Honestly, I don't know what happened to this series. It started off promising and then fell off a cliff real fast.

To recap, in 2000, the first Final Destination movie directed by James Wong was released. It was a fun piece of mainstream horror and while not great, it was still pretty darned entertaining. It was followed by a sequel a few years later, directed by David Ellis, which is not only my favourite movie in the series, but I'd even put it up there with some of my favourite horror movies in general. It was funny, campy, and the kills were gory and creative. Not only that, but the story took a unique approach to connecting with the first movie. It was a solid package all around and a great popcorn horror movie. Then came the 3rd movie with the returning Wong, which was not so great. With this 4th movie, I had high hopes going in. You see, it was directed by Ellis who had a strong showing in the 2nd and plus it was going to be in full-length 3D, what could go wrong?

Well, a lot of things. This movie isn't a reboot to the franchise, I think it's still considered the 4th movie in sequence, but I guess the big wigs didn't wanna stick a 4 at the end, instead they opted to stick the word "THE" to the beginning instead. It's as if they're telling you the other movies you saw may have been Final Destination movies, but this one is THE Final Destination movie.

The movie follows a group of young pretty looking people at a stock car racing show. The main dude gets this premonition of a huge car crash and a crapload of people dying, so he and his friends bolt out as well as others by accident. Anyhow, the premonition becomes true, killing dozens and dozens of people, but the survivors find themselves picked off by death one by one. Death is following its design.

So what I did like was that a lot of the kills were still fun. The first "real" death had me laugh out loud, and so I thought we were headed for a happy place for the rest of the movie. Basically, they insert a Rube Goldberg device into a scene and at the end of it, you get your kill.

I would have been fine with the story if the main dude didn't utter a piece of thought in the last scene of the movie. I'm not going to say what he said, but basically if what he said were true, then it just destroys the whole idea and premise of the previous three movies. Knowing this little last bit of detail sort of ruins any semblance of hope we have for any of the characters of this and past movies. In fact, I would have totally been okay with this movie were it not for this last minute. Way to go!

Also, you know a movie is going to be cheesy when the actors in the movie look like other actors. For instance, the main dude looks like a cross between James Franco and Joseph Gordon Levitt, his best friend looks like a mix between Chris Evans and an 80's teen comedy heart-throb, and the two girls look like generic attractive girls. The best part is that there's a security guard character that tries to help them unravel the mystery behind the deaths and he looks like Bubba Gump from Forrest Gump! Wait, let me IMDB this... well smack me silly and call me Susie, IT IS BUBBA GUMP! What a career!

If I had to rank the series right now, from best to worst, I'd go 2, 1, 4, 3. This is a skippable movie and with so much good horror movies released this year, you're not missing anything if you choose to pass on this. Til next time, later geeks!





Categories: final destination , horror , movies

Today was the first in the Reconstruction of Christmas series at FreeChurch Toronto. David McGhee, a former pastor at FreeChurch (Freedomize), kicked things off with a message on Gathering. The artsy peeps did a tremendous job of decorating the place for the occasion. Below are a few pics.





Categories: christianity , christmas , freechurch toronto

After watching 10 minutes of The House of the Devil, I had to do a double take and almost stopped the movie completely. You see, the movie was so eerily similar to Babysitter Wanted that I thought I was watching the same movie.

House tells the story of a young college girl named Samantha who accepts a babysitter ad she saw on campus. She gets to the house with her friend Megan and slowly, things start to get creepy. They arrive at the house to find a certain Mr. and Mrs. Ulman who confess that they don't have a child for Sam to babysit... but rather they need her to babysit their mother. The creepiness factor tips the scale and Sam is reluctant to take the job, but Mr. Ulman offers her $400 dollars to do it because it was of the utmost importance. So $400 for four hours, what could go wrong? Need I mention that this particular night is a full and total eclipse, what could possibly happen?

Like I said, the movie is very similar to Babysitter Wanted, but whereas Babysitter built to a twist in the story, House opted for a more gradual and suspenseful approach to a mystery that we the audience know for sure exists. The movie turns it up a notch once the veil of secrecy is removed. What makes it frightening is that during certain scare scenes, we'll see single frames of demonic faces so that these frightening images are burnt into our subconscious. It is sort of cheap and we've seen it before, but it works.

I love the look and feel of this movie. It takes place sometime during the 70-80's and does a great job of capturing that atmosphere even on its limited budget. Even the opening credits are presented in a cheap 70's style.

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the performance of Jocelin Donahue, who played Samantha. She's hands down the cutest girl ever to grace horror movie screens. She's simply great in that innocent college girl role. What sealed the deal was a montage in the middle of the movie where she listens to her walkman (remember those?) and runs around the house doing a wacky dance and just having fun by herself. And I guess she was effective in her role; the cuter she grew the more I didn't want bad things to happen to her. And really, that's the role of the damsel in distress right?

Another surprise was Tom fuckin' Noonan! He plays Mr. Ulman in this movie, but I haven't seen this guy since the early 90's, in Robocop 2 as Cain the nuke addicted drug lord and from Last Action Hero as the Ripper. This was a welcomed surprise and I'm glad he's still doing movies these days.

I can't decide if I like this movie more than Babysitter Wanted. For sure this was a better put together movie, but I did like Babysitter a lot because it was campier (and I do love me some cheese!) and took me by surprise as I had no idea what I was in for. Maybe I like them both equally but for different reasons. I don't know. I just can't decide.

But for sure I really enjoyed this movie and maybe that's good enough! Later gore-hound-geeks!





(Note: If you wanted to see the similarities, the trailer for Babysitter Wanted is [here].)

Categories: dtv madness , horror , house of the devil , movies

It's time for another edition of Review Haikus; a feature I like to write when I'm too lazy to write out full reviews~!!!

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

Tony Scott schlockfest~!
All his movies seem the same.
A needless remake.

Denzel's a bad-ass.
Given up on Travolta.
1 of 2 ain't bad.






Public Enemies

Well? Disappointed.
I expected more from Mann.
The pacing felt off.

Acting was good though.
Man-crush on Depp and Bale.
5 more syllables!






Saw VI

Yes, another Saw.
Harder to tell them apart.
Blood, guts, bad story.

Why more Saw movies?
Each movie makes less and less.
End this series now.





======

Later geeks!

Categories: movies , public enemies , review haikus , saw , taking of pelham 123

Continuing with my Campaign of Cheapness, I finished reading Adland by James P. Othmer this past week at Chapters. I picked it up not knowing anything about it but I knew two things: a.) I wanted to read a book that was somewhat related to business and/or economics and b.) it was on a display shelf, so I figured it had some sort of notoriety.

Last year on a trip to New York, me and my friends took a ferry tour of the upper bay in Manhattan. The tour was led by a fast-talking witty young man, chock full of jokes and fun facts about the Big Apple. One of his trivia questions to us was, "what's New York City's biggest industry?". We threw out guesses and if I recall correctly, we guessed the top 2nd to 5th biggest ones, but we couldn't figure out that 1st one. After leaving us stumped for a while, he finally revealed that, yes, the advertising industry was the largest.

Those of you who know me or have been reading my blog for a while know that I'm an engineering grad, so the advertising field is something I'm totally unfamiliar with. After reading this book, I feel a bit more learned about this field and for sure, I feel more respect for those people in this field of work.

Ads are an interesting thing. To me, they're the perfect blend between art and business. If you bend too far in the direction of art, the purpose of trying to sell a product might get loss. However, bend too far in the direction of business, and you risk losing the viewer's interest. I think that's why my brain just shuts off whenever there's one of those paid advertisement's on TV; it just doesn't pique my interest in a creative way (Snuggie, I'm looking in your direction).

In Adland, Othmer attempts to paint a picture of the advertising industry; from the past to the present and with insight into the future of the industry. He shares with us his experience in the industry after having been there for several decades. Not knowing what to do at a young age, he sort of fell into the industry rather than choosing it. He first started out in a small company, but over decades, worked his way through some of the world's largest and reputed advertising firms (at the time). But a strange thing happened. After the year 2000 hit, the industry was turned on its head. Some of the world's largest ad firms, institutions in the industry, were dying out. These were firms that stood tall for decades on out, why would they die? The culprit: the internet. Old structures and old management just couldn't keep up with the digital direction that everyone else was going in. Nowadays, instead of large advertising agencies dominating the industry, it's now smaller and younger upstart agencies (dubbed Idea Factories) that are getting all the business. The traditional ways of doing advertising (TV, radio, print) wasn't cutting it anymore, and at these Idea Factories, there were less restrictions, allowing ideas that were outside of the box to hit the real world.

One of the biggest trends right now is the concept of viral marketing. It's an intriguing way of involving the audience or demographic in the advertising process. Think back to 2007, when the hype started building for the newest Batman movie, The Dark Knight, due for release the following summer. They had geeks scour the internet for fake websites leading to real world scavenger hunts to solve puzzles and dress in costume (as part of Joker's crew) before they hit the San Diego Comic-Con. They did similar things in key markets and actually my brother solved a puzzle and got to see a 15 minute secret screening a year before the movie was released (damn him! But I wasn't in Toronto at the time). And all of this non-traditional marketing was cleverly developed by a young freethinking company called 42 Entertainment.

A more recent example would be for the movie Paranormal Activity. Paramount only released this movie into a handful of theaters at first. They created an internet campaign, asking fans to "Demand It!" in their city and after I think 1 million fans demanded it, the movie would be receive a nationwide release. The hype built up by word of mouth and it did (or is doing) bonkers at the box office.

One of the stories that stood out for me was on his visit to this young and successful ad agency (I forget the name of the company). He had a discussion with one of the key creative members on what's the next big thing that they're trying to crack. Interestingly enough, the gentleman replied that they're trying to develop an advertising model within the game World of Warcraft (a game that I was addicted to for 2.5 years). They're looking for a way to integrate advertising within the game's seamless world. It's all speculation at this point and obviously from the player perspective, there would be a huge vocal backlash against such a doing, but having thought about it from the business standpoint, it does make sense. Here's a game that advertises 10 million active subscribers worldwide playing everyday, and not just for mere minutes, once you're in the game, you stay for hours.

I could go on and on, but that would defeat the purpose of reading the book. If you wanted a nice, humourous read on the advertising industry, you can't go wrong with Adland. It's a good read, especially for n00bs like me. Until next time, later geeks!

Categories: adland , books , campaign of cheapness , james p. othmer

I think I went into this series with the wrong impression. See, with a title like Wolverine Origins you think that you'd get an origin story or a young Wolverine going through his adolescent age to becoming a young man journeying into adulthood. Well, if you're like me, then you'd be quite mistaken.

Written by Daniel Way, Wolverine Origins is actually more of a present day storyline following Logan as he discovers elements of his past. We discover that Wolverine and an American soldier named Nuke were responsible for a village massacre during the Vietnam war, both who were under the influence of the government at the time. With help from Emma Frost (a telepath), it's revealed that Wolverine had a son, who he thought was dead since childhood. His son, Daken, is not only alive and well, but is angry and seeks to kill his own father. That's basically the first 15 issues in a nutshell, but of course I'm missing several elements.

Well, needless to say, I didn't enjoy the first 3 story arcs. Like I said before, I was hoping for an actual origin storyline that took place in times past. And on top of that, it just broke the character of Wolverine for me, knowing that he was/is a father. I'm trying not to be a fanboy about the whole deal, but I just can't help it. I think adding this new element to his character changes his mythos a bit too much. I mean, imagine you find out that Batman once had a son. Wouldn't it be like a big 'what the fuck?' and not in a good way?

I was quite surprised to find that Steve Dillon did the art for these issues. When I started reading this series, I had just finished reading Preacher which Dillon also worked on. Of all the comic book series out there, I just happened to pick two series back to back with the same artist. But having finished reading Preacher and this many issues of Wolverine Origins, I feel more comfortable in commenting on his art work. I thought his style of drawing worked fine for Preacher but it just didn't click with me on Wolverine. Dillon opted for a more realistic style which didn't fit with the way I imagined Wolverine; the stout yet overly muscled mutant. The more realistic style I suppose is influenced by the movie version of Wolverine; a more proportional and human style of drawing him. Having said that though, much like in Preacher, he makes the violence look real, bloody and brutal, not the more cartoonish kind you'd find in the other X-Men series, which I did appreciate.

Anyhow, in the end, I wasn't totally enamored with this series. I guess it wasn't the story I was expecting to read. I might venture a few issues further to see where things go, but beyond that, I might just drop this series. That's all for now, later geeks!

Categories: comics , marvel , superheroes , wolverine

I don't know if it's a good or bad thing but today I watched Public Enemies, a film by Michael Mann with the likes of Johnny Depp and Christian Bale and later I watched The Tournament, a DTV lower budget action movie. For whatever reason, I enjoyed the latter more. I guess it appealed more to my primal sensibilities. Although The Tournament was produced on a low budget, it was still a higher low budget movie than your usual fare.

I think this movie is as close to an American version of Battle Royale that we're going to get. Basically every 7 years there's a tournament held by all the big wigs and high rollers that pit 30 different killers together in a last man standing battle. The winner is awarded $10 million dollars. The tournament lasts 24 hours and at that time, if there is no winner, then a tracking device lodged inside their bodies would explode, killing them in the process (just like Battle Royale!).

There's all sorts of wacky killers in this movie, from your straight up martial arts experts, to gun toting muscle men and even a parkour enthusiast. Amongst all these ruffians is a priest, who is not a killer, but gets tangled in this mess of a tournament by drinking the wrong cup of coffee (I kid you not, how awesome is that). Aside from that, the movie is a top to bottom action spectacular. The style of action is definitely a throwback to that 80s style of action. The exploding bodies and heads were much appreciated by this author. There's also an awesome montage scene in the middle of the movie as a fast forward way of cutting down the ranks of those still alive in the tournament.

I have no doubt that if this movie were released in the 80s during the action movie boom period, that it would have done bonkers at the box office. It's unfortunate that the standards for theatrical run movies have changed so much that movies like this wouldn't stand a chance.

Also, don't let the generic movie title fool you, there are actually some mainstream celebrities in this movie including Ving Rhames (Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within), Robert Carlyle (28 Weeks Later) and the foxy yet somehow aged 41, Kelly Hu (Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan). Rhames does a great job of playing a heartless Terminator-like killer while Carlyle does a great job as the sympathetic priest. Hu, probably the weakest of the three, is great when she's fighting, but in speaking parts, they make her use this fake-assed chinese accent when speaking english and it is purely dreadful (note: she is not pure Chinese).

If you watched Spike TV the past 2 weeks or so then you probably saw TV spots for this movie. It's nice that movies like this get some sort of advertising so that they don't completely disappear into the ether of the Blockbuster Video shelves.

This movie comes highly recommended if you want some mindless action! Until next time, later geeks!





Categories: action , dtv madness , movies , the tournament

I missed The Inglorious Basterds during its theatrical run and it's a shame too because I'm a fool for Tarantino movies. But I finally got to see it this weekend and I'm happy to say that I mostly enjoyed it. I don't think it's his best movie, but it was damned entertaining.

The Inglorious Basterds takes place during World War II and tells its story by following three different groups of characters: from Lt. Aldo Raine and his squad of soldiers infamously known as the Basterds, Col. Hans Landa, a Nazi colonel better known as "The Jew Hunter", and from a young Jewish girl named Shosanna, who had her family murdered by Col. Landa. We follow the Basterds in their Nazi killing business (and business is good) as they lay out a plan to take out several high ranking officials all at once. We follow Shosanna as she operates her theater and lays down her own plans in exacting revenge on the Nazis. And of course, the "Jew Hunter" is hot on their trails.

What gives the movie life is how Tarantino knits together these long drawn out scenes where almost nothing happens except sharp dialogue between characters; a trademark of his films. The opening scene really shows us what we're in for. We have Col. Lando and a french farmer sitting down and just talking about their lives. At the same time we know something is wrong but we're not sure what and it's not until late into the scene that the reveal happens. There's another scene that takes place in a basement bar in France which is to be the rendezvous point for several of the undercover Basterds. Over and over, they try to talk plans, but continue to get interrupted. We can see the face of one of the Basterds, Hugo Stiglitz, specifically how it changes as the tension builds and builds.

That's what I like about Tarantino, he demands patience out of his viewers. He caught a lot of slack from the fanboy community in Deathproof because it was "slow" and not as in your face as Robert Rodriguez's Plant Terror. But between the two, I actually thought Deathproof was a better put together movie and it was because of the slow sequences of dialogue that made me connect to the movie.

I like how Tarantino intentionally takes liberties with history. The best example of this is the sequence at the theater. I won't spoil it, but it is a bloody good bath of a scene, easily my favourite scene of the movie and will probably remain as one of the most memorable scenes from movies in general.

As of now, it's number #47 on IMDB's top rated movies, pretty darned high. It was a pretty awesome movie, but it could have been more awesomer. The problem I had with the movie was that they didn't take enough time to build to the legend that was the Inglorious Basterds team. There was only one sequence that showed why they were so infamous to the Nazis. I wish there were more scenes to solidify their iconic status, both within the film's context and cinema in general. For example, "The Bear Jew" who was introduced as an almost mythical hero known for beating Nazi heads in with a baseball bat. But we were only shown him doing this once, weakening the legend that he supposedly is. The same goes for Aldo Raine.

Actually, now looking back on it, we weren't given enough time with the Basterds to develop that connection with the characters. I think there were 7 or 8 of them in the band, but half of them weren't even introduced and were offed quickly, before we even got to know them.

With only one and a half months left in the year, time is becoming tight and my top 10 list for the year is still short by 5 movies. I'm tempted to slide this in to make it 6, but I just don't feel it's of the top notch quality to hit the list. If I had an 'honorable mentions' list, surely this would make that. We'll see. It's been sort of a shitty year for movies, at least for me.

Until next time, adieu geeks!




Categories: drama , inglorious basterds , movies , quentin tarantino

In lieu of the release of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 this week I just wanted to do a small review of the first Modern Warfare game. I guess that's the problem with adopting a new system in the middle of its shelf life; I'm playing catch-up with all of the big releases over the recent years. Buy hey, I'm not complaining. I welcome all lower price tags!

COD4: Modern Warfare originally came out in the Fall of 2007 and was touted as the best shooter (at least on console systems). The game has you playing as Sergeant 'Soap' McTavish who together with a squad of soldiers, travel around the world tracking down a terrorist named Zakhaev. Most of the levels you'll go through are "desert" levels of Middle Eastern cities, but you also get to travel around parts of Russia. The story is told basically only in the segments between each of the levels. For me, the story wasn't the strong point, it definitely has a cinematic feel to it, but let's face it, you're playing Call of Duty to shoot shit up, not for the story. And its in the action where this game excels.

So far, I've completed the single player campaign on normal, easy, and I'm 2 missions away from beating the game on Veteran difficulty (the hardest one available). On normal difficulty, the campaign is quite short, needing only 7 hours to complete it. Let me say that playing on Veteran required a ton of patience. While the bad guys were planting all sorts of bombs, I found that I was equally dropping as many F-bombs. I'd have to take breaks and have meditation sessions just to clear my head of all the cuss words going through my head.

Multiplayer is where this game thrives. If you look around online, you'll often find articles of people buying the game and just going straight to the multiplayer mode, never touching the single player campaign. And who can blame them, it has an addictive system built into it. Basically you start off with only a limited amount of weapons to choose from. As you gain more experience points by killing opponents or achieving map objectives, you'll unlock new weapons and perks that you can customize into 5 slots. The perks are extremely handy granting you anything from stat boosts to extra ammo for your weapons. The maximum level that you can achieve on multiplayer is 55 and right now I'm at 25. My kpd started at a measly 0.30 when I first started, but has slowly climbed to 0.45. Not great, but I'm getting better. Those damned kids are just too much. Funny thing is, I never get pissed when I get owned in multiplayer. My frustration never goes beyond "what the hell! I shot you first!" compared to the "!##%$ #$^%%$& #$^%#$*^ $(%^*#($^ #$%#$%*" that you'd hear if you saw me playing the single player campaign. I guess I can accept that players are better than me, but not the computer. The Lam > Computer.

Anyhow, that's all. I'm guessing if you have an Xbox 360 you've not only played this, but you're probably in the middle of pwning in MW2 right now. Later geeks!

Categories: call of duty , gaming , shooters , xbox 360

When I first read Eric Schlosser's Fast Food Nation, the stories he told of the fast food industry made me so disgusted that it threw me off of fast food for a good 3 or 4 months. So it was with some trepidation when I watched in Food, Inc. knowing that Schlosser had produced it... because... well I just couldn't go off of all food for 3 to 4 months.

Food Inc. manages to cover a wide range of topics related to the food industry in an attempt to unravel the insidious and corrupt aspects of the business. We're shown how more and more of all the food products we see in the supermarkets are controlled by fewer and fewer companies. Often on food labelling, we'll see pictures of farms or farmers, yet the food in reality is produced at factories, not farms at all. The great irony. Perhaps one of the most sickening sights we see is at a chicken house operated under the Perdue company. We see how chickens are mass produced and how many of them often die because they can't keep up with their own accelerated growth.

One of the most heartbreaking stories is in the middle of the movie, where we learn of how a 2 year old boy died of E. Coli contracted from a hamburger that he ate. He died within 12 days of contracting the disease. We see how both the Republican and Democratic representatives push for a bill that requires the meat industry to do more stringent health and safety tests, but the stumbling block is one of the court judges... who was at one time a lobbyist for the beef industry.

Like other movies of this nature, the end of the movie is like a call to arms, empowering the viewers to do their part in supporting the clean food production cause. I really recommend this movie to everyone. It's a subject matter that virtually everyone can relate to, given that we all need to eat and we all want to be safe doing so. So check it out if you get the chance! Later geeks!

(Note to Beka: you'd love this movie.)





Categories: documentary , eric schlosser , food inc. , movies

You know, I try to avoid writing music reviews if I can. To this date, I think I've done zero reviews, only concert reports. I just find it difficult to review music. I find it's a whole different beast than reviewing a movie, where it's more clear whether it's good or bad. With music, to me whether you like a band/genre or not, relies more heavily on your preference. So even though I don't like country or techno, I can't say they're bad because I don't regularly listen to them and therefore, have no grounds to say whether they are any good. But I was listening to this album this week and it caught me off guard, so I decided to do a little write up.

Which brings us to Say Anything's latest album, the self-titled Say Anything released this past Tuesday. I'm not a huge Say Anything fan, just a casual fan. Every now and then I'll fancy a listen to Is a Real Boy, but aside from that I don't really follow them.

The album opens up with a track called "Fed to Death". At first, lead singer Max Bemis' vocals and acoustic guitar hit us with an up-tempo anthem that seemingly is about a gruesome death in Allentown. A third of the way through this track, the full band kicks in and the tone changes as he sings about how the war has perversed Jesus. Heavy stuff! It's then followed by "I Hate Everyone", the Clash-esque single very much in the same catchy vain as "I Fought the Law". This leads into "Do Better" which goes for a more digital beat mixed in with some strings. The rest of the album is quite dynamic and nuanced, mixing several different genres into each song. It makes their style of music is hard to describe. At their roots, they're an emo-esque pop punk band but at the same time, they're experimental, often incorporating different instruments and even digital tracks besides the traditional guitars and drums. Though there is an evident pop punk catchiness, it isn't the sugary-coated type like All Time Low or Boys Like Girls, but is rather sharper and smarter in their lyrics, all while retaining the same types of hooks.

The story of Bemis is quite an interesting one. Bemis suffers from bipolar disorder which led to quite a turbulent lifestyle in the past; one that jeopardized the band a few times. He's struggled with drug abuse, to which he was treated for at a rehab center. The past year has been a revival of sorts, where things seemed to have picked up; including getting married (to Sherri Dupree of Eisley fame) and becoming a Christian (he was raised Jewish). In fact, a common theme throughout the album is on Jesus and following His way. You might not think so because of his bluntness with language, but I think that's what helps me connect to this album. A man after my own heart.

Anyhow, that's pretty much it. If you're interested in hearing something different but not too far out there, then check it out. It's mostly harmless. Yay! Later geeks!

Track listing:
1. Fed To Death
2. Hate Everyone
3. Do Better
4. Less Cute
5. Eloise
6. Mara and ME
7. Crush'd
8. She Won't Follow You
9. Cemetary
10. Property
11. Death For My Birthday
12. Young, Dumb and Stung
13. Ahhh... Men



(I should note that my favourite album of the year is fun.'s Aim and Ignite even though I didn't write a review for it. But thinking about it, maybe I should in the near future.)

Categories: music , music albums , say anything

Welcome to another installment of DTV Madness!!! This time we take a look at Wrong Turn 3 and Bachelor Party in the Bungalow of the Damned. Both are horror movies and that's about where the similarities end.

Wrong Turn 3

I saw the first Wrong Turn when it originally came out for a theatrical run and I quite enjoyed it thanks to the gory effects, Eliza Dushku *drool*, and Jeremy Sisto. Somewhere between then and now, Wrong Turn 2 was released. I never saw it or even knew it existed, but it's out there apparently. So I saw Wrong Turn 3: Left For Dead last week and actually had a pretty good time with it.

There's not much to the plot (well, it is a horror movie). Basically a busload of convicts are being transferred from one prison to another. On their voyage, the bus gets runoff the road and taken down by the mountain men that dwell in the forest. From then on, it becomes a survival story but the mountain men are watching... and are hungry.

The story is as predictable as it gets, but what really made the movie work for me was all the gore, blood, and the inventive kills. From the opening sequence where a bunch of campers and a buxom young lass get dispatched, we know that we're in for a wild ride. The practical effects and even the CG blood effects are pretty well done. The incestuous mountain men look pretty hilarious but not as good as the ones from the first Wrong Turn as I recall. These ones look basically like a mix between Gollum from Lord of the Rings and the hillbillies from Deliverance.

Although this was a low budget DTV movie, I should note that it was backed by Fox Home Video, so it's of the high low-budget caliber of movies. It probably explains why the gore and blood were done so well. It even had TV spots 2 weeks ago advertising its release which surprised me.

It's out on video now so feel free to rent it if you're bored on a Friday night.


Bachelor Party in the Bungalow of the Damned

Honestly, if you know of a movie with a better movie title than this, then I'd like to hear it. This is likely one of the best titles I've ever heard for a movie. Well, now that I got the good aside, let me get to the bad. THIS MOVIE WAS SHIT!!#$%#$#%#$!!$!!!

What a waste of time! I've said it before. Most of the time when you venture into the DTV territory, you've gotta be prepared to watch some shit, because 9 times out of 10, that's what you're going to get. After watching this movie, I feel as though I were served shit as an appetizer, given a shit entree, capped off with some sweet shit for the desert. Point being: I was given shit the whole time.

Yes, the movie was that bad and yes, it was made on a super low budget. But that's not an excuse. I've seen a ton of low budget movies and I've seen that they can be good. It's not an impossibility.

Oh yeah, I didn't even get to talk about the movie yet. Well fuck this movie!!!!!!!!!!! I was in such a good mood before writing this review. Now I feel like I'm full of anger and vitriol.

Okay. Breathe Jeff, breathe. 3... 2... 1...

I'm in a happy place. Clouds. Rainbows. Fluffy sheeps.

I'm calm again. But that's not enough to get me to talk about this movie. Heed my warning my friends, heed my warning. Later geeks.







Categories: bachelor party in the bungalow of the damned , dtv madness , horror , movies , wrong turn 3

I was reading John 13 last week in an attempt to catch up with my devotionals and its funny how sometimes you want to do one thing, but you discover something else.

At the time of reading, verse 21 stuck out to me where it says that Jesus was troubled in spirit. After reading the whole thing, I took a shower and was just reflecting on the passage that I had just read. Even though my mind was focused on that one line (and how unfathomable is it, just the thought of God being troubled), my head started thinking more about earlier in the scripture, specifically the story of how Jesus washed the feet of his disciples.

Whenever I read this scripture, the take home for me is always on servant leadership. You have Jesus our Lord, bringing Himself down to our level to perform one of the most menial acts: washing someone else's feet. He said to His disciples that if He being our Lord could bring Himself to do this, that we should learn from His example, and do this for each other. So He does all this and also reminds them that no servant is greater than his master.

To recap, not only did he perform such a humbling service, but He did it in the most humbling manner possible... bare-freaking-naked. He stripped down all of His clothes and only wrapped a towel around His waist. He used a towel specifically because He needed something to dry off the feet of His disciples, so it's quite possible that He wasn't even concerned about covering His junk.

Anyhow, that was a digression, moving on. I finished showering and decided to dig a little deeper just to find out more about this scripture.

It's interesting to note that of all the body parts Jesus could have washed, only the feet were of His concern. Jesus did this to purify us, cleanse our soul, before the presence of God. The feet are significant because it's the washing away of all the "dirt and crap" that gathers while we walk through this world of sin.

Peter requested that if He was going to wash him, that He should also wash his hands and head. But Jesus knew it wasn't necessary because it was already accomplished. If we are truly His, then we are born again and our bodies are cleansed by the Word; it doesn't need to be done over and over (just as we aren't baptized more than once). But our feet always need washing as they get dirty every day when we sin.

At the time, before the priests officially began their service in the tabernacles, they were fully washed at their ordinations. Their bodies would be fully bathed, then their hands and feet. The washing was never repeated because they were spiritually renewed by the Word and it was not necessary to repeat it. Whenever the priests engaged in any activity that drew them closer to God, they would prepare themselves by washing their hands and feet, but never their whole body.

Much like the priests, we as followers of Christ need to wash our feet continually, and like them, we don't need to be washed all over again. When we do so, we do it everyday to cleanse off the guilt that builds and to wash off everything that makes us unclean. So the next time you go to God, make sure you show Him how dirty your feet are.

Later geeks!

(Note 1: in finding a picture for this post, just about 99% of them have Jesus fully clothed when it clearly states in the scripture that He takes them off.)

(Note 2: if you want an almost equally humbling experience, play Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare online. There's nothing like getting your ass handed to you by 12 year olds. It definitely puts you in your place.)

Categories: christianity , jesus , religion