Video Game Guru: Controversy for the Sake of Attention

I've been meaning to write an article like this for a while. The reason I've put it off is that there have been countless articles, most of which are very well written, pertaining to this subject. So I thought to myself "What could I possibly add to the already lengthy discussion that has been going on for a number of years?" After some long thoughts I came up with nothing. But I still wanted to give my spin on it, if for no other reason than to get my voice out there and possibly start a discussion. What is the subject you ask?

Video Game Controversy. 

As long as I've been alive, the gaming community has been neck deep in controversies. Either they rot your brain, turn you fat, make you kill your parents/classmates, or cause kids to have complete breaks with reality. No matter what the reason, there always seems to BE A REASON not to play video games and/or get them banned entirely. Granted that has shifted more towards getting VIOLENT/SEXUAL video games banned in recent years, but it seems no matter what there will always be a problem with video games. But who is really to blame? 

I think that is where this gets hard.

Most of the video game community blames media outlets like Fox News for spreading ignorance when it comes to video games. Whether it's showing stock footage of a non-existent game called "Cop Killer" to pad a story, not doing their research on Mass Effect's ten second no nudity sex scene in the now infamous "Sex Box 360" piece, or bringing on an expert psychologist who claims video games cause rape and sexual deviancy, without any valid sources to back her up, Fox News has become the go to place in the minds of the video game community for spreading video game ignorance. 

But that's just one outlet out of many that spread the story that video games are kids toys and need government supervision when it comes to what can and can not be released. We've seen stories all over the globe about how video games have caused everything from massacres to promoting killing/not supporting adopted children (I kid you not). Myself, among many always groan when these stories come on. It's not because there is no validity to their arguments (I'll get to that in a second) but because it seems like nobody outside game journalists bother to do their homework. And why is that?

Just this past week I've seen a story coming out of Australia about a government official who is trying to ban violent/sexual video games in Australia. The story had some interesting points but all of that seemed moot when they showed a seven year old clip of the "Hot Coffee" GTA San Andreas mod and claimed that it was from this generation as well as quickly brushing off the rebuttal to the argument from a video game official and moving back to the original point of banning these games. Do you see something wrong here? Journalism (despite it's numerous shortcomings) is all about trying to provide a fair and balanced story with credible sources that gets both sides of the story equal screen/page time. Denying or simply brushing off the other side doesn't make your story look better, it makes you look scared or uninformed to anyone who is paying attention. You may get some people behind you, especially those who know nothing about video games, but to a journalist/communications major like myself, you look weak. Not only that but if you do have a source (in this case "Hot Coffee"), make sure the source is from the past three years, or at least from this current gaming generation. The "Hot Coffee" mod was a black spot that we all know was bad but we have moved on to bigger and better things and remedied that problem almost as quickly as it popped up.

But are the news outlets the only ones to blame? No. In fact the gaming industry HAS caused some problems the past couple years, and they do nothing but make us look juvenile and as weak as some of these outlets. The mission "No Russian" in Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 is an optional mission in the beginning of the game that has you playing an undercover CIA agent in a Russian terrorist cell with the objective being to kill everyone in the airport, man, woman or child, and then escape. You are given control over your character the entire time and you never actually have to pull the trigger while in the "kill innocents" part of the stage. Without consequence you can just walk through that section of the level and just view the horror that is taking place. 

To some this is an emotionally impactful scene and if you are moved by it than by all means, be moved by it, I'm not here to pass judgement on a person's individual taste. But to me, a lot of journalists and a good portion of the general public (including the aforementioned media sources) this seemed like nothing more than shock value or controversy for the sake of attention. Otherwise why would this scene have been leaked early? In a world where even mentioning Fallujah in an interactive form, even for educational purposes, causes the news to explode and grab their pitchforks and torches, do you really think a level in which 90% of it is gunning down random bystanders is appropriate? In games like Saints Row the Third and GTA IV you are given a CHOICE in acting like a morally corrupt douchebag who kills innocents. You never actually have to run around the street with a purple dildo killing grandmothers, it's all your choice. In MW2 it is a mission. Optional yes, but a mission nevertheless. 

And besides the "No Russian" mission or the "Hot Coffee" mod, there have been numerous middle fingers to what's good and right put in video games for no other reason than to piss people off. The numerous propaganda games that come out every year, games like Manhunt which, while amusing at first, seem to had been really made only to piss off the overly sensitive, or games like Zog's Revenge in which you play a Neo-Nazi who kills Homosexuals, Jews and African Americans the entire game. These are just a few of the hundreds and hundreds of really crappy, exploitative games that come out that bank their success on creating a stir. Why else would you have a PSA humorously named F.A.G.S?

But why the MW3 logo above? Well it's partially why I picked today to post this article. A recent video was "leaked" (cough released to the media cough) today from Modern Warfare 3. In it (since videos of it will probably be removed soon) a man with a camera is taping his wife and young daughter walking through the streets of London. They are tourists going around looking at all the landmarks and the one they had stopped to notice today was Big Ben. After looking at it briefly the daughter walks forward to chase some birds as a large van pulls up and explodes, killing the little girl as well as the mother and father. I'm reminded of this scene from Homefront (warning...it's graphic)

If you watched this scene you probably had one of two reactions: 1. "Wow that's...messed up." or 2. "Really?" I was actually the former while I was playing it but the more I saw it the more it turned into the latter. The scene was still impactful in it's own way, but it feels a little overboard in the grand scheme of things. No matter what your reaction, one thing this scene DIDN'T Do was cause a big stir. And why is that? Because this scene was trying to convey emotion and get you into the mindset of what's happening during that time. It wasn't done for shock value. And it certainly wasn't leaked early to the media to get attention.

But MW3's scene IS shock value. What's the difference besides the leaking early? Well this scene seems too forced to be of any real emotional value. The explosion is sudden and that freaked me out the first time I heard it, but they might as well have been singing "I love to be alive" or "Kumbaya." The emotions seemed forced and in some ways it seems like they were using the little girl as the bait (aka the one who runs right next to the bomb) because of the wonderful Dead Island trailer from earlier this year. People get emotional over dead little girls. And in some ways I can't blame Infinity Ward and Activision. But at the same time don't try to force a scene down are throats. Even more than that don't force a scene that feigns emotional depth down our throats but first release it for the world to see the week before your game comes out. Now we all know about it and the scene will seem like nothing in the bigger picture. So then why put it in? 

So who is really to blame? The outlets for spreading ignorance or companies spreading controversy only to get attention? Or is it something else entirely? What controversies have stuck with you or stand out? Is this an argument even worth having? I would really love to get people involved in this discussion. So leave your thoughts below in the comments and we can get this thing going.

Read More

Comic Noob Review: Avengers Solo #1

I haven't been reading that many Marvel comics lately. Besides Ultimate Spider-Man, I've kind of avoided the Marvel Universe like the plague. It's not because I don't like Marvel, in fact I like some Marvel characters more than most of the DCU, it's just new readers seem to get left in the dust for the most part. Besides a few choice series (the current X-Men/Punisher/Avengers Academy reboots) most of the comics are 20-30 issues in (some are even 500-700 issues in) and really hard to get into if you haven't been reading for multiple years. Luckily though there are a few new series and today at my local shop I picked up Avengers Solo #1. 

Solo is a Limited Series (Mini-series) that, from what I can guess from reading issue #1, features a different Avenger each issue. In issue #1 it focuses on Hawkeye, a fan favorite among comic lovers, but relatively unknown to the general public unless you had him pointed out to you during his cameo in the Thor movie. I love Hawkeye honestly. He's quick witted and even quicker with a bow and can play serious almost as good as he can funny. And since I can't for the life of me find any copies of any issue of Ultimate Hawkeye, this is a great place to go if you are a fan of Hawkeye. 

• Plot-In the opener to this six issue Limited Series, Hawkeye gets neck deep in a conspiracy after saving a man from a robot superhuman. The man is looking for his sister, who seems to be at the heart of this whole mess and asks for Hawkeye's help in finding her. Things go south quickly when the man is found dead with an arrow reading "Avenge This" lodged in his heart and soon Hawkeye realizes that this whole thing is much bigger than he had anticipated. 
• Writing-You get your money's worth with this comic. It's dense with dialogue and narration and the majority of it is quite good. Some of the writing gets muddled around the middle when they try going in deeper with the conspiracy, but this seems like an issue that will get ironed out as the comic goes on. Hawkeye plays it really straight in this issue, which is something I appreciate (seeing him in full detective mode) but it may turn off some fans who love his witty banter.
• Art-The art is...well it does it's job. It's not pretty but it's not grimy and the characters all look well enough. No weird bugging eyes, overly dark lines or anything weird like that. But nothing really pops. My one big issue is with the robots though. They look too alike. In fact I couldn't tell which one he was fighting until the other one showed up and identified himself as the other one. That DID bother me.

• Pros-Good writing, nice to see Hawkeye get a great starring role, has potential to be a very good limited series.
• Cons-Some confusing plot threads, mediocre art, hard to differentiate between villains, worried it might need more than six issues with a story this deep.
• Worth coming back for another issue-Oh yeah for sure. The writing alone can more than make up for some mediocre art.

Overall-Recommended. If you love Hawkeye, or are looking to jump into a new series, I suggest giving this one a look. You could do a LOT worse.

Van Meter has created a solid beginning and I look forward to reading the next issue. Recommended for any fan of Hawkeye.

Read More

You don't want to be trapped inside with me sunshine. Inside, I'm somebody nobody wants to f**k with do you understand? I am Charlie Bronson, I am Britain's most violent prisoner.

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Nicolas Winding Refn is an amazing director. This was proven to me two years ago when I watched the Pusher films (good films if you ever get a chance to watch them) and it was again proven to me earlier this year with Drive (my pick for Best Film of 2011). But now having watched Bronson, a film I've rented through Netflix a few times but never actually watched but have been meaning to, I can easily say that Refn knows exactly what he's doing behind a camera and he is brilliant at that. His use of colors (which is especially interesting since he is colorblind), the way he sets up the camera and plays with different angles he makes any film better.  

Then again it helps when you have such an amazing cast, especially Tom Hardy whose career should have skyrocketed after this film was release. Granted most people know him now from his work in Inception and the Warrior (as well as the upcoming Batman film) but Hardy has been around for a while and this film, much like Hardy, flew under the radar with barely a peep...at least in America. I'm willing to bet there has been some definite controversy in Britain and other countries, or at least you'd think considering this is a film about "Britain's most violent prisoner." But what do I know? All I know is Bronson is one twistedly funny and dark film that could very well be called the Clockwork Orange of the 21st century. 

The film is the semi biographical story of Michael Peterson who has become better known by his fighting name "Charlie Bronson" which he got from the famous action star Charles Bronson. He had a fairly normal upbringing but liked to fight. He'd fight in school, he'd fight in the street and got in trouble with the law a few times. But fighting isn't really a bad thing from where he's from. So eventually he gets a job, settles down and has a kid. But as a man who loves to fight and loves the attention he gets from fighting, he decides to up his game and rob a post office. This lands him in jail and once there he decides he wants to become famous. But not famous for nothing....no, he wants to be known as the most violent and dangerous prisoner Britain has ever seen. So every chance he gets he fights the guards. He fights and fights and fights. He's obviously bonkers but he's almost so bonkers he's sane. He's like Batman's Joker in a lot of ways: crazy but fascinatingly sane about the whole thing. 

The whole story is told from Bronson's perspective, with Bronson narrating the whole thing in two different settings. In one setting he is just standing in a dark room with a light and the other is a full on stage production. I was never sure if this was real or all in his mind but it was fascinating how it would switch back and forth between the different settings. The film keeps you on your toes. Just when you think you are going to get settled in, it turns on you and switches directions. In a way this could be bad for some because it does jump around a lot, but for me it kept things interesting and I was engaged from beginning to end. It also helps the film is as funny as it is serious so for every serious moment you get a funny moment and vice versa. Very clever writing there.

Besides the direction, probably the best thing about this film is Tom Hardy. He IS Bronson. Every nuance, every twitch, every mannerism, he has it in spades. One minute he is a violent lunatic, next he is a quiet reserved man and then boom he comes out and he is a clever, sarcastic dry witted man with plenty of jokes. Hardy's almost schizophrenic approach to Bronson only helps make the character more dynamic and you root for him, even though he is doing terrible things and is obviously out of his mind. Hardy's Bronson is never boring and if you remember one thing about this movie, you'll remember him. The rest of the acting is fine but is engulfed by Hardy. Even if the scene belongs to someone else he somehow steals the show without even having to blink an eye. His being there is enough to steal the show. That's REAL charisma. 

On a side note I have to point out that the soundtrack and score to the film is amazing. Almost as amazing as this guy's dancing:

Bronson is definitely a polarizing film and I can understand it may be a little too out there or extreme for some but I absolutely loved Bronson. Hardy is fantastic, Refn is an amazing director, the music is great, and I loved everything about this movie. Is it perfect? No but it's definitely one everyone should check out.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT

Read More

Weekly TV Wrap Up for the Week of 10/2-10/9

Hey everyone and welcome to yet another new addition to the blog: the Weekly TV Wrap Up. This post is inspired by Rachel over at Rachel's Reel Reviews who every week would put up her thoughts on a few shows that she watched every week. I haven't seen her do it in a while (it's a feature I miss) but it's inspired me to do a post like it myself every week. Since I don't watch anything on Fridays I figured today would be an appropriate day to post this.

As for the format I plan on doing one or two shows Sun-Thurs depending on what I watch that night. Usually I'll stick with the same shows and if I watch/buy a season of a show I'll do a quick review but if a new show catches my eye I will add it to the list. Subsequently if a show gets cancelled or becomes unwatchable I will remove it from my weekly coverage.

The review/recap of the show will be as short and sweet as possible and I'll try to leave out major spoilers or twists if there are any (I mean I'll talk about the general plot of the episode but like stuff that makes you go OH I'll leave out). This week may be slightly longer since it's an intro though (just a warning).

So without further ado...

Sunday:
DEXTER-

 We are now into week two of Dexter (don't worry I'll give a quick recap of the events of the first episode) and this season is setting up to be a season of change. Not only physically but mentally and philosophically as well. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is yet to be determined but I'm optimistic that Mr. Hall and co will put on a great show no matter what.

For those of you who don't watch Dexter do so now you'll thank me later. But the short and sweet is Dexter is a lab geek for the Miami Metro PD who works with his foul mouthed half sister Deb, a detective. His adoptive father (Deb's dad) Harry was a decorated police officer and highly regarded among the higher ups but he died when Dexter was in his early twenties(?). The catch of the show is Dexter moonlights as a serial killer who kills criminals and he does this because when he was a toddler his mom was chainsawed in front of him and it "broke him." Harry was the responding officer and adopted him as his own son and when he saw Dexter had homicidal tendencies because of his trauma, Harry trained him to kill killers and follow a set of "rules" to not get caught. That's basically the plot.

As for the first episode of Season 6 we see immediately what the overarching theme is: "faith." Dexter has never really been a religious man, but now that his son Harrison is growing up, he thinks Harrison should have the option to choose whether he wants to believe in a god or not. This opens doors for Dexter to explore his fascination with religion. Meanwhile a student-teacher duo of serial killers are killing victims and using religious symbolism in their methods (carving Alpha & Omega into a snake filled chest cavity) and a reformed gangster who now uses God to help other criminals piques Dexter's interests.

In the second episode we see Deb get promoted to Lieutenant, a position that the now Captain LaGuerta (who is in full bitch mode this season) thought would go to Batista, who had been working as active Lieutenant. Batista takes it in stride, almost like "If I don't get the job, she should" but LaGuerta flips out and vows to get her booted. Deb spends most of the episode trying to process this new job, as well a proposal from Quinn, who gets pissy when she denies him. While all this is happening Dexter starts to track his next victim named Brother Sam, a former criminal who murdered a man but has since turned to God and became a preacher/mechanic who spends his nights helping criminals get back on their feet and turn away from a life of crime. Dexter becomes fascinated with him and decides he's worth keeping around.

The episode itself, as well as the previous episode are both good examples of the Dexter formula. They are well written, funny, entertaining and Michael C Hall is great at his job. The problem with that is because of events on previous seasons of Dexter, unless you are doing wild and crazy things during the episode it will tend to feel a little SOS. That doesn't mean it's bad, just familiar. Yes snakes coming out of a man's chest is gross and out there but Dexter (the show) has done much more. That and because of Jordan Chase and Trinity, the two villains this season seem a little one note so far and aren't really that interesting. But I'm not going to be pessimistic about it, it's still one of the best shows on television and if you aren't watching it, you should be.

Monday:
CASTLE-

The police procedural genre, whether serious or comedy, is a genre that has been done to death. Usually if you want my time and ad money, your show needs an edge. Even if it's not the most original edge, it needs something keeping it from being the norm that we've seen over the years. The NCIS's have the military, Bones has...bones, Psych has a fake psychic, the list goes on. So what is Castle's edge? Well it has two: Nathan Fillion and the writer angle. Nathan Fillion, for those who don't know, is an internet and nerd/geek icon. His work on Firefly, Doctor Horrible and Slither (to name a few) have given him a large and loyal fan base and his inclusion in Halo and his work with comics have only helped him become one of the must watch actors for people like me. The writer angle is a modified form of the "consultant cop" angle except this time the consultant is a mystery writer who knows how a criminals mind work. Add in the fact the show is mostly lighthearted and the crimes tend to veer towards the strange and you have a show that is well into it's fourth season and, minor ratings hiccups aside, seems to still be going strong.

This episode dealt with a previous killer introduced in the last season, the 3XK Killer. He escaped police custody in front of Castle (Fillion's characters name) and has been on the run. Like Beckett (Stana Katic...the female in the poster) and her mother's murder case, the 3XK killer is the case that has been haunting Castle for over a year and in this episode, a piece of evidence triggers memories of that night.

A woman is shot and buried in cement at a construction site. The gun she was shot with belongs to Detective Ryan (another main character) but that particular gun was stolen by 3XK when he escaped so somehow he must have gotten rid of/sold it to someone else so it could be used for another crime. This bothers Ryan and he decides to take the initiative to track down this killer, even if it means him getting taken off the case.

It's a fantastic episode, although for new viewers they will probably be lost. It's nice to see Ryan get some more screen time and more than that actually be a tough as nails cop. Seamus Dever (Ryan) has a great emotional range and it's nice to see the writers noticing that too. The twist is slightly predictable and it happens a little too late in the episode for me but it's still one of the best episodes I've seen in a while and you should check it out.

TUESDAY:
NEW GIRL/RAISING HOPE-
Usually I would put the combo New Girl/Raising Hope here but both shows will be off till November thanks to baseball and The X Factor so I'll keep my thoughts on that show quiet until later.

Next up...

UNFORGETTABLE-

When this show was just known as "The Rememberer (I kid you not)" I wrote this show off as another one and done cop show that wouldn't make it past 13 episodes. But then it changed to Unforgettable and I read more into the premise of the show and I was actually intrigued, or at least intrigued enough to watch the pilot. And once I heard it got solid ratings I figured it was safe to watch it on a weekly basis (I hate getting into a show only for it to be yanked out from under me.

The story follows Detective Carrie Welles (Poppy Montgomery), who suffers from Hyperthymesia, which means that it is impossible for her to forget anything. That is both a blessing and a curse for her as she uses it to solve murders but at the same time has to live with the image of her dead sister for the rest of her life. Usually the cases have very obscure clues (or in the case of this episode, no crime scene) and she uses her Hyperthymesia to find clues and recreate the events in her mind. Her partner also happens to be her ex (played by Dylan Walsh) which causes some rough patches every now and again.

In this episode a man is shot but Carrie only gets 28 seconds to see the crime scene before it blows up destroying any and all evidence. Now Carrie has to use her memory of the crime scene to find clues and figure out who the killer is. It's a pretty standard cop procedural episode when you get down to it so nothing too special, but the added element of no crime scene, and the ultimate outcome of the case are a nice surprise and it was a decent episode for the series.




WEDNESDAY:
HAPPY ENDINGS-

Remember Friends? Well ever since Friends went off the air, every network has tried to recreate Friends in some form or another in hopes that it will become a ratings juggernaut too. Happy Endings follows that same formula but it's added enough spiciness to that formula to make it interesting.

The story follows six friends all trying to make a living in Chicago. There is Dave, a food truck owner who is the realist of the group. Max, Dave's gay roommate and best friend who is the snarky sarcastic one of the group. Alex, a clothes store owner and the dumb blonde of the group. Jane, Alex's sister and the neurotic mom type of the group. Penny, the free spirit and always happy one of the group. And finally there is Brad, business man, token black character, Jane's husband and the funny one of the group.

The edge of this show comes from not only the characters but the now famous opening scene of the series in which Dave and Alex are going to get marred, only for a guy named Bo to run in and take Alex away leaving Dave alone at the altar. This sets up the overarching plot of Alex and Dave trying to reconcile/stay friends while slightly holding a flame for each other.

Here's a promo:



As for this episode Penny's mom returns (played by Megan Mullally from Will and Grace) to do a singing gig while Dave discovers his inner Navajo and Jane and Brad use their new skills from improv class to help Max earn some money. It's a funny episode although loses steam halfway through. Mullally is always a treat and the last scene with Penny and Penny's mom singing at a boat show was hilarious but it wasn't one of the best episodes the show has ever done.

Next up...
REVENGE-

I first found out about this show while sitting through my movie theater's "The Twenty." It claims to be a take on "The Count of Monte Cristo" but in the Hamptons and with more attractive people. The premise didn't grab me but I did like Emily VanCamp from Everwood and Brothers and Sisters so I figured I'd give it a shot. I'm glad I did because it is a surprisingly good show and one of my favorite new shows of the year.

The story follows Emily Thorne, an extremely wealthy young lady who has just moved to the Hamptons with one goal in mind: revenge. When she was young her father was accused of being a terrorist who caused multiple deaths but the people who were really behind it got away with it by using him as a scapegoat. They ruined his reputation, left him in prison to die, and threw Emily in a mental hospital till she was 18. When she got out a billionaire techie and friend of Emily's father gave her a box with all the proof she needed that he was innocent and after a few years of building a new life (she WAS named Amanda) she returns to her old home in the Hamptons and plans on ruining the lives of everyone who wronged her.

In this episode the psychiatrist who kept her in the mental hospital until she was 18 is having a benefit thrown in her honor. Besides locking her up for all those years, she also was paid off by the head of the conspiracy against Emily's father to make sure she stayed in the hospital all those years. So now Emily is going to use all the dirty laundry she can find to ruin that woman's career. On top of all this her "boyfriend" (she's sleeping with the queen bee's son to get closer to her) is getting tricked by his roommate from Harvard who is trying to get Emily out of the picture. It's a fantastic episode and if you aren't watching this show you should be.

And just because I need an excuse to talk about it and it happens to be on Wednesday, let's talk about this show...
AMERICAN HORROR STORY-

Oh boy this show....I'm not sure whether I hate it or love it to be completely honest. I'm cautiously optimistic because it's FX and it's Ryan Murphy, but the show is so goddamn weird that it's hard to really enjoy it.

The show follows a family as they move cross country to a mansion in the forest. It's near the city and it's not a bad location but the house and it's neighbors are creepy. Apparently anyone who has lived there, save for one man, has died. Murdered actually. But why move there then? Because they have to. The husband (Dylan McDermott) cheated on his wife (Connie Britton) with one of his students (he's a pysch professor I believe) and the wife had a miscarriage. So needless to say the house held some bad memories. So they take their daughter (Taissa Farmiga...Vera's daughter) and move into the death house, despite a creepy lady sneaking in and proclaiming death upon them, a nosy neighbor, a gimp who enjoys rape, evil twin ghosts and  a boy who may or may not be Cthulhu incarnate. Yeah...not a normal show.

I haven't watched the second episode yet (DVR glitch) but the pilot is a dandy of a doozy. Basically everything I mentioned happens in the first episode but with jars of aborted fetuses, an undead maid, a burned man's warning of death and bullying at the daughter's school. Yeah it's a doozy. I'll keep watching but wow...whew.

THURSDAY:
THE LEAGUE-

The League is one of those rare shows where you don't have to have watched any previous episodes or seasons to get what's going on. It's a show about a group of friends and their fantasy football league. That's all you need to know. And it is funny. Is it the best show on TV? No, but it's entertaining and accessible enough that I'd recommend it to anyone who likes raunchy comedies or fantasy football.

In this episode, it's the week after the draft and nobody is happy with their picks. But nobody will trade because they are all paranoid. Well thanks to the quick thinking of one of them, they are able to come to a deal, until a secret comes out and ruins the deal for everyone. For the most part it's a funny episode (some dry parts here and there) and if you like the genre you'll love this episode.


Well that's it for this week. Stay tuned next Friday with the newest edition of Weekly TV Wrap Up

Read More

All for one and one for all!

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Alexandre Dumas probably had no idea when he was writing The Three Musketeers that it would ever be adapted into a film like this. Granted he had no idea what film was in general but you get the idea. Many Musketeer films in the past have tried to emulate the book to a tee, or at the very least stay within a reasonable continuity that could do the book some justice. Paul W.S Anderson saw the book, flipped through a few pages to find a female badass character (it can't be an Anderson film without his wife Milla Jovovich now can it) and then tossed the book behind his shoulder and said "F**k it I'll make it up as I go." Or at least that seems what is most likely considering the new Three Musketeers movie is one of the most ludicrous, stupid, over the top, confusing films that I've seen in a long time and spits...no defecates on Alexandre Dumas' grave. And while there is a lot of negative things to say about the film, honestly I didn't hate it. In fact for all it's stupidity it was at least entertaining and tongue in cheek enough that I could somewhat respect what Anderson was going for here.

The plot follows the three musketeers Athos (Matthew Macfadyen), Porthos (Ray Stevenson) and Aramis (Luke Evans). After a failed mission in which they are betrayed by a freelance assassin named Milady (Jovovich), they are put out of commission and spend most of their time drinking and getting into fights. They seem content with this until a brash, cocky, arrogant son of a musketeer D'Artagnan (Logan Lerman) shows up and causes a fuss, which gets their blood flowing again. Soon after D'Artagnan shows up and starts hanging around the Musketeers, they get knee deep in a conspiracy that is led by Milady and an evil Cardinal (Christoph Waltz) who want an all out war between France and Europe (led by Orlando Bloom) which will ultimately end with the Cardinal somehow becoming the leader of France. Now it's up to the Musketeers and D'Artagnan to stop this before it's too late.

It's actually a fairly straightforward plot and besides Anderson's knack for putting in irritable cliffhangers at the end of all his movies now, the film pretty much resolves itself in its little over 100 minute run time. There isn't too many scenes of pointless dialogue and for the most part the action is always moving. Anderson knows how to make an action movie, even if the movie itself isn't all that great. The writing is littered with one liners that, while cheesy, contain some chuckles and for the most part the film doesn't take itself too seriously. In a lot of ways I look at this film as a satire or an action comedy rather than a straightforward action film. Characters chew the scenery, face palm moments happen once a scene, and I swear some pieces of the film are lifted from other films of its type.   

The acting, for the most part is actually quite decent, although it's hammier than a Christmas dinner. You can tell all three of the Musketeers are enjoying themselves and when an actor is having fun, the audience tends to have fun too. You will probably groan a lot (I know I did), but Macfadyen especially knew how to win me over when it mattered. Lerman though is a bit of a weak link as his humor and attitude come off more arrogant and cocky rather than funny. I realize that is the kind of character he is supposed to be, but if I want to punch you repeatedly every time I see your face, you may want to pull it back a little. Also the females, sans Jovovich, are all criminally underwritten and D'Artagnan's love interest Constance comes off as wooden and stilted. Juno Temple tries to liven things up a little as the Queen of France, but doesn't have enough screen time to really accomplish anything.

The villains are a mixed bag of crazy ham but all have this over the top giddiness (at least Bloom and Waltz do) that makes them almost Bond villain esque in nature. Waltz definitely steals the show though with some great near fourth wall breaking moments ("Is this the part where I'm supposed to laugh maniacally and reveal some sort of evil plan to you?") and chews the scenery like its candy. Waltz can out-villain anyone it seems nowadays. Bloom, for the short time he's in the movie, does well but comes off more Ziggy Stardust meets 30s mustache twirling villain rather than actually evil. And Jovovich is Jovovich. Basically imagine Alice from Resident Evil but doing all her stunts in full collared Victorian garb. Silly, but impressive nevertheless.

The action is aplenty in this film with slo-mo fight scenes (a trademark of a Paul W.S. Anderson film), swordplay and explosions/destruction but to Anderson's credit he didn't abuse the slo-mo as much as he has in the past. In fact he has started incorporating a little fast motion too. It's all quite over the top and ludicrous (air ships, automatic cannon guns, flamethrowers) but it's fun and I was certainly entertained.  The 3D is impressive too for what it is (really adds to the big sword fights and the slo-mo scenes) but if you have a choice go 2D.

It's nothing like the book, full of ham and cheese, over the top, stupid and features some meh acting, but overall Three Musketeers should be looked at as a comedy, or a guilty pleasure at least. It has plenty of action, everyone is having fun, Waltz is Waltzing the s**t out of his role, and it's so stupid it treads into awesome territory. If you go in with an open mind you might enjoy it, just don't expect an Academy Award winning film.

MY VERDICT: SEE IT

Read More

Comic Noob Review: Red Hood and the Outlaws #1

In DC's new 52 there are seven books dealing with Batpeople of some kind (Man, Wing, Woman, Girl). Besides those seven though there are five that are heavily involved in Bat lore, either featuring a former sidekick (Jason Todd/Red Hood, Dick Greyson/Nightwing) or villains that the Batpeople have faced in the past (Catwoman, Suicide Squad, Birds of Prey). Not only that but most comics in the new 52, or at least from the ones I've read, mention or feature Gotham City and its inhabitants in some form or another. While this bothers some people (I've had a few arguments with people who hate the new direction that DC is taking), I'm actually kind of happy to see so much emphasis put on Gotham. It's a vibrant city with colorful characters, despite being dark and gloomy most of the time.

So what does this have to do with Red Hood and the Outlaws? Well Jason Todd, former Robin turned villain known as Red Hood, is finally getting his own comic. But whether it was because of a lack of outsider based/B sidekick comics or because DC and the writers couldn't trust a Red Hood comic all by itself, he gets stuck with two people who you would probably never expect to see with Red Hood: the Teen Titans own Starfire and Green Arrow's former sidekick turned villain Arsenal. Together they make up the Outlaws, a rag tag group of misfits causing havoc. But is it any good?

• Plot-The story begins with Roy Harper (Arsenal) in prison for crimes that are undisclosed. Jason Todd comes in disguised as a priest and with the help of Starfire escapes the prison to a remote beach location with very few people. It is there Jason meets up with Essence, a woman only Jason can see and is given a mission to hunt down the group known as the Untitled. While all this is going on, Starfire and Arsenal have sex. 
• Writing-The writing is actually a bit of a mixed bag for me. On one hand there are plenty of clever zingers that I've come to enjoy from B-movie action film esque comics (Suicide Squad) but at the same time there is a lot of clunky dialogue and puzzling motivations from characters, especially Starfire. The clunky dialogue mostly comes from Essence's explanation of the mission, which is a lot of talk with very little meaning for people in this first issue (no doubt it will mean more later). Besides Essence's mission explanation, the exchange between Starfire and Arsenal is clunky and is kind of confusing to anyone who knows the characters from the previous continuity. Just take a look:

This is compounded by the fact that Starfire's motivations for everything are quite confusing. She apparently can't see either of them, or at least tell which one is which, but can tell them apart by their smell...sometimes. On top of that her views on sex seem a little warped and her sudden lack of memory of anything she's ever done seems more like a lazy retcon then something that makes sense.

• Art-The art is ugly. Well except for a few panels with Starfire (whose breasts change size throughout the comic) but that was probably done more as fan service then a standard that the artists hope to set for the rest of the series. People look dusty, dirty, grimy and the environments all look muddled and even a tropical paradise setting seems dull and uninteresting. Pretty disappointed with the art.

• Pros-Some clever one liners, nice to see Red Hood get his own comic, seeing people like Arsenal and Starfire featured is good, Essence and her whole mission seem interesting, intriguing last panel.
• Cons-The writing in general, the ugly art, Starfire (just everything about her character). 
• Is it worth coming back for another issue-Tough to say actually. I'll give it another issue just to see how the current mission turns out but it may not stay on my reading list long.

Overall: Pass...good idea on paper but almost too many problems to warrant reading.

Read More

I have an idea for a movie starring me as an action hero

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

To my artsy film friends I will deny his very existence but if I'm going to be completely honest I just have to come right out and say it: I like Dax Shepard. I don't know why and really I probably shouldn't but to me he's just one of  the funniest people alive. I've seen every film he's in and even if I hate the film, I usually love him in it. So in theory Brother's Justice, a film that's basically an hour and a half of Dax Shepard playing himself trying to sell a film, should be amazing right? Well sadly no. While Brother's Justice is certainly funny in some parts, the overall film breaks the cardinal rule of documentaries, whether they be real or fake: you can't be boring. And for every great, hilarious moment in this film, it's rife with boring, awkward moments that almost made me press fast forward on my remote.

The film, like I briefly mentioned in the intro, is the documented account of Dax Shepard trying to sell a movie pitch called "Brother's Justice" to every major Hollywood studio or executive he happens to have contacts with. The pitch is never fully explained, and seems to change with every time he tells it (in fact at one point he asks for money BEFORE giving the pitch), but the basic idea is that Dax and (insert person here) play martial arts action heroes fighting crime. The people he visit seem interested at first, until Dax reveals he plans on playing the movie straight. For those who don't know that means he wants to do the movie seriously and NOT as a comedy. That doesn't bode well for the people since Dax has, up until that point, always did comedies and had no action movie experience whatsoever. Dax then spends the majority of the film trying to prove the people wrong by reinventing himself as an action hero.

On paper this film sounds funny. In reality, it's spotty. Dax has some great moments of his signature dry humor, especially when he's giving the newly modified pitch or going off on other actor friends, but the rest of the time his humor seems forced, flat or downright cruel. His buddy/producer is actually funnier than Dax most of the time because he isn't trying as hard to be funny. But where the film shines in it's humor is with it's celebrity guests like Tom Arnold, Bradley Cooper, Dave Koechner and Ashton Kutcher. Each play themselves, only totally exaggerated. You can tell they love to let loose like this and some of the improv between them, especially Tom Arnold and Dax, is fantastic. It almost makes up for a lot of the mistakes.

The film is fairly quick and only drags in some of the unfunny parts of the film. You can tell Dax was trying for the throw jokes against a wall and see what sticks method and the pacing of the film tends to lend itself to the humor more often than not. One thing I'll say though, if you don't like the film itself, the mock films that he does throughout the film are flat out hilarious and are worth watching if nothing else. Think Simple Jack from Tropic Thunder.

If you like Dax Shepard or any of the aforementioned buddies that show up in the film or if you like to see a little insight into how a film comes to be (or at least pitch to production) then this film is for you. It's not the best film and Dax does miss more than he hits, but it's a fast paced film and worth a watch if nothing else is on.

MY VERDICT: RENT IT

Read More

Quickie Review: Call me Old Fashioned But I Preferred it When We all Hated Each Other

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Intro: Oh the things I do for the ones I love. Whether or not I like it, I end up seeing most of the kid movies to come out every year. Some are really quite good, like the films from Dreamworks and Pixar, and some are harmless entertainment, but a good portion of them tend to be condescending, eye-gougingly awful and Cats and Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore is definitely in that last group. It's not that I was expecting an Oscar film out of C&D, but the original one really wasn't half bad and had some great humor that kids and adults could relate to. The sequel panders to the lowest common denominator of intelligence and I found myself wanting to walk out about halfway through the film. And that's saying a lot because I didn't even have the slightest urge to walk out or leave the room during Human Centipede or Antichrist. Think about that for a minute.

Plot: If you've never seen the first Cats and Dogs, do me a favor and go watch that first. But in short the idea is that the cute and cuddly dogs and cats that live with us are actually secret agents. The dogs are the good guys and the cats are evil. In this film an evil cat named Kitty Galore wants to take over the world and since the world being taken over would be good for both dogs and cats, the two secret agencies team up to take down Kitty once and for all.

Pros: This is short. Jack McBrayer and Chris O'Donnell are good and work well with what they're given. The effects aren't terrible either and it's relatively harmless violence wise for kids.

Cons: Pretty much everything else. Terrible writing, terrible pacing, the acting from the animals is spotty at best, the jokes caused my eyes to almost roll out of my head and the other humans are bad as well and seem like they really don't want to be there.

Final Thoughts: A terrible film, even for kids that should be forgotten by everyone. Skip it.

MY VERDICT: ABOMINATION TO CINEMA

Read More

Game Guru Review: Just Dance 3

Hey everybody welcome to my first Game Guru Review. The review style will be similar to my Comic Noob Reviews but with some different subcategories added. The style may change over time but for now let's start with this.

I know it doesn't exactly solidify my nickname of The Game Guru with my first couple reviews being Kinect games, but I won one and got two for free so I can't exactly complain. Plus the Just Dance series and I have a deeper connection then most people might realize. You see...I love dancing. Despite being quite overweight I've always loved dancing and never cared if I was any good or not. And I knew dancing games existed, mostly in the form of DDR, but I was never really into that trend. I was more of a traditional platformer/RPG/strategy kind of gamer, not a dancer.

But at PAX 2010 I had my first taste of the new generation of dancing games when I went up on a stage in front of probably 50 people and danced with Spoony from The Spoony Experiment to "Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go" by Wham. It was a lot of fun. Wii's and I don't get along but I was having fun nevertheless. At parties or events if they had the Just Dance games I would be more than happy to play alongside all of them. I still had trouble with the Wii but I was having a lot of fun.

Then at PAX 2011 I had another moment, this time with Just Dance 3 which was being advertised as THE Kinect dance game. Considering how well Dance Central did and how much I loved that game, I figured Just Dance 3 would be as fun as the last one. And it was. I also won a free copy which arrived in the mail today hence why I'm reviewing it. I've had a few hours with it and these are my thoughts:

• Plot/Goal-By yourself or with up to four other players, dance to 40+ tracks by artists from the 70s to now by matching body movements with the movements on the screen. You can also choreograph your own dance and upload it online for the world to see. Or you could use the game as a workout with the all new Just Sweat mode.
• Gameplay-Gameplay is similar to the other Just Dance games (matching body movements) but it's a lot more intuitive with the Kinect. Very rarely did I ever have the Kinect read my body wrong and it ran a lot smoother than it ever did on the Wii. There are a great selection of songs, with DLC on the way and I had a blast with the game by myself and with others.
• Graphics-This game won't win any awards for graphics, relying mostly on colorful silhouettes but it's a very bright and flashy game that is fun to watch. It's cheesy and over the top but just what a game of this type needs. You'll never get bored watching this game.
• Replayability-You will be playing this game for a while. It'll become a party staple like the ones before it but my only concern is I don't know how much DLC there will be and maybe the game will become repetitive after a while. That hasn't happened yet for me but I know it's a possibility. 

• Pros-Great, fun, flashy, addictive party game that is fun for all. If you love dancing games you'll love this.
• Cons-Graphics, while flashy, aren't anything special, could get repetitive, some minor detection hitches.

Overall-4 out of 5 

A must have for fans of the dancing genre and even newcomers might find reasons to like this. 

Read More

Things To Click On 10/12/11

Hey everyone. I'm adding yet another weekly feature to this site, not sure exactly when I'll post it every week (Tuesday seems good for now) but it's basically my evolved form of MALARKY (that failed blog linking thing I did once). Not only will I link some of my favorite posts this week but I will also link some of my favorite videos I've watched this week and recommend some new music that you should be listening to. So I'll divide them up by category and I hope you enjoy.

BLOG LINKS:

• My friend Lindsey has restarted her old blog The Gamer Chick (of which I did a few posts for back in the day) as well as her own personal blog. She's a great writer and hopefully she can develop an audience. You can find her at The Gamer Chick and The World As I See It From Under 5'
• Nick at Random Ramblings of a Demented Doorknob is still running his 60/60 feature. If you haven't been reading it, check it out now and get caught up. If you need more incentive, here is his Troll 2 review which could be the best thing I've read all year.
• Max at Anomalous Materials does a great Shocktober piece that is a crash course in the horror genre. It's a great read and a helpful guide for people new or hesitant to horror films.
• Duke over at Duke & the Movies does a great post on the best films of the 00s. Check out his list and give yours in the comments.
• Kai over at Man, I Love Films does a great post in defense of lists. As a list lover, I totally agree with the post and if you love lists too then I don't need to give you one to convince you to read this post.
• If you aren't taking part in Rachel's Saturday Sims Screenshot then you better start now if you want to catch up to Nick.

VIDEOS:

• First up is a video done by Griffon Ramsey, wife of Geoff Ramsey aka Grif from Red vs Blue. She does a chainsaw carving of the Gears of War symbol. It's pretty awesome.

• Next up is the now famous Playstation "Long Live Play" commercial that is as awesome as it is touching. If you love video games then PLEASE watch it...even if you hate Sony.

• Next up is a double whammy for game fans as well as wrestling and UFC fans...Brock Lesnar will be in WWE 12 alongside the Rock, Stone Cold, and many others. This will be his first appearance in seven years. Talk about incentive to buy the game.

• Finally we have a second appearance from Griffon but this time it's from back in early 2010. It was for a series called Immersion. Even though it's now cancelled it's quite fascinating and it's worth a look if you like Mythbusters and/or gaming.

MUSIC YOU SHOULD LISTEN TO:

• First up is Evanesence's new self titled album. I was a big fan of theirs back in the day and I thought after five years and some band mate switch ups the band wouldn't be the same or not as good as it was before. Wrong, it's better then it ever was and this is one of the most cohesive, well done goth rock albums of the year. Listen to it here
• Next is a collaborative effort between Luke Conard (who I'll feature next week), Alex Goot and Chad Shugg singing Someone Like You by Adele. Check it out here
• Finally is an awesome new band I discovered called Northern Kings. They do covers of cheesy/amazing pop songs in a rock opera style. The link I'm putting on here is the link to Take on Me featuring Kermit the Frog. Find it here

Well that will do it for this week. What did all of you think? If you have any videos or links or music to recommend send it to travismccollum@hotmail.com Until then I will see you all next week with more Things to Click On! 

Read More