“Hell is empty and all the devils are here.”

- Boyd Crowder

This week’s episode title – “The Man Behind the Curtain” – is wonderfully ambiguous.

It could be referring to Theodore Tonin, the head of the Chicago mafia, who sends his son Sammy down to Harlan to check on Robert Quarles. Thus far this season, Quarles has positioned himself as the head of the Dixie Mafia and has looked to grab all the power he can, but at the end of the day he still has to answer to Theodore.

Courtesy of Sammy’s visit and Raylan’s FBI file, we are also beginning to get a clearer picture of who Quarles is and why he was sent down to Harlan. It seems Theodore was once grooming Quarles to take over the business until he fell out of favor at least, in part, because of his tendency to tie up and beat down “hustlers,” which he apparently has continued to do in Harlan.

The man behind the curtain could also refer to Boyd Crowder, who Quarles believes is pulling Raylan’s strings. Misunderstanding Raylan’s motives and his volatile relationship with Boyd, Quarles assumes Raylan is on Boyd’s payroll. Robert doesn’t know Ellen May was the one who tipped the marshal off about the Dixie Mafia’s oxy clinic, so he assumes Boyd was the one who told him. Arlo’s involvement in Boyd’s gang and the fact that Aunt Helen’s house was where Boyd set up his oxy clinic only further supported Quarles’ theory.

This week we see Quarles attempt to turn Raylan and get the marshal working for him. When that fails, Quarles turns to Sheriff Tillman Napier to put the squeeze on Boyd. Napier and his men show up and shut down Johnny’s bar, which is no doubt only the beginning of the pressure they’re going to be applying.

In response, Boyd decides to be the man behind the curtain in Shelby’s campaign to run for sheriff. Since his old buddy from the mine (last season) is now stuck spending his days as a Walmart greeter, Boyd decides to call him in and set him up as a puppet candidate who will be loyal to him and his operation.

We also have the FBI, hiding behind a curtain watching Sammy Tonin and building a RICO case against the Chicago mafia. They are nonplussed to see the good Marshal Givens muddying the waters with his own investigation.

Finally, there’s Ellstin Limehouse and his crew. Limehouse has always been the true man behind the curtain in Harlan. As he said so eloquently last week to Boyd, “it’s always been our business to know you.” Limehouse is the unseen hand in Harlan, laying low in his holler, playing the banker and subtly influencing the course of events in the county. He knows who everyone is and what they are into and is content to sit back and wait for his opportunity to capitalize.

I loved how this week’s episode showed us all the various factions attempting to outmaneuver each other. Everyone thinks they are one step ahead, but every action they take causes an unexpected response in someone else – Raylan enlisting the help of Sammy to take down Quarles after Quarles shows up and bribes Raylan, Boyd fronting Shelby for sheriff in response to Quarles buying Napier, Quarles going to Tulsa to find Gary in response to Raylan’s eviction. These are all smart, calculating men looking to take each other down and with Limehouse in the shadows waiting for the right moment to make his play, it makes for a very exciting and unpredictable season. I like where things are headed.

And another thing …

• It’s odd to see Robert Quarles in a leather jacket instead of a three-piece suit. Also, I can’t help but wonder if he still had the Derringer hid up the sleeve in his more relaxed attire.

• So it looks like I was right last week with my guess that Arlo’s going senile. This week he shows up at the holler thinking Frances is hiding out there and he once again gets a beating for his troubles (but this time he doesn’t have Raylan to drive him home).

• It turns out Limehouse is quite a liar, isn’t he? After lying to Dickie about how much money Mags left him, this week we find out that Quarles does indeed remember Arlo and the ass kicking he gave him, though he feigned ignorance when Raylan asked him about it earlier this season.

• “Last I checked, you were a marshal too.” It was great to have Tim featured prominently this week. I really love the idea that while we follow Raylan each week on the show and view him as the hero, Tim and Rachel are annoyed to get sucked into his drama and be his supporting cast. I also love that they hate his corny jokes.

• I appreciated Raylan’s description of Quarles as a “big toothed Albino looking son of a bitch.”

• Why does Limehouse think he can trust Tanner to go back to Quarles and claim the hit on Boyd’s oxy clinic was his idea? Right now, Tanner needs Limehouse to hide him out in the holler and to keep him alive, but once he leaves, why wouldn’t he sell out Limehouse’s crew in order to get back in Quarles good graces?

• I always appreciate a good Stephen Tobolowsky sighting. I really hope his role as Agent Barkley is a reoccurring one.

Written by Joel Murphy. If you enjoy his recaps, he also writes a weekly pop culture column called Murphy’s Law, which you can find here. You can contact Joel at murphyslaw@hobotrashcan.com.

Angela Martin can be a bit uptight. She is the sort of judgmental buzzkill that we’ve all had to deal with in our workplace. But Angela Kinsey, who plays Martin on The Office, couldn’t be more different from her character. Upbeat and bubbly, this Texan was more than happy to sit down and chat with us back in 2006.

If you missed it then, enjoy it now:
http://www.hobotrashcan.com/2006/02/28/one-on-one-with-angela-kinsey/

Ned Bitters

This week’s inductees into the “Overrated Hall of Fame” are … eating contests.

I hate that I know the name Joey Chestnut. Of all the ugly acts that make us ugly Americans, the eating contest might squat atop of that dirty, smelly trash heap of ugliness.

I’m not sure if other countries have eating contests. (Hey, I churn out drivel for a blog. I’m not an actual journalist who does research for actual, you know, journalism. You’re reading this online, which means you have Internet access, which means you have Google. If you’re that interested in knowing, look it up yourself, Mr. Woodward.) I’m guessing they don’t. (See how easy it is to blog?)

In countries where food is treated with reverence, such as Italy and France, it would seem sacrilegious to see how many crepes a person can shove into his piehole in ten minutes. In countries where food is not so revered and is instead looked at with the quaint idea of its purpose being actual sustenance, I’m guessing they view the eating contest for what it is: gross obscenity.

I’m not religious, but there is something spiritually perverse in the eating contest. In the history of man, the quest for food has been the hardest part of existence. Natural disasters and disease have kicked the living shit out of us. Religion has caused more wars than all the Bush egos combined. Some day another Chris Christie-sized asteroid is going to thwomp into the planet and put one hell of a damper on humanity’s future. But nothing has caused more death, more suffering and more heartache than food issues.

For the bulk of human existence, back before we had Winn Dixies and Super Walmarts for all your Cheetos and Oreos needs, the acquisition of food has required more time, attention and effort than any other part of life. Growing crops and raising meat animals was why most people got out of bed in the morning. If for some reason you wanted to maintain your boring-assed, Internetless, Comcastless, Blackberryless existence, you had to get up and work the fields and milk the cows and feed the pig and get out on that leaky wooden boat and hope your tattered net bagged a few grouper.

But today, although a large segment of the world lives without food angst, there are still many places where food has actual value. Not monetary value. Life sustaining value. And here in America, we have so much extra food and so little appreciation of this fact that we make rabid, rapid overeating a sport. It’s disgusting and, were I religious, I’d go so far as to call it sinful.

So I can’t stand that I am aware of the most famous of the eating contest participants, such as overrated chicken wing stuffers Joey Chestnutt and that semi-hot little Asian-American lady from Virginia they call the Black Widow and the Japanese guy with the bandana, Kositostitos or Kimhibachi or Sushisucko or whatever the little shit’s name is.

[Oh man, that is so racist! How dare you make fun of his Japanese name like that! Talk about the ugly American! Yeah, you’re right. I’m so sorry. I wouldn’t want to offend the dignity of a man whose popularity rests on his ability to cram 60 hot dogs into his mouth every Fourth of July and who holds world records for eating the most meatballs, hamburgers and Twinkies in a singly setting. All apologies, Honorable Kobayahsi-san.]

While I can’t stand the participants in these contests, my real anger goes out toward ESPN and any other network that covers these vulgar food orgies. The “S” in ESPN allegedly stands for sports, but I could be wrong. (It might now stand for “Shill for the NFL.”) Yet they give actual news coverage to these obscene bouts of overindulgence. Interviews are conducted. Odds are set. Extensive highlights are shown. (After all, we wouldn’t want the nation’s premier college basketball network to devote more time to something a little more substantive, like that Syracuse basketball scandal.)

I can barely get ESPN highlights of all three goals of an Alex Ovechkin hat trick, but I’d bet my last Nathan’s frank that I’ll get two minutes coverage (on the world’s premier sports programming network) of a pained, but victorious Joey Chestnut doubled over and breathing heavily as he tries not vomit 53 hot dogs on the Black Widow’s shoes.

But maybe I shouldn’t rip on ESPN. They’re just giving the bloated masses what they want, which are clips of people doing what they do, only much doing it much better.

You might play hockey, but you watch ESPN to see highlights of Evgeni Malkin, who plays it better. You might shoot a little hoops in the driveway, but, assbag that he is, Lebron James plays it better. You might toss the football around with your kid and enjoy you some pussy, but Tom Brady does both better.

And Americans love to overeat shit foods, gorging our morbidly obese selves on fried, fatty fare until we are relegated to motorized wheelchairs, but Joey Chestnut does it better.

Hey, all your eating contest winners, if you have an open date on your Tour of Indecency calendar, feel free to pencil yourselves in for a contest where I live. All you have to do is show up … and eat me.

Ned Bitters is, in fact, overrated. You can contact him at teacherslounge@hobotrashcan.com.

Wanderlust Release Date: February 24, 2012 Director: David Wain Writers: David Wain and Ken Marino Stars: Paul Rudd, Jennifer Aniston and Malin Akerman MPAA Rating: R HoboTrashcan’s Rating:

Your enjoyment of Wanderlust will probably hinge on how much you like Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston.

The film centers around a New York couple – George (Rudd) and Linda (Aniston) – who find themselves unemployed and unable to afford their new apartment. So George must suck it up and move to Atlanta to take a job working for his pompous brother Rick (Ken Marino).

On the drive to Atlanta, George and Linda happen upon a bed and breakfast named Elysium, which turns out to be a commune. After getting fed up with Rick, on a whim George decides to head back to the commune to live, bringing Linda reluctantly along with him.

If you are a fan of Rudd – particularly in his goofier comedic roles like The 40 Year Old Virgin, Wet Hot American Summer and Role Models – then you will enjoy his role as George. Rudd is a talent actor, but he seems most in his element in ridiculous comedic roles. As George, he is often playing the straight man to the other, wackier characters, but he still gets some great comedic moments himself. One of the funniest scenes in the film is Rudd alone in front of a bathroom mirror trying to psych himself up for something. It is an amazingly funny and very painful scene to watch unfold.

But while he gets a lot of laughs, Rudd is also the emotional core of the film. Rudd needs to be able to sell this bizarre idea of giving up on his regular life and moving into this commune, which he is able to do. We need George as the character we can relate to in order to ground the film and make the other, more outlandish characters work. Rudd is able to do that, which allows the rest of the film to work.

Linda is a more problematic character. Since Paul is the protagonist, the audience is more prone to side with him. And as the film unfolds, Linda makes a series of decisions that are against Paul, including one major decision. While the film does a good job explaining why she makes these choices and showing how Paul’s actions facilitated them, it still makes it difficult to sympathize with Linda.

If you are a fan of Aniston, you will probably be able to see things from her character’s point of view and to understand Linda’s actions. But if you aren’t a big fan of Aniston going into the film, the writing makes her a tough character to like. The major decision she makes, which sets up a number of plot elements both comedically and thematically, is likely to alienate her from a lot of viewers.

The supporting cast is quite enjoyable. Fans of The State and of Wet Hot American Summer will recognize a lot of the people living at Elysium. Joe Lo Truglio steals all of the scenes he’s in as Wayne, the nudist/aspiring political thriller novelist. Kerri Kenney is also quite enjoyable as Kathi, another one of the odd inhabitants of Elysium. Malin Akerman is great as Eva, a free spirit who nonchalantly tells George she’d enjoy making love to him. Lauren Ambrose, Kathryn Hahn and Jordan Peele do a great job rounding out the Elysium cast.

Michael Ian Black, Michael Showalter and David Wain all have cameos in the film as obnoxious anchormen who harass Jessica St. Clair’s anchorwoman character as she’s trying to deliver a story.

Wain does a good job balancing the sillier elements like the newscast scene with the overall plot. Unlike Wet Hot American Summer, which felt mostly likely a collection of funny scenes loosely tied together with a threadbare overarcing plot, Wanderlust feels like a cohesive film with occasional silly diversions thrown in there. Having a commune as the setting allows Wain and Marino to present us with outlandish characters, but having George and Linda there too keeps it from being too ridiculous and difficult to relate to.

Your feelings on Paul Rudd, Jennifer Aniston and David Wain’s comedic style will ultimately determine whether or not you enjoy this film. But if you are a fan of Rudd and Wain and are at least somewhat sympathetic toward Aniston, you should ultimately find this film to be a pleasant bit absurd of comedy.

Written by Joel Murphy. If you enjoy his reviews, he also writes a weekly pop culture column called Murphy’s Law, which you can find here. You can contact Joel at murphyslaw@hobotrashcan.com.

Similar Posts:

• Review – Marley & Me (Blu-ray)
• Hobo Radio 145 – Lars finally peaks
• Outside of the In-Crowd – The sad state of chick flicks
• Outside of the In-Crowd – Reality people don’t count
• Outside of the In-Crowd – The Anonymity Awards

Act of Valor Release Date: February 24, 2012 Directors: Mike McCoy, Scott Waugh Writer: Kurt Johnstad Stars: Alex Veadov, Roselyn Sanchez and Nestor Serrano MPAA Rating: R HoboTrashcan’s Rating:

Thanks to the use of real active duty US Navy SEALS in the lead roles, the makers of Act of Valor give moviegoers a unique cinematic experience. Unfortunately, they just don’t actually give the audience a very good film.

Act of Valor tells the story of an elite SEAL team tasked with rescuing a CIA asset who has been kidnapped, a mission that uncovers a deeper plot posing a great threat to Americans. Terrorist Christo (Alex Veadov) has obtained a collection of untraceable explosive vests that he plans to smuggle into the United States to set off at various densely populated areas. The SEALS have to track down Christo and his men to stop the plot in time.

The film claims to be “inspired by true events,” though that’s often Hollywood speak for “we made most of this up.” Whether Christo’s plan is based on a real terrorist plot or not, there isn’t much subtlety in the film’s storyline. The good guys are clearly good and the bad guys are clearly bad. The film is also filled with most of the normal war film tropes, like the teary goodbye with the wife, the letter to a fallen comrades’ young son and the selfless act of bravery to save the rest of the squad.

The writers never really fleshed out the characters in the film. And because of the acting limitations of the SEALS, the characters don’t have any added depth or nuance trained actors could have provided. The quiet, emotional scenes never quite ring true and often end up feeling a bit trite. Line deliveries are generally wooden and forced. Many of the SEALS with smaller parts deliver lines as if they are simply trying to remember all of the words and get them out in the correct order. (Perhaps by design, the actual actors in the movie don’t give performances that are much better.) Mostly, you just find yourself waiting for the next big action sequence whenever a dialogue-heavy emotional scene comes on.

The one notable standout is the man who plays Master Chief (the names of the SEALS who appear in the film have not been released since they are all active duty). He is by far the most relaxed on camera and he has a natural screen presence. His interrogation of Christo is by far the best non-action scene in the movie.

The writers don’t help things much either. Most of the dialogue and plot points are incredibly cliched and not particularly well-written. The scenes that have the most emotional resonance are the ones that go easy on the dialogue and simply show these men doing what they would actually do in the situation. There is one touching scene where the surviving SEAL members stick their pins to their fallen brother’s casket during his military funeral, an authentic moment which carries a lot more weight than anything written by the makers of the film.

Of course, the moment where the SEALS and the filmmakers shine are during the action sequences. Using real Navy SEALS and the actual equipment and weapons they use on missions does add a level of authenticity to the film. They way they move and operate is something that Hollywood rarely can or even seeks to genuinely recreate. Watching the SEALS work as a team to take out their targets is truly a joy.

Wisely, the filmmakers borrow heavily from the Modern Warfare video games in the aesthetic of the action sequences. There are a lot of first-person POV shots which make you feel like you are moving as part of the SEAL team. And even the map sequences that show you when the team deploys to a new location look like something out of the Modern Warfare games. That’s certainly going to win them brownie points with the younger demographic.

The film would have been better served adopting a faux documentary style. The non-action scripted scenes could have been abandoned in favor of talking head interviews with the SEALS setting up the mission we are about to witness. The filmmakers could have also given the SEALS leeway to set things up in their own words instead of having to deliver word-for-word dialogue from the script, which would have helped them sound more natural. It also would have spared us from the cliched dramatic scenes, which are clearly not this team’s forte.

Still, if you are interested in the SEALS or simply looking for some fun, mindless action, you’ll probably still enjoy this film (and be willing to look the other way with regards to the acting and script problems). It’s by no means a great film, but it is a unique filmgoing experience.

Written by Joel Murphy. If you enjoy his reviews, he also writes a weekly pop culture column called Murphy’s Law, which you can find here. You can contact Joel at murphyslaw@hobotrashcan.com.