The Hunger Games, a (sort-of) (film) Review

In 1998, the bombing of the World Embassy in West-Northwest Centersville, East Serbia, shook the world to its core.  In retaliation, the Serbian government conscripted all males under the age of 64 into their armed forces and established a quarantine around the entire country, with men at arms standing shoulder-to-shoulder along the perimeter.  After a fortnight of fortnights had passed and no one really noticed, the people of WNWCEB decided to stage a coup d'état and soon all the beatniks and yuppies were crowding the streets.  People complained, loudly, and the world continued to ignore them.

Far away, in the country of Panem, the President decided to start a new kind of Olympics.  Every year he would call up two children from each of the Twelve Districts and invite them to the Capitol to represent their communities.  If they won, they got prizes, usually in the form of a new Game Boy Advance game and sometimes a batch of homemade cookies, baked by the President himself.  If they didn't win, then they died.  It was a brutal sort of Olympics the President thought of.  You see, these Olympics, which he dubbed the Hunger Games, weren't really anything like the classical Olympics of old, but were instead a twisted game he devised to keep the people of Panem held under his oppressive thumb.  He figured correctly that pitting children against other children in a battle to the death would create a country of unrest.  Because of the President's totalitarian rule, people's magazines stopped arriving on time (and soon at all), and if they couldn't get their magazines and newspapers then their understanding of the world around them dwindled.  (This was pre-y2k, so the Internet hadn't yet came into fruition.)  As their freedoms compressed, their fear of the Hunger Games increased, and every year when the President made his phone calls, great tragedy would drop on to each of the Districts.

Or something like that.

I first read The Hunger Games in May 2010 (my review).  I enjoyed it quite a bit, actually, as much as one can enjoy this sort of senselessness.  Not entirely an original idea, but Suzanne Collins made a book with characters I cared about.  Katniss Everdeen was a fascinating heroine, but she was stubborn and a teenager, too.  While I can only guess at the thought processes of a teenage girl, I felt that Collins conveyed the mindset very well.

Keisha & I went and watched the movie rendition of The Hunger Games last Friday night.  The cinema was packed, of course, but everyone quieted down as the movie started.  I had some reservations about the casting of the characters, but shortly after the start I was fine with most.  The exceptions were Gale and President Snow, who I felt was too handsomely cast and too slovenly cast, respectively, if that makes sense.  (It doesn't, as I tried to explain this to Keisha and wound up making a fool of myself.)

Additionally, I, like many others, had issues with the camera work in the film.  I told Keisha during the thing that I felt like I was getting sick.  It reminded me of those roller coaster ride things with screens.  The kind that the People of Serbia no longer get to enjoy because of the problems going on over there, what with the border being closed and the ruffians crowding up the place.

Keisha's main problem was all the time spent outside of the Arena, focused mostly on Seneca and the Game Room.  She thought this pulled away too much, and I agreed.  Maybe those scenes were added to break some of the tension up?  Maybe the director wanted to show off some special effects?  Whatever the case, the wife and I didn't much care for all the Game Room time.  (Honestly, pacing leading up to the Games was a bit off, too.)

The film was tough to watch, especially when the Games began.  I knew what kind of bloodbath was coming, but still yet, wow.  And the tracker jacker scene!  Oh my.  Let's not forget the muttations, either, and how horrible that had to have been.

As I've already said, I enjoyed the movie.  It's been a few years since I read the books, so I had forgotten some of the fine details.  From my recollection, the film was a worthy adaptation of the book, though it could have done better at building up the characters.  No doubt there will be the sequels made, and no doubt they will rake in the money.  I am most interested to see how Mockingjay comes along, considering the way we Americans tend to like our movies.

I am reasonably sure that I've lost my mind somewhere along the way.  The truth is out there, and so is the fiction.  I'm not sure what just happened...

Dream Lover, a Review

One of the best things about blogging is the community.  From my experience, most of the bloggers I've "met" are all friendly, professional, and bloody brilliant.  It seems that everyone is erudite and capable.  It's fun vicariously exploring different talents through the blogs of others, whether it's as a stay-at-home mom or an emigrant living in a haunted house somewhere in Scotland.  You get all kinds of differences, and that's half of the beauty of the blogosphere.  

In particular, I've mentioned fellow blogger Mattson Tomlin a time or two here on Rememorandom.  The lad (I can say that, as he's four years my junior) attends SUNY Purchase for Film (according to his IMDB page), where he's finishing up his junior or senior year, I can't recall which.  Anyway, I've been following Mattson for a few years now, and watching his films and ideas develop on his blog has been a real treat.  His posts often seem like "behind the scene" special features on DVDs, and when you watch this stuff prior to watching a film, it gives one a completely different feeling.

Mattson used a Kickstarter project to fund the short film called Dream Lover.  I kicked a buck, willing to support someone else's dreams, and then followed the many status updates Mattson posted intermittently.  Then, to my surprise, I received an email yesterday telling me that Dream Lover was up and available to watch.  So last night I lounged on the chaise, turned off the lights, put in earphones, and let the movie take me away.

To attempt to describe what Dream Lover is would be, in essence, like asking you to describe your dreams.  While that may sound simple enough, then throw in the challenge of not only describing, but also conveying your thoughts and feelings during your dreams.  Explain the why, the how.  Heck, sometimes even the who and where is beyond words.  This is a glimpse of Tomlin's 16-minute short, and I feel like the director/writer has done well in capturing a dream.  It's ethereal.  It's bizarre.  It's ever-changing.  There's horror, sex, death, and many other commonalities of Dream.  Scenes are quick and fluid, and transitioning between them is handled with grace and feels natural.

All of that still does not describe what the film is about.  And here's the dilemma.  Like with anything worth value, there will be different interpretations, and Tomlin's Dream Lover is no different.  People are definitely going to react differently, to get different things out of it.  One may feel pity for Anderson, the lead actor (and played by the dapper Adam Griffith) who has either moved on in a relationship or not, while someone else may find him skeevy and calloused.  Then there's the spurned-and-devilish Selene (played by Maria Rowene), the other main POV.  Her development is as beautiful as it is frightening.  And the third main player is Hera (Jenna D'Angelo), though she's more of a secondary character.  Throw in the actual Greek myth of Selene and Endymion, and the film can take on a whole different meaning.  

The sound effects of Dream Lover are perfect.  They've definitely been loved on and tailored to each scene.  The camera shots are all very-well done (I particularly liked the wide-angle shot of Young Anderson hiding under the bench), and even the sex scene was done with skill.  The accompanying score at the end provided a haunting tune to close out the credits*, wrapping up a stirring little movie.

So the real question is what's to do now?  I could talk about my thoughts, my feelings, but I also don't want to cross into spoilery.  So instead I'll strongly recommend that you go to the Dream Lover site (here) and watch the film.  It's 16-minutes long, nothing too taxing.  It's free, too.  (If it asks for a password, use "sweetdreams."  And don't worry.  Mattson wants as many people to watch it as possible; it's password-protected because of film festivals or something.)  Furthermore, if you like it, be sure and let Mattson know, as well as any other people you'd care to share it with.  Dream Lover is a great exploratory film about dreams, love, loss, and many other things, and you'd be sore pressed to miss it.  It's also a perfect conclusion to this year's RIP, as horror is definitely present (a la monsters and confusion).

I believe in Mattson Tomlin.  I've watched everything he's made available, except for Pit.A.Pat, whatever that is, and I see him going places.  His vision is great.  His skills are tremendous.  His passion is obvious.  So here's to you, Mr. Tomlin.  Great work on Dream Lover.  Now, I can't wait to get to the feature film of Solomon Grundy...

-----

*Yep, my name is in the credits.  I'm assuming its the Kickstarter donors list.

Nosferatu, a Review

Nosferatu is widely acclaimed for being one of the scariest films of all time.  With its iconic screen-shots, recognizable villain, lack of speech (i.e., a silent film), and word-of-mouth praise, I had some pre-conceived ideas about what to expect when I put the film on last night.  Sadly, my expectations fell flat within minutes of the film's exposition.  There are spoilers for those of you unfamiliar with Dracula or any other vampire story.

Nosferatu is essentially Dracula, though for legal reasons at the time, changes were made to avoid being sued.  Chiefly, Count Dracula is now Count Orlok, a creeper that lives off in the "land of ghosts and thieves."  A young real estate agent, and the film's protagonist, Hutter, has been given the task of securing deed work from Orlok to purchase a "beautiful and abandoned house" in the town.  Hutter leaves his beloved, Ellen, and sets off.  Needless to say, things go about how you'd expect, with only one additional plot element that I didn't see coming.

First off, before I begin deconstructing this film, an apology: I obviously am not the targeted audience and I've been too exposed to modern cinema to enjoy this movie.  Others (perhaps fans of TCM and Expressionism) like and appreciate this movie.  I don't.  And I'll explain why.

To begin with, I'm not a fan of Expressionism theater*.  I understand that it may have been useful for early 20th century folks, especially when so much was relied upon conveying through movement, but to me, it's just ridiculous.  I can't fathom why the folks of the time cared for it, either.  Real life is not Expressionistic.  The over-exaggerated movements and absurd facial expressions belong in a comedy, not a horror.  Most of the time I wanted to punch Hutter in the face for being so idiotic; I wanted to wipe the sycophantic smirk off of Knock's face; I wanted to slap some liberation into Ellen.  Even Count Orlok, while relatively reserved compared to the rest of the cast, fell to this form.  And as I said, this does not perpetuate horror, but comedy.

The next thing, and perhaps my biggest annoyance, was the score that accompanied the film.  We watched the Netflix Instant version of Nosferatu, and the film had a slide at the beginning that said the score was added in 1991.  I'm not sure who composed or played here**, or how this score compares to Hans Erdmann's original, but it was awful.  It basically sounded like a young musician learning about synthesizers and keyboards decided to tinker around.  Music rarely fit the scene, and half of it grew tedious after a few seconds of listening.

The third (and for brevity's sake, final) problem was the character's themselves.  Hutter was an idiot.  I don't know why he chose to act the way he did, but his actions were totally unforgivable.  Consider the following:

At Orlok's eerie and abandoned manse, Hutter is cutting him a slice of bread.  He cuts his finger accidentally.  Immediately Orlok is at the man's side and attempts to suck the blood from his finger.  Disturbed, Hutter backs away.  All the way to a cozy chair beside a fireplace.  Orlok, seconds later, suggests they sit and chat a while, and Hutter agrees.  The idiot falls asleep.  Then, the next day, he frolics around the estate, where he happens upon Orlok's sleeping body, that so happens to be in a coffin.  Horrified, Hutter runs away to the safest place possible: his room, where he puts a cover over his head and cowers in terror.  Good thing Orlok decided to leave for his new abandoned mansion, else I might have broken my tv.

What person is their right mind would do something like that?  It's so bad that I had to offset the whole paragraph!  Is Hutter supposed to be an imbecile?  And another thing.  Hutter brings a few books with him to read.  They're necessary plot devices, and when he picks one up, a slide comes up to show the Viewer what he's reading.  At one point, Hutter finishes his book and he slams it shut then hurls it to the floor.  For no apparent reason other than to persuade the Viewer that that's how one ought to treat a book.

I could go on and on about my problems with the film, but I'll stop at three.  There is a few commendable features, chiefly Orlok himself, that I found slightly enjoyable and somewhat creepy.  Max Schreck played his part well, and the vampire's movements & actions were the only part of this movie that could qualify as horror.  I particularly liked his slow walk and his disfigured face.  

In the end, Nosferatu was a worthless movie to watch.  Perhaps had I watched it fifty years ago.  Perhaps had I muted the tv.  Perhaps had I gouged my eyes out.  But alas, I did watch it, and I can't really recommend it to you unless you're a silent film fan, or simply curious to see the seminal vampire movie.  That said, there are other versions besides the one on Netflix, and mayhap they're better.  I won't be investigating, though.

---------------

*Though it does often work well in a comedy.

**A Google search says there are two Netflix versions.  One has a score created by the Silent Orchestra, which I believe is the one I watched.  The other apparently is no better.  [Source: here.]

Buried, a (film) Review

I've watched the cursor blink several times now, waiting for me to somehow begin this post.  And yet, after watching Rodrigo Cortés' 2010 thriller Buried, I don't know how to begin.  A brief synopsis:

Paul Conroy (Ryan Reynolds) is an American truck driver working as a private contractor in Iraq.  After one convoy trip goes wrong, Paul wakes up to discover that he's been buried alive in a wooden coffin.  Armed with only a cell phone and a lighter, Paul begins a desperate struggle to have himself located and freed.

I wanted to watch Buried back when I first heard about it, primarily because of the risky gimmick.  See, the entire film is really one long scene.  The camera never leaves the coffin.  This gives the audience a somewhat claustrophobic effect, though certainly nowhere near as strong as Conroy's.  So when I settled in to watch Buried last night, I was expecting to be on the edge of my seat, and Rodrigo Cortés went well beyond my expectations.

Honestly I'm still struggling on how to come to grips with this film.  I classify it as a suspense/horror movie, and of the worst possible kind.  To me, scary isn't some ethereal monster lurking in the shadows, ready to pounce and devour.  It's not demons and goblins boiling young children and feeding them in pies to trolls.  No, to me, true horror is the possibility that an unsettling event could actually happen, and that's definitely the case with Buried.  (That's also the reason why I detest torture-porn movies, because some psycho could actually watch, find inspiration, and act on what they've just seen, but that's tangential.)

What makes Buried even more frightening is that I personally have friends and family that are serving our country overseas.  Some are military, but some are private contractors, working in war zones, just as Paul Conroy was.  And that's part of why this film affected me so strongly.

So how to discuss the movie without spoiling anything?  I've decided on a list of adjectives I felt throughout the film.

• Emotional, of the heart-wrenching kind.  
• Disturbing, of the "what the heck's wrong with humanity?" kind.  
• Pulse-gripping, of the kind that grabs and doesn't let go.  
• Bleak, of the "help, I'm buried alive in a coffin somewhere in the Iraqi desert and I'm suffocating" kind.
• Infuriating, of the "surely this kind of thing doesn't really happen but it probably does" kind.
• Dreadful, of the full-of-dread kind.
• Suspense, of the "how is this going to end?" kind.
• Melancholy, of the "!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" kind.

Truly, this movie kept me in full attention.  As the film progresses, watching the character development has a staggering affect on the Viewer, and Reynolds performs superbly.  The acting was convincing, the lighting believable, and the sounds as I would imagine.  There was one part that was remarkably creepy, and another that was remarkably tear-jerking. The restrictions of filming solely in the coffin are smartly handled and felt by all, and I think the risk taken by Cortés paid off.

Buried is one of those movies that leaves you pondering well into the night, and then on into the next day.  My only solace is knowing that the film is fiction.  That's a comforting thought, and possibly the only one I have.  Buried is not an easy film to watch, and the feeling after finishing is truly horrifying.  This minimalist movie had a maximum affect on me, and I'd love to discuss it with someone.  It's available now on Netflix Instant Streaming for those with a stout heart.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Pt 2), a Review

I'm shrugging off routine here and throwing caution to the wind.  SPOILERS imminent.  

Call me old and crotchety, but there seemed to be a lot of rambunctious tweens at the cinema last night, eager to watch the Boy Who Lived face down He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named and let victory triumph over evil.  Costumed characters ran amok and I couldn't help but question why it is I find these midnight shows appealing.  Nevertheless, apart from the expected sudden applause and the preternatural (and completely uncalled for) sobbing*, I had a good enough time watching the final Potter film.

The words that immediately come to mind are ruthless and expeditious.  Where Part 1 served as exposition, Part 2 gives the viewer mere minutes of set-up before one is thrown into the action.  We're reminded of Voldy baby stealing dead ole' Dumbledore's wand (a grave robber!  my word, someone ought to teach that Riddle boy some manners) and Harry & the Gang are trying to seek and destroy those cursed horcruxes.  The filmmakers give the audience little breathing room, and I daresay 90% of the film was action-filled and intense.  

Acting is genuinely sublime all around, though I particularly enjoyed Ralph Fiennes (Voldemort), Alan Rickman (Snape), and Daniel Radcliffe (Harry).  Truly I'm struggling to think of a bad performance.  Throughout all eight of the movies these actors have grown with each other, and their synergy is a large part of why these films are so successful.

I can also attest that this was definitely the most visually stunning of the films.  It is the only one with a 3-d counterpart, and although I chose not to watch it this way, it was nevertheless quite beautiful.  Spells and enchantments of all colors.  Gringotts' vaults and the dragon within.  I didn't realize just how dark and bleak everything was until Harry used the pensieve, and then again when he went to King's Cross.  Other than these two scenes, everything has a grim feel to it, and rightly it should.

As I mentioned earlier, there was entirely too much crying for my liking.  I'm not joking when I say that the girl behind me started sobbing and sniffling when the WB logo came up at the very beginning of the movie, and she pretty much continued the rest of the way.  Sure, when Sev died, that was sad, yes, but would I call it Sad-Enough-To-Cry-In-Public sad?  No.  And then seeing Fred & George for the first time, when they're both still alive, she cried again....  Grumble.  Anyway, death, evil, and violence rule the screen here, and because of this there is a lot of sad & terrible things that happen.  I admit, Severus's death was one of the more horrible death scenes I can remember, but I watched it wincing and stoic.

The final showdown between Harry & Voldemort was breathtaking.  I rather enjoyed their in-flight fight.  Heck, the battle for Hogwarts was pretty awesome all around.  The school's grounds make for an excellent battlefield, and its spaces were utilized brilliantly.

If there's any wrong in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 2) it's that it doesn't capture all of the subtlety and character development Rowling does in her books, but this is a flaw any book-turned-movie will have.  There's only so much one can transpose.  

There is so much that I could talk about when it comes to Harry Potter, and particularly when it comes to The Deathly Hallows.  How each character is so rich and detailed.  How Rowling deals with life lessons and serious themes.  How I always stood by Severus and puzzled out the events 'ere they were told.  How heartbreaking it is that Hedwig died so innocently and randomly (the same as many victims of the Battle).  How truly loathsome Voldemort is, and yet pitiable, too.  So much that I must cut myself off now or I may wax gibbous and never shut up.

On the whole, I wholeheartedly enjoyed this movie.  It was the perfect conclusion to the epic series, and I think it captured the heart and spirit of what makes the books so darned good, and that's that friendship and love are far superior to immortality and prejudice.  If you've somehow made it through your life without reading these books, then I'm sure my pleading won't get you over the hump, but you are robbing yourself of a wonderful journey.  And, if you've not watched any of the film adaptations**, again, you cheat yourself, but especially more so now that Part 2 is out.  It was a legendary film series capped with a satisfying and beautiful ending.  I will miss these movies, but I don't see them going away for a long, long time.

Thor and True Grit, a Double Review

A curious thing happened on Saturday night.  See, Keisha and I had plans.  Her aunt cooked us a nice, big meal and invited us over.  We couldn't refuse.  But then, the cogs in my brain started working, and on the off-chance that we were done early enough, I thought we'd go to the drive-in.  Thor was playing with True Grit on the B-side.  As it turned out, we finished our meal and fellowship at 7:30ish, and the movie started at 7:55.  So, into the car--blankets, seats, and a stereo in the trunk--and onto the road, we hit the drive-in.

I didn't really have much interest in seeing Thor.  But, I thought, it could be like Iron Man.  I decided not to watch Iron Man until several months after it was out on DVD, cause frankly, it looked ridiculous, and I never was much of an Iron Man fan.  But, as it turned out, I enjoyed the movie.  And (here's the curious part) similarly, I wound up rather enjoying Thor.

Thor, starring a cast of handsome and pretty actors, is a movie about mythology and aliens and sibling rivalry and evil government agencies and science and interstellar weather patterns.  In Asgard, where Thor and the Norse pantheon reside, Odin is ready to settle down into retirement and pass the mantle of king off to his eldest son, Thor.  Loki, Thor's jealous brother, doesn't like this idea too much, and so he plays the role of the antagonist.  Oh, and there's also Natalie Portman hanging out in the New Mexico desert.

In short, Thor is largely a movie that serves as a stepping stone into next summer's massively epic (redundant?), Joss Whedon-directed Avengers.  It also helps to introduce the Norse god-alien-man-thing to the American audience, as I suspect Thor ranks on a lower tier than many other superheroes (since we're Marvel here, I'll mention Spider-Man, Wolverine, and Iron Man, to name a few).  But, oddly enough, the movie had enough action and plot (plus some good humor) to keep me interested.  In particular, I really thought the frost giants were a very cool enemy people.

Overall, if you're looking for a mindless, fun action film, Thor is it.

 

The highlight of the night, though, definitely rested in the Coen Brothers' recent adaptation of True Grit.  This movie has been out so long that there's probably no reason to review it, but I do so, if only for completion purposes.  True Grit is the story about vengeance and retaliation.  Mattie Ross, played by the delightful Hailee Stienfeld, is directly involved in a manhunt for Tom Chaney, the man who murdered her father.  She's forced to take matters into her own hands, as she fears nothing will be done about his death.  So, she hires the meanest US Marshal in town, Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges), to help track Chaney.

The story is simple, but the film is wonderful.  From the faint opening chords of an old-timey piano through the start of the credit reel, True Grit keeps you captive.  Bridges performance as Cogburn is hilarious and masterful.  His mannerisms and brogue are fitting and perfect.  Stienfeld does a remarkable job in her first feature film and definitely steals the scenes with her quick tongue and sharp wit.  The movie is somehow both funny and serious, and the Coens did a great job with the movie.  Every actor played their parts perfectly.

In addition, the score is beautiful.  Old hymns whisper through the scenes, always on an old-sounding piano and rustic accompaniment.  It seems the Coens always have great scores and soundtracks (Raising Arizona is a classic, O Brother started a revival of bluegrass across America, and many more are memorable), and this film is no different.

If you've not yet watched True Grit, do yourself a favor and pick it up.  A good western is hard to beat, and True Grit is a good western.*  Paced perfectly and cast the same, this is a film well worth the Oscar nominations it received.**

---------------------------

*Let it be noted that I've not seen the original True Grit, starring John Wayne, though my wife informs me that it, too, is quite good.

**Check out Omphaloskepsis for another review of True Grit.  L always has excellent reviews, and if you aren't reading her blog, then you should be.

The Adjustment Bureau, some thoughts

Like my typical reviews, these thoughts will be spoiler-free, but there will also be a clearly marked spoiler section, too.

---

I came into the theater with an idea of what The Adjustment Bureau was about.  Some guy destined to become the President or something cannot be allowed to fall in love with some girl and he's being forced to take drastic steps in order to maintain his love.  It seemed kind of like The Fountain but maybe possibly a Borne movie, too.

My expectations weren't quite right, and instead I watched a weak action movie with a heavy hand of philosophy and true love.  Suffice it to say I was bored.  The film progressed way too slowly, with an exposition that seemed to go on and on and a plot that seemed to only slightly pick up steam towards the end.  As for conflict, my assumptions were right on the surface, but the motivations behind them were completely wrong.

In short, The Adjustment Bureau was not worth the matinee prices we payed to watch it.  I thought the plot could have been salvaged by Damon & Blunt, but even their on-screen chemistry could not lift the story from its cheesiness, flawed ending, and dumb characters.

Maybe I'm in the minority here, since the film currently has a 69% freshness rating on Rotten Tomatoes, but not by much.  If you want my recommendation, I'd wait until it's out on video.

-----

SPOILER Section

1.  Referring to the Chairman as "the Chairman" all the time was just ridiculous.  I really had a problem with the "angels" and stuff being portrayed as clandestine agents, because that's just stupid, and the corporate type setting is just plain dumb.  Their plan books with their weird, circuit-like paths came across as cheesy and simplistic.  The hats were silly.  The idea of the doors was pretty cool, but other than that I thought these guys were total squares.

2.  After half an hour of exposition I thought that the film was about to pick up speed, but nothing.  The only excitement came from Harry chasing down a bus, from Norris running from some agents, and then more running later on. 

3.  I felt like the film was out to pose deep philosophical questions about fate and free-will and stuff, but it didn't.  I think it was just out to say "Look, humanity, you keep screwing up and you better stop it or you're gonna destroy the world and Imma tell on you!"

4.  Matt Damon, Emily Blunt, and Anthony Mackie all did well, and I enjoyed Michael Kelly's performance quite a bit, too.

5.  The more I think about it the more I disliked the movie.  Maybe I should've save my money for Battle: LA or something.

Hellboy: A Five-Part Review

I spent the last several days immersed in Hellboy, tearing through three graphic novels and watching two films. All are reviewed below.

---

Volume 6: Strange Places

Strange Places continues the fascinating saga of Hellboy, this time taking the reader to strange places such as the bottom of the sea and a mysterious island.

The first arc, "Three Wishes," picks up where Volume 5 left off. Hellboy has left the BPRD and gone to Africa. At some point he gets tossed into the ocean and this is where "Three Wishes" takes place. This story delivers a very fine plot and hints at a few more secrets to the Hellboy universe.

The second arc, "The Island," was an equally fun and entertaining story. This one tells a creation story for Hellboy, and to me, this was icing on the cake. I really liked "The Island" quite a bit, and the Epilogue was perfect.

Overall, Strange Places is a fine addition to the overarching story of Hellboy. It's made clear some things, muddled others, but at the end of the day, it's got me wanting to start Volume 7 (which I already have)

Volume 7: The Troll Witch and Other Stories

The Troll Witch and Other Stories is another collection of one-shots and different folktales accounted in the Hellboy universe. I really like these quick reads, especially discovering all the different legends and myths from other cultures. This was a great addition to the series, and though it doesn't add much to the overall arc, the layers it adds are fun and enjoyable.

This is the first volume where a new artist is introduced, but only partially. The art style was something to get used to. While not as amazing as Mignola's, it's still fitting to the feel of the book.

Volume 8: Darkness Calls

Wow.

Darkness Calls was an incredibly fast paced arc that made me turn page after page just to get to the end and see what happened. Hellboy gets whisked away into Russian folklore and is put up against the Baba Yaga, who's still mad at Hellboy for taking her eye. Meanwhile, the Witches are plotting something big, and by the end of the collection, it looks like the future is going to get rough for Red and the BPRD.

This collection is one of my favorites from the series so...moreWow.

Darkness Calls was an incredibly fast paced arc that made me turn page after page just to get to the end and see what happened. Hellboy gets whisked away into Russian folklore and is put up against the Baba Yaga, who's still mad at Hellboy for taking her eye. Meanwhile, the Witches are plotting something big, and by the end of the collection, it looks like the future is going to get rough for Red and the BPRD.

This collection is one of my favorites from the series so far. Mignola hands over the art reins to a different artist (Duncan Fegredo) who does a great job at creating the feeling of Mignola's art. Mignola is a master of minimal panels and simple color palettes; Fegredo adds more complexity to his illustrations, and it works.

Darkness Calls is a fantastic Hellboy collection, especially for anyone with interest in Russian culture. This would stand on its own, but depth and understanding would certainly be lost. Highly recommend.

Hellboy  --  (Live action film) 

Back when the first Hellboy movie came out, I was in high school and thought the film looked ridiculous.  Who the heck was Hellboy?  Particularly, I thought Abe Sapien looked stupid, and Hellboy was just plain cheesy.

Then, after falling in love with the comics, I had to rectify the situation.  Guillermo del Toro created the movie, so it had to be good, right?  And it better be, since I bought Hellboy 2 on blu-ray the day after Thanksgiving.

Anyway, we popped in the borrowed movie last night and settled on the couch for a Hellboy marathon.  The plot of the first film is somewhat similar to the comics, but there are some things that in no way hold up to the trade of mediums.  For one, the Ogdru Jahad, while cool, are nothing as awesome as Mignola's vision.  Another big difference was Rasputin's character and how he acted/looked.

Still, the movie was fun to watch, and the story mostly congruous with the source material.  A new recruit for the BPRD comes on board to help keep an eye on Hellboy, and the audience is pulled along with him.  John Myers isn't particularly memorable, but his role necessary as a protagonist to explain some things to folks unfamiliar with Mignola's creation.  The point of the movie is that there are dark things that go bump in the night, and the BPRD exists to bump back against them.

Overall, not a bad way to spend two hours, and a great bridge for folks that don't like comics, but definitely not as good as the actual books.

Hellboy: Blood and Iron  

(Animated film)

Apart from the standard animation and corny voice acting for some characters (Hecate!), Blood and Iron was a fun cartoon movie to watch that is in no way fitting for young kids.  Ghosts, vampires, wolves, witches, evil gods & goddesses, and plenty of other murderous evils abound, and I wondered if kids would get scared watching something like this.

This was partially written by Mike Mignola, and it's definitely more complicated than the live-action film.  The story is told through flashbacks and present-time, recounting the legend of Erzsebet Ondrushko, a vampire that would bathe in maiden's blood to retain her youth, and her relationship with the thrice-goddess Hecate.

I enjoyed this hour and change, even if I loathed some of the voice work.  This would be great around Halloween time, I think.  Plus, it's on Netflix!

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1, a Review

In case you didn't know, a tiny budget movie came out last night at midnight o'clock.  It quietly sneaked its way into theatres all across the globe, daring to hope a return on investment and a pleased audience.  Very little fanfare was made for this film, as countless people have joined the ranks of logic and science, shunning the very mention of magic.  Only die-hard, B-movie folks were excited, but their excitement reverberated throughout the realms of Hollywood.  (What the heck am I talking about?)

Actually, there was much ado about The Deathly Hallows, Part 1, and I imagine cinemas across the world filled with sights similar to what I beheld last night.  I did not dress up, as many were wont to, unless you say I went as a modern American muggle, which I suggest you don't, but I did see plenty of creative outfits.  It appeared that the magic of Harry Potter was turned on a bit early.  The nerdfest was endearing, the packed out crowd in the IMAX theatre a regular mixing pot.  People of all ages, races, creeds, and intelligences (high school kids that scream stupid profanities are low on this list) made gentle chit-chat as the 3-hr wait ensued.  And when the lights dimmed, the crowd erupted, and for the next 146 minutes I was spellbound.

I won't spoil the movie and say what's in the film and what's not, but I will say that the movie was mostly true to book.  I understand some things have to be converted and translated to make a movie appealing.  That's well and good.  Plus, I understand that Mrs. Rowling herself gave an okay to the changes, so if she's happy, I'm satisfied.  There were several things, mostly regarding the use and misuse of polyjuice potions and Harry's invisibility cloak, that were off, so to speak, but it worked well with the events of the movie.

(Possible Spoilers)  Okay, I lied.  I'll speak a bit on what I liked and didn't like.  If you don't want to read this part, skip down a bit to the end o' spoilers bit.  I liked the battle in the sky between the Harrys and the Death Eaters, but I didn't like how nonchalant Hedwig was played off there.  Her death in the book is tragic.  I like how evil Voldermort is portrayed in this film, and his scenes are all great at establishing how horrible of a villain he is.  I liked Godric's Hollow, and Bagshot was crazy-wild.  I felt like the Malfoy's Manor scenes towards the end should have been expanded, but the opening with Burbage was awesome.  I really liked the interlude cartoon of "The Tale of the Three Brothers."  The artistic view on that was brilliant.  I wish there had been more back-story revealed on Tom Riddle and Albus Dumbledore.  The Ministry scene was funny and cool.  How I loathe Umbridge.  (End o' Spoilers)

The Deathly Hallows, Part 1 starts off on a sad note, laying the groundwork for what's to come.  In fact, this movie is much darker and grittier than any of the other films of the series, so much so that it almost seems like its in a class of its own.  All of the actors performed admirably, of course, and the directing by David Yates was beautiful.  I really liked the tone that this movie carried, and the weight of the film was felt by the audience.  Set design was also spectacular, as were the costumes and special effects.

As a Harry Potter fan, was I happy?  Satisfied?  Absolutely.  Apart from the expected crowd reactions -- spontaneous applause at certain points, laughter, commentary -- and the stifling heat, The Deathly Hallows, Part 1, was everything I'd hoped it'd be.  It cut off right where I expected it to, with emotions put through the gamut and a seemingly cliffhanger end.  If Part 2 is as good as this opener, which it will be, then color me excited.  Heck, color me excited anyway.

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, a (Film) Review

Unless you've been hiding out under a rock, you've probably heard of The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, written by the late Swedish journo-novelist Stieg Larsson.  The conclusion to the book trilogy, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest, just came out earlier this year.  All three novels are international sensations, and I admit, I bought a copy of the opening number to see what all the fuss was about.  But, as it goes, I never got to read it, and now I'm not sure if I ever will.

In 2009, a Swedish version of the movie was released.  Like its source material, the film received excellent reviews.  Performance-wise, Michael Nyqvist (Mikael) and Noomi Rapace (Lisbeth) both acted their characters perfectly, so I've read.  The tone of the movie was on par with the book, and all around it's grossed loads of money, if you want to measure success that way.  Knowing that Hollywood would be releasing a (likely dreaded) adaptation soon, I decided to rent the foreign film and watch it on Friday night.  (The movie is in Swedish, but subtitled in English.)

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is a layered story.  Chiefly, journalist Mikael, recently indicted on several accounts of libel, is contacted by the wealthy entrepreneur Henrik Vanger.  Forty years ago, Henrik's niece, Harriet, vanished, and ever since then Henrik's obsessed over her disappearance.  He hires Mikael to try and uncover what happened to her.  Meanwhile, Lisbeth Salander, a modern-day punk with a troubled past, has been hired to hack into Mikael's computer and keep track of him.  Eventually the two's paths cross and from there the film evolves.

This summary is a rough review at best.  There are several things going on throughout the movie, and the disappearance of Harriet Vanger takes the back burner.  The list of suspects is large, and the film takes time to investigate most.  In America, this stuff would largely be overlooked, I think.  Hollywood seems too bent on churning out action and memorable climaxes that not enough time is spent on the rising action.  In Sweden's movie industry, at least with this film, this is not the case.  The plot slowly unravels, inviting the viewer to learn more about the protagonists and their lives.  The whole time I was wondering what happened to Lisbeth in her past?  Is Mikael as "good" as he's portrayed?  Characterization is truly the main driving force behind the movie.

Lisbeth is a highly fascinating character.  Immediately you can tell she's got something going on with her.  She comes across as cold and uncaring to nearly everyone.  She's obviously smart, being her career choice, but how smart?  She's a character with a past that's strongly affecting her every action, and I was interested to explore her more.  Add Mikael to the mix, who's a bit more open to conversation, and dynamic between the two is amusing.

Stylistically, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is a dark film.  Part of this comes from Lisbeth's wardrobe.  Part from the cold, deadly grip of Sweden's winter.  Most of it's from the darkness that's becoming more apparent as each minute ticks by.  Incredible acts of violence, some very graphic, and you can't help but feel a pang in your gut.  By the end of the movie, I remarked how sick and disgusting some things were, and Keisha agreed.  Yet, despite this grisly nature, the movie is great.  The real world is not peaches and sunshine.  It's not hard to imagine every dark action taking place outside of the film, and it's a tragedy that such things happen in our world.  The movie is graphic, as I've said, and borderline Realistic, but that culminates in making the film even better.

After watching The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, I can't help but wonder how the final two books pan out.  What's in store for the two fascinating protagonists?  Furthermore, I wonder now if it's even worth reading the book after watching the film.  What was omitted?  Would a Wikipedia summary suffice?  I'm not sure, and if any of you could tell me, let me know.  Overall, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo was an exceptional movie, filled with mystery, tension, and unforgettable characters.  It's dark, but in my opinion there's enough light shining through the shadow to make it worth your while.  If you're going to watch it, I'd recommend doing this version instead of waiting for the Hollywood atrocity that's bound to happen. 

Inception, a Review

Inception, on a basic level of understanding, is a simple heist movie.  You’ve got your suave hero Dom (Leonardo DiCaprio), the best in his field, who assembles a team to perform one last big hoorah, one big enough to put his thieving days to an end and get back home.  And like all heist movies, the team is tight and quirky, each adding their own special perk to the group, each relying on the others to perform their jobs and do them right.  Yet, Inception is more than just a simple heist movie.  It’s a film that’s set predominately in the world of dreams, where things stolen are ideas, and death is only an awakening.

Christopher Nolan’s latest film pulls you in quickly and takes you on a fast-paced ride that demands attention lest you be left in the dust.  Extraction, the technology that allows people to enter other people’s dreams and “extract” things, is a fascinating invention.  Entering into someone’s mind is never predictable, and the dreamscapes are always mesmerizing.  When architect Ariadne (Ellen Page) joins the gang, she’s given a short class on how operation within a dream works, and soon she’s on to designing and creating the worlds within.

The ultimate job, the one that will send Dom home, involves inception, the process of planting an idea in someone’s mind through dreams.  It’s “never been done” before, but Dom says he can do it, and so the story begins.  (And it’s also all I’ll say, so as to remain spoiler-free.)

I was very impressed with Inception.  I thought the acting was excellent all around.  Everyone performed perfectly to character.  I also loved the imaginative set designs for the dreams.  The worlds felt enormous, massive enough to swallow you whole and you not even know it.  I would be remiss to leave out the score.  The music that accompanied the film was powerful, good enough that it was the first thing I thought of when the credits began to roll.  The plot itself I enjoyed, finding it a bit complex, but not unwieldy, spiced with the right amount of emotion and intrigue.  And the climax… wow.

There’s no doubt that if you want to see a movie this summer that will have you on the edge of your seat, Inception is certainly it.  The flaws of the film are few and easily forgettable.  The story is as gripping as the characters, both of which are fun to watch and unravel.  I can easily, quite easily, recommend Inception to you.  It’s definitely one I’d see on the big-screen in case you’re thinking about waiting.

Toy Story 3, a Review

I should preface this post by saying that it’s been a long time since I’ve seen Toy Story or Toy Story 2.  I do remember that I enjoyed them both, finding their stories entertaining and their humor satisfying.  Plus, the characters are memorable and iconic.  That said, I had a certain expectation for Toy Story 3, namely that I would laugh and that I would get a good story.  Did the movie achieve these things for me?

Toy Story 3 takes place several years after the first two films.  Andy is getting ready to head off to College (not some unnamed university or college, but College).  His childhood toys—Woody, Buzz, the Potatoheads, etc.—have all been left behind and stored in a toy box for years.  As Andy grew up, he stopped playing with them, and now that he’s going off to College he no longer needs them.

The film opens with a glorious battle between the toys in their play universe.  All the favorites are there.  The action is high.  The fun is great.  But then when real life hits, when we find that the toys are desperate for attention once again, all the fun seems to stop.  By accident, the toys end up at a daycare where things aren’t as happy as they seemed.  The kids there are rough and hard on toys, uncaring that they break or are damaged.  The daycare serves as the main plot for the movie, introducing new characters with exciting potential. 

A lot of stuff happens, things that test friendship, loyalty, and self-importance, and the toys (namely Woody) end up changed.  The conclusion was a sappy, probably unrealistic scene that tried to jerk at tears that I didn’t feel like shedding.  Am I heartless?  No.  It succeeded in that it had me thinking about my childhood, waxing nostalgic, but I never had a favorite toy that I cared deeply about, let along a sack full. 

Don’t get me wrong.  Toy Story 3 offers a great adventure story.  There were times when I was unsure how the toys were going to manage.  The plot is fun and original.  But what was missing was the humor.  Long has Pixar been a studio that produces films of exceptional stories and high comedic values.  I laughed once or twice, but nothing like I’ve done with past Pixar films.  And that is where the film suffers.  If there was more clever humor, more oddball funny situations, I might have enjoyed it better, but sadly there was not.

On a plus note, the animation was beautiful.  The junkyard scenes were fantastic.  The characters are seamless and smooth.  Even the human characters are better looking, still maintaining their CG animated characteristics but looking more realistic while not crossing the line into Realism.  And the toys were all well crafted and created.

Toy Story 3 let me down.  Perhaps it’s because it’s been a while since I’ve seen the last ones.  Perhaps it’s because I had my standards too high.  Maybe I’m not the target audience?  Whatever it is, I can only recommend this movie to diehard Pixar fans (I’m a fan, but I don’t think diehard is a word I’d use to describe my devotion) or Toy Story fans.  Of course, I couldn’t expect Pixar to never mess up, and after a dozen mostly-fantastic films, this one blip isn’t going to change my opinion of them.  I’m sure they’ll be back with a new, grand story, and when it’s there, I’ll watch it happily.

(Note: I saw the 2d version.  I still don’t understand the fascination with 3d cinema, and I hope by not purchasing the 3d tickets I’m sending a small message to somebody that I don’t want that technology to stick around.  Sadly, I’d say I’m in for a rude awakening.)

How to Train Your Dragon, a Review

Call me a sucker for animated films, but I can’t help it.  They’re almost always a win in my book, as I usually find myself engrossed in the world of CGI.  DreamWorks new feature, How to Train Your Dragon, fits great into the scads of computer-animated films that I like to say I enjoy.

The story takes place on the island of Berk.  Young Hiccup, the Viking chief’s son, is a walking disaster.  Everything he touches breaks.  Even venturing outdoors often invokes fear and awe in the villagers.  Hiccup is a scrawny lad, lacking all the rugged muscle and bulk all the other Viking’s have.  His father is the most famous of all dragon slayers, and though Hiccup longs to be like everyone else, he’s hampered by his physique.

But Hiccup has more than just daddy issues to work on.  His village is constantly attacked by dragons.  They come in the night and steal their livestock, burning down the homes as they fight the mighty Vikings.  One night, during an attack, the dreaded Night Fury, a dragon so mysterious and dangerous that no one’s ever even seen one, shows up.  Hiccup, in an effort to prove himself, decides that he will capture and kill the Night Fury, thus earning his father’s respect, the admiration of the town, and the heart of the cute little blond Astrid he’s had his eyes on.  While the village is occupied with the dragons, Hiccup sneaks away and launches his plan, and things will never be the same…

As I mentioned, I really like animated films.  They seem to pack more of a punch than many live-action movies.  Mayhap this is because we feel a little safer when dealing with imaginary situations.  Maybe it’s because we see them as children’s movies and we let our guard down.  Whatever the case is, many of the computer-animated films deal with heavy issues (see Up if you don’t believe me).  How to Train Your Dragon was no different, dealing with daddy issues, self-confidence, and moral objection of societal views to name a few.  And while movies like this often have “feel good,” happy endings, I don’t feel cheated or mislead when I see them.  No, I cheer.  Our lives have too many problems as it is.  If I can see achievement and accomplishment in someone else, even if that someone is a computer-animated Hiccup, then I can find meaning and apply it to my life as well.

This movie is different from other CGI films, too.  I was expecting a lot more comedy (like Shrek) thrown in with the adventure, but instead it was the other way around.  The worldbuilding is massive and creative, filled with possibilities for adventure, and our hero finds himself on one.  The movie does succeed in delivering funny jokes/scenes, but honestly I was more excited about the plot.

My favorite thing of the film, however, was definitely the dragons.  (What fantasy reader can resist dragons when they’re done right?)  The writers have imagined many different kinds of dragons.  Some are small and dorky looking.  Some are fierce monsters as large as a building.  Some have thick scales.  Some have multiple heads.  All of them were visually stunning and beautiful.  Yes, there are plenty of dragons in the movie, and my favorite was definitely the Night Fury.  This dragon reminded me of my pet dog Stella.  Some of the mannerisms and actions were identical, so it was hard for me not to like the Night Fury.  In addition, the relationship between the dragon and Hiccup was endearing and heartfelt, harkening up familiar feelings to anyone that’s ever owned and loved a pet.

Overall, I really enjoyed this movie.  I watched it in 3D (as we had my 8-yr-old brother-in-law with us), and it was impressive, but plain-ole 2D would have easily sufficed.  DreamWorks has some failed movies in its past, but How to Train Your Dragon isn’t one of them.  I can easily recommend the movie for anyone who wants to be thrilled and entertained.  To me, it was worth the full-price of the movie ticket(s) on a weeknight, so that’s saying something.

Shutter Island, A Review

US Marshal Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his partner Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo) are sent to Ashecliff Hospital to investigate the disappearance of a patient.  The hospital is a unique institution, the only one of its kind in the world.  It houses the most severe of the criminally insane and is located on an island twelve miles from the nearest shore.

I was expecting a lot from this movie.  Many of the reviews I’ve read have hailed it as a true horror movie, but after seeing the film I’m not so sure about that assessment.  While there were some suspenseful scenes, I think I only jumped one time, and that was just because the speakers were way too loud.

Perhaps the problem with tagging Shutter Island as a horror movie is that there is no accepted definition for “horror.”  What may terrify one person might make another laugh.  There are things in the movie that are creepy, macabre, strange, even ghostly, all the elements of a classic horror motif, but I failed to have any real fear.

That’s not to say that the movie is bad.  No, in fact, I enjoyed the movie, with reservations.  The meat of the story (though somewhat predictable… I had one character pegged from the moment I first saw him) centers on guilt.  Teddy served during WWII and helped liberate a death camp and he has severe post-war trauma.  His wife died while he was at work and he feels responsible for that.  Teddy is a walking bag of mixed emotions, trying to come to grips with life and accept it.  This, truly, is the main story, but even it was not altogether engrossing.

The best thing about Shutter Island was the island itself.  The set design was beautiful.  The film takes place in 1954, and Scorsese’s directorial eye captured this time period gracefully.  The Ashecliff hospital’s grounds are beautiful and well manicured.  The buildings are old but attractive.  The costumes are perfect.  Then there’s the darker side of the island.  The prison side.  Ward C, an old Civil War-era building that’s home to the most violent of the patients, was definitely the creepiest part of the film.  The lighthouse and its mystery.  The caves.

Indeed, watching the film was enjoyable.  I think I went in expecting something grand, and my sights were set to high.  I felt the conclusion was underwhelming, and I was certainly prepared for it.  The film was slow at times, especially Teddy’s flashbacks to the War, but there was just enough intrigue to keep me watching.

Overall, I enjoyed Shutter Island, but at the same time I was a little disappointed.  The acting was superb.  The set was beautiful.  The sounds were pleasant.  The plot, however, the main crux of any movie, dropped the ball.  I can recommend seeing the movie, but waiting for a matinee or the DVD release wouldn’t be a bad idea.

Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief, A Film Review

I’m sick again.  Or maybe I never got better.  With that, the weekend was crammed full, exhausting, productive, and fun.  Keisha and I went and watched Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief over the weekend for a Valentine’s date, and now I submit my review.

Having not read the book, nor possessing any foreknowledge about the film, I had no real expectations for the movie.  Keisha has read the book and enjoyed it.  She wanted to see the movie.  In short, I think I probably enjoyed it more than her.

The film adaptation was directed by Chris Columbus, who also directed the first two Harry Potter films.  The movie stars Logan Lerman as Percy, Brandon Jackson as Grover, and Alexandra Daddario as Annabeth, along with several other celebrities.

The plot of the movie interweaves the modern world with classic Greek gods.  I’ve always been a huge fan of mythology (especially Greek), and I found this mechanism of the film to work well, with a few minor flaws.  Zeus’ lightning bolt of power has been stolen, and he accuses Poseidon of having his son to steal it.  Poseidon gets all indignant and says “No way, dude.  You got it all wrong.”  Zeus tells him that if the bolt isn’t returned by the summer solstice (wince!) then there will be a war between the gods.

Cut to Percy Jackson, a normal, everyday high school loner.  He’s grown up without a dad.  He’s angry and smart-mouthed.  He only finds peace while he’s in the water.  But then one day, on a class field trip, something goes terribly wrong.  A series of events leads Percy to a secluded camp for half-bloods, the offspring of a god and mortal, and his life will never be the same.

I thought the movie was fun and entertaining.  The light-hearted feel made for a pleasurable viewing experience.  The blending of Greek gods in our world made for fun watching.  The story wasn’t grandiose or even amazing, but it was entertaining, so that’s really all that matters.  I can definitely see how children would love the movie.

Flaw wise, I thought some of the acting was poor, and the villain was easy to peg from the get-go.  Some of the special effects were awesome (Hades was pretty cool), and others not so much (Pierce Brosnan’s centaur body was weird).  The gods weren’t how I would picture them, and there didn’t seem to be as many as there should be.  Keisha, on the other hand, said that the book and movie were quite different on several occasions, and this was a big flaw for her.

Overall, Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief was a fun movie, but one that would be more fun for children or people who haven’t read the book.

Random Bits & Pieces

• We also rented and watched Surrogates over the weekend, which I thought was pretty cool, both plot-wise and effects-wise.
• Taxes turned out much better than I thought.
• More snow here.  It started yesterday around noon and hasn’t stopped yet. 
• Church was good yesterday.  And by that I mean worship.
• Why am I getting spam, even with CAPTCHA enabled?
• I hope I get feeling better soon.  My stomach is a clenched fist, my nose a runny mess, my eyes a swamp.  Ugh.

A Film Review + Amusing Photos

Today I thought I knew what I wanted to post about.  I had it in my head (and it’s really already written) to post my review of Ted Dekker’s Green.  But for some reason, I’m just not feeling it.  Instead I have a brief post for today.

A few weeks ago I mentioned that fellow blogger Mattson Tomlin was giving away another free DVD to four people.  I’ve been Following Mattson’s blog for quite a few months now, interested in seeing his ideas develop and come to life.  He blogs about various aspects of directing and creating a film, from the perspective of a young SUNY Purchase student, and occasionally posts a finished product.  I recently received and watched the DVD in its entirety, which is composed of three separate short-films: Solomon Grundy, (i), and Until the Sky Falls.

Solomon Grundy is an interpretation of the classic English nursery rhyme, “Solomon Grundy.”  Jimmy is young and nervous and he has a dark side.  He tries to keep it in, but he’s not always successful.  And when it shows itself, bad things tend to happen.  I’ve liked the “Solomon Grundy” rhyme ever since reading Batman: The Long Halloween, so I was eager to see Mattson’s interpretation. 

The film is well shot, the acting is solid, the script is great, and the plot is interesting (if a bit predictable).  I found it refreshing to see this up-and-coming director’s take.  The only problem I had was I felt that the build-up to the climax was a bit too long, but considering the film is only 7:31 in length, I understand.  If you’d like to watch Solomon Grundy, click here to head over to YouTube.

The next film, (i), was a film experimenting with technology.  Mattson wanted to shoot an invisible man piece.  He blogged about his “how to” do this here, which is even more interesting after having watched the film.  (i) was the weakest film of the three, but it was cool seeing the technology used come to life.  The acting was great, though I felt the digitalization was a bit shaky at times (certain backgrounds, etc.)  Overall, though, I liked watching the brief film, and I would likely watch a full film of this feature.

The last film was the longest (around 20 minutes) and best on the DVD.  Until the Sky Falls is a dystopic, post-apocalyptic silent film.  The video style and look of the film was pretty sweet.  I’m not sure if it’s because it was filmed using 16mm film or if there was some type of editing, but I really liked it.  It definitely added to the theme of the movie.  The plot itself was also very interesting, especially since it was told using no words.  The acting was superb and I’d like to see more like this.  You can see more about this film on Mattson’s blog around April-June of 2009.

In the end, I really enjoyed this small DVD.  I’ve liked watching Mattson’s work and progress.  I don’t know him at all outside of the blogosphere, but I think he’ll be going places with what he does.  He’s currently fundraising on Kickstarter to try and film more in the Solomon Grundy world.  If you’d like, throw some support his way.  I’m sure he’d appreciate it.  You can check out his studio website at www.wackeychan.com.

-----------------

As some of you know, I’m going on a cruise in May.  We don’t necessarily have to have our passport for the cruise, but it’d be much easier if we did.  So Keisha and I went and had our Passport photos taken.  There were some strict rules to getting those photos.  Ears had to show.  Face had to be just right.  Look natural.  Don’t smile.

Well, after paying $15 for both photos, I was expecting something awesome.  Instead, we wound up with two mug shots.  Neither of us look happy.  “I’m so mad that I’m going on a cruise.”  “I know.  It’s awful.”  Anyway, take a look and see for yourself.  And by all means, DON’T TURN US IN!

By the way, I took a lot of that wording from the actual wanted posters stemming from President Lincoln’s assassination.  Of course, a few things were changed…

Reviewing the new Star Trek movie

Over the weekend Keisha and I fully intended to go and watch Avatar, but things took a turn and we didn't get to go watch it. Instead we wound up renting the new Star Trek movie, directed by J.J. Abrams.

To be fair, I've never watched a single episode or movie of the Star Trek franchise. What I know about it ("Beam me up, Scotty," phasers, "Live Long and Prosper," and Klingon) all comes from being ingrained into pop-culture. Plus, as a lifetime STAR WARS fan, I just assumed Star Trek was my arch-enemy. That said, I now offer my review of the newest franchise film.

Star Trek begins with an exciting action sequence, filled with beautiful space imagery and fantastic technology. This spectacular display of future technology does not cease throughout the film, and it doesn't get old, either. The Starfleet spacecraft U.S.S. Enterprise, as well as the Romulun ship the Narada, are both visually stunning. The special effects throughout the film were all well done and only slightly cheesy a few times (a green-skinned woman? What?). Watching the fate of Vulcan was mesmerizing. Overall, I found the imagery of the movie Grade A eye candy.

The second aspect of the film I enjoyed was the intense action scenes. The few battle scenes between individuals, especially when the Starfleet crew arrived at Vulcan, were all entertaining to watch (albeit not as exciting as a lightsaber duel, but that's a different matter entirely). Abrams pumped adrenaline throughout the movie, and anyone seeking an action movie would surely enjoy this film.

For the most part the plot of the film was enjoyable, too, but not completely. To remain spoiler free there was a large problem with physics and continuity and reality that I felt would have been better explained using a different mechanism. The red-matter technology had some cool stuff to it, but the implications regarding timelines felt a bit too much. Sometimes this mechanism works (like Lost) and sometimes it doesn't (like Heroes). Besides this, the story of Kirk and Spock were both intriguing, and if you could forget about some things the conquest of the Romulans was cool, too.

In the end, Star Trek was a worthwhile movie to watch. I was entertained and thought the special effects were amazing. The story was good, but not great, due to a few fickle things I didn't like. Keisha, on the other hand, had no problems with it, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. If you're looking for a thrill-ride, sci-fi, eye-pleasing movie to watch during the Christmas season that's available on DVD, I'd recommend Star Trek.

Random Bits and Pieces

• Nearly finished with Warbreaker. Hopefully will be before the weekend.
• Blue Mtn. Dew is definitely not the best Dew out there.
• Those who are dead are just living in my head.
• I joined a gym over the weekend.
• I joined Sams Club over the weekend.
  

Where the Wild Things Are, A Review

Like most folks under the age of 40, I read Where the Wild Things Are when I was in elementary school. The book, written by Maurice Sendak, was a particular favorite, alongside classics like Green Eggs & Ham (by Dr. Seuss), Love You Forever (by Robert Munsch), and Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day (by Judith Viorst). Yes, I remember really liking Where the Wild Things Are, especially from the fascinating art and vivid imagination of the protagonist, Max.

When I first heard about the movie adaptation last year, I was hesitantly excited. I wasn’t sure how there could be a movie made from a short, ten sentence picture book, but I still decided that I would see it.

Where the Wild Things Are, directed by Spike Jonze, stars Max Records as Max from the book. (I know, it’s kind of ironic, but it’s the truth according to Wikipedia.) The movie is quite similar to book in several ways, but there are many creative avenues pursued by Jonze as well. The film runs for just over an hour and a half.

The acting from the movie was solid and well done, and the emotions on Max’s young face were perfectly captured for his scenes. His anger was vivid, his sadness was evident, and his joy was impossible not to notice. In fact, this role was only Record’s second filmed acting role, and his performance was noteworthy. In addition to the fine acting by Records, the voice acting of the Wild Things was top notch. Many well known actors fill these roles, and all do a great job with giving unique character to their Monster.

To me, the best thing about this movie was the surreal art of the Wild Things. Their island is vast, but somehow small, too. There are expansive deserts, a creepy forest, rocks and bluffs, and a magnificent oceanscape, all complete on the one island. Each monster is beautifully crafted and marvelously detailed, from their odd assortment of feet to their individual heads. And the giant fort-house that was built was breathtaking.

Another thing I really enjoyed about this film was the accompanying soundtrack. Some songs were guttural and wild, filled with arcane whoops and screams that instilled a sense of craziness. Other tracks were somber and bleak, and these fit their individual scenes perfectly.

It may come as a surprise, then, when I say that I did not enjoy the movie. While the acting was fantastic and the art was beautiful, the film was too weighty, too serious, for me to say that I enjoyed it. Max is a very mean, lonely kid, and he spends all of his time in his own imaginary world. He is not disciplined at home, and at one point he even bites his mom. But this was not why the film was heavy. No, the heaviness sets in when Max runs away from the “Real World” and goes into his imagination.

It’s easy, yet complicated, to see the metaphors and symbolism each of the monsters embodies. They are all depressed and sad and they are hoping for a King to make them feel happy. Max becomes that king, but he fails, and everybody stays pretty much the same: depressed and sad. The heaviness of life sets in on the island, and it’s a little frightening. Eventually Max realizes he wants to go home and he leaves the island to its own problems.

The conclusion of the film is a powerhouse of emotions, and I spied my eight-year-old brother-in-law wiping tears from his eyes. Indeed, the heartstrings were tugged a bit, but I didn’t turn to tears, only disgust and confusion. After I left the movie, my remarks were that it was not what I was expecting. No, it was too heavy of a film, and because of that I did not enjoy it. However, I’m not really sure if you’re supposed to enjoy it. Sure, the imagination was a fun trip, but it was too rooted in the sadness of life and love to last.

Overall, it’s a bit unfair for me to not like the film. Really I was upset that there were all these valid life problems presented and no real resolution, which is how life truly is. But, we Americans like our cinema to end with resolution, and I felt that there were too many loose ends in this movie. So, in the end, I can recommend watching the film, if only to revel a bit in childhood fantasy, but I can’t promise you that you’ll glean much from it other than life is heavy and hard, and sometimes even our imagination is not an escape.

More of Writing Wednesdays and The American Dreamer tomorrow. You can find my review of Terry Brooks' The Dark Wraith of Shannara on my Goodreads page, and I think clicking here may take you to it. And if you don't use Goodreads, then you really, really should.