Pompeii

My parents have always been big movie fans, often seeing everything that comes to the theatre regardless if
it's good or bad. Whenever I go visit them, I eagerly anticipate watching a movie in one of their many recliners, embraced by the heavy blanket embroidered with majestic golden retrievers. The air conditioning typically runs high, so the blanket is needed, and the end result is a cozy movie watching experience that only mom could provide.

On a recent visit, my father was listing off the movies that we could watch. I'd seen many of them, but voted for Pompeii. My perception of the movie made it seem like a good match, and it didn't matter that everybody said the movie was terrible. If anything, that works for the movie in these situations. I often can't take my mom's word for the quality of a film, as she tends to enjoy it all - unless it's overly violent, vulgar or offensive. Pompeii is a PG-13 rated film that has been scientifically melded together to be as inoffensive as possible: you won't find much blood here (although there is violence), a lack of skin, no sign of band language, and simple leading characters with names you don't need to remember.

The story is familiar for anybody who has watched movies in the past, and the Pompeii name is going to be familiar to many who learned about the disaster in school. To catch everyone up though on the story, Pompeii was an ancient city that was devastated by the eruption of the nearby Mount Vesuvius in the year 79AD. Instant death occured for most of the inhabitants, estimated at around twenty thousand. The city was then covered in many metres of ash, where it would remain for another thousand years before the city (and a neighboring town) were rediscovered, so to speak. What you see in many images of are the result of injecting plaster into the digs, which exposed "perfectly" preserved people and animals, in various living and dying states. The images are both fascinating and unsettling; a reminder of how fragile life is and how humanity seems to love living on the edge. Indeed, there are over 3 million people living close to Vesuvius now.

So how do you fit that into a full length feature film? Well, you first watch Gladiator a few times to figure out what worked for it, then remove those elements. Halfway through your film, have the volcano explode and we can proceed to run frantically around, and hope that our hero gets away with his girl, and the villain is taken out with a gigantic, burning rock. Use Pompeii for the backdrop, because people will actually recognize the name. It's a recipe for success, right? With a budget reportedly hanging around $100 million, the film would gross just $23 million ($98 mil internationally) to become classified as a gigantic flop. And unfortunately it's not even the type of movie that will live well afterward, perhaps picking up a cult following of sorts. No, this is an example of a movie that will be forgotten, only coming up as a footnote in articles describing the history of the ancient town.

Is the movie all that bad? It is - and it's not. For a formulaic, inoffensive romp of special effects, it could have done much worse. It's just that the story has been done before, and this brings nothing new to the table. Gladiator was released in 2000, was a brilliant film and still in the minds of movie-goers, so a film like this may seem like a bit of a cheaper, weaker rip off. What stands out then are the elements missing from Pompeii that really made Gladiator shine, which is nearly everything: real emotion, motivation, context, acting, pacing, etc. The list goes on. Pompeii is empty and harmless. But it may not be fair to compare this to Gladiator in the end: Pompeii could have done much worse. Kit Harrington and Emily Browning were decent enough, and it's always nice to see Jared Harris on screen. I haven't seen Carrie-Ann Moss in anything in what seems like ages. Keither Sutherland though, damn. If anybody could be accused of phoning in a performance, this is definitely it. I'm thinking the movie would have been better off without his character at all, and instead spend more time on building the chemistry between our main love interests and our hero's rise from orphan to slave, from slave to gladiator, and from gladiator to free man. The shining star in this film has to be Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, who plays another gladiator who must do battle one more time before earning his own freedom. You may recognize him as Eko from LOST, or from other films like Thor, and The Mummy Returns. Let's get a Pompeii prequel that focuses entirely on Atticus' story. Now that, could be great.

Godzilla

There is a tremendous amount of guilt when I tell myself - and others - that Godzilla has been an institution in my life since, well, as long as I can remember. In the mid-eighties my father and I would spend an inordinate amount of time watching Godzilla movies on Betamax. My favourite around the time was GODZILLA 1985, although I haven't seen it in years (and reviews indicate it may be one of the worst). The guilt comes from not having watched any for a solid period of time, perhaps fifteen years or more; the only exception was taking a break to watch GODZILLA 2000 and of course, the abomination of Hollywood's 1998 remake. For one of my birthdays, my friend obtained a large amount of the franchise films and we watched a few, and it was all new to me. It turns out I don't know much about Godzilla, but that hasn't stopped me from loving the character, or falling into a warm, nostalgic bliss when I recall Sunday afternoon's spent in front of the black and white set watching the King of Monsters' exploits as a child.



There's no better way to break back into the Godzilla franchise than experiencing it on the largest scale possible, the IMAX screen. If a large screen was ever needed, it's to fit the scale of Godzilla himself. So it was a Monday afternoon when my friend and I undertook the mission, plopped down our cash and strolled into the IMAX screen. The ominous voice told us it was time to put on our 3D glasses; we obliged, and the famous IMAX countdown began. When it hit 2, then 1, a quiet moan turned into a monstrous thunder of rage and fear inducing terror that only the voice of Godzilla could pull off. The roar of Godzilla brought shivers down my spine. I was instantly transported back in time as nostalgia reached out and caressed the back of my head. At this point I had a feeling that this was going to be it: I was going to love this movie regardless if it was terrible or not. If all I got was an amazing rendition of the King himself, with more of that mighty roar, I would be satisfied.

So at this point, my opinion may be skewed into bias. I loved this film. The slow build-up and reveal of the King of Monsters was perfect. Godzilla himself looked incredible: he had all the appearances of the Godzilla we've come to know and love, and none of the giant lizard monstrosity that appeared in Roland Emmerich's 1998 attempt. His sound was spot on, and loud, just as it should be. This is exactly how a young Ryebone would picture Godzilla in the future: larger, louder, full of menace and warmth. Satisfaction was finally here.

In the 1998 version they attempted to make Godzilla the villain, which he inherently will be, as he tromps through cities causing death and destruction. And that's how Godzilla first appeared, in 1954 (and 1956 in the American butchering). Godzilla represents the nuclear threat, a man-made terror that we unleash on ourselves and once out, are unable to stop. This remake takes the focus away from monster-as-man's-creation and puts humanity as the semi-hapless victim (they are partially responsible, but the film focuses elsewhere), which is a significant change that doesn't really detract from the quality of the film, but definitely takes away potential, meaningful depth that could help the film long term.

It's unfortunate then as well, that the acting stood out as particularly terrible. Our main protagonist was barely that, played with wooden stoicism by Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who you may remember from the Kick-Ass films. He may be a victim of the script, which doesn't give him a lot to work with: his character is fairly passive and seems to wander from location to location, coming into close contact with more important characters through sheer chance than anything else. It would have all been forgiven though, if it wasn't for the great job that Elizabeth Olson did opposite Johnson's character. The scene was lopsided, awkward and seemingly cut short out of embarrassment. Bryan Cranston delivers, of course, but he doesn't get nearly as much screen time as he deserves and what the film actually needs. I would have thought that Ken Watanabe would be more significant as well, but he seems to be stuck in a daze throughout the film. I'll blame the script for that one. When you boil it down, it seems there were quite a few missed opportunities: they had the right actors, but didn't do the right things with them.

A slow build-up to Godzilla and his fight scenes may put off the modern viewer, but they are faithful to the Toho films of past and allowed the anticipation to build to a solid pay off, although we could have used a bit more (who wouldn't want more, really). There are times when the camera seems to cut off too early, but I feel as though it executed properly. Gareth Edwards was able to capture Godzilla's character and makes us see why he's named the King of Monsters. It doesn't blatantly set us up for a sequel - although there will be one - and stands tall in the franchise. The problems and missed opportunities will not get in the way of the child-like awe and giddiness that I felt throughout the film. It's an excited state that I haven't felt at the movies in quite some time, and seems rather fitting that it comes back here.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

That the general public wasn't ready for a Spider-Man reboot ten years after the release of the "original" in 2002 is proven by the relatively poor box office numbers the new one has managed to do. However, I think it's safe to say that everyone is happy that it wasn't as bad as Spider-Man 3, which was a boneheaded mess (for the most part). I didn't really care for The Amazing Spider-Man in 2012, but it wasn't terrible. I like to think that it would have done much better if it wasn't overshadowed by Marvel's runaway juggernaut of The Avengers films. And as time keeps on churning, the need to bring the largest Marvel properties back into the fold of the home studio is becoming more pertinent with every release. Sony did a good job twelve years ago, but Marvel came in and disrupted the whole thing. We wanted a crossover with X-Men as well back then, but the fact that different studios licensed our beloved characters all but cemented that this will not happen. Enter Marvel, who turned the comic book movie industry on it's head. With the advent of Spider-Man 2, Sony is talking about a similar structure, albeit with purely Spidey related characters - the only ones they are licensed for. They're talking Sinister Six and spin off movies, so it's relevant to look at this singular movie not only as a Spider-Man sequel, but as a setting off point for a gargantuan franchise of movies, television series and toy lines.


The first movie in this series did not impress me. I felt as though they messed with the origin of Spider-Man just a bit too much: they took him away from the wrestling ring yes, but what really got me was Peter Parker as a character. That is to say, he was ass. And I don't want to discredit that Parker was an ass in the original story, but he had good reason for it (kind of). My issue is that Parker is an ass throughout the entire film. He's kind of a passive aggressive bully with a jerk attitude that just didn't fly with me. I chalked it up to modern times: this is a remake for the current generation. I realized that Spider-Man was not being written for me anymore, but molded into a persona that current kids can relate to. So yeah, I'm just too old now, great. There were also a few ridiculous elements in the movie, and maybe too-convenient coincidences but overall, it was a decent ride, just not entirely my thing. As a child, I collected Spider-Man comics like it was nobody's business - they make up the bulk of my collection. And today, when I look at a modern comic or storyline, I become bewildered, and swing back to my old collection of eighties and nineties comics where I find comfort in the writing and art styles (except Spectacular Spider-Man, the art always bothered me in that title).

So I was pleasantly surprised in The Amazing Spider-Man 2. It was pretty good!

First, there was the acting, which I think has improved greatly since the first iteration. Garfield is definitely hitting a comfort spot here and has dropped the smug, jerk like mannerisms. Emma Stone turns in another good performance, as she has more to work with in this film. What it equates to real, genuine (I'm buying it) on screen chemistry which helps the film quite a bit and actually leaves the original trilogy in the dust (many moments between Maguire and Dunst were just weird). The rest of the cast, including Foxx as Electro, is full of talent and put in decent performances.

This isn't a Spider-Man origin story, which helps (for me) my enjoyment of the film. We've sat through enough already, so moving on to something new feels refreshing. Tackling new villains is perfect, although I will say that I don't feel as though Electro had much motivation or screen time. The same could be said for other villains, although I appreciate that Rhino merely book-ended the film, which lends itself to appearing in future movies. It's become pretty defacto that our favourite villains will be enhanced through technology, as opposed to their original powers. X-Men set the standard for costumes that will work on screen, and this is no different, as the villains take on somewhat realistic looks, although I'm glad to see them go over the top a bit. Electro looked very cool, although it reminded me too much of a recent video game release. You could easily say the movie dragged on too long - and it did. The movie's plot didn't necessarily focus on what I want it to, and spent a lot of time on Peter and Gwen's relationship. Which is great and all, but I got it already, you know? The movie isn't necessarily subtle, and because of this, I feel it wastes some time here and there.

Spider-Man, as depicted on the streets fighting crime, has matured a bit in his juvenility: he's quick with his wit, and is more comfortable with both criminals and fighting. He's tormented though, and in wanting to protect everyone he pushes them away. With great power, right? I'm really looking forward to the third film now, to see where Spider-Man's actual character goes: they introduce villains but they also grow Spidey's character, so we should have a fairly solid trilogy. Then where? Well, they were talking about Sinister Six, which is always classic. They've firmly established that all these great villains will be a byproduct of Oscorp special projects working in the dark, which is fine I suppose; it's a popular comic book trope. Spin off movies? Maybe we can get a Black Cat film to help fill the lack of female heroes on screen. He has one of the largest, most diverse rogues gallery in the industry, so there is a lot to tap into. We got a glimpse of a solid Sandman story in Spider-Man 3 (I believe - if the rumours are true - that he was the focus of the third film, when the studio forced Raimi to include more villains and plot than the movie could sustain) that was driven not by a greedy criminal, but a man trying to make ends and doing anything for his family. Done right and with some actual character study, there could be a long list of movies featuring Spider-Man villains that could lead into a mixed movie. They could do for villains what The Avengers did for heroes, and because it hasn't really been done before, it would feel fresh.

Sorcerer

As I "review" films I often make a note of what my expectations were going into the film, and how those
expectations affect my level of enjoyment. It's typically an inverse relationship with low expectations often resulting in a high enjoyment of the film. That is to say, it's easier to enjoy a movie if you bring in low expectations, as it's harder to enjoy a movie with high expectations. Oftentimes, I think of it as a crutch, and it's easy to dismiss or praise a film based on that binary scale. Every so often though, I bring in expectations not of general quality, but regarding specific elements, which can either be met or not met, and in turn, my satisfaction could go either way. For an early example, I look back to the original Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. In this case, I knew very little and didn't expect very much, but I did want to see some great skeletal action - you could say I wanted an update on the old Clash of the Titans skeleton combat that I so thoroughly enjoyed as a child. I got it, and much more (did anyone expect such a clever performance from Depp though, really).

Over the past few weeks I've been keeping tabs on the latest Blu-ray releases, and saw a movie named Sorcerer come up on a frequent basis. I hadn't heard of the film before, and for some reason, I never sought out any information on it. I would see the cover art - and this is crucial - in thumbnail form alongside other April releases, but I would never click on it. I saw news of different editions, and discovered that the film is from 1977 and directed by William Friedkin, a name of whom I did not recognize (although in retrospect I should have, being the director of The Exorcist). None of this was on purpose, but it ended up being quite the experiment in what your expectations can do to a film.

I'll allow you to stop reading now if you don't want to know more about the movie - an effort for me to pass onto you the ability to view the movie with a completely blank slate. (So spoilers ensue, of course.)

Movie Collection part 6: The Third Era

The Second Era of movie collecting for me would be marked by the wrap up of The Great DVD Purge, which began in 2005 and ended a short year later in 2006. For the record, the First Era would be everything before DVD technology, so all those VHS movies I bought and movies that were crudely recorded off television. It could also be marked by a shift in the rules of buying. I developed a DVD Counting Standard before, but the rules of acquisition were never clearly defined, nor would they be. But there would be - and has been - a value in placing, at least, some loose guidelines to my own buying habits.

I wouldn't say that I was out of control with DVDs. Financially, it was difficult to do so. Today, with a decent amount of disposable income, combined with easier access and an abundance of special editions create a perfect recipe to get carried away. I tried putting some limitations on myself.

Don't buy a movie that is less than one year old.

This may seem odd, but I wanted to ensure that I truly appreciated the movie and had an interest in seeing it again before buying. This could be done to avoid any kinds of duds that would begin to litter the collection. It also addressed specifically my habit of loving every movie I saw in the theatre - the entire theatre going experience would skew my score on a film - and would result in me buying a movie upon home release based on that experience. Sometimes I would see a movie again at home after buying, and wonder, "why?"

While the collection quality could be increased, there was a flip side in that the addition of special, time limited editions of films that I truly did enjoy were out of grasp. There are a few brilliant movies that have sub-par releases in my collection now because of this rule, but there are also a decidedly higher ratio of "quality" films that I'm proud of.

Stop Caring About Editions

As a result of the one year rule, I told myself to stop caring about what edition I had. It was about the movie, moreso than anything else. When the lights are off, it doesn't matter how many extras are there, or what type of packaging the movie is in: I'm here to enjoy the movie itself. The only thing that could grab me though were remasters where the audio/visual quality was better than a previous release, but I had to carefully weigh those purchases. Another benefit of waiting at least a year was that those remastered editions were typically coming out during the time I wanted to buy.

The rule was steady until the collecting bug really bit me and I started seeing more "special" editions than I was accustomed to. What ended up happening is some catalogue releases coming out with special editions, like SE7EN, in its digibook package. I love the movie, so I was going to buy it, and the edition was properly mastered and so happened to be in a format that I loved. It would inevitably lead to me considering digibook editions more often than not, for the sake of the collection - although, I still had to enjoy the movie.

Steelbooks are a Scam

I was pretty negative toward steelbook releases initially, as I viewed them as cash-ins on what amounted to the exact same release of a normal Bluray, but with "steel" packaging. Some movies lacked the extra features that their regular counterparts had, affirming that you were paying a premium for the package alone. The marketing for them left a bad taste in my mouth as well, as they were typically touted at Future Shop as exclusive. It was easy to avoid most of them of course, as they would be released for newer movies that I wasn't going to buy anyway.

INCEPTION was probably my first steelbook. It broke two of my guidelines (being recent and a steelbook) but it was a gift, so the guidelines were moot. However, it had an unexpected side effect of being a special edition that contained just the movie, which went with my overall goal of just enjoying the movie itself. They typically feature better artwork, and makes for a much nicer display on the shelf. I realized the error of my way and slowly began picking up more steelbooks, although I always made sure it was the movie I was buying foremost, rather than the packaging. It also doesn't help that digibook editions are few and far between (my preferred packaging).

Love the Movie

This was easier back when I started, but becomes more difficult: once you buy all your favourite fims, where do you go? Well, instead of buying only 10/10 movies, you buy 9/10, and so on. I've never been partial to rating films in that way either, and determined that there was no set rule here and that I could simply buy a film to enjoy the film for any number of merits.

No Blind Buys

This was probably made in an effort to save money, of course, and to ensure the quality of my collection was up to my own standards. But, I break it from time to time. I find myself downloading a movie to watch first, then going out to buy it if I find it enjoyable. While this may be reprehensible to many, it's definitely operating in the gray area and without a doubt, has had the benefit of increasing my total purchases and expanding my interests into artists and genres that I normally wouldn't visit. It's also a lot easier to blind buy a movie when it's cheap enough and has enough positive reviews.

Embrace the Hunt

This is a more recent guideline that's always been in place, but never brought to the forefront. Embracing the hunt is just that: enjoy the search for those movies. Enjoy looking for the deals. Enjoy looking for movies that will fit into your collection. Enjoy looking for things you've never seen. The list is long, and it was kind of there to prevent me from just going online and ordering everything I wanted, especially in terms of pre-orders. Not only do you support local establishments, you get the satisfaction of the kill. Unfortunately, unbeatable prices will often win out and it's nearly always cheaper to buy online.

So in the end, the guidelines were a nice thought but many of them have been thrown out, or at least, bent a bit. I didn't hesitate to buy PACIFIC RIM when it came out, and I haven't regretted the purchase nor the broken rule. I'm getting into steelbook editions: it creates goals during the hunt, and is fun to research. This goes for collecting day to day as well. I'll buy equal parts special and bare bone editions of movies.

There are so many instances where your guidelines are going to be broken: maybe you are collecting every film from a certain director, and you like 90% of them. Do you buy the rest? In time, I can see myself doing exactly that.

There are few other guidelines too, including the issue of upgrading. Typically I don't, unless the release is significantly better (see FULL METAL JACKET, for example). In terms of price, I like to avoid anything over $20 (unless it's a high quality product or a favourite movie), and when a decent title goes under $10, there becomes very little guarantee that I can resist it.

MOVIE COLLECTION

part 1: The Beginning

part 2: Collecting

part 3: The Great DVD Purge

part 4: High Definition

part 5: Current DVDs

part 6: The Third Era

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension

Wow, that title is a mouth full. And so is everything about this mid-eighties movie. Let's take a look at a description of the film:

Adventurer/surgeon/rock musician Buckaroo Banzai and his band of men, the Hong Kong Cavaliers, take on evil alien invaders from the 8th dimension.

You know you're in for a ride, and I was certainly aware of the film for a while because of its cult following,
but nothing could prepare me for what I was about to see. To say that Buckaroo is a movie ahead of its time may be a bit misleading, as everything about this film seems to be a product of its era. The eighties are screaming through on this one, although I will admit - perhaps with all the throwbacks to the last half century of sci-fi and action - that there is a certain timeless quality to it. Apparently famed film critic Gene Siskel noted upon release that this would become a cult classic, and he was completely right. The story of Buckaroo Banzai is an interesting one.

Buckaroo starts off explosively, and doesn't really let up throughout the run time. As the opening credits come up, I recognize many of the actors. My friend notes that the movie is well stacked, and he's right: Peter Weller, John Lithgow, Jeff Goldblum, Christopher Lloyd and Clancy Brown were some of the most recognizable names. Once the movie gets going you'll see many familiar faces, including Mike from Breaking Bad and the late, great character actor Vincent Schiavelli. From the description of the movie, we know Buckaroo is a renown surgeon, so why not just jump right into that for the opening scene? He's a neurosurgeon operating on somebody, and just as quickly as we enter that scene, we move on to Buckaroo piloting a vehicle on the salt flats in a speed run. It's not any normal speed run though, as he goes off course (after breaking the speed of sound) and with the help of a little device called the "oscillation overthruster" he is able to travel through the side of a mountain and into the titled 8th dimension, which catches the attention of aliens (presumably from the 8th dimension) who just so happen to be orbiting the planet keeping tabs on Team Banzai - I mean, if aliens were to keep tabs on anybody on Earth, it would have to be this group of multi-talented adventurers, right? Right after breaking into the 8th dimension, Buckaroo treats us to his other talent as a rock musician, where he meets the love interest of the film.

It's a bit of a rollercoaster ride from the beginning, where nothing seems to make sense but at the same time, everything makes sense. You take things for granted: Goldblum's character is wearing a bright red cowboy outfit the entire duration of the movie, for no apparent reason. But it's not questioned in world, and we continue to roll on. This happens a lot, as we jump from scene to scene, with bits of action and ominous villain speeches spread throughout. Lithgow is a genius of evil, deranged expressions. He takes on an Italian accent (most of the time) and could very well be overacting, but it fits in here perfectly, and is a nice opposite to Peter Weller's cool, calm and collected hero. We get a bit of a They Live (1988) situation where the aliens - once exposed - seem to be visible to some but not visible to others. I wasn't entirely clear on their motivations, aside from protecting their dimension - although there are good aliens and bad aliens and...yeah. I won't try to explain things because it doesn't necessarily make sense as it's going on. The movie borders on the absurd most of the time, and you can't help but go along for the enjoyable ride.

Halfway through the film we paused and I made mention that I thought this movie was directed at children back in mid eighties. The thought was questioned, but my line of reasoning would appeal to the fantastical nature of the film. Picture yourself as Buckaroo: you're a super multifaceted guy who everyone adores, everybody wants to work with and women love, who has a direct line to the President's office and YOU tell him what's going on. You're not charged with saving the world, no, it's your job and you're doing it with some of your best friends. You live in a mansion with mad laboratories, you have a samurai sword and an endless supply of gadgets, in addition to your own tour bus and friends with helicopters. You play it cool all the time, and when you don't want to talk about something, the scene ends. You get to make the tough decisions, and sometimes your friends are going to fall but you remain stoic and charge forward: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Your friends rely on you, but you can rely on them as well: they remain loyal and talented on their own.

What it all amounts to is an ideal fantasy for any child, as Buckaroo displays qualities that anyone can aspire to. In that, the character, and the movie, become incredibly accessible and intriguing as you'll have no problem placing yourself in the lead role, or even any of his friends. As you watch the film, you can envision your own friends filling out all the roles, and even an enemy or two for good measure. Imagine the more active imagination of a child viewing the movie and forming their own adventures, formed on the structure of the universe that this movie paints. When the end credits come up, proudly displayed is a promised return of Buckaroo versus the World Crime League, but alas, it was never meant to be. I can't help but think how disheartening this would have been for a child at the time, and yes, how I actually want to see more of these wacky adventures myself. And if it wasn't for the children, then perhaps more for the coming of age teenager, especially for those with "geeky" fascinations and interests. I think, in retrospect, the movie can and does appeal to all, as I was reminded of simpler times when I was younger and would enact with friends bizarre worlds and creations from our imaginations.

The movie came out in 1984 and bombed at the box office, causing it's studio, Sherwood Productions, to go out of business. They reportedly had a budget of $12 million and ended up with $6 million at the box office even with fairly positive reviews. I can imagine the film would be very profitable in the following 30 years, with DVD special editions coming about. But at the time, the sequel would be shelved, and apparently attempts from other studios to go on to make it (or any other film) were unsuccessful due to complex licensing and rights issues. It also came out around a time where other, larger movies were dominating a the box office, including Star Trek III, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, and Ghostbusters. Stiff competition for sure, and with a complete lack of traditional advertising, the writing was on the wall from the very beginning. It's actually quite nice to read quotes from the likes of Lithgow talking about how much fun the character was to play, and his fondness for the film after all these years. A bit disappointed that it has taken me so long to get around to watching this cult film, but on the 30th anniversary, I'm glad to have done it.

For further reading, I recommend Wikipedia, of course.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

"Chris Evans is a wall of a man."

If you're going to take anything away from this movie, I guess that would be suitable. The guy is massive, most likely impossibly so, but it plays well to the new found depiction of the Captain's displayed feats of strength throughout the film. That's not to say he didn't display some pretty impressive feats beforehand, but I feel as though it keeps intensifying every time he's on screen. In the sequel, The Winter Soldier, we get treated to the Captain blasting through walls and tearing down obstacles with ease, as well as taking care of regular villains with ease. We feel the weight, and the power, of The Winter Soldier himself, which makes his match up with Captain more significant. Yes, the action is incredible - as it should be - but there is much more to this movie.

Part of the issue of Captain America is that I frankly don't know much about him. Yes, I grew up collecting comic books but I never read the Captain, or any other of The Avengers. So Marvel's multi-phase rollout of an Avengers centric movie universe is two things: exciting and nerve-wracking. Exciting because it's new (to me), and nerve-wracking because I feel this tremendous guilt about not knowing enough about what's on screen, and that I'm going to miss out on little bits of fan service. I also get some people (who know my background with comics) asking for more information, but I really have none - although I will typically try and act like I know something, at least. However, there is the stigma around the Captain, in where he draws comparison to the negative traits of DC's All-American Superman: he's a goody two shoes, with incorruptible moral guidelines that put them both on the side of frustration, especially for today's modern darkly driven characters. This is beginning to shift, as we saw in last year's Man of Steel movie, and was tackled well enough during television's Smallville, where Clark's bridled morals were often put to the test. When done properly, it can create compelling story. And you'll notice that I don't have any Captain America examples to utilize; instead, all I can lean on is the general, mainstream pop-culture driven sentiment that many of my friends have expressed, which in general, is that Captain America is a boring, unbending muscle of American patriotism.

It would come as no surprise then - with this negatively skewed outlook on our hero - that we are all so pleasantly surprised to have actually enjoyed the Captain's foray into the film industry. I recall clearly not only the doubt and hesitation, but the questioning of how good a Captain America film could be. Then, we saw it. And we were incredibly impressed. Captain America: The First Avenger provided the origin of Steven Rogers becoming the super soldier during World War II. We weren't inundated with pro-America messages and morals: we were treated to a good character who wanted to fight the good fight in any way he could. It didn't matter who the villain was; Rogers wanted to fight for his friends who were dying, and to put down any bullies - a battle he was losing his entire life. When he is giving the opportunity, he takes it: injecting himself with a super-soldier serum of sorts, he takes on the role of protector. Not necessarily protecting his country, but protecting his fellow soldiers. What I liked about this film, and Captain America, was that they don't cover up some of the atrocities of war: he's a soldier, accepts that fatalities will happen, but does his best to prevent them while maintaining the integrity of the mission. That is to say, he's not going to get all emo when his best buds die in battle: they all know the risks. The movie also follows the classic underdog structure, which is difficult to not appreciate.

All that being said, it's easy in The First Avenger to do the good thing: Hitler and Red Skull are truly evil, and there are clear goals to go after. In The Winter Soldier, the situation becomes more clouded. The threat here isn't alien or foreign, it's our own government (well, the American government at least). Marvel really pulls something off here: he makes Captain America relatable, as both he and us are learning about surveillance, secret operations and what our government has planned for us for the first time (or at least, bringing those elements into the spotlight). The plot becomes incredibly relevant in light of all the leaks of classified documents, and the attempt of government to push aside privacy at the expense of "catching the terrorists" through complex bills. The world in The First Avenger was - for lack of a better word - simpler. The modern day, including the one depicted in The Winter Soldier, is rife with complexities that require some careful thinking and cautious treading. Captain American wants to do what's right, but he may have aligned himself with forces that operate in the grey. His moral compass is put to the test throughout, as he finds himself alone for the first time as he is being chased and unable to entirely trust anybody, including his allies.

With all the complexities and parallels drawn between current events and what goes down on film, The Winter Soldier doesn't fail to impress on a more basic, entertainment driven visceral level either. We get all the action and explosions you could ask for, with incredibly visual effects. According to IMDb trivia, the filmmakers tried to make as many practical effects as possible, which definitely show when Captain is driving his bodies through walls and tossing aside soldiers like oversized papercraft. It's all blended seamlessly into the grander scale things, like the new, gigantic helicarriers.

I have many people telling me that The Winter Soldier stands as their favourite Marvel movie, and I would tend to lean in that direction as well. It has a beautiful mix of polished characters, conflict, humour, effects and continuity that I don't believe we've seen in cinemas before. What they are doing with the Marvel Cinematic Universe is truly unique: they've perfected the formula but aren't skimping out on quality and giving care to every detail. While it may seem like we're getting too many movies, I would disagree: I look forward to the next installment every time.

A Night of Catan: Seafarers

We've been playing Catan for quite a few months now, nearly every weekend. With the addition of another roomate in the house, we have the ability to play Catan nearly at will (we've never tried two player). So a few Friday's ago, the three of us found ourselves playing the vanilla game of Catan. Red was cleaning up in a serious way, taking all three games. The second game was a farce, perhaps my worst. Myself (Green) and Brown left the board open to Red: we both seemed to bet on six, which just wasn't coming up. It was a slow burn, but Red finally took the win and we moved onto another game where Red cleaned up again.

The following night, we decided to try the Seafarers expansion. With just a few different rules, the game felt oddly foreign. Your typical strategy is not welcome here. Indeed, you have a main, small island surrounded by three even smaller islands. When you get to another island, your first settlement is awarded with two extra victory points in addition to the regular points for that build. You play to fourteen points instead of the typical ten.

With the condensed main island competition was a bit more fierce, as we believed we would run into each other. But instead, we all tried shooting out to the sea, which involved building settlements on unprofitable coastlines. It also meant that we were using sheep much more than we were used to. And all of a sudden the game become balanced in an interesting way: all your resources are precious, and there are more avenues to success. I found that this turned everyone into hoarders, with very little trading going on. It also opened to the door to the robber taking your extra cards more often, and the few trades that did happen were ludicrous (two or three to one trades).

Our first Seafarers game is pictured above, with red taking a victory. I was glad to see the pirate ship get moved around a bit. Myself (Orange here) started with my typical strategy of trying to get all resources accounted for, regardless of how terrible the numbers are. Again, this proves to be my undoing, and I wasn't able to secure brick at all. Normally this would be fine, but with three players and an unwillingness to trade, it proved difficult to secure. My game was pretty much over from the start, but I was able to get into a ship building routine later on. Red had excellent first placement, taking both a common wood and sheep, which allowed for boat building and quick island expansion. All of a sudden those simple settlements become incredibly valuable with those special victory points.

The second game, above, displays my own victory (which feel fairly uncommon). Unfortunately Red made a mistake due to new rules, and got a bit of a slower start than the rest of us. This game, we strayed off the predesigned board and randomly placed both terrain and numbers. Even though I didn't have first placement, I secured two rather ideal spots: one in the northern section, where I sat on both wood and sheep - both were 9. Every time nine was rolled, I was secured a boat, so it was important to get onto the sea. It was a bit harder though, as the robber was very active and prevented my rolls. It was a good thing then, that I lay on an ore (6), which proved bountiful and useful with the 3:1 trade.

What I like about the board above was Ten Island. In our Catan circle, it feels like tens are rolled quite often, and to see two tens appear on an island of their own made the venture there very attractive. If you see, the other ten belongs to Red, which produced four wheat on each roll. We all seemed to learn from our first game as well, and stayed toward the coastline where we could easily go to see. Another noteworthy tactic here was Blue going to the gold mine on 6. It came up often, and he was able to secure any two resources he wanted whenever it was rolled. Unfortunately for him, victory was just out of reach.

The third game, above, saw us try a different scenario. In this case, you could start on any of the four islands, and gain special victory points for expanding to foreign islands. The style of gaming here was so different: a couple of us started on our own islands without interference. Robber placement was incredibly difficult and personal. My initial placement on the south east island proved to be a mistake, as building in the area was early and busy, blocking me from making a long route to my other island. Once I focused on typical island life, I had more success, but by then it was too late. Red and Blue fought for longest route, with Red ultimately building five roads at once to finish it off and secure a win. Red was able to secure quite a few ports and with the robber barely moving, accumulated a wealth of cards that saw unprecedented construction. An incredibly interesting board layout, it brought fresh gameplay, new strategies and generally, a lot of fun.

300: Rise of an Empire

It's hard to believe that 300 was released upon us in March of 2007, a whopping seven years ago. The movie was met with a healthy box office turnout as well as decent accolades - in my circle, at the least. It was difficult NOT to enjoy the film, as we were blasted from start to finish with visual splendor in the form of gratuitous blood, violence, slow motion, over the top dialogue and of course, impossibly muscular men. Zack Snyder seems to revel in his ability to bring comic book pages to life, allowing us to enjoy Frank Miller's splash pages on the big screen.

Where did we leave off? I believe the basic plot and straightforward execution thereof made 300 an enjoyable film and one that was easy to revisit. So before going to see the prequel/sequel, I watched it again and can conclude that it wasn't necessary to the understanding of this new creation. The first (what felt like) ten minutes of 300: Rise of an Empire felt like a "last seen on" intro to your favourite television show, and reduced the previous movie to a summary of actions and plot points that makes one wonder why we don't watch entire films in compressed form. We get to find out what happened to our King Leonidas immediately after his sacrifice, then quickly do we scrub back ten years to find out why Xerxes went on his rampage to begin with. And with that, we're introduced to our protagonist Themistocles and his counterpart Artemisia, played with perfect villainy by Eva Green.

What follows is another hour of action, violence, death, sex and slow motion (although not as much as its predecessor). We get a lot more talking though, as we gain an exposition on the war from both fronts and how everyone is involved, including multiple trips back to Sparta in an attempt to have them join the Athenian army in the rest of the fight. Of course, we know they do, as the ending of the original 300 depicted (I believe) the final battle that saw the end of Xerxe's advances.

I honestly thought we were going to see a rehash of the original, but was pleasantly met with something new. The setting is completely different, and while the movie was shot entirely on sound stage with extensive blue and green screen, it had a different look. Indeed, we find out that the men aren't as muscular (only Spartans can get that big it seems) but significantly less of the infamous "black crush" was used. Where 300 was red, Rise of an Empire is blue. Where 300 seemed outlandish, Rise of an Empire feels more rooted in history, and when you have a look, you can see that many of the characters actually existed and the story is more true to itself than you would let yourself believe a stylistic action movie could be. But both movies take liberties where they need to: both Snyder and Miller admit that they bent the truth to make the best scene, and I'm sure this philosophy was brought forward here as well.

It's still March though and we're surviving our way through the winter that never wants to end. Rise of an Empire gives us an escape - albeit a short one, but still an important one. While it may fall a bit short of the original - if not for anything else than the innovation at the time - Rise of an Empire is still a fantastic voyage.

Movie Collection part 5: Current DVDs

Now that a bit of the history of my collecting has been recounted, I want to share with you the collection itself. I'll start with the DVDs - the last remaining greats of the Great DVD Purge.

ALIEN and ALIENS represent two top ten movies, that are also incredible special editions. I believe they were my introduction to the Fox collector's series, numbered 10 and 11. I'm pretty sure ALIENS has been played a few dozen times throughout the past decade, until the Blu-ray hit.

BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES was avidly watched when I was a child and would shape my interest and expectation for what Batman should be. I never picked up the fourth volume, one reason being that the show changed a bit and the edition was relatively difficult to find. It didn't help that I wasn't exactly going back to watch all of them, although I did for a brief stint when I would "do the treadmill" for a few weeks.

I saw BLACK HAWK DOWN in an old theatre when I was going to university, with a bunch of friends. The audio was either terrible or fantastic, depending on your mood: unlike a typical movie theatre, this theatre was designed with stage performances in mind (they simply drop a big screen down). The audio has a distinct echo, which really made this movie a different experience. I believe I had purchased the regular edition of it first, then grabbed this 3 disc set once it was released. I haven't fully explored it, but it remains the definitive edition of this movie that most people either seem to love or hate.

FIGHT CLUB was long standing at the top of my favourite movies of all time, for good reason. I haven't watched it in years, probably because it will be even more relatable and relevant now moreso than ever (having crossed the 30 threshold). As I mentioned before, it was a fantastic blind-buy: it was probably the first DVD I bought based in large part on the packaging, which remains one of my favourites. The blu-ray release is a bit disappointing in comparison, but still a welcome addition to the club.

GOJIRA, always a classic, gets a beautiful digibook release that I've cherished for quite a few years. It may have been a gift, but the second two in that series of editions were incredible finds at a local shop - priced at $5 each, I still haven't removed them from the package and neither have I found the rest in the set. I have seen the complete boxed set in stores though, but it is expensive.

I don't typically buy television on media, as it's difficult to get around to rewatching, but INVADER ZIM was worth the purchase. Unfortunately, after I picked the complete set up (individually) they announced quite the special edition of the complete series. A great cartoon series though.

MASTER AND COMMANDER may be one of the best editions I have; it was a find on day of release and I had to have it without hesitation. This one is notable as well because we just added a subwoofer to our home theatre setup and this movie absolutely destroys it.

METROPOLIS is the only anime I have (save for AKIRA, recently). This is a novelty because the second disc containing special features is a mini-DVD, similar in size to a Gamecube disc - for those familiar. The movie itself is quite good, although it's been half a decade since I watched it. I'm always keeping an eye out for it to arrive on Blu-ray, but haven't seen it in stores yet.

PREDATOR. Easily one of Arnold's best.

THE ROCK was my first Criterion and is a beautiful disc with great special features. My parents bought this for me for my birthday many years ago; I can honestly say I didn't think they would because of the cost, but they did and it's now one of the most memorable pieces in my collection.

My sister bought me Criterion edition of THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS, which I have since upgraded to Blu but just can't part with this original DVD. I'm not big into Wes Anderson films, but I foresee an effort in my future to obtain all his films as they are great Criterion releases.

SE7EN is a great edition, modeled after the notebooks they find within the movie. This also marks the film in which I declare David Fincher to be one of my favourite directors. I loved that he oversaw the transfer and they included features on how it was done. Oddly enough, I missed it in theatres (just like all of his films so far).

SAVING PRIVATE RYAN was a thrilling experience in the theatre, and continues to be at home. This edition is made up to look like a box of ammo I suppose. It's a bit oversized and has solid construction regardless. One of the more interesting editions.

That silver case is TERMINATOR 2, in its metal slipcase. The other spine has the title of the movie written on it but I like the clean, steel look. The sleeve is open on the one side and has actually mangled lesser, weaker cases that sit beside it. It's also noteworthy that the inner case was too small for all the contents, as you have to squeeze it tightly to snap it shut. It contained a whole host of versions, which was quite impressive when it came out, and has been re-released with a cardboard/plastic sleeve (not sure honestly). The TERMINATOR series is definitely a run of films that has seen no end of different editions, so I keep this around as my definitive.

TOMBSTONE is the last Vista Series DVD I have kicking around. Not only is it a fantastic film and perhaps one of my favourite westerns, but it also features some nice packaging that is topped off by a neat map of the historical shootout depicted in the film.

Finally, we come to the small TRANSFORMERS section, which features the animated movie of the eighties, as well as the first volume in the original cartoon series. The television series was a difficult find: I anticipated its release for months, and when it came out, it was not to be found. I hit every single store that sold DVDs in the city that day, and left empty handed. It was very disappointing, and I believe it would be weeks if not months before I got it in my hands - I may have resorted to going online (which is now common practice). I eventually picked up the second volume (which contained half of season two) but never continued. They were pricey, and beyond my time as I was most familiar with the first season as a child. The movie is a great edition from Rhino, and after opening (and viewing) I quickly put it in protective plastic.

And there we have it, the modest but important DVD collection composed of movies that are meaningful to me on various levels. Since collecting Blu, I have often neglected the idea of buying DVD again; however, there are many releases that don't seem to be coming to the new format, and I'm forced to consider the old. I can't help but think where I would be if I continued buying them and forewent the Xbox 360. It's a different landscape than when I began collecting: you can find great movies for bargain bin prices. Pawn shops are chock full of titles and special editions that went unnoticed years ago. Around 2002, I went straight to the mall with a fistful of freshly earned cash. I picked up four titles that night, including the Burton BATMAN films. The thrill of making the decision, bringing them home and inspecting the package, followed by putting one in the player and sorting them all into their homes in the collection is a prime feeling indeed. If you're a collector you'll have done the same thing: standing, or sitting - maybe on the floor - and admiring what you've built. You become lost in it all, as you stroll down memory lane thinking of each film, of each purchase.

MOVIE COLLECTION

part 1: The Beginning

part 2: Collecting

part 3: The Great DVD Purge

part 4: High Definition

part 5: Current DVDs

part 6: The Third Era