By our guest blooger, Maria Biondolilo

Controversial auteur Roman Polanski has just been granted bail in the amount of $4.5 million Swiss Francs by a Zurich court. Arrested on Sept. 26 on a 31-year-old U.S. warrant, Polanski is being held in Switzerland on statutory rape charges. The 76-year-old director is fighting extradition to the United States for sentencing in Los Angeles.

In 1977, Polanski was arrested for sexually abusing a 13-year-old girl. During his trial, he fled the United States for Europe, where he has lived and worked ever since. A warrant for his arrest was issued in 1978, but Polanski was not actually arrested until just two months ago. Since then, the director has languished behind bars. If released on bail, Polanski could be released in a just a few days into house arrest at his Swiss chalet.

Although the Swiss Federal Crime court acknowledges that, given his history, Polanski is a high flight risk, they also believe he will not flee again. According to German newspaper Deutsche Welle, the Swiss Federal Crime has stated that "The court considers bail in the amount of 4.5 million Swiss francs offered by Polanski, together with supporting measures, as being sufficient to avert the risk of flight.”

Polanski’s lawyer, Herve Temime, argued for his bail by describing the stress the director’s imprisonment was causing his family. He said that Polanski’s wife and two children are extremely upset by this separation. Mr. Temime also stressed that Polanski’s incarceration could lead to significant financial loss for investors in Polanski’s latest film, “The Ghost,” which is due to premiere in February. The film is currently unfinished.

Polanski is perhaps best known for such films as "Rosemary's Baby," "Chinatown" and "Knife in the Water." His 2002 film, “The Pianist,” won multiple Academy Awards.

Sources:

LA Times: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gossip/2009/11/roman-polanski-makes-bail-poll.html.

Deutsche Welle: http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,4930119,00.html

Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1230901/Roman-Polanski-set-walk-free-hes-granted-2-7m-bail-Swiss-court.html

By our guest blooger, Maria Biondolilo

Controversial auteur Roman Polanski has just been granted bail in the amount of $4.5 million Swiss Francs by a Zurich court. Arrested on Sept. 26 on a 31-year-old U.S. warrant, Polanski is being held in Switzerland on statutory rape charges. The 76-year-old director is fighting extradition to the United States for sentencing in Los Angeles.

In 1977, Polanski was arrested for sexually abusing a 13-year-old girl. During his trial, he fled the United States for Europe, where he has lived and worked ever since. A warrant for his arrest was issued in 1978, but Polanski was not actually arrested until just two months ago. Since then, the director has languished behind bars. If released on bail, Polanski could be released in a just a few days into house arrest at his Swiss chalet.

Although the Swiss Federal Crime court acknowledges that, given his history, Polanski is a high flight risk, they also believe he will not flee again. According to German newspaper Deutsche Welle, the Swiss Federal Crime has stated that "The court considers bail in the amount of 4.5 million Swiss francs offered by Polanski, together with supporting measures, as being sufficient to avert the risk of flight.”

Polanski’s lawyer, Herve Temime, argued for his bail by describing the stress the director’s imprisonment was causing his family. He said that Polanski’s wife and two children are extremely upset by this separation. Mr. Temime also stressed that Polanski’s incarceration could lead to significant financial loss for investors in Polanski’s latest film, “The Ghost,” which is due to premiere in February. The film is currently unfinished.

Polanski is perhaps best known for such films as "Rosemary's Baby," "Chinatown" and "Knife in the Water." His 2002 film, “The Pianist,” won multiple Academy Awards.

Sources:

LA Times: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gossip/2009/11/roman-polanski-makes-bail-poll.html.

Deutsche Welle: http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,4930119,00.html

Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1230901/Roman-Polanski-set-walk-free-hes-granted-2-7m-bail-Swiss-court.html

Movie Review

"Law Abiding Citizen"

Directed by F. Gary Gray, written by Kurt Wimmer, rated R, 108 minutes.

By our guest blogger, Michaela Zanello

Directed by F. Gary Gray, “Law Abiding Citizen” is a revenge fantasy whose lofty aim is to make a grand statement regarding the perversion of the American judicial system. Spotlighting the way that justice is not always ensured in a system where it is possible for criminals to manipulate laws to their advantage is an interesting concept, but this film delivers its message in such a way that it comes across as unrelentingly absurd.

At the helm of this anything-for-a-thrill kind of film is Jaime Foxx and Gerard Butler. Foxx plays Nick Rice, a Philadelphia district attorney with a near perfect conviction record, and Butler tackles the role of Clyde Shelton, a family man with a hidden past who is out for blood. The performances of these two actors are the only things this film has going for it, and even these kudos should be taken with a big old grain of salt.

The film opens with Clyde Shelton spending a quiet evening at home with his family when two men break in and brutally murder his wife and daughter. The killers are swiftly apprehended, but for Clyde, justice is definitely not served. A plea bargain is made by the D.A., Nick Rice (Foxx), to get one killer to testify against the other, which essentially makes it possible for one of the murderers to walk away with only a slap on the wrist.

Flash forward 10 years. The execution of the condemned killer goes hideously awry. Soon thereafter, the other murderer winds up butchered in an abandoned warehouse. This is where the film starts to really go downhill. The systematic death scenes of these two characters are intensely crass and so distastefully horrific that some will need to shield their eyes.

After the termination of the second murderer, it doesn’t take long for the police to realize that Clyde is the one who is behind these vicious slayings, and he is quickly arrested. Throughout his incarceration, Clyde is very obliging, even giving Rice a confession, but not without keeping an ace or two up his sleeve. Clyde is no fool, and he makes sure to spill the beans in such a way that doesn’t quite permit Rice to convict him.

See, Clyde has spent years meticulously plotting his revenge, which up until this point still seems justifiable. But as the plot thickens and Clyde starts using gadgets better suited for a superhero movie, such as exploding cell phones and prop guns rigged with paralyzing needles.  As such, it becomes apparent that the plausibility factor has gone out the window. Clyde further exploits the judicial system by getting himself placed in solitary confinement. Now, even behind bars, Clyde continues his reign of terror on those people he discerns to be corrupt or compromised.

So, as the body count continues to rise, so does the absurdity level. Plus, the audience is never quite sure how they are supposed to feel about Clyde. On the one hand, when Clyde seeks revenge on the men who murdered his family, sure, the audience gets where he is coming from, but then, when he begins murdering people simply on the grounds that they work within a flawed system, the sympathy starts to waver.

With a muddled message and a lack of character pizzazz, unless you’ve got 108 minutes of your life that you’d like to waste and some money that you’d like to throw away, do not bother seeing “Law Abiding Citizen."  It should be put under citizen's arrest as it's one colossal disappointment.

Grade: D+

View the trailer for "Law Abiding Citizen" here. Thoughts on the movie?

Movie Review

"Law Abiding Citizen"

Directed by F. Gary Gray, written by Kurt Wimmer, rated R, 108 minutes.

By our guest blogger, Michaela Zanello

Directed by F. Gary Gray, “Law Abiding Citizen” is a revenge fantasy whose lofty aim is to make a grand statement regarding the perversion of the American judicial system. Spotlighting the way that justice is not always ensured in a system where it is possible for criminals to manipulate laws to their advantage is an interesting concept, but this film delivers its message in such a way that it comes across as unrelentingly absurd.

At the helm of this anything-for-a-thrill kind of film is Jaime Foxx and Gerard Butler. Foxx plays Nick Rice, a Philadelphia district attorney with a near perfect conviction record, and Butler tackles the role of Clyde Shelton, a family man with a hidden past who is out for blood. The performances of these two actors are the only things this film has going for it, and even these kudos should be taken with a big old grain of salt.

The film opens with Clyde Shelton spending a quiet evening at home with his family when two men break in and brutally murder his wife and daughter. The killers are swiftly apprehended, but for Clyde, justice is definitely not served. A plea bargain is made by the D.A., Nick Rice (Foxx), to get one killer to testify against the other, which essentially makes it possible for one of the murderers to walk away with only a slap on the wrist.

Flash forward 10 years. The execution of the condemned killer goes hideously awry. Soon thereafter, the other murderer winds up butchered in an abandoned warehouse. This is where the film starts to really go downhill. The systematic death scenes of these two characters are intensely crass and so distastefully horrific that some will need to shield their eyes.

After the termination of the second murderer, it doesn’t take long for the police to realize that Clyde is the one who is behind these vicious slayings, and he is quickly arrested. Throughout his incarceration, Clyde is very obliging, even giving Rice a confession, but not without keeping an ace or two up his sleeve. Clyde is no fool, and he makes sure to spill the beans in such a way that doesn’t quite permit Rice to convict him.

See, Clyde has spent years meticulously plotting his revenge, which up until this point still seems justifiable. But as the plot thickens and Clyde starts using gadgets better suited for a superhero movie, such as exploding cell phones and prop guns rigged with paralyzing needles.  As such, it becomes apparent that the plausibility factor has gone out the window. Clyde further exploits the judicial system by getting himself placed in solitary confinement. Now, even behind bars, Clyde continues his reign of terror on those people he discerns to be corrupt or compromised.

So, as the body count continues to rise, so does the absurdity level. Plus, the audience is never quite sure how they are supposed to feel about Clyde. On the one hand, when Clyde seeks revenge on the men who murdered his family, sure, the audience gets where he is coming from, but then, when he begins murdering people simply on the grounds that they work within a flawed system, the sympathy starts to waver.

With a muddled message and a lack of character pizzazz, unless you’ve got 108 minutes of your life that you’d like to waste and some money that you’d like to throw away, do not bother seeing “Law Abiding Citizen."  It should be put under citizen's arrest as it's one colossal disappointment.

Grade: D+

View the trailer for "Law Abiding Citizen" here. Thoughts on the movie?

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

The highly anticipated Steven Spielberg/Peter Jackson team-up project, a trilogy of motion-capture films based on the classic "Tintin" adventure comics by Belgian artist George Remi (also known under the pen name "Herge"), has finally made some progress. Spielberg finished shooting all of the footage for the film in the past month, says Studio Briefing. There's still a ways to go before we see the first entry, however, as artists and technicians will now be taking two years to animate the footage.

The epic undertaking got off to a rough start when the two directors couldn't find funding, which delayed filming and resulted in actor Jamie Bell ("Jumper") replacing the original star Thomas Sangster. Eventually, everything fell into place, and now all is completely underway.

It's interesting to note that this is the first foray into animation for both of the high-profile filmmakers (though Spielberg has produced dozens of animated features). Jackson will be supervising the animation for the first film (titled "The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn") and will direct the second, and the two hope to co-direct a third installment when all is said and done. Considering the first entry alone will take two years to animate, it may be a while before they need to begin worrying about that, though.

I don't know a whole lot about the comics, but with such an incredible bunch of people involved in the project, it's hard to expect anything but brilliance. Besides Spielberg and Jackson's involvement in direction and production, the script was co-written by the British comedy masters Edgar Wright and Steven Moffat, was shot by Oscar-nominated DP Janusz Kaminski (Spielberg's frequent collaborator), and stars Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, and Daniel Craig.

Seriously, what a line-up!

Jackson expects the film to be ready for a Winter 2011 release in 3-D.

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

The highly anticipated Steven Spielberg/Peter Jackson team-up project, a trilogy of motion-capture films based on the classic "Tintin" adventure comics by Belgian artist George Remi (also known under the pen name "Herge"), has finally made some progress. Spielberg finished shooting all of the footage for the film in the past month, says Studio Briefing. There's still a ways to go before we see the first entry, however, as artists and technicians will now be taking two years to animate the footage.

The epic undertaking got off to a rough start when the two directors couldn't find funding, which delayed filming and resulted in actor Jamie Bell ("Jumper") replacing the original star Thomas Sangster. Eventually, everything fell into place, and now all is completely underway.

It's interesting to note that this is the first foray into animation for both of the high-profile filmmakers (though Spielberg has produced dozens of animated features). Jackson will be supervising the animation for the first film (titled "The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn") and will direct the second, and the two hope to co-direct a third installment when all is said and done. Considering the first entry alone will take two years to animate, it may be a while before they need to begin worrying about that, though.

I don't know a whole lot about the comics, but with such an incredible bunch of people involved in the project, it's hard to expect anything but brilliance. Besides Spielberg and Jackson's involvement in direction and production, the script was co-written by the British comedy masters Edgar Wright and Steven Moffat, was shot by Oscar-nominated DP Janusz Kaminski (Spielberg's frequent collaborator), and stars Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, and Daniel Craig.

Seriously, what a line-up!

Jackson expects the film to be ready for a Winter 2011 release in 3-D.

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

Rob Zombie, whether you appreciate his work or not, is undoubtedly deserving of the label "auteur." His films ("The Devil's Rejects," "Halloween," "Halloween II," among others) are far from sophisticated, but he definitely brings his own very specific sense of style to them. Whereas films like the "Saw" series are afraid to admit that they're little more than dirty grindhouse entertainment, Zombie knows he's making trash and he revels in it. I haven't seen his second Halloween film, but I love the rest.

Having said that, it seems the director wants a change. Though there was word he intended on remaking "The Blob," it appears he's saving that potential gem for later and wants to separate himself from horror for his next project, another trashy exploitation film that this time is more within the action genre. According to Slashfilm, the project, titled "Tyrannosaurus Rex," and it's about "a prize fighter who goes to prison for a decade and a half, comes out rather hardened and becomes a skull crusher on the underground fight circuit."

Regardless of the genre, this definitely sounds like Zombie's territory, and a rather appropriate direction for him to take considering "Rejects," his most acclaimed film by far, is more of an action film than horror anyway. Sounds like there's a lot of room for Zombie's regular cast, as well. It'd be great to see Sid Haig and Bill Moseley as underground fighters.

The film is far from production stages though, so we'll be waiting a while to see Zombie's first major non-horror attempt. In the meantime he has a new album awaiting release sometime next year and he'll be touring to support it.

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

Rob Zombie, whether you appreciate his work or not, is undoubtedly deserving of the label "auteur." His films ("The Devil's Rejects," "Halloween," "Halloween II," among others) are far from sophisticated, but he definitely brings his own very specific sense of style to them. Whereas films like the "Saw" series are afraid to admit that they're little more than dirty grindhouse entertainment, Zombie knows he's making trash and he revels in it. I haven't seen his second Halloween film, but I love the rest.

Having said that, it seems the director wants a change. Though there was word he intended on remaking "The Blob," it appears he's saving that potential gem for later and wants to separate himself from horror for his next project, another trashy exploitation film that this time is more within the action genre. According to Slashfilm, the project, titled "Tyrannosaurus Rex," and it's about "a prize fighter who goes to prison for a decade and a half, comes out rather hardened and becomes a skull crusher on the underground fight circuit."

Regardless of the genre, this definitely sounds like Zombie's territory, and a rather appropriate direction for him to take considering "Rejects," his most acclaimed film by far, is more of an action film than horror anyway. Sounds like there's a lot of room for Zombie's regular cast, as well. It'd be great to see Sid Haig and Bill Moseley as underground fighters.

The film is far from production stages though, so we'll be waiting a while to see Zombie's first major non-horror attempt. In the meantime he has a new album awaiting release sometime next year and he'll be touring to support it.

By our guest blogger, Jonathan Wu

The 2006 "Syndromes of a Century" by Thai filmmaker Apichatpong Weerasethakul recently was picked picked by the Toronto International Film Festival Cinematheque as the most important film of the decade out of a list of 54 other films.

The film was chosen by an esteemed panel of over 60 film curators, historians, archivists and programmers who have had leadership roles in the field of historical film curation and have published numerous books, essays and polemics on cinema. Members of the panel represented institutions such as the Museum of Modern Art (New York); the British Film Institute (London); the UCLA Film & Television Archive (Los Angeles); Vancouver International Film Festival (Vancouver); Centre National de la Cinématographie (Paris); and many more.

TIFF Cinematheque's Senior Programmer, James Quandt, stated:  "Their perspective should give us a longer view of the films made in this decade, the films that should stand the test of time and be acknowledged as historically influential works in the decades to come."

Written and directed by Weerasethakul, "Syndrome of a Century" was a commissioned work for Peter Sellar's New Crowned Hope festival in Vienna to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the birth of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and premiered in 2006 at the 63rd Venice Film Festival. The film is divided into two parts--the first, in a rural Thailand hospital and the second in a Bangkok medical center. The characters and dialogue in the first and second parts are basically the same, with the only changes being the setting and the outcome of the stories. Apichatpong stated in an interview that the film is about "transformation, about how people transform themselves for the better."

Upon its release in Thailand, the film created a lot controversy with the Board of Censors, who demanded the director to cut four scenes from the movie in order for it to be shown commercially. Since then, the movie has had a limited release in Thailand in which the four scenes that were cut out are shown as black-scratched film that lasted as long as the original scenes. This was done as a form of protest and to inform the Thai public about the issues censorship.

"Syndrome of a Century" beat out various other films from all around world. The most prominently represented countries from the list were France (21), USA (9), Germany (7), Taiwan (6), and Japan, China and Italy (4 each).

The list was compiled to launch the 20th anniversary celebration of TIFF Cinematheque and the top 38 films be shown in Toronto in January 2010.

Sources:  1 and 2

By our guest blogger, Jonathan Wu

The 2006 "Syndromes of a Century" by Thai filmmaker Apichatpong Weerasethakul recently was picked picked by the Toronto International Film Festival Cinematheque as the most important film of the decade out of a list of 54 other films.

The film was chosen by an esteemed panel of over 60 film curators, historians, archivists and programmers who have had leadership roles in the field of historical film curation and have published numerous books, essays and polemics on cinema. Members of the panel represented institutions such as the Museum of Modern Art (New York); the British Film Institute (London); the UCLA Film & Television Archive (Los Angeles); Vancouver International Film Festival (Vancouver); Centre National de la Cinématographie (Paris); and many more.

TIFF Cinematheque's Senior Programmer, James Quandt, stated:  "Their perspective should give us a longer view of the films made in this decade, the films that should stand the test of time and be acknowledged as historically influential works in the decades to come."

Written and directed by Weerasethakul, "Syndrome of a Century" was a commissioned work for Peter Sellar's New Crowned Hope festival in Vienna to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the birth of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and premiered in 2006 at the 63rd Venice Film Festival. The film is divided into two parts--the first, in a rural Thailand hospital and the second in a Bangkok medical center. The characters and dialogue in the first and second parts are basically the same, with the only changes being the setting and the outcome of the stories. Apichatpong stated in an interview that the film is about "transformation, about how people transform themselves for the better."

Upon its release in Thailand, the film created a lot controversy with the Board of Censors, who demanded the director to cut four scenes from the movie in order for it to be shown commercially. Since then, the movie has had a limited release in Thailand in which the four scenes that were cut out are shown as black-scratched film that lasted as long as the original scenes. This was done as a form of protest and to inform the Thai public about the issues censorship.

"Syndrome of a Century" beat out various other films from all around world. The most prominently represented countries from the list were France (21), USA (9), Germany (7), Taiwan (6), and Japan, China and Italy (4 each).

The list was compiled to launch the 20th anniversary celebration of TIFF Cinematheque and the top 38 films be shown in Toronto in January 2010.

Sources:  1 and 2

By our guest blogger, Colin George

If a recent article posted on MovieHole is to be believed, it seems Woody Harrelson and Jesse Eisenberg may be reteaming with director Ruben Fleicher for a follow-up to this summer’s hit ‘Zomedy,’ "Zombieland," this time with the aid of 3-D technology and those irksome plastic glasses through which a healthy supply of zombie extremities are certain to fly.

The first film was an unusual success story for Sony and horror/comedy hybrids, which have a notorious history of underperforming at the box office (“Zombieland” grossed nearly twice that of Sam Raimi’s riotous “Drag Me to Hell”). Woody Harrelson himself also has proclaimed that his performance in the original is the first in his filmography that he actively wants to reprise.

So, while enthusiasm for a sequel seems high at this point, the franchise would still be unlikely to shamble back into theaters for another couple of years, as a script at this early stage is all but nonexistent. Also curious is how the character dynamics, which shift dramatically at the end of the first film, will shape a potential second installment.

By our guest blogger, Colin George

If a recent article posted on MovieHole is to be believed, it seems Woody Harrelson and Jesse Eisenberg may be reteaming with director Ruben Fleicher for a follow-up to this summer’s hit ‘Zomedy,’ "Zombieland," this time with the aid of 3-D technology and those irksome plastic glasses through which a healthy supply of zombie extremities are certain to fly.

The first film was an unusual success story for Sony and horror/comedy hybrids, which have a notorious history of underperforming at the box office (“Zombieland” grossed nearly twice that of Sam Raimi’s riotous “Drag Me to Hell”). Woody Harrelson himself also has proclaimed that his performance in the original is the first in his filmography that he actively wants to reprise.

So, while enthusiasm for a sequel seems high at this point, the franchise would still be unlikely to shamble back into theaters for another couple of years, as a script at this early stage is all but nonexistent. Also curious is how the character dynamics, which shift dramatically at the end of the first film, will shape a potential second installment.

By our guest blogger, Matt Jussim

Francis Lawrence ("I Am Legend," "Constantine") is tipped to direct a film adaptation of the comic "In the Small" for Warner Bros. Pictures reports Pajiba.

According to Pajiba: Michael Hague's graphic novel concerns a strange explosion that leaves all humans six inches tall, yet nothing else is affected. Those who survive the transition are forced to create a new social order and adjust in a world where man is no longer at the top of the food chain. As they attempt to find out what happened, humanity is faced with a new and existential threat.

Earlier this month Lawrence replaced Guy Ritchie as the director on the WW2 comic adaptation "Sgt. Rock." Akiva Goldsman is set to produce both projects.

After “I Am Legend,” it’s hard for me to say that I think Lawrence will do a great job on something that will require extensive special effects, but the story seems interesting enough.

Having said that, I still can’t forget how terrible and fake the ‘vampire’ type creatures looked in “I Am Legend.” That film really did have the potential to be an amazing science fiction film, but instead was just Will Smith running around in an empty Manhattan.

Lawrence has several projects in development that could be his next picture. Besides “Sgt. Rock” he also has Michael Chabon's "Snow and Seven" and an adaptation of "Water for Elephants."

By our guest blogger, Matt Jussim

Francis Lawrence ("I Am Legend," "Constantine") is tipped to direct a film adaptation of the comic "In the Small" for Warner Bros. Pictures reports Pajiba.

According to Pajiba: Michael Hague's graphic novel concerns a strange explosion that leaves all humans six inches tall, yet nothing else is affected. Those who survive the transition are forced to create a new social order and adjust in a world where man is no longer at the top of the food chain. As they attempt to find out what happened, humanity is faced with a new and existential threat.

Earlier this month Lawrence replaced Guy Ritchie as the director on the WW2 comic adaptation "Sgt. Rock." Akiva Goldsman is set to produce both projects.

After “I Am Legend,” it’s hard for me to say that I think Lawrence will do a great job on something that will require extensive special effects, but the story seems interesting enough.

Having said that, I still can’t forget how terrible and fake the ‘vampire’ type creatures looked in “I Am Legend.” That film really did have the potential to be an amazing science fiction film, but instead was just Will Smith running around in an empty Manhattan.

Lawrence has several projects in development that could be his next picture. Besides “Sgt. Rock” he also has Michael Chabon's "Snow and Seven" and an adaptation of "Water for Elephants."

By our guest blogger, Eva Medoff

The penultimate episode of “Sons of Anarchy,” titled “The Culling,” went medieval on us. In the face of imminent war against the League of American Nationalists, the king (Clay) gathers all his subjects within the castle walls for protection, or in this case, within the automotive shop. During his speech to the many club family members gathered together, he leaves authority with Piney and his “queen,” Gemma, in his absence. The knights of the round table (Clay, Jax, Piney, Chibs, Tig, Bobby and Opie) have spoken. It’s time for bloodshed.

Wikipedia defines “culling” as “the process of removing animals from a group based on specific criteria. This is done in order to either reinforce certain desirable characteristics or to remove certain undesirable characteristics from the group. For livestock and wildlife, the process of culling usually implies the killing of animals with undesirable characteristics.” After gang raping the matriarch, Zobelle and his right hand man Weston are little more than swine.

The majority of “The Culling” takes a page from the finale of “Mad Men” in that it’s spent assembling a team and putting a plan in motion. Rather than poaching talent for a new ad agency, however, Clay and Jax are busy getting Henry Lin the gun dealer and Laroy the drug dealer to join in their fight against Zobelle. Once the league is gone, the pathway will be cleared for everyone else to pollinate the countryside with their various illegal commodities.

They also strategically inform Weston that Zobelle has been dealing with the Mayans behind his back; the mere thought that Zobelle would mingle with someone of a darker hue sends Weston into a homicidal rage. Playing the skinhead psychopath to a tee, Henry Rollins as Weston is a thin, harrowing sight to behold--as he offs three people, he discovers secretly processing heroin under Zobelle’s sanction. He stops just short of killing Zobelle himself, but when Unser makes a call to have his kids committed to child services, he makes a date with Jax later that night to let out a bit of his frustration.

Chibs is caught up in a slightly confusing love triangle with his ex-wife, Fiona, and Jimmy O, the IRA gun mastermind. Whether this will be explained more in the finale or next season is anyone’s guess. “The Culling,” like all of the past few episodes of “Sons of Anarchy,” is drawn so tight with threads of plot that some strings are left dangling and neglected. The same can be said about Polly’s (Zobelle’s daughter) dalliance with the Irish gun dealer Edmond, and her father’s subsequent jealousy and rather un-fatherly kiss. Are they not blood related, or is incest being introduced as another dark topic to explore?

Clay is able to convince Jimmy O that Edmond and his father were the ones who ratted him out to the ATF, not Chibs. In a brilliant feat of planning, they lead Agent Stahl to what she thinks is an illegal drug deal that will finally take down her target. Naturally, Jimmy O’s nowhere in sight and the crate she thought was full of guns is empty except for two dead rats. To make matters worse, Stahl forces Edmond onto the scene, thus exposing him as her snitch. I have a feeling Edmond (Callard Harris, possessing the best Irish accent of all time), however cute, may not be around much longer.

Gemma has been dallying with religion all season, and seems to have come to a conclusion that suits her lifestyle. She tells Tara that we are all put on Earth for a reason--Tara as a healer, and herself as a “fierce mother.” It’s been a wonder to watch Katey Sagal and Maggie Siff show us the progression of Gemma and Tara’s relationship. At this point, they’re nothing short of queen and princess, especially when the other club women wait on them hand and foot, and Gemma explains that it’s a sign of respect. Tara is bona fide SAMCRO royalty.

Perhaps this has gone to her head. While doing some paperwork at the hospital, she is cornered by Margaret Murphy, her administrative supervisor and also the woman bringing charges against her and potentially ending her career. Words are exchanged, and Murphy none too wisely insults Gemma. Big mistake. Tara whips around and begins choking her. "This is assault!" Murphy cries. What follows is the most intense session of female ass-whupping ever to grace cable television. "No,” Tara says, punching her in the face, “That was assault.” With a slight mention that she knows where Murphy lives, it seems that the charges against her might be dropped. Tara has officially turned into Gemma Jr. The mantle has been passed, or at least it’s now shared.

We end on two scenes that made my adrenaline pump harder than anything I’ve ever seen on television. The knights kiss their ladies goodbye, mount their stallions, and amid the thumping of the most masculine rock music I’ve ever heard, ride off to do battle against Weston and his crones. No words can really describe the badass-ness of this scene--suffice it to say, it must be seen with your own eyes. Before anyone is killed, however, Hale rides in to rain on their parade. At this point, he must make a choice between enforcing the law to its fullest degree, or choosing the lesser of two evils between Weston and SAMCRO. He chooses the latter, and arrests Weston for arson (one finger guy did not die in the Cara Cara fire, and emerged as an eye-witness).

Clay and Jax are not about to let Hale ruin all their fun, however. They take their business to Zobelle’s cigar shop, where Polly and Unser are already waiting. Zobelle emerges, and just as they’re about to get revenge for Gemma, Hale arrives once again. Foiled twice in one episode! Unser tells Hale he outranks him and commands him to leave, but Zobelle is fast thinking and tells the cops he and his daughter are in possession of narcotics. Once they find the heroin, they have no choice but to arrest Zobelle and his skinhead spawn. “I’ll kill you,” Jax promises right before Zobelle is carted off to jail.

“The Culling” spent the entire episode building up the suspense, but both fights were left without the conclusion Jax and Clay wanted. No matter for the viewer, however. “Sons of Anarchy” is a lesson in tension, and next week we’ll see where the saga ends--or possibly begins.

By our guest blogger, Eva Medoff

The penultimate episode of “Sons of Anarchy,” titled “The Culling,” went medieval on us. In the face of imminent war against the League of American Nationalists, the king (Clay) gathers all his subjects within the castle walls for protection, or in this case, within the automotive shop. During his speech to the many club family members gathered together, he leaves authority with Piney and his “queen,” Gemma, in his absence. The knights of the round table (Clay, Jax, Piney, Chibs, Tig, Bobby and Opie) have spoken. It’s time for bloodshed.

Wikipedia defines “culling” as “the process of removing animals from a group based on specific criteria. This is done in order to either reinforce certain desirable characteristics or to remove certain undesirable characteristics from the group. For livestock and wildlife, the process of culling usually implies the killing of animals with undesirable characteristics.” After gang raping the matriarch, Zobelle and his right hand man Weston are little more than swine.

The majority of “The Culling” takes a page from the finale of “Mad Men” in that it’s spent assembling a team and putting a plan in motion. Rather than poaching talent for a new ad agency, however, Clay and Jax are busy getting Henry Lin the gun dealer and Laroy the drug dealer to join in their fight against Zobelle. Once the league is gone, the pathway will be cleared for everyone else to pollinate the countryside with their various illegal commodities.

They also strategically inform Weston that Zobelle has been dealing with the Mayans behind his back; the mere thought that Zobelle would mingle with someone of a darker hue sends Weston into a homicidal rage. Playing the skinhead psychopath to a tee, Henry Rollins as Weston is a thin, harrowing sight to behold--as he offs three people, he discovers secretly processing heroin under Zobelle’s sanction. He stops just short of killing Zobelle himself, but when Unser makes a call to have his kids committed to child services, he makes a date with Jax later that night to let out a bit of his frustration.

Chibs is caught up in a slightly confusing love triangle with his ex-wife, Fiona, and Jimmy O, the IRA gun mastermind. Whether this will be explained more in the finale or next season is anyone’s guess. “The Culling,” like all of the past few episodes of “Sons of Anarchy,” is drawn so tight with threads of plot that some strings are left dangling and neglected. The same can be said about Polly’s (Zobelle’s daughter) dalliance with the Irish gun dealer Edmond, and her father’s subsequent jealousy and rather un-fatherly kiss. Are they not blood related, or is incest being introduced as another dark topic to explore?

Clay is able to convince Jimmy O that Edmond and his father were the ones who ratted him out to the ATF, not Chibs. In a brilliant feat of planning, they lead Agent Stahl to what she thinks is an illegal drug deal that will finally take down her target. Naturally, Jimmy O’s nowhere in sight and the crate she thought was full of guns is empty except for two dead rats. To make matters worse, Stahl forces Edmond onto the scene, thus exposing him as her snitch. I have a feeling Edmond (Callard Harris, possessing the best Irish accent of all time), however cute, may not be around much longer.

Gemma has been dallying with religion all season, and seems to have come to a conclusion that suits her lifestyle. She tells Tara that we are all put on Earth for a reason--Tara as a healer, and herself as a “fierce mother.” It’s been a wonder to watch Katey Sagal and Maggie Siff show us the progression of Gemma and Tara’s relationship. At this point, they’re nothing short of queen and princess, especially when the other club women wait on them hand and foot, and Gemma explains that it’s a sign of respect. Tara is bona fide SAMCRO royalty.

Perhaps this has gone to her head. While doing some paperwork at the hospital, she is cornered by Margaret Murphy, her administrative supervisor and also the woman bringing charges against her and potentially ending her career. Words are exchanged, and Murphy none too wisely insults Gemma. Big mistake. Tara whips around and begins choking her. "This is assault!" Murphy cries. What follows is the most intense session of female ass-whupping ever to grace cable television. "No,” Tara says, punching her in the face, “That was assault.” With a slight mention that she knows where Murphy lives, it seems that the charges against her might be dropped. Tara has officially turned into Gemma Jr. The mantle has been passed, or at least it’s now shared.

We end on two scenes that made my adrenaline pump harder than anything I’ve ever seen on television. The knights kiss their ladies goodbye, mount their stallions, and amid the thumping of the most masculine rock music I’ve ever heard, ride off to do battle against Weston and his crones. No words can really describe the badass-ness of this scene--suffice it to say, it must be seen with your own eyes. Before anyone is killed, however, Hale rides in to rain on their parade. At this point, he must make a choice between enforcing the law to its fullest degree, or choosing the lesser of two evils between Weston and SAMCRO. He chooses the latter, and arrests Weston for arson (one finger guy did not die in the Cara Cara fire, and emerged as an eye-witness).

Clay and Jax are not about to let Hale ruin all their fun, however. They take their business to Zobelle’s cigar shop, where Polly and Unser are already waiting. Zobelle emerges, and just as they’re about to get revenge for Gemma, Hale arrives once again. Foiled twice in one episode! Unser tells Hale he outranks him and commands him to leave, but Zobelle is fast thinking and tells the cops he and his daughter are in possession of narcotics. Once they find the heroin, they have no choice but to arrest Zobelle and his skinhead spawn. “I’ll kill you,” Jax promises right before Zobelle is carted off to jail.

“The Culling” spent the entire episode building up the suspense, but both fights were left without the conclusion Jax and Clay wanted. No matter for the viewer, however. “Sons of Anarchy” is a lesson in tension, and next week we’ll see where the saga ends--or possibly begins.

By our guest blogger, Kristen Lopez

As much as I despise romance films, there's something about Amanda Seyfried that makes me take a second look. The young actress always seems to bring light to otherwise ridiculous or off-beat stories and the trailer for her latest film, “Letters to Juliet,” suggests that the movie will put her skills to the test.

In the trailer, we see the story of Sofie (Seyfried), who travels to Verona, Italy with her boyfriend. While there, she volunteers to answer letters written to Juliet, the doomed lady of Shakespeare's story that fictionally lived in Verona. Sofie answers a letter from 1957 from a lady asking for advice after leaving her true love. When Sofie meets the writer, now an old woman, the duo, along with the woman's disenchanted grandson, travel to find the man who was left behind. As the group goes about their quest, Sofie starts to doubt her own relationship with her boyfriend--and possibly find her own chance at true love.

One can't say the story isn't creative: Young woman travels to Italy and answers letters as Juliet, the star-crossed lover of Shakespeare's tale. The thing to question is which love story is going to be the better of the two--the lost love of Vanessa Redgrave's character or the potential saccharine romance of Seyfried's story. The movie does seem a bit too cliche in the latter storyline--said girl realizes she's in a relationship that isn't satisfying and finds love with a surly individual she didn't expect. Scenes where her and the grandson (Christopher Egan) have their cutesy interludes seem ripped from other romance films and that might be where the story falters.

Seyfried can deliver the cute and romantic--“Mamma Mia” is perfect evidence for that--but if the story is too formulaic and boring it might collapse the film. The generational love story with Vanessa Redgrave and her abandoned love seems the stronger and more romantic of the two. A love story that crosses decades seems more genuine and true than a romantic liaison exacerbated by a romantic locale and forced surroundings. The quest of the old woman to find her true love seems so sweet, yet the trailer makes it seem like such a small part of the story when it probably shouldn't be. A great thing is that the trailer seems to be playing up the romantic locations quite well. Italy is usually gorgeously filmed and hopefully we'll be seeing a lot of the countryside in this movie. It also seems that singer Taylor Swift's song “Love Story” was written for this movie when it wasn't, but really could you see any other song accompanying this?

“Letters to Juliet” is an odd one. It doesn't seem to have anything interesting going for it, yet that generational love story is nagging because it has so much potential. Maybe once more clips are available to highlight the story, and audiences figure out which love story is going to be the main one, it'll be easier to determine whether this is a satisfying romance film or another in the endless drivel of the genre.

Letters to Juliet hits theaters May 7, 2010.

View the trailer for "Letters to Juliet" below. Thoughts?

By our guest blogger, Kristen Lopez

As much as I despise romance films, there's something about Amanda Seyfried that makes me take a second look. The young actress always seems to bring light to otherwise ridiculous or off-beat stories and the trailer for her latest film, “Letters to Juliet,” suggests that the movie will put her skills to the test.

In the trailer, we see the story of Sofie (Seyfried), who travels to Verona, Italy with her boyfriend. While there, she volunteers to answer letters written to Juliet, the doomed lady of Shakespeare's story that fictionally lived in Verona. Sofie answers a letter from 1957 from a lady asking for advice after leaving her true love. When Sofie meets the writer, now an old woman, the duo, along with the woman's disenchanted grandson, travel to find the man who was left behind. As the group goes about their quest, Sofie starts to doubt her own relationship with her boyfriend--and possibly find her own chance at true love.

One can't say the story isn't creative: Young woman travels to Italy and answers letters as Juliet, the star-crossed lover of Shakespeare's tale. The thing to question is which love story is going to be the better of the two--the lost love of Vanessa Redgrave's character or the potential saccharine romance of Seyfried's story. The movie does seem a bit too cliche in the latter storyline--said girl realizes she's in a relationship that isn't satisfying and finds love with a surly individual she didn't expect. Scenes where her and the grandson (Christopher Egan) have their cutesy interludes seem ripped from other romance films and that might be where the story falters.

Seyfried can deliver the cute and romantic--“Mamma Mia” is perfect evidence for that--but if the story is too formulaic and boring it might collapse the film. The generational love story with Vanessa Redgrave and her abandoned love seems the stronger and more romantic of the two. A love story that crosses decades seems more genuine and true than a romantic liaison exacerbated by a romantic locale and forced surroundings. The quest of the old woman to find her true love seems so sweet, yet the trailer makes it seem like such a small part of the story when it probably shouldn't be. A great thing is that the trailer seems to be playing up the romantic locations quite well. Italy is usually gorgeously filmed and hopefully we'll be seeing a lot of the countryside in this movie. It also seems that singer Taylor Swift's song “Love Story” was written for this movie when it wasn't, but really could you see any other song accompanying this?

“Letters to Juliet” is an odd one. It doesn't seem to have anything interesting going for it, yet that generational love story is nagging because it has so much potential. Maybe once more clips are available to highlight the story, and audiences figure out which love story is going to be the main one, it'll be easier to determine whether this is a satisfying romance film or another in the endless drivel of the genre.

Letters to Juliet hits theaters May 7, 2010.

View the trailer for "Letters to Juliet" below. Thoughts?

Movie Review

"An Education"

Directed by Lone Scherfid, written by Nick Hornby, 95 minutes, rated PG-13.

By our guest blogger, Kristen Lopez

The true sign of Oscar season is when the smaller, independent films that are slowly gaining acclaim expand into the major theaters for mass consumption. “An Education” is indeed entering major cities and it's not a film to be missed. A true Academy Awards contender with heartfelt performances all around, this is a must-see and possibly one of the best films of the year.

The story follows 16-year-old Jenny (Carey Mulligan), a girl whose life has been planned out for her by her overeager father Jack (Alfred Molina). Meant to live a boring life attending Oxford, one rainy day she meets the dashing David (Peter Sarsgaard), who offers her a ride home. To Jenny's family, David seems willing to take the girl under his wing and give her a taste of the finer things in life. But as Jenny and David become closer, the young girl is forced to grow up quickly and ultimately discover deceit and heartbreak.

“An Education” may have a premise ripped from a song by The Police, but the film is a sweet and heartfelt coming-of-age story about sexual awakening, love, life and all the other things these films teach us. The relationship between David and Jenny is not tawdry or depraved--David spells out his intentions by saying he's happy to meet a girl of Jenny's age who actually is interested in culture and art. Jenny isn't a normal girl obsessed with boys and makeup; instead, she reads books, speaks French when she doesn't need to, and dreams of traveling all over the world.

To David, she is the exotic one because she wants to do things and learn, which complements David, who has the ability to give her anything she wants. Yes, their relationship turns sexual at some point, but that's not David's sole aim and purpose as he truly comes to care for Jenny. The film also makes their relationship respectable due to the time period, which takes place in the early 1960s, when young women were still getting married at an early age to older men. Aside from that, the movie is about a young woman growing up and learning about the harsh realities of adulthood. She starts to question her need for an education, what truly constitutes said education, and a woman's place in the great scheme of things. Jenny has several revealing conversations with her Headmistress, played hilariously by Emma Thompson, about the need for schooling and if it leads to more or less life experience. In the end, the movie is about living life and what a full life means, but along the way, harsh lessons are learned.

A movie like this, with sharp and insightful writing by “High Fidelity” scribe Nick Hornby, lives and dies by its cast. The cast in “An Education” is nothing short of spectacular. I would look for this to win a Golden Globe for Best Ensemble as the cast really works as a group. Carey Mulligan has been endlessly compared to Audrey Hepburn and it's both fair and unfair. Yes, Mulligan does look like the actress when she's all dolled up, and she does have a worldly innocence about her, but the actress makes the role of Jenny all her own. Jenny is both naive and smart, clever, witty and completely out of her element. When she's sitting in a group of David's friends, she's at sea, and Mulligan conveys the emotions of being out of place, yet trying to act like she belongs. This young actress has a career ahead of her and she just dazzles in both comedic and dramatic scenes in this film.

Peter Sarsgaard is slowly creeping up the ladder in his career and is phenomenal as the handsome David. He's never creepy or pervy--he's just a man who wants what he wants, and who doesn't think about the consequences. His love for Jenny is pure and Sarsgaard is wonderful when he's sitting with Jenny's family, attempting to charm them so they'll let their daughter leave with him. Alfred Molina and Cara Seymour are perfect as Jenny's equally naive parents who want what's best for their child, whether that's school or the chance for a good marriage. Molina should get an Oscar nod for this role because his character is so conflicted. Does he want his daughter to be smart and educated, or married and cared for? Olivia Williams and Emma Thompson are solid in small roles as Jenny's school teachers. Rosamund Pike steals her scenes as the dippy friend Helen, showing Jenny what she could end up as one day if she stays with David. Dominic Cooper dominates the film in his role as Jack's friend, Danny, the disjointed voice of reason. Cooper will hopefully get recognized for something as his character has been glossed over.

“An Education” is spectacular. The performances are amazing, the story is fresh and insightful and everything comes together to craft a film that is at times highly witty yet poignantly sad. To say anymore about the film would do a disservice to fans as it's a movie they should experience and discuss on their own terms.

Grade: A-

Movie Review

"An Education"

Directed by Lone Scherfid, written by Nick Hornby, 95 minutes, rated PG-13.

By our guest blogger, Kristen Lopez

The true sign of Oscar season is when the smaller, independent films that are slowly gaining acclaim expand into the major theaters for mass consumption. “An Education” is indeed entering major cities and it's not a film to be missed. A true Academy Awards contender with heartfelt performances all around, this is a must-see and possibly one of the best films of the year.

The story follows 16-year-old Jenny (Carey Mulligan), a girl whose life has been planned out for her by her overeager father Jack (Alfred Molina). Meant to live a boring life attending Oxford, one rainy day she meets the dashing David (Peter Sarsgaard), who offers her a ride home. To Jenny's family, David seems willing to take the girl under his wing and give her a taste of the finer things in life. But as Jenny and David become closer, the young girl is forced to grow up quickly and ultimately discover deceit and heartbreak.

“An Education” may have a premise ripped from a song by The Police, but the film is a sweet and heartfelt coming-of-age story about sexual awakening, love, life and all the other things these films teach us. The relationship between David and Jenny is not tawdry or depraved--David spells out his intentions by saying he's happy to meet a girl of Jenny's age who actually is interested in culture and art. Jenny isn't a normal girl obsessed with boys and makeup; instead, she reads books, speaks French when she doesn't need to, and dreams of traveling all over the world.

To David, she is the exotic one because she wants to do things and learn, which complements David, who has the ability to give her anything she wants. Yes, their relationship turns sexual at some point, but that's not David's sole aim and purpose as he truly comes to care for Jenny. The film also makes their relationship respectable due to the time period, which takes place in the early 1960s, when young women were still getting married at an early age to older men. Aside from that, the movie is about a young woman growing up and learning about the harsh realities of adulthood. She starts to question her need for an education, what truly constitutes said education, and a woman's place in the great scheme of things. Jenny has several revealing conversations with her Headmistress, played hilariously by Emma Thompson, about the need for schooling and if it leads to more or less life experience. In the end, the movie is about living life and what a full life means, but along the way, harsh lessons are learned.

A movie like this, with sharp and insightful writing by “High Fidelity” scribe Nick Hornby, lives and dies by its cast. The cast in “An Education” is nothing short of spectacular. I would look for this to win a Golden Globe for Best Ensemble as the cast really works as a group. Carey Mulligan has been endlessly compared to Audrey Hepburn and it's both fair and unfair. Yes, Mulligan does look like the actress when she's all dolled up, and she does have a worldly innocence about her, but the actress makes the role of Jenny all her own. Jenny is both naive and smart, clever, witty and completely out of her element. When she's sitting in a group of David's friends, she's at sea, and Mulligan conveys the emotions of being out of place, yet trying to act like she belongs. This young actress has a career ahead of her and she just dazzles in both comedic and dramatic scenes in this film.

Peter Sarsgaard is slowly creeping up the ladder in his career and is phenomenal as the handsome David. He's never creepy or pervy--he's just a man who wants what he wants, and who doesn't think about the consequences. His love for Jenny is pure and Sarsgaard is wonderful when he's sitting with Jenny's family, attempting to charm them so they'll let their daughter leave with him. Alfred Molina and Cara Seymour are perfect as Jenny's equally naive parents who want what's best for their child, whether that's school or the chance for a good marriage. Molina should get an Oscar nod for this role because his character is so conflicted. Does he want his daughter to be smart and educated, or married and cared for? Olivia Williams and Emma Thompson are solid in small roles as Jenny's school teachers. Rosamund Pike steals her scenes as the dippy friend Helen, showing Jenny what she could end up as one day if she stays with David. Dominic Cooper dominates the film in his role as Jack's friend, Danny, the disjointed voice of reason. Cooper will hopefully get recognized for something as his character has been glossed over.

“An Education” is spectacular. The performances are amazing, the story is fresh and insightful and everything comes together to craft a film that is at times highly witty yet poignantly sad. To say anymore about the film would do a disservice to fans as it's a movie they should experience and discuss on their own terms.

Grade: A-

By Christopher Smith

Among my favorite film bloggers is MaryAnn Johanson, who I've been reading and appreciating for years.  And so, when this "One-Question Interview" series started, she was high on my list.  If you've read her blog, FlickFilosopher.com, you know how good she is.  If you haven't, then allow me to introduce you to the spirited conversations that take place there.  MaryAnn starts the conversation, and then she jumps right into it, usually swinging and taking no prisoners.  It's her fearlessness that I like most, not to mention the mind behind it.  Last night was our first conversation together, and likely not our last.

So, to the question:  "You chose to blog about movies--why was that important to you?"

"Well, I actually started writing about movies online long before the word "blog" was coined. I started in 1997, when hardly anyone was reviewing movies online. And I started because I'd always been a worshipper of movies, to the point of going to film school at NYU in the late '80s because I thought I wanted to make movies. Turned out, I was more interested in writing than in being a film director, and I dropped out. A few years later, when the Web was going through its birth throes, I realized I could combine my love of writing and my love of movies by reviewing films on this Internet thing. I started FlickFilosopher.com in September 1997, and since there wasn't much competition back then, the site managed to catch on, and it all sort of snowballed. Twelve years later, the site is one of the most popular movie-review sites on the Web, and among movie sites run by a single person, as FlickFilosopher.com is, I'm not sure anyone is getting better traffic than I am. Among sites devoted to the reviews of a single critic, there are only a few more popular than mine (such as Roger Ebert's and James Berardinelli's).

"And that is sort of important to me, the traffic, because I do write for an audience. I have no interest in writing something that no one wants to read. Which is kind of ironic, maybe, because I didn't start out that way. I had no idea, back in 1997, whether anyone would want to read my ramblings on movies. Turns out people did want to hear what I had to say. And yet, if there's one primary impetus behind my reviews, it's that my reviews are usually about me trying to figure out why I feel about a movie the way I do. I mean, it's easy to say "I hate it" or "I loved it," but why do I feel that way?

"Today, more than a decade into something that started as a lark, I am so grateful for my readers, and for the smart, witty, ongoing conversation we have at FlickFilosopher.com. And I continue to be astonished that we've managed to maintain as high a level of conversation as we have, when the comments sections of so many blogs seem to descend into something unreadable.

"As for the movies themselves... well, as I like to say, I love movies, but I hate what Hollywood does to them, sometimes. And while I do review across the full spectrum, including foreign films and indies, my favorite movies do tend to be studio films, when they're done well. And I'm also fascinated by what popular movies -- whether they be good or bad -- say about us as a culture. Why is one movie popular and another movie a flop? So that's important to me, too: placing films in the larger context. Another thing I like to say: It's not just a movie. It's a lot more than that."

Check out MaryAnn's excellent work at FlickFilosopher.com.

By Christopher Smith

Among my favorite film bloggers is MaryAnn Johanson, who I've been reading and appreciating for years.  And so, when this "One-Question Interview" series started, she was high on my list.  If you've read her blog, FlickFilosopher.com, you know how good she is.  If you haven't, then allow me to introduce you to the spirited conversations that take place there.  MaryAnn starts the conversation, and then she jumps right into it, usually swinging and taking no prisoners.  It's her fearlessness that I like most, not to mention the mind behind it.  Last night was our first conversation together, and likely not our last.

So, to the question:  "You chose to blog about movies--why was that important to you?"

"Well, I actually started writing about movies online long before the word "blog" was coined. I started in 1997, when hardly anyone was reviewing movies online. And I started because I'd always been a worshipper of movies, to the point of going to film school at NYU in the late '80s because I thought I wanted to make movies. Turned out, I was more interested in writing than in being a film director, and I dropped out. A few years later, when the Web was going through its birth throes, I realized I could combine my love of writing and my love of movies by reviewing films on this Internet thing. I started FlickFilosopher.com in September 1997, and since there wasn't much competition back then, the site managed to catch on, and it all sort of snowballed. Twelve years later, the site is one of the most popular movie-review sites on the Web, and among movie sites run by a single person, as FlickFilosopher.com is, I'm not sure anyone is getting better traffic than I am. Among sites devoted to the reviews of a single critic, there are only a few more popular than mine (such as Roger Ebert's and James Berardinelli's).

"And that is sort of important to me, the traffic, because I do write for an audience. I have no interest in writing something that no one wants to read. Which is kind of ironic, maybe, because I didn't start out that way. I had no idea, back in 1997, whether anyone would want to read my ramblings on movies. Turns out people did want to hear what I had to say. And yet, if there's one primary impetus behind my reviews, it's that my reviews are usually about me trying to figure out why I feel about a movie the way I do. I mean, it's easy to say "I hate it" or "I loved it," but why do I feel that way?

"Today, more than a decade into something that started as a lark, I am so grateful for my readers, and for the smart, witty, ongoing conversation we have at FlickFilosopher.com. And I continue to be astonished that we've managed to maintain as high a level of conversation as we have, when the comments sections of so many blogs seem to descend into something unreadable.

"As for the movies themselves... well, as I like to say, I love movies, but I hate what Hollywood does to them, sometimes. And while I do review across the full spectrum, including foreign films and indies, my favorite movies do tend to be studio films, when they're done well. And I'm also fascinated by what popular movies -- whether they be good or bad -- say about us as a culture. Why is one movie popular and another movie a flop? So that's important to me, too: placing films in the larger context. Another thing I like to say: It's not just a movie. It's a lot more than that."

Check out MaryAnn's excellent work at FlickFilosopher.com.

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

Noah Baumbach, responsible for the brilliant "The Squid and the Whale" and "Margot at the Wedding," has another film on the way in the similar vein of drama and dark comedy. The film is "Greenberg," starring Ben Stiller in what seems to be one of the more low-key roles reminiscent of "The Royal Tenenbaums" I really appreciate him for.

The story, written by Baumbach and his wife, "Margot" co-star Jennifer Jason Leigh (who also has a role in this), is about a man who appears to be having a mid-life crisis, except instead of traveling, doing wild things or buying a fancy car, he does...well, nothing. He writes angry letters to Starbucks, sits around at home, goes to casual parties here and there, but generally just does absolutely nothing.

Based on the trailer, this is definitely Stiller at his most subtle and refined. It somewhat reminded me of Jack Black in "Margot," still retaining everything likable about his general acting persona but keeping it grounded.  Leigh also stars, along with the fantastic Rhys Ifans, who appears to be playing Stiller's friend and confidante.

Unlike many for comedies lately, the trailer actually made me laugh quite frequently, and not even with anything bombastic or excessive, just genuinely funny and well-delivered dialogue that I've loved Baumbach for in previous films (he also co-wrote Wes Anderson's immensely underrated "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou").

Thematically, it seems to be a natural progression for the director. He started with college angst in his debut feature "Kicking & Screaming" (not the Will Ferrell one), moved into parenthood and adulthood intellectualism in "Squid and the Whale," covered marriage and familial relationships between adults in "Margot," and is now moving into middle-aged territory.

With such a fine cast and a fantastic writer and director at the helm, "Greenberg" is surely something to look forward to. It's aimed for a limited March 12, 2010 release.

The trailer for "Greenberg" is below. Thoughts?

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

Noah Baumbach, responsible for the brilliant "The Squid and the Whale" and "Margot at the Wedding," has another film on the way in the similar vein of drama and dark comedy. The film is "Greenberg," starring Ben Stiller in what seems to be one of the more low-key roles reminiscent of "The Royal Tenenbaums" I really appreciate him for.

The story, written by Baumbach and his wife, "Margot" co-star Jennifer Jason Leigh (who also has a role in this), is about a man who appears to be having a mid-life crisis, except instead of traveling, doing wild things or buying a fancy car, he does...well, nothing. He writes angry letters to Starbucks, sits around at home, goes to casual parties here and there, but generally just does absolutely nothing.

Based on the trailer, this is definitely Stiller at his most subtle and refined. It somewhat reminded me of Jack Black in "Margot," still retaining everything likable about his general acting persona but keeping it grounded.  Leigh also stars, along with the fantastic Rhys Ifans, who appears to be playing Stiller's friend and confidante.

Unlike many for comedies lately, the trailer actually made me laugh quite frequently, and not even with anything bombastic or excessive, just genuinely funny and well-delivered dialogue that I've loved Baumbach for in previous films (he also co-wrote Wes Anderson's immensely underrated "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou").

Thematically, it seems to be a natural progression for the director. He started with college angst in his debut feature "Kicking & Screaming" (not the Will Ferrell one), moved into parenthood and adulthood intellectualism in "Squid and the Whale," covered marriage and familial relationships between adults in "Margot," and is now moving into middle-aged territory.

With such a fine cast and a fantastic writer and director at the helm, "Greenberg" is surely something to look forward to. It's aimed for a limited March 12, 2010 release.

The trailer for "Greenberg" is below. Thoughts?

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

"Real Steel" is set to be Dreamwork's first film produced with the $850 million they received in financing after splitting from Paramount. Helmed by "Night at the Museum" director Shawn Levy, the film is set in the near future and sounds like a mix between sci-fi, action and, oddly enough, a sports film. Everyone's favorite adamantium-laced mutant Hugh Jackman has signed on to star.

The plot from ReelzChannel:

"Jackman will play an ex-fighter in a near-future world where human boxers have been replaced by robots. Jackman's character discovers a junked robot that has a knack for winning and begins promoting the electronic fighter on the Robot Boxing circuit. Along the way, he gets acquainted with the 11-year-old son that he never knew he had."

I don't know about you, but this sounds completely baffling. It's like a mix between "Rocky," "The Wrestler" and "I, Robot," and I never expected to find a film that could be described as such. This is a pretty new direction for Levy, who has been working exclusively in family comedies for the past decade, with next year's "Date Night" being the only change in sight before this announcement.

Jackman tends to suit just about any role. The real question is whether the film deserves his abilities, as his films have ranged from brilliant ("The Prestige," "The Fountain") to awful ("X3," "X-Men Origins") for the past few years. With no word beyond the plot, it's pretty much impossible to say right now what we can look forward to.

The film is being fast-tracked, with the release probably aimed for late next year or early 2011.

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

"Real Steel" is set to be Dreamwork's first film produced with the $850 million they received in financing after splitting from Paramount. Helmed by "Night at the Museum" director Shawn Levy, the film is set in the near future and sounds like a mix between sci-fi, action and, oddly enough, a sports film. Everyone's favorite adamantium-laced mutant Hugh Jackman has signed on to star.

The plot from ReelzChannel:

"Jackman will play an ex-fighter in a near-future world where human boxers have been replaced by robots. Jackman's character discovers a junked robot that has a knack for winning and begins promoting the electronic fighter on the Robot Boxing circuit. Along the way, he gets acquainted with the 11-year-old son that he never knew he had."

I don't know about you, but this sounds completely baffling. It's like a mix between "Rocky," "The Wrestler" and "I, Robot," and I never expected to find a film that could be described as such. This is a pretty new direction for Levy, who has been working exclusively in family comedies for the past decade, with next year's "Date Night" being the only change in sight before this announcement.

Jackman tends to suit just about any role. The real question is whether the film deserves his abilities, as his films have ranged from brilliant ("The Prestige," "The Fountain") to awful ("X3," "X-Men Origins") for the past few years. With no word beyond the plot, it's pretty much impossible to say right now what we can look forward to.

The film is being fast-tracked, with the release probably aimed for late next year or early 2011.

By our guest blogger, Matt Jussim

Aziz Ansari and Jason Woliner, who previously worked together on sketch comedy series "Human Giant", have sold three comedy pitches to Judd Apatow and Universal Pictures reports Variety.

According to Variety: The first pitch is "Let's Do This," a road movie about two guys who work for a motivational speaking company. Next is an untitled project about a disgraced astronaut (Ansari), who is forced to return to outer space to clear his name. The last project is also untitled and somehow ties in with Ansari's supporting role in Apatow's "Funny People."

Said Ansari: “We didn’t expect all three to work. We had a breakfast meeting with Judd and pitched them. We were like, ‘Which one do you like?’ He wanted all three.”

Ansari and Woliner will write at least one of the projects together with Woliner attached to direct and Ansari to appear in all three. Ansari will be seen next year in director Nick Stoller’s “Get Him to the Greek,” which is a sort of spin off from “Forgetting Sarah Marshall,” that Apatow is producing for Universal.

I’m always pretty excited for any project that has Judd Apatow’s name attached, and all three sound like they could be some quality comedy films. Ansari used to perform at Upright Citizen's Brigade Theatre in New York City and also had a role in “I Love You, Man” as well as “Observe and Report,” with Seth Rogen. Ansari has also been great in the second season of “Parks and Recreation,” and he was absolutely hilarious while on the sketch show “Human Giant.”

More exposure is just what he needs to possibly move up to the higher echelon of the comedy industry. The fact that he has a relationship with Apatow can only be a positive for his career and his upcoming projects.

By our guest blogger, Matt Jussim

Aziz Ansari and Jason Woliner, who previously worked together on sketch comedy series "Human Giant", have sold three comedy pitches to Judd Apatow and Universal Pictures reports Variety.

According to Variety: The first pitch is "Let's Do This," a road movie about two guys who work for a motivational speaking company. Next is an untitled project about a disgraced astronaut (Ansari), who is forced to return to outer space to clear his name. The last project is also untitled and somehow ties in with Ansari's supporting role in Apatow's "Funny People."

Said Ansari: “We didn’t expect all three to work. We had a breakfast meeting with Judd and pitched them. We were like, ‘Which one do you like?’ He wanted all three.”

Ansari and Woliner will write at least one of the projects together with Woliner attached to direct and Ansari to appear in all three. Ansari will be seen next year in director Nick Stoller’s “Get Him to the Greek,” which is a sort of spin off from “Forgetting Sarah Marshall,” that Apatow is producing for Universal.

I’m always pretty excited for any project that has Judd Apatow’s name attached, and all three sound like they could be some quality comedy films. Ansari used to perform at Upright Citizen's Brigade Theatre in New York City and also had a role in “I Love You, Man” as well as “Observe and Report,” with Seth Rogen. Ansari has also been great in the second season of “Parks and Recreation,” and he was absolutely hilarious while on the sketch show “Human Giant.”

More exposure is just what he needs to possibly move up to the higher echelon of the comedy industry. The fact that he has a relationship with Apatow can only be a positive for his career and his upcoming projects.

By our guest blogger, David Voyles

Developer Naughty Dog proved to the world in 2007 that they could deliver a well refined and polished product. The huge success of "Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune" quickly launched protagonist Nathan Drake as the defining character for the Playstation 3 platform. Its predecessor, "Uncharted 2: Among Thieves," picks up where the first one left off, doing everything the first one did correctly--and blowing the doors down along the way.

With expectations rising and the pressure building, Naughty Dog answered the call and improved every aspect of the original, while including an excellent multiplayer campaign as well. In short – "Uncharted 2" is phenomenal.

The game begins in present time but only briefly, until it operates as a series of flashbacks leading up to the present scene once again. Taking place roughly one year following "Drake’s Fortune," Nathan Drake and friends are at it again, this time in search of the unfound treasures of Marco Polo. Drake’s adventures will take him to an immensely diverse array of locations, including South America villages and forests, frozen tundra, trains, Aztec Villages, and ancient temples. This provides for incredible pacing which does an excellent job of holding the player’s attention, until three-quarters of the way into the game, when it begins to come to a lull for a bit.

One of "Uncharted’s" numerous strong points is the incredible acting and production value. The dialogue between characters, along with their motion-captured actions, are single handedly the best ever seen in any for of digital entertainment. I often found myself wondering if I was watching a Hollywood film or playing a game.

Nolan North returns as the voice of Nathan Drake, and many player’s will recognize him from his plethora of appearances in other games, including "Halo 3 – ODST," and "Dragon Age: Origins." Other characters, including Sully and Elena, reprise their roles as well. The dialogue is believable, Nathan just oozes with charisma, and characters constantly have interesting conversations which display both their unpredictability as well as their justification for being on such a journey. You really begin to feel empathy for the characters as their adventure moves along. Currently, the presentation is unmatched and I believe it will be for years, at least until the third title arrives. Similar to the first title though, the lore and legend of the tale does begin to become a bit obscure toward the end, and puts a bit of a damper on the story’s credibility.

Graphically, "Uncharted 2" is a powerhouse. This is hands down the best looking title on the Playstation 3, and while it is not "Crysis" on the PC, it certainly gives it a run for its money. Naughty Dog used the same engine from the original, but greatly improved it to provide some of the most vivid and breathtaking environments seen in a title. The locations are sprawling with lush details and the view seems to reach for days. The lighting effects often provide a colorful hue to the characters and their environment, and moisture is retained within a character’s clothing for a few moments when exiting water. At no point was there any graphical slowdown, and it had my Playstaion 3 working overtime to keep the GPU cool – the fan was on full blast the entire time, but well worth it. Often times, the lines between a cut scene and playable sequence were blurred to the point where I was unaware I had to do anything at all, only to lead to my impending doom. It’s that good.

The sound is top notch as well. Those of you with a 7.1 (or even 5.1) surround system will be enthralled within "Uncharted’s" environments through the uncompressed sound, engaging dialogue, and whizzing bullets. The soundtrack does wonders for the title as well, and helps to empathy for the characters through their trials and tribulations.

Stealth plays a large role this time around too. Using cover behind environments, some altercations can be avoided altogether. Other times, players are rewarded for taking this approach as additional enemies will not spawn if all enemies are killed without alerting others. The cover system has been ironed out as well. The only problems I ran into here were in situations where the destination was not very clear. At times players will be thrown into an environment, unaware of what to do: Do you need to take out all enemies in a stealthy matter, survive long enough for a predetermined cut scene to occur, or just avoid enemies until they pass by? A number of gaming ending situations occurred because of this.

The camera also helps to provide a cinematic experience along the way. As tomb raiding and rock climbing make their return, the distinct angles the camera takes often reveal the correct path, albeit somewhat linear at times. Because "Uncharted" offers such a variety of locations to do your raiding and gun fighting in, it seldom gets old. As mentioned before, because transitions between cut scenes and gameplay are so smooth, it is often difficult to tell when you are in one or the other.

The final part of gameplay is of course the puzzles. They make their return here as well, if sometimes a bit too difficult. Often Nathan must resort to his handbook to solve a puzzle, whether it is correlating a color to an element of the earth, and then to an animal, or realizing how particular state should stand. While they are nothing you haven’t seen before, they do break up the run and gun intensity nicely.

Unfortunately, I cannot comment on the multiplayer because I have not played it at the moment.

So how good is "Uncharted 2: Among Thieves" really? Well, if it were a film it would be the summer blockbuster that audiences are talking about years later. This is the best-looking Playstation 3 title out there, with a Hollywood talented cast, unmatched writing and exotic locations. Is it perfect? No, but it’s about as close as you are going to get for now, and currently holds my nod for game of the year. If there is one title you pick up this year, make sure it is this one.

By our guest blogger, David Voyles

Developer Naughty Dog proved to the world in 2007 that they could deliver a well refined and polished product. The huge success of "Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune" quickly launched protagonist Nathan Drake as the defining character for the Playstation 3 platform. Its predecessor, "Uncharted 2: Among Thieves," picks up where the first one left off, doing everything the first one did correctly--and blowing the doors down along the way.

With expectations rising and the pressure building, Naughty Dog answered the call and improved every aspect of the original, while including an excellent multiplayer campaign as well. In short – "Uncharted 2" is phenomenal.

The game begins in present time but only briefly, until it operates as a series of flashbacks leading up to the present scene once again. Taking place roughly one year following "Drake’s Fortune," Nathan Drake and friends are at it again, this time in search of the unfound treasures of Marco Polo. Drake’s adventures will take him to an immensely diverse array of locations, including South America villages and forests, frozen tundra, trains, Aztec Villages, and ancient temples. This provides for incredible pacing which does an excellent job of holding the player’s attention, until three-quarters of the way into the game, when it begins to come to a lull for a bit.

One of "Uncharted’s" numerous strong points is the incredible acting and production value. The dialogue between characters, along with their motion-captured actions, are single handedly the best ever seen in any for of digital entertainment. I often found myself wondering if I was watching a Hollywood film or playing a game.

Nolan North returns as the voice of Nathan Drake, and many player’s will recognize him from his plethora of appearances in other games, including "Halo 3 – ODST," and "Dragon Age: Origins." Other characters, including Sully and Elena, reprise their roles as well. The dialogue is believable, Nathan just oozes with charisma, and characters constantly have interesting conversations which display both their unpredictability as well as their justification for being on such a journey. You really begin to feel empathy for the characters as their adventure moves along. Currently, the presentation is unmatched and I believe it will be for years, at least until the third title arrives. Similar to the first title though, the lore and legend of the tale does begin to become a bit obscure toward the end, and puts a bit of a damper on the story’s credibility.

Graphically, "Uncharted 2" is a powerhouse. This is hands down the best looking title on the Playstation 3, and while it is not "Crysis" on the PC, it certainly gives it a run for its money. Naughty Dog used the same engine from the original, but greatly improved it to provide some of the most vivid and breathtaking environments seen in a title. The locations are sprawling with lush details and the view seems to reach for days. The lighting effects often provide a colorful hue to the characters and their environment, and moisture is retained within a character’s clothing for a few moments when exiting water. At no point was there any graphical slowdown, and it had my Playstaion 3 working overtime to keep the GPU cool – the fan was on full blast the entire time, but well worth it. Often times, the lines between a cut scene and playable sequence were blurred to the point where I was unaware I had to do anything at all, only to lead to my impending doom. It’s that good.

The sound is top notch as well. Those of you with a 7.1 (or even 5.1) surround system will be enthralled within "Uncharted’s" environments through the uncompressed sound, engaging dialogue, and whizzing bullets. The soundtrack does wonders for the title as well, and helps to empathy for the characters through their trials and tribulations.

Stealth plays a large role this time around too. Using cover behind environments, some altercations can be avoided altogether. Other times, players are rewarded for taking this approach as additional enemies will not spawn if all enemies are killed without alerting others. The cover system has been ironed out as well. The only problems I ran into here were in situations where the destination was not very clear. At times players will be thrown into an environment, unaware of what to do: Do you need to take out all enemies in a stealthy matter, survive long enough for a predetermined cut scene to occur, or just avoid enemies until they pass by? A number of gaming ending situations occurred because of this.

The camera also helps to provide a cinematic experience along the way. As tomb raiding and rock climbing make their return, the distinct angles the camera takes often reveal the correct path, albeit somewhat linear at times. Because "Uncharted" offers such a variety of locations to do your raiding and gun fighting in, it seldom gets old. As mentioned before, because transitions between cut scenes and gameplay are so smooth, it is often difficult to tell when you are in one or the other.

The final part of gameplay is of course the puzzles. They make their return here as well, if sometimes a bit too difficult. Often Nathan must resort to his handbook to solve a puzzle, whether it is correlating a color to an element of the earth, and then to an animal, or realizing how particular state should stand. While they are nothing you haven’t seen before, they do break up the run and gun intensity nicely.

Unfortunately, I cannot comment on the multiplayer because I have not played it at the moment.

So how good is "Uncharted 2: Among Thieves" really? Well, if it were a film it would be the summer blockbuster that audiences are talking about years later. This is the best-looking Playstation 3 title out there, with a Hollywood talented cast, unmatched writing and exotic locations. Is it perfect? No, but it’s about as close as you are going to get for now, and currently holds my nod for game of the year. If there is one title you pick up this year, make sure it is this one.

Want to be a guest blogger and/or an Intern at Week in Rewind? Want to gain college credit for interning with us?  Read on!

WeekinRewind.com is seeking a number of entertainment reporters, film critics, television critics and hard-core gamers. Want to praise a movie, television show or a game? Ridicule it? Want to share your commentary on the latest movie, television and game news? Guest bloggers, Interns or those seeking college credit who work for WeekinRewind will have have their material posted on a high-ranking, well-read site.  Interning is good, especially for your portfolio when you graduate.  Each of your posts, after all, will include your byline and will be read by more than 5 million people.

Here are the details:


How it works

1) This can be used for college credit or as an Internship.  If you do so, just contact your adviser and follow their rules.  Drop us a line at bdnfilm1@aol.com saying that you would like to be a guest blogger/Intern at WeekinRewind.com. Put "Guest Blogger/Intern" in the title. Send along an example of your writing. A link will do.

2) We're seeking writers to write commentary on film-related news articles, film reviews, television news, and criticism on that latest games for the PS3, XBox 360, and Wii.  If you are seeking the Internship/college credit route, you should be at least a Junior.  Or be an amazing writer.

3) For you, the bonus is this.  If you just want to guest blog--you may include a link back to your Web site or any other content channel you would like to promote. Promotion is good--and we're not stingy about it.

If you want to Intern or gain college credit, you will gain valuable experience working for WeekinRewind.com, as this site, whose feed is mirrored on a major daily newspaper, reaches millions of people each month.  Millions.  That's more than most print publications.

4) We will give you 24 hours notice of when your post is going up. So you can tell all your friends, neighbors, and countrymen.

Rules

1) It has to be well-written. It has to be on a topic not already covered here. We reserve the right to edit all submissions for clarity and form, not opinion.

2) It has to be original content. Don’t steal anything from someone else, don’t republish an old blog or paper of yours.  No plagiarism.  It won't do.

3) By submitting, you agree to the legal information below.

4) The more timely the subject, the better.

5) Please write as if you were writing for any major publication--we do.  Also, there is no room for hate speech.  We won't tolerate that.

Legal

I hereby represent and warrant that (i) I own or have the necessary licenses, rights, consents and permissions to use and authorize WeekinRewind.com to use all patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights in and to this submission to enable inclusion and use of this submission on WeekinRewind.com, and (ii) I have any necessary written or implied consent, release, and/or permission of each and every identifiable individual person in this submission to use the name, picture and likeness of each and every such identifiable individual person to enable inclusion and use of this submission in Week in Rewind, and (iii) WeekinRewind assumes the right to retain your posts on its site when the internship or guest blogger decides to leave for whatever reason, and (iv)  None of my content is plagiarized; if it is, WeekinRewind.com is not held liable for any damages.  The author of the post in question assumes all damages.  In other words, write your own work--don't steal.  We won't tolerate it.  Neither will others.

Want to be a guest blogger and/or an Intern at Week in Rewind? Want to gain college credit for interning with us?  Read on!

WeekinRewind.com is seeking a number of entertainment reporters, film critics, television critics and hard-core gamers. Want to praise a movie, television show or a game? Ridicule it? Want to share your commentary on the latest movie, television and game news? Guest bloggers, Interns or those seeking college credit who work for WeekinRewind will have have their material posted on a high-ranking, well-read site.  Interning is good, especially for your portfolio when you graduate.  Each of your posts, after all, will include your byline and will be read by more than 5 million people.

Here are the details:


How it works

1) This can be used for college credit or as an Internship.  If you do so, just contact your adviser and follow their rules.  Drop us a line at bdnfilm1@aol.com saying that you would like to be a guest blogger/Intern at WeekinRewind.com. Put "Guest Blogger/Intern" in the title. Send along an example of your writing. A link will do.

2) We're seeking writers to write commentary on film-related news articles, film reviews, television news, and criticism on that latest games for the PS3, XBox 360, and Wii.  If you are seeking the Internship/college credit route, you should be at least a Junior.  Or be an amazing writer.

3) For you, the bonus is this.  If you just want to guest blog--you may include a link back to your Web site or any other content channel you would like to promote. Promotion is good--and we're not stingy about it.

If you want to Intern or gain college credit, you will gain valuable experience working for WeekinRewind.com, as this site, whose feed is mirrored on a major daily newspaper, reaches millions of people each month.  Millions.  That's more than most print publications.

4) We will give you 24 hours notice of when your post is going up. So you can tell all your friends, neighbors, and countrymen.

Rules

1) It has to be well-written. It has to be on a topic not already covered here. We reserve the right to edit all submissions for clarity and form, not opinion.

2) It has to be original content. Don’t steal anything from someone else, don’t republish an old blog or paper of yours.  No plagiarism.  It won't do.

3) By submitting, you agree to the legal information below.

4) The more timely the subject, the better.

5) Please write as if you were writing for any major publication--we do.  Also, there is no room for hate speech.  We won't tolerate that.

Legal

I hereby represent and warrant that (i) I own or have the necessary licenses, rights, consents and permissions to use and authorize WeekinRewind.com to use all patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights in and to this submission to enable inclusion and use of this submission on WeekinRewind.com, and (ii) I have any necessary written or implied consent, release, and/or permission of each and every identifiable individual person in this submission to use the name, picture and likeness of each and every such identifiable individual person to enable inclusion and use of this submission in Week in Rewind, and (iii) WeekinRewind assumes the right to retain your posts on its site when the internship or guest blogger decides to leave for whatever reason, and (iv)  None of my content is plagiarized; if it is, WeekinRewind.com is not held liable for any damages.  The author of the post in question assumes all damages.  In other words, write your own work--don't steal.  We won't tolerate it.  Neither will others.

Movie Review

"The Twilight Saga: New Moon"

Directed by Chris Weitz, written by Melissa Rosenberg, rated PG-13, 130 minutes.

By our guest blogger, Gavin Stone

First and foremost, I have read these books and I think Stephenie Meyer is a twit. I have no clue how this saga of a whiny teenaged girl who thinks she knows everything has become so popular. It’s kind of insulting actually to know that this is what our world has come to--Vampires are disco balls in the sun and kids know everything.

The first movie "Twilight" movie introduced Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart), who had just moved in with her estranged father in Washington, and Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson), who is part of a mysterious yet friendly vampire clan.

Girl meet boy, boy is undead. Girl whines about wanting to be undead. End of story. The first movie seemed rushed and forced. Now, I was dragged to "New Moon" by the missus. Yes, I do like the book (It was so much better than the first), but did I want to sit through two hours of pointless teen angst? Nope. In "New Moon," Edward leaves Bella for her own protection, and she takes it really hard. She bonds with her childhood friend Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner) and realizes that when she puts herself in danger, she can see Edward in her mind scolding her. So she becomes an adrenaline junkie and uses Jacob to get that high. Only some feelings emerge between the two. Oh, and Jacob becomes a Werewolf, sworn enemy of the vampires. When Edward thinks Bella is dead, he decides to end his life by having the vampire council--The Volturi--kill him. Bella runs off to save him and leaves Jacob behind.

Let’s be clear--not many over the age of 20 have had a lot of good things to say about this movie. I went in expecting to hate it but instead I really kinda liked it.

Is it a good movie? Not really, but then it is not supposed to be “Casablanca." At no time does this movie not know who it is aimed at. I heard a lot of groans from adults in the theater but every tween girl sighed every time a shirt came off. And a lot of shirts came off until the young men just stopped wearing them altogether. My only complaint is that this movie began to drag about half way through. Coming in at a hefty two hours, this story could have used some more editing. The pacing is slow.

Sensibility wise, the characters in this movie are infuriating. Bella Swan is a whiny teen girl who will give up everything for a guy. Edward isn’t even a worthwhile guy to give your life for. He is flaky and overbearing. On the other hand, you have Jacob, who is grounded in reality and generally a good guy. Yet stupid girl goes for the wrong guy. As an adult, I look at this and just sigh. The stupidity of youth. This is what legions of girls are looking up to. All the girls in the audience are eating it up--mad, corny dialogue and all. I weep for our future.

Yet all of the other complaints about this movie are pretty unfounded. For one, critics have torn apart the acting. In all reality, these are kids acting like kids. Look around you. Kids are kids. They are not Kurt Douglas. Give them some credit. I have worked around tweens all my life and yes, they don't exactly possess much range. Also under fire is the whole glitter-skinned vampire deal. Do I like it? No. Vampires are not sparkly. But why couldn’t they be? We let zombies run. Why can’t a vampire sparkle? It’s just another take on a classic monster that has been done to death.

"New Moon" is 100 percent better than the original "Twilight." If you can’t really sit through the first one, don’t see this one. If you are like me and can tolerate "Twilight," then ‘New Moon’ will definitely be far more entertaining.

View the trailer for "Twilight Saga: New Moon" below. Thoughts on the movie?

Movie Review

"The Twilight Saga: New Moon"

Directed by Chris Weitz, written by Melissa Rosenberg, rated PG-13, 130 minutes.

By our guest blogger, Gavin Stone

First and foremost, I have read these books and I think Stephenie Meyer is a twit. I have no clue how this saga of a whiny teenaged girl who thinks she knows everything has become so popular. It’s kind of insulting actually to know that this is what our world has come to--Vampires are disco balls in the sun and kids know everything.

The first movie "Twilight" movie introduced Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart), who had just moved in with her estranged father in Washington, and Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson), who is part of a mysterious yet friendly vampire clan.

Girl meet boy, boy is undead. Girl whines about wanting to be undead. End of story. The first movie seemed rushed and forced. Now, I was dragged to "New Moon" by the missus. Yes, I do like the book (It was so much better than the first), but did I want to sit through two hours of pointless teen angst? Nope. In "New Moon," Edward leaves Bella for her own protection, and she takes it really hard. She bonds with her childhood friend Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner) and realizes that when she puts herself in danger, she can see Edward in her mind scolding her. So she becomes an adrenaline junkie and uses Jacob to get that high. Only some feelings emerge between the two. Oh, and Jacob becomes a Werewolf, sworn enemy of the vampires. When Edward thinks Bella is dead, he decides to end his life by having the vampire council--The Volturi--kill him. Bella runs off to save him and leaves Jacob behind.

Let’s be clear--not many over the age of 20 have had a lot of good things to say about this movie. I went in expecting to hate it but instead I really kinda liked it.

Is it a good movie? Not really, but then it is not supposed to be “Casablanca." At no time does this movie not know who it is aimed at. I heard a lot of groans from adults in the theater but every tween girl sighed every time a shirt came off. And a lot of shirts came off until the young men just stopped wearing them altogether. My only complaint is that this movie began to drag about half way through. Coming in at a hefty two hours, this story could have used some more editing. The pacing is slow.

Sensibility wise, the characters in this movie are infuriating. Bella Swan is a whiny teen girl who will give up everything for a guy. Edward isn’t even a worthwhile guy to give your life for. He is flaky and overbearing. On the other hand, you have Jacob, who is grounded in reality and generally a good guy. Yet stupid girl goes for the wrong guy. As an adult, I look at this and just sigh. The stupidity of youth. This is what legions of girls are looking up to. All the girls in the audience are eating it up--mad, corny dialogue and all. I weep for our future.

Yet all of the other complaints about this movie are pretty unfounded. For one, critics have torn apart the acting. In all reality, these are kids acting like kids. Look around you. Kids are kids. They are not Kurt Douglas. Give them some credit. I have worked around tweens all my life and yes, they don't exactly possess much range. Also under fire is the whole glitter-skinned vampire deal. Do I like it? No. Vampires are not sparkly. But why couldn’t they be? We let zombies run. Why can’t a vampire sparkle? It’s just another take on a classic monster that has been done to death.

"New Moon" is 100 percent better than the original "Twilight." If you can’t really sit through the first one, don’t see this one. If you are like me and can tolerate "Twilight," then ‘New Moon’ will definitely be far more entertaining.

View the trailer for "Twilight Saga: New Moon" below. Thoughts on the movie?

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

As awards season draws nearer and nearer, studios will be pushing plenty of their films for consideration for numerous awards. Plenty of features are obviously going to get some attention; Jason Reitman's "Up in the Air," the Coens black comedy "A Serious Man," musical drama "Nine," and very likely James Cameron's alleged revolution of cinema, "Avatar." But Universal apparently has the unlikely Judd Apatow film "Funny People" up for consideration this year, notably for Best Picture and Best Actor for its star Adam Sandler.

It's not entirely out of the question that "Funny People" deserves some major credit. Apatow put in a respectable deal of effort combining the straight comedy of his first two features ("40-Year-Old Virgin" and "Knocked Up") with drama in a way that has been compared to the works of James L. Brooks, but for me seemed a lot more similar to Woody Allen's more dramatic (but still comedy-infused) efforts. Critical responses were quite mixed, with some people praising Apatow's boldness and Sandler's performance and others...well, others were a lot less supportive, saying it was incredibly self-indulgent and the attempts at drama were half-hearted at best.

I don't really fall into any specific category with the film. I do quite like it, and it does have very admirable things to say about comedy, fame, fortune, etc., but nothing is really expounded upon at any great length and most of the film tends to fall more into melodramatic territory than straight drama. It works far better as a comedy, and the film clocks in at nearly two and a half hours, overstaying its welcome by about 40 minutes. A Best Picture nomination would be jumping the gun big time--I don't doubt Apatow may make further strides in drama if he decides to continue in that direction, but his first attempt simply is not deserving.

That said, Sandler did give a great performance. Is it Oscar-worthy? I don't believe so. I think the Academy messed up big time not nominating him for "Punch-Drunk Love," because I think that's just about the best we're going to get from Sandler, at least before he decides to slow down a bit with the juvenile comedies and focus on more serious comedy and drama permanently (if that day ever comes, that is).

The best bet I would've given "Funny People" for awards contention is for the screenplay, which I actually had read before seeing the film, and felt developed the concepts far better than the film itself (this probably has a lot to do with Apatow's inexperience as a director). I wouldn't be opposed to seeing Sandler get recognized for his performance, but I don't believe he deserves the win by any means and there have surely been better performances this year to focus on.

But all power to Universal for seeing a generally quality film for what it is and at least trying for some glory, even if the film doesn't quite deserve it, nor do I believe it'll get it. But we'll certainly see come February, and if anything, it will be very intriguing to see the Academy give some attention to a non-independent comedy for once.

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

As awards season draws nearer and nearer, studios will be pushing plenty of their films for consideration for numerous awards. Plenty of features are obviously going to get some attention; Jason Reitman's "Up in the Air," the Coens black comedy "A Serious Man," musical drama "Nine," and very likely James Cameron's alleged revolution of cinema, "Avatar." But Universal apparently has the unlikely Judd Apatow film "Funny People" up for consideration this year, notably for Best Picture and Best Actor for its star Adam Sandler.

It's not entirely out of the question that "Funny People" deserves some major credit. Apatow put in a respectable deal of effort combining the straight comedy of his first two features ("40-Year-Old Virgin" and "Knocked Up") with drama in a way that has been compared to the works of James L. Brooks, but for me seemed a lot more similar to Woody Allen's more dramatic (but still comedy-infused) efforts. Critical responses were quite mixed, with some people praising Apatow's boldness and Sandler's performance and others...well, others were a lot less supportive, saying it was incredibly self-indulgent and the attempts at drama were half-hearted at best.

I don't really fall into any specific category with the film. I do quite like it, and it does have very admirable things to say about comedy, fame, fortune, etc., but nothing is really expounded upon at any great length and most of the film tends to fall more into melodramatic territory than straight drama. It works far better as a comedy, and the film clocks in at nearly two and a half hours, overstaying its welcome by about 40 minutes. A Best Picture nomination would be jumping the gun big time--I don't doubt Apatow may make further strides in drama if he decides to continue in that direction, but his first attempt simply is not deserving.

That said, Sandler did give a great performance. Is it Oscar-worthy? I don't believe so. I think the Academy messed up big time not nominating him for "Punch-Drunk Love," because I think that's just about the best we're going to get from Sandler, at least before he decides to slow down a bit with the juvenile comedies and focus on more serious comedy and drama permanently (if that day ever comes, that is).

The best bet I would've given "Funny People" for awards contention is for the screenplay, which I actually had read before seeing the film, and felt developed the concepts far better than the film itself (this probably has a lot to do with Apatow's inexperience as a director). I wouldn't be opposed to seeing Sandler get recognized for his performance, but I don't believe he deserves the win by any means and there have surely been better performances this year to focus on.

But all power to Universal for seeing a generally quality film for what it is and at least trying for some glory, even if the film doesn't quite deserve it, nor do I believe it'll get it. But we'll certainly see come February, and if anything, it will be very intriguing to see the Academy give some attention to a non-independent comedy for once.

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

Fresh off the box-office busting "Twilight" sequel, "New Moon," director Chris Weitz has signed with the vamp-romance producing studio Summit Entertainment to direct a film called "The Gardener."

This definitely isn't a return to the fantasy genre, however. Empire says this about the film:

"This will mark a considerable change of pace from Weitz's last two films (before "New Moon," he was put through the ringer on visual effects Oscar-winning "The Golden Compass"), involving as it does... well, a gardener. A Mexican gardener, to be specific, who according to Variety, lives in Los Angeles and takes measures to protect his son. At this point we don't even know if this is a thriller, drama, comedy or rom-zom-com, but we're guessing it'll be some flavour of drama."

Weitz has gone through some drastic genre changes in his career. Most "New Moon" or "Golden Compass" fans would likely be surprised to learn he co-directed the first "American Pie" film with his brother Paul. The two also worked together on the British drama-comedy "About a Boy," and Chris' first solo project was the Chris Rock comedy, "Down to Earth."

Following troubles during the filming of "Compass" and the film's subsequent disappointing box office returns in the U.S., Weitz was ready to leave the film industry entirely. He has been reported to have said "New Moon" gave him a new lease on his career.

Weitz is an incredibly endearing filmmaker, regardless of what projects he's worked on. He brought much more assured direction to the "Twilight" sequel, so I'm glad he's decided not to quit just yet. I think it'll be great to see him tackle something a bit more low-key for the first time in quite a while.

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

Fresh off the box-office busting "Twilight" sequel, "New Moon," director Chris Weitz has signed with the vamp-romance producing studio Summit Entertainment to direct a film called "The Gardener."

This definitely isn't a return to the fantasy genre, however. Empire says this about the film:

"This will mark a considerable change of pace from Weitz's last two films (before "New Moon," he was put through the ringer on visual effects Oscar-winning "The Golden Compass"), involving as it does... well, a gardener. A Mexican gardener, to be specific, who according to Variety, lives in Los Angeles and takes measures to protect his son. At this point we don't even know if this is a thriller, drama, comedy or rom-zom-com, but we're guessing it'll be some flavour of drama."

Weitz has gone through some drastic genre changes in his career. Most "New Moon" or "Golden Compass" fans would likely be surprised to learn he co-directed the first "American Pie" film with his brother Paul. The two also worked together on the British drama-comedy "About a Boy," and Chris' first solo project was the Chris Rock comedy, "Down to Earth."

Following troubles during the filming of "Compass" and the film's subsequent disappointing box office returns in the U.S., Weitz was ready to leave the film industry entirely. He has been reported to have said "New Moon" gave him a new lease on his career.

Weitz is an incredibly endearing filmmaker, regardless of what projects he's worked on. He brought much more assured direction to the "Twilight" sequel, so I'm glad he's decided not to quit just yet. I think it'll be great to see him tackle something a bit more low-key for the first time in quite a while.

By our guest blogger, Jonathan Wu

The upcoming romantic comedy, "Knight & Day," starring Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz, was not so funny on Sunday when seven bulls escaped and ran wildly for 40 minutes from the film's set in Cadiz, Spain, and thus injuring two women.

The two stars, Cruise and Diaz, were not on the set as they are arranged to arrive next weekend for filming.

The bulls, who are being used in scenes that emulate the famous bull run in Pamplona, were eventually recaptured on a nearby beach.

A spokesperson for the mayor of Cadiz stated in a local newspaper, "Nothing will be filmed in Cadiz until we have a new plan that guarantees the safety of local residents."

Various anti-bullfighting activists have initiated a letter-writing campaign to urge Cruise and Diaz to withdraw from the film.

Source.

By our guest blogger, Jonathan Wu

The upcoming romantic comedy, "Knight & Day," starring Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz, was not so funny on Sunday when seven bulls escaped and ran wildly for 40 minutes from the film's set in Cadiz, Spain, and thus injuring two women.

The two stars, Cruise and Diaz, were not on the set as they are arranged to arrive next weekend for filming.

The bulls, who are being used in scenes that emulate the famous bull run in Pamplona, were eventually recaptured on a nearby beach.

A spokesperson for the mayor of Cadiz stated in a local newspaper, "Nothing will be filmed in Cadiz until we have a new plan that guarantees the safety of local residents."

Various anti-bullfighting activists have initiated a letter-writing campaign to urge Cruise and Diaz to withdraw from the film.

Source.