YouTube videos of Francisco imitating everyone from Arnold Schwarzenegger to that movie voice-over guy (Don LaFontaine) have helped the comedian break big across the globe.

“The Internet is such a beautiful thing,” says Francisco, who recently returned from his third trip to Australia and has also played in South Africa. Comedy pals warned him about being unable to connect with crowds while traveling abroad – “good luck with the language barrier, dude,” they told him. Turns out the YouTube videos of his act arrived well before he did.

“They’re getting the comedy … they love YouTube,” he says. “They have the same Burger Kings, the same 7-11s.”

Besides, Francisco’s kind of comedy hardly needs a translator.

“I’m doing it just the way Benny Hill was doing it … everybody likes goofiness, everybody likes messing around, as long as it’s done with soul,” he says.

Anyone can become a YouTube sensation today, but Francisco notes not everyone can write their own material. It’s here where his embrace of the Web casts him apart from a cute kitten or warbling toddler.

Francisco’s latest Comedy Central special, “They Put it Out There,” is now available on DVD. The concept behind the DVD, and his act in general, is simple. If someone dares to enter the public arena, be it that Shamwow guy “who looks like he farted and kept the face,” or a family of reality show dwarves, then it’s fair game for Francisco.

“It’s OK to make fun of them. They put it out there. I’m not a bully,” he explains.

He is a first-rate impressionist, though, channeling everyone from Howard Stern to Bill Cosby in his manic act. He first started doing impressions during his school days, but there wasn’t a formal way to pursue his comedy skills. So he forged his own education.

“You turn it into a hobby, then the hobby comes a career,” says Francisco, who used a fake ID to perform at comedy amateur nights early in his self-made career. He caught a break early in his career when he was cast to replace Artie Lange on MADtv for seven episodes.

“Just because the producers know you well doesn’t mean you’ll be on the show,” he recalls. Being a cast member taught him the nuances of pitching sketch ideas, connecting with the right people and making sure he knew what the right ingredients were for setting up a successful career in the business.

“It taught me a lot about how to make money,” he says.

One part of his career he can’t rush is incorporating new voices into his act.

“Dennis Hopper came this quick, man,” he says, doing a spot-on take on the “Easy Rider” star. Other celebrity impersonations aren’t so easy. “Chris Rock took forever. I thought I’d never get it.”

Francisco says famed impressionist Rich Little typically listens to a celebrity’s voice on a loop while lounging around his house to nail a new voice. “Saturday Night Live’s” Darrell Hammond breaks an impression down piece by piece. But he has a hard time articulating the learning process, as if it’s a natural part of him like taking in oxygen or nutrients from food.

He only wishes more actors were worthy of his fellow impressionist’s time these days.

“It’s very hard to find stars out there [to imitate],” he says. “Shia LaBeouf? You can’t do any of the guys from ‘Twilight.’” “All these stars, these actors, they’re the same common denominator. They’re just average.”

“We’re ready to go … we’re locked and loaded,” he says.

—–

Both this installment and the “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” have made me question my enjoyment of the original. I’ve seen “Transformers” since it arrived in theaters but now that I’ve seen the sequels it spawned, it’s hard to explain how the filmmakers went so wrong in what could have been a fun and exciting series. Both sequels  are overlong affairs, completely devoid of excitement or intrigue.

“Dark of the Moon” begins with a strong action sequence in space showing the battle for Cybertron. With 3D glasses, this battle and several other action sequences are impressive. Reminiscent of the battle sequence from the original “Star Wars,” this scene shows what can be done with the use of strong special effects and 3D.

Soon enough, the story begins rewriting history. Intermixed with clips of actors playing Presidents Nixon and Kennedy, real footage shows the former presidents talk about our nation’s first trip to the moon but the film argues that our goals on the moon were far different than what was stated publicly. Like in “X-Men,” an alternate reality is created using real-life events to supplement the story and in both stories, this alternate history lesson works well. Unfortunately, neither the strong special effects or rewriting history can overcome the story’s shortcomings.

When Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) arrives onscreen, the story goes downhill quickly. Sam is a recent college graduate who, after surviving the events of the first two films,  is searching for a job that is worthy of a man who received a medal from President Obama for saving the planet. Sam is living with his girlfriend, Carly (Rosie Huntington-Whiteley), who is first seen walking up a flight of stairs in her underwear.  That’s all of the character development we get from her; she’s only onscreen to be Sam’s love interest and, inevitably, to find herself in danger.  Surprisingly enough, Megan Fox is missed in this installment. At least, she was able to create a character in the first film.

As usual, the Decepticons are up to no good as they plan to overrule the Earth and Sam and his friends have to unite to stop them. Unfortunately, the plot spends much of its time meandering around with useless story-lines and unnecessary characters so that when the story finally gets moving, it’s hard to get excited. With weak dialogue and a running time of over two and a half hours, “Transformers 3″ could have easily been edited down to a more manageable running time of two hours. Instead, director Michael Bay chooses to fill the film with silly characters and bad dialogue.

At one point, Sam says to his girlfriend “I just want to matter.” In movies like this, none of the characters really matter. It’s all about the special effects and cars fighting against each other. I enjoyed some of the excellent special effects, a few neat cameos and the rewriting history aspect of the film. Unfortunately, everything else feels like a waste.

If Sam really wanted to matter, he wouldn’t be spending his time in a “Transformers” movie.

—–

Well, who cares, really? Huntington-Whitely is the designated babe in this third Transformers destruct-a-thon. Shia LaBeouf, unlikeliest of action men, is back as young Sam Witwicky, friend to the noble Autobots, scourge of the evil Decepticons. And series regulars John Turturro, Tyrese Gibson, and Josh Duhamel, all returning for another tent-pole paycheck, are joined this time around by John Malkovich, Frances McDormand, and designated supporting stud Patrick Dempsey. It’s a crowded movie, especially after packing in Optimus Prime, Megatron, and all the other clanking behemoths once again on hand. But who would have it any other way?

Writer Ehren Kruger, who worked on the last Transformers film (the widely reviled Revenge of the Fallen), here had script duties all to himself, and he has fashioned a narrative of ornate silliness—which is to say, pretty good pulpy fun, when it’s not engulfed by digital hubbub. In a brisk prologue, we learn that America’s 1969 Apollo flight was actually a mission to investigate a mysterious alien spaceship that had crashed on the dark side of the moon, and to bring back its payload of mysterious alien technology. That mission, in this telling, was accomplished.

Down on Earth decades later, in a scene that begins with a traveling closeup of Huntington-Whitely’s eloquent behind, we find Sam desperate for a job now that he has graduated college. He finds one in a company run by the eccentric Bruce Brazos (played by Malkovich with his customary eccentricity), but then has to worry about a slick millionaire named Dylan (Dempsey) moving in on his new girlfriend (Huntington-Whitely). More stressful yet, a world-threatening emergency soon arises involving the helpful Autobots—exiled from their home planet of Cybertron and now employed as international trouble-shooters by U.S. intelligence—and the ferocious Decepticons, who are currently on their way to Earth with conquest and enslavement at the top of their to-do list.

Read the full review at Reason.

——

Cut to nearly a quarter-century later, and Stone has lost some his clout after spending the past decade making films that were all over the map politically and stylistically. He’s created a family-values, all-American take on 9/11 in “World Trade Center” as well as the off-the-charts lefty documentary “South of the Border” on Hugo Chavez and other leftist South American leaders this year, with a surreal and surprisingly sympathetic biopic on President George W. Bush in “W.” in between.

Now, however, he’s returned to some of his strongest territory by showing what happens when Gordon Gekko is unleashed on the financial industry amid the meltdown of 2008 in his new sequel, “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps.” And it’s a welcome return to form from a master who tops the first film in many ways.

The new film replaces the first’s stellar star turn by a young Charlie Sheen with another twentysomething hotshot, Jake Moore, played by Shia LaBeouf. LaBoeuf thankfully steps into Sheen’s shoes with a performance that covers all the bases from the callow cockiness of youth through his despair over losing everything around him to the romantic determination of a guy who just wants to win back his girl, even if it means losing the world.

Jake is sucked into Gekko’s universe because his fiancé, Winnie (Carrie Mulligan), is the mastermind’s estranged daughter. After Gordon was released from prison in 2001, he was left alone in the world and lacking in the funds to regain his status as a titan, so now he’s stuck giving speeches to college students and doing a book tour for his memoir “Is Greed Good?” – a clever about-face on his most famous line in the original film: “Greed is good.”

Winnie has forbidden Jake from having contact with Gordon, but after Jake’s firm goes belly-up in bad trades and his mentor (stunningly played by Frank Langella) is suddenly out of the picture, he’s desperate for a job and approaches the former titan. Gekko becomes his new mentor, claiming that he’s atoned for his past sins and that he wants to re-enter Winnie’s life again.

Gordon inspires Jake to get revenge on the modern-day slime kingpin (Josh Brolin) who brought Jake’s firm down, and soon Jake finds himself caught ever tighter in Gordon’s grasp. But as events unfold, Winnie keeps warning Jake to watch out for her father, certain that he’ll eventually betray Jake.

The tension over whether that betrayal will happen, and what Jake will do if it does, sets in motion a very complex yet intelligent and rewarding string of events and double-crosses that makes the sequel more entertaining than the original. Stone has also employed the vast advances in effects from the past 23 years to help convey what could have been arcane trivia into eye-catching and easily digestible explanations that keep viewers fully invested in the story.

MILD SPOILER: But what’s most surprising about the new film is the fact that Stone has made this film an homage to family, and in particular the effect that an unborn child can have on even the hardest of hearts. That statement may seem like an obvious giveaway of the film’s plot, but while it’s unavoidable to mention it, the issue of the impending baby is still embedded in the array of twists to brilliant effect.

Coming from a guy who has had a track record of films with psychedelic freakouts and wanton debauchery, from “Natural Born Killers” to “U-Turn,” or anti-capitalist and anti-American sentiments in films like “South of the Border” and a recent documentary on Fidel Castro, this is a stunningly refreshing change of pace. Here, he’s not saying only that greed is bad, but that family and the time you have on earth is worth more than any amount of money. Capitalism and wealth can bring happiness, if one strives to make moral and ethical choices above sheer dollar-driven ones.

Best of all, Douglas shows that you can go home again, returning to his greatest role without losing a step, and even adding new dimensions to what was already a pitch-perfect portrayal. Facing down cancer in his real life, Douglas was likely able to feel the emotions that Gekko is forced to face – of time, age, family and what matters most in this world. Godspeed to Douglas’ recovery, and get thee to the theater.

Another needless sequel. Whatever.

What got my attention was the “money line” in the trailer (pun fully intended). Douglas says “I once gave a speech that said greed was good. Now, apparently, it’s legal.” Wow is that stupid.

Of course greed is legal. So is ambition. So is hard work. So is having a big ego. So what?

Leftists constantly whine about “greed” as if that desire is the root cause of all misery and evil in the world. Greed alone does nothing. I can sit on my couch all day watching TiVoed episodes of “Nip/Tuck” eating Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups and declare myself “greedy” without accomplishing anything.

And no, you can not have one of my Reese’s Cups. They are crazy delicious and they are all mine.

For a “greedy” person to actually impact the world, they have to amass enough personal wealth to incur the wrath of the socialists and the communists. That takes a lot of luck, hard work, a healthy ego, and a fair dash of smarts. Unless of course you are a Hilton or something. Yeah, screw them!

Greed is a lame scapegoat, but it’s an easy one. Politicians, authors and filmmakers don’t sound as pious railing on about those of us who “work harder” than others and therefore have more than the rest. It doesn’t flow off the tongue as easily to assail those who have “risked greatly” and have been rewarded handsomely for their efforts.

But going off on the “greedy” sure makes a great speech.

What I want to know is when and where this hippie Utopia existed? History is full of monarchs, dictators, and assorted evil cabals. There wasn’t a time in history when everybody shared everything. There is no society where people worked equally and shared the rewards equally. It’s human nature to have ego. Greed is part of our DNA.

Our Founding Fathers understood this.

Those crafty old white guys in the powdered wigs realized that you can’t beat human nature, and that a minimal government was actually the best and fairest form of organization that they could conceive. Rather than being ruled by the guy who knew how to make fire, or the guy who’s dad killed more people than the other guy’s dad, or the guy who claimed that he spoke to God, the Founders envisioned a society run by the people. We all have the freedom to do as we choose, to be what we want to be.

The upside is that people who aren’t wealthy or from noble families can strive to be something bigger and better. The downside is that some people will end up total losers.

But that’s part of the deal. That’s the trade off. And that’s ok.

I roll my eyes whenever someone starts a sentence with “we are the richest country in the world…”. Why shouldn’t we have universal health care? Why shouldn’t we have a huge government with tons of employees who are set for life?

Well, we are the richest country because we DON’T have the things that the left thinks we should. Everything on the Leftist Wish List of Stupidity is a recipe for economic disaster. If you string ten or so Obama administrations together, the United States won’t be the richest nation in the world.

Will that make the socialists shut up?

Let me break it down save you leftists some time. We libertarians and conservatives don’t like or want corporate welfare. If a company is failing, let them fail. We don’t like, advocate, or support people who break the law. We are all for regulations, provided that they are rational, fair, and don’t benefit some new government bureaucracy or special interest.

We are all about the free market, liberty and individualism. Those things have made this country great. They have provided opportunities that have attracted immigrants from around the world for centuries. They have provided the wealth to create the world’s greatest military that has liberated millions from the grasp of tyranny. The free market and the engine of capitalism have provided a shining beacon of hope to the rest of the planet since the beginning of our nation.

Greed is a byproduct of the free market and capitalist system. We are fortunate to even be able to be “greedy”. Most people around the world and throughout history haven’t had that luxury.

Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms–greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge–has marked the upward surge of mankind.

I didn’t write that last paragraph. Oliver Stone did. It’s from the first “Wall Street”. That speech by Michael Douglas highlights the film’s rich, thematic subtext. It helps crystallize the dilemma faced by Charlie Sheen. That definition of greed isn’t the cheesy scapegoat one tossed around by college Marxists and our president. It’s the complex version, one that acknowledges the benefits of capitalism to the advancement of human society. It acknowledges the benefits of liberty.

That speech was crafted by a filmmaker far more relevant than the current Oliver Stone. Back in the day, he was an artist capable of creating challenging narratives with strong conflict. Now, he’s a leftist stooge and mouthpiece for thugs like Chavez and Castro.

Sad.

My predictions for “Wall Street 2?” Tepid box office, critical acclaim, lots of articles and clips on leftist rags like the Huffington Post, lots of angry commentary from Big Hollywood (maybe more than “Avatar”!), and the first (and only) Oscar nomination for Shia LaBeouf.

As for me, I will skip this one in the theater. I’ll watch it on Netflix or grab a DVD from Redbox where I know from first hand experience that the filmmaker makes a lot less money.

Does that tick you off, Oliver? Do you want more of my money?

What are you? Dare I say…greedy?

After the disastrous “Alexander,” both “World Trade Center” and “W.” were essentially television-level productions self-consciously obvious in their desperation to feel relevant. Arguably, “WTC” ended up being an above-average TV movie but “W.” was a complete embarrassment for everyone involved, especially those Leftist critics who carried its water one percentage below a fresh rating. And now comes a sequel nobody wanted with a truly terrible title: “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps,” which hits theatres April 23rd.

And as with all Shia LaBeouf movies, the first question that must be asked is: Shia LaBeouf?

Go back and watch the original “Wall Street.” It’s a terrific film with some great acting courtesy of Martin Sheen and Michael Douglas and a compelling story that immediately grabs you as you’re taken on a tour of how things work in the fascinating world of the stock market at the very top level. One of my favorite shots in all films is our first glimpse of Douglas’s Gordon Gekko through his office door just before it closes. Just like Charlie Sheen’s young Bud Fox, oh how we want to know what goes on in there. Great moviemaking. 

I also have warm memories of the original “Wall Street.” The wife and I saw it in ‘87 for the first time while vacationing in Los Angeles — I think at Universal City. It was our first vacation together. We lived in Milwaukee at the time and L.A. seemed so…so… Well, like the one-story ghetto it really is. Why did I move here? Anyway…

Judging by the trailer, this sequel looks and sounds tired — exhausted, in fact. Reportedly the plot surrounds Gekko’s attempt to rehabilitate himself (that’s no fun) and there might even be some kind of murder mystery involving the LaBeouf character’s mentor. None of the elements that made the original so re-watchable (Faustian bargaining, a 101 tutorial on how the market works) looks to be here. Most dispiriting are the attempts at fish-out-of-water comedy. Big 80’s phone jokes are so 90s.

As is always the case, once the lights dim my hope will spring eternal. However, should disappointment be the end result of the 64 year-old director’s last desperate gasp, there is always that unofficial “Wall Street” sequel/remake, ”Boiler Room” … which doesn’t star Shia LaBeouf.

NOTE: This post openly violates the rule that only allows Leftist critics to speculate about upcoming films they haven’t seen.

He was so excited (agitated?) when he got back that he asked if he could make a video of his impressions of “Transformers 2″ and post it on Big Hollywood. “I don’t know, Tío, that movie’s been out for a couple of weeks now, Big Hollywood is a blog, it’s all about what’s happening right now.” Tío Chano assured me that he’d find a way to make it current. So I relented. Why not? I hadn’t planned on posting anything this week anyway. So, here he is, my Tío Chano. Oh, and by the way: Spoiler alert!

One source of endless enjoyment for me and my co-workers is watching how the various buyers (DVD, television, and international) market the films.  The trailers, posters, and commercials  are wildly different depending on who the intended audience is.  As an example, in the U.S. my latest film is called “Chrome Angels.” It’s a sci-fi/action/comedy about a female biker gang that runs into a town populated by evil cyborgs. At the Cannes Film Market, the distributor is calling it “Cyborg Conquest.”  The trailer and poster don’t even reference female bikers, motorcycles, or comedy.  They, instead, are selling it as a serious action film centered on CGI cyborgs that don’t actually appear in the film.

Hollywood has done this for years.  How many times have you seen a trailer that looked awesome, only to find the film to be lame?  Most of the time the best parts of the movie are in the trailer.  While domestically, we rarely see the blatant trickery demonstrated by the overseas vendors, we are occasionally subjected to marketing elements that don’t match the final product.

Politics today is very similar to Hollywood. We have a President known more for his wife’s fashion and his great speeches than any policy achievements.  After all, do you call someone lost without their script (i.e. teleprompter) anything but an actor?  It’s all style and no substance.  People pick politicians like they pick movies, based on the short version, the “trailer,” and not on the substance of the actual individual.  It’s an emotional decision, based on immediate needs and not on actual principles.

And this, my friends, is where the conservative movement has lost the battle.  Poll after poll indicates that the American public likes President Obama, but are against every single one of his actions and policies.  On a broader scope, they actually are against the very tenants of the liberal agenda.  The people love the trailer and the poster, but the movie itself gets two “big thumbs down.”

The Democrats pulled a great maneuver.  They sold everyone a bunch of tired, old, ideas that we know won’t work as “Hope and Change.” They inflated their box office to make it seem like they had the number one film in the country.   They created the “must see” movie event of the year, despite the fact that their production is lamer than the last installment of the “Police Academy” franchise.

In fact, they cut together a trailer like this one, that sells the film as something it isn’t:

–

If you saw that trailer, then paid $10 bucks to see the real movie, you’d be pretty pissed.  Imagine the reaction when the U.S. wakes up and gets the tab for the “Obama Movie” that we’re all living in right now.
All we need to do is refine and change our marketing.  We know the critics (which in our industry is the mainstream media) are going to savage us, but who cares?  How many summer blockbusters that make hundreds of millions of dollars get stellar reviews from the New York Times?

Conservatism is all about freedom.  That’s the sales pitch.  Conservatives endorse freedom.  We are the modern day rebels.  We are the punk rockers of politics.  We like to work hard and party harder.  The government is “The Man.” “The Man” tries to hold you down.  Anybody who wants the “safety net” of cradle to the grave government support should be ridiculed.  And rightfully so.

I grow a bit tired of the in-fighting on all the conservative blogs and news shows between the “social conservatives”: and the Libertarian wing of the party.  Ditch abortion.  Don’t ditch abortion.  Move to the center.  Don’t abandon principles.  It’s a defeatist argument and one that really doesn’t need to be fought.  The David Frums and Meghan McCains have it half right.  Where they lose me is in their obvious attempts to gain approval from our enemies.

But they do have one thing right.  In the current climate, many of the social issues are big losers amongst certain voter groups.  The biggest bloc, and the one we have the greatest potential to turn, is women.  Women tend to poll liberal on issues like gay marriage and abortion.

Now, before this turns into a two-hundred comment post with people yelling about not giving up their core principles, let me be clear.  I do not advocate that the party pull left or advertise itself as “Democrat-light.”  But I do advocate prioritizing the issues that form the foundation of our marketing campaign..

I’m sure “Transformers 2″ has a romantic subtext between Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox.  I’m sure that there are at least two minutes in the film of them making kissy face and being sappy.  Yet, the trailer is all about giant robots trashing everything in sight.  In fact, almost every shot is a giant explosion, or a giant robot.  That’s smart marketing.  It’s a summer popcorn movie.  Give the people what they want.  If there is a great romance or moments of rip-roaring comedy, that’s a pleasant surprise.  But, if I don’t see a forklift turn into a robot and crush an Apache helicopter, I will be disappointed.

Did the Democrats put nationalizing the banks, firing corporate CEOs, and practically making out with Hugo Chavez in their trailer?  Did their poster include Obama’s embarrassing world apology tour?  I think not.

Yet, we allow the media to frame the discussions and the debates.  Why, for example, did most of our pundits take the bait on the Perez Hilton thing and let the media frame the arguments as an example of the gay marriage issue being debated in the public forum?  That incident was about how the left stifles free speech.  It was about how women are second-class citizens in the Democratic party.  Every discussion of Ms. California should have been an opportunity to bring up the media’s treatment of Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton.  But it wasn’t.  Instead, we allowed the Democrats to cut our trailer and replace the robot on the key art with a photo of Shia LaBeouf.

The core values of the movement can be different from the marketing campaign.  That’s the smart way to do it.  It’s how the Democrats took over the government and it’s our only hope at taking it back.