Not as strange a tide as the last one...

So, I was trying to write this review for a while, but the blogger page kept giving me the dreaded '404' error...I guess I'm outdated.  Nothing new there.  Okay, so everyone loves the first one, likes the second one and finds the 3rd one absurd.  I...like the first one...thought the second one was alright...and thought the 3rd one was too long and sort of incomprehensible.  So, not the biggest Pirates fan, though I always give them a chance. 

This one is one of the best in the series if not the best in the series.  I know a lot of people are saying "it's more of the same like 3", but don't believe it.  There's no women growing to enormous size and then turning into crabs, there's no flipping the boat to survive, there's none of that.  Thankfully, there is also no Orlando Bloom or Keira Knightley.  Watching this film, I came to realize how much both characters SUCKED in the first 3 films.  They did, Bloom was a whiny little wimp and Knightley pouted and did stupid things.  This one is all about Jack Sparrow (well, almost all...more on that later) and that's how it should be.  Depp is clearly the best actor in this series and his character is obviously the most interesting.  In this one I actually liked him...I didn't like in the first three.  He's supposed to be a hero, but he's a scoundrel?  Why would they go to World's End to save his weaselly ass? The focus should be on him, not some gawd-awful love affair that is poorly written.  This movie, the focus is on him, which is a plus.

Not to say the other people in this movie weren't good, as well.  Geoffrey Rush is solid as usual as Barbossa, he's the best thing in the entire series next to Depp.  Penelope Cruz is a lot sexier and a lot more credible as a female lead than Knightley was.  Ian McShane is great as Blackbeard, I mean, he's just really good, he stands out in every scene and unlike some characters in this series, he's actually a menace, it isn't all for show.  Oh and for those who like creatures, there's zombies and the mermaids kind of are like vampires, so there you go.

The action...well I could see it.  There is quite a bit too, especially near the start.  There is a lull in the middle but luckily, the characters are (for the most part) interesting enough to keep the story moving, though the movie is still far too long.  I don't know why they think these movies have to be 2+ hours, there isn't enough story to really justify the length.  It could have been trimmed by 20 minutes, no problem.  One thing they could have done is trimmed the romantic subplot between the religious guy and the mermaid.  It was pointless and once again, just poorly written.  The Pirates writers cannot write romance, period.  They should just stick their strength which is writing swashbuckling action and (somewhat lame) jokes. 

Anyhow, there's my review of Pirates.  I enjoyed it probably the most I'll enjoy any of the movies in the series. 

Rating: 3.5 out of 5.

- Stephenstein

Voyage of the Yawn Treader

Thanks to the magic of 3-D...I had to find other means of viewing this movie. Anyhow, I own parts 1 and 2 of this series, and despite the universal groan that seemed to come from everyone, I actually liked part 2...better than 1 even, though one was still really good. I liked the excitement and the battles, and the creatures, and all that good stuff from the first two films...now I haven't read the books, so this one may have followed the book, and if so...hoo-boy.

There just wasn't a lot of excitement for me in this movie. Firstly, and I know they're probably just following the books at this part, but I didn't like having neither Peter or Susan there. That was my one and only problem with Prince Caspian, and it's just as I suspected. It's not that I don't like Edmond or Lucy...it's just...to make an analogy, it's like the Beatles if it's just Paul and Ringo. Now, there's nothing wrong with Paul and Ringo, but you know what's better? All four Beatles! It just seemed something was missing, and I know why it was done, etc, etc, I'm not saying it was dumb, but it doesn't feel the same.

Worse though, is there is really no action in this movie. I mean yes, there's a fight near the beginning, and there's a decent creature battle at the end, but you have Edmond, Lucy, Caspian and the crew of the Dawn Treader walking around for most of the movie, looking for magical swords. Now, a clever writer would have had them go through big trials and tribulations for these swords. After all, they're integral to beating the main villain (more on that later). So, you would think they'd have to go through a lot to get the swords. Nah. They're mainly just lying around. You can just go and pick them up. Wah? Where's the adventure! Where's the danger and peril, if these damned swords are so important, why can I just go up, pick them up, and beat the villain? What's the point in even having these characters here if all they're going to do is ordinary stuff?

I didn't like the villain, either. Look, in part 1, we had the White Queen, and she was awesome. Part 2 had Caspian's uncle, and while he was not as cool as the White Queen, he still lead this big human army, and there was a hell of a battle. In this one, there's a mist...and it's going to corrupt Narnia...okay. So, you have to beat a mist. Okay. Then the writer's threw in (and believe me, this might all be C.S. Lewis' fault, if they're following the book) "if you think of something scary, it will be manifested in the mist". Okay, so it's Ghostbusters. The Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man (or in this case, a big sea serpent) will show up, and fight the good guys. The sea serpent was cool, but I'm like, how is this mist going to corrupt Narnia? By swallowing people? Okay, but I'm not afraid of a mist...unless it's John Carpenter's mist. I don't care if it manifests something scary, or something tempting, or whatever, at the end of the day, you can blow on it, and it disappears.

It was cool to see some of the characters from previous films, and of course they had to work the White Queen and Aslan in there. I liked the characters who appeared previously, and the new major character, Eustace was alright (though it was better when he was turned into a dragon). All in all though, I think they could have done something better with this movie. I heard they wanted to make it more kid-friendly...the run time is a lot less than the previous films, so they probably condensed the crap out of the story...and they condensed all the action and excitement out as well.

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars (just because of how much I liked the characters from the first 2...it's closer to a 2.5, really).

- Stephenstein

Harry Potter and the Draggy Plot

Far be it for someone with my humble life to criticize a juggernaut like the Harry Potter franchise. I've read all the books and liked them, saw all the movies and liked them, to varying degrees. I wasn't a huge fan of #5, but still found it okay. Liked the others one a lot. I own all the movies, but I was still surprised when I heard #7 was going to be shown in 2 parts. Firstly, the book was huge, but quite a few of the later ones are too, so that didn't make sense. Secondly, the story really didn't need to be told in 2 parts. It wasn't that action-packed, or anything....or right! [hitting forehead] They're just doing it for the money! Duh!

So, what did I think of this Harry Potter? It was alright, good, but not great. Why? Same problem I gave above. It dragged. There was a lot of scenes in the woods. A lot of contemplating one's circumstances. A lot of what should we do? I don't know, what should we do? A lot of wandering, without knowing what to do. That's all well and good...if this was the first story. Unfortunately, it's not. Voldemort has taken over the Ministry of Magic, he's coming for Harry and his loved ones, and he's also going after the most powerful weapons in the magic world...we don't have time for this.

Not to mention, it makes no sense. In every movie, Harry has had some mystery to solve, some danger to avert. The Philosopher's Stone (say it with me, Americans...phil-os-oph-er's stone), the Chamber of Secrets, unravelling the secret of Sirius Black, surviving the tournament, surviving...whatever happened in book 5, finding out who the half-blood prince is...and also, I thought it was esablished in the last film he was going after the horcruxes? So, does he think that the horcruxes are going to magically appear in front of him? No! He, and Ron and Hermione have to find them! Geez, is that so hard to figure out?

Oh yeah, and I got shaky-cam in this film. Even though it's not long, and it's not like Harry Potter is noted for its action, we still got shaky-cam. I was not happy. It pulls me out of the movie. I shudder to think that other country's are going to adopt the shaky-cam.

That all being said, the movie's not bad, but I have a feeling the next one will be much better. This was a lead-up to movie 2, but in all honestly, they could have edited out some of the crap in this film, edited out some of the crap guaranteed to be in the 2nd film, and boom, we would have had a perfectly good Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, 1 movie, 3 hours, and this post's tone would have been different...but then again, they wouldn't have got me paying for 2 movies this way, would they?

Rating: 3.5 out of 5.

- Stephenstein

The Final Saw?

I refuse to call this film Saw 3D, just because actually saying 3D pisses me off. So, I'll be refering to this as Saw 7. I saw this yesterday, NOT in 3D, and here are my thoughts, as the series wraps up, supposedly.

First of all, and saying this will make people laugh, but I consider the Saw series to be a real landmark in movie-making. Why? Can you name me another movie series that lasted 7 movies, had the same actors play the same characters, referenced all the previous films, kept the same tone, the same story structure, and delivered the same amount of enjoyment, year after year, movie after movie? Can you name the another series that has lasted this amount of time, and delivered the same amount of quality, every single movie? Even the vaunted Harry Potter had a mis-step at 5 (in my opinion), and the Harry Potter 7.1 wasn't as good as some of the other ones, either.

It's just a really, really solid series, up and down, front to back, year after year, I looked forward to the next Saw. I looked forward to the traps, the staggering leaps in logic, how it was all tied together, what the twist was...all of it was awesome. Except for this 3D crap, I watched all the movies in the theatre...and p.s., I had a friend tell me there was hardly any 3D in the film, and he saw it in the theatre, so even that's a rip.

I'm not reviewing the movie's storyline. There's a few games, a few traps. Someone thinks they have the upper-hand, they don't, Sean Patrick Flannery is the guy who has to go through the gaunlets of traps this time, there's some cameos from the past, there's some twists, and traps, and gore and more traps. Look, you know Saw, you know what you're going to get. It was one of the few franchises these days I could rely on to really please me, every single year. Spider-Man, Superman, Bourne, Pirates of the Caribbean, even Batman...have all disappointed me, in some way. Not Saw though. From beginning to end, this franchise has delivered the goods, and despite it not getting the recognition it deserves, I'm sure the fans of the Saw series are more passionate and die-hard than the "fans" who supposedly loved something like Iron Man since "day 1. "

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars.

Rating of series: 5 out of 5 stars.

- Stephenstein

Not in 3D

Well, I refused to see this one in theatres, just because of the 3D garbage. I hate 3D. It's a gimmick, and I hate gimmicks, especially lame gimmicks, and 3D is in my opinion, a lame gimmick. So I waited, and caught this one elsewhere. I like the Resident Evil franchise, I own all the movies, so I wanted to see this one. Just not in 3D.

So what's new? Well, let's start with what's old. Alice and her clones are back (the clones don't last too long, unfortunately). Claire is back, and is joined by her brother, Chris (and you fans of the game franchise know who he is). K-Mart is back in a small role, as well. The zombies are still there, and Albert Wesker is back (he's the main villain now, and yeah, it only took 4 films to make him the main villain, but then again, they were too busy dealing with the various freaks).

This one starts off where the last one left off. Alice storms Umbrella's Tokyo base, and then heads to Alaska for a less than hopeful discovery. Then she ends in Los Angeles with Claire, where there's a bunch of new people to run into (including Chris), zombies to fight (including an Axeman who is a dead ringer for the terrifying Ax guy in Silent Hill), humans to fight with (Kim Coates is the resident jerk in this one), and at the end, when the credits are rolling, an old face returns, setting up who the main villain would be in the next movie (hint: this character was last seen in the 2nd film).

So how was it? Good. I wouldn't say I liked it more than part 3, but that's for a number of reasons.

Firstly, I was disappointed that the clones were wiped out fairly quickly. Okay, I know logistically, they can't have multiple Alice's running around the entire film. Okay, fine. Then why even introduce the idea? Then right at the beginning, they have Alice lose all her powers. Once again, this is because she can basically just create an earthquake, and wipe out everything, and it really doesn't matter in the rest of the film if she has the powers or not (Milla is still badass), but once again, then why bother? I'm not a fan of people losing powers, especially characters who are the main heroes.

I was disappointed by the last fight in the film, too. They set up Wesker as this unstoppable, superhuman guy, who took out both Claire and Chris, after fighting them both at the same time. Milla, though? De-powered Milla? She doesn't fight Wesker, the final boss. She just shoots him a couple of times in the head. That's it. That's the extent of the final confrontation between him and her. Big deal. They could have got anyone to do that. I wanted a big superhuman fight, not Kill Bill 2! Now, it's set up he can return in the next film as well, but if that's the extent their going to use him, then he might as well have stayed dead.

I did still like the movie, though. The action is pretty good (and you can see it all, so that's a plus). Milla uses a variety of weapons (swords, explosives, machine guns), and she's the same, Milla is the rock of this franchise, and as long as they have her, you're going to do okay in these films. The supporting cast is the usual assortment of stock types (the arrogant schmuck, the buff, but logical dude, the guy whose good with machinery), and the majority of fighting is relegated to enclosed spaces again (Umbrella's Tokyo Base, a Los Angeles prison), so if you're a fan of action taking place in small, enclosed locations, than you'll like this movie.

That's about it. It's Resident Evil, so you all know what to expect. It was a decent effort in the series, and I am curious to how 5 will play out.

Rating 3.5 out of 5 stars.

- Stephenstein

One more Nightmare

Hollywood, Hollywood. Why must you remake everything? Isn't it bad enough that you did a Friday the 13th "reboot" and a Halloween "reboot", must you have nailed the unholy trilogy? Was this really necessary? Were people screaming for the Nightmare franchise to be rebooted? Well, as we've all learned now by reading this blog, nothing, and I mean nothing, is sacred in Hollywood. Anyhow, I finally caught this one, just to see if it sucked as much as I thought it would. Actually, it didn't. Which doesn't mean it should have been made in the first place.

Everyone was applauding the casting of Jackie Earl Haley as Freddy. Now, I like Jackie...he was great as Rorschach in Watchmen. That doesn't mean he should get every role in the planet, though. He tries his best, and his best is still good, but I don't know if I buy him as Freddy. He's too short, for one thing, and unfortunately, they shot him short. I don't think Robert Englund is the tallest man on planet Earth, but filmmakers were usually smart enough to shoot him in a way that he filled the frame...made him more intimidating (at least, before he became jokey Freddy). There's one shot, when Freddy is fighting with Nancy, and I swear she's taller than him! Couldn't they have put a track below him, at least?

Then, there's Nancy. In this one, she's an outsider, right from the beginning. Okay, is that just to show us how isolated she is to begin with? So when Freddy starts his shenanigans, it's set up that she can't confide or turn to anyone (thus setting up her relationship with the smart, yet awkward boy)? I will say, this Freddy was kind of perplexing. What were they going for? Why turn Freddy from a murderer into a simple molester (if there is such a thing), and try and throw the "he didn't do it" angle at the viewer? Because, if you're watching this, you're either a dumb teenager (whose opinion doesn't count), or you've caught a Nightmare or 2, and know who Freddy is...and know Freddy can never, ever be innocent. He kills children in their dreams! It doesn't get more bad than that.

Then there's the Mom. Okay, so she hid evidence that Nancy went to that school, so she wouldn't remember what Freddy did to her. So why keep a class picture of Nancy and her schoolmates in her drawer! Neatly labelled with everyone's names! You know, Nancy doesn't need to remember Freddy diddling her, but I want to keep a souvenir of that! Huh? What kind of irresponsible parenting is this? Luckily, she gets the most gruesome death in the entire movie.

I will commend the filmmakers that they really tried hard to make Freddy serious. There are no real quips, and Freddy shows up a lot, and I do mean A LOT in this movie, which is satisfying, because you don't have to wait around to see Freddy. He shows up in the first 5 minutes. The makeup...I'm not completely sold on. I read they tried to emulate what a real burn victim would look like...but I like Frankenstein's green look, and what's the last time you saw a corpse that was green? So, that's fine and dandy, but why screw with a classic?

Anyhow, this movie was actually better than I thought it would be (which shows the expectations I walked in with). At least Freddy was serious, and he was doing stuff, and trying to get scares. The script didn't make sense at parts, I was indifferent to the new makeup, and Freddy wasn't menacing enough to live up to his predecessor, despite Haley's best try. Catch this one, only if you're a collector of the series, and you get every Nightmare, or whatever. Otherwise, you probably have a better movie to watch.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars.

- Stephenstein

Iron Man 2: The Tony Stark Show

I'm going to break my tradition and write about a movie already reviewed on this blog. Why? Because it's Iron Man. Growing up, Iron Man was not one of the comics I read, but since getting back into comics, I've noted how enormously important Iron Man is, both to Marvel's comic book world, as well as the films they are trying to make. Iron Man is sort of like, the lynch pin (in my opinion) of the whole Avengers concept, so any film adaptation they do, bears comment.

What did I like? I liked the humour, for th most part. I liked parts of the story, such as Howard Stark leaving clues to the new element to his son in the design of the Expo. Iliked Robert Downey Jr, and Sam Rockwell. Robert Downey Jr. is great...as Tony Stark. Let's face it, any yahoo could be in the Iron Man suit. But Downey just plays the part of the Tony Stark so well, and infuses him both with a half-serious superficiality, and a determination to do what's right, that you have to admire it. Likewise, Rockwell really stood out for me, as a villain who is trying to capitalize on an opportunity he sees. He's not totally evil, but he's sort of like the standard selfish, capitalistic corporate head. Except Rockwell makes him 10 times more memorable. Dancing to the podium, eating ice cream flown in from San Francisco, he's got nice little touches that I really liked.

Then there's War Machine. Okay, they didn't really call him War Machine, but I really dug his look, and his arsenal. I liked too, that War Machine didn't give the suit back in the end. Likewise, I enjoyed the drones, that they had certain drones for certain parts of the military (though that concept did not really play out), and the fact they were so effective an adversary to Iron Man.

Okay, so that's all well and good. Now let's get on with the bad. Pepper Potts. Annoying as hell, I could not stand her. From the beginning to the end, all she does is whine and complain to Tony. You didn't tell me you were dying, this job is so hard, what are you doing, I can't take this anymore, etc, etc. Umm, you've worked for this guy for years, how about a little gratitude when he makes you CEO? How about the benefit of the doubt? "Tony, you're acting a little weird, what's wrong?" Nope. She was just a bitch from beginning to end, and I wished that drone had blown up and killed her.

What else? Not enough Iron Man. J-Man brought this up, and he's right. He should have appeared more in the 2nd film (as we've already established how Iron Man was put together), the fights should have been longer (the end fight was really pathetic for an end fight). Whiplash and Black Widow were completely wasted. I've rarely seen an ineffective villain like Whiplash, he didn't really engage Iron Man after his first appearance at the racetrack, but tinkered in Justin Hammer's compound. The real villain of the film was the faulty arclight generator in Tony Stark's chest. Nice concept, but I want to see Iron Man fight someone worthy, not worry if his chest generator is going to kill him. Some of these problems may seem nitpicky, but I don't think so: this is 2010, we know how good superhero movies work, and how the rest don't. We're running out of time for excuses.

My rating may seem generous, but I do like Downey Jr. as Iron Man, and I like the universe they've created here. I just think this one was a little on the weaker side, compared to the first film, and a lot of the concepts, while neat, either didn't play out to their maximum potential (such as Whiplash and Justin Hammer teaming up), or were given too much attention (the arclight generator failing in his chest).

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars.

I wish thee a fond goodnight

- Stephenstein

Where no viewer has gone before...

I have gone where no viewer has gone before...well maybe not, but I did watch all 10 in a row, recently. Not all 10 in a row as in sitting there and just throwing the DVD's in there one at a time (though, I kinda wish I had, now)...but NO! I had to go to work, or some b.s. like that. Anyhow, I did watch all 10 recently, going from 1 - 10, and here's my ranking of them, from most to least favourite. (Keep in mind I never watched the shows, so I'm sure to piss off some fans with my rankings...bring on the hate!)

1. Star Trek: The Motion Picture - okay, yes, it's slow. Let's get that out of the way. I really liked the storyline, though! With V'ger, and how it's trying to merge with its creator, and all that, and I really loved the girl coming back as the probe, and there was all that stuff between her and Decker, and the whole wormhole thing...I thought it was damned good! Also, I appreciated the original cast coming together, and doing this film, years after the show ended. All in all, my favourite one, and deepest storyline of the bunch.

2. First Contact - back on familiar ground now. The Borg is one of my favourite villains of all time in film, period, and I really just liked the idea that Picard's all conflicted with having to deal with them, having been assimilated before. Also, I thought the Zefram Cochrane character was interesting too, and how they remembered him being this big humanitarian, while he wanted to do the mission just for money.

3. The Undiscovered Country - I just liked how this one was more of a murder mystery (and was quite happy that they just didn't blame it on one faction in this one, pretty much everyone had a conspirator involved), and how this was the last journey for the original cast, and they actually acknowledged it.

4. Generations - okay, I know I'm going to take heat for this one, but I don't know, I really dug the Nexus, and how Soran was trying to get back into this thing, even though it had pretty much destroyed everything in its path. Yes, I also thought it was neat how Picard and Kirk managed to share a scene together and (spoiler, for those who haven't seen it), if Kirk had to die, at least he died in a heroic way, and not some cheese way.

5. The Wrath of Khan - number 5 man, I know everyone loves this one, but after the first one, the storyline is kinda whatever. I mean, it's just a revenge tale, it doesn't have the meat that the first one did. Luckily, Khan is just such an awesome character, he can't be ignored. Fueled just by him, this movie makes my top 5 of Star Trek movies.

6. The Journey Home - Ahhh...the whales. I remember really liking this one as a kid, and watching it years later, it's still good, though not quite as good as I remembered. I don't know, there's something about going back in the past that irks me...like they're out of their element, which is cool, but also they don't quite get a chance to fly around the universe, and do stuff, which is what I think Star Trek of being, they're kinda stuck in San Francisco. Whatever, it's still good, though.

7. Nemesis - Why do people hate this one? It's still good! Picard's got a clone, who wants to take him out! The clone has Nosferatu guys with him! What's the reason? Is it because (spoiler, again) Data's destroyed? They don't like Shinzon? (I thought he was awesome, by the way). I don't know, this one was really good, and the Enterprise really had to fight to earn the victory in this one.

8. Insurrection - okay, another one people don't like, and I don't know why. You have a deep storyline, that is really kind of neat (when is it right to move 600 people off a planet, without them knowing), you have cool villains (the Son'a's), you have plot twists, and you have a chase, and the Enterprise duking it out with Son'a ships. What more do you want?

9. The Search for Spock - I was still into this one, but to be honest, it was kind of a ho-hum storyline (Spock's alive, and we know he probably won't die again, so no suspense), and there wasn't a lot going on, other than the Enterprise tricking the Excelsior, and the Kirk/Kruge fight at the end...though, Christopher Lloyd is a pretty damned good villain, so the movie had that going for it.

10. The Final Frontier - Okay, number 5 is the worst of the bunch, and yeah, the humour is pretty lame, but it still had some good ideas...I mean, the Enterprise crew go on a mission to find God, it doesn't get much bigger than that. It's true that such a heavy storyline doesn't really mix well with the hokey humour, but this movie wasn't a total disgrace, just a misguided mismash, which needed some direction in what it was going for.

So, disagree? Want to send me some hate mail? Think I'm bang on? Post on the boards!

http://fantomzone.proboards.com/

Oh, here's my ratings for the movies:

The Motion Picture - 5

First Contact - 4.5

The Undiscovered Country - 4.5

Generations - 4.5

Wrath of Khan - 4

Journey Home - 3.5

Nemesis - 3.5

Insurrection - 3.5

The Search for Spock - 3

Final Frontier - 2.5

I bid thee a fond live long and prosper.

- Stephenstein

Harry Potter and the Ridiculously Lucrative Franchise

Okay, today I braved hundreds and hundreds of kids (okay...that's an overstatement...it only FELT like I braved hundreds and hundreds of kids) in order to bring this review to you. You're welcome. It's Harry Potter. You know, the kid in the glasses who has made billions of dollars, both on print and the big screen. That's right. People make fun of you growing up, calling your four-eyes and what not, and then someone writes a series of books about a four-eyes, and now that four-eyes is popular beyond belief. As a person whose worn glasses all my life, I'm proud of that fact. So for all the people who called me four-eyes growing up, all I have to say is you've probably paid over hundred dollars combined to find out the further adventures of that particular four-eyed kid, so how smart are you? Oh yeah, and eff you.

Anyhow, my childhood demons aside, this franchise has been amazingly good, I mean 6 movies in and not a bad one in the lot. They've gotten all the principal actors back (except for Richard Harris, and he would have been back, but unfortunately is deceased), and they've all been British actors, non of this American-pretending-to-be-British b.s. You know what this means. J.K Rowling might have written the books, but the Mafia is producing the films. This is unheard of! I seriously think Rowling sold her soul to the devil. There's no other explanation.

Well, people are calling this one one of the best of the franchise? Do I agree? No. I see that there's a lot more drama (and romantic entanglements) in this one than the others, the magic is about the same, the action is a little bit less. The best? This one still has plotholes, and for those who don't like spoilers, stop reading. Harry doesn't try and find out who the Half-Blood Prince is? I mean seriously, you're reading a spell book written by someone calling himself the "Half-Blood Prince", and you're not remotely interested in the author of said book? Then there's the relationship between Harry and Ginny...where exactly did that come from? Don't give me this horse manure either, about how she had a crush on him in the 2nd film, or how the camera took pains to catch her looks to him in the 5th film; let's face it, Ginny's been pretty much wallpaper since the 2nd film. Now she's Harry's main squeeze. Huh?

That being said, there isn't a lot to complain about. The actors are all back and if you liked them in the 1st film, well, you'll probably like them in this one as well. This movie is just building up to the climatic showdown we're all waiting to happen on the screen in the Deathly Hallows. Even with the (somewhat surprising) absence of Lord Voldemort in this film, we still have his Death Eaters running around, causing havoc, and he is very much still in charge. Hopefully, now that we've gotten rid of who-has-feelings-for-who in this film, we can get on with the good stuff, and get this conflict settled once and for all. Anyone expecting anything more than a setup for the final film(s), be warned. That's all this movie is.

I bid thee a fond goodnight

- Stephenstein

Rating 4 out of 5 stars.

Terminator Salvation (aka the best lit movie in Hollywood)

Terminator. The name inspires images of a frowning Arnold Schwarzenegger going back to the past, alternately attempting to kill, and attempting to save John Connor. Through the entire franchise, we have heard whispers in our ears: Judgment Day. (Okay, most people were hearing those whispers...I was hearing "where'd you leave the toilet paper this time, you little ass!") But I digress...this is not the time to discuss whom left the toilet paper where. This is Terminator. This is serious. This is...McG. Excuse me? McG. The Charlie's Angels guy? Are you serious?

To best answer that question, I will simply say: yes. Yes, I am serious. This movie rocked. It rocked all night, and partied every day. This movie delivered, in a series of movies, where some were okay (Wolverine), and some were bad (Star Trek), this movie delivered large and in spades. What do you want? Do you want a large friggin' robot attacking people, and then little motorcycles spawning from his legs to give chase? Yes, we had that. Do you want, in one particular scene, missiles fired, land mines detonated, John Connor shooting a Terminator from a helicopter, and then burning the surounding landscape, before crashing the 'copter and doing battle with some water-based robots? That may be the longest sentence I've written in my entire life, but yes, you got that. Do you want a serious, hardcore, relentless action film set in the Terminator universe, complete with a big muscular guy with Arnold's face in a cameo? You have that. You even have the best lit movie in history (as Christian Bale would attest). This movie DELIVERS people, flat-out delivers, and whatever you've been reading on the 'Net, whatever you think about this movie, think again. Remember, those goofs on the web slamming this movie probably think Transformers rock...and that not being able to see action is cool. You want to see the story of these guys? It's actually already been released. It's called Idiocracy.

So, do yourself a favour, and plop down 12 bucks and see this movie. It must be seen in the theatre, for its great cinematography, for the effects, for the unreal sound, for everything. If you miss out on this movie, if you decide to rent it on DVD, you are just not getting the full effect of this movie...and just remember...diss the Terminators...and Arnold (or his CGI variant) will get you. He'll be back.

I bid thee a fond good night.

Rating 5 out of 5.

- Stephenstein

Star Trek

Well, look at me. Last night, I boldly went where a lot of people have gone before. I went to the movie theatre. What did I see? Obsessed? Let me ask you something: WOULD I BE POSTING THE STAR TREK POSTER IF I WENT AND SAW OBSESSED???? No. So, that answers your first question. Your second questions is: how was it?

Well, let's see. The effects were good. Now, before we all start clapping, and sending cigars to J.J. Abrams, take note: everyone's effects are good these days. This movie was given a budget higher than the gross national product of most countries. If I make a movie that looks that good on 99 cents, then there's cause to celebrate. So there.

Secondly, the characters. Scotty -- good, though played mostly for laughs. Chekov -- good, though mostly played for laughs. Sulu -- alright, though I find it interesting he can now flip and fence. Perhaps he should be the captain. Bones -- the best one there. Karl Urban was remarkable, with the mannerisms and voice of DeForest Kelly. Maybe he ATE DeForest Kelly. I don't know. Uhura -- worthless, and apparently, has a fetish for Klingons. Nice. Spock -- I want to like this actor. I want to like his portrayal of Spock. However, I want to like a lot of things...and I don't. Kirk -- the biggest disappointment, character-wise. A cheap punkass kid, who looks like an adolescent trying to play his father. When he tries to take command, you want to give him a lollypop and send him on his way. I don't buy him as Kirk...seriously.

Now, the plot...whoo boy. A pissed-off but supernaturally patient Romulan named Nero (as in Captain Nero...get it?) goes through a black hole after his planet is destroyed, and waits for Spock (Leonard Nimoy), the guy he blames for the end of Romulus. In the process, he kills James T. Kirk's Dad, because apparently, he can't stand Kirk either...though he never met him. Warp speed ahead. Kirk is punk in Iowa (a hotbed for punks), and Spock is wrestling with his emotions (and the fact Winona Ryder is his Mom...I mean...wasn't she just in Heathers?) Eventually, Kirk joins Starfleet, and ends up on board with Urban's Bones, Chekov, Sulu, and Uhura. Eventually Vulcan is destroyed (thus infuriating millions of Trekkers), and Kirk is deposited on a snowy, monster-infested planet, because Kirk wants to attack Nero, and not go running back to Starfleet (also, perhaps, because Spock knew Kirk bopped a green woman at the beginning of the film, and made a pass at Uhura...after all...that's his woman!). There, Kirk meets old Spock (and I just lost you), and old Spock tells Kirk to go back and cause his younger self to show emotion, thus allowing him to gain power over the ship. Kirk returns, and taunts Spock, (which is a brilliant ploy, considering the latter knows a move known as the Vulcan Deathgrip...let me repeat...the Vulcan DEATHGRIP).

After these hijinks, Kirk takes over the ship, and with Spock's reluctant help (reluctant because apparently he wants to make out with Uhara again...which he does just before warping to save Earth), they warp to the Romulans ship (which is drilling into the Earth to put a black hole into it...either that, or they're looking for oil), and save Captain Pike (who decided the best course of action when the Romulans first engaged them was to walk right into their hands...that's why he's the Captain). A bunch of visual effects follow, and the bad guy is either destroyed or warped another 25 years in the future, to wait for everyone to return (whilst playing in an egaging game of Yahtzee). Future Spock meets up with Old Spock (I lost you again, didn't I?), and old Spock tells young Spock "good luck"...presumambly because Leonard Nimoy realizes the writers are returning for the sequel. The cast leaves on the Starship Enterprise, and the credits roll.

Now, if you've read this synopsis of the movie, and are not laughing, then this is the movie for you. If you did laugh though, then stay away...the ridiculous events I have described actually transpired in the film (well...maybe not the Yahtzee). This film is another in a long series of ludicrously plotted films from young writers who are "hip" and "cool", and obviously have never actually studied how a plot is actually supposed to work. In closing, a person who "loved" this film told me it was made to "to make it more accessible for more people to get into Star Trek." My only response is this: if this film gets people interested in Star Trek again, then my worst fears about our society have been realized.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5 (as I am feeling overly generous at the moment, and the film didn't really anger me in any way).

I wish thee a fond good night.

- Stephenstein