Manga Review: Akira (Katsuhiro Otomo)

Even if you've seen the film adaptation, Otomo's original creation is a sprawling monster of a story unlike any other.  Available in six huge volumes, the manga tells the epic and incredible story about unbridled psychic warfare in the midst of civil strife.  It's a pulpy, punkish world of biker gangs, secret military projects, mutants, and more.  Something is bound to blow up every ten pages or so...

This might be one of the most breakneck mangas I've read; from start to finish, the story is loaded with chases, fights, battles, and all-out destruction.  Bullets and rockets fly pretty frequently, as all the different characters and factions clash in a complex and twisting series of struggles.  When the psychic powers become unleashed, an awe-inspiring amount of vehicles, buildings, and city blocks are decimated and left in ruin.  Even after everything gets nuked, the battle continues relentlessly.  There is practically no drag in this series, and each new page presents a big and bold visual story that inspires awe and excitement.  It is also a violent story with a huge body count, which gives the story a lot of edge and weight behind all the different conflicts that erupt.

The story feels a little wonky at first; it seems like characters ran into each other very randomly and in the most unlikely ways.  Around the halfway point, when the whole story diverges into the more post-apocalyptic setting, I felt the story became more balanced and focused.  There are numerous characters in this saga - some get more attention than others - but many of them are likable, or at least easy to understand.  However, these characters sure do scream at each other a lot, and there are times when they seem unreasonably mean and nasty.  Through it all, the story illustrates strong themes concerning the abuse of power, war, corruption, and social isolation.  Above all, the story is post-modern punk at its finest, given that the core of the story is about the youth of NeoTokyo rebelling, and even evolving, against the older generation.

This manga is illustrated with superb artwork.  Nearly every page is ordained in highly-detailed settings and striking action scenes.  Characters tend to look a little odd, with their huge wide cheeks and faces, but they are actually pretty well-drawn.  There is a lot of ingenious design behind all the different settings, vehicles, creatures, and effects throughout the story.  Writing is not bad either.

Even though I found the first half of the saga a bit convoluted, the last three or four volumes are phenomenal, and the whole series is a thrilling read.  The movie hardly even compares to the sheer scope and detail of the manga.  It is easily recommended to any manga or sci-fi fan.

5/5 (Entertainment:  Perfect | Story:  Good | Manga:  Perfect)

Film Review: Exodus: Gods and Kings

For thousands of years, the Book of Exodus has stood as a awe-inspiring account showing how Moses, united with God's power, liberated the Jews from slavery, and set them on the path to form their own nation. It's always been an inspiring tale of faith, power, and liberation. Plus, the characters have always been compelling archetypes; Moses, much like Maximus in Gladiator, is a man who serves his country, is banished, but comes back with a vengeance. Ramesses, much like Commodus in Gladiator, is a man whose ego is so bloated, he is driven to betray his most loyal followers. Put the two together, and you have a dynamic, intense character-driven conflict, which touches on timeless themes of loyalty, the nature of power, and the nature of faith.

Exodus: Gods and Kings promises an epic, visually-lush retelling of these classic characters and events. It bears something in common with Ridley Scott's earlier work with Gladiator, especially in regards to the characters. However, as it is with Kingdom of Heaven's theatrical cut and 2010's Robin Hood, the experience of Exodus is not always perfect.

The film definitely delivers on the visual front: each scene is laden with beautiful landscapes, highly-detailed sets and props, and lavish visual effects. There is one major battle scene in the beginning, which is fairly satisfying. After a long stretch of slower-paced drama, the ten plagues are shown as a montage of widespread chaos. It's portrayed less as a direct action of God, and more as a chain reaction of nature, with God's oversight; some audiences won't like this depiction, but I personally loved it. The passover scene is appropriately somber. When the exodus finally happens, the famous Red Sea scene offers a fantastic vision of a giant wall of water crashing over the Egyptian army, and it is quite the impressive sight.
Unfortunately, in-between all these exciting scenes, the film slows down drastically to a crawl, wadding through character-driven drama. It makes the pacing really herky-jerky, and if you don't care for the lead characters, then the film will be a total bore.

As it is, I found the characters to be decent enough. I could appreciate the conflict between Moses and Ramesses, which has a lot of push and pull that keeps the plot moving through its projected course. What might make the story iffy, however, is the details and how they compare to the source material. Moses is presented as a man who "wrestles with God," rather than simply doing God's bidding or wielding God's power. God appears as a character, and it's not even clear if He's meant to be taken literally or as a figment of Moses' imagination. God's goal throughout is to upstage everybody else, to humble them. It's in line with the Old Testament view of things, but on-screen, it feels off, because God's relationship with Moses is purposefully strained. Bible literalists will find this movie distasteful, thanks to the unconventional way the characters and events are handled.

Fortunately, the film looks splendid, with fantastic photography and editing. Acting is great: I thoroughly appreciated Christian Bale and Joel Edgerton as the two leads, I loved Maria Valverde, and everybody else is not bad. Writing is pretty bad; most dialogue is blunt, unrefined, and it feels oddly modernized. This production uses spectacular sets, props, costumes, and special effects. The music score is really beautiful too.

Despite the quality of the production, the quality performances, and the visual grandeur, the film has messy pacing and messy content that won't sit well with most viewers. I personally feel that the film has merit, and deviations from the Bible don't bother me that much, but it does feel a little off, and I'd love to see if a director's cut will rectify these problems the way it did with Kingdom of Heaven. As it is, anybody looking for a straight biblical adaptation should stick with Cecil B. DeMille's The Ten Commandments. Rent this only if you're a fan of historical epics, and you're not too hung up over biblical accuracy.

3.5/5 (Experience: Average | Content: Marginal | Film: Very Good)

Book Review: The Melancholy of Mechagirl (Catherynne M Valente)

This short book caught my eye, with the promise of offering a collection of sci-fi that focuses on robots, artificial intelligence, and the human consciousness, with the exotic backdrop of Japan and the surreal tropes of the cyberpunk genre.  The stories definitely offer all of that and more, but it becomes clear very fast that the author's heart and soul is firmly rooted in Japan, and every page is imbued with traces of Japanese culture, myth, and style.  Actual sci-fi storytelling is diminished in favor of the art of pure expressionism.

In spite of this, I found the stories to be utterly convoluted, dense, and bizarre - easily some of the most confusing and frustrating prose I've read since William Gibson's Neuromancer, or William S. Burroughs' Naked Lunch.  Like these other texts, Mrs. Valente's work shows a uniquely masterful manipulation of words and sentence syntax, to give each story its own unique texture and feeling.  These aspects make her stories stand out artistically, but like Gibson and Burroughs, the content is so surreal and abstract that it defies the standard conventions of literary narratives.  Thus, the most of the stories went over my head without much resonance.

To be fair, there are bursts of the text that I found engaging.  The opening story, Melancholy of Mechagirl, is a kind of poem told in the perspective of robot with a female consciousness, and I thought it was cool.  Thirteen Ways of Looking at Space/Time is a very interesting 13-part tale that entwines the life of a sci-fi writer with different variants of creation myths (I wonder how much of this story is based on Valente's own life and thoughts).  These chapters include very bizarre but thought-provoking combinations of classical myth with scientific terminology.  Killswitch is an interesting short story (or maybe I found it interesting because it's about a video game; I kinda wish it was a real one).

Unfortunately, I found everything else to be a little too far-out for my tastes.  This includes the very meaty stories of Ink, Water, Milk, Fade to White, and Silently and Very Fast.  They drone on for many pages, but never really engaged me on any level; I found no characters I could really care about, and no conflicts that kept me invested.  Ghosts of Gunkanjima started off well, but I quickly lost interest.  Same for Story No. 6.  I hardly even remember how the other stories - Fifteen Panels Depicting the Sadness of the Baku and the Jotai, One Break One Stroke, Emperor of Tsukayama Park, Memoirs of a Girl Who Failed to be Born From a Peach, and The Girl With Two Skins - they all failed to captivate me personally.

All that being said, I can't deny that Valente's craftsmanship is unique, vivid, and worth a look on its own merits.  Chances are that there are readers who will love her work and find it more engaging than I.  It is an interesting blend of all things fantastic, futuristic, and real, drawing upon inspirations from her own life, her surroundings, and her imagination.

This book is brimming with art in its purest form.  It's not art that I can personally appreciate, except in short bursts, but the more high-brow readers may find it engaging.  I would recommend giving Valente's stories a look.

3/5 (Entertainment:  Poor | Stories:  Mixed | Book:  Very Good)

Book Review: Doctor Sleep (Stephen King)

It's been 36 years since one of Stephen King's biggest and most famous titles, The Shining, hit bookstores and made a huge splash in the world of horror fiction.  It had a simple premise of showing a family haunted, tormented, and pulled apart by ghosts haunting a hotel; they found salvation only in their gifted son, who used his shining - telepathy - to call for help.  As simple as it is, the book remains a horror classic thanks to its imagination, its nuanced attention to stark themes of domestic violence and alcoholism, and King's signature laid-back ethos.

Personally, I would have been happy if The Shining remained a one-off.  It told the story it needed to well, and ended in a satisfying manner.  However, when the question came up about what could have happened to the little boy who survived the ordeal of the Overlook Hotel, King decided to answer that question for himself, by writing this novel, Doctor Sleep.

The book picks up on Danny Torrance's life since the events of The Shining, and it's not always an endearing tale.  Danny becomes something of a lost soul, who decides to drown out his shining abilities and his painful memories in drinking.  Once he feels he hits rock bottom, he picks himself back up, tries to live a cleaner life, but inevitably his path clashes with a new main character.  The story of Danny becomes entwined with the story of Abra Stone, a girl with super-duper shining abilities.  The two connect psychically, but as Abra grows and matures, she draws the attention of a new kind of evil.  Things get really interesting and gripping when The True Knot - a group of vampire-like people who roam around America feeding off of kids with the shining - target and hunt Abra.  It all builds up methodically to a psychically-charged climax at the site of the Overlook Hotel.

It is a breezy and thrilling book, easily among King's most accessible works.  It is a meaty book, but it's not too wordy that it becomes bloated.  The book strikes a good pace and a good balance between dialogue, description, and action.  King's laid-back style makes the words flow by well, and the plot by nature makes you want to read more to see what will happen next.  Conflict runs strong - even during the less exciting scenes, the focus on the supernatural and characterization keeps it engaging.

The story is pretty cool and new.  It's thankfully not a rehash of any kind, and it presents a plethora of great new characters.  If anything, character-building is the book's greatest strength;  Danny's life story is so full of ups and downs that you can't help but to sympathize with him.  Strong themes of alcoholism and history repeating itself emerge strongly through his story.  On the flipside, Abra is a great, perfectly-lovable character, who also exudes a great amount of attitude and spirit.  Side characters are pretty decent, and the villains (especially Rose) are classic King villains so despicable that we love to hate them.  There's a lot of strands in the plot that get juggled around.  I can't say that the revelations concerning Dick Hallorann are all that endearing or even necessary (it's actually kind of sick, but I guess it ties into the ongoing theme of child abuse), but other than that, the story ties everything together into an elegant braid of complex characters and thrilling situations.  It's especially inspiring to see how King evolved this world from the small-scale settings of the Overlook Hotel and expanded it to encompass the entire nation.  And yet, everything is connected quite sublimely.

This book is written in King's classic style; a slick combination of elegant description and down-to-Earth wording.  Dialogue is really sharp and good, descriptions aren't too overbearing, details seem well-researched and refined, and the book matches up with the original Shining well.

Doctor Sleep is a grand supernatural adventure with heart, thrills, and a group of superb characters.  It's easily one of the best books in King's repertoire, and even though you can read The Shining on its own merits, this is an excellent follow-up.

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

Film Review: John Wick

If it's one thing action movies can teach us, it's that you don't mess with people who have nothing left to lose. John Wick hinges on the simple premise of a retired hitman who plows through the Russian mafia and leaves a mile-long body trail, all because they killed his puppy. And stole his ride. Somebody has to pay!

As silly this may sound, the film plays it all with a straight face, and it works because there is a good amount of heart to the setup. In the opening scenes, we see that this is more than the story of a man, his car, and his dog; it's the story of a loss and betrayal. Once the appropriate pathos is established, John Wick rises as the tough and skilled action hero we can root for. It doesn't take long for the butt-kicking to commence, but once it does, it's densely-packed, fast-paced, relentlessly-brutal, and very well-executed. Whether shooting, punching, stabbing, or running bad guys over, it is quite a rush to watch Wick descend into the criminal underworld and find payback.

As exciting and stylish as the film is, what really keeps it from falling into mediocrity is the title character. The film successfully evokes sympathy for Wick - the man who lost his wife, before losing everything else - and it provides a solid reasoning for why we should care about whether or not Wick succeeds. As the film goes on, Wick's journey takes him through a bizarre criminal world with its own set of rules, codes, and even currency. It turns out that it's a world Wick is already familiar with, and he has a history with most of the minor characters that pop up. Thus, the film unearths stark themes of how the past, present, and future are entwined.

This film is well-shot, with great-looking photography and editing. It is especially refreshing that the action scenes are solid and steady, with no fast-cutting or camera shake. I also think the color schemes and nighttime cityscapes lend the film a dark and grimy type of neo-noir appeal. Acting is fine for what it is; you may not think much of Keanu Reeves, but this film is proof that the man can act. His portrayal of John Wick is quite spot-on. And he can kick a lot of butt very impressively. Writing is not the best, but it gets the job done. This production has pretty good-looking sets, props, and costumes. Music choices, and the music score, feature really heavy beats and hard rock cues, and I found it awesome that way.

John Wick, much like A Bittersweet Life, is a dark crime movie with lots of action, but also a lot of emotional backing behind its characters. It's a simple story that's told well and features plenty of satisfying setpieces. Recommended for at least one viewing.

4/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Good | Film: Good)

Film Review: Snowpiercer

It may be a stretch, but just imagine a single train looping around a track, cutting through an Earth that's completely frozen over.  This train has been running for years, and it has its own microcosm of social classes, with the rich and powerful living in the front in luxury, and all the poor and wretched stuck in the back.  When those in the back of the train stage a revolution to take over the front, all hell breaks loose.

That's pretty much what this film entails:  the prologue is brief, setting the stage immediately for an all-out onslaught of bloody fighting, riveting peril, and startling revelations.  It's a rather grim and bleak film that doesn't shy away from the grisly details, but it's rarely trashy or distasteful.  The film is dark, fast-moving, and action-packed.  I personally couldn't ask for a more entertaining picture.

What's even more rewarding is the storytelling.  It's a bit of a weird and unbelievable yarn, thinking that a single train could run endlessly like this.  There are bound to be plot holes to uncover if you really analyze it on the surface level.  However, the film slowly unveils more and more details behind its concept that gives more background (whether it's plausible or not is probably debatable).  Above all, the film takes itself seriously, everything looks creditable, and it provides a self-contained world that's easy to take on its own merits.  In spite of all this, the plot moves fast and reaches an interesting climax (the likes of which would be on-par with the architect scene of The Matrix Reloaded, minus the mumbo-jumbo, but with the same level of plot twisting).  Characters aren't terribly deep or refined; they ultimately serve little more than voices for the issues, plot complications, and conflicts that erupt.

The biggest asset to this film are its themes.  Some folks won't like them, because it's a very blatant, in-your-face allegory concerning the state of the world we currently live in.  The film asserts that we are all headed toward disaster if we continue to run this "train" of ours the way we have been.  Whether you look at it as a criticism of the upper class exploiting the lower class, or the depletion of the environment and resources, the film paints a bleak picture to expose the ugly truths of our cold world.  I find the parallels compelling, although I'm sure there are those who will find them pretentious, obnoxious, stupid, or something else.

Regardless of how you grade the content, the film looks great with its dark and gritty photography.  Editing is top-notch.  Acting is great:  Chris Evans is surprisingly somber as the protagonist, and I enjoyed the performances by John Hurt, Ed Harris, Song Kang-ho, and Go Ah-sung.  Tilda Swinton is awesomely hammy in her role.  Every other actor pulls their weight really well.  Writing is pretty sharp and good.  This production has great-looking sets, props, and costumes.  Special effects tend to look fake, but it rarely detracts from the film's overall quality.  Music is decently somber too.

Snowpiercer is a rather odd tale, but one that is highly imaginative, consistently entertaining, and it's chock full of themes worth exploring (whether you want to or not).  Highly recommended!

5/5 (Entertainment:  Perfect | Content:  Good | Film:  Perfect)

Film Review: Dracula Untold

Dracula's story has been told and re-told so many times in so many different ways that the mere thought of having a "untold" Dracula tale comes off as ironic. But there is potential, especially in the historic roots of the character (as inspired by Vlad III "The Impaler," or "The Son of the Dragon," considered a hero of Wallachia, but also an infamous butcher everywhere else). Regardless, very few films have explored exactly how Dracula became such a cruel bloodsucking vampire.

The film kicks off with a prologue sequence that spells out who Vlad is and what the Turks are doing to his kingdom, in a style that feels like a moving graphic novel. From then on, the film wastes little time in pitting the titular prince against the Turkish army. Naturally, the prince resorts to fighting evil with evil, consorting with a vampire to gain supernatural powers. From then on, Vlad goes on to crush waves of Turks almost single-handedly. Most of the time, he's either transforming into a swarm of bats that rushes through his enemies, or he's slicing necks with expert swordplay. Scenes in between the action rarely drag; there is a fair amount of drama involved between the prince, his wife, his son, his followers - adding vampirism to these relationships offers a few intriguing twists and implications worth exploring.

However, the story is pretty standard fare; it's as if they took 300, took out the Spartans, replaced Leonidas with Dracula, and used Castlevania as a backdrop. As cool as it is to see a medieval Transylvania in action, the story is very simple and straightforward, and can be quite predictable. Most of it feels like it could have used more refinement; plot holes can undoubtedly be found, and more character development would be quite welcome. The whole film breezes by in a formulaic fashion, entwining bits of history with bits of vampire legend, but it amounts to very little that feels fresh, new, or invoking.

The film generally looks okay, with mostly-good photography and editing. Some of the action scenes have horrid camera work. Acting is okay: I enjoyed watching Luke Evans as the main character, and other actors can be a hit or a miss. Writing is quite simple and unrefined. This production uses pretty fine-looking sets, props, and costumes. Special effects offer some good-looking views of fantastic places, and are good with some of the creature effects, but are rougher in the action scenes. Music sounds like more of the same.

Dracula Untold is certainly action-packed and takes advantage of some of the original lore of the character, but it also feels like just another typical swords and sorcery flick. Fans of the character or genre may find it worth renting.

3.5/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Average | Film: Average)

Film Review: The Maze Runner

A kid wakes up in a cage that's climbing up an elevator shaft, with no memory of who he is and where he came from.  At the top, he finds himself stuck in the middle of a grassy plain, surrounded by trees, and giant metal walls beyond.  Beyond the walls is some kind of massive labyrinth, which closes itself off every night, and there are deadly cybernetic creatures that come out to slay anybody who's stuck inside.  This kid finds himself among a small society of other kids who have been stuck in this place for years, and could never find their way out of the maze...until now!

If nothing else, I think The Maze Runner starts off with a really cool concept and it remains enthralling all the way to its end.  Even if it does fall into the typical tropes, cliches, and formula set up by other adaptations of YA fiction novels (especially The Hunger Games), the film is very consistently thrilling.  It's not just the action scenes, of which there are plenty and they're never really overdone - it's the plot and the methodical way it unravels that captivated me the most.  It starts off so enigmatically, the film kept me glued to the action to see what the heck is going on and what the secret is behind the maze.  The maze lends itself easily to building suspense, as the characters have to maneuver through its winding corridors and evade death at every turn.  Outside of the maze, the film keeps the tension high thanks to an overarching sociological struggle that forces the characters to question whether they should risk their lives to escape or remain alive in their well-organized mini-society.  At times, this takes the characters to darker and savage territory.  The film can be pretty violent and nasty when it needs to be; it's not too distastefully graphic, but it is definitely not all that fluffy either.

The plot runs pretty evenly with minimal drag, thanks to the plethora of conflicts that emerge among the different characters and the events that unfold.  That being said, it's still not a perfect story; I personally found it odd that all it takes place in the course of three days (were it not for the dialogue, I would have assumed that months had passed).  There are moments in the film where you could question why certain things weren't tried to accomplished before the main character's timely arrival.  I found most plot holes easy enough to dismiss, but the film's success in the long run may depend on how the sequels do (and yes, the movie does end with a huge infodump that leaves more questions unanswered, and offers a lead-in for the next movie).  I found most of the characters likable, except for one major antagonist, who may be one of the most unreasonably jerky characters I've seen in a while.  I wanted to slap that Gally upside the head.  The story seems to dig up some very interesting sociological themes, thanks to its focus on the group, the system they built, and their ongoing struggle through the maze.  I have no idea how this movie compares to the original book, but it certainly has me interested enough to read it sometime.

The film looks mostly-good.  Photography is great in many scenes, but a few of the action scenes tend to be jittery and erratic at times.  Editing is decent.  I felt the cast was good, especially considering that so many of these actors are children.  Writing gets the job done; there is a lot of exposition, some of which dumps a lot of new terms on the audience, but it keeps things rolling well.  This production has decent-looking sets, props, and costumes.  Music is okay.

This film is a bit like what you get if you take the death-match scenes from The Hunger Games and crossed it with The Lord of the Flies.  It may look like just another YA adaptation, but I think The Maze Runner is decent sci-fi and it could be the start of a cool new film franchise.

Recommended!

4/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Story:  Good | Film:  Good)

Book Review: Naked Lunch (William S Burroughs)

Naked Lunch might be the most challenging book I've encountered.  Part of it is because of the book's namesake, which asks the reader to take a good long look at the end of the fork and see the lunch they're eating, fully exposed, for what it is.  Or, perhaps this is more accurately Burroughs himself looking at his own lunch, which had become defiled after ingesting massive quantities of opiates throughout his life.  Ultimately, that's really what this book is:  it's every random thing he jotted down while under the influence, and none of it is particularly pretty.

The other part of the challenge is that the book makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.  I couldn't tell you what the plot actually is; it's a haphazard concoction of many short pieces strung together continuously.  Most of the characters are nameless, identified only by vague designators like "The Mark," "The Vigilante," "The Exterminator," and so forth.  None of them stand out as anybody with definition or depth.  They all exist in a strange foreign place called the Interzone, which is home to both men and some weird creatures called Mugwumps.  Nearly every episode in this book involves extreme amounts of perverse sex, sadistic violence, and a rather distasteful penchant for endless discharges (or even consumption) of bodily wastes.  Sometimes all of these things are rolled together in one disturbing scene after another.  The sickening details seep through every line of the book, offering tales that are mean-spirited and vulgar.  Beyond the sheer shock value, I really couldn't tell what was going on with this book.  Especially during all its digressions, such as when the book repeatedly breaks into some kind of random courtroom scene, or turns into a movie set or something.  Seriously, what the f*!k is this bull$@&t?

The prose, however, is surprisingly lucid in its own right.  This is one of those books (perhaps one of the first even) that manages to combine words and phrases that shouldn't go together in ingenious ways to deliver abstract scenes with a remarkable level of texture.  The sentences flow well and are hardly ever dull.  Much of what's said may not make sense, but given the way it is said, it's hard to tell if Burroughs was a madman or a genius.

There was a South Park episode, where one of the kids wrote a book that was about nothing but defecation, and it became a renowned smash hit that everybody praised as a masterpiece.  I kinda wonder if that show was meant to parody the success of Naked Lunch, because it certainly feels like the book uses so much disgusting content to shock and repulse the reader, but it's hard to tell if there's really anything worth saying.  I got to admit that it's written in an interesting way, like a form of literary freestyling, which could push it into levels of artistic merit, but I feel the content is not only horrid, but also convoluted and messy.  Thus, I don't know if I should call it good or terrible literature, but its definitely distasteful.  I think I prefer David Cronenberg's film adaptation over this; at least it had a plot.

3/5 (Experience:  Extreme | Content:  Awful | Book:  Mixed)

Film Review: Eraserhead

When it comes to cinema as an art form, very few films, if any, are as abstract and bizarre as David Lynch's first-ever feature-length film: Eraserhead. Like any piece of art, some people will embrace it, others will shun it. Most are content to give it a shot and never see it again.

It truly is an experience unlike any other. The film takes place in its own little world: a dark, grungy, industrial nightmare laden with stark patterns, shadows, and odd details. Characters don't have much to say, leaving their odd actions and reactions to tell most of the story. There are numerous expressionist images that will truly challenge one's understanding of what's going on: I seriously can't say why this film has a scene with a man on another planet, or why there's an ugly lady dancing inside a radiator, or why there are worm-like things everywhere. The film has its share of grotesqueness, from the crying of a strange mutant baby to the bizarre nightmare where the guy loses his head and it literally becomes a pencil eraser...the film packs in so much weirdness, but it runs evenly and hypnotically, to the point where it's all effortless and natural for the strange world Lynch has created.

The film's content doesn't really follow a standard narrative, so interpreting its plot will depend entirely on the viewer and what he or she makes of the images. The most obvious thing is that this is about some dude having to put up with the horrors and fears of parenthood. You could probably watch the film and extrapolate psychological and sexual subtexts as well. Characters don't have much to them, but it's easy to relate to the protagonist through all his surreal visions, no matter how harrowing they become.

The film uses some very strong, vivid, and stark imagery, all shot with fantastic black-and-white photography. Editing is really precise and good. All of the actors fulfill their parts well. Dialogue tends to be pretty short, blunt, and weird. This was never really an expensive or elaborate production, so considering the film's limitations, it really made the most of what it had. Sound design is very punchy, while the music is extremely airy and surreal, giving the film the perfect atmosphere.

Eraserhead is a strange, surreal, gaudy piece of work that may not make much sense to a casual viewer. As a work of art, it is phenomenal, and all mature audiences should give it a try at least once.

5/5 (Experience: Extreme | Content: Extreme | Film: Perfect)

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: 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)

Film Review: Lucy (2014)

Popular scientific myth claims that human beings only use ten percent of their brains. Modern research tells us that we really use every part of our brain in subtle ways. And yet, isn't it remarkable to consider the possibility that there is room for human consciousness to become something greater than it already is? In this film, Lucy is an average person who unwittingly becomes the next step in human evolution, who uses more and more of her brain capacity in a struggle to survive and evolve. As she exponentially grows in power, she becomes able to control her mind, her body, other matter, energy, space, and ultimately time. Which, of course, is completely ridiculous and unbelievable, no matter how many neurons Lucy fires off. But it does make for a whimsical "what if" scenario, doesn't it?

The movie's biggest selling point will be in watching Scarlett Johansson kicking a lot of butt with wild superpowers! And there is plenty of action scattered all about: the movie is pretty evenly-littered with big-scale shoot-outs, car chases, and off-the-wall mental powers. However, butt-kicking is not really the movie's primary focus; it's more about chronicling Lucy's journey. Moments in between the action slow down a lot, but it's rarely dull; the film dishes out a plethora of intriguing situations and implications. In doing so, the film will lay out a ton of exposition, which may bore the most critical of viewers, but engage those with a more open mind. Regardless, I found the picture to be trim, to-the-point, and it has just enough momentum to keep it rolling smoothly. I felt it struck the perfect balance in terms of pacing and structure.

Ultimately, the story is an interesting affair, but falls short in numerous ways. The science behind the film's premise is totally unfounded. Other observations are interesting on the surface, but they amount to a few simple messages that audiences may or may not care for. Personally, I was intrigued by the way the film juxtaposed scientific lecture and imagery next to the events. As far as the plot goes, it's a short and simple affair, but with plot holes to be found. The film jumps right into the events without much background to the characters or events (seriously, who manufactured CPH4 to begin with? Who is Lucy and why is she in Taipei to begin with?). A few good scenes keep the characters from becoming total cardboard cutouts, but the film becomes increasingly whack as it goes along, until it reaches a really absurd ending. It leaves off with a rather blunt and empty message.

On the plus side, the film is as slick as they come, with superb photography and editing. Acting is swell: I loved watching Scarlett Johansson, even when she does become monotonous. Morgan Freeman pretty much phones it in, serving the same role as he did narrating Through the Wormhole. The various cops and gangsters are decent. Writing is rather unrefined and blunt, but it gets the job done. This production uses good-looking sets, props, costumes, and locales. Special effects look good in some scenes and bad in others. Music is pretty cool.

Lucy is a pretty neat "what if" scenario. It's not quite as big of a rip-roaring actioner as you might expect, but it's also not nearly as intellectually challenging as top-tier sci-fi pictures. However, as a crime thriller with a scientific commentary, I believe it's a blast.

4/5 (Entertainment: Perfect | Story: Marginal | Film: Very Good)

Book Review: Hannibal (Thomas Harris)

Some years after Silence of the Lambs, Thomas Harris picks up on the trail of Hannibal Lecter in this follow-up thriller.  Throughout the previous books, Hannibal stood out as one of the most ominous and menacing characters in crime fiction, and the book Hannibal finally sees the character totally unchained, free from the confines of prison, and above reproach of all the forces that try to capture him again.

Like the other books in the series, Hannibal is a pretty breezy read.  Chapters are short, there's plenty of action and suspense to keep the pages turning.  Dialogue is mostly interesting, and the characters have enough charm to maintain interest.  The prose is easily digestible, and the story's not too hard to follow at all.

That being said, it is a rather odd story.  It's not even much of a mystery novel; it's more of a revenge thriller with multiple plots and conspiracies laid over each other, all of which are tied together and contribute to a pretty weird climax.  It starts off compellingly, as the book chronicles how Clarice Starling falls out of favor of the FBI (I felt she got a bad rap).  Then it goes way off course to Italy, following a totally random investigator, whose actions contribute somewhat to the later investigation (although I felt these scenes were thrown in just because Italy is cool and exotic).  Then the plot kinda wanders around a lot, and then the inevitable conclusion occurs.  Even though I understand why the ending is the way it is (and it actually does underscore the motivations of Hannibal's character throughout Silence of the Lambs a lot better), I think it diminishes Clarice as a character, and it could have all been a little more coherent.  It is a bit of a rushed ending.  I always felt that the ending dinner scene was perverse, for better or for worse.  On top of that, some of the individual scenes and subplots (especially the one regarding Margot Verger) could have been omitted completely.

All that being said, the book does have its merits.  Characters are pretty strong; it is still intriguing to read about Hannibal and Clarice, and Mason Verger is a well-developed adversary.  The book is especially bold in flipping everything around so that Hannibal is the intended protagonist, characters in power are antagonists, and they create a dynamic push and pull that makes the plot twisty.  Parts of the book are pretty well-researched (especially the scenes in Italy).

As far as the prose goes, it's most of the way decent, although there were parts where I felt wording was awkward.  There were a few parts where the tenses were all mixed up:  it tended to flip-flop between past and present tense for some odd reason.  I think this correlated to an odd habit I noticed where the book tried to become first-person by using "we" a lot, as it randomly stated "we notice this" or "we behold that," and the final words of the book are "we can only learn so much and live." What is this "we" garbage? I suspect that there's a bit of pretentiousness there, that the book wanted to deliver a greater truth behind the story, but never really articulated it.  No matter what level of elegance it aimed for, the book remained pretty straightforward and low-key, especially in the occasional indulgence in gnarly details and harsh language.  As such, I think the book would have benefited from more editing and refinement.  Other than those issues, the book is perfectly readable.

Hannibal has its moments, but I feel it's a weird turn of events, which is marred a bit by a slightly weird prose.  This may even be one rare case where I found the movie more appealing than the book.  It's still a fun enough read though, and should be worthwhile for fans of the series.

3/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Story:  Marginal | Book:  Average)

Film Review: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

After the apes rose up in rebellion and fled San Fransisco, a plague descended on mankind, setting the stage for the inevitable clash of two cultures.  With human civilization in decline and ape culture on the rise, it is a fragile and fearful time for all.  It would only take a few bad misunderstandings to set off an all-out war between men and apes.

That's pretty much what we get in this follow-up to Rise of the Planet of the Apes.  It starts off a bit slow, but builds momentum and tension as the two sides of the conflict rub together.  By the last act, it becomes a shooting war.  It's not quite as tight as the first film, especially since your enjoyment could hinge on whether or not you care for the human and ape characters.  However, the film doesn't linger too long on the drama, even though the film is attentive to all sides of the conflict.

What matters the most is the story.  Not only is is a sequel to Rise of POTA, but it also borrows the plot and ideas of Battle for POTA (which, ultimately, remains the weakest of the franchise thanks to its cheap and dated look, and poor execution of the story).  Dawn improves on Battle substantially, if for no other reason than it gives the characters a fresh new life and emotional anchor that audiences can latch onto (specifically, regarding Caesar and his ape tribe; the human characters have their moments, but never really take the spotlight enough to make us care).  The story proceeds to underscore the key themes behind the apes' civilization - the moral battle between taking action or enforcing pacifism - and it's a struggle that endures for the entire picture and drives the characters.  It all builds up to a moving tale of treachery; the ultimate turn of events mirror the takeovers and oppression of typical human dictators, and the film provides a stark reflection on how the rage of a few unchecked individuals could ruin peace for everyone.

This film is crafted with decent photography.  Acting is not bad; the ape characters easily steal the show, with Andy Serkis and Toby Kebbell bringing their characters to life marvelously.  Gary Oldman is as great as ever, although his role is pretty small.  Jason Clarke is okay.  Writing is good.  This production uses quality sets, props, costumes, and special effects.  Music seems quaint, but it works.

This sequel continues the chronicle of the new POTA saga sublimely, and for anybody who enjoyed Rise, Dawn should satisfy.

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

Film Review: Kill Bill Volume 2

"I've killed a hell of a lot of people to get to this point, but I have only one more. The last one. The one I'm driving to right now. The only one left. And when I arrive at my destination, I am gonna kill Bill." - Uma Thurman

Quentin Tarantino channels the manic, ultraviolent, stylized energy of cheesy kung-fu cinema, American westerns, and a slight twist of Italian horror, and he uses it all like threads to weave one of the greatest revenge stories ever made. Both Kill Bill movies collectively form a coherent, cohesive, sublime storytelling package; ideally, they should be watched back-to-back to understand every nuance of the story and the characters, since there is so much depth to them.

Volume 2 of this saga fills in the gaps that its predecessor left behind, not only in following up on the rest of the Bride's rampage, but also in revealing her full back story.  But while Volume 1 had tons of rip-roaring action and an extremely vivid style, this follow-up is much more toned-down and mellow, laden with more dialogue than swordplay.  In a way, this falls more in line with Tarantino's other work, but I personally favor the first film more for being sublimely entertaining.  As it is, Volume 2 tends to be a bit long-winded and dry.

That being said, it still has a lot of brilliant moments that are worth seeing, including the burial scene, the fight between the Bride and Elle Driver, the brutal training scenes with Pai Mei, and the last half-hour or so, which builds up to a beautiful bittersweet ending.

For the most part, it's the story that counts, and it excels at taking characters we already know and love, and taking them to the next level.  The full reasons for both sides of the conflict are finally revealed, generating empathy for both Bill and the Bride.  Any other movie would be content in leaving things as a plain, straightforward black-and-white affair, but in this case, there's much more insight to the characters and the overall plot.  It all builds up to the inevitable climax, which pulls out one of the most heart-wrenching twists imaginable.  Through it all, the film provides the most satisfying ending possible, and it makes the entire Kill Bill saga one of the most endearing and complete storytelling experiences made.

This film is crafted with superb photography and plenty of flashy editing.  A few title cards, flashbacks, and asides are thrown into the mix for a stylized effect.  Acting continues to impress:  Uma Thurman is effectively perfect in her role, and it's especially notable how physically demanding her role must have been.  David Carradine exhibits an interesting presence as Bill, while Michael Madsen and Daryl Hannah excel at being villains we love to hate.  Writing is very sharp and interesting.  This production boasts some good-looking sets, props, costumes, and locales.  Music is pretty good at times, though I enjoy the music choices of Volume 1 better.

While Volume 1 excels at the action and style but comes up a little shorter on substance, Volume 2 is the opposite, subduing the action to favor the dialogue and storytelling.  Some people may like one over the other.  I personally prefer Volume 1, but this sequel is essential for the complete experience, and it adds up to a satisfying saga.  If you can handle the violent bits, the whole affair is highly recommended.

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

Film Review: Kill Bill Volume 1

"Silly Caucasian girl likes to play with Samurai swords..." - Lucy Lui

Quentin Tarantino channels the manic, ultraviolent, stylized energy of cheesy kung-fu cinema, Japanese anime, and a slight twist of American westerns, and he uses it all like threads to weave one of the greatest revenge stories ever made. Both Kill Bill movies collectively form a coherent, cohesive, sublime storytelling package; ideally, they should be watched back-to-back to understand every nuance of the story and the characters, since there is so much depth to them.

Even if you decide to watch it separately, Volume 1 doesn't disappoint on its own merits. In fact, this is the most entertaining of the two films; it starts off fast and hard and hardly lets up.  It focuses a lot less on words and story-building, drip-feeding the audience just enough to understand what's going on, before diving headlong into a gory rampage (Volume 2 is the opposite, so if it is dialogue and storytelling you're after, you might want to follow up on the sequel). There are a number of good fight scenes throughout the first hour, but the film's last act is a host for one of the longest and finest fight scenes ever filmed. It starts off with a number of one-on-one engagements, before busting all out with a massive one-vs-fifty brawl. The katana-wielding Bride proves herself to be a triumphant heroine, as she hacks and slices her way through an army of enemies, gradually honing in on her ultimate target (who is, of course, a dude named Bill).

If you're wondering what on Earth could warrant such bloodshed, rest assured that the story for Kill Bill is sound. This first film does a marvelous job of using strong visual imagery, flashbacks, and narration to establish the groundwork for this revenge plot. You can really get to feel for the character, given all the torment she suffers under the hands of Bill and his assassins; it makes it easy, and dare I say enjoyable, to watch her rise from adversity and get some payback. At its core, the film brings to life some brilliant characters with a solid amount of depth (especially after watching the sequel, which answers a lot of unanswered questions) and lots of personality.

Even by Tarantino standards, Kill Bill stands as one of the most stylish films made. It features excellent photography, some very unique editing, and plenty of strange artistic effects that help accentuate the film's given style. You can expect plenty of title cards and subtitles flashing across the screen, along with some occasional asides and digressions. One of the most notable stylistic choices will be the anime segment, brought to life by Production IG with a style that's sketchy, but visceral. The film overall carries the same tone and style as a 1970s Japanese gangster movie, and it's cool. Acting is impeccable; Uma Thurman puts on her best performance of her career, for she brings the Bride to life in a way that nobody else can (and she endures a lot of heavy physical work in doing so). Lucy Lui plays it cool as the villain, O-Ren Ishii. Cameos by David Carradine and Sonny Chiba don't hurt either. Every other actor fulfills their parts well, no matter how minor. This production has good-looking sets, props, and costumes. The film uses a varied mix of music, including a rockin' live performance by the Japanese band the 5.6.7.8.s; it's all pretty darn cool.

Out of the two films, Volume 1 is my favorite. It represents everything I enjoy in films:  the slick combination of style, action, and storytelling.  For me, it never gets old, and I've grown to love all the characters and nuances of these films.  If you can stomach the extreme violence, then it comes highly recommended.

5/5 (Entertainment: Perfect | Story: Perfect | Film: Perfect)

Video Game Review: Thomas Was Alone

At first glance, I didn't think much of this game, where you have to maneuver a bunch of sentient rectangles across a landscape of blocks.  That's right...you control rectangles.  They jump.  That's pretty much all there is to this game:  jumping from area to area, dodging obstacles and dangers in order to get to the exit.  It's a platformer so simple, the only thing simpler would be Pong.

And yet, the game makers did their best to make something special out of this bunch of rectangles.  They all have personalities, more or less, which are mostly conveyed by their shape, color, name, and the cute ethos expressed by the narration (which, in turn, provides a feel-good sentimentality similar to the narration in LittleBigPlanet).  Above all, each shape has a different range of characteristics.  Some jump really high.  Some don't.  One can float on water.  One can make other shapes jump higher.  One defies gravity.  And when you have to move them all to their respective exits, the levels get substantially challenging, because you have to use all the shapes' strengths and weaknesses in inventive ways to complete each level.  As a result, each level is a unique puzzle or challenge that will stimulate some brain cells.

There is a story behind these little rectangles.  They're actually artificial intelligences growing sentient in some company's lab, and the game chronicles their evolution and eventual liberation.  That being said, the story is very understated, and some more explanations, especially in the last levels, would have been welcome.  As it is though, it's a clever enough set-up for an otherwise bizarre game.

The game plays smoothly.  Controls are as easy as they come.  Graphics are minimalistic, but the backgrounds, lighting effects, and particle effects are great.  Each level is designed pretty smartly.  Voices and sounds are good.  Music is quite lovely too.

This is probably the most fun you can have moving rectangles across a screen.  The game is worth playing once.

4/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Story:  Pretty Good | Game:  Very Good)