'Deliverance'

I was prompted to re-watch and give this film the ol' review after a friend's wife watched it while on vacation and she decided to type up her own review.

She overrated it, I think, because she has an unhealthly affinity for Burt Reynolds. I've never liked this film, this being about the third time I've seen it all the way through.

I think its a train wreck from the beginning. I think the casting sucks and the complete lack of character development despite it being nearly a two-hour film is horrifying. We are given the bare minimum of information (that the river is being flooded, that Bobby and Drew are green) in the opening credits as the crew are driving to their destination. We later find out that Bobby and Drew and Lewis are barely acquianted.

All of this information should matter and is important when you give it thought. Instead, we are transfixed with Bobby getting anally raped by the hillbilly and Drew -- for whatever reason -- having his guitar out and having impeccable chemistry with a narrowed-eyed hill people youth despite neither of them learning to chord an actual guitar or banjo.

The film lacked focus. It's not an adventure flick. It turns into a backwoods version of Crime and Punshment as the four address the horrors of taking a life and the argument of keeping it a secret. Burt Reynolds is essentially taken out of the film for the final 40 minutes and we are stuck with Bobby and Ed (Ned Beatty, Jon Voight) trudge along despite having zero chemistry.

The best part, by far, is Drew getting shot.

'Braveheart'

I can't believe this film is 16 years old. 1995. Wow. I was 15 when it came out and I didn't see it in the theatre for some odd reason. Or maybe I did see it. It's highly probable because those were my halcyon days of movie watching. Still I don't remember it.

And I'm not impressed now.

Braveheart was known for its violence. The battle scenes are fierce and violent. It was the one thing Mel Gibson apparently got right. The history is bunk. However, you can't have the barbarian weaponry, mindsets and tactics without people getting seriously maimed.

Again, that's all this film got right. The thing is, after watching Passion of the Christ and Apocalypto, Gibson made this film at the wrong time. I mean, had he made this film later in his career, around the time of those other two films, it would probably be 25 percent better. No hokey lines, he would not have hooked William Wallace up with the princess of Wales (singularly the dumbest plot development in 1990s cinema). That would not have happened in Passion of the Christ.

A case of bad timing.

'Kill Bill'

Quentin Tarantino is one of the most remarkable filmmakers of our time.

No one has more style, yet, all his style is just an homage to a spaghetti western or an old kung fu movie. However, it's different. What Tarantino does with a camera and a group of actors is not derivative or boring. It's interesting. These characters simply burst off the screen and even though you are supposed to root for the good guy and against the bad guy, you end up loving both equally.

It's violent and bloody. It's carnal and real. You'd be grossed out and want to look away only if your eyes weren't completely transfixed on what was going to happen next. If you blink, you'll miss something.

Tarantino, it seems, does not see boundaries. If wants to throw some animation in there, he does. He wants tell you these back stories and weave all this into one tight, fascinating narrative. Sure. Why not? Because he can. Because he wants to.

Tarantino is one of the true auteurs of our generation. Not watching his films is a modern-day crime.

'Apocalypto'

I watched Mel Gibson's Apocalypto one night. The next night, I watched another film and it had a trailer for the Mesoamerican action-adventure flick.

I could have sworn that the trailer and the film had different actors portraying the main protagonist, Jaguar Paw. I watched it again to make sure. Just sure seems like a different-looking guy. I've searched long and hard to find some mention of this. Couldn't. So maybe I'm crazy.

In perfect Gibson fashion, he found a way to ruffle a bunch of feathers in this film much like in The Passion of the Christ. Most of it is based on his depiction of the Mayan people being bloodthirsty, human-sacrificing degenerates.

Reading arguments, they go both ways. I can only assume that Gibson, as far as we actually know, got it pretty right, or more right than wrong.

Gibson is apparently a fan of language. In both Apocalypto and The Passion of the Christ, he opts for the actual language the characters would have used for their actual culture and timeframe. In the latter, it was Aramaic, Hebrew and Latin. In the former, they used the Yucatec Maya dialogue. If nothing else, Gibson wants to be genuine.

This is an interesting film. Tons of action. It's not a feel-good film in the least. It's dark and brooding. Tons of blood with the good guys largely not surviving. Then the Spanish come at the end and all the blood leaves your brain for a minute when you realize what's coming next.

'Gladiator'

One of the few films I saw twice. Once I guess with some ol' gal and a second time with my brother-in-law.

Realizing what kind of a douchebag Russell Crowe is, the film doesn't hold up very well. Apparently, Crowe was a total asshole during the filming, forcing untold rewrites of the script. Even allegedly stating that he was the greatest actor in the world and he'd make garbage dialogue sound good.

It also features Joaquin Phoenix in the one role that I first remember him in. I thought he was really good even if a lot of the other performances were pretty uninspired.

This film sells for one reason: Violence. The bloodier, the more primitive the better. We love this stuff. You might assume that people of other centuries were more blood thirsty or even more brutal. This may or may not be true.

I do think they did not regard life as highly as we do now. There was a greater gap between the ultra-rich and the sublimely poor. You had Rome sacking everything in sight.

More than anything, death was just too primitive and the way people were killed were no where near as sophisticated. We didn't know how to kill properly. Warfare is the prime example. It was brutal. If it wasn't a bloody mess of a death, but was most certainly bloody and drawn out for possible hours. Whereas a bullet to the head would kill you instantly, that wasn't possible then.

Still, we like gladiators battling each other and tigers. We also like that it was entertainment. Secretly, we'd like the same. It doesn't make Romans in the first century barbarians nor does it modern day humanity. It does make us all kind of weird.

'The Killer'

This film is in Chinese and for about the first 15 minutes there is talking and not a whole lot of subtitles going on. It's OK. Because there's not a lot of talking. Just a lot of shooting.

Still, the subtitles weren't working. Still, when hte subtitles clicked on (after much remote control wrangling), there was something off about them. As if they weren't really translating what was being said or the Chinese syntax and subtleties of the langauge don't translate well or it's one of the corniest written film of all time.

I tend to think it's the first and a bit of the third. This film's really over the top in that Quentin Tarantino kind of way with a shitload of blood, these melodramatic subplots, the killer with a conscience and more.

It is very crazy. The action scene never seem to end and they include so much blood, equal to any Tarantino or Robert Rodriguez film. It also launched the mainstream careers of Jet Li and John Woo, who'd both latre make craploads of money in the United States.

'Notorious'

Ingrid Bergman. Hello nurse!

I didn't know that Bergman left her daughter and husband in New York City to do a film (and to do) with director Roberto Rossellini. The fat, balding Rossellini. Directors get all the good-looking chicks. She'd eventually have Rossellini's kid while married to the first guy.

Meanwhile, the daughter and husband are at home wondering where mommy went. They'd get a divorce, she goes to Italy and has more of Rossellini's children, including Isabella Rossellini, who is hot, but who I didn't know was Bergman's daughter.

I didn't know any of this. Got a little bit less respect for Bergman today than I did yesterday.

Notorious is good thanks to Alfred Hitchcock and Cary Grant. Set in Brazil, Bergman must infiltrate a group of Nazis who got their hands on some plutonium. Grant is her contact in the CIA.

As she gets deeper, her love for Grant (and vice versa) get in the way of the investigation and pinch. It was written based on a short story in the Saturday Evening Post by Hitchcock, who owed David Selznick a film. Selznick sold it -- the director, actors, script -- for $800,000 in addition to 50 percent of the box office take. Must be nice. Selznick probably wonders why Bergman didn't leave her husband for him.

'Top Gun'

Ol' Top Gun did not age well. It's corny and dumb: From the shirtless volleyball scenes, over-the-top acting and writing, the shower scene, the flying upside down and taking a photograph, the "Great Balls of Fire," Tom Cruise, "You've Lost That Loving Feeling," the music, Kenny Loggins, "need for speed," Val Kilmer's hair, Anthony Edwards' hair, Kelly McGillis, the aviators.

It loses a lot over time.

However, that should not take away from the very fact that Top Gun was the coolest fucking film of all time and it defined everything that we wanted to be as pre-teens and teenagers.

All that shit above, we wanted. We wanted to be magnificent lovers like Tom Cruise. We wanted to be coy and cool like Kilmer. We wanted to drive McGillis absolutely nuts by blowing her off. We wanted leather jackets, aviators, motorcycles, "Top Gun" hats, jets, the ability to play Jerry Lee Lewis on the piano, be a jet pilot, marry Meg Ryan and have a kid without actually having to live with them. Even Goose was cooler than us.

And the nicknames. We hardly knew these people outside of Iceman, Maverick, Joker, Goose, Jester and Viper. How fucking cool was that?!

The general summary here is that most of us at nine, 10, 11 and 12 years old were complete geeks and the cult of personality hits us at that age like no other. We're dumb. We don't like Bob Dylan or Jean Luc Godard. We had a lot growing up to do. Just like Maverick.

'Goldfinger'

Gollld-finnngahhhhhhhhh

Shirley Bassey's introduction to the adaptation of Ian Fleming's James Bond novel brought me and my college friends a ton of laughs and parody.

I came up with a hotshot theory about James Bond: Much like one's favorite Beatle, it is likely to change with age and maturation. When someone's 16, their favorite Beatle is probably John Lennon and their favorite Bond is probably Sean Connery.

And it's not close. They don't consider Paul McCartney or Roger Moore.

However, as our tastes and ability to perceive and enjoy nuance and subtleties, things change. Or they should change. If they don't, then you have to consider that life isn't really interesting.

Besides, liking Lennon and Connery is like like rooting for the New York Yankees.

I do like Connery. I just have a higher appreciation for the other Bonds. In fact, if we're not careful, Daniel Craig is likely to overtake them all. He's the George Harrison of this equation. Or the Ringo Starr, considering both joined last.

Connery's appeal stems from his pure eroticism that he exudes with every turn and judo chop. He's a sexy man and he knows it. I also think he was the most chauvanistic Bond nad just about every time he looks at a woman in the film, he's just wondering what it's going to take to get her to spread her thighs.

Goldfinger is solid. A good villian (the oddly-named Goldfinger), a good henchman (Oddjob), good bumbling henchmen (Oddjob's Korean extended family ... all skinnier and dumber) and even some hot trim. Unfortunately, it also has Pussy Galore (the biggest misnomer in film history), who couldn't be any more ordinary looking.

'The Right Stuff'

The Right Stuff is a really good movie. There's really no weak link from the acting and writing to the cinematography and general epicness of it all.

In hindsight, it's quite a who's who -- in one way or another -- of actors and actresses with a ton of interesting footnotes. Interestingly, it's one of only two films to get three Oscar nominations for acting.

Levon Helm
The drummer and principal of The Band provided his voice for the narration and portrayed Jack Ridley, a character I was generally unaware of. No clue as to how he got involved. Quite the odd choice.

Sam Shepard
Gives a very understated portrayal of Chuck Yeager, the groundbreaker who was left behind in the space race. Shepard is the type that you immediately know the face and his filmography is impressive, but I never remember his characters. I'd probably remember his Yeager, however.

Chuck Yeager
Guests as "Fred."

Ed Harris
Was a nobody in 1983. Gets the starring role as John Glenn and then he exploded. An extremely fit and young-looking Ed Harris. Before he would be typecast as a mysterious outsider in every film.

Kim Stanley
Portrays dive owner Pancho Barnes, a particularly minor role for a particularly minor actress. Her one major bullet point is that she provided the voice for a grown-up Scout (or narrator) for the 1962 version of To Kill A Mockingbird.

Dennis Quaid
Looks as if he were just out of high school. Was 29 at the time. Pretty much makes the film.

Fred Ward
You probably know him. He's a familiar face. Most notably, he's been in every Tremors film every made. From Gus Grissom to fighting gigantic killer worms with Michael Gross.

Jeff Goldblum - Harry Shearer
Both play a pair of recruiters seeking the best and the brightest with "the right stuff." Goldblum had co-starred in The Big Chill that same year. Shearer hadn't portrayed Derek Smalls, bass player for a little metal band named Spinal Tap yet.

Mary Jo Deschanel
I wouldn't know Mary Jo Deschanel from Eve. Although, she portrays John Glenn's stuttering wife, it's her last name that caught my attention. She is the mother of Emily and Zooey Deschanel, both of whom have put togethre a good number of successful films and TV shows and a singing career. She must be proud.

'Die Hard'

I could probably write about 15,000 words on this film.

For one, it's probably the perfect action-adventure film. It's not horribly acted, nor did the writers/director put the actors in any position to act poorly. With these type of films, it's the director's job to be like a coach in the NBA: Put your players in the best position possible to make a play.

Director John McTiernan (who also did The Hunt for Red October, Predators and the very underrated Thomas Crown Affair). Cut out any fluff. It's not a blast-a-moment film, but it has an excellent pace.

Finally, to make a good action-adventure film, you need clever, punchy writing. Again, never should the action-adventure slow down. But you also need dialogue. The clever bon mots flow from Bruce Willis with the ease of the Amazon River.

Willis, however, makes the film. Willis isn't the most awesome actor of all time, but there are thousands much worse. Willis, more often than not, takes bad roles in bad movies. The guy likes getting paid and I have little wrong with that.

In Die Hard, Willis took the perfect role. And I think he puts forth a really fine effort. What sells John McClane and, thus, the film, is Willis own vulnerability.

Once the hostile takeover begins and Willis realizes that he's in an impossible situation, his own insecurity to handle things comes out. McClane isn't some badass (although he plays one on TV), and is very scared of never seeing his children or wife again.

Once he and Karl have the big fight, that frustration and carnal anger explodes from McClane as he is repeatedly punching Karl on the stairs, screaming "Motherfucker! I'm going to kill you!!"

It's raw. And it's exactly what any of us would do if it were life or death.

Two character actor notes:

1. Karl is in fact played by Russian actor Alexander Godunov, who died at the age of 46 of "natural causes." He was trained early as a ballet dancer, and was quite good considering where he danced and the leads he got. He also danced in competitions internationally. After roles in Die Hard and Witness, he was offered a ton of roles but turned them all down because they were all for ballet dancers or villains.

2. One of the more understated roles in Die Hard is that of Harry Ellis, the asshole, coke-snorting co-worker of Holly, who gets shot in the head by Hans Gruber. He is played by Hart Brochner. He's a smartass. And he's coked up. And he nails the role perfectly. Brochner's probably better known (or acknowledged) for directing PCU.

'King Kong'

Leave it to a bunch of dumb Americans to see the first dinosaur in three million years only to automatically (without even talking about it!) blow it away and kill it.

That's what I don't undrestand about films where the characters are placed in a super unbelievable set of circumstances and there's never that moment of adjustment and contemplation as they grapple with ... well, seeing a fucking dinosaur.

Wouldn't that blow your mind? Or were people in the 1930s simply not that impressed with dinosaurs? Eh. I tend to believe they were.

The ironic note here is that the characters in King Kong were capable of being amazed. Before they start their journey, they discussed the myth of the Kong and they simply dismiss it as poppycock. Giant gorillas seemed out of the realm of reason. So, shouldn't stegosauruses also boggle the brain?

Later, the sailors and filmmakers come up upon the natives performing a sacrificial dance in front of the giant wall that protects them from dinosaurs, giant snakes and giant gorillas.

The visitors stand there in amazement of the whole thing.

But a dinosaur? Shit. Let's blow it out of the water.

'The Defiant Ones'

Allegedly, director Stanley Kramer wanted Sidney Poitier and Marlon Brando to star in the film.

Other rumors had Elvis Presley interested in playing Joke alongside Sammy Davis Jr. as Noah.

At some point, the role of Joker was offered to veteran actor Robert Mitchum, who would've been great in the role (better than Tony Curtis, for sure).

Mitchum declined. At the age of 14, he actually was sentenced to and escaped from the chain gang in Georgia. He noted that a white prisoner would've never been bound with a black prisoner. The premise, he stated, was too unbelievable.

In 1953, Mitchum starred in White Witch Doctor, in which he played a hunter in the African wild, who agrees to escort a nurse through the wilds of the African jungle, escaping gorillas, hostile natives, lions and all the other realistic shit that happens.

The anecdote about not being chained together with Sidney Poitier is considered false even though Mitchum put it his book.

It's worth noting that Mitchum also had some unfortunate comments about the Jews in the 1980s. He was also an alcoholic and was one of the first celebrities to get busted for weed back in the late-1940s.

Either he was a badass or total dick, hard to tell.

'Come Drink With Me'

One of the top 10 most visually appealing films I've seen.

A beautiful movie that was Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon ... only 30 years before. It's fresh and vibrant and could go toe to toe with any modern kung fu movie.

This film probably makes Quentin Tarantino horny.

'Raiders of the Lost Ark'

How many films can be largely recognized by much of the free world by just one word?

Mention "Raiders" to just about anyone in the United States and that person will know exactly what you're talking about. "Empire" and "Jedi" probably get the same knowing reaction.

The fact of the matter is, I've watched a ton of high-toned, big-budget, well-acted, well-directed movies in my day, many of them trying to "say something" or "mean something" on some secondary level.

That's fine and all, but Raiders of the Lost Ark might be the greatest film ever made.

It's well written, the direction isn't bad, it's funny, tons of action and adventure, it has Nazis, it's a period piece, it has the handsome leading man, the very underrated cute female lead, it involves a mystery, it's historical and religious. It's why Dan Brown makes millions of dollars writing books.

Sure, Raiders doesn't mean anything. It doesn't represent post-Cold War America or preach about global warming. It doesn't make you think anything past what's happening in the film. What it teaches us, if anything, is that the good guy always wins.

I would like to add that there's been two films that affected my future career: Raiders (archeology) and Twister (meteorology).

'Batman'

Tim Burton's 1989 installment of the brilliant Batman pop culture mythology was one of the first films I ever purchased. I probably watched that VHS tape 75 times and probably another 50 on TV or DVD. It's one of my all-time favs.

Watching and appreciating it today as an adult is interesting because there's probably three dozen things that I totally didn't understand because it was a series of complex relationships that we as the audience are thrust into with no explanation.

Often, as a kid, I would fast forward the film to the part where Jack Napier falls into the vat of chemicals because it only got interesting once The Joker came around and started terrorizing Gotham City.

Burton's Batman is nowhere near the creation of Christopher Nolan's latest films in which Batman is given his proper depth, duality and persona.

Still, here's 10 questions I always had as a kid that are answered (kinda) as an adult about Batman:

Who Was Grissom?
Jack Palance played Boss Grissom. Again, his scenes are ones I typically fast forwarded through because they were boring. Grissom is in fact a mobster. A very powerful mobster and the guy who signed Napier's paychecks.

What Was The Deal With Alicia?
At the beginning of the movie, it's clear she's Jack's girl. Later, we see her walk into Grissom's lair with shopping bags. As an adult, I realize the look she gives Jack and that Grissom noticed this look, too. She was cheating on Grissom with Jack. Late, after Grissom is murdered, The Jocker intentionally deforms Alicia's beautiful face. Then we learn that Alicia "threw herself from a window." It's unclear whether this was Jack's doing or suicide. It's equally unclear as to their relationship or whether Alicia was a dumb bitch.

Why Did The Joker Kill Grissom?
As noted, Alicia was cheating on Grissom with Jack. Once Grissom realizes this, he sends Jack on a fool's errand to ransack Axis Chemicals. The crime lord sets Jack up to be murdered by tipping the police officers on his bankroll. Of course, Jack falls into the chemicals with thanks to the Batman. Knowing he'd be set up "over a girl," The Joker kills Grissom.

Did The Chemical Bath Turn The Joker's Skin White Or Normal?
Throughout, The Joker is applying and re-applying (or wiping off) make-up from his face. At times, it looks like he's applying white make-up, but others he's applying the skin-toned make-up. It's clear now that his face was white (shown on the hand reaching out of the chemical sludge and when Vicki Vale douses his face with water).

Why Did Bruce Wayne 'Disappear'?
Following the evening of love making with Vale, she invites the multi-millionaire to a day of festive boyfriend-girlfriend frivolity. The sleepy Wayne initially agrees only to remember that he has a business meeting and will be leaving town and be gone for sever days. Upon leaving Wayne manor, she references the leave with Alfred, who dismisses the lie. We learn that Wayne actually goes to an unspecified corner of Gotham City where he mysteriously lays down a pair of red roses.

Minutes later, Wayne and media members congregate in front of city hall where local mob bosses discuss Boss Grissom when The Joker attacks. Vale, of course, sees Wayne there. Trying to confront him, he speedily dashes away. Why not say, "Hey, I've got something going this afternoon. How about dinner?" when it's pretty clear that you're not going out of town and, in fact, will be clear in the public.

Why Did Wayne React To The Joker's Attack At City Hall?
Once The Joker's minions begin shooting things up (dressed as mimes), Batman's biggest foe walks to a waiting car to be driven away. Wayne, unperturbed by the blaze of machine-gun fire buzzing around him, is agog at The Joker's presence, eyes ablaze, shocked.

I thought it was Wayne remembering it was Napier who had killed his parents. I know now that Wayne was shocked to see The Joker (or Jack Napier) alive considering the last time he saw him, the guy was sinking into a cauldron of boiling chemicals.

How Did Wayne Now The Joker Would Shoot Him In The Chest?
In Vale's apartment, Wayne is over trying to apologize. The Joker ruins everything. Wayne disappears into the ajoining room placing a silver serving dish underneath his jacket. He re-enters the room, antagonizes The Joker until he is shot. Luckily, the silver tray blocked the bullet. Why this was significant is a mystery. Why The Joker didn't shoot him in the head is another myster.

Why Did The Joker's Balloons Inflate Once The Poisonous Gas Was Released?
Still not answered.

Did The Joker/Jack Know He Had Killed Wayne/Batman's Parents?
Surely Jack read the newspaper. After Mr. and Mrs. Wayne were murdered, he had to have known what he done. The Wayne family being very popular people, everyone had to have known that Bruce was aliving and kicking. Any time Jack/The Joker ran into Wayne or vice versa, wouldn't the former realize he'd killed the latter's parents and that Wayne might be a little pissed off about this? Was he that oblivious.

In the final scene where The Joker and Batman fight, The Joker claims that Batman "made" him by dropping him in the chemicals. Batman counters saying that Jack had killed his parents, thus, making Batman. The Joker then admits that "he was a kid" when he killed his parents. It was a long time ago. So, did The Joker know that Batman was Wayne? If this is realized, when did it happen and why didn't Jack/Joker realize this the previous 20 random meetings?

Did Batman Know Jack Napier Killed His Parents?
I refuse to believe that Wayne didn't know who killed his parents. He had to have found out and it looks like the youngster got a pretty good look at the guy that murdered his ma and pa. But how many times had Wayne the opportunity to get to Napier and exact his revenge? Why did Wayne seemingly have no idea who had killed his parents and eventually figure out that Jack had done it, 30 years later?

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

Oddly, you can not get this film nor any other Russ Meyer film on Netflix other than the Roger Ebert-penned "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls."

This is odd to me because "Faster Pussycat" is considering a classic film of some artistic or camp value. In addition, it's a fringe fav capturing big cars, big tits, fighting, cussing, boozing and surviving.

It's also Meyer's tamest film as there's no nudity, language, overt violence or anything explicit. There's suggestion and that's about it.

This is a fun movie. I'm not going to pan it because it's not worth it. This is meant to be a bad film, yet the strong female characters give it a totally different vibe that still resonates today, 40 years after the popularity of the go-go dancer.

'The Adventures of Robin Hood' & 'Captain Blood'

Errol Flynn was quite the swashbuckler. In fact, was the term "swashbuckler" even coined before Flynn was in the Hollywood? Even as a dumb kid growing up in the 1980s, I associated the term with Flynn, who I had never seen in a film. It was just common knowledge.

That's probably why Flynn is so good. Or the perception, thereof. Take any other actor or actress and associate them with a noun or adjective. "Grace" and Grace Kelly, maybe. But that's probably due to the name.

Flynn is more swashbuckling than Audrey Hepburn is precocious, Humphrey Bogart is grumpy or Cary Grant is smarmy.

Flynn is also synonymous with the ladies. As it turns out, probably the younger ladies. He was tried once for allegedly sexing up two teenagers. He was acquitted. He later allegedly bedded two other teenagers. This on top of the hundreds and hundreds of other women he screwed his entirely life because he was A) rich, B) incredibly handsome) and C) in the position (ha!) to do just about anything that walks.

Other rumors about the guy was that he was bisexual (probable) and a Nazi sympathiser (yeah, because zee Germans were the only people to dislike Jews).

'Captains Courageous'

You know, I always thought that I could've been a fisherman in another life. Or even in this life, I guess. There's still fishermen. I've seen "The Deadliest Catch."

There's something about the sea, living off a boat, working directly toward how you got paid, having a very specific purpose and directly seeing the fruits of your labor.

Also, the idea of living away from everything for months at a time and living a sad, adventureous life, but a life that a majority of the general public couldn't do. It's like being a window washer on high-rise buildings. There must exist an extra special sense of pride knowing that nobody wants your job.

Spencer Tracy is great, FYI.

'Enter The Dragon'

I will not pretend to be this lifelong Bruce Lee fan like most other guys will attest.

I watched random, crappy kung fu movies growing up, but in terms of knowing names, faces, titles or whatever, I didn't care. I just couldn't figure out why their mouths moved at different times than the actual voices.

Lee, of course, is a cultural icon. Being a noted badass. And I see why. I don't care about kung fu movies now after watching the best, probably, kung fu of all time. I'll probably never like these movies, but I totally understand Lee's appeal.

Lee is one of the celebrities that died "too young" (as if infants didn't) and is "missed" by people that never met the guy nor were they born when he died due to a reaction from a muscle relaxant.

Lee's value, however, didn't lie in his legs, arms or fists.The dude was fucking charismatic as hell. He's aura just jumped off the screen. He generally seemed like a sweet guy and it sucks that he wasn't able to play out his film career.

If it's any consolation, Steve McQueen, James Coburn, George Lazenby and Chuck Norris served as pallbearers. The coolest set of pallbearers of all time.