In this episode: Titus, Jared, and John discuss their Top 10 lists of 2011 and debate about what they think are the worthy, and unworthy, picks.

You can listen below:

Download this episode (right click and save)

Don’t forget to subscribe to our podcast for free on

by Ray Velez

Let’s get this out of the way first: “The Thing” (2011) is a good monster movie. It has the scary jump moments, the CGI creature effects, the gore…pretty much everything that would make it a good monster movie. The problem is that, in making it a prequel to an awesome film (John Carpenter’s ”The Thing”), you have asked me to at least expect your film to play by a particular set of rules. Rules that were set up in the 1982 film.

Like I said, this is a good monster movie. But what made the 1982 film so good was that it wasn’t necessarily a monster movie. It was a film that played with paranoia, and when the monster did appear, the practical effects (which will ALWAYS be better than CGI, in my opinion) made you cringe with disgust. This monster was really there. But again, the monster only appeared out of necessity! It wanted to survive, and the best way for that to happen was to lay low until it was called out by Kurt Russell’s magnificent beard! Which I hear can cure cancer, but that’s neither here nor there. In the prequel (or reboot or whatever they are calling it), the monster is almost predatory, spending most of the film giving itself away, hunting most of the crew in its monster form. One of the scenes is reminiscent of the raptors-in-the-kitchen scene in “Jurassic Park”, which is NOT what “The Thing” should be! The people behind this film had an opportunity to make a film on par with the John Carpenter version, dealing with claustrophobia and paranoia. Instead, they just turned it into a loud affair, with very little subtlety.

All that said, the movie was nice to look at. The cinematography by Michel Abramowicz was beautiful, the direction by Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. was visually appealing, the script by Eric Heisserer was strong, and the actors were all very good. Mary Elizabeth Winstead takes the lead, with Joel Edgerton as the helicopter pilot, minus any sort of epic beard. The rest of the cast, filled with what I assume are popular Swedish/Danish/Norwegian actors, were all very good, and believable in their roles. The lack of any real stars made it less obvious who was going to perish. And bonus points to the director and writers for having a good portion of the film in Norwegian with subtitles.

The score evoked John Carpenter’s film in some of its score, but again, most of the time just turned into a loud mess. The CGI effects of the monster were good, but the 1982 film still holds up today because of its practical effects. Sadly, this film’s special effects will be outdated in a few years. There were a few questions that I did have throughout this film that kind of bugged me. When Mary Elizabeth Winstead discovers for the first time what the cells of the creature are actually doing, she doesn’t tell anyone except her friend. Why!? Call me crazy, but you would have caught me blaring it over the loud speaker, writing the message in the snow with my own urine, and leaving post-it notes for everyone to find! Also, if this is a Norwegian base, why are most of the items in the background in English?

All in all, “The Thing” (2011) is a good, effective monster movie. I just wish they would have played with more of the elements that made the John Carpenter film such a classic. And though they left the film open to a sequel, I highly doubt we’ll get the opportunity to see it due to this film’s low box office numbers. Sad really, given that when the new Twilight film comes out in a month, it will more than likely break records… I miss the horror films of the 80’s.

Production still from Michael Tully’s “Septien”

Recap of Day 4 at SXSW 2011.

• JOHN’S GONE
• SCENES FROM THE SUBURBS
• SEPTIEN
• THE OTHER F WORD

Production still from “Fightville”

Recap of Day 5 and wrap-up of SXSW 2011.

• FIGHTVILLE
• HOW TO DIE IN OREGON
• HESHER

Don’t forget to subscribe to our podcast for free on

Recap of Day 3 at SXSW 2011.

• WEEKEND
• CONAN O’BRIEN CAN’T STOP
• THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER SOLD
• 13 ASSASSINS
• PAUL
• THE FUTURE

Don’t forget to subscribe to our podcast for free on

To lie or not to lie, that is the question. Not posed by William Shakespeare of course but rather by the growing interest of “documentary” films today. I recently screened two widely discussed films, “Catfish” and “Exit Through the Gift Shop”. But rather than simply review them, I’ve decided to take a different approach.

What these two films have in common and why I’ve chosen an alternate path to writing this article, is because both films have been questioned of their legitimacy. What’s odd, is that these aren’t the first documentaries to be asked of this however it seems to be a growing trend. Though with all of this controversy surrounding these films, you have to wonder if that was the producer’s plan all along.

Let’s begin first by analyzing each film separately and then from there decide which film in fact holds merit, and which film simply is holding your cash. The first film is “Catfish”, one that I had high expectations for and one that I also enjoyed. Although it should be pointed out that going into this film without knowing it, I believed it to be a work of fiction. The film revolves around the relationship between the center piece of the documentary (also the filmmaker’s brother) and a girl he meets online. I can’t say much more than that although, in the digital age we live in today the film is very interesting. Later, when curious of the film’s reception, I researched it and discovered that the film was actually listed as a documentary. Upon realizing this I also found that many, like myself, questioned the very same thing. What is used as proof of the film’s fraud is that there are scenes that are too convenient to the “arc of a story” and to the “composition of a film”. Furthermore, at the Sundance Film Festival and when asked about the film’s legitimacy, the director’s of the film shut down the Q & A panel, which didn’t help. Regardless of the films authenticity, I still enjoyed it but also can understand why a simple concept and modest budget would attract producers.

What’s truly astounding about this argument in general is while seeing the second documentary, “Exit Through the Gift Shop”, I believed the film to be real. Although once again, once finished with the film I learned that others like me had also wondered of this film’s “true meaning”. The difference in contrast is far more apparent than with “Catfish”. This reason being that the film centers around a street artist known as “Banksy” who is infamously known for his elaborate pranks and also serves as the film’s director. When figuring this out and looking back at the film, of course I became more curious. My final bit of curiosity relied on whether or not the film itself was just another media stunt or if it was making an extremely ironic point about media stunts in general. Though real or not, like “Catfish”, this film is one that is highly entertaining and shouldn’t be missed.

So, two documentaries, real or fake, have been released and it raises the idea of whether or not it matters. In comparison, the recent film “I’m Still Here” about actor Joaquin Phoenix’s recent “retirement from acting” anchored completely on the idea of whether or not the film’s plot was real. When discovered that [SPOILER ALERT] it was in fact a fake, many wrote the film off in its entirety. While somewhat harsh, it’s easy to understand since the film had no real story other than the audience wondering if the film was based on truth. Once again a problem many of Hollywood films are faced with today, you have to base a film around a story not a concept.

While the subject of fake documentaries may be shocking to some, in filmmaking it’s nothing new. The difference being that in most “fake documentaries” or “mockumentaries” as they are often called, the lie is more forthwith. Whether it’s in film with a movie like “Best in Show” or in Television with examples like “The Office” and “Modern Family”, the concept has been seen before. What’s important to realize in all of this is that just like any human being it is what’s inside that counts, and if the film, like a person, has no heart then it’s not worth the effort.