The Billionty-Oneth Geek

Gaming and God: An Ongoing Conversation With My Pastor (Part 3)

2012-01-23T22:35:00.000-05:00

Welcome to the 3rd edition of of Gaming and God. A lot has happened between now and when we exchanged the below emails (which has approximately a 9 month gap... :).

Since then, Matt has moved on from our church community (here) in Toronto to settle down more at home, in his hometown of Hamilton. He's living happily and finding new ways to serve God closer to home. Try as it may, but distance can't hamper the relationship of two gamers! I was telling a friend this past weekend about our continued correspondence, and how it's special for me because I have few friends that share a similar upbringing as Matt and I, who grew up gaming and respecting it to a point of discussion. We've continued to exchange our letters to each other on gaming and how it is in our lives. It's sort of interesting reading these emails in retrospect. It's only been a few months, yet so much has changed.

If you want some context, you can find part 1 of the series (here) and part 2 (here).

My Response Letter to Matt:

Hey Matt,

Good words and questions on that last letter. Definitely stuff to think about and discuss further too.

In thinking about all this gaming and how God plays into the whole scenario, I’ve come across a mental and spiritual conundrum. The conflict is where I am using the Bible to justify my life, or is the Bible a justification of my life? I think at any point if I use the Bible to justify what I’m doing instead of the other way around, then I’m veering off the wrong end. So I'm trying to keep this in mind when replying.

I agree with how you prefer the shorter bursts of cinematic experiences nowadays. Especially now, when time seems so short, this approach seems like the most fitting approach even for myself (for the time being anyways). I find that most games (certainly not all) are following this trend, giving you an 8-10 hour single player campaign, and if included, a multiplayer option to extend the experience. But to be perfectly honest, I’m not really liking that trend. For me, such a short campaign only brings that much gratification; it’s like a quick fix. But it’s usually not enough time for me to connect with the story and characters. Just like Michael Bay movies. High action, low plot, quick fix. But how is that good?

One of the things that I totally agree with is the way you described games as an amalgamation of different facets of art; visually, musically, narratively. You’re allowed to be in the thick of it all. But over the past year, I’ve been wondering, is creativity dying in the gaming field? It seems as though all the biggest titles marketed and sold are shooters. Story and narrative seem to take a backseat to all the flashy lights, sounds and explosions. This is starting to sound analogous to Hollywood movies nowadays. Hmm. An ‘expression of creativity’ is one of the main points I want to give towards gaming, but as more shooters are being pumped out each year, it seems harder to merit this.

And for this reason is why I did enjoy Bioshock. Though a shooter, the world was small as you said, but I thought it was stylistic, unique and something different not offered before at least through a gaming medium. The narrative direction and twists were what really captivated me, and I haven’t really witnessed this in any other shooters I’ve played. I got the same sort of feeling as I did whenever I watch a movie and they throw in a good twist. And on some level, I’d like to attribute that to good characters and dialogue. If you’re referring to the main character, I can see your point, but then a question arises: does there exist a first person shooter with a compelling main character? I’m trying to think of one instance of an FPS with a well developed main character, but none come to mind. I think it’s the fact that you never see the character and that they rarely talk that affects this.

But it brings back the question, how can gaming be pleasing to God? Is it even possible?

Are the only games that are satisfying, ones with rich and deep stories with well-rounded characters? If so, then what about social or casual games? Is there any value to a Bejeweled or Farmville or almost any iPhone game?

I mentioned to you on Sunday about my current playthrough of the first Assassin’s Creed. Because of the repetitiveness of the missions and a weak narrative (in my opinion), the game seemed like nothing more than a glorified casual game. I was doing the same thing over and over with no clear gains to my character. Our conversation definitely weighed on me as I was working my way through the game.

Knowing that joy is a God given gift, is it not enough if gaming brings one joy? I know the counter argument is that other things (and less expensive things) can bring joy, and maybe even bad things can bring joy (crack addicts must enjoy crack right?... not that they must… or that they should). I agree with what you say, there is more “out there”. But what does ‘more’ even mean? Is joy not joy? As you said, the key is “to find, create and enjoy other kinds of satisfaction the world has to offer”, but moreover, could this not be done while still including the gaming factor within. Is it necessary to cut it all out? This alludes back to early on in the conversation where things vary from person-to-person. Not everyone has to game (which is too bad). And obviously so, because God has called us to go “out there” and love the people around us… not to go and love the things that surround us.

At the same time, gaming has etched a funny way into my life. For the first two months working at my current job, almost every day after work was occupied with seeing and meeting friends for eats, meets, fellowship or what have you. This was all in itself great by the way. But so much time was spent out of the house experiencing joy in other facets that I started feeling an emptiness in some ways. I’ve lamented this to my Living Room as well. I just wasn’t having the proper downtime and recharge time that one needs now and then. And yes, my downtime is usually filled with gaming. As silly as it may sound, life felt sad because I wasn’t gaming (have I gone over the edge?). It wasn’t until December when I had time to game (and other stuff, not just gaming, I’m generalizing) that I started to feel better.

One thing I just learned about this week while listening to a gaming podcast is this charity called Child’s Play Charity (www.childsplaycharity.org). It’s a charity organized by gamers that raises money towards games, toys, books, or whatever else, for children’s hospitals across North America (including Toronto Sick Kids, hell yah!). So kids who are bed-ridden (or even those who are not) who aren’t allowed to leave the hospital, is gaming good or bad in this type of situation? (And yes, that’s right, I’m playing this card!)

In regards to the gamer-related-friend-circles. I only have half a handful of friends that I would characterize as “gamers”. Most don’t or if they do, just on a casual basis. But I will share one example. I have a friend at work who games probably 4 times more than I do. Of the people I know at work, he’s one of the people I’ve known the least time-wise. Yet, he’s one of the people I know better life-wise. One of the underlying commonalities that has helped boost this friendship is both our gaming endeavours. Yet whenever we talk in office or go out for lunch, gaming is hardly a central topic. It might make 5-10% of a conversation but it’s almost never the central point to the conversation. So on that note (and really, much like any common hobbies), gaming has helped me connect better, at least to this dude. But as I said, I have few friends who are “gamers”, so this remains to be scientifically proven. More data required.

I think like all things, intent is the key. Is gaming a ‘means’ or an ‘end’? I think we would both agree that it shouldn't be an 'end'. But then how do we more effectively turn it into a ‘means’?

I await your thoughts! Peace bro,

Jeff

-----

Matt's Response Letter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtAdjrvD0bY - in case you haven't seen this, check it out! haha.

Okay, so here we go. Great response sir, I'm looking forward to throwing down a few thoughts in reply.

I was confused about your initial statement about the Bible and "justification for life". I want to know what you meant by "justifying my life". Because to me the phrase sounds like, "justifying what I do" or "justifying how I spent my life". But if that's true, then I was surprised when you said you don't want the Bible to be used to justify your life. I do. But I think we're just having some kind of miscommunication here so I'm asking for some clarification.

Moving on. Art in gaming. Agreed! There is a TON of potential for great art in gaming but I think it often takes a back seat and people aren't really concerned with creating great art in games or great games as art. Every once in a while you can tell that someone really was going after that "Achievement" and we see some exciting, unique and beautiful games come out, but they are rare. When these games do come out, someone like Kevin Makins actually makes a serious effort to buy these games regardless of replay value/price/ability to get it used or cheaper elsewhere, simply because he wants to support the game/company because it bothered to make something artful and beautiful rather than just something that might sell a large number of copies. Unfortunately, good art has often translated into poor sales in this backwards world. I would like to see MORE games which are serious attempts by artists to create excellent art. Some games that come quickly to mind as being more or less an example of artfully well done would be - Okami, Windwaker, Limbo, Dead Rain, that game for XBLA where you were a small Mario-type character and you could mess with time and you had red hair ... i forget the name ... anyway, I'm finding it hard to think of examples but you know what I mean. (And of course amazing JRPGS with incredible character depth, dialogue, storylines, music, etc.)

Moving on. Iphone games. These mostly suck, but I find the Iphone is sort of the perfect platform for puzzle games, so here's a quick word on that. I think puzzle games having a redeeming quality in that they challenge the mind and I'm sure, in various ways, they actually aid and develop thinking, problem solving, critical analysis, spatial recognition, blah blah blah. Plus, there are some great old school rpgs on the Iphone, muahaha. But yeah, I kind of like puzzle games and puzzles in games because they're a mental challenge and fun too. The iphone adds new ways and a mastery of control (intuitive when done well) which is pretty sweet, but I also find puzzle games don't last super long, they tend to get boring after a while, but as you probably know by now, I kind of like that.

Moving on. Sadness when not gaming. I think you're just messed up buddy! Hahaa, just kidding. I do think we all need alone time, personal space, recharging hobbies, and just plain FUN in our lives. I certainly don't think that the body of Christ needs a bunch of bored, boring, bores that just bore their way through their boring lives boring boredom wherever they go. :)

So, when you need that time, that alone time, that Jeff-time, and if gaming is a way that you really and truly enjoy spending that time, then I think: wonderful! Go to it young man!

I have only two concerns at this time. Do you play games only when you've realized that you need some of that alone Jeff-time, or do you play because you HAVE MORE ACHIEVEMENTS TO ACHIEVE! Know what I mean? What dictates when you play? Self-awareness and self-control, or self-indulgence? And I'm kind of talking about the PAST here, because at present it sounds like work and other things have you so busy that there is very little temptation to over-indulge. Concern # 2 is: Is it possible that you have an addiction which is creating a sense of withdrawal in you, so that you're experiencing a sadness when you're doing other things for too long and you don't get your gaming fix? I'm not saying that's true, just asking the question. We've both been playing countless hours of games since we were kids. I would expect that cutting that off or cutting that back would result in some kind of psychosomatic response? And we still have that other old question, what about other activities such as ... learning to play a Ukulele? Reading books. Exercising. Walking, travelling, praying, etc.

Moving on. Childs play charity. Tough question, cool question though. I think if you're cooped up in a Hospital that video games are actually a great way (lame as this might sound) to see the world, experience a variety of circumstances and life scenarios, have fun, etc. So I kind of think this is a cool notion. I've often noticed video games in hospitals and my initial reaction was, "that's good", someone was sensitive enough to think that maybe we should get something in here to make a child's experience of a hospital less frightening. Even for a short stay in the hospital, the presence of a Nintendo 64 might be a great comfort to a child, especially if that child is sick or suffering. I used to play video games when I was sick, I remember them helping me through whatever painful or discomforting symptoms I was experiencing. When people are sick, especially kids, we often give them comic books or toys or ice cream or whatever and I think that's just being loving, human and sympathetic. Also, I think it might be a good thing for kids to have heroes and heroines and to have things like ... oh I don't know ... GRAPHIC NOVELS (muahaha) to encourage them to think in terms or right and wrong and want to emulate the right. It also probably satiates and encourages that human hunger for adventure and mission. So I'd say video games can do this too.

BUT, when we're not kids, or sick kids, and we CAN actually go out and see the world, and live the things we've been imbibing and chewing on ... then shouldn't we!! Or else, was the point? Sometimes video games can prepare and spur us on, but then sometimes they can be the reason why we never go, why we never fight for justice or risk our safety for the sake of another ... because we're too busy sitting at home playing video games or because we've lulled ourselves into a mode of self-satisfaction and we want to protect our cushy domestic situation and so now we're actually motivated NOT to get off our butts, NOT to care about wrong in the world, NOT to risk and spend ourselves helping the victims who are within our reach. So, like anything else, I think we need to be constantly evaluating, what effect is this having on me right now, not just ... are games always bad or always good.

So, and here's my big and exciting news ... Gene and I are going to the Philippines in May!!! W00t ! We got a great deal on tickets to we bought them last night, we're totally stoked, but please keep it a secret for now because we're going to tell folks but just not yet. We have to consider fundraising and other things. But we're so excited, and we've been in the praying process for a long time now. We're going for a month and we're going to live in Novaliches which is one of the poorest places in the world. We're extremely excited because we feel God is calling us and that it's not only going to be an amazing trip but also a part of a larger vision that He is giving us for future ministry in the Philippines. So, it's kind of cool because there is some danger and discomfort that will come with the trip, but we don't care because we want to love and serve and bless Gene's family who live there, and any others God will use us to minister to, and it's kind of crazy (can we AFFORD this??) but we're putting our trust and faith in God. So it feels like an adventure, a mission, and I love that, and I think part of me IS feeding off of the video game/graphic novel world. I have mental examples of (albeit fictional) great men/women, leaders, heroes who have laid their lives down for the sake of others, and that IS encouraging. Obviously I have real life examples or real people too, contemporary and historical, but I don't think it's weird that I also draw upon the examples from great fiction. I think human beings have always done that, that's why we create the stories.

So perhaps that also answers, in part, your means/ends question. But there's more to be said about that, but this post is pretty long. I look forward to your next correspondence my friend.

God bless!!!

m@

Favourite Movies of 2011

2012-01-10T19:18:00.005-05:00

As is the norm for starting the new year, now is the time to reflect on the past year. On an overall basis, at least personally, I’d like to say that 2011 was pretty great. But on a movie basis, it sucked!

I was talking to my friend Tyrone recently about this past year’s cinematic offerings. He offered sentiments that I agreed with: in the past year, there’s been a lot of entertaining movies, but not as many of those deep, layered, ”great” movies. So I’m filled with disappointment that I couldn’t produce an honest top 10 list. This year goes to 6. If I did try to fill out spots 7-10 it wouldn’t be fair, because I’ve seen so many that seemed to be within the same range as far as entertainment goes.

The top 6 aren’t necessarily the best movies, but are the ones that I feel I’ll remember in the years to come.

You can view my favourite lists for the years (2010), (2009), (2008), (2007), and (2006).

6. Shame – When friends asked me about this one, I described it in a similar way I described my sentiments towards Requiem for a Dream. The movie is well crafted and acted, but because of the bleak topical nature of the movie I don’t see myself watching it again. They’re both powerful in the sense that they can make you feel so depressed, and so it transcends the medium into an emotional experience. Because of the subject of the movie, it is quite graphic in content. Me and my coworker determined that no matter who you choose to watch this with, it’s going to be awkward. That said, bother Michael Fassbender and Carey Mulligan were terrific in their roles, playing troubled siblings. But what I loved most was probably the cinematography. The way that New York comes out on this side of the lens, really gives it a rich feel.

5. Trollhunter – (review)

4. X-Men: First Class – (review) – I’ve watched XM:FC two more times since the initial viewing. Shit, it’s great.

3. Drive – This was a fantastic movie, plucked right out of the 80s, yet somehow from 2011. Something about the soundtrack and the visceral action/violence gave it an edge akin to low budget 80s genre movies. It was superbly shot with performances to match. Albert Brooks was quite possibly the best heel this year! I haven’t seen many of Ryan Gosling’s movies (Half Nelson and Blue Valentine) so never thought too much of him. He nails the role here! Young Hercules, yah!

2. The Artist – (review)

1. Elite Squad 2: Enemy Within – a shame that I didn’t get to write a full fledged review of what is to be my favourite movie of the year. Perhaps I will do so later on to make up for it. I was describing to a friend over the holidays that watching ES2 was in a way analogous to my experience of playing Batman: Arkham City. Whereas Arkham Asylum was more of a small scope, linearly focused game, Arkham City opened up the world and offered an experience that was wider in scope. This parallels ES2. ES2 is quite the tour de force, taking everything done right in the first movie, and kicking it up several notches. I’ll save my comments for the forthcoming review. But it is a bad-ass movie.

If spots 7-10 should require filling, please close your eyes and randomly select any 4 of the following:

Bridesmaids, Captain America, Conan O’Brien Can’t Stop, Fast Five, Hanna, Hobo with a Shotgun, Insidious, Limitless, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Source Code, Super 8.

THE ARTIST!!!!!!!

2012-01-05T17:58:00.000-05:00

The Artist is director Michael Hazanavicius ode to the silent films of yesteryear. Not only focus on a silent movie actor and movie making, but it in itself is also a silent movie.

The movie follows a silent movie actor named George Valentin through the rise and fall of his career. At the start of the film, we see George as this superstar celebrity; he loves the glitz and glamour of being a famous actor and soaks in all the attention he can get. He loves having his photos taken and being adorned on the front pages of newspapers. He is THAT kind of celebrity. At the premiere event of his latest movie, he bumps into one Peppy Miller – a young woman with big ambitions and dreams in Hollywoodland. The lives of the two intersect and an attraction immediately blossoms. The romance could only go so far as Valentin is a (happily?) married man.

George’s superstardom reaches its height at a precarious time. And as the 1920s are ushered out, so are silent movies. The new decade brings with it the advent of film audio and actors who can now utilize speech – or Talkies as they’re referred to. George, a traditionalist and a master at his craft, refuses to accept the new technology and soon finds that, like time, he too is fading away. Peppy becomes the new face of the Talkies and is a nationwide sensation. However, her rise to fame is at the cost of George’s descent into obscurity. And it’s their career directions that becomes a source of conflict, dampening their romantic endeavours.

Watching The Artist, I was reminded of why I loved Wall-E so much. There’s something powerful about a film that’s able to make you feel without the use of dialogue. Without the aid of speech, you have to channel your focus to facial expressions and the actions of the characters to understand the narrative. It’s a shame that this form of art is not greatly appreciated on the mainstream level. As George proclaims in the movie, they helped pave the way.

The story itself is nothing spectacular and nothing that you haven’t seen before. But there’s a certain charm with the way they tell the story and how you see the attraction grow in each of the two leads. On top of that, what made it work so much is that both of the main characters are completely relatable. You have George who is filled with this prideful soul, who won’t accept help when it’s offered or who refuses to humble himself and get off his high horse. And then there’s Peppy who is the kind of person who just wants to genuinely help out someone she cares about, even though the person might not appreciate it or understand. She has a good heart that brings out the best of intentions. But even she’s not flawless. The real winner in this movie is George’s best friend: a small dog named Uggie. Uggie completely steals every scene that he’s in. Not only does he provide comedic relief, but he plays an important role in the dramatic scenes.

In a movie with no dialogue, the musical score becomes even more important to heighten the emotion and to really flesh out the scenes. The score in The Artist really captures the mood of the characters and is so fitting to all the scenes. There are only a few moments of complete silence, done purposefully to bring in a sense of tension. It’s funny how silence can do that.

The only gripe I had was with some of the casting. I thought the movie would have benefitted more with a completely unknown cast. And although the two main leads are not known in mainstream America, there are a few recognizable faces that fill out the supporting cast (i.e. James Cromwell, John Goodman, Malcolm MacDowell, etc.). But it’s the recognizability (is that a word?) of these faces that ground the film back to present day. I think having an unknown supporting cast would have really given the feeling that you’re seeing something from a different decade. But all things considered, this is just a small gripe.

In a year filled with unspectacular movies, it’s not hard to call this movie one of the year’s best. It’s well crafted, and you can tell that Hazanavicius loves this art form. He really has fun with it, and in turn, the audience can have fun with it.

It’s in limited release right now, and if I can recommend, see it with a wife/husband or girlfriend/boyfriend. It’s one of those types of movies. Until then, later geeks!

The Flash, Age of Empires 2... Oh Yeah and Stuff!

2011-12-20T22:26:00.000-05:00

I was reading The Blackest Night the other week, and man, it was great! Imagine a “zombie” story involving the whole DC universe (admittedly, I haven’t read Marvel’s Zombies)! The Blackest Night was the big DC crossover story of 2009-2010, that basically told a story of dead superheroes and villains rising. It was a captivating story filled with some “oh shit!”-shock moments coupled with frightening moments. Though the story focuses more around the Green Lantern and the Green Lantern Corps, I couldn’t help but think about the Flash, who plays a significant role in the story. I had a dream that week about the Flash and his qualities as a superhero, and how it related to me. It was a strange dream, yet one where I was able to find some wisdom. (Note: it doesn’t happen often, but I have a history of superheroes ending up in my dreams. For the record, appearing in separate dreams have been Superman, Batman, Iron Man, Ice Man, Spider-Man and now the Flash. I guess inside, I want to be more courageous like a hero.)

The Flash is the fastest man alive. He can move at the speed of light; he’s even faster than Superman. He utilizes his accelerated speed in travelling, in missions… to fight crime in general. As I was reading the Blackest Night, I was sort of blown away by the Flash. It was not a new revelation or anything, just more of a realization on my part. The Flash can move at the speed of light, yet he doesn’t always exercise the ability. Why not? If you could move like lighting, why wouldn’t you always stay in that mode? And this is when it hit me in my dream. Although he’s the fastest man alive, he knows at times, it’s necessary to slow down and spend time with those that he cares about; those that run at different speeds. To spend time to grow his community/the Justice League.

The day after I had that dream, I started thinking about Age of Empires 2 – a game I played partly during high school, but more relentlessly during the early university days. A common feature to real time strategy games is the ability to group units. It’s a way of managing and commanding your troops more efficiently. Grouping gives you the ability to hit a single key on the keyboard to select a group of units that you formed. It’s quicker than highlighting, selecting and commanding the same units over and over. In AoE2, grouping had a unique (but sometimes frustrating) feature. When you grouped together a fast-moving unit, like the Cavalry, and a slow moving unit, like the Trebuchet, the faster units would always conform to the speed of their slower, but more powerful counterparts. It can be frustrating in the heat of a battle, when you’re trying to get your troops out as quickly as possible to the front lines of battle. And although it was frustrating from our perspective, it was good for them. The fast soldier knew that it was better to slow down, stay as a group and fight together.

So how does this relate to life? Well first, I’m not saying that I can run at the speed of light. Secondly, I’m not saying that I can outrun a Cavalry… but I do think I’m trying to say that I can run faster than a Trebuchet. Moreover, I’m trying to say that we all move at different speeds. But really, this has nothing to do with how fast or how slow you run – speed is incidental.

It’s more of a reminder to be mindful of all those surrounding you, and if it requires slowing down, then it’s okay to slow down. While always being on the go, it’s easy to lose sight of all the greatness that surrounds you. God blesses us with so much. Don’t get caught up in the doing; get caught up in the being. We need to be there for each other if we are to be a community.

I say this with much conviction. For me, the difficult thing is that on most days of the week, I’ll have something planned out and scheduled. I’m sort of boxing in life instead of living organically. And I hate that. I didn’t realize it until yesterday, but even my roommate pointed out, we live in the same house, yet we hardly see each other. So many different things have happened in my life in the past little while, yet those close to me don’t even know. I need to keep up and even gather together other Trebuchets and the Cavalries (I see myself more as a Pike Man).

It hasn’t been published yet, but in a future edition of my “Gaming and God” column, my friend Matt wrote the following (oh, spoiler, haha!):

“Now that I’ve changed pace of life a bit, becoming a regular working joe, a bonafide blue collar boy, I’ve been thinking more and more about life, rhythm, time, pace, pattern, equilibrium, sabbath, etc. The change has affected my devotional life, my physical rhythms, my priorities and understanding of how many, if not most, people experience life and the average "work week". It becomes increasingly more difficult, but also more important, to keep connected to God, to find time to do the stuff of life other than work, and to find and maintain equilibrium within."

The thing is, the more I think about it, the more apparent it becomes that it’s not a Christian message or idea at all. I mean, although community and fellowship are fundamental aspects of being a Christian, the idea of maintaining and cultivating relationships is not limited by faith boundaries – it’s important for everyone.

The great thing about the Flash and his friendship with the Green Lantern, and hopefully, between the Cavalry and Trebuchet, is that anytime they need to slow down, it’s not for self-serving purposes. It is to encourage and build each other up. In both cases, they know it’s better to fight together than on their own. “Slowing” down is not about you, but them. We need to find that right balance, of running the distance by yourself, and running alongside others.

What Matt alluded to is right. It’s okay to run, but run with rhythm.

Later geeks.

Dante's Inferno!!!! (Xbox 360)

2011-11-26T15:29:00.000-05:00

Though Dante’s Inferno is nearing 2 years old, I purchased it recently having gone on sale at The Source for $4.99. It was a bargain. I wanted to play an action-heavy, thoughtless, hack and slash. And for that, I received what I wanted.

The developers made no reservations about the game: it’s a blatant rip-off of God of War, an exclusive property to the Playstation. However, Dante’s Inferno opened up that console barrier by being accessible on both the PS3 and Xbox, in an attempt to satiate Xbox owners who didn’t own both machines.

Dante’s Inferno is loosely based on the 14th century poem of the same name.Y ou play as Dante Alighieri, a holy crusader who dives into Hell to save his lover’s soul from the clutches of Lucifer. But the feat is not so easily accomplished as Dante must dive deeper, within the 9 circles of Hell, combating demons and devilry along the way.

Much like God of War, Dante’s Inferno is a straight up hack and slash, with minimal focus given to the story. Not that there isn’t a story, there is. But it’s not one that begs the attention from the player. Story is secondary, maybe even tertiary to the gameplay. Much like GoW, you’re given a light and strong attack, evasion techniques, and a few spells. In some fights, you’ll be prompted by quick-time-events that you’ll need to follow in order to defeat your foe. You’ll wash, rinse and repeat for about an hour per level before running into a boss.

The game incorporates RPG elements to it. You’re given two tech trees: holy and unholy. Spending points on either side will unlock abilities, combos, upgrades and enhancements for Dante. The points you use are gained through defeating enemies or from statues located around each stage of Hell. But how far you go in each tech tree is dependent on the choices that you make while executing enemies. With certain enemies, you are given the choice to either absolve or punish them for their sins. The former would contribute towards your holy level while the latter, unholy level. Additionally, increasing your holy levels would increase the power of your projectile offence while with unholy, your melee skills are strengthened.

Another addition to your arsenal are relics (equipable items) that are scattered throughout the levels. Equipping relics will provide passive upgrades, be they increased defence, offence or some other stat boost.

Perhaps the most fun thing about the game is the bosses. Visually, they are grotesquely designed and are sort of like puzzles in themselves, requiring you to figure out their attack patterns and watch out for visual cues. Because they are the biggest challenges in the game, they offer the most gratification with each victory.

The visual design of the game ranges from outrageously ridiculous to terrifying. I can’t even begin to describe the boss for the Lust level. The babies. The damn babies! If you Youtube the boss, you’ll understand the ridiculousness of it. At the same time, some of the level design evokes a good sense of terror. Climbable walls are strewn with bodies, begging you to save them or taunting you as you climb over them. It is frightening.

Where the fault lies is in the repetitiveness of the gameplay. Hacking and slashing enemies are fine, but enemies vary only slightly as you progress deeper into Hell. In addition, the game doesn’t offer much in the variety of puzzles or challenges. It’s not too demanding of a game until you get to the bosses. Unfortunately, all the moments in between are pale in comparison.

Despite it being a rip off and some shortcomings in the game, I still had fun with it. But perhaps I only enjoyed it because it justified the amount of money I paid for the game. I wanted a mindless action game, and I received it. If you see it in the bins for $5, it’s worth a pick up. Til next time, later geeks!

Call of Duty: Black Ops!!! (Xbox 360)

2011-11-17T00:01:00.000-05:00

(Note: I wrote this back in March. I have no idea why I didn't publish it. I recognize that Modern Warfare 3 came out this past week so this seems sort of old. Sort of really old. But I might as well pump this out before I release my post on MW3... :)

Amidst all the controversy and drama surrounding Activision and the Call of Duty franchise, developer Treyarch completed and released a fantastic new addition to the series. It’s definitely a franchise favourite for me. Since Modern Warfare, I’ve much enjoyed each release, but more so for the gameplay than anything else. I find that the thrills of COD games are similar to summer Hollywood blockbuster movies – they’re full of intensity and action, but rarely offer anything more than that quick thrill. With Black Ops, it feels as though they’re trying to create something deeper than just a straight-up shooter tied together with an end-of-the-world-type plot. The story this time around, seems more cleverly crafted, and is better told than previous entries.

In COD: Black Ops, you play as a government Black Ops operative during the Cold War era named Alex Mason. The Black Ops unit is a special government task force that carries out missions behind the enemy lines. The game is played in flashbacks, where in “current” day, Mason is strapped to a chair and interrogated by his ominous captors. His captors try to uncover a mystery, one that surrounds Mason, unfortunately, Mason’s memory is fragmented, offering little help. But with each piece of memory that returns is a mission that you will get to playthrough. Through your “travels”, you get the opportunity to fight in Russia, Vietnam, Cuba, Laos and so forth.

What I enjoyed about the game is the more grounded approach to storytelling. Since most of the game is played through and narrated by Alex Mason, it gives it more of a human feel and connection. The story itself tries to do something new which I really appreciated in its use of twists and turns (it’s nothing new by conventional storytelling standards, but at least it’s new for COD-standards). In the previous games, the stories really took a backseat to the action, with such convoluted and over the top storylines. The more grounded and “real” approach is appreciated this time around.

I’m enjoying the online play a lot more than Modern Warfare as well… mainly because, well, I’m actually getting kills! I guess because the guns aren’t as modern and high-tech, that it puts players at a more even playing field. Since the last game, I don’t think I’ve become a better player, but the lo-fi guns probably bring the good players down a notch. Either that or I’ve been playing against a bunch of n00bs. My KPD is up, so that’s all that really matters for me.

Much like Treyarch’s other release (COD: World at War), they’ve attached the Zombie Survival mode, where you and 3 other players defend yourselves against waves upon waves of the undead. It’s ho-hum; if you’ve played it on W@W you’ve played it here. I gave it a few shots, but I think my urge to shoot zombies has died down.

My favourite ‘online’ mode is what they call Combat Training. For some reason, it’s an online mode, but it’s not really online. Basically, it functions the same way as the multiplayer, but with only Team Deathmatch and Free For All modes available. The kicker is that you don’t play against human players, but against AI bots (hence the strangeness that this mode’s only offered when you connect online). So it includes all the fun that multiplayer brings, but with less kids swearing at you over Xbox Live. The cool thing is that your friends can join you if you invite them into your game (the only real online component of it). If you’re worried about difficulty and that bots are too easy to kill, you’d be wrong. These bots are not pushovers.

You definitely get the bang for your buck in Black Ops. Chances are, if you’re a gamer, you’ve already played it, and if not, then you had no intention to in the first place. It’s definitely a shooter, so if you’re sick of this genre, there’s not much in the box that will convince you otherwise. That said, the box does have a lot to offer. Til next time, later geeks!

Hunting trolls with the TROLLHUNTER!!!

2011-11-14T00:01:00.000-05:00

Troll Hunter is a mockumentary based on the troll hunting escapades in Norway. As such, it’s shot handicam style. The movie follows a group of university students filming a documentary about an elusive bear poacher in Norway. The students follow him despite his wishes to be left alone. One night they track him down to a forest outside of town, hoping to catch him in the act. The kids get more than they bargained for. Instead of catching him killing a bear, they find him being chased by a giant TROLL!!! It turns out he wasn’t a bear poacher at all, but a troll hunter!

In an effort to cover up troll-related activity across the nation, the country has what’s called the Troll Security Service (or TSS), who act on reported sightings by killing off the destructive and giant-sized trolls. There is much humour, as the TSS makes public statements to the local press, pinning the blame for the damaged communities on bears, inserted onto the scene afterwards. The rest of the movie follows the students as they document the troll hunter and his journey to take down bigger and badder trolls.

The movie has been a success around geek circles. It is certainly an entertaining movie. Great? I don’t believe it’s great, but it is new and original.

Probably the greatest aspect of the movie (to no surprise) is the trolls, which seem to be a mash up of CG work and practical effects. Whichever it is, they look great on screen. They have a realistic, yet goofy look to them, if that makes any sense. Like Carrot-Top. He’s also a realistic person, but he looks goofy, right? The trolls in this movie look like something out of a fairy tale story, but brought into real life.

I’m not really familiar with troll folklore or mythology, but apparently they can smell the blood of Christians and will dispatch them on sight. It’s amusing but does not bode well for me and my brethren. However, oddly, God believers of other faiths are exempt, confirmed with a hilarious scene where they hire a Muslim videographer.

Whether it’s really good or bad, at least it’s a breath of fresh air into genre filmmaking. There’s too much vampires, werewolves and zombies, it’s about time we got ourselves some trolls! Until next time, later geeks!

Lucky McKee's THE WOMAN!!!!!!!!!!

2011-11-09T07:38:00.004-05:00

I was lucky enough to catch Lucky McKee’s The Woman at the 2011 Toronto Afterdark Film Festival.

The Woman tells the story of the Cleek family. The Cleek’s are your run-of-the-mill suburban family; you’ve got the breadwinner father, the submissive mother, the tortured soul older daughter, the rebellious son and the innocent toddler. The father, Chris Cleek, who goes hunting one day, captures seemingly, his biggest hunt to date: a wild woman. He traps her, kidnaps her and takes her to his secluded ranch house. She is locked and chained away in his dungeon like shed. He is filled with joy as he shows his family his most prized finding. He doesn’t seem to comprehend the wrongness of his actions. Yet, his family doesn’t exactly share the same sort of joy and are filled with a sense of disbelief. However, they follow along with the mad father’s idea and reluctantly go along with the hi-jinks. Chris Cleek decides the whole thing is a family project, to domesticate and teach the titular Woman how to be proper. Although seemingly well intentioned, Mr. Cleek has more insidious and perverse intentions in mind.

These days, not very often do I feel moved or invested into a horror movie. But The Woman did it for me. Director McKee does a great job of painting each character and allowing the audience to dive deeper into each of them. We feel for the Woman. We sympathize with the wife. We hate the father. The whole thing works because of our investment in the characters. And McKee demonstrates patience in telling his story. There aren’t any quick thrills. It’s all a build-up to the last 10-15 minutes when all our emotions are released.

One of the things that make it unique is it’s dark approach to the subject matter. It starts off innocently enough, as we’re introduced to the family. We see their quirks and we know something isn’t right, but it’s never thrown in our faces. But as the minutes roll on, the movie gets darker and darker, and suddenly the comical laughter becomes more of a nervous laughter.

The violence depicted in this movie against women is quite brutal. To digress for a moment, in prowrestling lingo, this would be considered creating heat. The more deplorable the heel (i.e. the bad guy), the greater the heat. And with great heat, comes an even greater pop (i.e. cheers) when the good guy finally conquers the bad guy after a long uphill battle in the end. But there’s also such thing as cheap heat. Cheap heat refers to basically cheap shots to get the crowd to boo you. Simple examples would be making fun of the town they’re in, or pointing out people in the crowd and making fun of them. They’re cheap tactics to get boos, or to build cheap heat. This is opposed to real heat, which relies more on story driven elements to get the crowd to hate you, usually more potent and lasting. Anyways, why all this explanation? Well, in the context of the movie I’m trying to determine whether Chris Cleek’s violence towards women is a cheap heat tactic or real genuine heat. I’ve always viewed violence towards women both in movies and video games as a cheap heel heat tactic, but since in this movie it’s quite central to the plot I’m conflicted. Is it real heat or cheap? The auditorium erupted in applause and cheers when the antagonist received his just desserts, and I for one, was amongst them. So it’s hard to say, it’s certainly debatable.

It’s a wacky horror movie, not one to be taken seriously. From the moment that Chris Cleeks introduces his family to the Woman with a smile on his face, we know we’re in for a ride. It’s a movie that will get your blood flowing as you cheer and boo what’s happening on screen, and to me, that’s an effective movie. No, it might not be the best thing ever, but as far as horror in 2011, it’s probably one of the better ones. Until next time, later geeks!

Gaming and God: An Ongoing Conversation With My Pastor (Part 2)

2011-08-10T00:51:00.000-04:00

Hey friends! So originally I meant to release these over the course of a few weeks, but I guess out of laze, I fell behind. Anyhow, as a quick recap, these are letters that I have been exchanging with one of my pastors regarding gaming, being a Christian and seeking something more.

You will probably need some context if this is new to you. You can see part 1 of our exchange (here). Without further ado, here is the latest exchange (although not really latest, these were originally sent back in December).

My Response Letter to Matt:

Hey Matt,

So as I mentioned last time, it’s tough to make a fitting argument against the time issue. And as I progress more into the working life, arguing against it becomes weaker, futile even. The time I have to game these days, seems rare and short if at all. As I already mentioned a few weeks ago, there was a Saturday morning where I woke up early to finish the Riddler challenges in Batman: Arkham Asylum. They were repetitive, and probably a waste of time for the measily points that I would garner. At that moment, I thought of you. I asked myself, “What am I doing?”. I think all it is is for a sense of satisfaction, if anything. Is it completely about the points? Not really. If it were, I would obsessively be playing everything and anything to accumulate as many points that I could. But what does a sense of satisfaction even mean? These are questions that I think about.

Your words have a lot of merit. On that note of a “sense of satisfaction”, there are many things that are better to do that would cost less and that is a good thing to strive for.

I think, just like you’re suggesting, that it comes down to the person. For a binge gamer (my criteria being one who can do several 3+ hour sittings consistently throughout the week), I think video games is a degenerative habit (not hobby). Looking back, I can speak for myself when I say that I was there. Although I’ve been playing games since I was 5 years old, I think there was nothing worse than the period when I was a World of Warcraft player. I forget if I told you this story or not, but I certainly did tell a few people at church. During this period, I became so reclusive that every day after work, every Sunday after church, instead of doing to celebrate and be in community, I’d skip out to play WOW instead. I think I seriously hurt some of my friendships during this period just by being unavailable. In game, I had an add-on in the interface that told me how many online hours I spent in the game. It never even occurred to me how bad it was until my best friend looked at the stats and laughed at the ridiculousness of the hours spent. At that moment in time, it totaled around 65 days of online playing. 65 days times 24 hours!!!!! It wasn’t until at his wedding when I looked at myself and said “Jeff, what the heck are you doing with your life?”. People around me were falling in love and getting married, yet all I had to show for myself was a few pieces of epic loot. Laughable! And that’s when I decided to quit WOW.

So what I’m trying to say is that binge gaming (or binge anything for that matter) is bad. How can you approach a game (or any activity) without it sucking out joy and life away? I’m thankful, that other than the WOW period, I’m pretty casual with gaming. I’m into the culture, the news, and the pulse of the industry, but at the same time, I try not to let it consume me like it once did.

Although there are plenty of things that you can argue against gaming, there are a few positives that I see.

I see how gaming at an early age has helped influence different aspects of my life today. For example, at work, I’m meticulous about certain details. Certain things, I want to get precisely right. If they’re wrong, I want to know why they’re wrong. Especially right now, with engineering consulting, there are projects that demand outside-of-the-box thinking because standards haven’t yet developed. I think in some ways, these things are similar to my love for role playing games, more so when I was 8-12 rather than now. Back then, when playing Final Fantasy or Dragon Warrior games, you had to develop strategies to win battles as quick and unscathed as you could. At least the way I played it, I tried to tweak my characters as much as I could. Unfortunately, I think that sort of craft is lost nowadays. For myself, I find it so much easier to just go to an FAQ and read up on someone else’s strategy instead of developing my own.

Much like movies, the games I enjoy the most are ones with good stories and narratives, with the only main difference being that you’re the central character, and depending what game you’re playing, you’re the one making crucial decisions. Just thinking of recent ones that I’ve connected with in the past year, I think of Bioshock or Dragon Age. Games that present a good story and allow you to drive the narrative help make for a lasting impression. But all this is really only adding to the ‘entertainment factor’, but is it life fulfilling? Are any movies truly life fulfilling either?

Also, thanks to the technology, gaming is becoming less of a solo experience and has opened up more towards the direction of the shared experience. I totally agree with the different podcasts that I listen to and wrote a bit about it on my site, the best campaigns that I enjoy are the co-op ones. It’s that experience of joy when you and a friend tackle down a final boss. It reminds me of the line in Into the Wild, “Happiness is nothing unless it’s shared” (or something to that degree).

So how does all this play in to my walk with Christ? Since a month ago when we talked about it in person, I still don’t know. If the game envelopes you, then it’s bad. How can you be devoted to game and Christ? The math doesn’t work. But even in a casual sense, unfortunately it’s still not adding up. Time allotted to gaming, is time taken away from devotions and walks with God. So new questions arise. Do you take yourself out of gaming? Or do you bring God into gaming (ie. by having gaming be a secondary purpose to a primary goal, of say, creating community)?

I’m providing more questions than I am answers, but it’s a deep issue I think. Let me know what you think.

Jeff

-----

Matt's Response Letter:

Jeffrey!

So I just finished reading your latest letter on the game front. I'm using the term "letter" because I'm privileging this conversation, it's turning into something truly edifying. A lot of people have written letters back and forth, and later (often after they had died!) those letters got published under titles such as "letter to a ..." or "letters to ...". For example, my sister just gave me a short book that I'm excited to start digging into written by Simone Weil (pronounced v-ay). It's called "letters to a priest", and, as I understand it beforehand, it's about Simone's struggle with the Roman Catholic Church. But there are countless examples, such as C.S. Lewis' "letters to malcolm", a friend of his. So I suppose this is more like that, a conversation between peers about the things we want to wrestle to the ground. And wrestle we shall, because that's what writing is about, and relationship too. I just wish we still lived in the days when we actually wrote letters, rather than e-letters. I like typing, it's fast and efficient. But I prefer hand writing and I prefer paper and I prefer the possibility that some day, after we are dead, someone might find our letters and publish them. RDRR.

Now to the topic at hand.

How satisfying are the games we play? I want to ask this question and be very honest in my answer. I hope you will be too. When I play video games, especially a new and exciting game (or an old and exciting game that I haven't played in a long time - we'll get there) I discern that some fun is being had. If I'm really into it, I will be quite vocal as I play (oh baby, come on, come on! ... yeaaaAAHHH!) and there might even be some fist pumping if things go exceptionally well. At their best, video games are an exhilarating excursion, as you referenced, Into the Wild. It's a blast to play a fun new game, especially something innovative, genre-busting, something of quality. These moments and experiences are worth celebrating, because it's God's good world that we're swimming in. A good game, like a good movie, CAN help you to see the world in new ways. Unfortunately, these moments and experiences are quite rare for me. Video games have a way of hooking you for long periods of time while delivering very few precious moments, sort of like bad anime ... I hate those stupid filler episodes in between things that actually move the plot forward, deepen the character arc, or at least have some sweet fight scenes! I think the designers are intentional about trying to hook you, to suck you in and fool you into spending those hours, when there really isn't any justifiable substance to be found. For example, in the 1560 hours of WOW that you played, how long did it take you to grasp and experience the basic substance of WOW, and see the worlds that there were to be seen, beautiful and well-thought out worlds that they were, and how many of those hours were not about seeing new worlds, learning new things or hunting down rare and precious moments of exhilaration, but instead, were about a "degenerative habit", an addiction to item finding for its own sake? I think we need to separate these two experiences with the same medium, otherwise we will always get stuck wondering ... are games good or bad? The truth is, there is good and bad, and we must learn to pay careful attention so as not to be fooled.

So if you're with me at this point, we have a major problem now.

Certain games simply cannot be played unless you sign up for a certain amount of monotony. Games are designed this way. (the exception would be the short, action-packed, cinematic games, or games on rails rather than free-roamers ... but that's a whole other conversation, perhaps I'll say a word at the end about this.)

You mentioned rpg's. Someone recently gave me a free ipod touch, and then for my birthday, a friend gave me a $20 itunes gift card. I didn't really want any music and square enix had a christmas sale on its iphone rpg's. I got FF 1, FF 2, Secret of Mana and a sweet Square game made for the iphone called Chaos Rings, all for less than $20. I've been playing them over the holidays since I had a busy fall and its a rare opportunity to do so. I beat Chaos Rings, FF 1 and I'm working away on SoM now. But, I must confess, I've been feeling a general sense of dissatisfaction, even though I've been having fun. It's kind of annoying, but it's there nonetheless. It's just not that satisfying, and I LOVE these old school rpgs. I really do relish the beautiful, simplistic, colorful graphics and the cheesy but earnest dialogue. And then there's the awesome soundtracks! These are video game masterpieces! But they are still kind of lame when compared to the satisfactions that are available ... out ... there. But I believe that to be true of all media ... it's better to live a good life than to watch it in film, hear about it in music, or read it in a book. But ... I do believe in the value of films, music and books. I'm just saying, video games aren't super satisfying. Living a good life is immeasurably more so. That's important to keep in mind no matter what.

I think the key to seeing through some of the falseness of video game satisfaction is learning to find, create and enjoy other kinds of satisfaction the world has to offer. There are many. For example, I'm just now learning to love a 2 hour visit to the Art Gallery of Hamilton. I can go in there feeling any which way (sad, stressed, tired, etc.) and walk out feeling completely renewed and deeply, deeply satisfied. I love to just walk around in the quiet, uncluttered, peaceful ambiance of the gallery, and let the Spirit lead me, as I immerse myself in the sculptures, paintings and installations. That's just one example, but it's a new hobby of mine that I feel is good, good, good, good, good for me deep down in my soul. Things like having a wife and a son are also relatively new things that consistently bring deep satisfaction into my life. I used to like video games because they're a cheap easy way to "spend" hours and hours, and I used to actually buy video games with the hope of massive replay value. $20-60 for 1560 hours of some kind of fun is a good deal! But, I think part of maturing is finding the less accessible, harder-won, but deeper and more powerful satisfactions in life, because they don't leave you feeling shallow or infantile. Sage drinks milk and eats a sugar cookie or two if he's really lucky, but he just can't appreciate the kinds of meals that I can.

And this is when we get explicit about God and ask some important questions. We are told in Scripture that ultimately God is the greatest satisfaction, for every hunger and thirst. Hence the Bread of Life and Living Water titles Jesus uses. But the question is, how do we find satisfaction in God, and what does it look like here and now? Fortunately, we have Jesus' life to help us answer some of the tough God questions, but unfortunately, there was no Capcom in the ancient world. But my basic observation about the life of Jesus would be that He found His satisfaction in doing God's will, which was as specific for Jesus' life as it is for ours, but I also believe that He may have struggled to figure it out (that's debatable, but my personal opinion). But, even when He had what you might consider to be doubts (before and during His Passion week), He clearly deferred to the Father and trusted. When the disciples asked Jesus to take some food (He presumably hadn't eaten for a while) He had His mind on other things and said, "My bread is to do the will of My Father." Now, God's will is the same for all of us in some respects right. Love God, love people.

Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.
(1Th 5:16-18)

And as we get more and more specific, then God's will for you isn't necessarily the same as His will for me. So back to video games. Perhaps I find video games increasingly less satisfying because I know that God has called me to other preoccupations. A strong sense of call hinders my ability to enjoy something I used to find more satisfying.

But is that a cop out answer? Is the bigger question ... are video games just a waste of time? For anyone, anywhere? Argghhh...

My simple go-to answer on that one is going to be NO. Because I think to make that claim you have to be able to back it up. And like I said, I think there can be some benefits (although benefits are not always justifying). I do have my suspicions about television and the negative effect of flickering pixels (an excellent read is a book called "Flickering Pixels" by Shane Hipps) but I do still watch a movie (or two) a week. I just think that being outdoors and being with people, or being contemplative, reading, praying, studying, exercising, all these things are preferable, but I realize at this point that I'm simply listing what I'm biased towards, not providing solid arguments. I liked your distinction about how binge gaming is always bad. Agreed.

I read a book about "Literature through the eyes of faith" once and it said, some people read literature to escape reality, some people read it to participate more fully in reality. Two opposite uses of the same medium. The book was written by a Christian and argued that the latter was the legitimate way to engage literature and that literature was valuable when that was understood. But even with that in mind, I can still play video games and ignore reality ... such as when i'm playing a game with a great love story, soaking it in and enjoying it, but then when Gene interrupts me during the game to do a house chore, I get peeved at her for interrupting my gaming. See the problem? Is the game (love story and all) enhancing my ability to participate in the reality I live in? Not in that moment, even though I might want to think, say or believe it does. So just saying, "games help me to participate more fully in reality" is not the same as it being true. Ahhh ... I feel this email needs to be wrapped up.

I like what you wrote about co-op and I agree, things are better shared, and gaming to create community is a step up from gaming to avoid it. But then we still have to ask, does gaming create community? Does it create good community? Does it do it well? I find that my gamer buddy relationships are much shallower than my never-play-video-games-together relationships. Care to comment?

Anyway, I really am enjoying this whole conversation. It's sharpening and honest and very enjoyable. Thanks for your last letter, I'm looking forward to the next one!

Matt

P.S. At this point I'm more into cinematic games, that don't eat a lot of time but deliver in a big way. I wish more games were like this but I think developers make less money often. I still love traditional RPG's though, but is a lot of it just nostalgia? I wish they made more games like ... Zelda? Halo? Heavy Rain? I don't know ... I guess I just like the linearness, the creativity of the world's and characters, and the pace. Pace has become WAY more important to me than it ever was before. To me, pace is now one of the most crucial factors in what makes a good game, a game I'm willing to play and endorse. But that still leaves a lot of room for personal preference ... ie. I admit Bioshock was pretty awesome, but I felt the story was shallow and the world was too small (which is excusable if you have great characters and plot, but Bioshock didn't, lots of games don't, really.) Even Assassin's Creed ... a game I really liked because it had so much going for it, but I like a game like Zelda or Tomb Raider because you go to the craziest locales, and there is a lot of range and diversity, without having a free-roaming time-sink. But again, this is largely personal preference. If someone was, say, in love with Renaissance Italy, then AC2 is perfect, and I actually really did enjoy the world of AC2 for that reason and so don't think I'm saying AC2 wasn't great because it was. But, I'd like to see game developers focus more on character depth and transformation, and narrative arc and compelling plot, etc. It's hard to do that well with video games, especially because the pace is slower, and to some degree user-controlled. Arkham Asylum!!! Just thought of that. I think we need more games like that! I think you know why. Grace and peace.

This Paper Posed as Photographs

2011-07-30T14:11:00.005-04:00

So I purchased a DSLR camera about 3 months ago. I’ve been having a blast taking photographs of random things and also intentional things. I went on a 16 day trip to Costa Rica earlier this month and just loved wandering around forests and local towns, shooting whatever caught my eye. But I tried not to shoot absolutely everything that I came across. I wanted to add some sort of finesse and style to things that I thought were worth my attention. And through this, I’ve learned a valuable life lesson.

In the past few months since I got the camera, I can’t count how many times I’ve lined up what in my mind was the picture perfect shot only to have it ruined by some unforeseen circumstance (i.e. people). And it would always happen quickly too. In the short period of time that it would take to lift my camera, remove the lens cap, and position myself in the right spot, someone would walk into and stand in the shot, thus, ruining the composition.

It was a source of anxiety and frustration.

And I know that it’s wrong for me to feel that way. I shouldn’t have to be so anxious. It’s not like they’re going to stand in that spot for the whole day (although the mere minute seems like an hour at a time). Why can’t I wait? Why can’t I just be patient? If it’s really picture perfect, then it will be worth the wait when the time was right.

It’s tricky though. Sometimes what you see through the viewfinder isn’t what it really seems. Many times, it would look right as I’m shooting but when I got home and blew it up on the computer, it wouldn’t match what I had in mind. Sometimes your vision can be narrow when you’re looking down the barrel of the lens. There’s a lot around you that you might be missing or are not aware of.

It’s something that I need to keep telling myself and a lesson that I need to constantly relearn. I have to be patient in waiting for the right picture. But don’t pin it all on one picture. The world is a source of photographs waiting to be taken. Enjoy the whole process, because if there’s no joy, what’s the point of it all?

SUPER 8!!! Not super great, but at least super good.

2011-06-23T22:19:00.004-04:00

Super 8 was probably one of the movies I was most anticipating this year. And perhaps it was that self generated hype that led to a letdown. I enjoyed the movie, but I just came out thinking that I wanted to enjoy it more. When they first released that extended trailer a few months ago, there was something magical about it that even when I watch it today, gives me a chill down my spine. It looked like all those movies from the 80s that I loved.

The story follows a group of kids in a town called Lillian, Ohio who aspire to become horror movie makers by winning a local film contest. Their ragtag group has been shooting a little zombie movie on their super 8 cameras. The kids sneak off one night, joined by a girl named Alice, who happens to be the crush of the main kid, Joe. While filming a scene at the train station, they get caught in the middle of a freak accident, with a car crashing and totaling a freight train. It turns out the train was transporting a mysterious creature, known only to the government, and it is freed into Lillian. Strange things then start happening to the local community. Electronics go missing. Pets run away from the county. People go missing. Stuck in the middle are these kids, who wish to complete their film. That is until Alice disappears, sending the kids into a search and rescue mission. For our young adventurers, they find more than they were looking for.

Super 8 is a perfectly good movie. But it’s just that: good. Good is as much as I can give it, at least right now. I wish it were great, but it just lacked a certain charm that would of pushed it over the edge. The movie had all the right nostalgic elements; from the clothes, hairstyles, the music – everything worked well in capturing the atmosphere from the 80s. So technically, everything was spot on. But there was something that kept the story and, therefore, the movie from having that same feel as similar fares from that decade.

To me, why it didn’t click in the same way was how the story would shift back and forth from the kids to the adults. Granted, the adult story didn’t encompass the whole movie (it is still the child’s story to tell), but the fact that the adults had a story at all, took away some of that magic.
Why I LOVE the Goonies and enjoyed E.T. was because for the most part, it stuck with the kids unless they had to shift to the adults, who were more plot devices than part of the main plot. But the adults never had their own little story arcs, they were periphery to the main narrative.

The movie is teeming with nostalgic appeal, so anyone, such as myself, who grew up in the 80s would appreciate it. Just don’t expect another E.T. It’s still a good movie and definitely worth seeing. Til next time, later geeks.

X-Men: First Class!!! A First Class Offering!

2011-06-22T23:27:00.003-04:00

After two lacklustre offerings (in X3: Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine), X-Men: First Class explodes on to the screen with a face melting goodness not seen since X2. It is a triumphant return and a return to form in the X-Men franchise.

Set in the 60’s amidst the Cuban missile crisis, X-Men: First Class depicts the early days and the inception of the X-Men. As such, we see the origin of the friendship between Xavier (Professor X) and Erik (Magneto), destined rivals. Being an expert in mutants, Xavier is recruited by the CIA to assist in capturing a suspected mutant threat in the form of Sebastian Shaw and his Hellfire Club – a band of mutant miscreants. It’s Shaw who wants to stimulate a third World War in an effort to attain mutant supremacy. However, the CIA and the Xavier’s new team of young mutants are hot on their trail and attempt to thwart his plans in causing nuclear strikes. Meanwhile, Erik has his own agenda and seeks the blood of Shaw for the murder of his mother, killed when they were held in a German concentration camp.

What makes the movie work is its attention to the story and character building – it’s not just a summer blockbuster movie full of big flashes and loud explosions. It’s a movie with a clear direction. Come to think of it, besides a short sequence in the middle and the finale scene, there were no really long action scenes. The action is really kept minimal, used when needed, yet is still engaging. It’s a testament to good human (or mutant) drama.

However, the one thing that I wish they hadn’t done was split Xavier and Erik up so early. Clearly, they are going to be making new movies after this one, so why rush it? In the books and other X-Men media, their friendship is spoken of in such high regard. It would have been cool to see them take on other missions together and have maybe a trilogy of movies that would build up to the eventual division. As it stands now, they’re friendship was predicated on about a week’s working relationship. Sort of weak.

Perhaps this relates to the impatience of Hollywood, I mean, I had a similar problem with Thor last month. It seems things are rushed when they don’t need to be, opting for the quicker cash grab. Let things rest, let it breathe.

The movie was helmed by Matthew Vaughn who directed two other greats in Stardust and Kick-Ass and is no stranger within the geek circles. It’s almost sad to think that he was originally attached to X-Men 3 – he could have made it into something great, instead of the crapfest we received.

X-Men: First Class is the first great blockbuster movie of the season (if you don’t count Fast Five). Catch it in theaters now. Later geeks!

Who's problem is it?

2011-06-12T22:31:00.006-04:00

I’ve had a series of interesting conversations in the past 2-3 weeks, all with female friends who have described to me their life situations and relationships. With each story, a flag goes up in my head as one is similar to the next. To hear a story twice is okay, it’s not a big deal. To hear 5 or so similar stories in the span of 3 weeks tells me something is not right.

It’s been really interesting and eye opening as well. To summarize, each girl has been single – either for a bit of time or just recently. Each has the mindset of wanting to be in a relationship, so there is no doubt about their intentions. Yet, nothing has been working out. And the part that intrigues me is that in each case, it’s nearly for the same reason. The common thread between each situation is that they can’t find a proper guy that will step up to the plate to play the game. From what I gather, either the guys were too shy to initiate or do anything, or if they were in a relationship, the guys were flying by the seat of their pants, with no definitive goals or motivations. After hearing all these stories it’s made me wonder; is this a persistent problem or a growing trend? Why aren't we manning up?

Each time I’ve had these conversations, I couldn’t help but look at myself as my friends were talked about their situations. It’s made me reflect: am I similar to these kinds of guys? It’s hard to say since I’m not in a relationship, but I wonder if I’m part of the problem? I’d like to think not, but I think a bit of those characteristics exists in everyone, it’s just how prominent are they, is the question.

A friend suggested, perhaps it’s a biological sort of difference. Women are on different timelines than men. Ideally, they need certain things to happen within some sort of time frame, whereas we aren’t constrained to those same sorts of implications (or complications). Yet for a relationship to work, somehow that time frame and idea of a time frame needs to overlap.

During these conversations, I couldn’t help but sense some sort of frustration. I mean, in all cases, each person has a lot going for them – they are young, attractive, intelligent, talented, and so forth (the all important so forth!). But it’s just the one piece of the puzzle that they’re missing. And I believe it’s an important piece. However, frustration does not necessarily equate to hopelessness, and fortunately, all seemed hopeful.

Someone said to me the other day:

“At the end of the day, work is just work, it’s the relationships you have with people that make life matter.”

Romance or not, it’s true, it does help make life feel more alive. Later geeks.

THOR or BORE??!

2011-05-30T23:55:00.003-04:00

And as it’s becoming typical, another Marvel movie has opened up the summer movie season. Yes, Thor, the movie about our favourite God of Thunder. But will it be up there with the likes of Iron Man, or lower like the second Iron Man, or worst, X-Men Origins: Wolverine?

The movie starts off with a brief history lesson on Asgard, and its relationship to Earth and the rival kingdom, Jotunheim inhabited by creatures called the Frost Giants. The Asgardian King Odin, defeated the Frost Giants, and established a peace with the warring kingdoms. The story then refocuses on two brothers, Thor and Loki, the sons of Odin. One of the brothers is destined to become the new king, and as such, they are destined on a path of rivalry. After an attempt on their kingdom, Thor, both rash and impulsive, gathers his friends to make an attack on the Frost Giants. Nearly suffering defeat, the team is saved by Odin, who in anger, banishes Thor to Earth, sans all the cool powers. He lands in the deserts of New Mexico, and it’s here, where he meets scientist, Jane Foster, her sidekick, Darcy, and mentor, Dr. Selvig. It’s on Earth where Thor needs to become worthy again to regain his powers and wield the magical hammer of Mjolnir. But time is ticking as on Asgard, a sinister plan is unfolding by a likely traitor.

The movie has its share of problems, but I would say, overall, I enjoyed the movie. But it’s a marginal type of enjoy, and I’d say it’s a thumbs up at a 10 degree angle.

There were problems I had with the movie, and it mainly had to do with the story. Firstly, I think that this movie would have been better served as a sequel. The first movie should have been about Thor and his Thor-friends going on adventures, slaying beasts and saving kingdoms. You could tell throughout the movie that Thor and his Thor-friends cared for each other; it would have been exciting to see how they got to where they are at, how that trust and camaraderie was built. It’s actually these moments, when all the friends are together, that I enjoyed the most, and I wish the movie had more scenes of them working together.

I’ve heard many a-complaints about it, and I’m only tacking on, but the whole romance story was pointless. From a marketing standpoint, I can understand why they had this little story line, but it was not necessary. At no time did I feel like, wow, these two are really into each other. I mean why is it that Thor became so attached to this Jane character? There was no motivation to! What, because she listened to his story about the different realms and galaxies? Bogus!

The performances were pretty great all around, particularly, that of Tom Hiddleston, who played the evil Loki. He is a pretty darn good actor, and great at playing a hate-able character. I mean, just by his demeanour, you could tell he’s not one to be trusted. Chris Hemsworth as Thor also did well. I’m not too familiar with his body of work, but I know he did have the small role as playing Captain Kirk’s dad in that opening scene of the Star Trek reboot.

The settings and effects were fantastic. When I first saw the trailers, I thought that Asgard and its inhabitants looked ridiculous, but it really worked in the movie. Asgard was a grand place. However, this is both good and bad, and I think this contributed to that disjointed feeling with the movie. I found that every time the story shifted back to New Mexico, it took away some of that grandiose feeling. It goes from grand magical kingdom to an American desert town. Boring. Every time they went back to the desert, I wanted to see more Asgard.

The movie does build up to the Avengers movie next year, and as far as I can tell, there were three connections made, but all seemed quite lacklustre. Firstly was the unannounced Avenger cameo. Unless you knew what was going on and who he was, it was just a random addition. And he didn’t do anything cool. It was a failed attempt where much potential could have been had. Secondly, was the deal Thor struck to help SHIELD in future crises. Basically, his future involvement with the team is on the basis that they would return Jane Fosters equipment. That’s it. That’s why he’s going to be an Avenger. Stupid. Lastly, was the post-credit scene, which I guess sets up one of the key plots in the movie. Without spoiling it, it was an “oh” moment, but it didn’t “WOW” you.

Is the movie worth seeing? I’d say it’s good for a rent, but it’s nothing to rush out to see at the theaters. Even worse, the 3D adds nothing to the movie, much like Green Hornet. 2D and on TV is the way to go. So back to the original question. In the lexicon of Marvel movies, I think this is definitely below Iron Man the first, but above Iron Man the second and Wolverine. Til next time, later geeks!

FAST FIVE!!!! Five out of five!!!!

2011-05-15T20:43:00.005-04:00

I probably should have written this a week ago, but man, it’s been a busy few weeks and I’m admittedly behind on many things. But hey, better late than never! And what a movie to talk about... Fast Five!

The movie starts off as we see Dom being hauled away to prison, for crimes from the previous movie. He’s taken away in cuffs and placed on a prison bus, as his friend and sister, O’Conner and Mia look on. A high speed chase ensues as O’Conner and Mia chase after the prison bus, attempting to free Dom. They speed in front of the bus and grind to a stop. The prison bus hits the little sports car, sending the bus flying and flipping through the air. Yet somehow, the sports car is umoved and undamaged! Cue opening titles. The opening scene pretty much tells you where the rest is going.

The movie then fast forwards to Rio, where the rest of the movie takes place. To avoid arrest in the US, the band is in Brazil conducting small heists to get by. Unfortunately, they steal a car owned by the most notorious crime lord in the city – a car that is of some special value i.e. bad news for our heroes. Now, not only are they the targets of US Federal agents led by The Rock, but now a gang of hot blooded Brazilians are after them. But they are not alone. In an Avengers-Assemble type sequence, our heroes recruit an array of characters from previous Fast and Furious movies. And it’s together that they pull off the biggest heist that they’ve ever done.

This movie is a wild fun ride! I’ve said it before, I love team based action movies. It’s why I enjoyed The Losers so much last year, and to a similar degree, The A-Team. The scene where the team finally comes together is classic. The only shitty thing is that it takes so long before this all happens. Going into the movie, I thought that they were going to assemble earlier on. Not so unfortunately.

The tone and action in the movie borders on the level of normally and comically ridiculous, but since it’s just a notch below, it’s still somehow in the realm of seriousness. But really, it’s not too far off from being The Other Guys. So although there are serious moments, you never take it TOO seriously. And most of the action defies the laws of physics, so belief must be suspended to some degree!

The cast does what it’s supposed to do in a movie like this – flex muscles, fire guns, drive fast cars and look good. You’re not watching a Fast and Furious movie for the acting chops. So in that regard, everything is met. The standout though, is the introduction of The Rock’s character which really made the movie for me. He is a constant source of one liners and bravado throughout the film. He is a key contributor of the fun in this movie. And the dream fight sequence between him and Vin Diesel? Yah, it’s here. And I swear, his biceps were growing half an inch bigger with each scene.

Using Rio as the primary location was a smart idea. The favelas continue to look great on screen. Despite the grittiness and ruggedness, it is a beautiful city bringing in a character in of itself. Seeing the city, I was reminded of Elite Squad, which if you haven’t seen, you must.

This is a feather in the cap for director Justin Lin, who hasn’t exactly had the best track record in doing movies, but hopefully this will be a step in the right direction. Based on the current success of Fast Five, he is being tapped as the director in the next instalment of the Terminator series.

Thinking the whole thing through, I think why I really enjoyed the movie was for the little lessons that it teaches you. I know what you’re thinking, “Fast Five taught you something?”. Well yes, indeed it did. It taught me the moral that the asian guy always gets the hot girl. I can go to sleep better knowing that.

Til next time, later geeks!

Source Code!!!!!!!!!!!

2011-04-16T10:32:00.004-04:00

The movie going public can sometimes be frustrating. We cry about the lack of originality and complain about the onslaught of prequels, sequels, spin-offs and what-have-you, yet when we’re finally given something new and original, we don’t go out and see it. And that’s exactly what happened with Source Code. Source Code, which received a whopping 90% on RT opened with a measly $14 million on its debut weekend (second only to Hop which did a ridiculous $37 mil despite being slammed all around). Which tells me one thing – our western nation is full of idiots. Moving on.

Source Code follows Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) who wakes up one day on a train in front of a complete stranger. He has no idea what’s happened or how he got there and has no idea why this woman in front of him is calling him Sean. After a bout with confusion, he winds up in the washroom of the train. When he looks into the mirror, it’s not his own face he sees but the face of a man he doesn’t know. He steps out of the washroom and... BOOM! What the hell! Colter wakes up strapped inside of a capsule like chamber with monitors and screens surrounding him. A military official named Goodwin begins communicating with him through the video screen. He learns that he’s part of a program called Source Code (un-italicized), a technology that somehow uses the brain of a deceased, to backtrack 8 minutes in time before the original brain owner died. They are able to backtrack over and over, reliving those same 8 minutes each time. The train he was on exploded earlier in the day and he was sent there via Source Code to discover the bomb and the bomber before the terrorist pulls off another disaster.

The story is captivating and intriguing. It’s a Hitchcockian-like mystery, with Colter thrown into the middle of this mission not knowing what’s going on. Each time that he returns to this pseudo world, he discovers something new, both inside and outside of this reality. The plot is full of twists that will keep your brain racking with your butt at the end of your seat.

Everyone does well in their respective roles with Gyllenhaal, Michelle Monaghan, Vera Farmiga and Jeffrey Wright rounding out the cast. For me, Jeffrey Wright stole the show as the eccentric scientist who created the source code. Everyone plays their roles pretty straight, but it’s Wright who adds a little nuance to his role.

It’s too bad that not many people went out to see this. The Jake Gyllenhaal curse goes on. The poor guy just can’t get anything off the ground. Is the man destined to be a supporting player at best?

The film was directed masterfully by a young man named Duncan Jones (son of David Bowie!), who also did Moon (a movie I haven’t seen yet, but which has received much acclaim). Word on the street is that higher-ups at Fox were so impressed that they’re trying to attach him to the now director-less Wolverine (which un-fucking-fortunately, Darren Aronofsky left last month). I’m glad that Fox is doing something smart and not Brett-Ratner-izing the Wolverine franchise and doing something smart by attaching Jones.

At the mainstream level, it’s probably the best movie released so far this year. You might as well see it while it’s still in the theatres because honestly, there’s only shit playing right now. And by the look of this week’s release schedule, there’s tons more shit on the way! Until next time, later geeks!

Battle: L.A.!!!!!!!! Ah, hell.

2011-04-06T00:05:00.002-04:00

World Invasion: Battle L.A. Oh no. This was not a good movie.

There isn’t very much to the story. The movie takes place in August 2011, when one day aliens decide to invade our world. As it goes, the aliens have pretty much taken all over all of the major cities on the west coast… all save for Los Angeles. The movie follows Staff Sergeant Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) and his platoon of grunts as they look for a way to save the city and any civilians that they come across.

Battle L.A. is a lazy man’s Independence Day, without the fun or the tongue in cheek smarminess of Will Smith (awww hay-llll naw!). The story moves A to B without any feeling or emotion. What also hurts is the lack of a climax that is almost pivotal in big action blockbuster type movies. It lacks the sense of direness that one would associate with a world invasion. So the story doesn’t give you anything worth buying into and what’s worse is that they don’t give you any characters worth investing into either. Everyone is one dimensional. They’re quickly introduced at the beginning with a short blurb each, and we’re supposed to care? So with no good story and no good characters, what’s the point in watching the movie then? Loud noises and big explosions, if that is your thrill.

And I guess that is the one positive thing. I liked the way the action was filmed. I know a lot of people don’t like the shaky-cam style of filming, but I really like the grittiness that it adds to a movie. The action in this movie is frantic and the shaky-cam works well with it, making you feel like you’re right there in the battle with the platoon.

The movie pretty much hits all the Michael Bay-ian dramatic cues, complete with pep talk speeches meshed with a sentimental score, but clearly without the $200 million Michael Bay-ian budget. I was talking to my friend at work about this movie, shortly before it was released. It looked like a higher budget version of Skyline which was released (unfortunately) last year. But nothing, and I mean, NOTHING, should be compared to Skyline. What a wretched piece of shit!

And I will end as I began. World Invasion: Battle L.A. Oh no. This was not a good movie. Later geeks.

Hobo With A Shotgun!!!!!

2011-04-03T20:16:00.003-04:00

I love movies where the title describes what you’re going to get. Like Snakes on a Plane. Or Hot Tub Time Machine. There’s no ambiguity. Here you have a hobo. You give him a shotgun. Hobo With A Shotgun! Of course!!! The math couldn’t get any simpler.

Hobo With A Shotgun follows an unnamed hero/hobo as he lands in the town of Scumtown (or was it Fucktown?) after hopping from a train. Upon arrival, he quickly learns that the narcissistic Drake, along with his sons Slick and Ivan, run the town after witnessing a literal blood bath in the middle of the streets. The town is infested with drug, violence and heinous crime in general not unlike that of the Detroit depicted in Robocop 1 to 3. The Hobo sees it all and watches with a sick sort of disbelief. What the fuck is wrong with this town? After saving a prostitute named Abby from Slick, Hobo experiences his first run-in with the corruption in the town. Abby befriends the Hobo, and it’s not long before he shares with her his dream of owning a lawnmower and cutting lawns. It’s the dream that keeps him attached to reality. After leaving Abby’s, he cuts a deal with some rapscallions on the street to make a few bucks. With cash on hand, he heads to the pawn shop to purchase the lawnmower of his dreams. But all does not go according to plan. While at the store, he finds himself in the middle of a robbery. It’s here that he makes a life altering choice: should he purchase the lawnmower or the shotgun? Can you guess which he went with? From here on out, it’s a blood and guts affair to the nines, as he rights all the wrongs in the city. The Hobo becomes a folk hero to the citizens of Fucktown.

It’s funny. Coming out of Hobo, I felt positive about the movie but I didn’t come out loving it as I thought I would have – I just liked it, that’s all. However, it’s been a few days and the movie is starting to sink in. At the time, I think I was at a 6.5, now I feel more like a 7.

I’ve thought about it more today, I realized that the movie is allegorical to the current crisis in the Middle-East and North Africa. From the get-go, we’re introduced to the tyrannical leader who rules the citizens with an iron fist. Eventually, the people revolt and the revolution starts with the voice of a few which leads to a change for the many. And in Hobo With A Shotgun, it’s done one shell at a time.

Rutger Hauer as the titular Hobo, really makes the movie. His performance is a cut above the rest. He really owns it as the Hobo. Unfortunately, it makes everyone else look like amateurs... although, I think the majority of them were actually amateurs, so it’s no real knock against them. I don’t know if the movie would be as enjoyable without Hauer.

I really like the feel and the setting of the movie. It is akin of something from the 80s. All the tech is lo-fi, complete with boxy TVs, VHS tapes, arcade machines, etc. No cell phones or flatscreens in this production!

For gorehounds, fear not, the movie is nice and gory. Blood and guts litter the streets of Fucktown. I find these over-the-top type movies hilarious as in it seems like everyone is made of either glass or water balloons – they break and pop with the slightest hit. Speaking of over-the-top style shit, there is a lot of unexplainable stuff in the movie. There’s a lot of random things thrown in and it’s never questioned, it’s just a part of their world.

The soundtrack is also quite killer, pardon the pun. It is as cheese-tastic and corny as something straight out of the 70’s or 80’s.

But it’s not all love. I did have a few gripes with the movie. Firstly is the visual style. While most of it is gritty and good, there are sequences where it’s too much for the eyes. I’m talking mostly of those night scenes or dark scenes that are almost like watching cosmo-bowling or that scene from Batman & Robin where Robin and Batgirl are fighting off these neon hoodlums in a backalley. Hmm. And how dare I bring up Batman & Robin! The audacity!

The movie also wasn’t as laugh-out-loud as I hoped it would be. It’s certainly funny, but funny ‘hehe’ instead of funny ‘HAHA’. Hobo could have used more one-liners, heck, he could of talked more, because anytime his mouth opened, it was gold.

The film was Canadian produced and shot in quaint Nova Scotia. In addition with Incendies which I saw last month, I feel even more proud to be a Canadian. Though two diametrically opposite films, I enjoyed both.

This is the second movie to become a full length feature based on fake trailers attached to the Grindhouse double feature (Planet Terror and Deathproof), with the first being Machete. Although the movie is not quite as polished as Machete, it’s the low budgetedness of the movie that gives it its charm. It’s playing in Canadian theaters now, and I believe is getting a US release in May. If you’re a fan of Grindhouse-like movies, then this is a no brainer! Later geeks!

“Hold on while I wipe this guy’s asshole off my face.”
-Hobo; Hobo With a Shotgun

Batman: Arkham Asylum!!!!!!! (Xbox 360)

2011-03-29T00:09:00.000-04:00

Batman: Arkham Asylum. What an epic game! Never has there been a Batman game, or superhero game in general, that has made you feel more like the titular character. For the first time in my life, I lived through Batman’s shoes (or boots) and I loved it!

The game starts out with a long sequence that sort of maps out where the rest of the game is going. You (playing as Batman) arrive at Arkham Asylum with a delivery on hand: the Joker. You escort him with the police as they transfer him through the prison. In this sequence you get a peak at some of the different rooms and corridors that you will be battling through and also glimpses of some of the foes that you will be encountering, including a hulk like Killer Croc. Before long, something goes haywire in the transfer and the Joker is freed, and assumes control over the asylum. The dastardly Joker conceives of a plan to create an unstoppable army of juggernauts to reign upon the city via prison inmates and a growth serum called the Titan. But thankfully you’re Batman, and ass-kicking is your number skill.

The game is visually stunning, incorporating the Unreal 3 engine. Batman and almost every character within the game are jacked to the gills, with their clothes or costumes hardly containing all the muscles underneath. It is quite impressive and intimidating to see Batman as this steroid-type beast. It helps in giving you that sense that he’s handing out some serious ass kickings during the fights throughout the game.

One of the things that boosted my joy for this game was that I was expecting one thing, but received something totally different. And usually, that’s a shitty deal, but in the case of Batman: Arkham Asylum it worked out superbly. You see, I thought that the game was going to be a straight-up beat ‘em up title (and granted, part of it is), but the game actually deals more with the detective (as Batman is!) and stealth/espionage aspects. While the option of running head-on into a room full of bad guys and kicking the tar out of them is available, the more effective approach is to stalk your prey from the ceilings and crevasses of the chambers. And it is a more safer approach as Batman can withstand only 3 or so gunshots before he succumbs to his wounds. The game is designed meticulously, for example if the henchmen come across the unconscious bodies of any of their friends, they will be overcome with fear and start acting nervously.

The detective mode of the game is one of the devices that help drive the story. Often you will have to scan for DNA, fingerprints or other residue in order to find your next destination. You’re given access to different visual modes that will aid you in this process. You’ll end up spending more time in the detective mode than the regular mode, only because it offers up so much more information, in respect to usable environment and the statuses on bad guys.

Combat, though basic in form, can actually get pretty deep. It’s a one-button system for fighting, but you’re also given a block and a counter button. The key to success though is chaining together as many hits as you can with your combos, thus minimizing the amount of damage you take. You also need to watch for visual cues to know when to counter. In true Batman fashion, you don’t kill your enemies, but incapacitate them instead. Armed at your disposal are a number of items, some that can be used during fights, while others are used for maneuvering around the environments within Arkham Asylum.

What really solidified this game for me was the superb voice acting. Reprising their roles as Batman and the Joker are Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill, respectively, from their days on Batman the Animated Series, a show held in high regard within geekdom. Usually voice work is something I brush off or don’t take too much notice to, but Conroy really brings Batman to life, allowing you to feel like you’re in that role.

I can’t think of a single bad thing or complaint about the game. The only thing I can say is that I wanted more, but that’s not a knock against the game, and on that regard, they’re releasing a sequel later this year, so that’s something to look forward to.

Batman: Arkham Asylum is well worth the time and even better, you can find it at the retailers for $30 or less nowadays. I like playing backlog games, it’s easy on the wallet! Until next time, later geeks!

Torsten Krol's CALLISTO!!

2011-03-26T09:45:00.003-04:00

From around Christmas time, I had a good momentum going in terms of reading the stack of books I’ve got lying beside my bed. I knocked out 3 titles in the span of a month, which for me, is a fast pace. But when I started reading Torsten Krol’s Callisto, the pace grinded to a near halt. It’s not that it’s a bad story, but I just never felt that connection with the characters as I had with the last book I read (that being Slam by Nick Hornby, love, love, love).

Callisto follows a big lummox of a character named Deefus Odell (an astute individual, as you can tell by that name). Deefus is from the south and isn’t the brightest crayon, but somehow he manages to get by. Without a clear direction in life, he decides that the only thing to do is to join the army and serve the country. He drives across Kansas to hopefully do just that. Unfortunately, his Chevy breaks down in the middle of this small town called Callisto and it’s here where all the fun begins.

He meets a local yokel named Dean who helps him out by setting him up with his lawn mowing business. By pure accident, Deefus accidently kills Dean one night which sets off a series of events, putting him at the center of a terrorism situation, involving the news media, drug dealers, the FBI, the government and the church. If it all sounds zany, well it is. The story is a satire on the state of the US and the war on terror.

I picked it up at the book store not knowing too much about it. I read the back, was intrigued and also quickly browsed some reviews online before picking it up. One of the reviews I read described the story as Forrest Gump-like, which I was sold on. However, that analogy is very loose. Deefus is Forrest Gump-like in that he’s naïve and a bit slow, but that’s where the comparisons end. Because of his southern charm, it’s hard to avoid the comparison of Deefus’ speaking skills to that of George Dubya, which provides some good comedy.

The story was a bit too slow moving for me, that plus the characters that I couldn’t connect to made it a difficult read to plow through. However, the last third of the book moves well when pieces of the puzzle start coming together. Still, the ending leaves a bit more to be desired. The story is laced with dark and oftentimes, odd humour. But at the same time, it's never laugh out loud type humour.

Author Torsten Krol is a bit of an enigma himself. He supposedly resides in Australia, but not very much else is known about the elusive author. Some say that it’s just a pseudonym for a more well known author and interestingly, some claim that he is Stephen King. I think a story about this mysterious Krol would be more interesting, if it is indeed Stephen King.

For me, the book is a tough recommend only because the pacing didn’t work for me. If you’re up for reading a satire then I suppose it might work for you. Til next time, later geeks!

INCENDIES!!!!!

2011-03-22T00:04:00.000-04:00

It’s an unfortunate and unfair thing, but when it comes to Canadian movies, I usually dismiss them before I give them a chance. There’s just this false stigma that I have with Canadian produced movies – that they’re cheesy or boring or in general, just not worth my time. That said, if a friend recommends me something, I’ll be open to the recommendation. Incendies would be one of those, and wow, I don’t know if I can look at Canadian films the same way after this. This was a powerful movie.

Incendies is a French-Canadian made movie that was nominated for an Academy Award this year for best foreign film. When I first read the nominations, I thought it peculiar that a Canadian film would be considered “foreign”. Sure we’re not American, but all things considered, we’re not THAT different or foreign. But after seeing the movie, it totally makes sense why it would.

Incendies is a journey that follows twins, Simon and Jeanne, as they uncover the dark past of their dying mother. Her dying request is for the twins to deliver letters to their alleged father and a long lost brother. With their detective caps on, they travel to the Middle East to put together the puzzle that is their mother’s past life. It’s a past that’s filled with darkness and depravity, and one that unfortunately connects with their births.

Incendies is gritty and it is violent; a cold blooded sort of violence that you don’t typically see. Once the reel rolls, there is no letting down and nary a lighthearted moment. It is a bleak and emotional story. What I really liked about the movie was director Denis Villeneuve’s approach to the content. Much of the time, we don’t see the evil acts on screen. We see the before and we see the after – he allows our imaginations to fill in the rest.

The movie is presented about half in flashbacks and half during present day. Although the base for the movie is in Quebec, the majority of the movie takes place in the Middle East.

The cinematography is breathtaking, with a tone that perfectly matches the context of the movie. The movie has this raw and rugged feel that looks immaculate in digital projection. Adding to the atmosphere are the strategically placed Radiohead songs that are interlaced with key scenes.

Incendies is a breath of fresh air amongst the vapid choices out in the cinemas nowadays. Despite the bleakness of the story, I feel proud that it’s a Canadian made movie. It’s a reminder to myself that we too are capable of goodness! I don’t think it’s playing at many screens out there, but if you’re living in Toronto, it’s playing at the TIFF Bell Lightbox (thanks Elyse for the connection!).

See good filmmaking. See good Canadian filmmaking. See Incendies. Until next time, later geeks!

ADJUSTMENT BUREAU... I wish they could re-adjust my time

2011-03-11T00:04:00.001-05:00

Well, at least I didn't go in with high expectations.

I didn't know too much about the movie going in; it was a story by Philip K. Dick and it seemed Inception-like. And in some ways, it was, but not in a good way. You see, I had the same problem with The Adjustment Bureau as I did with Inception. Both movies introduced these really cool, geeky and intriguing ideas but they were all used to pull off such a small scope of story. In Inception, it was a heist movie, in Bureau, it was a love story.

The story follows a young and hopeful US politician named David Norris who is running for a seat in the Senate. Despite his popularity, he fails to win the election after a would-be scandal jeopardizes his campaign. He bumps into a young woman hiding in the men’s bathroom stalls, who not only encourages him but charms him, inspiring him to go rogue in his concession speech. The speech takes off with the crowd, giving him an upward momentum in the next election. But was he supposed to bump into the woman? The next day as he heads to work, lo and behold, he bumps into the woman again, this time on the bus. Is it fated? Cue in the Bureau. Norris happens upon them by chance. The Bureau is represented by a group of well dressed men in business suits and ominous looking characters in SWAT outfits. The Bureau is not of our world. The Bureau controls or "adjusts" our actions behind the scenes. When things don't go according to the "Chairman's" plans, your life will be re-adjusted to get you back on track. The rest of the movie follows Norris around as he struggles with the intentions of the Bureau while searching for his love... this woman that he keeps bumping into.

At the end of the movie, me and my brother looked at each other and said, “is that it?”. The auditorium collectively groaned. I think we all felt a victim of the ol’ bait-and-switch. Beforehand, I had only seen the trailer once or twice, but I was under the impression that it was going to be this sci-fi-ish action-y thriller. I was wrong. We all were.

This was a geek romance movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ARRRRRGHGGHH!

Thank goodness for Matt Damon. While the movie was no good for me, I still enjoy his acting. Doubly delightful is Emily Blunt, who I don't think I've ever seen in a movie before. I know her more as John Krasinski's wife than for her acting creds. She's pretty babetastic, it's no wonder Matt Damon's character searches years for her. Rounding out the named stars is General Zod himself, Terence Stamp. He pretty much plays the role that Frank Langella did in the Unknown last month.

While as a whole I didn't enjoy the movie, I did find redeeming things about the movie. The thing that made me go, “wha~!?”, was the subject matter of God (or the Chairman as they call it) and the idea of your life’s plans. Are you in control of them or are they completely someone else's? Hmmm. The whole idea is explored throughout the movie. The idea of life's plans and freewill are bounced around back and forth. It's interesting. It’s not a Christian standpoint at all, but more from a generic theological perspective. So if that subject matter piques your interest, Bureau might not hurt.

Anyhow, I didn't like it a whole lot, I'd say it's worth a rent or an On-Demand order at best. Go in with expectations low... like real low... don't expect action... expect kissing and romance and gooey stuff, and then I suppose you'll enjoy it. Til next time, later geeks!

On With Encouragements.

2011-03-07T00:03:00.001-05:00

So originally this was part of the post that I put up last week, but when I started reading the rough draft, I realized that the whole thing sounded disjointed because the two trains of thought were loosely tied together. Well, I separated the two so hopefully the two thoughts are more coherent now.

I was reading 1 Thessalonians the other week, and there’s one line, though a short line, that really resonated with me. There’s so much wisdom within the fewest words sometimes. It’s at the beginning of chapter 3, where Paul talks about having sent Timothy to the church of Thessalonica, to encourage and strengthen the people there. He wasn’t sent there to do or complete any certain physical task, but he was sent there just to be a spiritual boost, to give them a 1-up mushroom if you will. His “job” was to encourage people. How crazy is that? How many people do you know in your life whose job is to solely encourage people? That would fly around the country just to encourage?

This got me thinking about the city. Perhaps it’s always been there and I just never took notice, but our city is one filled with so much angst. You don’t have to walk very far down Yonge Street before you find someone cussing or cursing another out or couples at each other’s throats. It really stood out to me in the past year, where on numerous occasions commuters would take videos or pictures of transit operators “sleeping” or in general, not doing their job, then have these videos or pictures published in the news or newspapers. Y’know, what a shitty thing to do. We’re blinded by the planks in our own eyes.

It just reminds me sometimes of how our city (or world if you want to take it that far) is so broken.

Sometimes it drives me nuts inside to think that people can be so shitty to each other. But I guess that’s the whole point of my writing today. We don’t have to be the way the world would want us to be. We’re called to be opposite if we are to strive for that “upside-down” gospel. Why can’t we be people of encouragement? Though shit breeds shit, good still breeds good.

So for the past few weeks, I’ve been trying to intentionally encourage people around me. I have friends that are attempting to quit smoking, and I try to encourage them. Me and some friends at work started running this past month, and so we’ve been encouraging each other. I’ve been trying to encourage those friends who are in school and feeling the pressures associated with it.

Interestingly enough, last Sunday, our pastor preached on loving one another. How when love is overflowing, can be infectious and rub off on the people surrounding you. It’s what true community is and is a necessary underlying foundation. [Side note: this is likely the billionty-oneth time that this has happened, where some idea or thought really active in my mind in the past week, will be the focus of the message that following Sunday. I think this month it’s been 4 for 4. A good batting average!]

So I con’t encourage you enough, reader, to be aware of those around you and just pay them a compliment. You never know who may be yearning to hear it. Later geeks!

Side Story

During the afternoon of the day when I started drafting this post, our crew at work went for a run. Just for background, it’s our winter attempt at staying fit while raising funds for a charity (win-win situation, it’s the best!). Anyhow, while we were running along Eglinton Avenue East (a busy stretch of road), we came across a group of 20 or so random teenagers that were cheering us on. Hooting and hollering, “go runners!”, meanwhile dishing out high-fives. Me and my friend Megan were laughing because it was so ridiculous! “What the heck’s going on!”, I said. Now, there’s a-plenty good chance that they were mocking us, but I’m going to be forcefully naive and say that they were sincerely cheering and encouraging us because I’m about positive thinking here, HA~! But even if not, when we got to a red traffic light on that same stretch shortly after, there was a girl there (older than those teens) who was on the phone, but paused in her conversation to tell us, “good job runners!”.

After we all arrived back at the office for refreshments, those that ran that route talked about it. I was saying how I needed that encouragement, that booster, those few words, as I was dying! I mean c’mon folks, I’ve got a physique built for a gamer, not an athlete! I thought I was going to pass out! It’s funny how just a few positive words can shape the way someone thinks.

I’m glad all that happened. It reminded me that good hearts are in the city and that we can continue to strive to encourage each other. You may never know how your words, no matter how little, can affect those around you.

"Let's stop the pointless fighting and let's start living in loving... did you know we all pump the same red blood into our veins? Did you know that we all wish upon the same stars for the same things? Heart and heart our hands they all fit, this is the world as we know it."
-The Morning Of; The World As We Know It

Liam Neeson in UNKNOWN!!!!!!!!!

2011-03-02T00:06:00.000-05:00

Apparently (from what I’ve read and heard) the movie was marketed completely identical to Taken, from 2 years ago. Taken is a movie that I love for its showcasing of Liam Neeson in a total badass form. Now, besides seeing the poster, I knew nothing about Unknown except for what my friend told me shortly before we walked into the theater. I don’t even think I’ve seen the trailer beforehand. All I knew was that from the poster,

The story follows a scientist named Martin Harris (Liam Neeson) who arrives in Germany with his wife (January Jones) for a conference. Shortly after arriving at their hotel, he realizes that his luggage and identification was left at the airport and takes a cab back to retrieve it. However, on their way back, the cab gets into a little traffic scrimmage and ends up going off a bridge into the river below. Harris is trapped and drowns, that is until the superhero-like cab driver rescues and resuscitates him. He wakes up at a local hospital, and finds it odd that no one knows who he is or where he came from. He returns back to the hotel to find that not everything is as it once seemed; he finds his wife, but unfortunately, she does not recognize him. And in fact, some stranger is posing as her husband, and claims to be exactly him, Martin Harris. A mystery, dear reader, is afoot!

As a whole, the movie is solidly-pretty-alright; a 3 out of 3 on the 7 out of 10 scale, I’ve been saying. I think where Taken has the edge is with its intense action. Unknown is more methodic and slow-plodding, more apt for a mystery story, for which it mostly is. It’s not until the last 20 to 30 minutes where we see some semblance of action.

There is the one sort-of-plothole that stuck out to me. Oh, and I should preface this with a mild ***SEMI-SPOILER WARNING***. Why is it that when Liam Neeson remembers everything prior to the car crash, that all of a sudden he decides to be a good guy? I mean, with everything before the car accident and drowning, he was technically a bad guy. What reasons did he have to have a change of heart? Shouldn’t he have been like, oh yeah, I was a bad guy, commence evil. Moreover, as a former assassin, he pretty much is a wimp until the last act of the movie. Definitely not the Jason-Bourne-style of memory loss.***SEMI-SPOILERS OVER!***

What made the movie enjoyable is Liam Neeson. He has this very commanding onscreen presence where if he talked, you were sure to listen. He did not pwn as much as in Taken, but he made up for it with some strangely timed one-liners. Aidan Quinn on the otherhand, as the villain, I couldn’t buy. He just doesn’t come across as a believable bad guy. Frank Langella on the otherhand, even before he says anything, you know he’s up to something. Langella has a knack for playing this type of character; an ominous and mystery well-dressed old man.

As a whole, it’s worth a rental at worst. If you’ve got the time and money, then on the big screen couldn’t hurt. It’s a zany story, but thanks to Liam Neeson, it works. Until next time, later geeks!

A Self-Rebuttal: Down, Set, Go

2011-02-25T20:22:00.002-05:00

You know sometimes when you write things and they sound fine as you’re writing them, but as your read your own words afterwards, how they might come across differently? Well, I re-read yesterday’s post this morning and totally got that feeling.

Specifically when I wrote: “With this in mind, whether God grants you your dreams or not, if you have this very type of hope within you, do those plans or dreams even matter?”. It makes it sound as though your own dreams don’t matter, and that’s not what I was trying to say. I mean, that is a bit harsh! Especially myself, as a big dreamer; always gazing at the skies.

But y’know, I put a question mark there at the end, because it’s a legitimate question I have with God. It’s nothing definitive or directive, just something I’ve been wondering about. How do our dreams play into His plan, if even at all?

Maybe it’s like in Inception, where an idea that’s Inception’d, becomes this great source of motivation and inspiration, one that could change an entire outlook on life.

Back when I was in school and even coming out, I had this plan, not an entire concrete plan, but a list of milestones that I wanted to hit in a certain order. It was a list that included career direction, “stuff” (having a home, where I’d be living, what I’d be driving), family, relationships and so forth. But I had an epiphany after getting out of school: wouldn’t life be boring if it went along the way I planned it?

I certainly don’t think it’s bad to dream, but I think it can turn bad if you anchor your life to just one picture in your head; an “ideal” picture that would take precedence over all other aspects in your life. Life is full of colour and spontaneity. Imagine all the greatness we’d miss out on.

Upside Down To Be Right Side Up

2011-02-24T21:01:00.004-05:00

For the past few weeks, I've been thinking a lot about the idea of the Bible as the upside-down gospel, as described by one of my pastors last year. It revolves around the idea of irony, how many stories told within the Bible are based on backwards thinking - turning the whole thing upside down, if you will.

When cursed, you bless.
To be last, is to be first.
To be poor, is to be rich.
To be level 4 gnome healer, is to be level 85 dungeon raid leader.

Well, I'm sure that last one will appear in the new edition of the Bible someday. But you get my point, we are to be opposite from the way the world would want us to be. A life lived in irony, since we're not living for the world.

So I was thinking about things in my life right now and the direction I wanted life to go. A life of uncertainty, where every dream in the seas of opportunity are anchored to question marks. But that I guess, is the inherent problem with all this, I was thinking about the things that *I* want in life.

I was talking to my friend Drew last week. He shared with me a story that he's shared a few times before because of its significance in his life. Drew has this great passion to be within the acting industry; an industry that he's been pursuing for the past few years. Despite attending classes upon classes and auditions upon auditions, he could not sign onto anything solid. The stress and pressure was building; was it worth chasing after this dream? After some hard thinking and praying, he finally conceded that it was about God's desires for him, and not his own for himself - where God should want him to be, there he'd go.

Life then took an unexpected but welcomed turn. Later that week, he signed onto a role for this Canadian-made war movie. Not too far long after that, he signed a deal to become a TV host on a children's block of programming every afternoon. God's grace is amazing.

But the point of the story is this, that the opportunities that came only arose after realizing that God was the only true thing worth chasing for. The upside-down gospel. It is an immeasurable act of faith; to sacrifice a personal desire in order to show your commitment to God.

And it's something easier said than done. You can tell yourself easily, that you're going to give up your own plans for God. But to fully realize and convince 100% of yourself, including that small voice in the back of your head (that would tell you otherwise), is something completely different. It requires a total commitment and understanding of being a servant and disciple of God.

And perhaps after that point, God will give you that thing that you desired in the first place. But will you accept it and embrace it if he doesn't? Who's plans do you desire to live out?

It is similar to the story of the rich young ruler. When asked Jesus what he must do to receive eternal life, was told to sell all his possessions and "follow me".

This past Sunday, my pastor preached this amazing message on hope and hopelessness, that we ought to stop living miserably, open up the eyes of our hearts to see all the goodness that surrounds us. We are his inheritance. With this in mind, whether God grants you your dreams or not, if you have this very type of hope within you, do those plans or dreams even matter? It is a matter of faith and trust. Trust that He's doing good for you. Trust that He's for you, and not against you.

Nick Hornby's SLAM!!!!!!!!!

2011-02-22T00:15:00.000-05:00

Nick Hornby continues to be my favourite author and Slam further solidifies this. He writes about me, without writing about me. He writes about characters who have one foot forward into growing up, but with their other foot firmly rooted into their childhood. Like in High Fidelity or About a Boy, they’re stories of men who don’t want to grow up. So Slam follows this trend of characters, except it turns things on its head a bit. Instead of a story about grownups, this is a story about a teenager; someone who is half-way between childhood and adulthood. With the analogy of one foot forward and one foot back, the teen would probably be mid-way... that’s right, in the crotch region of life.

The story is about a 16-year old boy named Sam who is raised by his single mother who conceived him when she was a teenager. Sam is a typical teenager, the one that’s sort of breezing through life, without any clear direction or motivation to take his life anywhere. He’s a big fan of skating (as in skateboarding, but he refuses to use the full term and frowns upon those that do) and idolizes his hero, pro-skater Tony Hawk. He’s read his biography over and over, and confides in a poster of him which hangs on his wall. Anytime anything goes wrong in life, he laments to the poster of his struggles and problems. Any responses that Tony gives Sam are always in the form of excerpts from his biography. His imaginary celebrity friend is his closest confidant.

Things get more complicated when Sam meets Alicia, the attractive daughter of family friends. It gets complicated because they’re both teens. And teens are sometimes stupid. There is an ironic twist of fate that’s topped off by some weird events (without trying to spoil anything… okay, I’ll spoil it at the bottom via inviso-text). The rest of the story follows Sam as he struggles to accept the responsibilities associated with his new life.

Though Sam is a teenager, he’s written similarly to characters from Hornby’s previous books. It’s perhaps because they all go through similar struggles; finding out new responsibilities coupled with the fear and unwillingness to accept them. Sam just wants the simplicity and comfort of the old life. Hornby makes some strange choices though. The one that puzzled me the most was why he would use Tony Hawk as the idol figure, and not say, David Beckham, as Hornby is a diehard soccer/football fan and given that the story takes place in England. He does try something new with Sam’s character, and without spoiling what happens, it’s something that you wouldn’t think would happen to characters in this type of story (I’ll explain in the inviso-text).

I can totally relate to this story though, or more so to Sam’s character, it’s how I’ve always seen my life. One part of me wants to grow up but another part of me refuses to. I was talking to one of my former pastor’s about this years ago. He, who is near 50 but is still the biggest kid, said that you can mature but you should never grow up. The fun and joy in life would be taken away.

Needless to say, after reading the book, it made me think a lot about growing up, trying to grow up or whether I should even try. I’ve always felt like ‘the kid’ in any social type of situations or the ‘young gun’ at my work. A lot of the new friends I’ve met over the past year can’t even believe I’m as old as I say I am because my attitude is “youthful”. It’s not like I do anything immature or stupid, but my outlook on life is just to be chill. And I’m glad that I am this way.

The timing of when I read this book is also interesting (at least to me). Already the book had me thinking a lot about “growing up”. That same weekend at my church, my pastor preached a sermon about how we need to “grow up” or mature as Christians and in our roles as part of the body of Christ. And on top of that, I made a commitment a month ago that enacted this same weekend to give up watching, listening, and following in general, anything that was related to prowrestling, in support of a friend who was giving up smoking; one distinct way that I needed to “grow up”. So the timing was very relevant. That week, I also started listening to the musician Jonsi, and I had his album on repeat the whole time. It really helped create the atmosphere of the book for me.

As a big fan of Hornby, how could I not recommend this book? Especially if you’re a young man, it’s a worthwhile read. I guarantee that Hornby (through Sam) struggled with the same sorts of questions that you have with life. Until next time, later geeks!

[Secret Inviso-Text Spoilers (highlight to reveal): the weird events have to do with a sort of out-of-body and time travel experience. He wakes up as himself 3 times in the future, and is frightened by everything he sees. However, life loops around, and he offers some insightful words about how things can change even though things may stay the same. At first, I didn’t like this time travelling aspect, but it’s when it first loops around that made it good. But, the book is not about time-travel at all, don’t let that geekiness throw you off !]

ZOMBIE NINJAS!!!

2011-02-13T23:14:00.003-05:00

My friend Andrew released his music video for a song called "Zombie Ninjas" last week. I was blessed to play one of the zombie victims. Good times and a fun song! Check out his website right (here) for Songs To Wear Pants To.

Bioshock 2!!!! (Xbox 360)

2011-02-09T00:07:00.000-05:00

Besides Mass Effect 2 and Final Fantasy 13, Bioshock 2 was the third game that I was most looking forward to this year. I’ve said before that Bioshock the first was my favourite game on the Xbox 360 and it pretty much still stands today. So I was quite excited for the sequel.

The game takes place years after the first within the same world; the dystopian underwater city of Rapture. However, you explore new and different parts of the city. This time around you play as a Big Daddy named Subject Delta; the big hulking robotic menaces that you had to fight in the first game. The Big Daddy’s are eternally linked to small zombie-like girls that wander around the city called Little Sisters. The Daddy’s sole mission is to protect the Sisters from harm. The game begins by showing how Delta was initially separated from his Little Sister, a girl named Eleanor. Delta is forced beyond his control to kill himself but is revived several years later as the Little Sisters repair him under Eleanor’s command. The rest of the game follow’s Delta as he destroys this maniacal family who lurks in the world of Rapture, but ultimately, to reunite with his Little Sister, Eleanor.

For everything that Mass Effect 2 did to improve upon its predecessor, Bioshock 2 did not. Rather than going through a complete overhaul of the gameplay system like in ME2, BS2 took the more conservative approach and gave you more of what you loved in the first game. The gameplay and settings are virtually the same as in the first. They throw in a few new weapons and a few new abilities, but they’re nothing that will blow you away. The look and feel of the game is virtually the same as the first. You have some new locations, but generally, they’re still dark, dimly lit, leaky chambers. Because of all this, the game feels more like an expansion rather than a full on sequel.

All the mechanics are the same as in the first game. You save Little Sisters which will award you ADAM Points that you spend on to purchase upgrades or new abilities. One new aspect they’ve added is the mode where sisters extract ADAM from corpses. When you locate the correct corpse and enable this mode, the sister will take a needle and extract ADAM indicated by a progress bar on screen. Until the bar fills up completely, your duty is to defend the sister from the attacks of multiple bad guys who have been lured by this activity. It’s a pretty intense and exhilarating 2 minutes each time when you have to do this.

Much like the first game, you’re still collecting money from corpses and containers used to purchase usable items and ammo. You will be hacking vending machines and different robots like the first game, but this time, instead of a Pipe-Dream-type game, they simplify the process with a quicker mini-game. It’s one of those reflex/timing games where you have to stop a quick-moving needle in small areas of a gauge. I think I was one of the few people that liked the Pipe Dream mini game of the first, so I was sort of disappointed that they replaced it with this. It just isn’t as fun. Pipe Dream to me was a welcomed escape from the intensity that builds during the course of the game.

The story also isn’t as good as in the first game. I never felt captivated by any of what was going on. There was a point where I just shut out the narrative and was moving point A to point B. It sounds trivial, but I think one of the things that hurt it was the voicework. By themselves, the voicework was fine, but you had a few female characters, who you’d only hear by voice communication and never see where their voices were so similar that it was difficult to distinguish who you were hearing. It needed more variance I think. So while the overall story wasn’t as interesting as the first, I thought that the ending sequence was still an emotional one all things considered.

Overall, no, it was not as great as the first game, but it’s still a good game and warrants a playthrough. If you loved the first game, Bioshock 2 does well in giving more of the same gameplay that you love and seeing more of Rapture too. Until next time, later geeks!

Taking a trip back to 1990 with TWIN PEAKS!

2011-02-02T00:03:00.000-05:00

This past Christmas, I had a lovely and extended 2 week break between work. My mindset was to relax, relax and relax. I didn’t have too many things planned out but I had one goal in mind: to start and finish the Twin Peaks TV series before heading back to work. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to finish it all within 2 weeks, but I came close, with only 5 episodes left before my first day back at work. It’s all good though, it took nearly 2 weeks, but I finished the remaining 5 episodes as of yesterday. I don’t know if you’ve ever seen Twin Peaks before, but if you have, I have one thing to say to you: what the heck was that!?!?

Twin Peaks was a television series created by David Lynch. It originally aired in the early 90’s and was a hit amongst critics and the audience. The show was praised for its unconventional approach to the crime genre, with its use of metaphorical and enigmatic dream sequences coupled with its offbeat and dark humour. Those familiar with Lynch’s oddball filmmaking style will be accustomed with the style brought to the show. Some look for meaning in between the lines, others write it off as weird for the sake of being weird. Unfortunately, due to the sharp turnaround in ratings, the show only lasted 2 seasons, with 12 episodes in the first and 22 in the second. The series ended with a “fuck you” sort of a cliffhanger and when you read about the backstage drama amongst the creators, writers and network, you’ll understand why it was the way it was.

The show takes place in the small fictitious town of Twin Peaks, Washington. The town, though small, is filled with a colourful array of characters, each a bit odd in their own way. The first season and a good part of the second season is centered around a murder mystery story. It opens up with the discovery of the body of Laura Palmer, a young woman beloved by the town all around. Cue in the main character of the show, an FBI agent named Dale Cooper, who is a straight edge federale. Like the folks of Twin Peaks, he is not without his own set of odd sensibilities, including his insatiable desire for coffee and his use of Tibetan meditating/dreaming to find clues. Together, along with town Sheriff, Harry S. Truman, and his band of deputies, they unravel the mystery that is the death of Laura Palmer. But with each layer that is removed from her murder, another layer is removed from the citizens of Twin Peaks.

After the main story arc ends, the show goes on a downward spiral in the form of disjointed stories and overall quality. The show loses its overarching focus and instead, splits off into several mini storylines that are less interesting than the previous main one, with many of them absent of any resolutions. This part of the show brings more of the offbeat humour and incorporates more paranormal elements including good & evil spirits, alternate dimensions and so forth.

As I was watching the series, I couldn’t believe that such a show like this made it onto air and on a broadcast network no less! It’s an atypical show that was aired during an era where family sitcoms and TGIF lineups were the big hits. That the show even lasted 2 seasons is a remarkable achievement, keeping in mind that this was the pre-X-Files era, before the paranormal genre started to really take off. The quirkiness of Lynch’s style is what made the story telling interesting, in what would otherwise be another crime drama show. Characters behaved oddly and were filled with bizarre idiosyncrasies, random, abnormal, and often, unexplained occurrences littered the show, leaving viewers to wonder whether things were intentional or not.

I very much enjoyed the show up until the main story arc ended. After that, my interest in the show descended in a parallel direction as the quality of the stories. It’s why I dragged the last 5 episodes over 2 weeks, when I finished the first 29 in the same timeframe. But when it’s good, it’s really good, so you have to appreciate those moments.

Some herald it as the Lost of the previous decade and in some ways I can see that. Though I would say that the difference is that even though Lost left some questions unanswered, that there was still a general focus and direction despite all those little things. With Twin Peaks, you will be left with unanswered questions and at times even the overall direction will be questioned. Still, Time magazine named it one of the “Best TV Shows of All-TIME”, for what that’s worth. And if you’ve got the time, the first half of this series is worth checking out. Until next time, later geeks!

Malcolm Gladwell's THE TIPPING POINT!!!

2011-01-28T00:28:00.000-05:00

The Tipping Point is a bestselling book by acclaimed author Malcolm Gladwell. In addition to being an author, Gladwell is a journalist for The New Yorker having also written Blink, Outliers and What the Dog Saw: And Other Adventures (a compilation of some of his articles).

The ‘tipping point’, as Gladwell suggests in the title, refers to the point where a trend grows gradually until it hits a point where instead of gradual growth, it becomes an epidemic. He aims to prove that seemingly different epidemics occur for the same underlying reasons. He opens up the book describing two examples: the boom in sales of Hugh Puppy shoes in the late 90’s and the significant drop in crime in New York in the late 80’s/early 90s. Very different right? Yet he makes the claim that they are for the same reasons. He attributes the epidemics to three main concepts: the Law of the Few, the Stickiness Factor and the Power of Context.

In describing the Law of the Few, the basis of the concept is on the 80/20 principle where 20% of the people do 80% of the work. In examining this principle, he comes across three types of key people that he sees responsible for change. They are dubbed as Connectors, Mavens and Salesmen. Connectors are people who are socially adept and are able to connect networks of people together. Mavens are described as information hubs. These are people who are up to date on the latest trends and the latest ‘it’ things. They are essentially a wealth of knowledge and have a pulse on everything going on. Lastly are the Salesmen, who are charismatic people of persuasion. These are the types of people you know who can persuade or negotiate. Gladwell proposes that if you want to start a movement, you don’t need to convince a lot of people; you just need to convince these three key people and get them together.

The second, the Stickiness Factor deals with how certain pieces of information and the way in which it’s delivered are more retentive than others. In elaborating this idea, he explores the realm of children’s programming, specifically Sesame Street from its inception and evolution into a teaching medium for kids and also Blue’s Clues, and the different approach this show used in helping kids learn.

Lastly is the Power of Context which talks about how our behaviour is affected and influenced by our surrounding environment.

The book is an interesting read and if anything, Gladwell is able to insight thinking and conversation amongst his readers. Whether the results from his book are conclusive is up to the reader. In some ways, the book does inspire a sense of hope to the reader. The idea that you’re just one little cog in this giant wheel of life is refuted by Gladwell’s argument. The changes you want to make to the world are entirely possible.

That said, there are things that you should raise your eyebrow at. Keep in mind that this is coming from a mathy-sciencey (eg. engineery) perspective. Although he throws different numbers and statistics, the approach though empirical, is not exactly scientific. All of the examples and cases he cites are after-the-fact. Though these facts may be true, they’re only true for these instances. A more scientific approach would be to take all these concepts and ideas that he has developed, and put them into practice to see if the desired results are generated. That way all the points he makes can be proven, and more solidifies his argument. The book presents a one sided look, but with a complementing side of proof and analysis, would build a stronger and perhaps conclusive case.

It’s a fascinating read and hell, it’s a bestseller, there’s no reason to not have a peak within. You might not agree with what he has to say, but it does get you thinking, and I think that in itself is quite powerful. Til next time, later geeks!

The Green Hornet!!!!!!!!

2011-01-20T00:04:00.000-05:00

Green Hornet. Despite all the negative reviews out there, I thought that the movie was very, very, very… okay. It had good action, it provided some good laughs, thus satiating the crave for an action comedy. The story wasn’t the greatest, but I liked their approach to the concept. It was their attempt at turning the story into a buddy action comedy that I liked. Superheroes are sort of wacky as it is (the original Green Hornet not withstanding), so going for the comedy angle was appreciated. But that said, it was probably the weakest movie written by Seth Rogen and childhood pal, Evan Goldberg, and an even weaker attempt by mastermind director, Michel Gondry. It didn’t feel as polished as any of their previous efforts.

The story follows Britt Reid, the son of a wealthy newspaper owner, who lives the highlife as a socialite of sorts; sleeping by day and partying by night. One day his father dies from a freak bee sting, and Britt is handed the reigns as the new owner. He disregards his responsibilities until he meets his father’s enigmatic mechanic/coffee maker, Kato. Kato is sort of like Britt’s gateway drug into the world of ass-kicking. The first time they fend off a group of thugs, he gets a little bloodlust and craves for more. This fuels an idea he has to become a superhero who poses as a villain in order to get closer to the true villains, and eventually take them out. Unfortunately for him and Kato, the biggest crime lord in the city, Chudnofsky, sets off on a tear against them for disrupting his business.

The action in the movie is fun, with its video-game-like slow motion and visual style. It’s definitely the strongest point of the movie. The comedy itself is sub-par and definitely not as risque when compared to other Rogen movies, but that might be because of the more lax rating. It has its moments though! Story-wise, it’s very ‘meh’, nothing that will blow you away, but I will say that I was thoroughly entertained during the last 15-20 minutes. The way they tied up the loose ends had me rolling!

Seth Rogen (a really trimmed down Seth Rogen) plays the same sort of Seth-Rogen-character you find in his other movies. He’s still the bumbling, non-alpha male hero, but this time around adds an arrogant edge, based on his character’s wealth and fame. What really made the movie for me (and I think most people) was Jay Chou as Kato. He kicked all sorts of butt throughout the whole movie, with his Matrix-like fighting skills. Unfortunately, it was sort of ruined anytime he had to talk. God bless the guy, but there were times when I didn’t catch a single word he said because his accent was so strong. But really, he made up for his lack of oratory skills with his ass kicking skills. While Christoph Waltz is an outstanding actor, his role as the main villain wasn’t given much. He was a one-dimensional, I-want-to-do-crime-type character that more filled out a role than embodied one. But, it’s not his fault, he was great doing what he was given, which for me, wasn’t enough.

The biggest surprise of this movie was a cameo from someone I would have never expected: Edward Furlong!!!!! John Connor himself! And boy, he didn’t look good. I’ve heard that he’s an addict of sorts and it shows. That’s the type of makeup that Hollywood can’t buy! I get the feeling that the producers found him going through the garbage in the alley of the film lot and yelled to him, “Hey Eddie, is that you? Wanna be in a movie? Just say these lines!”. And away he went!

So yah, if you're going to see this movie for any reason, see it for Edward Furlong! Just for the shock factor! If you're going to watch this, go on a Tuesday when tickets are cheaper and also, forget the 3D, that will save you a few more bucks. Til next time, later geeks!

Mass Effect 2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Xbox 360)

2011-01-18T00:14:00.003-05:00

Playing Mass Effect 2 reminded me of a few years ago, watching Spider-Man 2 in the theaters on its opening night. It just about improved on everything I loved about the first movie: the action, the thrills, the laughs and so forth. With the exception of the story, everything about Spider-Man 2 was better than the first (in my opinion, easy now). And likewise, Mass Effect 2.

ME2 takes place years after the end of the first game (here). The story kicks off with a bang as your beloved spaceship, The Normandy, is destroyed in the opening segment by an alien species called The Collectors. And like the olden days, "the captain goes down with the ship", as the returning lead, Commander Shepard is killed off in this introductory segment. But the game would be a bust if it just ended there. Through their miraculous technology, an organization called "The Cerberus" is able to revive him. Under their employment, he is charged with the task of uncovering the mystery behind the Collectors, who have been harvesting humans for unexplained reasons. But before Shepard can embark on such a perilous journey, he must recruit a team of specialists who will aid him on this mission.

The game fixes and streamlines several of the problems from the first game. Everything is made simpler and easily accessible to appeal to a broader audience. The shooting mechanic is streamlined so that the action is played out more like a conventional shooter. You have aim, you have ammo, enemies have weak spots. Also gone is your inventory space. No longer do you have to worry about picking up stacks and stacks of weapons or about emptying out the maxed out inventory space. You will still collect weapons, but they straight to a weapons locker that is only accessible in certain areas of the game. And even then, for the most part I stuck with the default weapons for most of the characters, only changing Shepard’s weapons. The focus is more on purchasing upgrade plans from shops, and then implementing them from the research area of your ship. To research your upgrades, you’re required to mine minerals from all the different planets at your disposal. The minerals are then used as a currency towards the upgrades. It can be a tedious task, and at times, can break the flow of the game. My strategy was to mine as much as I could early in the game so I wouldn’t have to worry as much later, which worked out well.

In terms of character development, you still need to distribute points to a varying list of abilities, but the list is much shorter than in the first game. And to add to that, your level cap is much lower (it sits gingerly at 20). However, if you decide to max out on a certain skill, you’re given a choice of between a pair of “ultimate” abilities that relate to that certain skill. So it gives you a ton of choice and creates an incentive to go through multiple playthroughs if you want to see all the different abilities.

Gone also are the re-used building models. In the first game, so many times you will enter a ship or a building, and the layout will be re-used over and over, albeit filled with different enemies or characters. This time around, all environments you enter are unique and specifically designed. This made for a much richer gameplay and experience.

It’s not really complaint, but the thing I enjoyed much more from the first Mass Effect was the story. In Mass Effect 2, a large portion of your time is devoted to recruiting team members and doing the related team member quests (loyalty missions, as they call it). So much time is spent in this that at times I lost focus of what the bigger mission was about. Many times I missed the forest for the trees. After every few missions they will send you back on a mission towards the main story to get you back into the loop. For me, all the back and forth with the story made the experience slightly disjointed. The story in the first game felt more seamless as you’d recruit characters along your main journey, it was never a tangent to the mission you were on.

But despite that, the gameplay is more fun and fast paced than the first, and the missions are quicker, making it easier for you to pick up and play as you see fit. Which worked for me because I started working around this time and didn’t have long periods to devote to epicly drawn out missions.

Early on the year when it was released, it was being touted as a contender for game of the year. At year’s end, it managed to hold on to that pedigree and managed to win that title, at least at a few publications. And truly it deserves it. Despite the minor setbacks mentioned above, ME2 is a really solid and polished game. This game is also on the cheap nowadays and is a worthy addition to your gaming library. Pick up the first one too if you haven’t already. Until next time, later geeks!

Final Fantasy XIII (Xbox 360)

2011-01-13T00:04:00.004-05:00

So I started and stopped about five or six posts last summer, and for whatever reason, never got around to finishing them off. Anyhow, this is just one such posting.

Final Fantasy XIII is one of the most highly anticipated titles originating from Japan this past year. The release was met with some criticism for its linearity but on an overall basis, it fell on the positive side of reviews. Even though Final Fantasy is my favourite series of games, I came out of this game liking it, but not loving it. I guess that puts me into the majority of people who have played this game.

The story follows a character named Lightning who was a former soldier of a government organization called Sanctum, as part of the floating city called Cocoon. The soldiers are branded with the task of suppressing people labeled as Pulse l’Cie, who are people infected with magic after coming in contact with the land called Pulse, the world below. The Pulse l’Cie are feared because of their control from god-like beings called Fal’Cie. The l’Cie are each given a catch-22 sort of mission. If they complete the mission, they will turn into a crystal-like statue, if not, they will turn into a monster. Lightning and her rag-tag band of heroes become infected after a skirmish and together, go on a journey to discover whether they can avoid the ultimatums inherited when becoming a l’Cie. Get it?

I enjoyed the action heavy combat system, sort of like a hybrid of Final Fantasy X and XII. You can see the enemies on the field before engaging in a battle, but when engaged, you transition into a newish field where you do battle. The battles themselves are fast paced, giving you only control of your main character while the computer controls your other two partners. Your control over your character during fights is akin to an MMORPG, in that you can issue it general sort of tasks (auto-battle) or you can manually select the abilities. The abilities you have available are then dependent on the roles that your characters play. There are a variety, such as Commando (similar to a straight up fighter), Ravager (which focuses on offensive magic), Medic (who specializes in healing abilities) and so forth. What makes it strategic is that you can’t change the roles of the characters on an individual basis. Rather, you are allowed to switch between sets of roles amongst your characters (which they dub ‘Paradigm Shifts’), through a limited number of customizable slots. Because the slots are limited, it becomes a balancing act of refining what role sets are best used for the current situation. For boss fights, loss is inevitable, and often requires tweaking of the role sets.

The game is visually stunning, taking you across a wide array of terrain and landscapes, both natural and techno-futuristic-y. It’s not until you hit an area called Gran Pulse that you’re allowed to free-roam and explore the vastness of their world. Gran Pulse itself is breath-taking, almost like a savanna in Africa, filled with all sorts of creatures both big (REALLY BIG) and small.

Now this is what bogged down my experience with the game: the story. There was a lot of criticism for the linearity of the game. More specifically, a good portion of the game consists of running down a straight corridor, fighting some sort of boss character and going to a cutscene… if you think about it, it’s similar to the structure of the first Super Mario Bros., Level 1-4. But I don’t agree with this particular criticism. I understand where the Japanese game designers are coming from. They want to tell a certain and specific story and want to bring the player through a certain experience. The problem I have is with the story itself. The first problem is that they sort of throw you into the middle of the story from the get go. They throw all this verbage and lingo at you without clearly explaining what they’re talking about, which makes for a confusing start. It’s only after a few hours of play that I finally understood what the characters were talking about. It’s not the ramp-up experience that we’re typically used to, it’s more “GO GO GO!!!~!@~!”.

The story itself did not seem as intriguing as the stories of past entries in the series. I think this was hindered by the stoic female lead, who I think would have been a more interesting side character than as a main character. There’s something that keeps the character from being relative when there’s not that emotional connection. The same can be said of most of the characters. The characters lack character. It sort of reminds me of the type of main characters you’d typically find in Japanese anime. I guess that ‘dry’ kind of attitude is supposed to be ‘cool’. Probably my favourite character was the black character named Sazh. I thought that everything they designed with him was amazing, including the voice work which was fitting. Plus his son in the game is probably one of the cutest characters I’ve seen in a video game. He’s like a mini Marshmellow Man from Ghostbusters.

Technically and mechanically, the game was impressive and a work of art. It had all the nuts and bolts that are needed to make a great game, yet it was missing some that cohesive element to really hook you in and give you a reason to press on. So while on the whole, I enjoyed my experience with the game, I wish there was something more. It’s one of those games where when I finished it, I decided that I would probably not play it again. And it’s disappointing that I have to say that about a Final Fantasy title.

You can find the game for cheap nowadays, and I think it merits a single playthrough at the very least, especially if you’re a fan of Japanese RPG’s. Until next time, later geeks!

Favourite Movies of 2010

2011-01-10T09:05:00.000-05:00

Unlike last year, which was filled with a slew of 'good' movies, this year’s offerings seemed more hit or miss; absent was the grey area, as far as wide releases were concerned. I had trouble compiling a top 10 list as the movies below 5 were ones that I enjoyed rather than ones that truly captivated me. Still, the top 5 were great for what they were and helped to redeem the year from being a complete mess (although it was almost there).

You can view my favourite lists for the years (2009), (2008), (2007), and (2006).

Anyhow, here's this year in reverse order:

10. Kick-Ass (review)

9. Catfish (review)

8. The Fighter (review) – The Fighter was a good movie made great thanks to some outstanding performances.

7. True Grit (review) – Much like The Fighter, I feel as though the performances outshadowed the movie. Still, as a whole, this was an enjoyable movie, and I think more polished than The Fighter, hence it’s 1-up.

6. Buried (review)/127 Hours (review)/Frozen (review) - I didn't think it would be fair to put one of these on the list without the others, so I'm sort of cheating here. I enjoyed all three movies very much, probably in the order that you see written. Each movie was unique and had something different to offer. Each was able to convey this feeling of terror as you watched the situation unfold.

5. Scott Pilgrim VS The World (review) – Probably the most fun I had watching a movie in the theaters aside from Toy Story 3. Finally, someone who understands how I view life! It’s unfortunate that it was a failure at the box office despite the critical praise. A cult following is inevitable.

4. The Social Network (review)

3. Inception (review) – Christopher Nolan prints money and Inception furthers that case. The only thing that keeps this movie from being higher is the weak plot strewn together by some great and interesting plot devices. It was a great summer popcorn type of movie.

2. Toy Story 3 (review) – This was easily the best movie of the summer season. Pixar can do no wrong. Toy Story 3 had a way of touching all your emotions; you laughed, you cried, you were thrilled. No other movie this year, let alone the summer, was able to do this.

1. Black Swan (review) – There’s no other movie that left me in deep thought days after watching it this year. Unlike Inception, which compelled me with its plot devices and ideas, Black Swan compelled me with its plot.

90 minutes with 127 HOURS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2011-01-07T00:43:00.002-05:00

127 Hours is the third movie I've seen in the past year that deals with theme of isolation (the first being Frozen and the other being Buried). All three use a minimalist approach to film making and despite the limitations of locations, manage to tell three very different, yet unique and emotional stories. Frozen dealt more with victims battling against forces of nature, Buried focused more on the mystery aspect of a man trapped in a coffin and finally, 127 Hours was more about one's drive to overcome the self.

127 Hours is a true story about a mountaineering/canyoneer named Aron Ralston who goes out to explore the vastness of canyons offered in Utah. He's shown to us as a thrill seeker and one that wants to connect more with nature rather than a life afforded by an engineering career (his words not mine). On one particular trek, he stumbles and falls into a crevasse only to have a boulder fall and trap his right arm. That's only the first 10 minutes. The remaining 80 minutes shows us his struggle and determination to persevere and survive.

It goes without saying, but Danny Boyle is a great director. Just look at his past 5 movies. He's covered horror, sci-fi and drama. And he did all of them well! It's a testament to his versatility as a director. 127 Hours turns things upside down, as he's given an opportunity to show how much he can do with so little.

But much should be said of James Franco as well, who spends 95% of the movie alone on screen. Franco himself is sort of a renaissance man. He's an actor, a painter, a writer; one who always seeks to fine his craft. A few years ago, he went back to acting school to do just that. In fact, while studying at NYU, he took a recurring role on the daytime soap opera General Hospital (after the fact that he's made it big). I read a few of his stories in Esquire and he does a fine job of weaving words together. Anyhow, in 127 Hours he really pushes himself, and it's probably a side of Franco that we haven't seen yet on the big screen. We see the full spectrum of emotions on his face through the duration of the movie (well, that's all we really get to see).

I really recommend that all three movies. They each have different offerings but really do what's been missing from Hollywood movies this past year: storytelling. Until next time, later geeks!

Gaming and God: An Ongoing Conversation With My Pastor (Part 1)

2011-01-05T00:41:00.001-05:00

So before we get to the meat of the matter, I thought I'd just give you a little background on how this all came about.

For the past few months, me and my friend Matt have been having a back and forth conversation (some parts in person and some parts through email) regarding gaming and being Christians. Matt, legitimately one of the nicest guys I know, who besides being a father, a friend, and a "former gamer", is the associate pastor at the church I go to. And I say "former gamer" because he sold his Xbox 360 this past year leaving his home devoid of any gaming consoles (at least current gen?). However, if a great game does come out and if time permits, he indulges at a friend or relatives house. Also good to note, we both have similar gaming upbringings; that being the heavy influence of the 8-bit and 16-bit era, and in particular, Japanese RPGs of yesteryear.

Anyhow, it all started a few month ago when we started talking about gaming in general, but more specifically, achievements and achievement points. You'll see, over the course of the series, how our conversation transitioned from something as lowly as AP's into something more edifying and deep as it relates to us being Christians. We've gotten a few emails down so far and he gave me permission to share with you all our conversation. I'll publish them two at a time or as the dialogue continues.

So without further ado...

My Letter To Matt:

Hey Matt,

So I was thinking about our conversation last Sunday about gaming and I had a few thoughts in regards to achievements (and I know online, that it’s a big discussion point).

I like the idea of Achievement Points, not for its competitive nature, which some people view it as, but rather as an indicator that I did all the things that the developers planned for the user to do. I suppose it’s to satiate the completionist side of me that sometimes rears its head. And I say ‘sometimes’ because I don’t do the same with every game obviously. I sort of choose my battles carefully before entering them.

I think as a general rubric, I strive to accumulate as many points that I can, without really going out of my way to pick up anything that I may have missed. But I’ll have in mind what I’ll want to do by just looking at the list of achievements beforehand. Depending on whether I love the game, I’d move on from there. For example, for Final Fantasy XIII, I chose to undertake the 100%, because of my personal love for the series in hopes that the 1000 points would reflect that. Clearly, I wouldn’t do the same for something like Kung Fu Panda. I mean, I’m sure it would be easy to accumulate 50% of the points (50% is what I feel comfortable leaving each game with) but would it be worth my time to play in general?

As to all the other achievements that are more ancillary to the game, like the ones you mentioned on Sunday, I like to look at it this way. In the perspective of a mountain biker (this just comes to mind first cuz my cousin just did an amazing race in the mountains of Bolivia), do you see the mountain as an hindrance or an open challenge. How high is too high, and should you even attempt to climb it? In a lame kind of way, sometimes that’s how I look at achievement points. Is the mountain to achieve those points too high? But thankfully (or bitterly) we live in the internet age, with information and resources aplenty at our disposal, which makes it a simple process of going to your favourite forum to see how long and difficult it was to attain certain achievements (the time versus effort gauge). So if the mountain is much too hazardous or dangerous to climb (as I hear Call of Duty: World at War is), at least you can know beforehand.

And now I want to point-counter-point myself. I realized this later on in the week. I wrote a few paragraphs above that achievements could be “an indicator that I did all the things that the developers planned for the user to do”. While it could be true, at the same time, the confines of the game can be exposed. For example, Grand Theft Auto IV. There are a plethora of things that you can do post-game, but after I nailed all those extra achievements, why bother even touching everything else? So there can be world’s out there, but I’m just limiting myself to the different exercises that gain me achievement points.

In part, I think that’s where the designers of Starcraft II got it right. There is an achievement system within the game. But you don’t find out until after you finish a mission what those achievements are, that you achieved or didn’t achieve. I wonder if hiding the achievement list could be an option. Wouldn’t that be what game publishers want? People just dumping hours upon hours into their game? It would make games a journey of discovery than of just grinding (although it could be a combination of both given the circumstances).

Anyhow, that’s all I’ve got for now. I’m open to your rebuttal.

Cheers bro,

-Jeff

------

Matt's Response Letter:

Hey sir,

I finally had the time to read through your email. Good stuff! Here is my reply. I was hoping that you would talk about or defend the actual time spent in pursuing AP's. My thoughts on video games often revolve around whether or not they are the ideal hobby for me, even though I am naturally good at them and I naturally enjoy them. My thoughts on AP's therefore, are mostly about, what's the point and is it worth it? I ask these questions mainly out of a desire for obedience - to be obedient to God's plan for my life. The tricky thing about it is, how do I know what God's plan for my life is and therefore, what obedience looks like for me.

In other words, do video games in general (and AP's in particular) align with how God sees me living my life to its potential? This is a tough question to ask but important for anyone who wants to take discipleship seriously, honor God brightly and experience the John 10:10 life. I think sometimes, just being willing to seriously ask the question is a victory.

(What I'm NOT saying is that hobbies are a waste of time or that fun is bad. Let's be clear about that.)

So, you mentioned that you view AP's "as an indicator that you did all the things that the developers planned for the user to do." That's an interesting and possibly valid way of enjoying the video game experience. But, as far as justifying whether or not it's worth the time, it doesn't answer that question. Because, do the developers want what's best for you or do they just want your loyalty to make more money? Or possible, some may actually want to teach you something or expand your view of something, etc. but once again, do they understand the best way to do that? I think it's up to us to make that call - and individually because we're all different. But you know this stuff.

So, here is my personal experience. I found that not only did video games eat up a large amount of my time and money, I found they also dulled me mentally and spiritually. That's just the honest truth but I'm not taking that as certain evidence that it would have the same affect on all people. I speak in front of people and for that I think my mind needs to be really sharp, and I could feel it get "mushy" when playing video games. I also need time! I have very little of it it seems, so much to do and so much I want to learn, experience and accomplish. I suppose it's my ambition that makes video game playing difficult for me, but from another perspective, it could be my lack of self-control. Maybe it's because when I do play them, I usually have to sink hours into them, because I have the desire to conquer all, get the AP's, max out stats, see every level and unlock every secret. I have an addictive personality and I like to "collect", ever since I was a kid, I used to collect key chains, shells, rocks, comic books, action figures, sports cards, etc. So maybe its for these reasons that I have a problem with video games but others might not share that. Also, on the money thing, I have found that there are lots of other ways for me to have exciting, addictive, joyful fun that are less expensive and don't leave me feeling dull or reclusive afterwards.

But I do agree with your last point and I think it was quite insightful - hidden achievements are a good idea, since they get you to replay the game; they give you a sense of exploration on the first run and mission on the second. But once again, is getting you to replay the game a good thing for disciples of Jesus? I'll stick with my answer: it depends on the person. But let's hear that with a different emphasis now: it DOES depend on the person, to be self-aware and to be honest with themselves and with God, and to make the best choices.

So I'm curious to hear how you feel video games fit into your life and walk with Jesus. And AP's too. :)

much love,

matt

THE FIGHTER puts up a fight!!!!!!!!!

2011-01-03T00:12:00.000-05:00

There's something about sports/sports-related movies that always gets to me. And it's interesting because I'm not a big sports fan (only as far as some MMA and unless you count prowrestling), yet I can really get into those types of movies. Movies add a narrative that's missing from its real life counterpart, and it's that narrative that hooks me. Football movies are a great example. I don't watch or understand football all that much, yet there's not one football movie that I haven't enjoyed, and I've seen many. But I wouldn't exactly put The Fighter in the same category as football movies, as the sport takes a real back seat to the drama that's up front. Sort of like The Blindside and football or The Wrestler and wrestling (I know, it's not a sport!).

The Fighter is based on a true story in the early 90's about a local boxer named Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg) in Massachusetts who climbs the ladder in the boxing world, both hindered and helped by his older brother Dicky (Christian Bale), a former boxer and a crack addict. Micky and Dick are part of a close-knit family including seven sisters, who combined with their parents, are part of every decision in their lives, despite all being in their 30's and older. Micky tries hard to succeed as a boxer but fails miserably. Everyone outside of his family tells him that he has all the potential but that Dicky is the one thing that's anchoring him down. The story continues as Dicky continues to head down a slippery slope filled with drugs and crime and as Micky learns to let go.

The Fighter is a pretty awesome movie and doesn't hold back any punches (pun!). But much like True Grit, The Fighter seems more about the performances rather than the story. Christian Bale completely gets lost in his role as Dicky and at times, it's impossible to conceive that this is the same man who plays Bruce Wayne. He completely transforms himself into this fragile but frenetic crack addict. There's already Oscar talks in regards to his performance and it is well warranted. The other performance I loved was Melissa Leo, who plays the overbearing mother in the family. She plays the typical 90's Boston kind of mom, with a big mouth, big hair and big attitude. You want to hate her but love her at the same time.

What I love about movies based on true stories are how some movies choose to show clips or pictures of the real life characters at the end. We're shown clips of the real life Micky and Dicky at the end, and seeing Dicky is a true testament to Bale's performance .

David O. Russell continues to be a great director and The Fighter continues the streak. I was more surprised to see Darren Aronofsky in the credits as an executive producer. Already having directed the masterful Black Swan earlier this year, he adds another notch to his belt with this effort. Plus, I think it's awesome that now he's worked on a movie called The Wrestler and now, The Fighter. Who doesn't like themes!

This is worth seeing for Bale's performance. The story doesn't offer up anything you haven't already seen, but that's okay. What it does, it does right. Til next time, later geeks!

TRUE GRIT!!!!!!!!!!!

2010-12-28T13:15:00.007-05:00

So I didn't know much about True Grit before going in. I saw the trailer once and it didn't tell me too much. All I knew was that: a.) it was a western, b.) that Jeff Bridges looked totally bad-ass as a one-eyed marshall, and c.) it was a movie done by the Coen brothers. I knew not of the story or much else, but I was sold on all those 3 points.

True Grit follows the story of a young girl named Mattie Ross who seeks vengeance for her father's murder, a killer by the name of Tom Cheney (Josh Brolin). In tracking him down, she enlists the help of a drunken US Marshall (Jeff Bridges), reputed for being the toughest Marshall in the territory, as well as a Texas Ranger (Matt Damon). The band tracks Chaney down in the Indian territories, but are continually hindered by each other's presence ie. by constantly doing the equivalent of comparing their penis size.

The movie is nothing short of amazing, if anything, for the performances of the main players. Jeff Bridges and Hailee Steinfeld (who plays Mattie) own their respective roles. Bridges exemplifies the drunken/grizzled veteran and breathes his unique take on this character. I've never seen Steinfled in anything before, but I thought she did amazing playing a 14-year old quick witted, fast talking girl. She was 14, but she made you believe that she could have been 40. The surprise for me was seeing Barry Pepper. I've always liked him as an actor and always thought that it was too bad that he always played second fiddle characters (I still think he would of made an awesome Captain America, just look at him). Anyhow, I hardly recognized him underneath the heavy makeup, the outfit and the accent, but he was pretty awesome despite the short role playing the outlaw leader.

It hasn't earned any Golden Globe nominations this year. It's a shame, if anything, I think it deserves a nod for Jeff Bridges performance, but hopefully the Oscars will hold up better. The story is a bit straight up so I can understand why it might not receive a movie of the year award (that, and it's a remake), but the story was still well told, that can't be ignored.

The past week I was thinking about my top 10 list, and really, the movies I feel deserve to be on the list are not more than 3 or 4, so it will be interesting this year. That said, you can count on seeing True Grit up there. Just where, I'm not sure yet. This was a fantastic movie. It's the Christmas season, go see it if you can and bring the whole family! There's blood, guts and all! Til next time, later geeks!

UNSTOPPABLE!!!!!!!... yet stoppable.

2010-12-20T00:08:00.000-05:00

Rottentomatoes isn't always the greatest indicator of when a movie is good. Case in point, Unstoppable. Currently, it's sitting pretty with 86% positive reviews. However, that's a deceiving number. If say, 9 out of 10 reviews gave the movie a marginal thumbs up, it would end up looking like a 90% on RT. Deceiving. However, referencing RT and Metacritic will give a fairer look at the critical reviews. MC gives an aggregate score based on professional reviews, which may give a better gauge on how a certain piece of entertainment is doing. On MC, Unstoppable garnered a 69. I think that's a lot more fair than 86%.

Unstoppable is a film by Tony Scott featuring frequent collaborator, Denzel Washington, and the new Captain Kirk himself, Chris Pine. It's as you've seen it in the trailers; there's a runaway train, there's Washington, there's Pine, and they try to stop it. Whatever you think would happen probably did. It's one of those sort of movies. And it's why I didn't understand the RT 86%. It wasn't until after I watched it that I looked up its MC score.

Still, it was enjoyable for what it's worth. I liked it in that there were characters that you could get behind and relate to. They're not superstars or superheroes in the typical fashion. They're regular joes that want to do good and understand their place in the grand scheme of a situation. I guess what's unique about Unstoppable compared to other Tony Scott movies is that there aren't really any good guys are bad guys. The "good" guys are just a bunch of regular train workers. The only "bad" guy is the runaway train, and really, it's not a bad guy either. It's just a train doing what it was told to do: move. It's not its fault that some jerk forgot to put on the brakes and jumped out of the train before doing so.

If there's nothing else in the theater you want to see, then I guess it wouldn't hurt to choose this movie by default (I wouldn't blame you, the selection is looking pretty shittay at the ol' cinemas). It's a short review, but really, there's not too much to say. Til next time, later geeks!

Black Swan

2010-12-14T00:11:00.000-05:00

When I got home on Friday night after seeing Black Swan, I texted my friend whom I went to see it with. I was thinking about the array of films that director Darren Aronofsky has undertaken in his film career. I texted my friend, “I don’t think it’s possible for Aronofsky to make a feel-good movie”. It makes you wonder, because as of right now, he’s attached to make the next Wolverine movie. So will it be an arthouse Wolverine movie? An existential look at everybody’s favourite mutant? So Black Swan is not a feel-good type of movie, but it is a brilliant one.

The story follows an aspiring ballet dancer named Nina (Natalie Portman) who toils herself in winning the lead role in a ballet called Swan Lake. The lead role requires the dancer to take on two different styles; one representing the White Swan, who dances gracefully and perfectly, the other, representing the Black Swan, who is a more passionate and seductive character. Nina perfectly portrays the White, but has difficulty taking on the Black. The pressure builds on when a new dancer named Lily (Mila Kunis) enters the mix. Lily is a bit more reckless than Nina, but more passionate, clearly something Nina lacks. She feels her spot in the ballet is threatened with Lily’s presence. From here, the pressure builds; from her mother, from her director, but mostly, from herself. The movie follows her life as she spirals in reaching perfection.

When I look at the movie as a whole, in a way, Black Swan is a merger of sorts between two of Aronofsky’s previous efforts: The Wrestler and Requiem for a Dream. It’s like The Wrestler in how it follows a character journeying through, perhaps obsessively, in a niche performance based profession. We see the difficulties and struggles with the characters as they accumulate more pressure; sometimes self-imposed, sometimes not. Where they differ is depiction of that pressure. For Randy “the Ram”, we see the physical consequences resulting from his actions whereas with Nina, the struggles and frustrations manifest themselves in a more psychological form. This is when it turns a bit more Requiem for a Dream-like. Even from a stylistic point of view, her obsession and delusions are somewhat akin to the depiction of obsession in Requiem.

Needless to say, the movie was brilliantly directed by Aronofsky. He’s capable of drawing so much varied emotions throughout the movie. You can feel the pressure that Nina puts on herself, you can feel that nervous tension that she has with her peers. There are even moments in the movie where you’ll feel genuinely terrified. Obsession, with anything, is never a good thing, and Aronofsky is gifted in showing this with almost all his works. After watching the movie, it made me think though, that instead of a Wolverine movie, I’d rather see him direct a horror movie, because I truly believe that it would be a frightening one.

Much has been said in the press of Natalie Portman’s performance, and really, there’s nothing to be argued. She is magnificent in the role as Nina. I’ve always thought of her as a pretty face and nothing more; her acting never convinced me that it was anything spectacular, but this movie changed all that. You can see she pushes her acting chops (and I’m NOT referring to the awkward ‘love’ scene by the way).

This movie falls easily into my top 10 of the year. Not hard a hard task this year. We’ve seen a ton of shit. I haven’t thought about it much, but right now it’s only a list that’s 3 deep. But it feels good to know that there are still great stories to be told by storytellers who know how to tell them. A diamond in the rough, if you will. Check it out if you can! Later geeks!

Time Lapse

2010-12-07T22:38:00.003-05:00

It's been well over a month since my last post, and I was about to post a review of Final Fantasy XIII, but I thought it’d be more appropriate to do a life update rather than a geek update… although, I am a geek, so I guess this is sort of a geek update.

It’s been over two months since I started working full time and I think I’m starting to see the life balance. I lamented in a post in October that time seemed to move quick and that there wasn’t any downtime. Since then, I’ve taken a more intentional approach to taking recharge time, even if it meant sacrificing a Friday or Saturday night. But even then, time seems to zip by. Those rare free evenings quickly become coveted once midnight hits. How fast it moves.

About three weeks ago, my friend Natalie at church expressed her worry with me. She said that I wasn’t smiling and didn’t seem as joyous as I usually was. I know that during that week that I felt off in someway, but it didn’t really hit me that it was physically apparent until she pointed it out. I think I was subconsciously aware at best.

I've had this conversation with at least ten different people in the past month, of how time feels as though it's accelerating. I think everyone I talked about it with concurred. Perhaps it's because most of my friends are around the same age and hence, going through similar life stages. I was lamenting to my old pastor, expressing the fear of blinking and turning 40 all of a sudden. I posed the question, “isn’t there any way to slow it down?”. To which he replied: “the bad news is that it does go faster and faster and the amount of it seems to decrease at an accelerating rate.”

I met with my roommate from my first two years of university the other night and we were talking about the same thing. It only seemed like yesterday when we were moving into residence, with that awkwardness of meeting each other for the first time. Though it seemed like yesterday, unfortunately, it was 8 years ago. However, my friend did offer me one opinion of which I haven't heard from anyone else in the past month. Though he feels life is speeding by, he said that the one thing that helped slow it down was when he met this one girl. They were dating for over a year and he described how some days would feel like eternities; just being with each other and getting to know each other. If there’s one thing that would help, it’s to meet a good girl, he says.

So no, I haven’t met that type of girl yet. But I'm keeping that in mind (which could become a whole separate post).

However, I've learned to come to grips that life is going to be this way. I've accepted and embraced it. While it's true, that I may not get enough time to watch all the movies I want, play all the video games I want to play, read all the things I want to read, I'm getting a chance to spend time with those who are close to me... Friendships that outweigh any gamerscore that I might gain... Hearing life stories that are infinitely more exciting than the Justice League in Infinite Crisis. Overall, just accepting where God's put me. I learned to smile again.

This past weekend, I saw my friend Natalie again this and we talked and connected, as much as time would permit. Before she left, she said, “I’m glad the Jeff I know is back”.

Getting down with BURIED!!!!!!!!!!!!

2010-11-01T19:58:00.004-04:00

So it was Friday night. I was hanging out with my friend Zoro and we were trying to figure out something to do after dinner. We decided the best course of action was to check out a film at the local cinemas. This in itself proved to be a challenge, for you see, the only movies playing at the theaters were either shit or were movies that either of us had already seen (not necessarily meaning those movies were any good either). So our choices boiled down to The Town and Buried. Both garnered generally good reviews. Both had pros and cons going for it. The Town seemed to be an action filled drama, but we figured the story would be not unlike anything we've seen before. Buried, on the other hand, was a unique story that took place in its entirety within a coffin. On the downside, I was tired and sleepy after a long day of work and pumpkin carving (also at work). So we weighed it out, and of course, Buried won. We figured it was an indie movie that not many people have seen, so it was probably better to support the smaller film, and spread the word to friends.

So despite my tiredness and its runtime of 90 minutes, I managed to stay awake and conscious throughout the whole movie. I think that's a testament to some gripping film making and story telling (note: in comparison, I fell asleep at the theaters when I watched Live Free or Die Hard and Sweeny Todd).

Buried tells the story of, Paul Conroy, an American truck driver hired for work in Iraq. On one particular day, his convoy is attacked by a group of terrorists with his colleagues all murdered. For some reason, they spare Conroy's life, but they kidnap him, and bury him alive in a coffin. He is armed with nothing except a lighter, a flashlight and a Blackberry phone. It's here that the movie takes place in its entirety.

Much like Frozen, this is another movie that takes advantage of the minimalist approach to film making. Because of its unique premise, the success of the movie relies solely on two things: the performance by Ryan Reynolds and story telling. Watching the movie is like assembling a jigsaw puzzle; every time you fit in a little piece, you're filled with joy at the mystery that you're uncovering. It's similar in the movie, as we start off basically knowing nothing about what's going on, but we become more gripped with each little tidbit that's revealed via cell phone. The intrigue never lets up, ramping up and concluding with a tour de force of an ending.

Rodrigo Cortes, who has done only one other full length feature, succeeds in putting together this movie. The way he shoots, cuts and adds musical cues to the movie helps to create the mood and sets the stage for the forth coming reveals. The way he makes so much out of nothing is a testament to his skill as a film maker. Just as much respect goes to Reynolds who delivers a powerful performance, as the sole actor in the movie (minus the voice actors). He bears all the weight of the movie; we laugh when he goes nuts, we despair in his sadness. Really, I never thought much of him as an actor, he's never done anything that blew me away, but he won me over with this one.

If you want to see something unique, give this movie a try. On the outset, it seems pretty daunting heading into a 90 minute movie that takes place only in one scene, but it never disappoints and will keep you hooked. Til next time, later geeks!

Eating and Running

2010-10-28T00:17:00.003-04:00

First of all, the picture to the left couldn't be more perfect. It makes me laugh (note to reader: it's not me).

It’s kind of interesting how life is like an ocean — it moves like waves. At my small group fellowship on Wednesdays, prayer is always an interesting time. I find that more often than not, our group will pray for things in waves. Every so often when we pray together, a bunch of us will present prayer items that are similar to each other. Our lives are so different, yet in some ways, the paths are parallel.

For those who might not know, I started a new job a few weeks ago, and it’s been great so far. It’s with a company that I worked for in the past, but this time I’m in a different position, with new challenges and responsibilities. I don’t know if it’s a coincidence or not, but at the same time for the past 3 weeks, it seems as though every evening after work has been occupied by some sort of activity, be it connecting with friends or just going out to do stuff. My time felt tapped out. I didn't get to do a lot of geek things (eg. playing video games, watching movies, reading comics, etc.) and unfortunately, this blog has been sort of neglected as a side effect. Worse than the geek things though, I realized that I wasn't spending proper time with God. Bible readings and devotional time were out the window, even prayer times were half assed.

Anyhow, the other week a few friends of mine were sharing prayer requests and they resonated with me. A few of my friends were going through the same things. Time was tapped out, life felt exhausting... God was on the back-burner. But I felt reassured and comforted just hearing how we were going through similar phases. We weren't suffering alone. We are in fact growing together and supporting each other and it’s such an invaluable thing to have and to look forward to each week.

So as my friends were sharing their items, I started thinking about how I’ve been putting God in the backseat lately. My time has felt so sapped and I haven't been giving Him my all. Deep inside, I’m seeking wisdom, I want His wisdom, but I don’t feel as though I’ve been leaving myself open in a position to receive it.

I think of a runner, who is constantly moving forward trying to attain a certain goal. The runner, even though a dedicated athlete, at some point needs to stop and refuel too. He needs to stop and eat, he can't just run and eat at the same time. Well, I mean, technically you could, but I don’t know how fun either act would be. To me, wisdom is like that food that we can consume to nourish ourselves. It's filling. But to properly eat it and allow it to savour, you've got to slow down and stop to truly appreciate it.

I know for myself, I need to intentionally take time outs. I need that time to be geek, that time to be hermitting. Everyone needs to regenerate and refuel before he or she continues their run. Though geek time may be fun, God time is filling and nourishing to our lives. It will grow you and lead you as you set out to do the next leg of your run. So if you are a reader and a friend of mine in real life, don't take it personally if I reject a hangout time, I'm probably recharging in some manner. But don't worry, I'm not a heartless man, I'm probably going to say "how about Monday or Tuesday instead?". So eat your bread and run your runs, but try not to do both at the same time. Peace!

Jackass... IN 3D!!!!!!!! This review in 2D.

2010-10-20T00:05:00.000-04:00

So before I talk about Jackass 3D, let me preface it with a real life story. So last week, I bared witness to a Jackass-like scenario. My work's office is on the 21st floor of a building in the upper downtown area where my office space is right by the windows, facing Toronto's west. I've got a great view of the city and an even better view of the apartment building that is right beside ours. So last Friday I was sitting at my desk and out of the corner of my eye, I see a bunch of teenagers hobbling on top of the roof. Bad. You see, the apartment building is about 20 storeys high — a long way to fall. And of course, teens are teens, and you know they're up to no good when they're on roofs. So they're smoking what they're smoking, drinking what they're drinking, walking around on the roof without any sense of balance. I ask one of the managers at the office whether we had the number for security in that building. She instead wisely calls the police. When I get back to my cubicle, I see one of the teens, sitting on the edge of the ledge, and he pushes himself off! Thankfully, there is a deck below, about a 15 feet drop, but unfortunately, the fall is padded by concrete. This numbskull of a teen lays there, with either a broken leg or ankle. I tell this to the manager, and she calls for an ambulance as well. Meanwhile a good bunch of us at work are just watching this trainwreck of a scene. Thank goodness the teen didn't land on his head and thank goodness there was this platform below. But really, how stupid can you be?! We all shook our heads but at the same time, couldn't turn away from this scene that was the blackhole of intelligence.

And that brings us to Jackass 3D. Really, there's almost no point in writing about this movie. Chances are, you already know what you're getting into when you cross the line into the theater. Expect human torture, feces, bodily fluids (including the "bodily part"), vomiting and so forth. It's the childish part of me, but I love this kind of comedy. Sometimes it's unbearable and cringe-worthy, but there comes a sense of relief after each "stunt" when the performers walk off laughing... even if they get nutted.

Jackass in general holds a special place in my heart. The first movie came out when I was in my first year of university and it was one of the numerous things that helped me bond with my floormates. Watching dumbasses do dumbass things can really bring a group of young guys together.

There's not too much I can say about the 3D except that seeing shit and vomit in 3D really brings the medium to a new light. At first I was intrigued, but now I wish I could unsee things.

If you love Jackass, then you're going to love Jackass 3D. And if you don't, you probably had no intention of doing so anyways. Til next time, later geeks!

The elderly rebel! RED!!!

2010-10-18T00:17:00.001-04:00

I love Warren Ellis' work in comics. I think he's a brilliant writer especially his work on Planetary, The Authority and The Astonishing X-Men. Most of the titles that I've read from him dealt with superheroes or at least some in that realm of reality. So when I first heard about Red, I was kinda surprised in that I've never read any of his "real world" material. But anyhow.

Red follows a group of retired CIA agents as they flee from government agents who are chasing them for some unknown reason. The retirees are a unique group and in fact are labeled as R.E.D. because they are "Retired and Extremely Dangerous". The team is led by Frank Moses (Bruce Willis) who is a retired ex-black ops agent. He swoons a pension officer (Mary Louise Parker) who is then whisked away into the James Bond-ian like adventure that she's always dreamed of. They're joined by a bevy of retirees as they balance fleeing with crime solving as they try to crack the mystery behind their being chased.

The movie is tonally similar to Kick-Ass (in fact, both were filmed in Toronto!). It's in a pseudo-real world, where all the background players and civilians are normal, but the main actors are outright cartoony. What would otherwise be a serious story of retirees on a mission is parsed with comedy throughout, giving it this light-hearted feel... with blood and bullets. I haven't read the comics, but from what I can gather, the tone in the books is radically different from the movie. It's more of a serious story, whereas the movie is played for its comedy bits. It's like two different mediums using the same premise and producing two different results.

Helen Mirren is pretty damn awesome in the role as Victoria, a once cold-blooded killer. Mirren, who normally exudes with elegance, is juxtaposed with her blood thirsty trigger finger. There is just something hilarious about seeing her clad in arctic camo gear, wielding a sniper rifle. But really, as if I really needed to say it, John Malkovich steals the show. Anytime they focused too long on another character, I wanted Malkovich back on the screen. He was just damn hilarious playing the wacky old paranoid character. Bruce Willis probably has the most straight-up role as far as the main cast goes, and he does what he does. I was kind of disappointed with Mary-Louise Parker, who is supposed to be excited that she's on this wild adventure, but I just never bought it. I think Cameron Diaz did a better job playing a similar kind of character from Knight and Day earlier this summer.

The movie was entertaining, and in the end, was good, but didn't reach levels of greatness. The casting of such talented older actors is superb and each does great with what they are given. I think the problem is that they weren't given much. However, it's still worth a DVD rent at best, when it comes out. Til next time, later geeks!

The Social Network

2010-10-12T00:05:00.001-04:00

Before the movie was released, I admit that my interest in this movie was nil. A movie about the creation of Facebook and its associated legal dilemmas just didn't seem compelling. When the trailer was released earlier this summer, the internets raved about the powerful and emotional clip that many praised as a work of art in itself. I didn't quite understand the clamor; I was still nonplussed. If anything, I was intrigued at the collaboration of director David Fincher and scriber Aaron Sorkin. But then it was released, and the reviews were raving, with an outstanding 97% on Rottentomatoes and a 95 critical score on Metacritic. So with my eyebrow raised, I had to see it for myself.

Without getting too much into the story, The Social Network follows Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg, as he goes through some personal and legal trials in the creation of the ubiquitous Facebook. The movie was interesting in that it didn't follow the conventional three act structure. Instead, we saw a general progression of events, flipping back and forth between the "current" legal drama cases and scenes from the past, depicting the history and inception of Facebook.

More than the story itself, which was nothing atypical, what hooked me was the execution of the movie. The script is filled with sharp, fast and witty dialogue as one would come to expect from Aaron Sorkin, who is known for crafting highbrow exchanges. I think Fincher did a great job of crafting this pseudo-univeristy world, where everything looks, seems and feels prestigious. The decision to shoot with a low palette was a stroke of genius, giving the movie this grounded but rich look. All the visual aspects of the movie are complemented by the excellent score by Trent Reznor, who matches the emotional beats of the movie with a cyberpunk kind of flair.

The Social Network actors and their real life counterparts.
From (L-R): Jesse Eisenberg, Justin Timberlake, Andrew Garfield.

Much praise has been aimed at the actors in the movie, particularly Jesse Eisenberg (as Mark Zuckerberg) and Andrew Garfield (as his best friend, Eduardo Saverin). I think Eisenberg does a great job and extends his acting chops, showing us that he's a lot more than what people claim him to be (a Michael Cera clone that is). I'm not seeing it in Garfield as much. He did good in the role, but it grab me as much as Eisenberg. What made me more skeptical was his casting as the next Spider-Man in the upcoming reboot/remake/whatever movie. I think the reason is more with his look than his acting skills. He's a handsome guy that would stand out in a crowd, but I'm not so sure that's who Peter Parker needs to be. We'll see what happens, I'll wait with abated breath.

The Social Network is a solid outing and one to check out, even if you're not a big fan or user of Facebook. Til next time, later geeks!

Hatchet Follow-Up: Hatchet II gets the hatchet

2010-10-06T23:36:00.003-04:00

So there's been a bit of controversy regarding the release of Hatchet II this last weekend. It was prematurely pulled from the screens on Sunday night. There's a few floating reasons as to why. Though the official word is due to the poor performance, many think it has to do with the "unrated" rating that the movie carries. It may be true, as AMC usually carries a handful of indie movies that don't generally do well. Here's the article:

Just got word that Adam Green's Hatchet II has been pulled from U.S. theaters.

This comes in the wake of Canada's decision over the weekend to similarly block the film from the theatrical circuit.

I'm being told a "full press release" is coming tomorrow and I'm curious to see how they're going to spin this. The film opened in 68 theaters taking in an estimated $900 per screen grossing - around $60 thousand at the box office. It was playing without a rating at AMC theaters.

The original The Last House on the Left and I Spit on Your Grave and Henry: Portrait of a Serial killer: All films that faced an uphill battle getting seen on the big screen. But I think some of you who have seen Hatchet II can agree that the film is drastically different in tone, so it's interesting to see an unrated film such as this creating such drama.

Well, I'm glad I made the right decision last week and caught it on the big screen before the pull. Much too bad. Good slashers are nearly non-existent in the mainstream nowadays. Anyhow, you can see the original article (here) with comments from fans. Later geeks!

Victor Crowley lives!!!!! HATCHET II arrives!!!!!!!

2010-10-04T00:10:00.000-04:00

You know, I feel blessed living in Toronto. You see, for a limited time, Hatchet II is screening in select cities across the USA and Canada. The AMC theater in downtown Toronto is one of 2 theaters across Canada participating. Even though The Social Network and Let Me In were released (both to raving reviews), the chance to see a Hatchet movie on the big screen was an opportunity that I couldn't pass up.

Hatchet II picks up immediately where the first one left off. The lone survivor, Marybeth (Danielle Harris), is fending off an angry and injured Victor Crowley in the swamps of Louisiana near New Orleans. Victor Crowley is of course the hatchet wielding killer — a deformed ogre-like hillbilly that lurks in the swamps. She frees herself from his clutches and makes her way back to New Orleans, to the shop of one Reverend Zombie (Tony Todd), the mysterious magician like shopkeeper that directed the previous group to Crowley in the first place. Marybeth, wanting revenge on Crowley, demands that Zombie take her back to the swamp to retrieve the bodies of her brother and father. Zombie agrees only under the conditions that he can bring his own team to the swamp to take the killer out. But what she doesn't know of is Zombie's real plan of breaking the curse that surrounds Crowley by letting him kill a few of his own.

I much enjoyed this movie, but I wasn't loving it as much as I hoped to like I did with the first one. Adam Green, who wrote and directed again (as well as the first one) did some pretty interesting things with the story. He expands on the lore and mythos behind Crowley. We're given more insight into his origin but it's left with room to create more mystery. The ideas behind the curse of what is Victor Crowley are also intriguing, but they're only ideas and not solid facts, hopefully to keep doors open for any future sequels (how do we even know that a curse is true?). He also fleshes out Zombie's character, who was only a cameo in the first movie, most likely a delight to horror fans familiar with Tony Todd's work as The Candyman from the 90's.

Much like the first movie, Hatchet II is filled with geektastic cameos and appearances by horror icons of the past. I was nearly floored when I saw John Carl Buecheler's name during the opening credits. Buecheler is probably more known for his directing gigs than acting ones, specifically for his work on Friday the 13th Part VII, a beloved movie to Friday fans. One thing that really threw me off was the replacement of the original actress with the ever-so-cute scream queen, Danielle Harris, in the Marybeth role. The movie opens up, and we see her in terror as Crowley tries to throttle her, and it sort of threw me off because I didn't remember Harris in the role originally. It fooled me and made me think that there was a gap in between the last movie and this one.

Green takes a cue from Tarantino's book as he gives a hint that his movies may exist in the same continuity. There's a cue early on in the movie that suggests that the world of Hatchet may be in the same world as Frozen, Green's other feature earlier this year. I admit, when I saw the clue, I cheered and clapped, but was slightly embarrassed as I was the only one (well... given that there were only 30 people in a 300 seater auditorium).

As I said, I didn't love the movie as much as I hoped to. I think a lot of it has to do with the plethora of generic characters. The team that's assembled in the latter half of the movie seem to be all disgruntled old men in flannel shirts. Except for the token black guy and the generic hot blonde girl, the rest of the team aren't really even given roles to fill. They are clearly there to be fodder.

Another problem was with the pacing. The movie doesn't exactly hit the ground running. There's a lot of time devoted to set up and telling origin stories before anything gets going. This would be fine were it another kind of movie, but Hatchet is a slasher movie, and the slow pacing hurts a movie of this genre. What we have in the end is a series of scenes that are rushed and more akin to a montage of horror movie kills than a horror movie itself. In fact, in the middle of the movie, there IS a montage of deaths, which is sort of played for laughs. Perhaps it was parodying itself?

But that said, the kills were good, bloody and creative. I don't know if it's because the movie was unrated, but the theme of the kills seemed to be overkill. You'd think that ripping out a guys intestines was enough, but no. He uses the intestines to strangle his victim. Is that enough? Nope! He strangles the guy so hard until his head pops off. Yup. There's a few instances of guys getting their faces so mashed in until there's only pulp left at the end. Four or five hits to the face would be good enough, but Crowley goes for the extra mile with twenty to thirty hits. Pretty unbelievable. There's also a lot of cutting in halfs, I think those were my favourite deaths watching horror movies when I was younger, because they were so rare. But this movie is littered with them. So I guess what I'm saying is that if you're a gore hound, then it's a bloody good time.

I'm glad I caught this in the theaters. While it's true that it wasn't a great movie, just the honor to see such a B-movie (pretty much a DTV movie no less) on the big screen is a thrill. I can't really say I recommend this unless you're a real horror or blood fan, but if you want something fun and silly, I recommend the first Hatchet movie instead. Til next time, later geeks!

Oh Me

2010-10-01T00:34:00.004-04:00

Hey friends. Sorry for the lack of updates and stuff in this past week. I started and stopped 5 different posts. I'll complete them soon! This week I was pretty busy and also pretty intentionally lazy. And I do say intentionally. Life is at an interesting point right now. It's too much to write about, but I heard the following joke a few years ago, and I think it sums things up:

A big storm approaches. The weatherman urges everyone to get out of town. The priest says, "I won't worry, God will save me". The morning of the storm, the police go through the neighborhood with a sound truck telling everyone to evacuate. The priest says "I won't worry, God will save me".

The storm drains back up and there is an inch of water standing in the street. A fire truck comes by to pick up the priest. He tells them "Don't worry, God will save me."

The water rises another foot. A National Guard truck comes by to rescue the priest. He tells them "Don't worry, God will save me."

The water rises some more. The priest is forced up to his roof. A boat comes by to rescue the priest. He tells them "Don't worry, God will save me."

The water rises higher. The priest is forced up to the very top of his roof. A helicopter comes to rescue the priest. He shouts up at them "Don't worry, God will save me."

The water rises above his house, and the priest drowns.

When he gets up to heaven he says to God "I've been your faithful servant ever since I was born! Why didn't you save me?". God replies "First I sent you a fire truck, then the national guard, then a boat, and then a helicopter. What more do you want from me!!??"

DTV Madness: Titanic 2!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2010-09-23T00:51:00.001-04:00

I bet you never thought that they'd make this movie. Well, you're right. Technically, "they" didn't. But someone else did! Yup, our good friends at Asylum Films, who brought us such mockbusters as Transmorphers, The Da Vinci Treasure and The Day the Earth Stopped, produced this spiritual sequel to one of the biggest movies of all time. Nope, Leonardo DiCaprio doesn't come back from the dead and no, Kate Winslet doesn't do a walk-in cameo. This is a brand new story placed in present day with a brand new Titanic dubbed "The Titanic II".

Titanic 2 takes place exactly 100 years after the first Titanic sank. To commemorate the occasion, a new Titanic is created with a much stronger and more durable design. It tries to outdo the original Titanic, by completing the course that the original ship set out to do. Unforunately for the Titanic II, the world isn't what it once was, and is now threatened by the dangers of global warming. For you see, the melting ice caps in the north are causing giant tidal waves in the Atlantic — waves coming straight for the Titanic II.

So imagine everything you loved about the original Titanic; the grandeur, the romance, the suspense, Billy Zane. Now take away all of that and what you get is Titanic 2. This movie SUCKED! It was so bad in every way but going into it, I knew it was going to suck. I watched and laughed at the trailer, then promised myself that I would watch this movie just so that I could tell people that I watched Titanic 2. Almost like an anti-badge of honor. Let me tell ya folks, it wasn't worth it!

The tip off should have been the knowledge that it was directed by and starred none other than Shane Van Dyke, who also brought us the bombastic Transmorphers 2: Fall of Man last year. Unfortunately, quality and Shane don't got together in a sentence, unless that sentence is "Shane's movies have no redeemable quality". It kinda sucks because I love bad movies, but even I could only stomach so much. Yes, bad acting, bad script and a shoddy production. The thing that's laughable and made the movie semi-watchable was the unintentionally funny production. That is, the whole movie looks like it was shot in a hotel. Okay, so maybe it's not that funny, but still.

So, in case you don't catch my drift: don't watch this movie. However, do watch the trailer (embedded below) and have a laugh. Share it with your friends, because I bet they'll think you're joking, but you're not because "they" actually made this. The nerves of these people. Imagine how much a charity could have used the money they spent making this trash. Til next time, later geeks!

SNL Showdown!!! MacGruber VS The Other Guys!!!!!!!

2010-09-20T00:33:00.001-04:00

Over the past week I got to watch two comedies produced by either current or alums of Saturday Night Live. Both were quite decent on their own rights and I was surprised at which one I enjoyed more, but that's not to take anything away from the other.

The Other Guys

Ah yes, the pairing of Will Ferrell and director Adam McKay. They've been quite the epic duo in the past, producing such legendary hits as Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy, Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby and of course Stepbrothers, a movie that's close to my heart. This time around, they've added Mark Wahlberg into the mix. Is the chemistry harmonious or explosive?

Gamble and Hoitz (Ferrell and Wahlberg) are two cops who are not exactly the cream of the crop at their police department. They are 3 degrees below the superstar cops Danson and Highsmith (Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson and Samuel L. Jackson) who Gamble admires with a fanboy like awe while Hoitz looks on with disdain and jealousy. You see, Hoitz really wants to be the supercop that he believes he can be, but feels held down because of his dimwitted partner. After a tragic accident with Danson and Highsmith, Hoitz sees an opportunity to rise to the top. Along with Gamble, they inadvertently uncover a huge corporate scandal after their investigation of what would be a scaffolding permit violation.

So for whatever reason, this movie just didn't feel like a home run for me. They played all the right cards, but it just didn't win me over as much as I hoped it would. I think it was a case of overhyping the movie for myself, and so when I finally saw it, I felt a bit let down. The casting was amazing and given the pedigree of the writers, I knew the story was going to be great as well. Don't get me wrong, the movie is good, it's just that I wouldn't put it high on the pedestal like I would with Stepbrothers or Anchorman.

Will Ferrell plays Gamble in a the subdued-Will-Ferrell form. You've seen it before on Saturday Night Live. It's funny because he's subdued, when you know he's over the top usually. But unfortunately, it's only funny for 10 minutes, not for over 100 minutes. He doesn't have as many zingers or one-liners as in previous movies, which I guess keeps it from that legendary status. Wahlberg who is rarely in comedy movies does well playing the pissed off cop that doesn't understand Ferrell. It's what you would expect from Wahlberg, but it works because he gets to play off of Ferrell. In a stroke of a genius, my favourite casting in this movie is Michael Keaton, who plays the chief at the police department. You don't see Keaton much on the big screen nowadays, so it was definitely a welcome to see Mr. Batman himself, especially in a comedic role.

So I guess why it didn't exactly click with me was because of the story. I just felt like they could have done so much more with it. I love the premise, and just reading the synopsis alone, they could have done so many more bits. But what we get are bits every now and then, mixed in with small laughs in between. There were no knee-slapping uproarious laughs like I had with all the other McKay movies. This felt like a much more grounded fare as compared to the other movies in his repertoire, which I suppose is a good thing. But what I really do like is the moral message at the end of the movie, which for me, saves this movie from the neutral realm to the slightly-thumbs-up category.

The message is quite true too. You in your own life can be a hero doing what you do, taking care and loving the people around you. You don't have to be an action star to hit that status. Oops, I should have said SPOILERS, haha.

MacGruber

"The man's a fucking genius! MacGruber!!!!"

If The Other Guys can be considered a grounded comedy, then MacGruber should be considered a balls-out, all-out laughfest. Simply put: I loved this movie more than I thought I would of. It has action, it has comedy, it has romance... it's all there!

Spawned from the 30 second sketches on Saturday Night Live, MacGruber is a full length feature that spoofs on action movies of the 80's, but especially of the TV show, MacGuyver from the same era (trivia note: MacGuyver was a house favourite here at the Lam household when I was a kid). The movie follows MacGruber, who retired and became a monk of sorts, as he tracks down a terrorist named Dieter Von Cunth (imagine that for a last name... eek). MacGruber seeks vengeance on Cunth who was responsible for his wife's murder, which led him to become a monk. But MacGruber is not alone thanks to his trusty team in the form of Vicki St. Elmo and Lt. Dixon Piper. Can MacGruber and his team stop Cunth (ugh) from a nuclear chaos?

I much enjoyed this movie, being a child of the 80's, having experienced cheesy 80's TV shows and movies. The comedy is silly and even childish at times, but shit, I guess I'm silly and childish at times. The movie just made me laugh. It was stupid funny, but funny nonetheless. It all works thanks to Will Forte (MacGruber), whose comedic timing is spot on. Forte isn't afraid to put himself out there, in what would be humiliating circumstances, all for a laugh. Forte is teamed with Ryan Phillippe, another actor who isn't generally known for comedy, and it works, similarly to the chemistry of Ferrell and Wahlberg. Phillippe does get out of his roots a bit, even if all it takes is a bit of celery (you'll understand if you watch it). Another SNL member, Kristen Wiig almost steals the show as Vicki St. Elmo.

It's unfortunate that the movie fell flat at the box-office. Perhaps Will Forte isn't as big of a box office draw as one could hope he'd be. He, along with Bill Hader, were two shining stars in that SNL cast, and it's unfortunate that he wasn't re-signed for this coming season. It's also too bad as MacGruber sequels will now be highly unlikely. There was so much potential there though!

It's on shelves now, and if you do like silly comedy, have a go! Especially if you were alive in the 80's. Til next time, later geeks!

Try the tasty CATFISH!!!

2010-09-14T16:11:00.007-04:00

Before I say anything, I want to note that this will be a SPOILER-FREE look at the film, just in case you're fearful of anything important being revealed. And I think that it's best to go in this way anyhow. After all, "Don't Let Anyone Tell You What It Is", is the tagline.

I caught a screening of Catfish last night and I'm still reeling in from the whole experience. It has been circulating the film festivals over the past year, oftentimes stealing all the attention. The film has created an electric buzz over its audience, causing fervent discussions amongst the crowds.

Catfish is a documentary about a young man named Nev, chronicling the heated relationship he made with a girl he met on Facebook. He's a New York photographer who connects with a family in Michigan after they see his work in a newspaper. They start sending him paintings of some of the photos he takes, painted by a 9 year old prodigy named Abby. He starts to develop a relationship with each member of her family, with all contacts made through phone, texting and Facebook. He soon falls for Megan, Abby's older sister, an artist of sorts. She appears to be a stunningly attractive young woman, with the artistic talents to match. To Nev, she is THE package. Nev's brother, being an amateur film maker and his best friend Henry, document the whole thing from the beginning, thinking that the story of a child prodigy connecting to his brother via Facebook would make an amazing movie. But the movie they end up with here is something radically different from what they expected.

This film was quite the emotional fare. Most of the time you'll laugh, but you'll also cringe with tense fear while saddened at other times. I think the sadness aspect is what hit me the most about the movie. The third act is where a revelation is made, and pretty much afterwards, it's a downer. You can't help but feel sorry for so many of the people involved. I think it's going to be effective for a lot of people because they can relate to situations like this. I think it's going to be a powerful film that will appeal to the internet savvy-youth generation, specifically the 20's crowd and those in their young 30's.

I think this movie is going to cause a lot of discussions. For one, people are going to talk about the validity of the movie and how truthful it is or isn't. To me, whether it's true or not almost doesn't even matter because I'm quite sure that things like this happen in real life. It doesn't change the fact that these things happen. Which leads to the second discussion point: the subject matter. As I mentioned in the above paragraph, I think a lot of people can relate to situations like this, bringing about the topic of social networking and identity, specifically, when the two blur together.

Yes, 2010 was a year for some shitty movies (at least so far) but at least it's producing movies that have people talking. Inception, for one, this, as another, and I'm sure Black Swan will have people talking too. The movie is getting the Paranormal Activity-treatment. It's being released in selected markets at the end of this week, but it catches fire with the public, it will receive a wide release. You can request if for your city (here).

If you can, watch this movie. And better yet, bring along a group of friends. This is one to experience together. Til next time, later geeks!

Getting frozen with... FROZEN!!!!

2010-09-10T01:03:00.004-04:00

I've always loved movies that dealt with isolation. I think the first movie that wowed me this way was Hitchcock's Rear Window. To a lesser extent, I also enjoyed Phone Booth a few years ago. In the next little while, we're getting Buried, dealing with a man buried in a coffin alive and Alfonso Cuaron's Gravity, dealing with a man trapped in space. I guess I enjoy that minimalist approach to film making. How much can you do with so little?

Which brings us to Frozen, released earlier this year in theaters. Frozen follows three college students as they hit the ski slopes during a school break. Low on cash, they bribe one of the ski lift operators to let them on. But the fun and games only last so long for these friends. That night, they are mistakenly left in the middle of the lift, abandoned and forgotten. Luck for them further diminishes as the hills are closed for the week due to the bad weather. Will they ever get off the hill or will they succumb to the cold, leaving them... FROZEN!

I loved this movie. I couldn't help but feel dread as we watched the characters realize their situation — they were stuck. For those who've been skiing, I think you can relate to that feeling on some degree, when the lift momentarily stops, leaving you hanging for who knows how long. Or even the few times that that's happened to me on the elevator; that dread overcomes you because you feel helpless. I think that connection is really helped me enjoy this movie.

With such a minimal setting, movies like this have to rely more on story and performances rather than a high and lavish production. I think the movie succeeds this way as well, creating such gripping suspense in its story. Each second is another wasted moment and you never know whether the characters will make it. The performances were quite strong too, particularly that of Shawn Ashmore, who I know nothing of except that he was Ice Man in the X-Men movies (or maybe he caused the ice storm in this movie? Sonovabitch.)

This is another thumbs up for director Adam Green who did the cult favourite Hatchet, probably one of the best slashers of the past decade. Green improves upon his style, showing us that he's a lot more than gore and cheap thrills. He's able to build character and craft a suspenseful story, while connecting to his audience.

If you can, I say check this baby out. Til next time, later geeks!

A Society In Rehab

2010-09-08T00:49:00.000-04:00

I was playing catch up with last month's issue of Esquire and I read an interesting article by Stephen Marche called "Have We All Gone Completely Nuts?". He talks about how our culture has changed this idea of redemption.

Here is a small excerpt from the article:

"For millennia, Western culture had a very simple system for dealing with bad actions. You sinned, you recognized it, you decided you wanted to change, and you were redeemed. This neat little system was called Christianity. Now "sins" are called "bad choices", and for the price of a stay at Hazelden or Pine Grove, redemption comes in the form of rehab."

The other day, I was having a conversation with my brother about this article. This idea that rehab leads to redemption can't be more visible than it is in popular culture today. You don't have to think too hard to come up with a handful of celebrity names that have been through this in the past year. But in a way, isn't this just a band-aid solution?

So my brother was telling me about a friend of his who went through some hard time with the law and was required to go to rehab. He told me that part of the rehabilitation process involved taking courses dealing with mannerisms, how to carry out conversations, gaining self-esteem and confidence, and so forth. Which is really good, but then I got to thinking, isn't this sort of backwards?

In the industrial and engineering world, they'd call this an end-of-pipe solution; that is, handling a mess after its happened. Oftentimes, this is an expensive process (think oil spill, disastrous!), and so lots of research and development are put into efforts to prevent a disaster before it can happen. So why can't we do this with people?

And I know this is a can of worms in of itself, but it got me thinking about the education system in Canada. It all seems like a by the books, thinking inside-the-box type of system. Why not teach these social skills? I don't know how much more important are these human skills than say reading or math, but to me, they seem just as weighty. I think about those things like mannerisms, self-esteem and confidence, and how much I could have benefited from such teachings (not that I'm that ill-mannered or confident). But I guess the problem is whether this type of material is didactic at such a young age. And also, how do you make it stick?

Then there's also that topic of redemption packaged into rehab. Another can of worms. I'm not going to get into it, but our world is a dark place and I'll leave it at that. Later geeks.

Piranha 3D!!!!

2010-09-06T00:21:00.005-04:00

From the opening scene of Piranha 3D, you know a statement is being made. They had the smarts to hire Hooper (Richard Dreyfuss, I believe is his civilian name) to play the opening kill — a staple in horror flicks. Yes, Hooper may have survived Jaws, but he certainly didn't survive Piranha 3D. And so the standards were raised after the first 5 minutes. And if that wasn't enough, the jabs really started when they released the poster (to the left) even before the first minute graced the screen.

But obviously they weren't trying to top Jaws, a cinematic masterpiece all things considered. No, Alex Aja isn't that stupid being an esteemed director himself. Instead, he tries to take the spirit of the original Piranha and mix it up with an over-the-top flavouring, nearing Scary Movie-levels of ridiculousness. Thinking about it, this movie was akin to the B-movie qualities of Eight Legged Freaks, which was surprisingly decent.

The movie takes place at a lake side town by Lake Victoria in Arizona. An earthquake breaks open the lake floor and out comes a horde of deadly prehistoric piranhas (I'm tempted to say a school of piranhas, but that makes them sound like wussy fishes). Unfortunately for this small town, the piranhas are hungry for meat. Making matters worse, it's spring break and the lake is flooded with drunken and debaucherous students. How will the town survive this epidemic of killer fishes?

Well, the short answer is that most of them don't. And I'm not kidding, lots of people die! I might be wrong, but this movie could have had the highest kill count for all the horror movies I've ever seen. So much blood, so much limbs, so much gore! For a gorehound (like myself) this was bliss. For the squeamish, this was hell. But what this movie reinforced for me was my love for prosthetics and practical special effects. Not that it's any more real, but it's just more fun seeing physical fake-limbs being thrown around on screen rather than a CG version. Granted, there was a fair amount of CG in the movie, but it more than balanced out in the end.

The casting for this movie was pretty amazing, filled with an ensemble cast, many who've hardly graced the silver screen nowadays. First there's Elisabeth Shue as the town's sheriff, who looks stunning at the age of 46, if Wikipedia is correct (and yah, I had a crush on her when I was young). Ving Rhames, who reprises his role as the big black tough guy-bad ass. Richard Dreyfuss, I already mentioned, but the cherry on top is the casting of DOC! Yes, that's right DOC! Uhh Jeff, which Doc? DOC BROWN! YES THAT DOC! DOC BROWN AND HIS DELOREAN! This movie is a reunion of sorts, with the reuniting of Elisabeth Shue and Doc Brown, a la Back to the Future Part II (note: my brain nearly overloaded as I realized this while I was watching the movie).

The movie itself is decent. I didn't love it as much as the original Piranha, but I did enjoy it heaps more than Piranha II which I still can't believe that James Cameron did. Besides the zany and quantity of kills, I just never felt the hook, maybe because of such a large cast that kept me from connecting to anyone. One thing that I was disappointed about was the piranha sounds that they made in the original movies. I was hoping that these piranhas would have that same campy but cheesy sound. As for Alex Aja, I'd file this under his 'good' folder. His first hit Haute Tension is still one of my favourite horror flicks, creating such gripping suspense with hardly any dialogue. Then there was The Hills Have Eyes remake which was a tour de force in horror. But then he limped with Mirrors. Well, I'm glad Piranha 3D is back on the right track even if it wasn't a blow away hit.

Lastly, I want to touch on the 3D. I know there is sort of an internet fanboy backlash against the medium. I can't say I'm for or against the 3D, I enjoy it when it's done good. But for this movie, there was not one minute that I thought the 3D added any enjoyment to my viewing. I've seen a handful of movies in 3D, and still, the only ones where I thought it was good was Avatar and strangely enough, My Bloody Valentine 3D.

Anyhow, this is worth a rent at the very least. If you're into the whole 3D thing, then I suppose a theatrical viewing wouldn't hurt. But I'd say walk don't run, to see it. Or should I say swim? Til next time, later geeks!

Oh, hello!

2010-09-02T01:29:00.002-04:00

So we're at September already! I figured it was time for a change. I had the last layout for about a year. I spent the past 2 weeks like a coding monkey, designing the layout from scratch. I think it looks pretty good but I have to work out a few little kinks. Anyhow, thanks to all you loyal readers and casual readers alike. I enjoy writing and I hope you enjoy reading it. Here's to another year! Peace!

DTV Madness: Tekken!!!!

2010-08-31T00:39:00.001-04:00

I think the first Tekken game came out when I was just hitting my teen age. Although a few of my friends got really into the game, I just couldn't muster the same love for the game. Even before it was released, I was raised on Street Fighters and Mortal Kombats — not this no-fireball nonsense. To its credit, Tekken had a really deep, technical and intensive combat system, but I guess I just preferred something easier... plus, I liked fireballs and fatalities.

It seems as though there is going to be a triad of bad movies based on fighting video games. The gauntlet was laid down last year with release of the box office smash hit Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun Li (cue sarcasm). Not to be outdone, Namco answered the challenge with Tekken and SNK also threw their name into the hat with The King of Fighters, which should be out soon. But let's talk about Tekken.

Tekken takes place in a futuristic Earth, where the continents are taken over by corporate entities. We follow a young fighter named Jin Kazama as he seeks to avenge the death of his mother, killed by an evil group led by one Heihachi Mishima, who also happens to be president of the Tekken Corporation. However, in order to get to Mishima, Jin needs to enter a tournament held by the Tekken group — a tournament to find the toughest fighter in the world.

Now, I don't know the Tekken canon very well, so I'm not too sure if the story followed the game's story closely or not. It's pretty much a straight up action movie with a few cheap twists along the way. The tournament element of the movie made it really similar to Mortal Kombat, in that our hero needed to enter himself in in order to get to the big boss. Speaking of Mortal Kombat, Cary Tagawa who played Shang Tsung in MK also played the big boss in Tekken. If only he played M. Bison in Street Fighter, he could have completed the set.

Bryan Fury VS Jin Kazama!

The movie is filled with a handful of characters from the video game and thankfully, doesn't make the mistake of over-saturating it a la Mortal Kombat Annihilation. Many of the characters though have little significance to the story other than being fodder for the next fight sequence.

So as per DTV standards go, I was quite entertained with the movie. The movie was action packed and hardly let its guard down. The movie clearly used some small sets, but they did well with the budget they were given and it ended up looking pretty good (again, as per DTV standards). We don't get many cyber punk movies nowadays, especially in the mainstream and I thought it did a good job of adding a bit of that element to it.

What can I say? I was entertained. I enjoyed it much more than I did with last year's Street Fighter and I think it's mostly because they kept the story simple. So give me a simple story, throw in some action, mix in some cheesy dialogue and at 80 minutes, you can't go wrong. King of Fighters, let's see what you've got! Til next time, later geeks!

More on hoarding.

2010-08-28T00:47:00.001-04:00

I was reading this article yesterday and it reminded me a lot of the book I read, earlier this summer, Stuff: Compulsive Hoarding and the Meaning of Things. Anyhow, here's a snippet of the article:

"Bill James apparently had no idea that the body of his pack-rat wife, Billie Jean, was under the same roof as he helped police scour the home and the Nevada desert for any sign of her. Then he spotted the feet of the body poking out of a floor-to-ceiling pile of junk Wednesday, revealing in shocking detail the woman's penchant for hoarding."

You can read the rest of the article (here).

Rest In Peace: Satoshi Kon

2010-08-27T01:30:00.004-04:00

Truly, this is a sad week in geekdom. The anime world lost one of its great, a man that was and possibly is a legend in and around anime circles. The Japanese animator, Satoshi Kon, passed away this week at a young age of 47. Kon created such titles as The Perfect Blue (possibly my favourite anime movie), Millennium Actress, Tokyo Godfathers and Paprika, as far as full length features go. He was skilled in blending together adult themed storylines with a distorted dream-like tapestry all the while connecting to the audience with its emotional grab. When I think about who my favourite animator is, it falls between Hayao Miyazaki and Satoshi Kon. Well ff it can be considered a deciding factor, I have all of Kon's movies on DVD but not all of Miyazaki's. I am saddened that we will no longer see new ideas, new creations and new worlds from the mind of this master artist. But life is what it is and we have what we have. So thank you for that. Rest well Mr. Kon and peace be to your family and your friends.

So yes. Scott Pilgrim.

2010-08-25T00:29:00.006-04:00

HOLY @#$@!!! WHAT A MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yah, I really enjoyed this movie. It's a shame that it's doing so bad at the box office. In its second week of its theatrical run, it amounted to only 10th place for the weekend. A poor showing. But it was interesting. I went to see it in downtown Toronto with a crew of guys and to my surprise, the theater was nearly packed... and this was a Monday night! It's weekend revenues surely did not reflect this particular cinema. But then again, for this particular movie, Toronto theaters might be biased as our city played host to the movie.

The movie opened up with a 16-bit version of the Universal Pictures logo complete with 16-bit audio. As soon as that graced the screen, I knew I was going to love the rest of the movie. Immediately after, the voice over reads an introduction and proudly proclaims that the movie takes place in Toronto to which the theater I was at erupted in applause. Finally, a movie that doesn't try to hide it! 90 seconds in and we're 2 for 2.

Scott Pilgrim VS The World is based on the hit comic/manga series by Toronto native, Bryan O'Malley. Much like the comics, the movie follows Scott Pilgrim as he does battle with each of his new girlfriend's evil ex-boyfriends. Seven of them in fact. That is the story in a nutshell, but there is so much more. There's a plethora of background characters that are fully fleshed out and who are constantly interacting with Scott. Add to that the tons of visual and audio video game cues and you've got quite the pop culturey movie.

Thankfully, the story stays very true to the source material, deviating only slightly. It trims a lot of the fat and a few times, combines different ideas from the book into a single scene. What we get is a more streamlined version of the books, making it a lot easier for us, the audience, to follow. It's pretty amazing, considering 6 books were summed into a 2 hour movie. O'Malley must have been in constant dialogue with the production of this movie, as the 6th and final book of the series was only released in July, when the movie was already done for several months. Yet the ending scenes in the movie kept close to the books.

I think what I loved most was how much video games influenced this movie. And I'm not even talking about the playing of video games, which actually only happens three or so times within the movie. But so many of the different elements we find in games are incorporated into the movie. Things like life bars, stat points, levelling up and so forth. The movie does a great job of bringing these ideas (which were in the book) to life on the big screen. But not only that, it also expands on these ideas in ways that you can't in a comic book. For instance, the Zelda video game music that gradually turns into part of the score for the movie. Now that I think about it, a lot of the sound effects from the Zelda games made it into the movie. That is fantastic. Speaking of the score, the music was another highlight of the movie. It had a killer soundtrack featuring not only original tunes by the in-movie band Sex Bob-Omb, but also from Metric, The Rolling Stones and Beck, just to name a few.

As far as major motion pictures, director Edgar Wright goes three for three with Scott Pilgrim VS The World. It's hard to rank this amongst a lauded filmography which includes Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz given the gravitas of both films, but I'd say it fits nicely right in between them.

The cast was near perfect and really felt like their comic book counterparts. I knew Michael Cera was going to be spot on as Scott but that wasn't hard, considering all he had to do was really just play himself. But going in, I was unsure of Mary Elizabeth Winstead who was playing his main lover, Ramona Flowers. She certainly looked the part, but I feel, of all the characters in the movie, she had the weakest performance. It was really subdued and uncharismatic compared to how we see her in the books. With such a wide array of characters, there are so many favourites that I could choose from. Brandon Routh's vegan powered, super saiyan, evil ex-boyfriend was clearly my favourite evil ex-boyfriend. But overall, I think I'm going to go with the unconventional choice. And that is Bill Hader, as "The Voice". "The Voice" added so much and was pivotal to all the key scenes yet is this unseen force that can be easily forgotten when it's all said and done. And I admit, Bill Hader is probably one of my favourite comedians/impressionists.

The only thing I have to complain about is that they never really took advantage of all the different locations that Toronto had to offer. So many times, they're just hanging around the Annex area (@ Bloor and Bathurst). Our city is so eclectic and multicultural that I think it was a failure that they didn't explore these avenues more.

Today I was thinking about the cyclical progression of how this movie came to be, and in a way it forms a full cycle. Bear with me (with my nerdiness). A lot of times, movies inspire video games (perhaps more so nowadays than before). Video games then inspired Bryan O'Malley to write this series of books. These books are then adapted into a mainstream movie, thus completing the circle of life.

A lengthy review, but I had to get it all out. Anyhow, I admit, my love for this movie may be extremely biased as it is: a.) extremely geek-centric and b.) it takes place in Toronto. Still, it's a solid (if not hyper) look at young love and you can't go wrong with that. Honestly, if you grew up in the 8-bit or 16-bit era, you've got to see this movie! In fact, it's more than a movie, it's an experience. Til next time, later geeks!

Un Prophete [Foreign]

2010-08-23T00:46:00.001-04:00

So while the American movie industry is spewing out sequels, remakes, reboots and/or other vacuous works of unoriginality, at least our friends overseas are attempting to create original ideas. Un Prophète (or A Prophet) is a 2009 French made film that garnered much accolades and success. Not only was it nominated for the best Foreign Language Film at this year's Academy Awards, but it also won the Grand Prix award at last year's Cannes Film Festival.

The film tells of a young miscreant named Malik who is thrown into a French prison for some unmentioned petty crime. As a French born Arab, he has difficulty with the French as well as the rising Arab inmates. Realizing that the Corsican gang holds all the power in the prison, he begins to connect with this group of convicts, led by their elderly leader, Luciani. But before he is accepted by the gang, Malik has to kill a fellow inmate. He complies with his duties and is soon part of the 'in crowd' at the prison. But Malik is no ordinary prisoner. Every now and then he receives prophetic messages from the very man that he killed, and it's with this little secret that is responsible for his rise in power both in and outside of prison.

This was an incredible movie. Tahir Rahim as Malik does an astounding job of portraying this young man who evolves into this criminal mastermind. It is such a stark contrast from the boy we see at the beginning of the movie to the man at the end and Rahim does a great job of transforming himself. Nearly the entire movie sticks with Malik, so the success of the movie really hinged on Rahim's performance.

The story is interesting in that at the end, it's somewhat of a happy ending, but because it involves criminals, it's only "happy" given the perspectives of the characters. There is a lot of betrayal and allegiances made throughout the movie and at first, it seemed a bit daunting connecting together everything that was going on. I was afraid that I was losing something in the translation. But after careful contemplation it made complete sense every move that was made. It was a crafty little story.

The only one thing that bothered me was the idea that he was a prophet. Really, the prophetic scenes were few and far in between. I think I would have liked it more had they expanded on the whole idea of prophesying. And to add to that, a bunch of the prophetic messages seemed more like entertainment for Malik rather than anything useful for his life.

It's still a great movie and worthy of the pantheon of awards that it garnered. As the summer movie season is winding down, it wouldn't hurt to check it out! Til next time, later geeks!

THE EXPENDABLES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2010-08-20T00:45:00.004-04:00

Me: "What a bad-ass movie."
Friend Zoro: "I think that's the perfect description."

So I'll say it again. WHAT A BAD-ASS MOVIE! Summer 2010 has to have been the year of team-based action movies. Just when the summer season was kicking off, we got The Losers. Mid-summer, we got The A-Team. And to cap it off at the end, we get The Expendables. And I'm happy to say that all three are enjoyable. But whereas The Losers and A-Team were filled with unique characters with distinguishing attributes and skills, Expendables opts for just a simple array of ass-kickers. And boy, did asses get kicked.

As the story goes, Sylvester Stallone's team of hired mercs are on a mission to take down a ruthless general and his army on a South American island named Vilena. Also on the ranks of team evil are Eric Roberts and Stone Cold Steve Austin. That's pretty much it.

So you're not going into this for a heavy or plot-centric movie (and if you did, what the hell are you thinking!). Compared with the other two movies mentioned earlier, Expendables goes for the straight up action rout. Which is good, because this is the key strength of the movie. Hard, rugged, bloody action. Thankfully for us, there's a ton of it. And it's best at the end when everyone turns on their "God-modes" similarly to Arnie in Commando.

I haven't read any reviews for the movie, but I did look at the aggregate scores that it received from critics and it seems to generally be in the middle of the road. I think that's a fair assessment given movie standards nowadays. But were this released in the 80s, it would have been an easy fit into the plethora of action movies from that era. Clearly, from the story structure and the actors chosen for this movie, it was an homage to those movies that we grew up with. It's true, the characters aren't fully developed and are pretty much one dimensional. But you paid to watch them squish heads, so what more could you want?

The casting is amazing. Oddly, I think my favourites were the casting of Eric Roberts as a turncoat CIA operative and Steve Austin as his muscles. I don't know if it was intentional, but both were so cartoony in their roles, that it just worked for me. Both were overtly evil, making their eventual demises all the more salivating.

I think my only complaint is that a few of the team members on Stallone's team get underplayed and are really relegated to cameo-like roles. Terry Crews was gold anytime he was on screen, but he couldn't have been in more than 10 minutes of the 100 minute film. Same for Randy Couture. A more minor complaint is the amount of CG gore and effects they used for the movie. I'm a big fan and proponent of practical effects and especially for a movie like this so I was kind of disappointed with the amount of digital work.

Still, I had fun. If you are a man, go see this with your man friends. If you are a woman, please force your husband or boyfriend to watch this movie. You don't have to go, but he does. Til, next time, later geeks!

SPLICE is nice... but...

2010-08-15T11:05:00.000-04:00

...I'm still reeling in a bit from seeing it. It was altogether a very good movie (in the sense that Inception was also very good). Great? I'm not sure at the moment, but that could change soon. I watched it a few days ago and since then, I've thought a lot about it and I like the types of ethical questions they pose in regards to science. Mix that in with elements of sci-fi with horror and drama, and you get one unique film. Also to note, it was probably also one of the most disturbing movies I've ever seen.

In Splice, we follow two scientists, Clive and Elsa (Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley), who successfully create a new species by splicing the DNAs from different animals together. The company who they are funded by wishes to take their research into a new direction and fearing that they would be relegated to mundane research, they start taking matters into their own hands by secretly conducting experiments: splicing animal with human DNA. The new creature they create, Dren, is at first startling, but becomes more tame after they start nurturing it like a baby. Elsa becomes particularly attached with the reasons being slowly hinted at. They discover that Dren ages at a substantially faster rate than humans where some of her feelings and emotions begin to mature. This spells trouble for our scientists.

The first thing I should point out is that they sold the wrong kind of movie from the trailer. When watching the trailer, you get the feeling that the movie is some type of horror and thriller movie, but it's really not. The scares are few and it opts more towards the human story — is what they're doing right? I think it's why I enjoyed this movie. Despite the horror and sci-fi background of this movie, it gave me something to really chew on and think about. When is far too far? Where is the proverbial line?

The director of this movie was Vincenzo Natali who also did the much beloved Cube back in 1997. Also, much like Cube, Splice was a Canadian production, which makes me more proud that I enjoyed the movie. All the effects are spectacular, particularly those of Dren when she's at an earlier age, which I believe is entirely CG but I could be wrong.

At the beginning I mentioned that it's one of the most disturbing movies I've seen. I don't throw that term around often because I rarely get disturbed especially from movies. In a way, I think horror movies have desensitized me from horror movies (I say "from horror movies" because real life gore still makes me squirm). But there's this one scene in the movie, which I shan't spoil for you, that is probably the most weirdest (check that, WEIRDEST) and most disturbing scenes that I've ever laid eyes on. It's a tough watch.

I should mention that the span between the first paragraph and the previous one was about 6 days, and I think between those days, I've had the movie sit on my mind more and I think I really enjoyed it. It's worth a watch, but I'm going to warn you that about 3/4's of the way, something weird happens. Just saying. Later geeks!

Tropa de Elite [Foreign]

2010-08-11T00:46:00.000-04:00

Tropa de Elite (or Elite Squad) is a Brazilian made film dealing with the corruption of the police force and the conflicts against the drug lords in different divisions of Rio de Janeiro called favelas. It was released in 2007 to much acclaim including winning the best feature at the Berlin International Film Festival that year. It garnered much success in its home country of Brazil, quickly becoming one of the most watched movies in the country.

The movie follows a captain named Nascimento who is part of an "elite squad"called the BOPE, who are analogous to the ATF locally. Because the police force is so corrupt, the BOPE is needed to stay above the law that is above the law. They are a presence feared by everyone in the city, including the druggies and gangs, as they take no shit from anyone. But Nascimento is getting worn down by the risky nature of his job, compounded by the pressures of becoming a father, and so he seeks a replacement for his position. Two new recruits are quickly singled out by Nascimento: Neto and Matias. The problem is, each candidate possesses something that the other is missing. Neto, while ruthless and impulsive, has all the heart, but lacks the brains. Matias, who is highly intelligent, unfortunately lacks that intestinal fortitude. If only the two were combined into one, the problem would be solved. From there, the movie follows each man as they build themselves up as men of the law, while taking down drug cartels and other hooligans.

This was a brilliant movie. A man’s man’s movie. It is raw, it is rugged, it is ruthless. I’ve seen many horror movies, believe you me, but I don’t think I’ve seen violence this in your face with brutality. But I guess it’s two different sorts of violence. In horror movies, deaths are so fantastical and outrageous that in a way, it is beyond the realm of believability, whereas deaths in movies like this are a bit closer to home. Deaths like these happen every day. The most brutal scene was seeing a woman getting shot point blank in the face. There are no cuts or pan arounds to the back of the head. We see it upfront, head on and it’s brutal.

The story and the style in which it is shot make the whole journey a visceral one. We grow with these men as they enter the BOPE with a child-like innocence and as they mature into hardened men of the law. The movie was made in an almost documentary like fashion, similarly to Hurt Locker, putting is square in the middle of the action.

It’s definitely a movie to check out and watch with a group of guy friends. If you see it on the store shelves, I recommend a rent at the very least. Til next time, later geeks!

Let Me In!!!!!!!! (Trailer)

2010-08-07T18:12:00.003-04:00

Last month, the trailer for Let Me In was released. It's a remake of the Swedish movie Let the Right One In from 2007. The thing that really hit me when I saw this trailer was how similar looking it was to the original movie... like the frame-by-frame type of similarity. I think the movie is going for the type of remake in the vein of Gus Van Sant's Psycho (1998). Rather than adding their own spins on the movie, they stay loyal to the material in reproducing every scene. I'm not sure how I feel about these type of remakes. I mean, if you're going that route, why not just tell people to watch the original? But at least in this case, it's bringing an original story to a fresh new audience. I wasn't fully enamored with the original but I did enjoy it. We'll see how the reviews turn out for this one. Have a good weekend geeks!

Red Faction: Guerrilla!!! (Xbox 360)

2010-08-06T00:51:00.006-04:00

Destruction at its very best.

So the only reason why I ended up reviewing Crackdown a few months ago was so that I could talk about Red Faction: Guerrilla. The gameplay was so similar that I couldn't ignore it. But whereas Crackdown irked me, RF:G brought joy.

Red Faction is a futuristic open world game that lets you play as a miner named Alec Mason who is new to Mars. He is reunited with his brother who is part of a rebel group called the Red Faction, who are united against an evil empire like group called the Earth Defense Force (EDF for short). But their reunion is short-lived as his brother is assassinated early on, prompting Alec to join the RF. From there, you travel from region to region, freeing the Mars colonies from the oppression of the EDF forces.

At its core, the game plays very similar to Crackdown, with a loosely held story opting to let you choose your own paths. You can basically do whatever you want although on the mission side of things, you get your choice between side missions (which occupy most of your time) and story missions (which are fewer, but progress the story). Side missions are where you'll end up spending most of your time and can have you doing a range of things from rescuing hostages, to destroying buildings or even racing, to name a few. Doing these missions will affect two gauges: civilian morale and EDF presence. The two work inversely, basically the more morale you gain, the better, as the civilians will aid you on missions or whenever you find yourself in a bind. Conversely, the lower the EDF gauge the better, as their lowered presence means more freedom for the colonial people. Before you can attempt any of the story missions, the game will require you to reach a certain level on the EDF gauge before you can progress further. So you'll end up having to do a handful of side missions, but whether you want to complete them all is all up to you.

The game provides you with an array of weapons of which the civilians will research for you as you progress in your game. These include different rifles, rocket launchers, grenade launchers and so forth. But nothing brings more joy in the game than the default weapon that you're provided with: your trusty hammer. It's almost for this sole reason that makes the game so fun. You can run around taking down fortress-like buildings with just your hammer as well as batting off enemies into the air, killing them with a single blow. But what really makes this great is that the game has this memory system to remember every little bit of destruction that you created. Even the slightest dent you make to a building will be remembered if you were to save and re-load a game. It's unlike any game I've played before where more often, buildings and objects are restored on a reload. It is quite amazing.

There are a few downsides to the game though. Because it takes place on a colonial Mars, the terrain that you encounter in each of the different zones don't vary too much. Besides appearing in different colours, the terrains are quite homogeneous, not exactly the most scenic game. Get ready for lots of rocky landscapes. Also, story in this game is downplayed, with more focus on game play than enveloping you with plot points. It becomes a problem because they don't build up the EDF empire that well and it becomes a faceless organization, making the ending quite anti-climatic.

Still I had much fun with this game than Crackdown. The game, even at its normal difficulty, brought tons of challenge, enough to keep you on the edge of your seat but keeping the F-bombs from dropping. You can probably find this game on shelves marked down at your favourite gaming store and I definitely recommend it for some mindless fun. Til next time, later geeks!

Michael Crichton's JURASSIC PARK!!!

2010-08-05T00:35:00.003-04:00

This week I finished reading this little book called Jurassic Park. You may have heard of it. It was adapted into a movie by one Steven Spielberg in 1993, which I think a few of you saw. Anyhow, it's kind of funny. I've never read the book before, but I did read The Lost World, the sequel to this book back when I was 14 years old, in anticipation for the movie sequel.

If you need a rundown, here it is in 5 short sentences. Old billionaire tycoon creates a park on an island in Costa Rica. He successfully funds research in recreating dinosaurs from rare DNA. He invites a bunch of people to check out the island. The power goes out. Carnage ensues.

Okay, they're not really sentences. It's always interesting to read the book after you've seen the movie. Instead of having your imagination paint the world described in the pages of the book, the world is kind of built for you already from all the visuals you saw in the movie. Whereas if you went the other way around, it's more of your own fantasy.

The movie is definitely a more streamlined and action packed version of this book. The best way I can put it is that they really trimmed the fat. There's a lot more dialogue between Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum's character) and the scientists in discussing different theories and philosophies. Clearly, not cinematic though. What's more interesting is that there are a number of characters who had only a few lines in the movie, but are completely fleshed out characters in the book. Particularly, Dr. Wu (the asian scientist guy, remember?), Harding (the doctor that was looking after the sick triceratops, remember?), and Arnold (Samuel L. Jackson, of course you remember!). There's even some change in who lives and who dies, so even though there was a lot I expected having seen the movie, I was still left with some intrigue in reading the book. Also, some of the scenes that happened in the book were missing from Jurassic Park, but were instead placed into The Lost World and Jurassic Park III movies.

It's still a good read and it is action packed, which made the 400 pages go by pretty quick. But having read it now, I think I can clearly say that I enjoyed the movie more. Trimming the fat was good. And plus, no imagination can compare to one Jeff Gone-Goldblum. Til next time, later geeks!

@#$# you, Virgin Radio 99.9!!

2010-08-02T01:39:00.005-04:00

Ya know, I think I've gotten soft over the past year. I realized that I'm hardly ever ranting and raving anymore. I've even noticed that my language is getting better; I'm hardly ever thinking or saying 'fuck this' or 'fuck that'. Overall, I think I've been more peaceful, which in the end, I believe is a good thing. Even my gaming tirades have been more calm. I might drop the F-bomb every now and then, but it's hardly ever the screaming bouts of yesteryear.

But the other day I was driving and had the radio tuned into Virgin Radio 99.9 Toronto to get my fix of popular hit music. Granted, the genres of music they play aren't my favourite but I still enjoy it from time to time. Then I realized something: Virgin Radio Toronto overplays every single hit song over and over. I swear, their playlist must be 30 songs deep, with the repeat option enabled.

We have an ongoing joke in our family that whenever we drive out somewhere, that the car ride is incomplete unless we hear a Lady Gaga song. I never really gave it much thought, because although it was true, I thought it was more coincidence than anything. But then I realized that it wasn't coincidence at all. The fact of the matter is, nearly every other song was a LADY FRIKKIN GAGA song! If I had a cannon, I'd take it to my ears!

And it's not enough that they overplay songs that I don't enjoy, they overplay the ones that I do as well, to the point where I don't enjoy them anymore. The songs that I used to find catchy and likable are now tiresome and loathe-able all thanks to this jukebox called Virgin Radio. Thanks Virgin Radio. Thanks for ruining B.o.B's "Nothin' on You" for me. Thanks for ruining Katy Perry's "California Gurls" (yah, I like that song, so what!).

But I'm not going to say "fuck you, Virgin Radio!", because like I said, I've been more peaceful and its going to take more than a radio station to ruin that. But I will say this, "@#$# you, Virgin Radio 99.9!".

Later geeks!

(Note: @#$# = 'peace to you, as we go our separate ways')

Congrats to Keith and Beka!!!

2010-08-01T01:14:00.006-04:00

Photo Credit: Heather Jardine

I don't know how I let this one slip through the cracks! Two weeks ago, two of my closest friends tied the knot after two and a half years being together. It was a beautiful ceremony and reception held at this country club up in Stouville, Ontario called The Sleepy Hollow Country Club.

A good time was had by all, with tons of smiles, laughs and even a few tears. I had the honour of being not only a groomsman but a co-emcee with my friend Maurice as well. When you put the two of us together, hijinks usually ensues, but I think we kept things pretty tamed (LOL).

Anyhow, congrats to my Keith and Beka! Not only are they newlyweds, but they're also now my new neighbours (which is good for gaming!). They're now enjoying the sights and sounds of Malaysia, having travelled to Thailand for a week. Seeya soon and congrats again!

Photo Credit: Kimberly Lam

Photo Credit: Laura Hogan

SALT!!!!!!!!!!

2010-07-30T00:20:00.001-04:00

So this past Tuesday I went to see Salt, not that I really had a choice. My mother and sister wanted to see Inception, of which I had seen twice already, and all that was left at the theater were a bunch of movies I had already seen, a bunch that I didn't want to see and then there was Salt. I knew just about nothing about the movie except that it was about spies and that it had Angelina Jolie. And as I sat in the theater waiting for the movie to start, I remembered that I saw the trailer months ago. And in fact, I remembered there was a brief scene in the trailer for a third of a second, that showed the great curve of Angelina Jolie's butt [side note: isn't that subliminal marketing? I watched the trailer months ago, and this scene was no more than a second, yet it was ingrained in my memory]. Anyhow, I thought to myself, okay, at least there's that to look forward to. But when the movie reached its end, the scene never occurred. The old bait and switch! Anyhow, I took the liberty of taking a screenshot from the trailer to show you what I mean:

The aforementioned curve of Angelina Jolie's butt. You'll notice the lighting in the room gives it the perfect definition. I hope I'm not bursting any bubbles when I tell you that this snippet isn't in the movie.

Butt I digress. I ultimately chose this movie because I heard mixed to good things about it. And after Toy Story 3 and Inception, heck, "mixed to good things" was good enough for me!

The movie follows Angelina Jolie's Evelyn Salt, a highly trained CIA operative, as it's quickly discovered that she may be a spy, raised and working for the Russians. But through the duration of the movie, there is uncertainty of where her true allegiance lies. The story is thin, opting for more action scenes with dialogue scenes used as an excuse to string together more action. As the movie neared the end, I thought that it was pretty good and for a moment, it seemed as though they wouldn't go the conventional route of revealing a traitor who set her up. But right as I thought that, they did exactly what I hoped they wouldn't do, and I thought, "awww".

Even so, the movie was decent. The action is fun and never seems to let its guard down. The only unfortunate thing is that it's a lot of generic action — I left the movie without any particular scenes sticking in my head. The story is a bit contrived as well, trying to stick in real life stories with fiction (ie. that Lee Harvey Oswald was really a Russian spy in their prototype program). It's also a bit ridiculous seeing a super slimmed down Jolie taking down multiple men who were twice or thrice her size. But we can suspend our belief.

The ending leaves more to be desired, it leaves things open for a sequel as well. If anything, at least they've got the titles set up easily. The next movie can be called Saltier and the third one can be called Saltiest. Or perhaps they could go the team up route and pair her with a male spy named Pepper, calling it Salt and Pepper. Yes, they could have Pepper be a doctorate grad in physics, just so could call him... Dr. Pepper. Bad humour over, I'm done. Later geeks!

"Yah, but I'd rather see [Angelina Jolie] in some movie like [Salt] than one of those serious movies where she's in a mental institution running around like a crazy person."
-Howard Stern on Salt

Reception: INCEPTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2010-07-28T01:49:00.000-04:00

I wanted to make sure I had two viewings before I wrote about this movie. I originally saw it early last week but came out of it confused mostly because of the first chunk of the movie. At first I thought that it was something intentional, but during my second viewing, I paid closer attention to the series of scenes that made up the first 45 minutes or so, and realized that it wasn't meant to be confusing at all. So I guess on that first time I was either too tired or it was too late of a show... but probably both.

As much as I dislike 20th Century Fox and those monkeys there, I love Warner Bros., their goons, and the way they think (monkeys against the goons). Pretty much after the success of The Dark Knight, they cut Nolan a blank cheque and said, go to town! And so to town he went to create this psychological blockbuster that he dreamt up 10 years ago — Inception be thy name!

I'm going to skip the story, because: a.) you've watched it already and b.) if you haven't seen it yet, I think it's best going in not knowing anything about it.

So when I walked out of the theater the first time, I was blown away and thought, man, that was an easy 9 out of a 10 film. It was fantastic, I thought. But over the next few days, I thought about it a little more and came to my senses. While the movie was good, it was only that: good. It was really closer to a 7.5 out of a 10, which is nothing to be ashamed of.

And here's why (skip the next paragraph if you want to avoid mild spoilers).

[Spoiler Start]

If you think about the whole motivation for the mission, it really is a shallow reason. The sole purpose was just to prevent this corporate entity from monopolizing the energy market. In a 2 and a half hour movie, they spent about 2 minutes talking about this motivation and just left it for the rest of the movie. So Nolan pieced together all these intricate ideas, interesting concepts, tied together by breath taking action scenes, that in a way, was all for nothing. It was a MacGuffin now that I think about it. And if you think about the characters a bit further, really our band of heroes were nothing but a bunch of bad guys. They were hired by a greedy boss to perform a task that was morally wrong. How did we ever really get behind them?

[Spoiler End]

Nolan, however is talented in a way that he can create conversations out of his movies, and that itself may even be more powerful than the medium itself; stimulating conversations and having people spur their own ideas.

Despite what I wrote in the spoiler paragraph above, there are many things I love about the movie. All the effects and action were gripping, with the zero gravity fight probably being my highlight. Even though it was supposed to be a futuristic movie, I loved how they kept all the technology lo-fi. All there was to it was a briefcase with some wires and a rubber button, that's all. If this were a Michael Bay movie, it would have been balls to the walls full of hi-tech, geekgasmic technology, which would of taken away from the story. Also despite the weak story, I loved all the different ideas and concepts that they pieced together in explaining the dream philosophies. They're very rich and layered ideas, and it's only regretful that they couldn't get into this more. That said, having had many discussions with different circles of friends, most of the topics of conversations came back to discussing these ideas rather than the story itself. A testament to creativity.

As I mentioned on a previous posting, I love team based movies, and going in, I had no idea that this too would be a team based movie. You had the financial backer, the architect, the chemist, the forger, and the two greatest 'extractors' on a team. Each was skilled in a different area, it's something I love seeing in movies. The casting for this movie is too amazing and it'd be futile to list off each actor. But I will say that my favourite had to be Eames played by Tom Hardy, who completely owned it last year in Bronson (watch this movie if you haven't had the chance yet). His demeanor and delivery worked so complimentary with the rest of the more serious cast.

Lastly, perhaps my favourite thing coming out of the movie was the score created by Hans Zimmer. It is very Dark Knight like and I love the atmosphere that it helps to create. All the music has this deep and rich kind of sound which fits perfectly with the movie. And also, it was perfect for my gaming. I've been playing Just Cause 2 on the Xbox 360 and had the Inception score play in the background. Intense gaming!

What the movie does exceptionally is wow the audience with its visual style, its action scenes and effects. It's a summer blockbuster action movie to the T. It is definitely not the best movie of the year or summer (thank you Toy Story 3!), but it is still a cut above the rest and a solid movie at that. Check it out [again]! Later geeks!