After my experience with Drag Me to Hell, it only made sense to give director Sam Raimi's earlier horror films a shot. I made my way through 2/3 of his Evil Dead series, Evil Dead and it's sequel/remake Evil Dead II.
I almost wish that I'd only seen Evil Dead II; it's essentially the same film as Evil Dead only the budget is roughly ten times larger. Both films suffer from the same weaknesses: a complete lack of characterization, amateur performances, and a bare semblance of plot. And both films have the same strength, a madcap imagination that fuels the inventive camerawork and wall-to-wall violence. Although the first film has some superb gross-out moments in its finale that its sequel can't hold a candle to, anything that Evil Dead can do Evil Dead II can do better.
But sometimes "better" isn't good enough, and while Raimi's "Three Stooges meets Night of the Living Dead" tone is awfully fun, there's very little reason to be invested in the films. The characters - stereotypes at best, redshirts at worst - are plopped into the woods and get possessed. Ash, the erstwhile hero of the films, is remarkably bland for someone revered as a badass by fans (perhaps the screenwriters inject some life into him in Army of Darkness). I'd say that these were just rookie errors, but I didn't care much for the plot or characters in Drag Me to Hell either. I'd love to see more of Raimi, but only as a collaborator. He's worked with the Coen Brothers in the past and if the three of them teamed up for a horror film I'd be there on opening night. When it comes to him as an auteur, though, I find the results sadly lacking.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Top Chef Las Vegas 10/28
Meh.
Worst episode of the season by a long shot. It's not even close.
Take the Quickfire, for starters. The contestants were supposed to put their spin on TV dinners, using classic shows as inspirations. Only three of the dishes strongly related to the shows they were based off of. You can't blame Mike for not knowing how to do a Seinfeld-based dish, but Michael's Cheers-based dish was devoid of anything resembling pub/bar food. Only two dishes were reasonable facsimiles of what you'd find in the frozen foods section. Apparently you can put anything in a compartmentalized tray and claim that it's your take on a TV dinner. Lame.
Then comes the Elimination Challenge, which throws everyone for a loop by forcing them to cook vegetarian dishes using what's available in the kitchen of Tom Colicchio's Vegas steakhouse. Remember the vegan challenge from Top Chef Masters? That not only tested the flexibility of the chefs but also produced interesting dishes. However - I assume due to the limitations of what was in the restaurant's pantry - in this episode the dishes were by and large nothing but veggies on a plate. No fruits, no soups, no salads, barely any starches. If you enjoy watching six chefs make six vegetable dishes, boy have I got an episode for you.
Kevin sweeps, Robin survives, Jen continues her surprising self-destruction, and Mike gets the boot. Our favorite Jersey douchebag wasn't even that interesting this week, getting some half-hearted jabs at Robin in at the end and adopting a que sera sera attitude the entire time. I'll miss the scamp anyway.
Completely disinterested power rankings!
1. Kevin
2. Bryan
3. Michael
4. Eli
5. Jennifer
6. Robin
Next week: my dinner with Fabio!
Worst episode of the season by a long shot. It's not even close.
Take the Quickfire, for starters. The contestants were supposed to put their spin on TV dinners, using classic shows as inspirations. Only three of the dishes strongly related to the shows they were based off of. You can't blame Mike for not knowing how to do a Seinfeld-based dish, but Michael's Cheers-based dish was devoid of anything resembling pub/bar food. Only two dishes were reasonable facsimiles of what you'd find in the frozen foods section. Apparently you can put anything in a compartmentalized tray and claim that it's your take on a TV dinner. Lame.
Then comes the Elimination Challenge, which throws everyone for a loop by forcing them to cook vegetarian dishes using what's available in the kitchen of Tom Colicchio's Vegas steakhouse. Remember the vegan challenge from Top Chef Masters? That not only tested the flexibility of the chefs but also produced interesting dishes. However - I assume due to the limitations of what was in the restaurant's pantry - in this episode the dishes were by and large nothing but veggies on a plate. No fruits, no soups, no salads, barely any starches. If you enjoy watching six chefs make six vegetable dishes, boy have I got an episode for you.
Kevin sweeps, Robin survives, Jen continues her surprising self-destruction, and Mike gets the boot. Our favorite Jersey douchebag wasn't even that interesting this week, getting some half-hearted jabs at Robin in at the end and adopting a que sera sera attitude the entire time. I'll miss the scamp anyway.
Completely disinterested power rankings!
1. Kevin
2. Bryan
3. Michael
4. Eli
5. Jennifer
6. Robin
Next week: my dinner with Fabio!
A Man for New Seasons: The Venture Bros. and It's Always Sunny
The Venture Bros. has come roaring out of the gate in its fourth season. Everything that I hated the most about the third season is pleasantly absent. Whereas last season's premiere didn't even feature the title characters and focused exclusively on The Monarch, "Blood of the Father, Heart of Steel" puts the Venture family front and center - even H.E.L.P.E.R.! And while the second episode of season three trotted out Dr. Killinger, a character I never really cared for in the first place, "Handsome Ransom" introduces Captain Sunshine and a handful of other new superheroes (I am begging for Ghost Robot to reappear). While the episode's vaguely pedophilia-related undertones are hardly new ground, the episode was bonkers enough for everything to work. So long as the current season continues to introduce new characters and not get bogged down in its own mythology, this could be one of the best seasons yet.
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia barely warrants a mention; the show has never bothered to flesh out its characters or construct broad story arcs. As long as the gang continues to behave reprehensibly the series will be funny, and so far it has fulfilled this obligation.
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia barely warrants a mention; the show has never bothered to flesh out its characters or construct broad story arcs. As long as the gang continues to behave reprehensibly the series will be funny, and so far it has fulfilled this obligation.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Top Chef Las Vegas 10/21
RESTAURANT WARS.
I was looking forward to this all day (it helps when you have the day off and don't need to think about important stuff). Bravo was showing the restaurant wars episodes from seasons past and I caught the one from the first season, which I hadn't seen before. They had 3 vs. 3 for that one. Crazy. Then again, there were fewer diners as well. I was surprised that Stephen survived - was a prick for the whole season, or just that episode? - but fortunately he got PYKAG'd in the next episode.
I hope they bring back the tag team quickfire, because that was a really fun and original challenge. It needs to be a staple like the relay race.
I was a little bummed that the chefs weren't in charge of the decor. Sure, the decor comes second to the food, but it allows the cheftestants to show off a different side.
This is the last time I prognosticate about what happens on Top Chef. I was certain that one of the stronger chefs would be eliminated, specifically Jennifer or a Voltaggio brother. And I was doubly certain after seeing the teams that Jennifer/Kevin/Mike/Laurine would win, given that their personalities wouldn't clash. Well the only thing I got right was that Robin would survive to die another day. The chefs for Mission didn't clash but nobody took charge, either - Michael is a domineering hardass, but he gets results and his team pulled through.
The real bone of contention is: should Laurine have been kicked off? Honestly, the judges could have sent Jennifer home and I would have understood completely. She's the better chef by a long shot, but Laurine had a slightly better showing. "Slightly" being the operative word. Hell, I would've wilted too.
Power Rankings!
1. Bryan
2. Kevin
3. Michael
4. Jennifer
5. Eli
6. Mike
7. Robin
Not that it matters anymore. With the stronger chefs surviving restaurant wars by a hair, it'll be smooth sailing for the top four until the final few episodes. It's possible that the Voltaggio Brother Death Feud could send one into a tailspin and leave a spot open for Mike or Eli, but the top four are just that damn good. Remember, it's been nine episodes and they are the only ones to have won an elimination challenge. That's ridiculous.
I was looking forward to this all day (it helps when you have the day off and don't need to think about important stuff). Bravo was showing the restaurant wars episodes from seasons past and I caught the one from the first season, which I hadn't seen before. They had 3 vs. 3 for that one. Crazy. Then again, there were fewer diners as well. I was surprised that Stephen survived - was a prick for the whole season, or just that episode? - but fortunately he got PYKAG'd in the next episode.
I hope they bring back the tag team quickfire, because that was a really fun and original challenge. It needs to be a staple like the relay race.
I was a little bummed that the chefs weren't in charge of the decor. Sure, the decor comes second to the food, but it allows the cheftestants to show off a different side.
This is the last time I prognosticate about what happens on Top Chef. I was certain that one of the stronger chefs would be eliminated, specifically Jennifer or a Voltaggio brother. And I was doubly certain after seeing the teams that Jennifer/Kevin/Mike/Laurine would win, given that their personalities wouldn't clash. Well the only thing I got right was that Robin would survive to die another day. The chefs for Mission didn't clash but nobody took charge, either - Michael is a domineering hardass, but he gets results and his team pulled through.
The real bone of contention is: should Laurine have been kicked off? Honestly, the judges could have sent Jennifer home and I would have understood completely. She's the better chef by a long shot, but Laurine had a slightly better showing. "Slightly" being the operative word. Hell, I would've wilted too.
Power Rankings!
1. Bryan
2. Kevin
3. Michael
4. Jennifer
5. Eli
6. Mike
7. Robin
Not that it matters anymore. With the stronger chefs surviving restaurant wars by a hair, it'll be smooth sailing for the top four until the final few episodes. It's possible that the Voltaggio Brother Death Feud could send one into a tailspin and leave a spot open for Mike or Eli, but the top four are just that damn good. Remember, it's been nine episodes and they are the only ones to have won an elimination challenge. That's ridiculous.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
The Next Iron Chef: postscript
It figures. The night that I post my appraisal of the first two episodes of The Next Iron Chef, the third episode messes everything up. First, the opening challenge is independently judged. Then Mehtra serves an insipid take on the challenge, Americanizing thai food simply by putting it in takeout containers. I would've sent him home for lack of imagination alone, although combining a pierogi with a dumpling isn't brilliant either.
Also, Jeffrey Steingarten is a dick.
Also, Jeffrey Steingarten is a dick.
A Man for New Seasons: The Next Iron Chef
When all you've ever eaten is filet mignon, it's hard to adjust to a lesser cut. Such is the case with cooking reality shows. I've only ever watched Top Chef and its spinoff. I attempted watching an episode of Hell's Kitchen once for kicks and turned it off about five minutes in. I've always been a fan of the Iron Chef series but that's an entirely different animal, built around colorful dishes and gimmickery. With The Next Iron Chef, the Food Network is trying to take a page from Bravo's playbook.
At first, I was surprised that another chef was needed - wasn't five enough? But Batali hasn't cooked once all season (too bad, I like him) and Morimoto cooks sparingly (ditto). And somebody needs to pick up Cat Cora's slack - she wins less than 60% of the time. Meanwhile, first season winner Michael Symon is doing pretty well for himself.
Is it unfair to compare The Next Iron Chef exclusively to Top Chef? Yes. But one of these shows is the gold standard, and the other is the upstart.
Next Iron Chef borrows the preliminary challenge/elimination round format from Top Chef but throws in a nifty wrinkle by having the chefs evaluate each other's dishes in the beginning challenge. There's no secret ballot, which strikes me as unfair - perhaps that's edited out to ramp up the drama.
In place of Padma as host, there's Alton Brown. I'd say that's a pretty solid tradeoff; Brown does a great job as host of Iron Chef America and his culinary credentials trump Ms. Lakshmi's. But he's behind a booth on Iron Chef America and Next Iron Chef forces him to intermingle. It's in this role that he struggles. Padma and Tom Colicchio have this act down pat, but Alton Brown tends to stand uncomfortably close to the contestants and interject awkward statements. With his pocket notebook in hand, he comes off sort of like an overbearing college professor.
Next Iron Chef also takes more of an educational stance. Its parent show has often focused on interesting tidbits about different foods and cooking techniques and the spinoff follows suit, including pop-up text balloons that explain the origins of certain dishes and describing culinary terms to the layperson. I wish Top Chef did this too; I only recently found out that creme fraiche was more akin to sour cream than fresh cream.
The challenges have been fairly vanilla so far, and so have the challengers. Just like in Top Chef Masters, these competitors are professionals in their field and pettiness is not encouraged. There is a vague attempt to make Nate Appleman a villain, but it's pretty weak.
Will I keep watching? Perhaps. Mad Men already occupies a piece of my Sunday nights so another show isn't going to hurt. But I could easily miss a few episodes and not lose any sleep.
As for early handicaps, I like Jehangir Mehta. But like in any reality cooking show, it's too early to tell.
At first, I was surprised that another chef was needed - wasn't five enough? But Batali hasn't cooked once all season (too bad, I like him) and Morimoto cooks sparingly (ditto). And somebody needs to pick up Cat Cora's slack - she wins less than 60% of the time. Meanwhile, first season winner Michael Symon is doing pretty well for himself.
Is it unfair to compare The Next Iron Chef exclusively to Top Chef? Yes. But one of these shows is the gold standard, and the other is the upstart.
Next Iron Chef borrows the preliminary challenge/elimination round format from Top Chef but throws in a nifty wrinkle by having the chefs evaluate each other's dishes in the beginning challenge. There's no secret ballot, which strikes me as unfair - perhaps that's edited out to ramp up the drama.
In place of Padma as host, there's Alton Brown. I'd say that's a pretty solid tradeoff; Brown does a great job as host of Iron Chef America and his culinary credentials trump Ms. Lakshmi's. But he's behind a booth on Iron Chef America and Next Iron Chef forces him to intermingle. It's in this role that he struggles. Padma and Tom Colicchio have this act down pat, but Alton Brown tends to stand uncomfortably close to the contestants and interject awkward statements. With his pocket notebook in hand, he comes off sort of like an overbearing college professor.
Next Iron Chef also takes more of an educational stance. Its parent show has often focused on interesting tidbits about different foods and cooking techniques and the spinoff follows suit, including pop-up text balloons that explain the origins of certain dishes and describing culinary terms to the layperson. I wish Top Chef did this too; I only recently found out that creme fraiche was more akin to sour cream than fresh cream.
The challenges have been fairly vanilla so far, and so have the challengers. Just like in Top Chef Masters, these competitors are professionals in their field and pettiness is not encouraged. There is a vague attempt to make Nate Appleman a villain, but it's pretty weak.
Will I keep watching? Perhaps. Mad Men already occupies a piece of my Sunday nights so another show isn't going to hurt. But I could easily miss a few episodes and not lose any sleep.
As for early handicaps, I like Jehangir Mehta. But like in any reality cooking show, it's too early to tell.
Octoberfest But With Horror Movies Instead of Beer: week two
Zombieland: Shaun of the Dead's American cousin isn't as satirical or gory, but it's equally freewheeling and goofy. Due to the 2000's explosion of zombie films, there isn't much left to do with the genre, and Zombieland certainly treads on familiar ground both as a horror film and a buddy comedy. Even Jesse Eisenberg and Woody Harrelson are playing archetypes they're more than familiar with. Fortunately, they're really good at it. And although at first blush the film falls into all of the wish-fulfilment traps of recent post-apocalyptic zombie horror, that isn't quite the case. Whereas Shaun of the Dead posited that any slacker could rise against the undead hordes, Zombieland's protagonists are a neurotic loner, a slightly psychotic good ol' boy, and two con artists.
Drag Me To Hell: Sam Raimi cut his teeth on ultraviolent horror movies before moving on to direct the Spider-Man series. He allowed himself a brief indulgence during Spider-Man 2, but steered clear of the genre until this past summer. I haven't seen Raimi's Evil Dead films, but it's clear that he still has a flair for dark humor, paranormal intrigue, and gross-out scares (I can't credit him for Christopher Young's score, but it's also exceptional). If I had to make a list right now of the five best scenes involving bad things happening to a cat, Drag Me to Hell would have two spots. Too bad the ending is so telegraphed that the final 15 minutes are virtually suspense-free, thereby taking the punch out of the whole movie.
Drag Me To Hell: Sam Raimi cut his teeth on ultraviolent horror movies before moving on to direct the Spider-Man series. He allowed himself a brief indulgence during Spider-Man 2, but steered clear of the genre until this past summer. I haven't seen Raimi's Evil Dead films, but it's clear that he still has a flair for dark humor, paranormal intrigue, and gross-out scares (I can't credit him for Christopher Young's score, but it's also exceptional). If I had to make a list right now of the five best scenes involving bad things happening to a cat, Drag Me to Hell would have two spots. Too bad the ending is so telegraphed that the final 15 minutes are virtually suspense-free, thereby taking the punch out of the whole movie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)