Sherlock Series 10/10

As a die-hard fan of the source material, I have tracked down and went through nearly every radio, television, film, and comic book interpretation of Sherlock Holmes - which run a mean gamut regarding quality, as you probably already know - and so I approached this incarnation skeptical but sanguine. Doubtful it would match the eminent Jeremy Brett series in quality, but hopeful it might preserve Conan's tone - something I think that series did well and the Downey Jr. movie did not.

To my surprise, and delight, this show just so happens to be the bomb-diggity. Let me explain.

Ever notice how lots of Agatha Christie fans complain when screenwriters change Poirot and Marple stories? I'm not one of them. I like new and different interpretations of those stories because otherwise, in the case of literary characters brought on screen, what's the point? What's the point if we film and re-film the same story, the same story which we've already read once, twice, maybe three times? Especially in many cases, what's the point when it's been done so perfectly before? In the case of Sherlock Holmes, The Hound of the Baskervilles has been filmed at least 24 times according to Wikipedia. So another iteration won't thrill me. However, one that takes liberties with the source material, i.e. bringing the characters into the 21st century, I'm all for it. Surprise me. That's what I say.

And there are two things I really love about this series. 1) For longtime fans there are many, many "Easter eggs" to discover in each episode. And, best of all, 2) My boyfriend loves this series. And I can't pay him to watch a Jeremy Brett episode. He did enjoy the Downey Jr. movie (as did I, I just prefer a less swashbuckling Holmes - one reason among many that I didn't love the film), but he's never excited to watch Sherlock anything. This series is different. He loves it. For any Sherlock fan that would like to get their significant others on the band wagon, this is a great gateway. (And my boyfriend's actually a very good barometer for high-quality mainstream television shows. Usually, if something's firing on all cylinders, he knows it. More risky fare - he's off-put.)

And, you may rightly ask, why should I give a crap what my boyfriend likes? Good question. I happen to be of the mind that TV and film can accomplish what my favorite art form - literature - cannot. The TV and film experience can be enjoyed by a group. Sure, book clubs discuss books, but with TV and film you and whomever you want to hang out with, experience story at the exact same time, in real time, and you can easily observe each other's initial, unguarded reactions. Plain and simple, it's fun to enjoy the mediums with others - to laugh together, to be scared, sad, thrilled, etc. It enhances the experience. I think literature's strength is the opposite. For me, the best thing about settling into a good book is that I'm alone. Just me and the test, together making up a story.

Well, if anybody has read this far, I apologize for the rant. But if you're on the fence about buying the DVD or renting it or whatever, take a chance. Take a tip from me. You'll be pleasantly surprised. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The butterfly effect

 

10 out of 10 for me!!! I am very glad I read the reviews posted by reviewers (thanks a bunch people!). I didn't see this movie in the theater, though I was intrigued too. After reading many reviews saying to watch the directors cut, I rented it and watched that version first. Wow was I blown away… I'm glad that I never saw it in the theater and instead saw the directors cut first. I actually was very teary eyed at the end as it made such an impact (and that never happens to me). Every now and then a movie comes along that makes such a profound impact that it takes a part of you with it, or changes you in some way. This was one of those movies for me. And I can count on one hand the movies that have done that to me… I can't give an unbiased opinion on this, but had I seen the theatrical version first, I probably would have given it an 8 out of 10 instead.

As with many movies, once they hit DVD, there is often additional scenes or a directors edition, and many times they are subtle additions or changes, not with this movie, mark my words. That is why it's important to watch the directors cut first. All this being said, I can see why they released the theatrical version instead as the directors cuts wasn't very Hollywood like. It would have been a risk to release the directors cut as the original theatrical version, but I think it would have done better (again my opinion). So just know the directors edition is more or less a different ending with one or two additional scenes in the middle to support it. But wow how 5-10 minutes of change can make a difference.

I certainly don't want to give much away in this review and for your sake don't read too many reviews or your bound to find one that will spoil it for you, and this is one of those movies that you don't want spoiled if you haven't seen it. So that being said I won't give any spoilers away. I thought the acting was well done by all the actors. The story line is intriguing and kind of Sci-Fi, but is one that you kind of have to accept the time travel thing up front, otherwise you simply can't get into the story. The effects were good, though they weren't a big aspect in my opinion, meaning I don't think the movie depended on them like so many others to succeed. Often times with time travel movies, you always have guys going ape over things and pointing out loopholes. Admittedly they bug me too when they are obvious. With this movie, it was either so carefully thought out or too much for my brain to handle, but in essence I didn't see any major plot holes. I thought the flow of the movie was excellent as it reels you in the more you go along, so much so that you don't even want to pause it to hit the bathroom.

If you like suspense, Sci-Fi's, drama's, `What if' kind of movies then see this movie (Directors cut first) and make up your own opinion. Then watch the theatrical version after. As said in another review, this movie is very involved and interwoven in that if you miss anything, get up to do something or tune out for a bit, you will loose your place and will get confused. So no getting up for pop corn, no bathroom breaks and no other outside interruptions without pausing it first, very important. In fact I would wait until you know you will have 2 hours to yourself before watching. Good nighttime movie. It also has good replay value too as you will understand things from a different perspective the next time around. I wouldn't recommended this movie to those who have been abused in there early childhood, or at least if you have, be ware. It can be a bit much at points as there are some sensitive scenes and I don't recommend to children at all. But the best movies IMO are the ones that chew you up and spit you out, and this one certainly does that.

Breaking Bad Review

First season took off a little slow. It settled up premise, characters, the mood of the show, its world, if you will. It has some great moments though, like body disposal scene from the second episode which made me choke on my own laughing tears.

Second season blew me away. Completely. Right from the very beginning. Second episode Grilled along with sixth episode Peekaboo,being so damn hilarious, bizarre and gripping, I'm sure, will fill find their places in the TV's Hall of Fame, trust me.

What third season will bring, has yet to be determined.

The show has quality to surprise. At first I was a bit skeptical toward it: A school teacher turns to be a drug dealer? Yea' I've heard something similar is already on TV, and I wasn't excited. So if creator of the show appeared to be someone else than Vince Gilligan (who made earlier in his career significant contribution to development of another great show "The X-Files") and if the show was on channel different than AMC or HBO, I even doubt I'd give it a chance. By the way, the pilot was shot with intention to be sold directly to HBO, that's why it later was edited for nudity and explicit language by AMC, which still is a cable channel, but apparently trying to remain more "family friendly."

"Breaking Bad" could be ridiculously funny and hellishly creepy, it contains some rough images and topics, not to mention that it's filmed astoundingly, unbelievably beautiful. Juxtaposition of plots, characters, places, even colors and sounds provides unique installments which had me on the edge of my seat, shaking with laughters and shivering with excitement and aesthetic delight.





Show's overdramatization brings us to the part which I praise the most: Style. It's kind of style that first puts before our eyes some quite clichéd soap-like picture: Common middle-America family consisting of middle-aged Chemistry high school teacher, his pregnant wife, and their cerebral-palsy-inflicted teenaged son. Then chain of circumstances invokes some highly absurd and eerie, often impossibly funny, unbearably scary and hopelessly sad situations. It's the kind of style you may find in 50's noir films, in pictures of French nouvelle vague, in characters of movies by Quentin Tarantino, the Cohen brothers and Robert Rodriguez.

In spite of the vortex of intense and dangerous situations the show manages to carry throughout all its episodes some unexplainable vibe of incredible, Buddhism-like calmness. As if we were told some sort of ancient myth or fable. Of course it has a lot to do with sophisticated work of cinematographers and subtle inputs of art designers. Although I usually prefer dark, foggy, shadowy – could be said depressing – cinematographic atmosphere ("Twin Peaks," "the X-Files," Millennium," "the Sopranos"), I found myself amazed by crystal clear images of "Breaking Bad." Insignificant and empty on the surface, yet filled with dimness and despair; New Mexican sun that doesn't burn you, it gives chills and almost numbs you in the end.

I'm not going to say anything about lead actor Bryan Cranston. His character doesn't speak that much either, it's all written on his face. Aaron Paul's character, on the other hand, has some mouth on him, but don't let him disencourage yourself, yo biach. Their intentions are good, in different ways. But you know the road to hell is paved with what, aren't you?

All of the above combines in highly unorthodox, exceedingly entertaining and fa

21 Jump Street

 
When I first came to know that (yet) another old TV show is dusted off for a big-screen adaptation, I wasn't that excited at all. After all, that show happens to be the once-popular 21 Jump Street which starred then-young Johnny Depp who became a star here before he gradually earned his distinctive reputation in the Hollywood cinema. Back then, the story about an undercover police unit composed of young-looking officers specializing in youth crime is refreshingly new. But now, it's seriously a worn-out cliché. Then there's the casting of Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum -- oh, wait -- Channing Tatum does a comedy? I smell an immediate recipe for disaster here, but directors Chris Miller and Phil Lord's (2009's CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS) live-action debut here seriously caught me by surprise . For all those naysayers out there, this big-screen version of 21 JUMP STREET is surprisingly funny and very entertaining as well.

Like the TV show, the movie revolves around Schmidt (Jonah Hill) and Jenko (Channing Tatum), two young-looking cops who both transferred to the 21 Jump Street division where they will be going undercover posing as students to infiltrate the drugs-dealing business that has been going on at a local high school. Both of them go by their names of Doug and Brad, and once there, they must find way to investigate the rampant use of a dangerous hallucinogenic called H.F.S. Their first lead is a dealer and classmate Eric (Dave Franco), whom they are trying to get close with, in hope that one day he will lead them to the mysterious supplier.

Story-wise, Michael Bacall and Jonah Hill's screenplay is actually nothing new at all. But what makes it refreshingly different than most like-minded script out there is the way how the execution is played out in such a hilarious manner. While there are times the script is trying too hard to be funny, rest assured most of the scenes never fail to elicit some genuine laughs. Thanks to the hard R-rating, Bacall and Jonah Hill let the story rip with all those colorful profanities like nobody's business. Added to that, is some of the worthwhile self-parody gags throughout the movie, especially the highway car chase scene involving the theory of exploding vehicles.

Directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller knows well how to keep the pace as entertaining as possible, while the cast here are no doubt the main star attraction here. Jonah Hill proves once again he's one of the genuine comic talents working today, but it was Channing Tatum who totally hits the ballpark with his surprisingly hilarious performance. Personally, I always thought Tatum's acting skill is always wooden at any given genre he's been involving so far (action, drama, romance) but he's finally proved himself as an excellent performer. In fact, both he and Jonah Hill are terrific together. And that's not all -- the rest of the supporting cast are equally playful and memorable as well, including Brie Larson as love interest Molly and Ice Cube at his profane best as Captain Dickson.

Apart from a flair of comedy, Phil Lord and Chris Miller does show some genuine talents in term of delivering well-crafted action sequence. Case in point is the aforementioned highway car chase scene and the violent shootout finale. Overall, 21 JUMP STREET is one of the best action comedy movies really need to be checked out for. And while you're at it, there's a surprise cameo appearance (priceless, indeed) throughout the movie.

Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty

I have recently started watching some SC2 streems, of plays and tournaments. And let me tell you, i cant wait for the game expansion to be released, (either this or D3).
For those who dont know in StarCraft II, it's still the Terrans, Zerg, and Protoss clashing against each other, and you're still mining minerals with SCVs, Drones, and Probes and pulling Vespene Gas from the ground to fuel production. It's a classic style of real-time strategy play, one old-school RTS gamers should be very familiar with. Compared to the changes Blizzard made between the traditional gameplay of Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and the hero-based leveling elements of Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos, StarCraft II feels like a relatively safe play; a game designed to slide in and discreetly supplant its predecessor instead of ruffle the feathers of longtime StarCraft devotees and risk rejection. While it's not a revolutionary game, it is one of the most fully featured, expertly designed, and impressively refined real-time strategy experiences on the market.

Even though at its most basic level a lot of the game is familiar, much has been adjusted. In no area is this more apparent than in the single-player campaign. Blizzard's decision to split the overall story of StarCraft II into three parts sparked some controversy when it was first announced; basically that means you only get to play as the Terran faction (with a few exceptions) for the solo portion, and must wait until later for the Zerg and Protoss campaigns to be released to see the entirety of the story. While that affects some of the impact of the tale, it in no way means you'll be starved for content if all you're looking to do in StarCraft II is play alone. There's a huge campaign here that could easily take many hours to play through (depending on your style and level of difficulty). It's all exceedingly well presented, with a totally reworked narrative delivery system, a few instances of choice driving the story, and options for inter-mission upgrades that make it feel like more of an role-playing experience than a series of mission that exist solely to get you ready for the multiplayer.
Unlike the original game, this time around you won't be staring at the sparsely animated heads of major characters as they bicker and plot on video monitors between missions. Instead, Blizzard gives you a detailed world to play around in to give its fictional universe a greater sense of place and atmosphere. The action follows along with Jim Raynor, who begins the game as a gruff alcoholic in the process of rebelling against Arcturus Mengsk, the corrupt emperor of the Terran Dominion. If you've forgotten the StarCraft storyline or never got around to learning it, then it should be fairly easy to dig into this one, though you're going to miss a lot of references.

Regardless of your level of exposure to the fiction, it's difficult to ignore the eye-rolling cliches and talk of prophecies being fulfilled, and the overabundance of 1980s action movie-style macho posturing and cheesiness. It's all snugly wrapped around the missions though, which makes it easier to look beyond the standard sci-fi trappings and appreciate the detail that's gone into the creation of the character models, the smoothness of the animations, and the amount of character interaction packed into the experience. Since missions are bookended by cut-scenes, great voice acting, and rewards, it makes each feel important in its own way, and adds to your motivation to meet every challenge. It's something a lot of developers besides Blizzard have difficulty doing in this genre, with their missions often feeling like a string of meaningless, boring tasks.

Additional narrative is also provided through interactive environments between missions. You're able to explore various settings, from a dusty building at the campaign's outset to Raynor's starship, the Hyperion, and beyond as the action continues. Eventually the entirety of the game's options and locations are unlocked, letting you flip around to different areas of the ship to talk to major characters or purchase upgrades. On top of that, new units are unlocked depending on which mission you choose to take on next, which can be further modified in the upgrade center, adding significant bonuses to each like more effective healing for medics or boosted protection for Marines. Because the campaign isn't tied down by the strict rules of multiplayer balance, this also means you'll see a number of favorites return from the original. Firebats, Vultures, Goliaths and more can be unlocked and upgraded in the story mode, which is both a great nod to fans and adds more variety for new players. It's a system that's constantly giving you new things to play around with and ways to modify what's already available, making progressions more exciting.

As if that wasn't enough, even more options for army customization exist throughout the campaign, including a research system and mercenary units. These mercs can be hired by Raynor for a fee, and when deployed in battle serve as elite versions of existing units that are called in instantly. It can be great in a bind, and adds to the stable of available fighters when setting up a battle plan. Optional objectives in missions call for the collection of Protoss or Zerg research items, which can then be turned in between stages for even more upgrades. Along both Zerg and Protoss paths these upgrades exist in pairs - where selecting one locks out the other - meaning you'll have to make permanent decisions about things like whether you want to buff the armor of a Bunker or slap a gun turret on top. All these modification systems combined make for a highly customizable campaign experience that's consistently fun because it introduces a steady stream of new content and options, making sure there's always something to look forward to trying out for the first time.