Championing 'Creed' and ranking the 'Rocky' movies

Sylvester Stallone and Michael B. Jordan in Creed

Happy Thanksgiving. This year I'm grateful for Creed, one of the best films I've seen this year and a real resurrection of the Rocky franchise and Sylvester Stallone's career.

This is riveting mainstream filmmaking of the highest order, that cements director Ryan Coogler's status as one of the most exciting up-and-coming filmmakers in Hollywood.

His first major film, the Oscar Grant biopic Fruitvale Station, was a little-seen masterpiece. And Coogler brings the same realism and frank honesty of that movie to this much more commercial project and strikes gold. This, along with Mad Max: Fury Road, is a reboot that draws on everything fans love about the original films, while bringing something entirely new to the table.

Actor Michael B. Jordan is the new lead, and he is sensational. For years, Hollywood has been searching for the "next Denzel," the gold standard in black leading men. Several actors have stepped up to the plate and whiffed (*cough" Terrence Howard *cough*), and lately some British actors like Idris Elba and Chiwetel Ejiofor have appeared to seize the mantle, but not so fast.

Coming off a big flop in the latest Fantastic Four reboot, Jordan comes out blazing in Creed, creating a vulnerable, but fierce unforgettable hero that in theory could sustain his own series of films. His partnership with Coogler has the same electric charge as Scorsese and De Niro's did 30 to 40 years ago.

But perhaps the biggest revelation of Creed is the performance of Sylvester Stallone. He gives a truly Oscar worthy performance as his most lovable character -- Rocky Balboa. Say what you will about his filmography as a whole, he always plays the hell out of this character. With the exception of the off-key Rocky V, I consider every other Italian Stallion movie fantastic. But in this one, he wisely plays his age (69!) and for the first time ever allows himself to appear frail on screen.

It's shocking to see Stallone appear so weak and unglamorous. Gone is the macho posturing of The Expendables and in its place is a stripped down and emotional performance that shows off how compelling this man could have been had his career taken a different direction.

This is a throwback to his underrated work in CopLand, and it should force audiences to look at him in a totally new way.

But how does Creed match up against the originals? It's hard. It certainly is the most visually dynamic of the series -- Coogler stages incredible fight scenes in one shot, something I've never seen before -- but it's also a more somber and realistic film than any Rocky film since the original. But the Stallone-penned films have a lot of bravado and action, that has become justifiably iconic. So like I said, it's hard, but here goes:

1) Rocky (1976): Ranking this one first is a no brainer for me. Not only is it one of my all-time favorites (and something akin to "our movie" with my fiancee) but it's the movie that creates the whole world based in Philadelphia that makes all of the subsequent films possible. The Rocky-Adrian romance is wonderful, the Rocky-Apollo rivalry is great and the friendship between Rocky and Mickey is key. Paulie may be the most useless character in cinema history, but he's entertaining.

2) Creed (2015): This new classic squeaks into second due to its sheer originality. It manages to do what I thought was impossible, both make Rocky relevant again (although 2006's Rocky Balboa was a tender and terrific send-off for the character in the ring) and bring something fresh to the boxing genre. The entire cast is kinetic and there really isn't a single thing I'd change about this crowd pleaser.

3) Rocky II (1979): Stallone took over the directing reigns in this one and works wonders with the story of the inevitable rematch between Creed and Balboa. Interestingly he sticks with the gritty, dramatic tone of the original here, showing Rocky's struggle to establish a life outside of the ring, while also showing Creed's battle to redeem his image. The final bout is brutal and it's suspenseful finish is epic. This sequel really reaches the emotional heights of the first film.

4) Rocky III (1982): With the casting of Mr. T as the antagonist, the series creeps a little closer to camp territory here, but there's so many great things in the movie, I can't complain. You see a more stylish somewhat cocky Rocky here, which is a cool turn for the narrative to take. SPOILER ALERT, the loss of Mickey is a real gut punch, leading to one of the most heartbreaking scenes of Stallone's career and the heart of this movie becomes the burgeoning friendship between Creed and Balboa, which is convincing.

5) Rocky Balboa (2006): Pushing 60 and reeling from a series of flops and direct-to-DVD drivel, Stallone pulled off this amazing comeback film, which defied all the jokes about an aging Rocky. Not only did he get into phenomenal shape, he brought the character back to his roots, and staged the most believable fight scene in the series up to that point. Even if the movie had its share of cheesy moments, I shed a tear when Balboa gave his final curtain call. A great film for fathers and sons.

6) Rocky IV (1985): Arguably the most over the top of the Rocky films -- Balboa appears to singlehandedly win the Cold War by beating a roid-raging monster played by Dolph Lundgren -- but it's also one of the most purely entertaining of the series. It's fast paced, leaning heavily on flashbacks and music video style cutting. But I enjoy it's absurdism and hubris. It could only work in the era in which it was released though. Today, it would be dismissed as laughable.

7) Rocky V (1990): The one Rocky film that doesn't seem be able to get anything right. I see what Stallone and company were trying to do here by trying to bring Rocky back down to earth, and giving him a plausible, albeit depressing, plot line about brain damage. But his protege in this film (played by real life boxer Tommy Gun) has no charisma and the final showdown -- a street fight -- just lacks impact. Stallone himself seems off in this movie as if he forgot how to play his signature role. Luckily over a decade later he's redeemed himself and the character.

Please don't let 'Rocky' return to the ring another time

Anyone who knows me knows I'm one of the biggest, unabashed Rocky fans on the planet. The original has a lot of significance for me and my wife (we even played tracks from the score at our wedding) so I am a defender of the character's significance and power.

Which is precisely why I am troubled by new stories claiming Sylvester Stallone -- who is approaching his mid 70s mind you -- is looking to resurrect the character yet again, with a film centered on his character (after two critically acclaimed supporting turns in Creed movies).

This comes after he dramatically retired the role both on and off-screen with the release of Creed II. It was a moving, magnanimous gesture -- with Stallone's aging fighter literally telling Michael B. Jordan's hero it was "his time." And his character was allowed that film's final grace note, a tear jerking reunion with his estranged son.

But Stallone never seems to leave well enough alone. He's like George Lucas endlessly tinkering with his Star Wars films. He can't seem to say goodbye to this character. His attachment makes sense. Regardless of what you think of Stallone as a man or as a performer, it's hard to deny the Cinderella story like success of the first Rocky film, which he not only starred in but wrote.

That film made him an icon. And although he's had successes with other movies and franchises, his greatest success both commercially and critically has always been the Rocky films. And their track record is largely good. With the exception of the abominable Rocky V, there's a cast to be made that all the other films are either great or at least wildly entertaining.

He attempted a send-off once before, back in 2006 with Rocky Balboa, a movie that managed to outperform expectations and give the character some renewed dignity. Ryan Coogler, whose passion for the franchise was heartfelt and personal, found new layers in Rocky for Creed, leading to Stallone's second Oscar nomination for playing the same role, no small feat for any performer.

Creed II did nothing to squander the good will, but that doesn't mean that this could all end badly.

While Stallone has been pretty tight lipped about the content (something to do with Rocky mentoring another upstart) but my fear is that this new film will call for Rocky to throw some punches again, which feels silly and unnecessary at this stage of his career.

There's a reason Last Blood, Stallone's supposed farewell to Rambo is greeted with giggles whenever the trailer plays. People see Stallone's age finally catching up with him, even if he doesn't.

Of course, I'd love for Last Blood to be a poignant, Unforgiven-style bookend the grisly, grounded First Blood, but I'm not holding my breath. Instead, it appears to be a cheap looking, totally un-self-aware vanity project, although as true fan I hope I'm wrong.

There also has been talk of a Rocky 'prequel' series, but I am not entirely sure how that would work and I'm not exactly excited to see someone else in the Stallone role.

My worry is this is all about ego -- Stallone has also been publicly griping about his lack of compensation over the years for the franchise -- and an unwillingness to really cede the spotlight to a new (and more diverse) generation of cinematic heroes.

I'd love to see Stallone continue to stretch and demonstrate the acting chops he's shown in films like Copland and Creed. He clearly is capable of doing powerful work and there's no harm in trying something new. His legacy with Rocky is secure, so he give his fans something else to cheer about.

'Creed II' is another knockout for Michael B. Jordan, Stallone

Sequels are always so risky. You almost always disappoint, and at worst, detract from the power of the original. But Creed II is one of those fantastic ones which builds off your affection and respect for the first movie, and spins such a captivating new yarn that you find yourself rooting for a third installment when you leave the theater. Honestly, I think if the fact that the movie was a sequel wasn't so front and center this installment would be the Oscar contender Ryan Coogler's 2015 movie was. It's that good.

Just like Rocky II put its hero through the paces of a challenging sophomore slump, this new movie (directed with grace and intensity by newcomer Steven Caple Jr.) is all about pain and redemption.

Sylvester Stallone co-wrote this one, but none of the grit, humor and authenticity of its predecessor is lost. Instead we get to enjoy what have become new friends maturing. For instance, Jordan's titular hero and Tessa Thompson's Bianca's relationship is beautifully fleshed out in this one.

Yes, it has the old fashioned convoluted premise of the Drago family (led by a terrifically stoic Dolph Lungren) seeking payback for the humiliation they suffered at the end of Rocky IV, but even there story is handled with sensitivity and nuance, so much so that there is real pathos and stakes in the big fight confrontations for them too.

Meanwhile, Stallone is just so in the pocket as Balboa. Here is an actor who has been able to master a single character for over 40 years. That shuffle, that cocked hat, and uncertain line delivery gets me every time. He's just as incredible and heartbreaking in this film as he was in Creed (and frequently has been in many of the previous Rocky movies) and can have me in tears with just a single reference to his dearly departed Adrian.

But this is the Michael B. Jordan show. Let there be no doubt, following his scene-stealing performance earlier this year in Black Panther, and this, he is the leading man of the year (sorry Bradley Cooper). He has this remarkable ability to be both hyper masculine and achingly vulnerable in just the right doses. He has so much chemistry with everyone on-screen from Thompson to Stallone to Phylicia Rashad as his long-suffering mother.

I have no idea if he's keen to track the growth of this character over several films as Stallone did very successfully (his final entry as Rocky in the ring, Rocky Balboa, is still surprisingly moving), but the prospect is exciting. Here is an unabashed African-American hero whose race is self-evident but also not a major force or feature in the narrative. Audiences simply root for him because he is so damn charismatic and heroic. I haven't seen something like this with a black actor since Denzel.

And while there are those who are keen to call this movie formulaic and sentimental, they are overlooking the fact that the formula really works and sentiment is genuine.

This hero's journey is not unlike the one Stallone goes on in Rocky II -- but Jordan's Creed is a very different character (he's far angrier than Rocky ever is, Thompson's Bianca is no Adrian (she actually encourages her husband to fight) and even Stallone's Rocky has changed -- he's a wise man -- not an intellectual -- but a student of human behavior who knows how to read a room and who has perspective for days.

I'm just so inspired to see a big mainstream drama do such great business and be appreciated for the great pop entertainment that it is. Just like Halloween from earlier this year, this is a great genre reboot that hits all the right notes without ever feeling hokey and predictable. That's no small feat. I loved this movie and if you are a fan of this type of movie -- you will too.

Sylvester Stallone feels expendable: The cinema of insecurity

Sylvester Stallone

Watching The Expendables 3 is a surreal movie-going experience. Twenty years ago it would have been a major cinematic event to see Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, Wesley Snipes, Mel Gibson and Harrison Ford in an action film together.

But now after some self-inflicted public relations wounds, father time and more than a few misfires, this collection of ex-A-Listers (with the possible exception of the 72-year-old Ford) can barely muster a blip at the box office.

The entire Expendables series has always been a mixed bag to say the least.

Sure, hipsters can enjoy them with condescending irony but for those of us who grew up idolizing these macho megastars, seeing them age so precipitously is a little disorienting. Still, each film had glimmers of greatness -- like Mickey Rourke's monologue about a girl he failed to save in the first Expendables or Mel Gibson's unexpectedly compelling performance in this new one.

But what were these films really about? Rocky is a story of beating the odds. The Rambo movies are revenge fantasies. The Expendables seemed to be about trying to recreate a past prime -- where narrative was insignificant and the bad guys were always vaguely ethnic. After nearly getting stranded in the direct-to-DVD wilderness, Stallone's career rebounded big time with audiences (and even some snobby film critics) with his terrific capper to the Rocky series (2007's Rocky Balboa) and to a lesser extent with his 2008 reboot of Rambo. And yet Stallone still wanted to prove he could still be plausible as a traditional (read: 1980s) action star.

So for the last four years we've watch a man well into his 60s round up an impressive "who's who" of larger-than-life action stars that we have grown to love despite their acting limitations. That said, the new film unwisely attempts to introduce a newer, younger crew of heroes who lack any charisma whatsoever and bring the movie to a screeching halt whenever they appear onscreen. But I digress.

Unfortunately after the runaway success of the first film and the diminished, yet still solid performance of the second, audiences seem to have tired of the novelty of seeing these old men blow stuff up real good. An early leak of the film online didn't help nor did the PG-13 rating, although I have never seen more people killed in a PG-13 movie in my life.

Why did The Expendables movies lose their charm? Let's start at the beginning. Stallone is an actor, whether he realizes it or not, who is motivated by his own insecurity, manifested by ego. His first major cinematic achievement will likely always be his greatest -- his screenplay and performance in the original Rocky film back in 1976.

The film, despite winning best picture, is often dismissed by highbrow critics as audience-pleasing hooey, but in my opinion, the film holds up as one of the greatest inspirational films ever made, featuring one of the most endearing likable characters of all time. Rocky was such an original, sweet character and while Stallone has never had tremendous range as an actor, his performance in that film was Oscar worthy (he was nominated, but lost for best actor). He is at his best when he's a little self deprecating and vulnerable, like in 1997's excellent Cop Land or the original Rambo film, 1982's First Blood or even 1993's underrated Cliffhanger.

Andy Warhol's take on Stallone

Unlike Schwarzenegger with his one liners, Stallone was never "in on the joke" about his films. He always plays everything earnestly and sincerely, which of course has won him his fair share of Razzies, but also, for me, makes him an admirable survivor in a business that doesn't tend to value age and experience.

Stallone will never earn the respect his contemporaries like De Niro and Pacino did. There's a great line in Rocky where his character says his father told him "you don't have much of a brain so you might as well work on your body."

I later learned, via Inside the Actor's Studio, that Stallone's father actually told him that in real life. And that heartbreaking insult says so much about the trajectory this man's movie career has taken. Despite claiming he was going to step away from bombastic action films over 15 years ago, the industry wouldn't let him. Instead he's been forced to try to keep recapturing his former glory with movies like Grudge Match.

And he looks like an incredible specimen of strength despite what appears to be an enormous amount of plastic surgery and hair dye. That said, the new Expendables end with an awkward, somewhat sad but ultimately honest scene where the "young" stars serenade Stallone with an off-key karaoke version of Neil Young's "Old Man". It's unsubtle Stallone at his worst and yet, perhaps even he understands now that he's beloved by action fans and he doesn't have to keep proving how tough he still is.

There's some hope for the movie Creed, which is still in development. It will resurrect the Rocky character but this time in the older trainer role (think Mickey) opposite Michael B. Jordan as the son of Rocky's former foe and eventual friend, Apollo Creed. Before you cringe, keep in mind that this film will be written and directed by the very talented Ryan Coogler, whose Fruitvale Station was one of the best reviewed films of last year. It would be exciting and interesting to see this unusual movie star (he's relatively short, has that nerve damaged curled lip and often unintelligible speaking voice) be utilized in a fresh and more believable way.

There's fun to be had in The Expendables 3. Like I said before, Gibson could make a whole new career out of playing villains, he's that good at it. Antonio Banderas is hilarious and fun as a motor-mouthed new addition to the squad. And Ford, who is unfairly maligned for having the audacity to finally start aging on screen, seems to be having a ball acting in such lowbrow fare.

But this is Stallone's picture -- with all it's glaring flaws (and there are many) and it's a portrait of a man who's deeply insecure and feels like he's unappreciated and expendable.

How to make sure that 'Creed II' doesn't squander the original

There have been heightened rumors -- especially thanks to a flurry of social media activity on Sylvester Stallone's part -- that not only is a sequel to the hit extension of the Rocky franchise Creed in the works, but that it will likely feature some sort of return of the Ivan Drago character -- originally played by Dolph Lundgren in 1985's Rocky IV.

This actually makes a lot of sense if you're a devotee of the original Rocky movies like I am.

Much of the dramatic motivation behind Adonis Creed's (played by Michael B. Jordan) embrace of boxing was inspired by the tragic death of his prizefighter father in the ring at the hands of Drago.

And while Drago was never mentioned by name in that 2015 film, he certainly survived the events of the 1985 film and there's no reason to think he's not alive and kicking somewhere in Eastern Europe, perhaps in hiding after his stunning defeat at the hands of Rocky Balboa, during which he was a human stand-in for all of Soviet Russia.

I have long felt that the inevitable, natural progression of the Creed narrative should/would take him to Russia to face the man who killed his father. Besides providing a dramatic and unpredictable new setting to see Jordan's character, it would also provide plenty of material for Stallone to chew on as well, since his bout with Drago took a real physical toll on him (if you accept the narrative of the dreary Rocky V) and because presumably his character still feels a requisite amount of guilt for failing to "throw the damn towel" to save Apollo Creed's life back in '85.

So far there has been not a single peep out of Jordan or Creed director Ryan Coogler about this concept (although in the past, they both have suggested they'd be down to do a sequel).

But, right now, all we have to go on is the posts Stallone has shared hinting at a Drago-themed plotline.

Here are a couple things that worry me. Although I thought Rocky Balboa was great, taking the keys to this franchise away from Stallone was one of the shrewdest decisions that could have been made to both protect the characters and also to revive its legacy.

Stallone is far from the subtlest director, and I fear that if he takes over the reigns the series will go for bombast and lose some of the style and versatility that Coogler brought to the table. I'm also troubled that in one TMZ interview Stallone implied that the new film might feature him fighting, which I simply don't want to see. Stallone is 71 now, and while I'm sure he's in great shape, we don't need to see him step into the ring yet again.

One of the things that made his Oscar-nominated performance in Creed so refreshing and moving was that for the first time ever Stallone actually played his age on screen and appeared vulnerable. Turning him back into some sort of macho Expendable would totally squander the good will his last major performance engendered.

I am also super excited about the prospect of Adonis Creed fighting some sort of proxy for Drago -- like his son. I might get past this depending on how the story is told or that part is cast, but to me a far more powerful confrontation would be between Creed and the man who literally killed his father, played by Lundgren.

Sure, Lundgren is 59 now and certainly not the specimen he was in 1985, but he also hasn't totally let himself go. I am sure he could train with Stallone to get a little more ripped just in time for a 2018 release date.

Of course, there's a case to be made that we don't need another Rocky-themed franchise, and with Coogler moving on to Marvel's Black Panther, there may not be. But if it has to happen, and commerce may dictate that it does, it should be a movie motivated by character not action, and the character of Adonis Creed still has unfinished business when it comes to the death of his father.

And that business may just be in Russia.

'Rocky Horror' virgin no more: Popping my midnight screening cherry

Tim Curry at peak hotness

This weekend I finally realized a long-held film buff goal -- I intended my first midnight screening of The Rocky Horror Picture Show with a coterie of sexy, uproarious friends. In addition to a vicious hangover, I came away with several takeaways.

Before I get into all the details, I'll answer everyone's first question: did I dress up? Yes and no. I wore glasses and a bowtie in homage to Brad, with a custom-made "Rocky Horror Virgin" t-shirt made by my girlfriend.

Perhaps I'll take the leap into wearing drag the next time, although my friends who did left some big heels to fill.

I've always enjoyed the movie on its own terms, ever since I first discovered it during its endless re-runs on Vh1. I've never known if it became a phenomenon because people thought it was so bad it's good or if people were just slow to catch on to how awesome it is.

I'd like to think it's the latter and not the former, mainly because I'm the kind of guy who gets emotionally attached to films I like. As my girlfriend very aptly put it, Rocky Horror is "absurd and it makes no sense but it's still incredibly fun and sexy." It's also pretty wildly subversive, especially for a 1975 film.

My favorite thing about it has probably got to be Tim Curry's performance. One of the rare performances that is probably equally titillating to both men and women -- his Dr. Frank-N-Furter has one of the greatest movie entrances of all time, a spectacular voice, wit, charisma -- he's breathtaking.

A close second would be Susan Sarandon, who is so incredibly sexy in this movie it should be a crime. Obviously she still looks phenomenal today, but she has never looked more delicious than she does here.

Susan Sarandon at peak hotness

As for the midnight experience? Well, of course it was a blast. I had been to this kind of thing before, most specifically The Room, but obviously this is the mother of all midnight screenings -- so I was a little worried I would be intimidated by the whole thing.

To prepare, I watched the movie a couple times beforehand to try to learn the call-and-response gags and I got properly wasted to weaken my inhibitions.

When my crew of friends arrived I was pleasantly surprised to see (with the exception of a few film snob geeks) that the crowd was incredibly sweet and welcoming to newcomers like me.

The screening opened with an impromptu dance party and then Rocky Horror first-timers were beckoned to the front of the theater to either drop it like it's hot or perform their best fake orgasm. I didn't participate in this only due to drunkenness but I did get to see my girlfriend and an Aussie friend of ours pretend to be in the throes of passion with each other. Not half bad.

Once the screening got going it was a delight to play along with the prop throwing, although I don't know if I could ever memorize all the one-liners you're encouraged to hurl at the screen.

Perhaps it was the fact that I was surrounded by funny, upbeat friends -- but the whole experience has a warm, supportive vibe about it, even if we were encouraged to scream "slut" at the screen on a regular basis.

It's an experience that everyone who wants to have an open mind should have. Again, the movie itself is not so much to be understood as enjoyed. The finale, which takes a sudden turn to sci-fi is confusing at best, and the songs while enjoyable enough are not exactly compelling musically.

But who cares? The movie is a joy to behold for its vivid visuals, its unabashed sexuality -- both gay and straight, and its undeniable originality. It's about to enter its fortieth year playing in theaters, the longest theatrical run in movie history, and after this unique experience I can easily see it running for forty more.

What are the best movie franchises of all-time?

Hollywood is and long has been an industry dominated by franchises. Even as the film business faces an existential threat in the form of piracy and streaming services, it chugs along largely on the backs of low risk, high reward name brands.

That doesn't mean that these films are altogether terrible. After all, one of the best genre films of recent years -- Black Panther -- was the product of the enormous Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Of course, many film series overstay their welcome (Pirates of the Caribbean, Transformers etc.) others never become a full-fledged franchise after just a couple solid outings. For me, a franchise should constitute at least three films, should be successful enough to have achieved a certain kind of iconic status, and to be a favorite (of mine at least) it should have preserved a very high level of quality throughout a significant portion of its run.

That standard hurts a lot of horror series that I enjoy but don't exactly respect, and again some films don't fit neatly into this construct. Is Blade Runner a franchise? Is Ghostbusters? I guess. But off the top of my head, these are the films that come to mind...

Iron Man/Captain America - This one is a bit of a cheat, since the Marvel universe has grown so big and enveloped so many characters. Still, I would argue that the Iron Man films and Captain America films have had the most distinct tones and character work. Robert Downey, Jr's cocksure Tony Stark has evolved considerably over three films and a myriad of side projects. It speaks volumes that I am already dreading the prospect of his character getting killed off in the upcoming Avengers: Infinity War, since his performance is one of the great stars of the last decade. Especially in the brooding Winter Soldier, but also in follow up films, the Captain America movies have been some of the only Marvel movies (until Black Panther) to address real world concerns is a smart way.

The original Star Wars trilogy - This trilogy is so good, so satisfying that to this day they loom like a shadow over not just every new Star Wars film but every pop action event film that has come in its wake. They are all paced wonderfully, flow into each other beautifully, and tell a simple accessible story in an engaging, exciting and heartfelt way. I discover new little moments I love every time I see them and they benefit enormously because of the limits of technology, their charm is in their shagginess.

The Godfather films - It's a popular punchline to pile on Part III, and while it in no way reaches the peaks of the original and its sequel, it is still a sumptuous, worthy gangster film. The first two films, however, are two of the best, most savage documents of American greed and hubris. I am still struck by the audaciousness of structuring an epic success story around a ruthless crime family. These are not good people, but you can't take your eyes off them.

The Ocean's trilogy - These are movies that I get sucked into whenever I see them. I stumble upon one of them on cable, I settle in and watch. The first one is a pop masterpiece. The second, I think, is  a misunderstood, experimental riff on the genre. And the third, is a loving, even sentimental send-off. Although these films only had a six year run, they were a wonderfully diverting source of joy for me at a time that was anything but joyful in the real world.

The Back to the Future movies - It's wild to me that these movies are so underrated. You'd have to live under a rock to be unfamiliar with the first one, which is just about as close to flawless a blockbuster can get, but I've also always been a fan of the weirder, darker Part II which has even more fun with the time travel premise. Sure, Part III feels less consequential, and I've watched it the least, but I still think it's a pretty fun little western movie and I like how it gives Doc Brown a romance of his own.

The Dark Knight trilogy - Although I'll always be more partial to Tim Burton's version of Batman, there's no denying the craft and thematic continuity of Christopher Nolan's trilogy of films about the Caped Crusader. I hold an unpopular opinion in that I enjoy the latter to movies more than Batman Begins, although I like that one too. These are epic, muscular, and yes, a little problematic films, but they are too interesting to be dismissed as pure genre fluff.

The Man with no Name films - The movies that made Clint Eastwood a legend are still the epitome of a kind of laconic 60's cool. In all three, Eastwood has never been more handsome and mysterious -- of course, he does have names in the films, sort of. But that's not the point. These films are all about style and sensational bursts of violence. The best Leone film -- Once Upon a Time in the West -- came after, but these three movies are probably the next greatest spaghetti westerns ever made.

Toy Story movies - These incredibly moving films have such a perfect arc (especially the third film) that I am a little troubled that a fourth film is on the way. Still, this is the sturdiest, most reliable series of animated films. Woody and Buzz have become our friends over twenty-plus years and their struggle to maintain their relevance is reflect of the human spirit at its most vulnerable. These movies are deep.

Mad Max series - There are some who have quibbles with Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, but I am a big fan of all three of George Miller's original post-apocalyptic Mad Max films starring Mel Gibson. And somehow, against the odds, his much-delayed fourth entry -- Mad Max: Fury Road -- is the best in my opinion. All of these films are action spectacles of the first order, but they also sneak in some subtle political commentary about our obsession with oil and the subjugation of the poor, which is not too shabby.

Rocky films - This franchise has always held a very special place in my heart. The original has always held special meaning for my wife and I, and I actually think all of the follow-ups except for the dreary part V are either genuinely good or great camp. For those keeping score Rocky II, Rocky Balboa and Creed are all solid to substantial sequels. Rocky III and Rocky IV are great but ludicrous, and part V is the dud. Whatever his flaws as a human being, Sylvester Stallone did create something inspirational and indelible with Rocky, and nothing will erase that.

Mission: Impossible - This is another series that has rarely ever erred as far as I'm concerned. Yes, Mission: Impossible II is bloated and dated, but the original is a Brian de Palma tour de force. The underrated Mission: Impossible III proved that J.J. Abrams was a legit big screen talent. And the last two entries -- Ghost Protocol and Rogue Nation -- have really upped the stunts ante to a fantastic degree despite their star's advanced age. I do honestly think Tom Cruise is going to die one day during the making of these, but what a run he's ad.

Indiana Jones - Speaking of advanced age. Sigh. I know that a lot of people can't get past the disappointment over the fourth entry (even that name is way too long) and while I don't revile that film as a much as some people, it definitely got a lot wrong about what fans loved so much about the first three adventure films. Who knows what this long gestating fifth entry will be, especially since Harrison Ford is pushing 80! But, these films are real landmarks for their time and the height of '80s roller-coaster filmmaking. Even though some of the cultural bits don't age well, these are some undeniably fun movies.

The new Planet of the Apes - I was as skeptical as anyone when this franchise got rebooted for a second time a few years ago, but modern technology and ambitious storytelling combined with a remarkable series of motion capture performances from Andy Serkis has led to a terrific series of intense action films. These films are so good that you sometimes lose sight of the insanity of watching CGI apes communicate with subtitles, and yet it somehow mostly works because these movies are committed to their premise and really sell it.

Alien 1-3/Terminator 1-3/Die Hard 1-3 - These are all series that just barely made the cut for me because I really like the first three installments of each of them. Sure, Terminator 3 is terminally stupid, but it's entertaining. And yes, Alien 3 suffers from studio interventions, it's still got some really great ideas and moments in it. All these series go seriously wrong in subsequent films and I fear will never recover their former glory.

James Bond - This is the most long-running, and in my opinion, consistently great franchise there is. It's weathered major casting changes and huge swings in style and taste to only emerge as vital and appealing as ever. Tremendous credit goes to the Daniel Craig era for rebranding and re-grounding the character for new generation. While I wish these films still came out at a brisk two-year clip, I appreciate how old fashioned these films are (real stunts) and how much it upholds the traditions set up for the series and its mercurial lead character. I will never tire of 007.

Engaged: Five films that defined my relationship with my fiancée

The proposal

If the social media barrage hasn't already informed you, I got engaged this past weekend to attorney-at-law and the unofficial editor of this movie blog, Elizabeth Rosado.

Movie-watching has been a huge part of our relationship, and thank God, she is a film buff just like I am. I thought as an homage to this huge life step I would take a look back at the five films that, for me, sort of defined us as a couple -- at least so far.

These aren't necessarily her favorite movies or mine, although some do make both of our lists.

It's more about the context in which we watched them, although the content being awesome matters a great deal as well.

For instance, there's Coming to America. Now, this is one of my favorite comedies of all time. And on one of the first of many unofficial dates, we decided to watch this Eddie Murphy classic on Instant Netflix on a whim. This was incredibly impressive to me on a great many number of levels.

First off, it was nearly 3 a.m. when we decided to embark on this journey to Zmunda and beyond -- so I'm thinking to myself, this girl's a badass. Second, I knew that if she appreciated this film as much as I did we were definitely going to connect on a cosmic level. Not only did we complete the film but we found ourselves relishing our favorite one liners at the same time.

On what I believe was our third "official" date we attending a Rocky Horror-style midnight screening of one of the greatest bad movies ever made -- Tommy Wiseau's epic The Room. Now, I can't express enough our mutual obsession with this film, we reference and imitate it constantly and are pretty cultish about getting our friends to see it and become part of the fun.

This midnight showing was a raucous good time, people dressed up (we didn't, we weren't 'there' yet), spoons and footballs were thrown (if you've seen the film you'd understand), and watching this bizarre monstrosity with an audience really enhanced the experience. Little did I know that midnight movie watching was going to become a staple of our two-plus years and counting together.

The Nitehawk Cinema in Williamsburg has long been one of our favorite spots. They play a great selection of films, especially late at night and sometimes early in the day for brunch. We've had so many interesting visits there, some terrific (Three Amigos, with an all-female mariachi band), some disappointing (drunken hecklers ruined one of my all-time favorites, Repo Man, for Liz) -- but always memorable.

It's hard for me to think of a favorite screening but I do remember being so excited and relieved that Liz appreciated the charms of Caddyshack, one of my favorite movies and comedies of all time. The movie is unapologetically crude and sophomoric, and some could, in a derogatory way, call it a "boy's movie" but Liz totally got it, and while I don't believe one should place too much stock in "liking the same things" when it comes to a relationship, this is one instance where I'll make an exception.

Which leads me to my next pick: Rocky. I'm not exactly sure why, but for some reason this sentimental, but still moving, Oscar winner just sort of became "our movie." Obviously the romance between Rocky Balboa and the mousy Adrian is sweet -- but there is also just a lot of genuine heart and determination in this movie. I think it speaks to Liz and I because deep down we're both very emotional people who resent unbridled cynicism.

This movie dares to be corny in the best way and it kicked off our habit of marathon watching movie series. For the record Liz actually liked Rocky II better than any of the others. Hey, no one will ever accuse her of not having a singular sensibility.

Scarlett Johansson in Under the Skin

And that leads me to my fifth selection, Under the Skin. Liz and I saw this kind of on the fly. We heard it was supposed to be weird and interesting -- and it was. We saw it in a Times Square theater with a sparse audience we suspect were seeing this sci-fi mind-bender because they heard Scarlett Johansson gets naked in it. She does, but the film is far more interesting than that.

Still, we noticed people walking out and seemingly turned off by the film. I had no idea how Liz would react, I was enthralled. When it was over we both immediately started gushing about how fantastic it was. And Liz being Liz, she found all sorts of feminist messages within the narrative that I had never even thought of. Watching movies with her is often an intellectual experience as well as an act of escapism, and I appreciate that so much.

The best part of all this is I get to keep experiencing this and so much more for the rest of my life. Thank you Liz for all your patience, good humor and spunk. You've managed to reignite both my passion for film and romance.

From Cheech & Chong to 'Superman III': My guilty pleasure movies

Thomas Chong

Part of being a true movie fan, in this humble writer's opinion, is embracing work that seemingly most other people don't appreciate. The same is true of music too, I think. We all have those artists or "works of art" we enjoy that most people look down upon or outright hate.

There are more than a few films I will probably be forced to defend liking over the course of my life, and I'm fine with that. It'd be boring if my collection only contained the selections the American Film Institute declares classics every now and then.

The idea for this blog came to me while I was recently binge-watching Cheech and Chong movies.

They're all pretty plotless and silly -- but I love them. Their stoner humor is on point, instead of manufactured. They're politically incorrect as hell but also rambunctious and unpredictable, which I would argue all great comedies should be.

Their three strongest films -- Up in Smoke, Cheech & Chong's Next Movie, and Nice Dreams -- are both time capsules of the era in which they were released, but also hilarious viewing for a lazy afternoon.

Fun fact: The duo also pop up sporadically in one of my favorite, underrated Martin Scorsese films as well, the 1985 New York classic After Hours. But I digress...

Here are a few other guilty pleasures of mine:

Superman III - The first two Christopher Reeve Superman films are pretty unassailable in my mind and have yet to be topped by any future adaptation of the DC Comics icon. Most fans of the franchise (and even some of its stars) have argued that series took a nosedive with part III. They probably have a point. It's a goofy, tonally-jarring movie, where Richard Pryor gets almost as much screen time as Reeve -- but that's kind of why I like it. It's great camp. Reeve playing "bad Superman" as a horny drunk? Phenomenal. Pryor wearing an oversize cowboy hat and a general's outfit, while taking on comic personas. Hilarious. And the Superman fighting himself sequence still holds up!

Drunk Superman

Russ Meyer movies - The king of the nudie picture is far from a feminist icon but I'd be lying if I said I didn't love the raunchy, devil-may-care quality of his best films. Yes, they feature copious amounts of T&A, but they are also shockingly bizarre and violent, with the female characters usually physically dominating the men throughout. Meyer was a fascinating guy who made sneakily brilliant movies like his satire Beyond the Valley of the Dolls.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - Even reading the title makes me wince a little, but that said, I am a sucker for seeing Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones. And despite this film's flaws, he's terrific in the much-maligned outing. Now, granted, I haven't watched it much since I first saw it in theaters, but this film is no way as atrocious as the Star Wars prequels it's often associated with. And while many fans were appalled by the sci-fi bent this film took, I personally enjoyed its attempt to be an homage to 1950s B-movies.

Bad movies - I've written about this before, but there's few things I adore more than an unintentionally horrible movie. It's probably not the best way to spend your time -- but there are few activities I enjoy more than sitting back and riffing on disasters like The Room and Miami Connection with friends. Not only does it make you appreciate the craftsmanship that goes into a good film but there's something so touching and tragic about someone aiming high and failing so miserably.

Rocky III and IV- I will contend that the original Rocky film, it's first sequel and 2007's Rocky Balboa are all actually excellent dramatic films about boxing. Part V is nearly unwatchable. But when it comes to pure adrenaline rush mixed with a healthy dose of absurdity -- the middle part of the saga has the goods. Part III is largely reasonable, although some pretty heavy camp creeps in. Rocky IV however goes all in with heavy-handed Cold War commentary I should have no patience for, but totally do.

Other much maligned sequels... - I am also a defender of several other sequels which have more than their fair share of detractors, such as Back to the Future Part III (I've never understood why people don't like this one), Ocean's Twelve (sure, it's a little smug, but it looks great) and Iron Man 2 (I loved seeing Robert Downey, Jr. face off with Mickey Rourke). There are probably a few others that just haven't immediately come to mind.

Hustle & Flow - This is one of those wildly entertaining movies that is morally reprehensible when you think about it for more than five seconds. Terrence Howard gives a genuinely terrific performance as a pimp we're somehow supposed to pity, who is trying to get a hip-hop career off the ground. I am pretty sure I can't support any of the notions this movie presents about relationships or the sex trade -- but it's got a great beat.

The squandered opportunity 'Rambo: Last Blood' seems to be

I have not seen the latest and what is supposed to be the last installment of Sylvester Stallone's Rambo franchise, Rambo: Last Blood, and if the early reviews are any indication, I shouldn't bother to.

 It's apparently not just jingoistic (which most of the Rambo films are) but particularly tone deaf culturally, considering the fact that it makes villains out of Mexicans at a time when the president of the United States is already singling them out for disdain on a daily basis.

While I can't say I'm surprised that Last Blood is a lunkheaded disaster -- most of Stallone's films are -- I will say I was hoping it wouldn't be, if for no other reason than there could have been a great final Rambo movie made, one that recalls the gritty realism of the first one -- First Blood -- but also because Stallone proved with the Creed movies that he could wring genuine pathos and power by resurrecting one of his long dormant heroes.

With the exception of Rocky V and probably whatever silly idea he has to resurrect the franchise again sans Michael B. Jordan, Stallone has never really erred with the Rocky character. He's great as Balboa, the humble and sweet gentle giant, who always gets up just when you think he's down for the count.

Rambo, his other most iconic role, has always been more problematic. In First Blood, he is a real person -- a veteran who is pushed to the brink by a particularly sadistic police force.

Sure, that film's message about the mistreatment of returning Vietnam veterans may be a tad on the nose, but as a genre picture its a great cat and mouse adventure, and Stallone gives a truly impassioned, compelling performance in the lead role.

But somehow three years later, Stallone seems to have doubled down on all the macho posturing and turned out a sequel that far more explicitly tries to re-litigate the Vietnam war, and as Rambo puts it, 'win this time.' In one of the most ludicrous blockbusters of all time, Rambo manages to single-handedly lead a one man army to take on the Viet Cong and save POWs to boot. It's a lot of fun in a totally '80s way, but hardly real filmmaking.

Rambo III commits the cardinal sin of being boring. Stallone has probably never been more shredded and inert, but besides the unfortunate veneration of the Taliban, the film doesn't have much staying power and was deemed something of a box office disappointment when it came out back in 1988.

Twenty years later, Stallone tried to bring Rambo back. He was hot off the heels of resurrecting Rocky in 2006's underrated Rocky Balboa, and I suppose he thought he could make lightning strike twice. It didn't, 2008's Rambo is a bloody free-for-all, but it's shoddy looking and politically a little murky, too.

Now, a part of me admires Stallone's hustle if not his values. He's clearly got a titanic ego -- why else would he refuse to let any of his franchises go quietly as he enters his mid-70s all while griping that he deserved to make more money on the earlier ones -- but he is also an undeniably striking screen presence, and when he has a good director with the ability to coral his worst instincts, he can be magnificent (again, see the Creed films).

When I had heard he was seeking to dig up Rambo for presumably one last time, I was open to the movie being a compliment to the very first film in the series. Maybe we'd get more character development and like in Creed, deal honestly with the fact that Stallone is now a very old man, albeit a relatively fit one.

But no. As much as I wanted to hope the film would be something different -- it's apparently 89 minutes of trash. I'm sure it's eye rolling, guffaw-worthy trash but when you read haughty critics saying that the character deserved better, you know it must be bad.

After all, who really loves Rambo or cares about Rambo. Rambo has become almost shorthand for a musclebound brand of toxic masculinity. At the very least Last Blood could have explored how a character like this feels anachronistic in the post-#MeToo world in which we live, but instead its apparently a pretty drab affair.

Stallone has always been a frustrating person to be a fan of for this very reason. He could have been Butch in Pulp Fiction, but instead he stars in a forgettable erotic thriller like The Specialist. After getting an improbable Oscar nomination, he could have pursued more prestige roles, or at least tried to get parts that showed his range, but he keeps making dumb action movies like it's still 1985.

I will probably get around to watching Last Blood eventually, after all, I'm a completist. But I am sorry to say he may have won the battle but lost the war for cinematic immortality.

Oscar pick-a-palooza year three: Who's the Best Supporting Actor?

This is the second in a series of of annual Oscar predictions posts featuring myself and my friend Brian Wezowicz of Too Fat 4 Skinny Jeans. Check out his blog and give it some love and in the meantime, read our take on this years Academy Award nominees.

Sylvester Stallone and Michael B. Jordan in Creed

BRIAN: That's insane that Monique hasn't made a movie since Precious! I remember having a brief conversation about that last year and recall her saying that she's basically been blacklisted in Hollywood because she didn't play the game during the lead up to her Oscar victory.

I know that change takes a long time, but this year seems particularly disappointing. With that being said, it's on to our second category.

Last year, you and I were basically in agreement on every category. This year, we're off on the first category. Let's see how we do with Supporting Actor. In a year marred by controversy, there's perhaps no better feel good story than the nomination of Sylvester Stallone. In a year with not a lot of front runners, he seems to be the one gaining the most amount of momentum going into the big show.

 Here are the nominees:

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Christian Bale, The Big Short
Tom Hardy, The Revenant
Mark Ruffalo, Spotlight
Mark Rylance, Bridge of Spies
Sylvester Stallone, Creed

Who will win: Sylvester Stallone.

Nominated for bringing new life into a role he created 40 years ago. Stallone has long been regarded as a muscle action movie actor, but he's shown the acting chops when given the chance. From Cop Land to Rocky Balboa, he's always felt like a wannabe good actor trapped in a chemically enhanced body. I'm going with the sentimental favorite here.

Who should win: Sylvester Stallone.

This year feels like the year of lifetime achievement winners for the men. With Leo hopefully winning his long overdue award and Stallone's win, it feels like a career recognition kind of night.

Dark Horse: Mark Rylance.

Bridge of Spies came and went at the box office with almost no fanfare. I'm not 100% sold on the notoriously snooty Academy giving an award to an action star. It reminds me of Eddie Murphy being denied for Dreamgirls because of his perceived status as a comedy actor. Rylance got some early buzz for his performance as the captured Cold War spy. Plus, Spielberg movies usually take home something.

Who you got?

ADAM: This was definitely the hardest category to predict this year, with a number of terrific performances left on the outside -- chief among them Michael Keaton in Spotlight, Idris Elba in Beasts of No Nation, Bencio Del Toro in Sicario and a personal favorite of mine, Harrison Ford in The Force Awakens. I honestly think it's a travesty he's not here -- I get it, Star Wars is not typical Oscar fare, but the 1977 film was nominated for Best Picture and Alec Guiness was in the Supporting race that year for his iconic first turn as Obi Wan Kenobi. I think Ford may go down as one of the most underrated and under-appreciated actors of his era and that's a real shame.

That said, I am happy with pretty much all of these nominees, save for Christian Bale -- who gave my least favorite performance in The Big Short. His character was more smug than charming and he didn't really land with me until the film's last act. But I feel like he's rapidly filling that Leo DiCaprio bracket -- the respected actor who will be in the running every year and will eventually win because he's "due." On the other hand I was pleasantly surprised to see Tom Hardy here because despite all the raves and attention DiCaprio is getting for The Revenant (and it is well deserved) I think Hardy is the one who makes the movie work. He is a terrific antagonist, and the performance was a wonderful bookend to his brilliant brooding in my favorite movie of the year -- Mad Max: Fury Road.

Michael Keaton and Mark Ruffalo in Spotlight.

And yet, this is all about Sylvester Stallone. Despite his occasional buffoonery and penchant for making inflated vanity projects I have always been a huge fan of his. With all due respect to Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis, he is my favorite of the 80s-early-90s era action stars because I always felt he was the best actor. The Rocky movies will endure as his best work because they were always pretty straight-forward character studies with the ominous 'big fight" tying them together. People maybe thought they were going to an action movie, but it was really a compelling narrative about an uncommonly kind lead character whose defining characteristic was his big heart.

The essence of what made Stallone and those movies great was on complete display in Creed, a tremendous example of how to make a great audience-pleaser. And for me, Stallone gave a really breathtaking performance that I hope he builds on in the future. It's downright shocking to see not just Rocky, but Stallone the actor, look so vulnerable. He moved me to tears in Creed, and it would be incredibly disappointing to see the culmination of his career be overlooked. It's interesting that you mentioned Eddie Murphy -- who of course has plenty of time to resuscitate his career, but after losing for Dreamgirls (which he shouldn't have) he retreated back to the safe mediocre comedies he was making before. Mickey Rourke, one of my favorite actors, has never taken on another awards caliber role after losing in 2009 for his fantastic comeback vehicle The Wrestler.

I would hate to see Stallone -- at 70 -- go back to churning out B-movies after this. I think he can finally start to show some more range and have a fascinating late career trajectory, Either way, no matter what happens, Stallone must be respected now as the great actor he always was, and won't be reduced to being a punchline.

Who will win: Sylvester Stallone

Although there is a long history of soul-crushing surprises in this category (few people predicted Eddie Murphy would lose in 2007, for instance), the stars really seem to have aligned for Stallone. He has the most emotional support behind his performance and since the movie was inexplicably snubbed in so many other categories, this could also be a way of paying tribute to a great hit film.

Who should win: Sylvester Stallone

Again, I really admired all the performances here. Particularly Hardy's. I think Mark Ruffalo is really overdue and he did some terrific work in Spotlight (although my favorite performance in the film was Keaton's), and Bridge of Spies' Mark Rylance gave a very memorable turn albeit in a role that seems tailor-made to win the Oscar. But the performance that I'll never forget is Stallone's in Creed. Again, the word "culmination" keeps coming to mind because we've all grown up with the Rocky Balboa character in its various iterations and it was as if his acting has finally grown up to with this film. Hopefully, he doesn't forget to give Ryan Coogler the credit he deserves this time. 

Dark Horse: Mark Ruffalo

Although Mark Rylance won several precursors, I'm not convinced that his film has stayed as fresh in voters' minds. I think Hardy could benefit if The Revenant just dominates the night. But I think Ruffalo has the strongest "he's due" narrative of the bunch, and although he has dipped a toe into commercial acting with the Avengers films, he's the kind of actor's actor that is made for awards like this. I think if anyone can eek out a victory over Stallone, it's him.

'Crystal Lake Memories' mythologizes 'Friday the 13th' franchise

The Friday the 13th franchise is decidedly and unabashedly lowbrow. Its main appeal are its creatively grisly kills, which may or may not be your cup of tea. A couple of the films stand a cut above the others, but they are largely all the same, which I suspect is what people like about them. They're not as fantastical and funny as the Nightmare on Elm Street movies or as atmospheric and moody as the Halloween films. They're real mean and potatoes.

Still, the epically long documentary -- Crystal Lake Memories -- seeks to elevate the series is our esteem. It's essentially copying the model of the incredibly watchable Never Sleep Again, which itself was a multi-hour trip down memory lane through all the Freddy Krueger movies.

Crystal Lake Memories isn't quite as engrossing because the movies its documenting aren't -- and yet it is still an entertaining enough watch (especially during these dog days of covd) and the experience of watching it got me thinking: what other prolific film franchises would I like to see get this same treatment.

Sure, these documentaries are arguably one long extended DVD feature, but who cares. When you're an obsessive film fan like I am you want all those little tidbits about scripting, casting, special effects et al. And what these docs do, which is fun, is really get the perspective of bit players and production people, so you really get a full sense of what making these movies was really like.

There are plenty of series that have been overly, exhaustively documented -- like Star Wars -- and maybe some of franchises I'm about the mention may have and I just missed it. But I'd happily devote 6 hours or more to.

Star Trek - I am by no means a Trekkie. I've seen a fair amount of the original TV series, but I mostly became familiar with it through the movies, especially the ones featuring William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy. The series is infamously uneven, but I think that would only make a documentary about their evolution that much more interesting. I think you can even stretch this into the Next Generation movies, as well as the J.J. Abrams era too.

Mission: Impossible - What started as a big budget (and wildly successful) big screen adaptation of a beloved TV series has evolved into something more over the course of six films. Each subsequent film has dramatically upped the ante in terms of the stunts that star Tom Cruise is really doing himself and I'd be fascinated to know about the behind the scenes machinations of putting these sequences together but also the arc of the franchise in general.

James Bond - This would be hard to do -- since we're talking 20+ movies here -- but there is no film franchise more durable and adaptable to its times than 007. Sadly, we've lose two of the most iconic Bonds in recent years -- Sean Connery and Roger Moore -- but there is plenty of archive footage and surviving players that can help fill in the gaps. The recent blu ray editions of the series actually have some fantastic mini docs covering the films from Dr. No through License to Kill which could serve as a blueprint.

Mad Max - Sure it's only four movies -- but each has such a strong, distinct flavor, have been hugely influential and could sustain a documentary of their own. George Miller is hard at work on his Furiosa prequel, but I'd love to hear him hold court on just how he developed this thoroughly unique cinematic world and conceived of the larger-than-life car, jeep and trunk stunts that are the franchise's trademarks. Especially, when it comes to Fury Road, which has been widely hailed as one of the last decade's best films.

Rocky - I've made no secret about my adoration for this series, which improbably became relevant again after 2006's Rocky Balboa and especially after Creed and Creed II. Naturally, this is Sylvester Stallone's greatest cinematic accomplishment, but it's really not his triumph alone and there's not just the films but the inspiration they delivered to so many fans, including Creed director Ryan Coogler, who got into the franchise because of his late father's appreciation for the criminally underrated Rocky II.

Halloween - I mentioned this one earlier and this is the likeliest candidate, since its already been done with Nightmare and Friday the 13th. The Halloween films are actually my favorite of all these horror movie franchises because I think they are cinematically more sound, the acting is generally a notch above (thanks to committed work from Jamie Lee Curtis and Donald Pleasance) and the series took some interesting detours (like the Michael Myers-less Halloween III) before rebooting yet again by David Gordon Green and Danny McBride with 2018's Halloween.

'Cobra Kai' is a case study in how reboots should be done

When Cobra Kai, the YouTube reboot of the hit '80s Karate Kid saga was first announced a lot of critics were understandably incredulous. After the crowd-pleasing, hit 1984 original and its two sequels (not to mention a 2010 reboot with Jaden Smith) it seemed as if the creative juice was long gone from this series.

Every indication was that this would be yet another tired retread of an '80s staple, and even worse, a slightly smug parody that would embarrass its aging stars Ralph Macchio and William Zabka.

But against the odds, after viewing the first two episodes, I can safely say the series is excellent. It provides a great platform to show off Zabka's genuine acting chops. It's genuinely funny and jarringly realistic and to my mind, it provides a real blueprint for how these kinds of decades-after-the-fact reboots can actually be effective.

The most direct comparison I can think of is Creed, which came along long after it seemed as though the Rocky series had no place else to go creatively. That film succeeds on several levels, but one of the things I like about it best is that it handles the previous Rocky entries as realistically as possible and then grapples with the real world implications of what those events could have transpired.

In other words Apollo Creed's death in Rocky IV plays a tangible and compelling role in who Michael B. Jordan's titular character becomes.

Cobra Kai, in a weird way, has a similar structure. In this case, the first episode mostly drills down on the fallout from the fateful finale of the original Karate Kid film. For the uninitiated, nerdy hero Daniel LaRusso (played then and now by Macchio) triumphs over his arch nemesis Johnny Lawrence (Zabka). For fans of that film, it's a great heroic moment, but we come to learn that for Johnny that incident marked a bit of downward spiral into heavy drinking and inconsistent labor.

Meanwhile, LaRusso has matured into a bit of a local celebrity -- a smarmy car salesman who capitalizes on his notoriety as a karate hero to make appearances in cheesy ads. It helps that Macchio has not aged particularly well, he no longer has his boyish cuteness, so his performance comes across as believably insincere.

The show does a remarkable job of making Zabka -- who was a pretty atrocious and unlikable thug in the original film -- into a pretty sympathetic figure, and while the film has some fun with the fact that both its leads are has beens, it's not interested in making cheap jokes.

Instead, the show (which also makes great use of footage from the 1984 film for flashbacks) is actually a meditation on lost youth and those little moments that make seem inconsequential on paper but can alter your entire adolescence if they impact you to right/wrong way.

I wish more reboots took this kind of care and consideration with their material. So many attempts to update long dormant franchises try to do it in the laziest way possible -- either by making it 'darker' or by re-creating every beat from the original note for note. Neither approach works for me.

To be a truly successful, standalone and original project in your own right you need to do what HBO's Westworld has done masterfully to my mind. They took the essence of the 1973 film that inspired it -- the key elements of its premise -- but then built on them and added far more sophisticated and ambitious story elements than the movie could have ever taken on.

The original Karate Kid couldn't be bothered to give its villain to much back story or resolution either, but on this show there is an opportunity to make these archetypes actual people, and that will make everything that happens in the movies retroactively more interesting.

I have no idea how sustainable this series will be, but for now, it's proved a lot of doubters wrong and it's a lot more entertaining than it could have been because its creators clearly not only have affection for this material but feel like they have something new to say about it, which seems like a simple concept, but it's alluded a lot of producers of re-imagined reboots over the years.

Obviously, I still think we re-make, re-boot and re-visit too much these days, but if it has to happen for commerce reasons, creative reasons should be as close a second as possible.