Rabu, 26 Juni 2013

Review: ‘Antiviral’

antiviral-250

This review was originally published on September 25, 2012 as part of Film.com’s coverage of the 2012 Fantastic Fest.

With his pale skin and throaty voice, Caleb Landry Jones resembles something like a sketchy distant cousin of Anton Yelchin and could pass for patron saint of the pathetic. That description would be more of an insult if he didn’t serve as such an ideal canvas for the sickly miseries concocted by writer-director Brandon Cronenberg for his feature debut, “Antiviral.”

Jones plays Syd March, employee of the Lucas Clinic for the True Connoisseur, an enterprise wherein the celebrity-obsessed can share the diseases of their favorite stars, for a price. A nasty job to be sure, but there’s a market for it, as tabloids scope out their targets with infrared cameras in order to determine who’s got the hot new bug.

Syd has been making some money on the side by injecting himself with high-value samples, smuggling them out of work and incubating the diseases at home to sell on the black market. It’s an occupational biohazard, leaving Syd to guzzle orange juice daily and rock a digital thermostat on breaks much as one might a cigarette. But when young starlet Hannah Geist (Sarah Gadon) reportedly dies from an illness with which he has just injected himself, our anti-hero has to discreetly determine how she contracted it and how he might cure it.

From the concept on down, Cronenberg’s film inevitably resembles the ‘80s body horror with which father David made his name, but Brandon brings his own antiseptic eye to this queasy noir mutation, like “D.O.A.” for a self-serving near-future. The literalization of tabloid culture as actual disease feels like too easy a target for satire, but the universe in which this concept exists has been well-considered, from the technologies necessary to not only copy-protect viruses but rendering them non-contagious to the growth of steaks from celebrity cells.

Syd’s world is that of a fluorescent nightmare, rendering the material surprisingly squirmy despite the minimal appearance of actual gruesomeness. With beautiful faces like Hannah’s blown up to fill entire walls, it reflects the nature of perceived, publicized identity dominating and effectively containing characters like Syd under their spell. As for Mr. March, Jones earns our interest if not our sympathy as he meekly schemes and sweats over how his best laid plans are literally rotting him from within.

Gadon has already put in her dues with David’s “Cosmopolis” and “A Dangerous Method,” and here, she serves as a porcelain-picturesque figure of compromised beauty. The supporting ranks are nicely rounded out by a few familiar faces, like Wendy Crewson as a Lucas Clinic rival and Malcolm McDowell as a doctor with his own celeb bio-fetish.

The physical deterioration of Syd inherently results in a somewhat limited and repetitive narrative as we witness his slow, steady spiral downward without necessarily gaining much steam in the process. The mystery becomes clearer and clearer while things become bloodier and bloodier, and although the climax feels like one last stab by Brandon to echo his father’s legacy, the rest of the film suggests the promise of his own distinct, distressing career to come.

SCORE: 6.7

Categories: Reviews

Tags: Antiviral, Brandon cronenberg, Caleb Landry Jones, Sarah Gadon

Selasa, 25 Juni 2013

Why ‘Spring Breakers’ Is the Best Thing James Franco Has Ever Done

James Franco. American icon, he of the Academy Awards hosting letdown, the very same man who brought you Harry Osborne in the “Spider-Man” franchise. He’s an enigma, this Franco, appearing one weekend in “Oz the Great and Powerful” a kid-friendly PG film, and then the next in the extremely R-Rated “Spring Breakers.”

James Franco doesn’t do one thing, he does everything. And as the great and powerful Steven Colbert noted, James Franco is a renaissance man … who also might be a complete fraud.

Even the director of “Spring Breakers,” the delightfully named Harmony Korine, had this to say about Franco’s performance in the film:

“He didn’t want to rehearse. When he put in the cornrows and the gold teeth and I heard the accent, I was like ‘whoa.’ He was a maniac.”

The trailer pretty much speaks for itself, a collection of y’alls, leers, and threesomes:

You would be hard pressed to construct a trailer more bonkers than that even if I spotted you Dennis Rodman and a case of Four Loco. Still, if “From Justin to Kelly” has taught us anything, it’s that a spring break film can launch one’s career into the stratosphere. It’s all been leading up to this, his masterpiece, Franco imprinting on the world in a big way. As such, let’s take a look at the Franco’s seminal works, and why they can’t quite measure up to “Spring Breakers”.

Also check out: The Francography!

“Freaks and Geeks”
Why it’s great: Here’s where we first became aware of James Franco, though sadly this beloved series only lasted eighteen episodes. Who’s up for a cheeky Kickstarter?
Why it’s still inconsequential compared to “Spring Breakers”: The freakiness level on display here still aired on NBC. How risque can you get on NBC? Besides Jay Leno I mean.

“Rise of the Planet of the Apes”
Why it’s great: The Apes really brought the acting thunder in this film.
Why it’s still inconsequential compared to “Spring Breakers”: The drugs here turn apes into super apes. The drugs in “Spring Breakers” turn James Franco into Gary Oldman from “True Romance”. Checkmate.

“127 Hours”
Why it’s great: This might be Franco’s best performance in which he doesn’t wear a gold grill and indiscriminately fire off handguns.
Why it’s still inconsequential compared to “Spring Breakers”: His co-star in “127 Hours” was a rock. Selena Gomez and Vanessa Hudgens are much better than a rock. Nicer, too.

“Tristan + Isolde”
Why it’s great: Hahahahahahahhahaha. … History?
Why it’s still inconsequential compared to “Spring Breakers”: Sorry, just seeing if you were still paying attention (wipes tear away from eye). Sidenote: Don’t ever watch “Tristan + Isolde”. The film feels shorter than the opera on which it’s based, and that opera was written by Wagner.

“Milk”
Why it’s great: The inspiring true story of Harvey Milk, James Franco helped portray the rampant discrimination same-sex partners faced in the ’70s.
Why it’s still inconsequential compared to “Spring Breakers”: It’s hard to argue that even a dramatization of the life and times of Harvey Milk is less consequential than “Spring Breakers,” but it’s not hard to argue that at no point in “Milk” did anyone shout “Bikinis and Big Booties Y’all, that’s what life is about!” We rest our case.

“Spider-Man”
Why it’s great: Sadly, it’s not, but it is consequential, simply based upon the box-office returns.
Why it’s still inconsequential compared to “Spring Breakers”: No one in the franchise is named “Alien,” as James Franco is in “Spring Breakers” and thus we rule your Spidey art invalid. Also, The Green Goblin wears a horrible face-mask, whereas “Spring Breakers” proves that a nice shiny grill is always the right way to go. Remember kids: Always.

In the cold light of day, it’s easy to surmise that we might never see a better version of James Franco than the one we see this weekend. He’s a man in full, perhaps not the Franco we want, but definitely the one we need. Spring break, you guys. Spring break, forever.

Laremy wrote the book on film criticism and was too busy getting ahead on the next semester’s assignments to go to spring break.

Categories: Features

Tags: Harmony Korine, James franco, Spider-man, Spring Breakers

Senin, 24 Juni 2013

The Best, Worst and Weirdest TV Shows Based On Movies

bates_motel__span

Not to put a damper on all this talk about “The New Golden Age of Television,” but despite the glories of ABC and HBO, it suddenly seems like TV has been seized by the same strain of “prequelitis” that plagues movie studios. Did you want to know how and why Norman Bates mummified his mummy? Here’s “Bates Motel” on A&E, which will spin this serial killer’s origin story for as long as the ratings demand. Did you need additional backstory to Thomas Harris’ “Red Dragon,” which introduced readers to an imprisoned Hannibal Lecter as the FBI’s go-to serial killer expert? You’re in luck, because NBC’s “Hannibal” will spin at least two seasons out of the relationship between Lecter and Special Agent Will Graham.

With news that “Gangs of New York,” “Fargo” and “Zombieland” are racing to serialize, it seems that our small screen will simply be full of stories we’ve already seen on the big one. While this deluge of small screen adaptations is certainly new, we weary cinephiles must remember that television has been gleefully ripping off the movies for decades. Many movies have found themselves repurposed into episodic bites. Sometimes, the result was so popular and successful that it outstripped the movie in pop culture, but more often than not, these television adaptations were hastily canned and buried, never to be discussed again.

Here are the good, the bad and the downright weird attempts to repurpose the silver screen for the television set. (For reasons of space and sanity, we’ve limited the list to live-action adaptations. Also because the cartoon “sequels” of everything from “Back to the Future” to “Men in Black” were pretty darn awesome.)

THE GOOD

“Buffy the Vampire Slayer” (1997-2003), based on “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” (1992)

This is the rare example of a television show that completely, utterly and indisputably outstripped its cinematic predecessor. The movie was a modest hit, but it failed to make much of a dent in pop culture. When Joss Whedon was given the chance to resurrect it on WB, he jumped at the chance, and the result was a delicious mix of girl power, horror, and wit that ran for seven successful seasons. It remains beloved and inspirational to this day, and may be the only vampire show to have inspired a whole subset of academia.

“Alice” (1976-1986), based on “Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore” (1974)

Martin Scorsese’s melancholy and hardbitten dramedy, “Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore” doesn’t seem likely fodder for a television sitcom. But the television industry lives for the inexplicable, and so Scorsese’s film naturally inspired a sitcom called “Alice” that ran for nine seasons. While it lacked the pathos of Scorsese’s film, it could be surprisingly dark, never really shirking away from the stingy, greasy poverty that the waitresses of Mel’s Diner lived in. It could be argued it outstripped Scorsese’s film in pop culture knowledge, as more people remember Flo, her “Kiss my grits!” catchphrase, and her eventual spin-off than the finer points of the original “Alice.”

“McCloud” (1970-1977), based on “Coogan’s Bluff” (1968)

If you were to pick a Clint Eastwood cop flick to meander its way to the small screen, you probably would have expected it to be “Dirty Harry” or “The Rookie.” But it was “Coogan’s Bluff” that found itself repurposed into “McCloud.” The premise is the same – a cowboy cop finds himself in the alien streets of New York, busts heads, and seduces women – but McCloud stays in the big city, his good-natured ways, Western drawl, and cowboy hat at odds with the mean streets and cynicism of New York. It ran for 7 seasons, and found time for a John Denver appearance, which was sorely lacking in the original film.

“M*A*S*H” (1972-1983), based on “M*A*S*H*” (1970)

It’s rare that great movies spawn great television, but “M*A*S*H*” really did manage to equal its cinematic predecessor in terms of tone, characters, and social criticism. (In retrospect, it seems downright radical to have a show commenting on a war while America was embroiled in one.) It could be argued the show even outstripped the film in terms of cultural impact. If you were to ask who played “Hawkeye” Pierce, most people would answer Alan Alda, and not Donald Sutherland, while many probably assume that the movie was based on the show, and not vice versa. (Bonus: “M*A*S*H also inspired the successful “Trapper John M.D.” (1979-1986), which managed to transfer one of its characters to a postwar scenario, and remain thoughtful and interesting, instead of descending into campy humor.)

“The Dukes of Hazzard” (1979-1985), based on “Moonrunners” (1975)

“Dukes” and “Buffy” share a similar origin story. (A sentence I never thought I’d write, and probably never will again.) Like Joss Whedon, writer/director Gy Waldron had the chance to develop a television series with WB, and opted to expand the moonshine-and-hot rods world of his film, “Moonrunners.” Substantial changes were made (the Duke boys were only former moonshine runners), but the schlocky, B-movie tone remained intact. “Dukes” was a huge hit, far more than the film ever was, and the Duke boys became permanent pop culture fixtures. Strangely, the cultural recycling process went full circle when “Dukes” was remade into a 2005 feature film.

“In the Heat of the Night” (1988-1995), based on “In the Heat of the Night” (1967)

A crime thriller laced with a seething current of racial tension hardly seems the stuff of a television series. The decision to update the story of Virgil Tibbs, and recast him as a former citizen of Sparta, Mississippi was at odds with the original’s theme. Yet the show works – even if it became more of a showcase for Caroll O’Connor than Howard Rollins – and was fairly fearless in its depiction of hot-button issues and grisly crime. It ran for eight successful seasons, and while “Heat” never came close to shoving the original film from its cultural standing, it remains a nifty, intriguing little sequel that worked on its own merits.

“Parenthood” (2010 to present), based on “Parenthood” (1989)

949873-switched-parenthood

The sprawling and tender “Parenthood” actually seems like a solid basis for a television series. Yet the first attempt, in 1990, was a critical and commercial flop and was quickly canned. It took Jason Katims of “Friday Night Lights” to rework the essence of the film – the constant dramas of being a parent and child – into a funny, sentimental, and honest story of a multi-generational family. It regularly reduces audiences to tears. Will it outstrip the original film in pop culture canon, or simply stand as a terrific example of adapting a story to the 21st century? Time will tell.

“Peyton Place” (1964-1969), based on “Peyton Place” (1957)

The lurid, rambling drama of “Peyton Place” was the ideal candidate for a nighttime soap opera, and it translated into a huge hit for ABC. It’s easy to understand why – sex sells! The Betty Drapers of the day just couldn’t get enough of the trashy shenanigans of this New England mill town. While it’s not as iconic as some of the other series on this list, it was certainly a cultural touchstone for its day, and a landmark for how television began approaching sex.

“The Odd Couple” (1970-1975), based on “The Odd Couple” (1968)

The title has become so synonymous with clashing roommates that it’s hard to remember it all sprang out of the brain of Neil Simon, and that it was an Oscar-nominated comedy long before it was a laugh-tracked sitcom. Nevertheless, it’s the show that persists in pop culture memory, despite the ludicrous guest-star lows it spun to, and it’s Tony Randall that has gone down as the epitome of Felix Ungar. Perhaps Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau were simply too much of the “Odd Couple” in real life to let one movie stick to their reputations the way it did to Randall and Klugman.

ON PAGE 2: OUR PICKS FOR THE WORST TV SHOWS BASED ON MOVIES.

Categories: Lists

Tags: Alice, Bates Motel, Buffy the vampire slayer, Casablanca, Elisabeth rappe, List, Mash, McCloud, Parenthood, Peyton Place, Psycho, Shaft, The Dukes of Hazzard, The odd couple, Tv

Sabtu, 22 Juni 2013

BIG TOP SCOOBY-DOO! (2012)

BIG TOP SCOOBY-DOO! (2012)

Tanggal Rilis : 9 October 2012 (USA)
Jenis Film : Animation | Family | Fantasy
Diperankan Oleh : Frank Welker, Mindy Cohn, Grey DeLisle

Ringkasan Cerita BIG TOP SCOOBY-DOO! (2012) :

Can Scooby and the gang save the greatest show on earth? Mystery, Inc.’s own Fred Jones has always dreamed of performing death-defying acrobatics under the big top. So when the Brancusi Circus comes to town, he leaps at the chance to check it out. The circus ringleader is desperate for the gang’s help. A werewolf has been terrorising the performers and stealing jewelry from the audience members. Now it’s up to Scooby and the gang to solve this mystical mystery.

[IMDb rating : 6.5/10]
[Awards : - ]
[Production Co : Digital eMation, Warner Bros. Animation]
[IMDb link : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2235542]

[Quality : WEB-DL 720p]
[File Size : 525 MB]
[Format : Matroska >> mkv]
[Resolution : 1280x720]
[Source : 720p.WEBRiP.XViD.AC3-LEGi0N]
[Encoder : nItRo]

BillionUploads
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Fileswap
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Sharebeast
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Uppit
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Zippyshare
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders

Download English Subtitle (Not available yet)
Download Indonesian Subtitle (Not available yet)

Bagi Pengunjung Baru klik di sini Cara Menggabungkan File Ekstensi .001 dan .002


( klik " Like " Dan " +1 " jika kamu suka Film ini )

Kamis, 20 Juni 2013

‘The Wolverine’ Teaser

[Via NextMovie]

The first teaser trailer for “The Wolverine” is here, and the claws have most definitely come out.

“What they did to me can’t be undone,” Hugh Jackman, as Wolverine, growls.

“Don’t be so sure,” comes the reply.

Intriguing! Every time we’ve been injected with something down to our bones, we’ve found it to be pretty much irreversible.

In this first look at the “X-Men“-universe sequel for Jackman’s adamantine-spiked mutant Wolverine, née Logan, we’re heading to the far east. Set after the events of Bryan Singer‘s “X-Men” trilogy and “X-Men Origins: Wolverine,” the film takes place in modern-day Japan, where our brooding hero is taking some time to think, and learning how to wield a samurai sword like a champ to boot.

“He realizes everyone he loves dies, and his whole life is full of pain,” director James Mangold told Entertainment Weekly of where Wolverine’s head is when our story picks up. “So it’s better that he just escapes. He can’t die really. He just wants to get away from everything.”

We’ve already seen a motion poster for the film, and MTV News yesterday released a six-second teaser for the teaser of the film. What new details can you glean from this latest reveal?

“The Wolverine” will hit theaters on July 26, 2013.

Categories: Trailers

Tags: Hugh jackman, James Mangold, Japan, Teaser, The Wolverine, Trailer

Selasa, 18 Juni 2013

Interview: David Zucker on How Spoofs Have Changed from ‘Airplane!’ to ‘Scary Movie 5′

timthumb

Film scholars may be quick to overlook his massive contributions to the medium, but David Zucker is a key figure in the world of contemporary cinema. Between “The Kentucky Fried Movie,” “Airplane!,” “Top Secret,” and “The Naked Gun,” the writer / director practically invented the spoof, and made the films that still endure as the genre’s finest examples, continuing to vindicate the form even when the likes of Friedberg & Seltzer (“Disaster Movie”) do their worst to make us wish that spoofs would go away.

When the “Scary Movie” franchise found itself in need of a new mastermind after the Wayans brothers opted out of a third installment, Zucker was a natural choice. After directing “Scary Movie 3? and “Scary Movie 4,” he contributed to “Scary Movie 5” as a writer / producer. We spoke to the comedy legend about why he opted against returning to the director’s chair for the latest chapter, and also about how cinematic comedy has changed over the 30+ years that he’s been in the business.

Film.com: We interacted by email a couple years ago.

David Zucker: I think I do remember, yes. What was that about?

I had written something at Film.com about the Marx Brothers’ “Duck Soup,” and about comedy and the making of it, and you sent me a very nice email about your own experiences with making “Airplane!” and “Top Secret”!–

Yes, that’s why I recognized the name! I think you wrote something and I thought, I can’t let this go! Because I know a lot about the Marx Brothers!

So you directed “Scary Movie” 3 and 4, but you were not credited as a writer — but those movies are clearly your style of humor. As the director, how involved are you in the creative process of actually coming up with the gags and so forth?

A lot. In 3 and 4?

For example, yeah.

I think it was 90 percent Craig Mazin and Pat Proft having written 3 and 4. Five was Pat Proft and me.

Right, so 5 is kind of the other way around, where you wrote but didn’t direct it.

Right, I wrote, and then Malcolm Lee directed.

I think that is not a common scenario for you, is it? To write something that you didn’t also direct?

That’s right. Well, I can’t remember what the last — on the third “Naked Gun,” I was also done with directing those.

I can tell you the last one you wrote but didn’t direct. Do you want to know?

Sure!

“High School High.”

Wait a minute, I DID direct “High School High”!

You did?

No, I didn’t! Oh, I need you to remind me! Hart Bochner directed it!

I was gonna say, I was going off of IMDB…

[laughter]

You know, in one of the interviews I did, somebody said, “Ashley Tisdale’s character in ‘Scary Movie 5' is listed as Jody Campbell. Did you do that on purpose, to link it with Sidney [Campbell], Anna Faris’ character?” Wait a minute, that’s — no we didn’t do that. In fact, her name in this movie was Jody Sanders, and that was a mistake.

IMDB does make mistakes sometimes.

That was a HUGE mistake! It’s the main character!

How is the process different when you’re on just the writing side of it and not as the director? I mean, here you were also producing, so I’m sure you could make your opinions known.

You know, I have to do all the work as a director. I mean, it’s so much work. It’s a year of your life. I have to find something about it that I’m passionate about, and I found that on “Naked Gun” 1 and 2 and “Scary” 3 and 4. And “Airplane!,” the first “Airplane!” But it’s just hard to do a 3 and maintain that passion. To power you through all that work, and all that — you have to run down every single little detail. I just didn’t – like the “Naked Gun” franchise – I didn’t want to do it again. I’d just rather write and produce, let someone else direct. So that’s how that decision was made. And it’s different because you have to sit back and let the director do it. I have to train them on the job, as I did Pete Segal [for "Naked Gun 33 1/3"], Hart Bochner, and now Malcolm Lee. Because this is unlike something they’ve ever done!

With “Scary Movie 5,” where you directed the previous two, so you could have directed this one too, if you’d wanted to. I certainly understand all the energy involved. Was that a hard decision for you, knowing that you’d have to, as you say, sort of train them on the job?

It was just what I had to do. I mean, I was resolved not to direct it. I just, I can’t do it. And that was it. And the studio tried for two years to get me to direct. That’s why it’s been so long since they’ve done a “Scary Movie.”

Oh really?

Yeah. And so – well, partially because no movies came up that they really – there hasn’t been a “War of the Worlds” or “Grudge” or “Signs” or “The Ring” in a while. In fact, we kind of went with this one without the necessary movie that we needed that had a physical monster. In 3 we had the scary girl from “The Ring,” “War of the Worlds” had the big aliens, and “Signs” had an alien. So we started out with “Paranormal Activity,” which is not any kind of visible demon, and “Black Swan,” which doesn’t have a demon, and “The Planet of the Apes.” So that’s why we added “Mama” later.

You bring up an interesting point. The early spoof movies, “Airplane!” and “Top Secret!” and so forth, were not very specific. Watching “Top Secret!” recently, I was surprised by how few dated references there were. Whereas now the trend in the spoof movies is to be very specific, very of-the-moment.

Right, no, it’s very specific, and so you really recognize those movies. [But] we spoofed different movies in “Airplane!” I mean, that movie was the forerunner of this, and kind of invented that style or genre, if you will, of doing specific movies. The one specific movie that we did — you know, outside of just the “Airport” movies, I suppose –

Sure, the genre.

But you don’t recognize those as such because the plot was from an obscure 1957 movie, “Zero Hour.” But we did “Saturday Night Fever”! I mean, the movie’s clippin’ along, and it’s an airport movie, and suddenly the audience is in “Saturday Night Fever,” and our guy is John Travolta. You know, we didn’t set out to invent that whole concept in the genre. It was just what we thought was funny. And that’s what really started that whole genre, when we did that specific movie within another movie.

At the time, were you thinking about trying to avoid jokes that would not last the test of time, or was that even a conscious thought?

It was not a conscious thought.

Just the way it turned out.

Yeah. I mean, if we had cared at all, if we had been conscious at all of “test of time,” we wouldn’t have done those stupid jokes on commercials. The coffee thing? ["Jim never has a second cup of coffee at home!"] That’s idiotic, if you want to stand the test of time.

The one in “Top Secret!” is there’s a joke about “I put your name on the Montgomery Ward mailing list,” or something.

Yeah. What’s Montgomery Ward? What’s a Pinto?

But, it’s like the only joke in the whole movie that’s like that! I think that’s impressive, that almost 30 years later it pretty much all still holds up.

Yeah, it’s funny, and some of these funny references are funny in their obscurity.

That’s true too. Sort of a time capsule.

Right.

You’ve been in the business a long time now. How is the process of making these movies now different from the way it was, say, 30, 35 years ago.

Well, definitely we made our own movie 35 years, and 30 years ago, and 25 years ago, and 20 years ago. And now, you know, I mean, the studio controls this franchise. And so we were directed to do “Paranormal Activity,” “Black Swan,” I think we added “Planet of the Apes.” And also “Mama,” and “Evil Dead,” and “Hunger Games,” “50 Shades of Grey” — all these things are stated by, demanded by the studio.

Is that difficult for you creatively, to not have that control?

Oh yeah. That’s like — it’s — but it’s the “Scary Movie” franchise, and the studio owns it. So it’s not like they’re taking my baby and taking over control. This movie comes from the studio. I get it. Some things I’ll argue with. Like I didn’t want to do “Hunger Games,” but they insisted “Hunger Games” had to be in it, so we shot it.

That makes sense. It’s the job they hired you for, so you do what you have to.

Right. Or they wanted to do “50 Shades of Grey,” which isn’t even a movie! So I said, “What? What is the visual on this?”

“Now you’re just listing things that are current!”

Right! And “Evil Dead” comes out a week before we do! And so we had to spoof the trailer! It’s really – there is more insanity in making this movie than there is in the movie.

I can believe it. How did you come to this franchise, anyway? They had the first two, that you had nothing to do with.

Yeah, the first two, the Wayans Brothers did the first two, and they were unable to arrive at a deal for 3. So that was kind of a break-up. And Bob [Weinstein] called me because I had done probably the only Ashton Kutcher movie that didn’t do any business.

“My Boss’s Daughter.”

Yeah. It ended up making money, it just wasn’t a big hit. But Bob said at the time that he thought I was a better director than the material. Because that was a – I didn’t like the script. So I could blame it on that. But he knew that the spoof stuff I could certainly do.

Well, it makes sense. If you’re not sure what to do with a spoof franchise, bring in a Zucker. See what a Zucker can do with it!

Yes, bring in somebody who invented it! Let them have a shot.

Who have been some of the writers and performers and filmmakers who have made you laugh, within the span of your career? Who do you find funny?

Well, you know, mostly before my career: the Marx Brothers and Woody Allen. And now – you know, I don’t find – I thought Mike Myers, that stuff was funny. “Austin Powers.” I think Will Ferrell is funny. And I think Kirsten [sic.] – who’s the one who did “Bridesmaids”?

Kristen Wiig.

Wiig, yeah. She’s funny. It makes me glad when I can go to a theater that makes me laugh.

What have you seen recently that made you laugh?

[pause] I think “Bridesmaids” is the last thing that made me laugh. [laughter] It’s already been a couple years!

As a comedy nerd, I’m always interested to know what makes funny people laugh.

I really don’t go to a theater unless like three different people tell me it’s funny. I can’t remember what was out recently as far as comedies. Can you think of any?

Let’s see, what were some of the recent big comedies. “The Hangover,” “Horrible Bosses.”

Yeah, “Hangover,” that was funny, although I didn’t think it was as funny as everybody else I was with. But I got it. I thought it was a trip. Todd Phillips is good. He’s excellent.

This is an unfair question. If you had to choose one movie from your career to be the only one saved in the movie annals of history, or whatever, which one would you choose?

Well, I think that’s an easy one. I think “Airplane!” “Airplane!” is the one.

Fair enough. When did that come out? ’80? ’81?

’80.

So it’s been, my goodness, 33 years? Do you ever get tired of talking about it, or of people wanting to talk about it?

No, it’s fine. It’s great, I’m so proud to have been a part of it, and it’s a part of my life. Probably I’ve never done anything as good as that, but that’s fine! They can’t take that away from me. There’s a lot worse things than having been the director/writer of “Airplane!” It only gives me joy.

Scary Movie 5 hits theaters this Friday.

MTV Movie Awards 2013Categories: Interviews

Tags: Airplane, Charlie sheen, David Zucker, Eric Snider, Interview, Lindsay lohan, Naked Gun, Scary Movie 5

Senin, 17 Juni 2013

THE MAN FROM NOWHERE (2010)

THE MAN FROM NOWHERE (2010)

Tanggal Rilis : 5 Agustus 2010 (Korea Selatan)
Jenis Film : Action | Crime | Thriller
Diperankan Oleh : Bin Won, Sae-ron Kim dan Hyo-seo Kim

Ringkasan Cerita THE MAN FROM NOWHERE (2010) :

Operating a pawn shop in a small neighborhood, Cha Tae-sik now leads a quiet life. His only connection to the rest of the world is a little girl, So-mee, who lives nearby. A heroin addict and So-mi’s mother, Hyo-jeong, smuggles drugs from a drug trafficking organization and entrusts Tae-sik with the product.

When the traffickers find out about this they kidnap both Hyo-jeong and So-mi. The gang sends a number of thugs to Tae-sik’s pawn shop to retrieve the stolen drugs, but is easily overpowered by Tae-sik, making his identity ambiguous. However, upon learning that the gang now has in their possession both Hyo-jeong and So-mi, Tae-sik gives the beaten gang members what they are looking for.

Realizing that Tae-sik may serve better as a mule than their former thug, the brothers that lead the gang — Man-sik and Jong-sik — promise to release Hyo-jeong and So-mi under the condition that Tae-sik make a delivery for them. Tae-sik makes the decision to face the outside world in order to rescue So-mi. However, the delivery was part of a larger plot to eliminate a drug ring superior, Mr. Oh, and Tae-sik is arrested.

At the same time, Hyo-jeong’s body, with her organs harvested, is discovered in the back of the car used by Tae-sik when he made the delivery, and Tae-sik realizes that So-mi’s life may also be in danger. He fights off half a dozen detectives and escapes from the police station.

(Sumber : wikipedia)

[IMDb rating : 7.8/10]
[Awards : 4 wins & 1 nomination]
[Production Co : Cinema Service, Opus Pictures, United Pictures]
[IMDb link : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1527788]

[Quality : BRRip 720p]
[File Size : 900 MB]
[Format : Matroska >> mkv]
[Resolution : 1280x544]
[Source : 720p.BluRay]

BillionUploads
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Megaload
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Uppit
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Zippyshare
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
180upload
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Single Link
Download Single File 180upload

Download English Subtitle
Download Indonesian Subtitle

Bagi Pengunjung Baru klik di sini Cara Menggabungkan File Ekstensi .001 dan .002


( klik " Like " Dan " +1 " jika kamu suka Film ini )

Sabtu, 15 Juni 2013

Five Things the Oscars Could Learn from the MTV Movie Awards

The Academy Awards are still the definitive awards show (ostensibly), but the general consensus seems to be that they’ve grown a little stale. Or a lot stale. The general consensus seems to be that they’ve grown some degree of stale. And even though the Oscars recently celebrated their 85th annual occurrence, they’re still having trouble figuring out what works and what doesn’t – what it is that people want to see when they sit down to watch a celebration of the year in film.

The MTV Movie Awards, the latest edition of which airs this Sunday night, have never had that problem. While they occupy a very different place in the movie world, the more casual nature of the program has ensured that it’s consistently fun and playful (and short), and the folks over at the Academy might should probably pay attention if they want to avoid a repeat of this year’s debacle.

So with that in mind, here are five lessons that the Academy Awards could take from the MTV Movie Awards:

Be Flexible

jennifer-lawrence-house-at-the-end-of-the-street-horror

If there’s one thing that’s been constant about the MTV Movie Awards, it’s that they have not been afraid to evolve. Not just in terms of the types of films they respond to (though it’s hard to imagine that “JFK” and “Bugsy” were among the nominees at the very first MTV Movie Awards in 1992) but also in their ability to shake up categories. “Best Scared As Sh*t Performance” sounds gratuitously silly, but it’s a solid way to show appreciation for the teen horror genre that has been so popular with MTV viewers in the last decade. I’m not saying that the Oscars should be adding new categories every year and trying to sound cooler, but perhaps a small degree of flexibility? I’ve been going hoarse for years yelling about how the Original Score and Original Song categories need to be opened up to reflect the reality of the filmmaking process in 2013, but thus far, tradition has won out.

Honor Your Elders

Anchorman_140Pyxurz

In MTV’s case, that means Will Ferrell, as horrifying as it might be to contemplate that. He’s getting their “Comedic Genius Video Vanguard Artist of the Millennium Award” this year. The presentation will be held during the show, televised in full, and may or may not feature Ferrell in character as Ron Burgundy. But there it will be, for the entire viewing audience to watch.

The Oscars have taken to handing out their Lifetime Achievement awards at a separate ceremony, weeks before, away from the hustle and bustle of the real show. This has caused a good bit of consternation among Oscar fans, seeing it as a sign of disrespect to their elders. And, look, watching a Paramount executive speak for five minutes after accepting the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award is probably nobody’s idea of a good time, but if Jodie Foster at the Golden Globes proved anything, it’s that Lifetime Achievement awards can end up being the most TV-friendly moments of all.

Look At All Parts of the Moviemaking Experience

Best-Shirtless-Performance

I will admit that I am probably the only person who is advocating that the Oscars actually be a longer awards show, but I could probably name a half-dozen more categories they could include, if they really wanted to honor everything worth honoring the moviemaking business. Best Stunt Coordination/Performances. Best Casting. Best Trailer. If you’re going to be THE movie awards show, do it up right.

The MTV Movie Awards don’t go that deep into the moviemaking well either, but they do give a pretty good scan of the moviemaking experience that their demographic enjoys. That means onscreen badasses, shirtless performances, “WTF moments,” what have you. Because the MTV audience wants memorable moments that everybody was talking about. Those moments that transcended the fragmented spheres of genres and media and made everybody pay attention to the same thing. They’re serving their audience. The Oscars should serve theirs. Which reminds me …

Stay In Your Lane

Ted-Mark-Wahlberg-e1362571673504

The temptation when discussing the lessons that the Oscars should take from the MTV Movie Awards is that they should get younger, cooler, less stuffy and musty. I’m here to tell you that that’s all wrong. There’s something positively Cool Dad about when the Oscars try to feel hip. It’s very much like watching an adult say the word “hip.” The second it comes out of your mouth, you’ve lost it. MTV goes aggressively for the youth market because that’s who’s watching. They’re not watching the Oscars. Not in numbers that advertisers like to see. Which is a problem because of demographics and disposable income and yada yada. I get it. Economics. But nothing good has ever come of the Oscars pretending to be something they’re not (case in point: Seth MacFarlane).

Young people watch the MTV Movie Awards. Movie People watch the Oscars. Young people who grow up to be Movie People will watch the Oscars. Provided the Oscars are still about movies. That’s where “stay in your lane” comes in. Play to the audience you have. Don’t flail about looking for an audience and lose yourselves in the process. MTV isn’t scrambling to honor Michael Haneke just to look smarter than they are. The Academy doesn’t need to pretend to like “Ted” just to seem cooler.

Recognize the Utter Brilliance of Salma Hayek’s Performance in “Savages.”

Just saying.

MTV Movie Awards 2013Categories: Awards

Tags: Jennifer Lawrence, Joe reid, Magic Mike, Mtv movie awards, Oscars, Will ferrell

Jumat, 14 Juni 2013

Why So Serious? How this Year’s Action Movies Are Proving that Fun is the Future

Antoine Fuqua’s “Olympus Has Fallen” hit theaters last Friday, and its arrival announces a possible new chapter in its director’s now twenty-year career. Fuqua has carved out something of a niche with his brand of gritty action drama, from the mud-colored theatrics of “King Arthur” to the crooked-cop morality play of “Training Day,” still his most successful film to date, but “Olympus” represents a surprising turn toward honest-to-goodness levity. A duly patriotic riff on the shopworn “Die Hard” template, “Olympus” seems from the outset like just another blast of urban grit and uncomfortable conservatism from a director known to specialize in both, but it quickly becomes clear that its intentions are markedly lighter.

Acutely aware of its own ridiculousness, Creighton Rothenberger and Katrin Benedikt’s screenplay gently mocks the genre to which it so obviously belongs, exaggerating the extreme silliness of the proceedings without veering too far into parody. It’s a good look for a film otherwise defined by noxious hyper-nationalism and a simplistic moral framework, ultimately ridiculing its own agenda instead of positing it problematically. And it’s a savvy career move for Fuqua, who proves that he does in fact have a sense of humor.

What “Olympus Has Fallen” doesn’t do is go far enough. Though it abounds in humorous one-liners and slightly mocking plays on genre convention, the film is nevertheless a bastion of formal mediocrity, proceeding with such nondescript simplicity that it may as well have been shot and edited using a computational algorithm. Fuqua, however “gritty” his aesthetic sensibility, still approaches filmmaking as though it were a job to simply be completed on time and under budget, and the most generous praise one could offer him is that he is a perfectly competent craftsman. This approach makes for consistent and – in this case – surprisingly successful films, but it also makes for films that are hard to get especially excited about one way or another.

This is in part because filmmaking as a practice is rigidly, almost suffocatingly ritualized, the formula for setting up a Hollywood project and seeing it through to fruition a matter of literally going through the motions required. And when so much money is on the table in each case—the budget for “Olympus” was $130 million—it’s not hard to understand why studios would discourage the risk of even minor innovations. And so what we get is another film like the others.

What we need, far more than workmanship, is genuine artistry, and if artistry is too much to ask of action cinema, at least a more innovative craft. When it comes to movies, it’s always better to have an unpredictable failure than a predictable success, which is why we need films whose purpose is to entertain without limitations, to mock themselves in form and content, and to essentially approach the genre anew. The best action films of the past several years aren’t the ones concerned with monochromatic urban grit or an air of dour self-seriousness; they’re the ones that seem vital and vibrant, liberated from their own pretenses to be pure and simply fun.

Our best action filmmakers think about the genre in a different way: for Paul W.S. Anderson, whose recent ”Three Musketeers” set a new high-water mark for the 3D adventure spectacle, that means deferring to a sense of space and visual orientation, retaining a light touch and formal elegance through the chaos of its action; for James Mather and Stephen St. Leger, whose wildly underrated “Lockout” (aka “Space Jail”) transformed Guy Pearce into a sci-fi Philip Marlowe (replete with a host of amusing zingers), it means adopting full-blown cartoon physics, using CGI not to augment natural reality but to stretch and expand it. And for Neveldine/Taylor, the directorial duo behind “Crank” and “Gamer” and two of the most inventive action filmmakers currently working, it means rejecting convention and making a movie however it pleases them.

Neveldine/Taylor’s sensibility has a crassness and vulgarity that can make their films difficult to stomach, but in terms of film production the two have more in common with the jazzy on-set improvisation of Jean-Luc Godard than with any of their contemporaries. Shooting on inexpensive, lightweight consumer cameras that enable them to cover their action with striking proximity (and precariousness), the pair also somewhat notoriously serve as camera operators on their own productions; they’re known to follow their actors on rollerblades in lieu of any sort of dolly, stringing themselves up on bungee cords and harnesses for daring mid-air takes, fashioning their cameras to bikes and car bumpers and generally just tossing them around with a carelessness they couldn’t afford were they relying on a more traditional setup.

The results, especially in both “Crank” and its sequel, “Crank: High Voltage,” proceed with a remarkable briskness of pace, the camerawork frenzied and breathless; in a given scene, many of which featuring broken anti-hero Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) running for his life, the camera might track his feet at ground-level, cut to a shot inches from his sweating face, spin around him rapidly, and be interrupted by a non sequitur title card or strange sight gag. The style is certainly abrasive, but it’s uniquely their own.

“Crank” is the sort of film series in which a character speaking in another language is given unhelpful phonetic subtitles, a flashback dream sequence turns into an imagined daytime talk show, and two characters inexplicably transform into giant Kaiju versions of themselves to have a Godzilla-style battle—all of which occurs without need or explanation and none of which seems even slightly predictable or boring. (“Crank 2,” in particular, is veritably an avant-garde work.) What’s astonishing is how Neveldine/Taylor are able to achieve such formal radicalism under the aegis of a Hollywood studio, but the reason they’re afforded such creative freedom is because, much to their credit, their films are made quickly and under-budget, which means a small investment on a relatively impressive return. It’s proof that innovation can not only be accomplished within the mainstream, but actually thrive there. It’s also proof that our continuing acceptance of the monotony of bland action films is patently unnecessary, because genuinely visionary genre filmmakers are among us. This weekend’s big release – Jon Chu’s “G.I. Joe: Retaliation” – features a wordless nine-minute sequence in which rival clans of ninjas zipline around a Himalayan mountainpeak while playing a deadly game of keepaway with a bodybag, and that’s reason enough to hold out hope for the future.

Categories: Features

Tags: Action movies, Antoine Fuqua, Calum Marsh, Crank, Crank 2: high voltage, G.I. Joe: Retaliation, Jason statham, Mark Neveldine, Olympus Has Fallen, Paul w.s. anderson

Rabu, 12 Juni 2013

BROKEN CITY (2013)

BROKEN CITY (2013)

Tanggal Rilis : 18 January 2013 (USA)
Jenis Film : Crime | Drama | Thriller
Diperankan Oleh : Mark Wahlberg, Russell Crowe, Catherine Zeta-Jones

Ringkasan Cerita BROKEN CITY (2013) :

In this modern noir from director Allen Hughes, his first fiction feature-length film in over a decade, Mark Wahlberg stars as Billy Taggart, a New York City private eye struggling to get his deadbeat clients to pay when he gets a call from Mayor Hostetler (Russell Crowe). His honor remembers Billy from seven years ago when, as a cop, the young man shot a rapist who had been exonerated on a technicality.

Back then, the Mayor told Billy he was a hero, but Billy was still forced off the job due to the public outcry and some incriminating evidence that never saw the light of day. Now the mayor needs someone he can trust to find out if his wife (Catherine Zeta-Jones) is having an affair – a fact that could cause him considerable trouble seeing as Election Day is just a week away. As Billy digs for the truth, he uncovers layers of political corruption, and discovers he himself is nothing more than a pawn in a much bigger game.

[IMDb rating : 6.1/10]
[Awards : - ]
[Production Co : Regency Enterprises, Emmett/Furla Films, Black Bear Pictures]
[IMDb link : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1235522]

[Quality : WEBRip | WEB-DL 720p]
[File Size : 375 MB | 650 MB]
[Format : Matroska >> mkv]
[Resolution : 640x272 | 1280x530]
[Source : WEBRip.XviD-S4A | 720p.WEB-DL.x264-WEBiOS]
[Encoder : nItRo]

BillionUploads WEBRip
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Megaload WEBRip
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Uppit WEBRip
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Zippyshare WEBRip
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
180upload WEBRip
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
BillionUploads WEB-DL 720p
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Fileswap WEB-DL 720p
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Megaload WEB-DL 720p
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Uppit WEB-DL 720p
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Zippyshare WEB-DL 720p
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 | Part4 | Part5 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders

Download English Subtitle
Download Indonesian Subtitle

Bagi Pengunjung Baru klik di sini Cara Menggabungkan File Ekstensi .001 dan .002


( klik " Like " Dan " +1 " jika kamu suka Film ini )

Senin, 10 Juni 2013

OLDBOY (2003)

OLDBOY (2003)

Tanggal Rilis : 21 November 2003 (South Korea)
Jenis Film : Drama | Mystery | Thriller
Diperankan Oleh : Min-sik Choi, Ji-tae Yu, Hye-jeong Kang

Ringkasan Cerita OLDBOY (2003) :

An average man is kidnapped and imprisoned in a shabby cell for 15 years without explanation. He then is released, equipped with money, a cellphone and expensive clothes. As he strives to explain his imprisonment and get his revenge, Oh Dae-Su soon finds out that his kidnapper has a greater plan for him and is set onto a path of pain and suffering in an attempt to uncover the motive of his mysterious tormentor.

[IMDb rating : 8.4/10]
[Awards : Top 250 #85 | 17 wins & 11 nominations]
[Production Co : Egg Films, Show East]
[IMDb link : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0364569]

[Quality : BRRip 720p]
[File Size : 550 MB]
[Format : Matroska >> mkv]
[Resolution : 1280x544]
[Source : 720p.BluRay]

BillionUploads
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Megaload
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Uppit
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Zippyshare
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
180upload
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Single Link
Download Single File 180upload

Download English Subtitle
Download Indonesian Subtitle

Bagi Pengunjung Baru klik di sini Cara Menggabungkan File Ekstensi .001 dan .002


( klik " Like " Dan " +1 " jika kamu suka Film ini )

Minggu, 09 Juni 2013

MADLY MADAGASCAR (2013)

MADLY MADAGASCAR (2013)

Tanggal Rilis : 29 January 2013 (USA)
Jenis Film : Animation | Short
Diperankan Oleh : Cedric the Entertainer, Danny Jacobs, Andrea Montana Knoll

Ringkasan Cerita MADLY MADAGASCAR (2013) :

Valentines day is one of Alex’s FAVORITE holidays! Back in the zoo, he was practically showered with valentines from numerous admirers, but now that he’s in Africa, he’s finding that valentines day is not what he was used to… can he still enjoy the day even though he’s not getting the amount of attention he’s used to having especially since his best friend is getting all the attention he himself is used to and more?

[IMDb rating : 6.3/10]
[Awards : - ]
[Production Co : DreamWorks Animation]
[IMDb link : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2702348]

[Quality : WEB-DL 720p]
[File Size : 450 MB]
[Format : Matroska >> mkv]
[Resolution : 1280x718]
[Source : 720p.WEB-DL.H264-HDB]
[Encoder : nItRo]

BillionUploads
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Fileswap
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Uppit
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
Zippyshare
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
180upload
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Join with HJ-Split, Download HJ-Split
Credit to original uploaders

Download English Subtitle
Download Indonesian Subtitle

Bagi Pengunjung Baru klik di sini Cara Menggabungkan File Ekstensi .001 dan .002


( klik " Like " Dan " +1 " jika kamu suka Film ini )

Jumat, 07 Juni 2013

Your Daily Short: ‘La Maison en Petite Cubes’

Welcome to Your Daily Short, a new feature on Film.com that will highlight and stream a short film at high noon. Every weekday. Every week.

TODAY’S FILM: “La Maison en Petite Cubes” (Kunio Kato) 2008

RUNNING TIME: 12:06

WHY YOU SHOULD WATCH IT: Winner of the 2009 Academy Award for Best Animated Short, “La Maison en Petite Cubes” is one of the most sweetly melancholic short films ever made. A Japanese production (despite the French title) about a man who lives in a floating house above the ruins of his flooded hometown, I had never heard of this short until I visited Hiroshima on the anniversary of its nuclear devastation and “La Maison en Petite Cubes” screened as part of the wistful memorial service. The film’s Japanese origins were unknown to me at the time, but the parallels to the aftermath of the A-bomb were obvious.

In a quick 12 minutes that will likely leave you in tears, Kato’s short is an immensely graceful portrait of how we live on the ruins of our memories (literally, in this case), and the often necessary pain involved in re-engaging with them in order to persevere.

Yesterday’s Short of the Day: Isabella Rossellini’s “Green Porno: Bee”

Do you have a favorite short film that you would like us to feature as Your Daily Short? Whether it’s something you love, something you made, or both, send it along to Filmdotcomshorts@Gmail.com and you might see it on the site! 

Categories: Columns

Tags: Academy Award Best Animated Short, Hiroshima, Kuno Kato, La Maison en Petite Cubes, Short Film, Your Daily Short

Rabu, 05 Juni 2013

The Croods (2013)

The Croods (2013)

Tanggal Rilis :22 March 2013
Jenis Film :Animation | Adventure | Comedy
Diperankan Oleh :Nicolas Cage, Ryan Reynolds, Emma Stone

Ringkasan Cerita The Croods (2013) :

Film ini dimulai dengan Eep ( Emma Stone ), seorang gadis dalam keluarga Neanderthal Cavemen (homo neanderthalensis) yang tinggal di zaman pra sejarah, berbicara tentang bagaimana keluarganya adalah salah satu dari sedikit untuk bertahan hidup di dekatnya, terutama karena aturan ketatnya overprotective ayah Grug ( Nicolas Cage ). Ketika di rumah gua mereka, Grug menceritakan sebuah cerita ke seluruh keluarga yang mencakup istrinya Ugga ( Catherine Keener ), putrinya Sandy ( Randy Thom ), Thunk anaknya ( Clark Duke ), dan ibu mertuanya ( Cloris Leachman ) dengan karakter yang mencerminkan sifat penasaran Eep itu. Dia menggunakan cerita ini untuk memperingatkan keluarga yang eksplorasi dan hal baru mengancam kelangsungan hidup mereka. Ini mengiritasi Eep bosan dan berpetualang, dan ketika keluarga tertidur setelah gelap, dia mengabaikan saran ayahnya, dan meninggalkan gua.

Sementara menjelajah, ia bertemu Guy ( Ryan Reynolds ), sebuah caveboy cerdas (homo sapien). Dia menjadi terpesona dengan api ia berhasil membuat dan bersemangat untuk belajar lebih banyak. Dia mengatakan padanya tentang teorinya bahwa dunia akan mencapai ‘akhir,’ sebelum memberikan tanduk noise membuatnya untuk memanggil dia jika dia merasa perlu bantuan. Dia kemudian meninggalkan Eep, yang kemudian tertangkap oleh Grug (yang telah panik mencari dirinya). Banyak kemudian, ia membawa pulang kembali, hanya untuk menemukan bahwa rumah gua mereka telah runtuh dari gempa bumi. Semua keluarga kemudian memanjat reruntuhan untuk menemukan tanah yang lain duniawi, jauh berbeda dengan lingkungan mereka yang biasa berbatu. Sementara menjadi sadar lingkungan baru mereka, keluarga diserang oleh beberapa merah berbulu burung yang mematikan. Dalam suatu tindakan panik, Eep terdengar tanduk serupa dengan yang Guy memberinya. Guy mendengar ini dan bergegas kepadanya. Berpikir cepat, ia menciptakan sebuah obor api, yang takut burung-burung pergi.

Grug kemudian memberitahu yang lain dari semangat penurunnya dongeng, kali ini mencerminkan peristiwa hari mereka, menyebutkan seorang gadis Grug dan Ugga sebelumnya Eep lahir yang melakukan usaha jauh dari gua dan mati. Guy kemudian menceritakan kisah sendiri, tentang surga, ia julukan “Besok.”Di pagi hari, keluarga mencapai jalan dilapisi batu berduri. Sebuah Guy dibebaskan kemudian menyajikan salah satu dari berbagai penemuan yang disebut sepatu. Dia membuat beberapa dari semua sumber daya yang ia dapat menemukan, untuk setiap anggota keluarga. Ini dia beberapa keuntungan rasa hormat dari orang lain, kecuali Grug, yang mulai merasa cemburu kecerdikannya Guy. Setelah membunuh ide Guy membantu Croods perjalanan berkelanjutan mereka, mereka semua mencapai pohon untuk berhenti selama satu malam. Semua orang tapi Grug memutuskan untuk mengubah jalan mereka untuk “Besok”.

[IMDb rating : 7.5/10]
[Production Co : DreamWorks Animation]
[IMDb link : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0481499/]

[Quality : TS]
[File Size : 400MB]
[Format : Matroska >> mkv]
[Source : TS XviD-SKA]

netload
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
turbobit
| Part1 | Part2 | Part3 |
Extract with winrar
Credit to original uploaders
======================================
uploaded
| Single link |
Credit to original uploaders

Bagi Pengunjung Baru klik di sini Cara Menggabungkan File Ekstensi .001 dan .002


( klik " Like " Dan " +1 " jika kamu suka Film ini )

Selasa, 04 Juni 2013

Your Daily Short: ‘The Cost of Living’

Welcome to Your Daily Short, a new feature on Film.com that will highlight and stream a short film at high noon. Every weekday. Every week.

TODAY’S FILM: “The Cost of Living” (BenDavid Grabinski) 2011

RUNNING TIME: 7:56

WHY YOU SHOULD WATCH IT: A hit at Fantastic Fest when it premiered there in 2011, BenDavid Grabinski’s impressively compact short takes the usual crises that most of us grapple with as we begin to feel the inertia of adulthood, and then raises the stakes. And by “raises the stakes” I obviously mean “adds were-children, gremlins and a mess of other monsters.” Ruthlessly efficient and as well-versed in genre tropes as it is the neuroses of Generation Y, “The Cost of Living” is deeply satisfying stuff, and a necessary reminder that films should better value our time.

Bonus: “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World” reunion like woah.

Visit the official site for “The Cost of Living.” 

Watch yesterday’s Daily Short: “La Maison en Petite Cubes”

Do you have a favorite short film that you would like us to feature as Your Daily Short? Whether it’s something you love, something you made, or both, send it along to Filmdotcomshorts@Gmail.com and you might see it on the site! 

Categories: Columns

Tags: BenDavid Grabinski, Brandon routh, Mary elizabeth winstead, Short Film, The Cost of living, Your Daily Short

Minggu, 02 Juni 2013

‘Thor’ Scribe Don Payne Passes Away

Emmy-winning screenwriter Don Payne has unfortunately passed away this week.

Payne, a noted writer and producer for “The Simpsons,” died on Tuesday March 26, 2013, his family confirmed. While the official cause of Payne’s death has not been announced, he is said to have been battling a form of cancer.

In the film world, Payne was known for his recent superhero co-scripting on “Thor,” “Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer” and his original screenplay, “My Super Ex-Girlfriend.”

Most of his notoriety, however, stemmed from his work on TV shows like “The Simpsons,” “The Brian Benben Show” and “Veronica’s Closet.”

Payne most recently submitted a story draft for “Thor: The Dark World” and also worked on the screenplay for DreamWorks’ “Maximum Ride” adaptation of James Patterson’s YA series.

“Thor” co-writer Zack Stentz took to Twitter today to react to the news of Payne’s passing, writing, “Don Payne was an excellent writer who leaves behind some great work, but mainly I’m just terribly sad for his family. Life can be so unfair.”

Kat Dennings, who stars as Darcy Lewis in the “Thor” films, also offered a public reaction, writing ”A wonderful, beautiful man has passed away. Don Payne, I am lucky to have known you. You are so missed.”

Mike Scully, a fellow “Simpsons” writer added a photo of Payne’s parking space at Fox studios and captioned, “Great Writer, Sweet Guy, Gone Way Too Soon.”

Over on Movies.com, Scott Weinberg has written a moving account of the kindness Payne personally showed to him.

Categories: News

Tags: Don Payne, Kat dennings, Thor, Thor 2, Thor: The Dark World

Sabtu, 01 Juni 2013

Review: ‘The Angels’ Share’

angels share

Just how is one supposed to react, in 2013, to a non-ironic use of the Proclaimers’ “(I’m Gonna Be) 500 Miles” in a musical montage?

It might inspire you to check your ticket stub to make sure you aren’t watching something on the order of “Parental Guidance.” But no, this is “The Angels’ Share,” a Cannes jury prize winner (somehow) and the latest from Ken Loach, a director who, last we checked, still had his act together. The prolific 76-year-old British creator of character-rich, social dramas steeped in natural realism (usually) has whiffed it and whiffed it hard with this one. It’s not that it’s just “lesser Loach.” It is, in my opinion at least, humiliating.

“The Angels’ Share” begins decent enough introducing a lineup of Glasgow-based screw-ups receiving community service sentences. Among them is Robbie (Paul Brannigan), a thug whose public interest attorney swears is going to clean up his act now that his girlfriend is pregnant, Albert (Gary Maitland) a bald, bespectacled nincompoop who exists mainly to disprove Darwin’s theory of natural selection and Mo (Jasmin Riggins) an unrepentant kleptomaniac. Under the watchful eye of Harry (John Henshaw) they and others paint walls in government buildings and clean up cemeteries.

Harry, while ostensibly “the Man” in this scenario, is more of a camp counselor. He lives in a modest home and his passion is tasting (but not getting wrecked on) fine whiskies. He takes Robbie under his wing and next thing you know Robbie is to sniffing single malts what Mozart is to writing piano concertos. Harry sees in Robbie the son he never had (as Robbie himself has just had a son but his girlfriend’s bruiser family threaten to separate them). With a shared fondness for discussing whisky, they find a hobby that takes their minds off their trouble.

And there is trouble for Robbie. In addition to getting jumped by his girlfriend’s brothers, he agrees to attend a counseling session for a boy he beat the hell out of years ago. Robbie seems conciliatory, but the matter is quickly dropped and the film’s focus turns back to whisky and, eventually, a wacky get rich quick scheme.

Not since “Silver Linings Playbook” has there been such a tone-deaf shift in a film’s level of verisimilitude. Like De Niro making side bets, Robbie and his crew are soon stealing liters of the world’s priciest whisky and smuggling them back to the city. Most baffling, however, are lengthy, flatly-shot scenes of watching our band observe the machinations of the high end whiskey market. They attend multiple tastings and even take a distillery tour that could double as a promotional video for the brand.

Unlike, say, the driving school scenes in Mike Leigh’s “Happy Go Lucky” (to bring up a director Loach is frequently compared to), these mundane scenes don’t draw out wonderful moments of human nature. They just lay there on the screen, daring you to ask “why the heck are we seeing this?”

Since the characters speak in hearty, obscenity-fueled dialects there is a sort of anthropological fun that can be had with “The Angels’ Share.” However there are far better ways to get a wee taste of the underclass of the British Isles than this odd duck of a picture. Despite its hopes, it is pure bottom shelf material.

SCORE: 3/10

Categories: Reviews

Tags: Jordan hoffman, Ken Loach, Review, The Angels' Share, Whiskey

Kamis, 30 Mei 2013

Review: ‘Disconnect’

disconnect_01

I was raised with manners and have a sincere appreciation for how difficult it is to make a film. These factors were not enough to prevent me from cackling, loudly, at the climax of Henry Alex Rubin’s “Disconnect,” in which the weight of modernity’s problems come metaphorically crashing down on the youth of today in the form of a hockey stick swung in misdirected anger. By Jason Bateman. In slow motion. As a Philip Glass-esque score throbs in your ears. Yeah, there’s a good chance you would have laughed, too.

“Disconnect” is another of those films where multiple storylines are (ahem) connected through characters unaware of the other narratives. This can work, as in Soderbergh’s “Traffic,” Altman’s “Short Cuts” or, my personal fave, Lucas Belvaux’s “Trilogy,” but it can also lead to an embarrassment like Fernando Meirelles’ “360,” Paul Haggis’ “Crash” or Garry Marshall’s films named after lanes in the Hallmark store.

“Disconnect” isn’t quite as bad as those, but it sure as heck ain’t good. The individual scenes are perfunctory enough – and somehow manage to make endless scenes of people typing vaguely cinematic – but if a product’s biggest selling point is that you get three mediocre stories for the price of one, you may want to consider shopping elsewhere.

Story A: Andrea Riseborough plays a local television newsreader who smells a scoop in the very young people on the other end of pay-per-minute sex cams. (Why she’s there in the first place is ambiguous.) She and Eighteen year old hunk Max Thieriot hit it off and, when she realizes the production house is local and also a haven for underage runaways, she twists his arm into sitting for an interview. After the story goes national and the FBI come with questions, we realize the station’s lawyer is the father of . . .

Story B’s Jonah Bobo, an emo kid with long hair, no friends and a love of GarageBand who is cyber-bullied into hanging himself. Despite the fact that Bobo’s checked-out demeanor would probably get him labelled as “cool” (the unnamed town is somewhere within driving distance of New York City) “Disconnect” sells him as emotionally destroyed by two shrimpy snots way smaller than he is. He is duped into thinking a mystery girl is hot for him. He sends “her” embarrassing photos and then may as well start wearing a scarlet L for loser. One of the two punk-ass kids’ father (Frank Grillo, far outshining the material) happens to be a cyber crime investigator and he is working for. . .

Story C’s married couple Alexander Skarsgard and Paula Patton, who have had their identities stolen, possibly because Patton has been spilling her guts in self-help groups (they’ve lost a child) or because Skarsgard has an online gambling problem. Their marriage seems over once the repo men come to take the flatscreen, but they start to reconnect when they locate the culprit and the spirit of vengeance puts some spice back into things.

“Disconnect” is unsubtle in its portrayal of technology as an agent of evil in our society. This just in . . .  people stole and kids were cruel long before the laptop. The oldest profession’s provenance is right there in its name. You can practically hear your grandmother clucking her tongue during the scenes where a boy is texting at the dinner table, and it sent me into a furious, futurist-defending rage.

I mean, give me a break. I got to my screening of “Disconnected” fifteen minutes early and you know what I did? I dove into a highly productive round of mobile phone emailing and managed my time very successfully. Yes, I suppose I could have been reading Proust or listening to Mahler, but I was on the clock and just a few short years ago the work I accomplished in that period would have been tacked on to the end of my day.

Luddite philosophy aside, “Disconnect” isn’t even all that interesting. I suppose the news reporter/cam-hunk story wins some points for reversing the gender of the savior/damsel dynamic, but the kid is a poorly constructed character. At first he’s too dense to realize luring underage kids to pose nude could lead to a jail sentence, then he’s moralizing over “who’s exploiting who?!?” The rest of the characters hew the line of cliché far better.

For those that still can’t tell a scam link when they see one, here’s a tip: ordering “Disconnected” on VOD is a trap.

SCORE: 3.5/10

Categories: Reviews

Tags: No Tags

Selasa, 28 Mei 2013

Tyler Perry’s Defense: Why the Filmmaker Deserves Our Respect

madea-goes-to-jail-original

Tyler Perry’s latest directorial endeavor, the erotic drama “Tyler Perry’s Temptation,” opens in wide release this Friday, and like every Perry film since 2006’s “Madea’s Family Reunion”, it will not be screened in advance for critics. Studios typically forgo press screenings only as a kind of desperate protective measure, shielding films with precarious reputations against audience-persuading pans. In Perry’s case one can hardly blame the policy: his thirteen films to date, which have generated a combined box office total of more than 661 million dollars, have an average Rotten Tomatoes score of 34%.

His most warmly received effort, 2009’s “I Can Do Bad All By Myself”, has the dubious distinction of a career-best score at a meager 62%—so far his only film designated by the aggregator as “fresh” and only one negative review away from being redesignated “rotten”. It’s very likely, based on the consistency of these numbers, that “Temptation” will do tremendous business this weekend while receiving uniformly poor reviews, events which in the eight years since the release of Perry’s debut have become remarkably predictable. These are the two knowable facts of the industry: Audiences love Tyler Perry films. Critics, for whatever reason, do not. At all.

It’s gotten to the point where, in the world of film criticism, Perry’s lucrative brand is considered a kind of insider joke, dismissed without need for further consideration. The release of a new Perry property is treated by most critics as simply an occasion to mock his enduring popularity, to lament the impoverishment of the American cinema and the indiscrimination of paying audiences, with the widespread denunciations sounding not only vitriolic but, more disconcertingly, outright condescending. You’ll read, for instance, that “reviewing Tyler Perry’s movies feels more like filing a witness report”, or, in a strikingly similar turn of phrase, that “reviewing a Tyler Perry film is a bit like reviewing the weather report”. His films are described as “terribly shot and crudely assembled”, characterized by a “Lifetime network aesthetic” that are “pedestrian”. (Even the positive reviews have a tendency to defer to audience expectations over critical engagement, suggesting that while the films themselves aren’t especially good, fans of the house style are likely to find something to enjoy—a failing of criticism if ever there were one.)

More problematic is where the cold reception begins to be informed, even implicitly, by race. It’s all too often that Perry is either brushed off as a black filmmaker making “urban” films for a decidedly niche audience or, even worse, reproached for somehow giving the black cinema a bad name—as when one critic felt it “just disappointing that the most successful African-American filmmaker of his generation refuses to try any harder” and another asked, quite smugly, if there isn’t “anything better for urban-marketed movies than this dreck”. It would be a fool’s errand to suggest that Perry’s poor reputation among American film critics is the result of some tacit racial bias underlying his reception, but it’s incredible how consistently issues of race emerge in the criticism. Even on a basic level, his films are mischaracterized by comparisons drawn on obviously racial grounds: of the poetic drama “For Colored Girls”, for instance, one critic observes that you could “stick a Wayans brother in there and could call it “Tragic Movie””, while another critic says, of a different Perry film, “it’s “Barbershop” with bigger bucks”.

Perry’s films have literally nothing in common with either a Wayans parody or the “Barbershop” franchise, meaning the only point of comparison is that they are films directed by people of color and intended, so much as any film can be, for predominantly non-white audiences. Same goes for a critic’s claim that “Diary of a Mad Black Woman” is “like a cross between “Big Momma’s House” and “The Klumps””, as though no white man has ever dressed in drag for comedic effect.

This is not to say that all critics have deliberately misunderstood or misrepresented the work of Tyler Perry, and surely there are legitimate reasons why many intelligent viewers deign to reject these films on their own terms. But when seemingly unanimous derision finds itself directed toward a traditionally marginalized voice—and when white critics make such inexplicable statements as “It becomes clear why Oprah is such a huge Perry fan”—it’s worth opening the discourse up to considerations of representation and, even more importantly, to take stock of the criticism and reconsider where one stands. I discovered Tyler Perry rather late, when I was assigned to cover last year’s “Madea’s Witness Protection” and felt I ought explore the back catalog for the sake of due diligence, and I went into the filmography with a lot of unfounded preconceptions. My sense of Perry’s filmography had been shaped its (by that point quite solidified) critical reputation, and, quite frankly, I accepted the review assignment under the presumption that I’d be handing down a certified pan.

tyler-perry-as-madea-in-madea-s-witness-protection

But then, as they say, a funny thing happened: I found myself enjoying Tyler Perry’s films. And not only enjoying them as passing entertainments, but actually moved by them as serious dramas, delighted by them as slapstick comedies, and generally excited by them as the work of a legitimate auteur. I began with “Madea’s Family Reunion”, his second film and first behind the camera, which serves as an ideal introduction to Perry’s strengths as a dramatist: at once a melodrama about a woman struggling to extricate herself from an abusive relationship with her fiance and, somewhat jarringly, a comic farce in which the titular matriarch helps raise a wayward child, it’s a well-rounded film notable for its juxtaposition of laughs and gravity. The most singular quality of Perry’s films, and a recurring criticism in reviews, is their unexpected tonal oscillations, which finds his morality plays veering into light comedy and back again without warning. But Perry, to his credit, never has difficulty adjusting to the tempo of the scene, and his capacity to effect such drastic changes of tone within the same film (and sometimes within the same scene) makes him a rather unique talent.

Though nearly every one of his films is defined by that confluence of styles, it’s clearly at its most effective—and perhaps most varied—in “Family Reunion”, both his funniest and most touching film. Here Perry proves himself an assured, competent filmmaker, a strong director of actors and unfussy visual stylist; far from being “crudely” shot or adopting a “Lifetime network aesthetic”, the film is often quite lush and sensual, showing an eye for dramatic lighting and clean, simple compositions. He possesses an exceptional sense for conveying on-screen intimacy, as in an elegant sequence which finds a young couple painting and reciting poetry together at an artists’ nightclub. But he also a real knack for comedic timing, both as a filmmaker—his flair for sight gags is a testament to this skill—and as a performer, taking on the role not only of the much-loved Madea but of her grumpy husband, too. Some of the funniest scenes find Perry slinging barbs back and forth with himself in costume, often mediated by the straight-man lawyer Brian…also played by himself.

I was pretty hooked after “Family Reunion”, a film whose earnestness about family values found a comfortable middle-ground between religious conservatism and progressive empowerment (many critics attempt to take Perry to task for his Christian convictions, but his sensibility is much too soft-shoe to come off as didactic). Happily, every other Perry film offers, to varying degrees of success, more or less identical pleasures. At his least compelling, such as the largely prosaic sequel “Why Did I Get Married Too?”, his films still have the virtue of giving strong dramatic roles to great performers, especially the wide range of young black women with whom Perry frequently works (and with whom he works wonders). And his best he’s making some of the strongest melodramas since Douglas Sirk and the funniest broad comedies since Jerry Lewis. The mid-career “I Can Do Bad All By Myself” remains a high-water mark for Perry’s style of magnetic drama, engaging in an interesting way with issues of class and co-dependence.

But my favorite to date is last year’s “Good Deeds”, a more straightforward drama (absent Madea or a comparable slapstick figure) about the relationship which develops when a wealthy CEO tries to help the working-class single mother employed as his overnight custodian. It’s a film with an uncommonly perceptive conception of adult relationships—it features an engagement that’s called off, not because either party is culpable or morally superior, but when the two fully realized characters maturely decide they’re better off alone—and a film that, like “All By Myself”, is honest about the difficulties facing single parents, an unfashionable subject in Hollywood that Perry deals with frequently and admirably.

Tyler Perry’s new film is about issues of infidelity, and if his filmography is anything to go on, it will likely deal with ideas about trust and bonding and the desire to have more in an earnest, adult way. And, if his filmography is anything to go, it will likely be dismissed out of hand by nearly every critic in North America before going on to score big at the box office. It’ll be the same story early next year when “Single Moms Club”, his upcoming film about single mothers bonding over an incident at school, isn’t screened for critics and is lambasted harshly in turn. And so on, and so forth. It isn’t clear exactly why the critical institution is so deeply averse to Perry’s brand of filmmaking, especially given how much vacuous nonsense gets a free pass for being marginally diverting for two hours, but there’s obviously something about the material that seems immediately galling. Thankfully, the movies themselves are, as they say, veritably critic-proof, raking in enough money to continue being produced at the same steady clip. One hopes that, over time, the critical taboo will dissipate, Perry’s filmography will be reconsidered and his best films thoughtfully reclaimed.

Categories: Features

Tags: Calum Marsh, Defense, Douglas sirk, Rant, Tyler perry, Tyler Perry's Temptation, Why Did I Get Married?