When watching previews during my "Phoenix marathon", I came across "Day Watch". I had seen this film before, so quickly wanted to mentioned that I loved this film. The special affects are awesome, the story line is fascinating, the characters are great. Even though it is all in Russian (and not dubbed), the subtitles are extremely tasteful, artful and entertaining in their own right.
Sergei Lukyanenko (the author of the novel) has an amazing story to tell, and the director (Timur Bekmambetov) delivered an excellent rendition of that story. I was blown away.
With Russia making awesome sci-fi games and now excellent fantasy-style movies, I have to wonder what the heck American movie producers are doing.
The chronology of the stories is very confusing. Lukyanenko has written two stories, NightWatch and DayWatch. DayWatch follows the other, chronologically speaking (the Talon of Fafnir follows the Chalk of Destiny). However, the movie is slightly misnamed, since the movie "Day Watch" tells the story of NightWatch. And I hear a third gook is either out or coming out. And Hollywood is picking up the next movie? I sure hope not, they might ruin it!
Just checked Amazon; apparently the third book ("The Twilight Watch") is already out. Amazon also tells me that the movie "NightWatch" came out before "DayWatch", but it is the prequel, and tells a different story then the book. Ay, corumba.
28 September 2008
Flight of the Phoenix, 2004
I did not think about how I was flying to Phoenix when I picked up this DVD. Or perhaps subconsciously I did. Strange.
Anyway, I did not have high expectations for Quaid. He came across pretty well in this one. Ribisi's Elliot character was a great match. A bit awkward at times, but I think that worked in well with the character. And I felt really good about Tyrese Gibson's character, but felt bad he was always walking in Quaid's shadow. And Hugh Laurie.... =) After watching several season's of House, it is almost relaxing to hear what I think is his real voice.
The film as a whole was ok. Very unbelievable at the end, but building up to it was good.
Anyway, I did not have high expectations for Quaid. He came across pretty well in this one. Ribisi's Elliot character was a great match. A bit awkward at times, but I think that worked in well with the character. And I felt really good about Tyrese Gibson's character, but felt bad he was always walking in Quaid's shadow. And Hugh Laurie.... =) After watching several season's of House, it is almost relaxing to hear what I think is his real voice.
The film as a whole was ok. Very unbelievable at the end, but building up to it was good.
Crank, 2006
I like Statham films I have seen so far, and this was another one of his action-packed deliveries. The artistic sense was a bit new, but not wholly undesirable. Having him expose himself so often got a bit old.
While the action was thick and the pace was quick, there was a bit too much swearing and nudity. And unnecessary gore. I did really enjoy the car chases, the bang-ups, the explosions, and the "go go go" race against time.
While the action was thick and the pace was quick, there was a bit too much swearing and nudity. And unnecessary gore. I did really enjoy the car chases, the bang-ups, the explosions, and the "go go go" race against time.
Poseidon, 2006
I do not know why I picked this film out; perhaps because I wanted some good old testosterone blood-pumping suspense and action. There was very little of that. Well, suspense aplenty. And most everybody dies.
Some of the things that really ruined this film. First, I know a little about tsunami's. But they never say "tsunami", but rather a "rogue wave". Yeah, a wave. What is the point of turned a big cruise liner parallel to such a wave? Would hitting it head on have a higher chance of breaking the boat? And I do not buy how a boat like that could possibly stay afloat once flipped over - I don't care about the big atrium in the middle, it would be crushed like a bubble.
Kudos to the actors who did a lot of swimming. That was probably hard work. Unfortunately, it was all very unbelievable, and dissolved any connection going into those scenes. Clear, warm well-lit water with several minutes of breathable air under exertion? *grin* What kind of boat wreck is this?
Some of the things that really ruined this film. First, I know a little about tsunami's. But they never say "tsunami", but rather a "rogue wave". Yeah, a wave. What is the point of turned a big cruise liner parallel to such a wave? Would hitting it head on have a higher chance of breaking the boat? And I do not buy how a boat like that could possibly stay afloat once flipped over - I don't care about the big atrium in the middle, it would be crushed like a bubble.
Kudos to the actors who did a lot of swimming. That was probably hard work. Unfortunately, it was all very unbelievable, and dissolved any connection going into those scenes. Clear, warm well-lit water with several minutes of breathable air under exertion? *grin* What kind of boat wreck is this?
Kingdom of Heaven, 2005
If nothing else, what most inspired me about this film was the utter injustice of the Crusades. "God wills it" is such a mockery of any true faith, and to result in such a massive amount of bloodshed (on both sides) is an embarrassment to Christianity and mankind.
I really appreciated Balian's story (Orlando Bloom). We are led to believe he has a good heart, a concept that is carried through the entire movie with great success. His honor, and defense thereof, propel him forward when all else is lost, and consequently he befriends a most influential Muslim.
The Knights Templar are appropriately evil, especially Guy De Lusignan. It is a good thing he was squashed.
I really appreciated Balian's story (Orlando Bloom). We are led to believe he has a good heart, a concept that is carried through the entire movie with great success. His honor, and defense thereof, propel him forward when all else is lost, and consequently he befriends a most influential Muslim.
The Knights Templar are appropriately evil, especially Guy De Lusignan. It is a good thing he was squashed.
Sahara, 2005
This film raised a few questions for me, questions that detracted from the film. Steve Zahn as an ex-Navy Seal? Are you kidding me? Watching him snap on rounds to an automatic rifle or disarming himself were just painful.
Penelope Cruz as a "brilliant" UN scientist? At least she was a doctor for the WHO, which is a little more believable. A little.
What are we supposed to believe about the ironclad? Did it really sail off to African, or did it slip through some kind of wormhole? That was never clarified. We are led to believe that it actually traveled across the Atlantic, and if so, I find it completely unbelievable that the characters, as smart as they are supposed to be, accept that.
Good action scenes, good suspense. The turmoil in African had an appealing quality merely because it was believable. The picture on the DVD, cruising the Sahara in a make-shift "sand-surfer" is... unforgivable.
Penelope Cruz as a "brilliant" UN scientist? At least she was a doctor for the WHO, which is a little more believable. A little.
What are we supposed to believe about the ironclad? Did it really sail off to African, or did it slip through some kind of wormhole? That was never clarified. We are led to believe that it actually traveled across the Atlantic, and if so, I find it completely unbelievable that the characters, as smart as they are supposed to be, accept that.
Good action scenes, good suspense. The turmoil in African had an appealing quality merely because it was believable. The picture on the DVD, cruising the Sahara in a make-shift "sand-surfer" is... unforgivable.
Life of Brian, 1979
I do not usually dig old movies. But this is Monty Python! =)
I also did not realize it was a parody on the "Life of Christ", so obviously, the whole think smacks of sacrilegious and scandalous bigotry. *grin* Otherwise it would not be Monty Python.
It was humorous, of course. I don't get the whole thing with Brian's mother being a man, nor why all the women want to wear beards.
I also did not realize it was a parody on the "Life of Christ", so obviously, the whole think smacks of sacrilegious and scandalous bigotry. *grin* Otherwise it would not be Monty Python.
A motion picture destined to offend nearly two thirds of the civilized world. And severely annoy the other third.
It was humorous, of course. I don't get the whole thing with Brian's mother being a man, nor why all the women want to wear beards.
Pathfinder, 2007
The preview made me think this film would be interesting, or at least entertaining. I was disappointed.
The concept at least is intriguing; Viking warriors descend upon Indians (go ahead, call them by their PC names) and utterly outclass them, but are stopped cold. The "destiny" of the orphaned child has been played on many times, and I think this film try to raise life from dry bones. Tried and failed. While the Vikings were portrayed as utterly barbaric and bestial, it was too much, over the top. And when the "ghost warrior" is reunited with his enemies/brethren, he automatically understands and can talk with them? Whatever.
I do not know if it was bad acting, or bad screenwriting, or both. But it was bad.
The concept at least is intriguing; Viking warriors descend upon Indians (go ahead, call them by their PC names) and utterly outclass them, but are stopped cold. The "destiny" of the orphaned child has been played on many times, and I think this film try to raise life from dry bones. Tried and failed. While the Vikings were portrayed as utterly barbaric and bestial, it was too much, over the top. And when the "ghost warrior" is reunited with his enemies/brethren, he automatically understands and can talk with them? Whatever.
I do not know if it was bad acting, or bad screenwriting, or both. But it was bad.
Shooter, 2007
I do not recall the last time I saw Wahlberg in a film, but I liked him in this one. The story has such a strong sense of betrayal that you really feel for him. I have never really liked Danny Glover (almost too cutesy or something), but at least he had some grit written into his character, which helped him a bit. And I have never liked Ned Beatty in anything, so I was hoping for him to bite it in the end.
My only complaint is that Wahlberg's character (Bob Lee Swagger?? a redneck?) is just too perfect. Even if he is the creme de la creme, he can take on a half platoon of armed forces or 4 other elite snipers. Or nail someone in the head while standing in a boat, using a plastic pop bottle to muffle the shot? Nope, sorry, lost some credibility there.
But I enjoyed the film.
My only complaint is that Wahlberg's character (Bob Lee Swagger?? a redneck?) is just too perfect. Even if he is the creme de la creme, he can take on a half platoon of armed forces or 4 other elite snipers. Or nail someone in the head while standing in a boat, using a plastic pop bottle to muffle the shot? Nope, sorry, lost some credibility there.
But I enjoyed the film.
Phoenix marathon
No, this has absolutely nothing to do with running insanely long distances. Nothing whatsoever; I do not run.
On a recent trip, I watched 8 movies to pass time. I am going to go over them briefly. =)
On a recent trip, I watched 8 movies to pass time. I am going to go over them briefly. =)
- Shooter
- Pathfinder
- Life of Brian
- Sahara
- Kingdom of Heaven
- Poseidon
- Crank
- Flight of the Phoenix
08 September 2008
Lilith, by George MacDonald
Poor C.S. Lewis might flip in his grave, but I had a really hard time enjoying this book. Perhaps this speaks more about me than either Mr. Lewis or Mr. MacDonald.
MacDonald creates a fantastic universe (or, to play on words, a "Phantastic" universe); both in its scope and its creativity. The problem is it is just too stinkin' thick. The main character, writing from the first person, is given to spouts of metadata, conveying the difficulty he has conveying to his reader what he is experiencing. I give kudos to MacDonald for his command of the language, but I fear his temporal removal from my own bestows upon his effort a sense of antiquity; he is just hard to read for modern folks. His modes, his grammer (and excessive use of commas and dashes) and depth make reading hard work.
And yes, that means I am a lazy reader. Look at what I read for crying out loud.
The story is unique, in its own right. Even though he wrote the book over 110 years ago (egads!!), he touches upon concepts that others have only copied; a man travels to a new place where the metaphysical becomes, for all intents and purposes, the physical. His own identity is questioned, and must be discovered. The issue of being is put under a magnifying glass. For these I applaud MacDonald. I would just hate to have to read it again. *grin*
MacDonald creates a fantastic universe (or, to play on words, a "Phantastic" universe); both in its scope and its creativity. The problem is it is just too stinkin' thick. The main character, writing from the first person, is given to spouts of metadata, conveying the difficulty he has conveying to his reader what he is experiencing. I give kudos to MacDonald for his command of the language, but I fear his temporal removal from my own bestows upon his effort a sense of antiquity; he is just hard to read for modern folks. His modes, his grammer (and excessive use of commas and dashes) and depth make reading hard work.
And yes, that means I am a lazy reader. Look at what I read for crying out loud.
The story is unique, in its own right. Even though he wrote the book over 110 years ago (egads!!), he touches upon concepts that others have only copied; a man travels to a new place where the metaphysical becomes, for all intents and purposes, the physical. His own identity is questioned, and must be discovered. The issue of being is put under a magnifying glass. For these I applaud MacDonald. I would just hate to have to read it again. *grin*
After the Sunset, 2004
I enjoyed "Entrapment" and had a small hope that this might be similar. In some ways it was, in others it was not. The story is supposed to be about a thief who is nearing retirement and takes on one final job, and the FBI agent chasing him. That specific plot has a long, drawn-out buildup. For the most part, I enjoyed the slow developement; the opening scene was great. Except I did not like Woody Harrelson's character (Stan Lloyd) at all. Too immature, in so many different ways.
After investing so much screen time to get to the climax of the story, I felt really let down; the heist itself was really rather basic. The small amount of intrigue was tasteful (and helpful, even critical), but by the time we get to the "Aha, gotcha" moments, you feel as if the best part of the movie happened a long time ago.
After investing so much screen time to get to the climax of the story, I felt really let down; the heist itself was really rather basic. The small amount of intrigue was tasteful (and helpful, even critical), but by the time we get to the "Aha, gotcha" moments, you feel as if the best part of the movie happened a long time ago.
05 September 2008
The Last Unicorn, by Peter S. Beagle
Unicorns have really lost their stature in modern fantasy. Not sure why; Zelanzy tried to bring them back (and did to a degree). Therefore, it was interesting to delve into a story about the "last unicorn".
I like the way Beagle writes. He has a good amount of detail in his environment and characters. I like how he focuses on expressions; eyes, facial, body language, etc. The short story he tells here is full of twists, depth and appropriate action. The bittersweet ending is full of delightful tension, if a little too quick, to short. I will look for other Beagle books.
I like the way Beagle writes. He has a good amount of detail in his environment and characters. I like how he focuses on expressions; eyes, facial, body language, etc. The short story he tells here is full of twists, depth and appropriate action. The bittersweet ending is full of delightful tension, if a little too quick, to short. I will look for other Beagle books.
Neverwhere, Neil Gaiman
Even though Gaiman's "Neverwhere" shares a lot with "Stardust", I felt this story was much more believable, more captivating. Again we have a relatively small "other world" that shares borders with what we know as reality, filled with exotic and esoteric beings, from the sniveling and meek to the powerful and evil. Again we have a somewhat high-placed, important damsel in distress, and a blunder-head guy with some enigma of a connection to this other place who happens to be the hero and eventually experiences that all-important rite of passage. Is Neil projecting that desperately?
It is hard to put my finger exactly on what I liked better about this book. The story is foreign to me, which I liked, with a appreciable (and some that you like to hate) cast of characters. The hard decisions that have to be made are poignant, although somewhat clouded by the context.
It is hard to put my finger exactly on what I liked better about this book. The story is foreign to me, which I liked, with a appreciable (and some that you like to hate) cast of characters. The hard decisions that have to be made are poignant, although somewhat clouded by the context.
Small Favor, by Jim Butcher
I have really enjoyed Butcher's Dresden series (or rather, the "Dresden Files"). Not because it is well-written, but because it is simply entertaining. There is a kind of off-beat Piers Anothonyish flavor thrown in, with a swashbuckling Han Solo-type wizard and a heavy sauce of sci-fi cult movie references. All based in Chicago, a city I know from my own childhood years. And I really like that combination, it works extremely well for Butcher.
The one downside is that he is not a very talented author, IMO. Neither am I. *grin* It is humorous to watch him find some new multi-sylable word in his vocabularly, and then use it twice in two contiguous sentences.
One thing that I also find interesting about Butcher's story line and character development is that he pulls in an interesting array of profiles. We have a young wizard with a ton of potential and a lot of natural abilities who tends to play fast and loose with the rules while somehow pulling off a mostly chivalrous stance towards the women in the book, driving a beat-up old beetle. His half-brother is a "white" vampire who feeds not on blood but romance; a disembodied spirit currently occupying a skull, a Martin "a brain the size of a planet" type entity, but instead of being depressed he is consumed by an appetite for sleazy sex; a God-fearing Christian family, the head of which happens to be a guardian and stalwart warrior of one-of-three holy swords. And the list goes on. Not only that, but the cast seems to grow larger with each book, meeting stranger and stronger entities from possessive demons to mysterious and almost seemingly benign angels, and queens of the Fae who have an unnatural interest in our protagonsit and swap favors like life debts.
With this book, I enjoyed the exciting fireworks as the big boys came out to play. Aside from the fact that Harry Dresden is doomed to always be stuck in impossible situations, yet blessed to always escape them, I enjoy the smaller aspects of his character development. For instance, his growing relationship with The Archive; nobody knows exactly what kind of relationship this is (father-daughter??), but with The Archive being so powerful and all, lots of fun things seem to happen when she is in danger. Butcher also introduced a small host of demons attached to the 30 silver coins in connection with Judas to betrayed Christ, and how these coins encourage power addictions with said demons. The resulting tension is a bit confusing to follow; is Harry really possessed or not, did his friend Michael (the Christian) really purge him of all ties to that dark acquantance? And now that Michael is pretty much out of the near future being almost dead, who will take up stewardship of the holy sword?
I fear that some of those minor plotlines will enjoy an unjust immortality, thus perpetuating the confusion and also detract from what we really like about Harry Dresden. And while I would really love to see him come into his own, I fear that it will happen too fast. It will be interesting to see.
I hear there is a TV series out. Sounds scary. =)
The one downside is that he is not a very talented author, IMO. Neither am I. *grin* It is humorous to watch him find some new multi-sylable word in his vocabularly, and then use it twice in two contiguous sentences.
One thing that I also find interesting about Butcher's story line and character development is that he pulls in an interesting array of profiles. We have a young wizard with a ton of potential and a lot of natural abilities who tends to play fast and loose with the rules while somehow pulling off a mostly chivalrous stance towards the women in the book, driving a beat-up old beetle. His half-brother is a "white" vampire who feeds not on blood but romance; a disembodied spirit currently occupying a skull, a Martin "a brain the size of a planet" type entity, but instead of being depressed he is consumed by an appetite for sleazy sex; a God-fearing Christian family, the head of which happens to be a guardian and stalwart warrior of one-of-three holy swords. And the list goes on. Not only that, but the cast seems to grow larger with each book, meeting stranger and stronger entities from possessive demons to mysterious and almost seemingly benign angels, and queens of the Fae who have an unnatural interest in our protagonsit and swap favors like life debts.
With this book, I enjoyed the exciting fireworks as the big boys came out to play. Aside from the fact that Harry Dresden is doomed to always be stuck in impossible situations, yet blessed to always escape them, I enjoy the smaller aspects of his character development. For instance, his growing relationship with The Archive; nobody knows exactly what kind of relationship this is (father-daughter??), but with The Archive being so powerful and all, lots of fun things seem to happen when she is in danger. Butcher also introduced a small host of demons attached to the 30 silver coins in connection with Judas to betrayed Christ, and how these coins encourage power addictions with said demons. The resulting tension is a bit confusing to follow; is Harry really possessed or not, did his friend Michael (the Christian) really purge him of all ties to that dark acquantance? And now that Michael is pretty much out of the near future being almost dead, who will take up stewardship of the holy sword?
I fear that some of those minor plotlines will enjoy an unjust immortality, thus perpetuating the confusion and also detract from what we really like about Harry Dresden. And while I would really love to see him come into his own, I fear that it will happen too fast. It will be interesting to see.
I hear there is a TV series out. Sounds scary. =)
03 September 2008
River of Gods, by Ian McDonald
Sad to say, I was not able to finish this book. Maybe it was my frame of mind, perhaps my expectations or mental requirements at the time. The book simply failed to capture my interest; it is quite slow, the supposedly intertwined stories too disparate (in fact, rather independent), and way too much emphasis on sex. Ian McDonald explores some bizarre concepts. The placement of a pure Indian (as in south eastern Asia) locale also makes the story seem much more alien.
02 September 2008
Stardust, by Neil Gaiman
I am glad I saw the movie first, in this particular case. I found the book to be overly fluffy, and did not really have the depth I was hoping for. I felt the movie, by going to the big screen, breathed so much more life into the story than what it originally had.
Additionally, Hollywood took the story in a much different direction than Neil did. Not sure how the author feels about that, but I sure enjoyed Hollywood's version more. With exceptions, of course.
Additionally, Hollywood took the story in a much different direction than Neil did. Not sure how the author feels about that, but I sure enjoyed Hollywood's version more. With exceptions, of course.
Declare, by Tim Powers
Tim Powers (from what few reviews I have read) has been compared to John Le Carré; I agree that there is something of a likeness in there, but I enjoyed Powers more.
This was another one in a series of authors I gleaned from another author. Why not? =) The book started really slow. In fact, I almost gave up on it several times. For the record, I did give up on Russia House. The spy genre is not really my cup of tea, I guess. But given that, I thought the book was tremendously well written. It is not often I appreciate the quality of a book without enjoying the story. Is that the difference between objectivity and subjectivity? Jazz is pretty much the same way, no matter how great the performers are, I hate Jazz. And I always give up on Jazz. =)
I really found Power's character development to be powerful, and classically paradoxical - the spy who falls in love with a spy. I loved his command of different cultures, use of languages and regional influences. The best part, in my opinion, about story telling is not forcing a fantastic, perhaps unbelievable, world upon a realistic canvas, but rather allowing (or rather, persuading, urging, beckoning) the reader to voluntarily extend his unbelief to the point that the story could potentially be real, no matter how fantastic it is. Or to put it a bit differently, I would grade a story by how thin the veil is between our world and the universe being fashioned by the author; how smoothly does it draw me in? Tim Powers painted a such a poignant, believable and livable world. Of course, my "standards" are constantly in flux, but, hey, that is my perogative.... *grin*
The "sci-fi" diversion is a bit interesting. I think this is perhaps what drew me on. I call it a diversion but this is what separates Powers from Le Carré - the point at which this is an utterly different and independent excursion. The exploration of a group of deities bound by archaic symbols and responsibilities, sentient, perhaps malevolent, beings that have no place in the natural order of things, but exert such a heavy influence upon that natural order so as not to be completely ignored.
I am glad I finished the book, and I now am firmly convinced I do not like spy books. I am glad I read Tim Powers.
This was another one in a series of authors I gleaned from another author. Why not? =) The book started really slow. In fact, I almost gave up on it several times. For the record, I did give up on Russia House. The spy genre is not really my cup of tea, I guess. But given that, I thought the book was tremendously well written. It is not often I appreciate the quality of a book without enjoying the story. Is that the difference between objectivity and subjectivity? Jazz is pretty much the same way, no matter how great the performers are, I hate Jazz. And I always give up on Jazz. =)
I really found Power's character development to be powerful, and classically paradoxical - the spy who falls in love with a spy. I loved his command of different cultures, use of languages and regional influences. The best part, in my opinion, about story telling is not forcing a fantastic, perhaps unbelievable, world upon a realistic canvas, but rather allowing (or rather, persuading, urging, beckoning) the reader to voluntarily extend his unbelief to the point that the story could potentially be real, no matter how fantastic it is. Or to put it a bit differently, I would grade a story by how thin the veil is between our world and the universe being fashioned by the author; how smoothly does it draw me in? Tim Powers painted a such a poignant, believable and livable world. Of course, my "standards" are constantly in flux, but, hey, that is my perogative.... *grin*
The "sci-fi" diversion is a bit interesting. I think this is perhaps what drew me on. I call it a diversion but this is what separates Powers from Le Carré - the point at which this is an utterly different and independent excursion. The exploration of a group of deities bound by archaic symbols and responsibilities, sentient, perhaps malevolent, beings that have no place in the natural order of things, but exert such a heavy influence upon that natural order so as not to be completely ignored.
I am glad I finished the book, and I now am firmly convinced I do not like spy books. I am glad I read Tim Powers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)