Showing posts with label Movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Movies. Show all posts

Saturday, November 20, 2010

The Nerdy News Blog - November 20th, 2010

Forgive me, folks, for failing to write up last week's Nerdy News, so here we go for what happened this week.

FOX Announces That Fringe Will Be Moved to Fridays
 Normally, I wouldn't find a change of day and time for a show to be anything remotely newsworthy. But let's take a look at the facts here. Fact: Fringe is a science fiction show on FOX with critical acclaim that's currently on Thursday nights. Fact: Starting on January 28th, it will be on Fridays. Fact: Firefly was a science fiction show on FOX with critical acclaim that aired on Fridays and was quickly canceled. Fact: Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles was a science fiction show that aired on FOX that was moved to Fridays in its second season and was quickly canceled.
Opinion: Oh crap oh crap oh crap oh crap oh crap oh crapohcrapohcrapohcrapohcrapohcapOHCRAP!
FOX might as well have put out a press release that said we're thinking about canceling another awesome show because we're a bunch of morons.

Cryptic Studios and CBS Will Let The Fans Design The Next Enterprise

I realize I'm probably the only person you know who plays Star Trek Online, and hell, I don't even play it as much anymore. But I think this next bit is pretty cool. The game's developer, Cryptic Studios, along with Star Trek license holder CBS Studios and Intel have announced a contest that asks for fans to design the next starship Enterprise. I'm assuming it will be the Enterprise-F, since, according to the game's timeline, the Enterprise-E had a significantly longer life span than some of the other ships in its line. The grand prize is kind of lame, though - an Alienware laptop, the collector's edition of Star Trek Online along with a lifetime membership, the new Enterprise will appear in STO and you'll get a replica of your design. Personally, I'd rather have the replica and royalties for the use of my design. Oh well. The contest starts on December 9th. Check here for details.

 Darren Aronofsky To Direct The Wolverine
 That's right. The guy who directed head trips and arftsy flicks like Requiem for a Dream, Pi, The Fountain, and The Wrestler, is directing the sequel to the abysmal X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Aronofsky has worked with big screen Wolvie Hugh Jackman on The Fountain and it would seem that it was Jackman himself that got him the job. One of the things Aronofsky has done already is to change the title from something that probably would have been awful, like X-Men Kinda Origins: Wolverine Goes To Hollywood, to the simple title, The Wolverine. Supposedly, Aronofsky is looking to really separate his film from the Gavin Hood-directed nightmare that gave us magic adamantium memory-erasing bullets and the horribly realized Wade Wilson/Deadpool. He's called it a "stand alone" film, that "isn't connected" to its predecessor. Frankly, I don't see how that's possible since you still have Hugh Jackman playing Logan (though I actually still think he's great in the role). But combine this with the fact that they're rebooting Wade Wilson's origins for Deadpool, which should film soon if Ryan Reynolds' schedule ever frees up, and the craziness that seems to be involved with X-Men: First Class, and it's pretty obvious that FOX doesn't give a rat's ass about maintaining continuity in its X-Men film universe.


Oh, and for your amusement here's an image from a mid-90's Star Trek/X-Men crossover comic. I actually own a copy of it.
Yeah, that's Spock owning Wolverine with a Vulcan Nerve Pinch.
Win.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

The Nerdy News Blog - November 4th, 2010

The Avengers Delayed?
Perhaps Nick Fury will educate Thor in the do's and don't's of foot massages?
Is Joss Whedon looking to spend too much money? According to BleedingCoolNews.com, Marvel Studios has delayed the pre-production process on the movie that will cause millions of fan boys to quite literally die from the excitement of seeing Iron Man, Captain America, Thor and the Hulk all on one screen. I might be one of them. And by might, I mean almost definitely. But it's okay, the new Star Trek should come out before The Avengers hits the screen. But the film's shaping up to be pretty expensive, with big name stars like Robert Downey Jr., Samuel L. Jackson and Scarlett Johansson, combined with what will surely be massive amounts of CGI and filming on location in New York City. So Marvel's accountants are understandably freaking out. With any luck, the movie won't be delayed. Cross your fingers, true believers.

James Bond to Reappear (Maybe) in Late 2012


Thanks to MGM's keen desire to blow all it's money like a drunken frat boy in Vegas with his daddy's credit card, many of its big properties, like the James Bond series and The Hobbit have gone through development hell due to lack of funds. In the case of The Hobbit, some iffy rights issues led to the film being a joint-venture with Warner Brothers. Agent 007, however, has not been so lucky. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer's money problems have left it looking for another company to make it their bitch. Yesterday, however, MGM filed bankruptcy - otherwise known as a Financial Get Out Of Jail Free Card. Now that they've got some breathing room, MGM is aiming to get Bond 23 out in November 2012. Daniel Craig currently has a pretty tight schedule, so it looks like they may not get to film until late 2011 at the earliest. Luckily, the current Bond series doesn't rely too much on CGI, so post-production shouldn't take too long. Woo! Yay for big Hollywood companies going bankrupt!

TIE Fighters Will Soon Be In Your Living Room And Everywhere Else You Go
I don't think Homeland Security saw The Galactic Empire one coming.
So, file this one under "Now I Wish I Had An iPhone." This really isn't all that important, I just enjoyed the thoughts of thousands of people all over the country saying to their neighbors, "Hey, you've got a TIE Fighter on your face."
THQ is working on a new augmented reality game that has you shooting down TIE Fighters with whatever your camera sees as a background. It's a simple arcade shooter of little consequence, it just lit up my eyes with nerdy glee when I saw it.

Out.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

The Nerdy News Blog - October 28th

It's Thursday, that means it's time for this weeks updates! This was the week for rumors and denials, it seems!

Batman's Got His Next Title and Won't Be Fighting The Riddler in 2012
What they didn't tell you is that Christian Bale broke a glass milk bottle over the photographer's head at this photo shoot. He claimed the man was being "so f***ing unprofessional."
On Wednesday, director/writer/producer Christopher Nolan, who brought us the wonderful awesomeness that is the last two Batman movies, gave us a couple tid-bits about what to expect with the third and final part of his epic Batman trilogy. We'll be seeing The Dark Knight Rises on our local IMAX screens (there will be absolutely no 3-D) in the summer of 2012. Nolan also told us that the script that he wrote with his brother, Jonah Nolan, and David S. Goyer does not involve The Riddler. So much for everybody expecting that the recent casting of Tom Hardy (Inception, Star Trek: Nemesis) in an unnamed role would end up with him as Edward Nigma. Oh, good God. Don't let it be Robin.

George Lucas to Convert the Indiana Jones Movies To 3-D Too? Wait. Nope. Nevermind.
Damn you, quit messing with my childhood! And making me pay $3 more on a $10 ticket!
For a brief moment on Tuesday, I thought I was going to have a coronary. It's ridiculous as it is that George Lucas is going to convert all six Star Wars movies into 3-D and release them into theaters over the course of six years. I call it "ridiculous," but I'll still go see every one of them. Anyway, rumor broke like wildfire all over the Internet that Lucas was also planning to convert the four movies in the Indiana Jones series as a ploy to further enhance our rage as a fan base. Luckily, within a couple of hours, a Lucasfilm spokesman let it be known that it was all utter crap and we should pay them all our money to see Star Wars 3-D Spectacular on Ice.

Entertainment Weekly Is Kind Enough to Give Us A Glimpse At Captain America: The First Avenger

The people who pissed and moaned about Chris Evans not being a blonde won't like this...

Well, I have to admit, the boy cleans up well. I didn't like the idea of Chris Evans playing Steve Rogers at all when I first heard. Not because he wasn't a blonde, but because I just couldn't picture Chris Evans as being this legendary hero that the likes of Iron Man and Thor would view as a leader. Just listen to this phrase: "Robert Downey Jr. admires Chris Evans as a hero and leader." Did you scoff? I've got to hand it to director Joe Johnston, though. These pictures make me feel a little better about how respectable Chris Evans looks in the role. At least he doesn't look like the slacker skateboarder next door - kind of like his Scott Pilgrim role (only the second time I really liked him in a movie). Now hopefully I can wash out the bad taste of his take as Johnny Storm in the Fantastic Four movies... Yuck.

Kieth Richards Cut From Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides? Wait. Nope. Nevermind.
Keith had actually just tried to smoke the little guy prior to this picture.
So this is another rumor that was circulating the ol' Intrawebs this week. The word was that Kieth Richards was going to be removed from his role as Jack Sparrow's father, Captain Teague, due to, get this, his alleged drug use. Wait, what now? People have been making jokes about how Kieth Richards has smoked every substance and object known to man at some point for decades now. They were making those jokes before he played Captain Teague in the previous Pirates movie, At World's End. So what's the big deal now? Well, Richards just released a new autobiography that apparently shows that he was even crazier about smoking stuff than anybody even knew. Lucky for all of us Stones fans out there, Disney had a spokesman come out and deny the rumors. Kieth Richards will definitely be in the next Pirates of the Caribbean. Thankfully, Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley are still out. I don't see how this movie can fail. Well, unless Keith smokes the film reels.


As usual, there's a ton of different things I could also tell you about, but you'll just have to look them up for yourself.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Slightly More Obscure Horror Movies That You Might Not Have Thought Of

As people prepare for the forthcoming holiday, DVD shelves everywhere will be awash with the classics - stuff like Psycho, The Exorcist and The Omen, along with the schlock like Saw XXIV. Now, I'm what some of my friends call a "film snob." I'm the guy who knows all the useless trivia and talks about how the original French version of your favorite movie was so much better. So I'm using my film snobbery to give you some recommendations on some horror movies that you might have never heard of.

Sunshine
Directed by Danny Boyle - 2007
Could've done without The Right Stuff rip-off poster.
This film by Danny Boyle, the director of Trainspotting, 28 Days Later and Slumdog Millionaire, might not appear to be scary at first glance. The film is about the crew of a ship sent to the sun in the 2050s in an effort to reignite fusion, after the sun mysteriously begins to go dark. To be honest, it's kind of a spoiler to ever tell you guys this, but about half-way into the movie, it becomes less 2001 and much more akin to Alien. Hell, even knowing that it takes that turn might ruin the movie for you, so feel free to yell at me if you feel that I, in fact, ruined it for you. Still, I'm sparing you all the details and, when I saw this movie, I left the screening feeling rather shaken up by the unsettling nature of some of the things in the film. I definitely recommend giving it a chance if you haven't seen it. Plus, Lost fans can be excited by seeing Hiroyuki Sanada - better known as Dogen, the leader of the Others in the temple - in one of his rare Western film roles. And it was the first time I saw Chris Evans in a movie and didn't think he was awful.


The Descent
Directed by Neil Marshall - 2005
Don't let this corny poster fool you. Seriously. This is a stupid poster. Why don't these movies have better posters?

This movie is probably the most well known of the movies I've listed tonight. By director Neil Marshall, whose track record aside from this film hasn't been great, had the honor of really disturbing my drunk ass last year at Halloween. The film follows a group of women on a spelunking trip, but one wrong turn leads them into the wrong cave for the most horrifying cave-crawling ever. The cinematography of this film alone makes it worth watching. Marshall went with a realistic approach to a cave - he kept it pitch black. The only light in the cave scenes are the lights brought by the terrorized women who are trying to escape the cave's ravenous, terror-inducing denizens. This helps create a stifling amount of dread. Unlike other movies, you really can't see anything coming until it's on top of someone. Added in the dynamic of people trying very hard to survive at any cost (even each other) creates for a really claustrophobic and terrorizing horror movie.

Incubus
Directed by Leslie Stevens - 1965
Dammit, now it's a bad DVD cover. What the hell?

 Okay, so I have to admit two things. One: I've never seen this movie. Two: I've wanted to see it for years out of curiosity and a strong belief that I would find it highly amusing. The film was one of two films ever to be made in Esperanto, an artificially constructed language meant to be a universal second language that would allow everyone in the world to communicate easily. It was directed by Leslie Stevens, the creator of The Outer Limits. For those of you who don't know, The Outer Limits is like The Twilight Zone's copycat little brother. Stevens decided to film the movie in Esperanto in order to give it an eerie feeling and also forbade it from being dubbed into any other languages. Apparently, they didn't have an Esperanto coach on set, so the film's stars didn't do a very good job with their pronunciations. Speaking of the film's stars, this one stars the King of Ham, Captain James T. Kirk himself - William Shatner. This one was actually filmed a year before the premiere of Star Trek, so this is the young Shatner. And to think, ten years ago, I wouldn't have known that I could track this movie down. It had been thought lost until a copy was found and restored by the Sci-Fi (now SyFy) Channel. The movie itself centers around succubi. That's succubus in plural. As in, beautiful women who suck the life out of men by having sex with them. Also, it's said to have been a cursed productions, since three of its stars were dead within a year - one pair of actors - Milos Milos murdered his girlfriend, Barbara Ann Thomason Rooney, then killed himself. Another of their costars committed suicide. Thank God Shatner made it. But do you guys see why I want to see it now?


And that's it for tonight's blog. I'd give you a preview for tomorrow, but I don't know what that's going to be yet!

Thursday, October 21, 2010

The Nerdy News Blog - October 21st

So where shall we start? Oh yes, the thing I just read a few minutes ago.

Martin Freeman Confirmed as Bilbo Baggins in The Hobbit

Unfortunately, Bilbo's not a pirate. But this picture makes me wish he was.

Holy hell, holy hell, holy hell! It's always awesome when you're top choice for a role in a movie you've been waiting for is exactly the guy you want! No, but seriously. Whenever I'd thought about The Hobbit, I saw Martin Freeman. He's short. I've only seen him in roles where he seems generally bewildered. And best of all, he has an actually English accent! Unlike Elijah Wood. They also announced who was playing the eight dwarfs who, along with Gandalf (Ian McKellan will be reprising the role for the two movies that make up The Hobbit), whisk Bilbo away. But honestly, who gives a crap about the dwarves? I can't remember their names even. Plus I didn't recognize a single one of the actors' names who play them. So whatever.

The Hulk is Coming to TV... Again

 The Hulk's first job as a go-go dancer didn't end happily. One drunken night with Thor can ruin everything.

Part of Disney's purchase of Marvel Comics has led the two companies to work on taking some of Marvel's properties to ABC. Amongst the possible series the companies were considering was The Punisher, The Eternals and, the one I wish would get made - Moon Knight. But ultimately, two shows were decided on. One involving young heroes Cloak and Dagger, that will be called, go figure, Cloak and Dagger, to be aired on ABC Family. The Hulk was previously the subject of a quite successful TV series in the 1980's, and Disney/Marvel is hoping to create another hit. This will make the fourth actor to play Bruce Banner in less than ten years, including Eric Bana, Edward Norton and Mark Ruffalo (who will appear in The Avengers in 2012). Everybody ready for some more ripped purple shorts?

Screenwriters Finally Begin Writing the Script for the Next Star Trek

Yaaaaaaaay!
Do I need to say anything else? I just hope they don't use Khan for the villain. I want to see some Klingons.

There won't be any of this guy though. Probably just as well anyway.
 
 
 
Fin.


Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Moon Review


Hey all. I realize I've not been updating the last few days with the Legend of Zelda series. I've been out of town a lot the last few days, so I haven't really had the chance to play and blog. On one of my incursions out of town, I had a chance to see Moon, a new science fiction film that's hit a limited set of theaters around the country. Only one theater in the OKC area is even playing it, the Quail Springs AMC.
Moon is the first feature film from director Duncan Jones, better known as Duncan Zowie Heywood Jones, the son of David Bowie (whose actual name is Robert Jones).
The film stars Sam Rockwell, who gives, what I believe to be, his best performance ever. Kevin Spacey also provides the voice of GERTY, the computer/robot that is the sole companion of Sam Bell (Rockwell), a miner contracted to maintain the Selene moon base, where the company that hires him mines Helium-3, a gas found in lunar soil that is solving the Earth's energy crisis. Sam has two weeks left in his contracted three years and is eager to return to Earth to see his wife and finally meet his daughter in person when he begins seeing things that aren't there. Then, after an accident on the surface, Sam awakens to find that things aren't as they should be.
One of the most striking things about Moon is that it carries the torch of the cerebral, thinking-man's science-fiction of yesteryear. These days, science-fiction movies must have dumbed down storylines and a lot of explosions to have any hope of succeeding. That's probably why this particular film was kept to limited release, because it has no real action to it at all. Moon is more akin to sci-fi films like Kubrick's 2001: A Space Oddessey or Roeg's The Man Who Fell To Earth (which starred David Bowie), and not just because it's carried by a single man and a computer. This is a film that forces the audience to think about what is going on and makes them consider the morality behind the events that occur within the film. Hollywood simply doesn't make science-fiction films like this anymore and that is a damn shame.
I've always thought Sam Rockwell was underrated, but now I truly believe it. He carries this film singlehandedly and feels very believable as the everyman stuck alone on the moon. One doesn't tend to think "blue collar" when they think "astronauts," but that's what Sam Bell is and Rockwell portrays it wonderfully. I don't think it was quite a Best Actor worthy performance - but it may be worth a nomination. Then again, we still have another five months in the year for someone to out do him. It was definitely the finest performance I've seen from anything that's come out this year.
The film itself is a little slow to develop, mainly due to the lack of action sequences that moviegoers (myself included) are so used to in science-fiction. There is, however, a lot of dramatic tension that Jones manages to build consistently throughout the second and third acts and that helps propel the movie more smoothly.
Apparently, Jones is building his own movie mythology. He stated in an interview that he was planning on giving Rockwell a cameo in the next movie as Sam Bell. The next film will apparently tie into Moon but will be its own independent story and not a true sequel.
I think Jones is going to be one of the new directors on the scene that everyone needs to keep an eye out for. This is a stellar film for a first timer and it shows a lot of promise. Hopefully people will catch on and go see it. If you like things blowing up and can't stand quiet, cerebral films, it's not for you. If you see that Moon is playing somewhere near you, I highly recommend that you go see it if you like old-school science fiction. If it's not playing near you, rent it as soon as it's available. I'll probably be buying it to make my friends watch it.

- Nate

Friday, June 5, 2009

Star Trek - A Second Opinion

First off, I'm sorry for the lack of updates. The last week and a half has seen me moving into a new apartment and aiding the family while my grandmother was in the hospital (she's out and she's okay, by the way), and I just got Internet service in my new apartment tonight.

So, now on to our subject matter. On Monday, just after a too-thick-to-drink chocolate shake from the Warren's diner, Megan, Julie and I went to see Star Trek again. For me and Julie, it was a second viewing, for Megan it was a third (which is just ridiculous since she'd never even seen a Trek movie before I gave her a crash course in the franchise over the last few months, yet she's seen the movie more than I have).
In any case, I walked out of the film with a more tempered opinion of it than the one I put up in my initial review.
Frankly, I was still on a contact high of brand new Trek after the disappointment of Star Trek: Nemesis in 2003 and the cancellation of Enterprise (which was just starting to get really good) in 2005. The movie was certainly quite good, but I definitely overlooked some of its flaws because I was still giddy from having just seen it.
So how does it hold up now? Aside from some science-geek and cinemaphile nitpicks and a highly-underdeveloped villain, quite well. It's still fast-paced and incredibly fun, it still has some superb special effects and it still has some great acting. Where it falls flat are the characterization of Eric Bana's Nero and some glaring logic problems (that, admittedly, most movie viewers would not cue on to).
Nero simply didn't get enough screen time nor enough to do. I probably did not catch on to this initially due to the fact that I read IDW's comic Star Trek: Countdown, which featured a story by the film's writers, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. This comic gives the details of what happened in the 24th century that made Nero as insane and vengeful as he is in the film. When I first saw Star Trek, I didn't question anything about Nero because I knew why he was the way he was. However, this time I noticed that all that's really said is that Romulus, Nero's home planet, was destroyed by a supernova (a science nitpick I'll get to in a bit) and he wanted to make the whole galaxy suffer for not helping to save his planet. Nero simply isn't developed enough. I think the writers aimed to make him more of a tragic villain, yet other than an image of Nero's wife who died in the calamity, we're never given any real reason to connect with Nero. There is nothing shown to make the audience connect with him in some way, to feel any sort of sympathy. Had we seen Nero as a man so torn by grief that he's fallen into insanity, he would have been a high effective villain - and Trek movies have a tendency for great villains, like Kahn, Chang and the Borg Queen. However, all we see is an insane, flamboyant, tattooed Romulan who we know very little about and who simply seems to want to watch the galaxy burn.
Another thing that irked me this time was not glaring but flaring (pun intended). For the most part, I love JJ Abram's cinematographic style in the film - with it's documentary style camera movements and angles. What I didn't like was the fact that every other second, there is a lens flare. Most were small and subjected to the sides of the screen, but on occasion there would be one that would totally white out the picture and it started to get on my nerves. The little ones I could deal with, but the big ones that interrupted my field of vision started to annoy me. I even found a humorous edit of the trailer for the Original Series episode "Space Seed" with the lens flares added in, so I apparently wasn't the only one who noticed. It's not really a problem with the film itself, but it started to bug me. It's something I can learn to ignore, however.
The science-geek in me had some problems with the science of the movie, namely supernovae and black holes. Generally, Trek has been really good about keeping to actual science (for the most part), so it was a bit of a disappointment to see problems like that. Apparently, Romulus was destroyed by a supernova that hit with little warning (an event depicted in Countdown, which likewise gave me the same thought). However, even a supernova of a nearby star to Romulus would have taken years to reach the planet, unless it was the Romulan star itself, because supernovae move at less than the speed of light - so there would have been plenty of warning and, thus, Nero would have no reason to be so angry. Also, a black hole is created at one point in the film, and the subsequent destruction shows that everything that is destroyed by it is simply sucked in. However, the debris would have formed a visible accretion disk that would orbit the black hole. That's a minor quibble and doesn't present much of a logic problem for the story as the supernova one does, but oh well, that's just me griping cause I've taken an astronomy class and actually learned something.
All in all though, I won't contradict everything I said in the first review, because those opinions still held true. I loved the acting and the story. I loved the action set pieces and I was still just as blown away by the incredible special effects. It's not as perfect as I initially made it out to be, but it's still a great movie in all respects.

One more gripe about it: I never want to watch it in anything but High Definition, because the film is simply gorgeous to look at. Unfortunately, I don't have an HDTV or a Blu-Ray player. So when this movie hits home video, I'm out of luck. Anybody have any high paying jobs to offer me?

- Nate

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Terminator Salvation - Review

Warning: There are some spoilers in this review, but if you've seen the trailers, then you should already know this stuff.
I'll be straight with you. It was very difficult for me to just take in Terminator Salvation as a movie in its own respect. I constantly found myself comparing it to the previous Terminator films, especially the first and second, as well as the excellent (but unjustly cancelled) TV series Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles.
The film essentially follows two interwoven plotlines, one involving John Connor (Christian Bale) and the more prominent one involving Marcus Wright (Sam Worthington). Both characters start at different places, with the opening of the film set in 2003, where Marcus agrees to donate his body to science after his impending execution. Cut to 2018, where John Connor is fighting the machines and we soon see Marcus alive and well. The film proceeds to tell these two characters' stories, focusing more on Marcus than John Connor. This decision is slightly contrary to what a Terminator fan like me might expect, since John Connor is supposed to be so important to the resistance against the machines yet he is only playing a supporting role here to Marcus in their eventually shared quest to protect Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin).
One problem that immediately struck me was how much the trailers gave away about the plot. Several trailers reveal that Marcus is at least partially cybernetic, and since the reveal of this is a good hour into the movie, it fell very flat and didn't have the impact it could have. Any time Marcus got thrown around before they finally revealed him, I found myself wondering if they'd finally show him to be a machine.
Another problem is that much of the performances just feel wooden. In the first couple of scenes, I was concerned Bale would be doing his Batman-growl through the entire film, but that luckily didn't happen. Worthington seemed to just shout a whole lot, but he did seem to manage to give the character some substance. Common's and Bryce Dallas Howard's roles turned out to be largely forgettable. Moon Bloodgood proved to be a strong point, but it was Yelchin that I felt stole the show. He brought a sense of humanity to the character that I felt was missing from the rest.
In the context of the franchise, Salvation lacks the strong characterization that pervades other entries in the franchise, especially the second film. The film simply felt hollow, with none of the other characters aside from Reese and his small mute sidekick, Star, really connecting with me. At the very least, John and Marcus both managed to capture my attention in the last forty-five minutes or so, but the failure of getting both protagonists to connect with the audience shows a strong failing in the film. And perhaps it's because this film is set entirely in the future that this film can't be as humanizing as the first two. It's simply an entirely different type of story. Another problem within the context of the franchise is that John seems to be terribly open about the fact that Kyle Reese is (or will be) his father. We know that in 2027, Reese goes back in time to protect Sarah Connor, but this movie is set in 2019, years before anyone but John know about the existence of a time machine. And yet, there he is exclaiming in front of everyone that Kyle Reese is his father, and no one, not even the people who don't know John, question him on how that's possible. I feel, as a fan, that it was a critical error on the part of the writers to not make John's need to keep his heritage a secret.
There were some nice nods to continuity, such as the recorded diaries from his mother (voiced by Linda Hamilton) that John listens to throughout as well as the initial appearance of the T-800, which sported a decent if sometimes obvious CGI rendering of Arnold Schwarzenegger's face circa the first movie. A few lines are lifted directly from the other movies as sort of in-jokes for the audience and a couple of locales are at least reminiscent of locations in the first two movies.
One strong point in the film was that there were some really great action set pieces. I was especially impressed by a desert highway chase involving Marcus and Kyle aboard an old tow truck with two motorcycle-like Terminators pursuing them and by a chase sequence involving Marcus and John through the resistance base camp. If only for the glitz factor alone, Salvation is fun to watch.
Overall, Terminator Salvation is an enjoyable film to watch and certainly doesn't feel as campy or forced as Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines. It lacks a certain substance found in the first two films (especially the director's cut of the second), but it definitely shows potential for future sequels - which are definitely coming. The film would have benefited from a more singular focus in its plot and strong use of characterization. I almost feel like those missing elements might have been cut on the editing room floor. I'd be very curious to see an extended cut of the film. In all, if you're looking for a fun post-apocalyptic free-for-all, I'd certainly go see it.

Thursday, May 7, 2009

The Second Coming of Star Trek


Well, folks, I've seen it. At 7PM tonight at the Warren Theater in Moore, OK, the Voice of the Theater spoke, the trailers rolled and then it began. The film I've been anticipating for something close to the last two years.
Star Trek.
The JJ Abrams-directed, Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman-written flick is both a loving tribute to and fresh breath if life into the Star Trek franchise. In fact, I would go on to say that this is one of the best science-fiction films to be released in years.
The film is a sort of sequel, prequel and reboot at the same time. Through some complicated bits of time travel and back story, actions that take place in the twenty-forth century of the timeline that's been set up by the last forty years of Trek and creates a new, separate timeline. This allows the filmmakers to create a story that both honors the established canon and creates new opportunities for story telling at the same time. The film proceeds uninhibited by the veritable Sword of Damocles of canon constraints, which makes for surprising twists of story that this life-long Trekkie did not expect to see. It sets up a new franchise with some very interesting possibilities.
The film itself is nothing short of epic. The script is wonderful, managing to incorporate the strong characterization inherent within the franchise along with strong crowd-pleasing action sequences. Every time I thought they had spent too long focusing on the action, they relented with character moments and that made the movie all the more enjoyable for me, as a bona fide Trekkie.
I said on this blog last October that as long as the characters felt right, I would be satisfied with this film. Other than a few minor parts, the casting and characterization of these iconic characters was nothing short of awe-inspiring. The most prominent reason for this is the spot-on casting, especially the choices of Chris Pine as Kirk, Zachary Quinto as Spock, Karl Urban as Dr. McCoy and Zoe Saldana as Uhura.
Pine simply exudes with the brash confidence that one would expect of a young Kirk. This is exceptionally well done because Kirk does not remain this way through out the entire film, but has a definite growth over the course of the film - seen especially well in a moment when Uhura tells Kirk that she hopes he knows what he's doing, and rather than providing a cocky quip that he would have delivered earlier in the film, his only reply is an honest "So do I." I did not expect to love Pine's performance nearly as much as I did.
Quinto was perhaps the most obvious choice for Spock that anyone could have come up with. Between his resemblance to a young Leonard Nimoy and the cool and unattached performance that he's given as Sylar on Heroes, he was a simple shoe-in for the role. He excellently portrays the emotional turmoil that is presented to Spock due to his heritage as well as the hardships he faces through the course of the film.
It seemed that Karl Urban was possessed by the spirit of DeForest Kelley while filming Star Trek. He doesn't just portray the character well, he is Dr. Leonard H. "Bones" McCoy. He has an incredibly strong introduction nearly the beginning of the film and the consistency with which he delivers the character persists throughout without ever feeling like imitation. Between his wonderfully in-character scripting and the way he performed the part, Urban was simply a joy to watch.
Saldana's Uhura was refreshing because the character was finally given her due. Throughout the original series and the movie, Uhura was ever present, but without much to do story-wise. In this new film, she plays a major role and her interactions with both Kirk and Spock give her far more character than she's ever had before. Uhura was always sort of a blank slate, a character that we never really knew much about. In fact, a running plot point in the film is the mystery behind her first name, something that was never once said before in any of the episodes or films. So seeing Saldana really give the character substance was great.
As for the rest of the cast, they were very strong, but perhaps not as much as the previous four. Simon Pegg was hilarious as Scotty, and while Scotty was used for a fair amount of comic relief in the episodes and movies, he has his serious moments. In this, he's given nothing and I'm hoping that he'll be given more to work with in the sequel.
Likewise, Anton Yelchin's Chekov was nothing but comic relief, with a few jokes on the accent and such. Yelchin does put his heart into the performance, staying true to Walter Koenig's campy Russian accent and being the exuberant youth at the navigation console.
John Cho isn't really given much to do as Sulu other than one cool fight sequence. It's hard to give a verdict on his performance.
Surprisingly, I found myself slightly disappointed with Leonard Nimoy's return as the future Spock. Mostly it was the portrayal I would have expected, with Spock even seeming like he had developed more since the last time we saw him. Unfortunately, there were simply a few lines that I felt were forced and those just kind of bugged me.
The special effects and sound are nothing short of amazing. From the opening shots of the battle between the Kelvin and the Narada to the ice planet monsters, this film looks and sounds positively incredible. I continually found myself in the theater thinking "Wow" at many of the effects shots.
Perhaps, though, the greatest achievement of all is the film's accessibility. My friend Megan was in the group I saw the film with tonight. She came in relatively fresh, with very little experience with Trek. I had had her watch the second, third, fourth, sixth and seventh films to kind of give her some background and a feel for the characters. She expressed it best when she said that it was a good enough movie that she thought anyone would like it, but it had enough nods to things she'd seen by watching other Trek that it made her feel like she was in the know. If this film can attract all the new fans that I think it could, then perhaps we'll get to watch more new Star Trek for years to come and, as a fan, that is wonderful.
Though, it's not that I didn't have some minor problems here and there with things. For one, I didn't care for the usage of Beastie Boys in one of the scene - I mean, the film already had such a great score in all the other scenes, couldn't they have used that? Also, the way Kirk jumps so high up in rank so quickly felt contrived and unrealistic. Some of the comedic scenes also got a little too ridiculous at times, feeling more slapstick than the usual dry humor found in the franchise. These problems, though, were not enough to ruin the film for me.

In the end, I definitely need to see it once, twice or maybe a third or fourth time more. But this is most definitely one of my new favorite Trek movies and it easily equals the caliber of The Wrath of Kahn,The Undiscovered Country and First Contact or even surpasses them. I haven't quite decided yet.

Star Trek is back. Or, to quote James T. Kirk at the end of the fourth film, "My friends, we've come home."

- Nate

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Clawing at Wolverine



Haha! I'm so clever with titles, aren't I?

(Warning, there will be some spoilers.)

So, last Friday I went off to see X-Men Origins: Wolverine with my good friend Megan. Admittedly I had fairly mixed expectations. I saw some of the trailers and set pics early on, thinking that it probably wasn't going to be that good of a movie. Then, after the famous Internet leak of a work-print, I heard a lot of positive buzz and I started to get excited. But then, but Thursday evening, I saw where the film's rating on RottenTomatoes.com was a pitiful 37%. So I really wasn't sure what to expect.
Wolverine ends up a film that starts fairly strong and then descends into cliche and some glaring logic problems.
The opening, an altered but relatively true to the comics take on the emergence of Wolverine (James Logan in the movie, though the character was originally named James Howlett in the Origin comic which this scene is taken from) was great. It's followed by a spectacular look at Logan and Victor Creed (later known as Sabretooth) as they fight through every major war from the Civil War until Vietnam during the opening credits. This sequence shows especially well how Logan and Victor start to grow apart based on their individual taste, or distaste in Logan's case, for violence and death. A montage used to show characterization is a somewhat rare thing in a film, so I appreciated its use.
After some scenes meant to get Logan and Victor on William Stryker's Team X, there is a fun action sequence where the members of Team X show off their talents. Ryan Reynolds shines here in his delivery of Wade Wilson (the future "Merc with a Mouth," Deadpool). Then some nice, if dragging, scenes with Logan working as lumberjack, putting his life behind him with a pretty wife.

And upon the death of that wife, it just goes downhill with a giant Hugh Jackman-yelled "NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!"

Literally, from that point, the film delves into cliche and horrible logic problems. As if the Episode III-Darth Vader-"Where's Padme?"-reaction at his wife's death wasn't enough, through the course of the film we see a 1964 Harley-Davidson with Wolverine atop bursting out of an exploding barn, that same motorcycle inexplicably survive direct hits from a .50 caliber machine gun, and a walk into the sunset near the end (though it does have a nice little twist).

The one thing that bothered me more than any was the glaring plot hole caused by Logan, Victor and Remy Lebau (Gambit). The film makes it clear that Gambit would like to see Victor dead. Logan, who also wants Victor dead, approaches Gambit for help but Gambit sees that Logan wears similar dog tags to Victor's and therefore doesn't trust him. Logan exits the building to find Victor. Gambit follows him out and his behind Logan when Logan elbows him the face, apparently knocking him out. Logan and Victor fight and just as Logan looks ready to finish Victor off... Gambit is suddenly running across the rooftops and jumps off and delivers a big kinetic shockwave to both Victor and Logan, preventing Logan from dealing the obvious death he was about to bestow on Victor. And then, Logan and Gambit both simply let Victor walk off after that.
How did Gambit suddenly get on the roof tops? No idea. Why did Gambit prevent the death of someone he wanted dead? No idea. Oh, and why did Logan just let Victor walk off? Again, no idea.

And let's not go into the mockery they made of the origins and powers of Deadpool, or the ridiculously useless boxing match between Logan and Blob, or the totally inaccurate depictions of Emma Frost and Silverfox (For one, those two aren't sisters!). Whereas many other Marvel comic films have managed to streamline the origins and cinematic translations of the characters with a fair amount of finesse, Wolverine is haphazardly done, as if a ten-year-old was sitting around saying "Wouldn't it be cool if Deadpool had laser eyes?!". The film breaks so far from the source material that it offends Marvel fans by default.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine, quite simply put, is a mess. I couldn't give anyone a recommendation to see it. Though, once it's on DVD, making a drinking game around it could be really fun - like every time there is a total logic problem, a cliche or a plot hole, you take a drink. Yep, that would get you hellaciously drunk.

- Nate

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Quantum of Solace (+Star Trek trailer)


Essentially an extended epilogue to Casino Royale, the new James Bond flick, Quantum of Solace, is heavier on action than the 2006 franchise reboot but not quite as engaging when it comes to characters.
From minute one, the audience is taken through the high-octane life of the 00 Agent as he tries to track down the mysterious organization that his love from the previous film, Vesper, was working for when she betrayed him and killed herself. Bond swears he's doing his duty, but the trail of bodies he leaves in his wake seems to prove otherwise.
I've been a big fan of the Bond movies since I first saw the Connery-era Diamonds Are Forever. I've always been especially appreciative of the Connery films because the character of Bond seems so much richer than the Bond we see in the days of Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan, in a world of ridiculous (though, admittedly, quite fun) gadgets and zero character consequences. So when Casino Royale came out, I was delighted to see a Bond film where Bond felt like a real man working in the real world with real consequences, to an even stronger degree than the early Connery films.
Quantum of Solace does feature these things, but I would say to a lesser degree than its predecessor. While Bond does have to grow and, in the end, get over the betrayal he felt from Vesper, I didn't see as much of that growth as I'd have liked. At points it seemed like false alarms, a friend (whom I won't reveal for the sake of anyone who hasn't seen it) dies in his arms and just when you think Bond is realizing what his actions are costing him, he turns around and leaves his friend's body in a dumpster, saying that he wouldn't care about it. Ultimately, we do have a satisfying emotional payoff, but the ending of this film simply wasn't as resounding as Casino Royale. Whereas in the first of these two films, we see Bond go from a somewhat eager new 00 Agent to the cold-hearted assassin that Ian Fleming made famous, we see Bond go from cold-hearted assassin to an even colder-hearted assassin.
The action scenes were also quite good, though a few of the action sequences seemed a bit contrived for this more realistic take on Bond. But, to be fair, none of those were too contrived, because I didn't even remember how contrived they were until I started this paragraph.
It was a hell of a ride and will still be an important chapter in the legacy of this new Bond (and, by the way, I like Daniel Craig in the role as much as I like Sean Connery). I'd say it didn't quite live up to the bar set by Casino Royale, but ultimately you still get a great film.

As for the trailer for JJ Abrams's Star Trek, a film I have already discussed at length on this blog... I don't know. I sincerely hope that the trailer is not indicative of the entire package. To me, Star Trek is about the characters. Yes, a Trek film needs its fair share of action, but the characters are supposed to come first. Look at Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn, Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country or Star Trek: First Contact. All three of these have a good blend of character and action, with a little humor, and are widely considered to be some of the best of the films. I realize the trailer is only two minutes of a two hour movie, but I hope JJ Abrams knows what he's doing. I'm still optimistic, but I'm also wary. As long as the spirit of Trek is preserved, and we get a good movie, I'll be happy.
One thing that worries me though: I live in a college town and there were a lot of my fellow college students in the theater. At the end of the trailer, I heard a fair amount of snickering. They had better get pretty creative with their marketing to entice my generation to go see this movie. There's still a bit of a social stigma assigned to people who are openly Trek fans. They need to make sure this looks like a movie that everyone is going to want to see, Trekkie or not.

- Nate

Friday, October 24, 2008

Thoughts on JJ Abrams' Star Trek

First, let me apologize for my lack of updates this week, my novel has been kicking my ass. But I've been kicking back these last few nights and have finally made enough headway to get on here and make some posts.

Second, let me put this out there. If you don't like it, stop reading this blog, because it'll probably be something you'll see a lot of.

I'm a
huge Star Trek fan. I even have this lovely white ringer t-shirt that simply says "trekkie" across the chest (Thanks goes to my sister on that one).

That being said, it's time to dive into my opinions on the upcoming Star Trek film. The re-pre-sequel-imagining-boot is directed by JJ Abrams (Mission: Impossible III, TV's Lost, Alias & Fringe) and will be released in theaters May 9th, 2009.
There are really two main camps within the Trek community when it c
omes to JJ's upcoming film. One faction is eagerly anticipating it and think a fresh take on Star Trek is welcome and needed if the 41-year-old franchise is going to endure. The other is claiming that this film constitutes heresy, because recasting the original Star Trek crew and re-imagining all of the series aesthetics, not to mention bringing the characters together chronologically before the original series goes against the story canon established in the franchise.
I fall more in with the first group. I've recognized that I'm a hell of a lot younger than the majority of Trek fans and that that group isn't going to last forever. I also recognize that it is the older fans who more frequently beat on the bible-that-is-canon and whose lack of support due to supposed "canon violations" caused the most recent Trek series, Enterprise (which had become an excellent series by the time it was canceled in its fourth season).
Plus, canon junkies should be satisfied that the writers, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, are such huge fans that they even went the extra mile of trying not to negate the storylines of the Star Trek novels published by Pocket Books. They're even canonizing some of the stuff from the books, like that Kirk's mother's name is Winona.
But because of insatiable canon junkies, Star Trek needs an infusion of fresh blood. The reason the original series has endured these forty years were because of its characters and the daring story lines. This was the series that featured the first televised interracial kiss. This was the series that had a black woman and a Russian as regular characters during the heights of the Civil Rights movement and the Cold War. It dared to challenge hatred and champion humanity in trying times. Hell, it was even reported to be one of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s favorite television shows. And right now, with America on the cusp of trying to decide where its society will take itself and the world watching in baited breath as we try to deal with economic and social problems that ultimately affect the entire world, we need Star Trek almost as badly as we did in the late 1960's.
I don't have high hopes that this film will be a riveting allegory on today's social problems and vices. If it is, I'll be vastly impressed and incredibly thankful that JJ Abrams could stay so close to the spirit of Trek. I imagine this will at least be a fun film and wi
ll hopefully be on par with the better Trek movies (Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn is widely considered to be one of the greatest sci-fi movies of all time, not just the best Trek movie).
My main hope for this film is that, with its big name stars (and hopefully excellent writing from Orci and Kurtzman), it will attract enough uninitiated film goers to the theaters that it can spark new life for Star Trek as a television series. I'm not looking for the cast of this movie to be in some kind of "New Adventures of Old Star Trek," since there's no way they could even get all these people to be regulars, not to mention that would negate canon and I'd prefer to see it preserved if possible, after watching hundreds of episodes from the different series. What I am looking for is something to carry the torch. If it were me, I'd create a new show, set in the 23rd century (Kirk's era), with the same design aesthetics as the film but with a new crew on a different ship. That way, it would be similar enough for new fans, who will hopefully be brought in by the movie, to feel comfortable with it. Plus it would open the possibility of guest roles by the actors from the film as their characters. Even better, the characters on this new ship can make references to the "current" adventures of Kirk and company here and there by mentioning events that happened in various Original Series episodes to create a more cohesive sense of canon for older fans. The best thing is, Bryan Fuller, one of the most underutilized writers to work on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise and also the creator of ABC's hit Pushing Daisies has been adamantly talking about wanting to create a new series very similar to this idea. I hope somebody at CBS-Paramount listens.

Now that I'm done talking about all that drivel, on to my reactions to some of the stills from the film that CBS-Paramount released last week.

First up, the most important of them - the crew on the bridge:

Okay, so this one I'm kind of ambivalent on. I don't really mind so much that they redesigned the bridge. In fact, they'd been warning us that they would. However, cast members and set visitors who happened to be big fans of the Original Series all kept saying how wonderful and true this set design is to the original. My immediate reaction was that this looks more like the bridge of the Apple iNterprise. But, on closer inspection, I saw that pretty much everything is where it's supposed to be, even the red railing, but most of it just has been covered in white, chrome and blue. Someone said it looked like someone barfed iPod on the bridge, and that's not completely inaccurate. However, that yeoman's station was not in the Original Series and is a blatant change in design. Here's hoping it sees the classic Exploding Console duty and is gone by the end of the movie.
The actors, on the other hand, look fantastic in this. I still have my doubts about Chris Pine (Bottle Shock) as Captain James Tiberius Kirk, but I admit, he definitely looks like he got into the character, just judging by the way he's sitting in that admittedly awesome-looking captain's chair. I have hope for him. Karl Urban (The Lord of the Ring
s, Doom) was another big question mark, especially as a fairly young New Zealander playing the grizzled Southerner: Doctor Leonard H. "Bones" McCoy. But in this image, it's like he's channelling DeForest Kelley, and I feel my doubts slipping away. I also took note that Kirk and Sulu - John Cho of Harold & Kumar fame - have shiners. Did they have a bar fight with some rowdy aliens? Or each other? I never had any doubts about Zachary Quinto (Heroes) as Spock, and he still looks great here.


Okay, so here we've got the entire Original Series crew, sans Spock. Again, Pine seems to have a bit of that Kirk groove to him, and Urban keeps looking better and better. I love Zoe Saldanya as Uhura - she's beautiful but still looks like she could make you feel like an elementary school kid with her smarts and charm. Uhura is supposed to be a strong female character, despite her relatively light duties in the Original Series, and I hope JJ's given her her due. Cho looks decent. I'm still pretty iffy on Anton Yelchin (
Charlie Bartlett) as Pavel Chekov. For one, the kid is younger than me, which doesn't seem right in the slightest, and he looks nothing like Walter Koenig. They didn't even bother to straighten the curls out of his hair. Simon Pegg, on the other hand, looks like he's going to be fantastic. Standing there in the background, the look on his face just screams "Ach, no. I cannae do it, Cap'n. It'll cause too much harm to me wee baerns!" Other than his hairline being a little too high, I'm sure Pegg is going to be an excellent Montgomery "Scotty" Scott.

So this is our villain, Nero, played by Eric Bana (
Munich, Troy). This dude appears to be some kind of Romulan renegade. It was with this picture that we got some story details (which everyone already knew anyone, but hadn't had confirmed). Nero is apparently from the 24th century, not long after the events of Star Trek: Nemesis, which left the Romulan political structure in ruins. If Orci & Kurtzman were looking to the novels, the Romulan Empire is even split into two seperate states by this point. Apparently, Nero and his cronies have a plot to go back in time to kill Kirk, which causes 24th century Spock, played by Leonard Nimoy from the Original Series, to go back in time to stop them.
I gotta say, he looks pretty bad ass. And anybody who has seen
Munich nows that Eric Bana's got some serious acting chops. Here's hoping this is aTrek villain on par with Ricardo Montalban's Kahn Noonien Singh or Christopher Plummer's General Chang.


WTF? No, seriously, what's going on? Spock is choking Kirk? Most illogical. Zachary Quinto has said that Spock is not as in control of his emotions at this point though, so I guess this is a glimpse. I'm glad they included the subtle green tint to his skin. And apparently, this is public, cause that looks like the bridge. It also looks like the top of McCoy's head there by Kirk's chin. He has witnesses, so maybe Kirk should file charges?

This is the USS
Kelvin (an in-joke JJ Abrams puts in his movies, since his grandfather's name was Kelvin). Though not the Enterprise, it is a Starfleet ship and should give us an idea of what to expect from the full view of the Big E. It's very reminiscent of the Original Series, but it has sharper detail that reminds me of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. I'm satisfied.

And that's it for my
Star Trek ramblings. I felt those were the pictures really worth commenting on, so there you go.

I'll try to get you guys my weekly recommendations tomorrow.

Live Long and Prosper, for my fellow Trekkies.