Remembering Charles McCrann

Today is kind of an important day, so I decided to try something little different.  I'm going to talk about one man- Charles McCrann...

Charles was a Princeton and Yale Law Graduate who made a movie in 1980- Toxic Zombies aka Bloodeaters.

However, this was not a usual thing for him.  Despite Directing, Writing, Editing and Starring in the film, he only made one.

What did he do after that?  He continued to work in his real job- a financial services company.  He did that for the next 21 years.

Unfortunately, Marsh and McLennan Companies decided- like many companies- to have their main offices in the biggest financial building in the world- The World Trade Center.

Yes, the reason why I bring up Charles McCrann today is because he died on this day 10 years ago.  His death was alongside numerous others, all of whom deserve recognition for their life's work.

With so much that happened that day and with all of the time that has passed, many- like McCrann- have not gotten that.  I think it's time to change that.

While I did not like his movie, McCrann was by all reports a successful businessman,- as Senior VP of the company- a great family man and an all-around good guy.

He is, and will continue to be, missed.

P.S. Comedy and sarcasm will return tomorrow.  It just doesn't feel right today.

Blockbuster Anniversary Trash: The 9/11 Commission Report (The Asylum's)

Yes, they went there.  I usually don't talk about stuff like this, but when I was reminded that this movie existed, I had to talk about it.  Part of your understanding here has to be based on a reminder: The Asylum make bad movies.  Some of them are better than they should be (e.g. I Am Omega) or have enjoyable actors in them (e.g. Transmorphers: Fall of Man), but most of them suck!  They've tried to turn their reputation into that of a company that makes kitschy films like Mega-Shark vs. Giant Octopus or Titanic 2 (yes, really), but they mostly make dull and/or painful films like Death Racers or Tokyo/Monster.  The biggest thing about them is that they make movies to capitalize off of upcoming *presumed to be* hit films.  This is amusing at times, but also leads to stuff like this.  Back in 2006, Oliver Stone wanted to make a memorial film about the tragedy that took place on 9/11/01.  Personally, I saw it as a bit tacky, but he was going in with a good heart.  The same could be said for the people behind United 93- another film I found to be tacky.  The Asylum's film is a cheap attempt to knock-off a film that arguably exploits a national tragedy- it's doubly-despicable!  So yeah, this is going to end well.  Get out your FICA Warrant for my review of...

This film is really just a series of random scenes of people talking.  What are they talking about, you ask?  Well, a man signs up for flight school and says cryptic things.  Nobody questions this until later, but it's not really all that notable.  A government agent talks cryptically about some operation.  An agent gets hired by that giant-nosed chick from Monster/Tokyo.  They talk about a government operation to kill Osama Bin Laden...while walking down a busy street in London.  How was this operation compromised again?!?  By the way, if you actually see this, count all the extras that nearly look right into the camera here.  Plus, check out the bit where a guy starts to walk in front of the camera and they suddenly change camera angles.  Seriously?

So yeah, we get more talking and, well, more talking.  They say things that could be interesting- like a woman explaining how killing Bin Laden is a viable option- but kill it with bad delivery and severely-muted acting.  I actually read a review from a British paper that talked about this containing 'The Asylum's best actors'- that's sad.  The big thing to note from the latter half of the movie is a very direct bias against 'Liberals.'  The FBI Agent wants to arrest the man taking flight classes, but those damn ACLU guys 'put a stop to that.'  My favorite part is where the random guy from Tokyo/Monster that helped the sisters outside and died off-camera plays a 'Democrat' who throws his authority in the Republican guy's face.  Yeah, remember all the authority they had in the year 2000 after Republicans took the White House & still controlled Congress.  Could you at least lie in a way that's feasible, guys?

By the way, I'm sure you're wondering- do they go there?  Here's the most they actually have the guts to do...

This movie is terrible!  It's pure, political exploitation that makes no damn sense.  The whole thing is hinged upon you believing their view of history.  It just doesn't synch up with, oh, reality!  On top of all that, the movie is just dull.  They pack a little action into the ending bit, I guess, but it's far too late.  This movie about political intrigue and the 'build-up' to the most tragic terrorist event in United States history is boring!  How can you do that?  The worst case scenario is that you play fast and loose with history (already done) in order to make action scenes occur.  Yeah, they don't do that.  If you think that the West Wing is too exciting for you, then this is your movie.  Unlike that show, the writing is terrible and just puts you to sleep.  This movie is just pointless and terrible.  How many 'terribles' are required for an Asylum film?  Just to cover my bases: terrible.

Next up, I celebrate 9/12 with a man more insane and dangerous than Glenn Beck.  Will his rally end the same way that his did?  Stay tuned...

A New Low: 9/11-sploitation

I have been bothered by this for a long time, but did not feel right bringing it to a public venue. The date being what it is though, it just feels right.

9/11-sploitation

This is just a terrible idea and I wish that it would go away. The basic idea is to make movies that reference the event or are inspired by the imagery of it. Yeah, we all want to relive it through cinema! There are many levels of it and different offenders that bear mentioning.

*

1. Cloverfield: While not an outright culprit, it knows just what it is doing. A mysterious event suddenly happens in NYC while everyone is caught off-guard. Everyone is running and giant dust/debris clouds litter the street. Everyone films all the destruction as well. I might forgive this movie if it did not suck.

2. W.T.C./United 93: I might get some flack for including this, but hear me out. For one thing, the first film is all about the heroic sacrifices of the men, but changes their names and turns one black man into Nicolas Cage! The latter is supposedly quite realistic based on what we know from the supposed phone calls. Oh, so you wanted it to feel gritty- thanks.

3. Reign Over Me: This weepy Adam Sandler film (how rare is that) is also not a major offender, but is pretty dumb for what it is. Adam's character is heart-broken because he lost his family in 9/11. That's very sad. Why does it have to be this event? It could not be a car accident/cancer/any other plane crash? It just feels so tacked on and stupid.

*

There are a few more minor and major offenders of this. While I will admit that most of them are not super-callous, the sheer idea of this even being thought up is bad enough. This is coming from a guy who lives in Florida and lost nobody that day. I have no real connection to the event, but can see why so many people still do. There's no need to do this, so why bother? At least District 9 is a vague allegory on the events it is based on. Just stop it.