The Big Bang Theory is one of the highest rated shows on TV right now. It's somewhat unclear why people seem to like it so much. I would love to see the demographic breakdown of the show's ratings. There must be a huge audience of people somewhere that enjoy stale stereotypical characters talking about science.
Big Bang's ratings are not its only success. Among other things, Jim Parsons has received 5 (5!) Primetime Emmy nominations. A substantial group of critics are impressed with the show as evidenced by its many Screen Actor's Guilt, Golden Globe, and Critic's Choice nominations.
All of this is a source of mystery and infuriation to me, and I would pay for someone to explain the show's success. After watching four episodes I honestly don't understand. There must be something I'm missing about this show that makes it seem funny.
I had learned to accept all of this until recently, when the cast, aware of their leverage, decided to negotiate for more money. Due to it's massive audience, the stalling of BBT was widely reported. This article from US Magazine outlines the MASSIVE salaries the main cast members are receiving. Jim Parsons, Johnny Galecki and Kaley Cuoco are all getting $90 million dollars a year. Each. $90 million dollars a year. They are making 90. Million. Dollars. Every year. Because of the delays in production due to negotiation, the next season will only feature 20 episodes. At $90 million dollars a year, that is $4.5 million dollars an episode. This orgy of unnecessarily huge salaries is heinous.
I will offer, as a comparison, the salaries of Bryan Cranston and Aaron Paul, the stars of Breaking Bad. As you are probably aware, Breaking Bad is considered by many to be the greatest TV program of all time. Here is evidence of that from Forbes, Philadelphia Magazine, and my favorite source, Uproxx. According to Business Insider, Paul and Cranston make $150,000 dollars and $225,000 dollars per episode respectively.
I will let that sink in. Jim Parsons is making literally 20 times what Bryan Cranston made. Parsons recites stale, cliched science jokes, Cranston became one of the most complicated, amazing characters ever broadcasted. And Parsons makes 20 times as much as he does. Will someone please explain this to me. The idea that Parsons actually held out for such a high salary is enraging beyond belief.
If you'll excuse me, I think I'll go look for some blue meth to take my mind off this injustice.
I've not kept it a secret that I don't think much of Michael Bay. His movies are, for the most part, awful. However, he regained some standing in my eyes when I found, while researching the supernaturally horrific director Uwe Boll for this article, a redeeming quote from Bay.
You see, in 2007, Uwe Boll released the movie Postal and more than a few critics were somewhat repulsed by how painstakingly dreadful it was. On Rotten Tomatoes, Postal has been holding steady at a 7% approval rating. Postal was so uniquely bad, it did not even succeed in being comical, like The Happeningor The Roommanaged to do.
In response to the bad reviews, Boll went on a furious diatribe and, among other things, called Mr. Bay a "fu8ing retard", even though Bay had not said a word about any of his movies once. Bay's response was surprisingly calm and articulate, a characteristic that has certainly never been used to describe his films. "I find that people who rant like that...comes from someone screaming because he is not being heard. He is obviously a sad being."
So Michael Bay is measured and pitying when it comes to Uwe Boll. That might make you assume, correctly so, that the man is a piece of work. This article isn't meant to be a full biography of Uwe Boll, but here a few telling things about a director who is more than simply bad at his job, he is a malignant blight on the movie industry.
First off, quite a few of Boll's movies are based of relatively unknown video games. Indeed, if he was even marginally talented, there is every chance he could have made a household name for himself several years ago. In 2008, the video game developer Blizzard was seriously looking for experienced people to produce a movie about their hit release World of Warcraft. WoW, as it was known, was so popular at the time any movie about it would probably be an instant hit. Boll, naturally, jumped at the chance; it probably would have netted him a lot of money, and, in terms of video game film experience, he had a certain claim to be the right man for the job. By 2008, Boll had released or was producing a total of 9 movies derived from video games. Blizzard, however, was less than excited about the prospect of working with Boll. Upon receiving his application to direct their film, Blizzard, notoriously protective of their games, responded, "Never...we will not sell the movie rights to you...especially not to you." If you watch Boll's movies, Blizzard made a wise choice. In 2006, Boll made an announcement that should have been a signal to the world at large that he was at least somewhat disconnected with reality and should never be allowed shoot a home video, let alone earn a living making feature films. Whenever Boll unleashed another one of his cinematic atrocities on the planet, critics all over the world were united, for once, in their distaste of the movie (I like to think I would have been part of that noble group back then, and certainly will be soon if I can sit through his segment of the The Profane Basement coming soon to a few desperate theaters and the internet). Boll was, understandably, more than displeased by the veritable hailstorm of horrendous reviews his movies consistently received. In fact, he was so incensed, that he, completely seriously, challenged his harshest critics to a series of 10 round boxing matches. He was, for the most part, ignored or mocked. However, a few critics accepted his challenge. Boll, as it turns out, is something of a fighting guru, because he beat most of them senseless. This did little more than send a few people to the hospital and worsen Boll's image. However, another filmmaker decided to make a short documentary about the incident cleverly titled Raging Boll. It wasn't Citizen Kane but Raging Boll certainly was the best film Uwe was ever involved in.
Finally, the probably most telling fact about Boll is that he is responsible for what is almost certainly one of the most in-bad-taste scenes in recent film history. Boll's most well known movie (still very obscure for most people) Postal, nearly featured a virtually unbelievable opening sequence parodying the September 11th terror attacks in which passengers overcome the hijackers but ultimately unwittingly crash the plane into a tower anyway.
It is shocking enough to consider that anyone would compose such a scene at all, but all the more audacious when you consider the release date of Postal was less than 7 years after the terror attacks occurred. America didn't even have a new president yet. Upon further inspection, two details make it crazier still. Postal was in various stages of production for two years. Given the time it would take a writer as implausibly bad as Boll to write a treatment and accomplish the extraordinary feat of securing $15 million dollars of funding for a script that wasn't worth 15 cents, he must have decided to parody 9/11 less than 4 years after it happened. Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this film is that Postal's assistant director, Dave Folley, had to urge Boll at great length to remove the offending scene. Boll insisted that America was portraying 9/11 victims in too positive a light and the scene would help to correct that. He ultimately relented when Folley made the argument that many, if not all, theaters in America would refuse to show the movie if it contained the scene in question. Boll still included this "secret scene" in the DVD release. You can watch below, but it's somewhat stomach churning.
My point, in all of this, is an attempt to seriously convey the message, do not see this man's movies. Every cent that he earns is a bad thing for people everywhere. He perpetuates an insensitive culture that is far worse than the smashy insanity of Transformers or juvenile gross out porn from movies like Grown Ups. Any person who believes the scene above is "good for America to see" needs serious help. Do the world a favor and watch an indy.
Even though it has already been half a year, the sting of Philip Seymour Hoffman's early death is still very strongly felt. He's had several movies released posthumously and there are still a few more to go. For movie goers everywhere, each one of these films is both an homage to one of the best actors of his generation, as well as a warning of what drug abuse can bring. It's taken MainScreenMedia too long to recognize him, but better late than never. Here are a few clips of one of the best: Philip Seymour Hoffman.
Everyone with a functioning Netflix subscription owes redditor clayton_frisbie a debt of gratitude. He cross referenced IMDBs top 250 movies with what was on Netflix and spit out the top 50. It is a great viewing guide if you're looking to see a few classics but don't want to wade through the list to find which you can watch. Thanks to Uproxx for the heads up. Here's the link. Enjoy.
(Okay, this one is a little predictable, but it needs to be said) For the last few years, the nearly unrivaled cinematic catastrophe that is The Room has slowly been percolating through movie-going circles. Many fans are calling it the worst movie since Plan 9 from Outer Space.
A big part of what makes The Room so bizarre is also what makes it hard to describe. There are a series of almost completely unconnected subplots that weave in an out of a strange, almost bipolar love triangle between the main character, Johnny (Tommy Wiseau), his friend, Mark (Greg Sestero) and Johnny's fiance, Lisa (Juliet Danielle). These awkward relationships are characterized by intermittent, extremely intense, and definitely uncomfortable sex scenes.
The Room, not unlike The Happening, the last bad movie I wrote about, is incredibly entertaining. The madness of each subplot (perhaps most memorably: a woman tearfully discovers she has breast cancer and proceeds to never mention it again) is matched only by the oddness of the dialogue. All that can be said of Tommy Wiseau's portrayal of the main character is that it will leave you astonished.
The guys over at CinemaSins did an excellent job skewering The Room. Frankly, I'm surprised how short this clip is.
As a bonus, here is writer, producer, director and main actor, Tommy Wiseau talking about his experience creating The Room as well as, wow, the finer points of comedy (see part 2). Apparently he's a misunderstood expert in the field. Enjoy.
Note: The man does seem like a nice guy, I'll give him that. He's no Uwe Boll (who's up next).
For all the Game of Thrones fans out there whose favorite character is Tyrion, I have two words for you: Station Agent. The 2003 film The Station Agent was one of Peter Dinklage's first big projects and it put him on the radar for his current role. The Station Agent is a masterwork in the study of loneliness.
Peter Dinklage's character, Fin, has been mocked his whole life for being small. As a result, Fin has grown into a supremely private, quiet recluse, who refuses even the most well-meaning attempts at companionship. The Station Agent is about him slowly forgoing that lifestyle. Patricia Clarkson, Bobby Cannavale, and Michelle Williams play supporting roles as the people who steadily bring Finn out of his shell.
It is a slow, deliberate film that manages to take the viewer on an 88 minute journey that, despite very little action, will leave you very pleased. Here's a clip:
In the last several days since Transformers 4: Michael Bay Swims in Money came out, I’ve heard people compare Bay’s 160 minute turd to Pacific Rim three times. This is wrong for so many reasons. I’ve literally hurt my brain trying to understand why so many people are still going to see transformers movies. Even someone dumb enough to keep the name Shia finally jumped ship before this one.
I know Guillermo Del Toro’s movie about giant robots smashing things (Pacific Rim) is just as dumb as Michael Bay’s 4 movies about giant robots smashing things. But I love the former and I honestly hope Michael Bay dies alone all Citizen Kane-y remembering the one good Indy flick he accidentally wandered into years before, (slowly whispers) “Take… Shelter…” (if you haven’t seen Take Shelter, you absolutely should. Michael Shannon and Jessica Chastain will knock your socks off).
There’s a key difference in the two. Del Toro made PR and dismissed the idea of coherent story structure in order to make a good, silly action movie, because realism would impede that. Instead, he sunk his teeth into outstanding visuals, a few great fights (a robot smashing a Godzilla thing with a cruise ship? Yes please.) and one epic speech from the man, the myth, the legend himself: Stringer Bell. I mean Idris Elba, aka Stacker Pentecost, aka I’m naming my firstborn Stacker.
If you pick apart all the logical inconsistencies: the coastal wall, the sword, the EMP, stopping the Jaeger program, Charlie Kelly being a biologist, I’m afraid you’re missing the point entirely. Could some of those aspects have been fixed? Yes, but then it wouldn’t be Pacific Rim, in all its hilarious awesome/dumb glory.
Michael Bay, on the other hand, thinks his movies are just misunderstood. He has a style, we just don’t get it because we’re dummies who don’t have houses made of gold. Bay’s movies, with the possible exception of The Rock, are all mashups of interchangeable, blurry, repetitively choreographed fight scenes with protagonists the audience will all actively be rooting against by the time the screen goes black.
Because it’s making an absurd amount of money and Michael Bay has no soul, there’s going to be a 5th, 6th, and 7th (a 7th!) Transformers. The good folks over at Warners quickly green-lit a PR sequel not long after it opened too. If you must see Transformers again, it’s your life. But you should check out Pacific Rim 2 (Atlantic Rim?), in case you’re looking for a better version. Maybe the best fight of the movie:
