Monday, July 2, 2007

Transformers is coming...to...destroy...all


If you live in one of the cities where Transformers opens tonight, ahead of its official Tuesday launch, you might want to stop in. Several of our co-workers went to an employee screening Saturday (we chose the new Die Hard instead; we liked it) and it generated a favorable response. So favorable, in fact, that we've spent the last 30 minutes or so scouring the Net for reviews. The consensus? People like a Michael Bay movie, they really, really like it. Or at least they don't hate it. Some even think Transformers is going to take moviedom - viewers and industry, alike - by typhoon, even if it's not, you know, that good.

Here's a snippet of the NY Post's review:

"A box-office analyst whom I respect predicts Transformers will be the year's top-grossing flick. If the enthusiastic response I saw at a screening the other night is any indication, predominately male audiences will flock to see some of Hollywood's most lavish special effects ever, climaxing in a battle that destroys much of downtown Los Angeles."

Here's what Ebert himself writes, in a three-starred review:

"I think Michael Bay sometimes sucks ("Pearl Harbor," "Armageddon," "Bad Boys II") but I find it possible to love him for a movie like "Transformers." It's goofy fun with a lot of stuff that blows up real good, and it has the grace not only to realize how preposterous it is, but to make that into an asset."

And, never one to give into to critical unanimity, the Old Gray Lady rains on Bay's celluloid parade:

"It’s kind of nifty when the robots transform the first time; they furiously shake back and forth like wet dogs desperately to dry off. But by the 99th time there’s no fun left at all, even during the rock-’em, sock-’em knockdown that delivers the movie, in Spielbergesque pastiche, first to a violent and then to a warm-and-fuzzy close."

Keep those pants on, Nick Lachey


Sports
Adam Dunn's still around, Jerry Narron is not. [Keep Adam Dunn]
Yi in Milwaukee? We doubt it's happening. [Winning the Turnover Battle]
The real Mike Maroth just stood up. [Viva El Birdos]
Rick Ankiel does not want, or need, your coverage. [NY Times]

Movies
Hey producers, we can't sleep with those swirling helicopters overhead. [LA Times]
The box office is lagging, could it be the rats in the kitchen? [The Weekend Report]
A foreign trailer for the new Sidney Lumet movie. [Some French Blog We Can't Translate]
What does John McClane do after he kills everybody? [YouTube]

TV
Roger Eberts says R.I.P. to Joel Siegel. [Chi. Sun-Times]
Some unkown station is showing, like, every episode of The Flintstones. [Broadcasting Cable]
Looks like we're stuck with Jericho for a bit. [TV Squad]
Dana Delaney on Desperate Housewives? We still wouldn't watch! [TV Guide]

Jon Kitna, further burnishing that rep as a nutjob


Last week, we did the unthinkable and actually defended Jon Kitna for projecting that the Lions would win 10 games in the 2007 season. We said we could see them winning eight, maybe, but that Kitna wasn't crazy for thinking the team would be much improved. We were wrong - Kitna's fucking loco. On Friday's edition of Mike and Mike in the Morning, Kitna said this regarding how many TD passes he'll throw this season:

"We've been joking around as the passing-game crew -- the receivers and tights ends and stuff -- we've been breaking down our little huddles saying '50' and all that stuff.

We know what you're thinking, isn't the NFL single-season record 49 TD passes? Yes, that would be Peyton Manning's 2004 season that was recently voted the greatest single-season performance in NFL history. So, either Jon Kitna's about to do some historic things, or this time he really is full of shit.

We're going with the latter.

Stephanie Tanner, trading meth for massive cleavage...


We usually stick to what we know, which surely isn't breast implants, but when we encountered these photos a few minutes ago we stopped in our tracks. We grew up on Full House, back before Bob Saget was a dirty old man popping up in awful Jamie Kennedy movies and John Stamos was a washed-up TV actor starring on washed-up TV shows. Because of our connection to the show, this is proof we have offically entered the "old as fuck" zone. Now back to your regularly scheduled blogging...

The top 50 horror movies


We're not really that into horror movies (we didn't grow a spine until we were 17), but we like the blog name Blood Letters so much we had to at least gloss over his list of the top 50 horror movies. We're a little disturbed that whoever's writing this admits Clive Barker is his favorite author, but we can't argue over the choice of Hellraiser for the top spot. Do we really think Hellraiser is the best horror film of all time? No. However, it had us biting a throw pillow (in the non-sex sense) throughout our one and only viewing.

Just for the record, we would've pushed both Dead Ringers and An American Werewolf in London into the top three, and made certain Interview with the Vampire and The Exorcist were more than two - two! - spots apart. All in all, not bad. It's better than listing Troy as one of the top-five war movies, right?

Here's the Blood Letters' top 10, for your pleasure:

10.) The Hitcher (1986)

9.) The Blair Witch Project (1999)

8.) Carnival of Souls (1962)

7.) Angel Heart (1987)

6.) Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1990)

5.) Dead Ringers (1988)

4.) Night of the Living Dead (1968)

3.) The Haunting (1963)

2.) Cube (1997)

1.) Hellraiser (1987)

Oh, and where's The Thing?

Meet me on the roof, you're goin' down

We found this clip at With Leather this morning and thought they made a nice point: Who the hell plays tennis on a rooftop? We've frequented many a rooftop pool, because, well, mainly because it involved submersion. Tennis on a rooftop? No way, no how, not ever.

About those all-star selections...


Okay California fans, we know it was you: Barry Bonds slipped into the National League All-Star starting lineup at the 11th hour and we're placing the blame square on the Golden State. We don't get up around the Bay much, but seeing as how San Fran is one of the highest populated cities in the nation, and is pretty much the only place Barry Bonds is adored...

It was you fuckers. Way to go. Eh, it's not like Alfonso Soriano was that much more deserving, anyway. Bonds, for all his diminishing physical tools, is still an on-base percentage monster. We heard on First Take this morning (yes, we watched it) that Bonds still gets on base one out of every two times he steps to the plate. That's insane. And, for the record, we thought Bonds should have been elected to the team. The NL's crop of outfielders this year is - kindness in 3, 2, 1... - extremely mediocre. We just didn't want to see him voted onto the team, by the fans, no less.

Now that that's out of the way, onto the real issue: the snubs. Who didn't make the team that was deserving? In the NL, that would be practically every starting pitcher who's had success this year. Tony La Russa (and as Cardinal fans, it pains us to say this) dropped the ball (along with the players) by selecting six - six! - relief pitchers to the NL team. The AL roster is much better, mostly due to the fact they have much better players to choose from. But there are still some glaring omissions:

1.) Chris Young, SP, Padres
- San Diego fans are pissed, and rightly so. He's 8-3 with a 2.14 ERA. We know, he plays in Petco, but come on...

2.) Orlando Cabrera, SS, Angels
- How upset are the Angels about the snubbing of O-Cab? Enough to take veiled shots at the players selected ahead of him. Beautiful.

3.) Curtis Granderson, OF, Tigers
- The Al is stacked at the OF position, and it hurts that Granderson is the least visible outfielder on his own team, but he's on pace for 300 total bases!

4.) Ian Snell, SP, Pirates
- Teammate Freddy Sanchez may have won the NL batting title last year, but Snell has an ERA under three and a 7+ K/9 rate. He's doing this for the Pirates.

5.) Kevin Youkilis, 1B, Red Sox
- Yes, the game is being played in an NL park so they have to sneak Big Papi in as a first baseman, but isn't is kind of insulting to his team's first baseman, the one having a better season than Ortiz?