Ooh, I'd like to, but I've just embarked on my latest opus, Sharkitect: Builder by Day, Destroyer by Night.

On the Pitch Black thing... I got this weird Tremors vibe from it. Not that it's a comedy or anything, just... I don't know, the general structure.

Am I alone here?

I believe that is the fabled blue lotus, prized symbol of the equally fabled Shadow Duel ninja cult, sworn enemies of the Down in Front investigators, worn by their greatest assassin, SHADOW DUELIST

Of course, there's also...

MAUL II, the evil young clone of deceased master crime lord and former head of the secret society PROFESSOR MAUL, always scheming to take his rightful place at the head of the secret society in place of DOCTOR SUBMARINE

INVID, an evil robot from the future that can transform into a warplane, brought to earth by Professor Maul

ZARBAN, a mysterious 200-year-old sage who advises the Down in Front gang to forget their foolish investigation, as it is far too dangerous and risks their very souls and sanity

LAND PORPUS, an evil, masked half-human, half-porpoise hybrid created by Professor Maul who can choose to walk around on land on human legs with a porpoise head or swim in the water with a human head and a porpoise tail

FCW, an unknown insane asylum escapee desperate to join the secret society... if he's not TOO crazy for them

KYLE MONROE, commander of the Pentagon's secret astro-marine brigade, sworn to fight evil robots, freakish hybrids, evil clones, and pretty much anything else that endangers earth

MAD BAD COYOTE, a werecoyote whose ultimate goal is to use the evil computer created by Doctor Submarine to find the answer to the question of life, the universe, and everything and use it to RESURRECT PROFESSOR MAUL

Take two 1970s Italian thrillers and call me in the morning. You'll feel much better about CGI Hollywood.

/the usual "erection lasting more than 4 hours" disclaimer

I don't understand why there would be ANY story in Asgard. The purpose for Thor to get thrown out of Asgard is to get him to earth, where he can have adventures. Then Loki comes to earth to harass and harange him. The whole idea of kingly succession among the gods is weird. Odin is king of the gods and will be (in a coma) until the end of time (Ragnarok). He's not going to get old and die, so sucession should be moot.

Anyway, succession among gods of pantheistic religions is usually bloody and often involves castration and cannibalism. (I'm thinking of Kronos and those other prehistoric Greek gods that became titans.)

Wow. I've always felt Kubrick often didn't have a very good handle on story (the beginning of The Shining is hilariously ham-fisted), but this guy is completely off the rails. Does he go to art galleries and shout at paintings? "Landscape! Landscape! Landscape! Tell me a story!! This. Is. Nothing!!"

EDIT: Weird. Got punbot questions ("Which Star Wars movie is best?" which I apparently failed twice, then "What is the name of our planet?"), then the end of my post got chopped off. Was the repetition throwing up a red flag?

Not sure how this sore point has come up, but I was with Brian on Star Trek, even tho I actually enjoyed the movie as stupid fun.

Zombieland was a good, fun movie that was a fair bit deeper than any other zombie movie I can think of. It certainly had flaws (many of the obstacles they encounter wouldn't be obstacles in a zombie apocalypse, and the climax requires the girls to act stupidly), but the panel harped on the flaws unnecessarily, pointed out flaws that don't exist, and never gave much credit to what works.

• The zombies-aren't-zombies complaint is pointless nitpicking, plus it's probably wrong. As far as we can tell from the Amber Heard incident, people get bitten, die, and rise as zombies. Regardless, they shamble around and try to eat you: they are zombies.

• The extended discussion of product placement was not helpful to your case.

• Emma Stone is terrific. The repeated complaints about her (and other popular actors who aren't even in the movie) were annoying. There are ways of expressing your distaste for something without acting like people who don't share that distaste are stupid.

• The characters' true motivations are different from their professed motivations, which are all foolish—and the other characters all know it. If you didn't see that, you were giving the film a shallow reading.

• The interlude with Bill Murray was too long, but that's the only time in the film when the characters are safe and can interact as normal human beings. It's a crucial turning point for their characters.

• Trey's complaint that the huge clown zombie at the end is no different from any other is a good example of the panel not making an effort to connect with the film. Columbus is afraid of zombies and clowns. Here is a great big clown zombie just when he needs to be brave. Not elegant, but give them credit for trying.

• The stakes in the film are emotional and not physical. The beginning of the film establishes that our main characters are survivors, so surviving won't be their challenge. Their problems are internal. The panel seemed unwilling to connect with that.

Overall, if anyone on the panel liked the movie, it didn't show. It felt like the panel was being unfair and not giving it any credit.

All I want for Mother's Day is for all the panelists to have a good time, whether or not they like the film, and thereby be entertaining.

That and flowers. Would it kill you to send flowers?

A bad story is a bad story, regardless of whether the audience overlooks it because of all the explosions and/or boobs.

But I was liking the movie for a while for a couple of reasons, I think. 1) I've only seen Michael Cera in Arrested Development, so I'm not tired of him. 2) I got that Scott was a jerk because that's the thing he's going to overcome by the end of the film while he's overcoming all the evil exes. "These guys are a lot like me in some ways. I need to change." They should literally be using some of the same lame lines and excuses he used earlier in the film.

The problem is that the film presents a huge analogy (overcoming a girl's memories of her exes is like fighting bad guys in a video game) that it then tries to subvert (the girl for me was right beside me all along [see My Chauffeur; The Sure Thing]). But Knives was annoying, and no video game ends with the player going, "You know, I guess I don't really want to save the princess after all." That's why the test audience didn't like the Scott-Knives ending and wanted the original conflict resolved using the original rules: fight the exes; get the girl. Result: Scott doesn't learn early enough not to be a douchebag, and Knives's arc is clumsily resolved. Worse, the whole Knives character becomes a distraction that makes her a secondary antagonist.

Cars made a similar mistake setting up and subverting an analogy. "A cool but self-absorbed guy is like a race car, speeding thru life and ignoring other people. He needs to slow down and learn that winning isn't everything." What? That's not what race cars are for! Race cars win races! Weirdly, that movie also had this whole other competing theme of "the talented rookie needs to learn to listen to the old veteran to get the tips he needs to succeed" which gets thrown away at the end when Lightning decides not to win.

Thanks for two fun commentaries on one-and-a-half good films!

You're recording on Easter Sunday? Heathens. Family-less heathens.

I will be worshiping the Easter Bunny with my family like decent folk.