Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Daily Dose of Awesome: Girl plays "I am the Doctor" on the violin
Granted, the original song is already awesome in it's own right, but this takes that and adds to it. Now, the fact that the original track plays over takes away some of the charm of the concept, but Lara's contribution is still noticeable and the video is definitely worth watching. I don't know why you would, but if you needed more proof that geek girls are awesome, this should go a long way towards swaying your opinion.
How Powerful is John Constantine?
*Originally published on 9/22/09
When I was in college, my roommate got me into Hellblazer, a dark mature comic that centered around cynical every man John Constantine. While there is profanity, nudity and violence, the story is actually well written and Constantine goes through a lot of evolution as a character. I've only picked up a couple of the trades, though I intend to get the others at some point in the future.
My roommate was convinced that Constantine is the most powerful mystic in the DC Universe. Yes, the Vertigo titles do take place in the main universe, though you'd hardly notice it as DC tries to keep those titles separate for fear of little kids picking up a Hellblazer comic and seeing all the dark material that lies within it.
Most of the magicians in the DC Universe think that Constantine is lying about his mystical abilities, that he's nothing more than a con man who's all talk. It's odd, because, if anything, Constantine underplays his mystical abilities. Yes, he'll conjure a spell from time to time, but he far prefers to outwit and con his opponents rather than just cast a spell. In that sense, he is a sort of con man, but he is definitely more powerful than he lets on.
I believe that Constantine is one of the most powerful mystics in the DC Universe, but I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that he's the most powerful out of all of them. You have Dr. Fate, who essentially acts in a similar capacity to Dr. Strange; Zatanna, who can do anything as long as she says it backwards; and lesser known character Tim Hunter, who appeared in the Books of Magic series. Where is he anyway?
I digress. All of the above listed characters are extremely powerful. Constantine is a potent mystic, but I don't know if I'd say he was that powerful. I was kind of disappointed when he was never mentioned during the Day of Vengeance arc, where a mad Spectre hunts down all of the magic users. His rampage is so great that it actually affects the mystical energy of the planet itself. I understand not having Constantine appear in the series as that would lead to kids thinking Hellblazer might be kid friendly, but a mention of it within the pages of Hellblazer itself would've been nice.
It's one thing for other mystics to think that Constantine is a fake, but I'm pretty sure an agent of the Lord (which the Spectre is) would know that Constantine actually does have some magical chops. As he's routinely outsmarted the Devil, it might be possible that he's got even God fooled. That would be impressive.
It's hard to gauge just how powerful Constantine is as we've never seen him try a spell that really pushed his abilities to the limit. It would be interesting to see him take on a foe that actually tested him on that level.
When I was in college, my roommate got me into Hellblazer, a dark mature comic that centered around cynical every man John Constantine. While there is profanity, nudity and violence, the story is actually well written and Constantine goes through a lot of evolution as a character. I've only picked up a couple of the trades, though I intend to get the others at some point in the future.
My roommate was convinced that Constantine is the most powerful mystic in the DC Universe. Yes, the Vertigo titles do take place in the main universe, though you'd hardly notice it as DC tries to keep those titles separate for fear of little kids picking up a Hellblazer comic and seeing all the dark material that lies within it.
Most of the magicians in the DC Universe think that Constantine is lying about his mystical abilities, that he's nothing more than a con man who's all talk. It's odd, because, if anything, Constantine underplays his mystical abilities. Yes, he'll conjure a spell from time to time, but he far prefers to outwit and con his opponents rather than just cast a spell. In that sense, he is a sort of con man, but he is definitely more powerful than he lets on.
I believe that Constantine is one of the most powerful mystics in the DC Universe, but I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that he's the most powerful out of all of them. You have Dr. Fate, who essentially acts in a similar capacity to Dr. Strange; Zatanna, who can do anything as long as she says it backwards; and lesser known character Tim Hunter, who appeared in the Books of Magic series. Where is he anyway?
I digress. All of the above listed characters are extremely powerful. Constantine is a potent mystic, but I don't know if I'd say he was that powerful. I was kind of disappointed when he was never mentioned during the Day of Vengeance arc, where a mad Spectre hunts down all of the magic users. His rampage is so great that it actually affects the mystical energy of the planet itself. I understand not having Constantine appear in the series as that would lead to kids thinking Hellblazer might be kid friendly, but a mention of it within the pages of Hellblazer itself would've been nice.
It's one thing for other mystics to think that Constantine is a fake, but I'm pretty sure an agent of the Lord (which the Spectre is) would know that Constantine actually does have some magical chops. As he's routinely outsmarted the Devil, it might be possible that he's got even God fooled. That would be impressive.
It's hard to gauge just how powerful Constantine is as we've never seen him try a spell that really pushed his abilities to the limit. It would be interesting to see him take on a foe that actually tested him on that level.
Digital vs Hard Media
*Originally published on 2/24/09
When movies started to make the upgrade to high definition, consumers were presented with two different options, Blu-ray and HD-DVD. It was a long battle, but one by one, studios started to abandon HD-DVD and exclusively support Blu-ray. A few months ago, HD-DVD was declared dead, distribution stopped and Blu-ray remained victorious.
The fight wasn't (and still isn't) over for the emerging format. Both Bill Gates and Steve Jobs have said that they sincerely believe that downloads are the future of film distribution. They want to do for movies what iTunes has done for music. Microsoft wants to use Xbox Live to accomplish the same goal, even going so far as to team up with Netflix to stream movies.
At face value, this would seem to make sense, both companies have had great success with their respective download services. I, myself, have downloaded the entire third season of Venture Bros. in addition to the Fleischer Superman cartoons from decades ago. The only problem is that all the movies Xbox Live offers are rentals, there is no purchase option on any of the available films. If you really expect people to ditch discs and go to downloads, not having any movies available to purchase does not seem like a good strategy to encourage the switch.
iTunes isn't much better off. There's a huge difference between offering songs and movies for download. Downloading a song that is only 5 MB (megabytes) on average is a simple matter. DVD quality movies are usually about 700 MB. If you upgrade to high def, then it will probably be about twice that much. The convenience of downloads is negated by the fact that it will take a long time for files that large to finish downloading.
Another problem with going the way of the download is the fact that consumers are limited by hard drive space. iTunes has an advantage here as there are external hard drives available that hold up to 2 TB (terrabytes). Xbox doesn't have that luxury. It's true that the 360 comes with a 120 GB hard drive, which is plenty for most things. With high definition films, however, that space is going to fill up quickly. What is the consumer supposed to do then?
All electronic devices encounter problems. If your computer crashes or your Xbox burns out, you lose everything. This is another problem with going entirely digital.
Hard media has another advantage in that it offers special features. With DVD's and Blu-rays, you get not only the movie, but extras. These extras come in the form of deleted scenes, commentary, interviews and behind the scenes footage among other things. In addition to getting a movie with great sound and picture quality, you get a little extra bang for your buck. These things are not available with downloads.
I'm not saying that these companies should stop offering downloads. It is a way of distributing media that does, in fact, have its pros. It saves space as you don't need to worry about shelves or cases and you can download the newest movies while you play Halo or finish that presentation for work. As I said before, I use Xbox Live to download things all the time. A lot of people use iTunes for music and tv shows as well. If they want to start offering movies available for purchase through these services, that's fine. However, I would suggest that you don't rely solely on that. Having a folder filled with video files of movies is nice, but I'd rather have a shelf filled with movie cases to show off my collection. My suggestion would be to keep this option open, but not to expect it to act as "the future of film distribution" because I find it unlikely that that is the case.
When movies started to make the upgrade to high definition, consumers were presented with two different options, Blu-ray and HD-DVD. It was a long battle, but one by one, studios started to abandon HD-DVD and exclusively support Blu-ray. A few months ago, HD-DVD was declared dead, distribution stopped and Blu-ray remained victorious.
The fight wasn't (and still isn't) over for the emerging format. Both Bill Gates and Steve Jobs have said that they sincerely believe that downloads are the future of film distribution. They want to do for movies what iTunes has done for music. Microsoft wants to use Xbox Live to accomplish the same goal, even going so far as to team up with Netflix to stream movies.
At face value, this would seem to make sense, both companies have had great success with their respective download services. I, myself, have downloaded the entire third season of Venture Bros. in addition to the Fleischer Superman cartoons from decades ago. The only problem is that all the movies Xbox Live offers are rentals, there is no purchase option on any of the available films. If you really expect people to ditch discs and go to downloads, not having any movies available to purchase does not seem like a good strategy to encourage the switch.
iTunes isn't much better off. There's a huge difference between offering songs and movies for download. Downloading a song that is only 5 MB (megabytes) on average is a simple matter. DVD quality movies are usually about 700 MB. If you upgrade to high def, then it will probably be about twice that much. The convenience of downloads is negated by the fact that it will take a long time for files that large to finish downloading.
Another problem with going the way of the download is the fact that consumers are limited by hard drive space. iTunes has an advantage here as there are external hard drives available that hold up to 2 TB (terrabytes). Xbox doesn't have that luxury. It's true that the 360 comes with a 120 GB hard drive, which is plenty for most things. With high definition films, however, that space is going to fill up quickly. What is the consumer supposed to do then?
All electronic devices encounter problems. If your computer crashes or your Xbox burns out, you lose everything. This is another problem with going entirely digital.
Hard media has another advantage in that it offers special features. With DVD's and Blu-rays, you get not only the movie, but extras. These extras come in the form of deleted scenes, commentary, interviews and behind the scenes footage among other things. In addition to getting a movie with great sound and picture quality, you get a little extra bang for your buck. These things are not available with downloads.
I'm not saying that these companies should stop offering downloads. It is a way of distributing media that does, in fact, have its pros. It saves space as you don't need to worry about shelves or cases and you can download the newest movies while you play Halo or finish that presentation for work. As I said before, I use Xbox Live to download things all the time. A lot of people use iTunes for music and tv shows as well. If they want to start offering movies available for purchase through these services, that's fine. However, I would suggest that you don't rely solely on that. Having a folder filled with video files of movies is nice, but I'd rather have a shelf filled with movie cases to show off my collection. My suggestion would be to keep this option open, but not to expect it to act as "the future of film distribution" because I find it unlikely that that is the case.
Roland Deschain vs. Jonah Hex
*Originally published on 6/4/09
Every once in a while I like to do an article that's a bit more fun and easy going. It's juvenile and doesn't really accomplish much but my brain likes to imagine confrontations between fictional characters and try to decide who would win. I wrote one article for Associated Content that pit Batman against Superman and I wrote another that pit Superman against Wonder Woman. This time my brain decided to pit Roland Deschain, hero of the epic Dark Tower series against western DC Comics bounty hunter Jonah Hex.
Both are one man armies that can, and have, decimated entire towns single handedly. They have both reached the status of legend in their own respective worlds. Both are quick on the draw and have cat-like reflexes. Both men are very driven and will fight to their last breath in a fight.
Forget the O.K. Corral, this is the gunfight to end all gunfights. Neither one of these characters will be going down in one shot. Both are extremely resilient. Jonah Hex has been mortally wounded several times in the comic yet lives on to fight. Roland spent a large chunk of The Drawing of the Three with poison from rock lobsters pumping through his veins and still managed to shamble onward. I guarantee you that both will have emptied one, if not both, of their guns at least once before this fight is done. Still, I think Jonah's got the edge here. He's endured a lot of torture at the hands of his foes and rarely does it ever phase him.
As quick as Jonah is, I think Roland's got him beat here. Remember, he was able to hypnotize people by rotating a coin over his fingers so quickly that it practically became a blur. Jonah's fast on the draw, but that's practically supernaturally fast. In a fight like this, even milliseconds count. Roland will be able to get the first shot off. It may be just barely, but really that's all he needs to get the advantage.
Roland also has an advantage in that he's been training since childhood. Jonah did fight in the Civil War and has been a bounty hunter ever since, but Roland's got him beat.
If it gets to close combat, I think Jonah would have the advantage as he seems to have more of that brawler mentality.
I really have no clue who would win, which just makes me want to see the fight that much more. Of course, seeing as both characters serve on the side of justice and follow codes of honor, they probably wouldn't fight. If they did, the best guess I can come up with is that they'd both end up dead. Neither one would go down easy and both characters are in for the fight of their life, but that's the best I can come to a concrete conclusion to this showdown.
Every once in a while I like to do an article that's a bit more fun and easy going. It's juvenile and doesn't really accomplish much but my brain likes to imagine confrontations between fictional characters and try to decide who would win. I wrote one article for Associated Content that pit Batman against Superman and I wrote another that pit Superman against Wonder Woman. This time my brain decided to pit Roland Deschain, hero of the epic Dark Tower series against western DC Comics bounty hunter Jonah Hex.
Both are one man armies that can, and have, decimated entire towns single handedly. They have both reached the status of legend in their own respective worlds. Both are quick on the draw and have cat-like reflexes. Both men are very driven and will fight to their last breath in a fight.
Forget the O.K. Corral, this is the gunfight to end all gunfights. Neither one of these characters will be going down in one shot. Both are extremely resilient. Jonah Hex has been mortally wounded several times in the comic yet lives on to fight. Roland spent a large chunk of The Drawing of the Three with poison from rock lobsters pumping through his veins and still managed to shamble onward. I guarantee you that both will have emptied one, if not both, of their guns at least once before this fight is done. Still, I think Jonah's got the edge here. He's endured a lot of torture at the hands of his foes and rarely does it ever phase him.
As quick as Jonah is, I think Roland's got him beat here. Remember, he was able to hypnotize people by rotating a coin over his fingers so quickly that it practically became a blur. Jonah's fast on the draw, but that's practically supernaturally fast. In a fight like this, even milliseconds count. Roland will be able to get the first shot off. It may be just barely, but really that's all he needs to get the advantage.
Roland also has an advantage in that he's been training since childhood. Jonah did fight in the Civil War and has been a bounty hunter ever since, but Roland's got him beat.
If it gets to close combat, I think Jonah would have the advantage as he seems to have more of that brawler mentality.
I really have no clue who would win, which just makes me want to see the fight that much more. Of course, seeing as both characters serve on the side of justice and follow codes of honor, they probably wouldn't fight. If they did, the best guess I can come up with is that they'd both end up dead. Neither one would go down easy and both characters are in for the fight of their life, but that's the best I can come to a concrete conclusion to this showdown.
Monday, September 29, 2014
Sunday, September 28, 2014
Daily Dose of Awesome: Fails of the Weak
A while back, my old roommate directed me to achievementhunter.com. I haven't had a chance to check out all of their stuff, but one segment he insisted I watch is the "Fails of the Weak". It's a series of short collections of bloopers taken from Halo: Reach.
The clips themselves run the gamut from game glitches to bad luck to sheer player stupidity. Whatever the circumstance, these videos are some of the funniest things you will ever watch. It never gets old. Hearing the two announcers crack jokes and get hysterical also adds an element of enjoyment as you can tell the two guys are having a blast just laughing at this stuff.
My only gripe about this series is that the episodes are too bloody short. Each video is only four minutes. I guess they want to let the viewer catch their breath. One also has to take into consideration that editing videos is no easy task and keeping the show short ensures that only the funniest clips are shown. Still, I can't help but feel like it ends too soon. Considering what a blast it is to watch these things, it's a little disappointing. Even expanding it to just a ten minute run time would make all the difference in my opinion.
As the title suggests, it is a weekly series (nice play on words by the way).
I highly recommend checking out this series. Even if you're not a gamer, I have no doubt that you will get a kick out of watching these clips.
You can find all of the episodes here.
The clips themselves run the gamut from game glitches to bad luck to sheer player stupidity. Whatever the circumstance, these videos are some of the funniest things you will ever watch. It never gets old. Hearing the two announcers crack jokes and get hysterical also adds an element of enjoyment as you can tell the two guys are having a blast just laughing at this stuff.
My only gripe about this series is that the episodes are too bloody short. Each video is only four minutes. I guess they want to let the viewer catch their breath. One also has to take into consideration that editing videos is no easy task and keeping the show short ensures that only the funniest clips are shown. Still, I can't help but feel like it ends too soon. Considering what a blast it is to watch these things, it's a little disappointing. Even expanding it to just a ten minute run time would make all the difference in my opinion.
As the title suggests, it is a weekly series (nice play on words by the way).
I highly recommend checking out this series. Even if you're not a gamer, I have no doubt that you will get a kick out of watching these clips.
You can find all of the episodes here.
Children of the Corn movie reviews
Children of the Corn
*Children of the Corn 2: The Holy Grail?
*Originally published on 10/31/09
I was on Netflix adding the sequels, Pet Sematary 2, the two sequels to The Mangler, I even went ahead and added the two Lawnmower Man movies.
A strange thing happened shortly after. I knew that they had made a whole franchise out of the Children of the Corn story so I just typed that in expecting to find all of the movies. A lot of them were there: the first one, the remake of the first one, the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh ones were there (seven? really?) but Children of the Corn 2 was conspicuously absent.
Determined to get the complete set, I typed in "Children of the Corn 2", nothing, just a list of the same movies. I added the subtitle, still nothing. I tried using roman numerals and just the subtitle to no effect. They just flat out didn't have the movie.
So, I went to Amazon, I figured that they would have a copy of the DVD for cheap. That was not the case. They only had six used copies and they were selling for like 40 bucks. Forget that mess, I'm not paying 40 bucks for a DVD of Children of the Corn 2, just no. Even more ridiculous is the fact that that was the cheapest one. Some copies were going for close to 70 bucks, "new" editions were going for 100, that's insane!
They did have a wider selection of VHS copies going for around 8 dollars, which is a better deal, I guess. Though even with the VHS tapes, one guy wanted 20 bucks for it. OK, the movie has a 4 star rating on Amazon but 20 bucks for a VHS tape and 40 for a DVD, I can get a deluxe blu-ray edition of a movie for that.
I know that some movies are hard to find, but those tend to be extraordinarily obscure. Heck, some of the movies I added to the queue were more obscure than Children of the Corn 2. This was part of a fairly large franchise, not to mention that every other sequel is widely available. Why, out of all of them is this one so rare? Curiouser and curiouser my dear readers. This is most peculiar. I am both baffled and shocked. It's just weird.
Children of the Corn 2: The Final Sacrifice
Children of the Corn 3: Urban Harvest
Children of the Corn 4: The Gathering
Children of the Corn 5: Fields of Terror
Children of the Corn 666: Isaac's Return
Children of the Corn: Revelation
Children of the Corn: Genesis
Children of the Corn (2009)
*Children of the Corn 2: The Holy Grail?
*Originally published on 10/31/09
I was on Netflix adding the sequels, Pet Sematary 2, the two sequels to The Mangler, I even went ahead and added the two Lawnmower Man movies.
A strange thing happened shortly after. I knew that they had made a whole franchise out of the Children of the Corn story so I just typed that in expecting to find all of the movies. A lot of them were there: the first one, the remake of the first one, the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh ones were there (seven? really?) but Children of the Corn 2 was conspicuously absent.
Determined to get the complete set, I typed in "Children of the Corn 2", nothing, just a list of the same movies. I added the subtitle, still nothing. I tried using roman numerals and just the subtitle to no effect. They just flat out didn't have the movie.
So, I went to Amazon, I figured that they would have a copy of the DVD for cheap. That was not the case. They only had six used copies and they were selling for like 40 bucks. Forget that mess, I'm not paying 40 bucks for a DVD of Children of the Corn 2, just no. Even more ridiculous is the fact that that was the cheapest one. Some copies were going for close to 70 bucks, "new" editions were going for 100, that's insane!
They did have a wider selection of VHS copies going for around 8 dollars, which is a better deal, I guess. Though even with the VHS tapes, one guy wanted 20 bucks for it. OK, the movie has a 4 star rating on Amazon but 20 bucks for a VHS tape and 40 for a DVD, I can get a deluxe blu-ray edition of a movie for that.
I know that some movies are hard to find, but those tend to be extraordinarily obscure. Heck, some of the movies I added to the queue were more obscure than Children of the Corn 2. This was part of a fairly large franchise, not to mention that every other sequel is widely available. Why, out of all of them is this one so rare? Curiouser and curiouser my dear readers. This is most peculiar. I am both baffled and shocked. It's just weird.
Children of the Corn 2: The Final Sacrifice
Children of the Corn 3: Urban Harvest
Children of the Corn 4: The Gathering
Children of the Corn 5: Fields of Terror
Children of the Corn 666: Isaac's Return
Children of the Corn: Revelation
Children of the Corn: Genesis
Children of the Corn (2009)
Saturday, September 27, 2014
Daily Dose of Awesome: Steven Seagal Lawman
Reality television has been oft maligned. I'm not a fan, but I can kind of see how people can get hooked on those types of shows, especially when they air in like eight hour blocks. While the genre doesn't appeal to me, I get it. Every once in awhile, an idea comes through that qualifies as a veritable gem. One such gem is the new Steven Seagal Lawman.
It premiered December 2. The idea is that a camera crew follows around action movie star Steven Seagal as he works as a bona fide police officer. Now, I read that Seagal has actually been operating as a reserve officer for years, which admittedly takes some of the fun out of it, but still, Steven Seagal will operate as a cop and help train new recruits.
That is one of those ideas that's so stupid it's brilliant. It actually manages to be both at the same time and you don't see things like that come around very often.
I mean come on, Steven Seagal as a cop. It's such a ridiculous concept that you almost have to watch it. Again, I have to say that I'm a little disappointed that he's been serving on the force for years. I think it would've been far funnier to put a badge on him right after he got out of Hollywood and just filmed the results. Wackiness would've ensued, I'm sure. Sadly, being on the force for over 20 years, he'll probably be pretty competent which doesn't make for as many lolz as this concept should deliver.
I didn't watch the premier, but I have seen previews for the show and, as one would expect, people recognize him. One suspect as he's being cuffed looks up and says "Hey! You're Steven Seagal!"
Now, I know you're thinking that I can't really judge this show having never seen it, and it does seem odd for me to declare something awesome when it falls into something that I have no interest in ie. reality television, but all of that just adds to the overall awesomeness of it.
It's so awesome that I don't need to watch it to tell you how great it is. It just is, the concept alone gets you excited to watch it.
How surreal do you think it's going to be to show up after being recruited and then being told that Steven Seagal is going to teach you how to fight? I guarantee you that every recruit is going to hear that, nod their head and say to themselves "Oh hell yeah!" Not to mention the fact that we'll get to see local police officers utilizing Kung-Fu skills when apprehending suspects. That's funny.
Reality television doesn't appeal to everyone, but I'm fairly certain that there isn't a human alive who wouldn't want to check this show out at least once. It transcends the genre and gives you something that is so goofy and yet so perfect that you'll want to tune in to see how it all turns out.
Check your local listings.
It premiered December 2. The idea is that a camera crew follows around action movie star Steven Seagal as he works as a bona fide police officer. Now, I read that Seagal has actually been operating as a reserve officer for years, which admittedly takes some of the fun out of it, but still, Steven Seagal will operate as a cop and help train new recruits.
That is one of those ideas that's so stupid it's brilliant. It actually manages to be both at the same time and you don't see things like that come around very often.
I mean come on, Steven Seagal as a cop. It's such a ridiculous concept that you almost have to watch it. Again, I have to say that I'm a little disappointed that he's been serving on the force for years. I think it would've been far funnier to put a badge on him right after he got out of Hollywood and just filmed the results. Wackiness would've ensued, I'm sure. Sadly, being on the force for over 20 years, he'll probably be pretty competent which doesn't make for as many lolz as this concept should deliver.
I didn't watch the premier, but I have seen previews for the show and, as one would expect, people recognize him. One suspect as he's being cuffed looks up and says "Hey! You're Steven Seagal!"
Now, I know you're thinking that I can't really judge this show having never seen it, and it does seem odd for me to declare something awesome when it falls into something that I have no interest in ie. reality television, but all of that just adds to the overall awesomeness of it.
It's so awesome that I don't need to watch it to tell you how great it is. It just is, the concept alone gets you excited to watch it.
How surreal do you think it's going to be to show up after being recruited and then being told that Steven Seagal is going to teach you how to fight? I guarantee you that every recruit is going to hear that, nod their head and say to themselves "Oh hell yeah!" Not to mention the fact that we'll get to see local police officers utilizing Kung-Fu skills when apprehending suspects. That's funny.
Reality television doesn't appeal to everyone, but I'm fairly certain that there isn't a human alive who wouldn't want to check this show out at least once. It transcends the genre and gives you something that is so goofy and yet so perfect that you'll want to tune in to see how it all turns out.
Check your local listings.
Friday, September 26, 2014
Why Isn't "The Plant" available as an e-book?
You can read my article here.
*While the story can be downloaded from Stephen King's website, the fact that there isn't a Kindle/Nook edition is still somewhat baffling to me.
*While the story can be downloaded from Stephen King's website, the fact that there isn't a Kindle/Nook edition is still somewhat baffling to me.
How important is your Xbox Live gamer score?
Some games don't have a lot of replay value. A lot of gamers feel that once a game is beaten, you're done with it. I find this true with some games, but not others. I still play Marvel: Ultimate Alliance and while you wouldn't think it, I've enjoyed going through Ghostbusters: The Video Game just as much the fifth time as much as I did the first time. Even so, there are a lot of games that can easily be beaten over a weekend, leading to only a rental.
To combat this, Microsoft came up with the idea of achievements. Each game would have certain tasks that got you a certain amount of points. You didn't have to do them, but it added another element to the game. Games usually have a total of a thousand points available to gain from completing every task.
Some people take the points for what they are, just a fun element that adds to the game's enjoyment. Others take it too far and seem to think that gamer scores are serious business.
It's an odd balance you need to create, a low gamer score isn't impressive, but if your gamer score is too high, than people see it as sad. We came across one player who's gamer score was over 100,000 and my roommate's pitied him more than felt proud. His profile insisted that he was employed full-time and had a life, but they were skeptical. It's possible, though unlikely. I mean, if you have enough expendable income and buy games that you want, sooner or later, those points are going to pile up over the course of several years, but it's hard to imagine. I know, that's a gamer stereotype that I don't want to reinforce, but at the same time a gamer score of over 100,000 is hard to ignore.
The points don't even really matter. It would be pretty cool if you got that amount of Microsoft points each year or something as a bonus, but alas the gamer score is a status symbol that doesn't reap much in the way of rewards.
However, I'm glad that they're there. It is fun to go through a game again and try to shoot for various goals. You also get a quick burst of pride every time that little oval pops up to tell you that an achievement has been unlocked and your gamer score has increased x number of points.
The PS3 has suffered quite a bit because a lot of the games are also available on the Xbox 360. As such, people figure they'll just get the Xbox 360 version for the achievements. Oddly enough, Sony has a similar network with trophies that act in a similar capacity. For some reason, gamers aren't as hardcore about trophies as they are Xbox Live gamer points.
It's important to take gamer points for what they are. They don't really mean anything,yes it adds an element of fun and gamers like trying to see how high they can get, but it's not such a big deal that you need to freak out over it. It doesn't really give you much in the way of bragging rights either, though admittedly, some of those achievements are difficult to get so there is some wiggle room there.
To combat this, Microsoft came up with the idea of achievements. Each game would have certain tasks that got you a certain amount of points. You didn't have to do them, but it added another element to the game. Games usually have a total of a thousand points available to gain from completing every task.
Some people take the points for what they are, just a fun element that adds to the game's enjoyment. Others take it too far and seem to think that gamer scores are serious business.
It's an odd balance you need to create, a low gamer score isn't impressive, but if your gamer score is too high, than people see it as sad. We came across one player who's gamer score was over 100,000 and my roommate's pitied him more than felt proud. His profile insisted that he was employed full-time and had a life, but they were skeptical. It's possible, though unlikely. I mean, if you have enough expendable income and buy games that you want, sooner or later, those points are going to pile up over the course of several years, but it's hard to imagine. I know, that's a gamer stereotype that I don't want to reinforce, but at the same time a gamer score of over 100,000 is hard to ignore.
The points don't even really matter. It would be pretty cool if you got that amount of Microsoft points each year or something as a bonus, but alas the gamer score is a status symbol that doesn't reap much in the way of rewards.
However, I'm glad that they're there. It is fun to go through a game again and try to shoot for various goals. You also get a quick burst of pride every time that little oval pops up to tell you that an achievement has been unlocked and your gamer score has increased x number of points.
The PS3 has suffered quite a bit because a lot of the games are also available on the Xbox 360. As such, people figure they'll just get the Xbox 360 version for the achievements. Oddly enough, Sony has a similar network with trophies that act in a similar capacity. For some reason, gamers aren't as hardcore about trophies as they are Xbox Live gamer points.
It's important to take gamer points for what they are. They don't really mean anything,yes it adds an element of fun and gamers like trying to see how high they can get, but it's not such a big deal that you need to freak out over it. It doesn't really give you much in the way of bragging rights either, though admittedly, some of those achievements are difficult to get so there is some wiggle room there.
Apt Pupil
This 1998 adaptation of the novella by the same name is one that tends to go under people's radars. As the credits were rolling, my roommate, who was focusing on his laptop, looked up and asked if this was based on the Stephen King work. When we answered in the affirmative, he said that he didn't know that they had made a movie adaptation of it.
Bryan Singer takes the helm on this adaptation. In an interesting bit of foreshadowing, Singer cast Sir Ian McKellan in the role of Dussander, Bruce Davison has a supporting role as well. The two characters would work together again when Singer cast them both in the X-Men films.
The film focuses on Todd Bowden, a high school student who has an odd fascination with the holocaust. The movie gives the implication that this is the first time he's hearing of it, which is weird, but let's just say that he had a basic knowledge and wanted to know more. He goes on a researching binge, reading everything he can find, looking at photographs, the whole nine.
The research pays off when he sees a man on a bus who happens to look like one of the SS soldiers he saw in the textbook. The setup is really my biggest problem with this film. There's something weird about the idea of running into a nazi war criminal while riding the bus. I can't put my finger on it, but something about it just rubs me the wrong way.
This discovery sets Todd into Batman mode, he lifts fingerprints off the man's mailbox and digs up all sorts of dirt on him before he finally knocks on the man's door to meet him face to face. His curiosity leads him to blackmail the old man to tell him everything about what happened decades ago.
This has a two pronged effect on the characters. It puts images into Todd's head that haunt his dreams and it reawakens the monster within Dussander. Despite the charming exterior shell, Dussander really is an embodiment of evil. He's not one of those soldiers who did what he did and regrets it, he liked it. After the sleeper has awakened, he decides to pick up where he left off, even going out of his way to try to cook a cat in the oven. If that's not a moral event horizon, I don't know what is.
On Todd's side, the images and stories end up taking their toll on him and his grades start to slip. He, of course, blames Dussander for telling him all these things that screwed him up. You know, the things he made Dussander tell him. He also starts to develop sociopathic tendencies of his own.
One of the major highlights of the film is seeing Dussander turn the tables on Todd and slowly gain the upper hand in their little relationship. It was fun seeing McKellan put the kid in his place and show that he wasn't going to just lie down and take it.
Overall though, the movie's OK. I mean, aside from the bizarre setup and the fact that there isn't really a protagonist to speak of, there's nothing really bad about the film. It's all OK. The acting's OK, the directing is OK, the score is OK. Everything about the film is OK.
Daily Dose of Awesome: Disney's Anne Frank
In a video, the Nostalgia Chick briefly discussed how Disney's Pocahontas franchise changed the nature of historical eras in order to be more family friendly. To illustrate this, she made a joke about a fictitious animated Anne Frank movie that Disney made.
It was a funny gag to be sure, but it didn't end there. The internet decided that this non-existent movie needed a page on TV Tropes, and it got one.
That's right, the fans decided to have some fun and made up a bunch of tropes for a movie that isn't even real. They cite specific scenes and bring up characters that the Chick herself never did. It also had a pretty big cast as Tom Cruise, Madonna, Molly Ringwald, Robin Williams, Frank Oz and Jason Alexander all had roles. Even Tim Curry had a cameo. That's not too shabby if I do say so myself. I probably would've thrown a couple of others like Keith David, Clancy Brown, and David Warner in there for good measure. That's just me though.
In any case, the page is a fun read. I know TV Tropes catalogs dang near everything, but I never thought I'd see the day when a page was made for something that doesn't even really exist. It's rather amusing, I definitely suggest checking the page out if you're looking for a laugh.
It was a funny gag to be sure, but it didn't end there. The internet decided that this non-existent movie needed a page on TV Tropes, and it got one.
That's right, the fans decided to have some fun and made up a bunch of tropes for a movie that isn't even real. They cite specific scenes and bring up characters that the Chick herself never did. It also had a pretty big cast as Tom Cruise, Madonna, Molly Ringwald, Robin Williams, Frank Oz and Jason Alexander all had roles. Even Tim Curry had a cameo. That's not too shabby if I do say so myself. I probably would've thrown a couple of others like Keith David, Clancy Brown, and David Warner in there for good measure. That's just me though.
In any case, the page is a fun read. I know TV Tropes catalogs dang near everything, but I never thought I'd see the day when a page was made for something that doesn't even really exist. It's rather amusing, I definitely suggest checking the page out if you're looking for a laugh.
Thursday, September 25, 2014
Batman: The Brave and the Bold reviews
When OMAC Attacks
Trials of the Demon
Dawn of the Deadman
Day of the Dark Knight
Journey to the Center of the Bat
The Color of Revenge
Mayhem of the Music Meister
Duel of the Double Crossers
Fall of the Blue Beetle
Last Bat on Earth
Night of the Huntress
Legends of the Dark Mite
Inside the Outsiders
Enter the Outsiders
The Eyes of Despero
Hail the Tornado Tyrant
Deep Cover for Batman
Game Over for Owlman
The Fate of Equinox
Menace of the Conquerer Caveman
Evil Under the Sea
Death Race to Oblivion
Long Arm of the Law
Invasion of the Secret Santas
Revenge of the Reach
Aquaman's Outrageous Adventure
Season 1
Season 2
Season 3
Trials of the Demon
Dawn of the Deadman
Day of the Dark Knight
Journey to the Center of the Bat
The Color of Revenge
Mayhem of the Music Meister
Duel of the Double Crossers
Fall of the Blue Beetle
Last Bat on Earth
Night of the Huntress
Legends of the Dark Mite
Inside the Outsiders
Enter the Outsiders
The Eyes of Despero
Hail the Tornado Tyrant
Deep Cover for Batman
Game Over for Owlman
The Fate of Equinox
Menace of the Conquerer Caveman
Evil Under the Sea
Death Race to Oblivion
Long Arm of the Law
Invasion of the Secret Santas
Revenge of the Reach
Aquaman's Outrageous Adventure
Season 1
Season 2
Season 3
Daily Dose of Awesome: Mr. Sinister does the Snoopy dance
As I don't really follow Marvel, I couldn't provide context even if I wanted to. Honestly though, that may work out for the best as this scene really speaks for itself. In the long run, context may only dilute the excerpt and rob it of some of its fun.
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
5 worst fictional cities to live in
*Originally published on 4/15/09
5. Gotham City
It's bad enough the mob has a stranglehold over the city, having most political figures and cops in their pocket, but you've also got a plethora of psychos and sociopaths to deal with. Everybody with the slightest grudge will don a costume and alternate persona to achieve their goals. It's gotten so bad here that a billionaire playboy has been forced to moonlight as a costumed vigilante, doing the work that the cops should have been doing. If that isn't bad enough, I've got two words for you, The Joker. Yeah, the clown prince of crime himself calls this city home. Anywhere he is, it's a good idea to be somewhere else. It's true the city has an asylum to hold these crazies, but it's a cardboard prison. It rarely holds the villains for long and the success rate for treatment is near 0.
4. Angel Grove
For a long time it seemed like the city was getting attacked by some ridiculous monster 5 times a week. It was OK when the monsters were human sized, but inevitably, the monster would grow to the size of a skyscraper and engage in a round of fisticuffs with giant robots that appeared from nowhere. Buildings would get destroyed on a regular basis, crumbling under the weight of one of the two fighters who happened to get thrown into it or getting hit by a stray laser beam. I feel bad for the city officials as it seemed they were fighting a never ending wave of destruction. Whole city blocks would get destroyed faster than they could be reassembled. I wouldn't be surprised if the state tax for those residents was higher than the federal tax rate, not to mention how much it must have cost just to get a pack of cigarettes, yeesh.
3. Derry, Maine
There is a child eating clown lurking in the sewers. It's not just any clown, but an extra-dimensional monster that's been lurking underground since the dawn of time. Acts of bloody violence are par for the course in this place as It's presence permeates throughout the town. His essence is so entwined with the city that when the Loser's club does finally kill it, the city gets rocked by a huge storm.
2. Raccoon City
The city in Resident Evil is ground zero for the outbreak of the infamous T-Virus. The end result is zombies, lots of zombies. I'm not sure if the virus has broken out past the city's barriers. I believe they have, but I'm no expert. Either way, it would suck to live here as the city is one giant zombie apocalypse.
1. Silent Hill
Holy hell! Who would live here!? You've got a crazy cult that's trying to conjure up some ancient god, a permanent fog hovering over the city (actually I don't think the fog is permanent in the games, but it's still there frequently enough to be unnerving) and then the random dips into a hell dimension complete with all sorts of monsters and freaks. If they just cut you up into little pieces, they've gone easy on you. That's how sadistic these things are. You've got Pyramid Head, zombie nurses, those weird headless things with acid for blood. It's a nightmare town in every sense of the word. Some entity, usually the spirit of someone you knew, lures its prey to the town through some elaborate scheme to unleash all manner of psychological and demonic horrors.
If you ever see a sign saying "Welcome to..." with any of these cities on them, just turn around and drive away. You'll be much, much better off.
5. Gotham City
It's bad enough the mob has a stranglehold over the city, having most political figures and cops in their pocket, but you've also got a plethora of psychos and sociopaths to deal with. Everybody with the slightest grudge will don a costume and alternate persona to achieve their goals. It's gotten so bad here that a billionaire playboy has been forced to moonlight as a costumed vigilante, doing the work that the cops should have been doing. If that isn't bad enough, I've got two words for you, The Joker. Yeah, the clown prince of crime himself calls this city home. Anywhere he is, it's a good idea to be somewhere else. It's true the city has an asylum to hold these crazies, but it's a cardboard prison. It rarely holds the villains for long and the success rate for treatment is near 0.
4. Angel Grove
For a long time it seemed like the city was getting attacked by some ridiculous monster 5 times a week. It was OK when the monsters were human sized, but inevitably, the monster would grow to the size of a skyscraper and engage in a round of fisticuffs with giant robots that appeared from nowhere. Buildings would get destroyed on a regular basis, crumbling under the weight of one of the two fighters who happened to get thrown into it or getting hit by a stray laser beam. I feel bad for the city officials as it seemed they were fighting a never ending wave of destruction. Whole city blocks would get destroyed faster than they could be reassembled. I wouldn't be surprised if the state tax for those residents was higher than the federal tax rate, not to mention how much it must have cost just to get a pack of cigarettes, yeesh.
3. Derry, Maine
There is a child eating clown lurking in the sewers. It's not just any clown, but an extra-dimensional monster that's been lurking underground since the dawn of time. Acts of bloody violence are par for the course in this place as It's presence permeates throughout the town. His essence is so entwined with the city that when the Loser's club does finally kill it, the city gets rocked by a huge storm.
2. Raccoon City
The city in Resident Evil is ground zero for the outbreak of the infamous T-Virus. The end result is zombies, lots of zombies. I'm not sure if the virus has broken out past the city's barriers. I believe they have, but I'm no expert. Either way, it would suck to live here as the city is one giant zombie apocalypse.
1. Silent Hill
Holy hell! Who would live here!? You've got a crazy cult that's trying to conjure up some ancient god, a permanent fog hovering over the city (actually I don't think the fog is permanent in the games, but it's still there frequently enough to be unnerving) and then the random dips into a hell dimension complete with all sorts of monsters and freaks. If they just cut you up into little pieces, they've gone easy on you. That's how sadistic these things are. You've got Pyramid Head, zombie nurses, those weird headless things with acid for blood. It's a nightmare town in every sense of the word. Some entity, usually the spirit of someone you knew, lures its prey to the town through some elaborate scheme to unleash all manner of psychological and demonic horrors.
If you ever see a sign saying "Welcome to..." with any of these cities on them, just turn around and drive away. You'll be much, much better off.
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
Under the Dome Season 2
Episode 1: Heads will Roll
Episode 2: Infestation
Episode 3: Force Majeure
Episode 4: Revelation
Episode 5: Reconciliation
Episode 6: In the Dark
Episode 7: Going Home
Episode 8: Awakening
Episode 9: The Red Door
Episode 10: The Fall
Episode 11: Black Ice
Episode 12: Turn
Episode 13: Go Now
Both seasons have been mixed bags, but the first season was more consistent. Once the ball got rolling here, it got a lot better, but you have to plod through some nonsense to get to that point.
Episode 2: Infestation
Episode 3: Force Majeure
Episode 4: Revelation
Episode 5: Reconciliation
Episode 6: In the Dark
Episode 7: Going Home
Episode 8: Awakening
Episode 9: The Red Door
Episode 10: The Fall
Episode 11: Black Ice
Episode 12: Turn
Episode 13: Go Now
Click here to join our Patreon campaign
Pros
- The season finale, which ranks as one of my all time favorite episodes.
- The mythos is expanded as we see forces outside the dome begin to make moves and some hints about what's to come are peppered throughout the season.
- I was a little skeptical about the addition of new characters, but they ended up working out fairly well overall.
Cons
- A lot of the episodes in the first half of the season suffer from excessive goofiness, stupid characters, and wonky writing.
- Rebecca Pine had some missteps early on, but she did get better.
- While lives were always at stake, you could argue that this season took the "kill characters for dramatic effect" too far as the kill count for recurring characters is uncharacteristically high.
-I'm no science expert, but a lot of what comes up here is questionable to say the least.
Overall
Both seasons have been mixed bags, but the first season was more consistent. Once the ball got rolling here, it got a lot better, but you have to plod through some nonsense to get to that point.
Monday, September 22, 2014
Could 11/22/63 be coming to television?
You can read my article here.
Posting this today as it is especially relevant coming on the heels of the announcement that Hulu will be the ones bringing this series to life as a 9 hour miniseries. I think it will be a good fit, though personally, I'm hoping that it will be available to watch for everyone and people won't have to subscribe to Hulu Plus to watch it.
Posting this today as it is especially relevant coming on the heels of the announcement that Hulu will be the ones bringing this series to life as a 9 hour miniseries. I think it will be a good fit, though personally, I'm hoping that it will be available to watch for everyone and people won't have to subscribe to Hulu Plus to watch it.
Wraith
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Click here to join our Patreon campaign
Pros
- Amazing artwork
- Collected in a really nice hardcover that will look great on your bookshelf
- Fleshes out the back story of who I consider to be Hill's greatest villain
- Evil is pit against evil as Manx goes after a group of depraved convicts
Cons
- The story works, but is fairly simple.
- The characters weren't as engaging as they potentially could have been
- Frequently replaces tension and dread with excessive gore.
Overall
This was a good read, but it wasn't mind blowing for me. It especially pales in comparison to the fun, gripping read that was the original novel. It's hardly a bust, by any stretch. There's a lot to like here, but it seems like it still could have been even more with some minor tweaks.
Was Susan Delgado Fridged?
*Originally published on 9/11/09
The thought crossed my mind earlier that there is a pretty good possibility that Susan Delgado was fridged. It had never occurred to me before, but the thought hit me recently, most likely as a delayed result of reading all the comics again.
For those unfamiliar, "fridged" is a term used to refer to a character death (specifically a female) that was unnecessarily cruel, cheap, done for shock value, and usually just done so that the main hero can avenge her. Comic writer, Gail Simone pointed this out in an essay a few years back and even made a whole list of characters to show the disproportionate treatment women got.
At face value, yes, Susan was fridged. Her death spurred Roland to go to the tower and being burned at the stake is a rather bad way to go (to say the least). The fact that she was with child definitely doesn't help matters. It was certainly a tragic end, but given the history of the Mejis, human sacrifice still hadn't been completely phased out.
At the same time the line's rather blurred. I mean, what sort of story would begin with the couple living happily ever after? Also important to note is the fact that everybody Roland knew died. It wasn't just Susan, but his whole first ka-tet that met a grim fate. This was a pretty important element in Roland's behavior. He remained distant because death seemed to follow him around like those storm clouds in old cartoons.
As the comic points out, characters met ends far more gruesome than Susan did. Look at Charles in the latest series of Dark Tower comics I reviewed. I would agree with the narrator that he got it a lot worse than she did.
Character deaths are common, especially in epics like this. Sooner or later a female character is going to meet a tragic end. It doesn't mean that the writer has issues with women, it just means that the story just happened to unfold that way.
I remember, back when King was early in the series, I think he had just finished The Wastelands, someone sent him a letter asking how it was going to end. King responded that he really didn't know. He's said on more than one occasion that he doesn't really plan his books out, choosing instead to just let things happen as his imagination sees it. As such, it was just a part of natural character development as opposed to adding something just for shock value.
There's also the fact that the more I think about it, the less I buy this whole "fridging" thing. It's a rant for another site, I don't want to go too far off topic, but let's just say that the more I think about it the less I agree with it.
I'm surprised the topic hasn't come up before to be honest. Especially in comic circles, nowadays, they freak out if Lois Lane gets a papercut.
Ultimately, I have to lean towards yes. Despite my qualms with the general movement, Susan's death does seem to meet the basic criteria. I wouldn't go so far as to say her death was cheap though. It was a pretty powerful scene and Roland made sure never to forget the sacrifice she made, nor did he forget her final words as she passed on to the next world.
What do you guys think? Could the story still have worked without Susan's tragic end? What if she hadn't died and Roland didn't go on his quest for the tower. Would the multiverse fall or would Ka find another reason for him to make his odyssey? It's true, Farson was still around so he could go on the grounds of trying to alter his actions, but it was Susan's death, more than anything that he wanted to negate; it makes you wonder what alternatives there were.
For those unfamiliar, "fridged" is a term used to refer to a character death (specifically a female) that was unnecessarily cruel, cheap, done for shock value, and usually just done so that the main hero can avenge her. Comic writer, Gail Simone pointed this out in an essay a few years back and even made a whole list of characters to show the disproportionate treatment women got.
At face value, yes, Susan was fridged. Her death spurred Roland to go to the tower and being burned at the stake is a rather bad way to go (to say the least). The fact that she was with child definitely doesn't help matters. It was certainly a tragic end, but given the history of the Mejis, human sacrifice still hadn't been completely phased out.
At the same time the line's rather blurred. I mean, what sort of story would begin with the couple living happily ever after? Also important to note is the fact that everybody Roland knew died. It wasn't just Susan, but his whole first ka-tet that met a grim fate. This was a pretty important element in Roland's behavior. He remained distant because death seemed to follow him around like those storm clouds in old cartoons.
As the comic points out, characters met ends far more gruesome than Susan did. Look at Charles in the latest series of Dark Tower comics I reviewed. I would agree with the narrator that he got it a lot worse than she did.
Character deaths are common, especially in epics like this. Sooner or later a female character is going to meet a tragic end. It doesn't mean that the writer has issues with women, it just means that the story just happened to unfold that way.
I remember, back when King was early in the series, I think he had just finished The Wastelands, someone sent him a letter asking how it was going to end. King responded that he really didn't know. He's said on more than one occasion that he doesn't really plan his books out, choosing instead to just let things happen as his imagination sees it. As such, it was just a part of natural character development as opposed to adding something just for shock value.
There's also the fact that the more I think about it, the less I buy this whole "fridging" thing. It's a rant for another site, I don't want to go too far off topic, but let's just say that the more I think about it the less I agree with it.
I'm surprised the topic hasn't come up before to be honest. Especially in comic circles, nowadays, they freak out if Lois Lane gets a papercut.
Ultimately, I have to lean towards yes. Despite my qualms with the general movement, Susan's death does seem to meet the basic criteria. I wouldn't go so far as to say her death was cheap though. It was a pretty powerful scene and Roland made sure never to forget the sacrifice she made, nor did he forget her final words as she passed on to the next world.
What do you guys think? Could the story still have worked without Susan's tragic end? What if she hadn't died and Roland didn't go on his quest for the tower. Would the multiverse fall or would Ka find another reason for him to make his odyssey? It's true, Farson was still around so he could go on the grounds of trying to alter his actions, but it was Susan's death, more than anything that he wanted to negate; it makes you wonder what alternatives there were.
Where they went wrong with Harvey Dent
*Originally published on 1/28/09
I said in an earlier article that the Harvey Dent we see in The Dark Knight is the best one to come to the big screen. This is true. However, there are ways that it could have been made even better.
I read Eye of the Beholder and saw the 2 part origin episode in Batman: The Animated Series, both were great and are neck and neck for the definitive Two-Face origin story. I know that in order for the transformation to make any sense, Harvey needs to be riddled with psychological and emotional issues. Whether it be in the form of an alternate personality or just a dark side, there needs to be a monster lurking beneath the surface of Harvey's psyche.
That being said, I was really happy with this issue free Harvey. The problem with the emotional issues is that they make him a time bomb. It suggests that no matter what happened, Harvey was going to fall. Nolan plays up the crusader for justice and takes away the dark past. There is the one line about his father's lucky coin, however like Ra's Al Ghul's line about being immortal, this is a line that is simply meant to be a wink to the fans of the comics and doesn't really have any weight behind it. Seeing an emotionally conflicted Harvey can, and has been, done very well. But when I say "I believe in Harvey Dent", this is the one I'm talking about.
The biggest mistake made was that they didn't sell the love. I'm OK with a psychologically sound Harvey Dent, but if you're going to make the basis for his downfall the loss of his girlfriend you really have to sell it. There was a lot of talk about the love, but aside from a passing reference to an engagement they come off as really good friends who flirt a little. This could be in part to Rachel's feelings for Bruce and Eckhart plays the type of guy you could see Rachel falling for perfectly, still there didn't seem to be any clicking. Even if it gets sappy, you need to make the viewers look at them and go "awww". They didn't do that. The death and aftermath were handled perfectly, there's not really anyway you could improve on that.
There was a lot of talk about 30 minutes of cut footage. I remember being confused by this as Nolan said on the Batman Begins DVD that there wouldn't be any deleted scenes or director's cut of his films as he gets all the editing done in the script writing process so the version we're seeing is what he wanted the film to be. It makes sense from a film making perspective, still I hoped that he changed his MO for this film. As epic as it was, I could see him cutting some out in order to shorten the time a bit. It would've been nice if this footage had existed. They could have used it to show Harvey going after other mob bosses besides Moroni. It could have also shown that even after going after Joker, Moroni, and the corrupt cops involved, Dent was still consumed with anger and grief. Bruce called in in Batman Forever when he said that killing someone out of revenge isn't going to make the pain go away; you would just find another person to go after, and another,and another. It wouldn't have taken much really. Just show Harvey sitting alone in the dark, hugging his knees, watery eyed and seething with anger while Dance of the Seraphim plays in the background. This would've made the attack on Gordon and his family much more logical. I got it, maybe because my brain filled in the blanks. But a lot of people were confused as to why he went after them so quickly.
The best thing they could have done was save Two-Face for the third movie. If they had shuffled things around, you could have had the Joker/Harvey (still with his bandages on) scene be the last we see of him. You could have taken away the "You live, you die" line (though it was a great line) and just had Harvey sitting quietly stewing in anger. Joker leaves, hospital goes boom. Then, when Joker says he kept Harvey as his "ace in the hole" after being captured we cut to the bar where the corrupt cop says "Jesus, Harvey I thought you were dead". The camera would pan up to show Two-Face when he replied "half". Cut to black, bam there's your hook for Batman 3. I don't know if it would've topped the Joker teaser from Begins but it would've been glorious in its own right.
The third movie could have shown Harvey going after the corrupt cops involved as well as every mob boss as opposed to just the one. You could have featured cameos by the Penguin, Scarface, and Black Mask, Rupert Thorne and other various crime bosses. Harvey would still be the vigilante who crosses the one line Batman won't, you could even have the same final confrontation with Gordon at the end as I thought it was an extremely powerful scene with strong performances from everyone involved. Heck, you could use the whole ending to Dark Knight as it would act as a good ending to the trilogy. We viewers would know that Batman will keep fighting even though he is an outcast.
This was a great take on the Harvey/Two-Face character but there was still room for improvement. It's unfortunate as there was potential for it to be even more than it was. As Nolan has come out and said that Dent is dead, and even Eckhart says that he's either dead or in a coma, we probably won't see Two-Face again in this franchise.
I said in an earlier article that the Harvey Dent we see in The Dark Knight is the best one to come to the big screen. This is true. However, there are ways that it could have been made even better.
I read Eye of the Beholder and saw the 2 part origin episode in Batman: The Animated Series, both were great and are neck and neck for the definitive Two-Face origin story. I know that in order for the transformation to make any sense, Harvey needs to be riddled with psychological and emotional issues. Whether it be in the form of an alternate personality or just a dark side, there needs to be a monster lurking beneath the surface of Harvey's psyche.
That being said, I was really happy with this issue free Harvey. The problem with the emotional issues is that they make him a time bomb. It suggests that no matter what happened, Harvey was going to fall. Nolan plays up the crusader for justice and takes away the dark past. There is the one line about his father's lucky coin, however like Ra's Al Ghul's line about being immortal, this is a line that is simply meant to be a wink to the fans of the comics and doesn't really have any weight behind it. Seeing an emotionally conflicted Harvey can, and has been, done very well. But when I say "I believe in Harvey Dent", this is the one I'm talking about.
The biggest mistake made was that they didn't sell the love. I'm OK with a psychologically sound Harvey Dent, but if you're going to make the basis for his downfall the loss of his girlfriend you really have to sell it. There was a lot of talk about the love, but aside from a passing reference to an engagement they come off as really good friends who flirt a little. This could be in part to Rachel's feelings for Bruce and Eckhart plays the type of guy you could see Rachel falling for perfectly, still there didn't seem to be any clicking. Even if it gets sappy, you need to make the viewers look at them and go "awww". They didn't do that. The death and aftermath were handled perfectly, there's not really anyway you could improve on that.
There was a lot of talk about 30 minutes of cut footage. I remember being confused by this as Nolan said on the Batman Begins DVD that there wouldn't be any deleted scenes or director's cut of his films as he gets all the editing done in the script writing process so the version we're seeing is what he wanted the film to be. It makes sense from a film making perspective, still I hoped that he changed his MO for this film. As epic as it was, I could see him cutting some out in order to shorten the time a bit. It would've been nice if this footage had existed. They could have used it to show Harvey going after other mob bosses besides Moroni. It could have also shown that even after going after Joker, Moroni, and the corrupt cops involved, Dent was still consumed with anger and grief. Bruce called in in Batman Forever when he said that killing someone out of revenge isn't going to make the pain go away; you would just find another person to go after, and another,and another. It wouldn't have taken much really. Just show Harvey sitting alone in the dark, hugging his knees, watery eyed and seething with anger while Dance of the Seraphim plays in the background. This would've made the attack on Gordon and his family much more logical. I got it, maybe because my brain filled in the blanks. But a lot of people were confused as to why he went after them so quickly.
The best thing they could have done was save Two-Face for the third movie. If they had shuffled things around, you could have had the Joker/Harvey (still with his bandages on) scene be the last we see of him. You could have taken away the "You live, you die" line (though it was a great line) and just had Harvey sitting quietly stewing in anger. Joker leaves, hospital goes boom. Then, when Joker says he kept Harvey as his "ace in the hole" after being captured we cut to the bar where the corrupt cop says "Jesus, Harvey I thought you were dead". The camera would pan up to show Two-Face when he replied "half". Cut to black, bam there's your hook for Batman 3. I don't know if it would've topped the Joker teaser from Begins but it would've been glorious in its own right.
The third movie could have shown Harvey going after the corrupt cops involved as well as every mob boss as opposed to just the one. You could have featured cameos by the Penguin, Scarface, and Black Mask, Rupert Thorne and other various crime bosses. Harvey would still be the vigilante who crosses the one line Batman won't, you could even have the same final confrontation with Gordon at the end as I thought it was an extremely powerful scene with strong performances from everyone involved. Heck, you could use the whole ending to Dark Knight as it would act as a good ending to the trilogy. We viewers would know that Batman will keep fighting even though he is an outcast.
This was a great take on the Harvey/Two-Face character but there was still room for improvement. It's unfortunate as there was potential for it to be even more than it was. As Nolan has come out and said that Dent is dead, and even Eckhart says that he's either dead or in a coma, we probably won't see Two-Face again in this franchise.
Sunday, September 21, 2014
Thinner
This movie is an adaptation of the Richard Bachman novel of the same name. As far as sticking to the book, it does a good job, but with that being said, it's still a pretty bad movie.
The first thing you'll notice is that the makeup effects aren't all that good. The "fat" effects used on Robert John Burke, who plays Billy Halleck, our "hero", are rather blatantly fake. I know, it's unhealthy to have an actor legitimately gain and then lose such a drastic amount of weight, but the make up and suits to make the cast of Friends looked much better and that was with the budget of a sitcom.
The plot follows the aforementioned Billy Halleck, an overweight lawyer who has recently successfully acquitted a crime boss (played by Joe Mantegna). Meanwhile, his family expresses great concern for his health and insist on putting him on a strict diet.
After a celebratory dinner, his wife decides to get a little frisky on the ride home. Suffice it to say, Billy gets a bit distracted and doesn't notice when an old gypsy woman bolts in front of the car. He makes a last ditch effort to slam on the brakes, but it's too late. She gets decked by the car and dies.
Billy pulls some strings and he gets off without any charge whatsoever. The gypsies aren't too happy about this, and in true gypsy fashion, they put a curse on him. They really don't mess around when it comes to curses do they? I mean, they cursed Angel and this guy (those were justified as it was payback for another death). I guess it beats being condemned for simply denying a gypsy a bank loan.
By merely touching his cheek and uttering the word, "thinner" Billy finds himself in a losing race with a deteriorating physique. No matter how much he eats, he finds that he's shedding pounds off on a daily basis.
Given the situation, you would think that this would make for a thought provoking film. I mean, neither side was really in the wrong. The gypsy woman's death really was an accident (not to mention that she does take some share of the blame, bolting out into the road without really looking) and you would think that the loss would evoke some sympathy for the family. While both sides are presented equally, it's only in the sense that they both suck.
The lawyer's a sleazy schmuck and the gypsies come off like a bunch of deranged a-holes. By the end of the movie, you'll find yourself hating all of them. Even minor characters end up proving themselves either racist or misogynistic. If you're the type of movie goer who likes having a likable character to relate to, you're not gonna find it here. The closest you're going to get is the daughter, and she isn't really in the movie all that much.
The only strong performance comes from Mantegna, who usually does do good work, but even he gets saddled with some awful dialogue. The closest this movie comes to a crowning moment of awesome is when Billy sicks Mantegna's character on the gypsy camp and he unleashes hell.
Of course, the gypsies act all shocked and mortified at the attack. Billy flat out told you that unless you took the curse off that he was going to make you pay and you laugh at him, and then proceed to maim him. OK, they couldn't have known of his mob connections, but did they really think he was going to take that sitting down?
The performances are sub-par, the script is weak, and the characters aren't sympathetic. The score isn't bad though; there were some scenes where it really carried the drama of the various confrontations between characters and it was actually pretty effective. Beyond that, this movie just isn't very good. I wouldn't recommend it.
So, what's the moral of the story? You may be asking yourself...umm..don't mess with gypsies? I don't know.
The Existence of Extra-Terrestrials
*Originally published on 6/29/09
Since the dawn of time, man has looked up at the stars and wondered whether or not we are alone in the universe. The possibility of life on other alien worlds has been fodder for fiction for decades. Whether it be in short stories, novels, movies, or comics, the idea of coming in contact alien life is a fascinating one. Oddly enough, whenever somebody comes forward and says that they either saw an alien craft in the sky or that they were abducted, he or she is immediately laughed at and dismissed.
Why? Is it really that far-fetched? Skeptics are quick to make their case that life doesn't exist on other planets, but when given some thought, the idea that we're alone is almost stupid. The universe is a vast, vast place. Our galaxy alone is home to millions of stars and there are tons of galaxies outside that and even past the ones we know. With all those stars, and all those systems, and all those planets, is it really that ridiculous to say that life spawned on another one? If you want to make the argument that alien life exists, but they're not visiting us, I can understand that. The closest star to ours is about four light years away so space travel is a difficult task to undergo. Even taking this into account, people who claim to have seen something in the sky or come into contact with extra-terrestrials shouldn't so quickly be dismissed. I'll grant you, many are loons, but there are a few encounters that aren't so easily explained.
One thing I never understood is how some planets are dismissed because their environment couldn't support life. Couldn't life adapt to whatever situations the planet has? I mean, the deep ocean shouldn't be able to support life because of the insane amounts of pressure, lack of light etc, yet there are some creatures that thrive down there, really weird looking ones too.
I think it's just important to keep an open mind. I'm not saying that we should all go the way of Fox Mulder and believe in some vast government conspiracy to hide the truth. There is, however, quite a bit of evidence to support the idea of alien life.
You know what I never understood? The military insists that there is no Area 51, not even a base to speak of. Yet, those who do drive out there are met with soldiers who insist that you turn around. If there's no base, then let the people drive. You can deny the existence of a crashed vessel and admit that a military installation is there. I don't see what the big deal with that is. Telling us that there is no base, but that we can't drive past due to military regulations is nonsensical.
The government conspiracy angle never made much sense either. Oh, it's entertaining to hear some of the theories that people come up with, and the government is known to keep us in the dark about a lot, but why hide the existence of alien life? Men in Black gave a pretty reasoned argument why people NEED to be kept in the dark, but I'm not so sure I agree. As long as people are presented with the information calmly and rationally, I'm sure the general public can handle such a revelation. There will be a few people who can't, I'm sure, but overall I don't see anyone really freaking out over the idea. It would take some getting used to, especially if we remain in constant contact with the alien race, but given enough time things would work out.
I for one, hope to see the day we make contact with life outside our solar system, unless they're invading. In that case, I want the day to be very far away and occur long after I'm gone.
Since the dawn of time, man has looked up at the stars and wondered whether or not we are alone in the universe. The possibility of life on other alien worlds has been fodder for fiction for decades. Whether it be in short stories, novels, movies, or comics, the idea of coming in contact alien life is a fascinating one. Oddly enough, whenever somebody comes forward and says that they either saw an alien craft in the sky or that they were abducted, he or she is immediately laughed at and dismissed.
Why? Is it really that far-fetched? Skeptics are quick to make their case that life doesn't exist on other planets, but when given some thought, the idea that we're alone is almost stupid. The universe is a vast, vast place. Our galaxy alone is home to millions of stars and there are tons of galaxies outside that and even past the ones we know. With all those stars, and all those systems, and all those planets, is it really that ridiculous to say that life spawned on another one? If you want to make the argument that alien life exists, but they're not visiting us, I can understand that. The closest star to ours is about four light years away so space travel is a difficult task to undergo. Even taking this into account, people who claim to have seen something in the sky or come into contact with extra-terrestrials shouldn't so quickly be dismissed. I'll grant you, many are loons, but there are a few encounters that aren't so easily explained.
One thing I never understood is how some planets are dismissed because their environment couldn't support life. Couldn't life adapt to whatever situations the planet has? I mean, the deep ocean shouldn't be able to support life because of the insane amounts of pressure, lack of light etc, yet there are some creatures that thrive down there, really weird looking ones too.
I think it's just important to keep an open mind. I'm not saying that we should all go the way of Fox Mulder and believe in some vast government conspiracy to hide the truth. There is, however, quite a bit of evidence to support the idea of alien life.
You know what I never understood? The military insists that there is no Area 51, not even a base to speak of. Yet, those who do drive out there are met with soldiers who insist that you turn around. If there's no base, then let the people drive. You can deny the existence of a crashed vessel and admit that a military installation is there. I don't see what the big deal with that is. Telling us that there is no base, but that we can't drive past due to military regulations is nonsensical.
The government conspiracy angle never made much sense either. Oh, it's entertaining to hear some of the theories that people come up with, and the government is known to keep us in the dark about a lot, but why hide the existence of alien life? Men in Black gave a pretty reasoned argument why people NEED to be kept in the dark, but I'm not so sure I agree. As long as people are presented with the information calmly and rationally, I'm sure the general public can handle such a revelation. There will be a few people who can't, I'm sure, but overall I don't see anyone really freaking out over the idea. It would take some getting used to, especially if we remain in constant contact with the alien race, but given enough time things would work out.
I for one, hope to see the day we make contact with life outside our solar system, unless they're invading. In that case, I want the day to be very far away and occur long after I'm gone.
The Fall of the Crimson King
When the Crimson King was first introduced, readers were given the impression that he was an almost omnipotent agent of evil. He was so powerful that even Randall Flagg, the primary villain in King's epic The Stand, was a subordinate.
The buildup was really well done. The way they talked about him in Insomnia and Black House, our intrepid heroes were up against astronomical odds. This was going to be a battle of epic proportions where reality, all realities, hung in the balance. One lone gunslinger vs. a Satan like entity, going mono e mono at the edge of the universe; it was going to be so cool.
Yet, when the climax came, the Crimson King was reduced to a cranky old man throwing grenades from a balcony. In an anticlimax that puts even Super Shredder to shame, the Crimson King is literally erased by a magic artist. What happened!?
In Black House, Speedy tells Jack Sawyer that a head on assault of the Crimson King would be stupid and that they wouldn't stand a chance. He goes on to say that Roland and his Ka-tet are doing most of the work, but Jack's job is to provide some back up by destroying the King's huge psychic machine thingy.
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure Jack could handle a crazy guy on a balcony. Then again, there is the chance that the old man was just a representation and not the King's true form. It wouldn't be the first time a powerful entity took on simpler shapes. Pennywise was a shape shifter and even the spider was just an image that our mind could comprehend as opposed to its true appearance. An entity willing to topple the nexus of the universe would have to be insane, so maybe, despite everything, he was still the Satanic entity that he was originally built up as.
The common theory is that the machine that Jack destroyed fueled the King's power, much like the slime was Vigo's power source in Ghostbusters II. This is a distinct possibility, nothing was said of it in the Dark Tower book, but as that was told, pretty much, from Roland's perspective, there was no way he could know if that had an impact as he had no idea that the machine existed in the first place.
Another idea, posited by King himself, is that this is a statement regarding the nature of evil. It talks big, but is ultimately little more than whining and throwing things. This may have worked with a different author or if the series were self contained. However, if everything King has written ties together, we know darn well that evil is quite capable of being a viable threat. I already covered my list of King's top ten villains, but there's a whole schmorgasboard of great villains to choose from, each of them powerful and intimidating in their own unique way. The epic stature of many King villains shows that evil is not something to be trifled with.
The Dark Tower comics have done a pretty good job of restoring the Crimson King to the badass villain that he was supposed to be. He's a puppet master, using those around him to serve his own ends. Even with this, his quick end taints what could've been a great villain legacy.
The buildup was really well done. The way they talked about him in Insomnia and Black House, our intrepid heroes were up against astronomical odds. This was going to be a battle of epic proportions where reality, all realities, hung in the balance. One lone gunslinger vs. a Satan like entity, going mono e mono at the edge of the universe; it was going to be so cool.
Yet, when the climax came, the Crimson King was reduced to a cranky old man throwing grenades from a balcony. In an anticlimax that puts even Super Shredder to shame, the Crimson King is literally erased by a magic artist. What happened!?
In Black House, Speedy tells Jack Sawyer that a head on assault of the Crimson King would be stupid and that they wouldn't stand a chance. He goes on to say that Roland and his Ka-tet are doing most of the work, but Jack's job is to provide some back up by destroying the King's huge psychic machine thingy.
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure Jack could handle a crazy guy on a balcony. Then again, there is the chance that the old man was just a representation and not the King's true form. It wouldn't be the first time a powerful entity took on simpler shapes. Pennywise was a shape shifter and even the spider was just an image that our mind could comprehend as opposed to its true appearance. An entity willing to topple the nexus of the universe would have to be insane, so maybe, despite everything, he was still the Satanic entity that he was originally built up as.
The common theory is that the machine that Jack destroyed fueled the King's power, much like the slime was Vigo's power source in Ghostbusters II. This is a distinct possibility, nothing was said of it in the Dark Tower book, but as that was told, pretty much, from Roland's perspective, there was no way he could know if that had an impact as he had no idea that the machine existed in the first place.
Another idea, posited by King himself, is that this is a statement regarding the nature of evil. It talks big, but is ultimately little more than whining and throwing things. This may have worked with a different author or if the series were self contained. However, if everything King has written ties together, we know darn well that evil is quite capable of being a viable threat. I already covered my list of King's top ten villains, but there's a whole schmorgasboard of great villains to choose from, each of them powerful and intimidating in their own unique way. The epic stature of many King villains shows that evil is not something to be trifled with.
The Dark Tower comics have done a pretty good job of restoring the Crimson King to the badass villain that he was supposed to be. He's a puppet master, using those around him to serve his own ends. Even with this, his quick end taints what could've been a great villain legacy.
Saturday, September 20, 2014
Friday, September 19, 2014
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs
You can read my review here.
Click here to join our Patreon campaign
Pros
- Great use of humor. Practically every joke lands and few, if any, fall flat.
- Great characters that you like and can relate to.
- While being goofy, the movie is still capable of tugging on your heartstrings whether it be through Flint's romance or his struggling relationship with his father.
Cons
- You may not be too crazy about the puns.
Overall
This movie was very entertaining. I really was caught off guard by how good it is. It's cute, sweet, and fun from beginning to end. I highly recommend it.
Click here to join our Patreon campaign
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
The Three Little Pigs if it were written by Shakespeare
In execution, it's more amusing, than flat out awesome. However, I will give points for the sheer concept of it. Taking a fairy tale and going all Shakespeare on it is rather clever.
The Fall of Gozer
I'm a huge Ghostbusters fan. I loved the movies since I was a kid, I watched the cartoon growing up and had several of the toys. I even had Ghostbusters bed sheets. I own the complete series on DVD, and have seen both movies more times than I can count. I bought the Ghostbusters video game and I was a Ghostbuster for Halloween. Were it an actual occupation, I have no doubt that I would be a ghostbuster. Finding out that someone is selling an Ecto-1 replica on eBay vexed me since it was well out of my price range. I know it gets a lot of flak, but I enjoy Ghostbusters 2. It's an over-bashed and under-rated film. I agree, it's not as good as the first one but it is still quite enjoyable in its own right.
One of the problems it had was that the villain was inferior. Sure, Vigo was inspired by and based on Vlad the Impaler, and he was fine as a villain on his own, but it didn't measure up when you consider that the villain in the first movie was Gozer the Gozerian, a Sumerian god who destroyed entire worlds. Gozer didn't have much in the way of screen time, letting the suspense build up to the epic confrontation on an apartment high rise. Gozer was an entity of few words, only asking Ray Stantz if he was a god, before blasting our heroes with powerful force lightning. Before the ghostbusters can regroup, she dissipates and challenges the ghostbusters to choose a form. That form is, of course, the now iconic one hundred foot Stay Puft Marshmallow Man.
Sadly, this is where Volguus Zildrohar peaked. Gozer was mentioned a few times on The Real Ghostbusters, but that was usually to say, hey this villain is even more powerful. I'll buy it with an enemy like Cthulu, but they did it several times, giving the statement less and less weight. I also recall reading about one opponent who specifically stated that as far as gods go, Gozer was low on the totem pole. It didn't help matters that the cartoon somehow separated Gozer from the Marshmallow man, somehow making them two separate entities (Stay Puft was a good guy no less).
As I said earlier, I picked up and played through the newly released Ghostbusters: The Video Game. If you haven't played it yet I will be revealing some plot elements so consider this your spoiler warning. The game picks up and elaborates on a lot of elements from the first movie. The Gozerian cult, as well as Ivo Shandor are fleshed out quite a bit and it seems that even the library ghost from the beginning of the movie has a greater link than simply being another ghost who crossed over due to the heightened psychic energy.
It's been known since the game was announced that the early levels have you battling ghosts from the film, Slimer and Stay Puft specifically (Vigo's in the game but he's not one of the bosses as I originally thought he would be).
Unlike the cartoon, which made Stay Puft and Gozer into two separate entities, this time around, Stay Puft is in fact Gozer. You don't see it in the original female form as evidently, it's "locked" into the pre-chosen destructor form Ray picked in the movie. While a few levels are spent chasing the giant, and trying to figure out what he's after, he's beaten rather easily, especially in comparison to some of the other bosses in the game. Even the revealed mastermind states that he was disappointed in the so called destructor god for not living up to the title.
Perhaps I'm making too much of it, putting too much weight behind the word "god". I mean Thor's a god and that didn't stop him from getting smacked around by Hulk in the recently released Hulk Vs. double feature. The video game does show respect to the entity in many ways and Ramis and Aykroyd did a great job fleshing out the cultish elements as well as the back story of the followers.
Having Gozer tied to such a classic film does add a certain standard that was set. It would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to top the original appearance. Still, I can't help but feel that Gozer got kind of shafted as far as villains go.
One of the problems it had was that the villain was inferior. Sure, Vigo was inspired by and based on Vlad the Impaler, and he was fine as a villain on his own, but it didn't measure up when you consider that the villain in the first movie was Gozer the Gozerian, a Sumerian god who destroyed entire worlds. Gozer didn't have much in the way of screen time, letting the suspense build up to the epic confrontation on an apartment high rise. Gozer was an entity of few words, only asking Ray Stantz if he was a god, before blasting our heroes with powerful force lightning. Before the ghostbusters can regroup, she dissipates and challenges the ghostbusters to choose a form. That form is, of course, the now iconic one hundred foot Stay Puft Marshmallow Man.
Sadly, this is where Volguus Zildrohar peaked. Gozer was mentioned a few times on The Real Ghostbusters, but that was usually to say, hey this villain is even more powerful. I'll buy it with an enemy like Cthulu, but they did it several times, giving the statement less and less weight. I also recall reading about one opponent who specifically stated that as far as gods go, Gozer was low on the totem pole. It didn't help matters that the cartoon somehow separated Gozer from the Marshmallow man, somehow making them two separate entities (Stay Puft was a good guy no less).
As I said earlier, I picked up and played through the newly released Ghostbusters: The Video Game. If you haven't played it yet I will be revealing some plot elements so consider this your spoiler warning. The game picks up and elaborates on a lot of elements from the first movie. The Gozerian cult, as well as Ivo Shandor are fleshed out quite a bit and it seems that even the library ghost from the beginning of the movie has a greater link than simply being another ghost who crossed over due to the heightened psychic energy.
It's been known since the game was announced that the early levels have you battling ghosts from the film, Slimer and Stay Puft specifically (Vigo's in the game but he's not one of the bosses as I originally thought he would be).
Unlike the cartoon, which made Stay Puft and Gozer into two separate entities, this time around, Stay Puft is in fact Gozer. You don't see it in the original female form as evidently, it's "locked" into the pre-chosen destructor form Ray picked in the movie. While a few levels are spent chasing the giant, and trying to figure out what he's after, he's beaten rather easily, especially in comparison to some of the other bosses in the game. Even the revealed mastermind states that he was disappointed in the so called destructor god for not living up to the title.
Perhaps I'm making too much of it, putting too much weight behind the word "god". I mean Thor's a god and that didn't stop him from getting smacked around by Hulk in the recently released Hulk Vs. double feature. The video game does show respect to the entity in many ways and Ramis and Aykroyd did a great job fleshing out the cultish elements as well as the back story of the followers.
Having Gozer tied to such a classic film does add a certain standard that was set. It would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to top the original appearance. Still, I can't help but feel that Gozer got kind of shafted as far as villains go.
Rose Red
Part 1
This original tv miniseries focuses on a team of psychics who are assembled by Joyce Reardon to stir the sleeping spirits of a haunted house called Rose Red. Reardon, played by Nancy Travis, is sort of a more realistic portrayal of a pre-Ghostbuster Ghostbuster. She lectures at a university, discussing the more paranormal aspects of psychology and she is mocked by a share of her students as well as the faculty. They look down on her for believing in such wacky things such as ghosts, but she's determined to prove herself.
Part 2
This original tv miniseries focuses on a team of psychics who are assembled by Joyce Reardon to stir the sleeping spirits of a haunted house called Rose Red. Reardon, played by Nancy Travis, is sort of a more realistic portrayal of a pre-Ghostbuster Ghostbuster. She lectures at a university, discussing the more paranormal aspects of psychology and she is mocked by a share of her students as well as the faculty. They look down on her for believing in such wacky things such as ghosts, but she's determined to prove herself.
She pays rather handsomely to assemble her crew too, offering each member $5,000 out of her own pocket to participate in the study. I'd take 5 grand to investigate a haunted house.
There are actually a few nods to Ghostbusters. While no one paints "Burn in Hell Reardon" on her door, someone does leave a card on her door as a sign of mockery. A skeptical college reporter also publishes an article titled "Who ya gonna call?". Emery also has a vision that originates from his refrigerator.
Her target, the aforementioned Rose Red is a century old house with a dark and troubled history. Think of it like the Overlook's twin sibling. Like the hotel, it straddles the fine line between "haunted" and "sentient". Also like the Overlook, it feeds on psychic energy. One of the interesting developments is that the house continues to grow. It appears the same on the outside, but the rooms change and more appear as time progresses.
They put together a decent cast, as well as Travis, you have Bones herself Emily Deschanel in a supporting role (it's really weird seeing her as a blonde by the way) as well as the actress who plays Rose on Two and a Half Men (which is oddly fitting). There are also a slew of actors whose names you won't recognize, but whose faces you will. Stephen King even makes a quick cameo as a pizza guy.
The acting is passable for the most part, but there are some really bad aspects as well. What is the deal with Emery's face for example? It's annoying. He might've been a somewhat sympathetic character were it not for that goofy expression he has on his face the entire movie. Yeah, he's not likable, but when you see his situation, you understand why he is that way. I mean, good grief.
Speaking of Emery, you'll notice quite a similarity between him and Harold Lauder. I would not be surprised to find out that it was intentional seeing as Harold's middle name was, in fact, Emery.
There's also one particular narmy scene where Travis tells off her boss for being narrow minded and stuck up. She really hams it up and you can't help but laugh a little.
The script is the same, passable, but there are some really bad lines in there as well. One of my roommates hated the movie in general and the other said that it was OK except the script was terrible.
This part is largely exposition. A large portion is spent discussing the history of the house itself as well as somewhat establishing the personalities of each of the psychics. The team doesn't even really make it to the house until the latter half of this portion of the miniseries.
The first real activity we see from Rose Red comes when a reporter sneaks into the house ahead of the team and is attacked by a swarm of bees.
Bees. My God.
The makeup effects are pretty subpar as well. A good chunk of the "monsters" look like people wearing Halloween masks.
It does the creepy thing pretty well. It's nothing you haven't seen in other haunted house faire, but it's done well enough. The score is effective and it does a decent job of building up suspense at a few points.
Compared to some of the other movies I've reviewed it is good by comparison, but it didn't really impress me all that much. It's not so bad that I suggest avoiding it, but it's not great enough for me to say check it out.
This, of course, only covering the first half of the series. We'll have to wait and see how the series feels after I watch it in its entirety.
Part 2
The second verse is more or less the same as the first in this case. In some ways it's better, but the improvements are negated by enhanced flaws.
One of the good things about this part is that we've moved past all of the over-complicated backstory and are just watching a group of people struggle inside of a haunted house.
The downside is that Emery manages to be even more annoying. Whereas you could feel some sympathy for him in previous parts, it's all but gone as this part goes on. Where the previous part had a small amount of hammy acting, this one ups the ante considerably.
Most of it comes from Nancy Travis, who really overdoes the whole crazy thing.
The woman who plays Emery's mom also amps it up to 11. Watch the scene where she first appears and try not to laugh.
Oh, I should mention that while Wikipedia lists the series as having three parts, I'm reviewing this by the two discs that the series comes on in the DVD. So part 1 is disc 1 (which contains parts 1 and 2 in the series) and disc 2 is part 3.
For as long as this series is, none of the characters seem all that fleshed out. Some are developed well enough, but you never really get a feel for others like Nick or Cathy.
This part was also sorely lacking in Bones' presence.
So, this is a series that's better left on the shelf. If you catch it on the SciFi channel on the weekends and you just feel like lounging around, there are worse movies to spend your time watching, but this didn't really impress me all that much.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)