Archive for the ‘chasm reviews’ Category
apocalypse, repeatedly »
Monday, June 22nd, 2009
Roland Emmerich seems to be obsessed with our civilization crumbling under its own weight. (Some call this a “kindred spirit.”) For those wondering who that is, think ID4 or 10,000BC.
Some background: 2012 is the year predicted by Mayans (before they were conquered in the search for wealth, like Malaysians) to be the end of the world. Considering our current social state and climate issues, they’re likely not far off.
Here’s a trailer for Emmerich’s next offering, titled (no creativity) 2012:
Crazy right? Boom! The effects are nuts. The cast is… well, whatever. The concept is interesting. How will it play?
This could be Emmerich’s redeemer (that they still reference ID4 13yrs later should tell you he’s had a few stale ones). It’ll likely involve some terrible story where the main characters are the only three people that aren’t killed… but an aircraft carrier rolling over the White House? w00t!
Wait, so the government’s been planning on all this happening? Cusack’s the hero? Danny Glover as President? A car jumping (yes. jumping.) out of a plane?
Um…
This is probably best seen in a theater, given the explosions and tsunamis but maybe second run? Or matinee? This should be terrible with a side of CGI worth seeing but immediately regretting. (Again, think 10,000BC)
I will say this, though. If there’s one thing Emmerich does well, it’s destroy the world with reckless abandon. And I, for one, appreciate that.
Photo courtesy WorstPreviews.com. Trailer from Film School Rejects.
bloody mess »
Friday, June 19th, 2009
Have you heard of True Blood? It’s seriously hyped and critically acclaimed. If that’s too vague for you, let me be explicit: it sucks. (Pun intended.)
To get you up to speed, it’s a series on HBO. Vampires are real and discriminated against. Near-blood is created so they can quench their thirst without the neck of a too-hot coed. It’s called True Blood. (See what they do there?)
Anna (“mind-the-gap”) Paquin is the lead, who falls in love with a vampire engeniously named Bill. He, of course, is one of the human-friendly vamps who refuses to kill. There’s also a shape-shifting guy. But before I get into that… how about the positive?
Being on HBO and an elaborate drama, there’s flagrant nudity. The action can be awesome and the character interaction interesting. The acting is adequate, usually. And… that’s it?
Yes. That’s it. It sucks for a few dozen reasons but here are a few.
The thinly veiled prejudice metaphor is muddled at best. Vamps are treated like second-class citizens and their blood is a drug? Why can Paquin’s character hear thoughts? If the vamps are “homosexuals” is the shape-shifter someone with a learning disability?
There’s barely any of the entertaining action. Each episode usually has a charged scene where one of the attractive characters loses all or an article of their clothes but the rest is yawn.
As far as critics liking it, maybe they’re just watching it as a remake of Six Feet Under (a great show by the same creater). Or their not watching it. The writing is mediocre, the characters are absurd and most of the drama comes from watching the cast improvise a storyline.
Take, for instance, the premiere. It’s a solid example of how lame meets duh in a back-woods Louisiana-ish setting. (I’ll try not to ruin details for you fans out there.)
Shape-shifter has flashbacks to stealing some artifact from a cougar he got on back in the day. There’s a sex scene that involves biting and slightly more nudity than blood. Someone’s found in a car heartless (literally), sparking more flashbacks. A new vamp bitches about the taste of True Blood.
Really. Who. Cares.
Photo courtesy MoTechPosters
less for more, the burger jones story »
Wednesday, June 10th, 2009
Want to have the best burger in town? Yeah… so do I. So Girlfriend, her former roomate and I made our way to the much-hyped Burger Jones.
Initial impression: What the hell? I knew it’d be expensive (it’s a Parasole restaurant) but $10 burgers typically at least come with sides. Still, most of the hubbub was about taste so I can forgive for a delicious patty.
After parusing the menu astonished, we sat in an acoustic nightmare and then ordered. Now locked into our financial sacrifice, the conversation was light. The murmer of the substantial crowd was like turning TV static to top volume so I tuned out and watched SportsCenter across the room.
The burgers arrived on large trays that made the sandwiches look absurdly small (maybe shrink them a bit, BJ). Our menu was as follows:
- Green Chile Cheeseburger—chile salsa, cheddar, onion ring, cilantro
- The Birkenstocker—house-made veggie burger, pepperjack, avacado
- Bacon Cheeseburger—cheddar, applewood smoked bacon (me)
- Faribault Creamery “Caveman” Cheese Curds—beer battered w/ smoked tomato ketchup
All reports point to the chile burger being fairly good. The Birkenstocker fell to pieces somewhere between our table and the grill, then over and over, but was quite good. The bacon cheeseburger was impressive.
Out of it all, the cheese curds took top honors. They were crispy, cheesy, salty and mmm. Everything was over-priced to laughable but definitely delicious. Save your pennies, stop by every few weeks and sample their entire unvaried menu (it should take almost a dozen visits).
With money like that, you pay for the experience right? Not. Worth. It. Go to Bulldog NE for a similar burger (with sides!!) and an atmosphere that blows BJ out of the water.
Photo courtesy: Parasole Restaurants
august »
Friday, March 13th, 2009
August
In the genre of personal transition or dot-com hysteria, August is sort of enticing. It’s forced cool is desperate. Overall, it’s beige. But… the period-piece-ness is awesome.
It’s set in 2001. Tom (the CEO of an interweb company), Josh, his brother (the developer), and other bit players run a company locked in the market and desperate for capitol. There’s an offer from a large company with no interweb presence. (Hi-jinx ensue.)
A speech Tom (Josh Hartnett) throws down could have easily been made at CATFOA or MacWorld this year. The cloud, interweb democracy and connectivity dreams were all there eight years ago. That they have yet to be realized is depressing.
(I’m confusing myself. How did Scott Bakula do it?)
Why the delay? A lag? Halted development? Unready technology? The movie offers it’s own reasons, commenting on the current interweb community of the past. It gives credit to the revolutionaries and alludes to the cultural shift to cowardice.*
What LandShark (the imaginary company) does is purposefully vague. The concepts invoked (digital revolution, collective voice, unified space) are real and were. Only now we have the technology to utilize it.
If only they would have made a worthwhile film, instead of something akin to Noise (<rant>car alarms!</rant>). Maybe it would have been able to resonate and inspire instead of proving (again) that Hartnett has no depth (only good in Lucky # Slevin) and flicks about rich failures teach no lessons.
For more proof the ideas of our age were of the last, here are AT&T (now at&t) predictions from 1993. (Creepy.)
* Innovations slowed after 9-11 outside the surveillance or weapons sectors.
zeitgeist: addendum »
Tuesday, March 3rd, 2009
Normally, I’d break down the film but Zeitgeist: Addendum is a “documentary” (think, Michael Moore) so instead, here’s an open letter to Peter Joseph (writer, director):
Dear Peter Joseph,
Your optimism in regard to the human animal is reassuring and unfounded. The presentation of the data is entertaining. Some of the facts were obvious, others obscure. The movie itself is fun for the whole family.
You made fine points about our money being worthless and the economic system being unsustainable. I’m all about it. Then you moved on to Utopian and lost me. To think the common folk will realize their oppressed status, have the finances to revolt and establish an advanced society is juvenile but comforting.
Your ideas on the abolition of religion are enlightening in their redundancy. Since there has been logical thought, some have opposed the regressive doctrine of intolerant faiths. Thanks for your diligence in reminding everyone.
The last sequence is laughable. Your mention of Seven World Trade Center was more a shout-out to those that spend their days taking illegible notes in worn notebooks about everything they see than a pointed statement.
You need to change your target market to spread the message beyond word of mouth and hippies. Aim for trust fund kids. They’re out of touch enough with present-day America and have the money to finance your initiatives.
Mostly, though, it’s the weak website you and your compatriots are subjecting my eyes to. I mean, the ideas of the Venus Project are interesting and all but it’s associated site is terrible. Until you find a decent designer, thanks but no thanks.
I wish you luck as one that shares your frustration with current trends and financial assumptions.
Cheers,
Draynd
Seriously though, take a look at this movie. It’s entertaining save for the suffocating hopefulness. The alternative perspective alone is worth at least a skim.