Dan's Movie Digest Issue #167 has been released by DVD Fever, and contains news on Terminator 4, Bean 2, Ambulance Chasers, Into The Mirror and the latest US/UK box-office.

MONK

Having been off work for a few days, I've rediscovered a wonderful show now tucked away on BBC 1 in the afternoons called Monk, starring Tony Shalhoub (Galaxy Quest) as Adrien Monk, a brilliant San Francisco detective with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD), whose affliction actually gives him an incisive viewpoint to solve crimes...

Monk isn't a new find for me, but since it transferred to daytime TV I haven't seen any of it. I'm not likely to again either unless I'm sick, invest in Sky+, or the Beeb bless us with a late-night repeat. Even a weekend omnibus would be great, Aunty Beeb...

It's one of those rare shows that is ideal family viewing, yet not humdrum so that it alienates the younger audience. Each week Monk basically solves a crime using a combination of his obsessive-compulsive attitude to the crime scenes, photographic memory, and old-fashioned detective work.

The crimes are never particularly bloody, or even wholly believable at times, let's be honest -- but that's not the point. This is old school "murder-as-entertainment" in the same mould as Murder, She Wrote and Columbo, so forget any CSI expectations!

If there is one criticism to Monk, it's that the show sometimes shows the murderer's crime to the viewer very early on, meaning the entertainment comes solely from Monk's investigation. While this is fine occassionally, I'd much prefer being treated with intelligence and have Monk's eventual summation of "whodunnit?" to be something that wasn't obvious to me after the first 10 minutes!

But, even with this flaw to some of the episodes, Monk survives it due to its off-beat style, a wonderful central performance from Tony Shalhoub, fine support from the regular cast (including Silence Of The Lambs' Buffalo Bill as Captain Stottlemeyer!) and some excellent guest stars, such as: John Turturro (The Big Lebowski), Tim Curry (Rocky Horror), Jason Alexander (Seinfeld), Malcolm McDowell (A Clockwork Orange), James Brolin and Willie Nelson, amongst others.

So if you're ever off sick from work, I recommend catching Monk (and perhaps e-mail the BBC to give it a primetime repeat for those of us who don't want Sky+!)

LA CABINA

Who remembers La Cabina? Well, perhaps not by name, but if you ever see a particularly wonderful foreign film about a man trapped in a telephone booth, then you'll never forget it! The movie has attained a cult status in the UK mainly due to the fact so few people have seen it, but those that caught a late-night showing in the 80's have had it burned into their memory forever.

La Cabina was a 1972 35-minute Spanish TV-Movie by Antonio Mercero about a man (played by José Luis López Vázquez) who tries to make a phone call on an out-of-order telephone booth. Unfortunately, the booth is a trap and he finds himself stuck inside...

Passers-by try to help him escape from the booth, but soon after a phone company truck appears and transports the booth away to an underground factory that contains hundreds of identical booths -- containing the skeletal remains of past victims, some of whom committed suicide with the phone cord...

Remember it now? If not, I recommend you download La Cabina on bittorrent here. It won an Emmy in 1972 for Best International Fiction, and quite deservedly so. Recommended to all fans of surreal cinema.

THE LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN

I caught an episode of Late Show on ITV 4 last night and it just struck me how continually awful David Letterman is. The fact he's just a revered and worshipped legend of American television just baffles me on most levels. His show is a stinker. If it wasn't for the A-list guests (usually, we'll forget the US politicians and musicans that pepper the show -- the audience even seem to) there really is no tangible reason I can think of to watch it.

Back in 1996 I saw Late Show for the first time - on Sky One, back then. It's amazing to think it's been on US TV since '93, and in a previous Late Night incarnation since '82!! But anyway, what annoyed me last night was how a 2006 episode (with Harry Connick Jnr as the main guest) was nearly identical to a 1996 episode I saw (with Harry Connick Jnr, plugging Independence Day)!

Not identical in the strictest sense of the word, that would be silly, but it's a source of endless confusion for me that the Late Show never, ever, ever changes it format. Yes, I know it's a chat show and there's only so much you can do to make it different from competitors, but... God almighty... David Letterman is the purest example of an overly paid entertainer who's totally complacent with his show and gets away with it!

Before any fans of Dave e-mail me, yes I understand that when Late Night/Show first aired it was a revolution and some of the stunts/pranks/skits Letterman did were pioneering stuff that has influenced many people... but that was in the past. The vast majority of "classic Letterman" examples fans ever tell me about happened in the late-80's/early-90's!

The chat show genre has a lot to thank Letterman for, I know. His format has been plagiarised the world over... but at least the copycats give their own shows continual twists to keep them fresh or (here's an idea, Dave) just end the bloody show when it becomes clear they're repeating themselves!

Don't any Americans find Letterman's schtick irriating? A rambling, unfunny monologue? Check. Numerous tie-straightenings? Check. Pointless gurning and pen twiddling? Check. Card throwing at the model New York? Check. Paul Schaeffer being unfunny? Check. A "Top 10" list with about 2 funny jokes? Check. Crap competition with the audience? Check. The band giving musical accompaniment to Letterman's every move, while the audience hoot like they're on drugs? Check.

Sigh. This turgid mess is on for what seems like 365 days a year! Talk about overkill! What's worse is that all his native competitors (Jay Leno, Conan O'Brien, et al) just blindly follow his lead and daren't try and shake-up their own shows with anything resembling originality either!

Now, the UK certainly offers no gold-plated alternative, but Jonathan Ross' interviews on his Friday Night show are undoubtedly more risque and hilarious than Letterman's (particularly when US stars are blindsided by his swearing and robust humour). It's of particular delight to me when a big-name American star clearly expect a Letterman style love-in sprinkled with plugs for their latest movie... but instead gets a bizarre grilling and have to go on the defence. For a great "rabbit caught in the headlights" moment try and find Sarah Michelle Gellar interview on Ross' show!

Oh well. Letterman will undoubtedly be stuck in the Ed Sullivan theatre twiddling his pen and twitching away to riotous applause until the day he dies... only to be replaced "Johnny Carson-style" with another so-called comedian who won't risk upsetting the apple cart and simply give the Yanks more of the same...

I'll tune in to the Late Show again in 2016, maybe. I wonder if Harry Connick Jnr will still have something to plug? Probably the Independence Day 20th Anniversary re-release...

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

"SAW II" - DVD REVIEW
REGION 2. £14.99 (RRP) PICTURE: 1.85:1 (WIDESCREEN) SOUND: DD5.1
DIRECTOR: Darren Lyn Bousman CAST: Donnie Wahlberg (Det. Mathews), Shawnee Smith (Amanda), Tobin Bell (John/Jigsaw), Dina Meyer (Kerry), Franky G (Xavier), Glenn Plummer (Jonas) more...
In recent years an apparent renaissance of old-fashioned horror has begun to emerge, with Cabin Fever and The Descent both eskewing CGI in favour of blood bags and make-up. 2004's Saw was a low-budget horror with a killer premise (pardon the pun), whereby a psychotic serial-killer known as Jigsaw imprisoned his victims and presented them with fiendish puzzles to solve and avoid death.

Saw's delicious premise, old-style frights, painful death/torture scenes and a surprisingly effective twist ending, ensured the film became a sleeper hit (indeed, it single-handedly funded the studio's Christmas party.)

Now, the fast-tracked sequel arrives, hoping to break the curse of the sequel (never more prevailant than in horror). Saw II relies on the usual sequel gambit -- more of the same, with twists on the theme. So this time corrupt Detective Mathews (Donnie Wahlberg) captures Jigsaw (Tobin Bell), but has to play a game himself in order for the villain to reveal where he's keeping a house full of imprisoned people breathing in toxic gas...

Unfortunately, while Saw revelled in its psychological angle - wherein the victims fought to survive the horrors inflicted on them as part of "the game", the sequel generally forgets about this element and offers far more bland torture devices. Only the opening "death mask", a "peep-hole gun" and "pit of needles" prove memorable, with everything else sadly lacking in originality and the twisted genius of the original.

It was certainly brave for Saw II to unmask its antagonist, who remained an unseen boogeyman in the original (only given physicality by a sinister puppet on a tricycle), but it's yet another piece of bad judgement. Tobin Bell has a wonderfully creepy screen presence and cool-as-ice voice, and manages to become the saving grace of the movie in many ways, but he can't escape the plain fact that he was twice as scary when he was unseen...

Perhaps Bell's newfound starring role was to counter-balance the criminal lack of acting talent elsewhere. You don't expect a movie such as Saw II to attract Oscar-winners, or even screenwriters particularly interested in character development, but Saw II suffers from a larger cast with no particularly likeable characters.

Donnie Wahlberg looks lost half the time, while the rag-tag group of victims just argue with each other before dying. Say what you will about Cary Elwes' performance in the original, but at least the original focused on two characters and created a compelling backstory for them both. Saw II is far too self-satisfied with its own existence to bother giving fans a satisfying companion piece to the movie they turned into a smash-hit last year. Characters? A logical backstory? No chance. Blood, blood, blood, that's what the kids want... right?

On the plus side, Saw II shares the same style and look of the original (it helps give franchises like this an overall identity, I feel), and there are some effective moments along the way that remind you how enjoyably twisted this franchise can be. Also, for what it's worth, I didn't expect there to be a twist ending this time around, so when one came along it proved a surprise (which was nice) but lacks believability in the cold light of day. In fact, the twist could mean Saw III will prove to be a tricky sell for any fans still left after this disappointing follow-up.

DVD REVIEW

PICTURE: Quality is very good, with nice dingy colours and a green/yellow grungy feel throughout. The blacks aren't particularly pure and there is a lot of grain on the image, but most of this is intentional. There are some distracting artifacts to be found, however.

SOUND: There is no DD5.1 EX track for Region 2, but the existing DD5.1 track is very good, with enough going on to immerse you in the experience aurally.

EXTRA FEATURES:

• 5 Featurettes (one covering the entire movie, and 4 focusing on the film's key "traps") All are entertaining, particularly the "needle pin" featurette, but nothing revelatory here. For some reason the Region 1 extra feature about the props of Saw II is missing.
  
• Commentary Track from director Bousman and stars Wahlberg and Beverly Mitchell is enjoyable because of their enthusiasim, particularly from Bousman.
• 4 Storyboard-To-Film comparisons; the usual stuff.
  

Not a bad release (certainly better than Saw's debut on DVD), but die-hard fans may want to hold out for the invevitable Special Edition to tie-in with Saw III's release this Halloween.

Over at DVD Fever the latest edition of Dan's Movie Digest has been released, with news on Ocean's Thirteen, The Simpsons Movie, Superman Returns, a mini-review of the Poseidon trailer, and the latest US/UK box-office charts!

So, what are you waiting for, DMD Issue #166 is waiting!

DISASTER MOVIES – Poseidon to 9/11

The disaster movie is a genre that has been around for decades, killing a variety of usually cliched characters by fire, earthquake, asteroid, volcano, tsunami, and many other ferocities of nature.

Disaster movies have been around since the 1930's, with San Francisco depicting the city's notorious earthquake, but it wasn't until the 1950's and '60's that disaster movies took on more epic proportions thanks the science-fiction craze with When Worlds Collide and Them! (giant ants) amongst others.

However, the classic disaster movies were spawned in the 1970's with The Poseidon Adventure (1972); ocean liner capsized by tsunami, The Towering Inferno (1974); world's tallest building catches fire, and Earthquake; massive earthquake strikes Los Angeles. Studios also began using all-star casts in such films, particularly after the success of Airport.

By the mid-70's, the genre was beginning to burn itself out (no pun intended). The obvious disasters had all been used up, so studios began producing sillier movies with weaker disasters and cheaper actors (such as The Swarm's killer bees)

The 1980's saw the disaster movie retreat into obscurity after its '70's hey-day, with only the 1983 TV Movie The Day After providing any value with its depiction of nuclear war. Disaster movies, and in particular the airplane-set Zero Hour, was even ridiculed by the hilarious Airplane! (1980), that perhaps put a few nails in the coffin…

But the final nail was never hammered into place and, thanks to advances in special-effects post-Jurassic Park (itself a disaster movie at heart), the 1990's saw a massive resurgence of the genre – spearheaded by 1996's Independence Day (alien attack).

The massive box-office of Independence Day saw studios clamouring for more technically impressive disasters to dramatize, such as Daylight (collapsed tunnel drama with Sylvester Stallone). Parodies even became an accepted variant of the genre with Mars Attacks! (1997).

The frenzy for CGI-assisted disasters meant movies with similar premises also battled each other at the box-office – as with Dante's Peak versus Volcano and Deep Impact versus Armageddon (comet/asteroid impacts).

Then, in 1997, the disaster movie achieved its crowning glory with the release of James Cameron's Titanic, which won 11 Academy Awards and became the biggest-grossing movie in history ($1.8 billion so far). It was only fitting that the world's most famous disaster became the disaster genre's most famous movie.

After the millennium, the disaster movie beat another hasty reteat following the events of 11 September 2001, when the world watched a real-life disaster unfold on the news. How could a movie possibly compete with reality, or even exist to entertain people anymore? Two years later, The Core dipped a toe into the water again with its tale of a subterranean disaster. Interestingly, given its post-9/11 release, the movie was more about stopping a global disaster, rather than experiencing one…

But, in 2004, the genre returned in force with The Day After Tomorrow, an environmental disaster movie that upped the ante by containing numerous global disasters and didn't flinch from destroying New York landmarks again. In 2006, Poseidon, based on the classic 1972 movie that started the modern craze for cinematic catastrophe, is about to be released… so the genre is most definitely not dead. But with a remake of When Worlds Collide also on the cards... is it now entering a "recycling phase"?

Also of interest this year is the fact reality will collide with fiction in the disaster movie genre (for the first time) when two projects about the events of 11 September 2001 are released – United 93 and World Trade Center.

DERREN BROWN - TRICK OF THE MIND

Sundays 9 p.m, Channel 4

I'm a huge fan of Derren Brown, so I'm obviously glued to the TV every Sunday night at 9 p.m now his Trick Of The Mind series has returned to Channel 4. Brilliant, brilliant stuff. I'm sure everyone knows who Derren is (certainly if you live in the UK -- not sure if he's gone international yet...), but if not, well, he's basically a psychological illusionist. Or "mind reader".

However you categorize him, he's been making magic/hypnosis cool again in recent years. Yes, David Blaine pioneered "street magic" to phenomenal effect, but his increasingly surreal and pointless endurance stunts have become old very fast. All exemplified by the "living in a box" debacle above the River Thames! Watching Londoners turn his stunt into a living hell was pure TV gold...

But I'm not dissing Blaine, really, as he's clearly very talented and still an interesting performer, but at least Derren Brown is personable and, for my money, has a brand of magic streets ahead of Blaine and co in terms of interest.

Last night's Trick Of The Mind was particularly good. In one standout, a volunteer was blindfolded at a train station, driven across town in a taxi playing classical music, told to get into some pyjamas, quickly (and bizarrely) shown subliminal messages on a projected screen, then told to go to sleep. Simple.

However... the fun began when it became clear Derren had been able to plant ideas into the guy's mind and prompt his dream! At one point, Derren woke the sleeper and was told he'd been having a dream about a "hospital", an "old woman", "sheep", "grass", "snow" and other dream-like oddities (all predicted by Derren on a board).

Then came the masterstroke: the sleeper's bedroom was slowly altered during the night to resemble his dream! The poor bloke woke up to find himself in a snow-covered grassy hospital full of sheep and a creepy old lady lying in bed! Bizarre. Very strange to see the poor lad wander around, acting as if this was still the dream, before being told by Derren (via intercom) to head back to bed...

Fabulous stuff. If you're new to Derren's work, check out his own website and the CH4 microsite for more information, DVD's, tour dates, and other goodies!

V FOR VENDETTA

Writer Alan Moore may have disowned it, but I'm sure fans of the DC/Vertigo graphic novel will want to judge the V For Vendetta movie adaptation themselves. I read the book about four years ago and immediately saw massive potential for a gripping, imaginative and intelligent movie version.

Unfortunately, as you might expect, V For Vendetta is quite sporadic in quality. There are some great moments sprinkled throughout, but there is also a lot of talkative padding. The Wachowski Brothers (The Matrix trilogy) wrote the screenplay, and while they do a competent job in removing some of the book's needless subplots and develop an interest new slant in the form of a governmental viral massacre, they also add new elements that just detract from proceedings.

At times V For Vendetta is quite cliched and frustrating in its depiction of Britain. It would have been preferably to have a director who understands the British psyche, as some scenes (particularly in Act I) are quite clunky and embarassing to watch. The constant uttering of "cunt" and "bollocks" is the sole way the writers signal the characters are British at times! Stephen Rea even pronounces "lever" (leever) as the Americanized "levva"!

The mid-section is also far too talkative, with endless scenes of Chancellor Sutler (John Hurt) shouting at his henchmen from a viewscreen and a police investigation that resembles a bad ITV detective drama. The movie also suffers whenever V (Hugo Weaving) and Natalie Portma are off-screen, primarily because the supporting cast are so underwritten - except for a startlingly good Stephen Fry!

Overall, there are moments in V For Vendetta that almost sink the show. Fans of Alan Moore's fabulous book will be watching between cringes for the first 30 minutes and will surely get a little restless half-way through. But, thankfully, Act III fires with all cylinders and the plot (including the new strands created by the Wachowski's) come together nicely, and the finale -- whilst deviating from the novel -- packs enough of a punch to have made the experience worthwhile.

So, not the blistering success it could have been, but neither is it a massive disappointment. I can only speak as someone who has read the book, but I found V For Vendetta a decent enough adaptation of difficult source material. No matter how you look at it, it's quite brave for a film to be destroying London landmark less than a year after the London underground bombings of 7 July 2005...