"I Told Myself I Would Never Come Back."

THE HANGOVER III (2013) 

The Wolfpack...or something like it.

Here's the thing. I've been a pretty big fuck-it fan of the Hangover series. Why? Because they're shameless, predictable, and usually come hand-in-hand with a good soundtrack and a couple memorable one-liners. The Hangover had a tight script, it knew what it was, and it owned it's insane ridiculousness. The Hangover II was a little less tight, a little less laugh-out-loud, but I stood by it because, hey. It's a bro-comedy about bachelor parties gone wrong. How seriously can you really take that shit, right?

Well. Apparently, very seriously. In Todd Phillips' final installment of the Hangover trilogy, I have finally run out of redeeming things to say about it. Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed it. Because, at the heart of it, I have a soft spot for the series and a soft spot for the characters. If you right fun characters and hook me in, I'm there. The Wolfpack (and Doug) are just fun to watch in action. Nine times out of ten, you get the feeling that, deep down, they're all bros in some way or another. Even (and maybe even especially) when they laugh at each other's misfortunes and pull terrible pranks on one another. 

Image from Huff Post.

However, the Hangover III forgot the main draw of the films. The bromance. The Wolfpack. Instead, it focused more heavily on the gimmicky characters. But the problem with gimmicky characters is that they're only funny because they're explosive side-characters. When you devote a whole movie to Leslie Chow...well. Yeah, we liked it, but not that much. 

If I had to pick one main character out of the entire series, I'd probably put my money on Stu. He's the one who always seems to have the major challenge to overcome, start to finish. He always goes through the most noteworthy "journey," where all the other characters are, more or less, just trying to get to the wedding on time. In Hangover III, however, Stu was basically nonexistent. He popped up now and then to deliver a couple one-liners that were repeated throughout the series, but that was it. He had approximately zero screen time. Phil, who often took the "leader" role, was also sectioned off to the sidelines. Instead, we handed the movie over to Alan and Chow. First mistake. 

To top off an already bad move, this wasn't even the same warm and well-intentioned Alan we'd grown to love from the first film. Instead, this Alan was mean, aggressive, and a little more sociopathic. Maybe the failed bachelor parties just hardened him into a bitter, angry man. Maybe he's worked so hard at impersonating Phil that he's got the callousness down to a T. I don't really know what was going on, all I know is that I was not a fan of Alan 3.0. 

My overall experience of Alan in the last movie.

But evil!Alan was, more or less, the epitome of everything that was wrong in Hangover III. Here's the thing: I wouldn't be bashing this movie if it just let itself be a bad movie. I had problems with Hangover II, but I let most them go. Because it presented itself as a shameless repeat of the first one. It said, "Hey, we know what you came here for, so here it is, word-for-word." A cheap move on Todd's part, but as I'm a big fan of unapologetic shamelessness, I could appreciate it for what it was. Hangover III, on the other hand, tried too hard to be a good movie. I could see it trying. But, at the end of the day, it was like watching Sam Worthington try to pull off an accent. Painfully obvious and, ultimately, a waste of time. 

I don't want to end this on a completely sour note. Because the thing is, shit. I enjoyed it. I enjoyed The Wolfpack. I enjoyed their antics and one-liners. I enjoyed the movie, overall. But at the end of the day, it took the series to a place it didn't need to go. I never thought I'd say this about John Goodman, because I love that man, but his character pretty much fucked up the whole movie. You know something's wrong when too many people die in what was supposed to be a shameless comedy, including the dogs. I enjoy excessive violence, but there's a movie for that and this is not it. I will say this, however: for people who enjoyed the series throughout (or at least enough to stick to it), this entire movie might have just been worth it for the ending credits scene. That last couple minutes was what I needed to see for the entire of the movie. End credits is where it's at. 

Dammit, Goodman. 

The Lost Art Of The Bad Movie.

THIS MEANS WAR (2012)

It's not about the size of the gun. Er. Mostly.

So here's the deal. I didn't particularly want to see this one. Anyone could tell from the trailer that it was going to be another poor attempt at bringing "guy's night" to "date night". The girls will like it because it's a romance with hunks Chris Pine and Tom Hardy and the guys will like it because it's got, like, things-that-go-boom and, like, stuff, right? Oh my god, gag me with a spoon! Anyway, the plus side of moving to Atlanta is living with my girl, spending time with her, doing lesbian things like petting cats and driving pick ups and going to Home Depot just for the lumber smells. The downside is compromise, which means watching The Bachelor, Dr. Phil, and romantic comedies like This Means War. And so I bit the bullet and took her out to the theaters. We got popcorn, sat in the back, held hands. And then something really strange happened. I enjoyed it. And everything Dr. Phil says is right.

I know what you're thinking. M., you've gone soft. Mushy. Soon you'll be putting up The Powerpuff Girls as your BAMF of the week and whining about The Walking Dead would be better if there wen't so many icky, decomposing zombies. Wrong. Trust me, I wanted this movie to be godawful. I wanted to bitch about Reese Witherspoon's face. I wanted to leave the theater and find a toothpick to lobotomize the part of my brain that had processed the last two hours.

And then Til Schweiger stepped in the room.

As someone who doesn't familiarize themselves with German comedies on a regular basis, this is what I saw when he came on screen:

So we've got Hugo Stiglitz, Kirk, and Eames all in one movie. I'm suddenly feeling a little more confident about my chances of making it out of here alive. The plot runs something like this: Tom Hardy and Chris Pine play two CIA spies who work well together and have a great "playboy vs. professional" bromance going. COOL. Heinrich (Hugo Stiglitz) is the evil German who is doing...something...ambiguous and evil. COOL. All goes to hell when Reese Witherspoon's face shows up and the two spies fight for her affection. NOT COOL.

I'll start with the positive. The acting was, of course, spot on. Tom Hardy has yet to disappoint me, and since he's been everything from Handsome Bob to Bronson, I can cut the man a little slack. He's about to be the lead villain in a fucking Batman movie, I don't think anyone's worried about his career going into the shitter because of one Valentine's day ploy of a romantic comedy. And, quite frankly, he plays so many eccentric, bold characters, it was kind of nice to see him play the family man with a stick up his ass. Chris Pine (also soon-to-be in the Star Trek sequel...I'm not too worried about him) played his usual bad boy with a heart of gold demeanor, so I knew he'd pull it off well. Hugo Stiglitz is a fucking badass, so his presence was enough to keep me entertained even if his role was shoved a little too far under the rug.

Then there's Reese Witherspoon. I normally don't hold grudges against actors because they can't always help the roles they're giving. But really, bitch? Really? She's made an entire career out of playing dumb blondes and Mary Sues. If her characters weren't annoying enough, you can't even throw in the towel and say "well, she may be a shit actress, but at least I'll have a nice pair to stare at for a couple hours." No. She's intentionally irritating and somehow makes a lot of money. I don't get it. Her character might as well have just been played by a Hallmark that opens up every once in a while to deliver a cheesy pre-recorded romantic line. At least it would've been an interesting romance, as inanimate objects are all the rage these days.

Why does this look familiar?

But the good acting (and the irritating acting) didn't surprise me. They're big names. I expected it. What I didn't expect was for the script to be...well. Actually good. Let me explain what I mean by "good" in this context. This wasn't, in any way, shape, or form Apocalypse Now. Instead, it was a movie that knew exactly how crappy it was, and so strived to be the most entertaining crap it could be. And you know what? I was entertained. It's been a long time since we've had bad movies that are actually enjoyable. Instead, we get crap like Priest (2011), a movie that might've been good if they had just cracked a smile. Bad movies have got to stop taking themselves seriously. Let's face it, Expendables, you're all classic heroes and I will root for you all the way, but John McClane didn't become the ultimate badass by standing there with his hands on his hips and waiting for his Oscar moment. I've got a shit ton more respect for a movie that pokes fun at itself than I do for a movie that rocks back and forth on the highest of high horses for two hours. Which is the long way of saying This Means War knew exactly what it was, it knew that it was ridiculous, and it let itself be just that. Ridiculous, good fun. Did the romance fall short? Sure, but no one was expecting this to be the next great love story. So they played up the bromance, which, since helmed by two excellent actors, was perfectly believable and actually gave us something to root for. And then when the audience started to nod off, they upped the ante with another scene of Hugo Stiglitz being badass, which worked to wake everyone back up again.

Is this the movie of the year? No, it isn't. Hell, I won't even suggest you pay good bucks to see it in theaters. But I will tell you that, in case you're dragged along to see it, maybe leave the do-it-yourself lobotomy kit at home. You might surprise yourself by catching a glimpse of an increasingly endangered species in cinema, the good bad movie. 

He's Farting Because Of His Medication.

THE HANGOVER PART II (2011)

Image from www.thehangoverquotes.com

Oh shit. It's come to this. The one movie of the year that has yet to disappoint me (besides Hanna which I can't love on enough) is Hangover Part II. How the fuck did that happen? I'll give you two words: midnight viewing. Better yet, opening night midnight viewing. Because, honestly, if you're going to see a comedy on the big screen? The only way to see it is with a large group of rowdy and obnoxious movie goers who are all pumped on opening night high (and a couple other illegal substances). Which is a giant disclaimer for "this review will be entirely colored by my badass theater experience."

Return Of The Morning After.

The movie ran something like this: Stu is getting married and they're heading all the way to Thailand to do it. And despite Stu's best efforts to keep anything resembling a bachelor party at bay, "somehow" the Wolfpack ends up in a shitty hotel in Bangkok without any recollection of the night before. With a biker monkey, a coked out Mr. Chow, and the bloody finger of Stu's pending-brother-in-law, Teddy. So they literally used the exact same plot (down to even the minor ups and downs). So they pulled out the same gags to get the same laughs. But hell. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right? The stakes were higher, but they didn't go over the top. Which is really impressive when you think about it, because it seems to be the comedy writer's gut reaction to go too big, too campy, and all out crazy as soon as they get a sequel budget. Here, they kept the same level of crazy, and they stayed true to the form of the original. They kept the character realism instead of turning them all into caricatures of the original movie. If anything, this one almost seemed more realistic than the first at times. But maybe it was just the grittier landscape of Bangkok and opposed to the anything-can-happen nightmare city of Vegas. 

As for the Wolfpack themselves. Doug, unfortunately, has to sit this one out again. Sorry, bro, you will never be Benjamin Gates. Never. You will always be Riley Poole. Waiting with the car and picking up the checks. But you did get to deliver the line, "It's going to get worse before it gets better", so, you know. We didn't forget about you completely. Then there was Phil, the baddest man to ever wear a bright pink diaper bag. I've got to love Todd Phillips for his careful balance with Phil's character. On one hand, he's the flirtatious, wild man of the bunch. On the other hand, he's an grade school teacher and father of two. It's because he's actually so lame in reality that Phil doesn't come off as so much of a douchebag, but instead is often the leader of their ragtag bunch. Then, of course, there's Alan. Alan was everything I needed from him--always ridiculous and never quite coming to terms with the gravity of the situation. Which was especially important for this movie, since it was a little heavier on the "holy shit, we're legitimately in trouble" than the first Hangover (2009). 

Image from popbytes.com,

Nonetheless, it's clear that at the end of the day, this is Stu's movie. He's the one with the most on the line, what with this being his wedding and all, plus he's the only one that goes through any real character arc. Even if his arc was fucking ridiculous. Stu and the stripper. No words. I have NO words. Only tears of laughter and my jaw stuck somewhere on the candy coated theater floor. They fucking went there. But we've also got a lot of great bits, like Stu's obligatory song, the badass monkey who has officially replaced Scott Glenn's spot as my power animal, and every scene with Mr. Chow. Let's face it. He stole the first movie, and he's returned to steal the second movie. There's little better than the flamboyant international criminal with a limp wrist and a tiny mushroom. I said it. I'll forewarn that there's a lot (and a little) of dick in this movie. I'm going to stop dropping hints now, but it's fucking hilarious. 

For last notes, the music was as completely epic as it was in the first, and we had a enough badass action scenes to keep me pumped. My only complaint was that the end somehow didn't feel quite as satisfying as the end of the last movie. I couldn't tell you why. Maybe because we'd just seen this all before. Maybe it's because the Wolf Pack didn't feel quite as pulled together as it did in the last movie. In the first Hangover, Stu hated on Alan, but he at least laughed when Alan made the baby air-jack himself. And Phil was always there to back Alan up, because he felt some strain of sympathy for the guy. But in this movie, they actually got legitimately pissed at Alan. Plus, they spent most of the movie as The Wolfpack plus one, whether that plus one was Mr. Chow or the little brother or the badass monkey. Either way, we didn't get as much Wolfpack bonding moments as we did in the first film, which might've made the ending not quite as satisfying. But, shit. It's a comedy movie with a minor in action. And a sequel. I expected it to be ten times worse than this, so the fact that I'm coming out of it with only one real complaint? Power to you, Hangover, power to you.

MORNING AFTER EDIT: Now that I've had time to sit on the movie, I'm come up with this: I put in an extra star there purely for the a-fucking-mazing theater experience. And the fact that I've seen SO MANY disappointing movies in the theater lately, I was overly enthusiastic to find a movie that actually lived up to my expectations. 

But on rewatching the first Hangover, there is one blaring problem with its sequel that I've got to bring to the front, and that is: the Wolfpack. The real joy of these movies for me is not the eccentric characters they meet, or the funny gags--it's the intense bromance that exists between these men. These four men--Stu, Phil, Doug and Alan. Sure, we have wild and crazy scenarios, but what invests us in the movie is the bond between these men--the ups and downs of Stu and Alan's relationship, the weird one-sided romance between Alan and Phil, the way Doug seems to be the only one who can really mediate between the men. In the sequel...just we don't get that same connected feeling. Even though Doug, granted, spent most of the first movie frying on the roof, he got enough screen time with the boys at the start of the movie to develop a solid relationship with them. In Part II, Doug doesn't get any real screen time with the boys at all. Which is strike one. Strike two is Alan. Apparently, no one's talked to Alan since the last movie. Which, understandably, is realistic, but. After building up their relationship in the first movie, you kind of wanted something to continue with Alan and the gang. And then, the last strike--the Wolfpack themselves aren't even that cohesive. They spent most of the movie bouncing from weird event to weird event, and not much time with their own internal drama. Phil and Alan even have a moment where Phil tells Alan he's not his friend, but that conflict which could have been played up and had a nice pay out is instead defused 30 seconds later. 

The thing is, it was a funny fucking movie anyway. What it lacked in extensive bromance, it made up for in funny gags and awesome new (and old) characters (and monkeys). But it does have its flaws, and any of those who did not get to witness the epicness that was the opening night rush might as well be warned.

BAMF Of The Week: Kevin Smith

KEVIN SMITH

Because no one does excessive cursing, stoner humor, and long commentaries that leave the mark of a good dick slap on society like Kevin Smith. From creating the unforgettable duo Jay and Silent Bob to the retelling of the apocalypse in Dogma (1999) to giving Ben Affleck a career, Kevin Smith has really proved just how badass he is again and again. And just when you think it couldn't get any better, his new film coming out in March, Red State (2011), the horror film based off the gay-bashing Westboro Baptist Church, gives us a whole new and exciting side of Kevin Smith. Indeed, he is really the gift that just keeps giving. 

Personal Quote: "There's something to be said for failing. It's not the failure you feel, it's the failure that people project when something disappoints. You're back to ground zero, where there's no expectations, and that's where I like to be. People like to set the bar high. I like to put the bar on the ground and barely step over it. I like to keep the expectations really low. After something like 'Mallrats' or 'Jersey Girl,' the expectations are in the toilet. People are like, 'He's over, he's done.' So it's easier to be, like, 'Ta-da, I'm not.' It's a much more comfortable place to work from. When you have an escalating career, and every time you have to outdo yourself, I couldn't handle that kind of pressure. But having to outdo 'Jersey Girl'? Not very difficult."

Best Films: Clerks (1994) for still being extraordinary even as his first movie on a penny budget, Dogma (1999) for its complete and utterly crazy, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back (2001) for Jay and Silent Bob, and Clerks II (2006), just for giving the world pillow pants. 

Best Moment: Star Wars PWNS Lord Of The Rings. Forever.

Kato And That Dude Who Makes Fart Jokes.

THE GREEN HORNET (2011)

Christoph Waltz does not approve. 

...Is more or less what the movie should've been called. If you're like me and went to this movie because you know nothing about the actually radio show/comic book The Green Hornet but you just wanted to see Christoph Waltz blow shit up, I'll give you the quick and dirty of it. Britt Reid (Seth Rogen) has major daddy issues (hey, at least he got it better than this guy. What is it with Tom Wilkinson and bad parenting?), which is fine until his old man kicks the bucket. So he goes putzing around for a bit, wishing he could do something useful with his life, when he comes across his dad's coffee maker mechanic, Kato. The two form a bond over being losers and decide to take control of their lives and become superheros--thus forming the identity of The Green Hornet and...Kato. Meanwhile, Britt Reid has to come to terms with inheriting his father's newspaper company and the responsibility that comes with it, while offing the bad guys in order to get to the king pin--Chudnofsky. 

Image from alanbobet.blogspot.com

My problem with the movie broils down to this. Chudnofsky, Christoph Waltz's character, carries around a two barreled gun. In theory, a two barreled gun is a good idea. You give it one squeeze of the trigger, and bam. Two opponents down in one blow. Great, right? Well, kinda. Except I'm thinking, you get behind that gun, where's your sight? Do you look down one barrel, aim, and hope the second bullet hits? Or do you aim for somewhere directly in between the targets and pray your bullet makes it there? What I'm trying to say is, simultaneously firing at two targets with one shot is a tricky task, and I'm sure with Seth Rogen's comedic gold on the left and the high action film budget on the right, the directors thought they'd hit both the action junkies and the collegehumor crowd in one blow. Weeell...not quite. 

It was a noble effort. I will say that. I don't think it's a crime to mix the action super hero addicts and the couch potato stoners. Just ask any superhero movie made in the 80s and 90s. Batman And Robin (1997)? Even Ghostbusters (1984) had a similar campy edge, even if they weren't superheros per se. Frankly, I think between Christian Bale's growly angst, Spiderman's "dark side", and now even Blondie Thor furrowing his brow in serious contemplation, it's about time we lifted the superhero genre with a much needed stop taking yourself so seriously injection. Give us something campy, something ridiculous! And, finally, The Green Hornet answered that call.

But the next step is actually pulling the comedic superhero action movie off, and there I think The Green Hornet came up short. This isn't to say I was stonefaced throughout the entire movie. It did pull some laughs--mainly from the banter between Britt Reid and Kato. Their petty, competitive little digs were nicely done, especially during their tiff about the Green Hornet gun. Seth Rogen's payback for shooting himself in the face was nicely done. But otherwise, the comedy just felt forced and out of place. And I'm still scratching my head as to why. I loved Pineapple Express (2008), written and directed by the same Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg. And Pineapple Express was a great example of a comedy-action movie that also happened to be a stoner movie, and came out perfectly on all fronts.

Image from schmoozequeentv.blogspot.com

The only way I can come to terms with the non-grooviness of The Green Hornet is the fact that...well. It wasn't a ridiculous stoner movie. It was a high budget action film with some larger than life action scenes and some badass Kato karate. But most of all, it was a superhero film, and with a superhero film, there are certain things you want to feel: fear of the bad guy, the badassitry of the good guys, and the overall sense of justice being served. And I felt none of the above. The Green Hornet was a crybaby loser, Cudnofsky (who I'll get to in a second) wasn't taken seriously by anyone, and I definitely felt no justice being served. Except for the first fight right after he's severed the head of his father's statue. Besides that...they were basically killing a lot of people who didn't need to die? They were killing small time crooks who may have never killed anyone. Not rending them unconscious, not handing them to the cops, killing them. And they did the same with...just about everyone else. Which didn't make them seem like the villains. It made them the villains. Even the ways in which they put down the real villains of the movie seemed a little cruel and unnecessary. Having a hero movie where justice doesn't feel...justified...is like having a Samuel L. Jackson movie in which his only part is to read The Little Engine That Could to retarded kids. It just plain doesn't work.

Welcome to Hollywood, land of bad career choices.

Enough of that. On to the acting. Seth Rogen was Seth Rogen, love him or hate him. I happen to just like the fact that a normal looking big-boned fella can now act in roles such as playboy. I think Hollywood's starting to come a long way with its "hunky men" stereotype--believe it or not, girls like a guy for his personality. Now if only I could say the same about Hollywood's women. On the flip side, we have Cameron Diaz, or Lenore Case. I will give Lenore props in that she only dates the sidekick once and doesn't go all the way with either of the men in the movie. Nor does she seem interested in them. Good for her! But if you're going to make a woman "the brainiac" and want her to be a strong character, it'd be a good thing to, somewhere along writing the script, actually insert a personality. I understand that Seth Rogen is better with the bromance and not so much with the writing strong chicks, but someone give him a hand here.

And then there's Kato, played by Jay Chou. Me, being the non-comic book reading freak I am, immediately went to Cato, who just happened to be inspired by the Green Lantern's sidekick. Who knew? First, I'm going to say that the Kato in the trailers was way more badass than the Kato on screen (seriously, am I crazy, or was the plot in the trailers an entirely different movie?). With that, he was a really awesome character. Even if he got pushed around way more than he deserved. And, honestly, I didn't see any sparks flying with him and Britt Reid. The bromance wasn't really doing it for me. Mostly because Britt Reid was a major dick, and Kato deserved much better. His marshal arts were the bomb, his technology work was amazing, in fact, by the end of it I was kind of hoping he'd get the girl because at least then he'd be getting something out of this very one sided relationship.

Of course, I've saved the best for last. As you may or may not know, I was practically salivating when I learned Christoph Waltz was to be the villain in a superhero movie. Christoph Waltz + guns + over the top action? Sign me up. After all, he's the ultimate villain, how could they go wrong, right? What I did not except was the most inappropriate casting choice of all time. How do you cast Christoph Waltz as the pathetic and desperate for attention Chudnofsky/Bloodnofsky? I'll repeat myself: how do you cast the most charming and subtly frightening villain in recent years as the non-threatening, non-charismatic, washed up hasbeen? The logic just does NOT compute to me. With that said, I will add that Christoph Waltz, being, you know, the genius that he is, does pull his own weight to make the character believable. The man's a professional actors, and as painful as it is to watch him turn off the charm, he does it well. And what Waltz adds to the character is an amazing--and yes, frightening! For the love of god, you have an intimating character, play it up!--lack of compassion and complete and utter apathy towards human life. In fact, he quite enjoys killing, and he'll do it just to lighten his mood, thankyouverymuch.

Image from www.eatsleepgeek.com

To bring this to a close, the movie had a heck of a lot of potential, and I feel like most of it went down the drain. But I will give it this: it was a fun movie, it has laughs, it has decent action, you won't feel like shooting yourself in the foot after seeing it. Just don't expect an Academy Award on this one.

...One last thing. I will say this. For the gear heads out there? I may not know one car from the other, but I am aware that this film was packed with many sexy sports cars. About that big budget? 

Don't Throw Away Your Television.

Image from http://moviecarpet.com

Angry at the the Skins child porno debate? Wounded by Ricky Gervais (you humorless bastards)? Heartbroken because The Walking Dead hasn't come up with a precise return date? Never fear, I come bringing tidings of hope, also known as: three reasons not to throw away your television.

Image from http://images.buddytv.com/

1. Lie To Me is awesome. Yeah. I know. About %1 of the human population watches this show. But really, it's a good one to get on. Sure, it's methodic, but no one complained when every episode of House M.D. had the same ending. It has an interesting premise--human lie detectors. Plus, it has the quirky and ever lovely Tim Roth and the beautiful Brendan Hines. What more do you need? Okay. So the show doesn't sell itself well. So it had a bit of a sloppy first season. But I think it's really started to kick itself into gear--especially with one of the latest episodes, Funhouse (3x09), in which Lightman gets himself admitted to a mental hospital and spends some time going absolutely crazy. I know what you're thinking--another House M.D. ripoff, Lie To Me? Really? But no, really, they actually pull it off well, and it's a great bit of character development. One of the best episodes of the season, if not their best. I recommend checking it out on hulu.

2. Archer is coming up. YES. I've been waiting for this for way too long. If you're wondering what Archer is, it's another hulu venture for you. It's more or less an animated spoof of secret agent movies, focusing primarily on the 007 franchise, and basically rips it to pieces. From the sick geniuses that brought us Frisky Dingo, Archer is not for the faint hearted, often laced with twisted sexual humor, butler abuse, and mommy issues. But if you're a James Bond fanatic*, you'll no doubt find this amusing to no end. It's coming back January 27th, and I'm psyched.

Image from http://blog.oregonlive.com/

3. Battlestar Gallatica is on netflix. Okay. So this has nothing to do with TV, actually. Well, a little bit to do with TV, I mean, it is...you know. A TV show. Just happens to be a TV show that I watch on the computer! Alright, so it's old news for everyone else, but I just started getting into it, and let me tell you. It's fucking awesome. Amazing, well written script? Check. Exciting plot with robots? Check. Great action scenes? Check. Complex characters? Check. Badass chicks? Motherfucking check. There is really nothing that makes me happier at the moment.

*NOTE: Speaking of TV. Yeah. I'm not going to be talking about Human Target. I know, I'm talking about badass shows, how can I not watch Human Target, right? Well. Human Target makes me angry. It's a wannabe James Bond show. And it's one thing to spoof James Bond, another thing to try to be as cool as 007 himself. Don't try. You will fail. Miserably. Am I not giving this show enough credit? Probably. But this is my irrational rage showing.

"At The Crime Scene, LOL."

THE OTHER GUYS (2010)

Image from blog.timesunion.com

Alright, director Adam McKay. You win. I wasn't that big a fan of Anchorman (2004), even though the rest of the world seems to have loved it, and I didn't bother going to see Step Brothers (2008) because, again, not crazy about Adam McKay's work. Or Will Ferrell. Actually, there's something about Will Ferrell that just plain pisses me off. It's not personal, it's just an unwarranted vendetta I have going against his face. I see his face and I'm turned off to the movie all together. However. Saving grace. Mark Wahlberg. Ah, Mark Wahlberg. All it took was one viewing of Scorsese's film The Departed (2006) and I was hooked on him. It was that character--Staff Sgt. Dignam. In case you've forgotten who he is, you can refer here. In any case, he was a character hard not to fall in love with. So, imagine my pleasant surprise when I found the exact same character in another movie--Adam McKay's creation The Other Guys. Except instead of being Staff Sgt., he was pencil pusher Terry Hoitz with anger management issues, a surprisingly good ballet foot, and a restraining order. There is a God. 

Image from http://mimg.ugo.com/

The Other Guys follows Terry Hoitz and Allen Gamble (Will Ferrell), two police partners who spend most of their time behind the desk, filling out paperwork. While this is a more than satisfactory job for Allen, Terry can't stand being harassed by the so called "heros" of New York City and hungers to get his gun out and his hands dirty. In a classic bit of "be careful what you wish for", Allen unwittingly gets them involved in a major Ponzi Scheme-type case and they get in over their head. And that's the plot. Which, in a comedy or an action movie, is usually just about the least important part of the movie. On to the good stuff.

First, I have to say something about the genre of the movie. Yes, it's a comedy. We've got that much down. But it's also...just a good movie. It's not a string of one-liners haphazardly thrown together. It's got interesting characters we can relate to, a fleshed out plot, and...wait for it...some really badass action scenes. That's right. It makes a legitimately good action movie just on it's own. We have our hero characters, we have rival police partners, we have the bad guys. They've got an awesome fight scene in the office where Mark Walhberg slides down the table shooting up the office (to the sounds of the White Stripes "Icky Thump"...the music makes half the action, really. That goes for most action films in my opinion. Put a killer score to it...and I'm with you). There's a couple well placed car chase scenes, and another great moment when Terry and Allen go drinking. In short, it's a cop movie spoof, sure. But it's done clearly from someone who digs cop movies, and it shows. 

Will Ferrell, Steve Coogan, and Mark Wahlberg.

Another surprise this movie threw my way. I actually liked Will Ferrell. Yeah, I know, everyone's like "Oh, but Elf (2003) was really touching". I failed to see the heartwarming Christmas movie about Will Ferrall being a super tall cast out elf, so I wouldn't know. But in most everything else, he's one of those comedic actors that just rubs me the wrong way. His characters come off kind of arrogant and repulsive in a way I can't quite put my finger on. However, as Allen, his character is, for once, the soft and gentle one. He just wants to sit behind his desk and stay out of everyone's way. And he actually acted it really well. I was endeared. It helped that he had great chemistry with Mark Walhberg, and their characters balanced each other out well. Allen's calm and rational attitude worked well against Terry's violent outbursts, drug lord paranoia, and constant petty insecure hissy fits (which were magically tamed by Eva Mendes' fantastic rack). The best moments in the movie revolved around them bantering it out--and usually ended with spilt coffee, a destroyed FBI mug, or convoluted Miranda Rights.

Image from listal.

Well. Most of the best moments. Every other moment was stolen completely by Samuel L. Jackson. If it's not obvious, I think this man is the shit. And he was perfectly cast in this role. Why? Because the whole premise of the character revolved around the fact that the audience could believe that, no matter what he did, he would come out without a scratch on the other end. And, since he was Samuel L. Jackson, I was with them the entire way, I believed he could do anything. Which made the ultimate punch line for his character that much more rewarding. I didn't stop laughing about that one until about halfway through the movie.

The Other Guys has a great sense of humor, badass action sequences, and an excellent buddy-buddy dynamic. In short, it's kind of hard not to enjoy. In case you need a little more convincing, I give you this Animal Planet gem. Enjoy.