How Many Friends do You Have in The Social Network?

Rating: A+
I personally have about 300,000 billion and a half, but that’s because I’m awesome. Don’t worry, one day you will learn the ways of awesometasticalness, but not now. I’ve got to tell you about this movie I saw the other day so you can figure out whether or not to spend your hard-earned money on it. I can tell you right now that you definitely should.

With the way that ticket prices are going these days, I know that it is becoming ever-so-difficult to choose a film to see that you won’t be disappointed with. Because of this, I can’t help but wonder why someone would choose to go and see horrendously bad movies like The Last Airbender, sorry M. Night, but after Signs you may as well have given up because it seems like that’s what The Village was. I mean seriously, what in the world happened?

Anyway, David Fincher’s The Social Network is one of those movies that when you walk out of the theater you think about what your life is like and wonder whether you’re doing the right thing with it. That’s how you know you’ve witnessed a really good piece of artwork. This tends to be a recurring theme in Fincher’s work, quality I mean. Whether it’s Se7en, Fight Club, or even The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (no matter how unlike the short story it was), David Fincher always expresses the tone of his films extremely well, and oftentimes Fincher does this with colors. In all of the films listed previously as well as the film currently under examination, Fincher uses dark colors because of how dim the subject matter is. These dark colors are extremely appropriate considering just how sad this story is.

If you’ve been living under a rock or this is your first time seeing a film or both then let me give you a little information about the story. Basically, Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) is at Harvard because he’s extremely good with computers and gets in trouble for being better at writing applications and (insert other computer lingo here) and eventually is approached about an idea for a social network site specifically designed for students of the university. He then takes that idea and essentially makes it better turning it into Facebook. The problem, however, is that the group he “stole” this idea from is now suing him for taking their idea global and in the process he loses his best friend. It should be noted that this is not exactly the true story of how Mark Zuckerberg created Facebook, but oddly enough the filmmakers chose to use the real names. The story is told in two different timeframes, during the course of being sued and in the process of becoming über famous. These sequences are moved in and out of extremely well making for exquisite editing.

This is going to sound really sinister on my behalf but I really love the idea that a person can lose so many friends while at the same time trying, and succeeding, to gain millions more. When I say that I love the idea, what I mean is that it is innovative, which I believe is what makes this film unique to cinema. It seems like every idea has been done to death and will probably continue to seem that way, but when a film like this comes along, no matter whether it’s well-done or not (which this film is) it shows that there is hope for continued ideas in the world of filmmaking.

So if you’re interested in seeing something that will stimulate your mind and possibly think about that person who used to be your best friend but something you or they did caused that friendship to end, then I suggest this innovative film about the current era of social networking. The Social Network is a great film that discusses how becoming friends with someone has changed to suit the technological age. I have spoken.

Are You in The Union?

Rating: B+
Today I am going to go out on a limb and venture into some new territory of writing reviews. Today’s topic of discussion is going to be a documentary called The Union: The Business Behind Getting High from 2007, directed by Brett Harvey. This documentary traces the history of the illegal marijuana business in British Columbia while also offering information to those who may not be completely educated on what exactly the drug does and why it’s illegal in the first place. Before I go any further I feel I should tell you, yes this includes you mom, that I DO NOT smoke or ingest any drug whatsoever, including marijuana, cigarettes, or alcohol. I like to go into a film with as objective a point of view as possible and that goes double for documentaries.

I have to say that I really liked how persuasive this documentary was in terms of why marijuana should be legalized, which is basically its intent. I think that a quote from the film sums up its purpose; this being, “Legalize it, control it, and tax the livin’ hell out of it.” Now, The Union goes into a lot business talk that, quite honestly, confuses me because I’ve never really understood all of that stuff, which makes me wonder why I like Boiler Room so much… Anyway, what really caught my interest was the massive amount of facts about why marijuana is basically harmless. Aside from the obvious facts like, cigarettes have hundreds of chemicals that go into their production; this film brings up evidence like marijuana cannot do any harm to the body that you would not get from a night of drinking or the harm that comes from breathing in any kind of smoke. Now, I’m not here to convince you to believe the same things that I now believe but I do bring up these facts to show you how persuasive this film really is. There are many other facts that are just as convincing as these are, if not more so, but as I’ve implied, it’s not my job to give you those reasons; I’m here to help you decide whether you should see the film or not, and give reasons why to do so.

I think the best reason why you should watch this film is firstly, to see the new underground railroad (if you’ve seen this, then you know what I’m talking about) and secondly, to get a true understanding of just how far down into the pockets of big business our capitalist system is. Don’t get me wrong, I love my country and yada yada yada, but it is peculiar why cigarettes and alcohol are legal when they are known killers but marijuana, which in reality just makes people lazy, isn’t. I really like how in depth with this particular topic the documentary goes and how hopeful all of the experts in this documentary are about this country actually becoming sensible. I also like how this documentary gives legitimate scientific research and tells the truth about the research used to persuade people like that used in the political agenda of Ronald Reagan.

However, there are some things about this documentary that I didn’t like. I didn’t like how this documentary was given a “host”, I don’t really know if that would be his appropriate title or not but that’s what I’m going with. In some documentaries it would be appropriate to do this, whether it is journalistic or what have you, but this seemed to be more about changing the thinking habits of normal people. When you give a documentary like this a face to remember it with, it tends to make you think, “Oh, this guy is on a mission to find out something, good for him.” (Not necessarily me). When a persuasive argument is faceless it is also all faces and tells you that this is how everyone should see this topic, not just one person. There were some other topics that got on my nerves like the discussion of political administrations and so on, but that’s just a personal issue and has no value in weighing how good of a film this was.

In all, I would highly recommend watching this film to get a better understanding of how the drug works, its place in the American and Canadian cultures, and many other topics. Even if you still don’t agree with the stand that it takes, at least you’ll know why you believe what you believe. I have spoken.

Spartan Swords and Cinema Style

First off, I would like to say that this is NOT a review of 300. This is a general scene analysis of an important, technical part of this film. I know that it is in with my reviews but I felt that it was still appropriate. Now please, read on.

Brutal is the only way to describe Zack Snyder’s 300. It is a movie filled with blood, guts, and cinematic beauty. Coming from a graphic novel, written by Frank Miller, it could be hard to capture the emotions of this movie on a reel of film. But Zack Snyder and his team make that job look very simple.

The fourteenth scene of this movie, according to the DVD recording, shows how an action movie should be filmed, taking different approaches to hits, stabs, screams, war cries, and everything else a good action movie should have. This is the most famous scene from the movie, in which Leonidas and his 300 warriors first fight against the Persian armies of Xerxes. Beginning with Leonidas coming down from the hill where he speaks with Ephialtes, the deformed and outcast wannabe Spartan warrior, and giving a battle order to Artemis, his loyal friend and Captain, this scene lasts approximately five minutes and eight seconds. The end of the scene comes when Leonidas pulls his sword from the body of a dead Persian as the camera tilts up.

The scene, as well as the entire movie, seems to be tinted with different colors. In this particular scene there is a golden hue about everything. When the first wave of Persian soldiers come around a bend on the cliff, where the battle takes place, the sky is shown with the sun casting rich gold onto their battlefield, this adds to the dramatic effect of this particular battle. The next shot pulls back from Leonidas’ helmeted face to reveal his loyal followers behind him with tall spears in the air. Here we see an extreme contrast of the golden tone of their skin and the darkness of the shadows. The horse hair on Leonidas’ helmet is almost unnoticeable because of how dark it is. We can also see this with the capes that the warriors wear. The lighting also affects the capes of the Spartans by toning it to the color of strawberries except where there is a shadow cast from the helmeted heads causing it to appear black. The two colors that mainly appear in this scene are red and gold. Audiences will associate these two colors with royalty and warfare which adds to the epic fight that is taking place between two giants of combat.

One thing that must be remembered about this movie is that it is intentionally over-the-top while still remaining true to the history books. Whether it’s the executioner with blades for arms, the enormous height of the god-king Xerxes, or the earthquake effect of the Persians readying battle formations that occurs at the beginning of this scene; all of these things help to show the devastating power of the Persian empire that only a few Greeks are about to face. To help add to this over-the-top quality, a well constructed musical score is introduced at the time of the Persians wrapping around the bend of the steep cliff which helps the brilliant color of gold play its dramatic role in the picture. With low, resonating bass drums, crashing cymbals, all male chorus, and trumpets doing their part; anyone would get the sense of epic war and waning hope for survival. The bass drums are intended to be a nondiegetic aspect, but they almost sound like war drums, which would be used by major armies in ancient times causing these drums to toy with the line between the story world and the filming world. Another musical quality of the scene is when the Persians sound their trumpets for the charge, playing with the line between diegetic and nondiegetic aspects in this film. The music stops when the Persian army crashes into the Spartan shields, making the watcher focus on the screams and cries of the soldiers until the Spartans stop allowing themselves to be pushed back by the barbarians and dig into the sand. They then use their shields to push the front line of the enemy off of them and stab into their flesh with sharp spears and deadly accuracy. The low tone of the drums picks back up as well as the trumpets and horns when the next row of Persians slam into the shields of the Spartans. The score in this scene ends when Leonidas and his men break ranks and take on the Persians that have not yet been slaughtered, and a variation between slow motion and real time speed takes place in a single shot.

The cinematography throughout the movie is both technical and innovative, following the guidelines of camera work and allowing for more exciting methods of filming the action that takes place in this amazing battle scene. An example of one of the innovative aspects of the scene is where we first see Leonidas in his helmet. The camera is first focused on his eyes then zooms out to reveal the soldiers standing behind him. This could have been done in many other ways, such as having a more open shot showing the soldiers in ranks ready to fight with their helmets on however, this would not have been as intense as showing their leader ready to fight and giving a speech to his men to raise morale in them for the fight which they are about to engage. Another innovative technique that is employed is when the Persians first crash into the Spartans. The camera is set within the group of Spartans, which allows us to see what the Spartans would see, allowing for a type of point-of-view shot, even rocking back when the impact of the collision is first felt. Also, there is a shot where one of the Spartans is cut by a Persian spear and he takes his revenge by stabbing the Persian with his own spear. We never see which Persian it is that cuts the warrior; we only see his spear point. Then the camera is set back far enough to see between two columns of Spartans, the one who was cut and one that we must acknowledge is there without ever really seeing him. At this point we see the angry Spartan take his revenge on the Persian who committed the atrocity. Yet another example of innovative camera work is when there is a cut to the camera set high in the Hot Gates, where the battle takes place, and there is a slow tilt up revealing the massive numbers of dead Persians and the red-caped backs of the Spartans advancing forward. This helps to show how the Spartans are like a swarm of locusts destroying the fields of Persians in front of them, slowly but surely. Finally, there is a long shot focused on Leonidas as he moves through the Persians killing one after another. This shot lasts for a little over one minute but varies between slow motion and real time. In this shot, the camera zooms in and out and moves along with Leonidas as he moves forward. There is one point in which Leonidas throws his spear into the body of a Persian and the camera follows the spear through the air. When the spear lands in the body of the Persian, the camera moves back to Leonidas and is covered for a brief moment by a Persian approaching the Spartans. The Persian is out of focus at this point, providing evidence for the conclusion that the type of lens used for this shot may be a telephoto lens. This makes for an astounding final shot for this scene and also proves to be the most famous shot of the movie.

The biggest aspect of editing in this scene is the amount of slow motion shots that are used, as well as the computer generated special effects. There are three shots of the Persians running toward the Spartans which are all in slow motion. This helps to show the drama of the scene and the emotion that is felt by the participants in the battle, as well as slows down the momentum of the action allowing the audience to feel and see everything that happens. There is another shot that moves between slow motion and real time, in which Leonidas takes on a number of Persians by himself. This allows the viewer to see the strength, speed, and ability possessed by the warrior king. The shot only moves to slow motion when he comes to face his next victim showing his technique and shear ferocity.
There are a few instances of CG used in this scene, such as the spear that is thrown hundreds of feet from the Spartans into the body of a mounted Persian officer who tells them to surrender. This could not possibly happen for a two reasons; the first is the most obvious in that the actor would die. Another is that it would not be physically possible to throw a spear the distance that is shown in the movie. Another instance in which CG is used is when four Spartan spears are thrust into the body of one Persian soldier splattering blood and moving smoothly back out of his body. Also, in the shot where Leonidas takes on the Persians, he slices off the leg of one of them and blood flies through the air. While these things are obviously computer generated effects, they add to the over-the-top quality of the movie, like all the other editing techniques that are used, whether it is the obvious cuts or the hidden ones.

This scene is the most famous of the movie and rightfully deserves it. This scene shows the ferocity of three hundred warriors fighting for their survival from a tyrannical ruler who is bent on world domination. Zack Snyder and his team have done a wonderful job putting this scene together and making it as epic as it possible while still following some conventional rules and playing with others. 300 is a cinematic giant and the fourteenth scene is a great example of why it remains absolutely astounding.

You are Going to Burn After Reading This!

Rating: A-
I know. I’m a genius at coming up with titles for these things, no need to compliment me, unless you want to… This 2008 film by the Coen Brothers is brilliant, which probably doesn’t need to be said because just about anything that Joel and Ethan put their hands on turns to gilded platinum awesomeness. I hadn’t seen this film until a few days ago when my fiancé said that we really needed to put it at the top of the queue on Netflix. Like almost every other human being in the world I had heard of it upon its initial release but for some reason at that point in my life I wasn’t really feeling like the Coen Brothers were exactly my thing, it may have been the Tarantino binge I was on.

One thing that I was excited for was to see Brad Pitt, Tilda Swinton, George Clooney, Frances McDormand, and John Malkovich all in the same film. One thing I noticed while watching this movie was that if Pitt’s character, Chad Feldheimer, were to meet with Pitt’s character from Fight Club, Tyler Durden, he would knocked out within the first two spoken words. The good news is; he would be smiling the entire time. I could not believe just how funny Pitt could be until I saw this film. He truly does amazingly well at playing such an insanely inane person. He’s even got that glazed-over look that tells you that there is absolutely nothing going on in that head of his. I have to add that when Brad Pitt is dancing while running on the tread mill I had to pause the movie I was laughing so hard. I’m laughing just thinking about it. Each actor does such an amazing job in this film it’s almost worth watching just to get an idea about what good acting is; whether it’s about how to show anger like Malkovich or how to be a giant bitch like Swinton. (Disclaimer: I am not saying that Tilda Swinton is a bitch, but her character certainly is). I cannot say enough about the acting in this movie, although it does make you see Clooney as a bit of a douche, but McDormand, who seems to be in almost every Coen Brothers film is hilarious as well. There are other actors who I should give praise to but if I were to mention anyone else I wouldn’t get to what I really want to talk about with this film.

The basic plot of the film is extremely confusing and would be nearly impossible for me to explain here in simple terms like I always try to do. Let’s just say that there is a lot of sleeping around (Clooney and Swinton, which is both hilarious to hear and mostly involves Clooney), a CIA agent (Malkovich) gets kicked out of the Agency and his house, and a moron (McDormand) needs plastic surgery. Trust me, it may be confusing to explain but it is hysterical and completely makes sense if you watch everything in its intended order.

The film is really about levels and what happens when someone tries to move between those levels and even gets kicked completely out of those levels. Now, you may be wondering why I’m not saying “social classes” or “hierarchy”, this is because of the importance of the house in which a lot of the film takes place. I’m not going to give away what happens in this film but I will tell you that there are four levels that we know of; the basement, the ground floor, the second floor, and a mysterious third floor that we never get a glimpse of. Because this is a review and not an analysis of the film, I won’t go any farther than that, but when you watch this film you will certainly understand what I’m getting at with this.

Now there are some other things that I feel need to be mentioned. In many ways, the Coen Brothers always have a way of making their films feel like they are taking real life and just slightly altering it. The Coens are really like scientists of the film industry and love to experiment with everyday people; which is why Frances McDormand is such an asset to this team of filmmakers. There are as with many films some things that just aren’t quite right or slightly annoying like the way John Malkovich pronounces French words or the way he says “memoirs”. (I’m not sure if that’s a French word or not…) I find this funny because if you see early films of his, he sounds a lot like Christopher Walken which is always hilarious, especially in films like The Glass Menagerie.

This is an extremely smart and hilarious film and I definitely recommend seeing it and if you’ve already seen it once, go watch it again. I have spoken.

Drowning in Waterworld

Rating: C
You may be asking yourself, “Dude, seriously? Waterworld? Of all the amazing films in history why choose such a (insert chosen adjective here) one?” I’ll tell you why who-ever-you-are! Because I feel that Dennis Hopper should be given some tribute! Yeah, I’ll bet you forgot all about him being in it, didn’t you? According to IMDb, Dennis Hopper was in 203 films, and that’s just acting mind you. He was also a director and writer, most notably for the piece of film gargantuousity known as Easy Rider. But there are others like the super-cool True Romance written by my favorite filmmaker, Quentin Tarantino, Apocalypse Now, and of course Speed. I know it may be a little late to pay tribute to him now but I think he would appreciate it all the same. Dennis Lee Hopper will be sorely missed.

As for this film however, I have heart-wrenchingly mixed feelings. On one hand, I love the idea that people have literally brought about the next great flood and all of the other Bible story imagery that goes along with it. But on the other hand, where did the giant fish monsters come from? On another hand I really like Dennis Hopper, but on yet another hand I can’t stand Kevin Costner. I don’t know where the other two hands came from but maybe I can finally challenge Goro to that match of arm-wrestling. Anyway, there isn’t much to be said technically about the film but I have to say that the story is downright amazing.

The film takes does a good job of giving you an origin story of sorts, in that it is explained by a mysterious narrator in the first few moments of the film. We never hear from him again but I think it should be assumed that it is God… or maybe his brother, I don’t know but I’d really like to. If you have any ideas please let me know, I’m begging you! He (I can tell it’s a “he” from the voice) explains that the polar ice caps have melted causing the world to be flooded leaving no land to be found anywhere, or so he thinks. We follow alongside of the character known as The Mariner (Costner) throughout the film, showing us the social conditions of the new world that these people are so unfortunate to live in. The best way to describe would be to imagine a world where cavemen had access to alien technology. The Mariner ends up stopping at an atoll on his way to nowhere to refuel his supply of fresh water and trade for various items like a tomato plant, because, as everyone knows, Costner loves tomatoes. While at the atoll, it is discovered that The Mariner is a mutant with gills and webbed feet and because the atoll is filled with fanatical religious types he is persecuted for being different, quite literally. Then the atoll is attacked by Smokers, who are essentially pirates led by The Deacon (Hopper), and allowing for The Mariner to escape with the help of a woman who he tells that he can take her and her daughter to dry land. These three along with a scientist are able to escape from the atoll before it is completely destroyed. Quite quickly, The Mariner learns that the Daughter called Enola (Tina Majorino) has a map outlining the path to dry land tattooed on her back; the only problem is that the directions are in a language that is no longer spoken or written. From there the fun ensues with visits to the past via going underwater and eating giant sea monsters.
From a cinematic standpoint, not much can be said as stated before. The CGI is mediocre at best, and for all of you who want to compare it to other films you must remember that this film was made in 1995, fourteen years before Avatar, so don’t start the comparison competition just yet. As for the direction and cinematography, nothing innovative or cool is done, making the film centered around action and character development coming through due to the story, which along with Dennis Hopper single-handedly saves this film from being something other than quality material and would be a waste of time.

I think it is apparent that I am a super nerd who loves science fiction, but I’ll tell you why. Science fiction gives you something that no other genre can; the stories can be told through almost any world, technological device, etc. and you will never forget it. These are films that you reminisce about later in life when you’re hanging out with old friends. If you don’t think I’m right then you should probably go watch Star Wars one more time.

Why Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is Awesome

Rating: Triple A++
First of all, I’d like to apologize for not having posted anything in quite a while. There have been a lot of changes going on lately for me personally and I have been in kind of a funk lately in terms of not being able to write anything really, other than a few papers for school. However, I think I have found a film to get me back in the groove of things. Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is the only film written and directed by Kerry Conran as of yet. Now let’s get some things straight right off the bat, this film is A) phenomenal, and B) not very good. I’ll get to why this is in a minute but first you should know that the story revolves around a female journalist named Polly Perkins (Gwyneth Paltrow) who always gets her story and when giant flying robots drop into New York City she has to be in on the action and get as close as possible even if she endangers herself and Sky Captain (Jude Law) has to step in and save her. And let the amazement ensue. Now I will explain why this film could have been greater than Citizen Kane but isn’t. In simplest terms, the actors chosen were not the best and general audiences can only take so much science fiction awesomeness. Don’t get me wrong, I love the acting talents of Giovanni Ribisi who plays Dex and I have a fondness for Angelina Jolie, don’t ask. However, these actors only play minor characters and are not involved in enough of the film. I believe that if the lead roles and supporting roles had been switched then the film could very easily have been more appealing to general audiences.

Now for those of you who may have trouble understanding why this movie is so awesome I will give you the top five reasons.

5. Giant Flying Robots – If those three words haven’t already convinced you, I should add that there are three different types of robots one that fires lasers from its face, one that has tentacles for arms, and the other only flies but also has lasers. Enough said, right? No? Okay on to reason number four.

4. Airplanes that become Submarines – Need I say more? No, seriously there are freaking air-sub-plane-marines in this movie!

3. Jude Law Punches Gwyneth Paltrow in the Face – You and I both know she had it coming ever since she showed us just how annoying Young Wendy was in Hook.

2. The Look of the Film – The art style of the film has been called Art Deco, now I’m not sure what that means exactly but it truly is shot in beautiful colors and divine textures. Many of the shots remind me of comic books with a series of silhouetted guns or hands pointing to the sky. It also helps that old comics of Buck Rogers are shown at appropriate times during the film. If you don’t watch this movie for any other reason, then you most definitely should watch it for this.

1. Laurence Olivier – That’s right, Laurence Olivier is in the movie. Now you may be asking yourself, “Wait, isn’t he dead?” Why yes he is, but he has come back to help create the greatest story ever applied to celluloid. The classic actor appears in an unusual but very important role as an Oz-like character.

There you have it, I could have listed other reasons like miniature elephants but even that is giving too much away about the plot of the story which I don't like to do. So, if this hasn’t changed your mind about how amazing this movie truly is then you are either dumb or a Communist… or both, which is the worst kind of Communist.

Man, That's a Good Burger

Rating: B+
Recently, I thought of a movie that I hadn’t seen in a long time. This was a movie that I watched over and over again when it came out. Now, you have to know that when it came out, I was only six years old and was in love with Nickelodeon. Having said that, I was looking into the recesses of the internet and happened upon one of the great childhood movies of all time, Good Burger.

This movie starred one of the greatest comedy duos for childhood entertainment, Kenan Thompson, who is now a star on Saturday Night Live, and Kel Mitchell, who is seemingly nowhere to be found these days. This pair got their start in entertainment with the Nickelodeon television show, All That, which was in essence a children’s version of Saturday Night Live. For what this movie was supposed to be for the kids, it did very well in the acting department, however looking back at it sometime later with adult eyes, I realize that acting does mean a whole lot to kids. However, it doesn’t need to. In its own way, the director, Brian Robbins, gets to teach children a little about the world of competitive business, mirroring actual restaurants like McDonald’s and Burger King. As well as the moral lessons that always come with children’s films, which are basically always “don’t do bad things”, and this film is no exception. The bad guys go to jail for using illegal substances in the food that they are selling to their customers, and the good guys win for sticking to the inventiveness of a dope.

The basic plot of the film follows the path of a very young burger-flipper named Ed (Kel Mitchell) who is as remedial as humanly possible causing a car accident for the unlicensed high school student Dexter Reed (Kenan Thompson) who has just started his summer vacation. After slamming into his teacher Mr. Wheat (Sinbad), Dexter’s friend, Jake (Marques Houston) who was riding in the car runs off never to be seen again, it is presumed that Sinbad caught up to him and threatened to kill him if he did not star in a crappy dance movie with the other members of B2K, but not before putting Dexter in the uncomfortable situation of having to get a summer job to pay for the damage done to his car. After being fired from Mondo Burger, he is offered a job at Good Burger (God, these restaurant names are amazing!) with the help of soon-to-be best friend Ed, at which point the antics ensue. The plot is great and takes unexpected twists with the two meeting celebrities like George Clinton in an insane asylum and everyone’s favorite basketball player, Shaq.

The plot seems to be designed to show off the comedic skills of the pair and does it well. I found myself laughing almost the entire time, except when Dexter talks to Ed about the relationship with his father, at which I ruffled my eyebrows because it did not seem to fit in with the comedic style of the film but did come around in the end to work because of the heart-felt moment when Ed gives Dexter a yo-yo. The only question that is really left for the audience to ponder is; where the hell are the parents? Dexter mentions briefly that his mom is away and at the start of the film we see Ed in his room but that is all of the home life we see for him. Kel kind of gets screwed over in this movie because if you pay attention, he has to be a complete idiot without so much as a last name or parents, possibly even a high school dropout, and only gets the glory of having some special sauce, plus his career pretty much tanks after this film. So who do you think came out better? …I thought so.

From a technical standpoint, this film isn’t anything special. We get to see some trippy flying hamburgers at the beginning of the movie and a cargo truck jumping from a dirt mound onto a mailbox, but that’s pretty much it. However, this film doesn’t need the technicality of a super artistic director to be great. The film is still amazing because it is so character driven which makes the actors responsible for making the film a huge success which it was. The budget for this film was a “whopping” $9,000,000 and came back with a little over twice that, which ain’t too shabby. The actors did their jobs and were rewarded for it.

In all, I love this film. Not because it is a work of art, but what it meant for me as a child. We all have those movies that remind us of days gone by, and even though other generations will look at them and wonder what the hell is wrong with us; we know that “I’m a dude. He’s a dude. She’s a dude. Hey! We’re all dudes.” And all dudes have their day.