Disc Reviews

Bugs Bunny and his special Looney Tunes friends have been around for a long time. He first appeared in 1938 in his most familiar form. During the second World War he was a popular choice with the fighting men. Many of the cartoons of the era were patriotic, and some might even call them propaganda. They certainly pushed the war effort in a supportive way. When the war was over Bugs and his pals took on a wide range of subjects. Often movie stars were spoofed, and the series of shorts soon became a satire on the pop culture of the time. It's hard to really see it now, but Bugs and Looney Tunes were the South Park of their time, and no institution or celebrity was safe from being spoofed.

The cartoons have evolved over the years and have practically given Warner Brothers their identity for over 80 years. The characters still thrive. They do advertisements, and every now and then a new Looney Tunes cartoon show makes its debut. The Looney Tunes Show was one of those more recent entries in the franchise.

Frida Kahlo's life was tragic, romantic, epic, and inspiring. This film takes on the immense challenge of telling the story of such a complex life in the time frame of a stand-alone feature film. Frida is about art just as much as it is about an artist. Often stylized, but never unapproachable, Frida is a rare success by the way it managed to capture and display a part of Frida Kahlo's artistic soul.

Director Julie Taymor is widely known for her stylized approach to any production, be it on film (Titus, Across the Universe) or on stage (Lion King, Spiderman: Turn off the Dark). It is no small wonder that Taymor expresses her own artistic flair through her direction without comprising the work of her subject. Taymor uses dreams as her platform to inject the strangest visuals that are not the direct work of Frida. There is even one scene that is not the composition of Taymor or Frida, but the a dream sequence inspired by Mexico's day of the dead, created by the enigmatic animation duo, the Brothers Quay. As I suggested, the injection of other artist's unique style and creations into a film about an artist is not as disruptive as one may imagine. Both Taymor and the Brothers Quay honour Frida's life and work with their own contributions. Neither attempt to mimic Frida, save for one painting at the very end, but rather, they include something about Frida's life that she herself may not have expressed in her work. That is to say, not explicitly in any particular piece.

"It seems to me the measure of the true perversity of the human race, that one of its very few reliably pleasurable activities should be the subject of so much hysteria and repression."

I believe a movie that extensively examines the complex relationship between Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud, pioneers in the field of psychoanalysis and two of the world's greatest minds during their time, has the potential to be a dynamic cinematic experience. At the very least, it would be intellectually stimulating and serve as a wonderful showcase for a pair of capable actors. Unfortunately, A Dangerous Method is not really that movie.

In the 1930’s and 40’s MGM was trying to get in on the lucrative animation game. The field was dominated at the time by Warner Brothers with their Loony Tunes shorts, and of course, the iconic cast of animated characters coming out of the Walt Disney Studio. For years they had failed to find the right property to take advantage of the market. It wasn’t until the team of William Hanna and Joseph Barbera approached the studio with their first project that the times did change, at least a little, for the fledgling animation department at MGM. The project was far from an original one even for the time. It was a very basic cat and mouse adventure featuring a cat named Tom and a mouse named Jerry. There would be almost no dialog on the shorts. It certainly didn’t look like much of a hit to the studio brass, but with no better ideas on the way, they went ahead with the new shorts of Tom And Jerry. There’s a reason why the cat and mouse pair is such a classic. It’s because it works. If you can make your characters entertaining and endearing enough, you can have a hit. MGM finally entered the major leagues, and the team of Hanna and Barbera would become one of the most successful animation teams in history. They would go on to create such cherished characters as The Flintstones, Yogi Bear, The Jetsons, and, of course, Scooby Doo.

These were the days of the Golden Age in Hollywood. These shorts were not being produced for television, which hadn’t been invented when they began; rather, they were intended for theater-goers. In those days going to the movies was much more of an inclusive experience. You always got a cartoon short along with an adventure serial, the likes of Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, and The Lone Ranger. These multi-chaptered serials were the forerunners to the modern television series. It kept you coming back to the movies to see what would happen next. Each chapter ended in a cliffhanger. These early serials were the inspiration for such film franchises as Star Wars and Indiana Jones. Finally you got one, sometimes two movies, all for the price of a single admission.

Released back in 1982, Treasure Train tries to capture the imagination of kids as Disney had for years but with a much smaller budget.  Helmed by surrealist artist and director Fernano Arrabal, he crafts a film heavy on the power of a child’s imagination and sense of adventure. To be fair I had to give this movie a second viewing not because I liked it but because it was so weird I had to make sure what I saw was real.

The film opens with a beautiful overhead shot of a train barreling down the tracks.  As the credits begin to roll the beautiful footage dissolves from the real train to a model train that is steaming ahead to collide with another train. As the toy falls to the ground a frustrated man scoops up the train only to yell at the children.  This scene though on the surface is simple but represents what the film is about.  Every child while growing up is excited about the prospect of being older and how great it all must be but the reality is never is as good as it was supposed to be.

“Ohh. Oh, Fritz? Fritz, get up for God's sake! Get up! They've killed Fritz! They've killed Fritz! Those lousy stinking yellow fairies! Those horrible atrocity-filled vermin! Take that! Take that! They killed Fritz!!!”

Ralph Bakshi is probably best known for his x-rated animated adaptation of R. Crumb’s Fritz the Cat, the first animated film to receive an x-rating from the Motion Picture Association of America and still turn into the most successful independent animated feature of all time. When his second and also x-rated animated feature, Heavy Traffic, a blacker than coal satirical comedy, became a hit (theaters were willing to take a chance on the x-rating due to the success of Fritz), Bakshi became the first person in the animation industry since Walt Disney to have two financially successful movies released consecutively.

The strangely compelling pop-rockers first played publicly in February 1977. Almost exactly 34 years later, the B-52s soared again into their hometown, delivering an exuberant, hit-filled set at the Classic Center in Athens, Ga. Fortunately for concert-party aficionados, the show was captured in high-def, widescreen glory for the Blu-ray winner, The B-52s With the Wild Crowd! Live in Athens, GA. If you’re already a fan of “the world’s greatest party band” (it says so right on the dust jacket), this 96-minute celebration is an obvious must-have. The old new-wavers haven’t lost a step as they crossed one at a time into AARP territory. But even first-time flyers will feel the power generated by the B-52s time-tested crew. This high-energy set kicks off with a driving kickoff of “Pump” and the ever-catchy hook of “Private Idaho.” The pace doesn’t seriously slacken for another 90 minutes of bouncy dance-rock, lively melodies and irresistible harmonies.

While lead singer Fred Schneider takes on key front-man duties, this expertly edited program shows that he’s the captain of a totally talented team. Schneider’s wit as a vocalist and emcee are charmingly apparent here, but we also get time to appreciate Kate Pierson’s far-ranging warble, Cindy Wilson’s rich vocal counterpoints, and Keith Strickland’s stinging guitar riffs. (Strickland was the band’s original drummer, who switched to guitar after the death of founding member Ricky Wilson, Cindy’s brother.)

For me the last decent spoof film Scary Movie 4 (2006), and having David Zucker (Airplane and the Naked Gun series) at the helm helped make the movie what it was.  Hollywood doesn’t exactly have the best track record for putting out good spoof films, so when I saw the trailer for it Breaking Wind was immediately forgotten to never be thought of again.  Or so I thought.

Before going any further I should be clear in saying I have never watched a Twilight film, nor do I ever plan to watch them.  Any questions I may have had about the books or films I simply asked my girlfriend to explain, which was usually followed by her enduring my ranting about how much I loathe the existence of the franchise.  This review would prove to be a challenge to not let my bias get in the way. Thankfully the movie was awful on its own merit.

Most of the people when they hear the name Titanic think of the ship that sank almost one hundred years ago to this day. Well, except for James Cameron who thinks of the oodles and oodles of dollar bills that he bathes in on a daily basis. Regardless, the people at A&E and the History Channel decided to bring us three documentaries and five hours of knowledge on perhaps the most famous ship of them all. The RMS Titantic.

Titanic: The Complete Story comes on two discs and has over five hours of interviews, narration, recreation and tons of old footage. There are really two documentaries here disguised as three (one has two parts) but each of them has their own theme.

Even though I'm guilty of doing it myself, I always laugh a little when I hear someone complain that certain actors "just play themselves": as if you or I actually know these celebrities personally and have the authority to say what they're like in real life. Of course, what we really mean is most movie stars have found a screen persona that has connected with audiences and — in the spirit of giving people what they want (or laziness) — tend to stick pretty close to that image, adding only a tweak when we catch on to their game. (I mean, do we really want to see Sylvester Stallone tackle Hamlet? Wait, that would be amazing!) This isn't a new development: it's been happening since the days of John Wayne, and it continues to happen today with the likes of Tom Cruise, Will Smith, Jennifer Aniston, Seth Rogen and others. (Ok, so Seth Rogen probably is just playing himself.)

Few actors are "playing themselves" to as much critical and commercial success today as George Clooney, a handsome, articulate, serious-minded charmer who looks great in a suit. So when he plays handsome, articulate, serious-minded charmers who look great in suits, I can understand why some people may shrug their shoulders, no matter how excellent the performance is. You think it's an accident he won an Oscar for gaining some weight and covering his face with a scraggly beard in Syriana, but was shut out for superior work in Michael Clayton and Up in the Air?