Review: UP

Just got back from the film, and I figured I'd post my review up in time for the weekend. Now, I love me some Pixar. I've found them to be an extremely reliable source of family entertainment. Finding Nemo, Cars, The Incredibles, Ratatouille, Toy Story--their list goes on and on. Sooner or later, they've got to fall flat on their faces, or at least not quite meet the standard they've set for themselves.

This time, they've exceeded that standard. By a wide margin.

In fact, I'd have to say that UP is likely their best movie yet. As I think back on it, there's really not a single thing with the movie that I could quibble about. It's tight: a lean, mean, funny machine. I loved every minute of it, from beginning to end. It hits all the right notes on a spectrum of emotions, from humor to drama to adventure--you name it. I don't really want to get in to any of the specifics, because I think it was a stronger experience for me by not knowing too much about it before I went. All you need to know is that it's about an old man who uses helium balloons to make his house fly. The fact that I can give that as the summary and still give the movie a strong recommendation says oodles right there.

Dads, this is one to see with your sons. Or grandfathers with their grandsons. Not saying that it won't be enjoyed by the ladies, but I think it made an even bigger impact on me to be sitting there at the first showing, my son next to me, laughing along with me. The movie's a strong four stars from me. I can't recommend it enough.

As an added bonus, the film plays with a cartoon short in front of it, as has been Pixar's tradition. This one's called Partly Cloudy, and it's every bit as good as any of the others you've already seen. Really, the fact that you can see entertainment this good for a matinee price ($3.50 for me here in Maine), is a jaw dropping good deal.

So fly, my pretties. Fly! Go watch this movie. Now.

That is all.



Squirrel!

TRC at Work

Brought my son in with me to work today, just for a half day (we're taking off early to go see Up, believe it or not. Me? Seeing a movie opening day again? Very nice.) It's fun to have him here with me. So far he's stamped, de-barcoded and de-callnumberified some discards, made a picture for a coworker, helped me fix a computer, and read a lot of books. Right now he's playing with my Optimus Prime Transformer that I keep here for just such occasions. A few hours after we'd been here, he said, "You know, Dad, when I grow up, I think I'll be a librarian at this library, too. That way we could work together every day."

Clearly I have him effectively fooled. :-)

The Curious Case of Forrest Gump

I just realized I never blogged my review for this movie, so here we go. Let's get one thing out of the way right off: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is not the feel good movie of the year. In fact, it's pretty darn depressing, when you get down to it. It felt a lot like Forrest Gump, except it wasn't as funny. One of those journey through life flicks, where you see a lot of how life has changed over the years, through the eyes of an interesting narrator. With that in mind, realize that this isn't the sort of movie I usually go for. I don't like depressing, first and foremost. But I really enjoyed this film. Why is this? Well for one thing, it's based on a great concept. What would it be like to live your life backward? Be born old, then grow younger each day. Wouldn't that be fantastic?

Here's your answer: no. It wouldn't. It would totally stink.

However, watching someone else go through that experience is fascinating and made me appreciate my own life more. The effects were great, the acting all superb, and the shots in the movie were outstanding. Frequently I was blown away by some of the way they handled film. There's a reason this film was nominated for 13 Oscars, and a reason that it beat out Iron Man and Dark Knight for best visual effects. Really, if it weren't for Slumdog Millionaire, Button likely would have cleaned up at the Oscars.

This is a movie you ought to see at least once. Yes, you'll be sad. Yes, it's a downer. But at the end of it, it's a downer that makes you feel better about life, and that's worth something. Four stars.

Review: The Great Hunt

The Great Hunt by Robert Jordan

My review

rating: 5 of 5 stars
It had been a while since I read this one from cover to cover, and in my memory, it was never one of the Wheel of Time books to stand out in my mind, so I'd given it three stars. After reading it, I was surprised at how many of my favorite parts of the series it contained. I love the Lanfear pieces introduced here, and the climax is one I've always enjoyed. Better yet, there are so many pieces of the puzzle only hinted at here which become of great significance much later on in the series--Jordan was very skilled at tying many plots into an intricate weave, something that is far from easy to do. TGH builds on the foundation of TEOTW and broadens it. I enjoyed all of it, and have corrected my too-low-rating of earlier.


View all my reviews.

A Post for My Maine Friends

Just wanted to let you know--Allegiant Air has a really good sale going right now. Bangor to Orlando direct, $88.70 round trip, including tax. (They charge extra for checked luggage, etc--FYI). A lot of dates available in June. So if you wanted to go down to Florida, but didn't want to pay a whole lot, now might be the time to go. Unless, of course, you wanted to go to Florida, didn't want to pay a whole lot, but already went in April. I paid $60 more than this price, and felt like I was getting a good deal back then. Oh well--it's a lot hotter in Florida in June. :-)

Massive Update

Well, I'm not so sure how long this actual update will be, but I've got plenty to fill you all in on. Yesterday was officially the Most Effective Day Off Ever, as I got the following done: painted trim in one room, helped DKC paint the entryway, wrote (my current effort is a Groundhog Day murder mystery, watched the Bluray Pinocchio (review below), painted Lightning McQueen on TRC's wall (my first foray into wall art--I'll post pictures once it's totally done), finished The Great Hunt, cleaned the garage, cleaned the interior of my car, and worked on editing a friend's book. All in one day. And as a reward for all that hard work, I was down to 204.8 this morning. Very nice. Of course, I'm pretty darn tired now, but it's all good. Every now and then I get into this strange hyper-efficiency mode, and I just have to keep working until it wears itself out. Maybe it's sort of like all the efficiency I'm usually capable of (but don't exercise) stores itself up until it just explodes out in an exhausting whirlwind. In any case, I should be good for the next month or two at least. :-) What did all of you do on your day off?

And now, a couple of movie reviews:

Pinocchio--What's not to like about this film? (Especially when it's in 7.1 audio.) TRC really enjoyed it--he wasn't even as scared of the Monstro scene as he thought he'd be. I think this might be one of the best Disney "boy" movies, at least for small boys. It's got conflicts in it that they relate to and understand. In any case, it had been a long time since I'd seen it, and I still loved it. Three and a half stars.

Across the Universe--Over 30 Beatles songs crammed into one movie. This film was almost everything I wished Mamma Mia had been. It's not perfect, but it got a few things right: number one, the characters were actually appealing, or at least not actively revolting. Number two, they hired singers, not actors, so the vocals are really good. Number three, the plot has some semblance of sense to it. Yes, there's a long psychedelic part in the second third, but that felt right at home with some of those Beatles songs. Plus, it has Bono singing "I am the Walrus," which makes just about any film better. (Think about it. War and Peace? Boring. War and Peace with Bono singing "I am the Walrus"? Strangely intriguing.) Three stars. Could have been more if the plot made a tiny bit more sense, but hey--nobody's perfect. Strongly recommended for Beatles fans or musical lovers.

TRC Writes a Story

I have TRC dictate a journal to me about once a week (I try to, at least). He likes to throw in stories now and then to keep things interesting, and I thought I'd share today's with you:

Once upon a time, there was an old king who lived faaaaaaaaar in the distance, and he and his queen were searching for gold, but instead of gold, trash was everywhere. Everywhere they dug, trash was in their way, and they couldn't find gold. But one day, they went into a mine and got lost, but they found some gold, and they found a map, and a compass, and a miner. Then the miner helped them find their way home, and they lived happily ever after with the miner.

Reviews: So You Think You Can Dance and Hard Times

Yesterday was a strange viewing experience for me. DKC was working, so I took the time to catch up on a film that had been loaned to me a while ago: Hard Times. Charles Bronson movie, where he's basically a street fighter who fights for money. He fights a lot and does cool things. So your standard action fighting movie, really. I enjoyed the film a lot, though--some very nice sequences. I wonder if anyone's done a study on the escalation of violence in action/fighting movies. For example, both this one and Ong Bak have a scene right at the beginning where an apparently really tough fighter is floored by one punch of the protagonist. How often has that happened in movies? What was the first one? Where did it go from there? Is there a usual pattern these sort of things follow? I imagine there's an academic paper waiting to be written there, if any of you are really dying for a cool paper topic. :-) Maybe one day I'll start doing that sort of thing again--who knows? Three stars for the film, by the way.

So I went from that, to . . . So You Think You Can Dance? Why was I watching this show? Well, it's because my sister had talked it up so much. She now owes me two hours of my life back, although she swears it gets better later on, once the first round of cuts is over. Maybe. Maybe. But I still should have just watched the latest Mythbusters I had DVRed instead. Oh well. Live and learn.

Hot

I don't do well in heat. It makes me unhappy. And it's in the 90s today, so I'm feeling kind of sluggish. Went down to a librarian's meeting today, and I ended up hearing some fascinating info on the booksellers' side of the writing/book business. I'd never really had the chance to hear how booksellers work their magic, and the sort of effort and techniques that go into that business. Really interesting stuff, that I'm sure I could eke into a good blog post. Of course, I could only do that if it were cooler. I blame the fact that I can't on global warming. Such is life. I think I'll go stick my head in the freezer.

Book Review: Eye of the World (and a WoT update)

The Eye of the World by Robert Jordan

My review

rating: 5 of 5 stars
After all these years, I'm happy to say that I still enjoy Eye of the World as much as ever. Sure, there are things in the book that these days seem hackneyed, but at the time, they were bold new steps in fantasy, and I think that deserves some respect. The reason these sort of things became so common is in large part due to how well Jordan handled them. All told, I firmly believe this is a must read for anyone who wants to have a clue about modern fantasy and how the genre has come to be where it is today.


View all my reviews.

And in other Wheel of Time updates, I'm over halfway done with The Great Hunt. I'm surprised at how much is in this book that I didn't remember happening until much longer. For example, somehow in my memory, Thom was absent for far more of the series, and Rand didn't meet up with him again until three or four more books were gone. And yet here he is. Some of this faulty memory is to be expected--when you're waiting for the next book to come out, it can make things seem to take much longer. But I wouldn't have thought that would be the case with book #2 . . . Maybe I'm just getting old.

It's interesting to see how the series develops--with a fairly tight POV in the first book that begins to expand toward the end of it. Here in #2, we see the POVs broaden even further. I think this is an excellent way to introduce us to a fantasy world as deep as this one. We get the chance to see it clearly through one set of eyes before we start exploring different aspects and viewpoints.

In any case, still enjoying the read immensely, and not regretting rereading it at all. I love these books.

Sundry Movie Reviews

I've seen three films that I need to update you all on. In order from worst to best (because bad reviews are always more fun):

Eagle Eye--This movie could have been okay if they just moved the setting into the near future instead of the present. As it is, it just turned out to be laughably unrealistic, which is disappointing, since I loved Disturbia, the last time LeBeouf paired up with Caruso on a film. This one tells the tale of a kid who is "activated" to become what seems to be part of a terrorist cell--against his wishes. Much intrigue and shoddy plotting ensues. Maybe if I didn't know how far from the truth some of the stuff portrayed is, I would have liked it better. Sounds like it was originally a Spielberg movie, then he left and it got cannibalized by four other writers, and this is the dreck we're left with. One and a half stars.

The Incredible Hulk--Finally got around to watching this one, and DKC and I really enjoyed it. Fun action scenes, great effects, sweet sound on my system--thumbs up. If you don't know the plot of this one, you can guess. Bruce Banner tries not to become angry. He fails. Three stars.

Star Trek--Yes, it's true. I actually made it to the theaters. I think I'll be making it out more often this summer--do some matinees or something. This one was a blast. I don't think any of you need me to sum up the film for you. So I'll just say that I thought it was really well done, and I give it a strong three and a half stars. DKC also enjoyed it--so much so that at the end, she even said she'd like to watch it again. This one's a keeper.

In other news, I am now down to 206.6. That's 19.4 pounds of weight that I'm not lugging around with me anymore. 16.6 pounds to go, although if I don't make it all the way down, I won't really be upset. I'm already very pleased with how far I've come. 8.6% of my weight, gone. Nice.

Graduation and Separation

TRC graduated from preschool today. He was very excited (they performed a play--he was a frog. Again.), but he was also really sad. Sad because it had come to an end and "he'd never get to go to preschool again." I tried to comfort him: reassure him that he'd still see his friends, and that Kindergarten would be fun, too. At the same time, though, I couldn't help but think that this is something he has to learn to deal with. I've never been a good one for good byes. I like to keep them short, because they make me uncomfortable. There are probably deep seated psychological reasons for this, but you don't want to read about this, and I don't want to write about it. Suffice it to say, I could relate to him. For a long time, I hated watching family videos, just because I didn't like to be reminded of what was past and could never be recovered. They still make me kind of depressed, although I can handle them now. This isn't to say by any means that I'm not happy in the present. It's more that I wish I could be happy in the present and still get back the past and be happy there, too.

I know that makes no sense.

In any case, I think he's recuperating well. The thing that I've found that helps the most is to remember that today's present will be tomorrow's past. It's a lot easier to deal with the loss of yesterday if I know that I spent that time well.

Okay--clearly I'm feeling too retrospective right now. I have no right to be posting when I'm in this condition. That is all.

Screenplay: Finished

Just finished the screenplay version of Ichabod. The first draft, at any rate. It clocked in at 106 pages, and it's by far the most unique thing I've done in a long time. I have no idea if it's any good or not. With books, I have a lot of experience--not just writing them, but reading them. With screenplays . . . not so much. I have tons of experience watching movies, but I have only read a few screenplays cover to cover. That puts me at a big disadvantage when it comes to making one. Ideally, I should have taken some time to read fifty or so before I started this thing. But I didn't.

What did I learn in the process?

Well, one thing is that I think my writing will be better because of this. There were times when my dialogue didn't do a whole lot, and it wasn't until I pictured two people actually acting out that dialogue that I realized how little it was doing. For some reason, being forced to think of each scene the way I think of a movie scene made things different. It's as if when I read books, I have different expectations of what can and can't happen. I'm not saying that from now on I'm going to write my books the way I wrote this screenplay, but . . . I think I'll approach it differently, is all.

I learned that Ichabod is a mystery. That's the essence of what it is. Before this, I hadn't really been sure. Was it fantasy? Literary fiction? Mystery? It's the latter. The rest is just dressing. So it needs to succeed as a mystery, which I think it does. If/when I do another round of queries for the book, I have a better idea of how I want to spin it. That's a good thing.

I learned that I enjoy writing screenplays. I would do this again, if the opportunity presented itself. Adapting was a ton of fun, and trying to figure out how to have scenes play out on screen when they really were written to be completely literary . . . that was a kick. There's one scene, for example, where Ichabod is reading, and it's important that we know what he's reading. How to portray that? I didn't want to just have him narrate out loud or in his head--especially not when the text he's reading is Beowulf. I finally settled on going split screen (or maybe using a thought bubble) and portraying what he's reading in an animated side window. Is this a good idea? I have no clue. But I like it.

Anyway--glad to have another thing done. It took two months, but that's just because I don't have as much time these days to work on writing as I used to. I get about a half hour each day, if I want to keep my sanity. At least, that's all I could do on this screenplay. Maybe now that I'll be back to regular writing, I'll be able to do it a bit longer. Or maybe it's that I can't diet and write a ton at the same time. (Current weight, BTW: 208.4. That's 17.6 pounds lost, baby!)

That's all I have time for this evening. I'll no doubt revisit this again. First drafts are never final drafts, after all. If any of you crazy cats out there would like to read the draft, I have it in an RTF file, if you promise to be very careful with the digital copy. Email or leave a comment. TTFN!

Writing vs Gardening

So the wife and I were having a conversation last night. Every now and then I get feeling a tad apathetic. Hard to describe, but what I mean is that I just feel pretty meh. Not happy, not sad. Not excited, not depressed. Just . . . neutral. Anyway, DKC was saying how much she enjoyed gardening, and how that helps her to feel more chipper about things. Not exactly her words, but the general sentiment is right. Anyway, the point is that she was wondering if I didn't want to pick up some sort of hobby that I really enjoyed that would help me feel not so meh. I thought about this for a bit, and then explained that I had a hobby that I really enjoyed, but sometimes it's hard to remember that. Here's how I explained it:

Imagine that you'd been gardening every day for the past seven years. In this amount of time, you'd gotten some pretty good crops in. And each time you harvested, you looked them over and felt really good about the work you'd done. You piled all the produce up from one harvest, and you carted it down to the local farmer's market. There, the professional gardeners looked it over for a bit, then explained that your harvest wasn't quite up to snuff. You looked down at your harvest and saw they were right--all their points were valid. So you took the harvest back and decided to try again. And again. And again. You still enjoy gardening, but there are times that it gets a tad old--all that gardening and no recognition. It's the same way with my writing. There are ups and downs. At times, I feel great about it. At others, I feel meh. This doesn't mean I want to stop writing, but it does explain why something I love to do can get old now and then.

I think the explanation made sense to DKC.

(And on a completely unrelated note, I watched JCVD yesterday. Three stars. It's a movie in which Jean Claude Van Damme plays himself. He's going through a bitter divorce, can't get good movies to come his way, and he's short on cash. Then he finds himself in the middle of a robbery. Intriguing movie, with an awesome acting turn by Van Damme. Really impressive. There were some slow spots, but it was a good movie. Surprising.)

Movie Review: Mamma Mia

WARNING: I freely admit that I'm probably not the intended audience for this film. If you cherish this movie, holding it dear to your heart, I strongly suggest you not read what I'm about to post. Because I'm not gonna hold back on this one. It's very rare that I watch a movie I strongly dislike, and even rarer that I finish it. And it's even less common that I feel vehemently opposed to a movie. As if its very existence is something which must be struck down in order to make the world a happier place not just for me, but for humanity in general.

Mamma Mia is one such film.

So please, don't take this personally if you loved the movie. Just because I think something you enjoyed is actually a piece of mind rotting garbage, don't be sad. We all have different opinions. And sure, some of those opinions are right (mine), and some are wrong (yours), but that's why I have a blog and you don't. And in this case, there is no debate on this film. Because you see, I'm its worst enemy: an Abba fan who's also a fan of musicals. Yes, it's true. I'm even willing to out myself as an aficionado of seventies Swedish pop music in an effort to expose this movie for the awfulness it truly is. I even like Meryl Streep and Pierce Brosnan. But, in case you haven't gotten the point yet, I did not like this movie.

At all.

It fails on so many levels. Where shall I begin? My biggest gripe definitely roots itself in one simple fact: this isn't a story. This is a series of pop songs never intended to tell a story, forced together into a "plot" in which the characters aren't characters--they're simply devices to be manipulated until they get to a spot where they can belt out off key pop tunes that make about as much sense (in the context of the movie) as asgf asgf apaweroag aw48awt3 asvd90q2t ag 9qw4t asgp. The characters go from loving to hating to manic to drugged to stupid in about the same amount of time most normal people take to do simple math.

And while I'm on the subject of "characters," let me state another complaint: I didn't meet one single person in this movie that I would want to meet in real life. Ever. The teenagers are idiots who do stupid things for even dumber reasons, the grownups are brash and annoying, separated from the younger generation only because they're more wrinkly.

Next issue? Morality. This movie had none of it. Let's boil it down to its essentials: a woman was so in love with a guy twenty years ago that she slept with him, and when he left to get married to another woman, she waited a whole week before she slept with another guy. And then another. Then (surprise surprise) she ended up pregnant, but had no clue who the father was. Great premise. The whole movie is one big ball of hormones unleashed on actors who really are capable of much better stuff. And the climax of the film? Where the girl--even though she's been wanting to get married, she's standing with her betrothed in front of an altar, she's got everyone invited and is about to say "I do"--decides that marriage is pretty lame after all, and why not just go off on a cruise with her lover and see the world and worry about marriage later, if at all? How is this something we want portrayed as positive?

I could go on. About the awful singing, and how upsetting it was to have these songs that I liked be ruined by a series of accomplished actors with very unaccomplished singing voices. About the acting itself, which seemed to boil down to "pretend you're high on meth, and let's just see what happens." About the incessant back lighting of Meryl, who must have had a "must be back lit in 90% of the shots" clause in her contract. About how WRONG it was to have JAMES BOND making an idiot of himself.

Deep breath.

If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all, right? Well, let me see . . . something nice . . .

The scenery looked very good on Blu-Ray, and the 5.1 audio track was well done.

Anyway. I've taken up enough of my life with this bucket load of refuse. No stars out of four. Return to sender.

Yorkshire Terriers

To continue a bit of negativity from yesterday, I came across this great site that compiles one star Amazon reviews for classic movies, music and literature. It just goes to show that people can be real boneheads, especially when you ask the public at large for their opinion. This is one reason why I'm leery of Amazon reviews. Once there is a big enough sample (ie--lots of reviews for a single item), then I feel more comfortable accepting them. But where there's just a handful? Who knows who the people are who gave those reviews. Some of them are no doubt logical, thinking human beings. Some of them, judging from their editing skills and grammar, might well be Yorkshire Terriers. Case in point: a review of The Princess Bride:

I have no idea what this is. This can’t be a movie because movies are supposed to be good. The story is assanine and unbelievable. The title makes no sense. What exactly is a princess bride who is named after a buttercup. I was made to watch this movie in school and it was torture. Thank you.

See what I mean? That's 100% pure Terrier, right there.

Or how about a review of The Great Gatsby?

The way that FSF wrote made it very difficult for me to follow and understand what he was saying. Everything was almost written philosphoically. I had a hard time concentrating on the words written because I simply lost interest in what was being said. It wasn’t exciting enough to keep my attention.

Woof. Or rather, yip yip yap. I've got nothing against Yorkies, but I'm certainly not going to take their advice when it comes to my listening, reading or viewing habits. So I'm making up a new category of reviewer: Yorkshire Terrier. Yorkie for short. Anyone seen any Yorkie reviews lately?

And no, you can't link to any of my reviews.

I am not a Yorkie.

What's Up with American Cinema?

Seriously, Hollywood. Cut it out. Cut what out, you all ask? I'll tell you. I'm sick of Hollywood remaking fantastic foreign films. What's the point? So that stupid American audiences don't have to read subtitles? It's ridiculous! Case in point: The Orphanage. (Although I could just as easily be discussing 13 Tzameti here, or La Femme Nikita, or a slew of other foreign movies.) I watched this one yesterday, and I was really impressed with it. It tells the story of a woman who returns to the orphanage she grew up in, now intent on turning it into a home for developmentally handicapped children. All is fine and dandy at first, but then she begins to notice things that aren't quite right. Scariness ensues. The movie was intense, frightening--and far from cheap. In other words, it didn't have to resort to cheap tricks to scare its audience. Really well done. So it was in Spanish. So what? I loved it anyway. A good strong three star movie.

Why does it have to be remade?

Why can't people just watch the original, appreciate it, and let Hollywood start actually making something besides the latest crappy "satire" movie or yet another remake. I get that Hollywood is a business, and that they only want to invest in sure deals. But come on, guys. Grow a spine and take some chances. There's lots of material out there just waiting to be made. Why redo things that have already been done so well before? And don't get me started on the remakes of classics. Seriously--unless you're bringing something new to the table, don't come knockin' at my door. I don't mind if you take existing material and adapt it. In fact, I'm all for that. Disturbia's take on Rear Window was awesome. But don't just retread the same stuff, just to make a buck or two.

It's disappointing.

Can I get an amen from anyone out there?

Netflix

If any of you faithful readers out there have never used Netflix, and you're getting frustrated that so many of my recommendations are hard to find, then I've got a deal for you. Netflix has given me a few invites to let you try out their service for a month free. Usually they let you use it for two weeks free--this is double that. If you're interested, leave me a comment and I'll send you the invite. First come, first served until the invites run out. Enjoy!

Headaches =/= Fun

So I've had a headache for about two days so far, and nothing I can do will make it go away. I think it's sinus related, and I'll be getting some Sudafed Sinus soon, which hopefully will make it disappear. I'm always a bit leery of sinus medication, though, since it has a tendency to make my body go pretty loopy. When the choice is between headachy and loopy, I usually opt for achy until I can't stand it anymore.

Anyway.

In honor of the new Star Trek coming out, I thought I'd give you all a recommendation for the hardest sci-fi movie I've seen in an extremely long time. A sci-fi movie so deep that people have said "anyone who says they understand everything that's happening the first time they see it is lying." And I don't doubt that statement. What makes it even cooler is that it was made by a first timer for a budget of a whole $7000. And this one can stand toe to toe with Hollywood movies. I loved it. It's called Primer, and I'm going to give it four stars. I thought a long time about that four star rating, but for what this movie is and what it wants to be . . . I just can't see a better way for it to do it. So it's a very different four star movie than the kind I typically go for, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. I don't want to give too much away, but I will say the basics: it's a time travel movie that reminded me of Groundhog Day in some aspects--only without the humor, the romance, or the ability to easily understand what's going on. Oh--and without the repeating days. So I guess it's not much like Groundhog Day at all. Oh well. Watch it and tell me what you think.

Just don't expect to understand what's happening. :-)

And now, back to my headache.

The Hunt for Gollum

Okay--really cool, geeky thing to share with you all today. A bunch of fans just released their version of a prequel to the Lord of the Rings: The Hunt for Gollum. It tells the tale of Aragorn's search for Gollum, once Gandalf knew that the little stinker might pose some problems for their efforts against Sauron. What makes this so particularly cool is how good of a job they did on it--on a budget of $4500. To make a 45 minute film that looks this good, with that little amount of money . . . I find that really cool. I mean, don't go watch it expecting to see the latest and greatest Hollywood release--watch it and think to yourself, "Could I make that for under 5 grand?"

I have yet to finish it (haven't had the chance yet), so I suppose there's a chance they dumped all their budget into the first 15 minutes, but I doubt it. Any of you out there watch it? What do you think?

Wheel of Time Update: Halfway through Eye of the World

So I'm halfway through Book One now, and I'm happy to say it's still a pleasurable experience, even after all these years. Part of me wondered if this would be like when I watch movies I loved as a kid, only to find out that they're junk through the eyes of an adult. Not so with this book. Of course, there are pieces that really bug me, but they bug me more in the way that siblings can bug me. It's an irritation you know and accept, so it doesn't really get to you. For example, I don't like the Traveling People. They annoy me. And so when Perrin and Egwene got roped into hanging out with them for a few chapters, I sighed, rolled my eyes, and kept reading. Because there are cool things there, too--especially anything with Perrin getting to know the wolves. That's always full of Win. Right now I'm at the part where Mat goes all coo coo for cocopuffs and his ruby dagger. Again, I don't like Mat at that point. I like the cool General Luck Mat. So when he gets all shifty-eyed, I take it in stride and wait for him to snap out of it.

These aren't flaws in the book. They're aspects of why the series is so successful, in my opinion. Jordan did a great job creating characters that I deeply care about, and he did so quickly and efficiently. At the beginning of the novel, I care about Rand and his friends right away. Why is that? Well, some of it is because I know them from having read 9,000 other pages of the series. But a large part of that is because at heart, they're good people. They're not just characters. They have personality, and they're in situations I can relate to. No, I'm not saying I was ever a farm boy in a medieval society, but they're going through a growing up process remarkably similar to the things young adults deal with today. I remember relating to these three guys while I was reading them as a teenager--admiring them and learning from some of the things they did or didn't do. Maybe that sounds stupid now, but I still think it, and rereading the books, I can still see why.

A lot of what Jordan does in this book has since become cliched, but I think it's vital to remember that he's a big reason why these things got that way. He did them so well, and along came a slew of other writers who copied what he had done.

What will really be interesting to me is to see how well Brandon can capture these same characters and make them come alive and still be consistent. I would think the task would be easier, since there are so many books to draw from. But at the same time, I think that might make it harder, as well--sort of like the "real" characters in any number of motion captured movies these days. (Polar Express, anyone?) They have all the basics down--skin textures, movements, nuances--everything is there that should make them look real. But the realer they're supposed to look, the creepier they become. We'll have to RAFO on this one, I suppose. :-)

Movie Reviews: 13 Tzameti and Sleeper

Two reviews for you today, both good ones. Saturday I had the chance to watch a French film I'd heard really good things about: 13 Tzameti. (For those of you playing at home, "Tzameti" is the Georgian word for thirteen, so yes--the movie is called 13 13. Got a problem with that?) The basic premise is simple: a young handyman finds directions addressed to someone else, telling that person to go to a certain hotel room at a certain time, and he'll be able to make a lot of money. Lots of money. And because the guy's just an out of luck handyman, he decides to follow the directions, having no clue what they will entail. I don't want to spoil anything for you, but let's just say that nothing in life comes cheap. The movie was full of tension and extremely well done. (It's being remade by an American company now, which could be good or bad. The good? They're keeping the same director. The bad? It's starring 50 Cent.) The film's rated a totally justified R, but it's more for subject matter than anything else. Not really bloody or sexy or vulgar--just for something I don't think anyone below the age of 18 really ought to be watching, for obvious reasons (once you've seen it). Three and a half stars.

(And on a side note, one thing this film really impressed me with was its ability to show that a great movie doesn't need to be really complicated. It can all be based on a fantastic idea that's simple to understand, yet compelling by its very nature. Anyone else out there seen this one? I'd love to talk more about it, but I refuse to give out spoilers.)

The second one is Woody Allen's Sleeper. Yes, I know. I fail as a film watcher. It's taken me this long to watch this film. It's about a man who's cryogenically frozen in 1973, then thawed in 2173. Hilarity ensues. Really, it's got a lot of the Woody Allen strengths I love: great acting, extremely funny scenes, great dialogue, interesting ideas. It's also got some of what I see as his weaknesses: pieces in the middle that really drag, and an insatiable desire to continually focus on sex. That said, it's rated PG, and DKC enjoyed it, too. So there. Three stars, and always great to see what people think the future might hold. (My personal favorite quote of the movie involved two future scientists talking about Woody's diet in 1973:

Dr. Melik: This morning for breakfast he requested something called "wheat germ, organic honey and tiger's milk."
Dr. Aragon: [chuckling] Oh, yes. Those are the charmed substances that some years ago were thought to contain life-preserving properties.
Dr. Melik: You mean there was no deep fat? No steak or cream pies or... hot fudge?
Dr. Aragon: Those were thought to be unhealthy... precisely the opposite of what we now know to be true.
Dr. Melik: Incredible. )

Move Review: Son of Rambow

Okay--highly irritated here. I just finished writing up my review of Son of Rambow, and LJ ate it. Sigh. Here's the basics: the movie is about Will and Lee. Will's a sheltered religious boy who's never watched any television or movies--until he meets Lee, a troublemaker at school. The first film Will watches is Rambo: First Blood, and he's totally entranced. He decides to make a sequel with Lee, entitled Son of Rambow. Cool hijinks ensue. The film's like Napoleon Dynamite meets Stand By Me, and I highly recommend it. Three stars--maybe even three and a half. My original review was much better than this. Please judge this post accordingly.

PS--Becky--your current Rambofest inspired me to watch this movie. You especially should watch this. :-)