Hey guys, just as a heads up, I'm clearing out 2011's movies and games, and starting the new list for 2012. Exciting, right?
No, it's not exciting, don't patronize me.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
2011 Games of the Year #1 - Terraria
There are two things I like in video games: I like making stuff, and I like blowing stuff up. Terraria offers both options in spades, so I like Terraria. A lot, in fact. Enough to net the #1 spot on my games of the year list for 2011.
Terraria is reminiscent of Minecraft, but it's got a few aspects that I think set it apart, positively. First, Terraria has a bit more direction for you. There are feats to accomplish, and rewards for doing so:
Finally, and I may get some detractors here, but I think Terraria's just a better-looking game. The graphics are eye-pleasing if simplistic, and everything is crisp and easy to see. It may run on basically Super Nintendo graphics, but the Super Nintendo did alright. I don't remember people ever complaining that Final Fantasy III didn't look good enough.
Terraria's got a nice flavor when played multiplayer, as it adds in that level of panic that all good multiplayer needs. You can work together to take down bosses, and cover each other while harvesting the lands resources. It's also got a PvP option, though I've never used it. But I could see it being fun, in the right circumstances.
More than anything, I like Terraria's potential. The game has received two huge updates since I purchased it last year, and I've read plenty of articles of people talking about their gaming experiences, and sharing their creations. I've really enjoyed what I've seen so far, and I'm excited about how much more it can be.
Oh. And as always...fuck Valentine's Day.
Terraria is reminiscent of Minecraft, but it's got a few aspects that I think set it apart, positively. First, Terraria has a bit more direction for you. There are feats to accomplish, and rewards for doing so:
- Build a house? You now have somewhere safe from zombies when night falls, and a place for NPCs to hang out.
- Shatter an evil orb? A meteorite may fall from the sky, giving you access to a unique resource to craft better armor and weapons.
- Defeat Skeletron, a floating skeleton head and a pair of bony hands? The tailor is free of his curse, and can offer you his wares.
Finally, and I may get some detractors here, but I think Terraria's just a better-looking game. The graphics are eye-pleasing if simplistic, and everything is crisp and easy to see. It may run on basically Super Nintendo graphics, but the Super Nintendo did alright. I don't remember people ever complaining that Final Fantasy III didn't look good enough.
Terraria's got a nice flavor when played multiplayer, as it adds in that level of panic that all good multiplayer needs. You can work together to take down bosses, and cover each other while harvesting the lands resources. It's also got a PvP option, though I've never used it. But I could see it being fun, in the right circumstances.
More than anything, I like Terraria's potential. The game has received two huge updates since I purchased it last year, and I've read plenty of articles of people talking about their gaming experiences, and sharing their creations. I've really enjoyed what I've seen so far, and I'm excited about how much more it can be.
Oh. And as always...fuck Valentine's Day.
Monday, February 13, 2012
2011 Games of the Year #2 - Dead Island
As someone who's got a history of liking zombie games, I looked forward to Dead Island for a while. From Left 4 Dead to Dead Rising, and through a plethora of lesser games, I've always been on the lookout for another zombie game. Something about killing zombies just feels gratifying, more so than Nazis or wild beasts. It's like I'm doing God's work...
Dead Island is a slightly different kind of game from a lot of the other zombie games out there, though. It draws on two games in particular: Left 4 Dead (obviously) and Borderlands (not so obviously). The basic scenario (zombies overrunning everything) and many of the enemies seem to hearken back to Left 4 Dead. And it definitely induces the same sort of panic when you start getting pummeled by the infected.
But overall, the game is actually more like Borderlands, morphed into a melee-heavy game. You spend a lot of time accumulating gear and doing quests. The missions are fairly straight-forward: kill X zombies, collect Y supplies, escort Z bastard back to base. Yes, there are escort quests, and yes, they suck ass, just as they do in every other game. But the innate universal bullshit of escort quests isn't enough to counter the substantial awesomeness of Dead Island.
One of the cooler facets of the game is the crafting of new weapons. You can take a simple weapon like a baseball bat and add barbed wire or razors, or take a machete and charge it with electricity. You can also create bombs, Molotov cocktails, and ammunition. Guns aren't all that useful in the game, but they have their place. Mostly, though, you're hacking and slashing up close and personal, which gets pretty tense. Especially because you really can't take many hits before you're toast.
Multiplayer is enjoyable, though you'll likely miss out on some of the cutscenes because people click through, or because you're hearing your friend talk shit. Truthfully, though, the story in my experience so far has been fairly blah, so you're not missing much. The negatives of missing plot points are far outweighed by the enjoyment of partnering up with three friends and stomping on zombie skulls.
Though there are ways to improve upon it, Dead Island one of the strongest zombie games out there.
Dead Island is a slightly different kind of game from a lot of the other zombie games out there, though. It draws on two games in particular: Left 4 Dead (obviously) and Borderlands (not so obviously). The basic scenario (zombies overrunning everything) and many of the enemies seem to hearken back to Left 4 Dead. And it definitely induces the same sort of panic when you start getting pummeled by the infected.
But overall, the game is actually more like Borderlands, morphed into a melee-heavy game. You spend a lot of time accumulating gear and doing quests. The missions are fairly straight-forward: kill X zombies, collect Y supplies, escort Z bastard back to base. Yes, there are escort quests, and yes, they suck ass, just as they do in every other game. But the innate universal bullshit of escort quests isn't enough to counter the substantial awesomeness of Dead Island.
One of the cooler facets of the game is the crafting of new weapons. You can take a simple weapon like a baseball bat and add barbed wire or razors, or take a machete and charge it with electricity. You can also create bombs, Molotov cocktails, and ammunition. Guns aren't all that useful in the game, but they have their place. Mostly, though, you're hacking and slashing up close and personal, which gets pretty tense. Especially because you really can't take many hits before you're toast.
Multiplayer is enjoyable, though you'll likely miss out on some of the cutscenes because people click through, or because you're hearing your friend talk shit. Truthfully, though, the story in my experience so far has been fairly blah, so you're not missing much. The negatives of missing plot points are far outweighed by the enjoyment of partnering up with three friends and stomping on zombie skulls.
Though there are ways to improve upon it, Dead Island one of the strongest zombie games out there.
Friday, February 10, 2012
2011 Games of the Year #3 - Magic 2012
As Anthony put it, "The game so nice you bought it twice!"
Many months ago, Xbox Live had a sale that dropped Magic 2012's price down to $5, and so I jumped on it. I've always been intrigued by Magic: The Gathering, but it's quite a complex system, which makes it a bit intimidating. And when you're a nerd like me, you're easily intimidated. I had bought the previous version, and I found it fun, but frustrating, as it was pretty buggy. Interesting enough that I was willing to give the new version a half a shot, and boy am I glad I did.
The game is...well, it's Magic. But there are a few things that the game does particularly well to bridge the gap between Magic neophyte and total nerd-bomb.
The first thing is the decks. They start you with just two decks to choose from, and they're fairly straight-forward decks. That's not to say they don't have their own intricacies and nuances, they're just a little easier to spot. As you play the game and win matches, you unlock more and more decks, with escalating levels of complexity. So by the time you win the last few decks, you've learned enough to actually be able to use them effectively.
The second bridging factor is the use of "puzzles." The advanced puzzles are mostly exercises in frustration, but the first 6 or 7 are learning tools. They help you learn about some of the more common keywords and activated abilities, and teach you (often through trial and error) how the different cards work together, and how to generate synergies. Some of it can be frustrating, but it's pretty damn gratifying when your plans come together perfectly.
It's got online multiplayer which is entertaining enough, but the most fun I've had playing the game is playing local multiplayer, using the Archenemy feature. Archenemy is a 3 vs. 1 game, where the solo player gets bonus "schemes" that give him a distinct advantage. Only by the three players working together can they defeat the Archenemy, and Nick, Eddie and I have spent several hours working together to try to take down the super-villain.
In Steam's end-of-the-year sale, the PC version of Magic went on a deep enough discount, and enough of my friends purchased it that I grabbed a second copy so that I could play with them. And in fact, I purchased a third copy that I gave to Scooter, so we could play some cross-continent battles. They've come out with three deck packs that offer two new decks apiece, and I've purchased all three for PC, as well as two of the three for 360.
It's a good strategy game that takes some time to get the hang of, but when you do, it's a lot of fun. And the games are short enough that you don't have to play for four hours to feel like you did something. I'm looking at you, World of Warcraft.
Many months ago, Xbox Live had a sale that dropped Magic 2012's price down to $5, and so I jumped on it. I've always been intrigued by Magic: The Gathering, but it's quite a complex system, which makes it a bit intimidating. And when you're a nerd like me, you're easily intimidated. I had bought the previous version, and I found it fun, but frustrating, as it was pretty buggy. Interesting enough that I was willing to give the new version a half a shot, and boy am I glad I did.
The game is...well, it's Magic. But there are a few things that the game does particularly well to bridge the gap between Magic neophyte and total nerd-bomb.
The first thing is the decks. They start you with just two decks to choose from, and they're fairly straight-forward decks. That's not to say they don't have their own intricacies and nuances, they're just a little easier to spot. As you play the game and win matches, you unlock more and more decks, with escalating levels of complexity. So by the time you win the last few decks, you've learned enough to actually be able to use them effectively.
The second bridging factor is the use of "puzzles." The advanced puzzles are mostly exercises in frustration, but the first 6 or 7 are learning tools. They help you learn about some of the more common keywords and activated abilities, and teach you (often through trial and error) how the different cards work together, and how to generate synergies. Some of it can be frustrating, but it's pretty damn gratifying when your plans come together perfectly.
It's got online multiplayer which is entertaining enough, but the most fun I've had playing the game is playing local multiplayer, using the Archenemy feature. Archenemy is a 3 vs. 1 game, where the solo player gets bonus "schemes" that give him a distinct advantage. Only by the three players working together can they defeat the Archenemy, and Nick, Eddie and I have spent several hours working together to try to take down the super-villain.
In Steam's end-of-the-year sale, the PC version of Magic went on a deep enough discount, and enough of my friends purchased it that I grabbed a second copy so that I could play with them. And in fact, I purchased a third copy that I gave to Scooter, so we could play some cross-continent battles. They've come out with three deck packs that offer two new decks apiece, and I've purchased all three for PC, as well as two of the three for 360.
It's a good strategy game that takes some time to get the hang of, but when you do, it's a lot of fun. And the games are short enough that you don't have to play for four hours to feel like you did something. I'm looking at you, World of Warcraft.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
2011 Games of the Year #4 - Jolly Rover
There was no way I could've predicted this game making the top five list at the beginning of the year. There was also no way I could've predicted this game making my top five when I actually started playing the game. Jolly Rover wasn't striking off the bat, and it wasn't a particularly long, or challenging, or immersive game. And yet, all those aspects seemed to work together just fine to create a perfectly enjoyable game.
Jolly Rover is a point-and-click adventure game, like the old King's Quest and Police Quest games. Your character is a poor, scrawny little pirate dog, so you can't use brute force or high tech gadgets to accomplish your goals. You have to use your wits, your instincts, and the occasional input from your chirpy little parrot, who gives you clues if you give him a cracker.
Anyways, you move through your mission...quest...thing, meeting characters, getting bullied, and making funny asides. The puzzles are fairly interesting, and the jokes are actually quite witty. As I said, the game isn't an epic, but that actually works in its favor. The humor might run thin over a 14-hour game, but for just a few hours, it stays fresh and fun.
The one half-complaint I have about the game is that you can't lose. I don't mean that you have to start over if you fail; I mean that you literally aren't allowed to do anything that would cost you the game. In this regard, Jolly Rover is more of a cinematic experience than a game. But you definitely don't feel like you're not part of the adventure.
The best thing I can say about Jolly Rover is that it reminded me how much fun I used to have playing point-and-click adventure games. It was a fun, quick experience that I'm glad to have had.
Jolly Rover is a point-and-click adventure game, like the old King's Quest and Police Quest games. Your character is a poor, scrawny little pirate dog, so you can't use brute force or high tech gadgets to accomplish your goals. You have to use your wits, your instincts, and the occasional input from your chirpy little parrot, who gives you clues if you give him a cracker.
Anyways, you move through your mission...quest...thing, meeting characters, getting bullied, and making funny asides. The puzzles are fairly interesting, and the jokes are actually quite witty. As I said, the game isn't an epic, but that actually works in its favor. The humor might run thin over a 14-hour game, but for just a few hours, it stays fresh and fun.
The one half-complaint I have about the game is that you can't lose. I don't mean that you have to start over if you fail; I mean that you literally aren't allowed to do anything that would cost you the game. In this regard, Jolly Rover is more of a cinematic experience than a game. But you definitely don't feel like you're not part of the adventure.
The best thing I can say about Jolly Rover is that it reminded me how much fun I used to have playing point-and-click adventure games. It was a fun, quick experience that I'm glad to have had.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
2011 Games of the Year #5 - Pokemon Pinball Ruby/Sapphire
Way back when I was living at home, we had kind of an unreliable power situation. When weather hit, either heavy thunderstorms or heavy snow, we often lost electricity at the house, and we'd have to either sit around and do nothing or play Kevin's Game Boy. So we'd usually trade off turns on the original Pokemon Pinball.
With a 17-hour train trip down to Disney World at the beginning of 2011, I knew I'd need to be entertained for a while. So I grabbed my own Game Boy Advance and snagged a copy of Pokemon Pinball Ruby/Sapphire to fill the time. And it was worth it.
The game is simple enough; it's pinball. There are two boards, one much more difficult than the other, but both follow the same basic premise. You capture various pokemon, evolve them, run through bonus levels, and so forth. It's really not so much that the game is anything special; it's just a fun, simple game in portable form. Sometimes that's all you need. Good enough for #5 on the list.
With a 17-hour train trip down to Disney World at the beginning of 2011, I knew I'd need to be entertained for a while. So I grabbed my own Game Boy Advance and snagged a copy of Pokemon Pinball Ruby/Sapphire to fill the time. And it was worth it.
The game is simple enough; it's pinball. There are two boards, one much more difficult than the other, but both follow the same basic premise. You capture various pokemon, evolve them, run through bonus levels, and so forth. It's really not so much that the game is anything special; it's just a fun, simple game in portable form. Sometimes that's all you need. Good enough for #5 on the list.
Games of the Year - 2011 Eligible List
Last year was a much different year than previous years as far as my video gaming, the big difference being that I really didn't play much in the way of "new" games. Most of my gaming time was spent revisiting games I had played in the past (Mass Effect, Dead Rising 2, Rollercoaster Tycoon, World of Warcraft) or continuing to play multiplayer games that I started playing a year or two before last (Borderlands, League of Legends). This leaves us with a fairly sparse list of eligible games, and a tough decision on which games will make my top five. But hey, that's why they pay me the big bucks, right?
Here's the list of eligible games for my 2011 Game of the Year:
Gameboy Advance
Mega Man Battle Network 3
Pokemon Pinball Ruby/Sapphire
PC
BIT.TRIP.BEAT
Champions Online
DC Universe Online
Dead Island
Half-Life
Jolly Rover
Magicka
Puzzle Pirates
Terraria
Playstation 3
Call of Duty - Black Ops
Demon's Souls
Xbox 360
Dead Rising 2: Case West
Magic 2012
Here's the list of eligible games for my 2011 Game of the Year:
Gameboy Advance
Mega Man Battle Network 3
Pokemon Pinball Ruby/Sapphire
PC
BIT.TRIP.BEAT
Champions Online
DC Universe Online
Dead Island
Half-Life
Jolly Rover
Magicka
Puzzle Pirates
Terraria
Playstation 3
Call of Duty - Black Ops
Demon's Souls
Xbox 360
Dead Rising 2: Case West
Magic 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
2011 Movies of the Year
Last year was a nice year for me with regards to movies. I watched 47 films over the course of 2011, some of them fantastic, some of them not so good, but all of them added to my deposit of movie knowledge, and if I'm being honest, that's all I really care about: being able to talk to other people about said movies.
There's no point in delaying or discussing this any longer, so let's just get into the list. Top 5 movies I watched in 2011...go!
5. Your Highness - Danny McBride crested quickly after Pineapple Express, but he seems to have already cooled off. I think he's going to (and in fact probably already does) find himself typecast as bone-headed, foul-mouthed, and arrogant. He does it really well, though. And Your Highness is the best combination of comedy and fantasy since The Princess Bride...which basically means it's better than Black Knight. Regardless, it's a fun film with decent action and some good swears and quotable lines.
4. It's Kind of a Funny Story - I'm not one of these people that goes apeshit for everything that Zach Galifianakis touches. In fact, creepy as this is going to sound, Emma Roberts was more of a draw for me in watching this film. Really though, I've just enjoyed most movies about crazy people: Girl Interrupted, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, The Dream Team, A Beautiful Mind, etc. This movie was a lot cuter than most of those, but I liked it a lot all the same. It was fun, sweet, and warm.
3. No Strings Attached - I'll probably take some flack for this pick, but I can't help it. I saw the movie in the theater (making it one of like four movies I saw in the theater last year), and truthfully, I had to pee like the whole time. But also truthfully, I couldn't bring myself to leave the theater, for fear that I'd miss another great joke. My full review is here, so I'll let that tell the whole story, but I can say without a doubt that I laughed more at No Strings Attached than I did at any other movie in 2011.
2. The Muppets - I saw this movie late in 2011...like, December 30th. To give you guys a little background, I loved The Muppet Show when I was a kid. We went to Disney World last week, and even though it's pretty tired and a little outdated, I couldn't help but push us towards going to see The Muppets in 3-D for the umpteenth time, because the Muppets are the most nostalgic piece of television from my childhood. The movie itself was good, though the best jokes were those that poked fun at the movie itself. There were good cameos, fun songs, and a triumph of good over evil. But mostly, it was just really nice to sit and watch my favorite characters from my youth again. I'd be lying if I said I didn't get a little misty-eyed at points.
1. About a Boy - My aunt told me I'd love this movie...about a decade ago. But at that age, I made all sorts of judgments about Hugh Grant, non-action movies, and basically everything on the planet. But after growing up a bit, and after really enjoying some other Nick Hornby works, I decided to give the flick a shot, and it's pretty great. It's not overly negative, but it's realistic, with its fair share of darkness and sorrow. Maybe the most impressive thing about the movie is how genuinely it captures the strange thought processes that a kid can have, especially when presented with trying and serious situations. It's funny in a lot of really great ways, but also boasts a good story. Absolutely deserving of my stamp as Movie of the Year.
Now, as far as 2012 goes. I might have already mentioned this, but I'm not going to review movies as I watch them any longer. I wasn't doing a great job of it as is, and I don't really have enough to say about any particular movie to warrant an entire blog post. I'll still accumulate a list over the year, and I'll start doing this post annually, because it gives me something to do.
And I'll still go to the movies with you. :)
There's no point in delaying or discussing this any longer, so let's just get into the list. Top 5 movies I watched in 2011...go!
5. Your Highness - Danny McBride crested quickly after Pineapple Express, but he seems to have already cooled off. I think he's going to (and in fact probably already does) find himself typecast as bone-headed, foul-mouthed, and arrogant. He does it really well, though. And Your Highness is the best combination of comedy and fantasy since The Princess Bride...which basically means it's better than Black Knight. Regardless, it's a fun film with decent action and some good swears and quotable lines.
4. It's Kind of a Funny Story - I'm not one of these people that goes apeshit for everything that Zach Galifianakis touches. In fact, creepy as this is going to sound, Emma Roberts was more of a draw for me in watching this film. Really though, I've just enjoyed most movies about crazy people: Girl Interrupted, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, The Dream Team, A Beautiful Mind, etc. This movie was a lot cuter than most of those, but I liked it a lot all the same. It was fun, sweet, and warm.
3. No Strings Attached - I'll probably take some flack for this pick, but I can't help it. I saw the movie in the theater (making it one of like four movies I saw in the theater last year), and truthfully, I had to pee like the whole time. But also truthfully, I couldn't bring myself to leave the theater, for fear that I'd miss another great joke. My full review is here, so I'll let that tell the whole story, but I can say without a doubt that I laughed more at No Strings Attached than I did at any other movie in 2011.
2. The Muppets - I saw this movie late in 2011...like, December 30th. To give you guys a little background, I loved The Muppet Show when I was a kid. We went to Disney World last week, and even though it's pretty tired and a little outdated, I couldn't help but push us towards going to see The Muppets in 3-D for the umpteenth time, because the Muppets are the most nostalgic piece of television from my childhood. The movie itself was good, though the best jokes were those that poked fun at the movie itself. There were good cameos, fun songs, and a triumph of good over evil. But mostly, it was just really nice to sit and watch my favorite characters from my youth again. I'd be lying if I said I didn't get a little misty-eyed at points.
1. About a Boy - My aunt told me I'd love this movie...about a decade ago. But at that age, I made all sorts of judgments about Hugh Grant, non-action movies, and basically everything on the planet. But after growing up a bit, and after really enjoying some other Nick Hornby works, I decided to give the flick a shot, and it's pretty great. It's not overly negative, but it's realistic, with its fair share of darkness and sorrow. Maybe the most impressive thing about the movie is how genuinely it captures the strange thought processes that a kid can have, especially when presented with trying and serious situations. It's funny in a lot of really great ways, but also boasts a good story. Absolutely deserving of my stamp as Movie of the Year.
Now, as far as 2012 goes. I might have already mentioned this, but I'm not going to review movies as I watch them any longer. I wasn't doing a great job of it as is, and I don't really have enough to say about any particular movie to warrant an entire blog post. I'll still accumulate a list over the year, and I'll start doing this post annually, because it gives me something to do.
And I'll still go to the movies with you. :)
The Year That Will Be...2012
In all likelihood, if you're reading this post, you read my recent post summarizing my 2011. In re-reading it, I noticed that the blog might've come across slightly more negatively than I intended. While 2011 was by no means a rousing success, it certainly had its bright spots. Some I'm happy to talk about, some I'd rather not talk about, and a few I can't really remember. But enough that I should probably look back on the year a little more fondly than I do. And maybe, from a farther vantage point (aka in the future), I will.
But for today, we'll look into the near future, and make plans for 2012. Not concrete plans (though I did cash in on my concrete plans to visit Disney World last week), but a variety of..."intentions." I won't call them resolutions, because I feel like resolutions are either too vague (eat better, exercise more, be less of a racist asshole) or too easily dismissed as impossible after six weeks (see the previous list). I like the word "intentions," because it captures my sentiments. I intend to do these things.
What things, you ask? I'm not telling.
Not now, at least. I have written them down, and I even created a little worksheet for myself to track some of them. But some of them are too personal, and some are irrelevant to most of you. Most of all, though, I've found that I rely far too heavily on other people for my happiness. Involving other people right from the get-go just sets me up for disappointment, when I don't get two dozen emails and comments regarding my list.
But, because I like living in the limelight, I'll give you a little glimpse into my list of intentions. If you're looking for "train a team of guinea pigs to row a tiny boat" though, you may be disappointed.
- I am hoping to get myself back on the fitness train. I had a real nice first half of the year in 2011, but I undid way too much of that good work over the second half. I'm not sure exactly how I'm going to do it, but I'm going to try to find a way to get myself back on that horse.
- Similarly, the first half of last year I spent a lot of time working on creating a board game. I even had a test playthrough of the rough draft. The playthrough was informative, though it ended up with me deciding that the concept had to be split into two different games. My goal this year is to finish one of those games.
- I also want to be more social this year. I have a couple different concepts on how to make that happen which I won't go into, but the general idea is to get out more and do more.
Whether or not I'll be successful at these and my other, private or uninteresting goals remains to be seen, but no matter what, I hope to have an enjoyable and productive 2012, and I wish the same for all of you.
Also I hope the world doesn't end.
But for today, we'll look into the near future, and make plans for 2012. Not concrete plans (though I did cash in on my concrete plans to visit Disney World last week), but a variety of..."intentions." I won't call them resolutions, because I feel like resolutions are either too vague (eat better, exercise more, be less of a racist asshole) or too easily dismissed as impossible after six weeks (see the previous list). I like the word "intentions," because it captures my sentiments. I intend to do these things.
What things, you ask? I'm not telling.
Not now, at least. I have written them down, and I even created a little worksheet for myself to track some of them. But some of them are too personal, and some are irrelevant to most of you. Most of all, though, I've found that I rely far too heavily on other people for my happiness. Involving other people right from the get-go just sets me up for disappointment, when I don't get two dozen emails and comments regarding my list.
But, because I like living in the limelight, I'll give you a little glimpse into my list of intentions. If you're looking for "train a team of guinea pigs to row a tiny boat" though, you may be disappointed.
- I am hoping to get myself back on the fitness train. I had a real nice first half of the year in 2011, but I undid way too much of that good work over the second half. I'm not sure exactly how I'm going to do it, but I'm going to try to find a way to get myself back on that horse.
- Similarly, the first half of last year I spent a lot of time working on creating a board game. I even had a test playthrough of the rough draft. The playthrough was informative, though it ended up with me deciding that the concept had to be split into two different games. My goal this year is to finish one of those games.
- I also want to be more social this year. I have a couple different concepts on how to make that happen which I won't go into, but the general idea is to get out more and do more.
Whether or not I'll be successful at these and my other, private or uninteresting goals remains to be seen, but no matter what, I hope to have an enjoyable and productive 2012, and I wish the same for all of you.
Also I hope the world doesn't end.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Movies of the Year - 2011 Eligible List
Back in early 2011, I declared that I'd be reviewing movies for the year, similar to my game reviews. This means that my assessments would be not of movies that were released in 2011, but movies that I saw for the first time in 2011. So while some people's lists will have movies like The Help and X-Men: First Class, my list has Rock Star and Scott Pilgrim vs. The World.
In a week or two, I'll post my top five movies of the year. Look forward to that. I command you.
2011 Eligible Movies
28 Weeks Later
30 Minutes or Less
About a Boy
American Gangster
Any Given Sunday
Battle: Los Angeles
Big Fan
Clash of the Titans (2010)
Dave
Day of the Dead (1985)
Day of the Dead (2008)
Fanboys
For Your Consideration
Gamer
Guess Who's Coming To Dinner
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2
Highlander
Iron Man 2
It's Kind of a Funny Story
Law Abiding Citizen
No Strings Attached
Paul
Precious
Predator 2
Rampage
Rock Star
Run Ronnie Run!
Safe Men
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World
Super 8
The Book of Eli
The Crazies (1973)
The Crazies (2010)
The Goods
The Grand
The Men Who Stare At Goats
The Perfect Score
The Winning Season
This is Spinal Tap
Twilight
Twilight - Eclipse
Twilight - New Moon
Underworld: Evolution
Vantage Point
Visioneers
We Are Marshall
Your Highness
In a week or two, I'll post my top five movies of the year. Look forward to that. I command you.
2011 Eligible Movies
28 Weeks Later
30 Minutes or Less
About a Boy
American Gangster
Any Given Sunday
Battle: Los Angeles
Big Fan
Clash of the Titans (2010)
Dave
Day of the Dead (1985)
Day of the Dead (2008)
Fanboys
For Your Consideration
Gamer
Guess Who's Coming To Dinner
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2
Highlander
Iron Man 2
It's Kind of a Funny Story
Law Abiding Citizen
No Strings Attached
Paul
Precious
Predator 2
Rampage
Rock Star
Run Ronnie Run!
Safe Men
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World
Super 8
The Book of Eli
The Crazies (1973)
The Crazies (2010)
The Goods
The Grand
The Men Who Stare At Goats
The Perfect Score
The Winning Season
This is Spinal Tap
Twilight
Twilight - Eclipse
Twilight - New Moon
Underworld: Evolution
Vantage Point
Visioneers
We Are Marshall
Your Highness
The Year That Was...2011
So, 2011 is behind us. For some of us, it was a year of rebirth and renewal, excitement and adventure, accomplishment and...well, doesn't matter, wasn't that for me. Aside from a few invaluable new friends and my little weight loss excursion, 2011 was really just another year gone by for me.
Note: This post will only look back on 2011. My intentions for 2012 will be posted in a future blog.
Looking back inside the scope of the blog, I notice a few things. First, I didn't really do much reviewing of books or TV shows. I didn't review much literature because I really only read a half-dozen books last year. And I didn't review TV shows because it's so rare that you watch the entire run of a TV show that you haven't already seen. I think I watched the full series of three shows last year, and only two of which had I seen for the first time: Dead Like Me and Sports Night. The other was Star Trek: The Next Generation, which was obviously fantastic, but I had mostly already seen.
I did review a fair number of movies. Seventeen, if we're being specific...and there's really no reason not to be, when you have the number. There were movies that I liked a lot that I didn't review. Why? I think because reviewing movies doesn't really speak to me. It's a subjective, arbitrary exercise, and it's tough for me to aggressively analyze and judge a movie, when I'm pretty okay with most movies. I like some more than others, of course. But trying to write up a full blog post about my feelings for a movie never felt right. Something to think about going forward.
I did play some games this year, though, I don't know, I feel like I didn't "accomplish" anything with regards to video games. I played a lot of games I'd already played pretty heavily (NHL '09, Mass Effect, Dead Rising 2, League of Legends), and spent a good deal of time on Terraria, which you can't really beat. I enjoyed all of this time, but there's a certain satisfaction that comes from defeating a game that has a definite endpoint.
The weight loss competition between me and Nick was a definite highlight of the year, not just because I was able to lose some weight, but also because it created mandatory parties every month for six months. It seems like people don't throw parties often enough these days, or maybe I'm just hanging out with the wrong crowd, but I do like parties. I order you all to throw more parties, and invite me.
I'll be posting my brand new Top 5 Movies of the Year post sometime soon, and I'll start the process of examining my year in video games, so look for that series of annual posts as well. Finally, I'll be posting a sort of New Year's Resolutions blog this month, a little less public than a lot of people make their resolutions, and some of my intentions will be kept to myself, but I'll share some of my plans with the four of you who happen upon my blog in the next three months. So, look forward to that.
See ya, 2011.
Note: This post will only look back on 2011. My intentions for 2012 will be posted in a future blog.
Looking back inside the scope of the blog, I notice a few things. First, I didn't really do much reviewing of books or TV shows. I didn't review much literature because I really only read a half-dozen books last year. And I didn't review TV shows because it's so rare that you watch the entire run of a TV show that you haven't already seen. I think I watched the full series of three shows last year, and only two of which had I seen for the first time: Dead Like Me and Sports Night. The other was Star Trek: The Next Generation, which was obviously fantastic, but I had mostly already seen.
I did review a fair number of movies. Seventeen, if we're being specific...and there's really no reason not to be, when you have the number. There were movies that I liked a lot that I didn't review. Why? I think because reviewing movies doesn't really speak to me. It's a subjective, arbitrary exercise, and it's tough for me to aggressively analyze and judge a movie, when I'm pretty okay with most movies. I like some more than others, of course. But trying to write up a full blog post about my feelings for a movie never felt right. Something to think about going forward.
I did play some games this year, though, I don't know, I feel like I didn't "accomplish" anything with regards to video games. I played a lot of games I'd already played pretty heavily (NHL '09, Mass Effect, Dead Rising 2, League of Legends), and spent a good deal of time on Terraria, which you can't really beat. I enjoyed all of this time, but there's a certain satisfaction that comes from defeating a game that has a definite endpoint.
The weight loss competition between me and Nick was a definite highlight of the year, not just because I was able to lose some weight, but also because it created mandatory parties every month for six months. It seems like people don't throw parties often enough these days, or maybe I'm just hanging out with the wrong crowd, but I do like parties. I order you all to throw more parties, and invite me.
I'll be posting my brand new Top 5 Movies of the Year post sometime soon, and I'll start the process of examining my year in video games, so look for that series of annual posts as well. Finally, I'll be posting a sort of New Year's Resolutions blog this month, a little less public than a lot of people make their resolutions, and some of my intentions will be kept to myself, but I'll share some of my plans with the four of you who happen upon my blog in the next three months. So, look forward to that.
See ya, 2011.
Monday, December 12, 2011
Movie Reviewed - Any Given Sunday
Sometimes, you go into a movie expecting a lot, and you're left disappointed. Sometimes, you go into a movie not expecting much, and being pleasantly surprised. And sometimes, you go into a movie expecting mediocrity, and you get it. Such was the case with Any Given Sunday, rated a middling 50% on Rotten Tomatoes.
The movie is about a football team (obviously), struggling to make the playoffs as all teams do. They suffer an injury to their starting quarterback, and the film follows the rise and fall of the backup quarterback, played by Jamie Foxx. He starts out nervous and wild, but shows flashes of brilliance, and becomes one of the big stories of the season.
There are ups and downs, crises of character, and the whole gamut of experiences that we so often encounter in Oliver Stone's films. But the thing about trying to make a non-traditional football movie, a football movie about football players, rather than the team, is that most of the time, you get caught. You get caught between exploring the various characters and their trials, and trying to tell the story of a football team. You delve into the players because as a writer, that's where you wanted to go with this movie. But you follow the team because that's what a lot of movie-goers want to see, and, if we're being truthful, football sells.
Don't misunderstand me, though. There are definitely bright spots in the film. Lawrence Taylor actually does a damn good job portraying a half-crazy defensive star whose injuries put his life at risk. And as a Redskins fan, I can completely identify with an up-and-down season with an intrusive owner. Finally, Al Pacino's big speech (a mandatory in all sports movies) is quite good...and not just because it's used in a montage at Caps games.
But there are too many parts that feel like they're trying to say something that just don't go anywhere. There are so many concurrent storylines that it feels like none of them really get fleshed out appropriately. There's a doctor who over-medicates players (and his intern who disagrees with his actions), a linebacker who's trying to get to a performance incentive, the two quarterbacks each with their own set of circumstances, a legendary coach who's time may have passed, a severe owner who inherited the company from her father, assistant coaches, secondary players, and a whole slew of family and friends.
I'm reminded of a quote from a quirky Michael Douglas movie called Wonder Boys:
The Last Word: Fine. It was fine. Worth seeing once, not worth seeing again.
The movie is about a football team (obviously), struggling to make the playoffs as all teams do. They suffer an injury to their starting quarterback, and the film follows the rise and fall of the backup quarterback, played by Jamie Foxx. He starts out nervous and wild, but shows flashes of brilliance, and becomes one of the big stories of the season.
There are ups and downs, crises of character, and the whole gamut of experiences that we so often encounter in Oliver Stone's films. But the thing about trying to make a non-traditional football movie, a football movie about football players, rather than the team, is that most of the time, you get caught. You get caught between exploring the various characters and their trials, and trying to tell the story of a football team. You delve into the players because as a writer, that's where you wanted to go with this movie. But you follow the team because that's what a lot of movie-goers want to see, and, if we're being truthful, football sells.
Don't misunderstand me, though. There are definitely bright spots in the film. Lawrence Taylor actually does a damn good job portraying a half-crazy defensive star whose injuries put his life at risk. And as a Redskins fan, I can completely identify with an up-and-down season with an intrusive owner. Finally, Al Pacino's big speech (a mandatory in all sports movies) is quite good...and not just because it's used in a montage at Caps games.
But there are too many parts that feel like they're trying to say something that just don't go anywhere. There are so many concurrent storylines that it feels like none of them really get fleshed out appropriately. There's a doctor who over-medicates players (and his intern who disagrees with his actions), a linebacker who's trying to get to a performance incentive, the two quarterbacks each with their own set of circumstances, a legendary coach who's time may have passed, a severe owner who inherited the company from her father, assistant coaches, secondary players, and a whole slew of family and friends.
I'm reminded of a quote from a quirky Michael Douglas movie called Wonder Boys:
"...it sort of reads in places like you didn't make any choices. At all."I think in all work, you have to make decisions to leave things out, to say that this is the story I want to tell, and the only stuff I'm going to include is the stuff that makes this story more complete. The storyline with the team doctor is interesting, but it's utterly useless to the main storyline of the coach, or the secondary storyline of the quarterbacks. I feel like, for as important as teamwork is to football, this movie needed to be a little less about the team.
The Last Word: Fine. It was fine. Worth seeing once, not worth seeing again.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Double Movie Reviewed - The Crazies (1973 & 2010)
How's this for reviewing efficiency? A double review of the original and the remake of The Crazies. Buckle up.
The plot of both movies focuses on a man and woman, a couple who find themselves in a town where people are beginning to act strangely, a result of a crashed plane carrying dangerous chemicals. The government steps in and attempts to first contain, then eliminate the infected people, with brutal results. The couple, along with a small party, move through the city and attempt to escape the madness.
(1973)
The original film, directed by horror legend George Romero, is a fairly typical horror story these days: infection, deaths, hysteria, many many more deaths, and a morbid ending. While predictable, though, the story and the acting are able to carry it enough that it's plenty entertaining.
One of the convenient things about this story concept is that it doesn't demand that the movie create fantastic special effects. In fact, part of what makes the story compelling is its utter realism. You don't have to believe in the living dead or alien invasions or ghosts to be able to buy into the concept of the story. It's simply a town where everyone is losing their minds. Additionally, this non-difference between infected people and regular people is a precipitating factor in one of the turning points late in the movie.
The Last Word: The original flick is definitely enjoyable. It obviously suffers from unexceptional special effects, but it survives that shortcoming to still be an entertaining movie.
(2010)
The remake of Romero's original can best be described as "modern." The basic story is consistent, but the execution is considerably darker, and things turn morbid quickly. It's a fairly predictable adjustment of the old story, incorporating a lot more panic, fear, and bloody, bloody murder. It's got my brother's favorite actor Timothy Olyphant, who I laugh at because his name is from Lord of the Rings.
But seriously, for a remake, this version has a pretty different tone. It's heavy-handed, violent, and gory. That's not to say that it's not enjoyable; it has its place. But in the modern translation, some of the finesse of the original is lost.
The Last Word: A tense, action-packed ride that follows two people through an increasingly unstable world. It's not going to blow your mind, but if you want to just curl up and be frightened, you're in business.
The plot of both movies focuses on a man and woman, a couple who find themselves in a town where people are beginning to act strangely, a result of a crashed plane carrying dangerous chemicals. The government steps in and attempts to first contain, then eliminate the infected people, with brutal results. The couple, along with a small party, move through the city and attempt to escape the madness.
(1973)
The original film, directed by horror legend George Romero, is a fairly typical horror story these days: infection, deaths, hysteria, many many more deaths, and a morbid ending. While predictable, though, the story and the acting are able to carry it enough that it's plenty entertaining.
One of the convenient things about this story concept is that it doesn't demand that the movie create fantastic special effects. In fact, part of what makes the story compelling is its utter realism. You don't have to believe in the living dead or alien invasions or ghosts to be able to buy into the concept of the story. It's simply a town where everyone is losing their minds. Additionally, this non-difference between infected people and regular people is a precipitating factor in one of the turning points late in the movie.
The Last Word: The original flick is definitely enjoyable. It obviously suffers from unexceptional special effects, but it survives that shortcoming to still be an entertaining movie.
(2010)
The remake of Romero's original can best be described as "modern." The basic story is consistent, but the execution is considerably darker, and things turn morbid quickly. It's a fairly predictable adjustment of the old story, incorporating a lot more panic, fear, and bloody, bloody murder. It's got my brother's favorite actor Timothy Olyphant, who I laugh at because his name is from Lord of the Rings.
But seriously, for a remake, this version has a pretty different tone. It's heavy-handed, violent, and gory. That's not to say that it's not enjoyable; it has its place. But in the modern translation, some of the finesse of the original is lost.
The Last Word: A tense, action-packed ride that follows two people through an increasingly unstable world. It's not going to blow your mind, but if you want to just curl up and be frightened, you're in business.
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Movie Reviewed - Highlander
There can be only one.
For whatever else you might think of it, Highlander gave us one of the all time great lines in movie history. And there are plenty of reasons to either love or hate Highlander, depending on your ability and/or willingness to suspend reality, and put aside some completely over-the-top acting.
The story is interesting enough, as it attempts to incorporate a medieval fantasy story into modern times. It's clearly written by a young man, but as I've got the maturity level of a pimply 15-year-old, I can appreciate it. Connor McLeod (Christopher Lambert) is a Scottish highlander who discovers that he's one of a select few Immortals, destined to live forever until decapitated by another Immortal, culminating at an epic battle in New York City (I told you, it was clearly written by a young man).
The fight scenes are good. They're not the insane fight scenes that you get in a lot of new movies, but that almost makes them more believable. They're angry and loud, and while they don't give you the "oh shit!" moments that modern action scenes do, they seem to fit into the story perfectly.
The actual story progression is fairly slow, though, and outside of Sean Connery, the acting is gratuitous. While the concept of the story is interesting, the execution of it, particularly the modern portions in New York, are bland and uninspired. I think it'd be better served by spending more time following the many lifetimes of the various Immortals. It's possible that some of the sequels or the subsequent television show go into this, which is why I'll probably end up checking them out at some point.
There are a few well-placed Queen songs in the movie, and the villain is well-cast and, though he's a little much sometimes, well-acted. The love story is a little far-fetched, but in a world with people who live forever, some irrational acts by a woman don't seem so unreasonable. And in the end, you do find yourself rooting for the hero, which is kind of mandatory for any solid action flick. I think it's a film that gets over-appreciated sometimes, under-appreciated other times, and the reality is that it resides somewhere in the middle. Overall, I liked it as a time-killer, and am glad that I finally got around to watching it.
The Last Word: A neat concept along with plenty of Queen songs and some intense swordfights make for a decent enough movie, which is how I'd classify Highlander: decent enough.
For whatever else you might think of it, Highlander gave us one of the all time great lines in movie history. And there are plenty of reasons to either love or hate Highlander, depending on your ability and/or willingness to suspend reality, and put aside some completely over-the-top acting.
The story is interesting enough, as it attempts to incorporate a medieval fantasy story into modern times. It's clearly written by a young man, but as I've got the maturity level of a pimply 15-year-old, I can appreciate it. Connor McLeod (Christopher Lambert) is a Scottish highlander who discovers that he's one of a select few Immortals, destined to live forever until decapitated by another Immortal, culminating at an epic battle in New York City (I told you, it was clearly written by a young man).
The fight scenes are good. They're not the insane fight scenes that you get in a lot of new movies, but that almost makes them more believable. They're angry and loud, and while they don't give you the "oh shit!" moments that modern action scenes do, they seem to fit into the story perfectly.
The actual story progression is fairly slow, though, and outside of Sean Connery, the acting is gratuitous. While the concept of the story is interesting, the execution of it, particularly the modern portions in New York, are bland and uninspired. I think it'd be better served by spending more time following the many lifetimes of the various Immortals. It's possible that some of the sequels or the subsequent television show go into this, which is why I'll probably end up checking them out at some point.
There are a few well-placed Queen songs in the movie, and the villain is well-cast and, though he's a little much sometimes, well-acted. The love story is a little far-fetched, but in a world with people who live forever, some irrational acts by a woman don't seem so unreasonable. And in the end, you do find yourself rooting for the hero, which is kind of mandatory for any solid action flick. I think it's a film that gets over-appreciated sometimes, under-appreciated other times, and the reality is that it resides somewhere in the middle. Overall, I liked it as a time-killer, and am glad that I finally got around to watching it.
The Last Word: A neat concept along with plenty of Queen songs and some intense swordfights make for a decent enough movie, which is how I'd classify Highlander: decent enough.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Movie Reviews - Lightning Round
I know it's been a while since I posted a review, and I've seen several movies in the meantime. Additionally, the year is coming to an end, and I'd like to have most of these movies reviewed by the end of the year, so you can prepare yourself for my "Movies of the Year" post (which will undoubtedly be dominated by movies that did not come out this year).
So, in order to provide a more complete picture of my film experience this year, I'm going to be going through sort of a "lightning round" of reviews. They'll be a little shorter than usual, but they'll be posted much more frequently. Hopefully I'll get through any movies you were hoping to hear me write about. If, after the first of the year, there are any movies I didn't review that you were really hoping to hear me talk about, by all means, badger me.
So, in order to provide a more complete picture of my film experience this year, I'm going to be going through sort of a "lightning round" of reviews. They'll be a little shorter than usual, but they'll be posted much more frequently. Hopefully I'll get through any movies you were hoping to hear me write about. If, after the first of the year, there are any movies I didn't review that you were really hoping to hear me talk about, by all means, badger me.
Friday, October 7, 2011
Book and Movie Reviewed - Twilight
I decided to combine these two reviews, since A) they're about the same story, and B) who wants to read two different reviews for basically the same thing? So here we go.
For anyone who's been living under a rock for the past few years, Twilight is a story about a girl, Isabella Swan, who meets and falls in love with a vampire, Edward Cullen. You know, typical high school love story.
Actually, kind of, yes. The main characters are regularly overwhelmed with emotion, a very "high school" reaction to meeting a cute boy or a pretty girl. The explanation is that there's something special about Bella, her blood in particular, that makes her irresistible to Edward (and very appealing to other vampires as well). Which, okay, I mean, regular human dudes all want to get drunk with Minka Kelly, and regular human ladies all want Tom Brady to take them to the dance. So the concept of an innate attractiveness isn't so far-fetched.
The story is totally and completely a love story, which means that it's not going to appeal to everyone in every mood. When you're not of the right mind going in, the intensely strong emotions, teenage angst, and the countless obstacles to a "happy ending" can be frustrating, or downright depressing. But in the proper context of your own mind, it's an appealing story with some interesting, if fairly one-dimensional, characters.
As is often the case, the book offers a much deeper look at the inner workings of each character. You get to experience Bella's initial frustration, then watch as it slides over to curiosity, then grows to romance, and finally to...well, I don't want to call it "love," because it's something different from that. I don't believe that "love" can develop as quickly as things progress in this story. Something more like infatuation is what develops between Edward and Bella. But their devotion to each other is something that can only develop over time, and the movie just doesn't take long enough to show how it blossomed.
My other main qualm with the movie is that it occasionally features bizarre cinematography that I can only classify as "artsy." It's the kind of stuff that turned The New World into my least favorite movie of all time. I'm sure it was an attempt to set itself apart from other young adult books converted into movies (read: Harry Potter), but I've never been one to care much for nonstandard filming techniques or attempts at artistry using light layers or unique shuttering or whatever else movie people would call the stuff that they did. I just know that there were a few moments when I found myself colossally bored while the director explored different ways to film Robert Pattinson and the state of Washington. We get it, he's handsome, and the Pacific northwest is dreary.
That being said, as a guy (and one who's in a constant state of disillusionment when it comes to romance), some of the book dragged a bit. I get that the content was necessary to illustrate how deeply Bella was falling for Edward, but I wish the author had managed to have it manifest in a little more activity. Not action necessarily, just, something.
All in all, I'd rate the two equal when compared with other similar media. They were both solid, not the best, but entertaining.
The Last Word: I know I'm sort of behind the times, so my recommendation mostly falls on ears that already made their decision regarding the book and movie, so the most I could offer is, if you've seen/read one, but not the other, go for it. You'll enjoy it.
For anyone who's been living under a rock for the past few years, Twilight is a story about a girl, Isabella Swan, who meets and falls in love with a vampire, Edward Cullen. You know, typical high school love story.
Actually, kind of, yes. The main characters are regularly overwhelmed with emotion, a very "high school" reaction to meeting a cute boy or a pretty girl. The explanation is that there's something special about Bella, her blood in particular, that makes her irresistible to Edward (and very appealing to other vampires as well). Which, okay, I mean, regular human dudes all want to get drunk with Minka Kelly, and regular human ladies all want Tom Brady to take them to the dance. So the concept of an innate attractiveness isn't so far-fetched.
The story is totally and completely a love story, which means that it's not going to appeal to everyone in every mood. When you're not of the right mind going in, the intensely strong emotions, teenage angst, and the countless obstacles to a "happy ending" can be frustrating, or downright depressing. But in the proper context of your own mind, it's an appealing story with some interesting, if fairly one-dimensional, characters.
As is often the case, the book offers a much deeper look at the inner workings of each character. You get to experience Bella's initial frustration, then watch as it slides over to curiosity, then grows to romance, and finally to...well, I don't want to call it "love," because it's something different from that. I don't believe that "love" can develop as quickly as things progress in this story. Something more like infatuation is what develops between Edward and Bella. But their devotion to each other is something that can only develop over time, and the movie just doesn't take long enough to show how it blossomed.
My other main qualm with the movie is that it occasionally features bizarre cinematography that I can only classify as "artsy." It's the kind of stuff that turned The New World into my least favorite movie of all time. I'm sure it was an attempt to set itself apart from other young adult books converted into movies (read: Harry Potter), but I've never been one to care much for nonstandard filming techniques or attempts at artistry using light layers or unique shuttering or whatever else movie people would call the stuff that they did. I just know that there were a few moments when I found myself colossally bored while the director explored different ways to film Robert Pattinson and the state of Washington. We get it, he's handsome, and the Pacific northwest is dreary.
That being said, as a guy (and one who's in a constant state of disillusionment when it comes to romance), some of the book dragged a bit. I get that the content was necessary to illustrate how deeply Bella was falling for Edward, but I wish the author had managed to have it manifest in a little more activity. Not action necessarily, just, something.
All in all, I'd rate the two equal when compared with other similar media. They were both solid, not the best, but entertaining.
The Last Word: I know I'm sort of behind the times, so my recommendation mostly falls on ears that already made their decision regarding the book and movie, so the most I could offer is, if you've seen/read one, but not the other, go for it. You'll enjoy it.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Movie Reviewed - Clash of the Titans (2010)
I never saw the original Clash of the Titans. I thought about getting it first from Netflix as I did with The Crazies and Dawn of the Dead, but for whatever reason, I ended up just getting the new one. Maybe at some point I'll go back and check out the original, but probably not anytime soon. I wasn't exactly wowed by the reboot.
The plot follows the myth of Perseus. I'm sure liberties were taken, but not knowing the original story, any discrepancies are incapable of bothering me. Which is kind of nice, having seen how people lost their shit when the elves showed up at Helm's Deep in the second Lord of the Rings film. The basic story is that Perseus is the half-human son of Zeus, he and other gods make various decisions regarding the mortal realm, monsters get involved...you know, standard mythology.
The special effects were pretty impressive, resulting in some very entertaining battle scenes with the aforementioned monsters. Perseus' traveling party also has some interesting members, which make the adventure more fun.
But the effects don't overtake the weakness of story or tepid acting in Clash of the Titans. While the action scenes are intense and fun, you simply do not care at all about the characters or their hardships. I think part of this comes from the innate difficulty of creating tension when a character may or may not be immortal. The fear of death is what makes a lot of stories engaging, and you're not really sure how mortal the half-son of a god is. Great acting could trump that (see Gandalf in Lord of the Rings), but there's no Ian McKellen in this film.
As I said, normally I watch the original movie before the remake, and that lets me feel comfortable watching the newer movie later, on the assumption that it'll at least be a little more watchable from a special effects standpoint. That's the circumstance with The Crazies, (though I actually enjoyed the original of that movie as well). So I don't expect to be watching the original Clash of the Titans any time soon.
Of course, that won't stop me buying that rum and..."Releasing the Kraken!"
The Last Word: I feel like the movie tried to get by on a few quotable moments and some dynamite effects, which happens all too frequently these days. The effects were fine, and the quotes were okay, but such things do not make a great film.
The plot follows the myth of Perseus. I'm sure liberties were taken, but not knowing the original story, any discrepancies are incapable of bothering me. Which is kind of nice, having seen how people lost their shit when the elves showed up at Helm's Deep in the second Lord of the Rings film. The basic story is that Perseus is the half-human son of Zeus, he and other gods make various decisions regarding the mortal realm, monsters get involved...you know, standard mythology.
The special effects were pretty impressive, resulting in some very entertaining battle scenes with the aforementioned monsters. Perseus' traveling party also has some interesting members, which make the adventure more fun.
But the effects don't overtake the weakness of story or tepid acting in Clash of the Titans. While the action scenes are intense and fun, you simply do not care at all about the characters or their hardships. I think part of this comes from the innate difficulty of creating tension when a character may or may not be immortal. The fear of death is what makes a lot of stories engaging, and you're not really sure how mortal the half-son of a god is. Great acting could trump that (see Gandalf in Lord of the Rings), but there's no Ian McKellen in this film.
As I said, normally I watch the original movie before the remake, and that lets me feel comfortable watching the newer movie later, on the assumption that it'll at least be a little more watchable from a special effects standpoint. That's the circumstance with The Crazies, (though I actually enjoyed the original of that movie as well). So I don't expect to be watching the original Clash of the Titans any time soon.
Of course, that won't stop me buying that rum and..."Releasing the Kraken!"
The Last Word: I feel like the movie tried to get by on a few quotable moments and some dynamite effects, which happens all too frequently these days. The effects were fine, and the quotes were okay, but such things do not make a great film.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Movie Reviewed - For Your Consideration
Some of Christopher Guest's work is masterful. Best In Show was a great story about a lot of really compelling characters, portrayed perfectly. A Mighty Wind had a lot of that same magic. This Is Spinal Tap was decent, though didn't have the impact on me that it did for many others. So it stood to reason that I'd enjoy For Your Consideration, which features a lot of the same cast (Catherine O'Hara, Fred Willard, Eugene Levy, John Michael Higgins).
Unfortunately, it didn't happen that way.
For Your Consideration is a movie about a movie, which might make some of my description confusing. Anyways, the film is called Home for Purim, and it features a few lesser-known actors. Some way or another (it's never fully explored), a bit of Oscar buzz is generated about one of the leads, then another, then another. FYC follows the actors, the director, and other ancillary characters as the movie is tweaked, then completely altered, filmed, and reviewed. Their reactions are stereotypically Hollywood-ish, taking the whispers of awards and running with them, as far and as fast as possible.
Watching actors portraying "actors" acting like actors should have been an easy road to humor, but mostly it comes across as frustrating or disappointing. Honestly, the movie makes you wonder if the on-screen talent in the real world is just as shallow and jealous, and ultimately clueless. We all hear nice stories about Tom Hanks or Kiefer Sutherland, but who knows if they're accurate. Certainly we're at least willing to believe that a lot of Hollywood stars are more like the guys from Entourage and less like the guys from The Lonely Island.
Guest is well-known for having some looseness with his scripts, and sometimes that creates some gems, as I mentioned at the outset of this review. Honestly, A Mighty Wind and Best In Show are two really, really funny movies. For Your Consideration, though, shows you the risk you run when you allow actors to improvise dialogue. It can get messy, and unfocused, and if it's not funny, you just have a crummy movie.
The Last Word: Go watch the other two movies I mentioned. For Your Consideration is a pass.
Unfortunately, it didn't happen that way.
For Your Consideration is a movie about a movie, which might make some of my description confusing. Anyways, the film is called Home for Purim, and it features a few lesser-known actors. Some way or another (it's never fully explored), a bit of Oscar buzz is generated about one of the leads, then another, then another. FYC follows the actors, the director, and other ancillary characters as the movie is tweaked, then completely altered, filmed, and reviewed. Their reactions are stereotypically Hollywood-ish, taking the whispers of awards and running with them, as far and as fast as possible.
Watching actors portraying "actors" acting like actors should have been an easy road to humor, but mostly it comes across as frustrating or disappointing. Honestly, the movie makes you wonder if the on-screen talent in the real world is just as shallow and jealous, and ultimately clueless. We all hear nice stories about Tom Hanks or Kiefer Sutherland, but who knows if they're accurate. Certainly we're at least willing to believe that a lot of Hollywood stars are more like the guys from Entourage and less like the guys from The Lonely Island.
Guest is well-known for having some looseness with his scripts, and sometimes that creates some gems, as I mentioned at the outset of this review. Honestly, A Mighty Wind and Best In Show are two really, really funny movies. For Your Consideration, though, shows you the risk you run when you allow actors to improvise dialogue. It can get messy, and unfocused, and if it's not funny, you just have a crummy movie.
The Last Word: Go watch the other two movies I mentioned. For Your Consideration is a pass.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Movie Reviewed - The Winning Season
I'm kind of a sucker for Sam Rockwell. He seems to do so well in every role he has, and does especially well when his character is some kind of sinner. Choke was strange, but entertaining. People will look at the lineup for Matchstick Men and deride it because of Nicolas Cage, but Sam Rockwell does fantastically well, and actually, Cage does a very good job as well. The Green Mile was fantastic all around, and Rockwell was as good as anybody.
As I've done with several other actors, I went through Netflix's instantly available movies and added anything that looked interesting and had Rockwell, and The Winning Season was on the list. So, even though my brother chided me for watching it instead of Iron Man 2 (which I've also seen in the meantime), I decided to kill some time one afternoon at work and watch this film.
The basic story is pretty straightforward: Sam Rockwell is a drunk who used to play basketball. An old friend offers him a job coaching the girl's team at his old high school. Once you get past the ludicrous idea that a girl's varsity team would have an independent coach, the plot carries alright. Rockwell does a great job of portraying a guy who you could believe has a good heart, but is buried under the demons of his past.
The progression of the movie is predictable, but sometimes that just means that you get a standard feeling of satisfaction at each turn. Early troubles, moment of clarity, small successes, obstacles, overcoming them, new and seemingly insurmountable obstacles, redemption, etc etc. It's completely unsurprising, but it's pretty well-written and very well-acted, so I wasn't bothered by that. Though, truthfully, I'm not someone who gets bothered by predictability very often.
I laughed more than a couple times at the film, and Emma Roberts is cute in a "man I wish I was still in high school" kind of way...as she so often is. And Sam Rockwell is very good, as he so often is. I'm glad I watched it...about as glad as I am that I watched Iron Man 2.
The Last Word: I don't know if I'd say it's a must-watch, but if you're bored and in mixed company, you could do a lot worse.
As I've done with several other actors, I went through Netflix's instantly available movies and added anything that looked interesting and had Rockwell, and The Winning Season was on the list. So, even though my brother chided me for watching it instead of Iron Man 2 (which I've also seen in the meantime), I decided to kill some time one afternoon at work and watch this film.
The basic story is pretty straightforward: Sam Rockwell is a drunk who used to play basketball. An old friend offers him a job coaching the girl's team at his old high school. Once you get past the ludicrous idea that a girl's varsity team would have an independent coach, the plot carries alright. Rockwell does a great job of portraying a guy who you could believe has a good heart, but is buried under the demons of his past.
The progression of the movie is predictable, but sometimes that just means that you get a standard feeling of satisfaction at each turn. Early troubles, moment of clarity, small successes, obstacles, overcoming them, new and seemingly insurmountable obstacles, redemption, etc etc. It's completely unsurprising, but it's pretty well-written and very well-acted, so I wasn't bothered by that. Though, truthfully, I'm not someone who gets bothered by predictability very often.
I laughed more than a couple times at the film, and Emma Roberts is cute in a "man I wish I was still in high school" kind of way...as she so often is. And Sam Rockwell is very good, as he so often is. I'm glad I watched it...about as glad as I am that I watched Iron Man 2.
The Last Word: I don't know if I'd say it's a must-watch, but if you're bored and in mixed company, you could do a lot worse.
Monday, September 19, 2011
Movie Reviewed - Fanboys
Let's start with this: I love Star Wars. I know that it's got its flaws, and that a lot of people hated episodes 1, 2, and 3. But my dad watched Star Wars about a dozen times in the theater, and my whole family caught on to the fever. The Star Wars universe has produced some great stuff, like Star Wars - Pod Racer for Nintendo 64 and Knights of the Old Republic for Xbox. This movie, though, doesn't register quite so high on the list.
The plot of the movie is kind of questionable. By that, I mean that I was actually finding myself questioning parts of the plot. Like, "Really? I don't buy that." The basic story is that a few friends who've grown apart over the years are brought back together when one of them finds that he's got terminal cancer. The whole group loves Star Wars, and since Episode One won't come out until after the friend's expected demise, they resolve to break into George Lucas' home to steal the film and watch it while he's still around.
Here's the thing. This movie had all the makings of being really, really good. Anytime you have nerds creating a self-deprecating piece of media, you've got a chance at something fantastic (see: Internet). And they got kind of a fantastic lineup of supporting cast/cameos. William Shatner, Carrie Fisher, Billy Dee Williams, Seth Rogen, Danny Trejo, Danny McBride, Kevin Smith, Jason Mewes, Craig Anderson, and Will Forte all make an appearance at some point, and they all do pretty well. Oh, and Kristen Bell is walking around the whole time, looking awesome like she does.
So where did it go wrong? Well, the lead cast was actually pretty weak. Even Kristen Bell, as smokin' ass hot as she is, can't really carry a movie. The four main guys are all relative no-names, and none of them is some diamond in the rough that ends up blowing you away with his performance, like Christopher Mintz-Plasse in Superbad. Furthermore, as I said before, the story doesn't really engage you as well as you'd like, and it seemed like a conglomeration of scenes, rather than a fluid film.
In the end, I wish the movie had been better than it was. So many worthwhile contributors went in on the movie, you'd like to believe that they could put together something impressive. Especially when you're adding in the various Star Wars references that a guy like me can appreciate, it's a damn shame this wasn't a more well-made movie.
The Last Word: It had its moments, but mostly Fanboys was a disappointment, for how good it could have been.
The plot of the movie is kind of questionable. By that, I mean that I was actually finding myself questioning parts of the plot. Like, "Really? I don't buy that." The basic story is that a few friends who've grown apart over the years are brought back together when one of them finds that he's got terminal cancer. The whole group loves Star Wars, and since Episode One won't come out until after the friend's expected demise, they resolve to break into George Lucas' home to steal the film and watch it while he's still around.
Here's the thing. This movie had all the makings of being really, really good. Anytime you have nerds creating a self-deprecating piece of media, you've got a chance at something fantastic (see: Internet). And they got kind of a fantastic lineup of supporting cast/cameos. William Shatner, Carrie Fisher, Billy Dee Williams, Seth Rogen, Danny Trejo, Danny McBride, Kevin Smith, Jason Mewes, Craig Anderson, and Will Forte all make an appearance at some point, and they all do pretty well. Oh, and Kristen Bell is walking around the whole time, looking awesome like she does.
So where did it go wrong? Well, the lead cast was actually pretty weak. Even Kristen Bell, as smokin' ass hot as she is, can't really carry a movie. The four main guys are all relative no-names, and none of them is some diamond in the rough that ends up blowing you away with his performance, like Christopher Mintz-Plasse in Superbad. Furthermore, as I said before, the story doesn't really engage you as well as you'd like, and it seemed like a conglomeration of scenes, rather than a fluid film.
In the end, I wish the movie had been better than it was. So many worthwhile contributors went in on the movie, you'd like to believe that they could put together something impressive. Especially when you're adding in the various Star Wars references that a guy like me can appreciate, it's a damn shame this wasn't a more well-made movie.
The Last Word: It had its moments, but mostly Fanboys was a disappointment, for how good it could have been.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
