X-Men: Days of Future Past

Maj. William Stryker (Josh Helman) and Dr. Bolivar Trask (Peter
Dinklage) working together to create a fiendishly complicated movie plot.

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Like its actors, the franchise is showing its age.
The Long Version:

I know I said I was about movied out after viewing Godzilla 2014 last weekend. The key word here is "about." This weekend I hit the early morning $6 matinee to see the latest X-Install of X-Men, "X-Men: Days of Future Past."

It was a better film than Godzilla 2014, but that's not a very high bar at all for success. What you should compare it to are all the other X-Men movies that have been produced in the series so far:

1. X-Men - 2000
2. X2 - X-Men United - 2003
3. X-Men: The Last Stand - 2006
4. X-Men Origins: Wolverine - 2009
5. X-Men: First Class - 2011
6. The Wolverine - 2013
7. X-Men: Days of Future Past - 2014

If you're paying close attention you'll note the general two-to-three year release pattern in the X-Men movies, as well as a love for colons in titles. "The Wolverine" was an odd-ball, essentially released to "correct" 2009's poorly received "X-Men Origins: Wolverine." Of course that fits another pattern in the Marvel movie universe, the release of movies to correct for prior poor releases (the most classic example being "Hulk" in 2003 followed by the corrective film "The Incredible Hulk" in 2008, then again with a third corrective Hulk interpretation with "The Avengers" in 2012).

I have few regrets in life, but one of them is knowing I've seen all the movies I've just catalogued.

"X-Men: Days of Future Past" is an attempt to correct the so-called damage caused to the franchise by "X-Men: The Last Stand," in which we see Jean Grey, Scott Summers/Cyclops, and Professor Xavier all killed. The franchise had really gone off the rails at that point, not that I really cared, mind you. This is, after all, a movie franchise based on comic books. It ain't Shakespeare.

Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) wondering how much he can drink before he blissfully forgets all of this.

So what do you do with what appears to be a movie franchise storyline that's headed over the cliff? Follow it down to the bottom and then write another movie plot attempting to correct it. And this time, wrap the whole thing up with a happy ending. That's precisely what DoFP did.

The movie opens on a dark and stormy dystopian future. Using the NSA's three hops of mass surveillance rule, just about everyone in the U.S. who's a mutant or not and hasn't been killed by a lawful drone strike is rounded up into the year 2023's version of GitMo in New York's Central Park. Next we cut to a frantic battle in Moscow between B-list mutants we've mostly never seen before, mixed with some we have. We get a quick and violent demonstration of what future Sentinels are capable of, those robotic overlords who contain weaponized mutant DNA allowing them to "adapt to any mutant threat."

However (there's always a however), using one of the Good Mutant's ability to warn them in the immediate past (a few days before) when they're getting their asses handed to them by these super Sentinels, we see the rag-tag Good Mutant remnants avoid destruction in Moscow and arrive next up at a mountainside monastery in China. There, along with a really old Professor Xavier (Patrick Stewart) and Magneto (Ian "Gandalf" McKellan) they conceive of an audacious and barely coherent plot to send the 2023 consciousness of Wolverine back to his 1973 physical self so that his 1973 self can somehow stop the key event that led to their current dire predicament; the killing of Tyrion Lannister in 1973 by Mystique.

The same Tyrion Lannister who would never live to write Game of Thrones, leaving Dr. Bolivar Trask so bored that instead of reading all those Game of Thrones books he would instead create the very first Sentinel. And the rest, as they say, became history.

Mystique's (Jennifer Lawrence) reaction to the dialog she's not been paid enough to deliver for this film.

The throwback works, and the next thing we know we're back with Wolverine's 2023 consciousness in his 1973 body, which conveniently happens to be naked in a water bed next to a not-quite-naked beautiful woman (thus fulfilling every old guy's fantasy), who he's not actually supposed to be canoodling with. As he's trying to dress his naked ass, three big guys burst in and threaten to kick Wolverine's partially dressed ass because they didn't get to canoodle with said girl. We've seen more than enough Wolverine movies at this point, so we all know how this is going to work out. Sure enough, in the next scene we see Wolverine, now in full 1970's denim and polyester regalia, swaggering out into the street with another man's car keys, ready for the big times of 1973.

Since time is of the essence, Wolverine drives up to the dilapidated door of a young Professor Charles Xavier (played by Mr. Tumnus, a.k.a. James McAvoy), where he proceeds to punch out a young Beast (Nicholas Hoult) and magically convince a slobbering, self-pitying Xavier that he's there to rescue him and thus rescue all of them from a fate worse than death 50 years in the future. More or less.

Quicksilver (Evan Peters) showing what he can do after consuming way too many stolen Hostess Ding-Dongs and listening to bad 70's rock. Wolverine, Magneto, and Professor X just ignore the little snot.

With that taken care of they then they hop on a jet plane and head to Washington D.C. where another mutant named Quicksilver (Even Peters) lives, and convince him, in between product placement shots for Hostess Ding Dongs and severe ADHD episodes, to break into the Pentagon and break Magneto out of the bottom of the Pentagon. Because. And this so captivates young Quicksilver's attention that his severe ADHD episodes temporarily abate long enough for him to get into the same car with Beast and Wolverine so they can drive to the Pentagon, and then walk into the Pentagon on a tour with a funky electronic gizmo made from a Radio Shack electronics kit that nobody seems to notice, that causes Sanford and Sons to play on the Pentagon's security video.

They eventually break Magneto out, but not before Professor X knocks Magneto on his ass for stealing the Professor's girl, Mystique. You just knew this complication was coming.

Magneto (Michael Fassbender) and Mystique sharing a quiet romantic moment together after Mystique grabbed him by his 70-styled lapels and threw him into a French phone booth with her.

Except, of course, Mystique isn't having any of it. She's a woman of the 70's, not just a feminist, but a Mutant Feminist with an agenda to free all her oppressed sisters around the world. She's not going to take crap from Magneto or Professor X or any inferior male, and shows at one point she's got more balls than both combined.

Magneto getting to the bottom of Watergate.

Since future peace is so dependent upon what Mystique does in 1973, and having been forewarned what will happen if she Chooses Poorly, she decides to do what any self respecting Mutant Feminist would do, and that's kill all the males, not just Dr. Bolivar Trask. Because, after all, Trask is just this guy, you know? But somehow, some way, she has a special plastic gun, and within range of this special plastic gun she conveniently has all the males who have caused a half century of political and cultural carnage, starting with Richard Nixon. If she can get rid of all those assholes, including Magneto, then what a happier, sunnier place the world will be going forward from 1973.

Mystique getting her revenge by drawing a bead on the writers and the director.

But no. Ain't havin' none of that. Young Professor Xavier, no longer high on drugs but instead high on life, is now miraculously sober enough to convince Mystique to just let the guys alone, and to trust him, they'll get it all worked out for the best. Honestly and truly. And so Nixon lives to be pardoned, Magneto floats off to be an asshole on another planet, Mystique swears off Mutant Feminism and limps off to hang out with Thor's brother in West Virginia, and everybody lives happily ever after. They even find Wolverine at the bottom of the Potomac and haul him back up so he's around for all those future X-Men movies.

Oh, yeah, I forgot this spoiler. Magneto drop-kicks Wolverine's ass into the Potomac. From the White House lawn. Trust me, Wolverine asked for that particular ass kicking.

In fact, the world becomes so bright in 2023 Wolverine nearly has to wear Cyclop-strength shades. He wakes up one last time in the movie, except this time he's alone (bummer) and in a regular bed. He stumbles out into the Charles Xavier School for the Gifted, where he finds a no-longer-dead Cyclops, a no-longer-dead Jean Grey, and everybody's busted relationships are all fixed again. Except for his relationship with Jean because Cyclops is alive again and Cyclops and Jean are an Item again, but hey, it's better than dying.

And in the last-last-last scene, after all the end credits, is a guy in some desert wearing an oversized IKEA bathrobe with skinny wrists and a skin complexion problem, with his hands up in the air, as special effects bricks fly in around him and magically create a pyramid in front of a cheering screen audience. Sort of like an Apple product release when Steve Jobs was alive. And in the magical bokeh background, there sit four indistinct dudes on their horses.

The End.

Update 26 June 2014

Box-Office Milestone: 'X-Men' Franchise Hits $3 Billion in Global Ticket Sales http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-milestone-x-men-715153

last updated 26 june 2014

Godzilla (2014) ゴジラ

Actor Ken Watanabe as Dr. Ishiro Serizawa
expressing my exact sentiments about this latest film.

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: A US$200 million mindless cinematic weekend juggernaut, to which I contributed $6.
The Long Version:

Everybody in Hollywood who has nothing to do with real cinematic creativity is going absolutely ape-shit over the latest Godzilla iteration because it has generated a monstrous pile of cash for its studio investors. Once again, this movie overwhelmingly proves that in today's Hollywood, cinematic quality and merit are inversely proportional to earning power.

It would seem after the critic's caterwauling over Roland Emmerich's 1998 version, everyone was so desperate to see a "better" Godzilla treatment that they blindly stampeded into every movie house on Earth that showed it. And I mean just about everybody.

In backwater Orlando, Florida, I tried to see the movie Saturday night on International Drive, but it was so crowded I couldn't find a place to park and went home unfulfilled. I got to see it by hitting the earliest Sunday morning matinee I could find. And it cost $6, even with my senior discount.

Rather than hash out all the spoilers, I'd like to just touch on a few points (with spoilers) that stick out like a sore paw.

1. Bryan Cranston as Joe Brody. Mr. Cranston was in nearly all the trailers. In fact, I went into the movie thinking that his character would somehow help find a way to defeat Godzilla, especially after the way he lost his wife. Imagine my surprise to see his character die less than a third of the way into the movie. That left me with mostly Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who played USN LT Ford Brody, who played his son. After fifteen minutes with the son, I almost got up and left and not even bother to ask for a refund. Seriously.
2. Supremely stupid nuclear bomb tricks. Rear Admiral William Stenz (played by David Strathairn( Sneakers, Bourne, Alphas)  hastily devises a really bad plan to use nukes on a cheap tour boat to attract all the monsters out into San Francisco bay and then just blow them up. You'd think time, being of the essence, would call for the use of some of those C-17 Globemaster IIIs (there's a video at that link of a C-17 on a training run air dropping four Humvees and 50 troopers) that we see flying all through the film. You know, the really big strategic airlifters. The C-17 in real life is cavernous on the inside, capable of carrying, well, capable of carrying both the train and the nuke it was transporting. But I guess the Navy doesn't believe in big fancy aircraft. So instead we get a slow diesel locomotive pulling a flatbed with said nuke, rolling cross country and across bridges for the express purpose of being attacked by a M.U.T.O.
3. Film length. The 2014 version is 123 minutes (two hours three minutes). Add in 20-plus minutes of commercials and trailers (insult to injury), and the time in your seat is close to two-and-a-half hours. The original 1954 release was 98 minutes (one hour, 38 minutes). The first time I saw the 1954 version in a theater (1973) they had a pair of Warner Brother cartoons to start off, lasting all of ten more minutes. Stripping back to the core running time, there's no reason why the 2014 movie needs another 25 minutes. The 2014 movie needs/needed a good editing. Unfortunately, when the Director's Cut comes out in about a year, it'll get another 10 to 15 minutes.
4. Aaron Taylor-Johnson. Maybe I'm too old to appreciate such young talent, but I've seen better in that age bracket (Emma Stone (Zombieland, Amazing Spider-Man). For a fresh change of pace it would have been nice to see a woman (again, Emma Stone comes to mind) in that role, someone with sparkle and energy and intelligence, instead of the typical dumb brute force movie male. But lest we forget this is, after all, a movie about Godzilla, the ultimate incarnation of dumb brute force.

I think I'm about movied out for 2014. I saw Captain America, and I've now seen Godzilla. The hype machines for the rest of this year's movies are spinning at near light speed and throwing out tremendously overwhelming waves of, well, hype. But I think I've reached a point in my long life where I've developed considerable immunity. I know this to be when I can keep my money in my back pocket, where it belongs, when I pass one of these current blockbuster epics.

Update 24 May

Matthew Broderick as Dr. Niko Tatopoulos and Maria Pitillo
as journalist Audrey Timmonds in the 1998 Godzilla movie,
can't believe that little changed in 16 years either.

I came across a wonderfully refreshing comparison and review of the 2014 Godzilla, showcasing five substantive advantages the 1998 version had over this latest version. 'Godzilla': 5 Things Roland Emmerich's 1998 Version Did Better touches on what I found annoying in the 2014 version; characterization and development and clearly defined objectives that were key plot points in the 1998 movie but totally lacking in the 2014 version. In the 1998 movie, even the Gogira name drop really was way cooler, far more in keeping with the old 1950 and 1960 monster movies than the 2014 version.

Lest I forget, the 1998 'Godzilla' had an intelligent and powerful female role in Audrey Timmonds, played by Maria Pitillo. Barbs and criticisms notwithstanding, there was a lot more brainy action going on in 1998's 'Godzilla' than in 2014's. Even the 1998 Godzilla was leaner, more agile, and seemingly more intelligent. The 2014 Godzilla could be more aptly called Blubberzilla.

last updated 24 May 2014

Star Trek Into Darkness

Concept: 1 out of 5
Execution: 0 out of 5
Yeah, but: Plot holes big enough to fly starships through.
The Long Version:

"Star Trek Into Darkness" first hit theaters (or theatres) in May of 2013. It played well to its intended audiences around the world, racking up nearly a half billion dollars in ticket sales before its run was done. It scored a respectable 87 on Rotten Tomatoes. It was a generally entertaining enough movie, being released for a second round of studio money gorging with its release on Blue Ray later in September. It had the usual cast of characters, and it had Benedict Cumberbatch. What wasn't to like?

The plot, or more precisely, the plot holes. The most egregious occurred early on in the movie after Cumberbatch's character John Harrison, a.k.a. Khan, shot up Star Fleet's leadership while it was conveniently meeting high up in an insecure skyscraper. Harrison showed up in a small one-person aircraft and with his infinite ammunition gun proceeded to open fire on a completely un-defended conference room fronted by an equally convenient floor-to-ceiling window setting that stretched from one end of the conference room to the other, until Chris Pine as Jim Kirk managed to single-handedly cripple Harrison's ship and eventually cause it to crash.

But before it crashed, John Harrison managed to trigger a very magical transporter that was so small it fit into the same cockpit area as Harrison. So magical it managed to transport him to the Klingon home world of Qo'noS, a mythical world located some 112 light years away from Earth. Not only do you see Harrison transported away from an aircraft rapidly spinning out of control, but mere seconds later you see him transported to the surface of Qo'noS, none the worse for wear.

Let me make sure I have all this straight. Harrison is in possession of a small, portable transporter that can move him from a spinning machine on a rotating planet (Earth) orbiting a star (our Sun) with the whole ensemble traveling through intergalactic space in our galaxy, to another planet, rotating on its axis, orbiting a completely different star, and that whole ensemble moving in an independent but generally same direction, 112 light years from Earth.

With that kind of capability, why the hell do you need starships?

With that kind of a transporter, why not just use the same method to go and get him? Oh, wait. You only made one? And the one you found in the wreckage, the one that told Scotty where Harrison had fled to, wasn't working well enough to beam his pursuers to Qo'noS, or him back? How convenient!

In fact, why wasn't this particular type of transporter used to transport anti-matter weapons (or just raw bits of anti-matter) all over the surface of Qo'noS and just blow the planet to bits? What's amazing is that Harrison didn't invent this, Scotty did (with Spock Prime's help) in the first movie. I knew when Spock Prime beamed Scotty and Kirk back on board a star ship speeding at warp velocities in the first movie that JJ Abrams had managed, without really trying, to completely destroy any rational reason for his big starship in the whole series. With just a small scene in the second movie, JJ Abrams managed to make all his big shiny starships totally irrelevant. Every. Single. One.

The 2014 silly season for movies is about to start up again. I think, from this point out, I'm going to sit the whole thing out. At least anything from JJ Abrams and his kindred directors.

last updated 15 february 2014

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Concept: 1 out of 5
Execution: 0 out of 5
Yeah, but: It makes Ed Wood's body of "work" look like William Shakespeare

The Long Version: Let's get the important part out of the way first. From its release on 29 June 2011 to 29 September 2011, "Dark of the Moon" has grossed $1.18 billion worldwide to become

• the fifth highest-grossing film of all time, 
• the second highest grossing film of 2011 (behind Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2), 
• the highest grossing film in the Transformers series.

With a $198 million budget it grossed five times its production costs, which means it's a success. It will, in all likelihood, spawn yet another Transformer sequel. Heaven help us all.

I like my science fiction films one of two ways; either hard-core and fact-based, or good and trashy. For examples of enjoyable hard core I point to 1951's "The Day the Earth Stood Still", 1956's "Forbidden Planet", or 1968's "2001: A Space Odyssey". Good and trashy films, like "The Evil Dead", are minimally financed fun little movies with no pretensions, bad in a good way, fun to watch because you can see through the cheesy effects and the plot holes, but you don't care. There's a certain earnestness and honesty in those types of films. That's why I can watch "Plan 9 From Outer Space" repeatedly and find enjoyment each and every time. Especially in a group setting.

I didn't see "Dark of the Moon" when it was in the theaters because I was very busy. I felt no motivation to make the time because I've come to loathe the cineplex experience. Going to the movies now is like airline travel, but without the TSA. The few fixed times you can see a movie, the commute through traffic, finding a place to park, standing in line for expensive tickets, paying exorbitant soda and popcorn prices, then sitting through a good half-hour of ads and previews before the movie, the rude and noisy theater patrons, and on and on and on make a trip to the cineplex almost as bad as a trip to the airport. It's a far cheaper, far better experience to wait and watch a movie on Blu-ray (even a bad movie) in the comfort of your own home. That's why I waited to pick "Dark of the Moon" up at the local Walmart while grocery shopping this weekend. If the movie turned out to be truly bad, well, at least I was doing something useful besides just picking up a bad movie.

When I'm at home I might get to sit through an entire movie uninterrupted. Most of the time I don't, and this time was blessedly no exception. Watching "Dark of the Moon", at 2 hours and 34 minutes total length, took me over three hours in real time. That's because I needed to make the occasional stop, sometimes just to let my brain rest between the too-long pitilessly plotless and confusing stretches of the movie punctuated by the short chaotic sections of hyper-violent noise and action. I've sat through many long movies, some longer, but I've never had the need to just shut a movie down for a mental rest break. Even "2001", one of the most cryptic movies every made, seemed like a Pixar short compared to "Dark", and it clocks in at 2 hours 21 minutes.

Normally I'd write multiple paragraphs about the special effects, but not this time. Industrial Light and Magic, the effects house for "Dark", managed to render a world that looks overly complicated, muddy and just downright fake. It's difficult to see critical detail on the Transformer's, such as Sentinel Prime's face (voiced by Leonard Nimoy). The desire by the film's creators to overlay as much GCI action onto the live action locations (such as Chicago) makes it nigh impossible to accurately track the action, let alone sit back and enjoy the action. This is, in my opinion, ILM's worst work to date.

After re-reading the last five paragraphs I've come to realize there's nothing positive I can say about the film, so I'll just stop. I can't return the Blu-ray because of the store policy that says once the shrink-wrap is broken, I own the disc. But all is not lost; I can take it to a local Movie Stop and trade it for something else. That's probably the only good thing about this movie, and that is it'll go towards the purchase of something better to watch.

last updated 2 oct 2011

Red - The Movie

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: Toronto-spotting is a hobby of mine.

The Long Version: I'm not someone who goes to the movies very often, but when Penny tells me that she's scored a pair of comp passes to an advance screening, I'm not about to stay home. So tonight I found myself sitting in a packed theatre waiting for the start of a movie I'd never heard of, featuring a whole cast of stars that I had only intermittent knowledge of, without any real expectations.

Red - the movie - turned out to be a huge success. It's fairly smart, well put together, and entertaining. In its structure and style, it's almost more of a 'caper' movie than an action/adventure thriller. Being based on graphic novels gives it a certain super-hero aspect to some of the characters, but it's more of a postmodern too-cool Tarantino style than Superman, if you know what I mean. Some of the camerawork and choreography brought gasps from the audience; the price of admission is worth it just to see the most awesome exit from a police car ever conceived.

While this is an exceedingly violent movie, it's not heavy on the gore. People tend to disappear in bloodless explosions or get nocked down - there's no sense that we're in the middle of a first-person shooter video game or a slasher movie. And even places where it does get quite graphic, such as a direct grenade hit in the container yard, it tends to be as much of a visual shock as a horror show. Red doesn't seem to revel in human suffering as much as The Expendables did. In fact, I generally found that particular Badass Grandpa movie much less satisfying than this one, and Red never felt like a vanity project. If you're tying to decide between the two, unless you're a huge Stallone fan, pick Red instead.

I think this is the first time I've gone to an action movie and come away thoroughly impressed with the acting. Sure, Morgan Freeman's a given, but John Malkovich stole every scene he was in. And then there was Bruce Willis - who knew?

Even while I was watching the movie I was making plans to buy the DVD. Red will be great on a decent TV with a good sound system, but it really is worth seeing with an audience. This could become the first movie I'll watch in the theatres more than once since - I'm embarrassed to say this - Pump Up The Volume. For those who can't think back to 1990, that's the movie where Christian Slater plays a disaffected and maladjusted youth. In my defence, it had some redeeming moments (nsfw), and I was sixteen years old. But I digress – Red is one of the best movies I've seen in a very long time, and not to be missed if this genre is something you think you'd like.

Kirk Gleason

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: My excitement must be clouding my ability to judge comedic hyperbole.

The Long Version: "Kirk" is the character played by Sean Gunn on the long-running TV show "Gilmore Girls". He's clearly a good idea that occurred to the creative powers just a little bit late; his first appearance is in the second episode as a walk-on character who's installing a DSL line. At that point he's called Mick. Gunn's first appearance as Kirk is when he gets into an altercation with Miss Patty in Doose's Market, where he's working as an Assistant Manager. The conflict arises because Kirk doesn't know who Miss Patty is; later in the series Kirk has transmogrified into a life-long Stars Hollow resident who used to study in Miss Patty's dance classes.

Kirk Gleason appears in 137 out of 154 episodes, making him one of the most common minor characters. But even his important roles tend to be fleeting; Paris and the Grandparents are seen in fewer episodes but are always significant characters. Poor Kirk is never in control of the scenes he's in. Instead he spends his time filling quiet moments, adding character, providing transitions, and occasionally being a plot device, and yet somehow he manages to do every odd job in the entire town. On our last run through the seven seasons of Gilmore Girls, Penny and I kept track of his different jobs:

DSL Installer (as 'Mick')
Bird delivery (credited as 'Swan Man')
Assistant Manager at Doose's (first appearance as Kirk)
Flower Delivery
Photographer
Mechanic
Waiter
Exterminator
Video Store Cashier
Skincare product developer ("Haythere")
Waiter at Weston's Bakery
Beauty Supply Store Cashier
Hockey Announcer
Mailman
Daily Topical T-Shirts
Pizza Delivery
Mold Inspector
Skydiver (paid $20 by Taylor)
Alarm Installation, Star's Hollow Security
Custom Mailbox Salesman
Dog Walker
Pedi-cab Owner
Notary
Mailbox Store worker
Doose's Market Cashier
Wedding DJ
Firewood Delivery
Movie Theatre Worker
Handbill Distribution - "Lunch at the Dragonfly!"
Bath and Shower Adhesive Decals salesman
Twickham Souvenir Sales
Tow Truck operator
Estate ring salesman
Kirk's Doggie Daycare
Real Estate Agent Trainee
Owner, Yummy Bartenders
Owner, Kirk's Diner
Gift Wrap salesperson
Official Town Sash Maker and Presenter

This list isn't counting his roles that were probably volunteer positions, like being an historical war reenactor, playing Joseph in the Christmas pageant or being the tallest person in the children's production of Fiddler on the Roof. He also has roles in every town event or scheme that Taylor has going, so he's the one handing out maps from the Historic Star's Hollow booth, and Kirk's the one in the hi-viz vest when the red-light camera goes up. It also doesn't count his hobbies, like being the Asaad Kelada of Star's Hollow. Next time we watch the series - all seven seasons are on DVD - we'll keep at least a couple more lists.

TVTropes.com has a few opinions about Kirk as well, thinking that he fills the Village Idiot role, as well as being the one who never has anything good happen to him. They also point out that his mother is one of the 'ghost' characters who's often mentioned but never seen. (Gilmore Girls has a few of these - Lane's father, Mr. Kim, is occasionally mentioned but there's never any evidence of him, and East Side Tilly has the inside scoop on all the gossip but never makes an appearance.) His other distinction is that he may be the only character on the show who speaks at a normal speed.

Kirk is in no way a central character in the Gilmore Girls world, but he'd be missed if he went away. His inclusion in the cast is one of the better ideas that they had - and as with most things, late is better than never. If someone decides to go all Tom Stoppard on him, and creates a spin-off show in the spirit of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, I'd be all over it. There would be so much great material to work with - and he's the only one who could pull it off. Like Rory said, he was always a cat person, he just never had a cat.

Ridley Scott's Robin Hood

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: Sir Ridley doesn't make bad movies.

The Long Version: I hate the term 'prequel', so I won't call Ridely Scott's 'Robin Hood' one, even though it's the story that happens before his days as an communistic outlaw. Like the recent "Alice in Wonderland", I walked into the theatre with no expectations about what I was going to see, and in both cases they were exceeded. The latest take on the band of merry men is well thought out, well told, and as always with a Ridley Scott film, its execution is nearly flawless. The Australian Russell Crowe seems perfectly suited to play the soon-to-be-famous outlaw, and I found it far more convincing than his attempt to chase the Acheron around the Pacific ocean.

At no point in the movie is there an exchange to rival the classic "You speak Treason!" and comedic style of Errol Flynn. I can't see this new story being incorporated into the culture in the same way as that landmark interpretation; it will never match the societal impact of Scott's dystopian interpretations of Dick and technology. But I'm not an historical purist, especially where folk tales are concerned, so if there were any anachronisms or missteps – beyond the idea of soldiers being able to read, or the notion of 'rule of law' - they didn't detract from my enjoyment of the story. It was well worth the time and expense to see it in the theatre.

Valentine's Day (Movie)

Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: A favourable review. More or less.

The Long Version: For me, this is a very odd review to write, so there's a bit of a back story that I need to share. I usually have a real problem with this genre of movie, and I don't mean 'chick flick' - I have a hard time with any movie with a large ensemble cast. If there's such a thing as an anti-photographic memory, I have one; I'm especially bad at remembering faces and recognizing people. Women in movies and on TV is a particularly weak point for me, since there's so little variety in what seems to pass for beauty these days. For example, I'm hopeless at watching that television masterpiece "The Bachelor." There are either too many people running around for me to keep track of any of them, or the selection process has reduced the crowd to only five or fifteen interchangeably tall, skinny women with a particular hair colour that he's formed some spiritual connection with. Rubbish - but I digress.

I was pleasantly surprised to discover that, with only a few slips, I was able to follow the plot of Valentine's Day. And I'm being neither snarky nor sarcastic here - while I wouldn't recognize Taylor Swift or Jessica Biel if I saw them in another movie, and couldn't identify them in a police lineup, the cast had a healthy range and used enough individual environments that I could usually keep track of who was who. It also helped that the movie looked a bit like a collision between Grey's Anatomy and Alias; and of course even I recognize Julia Roberts. I've known who Queen Latifah is since she remixed Bowie's Fame, and there was the guy from the Nikon ads, so I actually did pretty well at following the action.

There's really not a whole lot to keep track of in terms of the plot: it's a day in the life of a handful of people with some tenuous connections that I was mostly able to put together. Some break up, some hook up - and some do both - while others stay as they are. It's entertainment rather than art, and it's light, fun, and generally upbeat. 'Fluff' isn't a bad thing; if I wanted mean and nasty, I'd watch reality TV. I'd rather choose to include happy things in my life, especially when I'm out on a date. And while I think 90% of movies are too long, I wouldn't have minded if this one took another ten or fifteen minutes to play out a bit more.

When I watch a movie or TV series, I pay attention to the first shot. It's an interesting distraction - with all of the editing decisions to be made, what gets chosen for the first impression? In this case, what struck me is the opening song. "Say Hey (I Love You)" is by Michael Franti & Spearhead, which is a great upbeat number that's been a favourite of mine since the album 'All Rebel Rockers' came out. It set the tone for the movie, and may account for some of my fondness for the show. If I'm ever in the mood for something simple to rent for a lazy afternoon, it's one I might actually be able to watch again.

... and this concludes the example of why I rarely review anything from popular culture. The regular postings about camera gear and subway stations will resume shortly.

Earth: The Biography: The Story of Our World

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 1 out of 5
Yeah, but: The last two hours of each disk are great.

The Long Version: This is a series that's in the same class as the BBC's Planet Earth & The Blue Planet, but with a couple of differences. Instead of looking at ecosystems or geographic regions, Earth - The Biography divides its approach into forces of nature, such as ice and volcanoes. The other difference is that it's narrated by a Scotsman, Dr. Iain Stewart, instead of the much more aloof Sir David Attenborough. Indeed, Dr. Stewart is a character in the drama that he records, giving him more of a Michael Palin style to his storytelling.

The cinematography is beautiful, the stories are compelling, and even as an owner of the Blue Planet Earth DVDs, there's information here that I hadn't heard or seen before. Sure, it took me a while to stop snickering at the host's recurring mentions of bubbling lava pools - the pronunciation seeming to drop the final 'L' - but the series is very well done. Add in the bold editorial indecision that gifted it with a subtitle and a secondary subsidiary subtitle, and there's not much not to like.

But.

Both DVD disks start with commercials for other DVDs, and they can't be skipped. For a rented movie, that would be annoying. For a DVD that I spent a not inconsiderable amount of money to purchase, specifically so that I can re-watch it at my leisure, it's completely unacceptable. I'm glad I've seen these episodes, but I wish I hadn't bought them. In fact, I wish I had taken the DVD back to the store and demanded a refund because I would argue that the disks are defective. It's rare that I say not to buy something, but in this case, don't.

Helvetica (Documentary)

Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: It's hard to evaluate. It's like being asked what you think about off-white paint. It's just there.

The Long Version: There aren't that many good typefaces, and Helvetica is one of the classics. Modern, clear, Swiss and san-serif, in the past fifty years it has become the default for signage and corporate identities. In his directorial debut, Gary Hustwit had the brilliant insight to explore the ubiquitous. The feature-length documentary Helvetica is the result.

The film's not just about typography, but explores many aspects of design and culture. It's said at one point that typography looks like it's about the letters, but that it's really about the space between the letters. "Helvetica" looks like a documentary about a font, but it's really about the design and its role and influence in culture. It's a fascinating look at something that goes unexamined every day.

One of the points that the documentary makes is the ways typefaces affect the tone of what's written. It implies an interpretation. Imagine the word "Shark" written in script or in bold block letters: the word is the same but it says something different. At the same time Helvetica is shown to be something of a chameleon. It's the font for American Airlines and American Apparel, and each company uses it to project a very different image. After watching the documentary, I start to see Helvetica everywhere, adding my own experiences and examples to the dozens of divergent uses shown in the movie.

The format of the movie is a mix of talking-head interviews interspersed with examples of designers at work and samples of popular culture, with a score that's usually understated and well-chosen. The film is 80 minutes long, with another 95 minutes of interviews included as bonus features. I'm glad that it was perpetually rented out at Queen Video because it spurred me to eventually buy my own copy. I had to laugh when I saw that the 'security seal' uses Helvetica to identify the package - the documentary literally can't get away from the influence of its subject.

Further Reading:
HelveticaFilm.com, the main web site for the documentary.
Wikipedia has pages about the documentary, the typeface, and Arial, a derivation on Helvetica that's also mentioned in the film.

Queen Video (Bloor St. Location)

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: It would be a "5" for execution if they had more of what they have in stock.

The Long Version: Small video stores are great. They've been the subjects of songs, movies, and probably even books. But it's something that many people love in theory more than in practice: those big chains with the hidden charges and twenty copies of each of their twenty movies clobber the little independents over and over again.

But it didn't work that way in Toronto's Annex neighbourhood. The crowded shelves and aisles of the neighbourhood Queen Video created a thriving, vibrant contrast to the stark airport-corridor emptiness of the Blockbuster Video that was almost directly across the street. The massive American chain store - with its video games, great lighting, and no late fees - is now gone, with its sign pulled down in an attempt to make its defeat anonymous. Soon a new grocery store is about to take over it's space; hopefully it's better than the neighbourhood Dominion, but it would be hard for it to be any worse.

But back on subject: Queen Video is the reason why I don't have cable TV.

Exploring the aisles of Queen Video is either a great pleasure or an experience in frustration and claustrophobia, depending on the time of day, my mood, and whether I'm trying to find something in particular. The most popular titles are arranged around the walls of the long narrow space in a rough approximation of the alphabet, but with no other organization. Hollywood films, foreign cinema, documentaries, and pr0n all exist happily mixed, and most of it will be rented out at any one time. There are also vast quantities of titles stacked with just their spines facing out, grouped roughly according to genre, but the alphabet is still a fuzzy concept and it's hard to know when to give up the search. I'm still not convinced that they don't have a copy of Buffalo Boy - an excellent film by a man who's a friend of my father and stepmother - but I haven't wanted to spoil the game by asking for it.

My only true frustration with Queen is that some of their titles are perpetually rented out. The documentary Helvetica really is excellent, but I had to find that out the hard way. After seeing its empty box on the shelf, I looked for it every time I went in for at least six weeks before I finally just broke down and bought a copy for myself. It took a month before the first season of Get Smart was available, and I made a dreadful mistake by not renting season two when I had the chance. (I missed it by that much.) I'm okay with the idea that a specific title that I want may not be available - something that Blockbuster offered at the expense of Queen's variety, culture, and intelligence - but sometimes I wonder if they've just lost the velcro-backed tag that indicates when something's back in stock.

Queen Video's Bloor location is open from 11am to 11pm every day of the week.