Seriously, they hit the nail on the head here: http://www.newsweek.com/id/222503Just about every individual mentioned in this list may have had their humorous moments now and again, but their overall, continued draw after many years has me scratching my head.
This is the type of news that makes me scratch my head: http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/11/14/william-friedkin-and-william-peter-blatty-reteaming-for-an-exorcist-remake/I suppose, based on the quotes from author William Peter Blatty, that there might be something to re-doing The Exorcist as a mini-series, and I suppose producers might get excited about having director William Friedkin take another run at one of the two properties (the other being The French Connection) that really put him on the map. But, as with the rumored remake of The Fly by the original remake director David Cronenberg, I'm terribly ambivalent about such a project. At least with Mr. Cronenberg, his recent output has been quite good. Sadly, the same cannot be said about Mr. Friedkin, whose work following The French Connection and The Exorcist has been up and down (note in the article linked to above the comments the /Film people have regarding the Blu Ray release of The French Connection, too). So, a part of me is intrigued at the thought of adding sequences and a "better" ending. Another part of me is very worried...the TV mini-series remake of The Shining proved very inferior to Kubrick's film, despite the fact that it was made, one supposes, to make a version of The Shining that was closer to the novel. On the other hand, if the same director and author are supposedly involved, can lighting strike twice?
Seems that there should be a whole new category in the news section devoted to inappropriate uses of the 911 emergency system. In this case, the man was looking for...sex?! See/hear for yourself:
Not to beat a dead horse (though no doubt that's exactly what I'm doing), but one other thing occurs to me regarding the works of Michael Connelly, and this may in some part explain my general disappointment with 9 Dragons. When you've read a certain author's works for a long time, as I have with Mr. Connelly, you begin to pick up on certain elements, whether they be familiar characterizations or plot retreads. Author Clive Cussler may be the ultimate plot repeater: All his books seem to revolve around a) showing us an ancient tragedy involving real or imagined vessels, whether they be trains, planes, or ships and b) in the "modern" times, our hero (Dirk Pitt) is in a race to find the sunken train/plane/ship etc. because it has within its cargo hold something vitally important or dangerous that may destroy/save the world. With Mr. Connelly, I've come to realize that one aspect of his novels that repeats is that he likes to give the readers multiple plot twists at the tail end of his novels. He tends to reveal in his book's final pages that characters within had hidden motivations or were somehow involved in whatever mystery is played out in ways designed to surprise us. To me, though, the only big surprise in 9 Dragons is the unpleasant one I dealt with in my previous notes about the book (just scroll down). However, when focusing on the book's central mystery(s), I had the suspects of the original crime pretty much pegged from the start. Please understand: I'm not trying to boast. I only fear that my familiarity with Mr. Connelly's writing style may be getting in the way of my enjoyment of the same. Further, I found myself anticipating the novel's second big plot twist, the one delivered on the final pages of the book and involving Bosch's daughter. Before those revelations were made, at least twenty some pages before getting there, I knew where Mr. Connelly was heading. Again, the reason for this insight may well be my familiarity with Mr. Connelly's writing style. Regardless, I point this out because these elements ultimately detracted from my enjoyment of the novel (that along with the unpleasant surprise mentioned before and the fact that the central mystery wasn't all that great, IMHO, to begin with). However, someone who may not be as familiar with Mr. Connelly's work may find the plot twists both engaging and surprising. As I said before, according to Amazon's reviews (and a looks around other reviews of the book) my negative opinion of the novel seems to be in the minority. So please take that into account should you find yourself interested in picking up this book.
I have yet to read a positive review of AMC's new Prisoner mini-series. Here's USA Today's Robert Bianco's take: http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/reviews/2009-11-12-prisoner13_ST_N.htmWhile I was somewhat optimistic at one point that I could find something to like in the show (it is The Prisoner, after all...a remake of my favorite TV show...they had such a great template to follow...what could go wrong?!), it appears that as more and more critics offer their opinions, the less I'm looking forward to the mini-series. Looks like its shaping up to be a big missed opportunity.
A while back (You can check here and here) I noted I was a fan of author Michael Connelly. In the later link, I stated I was very curious to read his latest novel, 9 Dragons, which was just recently released in hardback. It is, incredibly, his third novel released in a span of one year, and the reviews of the work seemed more divergent than other novels he's released. As a fan of his work, of course I was curious, so instead of waiting for the softcover (which I usually do...space around here is tight enough as it is!) I went ahead and picked up the hardcover and, eventually, read it. I'll be getting into SPOILERS, so be forewarned: If you want to read the book and don't want certain aspects of it revealed, READ NO FURTHER!!! SPOILERS BELOW... ....YOU'VE BEEN WARNED! There are times I've wondered what a popular writer or filmmaker or singer might think about themselves if, somehow, they could examine their later work while still young and in the prime of their career. For example, what would David Bowie, fresh off of making The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders of Mars, think of himself if he were given the opportunity to spend a day with all the albums he created from that point on? Would the younger David Bowie be confused by all the different directions he eventually followed? Would he find certain albums perplexing, and wonder how he could have released them? Or would he be proud of the work, knowing that life has its ups and downs, and that at the very least there was a consistency to the work? Similarly, what would a Jaws era Steven Spielberg think if he were allowed to sit through all the films that followed, both good and bad. Would the younger Spielberg, like the younger David Bowie, also wonder how it is this older version of himself got to where he was? Would he take certain films and recognize their genius, but feel he could do better...or at least differently, than the man he would become? I ask these questions for a reason, because I wonder what the Michael Connelly who introduced the world to LAPD detective Hieronymous "Harry" Bosch in Black Echo back in 1993 would think of the Michael Connelly who just released Bosch's latest mystery, 9 Dragons. I ask this because Black Echo not only introduced readers to Bosch, but also to Eleanor Wish, a fascinating female FBI agent who was the second lead in the the story and who subsequently appeared in several other Bosch novels, including this one. I ask these questions because apart from Harry Bosch, Eleanor Wish has been one of the most interesting characters in the series, and her progression from that first novel on has been well crafted and interesting. So interesting that there have been times I've found myself as interested in what is happening in her life as I was with Bosch's. Which makes what happens to her character in 9 Dragons so incredibly appalling. Once again I ask: Did the Michael Connelly of 1993 envision this was the way her character would eventually go? Doubly sad is the fact that the plot in this novel isn't one of Mr. Connelly's stronger efforts. The central mystery is rather weak and the author resorts to the cliched idea of the bad guys "going after my family". Eleanor Wish's character in 9 Dragons is there, it seems, to be alternately hysterical and angry before being killed off. She isn't so much the character I've grown to enjoy seeing in the books as a plot device: Reader, you must now be sad that she's gone. And that, at least to me, is a terrific shame. As Jennifer Reese, the reviewer for Entertainment Weekly put it (you can read her full review here): Connelly dispatches an important
character so randomly that you wonder whom he
wouldn't kill to energize a fundamentally inert narrative.Now, if you haven't read the other Connelly books as I have, you may find enjoyment out of 9 Dragons. Indeed, going by many of the reviews in the Amazon listing, my opinion is in the minority. However, I reiterate what I've said before: It's a shame such a dynamic character had to be dispatched in what is ultimately a minor work of an otherwise great author. Here's hoping the next one is better.
Made it half-way through watching the Blu-Ray edition of Alfred Hitchcock's North By Northwest (1959) and boy is this film a beauty to finally see in high definition (I've seen it many times before, but this is the way it should be seen). A warning to those who haven't seen it: The plot remains completely silly (I can't help imagining what would happen if I were to submit such a story to publishers or agents unfamiliar with this great film's mostly tongue in cheek storyline), but the dialogue is so damn crisp and alternately laugh out loud funny and sexy and tense and...look, its a great film, even if the plot itself is pretty loopy. It is also my understanding is that it was a big inspiration for the James Bond films that first appeared only a few years later ( From Russia With Love, the second of the Bond films, features Bond on foot being pursued by a helicopter in a sequence that is suspiciously similar to NBN's most famous sequence, involving a cropduster). Mr. Hitchcock's career was filled with one brilliant film after another. Some were better than others, of course, but the films he released immediately before and immediately after NBN indicate this was his last great creative hurrah ( Vertigo came before, Psycho and The Birds afterwards). After The Birds, it appeared the great director's career never quite reached the same dizzying heights. He would make five more films after The Birds, and while none of them were terrible, neither were they quite as memorable as what came before. Regardless, the Blu-Ray version of North By Northwest is well worth checking out, if you're so inclined.
Not the most surprising news to hit the waves, but there you have it: Dollhouse is finished. Fox will air the last few episodes and its done: http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2009/11/11/this-just-in-dollhouse-axed/Of all the shows I've watched recently, Dollhouse is probably the one I've given the most number of chances. The first season began pretty badly, got a little better somewhere midway through, only to slip again toward the end. Season 2 began OK, but then, for me, it slipped. I heard the last aired episode was one of the best of the lot but I couldn't get past the first segment and wound up deleting it from my DVR and finally giving up on the show for good. Oh well...I was truly hoping for something to intrigue and entertain me, but it just didn't work out. Here's hoping the next Joss Whedon project is worth following.
This might just be, hands down, the strangest, most bizarre article I've run into in a very, very long time. See for yourself: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1937370,00.htmlWhat can I say? The future (or perhaps "nature" or "God") is essentially stopping what scientists in the present are trying to achieve with the Hadron collider?! Wow. Who says fact isn't stranger than fiction!
Here's a pretty thorough one. It goes over both the good and the not so good about this highly anticipated game...
Movie producer Joel Silver has had the Sgt. Rock property for like...forever. I recall many years ago there was talk that Arnold Schwarzenegger was being pursued to play the role (I could imagine as the movie progressed all the nervous men in his charge would constantly ask him who pitches for the Yankees or what's the capital of New York or what part of Kansas did he really come from). Anyway, it appears that Mr. Silver is still at it, and according to this article, they may move Sgt. Rock from the front lines of WWII into the...FUTURE!!! http://www.aintitcool.com/node/43018I don't know about that...
These types of stories are not only fascinating, but also quite thrilling (at least to me!) to read. This one concerns a lost Persian army that contemporaneous Greek records indicated drowned in the sands
of the western Egyptian desert 2,500 years ago. It is one of archaeology's "biggest outstanding mysteries", according to the article, and there were those who thought the story a myth. However, as this article indicates, the army's remains may well have been discovered: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33791672/ns/technology_and_science-science/As I said before, fascinating!
I suppose this is THE big video game release of the week. I'm curious about it, although according to this video from msnbc.com, there is some controversy swirling around it...
I mentioned before that a film that isn't available on DVD (that I'm aware of) that I'd like to get is The House By The Lake (aka Death Weekend). However, another film, this one from 1975, is also very high on the list of films I'd love to get my hands on: The Reincarnation of Peter Proud. Adapted from the novel by Max Ehrlich (who also wrote the movie's screenplay) and featuring Michael Sarrazin, Jennifer O'Neil, and Margot Kidder, the movie focuses on Peter Proud (Sarrazin) a man who has nightmares of being murdered while on a row boat in a lake. This leads to his finding the place where he "died", and the possibility that he may well be the reincarnation of another man, the man in his dreams. Will history repeat itself? I've only seen this movie twice, the last time over a decade ago, and both times it got to me. Now, it appears that director David Fincher ( Seven, Fight Club) has his eyes set on making a new version of the film: http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/11/08/david-fincher-directing-adaptation-of-the-reincarnation-of-peter-proud/I'm ambivalent about a remake of this film, but if it means we'll see the DVD (or Blu Ray) release of the original, I'm all in favor! Rooting around YouTube, I found this, the opening couple of minutes of the original film...
Very scary stuff, this article, from msnbc.com: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33778733/ns/technology_and_science-security/As if we don't have enough to worry about with regard to viruses or other malicious code on the net. Now one must be very careful that their computers don't pick up viruses whose function is to make it appear you're visiting and downloading child porn from the internet. The end result can be, as it was for Michael and Robin Fiola (they're mentioned in the article) quite devastating.
Interesting article regarding a phenomena I hadn't heard of before, that of the so-called "third man" (and in no way related to the Orson Welles' movie): http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/wayoflife/11/08/third.man/index.htmlAfter reading the article, my feeling is that an explanation to this phenomena is pretty close to this line, offered by the author of the book " The Third Man Factor: Surviving the Impossible," John Geiger: Maybe the Third Man is a coping mechanism, Geiger suggests. The brain
creates a companion to help a person survive a terrible situation. Or
perhaps there is an "angel switch" in the brain that's activated in
life-or-death struggles.
As of today (November 11th), the answer is obvious. Of course, the season officially ends November 30th, so I guess I shouldn't be too surprised... For those in the potential path, stay safe. To date I've survived five or six of these beasts, the worst being Andrew (although the worst of it hit a little south of where I was). The others were category 1's, but even that can be harrowing.  
A list from Entertainment Weekly: http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20302680,00.htmlI've seen most of the film, and it occurs to me that while I enjoy animation (and animated films), I may not be the medium's biggest fan. Don't get me wrong, I like them, but its hard, at least for me, to build up all that much excitement over their list. Still, I did enjoy Wall-E quite a bit. The Iron Giant was good, but I think it's a little overrated. Same goes with Akira, a film I enjoyed but only really took the first part of the graphic novels (thus ending rather abruptly). One film not on the list (and, no, I don't think it belongs there, either) is Heavy Metal. When I was younger, it was a stunning thing to see in the theaters. It was the first time I ever saw an animated film that was "R" rated, and for very good reason. It also featured what I felt was a pretty kick ass musical score. But, of course, the film had its moments and then there were other moments which weren't all that good. The animation also varied, although I loved the opening sequence as well as the Harry Canyon and Gunner's Dream stories.
I'm always fascinated by movies that create divergent opinions. Precious, a new film out very soon, has been getting pretty good reviews (including some praising the work of singer Mariah Carey, in a supporting role. One of her previous film ventures was Glitter, which drew much derision). I ran across this review praising the hell out of the film:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/42990
Then, I ran across this review: http://www.slate.com/id/2234728/The contrarian in me appreciated the later article's title alone. Whether the film is good or bad, of course, depends on your own personal viewpoint. Just thought it interesting to see the contrast.
Interesting mini-article from Entertainment Weekly which posits the question: When is a very bad movie so bad its actually good? http://movie-critics.ew.com/2009/11/05/craptastic-or-crap-how-do-you-tell-the-difference/There are a few I could list that fit that definition, at least to me. One that sits high on the list is Lifeforce (1985) (I would also put the hallucinogenic action/philosophy fest On Deadly Ground, mentioned a couple of postings ago in the list as well). Lifeforce involves alien vampires, the end of the world, zombies (or zombie vampires, I guess), space shuttles, a beautiful naked woman who walks around a lot, and Steve Railsback ( Patrick Stewart, pre-Star Trek: The Next Generation, also makes an appearance). Not necessarily in that order. It's a movie so out there that you can't help but laugh. Or cry.
Here's a handy dandy rundown of the various "versions" of the film available or, rather, the various "collectible" sets which will be offered (and where): http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/11/05/star-trek-dvdblu-ray-retail-exclusives/You know, as time goes by I find myself less and less impressed with the Star Trek re-boot movie. It was a competent enough production, it was well acted, it featured decent special effects...but it wasn't anything at all we hadn't seen before. Still, I have faith in J. J. Abrams and company. After getting this one out of the way, perhaps the next ones will be more original and exciting.
A fascinating article regarding transient global amnesia, or TGA, a condition that has patients lose their ability to retain immediate memory. The cause of this, according to the article linked below, can be from strenuous exercise...such as sex. In the case of this article, just one such example of post-sexual onset of just such a condition is related: http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/11/04/transient.global.amnesia/index.htmlOne of the more fascinating lines from the article: Levitra, which is a pill for erectile dysfunction, lists TGA as a possible adverse reaction.Now you know.
One of those stories that pops up now and again...a $65,000 home had, stored within, a million dollars worth of comic books:
Johann Hari at Slate.com offers a review and blistering comments regarding the philosophy of Ayn Rand, perhaps the far right's philosophical darling:
http://www.slate.com/id/2233966/I've always been intrigued by Ms. Rand, and Mr. Hari's comments offer a scathing look at what may lie behind her philosophies, as well as the paradoxes, self-loathing, etc.. While reading the article, I couldn't help but find comparisons between Ms. Rand and another pretty well known author turned philosopher, who himself has brought about what many consider a cult. In the last paragraph of this article, Mr. Hari himself makes that very same comparison, so at the very least his essay was successful in bringing about his ultimate point. Still, the only thing I've ever really been exposed to, at least concerning Ayn Rand, are reviews of her philosophy (and articles both pro and con) and seeing the Gary Cooper starring The Fountainhead movie (which was, of course, based on Ayn Rand's novel). The movie was decent enough, although the philosophy was spread rather thick, which is evident even in this trailer for that movie.
Just found this website the other day, and its a hoot: http://www.avclub.com/features/my-year-of-flops/Basically, our intrepid reviewer is spending a year going over very, very bad films, and offering his hilarious insights into them. Was particularly amused by the Roman Polanski (yeah, that guy) forgotten film What? Until that review, I had never heard of the film. Sounds...uh...strange. http://www.avclub.com/articles/polanskitastic-sickfuck-case-file-149-what,34678/The other one I would point you out to (but, please, feel free to read through them all!) is the Steven Seagal turkey On Deadly Ground. I actually paid money back in 1994 to see that one in the theaters when it was released (it must have been a fairly boring day and the cinemas must not have been showing much, as I was never a particularly big fan of Mr. Seagal and, other than the much more critically accepted/audience-approved Under Siege, these are the only two films of his I ever saw of in the theaters). On Deadly Ground has to be one of the worst "action" films ever. I put the word "action" in quotes because truly it seemed Mr. Seagal (who directed as well as starred in this film) seemed intent on making some kind of larger spiritual message while kicking all kinds of ass. Michael Caine, who I usually absolutely love, is horrible in this film as the villain, an oil man who wants to pollute a pristine Alaskan bay (or somesuch) with his oil drills. So, to prevent that, our hero blows the whole thing sky high, no doubt ensuring the bay is polluted for years to come. And, even more hilarious/sad...check out the fact that despite numerous fist and gun fights, no one lays even one fist on Steven Seagal. Not once! It's amazing the man didn't walk on water at some point in the film, as well... http://www.avclub.com/articles/earthfriendly-case-file-130-on-deadly-ground,23400/For the masochists out there, here's the trailer to On Deadly Ground:
Absolutely love this story. In the age of fears regarding swine flu, it goes to show the lengths a corporation -with a straight face- would go to try to boost sales of their product. In this case, as Kelly Brownell, director of Yale University's Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity is quoted within the article states: "this (advertisement) belongs in the hall of fame...By (Kellogg's)
logic, you can spray vitamins on a pile of leaves, and it will boost
immunity." See for yourself: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2009-11-02-cereal-immunity-claim_N.htm?se=yahoorefer&poe=HFMostPopularI can't help it, I had to post the image of the actual cereal box with its ludicrous claim:
This is one of those videos that is hard to believe, even as you see it. The amount of booze destroyed in a matter of seconds...amazing...
Ah Blu-Ray. Gotta love the good transfers (as opposed to the lesser quality ones out there...read up and check!). But there remain many films unavailable, at least until now, on Blu-Ray. dvdfile.com presents their list of top 10 animated films they would like to see on Blu: http://www.dvdfile.com/views/article/blu-ray-wishlist-the-ten-most-wanted-animated-films-89337Frankly, I was expecting many, many Disney films listed, but the folks at dvdfile offered a fairly diverse list of films/tv shows/what-have-you. Some, though, I wonder if they would truly be worth the Blu-Ray treatment. I mean, nothing against South Park, but the animation is purposely crude...would it really be worth seeing it in a crystal clear format? Same goes, at least for me, with The Simpsons (of course, there's a whole other issue for me regarding that show. I used to love the hell out of it, but somewhere down the line...perhaps season 6 or 7, I grew tired of it. I bought the DVDs as they came out, up to roughly that time, but have yet to watch any of them.) On the other hand, Futurama would be interesting to see in HD, if only for the wild backgrounds (the characters are on the level of The Simpsons). But missing from their list, inexplicably and bafflingly, are any of the wonderful Warner Brothers short collections. Come on! Wouldn't you love to see Daffy Duck, Bugs Bunny, Wile E. Coyote & the Roadrunner, et al in HD? Wouldn't it be incredible to see the works of animation giants such as Chuck Jones, Friz Freleng, Tex Avery, etc. etc. etc. in full high definition?! How could they forget them?!
Fascinating story concerning the murder of 13 year old Mary Phagan in 1913 which lead to the imprisonment of Leo Frank and his subsequent lynching in 1915. This true crime story covers so many cultural aspects and is incredibly fascinating. Was Leo Frank guilty of the crime? I suspect that now, after so many years, we'll never know. The link below includes a fascinating video that offers photographs of all the participants in this case, as well as some rather grizzly pictures of Mr. Frank's lynching and the crime scene. If you don't want to see them, you may want to skip the video... http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/02/leo.frank/index.html
Post 700!!! Always love stories like these, this one concerning a lost Mayan city of staggering size, in Guatemala, that the jungle essentially ate up over time. The video below makes me very curious about what fascinating discoveries remain to be made at Mirador...
Rafe Needleman at CNET offers some great comments regarding all the upgrades that hit computer users every few years. He's prompted to write this article, of course, because of the brand new Windows 7. Thus far I've upgraded several computers, mine and other family members (legally!!!) with the new Windows 7 and have had only one major/minor problem thus far. I'm happy with Windows 7, although I've noted before that Vista, at least to me, was never quite the clunky OS that others seemed to so intensely dislike. On the other hand, Windows 7 operates quicker and has a few interesting new features (my favorite is their much improved search function). But, having said that, I'd be lying if I said that this version of Windows is some radically improved operating system. It is an improved, perhaps even much improved, version of Vista, but an improvement (not a complete reworking) nonetheless. So why force us to pay for an upgrade? And this is the crux of Mr. Needleman's article, which also goes after OS X Snow Leopard. http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/30/upgrade.pricing/index.html
I'm always fascinated by critics and their reactions to whatever it is they are reviewing. Opinions vary, of course, and sometimes people's opinions change over time (I recall two interesting instances in Siskel & Ebert's At the Movies review show. In the first, they reviewed both Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket and Benji: The Hunted on the same episode. If memory serves, Mr. Siskel was incredulous when Mr. Ebert gave Benji a "thumbs up" but panned Full Metal Jacket. Mr. Siskel couldn't understand Mr. Ebert's reasoning, that Benji was a satisfactory movie "for its intended audience" but that Kubrick's Vietnam War film was a miss. Later on, the duo had an episode that, again if memory serves, focused on films they were wrong about the first time around. Mr. Siskel admitted that he was wrong when he originally panned another great Vietnam War epic, Apocalypse Now). Which brings us to this article from Owen Gleibman, for Entertainment Weekly. He originally panned the vampire film Let The Right One In, a film that has apparently developed a very healthy cult status, and decided after receiving plenty of irate comments regarding that original review, to give the film a second chance. Did he like it this time around? See for yourself: http://movie-critics.ew.com/2009/10/31/let-the-right-one-in-yes-i-saw-it-again/Of the many, many films I've seen, there are probably only two of them I can say I truly changed my mind 180 degrees from my original impressions. When I first saw Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds, I was unimpressed. For years I thought this film was the single most over-rated Hitchcock film ever. And even back then I was a pretty big fan of Hitchcock's films! One day, I saw the film once again and, suddenly, I "got it". This film was Alfred Hitchcock's version of all those 50's "giant animals attack" movies that came before. Only instead of using a giant, scary creature (like a tarantula, an octopus, ants, etc.) he used a common creature that most view as completely not scary. Further, he didn't bother having the animals irradiated or enlarged: They retained their size and only presented a threat because of their overwhelming numbers. Lastly, Mr. Hitchcock ended the film the opposite way that the other creatures on the loose films ended: With a decidedly downbeat end of the world scenario. Chilling! The other film I originally didn't like, but has over time become (yes) perhaps my all time favorite horror film is Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. When it was originally released in 1980, I went with my father to see it. Frankly, I was bored. The scares were there, but there were so few, and Jack Nicholson and Shelley Duvall were so weird and annoying. But then, the show kept popping up on TV, and I would catch bits and pieces of it here and there. Years after, I finally sat down and watched it from start to end and, like The Birds, I finally got it. Watching The Shining is like dipping into an eerie, creepy nightmare. A great, great movie.
If the morning/early afternoon are any indication, it's going to be a weird one. Keep safe!
Halloween is upon us, and articles concerning horror movies and the odd are popping up. This one is particularly intriguing, an article concerning abandoned places (there are even websites devoted to showing images from such places. They're described in the article and I'll have to look them over. There's something so sad, and intriguing (at least to me) about abandoned places: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33421753/ns/travel-destinations/The article reminds me of the movie Carnival of Souls. It featured the abandoned (and very stunning) Saltair Pavillion, and is a worthy cult movie (although, like many older films, the "punch" and "surprise" of its plot/ending may be a little softened by the passage of time and other, similar films that followed. Still, very much worth a look.
It's a sure sign that a show is starting to lose it with me when I take longer and longer to get to it on the DVR. But, to be fair, episodes 5 & 6 of FlashForward ("Gimme Some Truth" and the obviously David Bowie title inspired "Scary Monsters and Super Creeps") weren't all that bad. They weren't all that exceptional, either. "Gimme Some Truth" had our leads go to Washington to face a committee and, essentially, justify their salaries and/or budget. They faced a harsh Senator who saw herself as President in her FlashForward and who has some "history", none of it nice, with Agent Wedeck, the boss of the FBI division in L.A. By the end of that episode, she's one step closer to her future, and while the agency has its funds to continue their research into the cause of the FlashForward, they've also made some powerful enemies, not least of which is the actual, current President of the United States. The episode ends on a cliffhanger, as simultaneous attacks are made on the FBI group, both in Washington D.C. (where the bulk of the FBI agents are) and in L.A., where Agent Hawk is ambushed and shot. "Scary Monsters and Super Creeps" takes up where the previous episode left off, with Agent Hawk clinging to life and coming out of her operation possibly unable to fulfill her FlashForward. This proved, at least to me, the most irritating aspect of this episode. The rest of the episode had the Benford's visited by the man who may cause their marriage to disintegrate (and who, secretly, is apparently part of the group that caused the FlashForward event), and the prolonged appearance of Dominic Monaghan's Simon, the other member of the group that set off the event. Now, the two episodes flowed well enough and they certainly were better than episode 4. I'm still sticking around with it, but I hope they start ramping up the story and direction a little better. It would also help if they don't present very famous songs re-worked by lesser talents (Not only did we have a...uh...new version of "Scary Monsters", but also "Across the Universe". Neither was all that good). I also tried to see last week's Dollhouse, but...I don't know. I just can't take the show anymore. After five minutes I shut it down. At this point in time, I don't think I'm coming back. Yeah, like I never said that before...
If you've seen my list of 14 films to see (click here) you'll know that my first three (and top three) films of all time are 2001: A Space Odyssey, Orphee, and.... Metropolis (ha! Bet that last little bit of information took you completely by surprise!). For those who don't know, Metropolis (1927) is a legendary silent German science fictional film directed by the equally legendary Fritz Lang. When the film was originally made, it was very expensive and maybe a bit too long (at least to the studios, who were eager, naturally to recoup their cash). Following the premiere, which featured the director's cut of the film, other hands went to work cutting the film down, time-wise. As the decades passed, various versions of the film were available, but the "director's" original cut was nowhere to be found and feared lost forever. Until the mid eighties, you could only find very scratchy bootlegs of the film. Then, Giorgio Moroder released his version of the film, which included some lost scenes and a (to me anyway) pretty damn good 80's soundtrack (your feelings about this soundtrack may vary, but I enjoyed it). However, this only increased my interest in seeing the version of the film Fritz Lang himself created. A couple of years ago Kino films released the, up until that time, more complete version of the film, but even that version featured some "information cards" describing scenes thought lost forever. Until last year, when to the surprise of everyone a complete 16 mm copy of Metropolis was finally found in Buenos Aires. Since that time, I've been eagerly waiting to hear word of the fully restored version of this favorite film of mine. Well, it appears we're getting close to that day: http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/10/29/the-lost-cut-of-metropolis-to-play-at-the-berlinale/Kino was, if memory serves, planning to release a Blu-Ray edition of the film when the uncut version was found...I'm hoping this Blu-Ray edition will follow shortly afterwards (and how about they include the Giorgio Moroder version, as well?!)...
A little while back (you can read it here) I mentioned I was a big fan of author Michael Connelly. His latest novel, 9 Dragons, is out (I have it, but haven't read it yet) and the author, while researching Hong Kong for the novel, afterwards discovered he was in the area when an apparent crime was committed that has some similarities to what he was writing. The article follows: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/29/michael.connelly.fact.fiction/index.htmlMy heart goes out to the family of Ani Ashekiar. As for Mr. Connelly's novel, as a fan of his writing I'm eager to read it, but the reviews have been pretty divergent. The critic at Entertainment Weekly wasn't too impressed at all with the novel ( http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20310556,00.html). However, other reviewers (like the one here: http://www.miamiherald.com/entertainment/story/1301193.html) felt it was one of his best books. I'll offer my opinion after I read it!
The show's had its ups and downs (I feel that the first half of season 1 remains its best hours) and ridiculous moments (LA being nuked, yet no one seemingly reacting; terrorists somehow swimming under and into the White House), but damn if the sight of Kiefer Sutherland locking horns with terrorists doesn't get my blood pumping. If there is one thing I hope, though, is that they offer some kind of resolution to the whole Tony Almeida situation. It was fun seeing him again last season, but they left his status too "up in the air". Hope he makes a return and redemption...
|