Sue Wilson and I were on the air the other day on the WQMX morning show, going off on the recent surge in gas prices. Up like 31 cents basically overnight. So that day I went home looking for answers. The prevailing lame response that I heard time and time again all day on TV was - "Well, it's complicated." Blah, blah blah!
Yea OK I hear you, gas prices are complicated I get it. But if you think about it, this is the cop-out catch phrase of the day. When the experts we turn to for answers to important questions are backed up into the corner without any real substantive response, they yank out the "complicated defense." Question is....are these kid of problems really complicated?
I have a real sense that gas prices are not really all that complicated. Or a bevy of other daily subjects that routinely impact our lives from the outside are shoved off into the "complicatedland abyss." It just sounds a whole lot better than, "We have no real answer, we just know that you don't deserve a straight answer." So it becomes, "complicated."
I'll tell you what's complicated. Most Americans work schedules, the kids sports calender, being a teenager, sending kids to college and paying for it, saving for retirement, or figuring out a medical bill. The Rubik's Cube, learning to use your new Blackberry, and trying to get a real person on the customer service hot line when you have a problem. Now those are really complicated!
The truth is, life in our world today, is complicated. The things that matter have slowly become such, and that's a shame. We're all busy with our lives and families, deadlines, peer pressures, and trying to keep it all going forward. Work, taxes, ever changing rules and regulations in our public lives make it such. And it bleeds over.
Relationships with our families, both immediate and extended, siblings, aging parents, and the growing children we're raising. And, be honest have you ever seen a romantic relationship that gets less complicated as time goes on? Yea, me either. These are the things are truly complicated, and real. And many times, are worth the time and effort required to untangle the crissed-crossed web that has been spun by life in general.
Gas prices and the like - complicated?
I'm thinking not.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
MOVIE REVIEW - X-Men Origins Wolverine
With the release of X-Men Origins Wolverine, the blockbuster summer movie season has officially begun. This one stars heartthrob Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, and his life leading up to him being the X-Men character you've known in the first couple of X-Men movies.
Prequels have become very trendy in Hollywood over the past ten years or so. It gives movie makers a chance to tell more of a story, and make more money for a successful movie franchise. And XMOW is off to a great start at the box office. Cha-ching!
You know from the original X-Men movies, Wolverine is the indestructible mutant with the slashy metal blades that jet out from his hands. XMOW is the story of the government project that takes this "regular" mutant and gives him the gift of being indestructible. And of course, it's a project gone wrong and the government changes their mind, and has ulterior motives, and even sets out to kill our hero. Blah, blah, blah.......here we go again. The government gets it wrong, and is the big evil. Even if this the way you may feel about the Feds, have you seen this storyline enough? Can't anyone be more original?
To be very honest, if you're a fan of the X-Men you will love this movie. If you're not, or if you're not into superhero movies in general, this movie will miss with you. This is an over-the-top special effects fest on steroids. While there is plenty of action for all, much of this is just looks silly, and as I watched it I envisioned a bunch of 14 year - olds thinking how cool this all is. There is no new ground here, and the effects have been used in countless movies in the past. I found myself checking my watch more than a few times wondering when this pubescent picture was going to be over.
Although with all things in perspective, this is summer fun movie time, and at times this is. But by and large this flick thin on any kind of meaningful story, or dialogue to mention. The real downfall of XMOW is that we've seen this movie 150 times before in one way or another. The same effects, same silly spoken lines, and a soundtrack that sounds just like every other superhero movie ever made.
X-Men Origins Wolverine, If you're a fan, go and have fun. If you're being dragged along for the ride, or expecting to see something exciting and new....you'll be checking your watch too.
Prequels have become very trendy in Hollywood over the past ten years or so. It gives movie makers a chance to tell more of a story, and make more money for a successful movie franchise. And XMOW is off to a great start at the box office. Cha-ching!
You know from the original X-Men movies, Wolverine is the indestructible mutant with the slashy metal blades that jet out from his hands. XMOW is the story of the government project that takes this "regular" mutant and gives him the gift of being indestructible. And of course, it's a project gone wrong and the government changes their mind, and has ulterior motives, and even sets out to kill our hero. Blah, blah, blah.......here we go again. The government gets it wrong, and is the big evil. Even if this the way you may feel about the Feds, have you seen this storyline enough? Can't anyone be more original?
To be very honest, if you're a fan of the X-Men you will love this movie. If you're not, or if you're not into superhero movies in general, this movie will miss with you. This is an over-the-top special effects fest on steroids. While there is plenty of action for all, much of this is just looks silly, and as I watched it I envisioned a bunch of 14 year - olds thinking how cool this all is. There is no new ground here, and the effects have been used in countless movies in the past. I found myself checking my watch more than a few times wondering when this pubescent picture was going to be over.
Although with all things in perspective, this is summer fun movie time, and at times this is. But by and large this flick thin on any kind of meaningful story, or dialogue to mention. The real downfall of XMOW is that we've seen this movie 150 times before in one way or another. The same effects, same silly spoken lines, and a soundtrack that sounds just like every other superhero movie ever made.
X-Men Origins Wolverine, If you're a fan, go and have fun. If you're being dragged along for the ride, or expecting to see something exciting and new....you'll be checking your watch too.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
MOVIE REVIEW - The Soloist
What if they made a movie with a real good story on the surface, but it didn't really have a point? Well, The Soloist fills that void.
I'm not here to lay this movie out, but sometimes even the most interesting people and stories can get lost somewhere in Hollywood's movie making abyss.
The Soloist stars Robert Downey Jr and Jamie Fox. It's based on a true story, that's since been shown on 60 Minutes and other news shows on cable. It's the story of Nathaniel (Fox) who is a middle-aged homeless man suffering from a lifetime of serious mental illness. To go along with his mental illness, is also a God-given musical talent worthy of Julliard. In fact, he attends the famous arts school in the early 1970's as a cellist, but withdraws because of his deteriorating mental state.
Steve (Downey) is a writer for the Los Angeles Times who is in need of a story. He discovers Nathaniel by happenstance, and writes a series of articles on him in the paper. He listens to Nathaniel's extraordinary gift in the streets of LA as he plays Beethoven on a 2 string violin with precision. Steve then befriends Nathaniel and has a desire to try to assist him in establishing a "normal" life. And to become a life changing friend to a man who has had none.
There are parts of The Soloist that work extremely well. The music is great, and Downey and Fox are both strong in their polar-opposite roles. The supporting cast is fine, and the whole idea of this movie is really intriguing. But there's just something missing here.
The Point. There is none. In the end, the movie sort of throws Steve and Nathaniel out of bounds, and the movie suddenly becomes a movie about homelessness. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but our characters from a movie making perspective are cast aside, with no real resolution, or no real reason for telling this story on film. Maybe it is a better 60 Minute piece. The story is certainly an interesting one, maybe it's just not a movie.
Also, there is an attempt to give you some perspective of what goes on in Nathaniel's troubled mind during certain sequences. Especially when he is deeply moved by classical music. This is done with a collage of wavy colors on screen sometimes for minutes at a time. This certainly does not work. It's overused and fatiguing.
The Soloist has been delayed to the theaters a few times, but it's here now. Originally it was slated for a Christmas release with the rest of the heavyweight movies. Then January, and now the spring. There was talk at one time of Oscar buzz for last year, but that dream died hard. It's certainly made in the style of an Oscar contender. But in reality it's not the movie they thought they had.
The Soloist. Performances good. The rest - marginal.
I'm not here to lay this movie out, but sometimes even the most interesting people and stories can get lost somewhere in Hollywood's movie making abyss.
The Soloist stars Robert Downey Jr and Jamie Fox. It's based on a true story, that's since been shown on 60 Minutes and other news shows on cable. It's the story of Nathaniel (Fox) who is a middle-aged homeless man suffering from a lifetime of serious mental illness. To go along with his mental illness, is also a God-given musical talent worthy of Julliard. In fact, he attends the famous arts school in the early 1970's as a cellist, but withdraws because of his deteriorating mental state.
Steve (Downey) is a writer for the Los Angeles Times who is in need of a story. He discovers Nathaniel by happenstance, and writes a series of articles on him in the paper. He listens to Nathaniel's extraordinary gift in the streets of LA as he plays Beethoven on a 2 string violin with precision. Steve then befriends Nathaniel and has a desire to try to assist him in establishing a "normal" life. And to become a life changing friend to a man who has had none.
There are parts of The Soloist that work extremely well. The music is great, and Downey and Fox are both strong in their polar-opposite roles. The supporting cast is fine, and the whole idea of this movie is really intriguing. But there's just something missing here.
The Point. There is none. In the end, the movie sort of throws Steve and Nathaniel out of bounds, and the movie suddenly becomes a movie about homelessness. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but our characters from a movie making perspective are cast aside, with no real resolution, or no real reason for telling this story on film. Maybe it is a better 60 Minute piece. The story is certainly an interesting one, maybe it's just not a movie.
Also, there is an attempt to give you some perspective of what goes on in Nathaniel's troubled mind during certain sequences. Especially when he is deeply moved by classical music. This is done with a collage of wavy colors on screen sometimes for minutes at a time. This certainly does not work. It's overused and fatiguing.
The Soloist has been delayed to the theaters a few times, but it's here now. Originally it was slated for a Christmas release with the rest of the heavyweight movies. Then January, and now the spring. There was talk at one time of Oscar buzz for last year, but that dream died hard. It's certainly made in the style of an Oscar contender. But in reality it's not the movie they thought they had.
The Soloist. Performances good. The rest - marginal.
Friday, April 24, 2009
MOVIE REVIEW - Obsessed
You may have heard that the new Beyonce' movie Obsessed is sort of like Fatal Attraction the Classic Glenn Close movie. I am here to tell you, Obsessed is no Fatal Attraction.
Where to begin? Derek and Sharon (Beyonce') are a young married couple in California with a young son. They are a happy family. Derek has a great job, they bought a new house, and whole nine yards. Then at Derek's work here comes Lisa, who is a whack-o beautiful, young temp girl who sets her sights on Derek. A seemingly innocent office flirtation turns ugly and Lisa is relentless in her romantic pursuit of Derek.
After Sharon eventually finds this all out, it's on. Derek and Sharon separate, and get back together, and the cops are eventually are called in when it all starts to get out of hand. Leading to the movies completely predictable ending with Sharon giving Lisa a big- time beat-down. For heavens sake, could this movie really be any worse? I think not!
This is supposed to be a sexy, thriller - I think. But it's neither sexy, or thrilling, or anything except - bad. This movie staggers out of the gate, and is painfully slow throughout. If you want to hear some really bad writing, and see some equally bad acting, then this is your movie. A highly awkward soundtrack that really doesn't fit the movie, plus maybe the worst costuming of the year. Beyonce' who is supposed to be a stay at home mom here, is dressing more for the camera, and her own real -life image. I know she produced this movie, so you think that someone would have told her she was actually in it. She just couldn't bring herself to look real, she looks like - Beyonce'. There is no resemblance of real life at at all.
Ali Larter as the maniacal Lisa is the movies lone flicker of hope. But the movie makers handcuff her character half way, and although she shows moments of being scary, overall she's not. With characters like Lisa, you've got to go all out, and let it fly. They didn't let her, and Lisa falls flat. Much of this I think was not to go too far, and make sure that the R rating didn't show up. Lisa has to be super sexy, and super nutty, and totally frightening. And they stopped short. Horrible mistake!
Why is Fatal Attraction so scary? Glenn Close, and her totally deranged character. You can hardly remember who else was in that movie. That's why it's a modern day classic. In Obsessed it would appear that no one was going to upstage Beyonce' and that makes Obsessed totally forgettable. Quick - who killed Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction? Case closed.
If you're going to make a sexy thriller, then make a sexy thriller. Rating system be darned. Stop thinking about making a so-called adult movie for 15 year- olds to cheer for their favorite singer. Instead start making a movie that is clearly for adults, that deals with adult issues, and gives us something to bite into.
Obsessed. Halfway done, and all the way bad! Save your money!
Where to begin? Derek and Sharon (Beyonce') are a young married couple in California with a young son. They are a happy family. Derek has a great job, they bought a new house, and whole nine yards. Then at Derek's work here comes Lisa, who is a whack-o beautiful, young temp girl who sets her sights on Derek. A seemingly innocent office flirtation turns ugly and Lisa is relentless in her romantic pursuit of Derek.
After Sharon eventually finds this all out, it's on. Derek and Sharon separate, and get back together, and the cops are eventually are called in when it all starts to get out of hand. Leading to the movies completely predictable ending with Sharon giving Lisa a big- time beat-down. For heavens sake, could this movie really be any worse? I think not!
This is supposed to be a sexy, thriller - I think. But it's neither sexy, or thrilling, or anything except - bad. This movie staggers out of the gate, and is painfully slow throughout. If you want to hear some really bad writing, and see some equally bad acting, then this is your movie. A highly awkward soundtrack that really doesn't fit the movie, plus maybe the worst costuming of the year. Beyonce' who is supposed to be a stay at home mom here, is dressing more for the camera, and her own real -life image. I know she produced this movie, so you think that someone would have told her she was actually in it. She just couldn't bring herself to look real, she looks like - Beyonce'. There is no resemblance of real life at at all.
Ali Larter as the maniacal Lisa is the movies lone flicker of hope. But the movie makers handcuff her character half way, and although she shows moments of being scary, overall she's not. With characters like Lisa, you've got to go all out, and let it fly. They didn't let her, and Lisa falls flat. Much of this I think was not to go too far, and make sure that the R rating didn't show up. Lisa has to be super sexy, and super nutty, and totally frightening. And they stopped short. Horrible mistake!
Why is Fatal Attraction so scary? Glenn Close, and her totally deranged character. You can hardly remember who else was in that movie. That's why it's a modern day classic. In Obsessed it would appear that no one was going to upstage Beyonce' and that makes Obsessed totally forgettable. Quick - who killed Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction? Case closed.
If you're going to make a sexy thriller, then make a sexy thriller. Rating system be darned. Stop thinking about making a so-called adult movie for 15 year- olds to cheer for their favorite singer. Instead start making a movie that is clearly for adults, that deals with adult issues, and gives us something to bite into.
Obsessed. Halfway done, and all the way bad! Save your money!
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Sorry, Aunt Louise
Buried in the heaping piles of economic, political, and local news a day or two ago was a gem that passed with little fanfare, but it's worth noting.
While Sue Wilson and I were doing the show the other morning, our news guy, team member Chris Keppler ran across the story about the "Storied 4 Corners" out in the American West. The place where you can stand in 4 states at the same time. Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Millions of Americans have stopped there to have their pictures taken on that spot, and sent them to your Aunt Louise for generations. "Isn't that cute!" Can you hear it? Yea, me too.
But guess what, they're all shot! That's right, the people that know what they're doing this week say that you're actually only standing in 2 states. Plus, the real state line for the other two states is about 2 and half miles away. How the heck did that happen? I could understand a few feet, maybe a hundred yards or so at the outside, but over 2 miles? What is Aunt Louise going to do now? She's been showing that picture of you there for years to her friends, and recently figured out how to post it on her new Facebook account.
Please tell me for Aunt Louise's sake, the Grand Canyon is on the American side of the border. And for heavens sake reaffirm with me that on Mt. Rushmore, really is Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Thomas Jefferson.....and not George Jefferson! Because Aunt Louise has those pictures of you there posted online too. MySpace I think.
And don't even get me started on the online ridicule Aunt Louise is going to endure after her "check out my nieces and nephews pictures" "tweets" she sent out this week. They're all a sham now. Shame.
But with tongue now out of cheek, you gotta wonder how that really happened. How could some clown, or as it would appear generations of clowns get it that wrong? I had a neighbor once used to have a fit if I mowed one extra mower swipe onto his property. If he was a part of this deal, he'd be giving birth to an extremely large cow right now!
Clearly, this is not a national disaster, but you do have to wonder in this day of GPS, lasers, Google Earth, digitization, and countless other effective surveying techniques over the years how this could have been in error for 150 years. And now what state do some of these people live in?
And more importantly, what pictures will Aunt Louise have now to brag about you with? Better get to Niagara Falls quick. I'm hoping it's still on the American/Canadian border.
While Sue Wilson and I were doing the show the other morning, our news guy, team member Chris Keppler ran across the story about the "Storied 4 Corners" out in the American West. The place where you can stand in 4 states at the same time. Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Millions of Americans have stopped there to have their pictures taken on that spot, and sent them to your Aunt Louise for generations. "Isn't that cute!" Can you hear it? Yea, me too.
But guess what, they're all shot! That's right, the people that know what they're doing this week say that you're actually only standing in 2 states. Plus, the real state line for the other two states is about 2 and half miles away. How the heck did that happen? I could understand a few feet, maybe a hundred yards or so at the outside, but over 2 miles? What is Aunt Louise going to do now? She's been showing that picture of you there for years to her friends, and recently figured out how to post it on her new Facebook account.
Please tell me for Aunt Louise's sake, the Grand Canyon is on the American side of the border. And for heavens sake reaffirm with me that on Mt. Rushmore, really is Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Thomas Jefferson.....and not George Jefferson! Because Aunt Louise has those pictures of you there posted online too. MySpace I think.
And don't even get me started on the online ridicule Aunt Louise is going to endure after her "check out my nieces and nephews pictures" "tweets" she sent out this week. They're all a sham now. Shame.
But with tongue now out of cheek, you gotta wonder how that really happened. How could some clown, or as it would appear generations of clowns get it that wrong? I had a neighbor once used to have a fit if I mowed one extra mower swipe onto his property. If he was a part of this deal, he'd be giving birth to an extremely large cow right now!
Clearly, this is not a national disaster, but you do have to wonder in this day of GPS, lasers, Google Earth, digitization, and countless other effective surveying techniques over the years how this could have been in error for 150 years. And now what state do some of these people live in?
And more importantly, what pictures will Aunt Louise have now to brag about you with? Better get to Niagara Falls quick. I'm hoping it's still on the American/Canadian border.
Monday, April 20, 2009
MOVIE REVIEW - State Of Play
It's an all-star cast in State Of Play that opened up over the weekend. Russell Crowe, Ben Affleck, Rachel MacAdams, and many others star in this government cover-up thriller.
SOP is the story of Cal (Crowe) who is a seasoned old school newspaper reporter for the Washington Globe. He finds himself teamed up with Della (MacAdams) who is a young upstart blogger for the paper's online division. Together, with their obvious differences, are teamed up to investigate a murder at the highest level of our federal government. Who is involved? Who is the bad guy? Good guy?
This movie may look like you've seen it before, and you have. But there is something fresh about SOP that is hard to resist. It does keep you guessing for the most part, and you have to swallow the fact that this is a cynical look at the state of Washington D.C. today. Who is really the sleaziest? Is it the people we elect to federal positions? Is it the failing newspaper and it's reporters? Is it the defense contractors? Is it the Feds in general? Well according to SOP, they all are. And to be honest, that is the movies focal point. All of the above are equal opportunity offenders. In fact, there's enough sleaze to go around and back again. You may feel the need to shower it off when you get home.
Russell Crowe again is really strong in this commanding role, And MacAdams is a great, new fresh face that I have loved in everything she's done. Affleck is also great in his sleazy role as the elected official in question, Representative Steven Collins. A small, but pivotal role, he is really good here. Again with Affleck, I think less of him is more. I've not enjoyed him in too many leading roles, but love him on the side. Toss in Helen Mirren, Jeff Daniels and Robin Wright- Penn too as side dishes, and you've got a star-studded cast that makes SOP a real winner.
State Of Play is just flat out good movie making, and is time and money well spent. It also has the look of a possible series of movies, as suggested subtly at the movies end. It is based on a BBC Series, so we'll have to wait and see.
But don't wait to see State Of Play, get there soon.
SOP is the story of Cal (Crowe) who is a seasoned old school newspaper reporter for the Washington Globe. He finds himself teamed up with Della (MacAdams) who is a young upstart blogger for the paper's online division. Together, with their obvious differences, are teamed up to investigate a murder at the highest level of our federal government. Who is involved? Who is the bad guy? Good guy?
This movie may look like you've seen it before, and you have. But there is something fresh about SOP that is hard to resist. It does keep you guessing for the most part, and you have to swallow the fact that this is a cynical look at the state of Washington D.C. today. Who is really the sleaziest? Is it the people we elect to federal positions? Is it the failing newspaper and it's reporters? Is it the defense contractors? Is it the Feds in general? Well according to SOP, they all are. And to be honest, that is the movies focal point. All of the above are equal opportunity offenders. In fact, there's enough sleaze to go around and back again. You may feel the need to shower it off when you get home.
Russell Crowe again is really strong in this commanding role, And MacAdams is a great, new fresh face that I have loved in everything she's done. Affleck is also great in his sleazy role as the elected official in question, Representative Steven Collins. A small, but pivotal role, he is really good here. Again with Affleck, I think less of him is more. I've not enjoyed him in too many leading roles, but love him on the side. Toss in Helen Mirren, Jeff Daniels and Robin Wright- Penn too as side dishes, and you've got a star-studded cast that makes SOP a real winner.
State Of Play is just flat out good movie making, and is time and money well spent. It also has the look of a possible series of movies, as suggested subtly at the movies end. It is based on a BBC Series, so we'll have to wait and see.
But don't wait to see State Of Play, get there soon.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
MOVIE REVIEW - 17 Again
It's not rocket science. Put Zac Efron in a movie bout being 17, open the doors, and get out of the way because here comes the crowd. Efron stars in the new 17 Again in theaters this weekend.
17 Again stars Efron, and Mathew Perry. It's the story of Mike (Perry) who is about 38 years old and he gets the chance to be 17 again (Efron) and go back to his old high school to try to blend in. Although Mike is 17, he is in the modern day, and has to catch up to the kids of today and not the kids of 1989! 38 year old Mike has two kids who are detached from him, and a high school sweetheart wife who is divorcing him. As a 17 year old though he gets to go to school with his kids, and see what they go through in their life, and as you can guess, the fun is on.
17 Again is targeted right at high school kids, girls especially and they will love everything about this movie - period! It's a movie that sets a pretty realistic tone about today's modern teen and that is commendable. They are shown in the true roles that kids today play. To it's credit, there's no teen drinking, drugs, and needless language or sex to get in the way of a fun movie. Although it should be noted that the teens are NOT shown to be flawless either, which is a strength of this movie.
There are some troubles here. First up, it is never made clear how he's made 17 again. You see it happen, but are clueless on why he gets this chance and where it comes from. I think this is the movies weakest link. And it's just as murky when he is turned back into a 38 year old man at the end. (Not a spoiler, you know it's coming) There is no drama on how long he gets to be 17, or anything even associated with it. He just is, then he's not. Good chance for this movie to be smarter, and it doesn't take it.
One more note. If you're going to see Mathew Perry, you'll be disappointed. (I'm guessing that's only a few, all the kids are there to see Efron.) Perry is in this movie for only a short time. BUT to me that's a good thing. He's very good in this very small role. I have always felt he is better as a side dish and not the main course. The less of him the better. I have never liked him in leading roles, he's just not funny enough. To be noted - this is Zac Efrons movie.
17 Again......Could have been good and really smart, but has to settle for just good.
17 Again stars Efron, and Mathew Perry. It's the story of Mike (Perry) who is about 38 years old and he gets the chance to be 17 again (Efron) and go back to his old high school to try to blend in. Although Mike is 17, he is in the modern day, and has to catch up to the kids of today and not the kids of 1989! 38 year old Mike has two kids who are detached from him, and a high school sweetheart wife who is divorcing him. As a 17 year old though he gets to go to school with his kids, and see what they go through in their life, and as you can guess, the fun is on.
17 Again is targeted right at high school kids, girls especially and they will love everything about this movie - period! It's a movie that sets a pretty realistic tone about today's modern teen and that is commendable. They are shown in the true roles that kids today play. To it's credit, there's no teen drinking, drugs, and needless language or sex to get in the way of a fun movie. Although it should be noted that the teens are NOT shown to be flawless either, which is a strength of this movie.
There are some troubles here. First up, it is never made clear how he's made 17 again. You see it happen, but are clueless on why he gets this chance and where it comes from. I think this is the movies weakest link. And it's just as murky when he is turned back into a 38 year old man at the end. (Not a spoiler, you know it's coming) There is no drama on how long he gets to be 17, or anything even associated with it. He just is, then he's not. Good chance for this movie to be smarter, and it doesn't take it.
One more note. If you're going to see Mathew Perry, you'll be disappointed. (I'm guessing that's only a few, all the kids are there to see Efron.) Perry is in this movie for only a short time. BUT to me that's a good thing. He's very good in this very small role. I have always felt he is better as a side dish and not the main course. The less of him the better. I have never liked him in leading roles, he's just not funny enough. To be noted - this is Zac Efrons movie.
17 Again......Could have been good and really smart, but has to settle for just good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
