Bryce Zabel's FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH

Guys and Molls

Check out Sherry Coben's latest Movie Smackdown! between "Public Enemies" and "Bonnie and Clyde." Guns, women, fast cars and cool sunglasses. Beatty versus Depp. Did we mention the cool sunglasses?

UFOs or SETI: What FIRST CONTACT w/ E.T. Really Looks Like

"When Visitors Come to Call" originally posted on Movie Smackdown!

 Contact (1997) -vs- Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) 

The Smackdown. If you're old enough to remember the marketing campaign for "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," then you'll remember the goosebumps you got when you heard the phrase, We are not alone.  What was great about that simple sentence was that it promised a movie about aliens that was about wonder and mystery and wasn't about the same old Hollywood treatment of life in the universe, namely that if it bothered to interact with humans it was for a nefarious reason, everything from "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" to "War of the Worlds" to the later "Independence Day."   Twenty years after "Close Encounters" came another film that promised to make first contact a matter of humanity's growth out of the cradle and not some intergalactic cage match. Both "Close Encounters" and "Contact" were aliens for smart people brought to you first by the immense talent of Steven Spielberg and later by the immense intellect of Carl Sagan.  In my Hollywood career, I've had the good fortune to discuss UFOs and extraterrestrial life with both of these men and found them to have some very different visions of the subject.  They each have used film to express their views about life as it might exist "out there."  The question is, which version comes closest to what might be the truth about first contact, and which one is the better film?

The Challenger. "Contact" (the movie) directed by Robert Zemeckis is a faithful film adaption of Contact (the novel) written by Carl Sagan.  In both tellings, radio astronomer Dr. Ellie Arroway (Jodie Foster in the film) hits the cosmic jackpot when the giant radio telescopes that are part of S.E.T.I. (Search for Extra-terrestrial Intelligence) actually turn up a non-random signal from across the universe.  Someone is talking to us or, more accurately, talking back.  You see, they've picked up the very first television transmission the Earth ever leaked outward, amped it up and sent it back to us.  It's an excellent surprise and -- without spoiling it -- let's just say that the first TV signal that went out from Earth is, well, unexpected.  After that, the story kicks into where no film has really gone before.  There's another signal buried in that TV re-transmission that is, basically, the blueprints for building a gigantic spacecraft... for one person!  Well, if there was ever a situation designed to stretch our humanity to the breaking point, it would be trying to determine who's going to be that lucky (or, in failure, unlucky) person.  Where will they go?  Will they ever return?  Will they die?  Is it some kind of trick?

Up, Up and Away!

Stephen Bell is a regular contributor on Movie Smackdown!

 Up (2009) -vs- Wall-E (2008) 

The Smackdown.  A year ago on this very site, a small, garbage-collecting robot named "Wall-E" dethroned the king of computer animation, Pixar's beloved "Toy Story." The film found gigantic success, being hailed by critics, winning the Academy Award for best animated feature and receiving a nomination for Best Screenplay. "Wall-E" transformed the genre and pushed the limits of innovation and creativity. Now, a year after its historical upset, "Wall-E" stands ready to defend its title against the newest of Pixar's animated giants, the high-flying adventure story "Up." Headlining opening night of the Cannes Film Festival, a feat never before accomplished by an animated feature (let alone an American one,) "Up" and its cast of elderly men, children and talking dogs (you heard me) have entered the world of cinema at full steam, their focus fixed solely on taking our favorite robot's crown. Will "Wall-E" have enough strength to put down its first challenger, or will his reign prove a short one? Let's find out!

The Challenger.  "Up" tells the story of Carl Fredricksen, an elderly balloon vendor who once dreamt of adventure with his wife Ellie, but now resigns himself to sitting on his front porch while the world moves on around him. In order to keep a promise he had made to his Ellie a lifetime ago, Carl decides to leave the world behind and relocate their home to the mythical Paradise Falls in Venezuela, the last known origins of Carl and Ellie's childhood hero, adventurer Charles Muntz. His plan - to lift their home out if its foundation by thousands of colorful balloons and sail through the heavens to his Paradise Falls. However, what Carl doesn't plan for is to accidentally take Russell, an energetic young boy scout, with him on his adventure. Nor does he plan to be thrown into the middle of a battle for a mysterious giant bird known as "Kevin," a conflict that has the potential to jeopardize his promise to Ellie.

The Losing Case of Benjamin Button?

Tom O'Neil can be read regularly on the LA Times Gold Derby

In our video chat with Associated Press reporter Christy Lemire, she mentioned something truly curious -- the possibility that the movie that leads with the most nominations at the Oscars, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," could lost all 13 bids.

If that happened, it would surpass the two films currently tied for suffering the worstOscars shut-out when they lost all 11 nominations: "The Turning Point" (1977) and "The Color Purple" (1985).

But don't fret, "Button" fans. While "Slumdog Millionaire" seems to be top dog in the leading categories, "Button" is the front-runner in a few tech races.

BEST ART DIRECTION
"Curious Case of Benjamin Button" won the Art Directors Guild Award, which makes it the leader here, but so did "The Dark Knight." That's because the guild has separate categories for period films ("Button") and fantasy ("Dark Knight"). However, when other co-winners battled at the Oscars in the past, period films usually prevailed, probably because voters consider "art" in this category name in a high-brow way. "The Duchess" may be a serious contender here because it also, by its very title and look, seems artsy.

BEST MAKEUP 
Theoretically, "Hellboy II" has hope to win because popcorn pix like "Chronicles of Narnia" sometimes prevail, but it's only got a snowball's chance in you-know-where because "Hellboy" a horror flick.

Tom O'Neil can be read regularly on the LA Times Gold Derby

In our video chat with Associated Press reporter Christy Lemire, she mentioned something truly curious -- the possibility that the movie that leads with the most nominations at the Oscars, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," could lost all 13 bids.

If that happened, it would surpass the two films currently tied for suffering the worstOscars shut-out when they lost all 11 nominations: "The Turning Point" (1977) and "The Color Purple" (1985).

But don't fret, "Button" fans. While "Slumdog Millionaire" seems to be top dog in the leading categories, "Button" is the front-runner in a few tech races.

BEST ART DIRECTION
"Curious Case of Benjamin Button" won the Art Directors Guild Award, which makes it the leader here, but so did "The Dark Knight." That's because the guild has separate categories for period films ("Button") and fantasy ("Dark Knight"). However, when other co-winners battled at the Oscars in the past, period films usually prevailed, probably because voters consider "art" in this category name in a high-brow way. "The Duchess" may be a serious contender here because it also, by its very title and look, seems artsy.

BEST MAKEUP 
Theoretically, "Hellboy II" has hope to win because popcorn pix like "Chronicles of Narnia" sometimes prevail, but it's only got a snowball's chance in you-know-where because "Hellboy" a horror flick.

"The Reader" Should be Oscar's BEST PICTURE and Here's Why

Who Does It Reflect? Pollack/Minghella -vs- Rudin/Weinstein

This is an original essay by Movie Smackdown! contributor Joe Rassulo

One always wonders, at least in the business of making films, how much difference a Producer makes if film is ultimately a director’s medium and ultimately a writer’s descent into hell. We have an interesting case at this year’s Oscars.

No one truly expected “The Reader” to snag one of the best picture nominations.  It has not been an overwhelming critical favorite or a significant audience favorite. It is, however, the only movie on the list we haven’t seen before, that disturbs us deeply as we struggle with its moral ambiguity. And it continues to slowly earn its praise and its viewers because of that. With help, of course, from Kate Winslet’s amazing ability to make so unlikable a character burrow so deeply under our skin until we see ourselves in her, like it or not.

The tragedy that has struck this film historically is now renown. Its two producers, industry giants Sydney Pollack and Anthony Minghella, both died before the film was completed or released. They were the duo that shepherded this film and all its components into being. It was their sensibilities, their talent, their perseverance, and their belief in the talent assembled (including  director Daldry and writer Hare) to bring an uncompromising, unusual, and unforgettable film to all of us.

Movie Smackdown presents. . . NEW YEAR'S EVE AT THE MOVIES

That clock is counting down to New Year's Eve but there's still time to watch a film or two to get in the mood. We have two Smackdowns for you over at MOVIE SMACKDOWN! -- that's a whopping four films, all with something to do with New Year's Eve.

Our Oregon-based SmackRef, Mark Sanchez dives into a couple of romantic comedies that both have scenes bringing in the New Year in his Smack, Bridget Jones's Diary (2001) -vs- When Harry Met Sally (1989). Plus, as an added bonus, it's a chance to remember one of the most famous scenes on film, the time when Megan Ryan fakes a, well, you remember...

Meanwhile, down here in Hollywood, Sherry Coben takes us back to New Year's Eve 1959 with her Smack, Diner (1982) -vs- The Apartment (1960). That's right, both of these films go back to a simpler New Year's and it's a trip down memory lane that's not to be missed.

It's been a busy month over at the Smack. We have film-on-film competition with almost all of today's films like Slumdog Millionaire, The Reader, Frost/Nixon, Revolutionary Road, Valkyrie, Milk, Defiance, Marley & Me, The Wrestler, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Twilight, Doubt and Gran Torino. It's your last chance to check it out this year!

To see an entire site devoted to Movie Smackdown Comix! like above, go to www.MovieSmackdown.tv.

MOVIE SMACKDOWN! - Two Reviews... One Film... No Holds Barred!

Getting Smacked Around Good

A good film review ought to be as entertaining as the film that inspired it. 

That's the 'high concept' behind our  Movie Smackdown! site -- a whole new format in film reviews.  While For What It's Worth takes a short Thanksgiving holiday, we want to introduce you what's going on over at www.moviesmackdown.com.

Others have tried adding a bell here and a whistle there to sizzle things up in movie criticism.  First there were stars.  You got a lot or a little.  Then there were thumbs.  They were up or down.  Old School.  One note.

We're talking film reviews that have winners and losers.

That's right.  Film review as a contact sport.

Movie Smackdown! gives readers the suspense and drama of authentic film-on-film competition.  It's based on the way people watch and talk about movies these days.

We constantly compare films we've just seen with other films, right?  We'll have passionate arguments about which was better.  Sometimes, disappointed, we'll even wonder if we should have stayed home -- saved the parking and popcorn -- and watched a new Blu-ray.

Like any blockbuster, Movie Smackdown! has a "high concept."  Ours is as clean and simple as this:

Two Films -- One Review -- No Holds Barred!

Each review is a two-fer:  usually a film that's out in the theaters goes in the ring with a competitive film that's easily seen on DVD.  They each share something, anything from a theme to a director.

Every review or "Smack" breaks down like a real fight into these sections:

• THE SMACKDOWN. This section explains why the two films are being put in competition against each other.
• THE CHALLENGER. This is our newest film, the one that has just been released in theaters or on DVD or, in the case of a classic, the most recent film.
• THE DEFENDING CHAMPION. The classic film that the first film is compared to is our champion.
• THE SCORECARD. This is the section where we compare each film's strengths and/or weaknesses.
• THE DECISION. We don't allow ties. We always declare a winner.

Times have been tough lately for the mainstream media's newspaper critics.  They've been losing jobs at the same pace as the auto industry.  The problem seems to be that people don't feel they need an established critic to tell them how to feel about a film and, if they do, they'll probably ask a trusted friend or look at a favorite blog or check out the official film site.  Like so many other things today, consumers have options.

But the disconnect between audience and reviewer must be more complicated than that.  After all, why would a piece of media content that talks about movies when people are going to movies as much as ever be unpopular? 

My opinion's that film reviews, as they're done in print and on-air, are predictable.  It's like a high school essay.  Explain what the film's about, tell why you liked it or didn't, and conclude.  My high schooler's writing one now for his film class.  Been there, done that.

So we think it goes back to format.  The ways that reviews have always worked has gotten old and stale and hasn't kept up with today's audiences. 

Our way of doing things takes into account the burgeoning home viewing market and the competitive frenzy that chasing box office has created.  Then it presents itself in a breezy and fun format (film-on-film competition) that is, in its own right, a piece of entertainment.

MOVIE SMACKDOWN! will, hopefully, become more than a blog.  It was conceived to be a versatile concept that can be expressed in a cross-platform way.  It's both written and visual, and it's something that works as a blog, a TV series, mobile content and regular entertainment column.  That's the vision for it.  The end of 2008 wraps up a planned three-year "proof-of-concept" stage where ideas and forms have been tested and developed, low-risk, on this blog.   

FROM THE EDITOR:  Bryce Zabel

MOVIE SMACKDOWN! started as a one man effort and has grown to where we now feature the work of 17 different "SmackRefs" (as we like to call them).

Our SmackRefs are a diverse group of voices, men and women, old and young, in the biz and not.  Everybody writes in the same format, but you'd be surprised how versatile it is and open to creative riffs. Besides Bryce, three other strong voices can be found regularly on this site these days:  Mark Sanchez, Sherry Coben and Beau DeMayo. 

We also hear from a dozen others: Jay Amicarella, Scott Baradell, Stephen Bell, Randal Cohen, Sarah Harding, Sloane Hayes Skala, Bob Nowotny, Joe Rassulo, Lak Rana, Lorianne Tibbets, Tyger Torrez, Jonathan Zabel and Lauren Zabel. You can read about all our SmackRefs on The Critics bio page and finds links to their specific work.

There's also a vibrant visual style, all over the site and within the reviews themselves.  Designer Nancy Tokos of Tokos Design Associates is responsible for the incredible banners we've tried on so far.  These days we're going with Nancy's take on the pop-art look. 

You'll also notice that each film we review also comes with a captioned photo.  We call these our Movie Smackdown "Comix."  Armed only with an iMac, some Comic Life Magiq software and a serious authority issue, we take common publicity stills and present them in a way that you can't get anywhere else.  Then we also collect them on a special iWeb created-site where you can download them to send them around to friends (they're protected as "fair use" because of their critical commentary) and where they're collected in "albums" that can play as a pretty cool slide-show.  You really should check this out.  Because it's graphic intensive and we offer these photos in high quality, these pages load a little more slowly than, say, the blog, but we think they're worth the few seconds wait.

We've done over 300 reviews (or "Smacks") so far.  There's a Google Search box in the right sidebar that indexes only the Movie Smackdown! site.  Type in the name of a film you're interested and you might find we've already taken a crack at it.  Please write your own comments, too.  We like the feedback and, frankly, we might be wrong in our decision(s), so fire away.

You'll also find a number of polls where you can make your own decision on a Smack, especially on some of the newer reviews.  Many of these polls have hundreds of responses already.  Some of them are more lop-sided than you'd think and a few of them are nearly dead even.

Responding to that point-of-view, in 2008, AMC even named Movie Smackdown! its "Site of the Week."  They responded to our tone that we try to shed a little light but not take things too seriously either.

Movie Smackdown also happens to be a registered service mark with the U.S. government.  Accept no substitutes!

Over on the left side-bar at the top, you'll find two ways to get MOVIE SMACKDOWN! on feeds.  Come join us!

Let the million or so other film critics out there do it the old fashioned way -- one movie at a time. We’ll do it the new way.

Two films for the price of one!

The Godfather (1972) -vs- The Godfather, Part II (1974)

Vote in the Great Godfather Smackdown: An Offer You Can't Refuse...

The Smackdown.  By now it's all become a part of our collective cultural memory -- the horse's head showing up in the bed, making an "offer he can't refuse" and that haunting score by Nino Rota.  Imagine being in the theaters though, almost four decades ago when the original "The Godfather" was in release back in 1972. For years new viewers of the Godfather Trilogy were exposed to either increasingly degraded theatrical prints or VHS or DVD copies that were, in many cases, even worse.  For the past two years, though, Francis Ford Coppola and a small army of digital restoration experts have been at work reclaiming the golden glory for high-definition Blu-ray, standard DVD and even a few more theatrical prints out in some major cities.  It's not the purpose of this Smackdown to lay out that process but if you want to know more about "The Godfather: The Coppola Restoration," there have been some excellent articles including The New York Times and Slate Magazine.

What is most astonishing about "The Godfather" which won the 1972 Oscar for "Best Picture" is that two years later "The Godfather, Part II" also won the Oscar for "Best Picture."  This pretty much qualifies the second film as the unquestioned best sequel of all-time.  And, of course, it triggers a Smackdown to find out which of these two extraordinary films is the best.  We'll give them our usual treatment but, unusually, we'll let a number of our critics weigh in with their own analysis and then, at the end of this review, you can put in your own two cents by voting in our Smack-Poll.  Also, if you're up for it, we'd love for you to leave a comment that describes the circumstances where you first saw "The Godfather."

The Defending Champion.  If you think about it now, the "Godfather" films are the modern world's version of those Shakespeare plays about kings and princes.  This is the film where Vito Corleone, the aging Don of a powerful Mafia family hands off the power, reluctantly, to his youngest son Michael, delivering one of the saddest lines in cinema, "Michael, I never wanted this for you."  Al Pacino's Michael Corleone is one of the greatest acting performances on screen ever and his transformation from shy son to ruthless criminal makes you forgive any of the actor's excesses over the years.  The film opens on a wedding where Michael has returned from World War II just in time to see his sister Connie get married. All of the men in Michael's family are involved with the Mafia and it's assumed that the older brothers will handle the criminal duties while Michael lives a legit and decent life. It's truly the story of the family but the engine that drives the action is about a drug dealer Virgil Sollozzo who wants Don Corleone (Marlon Brandon) to go into the drug trade with him.  Corleone refuses, gets shot by hit men, barely survives.  This opens the door for his son to begin a violent mob war against Sollozzo that changes him and his family forever.  It's the story of the old ways surrendering, violently, to the new ways.  You probably know all this.  Beautifully photographed, scored, directed, written.  Most people have it on their Top Ten lists and more than a few place it as #1. 

Movie Smackdown Comix presents... THE GREAT DEPRESSION

While the world today is transfixed by the impending bailout caused by scammers who put us on a path to economic meltdown, this current crisis is a Movie Smackdown "opportunity."

In a new review, both "Paper Moon" and "The Sting" are put in the the Smackdown ring because they're about scammers who did their best work after the arrival of the Great Depression. 

To read our full review of that Economic Meltdown Smack, go to Paper Moon -vs- The Sting. 

To see an entire site devoted to Movie Smackdown Comix! like above, go to www.MovieSmackdown.tv.

MOVIE SMACKDOWN! - Two Reviews... One Film... No Holds Barred!

Review and Comix by Bryce Zabel.

Movie Smackdown Comix presents... COOL HAND LUKE

In the wake of Paul Newman's death, it's truly amazing to see the number of bloggers who chose to refer to him in their writing as "Cool Hand Luke."  The name and the persona just stuck with Newman over the years. 

To read our full review of that film, go to Cool Hand Luke -vs- One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. 

MOVIE SMACKDOWN! - Two Reviews... One Film... No Holds Barred!

Review by Jay Amicarella.  Comix by Bryce Zabel.