Movie: The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

Rating: B+

Probably the most anticipated movie of 2012 also contained the most IMAX footage ever used in a feature film. Sure, plenty of movies, including this year's The Avengers, was converted into IMAX, but director Christopher Nolan actually used IMAX cameras to include over an hour of actual IMAX images for The Dark Knight.



The result is palpable. So if you do get a chance to see the movie in IMAX, it's definitely worth giving yourselves a treat to fully experience the clarity, vividness, and perfection that is IMAX.

But that being said, while I absolutely loved the movie, it really bothers me when there are plot holes. I'm going to try to say this without issuing a spoiler alert. Batman's injuries vs. recovery. Just doesn't add up. Another thing that bothers me is when symbols are overused that it becomes trite. Without giving away too much of the 2h45min movie, was it really necessary to have the ENTIRE national anthem sung? Granted, DC Comics really does cater to a more patriotic crowd, but this was overkill.

I love watching Christopher Nolan's movies and I think he's a great director. But if you watch the first two in this particular Batman trilogy, Gotham is a much different place. Yet, in THIS finale of the trilogy, Gotham City looked decidedly like New York. I just thought that the inconsistency was too great. Of course, did it detract from the movie itself? No. Just me being picky.

And my final problem with the movie. It really might have been a good idea to include subtitles when Bane spoke. And he spoke a lot. With the muffled mask, it was very difficult to understand him at times.

Aside from these things, the finale was everything that we've come to expect of Christopher Nolan's movies. I must say that I really enjoyed some of the character twists that they provided, ie, using the Selena Kyle character...you know, before she was officially the "Catwoman".

~Cheers.

Movie: Underworld: Awakening (2012)

Rating: C

One thing I really like about flights these days. It's a great opportunity to catch up on movies. Especially movies that you weren't quite sure that you want to spend money on at the cinema. Especially movies that cater to some guilty pleasure. Particularly true, for movies like Underworld: Awakening.



Like the rest of the sequels in this series, it's not a very good example of cinematic brilliance. It's not even an example of cinematic mediocrity. What it is, is just fun to watch.

Fun to watch Kate Beckinsale kick some butt in her skin tight black leather (well, probably faux leather). If you're expecting anything else from this movie or its franchise? You might want to get your head examined. You're delusional.

Granted, she's young. Granted, she's green. And granted, this role doesn't allow for her to fully explore her acting abilities, but the role of Eve, played by India Eisley was fairly lacking. It really felt like they just plucked a girl out of a crowd and put her into the movie. Of course, she only has but a few titles under her belt, so who knows...maaaayyybee she'll grow into it. Maybe. I guess we'll see huh.

~Cheers.

Blogger's Note: 15,000 Page Views!

Woah....! 5000 page views in a month! Wow....thanks so much you guys! Thanks for showing this little blog love and support so far. I certainly hope that it continues to receive such awesome love and support so that it can flourish and grow and mature.

And....Sorry, I'm not generally so ready to toot my own horn, but.....WE'RE NUMBER ONE! WE'RE NUMBER ONE! My little post about IMAX vs. UltraAVXis now the TOP Googled result!

Since this 15,000 page view landmark only took about a month to reach (from 10,000), the next token of appreciation be at 30,000. Same rules apply. First person to send a comment that they are the first comment on or after 30,000 page views will get a little gift as token of my gratitude.

Thanks again so very very much. And please...keep tuning in....and more importantly...spreading the love! =)~

~Cheers.

Restaurant: Nan's Thai Fine Dining

I don't get to try very many restaurants when I'm away for work because I'm generally on my own. Once in a while however, my running around does allow me to try some different restaurants, so I'm especially appreciative when they stand out. And man, did this place stand out, and apparently not only to me. According to the plaque on the wall, it also received AAA's 4 diamond award.

Ambiance: 4 / 5
Cleanliness: 5 / 5
Service: 5 / 5
Taste: 4.5 / 5
Presentation: 4.5 / 5
Price: $$$
Overall: 4.5 / 5

Nan's REALLY has designed this place designed exceptionally well; even the washrooms. Sorry, the washrooms in particular. I seriously wanted to bring my camera into the washroom to take a few shots, but uhmm....I don't think the other patrons would take so kindly to that. HAHA. But the washrooms were not only absolutely pristine, you felt like you were walking into a spa.

The first dish that arrived was Nan's Tasting Tree, which consists of a small sampling of a few of Nan's sumptuous appetisers. I was unfortunately, still admiring the design of the washroom while washing my hands when it came, so I can't really tell you what everything is. They were all good, but those two little pink swirly things at the bottom of the photo? They were simply AMAZING. Perfect balance of flavours with a nice kick from the hot pepper on top.

My selected entree isn't on their menu, but a special of the day. It was a steamed Chilean Sea Bass over some Bok Choy & mushrooms in a soy sauce. The sea bass was cooked perfectly, but honestly, the soy sauce was a bit much for my liking, even after I mixed in the ginger, green onion and pepper. But delicious nevertheless.

Below is just a quick photo of what my friend ordered. Unfortunately, she didn't seem to want to share, so I didn't get a chance to taste it. HAHA. She did say it was droolworthy tho. =)~

If you do get a chance to go to Atlanta, I'd highly recommend this place. Servers were all Thai and extremely hospitable. Thai hospitality + Southern hospitality = AMAZING hospitality. hahaha =)~


Nan's Thai Fine Dining
1350 Spring St. NW.
Atlanta, GA
404-870-9933

~Cheers

Movie: Brave (2012)

Rating: C+

I don't understand how other people have given this movie such amorous reviews. Is it simply because it's a Pixar movie? While it was entertaining enough to watch, it's yet another movie that languishes in mediocrity, without taking any risks, or any attempt to follow through what the first part of movie suggests that this movie about. Both the introduction of the movie and the trailers suggest this is a movie about a young girl's quest for independence. Instead, it turns out that this movie is entirely about teaching the values of family and that mom really does have your interest at heart.



It really does seem like Pixar's lost its mojo after being bought by Disney. Even the jokes are losing their bite. The first couple of Pixar movies offered something different, something new; giving you the perspective of the toys as opposed to the kids playing with them. Or the turmoil that a monster needs to go through in order to have their place under your bed / in the closet. Or a different type of an "adventure" through a trip on a bajillion helium balloons. But Brave fails to do anything different. Oh, you'll enjoy it if you like the Pixar / Disney formula, but don't expect anything else.

Aside from a few belly laughs, the movie is awkwardly paced, there doesn't seem to be any breakthrough with the animation technology, nor does there seem to be any real artistic creativity (blogger's note: I really liked the flashback art in KungFu Panda 2). Everything is formulaic. A decent formula, but formulaic nevertheless.

~Cheers.

Movie: Ted (2012)

Rating: B+

Let's call a spade a spade. Is Ted an artistic masterpiece of biblical proportions? No. It's crass, it's boorish, it's inappropriate; the story line is cliched, and really nothing new. But....it's SUPPOSED to be crass. It's SUPPOSED to be boorish, it's SUPPOSED to be inappropriate. And how do you get around a cliched storyline? Make fun of the storyline itself. The result is some seriously extended inappropriate hilarity.

(The is the red band trailer. View discretion is advised)


The interplay is fantastic and Seth MacFarlane reunites some of his cast members from Family Guy, including Alex Borstein, Mila Kunis, and yes....Patrick Stewart. Look for a tonne of cameo work, which totally makes this movie work. In particular, the scenes with Patrick Warburton. Quite honestly, there isn't a whole lot to say about this movie. If you're looking for laughter and a good time, and don't mind some totally refreshing, politically INcorrect humour, go watch it.

For me, there was an added bonus to this movie. I went to school at Boston University,  and I haven't been back in over 10 years. Seeing some familiar streets, neighbourhoods, parks, and in particular the Citgo sign really brought back memories and moments of nostalgia. So you'll have to excuse me if I have a bit of a soft spot for this movie, knowing full well that while the movie runs for about 115min, only about 30min of it was comedic genius and the rest was just tepid drivel.

~Cheers.

Movie: What To Expect When You're Expecting (2012)

Rating: F

I suppose I know what the director Kirk Jones was trying to do. But What to Expect when You're Expecting is the perfect example of what happens when you try too hard to do too much. And in this case, trying to cover every single possible outcome of how a pregnancy might turn out into a single movie.



This movie fails at every turn. The characters are weak, the script is forced, the jokes seem canned, and the interplay between the characters isn't believable at all. Babies take 9 months to be born. It seriously felt like this movie took 9 months to watch.

Despite the fact that Elizabeth Banks seems to be in every other movie and in every single genre this year, this particular performance was just empty. Her's should have been the most compelling story in this whole movie, and yet I wanted to gouge my eyes out every time she was on the screen.

Quite honestly, the only saving grace to this movie was Anna Kendrick for no reason other than the fact that I thought she looked entirely too cute. haha.

~Cheers.

Blogger's Note: 10,000 Page Views!

Wait...What...? Wow! We got to 10,000 page views! 10K! Thanks everyone for the support! Quite honestly, I never thought I'd reach this little milestone, and during my little hiatus, I really wasn't sure if I was going to continue. But here we are, at TEN FREAKING THOUSAND! WOOT WOOT! From here on in, the milestones are going to be a little more spread out.

And a bit of ADDED pride? My little post about IMAX vs. UltraAVX is a top 10 item on google's search engine! Woot Woot!

The next token of appreciation will be at 15,000. Same rules apply. First person to send a comment that they are the first comment on or after 15,000 page views will get a little gift as token of my gratitude.

Wow. 15,000. I can hardly imagine. I wonder if I'll reach it before G.I. Joe: Retaliation comes out. HAHA. While a few of you are following this little blog of mine, I really wish I knew who the rest of you were so I could thank you all personally. So please, feel free to comment lots and often! Thanks again!

~Cheers.

Movie: Men in Black III (2012)

Rating: B


Most sequels come out a couple of years after the previous on. But the first sequel to Men in Black (MIIB) was so bad that even after watching the preview again, I can't remember what it was about. It was so bad, that I almost didn't watch this rendition. It was so bad, that I think majority (myself included) of people who have critiqued this movie have pretty much given it a free pass. Men in Black III was finally produced and released 12 years after MIIB.



Thankfully, Men in Black III delivers as a serviceable follow up. Will Smith reprises his role as J, the smart alec MIB agent. And Tommy Lee Jo--- well... Josh Brolin playing the role of (young) Agent K. And I have to say, Brolin was amazing. At no point did I think that Brolin was Brolin. Totally believable as the younger version of Agent K.

The humour's a little different, and perhaps that was in part because the bulk of the movie was placed in 1969. The movie's a bit more mature, seemingly catering to an older audience, which makes sense, since younger audiences probably wouldn't connect with the 60s anyway.
It's not QUITE as silly as its predecessor, but still funny nevertheless. The interplay between Brolin and Smith is really, almost as good as it was between Smith and Jones in the original.

~Cheers.

Movie: Prometheus (2012)

Rating: B-

The prequel that isn't a prequel that really is a prequel to Alien. If you're watching this movie as a fan of the 1979 movie with Sigourney Weaver and looking for answers, I'm afraid you're going to be sorely disappointed. The movie's screenplay is co-written by Damon Lindelof, one of the writers/creators of the hit TV series, Lost. So before you even step in to the cinema, you should be prepared to come out with more questions than answers.



There are certainly many Easter Eggs that pay homage to the 1979 film, but to call this an official prequel is a little bit of a misnomer. What it is, is the introduction for a new series based upon the Alien creature. The curious thing is, the way that this story is written, the Alien creature doesn't even have to be involved as this particular story moves forward, which makes it pretty interesting.

The cinematography and set design in Prometheus was astounding; as was the performance of Michael Fassbender. The story moves along with thrills and scares and all the things you find in a Sci-Fi Thriller/Horror film. But Prometheus tries too hard to do too much which just simply leaves too many holes for me to give it a better grade. Without including spoilers to this movie, the trials and tribulations of Noomi Rapace's character is so far fetched that it was no longer believable.

While I could point out all the plot holes and things that really don't make a lot of sense, I would be giving too much away. But given all the issues with this movie, why is it still a B-? There's enough there to give you a thrill ride. There are enough questions left unanswered for there to be a viable sequel. And there is certainly enough there to make you squirm in your seats and make you wonder if space exploration might not be such a great idea.

Casual fans of the movie might not want to stay until the end of the credits, but for y'all die hard fans, there is something there that you might want to stick around for. But don't blame me if you do. haha.

Here's an interesting TED talk video related to the movie that's rather interesting:



~Cheers.

Movie: The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (2012)

Rating: A-

What happens when you put a star studded veteran cast together with a touching story and a semi-decent witty script? You get The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel.



Even with just a few too many cliches and too many storylines for a 2 hour movie, the movie is held together brilliantly by the performances of the likes of Judy Dench, Tom Wilkinson, Maggie Smith, Bill Nighy, and company.

The movie is thoughtful and funny, with a lot of heart and humanity. And while you'll likely connect better if you've had a few years under your belt, it's entertainment for all ages. I really can't say enough about the cast and their performances as they really had you connect with them. Each character with stories that are entirely believable and touching in their own way. You end up sharing in their joys and heartbreaks. Easily one of the better movies of 2012.

~Cheers.

Movie: Snow White and the Huntsman (2012)

Rating: B-

Visually scintillating, Rupert Sanders directorial debut wasn't bad as far as fairy tales go. With the exception of some pretty odd pacing, and a couple of absolute brain farts, it was actually quite watchable if you're a teenager.



Before I write anything else, I have to mention a couple these brain farts because they were some really obvious and serious gaffes in my book. These two were particularly obvious. Some of the others might simply be me being picky.

- Once upon a time, in a kingdom far far away is no place for the 'Our Father'.
- Just because it's a fairy tale, doesn't mean you can just magically make a horse appear ever so conveniently

While Charlize Theron and Chris Hemsworth played their roles brilliantly, majority of the rest of the roles I felt were entirely miscast. You had wonderfully talented actors playing bit parts as dwarves and bit actors playing significantly larger roles. They could have easily given the opportunity to any number of pretty talented little people for the 7 dwarfs.

I do however, have to give HUGE ups for the movie visually. Absolutely stunning.





~Cheers.

Movie: Battleship (2012)

Rating: C

After seeing sales from the relic line of Transformers, it looks like Hasbro might be wanting to tap that keg again for Battleship. And from the looks of things, they're going to milk it for all it's worth. I mean, yes, they'll make money from the movie, but there's likely going to be some sort of a multiplier effect in terms of merchandising. Battleship was nothing more than a board game; one with very limited variables and variations. Now, not only can they sell the board game, they can sell a video game, boats, action figures, etc etc etc. So who cares if Rihanna can't act a lick?



Seriously. This girl should NOT quit her day job. Given lots of screen time with very limited lines, you'd think that she ought to be able to pull of keeping a stone face. The few lines she had, it felt like she was reading them for the first time. But, I guess everybody's gotta start somewhere. *sigh*.

The pacing and flow of the movie was choppy, haphazard, and full of holes. It's a wonder why Peter Berg gets so many chances to direct such half baked, barely mediocre, vapid movies. Maybe he should just stick with Friday Night Lights. That seems to be the only thing to his credit that deserves any recognition.

That being said, there's enough bangs and booms to keep this movie at least somewhat entertaining, and it certainly doesn't hurt keeping Brooklyn Decker around. And after John Carter, Taylor Kitsch really could have used something to put him back on the right track. I'm just not so sure that Battleship is that something.

Oh. For those of you so inclined, it wouldn't be such a bad idea to stick around after the credits. Heck, if you stayed after The Avengers, you might as well stick around for this one too right? haha.

Cheers.

Movie: Chronicle (2012)

Rating: B

(Blogger's Note: A lot of movies came out during my hiatus from this little blog, but it didn't mean that I didn't watch them. Chronicle is be released today for purchase, so I thought it might be fitting to post a few thoughts to this movie.)

Over the past few years, there have been an inordinate amount of super hero movies. So what happens when you put these powers in the hands of a few teenagers still trying to figure themselves out? And what happens if one of them loses it?



Superman meets Columbine. I think it's an effective look at how different circumstances and different personalities can affect people differently. Especially in those angst ridden teenage years. But they really could have done without so much in-story handycam footage. I can understand that they would want to do that in a few situations, but as far as the entire movie was concerned? It really wasn't necessary and actually detracted from the enjoyment of what was otherwise a very well thought out movie.

What was nice about the way it was filmed tho, was that it did make the story seem more genuine. While the flow was a little slow, it felt like a natural progression to the movie, the friendship, and their burgeoning powers. How it affects them, their friendship, and their outlook of the world; giving the movie real depth and a good look at how perhaps superheroes and their nemeses come to be. That being said, I really could have done without so much of that blasted first person, shaky, handycam footage.

~Cheers.

Movie: Safe (2012)

Rating: C-

There's really only one reason to watch any Jason Statham movie: To watch Jason Statham beat people up. It's your own fault if you expect anything more from any of his movies. If you're able to get anything more from his movies, you should consider yourself lucky. Haha.



Safe is no different. Aside from a few one liners and some fun fight scenes, Safe suffers from an over zealous plot-line that is so poorly executed that no amount of creative fighting could compensate. Why they decided to incorporate 2 foreign speaking gangs to be pitted against each other is entirely beyond me. This is an action movie.  It really shouldn't have THAT many scenes requiring subtitles. They could have made this movie with a Jamaican gang and an Irish gang, or a Mexican gang and an Italian gang. Any two gangs would have worked.

And in this day and age, you'd think that there would be a few more actors they could have found that ACTUALLY spoke Chinese. Listening to Reggie Lee attempt to to act in Chinese when he can barely act in English was enough to make me throw up a little inside. And while James Hong's performance was slightly more convincing, they need to stop making him the token old Chinese guy in every other movie with an Asian in it.

Even putting aside the poor choice of language, the story line was made overly complicated and executed with such ham-fistedness, that there really was very little cohesion over the hour and a half movie. And finally. Jason Statham is an athlete with a black belt. Not an actor. Stop trying to make him act. Making him the weepy, soft-on-the-inside-with-a-hard-exterior, 'this isn't what i wanted' hero. Just let him fight already!

~Cheers.

Critique: IMAX vs. UltraAVX

A little while ago, I wrote a post about UltraAVX.  Since then, I've seen a few more films in this format, as you're able to order your tickets in advance and don't have to wait in line for blockbusters on opening weekend. And I did mention that UltraAVX really couldn't compare to IMAX.

For simplicity sake, let's just look at the projectors used for the two technologies.


Name: UltraAVX
Projector: Christie CP2230
Brightness: ~33,000 lumens
Resolution: 4096 x 2160

Name: IMAX
Projector: Proprietary (so far as I can discern...and moving to a Barco later this year)
Brightness: ~600,000 lumens
Resolution: 12,000 × 8,700

So obviously, you're looking at apples and oranges. But it is in its experience that things get rather interesting. The way that IMAX is set up, the cinema room is such that when you look forward, the screen is supposed to encompass your entire viewing area when you look forward. Because of that, IMAX will limit the number of seats in a viewing room to optimise the audience's viewing experience. This is also actually the drawback of IMAX and a point gained for UltraAVX. In order to maximise the number of seats available in an IMAX viewing room, the seats are more packed in. You have less leg room, and also, less elbow room.

Quite honestly, the average person's ear isn't trained and therefore, really isn't that good. For all you audiophiles out there, you know that wattage isn't everything. UltraAVX does boast 16,000 watts vs. IMAX's 12,000 watts. And yet, I personally feel that IMAX's sound experience is more immersive. What makes that even more interesting, is that UltraAVX uses 7 channels vs. IMAX's 6 channels. I think it has to do with the speakers that are in behind the screen in an IMAX viewing room.

Both allow for audiences to purchase tickets in advance and preselected rocker seats.

You WILL notice a big difference between traditional screens and IMAX screens. But the difference isn't so big between UltraAVX screens and IMAX screens. Tickets are $14.99 (plus tax) and $17.99 (plus tax) respectively, versus $11.99 (plus tax) for regular admission. So the question of worth probably becomes the biggest point of differentiation because while per ticket, it doesn't seem like a whole lot, if you're going as a family of 4, it starts adding up.

My personal feeling is that, for movies that require big picture and big sound, UltraAVX will MORE than satisfy the overwhelming majority of audience members. And you're more likely to find a cinema offering UltraAVX than you will for IMAX. But for certain movies, that you just want things as realistic and as vivid and as brilliant as possible, there is STILL no substitute for IMAX.

~Cheers.

Movie: Marvel's The Avengers (2012)

Rating: A+

Unleash the power of the (comic book) geek! Seriously, if this popcorn movie doesn't unleash your inner geek, nothing will. And while the Hulk isn't a man of many words, he totally steals the show.



I was a little worried that this movie was going to be a mish mash of heroes thrown together into a half baked ensemble movie. But man was I pleasantly surprised. The action was fantastic. The visuals were fantastic. And the interaction and chemistry between the characters was absolutely magnificent. Yes, this is a comic book movie, and yes it's larger than life, and absolutely yes, this is fantasy, but for 2 hours and 22 minutes, this was YOUR world. It sucked you in, spat you out, and made you want more. It was action packed, it was fun, and it will rock your world.

The only negative thing that I can say about this movie is that while Robert Downey Jr., and Chris Evans are probably the supposed to be the main characters of this movie, it was Mark Ruffalo as The Hulk that totally stole the show. And really, the show doesn't really start until The Hulk covers the screen...Literally...the whole screen. And after that, the rest of the movie is just an action packed, mixed in with great dialogue and interaction, coupled with copious amounts of total hilarity.

As with each of the introductory movies over the past four years, there IS something to see at the end of the credits. It.....uh....might not....uh....be ....hrmmm....what you were expecting tho. hahaha =)~

~Cheers.

Restaurant: Allen's

To most people, comfort food is nostalgic and generally easy-to-eat foods that have some sentimental value to them. For me however, comfort food is JUNK. You know, wings, burgers, fries, pizza, chips, etc etc. You know, everything that's bad for you. But unfortunately, I do have a little bit of understanding of my health, so I can't have that stuff every day (maybe every other day is ok. haha). So while I've kept blogto's Best Burger list around for a while, I've only been able to try them sporadically. When a friend invited me thus to try Allen's....? Of course I jumped at the chance!

Ambiance: 2.5 / 5
Cleanliness: 3.5 / 5
Service: 3.5 / 5
Taste: 4 / 5
Presentation: 3 / 5
Price: $$
Overall: 3.5 / 5

So apparently, Allen's supposedly uses fresh, organic beef for its burgers (I don't know for sure, I read it somewhere at some point). And they DO have a fairly extensive beer list. The lighting was VERY dark which made me not want to go through it. It being a pub, I ordered a black and tan. It never occurred to me to take a photo of the beer (whoops), so I thiefed this one off of the internet. I apologise in advance to the person who took the photo for not giving credit.

For anyone who ends up ordering this. Please, I implore you, DO NOT MIX IT! There's a little section in the middle where the two beers connect that's a delectable little sweet spot. Not to be trifled with and certainly not to be ruined.

I was a little disappointed that the burger comes a la carte, but I suppose I kind of expected it. And on top of that, anything toppings outside of lettuce, tomato, and pickle, is also an extra charge. But I couldn't help myself and ordered sauteed mushrooms, and sauteed onions, and cheddar cheese to top my burger off. The burger itself, was ordered medium rare.

Yes....my photography skills are SEVERELY lacking. Plus, I only had my phone with me. The toppings, actually came on separate plates. Even the lettuce that I'd asked for came beside the burger. Anyway, picking up the burger, I found the bottom piece of bread already soggy. That was a bit of a disappointment. But biting into the burger was scrumptious. Nicely seared, perfectly grilled, and nice and juicy.

If you notice in the background of the photo, we did order a side of fries as well. And quite honestly, the fries aren't even worth mentioning. A little bland, a little dry.

If you've never been, I suppose this place is worth a try, but to be quite honest, by the time you top up your burger, and add in tax and tip, you're looking at roughly $20 for the burger all on its own. And while it was well prepared and delicious, I just don't see it being WORTH that much.

Allen's
143 Danforth Ave.
Toronto, ON
416-463-3086
~Cheers.

Movie: The Raven (2012)

Rating: C+

I really wonder if Hollywood is afraid of making anything provocative, shocking, and daring. The Raven had so much potential, and a wealth of back material to draw from. And while it was clever, it wasn't particularly smart. Where there were plot twists, they weren't particularly mind-bending. Yet another movie in this year's indulgence of mediocrity.



It's been said that John Cusack is probably the most natural actor of our time. And I quite agree with that. It's a shame that most of the other cast members in this film was not so natural. And while I feel that Cusack is miscast in this role, I think he did an admirable job as Edgar Allan Poe, I feel that the role would have been better served being played by someone a little darker, say perhaps, Johnny Depp.

The biggest problem of the movie was its lack of direction. There really would have been no difference if they completed this movie with 1 murder, or with a dozen. The clues of the murder led you to the next clue and not to who the killer was. So really, The mystery and chase was really rather pointless. And while ONE of the murders was decidedly graphic and macabre, none of the other ones had the same level fear, torture, nor blood.

Perhaps one would be more involved in the movie if they were more familiar with Poe's work, but I doubt very many know more than a handful of his life and work well enough to find the correlation intriguing. This movie could have had so much more depth. It could have been significantly more gripping. Or they could have opted to make it totally tragic. Instead, they opted for mediocrity.

~Cheers.

Blogger's Note: 10,000 Page Views...

The last time I posted a thank you post, I was closing in on 5000 page views. But unfortunately, I took a little hiatus. When I looked again, I was closing in on 8000 page views and I hadn't even been posting! So to all of you who have been checking in on my little blog, thank you so much. I will do my best not to fall behind again, but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves.

10,000 page views is going to be a big milestone for me. So... Same game. Same rules. First person to send a comment that they are the first comment on or after 10,000 page views will get a little gift as token of my gratitude. I really do appreciate the support all of you have given me over the past few months.

I really do appreciate the continued support. Thanks again. And of course... Don't forget to spread the love =)~

~Cheers.

Movie: The Hunger Games (2012)

Rating: B-

This movie’s been out a while, and I’ve been meaning to write put my critique out there. But due to extenuating circumstances, I’ve had to wait until now. Based on the book series of the same name, The Hunger Games had the potential of being something as visually powerful and mentally jarring as Lord of the Flies. Instead, they decided to dilute it for the Dora The Explorer demographic. Only problem is, it’s still too troubling for the kiddies, and far too gentle for anyone over the age of 10.



 While I disagree with many that this book / film is an English version of the Japanese book / film, Battle Royale; I do wish that they would have taken a page from the Japanese version. Make it daring, or poetic, or shocking. Instead, in order to placate soccer moms and interest groups, The Hunger Games languishes in mediocrity; Just good enough to be worth watching, but not nearly good enough for it to be memorable.


Jennifer Lawrence gave an admirable performance, and Stanley Tucci is one of my favourite supporting casts. But that's about it. And I suppose I should give credit to the direction of Gary Ross for moving the movie along fluidly because let's not forget, the actual "games" don't start until about the middle of the 140+ min movie. 


On top of that, the side stories just felt entirely too contrived and there were just too many holes in the movie. I mean, aside from the wolves that appeared out of no where for no particular reason, there really was never any real danger to Ms. Lawrence's character.

But judging from the reception of this movie, it looks like the film adaptations for the next two books of this trilogy is just going to be more of the same.


~Cheers.

Movie: 那些年 - "Those Bygone Years" (2011)

Rating: B-

I've never been to school in Asia, but from what I've heard / seen from friends and the media, 那些年 seems to give a pretty accurate depiction of the student life in Taiwan and I suppose fairly close to the student experience in Chinese Asia in general terms.



(Blogger's note: Sorry. This is the music video of the title song and not the Trailer)

This is a coming of age story of a group of friends going to school in Taiwan. I liked the fact that they didn't try to be cute, and tried to keep the story as realistic as possible; to a point where you could actually see that yeah...kids could quite possibly grow up like that. I also like that they didn't try to put a full cast of great looking kids out there, because let's face it, most people aren't good looking. HAHA. It really just seems like you're taking a glimpse into the lives of a group of very ordinary kids.


A friend of mine said that the depiction of the budding romance was a very accurate comparison to real life, I couldn't help but think back upon my own experiences back in school. Of all the people that I knew (not that I knew few or many), I only knew one person that spent their entire high school life trying to score a date with a girl. So while I understand that the movie was trying to focus on this one core group, the romantic relationship that underlined the group's dynamic seemed a little far fetched.

I don't know a single member of this cast, but the female lead really stood out for me. Watching her grow up and mature in front of the screen was a fantastic feat that left me extremely impressed with her performance. While the other members weren't nearly as noteworthy, I suppose that if we think of our own lives. How many of our lives would make for a good movie?

~Cheers.

Movie: Lockout (2012)

Rating: D

I have a big love/hate relationship with Luc Besson movies. I love the premise, hate the execution, and love to rip on them afterwards. Lockout was no different. If you've read some of my critiques, you'll know how much I hate holes in movies. This movie just had hole after hole after hole, with poor lighting, editing, and I do believe, that somewhere in the beginning sequence, they forgot the put the finishing touches on some Special Effects (CGI).



It's almost like Mr. Besson is doing charity work. He comes up with ideas, writes the initial screenplay, then offloads it to some poor up and coming director salivating at the opportunity at having Luc Besson in his credits at the end of the movie. Lockout seems to be yet another example. Both James Mather and Stephen St. Leger just seem overwhelmed with directing this movie.

Looks like Guy Pearce has been hitting the gym and looks great as a grisly framed agent on a one man rescue mission of the president's daughter played by Maggie Grace. Their relationship is what you would expect between a wily veteran and a sassy, but doe eyed beauty, and while a romance is somewhat inevitable in this kind of movie, how it blossoms is entirely contrived and there is no chemistry whatsoever. Quite honestly, the only person that stood out in this entire movie is Joseph Gilgun who plays the crazed brother of the main villain in the movie.

~Cheers.

Product: Jambox by Jawbone

Design: 4.5 / 5
Sound Quality (in): 4 / 5
Sound Quality (out): 3.5 / 5
Build Quality: 4 / 5
Battery: 5 / 5

MSRP: $199.99 (USD)
Overall: 4 / 5



I've been a pretty big fan of Jawbone products for a while now. And a while ago, they came out with a new item to add to their lineup. The "Jambox Smartspeaker". It's got a pretty nice design, and for its size, it packs quite a punch.

It's got all those gimmicky things that I'd previously mentioned for the Jawbone Era,  and again, it's cute...but entirely useless. But what I do find nice about it, is how versatile this little thing is. It probably isn't loud enough for a house party, but I've used it for conference calls, trade shows, dinner parties, video games, or just listening to music while I'm cooking or whatever.

It does have a slot for a 3.5mm headset cable if you like, but there's no noticeable lag if you're connecting via bluetooth.

Now, if you don't require speakerphone capabilities, or don't mind a little bit more heft, you can probably get away with similar sound quality for a cheaper price. But for what it is, you are getting plenty of value for your buck.

~Cheers.