I chose Tilework as today's fractal "cookie" mainly because it seemed to convey my feeling about the movie Inception: for want of a better description I can only say the movie is gray and multi-leveled. So--on with the review!
-
You can say at least one good thing about Inception--it's hardly your usual summer blockbuster. Yes, there are battle scenes aplenty and enough special effects to make even the most die-hard Fanboy weak in the knees. But there's also a truly deep plot--one that keeps you guessing to the very end (and I'm afraid that a lot of the movie-going audience won't be able to follow). If anything, that's where the movie trips up: the story begins if not in the middle than certainly well after the start. We literally jump into the action with no explanation who these characters are or how and why they do what theey do. The audience is merely expected to accept them at face value and go with that. Eventually you do get some explanation but the whole story is never fullly-revealed (as so often happens in real life).
-
Describing the plot is difficut so I will just give you the barest bones. Cobb (almost every character in the movie only gets one name) is an "Extractor"--an espionage agent who enters people's dreams to steal their secrets for profit--and that's all I can easily explain. (If you want to know more go see the movie.) ANYway--Leonardo DiCaprio--plays Cobb as a one-note character as does the rest of the cast. True, they all play their one not well but together it's not a tune I found particularly enjoyable. Worse, I found it hard to work up a lot of sympathy for any of the characters so I had nobody to root for.
-
The movie is beautifully shot: virtually every scene is shot through a gray, sepia or blue filter to give it just that extra bit of moody atmospherics. The dream sequences whey they veer away from reality are suitably spectacular and the FX are first rate. (To quote KTLA Entertainment Reporter Sam Rubin: "you see every dollar on the screen"--and you really do.) The visual style is almost enough to make it worth the price of admission (to a Matinee at least).
-
For me though, it takes more than a spectacular visuals to make a movie truly good. I've already spoken about the characters so I guess I need to talk a bit about the script. I can accept not knowing an entire character's story but knowing NO character's story is a bit hard to swallow. Likewise, the endless twist-on-a-twist-on-a-twist theme to the plot got tiresome after a while. I quit caring about an hour-and-a-half in and just waited for the movie to be over.
-
I can honestly say I'm glad I saw Inception--even though I can't say I truly enjoyed it--and I definitely don't feel the need to go back and see it again (even though I might get more out of it in a second viewing). It deserves to be seen on a big screen so all the depth and detail can be fully realized. Can I recommend it? That I don't know: the theater where we saw the movie was crowded and fans walking out seemed equally divided between "wow, what a great movie" and "geez--what a piece of crap!" I guess I fall somewhere between the two extremes. Go see Inception for yourself and tell me how you like it.
-
FINAL GRADE: B-
I chose Spinz 11 as today's fractal cookie for two reason: first--like Sherk, it's green. Second--this movie laid an egg and the imge is basically egg-shaped. (If you didn't figure that I was going to slam the movie by reading the title of this review maybe you'd better stop reading before you waste any more of your time.) Now that' we've got the intro business out of the way--on with the review!
-
Shrek began life as a 38 page children's book. Having suffered through a few "Doctor Seuss " movies I wondered if there would be enough material to pad out the material enough to make it work. Much to my surprise they did--and they made it work even better. Shrek 2 was even better than the first movie but by Shrek the Third the franchise was getting a bit tired. Shrek Forever After brings the franchise to a limping close (proving once again that if any series hangs around long enough it will eventually turn to crap).
-
Don't get me wrong: Shrek Forever After isn't completely awful. Sprinkled in among the tired old plots and characters, there are some truly cool bits. An early scene in a witch-infested Trailer Park is particularly inspired and crammed full of delightful little throw-away details. There are also several scenes that look like they came straight out of a video game: looks great but the rest of the movies pretty much comes out as "been there, done that". It's hard to get exitited about the movie whe you've seen it all befrrore and better ehsewhere. We didn't spend the extra money to see the 3D version and frankly I don't think I missed anything. How To Train Your Dragon did it altogether better--even if that movie wasn't made in 3D. Die-hard fans of the Shrek series will find what they have come to know and love in the series but for me the series has well and truly lost its lusterr.
-
FINAL GRADE: D+
A review of Prince of Persia: the Sands of Time pretty much requires one of the many "Arabesque" series as the fractal cookie. I chose Satin Arabesque 53 mainly because the color scheme so closely matched the one used in the film. Now you know so on with the review!
-
Two bits of information will tell you everything you need to know about Prince of Persia: the Sands of Time. The movie is produced by Jerry Bruckheimer (of Pirates of the Caribbean fame) and it's about a dagger that turns back time. The movie will reach it's inevitable end with non-stop action from start to finish. The movie is based on a well-known video game so you can expect minimum character development and maximum spectacle.
-
All that being said, Prince of Persia isn't a bad movie: sadly, it's not all that good either. I could get past the by-the-numbers plot and less-than-awesome acting, True, there are a few (very minor) surprises but you pretty much know how the movie is going to go from the moment it starts. I could blame Jake Gyllenhall as the male lead but the script doesn't give him a lot to work with. Sir Ben Kingsley gives a phoned-in performance as Nizam. (You know he's the bad guy because he's the only main character all dressed in black.) Alfred Molina fares slightly better in his comedy-relief role of Sheik Amar. Gemma Arterton looks pretty is feisty Princess Tamina but she didn't leave a lot of impression on screen. The other characters don't leave much of an impression.
-
The action scenes come thick and fast but there really isn't anything we haven't seen before (and better). The FX are plentiful but, again, it's nothing you haven't seen before. The costumes and sets are suitably "fantasy Arabic" but the whole film is overwhelmingly BROWN. Every color and shade of brown you can imagine are here and don't look for any red, blue or green 'cause it ain't here. (Yes, it's a movie set in a desert but I'd have hoped for a bit moer color here and there.)
-
In the end there's really nothing WRONG with the movie--but there's just not a lot that's RIGHT either. This is a completely typical summer blockbuster but there's nothing here you haven't seen before (and better) elsewhere. Check it out if you have an afternoon or evening to waste but surely there has to be a better way to spend your time and money.
-
FINAL GRADE: C+
I chose Compass Rose 65 as the fractal cookie for this post for one reason only--the red and gold color scheme harkens back to the colors of Iron Man's armor. (I couldn't think of anything better so I went with it.) I know the connection is slim but it's the best I had to work with. That being said--on with the review!
-
There's a slogan about New York City that goes something like "a place so nice they named it twice." The Producers of Iron Man 2 took this seriously to heart--so much so that they basically remade the first movie again. I was tempted to call this review "Same Song Second Verse--A Little Bit Louder, A Little Bit Worse"--and that pretty much describes the movie. Iron Man 2 to a "T". It follows the same path as the first movie--right down to the long, draggy middle section. The special effects and battle scenes look great but you won't see anything new on the screen. Everything about this movie is bigger, louder and more bloated--pretty much like any summer-movie sequel.
-
Yes, there is a lot of cute dialog and the chemistry between Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) and Pepper Potts (Gweneth Paltrow) is undeniable. Mickey Rourke as Russian villain Ivan Vanko/Rampage is perfectly cast as is Sam Rockwell as Star Industries low-rent competitor Justin Hammer. (He literally steals every scene he's in with his "loveable schlubb" act.) In fact pretty much all the performances are spot-on--even if the movie is stuffed with too many secondary characters. Comic book fan (and true "badass") Samuel L Jackson gives an interesting twist to Nick Fury but Scarlett Johansen gets very short shrift (and no back story) as Agent Natasha Romanoff. I loved her performance but was deeply saddened that she didn't get more screen time. (Hopefully. she'll get more screen time in other movies.) The character of James "Rhodey" Rhodes gets a major upgrade as he becomes War Machine and a new actor in the person of Don Cheadle. (You have to wonder how Terrance Howard feels about that...) Movie Director Jon Favreau gives himself a cameo as "Happy" Harrigan. (I knew this character's story from reading comics long ago but Robyn was left completely confused. "Shouldn't I know him from somewhere?" she asked.) I couldn't decide whether John Slattery as Tony's father Howard Stark (seen in flim clips) was doing an homage to or send-up of Walt Disney.
-
Iron Man 2 does exactly what a summer blockbuster is supposed to do--provide mindless, escapist fun. If you loved the first movie you'll probably like this one. It made 130 Million domestic in its first weekend so people were coming out to see it in dorve--but I didn't hear a lot of people raving as they walked out of the theater. If you ddin't care for the first Iron Man you have no reason to see the sequel. Comic fans should look for clues to upcoming "Marvel" releases in the movie--and comic fans NEED to stay for the "credit cookie."
-
FINAL GRADE: B+
Star Power seemed just about the perfect fractal for a review of the latest touring company of Dreamgirls. While the cast aren't "quite" stars--they certainly have a lot of power. Read on if you want to know more.
-
The Producers of Dreamgirls did a lot of things right: they spent their money where it would do the most good--in top notch vocal talent, elegant, effective (and abundant) costumes and a massive, five-panel LCD background. This show is all about the music and they showcased it beautifully. I didn't even miss the fact that there were no virtually no props and only one set-piece for the entire play. It helped a lot that the show had fourteen musicians (instead of the usual five maximum) common in most touring productions.
-
If you've been living under a rock--here's a quick plot review. Dreamgirls parallels the story of Diana Ross and the Supremes (with just enough factual changes to keep the Writers and Producers out of court). The story begins at the Apollo Theater in 1962 where the "Dreamettes" are trying to break into Show Business by winning a talent contest. Their "Manager" (Used Car Salesman) Curtis Taylor Jr. talks them into a gig as backup singer for Jimmy "Thunder" Early (clearly a reference to James Brown). Through hard work (and Payola) Curtis gets the Dreamettes R&B Stardom and a presence on the (then all white) Pop Charts where the "real money" was. Along the way lead singer Effie White (a vocal powerhouse but a fat girl) is replaced by prettier but less-talented Deena Jones. A resentful Effie is pushed out and has to start again. When Effie scores a minor hit a spiteful Curtis has it squashed--which leads to his downfall and a tacked-on happy ending.
-
Patrice Covington (the alternate) has all the chops: her runs and the musical tricks she can do are nothing short of spectacular. Still, I found her performance vergining on the desperate in I am Telling You--the closer of Act One. (In all honesty though--that might simply have been her trying to coax some energy out of a listless matiness audience.) Even so, her character Effie suffers from not being particularly likeable (and the best actress in the world can't overcome that. Effoe os a chroic complainer and after a while I just wished she shut up and go away!
-
American Idol alum Syeesha Mercado has the looks and a pretty good voice to boot. In fact, the whole cast is pretty damn good--whether they are singing solo or in tight, sweet harmony. What little choreography there is (mostly posing while singing) is done well. Only Chester Gregory as Jimmy gets to do much moving and his voicals are often as blistering as the female leads: his arc from swaggering prince to about-to-be-has-been is totally believeable. Still, I found myself growing bored after nearly three hours: yes, they can SING! but it's just not music I want to listen to for prolonged periods.
-
And I did have a few problems with the show. As Curtis, Chaz Lamar Shepherd has a relatively weak voice compared to the rest of the cast. I was able to pick out glaring voical mistakes on no fewer than five occasions (and no non-professional should be able to do that.) I also had problems with the script: luckily I had already seen the movie adaptation so I knew the story but I'd have been lost a few times if I'd come to this play
ithout that background. Lastly, there are some leaps in logic in the script that left me going "say what???" more than once. Still and all, Dreamgirls is a worthy effort--if only for the music up on that stage. Fans of big voices, show-stopping numbers and sweet soul music should definitely make the effort to check out the show live.
-
FINAL GRADE: A-
Today's post is a rant about lingerie so naturally my mind went directly to an image that was pink and frothy. Lacey Star seemed like the prefect fit--that being said, on with the rant!
-
Yesterday I saw something on our local news that I found rather disheartening. It seems ABC and Fox refused to air a commerical for Lane Bryant featuring "plus size" models in lingerie. Both Networks cited "inappropriate content". Said "inappropriate content" was the fact that the girls strutting around in their undies weren't your typical "Size O" sticks one usually sees in lingerie ads. If you haven't seen the commercial I've included a link for you to check it out. (You probably should take a look.)
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMxyZQfMmM4
-
Dunno about you but I don't find anything "inappropriate" in the content. Yes, the models show a lot of clevage but so what? Who cares. Victoria's Secret shows as much skin (if not more) and nobody complains! Fox Execs caved when Lane Bryant pointed out that there content was no different or more revealing than a comparable Victoria's Secret ad but ABC refused to run the ad on Dancing With The Stars.
-
So--what's up with this? Are ABC Executives enforcing a double standard? (In the words of The Prophet--"well duh!") This action sends a message that somehow it's not OK to be OK with your size. (Yes, I know there are health issues to consider but there are a lot of women who will NEVER be a Size 4--no matter how hard they work out and diet.) Some statistics say that over 60% of American women are Size 14 or above. Why would ABC want to disenfranchise a majority of their audience? I have no idea. I mean--come on people! Have you seen the costumes they wear on Dancing With The Stars? (And that includes Niecy Nash--who ain't no "skinny minnie" herself.)
-
Me, I like the curvy girls. (I could make a crack about "more cushion for the pushin'"--but that woudl be inappropriate.) In this day and age I thought we'd have come a little bit fartehr than to discriminate against people just because they don't fit a very narrow definitiion of beauty. (I doubt many men woukd kick these girls out of bed.) Boo ABC! I hope Lane Bryant pulss ALL their ads (and that other companies follow suit).
-
-nuff said.
Today's fractal "cookie" is entitled Golden Rings. I could spin you some sort of tale about how the convoluted pattern and star contrasts mirrored my journey but the truth is simply this: I pikced this image because I liked it and I doubted I'd be able to use it for anything else. That being said--on with today's rant!
-
I blame the 9-11 Terrorists for all my problems: you might think they blew up the towers to strike a blow against the "Great Satan" America but I believe they did it to make my life miserable. OK, I don't really believe that--but we blame everything else on the Terrorists so why not my passport "issues". And besides--the September 11 destruction is directly related to my troubles: because of 9/11 travel rules have changed--requiring a Passport to go anywhere outside the gold ol' U.S.A.--even the countries next door.
-
When Robyn and I decided we'd be taking a cruise to Alaska this year, we quickly learned that Passports would be required. It didn't matter that we'd only be visiting Victoria B.C. for half a day--nor would our Cruise Line let me board if I promised to stay aboard our vessel while I was there. No Passport--no trip. So Passports would have to be obtained (and since we would be traveling in June (and it was late March) we'd have to get on the stick to make sure it got done. And thus begins my tale...
-
Both the Corona and Norco Post Offices issue Passports so since the Norco P.O. was closer we decided to go there. Robyn was unable to get a Saturday appointment (those go FAST!) we were slotted in at 1:00 PM April 2. Robyn had the day off (it being Good Friday) so this was going to be a cake walk--in-and-out, easy-peasy, thick and cheesey. And it almost was too... Robyn had very thoughtfully obtained the paperwork which we'd filled out in advance (and not signed per their instructions). The Passport photos were taken ($60--and I won't show you mine since I don't want to scare you) and we went through the process.
-
Robyn sailed through with aplomb and then it was my turn: my application was in order but when I present my documentation I was told: "I'm sorry Sir--I can't accept this." "Why not?" I wanted to know. "This is expired," she told me. "You have to have a valid ID before I can accept your application for processing." (I wasn't even aware my ID had expired: turns out the State of California doesn't notify individuals when an ID is about to expire--as they do when your Drivers' License is.) She suggested I run next to to the Department of Motor Vehicles and get a Temporary ID and then she'd be happy to process me. So off I dashed over to the DMV to find the place closed! (Not because of the Good Firday Holiday but due to state budget cuts!) So now I had to make a second trip...
-
Getting an appointment on line proved unfeasable: the first one available was in the middle of May (and that just wasn't gonna work for me). So Monday April 5 I showed up at the DMV just after 7:00 AM--to find a loooooooong line of folks there ahead of me. There was nothing I could do but stand and wait for the doors to open--which I did. It was cold and dripping rain but I was under an overhang and had a great time chatting with other folks who were in the same boat as me. I got through the dorrs a bit after 8:00 AM and began the process.
-
I've often thought that Hell would be a lot like a Government Office: the place is bleak--starkly-lit and filled with desperate souls. Weirdly enough, the DMV Employees were surprisingly kind and helpful (maybe because it was so early in the week and they hadn't had a chance to get disgruntled). They guided me through the process and got me through the process in just over an hour. Once the process was finished they handed me a recipt clearly stamped THIS IS NOT A TEMPORARY ID. "Can I get a Temporary ID?" I asked. "I really need to that to get my Passport..." only to be told "we don't do those any more. You'll have to schedule your appoint after your ID arrives..." (It could have been worse: I could have gotten the news at the Passport Office.
-
It took the State 10 days to process my Identificiation and get it back to me. That was last Thursday (April 15) so I called the P.O. and scheduled an appointment for yesterday (April 19) at 11: 45 AM. Robyn came from work to pick me up and ttansport me to the office. (Corona/Norco is a great place to live but mass transit sucks here.) I arrived to find a rather long line and only one person working the counter. Still, I had an appointment so I walked up to the counter to announce my presence. "I'm sorry Sir--you'll have to go to the back of the line," I was told. "But I have an appointment!" I protested. She jerked her thumb: "back of the line," she repeated. So I went to the back of the line.
-
Eight minutes later I was back to the front of the line. They brought out the appointment book only to find my name was missing. "Your not scheduled and you're going to hve to reschedule in any case since you were more than five minutes later for your appointment!"
-
"Remember the back of the line comments a few minutes earlier?" I shot back. "Not my problem," she said (I'd swear gleefully). "You'll have to reschedule..."
-
But then an angel came down from heaven--or rather from the back of the office. "I know about this guy," she said. "I'll take him before I go to lunch." And so the nice lady did: it only took a few minutes to check my work and hand over my documents and we were ready to go. A hundred bucks lighter in the wallet I went home. Now all I have to do is wait for my Passport...
-
'nuff said.
