My rant about blu-ray

My rant about Blu-ray

 

There are things about Blu-ray's that annoys me, for example, I'm disappointed that you can't choose between wide or full screen with Blu ray's. I had a DVD copy of National Security where you can choose between wide or full screen as one of the features, why didn't they give that feature to all the DVDs and Blu rays? I mean it would save a lot of money, resources, manpower and time, it doesn't make sense to release a fullscreen and a widescreen version of the movie on DVD if you can do that. 

With Blu-rays you only get widescreen what's up with that? I wouldn't mind this if they set up the format where you don't see those annoying bars, some Blu ray's don't have the bars. The problem I have with Blu-ray's are the same with DVD's as far as double dipping, George Lucas is notorious for doing this with his Star Wars films. (This is also an issue I have with comic books.) Here are some examples when Total Recall first came out on Blu-ray there were no special features on the disc, when the remake of that movie was released they released Total Recall again on Blu-ray with the special features. 

Another example I saw a copy of The Terminator on Blu ray then I saw another copy of The Terminator on Blu-ray but with a book inside the case, last year I saw a box set of all the Terminator films. Do you see what I mean by double dipping, there is no reason to keep releasing these movies over and over again regardless if it's the movie's anniversary, the director's cut or another movie in that franchise is coming out. The thing I like about Blu-rays is that it has more features than DVDs like the pop-up menus. However, that's not always the case for example the Spider-Man 2 Blu-ray didn't have all the features as the DVD version. I also appreciate that the cases are smaller. That's another gripe I have with Blu ray's, I mean they advertise that you can watch the special features while watching the movie. You can't do that with all of the Blu ray's, plus the features are on the second disc anyway.

Also, some of the Blu-ray features are the same as DVDs, and not all Blu-rays have an interactive menu. I like that Blu-rays don't sell the single disc and the double disc they just sell double if the features can't fit in one disc, I don't get why they don't do that with DVDs? On a side note since 2009 or 2010 I have noticed that they stopped making double discs for the DVDs why? I also have issues with Blu-ray Live, as far as you have to create all these different accounts to chat with people online and create your own commentary on movies. 

I want to comment on the grain, I hear people complain about that saying that some Blu-rays don't have good picture quality because the movie has grain in it. To the people that complain about that, where do you think the grain came from, do you know what the grain is for? Blu-rays are not suppose to take away the grain so that we can get a clear image, they're suppose to transfer the original footage as it was meant to be seen. If you take away the grain you take away the quality of the picture.

This is a problem I have with the Dragon Ball Z orange box set, they took away the grain and it made the colors look bleached, which made my eyes sore. It's the same thing with Blu-rays, you're not adding better picture quality by removing the grain. I can't be mad at people for their ignores because this is something we become accustomed to, just like kids thinking black and white movies are bad because they're not accustom to those films. On a side note whenever I go to Best Buy or Target I notice that the Blu-ray picture quality on the TVs is better than mine's. I only have a 32-inch Digital flat screen that has 720p it can't go up to 1080p, I don't know if it's that or if those are plasma TVs. Blu-rays wouldn't have been the top format if HD DVD got more support from other movie studios. That's all I have to say about Blu-rays what do you think of them? 

P.S. I want to correct something I said earlier about the widescreen format. In The Dark Knight Blu-ray, there are scenes in the movie where there are no bars. I guess that has something to do with the IMAX camera, those scenes were shot by that camera. Then again The Avengers Blu-ray didn't have the widescreen bars either, I don't know if that movie was filmed on an I Max camera. I wish Blu ray's would have more director's commentary, I mean why do I have to go on Blu ray live to hear what they have to say about their movie?        



My 2013 Movie reviews

My 2013 Movie reviews

Intro: I'm starting to think that Mr. Cruise wishes his parents named him Jack. I mean this is the third time where he plays a character with that name.

Oblivion: This movie takes place in the year 2077 and it follows a man name Jack Harper who repairs drones that help monitor what's left of the earth after the war. His life starts to turn upside down when he meets one of the scavengers and a woman who knows him. After that, he's wondering if he's on the right side, so he has to figure that out before he dooms mankind.  

This movie kind of reminds me of Wall E to a point. The movie also reminds me of other sci-fi films like 2001 A Space Odyssey. The visual effects in this movie are gorgeous! The Earth may look doom and gloom but it's colorful. Also, the action scenes are fine. The movie got me interested in how things played out before and after the war. You can argue that the theme of this movie is never forget your past, but the movie could have done more with that. The movie also deals with what separates humans from machines? Yes! This isn't a new idea for this genre but it's explored in a different way. I mean The machines sees the value in humans. 

Jack Harper is a wide-eyed curious person. He may not remember his past he does have flashes of it. We learn something about him that's ironic. That's what bugs me about this character I mean I'm sick of the main character having no memory because it feels like a cheap way to make that character interesting. Also, Jack’s ship annoys me, because it looks like a body part. 

Vika is Jack's communications officer and she's contempt with her life. She's also kind of a tragic character I can't get into the reasons why without spoiling the movie.  

I don't have much to say about Juile (the woman Jake saved) because she also has no memory. Not only that she wasn't aware of the war at the time. What drives me nuts about this character is that it's no secret who she is, I mean she's one of two people. Plus, she doesn't serve much of a purpose in this movie.  

Beech is the leader of the scavengers. He doesn't think that Titan (The space colony that holds the rest of the human race.) has their best interest in mind. This character should have been written out of the movie because he's barely in the movie.    

The problem I have with this film is the characters because the characters are so bland it's hard to care about the conflict in the movie. The pacing in this movie is kind of slow. Another gripe with this movie is when we learn what happened it opened up a can of worms. Also, the trailers for this movie gave away too much of the movie. There is a quote we keep hearing in the movie, I wouldn't have minded it if it was applied in the story and characters. The climax is lame! 

In closing, this isn't a bad movie, but I find it underwhelming. The movie needed more work in the writing department. If you like sci-fi then I would recommend you check this movie out.

      
Rating = Rental

Intro: You had a chance to make me a Trekkie and you blew it. 

Star Trek Into Darkness: The movie is about Capt. Kirk and his crew going on missions. However, his reign as captain is short-lived due to his actions in his last mission so he has to start from square one. Kirk gets a chance to redeem himself when he's sent to find a man name John Harrison for terrorizing Starfleet. That becomes difficult due to a conspiracy, so Kirk has to figure out how to handle the situation? 

Sadly, this film was a miss-step, that's a shame because the creators withheld this film from being released so they can make this the best movie it can be. What hurts this movie is that it sets up plot points that amount to nothing. After the halfway point the movie has gone downhill. The conflict in this movie wouldn't exist if the characters weren't stupid. This movie has the same issue I had with the last film which is fan service. I mean it's done in a way that alienates the general public. If these movies are for Trekkies, you should have put that in the Ads. Also, this movie borrows elements from two of the Star Trek films to the point where it feels like a bad remake of those films. 

Captain Kirk feels like a captain more than a frat boy like he did in the first film. He's still rebellious but he's like that because he feels like the rules of Starfleet goes against doing the right thing.  

Spock is pretty much the same character as he was in the last movie. I do like his ARC because it parallels with Kirk's. The only complaint I have with him is I didn’t buy what Spock did in the last act.

John Harrison is an enigma. I say that because the movie doesn't know what to do with him. I mean one minute the movie paints him as a villain and the next minute he's a victim. This movie sucks at making him both of these things because he does things without thinking. What makes this worse is learning who he really is. That's what bugs me about this character he revealed himself in a way where everyone should know who he is. This wasn't a good reveal because Trekkie's called it from day one. How this character is portrayed in this movie is a disservice to how he was handled in the past. 

I don't have much to say about the rest of the characters because the movie has done much with them. I like the first hour of this film. That hour deals with the theme of friendship and figuring out how to stop John Harrison creates conflicts with the characters and character stuff. Overall, this movie was a written mess! The movie didn't have to be like this because it could have been better if the movie had better writers. 

Rating = Rental 

Intro: Mr. Smith you need to do a better job at picking scripts. The only reason I watched this movie is because it looked like you were playing a serious character compared to your other roles, I mean in most of your films you're playing the same character. 

After Earth: This film is about Kitai and his father Cypher going on a father-and-son trip. That goes wrong when they crash land on a planet that's inhabited by creatures. Since Cypher is injured during the crash Kitai has to go out and get help while keeping himself alive. 

Basically, if you have seen 10,000 B.C. then you have seen this movie. This movie is a waste of time, I know what I was walking into however I didn’t expect this movie to be so boring. I didn’t care about the father and son story because the father is so uptight, I understand why he's like this but lighting up a bit lets us know you care about your son. Lost in Space is a better father-and-son story than this. This movie could have been better if this wasn’t a military family because Cypher sees his son Kitai as a soldier first and a son second. Both Cypher and Kitai are stiff and doula characters. There are two plot points that adds nothing to the story. I would recommend this if you like survival movies. I wish I can show this movie to my father so he can understand why we're not close, it’s hard to be close to someone who’s high maintenance 24/7. 

Rating = Trash 

Intro: Am I the only one who thinks it's ridiculous that we have a movie with a character that has claws and we don't see him cut people up? Don't give me that doing that it's too violent for kids this studio let Mr. Lucas cut people's limbs off in his Star Wars films. Not only that someone was set on fire in that franchise and those movies were family-friendly, so what's this movie's excuse?     

The Wolverine: This movie takes place after X-Men the last stand, Logan/Wolverine is living in the woods and he's haunted by what he did in the previous film. Meanwhile, a mysterious woman has come to take him to Japan to see a man that he saved decades ago and he gets caught up in the middle of his problems. On top of that, he's losing his healing abilities, so Logan has to figure out why his healing powers are not working and protect this man's granddaughter.

This movie didn't make up for the last one. I feel bad for saying that because this movie tries to be better than the previous one by being the opposite of that film. This movie took inspiration from the Wolverine comic, but the movie is not as good as that comic. The movie has humor in it, but they are few and far between. Speaking of humor what's the point of putting this character in a different setting if we don't get fish-out-of-water jokes? You might find this movie boring because of the pacing. The theme of this movie is immortality, but the movie is one-sided about that theme. The reveal in this movie didn't surprise me because the movie foreshadows it. Plus, characters don't have a chance to process it. The climax of this movie is silly to the point where you can't take it seriously. The characters are another issue I have with the movie because some of them shouldn't be in this movie. Plus, most of them don't do much. 

I don't like what this movie has done with Logan/Wolverine as far as giving him an internal and external conflict. The internal conflict is him learning how to forgive himself for killing Jean. This doesn't work because they were not a couple. It's bad enough the franchise gave Scott/ Cyclops the shaft do you really have to continue doing it after his death? Also, he could have avoided doing that. As far as the external conflict the writers drop the ball with that. I mean Wolverine can still heal it just that it happens slower. This takes away the stacks of will he survive? Another thing we don't know is how much of his memory he has regained. 

Yukio is a mutant with the ability to see who's going to die. She has a fun personality and she plays off Logan. What bugs me about her is she serves no purpose in the film beyond helping Logan in one scene. It's too bad that she isn't Logan's love interest because their abilities parallel with each other plus she seems to understand him.   

Mariko is a victim in this movie. I'm not just saying that because someone put a target on her back it's because of what happened to her throughout the story. Also, it makes no sense why people are after her. I didn't care about her romance with Wolverine because she's engaged to someone else, the two have no chemistry and she's not interesting.     

Shingen (Mariko's father) is a character that should have been written out of the movie because he doesn't get a lot of screen time. That's too bad because he was a threat in the comic.  

Harada confuses me. I say that because he keeps switching sides I don't know if he should be considered a good guy or a bad guy. What annoys me about this character is the writer's screwed up making him like his comic book counterpart. 

The villain Viper reminds me of Poison Ivy you’ll see what I mean when you watch the movie. beyond that, she has no personality beyond being rude. My gripe with her she went through all this trouble to suppress Wolverine's healing ability for nothing. You see what I mean when you watch the movie. Also, she has no reason to do what she's doing.    

The comic this movie is based on is a love story, so I appreciate that the writers tried to make this movie about immortality. I like that this movie takes place in Japan and there isn't a lot of mutants. Doing that helps ground the film. This movie is more story-driven than the last film. There are moments when this movie can be funny. I enjoy some of the action scenes, especially the speed train scene. 

In closing, I didn't enjoy this movie as much as the last film despite the movie's attempts to make up for that film's shortcomings. I would recommend this if you samurai films because this movie reminds me of those films. 

Rating = Average  

Intro: Is anyone else annoyed that Thanos is not in this movie? Seriously what's the point of showing him in the Avengers if Marvel Studios is not going to follow up on that? 

Thor the Dark World: After the Avengers Thor has been keeping the peace in the other realms. Meanwhile, Jane finds a mcguffin that attracts the attention of Malekith. He wants to use it to regain something that he lost but that involves destroying the nine realms. So, Thor has to protect her and stop Malekith's plan with the help of Loki. 

Phase two is not off to a good start. I don't like the comedy in this because some of it comes at the expense of men being the butt of the joke. The rest makes the movie's tone uneven. The human characters shouldn't be in this movie because they don't do much to push the story. Also, the movie can be boring due to the pacing. The climax in this movie is so ridiculous that you can't take it seriously. The way this movie ended might bother some people. I'm not happy with how this movie wasted the bad guys but I'm getting ahead of myself. 

Thor has matured to the point where he feels like a flat character. He does have an ARC about if he really wants to be king or not? This causes him to butt heads with his father. The only complaint I have with him is that he doesn't do enough to maintain his relationship with Jane and the reason why he doesn't is weak. 

Speaking of Jane, I don't have much to say about her because the movie doesn't do anything new with her. That's a shame because she's important to the story due to her being connected to the mcguffin. 

Odin is a Jerk in this movie because of how he treats Jane and Loki. I understand why he's like that with her however acting like that goes against the lesson Thor learned in the last film. The fact he showed no compassion for Loki bugs me because he played a role in why Loki did the things he did. 

Loki is crafty as usual. I'm fond of what the movie has done with him as far as having him answer for his crimes and dealing with the resentment he has for his family. I wish the movie would give that more focus. 

Malekith (The main villain.) is a dull bad guy. This annoys me because he's Thor's version of the Joker in the comics what gives Marvel Studios? He could have been sympathetic if A his plan made sense and B if he showed some humanity. 

Kurse is Malekith's right-hand man and he's more threatening than him. This is another baddie that was wasted because he was more compelling in the comics. In this movie, he feels like a Power Rangers villain.  

 

What I like about this movie is that we got to see more of Asgard. I enjoy the way Thor and Loki interact with each other because they feel like siblings more than they did in the last movie. Overall, this movie was OK I don't think it's as bad as people make it out to be. 

Rating = Rental 

My rant about Superhero/comic book movies

My rant about Superhero/Comic book movies

                                                                                     

    

This year marks the 35th anniversary of Superhero/Comic book films. I'm surprised that these films don't have their own genre or sub-genre, because most of these films can fit into one genre and that's action/adventure. Despite being around this long they feel like they're in its infancy due to Hollywood not making a lot of these films. Fans of this material are notorious for being critical of these movies. These films restart or start actors and actresses careers and give them roles that they're well known for like Mr. Stallone is known for his roles as Rocky and Rambo. The movies also made comic book characters more popular, especially the ones people don't know that well, OK that only happened with Iron Man as far as I know. 

Hollywood didn't take these movies seriously at first, I mean check out the interviews from the earlier Batman films if you have them on DVD or find them on the Internet. Thanks to Mr. Nolan's Batman films and the MCU that's no longer the case. Mr. Nolan's Batman films have become a bad and good thing for the future of comic book movies. The good thing is that his films changed people's perspective about Superhero/Comic book movies, they can expect more from these kinds of films than just the hero and villain fighting, he added depth to his Batman films. Besides Iron Man, other films have done before Mr. Nolan like the X-Men films, Superman 2, Spider-Man 2, Batman Forever, Ang Lee's Hulk, Unbreakable and The Incredibles. The thing I appreciate about Mr. Nolan's Batman movies is that they don't feel like they're made for Batman fans. that's the problem I have with these movies, in general, they feel like they're made for the demographic that reads comic books. 

The bad thing about Mr. Nolan's Batman films is that for some crazy reason, people expect comic book movies to be more dark and serious why!?! The Avengers proves that lighthearted films can sell so there's no need to do that. Hollywood stop giving Mr. Nolan more credit than he deserves, he's not the only director who has done this and he won't be the last. The thing that bothers me about Mr. Nolan's Batman films is that they're marketed to kids, his Batman films are not for kids. Hollywood didn't do this with Daredevil or Watchman because those are not movies for kids.

Another issue I have with these movies is that they change a character's race or nationality, if a character has a certain look for decades don't mess with it. I have a gripe with these films targeting kids, I'm not saying Superhero/Comic book films shouldn't be for kids it's just that it handicaps these films from telling mature stories. Hollywood did you learn anything from the early Batman films? 

Before I get into what I want to see in these films going forward I want to address the issue of the heroes killing. I have mixed feelings about the heroes having a no-kill rule. On one hand, I understand why they have that rule to separate themselves from the villains and show that they value life. On the other hand, it's not reasonable to restore that fiction or not. Life is not Black and White so why should stories be like that? I'm not saying that I want comic books or movies to be more realistic however having things being Black and White makes the conflict for the heroes too easy. I think it's ridiculous that writers would come up with ways for superheroes to avoid killing because they're putting their moral integrity above saving people. How is that heroic? A hero makes sacrifices for others why should your soul be excluded from that? The question is should the no-kill rule be bent or broken to preserve the integrity of heroism? How you go about killing someone should determine if you're a good guy or not. 

If you kill someone to protect and defend others that should be acceptable. Police and Soldiers do that and we consider them heroes why can't we do the same for comic book characters? What about Captain America I mean he killed people in WW2 does that make him a bad guy? Now it's not OK to kill someone out of anger, revenge, envy, or to get out of trouble. If superheroes have to kill it should be a last resort and there should be consequences for resorting to doing that. That's what Superman did in Man of Steel but people throw a fit over it. A comic called Superman What Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? is a better example.  

I understand why people have a problem with it because he shouldn't be put in a position where he has to kill someone but what else could he have done? I mean he can't imprison him or send him to another plant. Plus, Superman wasn't happy that he had to kill him even if he was so what, Zod kill GOD knows how many people going to miss him? Now If Superman killed an average joe, I would understand people's outrage because that's an abuse of power. You shouldn't have an issue with the Green Lantern killing people because the Green Lantern Corps are space cops. Now if you objected to this idea let me ask you this why are you OK with them operating outside the law? Most of these comic book characters are vigilantes when you really think about it, don't believe me then which branch of Government do they answer to? The only time I saw that was in the Justice League cartoon.

Here are the four things I want to see happen more with these films. 

The first thing is I want to see a good trilogy. None of the third movies are good, I can forgive Superman 3 and Spider-Man 3 for being bad because of the production history. 

Second, I want the creators to embrace the source material more. Now I'm not one of those people who's mad that these films are not like the comics when really none of these films are completely like the comics, well Watchman came close. I don't mind changes from the source material if it's justified and is an improvement over the original work. Men in Black and The Mask are good examples, the worst example is Iron Man 3. It's safe to say that Hollywood is making a lot of profit off Superhero/Comic book films, if they want these films to last then they need to start doing that. The Avengers movie reminds me of the first issue of the Avengers comic. 

I can understand how adapting a story from the comics can be hard, because of copyrights and sometimes the story is either too long or too short to turn into a movie. I was rolling on the floor laughing when I learned that Hollywood made a movie out of How the Grinch Stole Christmas are you kidding me? How they were able to make an hour-and-a-half movie on a short kid's book is beyond me. I would like to see a trilogy where all three films adapted a story from the comic like the No Man's Land story because the dark knight rises shoehorn that story.

The third thing is I want these films to be more of a period piece, I would like to see a Spider-Man film take place in the 1960s, or a Flash movie take place in the 1950's so far we had that with Captain America the first avenger, X-Men First Class and Batman 1989. By doing that you're giving us something different. 

Now the final thing I want to see happen more with these films is I want the villains to be memorable, I'm not saying that the villains in these films are bad they just don't stand out like the Joker or Loki. This makes me mad because they wasted some good villains like Venom, Bane, and Malekith. I also want to see the villains have more victories over the heroes, it's not exciting to watch these films if you know the hero is going to win where's the fun in that?

Despite all of that the future looks promising for Marvel I can't say the same about DC. That's all I have to say what do you want to see happen more with these films? 

P.S. I also want to see these films be nominated or win Oscars not just for visual effects, despite the directing problems in The Dark Knight I still think it was robbed of best picture.

My rant about spill.com

My rant about Spill.com

Spill.com is a movie review site that features four or five hosts talking about films. They started as the Reel Deal then they became Spill.com. I like listening to them because they did the same thing the late Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert did as far as talking about the movie, joking around, and giving their rating, but expanded on it. Their video reviews are more entertaining than reviewing the movies. What makes these videos work is that they're animated. It's like watching a stand-up comedy for films, even if I don't find all the jokes funny. I like how they are having fun in their videos. Despite their disagreement with the films and ratings, they don't make each other feel stupid about it, it's too bad that certain people online don't know how to do that. I'm fond of their rating system because it's similar to mine. On their website, they have podcasts giving their full review of movies, plus spoilers. They also respond to fan comments and talk about geek culture on their site.      

Now I notice some changes with the reviews and the website; these changes are not for the better. for example, when they're reviewing a movie, they do it in 20 seconds, and they tell us to go on their website to hear their podcast of their movie reviews. Look, I don't have a problem with them promoting their site; however, if doing that comes at the expense of the review, then what's the point in making these videos? Plus, we might not have time to listen to a half-hour podcast of a review, that's why we watch your video reviews. The reason why I prefer the videos over the podcast is because the videos add context to what they say and the jokes they make. What makes these videos worse is that there's a timer on the screen to remind us how much time they have; we're not focusing on what they say about the movie, but on how much time they have. They even waste time in their 20 seconds by making jokes, their videos use to be 5 or 6 minutes long, and the movie reviews doesn't seem to be their main focus. 

                     

This is how they started doing their videos

This is how they use to do their videos

  

This is how they do their videos now 

This is not the best example of art thriving on limitations. If I didn't know better, I would say that they are making these videos bad on purpose so that we can go and listen to their podcast. Also, what's the point of promoting your website if it's not what it use to be? They got rid of some of the content on that site. I understand that was done because of budget reasons; however, that doesn't make it less annoying. Also, one of the hosts left the site to work on a movie called Sinister. Due to how they're doing their videos now, I don't watch them as much as I use to. I don't know what caused this change, but they need to go back to how they use to review films in their videos. Well, they won't have a chance to do that because we learn that this site will shut down later on this month. Yes! hearing this is a letdown, but I don't think this is the end for the people behind this site. They could move on to a different platform if they do well. Spill.com was fun while it lasted. 

   

My top 10 good movies that I don’t love



My top 10 good movies that I don’t love

Intro: Now these are movies that I can see why they are well received but I'm not crazy about them. They are films that I don't consider my favorite and I'm not excited to see some of them again. Despite how good these movies are it doesn't outweigh the problems I have with them that kept me from putting them in high regard. With that said most of them deserve the recognition they got over the years, others don't get enough of it.  

No 10. Boyz in the hood: Like I said this is the only film so far that has an all-black cast that I can think of that is good, besides the films based on true people and events. This movie is basically an underdog story as far as not becoming a product of your environment. I feel Tre’s father’s pain as far as him trying to keep his son on the right path. I feel sorry for one character in this movie because of how his mother treats him differently from his brother. How Black Americans are portrayed in this movie doesn't bother me because it works in the context of the film. 

This movie is also about hope not just for Black Americans but for anyone who lives in a bad environment. I wish there was another character that wasn’t affected by their surroundings besides Tre’s father. I feel almost a shame that this is not one of my favorite movies, because this movie deals with legacy, protecting what’s yours and overcoming your obstacles. It's also a shame that this movie didn't win the best picture award. 

No 9. Up: Darn it! I know I forgot one when I did my overrated movies list. This is an example of being good at what you do that you get carried away. This movie feels like it’s mostly for adults because of how depressing the movie is and it’s centered on an old man. I know this is a family film, but kids are not going to relate to an old man who thought that was a good idea? The film does have moments of humor but it’s not enough to detract us from how sad this movie is. 

The boy in this movie feels tacked on because we only know two things about him. They are he’s trying to get a boy scout badge by helping Carl (the old man) and he’s from a broken home. What’s the point of letting us know that about Russel (the boy) if the writers are not going to do anything with that? I know this movie is about letting go of the past and moving on but besides the floating house metaphor, this movie didn’t break any new ground in telling that story for me. Plus, we didn’t need a villain to make that point. I’m not saying this is one of Pixar’s weakest films however it misses the mark on being fun.

No 8. Metropolis: This is one of the most influential films of all time! I can see how other sci-fi films took inspiration from this movie. What I like about this movie is that it's not Black and White about the subject matter. For example, what makes this movie different from the other class division films is both sides are not innocent. Heck, they use the same strategy to find common ground with each other. The working class didn't enable their situation, but they are not making things better. The movie also exploders the ups and downs of innovation. The visuals are impressive for its time. Because this is a silent film that's my gripe with it. I mean there are scenes where dialogue can help give them emotional weight. Despite how this movie was made and who made it, this movie deserves to be preserved.        

No 7. Good Will Hunting: Out of all the Oscar films I've seen so far, I enjoy this one the most. Part of the reason why is because of the interaction between Dr. Shaw and Will makes the film entertaining. This helps the movie feel less depressing to be fair it wasn't depressing which was a plus. I like that the dynamic between Dr. Shaw and Will is not one-sided, both men helped each other. Robin Williams did an excellent job playing a therapist, I wouldn't mind seeing him play Dr. Hugo Strange. However, he did things that make me question can therapist do that? 

You can argue that this movie is advocating for people to get help because it deals with how we let trauma get the best of us. This is an ongoing problem we have today, I mean we let our fears rob us of our happiness and opportunities in life. My favorite scene in the movie is where Will's best friend threatens to beat him up if he doesn't stop wasting his potential being around him. Directors of drama films should take notes from this movie, not every drama film has to be sad.   

No 6 Total Recall: Before The Matrix and Inception we had this movie. The movie deals with the concept of dreams vs reality in a way that it feels like a mystery. Plus, providing action and comedy. The film does it in a way that doesn't explain much to you. It gave us subtle hits to make us wonder was the whole movie a dream or not? I appreciate the movie doing that instead of having us go back and forth with this question because doing that can make us not care. The visual and practical effects hold up well. I like that this movie has mutants and A.I. to give the film world-building. 

What kept this movie from being better is that I find it hard to believe that anyone would agree to have implanted memories that's asking for trouble. Now if the machine helps make your imagination feel real that would have been better. Things go wrong when his conscious and subconscious mind conflict with each other. With that said this is one of the best sci-fi films despite not being crazy about the over-the-top gory violence. Also, shame on Hollywood for remaking this film. 

No 5. Million Dollar Baby: Man, this movie took me by surprise. It starts off being similar to Rocky then it turns into something else. I will give the director and writer credit for playing with our expectations. Actually, this movie is better than Rocky because Maggie (the main character.) wasn't given an opportunity to fight the champion she had to earn it. We are invested in Maggie because she has to fight against the stigma of being a woman, being labeled as trash and not having a supporting mother. All of this makes you really feel for her in the end. 

We also learn about Frankie (the trainer.) I mean he has problems of his own. The movie also provides inside into Boxing as far as how it works and its culture. It's time to address the elephant in the room and that is the ending people didn't like it. I find this disingenuous because the ending works for Maggie's character and the theme of this movie, that theme is regret. Also, if you don't think what happened to Maggie is not the worst thing in the world then you should have no problem living like her. Plus, the ending reinforces how unfair and short life is. This movie may not be good enough to be considered my favorite, but it deserves the best picture award.    

No 4. Back to the future: It’s hard to consider this a time travel movie, because that's secondary to all the other elements in the film like adventure, comedy and romance. Plus, the movie doesn't deal with fixing the past or worrying about the future. With that said I like how time travel works and the consequences for doing it. Watching Marty and Doc Brown react to each other's timelines is fun. Watching Marty have influence over his father creates an interesting parallel considering they have the same issue. The problem I have with this movie is that I didn’t buy that the two main characters can be friends considering the differences between the two in age and I.Q. This movie has a scene that kids shouldn't be exposed to really, I'm surprised that the movie got away with putting it in the film. I may not consider this movie a part of the sci-fi genre but it's a welcome addition to it.   

No 3. V for Vendetta: This movie is a cautionary tale of the government's abuse of power and the people forgetting their own. What makes this movie different from the other films like it is V (the main character) needs a year in order to dethrone the government. I also like that characters from both sides are conflicted with what V is doing. It’s also interesting to see this fascist government operate like the human body, I mean the monitors are the eyes the news in the mouth, the police are the hands and feet etc. 

This movie has a fundamental problem that is it’s hard to root for V. He may be charismatic, but he doesn’t have the moral high ground by committing terrorist attacks to achieve his goal. He seems to be more interested in revenge than dethroning the government. Plus, he’s short-sighted about his goal I mean he doesn’t have a plan to fill that void or concern with how many people will die. To be fair he’s more of an idea than a person. It's hard to see a fascist government as a bad thing when the people are living fine. You have to suspend your disbelief in order to buy that he can pull this plan off. Everyone didn’t do much to help the story until toward the end of the movie. This movie could have been better if it adapted more for the comic, but this is a fine movie overall.

No 2. West side Story: This is a good example of telling the same story but in a different way. The movie is similar to Romeo and Juliet, what this movie offer that Romeo and Juliet don’t is that it's a musical. This movie did what good musicals should do that is use the songs to push the story and tell us about the characters. The movie also deals with racism, police brutality and the privileged class. besides the acting, this is a well-made film from the directing, dancing, songs, visuals, setting etc, etc. I was also surprised at how this movie ended. Because this movie is a musical it's hard to take the conflict between the two gangs seriously. Also, I wish there was more to the romance between the two leads than love at first site thing. What that said this is one of the best musicals of all time! That's saying a lot coming from me. 

  

No 1. Shawshank Redemption: This movie is a social commentary on the prison system. The first thirty or forty minutes was hard for me to watch, because it shows us how bad prison is. I didn't need a visual reminder of how that. With that said, I give this movie credit for not shying away from that. The theme of this movie is freedom vs fear. That theme is used to help humanist the inmates. Just because they do things that most people frown upon that doesn't mean that they should be dehumanized especially if they're wrongly convicted. 

That's what bothers me about this movie is that it gave a mixed message about prison, I mean the director can’t show that prison is an awful place to be and then show the inmate being happy. (You can argue that they are custom to being in prison.) Also, what's the point of this movie making you question the prison system, if nothing has changed? Whenever I watch a crime show or movie that the people in this show or movie joke about how awful prison is. I’m not saying that prison should be like Disneyland however the inmate should at least feel safe. Kids feel safe when they go to detention or come home after their parents ground them, kind of. There is a scene with Ellis that makes me sick. All in all, this is one of the best films of all time! I'm surprised to find out that someone in real life did the same thing that Andy did towards the end of the film.  

 

My review of Breaking Bad

My review of Breaking Bad

 

Intro: Well, that's one way of getting kids interested in chemistry.

The Parents: Boo! Boo! Boo! 

Me: Hey! I didn't say it was the best way. Also, you can't complain about a problem and have issues with the solution. 

Breaking Bad: This show is centered on a high school chemistry teacher name Walter White, who's diagnosed with lung cancer. On top of that, he has a child on the way and his family is not in the best place financially. So he decides to create crystal meth and sell it with the help of his former student name Jesse Pinkman, who also goes by the alias Heisenberg. 

The nickname for this show should be How to Be a Drug Dealer 101? Seriously this series shows you the do's and don't when selling drugs. That's what I like about this series selling drugs is a learning curve for the main characters and it can be funny and suspenseful at the same time. This series is also a character study of how an everyday man can go down the wrong path. Although we've seen this story before this series made feel fresh and real. Also, the main character is 50 years old. How many 50-year-old men do you know that want to be a drug dealer? Really this series could have been based on a true story. ( If it is then I stand corrected.) This show does a good job of keeping us guessing, building suspense, and have funny moments. I'm fond of the way this series was shoot, because it uses visuals to tell the story. I appreciate that this show isn't completely focused on Walter White/ Heisenberg because you don't want him to overshadow everything else about this series. We see the cause and effect of everyone's actions the show foreshadows that. You can argue that the theme of this series is obsession almost everyone is obsessed with something.  

Walter White/Heisenberg went from a modest family man to a ruthless, arrogant and selfless drug dealer. It's understandable why he would fall from grace because he's dying, going through a midlife crisis and doesn't feel respected by almost anyone. His transformation makes it hard for me to root for him because he has done some horrible things in this series. The hints that he has issues with his mother but the show doesn't explore that. He wouldn't have to sell meth if he let people help him.            

Skyler White is the most hated character on this show! I understand why I mean she doesn't respect Walter as the man of the house. You can care about someone but not respect them plus she almost babies him. Plus she did some messed up things most of them are not justified. I would have sympathy for her if she got out of the situation when she had the chance.  

I'm surprised fans don't despise Marie Schrader (Hank's wife and Skyler's sister) as much as they do Skyler. She's nosy, vain and likes to shoplift. To be fair the reason why she does this is because she has some mental problems and OCD. Despite that, she is a loving person.   

Jesse Pinkman is a street-smart and lazy when it comes to pushing himself. He has a love-hate relationship with Walter White, to be fair Jesse didn't give Walter a lot of reasons to trust him. Despite being a slacker, you do feel sorry for him. It's interesting how he parallels with Walter White. The only complaint I have with him is the writers tried too hard to make yeah Bxxxh his catch phase.   

Mike is a hitman with a heart. I'm surprised that Mike and Walter are not close because they have the same motivations for what they do but Mike sees that Walter is in trouble. We learn that he use to be a cop I would like to know more about that.   

Saul Goodman is Walter's shade lawyer and the comic relief.   

Hank Schrader is Walter's brother-in-law who works for the DEA and he's outspoken. I wish I could say that he's the hero in this series, but he isn't. I'm not saying he isn't a good cop but he can be a douchbag. He says offensive things, punches people and was willing to get someone killed to catch Heisenberg. Also, he doesn't have to stomach to work for the DEA, well see him having panic attacks and throwing up.   

Gus is a friendly low-key businessman in public in private he's a brilliant yet scary kingpin. What makes him scary is how casual he is with killing people and when someone wants to kill him, he calls their bluff. He's also very cautious about who he does business with and he has eyes everywhere.        

One of the gripes I have with this show is the first episode of season three. Season two build up to that episode and it was a letdown. Speaking of episodes the last three episodes of season 5 seems depressing to me. I also notice some editing mistakes in the series. You can argue that this show is not subtle about being anti-drug war. Overall, this is a fine show, if you like crime dramas then I would recommend this. 



My spoiler review of Iron Man 3

My spoiler review of Iron Man 3 

Intro: I don’t enjoy doing this, I mean I don’t enjoy dissecting the plot of movies. After everything that's happened in the past few years like 911, the hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes and mass shootings I want to see good films. I don’t enjoy wasting my time and money on movies that I thought was going to be good, if I wanted to do that, I would put my money in a shredder or watch reruns of Save by the Bell. (I was going to say watch Maury or a drunken prom date but those would have been obvious.) This movie was under a lot of pressure, not because it was the third movie but because it was a follow-up to The Avengers. However, this movie was just like the other third movies a waste of potential why am I not surprised? I’m starting to wonder do Studios have script meetings anymore? If they do, then they need someone to lash out at them for being lazy.  

Either we're not pushing these writers or they're doing this on purpose. I’m mad that they had that writer’s strike back in 2007, I mean if these are the writers, we have let them go. Most of the third movies they wrote aren’t good and they have the nerve to go on strike. You know what I’m not going to blame Hollywood for this, because I refuse to believe that no one in Hollywood has a brain. I’m blaming you the people for this. This is the third movie the third we all know that third movies are usually bad but we still waste our time and money to watch them anyway. Hollywood cares about making money, if that's not true then why did they make sequels to the following films and these films didn’t make a lot of money.

 The Terminator

Friday

Robocop

Ace Ventura  

The Karate kid

Atlas Shrugged

Kick Ax

I heard Chronicles is getting a sequel

We need to stop giving Hollywood mixed signals we can’t say that the Star Wars prequels are bad and offensive and then have those movies make a lot of money. We made these movies a hit, we defend these films and we won’t admit that they are bad, that’s how Hollywood gets away with this. Now back to the subject at hand, let’s start with what really bothers me and a lot of Iron Man fans about this movie.

No 1 Trevor Slattery: We never saw this coming. That’s right The Mandarin is not in this movie. If you're going to make excuses for the Mandarin twist I don’t want to hear it. You would be outraged too if you watched the dark knight and you found out that the Joker is not the main villain, in fact, he's Ronald McDonald. The joker was created by the league of shadows. So shut up with your excuses. 

Also, the twist would have worked in the context of the film if the real main villain’s motivations weren’t weak, but I'll get into that later. I’m sorry I’m not trying to sound like an Iron Man fanboy. If I wasn’t familiar with Iron Man, I would still be outraged by this. I mean the creators advertise the Mandarin as the main villain, the previous two films set him up and they got Ben Kingsley to play him. Why? Why is he in this movie, why is his face on the cover, why did he get top billing his character doesn’t do anything. We see him four times we find out that he's not the main villain then the movie forgets him, so why get a well-known actor to play a role that could have been passed as a cameo? Heck, why not get Maggie Grace to play her character? 

Ben Kingsley is too good for this film, it’s like staring him, Clinteast Wood, Morgan Freeman and Denzel Washington in one of the Scary Movies. They might as well advertise this movie by having him and Tony playing patty cake. I wish the Mandarin is like his comic book counterpart, the movie would have been better if they did that. Then again, I remember Mr. Favreau saying that he wants Iron Man to deal with earth-based threats, I don’t get it he deals with gods and aliens why not take that further? What happened to his lessons, I mean in the movie he said only two lessons remind how many were there, to begin with? Also, what happened to lesson number one heroes there are no such thing?  

P.S the Mandarin looks like a well-known terrorist, I’m not going to say who he is because we all know who I’m talking about. Also, what did Marvel Studios mean by the Mandarin is too ambitious for the first film? What happened to his cool lines like today is the first day of what's left of your life, do you want an empty life or a meaningful death?    

    

No 2 Tony Stark/ Iron Man: This character has two arcs in the film, the arcs are him dealing with the aftermath of The Avengers and does the suit makes him Iron Man or the man inside? The second arc or what’s left of it was ruined because we learned in the last act that he has more suits, so why did he go though the second act of the film like he has no more suits? 

Why didn’t he use his suits to protect his Mansion, speaking of that what was he thinking giving who we thought was the Mandarin his address? I laughed when his Mansion got destroyed because that was stupid, then again, he's a well-known figure in this movie's world. As far as his Anxiety attacks goes, they should have made it a PDST, in The Avengers Tony was a soldier in that movie, and he almost died. His coping mechanism is building these suits. He had four Anxiety attacks in the film; he wouldn’t have had the last two if it wasn’t for the kid. Speaking of the kid if I was Tony, I would give him a stunner, because Tony told him that he has Anxiety problems and talking about New York makes him edgy, but the kid keeps bringing up New York. Towers the end of the film Tony blows up his suits and removes his ARC reactor from his chest what’s going on here?

Why was that thing Tony said to Bruce in The Avenger?



Yeah so why would he remove the ARC reactor if it’s a part of you, you might as well cut off your writing hand and say I don’t need it.

I’m surprised that Bruce didn’t do this to Tony in the after-credits scene, I mean did Tony mean anything he said to Bruce?

Also, Tony narrates in the film that he can sleep better now that the ARC reactor is removed, I thought the Anxiety attacks were keeping him up. So is Tony done being Iron Man or what, this would make sense if they're setting him up to be the new director of S.H.E.I.L.D. Yes! In the comics, Tony was the new director of S.H.E.I.L.D. P.S. I was hoping the movie would have him deal with The Avenger's aftermath by having him drinking, I mean it would make up for the writers shoehorning the Demon in the Bottle story in the previous film. Also, the Anxiety attacks subplot wasn't resolved. Plus, Tony what happened to I'm a genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist without the suit?   

No 3 the Mark 42: This is the worst suit that Tony built! I mean the other suits are powered by his ARC reactor from his chest this one has to be charged. Also, it was a prototype none of the weapons work, is this the rescue armor? How can he operate some parts of the suit without the helmet? 

What makes this suit different from the other ones is that it can be summed from a far distance, which created too many convinces for him. Also, we learned at the beginning of the film that Mark 42 is operated by Tony’s headset, how was he able to control all the other Mark suits? What's powering these suits, like I said his earlier suits are powered by his ARC reactor from his chest so how is this better? 

P.S. towers the end of the film when the rest of the Mark suits shows up and Road head says suit me up, then Tony says sorry they're only compatible to me. OK if that’s true then how were you able to protect Pepper by putting the Mark 42 suit on her, was that suit an exemption? Also, why would he use the Mark 42 without knowing if his weapons work? 
  

No 4 Extremis: I don't think it was a good idea to do the Mandarin and The Extremis story, just like X-Men the Last Stand tried to do the dark Phoenix saga and the cure story and look how that turned out. I wish the movie explains how Extremis works, I mean the movie explains that it’s an experimental regenerative treatment intended to allow recovery from crippling injuries. 

In this movie it’s unstable and it’s turning people into the Human Torch how does that work? The writers could have worked this in the story; I mean the Maya Hansen character needed Tony to stabilize it. Tony’s arc is him coping with what he leaks with the other Avengers it would make sense for him to take a virus that can give him powers. In the comics, the Extremis virus got on Tony’s suit and it upgraded his suit. Then again Hawkeye and black widow don’t have powers so yes, the movie didn’t need the Extremis story. 

P.S. I wish this story was used in the previous film I will get into that later.   

No 5 Col. James Rhodes/ Iron Patriot: The explanation to why he's called Iron Patriot is nonsense War Machine is too aggressive are you kidding me? I wouldn’t mind this if Roadhead’s explanation as to why he is called Iron Patriot is because he’s a fan of Captain America and he has a collection of his comics, I would buy that explanation. This character shouldn’t be in these films unless he's going to be in The Avengers movies. Let’s backtrack to what he has done in these films.

Iron Man, He looked for Tony when he was captured and covered his track when he was Iron Man.

Iron Man 2 He stole one of the Mark suits, fought Tony, he was held captive in the suit and he fought with Tony.

In this movie he's looking for the Mandarin, then he gets captured the main villain takes his suit and he gets his suit back and takes the President to safety.

Really, he couldn’t help Tony fight the main villain. So yeah, he shouldn't be in this movie. 

P.S. How does his suit work, I mean one of the villain’s henchmen was able to fly it and when the President is in the suit and tied up, he can’t do anything.

No 6 Harley: This kid being in this movie really shouldn't bother me because he was barely in the movie but he does, because he's just in this movie to give kids someone to relate to and to make this film easier to market to kids. That’s the only reason he's in this film, this has been a problem that plagued Hollywood in the 90’s. 

When is Hollywood going to learn that kids don’t want to be the kid characters in the movie, you want to know how I know this? I know this because I wanted to be the hero when I was a kid and so did my friends at that time. This is why those kids were in those action films in the 90s, this is why Robin, Speedy and Bucky were created in the comics. I can’t believe that Hollywood did this with Power Rangers for Goodness Sink. 

No 7 Aldrich Killian: He's the real villain in this movie and a lame one. The reason why he's the villain is because Tony stood him up 14 years ago, that’s it that’s his motivation!?! Why is he doing this, what does he have to gain and what does he want? He comes off as a generic villain; I mean he is making trouble in the movie because he's the villain and his evil ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha screw you I’m not buying it. 

I can’t take this character seriously, because when he reveals himself as the Mandarin it's done for laughs. Also, there was a scene where he got Roadhead out of the Iron Patriot suit by putting his hand on the belly part of the suit and saying things like is it hot in there, are you ready to come out, does your tummy hurt? He has the same powers as his men, OK how is he separating himself from his men if they all can do the same thing? The only thing he can do but his men can’t do is breathe fire. What’s with the dragon tattoos is that a Fin fang foom reference? 

OK, he told Tony that he wasn’t mad at him for what he did 14 years ago and that he gave him desperation which made him become the villain and come up with the idea behind the Mandarin. So, he thanks him by putting Pepper in danger, OK is he doing this to help Tony or blackmail him? If he's trying to help Tony what does Tony have to gain from this? This movie establishes that Killian and Pepper had history together but that went nowhere. 

I like the idea behind the mandarin however I would prefer it to be the other way around. This character reminds me of Edward Nigma/ the Riddler from Batman Forever. In that movie Edward wants revenge on Bruce for not investing in his idea, here it’s the same thing. However, it made more sense here than in Batman Forever, because Edward became famous in that movie and Bruce wasn’t a jerk to him. This movie hurts the first film because Aldrich Killian set up the Ten Rings group as a distraction so he can hold the war on terror in his hands. This is the same group that kidnapped Tony in the first film, so he became Iron Man because he stood Aldrich Killian up great just great. I’m tired of this trend with third movies, the trend of trying to connect with the first film all it does is hurt the first film. They have done this with films like Spider-Man 3 and The Dark Knight Rises. 

P.S. Killian revealing himself as the Mandarin is a lame version of Henri Ducard revealing himself as Ra’s al Ghul in Batman Begins. I refuse to believe that this is the same Ten Rings group that kidnapped Tony.
   

No 8 Pepper Potts: What's Pepper’s role in this movie, I mean it looks like she is CEO of Stark Industries I thought she resigned in the previous film. Pepper was also annoying in this movie, I mean she complains about Tony building suits, didn’t she complain about this in the first film? Word to the wise if you're in a relationship with someone and they do something that you don’t like either you deal with it or move on to someone else, don’t try and change the person or give that person an ultimatum. 

Pepper shouldn’t be complaining about that for two reasons first of all that thing you're doing living is because of him, I mean he threw his suit on you instead of himself. Second, you wouldn’t have been able to beat Aldrich Killian without his tech, that’s right this is the second movie where she saved Tony thanks for making him look like a punk Marvel Studios. Also, she's the reason why Tony blows up his suits you know what screw Pepper Potts, she's the real villain in this movie. Why would Tony help her get rid of the extremis virus, I mean she has powers now why not make her a part of the Avengers? 

P.S. I’m surprised that Pepper didn’t try to kill Tony, I mean he talks about keeping her safe and he put her in danger.                

Epilogue: I also want to talk about the Maya Hansen character. Just like road head, this character didn’t serve much of a purpose, I mean we don’t spend enough time with her to know her. We get a flashback of her and Tony at a New Year's Eve party and she created Extremis. Then we see her again trying to warn Tony about the Mandarin, after that, we learn that she's working for Killian. Tony talks to her like we are suppose to know her like he talks about what a great person she was, like I said we don’t know her enough to see that. 

I like how much detective work Tony Stark does in this movie, I hope to see more of this in future Batman films if WB is planning on making them. The theme of creating your own demons would have worked if Killian had an actual motivation, you know what holding a grudge for 14 years is something a woman would do.

The female viewers: Boo, boo, boo, boo, boo.

Boo nothing women are emotional men are logical, that’s what makes men different from women, and don’t forget it. You can tell Shane Black directed this movie because this film has a Christmas theme to it just like his other films, which was kind of annoying because that served no purpose in the movie. The way this movie ended made me question are they making The Avengers 2, I mean this movie feels like it's rapping things up also S.H.I.E.L.D wasn’t in this movie. Why wasn’t S.H.I.E.L.D in this movie, Aldrich Killian used the Mandarin as a frontman to be an international terrorist and S.H.I.E.L.D is nowhere to be found? 

I understand if they don’t want Captain American in this movie however you could have written him out by having this film take place at the same time as Winter Solider, it wouldn’t hurt to have Black Widow or Hawkeye in this movie to help. As I said this movie would have been better if the Mandarin is like his comic book counterpart, this is a character that can mop the floor with Tony/ Iron Man. The Mandarin is just as smart as Tony and he's richer and stronger than Tony. This movie should have the Mandarin beat Tony/ Iron Man financially, physically and emotionally, and he destroys his suits, then Tony tries to beat the Mandarin by outsmarting him. I don’t see how they can make more Iron Man films because of how this movie ended; they could have if they saved Aldrich Killian for the second film and not used Whiplash or Justin Hammer. 

Iron Man 2 was coming off The Incredible Hulk the Army tried to bring back the super soldier serum and that didn’t work, so the Army goes to Killian they used the Extremis virus to create bioweapons. This would make the Hulk movie more relevant and would give Tony something that he can't comprehend. Each movie would have a different theme like the first film is technology vs. technology, the second film could have been bioweapons vs. technology and the third could have been alien tech vs. human tech, if they want to make more Iron Man films they can use Whiplash or Hammer. If Thor the Dark World is going to be like this movie as far as tone goes, I’m not going to watch The Avengers 2 this time I mean it. 

P.S. We saw a character that was in the first film which creates a continuity flaw, I mean he said in the first film that he and Tony met at a press conference and he was drunk.