After seeing the movie, I came out thinking, "Man, that film was so standard..." And, honestly, that says more about me than it does the film. Even when I know I should turn my brain off, I just can't help myself and keep the engine running. So while I can say that I wouldn't exactly recommend "Safe House" to everyone, I can say with pretty good confidence that people who have the capability to go in, shut down completely, and just enjoy the ride will have a blast in this film.

The first reason I'm confident that the film hits its target audience is obvious: Denzel. It's been a few years since he's got to flash the full Denzel (most of his recent roles have been more working man Washington) and here he lets loose but, as Denzel has mastered, lets his personality take control of scenes seemingly without effort. Denzel says more with a look than most actors can get across in a full page monologue and it's one of the reasons the audience hangs on his every move. This isn't the greatest performance of his career (obviously) but it's a nice example of Denzel being Denzel.

The other strength of the movie was the direction. Yes, it does seem like Daniel Espinosa went to the Tony Scott School of directing and there are some moments when his scenes embody the Cinema of Chaos (so many cuts that you can't really know what's going on or get the geography of the scene down) but more often than not, Espinosa showed you visually what you needed to know and his high octane approach wasn't haphazard. Whereas Scott's "style" is often pointless, here the editing and shooting style helps maintain the intensity (that, unfortunately, the script doesn't always deserve.)

Then there's Ryan Reynolds. I don't want to say Reynolds wasn't good because he certainly wasn't bad (honestly, he was solid) but he just didn't bring the role to life. And while there's no shame in getting shown up by Denzel Washington, I hope that Reynolds learned a lesson from Denzel and brings more than what's on the page to the screen. Reynolds's Matt Weston was a fairly bland character and Reynolds played it fairly blandly. Denzel's Tobin Frost claimed, "I'm already in your head" and, if he really was, he'd probably have heard an echo. And while I won't say it's entirely Reynolds's fault for not having a memorable performance, I will say that this is why he's not a movie star. Even when movies stars disappear into a role, they own it. You can't see anyone else playing that role. Reynolds never does that. In this case, halfway though the film, I couldn't help but think that this role would have been perfect for Mark Wahlberg (well, I might not have bought that he went to Yale Law, and Mark might be a little old for it now but still...) - a nice guy who is in over his head and has to think fast to get the job done/stay alive. While Reynolds is good as the nice guy in over his head roles in romantic comedies, for some reason he just doesn't make it work for me in action films.

As for the story, as I noted, it was completely standard. Although one thing that kind of bothered me was the fact that they kept flashing the time up on the screen. This was not a movie that had time pressure. There was no "We have to get there by this time or else!" element. In fact, at one point, the goal is actually to kill time. I'm not sure if the producers wanted to make sure people knew that this was all happening over the course of one day or what but it was kind of a clunky device that didn't really have much purpose in the film. And in the end, I just felt like the bigger picture wasn't worked into the smaller action well enough. At times, it almost felt like the "Who gave up the info on the Safe House" storyline was part of a different movie. It was never really made to be much of an issue and I think the movie would have been better without it and had just focused itself as a straight forward Predator-style Running to Stay Alive and Nothing More type movie.

So despite all of the words I just typed up about "Safe House", this is one of those movies that people don't really need reviews for. If you think you'd like it, you most likely will. If it doesn't look like your cup of tea, it won't win you over.

Although who will win you over is Ryan Reynolds's girlfriend in the movie, Nora Arnezeder. Just beautiful. ]]> http://soulhonky.com/2012/02/safe_house.html http://soulhonky.com/2012/02/safe_house.html Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:11:57 -0800 This week, some critics were celebrating the death of the death of creativity when Universal Studios aborted their partnership with Hasbro and dumped any future projects from the companies collection of toys and games. But the problem with this way of thinking is that it is ignores that Universal dumping Hasbro (and having to pay a substantial financial penalty to do so) is just another symptom of the bigger problem. While some pundits think, "Yeah! Now we'll get more original movies!", the reality is that this just shows how far away from consistent quality original movies Hollywood's fallen. How can you expect a company that couldn't even figure out a way to work a Ouija board into a horror movie to be able to come up with something wholly original?

True, Hasbro's toys aren't the easiest to translate to film, however, seeing the creative license given to "Battleship" (unless I actually have been playing it wrong all of these years or was missing the spaceship pieces from my game), it seems like they should have been able to conjure up some sort of storylines for their other games.
Here are just a few that I thought might have filled out the six (I believe) picture deal and could have helped Universal avoid paying a massive penalty for backing out of the deal.

Ouija: As noted above, I'm really not sure how they couldn't find a way to work this one into a horror film. Or into a teen comedy about a kid who suddenly has all the answers to life (and he learns a valuable lesson that it's not just what you know but how you're able to put that knowledge to use.) Hell, just remake Ghost and toss in a Ouija board into Whoopi Goldberg's character's hands (and, maybe, into the pottery scene if Hasbro wants to try to push a new Erotic Ouija board.) Any way you slice it, finding a way to put something that cryptically tells the future into a movie shouldn't have been too difficult. This one should have written itself.

Mousetrap: A game that was basically about a race in which players tried to avoid getting trapped by their opponents. In other words, The Running Man. Or switch things up a bit and it's a kind of Hunger Games ripoff. If you want to get less literal, you could make it a heist movie with multiple groups of con men vying for the same heist, tripping up their opponents while trying to secure whatever the MacGuffin might be. Again, there are countless filmic options for this one; it too should have written itself.

Risk: It's about world war. Really? Universal couldn't have figured out a way to make a movie out of this one? Hell, it Battleship does well, just make the sequel on land and call it Risk! Or they could have added zombies, vampires, werewolves, what have you instead of aliens this time around. If they rush it out, Risk could be the National Treasure to World War Z's The da Vinci Code. Odds are though that Universal was probably thrown off by the fact that this was a strategic war game and the plans might have to make sense and they couldn't just blow shit up and how people don't notice how little sense the story actually makes. Still, this one, you guess it, should have written itself.

Magic: The Gathering: I have to confess that while I've heard of Magic: The Gathering (usually as a punchline/reference in a joke about someone being a nerd) I don't really know much about it. But here's what I do know: it's about people fighting... with magic. COME THE FUCK ON, UNIVERSAL! How can you not figure out a way to make wizards fighting into a movie that people want to see? It's not going to make Harry Potter money but there's something there. Again, not getting this done says more about Universal's brain trust than it does the silliness of the idea that Hasbro's toys could be good fodder for movies.

Clue: Now Universal's not even trying. This one was ALREADY a movie (and a cult classic at that.) Clue is the kind of movie that I think should be remade. It wasn't a huge success and, admittedly, had its flaws, but the general premise was strong and I could see Team Apatow or Team Wain (or, ideally, Team Coen) putting together version of this. Or, if the execs are fired up about Downtown Abbey, you can make it an old fashioned honest-to-goodness murder mystery. (Or you could set it in modern day, if that's your druthers.) Murder mysteries have kind of disappeared from the Hollywood landscape and it might be time to bring them back. Clue would be a nice jumping off point.

Candyland: If there ever was a game that screamed for an animated movie, it's this one. Just start with an Alice in Wonderland or Willy Wonka rip-off and go on from there. And, again, tie-ins could be huge if you can make some Candyland treats for the kids to spend their parents' money on.

Monopoly: Universal hired Ridley Scott for this one but they should have given it to Shawn Ryan, who has made a living off of crooked real estate storylines (see The Shield, Terriers, and Chicago Code.) Hell, just make Terriers: The Movie and call it Monopoly since that show had a few of the main parts of Monopoly (real estate deals, going to jail, chance, etc.) If Ryan isn't available, just look at the many movies based around people trying to raise money to save some piece of real estate that they love (usually it's a store or a church or a house) for inspiration. What makes me nervous is that I could see studio execs going to cheesy with it; I can already see a movie about kids banding together to save their favorite park or their friend's home and then having the trailer end on some cheesy line like, "You own all of this, but you don't have a Monopoly on love!"
Yeah. Don't do that.

Admittedly, things get a little hairier from here on in but I believe that the deal was only for six movies and with Battleship already in the can, Universal just had to poop out five of those six easy ideas to get out of the deal. But, if for some reason Universal wanted more of a challenge, there's always...

Jem: Jem was about a record executive who was living a secret life as a rockstar Jem who, somewhat inexplicably, had some piece of amazing technology that two rival bands were trying to get from her. Not quite sure why they wanted it or, if it was so important, the government didn't want to get its hands on it but either way, the basic premise is kind of a grown up Hannah Montana, except instead of Billy Ray Cyrus as a dad, this one had Jem taking care of foster kids.

This one is a tougher sell since not many people remember Jem but I think you can make a Blues Brothers-style musical with a popular singer in the lead (be it Lady Gaga, Nikki Minaj, whoever.) I think having a musician in the lead is important since selling music and seeing the performance is important in this one. It needs to be more Stomp the Yard/Step Up than Josie & the Pussycats. But if you work this right, you could sell soundtracks and songs on top of bringing in a probably modest box office draw.

M.A.S.K.: I remember getting toys for this GI Joe meets Transformers rip-off but, for the life of me, I can't really remember what it was all about.

That video isn't helping the ol' memory banks.

Still, the idea of soldiers with masks that give them powers and they have bikes that transform into cool shit seems like the kind of premise that could easily become a medium-budgeted tween boy movie. It could be a straight GI Joe rip-off or maybe some kids find the masks and have to fight evil invading adults to save the day (Maybe they can take the Red Dawn remake that seems to have disappeared and add some masks to it and voila!) Also, Universal made Adjustment Bureau, about guys with powerful fedoras so I don't see why superpowered masks would be such a tough sell.

Lincoln Logs: Some smart-ass kids get sent back to pioneer times and have to learn to use their wits instead of wi-fi to save a kindly blind man and his beautiful daughter's ranch. Not sold? Starring Jaden and Willow Smith. CHA-CHING!

So there you have it. An hour of spit-balling and I found a way to make some solid and potentially quality movies out of the Habro/Universal deal. The execs at Universal spent four years and could only muster "Battleship". I'm not sure if they just rushed into every project before thinking it through and ended up with a bunch of scripts that they hated (to be fair, I'm not sure how you turn Stretch Armstrong into a movie. Being super stretchy just never seemed like much of a draw to me) or if the Hasbro deal was always seen as a backup plan; someone to co-finance movies for them in case they could think of enough fodder for the cineplexes.

Regardless, the fact that in four years a major studio couldn't find more than one Hasbro toy that they could make a good movie around is a bigger sign of the death of creativity out here in LALALand than it is a signal that a new day of original films could be on the horizon.

The Patriots disappointing Super Bowl, lowlighted by a Wes Welker drop.

The Red Sox implosion.

The ill-fated Kendrick Perkins trade (and Jeff Green subsequently being out the year with a heart condition) combined with LeBron hitting impossible shots to down the C's in the playoffs.

So... Which one of you Bruins fans sold Boston's soul for a Stanley Cup?

After watching the trailer for "Battleship", I'm starting to wonder if I haven't been playing the game correctly all this time. Was my game missing the alien spaceship pieces? Personally, that trailer made me think that an exec was beat his son in a game of Battleship, the kid through a hissy fit and smashed the board with his alien spaceship toy, and that's how the summer blockbuster was born.

While watching Madonna lip-sync wasn't my cup of tea, I do have to say that the tightrope guy was cool and she had arguably the best stage I've seen in Super Bowl history. MIA flipping the bird the lamest attempt at being rebellious in recent memory. Really? You're going to act tough while singing that corny ass song that basically felt like an affirmation tape someone made for Madge. Flipping the bird doesn't change the fact that MIA was filling the shoes that Xtina and Brittany Spears held a decade ago. Make waves by saying something, not by tossing out an empty rude gesture.

There has been a lot of talk about the Patriots missing a deep threat but after watching this season, I'm starting to wonder if Tom Brady might also be part of the issue. He's been underthrowing a number of the deep balls of late.

My friend Will made a great call, saying that maybe Brady is going for the reverse Elway. Instead of putting up great stats and not winning the big one until late in his career, Brady got rid of the rings at the start and is now in the "Nice stats on the way to losing the big game" part. Which, unfortunately, means that Pats fans will have to suffer through two more Super Bowl losses.

I don't like to kick a fan base when they are down (and Chargers fans have to be down since Norv Turner, the worst coach in the NFL, is back) but I think it's time to wonder if Eli could have helped overcome the negative that is Norv and gotten that talented Chargers team to the Super Bowl. Philip Rivers's legacy right now is that the Chargers dumped Drew Brees to hand him the job and (granted, by no fault of their own) traded Rivers for Eli Manning.

How inbred is too inbred? Peyton has gotten a lot of commercials; will we finally see Eli getting more love from Madison Avenue?

Why do some foreign bands not make their albums available globally? The Maccabees latest album doesn't appear to be available for download here in the US and the same goes for Various Cruelties latest single (and my guess is that their album probably won't drop here the same time it does in the UK.) I'm not sure if making US fans wait is a great idea; not sure what they get out of it, except a few more bucks from the die hards who'll shell out the 20 or 30 dollar price of an import CD. ]]> http://soulhonky.com/2012/02/happy_new_year_american_male_o_1.html http://soulhonky.com/2012/02/happy_new_year_american_male_o_1.html Sun, 05 Feb 2012 20:57:42 -0800 Let's be real, declaring a new year while in the middle of football season really doesn't make sense. How are people supposed to really stick with their resolutions when the specter of the Super Bowl is looming over them. True, if you're a Redskins fan, January 1st is probably a good time to realize that the season is over for you (and probably has been for a month or so) and to abandon all hope. But for everyone else, the best time to kick off the New Year is after the Super Bowl, after which your Sundays are open and your Monday nights are free. So I'm declaring today the real New Year's Eve (where a dropped ball is not something you hope for or cheer about, well unless it's the opponent who is dropping the pass.)

So Happy New Year's Eve!

"Chronicle" is the latest entry in the found footage genre and while you definitely have to suspend your disbelief a bit in terms of "Why is he still shooting this?" or "What kind of portable lighting package does he have to get such crisp images all the time?", I found that it wasn't too distracting. In fact, I thought what they did with the found footage approach during the final fight scene was very interesting and it heightened the final battle. Unfortunately, before that, the approach constrained more than it complemented. Throughout the film, I couldn't help but wish that they'd break from the found footage approach and give us a quieter character moment or something to help expand the characters behind the standard archetypes. Alas, that wasn't to be.

But, again, I don't want to poo poo the problems too much because the film was still enjoyable and a good way to kill two hours. I wouldn't urge people to rush out and see it in the theaters right now but I'd say it's worth checking into if you have the time or, at least, you should toss it onto your Netflix queue for the future.

Movie I liked More than Others: Margin Call
This year didn't have a bad movie that charmed the pants off of me like "Morning Glory" did last year. The closest I could really come up with was Captain America or Thor but a lot of people enjoyed both of those movies and they weren't necessarily "bad" as much as they were just pedestrian. However, I wil readily admit that Margin Call might not be for everyone but I still think it's a movie everyone should see. I think more people need to see how these corporations really work and how it's often about people saving the corporation, even to their own personal detriment.

Best Monologue: Paul Bettany - Margin Call
A lot of people were most impressed by Stanley Tucci's monologue but I felt like that was more impressive as a piece of memorization of Tucci's part than anything else (if you haven't seen it, there were a lot of numbers involved.) Also, to me it felt like more of a set up for Paul Bettany's one liner in which he kind of crushes Tucci's whole perspective. Instead, I thought the Bettany's cynical monologue (which I can't find on youtube or in the original script) about how people love to look the other way when things are good but are quick to point the finger when things fall apart was stellar. It reminded me a bit of the 25th Hour (another movie that I think it underrated).

The Movie I Disliked More Than I Should Have: Moneyball
First off, the Best Adaptation award should go to this because the book was pretty unfilmable and it was turned into a movie that even non-sports fans love. That being said, I'm not a fan of sabremetrics (although my dislike of them has more to do with John Hollinger and his ilk trying to make it work in basketball, as opposed to using it in baseball where I think it actually can work) and I hated how the movie was basically a propaganda piece for Beane and his mathletes. Art Howe's portrayal seemed unfair, the film overlooked the talent that the A's had (including one of the best pitching staffs in the Majors), and never even let Beane give even a nod to the scouts when they were right about Jeremy Giambi's attitude being a major problem.
But the thing that really annoyed me was what actually happened in the end - the A's lost to a team that had an equally low payroll in the Minnesota Twins (a team that focused on fundamentals that Beane dismissed.) For me, stat based analysis can be important but the problem, and something that Beane suffered from greatly, was the blind allegiance to them. To succeed, you need to look at the numbers but also pay attention to personalities and fundamentals. But why let details get in the way of a good story? For me, the details irked me through the film but Bennett Miller, Aaron Sorkin, and Steve Zaillian realized that people like me would be in the minority and the movie they made was better off for ignoring my issues.

The Movie I Argue Against More than I Mean To: Ides of March
Ides of March getting a Best Adapted Screenplay nomination is yet another example of why screenplay awards, as they are run right now, are stupid. To compare Moneyball (based on a non-filmic book) and Ides of March (based on an award winning play) is ridiculous but what makes the comparison even more one sided is that what George Clooney and Grant Heslov added to the play was little more than a showy role for Clooney and a melodramatic third act. And along the way, they lost the focus of the play and the lead character (played in the film by Ryan Gosling but originally knocked out of the park in the play by Chris Pine), who was kind of all over the place in the movie. Still, the movie was entertaining enough but the critical response is frustrating to me and it's also somewhat annoying when Clooney blasts studios for not having enough faith in the audience but then he went and did exactly what studios do and added melodrama where it wasn't needed. Ides of March is a decent, forgettable movie and there's nothing wrong with that; I guess I just get annoyed by critics trying to make it seem more than that.

Best Worst Chase Scene: The Mechanic
The Mechanic chase scene takes the movement of Chaos Cinema
to new levels. Not only do you not really know what the hell is going on in the chase but there's no way that the chaos is physically possible. There's one point in particular in which Jason Statham would have to be Nightcrawler and have the ability to teleport to cover the ground that he did. And I don't mean the usual chase scene nonsense of a bad guy getting a five minute headstart which the good guy makes up in the matter of two seconds, I mean that he's in a truck at one point (and he just crashed the truck full speed into something, if I recall correctly) and then two cutaways later, he's sprinting in a different area altogether. The movie was a mess but this scene was so joyfully bad that it almost made it worthwhile. (Although I do have to say that the scene was made infinitely better by the fact that my friend who I saw it with broke into uncontrollable laughter for a good five minutes when the aforementioned truck crash happened. There's something about watching a bad chase scene next to someone who is struggling to breathe because they are laughing so hard. I didn't think the chase was THAT crazy but his laughter was contagious.)

WTF?! Moment of the Year: The Lincoln Lawyer
So basically, we learn the Matthew Mccoughwhatever had a client (Michael Pena) who he told to take a plea even though the guy said he was innocent. Later in the movie, Matty Mc goes to see Pena with a picture that resembled the suspect that Pena always said did the killing. Pena's response should be one of thanks or, at least, relief that maybe the real killer will be brought to justice. NOPE! Pena instead flips out and runs off and demands to be brought back to his cell. It is honestly one of the most unrealistic reactions I've ever seen.

Worst Ending: (Tie) Scream 4 and The Adjustment Bureau
I'll try to keep this spoiler free. The Adjustment Bureau's ending was a let down because it was one of those films that was OK but that you knew needed to knock it out of the park in the end but when the final moment happens, everyone in the theater was either chuckling or saying out loud, "What the..." The film paints itself literally and figuratively into a corner and relies on one of the oldest tricks in the book to wrap things up. And it makes you wonder why the hell you just wasted your time (although Emily Blunt is pretty lovable in the movie.)
Then there's Scream 4. The fourth installment of the once seminal series is a terrible movie (save for Allison Brie's performance and Hayden Panettiere reminding me why she was once seen as a future star) but the ending seemed like it might have saved the film and found a new and very interesting (albeit challenging) way to reinvent the series and turn the horror world on it's head once again. But instead, there's an added 10 minutes or so that undo the initial ending and turn the film into being exactly the kind of movie that the original Scream sent up. Which is, ultimately, why the film and the ending were such a let down. The move simply became another forgettable slasher film.

The Movie People Will Discover/Time Will Forgot: Take Shelter
Largely ignored by awards and, to be fair, not an amazing movie, "Take Shelter" is the kind of film that I think people will discover if it gets enough run on the movie channels. It's not good enough to take on a second life ala Shawshank Redemption (an all-time classic that almost nobody saw in the theaters) but it has some great performances and is a very interesting movie. Sadly, as I walked into the theater, I overheard two assholes talking about the ending so it was kind of ruined for me but I still highly recommend people check it out. (Oh, and the film earns points for casting Ray McKinnon as Michael Shannon's brother. I'd love to watch a cop drama with those two in the leads.

Nostalgia Points: The Muppets
Armond White got a lot of shit for ruining the Muppets' 100% at Rotten Tomatoes but I can't really be that upset about it. While it was a good movie, it wasn't great. It was a fitting Muppet movie for the times since it was incredibly meta but I felt like that took away some of the charm of the Muppets. I liked the film but I would have been hard pressed to not like something with the old gang coming back together. In the end, while I liked the movie, I have to say that I really hope that Segal and Company don't return for the sequel and they put the franchise in someone else's hands.

The Breakout Star Nobody Knows: Jessica Chastain
: Chastain is a great example of how Hollywood hypes up someone amongst themselves and ignores the fact that not many people outside of Lalaland recnognize her name. Chastain was all over the place in 2011, appearing in Take Shelter, Tree of Life, The Help, The Debt, Coriolanus, and a few other films. And I will confess to crushing on her a bit but when I mention her name, people don't seem to know who I'm talking about. And that's when I mention her to people who are so-so film fans in LA. Outside of Cali, I get a straight up "Who?" I do think Chastain has a bright bright future ahead of her but I hope that Hollywood doesn't rush her into half-baked leading roles in order to take advantage of a buzz that isn't heard outside of the land of In and Out.

The Save Your Money Award: January Jones
I don't watch Mad Men so maybe Jones shows something more than an icy exterior and absent inner being but I just can't see her getting too many more shots at big supporting roles after this year. Jones is lovely, no doubt, but that's literally all she brings to the table and if you walk around Los Angeles for a week, you can stumble upon a gaggle of good looking ladies who could probably give a vacant stare ala Jones. Nevermind that youngsters like Shailene Woodley and Mia Wasikowska and others are ready to step up and I think Jones might want to curb the spending and save her paychecks while she's still getting them

Audience Participation Award - Fast Five
Yes, people talking in movies is annoying but I have to say that the group of high schoolers who were simply amazed at Fast Five made the filmgoing experience all the better. In the first scene alone, I kept hearing a chorus of "damn. Damn. DAMN!" (heightening in both volume and pitch) until the climax which was met with the quiet disbelief of "Oh, hell no. They couldn't survive that." It was amazing and I'm not sure I would have liked the movie as much if not for the running commentary.
That being said, the "Shut the Fuck Up!" award goes to the women talking behind me and my friends during "Young Adult" These two women yapped away for the whole movie, mostly non-film related small talk and chit chat, and when they were finally SHUSHED! by my friend, they got all uppity and "Oh yeah, you better not turn around!" But to top off that nonsense, near the end of the film someone's cell-phone went off and these women had the gall to say, "Oh hell no. I HATE when people don't turn there phone off in a movie." The hypocrisy was hilarious. Thankfully, Young Adult wasn't good so I didn't miss much but those two women definitely made me miss the Arclight and its quieter, more respectful crowds.

Best Argument for CGI: Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Enough has been said about Andy Serkis but I think the real takeaway from the film was that the CGI stuff was better than anything with the humans. The relationships of the apes were better than anything James Franco brought to the table.

Laziest Movie: Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
I didn't like the second and third movies at all but this film succeeded in making me at least respect those films a bit more because at least they tried to do something. True, they bit off more than they could chew IMO but it is better than the fourth film just going through the motions and bringing next to nothing new to the proceedings. Still, the movie does gangbusters overseas and it made a billion dollars so we'll see another one but this last one was so dismal that it dashed what little hope or good will I had for this franchise to match the classic original film. I won't even bother with the next installment.

Best Gag in a Bad Movie: "That's What She Said" in 30 Minutes or Less
I know my friend Nick would say the sneeze/shit in Hall Pass should get this but I'm going with "That's What She Said" in 30 Minutes or Less. I'm not sure if you can say the movie is worth watching for it but it's a funny thread that they run throughout the film, culminating with an emotional end. Although the emotion you'll probably be feeling at the end is relief that the movie's finally over. It might tie Laziest Film with Pirate of the Caribbean on Stranger Tides and it was a definitely let down as it was the director's follow up to "Zombieland".

Most Forgettable Movie: Transformers 3
To be fair, it is a third movie so there's the whole issue of confusing it with stuff that happened in the first two but I honestly can't really remember anything from the movie. Oh wait, I remember the trailer and how the moon mission was actually Transformers related but beyond that, yeah, nothing.

WIth the premise of people disappearing from Alcatraz fifty years ago and now reappearing, without having aged, the show is firmly planted in science fiction and the bottom line is that it's a lot harder to draw the masses to a science fiction show than it is a human drama. Still, that's hardly a death knell against a show but Alcatraz starts off behind the 8 ball and then buries itself underneath the weak interplay between the leads while the core of the show, the crime-solving procedural, is even weaker. With those elements not being strong enough to bring people back, all that's left in the bigger picture question of "Why is this happening?" and that answer is so obviously based in an other world and pretty much impossible for people to realistically even guess at at this point that there's not much to hold onto. Lost had so many theories because the first three seasons were mostly based in the real world (I believe the writers even claimed that everything could be explained via real world answers at that point) and people were trying to figure out how this all could be. WIth Alcatraz, there's no way to play along and, honestly, no reason to really want to. Yes, having some notorious criminals come back is bad but so far the baddies haven't been much worse than the people we see in every other crime show. And, as the show has shown already, the devil you knew 50 years ago is easier to figure out and apprehend than the devil you don't know. Despite the high concept premise, Alcatraz is just another crime procedural, just with a bigger (not not exactly pressing) picture looming over it.

That being said, the show isn't that bad, there's just nothing to hold onto right now. The main characters are weak, one dimensional archetypes, the cases aren't that great and the solutions have required some suspensions of disbelief. Also, I have no problem suspending my disbelief here and there but it's tough when a show seems to take itself so seriously. There's not much joy to be had despite Sam Neil chewing the scenery. Odder still, the bigger picture of how did this happen and why are the people coming back and who is behind it disappeared almost completely in the second episode. Lost lost its steam when the writers realized that it was a success and they had to start stringing out the drama so they could last as many seasons as possible. It seems like Alcatraz is already watering down their plot a bit with their eyes on this.

In the end, Alcatraz is the epitome of a show that you should probably wait until after the first season buzz to see whether you should get involved with it. Things could come together so you don't want to write it off but I also kind of doubt it's going to get that much better so you don't want to invest yourself weak in and weak out with the slim hope that they right the ship. I also think that if the show was on SyFy or a cable network, it would be better off. Lower expectations and the ability to breathe and throw in a breath of humor here and there would go a long way.