My Run - the Terry Hitchcock Story

This is a documentary made 11 years after the event - when Terry Hitchcock apparently "ran" (walked) what the marketing says is "75 marathons in 75 days" but what amounted to 28 miles in 8 or more hours per day, which comes out to walking for 8 hours a day. He started in Minnesota, wanting to do some kind of publicity gimmick and remembered the real life hero, Terry Fox, who was a young man with bone cancer who ran across Canada to raise awareness and money for cancer research. Terry Fox had only one leg, due to the cancer. And unfortunately the cancer spread into his lungs and he was unable to continue his run. He died. But he raised over $24 million. Now that is a real true hero story if I ever heard one. Not the same with this Terry Hitchcock version.

Everyone seems to think it's very inspiring and heroic, so I should probably just stay quiet but I didn't see it that way at all. After such a long detailed bit in the movie describing the poor wife and what she had to go through with Breast Cancer, and her death, it would be logical for something like this to be done to raise awareness and money for Breast Cancer. Instead, it appears that Terry had such a hard time raising his kids without her that he felt so sorry for himself and wanted to find a publicity gimmick to 'raise awareness for single parents' :\

That's pretty much a fail. Not all single parents are in need, or poverty stricken, nor need any awareness raised. Only those who think "poor me" as Terry obviously did. Why wouldn't you know what size pants your 5 year old wears? Come on now. Was he that goofy and out of the daily goings on with his own family?

He hadn't ever run before, was fat, on blood pressure meds, and had a heart attack a couple of weeks before he started. But he had the marketing/ PR machine in high gear and decided to go forward. He decided to run to Atlanta, where there was a TON of reporters and LOTS of publicity to be had.

We're very dramatically shown time and time again how he "nearly died" trying to complete this foolhardy stunt. Putting himself and his health at risk was silly. It showed that he didn't care if his 3 children were left with no parents. Why not gamble with his own life? Sure - why not. And putting his kids in the position of total responsiblity for him day in and day out during the run, tending to HIM, taking care of HIM, making sure HIS socks got changed 15 times per day - good grief - the ultimate in childlike and selfish behavior.

This is the story of a man who craved the spotlight, number one. Acted like a spoiled brat when he wasn't center stage (yelling at his son, throwing bananas, being an ass). Put himself and his children at risk for NO REASON AT ALL. And where is the foundation? I've googled it and don't see what foundation was started, or how much money was raised or what did that foundation ever do for anybody (besides Terry Hitchcock) ?

Not only the details of the foundation are missing - even more stunning is there are no details of the end result. No "Amazingly Terry lost 45 pounds during the 75 days, his blood pressure is normal and he no longer needed medication" etc. Statistics like that would be great to hear. In the movie when he got to Atlanta he appeared very much the same weight, which simply cannot be if he really did the walking/jogging that he says he did.

He does admit "Well, after the Run, I found myself in a hospital for three months nursing the fractures and the mental stress of the actual Run." That's a huge statement. 3 months for mental stress? One wonders - why? Who paid for it? What kind of breakdown did he have? And if it was such a heroic and wonderful experience, what intense mental stress would happen as a result of it?

My other criticism involves his many stops at radio stations and schools to do publicity. He is filmed saying to the microphone and to kids "I'm running from Minnesota to Atlanta, Georgia" only.... he's not. If I were one of the kids I'd answer "No you're not, you're standing here in our classroom talking!" Dean Karnazes is at this moment Running Across America. When he talks to press it's by phone (while he's running) or on an few minute break - AT THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. Why? Because that's where he is. They have to come to him because he's out there running!

Another inspirational story is Marshall Ulrich - he ran across America at the age of 57. He has a book coming out "Running on Empty" this month and shares his many stories as an ultramarathon runner and adventurer. I believe his stories to be more authentic and real than this movie was.

I found this to be a waste of my time, certainly not inspirational. It was very sad.

Alice in Wonderland

Alice in Wonderland. Let's see, I liked the books as a child, loved the Jabberwocky poem and memorized it voluntarily, and I happen to love Helena Bonham- Carter and Johnny Depp. So what could go wrong?

Oooooh - it goes wrong. It goes terribly, terribly wrong. :P

I had to see this alone. Tried to talk others into going for a couple of weeks and no one would go. My daughter saw it with a friend up in Denver and hated it but even with her thumbs way down I thought "Surely not... how bad could it be??" It be. It be terribly bad.

Where to start... the scenes are so staged and unengaging that you're always aware you're watching a play. The dialogue is bad, the costumes are bad, the acting is bad, the lighting is bad.... it just somehow falls totally flat. Johnny Depp looks way off his game here, as if he knows how bad this is and he's stuck playing along. His performance is psychotic rather than mad as the Hatter, and his demeanor and accent and way of speaking and entire self changes from scene to scene, which is very odd.

Anne Hathaway ('Devil Wears Prada') plays the White Queen and here she's doing a very bad impersonation of Glenda, the Good Witch from the Wizard of Oz. A very BAD impersonation. It was uncomfortable to watch.

I considered leaving 8 - count then EIGHT - different times. But I fought the desire. We always stay to the end, soldier - if we pay for it we see it! Even so I gathered up my things time and time again thinking of all the wonderful things I could be doing rather than sitting through this dreck. The only thing that was a glimmer of hope in this thing was the wonderful Helena Bonham-Carter. I've just loved her ever since I saw her in 'Fight Club' so many years ago. She's a very talented actress and has a hilarious look in this movie as the Red Queen (with a ginormous head). Her lines are the best of the bunch and she delivers the best performance possible considering what she's in the midst of. She alone kept me in my seat.

The movie as a whole gets a '1'. Without Helana Bonham-Carter it would have gotten a zero.

Pueblo Tinseltown was the place - hot fresh popcorn and I ate way too much since there was no one to share it with!

The Box

I'm about to save you some money and time and aggravation - Don't go see The Box. :P

We were looking forward to this movie, thinking it was intriguing - a couple is presented with a box that has a large button on it. If you push the button two things will happen - someone somewhere in the world will die, and you will receive one million (taxfree) dollars.

This story is one that has fascinated people for some time - the original story is named "Button, Button" by Richard Matheson. It was also made into a Twilight Zone episode.

The original story was as it should be - short. It presented this interesting concept that has spawned numerous conversations and debates. The Twilight Zone episode strained to flesh it out past a few minutes of reading and into 20 minutes or so of tv time by fluffing a bit and milking a bit and dragging a bit. This movie, The Box, absolutely destroys the concept. There is nothing but a grain of the original idea left after you add in the bales of fluff, the silly drawn out and boring dialogue, some very strange references to the "afterlife" and to Mars beings, and a whole lot of heavy, melodramatic music that plays throughout, mostly when nothing at all is happening on the screen.

We watched the audience in our theater skirm, check cell phones and several even left. We discussed leaving several times ourselves - God knows there's plenty of time to discuss anything you'd like with whomever is with you :P You're not going to miss anything in the movie, that's for sure.

What a waste of film. I wish I had my 2 hours back.

The only redeeming value of the day was seeing the friendly and helpful Eden at the ticket booth and fresh hot popcorn at the concession stand. Pueblo Tinseltown was the place. As we were walking out we heard comments like "I didn't like that at all" "I don't think anybody did!" and "Boy that was stupid" :P

This one gets a "1". It would get a negative number if it weren't for Frank Langella, a wonderful actor who has been in everything from Dave to Frost/Nixon. He does the best he can in this mess.

Public Enemies

After a fairly bit of a movie drought (earthdad had a yucky summer virus so we haven't gotten to the theater for awhile) we picked a 100 degree day and headed into the cool theater. We had been looking forward to this movie, being fans of Johnny Depp in general and thinking the trailers looked good. Unfortunately, this movie is another case of 'the best lines are in the trailer'. That's it.

We were and still are totally puzzled. Why in the world did Johnny Depp take this movie? Why did Christian Bale? It is one of the worst things I've sat through, and trust me, we nearly did not sit through it. We discussed walking out THREE different times! But feeling like we were working on an exhausting marathon, we hung in and lasted to the end, with no pay out for doing so. If you know the Dillinger story in general, there is not one surprise here. No additional information, no expanding the character, in fact just the opposite. The characters here are flimsy and one-dimensional, the story is chopped up and impossible to follow, the camera is imitating Blair Witch Project.

When we realized that Michael Mann directed and co-wrote it, the light bulb went off in our heads! OH! He's the TV guy - Starsky & Hutch, Miami Vice, Crime Story, etc. He's the genius behind crap tv. And thus, we get a crap tv movie done on a larger screen with no commercials. Commercials would have been a kindness, actually.

This is just a bad movie. Time and time again we got the impression that the actors were standing and saying "see these old clothes and this building? It really does look like 1933, huh??" or that everyone on camera was about to bust out laughing at the silliness they were trying to portray. It really felt like a kid's attempt to make a movie - some movie school project thrown together in 2 days and edited on someone's mac in their bedroom.

We give it a '1' And we feel like someone owes us for sitting through the whole thing.

Pueblo Tinseltown was the theater - popcorn was great, place was cool and clean so the entire experience wasn't bad.

Year One

This movie was shockingly, and really surprisingly, bad. If you saw the trailers on tv, you have seen the only funny lines in the movie. It starts off with some promise, giving us those quotes from the trailers.... and then just falls off the cliff. Story lags, the genius of Harold Remis and even my new fav actor Hank Azaria, just do nothing to save this. It may have been a party to film, and a hoot to play with the costumes, etc, but none of the fun comes through to the audience.

There are alot of jokes about penises and peeing and pooping. Those are the lowest common denominator in a comedy movie - they've run out of anything creative or interesting or clever when all they do is poop or vomit jokes. This movie is full of em. Plot? Ummm.... there isn't really one. And things keep happening that the lead characters just magically get out of with no explanation - like someone cut out a foot of the film and spliced it together in the middle of another scene. :\

Very, very disappointing.

Pueblo Tinseltown was in great form - fresh popcorn and friendly folks. And the rating for this one is nice - it's already built into the title! A '1'!

Terminator Salvation

This was highly anticipated - but why? Because we loved the original Terminator. Because it was a LONG time ago that we loved the original Terminator. Because our memories have forgiven the franchise for other Terminator movies that followed. And maybe because it's been a bit of a dry movie season so far.

Christian Bale plays the adult John Connor, the savior of the human race against the machines.

Here's the good, bad and ugly of this film. The good is that it had a spark of an idea. A little seedling about seeing John Connor as an adult, in a timewarp where his father exists as a teenager and he must save him. There is a little kernel of an interesting plot line with a mass murderer... there's a nice couple of scenes with Helena Bonham Carter ('Fight Club') that made me wish she had been in more of the movie. The other good part is a recreation of young, strong, Ahnold - the Original Terminator. That was fun.

But you wade through an intense amount of muck and crud and dirt and CG to get to those little kernels. That's the bad AND the ugly.

The demographic for this movie must be 10 - 12 year old boys who are so hopped up on ICEEs that their eyeballs are bulging going in. I think only that mind can absorb this kind of crash, fire, explode, metal on metal, fire, machine gun, crash, explode that just never ends. It's one big CG scene. There's actually very very little acting in this entire movie. Instead it's ruled by stunt people - all we see of our 'actors' are their stunt doubles falling, rolling, dodging, shooting, diving, plummeting.

Very soon into this your brain just checks out.

A key thing that action movies must create is some connection to the core characters, creating some desire on our part that they make it out okay. Frankly I didn't care, and I already knew they'd be fine. They had to be - after all there's another movie showing them in it and we know how that one goes so we know who lives to go on. Taking away that element of suspense just leaves you with.... a couple of hours of things exploding, things on fire, things shooting or being shot at, lots of fast camera takes and flashing stuff on a black and white dismal backdrop.

This was a lousy movie.

Popcorn at Pueblo Tinseltown was fresh, hot and fast - served up by the fast and helpful young Eden at the concession stand. That was the only redeeming thing to going to the show today. Oh, that and getting to see the Sherlock Holmes trailer - wow what a franchise Robert Downey, Jr. has gotten himself into! It looks promising and if it takes off, he could do sequels forever with that one!

Earthdad and I both gave this one a '1'. We feel kind of tired and beaten up from sitting through it. :P

Coraline

I slipped off to catch this movie at the 2nd run theater. I've been wanting to see it for a long time, keep hearing how wonderful it is and that it's a Must See and all, so I finally got to check it out.

Brace yourself, I may be one of the only people in the population who really disliked this movie! :P Where to start?

The gimmick here is Stop Motion Animation, like the Claymation Raisins we used to love to watch. Only this is not like that. No clay, and I kept wondering why did they bother with Stop Motion Animation? It would have had the same impact for me if it was a cartoon or any other faster, less laborious media. I think this story desperately needed the gimmick.

The entire thing is dark and creepy. If you adore Tim Burton (I do not) then you'll eat this up with a spoon. I hated it from the beginning and continued hoping it would get better, but it didn't.

Basically I don't like fantasy - meaning anything where pink elephants can fall out of the sky for no reason whatsoever and anything at all can just flash in front of your eyes. I think people who like that kind of thing also like to sit and stare at shiny objects. Anything that moves and flashes is enough for them. I like things to make sense and to have a reason - possibly even a plot. This movie DID have a story. It's a fantasy fable of a girl who gets whisked away to another world and her lesson is to realize things aren't so bad in her real life and "There's no Place Like Home" - ala Wizard of Oz. But with ugly, creepy trees, scary and weird scenes, garish and even sexually explicit neighbors with giant breasts.... I just couldn't figure out who this movie was catering to. It's absolutely not for children. Not for men or boys. Possibly the female 30 to 40 range? And would they willingly flock to a cartoon movie?

Because the film seems geared to an older crowd, the story is utterly simplistic and boring - you see the ending coming from the starting line and it seems so very far away. It never falters, never twists, just plods along until you get exactly through the checkpoints that you expected to find. Since the story is so elementary, it doesn't match up with the demographic. Seems geared to telling a tale to small children but not with those visuals.

The ugliness and odd, random fantasy stuff thrown in is distracting. Coraline never does come across as the clever, smart, quick or funny girl that I hoped for the entire time. I can't figure out why she has blue hair. I can't figure out why she feels so let down that her mother doesn't cook but her father does. She sounds like she was cut out of the 50s and her parents are modern day people.

She's downright rude to the only other kid in the movie - Wybie (she says "Wybie born?"). She puts him down openly and then asks for the "other mother" (a witchy, Cruella DeVille knock off) to sew up his mouth and silence him and when that happens she's happy about it. That cruelty isn't really addressed. Wybie walks about with a neck that dangles worse than George Clooney's, as if he were a bobble head with a sprung neck. He hangs his head in every scene, obviously less than, obviously bowing to the mean Coraline character, shy, but always helpful and attentive to her. It sure doesn't help that he's black, or at least mixed. His grandmother appears at the end and she's clearly black. Wybie's kinky hair indicates his race, and when you reflect on the boldly negative treatment of him throughout..... it feels a bit like the movie is more Gone with the Wind era than now. It was clearly insulting.

The strange neighbors living in the other apts also seem very old time - very old fashioned and reminded me of books I read as a small child that were written in the 50s.

It seems to me this was a very old story and a very old idea that was slapped with a weak attempt at updating ("Let's make the parents type on computers") and the Stop Motion gimmick and called good to go.

I didn't like it.

This one gets a '1'

The Happening

They told me not to go. They all did. The reviewers, my friends, my son. He texted as he left the theater in LA saying "Oh M. Night - please STOP! Just STOP!" We laughed. I thought "How bad can it be?"

I was looking forward to this movie for months so I was determined to see it. No matter what. Lady in the Water or not, I was going. After all, this is the brilliant man who created my beloved Signs and The Sixth Sense! Both ground breaking achievements. I can forgive him The Village and a few others.

And so we went.

Well at least now I know. All I can say is "M. Night - please STOP!!"

This is NOT a good movie. It's M. Night Shyamalan's first R rated movie, which means he has sunk to lower standards and is going for a bit of gore since the script is weak. The gore was pretty interesting, but nothing you didn't see last night on a Night of the Living Dead repeat.

Mark Wahlberg (Entourage) stars and you keep asking yourself throughout, "Why?" We grew tired of him almost immediately. He speak/whispers every line - he even shout/whispers and I so wanted to shake/slap him to get ANY kind of other sound to emerge from his body.

Basically people are being exposed to some strange gas that makes them become incoherent and then kill themselves. (It crossed my mind that the movie itself could be a mutation of the gas - the longer it went on I felt myself sinking into incoherence and most likely thoughts of ending it would have been next) Wahlberg is a science teacher for high school students, so of course it's logical that he's the only person who figures out what is causing the problem, how to stay away from it, and how to get himself and his wife to safety.

The plot is weak, the acting is overly odd. Even for M. Night. He doesn't even attempt real life - he has a crowd of people standing perfectly still, each one saying their lines as written. No two people ever talk at the same time. No one interrupts, no one makes a sound. People just stand and stare. They KNOW they don't have a line in this scene so they stare. These are not the people who have been exposed to the gas, either! They are the 'normal' ones! Just ridiculous.

One stand out performance - John Leguizamo (ER, The Kill Point) truly makes the most of every silly line and scene he is given. He does a great job with very little. Zooey Deschanel (Elf) is Mark Wahlberg's wife. She is cute but could have been nearly anybody in this one.

I hope someday that M. Night Shyamalan does a Behind The Scenes special where he bares it all and explains just truly what happened in between these movies. Did he start using drugs? Did he stop using drugs? Did his dog die? Wife leave him? Something must really have impacted his life to change his films so drastically. I keep hoping that the M. Night from Signs and Sixth Sense will return to us. In the words of Mel Gibson at the end of Signs - Come on, M. Night - SWING!

This one gets a 1.5

The Incredible Hulk

It had to be done - it had to be remade. This one is NOT a sequel. This one is a fresh start, trying to distance itself from the *other* Incredible Hulk movie that was a flat out disaster thanks to director Ang Lee. I always say, "You won't like me if I'm Ang Lee." He proved us all correct on that one. What a stinker.

So this time out of the gate the creators have alot to prove. They need to show that they can be true to a great comic book and a great tv show with a big following. This could be one of the best comic book to movie franchises yet, if they can do it right.

I grade this one pretty harsh because I was a fan of the comic and of the tv show. It has great promise, in part because Ed Norton (Fight Club) plays Bruce Banner! He's a good actor, surely he will do justice to Bill Bixby.

He does all that he can with what he's given. It's good, but just when the whole thing gets interesting - you know - just when he gets MAD, out the window the whole thing goes. We don't get The Hulk. We get a Saturday morning kid's tv cartoon Hulk on steroids. It's CG, CG, and more animated CG. I was so disappointed! It's silly, it's fake, it's a freakin cartoon set in the middle of a movie for God's sake!

As far as the cast goes, there's Liv Tyler (Jersey Girl, Lord of the Rings) as the girlfriend. She laments "Oh Bruce" about 400 times in the exact tone of voice with the exact facial expression. Boy you never get tired of that!

William Hurt looked good as the General and everyone else stood in the right places and said the right lines but Good Grief people - they inserted a cartoon Hulk into the movie! I was crushed.

There's a brief bit toward the end where they try to desperately attach The Hulk to Ironman's (successful and brilliant) coattails.

Overall I was just mad about the whole thing. Let down. Angry. You won't like me when I'm angry.

Gave this one a 1. Robert gave it a 3. He's much more forgiving than I am.

There are plenty of nods all around - Stan Lee does a cameo and watch for his name used in Stanley's. Bill Bixby is shown on tv, Lou Ferrigno even shows up for a little speaking part and boy does he look good! I would have liked to see him more and the cartoon Hulk less!

Seed of Chucky

This was approx 2 hours of my life I ain't gettin back. *yawn*

We discussed leaving in the middle of this one but we stay on principle, I mean if we paid real money we're gonna see the whole movie. And painfully, we did pay real money for this movie. The good news is we paid first matinee money, the cheapest show you can go to.

I never did like the Chucky movies. This one is a whole notch below the others. There were a few funny things where Jennifer Tilly makes fun of herself. All we could really figure out is that Jennifer Tilly must have bought the Chucky franchise and then created this movie all about and around her. She plays Chucky's wife, and herself in real life and there's just simply too much of her!

Here's one appalling thing - a lady brought a kid that looked about 4 into this movie. It may be about a doll, but people this is NOT a kid movie. There is a LOT of blood and guts, a graphic beheading, lots and lots of cussing (lots and lots) and highly sexual scenes.

If you are a die hard Chucky fan and just have to see what they've done with the 'story' now, by all means check it out. There's a transgender child of Chucky and a lot of strange stuff. Oh I nearly forgot, Redman (Method and Red) is in this too. He does a decent job, considering what he's doing.

Pueblo Tinseltown was the theater. Popcorn was good. Movie was not.

Overall Rating - 1

The Bourne Supremacy

Wow, this is the first movie we can remember that we discussed walking out of (several times) but hung in (barely) to the end.   If you're a tremendously huge Matt Damon fan (Stuck on You) or if you're just WILD, crazy, nutso over the Robert Ludlum novel that started this string of spy movies, then I apologize.  You would need to be fanatical in one way or another to be able to stay with this one.

Our biggest complaints:   The camera action in this movie is on par with The Blair Witch Project, so we were totally motion sick early on.   They do lots of fast jiggly, shaky scenes so you can't actually see anything - it's all just a blur.  I have a theory on this - most people complain that novels don't translate well into movies.  That's because everyone reads and imagines for themselves what people look like, what the scene looks like, etc.  When it becomes a tangible reality on the screen it's not going to be exactly like each person imagined, so they will feel let down.   The solution is what they did for this movie - blur all the scenes, make everything so convoluted that you have to rely on your imagination just like when you're reading a book!   That way everyone fills in the blanks for themselves and thinks it's exactly like what they remember from the book!  Voila!

Those of us who never read the book are left with a big smeary incoherent movie.  Matt Damon - loved him him Stuck on You but honestly he could be ANYONE in this movie.  Plug in any male actor and it's exactly the same movie.   The actor who brought something to this was Carl Urban (Lord of the Rings).  Every scene he was in we perked up and watched.  He is watchable.  Damon is not.

This movie is full of so many chase scenes that there's barely a break between them to form a story, and the chase scenes are so long you will honestly forget WHO is chasing and WHY!   We totally did. 

The crowd looked visibly restless - lots of getting up and going in and out so I don't think we're the only ones who felt we "should stay to the end because we paid for it".   

This one was a stinker.   The theater was great - Pueblo Tinseltown - popcorn was fresh and wonderful!   

Overall rating - a 1.    I didn't think I'd give anything a 1 because we can find redeeming value in most all movies, but hey - the 1 is being generous here.

Ella Enchanted

Today is rainy and cold, Robert and Sarah and I went to see this movie and I'm not really sure why. I voted for Home on the Range but Sarah didn't want to see Roseanne as a talking cow so we went to this one instead. It was a big waste of time. Sarah said "Well there's an hour and a half of my life I'm never getting back. " She's right.

This is a fairy tale, in the mold of Cinderella possibly, more tailored after Shrek but not a cartoon. It uses modern music in a medieval times. This worked in A Knight's Tale, one movie I like quite a bit, but it doesn't work here. There are some chuckle and groan sort of puns, and in the first third of the movie I was chuckling, but they didn't last. Soon we were shifting in our seat, wondering why we came, and by the end outright groaning.

There's a spell put on Ella (Anne Hathaway - Princess Diaries) and she has to obey orders. Sarah and I were saying under our breath "Make this movie get better" but it didn't work.

Hugh Dancy plays Prince Charmont. I don't remember seeing him before and he was your standard mail order prince guy. Cary Elwes (best known for Robin Hood, Men in Tights) is the evil Uncle Edgar. He does a reasonable job with this role, sharing the spotlight with a talking snake. Vivica A. Fox was over the top as the fairy Lucinda, but Minnie Driver does a nice job with the fairy named Mandy. Eric Idle turns up (Monty Python's Flying Circus) surprisingly enough. He floats in and out briefly to do a little narrative poem. I kept wishing he would stay longer.

If you're a girl ages 6 to maybe 8 or 9, this might be a good movie for you.

As the credits rolled, Sarah said "Everyone in this room just got dumber." That pretty much summed up how I felt about this one.

Pueblo Tinseltown was the theater - the popcorn was good.
Rating - Sarah says 1
I said 2
Robert said it was "okay for what it is" I think we're going with 2 - Forgot it as soon as I left the theater.