Thursday, December 27, 2012

Driving Miss Daisy

Yeah, that's right.

I was hanging out at my sister's house on Christmas and there was so little on, Driving Miss Daisy was actually the only thing even remotely appealing. In case you don't know, Driving Miss Daisy is the 1989 Oscar winning film about an elderly woman living in the South in the 50s who befriends her African American chauffeur. It's a sweet, charming film that is likable, wonderfully acted, and beautifully shot.

But it also really sucks.

To begin with, it's just really long and really boring, with almost nothing much to speak of in the way of plot movement or forward momentum of any real story arc, beyond Miss Daisy only kind of being less of a bitch to one, since black man over the course of 25 years. Granted, there are worse fates than being forced to watch an over-long film starring people like Jessica Tandy, Morgan Freeman, and Dan Akroyd, all of whom are always great and definitely at the top of their games here. Tandy even won the Best Actress Oscar while Morgan Freeman and Dan Akroyd were both nominated for Oscars as well. As I said, I have nothing but raves about the cast, all of whom were great, including Dan Akroyd who turned in a surprisingly sweet and effective performance.

However... the story just sucked. It was well intentioned and sweet at its core (a woman in the south begins to see her servant as a human instead of just a thing she can harass), but it was so poorly thought-out it was borderline racist in places. I rarely like films about oppression told from the point of view of the oppressors, with the sole intent being the redemption of those oppressors.

Quick... name five Hollywood films that deal with oppression in America in the South before or during the Civil Rights movement.

Now how many of those films have white actors as the main point of view characters? All of them?

And this movie's structure is a little worse than most. Morgan Freeman is wonderful and charming as Hoke, the driver of the titular Miss Daisy, but I don't think he has a single scene where he is alone or allowed to be himself. In every scene he is acting opposite either Miss Daisy or Miss Daisy's son. Miss Daisy, of course, is given most of the film to explore her motivations, thoughts, history, and sense of character. Hoke, on the other hand, is just a charming, good natured driver from start to finish. There isn't one single scene that I can remember where he is given any real sense of character or nuance. He exists solely to give Miss Daisy her personal redemption.

So just like the white people about whom this story is written used a black man as a servant, the filmmakers used this film as a black man just as a plot point, not as a character.

But, yeah, it's charming and funny, but that only kind of made it all the worse, in my opinion, since it belittled and glossed over the real story of what was happening back then.

But that's just me. Maybe I read too much into it. 

Monday, December 24, 2012

In Memoriam: Jack Klugman (1922 - 2012)

I'll be honest... I thought he had died years ago, but I was still sorry to hear of his passing today. I always liked the guy.

Rest in peace.

Top Ten Christmas Movies

Just for fun -- and without really thinking too hard about it -- here are my top ten favorite Christmas movies ever, in order from "favorite" to "even more favorite" or something:

10. A Christmas Story
This is a great film that by all rights should rank higher on the list, but to be honest I'm so sick of it I almost left it off entirely. But I'll probably end up watching it again this year and still enjoying it. It really is sweet and very, very funny.

9. A Very Sunny Christmas
This isn't a movie, so much as an hour long holiday-themed episode of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. It's irreverent and doesn't really capture the spirit of the holiday, but boy is it funny.

8. Christmas Vacation
Now this is a funny movie, and probably the last funny movie Chevy Chase ever did.

7. Gremlins / Die Hard / Lethal Weapon
These aren't really Christmas movies so much as moviea that takes place on Christmas, but I can't go a single December without at least watching one of them.

6. Holiday Inn / White Christmas
These are both basically the same movie, since White Christmas was basically a remake of Holiday Inn. Most people will tell you that the original is a classic and the remake sucks, but I enjoy both. It's all a matter of whether you prefer the team up of Bing Crosby and Fred Astaire or Bing Crosby and Danny Kaye... but, really, you have any combination of those guys and it'll be awesome.

5. Ernest Saves Christmas
For real! This movie is super funny and super sweet. I love it. It's my favorite Ernest movie too!

4. Joyeux Noel
A French film about the Christmas truce of 1914, where the opposing forces of the first world war came together in no man's land and celebrated the holiday together. Brilliant story, brilliant film.

3. A Miracle on 34th Street
I'm talking about the original film from 1947. Come to think of it, there was no remake. That never happened. Just go watch the original. It's brilliant and great fun.

2. Emmet Otter's Jug Band Christmas
Forget about that Muppet Christmas Carol movie. This was the best Muppet Christmas movie. Here's a video review I put together a couple years ago:

1. It's a Wonderful Life
This isn't just the best Christmas movie of all time, but a top contender for the best movie of all time ever. I've actually already reviewed this film on my blog, so I'm just gonna cut and paste that here:

I'm actually going to keep this one short and sweet, since there's nothing I can say about this movie that a million people haven't already said a million times already.

It's a Wonderful Life isn't just my favorite Christmas movie, but a strong contender for my all time favorite movie over all. It contains the absolute best performance by my absolute favorite actor Jimmy Stewart, and it tells a story so powerful and heartfelt that it makes me cry every time I watch, no matter what. I'd rank this movie right up there with Field of Dreams as the most likely to make even the most stone cold man break down in tears. George Bailey is too honorable and admirable to really be considered an "every man," but he's definitely the man that every man wishes he could be.

They later remade this movie and reversed the genders by having the main character be a woman played by Marlo Thomas. "It Happened One Christmas" was a fine film that used to play all the time when I was a kid, but if you haven't seen it by now, you probably never will. It happened to be made right as the original was being rediscovered by a new, perhaps more mature audience who could more related to the dark, honest story presented in the film, so the remake all but vanished. And that's fine, since the original is an absolutely perfect film that never should've been remade in the first place. It's just... special. Bailey's pain as he watches his hopes and dreams fade away is something any person who's ever been lonely or learned for more can relate to. And his joy at the end as he realizes how loved and alive he really is is something that anybody who's ever been loved or happy can relate to as well. It's the kind of film that makes you cry at one moment because you're sad, and the next moment because you're happy.

I have never seen a better moment in a film than the scene where George Bailey is on the bridge near the end of It's a Wonderful Life. I've never seen anything that was better written, better directed, or better acted. I have watched this movie dozens upon dozens of times over the course of my life and it never fails to bring me to tears. I have watched this film during moments of my life when I was happy, during times when I was sad, and even during some times when I was just as close to standing on my own bridge. If there has ever been a moment in film that has more honestly captured a moment in the life of every man who has ever been alive, I sure haven't seen it.

George Bailey isn't the greatest hero in movie history because he decided to save Clarence instead of taking his own life, and he certainly isn't a hero because he set aside his own hopes and dreams in order to serve the town of Bedford Falls. George Bailey is a hero because even though he never became the man that he wanted to be, he learned to embrace the fact that he became the man that the people he loved needed him to be. His wasn't a wonderful life because his dreams came true or because he was loved or even because he was happy, but because his life did matter, and because the people around him were all the better because of what he did.

And if you can watch this movie and not break down, well, you must be named Potter.

Life of Pi

This is one of those movies that I really loved right up until it was over, at which point I thought to myself, "wait... what? That was it?" You know... one of those movies where you keep waiting for the story to actually start right up until the credits role and you get up to leave.

But, for the most part, I liked it. It was certainly a beautiful film -- especially in 3D, which was the best I've ever seen -- well acted, and had a clever scripts that had seem real show-stopping moments, but it just never came together for me. This was a movie made for a poet or a philosopher. I'm neither. I'm just a simple man who likes a good story, and this really wasn't much of a story at all.

And that's really all I have to say about this movie, which so many people have told me is brilliant, and for them it is. I certainly have no regrets about seeing it, and if you do you should really make sure you do it in 3D, but I can't recommend it because I just thought it was kind of hollow and a little pretentious.

But it was pretty.

Saturday, December 22, 2012

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (High Frame Rate 3D)

I'll make a long story short (which is the exact opposite of what director Peter Jackson did): The Hobbit was awesome.

I probably graded that score of "awesome" on a bit of a curve if only because the reviews of this film have been so overwhelmingly harsh and negative that I wanted to counter them if I could, and also because they had me going in with such low expectations. I probably put off seeing this movie during its first week in the theaters because the reviews were so abysmal, but I decided to check it out anyway because everybody I know who actually saw it loved it and raved about it.

And now I saw it and I loved it, so I guess I'll rave about it. It's awesome. If you liked the Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy adaptations, go see this because you'll love it. And if you didn't like those films, go see this anyway because it's way better. For real. In my opinion, this is the best Tolkien film of all time, possessing the visual splendor and action of the earlier films, but without gutting the story, changing the characters, or just plain getting the story wrong. This is a better adaptation and just a better film.

But, yeah, it's also really long... and I'd even go so far as to say it's probably too long, since I was more than ready for it to be over maybe twenty minutes before the credits began to role. I wasn't bored by the film or unengaged by the story, I just had to pee and I was hungry. This is one of those movies that's so long you literally have plan your entire day around it, so you end up either having lunch really early or dinner really late, and lord knows you can't bring a soda in or you'll either have to pee your pants or miss part of the movie when you get up to use the bathroom. Let's hope Peter Jackson never films an adaptation of War and Peace or I'll have to have a catheter installed.

And, frankly, I was also getting antsy for the film to end because I knew it was just the first part of a trilogy, all based on one book. I've heard a lot of criticism about this decision because people feel it's just a greedy attempt to make more money by the studios, but I don't think that's why the film was split into a trilogy.

Honestly, I think the film was split up because Peter Jackson is out of his god damned mind, man.

I believe that Peter Jackson would split every film up into a trilogy if he had his druthers, and he seems incapable of making a film that isn't a bloated, three hour epic. I mean, this is the guy who's remake of King Kong spent more time just getting to the island than the original film ran from start to finish, and I'm not making that up! And I've never really understood why Jackson remade King Kong anyway. He said it was his all time favorite movie so his dream ever since he was a child was to make his own version, which is also proof that he's insane. Don't most people consider their favorite films to be sacred and scoff at the idea of anybody remaking them? But in Peter Jackson's world, when you love something, you need to remake it, only change everything for the worse, either because you think the original got it all wrong or because you simply didn't understand what it was all about at all.

Anyway, that's what he did with King Kong and that's what he did with the Lord of the Rings films, giving us a story that only kind of resembled what Tolkien originally envisioned and characters who are generally the same as his only in name only, with dialogue randomly reassigned, motivations changed, and entire concepts so radically different it could only be assigned to a total misreading of the original text.

But luckily very little of that happens here, and aside from too much action and violence -- which I don't mind, to be sure -- this felt very much like a faithful adaptation of the works of Tolkien. If anything, this film maybe suffers not because so much is changed or left out, but that too much is forced in, with just about everything from the novel taking place, as well as stuff from the appendices of the Lord of the Rings and other stuff from The Silmarillion.

Why did this film open with Bilbo talking to Frodo? Other than to bring back Ian Holm and Elijah Wood, I can't think of a single reason why this was needed. Same goes with the appearances of Saruman and Galadriel. It was nice to see Christopher Lee and Cate Blanchett -- especially Cate Blanchett who seems to just get more gorgeous as she gets older -- but their scene was completely pointless and overlong. And why was Radagast in this movie? And why was the interpretation of his character so strange? Again, he served no purpose and should've been left out, but at least he was a lot of fun so I didn't mind.

The cast of characters that actually appear in the book was big enough, I'm not sure why they had to add in all those people who didn't appear, but I guess I shouldn't complain because they were all so good. When I find myself complaining about an unnecessary appearance by Christopher Lee, I need to just realize how cool it is to see Christopher Lee in anything so I'll just shut up and enjoy it. Honestly, Christopher Lee should show up as Saruman in every movie. Why not?

Martin Freeman was perfectly cast as the young Bilbo Baggins, and I think he actually did a better job in the role than Ian Holm in the original trilogy. But then again, it's not really a fair comparison because Freeman was given so much more to do, being the star of the film instead of just a bit character who gets the plot going and then disappears. Anyway, Freeman has always been good in everything I've ever seen him in, and he has the brilliant ability to be funny and dramatic from scene to scene, and even from second to second. Hopefully this is the film that will finally make Freeman into a movie star, at least over here in America.

Ian McKellen returns as Gandalf the Grey, and he's as good and dependable as you'd expect. This isn't really a role that requires much in the way of acting other than appearing imposing at times and reading the occasional line with a certain amount of gravitas, but as film actors go, there's nobody more noble and regal than Ian McKellen.

Richard Armitage plays Thorin Oakenshield, the leader of this band of Dwarves, and he's amazing. I don't know who this actor is and for his first few scenes I thought he was Gerard Butler. This may be the best character from any Tolkien film adaptation, and I thought he knocked his performance out of the park, putting Viggo Mortenson to shame as another would be king leading a fellowship on a quest to restore honor to his people.

Then there were, like, a thousand other characters, a few hundred of them being Dwarves that were hard to tell apart, but the filmmakers really tried to give them different beard styles and each got at least once nice little moment here and there. I never really understood why they all looked so different from one another. Most of them looked like good luck troll dolls while one of them looked just like a young Rick Springfield, but whatever. I liked them all and can't remember if there was a single bad performance in the entire movie.

About the plot I guess I haven't said to much because, to be honest, nothing really happened, despite the film's three hour running time. Here's the plot in brief: A century or so ago a dragon named Smaug took over the Dwarven kingdom of Erebor, stealing their gold and forcing them out of their homeland. A young Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf join Thorin and a band of Dwarves as they attempt to finally drive off the dragon and reclaim their home.

But all that really happens in this movie is that they convince Bilbo to join them and go for a walk, where they keep getting into battles every fifteen minutes or so until the film just kind of ends randomly with them only slightly closer to the end of their quest than they were before they started. I guess this is one of the big complaints I've heard about the film, and it's certainly a major one. It's sort of like if somebody adapted A Christmas Carol and split it into a trilogy, with each film being about a different spirit, but even then the first hour of the first film would be devoted to a young Scrooge getting his MBA and then starting his own business. That would be awful.

Well... The Hobbit, somehow, isn't awful. In fact, it's awesome... but... yeah, not much happens in the way of story or plot. However, the film was so well done and so much fun that I never really minded and I'm already committed to seeing the next couple films when they come out. Honestly, a meandering film about a group taking a walk through Middle Earth is still more fun than almost any other movie with a deep script or intricate plot.

And before I go I guess I should talk about the version I saw, which was in 3D and shown in 48 frames per second. As if we needed another option when choosing how to see a film, we now have to choose between seeing it normally, in 3D, in Imax 3D, and now in 3D with a high frame rate. Enough already!

Anyway, I guess Peter Jackson decided to film this trilogy in 48 frames per second, which is double the 24 frames per second that has been used for every other film ever made. I respect Jackson for taking a chance and attempting to enhance the film-going experience with this new technology. But on the other hand, it totally sucks. It's just... weird, and so off-putting -- even after you get used to it -- that led me to wonder if anybody actually watched any test footage before giving 48 fps the go ahead.

When the characters aren't moving, or just when they are moving very slowly, the added frame rate is astounding and gives the film a clarity and detail that is, quite frankly, more beautiful and crisp than anything I have ever seen in the cinema, but then the characters start to move and it seems like one of those bits on Benny Hill where everybody is in fast motion. Even little movements feel jerky and out of whack with how people actually move, not just on film but in real life. Also, the added clarity actually makes everything look more fact and surreal, since the backgrounds look like backgrounds and the characters pop way more than they should. Everything sort of looks like a videogame cut scene.

So I say see this film in 24 frames, but then sneak into a showing afterward to check out a few seconds of the 48 frames just so you can see how awful an experience it really is. I'm glad I saw it so I can safely never see another film like this ever again.

And that's that.

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Another Tragedy

I don't really have anything to say about the recent tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut that hasn't already been said by more eloquent writers than me, not just about this recent shooting, but about the other recent shootings, and even the slightly less recent shooting, and all those other shootings in the past.

I guess I just wanted to acknowledge the tragedy because it's been on my mind and because I was born about an hour away from Newtown and then later lived about ten minutes away in Danbury. I'd be surprised if I'd never at least driven through there since I lived so close, but if I had I have no memory of it. Every small town in Connecticut is like every other small town in Connecticut, just like every small town in America is like every other small town in America.

And I guess I also just wanted to add my sentiments to what other people have already expressed: enough is enough. If after this shooting that left dozens of children dead you still oppose stricter gun control laws, well... then maybe that's why we need stricter gun control laws. Because people are insane.

Friday, December 14, 2012

Trailer Park

Hey... let's watch some movie trailers:

Pacific Rim
This might be the most epic trailer ever made.

Guillermo del Toro directing Giant robots, kaiju, Jax from Sons of Anarchy, Charlie from It's Always Sunny, Stringer Bell from the Wire... and was that the voice of Glados from Portal? I'll be there opening day.
This looks like fun. Jason Stathom as Parker from the Donald Westlake novels. I've never read those so I can't speak to their faithfulness to the source material, but I'd be surprised if Westlake wrote a character who did so much karate. Anyway... cool trailer. I'll rent this for sure.

Nice animation, but no thanks. Even as a kid I would've thought this looked stupid. Do kids even like all these animated movies anymore, or are they as sick of them as I am? When I was a kid, I always preferred movies about real kids. I could pretend I was one of the Goonies. I can't pretend I'm some weird, super-deformed, plastic-looking freak, nor would I want to.

But then again, that's just me.

World War Z
If you read my blog you know I love zombie movies... but this looks bad. Not bad, maybe, but just not engaging. Anyway, it's a boring looking trailer. I have no interest. But I do like Brad Pitt so I'll keep an eye on it. 

Star Trek Into Darkness
Pretty epic trailer, but at the moment I still have zero interest in this. The first JJ Abrams Star Trek film wasn't Star Trek, and this one looks even less so. Maybe if I can divorce myself from the source material I can go into it an enjoy it on its own terms, but I dunno. I didn't just think the previous film was bad Star Trek, but bad sci-fi in general. Then again, I've seen worse, and I do like that Bennedict Cumberbatch guy, or whatever the hell his name is.

A Haunted House
This looks awful. I laughed.

Man of Steel
Another epic trailer, but I'm still unsure of how I felt about it.

Henry Cavill certainly looks the part and it is action packed which should be an improvement on that last Superman movie, but the costume looks weird and some of the lines sound odd... like when Pa Kent suggests that maybe Superman should've let that kid die. Huh?!

Anyway... nice looking trailer. Check it out. I sure hope it's good. Lord knows the world deserves to see a good Superman movie. I just wish it looked a little more... I dunno.. like Superman.

The Last Stand
Schwarzenegger came out of retirement to make this? I'll rent it, but only cause I'm a fan. Doesn't look too good, but it could be fun.

The Lone Ranger
Fuck you.

Tom Cruise sure needs a hit, but this won't be it. But it is a very cool trailer and it looks like a neat movie. If it gets great reviews, I'll go see it. If not, I'll probably still rent it. I like Sci-fi and I like Tom Cruise, no matter what anybody says.

But here's my advice for Mr. Cruise just in case he reads my blog: Do some supporting work in some good films by good directors and put the big budget action films on the back burner. Just my advice.

Gangster Squad
I'd love to watch a big budget gangster film about Mickey Cohen (starring Sean Penn no less!), but this doesn't look too good. Also... what's the appeal of Ryan Gosling. Can somebody explain that to me? Nice looking kid to be sure, but he's not a particularly good actor. Or maybe he is, but he's not a particularly engaging one in my opinion. Still... interesting trailers.

Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning
Is there a single person in a single scene of this trailer that doesn't look greasy? According to this trailer, this movie came out last month. Who knew? Would you believe I've never actually seen a Universal Soldier movie? I sure as hell ain't gonna start with this one. 

Les Miserables
Does this looks good? I'm not sure. I don't know the musical well enough. Nice visuals though, and that's a cool cast, but only a few of the voices actually sounded all that good. But boy do I love Russell Crowe, and I'd love to see him in a musical. How funny is that?

Saturday, December 1, 2012


Don't see Flight a few hours before you get on a plane like I did. Or, then again, maybe you should, because it created a memorable, no doubt unique film-viewing experience that I don't think could ever be duplicated. It's a film about an alcoholic airline pilot who has to somehow land a broken plane even though he's drunk... so as I watched the film I kept thinking with apprehension about my upcoming flight, and then later, when I was on the plane approaching take off, I kept flashing back to the film I had just seen. So this unique confluence of events either made me hate the film or appreciate it on levels most viewers would never understand.

But, anyway... I liked it. It was a pretty darn good movie.

It wasn't the movie I thought it would be, however, and that's a comment I've heard from many people who've seen it. I thought it would be some kind of mystery or procedural film about an investigation following a plane crash...and it was, but only kind of. It was also a character study about a man dealing with -- and admitted that he suffers from -- alcoholism. That's not a complaint about the film nor is it a complaint about how it was marketed, since this is such a complicated, multi-layered film I would've been stumped as to how to market it as well. It was just a little more emotionally gripping than I was expecting, but that's not a bad thing. In fact, it might even be a good thing.

Denzel Washington plays an airline pilot named Whip Whitaker, who aside from having the coolest name in movie history (except for maybe Snake Pliskin), is a raging alcoholic who would put the combined drinking power of Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Jackie Gleason, and Danny Thomas to shame. Seriously... this guy drinks, and then in order to clear his head in the morning (so he can, you know, fly a plane), he does a couple lines of cocaine. Our film begins on one of these days, but unfortunately it ends with a crash that is totally the fault of the plane itself, and it is only his exceptional skill as a pilot and heroic conviction as a captain that gets the plane on the ground in one piece with almost all the souls on board safe and sound. Whip is rightly praised as a hero, but once his toxicology report comes to light and people see that his system was riddled with alcohol and cocaine, his life is turned upside down and he is faced with the prospect of facing criminal charges.

Now, that's a great setup for a story, but if anything it's almost too great a set up because from their it became clear that the writer didn't really know where to go with it, turning it into a kind of cliched character study of a man coming to terms with his alcoholism. I don't mean to downplay the power of that kind of story, but the film only really felt exciting and fresh during the scenes involving the plane crash and the resulting inquiry, investigation, and trial. All the stuff where Whip got drunk and then felt bad were, frankly, boring and occasionally trite. And the less said about the parallel storyline about the recovering heroine addict the better.

However, it's still a great movie if only because of the power house performance by the always exceptional Denzel Washington and the sure-handed work behind the camera by Robert Zemeckis, a director who had been working exclusively in animation for the past decade and finally made his return to live-action film making here. Denzel Washington is one of the dozen or so best actors in the history of film (no joke!), and this is one of the best performances he's ever done, which makes it one of the best performances of all time by anybody ever. It's a truly exceptional, bravura performance that lets him act like a hero in one sequence and a total asshole two scenes later. And Robert Zemeckis just knocked it out of the park, proving once again that very few directors understand how to direct a scene like he does. Seriously, this film is worth seeing in the theater for the crash scene alone, which ranks high on my list of the best scenes in film history. Just the moment where Whip told one of the flight attendants to tell her son she loves him so it would be recorded by the black box recorder has me misty just thinking about it.

And then the rest of the cast is just awesome. Bruce Greenwood and Don Cheadle play a union rep and a lawyer who do their best to get Whip cleared off all charges, even though they clearly hate him for what he did and themselves for how they're forced to defend him. Every scene with either of these two actors are great. But best of all was John Goodman as Whip's drug dealer. He only has three, very short scenes, but they are hands down the best moments in the film and Goodman should get an Oscar nomination for best supporting actor. I seriously can't remember being more entertained than I was watching him in this movie.

So... I guess I recommend it.

Friday, November 23, 2012

The Expendables 2

The first one was better.

That isn't to say this was a bad movie or that I was at all disappointed or let down, it's just that the first one was better is all. Maybe it's because the first film had more novelty and felt fresh while this one is just more of the same. Maybe it's because this film felt like less of an ensemble and more of a starring vehicle for Stallone. Maybe it's because this one had a weaker story and more muddled direction. Maybe it's because I'm a few years older and more mature. Maybe it's because I watched this one alone in my apartment instead of on opening night in a theater full of like-minded Stallone fans. Or maybe it was just because it wasn't a very good movie.

I dunno.

Anyway, I liked it.

If you liked the first film -- and I can't imagine that anybody would go see it unless they were the kind of person who was going to love it -- you'll like this one too, since it brings back almost all of the main characters and puts them through the same intense, over the top action. The I described the original film's finale as the best action sequence in movie history, but the opening of this one maybe tops it. This was seriously one epic opening battle that was ridiculous in all the right ways, perfectly creating one of the most epic introductions to some of history's most epic action stars. But then it kind of lost steam, and even though there was a lot of action along the way, it was never as creative or fun as that opening, nor as anything from the first film. It all just kind of played out with people shooting until they run out of bullets and then throwing knives into some merc's throat. In any other film review, that would be a rave recommendation, but for an Expendables film I just expected more.

I don't really remember the main plot of the first film (and that's as it should be!), but this one is about the team's search for revenge after one of their own is murdered in cold blood during a mission. But don't get too worked up, since the Expendable who died wasn't anybody from the first film, but a new character played by the very handsome but very bland Liam Hemsworth. Listen... if you're going to make your entire film revolve around a revenge story, you have to make it about a character we care about, not some new guy who was shoe-horned in just so he could be killed off in the first half hour. This would've been a much stronger story had they killed off one of the main guys, and at least that would've explained why none of them had much screen time anyway. I hardly remember Randy Couture or Terry Crews being in this movie at all, and Jet Li really only had a cameo before he disappeared all together.

There was also some woman added to the team which didn't really work. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with women in action movies, I'm just saying I didn't know who this actress was and that she was bland and added nothing to the story.

There was also an appearance or two by Chuck Norris, which sounds cool but it didn't really work either, since he was so awkwardly forced into the movie with no real explanation or thought. It was kind of funny how Norris basically played some god-like force or nature who showed up when the team needed him most, killed everybody, then vanished again, but it just didn't work for me. And having Chuck Norris repeat one of his internet meme "facts" isn't meta humor, it's just kind of dumb.

Much more fun were the expanded roles for Bruce Willis and Arnold. But then again, Chuck Norris's fame is kind of based on the fact that he's kind of a joke whereas these guys are famous because they're awesome, so having more of both actors is always great. I could've done without all the "I'll be back" and "terminator" jokes, however, since a little of that goes a long way.

And I don't know about Jean-Claude Van Damme as the villain. He was a lot of fun, but he didn't really do much and I never really knew what his plan was. But Van Damme is always funny, and his big fight against Stallone at the end was fantastic.

But the main problem -- and this is going to sound like a dumb criticism of a big budget action movie throw back -- is that the script lacked wit. The first movie was just as funny as it was exciting, but this one just fell flat in too many places. Here's one example: At one point Stallone and Jason Statham are running through the jungle when they are suddenly ambushed by a bunch of villains.

Statham: "Did you order room service?"

Stallone: "Not really..."

Not really? Not really?! That was really the best set up and follow through they had? Stallone should've said something like, "I really have to complain to the concierge."  Or, "Zagat's gave their service four stars," and then he could've thrown four ninja throwing stars into their throats. But all that happened was he said, "not really," then they stood around awkwardly until he pointed his finger at them at which point some sniper shot them all... which was a bit they ripped off from that movie The Losers anyway. But there were just too many moments like that, where I was left waiting for the joke or one-liner to come... and they just never did. This script just needed a punch-up.

Hey, Sly... if you're reading this, you can use that "four star" gag in The Expendables 3!

So that's the Expendables 2. I liked it and I recommend it for fans of the first film, as long as you go in realize some of the magic has been diluted every so slightly. But I still liked it.

Thursday, November 22, 2012


This is the best movie I've ever seen.

Well... ok... it's probably not the best movie I've ever seen, but off hand I can't think of a better one, nor can I remember ever sitting in a theater and feeling the same sense of awe I felt while watching this one.

Yeah, that's right... awe. I can't think of a better word to sum up the emotional experience I went through watching this film.

Awe from the experience of being transported back in time to a perfectly realized 19th century America.

Awe at seeing one of my personal heroes brought to life so utterly and completely.

Awe at the heroism of so many men and women who fought to bring freedom to those who were literally bound in chains.

And awe at seeing how much the world has changed over a hundred years, but how little us Americans have changed with it.

I'm not saying this film was an allegory for  the current debate sweeping our country regarding gay rights, but you'd have to be a cold person to walk out of this film and not at least consider how so many people are still being kept in literal chains.

But that's what this movie is: a literal retelling of a week or so in our country's history that can be taken as an allegory for modern times if you choose, or just rousing entertainment if you choose that.

I honestly don't have much more to say about this movie, if only because when I think back on it and remember the experience of watching it, I get a little welled up with emotion. It was that good, it was that important, and all I really have to say is you should go see it.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I just rented The Expendables 2.

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Stop Complaining About Christmas Music!

Now I don't want to get off on a rant here about Christmas music, but every year it starts earlier and earlier and it's just getting out of control. And, no, I'm not talking about Christmas music, but about people who complain about Christmas music.

Shut up already! Stop complaining. Just stop. Stop! Stop! Stop! Stop!

Since the invention of recording music and department stores, the two have come together every year about this time to fill our airwaves and sonic receptors with Jingle Bells, The Christmas Song, and All I Want For Christmas is You, buy Mariah Carey. Somehow Gimbles used to play that song forty years before Mariah Carey was even born. I don't understand it either. Anyway, my point is that this is not a new thing, and that entire familes have been making it a tradition to complain about this same cliche generation after generation.

And it just has to stop.

You want to know why every store, radio station, elevator, and hurdy gurdy man starts playing nothing but Christmas music? Because it's Christmas and because most people like it. Christmas music is nostalgic, fun, and pretty. And I say this as an atheist.

But I know what you're thinking... "But, Donald, it's not even Thanksgiving yet! It's too early!"

To this I say... what's a few weeks? And, really, even when it's the week before Christmas I hear people complaining about Christmas music. I don't understand this. What even makes Christmas music Christmas music anyway? The fact that it's about Christmas? Who cares? Who listens to lyrics? Bohemian Rhapsody may be a Christmas song for all I know, but I don't because the lyrics make no sense. I've never had a chestnut that was roasted on an open fire. I've never been on a sleigh ride. I've never tried to date rape a girl by convincing her that it was cold outside. These aren't things that in anyway reflect how I have spent the holidays with my family and friends.

But I still like Christmas music because it's fun and pretty and nice. You know... for the same reason I like music.

So stop complaining about Christmas music already. Just think of it as music and enjoy it.

And now you're thinking... "But, Donald, all this music all the time ruins and cheapens the meaning of the holiday."

No it doesn't. How could it? How could any meaningless external thing in any way impact how you choose to celebrate the holiday? It only can if you allow it to. Christmas for me is a time that I spend with my family, all of whom except for my sister and I are spread out across the entire country. Christmas is the one time of year we all somehow strive to get together and spend time as a family. That's what Christmas means to me (I don't know what it means to you, but it's probably something similar and sacred and special, at least I hope so), and no amount of Christmas music can change that. They could start playing Jingle Bells in April for all I care, or Toys r Us could start airing commercials where Joseph and Mary take little baby Jesus to Disney World and it wouldn't ruin Christmas for me.

All Christmas music does is add a nice soundtrack. If you hate Christmas music, maybe you just hate Christmas or just like to complain.

So just stop already and enjoy it or, at the very least, ignore it.

Well, except for any version of Santa Baby or that god awful "Merry Christmas, Baby" by the Beach Boys. Those are just terrible.

Quantum Conundrum

Why do videogame reviews still exist? I still read them and I still write them, but really... if you're interested in a game, go download a demo. And if you're a company who doesn't make demos for your games, go to hell. This is the 21st friggin' century already. Chop something together and put it out there. But, anyway, here's a little review for Quantum Conundrum, a game I actually beat the other day: I liked it.

I bought this after I played the demo. It's a first person puzzle game that is fun, clever, and very challenging. It's the kind of game that makes you feel proud after completing because there were times there when I never thought I would and honestly wanted to through my controller out of the window. The puzzles are very clever and of the variety that after you solve them, you'll wonder how it took you so long to work out what was pretty obvious all along. But sometimes the game is hard just because there are too many jumping puzzles. If they ever make a sequel, I'd recommend they trim those down a bit. Nobody likes jumping in first person games.

It's hard to avoid comparing this game with the Portal games, since it was created by Kim Swift, who was a lead designer on Portal, and since both games are first person puzzle games where you have to figure out how to get from one end of a room to the other, all the while encouraged (or discouraged) by the humorous narration of a nebulous voice in the heavens. Honestly, this games is no Portal, both of which were brilliant, since the graphics aren't as great, the puzzles aren't as intricate, the narrative isn't as compelling, and the script isn't as funny. But it's still very, very good... it's just not as good as Portal, but what game is?

But why are you reading this? Just go rent the demo and see if you like it. I did.

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

I give this movie an A for effort, but a B- for execution.

I liked it a lot and thought it nailed both Spider-Man and Peter Parker as characters, but the film around them really fell flat and was just kind of bland. This is a big contrast to the previous trilogy by Sam Raimi, which were astoundingly entertaining films that completely ruined the characters from the comics. At some point somebody will finally tell a great, entertaining story that perfectly captures on-model depictions of Peter Parker, Spider-Man, and the rest of the supporting cast. Oh wait... somebody already did that: Stan Lee and Steve Ditko in the comic books. But as adaptations go, this was a lot of fun and mostly respectful of the source material.

This movie is about, well, Spider-Man, so I don't think I need to recount the plot since the character's origin story has been told and retold so many times that by now it must be as well known as Superman's flight to Earth as a baby or the murder of Bruce Wayne's parents. Geeky high school outcast gets bitten by a radioactive spider, gets super powers, fights crime. Considering how this is a reboot of one of film's most popular and successful film trilogies, it was a bit odd how it was almost an hour before we actually saw the character become Spider-Man, but it's ok because this was really more of a film about Peter Parker anyway. But still, did we really need to spend that long retelling the same origin story once more? 

But once Parker finally did put on the Spider-Man costume, the action got pretty great and mostly non-stop. There was a bit too much CG (or, at least, a bit too much CG-looking CG, if that makes any sense), so I was never sure if there was ever a guy in a suit at all of if it was all digital, but the fights were still great and the scenes where he swung on his webs through New York City were astounding. I honestly regret not having seen this in 3-D in the theater because I bet it would've looked phenomenal.

Our star was Andrew Garfield, who was as perfect a casting choice as I could've hoped for. One of the reasons I never enjoyed the previous films was that I thought Tobey Maguire -- a fine actor -- was all wrong for the character. He was bland, flat, and lacking in any real charisma, but not so with Garfield, who just nailed it. I've never seen or even heard of this actor before, but now he's one of my favorites if only because he just captured the character I grew up reading. He was awkward when he had to be, but still charming and quirky, creating a perfectly believable high school pariah whose character arc has him becoming a hero. Oh, and he was funny too. Spider-Man should be funny.

The supporting cast was pretty great too. Emma Stone played the love interest Gwen Stacy, and she was very lovely and very charming. Dennis Leary showed up as her father, and he did his usual performance as Dennis Leary. He's ok. Peter's Aunt May and Uncle Ben were played by Sally Field and Martin Sheen, both of whom were great, but only Sheen was given much to do. Field was mostly wasted, but maybe she'll be given more to do in the sequel, I dunno.

Then there was our villain, Curt "The Lizard" Connors played by Rhys Ifans. I don't know what to say about this character or this performance since it just felt so disjointed and weird. Ifans is a wonderful actor who did a great job, but the Lizard was all CG so it almost felt like two different characters, and we never really got a sense of his motivations nor did I really understand his plan or what threat he posed. And, frankly, the CG was pretty weak and just looked fake. I hate to say it, but this wasn't a great villain, which is a shame because a villain is really only as good as the threat he's facing, so this kind of made the film fall apart slightly, at least on a emotional level during the climax.

But I still liked it. In fact, I liked it a lot. Director Marc Webb did a great job with the human characters, but maybe the action and the monsters kind of fell flat and eluded his talents as a director. The action scenes were neat and fun, but they often felt a little out of place, as though they were awkwardly inserted into a quieter, character-driven film. I still recommend it and I look forward to the sequel.

Thursday, November 8, 2012

The Day After the Day After

Does anybody care about my thoughts on the election? Probably not, but then again, nobody cared about my thoughts on Shark Attack 3: Megalodon, but that didn't stop me either.

Anyway, I'm glad that the better man won. Now, I didn't say the best man, just the better man, at least of the two, and by such a wide margin that I can't believe it was ever so close. But it was never really as close as the media would've had us believe. Even on election night I constantly checked between the main networks, CNN, Fox News, and my local Public Television station, and every one of them showed different electoral totals, and I'm not exaggerating. Of course this was because each station was being selective in their predictions, calling some state for whomever they wanted in order to keep up whatever narrative they were going for.  When I finally got annoyed -- disgusted? -- and went to bed, Fox News had Obama and Romney tied at 153, while NBC had Obama well over 200, and one other station had Romney in the lead.

So if we take anything from this entire election season, it's the utter failure by the media to act responsibly and report the truth without filtering it through the narrative that makes the best story. But that's just me.

But my guy won, and the proposed amendment in my state of Minnesota to change the state constitution to define marriage as a union between only a man and a woman was defeated by a wide enough margin that there is still hope that we are actually progressing as a civilization. Of course, there's probably another blogger somewhere pointing to those results as proof of our imminent doom as a society, but that blogger is an idiot.

INTERJECTION: The woman sitting next to me (I'm at a coffee shop, because that's where people write blog posts, right?) just looked up from her newspaper and exclaimed to me that over $6 billion dollars was spent on this election. I said that's a lot of money, and she said it sure is.

I have nothing else to say. Now I know why nobody cares about my thoughts on politics.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Obama's Back in Town

Congratulations to President Obama and Vice President Biden. In tribute to their victory, here's a a little video I put together this morning. And, yes, I know how stupid it is:

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

A Very Important Endorsement

This blog rarely gets political, but I felt it was important to finally admit that we here at Blessed are the Geeks endorse Barack Obama for President of the United States. And if you happen to live in Minnesota -- or any state with a similar amendment on the ballot -- vote no to the amendment outlawing same sex marriage.

That's all.

Monday, November 5, 2012

Duckth Vader

Yeah, that's the best joke I could come up with, sorry.

Anyway, now that my Part-3-Athon is over, I can finally comment on all the stuff other bloggers have been discussing all month. As we all know, the Internet has been abuzz with the recent acquisition of Lucasfilm by Disney for the low price of $4.5 billion. And I'm not being facetious when I call it a low price, considering how Disney bought Pixar for $7 billion or how Facebook bought Instagram (Insta-fucking-gram!) for a cool billion. All things considered, that's a hell of a deal, and I'd bet just the Star Wars Lego division will make that money back in just a few years.

But what's my opinion on this deal? Frankly, I don't give a damn.

I certainly find it interesting from a business point of view, but I'll be the first to admit I know nothing about business.

Am I afraid for the future of Star Wars? No.

I've heard from many people who are afraid for how the upcoming films and TV projects will be without the influence of George Lucas. Did those people see the prequels? I'm of the opinion that less influence from old George might be just the thing Star Wars needs for its return to glory. Don't get me wrong: I love the prequels. I own them all on DVD and on Blu Ray and rewatch them more than I rewatch anything. But they're not good movies, and they feel so far removed from the original trilogy that they feel like Star Wars as written and conceived in a parallel universe. So I don't see how any upcoming trilogy can really damage a franchise that, frankly, has been damaged and living on life-support for decades. And, really, the people who are complaining about Lucas selling to Disney are probably the same people who complained about how the prequels raped their childhoods. I hate those people.

So if I feel anything about this project, it's curiousity and a sense of excitement that we'll finally get more films. I think that's cool. If I have any hopes or desires for things I'd like to see in the new films, I guess my main wish would that they are all live-action and not CG. I enjoy the Clone Wars series (both of them!), but Star Wars just doesn't feel like Star Wars to me when it's not live action.

I'd also love to see the original cast back together, even if they're just in supporting roles. Mark Hammil as an aging Jedi Master would be amazing, and anybody who's seen Cowboys vs Aliens or Kingdom of the Crystal Skull knows Harrison Ford is still a badass. I haven't seen Carrie Fisher or Billy Dee Williams in forever, but if either of them are cast in the movie, that would be awesome. Billy Dee is still alive, right?

And, finally, I'd like to see an original story. Well, that's not entirely true, since a lot of stuff from the Expanded Universe is very cool. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't want to see a film version of the Thrawn trilogy, which is a suggestion I've read all over the internet. I seem to be the only Star Wars fan who thinks Timothy Zahn's trilogy of novels that continued the story after Return of the Jedi are awful. Zahn is a fine writer, but the stories are so trite and weak in conception that I found them to be far more obnoxious and lacking than the prequel films. Oh, and Thrawn is just a lame character.

But whatever they do, I'll go see it. I mean, it's Star Wars.

Sunday, November 4, 2012

Part-3-Athon Recap

Well, I'm glad that's over.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: When I first had the idea to watch and review 31 different parts 3 from series where I've never seen parts 1 or 2, I honestly thought I'd be watching some good movies. Turns out, I was wrong -- for the most part, anyway. Still, I had fun and, I hope, entertained some people, which maybe made some of the misery worth it. But, as I said, I'm glad it's over. This was a lot of work.

I'm finally able to actually come home from work and not watch some gawd awful movie. In fact, as soon as it was November and I was completely done, I went next door to the Redbox and rented The Three Stooges. It sucked. I should've known better than to rent something with "three" in the title.

Anyway, here are some random thoughts and pointless statistics:

Movies watched: 30 (I had two videos devoted to Death Wish 3)

Best Movie: House of Frankenstein. (Second best would be Dracula III. Third best would be, maybe, Phantasm 3. After that... everything sucked)

Worst Movie: Shark Attack 3... maybe.

Most Hateful Movie: Feast 3. (As bad as most of these were, this is the only one that I regret watching.)

Movie that was so bad I didn't even review it: The Grudge 3 

Best Actor: Ian McKellan for Richard III

Best Actress: Mary Elizabeth Winstead for Final Destination 3

Best Director: Patrick Lussier for Dracula III

Best Boobs: Natassia Malthe for Bloodrayne 3

Most Nudity: Chained Heat 3 (It was basically a porno... but watch Bloodrayne instead.)

Best Appearance by Warwick Davis: Leprechaun 3

Longest Video: House of Frankenstein (11 minutes and 39 seconds)

Shortest Video: Demons 3 (1 minute and 51 seconds)

Most Popular Video: Wrong Turn 3 (1,667 views... don't ask me why. I don't get it either.)

Least Popular Video: Every Death From Death Wish 3 (82 views. I honestly thought this would be popular. Not sure why.)

Personal Favorite Video: I thought House of Frankenstein was pretty good, but I also enjoyed Basket Case 3.

In Conclusion: I dunno. I got nothing.

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 31: Halloween III: Season of the Witch

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Halloween III: Season of the Witch:

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 30: Phantasm 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Phantasm 3:

Monday, October 29, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 29: Shark Attack 3: Megalodon

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Shark Attack 3: Megalodon:

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 28: Bloodrayne: The Third Reich

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Bloodrayne: The Third Reich:

Saturday, October 27, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 27: Lake Placid 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Lake Placid 3:

Friday, October 26, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 26: Basket Case 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Basket Case 3:

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 25: Every Death From Death Wish 3

Something a little different today. I was so impressed (is that the right word? Appalled? Shocked? Bored?) by the death count from Death Wish 3 that I decided to put together this little montage of every single death (I think) from the film. So here is my tribute to the amazing carnage in this film, the hilariously fun performances by the stars, the incredible direction of Michael Winner, and the epic score by Jimmy Page.

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.


Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 24: Death Wish 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Death Wish 3:

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 23: Turbulence 3: Heavy Metal

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Turbulence 3: Heavy Metal:

Monday, October 22, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 22: House of Frankenstein

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is House of Frankenstein:

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 21: Cube Zero

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Cube Zero:

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 20: The Howling 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is The Howling 3: The Marsupials

Friday, October 19, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 19: Final Destination 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Final Destination 3:

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 18: Chained Heat 3: Hell Mountain

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Chained Heat 3:

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 17: Wrong Turn 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Wrong Turn 3:

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 16: Dracula 3: Legacy

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Dracula 3: Legacy

Monday, October 15, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 15: Demons 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Demons 3:

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 14: Psycho 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Psycho 3:

Saturday, October 13, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 13: Children of the Corn 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Children of the Corn 3: Urban Harvest:

Friday, October 12, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 12: Richard III

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Richard III:

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 11: Puppet Master 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Puppet Master 3:

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 10: Tremors 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Tremors 3:

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 9: Child's Play 3

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the
 month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD
entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and

Here is Child's Play 3:

Monday, October 8, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 8: The Toxic Avenger 3: The Last Temptation of Toxie

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is The Toxic Avenger 3:

Sunday, October 7, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 7: Feast 3: The Happy Finish

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is Feast 3: The Happy Finish:

(If you're squeamish, do yourself a favor and skip this one...)

Saturday, October 6, 2012

Part-3-Athon Day 6: Gamera vs Gaos

Welcome to my Part-3-athon movie marathon, where every day during the month of October I will be posting a video review of a different THIRD entry in a horror/sci-fi series for which I have NEVER seen parts 1 and 2.

Here is the third Gamera film, Gamera vs Gaos: