All Pat Buchanan had to say to the Rev. Al Sharpton as he referred to President Obama was “your guy in the ring” instead of “your boy in the ring”…that’s all. Same meaning, same inference. But Buchanan is either getting tone deaf or getting old or becoming subconsciously whatever.Question: would Buchanan had gotten in as much trouble if he’d said “your homie in the ring”?

A compassionate assessment of David Dobkin‘s The Change-Up (Universal, 8.5) would be to call it a schizophrenic experience — a film with a split personality. It’s awful at first — “odiously vulgar” and “oppressively unfunny” are fair descriptions of the first 45 or 50 minutes. But then it improves when the characters suddenly “get real” and settle into intimacy and character and reality-facing issues, and the film stops playing to the cretins out there who squeal with laughter at poop, piss and dick jokes.

Ryan Reynolds, Jason Bateman in .

The first section, seemingly written and directed by a depraved, brain-dead, subhuman 13 year-old, delivers the basic story or set-up. A stressed-out, married-with-kids attorney (Jason Bateman) magically swaps lives and bodies with his immature pseudo-actor buddy (Ryan Reynolds) after they urinate into a kind-of magic fountain and say “I wish I had your life” (or words to that effect) at the exact same instant.

The second section, which is much more tolerable and even affecting here and there, is about these guys gradually realizing who they really are and what their lives truly amount by being able to stand outside themselves and assess from an outside perspective.

Bateman and Reynolds and costars Leslie Mann, Olivia Wilde and Alan Arkin handle their roles with professional aplomb and, as much as possible, a measure of dignity. Bateman and Reynolds do their level-best to make the sickeningly stupid parts play as well as possible, and the others “do the job” as best they can. Wilde is especially good as a sexy office colleague of Bateman’s attorney who develops an emotional-sexual interest when Reynolds’ personality takes over. She hits some genuinely honest notes.

But the depraved, brain-dead, subhuman 13-year-old section so thoroughly poisons the well that even the better second half of The Change-Up can’t quite balance things out. It’s a shame because Dobkin and his colleagues could have have made a reasonably decent comedy about values and choices and maturity and all that. But the animal sensibility (which the notoriously low-rent producer Neal Moritz probably had something to do with) wins out.

Complaint #1: What kind of moron pees into a public fountain? Even pot-bellied 20something apes who wear backwards baseball hats and oversized T-shirts and Kevin Smith shorts and sneakers with no socks are civilized enough to piss on the grass or in some bushes or against a tree. If I saw two guys pissing into a public fountain I’d run over and push them in and then run for it.

Complaint #2: Robo-babies who slam their heads against crib bars aren’t funny. Robo-babies who shoot a dark-brown milkshake substance out of their anuses and into Jason Bateman’s mouth aren’t funny, and the guys who thought this sequence up have something wrong with them…seriously. You’re sitting there and thinking, “Somebody actually got paid money to think this up and then shoot it for a mainstream big-studio feature?” Only a society in the last death throes of social degeneration and corruption would laugh at a scene as low as this, and believe me, hundreds were laughing their asses off at Monday night’s screening. I’m not talking about the vulgarity (although I am to some extent) — I’m talking about the primitive mentality that would find this kind of thing even faintly amusing.

Complaint #3: I wasn’t sure what was going on at first with the switch-out. It turns out that Bateman and Reynolds are not doing a Warren Beatty-in-Heaven Can Wait number but an internal personality switch. Beatty’s appearance stayed the same for us but once he occupied the body of billionaire Leo Farnsworth he physically appeared as Farnsworth to the other characters. But when Bateman “becomes” Reynolds and vice versa in The Change-Up their personalities are their own but their appearance is seen as one and the same by the audience and the characters. And that threw me at first because I had Heaven Can Wait in my head. Is this confusing?

Complaint #4: The basic Hollywood Elsewhere rule about driving scenes is that the driver has to act like a real driver in real life, which is to say he/she almost never takes his/her eyes off the road…ever. Bad movies allow drivers to frequently look at their passenger while driving, sometimes for three or four seconds at a time. But in one Change-Up scene Bateman takes things to a new level by mostly looking at the front-seat passenger and only glancing at the road or a second or two. I scream inside when I see this. You’re driving, asshole! You could kill someone! The bad guy, of course, is Dobkin, not Bateman. He could have straightened this out by reminding Bateman of the HE rule, but no.

I’m of the opinion that Andy Serkis‘s performance-capture emoting as Ceasar-the-chimp in Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a little too broad and underlined…just a tad. But I have no argument with those who feel Serkis and director Rupert Wyatt have done something truly exceptional here. There’s no question that Serkis’s performance is the emotional lynchpin of the film, and that, in a braver, fairer world, it would be fully justified and appropriate to nominate him for Best Supporting Actor.

As I said last night, the actors branch of the Academy, notoriously fearful of CG motion-capture acting as an industry trend, will probably try to stifle any such talk. That would be an unjust and discriminatory position to take, of course, but actors have staked out their position on this before, adamantly. So just to be an agitator let’s start the talk here and now — Serkis’s performance is not only striking and memorable but Oscar-worthy. It deserves the recognition of a Best Supporting Actor nomination. Really.

To be fair the talk actually started last night when The Hollywood Reporter‘s Carolyn Giardina broached the subject. While Rise of the Planet of the Apes “is sure to be a major factor in this year’s visual effects Oscar race,” she wrote, “the bigger awards question is whether Andy Serkis, the actor who portrays the ape Caesar, will be considered a contender for an acting nomination.

“That honor eluded him ten years ago when he played the tragic creature Gollum in The Lord of the Rings. That role, however, did launch an ongoing Hollywood debate about how much an actor contributes to CG characters who are created through performance capture.

“WETA Digital, the Wellington, N.Z.-based VFX company behind both Rings and Apes, has always maintained that the actor drives the performance of its CG creations. ‘Performance capture (is) really (designed) to give you the actors’ moment — the spontaneity, the thought, the insight that really comes from an actor who really truly understands his role,’ says WETA’s four-time Oscar winning VFX supervisor Joe Letteri.”

Hitfix‘s Drew McWeeny has written that Rise is “largely driven by yet another groundbreaking performance from Andy Serkis, who is nothing less than the first digital age superstar at this point.

“It is incredibly moving to see just how fully Serkis brings this character to life. When people say they don’t understand why filmmakers or actors are excited by performance capture, it’s because we’re still in the early days of this, and we don’t have many great examples to point at yet of how this really works. You can now use Rise Of The Planet of The Apes as a perfect case study in how an actor can project a soul through a digital character and really bring it to life.

“Caesar is the main character, and we see him grow from a clever but immature chimp in captivity, raised in absolutely optimal human conditions, pampered, loved, into an animal twisted by the worst sort of human behavior, abandoned, angry, ready to run. And Serkis plays it all.”

20th Century Fox’s Rise of the Planet of the Apes opens this Friday, and the town’s big-gun critics only just saw it tonight. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the standard term for showing a movie this late in the game is “hide the ball.” Which publicists tend to do when the movie in question isn’t very good. Except Rise of the Planet of The Apes is really good. It’s easily the best Apes movie ever made, and that includes the original.

Rise is sharper, tighter, more emotional…lacking a Statue of Liberty finale, okay, but nonetheless with a “better” story in a sense. And without the perfectly styled, Vidal Sassoon ape coifs that bothered me so in the Charlton Heston original. Not one orangutan had a single hair out of that place in that film, the reason being of course that the prosthetic makeup guys felt more compelled to represent the sartorial values of Beverly Hills, ape-appearance-wise, than the corresponding particulars in a world first imagined by French novelist Pierre Boulle.

We’re talking about a gripping, compassionate, well-plotted sci-fi fantasy popcorn film — riveting, amusing at times, state-of-the-art CG, movingly acted by performance-capture guy Andy Serkis, etc. No, I’m not exaggerating. It has excitement, intrigue, humanity, empathy, soul. And the story is primarily an ape POV thing — the human actors are strictly backup, speaking the same kind of rote expository dialogue that James Arness, Joan Weldon and Edmund Gwenn spoke in Them!.

So what was 20th Century Fox thinking? Why didn’t they show the whole thing at ComicCon instead of just clips? Why did I have to ask to attend tonight’s screening? Why did Hitfix‘s Drew McWeeny, who knows fantasy-genre stuff better than most of us, have to plead to get in? I don’t get it. And telling reviewers to hold until Thursday is just…what? This is a really good film. It’s not out of line to say that a franchise has probably been reborn, if they want to go there.

And don’t listen to guys like Lewis Beale, who earlier this evening called Rise a “fun, not-intellectually-taxing summer entertainment.” C’mon…it’s much better than that. It’s a compassionate look at imprisonment and oppression, and a rousing saga of rebellion and revolution. And it all levitates courtesy of some of the best motion-capture CG I’ve ever seen.

Okay, the apes seem a little too “CG”-ish and animated here and there but let’s not be crabby. This is a very strong, very on-target entertainment.

What could have been just another blah-blah origin story has been turned into a simian Spartacus….or more precisely the first act of Spartacus, which ends with the slaves breaking out of the gladiator school in Capua. That’s precisely how Rise concludes, so to speak.

James Franco plays a nice-guy genetic scientist — intelligent, tactful, bland — who’s trying to find a cure for Alzheimer’s Disease by performing serum tests on apes. He soon realizes that a serum given to a chimp mother named “Bright Eyes” (remember who had that nickname before?) has been passed along to an orphaned baby chimp named Caesar. The little chimp soon proves to be a major-league achiever and learner. Franco also tries out the serum on his Alzheimer’s-afflicted dad (John Lithgow), and it’s Awakenings all over again. But Ceasar’s passion and curiosity leads to complications and the authorities seize and lock him up.

This is when the Spartacus stuff kicks in. We’re not going to take this any more, fellow apes, and I’m the one to lead you guys out of this, because I’m smart and ballsy and a good strategic thinker. (Harry Potter costar Tom Felton plays roughly the same part that Charles McGraw played in Spartacus. Or the “Fritz” role that Dwight Frye had in Frankenstein.)

Franco hooks up with the beautiful Freida Pinto early on, but this is of no consequence as she has no extended dialogue scenes of any kind. As always, she’s very pretty. She obviously has to do more that just look great if she’s going to last. Her best chance at showing what she’s got will probably come with Michael Winterbottom‘s Trishna, an Indian-set adaptation of Thomas Hardy‘s Tess of the d’Urbervilles.

The apes are the soul and the spirit of the film. They’re fascinating, fully-emotional and fully-dimensional characters. Much of Rise is non-verbal, and appropriately so. Serkis, I should add, tends to over-emote at times. The facial expressions he gives to the young Ceasar — the lead ape protagonist — are just a tad too expressive for my taste, a wee bit too “actor”-ish. But I’ll probably be in the minority on this issue. There’s already talk about Serkis deserving a Best Supporting Actor Oscar nomination. I would have no argument with that at all. The AMPAS actors branch, traditionally fearful of CG-emoting, will probably try to nip this notion in the bud.

“I just saw Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” a friend wrote a couple of hours ago, “and even though I’m not supposed to say anything, I enjoyed it thoroughly as a fun, not-intellectually-taxing summer entertainment. (Full disclosure: I love the Apes franchise, except for the Burton atrocity.) But my wife, who also had fun with it, was wondering: who’s the audience? Other than the Apes cultists — and they’re out there — there doesn’t seem to be a must-see factor here. Am I wrong?”

Rise opens on Friday, 8.5 — three days hence. How eager is the want-to-see?

What everyone loves about sitting on the beach is that you know that the way the surf looks and sounds and smells today, right now, is pretty much exactly as it looked, smelled and sounded 49 years ago when Marilyn Monroe posed for this shot. Or 500 or 750 or 2,000 years ago. It never changes. I’m writing this because I like the photo, and I wish right now I could be sitting in this exact same spot. Except I have to go see Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

I had to run out to an 11 am screening of Gavin O’Connor‘s Warrior (Lionsgate, 9.9), a rousing, emotionally emphatic, Mixed Martial Arts family drama that I’m not allowed to review at this time. But Tom Hardy is the shit in this thing. The instant he appeared on-screen I knew he was up to something extra-special and quite fierce. He gives one of the most intense burn-through, seething-machismo performances I’ve ever seen in a mainstream feature.

Hardy’s Warrior character is an AWOL Marine who eats his MMA opponents in the cage. He’s a quiet animal in a hoodie, he’s Bane, he walks like a fucking musclebound gorilla, he’s bruised and compassionate and crying inside, and he’s really something else.

Longtime HE reader James Kent has written to explain why he’ll no longer be following the column. The reason is basically LexG, he says. I realize there’s a major annoyance factor out there, and I also think I’ve made it clear I won’t tolerate LexG’s self-pitying remarks about women or loneliness and/or occasional threats of suicide. But I respect good writing from any corner and the wisdom and the ability to cut through the crap. I wish more commenters had that slash-through quailty, and I also wish LexG would try to develop more personal discipline.

It could be inferred that Kent reps the HE “silent majority” readership. My reply to him is that silent sideliners make their own bed. You can’t sit silently when something annoys you. Speak up, explain and tell off….or live with it.

“I’ve debated this several times over the past few weeks, but I think I finally reached my decision point,” Kent writes. ‘I’ve been a loyal reader of your various sites since 1998. I stumbled upon you by accident and I’ve enjoyed, while not always agreeing, with your reviews, rants, crusades, causes, passions etc. But over the past couple of years there’s definitely been a change. The heavy emphasis on comments to your posts have created my least favorite part of the site. It seems that more often, than not, when someone has something insightful to say the topic quickly gets uprooted by someone with their own singular agenda.

“As I’ve mentioned a couple of times to you in the past, for me the worst has been, and always will be, LexG. I know you value his writing and have a thing for him, whatever. But I would really like to see the counterpoint raised — about the people who don’t enjoy him. Or, more importantly, the people whose experience with your sight has been ruined by the non stop posting of this manipulative egomaniac. His postings on your Jason Bateman switch movie is the last straw for me. He is so consumed with himself that he wants everything and anything about your column to revert back to him.

“I am not sure you understand how offensive it is to some of your audience to see a guy like this get such a forum. He threatens suicide and you give him a spotlight? What???

“You know, I don’t go crying and complaining about how things turned out for me. I went to film school at NYU in the early 90’s. I took a stab at Hollywood in my youth. It didn’t work out for me. I decided happiness was more important than years trying to make it as a filmmaker. I’m okay with the decisions I made. I’ve got a good career going. I have a wife and a small boy. I still enjoy going to the movies. And I have zero sympathy for a guy like LexG who wallows in his own misery. That behavior makes me sick and reading about it on what was, once, my favorite blog, is repulsive.

“Yet every time one person tries to point this out on your site a dozen more jump to this guy’s defense. So I’m left with two possibilities: either I am just in the minority and this is the culture of the internet, or there is a segment of people who read your site, like me, who don’t feel the need to post all the time. We hate how the LexG’s of the internet make these sites their home, and all of the attention he gets, and we say nothing. And I’d wager many have left and said nothing.

“But to me that doesn’t help you. I feel it is important to let you know that after 13 years I am deciding to leave this site. I will miss your writing, but I will not miss for one single second that repulsive human being. I have no sympathy for him, and his self-destructive behavior. Enough’s enough for me. You value his type of reader, and not my kind, so I have to make my own choice. It was a hard decision and even harder one to write you about this. I stopped any of my occasional postings three weeks ago when all of his suicide bullshit came about. Now I leave your site for good.

“I will always enjoy you, Jeff. But I can no longer endorse what’s been going on. I only wish LexG had a site of his own. And I think I know why he doesn’t. Because then we’d all have a choice not to go to it.

“You’re still the man, man. I wish you the best!”

Reason TV, a libertarian channel, has posted footage of Matt Damon debating the role of teachers during a Save Our Schools rally outside the White House on 7.30.11. The purpose of the event: “To put the public back in public schools.” The six-minute video [click here] was produced, shot and edited by Jim Epstein. Hosted by Michelle Fields.

The Good Will Hunting clip is a snarky editorial comment about Damon being a weepy liberal type — ignore it. The last line is great.

There’s a review embargo in place on The Change-Up (Universal, 8.5) until 4 pm today But I half-liked it to my surprise, and my evening was made at the after-party when costar Jason Bateman came over to say hi and tell me that he’s a regular HE reader/fan/admirer. Then he said, “Thanks for classing up the internet” or words to that effect. There are haters who would disagree (and I don’t want or need that debate right now), but it felt great all the same.

I spoke to Jonah Hill briefly about Moneyball (“See you in Toronto!”), and also to Sandra Bullock about Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, about which she said (a) “I’m in it!” and (b) “It only finally finished [shooting] a couple of weeks ago.”

Too close to Olivia Wilde as I shot this — too many bodies, overly warm, no room to breathe.

Inside Job dp Svetlana Cvetko (r.) and her niece Nastasa Radisic (r.)