Book Review: Alternating Currents (Frederick Pohl)

This thin tome features ten short stories of varying lengths and subjects.  They all offer a small dose of intriguing and imaginative sci-fi, but some stories stand out more than others.  Fortunately, each one is pretty breezy and should entice genre fans sufficiently.

Of the stories, the ones that I found most captivating were Let the Ants Try (a bizarre tale in which we give ants a try at evolving and controlling the planet in place of humans), The Tunnel Under the World (a rather interesting mystery in which a man discovers that his life is not what it seems), and What To Do Until the Analyst Comes (an amusing yarn in which an addictive chewing gum is successfully marketed and it turns everyone kinda stupid).  A few of the other stories I found a little less captivating, but are still worthwhile.  The Mapmakers might be the most important tale here:  a solidly-written and suspenseful thriller about spacemen struggling to map their way across the stars (this story is especially noteworthy in the way it emphasizes the threat of uncontrolled heat in space travel, which doesn't radiate and therefore just keeps building; it's not something I see mentioned in other works).  Rafferty's Reasons is a rather intense tale with some interesting psychology.  Target One is a pretty neat idea (something that actually mirrors the premise of the Red Alert video games).  Grandy Devil seems like an odd inclusion to the collection, but it has its share of charm.  As for the remaining three, I barely remember what happens in Children of the Night, The Ghost Maker, and Pythias.  For whatever reason, I found those stories to drag a lot more, and nothing about them really connected with me.

Frederick Pohl crafted each of these stories with a pretty solid blend of prose and dialogue; his writing tells just enough to set the scene, but he doesn't overdo it with the details.  His characters often show personality, and each story has a unique premise or twist worth telling.

If you're a sci-fi fan, this collection should be worth checking out.  Recommended.

4/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Stories:  Good | Book:  Good)

Film Review: Intolerance (1916)

Almost a century ago, D.W. Griffith produced this mammoth film as his follow-up to Birth of a Nation, partly to try and be bigger and better, and also to counteract the racial criticisms his previous film garnered. Intolerance is a massive production that spans thousands of years of human history. For the first time in cinema history, massive sets, massive amounts of extras, huge amounts of props and costumes were dispensed to craft a lavish and visual experience. To this day, many folks acknowledge this film as an important landmark of movie-making history.

Regardless, it is one long-winded film that runs for three hours, telling four different stories in four different eras. The most interesting and visually impressive story involves the fall of ancient Babylon; it's a brutal tale that boasts some surprisingly violent scenes of war, with the backdrop of massive and exotic setpieces. The film also flips around with the classic tale of Jesus and His crucifixion, and once again it looks fabulous. Scenes in 16th century France show the story of St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre. Then there's the modern day scenes (1916 that is) showing the struggle of the working class against the adversities of strike, strife, crime, and punishment. All these stories are united with the recurring image of a baby in a cradle, insinuating that the central theme of "intolerance" is a universal trait that carries on with each new generation, from the day we're born to the day we die.

All that being said, the film never really captivated me. Not even with the lavish visuals, the sumptuous set designs, and the expansive story; as grand of an effort as this film was, I found it to be dry and stiff. None of the stories had any strong characters to follow, and without a pathological attachment, I found myself disconnected to the events that unfolded. The matter is made worse by the fact that all conflict seems historical in nature - most of them revolve around religious differences that set two sides at each others throats. Personal conflict occurs in the modern story, but is still not all that interesting. Thus, I found myself not really caring for what was going on, and the film overall came off as a bore.

I am sorry to say such a thing, because the film clearly shows its quality and passion through its production. It boasts very solid, if not groundbreaking and impressive, photography and editing. Acting is generally good, even by silent-era standards. Title cards tend to be long-winded, and have a tendency to explain a lot of what's going on in a herky-jerky manner. This production spared no expense on the sets, props, and costumes. On DVD, this film is set to the organ score of Gaylord Carter...and I think it sucks.

Intolerance is an important landmark film that all serious film fans should attempt to see. It doesn't do much for me personally, I'm afraid, but it is best seen for its ambition, scope, scale, and overall quality and craftsmanship.

3/5 (Entertainment: Awful | Story: Average | Film: Very Good)

Film Review: Sin City: A Dame To Kill For

So there I was, late summer of '14, I was just cruising around and I decide to catch this flick while I was all hyped. Why not? I thought the first Sin City was ace, so if this second one had just more of the same, I'd be golden.

This sequel starts off kinda lousy, with a little ditty called Just Another Saturday Night. It pulls old Marv back into things (what the hell, I thought he was dead?). A bunch of stuff floats around the screen, Marv rambles on about beating up some punks. The film whips through all kinds of hoopla, before the main credits roll. I just hoped to God the whole thing didn't play as fast and loose as those first scenes.

Thankfully, it doesn't. The film settles down to a slower, more even pace. Hell, it almost seems to drag. But in my eyes, I like the way it unfolds and the film keeps me hooked, like the sultry serenade of a siren. The Long Bad Night kicks off, showing a hotshot kid trying to win big at a poker game with the high hats. That bit gets interrupted by the main feature, A Dame To Kill For; Dwight in his younger days gets played by a dame that everybody seems to fall for. I got to admit, I fell for her watching this picture; that Eva Green sure is one hell of a babe. She's a looker alright, with or without clothes, and I loved watching her whether she was nice or naughty. The story ends in a bloodbath, before going back to The Long Bad Night. I was digging it, but the ending was lousy. Then, we see Nancy's Last Dance, where little Nancy Callahan is all grown up and out for blood. That's a story I could take or leave, but I saw other reviews saying it just wasn't right.

So, the stories don't have all the same moxie as the first movie. There is some action, some blood, plenty of sexy dames, but it doesn't hit as hard. Some things between the two flicks don't match up right. But, I loved it all the same. The sequel keeps up the trend of showing tough guys and broads all caught up in the vices, the decadence, and the vicious cycles of Basin City, which feels more and more like some kind of expressionist hell. The tropes and cliches are all there, and there are familiar faces whether we like it or not. Vengeance, power, corruption, greed, lust, all the usual themes are there.

The film looks nice and slick. Can't say the visuals are as punchy as the first flick, but it looks to me like they took what they had and made it better; the color effects, the green-screen stuff, the transitions and comic-book type of look is as clean and sharp as ever. Editing ain't too bad, although the cutting of the stories could arguably be better. The players are alright: I could probably watch Eva Green playing this bit all day long. Josh Brolin gets a lot of crap, because of the prosthetics and because he has some big shoes to fill after Clive Owen, but I didn't mind him one bit. Micky Roarke seems to be having a ball. He gets crap for his prosthetics too, but once again, I don't see what the beef is. I like Bruce Willis, but for all the time he's in this picture, I wonder what the point is. Jessica Alba is alright. I didn't mind most everybody else: Joseph Gordon Levitt fits in good, Powers Booth is ace, Ray Liotta is fine and dandy, Christopher Lloyd does okay, and I was digging the Lady GaGa cameo. If I have a problem with anything, it's wondering what Stacey Keach is doing here, looking like a giant heap under all that prosthetic crap when he didn't do much of anything, and I miss Devon Aoki as deadly little Miho (Jamie Chung isn't doing much for me). This picture has some nice-looking sets, props, costumes, and other goods. Music is really swingin'.

So, it seems like lots of people have some kind of beef with the stories, the casting changes, the prosthetics, and God knows what else. I personally enjoyed the movie all the same. If you liked the first Sin City, then this should be worth checking out. Otherwise, don't bother.

4/5 (Entertainment: Good | Stories: Pretty Good | Film: Pretty Good)

Film Review: Sin City

So there I was in the fall of '05, scoping out the DVD rentals at the old shoppette, looking for the next big thrill.  I just happen to look up at the TV hanging on the ceiling to see them playing one of the new releases like they always do; I see Jackie boy and his gang getting cut up by deadly little Miho, spewing white blood everywhere.  Don't know how these creeps get away with playing that stuff for all the public to see, kids and all, but it hit me from that moment onward that Sin City must be a hell of a show.

The film is literally black, white, and red all over:  a smooth and breezy combo of extreme style and extreme violence.  It's got all the works:  car chases, shootouts, fist fights, knife fights, dancing ladies, and more.  Everybody here has a score to settle, and they leave body trails miles long.  There's so much blood, it's ridiculous.  The sheer brutality makes it all a real whopper too.  As much of a looker as the movie is, and with all its moxie, it's the stuff that comic book dreams are made of.

This picture takes after four of Frank Miller's original stories.  The Customer Is Always Right is a short segment (originally test footage) that sets the tone at the beginning, and rounds things off at the end.  The Hard Goodbye has always been my favorite:  a real hard case about a down-out-of-his-luck fella avenging a dame's death, and the resulting rampage sure is gutsy.  The Big Fat Kill is consistently thrilling doozy of a tale too, showing a guy doing everything it takes to stop war breaking out on the streets.  That Yellow Bastard is split up at the beginning and end, and it is a fairly touching story about a double-crossed cop trying to protect a broad.  All these stories play in the tropes of hard-boiled noir stories we all know and love:  it's a world where cops are rotten, everybody with power is corrupt, criminals are noble anti-heroes, and they're all using brute force to worm their way out of exploitation and to find their own brand of justice.  It's definitely amoral territory, but that's pretty much the point, and the movie handles the goods in all the right ways to make each story hit on all six.

Photography is solid.  Editing has a few choppy parts, but a lot of it is precise and good.  It's especially swell considering that most everything was shot on green-screens, and even the actors had to be spliced in together to make their scenes work.  There are a lot of crazy lighting, coloring, and transition effects, most of which hold up, but there are times when it seems kinda cheap.  The whole movie looks cartoony and processed, but as a moving comic book, it works great.  All the players are ace.  Writing can be blunt and choppy, but it helps the style.  This production has some fine-looking sets, props, costumes.  Most special effects hold up, especially considering that most of the movie is computer-animated.  The music's not bad either.

Booze, babes, guns, cars, tough guys, blood...you find the right alley in Sin City, you can find anything.  Recommended for mature audiences.

If you bag this on home video, you can either see this as one big cut with all the stories cut up precisely, or with each story separate with some good new scenes.  Both ways work great in their own ways.

4.5/5 (Entertainment:  Perfect | Stories:  Very Good | Film:  Good)

Film Review: The Avengers (1998)

This is it: one of the most notorious critical failures in blockbuster history. This film promises a hip, new, action-packed rendition of the classic British spy show: a slick hybrid of explosive action, thrills, and quirky humor.

The film definitely tries its best to be quirky, to the point where nearly every scene is weird and off-the-wall. Such eccentricities include a council of villains who dress up as giant teddy bears. There are at least a couple of scenes where old ladies whip out throwing knives or machine guns. The heroes are chased by robot bees at one point. One of the characters has an evil clone, with no explanation as to how or why. There are oodles of other odd things going on here, but the film pushes its quirkiness over the top with its script, in which every single line is a pun. Seriously, nobody ever talks normally in this film: every line is a funny remark, and it can get old really fast. The spaces in between these odd parts are filled up with fighting, explosions, chases, fighting, explosions, fighting, and more fighting!

My personal experience with this film has always been mixed; it's something I always wanted to like, but never could. The standard tropes of outlandish spy thrillers are there, and the action can be okay to watch at times. Unfortunately, the storytelling makes this a far duller experience, because there is no real story here to tell. With a whopping 28 minutes cut from the film in post-production, the plot is reduced to a constant string of action scenes, one after another, with zero character development, and zero reasoning given for why things happen on screen. In the end, it's hard to really latch onto this film beyond the aesthetics.

And the aesthetics get the job done. Photography isn't too bad. Editing is pretty stupid. Everybody in this film hams up their performances to match the quirky nature of the film. Ralph Fiennes bears a crud-eating grin the whole time, but still manages to channel enough charm and wit to make the most out of what he's given. Uma Thurman is pretty much reprising her role as Poison Ivy from B&R. Sean Connery doesn't seem to give a flying rip about anything, and in spite of that he seems to be the only one here taking his role seriously, even when he struts around in a kilt. I have no idea what Jim Broadbent and Eddie Izzard are doing here. Writing is horrible. This production uses okay-looking sets, props, and costumes. Special effects have not aged well. Joel McNealy's score is annoyingly repetitive and loud (which is a shame, because the movie's theme is not bad per se, and the CD soundtrack has been a favorite of mine since high school).

There may have been potential in this film somewhere, but so much of the story has been carved out in post-production that it leaves only a threadbare semblance of a plot, and a ton of frivolous action and ridiculous scenes. It's an interesting oddity at times, and a glorious guilty pleasure in its own right, but overall, it is the ultimate example of how a film with all style and no substance can fall flat on its face.

2/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Awful | Film: Marginal)

Film Review: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2014)

There's hardly a kid born from the 80s who has never heard of this totally bodacious group of walking, talking, pizza-eating, street-fighting reptiles. It has always been a goofy saga, but it was also hip, action-packed, and colorful. Can the same be said about the latest adaptation?

On the surface level, 2014's TMNT at least looks the part. It's a fairly breezy film that never takes itself seriously, packing on generous heapings of goofy comedy, stylish action scenes, and loads of special effects. The first half of the film takes its time to follow April O'Neil around, who inevitably uncovers the secret of the turtles' existence, and the outlandish Foot Clan plot to take over New York City. The last half of the film is pretty much all-out fighting and action, which includes a fight in the sewers, a lengthy chase scene down the slopes of a mountain, and a final showdown on top of a skyscraper. Thus, I found the last half of the film the most engaging.

It's still not without its problems though. Despite the light-hearted tone and all the jokes, very little of it made me laugh outright. The humor is quite low-brow and doofy. Action scenes will be a hit and a miss; fight scenes in the film's first half are horribly shot and edited (on purpose nonetheless). Later scenes are still hectic, but are at least watchable and fairly fun. Scenes in between try their best to keep things rolling fast and without becoming droll, but without any major emotional investment, these scenes tend to drag a bit.
Beyond the surface-level comedy and action, there's not much else to this film. The plot is pretty much a mash-up of typical TMNT fare and 2007's Transformers (also an adaptation of an 80s cartoon where human characters discover some weird life form and gets caught in the middle of a war nobody knew existed; both starring Megan Fox nonetheless). What plot the movie has is riddled with plot holes, and scenes that are simply way too unbelievable (maybe not a valid complaint for TMNT, but with the way the film tries to look believable, the film shoots its own creditability in the foot). The turtle characters are fun to watch, usually, and Splinter is one cool rat. They aren't terribly deep characters, but they are colorful, and there is just enough background to them to keep them from being total caricatures. Other characters aren't as good: April O'Neil is almost annoying as she obsesses over the turtles and shouts her findings at everybody she runs across. Her sidekick is a dork. Shredder is extremely flat, lifeless, and lacking in presence, serving little more than an excuse to have a boss fight at the end of the movie. The film draws some connections between all the characters to give their interactions more backing, but it only strains the creditability of the plot even further.

The film's photography looks good sometimes and terrible at other times. Editing is choppy. Acting is pretty lackluster from the whole crowd; Megan Fox is far from endearing despite her looks, the voice acting can be a hit or a miss, and other actors don't really take their roles seriously, for better or for worse. Writing is pretty daft. This production uses okay-looking sets, props, and costumes. Locales are pretty small-scale most of the time. Special effects vary from good to bad. Music is okay (I got to admit that I found the end credits song catchy).

This incarnation of the Turtles definitely has its flaws, but it tries to be a fun picture, and it is at least partway successful. Not everybody will be quite as easily charmed as I am, so I'm compelled to recommend  approaching this movie with caution.

3/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Marginal | Film: Marginal)

Film Review: Guardians of the Galaxy

"Why would you want to save the galaxy?"

"Because I'm one of the idiots who lives in it!" - Bradley Cooper and Chris Pratt

Back when Marvel kicked in Phase 1 of its cinematic universe, we all knew who Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Thor, and Captain America were.  All these films were destined to be hits to some degree.  But...the Guardians of the Galaxy? Who are these a-holes? If you're like me and never read comics, you may be asking the same question.  Seriously, a gun-totting raccoon? A walking tree? David Bautista? And the guy who directed Slither? Marvel is taking some serious risks...

If box office numbers are any indication, the risk paid off tremendously.  The film wastes little time in plunging the audience into the deep end of the most outlandish and far-out reaches of the Marvel universe.  From the desolate ruins of an abandoned planet to the thriving heart of an interstellar civilization, this space-faring adventure cuts across colorful nebulae and imaginative worlds, the likes of which have only ever been topped by the Star Wars universe.  The film has no shortage of action, as characters fight with their fists, knives, and futuristic guns against an onslaught of bad guys.  There is a huge all-out battle in the end, with thousands of space ships filling up the screen.  In between the exciting parts, the film moves fast and fluidly with plenty of spot-on comedy, and just enough drama to give the characters a little more depth.

The story covers pretty basic ground, using the same old type of Macguffin that Avengers and Thor:  The Dark World used.  The villain of this film is a pretty flat, one-dimensional fellow who's best remembered for his presence, and little more.  What makes this film stand out will be the protagonists.  Peter Quill (the self-proclaimed "Star-Lord") has charm, but thanks to the film's opening scene, he provides an emotional anchor we can all latch onto.  Drax is a warrior driven by vengeance, but is so blunt that he can't comprehend metaphors, and hilarity ensues.  Gamora is a fierce fighter as well with an allure of her own.  Rocket is a hard-drinking gun-happy raccoon with attitude.  Groot is a walking tree, who can kick some butt, but also provides some of the most lovable moments.  This whole gang is very much in the same vein of space outlaws as in Firefly or The Cowboy Bebop; each character provides enough emotional investment and attention so that they stand out and become heroes we can root for, no matter how bizarre or unlikely this union seems.  The film is also loaded with a plethora of side characters, who all stand out in their own ways, to the point where I wished they could have had more to them (especially Thanos, who's obviously going to be a major player somewhere down the line; Nebula, who I thought was cooler than anything; the Collector, who's not given that much to do here; and Yondu, who clearly shares a history with Quill).

This film is crafted with solid and precise photography and editing.  Acting is top-notch; you'd probably never expect much from this cast, but everybody does their best to make the characters stand out.  Chris Pratt is not too shabby as the main hero; I enjoyed watching Zoe Saldana; Dave Bautista's performance is surprisingly solid; voices by Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel get the job done well.  Everybody else contributes admirably.  Writing is pretty good.  This production spares no expense on the outlandish and imaginative sets, props, costumes, and special effects.  Music is alright.

Guardians of the Galaxy is one of the most well-rounded blockbusters since Marvel's own Avengers.  It balances action, comedy, and storytelling very well.  It defies all the odds and presents this obscure group of misfits as a thrilling new franchise for the masses.  Best of all, it does so with diligent attention to the characters.

Recommended!

4.5/5 (Entertainment:  Very Good | Story:  Good | Film:  Very Good)