Podcast: Best Films of the Decade (pt. 3 of 3)

We conclude our “Best of the Decade” talk with the top 10 lists of Matt Fickel, Cody Franklin, and Jeff Ayala. Will Fickel put “Tetro” on his list? Will there be a ‘Shotgun Stories’ in Jerf’s future? How many more times does ‘There Will Be Blood’ Appear? Tim Sigur makes an appearance by email and our own beloved Reverend Renke delivers a spiritual message to us after the discussion, so besure and stay tuned all the way through. Enjoy.

Click the player below to listen, you can also find the show here

Become a fan on facebook and follow us on twitter

Subscribe on iTunes and the Zune Marketplace.

email us at doomsdaypodcast@gmail.com

The Inception debate (podcast)

It looks like Inception is receiving more controversy than it deserves, not so much over the content of the movie, but of its seemingly overrated status by the fanboys. Some of us feel like the audiences of today have forgotten what good cinema used to be like, while others feel that Christopher Nolan has broken the mold and reinvented the motion picture. There is absolutely no one in this argument that thinks the film or the filmmaker is lacking in quality or skill. Inception is a perfect balance between every technical and aesthetic element that makes a good movie, and Nolan is without a doubt one of the best directors working today. However, the topic at hand has summoned an emergency meeting of war room officials and now we invite you to join the debate.

Click the player below to listen, if player hasn't updated yet, click here.

Visit our facebook page.

Subscribe on iTunes.

email us at doomsdaypodcast@gmail.com

Powered by Podbean.com

Sleep on it

Within the last decade, there has been a tectonic shift in the quality of filmed storytelling. The film business has always been just that, a business, I get it, but there have always been writers/directors/producers who have had passion for the medium and always wanted to create a true art form. Now, for the most part these people have found a larger home in the one place we (the film snobs of the world) have always considered a second-rate medium, television. This shift has left much more to be desired when we go to the theater, because most of the films released today are aimed at thirteen-year-olds. It seems that literally, once in a blue moon we are treated to a carefully crafted story, rather than the usual carefully marketed product.

That elusive moon has risen with the release of Inception. Christopher Nolan and company have, once again, produced nothing short of a quality film. Nolan is one of the coveted few whose attention to detail yeilds not only great stories, but brilliant looking images, especially in the special effects department. We, as an audience, have grown accustomed to watching entire scenes built in a computer and it's a breath of fresh air to see a filmmaker use gimbals and wires rather than a team of CG artists for once. I can only hope the success of his last two films can only inspire the studio system to bring a few more technically savvy and thought-provoking stories to the table more frequently.

I do get a little concerned sometimes when a movie of this caliber is released. Not for the film itself, but for the audience. I feel like sometimes our cinematic blue balls are aching so much for quality, that when we finally see it, our pants explode. I've heard a little too much talk over the past couple of years about certain films being amongst “the best of all time.” Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they're bad, I'm just suggesting you give it some time before making that decision and let it digest for a few months. Even if you saw it nine times on opening weekend, good for you, you're a winner, but come see me next year when you've had time to examine it for yourself and not see it just for the sake of bragging rights. Inception is a very good film, but not a perfect, 10 out of 10. Best of the year? Sure.....so far. Amongst the best of all time? Ask me next summer.

Reinvention and Revival

(Spoilers ahead) I've been a 'Star Trek' fan for many years now, and have been cautiously optimistic about this weekend's release. After my first viewing, I would have to classify it somewhere between “OK” and “Good”, but let's begin with the bad. Scott, you were right about one thing, and somewhere in the back of my mind I knew everyone would to use their catch phrases at least once in the film, but I was hoping they wouldn't overdo it. Yes, it did happen, but it wasn't obscene. Now hearing McCoy ask Spock if he was “out of his Vulcan mind” annoyed me because we have already heard this line uttered in 'Star Trek II' (One of many parallels I feel the filmmakers tried to force in this movie). So that aside, I guess I can live with the other obligatory phrases, even though they did make me twitch with frustration.

Another element that irritates me happens with about 90% of major films released these days, and that is the lack of development. No one takes their time anymore in developing characters and scenes. This could have been the perfect movie to introduce and develop every character in their respective elements. This is a story of origins and should have been allowed to take it's time. They could have concentrated more on the Starfleet days and had them all wind up serving on the ship in the end and guess what...It would have been great....but no, we've got to get to the action as fast as we can, plus we've got some CG to show off. But, as my experience watching movies has taught me, this was also to be expected, so I fight through it and take out what's left for me.

Perhaps the biggest offender of this movie, though, and the one I will not accept as having had to be there, was the casting of Leonard Nimoy as “future Spock”. This in no way gave any credibility to the story, nor did it make any sense. It's so forced that they couldn't even give a better reason for present day Kirk bumping into him on a remote planet by accident. Guest appearances are something that should be reserved for the series only. Hell, 'The Next Generation' featured almost all the original cast at one point or another. But for the movies, I think we should be able to rise above the mere charm of having an original cast member in it. If you have to put Nimoy in the movie, why not cast him as Sarek?

OK, so what was good about it? First of all, I think the entire cast was stellar. I was really pleased by everyones performances, especially since we weren't subjected to two hours of straight character impressions. Karl Urban came close with his Dr. McCoy, but I actually found him to be a pleasant surprise in this movie and thought he did a great job. I thought Chris Pine was excellent and delivered a young Kirk as well as anyone could. As far as the actual characters, I felt Sulu and Checkov were the weakest. They were just kind of there for the sake of introducing us to the rest of the regular cast. Sorry, we're focusing on the positive now so I won't get into Checkov not even being in the first season.

Overall, I have to say the story was pretty damn good. The “future Spock” element aside, I never found myself shaking my head in disappointment, which has become habit for me after virtually all of the “Next Generation” movies. In fact, there was a point for me after the destruction of Vulcan and the death of Spock's mother that I almost was in disbelief. Why were they re-writing our beloved Star Trek history? And then it made sense, the story itself was re-writing history and doing it effectively. It was a brilliant way to weave a new story into old fabric and therefore reinvent the saga. It worked. Although, I could have done without the “Back to the Future” explanation of timelines to the audience. I sometimes cringe at using a word like “fun” to describe a movie, but I did have a lot of fun with this one and would like to see it again. Could it have been better? Absolutely. But since the bar for Star Trek movies has been lowered so much over the years, it was nice to see one that delivered a story worthy of being a full length movie and not just a glorified, two-hour episode.