BuzzSugar

What to Netflix: New DVD Tuesday

BuzzSugar — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:30:00 -0800

All of the new DVD releases hit stores (and Netflix) on Tuesdays. So each week in What to Netflix: New DVD Tuesday, I sort through the best of the batch and tell you what to add to your queue. In addition to the titles below, Awake, a thriller staring Hayden Christensen and Jessica Alba is out on DVD as well.

Into the Wild
There has been no shortage of buzz around this heartbreaking and visually stunning film directed by Sean Penn and starring Emile Hirsh. While it didn't make it as far at the Oscars as many hoped it would, it did make it onto my March Must-Haves, and I know many people are just as excited as I am that this movie is finally out on DVD. Into the Wild is based on the best-selling true story by Jon Krakauer all about a young, upper-middle class man with the world at his feet who decides to part with his normal, steady life in search of adventure. He sets out on a journey across the country and eventually ends up alone in the wilderness of Alaska.

The breathtaking scenery and unforgettable characters, along with the thought-provoking tale of a young man's journey on the path less taken makes for an important and moving film. Special features include interesting information about the true-life inspirations for the movie.

For two more selections, read more.

Things We Lost in the Fire
Starring Halle Berry and Benicio Del Toro, Things We Lost in the Fire is Susanne Bier's directorial follow-up to her Oscar-nominated After the Wedding. At first glance, this movie looked melodramatic and depressing but I gave it a shot (after all, who can resist Benicio?) and I'm so glad I did.

The story follows a widow (Berry) attempting to put her life back together after her husband tragically dies. Benicio plays the husband's childhood best friend, now a troubled recovering drug addict, who moves in with the grieving woman and her children. Together they deal with the loss and learn to accept each other, in memory of the man they all cherished. This isn't an escape movie, but it is touching and features some beautiful performances by Berry and Del Toro. Special features include audio commentary and extra scenes.

Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium
First off, until now I've never been concerned that a DVD cover might have the same effect on my vision as looking straight into the sun. Those are some bright colors. Moving on. Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium stars Dustin Hoffman as a 243-year-old toy store owner and Natalie Portman as the store's manager. When Mr. Magorium discovers he's not well, he turns to Portman's character to take over his magical world of toys. Lots of colors, slapstick comedy and whimsical fun make this a great choice for family viewing, especially with little ones in the house.

Box Office: 30 Days of Night Sucks Up All the Money

BuzzSugar — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 00:15:24 -0700

Not a lot of folks are going to the movie theaters lately, but those who are seem to be most interested in the super scary vampire flick 30 Days of Night, which came in at No. 1 at the box office with $16 million. What with all the highly dramatic dramas coming out, maybe it's understandable that people are drawn to the fun unreality rather than checking out movies that address the starkest aspects of human life.

Only one of the weekend's anticipated dramas even cracked the top five at the box office: Ben Affleck's Gone Baby Gone came in fifth place. At No. 2 was Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married? while Disney's The Game Plan held steady at No. 3, and Michael Clayton followed up in fourth place. Rendition opened in ninth place to the tune of just over $4 million. The Halle Berry/Benicio Del Toro weepie Things We Lost in the Fire came in fifteenth place, while Reservation Road - only playing in a handful of theaters - came in at No. 39.

Photo courtesy of Sony Pictures

Things We Lost in the Fire: Lush, Moving, and Very Sad

BuzzSugar — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 13:38:13 -0700

Based on the melodramatic-seeming trailer that told most of the movie's story in its two-and-a-half minutes, I had fairly low expectations for Susanne Bier's directorial follow-up to her Oscar-nominated After the Wedding. But Things We Lost in the Fire far exceeded those expectations. Aided by some solid performances and wise directional decisions, the movie is less cheesy and more potent than the trailer suggests.

The story starts out dreary and sentimental, then kicks into high drama and deep sadness, then it's horrifying, and then back to very sad, where it ends. There is redemption, but little joy to this story. The narrative begins with the funeral of Steven Burke (David Duchovny), which I think is a questionable move because watching people mourn without giving the audience any reason yet to be sad along with the characters creates an empty, pointless feeling. But the characters go on to earn our sympathy, and through a series of flashbacks interspersed with present-day action we are absorbed into this world of Steven's grieving widow Audrey (Halle Berry), their two children, and Steven's best friend - the down-and-out recovering drug addict Jerry Sunborne (Benicio Del Toro). For more about the story and my take on it, read more

Though she spent years mistrusting and disliking him, Audrey invites the quiet Jerry to live with her and the children in the garage that was damaged in a fire and never entirely finished before Steven's death. Once he moves in, Jerry is simply given things - a job and furniture from family friend Howard (John Carroll Lynch), the love and affection of Steven's kids - because they all loved Steven, and because Jerry knew him in a way nobody else did.

What I appreciate most about this movie is the character of Audrey, which Berry portrays as graceful and conflicted. It is so refreshing to find a true-to-life, complex female movie character. She's a caring mother and a sympathetic person, but she also acts in incomprehensible ways, making impulsive decisions fueled by grief and lack of sleep that seem heartbreakingly rash but also deeply human. At one point she demands that Jerry move out of the garage, which leads to Jerry relapsing, a most upsetting part of the film.

Certainly, I have some quibbles with the film. Steven's character is a little too goody-two-shoes to be believable, even up to his heroic death - getting shot while trying to protect a woman from her abusive husband. I'm also sure that after Audrey tells us all about the things they lost in the garage fire, two scenes later we don't need an actual written-out list of things they lost in the fire, as it just seems irritatingly redundant.

Yet these things are overshadowed by the beautiful direction (complete with perfectly-chosen music, from soothing flute to a sorrowful Spanish guitar to the steely blues that Jerry often pumps through his headphones) and some near-perfect performances. Del Toro does well with these gorgeously flawed characters, and his depiction of Jerry's relapse brings tears to my eyes even now. This isn't a breezy, escapist film, but it is very moving and lovingly crafted.

Photos courtesy of Paramount

Fall Movie Preview: Heartstrings, Yanked

BuzzSugar — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:30:31 -0700

We may not be getting the crisp fall weather just yet, but we are getting previews for tons of movies opening in the fall. In preparation for this autumn and winter at the theaters, I've broken up the lengthy list of upcoming movies into many small themes for my Fall Movie Preview series. This way, you'll be in the know when the chillier months roll around, bringing a whole new crop of new films. Today I'm bringing you three movies that may just jerk at the tears and yank at the heartstrings.

The Kite Runner
The trailer for this movie is already enough to start me crying, especially since I've read the moving novel on which it's based. The story follows two childhood best friends: Amir, the son of a wealthy businessman in Kabul, and Hassan, the son of Amir's father's servant. Before Amir and his father flee to America, the boys' friendship is tested by a moment when Amir falls silent as Hassan is brutally beaten. Settled in California as an adult, this moment haunts Amir until he learns of Hassan's death at the hands of the Taliban, and returns to his homeland to search for Hassan's young son. It sounds bleak (and it kind of is), but there's a lot of beauty in this story as well. The Kite Runner opens November 2.

For two more emotional rollercoasters, read more

P.S. I Love You
P.S. I Love You is also based on a novel and stars Hilary Swank as Holly, a young widow who discovers that her husband wrote out messages for her just before he died. Some of the notes include unusual requests, and before long, Holly and her girlfriends (played by Lisa Kudrow and Gina Gershon, pictured) are going on a string of adventures that Holly's late husband planned for her. I think this premise actually sounds cute, and I like Hilary Swank so I'll be interested to see how it all comes together when P.S. I Love You opens December 21. And now I have that Beatles song in my head.

Things We Lost in the Fire
The trailer for Things We Lost in the Fire, starring Halle Berry, Benicio Del Toro and a bunch of adorable children, seems to show the whole story of love, loss and redemption, but I'm still curious to see the film when it comes out October 27. Berry plays Audrey who loses her husband (Duchovny) to a senseless crime. Del Toro is her husband's best friend who is also a heroin addict. He moves in with Audrey and her kids, and then he most likely becomes an irreplaceable member of the family. Awww...

Kite Runner photo source
Other images source

First Look: Things We Lost in the Fire

BuzzSugar — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 08:30:00 -0700

After watching the trailer for Things We Lost in the Fire, starring Halle Berry, Benicio Del Toro and David Duchovny, I felt like I'd seen the entire movie. Berry plays Audrey who loses her husband (Duchovny) to a senseless crime. Del Toro is her husband's best friend who is also a heroin addict. He moves in with Audrey and her kids, and we can all probably guess what happens after that. I'd been looking forward to seeing this trailer for Things We Lost in the Fire, which opens October 27, but now that I have it's kind of letdown. You can check it out and tell me what you think if you read more

Source

Let's Get Lost: "The Substitute" Recap

BuzzSugar — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 05:30:00 -0800

This week's episode of Lost is Locke-centric, though it's the parallel lives of Locke we're watching. We didn't get to see the temple or what's going on with Jack and Sayid back there, but I didn't mind - I was way into the handful of characters it did focus on.

Fake Locke, parallel Locke, and dead Locke all play a key role in the island and the story in this ep, and frankly I can't wait to start deconstructing, so to chat about it (spoilers up ahead), just read more.

In the parallel reality where Flight 815 lands, we watch Locke resume his life in Torrance at the paper company - and with Helen! I was shocked to see his old girlfriend, who's now his fiancee. The last time we saw Helen, it was before the trip to Australia and plane crash; Locke had just proposed to her after she caught him meeting up with his wily father, Anthony Cooper. Though she shook her head and walked away then, Helen must have forgiven John some time after his accident. I have to say, it was pretty depressing watching John struggle with his van, falling face down in the grass, but when Helen emerges from the house, and you see them all happy and wedding planning, I felt a lot better. I hope that this new reality helps Helen's fate - remember, when the real Locke returns to the mainland to find the Oceanic six, Abbadon informs him that Helen died of a brain aneurysm. One thing that bothered me: in the first Locke episode, "Walkabout," he's calling an operator named Helen (who's ostensibly not the real Helen) and inviting her to Australia. Did he get back with the real Helen soon after that but before he leaves for Oz?
Meanwhile man in black/fake Locke sets out to "recruit," according to Ilana. He has a run-in with a bloodied and terrified Richard and sees a blond child with bloodied arms - whom Richard can't see. This fake Locke appeals to Richard, once again condemning Jacob's treatment of him, but Richard's unmoved. I giggled with glee when he finds his next target: a drunk and distraught Sawyer. Sawyer has no intention of following this new Locke, nor is he concerned that Locke is dead, even saying he doesn't care if he's the "Ghost of Christmas Past." All hail the return of the nicknames! But Locke finds his in when he promises to answer the all-important question of why Sawyer is on the island. The two take off, and we again encounter the blond kid, who tells Locke that he "knows the rules" and "can't kill him." Who, Sawyer? Weirdly, fake Locke invokes real Locke's famous tagline: "Don't tell me what I can't do!" Anyway, who is this blondie, and why can Sawyer see him, while Richard can't? Could it possibly be Jacob visiting from another time?
Back in Torrance, Locke gets fired by slimy boss Randy (all those bit actors from the first season must be on speed dial) for using the company to pay for his trip to Australia but not attending a conference. Oops. Sooo what do we think Locke actually did in Australia since he wasn't at the conference and didn't go on the walkabout? In any case, he runs into the paper company's owner after he's let go - and it's Hurley! He chats him up and tells him he can hook him up at the temp agency he also runs. I knew we'd see someone else familiar there, and we do: Rose is the office manager. Since she never gets to the island, her terminal cancer still exists. Sadface.
So as original Locke lies dead on the sand of the beach, Sun finally suggests that they bury him before heading to the temple. Ben speaks, calling him a "man of faith" (invoking the season two premiere's title, "Man of Science, Man of Faith") and saying he's sorry for having murdered him. And he even sounds sincere.
Fake Locke leads Sawyer to the scariest ladder in the world, where Sawyer nearly eats it but is saved by his tour guide. He's led to a cave, where the first thing we see is a scale with a white and black rock, illustrating ongoing themes of good and evil, justice - and games. Remember the pilot, where Locke and Walt play backgammon? Locke even raised a black and white piece to either side of his face. Fake Locke tosses the white rock in the sea, calling it an inside joke. Oh, and also, that black rock? It can't be coincidental that the shipwrecked pirate ship Rousseau and her team discovered is also called the "Black Rock."
Locke then shows Sawyer what he brought him to see: a mass of last names with coordinating numbers scrawled on the cave ceiling. Locke explains that Jacob did it, who "had a thing for numbers." Plenty of names are crossed out, save for a few familiar ones, all people Jacob touched. Jarrah (Sayid), Reyes (Hugo), Kwon (Jin or Sun), Shepard (Jack), and Ford (Sawyer). Their numbers, of course, are the numbers. They're candidates to protect the island, apparently, and Locke says Sawyer has three choices: do nothing, take the job, or go. Not surprisingly, Sawyer replies with a spirited "hell yeah" to that last option. Did anyone else notice that Kate's is not one of the names that Jacob points out?
Back in the parallel world, Locke's been placed as a substitute teacher (hello, episode title) at a high school. A voice we know all too well is chastising the other teachers for poor coffee etiquette - it's Ben! He looks eerily at home as a history instructor with a penchant for caffeine. So whatever happened with Jughead, this new reality propelled the others to the mainland, and now they work regular Joe jobs, with Ethan as a doctor and now Ben as a teacher. Did the explosion cause them to leave the island and adopt normal lives, or are they still as nefarious as ever?

All in all, it was a pretty exciting episode and had a bit more juiciness than last week's. I just felt like it was laying a clear path to more answers and a satisfying wrapup of the series. I'm also really getting into the parallel stories and want to see more of what happens between Locke and Jack (you know he's getting that consultation some way). What did you think? Did I miss anything you caught?

Buzz Interview: Jason Reitman Talks Clooney and Up in the Air

BuzzSugar — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:30:44 -0800

I've been anxiously anticipating Jason Reitman's third film, Up in the Air, from the moment I first read about the project. With George Clooney on board I was practically giddy, so imagine how excited I was to have the opportunity to talk to the director himself when he stopped in San Francisco during his promotional tour.

The film is one of the many buzz-worthy December movies, and it opens in limited release this Friday. Reitman talked about everything from Clooney to the economy to how he handles garnering so much acclaim for his first three films. Here are the highlights:

On traveling: I love travel and there’s a reason I started doing this movie - even when I started doing commercials I’ve been a psychotic frequent flier, so I enjoy it. I enjoy having the itinerary, going to the airport, I enjoy the being nowhere and unplugging which being on an airplane allows you to do.
On whether or not he fell victim to one of Clooney's pranks: No, there wasn’t, I’m sorry I wish I had a better story. But we were making a movie at the end of the day. And it was a shorter shot - maybe he’s used to these Ocean movies where they have time for fun, but we were hauling ass, so no fun stories.

To see what Jason had to say about working with his father, Ivan Reitman, and how he's grown since making Juno, just read more.

On whether he intended to make a film about the current state of the economy: No. First of all, it’s based on a book, so I found the book seven years ago and I started adapting it and it basically took me six years to write, and I never intended to make a movie about the economy. The economy doesn’t interest me as much as [it's] just sort of a backdrop or metaphor for human connection, which was more important to me and that’s what I wanted to tell a story about. But certainly as the world changed and we went from an economic boom to one of the worst recessions on record, I had to take it seriously and scenes that were originally humorous were scenes that I had to make authentic and real and dramatic. And that’s why I started to use real people for people who’ve lost their jobs, people who actually lost their job instead of actors. I never wanted to be Michael Moore, as much as I respect him as a filmmaker. He has a tendency to try to give you answers and try to push people to believe something, and my point of view is to push people to be as open-minded as possible and not judge, so I think I have agenda-less films and hopefully they act more as a mirror so you simply see yourself in it.
On using "anti-heroes" in his films: I don’t know why I'm drawn to anti-heroes but I certainly am, I made three films. The first one [Thank You For Smoking] is about the head lobbyist for a big tobacco, second one’s [Juno] about a pregnant teenager, and the third one’s about a guy who fires people for a living. So for whatever reason I guess I’m somewhat contrary and I enjoy humanizing tricky characters. There was a line in the Thank You For Smoking book that said working for Greenpeace is easy, working for the Red Cross is easy, try working for big tobacco - that’s a job. And I can’t help but think the same way to a certain extent about filmmaking. Humanizing good people is kind of boring and I don’t really see the value in it. Showing romance of two people who are just kind of charming and deserve each other, what’s the work in that, what’s the value in that? Humanizing tricky characters for me is exhilarating and making audience films out of indie subjects excites me. At the end of the day I don’t know why I’m drawn to it.
On why Up in the Air is more deeply personal than his previous films: Each one of my movies is addressing a question I have for myself. Thank You For Smoking was about being libertarian and having a heart at the same time, Juno was about the moment you decide to grow up and it was personal for me. I had a child right before I started Juno and I felt like I was going through all the character’s experience and I was constantly drawing on my own emotions while making that film, but this was a script that I wrote over six years, and six very important years. When I first started writing I was single, I was a commercial director, I basically had zero life responsibility, and over six years I became a feature film director, I got married, I have a beautiful daughter, and I started to learn what was important in life, at least for me. And when I first read the script (because I would never go back and reread I would just go forward over those years), so five years in when I finally went back and read it, it was like watching myself grow up and watching myself re-evaluate what was important to me and I could watch my own sophistication change. So to have a film that speaks to so many questions I have, and perhaps the most important question of all - where do you find purpose in life and what do you want in your life, who and what do you want to play your life with? That makes it exceedingly personal, and you never know, maybe two years from now I’ll say this was the most important film, but I can’t help but think that they are very transformative years in my life and they get encapsulated in this film. You don’t have a question, you just have a camera.
On other actors he'd like to work with: I really love Laura Linney, I really love Rachel McAdams, love Joan Allen, I love Matt Damon, I think he’s actually really great . . . who else? I like Jonah Hill a lot, I like Seth Rogen. I mean, everyone I’ve worked with is great. Right now it becomes one of those hard things where, do you ever have that thing where you have old friends and you meet someone new, and then you have that new friend then you want to spend all this time with your new friend, but you also want to spend time with your old friends? I think that’s kind of how it is with actors. I got all these actors that I’ve already worked with that I really want to work with again. I worked with Rick Allen again, and Allison Janney, and Anna Kendrick is phenomenal and I want to work with her again, and Danny McBride. And then there’s the new group, and it’s like, if I work with the person I’ve already worked with, it’s like I already know how great they are and I know won’t be disappointed. I do get excited about working with new people.
On writing roles for actors: It’s kind of cool, I never know if people are going to say yes, there are plenty of people that will certainly say no, but there is a very good chance of them saying yes and that’s an exciting way to work. This movie I wrote for eight of the actors that are in it. It was cool to write for George and for Vera and for Anna and Danny and Zach and J.K, and Bateman, to know that they’re going to show up, it’s a cool feeling to have as you’re writing.
On working with his father Ivan Reitman for the first time: It's interesting because I avoided working with my dad for a while because I was so sensitive of being accused of the idea of nepotism, and it’s been important to me for so long to establish myself on my own. I remember when I was 19 years old I started a desk calendar company to pay for my first short film just so I could say one day my daddy didn’t pay for my first short film. And I really established myself through the film festival world, starting at Sundance and lots of film festivals and really took on a different style of film from my father and made my first two movies on my own, and really it was once after the second film that I felt, "OK, I think I’ve established myself as a director now and I’m going to go do a movie." But it’s something I’ve been looking forward to because I love my father and we have such a strong bond and I look up to him as a filmmaker and a storyteller, so it was great and when I see the credits and it says produced by Ivan Reitman and Jason Reitman, my heart swells. It’s really really cool.
On how he's grown as a director: There’s nothing like "Oh, that was the day I learned to do this," it’s more so you just become a more sophisticated filmmaker. I mean, look, the job is this: I have an idea and I want the audience to feel something specific. I want at each moment to articulate something in a way so that I make you laugh here, and make you envious here and I make your heart swell here, romance here, you feel heartbroken here, and as a director you get better and better at nailing those moments specifically. So when I look back at Thank You For Smoking, I see broad strokes but some of the detail work is not as strong as my last film. And that’s just over three films, so my only hope is that as I continue to make more and more films I’ll get better and better at making them, because you make 2,000 decisions a day as a director, sometimes more, even if you’re not even thinking about it, even if you’re responding to something. So you just become better at making these tiny, tonal decisions that if you add them up almost like a binary thing, they amount to the feelings so that when the joke happens or the line happens or the moment happens or when the song comes in, the audience feels it right there.
On handling success and awards show buzz: Well look, first of all it’s wonderful. And film festivals are really how I establish myself as a director, and I counted on them to give me legitimacy. So when a film festival honors me it really hits home for me, and as far as moving forward - I never a make a movie with the intention of some sort of award or nomination or whatever it is. I really just try to tell movies that are in my heart and I know when I respond to something - I read a book or an article or something and I have an instinctual response to it and I just try to follow that all the way through and I’ve been lucky. So far, [I've made] three movies people seem to like, but there’s a bad one waiting around the corner for me. Honestly, it happens. And my hope is that as long as I make movies for the right reasons, the ones that fail won’t hurt as much as if I made a movie for the wrong reasons, like I made it for money or something big, then I imagine the failing would hurt more.

Mad Men, "The Grown Ups": This Week's 5 Maddest Moments

BuzzSugar — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 06:30:10 -0800

Did you hear it? That was the sound of the Mad Men implosion, as the death of JFK on November 22, 1963, rocked the country and the lives of the show's characters. This season has been building up to the events of this episode, which felt more intense, more important, than next week's finale can possibly be. If there's an episode that has defined the third season so thoroughly, it's this one, "The Grown Ups."

Ready to talk? See this week's five maddest moments when you read more.

Death of a President: The timeline of the show has made it clear that John F. Kennedy's assassination is coming, but like those who experienced it, there was no way to prepare for it emotionally. So where is everyone when JFK is shot? Peggy is having a "nooner" with Duck, Betty is at home, Pete and Harry are talking work, and Roger's daughter Margaret is having a fitting on the eve of her wedding.
One wedding and a funeral: The show must go on, Roger decides, and Margaret's wedding still happens on Saturday night, with far fewer guests in attendance. I understand why they didn't cancel it, but as Joan remarks, "Poor thing." Margaret overcomes her marriage jitters and fit over Jane's extravagant gift and presence in her life, only to agree to be married the day after the President's shooting. That's pretty rough.
Downgrade: Pete is demoted so thoroughly at Sterling Cooper that he leaves work and tells Trudie he's been fired at first. Like Betty, the fact that he's already going through something jarring when JFK is shot only escalates his personal situation, and he stays at home with Trudie instead of going to Margaret's wedding. Shaken as well, Trudie tells Pete to start gathering his clients in preparation to leave the company. Pete seems shattered, and again, I enjoyed Vincent Kartheiser's nuanced performance of one of the show's most complicated characters.
Where's the love: A wedding and a violent event prompt everyone to re-evaluate their romantic relationships; particularly Don and Betty (their kiss at the wedding proves to be only passionate from one side) and Joan and Roger. That Roger calls Joan, just happy that she's home, says so much about his feelings for her.
The Proposal: "What is going on?" Betty asks both Don and Henry, distraught about the country's events, but that's exactly how I felt when Henry tells her in her car that he'll marry her if she leaves Don. Last week, when she got advice against divorcing him, I thought there was no way they'd split up, but now that Betty has this viable option, I'm actually scared they may divorce. As screwed up as their marriage is, their being together is one of the show's fixtures. Their separation would be like Sterling Cooper going out of business. But Betty sees things as having "no point" now, and she tells Don that she no longer loves him. I don't know what to think! Is it a coincidence that she was wearing a pink twinset like Jackie the day JFK is shot? Hadn't she just "lost" her husband in last week's episode when she discovers that Don is really Dick Whitman? In any case, it's completely disconcerting to see Don, sitting in his bedroom at the end, broken by Betty's dramatic disclosure of her lack of feelings for him.

Everyone keeps saying variations on how everything will be fine, it will all be OK, but we know from experience with this show that nothing is going to be fine. Whatever is to come, I'm so impressed by this episode; in the future, this will be the episode that you remember when you think of this season.

What do you think will happen with Pete, Roger and Joan, the Drapers? Will Betty take Henry up on his offer? And to talk more about the show later, join the Mad Men group in the community.

Photo courtesy of AMC

Halle Berry to Face Sharks in Dark Tide

BuzzSugar — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 10:30:44 -0700

Halle Berry is in talks to go swimming with the fishes - Great White sharks, to be precise. The next project she's looking at is Dark Tide, an action-thriller that will follow "a diving instructor who returns to the deep after a near-fatal incident with a Great White shark." The movie will begin filming in South Africa later this year.

The last movie I saw that starred Halle Berry was Things We Lost in the Fire, which I think showcased her talent well, but I'll be excited to see her in new projects. It looks like the next one to hit theaters will be Frankie and Alice, in which Berry plays "a young woman with multiple personality disorder who struggles to remain her true self and not give in to her racist alter-personality." Yikes. From that to swimming with Great Whites, Berry's life is all drama.

Lost Episodes 16 and 17, "The Incident, Parts 1 and 2"

BuzzSugar — Thu, 14 May 2009 09:30:58 -0700

I don't know about you, but I fell asleep with the images from the Lost season finale swirling in my head and woke up thinking about it, and my dreams were probably all Lost, all the time, too. I'm still confused - but almost in a good way - and feeling pretty satisfied. As far as season finales go, I think this one is pretty kickass. What do you think?

Certainly can't say much more without revealing spoilers a-plenty, so to chat about the two parts of the Lost finale read more.

Jacob's touches - Much of the episode is devoted to showing us how Jacob met - and, significantly, physically touched - various characters during small moments in each of their lives:

He pays for the (New Kids on the Block!) lunchbox that "Katie" steals as a (ridiculously cute) young'n.
He shows up at the funeral for Sawyer’s mother and father and hands Little Sawyer a pen as Little Sawyer is writing a letter to the man responsible for his parents' deaths.
Jacob asks Sayid for directions at the intersection where Nadia is promptly killed.
He goes to see a heavily bandaged Ilana in the hospital (he's her only visitor) and he asks for her help, which she quickly agrees to give him.
He's outside the building (reading Flannery O'Connor's Everything That Rises Must Converge) when Locke plummets to the ground from a window, and when he touches Locke, his eyes fly open. Jacob says, "Don’t worry everything’s going to be all right. I’m sorry this happened to you."
Jacob shows up at Jin and Sun's wedding and tells them never to take their special love for granted.
Jack recalls feeling humiliated by his dad during a surgery early in his career, and soon after they have a little talk about it ("Are you sure I'm the one who doesn’t 'believe in you,' Jack?"), Jacob shows up and hands Jack the Apollo candy bar that Jack had been trying to extract from a stubborn vending machine.
Hurley hops in a cab with Jacob after being discharged from jail. There, Jacob tells Hurley that he's not crazy and that maybe, he's actually blessed instead of cursed.
Interestingly, Juliet's flashback does not include Jacob - just the moment when her parents announced that they were getting a divorce.
And we don't see "the moment," but Richard tells Locke that he is ageless because of Jacob.

"I'm definitely not dead." - Jacob. So what the heck is he?!

Leaders, in charge, leaders, in charge . . . - Sun wonders who Jacob is and Ben tells her he's the man in charge of the island - not "the leader," mind you. That's Locke. And that's "a title that I've discovered is incredibly temporary." Later Eloise tells Jack not to "misunderstand who's in charge here," as she wants to go before him up to the Dharma village, but then Richard swiftly knocks her out, saying he's protecting his "leader."

Timeless beauty - Forget Richard (though I do find him seriously attractive in this episode), Sun is truly an ageless beauty. She just looks gorgeous on her wedding day, saying her vows: "I have loved you since the day we first met. I will love the man you will become as we spend our lives together. With this ring I make my promises."

"Oh, hell no." - The heart and humor of this episode for me is the run-in with Bernard and Rose. First off, Bernard sounds like Sawyer with his muttering of "Son of a bitch!" They manage to make the other Losties look like hyper children as Rose and Bernard explain that they chose to live a private, peaceful life together (in "retirement") over going to work for Dharma or something. And they don't care about this silly bomb business. "So we die. We just care about being together. That's all that matters in the end." I just want to know why I felt like crying at Bernard gently offering tea to Juliet? I feel like such a sap. (But also, Vincent!)

A valid question from Miles: "Has it occurred to any of you that your buddy is actually gonna cause the thing he says he’s trying to prevent? Perhaps that little nuke is the incident. So perhaps the best thing to do is nothing?"

Que será, será - Jack's all about the destiny stuff now ("If it's meant to be, it's meant to be"), but Sawyer doesn't "speak destiny." I feel like their big crazy man-fight was a looooong time coming. And I will admit that I sort of enjoyed watching Sawyer pummel Jack.

Teamwork! - I love all the Lostie teamwork in this episode. Hurley, Jin, and Miles zoom up in a Dharma van and grab Jack and a wounded Sayid, and later Sawyer, Juliet, Kate, Miles, and Jin come roaring up, guns blazing, to protect Jack from the Others. Juliet repeats an oft-uttered line from this show: "Live together, die alone."

"We're the good guys." - Another familiar phrase, this time said by Bram about the little group he has with Ilana. They search around for Jacob, find his cabin, torch his cabin, and move on to the statue foot - all the while lugging around a large metal crate. Ilana poses the question ("What lies in the shadow of the statue?") to "Ricardos," who answers her in Latin: "He who will protect/save us all." Ilana smiles, introduces herself to Richard, and shows him what's in the crate: Locke's freaking body.

Anti-climax before a climax - Just before Jack drops the bomb core into the pit all the lovebirds exchange meaningful glances, and they all cringe for the explosion . . . which doesn't happen. But then metal things start flying down the pit, causing Phil to be impaled, Dr. Chang to have his arm crushed (so that's how that happens!) and Juliet to get dragged down the pit by chains. In the moment when Juliet is pulled toward the pit I couldn't help but think of that new movie Drag Me to Hell - it was so horror movie-ish. It gets worse, of course, as Sawyer tries desperately to save her but she ends up flying down the pit anyway. And then she bangs on the bomb with a rock until the fifth season of Lost ends with a white screen.

Poor Ben - The way Locke gets Ben to want to kill Jacob is pretty great - and he has a good point. Ben has suffered and sacrificed tremendously for this dude he was never allowed to even meet. Ben wonders plaintively why Jacob wanted Locke and not him. "What was it that was so wrong with me? What about me?"

Ch-ch-ch-changes - Locke promises Ben that things will change with Jacob gone. I can't wait to see how . . .

Loopholes - In the beginning of this whole thing, a man expresses to Jacob how much he wants to kill him (but clearly cannot, because Jacob would be dead by now if he could) and he vows to find a "loophole." In the end, Locke gets Ben to kill Jacob for him - and this is the loophole. So who is that guy at the beginning? And in the beginning they reference "them." "They come, fight, they destroy, they corrupt. It always ends the same." And then at the end, just before Locke kicks the wounded Jacob into the fire, Jacob sputters out, "They're coming."