TRMPS #4: Be Cool (2005) w/ Brent Chittenden

Originally published at


Twinkle-Twinkle, Baby! On this edition of The Rocky Maivia Picture Show, Nate Milton welcomes Brent Chittenden (the “True North Nerds” podcast) into the theater to review 2005’s Be Cool!

The guys sit through one of the most random big-budget films to ever come out of Hollywood and come away with a TON of questions:

  • Does this sequel to 1995’s “Get Shorty” live up to the expectations set by the original?
  • Did the all-star cast (John Travolta, Uma Thurman, Cedric The Entertainer, Vince Vaughn, Andre 3000, Harvey Keitel, “The Rock”, etc.) come to play, or were they just there to cash a check?
  • Does “Be Cool” work as a cohesive unit, or does the film feel like a series of vignettes?
  • Is this movie just a poor man’s version of Pulp Fiction?
  • Is this DJ’s best acting performance to date?
  • And what the heck is “The Vig”???

Find out the answers to all of those burning questions and more on the latest installment of TRMPS!

Plus, YOUR feedback from the POST Wrestling Forum.

The Rocky Maivia Picture Show is a monthly movie review podcast that drops every 3rd Saturday on POST Wrestling!


Subscribe to POST Wrestling:
iTunes & iOS | Android | Spotify | Google Play | Stitcher | TuneIn | Mac & PC | RSS

Discuss this show at the POST Wrestling Forum

Follow us
Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | YouTube

A firm but fair assessment of what I also remember to be a pretty bonkers movie.
Divergence in opinion at the end led me to a question I thought I’d raise on the board - when rating a movie for TRMPS, are we better off rating it as an overall movie or should we be rating it as a “Rock” movie or should we be more focussing on his specific role/contributions?
If we’re looking at the latter for Be Cool, 3 is fair. He was entertaining in his role and as much as things don’t age well in the script, he did go all out in this to make the best of what was essentially a bit role. if we’re looking this as a “Rock” movie, it’s probably a 1 for me for one simple reason - not enough Rock. Also the delayed production syndrome you guys mentioned hurt this movie as in 2005 I would have expected the Rock to have cooler co stars (I would argue even Christina Milian felt a little D list by 2005) as this did feel like a movie that didn’t know if it wanted me to watch it or my Dad.
On the same scale, welcome to the jungle is probably a 3 for the movie, as it feels like a Rock movie, and a 4 for his contribution as it is pretty consistent with what you would come to expect as a Rock fan at that time if not exactly gamechanging.
Doom, I’m thinking would be a 2 as a movie (it sucked but the first person sequence was at least a bold idea even if a pretty dumb one. - kind of reminds me of a trailer I remember seeing for hardcore Henry - ) probs a 2 again for his role/contributions, as he’s in it alot so you wouldn’t feel ripped off in the same way you would for watching be cool on the promise of it being a “Rock” movie but he’s there at the expense of any of the charisma in this role that fans would have come to expect.
Looking forward to your next show.

Info on the sidekick for Brother Nate.

I didnt read the article. It looks like it is some of type of shoe that tracks steps and other things