Rating Stephen King's Bibliography

I gave this a shot once before. [1]  But I'm giving it another go.  Albeit in a shorter per item format that's different from my usual set-up.

I'm going to have short, one or two line reviews of everything thing the King has ever done.  Adding new things as I read them.

As previously noted elsewhere, I started working my way through King's canon late in 2016.

1974

Carrie: Telekinetic girl gets teased until she snaps and runs rampant.  Simply amazing.  To think this is a first book makes it even more so.  It's tense in all the right places. Read this one multiple times.

Carrie: A

1975

Salem's Lot: Vampires invade small town.  Things go poorly for the town.  Great ensemble cast.  Fantastic writing really fleshing out the town.  Classic vampire story from classic King.

Salem's Lot: A

1977

The Shining: Alcoholic plus family locked for winter in haunted hotel in the mountains.  Creepy as all get out.  Alcoholic changes which side he's on.  Danny in the playground is downright terrifying.

The Shining: A

Rage: The first Bachman book.  Insane teenager takes high school hostage.  Lots of explaining.  Sort of a Catcher in the Rye but Holden goes off the deep end.  Not so great.

Rage: C+ [2]

1978

The Stand: Plague kills most of world.  Good and evil battle it out using the people left alive.  Really long, but worth it.  The beginning is amazing.  The end is amazing.  Some of the middle's a bit long.

The Stand: A-

Night Shift: King's first collection of short stories.  Some of them are insanely good.  A few not so much.  Highlights: Last Rung on the Ladder, Man Who Loved Flowers, One For the Road, etc, etc.

Night Shift: B+

1979

The Long Walk: Second Bachman Book.  Kids walk in a competition where stopping means death.  Twisted and yet believable.  You'd think it would plod along, but it avoids that pretty well.

The Long Walk: A

The Dead Zone: Smith can see future.  Reluctantly uses power to save lives and stop killer. Realizes he's got to stop a megalomaniacal politician from destroying world, but at what cost?

The Dead Zone: A

1980

Firestarter: Test experiments on Mom and Dad lead to girl who can start fires.  Government agency tries to capture and control her.  Not too smart.  Starts to drag in the motives.  A sentimental favorite.

Firestarter: B-

1981

Roadwork: Bachman number 3.  Man despairs over progress.  Ruins his own life to spite the world.  Takes about as long to read this as it would to pave a road a road by hand.  Spend your time on the road.

Roadwork: F

Cujo: Series of bad choices and dumb luck allows a rabid Saint Bernard to trap a woman and child in a broken car.  Also somehow a commentary on women who feel/are trapped in their lives.

Cujo: B+

Danse Macabre: Non-fiction. King's commentary on horror in movies, radio, books and the like.  I really need to read the updated version.  Good insight from someone who knows the field well.

Danse Macabre: B

1982

The Running Man: Bachman number 4.  Man living in dystopia signs up for game show where he is hunted.  Great idea.  Well done in parts.  The ending isn't great.  The hero isn't so heroic.

The Running Man: B-

The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger: Roland begins his journey to stop the Man in Black.  More like a series of vignettes than a continuous story.  Didn't really like the first time I read it.  I was wrong.

The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger: A-

Different Seasons: Four novellas in one book.  They are:

Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption: Innocent man ends up in prison.  Survives until he can escape.  Amazing.  'nuff said.

Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption: A+

Apt Pupil: Boy discovers Nazi lives nearby.  Forces Nazi to tell tales. Both become twisted by it.  My memory of this was worse than the read.  Well written, but not something I will seek out again.

Apt Pupil: B-

The Body: The novel that inspire the movie Stand By Me.  Boys set out to see a dead body.  Their experiences along the way shape them more than they could have expected.

The Body: A-

The Breathing Method: Tales told in a gentlemen's club about a woman who gives birth even though she's essentially dead.  More of a long short story, but well worth the read.

The Breathing Method: A

Creepshow: A comic book collection of the stories that were made into the movie by the same name.  The stories are pulpy horror that succeed in being exactly what they aim to be an homage to the type of horror comics King read growing up.  But that doesn't make them necessarily all that good.

Creepshow: C-

1983

Christine: Boy loves car.  Boy loves girl.  Car comes alive.  Lots of people die.  But it takes a long [reading] time to travel the distance and the journey's kind of boring at times.

Christine: C+

Pet Semetary: Indian burial ground brings things back from the dead.  Doesn't work great with the cat.  What could go wrong if we do it to the toddler?  Lots.  A few dead spots but overall great.

Pet Semetary: A-

Cycle of the Werewolf: Quick story told over the course of 12 monthly installments about a werewolf coming to town.  Too short to have bad parts.  Good enough you wish there was more.

Cycle of the Werewolf: B-

1984

The Talisman (Co-wrote with Peter Straub): Boy travels the country to save his mother and a world connected to our own.  Evil twins in both worlds try to stop him.  Co-written with Peter Straub.

The Talisman: A-

Thinner: Bachman book 5. Gypsy curses fat man to slowly wither away to nothing.  Can he resolve things before he fades away?  The ending seams cheap after the journey.

Thinner: A

The Bachman Books: A collection of the first four Bachman books.  Look above for their individual grades. (Rage, The Long Walk, Roadwork, Running Man)

Skeleton Crew: Kings second collection of short stories.  Overall not as good as Night Shift, but still plenty of amazingly good stuff in here.  Highlights include: The Mist, Mrs. Todd's Shortcut, The Jaunt, The Raft, Word Processor of the Gods, Survivor Type.

Skeleton Crew: B  (fwiw, The Mist and Mrs. Todd's Shortcut are A+)

1986

It: A book about Pennywise the killer clown killing off kids in Derry Maine.  Only Pennywise isn't really a clown (and for that matter isn't really named Pennywise).  Also, the book is really about a group of misfit kids coming to terms with the reality of growing up and dealing with their own problems.  Any way you want to call it, this is a great book.

It: A+

1987

The Dark Tower: The Drawing of the Three: Second book in the Dark Tower series.  Roland gathers a group of three people to join him on his quest.  The book starts out rough for Roland and only gets worse.

The Dark Tower: The Drawing of the Three: A

Misery: Annie Wilkes is Paul Sheldon's number one fan.  She's also crazy and has him trapped in her house.  A page turner from jump this is probably my favorite King book of all time.

Misery: A++

The Tommyknockers: Bobbi Anderson finds a buried UFO.  The more of it that gets uncovered the better the aliens inside can control the nearby townsfolk.  Sounds like a great premise but this book becomes a serious slog.

The Tommyknockers: C

1988

Bare Bones - Conversations on Terror:  A collection of interviews with King from a variety of magazines and other places.  If you are into King they are interesting enough, but I suspect most people would probably get tired of them long before they finish the book.

Bare Bones - Conversations on Terror: B-

Nightmares in the Sky: Non-fiction collection of photographs of gargoyles taken by f-stop Fitzgerald.  King writes the long introduction. Not something you need to read, but interesting enough.  Not going to give this one a grade.

1989

The Dark Half: What if the pseudonym you wrote under became it's own separate entity.  What if it was trying to kill you?  Dark and grim story about just that.  King exercises his Bachman demons?

The Dark Half: B+

1990

The Stand: Reviewed above (under 1978), but 1990 was when the uncut version was released.

Four Past Midnight: Another collection of four novellas.  I'm reading this one right now.  Or at least I was when I wrote this.  They are:

The Langoliers: An airplane slips through a crack in reality.  Can the survivors get back to the real world?

The Langoliers: B-

Secret Window, Secret Garden: Maine Author gets accused of plagiarism by a strange man from Mississippi.  The truth of what is going on is thinly veiled and easily guessed.  The ending takes a ninety degree turn that both almost saves and almost ruins the story.

Secret Window, Secret Garden: C+

The Library Policeman: Don't forget to turn in your overdue books or the Library Policeman might have to come and get you. 

The Library Policeman: B

1991

The Dark Tower III: The Waste Lands: Roland, Susannah and Eddie are together, but they still need Jake.  Once they get Jake, they lose Jake.  They get Jake again and now a train is trying to kill Jake (and everyone else as well.)

The Dark Tower: The Waste Lands: A

Needful Things: Curiousity shop opens in a small town.  The proprietor is an agent of evil who sells the town just what it needs.  The only cost is your soul.

Needful Things: A

1992

Gerald's Game: Woman ends up handcuffed to a bed, without nobody around for miles to hear her.

Gerald's Game: A+

Dolores Claiborne: Set as a long narrative by a woman who's tired of hiding her secrets, like what did happen to her husband?

Dolores Claiborne: A

1993

Nightmares & Dreamscapes: 24 more short stories from King.  Highlights include: The End of the Whole Mess, The Night Flier, and Sorry, Right Number, plus more.

Nightmares & Dreamscapes: B+

1994

Insomnia: Question: What happens when you don't sleep for a long time.  Answer: You start seeing things.  But maybe the things you are seeing are real and maybe seeing them will give you the knowledge to save important people.

Insomnia: B-

Mid-life Confidential: The Rock Bottom Remainders Tour America with Three Chords and an Attitude: True stories about what happens when several people with a lot of talent in writing decide to take their much smaller amount of talent as a band on the road.

Mid-life Confidential: B-

1995

Rose Madder: Woman gets away from her psychotic husband and tries to live a new life.  Too bad for her , the psycho husband is a cop who can track her down.  Too bad for him she's not the timid mouse she used to be.

Rose Madder: A-

1996

The Green Mile: A tale about the guards and convicts on death row.  Including one who has a magical power to heal.  

The Green Mile: A

Desperation: What if you been arrested by a cop from a very small town in Arizona?  What if he is actually being possessed by an ancient evil?  Also what happens when an author and his pseudonym write books at the same time?

Desperation: B+

Regulators (Written as Richard Bachman): What happens when the characters from a kids TV show come to life and start killing everyone on the block?  Also what happens when an author and his pseudonym write books at the same time?

Regulators: B-

1997

The Dark Tower IV: Wizard and Glass: Two stories told at the same time.  In the present Roland and the others continue their travels.  In the past, we learn of Roland's adventures as a new gunslinger and the discovery of a plot to aid the enemy.

The Dark Tower: Wizard and Glass: A

1998

Bag of Bones: A writer moves into his cabin by the lake only to find it is haunted by some spirits that are only slightly nicer than some of the nearby neighbors.

Bag of Bones: B-

1999

The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon: Young girl gets lost in the Great North Woods.  Can she survive or will whatever else is out there in the woods with her get her first?

The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon: A+

Hearts in Atlantis: Five stories of differing lengths.  The longest is essentially a novel, the shortest is a very short, short story.  All a loosely stitched together by the characters involved. 

Hearts in Atlantis: A

Storm of the Century: The script for the TV mini-series of the same name.  Evil holds an island town hostage.  It's price?  Either one of the kids or all of the kids.

Storm of the Century: B+

2000

On Writing: A book about the craft of writing from someone who's done quite a lot of it.

On Writing: A

2001

Dreamcatcher: An alien invasion starting near a hunting cabin in the woods.  Four friends may be all that stands between the aliens and humanity.  Or maybe not?

Dreamcatcher: B-

Black House: The sequel to the Talisman finds our hero older and dealing with murders caused by a serial killer or are they being done by a haunted house?

Black House: A-

From a Buick 8: What looks like a car is actually a dimensional portal to a place where stuff isn't as nice as the cops who are tasked with watching over it.

From a Buick 8: B

2002

Everything's Eventual: 14 short stories by King.  Several good stories but any deficiencies in them is blown away by the amazing 1408.

Everything's Eventual: A-

2003

The Dark Tower V: Wolves of the Calla: The Ka-Tet has to defend a town whose children are regularly taken by an unknown enemy.

The Dark Tower V: Wolves of the Calla: B+

2004

The Dark Tower VI: Song of Susannah: Everyone comes to the "real" world to deal with various issues.  Some are protecting the Rose.  Others are protecting the author.  And Susannah's gonna have a baby.

The Dark Tower VI: Song of Susannah: A-

The Dark Tower VII: The Dark Tower: The Ka-Tet finally finishes its journey and get to the tower.  Well they get to the tower anyway.

The Dark Tower VII: The Dark Tower: A-

Faithful (Written with Stuart O'Nan): Two die-hard Red Sox fans chronicle a year of ball games.  As fate would have it, the book has a very happy ending.

Faithful: B-

2005

The Colorado Kid: Maine locals discuss a cold case in which a man was found dead on the beach.

The Colorado Kid: A

2006

Cell: What if cell phones could be used to take control of the mind of anyone who answers the call?  A journey of those who didn't answer.

Cell: B+

Lisey's Story: Widow of a famous writer discovers that her dead husband was dealing with a lot more than just crazy fans.  Only now she has to deal with the crazy fans too.

Lisey's Story: A

2007

Blaze (Written as Richard Backman): Gangster type with some mental handicaps tries to continue a life of crime after his best friend dies.  Things go about as you'd expect.

Blaze: A-

Duma Key: Ex-construction company owner has to deal with the aftermath of being run over by a crane.  Perhaps painting is the key to health, or perhaps it's just a doorway for an ancient evil to escape its prison.

Duma Key: A-

2008

Just After Sunset: 13 short stories from King.  Highlights include: Graduation Afternoon, N, and A Very Tight Place

Just After Sunset: A-

2009

Under the Dome: Small town is trapped under an invisible dome.  Survival is less a matter of food and more a matter of trying to stop the crazy politician from killing everyone.

Under the Dome: A

2017

Gwendy's Button Box (Co-written with Richard Chizmar): A short story about a girl who is given a magic box that will give you whatever you want, but at a pretty steep price.  Also a return to Castle Rock.  A tight story well told.

Gwendy's Button Box: A

Sleeping Beauties (Co-written with Owen King): The women are all falling asleep and not waking up.  The men are left to their own devices.  Testosterone takes charge.  Not a horror book.  Wants to be more of an adventure story combined with a  psychological look at the nature of the sexes.  Mostly succeeds.

Sleeping Beauties: B-

2018

The Outsider: How can a man be murdering a boy at the exact same time he is at a convention many miles away.  King's take on a doppelganger.

The Outsider: B

Elevation: Short story sold as a novella.  Scott Carey is slowly losing weight but not body mass.  Though really the story is about his interaction with other folks in Castle Rock with the weight loss stuff as a side story.  This probably would have been better received if it had been in a collection of short stories and not trying to survive on its own.  The ending just seems monumentally naive to me.

Elevation: B-

2019

The Institute: Uprising by the people being used as guinea pigs in a strange secret laboratory.

The Institute: B+

2020

If It Bleeds: Four Novellas by King.  

Mr. Harrigan's Phone: What if you started getting calls from a cell phone buried with an old man?

Mr. Harrigan's Phone: A-

The Life of Chuck: Story of a man who's life is ending, but told out of sequence.  

The Life of Chuck: B+

If It Bleeds: The return of Holly Gibney.  Holly uncovers another 'outsider' and has to deal with it.

If It Bleeds: A-

Rat: Author with writer's block makes a deal with a rat.  

Rat: B

2021

Later: School kid can talk to dead people.  A cop uses him to save her job.  Things go south from there.

Later: B+

Billy Summers: Hitman takes a case to kill some bad folks, ends up helping a girl with problems of her own.

Billy Summers: B+

2022

Gwendy's Final Task (Written with Richard Chizmar): Gwendy's given a final task to save the world.  The world doesn't end, but the story does weakly.

Gwendy's Final Task: C+

Fairy Tale: Boy helps out old neighbor and finds out there's a portal to another world hidden in the shed.  Can he help save that world?

Fairy Tale: B+

[1] - You can read my attempts HERE, HERE and HERE.  Better efforts are done by the Loser's Club.

[2] - I don't hate this as much as some.  I think if you read it with the mindset that a lot of what Charlie thinks he's seeing on the faces or in the minds of others is just as much a creation of his derangement as his actions and reasons for what he's doing, the book is pretty good.

Challenged to Post, "Without Comment"

[It's been a minute since I wrote something here, but I thought I'd put this out there so I could easily reference it later should it become needed.]

Someone has challenged you over the next X days to post on some media platform pictures of:

 - Your favorite albums of all time.

 - The movies that were most influential on you.

 - The books could you read over and over.

 - The [some way of pretending to get random things] photo(s) on your phone. [1]

 - The food you blah blah blah . . . 

 - The place(s) you would yadda yadda yadda . . .

 - etc, etc, etc.

Let's be clear, I'm not opposed to these sorts of things.  I most likely am interested in what you might have to share.  After all, the reason we are ostensibly friends on whatever social media platform this is occurring on is because we both chose to be.  Thus, I probably care some amount about you and am interested at least on some level about who you are, what you care about, and other parts of you life.

But here's the supposed kicker, you have to post them, "without comment".  

Though I'm probably reading more dramatic emphasis into it than is really there, I always imagine it more like:

"I was challenged to post this, WITHOUT COMMENT!"  [Dum, dum, dummmmmmm!] [2]

But the question is, why?

Why wouldn't you comment?  What point is there to the whole thing if you don't comment?

Oh, here's some photo that seems important . . .

 . . .but I've no idea why.

Hey look, they like a movie that 90% of people like . . . 

 . . .  what a non-surprise.

They've read that famous book . . . 

. . . that millions of other people have read too.  

Complete non-shocker, and honestly, I don't care.

Of course if you were to comment then suddenly I do care.  Because now I know that the reason you picked that photo was because of [something meaningful and/or interesting].

Or maybe it wasn't.  Maybe you just like the way you look in that photo.  Or you just want to show the world your cute kid(s).

Maybe you just like that movie because of that one fight scene.  Or that one line.  Or because of that hot actor/actress is in it.  

And I suspect that's one of the real reasons people are so pleased to post "without comment".  Because they have nothing to say beyond, "I liked this."  Because their 10 things are completely banal and in truth uninteresting. 

A second reason is probably that after posting and commenting on 1 picture of their kid/dog/self/whatever that fulfills the requirement of this supposed challenge, they would really have nothing left to say on days 2 through 10.

A third reason, and most likely to most applicable is that people are lazy.

So, before I wrap this up.  Let me actually challenge you.

The next time someone "challenges" you to post pictures of whatever "without comment", I challenge you to completely ignore the lets 'o', 'u' and 't' in the word "without" and to post them WITH comments.

Because let's be honest.  One of the main reasons you accepted this "challenge" is that you were hoping people will think the things you picked are cool/interesting/say something about you, and/or that you want people to talk with you about it.  

There's nothing wrong with that, so skip the hoping someone will take the lame bait of a pic with no comments and start the conversation yourself.  

I for one will be way more likely to: 

 - pay attention

 - think about what you've posted for more than half a second

 - post a comment

And if the person who challenged you complains about your changing the rules, just reply to them with a link to this post.

Challenged to Post "Without Comment": D-

[1] - This is "Pretending to be random" because: A) if the randomly selected picture isn't something you want others to see; or B) isn't cool enough; or C) you really want to pick some other picture, we all know your just going to pick whatever you want.

[2] - That's a bad attempt at dramatic sounding music.

Serendipity

Serendipity (2001):

Serendipity: a fortunate coincidence.

Serendipity: a movie starring John Cusack and Kate Beckinsale.

The premise of this movie is a little far fetched, but intentionally so.  Two people meet by accident, spend a few hours together and then part to go back to their individual lives.  But because they feel like there might be more to this meeting than it seems and at the same time don't want to read too much into what might really be nothing, they leave it in fate's hands.  She writes her name and number in a book and sells the book to a used bookstore.  He writes his name and number on the back of a five dollar bill, which then gets spent on a pack of mints.  If they were meant to be together, the book will find its way back to him and the fiver will end up back with her.

The movie continues with an unforgettable series of almost connections and near misses between the two. So much so that in another movie you would be hard pressed to accept them.  But since the premise of this movie is that fate might just be tinkering in people's lives, in this case it works wonderfully.

Call me a hopeless romantic, but there is something compelling and wonderful about the whole thing.  Fate, karma, destiny, whatever you want to call it, keeping these two people circling around each other but never meeting until the time is perfect, until it is the right time for them to find each other.

I'm not sure that I necessarily believe that it works out that way every time for everyone.  I suspect there are plenty of people in the world that would be a perfectly good match for any given person.  But at the same time, while that may be true, maybe there is that someone out there that is the perfect match for each of us and if we would just sit still long enough and pay attention to what's happening maybe our paths will come together at the exact right moment.

For instance, maybe that moment is in an otherwise 'meh' class you take while getting your masters and suddenly a little voice in your ear whispers, "That girl sitting in front of you.  You're gonna marry her."  But you've got to be paying enough attention to hear it.

Add in Jeremy Piven and you've got a fantastic movie.

Serendipity: A

A Movie Plot

A Movie Plot:

Imagine this movie:

The main character is a young man without a whole lot of prospects.  Living in the shadow of his older siblings and with no real likelihood of getting/inheriting anything on the home front, he heads out to make his own way.

Naturally he meets a girl and they immediately connect.  They seem like a perfect match.  But of course her family disapproves of their whirlwind romance.

Determined to make it all work out the hero starts manipulating things.  He's doing a little deceiving and he's working all the angles. He's got a lot of balls up the air and he's managing to keep everything in motion.   And while what he's doing isn't exactly on the most honest and straight and narrow of paths, his heart is in the right place.  He has a girl to win and a fortune to claim.

Of course things start to spiral out of control and then just as it seems there is no way he can pull it off, *****[1] everything comes together.  The girl is his and he's made a name for himself.

Roll Credits.

Perhaps at this point you are saying, "Mister B, this is not a very original movie plot."

Well you would be right.  There are countless movies that follow this general script.  Off of the top of my head: The Secret of My Success, Some Kind of Wonderful, Opportunity Knocks, 10 Things I Hate About You, etc, etc, etc.  Really just about every other movie made in the 80's

Okay, now go back to the place marked with the five asterisks (*****) and change the ending.  Scrap everything after that point and change it to:

everything gets worse.  The more he tries to keep it together the more things spiral out of control.  The more they spiral out of control, the more frantic he gets.  In the heat of the moment he starts making some bad decisions and before he knows what's really going on, he's stepped a bit too far over the line.  Instead of the hero of our plot, he's the villain.

I've just described Hans from Frozen.

The more I watch this movie [2] the more I feel bad for him.  One little twist of fate in the other direction and the credits are rolling, everyone is happy and he's got the girl.

Yes, I know.  You want Anna to end up with Kristoff.  That's only because you've seen the movie as scripted.  You've seen the wheels come off the wagon.  But you can't deny Anna and Hans have a connection at the beginning of the movie.  I don't know about you but I've never met someone before that I could immediately sing a complicated duet with. [3]  They were BOTH singing, "You and I were just meant to be."

If there was no Kristoff and the movie was scripted differently, you'd have been cheering at the end when they ended up together.

Just saying. [4]

Hans [5]: B-

[1] - Note this place.  It will become important later.
[2] - It's the Bean's favorite.  We watch it and/or listen to the soundtrack a lot.
[3] - Not even the Pook.
[4] - Yes, I know he tries to kill Elsa with a sword.  At that point, everything is so chaotic and out of whack he's been taken over by temporary insanity.  You may be laughing now, but there are plenty of real world stories (and movie stories) in which someone gets caught up in the moment and takes things one step too far without really realizing how far over the line they've managed to get.
[5] - Either a victim of bad luck or perhaps just simply on the wrong side of that Disney Magic.

Alien Resurrection (2003 Edition)

Alien Resurrection (2003 Edition):

There were five years between Alien 3 and this film.  The special effects took another jump forward. The plot took a huge leap backwards. [1]

The movie is in no way scary.  There was not one single time during the entire film that I felt the least twinge of fright. [2]

Honestly, I could go on and on about the things that sucked in this movie, but I'll spare you.

Just trust me.

Fine, you don't trust me.  Here are three of the many reasons you should trust me when I tell you this movie is bad.

The actors: we've got Warrick from CSI and Nick Tortelli from Cheers.

The acting [3]: Did I mention Tortelli from cheers?

The plot: Have you ever surfed around the net and found some film made by a second year theater major who wanted to make a movie using the names and ideas from his favorite group of books or movies, but he couldn't because the studio would sue him?  So instead he changes all of the names and places and things just enough to avoid getting sued.  And as you are watching this film, in whatever backwater of the web you found it in, you think, "Well, it's not so bad given where it's come from."

Well I imagine that is what happened with this movie.  Only the studio, instead of suing for copyright infringement, gave them several million for special effects [4]

If you somehow end up watching this movie and you're getting close to the end and you think, "Well, it wasn't that bad."  Just wait until you get to see Ripley and the Alien queen's love child.  You will regret the choices that brought you there. I do so declare.

The special 2003 edition is not changed from the original theater version.  At least that is what the director, Jean-Pierre Jeunet, says at the front of the movie.  Though he also says that he saw no reason to make a 'directors cut' because the movie shown in the theaters in '97 was the movie he wanted to make. [5]  Which given all of the other movies he's directed ought to mean it's gonna be good.  But it isn't. [6]

Alien Resurrection: D- [7]

[1] - There is clearly an inverse relationship between quality of spfx and quality of the movie when it comes to the Alien oeuvre.
[2] - Unless you count the disquiet I felt when about a half hour in I realized I was going to have to suffer through the rest of the pic.
[3] - Or should I say the over acting?
[4] - And for Weaver and Ryder.
[5] - Which I take to mean he's proud of it.
[6] - I wonder if he thought it was supposed to be a comedy? Amelie was a great movie.
[7] - Overall, the spfx are pretty good. That's got to count for something? Right?

Alien 3 (2003 Directors Cut)

Alien 3 (2003 Directors Cut):

The third movie in the series and a third director.  And also a third type of movie.

As previously stated in my posts on Alien and Aliens:

Alien (directed by Ridley Scott) is a sci-fi horror movie.

Aliens (directed by James Cameron) is a sci-fi action adventure/war movie.

Alien 3 (directed by David Fincher) is essentially a sci-fi art flick (with an alien that's trying to kill everyone.) [1]

It is once again noticeable immediately.  From the beginning much care is given to how each shot looks.  The sets are big and elaborate and rusty. [2] There's rain and steam and fog, which aren't used so much to hide the monster, but to make it all look just so.

We're back down to only one alien, but there's no real attempt to establish the horror aspect of the first movie.  And there are zero guns. [3]

There's plenty of running around and dying.  The monster is plenty nasty. [4]  But the plot and the director are more interested in the morality tale and the well shot visuals than the action or horror.

I remember when this movie came out a lot of people were kind of disappointed in it. A fact born out by the fact that on IMDB.com this film rates a full two points lower than the first two films.  And I can understand people's disappointment.  This film is not its predecessors, but then the second film wasn't the same as the first.

If you watch it realizing that.  If you watch it on its own merits, I think it is just as good as the other two.

For the record, six years had passed since the second movie was made and the spfx have jumped forward again.  We once again get to see half an android talking and this time it looks pretty awesome. Not much to say on what the computers and other technology look like, since it takes place on a prison planet and that's pretty much what it looks like.

Alien 3: A-

[1] - But in an arty way.
[2] - Seriously rusty.
[3] - Until the very end when the "rescue" ship shows up.
[4] - Though it now has a sort of bovine aspect to it because of its initial host.

Aliens (2003 Director's Cut)

Aliens (2003 Director's Cut):

Aliens originally came out in 1986, which is just seven short years from Alien, the original film, but it might as well have been the fifty-seven years Ripley was asleep because that is how different these two films are.

As I said in the last post, Alien is a horror movie.  It's dark and scary and creepy and did I mention scary.  Aliens is an action movie.  It's got space marines [1] and they have lots and lots of firepower. This isn't seven people stuck on a spaceship trying to hide from the monster.  This is a straight up war between the good guys and the bad.

Really everything you need to know can be seen in the two opening titles.  In Alien, there is a painstakingly slow crawl across space during which bits of something slowly, oh so slowly appear. Until finally it's all there and you see the title, ALIEN. [2]

In Aliens, there is some fuzzy blue light and then very quickly it resolves in the title, ALIENS.  But the whole thing is done in 1/20th the time. [3]

Don't get me wrong, I like this movie a lot.  In fact, I've seen it many more times than the first one. Probably in part because they show it on TV much more often, but also because it is more fun to watch.  It's not scary, scary boogums.  It's guns and explosions.

A big part of the difference in the movies is just the number of aliens.  In the first movie there is one alien.  You never get to see it clearly.  It could be anywhere.  It's terrifying.  In the second movie, there are hundreds of the aliens.  You see them, if not clearly, more clearly.  And while they are everywhere, they are just the "bad guys" of the film.  They don't really have any more power or coolness then any other nasty from any other us verses them film. [4]

The special effects in the second movie are also worlds better.  Many advances were made in the seven years between the two films.  The spaceship shots, while still clearly models in some shots, most of the time look great.  The computers and technology in the world and on the ships, while still not "modern" looking are much better than the TRS-80's [5] the first movie was using.

Even the painful fake head from the first movie is improved upon.  Granted in this movie there is half android [6] but it looks so much better.

In watching this Director's Cut, I could definitely see where things were added.  Most of it was fine and I liked the addition.  However, the early scenes with the colonists find the space ship and such were really not needed and took away from the whole.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the movie doesn't have its tension but it's just not the horror movie creepiness of the original.  Which is fine by me.

Also, while it's way crueler than my statement about leaving the cat behind in Alien.  Sorry Newt, but if it was me, there's no way I'm going down into that nest to get you.

Aliens: A

[1] - And that should tell you everything you need to know.
[2] - Just like the movie.  There's something out there.  What is it?  Can you see it?  Oh dear god!
[3] -  Just like this movie.  There's something wrong! It's Aliens. Let's start shooting.
[4] - Don't get me wrong, they still bleed acid and can bite your brain out of your skull, but in the end that's no different than bad soldiers who throw grenades and fire machine guns.  Either way you are dead.
[5] - Or is that too obscure a reference?
[6] - Sorry, artificial human.
[7] - I mentioned this in the Alien post, but I didn't see a clean way to talk about it in this one.  So here's a long footnote.  Aliens was the first rated R movie that I ever saw in the theater.  It came out before April in 1986.  I know this because I was only 15 when I saw it and I turned 16 in April of that year.  I had not yet seen the original and I went with my older brother and a friend of his.  I had no idea what to expect.  Anyway, the funny part of the story is that we all bought our tickets separately. My older brother, who is six years older got carded to get into the movie.  They didn't ask me for ID at all.

Alien (2003 Director's Cut)

Alien (2003 Director's Cut):

I got the Alien Anthology for Christmas or my birthday a couple of years ago and for one reason or another I haven't had a chance to watch it since then. [1]  Well, I finally managed to watch it.

The movie came out in 1979, the directors cut came out in 2003 and it is now 2014.  This version starts with Ridley Scott, talking for just a second saying he is proud of the film and that he had added some new footage that had never been seen before and changed a few things that needed fixing.

I never saw the original Alien in the theater, which really isn't surprising as I was nine at the time. In fact I didn't see Alien until after I had seen Aliens. [2]  Since then, I would guess that I have seen the original movie maybe three times (not counting today's viewing).  I've not seen the film enough times to be considered an expert on it, but I didn't see anything that stuck out as new or substantially different.

The Alien movies are supposedly 'sci-fi' movies, but let's be realistic.  The four movies are not all of the same genre.  The later three are more of what you would consider a sci-fi action movie.  The first one is a straight up horror movie.  Sure it's set in space and in the future, but don't kid yourself.

The movie holds up pretty good even though it is now thirty-five years old.  The special effects are pretty dated in some places. [3]  The computer systems on the ship are laughably low-tech, but I suppose in 1979 they were cutting edge.  The shots of the ship flying in space are pretty bad, but the real loser of the spfx is when they reactivate Ash's head so that they can talk to him.  The detached head they manipulate and the talking head [4] are not even close to similar.  Actually, I can remember thinking the same thing the first time I saw the movie in the late 80's.

The super secret computer interface room that only the captain is allowed to go into is kind of dorky too.  It's got eight million blinking lights on the walls that would serve zero purpose.  I wish they had just made that room dark and spooky like the rest of the movie. [5]

Anyway, as for the rest of the movie, as previously stated, it's scary.  Really scary.  Super duper scary. [6]

They do a great job of never really letting you see the alien monster clearly.  It's always around a corner, or there's bad lighting or there's steam everywhere.  Occasionally you get a clear look at an arm  and and it's obvious that it's a man in a suit, but those fleeting moments don't make you feel much better.

As I said, I've seen it enough times to know what happens and it's still a nail biter.

Other things that stand out for me are:

- Awesome cast including: Sigourney Weaver and Yaphet Kotto. [7]
- I like that they bothered to make the alien ship in Prometheus very similar if not identical to the one from this movie. [8]
- I've also always liked how the Alien monster was super drooly. [9]

Finally, let me just say that if I was on a space ship and there was a monster running around killing everyone, the cat better get its own butt into the escape pod, because I will straight up leave its butt behind.

Now excuse me while I go watch something nice and safe.  Maybe a musical or a kid's movie.

Alien (2003 Director's Cut): A

[1] - Mainly it's because, if the Bear and the Bean are around there's no chance I'm watching it and the Pook isn't a fan either.
[2] - Which I did see in the theater, but we'll save that for another day.
[3] - Pretty dated is a nice way of saying really old looking.
[4] - Which is just the actor sticking his head through a board.
[5] - There are some other spfx moments that fall short (like the stiff unbending baby alien), but really they are not that bad and again, this was 1979.
[6] - Especially when you are watching it alone because everyone else in the house is in Tennessee.
[7] - He's awesome.  Homocide: Life on the Streets anyone?
[8] - Prometheus still sucks in the plot department, but it's a nice bit of continuity.
[9] - Don't ask me why.

Days of Thunder & Real Racing 3

Days Of Thunder & Real Racing 3:

In case you don't know what one of these two things are, Days of Thunder is a movie made in 1990 about race cars. Real Racing 3 is a video game that came out this year and is also about race cars.

And what, you might ask, do these two things have in common besides the aforementioned race cars, such that they deserve to be rated together?

The answer?  Nothing, but here we go any way.

Days of Thunder stars the real life couple of Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman.  Back when Tom couldn't fail to make a hit movie and Nicole hadn't yet had enough of his brand of crazy.  It also has a slew of other famous stars: Randy Quaid, Cary Elwes, Michael Rooker, Fred Thompson, John Reilly and even Robert Duvall.[1]  Not to mention a ton of actual stock car drivers.

Real Raching 3, doesn't actually have any people in it.  Unless you count yourself steering the cars and thus has no famous stars [2] including Nicole Kidman. [3]

One big similarity between both Days of Thunder and Real Racing 3 is that neither of them has any actual plot to speak of.

You wouldn't expect RR3 to have one, it's basic premise is you buy and race cars around a variety of tracks so that you can make enough money to buy and race more cars around more tracks.

You might have expected DoT to have a plot, but you'd be wrong.  Okay, perhaps I exaggerate I little.  It does have a plot.  Here it is in its entirety:

Cole [Tom] is a race car nobody who convinces a car dealer to sponsor him as a driver.  In one season of racing, he wows the racing world and wins important races.  Along the way he gets into an accident and falls in love with his doctor [Nicole] and makes friends with a driver he started out being semi-enemies with.

Done.  There is no more plot to be had.  And I'm not exaggerating in the least.  Here it is boiled down a bit:

Cole races cars.  Cole gets hurt.  Cole meets girl doctor.  Cole makes friends.  Cole wins races. [4]

I'm pretty sure that is the initial plot treatment that they used to sell the script to Paramount in the first place.  The conversation went something like this:

Movie Person: Here's the movie we want you to pay for. [Shows the initial treatment.]
Paramount: That's it?  Hell no.
Movie Person: It will star Tom Cruise.
Paramount: Here's $50,000,000.  Let us know when you need more.

Since DoT is about stock car racing, everyone ostensibly drives the same car. [5]  Of course they paint them all different with big numbers so you can tell them apart.  And so that they can sell more movie memorabilia.  Since it is American car racing all of the tracks are a big oval.

In RR3 there are currently something like 48 different cars for you buy and race, including: Porsche, Audi, BMW, Dodge, Nissan, Bentley, Ford and Chevrolet. There are a bunch of different tracks and only one of them is just an oval. [6]

The change of cars and tracks keeps things interesting.  There are also a variety of different events to complete, only some of which are traditional "races".

In DoT all of the races are pretty much the same.  In fact if you pay close attention, you'll see that they keep repeating the same action in all of the races.  Including the "bad racers" bumping Cole, the various crashes and spin outs and even how Cole nearly wrecks but manages to stay in the race.  But of course, they change the cars and the numbers so you won't notice.

From a 'realism' perspective, one of the biggest problems with DoT is that the actual racing is pretty bad.  Cole can be in last place and somehow in just a few laps he can pass everyone in the race and get back to being right behind the race leader for some dramatic last minute passing to win the race. [7]

From a 'realism' perspective, one of the biggest problems with RR3 is that you win most races by several hundred yards.  The game claims that it carefully picks opponents to keep the racing challenging, but I think I can count the number of races that I had some dramatic last minute passing to win the race on one hand.

When DoT came out I happen to be working at Toys R Us and I can remember the frenzy among the car collectors as they tried to get all of the various replica models that were for sale.  There was one set of cars by Matchbox or Hot Wheels that had both the stock car and the trailer transport together.  Grown men would wait for hours around the store hoping that our next delivery truck would have a case of the cars in it and that the case would have the rare, limited edition, Cole Trickle black car. [8]

I wonder if those same fellows think back now and wonder what were they thinking? [9]

RR3 is completely free.  You can download it on your phone or iPad whenever you get a hankering. Of course you can spend actual money to get more "in game" money, but if you are doing that, you need to rethink your use of disposable income. [10]

RR3 also touts its "Real Time Multiplayer" technology.  Which supposedly is that the game records how you run a race and then when I run that same race, your car will be one of the people I race against.  Only, I don't think it actually quite works that way.  I say this mainly because I've run a lot of races in the game and I've never seen one single person drive at all the way I do. [11]  Neither have I ever seen another car suddenly go running off the road for no reason. Which is also something I do from time to time. [12]

The best part about RR3 is that you get to drive by tilting your phone or iPad like a steering wheel. [13]

The best part about DoT is Nicole Kidman, but I think I already mentioned that.

Despite DoT's lack of plot and general cheesiness, I find myself drawn to it every few years and I end up rewatching it.  And every time as it ends I think, "Man is that movie way worse than I remember."

Despite RR3's gaming flaws, I find myself drawn to it several times a day.  If you happen to play, send my an invite on FB. You get more money for racing against friends and I have my eye on a new Bugatti.

Days of Thunder: C

Real Racing 3: B+

[1] - Yeah, I have no idea how they got him to be in this movie either.  I'm assuming a boat load of money.
[2] - Unless of course you are actually famous, in which case, thanks for reading my blog, can I have an autograph?
[3] - Which is a shame cause she's a hottie.
[4] - Actually when you look at it, RR3 has more plot than DoT
[5] - Thus, "stock" cars
[6] - The Indianapolis Motor Speedway which is in America of course.
[7] -  Which begs the question if it's that easy, why isn't everyone doing the same thing?
[8] - I was actually offered sizable amounts of money by more than one person if I would "set one aside" for them.  If only it had been that easy.  I could have completed my Ninja Turtle action figure collection.
[9] - I suppose it is possible that they sit at home looking loving at the shelf that holds their complete set of Days of Thunder memorabilia and marvel at how rich their lives are.  Possible, but not bloody likely.
[10] - And perhaps go look at your Days of Thunder collection again.
[11] - Which is to say reckless and crazy.
[12] - Like say when a four year old jumps onto your lap in the midst of a race.
[13] - Hey, it's probably the closest I'll ever get to racing a Porsche so let me have my small pleasures.

Dead Again

Dead Again (1991):  I get asked what my favorite movie is pretty regularly. [1]  Though there are scores of movies that I love, I can never seem to think of any reply to that question except for Dead Again.  Thus, I supposed that seems pretty strong evidence that this actually is my favorite movie of all time.

Which isn't a bad thing, because this movie is awesome.

Justify that, you say?

Okay.

A great movie needs to have great actors.  This one has plenty.  It stars Kenneth Branagh [2] and Emma Thompson.[3]  If for some reason you don't know who these people are, I'm sorry.  Please go rectify that immediately. [4]  The rest of us will wait.

. . . .

Right, let's assume you've taken care of that.

Not only does the movie have these two amazing actors, they are playing roles in which they fall in love at a time when they are in love in real life.  Which, certainly can't hurt your performance.

For side characters we have Andy Garcia, Robin Williams, Derek Jacobi [5] and Wayne Knight among others.

Okay Wayne Knight isn't what you'd call a top tier actor [6], but he's great in this pic.  Robin Williams, who also can be in movies that are real stinkers, is great in this movie, in a sort of twisted, alternate reality, preview of the character he plays in Good Will Hunting.

Anyway, trust me the acting is top notch.  Also if I didn't sell you at Branagh and Thompson, there's no hope for you.

Hopefully you've accepted the awesome acting, but we also need awesome directing.

Well, hey now are you in luck, because it is also directed by Kenneth Branagh. [7]  What else has this guy directed you ask?  How about:

- Henry V
- Peter's Friends
- Much Ado About Nothing
- Frankenstein
- Hamlet
- Love's Labour's Lost
- As You Like It
- Thor [8]

If I didn't have you at Henry V, you got some watching to do.

It's usually at this point that people ask me, "What is the movie about?" and no matter how well I've been selling them on the movie so far, no matter how passionate I remain, this is where the wheels start to fall off the wagon.  Because no matter how much I preface the description trying to make them believe that it isn't a goofy weird movie, at some point in the description that's what they start to think. [9]

Branagh is a private investigator trying to help Thompson figure out who she is.  She evidently suffered some sort of emotional trauma and can't remember anything or talk.  They go to a hypnotist and through her remembrances while hypnotized, it becomes clear that she was married to him in a previous life.  A life in which he murdered her . . .

I could go on, but it's around this point that I realize I've lost them.

Look, just trust me on this.  If you've read any of my previous posts and thought even for a minute that I might know a little bit about whatever it was I was talking about, go rent [10] this movie right now.

You won't regret it.  It's that awesome.

Trust me.

Please.

Dead Again: A++++++

[1] -If you do what I do for a living, it seems to come up two or three times a year.
[2] - Though you couldn't hear it, I just pronounced his name correctly.
[3] - Please, please tell me you know Emma Thompson from something besides the Harry Potter movies.
[4] - If when you begin to rectify that the words, "But I don't like Shakespeare" or anything similar should come out of your mouth.  You are excused and can go away now.

[5] - He's the guy I always think looks like Harvey Korman, but if you saw him you'd know who he is.

[6] - Newman. (Yes, I just said that in the right voice.)

[7] - Okay, I admit it.  I'm a huge Branagh fan.  And yes, I'm still pronouncing his name right.

[8] - If the only movie you have seen on this list is Thor, please do yourself a favor and fix that as soon as is humanly possible.

[9] - In this description it will begin to happen at word 33 and by word 51 it will all be over.

[10] - Or better yet, buy.

Epic, First Movie

Epic, First Movie: So I went and saw Epic.  It was pretty good.  Good animation.  Good action.  Several funny bits.   My favorite scene was with the fruit fly.  Looks to me like it is setting itself up for an Epic 2. [1]

But enough about the movie.

More importantly, the Pook and I took the Bear along with us.  It was his first movie theater experience.

A few weeks ago after seeing a commercial for the movie on TV, he told the Pook that he really wanted to see it.  More than likely it was a typically fleeting passing fancy of a four year old, but the Pook took it to heart, so we made it happen.

When he found out we were going, the Bear was stoked.  When he found out he had to wait until after lunch, he immediately asked if we could eat lunch right then. [2]

Since it was a semi-big deal, we decided to splurge and buy popcorn and a Coke as well. [3]

In truth, I thought we would probably get about forty minutes in and then antsy pants would get antsy and we'd have to leave.  There were one or two times in which he stood up to look around the theater and take it all in, but he sat through the whole thing no problem. [4]

The Bear's take on the movie was: "The slug was my favorite part . . . and everything else, that was my favorite part too."

The Bear's take on the entire theater experience was: "The popcorn was my favorite part . . . and everything else, that was my favorite part too.  Why can't we get more popcorn?"

As you can see everything went well and a good time was had by all.  Upon leaving the theater, the Bear asked when we could go to another movie.  I'm sure that will happen soon. [5]

If you are friends with me on Facebook, look for some pics of the Bear at the theater, to be posted soon. [6]

Epic: B+
First Movie for the Bear: A

[1] - The Pook says it will probably have the Leaf Dude get large for some reason.
[2] - It was around 10:00 a.m.
[3] - The adults in the party near fainted at the total bill.  The youth in the group started demanding more popcorn about a third of the way through the movie.
[4] - Except for the evidently appalling lack of popcorn that is.
[5] - Just as soon as I can secure a small line of credit.
[6] - If you are reading this several weeks or longer in the future, you missed them.  They were epic.

Charlie's Angels (1&2)

Charlie's Angels (1&2): My memories of Charlie's Angels the TV show are pretty sparse. [1]  In fact, my only specific memory of the show [2] is an episode in which someone is trying to kill at least one of the angels and some bad guys replace the shower head in her apartment with a flame thrower.  Fortunately for whichever angel it was, she was the type of person who leans in and turns on the shower before getting in. [3]  Thus she avoids the trap.

That's it.  That's the only actual memory of any plot line or scene from the show.

So, in 2000 when the first movie came out, I can't say I was overly excited.  I wasn't antagonistic or anything, but I felt no burning desire to rush to the theater either.

When I did finally end up seeing it [4] I was pleasantly surprised on all fronts.  The movie struck all of the right nostalgia chords with me[5] and I was particularly pleased that they got John Forsythe to continue as the voice of Charlie.  Casting Bill Murray as Bosley could have been a disaster, but wasn't. [6] There were good stunts, well choreographed fights and an ample amount of explosions.  You got Crispin Glover in a role that let him be as creepy as he wants [7].  Plenty of cameos.  And best of all the plot was not too terrible.

It was good enough that when the sequel came out, I was actually excited to see it.  And I have watched it on DVD several times since then.

Which isn't to say that it doesn't have its problems.  Instead, it's just that any problems are minor enough that they are easily forgiven and quickly forgotten.

Charlie's Angels 2, is actually called Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle.  It has nearly the same cast (Diaz, Barrymore and Liu all return as the angels) with one big exception.  This time the role of Bosley is played by Bernie Mac.  [Insert sound of screeching tires here.]

That's right, Bernie Mac.[8]

To give the writers some credit, they don't actually expect you to believe it's the same guy.  Instead you are supposed to believe that they are brothers. [9]

Mac does a fine enough job, but you can't ever quite get past the fact that he's not Bill Murray. [10]

As for the movie, my guess is that when they decided to make a sequel they sat down and said, "We want it to be just like the first one, but with more of everything."

What they got was too much of everything.

The movie somehow loses the nostalgia feel completely.  John Forsythe is still there playing a small plastic box, but everything somehow seems less Charlie's Angels than before. [11]  The stunts are way too over the top and at times just downright stupid.  The fights are not nearly so well choreographed and at times you can practically see the wires. [12] And worst of all the plot is just stupid.

I mean really really stupid. [13]

Which really makes it no surprise that they never made a third one.

Charlie's Angels (2000): B
Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle (2003): D- 

[1] - Which is another way of saying that I didn't watch it much.
[2] - As opposed to vague impressions of the three main women being good looking, Bosley being kind of a dork, Charlie essentially being a box on a desk and of the quick sound they used for a scene change.
[3] - Which I pretty much assume is most everyone.  (Except for people who think freezing their bits off waiting for the water to warm up is a great way to start a shower.)
[4] - Which was actually in the theater, but I don't remember how or why I went to see it (as opposed to seeing something else).
[5] - Which given my lack of specific memories was impressive.
[6] - Don't get me wrong, I like Bill Murray.  But putting him in as Bosley meant Bosley becoming more front and center and let's face it, nobody was at the theater looking to see Bill.
[7] - And boy can that fellow get weird.  Anyone else remember that time on Letterman? "And I can kick."
[8] - I suppose the fact that Bill Murray evidently turned down the opportunity to be in the sequel should have been a red flag.
[9] - I said, 'some credit', not 'a lot of credit'.
[10] - Especially since they keep bringing it up.
[11] - Which is strange because they have a cameo by Jaclyn Smith, one of the original Charlie's Angels
[12] - Okay you can't actually 'see' the wires, but the laws of physics make their presence undeniable.
[13] - Seriously bad stupid.

Oblivion

Oblivion: Having missed this film in the regular theater, the Pook and I just watched it at the cheap theater. [1]  It's one of those artsy sci-fi movies in the same way as Solaris [2].

With out spoiling anything, Tom Cruise and his co-worker/girl friend are the last two people on earth.  They are doing some last minute 'care-taking' before getting sent off world to go Titan to rejoin the rest of humanity.  Only, it turns out that nearly everything that precedes this sentence in this paragraph is a lie.  Seriously, there isn't anything there that turns out to be true. [3]

Among those falsehoods, is the fact that there are other humans on the planet, one of which is Morgan Freeman.  And if he's in a movie it has to at least be decent.  Right?

[One quick check of IMDB.com later.]

Okay, so he was in the giant stinker "Dreamcatchers", but hey nobody's perfect.

Anyway, back to Oblivion.

The pacing of the movie is a little slow. [4] And a lot of the revealed surprises, aren't that surprising. And the whole movie has a little bit of a flavor of every other similar sci-fi movie you've ever seen.  Which doesn't lend itself to standing out as a great movie.  But in the end, despite all of that and one part of the ending that is a part of movie endings that generally makes me not like those types of movies, I still rather enjoyed the whole thing. [5]

Oblivion: B

[1] - Not sure why that fact is relevant or noteworthy, but there you go.
[2] - The remake w/ Clooney, not the original.
[3] - Including the first sentence.  Sorry about that.
[4] - Like Solaris.
[5] - fwiw, the Pook said she'd rather have watched it at home where she could have done something
else at the same time.

 

Les Miserables

Les Miserables: I suspect I might step on some toes here, but let me officially go on record as saying, 'meh'.

Having heard about this musical for years, I was expecting more.  Granted I have never seen the Broadway version [1] but I was moderately intrigued.  I had heard snippets of songs and such from various outlets. [2]  So, I had a small amount of preset expectations.

They weren't really met.

I'm led to believe that the movie version tried to make the singing more like acting and less like singing, [3] but whatever it it they were shooting for, it didn't thrill me.

For instance, I always imagined the "I'm Jean Valjean" song as being very emphatic at the end.  Sort of an "I'M JEAN VALJEAN!!!!!!!!!!!! and if the rest of the world doesn't like it, they can bite me!" vibe.  But when I saw it in the movie it was more like, "Say, does anyone know my name?  Oh yeah, that's right.  I'm [mumbles]."

Also sorry Russell, but stick to Roman warriors and crazy scientist.

In truth, at one point I thought to myself, "You know, I could fall asleep right now if they would just stop singing."   Okay it wasn't that bad, but I did find myself a bit bored at times.

I think part of the problem was that the scope of time covered caused them to go a pretty quick pace through the plot.  Thus everything felt way too full of emotions that were not yet warranted.  I'll see if I can capture the idea in a quick scene:

Bob and Carl walk down the street. [4]  They see someone on the other side of the road.

Bob: Who is that over there?  I don't think I have ever seen that person before in my entire life.
Carl: Me neither.  But I love her forever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bob: I think it's a dude.
Carl: I hate him forever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, that kind of captures it.

With out really giving away anything that might happen in a musical entitled, "The Miserable", one of the characters commits suicide.  When that was happening, I was a bit perplexed.  From what I could tell the character seemed to have a pretty good life, except that every few years he would bump into one of the other characters.  Suicide seemed a trifle bit of an over-reaction.

I understand that I've completely misinterpreted the relationship between the two, but that's sort of my point.  It wasn't really developed.  Everything in the musical happened so fast, with no real build up.

You have a job.
You're fired.
You're a prostitute with no teeth or hair.

Say what?

Also, now that I'm thinking about it, in that scene I made up, I should have actually called Carl by the name Marius.  I don't think there has ever been a more mercurial character in a movie.

I'm ready to die for the revolution.
Ooh! A pretty girl.  Forget that, I'm in love.
Wait, give me a gun, let's fight!
My love is true forever!
To the barricade!

He was like an otter spying a succession of shiny objects.  I don't envy Cosette trying to keep him faithful. [5]

I could write more about this and that, but I'll let it go.  Let me just finish by saying that I hope Russel and Hugh hit puberty soon.

Les Miserables: C-

[1] - Neither live or otherwise.
[2] - The radio, the Internet, the Pook.
[3] - Or some sort of nonsense like that.
[4] - I swear I picked those names at random.  Any relevance to janitors, sci-fi or otherwise, is purely coincidental.
[5] - Or alive.

Skyfall

Warning this post has some serious spoilers.

Skyfall: Before I begin in the interest of full disclosure I should say that I am a huge Bond fan. But less you think that means I will somehow be unable to impartial and/or to critique the film, have no fear.  I have left Bond films before so disappointed I was close to demanding my money back or at the least wanting to give someone a good talking to. [1]

I was thrilled when Casino Royale was made and they decided to change the Bond movies from a self mocking, low brow waste of time, more worried about cramming as much advertising, locations, retarded gadgets and skin as possible than about making a movie that made any sense whatsoever [2] into a more serious movie.  Not serious as in Schindler's List, but serious as in we're telling a story.  Sure it's an action story, but it has a plot and everyone is acting their part and none of those parts are intended to be comedic relief.

Anyway, this review is about Skyfall and not Casino Royale.

I had a few problems with the movie. [3]

Let's start with the Excavator on the train.  What exactly was he going to do with it?  Was he planning on slamming the bucket into the bad guy?  Because while they didn't exactly say that he was a super genius, I don't think he would have just stood there and watched it hit him.  Excavators don't exactly move at lightning speed.  Also they have limited reach.  Here's my idea of what would have happened.

Bad Guy sees excavator moving at him at max speed. [4]
Bad Guy thinks to himself: Is he seriously trying to hit me with that?
Bad Guy spends some time pondering his career choices and whether this is worth it.
Bad Guy reminds himself that Bond has run out of bullets and thrown his gun away.
Bad Guy reminds himself that he has already shot Bond in the shoulder and thus Bond is hurt.
Bad Guy spends some more time wondering about career.
Bad Guy scratches itch.
Bad Guy takes two steps back out of range and either waits for Bond to get out of cab of excavator or simply walks away.

But instead the script had him shoot the coupling between cars.  Another option.  But perhaps not the best.

Another problem was the whole point of Silva's plot.  It seems to me the thing he wanted to do most of all was to kill M.  So why didn't he just do that?

Why exactly did he need to set everything up so that he could get arrested and get the British Secret Service to move their base into the underground bunkers?  As far as I can tell the answer was so that he could then escape and kill M.  This all could have been achieved much more simply.  He could have simply waited for M to actually get back to her office and then blown her to kingdom come.

But he wanted to talk to her face to face and then shoot her, you reply.  Okay, then he could have come to London and shot M in her house.  It doesn't seem like that would have been to hard.  Bond broke in no problem.

Also, how and why exactly did he blow a hole in the ceiling so that the subway could fall in and not really come close to killing Bond?  When exactly did he have the time to set up those explosives?  And assuming we can get past that problem, why did he do it?  Or rather how did he know that Bond (or anyone for that matter) would be chasing him and catch up to him at that exactly place and time.  And that there would be a train coming by at that point.  And as previously stated, it didn't really succeed in doing anything.  Bond took the tactic Bad Guy in the train scene should have.  He just stepped to the side. [5]  If Silva actually knew Bond (or whoever) was going to be there at that time, then he should have put the bomb where it would have exploded and killed Bond (or whoever).

Anyway, there are a couple of other things like this that strained the bounds of contrivances and made Occam's razor rusty, [6] but let's move past that.

I still liked the movie.  I am fully prepared to admit that that fact is probably because I like me some Bond movies, but whatever.  I do disagree with some articles I read about the film that said it was the best Bond movie ever.  Casino Royale was easily far superior (imho).  But it was other engaging and fun.

Perhaps the thing I like most about it is how it managed to both continue the Bond mythos on it's already set path at the same time it managed to reboot it as well.

They brought back a car from an old film linking this one to the past at the same time they introduced a new Moneypenny as if she was there for the first time.  And there's once more a stuffy British dude sitting in the red chair and if his mode and manner are very similar to the man who used to sit there so much the better.

Skyfall: B

[1] - For instance, Die Another Day was aptly named, because anyone who watched it died a little bit that day.
[2] - But then I already talked about Die Another Day.
[3] - Betcha didn't see that one coming.
[4] - Something roughly in the neighborhood of 3 m.p.h.
[5] - Okay jumped, but the train was actually moving fast, as opposed to the excavator bucket.
[6] - Like even a first year agent knows you don't hook a strange computer up to your network.  Nevermind somebody who's supposed to be a computer maestro.

IMDB

IMDB: I've mentioned IMDB in several posts so I figured I should talk about it a bit and give it a grade.

In a word this web site is simply awesome.

Okay that's two words, but whatever.  The point holds true.

For those of you unfamiliar with this website, IMDB stands for Internet Movie Data Base.  It is a collection of all of the information you could ever hope to need about every movie or TV show ever.

It is for anyone who's ever been tormented by trying to remember who was the actress that was in that movie about dancing and welding back in 1983.  For IMDB that's no problem. [1]

Didn't that guy from Dallas do a weird TV show in which he could breathe underwater?  IMDB will tell you that he did indeed. [2]

Type in the name of any movie, actor, director, TV show, producer or just about anything else you might think of and IMDB has you covered.

It also has trailers, reviews, trivia and more as well.

After hearing about the new Die Hard movie coming out next year, you begin wondering if they are ever going to make a new Lethal Weapon.  IMDB can tell you.  [3]

Wonder who was born today?  No problem.  Assuming you are talking about October 28th the answer is Julia Roberts, Joaquin Phoenix and Dennis Franz among others.

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

If I could, I would thank the person who thought up this brilliant idea, but I can't.  Because it was thought up by every person who's ever seen a movie since computers could do more than add numbers.  And it was wished for by everyone who saw a movie before then.

IMDB succeeds at what Leonard Maltin and Roger Ebert used to try to do with their instantly outdated movie books and then multiplies the goodness by 1000.

On a scale of 1 to Gary Bussey, IMDB scores a Chuck Norris. [4]

The only real question is why hasn't this been copied by the music industry?  It can't be that hard.  Media Play [5] used to have a little terminal in their stores called "Muse" that had a workable database for basic searching by artist, album title, etc.  Somebody just needs to step up and put it online.

UPDATE: Turns out I was just not paying attention.  IMuzDB.com has got it all covered.

IMDB: A+

[1] - It was Jennifer Beals in  Flashdance.
[2] - Patrick Duffey starred in Man From Atlantis back in 1977-78.
[3] - Apparently it's in the writing phase and could possibly be out as soon as 2015.
[4] - Semi-inside joke, but you get the point.
[5] - The loss of this store still makes me sad :(

Safe House & the American

It worked out that I had a free evening last night. [1]  I decided to squander away my time watching movies.  I'd recently gotten a copy of The American and after a brief run to the used CD/DVD store I decided to pair it up with Safe House.

I pretty knew the gist of what Safe House was about [2] and thought that the American was similar. Which given the cover the American seemed a safe bet.  [3]

I began the double feature with Safe House.

Safe House: Denzel Washington and Ryan Reynolds "team up" in this one.  Denzel Washington takes a rare turn at playing a bad guy. [4]  To be honest I'd forgotten it was Ryan Reynolds in this one and if I had paid more attention at the store would probably have thought twice about buying it had I remembered.  It's not that I don't like the guy, it's more that I don't like the guy.

To be clearer. I haven't actually seen a ton of movie with Reynolds, but I've developed the impression that he's a bit of a goof ball and I expect more of a frat boy performance out of him than that of a soldier/spy.  This is probably in a large part because of Van Wilder and the Green Lantern movie, neither of which I saw. [5]

Safe House has definitely improved things.  He was completely believable and did a great job.  Granted it was an action flick and didn't really call for too much depth of acting, but nevertheless I enjoyed his performance and the movie in general.

If I have any real bone to pick with the movie it's that it fails in the same way that every movie of this ilk seems to fail. [6]  Which is that the "surprise" bad guy in the movie was about as much of a surprise as plain white toast. [7]  Anyone who didn't know that he was a bad guy the first or second time he was on the screen probably screams in terror every time the toaster pops-up.

The American: So if you've seen this movie and you read my assumptions above you have already realize what I'm about to say in the next sentence.  This movie was not at all what I was expecting.  It did have some violence and a sort of a car chase [8] and guns, but it is not an action movie.

Instead it's a movie about a guy whose life is sad, lonely and boring.  He then comes to realize how sad, lonely and boring his life is.  He decides to stop living a sad, lonely and boring life.  This naturally results in the ending that movies of this formula always end with. [9]  Thus, my biggest problem with this movie is that the "surprise" at the end was no surprise at all.

A minor problem could be the slow pacing and lack of action, but then again that is probably more a factor of what I was expecting versus what I actually got. [10]

Safe House: B+
The American: B+

[1] - Meaning the Pook took the boys to a Halloween party and I was free to do as I like.
[2] - Guns, violence, explosions, car chases, etc, etc.
[3] - George Clooney running with a gun.
[4] - Sort of.
[5] - Looking at his IMDB listing doesn't really change that opinion either.
[6] - So it's more of a bone to pick with these movies in general.
[7] - Just to be clear, by that I mean none-at-all.
[8] - Motor scooters count, right?
[9] - And of course, somewhere along the way he falls in love with a prostitute.
[10] - So more of a problem with me than the movie.

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (Book & Movie)

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (Book & Movie):  Stieg Larsson is the Swedish author who wrote the novel and its two sequels.  If you are anxiously awaiting his next novel, you're going to have a long wait. [1]  Hopefully something that you did know is that in 2012 they made a movie out of the novel.  The movie starred Daniel Craig. [2]  The novel starred whoever you pictured in your mind as the lead character.  Since I saw the movie before I read the book, Daniel Craig got the spot by default.

For the movie, the screenwriter stuck very close to the source material.  Which isn't always true. [3]  Which means that every scene in the movie is nearly identical to the same scene in the book.  [4]  What it doesn't mean is that everything that happened in the book is portrayed in the movie.  Large swaths of material [5] are left out of the movie.  But the movie doesn't suffer too badly for it as long as you are fine with missing out on a lot of the motivation and inner thoughts of the characters. [6] Also the bulk of the story line surrounding Blomkvist's trial and what happens later is completely missing.  Which is understandable as keeping it in would have made the movie twice as long.

Of course they could have saved some time by not expanding on the scene in which Salander beats up her social worker. [7]  Watching that scene in the movie just made me cringe.  When I started to get close to that part in the book, I was mentally gearing myself up for the worst, but the book was completely tame in comparison.

I must also admit that in the movie there were a couple of times in which several minutes were devoted to showing us all of the pictures that Blomkvist was sorting through.  I had no real problem with the pictures themselves, I just wish it had been a bit clearer what it was we were looking for.  The book does a much better job of that.

I'm looking forward to reading the second book in the trilogy and I believe that they are making a movie out of that as well . . . checking the Interweb . . . confirmed, but no dates mentioned as of yet.  I will probably try to see the movie when it comes out.  [8]

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo [Book] - A
The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo [Movie] - B [9]

[1] - He's dead.
[2] - Yes, he's current James Bond.  Yes, he totally did jump out of a helicopter with the Queen of England during the Olympics. That really happened.
[3] - Lawnmower Man and Running Man to name two off of the top of my head.
[4] - Unless of course you have an over active imagination, in which case all bets are off.
[5] - Could make a really big dress.
[6] - Long scenes of people thinking don't make good cinema
[7] - Granted he had it coming.
[8] - I suspect the Pook will not as she found the first to be too off putting.
[9] - Yeah, I didn't need to see all that.