Review: The Long Walk (1955)

A memoir. I actually read a memoir. It's the first memoir I've ever read, and I think one of the best I ever will read. It's also an example of the tried and true principle that my good old Uncle Bill always has good books for me to read. It even inspired the movie The Way Back, and I was so excited to find a film adaptation of this fantastic book.

The Long Walk tells the incredible story of Slavomir Rawicz's escape from a Soviet labor camp with seven and later eight companions. They brave the harsh environments of Siberia, the Gobi Desert, Tibet, and the Himalayas, all in an effort to escape to the safety of India. From Rawicz' interrogation by the NKVD, to encounters with shepherds in Tibet, to their spotting a pair of strange, bipedal creatures in the Himalayas, this tome leaves no stone unturned, no encounter left silent. This account is epic in scale, gritty, heartbreaking, and occasionally funny. It's a story of perseverance, survival, freedom, camaraderie, and hope.

This not a tale of just one man, no, far from it. We are told from Rawicz's point of view of his nine companions, including the big and big hearted Kolemenos, the humorous Zaro, the sole female, Kristina, and the American Mr. Smith (most of the others had names which were very hard to pronounce, let alone spell). These delightful cast members are all well rounded and individualized. They all make you care about them, though some more than others. They're all very human, which is just the sort of thing you'd expect in a real life, honest to goodness memoir.

Rawicz is a good narrator, and we really get inside his head. We feel every sensation, we hear every word spoken, we experience every loss he is struck with. He tells his story well, relaying it with that special spark that all stories worth hearing have.

I'm also partial to the book's shockingly frank tale of life under the communist regime in Russia. Rawicz relates how he was interrogated endlessly, drugged into signing a confession, and stuck in front of a kangaroo court where he was sentenced for "espionage." The basis of his guilt? Living in the eastern half of Poland automatically categorized him as a Polish spy in the eyes of his Russian captors. This perversion of justice is just one example of many in a communist police state.

This book should be read by everyone. Mind you though, it's not exactly meant for younger readers. Although there is a minimal amount of swearing, it can get rather intense as the party goes from situation to embattled situation. Nothing particularly graphic, but still pretty sad. I'd recommend it for ages fifteen and up.

RATING: 10/10

Image courtesy of goodreads.com

"I Have a Dream" Speech - 50th Anniversary

I wasn't going to write another post until tomorrow, but I just went over to Google and saw that today is the fiftieth anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s famous "I have a dream" speech. That's right, fifty years! I'm not an expert on the Civil Rights movement, but from what I understand, the "I have a dream" speech was the turning point in the Civil Rights battle. In it, King discoursed at length on what I presume was his favorite topic; the right of people of all races to freedom, as well as calling for a general halt to racism.

King's legacy will doubtlessly be remembered forever. He was indeed a great man. Here are two links to some important videos regarding King and his views. The first is a link to a recording of the famous "I have a dream" speech. The second is a dramatic reading of King's Letter from Birmingham Jail, which my history teacher Kirby Wilbur said is a good summation of his worldview and philosophy. I greatly respect Martin Luther King, Jr., and hope to find a good biography on him someday. He was a truly great man.

Image courtesy of history.denverlibrary.org

Review: Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

I am now getting around to reviewing this film, as promised. Before we begin, let me say up front that yes, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is better than its predecessor. That said, it's still not the best film I've ever seen, but obviously, few are.

Completely forgetting the sequel hook involving new improvements in the science of radio, and thankfully touching on the occult background of Sherlock Holmes only briefly, this film opens with a series of apparent anarchist bombings, leading Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) and Dr. John Watson (Jude Law) to begin an investigation  into the matter. Of course, Watson is getting married, and is about to go on his honeymoon, while Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) falls prey to the evil Professor James Moriarty (Jared Harris), who Holmes will tell you is "the Napoleon of Crime," as he is described in the books. After one madcap set piece involving a train, Holmes and Watson set off for France and Germany to track down Moriarty, who is working with crack shot Sebastian Moran (Paul Anderson) to plunge the world into a war which he will profit from. Can Holmes and Watson, with a little help from Holmes' brother Mycroft (name dropped in the previous film, played here by Stephen Fry) stop Moriarty's dastardly plans, or will everything go straight to, uh, Hades?

While I still believe that this film repeats its predecessor's mistake by including a ludicrous amount of over the top action, unlike the previous film, it doesn't rely on it. It also helps that the action is far more badbutt that that of Sherlock Holmes. In relation to this first point, I was thrown for a loop when Holmes and Moriarty engage in an actual fist fight, or rather, they don't. I know they fought physically in the books, but there's no actual fight here, just a fake out or two. But still, the action is very well done, even if there is still too much of it.

Harris' Moriarty is a great villain, appearing far stronger in the first few minutes that Mark Strong's Lord Blackwood was in the entire first movie. His goals are far more interesting and detailed than Blackwood's were in the first film, though not by much. He's menacing, calculating, and even cool. You simply love to hate him. The best scenes in the film are between Holmes and Moriarty. There's also an even greater dynamic between Holmes and Watson than there was in the first movie, even if it's more of the same from the first movie. By that, I mean that it's the same recycled conflict of Watson not getting along with Holmes because he's getting married and moving out, kind of like they're *gasp* breaking up. This ties into some innuendo and gags concerning just how intimate Holmes and Watson's relationship is. I still don't understand why Hollywood can't get it through its head that two males being close friends doesn't necessarily mean a romantic relationship. It's just so frustrating! At least the characters are a bit more rounded here, with Holmes demonstrating both sides as clownish detective and a determined fighter for justice. Of course, I'm not sure exactly if his means of defeating Moriarty financially would actually work in real life. I'd refer the problem to Law and the Multiverse, but I think that 19th Century British law is a little out of their field.

Irene Adler is written out of the script pretty early, and is replaced by some gypsy woman (Noomi Rapace) with a basic motivation, no name that I can remember being mentioned, and unmemorable scenes, characterization, and dialogue. I would much preferred if they had stuck with Adler doing stuff with Holmes and Watson and further developing her character, instead of not going out with a bang. There might even have been a conflict between Adler and this woman, which would have made them both more interesting. Conflict over Holmes, maybe, perhaps with Adler getting jealous. Of course, Adler's not the only interesting supporting character inexplicably shunted aside. Where the heck is Lestrade? Wikipedia says that he's in it, but I might have missed him during that brief scene at Scotland Yard where Holmes briefly alluded to him. This film has lots of fan service for Sherlock Holmes fans, but at the same time ditches two of its most important characters in exchange for Mycroft Holmes and random gypsy lady.

Like the first film, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows can be funny when it wants to, but its humor borders on vulgar sometimes. This includes a moment when Watson's newlywed wife Mary (Kelly Reilly) finds herself staying in Mycroft's house, and then comes face to face with Mycroft wandering through his house in the altogether. A disgusting gimmick intended for cheap laughs if I ever saw one. In addition, this film suffers from Sherlock Holmes' problem of keeping viewers in the dark about Holmes' deductions until later, despite what Jeremy Jahns said in his review. Again, this is extremely frustrating, and Guy Ritchie or whoever the heck is responsible for writing this thing could stand to learn from BBC's Sherlock.

Also, remember what I said about Sherlock Holmes being clownish? He was in the first film and he remains so here. I picture Sherlock Holmes as being far more serious than he is here, and it feels like Sherlock is just channeling his performance as Tony Stark in the Iron Man movies sometimes. I theorized in a conversation with my friend Nate (the one who thinks that Superman: The Movie is the best superhero film of all time) that Downey's tenure as Iron Man may have affected his other performances, or perhaps he's simply been typecast. Either way, if there are any persons in the audience who have seen any of Downey's other movies made after Iron Man, then I'd like to hear your opinion.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is more introspective than Sherlock Holmes, and leaves a possible sequel hook in for number three, and yes, there will be a number three, in the form of Sebastian Moran. He was also a great secondary villain, and I'd love to see him return. It would be fitting if he did, as that would coincide with the character's scheduled appearance in the upcoming third season of Sherlock. Ending with a rushed denouement, this film pleases me more than the last film, but not by much. I wouldn't mind seeing it again, but I still prefer Sherlock. On a related note, I really should get around to reading those books.

RATING: 7.5/10

Fun fact: I asked my mom why she liked Sherlock Holmes, and she simply replied that it was "fun." Yeah, I guess so, and I guess that's kind of why I liked "the Cape," which was essentially a live action cartoon, very much like Batman & Robin. But that's another post.

Image courtesy of beverlygray.blogspot.com

Bible Verse Sunday #38, Grandma's Birthday, and Bible Quiz Team 2013-2014

Today's verse comes from The Spirit of America, a collection of Bible verses cataloged by topic. That verse is Isaiah 26:3:

"You keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on you, because he trusts in you."

The ESV Study Bible has this to say about the verse:

"perfect peace. The peace described here is first the corporate peace of the city (v. 1) and the nation (v. 2) that comes from the "hand of the Lord" (25:10); but it is also the individual peace of the person whose mind is stayed on God. The source of such peace is the righteous, sovereign, saving God (25:9)- who "will swallow up death forever" and "will wipe away" every tear (25:8); cf Rev. 21:4), and who alone is worthy of trust. (On the meaning of peace in the OT and the NT, see note on John 14:27.)"

In church today the pastor in the main service talked about encouragement, specifically, the difference between encouragement and flattery. True encouragement should motivate, he said, and comes from the intersection of grace and truth. In the High School service, the youth pastor spoke from 1 Thessalonians 5, talking about what we are supposed to do as a church.

Yesterday was my paternal grandmother's 83rd birthday. We had a family gathering at my Aunt Amy's house, and we ate a lot of food. My mom brought some potato salad we had made, and we were allowed to bring home the leftover clam chowder. Mind you, I love clam chowder, but this one had some shell fragments in it, and let me tell you, there's few things worse than taking a bite out of clam chowder and getting that crunchy feeling against your molars. But I digress. We had a wonderful time and ate peach crisp for desert. Then we went home.

In other news, Bible Quiz Team is starting up again soon, and we're trying to step up our recruiting effort. One of our coaches told me that the best way to do that is to ask our friends if they want to sign up. I asked around and got a few possibles. I'm hoping we'll expand with a few recruiting posters, some speeches and some other stuff, we can get some more people on the team. Here's to many new members!

Review: Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn

I've written about Halo before, and I wrote there that I wasn't sure if I'd review Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn or not, but now I feel that the world deserves to know about this study in contradictions. Is it cleverly and professionally produced online series, or low budget sci-fi flick? Is it a definitive story of the origin of the Human-Covenant War, or a spanner in the works of an otherwise airtight continuity? Let's find out.

Originally released online in serialized form, but now combined into a ninety minute movie, Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn tells the story of the cadets at the Corbulo Academy of Military Science. The principal character is Cadet Thomas Lasky (Tom Green), who doesn't really want to fight. His friend Chyler Silva (Anna Popplewell), on the other hand, is apparently very much for fighting the "innies," that is, insurrectionists. The other cadets have their own stories, but most of the focus is on Tom and Chyler, with a little time spent on the others. But just as Tom is beginning to step up as a leader, who should show up at CAMS but the Covenant. They proceed to blow up the school, until only Tom and a small group of other Cadets are still alive against a force of Covenant troops. But they're not alone. Master Chief shows up! Yeah! Will Chief and Tom and company get out safely, or will everybody get killed to death? If you've played the Halo games, you probably know that it's a combination of both.

I call this series/movie a study in contradictions because I got a very different reaction watching it in serialized form online than I got from watching it as a movie. In serialized form, there was suspense and cliff hangers every week, and our investment in the characters was built up as time went on. I'm no film major, but I know that serialized shows and full length films are built very differently, and the movie version suffers for it. Granted, the movie version has extra scenes of the cadets introducing themselves at the beginning which gives them a little more depth, but that's about it. Also, all of the mini-cutscenes with Cortana and Master Chief were shunted to the front of the film or to the back. Of course, this film was made in order to promote Halo 4, so that may be a sign of it's quality.

To get to the point, Forward Unto Dawn simply doesn't work as a film, both for the reasons previously stated and for other structural flaws in the story and characters. But there are some good things about it. The acting is really strong, particularly on Tom Green's part, and the action scenes are really cool. The characters are also all likeable, even if not all of them get a lot of character development. We at least get some motivation for most of them, and we've got some good supporting characters in the form of Colonel Mehaffey (Ayelet Zurer, who played Jor-El's wife Lara in Man of Steel) General Black (Michael Dopud), and, of course, Master Chief (Daniel Cudmore). In hindsight, I'm kind of confused on why they had a different actor provide Master Chief's voice. I was thinking they could have gone with the Darth Vader approach and put some big guy in the suit while having Steve Downes, his voice actor from the games, do the voice. That said, Cudmore is still pretty good as Master Chief. I'd also like to offer high praise to the emotional depth that this series manages to pull off. Despite its flaws, that's the one thing it has in common with the games.

But remember those structural flaws in the story and characters that I mentioned? Yeah, we're going to have to talk about that now. Let's start with Chyler Silva. Despite being played by great actress Anna Popplewell, who I loved as Susan Pevensie in the Chronicles of Narnia movies, she's kind of a flat character. We're told through expository dialogue what her motivation is, as opposed to, say, an emotional reveal. I think the creators were trying to play up the contrast between the Lasky's wild card nature to her straight laced demeanor, but it only partially succeeds. The end result is a completely implausible romance. What do these two have in common that makes them bond? We are never told.

And then there's the other cadets. Sure, we're given some background on a few of them, but the potentially interesting ones, like J.J. and Vickers, are only given so much time to shine. I don't want to spoil anything, but even those that make it to the end of the movie aren't given much background and character. April (Enisha Brewster), the commanding cadet officer, in particular, is really underused. She's easily the coolest of the bunch, but she gets the least character development, though she still has some great scenes.

There's also the issues this story raises for just how the Human-Covenant War got started. I haven't read the Halo books, but from what I understand, the war began when the Covenant invaded the planet Harvest about a year before Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn. I think it's implied in here that the whole alien invasion thing was being kept secret from the rest of humanity, but I find that a pretty hard bite to swallow. I also read somewhere that it was stated in one of the books that humanity didn't run into Elites and Hunters until sometime later in the war, yet there a Elites and Hunters in this movie. If there are any Halo book readers in the audience, I would like to be enlightened.

On the whole, Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn isn't the best thing I've ever seen, having serious flaws. I want to like it, and again, I loved it serialized form, but as I said before, it just doesn't work as a movie. What's good about it though is that it's still available online, free to watch, albeit without the extra footage at the beginning. For this reason, if you're a die hard Halo fan, then you might want to pick it up on DVD, or at least watch it on Netflix. Otherwise, though, just go see it online. You'll have a lot more fun watching it that way; I certainly did. Mind you, however, this is a movie based on a first person shooter, so there's some gore, but not a lot, mixed in with a one or two cases of severe swearing. I'm actually surprised at how tame it was compared to the actual Halo games, which by themselves are pretty tame for a first person shooter.

RATING: 6.5/10

Image courtesy of itunes.apple.com

Reality Television

Okay, I might as well get to it. Here it goes. Let's talk about reality TV.

Reality television is a modern phenomena. You take an ostensibly unscripted group of people doing something and film it. Different from the documentary show, reality TV seeks to show us something unique while maintaining a sense of, well, reality. It can range from the average (Pawn Stars) to the bizarre (The Colony) to the exotic (Dual Survival). Some critics say that the rise of reality TV has been a significant blow to scripted television shows, and that reality TV is little more than cheap network fodder in place of people working hard to make entertaining television. There's also the issues with the "reality" of reality TV. Amish Mafia anyone? I for one feel that while these complaints have merit, reality television does have its place in the entertainment world.

There are dozens if not hundreds of reality TV shows out there, but I've never reviewed one on this blog. I've watched plenty of reality TV, but for some reason I don't review them. Maybe it's because reality television doesn't have quite the same requirements as a scripted television show. Scripted television is a conventional story, and it requires to be critiqued its characters, plot, acting, whether or not it's particularly compelling, and other factors which determine its quality. Reality TV only has to be compelling and believable to succeed. Half the time, it doesn't even have to be the latter.

Here are some reality TV shows that I feel are among the better ones out there. Note that the majority of them are from the Discovery Channel:

1.) Mythbusters - Special effects experts Jamie Hydeman and Adam Savage test out various myths, urban legends, etc., with the help of Kari Byron, Tory Belleci and Grant Imahara.
2.) Dual Survival - Survival experts Cody Lundin and Dave Canterbury demonstrate survival techniques in various locales.
3.) Human Weapon - MMA fighter Jason Chambers and former boxer and NFL player Bill Duff travel the world examining different fighting styles.
4.) Sons of Guns - The staff at Red Jacket, a gun store in Louisiana, make and sell unique guns. What more could you possibly want?
5.) Pawn Stars - The staff at Gold and Silver Pawn, a pawn shop in Las Vegas, buy old junk. What more could you possibly want?
6.) Wheel of Fortune - Ah, I love me some wheel. Basically an elaborate form of Hangman, three contestants spin the wheel to determine how much money they get when they guess a letter correctly, taking turns. Hosted by Pat Sajak and Vanna White!

Bible Verse Sunday #37, High School Camp 2013, and Upcoming Reviews

After spending the previous week at my church's High School Camp (more on that later in the post), I am happy to announce my return with Bible Verse Sunday #37. Today's verse is one that we studied in one of our camp sessions. Today's verse, courtesy of biblehub.com, is John 3:17:

"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him."

The ESV Study Bible has this to say on the verse:

"send his Son. John's favorite designation of Jesus is that of the Son "sent" by the Father (see also vv. 34-36; 5:19-26; 6:40; 8:35-36; 14:13; 17:1). There was a familiar concept in Jewish life that the messenger is like the sender himself (Mishnah, Berakoth 5.5; cf. John 13:15, 20). Jesus is the Sent One par excellence (cf. 9:7), and in 20:21-22 he in turn sends his disciples (see note there). Being sent (in the case of both Jesus and his followers) implies that the commission, charge, and message are issued by the sender rather than originating from the one who is sent. This verse refers to Christ's first coming. He will return to judge the world at his second coming (5:17-29)."

Today at church the pastor in the main service talked about the importance of confession, about the different types of guilt, and how we shouldn't be tempted to run up the bill on sinning by abusing God's grace. He spoke about how confession leads to reconciliation. In the High School service, packed to the limit by guest attendees, our guest pastor from Northern Ireland, a guy named Paul Bowman, who was the guy who gave the sermons at camp, came to preach to the Highlands group one last time before going home. Pastor Bowman spoke about the story of Zacchaeus the tax collector, and how even the worst people can repent and be saved.

And now... camp. High School Camp is an event I have never before attended, despite my status as a technical senior. I now say that I am glad to have attended. After a long bus ride down into Oregon, we went to the camp, spending a week there. We attended moving sermons given by Pastor Bowman, worshiped with the band Everfound, played games by day and by night, went to the beach, went to the lake, divided into small groups, played other odd games before session, ate, and slept. I participated in a game of Ultimate Frisbee on Monday with several others, including my good buddy Nathan. My team narrowly lost, I'm afraid, but we put up a good game. As for the rest of the week, we did all of the things that I listed, and then some. This included watching about ten people get baptized, including my friends Stephen and Jeff. There was also a concert by Everfound on Thursday night, which attended, and I am so glad they were handing out ear plugs! On the final day, we the seniors went on a hike on this trail to a picturesque waterfall, and got to see it up close. Davis, Westerling, and some others even stood inside of the water pouring down! We had to climb underneath and past this log to get to it, and then over some rocks, but it was well worth it. While on the hike, we had some great conversation between us. It was easily the best day at camp. And that night, after the final session, many people shared what they thought were the best of funniest moments at camp, and how God has worked in them this week. It was all very emotional. We then came home on the bus on Saturday, arriving at about 6:45 P.M. We were finally home.

During camp, I stayed in a large upper room in the lodge building with several other people, mainly freshmen. My small group's counselors were Larry Maison and Sam Piehler. My favorite thing that happened at camp was getting to know all sorts of people (you know who you are). But honorable mention goes to something we did on Friday evening. We had two guys and a girl put on plastic ponchos and hairnets, and then had twenty other people hold these buckets of ice cream Sunday toppings. They held them on top of their heads, and each bucket had a number on it. The three victims had to choose what numbered bucket they would have dumped on their head. The results were pretty gross- and hilarious. One guy got ketchup and relish dumped on his head, mixed with two buckets of chocolate syrup and then potato chips. The girl had to suffer through maple syrup and various cereals. The last guy got chocolate ice cream dumped all over him. I remember bucket holder number seven went first, and bucket holder number sixteen went last. My buddies Nathan, Davis, and Kristin were all bucket holders, and Kristin was the girl who held bucket number sixteen. All in all, it made for a good laugh from the rest of us at the expense of the victims.

Now, here are some upcoming reviews: Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, The Long Walk, The Old Man and the Sea, Star Wars: Knight Errant, The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Mafia, Second Edition, and Batman and Robin Volume 1: Born to Kill.

Also, I am still lobbying for questions for a potential Ask Levi! series, which never materialized after I posted about it a few months ago. Please, ask away in the comments section! I crave things to write about! Speaking of which, I also plan to write future posts on reality television, music, Tintin, Artemis Fowl, comic books, Spider-Man, Comics Alliance, and whatever it is you, dear readers, may request. Please, feel free to ask away about what you would like me to write about!

Review: Man of Steel

There are many movies and television shows I haven't seen, books and comics I haven't read, and audio dramas I haven't listened to. In the sector of comics that I have read, the least superhero I've read of is Superman. I've read Luthor and Superman: Secret Origin, and Superman for All Seasons and Superman: Birthright are on my list, but I can't honestly profess to be a huge Superman fan. I saw the sadly terrible Superman Returns, but I haven't seen the original Superman film series, the first two of which my buddy Nate thinks are the best superhero films ever made. I haven't even seen the awful monstrosity that is Smallville, though I've read the Comics Alliance commentaries on both the Superman films and Smallville to know a thing or two about those works. Thusly, I went into Man of Steel fairly fresh, not having much to compare it to, and not having huge expectations or preconceptions of what I should see on the big screen. But I knew and know enough to know that this isn't the best we could have gotten.

For those of you who don't know Superman's origin story, this film portrays Superman's origin, with Jor-El (Russel Crowe) sending his son, Kal-El, to Earth to escape the impending destruction of their home planet of Krypton. Kal-El is brought up on Earth by Jonathan and Martha Kent (Kevin Costner and Diane Lane, respectively) as Clark Kent (Henry Cavill). Clark's powers, activated by his Kryptonian physiology under our yellow sun, manifest in his childhood years, which are show via flashbacks which punctuate Clark's journey around the world, doing good where he can. Meanwhile, Intrepid Reporter Lois Lane (Amy Adams) begins investigating this mysterious do-gooder after encountering Clark at the crash site of a Kryptonian ship in the Arctic while on assignment (the laughably implausible explanation for her being able to be there is detailed in this post over at Law and the Multiverse). Unfortunately, she isn't the only one looking for Clark, as the Kryptonian revolutionary leader General Zod (Michael Shannon) and his troops have arrived at Earth, seeking to claim Superman who he believes has a genetic codex which will allow him to revive the Kryptonian race. Will Clark be able to defeat General Zod? Will Lois get her story? Will the military brass stop behaving like massive unprintable things to Clark, known to some as "Superman"?

Okay, let's get a few things straight. There are some things, a lot of things, that this movie gets right. Firstly, the movie has some impressive visuals, bolstered by top grade cinematography. Everything from the scenes on Krypton to Clark flying around Metropolis has a great look to it. The logical extension of this point is that the action is good and shot well, and while it is, I'll elaborate on my issues with the action later.

Secondly, there's also some great emotion in this movie. The scene from the trailer where Clark says, "The world is too big, mom," and she replies with, "Then make it small" is sold very well in the actual movie, where the whole thing is on display. Cavill also plays a great Superman, acting with the standard noble, friendly, but serious air of our favorite Paragon of Virtue (more on that in a minute). However, I'm sorry to say that he doesn't get the chance to play "Clark Kent," in that he doesn't adopt the mild mannered reporter persona until the very end of the film. If he did, I have no doubt there would have been a plethora of comparisons to Christopher Reeve, but I won't make those comparisons here because I have yet to see the original Superman films. As for the other actors, Russel Crowe is phenomenal as Jor-El, as is Amy Adams as Lois Lane, and Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent. Even Laurence Fishburne as Perry White is great, though his characterization is something I'll tackle later, along with that of others. But if anyone steals the show, however, it's Antje Traue as Faora-Ul, General Zod's number two. She's a total badbutt who absolutely wipes the floor with Superman, and excellently delivers some great lines. She's menacing, well acted, and really, really cool.

However, that's where the good ends. Let us proceed to the bad. My chief complaint with this movie is that there is just too much action and too much stuff blowing up. It batters your senses in a way that Green Lantern could only dream of. This movie is awash in explosions and violence, climaxing in a battle which wrecks Metropolis in a hemorrhaging spectacle which is undoubtedly a gross overuse of CGI. Smallville itself all but gets blown to bits, for Pete's sake! Even Jor-El gets in on the action, engaging in a fist fight with Zod. This scene in particular was way out of left field for me two reasons; first, Jor-El isn't a warrior, he's a scientist, and what with Krypton's apparent custom that every child's role in society is selected for them, why would Jor-El know how to fight if he was logically never a soldier? Did he enroll at the local dojo and learn how to be a badbutt? Just... why?

Another thing that doesn't make sense is Zod's plan. His goal is to use the Kryptonian world building machine to make Earth into a brand new Krypton, which would wipe out humanity. But instead of doing that, once they have Superman in custody, why don't they just back track to one of the worlds previously used by the Kryptonians, use the world building machine on one of those worlds and then use the codex to revive the Kryptonian race? I suppose one could argue that Zod wanted to control a world with a yellow sun that granted Kryptonians fantastic powers, but he clearly didn't know about that until he was in the middle of his plan, and even if he did, he could have avoided a lot of conflict by using the world building machine on, say, Mars, and colonize the new Kryptonian race there. (Knowing Zod, he would probably start a war of conquest against Earth anyway, but that's just even more hypothetical nonsense.)

Other complaints of mine involve characterization. Lois Lane may be well acted, but I don't think this is a very good version of her. Sure, she's an Intrepid Reporter, but she lacks that feisty streak, that tough-as-nails edge that Lois in the comics has. She was more like your average damsel in distress here. Her boss, Perry White, has a different problem. He's supposed to be a journalist, but rejects Lois' first article on Superman because he doesn't believe it would be well received by the public. Granted, that's probably true, but like I said, Perry White is a journalist. He of all people should believe that the people have a right to know. And then there's Jonathan Kent. He gets written out of the script pretty early, but it's done in a way that flies in the face of an important faucet of Superman's character in the comics. For exactly why, I refer you to Chris Sims' spoiler-filled review over at comicsalliance.com. Also, exactly why did they replace Jimmy Olsen with a random "Jenny." And where's General Sam Lane? He could easily have been worked into the script, and the filmmakers might even make it work it to their advantage by giving a plausible explanation of Lois' being able to go to that crash site which was cordoned off by the military.

Superman's characterization also gets a somewhat short stick. In this movie, we see Superman steal someone's clothes, take a swig of beer, and then does something which I will not reveal because it is such a major spoiler, but if you've seen the movie, you know what I'm talking about. Jeremy Jahns argues in his reviews that it was the only thing Superman could do in that situation, and that Supes felt really bad about it, but I say again, why? Why make a story where Superman does this thing which is the antithesis to his character in the comics? Why make movie Superman do the thing which (pre-New 52, of course) Superman promised himself that if he did this he would hang up his cape and retire? Again, just... why?

My final problem is with Michael Shannon's General Zod. Sure, the guy sells the idea of a menacing, heartless villain, but he's just not particularly memorable. What with the aforementioned spotlight-stealing that Faora pulled, it's kind of hard for him to stand out among the uniformly grey suited Phantom Zone escapees. To me, he's just another evil bad guy, though to his credit, he's better than Lord Blackwood.

"But wait!" you might say, "what's your take on the whole 'Superman as Space Jesus' thing?" Personally, I understand why the creators might identify Superman as being a Christ metaphor, or even my buddy Nate's view of him as a Moses metaphor, but I share Chris Sims' opinion that Superman is his own thing, and is not meant to be identified with any Biblical figure.

On the whole, this new, "realistic" take on Superman is a loud, raucous, cynical, joyless rampage in cinema which is now being touted as the jumping off point for a World's Finest movie. This film is a decidedly second tier portrayal of Superman which improves on what some of the previous movies (*cough*Superman Returns*cough*) got wrong, but for the most part either repeats other mistakes and invents new ones. To even let a hack like Zack Snyder (director of 300 and Watchmen) near a momentous project such as this speaks volumes of how ineptly this film was handled, similar to the ineptitude with which the first three films of the Burton/Schumacher quadrilogy was handled (Batman and Robin is an underrated gem, so there). And how could it have gotten this bad with Christopher Nolan producing? On the other hand, a stronger sequel might lift it out of the muck, not entirely unlike how Batman Begins was bettered by The Dark Knight. If Lex Luthor makes an appearance (LexCorp's presence was teased multiple times throughout Man of Steel) in that movie, then I might just go see it.

...Then again, maybe not.

RATING: 7/10

Image courtesy of impawards.com

Review: Sherlock Holmes

It was my mother's idea to watch this movie. I had previously had no desire to watch the film, but after I realized that my sisters and mother had gone so far as to move up its sequel, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows to the number one position in our Netlflix queue, I felt the need to watch it to see what good they saw in this film. After watching it, I still don't understand why my dear mother found it so appealing.

I've mentioned before that I haven't read any original Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Sherlock Holmes stories, mainly stemming from apathy crossbred with laziness. This movie did little to stir my interest in the stories, and if anything, it gave me reason to harbor discontent towards them. To cut to the chase, I felt that this movie blew like a bomb.

This sub-par excuse for a film chronicles the adventures of the long running partners Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) and Dr. John Watson (Jude Law) as they fight against Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), an occultist leader who uses apparent supernatural abilities in an attempt to take over England, and eventually, the world. At first, they have him captured, and then executed after trial, but he miraculously seems to rise from the grave. Holmes and Watson must track down Lord Blackwood and find out what his real plan is, with a little help from Irene Alder (Rachel McAdams), an old flame of Holmes'.

For all its faults, Sherlock Holmes does get some things right. Namely, it quickly shows from the start that Sherlock Holmes is awesome... and funny. He pulls of ridiculous stunts with frightening regularity, and is, of course, a genius detective. In addition, he's a formidable fighter, and the way he does his fight scenes is very detailed, planning his moves with surgical precision, predicting his opponent's moves and how long it will take them to recover from a beating. That said, the said fight scenes are slightly lackluster, in that they lack that special snap to them that makes them really go.

Also of note is the acting. And really, when you've got some solid stars like Downey, Law, and Strong in the lead roles, you can't get much better. As much as I disliked Green Lantern, I loved Strong as Sinestro in it, and I was hoping that his woefully underused talent would be put on display here. Sadly, it wasn't, but more on that later. Likewise, I like Downey as Sherlock Holmes, and he's got a good dynamic going with Law as Watson. They bounce off each other like rubber balls on the ground, and it's pretty good to watch, with most of the film's already solid comedy coming from their interactions.

However, I'm afraid that there are many flaws with this movie. For starters, Lord Blackwood isn't a particularly strong villain. We know that he wants to take over the world and all, but we don't go into his motivation very deeply. He's just so... I thing Jeremy Jahns put it best... generic. Blackwood is just a run-of-the-mill movie bad guy with run-of-the-mill goals.

Speaking of ill-defined characters, most of the others here aren't give a terrible lot of attention. Irene Adler is an interesting and likeable supporting character, but not a whole lot is done with her. She's sort of just there. True, she has a more or less well plotted out motivation, but she's still just not given a whole lot to do other than flirt with Holmes. Most of the other characters have the same problem, from the ill-defined but potentially complex character of Inspector Lestrade (Eddie Marsan) to Watson's fiancee Mary Morstan (Kelly Reilly) to Mrs. Hudson (Geraldine James). It's a shame really, especially about Lestrade, a tragically underexploited character in my opinion.

I'd also like to make clear that there is just too much stuff blowing up and too much action. Sherlock Holmes is meant to be a very cerebral character, with most of the conflict in the story rooted in suspense and mystery. There's a little mystery in here, but not a whole lot of suspense. BBC's Sherlock got that part right, focusing on the characters and the mystery rather than ludicrously over the top action sequences.

Finally, the actual mystery solving is largely kept hidden from viewers until the climax of the film, where Holmes reveals that he's worked everything out. In Sherlock, the audience is let in on the clues and things, allowing us to be kept "in the know." There's none of that here. Granted, when there is actual mystery solving, it's pretty cool, but there's just not a whole lot of it. There was also some clunky expository dialogue that rakes on the ears. The rest of the dialogue wasn't anything special.

In the end, I declare that Sherlock Holmes is the most mediocre film that I've ever reviewed, and I hope to never see it again. I will be reviewing it's sequel in a week or two, and I might eventually have to do a post on Sherlock, just so you all can get a taste of a Sherlock Holmes adaptation that is actually good. At least this film had the decency to not include the blasted dear stalker hat.

RATING: 6.5/10

Image courtesy of imdb.com

Bible Verse Sunday #36 & the End of Vacation 2013

Today's verse comes from a book I picked up while on vacation, called The Spirit of America. It's basically a catalog of various Bible verses by subject. Today's verse is Psalm 31:24:

"Be strong, and let your heart take courage, all you who wait for the Lord!"

The ESV Study Bible has this to say about the verse:

"The psalm closes with assurance: the God who has made promises and who has kept them in the past will continue to do so. On v. 24, cf. 27:14."

We didn't attend church today as we were busy driving home from vacation. We packed up all our stuff and let the hotel room swept clean. Then we went out for breakfast, going to this buffet thing at this fancy burger joint. Then we drove to this somewhat larger city where we walked around town. A lot. We walked more than half a mile to get to this bakery place where mom could purchase some gluten free bread. Then dad met up with us with the car, and we went to this electrical museum, where they had these old radios and telegraphs and stuff, including a theremin. It's a musical instrument invented by this physicist guy which you don't have to touch to play. You just wave your hands next to the rods and sound comes out. They even had this old radio which could be tuned to play stuff that would have been on the radio when it (the radio) was new, or something more modern, like a local news broadcast. After that, we went to this hobby shop, where I was unable to find anything related to the Star Wars Roleplaying game, but I did pick up some new dice. We then browsed at this comic book store where a bunch of guys were playing Yu-Gi-Oh. I didn't buy anything, but my Dad bought for my sisters some old Archie Comics and a Batman: Gotham Adventures issue from back in 2001! (As a rule, I generally don't buy any comics if I can get it from the library. Luckily for my comic book store, and comixology.com should I finally decide to shop there, there are plenty of issues out there that have yet to be collected in trade, namely issues from the first volume of the Azrael comic book)

We then left that town and hit the road again, listening to a Focus on the Family Radio Theatre production of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. I've always liked anything to do with The Chronicles of Narnia (except for the absolutely awful The Voyage of the Dawn Treader film), or anything to do with C.S. Lewis for that matter, and I listened to this series of audio dramatizations of The Chronicles of Narnia a lot when I was younger, and am thrilled to, after a series of technical issues, have them all ready to play on my iPod! With the help of a adapting cord, we were able to play it through the car radio. That kept us entertained until we got home (we stopped for bathroom breaks and an early dinner at this less-fancy burger joint). Aw, home, sweet home!

Vacation 2013 Lowdown

I looked up the term "lowdown" before I started writing this post. According to merriam-webster.com, it means, "the inside facts." So, I'll give you, my loyal and classy readers, the lowdown on this year's vacation (Also, I'm writing this post so as to meet my three-post-per-week minimum).

We spent most of our time sitting around watching TV, or in my case, working and/or playing on the computer. Since we don't have a TV back home, I was happy to watch Wheel of Fortune in the evenings, though I missed one night. There was also the pool, which I went to once or thrice. We played a rousing game of Marco Polo this one time. It wasn't a huge pool, just your standard hotel pool, with the hot tub and all. Then there was the beach. I'm afraid to say that it was not a terribly good beach, being incredibly swampy at low tide and made out of rocks at high tide. Not very good for walking on.

I also spent a lot of time reading this book that I've had in reserve for a while, The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Mafia, Second Edition. It's an altogether very interesting read so far, though I'm getting some conflicting information between it and good old Wikipedia. Of course, this may be because of two reasons: One, Wikipedia is not always reliable, and Two, this book was published back in 2004, almost ten years ago. But on the whole, there's a lot of good information on the history of the Mafia, and other things having to do with it.

So, if what we did by and large was watch TV, what did we watch? The others watched Pawn Stars and the Food Network, though my mom also went running and cycling, not mention cooking the meals and stuff. To our credit, we also went down to this little coffee shop and got coffee and muffins, and puttered about on scooters that we had brought. In addition, I worked on memorizing quiz verses for the Bible Quiz Team, and did situps. I'm working my way up to 300 a day, adding 25 every week. This week I've been doing 200 a day. Pretty good, huh? I'll have washboard abs in no time. I also caught the back half of what I presume is the first episode of the new Batman cartoon show Beware the Batman. It was okay, but I haven't seen the original Batman: The Animated Series or The Batman, so I don't really have anything to compare it to. I guess this would also require watching Justice League and Justice League Unlimited as well, which, happily for me, are both on instant on Netflix.

Anyhow, that's about all we did on vacation, until today, the last day at the hotel. We drove around, looking for something to do other than sit around watching TV. Then, we stumbled upon this place which had go carts and mini golf. Dad and I played mini golf while Rebekah and Naomi went on the go carts. Mom filmed them and cheered them on. The others later came down to watch dad and I play mini golf. This one whole took me 34 strokes to get the ball down the hole. But we eventually got through it. Unfortunately, we had delegated scoring after hole 15 to my sister Naomi, who I don't think kept a reliable record of the proceedings. The closest thing to my 34 was a 29 or 24 or something. I couldn't tell. Then again, I guess most golfers would love to have a caddie who can't keep score. Except Naomi wasn't a caddie. Oh well. Whatever. Also, this place had this weird train ride thing (we didn't go on it). After that, it was on to this local strip mall thing, where we got some groceries. Eventually, we came back to the hotel where we, you guessed it, watched TV or played on the computer. Well, we played a little bit with a Frisbee and then went out for chowder and fish and chips, but that was about it.

In sum, our vacation was pretty low-key. But I always preferred the "staycation" anyway. Oh well. We head back home tomorrow, so expect either a belated Bible Verse Sunday or a somewhat late one.