Film Review: Guardians of the Galaxy

"Why would you want to save the galaxy?"

"Because I'm one of the idiots who lives in it!" - Bradley Cooper and Chris Pratt

Back when Marvel kicked in Phase 1 of its cinematic universe, we all knew who Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Thor, and Captain America were.  All these films were destined to be hits to some degree.  But...the Guardians of the Galaxy? Who are these a-holes? If you're like me and never read comics, you may be asking the same question.  Seriously, a gun-totting raccoon? A walking tree? David Bautista? And the guy who directed Slither? Marvel is taking some serious risks...

If box office numbers are any indication, the risk paid off tremendously.  The film wastes little time in plunging the audience into the deep end of the most outlandish and far-out reaches of the Marvel universe.  From the desolate ruins of an abandoned planet to the thriving heart of an interstellar civilization, this space-faring adventure cuts across colorful nebulae and imaginative worlds, the likes of which have only ever been topped by the Star Wars universe.  The film has no shortage of action, as characters fight with their fists, knives, and futuristic guns against an onslaught of bad guys.  There is a huge all-out battle in the end, with thousands of space ships filling up the screen.  In between the exciting parts, the film moves fast and fluidly with plenty of spot-on comedy, and just enough drama to give the characters a little more depth.

The story covers pretty basic ground, using the same old type of Macguffin that Avengers and Thor:  The Dark World used.  The villain of this film is a pretty flat, one-dimensional fellow who's best remembered for his presence, and little more.  What makes this film stand out will be the protagonists.  Peter Quill (the self-proclaimed "Star-Lord") has charm, but thanks to the film's opening scene, he provides an emotional anchor we can all latch onto.  Drax is a warrior driven by vengeance, but is so blunt that he can't comprehend metaphors, and hilarity ensues.  Gamora is a fierce fighter as well with an allure of her own.  Rocket is a hard-drinking gun-happy raccoon with attitude.  Groot is a walking tree, who can kick some butt, but also provides some of the most lovable moments.  This whole gang is very much in the same vein of space outlaws as in Firefly or The Cowboy Bebop; each character provides enough emotional investment and attention so that they stand out and become heroes we can root for, no matter how bizarre or unlikely this union seems.  The film is also loaded with a plethora of side characters, who all stand out in their own ways, to the point where I wished they could have had more to them (especially Thanos, who's obviously going to be a major player somewhere down the line; Nebula, who I thought was cooler than anything; the Collector, who's not given that much to do here; and Yondu, who clearly shares a history with Quill).

This film is crafted with solid and precise photography and editing.  Acting is top-notch; you'd probably never expect much from this cast, but everybody does their best to make the characters stand out.  Chris Pratt is not too shabby as the main hero; I enjoyed watching Zoe Saldana; Dave Bautista's performance is surprisingly solid; voices by Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel get the job done well.  Everybody else contributes admirably.  Writing is pretty good.  This production spares no expense on the outlandish and imaginative sets, props, costumes, and special effects.  Music is alright.

Guardians of the Galaxy is one of the most well-rounded blockbusters since Marvel's own Avengers.  It balances action, comedy, and storytelling very well.  It defies all the odds and presents this obscure group of misfits as a thrilling new franchise for the masses.  Best of all, it does so with diligent attention to the characters.

Recommended!

4.5/5 (Entertainment:  Very Good | Story:  Good | Film:  Very Good)

Read More

Film Review: Lucy (2014)

Popular scientific myth claims that human beings only use ten percent of their brains. Modern research tells us that we really use every part of our brain in subtle ways. And yet, isn't it remarkable to consider the possibility that there is room for human consciousness to become something greater than it already is? In this film, Lucy is an average person who unwittingly becomes the next step in human evolution, who uses more and more of her brain capacity in a struggle to survive and evolve. As she exponentially grows in power, she becomes able to control her mind, her body, other matter, energy, space, and ultimately time. Which, of course, is completely ridiculous and unbelievable, no matter how many neurons Lucy fires off. But it does make for a whimsical "what if" scenario, doesn't it?

The movie's biggest selling point will be in watching Scarlett Johansson kicking a lot of butt with wild superpowers! And there is plenty of action scattered all about: the movie is pretty evenly-littered with big-scale shoot-outs, car chases, and off-the-wall mental powers. However, butt-kicking is not really the movie's primary focus; it's more about chronicling Lucy's journey. Moments in between the action slow down a lot, but it's rarely dull; the film dishes out a plethora of intriguing situations and implications. In doing so, the film will lay out a ton of exposition, which may bore the most critical of viewers, but engage those with a more open mind. Regardless, I found the picture to be trim, to-the-point, and it has just enough momentum to keep it rolling smoothly. I felt it struck the perfect balance in terms of pacing and structure.

Ultimately, the story is an interesting affair, but falls short in numerous ways. The science behind the film's premise is totally unfounded. Other observations are interesting on the surface, but they amount to a few simple messages that audiences may or may not care for. Personally, I was intrigued by the way the film juxtaposed scientific lecture and imagery next to the events. As far as the plot goes, it's a short and simple affair, but with plot holes to be found. The film jumps right into the events without much background to the characters or events (seriously, who manufactured CPH4 to begin with? Who is Lucy and why is she in Taipei to begin with?). A few good scenes keep the characters from becoming total cardboard cutouts, but the film becomes increasingly whack as it goes along, until it reaches a really absurd ending. It leaves off with a rather blunt and empty message.

On the plus side, the film is as slick as they come, with superb photography and editing. Acting is swell: I loved watching Scarlett Johansson, even when she does become monotonous. Morgan Freeman pretty much phones it in, serving the same role as he did narrating Through the Wormhole. The various cops and gangsters are decent. Writing is rather unrefined and blunt, but it gets the job done. This production uses good-looking sets, props, costumes, and locales. Special effects look good in some scenes and bad in others. Music is pretty cool.

Lucy is a pretty neat "what if" scenario. It's not quite as big of a rip-roaring actioner as you might expect, but it's also not nearly as intellectually challenging as top-tier sci-fi pictures. However, as a crime thriller with a scientific commentary, I believe it's a blast.

4/5 (Entertainment: Perfect | Story: Marginal | Film: Very Good)

Read More

Book Review: Hannibal (Thomas Harris)

Some years after Silence of the Lambs, Thomas Harris picks up on the trail of Hannibal Lecter in this follow-up thriller.  Throughout the previous books, Hannibal stood out as one of the most ominous and menacing characters in crime fiction, and the book Hannibal finally sees the character totally unchained, free from the confines of prison, and above reproach of all the forces that try to capture him again.

Like the other books in the series, Hannibal is a pretty breezy read.  Chapters are short, there's plenty of action and suspense to keep the pages turning.  Dialogue is mostly interesting, and the characters have enough charm to maintain interest.  The prose is easily digestible, and the story's not too hard to follow at all.

That being said, it is a rather odd story.  It's not even much of a mystery novel; it's more of a revenge thriller with multiple plots and conspiracies laid over each other, all of which are tied together and contribute to a pretty weird climax.  It starts off compellingly, as the book chronicles how Clarice Starling falls out of favor of the FBI (I felt she got a bad rap).  Then it goes way off course to Italy, following a totally random investigator, whose actions contribute somewhat to the later investigation (although I felt these scenes were thrown in just because Italy is cool and exotic).  Then the plot kinda wanders around a lot, and then the inevitable conclusion occurs.  Even though I understand why the ending is the way it is (and it actually does underscore the motivations of Hannibal's character throughout Silence of the Lambs a lot better), I think it diminishes Clarice as a character, and it could have all been a little more coherent.  It is a bit of a rushed ending.  I always felt that the ending dinner scene was perverse, for better or for worse.  On top of that, some of the individual scenes and subplots (especially the one regarding Margot Verger) could have been omitted completely.

All that being said, the book does have its merits.  Characters are pretty strong; it is still intriguing to read about Hannibal and Clarice, and Mason Verger is a well-developed adversary.  The book is especially bold in flipping everything around so that Hannibal is the intended protagonist, characters in power are antagonists, and they create a dynamic push and pull that makes the plot twisty.  Parts of the book are pretty well-researched (especially the scenes in Italy).

As far as the prose goes, it's most of the way decent, although there were parts where I felt wording was awkward.  There were a few parts where the tenses were all mixed up:  it tended to flip-flop between past and present tense for some odd reason.  I think this correlated to an odd habit I noticed where the book tried to become first-person by using "we" a lot, as it randomly stated "we notice this" or "we behold that," and the final words of the book are "we can only learn so much and live." What is this "we" garbage? I suspect that there's a bit of pretentiousness there, that the book wanted to deliver a greater truth behind the story, but never really articulated it.  No matter what level of elegance it aimed for, the book remained pretty straightforward and low-key, especially in the occasional indulgence in gnarly details and harsh language.  As such, I think the book would have benefited from more editing and refinement.  Other than those issues, the book is perfectly readable.

Hannibal has its moments, but I feel it's a weird turn of events, which is marred a bit by a slightly weird prose.  This may even be one rare case where I found the movie more appealing than the book.  It's still a fun enough read though, and should be worthwhile for fans of the series.

3/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Story:  Marginal | Book:  Average)

Read More

Film Review: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

After the apes rose up in rebellion and fled San Fransisco, a plague descended on mankind, setting the stage for the inevitable clash of two cultures.  With human civilization in decline and ape culture on the rise, it is a fragile and fearful time for all.  It would only take a few bad misunderstandings to set off an all-out war between men and apes.

That's pretty much what we get in this follow-up to Rise of the Planet of the Apes.  It starts off a bit slow, but builds momentum and tension as the two sides of the conflict rub together.  By the last act, it becomes a shooting war.  It's not quite as tight as the first film, especially since your enjoyment could hinge on whether or not you care for the human and ape characters.  However, the film doesn't linger too long on the drama, even though the film is attentive to all sides of the conflict.

What matters the most is the story.  Not only is is a sequel to Rise of POTA, but it also borrows the plot and ideas of Battle for POTA (which, ultimately, remains the weakest of the franchise thanks to its cheap and dated look, and poor execution of the story).  Dawn improves on Battle substantially, if for no other reason than it gives the characters a fresh new life and emotional anchor that audiences can latch onto (specifically, regarding Caesar and his ape tribe; the human characters have their moments, but never really take the spotlight enough to make us care).  The story proceeds to underscore the key themes behind the apes' civilization - the moral battle between taking action or enforcing pacifism - and it's a struggle that endures for the entire picture and drives the characters.  It all builds up to a moving tale of treachery; the ultimate turn of events mirror the takeovers and oppression of typical human dictators, and the film provides a stark reflection on how the rage of a few unchecked individuals could ruin peace for everyone.

This film is crafted with decent photography.  Acting is not bad; the ape characters easily steal the show, with Andy Serkis and Toby Kebbell bringing their characters to life marvelously.  Gary Oldman is as great as ever, although his role is pretty small.  Jason Clarke is okay.  Writing is good.  This production uses quality sets, props, costumes, and special effects.  Music seems quaint, but it works.

This sequel continues the chronicle of the new POTA saga sublimely, and for anybody who enjoyed Rise, Dawn should satisfy.

4.5/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Story:  Very Good | Film:  Very Good)

Read More

Film Review: Kill Bill Volume 2

"I've killed a hell of a lot of people to get to this point, but I have only one more. The last one. The one I'm driving to right now. The only one left. And when I arrive at my destination, I am gonna kill Bill." - Uma Thurman

Quentin Tarantino channels the manic, ultraviolent, stylized energy of cheesy kung-fu cinema, American westerns, and a slight twist of Italian horror, and he uses it all like threads to weave one of the greatest revenge stories ever made. Both Kill Bill movies collectively form a coherent, cohesive, sublime storytelling package; ideally, they should be watched back-to-back to understand every nuance of the story and the characters, since there is so much depth to them.

Volume 2 of this saga fills in the gaps that its predecessor left behind, not only in following up on the rest of the Bride's rampage, but also in revealing her full back story.  But while Volume 1 had tons of rip-roaring action and an extremely vivid style, this follow-up is much more toned-down and mellow, laden with more dialogue than swordplay.  In a way, this falls more in line with Tarantino's other work, but I personally favor the first film more for being sublimely entertaining.  As it is, Volume 2 tends to be a bit long-winded and dry.

That being said, it still has a lot of brilliant moments that are worth seeing, including the burial scene, the fight between the Bride and Elle Driver, the brutal training scenes with Pai Mei, and the last half-hour or so, which builds up to a beautiful bittersweet ending.

For the most part, it's the story that counts, and it excels at taking characters we already know and love, and taking them to the next level.  The full reasons for both sides of the conflict are finally revealed, generating empathy for both Bill and the Bride.  Any other movie would be content in leaving things as a plain, straightforward black-and-white affair, but in this case, there's much more insight to the characters and the overall plot.  It all builds up to the inevitable climax, which pulls out one of the most heart-wrenching twists imaginable.  Through it all, the film provides the most satisfying ending possible, and it makes the entire Kill Bill saga one of the most endearing and complete storytelling experiences made.

This film is crafted with superb photography and plenty of flashy editing.  A few title cards, flashbacks, and asides are thrown into the mix for a stylized effect.  Acting continues to impress:  Uma Thurman is effectively perfect in her role, and it's especially notable how physically demanding her role must have been.  David Carradine exhibits an interesting presence as Bill, while Michael Madsen and Daryl Hannah excel at being villains we love to hate.  Writing is very sharp and interesting.  This production boasts some good-looking sets, props, costumes, and locales.  Music is pretty good at times, though I enjoy the music choices of Volume 1 better.

While Volume 1 excels at the action and style but comes up a little shorter on substance, Volume 2 is the opposite, subduing the action to favor the dialogue and storytelling.  Some people may like one over the other.  I personally prefer Volume 1, but this sequel is essential for the complete experience, and it adds up to a satisfying saga.  If you can handle the violent bits, the whole affair is highly recommended.

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Perfect | Film: Very Good)

Read More

Film Review: Kill Bill Volume 1

"Silly Caucasian girl likes to play with Samurai swords..." - Lucy Lui

Quentin Tarantino channels the manic, ultraviolent, stylized energy of cheesy kung-fu cinema, Japanese anime, and a slight twist of American westerns, and he uses it all like threads to weave one of the greatest revenge stories ever made. Both Kill Bill movies collectively form a coherent, cohesive, sublime storytelling package; ideally, they should be watched back-to-back to understand every nuance of the story and the characters, since there is so much depth to them.

Even if you decide to watch it separately, Volume 1 doesn't disappoint on its own merits. In fact, this is the most entertaining of the two films; it starts off fast and hard and hardly lets up.  It focuses a lot less on words and story-building, drip-feeding the audience just enough to understand what's going on, before diving headlong into a gory rampage (Volume 2 is the opposite, so if it is dialogue and storytelling you're after, you might want to follow up on the sequel). There are a number of good fight scenes throughout the first hour, but the film's last act is a host for one of the longest and finest fight scenes ever filmed. It starts off with a number of one-on-one engagements, before busting all out with a massive one-vs-fifty brawl. The katana-wielding Bride proves herself to be a triumphant heroine, as she hacks and slices her way through an army of enemies, gradually honing in on her ultimate target (who is, of course, a dude named Bill).

If you're wondering what on Earth could warrant such bloodshed, rest assured that the story for Kill Bill is sound. This first film does a marvelous job of using strong visual imagery, flashbacks, and narration to establish the groundwork for this revenge plot. You can really get to feel for the character, given all the torment she suffers under the hands of Bill and his assassins; it makes it easy, and dare I say enjoyable, to watch her rise from adversity and get some payback. At its core, the film brings to life some brilliant characters with a solid amount of depth (especially after watching the sequel, which answers a lot of unanswered questions) and lots of personality.

Even by Tarantino standards, Kill Bill stands as one of the most stylish films made. It features excellent photography, some very unique editing, and plenty of strange artistic effects that help accentuate the film's given style. You can expect plenty of title cards and subtitles flashing across the screen, along with some occasional asides and digressions. One of the most notable stylistic choices will be the anime segment, brought to life by Production IG with a style that's sketchy, but visceral. The film overall carries the same tone and style as a 1970s Japanese gangster movie, and it's cool. Acting is impeccable; Uma Thurman puts on her best performance of her career, for she brings the Bride to life in a way that nobody else can (and she endures a lot of heavy physical work in doing so). Lucy Lui plays it cool as the villain, O-Ren Ishii. Cameos by David Carradine and Sonny Chiba don't hurt either. Every other actor fulfills their parts well, no matter how minor. This production as good-looking sets, props, and costumes. The film uses a varied mix of music, including a rockin' live performance by the Japanese band the 5.6.7.8.s; it's all pretty darn cool.

Out of the two films, Volume 1 is my favorite. It represents everything I enjoy in films:  the slick combination of style, action, and storytelling.  For me, it never gets old, and I've grown to love all the characters and nuances of these films.  If you can stomach the extreme violence, then it comes highly recommended.

5/5 (Entertainment: Perfect | Story: Perfect | Film: Perfect)

Read More

Video Game Review: Thomas Was Alone

At first glance, I didn't think much of this game, where you have to maneuver a bunch of sentient rectangles across a landscape of blocks.  That's right...you control rectangles.  They jump.  That's pretty much all there is to this game:  jumping from area to area, dodging obstacles and dangers in order to get to the exit.  It's a platformer so simple, the only thing simpler would be Pong.

And yet, the game makers did their best to make something special out of this bunch of rectangles.  They all have personalities, more or less, which are mostly conveyed by their shape, color, name, and the cute ethos expressed by the narration (which, in turn, provides a feel-good sentimentality similar to the narration in LittleBigPlanet).  Above all, each shape has a different range of characteristics.  Some jump really high.  Some don't.  One can float on water.  One can make other shapes jump higher.  One defies gravity.  And when you have to move them all to their respective exits, the levels get substantially challenging, because you have to use all the shapes' strengths and weaknesses in inventive ways to complete each level.  As a result, each level is a unique puzzle or challenge that will stimulate some brain cells.

There is a story behind these little rectangles.  They're actually artificial intelligences growing sentient in some company's lab, and the game chronicles their evolution and eventual liberation.  That being said, the story is very understated, and some more explanations, especially in the last levels, would have been welcome.  As it is though, it's a clever enough set-up for an otherwise bizarre game.

The game plays smoothly.  Controls are as easy as they come.  Graphics are minimalistic, but the backgrounds, lighting effects, and particle effects are great.  Each level is designed pretty smartly.  Voices and sounds are good.  Music is quite lovely too.

This is probably the most fun you can have moving rectangles across a screen.  The game is worth playing once.

4/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Story:  Pretty Good | Game:  Very Good)

Read More

Video Game Review: Prince of Persia (2008)

After the ups and downs of the Sands of Time trilogy, game-makers kicked off a reboot of the Prince of Persia series.  This game from 2008 is a colorful, cartoony affair with a less serious protagonist going on a grand adventure that involves a lot of acrobatics, puzzles, and combat.

Once the story is kicked off, you're set on a quest to cleanse the land by exploring four different corners of the map.  Together with Princess Elika, you spend your time traversing across the labyrinthine sprawl of ruins with your mad parkour skills.  Most of the time, you'll have to make calculated jumps and launches while running vertically along walls or clinging to ceilings or any number of other complex moves.  As far as combat goes, it's strictly one-on-one with occasional monsters.  The most intense of fights occur with four different bosses, who guard each area, but won't really die until you kill them in their respective lairs.  And once you liberate an area and cleanse it, you have to collect light seeds, which will unlock the ability to use special pressure plates that can propel you to new areas.  You just keep working at this until you can open up the temple and face the final boss.  It's an extremely structured game with a bigger focus on platforming, puzzles, and collecting things, but it's pretty relaxing that way.  You never really die in this game; even if a villain closes in on you, or you misjudge a jump and plunge down a lethal drop, Elika will save you every time with her magic.  That leaves you free to work through the game at your own pace and skill; some of the acrobatics can be frustrating, and the combat is not really all that smooth or fun, but it is a more laid-back experience and a great way to pass the time.

The story is pretty limited in scope and scale, but it is an interesting enough tale with a cast of endearing characters.  The actual Prince of Persia is a young, arrogant, wisecracking dude, and he shares great chemistry with Princess Elika, who proves to be just as sharp and able as the Prince himself.  There is a history to the princess and the ancient kingdom you're made to explore, which adds up to a pretty interesting and exotic mythology.  The characters often break out into discussions on free will vs destiny, and it all comes to full circle by the bittersweet ending.

This game is rendered with a cartoony, cell-animated look.  It is rendered with decently-sharp and smooth-looking textures, lighting, and frame-rates.  Particle effects are often pretty decent.  The writing is not bad, and the voices, sounds, and music are decent.  Designs for the settings, objects, characters, costumes, and overall worldbuilding is decent too.

2008's Prince of Persia is a fun game, plain and simple.  It's a simple structure that offers hours of challenges, and is thankfully not punishing.  It's not necessarily groundbreaking or profound, but it's satisfying nonetheless.

4/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Story:  Pretty Good | Game:  Good)

Read More

Film Review: Transformers: Age of Extinction

Regardless of how good or bad the last three Transformers films have been critically received, I can't deny that I've loved the whole lot of them. Even at their dumbest and most stupid moments, these films have always blown me away, leaving me satisfied and excited in a way that all the best summer blockbusters can. I would have been happy if they left it where it was, with the Chicago battle in Dark of the Moon serving as the final climax to the series. With the closing of the first three films, filmmakers decided to kick off a new trilogy with a new cast and new story arc.

It takes a while for the film to build its momentum. Once it does, you can certainly expect the same kind of big-scale spectacle that the last films provided: an onslaught of bullets and rockets, huge explosions, cars flying in all directions, robots bashing each other to scrap, and entire cities being ripped apart. When the action picks up, it becomes a stream of setpieces, one after another, that takes the characters across the US, onboard alien spaceships, and ultimately to China for the final battle. In the midst of it all, a plethora of new Transformer characters pop up, including an all-too-brief and understated appearance by the Dinobots and Grimlock.

As cool as it all is, I can't escape the feeling that something is missing. The film drags at spots, especially in the opening act. A lot of the manic, goofy comedy is gone, and what little remains isn't really all that great. The overall experience is not nearly as enthralling as the film's predecessors; it feels like business as usual, offering little new to the table and offering little that I'd say actually blew me away or made a lasting impression.  Parts of it are a bit daft...moreso than usual.

The story has its moments. Ditching the saga of Sam Witwicky, the film focuses on a Texan dude, his daughter, and her boyfriend, setting up the exact same dynamic that went into the characters of Armageddon. What matters the most is that they all go on the run, hunted by the government while becoming caught up in a new war between Autobots and a mysterious faction of aliens. The Autobot characters had a weird penchant for infighting, and seemed to harbor a lot more angst than before, which made them a lot less endearing. The plot is pretty much just one thing after another, before reaching a lengthy all-out battle at the end. As long as the film is, it feels like a two or three different Transformers films have been shoved into one, and I think parts of it could have been trimmed easily.  For the most part, the plot is rather thinly stitched together, serving as little more than an excuse to blow more stuff up.

The film boasts some really great imagery in some scenes, some horrid camera-shake in a few action scenes, and the rest of it looks a bit plain. Editing seemed pretty cheap, with choppy action scenes and one too many shortcuts. Acting is okay: Mark Wahlberg is pretty much the same kind of dude he always plays, Nicola Peltz is average, Stanley Tucci is fun to watch, and Kelsey Grammer is surprisingly effective in his role. Writing is kinda bad. This production spares no expense on the locales, props, and costumes. Special effects look great in some scenes and weak in others. Music has some interesting moments.

The fourth Transformers film is pretty much more of the same - loud, bloated, excessive - which is fun at times, but I find it's not as consistently energetic or satisfying as its predecessors. I don't think this film is quite as bad as critics make it out to be, but if you hated these films before, you'll certainly hate this installment. If you're a fan, you'll probably enjoy this all the same.

3/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Marginal | Film: Average)

Read More

Video Game Review: Borderlands 2

Borderlands was so great, they made a second one! This time, you return to Pandora and explore new corners of the crazy planet, battling a new onslaught of outlaws.  You also get to confront robots, soldiers, more alien monsters, and many new varieties of insane bandits! There are more bad guys to kill, more guns to find, more places to explore, more challenges, more story, more characters, more more MORE!!!!

Playing Borderlands 2 is pretty much more of the same, but that's not a bad thing at all.  The gameplay is pretty much the same, just with a slightly different control layout, a slightly different HUD, different character selection with different skills, and more of everything else.  There are a number of small, but helpful changes, such as being able to pick up loot by simply walking over it.  Completing challenges gets you reward tokens instead of experience; these tokens give you small stat boost in numerous areas, and can build up over time.  Equipping relics is more intuitive.  You get shields that have special bonuses that help a lot.  Weapon manufacturers have more interesting quirks (including one brand in which the weapon explodes as a grenade every time you reload it).  In the end, it all adds up to a more nuanced gaming experience.

And it is appreciated, because the combat tends to be more extreme than in the first game.  You can't go far without monsters flying into your face, or bandits crawling out of the woodwork.  Among the plethora of new bad guys, goliaths are thrown in, which can level up and become insanely powerful if their helmets are blown off.  Some bandits fly around in hovering vehicles now.  There are stalkers, threshers, bugs, crystal monsters of some kind, loaders, and so many more things to kill, and they all offer their own challenges.  Even though the combat can be intense, the game is still a blast, as it evenly balances out the fighting with exploration.  And as before, the game's overall tone is light and silly, in contrast to its ridiculously brutal and pulpy settings.  It's still a blast to play, even when you're constantly getting shot or mauled or melted or falling off a cliff...

What's really refreshing is that there's an actual story involved this time, with actual characters! Building on the events of the first game, the old character appear as NPCs who guide you on your quest to stop the Hyperion Corporation from unearthing the Vault and summoning an alien warrior beast thing.  While the first game never really had an antagonist, this one gives us a great villain we love to hate:  Handsome Jack, who's actually pretty ugly, especially in his narcissism and the way he always mocks you.  On top of that, the game dishes out a plethora of side characters, some familiar (such as Dr. Zed, Scooter, and Marcus) and some refreshingly new (including the rather well-endowed bartender Moxxie, Scooter's sister Ellie, and Tiny Tina, who's easily one of the most hilarious characters of the lot, and a new favorite of mine).  As for your characters, you get a choice between a siren with cool powers, a dude who can hack and slash things like a ninja, the gunzerker who can dual-wield guns, and the commando.  The game draws some pretty strong connections between most of the characters, laying out a drama that is actually compelling and gives the whole game some emotional heft.

As before, the gameplay is smooth and breezy.  The controls are great.  The game runs smoothly with good-looking renderings and framerates.  It actually renders a grade better than the first game, which had a tendency to draw the environments a bit slowly.  This game still uses the cell-animated look, which is neat, but still has enough texture and detail to make everything look great.  The world is designed really well, and includes a lot of great new locations.  The only issue I have is that getting around seems harder, since some areas don't have vehicle points, forcing you to run everywhere.  Voices and sounds are great.  Music is good too.

Borderlands 2 is what you get when you take a good game and make it better.  Highly recommended!

4.5/5 (Entertainment:  Very Good | Story:  Good | Game:  Very Good)

Read More

Video Game Review: Borderlands

The minute you set foot in Borderlands, you'll generally see what you're in for.  There's nothing clean or slick about this game; it's a raw, dirty world of psycho bandits, bloodthirsty outlaws, gnarly animals, greedy corporations, ridiculous levels of gun violence, crazy robots, and so much more.

The game is a pretty breezy shooter game with a lot of wide-open locations and a lot to do.  It's not quite as open and expansive as Fallout 3, but it's a similar form of gameplay, combining FPS and RPG elements.  As you explore new towns and territories, you have the option to follow the story or play though oodles of sidequests.  There are always bad guys to kill, loot to find, and challenges to complete.  As you level up, you not only get stronger, but you also get to use a special action skill, depending on which character you play.  The game's biggest rewards, however, come in the form of guns! There are a gajillion different types of guns you can find throughout the game to match your playing style:  big ones, little ones, pretty ones, ugly ones, common ones, rare ones, ones that deal elemental damage, ones that fire explosive bullets...you can't go two feet in this game without tripping over a new gun, it's crazy.  With whatever arsenal you acquire, the game moves as a smooth, even pace that's not too slow and not too erratic, and it offers just enough of a challenge to keep it from becoming monotonous.  The game even boasts some decent co-op support, allowing players to work together on quests (that is, when they aren't dueling each other or trying to murder each other in an arena).

The story is as simple as it can be; you're basically a treasure hunter on an alien planet.  The four characters you get to choose from show plenty of color, but rarely say much, and aren't really explored in detail.  With the encouragement of a mysterious character named Angel, you're led from one area to another toward the inevitable boss fight, and that's pretty much it.  It's not really much of a story or narrative involved, outside of figuring out how to open the Vault.  What matters the most is the overall game design; the world of planet Pandora is a brutal place that perfectly blends aspects of science fiction with classic westerns, and the plot is what you'd get if The Good The Bad and the Ugly took place in space, more or less.  It's best remembered for its quirky world of vicious skags, hilarious claptraps, and perpetually insane bandits.

Much like XIII, the game is rendered in a kind of cartoony cel-animated style.  Textures and details are purposefully simple and quite colorful.  The environments can be a bit of a pain to run through at times, but they are well-designed, with a plethora of great settings, characters, props, costumes, weapons, and more.  Sound, voices, and music are all pretty decent.  Controls work great.

It's a nutty game that offers hours of smooth and addictive gameplay.  While there's nothing much to the story, exploring the world of Pandora was still a blast.  Recommended.

4/5 (Entertainment:  Perfect | Story:  Average | Game:  Very Good)

Read More

Film Review: Maleficent

You know her, you walked with her once upon a nightmare.  Maleficent, the original villain from Disney's Sleeping Beauty, is an instantly recognizable icon of evil; even if you never knew her name, there is no mistaking her tall dark figure with the twisted horns, the wicked green fire all around her, and her coldly sardonic demeanor.  Originally, she was evil just for the sake of being evil, and for all intents and purposes, that was all she needed; she was a villain we all loved to hate, and she is one of the most definitive examples of her given archetype (that of the evil witch, sorceress, or a dark queen of sorts).  But, she was a rather one-dimensional caricature that was begging to be filled and fleshed out as a deeper character.  I always wondered, what was her beef with the king and the princess and everybody else? Why was she so evil?

2014's Maleficent comes in an ever-growing line of live-action fairy-tale movies, to flip around the moral roles of the classic Sleeping Beauty tale and show a new perspective on who's really good and who's really evil.  Those who are familiar with the classic animated film will recognize the characters and scenes instantly, but they are remixed in pretty refreshing ways.  Obviously, the main goal is to make Maleficent herself a more empathetic character with a compelling backstory, so we can understand why she does what she does, and allow us to root for her.  At the same time, the other characters we always thought of as good are villainized.

Despite these interesting twists, the story doesn't really bring that much new to the table.  It's actually been a common trend nowadays to make the bad guys sympathetic (as Disney already did with Frozen, Wreck-It Ralph, and Oz:  The Great and Powerful).  Thus, the story for Maleficent became predictable, even when it tried its best to be unpredictable.  The only thing that really keeps it from falling into mediocrity is Angelina Jolie's sumptuous performance as the title character, and the sumptuous visuals.

If it's fantastic visual whimsey you want, the film will certainly deliver, but not in any kind of dark or gothic manner.  Even at its darkest moments, Maleficent maintains a pretty light fairy-tale tone, offering just a few major scenes of combat and battle.  There are scenes that are goofy just as much as there are scenes that are dramatic and serious.  You could find it really delightful or really dry, and it all really depends on how invested you are in the storytelling and genre.

Fortunately, the storytelling isn't all that terrible.  Even though it retreads much of the classic tale, it moves at a pretty even rate, and it seems more interested in actually telling the story and developing a deeper pathological struggle than stringing together action setpieces.  In the end, I found it most interesting in the way it spun the characters around and developed a pathological conflict between Maleficent and King Stefan, using other characters as proxies, as if they were pawns in a 16-year-long chess game.  As this goes on, the characters experience just enough change to make them endearing and twist the plot around to its inevitable climax.

The film is pretty well-made, with decent photography and editing.  Angelina Jolie embodies the title character perfectly, while Sharlto Copley plays a perfect jerk once again.  Writing gets the job done, but I felt that some of the dialogue was weak.  This production uses good-looking sets, props, and costumes.  Special effects tended to look cartoony and fake.  Music is alright.

Maleficent falls somewhere in between the colorful, whimsical Oz:  The Great and Powerful and the gritty, serious Snow White and the Huntsman.  It is pretty much more of the same, but it's best seen for its visual flair and for Angelina Jolie's captivating performance.  Chances are that families and genre fans will love this film, while most others will be indifferent.  Probably best recommended as a rental.

3.5/5 (Entertainment:  Pretty Good | Story:  Pretty Good | Film:  Average)

Read More

Video Game Review: God of War

There have always been  fantasy-themed fighting games - Golden Axe, Gauntlet, Prince of Persia - but before and after the release of God of War, few games have matched the simple eloquence of the gameplay, the depth of mythology, the raw brutality of the combat, or the immersive storytelling of this classic game.

Playing God of War is the closest you can get to stepping into the shoes of a classic Greek hero, to wield the fantastic powers of ancient myth and challenge the gods of Olympus.  Instead of a hero like Perseus, however, you play through the tragic epic of Kratos:  a hulking beast of a man with blades chained to his wrists.  With the mere press of a few buttons, you can send Kratos on a mad rampage, sending his blades through men and monsters, with a varied mix of light, heavy, or grapple attacks.  As you go along, you come to wield the power of Medusa, to turn your enemies to stone.  You eventually acquire the trident of Poseidon, to swim underwater indefinitely.  You get to fire bolts of Zeus' lightning, and blast a ring of electricity with the Rage of the Gods power.  All of these abilities empower you to fight against soldiers, skeletons, sirens, sea monsters, harpies, minotaurs, and ultimately the gods themselves.  The game moves fast and smoothly; there are a few times where the levels are timed in such a way where your progress can be stalled, and balancing on ledges and beams can be frustrating, but most of the game flies by pretty evenly.  The controls are simple, but allow you to fight and move sublimely, and even to this day it holds up perfectly.

Despite the speed of the story, it is an epic-scale adventure the likes of which mirrors the Clash of the Titans movies.  The game's settings, creatures, and depiction of the gods and titans are highly imaginative, and make for a really fantastic experience.  At the core, however, is the character Kratos.  He's not a particularly likable character, for he is a spiteful, scowling, nihilistic brute with no regard for anybody other than himself.  As the game goes on, however, his backstory is slowly unveiled, and it is a compelling tale of betrayal that will go on to define the character and his motivation.  It embodies a lot of the same elements of a classic Greek tragedy, including the manipulation of the gods, and it makes Kratos one of the most well-defined antiheroes of modern pop culture.

The game is well-designed.  The levels are laid out in a somewhat circular pattern, so you often return to old areas after exploring new ones.  I've been personally fond of the Temple of Pandora levels, which presents a layered onslaught of puzzles, mazes, and arenas.  The game looks a little rough around the edges, given its age, but even the HD remaster for the PS3 looks really smooth and clean, leaving only the cut scenes to suffer (which are smoothly-rendered, despite their low resolution).  Game controls are very sublime; they work great and are easy to master.  Designs for the settings, characters, props, and costumes are great.  Sound and voices are great.  Music is fantastic as well.

Despite its extreme violence, God of War is a highly addictive game with a compelling story on a larger-than-life scale.  It is one of the most definitive fighting games of all time, and it is an essential title for any gamer.

5/5 (Entertainment:  Perfect | Story:  Perfect | Game:  Perfect)

Read More

Film Review: Edge of Tomorrow

What if, in an almost video-game-like fashion, a soldier could respawn after death over and over again and relive the same day? Surely, he would learn and alter the events over and over, and continuously hone his skills until victory is achieved.  Based on the Japanese novel All You Need is Kill, this film brings this unique premise to life on the big screen.

The film wastes little time in the set-up, before the big battles commence that pit armored men against crazy tentacled aliens.  It is a pretty hectic and hard-hitting struggle as is.  You'd think these scenes would get repetitive if the main character keeps having to relive this, but the film keeps the backtracking short, so that it always explores new directions in the narrative.  As a result, the action remains frequent, but is always varied.  All the different tangents lead to a suspenseful and satisfying finale.

Given the film's premise, it is an inherently interesting idea.  It probably could have come off as generic, cliched, or repetitive in lesser hands.  Fortunately, the story is well-built and well-told in this film, not only because it keeps things brisk and varied, but also because it has endearing characters and a strong attention to detail.  There are a few instances where I questioned the plausibility of certain things, but it doesn't stop the plot from holding up.

The film features good and straightforward photography.  Editing is pretty good, especially in the way it can string together multiple recurrences of a scene (to show progress, or sometimes for humor when the character dies a stupid death).  Acting is not bad; Tom Cruise isn't always endearing to watch, but he does have moments that help us sympathize with his situation.  Emily Blunt delivers a solid performance.  Everybody else is alright.  Writing is not bad.  This production has pretty good and gritty-looking sets, props, costumes, and special effects.  Locales are surprisingly interesting.  Music is alright (the end credits song seems out of place though).

This is kinda like what you get if you cross The Source Code with the Resistance:  Fall of Man video game.  It's a pretty solid piece of military sci-fi that's certainly better than average, offering its fair share of intriguing storytelling and rip-roaring action.

Recommended!

4/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Story:  Good | Film:  Good)

Read More

Film Review: X-Men: Days of Future Past

It's been fourteen years since the X-Men first hit the big screen, setting the trend for a whole monsoon of comic-book movies. Counting the two stand-alone Wolverine movies, Days of Future Past is the seventh in the series. The X-Men have had so many ups and downs over the years that it's easily become the most convoluted franchise since the original Planet of the Apes.  This film fulfills the same role as Escape from Planet of the Apes, redirecting the story arcs to rectify past mistakes and set the path for a bold, promising future.

Days of Future Past takes after First Class primarily, but there are vague connections to the other movies. Unlike the previous films, this one doesn't have the same light-spirited kick-butt feel. If anything, it starts off looking like The Terminator, swapping out T-800s for Sentinels, with Wolverine standing in for the T-101, Mystique fulfilling the role of Sarah Connor, and Trask standing in for Miles Dyson and Cyberdyne.  However, it never comes off as a rip-off; it's still X-Men to the core. The bleak future we see in the film's opening has always been in the cards, representing the apex of the ongoing conflict between men and mutants; the set-up is laid out very quickly, before launching a double-barreled narrative in both the past and the future with substantial stakes and suspense.

In lesser hands, this could have become a hokey affair (and chances are that the most critical of viewers could nitpick plot inconsistencies, especially when time travel is involved). However, this is easily the most mature film of the series, thanks not only to the complex plot dynamics that unfold with this unique premise, but also because of the characters. Their motivations and relationships are as strong as ever, and drives the story into different directions. Charles Xavier in particular emerges as the heart and soul of the whole film, driving numerous conflicts among other characters and within himself that underscores key themes concerning progress, destiny, and overcoming adversity of any kind. A lot of the lesser characters get sidelined, but Wolverine, Mystique, Magneto, and Beast get plenty of screen time.

Fortunately, as the plot unfolds, it does pull out a satisfying amount of action and spectacle. It's never overblown or overwhelming, and it's not just a bunch of things blowing up just because; it's nicely-balanced action that builds logically from the story. Scenes in the future show some pretty harrowing super-powered fights, while the rest of the film dishes out a lot of cool fights (including one crazy scene entirely in slow-motion, thanks to one super-fast mutant). It all builds up to a double-whammy climax, which not only ramps up the carnage, but also draws out the suspense.

This film features pretty good photography. Editing is fine, although it seemed like there were a lot of scenes in the beginning where a character starts to talk, but then the camera cuts away, and it came off as a little weird, as if the movie didn't want to show you who was talking. Acting is great across the board; James McAvoy and Patrick Stewart both excel as Charles Xavier, while Michael Fassbender continues to dominate as the younger Magneto (unfortunately, I felt Ian McKellen wasn't given enough to do here). It was also great to watch Jennifer Lawrence, Hugh Jackman, and Peter Dinklage. Writing is good, especially in the way it addresses the continuity of the series and bridges the gaps it needs to, while keeping things fresh and crafting a quality story with quality dialogue. This production has good-looking sets, props, costumes, and special effects. Music is alright (you can expect to hear a little bit of a reprise of the theme from the first two movies).

Days of Future Past is a movie about saving the future, not only in the movie, but also for the franchise as a whole. Despite certain contrivances, it is a highly nuanced story that rectifies some of the low points of the series. It genuinely kept me interested to see where it was all going. Even after the movie, it kept me interested, leaving just enough questions wide open to leave me wanting more. Best of all, the film accomplishes all this using plot and character more than special effects. So long as you've freshened up on the events of First Class, this film is highly recommended.

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Very Good | Film: Very Good)

Read More

Film Review: The Wolverine (Revisited)

Wolverine has been through so much. In spite of that, he remains one of the biggest superheroes of comic-book legend, and thanks to Hugh Jackman's performance in four previous X-Men movies, he became one of the biggest cinematic icons of modern times. Even though the character received his stand-alone film in 2009, filmmakers wanted to go farther and deeper with the character. Taking after Chris Claremont's and Frank Miller's comic, The Wolverine would test the character's limits in Japan.

This film is nowhere near as overblown as other X-Men films: the action is confined to just a few fights. Some of the highlights include a fight on top of a high-speed bullet-train, confrontations with a small army of ninjas, and a final showdown with a giant armored samurai suit. These are fairly cool fights that show off quality choreography and a few cool weapons, but there's very little wow factor. The film does satisfy in the same way thrillers like The Man From Nowhere or Crying Freeman do, but it feels far less like a superhero movie, or even an X-Men movie. Those searching for big, explosive action might be let down, but there is still merit in this moody, slow-burning drama.

The Wolverine takes its time to breathe, giving a steady focus on the title character. It is a much-needed character study; as a sequel to X-Men: The Last Stand, Wolverine is a broken man, tormented by guilt and deprived of purpose. As he travels to Japan and becomes caught up in a major conspiracy, he is revealed to be a figurative ronin: a master-less samurai struggling to regain his honor, perhaps even through death. Due to these issues, and with the threat of taking away his healing powers, this is Wolverine at his most vulnerable, and it makes for a very intense struggle. The conflict runs good and hard throughout the story, and the plot is well-structured. The story has a dense layer of conspiracy that's not exactly easy to comprehend, especially with so many side characters, but other parts are predictable. At the film's core, however, strong parallels are drawn between Wolverine and the Bushido code, and it makes for a rather compelling show.

This film uses pretty straightforward photography and editing, and it's refreshing that way. Acting is good: Hugh Jackman is still perfect as Wolverine, and the rest of the cast is decent and feels authentic. Writing is good. This production uses good-looking sets, props, and costumes. Locales in particular look authentic, and it helps, since the setting plays a major role in this story. Music is not bad either.

The Wolverine is the film the character deserves, with emphasis on "THE" to indicate that this is not just another plain ol' superhero flick, but an exploration on the character and his quest for absolution. Viewers might find this dull, but it exceeded my expectations in spite of the dramatic aspects. In the end, I enjoyed watching the character, both for the action and for the melodrama. It is a worthwhile experience overall.

This film has an extended cut available on specific home video editions. It is an evenly-paced cut that boasts some longer dialogue and longer action scenes (primarily with the ninja fight toward the end), including a little more R-rated cursing and a bit more bloodshed. For mature audiences, it's not a bad cut of the movie.

4/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Good | Film: Good)

Read More

Film Review: X-Men: First Class

You may know who they are, and after watching the three main X-Men films, you may have a good idea of what their histories are. But for the full tale of how Charles Xavier and Erik Lensherr became Professor X and Magneto respectively, look no further than First Class, the true prequel to the film trilogy.

Even though character drama tends to take the front stage, this film still has a phenomenal share of action and spectacle. Most of these scenes are short and tight, but every character gets a chance to shine and show off their powers. The fights are frequent and fun, but with the Cuban Missile Crisis as the centerpiece, the stakes are ramped up really well, before reaching an inspiring climax.

However, much like the first couple of X-Men films, the action never really drowns out the story or characters. In First Class, the focus remains firmly on showing how the original mutants came together, sowing the seeds for the conflicts that would come in the future. Some characters have more development than others, but each one do have scenes worth showing, and enough attention is given to the main ones to make them stand out. The film covers a lot of ground, but it does so swiftly and attentively, so the storytelling becomes endearing and faithful.

This film is crafted with decent photography. A lot of shots are wide-angle, but the film is composed well. Editing can be a bit choppy in some parts, but is otherwise solid (the scene with the coin at the end is specially inspiring in the way it's cut). Some scenes have overlays and transitions that gives the film a more uniquely dynamic style. Acting is phenomenal; James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender are the most perfect choices for their characters since the days of Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen, and the rest of the cast pulls their weight well. Writing is okay. This production uses good-looking sets, props, and costumes. Special effects vary from being okay to being rather poor, but they are very well-conceived. Henry Jackman's score is excellent, and is especially wicked when Magneto is on screen.

Forget X-Men Origins: Wolverine. First Class is the most endearing and satisfying prequel to the series. It is densely-packed with action and storytelling, and in spite of that, it stands as one of the best in the franchise.

4/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Good | Film: Good)

Read More

Film Review: X-Men: The Last Stand

After two satisfying X-Men films, it only seemed logical at the time that a third film should round off the series and provide a big-scale conclusion to the fight between mankind and mutant-kind.

If nothing else, The Last Stand has plenty of action to satisfy; the fights occur pretty frequently, and seem much more hard-hitting than before. It has always been great to watch Magneto take out an armored convoy with impunity, before gathering his army and taking over Alcatraz. The final battle is a fun free-for-all with so many mutant powers being thrown around that it's crazy. A bunch of new mutants - Beast, The Juggernaut, the Phoenix - are welcome additions to the lore of the film series.

Unfortunately, the film has not sat well with many viewers. Part of the issue is that the film doesn't take itself as seriously as its predecessors, and there are moments throughout where it tries to be funny but mostly isn't. What really ticks viewers off will be the storytelling decisions; many of the characters go into undesirable directions (including death). One's enjoyment of the film may also hinge on how seriously you can accept that mutation can be cured so easily. There are probably some plot holes to be found as well.

A lot of these issues have never bothered me personally (save for what happens to certain characters). For casual popcorn entertainment, the film is enjoyable in a laid-back manner. Its story flows well enough, and provides at least some closure to the series (at least at the time it was made).

The film looks nice and slick, with quality photography and editing. Actors continue to do their job admirably, with Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen, Anna Paquin, Famke Janssen, and everybody else pulling their weight well. Even Halle Berry seems to step up her performance a little. Writing is okay. This production boasts good-looking sets, props, and costumes. Special effects are often good, but some are weak. Music is alright.

X-Men: The Last Stand is an enjoyable onslaught of mutant brawling, but many viewers won't like what they've done to the characters and plot. It is a thrilling enough climax to the original three movies, but it's not quite as powerful of a catharsis as it thinks it is. It is often considered one of the worst comic-book movies ever, alongside with Spiderman 3. I personally don't think it's that bad, but it certainly has its share of weaknesses, and isn't quite as sublime as the first two movies.

Recommended only as a rental.

3.5/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Marginal | Film: Pretty Good)

Read More

Film Review: X2: X-Men United

The first X-Men film presented a grand cast of iconic heroes in a troubled world; their heroics would only become grander and more complex in the continuing conflict. Bryan Singer's second X-Men film carries over everything that made the first film great, and still manages to cram in a whole lot more.

The action in X2 is phenomenal. The film starts off with one of the most elegantly-staged fight scenes on film. Shortly thereafter, the film rolls ahead with a constant series of fights and flights; among the most inspiring of scenes, Storm takes out a pair of jets with tornadoes, and Pyro goes berserk against a police squad. The entire last half of the film takes everybody to Alkali Lake, for a massive cascade of impressive action, including a great fight between Wolverine and Lady Deathstrike, Magneto wreaking havoc with the military, and Cyclops blowing things up. The whole time, all life on Earth remains at stake. It all reaches its apex with an awesome dam burst sequence, the likes of which could put the scenes in Superman: The Movie to shame.

Despite having so much, the film never feels overblown or convoluted; it all flows very sublimely, and gives just enough room for the story to unfold and breathe a little. Characters shine a little better than before, and more attention is given to the lesser players. Some of the strongest moments include revelations concerning Wolverine's character. The film also digs up enough background on the villain, Colonel Stryker, and his situation to give the evil plot more relevance and depth. It all ties into the grander scheme of showing a world struggling against mutant prejudice, and thanks to the characters and their interactions, it remains a compelling struggle.

This film is made with fantastic photography and editing. Acting is great from the whole cast: Hugh Jackman continues to excel as Wolverine, while Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen, Anna Paquin, Famke Janssen, Brian Cox, and everybody else remains solid. Writing is not bad. This production uses great-looking sets, props, and costumes. Special effects are generally good, but are aging a little. John Ottman's music score is great.

X2 is a perfectly-balanced sequel with fantastic action scenes, but still gives a good amount of attention to the story and characters. In spite of this, it is a massive step up from the first film, and remains one of the best sequels since T2.

Recommended!

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Perfect | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

Read More

Film Review: X-Men

Superhero films are a dime-a-dozen these days. Regardless of whether you think that's good or bad, we all have the original X-Men film to thank. Prior to this, superhero movies were limited in scope, scale, and conception; after all, comic book stories are so larger-than-life that it's hard to adapt them for the big screen (much less justify a big enough budget for it). With the X-Men (and arguably Blade, released a couple of years earlier), filmmakers took a chance on modern effects and techniques to bring a whole team of heroes to life, ushering in a massive wave of comic-book movies that would eventually lead to Marvel's rise as a new studio: a cinematic force to be reckoned with.

As the first-ever X-Men film, it has its share of limitations, especially compared to later films. Action is kept to a minimum; the biggest highlights being the train station scenes and the big climax on Liberty Island. Special effects are plentiful, but used sparingly. What really matters is that you get to see a whole world of mutants showing off their varied powers. The film blasts so many memorable details with sporadic bursts of short scenes, crafting just enough spectacle to wow us, but also just enough to tell the story it needs to.

It is a decent enough story. The film takes its time tracking various characters and bringing them together, so we get a solid and well-composed introduction to the X-Men and the world they inhabit. There are a ton of characters involved, but the film juggles them well enough. A good amount of attention is given to Wolverine, Rogue, Magneto and Professor X, who are all endearing characters we can appreciate. Most of the others tend to be lacking; there is no real development involved with Storm, Cyclops, Jean Grey, or Mystique (and Toad and Sabretooth stand as two of the weakest villains in the franchise, for they are lacking in presence and depth). All things considering, the film covers so much ground that there's really no room for extraneous character beats; what matters the most is the plot, which is intriguing, as it builds up to a fairly decent climax. At its core, it's a film that underscores themes of prejudice, which provides all the dynamics for the character and the conflicts they go through.

This film is very tightly-composed, with excellent photography and very rapid editing. It is especially noteworthy how the film manages to relay so much information with a constant stream of short, revealing images. Acting is a little dry, but the casting choices are mostly perfect. Hugh Jackman is easily the most iconic character of the lot, thanks to his perfect portrayal of Wolverine. Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen, Anna Paquin, and Bruce Davidson are great in their roles, and I enjoyed watching Famke Janssen and Rebecca Romijn-Stamos. I got to admit that the more I watch this film, the more I dislike Halle Berry as Storm (she does deliver one of the worst lines ever in this film). Writing is pretty blunt, but it gets the job done. This production uses some very slick and cool-looking sets, props, and costumes. Special effects hold up mostly well, with just a few weaknesses. The music score is alright.

The first original X-Men film was an inspiring hit at its time, but would only be a small taste of even greater things to come. It still holds up thanks to its storytelling and nuanced attention to detail. It's worth seeing at least once, especially for genre fans.

4/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Good | Film: Good)

Read More

Film Review: X-Men Origins: Wolverine

Wolverine still stands as one of the most prolific, most popular, and most badass superheroes of Marvel lore. The man is literally immortal: he heals instantly, even from mortal wounds, and thanks to that he was grafted with an invincible metal skeleton, complete with retracting adamantium claws. Wolverine kicked plenty of butt in the three main X-Men films, but a stand-alone Wolverine film has always been in the cards, to give fans another chance to see this awesome character in action. So, they made X-Men Origins: Wolverine, in what would be the first in a line of stand-alone prequel movies for each X-Men character.

In hindsight, this proved to be a futile move; despite the film's commercial success, it is easily one of the worst films of the series, and plans to make more Origins films fell through. The film is one hot mess: a haphazard blend of rip-roaring action and plot contrivances.

The good news is that the film is still very tight, highly entertaining, and it does have some great moments. It is really cool to watch Wolverine rampaging through whole hoards of bad guys, taking out hum-vees and helicopters on a motorbike, and fighting mutants around a nuclear reactor plant. The film moves fast and is never skimpy on the action or style.

The story involved in inherently compelling, thanks entirely to the allure of the title character. It is a tragic tale of love, betrayal, and vengeance that helps shape Wolverine into the berserker we all know and love. The plot covers some of the same ground we've seen before in the original X-Men films, but this time you get to see the full background on how Wolverine got suckered into Colonel Stryker's plans. There are a few major twists, which will seem contrived at first glance, but do hold up on repeat viewings. The plot suffers the most with a number of scenes that don't really contribute; many of the action scenes are frivolous, and scenes involving a young Cyclops seem to the thrown in just for the hell of it.

A lot of the film's biggest issues rests with the editing, which is extremely choppy and screwy. A lot of shots are cheaply-cut to cover up deficiencies in the action. Worst yet, most scenes do not transition well from one to another, causing characters to appear at seemingly random places (such as Gambit suddenly appearing on a rooftop, or Victor appearing at the final fight out of nowhere). It is clear that the conflicts between the studio and the director have contributed to a film that's at conflict with itself, unable to find a balance between the heartfelt drama and the hardcore action.

On the plus side, photography is mostly-solid. Performances are a bit of a mixed bag: Hugh Jackman continues to excel at playing his iconic character, and Liev Schreiber is superb as Victor Creed. I enjoyed Danny Huston's and Lynn Collins' performances. Most of the other actors playing the side characters are pretty weak. The writing is pretty weak. This production uses okay sets, props, and costumes. Special effects vary from good to terrible. Music seems uninspired as well.

Wolverine's stand-alone film is not an inherently bad story; in fact, its potential is more effectively conveyed in the film's corresponding video game. Somewhere along the line it got mucked-up, and I blame it mostly on too much post-production tinkering. I still value the film as a guilty pleasure, and it does make for a satisfying stand-alone action flick. In an X-Men marathon, however, it doesn't fit as smoothly with the other films (especially since events in X-Men: First Class contradict this one). Diehard fans will probably want to check this out once, but for casual audiences, you can do better.

3.5/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Average | Film: Marginal)

Read More

Travel: Hadrian's Wall

Almost 2,000 years ago, the Roman Empire conquered much of Great Britain, up to what is modern-day Scotland.  In 122 AD, Emperor Hadrian decreed that a great wall would be built, spanning the entire width of England.  Reasons for building the wall remain vague to historians, but it would have been an expression of Rome's militaristic might and power, and it would help protect the Empire from barbarian invasion (which, at the time, would have been the Picts, and possibly the Brigantes).  Various forts along the wall would have provided a base for auxiliary Roman soldiers to serve as guards; auxiliary troops were non-Roman citizens who had to serve in the military for 25 years before becoming official Roman citizens.  As time went on, however, the lines between being a Roman and a native of England was blurred.  By the 5th century AD, the wall was abandoned, and parts of it became cannibalized by locals to build villages, homes, churches, and other structures.  Today, parts of the wall and Roman forts are scatted all around sporadically, and can be visited.

This wall once protected an empire.

The wall appears in certain spots, somewhere from 1 - 5 feet tall, before disappearing back into the grassy hills.  Actual forts are pretty much reduced to their foundations, with low-lying walls outlining where buildings used to be.  To see these places, you can either plan an extensive hike across the entire 77-miles stretch (which many people do, but I'm not sure what the particulars of it are), or you can follow the B3618 in your car.  Along this path, the most notable places will be Chesters, Birdoswald, and Vindolanda.  Other notable ruins may exist as well.  A lot of these places require admission or subscription to English Heritage,

The fort at Chesters (Cilurnum) features a smattering of small ruins, including a barracks building, gatehouses and towers, and a sizable bathhouse.  All of these structures are enclosed by wire fences, but it is possible for visitors to pass through and visit the ruins up-close.  It all rests on wide-open grass fields, close to a steep river bank.  Near the visitor's center, a museum is available, containing numerous artifacts and finds from all along Hadrian's Wall, especially from noted archeologist John Clayton.

Side of the barracks building at Chesters.

Birdoswald (Banna) is notable for having the longest stretch of intact wall.  After parking, you will need to walk up hill and around a curve for a bit, before coming across the visitor's center and exhibit, which includes wax figures and information.  Once you pay for admission, you can walk on the open grounds, where you can see large chunks of the wall and many low-lying ruins and foundations embedded in the ground.  Sheep roam around pretty freely here, which is cute, but also makes the ground littered with droppings.  If you walk past the ruins to the far side of the site, you can see a pretty wide-open view of the surrounding countryside (and this is a viewpoint that most people seem to miss, not willing to walk the extra 100 yards for some odd reason).

Ruins at Birdoswald.

Vindolanda is a place I saw many years ago.  As I recall, it is a pretty big site with some very sizable ruins.  A museum is also available here, amidst a garden.

As I said before, other places might be seen scattered around, including even more forts and wall segments.  These three sites are the three biggest that I've personally seen and am aware of, and are certainly with a trip for interested visitors.  It is pretty impressive to behold piece of Roman history in Great Britain; it is easy to see the influences of Normans, Saxons, Vikings, and the various English kings and queens of medieval history, but Rome predates all of these kingdoms, and their forts represent the very western edge of their vast empire.

Read More

Film Review: Godzilla (2014)

60 years ago, a monster rose up from the depths.  Godzilla, a gargantuan beast borne from nuclear fire, invaded the monster movie scene in 1954 and gave us a terrifying vision of Tokyo's destruction.  Godzilla's reign persisted through nearly thirty movies, seeing the titular monster as both villain and hero, pitting him against a whole universe of monsters, aliens, armies, and machines.  Then, after running through a whole gauntlet of battles in Godzilla:  Final Wars, the beast was given a good ten-year rest.

In 2014, Godzilla rose up again with a fresh new look and fresh talent.  Even though the beast has been rebooted repeatedly before, he has never before hit the western shores as hard.  In this American production, great care and detail has been given to provide a hard-hitting thrill ride that will remain true to Toho's original vision.

In a somewhat Spielbergian fashion, Gareth Edwards' vision of Godzilla purposefully builds tension before giving us the actual monster combat.  Much like Jurassic Park, the film steadily builds up the suspense with tremors, sound, and focus on subtle details.  Much like Jaws, the actual monsters receive limited screen-time to maximize their impact when you do see them.  And much like 2005's War of the Worlds, much of the action is subdued to the background, with a firmer focus on the characters' drama.  Above all, Godzilla represents an evolution of Edwards' debut film Monsters, which accomplished all these same techniques on a more limited scale.

What this amounts to is a film that builds and builds, taking its time on character-building and plotting before giving us what we really want:  all-out monster bashing and city stomping.  When you finally get to it, the mass destruction is modestly satisfying.  Special effects are top-notch throughout, giving us an intense and epic vision of creatures smashing into each other and smashing into buildings.  However, the action is not overblown or overdone, and it never overwhelms the plot.

The actual story involved is pretty much on-par with the older Godzilla films; most of these give us a handful of military and scientist characters who figure out what's going on, then behold some massive monster battle.  This film stays true to this formula, but the focus is constant on the characters and their struggles, whether it be the struggle to deal with the monsters, or the struggle to save loved ones.  The film definitely tries to pull at the heartstrings by showcasing a father trying to reunite with his family, while also trying to save his father and fulfill his mission.  While this can be a bit contrived and sappy, the film does have a little more depth and power to it than the older kaiju flicks.  All that being said, the characters are still not huge stand-outs; their emotional struggles are pretty much the only thing we can latch on to, but they remain pretty shallow and flat.  Plotting suffers a little as well, given that some parts don't always make sense, and characters don't always make the best decisions.  Much like the older films, the story overall conveys a strong theme about the folly of messing with mother nature and abusing nuclear power.

The film is competently made, with quality photography and editing.  It is especially noteworthy in the way it masterfully reveals just what it wants to when it wants to, to draw out the suspense and make each monster's presence more powerful.  Acting is okay from the whole cast; Aaron Taylor-Johnson is a pretty average everyman hero character, Elizabeth Olson is a pretty average as the guy's wife, Ken Watanabe is an average scientist dude, and Bryan Cranston steals the show in an all-too-small part.  Writing is so-so.  This production has some great-looking sets, props, costumes, locales, and special effects.  Sound design is phenomenal, with monster roars that's guaranteed to make the entire theater shudder.  Music is pretty interesting.

Finally, this has got to be the most intense and hard-hitting Godzilla movie since the original.  Storytelling and characters aren't a big standout here, but never were in the older movies anyway; this version still offers a phenomenal build-up and a satisfying payoff, and anybody wanting a good monster-movie fix should be pleased.  It'll be thrilling to see what directions modern film-making like this will take Godzilla next.

4/5 (Experience:  Good | Story:  Average | Film:  Good)

Read More