I am the Wolfman, goo goo g'joob

Never saw the original, but it's not like this movie has never been redone in any form before. In this version, a scientist gets infected with a genetic retro-virus that is activated on receiving a specific amount of reflected sunlight and leads to fact-acting mutations...

Ha! Nah, just kidding. Guy gets bitten by wolf. Guy becomes a wolf. It's a classic tale of man getting in touch with his bestial side. This movie doesn't waste a lot of time on the plot, although there is some. But it's largely there as an excuse to get on with the wolf attack scenes, and that's what we came for.

While the plot is weak, the effects are strong. Rick Baker knows what he's doing, and this is the movie he's been waiting for. We've seen many werewolf movies, and seen much bad makeup, but this is excellent and the wolfman is completely believable (in so far as a wolfman can be believable). You, too, will believe that Benicio Del Toro needs a shave. There are a number of wolf attacks, and they're all good.

Anthony Hopkins, surprisingly, doesn't steal the movie away, and has a rather restrain presence. Hugo Weaving is clearly having fun and gets some of the best lines (although I would like to see a movie putting him up against Sam Neil, just to see how could out smarm the other...). Emily Blunt isn't that impressive as the forced love interest, and Art Malik has dignity the rest of the movie doesn't bother with (who needs dignity, we got wolfmen!).

This isn't a movie you have to see, but if you do then have expectations set suitably for the type of movie. Plot blah, wolfman thumbs up.

[END]

Read more!

Because song-mashing is fun!

I like me a good mash-up of music, which is why I like Osymyso. (And don't forget Pulzar.)

The other day, I caught the impressive music of Victor Mix. Check out his Audiophile. 260 samples mixed up and delivered in 33 minutes! I defy anyone to work out all of them

In the mean time, check out this great mash of epic memes from REPLAYING :the game:. (How many memes do you spot? And how many does this cause you to go look up?)

[END]

Read more!

Because there's Nothing for Science to find

Recently on Close Up there was a piece between the skeptics (as represented by Vicki Hyde) and the homeopaths (represented by Mary Glasier). One comment made by Glasier is (paraphrasing) "Science can't find how homeopathy works".

That's right. It can't. Because, as I say in the title, there's nothing to find!

If there was something in the preparations, the 10:23 movement (overdosing on homeopathic pills) would have a serious problem. They didn't. Recently, the big paper they had on their side, the Wakefields paper, was retracted by the Lancet.

Interestingly, the homeopaths claim that medicine has to be tailored to the person. The skeptics have asked the Homeopathic Council to join them in asking that chemists do not sell homeopathic remedies, because it isn't tailored. Heh. Like to see that come to pass. :)

And before you say "What's the harm?"... here's the harm.

[END]

Read more!

Dark of Edgeness

Mel Gibson has been off the screen for a while (as an actor), but I did see his last movie, and now I've seen this one. This movie has a few issues, relating to what the hell this movie is, genre-wise.

We all know the movie starts with Craven's daughter getting killed. And Craven feels sad about it. Yet this movie is not about Craven sitting there weeping, so somehow the movie has to move from being 'sad drama' to being 'action drama' or possibly thriller. There is a clear point where we switch from 'sad drama' and move into... and here's another problem. Action? No really. Here's a secret I'm revealing: action movie this ain't. I've seen action movies, and this isn't one. Thriller? Um... to be honest, it's not that thrilling either. Government/Conspirady? Lamely (see belwo). Let's just stick with 'drama' and hope people come to see it expecting an action movie.

Another issue is the plot. As in, there barely is one. We are presented with people mumbling in low tones as if what they have to say is dramatic, but there were many times when I was lost as to what was going on. But, unfortunately, there were many moments (often the same moment) where I didn't care. The big reveal of "something bad going on" was so incredibly facile that you wonder if the script writers even cared about coming up with something. "Let's rip off a TV series and see if we can remove anything interesting from it." Bad things happen, Mel Gibson uncovers it, people die... yeah, why did I go see this again?

Oh, for the drama moments of Craven caring about his daughter. To be honest, they are well acted scenes, and emotion is well conveyed without suggesting even slightly that it is anything more than grief (such as slipping into insanity - an otherwise easy choice) driving it. They were the most enjoyment parts of the film! Go on ya, Mel!

To say that I was bored would be to give a negative impression of this movie and suggest you shouldn't see it... I was bored.

[END]

Read more!

Sychron-inanity

I was reading Stuff, as one does, and saw this article "Can you be bored to death?" It's about how boredom can be associated with other factors that lead to poor health and early death. Entirely possible.

However, something else occured to me as I read it. (The sad part is, I suspect others leapt to this connection without having recent reminders!) Recently, I've been watching a lot of Deep Space 9 episodes, and when I read this, I flashed back to In the Cards.

Allow me to quote: "Dr. Giger plans to use the supplies in the construction of his cellular regeneration and entertainment chamber – a device designed to keep the cells of the body from getting bored, thus prolonging life indefinitely."

...what? It's real? He was on to something? Dr. Crazy-Pants?

Worse... does this mean Star Trek is real? We can only hope not...

But, perhaps, we should be looking into building our own cellular regeneration and entertainment chambers...?

[END]

Read more!

Infestated

The latest direct-to-the-recycle-bin movie features large bugs. This movie takes a brave step of having the hero be unlikable, and implausible that he is able to step up to the bat to do anything at all to survive the post-apocalyptic bug world.

About five minutes into the movie the bugs strike and all of a sudden we switch to a world where slacker-boy is a hero, and he gains a group of people, each more incompetent than the last. Aside from the female lead, which is the only person worth rooting for in this movie. Why couldn't she have been the main lead? A far more interesting character than anyone else. Anyway, it's up to this ragtag group of heroes to defeat the bugs and revive the world. 'Cos that's a believable story.

Fine, some group of people were likely to accidentally stumble across the answer and deal with the bugs, but the people we are presented with are more likely to severely injure themselves in a garden implement accident than survive even one bug let alone a swarm. Sigh.

One measure of a movie is the names attached to it (although not always: who would have thought how big Evil Dead would have been way back when they were all unknowns?), and there are some really big names that... are nowhere to be seen. We do get Linda "Enterprise" Park, but the big draw would have to be Ray "Twin Peaks"/"Reaper" Wise. Now there's an entertaining man to watch! Now the two leads Chris Marquette and Brooke Nevin have substantial IMDB entries, but I'm not seeing anything that prompts memories of them. Yeah, big names...

But this movie is supposed to be about the bugs, and there are a lot of them. There are some compositing issues, but they are bugs and bugs have been done well before, so they mostly work.

Not a breakout hit, or even a rare treat. If you miss it, you aren't missing anything.

[END]

Read more!

How far can you go?

Okay, first there was the Discovery Channel video. Then the xkcd strip. Then there was the video of the strip...

(Find out who these people are.)

[END]

Read more!