Use of cell phones while reading this blog is not permitted.

I OWE YOU BLOG STUFF, I KNOW. Sokay, I gave in and paid $10 for a movie this weekend. Best part of Captain America? SAM JACKSON IN 3D! How come the Coen Bros. never do one in this amazing technology? (C’mon, No Country For Old Men and the air bolt killer thingy coming out at you? That’s movie fun, friendo.) One of the things that was different tonight was a new sign above telling people no cell phones et al. (basically anything that lights up). I semi-sorta appreciate a theatre that tries to cut down on distracting bursts of light during a movie, akin to our friends in Texas. But the fail award goes to Sprint, which ran three separate trailers each prompting users to text something. DID I SAY FAIL, because it was. As for 3D, I can seriously take it or leave it. It was basically used more for enhancing the depth of field than projectiles dramatically shooting out at you. I’d like to see Sam in 3D in an over the top 70sploitation film though. Quentin, get on that bitch.

"If you go to this adaptation of Stephen King’s novel expecting to see a horror movie, you’ll be disappointed.”

“...the setting is promising enough - an empty, isolated hotel in dead-of-winter Colorado - but Kubrick makes it warm, well-lit and devoid of threat.”
- Time Out London Film Guide, 1980

And other wonderful blunders from the movie review hindsight is 20-20 club.

Just your average, everyday Superheros.

A few things for the Netflix cue, or trip to the video store this weekend.

First, Batman has an anger management problem. Wonder Woman’s husband is an asshole. Hulk has to ride the bus to work and Superman smokes. Other than that, they’re just like you and me in Confessions of a Superhero.

And forget High School Reunion or Confidential for a look at those special teenage years, check out the moc Chalk instead, told from the POV of teachers.

Tags: Confessions of a Superhero, Chalk

Mmmmm. Donuts.

Damn. If there’s a more detailed review of the marketing push behind the Simpsons movie, I haven’t seen it.

Tags: The Simpsons movie

Hans Gruber is safe.

Just saw Live Free or Die Hard and his place in movie villain lore is secure. Yeah, it has the usual stunts as well as a few unusual ones–a pretty cool one actually involving a fire hydrant–and enough references to the previous three to make you feel at home. As a sequel fourquel goes, (yes, I said fourquel), it’s not that bad. It’ll definitely make a ton this weekend on the strength of the franchise’s built-in audience alone, but it comes up short in the one area a movie like this needs to be strong in:

Having great villains.

The ones here are the kind you’d find in a CSI or 24, (and even 24’s are better). Which is too bad. Like any great action flick, this series depends on memorable villains. And I’m not talking performances either, but their celebrity. If I had to venture a guess, I’d say Willis didn’t want anyone upstaging him here. Odd, considering he’s had some great competition in the other three that made those films entertaining.

(And to that point, Justin Long plays his vulnerable sidekick, but here is easily outdone by both McClane and his daughter. Now, the “I’m a Mac” ads are cool and all, but that boy needs to stop playing the insecure goofy nerd all the time and move into Keanu action territory soon.)

The Rock, Bourne Identity, Patriot Games, any Steven Seagal or Ah-nuld flick have bad guys that bring something to the table in terms of intensity and popularity. You can almost compare DH4 to Enemy of the State, where it’s basically the same bunch of government secret ops people found in DH4. Difference is, one has Jack Black, Seth Green and Jon Voight.

Here, well, if after seeing this you can name even one of the bad guys, I’ll refund your money. Case in point without revealing much: there’s a moment in a hostage scene where Bad Guy in Charge is indecisive. Would Gruber act like that? Not a chance. Gun to head. (New microsite: ‘What Would Hans Do?’ Just throwing that out there.) And I call him Bad Guy in Charge because I didn’t feel like looking up his name; he was that unimpressive for me.

Fear not, you’ll still get your Rocky 6 type closure watching Bruce hang from shit at impossible angles while spouting off one-liners. However, at this rate, it appears as if come Die Hard 7, Die Hardest, he’ll be on target to end up looking more like Vic Tayback than Stallone.

Tags: Bruce Willis, Live Free or Die Hard

Grindhouse, home of the B-movie.

What better way to follow-up a post on gun control than with a review of Grindhouse. No gun control here, that’s for sure. I didn’t know what to expect after reading a few lousy reviews of the flick, but since it’s Tarantino and Rodrigeuz I kept an open mind. For me, I wasn’t disappointed. I watched a lot of the flicks referenced here like White Line Fever, Vanishing Point and Deathrace 2000 and a slew of zombie flicks. Both directors hold a mirror up to those slasher/exploitation flicks of the seventies and nail them perfectly. And that’s where they both work best. Lower your expectations–Pulp Fiction’s ultra-hip dialogue this ain’t, nor is it meant to be.

The first film is Rodriguez’s Planet Terror. Forget the Scary Movie series. It’s to 70s zombie horror flicks what Blazing Saddles was to Westerns and Mars Attacks! was to the UFO movies of the 1950s. No shortage of gore, bad dialogue or bullets. Pretty cool stunts too. Makes From Dusk Till Dawn look like an episode of Sponge Bob.

Tarantino’s Deathproof casts Kurt Russell perfectly in the second feature. Say what you will about Tarantino, but the guy takes stars trapped in mass-market genres and gives them new life. Quentin’s flick centers around two separate groups of women and Kurt Russell. Without giving too much away, the typical exploitation format does a 180 in a Thelma and Louise sequence at the end. Yeah, it’s got his patented dialogue scenes which some have knocked, and maybe some of those F-bomb barrages do sound better when Harvey Keitel says them. Still, when’s the last time four women sat around shooting the shit without it leading to Hugh Grant marrying one of them at the end in some date flick?

Not here.

Overall, this is exploitation film time for sure. The opening trailers, the intermission trailers, the film effect designed to age the film, missing projector reel sequences, even the fake ads for local businesses. There is also a perfect trailer for a movie called ‘Don’t!’ which is better than anything Scary Movie has ever skewered. YouTube has clips obviously shot on someone’s own video camera, but see it in actual film. (Ironic that those illegal clips further enhance the look and feel of Grindhouse.) I dunno man, people knocking this must just love the usual shit out there. For $8 and three and a half hours, they gave me my money’s worth.

Especially as a creative. Take the retro design of these films. Right now Grindhouse is the best thing going. Both directors gave it a complete Grindhouse look. They didn’t dabble. The sticky floor I felt was probably not their doing but added to the authenticity. But as retro goes so many times these days, the source material is forced or barely there. Take That Seventies Show or a commercial like The LeBrons. Both merge a sitcom format from way back with a modern slick sensibility. That’s not a bad thing because they work. I just think if you’re going to pay tribute to a certain look and feel, don’t fuck around and hide your sources under a slick veneer. Go all-in. Grindhouse has the best title sequences since Seven. (No slight on Kyle Cooper either, but the production house kicked ass on all the graphics here.)

Amazing though how people knock this. To each his own I guess. Sin City is arguably one of the coolest flicks in recent times. Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs alone would buy any director a lifetime of passes. But someone like M. Night gets a pass even though he’s still trying to make a movie that convinces people Sixth Sense was no fluke. Now, I will agree with one critique heard ‘round the world: Quentin gotta stop acting in his flicks so much.

Still, Rodriguez and Tarantino have been far more consistant in their filmmaking and yet they take shit for this, which, taken on the whole, is really not that far off from their usual fair. (Save for the Kids series.) It’s making a slow crawl towards breaking even on production costs but I think it will get there–eventually. Next week will show if it has legs–or if they get cut off. For some reason, I think this will possibly have a better Second Life on DVD though.

Tags: Grindhouse, Quentin Tarantino, Robert Rodriguez

300: Lord of the Hero Gladiator Rings.

It was either that title or this one: Frazetta Finally Filmed. Either way, It definitely fits in with the gladiator genre, and a host of other fantasy epics as well. Let’s just say the homage needle was pinned. There’s some absolutely gorgeous shots, along with more action and less introspection than you saw in Braveheart or Gladiator, (which this will ineveitably be compared to). Is it a better movie than both of those? That’s like asking what’s a better Vietnam movie, Platoon, Full Metal or Apocalypse. They’re all great movies with different takes on the same theme.

Worth noting is Gerard Butler as lead bloodletter, who belts out a ton of inspiring speeches straight from the Conan meets William Wallace motivational handbook. Also of note is how so much of the very explicit Frank Miller violence felt so clean, almost like it came from a video game. Not a complaint by any means. Absolutely worth seeing if you’re into the genre. (And of course, what movie review would be complete without me mentioning that yes, small children again were brought to a film like this. I’m no Pat Boone, but there’s a time and place people. Think.)

Tags: Gladiator, 300, Gerard Butler, Frank Miller

$44+ million.

Shows what I know. Next up for Cage? The Herbie Mann Story.

Update: Damn thing made $7 million more after I posted.

Tags: Ghost Rider, Nic Cage

Movie reviews: Thank You For Wearing Prada.

Ok, two more movies I wanted to comment on, since my poll showed that’s why you really come here. Actually, a promotion company sent me a screener and asked me to check out The Devil Wears Prada and give my 2¢, so I said ok. (Thank You For Smoking was one I saw some time ago and wanted to mention also.) So, it’s two-for-one time people.

Like Smoking, Prada is adapted from a best-selling novel and is a snapshot of the entire fashion publishing world and features the egomaniacal boss from hell we’ve all worked for at some point. And I think that’s where it works best. But when you focus in on the individual stories, it’s there you go off in different directions and there where I think the parts bring down the whole. That’s when it felt like it wanted to be part coming-of-age-story, chick-flick, boss-from-hell tale and fashion exposé.

The main character Andy Sachs played by Anne Hathaway goes from girl-next-door plain to stunning fashion maven in a snap but still tries to maintain her integrity, akin to the premise of Working Girl. Oddly, she kept reverting back and forth between the two worlds from that point though. Meryl Streep as The Devil is awesome as usual. She is as dismissive with a single look as any actor working. Then there’s the solid Stanley Tucci as the smug second-in-command director of design and fashion, (even though he’s killing me on Cingular).

The art department parts are all there. The costume selections. The last-minute clean-up madness when clients and/or the boss arrives. But it felt clean. Too clean and staged at times. I’m more of a verite guy. Hand-held doc, real-life feel. I couldn’t help while watching Devil but compare it to some other great fashion movies: Altman’s brilliant Prêt-à-Porter or the overlooked doc Unzipped. And Devil does have moments like that. Streep dismissing ideas from her underlings rivals Mizrahi in real life. Streep in Paris at the main fashion show rivals Altman’s ‘conversations overheard’ style of shooting.

And as for being the worst boss of all time bit? Well, she is rude and egomaniacal for sure. Maybe she needs to be that in that world. Fashion is usually the result of a singular vision. Whether it’s the designer showing his new line, or the editor who controls the entire fall edition of a magazine, one person has the final say.

All others are there to serve. Advertising is far more collaborative. Client and CD have the final say of course, but certainly, more team work and expression of ideas goes into the initial creation and process than the world of fashion allows.

I still have a problem when the producer, director and writer on the DVD extras pat each other on the back for bringing a woman with power to the screen without acknowledging how she uses that power to belittle and dehumanize people. Especially because of her own personal shortcomings and justifying it further with ‘if a man did this, he’d get a high-five.’

Uh, no. If you’re an a-hole as a boss, doesn’t matter what gender you are, you’re still an a-hole. That behaviour is no less acceptable. But regardless, we’ve all been there. As good as Streep is though, and for all her stares and degrading comments, Kevin Spacey in Swimming with Sharks is still the gold standard for the boss from hell.

It’s worth renting, but I’d also check out the other films linked here as well, because those are the whole movies the individual parts of Prada want to be when they grow up.

Thank You For Smoking is already all growed up. It’s far more relevant to advertising as a look at the PR game and the lobbying that goes on for pretty much everything that made this country: guns, alcohol and tobacco. From writer/director Jason Reitman (yeah, Ivan’s son), it’s a must-see for anyone in the PR game.

Aaron Eckhart’s Nick Naylor is as convincing a shill for Big Tobacco and lobbyist as you’ll find brought to the big screen. I dismissed him after In the Company of Men, but he really surprised me here. Gotta love a PR guy who says “Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I talk. Everyone has a talent.”

While totally fiction, Smoking semi-mockingly hits the same topic that the far more serious film ‘The Insider’ does, and does it here without losing any punch.

The thing is, although he’s ultimately tormented about what he does, Naylor’s resolved to being the best at his profession. Think Jerry Maguire with a pack of Kools. Naylor has no shame in tearing apart a kindergarten class when discussing what he does for a living in the same breath that he would a US senator on the dangers of cheese from the senator’s home state being worse than the dangers of smoking.

Some other things worth noting are Rob Lowe as Jeff Megall, the slickest, most conniving Hollywood producer I’ve seen. Worth renting just to hear how he puts deals together. (Although not quite as good as Alec Baldwin’s five minutes in Glengarry Glen Ross, his character is right up there.) Here he is describing ways to get tobacco placement in films:

Jeff Megall: Sony has a futuristic sci-fi movie they’re looking to make.
Nick Naylor: Cigarettes in space?
JM: It’s the final frontier, Nick.
NN: But wouldn’t they blow up in an all oxygen environment?
JM: Probably. But it’s an easy fix. One line of dialogue. ‘Thank God we invented the... you know, whatever device.’

There are also the priceless discussions Naylor has with his other axis of evil lobbyists from alcohol and firearms. And also, a nice use of graphic icons and film technique to occassionally accent scenes, like Tarantino used in Pulp Fiction (Travolta/Uma before going into the restaurant on their date Kitty Kat).

So...rent both. But I think Smoking is the stronger, more unified film.

Tags: advertising, The Devil Wears Prada, Thank You For Smoking, fashion

Not just another film.

Ok, since my last two reviews combined dealt with Snakes on a Jackass, lemmee rave on a film at the other end of the spectrum that ‘cleanses’ the artistic palette.

Ashes and Snow by Gregory Colbert. If you’re an art director, an artist, a visual freak, film nut, whatever – this film is not to be missed. Stunning photography and composition, sparse soundtrack with a compelling narrative by Laurence Fishburne make this worth seeking out. (Larry, yes, I called him Larry – is one of the few actors I’d even pay to have read the phonebook and make it sound good.)

Sean Penn once said that film was too important a medium to waste. This film reinforces that point. The closest movie I can recall being as visual was maybe Hero, and even that doesn’t do this justice. Epic on a small scale, Snow is shot in cepia tones and slow-motion, and is a portrait of humans living alongside the animal kingdom. Is it a documentary? Commentary? Fiction? Know what? It could be all of these things.

Doesn’t matter. The opening scene rivals anything I’ve ever seen on film from a cinematic POV. Director Gregory Colbert based this film on the international exhibitions of his large-scale prints of animals he documented over the years through fictionalized letters from a man on a journey. A world-class photographer, Colbert took a decade off to travel around the world to shoot. (You can also read more on his and the film’s background here.)

Even the design of the freaking main menu screen is gorgeous. Problem is, Hollywood Video or Blockbuster don’t list it online as a rental, not that I’d expect they would, so you may have to buy it via the film’s website here, but be warned, it’s expensive. However, it may just be the only film I’d pay $50 to own. Definitely worth having in any film collection.

(Upping the art director porno content level: the DVD is also wrapped in a handmade bound cover made from ‘unique Nepalese paper’ finished with Beeswax. I said Beeswax people.) This ain’t your father’s jewel case, that’s for sure.

So yeah, um, like, two big thumbs up.

Tags: advertising, Ashes and Snow, Hero, Flying Elephants Foundation

Snakes box office.

Took in less than $900,000 this past weekend. Five-week release puts it at $33 million, matching production costs. At this rate, the DVD can be released in time for Halloween. Start buying rubber snakes for the release parties.

Tags: advertising, Snakes on a Plane, brands, Sam Jackson

Snakes on a Plane review.

SSSSSSSSSSS is for...

Surprised. At how much I really wanted to like Snakes on a Plane ahead of time compared to what I saw. S is for sue. As in, suing bloggers who hyped this as a ‘campy, fun’ movie and pitched it as a Sam Jackson F-bomb fest. S is for you’re about to read more F-bombs than a typical George Parker post.

And S is for spoiler alert:

IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO KNOW ABOUT SNAKES ON A PLANE, STOP READING NOW.

Ok. Let’s get this right out in the open: motherfucker, motherfucker, motherfucker, motherfucker!

There, all the snake fans who wanted it their way having the producers film new scenes with that little Sam Jackson mantra, you just got your wish: that was twice as many F-bombs as you’ll hear in the entire movie. Feeling ripped-off by Hype-palooza 2.0 yet?

Yeah. me too.

I can’t comment on the movie without also commenting on the surrounding promotional buildup, so this post covers both things and it runs motherfucking long.

Seeing the movie confirmed what I suspected but was reserving judgement on: while I absolutely loved the blog effort started by Brian, the feeling I got ahead of time from this movie was that it was going to be a comical snake tour-de-farce on the order of Airplane or Scary Movie. Then I saw the trailer.

BIG disconnect.

Because based on the trailer I saw months ago, I expected a tight, well-done thriller – ultimately it wasn’t even that. I watched it already aware of the blog effort and thought, ok, they’re selling this wrong. It looks like it’s gonna be a well-done thriller but, funny blog + trailer of scary thriller = confusing movie with lack of identity.

It’s one thing for the Web 2.0 crowd to sing the praises of brands who ‘embrace new media.’ After all, it’s in their best interest to want this experiment to work. Because if it doesn’t though, well, there goes that theory and they’ll need to blog about other stuff.

Truth be told? Even I want it to work. Brands should be engaging audiences in all channels using things like blogs when possible – but not at the expense of the product the consumer is sold on and expects it to be.

Because if you sell me on camp, don’t then turn around and motherfucking give me over-the-top crude violence and a weak motherfucking thriller and tell me it’s motherfucking ‘fun.’ Because then I can’t help but feel like it’s something else: a motherfucking lie.

And in that case, people will stay away in droves once bad WOM runs its course, (to mis-paraquote Yogi). Still, I actually wanted a Sam Jackson F-bomb fest.

That’s not what I got though, and that’s why I’m disappointed. Not because the movie wasn’t great, never said it would be. It didn’t live up to the ‘fun’ hype ahead of time for me.

I buy Nike because it’s Nike. I know what I’m getting, and it’s not a Wal-Mart imitation. Likewise, when I go to see a Tarantino flick, I know what I’m getting, (or at least expecting to get). Clever dialog. Blood. Cool-as-hell fight scenes.

And I was amped to see this movie when I first heard the words ‘Sam Jackson’ and ‘Snakes’ in the same sentence. Same as the original screenwriter who first heard about the project and then blogged about what a great title the movie was, followed by Brian who picked up on it and the rest is soon-to-be history.

I was also sold on that pic of Sam yelling into a mic, figuring this dude is gonna be some loose-cannon cop living on the Martin Riggs edge, swearing every two seconds left and right. Nope. Jules was calm, cool and collected the whole time. Jules, go in there and chill them snakes out. (And he did.)

That payoff line would’ve sure been set up a lot better if he had been a loose cannon all along instead of it being the out-of-the-blue line it was.

And the fateful line.

More than 3/4 of the way through the movie. I was waiting for the stupid motherfucking line so long, that when it motherfucking happened, I was motherfucking dissappointed. Motherfucker. It was just out of place. Congrats Mr. and Mrs. Iowa citizen filmmaker: you just got your :15 secs by having “motherfucker” added in.

Want more F-bombs in your movies? Leave the director alone and rent motherfucking Pulp Fiction next motherfucking time.

But what I can’t buy is the arguement that the hype in this case was what consumers were buying, not the movie. So now we’re supposed to forget about what we’re buying and revel in the sales process? Gotta try that next time I buy a car.

To Mack at Adverb’s point: you can bet there are a whole lot of movie studio marketing directors looking at this case study wondering if they should launch a blog for their next flick, or stick with the tried-and-true promotional machine based on the results of SoaP.

No matter which way they go, we sit here and blog while people still may get fired over that stuff when it turns out bad - or, promoted to go on and embrace the next big promotional hype touted.

Will this movie make money? Probably. Leave it out long enough and it should. But it’ll need a month at this rate to match an approx. 35 mill budget and that’s with any kind of good WOM. If this flick is so good and you’re really going to jump on the camp wagon, really jump then. Forget newspaper quotes like

“BEST MOVIE OF THE YEAR!”
.................Omaha Tribal Observer

“SAY YESSSS TO SSSSSNAKESSSSS!”
.................Saskatchewan Times

“SAM JACKSON IS UNSNAKABLE!”
.................Nuns For Peace Quarterly

Have :30 TV spots with testimonials from rubber snake-wearing audiences shouting “See this movie!!!” Geez, I mean New Line should enough money left over from the ad budget. After all, they saved a ton by letting citizen marketers do the work for them didn’t they?

(Here’s another freebie: ‘user-generated’ :30 TV snake spots highlighting Brian’s blog done up in the style of Carson Daly’s girlfriend’s self-absorbed video show. Talk about the internet tail wagging the dog.)

Do that, and the DVD release with Rubber Snake Parties^® should be gravy for them after breaking even. But those same marketing peeps are seeing Red Eye do 16 mill opening weekend last year at this time and then go on to a 90+ mill worldwide gross – all without a blog and wondering, why should I do things differently?

What about Flightplan? More high-concept but I’d still throw it into the B-movie genre and definitely include it in the airplane thriller category. Closer to 250 mill gross on a 24 mill opener - without a blog. Even though that had Jodie Foster, this has motherfucking Sam Jackson! He’s not any good for more than that in the airplane thriller genre?

I also understand SoaP is supposed to be a B-movie, and that the bar for expectations should be lowered. Which expectations would those be though? The box office ones? New Line wasn’t expecting a hit? Name me a studio that doesn’t? After seeing the interest by fans I’m thinking they were. Enough to throw more dollars towards a reshoot for promotional purposes.

15 mill inflated and 6 mill this week are not too shabby for a movie, but movies aren’t released in a vacuum. They’re compared to others in the same genre, rightly or wrongly. And this one also had some of the traditional marketing support behind it in terms of trailers and print. So 15 mill against RE’s 16 with no stars to boot is looking just average.

So what about about expectations for it being a good movie, even with the B-movie tag? I’m sorry, this ain’t a good movie, that’s the thing. At the end of the day, no matter how many virals or blogs you throw my way, it still needs to be a good movie.

Camp? Fine. Make it well-done camp like Mars Attacks or Independence Day. Even if it was a good thriller I expected from the trailer but maybe it didn’t jive with the whacky snake blog, ok, fine. Just make it a Flightplan thriller then. (Director really can’t claim he didn’t have the same stuff to work with. Solid lead actor and a motherfucking jumbo jet.)

At least the product would’ve been good and I would’ve felt I got my money’s worth. But this goes back to the point about selling me on one thing, but delivering something different.

And I get the genre. I love the genre. I am Mr. B-movie:

The Blob. Towering Inferno. Earthquake (with surround sound vibrating seats!). Poseidon Adventure. Scary Movie(s). Airplane. Sin City. Pulp Fiction. Resevoir Dogs. Desperado. Con Air. Independence Day. Mars Attacks. Dawn of the Dead. The Ring. Starship Troopers. Tremors. From Dusk Til Dawn. Nightmare on Elm Street. Devil’s Rejects. Anything with Jackie Chan, Steven Seagal or Ahhh-nuld.

Some action-adventure, some horror, some comedy, but all are B-movies that, depending on which flick, have varying degrees of humor and violence handled far more deftly than Snakes. And they were B-movies not trying to be something they weren’t.

That’s why I feel you focus on making a kickass product/movie, then add cool hype to it. Wouldn’t your efforts do more for the picture in that case?


But this move felt like it didn’t have that identity and was trying to figure it out. Part over the top violence, part horror, part soft-core porn and part suspense thriller. Sorry, but there were no parts gellin like a felon. Last year’s Flightplan had the suspense part down. Con Air had the humerous wise-ass thing.

Until Sam’s line, where was either? Pulp Fiction was funnier. Just one little wise-cracking sidekick is all I ask. A staple of B-movies the world over. Yet, nothing. Instead, we get Kenan from SNL and “I Believe I Can Fly” feel-good dialog.

As for Hitchcock-like surprise, well, we get two. One is a motherfucking speedy-ass snake jumps out of a motherfucking compartment and two: the stereotypical male flight attendant who pranced around actually had the girlfriend nobody believed he said he had the entire movie.

I felt let down because I was expecting total camp, instead I got gratutious violence and sex that’s not for the teens this movie is skewing towards. I saw 10-year olds in the audience. Others have said how they let their 13-year olds go to this ‘cause it was awesome!’ I ain’t NO prude, believe me. I’ve seen every genre of movie imaginable and absolutely love all film, but this ain’t for kids. It got the R for a reason.

Should a 10-year old be watching the Mile High Club admit new members? They cut away from a guy getting his head bashed with a baseball bat, (and I can’t believe I’m about to write this next part), but then let’s watch a housecoat-wearin’ grandma get aroused by a snake and then have her eye eaten by it. Awesome!

Or a guy get bit right where it counts just as he finishes up in the restroom. I can hear Bart Simpson on the intercom now: “Paging Mr. Dick Hurts.”

Yeah, that works for me.

Anyone want to guess that the parents brought them because they heard about rubber snakes and a blog? Parents, when your kids wanna see it, see it first, and tell me, honestly, you could let them.

But hey, maybe I’m the lone voice here. Wouldn’t be the first time. (What’s the saying again, blogs are like assholes, right?)

So I took my daughter who turns 18 next month to see it. She knows more than me or any other other Web 2.0 evangelist out there about multi-tasking, myspace, IM, all of it. Wanted to see what she thought. She’s also a horror movie fan and has seen the previously mentioned Ring and every bad/cheesy nasty-ass R-rated teen flick out there. Her response?

“Why did you take me to see that? It was disgusting. Worst movie of the year.”

Oh, and because WOM is so critical to Web 2.0, that’s exactly the same thing she IM’d two friends and a cousin on her cell immediately after it was over.

Good luck to New Line. Hopefully they won’t need more than blog hype and counting as far back as Wednesday night’s receipts to make the next ‘weekend’ gross look ‘awesome!’ You want to keep bravely ‘embracing’ new media this way after someone else actually comes up with the idea, fine.

Just like the Chevy Tahoe videos showed though, having the latest toy and knowing what to do with it are two different things.

Tags: advertising, Snakes on a Plane, brands, Sam Jackson, snakes, motherfucking snakes, New Line Cinema

Finally. A movie about art school.

Ok, the first movie about art school? I'll have to see it alone for John Malkovich as Professor Sandiford, ‘The Has-Been.’ After seeing the site though? Not sure how accurate the movie may be. No model in my figure drawing class ever looked like Sophia Myles.

Tags: advertising, brands, viral, Art School Confidential