Commentary on Saw 3 - (spoilers)

I took a break from packing and moving over the weekend to watch the movie Saw 3. I have to say it was very uneven and I think it more cohesion. There were parts that were 'edge of the seat' suspenseful and some that were 'head on the back of the couch, eyelids drooping' down right boring. Oh and there were also a few 'ack look away', moments too.

However it was interesting how they wove events from the first and second movies into the storyline of the 3rd and gave the viewers a look at what happened to some of the character and what their fates really were.

I don't think the 2nd and 3rd Saw movies captured the same spark of creativity that the first one had. Lacked the same intensity to the twists and turns of the plot.

I really hope they don't try to make a Saw 4 (but of course I'll watch it just to see).

Marla

I own an Apology to Kate Bosworth (spoilers for Superman Returns)

She doesn't know it, but I owe Kate Bosworth an apology. When I heard they had cast her as Lois Lane in the movie Superman Returns, I was like 'what??". She is far too young to be playing a 'seasoned news reporter' is how I felt about it.

Well I finally broke down and rented the movie. Kate Bosworth was awesome, that's all there is too it.

Her Lois Lane was tough, saavy but with a softer edge to her. That softer edge came from the fact that Lois was now a mother and Kate Bosworth played this aspect of the role perfectly.

All in all she was flawless in this movie and I certainly hope they keep her for any sequels.

Brandon Routh was just amazing as well. His take on Clark Kent was a seamless transition from the late Christopher Reeeve's portrayal and a perfect match. Yet his take on the Superman part was, IMHO far superior to that of Christoper Reeves'version. His Superman had great strength and power, but he also had grace and elegance about him. He not so much flew in the air as he danced upon it and was a thing of beauty to behold. He never lost his masculine energy, but he wasn't afraid to show his vunerability and serious side.(though my favorite Clark Kent/Superman is still Dean Cain's version and is followed closely by Tom Wellings version)

Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor. Great choice, but I think Michael Rosenbaum does a better, more layered take on this character.

Thankfully this movie has no Lana Lang!

Commentary on SG1 S10 Episode Bad Guys(spoilers)

Don't know if it was the lighting or not, but Michael Shanks looked very tanned:)

One day this man will get to do a real comedy and that will be a wonderful thing because he can do comedy very well. His timing and his use of body language/facial expression are amazing.

Sadly though, Stargate SG-1 is not a comedy and while some humor is always welcome, seeing Daniel Jackson reduced to nothing more than the comic relief for the sake of the story was not something I enjoyed watching for the character (but conversely thought that Michael can really do comedy).

Who was that guy impersonating Daniel Jackson? Is it some left over influence of Merlin's personality or some weird gate related mutation. Either way, it was very jarring and not something I want to see the character do again..Michael Shanks as an actor do again in some really all out funny comedy, yes..but Daniel Jackson, no. It threw me right out of the storyline.

So Vala did Sam's job while she was gone and as much as I hate to say this because I like Sam Carter, but Vala did it better and in a more interesting manner. If this episode proves one thing it's that Vala is one smart lady.

Mitchell and Teal'c were perfectly in character in this episode and that along with Vala made it very good in many parts. I liked Jaymas the guard and I liked the curator guy. They were good characters. Wish I could say more for the other characters..like the totally cliched 'valley girls from another planet' and the ridiculous catfight thing. I wonder who came up with that..Ben Browder or Martin Gero. Whichever one did needs a good talking to.

I like fluff as much as the next person, I just don't like it at the sacrifice of a character's integrity and intelligence. This episode did both to Daniel Jackson and I find that very disheartening. Only in the end did he actually turn back into the real Daniel Jackson.
__________________
MARLA

Supernatural - Houses of the Holy (spoilers)

In a recent interview, Supernatural Executive Story Editor, Sera Gamble says she jokingly describes the premise of Supernatural as "the epic love story of Sam and Dean." She might just be saying this to tease show creator Eric Kripke, but I think it's one of the most accuracte descriptions of the show out there.

Love doesn't just mean romantic/sexual feelings between two people. Love is something that encompasses many forms amd types of relationships. Why deny the fact that Sam and Dean Winchester, as brothers, love each other very much and that they are on a journey of discovering and testing what that love means and where it's boundries, if any exist, are.

Once again the writers of Supernatural, most specificly Sera Gamble take the backdrop of 'the hunt' to bring forth a story that reveals more to us about the complex nature of Sam and Dean Winchester and their connection to each other as brothers and warriors in the battle.

I think the most compelling thing that this episode brings to the table is something that we have seen alot of this season..and that is how much Dean believes in Sam. The one thing I have noticed and really admire the skills of the writers in presenting it to us in such a subtle way, not to mention the incredible acting talent of Jensen Ackles and Jared Padalecki, is that Dean is, when you come right down to it, not a leader, he is a follower. The subtle way that you see that while on the surface Dean seems to be the alpha male, it's actually Sam that is. Sam is the leader because Dean desperately needs something to believe in and to follow that he can see and know for sure has a tangible presence. For years the thing he believed in was their father, but that belief was rocked to it's foundations when John Winchester made a deal with a demon to trade his life, not really for Dean's but for a means to have Dean there to look after Sam.

I found The House of The Holy to be more than just a good vs evil issue or 'is there really a God' issue. I found it to be more of a metaphor about the changing relationship between Dean and Sam. About leadership and redemption. The 'angel' in this story was giving those who had led less than good lives the chance to redeem themselves by hunting down and killing real evil...which is a perfect allegory for what has happened with Dean and his father. John Winchester to whom Dean followed and hero worshipped his whole life gave (in Dean's own opinion of himself) his less than perfect son Dean a chance at 'redemption' by saving him from death to be there to protect and follow (in Dean's own opinion) John's perfect son Sam.

The ending car chase scene, the scene where Dean is doing, without question, what Sam wants him to do. Following the man Sam says is bad to keep him from killing that girl and Dean witnessing a 'devine intervention' was so well written. It was a revelation to Dean that there is something higher than what he can see. That there is something more to who he is than someone to be a follower.

That the angel turned out to be what Dean thought it might be, which was a vengeful spirit, was well written too. Not once did it take away from the idea of a higher power, but it brought home that man has to be careful with the powers he is given or assumes he has been given. That Sam has to be careful with whatever it is the Demon wants him for..that Sam himself might, all on his own, become the one to use it incorrectly without any influence from the demon at all. That he has to be careful not to become something he is not ready to be yet or should never be in the first place, especially not without someone there to balance him. Not without Dean there.

Very good episode, very well written and acted. Rock on Supernatural!

You're the Only One I'd Watch MacGyver For

Catchy blog title huh?

Not that this blog entry has anything to do with MacGyver LOL. Except to say it's one of my favorite older shows.

Actually I just found out that apparently a lot of people think this is what Melissa Etheridge is saying in her song 'You're the Only One'. The actual line is 'you're the only one I'd walk across the fire for'.

So I guess I'm not the only one who has being singing the wrong lyrics to songs like 'You're the One that I Want' from the Grease soundtrack. I mean for years I could have sworn Olivia Newton John was singing:

"I've got shoes, they're multiplyin', and I'm losin' control cause the power you're supplyin', it's electrifyin' .

Which of course didn't make a bit of sense to me even though as I've gotten older and somehow fallen into the kind of shoe buying fetish I had previously been able to ignore, I've discovered that shoes can indeed multiply. Oh and a full blown shoe buying fetish can go out of control, which is what makes the shoes multiply.

I have recently decided to do research and have found out that what she is actually singing is:

"I've got chills, they're multiplyin', and I'm losin' control cause the power you're supplyin', it's electrifyin' ."

Somehow when all said and done, I think I like shoes better LOL!

Marla

Commentary on Under The Mistletoe(spoilers)

This is a movie very dear to my heart because I got to spend some time on a location set for it interviewing star Michael Shanks and director George Mendeluk. While I was there I got to watch the actors at work. The following is a critique of the movie and a little bit about my experiences on the set.

Aside from a few sentiments that bothered my slightly feminist nature ...such as the deceased Tom Chandler telling his son Jonathan thatSusan 'needs a man in her life' because she is struggling to cope with paying bills and such... this is a charming and gentle movie.

Both George Mendeluk and Michael Shanks describe Jamie Ray Newman as being very 'present' in her role of Susan Chandler and after seeingthe movie I understand more clearly what they are saying. SusanChandler just fills the screen with chemistry and energy. The only problem I had with Susan Chandler is that she seems a bit too self absorbed. Even with mistakenly thinking that Kevin Harrison has a wife at home, she constantly imposes on him to look after her son while she pursues her 'love life'.

I mean I would think it was very strange for someone's wife to allow him to just go baby-sit my kid on a moment's notice.

After seeing this movie and even with knowing why Michael Shanks chose the role he did in it, part of me kinda wishes we could have seen what he would have done with the role of the ghostly father, Tom Chandler. In my interview with George Mendeluk, he says that Michael Shanks has a wholesome quality about him that makes Kevin Harrison so believable. Boy is this ever true.

You just can't help but want to take this man home with you. He is gentle, caring, intuitive, intelligent and dedicated to helping Jonathan deal with losing his dad. Yet there is an air of sadness about him that tugs at your heart. When he finally reveals the story of how he lost his own wife, you just want to hug Kevin and never let him go. It's easy to see why Michael Shanks was drawn to this role considering how devoted to his own family he is. If you haven't seen the movie yet, keep your eyes open for the bracelet he is wearing which is clearly visible in one particular scene. It is the one thathis oldest daughter made for him and Michael Shanks told me it was part of what he was using to remind him of his own family life and using it to create part of Kevin Harrison's character.Burkely Duffield is really amazing in this movie and George Mendelukis right, he is the one who brings it all together. Under TheMistletoe foregoes the stereotypical 'wisecracking' preteen who is smarter than the adults.

Instead, Jonathan Chandler is filled with achildlike faith and sense of wonder that so often children lose as the head towards their teens. Burkely Duffield makes Jonathan come across as sweet and sincere. In many aspects, Under the Mistletoe is a 'by the numbers' storyline, yet it manages to rise about that and stand out because of theextraordinary cast of characters and the actors playing them, especially Michael Shanks and Burkely Duffield.

Susan is a writer/reporter for City News Magazine and decides to use the radio contest thing as a story for the magazine after her son enters her in the contest. Jonathan is 11 years and there is no comedy ensuing fromthe plot of this movie. The movie is actually straight dramatic with only one small reference to 'going to plan b'.Jonathan Chandler is very worried about his mother and he finds a safe harbor in Kevin Harrison who, instead of treating him dismissively for claiming to be able to speak to his deceased father,opens his mind and heart to the troubled young boy to really listen to him.

The movie treats both Jonathan and Susan's issues of grief over the loss of Tom Chandler with respect, not as comedic fodder.The one thing I did come away with (and I read someone else pointingthis out too in a review) is that movie is really more about Jonathan and Kevin's journey towards bonding as 'father' and 'son', with some help from Tom Chandler more than it was about Susan and Kevin fallingin love.

Susan Chandler in many ways seems almost secondary to this part of the story line as she blithely turns her son's emotional issues and problems over to a man she hardly knows, but immediately trusts to help him. On the totally shallow side, Michael Shanks is absolutely stunning tolook at in this movie. His close ups highlight his eyes and hissmile. The camera angles and blocking for this movie are definitely used to his best advantage, as it is with all the actors involved. This movie was clearly made by someone who wanted it to be focused on the characters, not on the scenery around them.

Watching Michael Shanks work was, I have to say, a really amazing experience. The day was so hot and he was wearing that suit with a jacket.

They had to do the scene over and over several times for different camera angles or because the lighting would suddenlychange on them (drat that sun chosing to go behind a cloud at the wrong moment). Yet Michael Shanks never lost his energy or his enthusiam for the scenes. Not to say he didn't flub up a bit a time or two.

I couldn't stop giggling when he blew the line that began with 'lady' and immediately went into this perfect and I do mean perfect imitationof Jerry Lewis..'laaydeee'(said in high pitched squeaky voice).

Getting to watch he and Jamie Ray Newman rehearse the scene and trying out the dialog with different levels of intensity and voice inflections. Watching them make doing the kind of give and takeduring rehearsals that is what creates chemistry between characters that leap off the screen. Each coaching and critiquing the other all in the process of making each the best they can be on screen.

Standing quietly by in the director's tent as Michael came in towatch the playback of the scene and to ask George Mendeluk the director thoughtful questions about position and lighting because Michael Shanks has a genuine interest in learning everything about the industry he's in and learning it from people whose work head mires and respects.

I feel very privileged to have gotten that opportunity to see an actor, whom I admire, in his working environment and seeing himwithing his creative process first hand.Did I mention the man was glowing with happiness at being in thismovie and getting to play a dad, a hockey coach and play on the ice:)

Did you ever have the Urge

To 're-imagine' an episode of your favorite TV show because the episode just didn't work for you or you just expected more out of it?

I've had that urge ever since I saw SG1 S10 The Shroud. The episode had IMHO so much potentional and was to me very much a let down. As I stated in my review, it was just to glossed over and really had no heart or soul in the places and scenes where I wanted it most to be..yah I'm talking about the Jack and Daniel scenes.

I've re-imagined several episodes of SG1 before and really had a very satisfying time doing it. Don't know if others enjoyed them, but I had a great time working on them.

Have you ever seen a movie that you would like to re-imagine into an episode of your favorite TV show? I knew a very talented fanfic writer once who was very adept at doing this. Her re-imagine of 'Near Dark' into a War or the Worlds (TV show) story was awesome. Everytime I see the movie Manticore on the Scifi Channel I want to re-imagine it into a Stargate SG-1 episode. One with the Jack O'Neill as he was in the first several seasons of the show.

So who knows, I might share some 're-imagined' stories with my blog. Not that anyone is reading this but me LOL. So I write for myself. At least I know I'll have a friendly audience for my work:)

Marla

Supernatural - love those Winchester Boys

Supernatural has definitely become my most current 'must see' TV show. Eric Kripke has created a masterpiece, a wonderful combination of great story telling and intricately woven characters that drive those stories.

Dean and Sam Winchester are two of the best characters to come along, IMHO in very long time. The dynamic between them as two brothers, opposite in personality but united in the same cause, is simply fascinating to watch.

I am a longtime fan of 'buddy' shows from the days of Adam-12, Emergency, Starksy & Hutch, to Jack and Daniel from SG1(the early years of SG1) and Clark and Lex(before they hated each other) on Smallville. I am also rare I think in I like female buddy shows as well, Cagney & Lacey, Kate & Allie and male/female buddy shows like Hunter and The X-Files( before shippiness got in the way)

But I'm a fan of only certain type of buddy interaction, there has to be the right elements and I have to see chemistry between the characters electrifying the screen. And if Sam and Dean get anymore electric with the chemistry, we won't need power companies any more.

And I don't mean electric in the sexual sense. One of the things that I like best about these two characters is that they are not just friends, they are brothers. They have a genuine love for each other as brothers. Sometimes they don't like each other very much, but they always love each other.

I have to admit my favorite is Dean Winchester. What can I say, I like the tough guy, with the wiscracks, the cynicism and the compassionate gentle heart under it all(the only time this ever changed was with Jack and Daniel from Stargate. I started out liking Jack the most, but ended up completely enamored of Daniel Jackson). I like that Dean looks after Sam and has this fierce devotion to his little brother, even if he doesn't always understand what motivates Sam. I like that sometimes Sam doesn't even realise the power he has over Dean because of this protective streak. That Dean is willing to charge into the fires of evil and danger if Sam says he knows for sure there is danger or evil to fight against.

I like Sam Winchester too. He's not without his quirks, his strong and tough side. And he is equally devoted to looking after Dean. Willing to risk anything to protect his brother as well.

I like the easy banter that Dean and Sam have between them, but also like that they can have serious discussions and admit shortcomings and fears to each other. Sometimes it takes a bit for that to happen, but they are each other's support system (something that IMHO went AWOL between Jack and Daniel as SG1 went on and they were reduced to just making witty banter at each other). I like the gentle teasing, the knowing which buttons to push in the other to get them going. I like how Dean and Sam can come at things from two different perspectives and make it work like magic.

I also like the stories they get involved in. The dangers, the challenges, the emotional issues they face.

I just really love those Winchester boys.

Snakes On A Plane (spoilers)

I had heard so many bad things about the movie Snakes on A Plane that I almost didn't rent it. But I did rent it and boy am I glad I did.

I really liked this movie. It was suspenseful, well acted and the writers made a real effort to make the premise as plausable as possible.

I am not a fan of CGI work, but found that Snakes on A Plane artfully combined CGI with the use of live snakes to create images that had a very creepy feel to them.

The characters were well fleshed out as well. While you had the usual cliche types, they were nt cardboard cut outs, but instead were given interesting quirks and details. Even the little dog and the snakes was good characters.

The movie had some plot holes and some moments where it didn't quite work as well as it did in others, but it had me on the edge of my seat and it had me worrying about the safety of the characters. To me that is what a good movie is all about.

So yep, I liked Snakes on A Plane.

Marla