Spider-Man 3

It may be a well kept secret that I did not particularly enjoy Spider-Man 3 the first time around. A well kept secret because when I mentioned it to Cale, I was met with nothing but hostility. I can't really blame him though; I loved the first two Spider-Man movies, even wanting to give the first one 11 out of 10, if it were numerically possible. Indeed, the excitement leading up to the first film has never been matched, and the continued excitement throughout the film cemented the fact that this was a phenomenal ride. Of course, it helps that I've always been a big Spidey fan, collecting hundreds of comic books throughout the years. Of course, everybody is excited over these movies, as evidenced by the huge box-office they generate.

So what happened to number 3 that I didn't enjoy? Generally, I feel as though they tried to cram too much into the film, and because of that, it lost focus. The first one was an origin story and was very tight; the second one was about Peter Parker and of course Doc Ock, and was very focused: it knew where it was going. The third on had multiple enemies, personal problems galore and quite simply, too many big name characters being reduced to bit parts.

The Sandman was phenomenal. The way he looked, the way he acted, his motivations: everything was great. Venom was a bit of a mixed bag. While we all would have enjoyed seeing more of him throughout the film, I can understand why he was reduced to being only in the last act. And of course the "new" Green Goblin was handled...alright, I guess. James Franco did a great job screwing with Peter and that was just brilliant, but his quick decision to help him out at the end all thanks to his butler giving out an incredibly valuable piece of information at the last second...well that was just terrible. Why would this guy hold onto this information for two years? He knows exactly what's going on, lets Harry go crazy then decides to just tell him randomly. It was disgusting, but not everything can fit together so nicely, I guess.

Watching the film a second time around has given me some more appreciation for the film and many of the annoying parts were more enjoyable. Overall I would say it was a solid film, with some great action sequences and lots of heroics, with the only issue being a convoluted plot that started bursting at the seams near the end. It's not a clean film like the others.

Are we getting a Spider-Man 4? If we do I certainly hope that it's a different team: Raimi has done everything he needs to do, and I would like to see the franchise being tackled by other creative minds. I don't want to see another three-part story: movies that can stand on their own and have slight continuity would be fine (perhaps MJ should die and Gwen Stacy can take over, they certainly had much better on-screen chemistry). Let's keep the enemies going strong: Sandman was portrayed so wonderfully, you can believe the guy is human and just so happens to be made of sand. Spider-Man stories have always been character-driven and only suffer when things are rushed.

The Bourne Ultimatum

Great movie. Just get that out of the way first.

I downloaded a hi-def encode of this movie last week in anticipation of getting the HD-DVD soon, which isn't something I normally do for movies I know I'm going to purchase, but I couldn't wait to watch it again since seeing it in the theatre.

Anyway, I loaded it up to watch with my sister last night, and I just love how it picks up practically exactly where the second left off. There are some great action sequences, and the Waterloo scene is brilliant: Bourne guiding this poor guy who has no clue what's going on past some tough, super-secret agents. He's taking guys out left right and centre without the other knowing what's going on at all. He doesn't let them know he's there until the time is right, just in time to make them crap themselves. The whole scene plays out almost comically, as you know, at this point in the trilogy that Bourne cannot be stopped, and there is nothing he cannot do. Does that take away from the movie?

I don't believe they focus on his abilities so much time around: everybody has accepted them and they don't treat it like a big deal as they have before. He does some real fancy stuff just to re-affirm to us how awesome he is, but that initial sense of wonder is gone. The movie is made well enough that you don't need it though.

This entry in the series is just Bourne finding out who he is, and because of that, it feels much simpler and shorter. You kind of get the sense that he could have easily done this at any time, but just didn't have the motivation to do so until recently. The first movie, he was going crazy trying to find out, then the second he's come to acceptance that he doesn't really need to know (and was very much revenge driven) and now he's just curious.

And the whole movie seems to rely on other people's reaction to Bourne: "holy crap he's in my office! holy crap, he's looking at me from a distance!" (which is just classic), and "holy crap, we can't catch this guy!"

And what's the deal with Bourne having a previous relationship with Julia Stiles (I don't recall her name in the movie)? It could make sense but I just feel as though it was tacked in to make a couple of more scenes in an attempt to make the movie a complete two hours. And (spoilers) when she finds out at the very, very end that his body was never found, the look on her face punctuated with Moby's Extreme Ways...well, that was just too funny.

So I guess what I'm saying is this movie does not stand up to the others in terms of plot, or character development, or non-cheesiness. But it was still completely awesome, with great action, great chases, great music and of course Matt Damon acting invincible.

The Mist

What a fantastic movie. Usually before going to see a movie in the theatre I have some idea of what I'm getting into: movie trailers, reviews, all that stuff. I usually know when the movie originally came out too, but not this time. I may recall one or two commercials for The Mist on television at one point but I really couldn't tell you when. The memory is so fuzzy it could have been fifteen years ago.

So Dave and I were looking at movies that were actually playing, and one of the only ones of interest was The Mist. We watched the trailer and I felt like I saw some potential in it, although I wasn't completely sold. I don't care to go see I Am Legend, so we went to see The Mist. I'm not even sure how long it's been out in theatres. Judging by what screen it was playing on (one of the smallest) I would say the movie has either been out for a few weeks already or just isn't doing well at the box-office. Both could be true; both could be false.

So going in with somewhat low expectations usually results in a surprisngly enjoyable movie; many shows end up being half-decent because they just look so terrible going in. But this movie was great. I'm not even sure I was expecting to be frigthened during the movie: indeed, I had no expectations for this flick. And it was great.

First, the main character paints movie posters, and I want one of them, badly. Up on the wall was one for The Thing, and another unrecognizable Clint Eastwood movie. They even poke fun at movie posters that have poor Photoshopped artwork (just two heads put together). Good job Stephen King.

And things get rolling pretty quickly; nice, efficient introductions to characters let you know what type of people they are without much effort. Introduction of the mist itself within what - 15 minutes of the opening? was great. It is quickly established that the mist is bad, there are bad things in it and you had better start freaking out.

And this is great: the whole movie takes place inside the grocery store; you become intimate with the characters and can follow their somewhat rapid decline into insanity on levels you can relate to. The "religious-nut" in the trailer plays a more prominent role than I thought, and now the movie is a commentary on how civilization relies too much on technology and is still full of primal instincts, most notably getting caught up in "the mob" without even realizing it. The most normal people around can go crazy very, very quickly.

So there was that, and there are also the creatures in the mist. Just to confirm, you do get to see what's in the mist, basically. There are creature: you know from the trailer there are bugs, and they were small. But there are bugs, and they become huge. And they are all computer animated. They don't look bad per se, but this isn't top notch CGI work. Will it affect the movie down the road? I hope not. Dave mentioned that if this movie was made twenty years ago it would be a cult classic and I think that sums it up perfectly. This is especially true for the effects: throw in some really awesome, classic creature effects and you're golden.

The pacing of the movie, the slow fades to black throughout, and the characters are all great. Most importantly you can believe these characters for who they are, and why do they what they do. I can't spoil the ending for you but let me say it is disturbing, and perfect. This movie is not pulling punches and we thank everyone involved for not doing so. Now it's time to go read the novel.

Unfortunately I didn't watch any movies this past week. Nor did I really play many video games! So what did I do? Television...gym...and lots of Christmas shopping. I went out a couple of nights and have almost completed my shopping. It's at the point now where all I can do is wonder around and find random things for people, which is nice.

However, I guess there was some Guitar Hero played. I was late in the release schedule picking up Guitar Hero II, as just a few weeks later Guitar Hero III came and (and purchased, of course). Subsequently, number II got pushed aside and we only really played the new one for hours on end. Well, after essentially conquering the game on Medium (and I just cannot play Hard for the life of me) I went back to number II.

It doesn't feel like it, but you can see a lot of improvement in your own skill when you look at your old scores. There were songs in there that I only managed to get about 40,000 points on. I probably never played that song again as it was just a roadblock in getting to more songs. Plus, it was probably quite difficult. However, now I go back and just devastate the song, getting about 150,000 points on it! And I wonder why there was so much difficulty the first time around, but that's the way things are.

Which is why I really appreciate these games: your skills do improve, and it's clearly evident in the finely tuned point system, which is seemingly basic on the surface but is an actuality...more complex? No, it really is quite basic. It's the star bonus points that really get things going and will make a big difference. And it's critically important as to when you activate it. That is, if you're going for points now.

And that's exactly what I do now: try to get 100% notes hit and massive scores. Because I'm stuck on medium. Like I mentioned earlier, I just can't do hard mode. It's the movement of the hand: I forget where my fingers are. I truly appreciate all guitar players for their skill. So I'm stuck on medium but that's alright: you have to come to terms with your maximum skill level, right? I'm just a "medium" guy; not hard, and definitely not expert. What's upsetting is that I can activate hyperspeed mode on medium and still do well, so I know it's not the speed of the fret board, it's that dirty orange note.

I could go into the differences between II and III to a great level of detail but what remains is the same: the core of the game is simple and to the point. Hit the notes, get points, activate star power. I've read some reading that has mentioned that III is a bit easier than II. Is this true? On the surface, it looks to be true, but I have one feeling: Guitar Hero II has placed harder songs in the sets. We're talking all those punk and real-heavy metal songs that are just not getting the same representation in Guitar Hero III. So kudos to all your metal guitarists: your songs are tough. And they kind of suck, sorry.

I just may have to take the plunge and purchase some of the song packs to get more tunes going on, as the wait for number four sets in...or at least, the wait to get Rock Band!

At World's End

Remember really enjoying the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie? And remember being disappointed at the second one, because of the cliff-hanger and the stupid hijinks? Now remember as you're bored watching the third one. That's the way I feel about it, at least.

I loved the first one, if not for anything else than to see skeletons doing stuff. And of course in retrospect, I really appreciate its simplicity. The third Pirates movie is really long. I felt like the movie had barely started an hour and fifteen minutes in, and to realize there is almost double that left, the prospect of turning it off to finish watching another day was strong. But, I kept watching, as the movie did pick up thankfully.

Perhaps it was just the state of mind I was in, but I really couldn't comprehend what was going on for the first while. People are dead, they are coming back to life, let's travel to hell, essentially? I don't know. There are pirate lords now? And then a pirate king? Everybody is being turned into a captain and nobody is bad-ass anymore. Jack Sparrow is kept in neutral as he is lost within the convoluted storyline and Kiera is just weird and Orlando Bloom is barely there: mentally at least. I'm not even sure what he was doing in this movie, to be honest: you could tell he doesn't want to be there anymore, and they wrote his character into a mis-guided idiot.

Anyway, you can see that I didn't really enjoy the movie. But I did enjoy the special effects, of course, and the final action sequence (for the most part). I also appreciated that there were no scenes where people were trapped inside balls rolling down hills for twenty minutes.

Gojira

My dad had a passion for movies that he passed down to me by getting me excited to watch certain film series such as The Omen, Die Hard and Godzilla. There was definitely not shortage of Godzilla movies to be rented from the local video stores, and we certainly took advantage of that.

I couldn't tell you what the first Godzilla movie I saw was, but my favourite was probably Godzilla 1985. We most likely watched them on Beta, a format of which I still have a love for. Mothra, Rodan and even the son of Godzilla all held special places in my heart as I grew up to watch them over and over.


Unfortunately over the years my love for the movies have fallen a bit to the wayside and I come to appreciate other fare. And after getting quite excited for the American version in 1998, my disappointment would be felt for years as I would quickly forget about the big green guy. A few new Godzilla movies have come out in the past few years and they have been good, but it was a very surprising Christmas gift I received last year that gave me the nostalgic feeling for Godzilla again.

It is the Japanese version of the first Godzilla movie: Gojira. The movie was heavily re-edited, even adding in new scenes, new story and eliminating many things for the American market back in '56. Of course I had watched it as a child, and had no idea there was an original version out there. This new DVD set had both cuts on it, but it was the original, Japanese version that got me excited.

Unfortunately my arrogance of DVD prevented me from watching it until a few nights ago. I couldn't be happier with the fact that I like DVDs again, because this is a real gem. If you enjoy movies, and Godzilla, you must watch this film!

It feels weird to say this, but the special effects stand up to today's standards. Sure, the film is in tough shape and I'm sure that hides things, but Godzilla looked great. It's all in simplicity: they don't have him running around, doing fancy moves, he is what he is: a slow movie gigantic monster that shuffles his feet through buildings, and setting fire to his surroundings. They don't go overboard, and it helps that they don't use stop-motion photography.

And the story is character-driven: not so much about people just reacting to Godzilla, but reacting to a series of horrible, catastrophic events and how that affects their lives. A young couple planning on marriage spar with the bride-to-be's father over moral issues (i.e. is it right to just destroy Godzilla, or more important to find out why Godzilla is?). The same girl is faced with priority issues: betray a friendship to help civilization?

This movie is not subtle about it's messages, either. Clearly it warns of the dangers of using nuclear weapons, something of which was wiped almost clear from the American version. It warns that if these nuclear weapons could awaken something as fierce as Godzilla, what else could it awaken? And I don't think they were referencing giant monsters, but instead the monster within ourselves.

These messages would have been even more relevant to Japan when the movie was just released, not even ten years after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (characters in the film even mention surviving the event, only to be met by this new monstrosity).

Of course the movie, being so old and of "that" quality, it can be a bit slow and tedious to sit through. But every minute is worth it for the final attack: which apparently runs 13 minutes long and is just destruction. It's not spectacular like current blockbuster effects-driven scenes, but it is moving. Then comes the time for sacrifice and even more sadness as they are left with only one option of getting rid of Godzilla. Indeed, this Godzilla movie was more serious, sad and just plain real than any other that would come after.

Playstation 3: The Movie Machine

The other day somebody asked me how I'm enjoying the Playstation 3. I purchased it about three weeks ago, and have probably turned it on about once every two or three days since. Good sign, right? Well, that depends on how you look at it.

Immediately answering the question, I said "it's great at playing movies." And to that, there is no doubt. Previously I mentioned how impressed I was with its upscaling abilities with DVD, and of course, it's great at playing Blu-Rays, which look fine. And really, that's about all I've done with the system. It came with Motor Storm, which I popped in and played once. Not overly impressed with it. Sure, the graphics are fine and the sound is standard; the racing is neat but I just couldn't care about it at all. Perhaps it's just too run of the mill.

Are there any other games available? Anything good? There may be a couple but I really don't feel like playing them. Without a doubt I went into the PS3 with Blu-Ray in mind, and that's how I've been treating it. I downloaded some demos but have yet to play them. In fact, I now use it as my primary CD player too! Every day I look online to see what other media functionality can be done with the system or will be coming up.

So as a media player, it's pretty good. It's silent, it can be turned on with a remote (a real annoyance when using an HTPC) and it's smooth. As for it's game playing abilities: couldn't tell you.

And a good point was raised: if you are in the next-gen, you probably have a 360. If all your friends are on the 360, you will get one too, as the structure to play online, compare games and whatnot is so slick on Microsoft's system, it's difficult to get along without it. I want practically the exact same system on the PS3. But nobody I know has one to even test out the service. Ah well.

I'm sure in about a year there will be some great games that show off the true potential of the PS3, but until then, we're much better off playing games on the 360. This is especially true for cross-platform games: if you're going to get the same experience, why not go with the 360 and get some achievement points and compare with friends? Until then, I will continue to be extremely happy with the PS3 as it spins high definition movies and treats me to a wonderful visualization as I play my apparently obsolete CDs.