So the police chief asks "Billy" (Skeet Ulrich), "what cha doing with a cellular phone, son?"
Which, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, is hilarious now that everyone has cellular phones, even 5 year children.
How the fuck did these become common?
life changes in interesting ways, huh?
Saturday, October 4, 2014
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
Prometheus - A Movie About Evil Idiot Humans
Prometheus (2012) is supposively a movie about human scientists searching and finding the origins of the human race. Except there isn't one scientists in the entire movie.
There are many humans claiming to be scientists, but apparently in the year 2093 scientists have completely forgotten the scientific method, or perhaps more likely, have abandoned it for self-indulgent fantasies. Let me be clear: finding another alien race does not mean they are our creators. Yet that is the conclusion they immediately jump to, without any thought or examination.
Then there's the fact that in all this future tech, they are utterly unprepared for any possibility. They're unprepared for a silicon storm; they're unprepared for life forms of any kind!; they're unprepared for quarantine scenarios; they're unprepared to do an abortion operation (someone was telling me you can just take pills or something? nowadays...). How could a large complex "science" mission, funded by a massive corporation, not be prepared for any contingency?
And what was with that fake-"Superman" music? It was so out of place.
There are many humans claiming to be scientists, but apparently in the year 2093 scientists have completely forgotten the scientific method, or perhaps more likely, have abandoned it for self-indulgent fantasies. Let me be clear: finding another alien race does not mean they are our creators. Yet that is the conclusion they immediately jump to, without any thought or examination.
Then there's the fact that in all this future tech, they are utterly unprepared for any possibility. They're unprepared for a silicon storm; they're unprepared for life forms of any kind!; they're unprepared for quarantine scenarios; they're unprepared to do an abortion operation (someone was telling me you can just take pills or something? nowadays...). How could a large complex "science" mission, funded by a massive corporation, not be prepared for any contingency?
And what was with that fake-"Superman" music? It was so out of place.
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Cryptonomicon or Awesomicon
Cryptonomicon is a novel by Neal Stephenson, whom I consider to be one of the best science-fiction writers alive. This novel is no exception. While it is less science-fiction than science-fact, it still holds an aura of awe. I don't like books very much, especially long ones, and this one is long: 1130 pages, but this book was well worth the read. It ranks as one of my favorite novels...but still not as good as the Illuminati Trilogy by Robert Anton Wilson.
The story revolves around 3 (then 4) characters whose lives are intertwined by the nature of crypto-analysis. Whether it is about Lawrence, a crypto-analyst, Bobby, a competent soldier caught up in crypto-missions, or Randy, a crypto-computer-scientist, the story switches between these varied perspectives seemlessly. Often their personal experiences, though separated by time, parallel each other in fantastic narrative ways.
The only possible criticism I have of this novel is not one I share with most readers. Neal Stephenson, in this particular novel, goes into great depths about the science of crypto-analysis and the various mathematical applications to it. This, as the novel began, was an extraordinarily awesome addition to the mundane elements in the novel (for instance a semi-broken bicycle became a mathematical exploration in how to maintain the most constant use out of a broken bicycle chain). While these side-stories and mathematical indulgences are explained in a common way, so that any reader can understand the nuances of the mathematical application, they become tiresome and difficult as the exist consistently to the very end.
KEEP IN MIND that it took me over a year to read this novel. Had I been capable of reading this novel in only a couple of months, I seriously doubt this concern would have arisen. Unfortunately, I believe for me, when I found myself with only a couple hundred pages left, I thought the three page description of Randy's wisdom teeth being pulled was unnecessarily long. Or, perhaps more appropriately, I thought that the three pages slowed down the pace of the novel, which does reach a train speed by the end.
This is a novel I would recommend to people who like Sci-Fi (though it is not science-fiction, per se), who like spy stories, who like intrigue stories, who like action stories, and/or who like epic stories (which I do!).
I hope you enjoy!
The story revolves around 3 (then 4) characters whose lives are intertwined by the nature of crypto-analysis. Whether it is about Lawrence, a crypto-analyst, Bobby, a competent soldier caught up in crypto-missions, or Randy, a crypto-computer-scientist, the story switches between these varied perspectives seemlessly. Often their personal experiences, though separated by time, parallel each other in fantastic narrative ways.
The only possible criticism I have of this novel is not one I share with most readers. Neal Stephenson, in this particular novel, goes into great depths about the science of crypto-analysis and the various mathematical applications to it. This, as the novel began, was an extraordinarily awesome addition to the mundane elements in the novel (for instance a semi-broken bicycle became a mathematical exploration in how to maintain the most constant use out of a broken bicycle chain). While these side-stories and mathematical indulgences are explained in a common way, so that any reader can understand the nuances of the mathematical application, they become tiresome and difficult as the exist consistently to the very end.
KEEP IN MIND that it took me over a year to read this novel. Had I been capable of reading this novel in only a couple of months, I seriously doubt this concern would have arisen. Unfortunately, I believe for me, when I found myself with only a couple hundred pages left, I thought the three page description of Randy's wisdom teeth being pulled was unnecessarily long. Or, perhaps more appropriately, I thought that the three pages slowed down the pace of the novel, which does reach a train speed by the end.
This is a novel I would recommend to people who like Sci-Fi (though it is not science-fiction, per se), who like spy stories, who like intrigue stories, who like action stories, and/or who like epic stories (which I do!).
I hope you enjoy!
Sunday, December 23, 2012
The Hobbit: Barely Based off a Tolkien Story
Perhaps you have heard of this author J. R. R. Tolkien. He wrote this children's book titled The Hobbit. Quite a lovely story about a hobbit who reluctantly joins a group of dwarfs and a wizard on an adventure. I highly recommend it.
You have no doubt heard of the movie The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. A movie about a hobbit who joins a group of dwarfs and a wizard on an adventure. "Surely," you must think, "This movie is an adaptation of the J. R. R. Tolkien book, The Hobbit." However you would be wrong.
Well, that is to say, the movie may hold many similarities to the book but alters so many more elements and adds a whole unnecessary bunch of stuff (which may possibly be from some other J. R. R. Tolkien book, The Silmarillion). I could go through and list all the different elements, but that seems a little petty, so I'll just talk about the stuff that irked me.
Thorin, the leader and a most important dwarf, is portrayed in the movie as a bitter, angry, unforgiving dwarf. He curses the other dwarfs for not joining his cause; he curses the elves for never helping the dwarfs; he curses Gandalf for bringing Bilbo and Bilbo for being incompetent. In the movie Thorin is at the Misty Mountains when Smaug arrives and at the Mines of Moria when his grandfather Thror was killed by Azog.
Not true! Not, if we use J. R. R. Tolkien's book The Hobbit as the source, accurate. Thorin is wise and humble in the book. He observes an indecisiveness in Bilbo and presses him gently for a decision. He is not angry that Bilbo joins the party, but simply concerned for his safety and usefulness. Since all the dwarves were killed in the Misty Mountain when Smaug arrived, except for Thror and Thrain, it was a good thing Thorin was ADVENTURING. Thror battled Azog at the Mines of Moria without Thrain, his son, or Thorin, his grandson.
In the movie the say that Thrain went mad from watching his father Thror killed by Azog. A tough weathered dwarf who has seen many dwarfs die, killed many goblins,lived many years is driven mad by watching his father slain? According to the movie Thrain is an embarrassment to dwarfs. No wonder Thorin is mad all the time, with a dad like that...pathetic.
Of course in the book Thrain is driven mad when he is a prisoner of the Necromancer. Which also happens to be the place where Gandalf acquires the map and key to the Misty Mountain. Since Thrain can not remember his own name let alone his son's name, it takes Gandalf quite some time to find Thorin and return the map and key to it's rightful owner.
In the book there is a scene in which Thorin blows smoke rings and directs them: to the ceiling, up the chimney, under a table. Gandalf in turn blows smoke rings that catch and pass through Thorin's rings, then turn green and return to the wizards hat, where the float around it in a circle. Guess they didn't have time for such an awesome scene in the movie.
In the movie Blibo, the hobbit, makes decisions, stands up to trolls, fights a goblin, outwits a monster, battles an orc, and kills a warg. All of which earns him Thorin's trust and acceptance.
Bilbo is actually very unused to adventuring, according to the book. He is peer-pressured into joining the adventure, botches pilfering trolls, gets the dwarfs caught by trolls, wastes everyone's time, gets lost, worries everyone, puts Dori at risk, and then finally nearly breaks poor Dori's legs. He does have his moments of usefulness, as well, when he finds a key, saves the parties life, and survives on his lonesome. But he's not a warrior.
Gandalf lights some pine cones on fire and throws them at some wargs. In the movie he lights the pine cones on fire; in the book he lights the pine cones with blue fire, red fire, and green fire. A lost opportunity for the filmmakers.
Bilbo's blade burns bright blue when in close proximity to goblins. This is because it is an elvish blade. Both Orcrist, the Goblin-Cleaver, and Glamdring, Foe-Hammer, are elvish blades. In the movie, why don't they burn a bright blue in the presence of goblins?
Many other details were altered. The additional scenes are rather boring and expositional in nature. The movie does not tell the story that J. R. R. Tolkien wrote. Too bad, the books pretty awesome.
You have no doubt heard of the movie The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. A movie about a hobbit who joins a group of dwarfs and a wizard on an adventure. "Surely," you must think, "This movie is an adaptation of the J. R. R. Tolkien book, The Hobbit." However you would be wrong.
Well, that is to say, the movie may hold many similarities to the book but alters so many more elements and adds a whole unnecessary bunch of stuff (which may possibly be from some other J. R. R. Tolkien book, The Silmarillion). I could go through and list all the different elements, but that seems a little petty, so I'll just talk about the stuff that irked me.
Thorin, the leader and a most important dwarf, is portrayed in the movie as a bitter, angry, unforgiving dwarf. He curses the other dwarfs for not joining his cause; he curses the elves for never helping the dwarfs; he curses Gandalf for bringing Bilbo and Bilbo for being incompetent. In the movie Thorin is at the Misty Mountains when Smaug arrives and at the Mines of Moria when his grandfather Thror was killed by Azog.
Not true! Not, if we use J. R. R. Tolkien's book The Hobbit as the source, accurate. Thorin is wise and humble in the book. He observes an indecisiveness in Bilbo and presses him gently for a decision. He is not angry that Bilbo joins the party, but simply concerned for his safety and usefulness. Since all the dwarves were killed in the Misty Mountain when Smaug arrived, except for Thror and Thrain, it was a good thing Thorin was ADVENTURING. Thror battled Azog at the Mines of Moria without Thrain, his son, or Thorin, his grandson.
In the movie the say that Thrain went mad from watching his father Thror killed by Azog. A tough weathered dwarf who has seen many dwarfs die, killed many goblins,lived many years is driven mad by watching his father slain? According to the movie Thrain is an embarrassment to dwarfs. No wonder Thorin is mad all the time, with a dad like that...pathetic.
Of course in the book Thrain is driven mad when he is a prisoner of the Necromancer. Which also happens to be the place where Gandalf acquires the map and key to the Misty Mountain. Since Thrain can not remember his own name let alone his son's name, it takes Gandalf quite some time to find Thorin and return the map and key to it's rightful owner.
In the book there is a scene in which Thorin blows smoke rings and directs them: to the ceiling, up the chimney, under a table. Gandalf in turn blows smoke rings that catch and pass through Thorin's rings, then turn green and return to the wizards hat, where the float around it in a circle. Guess they didn't have time for such an awesome scene in the movie.
In the movie Blibo, the hobbit, makes decisions, stands up to trolls, fights a goblin, outwits a monster, battles an orc, and kills a warg. All of which earns him Thorin's trust and acceptance.
Bilbo is actually very unused to adventuring, according to the book. He is peer-pressured into joining the adventure, botches pilfering trolls, gets the dwarfs caught by trolls, wastes everyone's time, gets lost, worries everyone, puts Dori at risk, and then finally nearly breaks poor Dori's legs. He does have his moments of usefulness, as well, when he finds a key, saves the parties life, and survives on his lonesome. But he's not a warrior.
Gandalf lights some pine cones on fire and throws them at some wargs. In the movie he lights the pine cones on fire; in the book he lights the pine cones with blue fire, red fire, and green fire. A lost opportunity for the filmmakers.
Bilbo's blade burns bright blue when in close proximity to goblins. This is because it is an elvish blade. Both Orcrist, the Goblin-Cleaver, and Glamdring, Foe-Hammer, are elvish blades. In the movie, why don't they burn a bright blue in the presence of goblins?
Many other details were altered. The additional scenes are rather boring and expositional in nature. The movie does not tell the story that J. R. R. Tolkien wrote. Too bad, the books pretty awesome.
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
The Raid: Redemption - AMAZING!AMAZING!AMAZING!
YO! I just watched this for the 2nd time, and it is still the best action film to come out since...The Protector? Ong Bak 2? Whatever film you want to classify as the best Tony Jaa film. Although there are things about The Raid: Redemption that put it above Tony Jaa films (or perhaps I should say Prachya Pinkaew films, er Panna Rittikrai films...shucks! I thought they were done by the same guy?).
The best element of The Raid: Redemption is its non-stop action. This phrase is used a lot to describe films, but in this case it is accurate. The basic plot is a S.W.A.T. team is infiltrating an apartment building, full of known criminals, to extract a "crime boss," who happens to also run the building. In roughly 5 min. we are in the van racing to the apartment building. From that point to the end of the film, the story consists of suspenseful sneaking, huge assault rifle "gun-fights," focused fight-for-your-life martial arts, betrayal, and redemption. There isn't a long set-up, telling you everything about everyone. There aren't middle of the film scenes of dramatic intensity. There aren't even long dramatic death sequences.
Another fantastic element is the brutalness of the film. Many imaginative and emotionally powerful moments have been created by keeping the visual of a brutal killing off-screen. This film demonstrates that these visuals can have an important impact. This film shows that sometimes reality has to be seen to be appreciated. The fragility of life is enhanced by visuals of these killings. How easy it is to kill someone with gun. How when given the choice between life and death we (humans) will do whatever we need to in order to live. This film does not shy away from the truth of death.
If you like action films, especially martial arts films, you would be doing yourself a dishonor in NOT watching this film. Easily 5 stars. And if you are one of those fools who can't watch a film with subtitles...kill yourself.
The best element of The Raid: Redemption is its non-stop action. This phrase is used a lot to describe films, but in this case it is accurate. The basic plot is a S.W.A.T. team is infiltrating an apartment building, full of known criminals, to extract a "crime boss," who happens to also run the building. In roughly 5 min. we are in the van racing to the apartment building. From that point to the end of the film, the story consists of suspenseful sneaking, huge assault rifle "gun-fights," focused fight-for-your-life martial arts, betrayal, and redemption. There isn't a long set-up, telling you everything about everyone. There aren't middle of the film scenes of dramatic intensity. There aren't even long dramatic death sequences.
Another fantastic element is the brutalness of the film. Many imaginative and emotionally powerful moments have been created by keeping the visual of a brutal killing off-screen. This film demonstrates that these visuals can have an important impact. This film shows that sometimes reality has to be seen to be appreciated. The fragility of life is enhanced by visuals of these killings. How easy it is to kill someone with gun. How when given the choice between life and death we (humans) will do whatever we need to in order to live. This film does not shy away from the truth of death.
If you like action films, especially martial arts films, you would be doing yourself a dishonor in NOT watching this film. Easily 5 stars. And if you are one of those fools who can't watch a film with subtitles...kill yourself.
Real Steel - Real Pigslop
Real Steel is a movie about robot jocks piloted by humans...oh wait isn't that Robot Jox? Right. This is a movie about Robot Boxers controlled by humans. I can't believe this movie was made. Not only is the plot pointless and ridiculous (a dead-beat dad who doesn't care about his son, starts caring about his son when he has a successful robot boxer), but it's also poorly constructed.
I suppose it would be more accurate to say the script is a waste of time, energy and space. The actors, the sets, the special effects and so on aren't really grating or obnoxious; it's just the screenplay. Besides the absurd overall plot, there are also tons of unclear concepts. These concepts are not fleshed out; they are not logical; and mostly they are confusing and annoying (or perhaps...simply unnecessary).
I can't really recommend this movie to anyone. Even if you like robots...well, maybe if you are obsessed with robots (although then you would have already seen it, I presume)...this movie is a waste of 2 hours and 7 minutes.
I suppose it would be more accurate to say the script is a waste of time, energy and space. The actors, the sets, the special effects and so on aren't really grating or obnoxious; it's just the screenplay. Besides the absurd overall plot, there are also tons of unclear concepts. These concepts are not fleshed out; they are not logical; and mostly they are confusing and annoying (or perhaps...simply unnecessary).
I can't really recommend this movie to anyone. Even if you like robots...well, maybe if you are obsessed with robots (although then you would have already seen it, I presume)...this movie is a waste of 2 hours and 7 minutes.
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Tropic Thunder - Acting Analysis
Tropic Thunder is a brilliant film for two major reasons. 1. It's an incredibly entertaining film. 2. It analyzes acting from many different perspectives (arguably, all perspectives).
1. This film is chock full of excellent actors. Whether they're comedians or "playful" actors, all of the cast do a fantastic job of keeping the energy and entertainment high, despite the desperate situations they end up in. Ben Stiller, a way-too-comedic actor for the goofi-ness he presents, keeps a serious but ridiculous character from becoming trite and irrelevant. Robert Downey, Jr. masterfully plays a generic African-American 'Nam Sergeant, despite his white heritage. He, also, easily slips into his Australian character, on demand. [One of my favorite lines is: "I know who I am! I'm a dude, playing a dude, pretendin' to be another dude!"] Jack Black, perhaps a comic genius...perhaps...., plays a low-brow "comedian," where he creates gold through drug-hazed desperation.
This is perhaps one of the best Jay Baruchel performances ever. His role is perfect: just nerdy enough, he can't be taken seriously; just nerdy enough, he know exactly what's going on; but strong and confident enough to be there in a fight, when it's needed.
2. While my favorite moments in this film are when the characters are deconstructing acting, I still get a rush out of the action. I have always loved SPOILER the scene that ends with Robert Downey, Jr. saying, "I'm a lead farmer, motherf****er!!!" Simply because of the irony. Here he is, terrifying a whole group of blood-thirsty criminals with a crazy violent attack of two assault rifles; and yet his assault rifles are not real, ergo he poses no threat. These criminals are terrified, even though they can't actually be hurt. It's a testament to Robert Downey, Jr.'s character's strategy....We gotta do what we know best...Acting! It shouldn't work. It absolutely shouldn't work. No matter how much I blame it on Hollywood story-contrivance, I can't back around the fact that it WOULD work. In these scenarios, it would work.
I heard that Tom Cruise CHOSE to use fake hands in this film. His "fake" hands are chubby...it's brilliant...why wouldn't you watch this film?
1. This film is chock full of excellent actors. Whether they're comedians or "playful" actors, all of the cast do a fantastic job of keeping the energy and entertainment high, despite the desperate situations they end up in. Ben Stiller, a way-too-comedic actor for the goofi-ness he presents, keeps a serious but ridiculous character from becoming trite and irrelevant. Robert Downey, Jr. masterfully plays a generic African-American 'Nam Sergeant, despite his white heritage. He, also, easily slips into his Australian character, on demand. [One of my favorite lines is: "I know who I am! I'm a dude, playing a dude, pretendin' to be another dude!"] Jack Black, perhaps a comic genius...perhaps...., plays a low-brow "comedian," where he creates gold through drug-hazed desperation.
This is perhaps one of the best Jay Baruchel performances ever. His role is perfect: just nerdy enough, he can't be taken seriously; just nerdy enough, he know exactly what's going on; but strong and confident enough to be there in a fight, when it's needed.
2. While my favorite moments in this film are when the characters are deconstructing acting, I still get a rush out of the action. I have always loved SPOILER the scene that ends with Robert Downey, Jr. saying, "I'm a lead farmer, motherf****er!!!" Simply because of the irony. Here he is, terrifying a whole group of blood-thirsty criminals with a crazy violent attack of two assault rifles; and yet his assault rifles are not real, ergo he poses no threat. These criminals are terrified, even though they can't actually be hurt. It's a testament to Robert Downey, Jr.'s character's strategy....We gotta do what we know best...Acting! It shouldn't work. It absolutely shouldn't work. No matter how much I blame it on Hollywood story-contrivance, I can't back around the fact that it WOULD work. In these scenarios, it would work.
I heard that Tom Cruise CHOSE to use fake hands in this film. His "fake" hands are chubby...it's brilliant...why wouldn't you watch this film?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)