Daybreakers starts from the now popular premise that vampirism is caused by a disease and spreads rapidly. It then asks the question "What happens when the food (humans) run out?"
In the movie the vampires have either turned too many humans or have fed on too many of them. Vampires that are not getting enough human blood regress into a subhuman form. The society relies on corporate run human farms that slowly drain the blood from living humans. The army's primary mission is to round up stray humans.
To stave off the coming starvation, scientists are desperately hunting for a suitable blood replacement. One scientist thinks that discovering a blood substitute will mean the end of hunting humans. The more pragmatic vampires know that humans will always be hunted. He thrill of the real thing is just too strong.
While the underlying ideas are interesting, the movie does not go too far in examining them. Instead it sticks pretty close to accepted norms. The bad guy is greedy, immoral, and cowardly. The good guys are noble, smart, and strong. The resolution of the problem is both miraculous and reaffirming of the basically good nature of humanity.
That does not mean that the movie is no good. If fact, I found it quite enjoyable. The acting is strong and the characters are well drawn. The cinematography maintains a nicely dark aura.
Daybreakers is well worth the six dollar PPV fee.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Iron Man 2
H and I finally saw Iron Man 2. We had read the reviews, but hoped that they were just the typical stuffy reviewer tripe.
It wasn't. The movie is a mess. The creators attempted to cram way too many story lines and too many characters into a single movie. There are, if I counted right, five story lines vying for attention. There is an attempt to work them all together, but it never pans out. The net effect is that most of the story lines seem tossed in for no good reason except to further Marvel's need to push its other movie properties. The extra bits burry the bits that made Iron Man a good movie.
The whole Shield story line feels bolted on to pimp for Thor, Capt. America, and the Avengers. While Scarlet is nice to look at, her character serves no purpose worthy of the amount of screen time she gets. Samuel Jackson's Nick Fury is underwhelming. Pulling this fluff would free up needed time to make the rest of the movie better.
I never bought the Stark is dying story line either. It feels like a gimmick to explain the need for the new atom and the behavior that allows Rhodie to steel War Hammer.
The flaws do not get in the way of the movie being a fun romp. Downey and Paltrow are excellent together. In fact, the best parts of the movie involve Stark and Potts. Micky Rourke is fantastic as the baddie. The effects and action sequences rock - literally. The movie is very loud.
I left the movie feeling hopeful for the third movie. The lard piled on by Marvel couldn't destroy the strength of the franchise and by the time the third film comes out Marvel won't need to pimp other movies.
It wasn't. The movie is a mess. The creators attempted to cram way too many story lines and too many characters into a single movie. There are, if I counted right, five story lines vying for attention. There is an attempt to work them all together, but it never pans out. The net effect is that most of the story lines seem tossed in for no good reason except to further Marvel's need to push its other movie properties. The extra bits burry the bits that made Iron Man a good movie.
The whole Shield story line feels bolted on to pimp for Thor, Capt. America, and the Avengers. While Scarlet is nice to look at, her character serves no purpose worthy of the amount of screen time she gets. Samuel Jackson's Nick Fury is underwhelming. Pulling this fluff would free up needed time to make the rest of the movie better.
I never bought the Stark is dying story line either. It feels like a gimmick to explain the need for the new atom and the behavior that allows Rhodie to steel War Hammer.
The flaws do not get in the way of the movie being a fun romp. Downey and Paltrow are excellent together. In fact, the best parts of the movie involve Stark and Potts. Micky Rourke is fantastic as the baddie. The effects and action sequences rock - literally. The movie is very loud.
I left the movie feeling hopeful for the third movie. The lard piled on by Marvel couldn't destroy the strength of the franchise and by the time the third film comes out Marvel won't need to pimp other movies.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Splice
I'm a sucker for a smart science fiction movie that deals with ethical and moral issues, so Splice was high on my to see list. It is a tail in the mold of Frankenstein. Two scientists create life by splicing animal DNA together. Not satisfied with creating non-human blobs, they then add in some human DNA. From that point on, you can predict the direction events take.
Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley are brilliant as the over ambitious scientists. Their characters are troubled, complex, and flawed in many ways. However, you root for them because they are essentially good people. Their relationship with each other and with their creation is as complicated as the plot is simple. In fact it is the characters and their relationships that propel the movie forward.
The plot is predictable and not overly original. You know from the beginning where this will all end. As the creature matures, things get predictably complicated and predictably bad. The creature develops more quickly than predicted; it becomes increasingly hard to manage; it becomes more intelligent and independent than predicted; it doesn't die as quickly as predicted. As the scientists try to control things they only get crazier.
Of course part of the the crazy has to do with basic flaws in the scientists themselves. Brody's character cannot say no. Polly's character has conflicted feelings about children and parenting. This makes the whole situation even more complicated.
I loved the movie. The issues it brings up are real and scary. Scientists will create a transgenic human simply because they can. That is how science moves forward. People pushing the envelope of what is possible and what is moral and what they can control. Add in the dash of complicated characters and you've got a smart, well crafted sci-fi movie.
Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley are brilliant as the over ambitious scientists. Their characters are troubled, complex, and flawed in many ways. However, you root for them because they are essentially good people. Their relationship with each other and with their creation is as complicated as the plot is simple. In fact it is the characters and their relationships that propel the movie forward.
The plot is predictable and not overly original. You know from the beginning where this will all end. As the creature matures, things get predictably complicated and predictably bad. The creature develops more quickly than predicted; it becomes increasingly hard to manage; it becomes more intelligent and independent than predicted; it doesn't die as quickly as predicted. As the scientists try to control things they only get crazier.
Of course part of the the crazy has to do with basic flaws in the scientists themselves. Brody's character cannot say no. Polly's character has conflicted feelings about children and parenting. This makes the whole situation even more complicated.
I loved the movie. The issues it brings up are real and scary. Scientists will create a transgenic human simply because they can. That is how science moves forward. People pushing the envelope of what is possible and what is moral and what they can control. Add in the dash of complicated characters and you've got a smart, well crafted sci-fi movie.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Alice in 3D
H and I were looking for a good movie to see that was playing at a reasonable time. We found that there is a dearth of decent films out there that we both wanted to see. (I can always be convinced to see a crappy action/horror flick.) The choice came down to Iron Man or Alice in Wonderland.
I leaned toward Iron Man, but only because I knew the explosions and robots bashing each other would provide mind numbing escape if nothing else. In the end, the decision came down to showtimes. Alice in Wonderland was playing at a better time.
I went into the film with low expectations. I'd read very mixed reviews. Most of them felt that there was too much flash and antics and not enough story. The harshest reviews called it a Tim Burrton movie without a heart.
I was pleasantly surprised. It was visually chaotic and the characters were over the top, but it is Wonderland after all. Johnny Depp and Helena B. Carter were in full crazy mode. They took the Mad Hatter and the Red Queen to the edge of over the top, but managed to keep from toppling over. The rest of the cast played the parts just as well.
The story is what it is. It follows closely to the original except now Alice is on the brink of adulthood. She must reclaim her inner strength and learn to trust her imagination.
The visuals are lush and make any weakness in the story fade away. I'm not sure if the 3D enhanced the viewing experience, but it certainly didn't hurt it. I'm sure that the movie is just as immersive and lush on a flat screen. It may not be so good on a small screen however.
I leaned toward Iron Man, but only because I knew the explosions and robots bashing each other would provide mind numbing escape if nothing else. In the end, the decision came down to showtimes. Alice in Wonderland was playing at a better time.
I went into the film with low expectations. I'd read very mixed reviews. Most of them felt that there was too much flash and antics and not enough story. The harshest reviews called it a Tim Burrton movie without a heart.
I was pleasantly surprised. It was visually chaotic and the characters were over the top, but it is Wonderland after all. Johnny Depp and Helena B. Carter were in full crazy mode. They took the Mad Hatter and the Red Queen to the edge of over the top, but managed to keep from toppling over. The rest of the cast played the parts just as well.
The story is what it is. It follows closely to the original except now Alice is on the brink of adulthood. She must reclaim her inner strength and learn to trust her imagination.
The visuals are lush and make any weakness in the story fade away. I'm not sure if the 3D enhanced the viewing experience, but it certainly didn't hurt it. I'm sure that the movie is just as immersive and lush on a flat screen. It may not be so good on a small screen however.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Is the iPad all that?
The short answer is yes. It is the next generation of mobile computing.
Even before I got the iPad, my iPhone started eclipsing my MacBook Pro as the goto computer e-mail, Facebook, Web surfing, checking news, etc. H and I frequently joked that my MacBook Pro was an obscenely large phone charger.
The iPad has accelerated that process. Its larger screen makes Web surfing and e-mailing much better. Web pages are readable and typing e-mails a breeze. Facebook is even better since it is possible to use the Web interface. (The iPhone app makes Facebook usable on the small screen, but it cannot match the full Web interface.)
I have used my iPhone for blogging, but it was not something I'd choose to do. On the iPad blogging is a joy. The bigger keyboard makes typing easy. I also like the spell checking. The iPad not only points out spelling mistakes, it offers suggestions to correct the mistake. I use BlogPress which is a universal app.
Along the same lines, I've also used pages to write fairly lengthy documents. Again, I found the key board easy to use. It is best using in it landscape mode is much better than portrait, but that is a problem for Pages. In landscape mode all of Pages controls are hidden. This means that you have to flip back and forth to do any formatted text. Pages also falls down when it comes to transferring documents between the iPad and a computer. The process is convoluted and lossy.
For pure fun, the iPad rocks. The ABC app is magical. The shows are clear, smooth, and portable. There are commercials, but they are not as egregious as watching on cable. The games I've played are also kicking. My two favorites are Harbor Master HD and Parcel Panic. The graphics are amazing and the speedy processor handles the action without a hitch.
Running iPhone games on the iPad is a mixed bag. They looked lost on the screen when played at regular size. When played at 2x they are pixelated. For some games, the pixelation is not too big a deal. For others, it is a deal breaker. One advantage is that all the games play much smoother than they do on my vintage iPhone.
The iPad also shines as an e-book reader. iBooks does a decent job displaying crisp text. It also does an excellent job displaying images. The built-in dictionary is a nice touch, as is the ability to look up words in Wikipedia. The bookstore software makes getting books easy. The UI eye candy is a nice touch even if it is useless.
Is the iPad perfect? Can it replace my laptop? No. It cannot do any photo editing. I haven't found a decent money management app. The storage capacity is tiny. There is no way to print from it. I cannot find replacements for some of the applications I use for work that will run on it. (Although there are a number of apps that will allow me to connect to my work computer to use them.)
Of course most of the problems can be solved by software. Eventually a developer will create apps that fill in the gaps.
When that happens, my MacBook Pro will truly be just a very large phone charger.
Even before I got the iPad, my iPhone started eclipsing my MacBook Pro as the goto computer e-mail, Facebook, Web surfing, checking news, etc. H and I frequently joked that my MacBook Pro was an obscenely large phone charger.
The iPad has accelerated that process. Its larger screen makes Web surfing and e-mailing much better. Web pages are readable and typing e-mails a breeze. Facebook is even better since it is possible to use the Web interface. (The iPhone app makes Facebook usable on the small screen, but it cannot match the full Web interface.)
I have used my iPhone for blogging, but it was not something I'd choose to do. On the iPad blogging is a joy. The bigger keyboard makes typing easy. I also like the spell checking. The iPad not only points out spelling mistakes, it offers suggestions to correct the mistake. I use BlogPress which is a universal app.
Along the same lines, I've also used pages to write fairly lengthy documents. Again, I found the key board easy to use. It is best using in it landscape mode is much better than portrait, but that is a problem for Pages. In landscape mode all of Pages controls are hidden. This means that you have to flip back and forth to do any formatted text. Pages also falls down when it comes to transferring documents between the iPad and a computer. The process is convoluted and lossy.
For pure fun, the iPad rocks. The ABC app is magical. The shows are clear, smooth, and portable. There are commercials, but they are not as egregious as watching on cable. The games I've played are also kicking. My two favorites are Harbor Master HD and Parcel Panic. The graphics are amazing and the speedy processor handles the action without a hitch.
Running iPhone games on the iPad is a mixed bag. They looked lost on the screen when played at regular size. When played at 2x they are pixelated. For some games, the pixelation is not too big a deal. For others, it is a deal breaker. One advantage is that all the games play much smoother than they do on my vintage iPhone.
The iPad also shines as an e-book reader. iBooks does a decent job displaying crisp text. It also does an excellent job displaying images. The built-in dictionary is a nice touch, as is the ability to look up words in Wikipedia. The bookstore software makes getting books easy. The UI eye candy is a nice touch even if it is useless.
Is the iPad perfect? Can it replace my laptop? No. It cannot do any photo editing. I haven't found a decent money management app. The storage capacity is tiny. There is no way to print from it. I cannot find replacements for some of the applications I use for work that will run on it. (Although there are a number of apps that will allow me to connect to my work computer to use them.)
Of course most of the problems can be solved by software. Eventually a developer will create apps that fill in the gaps.
When that happens, my MacBook Pro will truly be just a very large phone charger.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Mutant Chronicals
I'm not sure why I was attracted to this movie. I hadn't seen any reviews, hadn't seen any previews, and didn't know any of the actors. The title is bland.
What ever got me to tape it, I'm not u happy I did. "Mutant Chronicals" is not a great movie; it is not what many would consider a good movie. It is not bad and includes some interesting touches.
Most of the dystopia, end of man tropes are present. Humanity has nearly stripped of it's resources. Mega corporations have replaced governments. The corporations are engages in constant war. There is a secluded religious order protecting the secret that can save humanity. A doomed quest must be made by a ragtag band. There is a noble, but troubled hero in the band.
The plot holds few surprises. There is plenty of action and gore to keep things moving.
What I found most interesting was the films visual style. It was all sort of soft focus and steam punkish. I'm not sure why. I've seen other films that use a similar style, and found it irratating. It just worked for "Mutant Chronicals".
What ever got me to tape it, I'm not u happy I did. "Mutant Chronicals" is not a great movie; it is not what many would consider a good movie. It is not bad and includes some interesting touches.
Most of the dystopia, end of man tropes are present. Humanity has nearly stripped of it's resources. Mega corporations have replaced governments. The corporations are engages in constant war. There is a secluded religious order protecting the secret that can save humanity. A doomed quest must be made by a ragtag band. There is a noble, but troubled hero in the band.
The plot holds few surprises. There is plenty of action and gore to keep things moving.
What I found most interesting was the films visual style. It was all sort of soft focus and steam punkish. I'm not sure why. I've seen other films that use a similar style, and found it irratating. It just worked for "Mutant Chronicals".
Retrograde
When a movie stars Dolph Lundgrin and Joe Montana, you can bet it will be terrible. Sadly, I didn't check the credits before taping "Retrograde". I was intrigued by the description in the info box.
Once I saw the cast list I hoped it would either be laughably bad or action packed. It was neither. The movie takes itself seriously and Dolph is too old to offer up any more than tepid action.
"Retrograde" isn't even good for a rainy day.
Once I saw the cast list I hoped it would either be laughably bad or action packed. It was neither. The movie takes itself seriously and Dolph is too old to offer up any more than tepid action.
"Retrograde" isn't even good for a rainy day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)