In the latest JEFF THE PRODUCER PODCAST EPISODE 5: Floyd Mayweather and UFC President Dana White are talking about something big happening in the UFC next year! Are we going to see a rematch between Conor and Floyd, or is Mayweather taking his chances in the Octagon as an MMA fighter? Jeff The Producer thinks he knows the answer!
Plus: Why did Ben Askren just announce his retirement after only 3 fights in the UFC? JTP says he’s made a terrible mistake and gives advice on what he can do to keep his name in the minds of MMA fans!
You may have seen the hashtag #ReleaseTheSnyderCut on various social media platforms, where fans of Justice League are asking Warner Brothers to release what they believe to be a better version of the film. Does the mysterious “Snyder Cut” even exist? Jeff The Producer sets the record straight and gives the “so-called-nerds” some real eye opening facts about their fantasy flick that was NEVER MADE!
Charlie’s Angels recieved yet another reboot, this time from Director/Actor/Writer Elizabeth Banks, but the movie flopped big time in the box office. The fledgeling director blames MALES and SPIDER-MAN for the failure! JTP reveals the REAL reason why the movie underperformed, and shares real audience reactions in his 2nd consecutive special segment of “Reviewing the Reviews”!
Don’t miss this exciting episode of the JEFF THE PRODUCER PODCAST Episode 5 – Listen NOW!
Spider-Man is the reason the new movie “Charlie’s Angels” bombed at the box office, or so says director Elizabeth Banks.
The new Elizabeth Banks version of the classic 70’s TV show “Charlie’s Angels”, is a repetitive, accidentally nonsensical, poor copy of every other action movie you’ve seen in the last 20 years, with a predictable plot. The soundtrack is outdated by at least a decade, and the film looks more like a music video produced by a YouTube user rather than a legitimate movie studio with a big budget and access to good actors.
It seems as if Banks was attempting to recreate scenes from 21 Jump Street, a comedic reboot of the late 80’s tv show of the same name, which put Johnny Depp on the acting map and led to his later success. Unlike that movie, however, “Charlie’s Angels” isn’t that fun, although the action scenes seem well shot, from a 90’s perspective. Its a very bland, slow moving unattractive spectacle, with predictable “surprises” and awkward dialogue.
Charlie’s Angels was an iconic 70’s TV show, which featured three women who were given missions by the mysterious “Charlie”, a person whose face was hidden from view at all times. He sent his angels on adventures that forced them to spy on the bad guys, beat them up and save the day. A reboot was first attempted in 2000, which seemed to be fun but not widely accepted by audiences or critics at the time, yet received a sequel as it eventually became a hit with the fans.
Director Elizabeth Banks can’t seem to accept that she’s just made a poor movie, and she’s quick to blame others for her lack of success, specifically men. She even attacks other comic book movies in both the Marvel and DC universe, saying they conditioned men to want to see male superheroes instead of females. “They’ll go and see a comic book movie with Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel because that’s a male genre.” said Banks. In this modern day “non-binary”, who-needs-a-damned-gender-anyway “woke” culture, no one should be surprised if Wonder Woman was a man who identified as a female, while using both the male and female bathrooms and declares that she’s a Trump hater. That still wouldn’t alter the fact that “Charlie’s Angels” bombed in 2019.
Elizabeth Banks’ history in attacking the Male gender is a broad, eye-opening and shocking discovery considering her past success as an actress. She’s starred in three of the original Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies, and later appeared in “Hunger Games“, which was a female-driven story about winning your freedom by killing others on a live tv show. She was even given her first big break on screen when she was still a college student and never acted a day in her life.
So why is Elizabeth Banks so angry?
In 1998 she starred in her first film, an independent movie called Surrender Dorothy. Director Kevin DiNovis discovered Liz and gave her a shot. But 14 years later, in a 2012 interview, Banks recalled, “The writer/director played the lead role… because there was no one else to do it. And he wasn’t a real actor. It was just one of those, ‘What am I doing here?’… I was still a college student, actually. And I thought, ‘I’d better go to drama school and learn how to never have this job again.“
You’d think the film was a complete bomb and that she had a horrible experience. In fact, DiNovis won multiple awards from various film festivals and it was the reason why Banks was cast in Spider-Man 1 in the first place. Why would Banks be so ungrateful for being plucked out of the chicken pen as a jobless college student, being cast in a movie that helped jumpstart her career?
In another misguided, estrogen driven attack against males, she accused legendary Director Steven Spielberg (E.T., Indiana Jones, Jaws and many others) of never putting a female actress in the lead role in any of his movies. In a 2017 interview, she proclaimed: “I went to [every] movie Steven Spielberg ever made. And by the way, he’s never made a movie with a female lead. Sorry, Steven. I don’t mean to call your ass out, but it’s true.” Banks must believe that Whoopi Goldberg is transgendered, as she was the lead actress in Spielberg’s “The Color Purple“, released in 1985. She also forgot another Spielberg movie called “The Sugarland Express“, which placed Goldie Hawn in the top slot back in ’74. Once again, Banks seems eager to insult, demonize and discredit men as a hobby, gleefully cheering herself on in a case of short-sighted amnesia.
Not all of Banks’ efforts are anti-male. Sometimes they’re pro-women, like her website “whohaha.com“, which is supposed to help female comedians get exposure. You’ve never heard about the site for the same reason you don’t like Charlies Angels: it’s sub-par, uninspired, and simply not good.
Elizabeth Banks doesn’t seem to care that she wasted someone else’s money to make a box-office-failure. “Well, if you’re going to have a flop, make sure your name is on it at least 4x. I’m proud of #CharliesAngels and happy it’s in the world,” tweeted Banks.
Had Liz actually decided to stick with her profession soley as an actor instead of trying to become a writer and director, she could have played one of the angels instead of gender-bending one of the most popular Male roles on the show and turning “John Bosley” into a woman. That’s right, in another anti-male move, Banks decided to reprise the role in her version of the movie and cast herself as John Bosley.
Directing isn’t easy, but if you’re going to attempt to reboot a franchise that lasted over 100 episodes and 5 seasons in the 70’s, you’d better do it with class and accept when you’ve failed.
Elizabeth Banks needs to get back to the drawing board, seek some advice from a mysterious millionaire, and get sent on a mission to make a great movie about 3 female spies who travel the globe, kick ass and save the day. It might sound like “Mission Impossible“, but with a little help she might be able to do it. If she comes up short again, we can all just blame Spider-Man.
Jeff The Producer Episode 4 starts off with JTP giving Dana White some advice as to how to put together the next few headliners for the UFC! Which divisons are the best? Who needs to fight who? Is there a standout fighter that no one is talking about? Jeff The Producer puts together the next few UFC Main Events!
Plus, JTP Vs. SUPERMAN: Henry Cavill may be the new On-Screen Man Of Steel, but does he know anything about lifting weights? JTP thinks Clark Kent needs to take a time out in his Fortress of Solitude and thinks Henry needs to learn a few things about exercising before he gives out bad advice! Who wins in this epic battle of muscle? You be the judge!
Finally: What’s with all of these “reviews” from so-called fans on popular movie sites? Jeff The Producer tries to make sense out of why someone would give a movie 2 star rating, but then write a positive review! Listen in as he “critiques the critics” in a hysterically honest and “critically acclaimed” review of the reviews! Tune in to another exciting episode of the Jeff The Producer Podcast! LISTEN NOW!
The Mandalorian takes place in the Star Wars universe some time after Return of the Jedi and before The Force Awakens, and features a mysterious Boba-Fett clone whose sole purpose is bounty hunting. It plays like a western, complete with drunk bullies preying on innocent people while the vigilante comes in and saves the day. You might find yourself calling him the BATMANdalorian, especially when he uses his grappling gun to drag his victims to their painful punishment, and later when he flies away in his BATMANdalorian ship.
Movie quality special effects, wardrobe and costume design make you take notice of the incredible landscapes and detail given to every scene and character. With director Jon Favreau at the helm, viewers should expect nothing less, and he delivers.
The Mandalorian works very hard to make sure you know you’re watching a true Star Wars story, by forcing in as many past trilogy easter-eggs in one episode as possible. Every monster, greedo-twin and gurgling sore-throat sounding alien you can think of makes an appearance. A distant cousin of r2d2’s shows up, along with the classic garbage-can-with-legs droid hobbling down a corridor. Star Wars wouldn’t be complete without Storm Troopers, and they even throw in that little one eyed security guard that used to work for Jabba The Hut.
We’re also given not one but two cantina scenes in the span of 10 minutes. We get it. This is Star Wars.
The show feels like an 80’s sci-fi drama, reminiscent of Buck Rogers, Battlestar Galactica and the original version of Knight Rider. It has a video game cinematic cutscene vibe to it. You’ll be looking for your Xbox controller to help maneuver “The BATMANdalorian” while he’s walking through the bar – I mean the “Cantina” – while hitting the A button to attack, B button to take the bounty, and X to change weapons. Don’t be surprised when “The Mandalorian” video game is released for in early 2020 with these exact same features.
We’re introduced to some new main characters who play an important role in the journey of The Mandalorian. The standout is one of the most creative droids ever created in the Star Wars universe: A robotic bounty hunter who resemebles a Terminator T-800, but with a 360 degree rotating sectional body capable of hitting multiple targets simultaneously. Of course, he becomes the Mandalorian’s sidekick.
Thankfully, the best part of “The Mandalorian” is The Mandalorian. He’s fearless, with an ominous presence, and has a caustic, impatient demeanor which is quelled only by tracking down his next target.
A new trend in movies and tv shows, probably due to Captain America: Winter Soldier, is to call the mysterious antagonist “The Asset“. It is compelling and annoying, but mostly annoying. How about a new word, like, “The Evader”, “The Bad Guy” or maybe the actual name of the “asset”?
Aside from a few cheap gimmicks, and the unintentional repetition of specific scenes, I found myself interested in the mysterious bounty from start to finish, and enjoyed the adventure of The Mandalorian and the path he’s chosen. He starts off as “The Mandalorian“, he ends up as “Han Solo“, even acquiring a droid version of Chewbacca, who has a tendency towards suicide.
The soundtrack is phenomenal: appropriately dark and brooding. Aesthetically, the music is perfect for the main character, who never should be off screen. The problem is, unlike all of the great Star Wars movies, the music and mood remain unchanged, despite obvious humor, suspense and light-hearted interactions. There’s only one pace that matters, and the atmospheric theme is mystery and suspense.
Certain elements of this show seem like they were forced in last minute additions by Disney, and not the creators. It’s as if director Jon Favreau and writer Dave Feloni wanted a much darker tone, as evidenced by the storyline and fighting sequences. But there’s an inconsistency between The Mandolarian’s first-half personality as a castigating bounty hunter, to a sensitive droid-loving hero by the end.
The run time is less than 39 minutes, which is not the standard for a typical Netflix competitor show. With Disney+ trying to burst its way through the “pay to watch app” business, it’s curious why they’re deliberately shortening the run time. Fans simply want a good show, not a longer season with shorter episodes, something the newer comic book tv show adaptations can’t seem to process. The culprit may be over-producing episodes and too many corporate voices shortening the script, rather than letting the artists paint thier own picture.
On a side note, Disney is making the utterly unrealistic and outrageous claim that in one day they managed to lure in 10 million subscribers to pay for the service, at a rate of $7 a month. That’s $70,000,000 in less than 24 hours. How is it that an underpromoted, unknown network with a strange release date managed to penetrate the market by 10,000,000 subscribers in under a day? Until the proof is released, this is simply a fantasy created by Disney to persuade people to join the 2019 version of TheMickey Mouse Club.
The Mandalorian is a promising new adventure in a galaxy not that far away. Pedro Pascal dominates the role as the lead character and manages to carry the pace, despite slight annoyances by certain supporting actor performances. But that’s not enough of a hinderance to sink the ship to an unrecoverable depth. This bounty might just be worth the risk after all.
There’s one major element that compells an audience to dislike a movie: Bad acting.
“Terminator: Dark Fate” is a good idea with terrible actors, and a storyline that could have been better if there was an actual villain. Add in some awkward looking cgi with obvious cuts, camera editing and poor special effects, and you have a barely made-for-tv movie that would have been great if it were released in 1995.
Let’s start with the good stuff.
Arnold Schwarzenegger doesn’t disappoint. His storyline is unique and it respects his character as the classic Terminator, while adding an element of humanity not observed in prior films. No longer is The Terminator a fearless robot, learning phrases he doesn’t understand or being disconnected from emotions. This time, he’s gone full blown human, while retaining all of the abilities of a T-800, and it works.
What also works is Linda Hamilton’s reprisal of her role as an older Sarah Connor. It’s as if she’s channeled the “Terminator 2: Judgement Day” version of Sarah Connor and brought her back to life, flawlessly. Her scenes with Arnold are memorable, funny, electric and infused with 35 years of understanding each others roles. Together, no matter what they say or do, they light up the screen and make it an enjoyable moment.
Now let’s talk about why this movie is a complete failure: The unnecessary addition of three characters, who form a plot which is somewhat easy to follow and even easier to forget.
First, we have Dora the Explorer – aka Dani – who is the replacement for John Connor, the main character in Terminator 2. This time, instead of a 14 year old white kid being the target of the evil terminator, he’s been replaced with some politically motivated “wokeness”. The new character is Dani Ramos, and she’s a young latina with a heavy accent who can kick your ass and lead an army. But, for some strange reason, needs to be protected by a half-human robot in order to save the earth from its destructive future. Confusing? It shouldn’t be. It’s a regurgitation of “Terminator 2: Judgement Day“, a movie where a robot was sent back in time to protect John Connor from being terminated by an evil Terminator.
Next, we have Grace, the protagonist of the story, tasked with protecting Dani from the bad Terminator. Grace is a cyborg who is seemingly invincible, endlessly pissed off, and is the result of what would happen if Ellen Degeneres had a kid with the male version of herself. Grace is very angry – at everyone – and she curses a lot. Nothing makes her happy at all. Which makes you wonder why we’re supposed to care if she gets hurt or killed while protecting a defenseless teenager from her future-terminator-stalker. Sound familiar? It should be: that’s the exact plotline to “Terminator 2: Judgement Day“. Having deja vu yet?
So far, Terminator: Dark Fate offers nothing original as the main plotline of the movie.
And our final character is – you guessed it – the evil Terminator. He’s the one who wants to kill Dani at all costs. The problem is, he’s treated like a punching bag throughout the entire film, and keeps coming back to get punched some more. He manages to kill a few humans, of course – he’s not a complete loser. But Gracie the Protective Cyborg beats him up, Sarah Connor beats him up, Dani uses her strategic unexplained self-defense expertise to keep him at a safe distance (which begs the question: Why does she need protection if she can handle herself?) and of course, ARRRRRNNOLLLLLLDDDDDD shoots evil Terminator in the face, throws him around like a kettle bell and strangles him to near death.
To summarize our new characters: We have a young latina who is being protected by a very angry lesbian cyborg from the future, who is being chased by another robot who has no ability to fight anyone with equal skills.
So, if we have our story outlined above, why do we need to see Arnold Schwarzenegger and Linda Hamilton appear in this movie? Because no one would pay to see it otherwise.
In fact, not many people did pay to see this movie. Opening weekend was a failure, and according to recent updated box office numbers, the film is severely underperforming by $80 million. That is, it cost $185 million to make and only raked in about $102 million as of today.
The majority of that budget seemed to focus solely on making sure The Terminator himself and his glowing eyes looked perfect. Unfortunately, the other fighting scenes seemed to receive little to no attention to detail or accuracy. You’ll be asking yourself how much alcohol the producers must have been drinking when they signed off on these sequences.
The “critics” are making excuses, rather than evaluating the reason, for the disappointing turnout. They blame “Joker” for stealing audiences from watching Terminator. They also suggest that “The Terminator” just doesn’t attract viewers anymore. They even blame Arnold himself, saying he’s no longer viable. Of course, none of this is true. “Joker” and its success has nothing to do with Terminator. Does one think Terminator would have fared better against IT 2, Halloween or Shazam? Also, “The Terminator” and Arnold are alive and well, appearing in a brand new 2019 video game called “Mortal Kombat 11“, which has seen an amazing boost in sales since releasing the character early last month.
The truth is, “Terminator: Dark Fate” is just a bad movie.
But, it does have one thing going for it: Older audiences who watched Terminator 1 and 2’s original theatrical release will enjoy seeing Arnold on screen again. There’s a type of nostalgic taste-bud satisfying feeling one gets when you hear, “I’ll be back” or watch Sarah Connor shrivel in fear as she escapes the clutches of the T-800. Unfortunately, not even Arnold’s 21 inch biceps, 60 inch chest or 220 pound ripped physique can save this franchise.
Terminator: Dark Fate suffers from a poor script, sub-par acting, and CGI sequences that are completely rushed and unrealistic. Nonetheless, praise has to be given to Schwarzenegger and Hamilton for thier efforts, and the story itself may have flourished with an alternate cast and a few script tweaks.
Save your money and wait for the digital download. After watching it once and asking yourself if you should watch it a second time, you’ll hear yourself saying, “I Won’t Be Back“.