Weeds to conclude after eight seasons. And yet another three-act narrative closes shop one season early...

I like Weeds, having watched it first for work-related reasons and then having caught it on my own slowly over the last year or so via Netflix.  I'm not a die-hard fan, so news of its upcoming cancellation following the upcoming eighth season would otherwise be untroubling save for one key factor. Weeds, like any number of ongoing episodic series was clearly structured into a three-act structure, with three seasons for each act.  Like 24, Mad Men, and (so far) Sons of Anarchy among others, the show's long-form storytelling clearly established a set structure.  The first three seasons established the core premise (Nancy sells dope to neighbors in upscale Agrestic after her husband dies) and literally burns down the primary story, while the second three seasons upended Nancy's world and left her at what amounts to rock-bottom (her family abandoned her and she basically surrendered herself to police custody at the conclusion of season six).  That leaves three seasons to rebuild to some kind of third-act finale.  But just like 24, the logical narrative has been cut short by a season.

Weekend Box Office (08-14-11): Rise of the Planet of the Apes tops again, The Help sizzles, Final Destination 5, 30 Minutes or Less, and Glee Live! underwhelm.

 It's a little sad when a drop of just under 50% is considered leggy, but here we are.  Rise of the Planet of the Apes dropped 'just' 49% in its second weekend, which was strong enough to once again claim the top spot at the box office.  The well-received franchise reboot earned $27.8 million in weekend two, for a ten-day total of $105 million.  The number puts it well-ahead of movies that opened with similar numbers in summers past, such as I, Robot ($95 million after ten days), X-Men ($99 million), X-Men: First Class ($98 million), GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra ($98 million), and The Incredible Hulk ($97 million).  It is comparatively down from Tim Burton's still-lousy (just watched it again this weekend) Planet of the Apes, which opened with $69 million back in 2001 and ended its tenth day with $123 million.  However, this much-better received and much cheaper variation is falling at a smaller rate, so it has a chance of catching up to the $180 million earned by the Burton re-imagining ten years ago.  The film is doing the usual Fox magic overseas as well, as it has $179.6 million worldwide, which makes this a HUGE win for the $93 million production.

Review: I Am Number Four (2011)

I Am Number Four
2011
110 minutes
rated PG-13

by Scott Mendelson

I Am Number Four is a film that seems to want to be better than it is, but feels hamstrung by the hopelessly generic narrative at its core. Based on a novel by James Frey and Jobie Hughes, the film basically tells a variation on the Rosewell/Smallville/Twilight formula, with all of the reverence that seemingly goes hand-in-hand with such soulful teen outcast stories. But director D.J. Caruso refrains from playing around with the formula for most of the picture, either too lazy or too afraid to put a unique spin on the contrivance at play. After all, Catherine Hardwicke inserted a knowing snark and self-mocking humor into the first Twilight picture, and was fired from the franchise for her troubles. Up until the last act, I Am Number Four is all-too content to merely 'go with the flow'.

I Am Number Four gets painfully assembly-line trailer.

While the plot seems to resemble the old WB show Roswell, the sell is hardcore Twilight. I don't need to point out the obvious similarities, but there are moments on inexplicable humor to be found. Dianna Agron's scrapbook looks like a lost volume of Se7en's John Doe while Theresa Palmer (as 'number 6' of nine alien survivors) ends up looking exactly like Agron. I honestly couldn't tell them apart in several key moments in the end montage. Aside from how bland and conventional this picture looks, it's just another piece of evidence that, for the last fifteen years frankly, actresses have much more opportunities on television than in mainstream features. On television's Glee, Dianna Agron gets to play a three-dimensional character with a subtly changing personality. In I Am Number Four, she's the token love interest who exists only to look pretty, swoon, and be captured by the villains. Oh well, for what it's worth, I rather liked Disturbia and kinda enjoy Eagle Eye, so hopefully DJ Caruso can find a better use of his talents if this continues his hit streak. I Am Number Four comes out in regular theaters and IMAX screens on February 11th, 2011.

Scott Mendelson

The obvious gender double-standard of GQ's Glee photo shoot.

Look, Glee's Lea Michele is really hot, and Dianna Agron isn't too bad either. So as a heterosexual male, I have no objection if they choose to partake in a somewhat risque photo shoot for GQ Magazine, although I do wish they had arranged for Jayma Mays to participate as well. There are others who may partake in a certain amount of finger wagging on the whole principal of the matter, but I've always been of the live-and-let-live philosophy. But what I do find annoying, if not a little disturbing, is the obvious differences in how female leads Michele and Agron are shot versus how male lead Cory Monteith is photographed. The pictures above are the most obvious (and least risque) examples, and they arguably speak for themselves. But just in case you need the obvious pointed out: the women are shot in overtly salacious poses in a state of semi-undress. Monteith is photographed fully clothed and (in his solo photos) engaging in relatively asexual behavior such as playing the drums or goofing off in the gym. I certainly don't need or want to see Moneith's bare ass or the man who plays Finn in any kind of compromising positions, but why is it that the women must be photographed with imagery out of a pornographic fantasy, while the male lead (and in fact most male actors in glossy photo shoots) get away with not doing so much as unbuttoning their top buttons? If you were going to do an entire shoot with Michele and Agron playing off the 'naughty schoolgirl' fantasy, wouldn't it have been a little bit fair to at least have a couple shots of Monteith with his shirt removed? Again, I'm not trying to get on a high horse about sexism and the double-standard of how men and women are photographed in Hollywood, but well, once you glance at the Glee pictorial, it kinda makes the point for me.

Scott Mendelson

"Always Be Closing". Glee again makes up for flawed middle with grand finale.

In a day when Lost can't wrap up their six-year run without negating everything that came before it, and even 24 can't end with a bang thanks to an upcoming movie version (the series finale was remarkably similar to the finale of season four), it's nice to see a final episode, even just a season finale, go out with a little style. Yes, the Glee mid-season finale was sharper and better paced, especially as two of the dramatic highlights (the kids doing a song for their teacher and Will making one last play for Emma) were reruns of last year's mid-season climax. Yes most of the break-out characters were put on the sidelines to focus to the original leads: Will, Sue, Finn, and Rachel. Yes, it's absolutely absurd that a character who has confessed to attempting to fix a dance competition just months ago would be allowed to judge a higher level of said competition. And the insertion of Rachel's long-lost mother proved to be a big fat deus ex machina to allow a known character to adapt Quinn and Puck's newborn.

Equal rights means equal responsibility. Why Glee's 'breakthrough gay scene' succeeds as drama but fails as a teachable moment.

It may be a doozy of a stand-alone dramatic scene, but last week's verbal tongue-lashing on Glee from Kurt's father to Finn was not the proud moment in gay/straight relations that it has been sold as. The scene in question has been heralded elsewhere as some kind of wonderful teaching moment about the hidden prejudice in all of us. Frankly, the scene is more about how a relatively reasonable person lashes out at the stunning manipulations of a sexually-aggressive asshole. Yes Finn (Cory Monteith) lost his temper and lashed out (he uses the term 'faggy' to describe the decorations purchased by Kurt for their new living quarters), but Kurt (Chris Colfer) bears responsibility as well. The clip below (after the jump... blame formatting issues) ironically removes much of the context that explains the outbursts in question.