Back for another cup of coffee?

As many of my friends and colleagues know, I have a pathological hatred of the remake, the "time-honored" method of taking the core elements of a previously made movie or TV show and reviving it as an newly produced entity. The reasons for this are simple enough - remakes, for the most part, blow. They do nothing to enhance the enjoyment of the original and quite often send audiences running toward the hills and away from the screen, much of the time throwing off profanities in the process. Yes, I am not naive enough to think that every remake every made has been a worthless pile of civet cat excrement (minus the aromatic coffee, of course). But for every 3:10 to Yuma, there are least a dozen All the King's Men. Maybe a thousand. It's hard to keep track in a Hollywood that increasingly reaches for the past instead of, oh, trying to create something new and different. So you will forgive me if I'm not in a tizzy over the forthcoming remake of the 1951 sci-fi classic The Day The Earth Stood Still, starring no less than Keanu Reeves in the pivotal role of the mysterious alien Klaatu. ("Klaatu barada nikto, dude!")

"That's fine, Dave," you may ask, "but what about sequels?" "Good question," I would respond. Sequels are in a different category, as they are usually a continuation of a story previous told. And many a sequel has improved on the original, or at least been up to the standards of the first, whatever those standards were. The Godfather, Part II, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, The Dark Knight - just three examples of a follow-up to an acclaimed movie achieving its own level of excellent. (The first two actually won Oscars for Best Picture, while the latter may be up for its own Academy Awards if the cards fall in place.) Still, there are many sequels that also, well, blow, meaning that there is still something of a dread that comes into my movie-loving heart whenever a "Part II" or such is announced.

This all comes up because of an article in the New York Post this morning which reported that Kevin Costner, Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins are in talks to reprise their roles in a sequel to the popular 1988 baseball romantic comedy Bull Durham. According to the Post, the film would have Sarandon and Robbins' characers, baseball groupie Annie Savoy and hotshot pitcher Nuke LaLoosh, now married, apparently wealthy and co-owning a big-league franchise that is managed by Costner's "Crash" Davis. Now, the sequel will reportedly be written and directed by Ron Shelton, who did the same for the first. And on the surface, the plotline sounds plausible, as many a minor-league catcher has gone on to manage in The Show in the real world. But a sequel? To one of the best baseball movies ever made? Twenty-plus years later.

Oh, well, I guess the proof will be in the celluloid. Besides, I was so fearful of the Sex and the City sequel until I finally saw it. Just don't have Tim Robbins wearing women's lingerie again.

The Dark Knight: "This movie kills ass. Hard."

More than two weeks ago, I became one of the first people in Los Angeles to see The Dark Knight in its completed form. I held back my impressions of the movie, at least to the general public, lest I get busted by anyone at Warner Bros. for jumping the gun - though that didn't stop the likes of Rolling Stone. And now that we're less than 48 hours from the megarelease and every outlet has expressed their opinion about Knight, I risk looking like a sycophant in revealing my feelings about the film. So call me a copycat for saying what's true - because this movie kicks ass. Hard.

And it's not just because of the presence of Heath Ledger as the Joker, though that's a large, large chunk of the movie's overall success. Ledger, whose acting talents obviously were no secret going on, is a revelation as this maniacal, malevolent evil doer who is literally capable of doing anything and everything for no other reason that he can, so he does. There is no trace here of Ennis del Mar or Ned Kelly or any of the other characters he played during his brief career. Indeed, there's no trace of Heath Ledger. When you forget that you're watching an actor play a role, the job has been done. All of the Oscar talk revolving around Ledger is more than true - it's a rock-solid guarantee that he will be among the final five up for Supporting Actor when the nominations are announced exactly one year after his death. (Ledger is so excellent that to watch him as the Joker is almost as heartbreaking as it is exhilarating, for obvious reasons.)

There's much, more to enjoy than just Ledger, though. All of the acting is top-notch, particularly Christian Bale as the tormented Caped Crusader; Michael Caine as his wry and wise butler, Alfred; and Aaron Eckhart as "white knight" district attorney Harvey Dent, who brings a whole new meaning to the term "split personality" when he is transformed into Two-Face with an assist from the Joke. Eckhart brings a different vision to the Two-Face character, but one that is just as chilling as the original. And the story woven by director Christopher Nolan and his brother Jonathan is dense with material and character development, along with some action set pieces that are all the more enthralling because of Nolan's use of IMAX cameras for about 20 minutes of the film, the first use of that technology in a mainstream feature film. The IMAX images do make a difference, even when seen on a standard screen. And the cinematography by Wally Pfister, which takes great advantage of Knight's locations in Chicago (and, in one sequence, Hong Kong), should net him a Oscar nod to go along with the one he received for Batman Begins in 2005. (That Batpod is killer, by the way.)

Overall, Nolan has created, if not a complete masterpiece, about as close as you can get to one. The Dark Knight is not just a great comic-book yarn or summer action movie; it is a superlative crime drama in the tradition of something that Martin Scorsese or Francis Ford Coppola would create in their primes. The only drawback - besides a lengthy running time that could interfere with Knight's chances of reeling in the highest-grossing non-holiday opening weekend of all time - is that it may set the bar too high for forthcoming superheroes flicks, including the inevitable third entry in Nolan's Batman trilogy.

Now go forth and see this film. Good luck getting a ticket, though!

Note: A warning for the grownups: Superhero movie,yes, but definitely not for the kiddies. There is mayhem aplenty here, and not the warm and fuzzy kind. I wouldn't be surprised if the original cut was an R. Parents would be wise to heed the PG-13 rating, no mater how much the tiny tykes in your house protest.

Note 2: I predict that The Dark Knight will gross at least $150 million in its first three days. I don't know if that will be the all-time record, but who cares? That's a lot of cash!

You haven't lived ...

... until you've watched Kill Bill in Spanish. It's like reading Shakespeare in the original Klingon. Somewhere, probably in his spacious but cluttered media room, Quentin Tarantino is smiling.

Am I missing something here?

Could someone out there explain to me why exactly Goodfellas is airing right now on Lifetime? Lifetime? I mean, Goodfellas is one of the finest movies of the last 20 years - a blooy but stylish Mob epic. And while I'm not exactly part of the demographic of Lifetime, I watch it fairly regularly, both as a TV critic and as a normal viewer. But I'm boggled as to what the two have in common. I'm not saying that women as a whole would want nothing to do with watching Mafia guys whack each other and eat sphaghetti with their mothers - I'm just asking what specific aspect of the film the Lifetime programmers thought would appeal to their core audience. It can't be the scene when Lorraine Bracco stuffed the gun down her panties - I think that was more for the guys. Just guessing.

I don't know what's more disturbing ...

... Martin Lawrence starring in a G-rated movie, or Adam Sandler starring in ... well, any movie!

When does The Dark Knight come out again?

Why come you haven't seen this movie yet?

Or maybe the better question is: In a world where films such as Norbit, Epic Movie and Kickin' It Old Skool can get wide release patterns and large amounts of studio promotion, is there any room for a genuinely funny and smart movie? Apparently not, at least in the eyes of 20th Century Fox. For while the studio gave extensive support to one of the aforementioned duds, the lame spoof Epic Movie (Rotten Tomatoes rating: 2% - that's right, two), Fox let one of the most hilarious and most insightful comedies of the decade, Mike Judge's brilliant, brutal satire Idiocracy, fester on its shelves for nearly a year before finally releasing it, nearly sight unseen, to all of seven cities and 130 screens. (By contrast, Epic Movie was released to more than 2,800 screens in its opening weekend.)

Judge, the Texas-based creator of prized comedic material such as the animated series Beavis and Butt-head and King of the Hill, as well as the critically acclaimed cult favorite Office Space, directed, co-wrote and co-produced Idiocracy, which is done no justice by a simple written explanation. But here's one anyway: a thoroughly average Army librarian (Luke Wilson) and a hooker (Saturday Night Live's Maya Rudolph) are selected for a military experiment aimed at preserving the best soldiers for future wars. Each is put into a hibernation pod for what is supposed to be a year. But through a series of mishaps, the pair are forgotten about and remain in stasis for five centuries. By the time Wilson and Rudolph wake up in the year 2505, the world is full of - morons. The top-rated TV show is called Ow! My Balls!, and it's about exactly what you think it is. The number-one movie is entitled Ass - 90 minutes of a man's naked ass. (It wins eight Oscars, including best screenplay.) Corporations run everything: Costcos are as big as cities and sell everything from sexual favors to law degrees. Starbucks now specialize in handjobs. A fictional sports-drink company literally has bought the FDA and FCC, and its product is so common that water is now only used in toilets - which, by the way, are combined with Lay-Z-Boys to allow for the watching of Ow! My Balls! without interruption.

That's just a taste of the highlights out heroes find in their new reality, along with the fact that, pretty much by default, Wilson is now the smartest person on Earth. Not surprisingly, that news makes his life decidedly more complicated as he adjusts to life among the impossibly stupid, though some things are the same - for example, Fox News still exists and is as popular as ever, even if it is not anchored by muscle-bound (male) and buxom (female) nimrods. Meanwhile, the resulting discoveries and misadventures of Wilson and Rudolph lead to plenty of gut-busting scenes and some clever commentary by Judge on the state of affairs in today's society. But very few people got a chance to see what was up with this movie thanks to Fox's decision to bury it in a virtual lead coffin underneath the proverbial six feet of concrete. Dump jobs of movies deemed, for whatever reason, to be commercial or critical failures aren't that uncommon in Hollywood, but this one had some feeling to it. In addition to the puny screen count (including not being screened anywhere in New York City), Fox produced no trailers or press materials for the film. So despite Judge's strong reputation and Idiocracy's overall positive reviews - that is, by the few critics able to see the movie in the first place - the movie made less than $450,000 from its theatrical run.

So what exactly happened? The honchos at Fox aren't talking, and Judge has not taken advantage of opportunities to raise hell about the mistreatment of his movie. (Some think that Idiocracy may have never been released if another director had made it - that it saw the meager light of day to appease Judge, who has made the studio millions thanks to King of the Hill.) One of the more popular theories is that Idiocracy was simply too good for its own good, that it was too effective in its skewering of contemporary culture and the dumbing down of America. (To which I would say, er, didn't the Fox brass know what they were getting into in the first place? You don't throw a director $30 million or so if you didn't already read the script, right?)

At least Fox has given Idiocracy a fairly decent push as a DVD release - there are actual clips available on the studio's home entertainment site, if you can find them - and the home version has made more than $9 million, so it is being seen. But not enough. A movie this funny and this on-point deserves as large of an audience as possible, if only to shame Rupert Murdoch and his minions for acting out the movie's central premise 500 years early through their own stupidity. So the next time you're at the video store or working on your Netflix queue, make seeing Idiocracy a priority, please. And do remember to empty your bladder before starting it up.

For more information about Idiocracy, including the aforementioned clips and several articles about its non-support, go to the film's Wikipedia page here. And a shout-out to my friend Beth for reminding me about the existence of Idiocracy after I had first heard about it last fall. Her musings about the film can be found here.