Hairspray review

I knew going in that "Hairspray" was going to be one of the gayer movie experiences I was likely to see all year, and it did NOT disappoint.

By gay, of course, I mean both happy AND appealing to homosexicals, several of whom didn't have any problem with jumping up out of their seats and dancing along with the movie as soon as it got started. I'm a song-and-dance man myself, so I wasn't put off at all (ok, maybe it was a little obnoxious), but mostly I just found it over-the-top and amusing.

Which kind sums up the movie itself. The exuberance in the audience was a perfect match for what was happening onscreen. This "Hairspray" is a movie adaptation of a Broadway show based on a John Waters movie (got it?!) about overweight, relentlessly upbeat Baltimore teen Tracy Turnblad (newcomer and former Cold Stone employee Nikki Blonsky).

Tracy's obsessively watches the Corny Collins Show, a local TV dance show, with her best friend Penny Pingleton (Amanda Bynes). Tracy gets an opportunity to audition for the show and quickly encounters prejudice both superficial (she's much plumper than anyone else on the show) and racial, when she realizes her detention hall friends, including Seaweed (Elijah Kelley), aren't allowed to dance with the white kids and instead get their own "Negro Day" on the Corny Collins Show.

In case you didn't guess, Tracy quickly sets about breaking down all these barriers and, in turn, inspiring her mom Edna (John Travolta, yes THAT John Travolta) to start living her life.

Director and choreographer (don't usually see THAT credit) Adam Shankman has created an appealing, candy-colored 1960's Baltimore. Most of his musical numbers (especially opening number "Good Morning, Baltimore" and any sequence on the Corny Collins Show) pop, but eventually they became a bit too similar and repetitive for me.

Still, the unbelievably talented cast keeps you interested, and I was particularly impressed by the youngsters. Nikki Blonsky makes a confident screen debut as the appealing heroine. Also, watching her large frame dance so nimbly with such unabashed joy is a pleasure. Amanda Bynes stole almost every scene she was in without saying much, although I wondered whether her character was slightly mentally challenged at several points. She had some strong chemistry with Kelley (who I'd never seen before in my life), who was terrific as Seaweed, particularly during his big number "Run and Tell That."

Efron was also solid as heartthrob Link Larkin, and James Marsden (Cyclops in the X-Men movies) was probably the most pleasant surprise as the appropriately named Corny Collins.

I thought I'd be blown away by the older cast members while the youngsters bogged it down, but the opposite happened.

Christopher Walken was his typical kooky self as Tracy's dad, but even he seemed a little too weird for this movie. Michelle Pfeiffer looked like she had fun playing uptight villain, Velma Von Tussle, but her character was too one-dimensional to really care about and she didn't really get to shine during her musical number. Queen Latifah, doing the sassy black woman thing for the 22nd consecutive time was kind of underwhelming as "Negro Day" host Motormouth Maybelle. I think I actually fell asleep during her protest/march song.

Then there's John Travolta. I still can't figure out whether his performance worked. I mean, he was going for a Baltimore accent, but he ended up sounding more like Dr. Evil. Also, every one of his scenes with Walken was the kind of funny they probably weren't going for. Still, he does eventually (and impressively in that 30lbs-fat suit) get down with to dancing with the rest of the cast (who doesn't love watching John Travolta dance onscreen). Also, by the end, I sorta believed that he was a woman, so I guess that's something.

Hairspray's not for everybody, though it IS for me as you can see there on the right. Ok, that's not so much hairspray as it is Glade air freshener, but I digress. Bottom line, if you like musicals (and I do!) this movie is one of the more fun/bizarre times you'll have at the movies this year.

Hairspray...B

What John Thinks...of the Emmy Nominations Part II: (Comedy)

….and we're back!

You've read my thoughts on the drama categories(right!?), so watch me break down the comedy nominees. As in the post with the drama series, if I disagree with a nominee, I'll offer a (better) suggestion to replace him/her/it.

On to the nominees:

Comedy Series

Entourage
The Office
30 Rock
Two and a Half Men
Ugly Betty

What John Thinks: I like these choices a LOT. Ok, so I would take out Two and a Half Men (which I actually think is funny, but a lot of snobs do) and sub in the superior My Name is Earl. Finally, you won't find too many bigger "Scrubs" fans than me and the show had one great episode ("My Musical"), but I'm mostly sad that the show didn't start to get nominated for Emmys until year 4 and 5, when it was at the height of its powers during its first three seasons. This past season, year 6, was merely ok (but still VERY funny), so I'm glad to see new shows 30 Rock and Ugly Betty get the nod.

Finally, I think The Office is the best show on television. Not the best comedy, but the best show, with the best acting, writing and directing. Period.

Actor in a Comedy Series

Alec Baldwin, 30 Rock
Steve Carell, The Office
Ricky Gervais, Extras
Tony Shalhoub, Monk
Charlie Sheen, Two and a Half Men

What John Thinks: Baldwin and Carell are CLEARLY the top two and I love those guys so much, that I have no idea who I think should win (or even who I WANT to win). I don't watch Extras, so I can't really comment on Gervais. Charlie Sheen is ok and I like his deadpan delivery, but he's not exactly stretching as a womanizer on "Men".

Then there's Tony Shalhoub. I'm still upset over the fact that he beat out Carell last year. Nothing against, Shalhoub, he's a VERY good actor, and I'm sure he's a nice guy, but what can he possible have done on Monk this year (what is it year 6 or 7?!) that he hasn't done before? We get it, he's fussy, he's brilliant and he solves the crime by the end of the hour, and that's nice. But enough is enough, give this award to Carell or Baldwin!

I'd take out Shalhoub and Sheen and sub in Jason Lee (My Name is Earl) and James Spader (because Boston Legal is a comedy).

Actress in a Comedy Series

America Ferrara, Ugly Betty
Tina Fey, 30 Rock
Teri Hatcher, Desperate Housewives
Felicity Huffman, Desperate Housewives
Julia Louis-Dreyfuss, The New Adventures of Old Christine
Mary Louise Parker, Weeds

What John Thinks: As I mentioned in my drama breakdown, the Emmys smartly narrowed the field to six nominees (as opposed to the traditional five) in several categories. Again, I like most of these nominations, particularly America Ferrara (who will win…but you'll get my predictions another day) and Tina Fey (who often joked on SNL about how she couldn't act. Huffman is the best actress on Desperate Housewives and Teri Hatcher's character on the same show made a nice comeback to season one form while Eva Longoria's character became increasingly unlikable (it was a toss up for me between those two and I'm glad Hatcher got it) toward the end of the season. Watch out for Mary Louise Parker (who I love), she's the dark horse. Good picks all around.

Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series

Jon Cryer, Two and a Half Men
Kevin Dillon, Entourage
Neil Patrick Harris, How I Met Your Mother
Jeremy Piven, Entourage
Rainn Wilson, The Office

What John Thinks: This is, without a doubt, the most difficult out of all the categories. Seriously, it really is. Think about all the funny, scene-stealing guys in your favorite sitcoms. This is one instance where they SHOULD'VE gone to six nominees.

That being said, I'm mostly happy with the choices. Piven is just the man, and I'm REALLY happy to see Kevin Dillon (Johnny Drama) get his first nomination because he's damn funny. Also in the damn funny category is Neil Patrick Harris, so I'm glad he got recognition. Finally, who inhabits their character more completely than Rainn Wilson as Dwight Schrute.

Now, I'm sure Jon Cryer is a nice guy, but there are a ton of other supporting actors I would personally rank ahead of him: Rex Lee (Lloyd) on Entourage, William Shatner (since Boston Legal is a comedy), Michael Urie (Marc the bitchy assistant) and Mark Indelicato (gay nephew Justin ) on Ugly Betty, Ethan Suplee (Randy) on My Name is Earl, Donald Faison (Turk) and John C. McGinley (Dr. Cox) on Scrubs, and Tracy Morgan (Tracy Jordan) and Jack McBrayer (30 Rock). Still, my choice to sub in for Cryer would be John Krasinski as The Office's Jim Halpert who, along with Jenna Fischer's Pam (more on her in a sec) is the (prank-loving) heart of the best show on TV.

Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series

Conchata Ferrell, Two and a Half Men
Jenna Fischer, The Office
Elizabeth Perkins, Weeds
Jaime Pressley, My Name is Earl
Holland Taylor, Two and a Half Men
Vanessa Williams, Ugly Betty

What John Thinks: Another tough category to break down, but not quite as hard as supporting actor in a comedy series because everyone knows there aren't as many good roles for women. I love that Fischer was nominated (and should win) since Pam had a breakout year on The Office. Pressley is damn funny, as is the force of nature that is Vanessa Williams on Ugly Betty. I'm also glad to see that the Emmy voters get Showtime and recognized Perkins' stellar work.

I hate to keep picking on Two and a Half Men (because it DOES make me laugh), but it's just not at the same level as some of these other comedies. I'd take out Ferrell and Taylor (Taylor IS pretty funny) and I'd sub in Becki Newton from Ugly Betty (as bitchy receptionist Amanda) and Angela Kinsey (as uptight Angela) of The Office, who routinely makes me laugh without saying a single word and often without being given much material to work with.

So those are my thoughts. Do you think Emmy got it right or did one of your favorites get screwed over? Let me know what you think so we can vent together or, as always, feel free to tell me how wrong I am.

What John Thinks...of the Emmy Nominations Part I: (Drama)

I've been saying it for a while now, but I'll reiterate. The best work (acting, writing, directing, etc) these days is being done on TV, not in the movies.

Unfortunately, the Emmys happen to be the most frustrating of award shows, mostly because of their convoluted voting process and the fact that nominees and winners for shows that span months are largely chosen based on the strength of one episode.

Imagine if the Oscars decided to reward films and actors for one particularly strong scene. Samuel L. Jackson and "A Time To Kill" would've swept the 1997 Academy Awards just based on the "Yes they deserve to die, and I hope they burn in hell!" bit.

Anyway, I'm gonna break down the nominees in the major categories (sorry, "Best Achievement in Single Camera Sound Editing in a Comedy Series). I'm going to have complaints. But instead of merely yelling about what should've been nominated, I'm going to do my best to suggest which of the actual nominees I would remove in place of my pick. It's more constructive that way, I think. Let's get to the nominees.

Drama Series

Boston Legal
Grey's Anatomy
Heroes
House
The Sopranos

What John Thinks: Sigh. This is the biggest category of the night (the one they hand out last) and I strongly agree with exactly one nominee ("Sopranos"). I kinda agree with "House", which has a solid, underappreciated ensemble, but it's STILL mostly a one-man show (also, the arc with the rogue cop Tritter stalking House turned out to be lame). Heroes is too uneven. It could be outstanding sometimes, but fall flat on its face other times with laughably bad writing and acting (also, the finale was trés lame). I've already shared my thoughts on "Grey's Anatomy". I mean, I thought it was overrated during its second season, but now that looks like genius compared to this past year (yeah, I'm sure we all thought Meredith was gonna die.) Then, there's Boston Legal, whose presence is sure to piss a lot of snobby people off. Personally, I LOVE this show. The only problem is that it's a comedy.

I'd take out everything except the Sopranos and House and add in Lost (finished SO damn strong), The Shield (Mackey finds Shane's killer…but it doesn't play out like you expected) and Friday Night Lights (I only saw one episode and it was really good…but that's how the Emmys work!) I don't watch Battlestar Galactica, Big Love or The Wire so I can't comment. Finally, I'm one of the biggest "24" fan you'll find, but I'm kinda glad it wasn't nominated…this past season was BRUTAL.

Actor in a Drama Series

James Gandolfini, The Sopranos
Hugh Laurie, House
Denis Leary, Rescue Me
James Spader, Boston Legal
Kiefer Sutherland, 24

What John Thinks: I actually like almost all these choices (nice to see Leary again), including Sutherland, who was good as a more beaten down and emotional Jack Bauer, even though "24" was BRUTAL this year. It's also nice to see Hugh Laurie actually pick up a nom this year. Last year House was nominated, but he was inexplicably snubbed. The only problem I have is with Spader, but that's because Boston Legal is a comedy. I'd take him out and add Michael Chiklis. This category is usually loaded, but Emmy did a decent job.

Actress in a Drama Series

Patricia Arquette, Medium
Minnie Driver, The Riches
Edie Falco, The Sopranos
Sally Field, Brothers and Sisters
Mariska Hargitay, Law and Order SVU
Kyra Sedgewick, The Closer

What John Thinks: Good work again, by the Emmys and is the first of many instances in which there were six nominees instead of the traditional five. I have no problem with adding an extra slot when there are so many deserving performances all of these ladies do good work. Mostly, I'm just glad I didn't have to go brush my teeth after throwing up in my mouth a bit in response to a nomination for Ellen "Meredith Grey" Pompeo.

Supporting Actor in a Drama Series

Michael Emerson, Lost
Michael Imperioli, The Sopranos
T.R. Knight, Grey's Anatomy
Terry O'Quinn, Lost
Masi Oka, Heroes
William Shatner (Denny Crane!), Boston Legal

What John Thinks: Again, six nominees, but that's because there are so many deserving candidates. Sorry, but I'd have to take out Shatner (Boston Legal is a COMEDY!) and add in Robert Iler who was brilliant as AJ Soprano in the show's final year. Also, although I have no problem with T.R. Knight (other than George being a waffling, whiny bitch…like most every character on the show), my anti-Grey's bias (what? Can you tell?) would make me take him out and sub in Walton Goggins (Shane!) from The Shield or Dominic Monaghan from Lost or Peter Macnicol (Tom Lennox) from 24. I'd go with Goggins.

Mostly I'm glad O'Quinn and Emerson (so creepy!) got recognized for fantastic work on "Lost."

Supporting Actress in a Drama Series

Lorraine Bracco, The Sopranos
Rachel Griffiths, Brothers and Sisters
Katherine Heigl, Grey's Anatomy
Sandra Oh, Grey's Anatomy
Aida Turturro, The Sopranos
Chandra Wilson, Grey's Anatomy

What John Thinks: Nice to see Bracco back on the ballot and in the supporting category (not lead) where she belongs. Chandra Wilson and Sandra Oh are the only two reasons to watch Grey's Anatomy…well that and all the sex. EVERY nomination they get is well deserved. Katherine Heigl is too much of an over-actor for me as Izzie, but most of her scenes and storylines are pure Emmy bait (though I still don't buy here being in love with George…they're clearly just friends). I'd definitely take her out and add in the outstanding Elizabeth Mitchell (Juliet) from Lost. Since day one I can't figure out where that chick is coming from, and that's mostly due to Mitchell's enigmatic performance.

This is getting long (that's what she said!) how about I take a break, and break down the comedy nominees in a different entry, mkay?

Transformers Review

You know how there are some movies that make you think about them for hours or days after they're over. Well, "Transformers" isn't one of those movies.

Still, on my way back home from the theatres, I saw lots of vehicles, including a truck, and was disappointed when none of them transformed into giant robots. So I guess that's something.

Either way, I'm pretty sure director Michael Bay (The Rock, Armageddon, Bad Boys) just wanted to make a kick-ass action movie with giant robots and lots of explosions. And he succeeds for the most part.

The film tracks the war between the Autobots (the good ones) and the Decepticons (the mean ones) as they bring their battle to Earth in search of a cube that can make every machine on Earth into a Transformer. Or something. Honestly, the plot doesn't matter that much and it's just there as an excuse to move things along to the next big action sequence.

During the first hour or so, the movie, which was executive produced by Steven Spielberg, splits its time between the U.S. military's futile efforts to fight the machines, and a dorky teen named Sam(Shia LeBeouf) with a crush on a hottie (Megan Fox) who just bought a car that is more than meets the eye.

The military stuff is a waste of time. Tyrese Gibson runs around yelling variations of "we're under attack!!!" and, as in pretty much every other alien invasion movie, we get scenes of military leaders and politicians (like Academy Award Winner Jon Voight) sitting in darkened rooms with lots of computer monitors in them and those big, lighted tables and walls with maps on them and ordering a bunch of anonymous soldiers to their deaths. This is actually the reason I really liked the new "War of the Worlds" (until its bs ending)…because it avoided that terrible cliché.

By contrast, the stuff with Sam and his family is by far more interesting and that's in no small part thanks to LeBeouf and immensely likable actor. He creates a character that you care about and even develops decent chemistry with his car (if that's possible) Bumblebee. The simple moment when Sam first spots a Transformed Bumblebee for the first time at a distance is more effective than all the garbage with the troops in the desert.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that the stuff with Sam and his car was probably Spielberg's idea, while all the military crap was Bay's doing.

One thing that Bay does that I've always liked is (somehow) convince actors with indie cred, like Steve Buscemi (Armageddon, The Island) and Billy Bob Thornton (Armageddon, to appear in his big dumb action movies. This time, it's John Turturro (I guess Buscemi was busy…or out of his element) as a government spook coming out of nowhere and delivering his looniest performance since nobody fucked with the Jesus. Honestly, I think whenever they approach serious actors to appear in movies like this, the actors accept on the condition that the director lets them do whatever the hell they want. I think it's called the Johnny Depp clause.

Anyway, things pick up as soon as the robots, particularly Optimus Prime (voiced by Peter Cullen), take center stage. All of the robots in the movie look fantastic and it all culminates in a spectacular downtown battle robot smackdown that might be the best action sequence of the year. I'll even overlook the fact that they couldn't work in Dirk Diggler singing "You've got the Touch" a song from the "Transformers" animated movie from the 80's.

The movie was headed toward a solid C, with particularly shrill turns by Bernie Mac and Anthony Anderson (who is at least mildly enjoyable), until Turturro showed up and the robot action kicked into high gear.

Transformers…B (it was gonna be a B- until that random moment when Decepticon leader Megatron casually flicked a random woman into a car)

NOTE: This blog does NOT condone violence against women: unless it's in a truly unrealistic action movie with giant robots. Or it's really funny.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Review

So, who do you think the Harry Potter films are for? Think about it before you answer.

I suppose the first instinct would be to say they're for fans of the books, who've devoured each of J.K. Rowling's volumes (like I have) and can't wait to see them on screen. However, my personal experience has been that fans of the books are often the biggest critics of the movies, often complaining about some trivial bit of info that was in the book, but not in the movie, or how somebody's hair or costume aren't right, and so on. They never seem satisfied, so I'm not sure the movies are REALLY for them.

Maybe it's more the casual fan, who knows about the books, but hasn't read them and just enjoys a good fantasy film with tons of imagination. Then again, the films can be a bit confusing for anyone who hasn't read the book because they just can't know all the terms in the Harry Potter lexicon. Then again, maybe, in this case ignorance is bliss and they're lucky because they can just sit back and enjoy the movie without the nagging thought that the way Dumbledore's Army is discovered in the book is different than in the film.

Then again, maybe the movies just exist to give work to every actor in the U.K. Oh yeah, the movie! Sorry about all that other stuff before, but all of that occurred to me while I was watching the newest Harry Potter flick. I actually really liked it.

"Order of the Phoenix" is Rowling's longest book and I thought it was curious it was made into the shortest film thus far. Considering how much had to be condensed, I thought it was probably the strongest adaptation and maybe the best movie in the series (I saw it about two hours ago) so I'm still a bit too close to the situation.

The movie hit all the important points in the storyline, which found Harry and Dumbledore at odds with the Ministry of Magic, which is in complete denial about Lord Voldemort's return. In response, they dispatch impossibly nasty Ministry official Dolores Umbridge to keep an eye on Dumbledore and his students, and she ends up wreaking havoc.

New to the franchise are director David Yates and screenwriter Michael Goldenberg bring a strong focus on Harry and his fellow students as they decide to prepare themselves for the approaching war between good and evil. They also highlight Harry's alienation from almost everyone in his life, as well as his fears about being so much like the evil Lord Voldemort, both of which are strong themes throughout the books.

That means the movie rested mostly on the shoulder of Daniel Radcliffe, who's still not a GREAT actor, but is improving a bit each time out…and this was probably his best work. I'm also glad he got a haircut…not to be superficial, but his look in "Goblet of Fire" was distracting. Rupert Grint (showing some backbone) and Emma Watson (who still tends to be a bit too dramatic…but she IS playing a teenage girl) are sturdy as Harry's best friends.

Unfortunately, that also means some of Britain's best actors have little or nothing to do. Still, people like Alan Rickman (Snape), Emma Thompson (Trelawney), Maggie Smith (McGonagall), Ralph Fiennes (Voldemort), Jason Isaacs (Lucius Malfoy), etc. do more than they probably should with the, approximately one scene they're given to shine.

Michael Gambon finally exuded the appropriate authority as Dumbledore (instead of running around screaming like some lunatic) and Gary Oldman, who'd had maybe 15 minutes of screen time over two films as Harry's godfather, is very good, exuding a fatherly, yet mischievous vibe.

Of the new additions, I think Imelda Staunton was FANTASTIC as Dolores Umbridge. The character is completely hateable, does despicable things, and does them all with a sick smile on her face. I know it won't happen, but I'll throw it out there: she should be nominated for Best Supporting Actress (that category's always hella weak!) Who wants to start a campaign?!

Helena Bonham Carter made a good, though brief impression as Bellatrix Lestrange, but I wasn't really feeling Evanna Lynch as Luna Lovegood.

Let's get my dad's thoughts on another new addition: "Who's the chick playing Tonks? She's fine!" Ladies and gentlemen, my dad.

This is a good adaptation of what's probably one of my two favorite books in the series. I haven't talked to any of my Harry Potter-loving friends, but I'm already anticipating their complaints about how this was different, or that was cut out.

Personally, my attitude is that I try to watch the movie and see if it can stand on its own. This movie addressed most of the major points in the novel and focused on its most important themes. I don't try to impose the book or impose my own imagination (what I may have pictured) on the film.

Also, if you're upset about all the changes, the books are always there for you to read.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix...A-

Live Free Or Die Hard Review

See, now THIS is the fun, straightforward action movie I've been waiting for in a summer that's been, to use the technical term, "meh."

For starters, I could actually count the number of important characters in this movie in one hand (whereas you need a glossary to keep track of everybody in "Ocean Pirates of the SpiderShrek")

Also, I'm not gonna lie — part of the reason I enjoyed this movie so much is because the expectations weren't very high at all. I mean, honestly, who was expecting too much out of DIE HARD 4?! It'd been well over a decade, and there were all these other shinier movies out there.

But that's exactly what set it apart. Other than a truly ridonkulous sequence involving a jet fighter attacking John McClane (Bruce Willis) on a highway, the (over-the-top) action sequences, with real cars slamming into each other and a hero who routinely gets his butt-kicked and injured, were a refreshing change from other just-as-dazzling, but not-quite-as-impressive-as-they-used-to-be action sequences.

"Live Free or Die Hard" (which, for some reason is NOT set in New Hampshire) finds our hero — grizzled, wisecracking NYPD detective McClane — still alienated from his family. Following a brief, funny scene with his daughter Lucy (Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who I liked) the movie doesn't waste time kicking into high gear (honestly, I think the first explosion happened less than two minutes in) as McClane teams up with a computer hacker (Justin "Hey, I'm a Mac" Long) to stop an Internet-based terrorist (Timothy Olyphant) who is crippling the U.S. government just to prove how easy it is and to make a few billions (even the plot was suprisingly engaging).

To me, this movie was full of pleasant surprises. As a GIGANTIC (well not THAT big...I'm 6'1" and down to 197 lbs) fan of the first film (and the entire trilogy in general), I was a little worried about this one for a few reasons.

The first was pretty superficial and it was the fact that Bruce Willis chose to forgo his usual John McClane look, including dirty wifebeater and wig (does Bruce Willis get the best wigs in Hollywood or what?) and went for a more stripped down, bald look that made him vaguely resemble a thinner, older Michael Chiklis in "The Shield." Well I recently found out that shirt had been donated to the Smithsonian (and wasn't available for the movie, I guess). Also, 15 minutes in, I was into the movie and forgot all about that other junk and it seems kinda silly now. Willis is still an easygoing presence on screen. At 52, he still looks convincing pulling off all the stunts and he looks like he's having fun.

Secondly, I was worried that the movie being rated PG-13 (the previous threes were R) would mean this would be a watered-down "Die Hard", but the action (directed by Len Wiseman) was as hard-hitting (if not sillier) than ever.

Finally, I wasn't too crazy about the casting of Justin Long. I was prepared to go in and roll my eyes at his forced attempts at comic relief (which has never been needed before because Bruce Willis is funny), but what I got instead was surprisingly good chemistry between the two actors who complemented each other nicely and mirrored the plot of the movie McClane/low tech vs. bad guys/ super hi-tech. Long and Winstead were both very solid in younger-people roles that could've been irritating.

Not faring as well was Olyphant, a very good actor who probably did more than he should've of with a severely underwritten villain. Honestly, do we know ANYTHING about this guy other than he's really smart and he apparently likes Asian women? He still manages to get off a few good lines though, but it's not his fault that he pales in comparison to original "Die Hard" villain Hans Gruber, who just so happens to be the best action-movie villain of all time. Also, the movie is about 15-20 minutes too long, and it loses a bit of steam at the end.

Still, on top of the already-mentioned impressive action sequences (I particularly enjoyed the sequence in a darkened tunnel and McClane's fight with the bad guy's head henchwoman), there were a few fun references to the original movie and the franchise in general. I liked seeing Willis' reaction when an "Agent Johnson" of the FBI is mentioned to McClane (the first "Die Hard" featured two meddling, humorless FBI agents both named "Johnson") although, judging from the look on Erica's face when I brought this up to her, I was the only one in the theatre that got that one.

I also enjoyed a scene with McClane and Long's hacker character where the younger man asks McClane why he does what he does and the old cop responds with "if there somebody else to do it, I would be glad to let them do it...but there's nobody else." I thought that was a nice callback to how his character, from the semi-realistic original to the increasingly bombastic sequels, always seems to be the one that has to save the day.

Well, especially considering that a movie revisiting an iconic character more than a decade later (like "Rocky Balboa") probably had no business being this good, I'd say he's saved this summer action movie season.

Live Free or Die Hard…B+

Welcome to my new blog

You may know me from such hit blogs as...well, I guess my old blog didn't really have a title.

Well, that's all changing now that I have this new, shinier space to break down the NFL and "America's Next Top Model" with equal insight and (semi)expertise.

So what am I gonna do now that I've set up this new blog? Why, go away to the Minnesota wilderness for a week (to visit my dad) and not write anything for at least that time (great timing!)

Anyway, once I come back I hope that (both) my readers follow me from my goofy, nameless blog to my goofy, titled blog, which will still feature fun links, but may now feature any fun photographs I decide to take while I'm out and about.

So what's been your favorite movie so far this summer? Anything I should check out/review? Any suggestions for TV shows I should be watching/reviewing now or when all the good ones come back in the fall...don't be afraid to speak up!