Showbits

Dear faithful readers: Hiphopguy23 has finally finished watching all the movies he wanted to see that were released in 2007. Therefore, Hiphopguy23 would like to issue some updates to his 2007 Best Movie Awards.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Sadly, nothing has changed. There weren't any stand-out supporting actresses so Hiphopguy23 is going to give the award to Cheryl Hines in Waitress. Waitress is a very well acted movie and the award could just have easily been given to the late Adrienne Shelley, but Cheryl Hines was just a wee bit more memorable.

BEST DOCUMENTARY: The King of Kong. This one isn't even close. This is an absolutely astounding documentary, with heroes and villians for you to root for. Never mind the claims that the documentarians "fudged" with the truth. Watch this movie for the entertainment factor. Also, you do not need to be a fan of video games at all to appreciate this movie.

WORST MOVIE: Across the Universe. Yikes, was this movie a disaster. Hiphopguy23 figured, "The Beatles are enjoyable. How could a movie featuring their songs go wrong?" It turns out that you need to be a tremendous fan of the Beatles to even remotely enjoy this movie. The filmmakers picked the most unpopular B-side "hits" to fill out the soundtrack, and there are constant references to obscure lyrics and callbacks to the horrid Beatles movies, none of which Hiphopguy23 has seen. All of this occurs in the most unstructured free-flowing mess of a "plot". Not even a special appearance by Bono could save this train wreck. Hiphopguy23 is curious to hear if any die-hard Beatlemaniac enjoyed this movie, because that seems to be the only audience.

BEST DIRECTOR: David Yates (Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix). Finally, a Harry Potter movie that works! Yates abandoned the "feel-good" vibe of the first two movies and wisely disregarded the "trendy teenager" motif of the third movie. The fourth movie was also too colorful and upbeat for this stage in Harry's life. Yates picks a dark, sinister direction that is very real and very true to life. This movie plays less like a crowd-pleaser and more as a twisted look into the good (and bad) that takes place at Hogwart's. This is the first Harry Potter movie that is better — yes, better — than the corresponding novel.

None of the other awards have changed, so in conclusion, Hiphopguy23 will give his top five recommendations:

1. 300
   
2. Enchanted
   
3. Juno
   
4. Waitress
   
5. The King of Kong
   

HONORABLE MENTION: Balls of Fury — but only if you prefer your comedy very slapstick.

Harry Potter's sixth of seven books will release to theaters this November 21st — but it will not be his penultimate movie.

CNN reports that the series' conclusion, The Deathly Hallows, will be divided across two films. "Unlike every other book, you cannot remove elements of this book," said producer David Heyman. The article also states that "the two final Potter films will be shot concurrently… The first film is slated for release in November 2010, with part two following in May 2011."

Right — because such a release schedule worked so well for The Matrix sequels. Here's an idea: how about the director cut from the middle of the book the hundreds of pages of pointless, inert camping? It didn't make for riveting storytelling in print; now imagine as their tenting explodes across the screen! Sheesh.

I don't approve of how The Golden Compass ended prematurely compared to the book. I hope Rowling's work doesn't suffer a similar ignominy.

The Half-Blood Prince was the only Harry Potter book that left me looking forward to the sequel. But before I take that step forward this coming weekend, I took a step back and watched the film adaptation of the series' most boring entry, The Order of the Phoenix.

The movie's opening is fashioned after one of the novels' most lamentable traits: a complete lack of introduction or context. Anyone who is just a casual fan of the series — that is, those who read the books only once each — will have trouble recognizing Dudley Dursley or Nymphadora Tonks in the opening scenes. Indeed, many characters' roles have been reduced, Potter's love interest is of little note, and the titular Order is rarely seen or referenced.

Most disappointing than these cuts, necessary to adapt this behemoth of a book to film, is that the parts cut were the parts I liked. Ginny Weasley speaks not a single word in the entire film, whereas in the novel, she provided a helpful connection between Potter's current dilemma and the one she faced in The Chamber of Secrets. Potter's hesitancy to pursue lessons with Snape is absent, yet that motivation is vital to understand the depth of Voldemort's manipulation. And though we know the Dark Lord is seeking a weapon, but the movie never solidifies what the weapon is, or its value and implications (including to Neville Longbottom and Professor Trelawney).

The Potter films often serve as a useful refresher to anyone who hasn't memorized the source material, and in this case, I was hoping to be satisfied by the movie in a way I wasn't by the book. Though the film was well-acted and had some nifty special effects, its lack of detail — or rather, its choice of detail — left me hoping the silver screen has not overwritten my memories of the original text.

C. S. Lewis's Prince Caspian, the second book in the Chronicles of Narnia, will be adapted to the silver screen in time for a May 16th, 2008 release, say the IMDb and Wikipedia.

I learned of this upcoming film only from an offhand comment in a completely unrelated blog post. I'm surprised only that I haven't heard more news about it, not that it's in development: with every Harry Potter book making its way to Hollywood, to tap only the first entry in Lewis' classic fantasy series without considering its sequels would've been unnatural. But I'm concerned at the rate of adaptation. The Potter books progressed rather rapidly, with only 18 months or so between each release. There's twice that between the first two Narnia films, which is a long time for its young cast (which is indeed returning for the sequel) to grow up. Kids age faster than adults, if you know what I mean, so I wonder how long this cast will be feasible. OTOH, the cast of the Narnia books is more mutable than the Potter novels. Future sequels will not contain the same characters, so without resorting to recasting, they can still cycle in fresh, young faces as the series progresses.

It's something to look forward to — as if next month's Potter plethora weren't enough. Which series do you prefer?

Seeing as how the Oscars are to be presented tonight, I thought it time to stop looking backward to the best (and worst) of 2006, and have plotted my moviegoing for 2007. The pickings are slimmer than I thought.

Movies I want to see this year:

Spider-Man 3 (May 4th)
The Transformers (July 4th)
Harry Potter (July 13th)

Movies I wouldn't mind seeing:

Ghost Rider (now playing)
The Astronaut Farmer (now playing)
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (March 23rd)
Shrek 3 (May 18th)
Sin City 2 (September?)

Movies that I can't believe they're making out of TV shows, whether or not they'll be out this year:

The A-Team
Get Smart
I Dream of Jeannie
Land of the Lost
Love Boat

Or video games:

Dead or Alive (June 22nd)
Prince of Persia
Soul Calibur

Or other franchises:

Hot Wheels
Jurassic Park IV
Underdog

What about you — what looks hot, or has you bothered, in 2007?