<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Pop Critics &#187; Renée Zellweger</title>
	<atom:link href="http://popcritics.com/tags/renee-zellweger/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://popcritics.com</link>
	<description>Reviewing popular culture so you don&#039;t have to</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 00:48:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Movie Review: &quot;Leatherheads&quot; (2008)</title>
		<link>http://popcritics.com/2008/04/21/movie-review-leatherheads-2008</link>
		<comments>http://popcritics.com/2008/04/21/movie-review-leatherheads-2008#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:00:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Duncan Brantley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Clooney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john kraskinski]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leatherheads]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Randy Newman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Renée Zellweger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Reilly]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popcritics.com/?p=2688</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An aging professional football player in 1925 is forced to recruit a college football star and WWI war hero to play for his team in order to save the team from bankruptcy.  Complications ensure, however, when a lady reporter comes between the two men and attempts to discover the truth of the young football star's war record.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><center><img src="http://www.popcritics.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/2008-04-21_0139.jpg" alt="" title="Leatherheads" width="500" height="287" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-2693" /></center></p>
<h2>The Essentials</h2>
<p><strong>Title:</strong> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379865/">Leatherheads</a> (<a href="http://www.leatherheadsmovie.com/">official site</a>)<br />
<strong>Directed</strong> by <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000123/">George Clooney</a><br />
<strong>Written</strong> by <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1445106/">Duncan Brantley</a> &#038; <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0717733/">Rick Reilly</a> (and George Clooney if he&#8217;s telling the truth)<br />
<strong>Running Time:</strong> 1 hr. 54 min<br />
<strong>Release Date:</strong> April 4th, 2008 (wide)<br />
<strong>MPAA Rating:</strong> 	PG-13 for brief strong language</p>
<h2>The Plot of &#8220;Leatherheads&#8221;</h2>
<p>An aging professional football player in 1925 is forced to recruit a college football star and WWI war hero to play for his team in order to save the team from bankruptcy.  Complications ensure, however, when a lady reporter comes between the two men and attempts to discover the truth of the young football star&#8217;s war record.</p>
<h2>The Story of &#8220;Leatherheads&#8221;</h2>
<p>In 1925, Dodge Connolly is a charming and brash football hero who is determined to save his team from going under and to guide them from bar brawls to packed stadiums.  But after the players lose their sponsor and the entire league faces certain collapse, Dodge convinces a college football star to join his ragtag ranks.  The team captain hopes his latest move will help the struggling sport finally capture the country&#8217;s attention.</p>
<p>Carter Rutherford, America&#8217;s favorite son, is golden-boy war hero who single-handedly forced multiple German soldiers to surrender in WWI.  Carter has dashing good looks and unparalleled speed on the field.  This new champ is almost too good to be true, and Lexie Littleton aims to prove that&#8217;s the case.</p>
<p>Lexie Littleton is a cub journalist ready to play in the big leagues.  Lexie is a spitfire newswoman who is assigned to find proof that Rutherford&#8217;s war stories are bogus in exchange for an assistant editor&#8217;s job.  But while she digs, the two new teammates start to become serious off-field rivals for her fickle affections.</p>
<p>As the new game of pro-football becomes less like the freewheeling sport he knew and loved, Dodge must both fight to keep his guys together and to get the girl of his dreams.  Meanwhile, Dodge&#8217;s attempts to legitimize football start to backfire, as rules are formalized, taking away much of the improvisational antics that made the game fun for many of its players.</p>
<h2>The Review of &#8220;Leatherheads&#8221;</h2>
<p><a href='http://www.popcritics.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/leatherheads.jpg'><img src="http://www.popcritics.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/leatherheads-202x300.jpg" alt="" title="Leatherheads Poster" width="202" height="300" class="alignright size-medium wp-image-2689" /></a>I found <em>Leatherheads</em> to be yet another movie on which I and the mainstream critics (and audiences it seems) simply do not agree.  <em>Leatherheads</em> has been getting very mixed reviews, but it is currently receiving on a 53% at Rotten Tomatoes and has only grossed $26.6M after a dismal weekend in which it only did $3M in box office.  After watching the film this weekend with my wife, I find these numbers to be a travesty.</p>
<p>I simply do not understand the critics who are saying that this film doesn&#8217;t work.  I see countless movies and have seen thousands of films in my lifetime so I feel that I have a fairly good feel for what works in a film and what doesn&#8217;t.  Although this movie certainly couldn&#8217;t be labeled a masterpiece I found it to be far superior to much of the dredge I see coming out of Hollywood on a regular basis.</p>
<p><em>Leatherheads</em> is a wonderful kickback to a past era in film, reminding me much of the great screwball comedies of the &#8217;30s and early &#8217;40s.  Clooney did an outstanding job of not only recreating the feel of the mid-1920s, the time in which the movie took place, but also in recreating the feel of those early films that often depicted that time period.  One should pay special attention to the music by Randy Newman which is almost perfect and goes a long way in helping Clooney create the feel of the film.</p>
<p>The direction was absolutely top-notch.  We already knew Clooney is a good director, but there were a lot of scenes in this film that I felt really showcased a keen director&#8217;s eye and a natural instinct that many directors lack.  There were numerous shots that I thought were just perfect for what he was trying to accomplish.  It was also obvious that he studied some of the early films because he seemed to replicate some of the shots that were often seen in those movies which I thought was a nice touch.</p>
<p>Now, in all fairness, this movie couldn&#8217;t actually be labeled a screwball comedy.  The pacing is much too slow and the banter between characters isn&#8217;t rapid fire enough to qualify under that heading, but it&#8217;s about as close as I&#8217;ve seen anyone come in recent years to the classic screwball comedies such as <em>It Happened One Night</em>, <em>Bringing Up Baby</em>, <em>The Philadelphia Story</em>, and <em>His Girl Friday</em>.  I think it&#8217;s probably not accident that the closest I&#8217;ve seen anyone come before this recently is the Coen Brothers with <em>Intolerable Cruelty</em> in which George Clooney starred.</p>
<p>If there is a better substitute for Cary Grant in today&#8217;s cinema than George Clooney I have no idea who it could be.  In fact, it was easy to picture this film being made with Cary Grant in George Clooney&#8217;s role, Katherine Hepburn in Renee Zellwegger&#8217;s role, and Jimmy Stewart in John Krasinski&#8217;s role.  Don&#8217;t get me wrong.  Zellwegger and Krasinski are no Hepburn and Stewart, but I felt that the two of them, Krasinski especially, did an excellent job in their roles.  I&#8217;m not a huge Zellwegger fan and this film did little to change my mind, but I thought she was adequate.  The supporting cast was top notch with pretty much everyone being perfectly cast.  I didn&#8217;t see a weak link in the chain at all.</p>
<p>I have read multiple reviews that comment on the lack of comedy in this film and so I feel I must address that as well.  Rubbish.  I laughed all through the movie, out loud on many occasions.  The dialogue was witty and the situations were as crazy and as fully of comedy as you&#8217;d expect.  Perhaps the popular reviewers need to stop watching so many parody films like <em>Epic Movie</em> and <em>Scary Movie</em> and start watching some of the movies that are actually funny such as those I mentioned above.</p>
<p>Overall I found the film charming and funny.  The likability and charm of the lead actors is undeniable and their charisma helps bring out the playfulness of the script.  Don&#8217;t make the mistake of thinking this is a film strictly about football.  Although football is the backdrop for the story, it is only the setting and should in no way impede those who have no love for the game from enjoying the romantic comedy aspects of the story.  There are plenty of laughs and surprises to keep the whole family entertained.</p>
<h2>Watch &#8220;Leatherheads&#8221; If&#8230;</h2>
<p>You enjoy the old screwball comedies of early Hollywood, romantic comedies that don&#8217;t involve people sleeping together five minutes after they meet, or stories told by great directors with wonderful casts that make you laugh and forget about the world for a couple of hours.</p>
<p><center><br />
<h2>Rating: 8/10</h2>
<p></center></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://popcritics.com/2008/04/21/movie-review-leatherheads-2008/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Star Trek&#8221; Pushed Back To 2009</title>
		<link>http://popcritics.com/2008/02/14/star-trek-pushed-back-to-2009</link>
		<comments>http://popcritics.com/2008/02/14/star-trek-pushed-back-to-2009#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:59:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Angels and Demons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ben Stiller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Fincher]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eddie Murphy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nowhereland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Renée Zellweger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shawn Wayans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Star Trek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Star Trek XI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Curious Case of Benjamin Button]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tropic Thunder]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popcritics.com/2008/02/star-trek-pushed-back-to-2009/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Variety is reporting the sad news that the release of J.J. Abrams&#8217; Star Trek (official site) has been pushed back to 2009. Originally scheduled for release on December 25, 2008, Star Trek will now bow on May 8, 2009. Star Trek fans everywhere moan. Paramount has their reasons, of course. They apparently believe in the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img align="left" width="200" src='http://www.popcritics.com/wp-content/uploads/star-trek-11-poster-2.jpg' alt='Star Trek Teaser Poster 2' />Variety is <a href="http://www.variety.com/VR1117980912.html">reporting</a> the sad news that the release of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0009190/">J.J. Abrams&#8217;</a> <strong><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/">Star Trek</a></em></strong> (<a href="http://www.paramount.com/startrek/">official site</a>) has been pushed back to 2009.  Originally scheduled for release on December 25, 2008, Star Trek will now bow on <strong>May 8, 2009</strong>.</p>
<p><strong><em>Star Trek</em></strong> fans everywhere moan.</p>
<p>Paramount has their reasons, of course.  They apparently believe in the film so much they want to use it as a summer tentpole film and release it during the summer movie season where the blockbuster potential is larger.</p>
<p><em><strong>Star Trek</strong></em> has no competition in its new slot &#8211; at least not yet, although it opens one week after 20th Century Fox opens <strong><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458525/">X-Men Origins: Wolverine</a></em></strong> and one week before Sony is slated to bow the expected hit sequel <strong><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0808151/">Angels and Demons</a></em></strong>.</p>
<p>The <em><strong>Star Trek</strong></em> change was not the only shuffle Paramount made to its schedule and to the schedule of Dreamworks.  Some of the other changes they made include:</p>
<ul>
<li>The Ben Stiller summer comedy <strong><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0942385/">Tropic Thunder</a></em></strong> is moving from July 11 to Aug. 15</li>
<li>Martin Scorsese&#8217;s Leonardo DiCaprio vehicle <strong><em>Shutter Island</em></strong>&#8230;er&#8230;<strong><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1130884/">Ashecliffe</a></em></strong> will be released Oct. 2, 2009.</li>
<li>An untitled comedy produced by Marlon and Shawn Wayans will be released on Feb. 9, 2009.</li>
<li>The Eddie Murphy family film <strong><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780567/">Nowhereland</a></em></strong> is moving from Sept. 26, 2008, to June 12, 2009.</li>
<li>Renee Zellweger&#8217;s horror-thriller <strong><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0795351/">Case 39</a></em></strong> is moving from Aug. 22, 2008, to April 10, 2009.</li>
<li>David Fincher&#8217;s Brad Pitt starrer <strong><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/">The Curious Case of Benjamin Button</a></em></strong> is moving from Nov. 26, 2008, to Dec. 19, 2008.</li>
</ul>
<p>Still, it is the <em><strong>Star Trek</strong></em> news that is the most disappointing.  It&#8217;s not that the studio doesn&#8217;t have a valid point and it&#8217;s not that it isn&#8217;t a smart business move.  It just sucks that we have to wait another five months to see a movie we&#8217;ve already so excited about.</p>
<p>In case you&#8217;re doing the math in your head, we saw the teaser in January which means we saw the first trailer for <em><strong>Star Trek</strong></em> a full one year and four months before the film is set to open.  That&#8217;s insane.<br />
<!--bloggingzoom--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://popcritics.com/2008/02/14/star-trek-pushed-back-to-2009/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

