Movie Review: Surrogates

Last Thursday night, my wife and I decided to head to the cinema; with only a few movies currently interesting us, we selected the new Bruce Willis movie, Surrogates (PS: don't read any further if you want to avoid spoilers, or go to the Wiki link if you haven't seen the movie). We had seen the preview a few weeks ago and had decided that it might be worth watching.

The story revolves around worldwide use of a virtual "avatar" technology called Surrogates. In essence, technology was developed to help people who were paralysed or disabled by allowing them to experience walking and other physical skills virtually, through the use of a wireless neural interface and robotic surrogates. The technology caught on with the public, and due to the increasing use of surrogates in everyday life, reductions in crime rates have made their use practically "normal". The nature of the crime reduction is attributed to the freedom that surrogates have provided to the population; with the possibility to experience all that life has to offer without physical danger, there is no reason for crime.

The surrogates themselves are anatomically correct, idealized versions of their owners, although we quickly discover that this is not always the case. It actually becomes a major element in the story, as the use of surrogates can be likened to the puppeteer and the puppet; it is not always possible to know who is behind the puppet.

But there is a worldwide movement of humans who refuse to use this technology, and even refuse to interact with other humans who make use of this technology. In the movie, this is quickly touched on in news broadcasts indicating that "Dreads" have established outposts in all major US cities, and have banned the use of surrogates within their territories. This becomes a major plot point of the story.

As the story begins, we meet Agent Tom Greer (the character played by Bruce Willis), who is an FBI agent investigating the first murder in years. Like everyone else, Greer goes through everyday life through his surrogate, much like his coworkers and other people he meets. This murder seems especially suspect, as the victim, Jarod, is the college student son of the man who invented the surrogates and related technology, and who uses multiple surrogates himself (which we learn is illegal but not unheard of). The case grows more complicated, however, when several humans are murdered when their surrogates are "murdered", something which is not supposed to happen due to specific technological safeguards built into each surrogate. The technology is so reliable that it has been adopted by the military for combat use.

In effect, a discover that some humans simply refuse the surrogate technology, and even go so far as to refuse to deal with anyone if they are using surrogates. The plot quickly develops and we discover that a weapon has been created and used, which can effectively kill a user through their surrogate, a development which the authorities want to be kept quiet, as it would undermine the entire reason for the use of surrogates if users could be killed.

There are some fantastic visual effects in this movie, but unfortunately, the plot seemed a little lacking. By the middle of the movie, it is pretty easy to determine that some event will happen which will force the end to the use of surrogates. I just thought that it seemed a little silly to have such a sophisticated system, in use worldwide, to be so easy to disrupt. Even today's simple telecommunication technology is capable of this type of protection.

Nonetheless, the movie was visually entertaining, although we were both left with the feeling that perhaps we should have waited for this one to come out on video...

Movie Review: Inglorious Basterds

Let's start off by saying that this is a Quentin Tarantino movie. Yes, as you may imagine, it is violent and shocking. And a little long by standard movie comparison. But it is a Tarantino movie, a vision if you like, of how World War 2 should have worked out, at least in his twisted mind!


Inglorious Basterds brings together Brad Pitt, as Lt. Aldo Raine,


and eight Jewish American soldiers, about to be dropped behind enemy lines in occupied France, to do one thing, and one thing only: killing Nazis!
I applaud Tarantino for telling this story in English, German and French, with subtitles when required. It is a little heavy on the dialogue, as most Tarantino movies are. But this is how he develops his characters.

I don't want to reveal too much about the movie; I invite you to go see it and judge it for yourself. Personally, I'd like to see it again, so I can make up my mind about it properly; I think I'll wait for it to come out on DVD and watch it again.

Movie Lemons: The Core

I had seen the preview for this movie several years ago, but never got around to seeing it. If I remember correctly, I found the plot so idiotic that I had made a conscious decision to not watch this movie. Fast-forward several years, and as I am watching television yesterday evening, this movie comes on, and I decide to watch it (as there was nothing else playing). Little did I know that watching the blank television screen might have proved to be a more entertaining venture.

The movie starts out with the far-fetched notion that the Earth's core has come to a stop for some undetermined reason. The consequence of this is that the Earth's magnetic field will slowly collapse and eventually disappear, leaving the planet vulnerable to solar radiation bombardment, which will destroy everything alive on the planet. Who will save the Earth, you ask. Well, scientists will, that's who! Of course, all the scientists present agree that there is no way they can dig down to the core of the Earth. Unless...

In comes a forgotten geological genius, who on his own, has come up with a new mining technology that relies on lasers (what else?) and ultrasounds, and can dig at speeds that leave the special effects crew far behind. Conveniently, our genius has also invented a new material, which has the special properties of being nearly indestructible, and with the unique capability to convert heat to energy..... Did I mention what he names the material? Unobtonium, as it's so unobtainable.....

Armed with these two ideas, in steps the US military to fund the whole project and build a ship that can carry a crew to the center of the Earth. Now, guess how they plan to get the Earth's core started. You go it, nuclear bombs. Not just one, but five of them. And not just any bombs, 200 megaton bombs..... And to top it off, the Army realises that it would not do to have any information about this problem leak out to the world and cause a mass panic, so they hire/kidnap a reputed hacker to "filter" the Internet and prevent spread of information about the issue. Of course, when a hole in the magnetic field of the planet allows solar radiation to melt the Golden Gate bridge in half, and destroy most of the city of San Franscisco, the hacker is one it, using a program he wrote in a few minutes to search and destroy any information relating to the disaster.....

You can imagine that the journey is fraught with dangers, but fear not, with a new scanning system developed by the head scientist, they'll be able to see the path ahead. With a crew of six, the 4 day journey takes them through a giant cobalt geode to fields of diamonds the "size of Rhode Island". After several fatalities, we discover that one of the scientists on board (yes, the one everybody hates within five minutes) created a weapon used to create tectonic instabilities through the Earth's core.... The same scientist that makes a mistake calculating the explosive yield required to restart the rotation of the core is able to quickly calculate that using precise placement of the bombs, they will be able to set up a harmonic resonance that will amplify the explosive yield by exactly the right amount. Right!

My perception of this story begins with the apparent lack of respect for the audience's intelligence, and the clear lack of knowledge of the writing and production teams. Good Lord, it could have been just a little more believable if one of you had bothered to open up a grade school science book! I know it's science fiction (well, it's fiction of some kind), but that doesn't mean it has to be utterly outrageous. I mean, for a second, I was almost sure Uwe Boll had directed this waste of celluloid. Do yourself a favour, and just make up your own story instead of losing the brain cells watching this sorry excuse for a film.

New Feature: Movie Lemons

Every once in a while, a movie comes out that is so terrible to watch that you simply need to warn others of their impending doom if they choose to behold it. Well, I have decided that I can be silent no more; too many times have I wished for a slow and agonizing death rather than be subject to the wasted efforts of hundreds of people, never mind the astronomical sums of money to bring me something that is the very antithesis of entertainment.

Out of this situation rose Movie Lemons, my own section on the terrible movies I have seen. I also decided that the first movie I would list in this feature is the atrocious science fiction feature called The Core. I hope that my warnings serve to at least save one movie night!

New Feature: Classic Movie Review

It's come to my attention that many of the movies I've enjoyed the most are in some cases several years old. With that in mind, I decided to create a new feature called Classic Movie Review, where I will review movies that I have seen over the years, and that I believe might be enjoyed by others. I have pretty eclectic tastes, but foremost, I enjoy a good story. I am not a fan of movies that attempt to disguise bad writing with special effects.

I hope that this new feature will prove to be an interesting addition to this blog, and provide some new choices from older features. Enjoy.

Movie Review: In The Name Of The King

Good Lord, what was I thinking? I've been buying movies for a while now, and only once or twice do I consider that I've been had. The first time was when I found the Bourne Identity for dirt cheap, bought the DVD, and realized once I got it home that it was a full screen edition as opposed to the wide screen editions I prefer. I know that's not much of a difference, but I really dislike full screen aspect ratios as it does not match what the director saw when he or she filmed the movie. The other time I feel that I was suckered was when I purchased a Superbit edition of the Fifth Element; I was lured by the idea of a very high resolution version of what I considered a great movie. Well, the movie quality is exactly the same as any other DVD of the same film I've seen, except that it only contains the movie, nothing else. I've come to expect a few extras with the DVDs I purchase, and in many cases, these extras have provided just as much entertainment as the original material itself. The official explanation is that these features are removed in order to make space for the main feature at a higher bit rate. Right.

So yesterday, as I was going through the bin of DVDs on sale at the store, browsing through such great movies as The Abyss, The Green Mile, and yes, even Commando (I know it's not really a great movie, but it is funny, and entertaining at the very least!), I saw In The Name Of The King, with Jason Statham, and I thought, why not? I mean, although Statham is not exactly an Oscar winner, he's been in some pretty decent action movies, like the Transporter series, Crank, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch. So I thought, at the very least, there will be some decent action scenes, and for the price of five dollars, how could I lose? I even went as far as to read the summary in the back: family man, wife kidnapped, boy killed, evil wizard, evil army, rescue, revenge, etc... Sounds like a decent fantasy-type story to me, and being a fan of fantasy stories, I thought the deal sounded good. And so I return home, happy as a clam with my purchases.

My wife and I decided that we would watch this movie yesterday evening. The movie starts, and for the first minute, it looks pretty convincing. Nice scenery, medieval-type architecture, father farmer tending to his crops with his son. The wife comes out of the quaint little farmhouse, and that's when I start wondering. She is quite attractive, and practically wearing makeup! Well, it's a fantasy story, I tell myself, it doesn't have to be historically accurate. Then they begin to speak, and I wonder about the dialogue within the first several sentences. Who wrote this drivel? Well, a movie can't be perfect, so we continue watching.

All I can tell you is that around the halfway mark, my wife got up and returned to browsing the Web, and I just, well, dozed off. I can't begin to tell you how utterly dreadful this movie is; the dialogue is terrible, and at some points, I get the impression the actors are looking at each other and really wondering what the hell they are doing here? The plot is convoluted, and twists and turns at all of the wrong moments. It's like someone decided to do Lord Of The Rings in two and a half hours, with one tenth the budget, and the Coles Notes to the book. I picked up the DVD case from the living room table and looked at the director. In the fraction of a second before I looked at the back of the case, I wondered about some of the worst directors I've ever experienced, and one name stood out, Uwe Boll. Then I saw the movie's director: Uwe Boll. I just laughed. At least I can say one thing about him, he is consistent. I can now safely say that yes, ALL of his movies are absolutely terrible, just complete rubbish. It's not that he doesn't know about the technical aspects of movie making. But he just can't tell a story.

I've been trying to come up with a way to describe how bad the storytelling is, but words fail me. I read up a bit on Boll, trying to figure out how he had managed to get people to put up money for him to make movies, and I discovered some interesting facts about the German entertainment industry. Apparently, due to some interesting tax incentives, it makes sense to invest in a movie made by a German company. Any money invested becomes 100% deductable, and taxes will only be garnished on any profit the movie makes. If the movie loses money, the loss becomes useful tax wise, and since the investment had been deducted beforehand, any profit losses can still turn out to be advantageous. Wow.

Under no circumstance should you even see this movie. I paid five dollars for it, and I now realize that I would gladly pay ten dollars to get rid of it. Good Lord man, Boll, what's wrong with you? Did you actually watch this movie and think: yes, I'm proud of this work, I'm sure people will like it? Do you do this for all of your movies? I'm not saying I could do better, but I sure as hell would not do worst! If you did, then perhaps you might take a lesson from George Costanza, and do the opposite. It might be the best thing you'll ever do.

Movie Review: Shaun of the dead

I have always been a fan of zombie movies; there is just something about zombies that makes me laugh. Most zombie movies are not comedies to begin with, but are usually so laughable that at some point, most people begin to believe that they are. There have been a few notable exceptions (such as 28 Days and 28 Weeks Later) that have been truly scary, but most are not.

And then, there are movies that just like to poke fun. I guess that the best way to describe Shaun of the Dead is to label it a parody of zombie movies. Directed by Edgar Wright, and starring Simon Pegg and Nick Frost (of Hot Fuzz), and written by Pegg and Wright, the plot of Shaun of the Dead revolves around Shaun, a young man who is trying hard to get some kind of focus in his life as he attempts to get back together with his ex-girlfriend and settle his various life issues. At the same time he has to cope with an uprising of zombies.

If you enjoy British humour, Shaun of the Dead is sure to please. There are some brilliantly scripted moments, and some truly humorous situations. If you like zombies and comedy, you have to see this one.

Movie Review: Pink Panther 2

"I would like a rhumb". Whenever I've heard those words pronounced, even without the outrageous French accent, in any hotel lobby, I can't help but laugh. I've been a Peter Sellers fan since I was a young boy and those words always remind me of the bumbling Inspector Clouseau. Many people have found Sellers interpretation of the inept detective as pure comedic genius, and as such, it is to be expected that anyone trying to reprise the role would have some rather large shoes to fill. And as funny as Steve Martin is, I just don't believe that he is up to it.

When many think of Clouseau, they mention several traits that Sellers used to define the character: the outrageous French accent that even the French don't seem to understand, the sexist and racist remarks that are pronounced regularly and the massive ego of the bumbling detective. Personally, I've always thought that what made Seller's Clouseau tremendously funny was his outrage at others less than gallant behaviour and his nonchalance when faced with the most embarrassing mishaps. But the true genius behind it was the delivery. Deadpan, and believable. And sadly, Martin is anything but.

Although I laughed on a few occasions throughout the film, I was also reminded how unfortunate it was that Sellers died so young. Martin has seized on what the average person knows about Clouseau, bumbling ineptness, and given his take on it. I hate to critique someone of Martin's comic calibre, but in this case, I can't do anything but. Whereas Sellers seemed a natural, Martin is nothing short of forced in this role. He is just trying too hard, and that just takes away from the comedy. And in a movie with a cast that also includes another comedic genius, John Cleese, the result is simply not what I expected.

My recommendation really depends on your tastes. If you like Peter Sellers, then don't bother with this film. Otherwise, take a look, you might find something to like about it.

Movie Review: Knowing

I've always liked end of the world disaster movies, like The Day After Tomorrow and Deep Impact. There is something a little satisfying in seeing the reaction of the masses to some implausible but potential scenarios of global doom. But Knowing takes this concept one step further; what if you knew in advance about the end of the world?

Starring Nicholas Cage as a widowed and less than believable astrophysics professor. Spoilers are provided below, so if you haven't seen the movie, do yourself a favour and wait before reading the rest.

During the historic opening of a time capsule placed at his son's high school, students unseal letters written by students from fifty years ago. Cage's son receives a strange letter covered in numbers, without any obvious sense. Piqued by a curious encounter with a mysterious being and strange whispering, the son brings the letter home. That night, after confronting his son concerning the theft of the letter, which Cage considers school property, and during one of his nightly drinking bouts as he slips into a depressive state due to the death of his wife, Cage discovers within the letter a sequence of numbers that corresponds to the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre. More importantly, a number following the date corresponds exactly to the number of victims.

Furious research through the night allow Cage to discover that the letter is a complete list of all of the major disasters of the last fifty years, in perfect sequential order. But is it a coincidence? As one of his colleagues points out, there are also sequences of numbers between each set of dates that are unaccounted for, which could indicate that Cage is simply finding meaning in random numbers. And the odd ending of the letter, which provides a date and the number 33 do not really correspond to anything. Since there are three sets of dates that indicate future events, Cage proceeds to investigate and eventually attempt to stop the disasters that indicated by the dates and numbers of victims, and what we eventually discover are the exact coordinates for each happening. We also learn that the little girl who had written the letter fifty years ago had locked herself in a closet in the school and scratched something else into the door. After meeting with the daughter of the letter writer, Cage discovers that the 33 are actually upside down letter E, and that EE stands for Everyone Else and we finally understand that the final catastrophe will be global in scale and will mean the end of humanity. Being an astrophysics professor, Cage quickly determines that an unusually strong solar flare will destroy all life on Earth.

The mysterious stranger has now multiplied and we begin to realize that they are not from this world, and that they are here for a purpose. This is when the movie begins to take a turn for the worst as we quickly learn that the Strangers are here to save some humans, specifically certain children, including Cage's son and the daughter of the daughter of the original letter writer. All along, the Strangers had sent messages, warnings if you like, to allow the descendants of some chosen people to survive the next fifty years in order to be "picked up" just before the impending disaster.

The story ends, and we witness the destruction of the Earth but not before watching the alien spaceship lift off from the surface, and from our bird's eye perspective, we see that several ships are leaving the surface of the planet in the same way. Moments later, these ships quickly "warp" away from Earth's orbit and the flare hits the planet, eradicating everything on the planet's surface. The children are dropped in a field of bulbous, wheat-like plains, where they immediately begin to walk towards a lone white tree, as we see other alien ships in the distance, we assume dropping their "cargo" in the same manner.

The movie was an enjoyable visual experience, and although the story has some elements of drama, the story telling was simply not up to par with the possibilities that this story held. Cage provided adequate acting skills, but his role did not really allow him to display anything other than utter depression, or utter terror at the impending doom! It's worth watching at least once, but that's about it.

Movie Review: Terminator Salvation, or how to waste money and talent on the mindless hordes

My wife took me to see Terminator Salvation last night for my birthday date. I love going to see movies with my wife, because I then have someone with intelligence and taste to discuss the movie with afterwards. Well, we were both less than impressed with this last instalment in a series that is practically pre-written for anyone willing to tell the story.

The visual effects were outstanding, as I have come to expect from Hollywood. But the story, or lack thereof, was more of a let down than usual. Of course, let me start by saying that Arnold Swarzenegger is not a great actor; actually, he can hardly be called an actor at all. But he carried the Terminator franchise to heights completely unexpected by the producers of the first Terminator movie. The second Terminator movie is still one of the great science fiction stories of our century. The third movie in the series was not as well received as the producers expected, but I still found it enjoyable. At least, by this point, the story still made some sense.

But Salvation performed that marketing ploy known as the reboot, or what I refer to as the bait and switch technique. By purchasing the rights, new producers get to use the brand to draw audiences in, but then provide them with a sub standard product that is not at all what the brand represents.

I have always believed that the Terminator story had a major plot hole in it; the machines think like humans, and Skynet has no strategic capabilities. From what we've been led to believe so far in the story, Skynet has complete control over the military arsenal of the USA. From what I understand, if humans are the primary threat to Skynet, would not biological weapons be a far more effective and efficient method of disposal of this threat? Why even bother creating bipedal Terminators at all? With this line of thought though, there would be no story at all, and we would not even be discussing this topic.

Salvation introduces us to an experimental infiltration Terminator model, in the guise of Marcus Wright, a death row inmate scheduled for execution, who sells his remains to good old Cyberdyne, to do with as they please after his passing. Of course, the script spoon-feeds us the idea that this would be a way for Marcus to get a "second chance"... Later on in the movie, when Marcus discovers the nature of his existence in this time period, the idea that Marcus is Skynet's first forays into cybernetic organisms, why would his entire skeletal and muscular structure be remade, but his organic heart be still in place? Of all the organs in the body, a simple pump does not seem to be beyond the capabilities of Skynet at this point. Oh well, I guess those "detailed files" are just not that detailed after all.

It was, as revealed at the end, a simple plot solution to the "deadly" injury sustained by John Connor and a convenient way to set up the audience for a sequel. A sequel of a reboot of a trilogy... Hmmmm, not sure where this will go, but unfortunately, with what I've seen there is always room for making things worst...

Movie Review: Star Trek

Yes, I am a Trek fan. From the very first time I watched the Original Series, through all the movies, then Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager and even Enterprise. I've seen every episode, from every show at least twice, and in some cases, a lot more than that. Like a lot of fans, I kept hope for another movie, seeing as Nemesis had left such a convenient opening for another story. I even secretly hoped for a Voyager movie, although that was wishful thinking to say the least.

So when I saw the first previews for Star Trek, I rejoiced! When I discovered that Adams would produce, I became a little sceptical; being the hardcore fan that I am, I was hoping that it might be conceivable to have Jonathan Frakes direct another movie. And then, as more information became available, I realized that the franchise was about to get a reboot.

I have never been a big fan of rebooting movie franchises. But after seeing the movie, I am a little torn on this topic. The cast was fantastic, the chemistry was quite good and bound to get better, and the special effects were astonishing, if not a little too overwhelming. But the original time line has now been destroyed. With Spock as the only conceivable link back to the Federation that we discovered in all those different episodes is gone. And I find myself missing it already.

Perhaps this time, Star Trek will finally gain the audience it deserved all along.