WHITE HOUSE DOWN is action...make no mistake about it.

Well...of course...if I write a blog about history as entertainment, I would have to write something about the new action film White House Down starring Channing Tatum and Jamie Fox. It's the story of a bunch of baddies taking over America's most iconic and important building with the president trapped inside. Movies don't get more "Americana" than that. So...did it blow my mind? Did it make me laugh? Cry? Clutch my armrests with white knuckles? Did it leave me stunned, speechless or spellbound? With ticket prices in the $10 to $15 range, audiences have certain expectations from their silver screen entertainment...especially during the Summer. And the question is...did White House Down deliver? Well...

If you grew up in the 1980s like I did, you're no stranger to over the top action films (in fact one such film was actually titled Over the Top). These films all fit a certain formula which includes muscular/jacked male leads with big guns trying to save nothing less than the world itself from unrepentant bad guys with no redeeming qualities. The dialogue is short and snappy with one-liners like, "I like you Sully. That's why I'll kill you last." (Arnold's Commando). A person in power who the main character trusts usually ends up being the evil puppet master by the end of the film. And there's almost always some damsel or child in distress who makes the fight personal for the hero. If there was an "Eighties Action Film Checklist" White House Down would garner all the requisite checkmarks even though it's more than twenty years removed from that cinematic era.

Enough already...what's the verdict on the film?

While White House Down can be categorized as a formulaic action film in keeping with the heyday of action films, it has a few things that separate it from the typical fare. First of all, the special effects are amazing. I don't think a film like this could have been made in the 1980s because the technology wasn't around back then to pull it off convincingly. Second, the acting is very good...better than your average 1980s actioner. Third, it has some nice subtle touches of history woven into it that history buffs like myself enjoy...most standard action films ignore that.

Wait a minute, Guy...you didn't offer much to make us think this wasn't a typical action movie!

That's right. I didn't. And the reason I didn't is because there wasn't a lot to separate White House Down from the pack of action films. But that doesn't mean that this film is mindless junk...far from it. I contend that if you go into the theater expecting nothing more than adrenaline pumping action from a somewhat predictable plot punctuated by the types of characters you've seen before, you will not be disappointed. Now of course that description doesn't make the film sound very appealing...unless you consider that most recent box office champions fit into that formula. The truth is that audiences find a certain comfort in predictability. Moviegoers rarely pay money to see action films that make them think. They want to see big muscles firing big guns. They want to see the world saved and the damsels rescued. They want the bad guys to be completely bad with hats that are pitch black without any shades of gray. And they will pay big money to see this...most of these films earn well over half a billion dollars in their box office runs.

It's obvious that the makers of White House Down considered the parameters of their genre carefully. They deliberately included all the criteria found in action films and they were cautious not to offend anyone on the international scene who might be buying tickets to see the film...****SPOILER ALERT**** That's why the villains who take over The White House are domestic radicals and racists (groups that almost everyone can despise) rather than foreign enemies.

And now for my verdict...

I enjoyed it very much because I didn't have any highbrow expectations. I wasn't looking to be enlightened. I didn't think my political or world views would be challenged. I didn't expect White House Down to give me any sort of epiphany. I plopped down my money thinking that I would be treated to some fun escapist entertainment. And that is precisely what I received. Sure, there may have been some predictability and a great deal of unrealistic happenings, but that's what the action genre has offered us since its inception and it's not likely to change any time soon. White House Down gives us what we expect...nothing more, nothing less.     

Will MAN OF STEEL destroy Hollywood or save it?

Are Superman's shoulders broad enough to support an entire industry? Warner Bros. certainly hopes so. If you've been following entertainment news lately, you know that two of Hollywood's heaviest hitters, Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, recently predicted the implosion of the Hollywood system. The basic gist of what they said was that Hollywood's reliance on big budget "tent pole" films prevents smaller scale, less popcorn-friendly movies from being made. Therefore, if and when these big-budget extravaganzas bomb, Hollywood will implode because it had too much riding on precious few films. Spielberg cited his movie Lincoln as an example of a film that almost became a smaller scale television production. He didn't say it, but one can infer that were it not for the clout of Mr. Spielberg such would have been the fate of Lincoln.

What does this have to do with Man of Steel (aka Superman)? Well...with a budget of over $200 million and a full-scale hype machine behind it, Warner Bros. Studios is banking on Man of Steel to pull in huge box office numbers and re-ignite their superhero franchise. But wait, you might be saying, what about all these other superhero movies that have filled our movie screens lately? Aside from The Dark Knight (aka Batman), recent box office champions in this genre have come from Marvel Studios, which is owned by Disney. Warner Bros. owns DC Comics, which is a whole different stable of superheroes. So...back to my original question...what does the prediction made by Spielberg and Lucas have to do with Man of Steel? The answer is...everything. If Man of Steel becomes a billion dollar box office bonanza, it will spawn two sequels, then launch a Justice League film that will essentially be a DC Comics All-Star movie in the vein of Marvel's Avengers, which grossed more money that the GDP of many countries. After that, Warner Bros. is planning on making films featuring Aquaman, Wonder Woman and God knows who else.

So, are Spielberg and Lucas right? Will Hollywood's reliance on big budge lack-of-originality films prevent smaller, less predictably commercial films from reaching the silver screen? Possibly. But it's interesting to note that the two men who made this prediction are the ones who are responsible for ushering in the age of tent-pole filmmaking (anyone remember Jaws and Star Wars?).    

Now what about Man of Steel? It's in the theaters now. Does it live up to the hype and production expense? Will it put Warner Bros. safely back on a path paved with gold? Having just seen the film, I would say "yes" to both these questions. Man of Steel has all the over-the-top action and effects audience expect in a superhero film. But it also has a strong story with plenty of character development. Henry Cavill, who plays the title character, makes a convincing Superman and brings a depth of emotional angst and loneliness to the part. The film's villain, General Zod is played by Michael Shannon, who is an incredibly talented actor with an ability to tap a range of convincing emotions. I was also impressed by the screenwriter's ability to create a complicated story and give us much of the character origin that previous Superman films ignored. So my final assessment is that Man of Steel reaches beyond cliched superhero fare to give us a story that could survive quite well without the big-budget effects that characterize tent-pole films.

Spielberg and Lucas may be warning us against a reliance on epic motion pictures, but if all these films have the depth that Man of Steel possesses, perhaps we might be able to avoid a Hollywood implosion. Only time will tell.   

GAME OF THRONES season finale disappointing? Say it ain't so.

What can I say about Game of Thrones that hasn't already been said or written? The characters are rich, deep and they seem to be real flesh and blood people. The numerous storylines run concurrently and intersect seamlessly. The imaginative settings seem to be real places. Even the names appear to be authentic. And what about the plot twists? There are more surprises in this HBO series than one would find in a lifetime of Christmases.

But I think there is one thing that has been rarely said or written about Game of Thrones. And that one thing can be summarized in a single word...disappointment.

What is that? Did I dare say I was disappointed in Game of Thrones? With the popularity of this show, it seems almost blasphemous to utter such a statement. But at the risk of being haunted by all the Stark spirits, I said it (actually, I wrote it...but who wants to be technical?). I was disappointed when the credits finally rolled on tonight's season finale.

But before you summon your dragons to smash me upon Casterly Rock, let me explain. I'm not saying I'm disappointed in the show or this entire season. I'm simply talking about tonight's finale. 

What does it mean to be disappointed? It means that you were expecting...nay, anticipating a certain outcome, and you did not receive it. And what was I expecting from the season finale of Game of Thrones? To be honest, I'm not really sure...but I thought I'd be treated to a season climax on par with the shocking season 1 finale. Short of that, I thought I'd be treated to an episode that grabbed me by the...ahem, uh collar...as much as the previous episode did. Remember the previous episode? It's the one everyone was talking about. It's the episode that ended with the Red Wedding and the slaughter of the majority of the Stark family. It was the shock of shocks that no one expected (unless of course you read the books and already knew what was going to happen). It was epic storytelling that blew me away. And I LOVED IT! It was imaginative and it flew in the face of conventionality. It shattered the myth of the happy ending. In a word, it was brilliant.

But that was the previous episode, not tonight's season finale. Tonight's episode was a story building episode...the valley that comes between emotional peaks. I imagine in a book it would fit nicely. After a powerful scene as gut-wrenching at the Red Wedding, it would be necessary to give the reader a moment to catch their breath with the events that transpired in tonight's episode. But let's not forget that tonight's episode was a season finale. With season finales audiences have certain expectations. In the case of Game of Thrones, the bar of expectation had been set so high that audiences (myself included) thought they would be treated to something that would just blow their minds. No one was sure what a mind exploding episode would look like...perhaps Daenerys Targaryen's dragons might turn and kill her in the most heinous of ways...I don't know. But we were sure...I was sure...something big would happen in tonight's season finale.

Alas, it did not happen. Arya Stark killed her first man. Tywin Lannister continued to plot. Jaime Lannister returned to the love of his life, his sister Cersei. Oh, and Theon Greyjoy's favorite appendage was put in a box and shipped to his father. No big deal, right? In any other series, these events would be pretty big...but in the world of Game of Thrones, they ranked low on the excitement scale.

So what are we to make of an anti-climactic season finale? Precisely what George R.R. Martin and the show's creators wanted...more expectation. Martin and the filmmakers deliberately created a series that would keep audiences guessing. And in order to do that, you must NOT give the audience what they expect. If we expected a finale bigger than the episode that came before it, they would give us one that was smaller.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the beauty of Game of Thrones...unpredictability. So am I really disappointed? Only in myself for believing I could predict the unpredictable.

Nice work Game of Thrones. You surprised me yet again. See you next season.