Dec. 21, 2007, 8:58 a.m. CST
Dec. 21, 2007, 9 a.m. CST
Can't wait to see it.
Dec. 21, 2007, 9:08 a.m. CST
While it's true that WALK HARD isn't only focusing on RAY and WALK THE LINE, it does spend the majority of the time focusing specifically on scenes from those two films. How can you say it doesn't pay special attention to those films? "I'm smell blind!" Or the tragic death of the brother... Or Dewey's introduction to drugs? Those are all scenes right out of RAY. And there are even more blatant jokes from WALK THE LINE. I think this is a fine parody, but to tell people it's not a parody of those two biopics in particular is just missing the point completely, my friend. And while I do agree that it's not quite as funny as SUPERBAD, THE 40-YEAR-OLD VIRGIN, or KNOCKED UP, I think it's as funny as it could possibly be considering the restraints of the (parody) genre. That is all.
Dec. 21, 2007, 9:43 a.m. CST
by The Brain Machine
You are the Man. This is a great look at all the stuff coming out today. I can't believe how much got dumped into the theater this weekend. How is National Treasure 2? Seen it yet?
Dec. 21, 2007, 11:29 a.m. CST
by Mullah Omar
The reason this film clocked in short is apparently due to cuts made to stave off legal threats from people portrayed in the film. I think if we ever get to see the full cut, it will change the way we think about this film and this story. I don't know whether to be angry at Mike Nichols or the studio for caving in and neutering their own film, but that is apparently what they did. This could have been a classic political satire and instead it comes off as a Lifetime Movie of the Week with a few stray tits. <br> WALK HARD was lame. Not bad, just boring. The music is worth checking out, but you can find the best clips online (Jack White, Tim Meadows, and . . . uh, not much else) and save yourself some cash. <br> I sent AICN a review of NATIONAL TREASURE 2 a few days ago but haven't seen it. The short version is that it's not as fun as the first one - if you didn't like the first one, definitely avoid the sequel, and if you liked the first one, then this one might disappoint you. It just lacks the focus, and it's not the international film that it makes itself out to be - they're out of the US for maybe 20 minutes.
Dec. 21, 2007, 11:31 a.m. CST
by Mullah Omar
As in, haven't seen the review I sent about NT2 appear at AICN. <br> <br> And so much for line breaks. Sigh.
Dec. 21, 2007, 12:03 p.m. CST
The blowback has already started, with complaints from some of the people who were actually involved in the Afghan operation. Now, it's true that--at the instance of Wilson--that footage claiming that "we created the Taliban" was removed, there seems to be several other bloopers left in. The film apparently depicts Wilson as the driving force behind giving the Mujahidin Stingers when in fact the CIA was against it and Wilson was lukewarm about it at best. The film, which never mentions the name of the man who really won the Cold War, President Reagan, implicitly blames him for the chaos that followed the defeat of the Soviets and the rise of the Taliban. In fact that was Bush the Elder and, especially, Bill Clinton. Still, it is nice to have a film coming out of Hollywood that depicts the Soviets as bad guys and us as good guys.
Dec. 21, 2007, 12:38 p.m. CST
by Lance Rocke
i just bet
Dec. 21, 2007, 1:05 p.m. CST
Spinners are spinning their spin cycle to spin the spinny stories.
Dec. 21, 2007, 1:41 p.m. CST
because they're narrow-minded dumbasses who don't want to change with the times and believe everything the U.S. does is patriotic. "Killing those (Indians, slaves, Iraqi civilians) was patriotic." I wish I lived in California instead of a red state filled with in-breds. The problem--er, one of the problems--with the neo-cons is that they have no problem bashing everyone and everything that goes against their agenda, but when someone questions them or mocks their gun-toting low-IQ heroes, they whine like bitches. REDACTED, blah, blah... SICKO, blah, blah... CHARLIE WILSON, blah, blah... We liberals don't hate America, we're just embarrassed to be associated with the rest of you assclowns. The whole world hates us and these bastards have the nerve to think it's because we're so right and everyone else is wrong. The president can't even pronounce the word "nuclear," for Christ's sake. Ugh. You people hurt my head.
Dec. 21, 2007, 2:33 p.m. CST
...Paul Kucinich '08. Left, right, left, right, left! Let's all meet in the middle and have a big constituional party complete with a hardy tarring, feathering and running out of town on a rail all the money whores and murderers. Moon Bats, can you hear me??!! Peace and Freedom, BABY!!!
Dec. 21, 2007, 3:36 p.m. CST
Conservatives are "real Americans"? No, conservatives want to destroy the very fabric of this nation. Conservatives have no love or compassion for anyone--they only care about their own ideology. They wave their supposed morality in everyone's face as they do everything they can to destroy everything they touch. They hate women, blacks, Mexicans, Arabs, the poor, constitutional freedom, and the religious freedom of everyone who doesn't worship the same god they do. As for the liberal agenda, funny I never see liberals boycotting and protesting movies every other week. That was my point, you smug asshole. And yes, I gladly lump all types of conservatives together because they all suck. Conservatives today aren't much less to the right than fascists, and they--and you, dickhead--are a prime example of the decline of intelligence in America today. How can a people support the removal of their own civil rights as happily as you do? But then you are the same people who believe that a man lived inside a whale and that a big boat held two of every animal that existed on the planet. Oh, and the earth is only 7,000 years old, too, right? And there were no dinosaurs? And you smugly think you've got all the answers and you believe that ignorant shit? Talk about dumb.
Dec. 21, 2007, 5:10 p.m. CST
As for "calling Obama a crackhead," when was the last time your party ran either a woman or an African-American? It'll never happen. As for the party of Lincoln, etc., those roles changed long ago, buddy. You know it and I know it.
Dec. 21, 2007, 5:58 p.m. CST
Almost every review I've read makes excuses for it. If they can't sing the part, they can't sing the part. Who cares if the little kid can sing? He's the little kid and barely in it. I kinda even thought they got the whole tone of the musical wrong. It's not supposed to be as light-hearted as it was. So when the dark parts came it just didn't make sense. You wanted to laugh and it wasn't funny. I think it has everything to do with the lightness of the leads' voices. Johnny can sing, but he does not sound like a vengeful manly man. Half the soundtrack sounded like "Endless Love".
Dec. 21, 2007, 7:18 p.m. CST
I recently saw Kasdan's "The TV Set", and I enjoyed it a lot, and thought it was painfully truthful, but it seemed a lot more like a pilot for a show rather than a self contained movie, and with the subject matter somewhat similar to Duchovony's character in Californication, is there any chance that this was originally developed for TV maybe?
Dec. 21, 2007, 8:16 p.m. CST
Right up there with Airplane and Naked Gun 1. Beats the hell out of the crappy spoofs these days like Epic Movie, Scary Movie, Date Movie, Meet the Spartans, etc.
Dec. 21, 2007, 8:19 p.m. CST
Ever hear of Alan Keyes? I guess he's not black, huh. Bush has had more women and minorities in his cabinet than Clinton every did. And thank you for making me defend Republicans, you jerk!
Dec. 21, 2007, 8:32 p.m. CST
"the film serves as a reminder of a time when America actually did seem to care about helping a victimized nation"<p>On behalf of the countless millions of people the world over that have been saved from fates worse than death by our generous country - stick to reviewing the movie and spare us your juvenile political commentary.
Dec. 21, 2007, 8:58 p.m. CST
Alan Keyes was never a frontrunner...
Dec. 21, 2007, 9:08 p.m. CST
"douchebag cocksucking extreme Left piece of shit." Wow, what an intelligent comment. And asking me if I know the difference between hardline conservatism and Ron Paul is ignorant because you and I know Ron Paul is going nowhere. How much support is he going to get from the hardline conservatives? As for me/us labeling Obama--I'm a huge Obama supporter. He's my guy. Allow me to rephrase. When I said conservatives are pieces of shit, I just meant the ones who voted for that idiot Bush. You are just like O'Reilly and every other conservative I know--you scream your points, hoping to drown out those you disagree with. And you're right, I am extremely left. I'm proud of it. I'm proud that I want all Americans to have health care. Gee, isn't that *extreme*? I'm proud that I disagree with this bullshit war. I support the troops--was in the Army a decade myself--but I think this war is crap. I'm proud that I treat gays like human beings--that I believe that all Americans should be given the same freedoms. Wow, I must be an asshole as you say, huh? I'm proud that I believe that ALL RELIGIONS should be given EQUAL WEIGHT. You know what your true beliefs are, so why candycoat them? Be proud to be a gay-bashing, gun-loving, Bible-thumping hypocrite. You're a conservative. Stand up and be proud of your shittiness, don't try to mask your true beliefs. I believe in freedom and dream of peace. You don't. Be proud of it. Just be yourself. I love everyone, even if they're gay. You don't. It's who you are, and I love you for it, asshole.
Dec. 21, 2007, 11:58 p.m. CST
You pretty much just nailed everything that I was thinking as I read that debate. Republicans are a bunch of unwiped assholes.
Dec. 22, 2007, 12:31 a.m. CST
And except for the talking points involved, they sound exactly the same.
Dec. 22, 2007, 10:13 a.m. CST
"Except for being different colors, blue and orange are exactly the same." Um...
Dec. 22, 2007, 10:23 a.m. CST
by I am_NOTREAL
so some of the jokes are stretched a little thin (the brother cut-in-half stuff isn't very well executed) and certain parts are a little smug, but the Dylan scene and the rapper who samples Dewey near the end alone are worth purchasing the DVD Absolutely hilarious. And John C. Reilly is really good.
Dec. 22, 2007, 11:53 a.m. CST
Great job Capone, it would seem you're carrying all the reviewing weight on this site these days, and you're doing a hell of a job. Still, it would seem you forgot a little Terry Gilliam masterpiece with one of Robin Williams' best performances that LaGranvese wrote called the FISHER KING. Either that or you're living in an alternate universe where it doesnt exist. LIVING OUT LOUD is hella underrated though.
Dec. 23, 2007, 7:43 a.m. CST
I noticed though, the story was changed to make Todd the protagonist rather than the antagonist. In the book, he's most definitely the villain, in the play, less so, but by the way he abuses the boy, he's still quite evil despite having a legitimate motive for bloodthirst. But in the movie, you're definitely rooting for Sweeney, but it worked great. Its visually stunning, and its practically a masterpiece.
Dec. 23, 2007, 11:05 a.m. CST
I just need to point out two things about that rant... <p> Thing the first: It wasn't two of every single animal, it was two of every KIND... in other words, there wouldn't be two pumas, two lions, two tigers, and two little kitties (partly because things wouldn't have diversified that much by that point in history), there would be two felines. The diversity in the kind would have happened afterward. <p> Thing the second: And anyone who doesn't believe in dinosaurs is an idiot. We have bones, we have cave paintings of dinosaurs, and of course, the dragon legends that most likely came from dinosaurs. <p> That is all.
Dec. 24, 2007, 8 p.m. CST
by Lenny Nero
TomBodet, not all conservatives are money-grubbing murderers. AnimalStructureBalls, not all liberals are PC-proclaiming hypocrites. The fact that either of you are using such dastardly blanket statements is proof enough of intellect.
Dec. 26, 2007, 3:30 p.m. CST
I HAVE LOST ALL FAITH IN THE WORLD. anyone who says that walk hard was a winner needs to have their fucking skull cracked. okay, let me digress. i'm sorry to be so angry but walk hard was the biggest piece of shit i have ever seen EVER. and capone's not the only one to give a positive review. there are actually several positive reviews. and not ONE scathing review, which is astounding. critics lack balls anymore. let me tell you something, i've only walked out of a small handful of films in my life. i RAN out of this fucking flick. i went to see it because i love apatow AND nearly every actor in the film. bottom line: the shitty writing in this picture made almost every last one of these incredible actors decidedly UNfunny. there were scores of dialogue that simply narrated biopic cliches. did that make sense? prolly not...let's see...example...lines like "dewey cox needs to think about his entire life before he plays." that's not fucking parody. that's lazy. that's just using dialogue to explain a cliche. fuck this fucking piece of shit. i love judd apatow specifically for NOT making this kind of luke warm, lowest common denominator, mass-marketed bullshit. judd, what have you done??? fuck fuck fuck. the unprecedented full-frontal male nudity close-up was funny. the beatles were funny, though not nearly enough when you take into account who they were being played by. the brian wilson stuff was funny. but that's IT. the shitty writing even managed to make jonah hill bomb like a motherfucker. GODDAMN PISS BALLS SHIT FUCK FUCK FUCK. SHIT ON THIS MOVIE. I WANT MY FUCKING EIGHT DOLLARS BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dec. 27, 2007, 11:42 a.m. CST
by Lenny Nero
Sorry KGP, I thought Walk Hard was absolutely hilarious. As usual, I'm going to use the Siskel quote and say "Nobody can tell you what is funny or what is sexy. Either it is to you or it isn't." I would hesitate with you calling the humor lowest common denominator, because you may not find it funny, but it's definitely laced with cleverness. Whether or not you like that kind of humor is one thing, but to misrepresent it is another.
Dec. 27, 2007, 11:43 a.m. CST
by Lenny Nero
Why did I put my own name as the post subject?