This Lone Ranger is a very inventive re-telling of the classic story of the western era crime fighter.
This version is a comic satirical romp. Johnny Depp is brilliant with perfect comic timing as Tonto. You barely recognize him. Tonto/Depp carefully and discretely guides the plot from beginning to end.
The humour is obvious yet far from slapstick. Funny, entertaining and intelligently written with twists that hold your attention throughout.
9/10
A broke universally student goes to Costa Rica to out an online gambling tycoon for cheating him.
The title should be Mediocre Mediocre, because that’s the theme of this movie in every way. Justin Timberlake compliments Ben Affeck’s acting skills almost perfectly, as they are both mediocre actors at the best of time. Timberlake might outshine Affleck just slightly, but it’s hardly a compliment. To say the writing is mediocre would be a stretch, and the plot is thin and completely predictable.
Overall movie quality is below average, and scenes of back-water Costa Rica are often highlights of the cinematography. It’s head shaking how Affleck coasts through this movie mumbling and barely moving in most scenes, his part could be played by anyone, and better by most any actor. He definitely brings this movie down a point or two.
If someone were to ask you what you thought of this movie after it was done, you’d likely say, “Ummm, I guess it was okay.”
4/10
(Reposted from Discovery.com News)
NATIONAL PORTRAIT GALLERY, LONDON
Computer scientist Alan Turing, born in 1912, was a man light years ahead of his time. He performed groundbreaking computer science work long before the concept even existed. An artificial intelligence test he developed remains relevant today. During World War II, his cryptanalysis work helped Allied convoys safely cross the Atlantic.
Turing was also openly gay. In 1952, he was convicted for homosexuality and punished by being chemically castrated. Just two years later, he died after eating a cyanide-laced apple. An inquest ruled the death a suicide, but friends and family dispute the finding.
Now, finally, after several petitions, appeals and even an apology from prime minister Gordon Brown in 2009, Turing has finally received a pardon. It was granted on December 24 under the Royal Prerogative of Mercy after a request by Justice Minister Chris Grayling.
Turing was not the only gay man persecuted at the time. More than 50,000 other were convicted of “gross indecency,” for being homosexual. Advocates for Turing hope the pardon will be extended to others.
In the meantime, Turing’s legacy in computing and beyond should not be overlooked.
James Sumner, a lecturer in the history of technology at the University of Manchester, helped plan the Manchester Museum’s centenary Turing exhibition. “Alan Turing is somebody who, in recent years, has gone from being almost written out of the story of the computer’s origins to being given a very, very strong starring role,” Sumner said.
Sumner highlights Turing’s contribution here.
A snitch mob family in Protected Custody that has to move from town to town on a regular basis, due to their dysfunctional and violent tendencies.
Robert De Niro and Michelle Pfeiffer play the strong willed parents in this dark comedy. The daughter is one of the stars in the TV series Glee.
Entertaining, amusing, and fun to watch. The story takes place in France, but could be anywhere. The fact that the family is hiding out in a small French (and expectedly obnoxious) town, is an odd distraction that gives the movie a somewhat unique flare from the usual main stream film.
8/10
When in recent human history have the dregs of society been drawn like a magnet to anything like website comments?
Douche bags, idiots, mentally disturbed and losers with nothing better to do, flock to any website where they can share their negative, hateful, or at best off-beat opinions, thinking the rest of us want to see and read this garbage. And why do these scum bags think they can get away with voicing their opinions in public? Because the Internet allows them to do so (in most cases) anonymously.
Most of these people would not have the balls to say what they say in public if we all knew who they were. Why? Generally they would be shy, embarrassed, know better, or be afraid of being confronted personally or legally. But the Internet is a god send to the world’s human trash. They get to spew till in rare cases they get caught and confronted.
Recently Google has tried to deal with this problem on their media property YouTube. By requiring people wanting to comment to sign up at Google+, where in most cases they are required use their real name. Awesome! Well most intelligent people would think it’s awesome. According to the media, there was a huge backlash against this change. Shocking! If we can believe the often sensational and self serving “media” who often specialize in making “news” from small events, why would it be a surprise? It turns out the losers that use their anonymity to abuse and attack others were upset when their prize hobby was no longer the same or as safe. Not unlike a vandal being required to leave a personalized business card behind after doing their damage.
I enjoy seeing positive and informative comments on my own sites. But even this little personal blog has received some negative and trashy comments. And to those people let me explain something to you. This is a personal blog. No comments are posted without my approval. In fact I will only post positive and constructive comments I like and feel are appropriate. And for your information, the Internet DOES NOT have a rule that says you have a right to post your opinion where ever you want! If you have an opinion, get your own website and take responsibility for your own comments publicly. We all know that this type of person will rarely do so, as they are vandals at heart and attack in the shadows. These are the same type of people that will key your car in a parking lot when no one is looking, or poison your pet if they had a chance.
And to the angry, emotionally disturbed, and illogical woman that wrote me to call me a racist and to claim that all white men in North America are rapists (yes she said rapists, and it was completely out of context) I say get a life! Get your own blog, have your own opinions, and if people are interested they will come and read it, like you were interested in reading mine.
Man ‘o Steel is a decent Superman remake. Decent but it still lacks in many ways.
Special effects are arguably flawless and fantastic. Our new Superman, actor Henry Cavill who I like, played a very boring and monotone super hero. The main villain, played by Michael Shannon, who I know best from the TV series Empire, does not a scary villain make. He’s excellent on Empire, but his voice is not the voice of a super villain. And even when he tries to act scary, it’s strange and surreal. So the story is built around a boring super hero and villain. With too many secondary characters that have little to no back story.
The movie is long, and like many movies over 2 hours long, it’s too long for what they have to offer us. And there are missing (unless it’s just me) explanations for things like, where did his perfectly fitting indestructible super suit come from? They explained how he wasn’t genetically designed like everyone else on his planet, so they had no way of knowing how he’d mature, so how could they have pre-made a form fitting suit for him? Maybe they did and it’s just really stretchy. There just seems to be a lot of holes in the story that could have been explained since it’s such a long movie.
I was left feeling bored and disappointed, and looking forward to the climax.
6/10
Merge the basic plots of Transformers and Godzilla and you have the entire plot of Pacific Rim. Well with a tiny plot slice that is a bit of a spoiler, so I will leave it out here, but it doesn’t change the story in the least.
This movie is fun and interesting for the first hour and a bit. Then it is simply boring, repetitive and pointless. I would rate the first hour at an 8, the last hour as a 5 at best. Giving this a 6 overall is somewhat charity, as it’s simply far too long for what it has to offer. This is one of those movies where you’d enjoy it at 1 hour and 20 minutes. Not 2 freakin hours and 10 minutes. Starts out very well, and ends up painful and you wishing for the end to come quickly.
6/10
A brilliant comedic fantasy story, where the characters are actual actors and comedians that play themselves, in a scenario where Armageddon occurs while at James Franco’s house warming party.
I had no idea what this movie was about when I started watching. It was fairly new, had some currently well known actors, and I was in the mood for a surprise. So I was very pleasantly surprised. For such an off-beat story line, this movie is incredibly well written and thought out. To enjoy this film you have to be able to appreciate comedy and fantasy. And having a sense of what Armageddon is will definitely help as well.
10/10
We have the same old Sci-Fi “end of the world” rich people against poor plot. The only difference about Elysium would be the particular brand of tech and space station involved in the story. There is really little change in theme from Matt Damon’s Bourne movie series.
It’s fairly well told, entertaining action, and special effects are excellent. It was fun to see Jody Foster as the villain, but they could have done a lot more to build her character. And in the end it felt like her character just gave up, and we have to guess why, cause it was completely out of character. The movie would have been a lot better with her character having more air time, substance, and end fight.
The ending wraps everything up in a pretty little cute unrealistic bow. Which I could have done without. Sure have the good guys win, but maybe without the completely expected perfect ending. They obviously knew this was a one win pony and had no hope for a sequel. The ending in Sci-Fi doesn’t seem to matter that much these days, it’s all about the punch you can throw into a really good trailer. It’s a reasonably good movie with an infantile ending.
7/10
This isn’t your traditional zombie movie, but it is a typical zombie movie. The only differences this round are that the zombies are very fast and strong, and act like rabid lemmings. There is good character and plot building. And the story is mostly action, and is well done. Other than that it’s the same old zombie, end of the world thing. The movie holds your attention, and is rather intense. And for that, I give it a good rating.
I would like to see a zombie movie that tried to use science to explain how a virus could make a human into a super human that can live forever without eating. Even vampire fantasy movies point out how a vampire has to keep drinking blood (fuel) to stay “alive”. But every single zombie movie I’ve seen shows that zombies live forever and simply live off air, and only eat for “fun” and to infect. I think the zombie concept is one of the lamest in the fantasy movie realm. I’m fine with the concept of a virus turning humans into mindless rabid animals, but the infinite life spans, and partial bodies, makes it complete fantasy. Where are the science fiction zombie movies? I felt World War Z tried to legitimize the zombie movie as science fiction, but it doesn’t come close. Nothing lives forever, and all plaques die out, and all “real” zombies would eventually die, assuming they were eating something and at least dying of old age.
I didn’t like that when this movie came out, the trailers told you absolutely nothing. I felt they were trying to hide a bad movie behind deception and mystery, which lead me to believe it was going to be a crappy movie. I think I was probably half right. I think they were worried it would be perceived as just another “same old” zombie warm over, and it is. It has a slightly new twist, and is well made and told. And for that it’s a decent flick. But because of the annoying and intentionally vague ads, I had less than no interest in seeing it in a theatre. Good job marketing department!
8/10