It's only he heavy-hitters in this week's new DVD releases. A triumphant comeback, the downfall of a president (and a rapper), and cylons, cylons, cylons!

Here to put his stamp of cynicism on the proceedings is Videoport Jones.

The Wrestler

Videoport Jones: "See, now here's where I have to come off like a grump. People call me a grump, in that I often persist in not being washed away on an euphoric flood over some movie that everyone else can't stop gushing over. 'You grump,' they say, rolling their eyes at the grump, 'you just can't enjoy anything.' Well, no, see I can enjoy a lot of movies, of all kinds; what I can't do is allow the 'feelgoodiness' of the hype surrounding a movie to force me to overrate something which doesn't deserve it. Which brings us to 'The Wrestler'. To begin - I liked 'The Wrestler'. I liked director Darren Arnofsky's willingness to take a step back from his usual, stylized mind f-ers (which I also like) and try something straightforward, down 'n' dirty, and grubby. I like Marisa Tomei's, um, courage in her almost completely naked (in both ways) performance. I really liked the film's authentic take on professional wrestling, which I must confess, I still have a soft spot for. And, yeah, I liked Mickey Rourke, who returned from direct-to-DVD oblivion to reveal, along with a tragically beefed-up body, that he still can carry a movie. I liked that the movie made me cry a couple of times, and laugh here and there. I liked the movie. But I didn't love it. It's a thin stew. It's currently rated #76 on IMDb's top movies of all time list, which is a testament to how many uninformed people vote in that otherwise excellent film site (it's a fine little movie, but its lofty position is more a testament to that whole flood of overpraise phenomenon I was talking about). See, people love a good underdog story well told. Check. They also love when they can make a facile comparison between the lead actor of such a tale and the character he portrays. Check. Plus, people are pretty easily impressed by a celebrity's willingness to undergo some sort of grueling physical transformation in said role. Check and checkmate. In a role tailor-made for the sort of comeback plaudits he's now getting, Mickey is good, even very good; his ruined glam-god pro wrestler is physically very convincing and emotionally pretty satisfying. But he's riding that wave of undeserved overpraise, and good for him; he'll get some more high profile roles, make some money, and continue to be entertainingly crazy at awards shows. But he's just not that good anymore; people looking to see him expand his range after this are going to be sorely disappointed. Sorry, the grump has spoken."

Justin: "And Killjoy Jones has entered the building. Wow man, you have a unique, pitch-perfect ability to cut the legs out from any movie. It's what I like about you. If I understand your argument though, it's more about the noise surrounding the movie than the actual film effort itself. It's about people's reaction (or overreaction) to 'The Wrestler.' And that I don't get. Is this a great movie, a pillar in the cinema pantheon? No. Of course not. Is the story touching, the performances moving and the direction thoughtful? Sure. And you are right that this film has the perfect storm of art-imitating-life qualities in Rourke's comeback and Tomei's, uh...revealing turn, that have the ability to really move people. And no, we can never, ever, as a movie-going public, deny an underdog/comeback movie. (See, 'franchise, Rocky') Was the flood of praise and accolades deserved? I don't know. But I'll say this, I don't think it's wrong if people are deeply moved by this movie. If some folks want to think it's among the best movies ever made, then so be it. It's the reason people go to movies, or at least one of the reasons."

Notorious

VPJ: "This biopic about the life and death (sorry, but if I just spoiled the ending for you, you weren't going to watch this anyway) of rapper Biggie Smalls hits the Videoport shelves this week, with former unknown Jamal Woodard as B.I.G. and, well it's okay. Suffering from the usually-incurable malady 'biopic-itis', 'Notorious' follows its subjects well-trod path from picked-upon fat kid to marginally-successful dope dealer to rap megastar to, well, dead rap megastar in, sadly, a pretty by-the-numbers fashion. Woodard's not bad, and Derek Luke's not bad (as Sean Combs), Angela Bassett (who deserves so much better than the 'I'm worried about you' mom role she gets here)...isn't bad. The whole movie's not bad, although it seems to be making the case that Biggie was really just a sweet, rapping teddy bear and, while I may not be the hippest dude around (please note my lame use of the word 'dude'), I have seen enough biopics (of musicians, sports stars, politicians, writers, and one windshield wiper-inventor) to see that this...is another one."

JE: "And that's what makes the whole enterprise sad. This movie got a lot of hype when it finally got off the ground. I don't know if people thought it would reveal more about who Biggie was, the feud with Tupac, or the details surrounding his death. In my opinion a bio-pic is probably not the place to go for those answers. And really, those questions may never get answered. Maybe the problem was that a lot of this ground's been covered in books and 'Behind the Music' specials. Maybe the problem was the timing. Though he's released albums posthumously (but who hasn't?), is he still on people's minds over 10 years later? And I say that as a fan. Of course the problem could just be biopic-itis, as you put it. The biopic is pretty much as paint-by-the-numbers moviemaking as you can get since the plot is pretty much well-established (especially since the subject is usually dead, giving the director a nice and tidy ending), so that doesn't leave a lot of room for creativity. Then again, going with the guy who directed 'Soul Food' and produced the 'Barbershop' franchise may not help either. Who knows. I'm now going to go listen to Life After Death..."

Frost/Nixon

VPJ: "In the workmanlike, completely overrated hands of Oscar-winning director Ron Howard, this adaptation of the legendary interviews between disgraced former president criminal Richard Nixon and ambitious, unctuous Brit TV presenter David Frost is burdened with Howard's trademark stylelessness. Which is actually fine in this case, as really, nothing should be in the way of the two lead performances; Michael Sheen's Frost and, especially, Frank Langella's Nixon are fully inhabited characters and, constrained though they may be by having to, you know, abide by the actual interviews (and some juicily extrapolated behind the scenes stuff), create two indelible characters. Langella (the best film Dracula, in my opinion) is absolutely spellbinding as his Nixon is alternately boorish, painfully awkward, needy, self-pitying, and creepy, and Sheen's Frost matches him with a layered portrayal of the outwardly courtly, but quietly manipulative and shrewd Frost. It's riveting work from both leads, and Howard mostly keeps his pasty mitts off. Stick to narrating criminally underwatched sitcoms Ron."

JE: "Annnd there go the legs again. Poor, poor Opie. Not a fan of 'Cinderella Man,' or 'Backdraft' Jonesy? All I can say is go rent this. Now. If, like me, you are a student of history, like intense character pieces, and enjoy anything that has to do with the Watergate period, go rent this. In fact, I'm going to go on record saying I don't know how anyone could not be interested in the Watergate era, or Richard Nixon. Let's put aside the crimes for a second and just consider the complex psychology of a guy like that? What on earth does it take for a man (who held what some would say is the most powerful office in the world) to be so paranoid and in turn risk everything just to assure himself? Think about that. How a person, a powerful person, comes to justify what was done - the break-ins, the recordings, the spying? And considering all that, what does it say about his mind and his ego, that he would agree to do the interviews with Frost? How could you not want to see this? Go. Rent. This."

Battlestar Galactica: Caprica

VPJ: "Hey, I've got this great idea! I'm gonna create some super-strong, ultra-intelligent robots that can mimic human form! Oh, and I'm gonna make them self aware okay? Maybe I'll call 'em cylons, I don't know. I'm sure my actions won't result in the human race being pretty much decimated and forced to flee to the stars from these creation in about, oh fifty years from now. Nope, no problems I can see. Way to go Eric Stoltz."

JE: "STOLLLLLTZ!!! OK, for the uninitiated, yes, once again 'Battlestar Galactica' rears its complicated (possibly cyclon) head. As Jonesy alluded, this story takes place long, long before things got messy and violent between humans and cylons (what with the bombing and mass extinctions and whatnot) that took place in 'Battlestar Galactica.' This is the pilot for a new show that looks at the quieter, simpler days when you knew who you could trust and the word cylon wasn't in common usage. Of course, all of that changes...dum, dum, DAHHHHHHHH! Watch to find out what happens."

Parting shots for today:

- Who do you side with: Jonesy or Justin? Overrated or justified?
- How do you cure biopic-itis?
- Can the Watergate era be overanalyzed?

E-mail this entry to a friend