T.M.E

Video Game Guru: Controversy for the Sake of Attention

2011-11-04T16:26:00.000-07:00

I've been meaning to write an article like this for a while. The reason I've put it off is that there have been countless articles, most of which are very well written, pertaining to this subject. So I thought to myself "What could I possibly add to the already lengthy discussion that has been going on for a number of years?" After some long thoughts I came up with nothing. But I still wanted to give my spin on it, if for no other reason than to get my voice out there and possibly start a discussion. What is the subject you ask?

Video Game Controversy.

As long as I've been alive, the gaming community has been neck deep in controversies. Either they rot your brain, turn you fat, make you kill your parents/classmates, or cause kids to have complete breaks with reality. No matter what the reason, there always seems to BE A REASON not to play video games and/or get them banned entirely. Granted that has shifted more towards getting VIOLENT/SEXUAL video games banned in recent years, but it seems no matter what there will always be a problem with video games. But who is really to blame?

I think that is where this gets hard.

Most of the video game community blames media outlets like Fox News for spreading ignorance when it comes to video games. Whether it's showing stock footage of a non-existent game called "Cop Killer" to pad a story, not doing their research on Mass Effect's ten second no nudity sex scene in the now infamous "Sex Box 360" piece, or bringing on an expert psychologist who claims video games cause rape and sexual deviancy, without any valid sources to back her up, Fox News has become the go to place in the minds of the video game community for spreading video game ignorance.

But that's just one outlet out of many that spread the story that video games are kids toys and need government supervision when it comes to what can and can not be released. We've seen stories all over the globe about how video games have caused everything from massacres to promoting killing/not supporting adopted children (I kid you not). Myself, among many always groan when these stories come on. It's not because there is no validity to their arguments (I'll get to that in a second) but because it seems like nobody outside game journalists bother to do their homework. And why is that?

Just this past week I've seen a story coming out of Australia about a government official who is trying to ban violent/sexual video games in Australia. The story had some interesting points but all of that seemed moot when they showed a seven year old clip of the "Hot Coffee" GTA San Andreas mod and claimed that it was from this generation as well as quickly brushing off the rebuttal to the argument from a video game official and moving back to the original point of banning these games. Do you see something wrong here? Journalism (despite it's numerous shortcomings) is all about trying to provide a fair and balanced story with credible sources that gets both sides of the story equal screen/page time. Denying or simply brushing off the other side doesn't make your story look better, it makes you look scared or uninformed to anyone who is paying attention. You may get some people behind you, especially those who know nothing about video games, but to a journalist/communications major like myself, you look weak. Not only that but if you do have a source (in this case "Hot Coffee"), make sure the source is from the past three years, or at least from this current gaming generation. The "Hot Coffee" mod was a black spot that we all know was bad but we have moved on to bigger and better things and remedied that problem almost as quickly as it popped up.

But are the news outlets the only ones to blame? No. In fact the gaming industry HAS caused some problems the past couple years, and they do nothing but make us look juvenile and as weak as some of these outlets. The mission "No Russian" in Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 is an optional mission in the beginning of the game that has you playing an undercover CIA agent in a Russian terrorist cell with the objective being to kill everyone in the airport, man, woman or child, and then escape. You are given control over your character the entire time and you never actually have to pull the trigger while in the "kill innocents" part of the stage. Without consequence you can just walk through that section of the level and just view the horror that is taking place.

To some this is an emotionally impactful scene and if you are moved by it than by all means, be moved by it, I'm not here to pass judgement on a person's individual taste. But to me, a lot of journalists and a good portion of the general public (including the aforementioned media sources) this seemed like nothing more than shock value or controversy for the sake of attention. Otherwise why would this scene have been leaked early? In a world where even mentioning Fallujah in an interactive form, even for educational purposes, causes the news to explode and grab their pitchforks and torches, do you really think a level in which 90% of it is gunning down random bystanders is appropriate? In games like Saints Row the Third and GTA IV you are given a CHOICE in acting like a morally corrupt douchebag who kills innocents. You never actually have to run around the street with a purple dildo killing grandmothers, it's all your choice. In MW2 it is a mission. Optional yes, but a mission nevertheless.

And besides the "No Russian" mission or the "Hot Coffee" mod, there have been numerous middle fingers to what's good and right put in video games for no other reason than to piss people off. The numerous propaganda games that come out every year, games like Manhunt which, while amusing at first, seem to had been really made only to piss off the overly sensitive, or games like Zog's Revenge in which you play a Neo-Nazi who kills Homosexuals, Jews and African Americans the entire game. These are just a few of the hundreds and hundreds of really crappy, exploitative games that come out that bank their success on creating a stir. Why else would you have a PSA humorously named F.A.G.S?

But why the MW3 logo above? Well it's partially why I picked today to post this article. A recent video was "leaked" (cough released to the media cough) today from Modern Warfare 3. In it (since videos of it will probably be removed soon) a man with a camera is taping his wife and young daughter walking through the streets of London. They are tourists going around looking at all the landmarks and the one they had stopped to notice today was Big Ben. After looking at it briefly the daughter walks forward to chase some birds as a large van pulls up and explodes, killing the little girl as well as the mother and father. I'm reminded of this scene from Homefront (warning...it's graphic)

If you watched this scene you probably had one of two reactions: 1. "Wow that's...messed up." or 2. "Really?" I was actually the former while I was playing it but the more I saw it the more it turned into the latter. The scene was still impactful in it's own way, but it feels a little overboard in the grand scheme of things. No matter what your reaction, one thing this scene DIDN'T Do was cause a big stir. And why is that? Because this scene was trying to convey emotion and get you into the mindset of what's happening during that time. It wasn't done for shock value. And it certainly wasn't leaked early to the media to get attention.

But MW3's scene IS shock value. What's the difference besides the leaking early? Well this scene seems too forced to be of any real emotional value. The explosion is sudden and that freaked me out the first time I heard it, but they might as well have been singing "I love to be alive" or "Kumbaya." The emotions seemed forced and in some ways it seems like they were using the little girl as the bait (aka the one who runs right next to the bomb) because of the wonderful Dead Island trailer from earlier this year. People get emotional over dead little girls. And in some ways I can't blame Infinity Ward and Activision. But at the same time don't try to force a scene down are throats. Even more than that don't force a scene that feigns emotional depth down our throats but first release it for the world to see the week before your game comes out. Now we all know about it and the scene will seem like nothing in the bigger picture. So then why put it in?

So who is really to blame? The outlets for spreading ignorance or companies spreading controversy only to get attention? Or is it something else entirely? What controversies have stuck with you or stand out? Is this an argument even worth having? I would really love to get people involved in this discussion. So leave your thoughts below in the comments and we can get this thing going.

Comic Noob Review: Avengers Solo #1

2011-11-04T14:48:00.000-07:00

I haven't been reading that many Marvel comics lately. Besides Ultimate Spider-Man, I've kind of avoided the Marvel Universe like the plague. It's not because I don't like Marvel, in fact I like some Marvel characters more than most of the DCU, it's just new readers seem to get left in the dust for the most part. Besides a few choice series (the current X-Men/Punisher/Avengers Academy reboots) most of the comics are 20-30 issues in (some are even 500-700 issues in) and really hard to get into if you haven't been reading for multiple years. Luckily though there are a few new series and today at my local shop I picked up Avengers Solo #1.

Solo is a Limited Series (Mini-series) that, from what I can guess from reading issue #1, features a different Avenger each issue. In issue #1 it focuses on Hawkeye, a fan favorite among comic lovers, but relatively unknown to the general public unless you had him pointed out to you during his cameo in the Thor movie. I love Hawkeye honestly. He's quick witted and even quicker with a bow and can play serious almost as good as he can funny. And since I can't for the life of me find any copies of any issue of Ultimate Hawkeye, this is a great place to go if you are a fan of Hawkeye.

Plot-In the opener to this six issue Limited Series, Hawkeye gets neck deep in a conspiracy after saving a man from a robot superhuman. The man is looking for his sister, who seems to be at the heart of this whole mess and asks for Hawkeye's help in finding her. Things go south quickly when the man is found dead with an arrow reading "Avenge This" lodged in his heart and soon Hawkeye realizes that this whole thing is much bigger than he had anticipated.
Writing-You get your money's worth with this comic. It's dense with dialogue and narration and the majority of it is quite good. Some of the writing gets muddled around the middle when they try going in deeper with the conspiracy, but this seems like an issue that will get ironed out as the comic goes on. Hawkeye plays it really straight in this issue, which is something I appreciate (seeing him in full detective mode) but it may turn off some fans who love his witty banter.
Art-The art is...well it does it's job. It's not pretty but it's not grimy and the characters all look well enough. No weird bugging eyes, overly dark lines or anything weird like that. But nothing really pops. My one big issue is with the robots though. They look too alike. In fact I couldn't tell which one he was fighting until the other one showed up and identified himself as the other one. That DID bother me.

Pros-Good writing, nice to see Hawkeye get a great starring role, has potential to be a very good limited series.
Cons-Some confusing plot threads, mediocre art, hard to differentiate between villains, worried it might need more than six issues with a story this deep.
Worth coming back for another issue-Oh yeah for sure. The writing alone can more than make up for some mediocre art.

Overall-Recommended. If you love Hawkeye, or are looking to jump into a new series, I suggest giving this one a look. You could do a LOT worse.

Van Meter has created a solid beginning and I look forward to reading the next issue. Recommended for any fan of Hawkeye.

You don't want to be trapped inside with me sunshine. Inside, I'm somebody nobody wants to f**k with do you understand? I am Charlie Bronson, I am Britain's most violent prisoner.

2011-10-15T01:33:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Nicolas Winding Refn is an amazing director. This was proven to me two years ago when I watched the Pusher films (good films if you ever get a chance to watch them) and it was again proven to me earlier this year with Drive (my pick for Best Film of 2011). But now having watched Bronson, a film I've rented through Netflix a few times but never actually watched but have been meaning to, I can easily say that Refn knows exactly what he's doing behind a camera and he is brilliant at that. His use of colors (which is especially interesting since he is colorblind), the way he sets up the camera and plays with different angles he makes any film better.

Then again it helps when you have such an amazing cast, especially Tom Hardy whose career should have skyrocketed after this film was release. Granted most people know him now from his work in Inception and the Warrior (as well as the upcoming Batman film) but Hardy has been around for a while and this film, much like Hardy, flew under the radar with barely a peep...at least in America. I'm willing to bet there has been some definite controversy in Britain and other countries, or at least you'd think considering this is a film about "Britain's most violent prisoner." But what do I know? All I know is Bronson is one twistedly funny and dark film that could very well be called the Clockwork Orange of the 21st century.

The film is the semi biographical story of Michael Peterson who has become better known by his fighting name "Charlie Bronson" which he got from the famous action star Charles Bronson. He had a fairly normal upbringing but liked to fight. He'd fight in school, he'd fight in the street and got in trouble with the law a few times. But fighting isn't really a bad thing from where he's from. So eventually he gets a job, settles down and has a kid. But as a man who loves to fight and loves the attention he gets from fighting, he decides to up his game and rob a post office. This lands him in jail and once there he decides he wants to become famous. But not famous for nothing....no, he wants to be known as the most violent and dangerous prisoner Britain has ever seen. So every chance he gets he fights the guards. He fights and fights and fights. He's obviously bonkers but he's almost so bonkers he's sane. He's like Batman's Joker in a lot of ways: crazy but fascinatingly sane about the whole thing.

The whole story is told from Bronson's perspective, with Bronson narrating the whole thing in two different settings. In one setting he is just standing in a dark room with a light and the other is a full on stage production. I was never sure if this was real or all in his mind but it was fascinating how it would switch back and forth between the different settings. The film keeps you on your toes. Just when you think you are going to get settled in, it turns on you and switches directions. In a way this could be bad for some because it does jump around a lot, but for me it kept things interesting and I was engaged from beginning to end. It also helps the film is as funny as it is serious so for every serious moment you get a funny moment and vice versa. Very clever writing there.

Besides the direction, probably the best thing about this film is Tom Hardy. He IS Bronson. Every nuance, every twitch, every mannerism, he has it in spades. One minute he is a violent lunatic, next he is a quiet reserved man and then boom he comes out and he is a clever, sarcastic dry witted man with plenty of jokes. Hardy's almost schizophrenic approach to Bronson only helps make the character more dynamic and you root for him, even though he is doing terrible things and is obviously out of his mind. Hardy's Bronson is never boring and if you remember one thing about this movie, you'll remember him. The rest of the acting is fine but is engulfed by Hardy. Even if the scene belongs to someone else he somehow steals the show without even having to blink an eye. His being there is enough to steal the show. That's REAL charisma.

On a side note I have to point out that the soundtrack and score to the film is amazing. Almost as amazing as this guy's dancing:

Bronson is definitely a polarizing film and I can understand it may be a little too out there or extreme for some but I absolutely loved Bronson. Hardy is fantastic, Refn is an amazing director, the music is great, and I loved everything about this movie. Is it perfect? No but it's definitely one everyone should check out.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT

Weekly TV Wrap Up for the Week of 10/2-10/9

2011-10-14T23:50:00.000-07:00

Hey everyone and welcome to yet another new addition to the blog: the Weekly TV Wrap Up. This post is inspired by Rachel over at Rachel's Reel Reviews who every week would put up her thoughts on a few shows that she watched every week. I haven't seen her do it in a while (it's a feature I miss) but it's inspired me to do a post like it myself every week. Since I don't watch anything on Fridays I figured today would be an appropriate day to post this.

As for the format I plan on doing one or two shows Sun-Thurs depending on what I watch that night. Usually I'll stick with the same shows and if I watch/buy a season of a show I'll do a quick review but if a new show catches my eye I will add it to the list. Subsequently if a show gets cancelled or becomes unwatchable I will remove it from my weekly coverage.

The review/recap of the show will be as short and sweet as possible and I'll try to leave out major spoilers or twists if there are any (I mean I'll talk about the general plot of the episode but like stuff that makes you go OH I'll leave out). This week may be slightly longer since it's an intro though (just a warning).

So without further ado...

Sunday:
DEXTER-

We are now into week two of Dexter (don't worry I'll give a quick recap of the events of the first episode) and this season is setting up to be a season of change. Not only physically but mentally and philosophically as well. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is yet to be determined but I'm optimistic that Mr. Hall and co will put on a great show no matter what.

For those of you who don't watch Dexter do so now you'll thank me later. But the short and sweet is Dexter is a lab geek for the Miami Metro PD who works with his foul mouthed half sister Deb, a detective. His adoptive father (Deb's dad) Harry was a decorated police officer and highly regarded among the higher ups but he died when Dexter was in his early twenties(?). The catch of the show is Dexter moonlights as a serial killer who kills criminals and he does this because when he was a toddler his mom was chainsawed in front of him and it "broke him." Harry was the responding officer and adopted him as his own son and when he saw Dexter had homicidal tendencies because of his trauma, Harry trained him to kill killers and follow a set of "rules" to not get caught. That's basically the plot.

As for the first episode of Season 6 we see immediately what the overarching theme is: "faith." Dexter has never really been a religious man, but now that his son Harrison is growing up, he thinks Harrison should have the option to choose whether he wants to believe in a god or not. This opens doors for Dexter to explore his fascination with religion. Meanwhile a student-teacher duo of serial killers are killing victims and using religious symbolism in their methods (carving Alpha & Omega into a snake filled chest cavity) and a reformed gangster who now uses God to help other criminals piques Dexter's interests.

In the second episode we see Deb get promoted to Lieutenant, a position that the now Captain LaGuerta (who is in full bitch mode this season) thought would go to Batista, who had been working as active Lieutenant. Batista takes it in stride, almost like "If I don't get the job, she should" but LaGuerta flips out and vows to get her booted. Deb spends most of the episode trying to process this new job, as well a proposal from Quinn, who gets pissy when she denies him. While all this is happening Dexter starts to track his next victim named Brother Sam, a former criminal who murdered a man but has since turned to God and became a preacher/mechanic who spends his nights helping criminals get back on their feet and turn away from a life of crime. Dexter becomes fascinated with him and decides he's worth keeping around.

The episode itself, as well as the previous episode are both good examples of the Dexter formula. They are well written, funny, entertaining and Michael C Hall is great at his job. The problem with that is because of events on previous seasons of Dexter, unless you are doing wild and crazy things during the episode it will tend to feel a little SOS. That doesn't mean it's bad, just familiar. Yes snakes coming out of a man's chest is gross and out there but Dexter (the show) has done much more. That and because of Jordan Chase and Trinity, the two villains this season seem a little one note so far and aren't really that interesting. But I'm not going to be pessimistic about it, it's still one of the best shows on television and if you aren't watching it, you should be.

Monday:
CASTLE-

The police procedural genre, whether serious or comedy, is a genre that has been done to death. Usually if you want my time and ad money, your show needs an edge. Even if it's not the most original edge, it needs something keeping it from being the norm that we've seen over the years. The NCIS's have the military, Bones has...bones, Psych has a fake psychic, the list goes on. So what is Castle's edge? Well it has two: Nathan Fillion and the writer angle. Nathan Fillion, for those who don't know, is an internet and nerd/geek icon. His work on Firefly, Doctor Horrible and Slither (to name a few) have given him a large and loyal fan base and his inclusion in Halo and his work with comics have only helped him become one of the must watch actors for people like me. The writer angle is a modified form of the "consultant cop" angle except this time the consultant is a mystery writer who knows how a criminals mind work. Add in the fact the show is mostly lighthearted and the crimes tend to veer towards the strange and you have a show that is well into it's fourth season and, minor ratings hiccups aside, seems to still be going strong.

This episode dealt with a previous killer introduced in the last season, the 3XK Killer. He escaped police custody in front of Castle (Fillion's characters name) and has been on the run. Like Beckett (Stana Katic...the female in the poster) and her mother's murder case, the 3XK killer is the case that has been haunting Castle for over a year and in this episode, a piece of evidence triggers memories of that night.

A woman is shot and buried in cement at a construction site. The gun she was shot with belongs to Detective Ryan (another main character) but that particular gun was stolen by 3XK when he escaped so somehow he must have gotten rid of/sold it to someone else so it could be used for another crime. This bothers Ryan and he decides to take the initiative to track down this killer, even if it means him getting taken off the case.

It's a fantastic episode, although for new viewers they will probably be lost. It's nice to see Ryan get some more screen time and more than that actually be a tough as nails cop. Seamus Dever (Ryan) has a great emotional range and it's nice to see the writers noticing that too. The twist is slightly predictable and it happens a little too late in the episode for me but it's still one of the best episodes I've seen in a while and you should check it out.

TUESDAY:
NEW GIRL/RAISING HOPE-
Usually I would put the combo New Girl/Raising Hope here but both shows will be off till November thanks to baseball and The X Factor so I'll keep my thoughts on that show quiet until later.

Next up...

UNFORGETTABLE-

When this show was just known as "The Rememberer (I kid you not)" I wrote this show off as another one and done cop show that wouldn't make it past 13 episodes. But then it changed to Unforgettable and I read more into the premise of the show and I was actually intrigued, or at least intrigued enough to watch the pilot. And once I heard it got solid ratings I figured it was safe to watch it on a weekly basis (I hate getting into a show only for it to be yanked out from under me.

The story follows Detective Carrie Welles (Poppy Montgomery), who suffers from Hyperthymesia, which means that it is impossible for her to forget anything. That is both a blessing and a curse for her as she uses it to solve murders but at the same time has to live with the image of her dead sister for the rest of her life. Usually the cases have very obscure clues (or in the case of this episode, no crime scene) and she uses her Hyperthymesia to find clues and recreate the events in her mind. Her partner also happens to be her ex (played by Dylan Walsh) which causes some rough patches every now and again.

In this episode a man is shot but Carrie only gets 28 seconds to see the crime scene before it blows up destroying any and all evidence. Now Carrie has to use her memory of the crime scene to find clues and figure out who the killer is. It's a pretty standard cop procedural episode when you get down to it so nothing too special, but the added element of no crime scene, and the ultimate outcome of the case are a nice surprise and it was a decent episode for the series.

WEDNESDAY:
HAPPY ENDINGS-

Remember Friends? Well ever since Friends went off the air, every network has tried to recreate Friends in some form or another in hopes that it will become a ratings juggernaut too. Happy Endings follows that same formula but it's added enough spiciness to that formula to make it interesting.

The story follows six friends all trying to make a living in Chicago. There is Dave, a food truck owner who is the realist of the group. Max, Dave's gay roommate and best friend who is the snarky sarcastic one of the group. Alex, a clothes store owner and the dumb blonde of the group. Jane, Alex's sister and the neurotic mom type of the group. Penny, the free spirit and always happy one of the group. And finally there is Brad, business man, token black character, Jane's husband and the funny one of the group.

The edge of this show comes from not only the characters but the now famous opening scene of the series in which Dave and Alex are going to get marred, only for a guy named Bo to run in and take Alex away leaving Dave alone at the altar. This sets up the overarching plot of Alex and Dave trying to reconcile/stay friends while slightly holding a flame for each other.

Here's a promo:

As for this episode Penny's mom returns (played by Megan Mullally from Will and Grace) to do a singing gig while Dave discovers his inner Navajo and Jane and Brad use their new skills from improv class to help Max earn some money. It's a funny episode although loses steam halfway through. Mullally is always a treat and the last scene with Penny and Penny's mom singing at a boat show was hilarious but it wasn't one of the best episodes the show has ever done.

Next up...
REVENGE-

I first found out about this show while sitting through my movie theater's "The Twenty." It claims to be a take on "The Count of Monte Cristo" but in the Hamptons and with more attractive people. The premise didn't grab me but I did like Emily VanCamp from Everwood and Brothers and Sisters so I figured I'd give it a shot. I'm glad I did because it is a surprisingly good show and one of my favorite new shows of the year.

The story follows Emily Thorne, an extremely wealthy young lady who has just moved to the Hamptons with one goal in mind: revenge. When she was young her father was accused of being a terrorist who caused multiple deaths but the people who were really behind it got away with it by using him as a scapegoat. They ruined his reputation, left him in prison to die, and threw Emily in a mental hospital till she was 18. When she got out a billionaire techie and friend of Emily's father gave her a box with all the proof she needed that he was innocent and after a few years of building a new life (she WAS named Amanda) she returns to her old home in the Hamptons and plans on ruining the lives of everyone who wronged her.

In this episode the psychiatrist who kept her in the mental hospital until she was 18 is having a benefit thrown in her honor. Besides locking her up for all those years, she also was paid off by the head of the conspiracy against Emily's father to make sure she stayed in the hospital all those years. So now Emily is going to use all the dirty laundry she can find to ruin that woman's career. On top of all this her "boyfriend" (she's sleeping with the queen bee's son to get closer to her) is getting tricked by his roommate from Harvard who is trying to get Emily out of the picture. It's a fantastic episode and if you aren't watching this show you should be.

And just because I need an excuse to talk about it and it happens to be on Wednesday, let's talk about this show...
AMERICAN HORROR STORY-

Oh boy this show....I'm not sure whether I hate it or love it to be completely honest. I'm cautiously optimistic because it's FX and it's Ryan Murphy, but the show is so goddamn weird that it's hard to really enjoy it.

The show follows a family as they move cross country to a mansion in the forest. It's near the city and it's not a bad location but the house and it's neighbors are creepy. Apparently anyone who has lived there, save for one man, has died. Murdered actually. But why move there then? Because they have to. The husband (Dylan McDermott) cheated on his wife (Connie Britton) with one of his students (he's a pysch professor I believe) and the wife had a miscarriage. So needless to say the house held some bad memories. So they take their daughter (Taissa Farmiga...Vera's daughter) and move into the death house, despite a creepy lady sneaking in and proclaiming death upon them, a nosy neighbor, a gimp who enjoys rape, evil twin ghosts and a boy who may or may not be Cthulhu incarnate. Yeah...not a normal show.

I haven't watched the second episode yet (DVR glitch) but the pilot is a dandy of a doozy. Basically everything I mentioned happens in the first episode but with jars of aborted fetuses, an undead maid, a burned man's warning of death and bullying at the daughter's school. Yeah it's a doozy. I'll keep watching but wow...whew.

THURSDAY:
THE LEAGUE-

The League is one of those rare shows where you don't have to have watched any previous episodes or seasons to get what's going on. It's a show about a group of friends and their fantasy football league. That's all you need to know. And it is funny. Is it the best show on TV? No, but it's entertaining and accessible enough that I'd recommend it to anyone who likes raunchy comedies or fantasy football.

In this episode, it's the week after the draft and nobody is happy with their picks. But nobody will trade because they are all paranoid. Well thanks to the quick thinking of one of them, they are able to come to a deal, until a secret comes out and ruins the deal for everyone. For the most part it's a funny episode (some dry parts here and there) and if you like the genre you'll love this episode.

Well that's it for this week. Stay tuned next Friday with the newest edition of Weekly TV Wrap Up

All for one and one for all!

2011-10-14T22:48:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Alexandre Dumas probably had no idea when he was writing The Three Musketeers that it would ever be adapted into a film like this. Granted he had no idea what film was in general but you get the idea. Many Musketeer films in the past have tried to emulate the book to a tee, or at the very least stay within a reasonable continuity that could do the book some justice. Paul W.S Anderson saw the book, flipped through a few pages to find a female badass character (it can't be an Anderson film without his wife Milla Jovovich now can it) and then tossed the book behind his shoulder and said "F**k it I'll make it up as I go." Or at least that seems what is most likely considering the new Three Musketeers movie is one of the most ludicrous, stupid, over the top, confusing films that I've seen in a long time and spits...no defecates on Alexandre Dumas' grave. And while there is a lot of negative things to say about the film, honestly I didn't hate it. In fact for all it's stupidity it was at least entertaining and tongue in cheek enough that I could somewhat respect what Anderson was going for here.

The plot follows the three musketeers Athos (Matthew Macfadyen), Porthos (Ray Stevenson) and Aramis (Luke Evans). After a failed mission in which they are betrayed by a freelance assassin named Milady (Jovovich), they are put out of commission and spend most of their time drinking and getting into fights. They seem content with this until a brash, cocky, arrogant son of a musketeer D'Artagnan (Logan Lerman) shows up and causes a fuss, which gets their blood flowing again. Soon after D'Artagnan shows up and starts hanging around the Musketeers, they get knee deep in a conspiracy that is led by Milady and an evil Cardinal (Christoph Waltz) who want an all out war between France and Europe (led by Orlando Bloom) which will ultimately end with the Cardinal somehow becoming the leader of France. Now it's up to the Musketeers and D'Artagnan to stop this before it's too late.

It's actually a fairly straightforward plot and besides Anderson's knack for putting in irritable cliffhangers at the end of all his movies now, the film pretty much resolves itself in its little over 100 minute run time. There isn't too many scenes of pointless dialogue and for the most part the action is always moving. Anderson knows how to make an action movie, even if the movie itself isn't all that great. The writing is littered with one liners that, while cheesy, contain some chuckles and for the most part the film doesn't take itself too seriously. In a lot of ways I look at this film as a satire or an action comedy rather than a straightforward action film. Characters chew the scenery, face palm moments happen once a scene, and I swear some pieces of the film are lifted from other films of its type.

The acting, for the most part is actually quite decent, although it's hammier than a Christmas dinner. You can tell all three of the Musketeers are enjoying themselves and when an actor is having fun, the audience tends to have fun too. You will probably groan a lot (I know I did), but Macfadyen especially knew how to win me over when it mattered. Lerman though is a bit of a weak link as his humor and attitude come off more arrogant and cocky rather than funny. I realize that is the kind of character he is supposed to be, but if I want to punch you repeatedly every time I see your face, you may want to pull it back a little. Also the females, sans Jovovich, are all criminally underwritten and D'Artagnan's love interest Constance comes off as wooden and stilted. Juno Temple tries to liven things up a little as the Queen of France, but doesn't have enough screen time to really accomplish anything.

The villains are a mixed bag of crazy ham but all have this over the top giddiness (at least Bloom and Waltz do) that makes them almost Bond villain esque in nature. Waltz definitely steals the show though with some great near fourth wall breaking moments ("Is this the part where I'm supposed to laugh maniacally and reveal some sort of evil plan to you?") and chews the scenery like its candy. Waltz can out-villain anyone it seems nowadays. Bloom, for the short time he's in the movie, does well but comes off more Ziggy Stardust meets 30s mustache twirling villain rather than actually evil. And Jovovich is Jovovich. Basically imagine Alice from Resident Evil but doing all her stunts in full collared Victorian garb. Silly, but impressive nevertheless.

The action is aplenty in this film with slo-mo fight scenes (a trademark of a Paul W.S. Anderson film), swordplay and explosions/destruction but to Anderson's credit he didn't abuse the slo-mo as much as he has in the past. In fact he has started incorporating a little fast motion too. It's all quite over the top and ludicrous (air ships, automatic cannon guns, flamethrowers) but it's fun and I was certainly entertained. The 3D is impressive too for what it is (really adds to the big sword fights and the slo-mo scenes) but if you have a choice go 2D.

It's nothing like the book, full of ham and cheese, over the top, stupid and features some meh acting, but overall Three Musketeers should be looked at as a comedy, or a guilty pleasure at least. It has plenty of action, everyone is having fun, Waltz is Waltzing the s**t out of his role, and it's so stupid it treads into awesome territory. If you go in with an open mind you might enjoy it, just don't expect an Academy Award winning film.

MY VERDICT: SEE IT

Comic Noob Review: Red Hood and the Outlaws #1

2011-10-14T21:40:00.000-07:00

In DC's new 52 there are seven books dealing with Batpeople of some kind (Man, Wing, Woman, Girl). Besides those seven though there are five that are heavily involved in Bat lore, either featuring a former sidekick (Jason Todd/Red Hood, Dick Greyson/Nightwing) or villains that the Batpeople have faced in the past (Catwoman, Suicide Squad, Birds of Prey). Not only that but most comics in the new 52, or at least from the ones I've read, mention or feature Gotham City and its inhabitants in some form or another. While this bothers some people (I've had a few arguments with people who hate the new direction that DC is taking), I'm actually kind of happy to see so much emphasis put on Gotham. It's a vibrant city with colorful characters, despite being dark and gloomy most of the time.

So what does this have to do with Red Hood and the Outlaws? Well Jason Todd, former Robin turned villain known as Red Hood, is finally getting his own comic. But whether it was because of a lack of outsider based/B sidekick comics or because DC and the writers couldn't trust a Red Hood comic all by itself, he gets stuck with two people who you would probably never expect to see with Red Hood: the Teen Titans own Starfire and Green Arrow's former sidekick turned villain Arsenal. Together they make up the Outlaws, a rag tag group of misfits causing havoc. But is it any good?

Plot-The story begins with Roy Harper (Arsenal) in prison for crimes that are undisclosed. Jason Todd comes in disguised as a priest and with the help of Starfire escapes the prison to a remote beach location with very few people. It is there Jason meets up with Essence, a woman only Jason can see and is given a mission to hunt down the group known as the Untitled. While all this is going on, Starfire and Arsenal have sex.
Writing-The writing is actually a bit of a mixed bag for me. On one hand there are plenty of clever zingers that I've come to enjoy from B-movie action film esque comics (Suicide Squad) but at the same time there is a lot of clunky dialogue and puzzling motivations from characters, especially Starfire. The clunky dialogue mostly comes from Essence's explanation of the mission, which is a lot of talk with very little meaning for people in this first issue (no doubt it will mean more later). Besides Essence's mission explanation, the exchange between Starfire and Arsenal is clunky and is kind of confusing to anyone who knows the characters from the previous continuity. Just take a look:

This is compounded by the fact that Starfire's motivations for everything are quite confusing. She apparently can't see either of them, or at least tell which one is which, but can tell them apart by their smell...sometimes. On top of that her views on sex seem a little warped and her sudden lack of memory of anything she's ever done seems more like a lazy retcon then something that makes sense.

Art-The art is ugly. Well except for a few panels with Starfire (whose breasts change size throughout the comic) but that was probably done more as fan service then a standard that the artists hope to set for the rest of the series. People look dusty, dirty, grimy and the environments all look muddled and even a tropical paradise setting seems dull and uninteresting. Pretty disappointed with the art.

Pros-Some clever one liners, nice to see Red Hood get his own comic, seeing people like Arsenal and Starfire featured is good, Essence and her whole mission seem interesting, intriguing last panel.
Cons-The writing in general, the ugly art, Starfire (just everything about her character).
Is it worth coming back for another issue-Tough to say actually. I'll give it another issue just to see how the current mission turns out but it may not stay on my reading list long.

Overall: Pass...good idea on paper but almost too many problems to warrant reading.

I have an idea for a movie starring me as an action hero

2011-10-12T16:33:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

To my artsy film friends I will deny his very existence but if I'm going to be completely honest I just have to come right out and say it: I like Dax Shepard. I don't know why and really I probably shouldn't but to me he's just one of the funniest people alive. I've seen every film he's in and even if I hate the film, I usually love him in it. So in theory Brother's Justice, a film that's basically an hour and a half of Dax Shepard playing himself trying to sell a film, should be amazing right? Well sadly no. While Brother's Justice is certainly funny in some parts, the overall film breaks the cardinal rule of documentaries, whether they be real or fake: you can't be boring. And for every great, hilarious moment in this film, it's rife with boring, awkward moments that almost made me press fast forward on my remote.

The film, like I briefly mentioned in the intro, is the documented account of Dax Shepard trying to sell a movie pitch called "Brother's Justice" to every major Hollywood studio or executive he happens to have contacts with. The pitch is never fully explained, and seems to change with every time he tells it (in fact at one point he asks for money BEFORE giving the pitch), but the basic idea is that Dax and (insert person here) play martial arts action heroes fighting crime. The people he visit seem interested at first, until Dax reveals he plans on playing the movie straight. For those who don't know that means he wants to do the movie seriously and NOT as a comedy. That doesn't bode well for the people since Dax has, up until that point, always did comedies and had no action movie experience whatsoever. Dax then spends the majority of the film trying to prove the people wrong by reinventing himself as an action hero.

On paper this film sounds funny. In reality, it's spotty. Dax has some great moments of his signature dry humor, especially when he's giving the newly modified pitch or going off on other actor friends, but the rest of the time his humor seems forced, flat or downright cruel. His buddy/producer is actually funnier than Dax most of the time because he isn't trying as hard to be funny. But where the film shines in it's humor is with it's celebrity guests like Tom Arnold, Bradley Cooper, Dave Koechner and Ashton Kutcher. Each play themselves, only totally exaggerated. You can tell they love to let loose like this and some of the improv between them, especially Tom Arnold and Dax, is fantastic. It almost makes up for a lot of the mistakes.

The film is fairly quick and only drags in some of the unfunny parts of the film. You can tell Dax was trying for the throw jokes against a wall and see what sticks method and the pacing of the film tends to lend itself to the humor more often than not. One thing I'll say though, if you don't like the film itself, the mock films that he does throughout the film are flat out hilarious and are worth watching if nothing else. Think Simple Jack from Tropic Thunder.

If you like Dax Shepard or any of the aforementioned buddies that show up in the film or if you like to see a little insight into how a film comes to be (or at least pitch to production) then this film is for you. It's not the best film and Dax does miss more than he hits, but it's a fast paced film and worth a watch if nothing else is on.

MY VERDICT: RENT IT

Quickie Review: Call me Old Fashioned But I Preferred it When We all Hated Each Other

2011-10-12T16:23:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Intro: Oh the things I do for the ones I love. Whether or not I like it, I end up seeing most of the kid movies to come out every year. Some are really quite good, like the films from Dreamworks and Pixar, and some are harmless entertainment, but a good portion of them tend to be condescending, eye-gougingly awful and Cats and Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore is definitely in that last group. It's not that I was expecting an Oscar film out of C&D, but the original one really wasn't half bad and had some great humor that kids and adults could relate to. The sequel panders to the lowest common denominator of intelligence and I found myself wanting to walk out about halfway through the film. And that's saying a lot because I didn't even have the slightest urge to walk out or leave the room during Human Centipede or Antichrist. Think about that for a minute.

Plot: If you've never seen the first Cats and Dogs, do me a favor and go watch that first. But in short the idea is that the cute and cuddly dogs and cats that live with us are actually secret agents. The dogs are the good guys and the cats are evil. In this film an evil cat named Kitty Galore wants to take over the world and since the world being taken over would be good for both dogs and cats, the two secret agencies team up to take down Kitty once and for all.

Pros: This is short. Jack McBrayer and Chris O'Donnell are good and work well with what they're given. The effects aren't terrible either and it's relatively harmless violence wise for kids.

Cons: Pretty much everything else. Terrible writing, terrible pacing, the acting from the animals is spotty at best, the jokes caused my eyes to almost roll out of my head and the other humans are bad as well and seem like they really don't want to be there.

Final Thoughts: A terrible film, even for kids that should be forgotten by everyone. Skip it.

MY VERDICT: ABOMINATION TO CINEMA

Game Guru Review: Just Dance 3

2011-10-12T00:56:00.000-07:00

Hey everybody welcome to my first Game Guru Review. The review style will be similar to my Comic Noob Reviews but with some different subcategories added. The style may change over time but for now let's start with this.

I know it doesn't exactly solidify my nickname of The Game Guru with my first couple reviews being Kinect games, but I won one and got two for free so I can't exactly complain. Plus the Just Dance series and I have a deeper connection then most people might realize. You see...I love dancing. Despite being quite overweight I've always loved dancing and never cared if I was any good or not. And I knew dancing games existed, mostly in the form of DDR, but I was never really into that trend. I was more of a traditional platformer/RPG/strategy kind of gamer, not a dancer.

But at PAX 2010 I had my first taste of the new generation of dancing games when I went up on a stage in front of probably 50 people and danced with Spoony from The Spoony Experiment to "Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go" by Wham. It was a lot of fun. Wii's and I don't get along but I was having fun nevertheless. At parties or events if they had the Just Dance games I would be more than happy to play alongside all of them. I still had trouble with the Wii but I was having a lot of fun.

Then at PAX 2011 I had another moment, this time with Just Dance 3 which was being advertised as THE Kinect dance game. Considering how well Dance Central did and how much I loved that game, I figured Just Dance 3 would be as fun as the last one. And it was. I also won a free copy which arrived in the mail today hence why I'm reviewing it. I've had a few hours with it and these are my thoughts:

Plot/Goal-By yourself or with up to four other players, dance to 40+ tracks by artists from the 70s to now by matching body movements with the movements on the screen. You can also choreograph your own dance and upload it online for the world to see. Or you could use the game as a workout with the all new Just Sweat mode.
Gameplay-Gameplay is similar to the other Just Dance games (matching body movements) but it's a lot more intuitive with the Kinect. Very rarely did I ever have the Kinect read my body wrong and it ran a lot smoother than it ever did on the Wii. There are a great selection of songs, with DLC on the way and I had a blast with the game by myself and with others.
Graphics-This game won't win any awards for graphics, relying mostly on colorful silhouettes but it's a very bright and flashy game that is fun to watch. It's cheesy and over the top but just what a game of this type needs. You'll never get bored watching this game.
Replayability-You will be playing this game for a while. It'll become a party staple like the ones before it but my only concern is I don't know how much DLC there will be and maybe the game will become repetitive after a while. That hasn't happened yet for me but I know it's a possibility.

Pros-Great, fun, flashy, addictive party game that is fun for all. If you love dancing games you'll love this.
Cons-Graphics, while flashy, aren't anything special, could get repetitive, some minor detection hitches.

Overall-4 out of 5

A must have for fans of the dancing genre and even newcomers might find reasons to like this.

Things To Click On 10/12/11

2011-10-12T00:26:00.000-07:00

Hey everyone. I'm adding yet another weekly feature to this site, not sure exactly when I'll post it every week (Tuesday seems good for now) but it's basically my evolved form of MALARKY (that failed blog linking thing I did once). Not only will I link some of my favorite posts this week but I will also link some of my favorite videos I've watched this week and recommend some new music that you should be listening to. So I'll divide them up by category and I hope you enjoy.

BLOG LINKS:

My friend Lindsey has restarted her old blog The Gamer Chick (of which I did a few posts for back in the day) as well as her own personal blog. She's a great writer and hopefully she can develop an audience. You can find her at The Gamer Chick and The World As I See It From Under 5'
Nick at Random Ramblings of a Demented Doorknob is still running his 60/60 feature. If you haven't been reading it, check it out now and get caught up. If you need more incentive, here is his Troll 2 review which could be the best thing I've read all year.
Max at Anomalous Materials does a great Shocktober piece that is a crash course in the horror genre. It's a great read and a helpful guide for people new or hesitant to horror films.
Duke over at Duke & the Movies does a great post on the best films of the 00s. Check out his list and give yours in the comments.
Kai over at Man, I Love Films does a great post in defense of lists. As a list lover, I totally agree with the post and if you love lists too then I don't need to give you one to convince you to read this post.
If you aren't taking part in Rachel's Saturday Sims Screenshot then you better start now if you want to catch up to Nick.

VIDEOS:

First up is a video done by Griffon Ramsey, wife of Geoff Ramsey aka Grif from Red vs Blue. She does a chainsaw carving of the Gears of War symbol. It's pretty awesome.

Next up is the now famous Playstation "Long Live Play" commercial that is as awesome as it is touching. If you love video games then PLEASE watch it...even if you hate Sony.

Next up is a double whammy for game fans as well as wrestling and UFC fans...Brock Lesnar will be in WWE 12 alongside the Rock, Stone Cold, and many others. This will be his first appearance in seven years. Talk about incentive to buy the game.

Finally we have a second appearance from Griffon but this time it's from back in early 2010. It was for a series called Immersion. Even though it's now cancelled it's quite fascinating and it's worth a look if you like Mythbusters and/or gaming.

MUSIC YOU SHOULD LISTEN TO:

First up is Evanesence's new self titled album. I was a big fan of theirs back in the day and I thought after five years and some band mate switch ups the band wouldn't be the same or not as good as it was before. Wrong, it's better then it ever was and this is one of the most cohesive, well done goth rock albums of the year. Listen to it here
Next is a collaborative effort between Luke Conard (who I'll feature next week), Alex Goot and Chad Shugg singing Someone Like You by Adele. Check it out here
Finally is an awesome new band I discovered called Northern Kings. They do covers of cheesy/amazing pop songs in a rock opera style. The link I'm putting on here is the link to Take on Me featuring Kermit the Frog. Find it here

Well that will do it for this week. What did all of you think? If you have any videos or links or music to recommend send it to travismccollum@hotmail.com Until then I will see you all next week with more Things to Click On!

Weekly Wrestling Wrap Up for the Week of 10/1-10/8

2011-10-11T22:40:00.000-07:00

Hello I am Travis "Dynamo Butterfly" McCollum and welcome to the first edition of Weekly Wrestling Wrap Up. I realize to many this means absolutely nothing and a few of you will probably laugh at me for making this a weekly feature but a good 9-10 hours of my television/internet TV watching is wrestling. And since it would feel weird to include it in my regular Weekly TV Wrap Up, I figure it deserves it's own post. And since it would probably be mentioned by someone if I didn't cut you off here, yes I watch UFC, yes I know it's staged, yes it has ludicrous storylines but I've watched it since I was five and I don't plan on stopping anytime soon.

Hopefully those who do plan on reading this enjoy. Now without further ado...

WWE RAW SUPERSHOW:

This past week on Raw we saw the effects of Hell in a Cell which ended with total and complete chaos, as well as a new WWE Champion in Alberto Del Rio. But instead of confronting the problem at the head of the show, instead we start Raw with a match, something that has become a rarity nowadays.

Randy Orton vs Drew McIntyre-Sadly Drew never stood much of a chance, which is a shame considering how much I like the Sinister Scotsman, but Randy needed this match to assert his dominance, and prove that losing clean to Mark Henry twice doesn't mean he is no longer a valid wrestler. There's some good back and forth though with Drew coming close on a few occasions but one RKO later and the match is over. Decent match overall.

Winner: Randy Orton

Afterwards Mark Henry comes out and brawls with Randy which leads to an impromptu match between Henry and JoMo (John Morrison).

Mark Henry vs JoMo-Like with Drew before, JoMo never stood a chance (kinda sad how he's become a jobber lately) and the match was almost over before it began. A squash match but nice to see two matches before a half an hour is up.

Winner: Mark Henry

Next we have multiple and very long talking segments in which the begrudged superstars that have been bitching lately (Ziggler, Swagger, Otunga, Christian, Rio, Rhodes) do what they do best but it leads into the main event being announced which will be a tag match between Ziggler/Swagger/Rio/Rhodes/Christian vs Sheamus/Air Boom/Cena/Punk.

Oh and there will be a vote of confidence to see whether Triple H should still be boss.

Next is a Divas match between Kelly...and it's over. No really the match ends in 30 seconds after Kelly pounds the holy living crap out of Beth Phoenix until she's disqualified. Huh...

Next up is Jinder Mahal vs Santino Marella in wh....and it's over. Really Raw? Two matches that are less than 30 seconds long? This is sad.

And finally we have the main event...

Ziggler/Swagger/Rio/Rhodes/Christian vs Sheamus/Air Boom/Cena/Punk- This is actually a really good match. Lots of great back and forth with the Faces getting the win. Problem is it won't close out the show which kinda leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I hate when shows have talking as their end piece. I want wrestling on a wrestling show. Is that too much to ask?

Winner: The Faces

Well that's it for Raw...oh and the Superstars walked out...well all except Zack Ryder...who was then pedigreed.

Next up is...

NXT Season 5: Wow We Really Need to Just Make This A B-Show Instead of a Competition

Since Darren Young was suspended for using drugs, the "competition," if you want to still call it that, is down to Derrick Bateman and Titus O Neil. But what's more interesting is that Bateman and O' Neil weren't the focus of tonight's episode. Instead it was on lesser known superstars on Raw/Smackdown which almost makes me wonder if they are trying to transition this into a B show like Superstars. Maybe that's why they brought Superstars back.

Curt Hawkins and Tyler Reks (now a tag team apparently) start the show to no reaction (the crowd is DEAD) and explain that they have been getting no respect in the WWE and no opportunities to show off their talents (Reks mic work has definitely improved). So they decide to hijack NXT and make it the "Hawkins and Reks Show." The Usos come out and challenge them to a match later on.

Now for our first match of the night...

Derrick Bateman w/Maxine vs Titus O' Neil- If anybody was shocked that this match would probably be on the card, please leave now. Granted it's not the fault of the superstars or the writing team, but when you suddenly only have two rookies who can compete...you work with what you got. As for the match itself you can tell Bateman and O' Neil have improved as wrestlers but still have a ways to go. It's a good back and forth match with Bateman getting the pin.

Winner: Derrick Bateman

After a short backstage segment we have our next match...

Yoshi Tatsu vs JTG w/Darren Young- I feel like I've seen this match before. It's kind of funny Young is there considering he's suspended but I guess they have to keep the tag team looking strong. The match is okay but like I said, it's familiar and I already knew how this one was going to end up. JTG put up a nice fight and is improving as a wrestler but he's still basically useless to the WWE.

Winner: Yoshi Tatsu

Immediately we have another match, which is something NXT definitely has over Raw...match after match after match. Raw could learn something here.

Bryan Danielson...err Daniel Bryan vs Heath Slater- Not a whole lot to say here really. A really well done back and forth match that showcased both superstars. It actually made me respect Slater a little more (he's grown) and the commentary from Regal in which he explains his relationship with Bryan is both touching and insightful. Definitely match of the night.

Winner: Brya...Daniel Bryan

And finally the main event...

The Usos vs Hawkins/Reks- I know the Usos are talented in ring workers and are one of the leaders in bringing the Tag Team division back to where it used to be (along with Air Boom) but that entrance was SICK! I have a whole new respect for them. If they do that before every match from now on, I'll watch every Uso match in its entirety. As for the match it's relatively short but it's action packed. Tag Team wrestling at its current finest.

Winner Hawkins/Reks

Next up is...

WWE SUPERSTARS:

I was pissed when this got pulled off the WWE schedule in mid September. Not only was it one of the consistently good shows in the WWE when it comes to wrestling, but it was the home of Brodus Clay, Zack Ryder and many other superstars I love but get overlooked each week on the big A shows. Maybe it was letters, maybe someone petitioned or maybe WWE needed more online viewers but they decided to bring it back and it was a great comeback episode.

On a side note before I begin I noticed WWE put the past two Superstars online (the show still runs internationally so it WAS taped) I appreciate that.

Immediately we start with

Alex Riley vs JTG- Wasn't I JUST talking about JTG? Well the second verse was same as the first. This time though replace Yoshi with A-Ry.

Winner: Alex Riley

After a lengthy recap of WWE Hell in a Cell (which we've seen on Raw and NXT) we get another match

Michael McGillicutty vs Percy Watson- I love this match. Not really for what goes on in the match as the match itself is short, slightly botchy and loses steam partway through but because we get to see two great young talents going at it and we get to see the son of Mr Perfect (Michael) get a little momentum in his singles career.

Winner: Michael McGillicutty

Next is a Divas match and this one is actually longer than 30 seconds

AJ vs Tamina- I love seeing AJ in the ring every week. That's partially why I look forward to NXT and Superstars as she's one of the top Divas on those shows. She's good on the mic, she's charismatic, she's funny, and while she may be smaller she certainly makes up for it in quickness and athleticism. The match is basically one sided for the first 99.9% of it with Tamina SLOWLY putting hold after hold on AJ (she may need more development time) which led to some incredibly awkward commentary but in the end AJ pulled a quick reversal and got the win which is always good for AJ fans like myself.

Winner: AJ

And finally we have our main event

Ted Dibiase Jr. vs Tyson Kidd- Dibiase comes out to an unusually large pop which is later explained by the announcers. Turns out Dibiase pulled a Ryder and started a Youtube channel in conjunction with his new event he plans on having at every show he participates in: A Dibiase Posse Party, which is basically a tailgate party but with Ted doing meet and greet and taping the whole thing on his Flip cam. I think it's smart of Dibiase and it seems to be working for him. The match is decent with Dibiase getting the win in the end.

Winner: Ted Dibiase Jr.

Next up is...

TNA IMPACT WRESTLING:

This will be my shortest post each week because I can't actually watch Impact Wrestling when it is on every week, instead having to rely on watching the matches when they go up online the next day. There's just a lot of other shows on at the time and I don't like TNA enough anymore to skip other shows in favor of it.

That said this week did have some interesting goings on and matches.

Hulk Hogan vs Sting at Bound for Glory
Mr. Anderson vs Bully Ray at Bound for Glory
Eric Bischoff attacked by Jeff Hardy

As for the matches

Winter/Madison Rayne vs Mickie James/Velvet Sky-Decent match, pretty botchy but okay for a Knockouts match. The heels cheat to win.

Crimson vs Samoa Joe-Decent match until the BS ending which the crowd was having none of. Crimson wins with a roll-up

Bobby Roode vs James Storm-A great main event and a great match. If you don't watch anything else, watch this. Roode wins.

Next up is...

WWE SMACKDOWN:

Boy this Smackdown was FUUN...and by fun I mean totally padded with useless talking and matches that were either way too short to be of any use or not interesting at all. But here's the skinny.

They recap the walkout from Raw, the whiny heels from Raw, along with more whiny heels from Smackdown talk in the ring for what seems like forever about the SOS we've been hearing all this week and after a commercial break we FINALLY get our first match.

Alberto Del Dio vs Sin Cara Azul-This match would be considered a treat for Mexican wrestling fans since Mistico and Dos Caras are held in high regard around the world but sadly this match is too short and too blah to be of any real note. Sin Cara Negro (Spanish for Black before you get your panties in a bunch) comes down and beats up Sin Cara Azul, thus continuing the "Who is the real Sin Cara" feud that we've seen for the past month or so.

Winner: Alberto Del Rio

After two commercial breaks worth of MORE talking and MORE interviews we finally get a match.

Air Boom vs Ziggler/Swagger- Air Boom is attacked before the match so it's pretty much a one sided squash match. Pity considering they put on a good show earlier in the week.

Winner: Ziggler/Swagger

We get yet another 30 second Diva match followed by another two commercials worth of talking. The only highlight is that Big Show returned and wants to fight Mark Henry at Vengeance for the World Heavyweight Title. Shortly after that we get another 30 second squash match and two more commercials worth of talking before finally getting another match. Are you sure this isn't Impact Wrestling?

Randy Orton/Sheamus vs Rhodes/Christian-If you watched Raw then you've already seen this match. The faces win and it's a fairly entertaining match.

Winner: Orton/Sheamus

We get a repeat showing of the walkout followed by Mark Henry saying no to Big Show's challenge only to get beaten into saying yes by the Big Show (well Teddy Long said yes for him) And that's the show.

Overall a pretty disappointing Smackdown.

Next up is...

LUCHA LIBRE USA MASKED WARRIORS-

After an incredibly lengthy hiatus, despite Season 2 AND 3 already being in the can, Lucha Libre USA returned (AAA is barely ever on where I'm from so this is basically as Lucha as wrestling will get for me right now) and it's definitely better than it's seven episode first season, but it's a long way from being a top tier wrestling show.

The show starts off with Tag Team wrestling featuring two Rudo teams (booking logic tells me that's probably not a good way to get fans interested right at the beginning of a show).

Treachery vs Rudismo-Lucha Libre USA is more slow paced Lucha then some people are probably used to. Sure there is a lot of high flying action and speedy combinations of moves but there is also a lot of deliberate set up between the big moves and there are some pauses between combinations so that the audience can catch up. Because of that the match has a slightly awkward pace but it recovers well despite also being heavily botchy (near Chikara level botching involved here) with Treachery winning after isolating one member of Rudismo and whupping him like a government mule.

Winner: Treachery

After some interviews setting up for the World Heavyweight Fatal Four Way Match we get another match, a mini vs female match.

Mini Park vs Rosetta Park-These kind of matches never really interest me. Most of the time the minis have to carry the match because (besides Tigressa and Reby Sky) most of the females can't really wrestle and because of that they tend to be pretty dull. I mean I like Mini Park and he is a pretty talented wrestler but Rosetta just isn't all that great and the match was very slow and drawn out. Mini Park wins with a roll up.

Winner: Mini Park

And now the main event...

Lizmark Jr vs Charley Malice vs RJ Brewer vs Marco Corleone- This was a great match once you got past all the weird distractions and outside interference that was going on. Yes it's great to see Petey Williams and yes the Canadian Destroyer is still the most awesome finisher (see video at end) but I wish I could have just saw the match that was going on w/o all the interference. Great spots by everyone involved with Lizmark winning dirty to get the first ever Heavyweight Title.

Winner: Lizmark Jr

Well that does it for this weeks Wrestling Wrap Up. I hope you enjoyed and every Sunday there will be a new entry so be sure to stay tuned for more.

Now...CANADIAN DESTROYER!!!!

Comic Noob Review: Batman The Dark Knight #1

2011-10-11T19:53:00.000-07:00

Batman: The Dark Knight was not only the first comic of the DC 52 I bought, but also the first of the DC 52 I ever saw. I walked into my local comic shop (Comic Book Ink in Lakewood if you're wondering) and sitting there on a small table were three comics: Aquaman, to which I laughed at (something I regret now), The Flash and Batman: The Dark Knight. Since I planned on starting a collection and wanted to try some new heroes as well as old heroes I picked up Flash and Dark Knight (at the time I had no idea of there being a ton of other Batman related titles) and was on my merry way.

As soon as I got home I opened up B:DK and here's my breakdown of it:

Plot-Bruce Wayne is on his way from a mission as Batman to a benefit for a recent flood in which he is the guest speaker. After his speech he is confronted by a Gotham PD Internal Affairs agent named Forbes who basically calls him out as Batman in front of the entire crowd. While all this is going on, Gotham SWAT are stationed outside of Arkham Asylum where there is a prison break and the inmates are running loose through the asylum. Before you can blink, Batman is there and goes into Arkham to save the SWAT who already went in and to get the inmates back in there cells. But it's never really that easy is it?
Writing- The story plays out like your typical summer blockbuster with a lot of emphasis towards action in the latter half of the comic. The intro piece and the confrontation between Forbes and Wayne is good but because the latter half focuses so much on action, towards the end we just get thought bubble after thought bubble from Wayne instead of any real dialogue. That said David Finch stays true to Batman's roots and the ending has enough bang and mystique that it's worth coming back for issue two.
Art- There are a lot of black lines in B:DK...a LOT. The faces, suits, costumes, and even the vehicles all have very thick, detailed black lines. The faces look great but some look a little dirtier than others. It's also very heavy on the oranges and blues, which actually works well once we get to the Arkham section of the comic. The effects (explosions, gunshots) are all very detailed as well. Not the prettiest comic but definitely detail oriented.

Pros-Interesting start for a story with an intriguing ending, detailed face and effects, true to Batman's roots.
Cons-A little too action/thought heavy towards the end, feels slightly been there done that with the plot (Arkham Asylum anyone), some really harsh black lines make some things like a little dirty, you see a lot of villains but none of them besides Two Face have any real characterization.
Is it worth coming back for another issue?- Definitely

Overall: Recommended...but there are definitely some better Batman comics out there. For fans of Arkham Asylum or a more action heavy comic then you might like this one a lot.

Comic Noob: Intro to Comic Reviews or How I got back into Comics

2011-10-11T19:32:00.000-07:00

Comics and I have always had an interesting relationship. Up until the spring of 2009 I really didn't read comics, at least on a regular basis. The interesting thing though? I knew a ton ABOUT certain comics, especially Spider-Man and Batman. I had four "History of..." books dedicated to Spider-Man, Batman and the DC/Marvel Universes so after reading through these books a few times it was safe to say I knew basically everything you could know about Spider-Man and Batman, with a smattering of other heroes thrown in for good measure. The rest of my comic knowledge though came from the various TV shows that the WB and Fox put out (Justice League, Static Shock, Spider-Man ect) and because of all this it was easy to fake it with my friends who DID read comics on a regular basis. You could tell where my inexperience lay if you were to poke holes in my knowledge or pull the whole "Remember when...that never happened" trick, but most of my friends knew I was trying to stay in the loop, even if I was failing miserably.

I think the reason I never actually sat down and read any of these comics I was pretending to have been reading on a regular basis (I did have a few physical comics though like Ultimate Spider-Man and Wolverine #1 and a random X-Men comic with a coupon for a PS1 fighting game) was because of my fear of comic book shops. It wasn't the shops themselves, as they are basically just bookstores that specialize in a certain type of book, more so it was the fear of being an outsider and the fear of being ridiculed because I didn't read a certain comic or I do read a certain comic. That and as the years went on the stories got more complicated and unless you had read all these other books (I believe for Final Crisis it was at least 10 different trades) you would probably be completely lost. So I never went to comic shops and thus never really read comics for the most part.

But then in the spring of 2009, shortly after I had graduated from high school (so more like summer but it was still technically spring) I decided I wanted to get back into comics, or at least the independents (Image, Dark Horse ect) whose stories have a definitive beginning and need no prior knowledge to understand. So the first thing I picked up? The Walking Dead Compendium 1. The first 48 issues of Robert Kirkman's acclaimed series collected for me to enjoy. Not only was this a good start to getting me back into comics, but TWD is an amazing comic series and shows just how great comics can truly be.

After getting totally caught up on TWD (which I did in one camping trip) I started getting into other series like Battle Pope, Haunt, Invincible, Chew and Scott Pilgrim. Before I knew it comics had become my main choice of literature when I wanted to read something new. I still kept up on Stephen King and Tom Clancy but otherwise comics started dominating my bookshelf like they never had before. But there was always one thing missing in my comic collection: single issues. Not only that but there was a serious lack of DC and Marvel outside of some collected stories that had a definitive beginning and end (Beyond! Kingdom Come, Marvel Zombies ect). I think the reason for this was two fold: my concern for being totally lost if I jumped into a story at the midway point (I never bothered touching Blackest Night/Brightest Day) and my dislike for not starting from the beginning.

But then in August of this year I heard news that DC was having a relaunch of 52 new titles. This was great for multiple reasons:

I got to start from the beginning
I didn't need a ton of prior knowledge to get into the stories
I'd discover new heroes I hadn't even heard of before
A potential chance for reviews

And that's the purpose of this article, my introduction into comic reviews. I'm still a comic noob (hence the title at the top of the page) but what better time to get into comics issue by issue than now? Not only that but because of my newness I can come in with fresh eyes and judge a book on it's own merits without any preconceived notions. I won't pick up all 52 and I'm not ONLY reviewing DC (I'll review some of my older stuff too) but I'll be picking up as many that interest me and hopefully you all enjoy.

Till then...

Quickie Review: I AM A SOLDIER OF A ROME! I WILL NOT YIELD!!

2011-08-13T18:00:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Intro: Neil Marshall has a knack for film making. Even if the story has been done to death or the genre has become tired and repetitive, he always seems to find a way to keep his films fresh and interesting. Even if the film lacks in certain areas, it's at least memorable for being something different. He first caught my eye when the Descent came out, a film I thought would be just another slasher/dark area movie a la The Cave. Instead I got a gripping horror film with great character development, genuine scares and a great plot. Then when Doomsday came out I was sure of my theory. While not the most original film (post apocalyptic has been done to death) it was still interesting and clever enough to be quite good, if not memorable. Now with Centurion, his latest film, he takes on the Greek/Roman era warrior genre and creates an exciting adventure, albeit with a few problems.

Plot: The film follows the Ninth Legion of Caledonia (and if you've read anything about the Ninth Legion you already know things won't end well) and are led by Titus Flavius Virilus (Dominic West) on a mission to stop the Picts and rescue a Roman Centurion named Quintus Dias (Michael Fassbender). While things start out smoothly, things go terribly wrong when a Brigantian scout named Etain (Olga Kurylenko), who had been working undercover as a scout for the Romans, turns on them and tries to annihilate them all. Outnumbered and in need of help, it's now up to Dias and co. to find a way back and somehow try to survive.

Pros: Neil Marshall's visuals are as great as always and his attention to details, even in how the film is colored, is breathtaking. He paces his scenes well and the action is always intense and in your face, like you would expect a film of this sort to be. The acting is pretty good for the most part with Fassbender really doing a great job and making quite the believable Centurion.

Cons: The writing leaves a lot to be desired and some of the acting is downright wooden. While Marshall is a fantastic director, the writing sometimes is uneven and some dialogue can drag out too long or the dialogue just isn't there when it needs to be. While Fassbender is good, and to an extent West and Kurylenko, a lot of the supporting cast is lifeless and wooden. Also some action scenes drag on too long as well.

Final Thoughts: Centurion is a good film but certainly not as good or as memorable as Marshall's past films. It's intense and well acted for the most part, but monotonous action, overly long scenes and some downright awful performances keep this from being great. Still worth a look though if you get the chance.

MY VERDICT: RENT IT

Death Doesn't Like To Be Cheated

2011-08-13T00:44:00.001-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

The Final Destination series and I have had a long, twisted relationship. The original one was one of the first horror (as well as R rated) films I ever saw. Even though I winced at a few of the deaths, I knew I had watched a classic and to this day the original remains one of my favorite horror films. Then the second one came out and when it was released on video I watched it and while I enjoyed it at first, upon repeat viewings I found myself liking it less and less. Yes the pile-up is cool and some of the deaths are ingenious. Yes it's nice that there is such a huge callback to the original one but it seemed almost inadvertently comical and too over the top for me to fully embrace. I will still watch it when it pops up on TV every now and again, but I'd rather just dust off the original and watch that instead.

Then the third one came out. That's when I started to realize something that every kid in the 80s who grew up with Freddy and Jason realized: it doesn't matter how much effort you put into your slasher film, if your kills are cool, people will come. The third one boasted some of the best deaths but as a film itself it lacked greatly. It was gory to the point of being cheesy, the characters were mind blowingly thin at best and besides maybe Mary Elizabeth Winstead's character, I could have cared less if they all died. Not to mention the writing was more hammy then a Christmas dinner.

Then The Final Destination came out (because in 2008 all sequels needed a "The" at the beginning to confuse people) and boy was I pissed. It was the first one I could actually go and see in the theaters and also the first one to embrace the then still growing 3D market. And I did see it, in 3D no less and afterwards I just sat there dumbfounded as to how a film series I grew up and appreciated could go from brilliant to garbage in the span of four movies. I mean the novels were pretty good and well written, why not just adapt those? Is it really that hard to make a good Final Destination. It's not that the death's were bad in TFD, it's just sad when your movie's best moment involves guts going through the pooper and into the drain. The writing was worse than the third one and really the film was just death after death after death. I don't care how many people you kill, just give me a good movie. Is it too much to ask?

I figured they would release the fifth one eventually and when I heard the news I was anything but surprised. Before I saw the trailer I thought "How can you dig the series into an even deeper hole?" and sighed as I clicked play. After the trailer I was shaking with excitement. Fifth films are just in this year it seems. They got a totally new director, some decent but fairly unknown actors and a writer who has gotten better the more work he's done (after TFD he wrote the Nightmare on Elm Street remake). Not only that but it seemed like they put more effort into the film, not in just the deaths but in the story line and character development. That and they brought back Tony Todd. Any movie with Tony Todd is automatically made better. For once I was genuinely excited for a Final Destination film.

So how was it? Well I'll tell ya: it's the best sequel of the bunch and is a close contender for the best in the series. It does have it's shortcomings and an Oscar movie FD5 is not, but for what it is it is amazing.

The story follows Sam (Nicholas D'Agosto), an office worker at a paper company (insert The Office joke here) who works part time as a short order cook with hopes of someday becoming a renowned chef like his boss. He gets offered an apprenticeship in Paris and this causes his long time girlfriend and fellow employee Molly (Emma Bell) to break up with him because she doesn't want to get in the way of his career. Sam is devastated but doesn't have time to sulk as his buddies Peter (Miles Fischer) and Nathan (Arlen Escarpeta), along with his demanding and rude boss Dennis (David Koechner), office womanizer and all around creeper Issac (PJ Byrne), fellow employee Olivia (Jacqueline MacInnes Wood) and intern Candice (Ellen Wroe) all pile on a bus heading for a mandatory office retreat. While on the bus they stop at a bridge that's getting construction done and Sam has a premonition that the bridge will collapse and they will all die. And like all the previous films before it, he freaks out and convinces people to get off the bus before the bridge does in fact collapse.

You can probably guess from there how the rest of the film goes but unlike the other entries in the series, they put a lot of detail into the storyline of the individual characters. Sam dealing with his break-up with Molly, Molly trying to figure out her feelings for Sam, Nathan dealing with an employee who gives him constant crap ect. You feel like you get to know most of the characters as the film goes on. You care about these people. Adding in the elements of "Kill or be Killed" and bringing back the Police/Feds investigating the bridge and subsequent deaths also add to the story. My only gripe is that some of the dialogue can be a bit heavy handed in it's delivery or come off as unnatural. Also the "Kill or be Killed" element is there but I felt it could have been better explained or have more depth. It feels slightly like an afterthought. I appreciate it being there, but still. I will say though that the film has one big twist in it that more than makes up for some of the writings downfall. It's damn near Hitchcockian it's so well done.

As for the acting it's quite good actually. D'Agosto, Bell and Fischer are all quite good and bring a lot of emotional depth and character to their roles, Fischer especially. Koechner and Byrne are mostly there for comic relief but they don't feel forced and actually DO generate some pretty funny lines. Escarpeta, Wood and Wroe all have smaller parts but play their parts well despite their size and all feel believable as their characters. The acting certainly isn't Oscar quality but it's well done and I appreciate horror films with good acting in them.

Now onto the deaths and the 3D effects. That's what a lot of the people who see the movie really care about. Well I can tell you the 3D effects are some of the best I've seen in a long time (no wonder since the film was SHOT in 3D and was directed by one of the people who worked on Avatar) and really do add a lot to the film without feeling gimmicky. The deaths are phenomenal in their build up to the money shot but some of the kills themselves leave a little to be desired. That said they do a good job at being not overly gory and some of them actually feel like they could really happen. Sure some laws of physics and other rules may not apply but they feel more down to earth than before. The 3D is best utilized in these scenes too. Blood flies, hints and clues accentuate and the red herrings always stick out enough that they make you uncomfortable.

There is only one problem with the 3D and it's my only serious gripe with the film: the opening credits. They are done in a way in which a glass pane shatters with every name and it's shattered by a corresponding death from the series. The glass and the object then shoot out at the audience. Now it's cool at first and it's fun to point out some of your favorite deaths as they come at you, but they are dragged out way too long and by the end you feel like you just sat through the opening crawl to Alone in the Dark. Yes, they are that slow. But in a weird twist however, the ending credits are some of the best 3D end credits I've seen in a while and are a great nod to the fans as well. Makes me kind of wish they would have switched them. Oh well.

Overall Final Destination 5 is a great entry in the long running series and is certainly the best sequel if not a close contender for best. Not only that but it's a good horror film in it's own right, is well acted, written and shot. I really do want to see this film again. And I want to buy it when it is released in stores. I haven't had the urge to do anything remotely close to that since the original, so that should tell you something. If you love horror or love the series than check this out.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT

Most Anticipated Films of 2011 Redux

2011-08-12T23:22:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Welcome to part 1 of 2 in my mid-card report for 2011. We are already halfway through the year with only four months left to go but that doesn't mean that films are going to slow down any time soon. We have dozens and dozens of movies coming out by the end of the year and since almost all of my original anticipated list has already been released and watched, I figure it would be worth pointing out which films left this year catch my eye.

In part 2 of my mid-card report I will tell ya'll my Top 5 Best/Favorite Movies of 2011 as well as one sentence thoughts on my anticipated films that have already come and gone. So stay tuned for that.

First up....

10. Dirty Girl-

Up until a few weeks ago I had no idea of this films existence but after watching Cracks the other day on my On Demand I decided to do a little digging on Juno Temple. I had seen her before in plenty of other movies but after her roles in Kaboom and Cracks as well as her announced role in the new Batman movie I wanted to see what else she had up her sleeve. Next thing you know I'm watching the trailer for Dirty Girl, in which she plays a slutty teen in the 80's who goes on a road trip with her closeted health partner in hopes of finding her birth father. Juno comes off as quite funny in the trailer and with people like William H Macy, Milla Jovovich and Tim McGraw you seem to have a pretty well rounded cast. And newcomer Jeremy Dozier as her partner seems pretty good too considering what he deals with in the movie (his father is quite homophobic). I don't know much else besides what I've already written but I'm looking forward to this movie quite a bit.

9. Piranha 3DD-

One of two films on my original most anticipated list to not come out, Piranha 3DD is shaping up to be my guilty pleasure of the year. I mean Shark Night 3D is trying hard but when you have Christopher Lloyd, David Hasselhoff, Gary Busey and Danielle Panabaker (one of my favorite young actresses) in the same movie with most of the film taking place in a water park...you win at guilty pleasure films. Here's hoping one of my favorite movies last year's sequel holds up. Fingers crossed.

Oh and the only reason it's higher up then before is because besides cast lists and what I've read on Wikipedia and IMDB, nothing else has been released. No trailer, no poster, no pictures...nothing. All the other films have SOMETHING. This one doesn't which is disappointing to me. Otherwise it would have been much higher.

8. Hugo-

The only other film from my original list to not come out yet, Hugo is shaping up to be better than I thought. Granted in my original list I had no idea what the film would be about besides what the book it's based on told me but after watching the trailer it looks like a visual treat for the whole family. And when you have Scorsese attached it can't be that bad right?

7. Straw Dogs-

This film holds a special place in my heart. The original film is a film I consider to be one of the best films ever made. Not favorite, best (I like to keep that distinction separate). Dustin Hoffman and Sam Peckinpah's classic is one you shouldn't miss and if you get the chance PLEASE go watch it. So you can probably guess that when I heard they were doing a remake I was devastated. But then I saw the trailer and read who was in the cast and honestly, I'm pretty content. I doubt that this version will live up to it's predecessor but as its own film it looks to be quite good. Marsden needs a role like this to help his career and any movie with James Woods and Walton Goggins must be seen by all. Oh and Kate Bosworth isn't half bad looking either. I just wonder HOW CLOSE they will be to the original. Because if they are totally faithful, the PTC might be pooping their pants soon.

6. Melancholia-

Lars von Trier and I have an odd relationship. I hate myself every time I watch one of his films and I see things in his films that I can never un-see but he's also a visionary director who makes some of the best films to come out that year so I wait impatiently for his next film to come out, no matter what Nazi or God related comment he spews, see it, love it, hate myself and then the cycle repeats.

With his new film, Melancholia (which is the name of a planet heading towards Earth), Lars creates a film about the end of the world and how it comes to be, all while Kirsten Dunst's character is getting married and dealing with personal problems. At times it suffers from "whisper-itus" (in which people whisper incessantly) but just from what people have told me about the film, it looks amazing and stylistic. I can only hope.

5.Coriolanus-

For those who haven't read the entire works of Shakespeare, you probably haven't heard of this obscure tragedy based on the life of Gaius Marcius Coriolanus. I had heard of the play before thanks to my friends who were really into Shakespeare but I had never seen or read it for myself. From what I had read on Wikipedia though it seemed quite good and when I heard Ralph Fiennes was developing the film adaptation of it and placing it in modern Serbia and was putting people like Gerard Butler, Vanessa Redgrave, Brian Cox and Jessica Chastain into it I couldn't help but be intrigued. I'm a huge Butler and Fiennes fan so if they were going to be working together it had to be good...right?

4. In Time-

I may be alone in thinking this but I believe Justin Timberlake is a really good actor who has the potential to become a great actor. Same goes for Amanda Seyfried and Olivia Wilde who are both in this movie as well. I don't know why but the concept of this film just gripped me from the get go. I mean a world in which you stop aging after 25 and have to earn the rest of your years? Seems like a good idea for a film in my opinion. The trailers have revealed a ton of the movie already and from what I've seen it looks amazing. I cannot wait to see how this film turns out.

3. The Ides of March-

I can sum up my excitement for this film in one sentence: If you put Ryan Gosling, Marisa Tomei, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti and George Clooney in the same film together and have Clooney write and direct it, I will see it. Hell if you put Tomei and Gosling in the same movie with Clooney writing/directing it I will see it. I think Clooney is one of the most talented actor/writer/directors out there and whenever he releases something you know he stands 100% behind it. As for Gosling and Tomei, they are two of the most talented and sexy people in Hollywood and brilliant in everything they do.

2. Moneyball-

Directed by the man behind Capote, written by Academy Award winners Aaron Sorkin and Steven Zaillian and starring Brad Pitt and Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Moneyball has got one of the best pedigrees going in this fall. And while I'm not Jonah Hill's biggest fan, he seems to be pretty good in this movie and I'm actually interested to see how he does in this movie. I also want to see this not only for its pedigree but because I was watching the Oakland A's intensely around the time this movie takes place so I almost feel a personal connection to the film in the sense that I was watching all this go down when it went down so to see it in film form is great. Also the book Moneyball that this movie is based on is a very good book.

1. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo-

People who know me know I love the Millennium trilogy. Not only the books but the original Sweedish films. I've reviewed the first one on the site but still have to review the others sometime in the near future. So when I heard they were making an American version with Daniel Craig and Rooney Mara I was slightly hesitant. Even with Steven Zaillian doing the screenplay and David Fincher directing I was hesitant. But then I remembered that Fincher has yet to let me down so I decided to fully embrace the film. And that was before any trailers came out. And while the trailer is slightly off putting to the casual viewer, I saw a lot of similarities between the original and the American one which led me to believe that this would be a very faithful adaptation. So why is it number one? Well partially because of my love of the trilogy but also because if done right, this could be the best film of the year.

Well that's it for my revised Anticipated list. I'll be back shortly with the Top 5 Best/Favorite films of 2011 (so far) list shortly.

We're takers love, that's what we do...take

2011-07-20T01:31:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Intro: I want to know who green-lit this picture. I really do. Actually, no, I want to know who cast this film. I want that person fed to llamas as quickly as possible. I can get the whole urban bank robbers getting chased by cops thing. The story has been done to death and done much better in other movies but it's still a genre worth revisiting if done right. But the casting in this film is downright awful. Besides maybe Idris Elba and Matt Dillon, nobody on the screen at any time had any reason to be there. None of the other people in the movie can act, or at least act in this movie and they do nothing more than make me want to tear out my hair. Add in some of the stupidest dialogue I have ever heard and some of the most bang-your-head-against-a-wall inducing plot turns and you have this steaming pile of crap.

Plot: Boy I wish I could tell ya because the film does a poor job of giving us one. The basic outline is a group of skilled bank robbers are setting up for a big heist and two detectives are trying to hunt them down. All the while the robbers have to deal with a deadly former friend and co-worker who may or may not double cross them at any time. The plot is Swiss cheese with the amount of holes it has, not to mention the absolutely terrible logic some characters use. You'd think some of these characters had mental illnesses. The dialogue is asinine, pedantic and speaks to the lowest common denominator. At one point it just turns into Flava Flav hype man yelling for five minutes. Either the writers gave up or realized nobody would care about the film at this point.

Pros: Explosions, shoot-outs and chase scenes are always nice. Matt Dillon and Idris Elba at least try.

Cons: Everything else. The plot, the acting from everyone else, the pacing, the ending, the dialogue...this film just fails on almost every level.

Final Thoughts: Unless you have a gun to your head you have no real reason to watch this movie. Watch Heat or another movie that doesn't make robbery films look stupid.

MY VERDICT: ABOMINATION TO CINEMA

Captain, I wish to report a mutiny. I can name fingers and point names.

2011-07-14T18:17:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Ah the Pirates of the Caribbean films. What a relationship we have together. The first one was a fantastic and memorable film that hold sentimental value as the last movie my grandfather watched with me before he died, the second was my first midnight film and my first giant anticipated disappointment and the third one was a confusing mess that only got worse the more and more I watched it. Despite the second and third films downfalls I still openly admit that I like the film series, if nothing else than because I love pirates and I was looking forward to the inevitable sequel that was to come.

And what do you know they made a sequel. Big surprise I know. And this one is without Bloom and Knightley, directed by Rob Marshall and loosely based on a book. Big changes to a series that has so far only been loosely based on a Disney theme park ride, but changes I think for the better. Bloom and Knightley (as much as I like them separately) were a big part of what I didn't like about the first three, Rob Marshall is great at big, epic, flashy films and the films needed a more centralized story as the other big part I didn't like about the first three was how confusing it got the longer it went on. And these changes DID end up helping the movie because, while not as good as the original, On Stranger Tides is a giant leap forward for the series and a good sign of things to come.

The story of course follows the adventures of Jack Sparrow but this time he is searching for the mysterious and elusive Fountain of Youth, which he claims to know the whereabouts of. Problems arise though when the King of England (with Barbossa as captain), Spaniards and Blackbeard all want the fountain as well. Jack ends up "teaming" with Blackbird, partially because he is totally insane and powerful and partially because he still has feelings for his daughter Angelica (who he happened to date and ditch many years ago...something she didn't appreciate). Their task: find a mermaid, get her tears, get the chalices of Ponce de Leon and travel to the mysterious island at which the fountain is apparently located.

The story is surprisingly good considering the previous two films. It's still a long movie (although much shorter than the last one) but it's more focused, better paced, and a lot easier to follow than previous two. There are a few plot holes here and there and the writers took a great deal of liberties with the material it was based on (loosely doesn't begin to describe it) but I can remember everything that happened in the movie and can explain it without having to put a lot of disclaimers or notes in between. Most of the main characters are well developed and you really start to care about some of the other non Jack and Barbossa related characters. It's also quite action packed as well which is great for a summer blockbuster like this.

The acting is mostly good across the board with only a few bumps here and there. Johnny Depp IS Jack Sparrow, down to bone and you either love it or you hate it. I love it so he was really easy to love. Same goes for Rush. Hot off The King's Speech (which makes his role all the more funny in a way) Rush is as talented as always and really seems to love playing Barbossa. Penelope Cruz as Angelica and Ian McShane as Blackbird are quite good as well, Cruz being sassy and surprisingly understandable for once and McShane doing what he is (in my opinion) best at: playing a bad guy. He is devious but you love him all the more for it. Most of the supporting cast is fairly good but certainly forgettable and get totally swallowed up by everyone else. I can't remember any one supporting character over another, something that kinda bums me out.

Also I have to say, Disney has now made me afraid of mermaids. Thanks a lot Disney. My first crush was Ariel and now I know all she wants to do is drag me down to the abyss and eat my face. *Sigh* But then again who would have thought mermaids could be evil?

Overall On Strangers Tide is a much better, more focused, mostly well acted film that is entertaining from beginning to end. If you don't like Jack and Barbossa you will obviously hate this film and it does put your butt to sleep with its long length but it's action packed and entertaining summer fun that gives me hope for the series.

MY VERDICT: SEE IT

Trailer Talk Thursday: 11-11-11 and Jack and Jill

2011-07-14T15:31:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

In today's T3 we are talking about two films with one thing in common: their date. 11-11-11 comes out on 11/11/11 (big shocker I know) and Jack and Jill, Adam Sandler's new movie is also released on 11/11/11. Actually when I think about it they both have another thing in common: by looking at the names attached to it, people are either excited or already groaning. Darren Lynn Bousman was responsible for Saw 2-4 and Repo the Genetic Opera and if you're like me, that's a pretty good resume so far. At the same time though, Repo and the Saw series can be very dividing films. I know just as many people who hate those films as I do people who love those films. Sandler is the same way. I know people who love everything he does and will see every film he makes but I also know people who think he should have retired after Happy Gilmore.

But now the trailer for these two films is out and now it's up to all of you to decide whether or not you want to see the films. Hopefully any personal bias you may or may not have towards Bousman/Sandler can be put aside for the sake of judging a film fairly.

First up is 11-11-11-

At first glance this looks like nothing more than a Number 23 ripoff or another film that is focused around a certain number. But when you really look into the film, past the whole "This number is significant and evil" thing, there seems to be a really spooky supernatural thriller underneath it. Needless to say my interest is piqued. Also toying with angels and demons can be a tricky thing to balance. You probably don't want to step on any religions' toes but at the same time you have to create a conflict well constructed enough that it warrants sitting through the film. Angels and Demons and Dogma did this concept well. But Bousman is an ambitious guy so hopefully he can bring something good to the table. The trailer is definitely intense and already has me a little on edge so hopefully it can deliver.

Take a look-

And next up is Jack and Jill-

I like Adam Sandler, I really do. Even if the film is terrible there is a sort of charm about him that keeps me coming back for more. At the same time he makes some odd choices and Jack and Jill is certainly an odd choice. Then again, seeing a 44 year old man in drag talking to himself doesn't exactly swing on the realm of normality. I can already tell by the trailer alone that this film will probably be hated by critics and moviegoers alike but I would be a liar if I said I didn't laugh a little during the trailer. I mean I didn't have any big belly laughs or anything but scattered chuckles and one nice knockout joke at the end kept the trailer from being boring. On top of that I think we all have a relative like Jill, a black sheep of sorts who breaks anything he/she touches and makes your life miserable but you still love them anyway, so at least people can probably relate to the movie. Also having Sandler regular Nick Swardson and Al Pacino in it definitely raised my eyebrows. I'll be surprised to see how far the Pacino character/Jill relationship turns out.

It certainly won't win Oscars but I think it might be...cute. I realize that to some I'm just fueling the fire that keeps films like this coming out instead of really great original ones but for every great film, their needs to be a Jack and Jill, a film that you can laugh at and then forget. Not everyone goes to a movie to think, and I don't thinking will be required for this one.

Judge for yourselves-

Well that's it for this weeks T3, see you all next week.

The Hamptons are like a zombie movie directed by Ralph Lauren.

2011-07-13T18:15:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Because I am a man who hangs out a lot with his mother, has plenty of female friends and is somewhat of a masochist, I tend to see almost every romantic comedy that comes out every year. Usually they are abysmal to tolerable in quality and, besides a few exceptions, tend to all be cut and paste from the same romantic comedy Madlib. And at each movie there is at least three previews of more romantic comedies coming later that year, all of which start to blend after a while. But like the good son, friend and masochist I am I see them and then review them for you. Otherwise I don't live up to my mantra.

I'm going to be honest with you when I say that Something Borrowed was at the very bottom of my list of films I wanted to see when it first came out. I like Ginnifer Goodwin and John Krasinski well enough and Kate Hudson can be tolerable in small doses, but from the previews alone it looked like the same love triangle (possible square) that we've seen a hundred times before. But because my friend I went and saw this with refused to see Thor that evening, I begrudgingly bought tickets for Something Borrowed and prayed it would be decent. And oddly enough, it wasn't half bad. It's about as typical as you get in terms of romantic comedies but there is some charm about it that kept me from hating it.

The story follows four friends Rachel (Goodwin), Ethan (Krasinski), Darcy (Hudson) and Dex (Egglesfield). Rachel is a shy but sweet girl who has been friends with loud and flirty Darcy since they were little kids. Ethan, the sort of sarcastic voice of reason among the group has been friends with Rachel and Darcy almost as long as they have but no romantic feelings (or at least any that Ethan will admit) have emerged between the three of them. Rachel meets Dex while attending law school and during a casual date, Darcy meets Dex and starts a relationship with him, despite Rachel obviously having feelings for him and, as of the beginning of the film, are engaged.

At Rachel's 30th birthday party, Darcy has a little bit too much to drink and takes a taxi back to her and Dex's place. Dex and Rachel stay back (Ethan left around the same time as Darcy) and eventually take a taxi together. While in the taxi Rachel confesses to falling for Dex in law school and next thing you know they wake up in Rachel's apartment together. With the wedding approaching quickly, what are Dex and Rachel to do? Do they tell Darcy at the risk of losing her or hide it and try to make it work?

The story is your typical "Love triangle relationship/affair" story but there's something oddly charming about it. You can predict everything that happens in the movie at least twenty minutes before it actually happens but there is enough legitimate humor, interesting development and solid acting that you can mostly overlook it's predictability. It certainly doesn't add anything to the genre and has no real reason to exist, but for 112 minutes (trust me it sounds long but some romantic comedies are much longer, or at least feel longer) I was entertained. Even if you hated this film, the pacing of the film is brisk and never feels boring. I can only think of one scene that needed to be shorter. The acting is actually quite solid for the most part. It's not great or memorable by any means, but it certainly gets the job done and the main leads are all charming and funny enough that you can relate and feel for them. Out of the leads though, Goodwin and Krasinski are probably the best.

Something Borrowed is another production line romantic comedy that we've seen a dozen times before but it's funny, charming and genuinely interesting for the most part. If you or your significant other want to rent a simple, feel good romantic comedy, you can do a lot worse than Something Borrowed.
MY VERDICT: RENT IT

Aright listen up! The guys we're after are professional runners...We find 'em we take 'em as a team and we bring 'em back. And above all else we don't ever, ever let them get into cars.

2011-07-12T16:43:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

The Fast and Furious series and I have had a rough relationship. I enjoyed the first one (if nothing more than I enjoy fast cars and action scenes), hated the second one, kinda liked the third and was meh on the fourth. I fully realize these will never be Oscar worthy films (and if that day ever comes I will eat my hat) but getting bogged down by useless and sometimes confusing narratives, trying to get more emotionally out of Paul Walker and not enough action seems counter intuitive to a film called "FAST AND FURIOUS."

So needless to say I was slightly hesitant at the idea of a fifth one. The story seemed simple enough and bringing back a lot of characters from the series seemed, on paper at least, a good idea, but trailers can be deceiving and after seeing the trailer for the umpteenth time, I was nearly exasperated with the movie before having seen it. But since I go into a movie with an open mind I let all those pent up feelings go and tried to enjoy the movie. And surprisingly, I did. I really did. In fact this is hands down the best of the series. I've seen it three times and I still really enjoy it. It's simple, sleek, and pumped full of action with only enough story to warrant their doing what they're doing. My question? Why did it take until the fifth movie to get this right? Maybe 5 is the new 2 in terms of sequels. Who knows?

The story follows shortly after the fourth one as Dom (Diesel) is getting taken to jail for the multiple crimes he's committed. His sister Mia (Brewster) and friend (well on and off at least) Brian (Walker) break him out and they head to Rio to escape prosecution. While in Rio they get a job moving cars off a train but, like most action movie jobs, it goes wrong. They get away with the cars (specifically Mia gets away with a Ford GT40) but in the process one of the henchmen shoots and kills 3 DEA agents who were covering the seized merchandise. It so happens the cars belong to an evil drug lord named Reyes and he wants that GT40 for himself. Dom and Brian escape and go back to their garage only to find out that there is a chip in the car that contains all of Reyes' business on it.

Meanwhile a DSS agent named Hobbs (The Rock) is sent to track down Dom and Brian under the idea that they were responsible for the murder of the DEA agents, and not the henchmen (who happened to work for Reyes). Things hit the fan when Reyes' crew and Hobbs crew' descend on the garage but instead of splitting up, Dom, Brian and Mia decide to stick together because Mia is pregnant with Brian's baby. So they call up some old associates and decide that they are going to have one last job so that they can stop running and live happily ever after.

The story is great considering the kind of film it is. It's like a street version of Oceans 11 but with more cars and lots of things shooting, blowing up and sweating. Yes sweating. The Rock alone could fill a pool with the amount of sweat he gives. I mean look at the picture below...glowing with sweat. The film never gets bogged down, save for a few moments where Brian laments on not having a good father figure and worrying about the baby, but those moments are only sprinkled in throughout the movie while the majority of the movie is fast paced and exciting.

The writing, especially the dialogue is cheesy but in a good action movie cheesy sort of way. The Rock tries his best to outdo Seagal and JCVD with the amount of one liners he drops throughout the movie. The difference between the three men though: The Rock's are kind of badass. Maybe it's all those years as a wrestler, but he knows how to lay down a good line, or at least make a bad line sound better. Diesel and Walker do what they're good at and play to their strengths. Walker is mostly just a pretty face and doesn't try to have a ton of monologues or big emotional scenes, something that has bugged me in previous movies. Diesel on the other hand has AN acting chop of sorts so he gets to deliver the big speeches and the like most of the time. And it works when he says it. Diesel has a calm, soothing voice when he's at rest and so his voice can be very engaging to listen to. The rest of the cast is good but there's so many of them that it's hard to really to pinpoint any of the side characters that really blew me away. They all had their moments, which is something not all movies can juggle.

Fast Five is surprisingly good, but maybe not that surprising because for once the series plays to its greatest strengths and irons out most of the problems that the other movies have. It's sleek, shiny, well shot, action packed and I enjoyed every minute of it. The series will never be more than action movie fodder for people who like their explosions with a little less robots but at least with this one they are aware of that and do their best to make it the best action movie fodder it can be.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT

I walked away from the greatest franchise in history, because I refused to go on at midnight. Here I am, on at midnight.

2011-07-11T21:06:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Ever since I can remember I have always loved watching Conan O'Brien. Not only was he a fellow ginger, but day in and day out he got more done in one day then many people do in a week. But besides a few rehearsal videos on his website and the occasional interview, we don't really tend to see a lot of what he does behind the scenes. We see the calm, cool, collected funnyman in front of the camera but we don't see the hardworking, stressed out man behind the scenes. A lot of work goes into hosting and co-writing a daily television show that's not only supposed to make people laugh but also inform people of that days goings on. And when the carpet was pulled from under him when he refused to be put on at midnight, he was forced to try to find something to do for the time he wasn't allowed to be on television. Because Conan can't stop, he won't stop.

The documentary takes us behind the scenes of Conan's journey away from the screen. During that time he went from city to city on his "The Legally Prohibited from Being Funny on Television" tour in which he did comedy, music, variety acts ect. Anything to please his fans who love his work. We see his writing process, his traveling, parts of the shows, basically every aspect that went into his life during that time. But it's not all sunshine and roses. Despite Conan constantly cracking jokes, he gets mad, well more cranky then mad but still mad, something we don't really see that often from him. He worries, he fusses, he's a perfectionist at heart and when there is so many aspects to pulling off a great show, it eats at him. But he has fun in the end and even the worst of moods is brought up by the people who love him.

This is a fascinating documentary and even if you aren't a fan of his you will love this documentary. Conan is very raw and human at times in this movie, and some of the moments where he lets his guard down in front of the camera are some of the best moments in the whole film. He's a man who puts on a smile day in and day out and yet you can see the cracks. But he loves what he does and that's why he keeps doing it. Rodman Flender does a great job of telling a cohesive story (from conception, to planning, to the eventual execution) and making everything feel organic. You feel like you are hanging out with Conan and getting to know the man better. Very little feels staged or fake. It moves at a brisk pace, and doesn't linger on any unnecessary moment. You breeze through this movie and before you know it, it's over. I wish it could have gone on longer.

Can't Stop is a revealing, beautifully done documentary on one of television's most beloved icons. If you love him you will eat this up, and even if you don't you will become a fan by the time the movie is over. Definitely one I plan on watching again and again for many years to come.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT

Your story may not have such a happy beginning but that doesn't make you who you are, it is the rest of your story, who you choose to be.

2011-07-10T01:03:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

For some reason, maybe it was because it was a busy time of the month or maybe I just HAD to see another movie week after week but I never actually had the opportunity to go see the original Kung Fu Panda when it first came out. Still to this day I have yet to see it, which considering how much I loved Megamind (another Dreamworks Animation film I didn't see until much later) is kind of sad. But lo and behold the people at Dreamworks Animation must have heard my sighs of disappointment because before I knew it a sequel was announced. Now usually I don't like to see sequels before having watched the original but because of the publicity surrounding the film and because of my playing of the video game cash in I already knew most of the goings on in the original film. Needless to say I wasn't going to be totally lost.

It was a 10:00 AM $5 dollar show and the audience consisted mostly of 2 year olds and grandparents (I opted not to see it in 3D which is probably why that crowd was there). Despite being so early it was still pretty packed so I shoved myself into a corner and reclined my chair and waited for the film to start. I expected it was going to be your typical family friendly fare but with some nods to adults, nothing special but not a waste of time. Surprisingly I thought it was pretty darn good. And for people like me who missed the first one, this film stands on its own two feet and provides a great story, regardless of whether you've seen the original or not.

In Kung Fu Panda 2, the story focuses around Po (Jack Black) trying to save the world from Lord Shen (played by the delightfully evil Gary Oldman). Lord Shen is a peacock who many years ago tried to turn fireworks into weapons (cannons and the like) so that he could be the ultimate ruler over all of China. One day he went to the soothsayer to check and see what his future holds and he learns that one day he will be defeated by a warrior of black and white. Assuming that's pandas (then again that fits the description) he wipes out all the pandas in China (or at least within a reasonable distance) and because of his actions he is banished. He doesn't take too kindly to that and vows that he will have his revenge.

Fast forward many years and Po, the hero from the original (and a panda), is still learning what it means to be the Dragon Warrior. His lesson for today: Inner Peace. Of course Po thinks that's easy but it turns out to be harder then he thought. Not soon after a village is attacked by wolves and all the metal is stolen. Po and the Furious Five almost won but because of a symbol on the wolf leaders shirt, he has a Vietnam-esque flashback that causes him to freeze (it happens to be of Lord Shen annihilating his village). Po and co. soon learn that Shen has returned to destroy kung fu and it's up to them to stop him.

First off, KFP2 is a beautiful movie. The art design is beautiful and even wide landscape shots are almost as breathtaking as their real life counterpart. I give some major props to the animation studio for that. Add in a great soundtrack and the whole feel of the movie is really quite good. But that's just the feel. What about the story? The story is pretty good, if not a bit generic. The film doesn't take too many risks (I can't really fault them because 2 year olds probably don't want Inception), the writing is generic and predictable and it's a pretty standard hero tale that we've seen before at least a couple of dozens of times (and done quite better), but the film is still fun to watch. It's familiar but friendly enough that you want to go on that ride again.

The acting is good although I will say everyone gets swallowed up by Black and Oldman. They eat up the scenery in every scene and unless you're paying attention it's hard to even notice the other A and B list actors who have come on to the project. Now that does definitely bum me out, as looking at the IMDB for it shows SO much talent (including a small JCVD cameo) but it really IS their film. Black is in typical shape as the over the top, emotional goofball that he always is and at this point you either love that or you hate it. I love it but I know a ton of people that don't. Oldman on the other hand is SO deliciously evil that every scene he's in draws you closer and forces you to watch it slowly unfold. Oldman has great control over his voice and is a very talented voice actor. Even though he's the villain, you may find yourself inadvertently rooting for him from time to time, just because of how awesome he is.

Overall Kung Fu Panda 2 is a generically told hero's quest but it benefits from having great visuals, good acting from Black and Oldman (sometimes to the detriment of the rest) and lots of action. If you have kids they'll probably love this, I say it's worth seeing if you're interested at all in it.

MY VERDICT: SEE IT

Shut up crime!

2011-07-09T13:55:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

As an inhabitant of the great Pacific Northwest (WA), I've always had a love for Rainn Wilson. His work on the Office is nothing if not memorable and I've always wanted to see him have a big starring role that I could gush over and be proud of, almost like a "He's from here dontcha know" kind of moment. Well James Gunn, the guy who wrote Dawn of the Dead and created Slither has made that moment happen with the film Super. Now I doubt Super will catapult Rainn into instant stardom like superhero films have done for other actors but Super definitely shows off a side of Rainn we've never seen before and that's both good and bad.

Super is a conflicting film. On one hand it is this black comedy that deals with a man so fed up with criminals he decides to become a superhero, something that takes him a while to learn but on the other hand it is this really dark drama about a man who is at his wits end and has probably lost his mind. I mean Nathan Fillion is talking through the television to him. I think we are witnessing a man slowly go mad. So in that sense it's a film that never lets you get comfortable and while I appreciate that, sometimes Super is hard to swallow.

Frank (Rainn) is a cook at a local diner who claims that only two good things have ever happened in his life: marrying his wife and helping the cops out (that helping consisted of basically pointing and going "He went that way officer."). Well sadly one of those things is taken away when Jacques, this drug lord and all around douche (Kevin Bacon oddly enough) gets Frank's wife hooked on drugs. Frank's wife is already a recovering addict and is now in a state of constant high. Because of her basic inability to function Jacques makes the executive decision on her behalf that Frank and her are no longer together. No matter how much he begs, or throws himself on the car or threatens Jacques, he can't seem to get ahead. It probably doesn't help that they are loaded to the teeth either.

Soon Frank descends into darkness as he spends his time crying, mumbling to himself and watching Christian public access TV. One of the characters, the Holy Avenger (Nathan Fillion) seems to speak to him and soon enough he is literally touched by God (Rob Zombie) and decides to become a superhero called the Crimson Bolt. It's not soon before a sadomasochistic comic store clerk named Libby (Ellen Page) decides that she has to join him as his sidekick Boltie. Armed only with a wrench, the Crimson Bolt protects the city from crime with the ultimate goal of getting his wife back.

The story is an odd one for me. The first half an hour are very engaging and very well told. But then it's not really until an hour and 10 minutes (into an hour and a half movie) that the movie gets good again. For a good 40 minutes the film is kind of in this constant state of limbo with where it's going. Part of it is this dark comedy with him going out trying to fight crime in the streets and then there are times where he literally sits and waits for something to happen, and we sit there with him. That or he tries to take on Jacques only to go down in flames in minutes. When Page's Boltie is brought in there's a little more energy but at the same time there is a lot more of the same. And there is also a weird sexual undertone between Libby and Frank and towards the end it gets really uncomfortable to watch.

Even when the movie gets better again it's still uncomfortable to watch. It's hyper realistic in what happens and in a way I applaud that for keeping the movie grounded in reality but some parts leave a bad taste in your mouth. It's also over way too soon and before you know it, it's over. And the ending is terrible. There is SOME closure but it's still bittersweet. And that could too be a part of the whole reality thing but still.

On the acting side everything is good. Frank is never really happy in the movie, and doesn't show much emotion besides anger, frustration and sadness but Rainn does his best and does a good job with what he's given. Page is good as well and you can tell she definitely had fun with her role. Bacon's Jacques is good but it's more of a caricature instead of a real character. It's the evil douche drug lord. We've seen it before and Bacon does it well. Everyone does well. Nobody blows anyone away and certainly not audiences (except maybe Fillion but he's more of a cameo) but it's competent.

Overall Super is an uneven movie with almost as much bad/weird as there is good. I suggest seeing it if you're interested but this hyper realistic, ultra violent and mostly uncomfortable and bittersweet movie might not be for everyone.

MY VERDICT: RENT IT

Trailer Talk Thursday: Mission Impossible 4 and Final Destination 5

2011-07-07T22:49:00.000-07:00

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

It's definitely been a while since I've done one of these but I'm glad to be back doing it and hopefully I can keep the T3's coming a little more smoothly from now on. I'm not making any promises because those are only as good as you keep them but I'll definitely be making a conscious effort to bring you the latest trailers and I hope you enjoy.

First up is the highly anticipated fourquel in the long running and always thrilling Mission Impossible series: Ghost Protocol.

I've always loved the Mission Impossible series ever since I was a little boy and when I was younger I would always find myself humming the theme song whenever I would do something "dangerous" or "exciting" (sometimes it was switched with the Bond theme but most of the time it was MI) and I would always call myself Agent Travis Hunt. And as I got older I appreciated more and more about the films, both in an acting ("Oh look it's that guy") and technical tense ("Considering what they were working with they did a good job here"). And ever since 2006 when the third one was released, I've been anxiously awaiting a new one and now this Christmas I'm getting exactly what a good portion of America and I have been wanting for 5 years, more Ethan Hunt. And this time they brought along Josh Holloway and Jeremy Renner to help fill out the cast, as well as bringing back some familiar faces (I'm especially happy about Simon Pegg's return). And with the story looking as epic, explosive and dangerous as ever, I'm pumped. Is it December already?

Take a look-

And next up we have the fifth installment in the widely popular but critically dividing horror series: Final Destination 5.

Ever since the first movie came out 11 years ago I have been hooked on the Final Destination series. I always bought them on VHS or DVD when they came out (as up until the fourth movie I couldn't see them in theaters) and have watched them more times then I can count. That said, in the back of my mind I always knew that after the second one the quality dropped big time in terms of creativity and quality. The first one was supernatural and spooky with some great tension and great scares. The second one wasn't as good but still had that air of spooky that made the first one good. Then it kind of became a game of "How many pretty teens (and possibly one or two adults) can we kill in increasingly more Rube Goldberg-esque machines for 90 minutes?" And when the fourth one added 3D it went from suck to blow very fast. So despite still owning the whole series (I'm a completionist at heart) I only rarely went past two while shifting through my library.

Then one day out of the blue the initial trailer came out for the fifth entry and I was genuinely surprised. Not just at the fact David Koechner was in it but that the film actually looked...dare I say good? It looked darker, more serious, they brought back Tony Todd, and they added an element to it that actually adds a layer of depth (If I murder someone then I live) to the usually shallow plots. And now a second trailer is out, one that gives a little more details on the plot, and I gotta say my interest is still as piqued as it was when I saw the first one.

Take a look-

Well that does it for this week's installment of T3, leave a comment below and I will see you all next week.