My rant about Wonder Woman

My rant about Wonder Woman

I have one question how is Wonder Woman such an iconic character? Saying that this character got the short end of the stick is an understatement, DC has done nothing with this character. I can’t think of any good Wonder Woman stories, she has no TV shows, no movies and no video games. That's a shame because she has a solid rouges gallery. (Well Doctor Psycho is too powerful for her, but I digress.) Three years ago, a network tried to make a Wonder Woman show, if you saw the unaired pilot then you know why the show didn’t happen. I don’t like what DC is doing with her in the new 52, in the new 52 she’s a killing machine. Again, why is this character so iconic? 

It’s sad that she's iconic but she doesn’t have what I just mentioned. I heard the CW is going to make a Wonder Woman show centered on her origin. I’m sorry Wonder Woman does have one movie but that’s it. Basically, writers don’t know what to do with this character, they keep changing her attire and personality. I can understand that characters can be hard to write, that’s the one thing she has in common with Batman and Superman but I digress. 

Speaking of Superman and Batman I didn’t like the idea of her being their love interest. What I don’t like about Wonder Woman in the Justice League cartoon is that they made her a feminist, which turned me off to her character. I didn’t mind that in the Wonder Woman animated movie because that was part of her arc. I wasn’t happy to hear that Wonder woman is going to be in the World’s Finest movie Come on do I really have to explain why?

I think Wonder Woman should be a good balance between Batman and Superman. The thing I like about her is she’s not gullible with villains, I mean she knows that some villains deserve compassion and some that need to be putdown. Another gripe I have with Wonder woman is I don’t know what she stands for, what is her foundation, what does she what to achieve? Hawkgirl is more of a complex character than Wonder Woman. 

Well, she was a poster Woman on feminism at one point in time, writers could make a story out of that. Like I said I can understand that Wonder woman can be hard to write because it seems like writes are having a hard time writing strong female characters without making the men look stupid, or have to women be men in a woman’s body. Just because it's hard to write female characters doesn't mean it's not possible I'm fond of how the MCU handles Black Widow so far, Black Widow didn't come off as a man in that movie.   

Bottom line DC or somebody needs to do something to make this character relevant, it's sad that she lasted this long and no one is doing anything interesting with her.

I walk alone

I walk alone

 

In this post, I will talk about my relationship with relatives and people in general. 

I don’t like talking to people in general. I’m not anti-social; it’s just annoying talking to people. I mean, people seem to be one-sided or closed-minded, which makes it hard for me to have a conversation with anyone. Religion's people, feminists, dating coaches and politicians can be narrow-minded. I'll give you a few examples of what I’m talking about when we found out that the late Bin Laden was killed or murdered. People looked at me like I’m crazy when I said that I wasn’t happy to hear. Why should I be happy about the death of a man that I don’t know and has done nothing to me personally? Even if he did, his death won't fix anything. The damage is done.  sidenote, I get annoyed when anyone asks me how I would feel if this or that happened to you or someone you know? That question is disingenuous. Also, we don’t know why he's done the things he did because we weren't there. He could have done these things to make a social change. If you want things to change, people have to suffer in the process, unfortunately. 

I want to ask women something; would you be outraged if your brother, father, husband or son were murdered by a group of women? If the answer is yes, then you and society shouldn't have any issue with men hitting women in self-defence for that reason alone. If feminists believe in equality, then this shouldn't bother them. If it does, then that tells me that you don't know how to conduct yourself around men. If that's the case, then you need to go back to Sesame Street. 

I’m embarrassed to be associated with geeks because they act crazy when anyone badmouths their favorite franchise or ruins it. Don’t take my word for it; look at Star Wars fans. They accuse Mr Lucas of raping their childhood because of how bad the prequels are to them. Do you see what I mean? Using that word in that context makes you look entitled and insensitive to people who experience that ordeal. If you think bad movies are as bad as being molested by your parents, then I don't want to be around you. People are one-sided when it comes to morality because they think it's universal, but it's not due to people's ethics and status.  

The reason why religious people are difficult to talk to is that they can come off as arrogant. As far as being so sure of themselves because of what GOD or the Bible says. Because of that, they can be disingenuous about their views on anything because their views are based on GOD and the Bible. Who wants to be around someone who doesn't think they're wrong? We were wrong about how dinosaurs use to look in the past compared to now, and Pluto is no longer considered a planet. You don't think it's possible that you could have misinterpreted the Bible? 

For example, a lot of people think an eye for an eye means revenge; what that scripture means is the punishment should fit the crime. Do you see how easy it is to misinterpret something? Also, they can be narrow-minded when it comes to what's in the Bible, for example, the Bible says don't provoke your kids to wrath. That scripture doesn't just apply to kids; it applies to anyone who has authority over people. They shouldn't be acting like they're so certain about things because they don't know the details of GOD's plan.

 

Also, making a valid point about a topic isn't enough to have people agree with it, because some people are stubborn. For example, I understand why people think men and women can't be friends because of sex; however, it's kind of disingenuous. Let me put it like this, would you look at a couple funny when you learn that they are in-laws? If the answer is yes, then that's my point. So, you're expected to not be involved with anyone else when you're married, not look at your in-laws sexually, not get romantically involved with your co-worker, but being friends with the opposite sex is out of the question. You see, the math doesn't add up.         

I’m tired of people not being honest with themselves. You hear people say I would never do this or that how would you know if you haven’t been put in that position? Just because people will do something that you frown upon, that doesn't mean you're above doing it. For example, on the show Fear Factor, you have to eat random things to win money. I wouldn’t do that because I don’t know how my body would react to what I eat, I could get sick, have an allergic reaction or die. It’s not worth the risk. 

Here's another example; whenever someone complains about someone being too negative, I find that disingenuous. There is a negative state to everything in life, and we do things to offset it. Here are some examples; when you don't take care of your body, it starts to stink, you're in pain and have health problems. If you don't take care of your house, it falls apart. If we are not on one accord with the rules, we will have chaos. If you provoke the wrong person, he or she will take it out on you, someone you know or others. If you provoke another country, we will have war. What do you mean, you can be too negative? People who are disabled should be insulted that people are inspired by them to make something of themselves despite their setbacks, because they don't want to walk a mile in their shoes. If that's not true, then spend a year of your life as blind, deaf and doing things without arms or legs.  

Remember the scene from Spider-Man 3 that everyone loves to make fun of? If you don't care what people think of you, then you should have no problem reenacting that scene in public. I mean, the worst things that could happen to you is people will make fun of you. Well, you can argue that people are inherently hypocritical, but you should still own up to it. Also, where do you draw the line when it comes to hypocrisy? People need to learn how to argue. The purpose of an argument is to reach an understanding, not to berate someone for their point of view on things. I don't understand how people can be jealous of each other. It's a childish emotion. Now, if you're addicted to attention or someone screwed you over to be successful, I would understand why you would be jealous.    

This is why it's hard for me to feel sorry for those who are going through a hard time. Let's say I met a boy who lost his sight. How can I show him compassion if I'm not willing to give up my ability to see to make him feel better? It's easy to feel bad for someone if you're not going to put your money where your mouth is. This is one of the reasons why people, in general, don't get along because we don't relate to each other. Yes! We can understand someone's pain; however, that's not enough. For example, you know getting shot is painful; however, you can't relate to how the pain affects that person because you're not the victim. Even if you have experience with getting shot, you still don't know. 

It's hard for me to be around White people because there is one thing that they do that drives me nuts, and that is complaining about unfairness. Whenever they do that, I roll on the floor laughing because they don't care about that. If they did, they would have made amends for all the messed-up things they have done to Black people. Don't you dare say you weren't there when it happened unless you're homeless or broke; you're reaping the benefits of slavery. Until White people are ready and willing to be enslaved, I mean, serve Black people for thousands of years, they have no business talking about unfairness.    

To the people who don't care about life being unfair, let me ask you this. If someone put a bounty on you and the police won't protect you, would you be upset? If you get injured or have cancer, would you be outraged that the Doctors won't treat you? If the answer to both questions is yes, then stop acting like you don't care about life being unfair. Just because life isn't fair, that doesn't mean we should enable it. 

I have nothing against the LGBT community; however, I don't like it when they act like everyone is suppose to welcome them with open arms. There was a news report of a same-sex couple who got a baker arrested for not baking them a wedding cake, the nerve. They do and say things where they're asking for trouble, like comparing themselves to Black people. Doing that is disingenuous because A they're not doing anything to make Black people's lives better, and B we can't tell if you're fruity unless you carry yourself a certain way. If you can't deal with the stigma of coming out of the closet, then keep it on the down low or go to New Orleans.         

I'm annoyed that men get into fights because doing that makes them look like cowards. For example, when someone is rude or disrespectful to you, you're ready to fight. I'm not saying you shouldn't respond in that manner; however, that response doesn't make you look sincere. Nine times out of ten, we don't fight someone unless we think we can win. Don't believe me, let me ask you this. How often do you fight someone twice your size? A better question is how often due men fight each other at the Gym? Would you file a lawsuit against a major company? I know that's not the same thing, but the principle still applies. 

That's the problem we have, egos about who we allow to mistreat us or beat us up. If that's not true, then how often do you fight your boss or law enforcement for acting out of line with you? You mean to tell me that you would be ashamed and embarrassed to lose a fight to a woman, but you won't feel the same way about losing a fight to a man who's fruity or smaller than you? My point is that fighting someone that you know you can beat is not impressive or respectable. Besides, would you feel terrible to learn that the reason why this person is provoking you is that he lost a family member, and you beat him up for it? At the end of the day, you're responsible for how you respond to situations. Showing someone compassion is easy when you're in a good mood. If picking a fight you can win is what masculinity is about, then who needs courage?           

That's another thing that bugs me about people; in general, they think their experience is a universal truth. If it works for me, then it should work for you. In order to be successful in life, you need good genes and to be raised in a good environment. Everyone doesn't have those things, and it's an uphill battle to make something of yourself without them. That's my issue with dating coaches when they tell men they have no game, because most men don't have game. If that weren't the case, bars and nightclubs wouldn't exist. I mean, why do we need them to get laid if game is enough? 

Another thing that people do that frustrates me is projecting their fear onto me. I mean, they do that when they say be careful, don't do this or that. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate their concern; however, it doesn't make it less aggravating. Suffering is a part of life, unfortunately, and you'll have a hard time finding someone who doesn't have regrets. Just because you went through a bad experience doesn't mean you can't gain something from it. Sidenote, I was jaw-dropped to hear how people talk to each other online, play Call of Duty or any of the Halo games online and be bad at it, and you’ll see what I mean. 

Also, I can be standoffish with people at work and with strangers. Because of that, they assume I'm rude, but I'm not. I'm just not interested in insane small talk, and I don't see the point in faking meaningless pleasantries with strangers for no reason. I'm not rude or unkind to people. I wouldn't be mean to anyone for no reason. I just don't nod at everyone I pass in the hallway like a bubblehead, and I see no reason to discuss the weather or ask how people are doing just for the sake of making noise. They're just going to say some meaningless crap anyway. ("Oh, I can't wait for Friday" etc. Boring!) What bothers me the most about those who get offended by this is the entitlement factor. Like I'm obligated to smile and talk about nonsense, especially when it's not reciprocated. If I don't, then I'm rude or think I'm too good for people, etc. Another reason why people view me that way is because I say harsh things to people. I say those things to get through to them, not because I'm looking for a fight.   

In case you didn't figure it out, I'm a pariah in my family because I'm not a family person; I'm the type of person who loves from a distance. Part of the reason why is because to me, family is a title and titles are earned. What's the point of a family if we alienate each other? I disagree with the saying you can't choose your family because there's a difference between family and being related. I'm not close to relatives who are older than me for the same reason why I'm not close to authority figures, I mean do you get sick of being around someone who knows it all? How can I have any relationship with them if I can't relate to them because of the age gap between us? How can I talk to them about the '50s or '60s if I don't know or experience what things were like in those times? 

That's another thing, elderly people are not above losing people's respect or being stupid. I will say this to them; if you haven't done anything that benefits the youth today, you don't get to complain about their lack of respect because you haven't done anything to earn that. If you did, what are you doing to preserve it? Just because I don't listen to them, it's not about me knowing better; it's about perspective. How can you say you want me to do better if we have the same views about everything? Really, what have your parents told you that you couldn't figure out on your own as you get older? Also, passing down wisdom means nothing if the youth don't know how to use it to make their life better and if they don't trust you. For example, if you didn't have technology growing up, why would they listen to you if you don't know how to use it or how it's impacting people's lives or our culture?   

This is why I didn't take history class seriously, because for the most part, history is about people who make the same mistakes over and over and over again. Don't believe me? Then explain to me why we have so many wars? How many of them started because of colonialism? How can Black people prevent being enslaved if they don't exercise their Second Amendment rights? (To be fair, when we do, Law Enforcement have a problem with it.) Sidenote; no one should be offended by being called stupid because history has proven otherwise. This reinforces why I don't want kids because I'm doing them a disserves by giving them knowledge instead of letting them figure things out on their own. I know I'm responsible for them until they turn eighteen; however, that doesn't change the fact that this could lead to other problems. 

The only time they see me is at funerals. I don't like going to funerals, not because it's sad, it's because it's a waste of time. What's the point of me being there if I can't help ease people's pain? I shouldn't feel like I'm walking on eggshells. I notice that loved ones don't talk about whether or not the deceased was happy when he or she was alive. Why do we show respect for someone when they're dead? That tells me you didn't love him or her at all. What does rest in peace mean? 

This is why I prefer a surrogate family, because I believe you have to earn things in life; how is love any different? I mean, we can do things to each other that cause us not to want anything to do with each other. Love means nothing to me if you don't trust me, respect my boundaries, and you're ashamed of me. I find it refreshing to know that someone who isn't related to me cares about me. It doesn't mean as much to me coming from relatives because there's nothing they wouldn't do to put a smile on your face. (Well, almost nothing) It's a nature vs nurture thing with me.      

As far as a romantic relationship goes, there are times where I wish I was asexual for three reasons. 

First of all, what's the point of being attracted to women when they act like this when you approach them? 

I'm not just talking about women who looks like they belong on Sports Illustrated, I'm talking about overweight women as well. I was turned down by them; if that's not a blow to your self-esteem, I don't know what is. 

Of course, I didn't go to the prom; if I did, this would be my prom date. 

Not only that, women love to give us blue balls. We can't ask women for sex directly because they find it offensive. (Well, that depends on who you are.) Prostitution is illegal, even if it wasn't, they make us pay a ridiculous amount of money for sex. When we're in a relationship, you don't know when you're going to have sex, plus you're jumping through hoops. Heck, they don't want to indulge us in foreplay. This is one of the reasons why you're a victim of infidelity, because they're asking for trouble when they do this, but I digress. Side note, there are things that I'm not willing to try when it comes to sex. I'm going to leave it at that. I wanna ask women something, do you wait for a job to fall on your lap? If the answer is no, then why is your love life excluded from that? I mean, if you see men that you're drawn to, why don't you approach them once in a while? Speaking of approaching, it's hard to talk to them when they are on the phone all the time, and they speak a different language.   

Also, you can't fully experience sex without running the risk of getting women pregnant. If you are not willing to pay that price, then you should engage in that activity. Second, birth control has side effects on women. Whether or not those effects are server, it's not fair to put women through that just to get my rocks off. Finally, men and women are not compatible enough to be monogamous because both parties are too different to the point where they want different things out of relationships or life. Women want marriage and to start a family. Men are not crazy about those things because A they want to have as much fun as they can and B they don't love kids the way women do. Why do you think men don't talk about how much they enjoy being fathers? Another thing I don't equate marriage with love, and it's hard to find someone who feels the same way. 

What's marriage going to do for your relationship that hasn't been done before? (Unless you're religious) It's hard to find a woman who enjoys doing guy things, and it's hard to find a man who wants to do women things. (If you do find a man like that, other men will bust his balls for doing those things.) If both parties don't want the same thing out of the relationship, then it's not going to work. Also, it's hard to have a relationship with anyone without money being a factor. Plus, women treat men like illegal immigrants, as far as they expect so much from us, but they give us so little in return. Don't worry I'll talk about that another time. 

These are the reasons why I'm a lone wolf. Granted! I have rubbed people the wrong way; however, it doesn't matter if I did those things or not. People will despise you regardless of who you are or what you've done. I'm not saying ruffling feathers is OK; however, that comes with the growing pains of getting to know someone. I know you have to earn people's respect; however, that doesn't work if you don't throw them a bone. Plus, I don't see the point of cleaning up my act for people who didn't want anything to do with me from day one. If doing that won't make up for the bad impression I gave you, then what's the point? 

That's another thing people need to be more forgiving, because no one is above seeking forgiveness. There are plenty of things that get us upset, like playing loud music in the middle of the night, eating your leftovers, being stuck in traffic, someone cutting you in line, someone making fun of your culture or religion, being sucker punched, the list goes on. I can understand why being forgiven is hard for some people because, for the most part, people are not sorry for what they did; they're sorry that they got caught. How many times do you hear people admit that they broke the law because they thought they could get away with it? 

Some things are considered unforgivable, like murder, rape, posting naked pictures of yourself online, giving your bank account number to strangers and accusing you of a crime you didn't commit. Forgiveness is not about second chances or letting people think what they did was OK; it's about moving on with your life. How can you do that if you won't let go of the anger you have toward anyone who wronged you? When you do give someone a second chance, you gave up the right to bring up what he or she did in the past. How can we have world peace if we can't find peace within ourselves?     

We live in a society that disregards men's well-being. Society treating men like this plays a role in them committing suicide, but that's a topic for another time. If being alone will drive you crazy, then I would rather lose my mind being alone than be around people who won't keep me honest. Just because you don't have the family or peers that you want doesn't mean you have to accept the ones you have.       

My rant about Valentines day

My rant about Valentine's Day 

This is one of the two days of the year I don’t like; the other day is Halloween if you're wondering. Also, Despite not getting a day off I think it’s funny that we treat Valentine's Day like it’s a holiday because it's a commercial for cards. If Valentine's Day had a nickname, it would be making your girlfriend or Wife Happy Day. You can say that’s sexist all you want but it’s true. When you go to a retail store what do you see when they advertise Valentine’s Day? You see flowers, cards, candy and stuffed animals. How many men do you know want those things? Also, the things I mentioned cost more on that day, what gives? 

Who spends the most money men do, we spend money on a woman buying her gifts and for her to wire and dine. What do men get from women?

A man: Sex!

Oh, whoop pee stinking do! Word to the wise if you're in a relationship and that's the only time of year when you get laid something is wrong. I thought this day is about celebrating love, if it’s true then ladies why don’t you buy your man gifts on Valentine's Day? Why don’t I hear men talk about their women buying them Power tools, a PS4, a flat screen TV and season tickets to the all-star games? Heck, what is the most romantic thing you ever done for a man? If you love your man, then this shouldn’t be a problem. 

What about the kids I don't see parents buying their kids anything on this day. Better question what about single people, why are there single people if Valentine's Day is about love? How can we celebrate love if we live in a world full of war, segregation and hate? I know love can't fix those things however it could help. The bottom line is this, men should save their money or spend it on themselves because this day is a waste of time and money. We don’t need Valentine's Day to celebrate the fact that you are in a relationship, isn't that what anniversaries are for?  

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.