DisneyBoy

I wonder if the Brangelina/Jennifer Aniston triangle will be fodder for a good season of this show. Obviously it's way too soon for that to ever happen, but I feel like it's the only modern day version of the tragic romance that really captured the world's attention since Di/Charles/Camilla. And I'm not really sure that Jennifer Aniston is especially interesting so maybe the story wouldn't really be anything more than all Angelina all the time.

I just caught that for the first time! Well, the last five minutes, with a rather funny bleeped out dialogue gag. Not a big fan of the format, but it was alright.

LOL, fair point.

Well said. UO: I didn't like The Dark Knight or Ledger's Joker. He was more of a terrorist/psycho to me than a Mistah J. I never laughed at his performance and the lip-licking made me crazy. Also: I loathe the makeup, which looks cheap and is sadly often imitated now come Halloween. Greasy hair? Yay! Just what we wanted to see in cosplay. I also hated what that movie did with Two-Face, if we can even call him that. Just hated the whole thing really, and everytime people fall over themselves proclaiming it the greatest, I hate it more.

Hey, I never met anyone who'd heard of much less seen Sunrise outside of a film class, and lo and behold! PTV's wonderful community proves I'm not alone. So again - have hope!

That's for the viewing public to decide. There's been plenty of big deal movies forgotten in the last 10 years because they just weren't very good in spite of all the hype and people stopped caring about them. I have faith that these live-action remakes, while I'm sure they will live on because Disney will never let us forget them, will never completely eclipse the animated Classics because the animated Classics continue to have a lot of support - there are massive amounts of merchandise out there and the characters are populating theme parks around the world. Kids these days may not have the relationship with Mickey Mouse that kids in the fifties or sixties did but he's still a recognizable icon. I think the same will hold true for even the Disney characters of the nineties 50 years from now. I honestly think parents will continue to show their kids the animated films over the live-action ones. I hope our generation isn't the last to know and appreciate the magic of hand-drawn animation, but if we show these films to our children and nieces and nephews and grandchildren, they will love them and appreciate the art form and not just buy into whatever hype is currently being marketed to them. The cream rises to the top, right?

I'm especially irritated by movies and television shows that further this notion of overwhelming attraction and passion because I think it encourages people in the real world to make really rash decisions. There was this funny supporting character on Ally McBeal named Margaret Camaro who was testifying on the stand about how ridiculous it is to marry a guy "just because you like his pecs". Her delivery was hilarious and the point always stayed with me: don't look at passion as an indicator for happiness. Why is it we can understand that sometimes we crave a pepperoni pizza or a tub of ice cream but that we can resist that urge and eat something healthy instead and later have no regrets....but when it comes to love, meeting one person who for whatever reason temporarily gets us hot and bothered means that we have to pursue them for months or years on end? Or stay with them when it's obviously a bad situation? I honestly feel like this message comes from movies, television shows, stories and fables and it needs to stop. Back on topic: what the hell was up with Han Solo saying "I know" when Princess Leia tells him she loves him? Dude, you're about to be frozen possibly forever and all you can do is sadly acknowledged that she loves you? I guess the delivery is meant to say that he feels badly for her for loving him because he's supposed to be taken away from her, but I would have almost rather he smiled faintly at her and said nothing then stand there going "yeah, I know."

She was married to Gene Roddenberry! I never knew that. How cool. She was always one of my favorite Trek characters.

Was anybody else incensed that Riker and Troi's marriage in the last Star Trek movie for the Next Generation crew featured them standing there in clothing? I mean, I get it - the actors aren't in their twenties anymore and probably don't want to appear nude even if it lines up with continuity but that was one of the most memorable bits of Star Trek trivia I retained since watching the original series. They were supposed to be naked and her wonderful mother was also supposed to be in attendance. I don't think she appeared in the movie, did she? Major bummer.

Or what about the Luthor mansion? I found it's a golden rule that any evil person with a massive mansion almost always has dramatic intruders popping up.

I can still remember watching the ads for Ugly Betty when it premiered ("killer poncho!"/"....thanks!!!"/ *gag*) and thinking I wanted absolutely nothing to do with it. It seemed like an instant televised version of The Devil Wears Prada too soon after that came out in theaters. I didn't really like that movie so I had zero interest... and then I think I saw the episode Fey's Sleigh Ride and got really engrossed in the mystery of the bandaged woman, all the while seriously enjoying the cattiness at Mode and the colorful life of the Suarez family. Suffice it to say I love the show and was happy to be proven wrong. The series was not a copy of that movie in the least - it was about a million times better. I revisit it often. Someone suggested Carnivale to me and I didn't think I would get into it but then I completely did. I'm not so sure why I resisted. I guess it's because Dust Bowl era drama was of no interest to me. Of course now I love the show for all of its attention to detail and era specificity.

I realize it's probably a little suicidal but I think I'd want to live for a summer in Melrose Place. Those apartments were so nineties and comfortable and affordable and there was always interesting stuff happening all around.

Interesting how much hate there is for Stepmom. I have to admit I didn't give that scene much of my attention, because I felt like things were just sort of pouring out of Julia Robert's character in a way that didn't make too much sense, logically speaking. She's blubbering and opening up to a woman who was basically her enemy for a time. It's obviously just written that way so that Susan Sarandon can say what she says and we can all feel like it's a clever moment of bonding. But I agree it doesn't make much sense for Isabel to act as though the bride wanting her actual mother there is some failure on her part. I guess you could kind of see it as Isabel feeling terribly about the fact that she will essentially be a stand-in for the real thing and that she doesn't want to be a stand-in and would much rather her actual mother also still be alive. I haven't watched this scene in a while...does that reading work? It's kind of hard for me to name this one as an example of a scene I hate because I don't hate it - I just think that it's a kind of cheesy way to end what could have been a really good movie. Have any of you seen Saved! ? It is a great premise - a devoutly Catholic girl (Jena Malone) from a very religious high school tries to help her gay boyfriend go straight by sleeping with him only to end up pregnant and hiding it while he is off at one of those infamous pray-the-gay-away camps. The film has plenty of humor and tongue-in-cheek moments but by the end of the story they seem to opt for every cliche happy ending in the book (not that this was based on a book as far as I know). The gay couple shows up defiantly at prom, the pregnant girl goes into labor at prom, the bad girl gets embarrassed at prom and then we all end in the hospital with all of the characters taking a group photo. Here's my beef: I honestly don't believe that the gay couple who have been together for a couple of weeks/months in secret at a camp are going to be together forever. Not realistic in the least which I point out because even if you have a bunch of really nice people in the hospital room after you've given birth, you probably aren't going to want a group photo like it's some kind of field trip with your baby's daddy and his then-boyfriend hanging off of you smiling because there's a big possibility that his first boyfriend is not going to continue to be his boyfriend years down the line when you finally show this picture to the kid when they're full grown. Come on! And then there's the mother of the Jenna Malone character, who spent most the movie completely unaware that her daughter was pregnant. She finally has a bit of a change of heart (not that she was ever a bad mother mind you) and seems super happy, as though there's nothing awkward about being in the hospital and seeing your teenage daughter become a Mom when you've barely had a couple of months to mentally prepare yourself for it. Riiiight. And look - there's her gay baby daddy! Yay! Group hug! And then there's the Patrick Fugit character, who falls in love with the pregnant girl and is super cool and chill and laid back and not at all thrown by the fact that his girlfriend will now be playing Mommy for the rest of her life. Seriously? He's ready for diaper dates? Power to him. It's like they wanted some super happy PC ending but that undercut some of the cleverness earlier in the movie, where they acknowledge that the world is complicated and imperfect and twisted and kind of make fun of that. They basically could have put a big sign at the end that said "And they all lived Happily Ever After!" and it would have felt about as satisfying. Maybe it's just me. Maybe the movie was corny enough to pull off that ending. I'm not saying they have to go with something sad but they didn't have to make it seem like everyone was super great and life was amazing and now everything was better. Especially by pulling out such trite resolutions that can easily be seen in any other teenage Coming of Age movie. On another note, I realize they were taking a different approach in the Nolan Batman movies, but I get super irritated by the fact that they felt they had to explain how the fabric in his cape allowed him to glide. For one thing, he's never really done that in the comics and for another it's one of those things that can't be explained away. It just doesn't make sense and actually diminishes our appreciation for the fantasy world they're trying to immerse us in. I had a similar reaction to the sonic bat vision that they used in the sequel. Some things just don't need explanations. How is it they got that right in the intro for The Animated Series but the big budget movies had to explain it all? I also got really really angry in The Dark Knight at the moment when I realized they were going to make that silly disposable love interest Rachel the reason why Harvey Dent becomes Two-Face. She was very poorly developed and felt so forced into the franchise I was thrilled they were getting rid of her but I definitely didn't want to see he as the motivation for poor old Harvey to become a criminal. And then on top of that they CGI him to look like a burn victim who hasn't received any treatment. How are we supposed to believe this character would have lived for more than 24 hours with his veins and eyeball and stuff exposed like that?! And then I just completely threw my hands up in the air when "Two-Face" fell what looked to be two-and-a-half stories and apparently died, after earlier in the movie Batman fell off a 40-story skyscraper and was completely fine, as was Rachel. I actually sat there for the rest of the movie scratching my head and looking around and basically asking silently "...so he survived that, right?" Because there's no way that the laws of gravity would suddenly apply in that particular situation when they never seemed to otherwise. In short, I'm not a big fan of the Nolan franchise.

Skimmed through Friday's episode and was really aghast at that scene of Brady feeding Tate fries in a diner with his baseball cap pulled down. Dude - what kind of life are you making for your son?!? If Brady really wanted to help Nicole he could have set her up with money and a place to escape to. Deciding he loves her and dragging his poor son along for the ride is stupid to a degree I can not fathom. Sonny can leave the show anytime he wants. No appeal anymore. I can't with Nicole's storyline. Too gross.

Wow - that's exactly it!!! *applauds* I am amazed anybody had any clue what the hell I was talking about. Thank you so much for clearing that up. I had long ago given up on ever figuring it out. You are awesome!

I love Maurice. I know she only gets one line in the entire movie (and it goes uncredited) but the Queen in Sleeping Beauty is, I think, a loving mother. We see so little of her in the film but that moment at the end where she reaches out her arms to embrace her daughter and just tears up says it all to me. I'm not entirely sure that they made the right decision surrendering their child to the three fairies but obviously Maleficent had already gotten into the castle before and could potentially overcome any obstacles Stefan and his army could put up. So I guess they made the right decision, even though it's an odd one, and if you find yourself wondering what kind of mother would surrender her child for 16 years, that moment at the end of the movie just says it all. That scene with the two Kings deciding their children's fate is a bit odd because again the Queen is completely left out of the discussion but I think in a strange way Sleeping Beauty lucked out in the parental department. Hubert looks like he'll be a fun father-in-law and frankly it's one of the few Disney families I can think of that are whole, with a mother and father and even a father-in-law. Plus you have the three good fairies who would be more than happy to lend a hand. (Man, I hate the Maleficent movie.)

Big mistake if true. James Scott is too good in the role. I doubt audiences will accept anybody else.

Love your entire post. I can only take solace in knowing KM wouldn't be able to play a humbled Abigail in this storyline, no matter how much fun it would be to see her get cheated on for a change. There would still be smug in there. And just wait - Jennifer will hang Chad out to dry and try again to steal custody of Thomas if the opportunity presents itself.

I've loathed him since he was cast as the Phantom of the Opera (ugh) but it was really TMZ - during the hot second to that I paid any attention to them - that opened my eyes to how much of a douche he really was in real life. There seemed to be constant reports of him bedding various women and fans and playing Mr. Big Shot. Just gross. I'm kind of glad his film roles have withered away. Did you guys see him in that ancient Egypt fantasy film? It was awful. I'm not a big Jennifer Aniston fan either by any means but when she had to play opposite him in that romcom, she came out looking about a million times better by comparison. I'm not saying she's a bad person, mind you, but rather that I don't think she has much range and she seems really uncomfortable as a celebrity and actress to the point where I wonder why we have to keep seeing her in things. I'm not a big fan of Catherine Zeta-Jones. I don't particularly like her voice and the botox hasn't helped much. I can tolerate her in Chicago, where even I have to admit she did a really good job, but I just haven't seen her in any role that seemed like a natural fit. I couldn't believe they tried to make her and Julia Roberts appear to be sisters in that movie about her being a big Hollywood actress whose life falls apart. They look and sound absolutely nothing alike! And now she's in Feud which really bums me out. I would rather she wasn't in there. And didn't she played Desiree on Broadway in the production of A Little Night Music? I don't really like her singing voice. I did like her however in The Mask of Zorro. I'm also a little put off by Glenn Close now that I know much more about the Sunset Boulevard fiasco of the nineties. She played a very over-the-top Norma Desmond and chewed the scenery and won a Tony Award all the while saying nothing to Patti LuPone, who was basically thrown out like trash by Andrew Lloyd Webber and nearly had a breakdown in the aftermath originating the part in London and being promised the Broadway premiere. I realize it would be considered poking the beast with a stick, but some kind of message from Glenn Close to Patti about wishing her well after being given the Broadway premiere might have be appreciated. And now she's back on Broadway getting great reviews for playing Norma Desmond again...only she's not playing Norma Desmond the way she played it in the nineties. If you're going to bring back the actress who won a Tony Award for her part and she's going to completely change how she plays the part I feel like that's disingenuous. If you go online, you can find a whole video of Betty Buckley in the production - she took on the part after Glenn left - and she played it very differently. Her Norma was sympathetic and human and there's a lot of nuance there in addition to a powerhouse singing voice. I feel like Glen is now cribbing from Betty Buckley's performance with this new take in the revival and that rubs me the wrong way. Maybe she and the new director came about this new take organically, but it just feels to me like no matter how good Glenn Close is, at some point she is screwing someone over when it comes to this show. I'm also not a fan of Shia LaBeouf, Joaquin Phoenix and Christian Bale. I actually liked Bale before he was cast as Batman but nothing he's done since has pleased me.

Maybe it was just the way she was lit or her makeup in the few clips I saw for The Others but she just spooked me out. It's sad to say because she's definitely a beautiful woman but she's very pale and the blonde hair and waxy skin complexion - brought on by Botox or makeup or both - combined to create something really alien-looking that makes me feel uncomfortable. She was so stunning in Batman Forever and in Moulin Rouge. I really wish Hollywood actresses could be allowed to age gracefully instead of opting for plastic surgery out of the fear that mother nature will screw them. I don't think of myself as a shallow person. I will happily watch a movie with an actor who has an asymmetrical face or lots of wrinkles or a recording hairline... but certain things can weird me out, especially when I have to see them in close-up. I'm going to add Quentin Tarantino to that list. His face terrifies me, regardless of whether he's had any work done or not.

Man that livingroom vow renewal looks lame.

Kind of clever of them to team up for a music video that subtly ties into their arc on the show.

If that's the one where she plays the lady of a Victorian house I'm going to have to skip it. She was really starting to get botoxy at that point and I find that really spooky. Ditto with that Wives movie she remade.

I never read the book but wasn't the Don Bluth movie pretty much perfect as it was? I think I read something about Disney considering making The Black Cauldron into a live-action movie which I think it can only be a good thing, provided they draw more from the books than the animated flop. I would really enjoy seeing a film remake of Dreamgirls one day because I just can't get past the Beyonce-ness and over-indulgent tone of the recent movie. I know it probably won't happen for another 30 years - or maybe less given how quick Hollywood is to remake things these days - but I will look forward to it. The story is by no means deep but with great passionate performers, tight choreography and staging it's a crowd-pleaser. Plus I really like the way that they added the song Listen to the stage show as a way four Effie and Deena to reconcile. That would work really well in a movie. I wonder if we will ever get another big screen adaptation of The Phantom of the Opera. I guess it's probably going to be something that's settled after Andrew Lloyd Webber is no longer with us, but the current film version bums me out so badly I can't believe it will be the only official film version in existence. Surely a better one will get made one day. I know Webber really wants to make a Sunset Boulevard movie musical but studio rights have been an issue. If it does get made I would rather not see Glenn Close in the part because I feel like she's gotten way too much praise for her performances (which differ), especially considering the limits of her voice and the way she just does not resemble a silent film actress. I wonder who would make a good Norma Desmond in a film version given the need to cast a star audiences will be familiar with. I think Barbra Streisand's name was being thrown around at one point but then again she seems pretty focused on trying to make Gypsy even though she's aged out of the role of Mama Rose. Was there ever a remake of Midnight in London? It's a famously lost film and I feel like studios would have capitalized on that by making a new version at some point... I have a sneaky suspicion that at some point they're going to make a Golden Girls movie. It would obviously have to star some big names like Meryl Streep or Susan Sarandon, but I can't imagine studios being above capitalizing on people's love for that brilliant TV show, regardless of the outcome. A reboot of The Rocketeer would be really interesting, especially if they could successfully turn it into a franchise.

I know I saw the original Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles live action movie when it came out and enjoyed it at the time. I've never watched it since. Does it hold up? I saw the he 2nd Turtles sequel that just came out a year or so ago and thought it was okay. I just don't know that anything will ever capture the fun of the original animated series. Maybe this is one of those concepts that doesn't really work best in live action. I will be very interested to see whatever becomes of He-Man in live action. I think there's a lot of ways it could go wrong but the premise has a lot of potential. I just hope they keep the magic and character relationships from the animated series intact.