By: Garrett Collins

Starring: Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy

I was pretty emphatic about my love for Before Sunrise. The non whimsical tale of two strangers who meet on a train and walk around Vienna while exchanging their thoughts on life and love felt like more than just a movie. It was a tale of many people who grew into adulthood in the 90s being represented onscreen by two optimistic twenty somethings from Generation X. So, a question I had going into Before Sunset, a film made nine years after its perfect predecessor, was why not just close the book on these characters, with the final scene of their fairy tale 24 hour life together being Jesse and Celine saying their good byes on that train platform in 1995. It would take a film written just as smartly and resisting the urge to contemporize the optimism that the prior film epitomized. It would have to show characters nine years grown, but not any different from what the ones I got to know through Before Sunrise for me to feel happy that a sequel was being made at all. With a more than a little contrived set up that consists of Celine walking into a bookstore as Jesse’s promotional tour of his new work of fiction that is based on their night together lands in Paris, I was not convinced that Before Sunset would match the great taste that the prior film left in my mouth.

Guess what? The final taste might have been even sweeter. Director Richard Linklater and stars Julie Delpy & Ethan Hawke were more than up to the task of following their prior film with one that might be even better. The crackling chemistry between the two leads is still there, and dialogue still flows from their mouths like beautiful verbal waterfalls. Yet, the obvious difference between the two films may its biggest strength. This being instead of two optimistic twenty something adults with their full lives ahead of them, Jesse and Celine are now two people who are in their thirties and have had a hard time chasing the feeling of love they felt on that one magical day together. Jesse’s physical change is more apparent than his emotional one. His leather jacket is now gone, only to be replaced by sad, time-worn lines on his face and a shorter haircut. Celine, on the other hand, has gone through a different kind of change. While not much different has happened physically, she has grown into, as Jesse calls her at one point, ‘a manic depressive activist.’ While she had a spring in her step in the last film, Celine is now an almost darkly humorless shadow of her former self. A person putting on a smiling facade. Are they only good at brief encounters or do they have a chance of finding the love they experienced that day in Vienna? It is an emotionally believable way to show how these characters have grown in the nine years between their reunion.Linklater wisely gives stakes that are similar to the last film. After Jesse spots Jesse in the library, his publicist tells him he only has seventy minutes until his plane leaves. Playing the film out in real-time, we are constantly aware of this cloud set to rain on their heads. As much fun as we are having are listening to Jesse and Celine catch up, we are constantly thinking about the inevitable separation they must once again experience. Yet, this doesn’t stop Linklater from showing the two characters go through the motions of catching up with one another. He beautifully enhances the romantic mood by keeping the soft glow of the Paris sun constantly in frame as the two characters do everything from going on boat rides and sharing a cup of coffee together. Their conversations are just as infectious. Yet, with Delpy and Hawke sharing script writing credit with Linklater, you get the feeling that they injected more than a little of their real lives into the film. Hawke especially, as his character of Jesse expresses the frustrations he is experiencing being the father of a four-year old child with a woman he doesn’t even love (Hawke would divorce Uma Thurman, the mother of two of his children, shortly after the film was released.)

The justification of a sequel to one of the most romantic films ever made is in answering questions asked in the last one. They get the one about whether they met up again in six months out of the way relatively early. However, like any great set of chronological films, Linklater has even more pressing ones to ask. Not to mention the fact that they top the open endedness of Before Sunrise’s ending with perhaps the most romantic and frustrating ending in film history. Yet, in the spirit of Linklater’s remarkable storytelling ability, I was feeling 100% of the former and 0% of the latter. At one point in Before Sunset, Jesse expresses the scenario of the only reason he wrote the book being that one day he would have a signing in Paris and she would come to it. Well, what if the only reason Linklater made a sequel to Before Sunrise was to prove that he could. Congratulations Mr Linklater. You have more than done so with me.

5 out of 5

Join the Spoder brothers on tonight’s episode of Spoder to Spoder. No farm animals were harmed in the recording of this podcast. We think.

Woo Hoo!  Are you ready for a duck-blur?

This Thursday join Delta Mike and November Papa (or Dave and Nate, to their mothers) as Big Show Thursday returns from it’s hiatus in deep space.  You can expect all the usual levels of jackassery, muppet wonkery and jesterability, but with a very special guest thrown into the mix!

Joining the boys this week is YouTube sensation, Hunter Davis.  We will ask him all about his Sir Ian McKellen impressions, The Dark Knight Retires, his acting ambitions and his favourite color.  Who knows, we may even stay on topic too! Probably not.

So come along, relax the ear canals and let your funny bone do the talking, as we go LIVE at 7:30pm (PST) on May 23, 2013.

Check out our AmigoRadio page, iTunes and our Official Spreaker Radio Channel for this and all past podcasts, available to stream and download! Also sign up for our newsletter to receive show notifications and updates!

By Adam Bunch

Directed by: Rich Moore
Starring the voice talent of: John C. Riley, Sarah Silverman, Jack McBrayer, Jayne Lynch, & Alan Tudyk

“Full length animated motion picture”. If you just look simply at that phrase and take it at face value, then it essentially boils down to “long cartoon”. In today’s day and age, and there are no shortage of movies brought to the Cineplex that simply happen to be animated and drive children in droves. However when they deliver a product that has the ability to not only appeal to children, but to bring out the inner child in adults as well, you can get films that rise above a singular label and become an enjoyable film that doesn’t need to be pigeonholed into a narrow category.

Wreck-It Ralph brings us the story of Ralph (Riley), who for 30 years has been the ”bad guy” in the arcade game “Fix-It Felix JR”. Every day Ralph does what he does best, he wrecks things. And while he is the best at what he does, after 30 years of watching the game’s hero Felix win a medal every time he fixes what Ralph wrecks, he decides he has had enough of being the bad guy and goes off in search of a medal of his own, to for once feel like he has a purpose that is acknowledged by those in his world.

While the films opening 15 minutes or so, is basically a story set-up that drags a bit at times, there are some fun moments that bring you back to being a kid again. Ralph explaining his difficulty in being revered at a support group called Bad-Anon specifically will appeal to those adults that have spent any amount of time playing video games. Bringing together the bad guys/bosses of games ranging from Street Fighter, to Pac Man, to Mario is a nice little nod to the parents who are watching with their kids. Watching Ralph walk through Game Central Station, which is the hub between all the games in the arcade (which is managed by a very delightful Ed O’Neill) gives the filmmakers a chance to throw in a plethora of characters from different genres and ages with a cameo feel that is very akin to what we had a generation ago with “Who Framed Roger Rabbit”. To start listing and naming them off would simply be a cheat code to you seeing them revealed for yourself.

Just as you start to think this movie is going to be a simplistic story of a misunderstood Ralph looking for acceptance however, the storytelling elements grab you and take you on a very satisfying and emotional journey. After Ralph is able to pilfer a medal from a violent First Person Shooter game, he is whisked away to “Sugar Rush”, a Mario Cart style racing game where the entire land is candy coated sweetness & lollipops run by the deliciously Ed Wynn sounding King Candy (Tudyk) . Here he meets up with Vanellope Von Schweetz (Silverman), a racing hopeful who happens to be a “Glitch”, shunned as an outcast from the rest of the game’s characters. Now when I saw that Silverman was in this movie, I’ll admit to you Amigos that I was turned off as she simply doesn’t appeal to me. In Venellope though, she brings the character out in a way that is outstanding. Her vocal styling, pacing and emotion really draw you in and doesn’t let go, and the relationship that grows out her time with Ralph is truly fantastic in its development.

Though slightly overshadowed by the great writing between our two main characters, much fun and excitement is given to not only Fix-It- Felix’s hero Felix (McBrayer) but also to the afore mentioned shooter “Hero’s Duty” Sgt. Calhoun (Lynch) as they are forced to team up to not only reunite Ralph with the game in which he belongs but to save the litany of video games and their characters who are at risk from being permanently removed from their own games.

The animation presented by the folks at Walt Disney Animation is exactly what we have been brought up to expect. Tight, crisp, and seamless in it’s delivery which, in a movie that moves through many different generations and styles of gameplay is a testament to the development of this film. With “Wreck-It Ralph”, first-time feature director & writer Rich Moore (who has also written and supervised some of the best episodes to ever come out of both “Futurama” & “The Simpsons”) has delivered a wonderful film full of fun, emotion, and heart that can appeal not only to kids, but to the kid in all of us.

 4 out of 5

Check out the new teaser trailer for the upcoming film, Dreamland, a feature children’s film in the tradition of The Never Ending Story!

This fantasy story that is grounded in reality takes a look at family binds and the sorrowing reality of the number of lost and abandoned children in the world which takes Evan on a courageous adventure to save his Grandfather, sister, and the rest of the kids trapped in an amusement park “dream land” created by some unknown force. Once Evan arrives, he begins to lose his memory. When his sister ends up missing, he discovers the meaning of family and must find a way to hold onto his memories so he can save her before it’s too late!

Written by Colby Heyer
Story by Jason Morris, Jeremia Draper and Colby Heyer
Directed by Jason Morris.

You can find out more about Dreamland at Digital Shadow Films and on their Facebook page! More to come, Amigos!

By: Garrett Collins

Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Tobey MaGuire, Carey Mulligan, Joel Edgerton, Adelaide Clemens, Jason Clarke, Amitabh Bachchan, and Isla Fisher

There were a number of questions running through my mind that made me want to run the other way when it came to attending a screening of The Great Gatsby. After versions of the F. Scott Fitzgerald’s 1925 semi autobiographical novel that cover everything from a 1926 silent film all the way through a 1974 Francis Ford Coppola adaptation starring Robert Redford, why, oh why tell the tale again in 2013? Why would a movie that involves more human drama than glitzy dancing warrant being released in 3D? And why does Baz Luhrmann feel the need to take old-fashioned stories like this and his 1996 rendition of William Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet, mold them into modernism, while at the same time stylize them with the hippest music imaginable? All of these questions worked against the slightest possibility that I could like this, the newest, and yes, hippest, version of The Great Gatsby.

Which makes it all the more surprising that I was actually happy to take the glitzy tour of this never forgotten story for a lot of The Great Gatsby’s 142 minute running time,. Luhrmann’s past tendencies to titillate even the most innate things by filling the surroundings up with gaudiness and glamour always had a way of making me turn my head and plug my ears. Yet they quite distinctly served the story Gatsby was telling remarkably well. Changing the character of Nick Carraway into a patient in a sanitarium we witness writing Gatsby’s story was a risky proposition that is played out quite vigorously throughout the course of the film. At times Fitzgerald’s words literally write themselves on the screen as Carraway types them. It’s a way of storytelling that I wasn’t sure what to make of at first, but grew on me the longer The Great Gatsby went along. It serves the narrative very soundly. It was also nice how Gatsby’s aura is felt all throughout the first half hour of the film, even if he does not make his first appearance onscreen until right after that mark. Luhrmann coordinates convoys to his parties and frames him from the back to make us completely aware that his presence looms. I have not always been on board with Luhrmann’s style, but the decisions he makes in The Great Gatsby are stunning. Whether it be coordinating swooping parties or luminating Mulligan in an almost permanently ardent glow, it fed into the essentials of making an eighty-eight year old story seem relevant today. Lurmann also never misses an opportunity to establish Gatsby’s mansion, and uses many zoom ins and zoom outs to paint pictures of the mansion that seem brighter than the diamond shrouded chandeliers that decorate it. Even the film’s 3D is nicely used, as Luhrmann resists the urge to point objects toward the screen yet shows us everything from swooping shots of Gatsby’s beautiful house to Gatsby skipping a coin in a pool toward us as ways of justifying using the technology for such a non action oriented film.

Unfortunately, when it comes to performances, The Great Gatsby is a big case of hit and miss. The obvious stand out is DiCaprio. When he and Luhrmann first teamed up for Romeo & Juliet, DiCaprio was a bright faced coming of age actor on the cusp of stardom. Now, at the ripe old age of thirty-eight, DiCaprio may not have the time earned lines of say, Redford from ‘74’s version of the story. But he is most certainly a star, and a well-respected one at that. He has one of the most memorable introductions of the year in Gatsby, and the fact that he owns the screen each time he is on didn’t surprise me. Every single time he uses the phrase ‘old sport’ to describe Carraway, it always seems earned, and never got old for me. Maguire, on the other hand, was off and on. His gravelly voice was probably not the best choice to narrate the story (it was fine in small increments throughout Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogy) but his presence in as important a character (arguably even more so than Gatsby) as Carraway comes more off more as a puzzle with incremented and scattered sections as opposed to one that is fully put together. Which might serve that character well in some circles, but for me was more of a distraction.Edgerton is not only almost unrecognizable, but he is excellent in his lost in the moment role as Daisy’s successful and jealous husband Tom Buchanan. Fisher is also really good as slutty but lovable Myrtle. Yet, one of the worst cases of miscasting comes in the form of Mulligan. Daisy is a role that is futile in telling the story of Gatsby, as she is supposed to come off as the object of attraction (the green light, if you will) and apple of Gatsby’s eye. Yet, I’m not sure whether it was the almost non-existent chemistry between her and DiCaprio (a BIG detriment when telling a love story), or the way they played off each other, I just never bought Mulligan in the role. Which is a shame, because I think she is a tremendous actress.

I also would be remised if I didn’t say when the mystery behind Gatsby and his background is unraveled, Luhrmann and frequent collaborator Craig Pearce’s script starts to do the same. The human drama at its core doesn’t wrap itself tightly as much as it just comes apart, and there are many instances in Gatsby that could have been trimmed. However, even with all of these faults, I would give a slight recommend to checking out The Great Gatsby. It is a timeless mindful tale about what can happen if greed and jealousy get in the way of power. Containing off and on performances, Gatsby nonetheless boasts an enchanting build up to its story, as well as a stunningly beautiful music score by Craig Armstrong. Luhrmann peppers the film with music by Jay-Z (who is also an executive producer on the film), which didn’t bother me much and actually added on to the glitzy feel of Gatsby’s parties. I enjoyed the way each of these songs serve as background to what is going on in the film at each given time. Even if there is an interesting version of Beyonce’s Crazy in Love that made me cringe almost as much as Emily Browning’s rendition of Sweet Dreams (Are Made of These.) I said almost.

3.5.out of 5

By David Mayne

Talking ANYTHING was cool back in the 80′s. The typical bleeps and bloops were finally replaced with some semblance of realty, a computerized voice very reminiscent of everyone’s favorite, the Speak & Spell. Offering 1 or 2 player baseball action, this little handheld game was great for long trips in the car, or just a quick fix after your homework was done.

Manufactured in 1987, vTech Talking Baseball took the usual batch of 4-AA batteries to operate which would give you roughly 5 to 6 hours of playtime (yes it was possible in 1987 to play this bad boy for 5 hours).

Solidly built, Talking Baseball has lasted over 26 years and still works like new, minus a few cosmetic blemishes. The “talking” commentator, whom I named “Gus”, is very easy to understand, and has a wide range of words that he speaks throughout the game. 2 player is a little difficult given the overall size of the unit, however, this thing was made for small hands and back in the day no one cared that you had to literally sit on top of each other to play the same game.

- Dave

By David Mayne

Two hand-me-downs, believe it or not, these things really kept my attention in the pre Atari and Nintendo days. Long before cutting edge graphics and digitized sound, we made do with a few blinking lights and 1 or two variations of the same beep that was sure to drive everyone in the house nuts.

Let’s start off with Tandy Baseball. Built circa 1981 by the Tandy Corporation (now RadioShack), Tandy Baseball is a simple 1 or 2 player game, featuring one side of the unit to be held and played by the “batter” and the other side to be held and played by the “pitcher”. Talk about “head-t0-head”, this game was the epitome of a 2-player handheld game. The unit is solidly built, requiring 4-AA batteries; yes, it was the age before rechargeable everything. The front “screen” sports a decorative baseball diamond and scoreboard, which allows several red diode lights to blink when appropriate to signify action on the “field”. Electronic beeps and blips sound off for just about everything, and with no volume control and a level that’s just about hair-raising after 5 minutes, you’ll be wanting to rip out the internal speaker by the 2nd inning.

Technically, Tandy Baseball is ideally suited for two players, as the single player mode only allows you to bat. You can play yourself, but what the hell is the point of that. When playing two player, you simply rotate the unit around at the end of each half inning.

All in all, Tandy Baseball is still fun, and I actually played with it for quite a while this evening in preparation for this article. Being that this game is over 32 years old, it’s amazing that I was able to insert 4-AA batteries and have the thing fire right up just like it did when I was 8 years old. Well done TandyShack.

Next up is the Pocket Simon by  Milton Bradley, a smaller version of the popular Simon memory game. Manufactured in 1980, the premise of the Pocket Simon is simple. One of Simon’s 4 illuminating buttons lights up and you must press that button in kind. Simon will then illuminate the same button in addition to a second random button, after which you must press the same two in that order. This continues, with new random buttons lighting up, adding to the overall progression that you must imitate back to Simon until you either make a mistake or forget what comes next. What seems simple actually turns frustratingly difficult in the first minute of play, with the entire challenge relying on just how good of a memory you have.

Taking an odd combination of 2-AA and one 9-volt batteries, the Pocket Simon comes to life with bright multi-colored lights and low-key, fun sounds that imitate the button presses. One complaint I always had, even when this thing was relatively new, was that the buttons required a slightly above average amount of pressure, making play by the youngsters somewhat of an added challenge. Another thing I noticed is the battery compartment. While it indeed says it takes 2-AA batteries, the slots for them are a mystery to me, with the positive and negative contacts not lined up correctly, leading me to believe that some metal part was lost to the toy bin decades ago. That said, I am currently unable to fire this puppy up, although I played enough of it back in the day to have a photographic memory of its operation. I always remember it was a bitch as well to track down the slightly more expensive 9-volt battery that this thing required. All in all, the Pocket Simon was a cool design, flawed by a few wonky buttons and the reliance on 2 different battery types to operate. Given the opportunity, you should seek out the full size Simon game if you are interested in this series.

Thanks for reading and I’ll see you next time on RetroToy Patrol at AdventureAmigos.net!

-Dave

By: Garrett Collins

Starring: Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy

If you stop and think about this thing we experience called life, it’s not much more than a set of non extravagant circumstances that can be separated into segments of what ifs. What if you hadn’t decided to apply for the job you are in the midst of a career in now? What if you turned the other way when that friend for life asked you your name? And then there’s the one Before Sunrise explores. What if, in a fit of spontaneity, you decided to temporarily abandon plans to go home in order to spend an entire day with a woman you just met? This question is pondered upon within the course of Before Sunrise’s 100 minute running time. All of which add up to a movie that doesn’t use sub plots involving exes. Nor is there any music to tell the audience how to feel. It relies on the sole power of stars Hawke and Delpy to convey their emotions through sharply written dialogue and fits of uncomfortable circumstances turned into romantic ones. The result is a film that displays more romanticism within the course of Celine and Jesse’s one day together than most Hollywood fare convey using standard storytelling techniques and bigger stars.

Before Sunrise is based on an experience that director Richard Linklater (Dazed and Confused) had with a woman in Philadelphia after a choice meeting in 1989. It starts with beautiful Celine (Delpy) reading on a train and getting frustrated with the bickering couple seated next to her. In a fit of irony, she rises from her current seat and sits in one located up the aisle and near a slumping against the window Jesse (Hawke.) After talking it up with her in the lounge car, the time comes for Jesse to get off the train. Yet, this is when we as an audience yell at him not to. Thankfully, he works the nerve to ask her to join him on a walk around Vienna. Before Sunrise doesn’t feel like a film. In complete contrast, it more or less feels like a pane of invisible glass that we are looking through as these two characters get to know each other. Where Linklater succeeds and most fail is that he possesses something that is essential for any great filmmaker to have: patience. And he uses it so very well here, letting the relationship develop as we spend time listening to Jesse and Celine exchange thoughts on things such as life reincarnation and romantic cynicism.It should be noted that no matter how well a script is written, it is nothing without actors who do not perform it well. Linklater really knew what he was doing when he cast Delpy and Hawke. Displaying the emotions they show could not have been easy. After all, they have to be two people falling in love right before our eyes. Linklater doesn’t hold back on showing the awkwardness that comes with these emotions. One particular scene involves Celine and Hawke listening to music in a record store listening booth. It is amazing to see both Hawke and Delpy in this scene. One looks at the other. Then turns away in time for the other not to catch them looking. It is simple and natural. And a big factor in the reason why Before Sunrise works so well. In real life, there is not a simple glance leading to love that Hollywood productions constantly exploit. It is about those instances you share with the other that would be detrimental if shared with any other person. And all of these built up feelings come to light in perhaps the most romantic scene of the entire film, in which Celine and Jesse reenact phone conversations with their best friends. What they ‘would’ say to these people is actually being told to the other, and the way their feelings come out within this conversation is brilliantly written and acted.

There are a number of questions asked and not answered by Before Sunrise. All of which I will not spoil here. They are questions that if asked by another film in another context, would be frustrating to comprehend. All I will say is that by the end of the film, you want these people to be together. Yet, the fact Linklater leaves these two as he does is perhaps the most romantic aspect of the film. Beautifully acted, smartly written, and gorgeously shot, Before Sunrise is essential viewing for those looking for a highly romantic story that is not jammed down your throat. And if by the end of Before Sunrise you aren’t aching to share a glass of wine in the park with your romantic partner, then you can kiss any sense of romanticism you two share goodbye.

5 out of 5

By: Garrett Collins

It’s an amazing world we live in when a first weekend in release film just misses the $100 million mark and is already considered an almost failure. But, as studios keep thrusting big films with massive budgets, the average of which is around $150 million for films that open during the summer, disappointment is almost imminent. Because in order for that studio to turn a profit, the film has to at least double its budget, or make as much state side. When their films fail to make at least half of its budget back when opened nationally, studios start to worry. Case in point: this week’s big ($200 million) budgeted opener Star Trek Into Darkness opened to a three-day intake of $70.5 million. Combined with its Thursday opening and Wednesday night IMAX screenings, it has accustomed a total of $84.1 million. For all intents and purposes, this is fantastic. But word of mouth among Trekkies, especially about the film’s seemingly kept in vault twists, has been mixed. As a kind of perspective on how the film has performed, its three-day total of $70.5 million is $2 million LESS than Iron Man 3’s SECOND weekend. All of this doesn’t bode well for Chris Pine and company’s future, as there’s some stiff competition coming in the next week. However, the film is still performing very well overseas ($80 million as of press time.) And while its total domestic intake of $80.1 million is nothing to sneeze at, imagine how much Star Trek Into Darkness would have made had its fans brought dates! Even with a fresh rating of 87% on Rotten Tomatoes, it seems highly logical that Abrams‘ second journey aboard the USS Enterprise will not have the lasting power of Robert Downey Jr‘s third adventure wearing the red & gold.

Speaking of loveable millionaire Tony Stark, Iron Man 3 ended up in second place, making $35.1 million ($337 million total) in its third week of release. In doing so, it also reached a milestone, as Shane Black’s first foray in comic book filmmaking officially passed the $1 billion mark. Congratulations to them, as even with the proven history of Marvel character films made before Iron Man 3, there is always the potential for a disaster that derails the franchise’s success train. However, while it seems people cannot seem to get enough of Downey’s performance as the character, I feel the real test will come in November when Thor The Dark World opens.

The Great Gatsby ended up in third place, making $23.4 million ($90.1 million total) in its second weekend. Michael Bay’s bodybuilding buffoons from Pain & Gain seem to have run out of steroids, as they ended up in fourth place with $3.1 million, bringing its total to $46.5 million. The Croods is still hanging in there, as it sits at fifth place with $2.7 million ($176.7 million total). 42 is still rounding the bases, as it ended up in sixth place with $2.7 million ($88.7 million total.) Oblivion is struggling to hit the $100 million mark, as it’s in seventh place with $2.2 million, bringing its total to $85.5 million. No wonder Tom Cruise wants to jump back into the Ethan Hunt role again. Mud has remained a consistent mainstay in the top ten, as it currently sits in eighth place with $2.1 million ($11.5 million total.) The top ten is rounded out by flops Peeples ($2.1 million, $7.8 million total) and The Big Wedding ($1.1 million, $20.1 million total.)

Next week sees the release of THREE big pictures, two of which are sequels. Thursday brings us The Hangover III. And Friday will have Fox’s 3D animated tale Epic and The Fast & Furious 6 (have there REALLY been SIX of those?!) There is also the opening of one limited release, Richard Linklater’s Before Midnight. What do you think, Amigos? Will Star Trek Into Darkness remain on top, or will fast crashing cars and drunken trips to Vegas rule the roost? Let us know on the Facebook page!

Source: Box Office Mojo