Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

That title is kind of a mouth-full, but that's fitting since much of the movie is kind of hard to swallow. Produced and set almost two decades after the previous Indiana Jones film, the pulp feel of the 1930s has been replaced by the paranoia and B-Movie vibe of the 1950s, the Nazis are removed as the villains in favor of Stalinist Russians, and the merely middle aged leading man is replaced by a decidedly over the hill Harrison Ford. Oh, and the wide-eyed thirteen year old who saw the Last Crusade in the theatre has been replaced by a 31 year old man.

But I liked it.

In fact, I liked it a lot, once I returned home from the theatre, allowed some time to pass, and managed to distinguish between the expectations of what it would be on my way into the theatre, and my memories of what it actually was on my way out. In the end, it wasn't exactly the movie I wanted it to be, or at least it wasn't the movie I was expecting it to be, but it entertained me and left me mostly satisfied. Most importantly, I'm glad I saw it, I'm glad they came back after so long to make it, and I hope they make at least one more. It was a mixed bag that was more than the sum of its parts, with more that worked than didn't work.

Here's what worked:

Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones. After George Lucas came up with the original concept for the film, and after he brought it to Spielberg to direct, the single greatest boon to the series was casting Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones. Casablanca wouldn't have been Casablanca without Bogart as Rick. Raging Bull wouldn't have been Raging Bull without DeNiro as LaMotta. And Indiana Jones wouldn't have been Indiana Jones without Harrison Ford in the titular role. He just brought a sense of humor, physicality, and effortless charm to the role that no other movie star has had in the right doses or to the same degree. And he's still got it. He's a little older, a little slower, and has a lot of gray hair, but he's still got it. I never doubted for a minute that, old as he obviously was, he could still kick ass.

And the rest of the cast was great as well. Ray Winstone and Cate Blanchett are both excellent, veteran actors who managed to take two characters who were, frankly, under-written and poorly defined and make them work and stand out. Winstone's Mac in particular was a lot of fun to watch when he was on screen, even though he never had enough to do and his motivations were always changing and kind of hard to follow. But he was a good addition to the series. Karen Allen, also frankly, isn't a veteran actor, so her inclusion in the film was based more on nostalgia than on her actual merits as an actor. She still has a beautiful, winning smile and a lot of charm, but acting wise, she really stood out as the weakest of an otherwise fantastic cast. But bringing back Marion Ravenwood, Indy's love interest from way back in Raiders of the Lost Ark, mostly still worked because she was a good character, even if most of our affection and love for the character from from that first film, and not from this one where she never has enough to do.

And then there's Shia LaBeouf. I've been a Shia fan since way back. I first saw him on Even Stevens and knew he'd be famous someday. He was just one of the funniest, most charming, and all around likable child actors I've ever seen. And I've watched almost everything he's done since, because he's that good. So I've been pretty excited to see him in blockbusters like Transformers, and I was excited to hear he was going to be in the new Indiana Jones film. And he didn't let me down. He's still funny, likable, and talented. Even if his character was slightly annoying and cliched. But he played it well.

So many sequels have been disasters because the creative teams behind the original successes weren't involved. Luckily for us, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg have been behind the cameras for all four films, and the series has been the better for it. Lucas has taken a lot of beatings in the past (somewhat justifiably so, at least in regards to his predilection for putting technical spectacle over story or nuanced acting performances), but the man is definitely a genius at producing, and his love of history and Americana are what ground the Indiana Jones films in the real world and make them more than just the pulp films from which they were inspired.

Steven Spielberg is the greatest visual stylist in film history. No other director, with the possible exception of Hitchcock, could tell a story purely through visuals as well as Spielberg, and no director makes films that look anywhere near as good. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is one of Spielberg's best looking films. The camera work, set design, photography, and everything else were stunning. It's nice to see a big budget film with actual sets. This might be the last big budget, spectacle film that actually took place on large scale sets and location shooting, and not on a green screen that would be fixed up in the computer later on.

And then what doesn't work:

Where were the villains? Cate Blanchett is a wonderful actress who was very good in this film, but Irina Spalko just didn't do it for me as an arch villain worthy of Indiana Jones. What can I say about a villain who's so forgettable I actually had to check the imdb to double check her name? Remember Toht from Raiders? Now that was a villain. That guy's laugh was enough to give me nightmares when I was a kid. Or Mola Ram from Temple of Doom? He pulled a guy's heart out of his chest and showed it to him before he lowered him into a pit of lava. Now that's a villain! Irina Spalko? I don't think so.

Russians just can't compete with Nazis in terms of villainy. Stalin was an evil man to be sure, but communism, at its core, is a political ethos that is more naive and unrealistic than it was misguided or evil. Nazism, at its core, was evil in its most pure form. No matter what else is going on in the story, the idea of the Nazis achieving any kind of victory is disheartening. But would it really be so bad if the Russians found the Crystal Skull? Probably not. Or, at least, not on any kind of emotional level that can strike a cord with movie goers.

So the film, on a basic level, lacked any kid of real conflict or emotional center for the audience to rally behind. Raiders was a race to stop the Nazis from harnessing the power of God. Temple of Doom was about Indy's emotional journey from a man who only craves power and glory to one who sacrifices everything to reunite those kids with their parents. And Last Crusade was about how Indy rekindled his lost relationship with estranged father. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, at its essence, was just about... Indy searching for a Crystal Skull. There was really nothing deeper beneath the surface, nothing else for the audience to care about.

The Crystal Skulls are pretty neat, but I never really bought into their whole mystique, nor why they were supposed to be such a big deal. The Ark of the Covenant, Shankara Stones, and Holy Grail were also mysterious and enigmatic, but they mostly acted as metaphors for the larger story as a whole. The Skulls don't really do that. They're just skulls. But at least they're crystal skulls. That makes them cool enough, I guess.

And as great as the sets were, what was with the overuse of CG? To be sure, the first three films were special effects extravaganzas that used pioneering technology, but I still felt the CG in this film was overdone. The Indiana Jones films have a certain look and feel, which they captured perfectly in the cinematography and set design, but that look just doesn't work with the obvious computer imagery. Computer generated car chases, prairie dogs, and monkeys swinging through the trees with Shia LaBeouf in full Tarzan mode just didn't look, or feel, right.

Some of the CG did work, however, especially the special effect laden finale in the collapsing temple. That was probably the best CG I've ever seen. Also, the computer generated fire ants were pretty awesome and suitably creepy and disturbing. But car chases need to feel real, and cute, animated animals don't belong in this kind of movie.

Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull was the kind of movie that kept me on the edge of my seat, but unsure of how I actually felt as I walked out. But as more time passed, and as I worked on this review, I began to enjoy it more and more. Many of the complaints I had faded away and seemed to work with the proper perspective added in. This wasn't Raiders of the Lost Ark, and I'm no longer a teenager. Nothing could recapture that same magic or sense of wonder, especially since so many films since then have been inspired by, imitated, and down right copied that original trilogy. But I liked it. I'm eager to see it again, and I guess that's the only compliment a filmmaker really needs.

Ipod Touch

A couple days ago, I bought an 8GB iPod Touch. Why did I get a Touch instead of an iPhone? For some reason, everybody keeps asking me that. I keep having to justify my purchase, as though I'm an idiot for buying the Touch when the iPhone does everything the Touch does but so much more.

But here's the deal... I didn't want a phone, ok! First of all, the phone is about $100 more, and that's before the fees for the AT&T service, and before the cancellation penalty I'd have to pay to get out of my contract with Sprint. And why would I do that since I'm perfectly happy with Sprint? But that's another review for another time.

Anyway, I bought an iPod Touch. Deal with it, America.

But, yeah, I do wish I could've afforded an iPhone. I mean, it can do everything the Touch can but so much more! And that's saying a lot since the Touch is a pretty amazing piece of machinery.

First an foremost, it's an iPod, so that means it's a fantastic MP3 player with above average playback quality, an attractive appearance, an an absolutely amazing interface. It just looks cool and it's fun to use. It has something Apple refers to as a "revolutionary multi-touch interface." That means you can use your fingers to move stuff around. And it actually is kind of revolutionary. It's just fun and intuitive and comfortable. The items on screen seem to have real world weight, and scrolling through the menus feels a lot like using your fingers to spin a globe. It such a cool interface, and one that feels so right, it almost sucks going back to my laptop's touch pad after using the Touch for a long period of time.

The minimalist design, and the "multi-touch interface" does get kind of annoying when you're listing to music with the Touch in your pocket. Since there is only one button, all of the major features have to be accessed via your fingers on the screen. So that means you have to take the Touch out of your pocket every time you want to do something as simple as adjust the volume, skip to the next song, or pause the music. This isn't a deal-breaker by any means, but it is annoying. They should've thrown on a couple more face buttons that you could map to adjust the volume or control the music player.

But the Touch isn't just a music player. It's a multimedia device that also plays videos and... well... I guess that's it. Just music and videos. But, for its size, the video capabilities are pretty amazing. The screen is small, but it's crystal clear and looks pretty good. I'm not going to replace my widescreen TV or anything, but it's good enough to watch while you're on a plane or in the waiting room for your proctologist. It supports any videos you download from the iTunes music store, and it also plays MP4s, after you use the conversion program in iTunes.

The other key feature of the iPod Touch is the ability to log online via wi-fi.

This is totally the bomb.

Unlike the Wii or PSP, which took hours to configure to work online, the Touch automatically finds a list of available networks and connects in seconds. It's easier to get online with the Touch than it is with most laptops I've used.

And the browser is... pretty good. It's Safari, so it's reliable and fairly fast, if not all together exceptional. The screen is kind of small, but it senses if you're holding the Touch vertically or horizontally and tilts the screen to match. And you can double tap or "pinch" the srcreen to zoom in and out. It's not ideal, but if you want to be able to check facebook on a device you can hide in your pocket, this thing is a dream come true. Wi-fi is a bit of a battery hog, however, so you'll want to turn it off when you're not actively going online.

Email is also built in as a feature, and setting it up is as simple as syncing your music. You can either manually set up your email information, or plug it into your computer and let it pull your settings from your mail account. It's pretty nifty and works well. My only problem is nobody ever emails me. But it's still nice to have.

There's also a notepad, calendar, map feature that lets you search and find directions. This is also the bomb. As long as you're connected to wi-fi, it will find your approximate location and center in on that. Then type in, say, "starbucks," and it will point out every nearby location, with a link to the website and to step by step directions on how to get there. So far, this might be my favorite feature.

Rounding out the features are the built in youtube program, which seems weird but it's nice if you're into that kind of thing, weather, calculator, and stocks, which I'm sure is great but I wouldn't know since I don't care.

Do I wish I could make phone calls on it? Sure. I guess. But is it a fantastic multimedia device that also lets me get online? No doubt. It's an awesome iPod and I'm glad I got it, even if I have to take it out of my pocket every time I want to crank up the volume on "Walkin' in Memphis."

Comcast Sucks

For the past few years, I had Time Warner Cable and all was right in the world. Now, don't get me wrong, I didn't choose Time Warner because I thought they were a fantastic company or because they offered amazing service for a low price. I chose Time Warner because, for whatever reason and no matter where you may live in American, there's only ever one cable company that you are forced to use. I don't understand why that's legal or how it works out, but there you go. But lucky for the Minneapolis - St. Paul area, Time Warner was pretty good.

But they they were bought out (or something) by Comcast and everything changed. To begin with, for a while I was getting two bills a month, one for my old Time Warner account, and one for the new Comcast account. How could that happen when they are actually the came company and I only had one account, let alone only one TV? Don't look at me. It was a question I never got answered, and only got sorted out after about three months. They finally waived the late fees they kept tacking on to my account after those three months of constant complaints and phone calls.

But I told you that story so I could tell you this one:

Earlier this month, my sister and I decided to upgrade to digital cable, with HBO and an HD DVR. It had been a couple months since my trouble with Comcast so I felt confident enough to go ahead and upgrade my service. Ha ha ha. Anyway, my sister called up and ordered all the stuff and set up the appointment. We made sure to ask for the HD DVR, because we were also getting the HD package and wanted to take advantage of those channels.

So maybe a week or so rolls by until the morning of the appointment. Or should I say morning / afternoon since these companies only schedule four hour blocks when you have to be home, though you can be sure they'll be late anyway. This guy wasn't late, but he did arrive in the last ten minutes of that four hour block. But that's technically still on time so I can't complain.

"Hi, I'm here to install a DVR?" he asked as I opened the door to let him in.

I replied in the affirmative and showed him in to my living room.

When he saw my TV he said, "HDTV, huh?"

"Yup," I agreed.

"Ever think about upgrading to an HD DVR?" he asked, which is funny for a few reasons.

I pointed out that that was why he was there. He was supposed to be installing an HD DVR.

Oh no, he told me. Comcast had been out of HD DVRs for weeks. There's no telling when more will be coming in.

"So you don't have the thing you came to install?" I asked, trying to be polite.

He said he did not. Then he said, "I do have a regular HD digital box though. It's exactly like an HD DVR."

"What's the difference?"

"Well, you'll get all the channels. But it doesn't record."

"I see. I really want the DVR though, so why don't you just hook up the regular DVR and I'll upgrade to the HD DVR when one becomes ready."

"I don't have a regular DVR. I just have this digital box."

"You don't have a regular DVR? So why did you ask me... forget it. Just set up whatever you have."

"Ok," he said, and then did. He told me I would have to call to reschedule, which I did as soon as he left. I explained the situation to the man on the phone, letting him know that this guy showed up with no HD DVR and said they were out of stock.

"I have no idea why he said that," the guy on the phone said. "We have plenty." They couldn't send anybody back out until saturday morning. Since this was a monday or tuesday, I was annoyed.

"You can't send anybody out sooner even though this was your mistake?" I asked for no good reason. It's impossible to talk logic with a cable company. No, they couldn't send somebody out sooner.

So as the week draws closer to Saturday, my sister and I decide to just call in and pick one up ourselves. But when we called in to ask about this, they told us they had none in stock and have no estimate when they'll arrive, so not only can we not pick one up, but there's no reason to have somebody come on saturday. So they rescheduled again to have somebody come on the 17th.

That's tomorrow. This was two weeks ago.

Two days ago, I realized that I wouldn't be here on the morning of the 17th, so I called in once again to reschedule. They had nothing later that day, but the 16th was open. Awesome, I thought. I'll get my DVR that much earlier. And, because I had learned my lesson at that point, I made sure that they had some in stock. Of course they did.

So I woke up this morning so I could be ready to let the cable guy in any time between 9 and noon. He finally called at 11 and said he would be late, probably closer to one.

That's fine, I said. I was just happy he was coming at all.

"There is one other thing," he said after we agreed on the time. "I don't have the HD DVR. We are all out of stock. All I have is this HD digital box. It's just like a DVR except..."

So that didn't work out. I let him know that this had already happened, and that the person I talked to on the phone two days ago said they had plenty.

"Oh, they always say that," he said. Thanks.

So I cancelled that appointment and called back to see what was up, and to make sure I wasn't being charged for the DVR service. By some odd twist of fate, I wasn't. Weird. I thought for sure they'd be charging me for three DVRs.

So now instead of having another pointless, standing appointment, they took my name down and will call mw when one becomes available, probably no sooner than March 1st.

So that's my day.

The Alien Years

The Alien Years

I recently finished reading the Alien Years by Robert Silverberg, which I suppose you could describe as the thinking man's "Independence Day," but as a thinking man, I still noticed that the plot was very contrived, the dialogue stilted and hoaky, and the entire epic somewhat anticlimactic. So It wasn't as brilliantly written as the best of the genre, but I still like it. I still recommend it to fans of Silverberg or of sci-fi in general. It just could've used a really good editor to rework some of the more questionable story elements.

The story is epic in scope opening "7 years from now" and ending... I don't remember... something closer to 100 years from now. The aliens land and all hell breaks out, but unlike in most post Alien invasion stories, there's no mad max like wasteland. Some humans are enslaved and society as we know it is radically altered, but the Aliens stay to them selves or the most part. There is very little real contact made betweent the races because there can be none. The Aliens are simply too alien. Most of their behaviours, actions, and intentions are left pretty nebulous, which was one of the strengths of the book. This was a story about the humans of Earth, not the Alien invaders, about how they were coping, how they were raising their children, and how they were making their way in this new world.

If John Jakes wrote Sci-fi, it'd probably be something like this, a sweeping saga about one family during a time of crisis. That's either a compliment or an insult, I'm not sure which. Anyway, it's a ringing endoresment of how entertaining this book was, how moving in places, and how clever.

Robert Silverberg knows people. There is nothing false about his characters, in my opinion, and the way they act in this new world -- and how they relate to one another -- is fascinating and feels completely real. I bought all of the characterizations and character interactions. Some of the plot elements were too forced, however, since Silverberg seemed to force too many important characters to run into each other seemingly at random. This happened a few times. Not enough to bring down the story, but enough to keep it from being brilliant.

Also, as far as science fiction is concerned, the science was surprisingly lackluster. There was hacker named Master Megabyte. Megabyte? That's still a viable unit of date storage in the future? And, anyway, it's just a gay name all together. All of the sections dealing with hackers and hacking in general (thankfully kept to a minimum) were all either corny as hell at best or impossible to follow along because they were so unrealistic at worst. But, as I said, those sections were kept to a minimum.

Do I recommend the book? Sure, if you like science fiction. If you don't like sci fi, you'll hate this book. Not just because it's science fiction, but it's somewhat poorly written science fiction. But the story is great and the characters really well drawn. I liked it a lot and stuck through to the end. I had a blast.

Anyway, that's what I did this week.

Star Wars Sooper Special Editions

Be warned, this is going to be my geekiest post yet:

Earlier this week, yet another Star Wars set came out for sale. This was only the second release on DVD (I think), but the billionth version over all. This is now, probably, the fourth time I've bought some version of the Star Wars trilogy. I'm not complaining mind you. I'm just saying is all. This version is unique in that it combines the recently redone special editions and the original theatrical cuts. It doesn't come with the super spiffy documentaries and stuff on the set that came out a year or two ago, but if you want to be a completest and have both versions of the films, these are the ones to get.

Personally, I like the special editions better for the most part. Sure, there are some really weird, wacky editions that don't sit right, like Han shooting first, a few changes in dialogue here and there, and the wacky comic relief thrown in to the new introduction of Mos Eisley, but I still prefer it for the new special effects and subtle tweaks. Frankly, I don't think Lucas changed enough. Rewatching the original editions again really brought to light all the ways the first trilogy doesn't completely match up with the newer prequels.

Lucas should go balls out in his next special edition of Star Wars.

First of all, I need more Sam Jackson. You can't really expect somebody to sit through six films if Sam Jackson is only in the first three. You'd go through Sam Jackson withdrawls. Does anybody really believe Mace Windu died after Anakin sliced him up and threw him out of a window? Lucas should change the original Star Wars so, in that scene in Obi Wan's house, Mace is just chillin' on the couch watching TV. He can be like, "FINALLY you brought that motherfucker over to teach him the motherfuckin' force. Why the fuck we been sitting here in the desert for sixteen motherfuckin' years is beyond me. I need to get out and get some of that Corellian pussy!"

And then Lucas could just stick footage of Sam Jackson into the background, saying things like, "I don't care how bad it smells, get the fuck in there, motherfucker!" or "Shut down all the motherfucking garbage mashers on the motherfucking detention level!"

Or in that scene where Luke asks Obi Wan about his father and Obi says something like, "A young pupil of mine named Darth Vader betrayed and murders your father," Obi should actually say something like, "Oh yeah, Darth Vader is your father." And then Mace can lean over and say something like, "No shit. Motherfucker was one bad motherfucking dude. Killed babies and shit. Nice genes, motherfucker."

And then, in that scene where Obi fights Vader and Vader says something like, "When last we met, I was but the learner, now I am the mastah!" Lucas should change it so Vader says something like, "Hey, asshole, I'm gonna fuck you up for chopping off my legs and throwing me into a pit of lava. What the fuck was that about, man?! Who's got the high ground now, bitch?!"

Or in that scene where Luke asks Leia if she remembers her mother and she says yes, Lucas should change it so she says, "No, I don't remember my mother at all. I do remember... and this is going to sound weird... but I think I was raised by Jimmy Smitts? It never really occurred to me until now but why is my father hispanic? Think I'm adopted maybe?" And Luke could be like, "Jimmy Smitts? Really? I mean, he was good on L.A. Law and all, but Star Wars? Whatever. Yeah, I don't remember my mother either..."

Or in that scene where Leia kisses Luke on the lips, Mace can lean in and yell, "God damn!! Oh no you didn't!! You know she's your sistah, right?! You know that bitch is your sistah?! God damn, motherfucker! Or should I say 'sisterfucker'?"

Those would be some sweet movies.

Field of Awesomeness

Yes, that is me acting like a jackass at the Field of Dreams Movie Site in Dyersville, Iowa. But wait... there's more.



Yes, that is Kevin Costner and his unnamed band appearing live at the Field of Dreams and in public for the very first time! Jealous much? But wait... there's more:



Yes, that is Lisa Loeb appearing for some unknown reason with Costner and his terrible band. She wasn't even introduced. After she came on stage and jammed with Costner, he basically said that she needed no introduction and then marvelled at how amazingly her career turned out. Yeah, it's real impressive how she's playing back up for Kevin Costner's band in a corn field in the middle of fuckin' Iowa. If only she had "stayed" at the top of the charts. Ha ha ha ha ha.

But wait... there's more.



And yes, that is a giant screen showing the film Field of Dreams in the middle of the actual Field of Dreams corn field. It was all part of some roadshow put on by the Netflix people. Read all about it here.

The schedule broke down like this: at 7:00 Kevin Costner and his band would play and then at 8:30 they'd roll the film. That means we had to sit through an hour and a half of Costner and his band's special brand of adult contemporary, shit-kicking rock and roll. Worse than that, there were about a thousand people there and we had to walk a half a mile from the parking lot carrying folding lawn chairs through a dirt road that wound around a fuckin' corn field in the middle of Iowa. And how bad was Costner and his band? Let's just say it was the first time in my life I actually found myself wishing I was watching The Postman.

But, seriously, what a jack ass, forcing a thousand people to sit through his shitty band for over an hour and a half (as it turned out) just because they wanted to watch the Field of Dreams in an Iowa corn field. I still love his movies and worship the ground on which he walks... but still.

Once he got off the stage and the movie started, it was pretty cool. I mean, we were watching Field of Dreams in the actual cornfield, on a beautiful summer night. How cool was that?

Jealous much?

Click here to see the rest of my pictures.

Superman Returns

Here's everything you need to know about this new Superman adaptation: In the comics, his cape is red and made out of cloth. In this movie, his cape is burgandy and made out of leather. I'm sorry, but if they can't even get the cape right, how are they going to get anything right? That sounds like a harsh fan boy complaint, I know, but when you have a character as beloved and iconic as Superman, you're playing with fire when you start to mess around with his established cannon. And, all things considered, the cape was the least of this Superman's problems.

Minor spoilers to follow...

But I did enjoy it, for the most part. It was a really neat, mostly entertaining movie that did a lot very well. To begin with, Brandon Routh was a great Superman. I had my doubts from when he was first cast up until I actually sat down in the theatre, but he's now officially in my dawg pound. My boy was a good Superman. He's not quite as handsome or charming as Chris Reeve was, but he's still more handsome and charming than anybody I've ever met. He was a good Superman and an even better Clark Kent. Routh and company actually made the correct decision in letting Clark be a character, opposed to the bumbling caricature he was in the earlier films.

Just watching Routh fly around in his Superman costume (as miscolored and oddly cut as it was) never got old. Too bad there wasn't more of, you know, Superman doing stuff. I actually think Lois Lane may have had more screen time than Superman, or, at the very least, she had as much screen time. And that wouldn't be ok even if they had cast the character perfectly, but it's certainly not ok since they got Kate Bosworth. Why has Hollywood had such a hard time casting Lois Lane? At least Kate Bosworth is pretty, which is a lot more than I can say for Margot Kidder. That's a low blow, I'll admit, but it's still true. But at least Margot Kidder had spunk. Kate Bosworth was a dramatic black hole. It's not even that she's a bad actress (what do I know?), but that her character was given nothing to do beyond looking glum and forelorn. But, still, I'd hit it. And so would Superman. I'd take her to my fortress of Solid tube... if you know what I mean. I have no idea what I mean.

Kate Bosworth is a lovely girl and a likable actress, all I'm saying is she's unconvincing as a world famous reporter, let alone one who won the Pulitzer Prize. Oh yeah, and how trite was that Pulitzer subplot? She won for some article about why the world doesn't need Superman. Some journalist she is. Her boyfriend runs off on her and she writes an editorial about it? What's next, the Nobel people are going to give their literature prize to my exgirlfriend because of the entries she wrote about me in her diary? Puh-leaze.

But she's got a point. Superman is a huge dick for leaving without saying goodbye. I know goodbyes are tough and all, but he couldn't have said something like, "hey, they may have found my home planet. I'm gonna go check it out"? Who would argue with that? That sounds likea fairly reasonable request to me.

And then there's Lex Luthor.

And then there's Lex Luthor.

Lex Luthor sucks.

In the films, that is, not in the comics. Hackman and Spacey are two of my all time favorite actors, and they are both a lot of fun to watch in these movies, but imagine how much more fun they'd be if they had stuff to do! I'm sorry but Hackman's whole missile plot in the first film was ridiculous and made no sense, and Spacey's crystal-land-mass plot in this film is even dumber and makes less sense. This guy is supposed to be the greatest criminal mastermind the world has ever seen, not some bumbling fool hanging out with an obnoxious, moronic Ned Beatty, or, in this case, an obnoxious, moronic Parker Posey. I understand that Parkey Posey has become the go-to actress for directors who want to cast an artsy-fartsy actress in a really dumb role, but can't we all just admit that she sucks already? Hell, I'd rather have Otis back than that kid from Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle. No shit. He was actually in this movie as one of Lex's henchmen.

And, come on, the Lex Luthor from the comics never had to sleep with some old widow to make some cash. What the fuck was that about?

And, come on, he was released from jail because Superman didn't show up in court? Don't they have videotape of him hanging out with General Zod in the Oval Office, slapping the president around? I guess Bush is right, we really do need the Patriot Act. Send that mother fucker to Guantanamo already.

But more important than that all... this movie was boring and had no story. It was two hours long and there were only two, maybe three, action set pieces that stick out in my mind. I'm not saying that a movie has to be all out, balls to the wall action, but how about just a little? No wait, this movie had just a little. How about all out, balls to the wall action? It's a fuckin' Superman movie. Beat some shit down, man. Other than the scene where he saves the plane in the beginning and goes up against the machine gun guy in the middle, he didn't really do much at all. Lois's boyfriend and their kid did just as much and were every bit as heroic.

And speaking of Lois's kid...



Major spoilers to follow...



Super baby. What the hell? After 60 odd years of Superman stories, Hollywood decides to add that little nugget into the mythos? Did we really need that? And forgetting all of the questions this raises (humans and Kryptonians can inter-breed? Didn't this kid ever visit a doctor and get a blood test? Forget not having James Marsden's character's DNA, the kid ain't even human! Nobody ever picked up on that?!), doesn't it take away from Superman's cachet that there's some kid running around with the same powers?

I just don't like the idea of Superman as a dead beat dad. It's kind of offensive, in my opinion. And, let's face it, if there's any guy who can pull out in time, it's Superman.

But, all in all, I liked the movie. Even though it had no story, even though the villain had nothing to do and wasn't much of a threat, even though it fell short of the comics in every respect... it was still Superman. I'm not one of those people who thinks Superman is the greatest comic character ever... but he is in the top five. So even a bad Superman story still has something going for it, considering how it's still a Superman story. If you loved the orignal Superman movies, it's a safe bet you'll like this one, since Singer and company did an incredible job remaining faithful to the look, tone, feel, and overall continuity of the film series. But I didn't really like the other Superman movies. The stories are dumb and the characters are nowhere near as good as they are in the comics. This was a really neat, entertaining movie, but it failed for me in the same three ways the original films. But everybody else loved those movies, so maybe everybody else will love this too.

Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift

Here's a movie for all the people who came out of Lost in Translation thinking, "You know, that movie was ok, but not enough drift racing!" I'm not ashamed to admit that I was one of those people. I'm not ashamed to admit that here on my blog, that is, where maybe 2 people will read a post on a good day. It's not like I'm going to walk into work tomorrow and say, "Hey, everybody! I would rather watch a second sequel to a bad Vin Diesel movie than some pretentious piece of shit that got nominated for a half dozen oscars." I'm not going to do that, even though it's all true.

But we were talking about Toyko Drift. It's a safe bet that nobody is going to walk out of this movie thinking, "You know, that movie was ok, but not enough drift racing." I've never seen more drift racing crammed into one feature length film. In fact, I've never seen more drift racing anywhere, at anytime. Nor would I want to, but that's neither here nor there. This movie contains the long-theorized theoretical limit of Drift Racing in any motion picture. This movie's use of drift racing could become the next standard universal constant. If this movie contained any more drift racing at all, the amount of drift racing would start to stretch into the infinity. Long story short, there's a lot of drifting in this movie.

And it's pretty good drifting, as far as these things go. In case you haven't seen any of the commercials, drifting is where you turn your car and brake in such a way that you, well, drift around corners. As they say, if you ain't out of control, you ain't in control. (And as a brief aside... that line wasn't even in the movie. We've all heard Bow Wow (nee little) say it in the trailer, but if it was actually in the movie, I must've zoned out because I didn't hear it. Lame.) All things considered, it's a really neat way to drive a car, but it isn't much of a premise on which to base an entire movie. Being able to slide around a corner isn't much of a hook, or, as Hitchcock called it, a "macGuffin."

But I liked it. This was a pretty good Fast and the Furious movie. I had some doubts going in. After all, what is there to say about a movie that even Paul Walker turned down? But then I remembered all of the movies that Paul Walker actually agreed to do, and I felt a lot better. It's not like he turned down Tokyo Drift to do a production of The Ice Man Cometh. He did that piece of shit Running Scared and some movie about snow dogs. So this movie isn't really a sequel in the traditional sense, it simply takes place within the same universe as the other Fast and the Furious films. Think about how silly that sounds for a few minutes. Some producer in Hollywood actually said something like, "Hey, baby, this idea of racing cars is too good to pass up. We need another FF movie pronto."

And I'm glad they did. Hell, I hope they keep cranking out these movies every couple years. They're dope. They're just two hours of hot chicks leaning against hot cars. What could be better?

I'll tell you what could be better...




SPOILERS






























SPOILERS















A cameo by Vin Diesel of course!! No shit. You've got to sit through the entire movie and you just get about 30 seconds at the end... but come on! Diesel! That was the greatest moment in film history. This was even better than Diesel's cameo at the end of The Passion of the Christ where he played God.