Epics and counter-programming
Movies from seen over the 2003-4 holiday period
Originally written: February 2004
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
Master and Comander: The Far Side of the World
Peter Pan
Love Actually
Something's Gotta Give
Lost in Translation
The Last Samurai
Two Towers - extended DVD
Oscar and Razzie pre-rants
Counter-programming is an interesting idea that film distributors seem to have cottoned on to. For example, the romantic comedy has made a bit of a comeback of late, particularly as a screening counterpoint to the large number of big-budget special effects movies being released late in the year. The big-budget movies have been the traditional fare of the northern summer but more are now being programmed for Thanksgiving and the year's end holiday season. Previously December was the time of the "Oscar movie": the pseudo-serious well-meaning drama with 'magnetic' leading performances. Romantic comedy was more the product for the US spring and "fall". With a greater number of December epics, distributors need something in the way of more adult fare to meets the requirements of those not drawn to the teenage comedy, the schlock horror movie, the car crash movie and the often senseless violence and illogic of the special effects epic. Mind you, we've been treated to a good number of above average epics of late: Pirates of the Caribbean and a number of the movies below indicate that. But that's not always the case as the Matrices and Kill Bill have demonstrated. Even if the majority of the cineplex fare is, of necessity, aimed at the young or those with no ability to discern the difference between good and ordinary movies, there has to be some leavening of the menu with the occasional more mature offering. Whether it's a very serious Oscar contender (Cold Comfort Mountain, Mystic River and Veronica Guerin fit the bill this year), a good independent or low-budget movie (Lost in Translation), the very rare non-Anglophone movie that breaks out of the art-house circuit (The Spanish Apartment), or a sophisticated comedy. You remember the latter: comedies without jism jokes or fart jokes or Adam Sandler or Ben Stiller. The holiday season has seen good examples of the adult romantic comedy, to complement the better than average big movies and, at least, one interesting indie production. Not to mention the kids' movies, which we haven't essayed.
CM
is the Featured Attractions Review and Criticism section.
Also in
CM
Alphabetical archive of movies reviewed
also in
Movies
Opening Credits
Critical Mess - Reviews
From the Director's Chair - Essays
Lists
One of my favorite scenes in the third book, The Return of the King, is not a battle narrative or an epic description of the world of Middle Earth or, indeed, another translated verse, but an encapsulation of Tolkien's recognition of the true nature of heroism, as he learned it in the tenches on the Western Front in the Great War. When the War of the Ring is over and the great deeds of the Captains of the West have been recounted in the narrative, the Ring-bearers are brought before the victorious army and greeted with praise in many languages and the King kneels before them and places them on the throne. It was a scene which I incorporated into the 1978 Tolkienfest when I got to write and direct that annual homage, The History of the Ring I called mine, as the climactic scene.
As I sat entranced, entertained, moved and uplifted by the third film in Peter Jackson's adaptation of the book, I withheld judgment until I saw how the writers staged that scene, or its analog. The way it is done, in font of the massed ranks of the Gondorians and Rohirrim, on battlements of Minas Tirith, sealed it for me. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is the best of the three films and the Jackson trilogy is a masterful filmic version of the epic. Even if it is not the book.
The third film generally covers the major plot and thematic developments of the third part of the novel. While it has some problems with timing (what is "a day" here seems like "a couple of days" elsewhere), the decision to delay Frodo's encounter with Shelob allows for a better inter-cutting of the events in the West and in Mordor, without undue schlepping across the Mordorian wilderness by the hobbits. In the West, Pippin's service to Gondor is given its due prominence even if Merry's similar pledge to Rohan is overlooked. Faramir is given his moment of gallantry, as is Eowyn, but their 'romance' is omitted from the film version - although I expect it to appear in the extended DVD. I wondered how the reforged sword would be delivered, and the use of Elrond, rather than Arwen, is sensible and leads logically to the Paths of the Dead. And the battle for Minas Tirith is magnificent. Trolls, Nazguls, orcs, oliphaunts and undead being intermixed with their human opponents and counter-pointed by Denethor's despair and Theoden's heroism - and all without a single dwarf-tossing joke. In the East, the major change is the separation of Frodo and Sam, following Smeagol's plotting. This plot device actually works well in leading to Frodo's capture and Sam's rescue of him. And the scenes on Mount Doom, and at Sammuth Naur, have the right gravitas. This is the film in which Elijah Wood and Sean Astin come into their own. Their portrayal of the questing hobbits, understated in the first film, and slowly developed in the second, is thrown into stark relief in this episode. It restores Frodo to his place as the central heroic character of the epic, with Sam as his close support. The weight of the Ring is shown both literally and figuratively on Wood's face. By contrast, Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen et al have less of a role to play this time.
One of Jackson's greatest achievements has been the realisation of the look and feel of Middle Earth. In this case, Minas Tirith and Cirith Ungol are both amazingly well presented. The white city, with its winding path to the summit and that summit's Segovia-like prow overlooking the valley below, is a stunning piece of CGI artistry, and the ride of Gandalf up that path to the Great Hall one of the best pieces of computer-generated film-making ever. It doesn't quite match the brilliant work on the Battle of Helm's Deep from The Two Towers, nor the battle scenes in this movie, but it is of a different sort and amazing in its own way. The city and its battlements also perform their role well in the battle scenes, although they do seem to recover quite quickly between the battle and the crowning of the King towards the end of the movie. There is a neat scene where Pippin lights the signal fire of Minas Tirith to call its allies to its aid, a vertigo-inducing climb above the top of the city. (Mind you, one of the sillier aspects was the series of signal fires each on a seemingly more isolated and impossible-to-supply summit.) The sense of great heights is replicated in the climb towards Shelob's lair above Cirith Ungol, with the hobbits and Smeagol sleeping, and arguing, on the edge of the sheerest of drops. Discomforting to say the least.
But through the film, my reaction more frequently was the thrill of recognition as Jackson managed to produce settings, peoples, scenes and battles that evoked the spirit, and the letter, of the original epic. To an extent this evocation exacerbated the major concern with the film: the number of apparent endings. But the film ended where it needed to end, with the Ring-bearers (bearers of the three Elven Rings, together with Bilbo and Frodo) embarking from Middle Earth as the Age of Men begins.
The trilogy of films will rank as one of the great achievements in film-making. The standard of writing, directing, acting and craft has been maintained throughout and, seemingly against the odds, has improved with each film. This has been reflected not only in the artistic success of each film but in the strange phenomenon that each successive film has been more financially successful than its predecessor, something that neither the Star Wars trilogy nor the Godfather trilogy nor (ptui) The Matrix films has achieved. I look forward to the extended DVD version of The Return of the King because the extended DVDs of the two earlier films have improved the cinema release. The extended versions will, in future, be the ones which the afficiandos will prefer. But, even without that, I am awed and exhilarated by Jackson's films and wonder what I have to look forward to next Boxing Day.
Weir feathers Crowe's nest
Another more thoughtful big-budget epic has been produced from an unlikely director, Peter Weir, who is better known for more intimate dramas. Master and Commander: Far Side of the World is adapted from two of Patrick O'Brian's Aubrey-Maturin series of sea adventures and takes us inside the world of the British Navy in the Napoleonic era. In this case the HMS Surpise is chasing a French ship which has been sent to prey on British interests in the Pacific and Aubrey 's orders are to stop her. But his ship is out-gunned and outmatched and, in the early encounter, out-thought. (It's interesting and instructive to note that in the novel from which this aspect of the scenario was derived, the enemy ship was manned by Americans. They had, at the time, tried to take advantage of British involvement in Napoleon's Europe to try and annex Canada, leading to the War of 1812. Having Americans as the putative villains was obviously a step too far for Weir's American producers and the French were an obvious fall-back position.) The film centres on three action scenes, each of which is among the best of its kind on film. There are two battles between the antagonists and a third battle, with nature, as the Surprise sails around Cape Horn in treacherous and dangerous weather. From the opening shot which takes us directly onto the decks of the Surprise where we become acquainted with a large number of its crew, Lt Pullings, Boatswain Barrett Bonden, young Midshipman Blakeney and Preserved Killick, among many others. I did wonder whether someone unfamiliar with O'Brian would have found it as easy to know who these people were. However, it was soon apparent that Weir had brought his talent for the intimate into the broader canvas of the epic. In this he is assisted by a number of startlingly good performances, especially from Russell Crowe as Aubrey. His humor and compassion are portrayed together with his more naval attributes. He is matched by Paul Bettany's Maturin. The script has simplified somewhat the multifaceted aspects of both characters. In a 140 minutes movie it is not possible to cram in the contrasts and contradictions that O'Brian had twenty novels to develop. Instead they become very much complements: Aubrey's energy and verve balanced by Maturin's intellect and quietness. What is well demonstrated is why Aubrey keeps Maturin around - the necessity for the Captain to have someone to talk with. What is also exceptionally well demonstrated is just how good an actor Crowe is: his Aubrey is another of his unique creations, perfectly at home on the maritime film set. He communicates, in his actions and in his presence, just why a boat-load of English johnnies would follow such a man and place their complete trust in him. Bettany's cerebral Maturin is excited largely by the discovery of the new, but is also completely competent in his area of expertise and unwilling to be fobbed off by the captain, no matter how strong his character. The performances of Billy Boyd and Max Pirkis, among many others, adds to the reputation of Weir as an actor's director, able to find ways of explicating personality amid the noise and confusion of battle and storm. There are quieter moments, particularly when the ship is at anchor in the Galapagos Islands, but these are followed by the preparation for, and engagement in, battle. Weir's achievement is to make both aspects of the film excellent and so find a balance in the epic format. This is an excellent film. In most years it might be close to the best film of the year. Too bad that The Return of the King showed up only a few weeks later. It is also a film best seen on the big screen in a cinema.
Hooked and not panned
P J Hogan has made a name from weddings: first Muriel's then My Best Friend's. Like Weir, this youngish Australian director has been given the reins of a big budget effects movie. It's hard to call Peter Pan an epic, but its cost and scope place it in the same class. And like Weir, Hogan has brought some human dimensions in front of his effects; and he has somewhat restored JM Barrie's Pan. The original has some nuances that were eviscerated by the panto and by Disney's cartoon version. The movie seriously contemplates the question of whether Pan is better off being unable to grow up or whether he is actually missing something that is available to others. These are serious issues for what is essentially a kid's movie but it is a mark of the sophistication of this adaptation that such issues are there without derogating from the fun in the foreground. The familiar narrative of the Darling children tempted to Neverland, Lost Boys, Indians, Pirates, fairies and Pan are all here. Jason Isaacs has a lot of fun with Hook, aided by Richard Briers' Smee and a job lot of Australian bit-part actors eating scenery as pirates, and also plays father Darling. Olivia Williams is an effective mother Darling. Relative unknowns play Pan and Wendy and each is very good, particularly Rachel Hurd-Wood as the girl just beginning to mature into a young woman, drawn by the promise of Neverland, but eventually smart enough to realise its limitations. Tinker Bell, played in mime by Ludivine Sagnier, is a completely chaotic creature, driven by her own motivations and thus capable of being used by Hook for his own ends. We saw this with a number of kids in a late night audience. At first restless in the London scenes, they were right into the film as it went to Neverland, charmed and entertained. So were we. So will you be. Hogan has managed to produce a thinking person's Sfx movie, with interesting characters and a narrative that isn't derailed by the necessity of the big scenes into which lots of money has been poured. This one surprised me as I had no great expectations for it. It has had a disappointing box office run in the US, undeservedly but not surprisingly: after all asking Yanks to think has never been a key to big box office. It will look OK on DVD but the big screen is the place to see it. Take a kid (at heart) with you.
Six degrees of love
Richard Curtis has made something of a name writing the British romantic comedy for over a decade. With Love Actually, he makes his directorial debut. This is a multi-strand narrative, reminiscent of Robert Altman's better movies, such as Nashville and The Player. Curtis has interwoven a dozen or so variations on the theme of love. A kid hopelessly in love with the most popular girl in school. A new bachelor Prime Minister in trouble when he realises that he's a victim of love at first sight. A woman secretly in love with a co-worker but committed to the care of her brother. A businessman tempted. A loser who's convinced he'll find true love in Wisconsin. Newly-weds and his best mate. A writer falling in love with his non-Anglophone maid. A couple of extras who meet on a porn movie. A recent widower missing his wife. And across it all, counter-pointing the romance and the pathos, is the story of a has-been rocker promoting his Christmas single with every degree of cynicism that the song deserves. At first it seems that this subplot, while the funniest of the segments, has little to do with the thematic concerns of the movie. But Curtis is canny enough to tie it in as he ties together various aspects of the story through the connections of the characters in a weird concatenation that exemplifies the fewer than six degrees that separate his players. And what a cast! Bill Nighy steals the film as Billy Mack, the singer. But there are effective performances from most of the rest, especially Hugh Grant, Alan Rickman, Laura Linney and the lovely Martine McCutcheon. Like her, many of the cast have graduated from Brit television, EastEnders and Teachers seeming to be the most frequent academies of learning here. Liam Neeson, in perhaps his first decent role since Excalibur, gets to carry much of the pathos but also gets involved in one of the better, more subtle in-jokes towards the climax. The romances not only cover a variety of ages, ethnicities and forms but counterpoint different approaches to the humor. Nighy's popstar subplot and Kris Marshall's Colin, who knows there's love for him in Milwaukee, represent elements of farce. At the other end of the spectrum, aspects of Laura Linney's doomed passion and Emma Thompson's wife who's afraid that her husband may be cheating demonstrate a more serious side. The meet cute of, and developing romance between, stand-ins Jack and Just Judy is sweet. The age-challenged feelings the PM has for his tea lady is a bit edgy. And somewhere among all that is the Colin Firth/Laura Muniz subplot, which is supposed to be cute in its use of sub-titles but has a tone somewhat at odds with the rest of the movie, but I loved its resolution. Curtis effectively bookends the film at the arrivals gate of Heathrow: the introduction establishing the themes by linking them to 11/9; the final scene completing the various storylines and returning us to the themes outlined at the start. This is clever movie-making with few dull moments, but a lot of belly laughs and more than a few surprises. You may actually need to bring your brain with you for this one. Thoroughly recommended adult entertainment.
A wrinkly in time
Something's Gotta Give is an American romantic comedy but with a few twists. It might be the first wrinkly romantic comedy since Spencer and Kate stopped starring opposite each other in the late 1960s, or the attempt to remake those movies in On Golden Pond. Ostensibly it brings together Jack Nicholson and Diane Keaton, together again for the first time since Reds. However, the neatly developed script by writer-director Nancy Meyers, who directed but didn't write What Women Want, takes it all a few steps further. When the putative lovers have their meet cute, he naked in front of her fridge, Harry (Jack) is dating the daughter of playwright Erica (Diane). Only an inconvenient mild heart attack stops Harry and her daughter consummating their affair at Erica's beach house. His illness and her propinquity lead to the inevitable attraction but, again, the script is ahead of us and throws a number of complications in front of the pair. He's frightened by the possibility of love, especially with a woman who is nearly his own age, and she discovers that she enjoys the idea of being in love, having just about given up on its happening again. A further complication, in what is perhaps the weakest aspect of the movie, is that Erica discovers another suitor in Harry's (much younger) doctor (Keanu Reeves). She also finds the situation grist for her latest play, in which she conveniently manages to kill of Harry's character at the end of the Second Act. Nancy's script takes a different turn and the Third Act finds Harry, Erica and the young doctor all in Paris for her birthday. I'm not sure I quite bought the denouement, which seems a little pat, especially given the relative sophistication of the earlier plot development, but it fits well within the parameters of the genre and I enjoyed the getting there. The film gives Keaton a very great part; the movie is worth seeing just for her performance. Too few good roles are available in Hollywood for women of her age and she relishes the opportunities to again play the romantic lead. Nicholson is playing a part so close to Nicholson that you can only admire his self-deprecation as he finds the genuine humor in the part. The supporting cast includes Amanda Peet as the daughter and Frances McDormand as Erica's sister. Both are good and you end up hoping that each had more to do in the film. Can't say the same for Keanu who is, nonetheless, adequate. An entertaining diversion.
The real Japanese Story
A different sort of cross-generational affair, perhaps not as romantic, is portrayed in, Lost in Translation. It could probably described as a romantic comedy but that would be pushing the point because, for much of it, the comedy takes second place to the drama - although it is constantly there - and it's hard to definitively label it romantic, although there are more than a few elements of that genre as well. Let's call it sui generis. And let's also call it one of the better "small" independent movies from Hollywood of late. The auteur is Sofia Coppola, daughter of Francis Ford Coppola, and hence the scion of a major Hollywood clan. (Nicolas Cage is a Coppola, for example and FF's father wrote the music for the Godfather movies.) Sofia was a lead in the third Godfather movie, the least successful one, and was the subject of much criticism: her position in the cast seen as nepotism, not justified by her acting talent. If she lacks in that department, she seems as a writer-director more than talented enough. Lost in Translation is her second feature; Virgin Suicides, another critically acclaimed indie, being her first. Derived, at least in part, from her own experiences in Japan, where she travelled with her husband, the director Spike Jonze, Coppola has imagined a meeting of two lost souls, late at night, in a bar, in a large Tokyo hotel. He is a (former) movie star being paid a huge amount to endorse a Japanese whisky; she is a grass widow whose photographer husband is off shooting some rock band or other elsewhere in Japan. Bill Murray is the actor, a world weary fifty-something, who is innately funny but finds nothing humorous in his isolation from family and culture. Scarlett Johansson plays a twenty-something philosophy graduate (who doesn't appear to read books). Thrown together by circumstances and mutual insomnia, they natter about this and that - the meaning of life - and experience bits of Japanese culture from a karaoke bar, through a party of the cohorts of a Japanese friend of hers, to an amusement arcade. And back to that bar. This could be dull as ditchwater but Coppola's script keeps things interesting and Murray (particularly) and Johansson manage to inhabit two great characters. Murray, who has been undergoing his own sort of Groundhog Day apparently struck in the Stripes/Caddyshack mold (with minor break-outs in Groundhog Day and Rushmore), is given a real opportunity here and doesn't deviate from the right line. He is Bob Harris and he doesn't take any of the easy options for mugging. Johansson matches him all the way; it's just that her character is not quite so well imagined or nuanced as his. Coppola is, if anything, better than both of them. I loved this movie; it's so well put together by all concerned.
The unreal Japanese Story
Returning to the epic, but staying in an American-imagined Japan, The Last Samurai is an interesting film which doesn't quite transcend some basic problems with its set-up and, thus, ends up being passable, rather than very good. Mind you, for much of its length, it contains elements of a very good film. It has a reasonably interesting setting, based in part on the early history of Meiji Japan but, in the end, its concentration on western romanticism, its forced denouement and its derivativeness derogate from its success. The film is set in 1876 when Japan was emerging from feudalism and attempting to modernise all aspects of its society along western lines. This involved a rapid industrialisation and, especially relevant to this movie, the recruitment and training of a new, mainly peasant, army with modern weapons. This latter development was opposed by some conservative elements of the old samurai military caste, who were losing not their monopoly on military might but their protected positions in the administration of the regime and their incomes. One of the most celebrated of these resisters was Saito, a Satsuma samurai. He is one of the more interesting characters of the period and a very complex one. He was a leader of the group of relatively young samurai partly responsible for the overthrow of the decadent Tokugawa shogunate and the developments that led to the restoration of Imperial rule in what is called "the Meiji Restoration". Thus Saigo was one of those responsible for the initiation of the changes against which he eventually fought. He had the element of the fanatic about him: for instance, when a war against Korea was being contemplated, he planned to go to Korea and provoke his own death, which he hoped would be a martyrdom to encourage his countrymen to revenge against the enemy. The war never eventuated so the plan lapsed. When he found himself at odds with the new Imperial government he resigned, returning to traditional Satsuma lands with a large number of disgruntled samurai - disgruntled largely for economic reasons: the loss of their annual stipend. The defeat of Saigo and his followers, numbered at about 40,000, in 1877, by the new Imperial army, former peasants armed with western firearms, spelled the end of the samurai resistance to the new regime. Saigo is the obvious inspiration for the central Japanese (and eponymous?) character in The Last Samurai, Katsumoto (Ken Watanabe). For all that the contradictory fanatic has been turned into a philosopher-general, the part is the most interesting aspect of the movie and Watanabe's performance its major strength.
Onto this story, the film-makers have grafted another of those disillusioned-westerner-meeting-with-a-simpler-culture plots, very similar to Dances with Wolves, itself derivative of the Lawrence of Arabia trope. Like Kevin Costner, Tom Cruise's Captain Nathan Algren (the other candidate for eponymous character) is inexorably drawn towards the foreign culture and brought over to the light side. In between the set piece battles, the main trust of the movie is Algren's capture by Katsumoto's forces and his forced detention in the idyllic bucolic village to which he is taken. There he undergoes a re-education into the ways of (a romanticised) Bushido and has many conversations with Katsumoto on philosophy, military matters and all that jazz. And like Costner, Cruise finds a female soul-mate among the indigines. The part of Algren has potential to provide a second anchor for the film but Cruise is not sufficiently good an actor to make it work. John Cusack or Russell Crowe, to name but two possible alternatives, might have made something believable out of the cliches and invested the part with some gravitas. Cruise's lack of conviction stands in stark contrast with the generally strong Japanese cast. The film is directed by Edward Zwick, who has been responsible for more interesting fare than this. In fact he seems to derive the climactic battle from his own better work, Glory. In that film, the black regiment comes of age in a hopeless charge against a fortified position. In The Last Samurai, the final battle seems to reprise elements of that climax. But with a major twist that alters the meaning of the sacrifice made by those we've come to know. For me, the anti-climax helps destroy any credibility the film might have had. The ending is grafted on apparently for American sensibilities and makes little sense within the logic of the narrative.
Still, there are interesting elements in the recreation of early modern Japan and the clash between the modernisers (personified here in Omura, an industrialist played by director Masato Harada in his first screen role) and the traditionalists, represented by Katsumoto and a village of fascinating characters. The film gives interesting cameos to Timothy Spall and Billy Connolly, among others. But, in the end, it is Ken Watanabe who carries the weight of the film. Nic's ex-husband gets nominal billing but is less than compelling.
Extended, improved and annotated
I thoroughly recommend the four-disc set that comprises the extended DVD version of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, which, like the similar version of the first film, includes an augmented version of the film, with new scenes and additional footage in many existing scenes. There is about 40 minutes of material additional to the cinema version. This greatly improves the flow of the film and underlines a number of interesting plot choices made in adapting the books. In particular it includes a scene involving Boromir, Faramir and Denethor, which establishes much of that family's issues. But of equal interest to the augmented film are the 'appendices', including discourse by the writers, on the choices made in the adaptation of the book, and in the special problems faced by the fact that The Two Towers is the middle episode. In these appendices greater emphasis is placed on the editing and the music composition than in the additional material that accompanied The Fellowship of the Rings. There are also some insights into the CGI work on the second film, particularly the effects related to the Battle of Helm's Deep. The DVD, as a format, has made film watching a different experience, particularly as more film-makers supplement the movie with genuine sidelights on the production; something deeper than a simple making-of doco. It used to be that you needed to buy Cinefex magazine and settle for a few flat, 2D color images of the sfx involved. No longer. Now you can see the artisans involved at all levels of the production process talking about, and demonstrating, the technology, and the thinking, involved. But, in this case, you can especially see how the effects integrate with the story-telling and characters to create the successful whole. Fascinating and enlightening.
Oscar and Razzie goss
The Academy has created history! In its 70-odd years, it has twice only nominated a woman director for the Academy Award in that category: Lina Wertmuller, an Italian, and Jane Campion, a Kiwi, were the two. Neither won. Now Sofia Coppola has been nominated for Best Director for Lost in Translation. She is the first American-born feamale nominee. And about time. I like the nominations of Johnny Depp, Diane Keaton and Ken Watanabe, among others, but was shocked by the inclusion of the young girl from Whale Rider, a good performance but not in the class of Scarlett Johanssen in Lost. Similarly, Russell Crowe seems to have been overlooked unjustly and I really thought that Bill Nighy (Love Actually) and Sean Astin (the third Rings) should have had supporting actor nominations. Talking of the latter, how did Andrew Lesnie, the Director of Photography for that film, also get omitted? I'm glad that Miramax was unable to leverage Cold Comfort Mountain into many nominations. I haven't seen it and am not drawn to do so, but it is exactly the sort of so-serious well-meaning drama that has been over-represented at the Oscars. And someone needs to come up with a category that recognises work such as that done by Andy Serkis (Gollum in the Return of the King) and Ellen deGeneres (Dory in Finding Nemo). Great voice characterisation is a skill in itself and worthy of recognition. One last Oscar note: neither Matrix 2 nor 3 got a nomination, not even in the visual effects category. The one thing that the films allegedly had going for them was their effects and the experts say even those weren't up to snuff.
In the Golden Raspberries, it's going to be wall-to-wall Gigli, which didn't get theatrical release here. Only the expected (and traditional) nod to Stallone in the Worst Supporting Actor category will stop the sweep.
[Note: Information about the movies mentioned, including cast and crew lists and all sorts of trivia, is available at the Internet Movie Database (IMDb).]