As a winter blockbuster of ejaculatory eyegasm proportions, it is virtually impossible to avoid rumblings, apprehensions and early reviews of Tron: Legacy. Diehard “Flynn Lives” fanboys of the 1982 predecessor have expectations that probably will never be met, therefore starting a snowball of reviews that leave a bad taste in the mouths of Tron-o-philes and critics alike.

Unfortunately, I did catch a wave of early reviews for the movie and I was totally right. Drew McWeeny of one of my favorite entertainment sites, HitFix.com tweeted:

Bottom line on my reaction to “TRON.” Nothing irritates me more than squandered potential.

Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian deemed it as a “belated and unnecessary follow-up” and the Salt Lake Tribune says there is “no soul in this machine.” As of December 16, 2010, whilst writing this, the Tomatometer on RottenTomatoes.com reads 49% for the movie.

Ouch.

As much as I respect (and love reading) these less-than-positive critiques, I actually liked the movie. (Does that make me a shallow person? If so, you’ll think I’m totally dense when you read about what I have to say about True Grit).

Having no recollection of the original Tron probably worked in my favor. It didn’t compromise my thoughts on this film. I looked at it as a totally different creature than the technologically groundbreaking original that made it OK for people to wear unitards with glowing circuitry.

Follow the jump to read more.

In this homage to retro movie heritage directed by rookie director Joseph Kosinski, our favorite video game developer, Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges) returns, but before we get to see him, we are introduced to his rebellious son Sam Flynn (Garrett Hedlund). When his father’s old pal Alan (Bruce Boxleitner — he’s also the OG Tron) gets a mysterious page (yes, I am referring to that kind of pager) from his father’s old arcade, Sam goes to investigate and possibly reconcile his questions about the mysterious disappearance of his father.

Amidst the retro stand-up video game consoles of the Centipede and Q-bert ilk and a jukebox that blasts totally rad ‘80s music, he discovers a secret room where he is transported to his daddy’s cyberspace that looks like an awesome laser tag ring.

As soon as he gets there, he is captured, dressed by pale-faced, charcoal-eyed hotties, plays a little death Frisbee and is introduced to his Kevin’s doppleganger Clu, who is basically computer-generated, super-Botoxed Jeff Bridges that rules the land that his father created.

Don’t worry. There’s more.

Sam eventually meets the real version of his father. He is now completely Zen’d out, wearing Lebowski-esque robes and has come to terms with being a prisoner in the world he created. He also has a hot, new platonic treat: his loyal apprentice Quorra (Olivia Wilde). The three of them want to do what’s right: fight for the freedom of this cyberland and return to the non-cyberworld where the sun shines and there are no high-speed motorcycles that form out of a stick that looks like a pregnancy test.

With the in-vogue 3D technology on its side and a symphonic, pulsating Daft Punk soundtrack, Tron: Legacy has many layers of fluff – but it’s good fluff. People want to see CG effects that blow their mind hole –- and it delivers a generous serving of super-futuristic bikes riding on ribbons of light, skintight glowstick uniforms, and other special effects that probably took 10 years to accomplish.

As far as the primary complaint of a lack of soul – I do see that, but it doesn’t bother me. There were certainly some cheeseball moments, but the bells and whistles of Grid races and disc fights make up for it.

The movie runs for over two and a half hours but it didn’t feel like it – much like a rave experience. There’s lots of awesome music, some hot people, some oddly hot people (see Michael Sheen’s Zuse and/or James Frain’s Jarvis) very dark backdrops with streaks of glowstick lights, large freaky pieces of machinery, fast-paced faceless figures doing awesome fight moves, and, of course, the occasional death where the victim is shattered into a million pieces (so cool) – all of this without any of that pesky teeth grinding.

People are probably waiting in line to see this right now — just like a rave!

Tron: Legacy opens in theaters Friday, December 17.

In this latest trip back to Narnia (also known as The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader) we only have half of Pevensie clan present as the older siblings have aged out of traveling back to a magical land where a lion named Assland — I mean Aslan — is basically Jesus Christ and can cure a papercut with a magnanimous roar (and the voice of Liam Neeson helps with the bellowing God-like appeal.)

The third installment to the popular movie franchise based on the classic novels by C.S. Lewis, focuses on Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund’s (Skandar Keynes) final journey to the land of Narnia because afterward, their lives will be unbelievably dull in the real world — or they can go join their older siblings Susan (Anna Popplewell) and Peter (William Moseley) in an even more magical place: 1940s America!

Familiar faces meet them when they are transported to Narnia: Prince (actually, he is now King) Caspian (Ben Barnes) as well as the lovable swashbuckling rodent Reepicheep (Simon Pegg). But there is also a stowaway that joins them in their journey: their uptight buzzkill of a cousin Eustace (Will Poulter). They land on a Narnian trip known as the Dawn Treader and journey to the edges of the world to do Narnian stuff like fight anti-Narnians, retrieve the Seven Swords of the Seven Lords to emancipate captive slaves and other fun Narnian things. While doing so, our heroes and heroine do some soul searching in a 3D movie with 2 dimensional storytelling.

In other words, it’s like any other Narnian voyage, but everyone has gone through puberty.

Follow the jump to read more.

The extent of Narnia knowledge comes from elementary school when my third grade (or was it fourth grade?) teacher read The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe to us. With this particular series of movies, my interest stays invested in the first installment when Mr. Tumnus added an emotional core to the movie and The White Witch taunted and bullied the Pevensie sibling quartet (Tilda Swinton makes another cameo as the awesome witch in this one too!)

Nothing much has changed in this one. My interest has plateaued and the only thing that tried to make this story interesting was the 3D component — which, like all other 3D movies, turned out flaccid and lame.

The fantasy genre has become rocky ground for movies — and this particular Narnia installment stumbled more often than not. It’s visually appealing (then again, what 21st century fantasy movie isn’t), but there wasn’t any excitement that should come out of a time-honored story of this ilk.

Adaptations like this should make me want to read the source material. Instead, it made me want to re-watch Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows to fully satisfy my fantasy craving.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader opens in theaters Friday, December 10.

Then there is this (it needs no explanation whatsoever):

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

Now, the Harry Potter franchise has become an unstoppable juggernaut of pop culture and our favorite students from Gryffindor are doing full-frontal stage plays with horses, posing as the “face of Burberry” and doing indie films that no one has seen (yes, I’m talking about Cherrybomb). But no matter what Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint do, they will always be known as wand-wielding, expecto patronum‘ing kiddos that started this generation’s British invasion.

In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 we are served an amuse bouche of a two-part series that is the end of an era. The first part is depressing, haunting, heavily thematic, kid inappropriate, and just because it is that sad, I’ll say it again: it’s depressing.

I am saying all of that with the greatest intentions.

Essentially, the first part of the Deathly Hallows is two and a half hours of Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) trying to kill Harry Potter. Along the way, bodies hit the floor, a ‘mudblood’ witch hunt ensues and our favorite trio of wizards test their loyalty and trust for each other.

Sounds fun huh? That said, follow the jump to read the top 10 things that make the movie enjoyable (and depressing):

1. No more Hogwart’s: Not having the physical setting of Hogwart’s in the movie is quite a downer. I’ve always loved seeing that enchanting school of moving staircases and floating candles — and I loved seeing the students in classes that I would love to audit.

2. The Death Eaters’ wardrobe: Voldemort’s followers may be as vile and evil as Cecilia Cassini, but they have the most discerning taste in clothes. They must’ve pulled pieces from Haider Ackermann’s F/W 2010 collection.

3. Voldemort’s cosmetic surgery: His nose (or lack thereof) has always bothered me. Rhinoplasty gone wrong? You make the call.

4. Horcruxes and other pieces of jewelry: The “heart of the ocean”-esque Horcrux is tacky. Xenophilius Lovegood’s Deathly Hallows necklace is more fetching.

5. The dancing scene between Hermoine and Harry: In one of many camping scenes, Hermoine and Harry have an impromptu dance party. What could have been hokey turned out to be heartfelt. It was the most un-depressing moment of the movie.

6. Dobby: Potter-heads know exactly what I am talking about. I love that gosh darn house elf.

7. Girl on girl action: The torture scene between Bellatrix (Helena Bonham Carter) and Hermoine was painful — and kind of hot in a women’s prison movie sort of way.

8. Matthew, Gunnar, and Lucius: The long lost Nelson brother has been found:

9. Polyjuice potion: This particular potion allows the drinker to assume the form of someone else and it is used multiple times in this film. Pfizer should seriously get to work on this.

Polyjuice put to use…

10. Hagrid’s motorbike: Any movie that has motorcycle with a sidecar is always worth watching.

Depressing? Yes. Action-packed? Yes. Emotionally heavy? Yes. A good sad set up to a satisfying finale? Definitely.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 is in theaters November 19…but hardcore fans are probably watching it at midnight.

Twilight blows. Boo-yah.

[Source: MTV.com]

So everyone practically got an orgasmic aneurysm when they announced Gwyneth Paltrow‘s “singing debut” on the CMA Awards — which just so happens to be in conjunction with her next big film Country Strong.

Everyone is basically saying, “She done good!” I am just posting this because I know everyone is dying to see the video — God knows people didn’t really sit through the entire duration of the CMA Awards. Also, I think this would make for some gratuitous blogger bait. I really need to get my metrics up.

In case they pull the above video off YouTube.com, you can also watch it at Gawker.tv.

A little over two years ago, the John Varvatos store set roots on Geary Street. Since then, the store has withstood the unfortunate onslaught of retail carnage (we’ll miss you Miss Sixty, Virgin Megastore, agnes b, et al), yet we still have the pleasure of seeing the blinding fashion caricature of Ed Hardy.

That aside, the John Varvatos brand has been in the biz for a decade (a major feat for many modern brands), and Varvatos recently made an appearance at the San Francisco store to celebrate with an intimate crowd that strayed away from the standard S.F. society types. In a way, the party seemed less of a “seen and be seen” hot spot of the evening and more of a gathering of people who matter the most: his loyal customers.

The gathering not only celebrated his 10 years, but also his new fall/winter collection, which Varvatos says exemplifies his original aesthetic.

“We were looking for that iconic, signature (look) that we started with,” Varvatos said. “We wanted heritage – the kind of look that seems like they have a history. The silhouettes are modern, but they look and feel like they have lived.”

Like the interior of the store filled with rock paraphernalia and original photography of Alice Cooper and Janis Joplin, the brand hasn’t budged on their style identity. The new collection certainly holds Varvatos’ “Old World sensibility” stamp complete with season-friendly colos of charcoals, blacks, deep wines and chocolates.

We had a quick chat with John Varvatos about his 10 years in the industry and why fashion in social media is a lot like reality television.

How is it like waking up in the morning now compared to 10 years ago when you first started?

When I woke up in the morning the first year, it was a different kind of excitement than it was today — I mean, it’s exciting today, but back then, it was an embryonic stage of the business. I was a “jack of all trades” back then. I was changing light bulbs, selling and I used to work at our SoHo store every weekend. There’s something special about something when it’s first growing. Today, it’s exciting to see it go to the next level.

Click here to read more.

At first glance, Never Let Me Go has nothing to do with Asians. Actually, there isn’t really a trace of any Asian-osity throughout the entire film: Carey Mulligan isn’t Asian; neither is the new Spider-man/Brit-boy du jour Andrew Garfield. If you put Keira Knightley in an unfocused lens, she can look kind of Asian. Other than that, there is nothing Asian about this movie — except the writer of the book in which the movie was based: the Japanese-English author Kazuo Ishiguro.

The most I know about Ishiguro is what my high-brow classy colleagues have told me. When they were talking about him, I just nodded my head, raised my eyebrows and said “Mmm-hmm — I totally agree.”

I was a big ol’ poser.

But I did know one thing about him: he wrote Remains of the Day. And that is considered a brilliant book. In turn, he is a brilliant writer. Therefore, Never Let Me Go is a good book. And by the transitive property, the movie is a good — and I can vouch for that.

Click here to read more.

But the movie is definitely less about the monolithic social networking platform and more about the strain it had on the relationships that build the site – more than that, it tells three sides of a story. But writer Aaron Sorkin and director David Fincher made sure that each prong of the story had a heaping amount of confidence. In other words, no one was wrong.

“We all thought we were right in our characters’s stories,” said Jesse Eisenberg of how Sorkin and Fincher guided the main characters of the film. “If we all believe we were right, there’s more nuance in their character.”

While sitting in a roundtable interview with Eisenberg. I notice his nuances parallel that of his characters. He talks, looks and has the mannerisms of someone who is endearingly – how should I put this? – neurotic. His rumpled clothes and less-than-groom doesn’t distract, nor does it look unprofessional. It’s genuine, approachable and, most of all, he fits in quite well with the Bay Area surroundings.

As we chat, I notice he speaks at Sorkin pace, but without the seamless flow. He speaks like a real person with appropriate “uhs” and “hmms” and pauses. As a playwright, Eisenberg relates to Sorkin’s made-for-stage-but-said-on-screen aesthetic and claims that his mile-a-minute wordplay didn’t get embedded in his mind – but it sure sounds like it did. We talked about this and other things in our recent interview.

In the ending, Rashida Jones says a line that was kind of insulting/nice in terms of Mark being an a**hole. Did you think that this was appropriate for the character?

I think it’s a sweet ending. I think in the end he is desperate for a connection. I look at her line as a sweet acceptance of him. It sums up the character and movie pretty nicely.

Why?

He feels this burden of being powerful and I think that’s partly why he feels so alienated. He has a perception of success and power as somehow connected with interacting with people in an unhealthy way. That partly what drives him to interact in this odd way. He assumes he has to compromise the relationship with his friends to maintain this power.

Did you relate to Mark when it comes to social interaction?

Similar to Mark, I had difficulty with school and interacting with kids.

Follow the jump for more.

Speaking of being social – when portraying Mark in the film, did you focus more on the character or on the “big picture” of Facebook?

I focused on the larger story of Facebook as far as Mark thinks about it. In the movie, he sees this void online in the same way we look at Facebook now and ask ourselves “How can it not exist?” That’s how mark viewed it – in the opposite direction. How can it have not existed and how can I make sure it does?
A lot of your characters in past films seem to be a little neurotic. Why are you drawn to these kinds of characters?

To me, those characters are the ones feel most authentic. That may be because I share qualities with them. I also assume that everybody interesting is neurotic – so why would you want to play anybody else? What other layers will there be besides neuroses?

What about Mark Zuckerberg? Do you think he has a neuroses?

Mark projects this confidence, but it comes across arrogance. But that’s masking something. For Mark, it’s masking the gulf between him and comfort. The gulf between him and people is vast – even if people consider him a friend. Like Eduardo – in the movie sees him as a friend, but Mark sees him just as another guy in the room.

Last week, I, along with my friends Janet and Erline went to a taping of Late Night With Jimmy Fallon. The guests were Ali Larter, Mario Batali and Jerry Lee Lewis (yes, he still alive and he can still play the hell outta the piano).

As for the actual show, I was laughing the entire time. I was laughing so much that I peed in my pants. No really — I peed in my pants. In addition, my mouth was exhausted after leaving the show. (That’s what she said.)

More importantly, at the end of the show, Jimmy went into the audience and started giving high fives. For a split second, if you look through the end credits, you can see me, Janet and Erline in the third row on the left! AND Jimmy denied us a high five! It was so magical.

I took the liberty of taking screenshots of us so that there is (blurry) proof that we were there. For even more convenience, I have an arrow pointing me out. To my right was Janet and to my left was Erline:

EXCITING!