Cinema Hype

This Friday is one of my most-anticipated release dates of the summer-movie season. (I’ve been WAITING and WAITING for The Love Guru; didn’t you know?) (Kidding.) I’m so excited: Friday is all about the shoe phones and general awesomeness of Dwayne “The Rock Johnson. Yes! Get Smart is finally here!

Now, Get Smart is a TV remake, which might, in a more rational world, make me think it’s going to be terrible. Why does Hollywood continue to fixate on TV remakes, when so many of them are so bad? Maybe it’s a personal-nostalgia thing; that kid who broke his arm trying to jump through his parents’ car window is later bound and determined to bring The Dukes of Hazzard to life once more. More likely, it’s the lure of possibility: people like the idea of reinvigorating something dated and making it cool again (or maybe they’ve just forgotten why the shows were cancelled in the first place). Dismal box-office stats aside, there’s always the chance that justice will be done to some old, well-loved show, and audiences young and old will come in droves. Each attempt is, more than anything, likely to be a Beverly Hillbillies, a Brady Bunch Movie, or a Scooby Doo, but maybe—just maybe—it’ll be more of a Charlie’s Angels.

Furthermore, there’s a perpetual supply of material. Nostalgia is powerful; even a mediocre show can look ripe for adaptation after twenty years. What shows will we see on the big screen in 2025? Will there be all-star re-casts of Friends? Lost? Grey’s Anatomy? And why do all of those sound so distasteful now? Is it that these shows are really so inferior to, say, Miami Vice? Or are we just too close for time—the equivalent of soft-focus lighting—to do its thing? (Personally, I’m wishing and hoping and praying for a Golden Girls reunion movie. That Betty White! Such a kick!)

Maybe today’s TV lends itself less to adaptation in the first place. Reality TV’s hostile takeover of the networks thins the list of future big-screen offerings, and a lot of popular shows are now so serialized—with a defined beginning, middle, and end—that their stories would be hard to pick up in a one-shot format. Besides, some shows are already eliminating the waiting period and making movies while they’re still on the air. Maybe the future of TV remakes is doomed. But I doubt it. TV maybe changing, but something tells me studios will find a way to keep this weird, surprisingly non-lucrative trend chugging along. So…bring on Saved by the Bell: The Movie?

TV remakes, Get Smart, Dwayne Johnson, The Rock, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, The Dukes of Hazzard, Friends, Grey’s Anatomy, Lost, Miami Vice, Saved by the Bell, The Beverly Hillbillies, Scooby Doo, Scooby-Doo, The Brady Bunch, Golden Girls, Betty White

I think the cat’s pretty much out of the bag when it comes to me and my crush on the Coen brothers. Of course, everybody loves the Coens these days, even people who never loved them before. They’re Best Picture winners, and suddenly The Ladykillers is fine cinema. So it goes.

And I guess I’m a bit of an easy target. Something about the rubber-band dialogue, the simple humor, the consistent brutality of their writing—even Coen comedies usually have at least one moment that comes on like a suckerpunch; think John Goodman as the Bible salesman in O Brother, Where Art Thou?—draws me in. And then there was No Country for Old Men, which had so much to say even with some of the longest stretches of silence this side of a solo road trip. It’s a Thing, the Coen brothers and me. But I have to say that it’s been many moons since I’ve loved a trailer like I love the trailer for the next Coen release, Burn After Reading. Check this out:

So we have a little Coen dialogue here, a little Pitt-Clooney silliness there, a little of each of these people doing what they do best, which basically adds up to classic comedy, revived. Feel the rhythm of that trailer—not to sound geriatric, but who in this day and age has cadence, who swings, like the this particular writing-directing-acting team? And anyway, why haven’t the Coens worked with Pitt before, when the match is so clearly one forged in heaven? If anybody approximates the screwball comedy aesthetic, retro or not, it may be these guys. Supplement the core cast with Tilda Swinton making funny faces (which is Swintonland means that quirked eyebrow), the return of J.K. Simmons to the Coen stable (zoo?) of talent, John Malkovich!, and the Russian mob, and we have a film that is practically unhateable. Come its September release date, I’m sure I won’t be the only one calling out hilarity all around—again with the Best Picture winner thing—but that won’t make me any less right.

Coen brothers, Joel Coen, Ethan Coen, Burn After Reading, George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Tilda Swinton, J.K. Simmons, JK Simmons, John Malkovich, John Goodman, O Brother Where Art Thou?, No Country for Old Men

When I was a little girl, my dad once said to me—in line for either the water slides or some unknown roller coaster; I’m don’t remember which, but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t my idea—”Hey, sometimes it’s fun to be scared.” Even at the time, I was pretty sure he was either wrong or lying. And that, ladies and gentlemen, boils down the basics of why this blog pretends that horror movies don’t exist. I don’t like to be startled; I don’t want to sleep with all the lights on. I don’t want to be a grown woman who’s just waiting for some Child of the Corn to come wandering into her bedroom as she sleeps. Alone.

Which makes me uncertain about The Happening. I like the poster, with all the abandoned cars; I keep telling myself that maybe it’s just a suspense thing. I like suspense. And I sometimes dig M. Night Shyamalan. After all, The Sixth Sense is my usual rule of thumb for scariness, the approximate ceiling of what I’m willing to subject myself to. So, you know, maybe fair game, right?

It’s true that I’ve skipped his last couple of projects, but that was a function of their being bad, not scary; I did see Signs and survive. But The Happening, as the ad campaign associated with it loves to remind us, is rated R, a first for the Shyamalan universe. And that makes me nervous—they don’t rate suspense movies R for nothing. So I guess that’s the question: does The Happening move Shyamalan from suspense and the supernatural into full-fledged horror territory? And how many minutes of the movie would it take me to figure that out?

Readers, I’m depending on you to let me know: CH-friendly, or no?

The Happening, M. Night Shyamalan, The Sixth Sense, Signs

Imagine being the person who chooses the trailers to attach to Sex and the City: The Movie. This is a big job—if the Sex and the City franchise is the royalty of women’s entertainment, you’ve got to figure that the trailers running before it are a kind of State of the Chick Flick address. The news here is good and bad. We saw The Accidental Husband and Mamma Mia!, which, if we’re going with the checking-in political theme, are like the vague assurances about health care and education reform—always there, always agreeable, and either a bit of a letdown (in the case of the latter, possibly) or a complete disaster from the start (which would be the former). And then there were the weird coattail-riders, the things nobody had really heard about and probably didn’t vote for, i.e. the new trailers. Like these:

The Women

I’ve got to hand it to Meg Ryan: she’s been trying to get this movie made for a long, long time, and she finally got it to the big screen. Whether the remake will be any good or bear any resemblance at all to the 1939 original remains to be seen—all evidence points to a tentative no on both counts, but we’ll reserve judgment—but the concept of an entirely female cast is intriguing. The main question here is probably whether the movie is more of a Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 14 or Heathers, Alive Again; it’s hard to say from the preview. Either way, it’s got Eva Mendes, which means The Men might show up even if The Women don’t.

He’s Just Not That Into You

This looks genuinely interesting. Based on the briefly-popular self-help/comedy book of the same name, this is…an unromantic comedy? A celebration of platonism? Or a falsely-advertised romance? Hard to tell. (Kind of. I mean, come on.) Anyway, it’s about time the excellent Ginnifer Goodwin got a leading role, and her supporting cast isn’t exactly creamed chicken livers on toast, either. Will it be as sharp and refreshing as the trailer leads us to believe? I…can’t say, not being a) psychic or b) a studio exec (not that they’d know either. Oh, burn!). But until then, CH is tentatively on board.

What do you think, readers? State of the Chick Flick? Are we recessing, or just in a pre-recession slump? Is there hope?

Sex and the City, Sex and the City movie, chick flicks, trailers, The Women, Meg Ryan, Eva Mendes, The Accidental Husband, Mamma Mia!, He’s Just Not That Into You, Ginnifer Goodwin

I’m not gonna lie: 2008 is looking like a banner year for summer movies. Whether you’re into explosions or brunch with the girlfriends (I personally like both), something should draw you to the theater before Labor Day. Just one question: where have all the original screenplays gone?

I can recite chronological release dates for three months’ worth of movies I can’t wait to see—and most of them are adaptations: Prince Caspian, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Sex and the City, Get Smart, The Dark Knight, The Incredible Hulk, The X-Files: I Want to Believe, Mamma Mia!, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2 (shut up, you). Even family films are getting in on the action, with Kit Kittredge: An American Girl (the inevitable foray of the American Girls empire into feature films) and City of Ember. Unless you’re Pixar or M. Night Shyamalan (whose new movie The Happening seems to be generating some excitement, despite the downward spiral of his last three projects), originality isn’t the name of the game.

This isn’t entirely true, of course. Reading between the lines of Coming Attractions shows that there are plenty of original (in the sense of not being adaptations, anyway) movies coming out, especially summer comedies in the vein of You Don’t Mess with the Zohan and The Love Guru. It’s just that the adaptations are what’s exciting this year. They’re what’s getting all the buzz, which leaves everything else—the unknown and unvetted—looking kind of crappy. And maybe they aren’t; maybe they’re just under-marketed. Maybe they’re great. But it’s hard to tell, which goes to show that summer audiences are a tough crowd. If I’m feeling lukewarm about the unfamiliar, maybe these movies need just a little extra boost, or just get out of the kitchen and wait until fall.

What do you think, readers? Are there any non-adaptation movies you’re looking forward to this summer?

Prince Caspian, Indiana Jones, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Sex and the City, Get Smart, The Dark Knight, X-Files, X-Files: I Want to Believe, The Incredible Hulk, Mamma Mia!, Kit Kittredge: An American Girl, City of Ember, Pixar, Wall-E, WallE, M. Night Shyamalan, The Happening, Don’t Mess with the Zohan, The Love Guru, Love Guru, summer movies

Well, this is weird. A biopic of George W. Bush? While he’s still in office? That’s got to be some kind of a first. I dearly hope we get some kind of (minor) media coverage here. Please tell me we’ll get MST3K from the White House screening room. (”Heheheheh…gonna watch a movie. About me. Heheheheh.” [/Jon Stewart])

I guess the first question I have here—of many, obviously—is…this is a drama, right? (Or do biopics necessarily divide into the traditional comedy-or-drama bins in the first place? Could this be Dubya: The Dramedy?) The pointedness of the release date, just before the general election and just in time to remind the nation of exactly what’s gone on during this Administration, suggests that it could go either way, depending on Oliver Stone’s level of rage. Want to warn people away from four more Republican years? Denounce President Bush with a strongly worded political drama. Want to vent a carefully tended head of steam and inspire the admittedly already-convinced liberal voting base? Let loose with a scathing satire, Thank You For Smoking-style, only with better jokes. Either way, there’s no shortage of material.

And let’s discuss this nutty all-star cast, shall we? We’ve got Josh Brolin—Josh, not James, mind you—as the man himself, which makes a weird kind of Texas-y sense, except that Josh Brolin is badass cowboy Texas and George W. Bush is Southern Gentleman-meets-Skull-and-Bones Texas. Brolin was born in 1972, which indicates that much of the movie might be pre-Presidency (speaking of Skull and Bones…); also, Elizabeth Banks will play Laura Bush, which seems like an apt choice, considering neither of them has left much of an impression on my consciousness at all. The rest of Bush’s cabinet seem well cast (though disproportionally British), with one particularly hilarious choice standing out from the crowd: Rob Corddry as Ari Fleischer? That’s genius, plain and simple. He’ll make the movie; mark my words.

The concept of a major Hollywood film hitting so close to the White House—in ways that feel so obviously politicized—carries with it, in my mind, a tiny twinge of wrongness, like there should be some kind of divide between Movies and State. Gross sense of national discontent or no, should Stone and Emperor, the company making the movie, interfere with the political process, especially for a profit? On the other hand, why shouldn’t they? Stripping moviemaking of its political clout and its potential as a personal vehicle for free speech—seems like the worst and most obvious kind of censorship, or at least like relegating films to some kind of cultural vacuum. And neither of those are good options, either. So I guess we’ll see what Stone comes up with: sharp, relevant critique (or, who knows? An enthusiastic pat on the back?), or two of the most tedious and hope-quenching theater hours of all time. As someone once said, History will tell.

W, W., George W. Bush, George W. Bush movie, Josh Brolin, biopic

So, here’s the thing: I love The Office. And along with everyone else, I love Dwight Schrute, weapon-hiding, beet-farming, Battlestar Galactica-and/or-bears-loving doof that he is. I mean, tell me: Did Dwight or did Dwight not steal the show last week, what with his “Five! Four! Three! Two! One! It’s gotta be now! Do it now! Do it! Do it! Do it!” trick? (Note: Remind me to try this technique in meetings at work from now on. I will rule the world in six months or less, or Dwight’s middle name isn’t Kurt.)

Anyway, I love Dwight, and I appreciate Rainn Wilson’s commitment to acting like a complete nutjob, but the trailer for The Rocker begs one pretty important question: Can Wilson carry a feature film?

We’ve seen him around before; he sneaks into the first few minutes of Juno, and then there was that movie last year with the kids and the aliens—you know what I mean?—but somehow holding that one against him seems downright cruel. Other than that he’s got a slew of TV guest-star stints (including a half-season of Six Feet Under), and….yeah. I’m trying not to have so many doubts, but it’s not working.

Maybe the problem is Dwight, the very outlandishness of him—maybe we can’t get beyond the aviator glasses and the tie with the short sleeves. Maybe it’s Wilson himself. Maybe his screen presence is too much; maybe he can’t contain the weird. It’s the kind of thing that’s either a great benefit (like when there’s a character like Dwight hanging around) or an ultimate career-killer (like when there are only characters like Dwight hanging around). Maybe he’s just too self-conscious onscreen to pull it off. Or maybe he’ll surprise me and blow us all out of the water. Maybe it’s just me. It’s hard to say.

Readers, what do you think?

(Also: Jason Sudeikis at a theater near me! Don’t ever leave me, Floydster.)

Rainn Wilson, The Rocker, Jason Sudeikis, The Last Mimzy, Juno, Battlestar Galactica, The Office

This just in: If your superhero movie does well, plan for sequels. (Who knew, right?) After a $99 million opening weekend for Iron Man, Marvel Studios has announced the greenlighting of Iron Man 2, set for release in 2010, in addition to Thor (as in, “by the hammer of”; how very Liz Lemon!) the same summer and both The Avengers and Captain America for 2011.

Surprise! Except…not. The bonus scene after the credits for Iron Man features Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury, leader of the Avengers, so it’s not like some studio exec just woke up this Monday morning with a yen for many, many sequels. In fact, the comic-book version of Ultimate Nick Fury (as opposed to just plain Nick Fury; it’s complicated) is intentionally modeled after, and looks just like, Samuel L. Jackson. How weird! How meta! How…obviously intended for film adaptation!

This kind of thing is, though, the very reason that I—in spite of/because of my complete ignorance about comic books—appreciate Marvel Studios and their attempt to seize their characters from the jaws of unaffiliated filmmakers. Adapting work they already own (and, ostensibly, respect) gives them the freedom to be as good and as accurate as they want to be, and even better, to build their movies as they have their comic books: as a continuous and self-referential universe. Continuity, the feeling that the events of a story matter somewhere outside of that story, win big points with me personally and doesn’t seem to hurt in terms of building a fan base, either. So although I have no nostalgia for Iron Man or any other Marvel character, I am wholly enthusiastic about getting to know their universe. Well played, Marvel Studios.

Iron Man, Ironman, Thor, Captain America, Nick Fury, Ultimate Nick Fury, Samuel L. Jackson, Marvel Comics, Marvel Universe, Iron Man 2

Let’s face it: spring hasn’t been much of a theatrical-release season. Each weekend I’ve been checking the listings, and…well, you can see how few new movies I’ve written about lately. The
last movie I saw in the theater was Leatherheads, which was an eon and a half ago, and it’s not like much has been slipping through the cracks. It’s like the Death Valley of release schedules out there.

But it looks like we’re finally getting somewhere. Barstow, or Twenty-Nine Palms, at least. The next three weekends—count ‘em, three!—mark the releases of movies I’m planning to see, or at least pretending to plan to see.

April 25: Baby Mama

I’ve accepted the sad fact that Baby Mama may, in fact, be terrible. But I so want it to be good, and I have a such a hard time saying no to the Fey/Poehler one-two punch, that I think I have to see it. It’s either that or The Life of Emile Zola for Project 501. Which would you choose? (Don’t answer that.)

May 2: Iron Man

I’m sorry. Did you think I wasn’t a geek? (…she says, hopefully…) Because I’m pretty sure my absurd love for this trailer—and my hyperventilating about the movie, and about Robert Downey, Jr. as anti-hero hero—proves otherwise. I just think it’s going to be so good. Even the trailer has great comic timing, plus general bad-assery. There can only be fun ahead.

May 9: Speed Racer

…I know, right? Keep repeating to yourself (as I do to myself), “It’s based on 1960s anime. What can you do?” and maybe you’ll feel better. And maybe the Wachowski brothers like their overblown identity/emotional angst, but they also like ridiculous car chases, and I like Matthew Fox’s face, and there you have it. (Note: I reserve the right to change my mind now that Lost is back on my TV. Why buy the ticket when you can have the Fox for free?)

Who’s with me?

Baby Mama, Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, Speed Racer, anime, Matthew Fox, Mach GoGoGo, Iron Man, Robert Downey Jr.

We’ve talked a little about how I feel about the upcoming Sex and the City movie. This is a show that has ended, and ended well. Everything’s tied up; everyone’s happy in ways we could never have imagined at the beginning of the series. So isn’t a movie tacked onto the end kind of unnecessary? I tell myself this…until I hear the first notes of the theme song, and I give a goofy little squeal and grin all the way through, and I can’t remember what my problem was.

I’ve thus far failed to mention another movie that’s been causing the same kind of reaction in these parts, only worse: I Want to Believe, the second X-Files movie, due out this summer. Like SatC, The X-Files is long over. Unlike SatC, X-Files didn’t end well—it overstayed its welcome by a good two seasons, guided by an executive producer who didn’t know how to end his own story but didn’t have the good sense to get out. There is a considerable amount of Chris Carter-related bitterness swirling around out there (I myself saw him recently at WonderCon, and was surprised at the wave of resentment I aimed towards his 20-foot face on the screens and his tiny self up on stage). Both of the actors involved have moved on to successful-ish careers. Isn’t second movie so long after the fact too little, too late? I am prepared to hold a grudge.

…And then I hear Mark Snow’s eerie, ethereal synthesizer, and I can’t keep up the act. I’m 22 and my roommate and I have just turned out the lights to watch another episode. Moose and Squirrel, back for one more adventure! Sure, we’ve missed six years, and nobody seems to have much faith in Carter’s abilities or his accountability to his own characters, but look how long Scully’s hair is, and is that Amanda Peet? (it is), and ooh, they’d better not be broken up now! Or if they are broken up, expect rotten tomatoes if we don’t get to see the reconciliation. And oh, man, Krycek had better show up, or heads. will. roll. How can I not love this movie, even though I want so badly to ignore it? I just can’t.

Wait a minute. Is this a conspiracy? Carter, I’m watching you.

X-Files, The X-Files, Chris Carter, Mark Snow, I Want to Believe, Amanda Peet

The 2000s, or the ’00s, or the aughts, or whatever we’re calling this decade, have been something, as far as nonsensical franchise titles go, don’t you think? Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, for one. And then there’s Indiana Jones and the Unnecessarily Complicated Title Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, which we talked about yesterday. But here’s a new one: the next James Bond film, previously referred to as “Bond 22,” is now officially called Quantum of Solace.

Yeah.

What does that even mean? “Shaken, not stirred, and don’t forget the quantum of solace”?
“Excuse me for a moment; I’m just going to step into my quantum of solace and collect myself”? Is this supposed to somehow compete with the Cone of Silence and the Fortress of Solitude? After all, one of those doesn’t actually work, and the other is top-secret and located in the Arctic, and I’m pretty sure the guy who lives there doesn’t like visitors all that much. So, you know, as much as I liked Casino Royale, and as pleased as I am with Daniel Craig as James Bond, Depressive, I’m not sure this whole thing’s going to work out. Did Bond 22 fail as a working title? It’s correct chronologically, and while I’d think a .22 is a tad on the dainty side for Craig’s particular brand of Bond-ness (Pierce Brosnan, on the other hand, having asked for his with a pretty pearly handle), it’s kind of a cute little firearms joke. A little NRA humor, if you will.

Man. So confusing.

On an unrelated note, I’m headed out of town for the rest of the week; I’ll be back after the weekend. See a movie for me, will you?

James Bond, Quantum of Solace, Bond 22, Daniel Craig

I was at the movies this weekend and finally got a good look at the trailer for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull:

Cool trailer, no? Maybe it runs a little long, but the beginning is so perfect: the whip, the shadow, the self-deprecating “not as easy as it used to be.” This trailer does what a good trailer should do: sets a mood, makes me laugh, and makes me want to chuck good old Harrison on the shoulder…while sitting down to watch his movie. It also makes me think, for whatever reason, that maybe this “resurrecting Indiana Jones” thing isn’t the worst idea George Lucas has ever had (which is kind of a post in its own right, don’t you think?). This is probably the point.

So, readers, here’s my question: What is the correlation between trailer quality and movie quality? I’m thinking here of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone vs. The Golden Compass, one of which was eerie and iconic, and the other of which was just scatterbrained. Is quality a one-to-one thing, or do we get sucked in by good trailers for bad movies? Do bad trailers happen to good movies, and if so, would anybody know about it? Trailers are made by trailer-production houses, meaning they don’t necessarily come with the vision of the director, but does the trailer-friendliness of a film mean it’s somehow more watchable? Inquiring minds (uh, like mine) want to know. Give me your best trailer stories.

And in the mean time, let’s ponder: Crystal Skull. Mysteriously valuable, or simply breakable?

Indiana Jones, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Harrison Ford, George Lucas, trailers, youtube

I was talking the other day to a friend about the movie Baby Mama. The conversation went something like this:

Me: So, Tina Fey and Amy Poehler have a new movie coming out.

Her: Oh, I heard about that. I wonder if it’ll be any good?

Me: I’m sorry. Did you hear what I said? Tina FEY and Amy POEHLER have a new movie coming out.

Her: Yeah, I heard. I said, I wonder if it’ll be any good.

Me: LISTEN TO YOURSELF. Have we met?

You see, the tendency around CHHQ is to lose the thread of the conversation somewhere after “Tina Fey and Amy Poehler.” Rule #4 of the CHHQ Constitution states clearly, and I quote, that “all movies written by and/or starring Tina Fey must be of higher-than-average quality and may, in fact, be cultural touchstones for girl nerds everywhere.” Combined with statute 7c of the same document (”Amy Poehler is like our crazy, not-right, bottle-blonde cousin, and we love her, so there”), things are looking up for Baby Mama, as far as Cinema Hype is concerned, sight unseen. Also, John Hodgman! He makes us giggle just by showing up. Wait ’til he actually has lines!

Except for one detail: neither Fey nor Poehler wrote Baby Mama. That honor goes to one Michael McCullers, the pen behind Undercover Brother and Austin Powers in Goldmember; he also wrote for SNL a decade ago. This all, frankly, gives us pause. We want to believe that anything starring Fey and Poehler must be sprinkled with the dust of smart, funny fairies. Still: Undercover Brother.

Judge for yourselves, CH readers.

Baby Mama, Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, John Hodgman, Michael McCullers, Undercover Brother, Austin Powers, movie trailers, Youtube

For the two months or so, I plan to wake up every morning and think how glad I am that my name isn’t Sarah Marshall. Have you seen the ads? I’m not talking commercials; these are print ads, and they’re everywhere: “I’m SO over you Sarah Marshall,” “My mom always hated you Sarah Marshall,” “You DO look fat in those jeans Sarah Marshall,” etc. (they’re also badly punctuated, but that’s another post for another day). This must be a weird kind of faux-nightmare for the real Sarah Marshalls of the world, waking up one day to find ads maligning them all over town. How would you feel? “Cinema Hype sucks!” on the side of every building? Eerie, I’m telling you.

So that you don’t fall for the admittedly clever marketing campaign and devote too many brain cells to Sarah Marshall in the month before her April 18th theatrical debut, here’s the deal: Sarah Marshall is the starring-ish role, played by Kristen Bell, in the upcoming romantic(?) comedy Forgetting Sarah Marshall (surprise!). This is one of those movies that, in ten years, will either be a two-star blurb in the back of TV Guide OR the defining youth-culture movie of 2008. The plot? A guy who’s been dumped runs off to a tropical resort to lick his wounds, only to find that his ex and her new boyfriend are staying at the same resort (presumably for different reasons, and yes, I am leaving that “lick” joke right where it is). Which, hasn’t Ben Stiller already made that movie? Or am I making that up? But it’s hard to count this cast out: Bell, who nobody doesn’t like, much like Sara Lee; How I Met Your Mother’s Jason Segel, who also wrote the screenplay, for better or for worse; Jonah Hill; and Paul Rudd, who makes everything better. It’s like an epic battle of Mediocre Movie Idea vs. Awesome Cast. Who wins? Just check your TV Guide.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Kristen Bell, Jason Segel, Jonah Hill, Paul Rudd, How I Met Your Mother, TV Guide, Ben Stiller, Sara Lee

“This is the story of a wealthy family and the one son who had no choice but to keep them all together.”

It’s Arrested Development. THE MOVIE.

And it sounds like it’s really going to happen—back in December, Keith Olbermann practically peed his pants when Jason Bateman mentioned the possibility of a post-writers’-strike Arrested Development movie, and suddenly it’s up on IMDB, with a cast and directors and all those things that point to movies being made. And since, you know, IMDB is the source of all things true and just in the universe, I think we’re safe to assume. The Bluths certainly would (only to have it blow up spectacularly in their faces, but we’ll ignore that part of the story and just practice our Mexican chicken dance instead).

Where the movie will pick up is unclear, and troubling only for those of us who love George Michael (though, really, does anybody not love George Michael?). Michael Cera isn’t eighteen going on puberty anymore. Do we now have George Michael Bluth, College Man? And what about Maeby Funke? Now she can go around saying “Marry me!” and mean it. We at CH aren’t too worried. Have the AD writers steered us wrong yet? Mrs. Featherbottom says, “No, dearies!”

So, readers, let’s hear it: What’s your favorite Arrested Development moment? Feed us the lines that make you shake with helpless laughter in the middle of meetings at work (just me?). Let’s see the videos of your GOB magician dance (again, just me?). Share the appallingly hilarious love.

Arrested Development, Arrested Development movie, Jason Bateman, Michael Cera, Will Arnett, Jessica Walter, Keith Olbermann