You haven't gotten lost in the woods, have you?

There's not a lot here that I can say that hasn't already been said, what with this being the most (over)hyped movie in some time. But I figure why not go ahead and put in my 2 cents anyway? Let me start by saying I wanted to see this movie despite the hype, not because of it. When something gets that much exposure it usually has the opposite intended effect on me, making me sick of it and uninterested before it's even released. It almost even got to that point for me with The Dark Knight, but with an established franchise like that I knew I was going to see it anyway (and of course I'm glad I did). With Avatar there were 2 things that kept me interested: 1)my morbid curiosity about this whole "changing the way you see movies" crap, and 2)it's freaking James Cameron. There is no way you can't at least respect the guy, and this being basically his life's work I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and see it in 3D IMAX in the way he says it was intended to be seen. Was it worth it?

Every penny.

James Cameron does absolutely everything right in this film (even though I guess it's almost inaccurate to call it a film, but more on that later). He does what he's best at. He takes a simple, yet intriguing story and tells it well. Some people have complained about the plot being weak and whatnot, but it isn't. It's simple, yes, but not weak. It's essentially Dances with Wolves on another planet, and that's ok. I actually listened to an interview with Cameron the other day and the interviewer brought up a good point that I agree with. The fact that you've got such a classic storyline actually makes the experience more engrossing. It gives your brain a rest from trying to find subtle nuances in the story and lets you instead get swept up with the characters in this world that he's created. Not to say this is a "turn-off-your-brain-and-watch-shiny-things" kind of movie, because it isn't. It isn't a passive watching experience, Cameron wants you to be engaged; to feel like you're in the middle of this alien world, and in limiting the amount of suspension of disbelief you have to wrestle with, he accomplishes that.

So the obvious: the effects. Just the term 'effects' doesn't even seem to fit in the context of the movie because there aren't really just impressive, flashy effects sequences. Cameron literally creates an entire world, akin to Peter Jackson with Lord of the Rings. Not only are the environments so insanely well-rendered that you simply can't tell what's real (if anything) and what isn't, but does an impeccable job of sort of easing you into this world. You're introduced to the avatars in a live-action setting and kind of get a feel for the space that they take up, then we move the avatars outside to kind of see how they work in space, then we take a helicopter with a mix of avatars and humans into the jungle to get a feel for the environment, then suddenly we're in the middle of a world that doesn't exist and we never even noticed the switch. Absolutely brilliant. He and his editing team have the right mindset too of having the goods and wanting to show them off. There a few big time action sequences in the movie, and instead of taking the now very popular "fast-cut-the-crap-out-of-everything-because-not-knowing-what-the-hell-is-going-on-on-screen = action!" he is not afraid to cut slowly. It really engages you much more with the action when you can actually see who's winning.

I really was beyond skeptical with all the "game-changing" talk the studio has been spouting for months now about this movie. I mean look at what the norm is out there for CG, it's gotten pretty damn good...so you're what? Adding 3D? And I should be impressed? Well I ate every single one of those words and they were delicious. Because of the level of hype the technology was getting I was paying extra attention in some scenes trying to figure out what was real and what wasn't and I simply couldn't do it (I know now that more than likely depending on the scene none of it was real, but still). The indigenous Na'vi people (and the avatar Na'vi) of the beautiful world of Pandora have real skin textures and move organically. They even avoided a personal pet peeve of CG characters...stretchy mouth. When they growl and hiss and yell their mouths move naturally. Also, they completely avoided dead-eye, which interesting given how big their eyes are. I think the thing that sold me on them taking up actual space was the teeth, especially Sigourney Weaver's avatar's teeth. Something about them just made them seem that much more human. And again, with these characters convincingly taking up space in the environment, it's much easier to suspend disbelief.

There were great performances all the way around in the film, but the stand out was definitely Zoe Saldana as Neytiri. Especially since it is a glorified motion capture acting gig (for everybody else too) she really gives a fantastic savage/sad/sympathetic performance. Whatever the scene called for she answered it, not to mention looking beautiful while doing it. Granted it's not actually her on screen, but still...close enough. I'd say she's having a pretty good year between this and Star Trek. Sam Worthington actually does a pretty good job too with Jake Sully ...not fantastic, but not nearly as flat as his recent Terminator Salvation outing. Yet another thing that allows you to be completely drawn into the movie is that it centers around Sully. It's so much easier to get swept away when dealing with such a focused storyline. The other standout role is Stephen Lang as Col. Quaritch. He's a very one dimensional character but damn he nails it.

I hate that this is coming off so ass-kissy but I'm still just blown away. Sure there are some things it falls a bit short on, like the fact that the element the humans are on Pandora to mine in the first place is called "unobtainium" (come on....), but the shortcomings are so few and far between. The last movie I can remember being hyped as a game changer technology-wise was the Matrix, and it delivered and really did change the face of special effects forever. Avatar was being billed as that much hype and I really didn't think it would have that much of an impact, but it did. I'm sure Robert Zemeckis is just salivating over this motion capture stuff too since he seems to be so in love with it. That said, it takes more than technology to make a good movie, and Cameron sticks to his guns here. He takes a classic story and tells it well, along with creating one mother of a spectacle to go along with it. It's the cliche of the year dealing with this movie, but it's more than a movie, it's an experience. Go see it in 3D. Now.

we're just wild animals...

Here's the thing...people either like Wes Anderson films or hate them. I happen to fall into the category of liking them a lot, but it seems to me that even people that are in the other camp may take a bit of a vacation to my side with Fantastic Mr. Fox. I remember first seeing trailers for it and I immediately perked up because I thoroughly enjoy all things stop-motion anyway, and I remember thinking "hmm, this looks like what would happen if Wes Anderson made a stop-motion movie." Turns out I was right, and it made sort of a perfect storm of me wanting to see this movie.

Mr. Fox has a lot in common with previous Anderson outings such as the quirkiness of the characters, but it also has a lot of differences, and these differences I feel like make it a much more accessible movie than, say, The Darjeeling Limited. First off, this is probably the most outright funny film that Wes has put together. Usually he draws on subtle quirks and sort of off-the-wall plot devices to provide that dark, awkward humor. Mr. Fox has that too, but throws in a lot more things that had me on the floor just outright laughing. He sets the tone from the beginning when you get a little bit of exposition as to where the Foxes live and what they're up to, and immediately following a serious conversation between Mr. Fox and Mrs. Fox about not wanting to feel poor, Mr. Fox just goes ravenous and annihilates his plate of pancakes. It's hilarious, and that juxtaposition really sets up the tone for the rest of the film.

Another thing that seems to set itself a part from previous works is the plot. Anderson films usually have very (VERY) loose plots, and really just focus on the journey and development of the characters in them. Mr. Fox, however, has a very tight plot with a clear direction. Basically we have the Foxes, who have moved out of their hole into a tree as sort of a status upgrade, and also because Mr. Fox sees that it is in very close proximity to the Boggis chicken farm, the Bunce ranch, and the Bean apple cider factory. Even though Mr. Fox has promised his wife that he's given up his foxy ways of stealing poultry, he sees this as an opportunity for one last big score. Unfortunately Boggis, Bunce, and Bean (one fat, one short, one lean) are absolutely insane and will apparently stop at nothing to destroy the fox that seems to be out.....foxing..them. I assume that Anderson had to reign in the plot a bit since they were trying to target kids a little more with this one, but it still absolutely works. I'm still not quite convinced that it's a "kid's movie" simply because the a lot of the subtle humor would go right over their heads, but i think the smarter kids will love it.

Given the cast, it kind of goes without saying that the vocal performances were great. I mentioned in my Men Who Stare at Goats review that I'm somewhat of a Clooney fanboy, and he does not disappoint at all. Jason Schwartzman really impressed me as well, because a lot of times he can come off as trying a bit too hard to be melancholy and weird, but his complete deadpan delivery of the Fox son, Ash, is brilliant. I actually read that Anderson decided to record the voice-over sessions on location (in a forest, out in a boat, etc.) as to get a more natural feel as opposed to the stiffness a studio can bring. I personally think that is a genius idea and it absolutely worked. All the performances seem to have such a liveliness and character to them that sometimes gets lost in animation. Even the smaller parts like Bill Murray's Badger, and Willem Dafoe's Rat are still brilliant. My personal favorite character though is probably Kylie, the opossum handyman and Mr. Fox's sort of #2 guy (voiced by Wally Wolodarsky, who you might know as Brendan from The Darjeeling Limited). He's just so hesitant about everything but still goes in 100% even when he clearly no idea what he's getting into.

The last and most obvious thing that stands out about the film is the style. As I said I'm a huge fan of stop-motion work, and not just because I like the aesthetic of it, but also because I respect the process so much. When it's done well you can really see every bit of care and love that was put into each minute detail and movement and it just adds a whole nother layer of awesome on top of it. The models they used were amazing, and the fur on the characters really makes them come alive because it's constantly moving (that's the detail I'm talking about...the fur constantly moving because the filmmakers had to get their hands in there to move the models). The film would have been good regardless, even if they would have gone 2d or even computer animation, but adding that extra layer with going the stop-motion route just makes it....fantastic. [Dammit, I tried to get through the whole thing without using that word.]

the silence of the goats...

I'm a little late to the game on this one, I know. The Men Who Stare at Goats came out a couple weeks ago, but I didn't get a chance to see it until yesterday. Sue me. I'm definitely glad I took to the time to see it though, and I'm sure I had more fun than the guy sitting in front of me that snored (loudly) through half of it. Talk about an expensive nap...

I fortunately was not bored enough to fall asleep and snore loudly, prompting other people to try to find remnants of popcorn to throw at me. I admit that I didn't know much about the film going into it other than George Clooney and Ewan McGregor were in it (I'm a pretty big Clooney fanboy so that was kind of enough for me) and it looked like a sort of quirky, Coen-esque film, much like The Informant! (I still love the exclamation point in that title). I was pretty much right, which is good because I think Clooney really shines in those sort of quirky/wacky roles.

The film tells us at the beginning that "more of this is true than you would believe." It's interesting because a lot of it falls under the old it's-so-weird-it-probably-is-true category, so I would be very interested to find out what is true and what isn't. Basically, we follow a young journalist, Bob Wilton (McGregor), who wants to prove himself to his (ex-)wife (who left him for his one-armed editor) so he does what any rational human would do: go to Kuwait and try to get into Iraq to find a story. While in Iraq though, he finds a man who had been mentioned while doing an interview with a man claiming to have been a part of an elite psychic unit in the military. Obviously Bob had sort of written this dude off as crazy or just strange until he had shown him a video of him making a hamster keel over. This obviously gives Bob reason to see at least a little validity in this guy's story. Now, in Iraq he's face to face with the man his interviewee had said was the best in the unit, Lyn Cassady (Clooney).

Cassady is at first reluctant to give Bob any information about his involvement in this psychic business, but after seeing one of Bob's doodles he has a change of heart and decides to bring Bob on his current mission. Throughout this mission we come to learn the story of the New Earth Army, an army unit that didn't officially exist and was basically a bunch of hippies finding ways to use psychic powers and other such non-lethal methods to fight for peace, so to speak. The flashbacks to the early days and the fall of the New Earth Army are integrated very well. A lot of times a film can get real disjointed with trying to tell two stories at the same time, but this one does a good job of setting the flashbacks in good spots.

The problem is, to me, the flashbacks are more interesting than what's going on in the present. After our heroes get kidnapped and escape there's really not a whole lot going on the rest of the time they're on their mission, but the flashbacks are very interesting. It's like a football game with an awesome halftime show, and your team starts to blow a lead in the second half and you start thinking "man, I wish they'd bring Springsteen back out" or something. It just kind of ran out of steam toward the end.

I mentioned The Informant! earlier and this film also shares that one's forgettable-ness. In the same way that both of them are kind of Coen Brothers-lite films, they just don't have the same staying power as their full calorie counterparts. I did really enjoy it (again, far more than the snoring guy), and I wouldn't MIND seeing it again, but it's not one I'm going to be rushing out to buy on release day or constantly quoting to impress my friends.

brain dump...

I've been slipping a lot on this thing, but for good reason! I've been out of the country for the past couple weeks touring Europe on bass for Theocracy (www.theocracymusic.com). It was absolutely one of the best experiences of my life (I can't say the absolute best, because I did just get married recently). Now that I'm back from living my dream, though, I wanted to kind of do some rapid-fire thoughts on some TV shows that I've been watching, along with the last movie I had a chance to see before I left.

Where the Wild Things Are: I got a chance to check this one out in IMAX before I left for Europe and I'm SO glad I did. Like a lot of other people, I had been looking forward to this one ever since those first promo images about a year ago, and the footage I got to see at Comic-Con this year just made the anticipation even worse. I wish I could find my copy of the book because I would really like to re-read it again so it's fresher in my mind so I could see the differences and similarities in the movie. However I don't think I'm alone in thinking that the main thing that attracted most people to the book was the artistic direction of Maurice Sendak, and Spike Jonze got the visual feel absolutely to a tee. Down to the details in the stripes on Carroll, and Max's suit is completely perfect. Best decision ever: using actors in suits rather than CG monsters...it allowed for MUCH more believable interaction, and just adds to the overall visual style. I think the best thing that this movie had going for it as an adaptation (because an adaptation was going to be made eventually, it was just a matter of time) was how much freedom Sendak gave Jonze. He wanted Jonze to make this a movie...not a page-for-page regurgitation of the book. This gave the story a lot more room to breathe and in the end, I think that allowed the film to really retain the heart of the book. It's interesting too because the film is definitely made for the people of my generation-the people who grew up with the book. If you're taking a kid to this film don't expect them to just be happy because there's big monsters and stuff..it's pretty heavy, but if you prepare them by reading them the book (I guess they could read it themselves..assuming they can read) then it really can be enjoyed by all ages.

Dexter: I haven't written anything on tv stuff yet, but I figure Dex is a good place to start. Lost is still my favorite show, but Dexter has very quickly become a close second. When I finished with Season 3 a couple months ago I felt like it was the best season yet (although S1 still is the tightest), but now about halfway through this new season, it's starting to shape up to be even better. The tension with Dex being forced to balance his new family with his dark passenger has not disappointed, even though he hasn't been killing as much which is kind of a bummer, but i feel like he's just been trying to figure out how to make it work, and after this most recent episode, he has a way to make it work. Also, it's been very interesting to see him come to the realization that he does genuinely care for his family. The big shock a couple weeks ago with (SPOILER) Deb getting shot and Lundy being killed and us still being a little up in the air with who did it (/SPOILER) provided us with one of the single best performances (from Deb of all people) I've seen in quite some time...in anything. Also, the big bad of this season, Trinity (played by a delightfully creepy Jon Lithgow) is just fantastic, and serves as a great sort of model for what Dexter wants to try to achieve in his own "hobby." I seriously can't get enough of this show.

House: I used to make fun of House a lot before I started watching it because the ads always made it seem like "Ohhhh geez, House is breaking the rules....again." Then I gave it a chance though, and it is a really solid show, with consistently some of the best writing in television. They do a great job of mixing the overarching storylines with the case-of-the-week stuff. This season has been especially interesting because of House's stint in rehab and stuff, so there seems to be more focus on the other characters, who are all very good, and House is still there to kind of monitor the cases and provide his wacky, awesome personality. I do wish his "transformation" in rehab would've taken a bit longer rather than cramming into the 2 hour premiere, just so it could breathe a little bit, but its still been a great season thus far...can't wait for it come back.

FlashForward: Dud. I gave it 3, maybe 4 episodes and I'm out now. The premise looked great: everybody in the world blacked out for a short amount of time, and everybody got glimpses of the future while they were out. Sounded pretty cool, plus there's some Lost alums in it, and John Cho is always good. Sadly, it just fell flat for me. The performances were pretty decent but the writing just always seemed very lazy to me, with very expected 'twist' type things. Also the show has a very bad habit of CONSTANTLY repeating things, and slamming you over the head constantly with whats happened up to this point. HEY DO YOU REMEMBER THIS GUY IS SUPPOSED TO DIE? DO YOU?!?!?!? Yes, I do. Thanks. Click.

Fringe: Apparently TV Guide listed Fringe as 'in trouble' because ratings have been down lately, but that's a bummer to me cause I love this show. Walter is just such a loveable old quirky scientist, Anna Torv has really come into her own since last season, and I've always been a sucker for Joshua Jackson. Also, you just can't go wrong with J.J. Abrams. Like House, the shows always been real good at giving you an overarching mythology, but also making interesting cases-of-the-week. Before the baseball break they blew the scope of the show wide open with talk of an interdimensional war coming, but over the past couple episodes they seem to have closed that up, which is kind of a bummer. To me the show seems to do better when there's bigger stuff going on. I hope it picks back up and I REALLY hope it doesn't get cancelled without giving any answers.

30 For 30: And now for something completely different. If you're unfamiliar, for ESPN's 30th anniversary, they've put together a series of 30 documentaries, made by well known directors both from fiction and non-fiction. The documentaries tend to focus on lesser known happenings in the sports world over the last 30 years or very well known happenings, just from a different angle. So far they have all been superbly done. Even for things that I really didn't care that much about. For instance, the one about the Gretzky trade I knew next to nothing about, nor did I really care that much, but it was a very engaging, interesting look at the event and what it meant for and did to the city of Edmenton and to Gretzky himself. My favorites thus far are the one about the Baltimore Colts marching band (that is just SUCH an interesting story) and the one about the USFL (because it is an absolutely honest portrayal of Donald Trump, and he really is a self-righteous arrogant piece of crap). Even if you don't really care about sports that much, these films still are fantastic just as films. It's nice when ESPN uses their power for good once in a while.

Nut up or shut up...

Wow. Biggest surprise of the year right here. I had gotten pretty excited about Zombieland a few months ago after it got a whole lot of positive buzz at Comic-Con plus possibly the greatest news story of the last few years when Woody Harrelson punched a photographer in the face and his excuse was "naturally, I thought it was a zombie." Really though I just got excited in the sense of "Hey...Woody Harrelson is awesome, and zombies are awesome...I'm in." If you read my previous post from a month or so ago on zombies, I had some thoughts as to why I still think there's life in the zombie genre (the irony...) as long as it's done well. I could not have prepared for the sheer amount of awesome that this movie contained.

The thing that makes this movie succeed is the fact that it's all killer, no filler. It immediately hits the ground running and doesn't let up until the end. The pacing is perfect. They don't bog you down with too much back story or side stories. It's a simple get from point a to point b plot and there's no sense in muddying up the simplicity of that with needless exposition. Director Ruben Fleischer gives you just enough to keep you from asking "wait, why are they doing ____" but doesn't dwell on it. Maybe it's because the only previous directing experience he has is a few episodes of Jimmy Kimmel, and he's used to the short format. I don't know...but it works. The cause of the zombie outbreak and what each of our characters were up to before the outbreak are all explained in short, to-the-point bursts just to satisfy your curiosity. Also, there is an absolutely brilliant use of text titles throughout the movie. Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg) has this list of rules to survive in Z-land and they constantly present themselves as text in the scene to remind you of the rules when a situation presents itself, which is risky...but it's always in such a hilarious way at just the right moment.

The wit and humor is absolutely relentless throughout the film and it really keeps it moving along nicely. I honestly can't remember the last time I've laughed so hard for so long. Obviously a lot of this is due again to the pacing, and trimming the fat, so all you're left with is gold. But when it comes to comedy it comes down to the performances. You can have the funniest line ever created but if your delivery sucks then it's completely wasted. Everybody was at the top of their game. I feel like it's because they didn't treat it as a comedy. Nobody really felt like they were trying to deliver jokes. It's more of a zombie survival movie with a cast of very quirky characters. This is also why I think Shaun of the Dead works so well.

I was a little concerned at first with Jesse Eisenberg because it kind of seemed like he was trying be Michael Cera with his delivery, but that faded pretty quickly and he made it all his own. Still with the little under-his-breath quips, but still original. Emma Stone definitely plays the more "complicated" of the characters but she pulls it off very well, and looks good doing it. I had only seen her previously in Superbad and The Rocker (what? I saw it for free...), one of which obviously wasn't a leading role and the other of which was pretty much a fluff piece where she didn't really stand out. She actually got a chance to flex some acting muscle here, and her delivery is perfect. Even when the film does focus a bit on the budding romance of her and Columbus (don't worry...it's not very long, and totally fits in the flow of the movie) she does well in those scenes too. Abigail Breslin's just about all grown up too and kicking ass in this film too so that's pretty cool. It goes without saying, though, that the standout is Woody Harrelson. Mainly because he basically just kind of plays a more badass caricature of himself, and really...how can you not win there? I'm sure everybody's been hearing about the mystery cameo as well, and I have to chime in too and say that it is absolutely, hands down, the best cameo ever put on film. I seriously made myself hoarse from laughing so hard during the entire section with him in it. I will not divulge who it is because that would just ruin everything. But seriously, holy crap.

Now, Shaun of the Dead is probably one of my top 10 movies of all time, if not top 5. I couldn't put this one in front of it because Shaun will always hold a special place in my heart because it really opened up the whole genre and introduced me to Simon Pegg and Nick Frost who are both absolute genius. I would, however, put Zombieland right up there next to it. It really is not only a just about perfect zombie movie, or a just about perfect comedy, but it's a just about perfect movie. Period. The pacing, the writing, the performances, the title sequence (one of the best ever in my opinion)...everything. It leaves me very excited and curious to see what Ruben Fleischer comes up with next...maybe a sequel? I'm definitely up for some more zombie kills of the week.

Seems like a lot of thinking for a bear...

I wanted to go see a movie this past weekend but I couldn't decide if I wanted to go see Inglorious Basterds again or check out The Informant! which I only had become aware of probably a couple weeks ago, but was curious about nonetheless. We could only find Basterds playing at like 10pm, which isn't too bad but considering how long it is we didn't feel like being at the theater all night, so we opted for The Informant! I'm really glad we did.

Let me first just say how happy it makes me that the title has an exclamation point. It makes every sentence like you're so excited about talking about The Informant! It's the little things. That's kind of the thing about the whole movie. The little things all seem to add up to create a really fun, interesting experience. My first gut reaction to the trailer sort of brought to mind a Coen brothers-lite film. It seemed to have that same quirky, smart, kind of awkward look and feel to it. My initial assumption proved to not be that far off actually.

There is a lot going on in this movie. In the kind of way that if you stop paying attention for a little bit you get completely lost and forget who people are, partly because of a lot of the people look the same and have impossible-to-remember names. The random cameos break that up pretty well. Scott Bakula and Joel McHale, while not technically cameos, always provide some good laughs simply for being on the screen. The meat of the film, though, comes from trying to unravel this twisting tale of backwards dealings and cover-ups and kickbacks and other such business espionage words. A lot of times dense political or business-oriented movies can go right over my head, but in the end it's up to the characters and the actors that portray them to keep you interested enough to want to figure out what's going on, and then wonder, even after the film, exactly what happened and what the motivation behind it all was. I like movies that make you really want to have a conversation about them afterward.

Although there are many fine performances in he film, the two that seem to matter the most are director Steven Soderbergh and Matt Damon. Soderbergh makes all the right moves to really move the story along and keeping you interested with little tidbits along the way but still keeping you engaged almost annoyingly wanting to figure out what's really going on with this Mark Whitacre character. I've always been a big Damon fan, so it's really no surprise that I'd like him in this film, but still...he really carried it. Once again, it's in the little things. His mannerisms just add so much detail to his character, who is a chubby, confused business man who seems to think he's much smarter than he is and that he is always doing the right thing. The writing is phenomenal, and his delivery is even better. One of my favorite aspects of the film are the little narration interludes where he gives his musings on life and such things. Usually they tend to parallel what's going on which just adds depth to the story, but then he keeps going and ends up rambling (usually hilariously), which adds more depth to the character.

According to the beginning of the film, it's based on a true story (although all the dialog has been dramatized "...so there"), and I have to say that even though I'm sure they embellished a good bit, it is a fantastic story. I haven't had a chance to research it at all yet, but I plan on it. I'd be very interested to read some interviews with the real Mark Whitacre (if that's his real name) or something...just to see if he's really that fascinating or if it was just all Hollywood. It was real nice to go to the theater and see something that didn't fall kind of flat to me or not live up to my expectations. I went in not knowing much of anything about it and was pleasantly surprised. That's definitely a good feeling.

We had such potential, such promise...

This is the first movie I think I've seen in a bit that has actually suffered from my high expectations. I usually try really hard to not get too excited about things because it only ends up setting myself up for disappointment, but this one just really got me going for some reason. I mean, did you SEE those trailers? Epic!

Let me go ahead and say first off that the movie is awesome. It really is. Shane Acker did a fantastic job of creating this whole world with its own sort of mythology that is hinted at throughout the film, and the world is very engaging. Also the characters are great. On the surface one could say that the characters are all very one-dimensional, but that's kind of the point. They are all parts of a whole, each representing one aspect of a persona, so it's reasonable to expect that they wouldn't break out too much from their defined roles. The voice actors did a great job furthering the characters as well. No one really stole the show per se but that's ok, as the whole film was sort of about working together, so it's only fair that no one would step up too terribly much above the rest.

The problem with Mr. Acker creating this awesome, engaging world is that he never gives a satisfying explanation behind some things. Now keep in mind that i LOVE unanswered questions. They keep the mystery and the fantasy alive, and keep you interested. See: Lost. But you have to give me something. I thought not knowing the full history of each of the ragdolls was fine, because it's fun to speculate as to how they got to where they are now. I thought explaining the machine takeover through a few snippets here and there of old news reels was awesome rather then just giving it to you up front. The one thing that bothered me though, was the scientist. Where did he find out about this "dark science?" What IS "dark science?" It seemed that he was a highly respected scientist inventing machines and such, so I just don't see why he would turn all voodoo on us. I get the why. He saw what his creation had become so in order to preserve what was left of mankind he left parts of his soul in his little ragdoll dudes. That's fine. I just want to know more as to how he found out that he could do this. I'm harping on it, but its such a critical basis for the film that I feel like just giving a bit more back story on how he came to find this and know that it would work would completely satisfy me. It's even more frustrating since the movie clocks in at just barely over an hour in running time, so there was no reason to rush things and leave important things out.

Now getting back to the positive, the visuals...very very nice. The overall style was very interesting, especially in the characters. Acker mentioned at Comic-Con that some people have started calling it "Stitchpunk" which is a pretty cool name and I think pretty accurately describes the style. There are a few effects that you can tell could have been better and bring out the fact that it was a low-budget animated movie, but I only notice those because I look for them. Stuff like fire and smoke especially. That being said though, they did an amazing job with what they had. The textures on the ragdolls are great, and their movements are impeccable. It's very interesting too since their eyes are in fixed positions, they rely on body language and subtle eyebrow animations to show emotion, and those are done to a tee. You can really tell that Acker was a very talented animator (since he was directing this, and it was feature-length, I seriously doubt he animated the whole thing, or any of it) because the attention to detail is brilliant. The creature models are great too, like the mother-brain, and the crazy flying thing, and the "seamstress" which is just downright creepy as hell.

All said and done, it was a very enjoyable and very entertaining movie. I just think I expected too much and wanted more. I'd be very interested to see what people who didn't have crazy high expectations for it like me have to say about it. I do think we'd immediately be in agreement on the ending though...just a bit much.

I am not proud of you tonight...

I saw Extract a few days ago, but I didn't get a chance to write anything on it until now because my weekend was pretty much taken up by Dragon*Con, so here it is now.

Mike Judge has always been great at delivering very interesting characters along with relatable situations ripe with satire. In his latest outing, he delivers both but doesn't quite stitch them together as masterfully as before.

The characters themselves are brilliant. I love Jason Bateman anyway, but he does a fantastic job playing a very believable entrepreneur American-dream-having everyman, Joel, who lives in his McMansion in the suburbs with a quirky neighbor. It's not exactly a standout role or anything, but he still does a fantastic job with it. I think he's at his best when the character is out of his element, like when his buddy accidentally gives him horse tranquilizers, or when he's smoking FAR too much pot at his buddy's friend's place. Basically whenever he's on drugs. Speaking of drugs, Ben Affleck really shines as Joel's buddy Dean. I've actually always really enjoyed Affleck as a supporting character. I don't think he's got the chops to support a whole movie, but in a supporting role he can really let loose and get those short, snappy lines out and then disappear back into the shadows. For a perfect example, check out Boiler Room and obviously pretty much any Kevin Smith movie.

You'll notice that I didn't mention Mila Kunis, who is the other sort of top-billed person in the movie. This isn't because she wasn't good, because she was (also, on a side note, I didn't realize just how hot she is until this movie...wow). Her character, Cindy, just got no real explanation. She was just there to randomly steal stuff for some reason, and use her hotness to try to swindle some money out of one of Joel's employees, Step. We never really figure out why she's on her own, stealing things and that's fine, but I just felt like they made her too important to not have ANY back story on. And that was the main problem I had with the film as a whole. There was no clear focus throughout the entire film. I wasn't sure what I was supposed to be following...Joel's quest to get laid by his wife, the fate of the factory and its employees, the pending lawsuit from Step, the random thievery that Cindy's up to, what the hell Gene Simmons is doing in this movie, etc. Too much going on! And I'm fine with a lot going on, as long as there's something that ties them all together. The problem here is that the only thing tying them together is that they're in the same movie.

I think what bums me out about it is the individual scenarios were fantastic. There were really some hilarious moments...any scene with "gigolo" Brad was killer, and the bits that did focus on the factory workers were classic, Office Space style relatable job site comedy. I just think there was a lot of fat that could have been trimmed. For instance, the neighbor was really funny, but completely unnecessary except for a few throwaway jokes and in the end a macguffin for getting Joel and his wife (played by Kristen Wiig, who was great but again...no real story as to why she acts the way she does) to start talking again. Also all this buildup of one of the employees, Rory, constantly talking about his band, then Joel shows up to his concert for about 5 seconds and leaves...it served no purpose other than to show that Cindy was at the show, which could have just been mentioned. If the movie could have been tightened up a bit it could have been just as memorable as Office Space. Instead we got some funny moments and a string of good scenes, but they just seemed to be aimless.

I'm being a bit harsh on it because I guess I had high expectations (however unfairly) based on Office Space, and how it was the perfect combination of social commentary and just outright funny. I don't want that harshness to come off as saying it wasn't good, because it was. It just wasn't as good as it could have been or, really, it SHOULD have been. I'm definitely not sad that I saw it, or that I spent the money on it in the theater because I still had a good time, but I think that's probably the only time I'll see it and it didn't really leave a huge lasting impression on me.

War, Tarantino style...

First I have to disclose that I'm a pretty big Tarantino fanboy, so there really wasn't a possibility that I would NOT like Inglorious Basterds. However I couldn't have prepared for just how much I did like it. It is equal parts moving, brutal, and...well....glorious.

I guess the best place to start would have to be how wonderfully Tarantino-an the whole thing is. It's split up into chapters, which is a convention he uses pretty often, and I think it's a great way to transition between completely different elements of the story without it feeling disjointed. Much like if Pulp Fiction had just seamlessly transitioned between scenes, or Kill Bill. It wouldn't make any sense. A lot of people accuse a lot of his movies as being slow and wordy. A lot of this came up in discussion of Death Proof, and this film, but personally I think it provides much more depth to the story and the characters. In the case of Basterds for instance, the very first scene with Mr. LaPadite and Col. Landa is wordy...but it serves to show right off the bat how cold and calculating Landa is. He knows exactly what LaPadite is up to the second he sets foot in the house, but he needs to establish a rapport in order to get information out of LaPadite willingly. There was a quick blurb I read recently about another film (I don't remember what it was now) that said something on the lines of the director focusing on the mundane. I think this totally applies to Tarantino. In focusing on the small, seemingly inconsequential, details of a scene and dialogue it makes it all the more powerful once something goes awry. Another for instance is the scene later in the German bar. You're treated to what seems like a typical bar conversation, with a bit of added tension from our Basterd characters, but when shit hits the fan its like a punch right in the face, and you realize that the shit hitting the fan means so much more once you get to know all the characters in the bar at least a little bit.

The other main interesting point of the movie is the style. I didn't really pick up on it specifically until toward the end when you watch all the high-ranking Nazi officers watching this propaganda film of Fredrick Zoller seemingly just shooting Americans in the head for the duration and them just laughing and enjoying it. The film itself is a propaganda film, and it's great. After realizing that, you can take a step back and realize that we're doing the same thing as the Nazis...sitting back and laughing and cheering while the Nazis are being killed on screen. Now, I'm not saying that it does this in a heavy-handed “look what you've become!!!” way at all. It's just an interesting observation. We have our own quintessential American badass, complete with Southern accent, Aldo Raine (the part where he “speaks Italian” freaking killed me), while the Nazis (especially Hitler) are shown as madmen who want nothing more than to spread chaos and destroy the world. Not that that's too far off, but it's just funny in spots like when they're watching their propaganda film and Hitler leans over and says it's the director's finest film ever and it's literally just a dude shooting Americans, and when Hitler is getting his portrait done in front of a world map with swastikas just all over the thing. The film seems to be catching a lot of flack for being so gory, but really I didn't think it was that bad. There are a couple quick gruesome parts, but nothing terrible...until the end. The final scene is definitely squirm-worthy, but it serves a purpose. It's not there just for sheer gross-out factor, it's there to completely drive home the point of *someone* getting their comeuppance.

Without good characters, you can't have a good film, and Basterds has no shortage of awesome characters. Brad Pitt is absolutely fantastic as the aforementioned Aldo Raine. The small detail of the scar around his neck that is never explained but really just adds to the overall badass effect that makes you not want to question this guy. Did someone try to slit his throat? Was he hanged? It doesn't matter. He will kill you. As good as he is, he gets eclipsed in my opinion by Christopher Waltz as Col. Hans Landa. Completely stole the show. He's so ridiculously smart, and always calculating, that you know that there is no way he would ever let anything get by him, and he will always get precisely what he wants, no matter what the cost. The way he always keeps such a level head makes him just seem all the more evil when he's toying with people who think they're pulling a fast one on him. It also makes it that much more jarring when he completely loses his cool at one point. Daniel Bruhl also plays a very interesting part in Fredrick Zoller. You first see him as this bumbling movie buff who's just trying to pick up a girl who's not interested. Later we come to realize he's this Nazi war hero who's American-killing exploits they made a propaganda movie about. He still maintains his unassuming kid persona when trying to hit on the girl, but when he's with his Nazi buddies you see his true colors start to bleed through a little bit. Especially while watching his own movie you really see how all of it starts to go to his head when he abruptly explodes.

All in all Tarantino's alternate-reality-propaganda-war-drama is a complete success. Brilliantly acted, brilliantly shot, brilliantly directed. You can't ask for much more. This has been a pretty good year, or at least a good month considering I've seen 2 contenders for best movie of the year in as many weeks. Granted they've been films I was excited about before, but nothing has really let me down this year yet, with the exception of Harry Potter...but I've been told that that's my fault.

...Insert quote from District 9...

It’s very rare that a film that I get real excited about real early can live up to the lofty personal expectations I create for it. Even The Dark Knight, which was absolutely amazing, still suffered from the anticipation that had been building for me. I’ve been looking forward to District 9 for a long time now, so I had that anticipation coupled with the MASSIVE amount of buzz it got at Comic-Con, and it far exceeded them.

I saw the film yesterday and I’ve been trying to think of anything to say about it other than simply, “Wow.” I’ve been following the director, Neill Blomkamp, since he was announced to helm the Halo movie a couple years ago that has since descended in to development hell and been essentially abandoned. Blomkamp has a more special effects background and has done some commercial work, but he’s also done a few little short films (most notable of which called “Alive in Jo-Burg,” which is basically what kind of spawned District 9…it’s fantastic, check it out on YouTube), including a couple live-action Halo shorts. All of his shorts had such depth, which immediately drew me in.

That depth continues into the world of District 9. The universe he has created in the movie is so rich and detailed it immediately immerses you. The faux-documentary style helps to make it sort of a fictitious bit of history too. No one ever comes right up on the screen and spoon-feeds you what happened and how we got to where we are. Instead we are forced to use context clues and fragmented bits of news footage to piece together what’s been going on. It makes it much more of an engaging experience. The CGI, much like in Blomkamp’s shorts, takes center stage, and yet never really reads as CG. His mastery at seamlessly integrating the CG into the environments just makes the world all the more believable. Even in detail, such as how emotive the prauns can be with their faces and just the believable mass they seem to have.

The other stand-out was Sharlto Copley, who played the main character, Wikus Van De Merwe (which is so much fun to say…try it). I got the chance to sit in on the District 9 panel at Comic-Con and he made it clear that he’s not an actor. He had just grown up making movies with his friends and acting in them. This style of acting worked absolutely perfect for this film. I’m fairly sure a good bit of his performance was ad-libbed, and it totally worked. It felt much less that he was acting scared, or angry, or whatever, and more like he actually was frustrated with something. I hope to see more of this guy in the future.

I think the thing that sealed it for me was the intensity. They kept the intensity up and never let up the whole time. This was most apparent in the gore level. It wasn’t over-the-top at all, there was just a lot of it, but it made sense. For instance, when Wikus is firing an alien gun at his pursuers, I expect them to get blasted into a whole messy puddle of nothing, and that’s exactly what I got. Also, Wikus losing his fingernails…whoa. It’s not just the gore that made it intense though. The whole situation woven throughout the film is just plain tense. The subtext of apartheid is constantly there (but not in your face or preachy), and that’s obviously not a happy situation. You never really get a clear view of who’s good and who’s bad either, and I like that. I don’t like when things are so clean cut. They obviously have their place, but not here. I mean you’re following Wikus, and you see him learn some lessons, but (without giving anything away) he’s also kind of a douchebag, so you always kind of have this moral question about him.

I’m sure I’m leaving things out, but I could seriously just gush about this movie for hours. It may not be the most original idea ever, but I think it was presented in such a fresh and original way, that I am honestly convinced that this is the best movie I’ve seen this year. I hate to suffer from short-memory syndrome, but I’ve been trying and trying to think of anything I’ve seen that could top it. Star Trek and Up come close, but I just think this one’s the most solid. I know that all the ridiculous buzz it’s getting can be off-putting, and I would be skeptical too, especially when everybody (including me) is saying the same thing: “omgz! fresh and original!!1!1!” but seriously, do yourself a favor and see this movie. I can’t wait to see what’s next for Mr. Blomkamp, because he is certainly going places.

(Not even close to a) Lightning Round Comic-Con Recap, Part 3

I realize that Comic-Con “news” is getting a bit stale, but this is a good way for me to pass the time while I'm at work. Also, it's fun for me to recount what happened so I don't forget. Onward!

So this was day 3, and the plan was to just hang out in Hall H all day because there was a lot of really good stuff going on that day. There were a couple of things that we weren't really super excited about, but it wasn't worth leaving and then trying to get back in later. So the hall opened at about 10 so I think we ended up getting out there about 6:30 or something. We were really trying to stay on east coast time so it was really like it was 9:30, so that's not so bad right? The cool thing was that now that all the Twilight people had left we were actually really close to the front of the line. Even though we got there just as early as the previous day, we were maybe only like 500 people back as opposed to like 2,500.

So we got into the hall and were able to secure a seat about 10 rows back on the left side of the stage. Just about perfect. We tried in between panels during the day to move closer to the center but it was a freaking madhouse over there with people ninja-ing into seats the instant they became available. Oh well, we were still content with our spot. Then the day got started. The first panel of the day was Warner Brothers. They had a bunch of awesome stuff to show. They started off with the kid who plays Max in the upcoming Where the Wild Things Are (who's name, incidentally, is Max Records..freaking best name ever) coming out to introduce some clips. He was so cute, and he wrote notes about what to say on his hand. I already love this kid. Then they showed a short clip of Spike Jonze talking to Maurice Sendak about the movie, and Maurice seems to think that Spike is doing a fantastic job, which from what I saw I have to agree with, but getting Sendak's approval is pretty much the best recommendation you can hope for. Then they showed a few scenes from the movie itself that totaled probably 15 minutes or so...maybe longer. It all looked absolutely fantastic. I'm SO glad they went more with guys in suits for the monsters. It just helps so much with the overall feel of the film, plus actually giving something for Max to tangibly interact with and emotionally connect with works wonders. I've always been a fan of Spike Jonze's style and it just seems perfectly suited for this, and from what I saw it really looks like he's keeping the core and soul of the book completely in tact, so that made me feel all warm and fuzzy.

Next up from the Warners was The Book of Eli. I knew absolutely nothing about this movie going into this, other than the title and that Denzel is in it. I gotta say though, it looks like a lot of fun. The Hughes brothers are directing, and looking at their resume, they've done some pretty good work (Dead Presidents, American Pimp, Menace II Society) so that's promising. Plus just look at the cast: Gary Oldman, Denzel Washington, and Mila Kunis (we actually almost literally ran into her in a hallway later on that day). Anyway, they showed a sort of extended trailer for the movie and it looks awesome. Sort of a modern Mad Max minus the cars, which kinda sounds like you're taking away the best part, but Denzel gets to be a total badass and that's ALWAYS fun to watch. Apparently he did all his own fight scenes too...nice. Also Gary Oldman let slip that they're starting to shoot the next Batman movie next year to set up for a 2011 release. Very interesting considering Chris Nolan still hasn't confirmed that he's doing it...so who is?

After that was onto something I also didn't know anything about and didn't particularly care too much about either: the new Nightmare on Elm Street. Now granted, I've only seen 2 or 3 of the original Nightmares, but I really dug them, and a lot of that is because of Robert Englund. He absolutely IS Freddy, and the fact that he's not in this new version really hurts it right out of the gate. They did, however, get Jackie Earle Haley in the role because apparently he's doing every movie and TV show ever now, and judging from the footage the dude can definitely pull it off. The footage was still kind of underwhelming. They say its not an origin story, but that's kind of all the footage they showed was. I don't know. I wouldn't mind seeing it, but I'm not gonna line up for it.

In yet more news that I didn't know about, the next panel was for Jonah Hex. I apologize for not even knowing this was a comic in the first place because it definitely seems awesome. I'm not really a big fan of westerns per se, with the exception of Tombstone and Unforgiven, but I do love when they ratchet up the action and sort of Spaghetti 'em up. I think the setting is great, but I only really dig the western machismo when it's pushed over the top. Anyway, I hope the director, Jimmy Hayward, can pull it off considering his only previous directing experience is Horton Hears a Who. The main people from the cast were on the panel, including Josh Brolin, who is a total badass, Megan Fox, who is very hot but was wearing far too much makeup, and Michael Fassbender, who I don't know, but I felt bad for because people were only asking (stupid) questions to Megan. The stuff they showed from the movie looked like a whole lot of fun and actually had glimpses of Megan Fox actually...acting. Crazy. Also, Will Arnett and John Malkovich, who didn't make it to the panel...you can't go wrong there. The film was definitely a surprise standout of the whole con, and a lot of people were buzzing about it after the panel.

To wrap up the Warner Brothers showcase we had the other project from them I was super excited about (the first being Where the Wild Things Are), Sherlock Holmes. To get things started, Robert Downey, Jr. walked onto the stage and very presidentially stepped to the podium and just soaked in the applause. He then laughed and said that he just loved it. Then he introduced the extended trailer. Unfortunately, the trailer didn't have a whole lot of stuff that wasn't in the trailer that was already out, but fortunately the stuff that's in it is freaking awesome. It's funny because when I heard they were doing a Sherlock Holmes movie with RDJ, I was in immediately, and when I saw the trailer it wasn't what I was expecting AT ALL. I don't know what I was expecting, but it wasn't that. The even better part was that I still love it. I love everything about it. RDJ, Jude Law, Rachel McAdams (who is just as cute in person...), Guy Ritchie directing...everything. Sadly neither Jude Law nor Guy Ritchie made it to the panel, but the rest of the guys there were fantastic.

So that was a wrap for the Warners. If they day would've ended there I would've been happy, but coming up next was the Disney/Pixar stuff. Considering I'm a big fan of both...this was good too. John Lasseter actually was the moderator for the whole panel which was really really cool because I think that guy is just brilliant. They really just launched right into the thick of things with announcements, all of which were really exciting. First off, for 2 weeks in October, they're releasing both Toy Story movies as a double feature in theaters...in 3D. They didn't rework it in 3D, all they did was add the second eye to the camera and saw how it turned out. They showed the intro to Toy Story 2 and it was amazing what just that little alteration did to it. Next, they announced that on Valentine's Day next year, they're releasing Beauty and the Beast in theaters in 3D. This one they actually went back in to the original cels and remastered them. They showed the Belle song, and (obviously) and the Beauty and the Beast song (dancing in the ballroom) and it was mindblowing how good they both looked. After that they talked a bit about this made for TV movie they're doing called Prep and Landing. It's about the elves that go in and sort of prep houses for Santa's arrival. They showed a bit and it was surprisingly pretty good for a made for TV movie. Then they finally spilled some beans on the new hand-drawn musical that Disney's coming out with, The Princess and the Frog. The directors, Ron Clements and John Musker (who both worked on some classics like The Little Mermaid and Aladdin), came out to talk about it a bit, and they were great. They showed some not quite finished footage, but it was still just so refreshing to see Disney getting back to what made it so great in the first place. Then a bit of a surprise. They brought out Hayao Miyazaki (who made such movies as Howl's moving castle and Spirited Away) to talk about his new movie, Ponyo. He was great. He was just such a sweet, soft-spoken, old Asian man. I wanted to hug him. They showed a pretty long clip of Ponyo, and much like his other movies, it was beyond words. Out of context I had no idea what I was watching, but it was absolutely, jaw-droppingly beautiful. The fact that he does all this animation by hand makes me never want to pick up a pencil and draw again. It was a perfect note to end on, and then Patton Oswalt came out to take some questions, which were actually very good this time.

Next on the agenda was something I've been really stoked about since the first trailer I saw maybe almost a year ago, 9. It made me go watch the short film that director Shane Acker first started with, and it was great, so it only made me more excited about this movie coming out. I mean the sheer fact that he had an idea that made Tim Burton seek him out to tell him that he would like to help this movie become a reality tells you how good it is. The whole world that Shane has created just seems so rich and deep, that it really draws you in. they showed a very pivotal scene in the movie and you really get a great feel for the characters and this world they live in, and the action is top notch. The panel was excellent too, Shane was there, Tim Burton (again!!), Timur Bekmambetov (who's also producing it...he directed Wanted), Elijah Wood, and Jennifer Connely. They all seem VERY excited about this project, and that really rubbed off on the audience I feel like.

After the 9 panel, we got a glimpse at a movie called Legion coming out. I knew absolutely nothing about this one either. It's basically kind of a world-ending war between angels and people. The director, Scott Stewart, kept basically selling it on the basis that it has angels with machine guns. Pretty good sales pitch, Mr. Stewart. The footage looked like a bit of fun, plus it's got Paul Bettany who I like a lot, and Doug Jones who's a pretty fantastic character actor.

Now, to top off a number 9 sandwich, we got to the District 9 panel. I think this movie came out of the con as the definite winner. They had a secret screening of it the night before and the buzz about it was off the charts. I had been totally excited about this since the Halo movie that Peter Jackson was producing fell through. When I had first heard about that project I researched the director he had tapped, Neil Blomkamp, and watched all his short films and loved all of them. The faux-documentary style with a science fiction edge, and the seamless CG was all brilliant. This film actually draws its inspiration from one of Neil's shorts that he made, Live in Jo-burg, which if you haven't seen it...check it out. It was awesome seeing Peter Jackson in person and seeing how much he believes in this project and how he said that it's sort of gotten him re-interested in doing smaller, lower-budget movies. It was funny too how the first thing he said when he walked out was clearing the air about the Hobbit. He basically said that they're not even to a point where they can start offering roles to anyone yet, so don't ask. They showed probably 20 minutes of footage from District 9 and even with how excited I was about it..it still fascinated me. I cannot WAIT to see this, and I'm pissed that I'll be out of town (for work, no less) this weekend when it comes out.

So that was our day in Hall H. It was a long one, but it was chock full of awesomeness. The awesomeness didn't even stop there! Earlier in the day we ran into some guys with fliers and Flynn's Arcade (from Tron) tokens. The fliers said something like “help us find Flynn!” and had a star on a map of downtown San Diego, and had business hours: 9:00 - ???. Sounds like a party. It seemed like a good idea so when we were walking around looking for dinner we figured we'd walk by the address and see what it was. When we found the address, we found a building with all the windows blacked out and a big neon sign that just said in all caps FLYNNS, and a paper hand-written sign on the door that said “Flynn's Arcade, open @ 9pm.” We knew immediately, that we had to check this thing out. We went and grabbed some food pretty much next door, and took a load off for a bit. Then at about 8 we walked over to Flynn's and it turned out there were already some people lining up, so we did too. More and more people started turning up but we were still probably 10 people from the front, and right at 9 they opened the doors. It was awesome. They had a fully-functional arcade set up in there with tons of neon signs including a “Home of Tron” sign, and 80's music blasting over the stereo. All the games were free so we immediately played a game of air hockey (I won). Then we split off and I went and played a couple games of the actual Tron cabinet they had set up (!!!) and took some pictures, grinning ear to ear the whole time. They had a few Space Paranoids cabinets set up too, which is another game from Tron. My wife was playing some Marble Madness when I caught up to her and I started talking to another guy that was taking pictures and he was like “I'm just waiting for that back wall to open up.” Just then, Separate Ways by Journey came on the stereo...noticeably louder than the previous songs. The other picture taking guy and I looked at each other and both kinda said “maybe we should move that way now.” I grabbed my wife who had just finished getting a new high score just as the lights and sound started to flicker. Then, sure enough, the wall that the Tron cabinet was resting against opened up, and the music changed to some Daft Punk. As we walked through the dark hallway behind the game, the walls were lined with concept drawings of the new light cycle from Tron Legacy and a couple other vehicles from the movie, and then we turned the corner. Sitting there, on a spinning round pedestal was a real honest-to-god light cycle. Not real in the sense that it was going to drive out of there, but real in the sense that it was there, in the real world. After a few minutes of gawking at it and taking pictures and wondering how long it would take for one of the security guys to beat the life out of me by the time I jumped the rope, we continued down the hallway and we got shirts with big print on them that say “Flynn Lives.” When we left there was a LOT more people in line than had been when we had gotten in. Then we walked giddily away and back to the hotel. Whew!

How did I not hear about this?!

A lot of people (not myself) are sort of groaning about the oversaturation of zombies in pop-culture right now. While I do agree that there does seem to be an abundance of the undead around in various media, I don't think that's a bad thing. Granted I've been playing Left 4 Dead for like a week (why did I not get that earlier???) so I might be even more skewed than usual on this subject, but still. I feel like the Zombie genre is just so ripe for going in so many different directions, it's still not tapped out yet.

The main cool thing about zombies is that they absoluetly satisfy human fascination with death, without really making us feel guilty. These things only resemble humans in body shape, but we feel no remorse for brutally killing them because well, frankly, they're dead already. Because of this it allows us to explore the more morbid side of human curiosity (what happens to a body when it gets attacked with a lawnmower?) without making us feel bad for watching it or wondering about it in the first place.

In recent years since there's been a divide slowly being drawn between fast and slow zombies, it also opens you up for directions you can take zombie media. For instance fast zombies can be more of a thriller/suspense/action product, such as 28 Days Later (even though they're not technically zombies..), the re-made Dawn of the Dead, and the game Left 4 Dead. Slow zombies can be more suitable for comedy because they're not all up in your face all the time, so it gives you more time to play with writing-wise, such as Shaun of the Dead, Fido, etc. Slow moving zombies can provide a good amount of suspense and dramatic tension as well, just as long as the scenes are set up properly. George Romero USED to be great at that.

Anyway those are just some things I've been thinking about, and seeing this trailer really brought all the thoughts to the forefront of my head because this looks like even still another direction I haven't seen anybody take with the undead and it looks great!

(Not so) lightning-round recap of Comic-Con, Part 2

Alright, so here's day 2...which is actually day 1 of the con, but if you count preview night then...well you get it. Since this was the first day where stuff actually started to go down, there were (expectedly) a lot more people there. Luckily we were prepared for the lines. We had fortunately watched a very informative “con survival guide” video over at uglycouchshow.com. It was funny and it really explained a lot of things well for the noobs like us. For instance, we wanted to hit Hall H (the biggest hall there...fits about 6500 people) first thing in the morning for the Disney 3D Showcase, which started at 10, so we had been thinking get there around 8-8:30 and we'd be fine. After watching that video we decided to push it ahead and we got there around 7:15 or so. Good thing we did because we were still about 3,000 people back. We could've still gotten in had we gotten there later but we would have been MUCH farther back.

The crowd in this line was skewed because the Twilight panel was that day, and TONS of Twi-tards had taken over the line spots the night before. To elaborate on the Twilight panel...it wasn't just Twilight. It was whatever the studio is that puts it out, so it was like Astroboy, something else, THEN like 20 minutes of Twilight. And they hadn't even announced who was going to be there! So these people camped out to see 20 minutes of something that may or may not have people they want to see...wow. I feel bad talking down about Twilight fans because I know there are some people that are legitimate fans, and I (of all people, obviously) understand that we're all geeks for something. However (most of ) the Twilighters bug me because they're not fans of the mythology, or the story, or the books, or the character development, or whatever....they're fans of that one hot guy from the movies. Drives me freaking crazy. Anyway this was the only day we had to deal with that. We weren't in there for that panel but apparently as soon as it ended something like 75% of the room left...crazy. End rant.

Anyway, on to the fun stuff. So we were in line for a couple hours, which really wasn't too bad, and then we got into the massive, hangar-like Hall H. Did I mention it was huge? We found a seat pretty much dead center of the room...lots of people in front of us and behind us. They were actually really decent seats, and considering they had a massive screen above the stage, and 2 more massive screens out over the audience, we had no problem seeing anything up close if we needed to.

Then the ball got rolling. The director of programming for Comic-Con, with whom we became very familiar with over the week, came out and said a few words, then introduced the moderator for the Disney 3-D panel, Patton Oswalt. First off, I just love that guy. He's genuinely funny, always just seems like a good dude, and he really is sort of proof that geeks can make it in this world. Anyway he kinda gave the rundown of what we were into, then he brought out the first guest, Robert Zemeckis. He was there to talk about his newest CG venture, A Christmas Carol. Going in I wasn't really expecting much from this. I mean there's been so many Christmas Carol adaptations and everything, plus there are the issues with the “realistic” CG movies dealing with the uncanny valley and all that. He did make a point as to him not being done with live-action. He just really believes in the technology and the freedom it gives you as a director to be able to put your camera literally anywhere. Also, and I agree, it makes effects blend a lot more seamlessly. For instance when something “unnatural” happens, you're not thinking “oh, that's CG” because the whole thing is. Anyway, they showed a good 10 minute portion of the movie (the part where Marley first visits Scrooge) and I have to say it was genuinely intense. I'm so glad he's taking that direction with it, because there is some seriously messed up stuff in that story that usually ends up getting glossed over. Also, the CG was most impressive. They've much improved upon the way eyes work, and the way Jim Carrey's eyes dart around so much to show so much emotion it would have been a total shame for that not to come across, but it really did beautifully. The 3-D was top notch too. I love 3D when it's done well and not just throwing crap at the screen to make you duck or something...it just gives so much more depth to scene. I was a little skeptical about Jim Carrey too for whatever reason but the more I thought about it, who better to play multiple characters? And he totally nailed Scrooge in the clip we saw. As Mr. Oswalt put it to Mr. Zemeckis: “you really made the scary parts scary!” and that's a good thing. Bonus: Zemeckis made a “I can neither confirm nor deny, but if I WERE to do it....” comment on a new Roger Rabbit.

If the panel were to have stopped there I would have been totally happy already, but next up was Alice in Wonderland, so needless to say I was super excited about that. Mainly because Tim Burton showed up. That was even more awesome because he's apparently never been to Comic-Con before, at least as a guest rather than an antendee, so that was cool because I hadn't been before either! He didn't really say anything earth-shattering or anything but it was still awesome to witness a conversation with one of my favorite directors ever. They showed the trailer which was so short it was almost just a teaser but the stuff in it looked great. Once again the 3D looked fantastic, and I can't wait to see it on IMAX. Apparently it was pretty much all the completed footage they had...which means they better get to work! We've of course all seen the still images but it was awesome to see stuff in motion, and by now I'm sure the trailer itself is pretty readily available but it was awesome. Patton kept prodding Tim asking if he had anything else he wanted to show and proceeded to show the trailer 2 more times. The way he kept asking you could tell something was up. Finally Burton said something along the lines of “well there is this imaginary friend, that might show up” or something, and sure enough Johnny Depp walked out, and the whole place went nuts. Especially with all the 13 year-old girl twilight fans. It was still pretty awesome though, and he proceeded to wave and say two words: “Tim Burton!” and then left.

Next up was Tron. I've always been a big fan of Tron, even though I haven't seen it in I think about...forever. However, after sitting through this panel it has made me very re-excited about it, and I've been trying to hunt it down on DVD since then. Apparently Best Buy, Target, and Wal-Mart don't carry it. WTF? Anyway, there was a good group on the panel. The director, Joseph Kosinski, the two main actors Garrett Hedlund and Olivia Wilde (you may know her as 13 from House...at least I do), and the Dude himself, Jeff Bridges. They were all very enthusiastic, especially considering how long this thing's been in development, and how little they still had to show for it. They did show a good bit of concept art that all had a very similar look to the old movie but modern enough without going overboard. There was a new light vehicle that actually had 4 wheels and could seat 2 people I think, and the newly redesigned light cycle. Also they've sort of revamped the disc arena so that looked really cool. I think only one person in the question line made a dumb Big Lebowski question for Jeff Bridges and he just laughed.

That concluded our day in Hall H. We wanted to stick around for the big Avatar panel later in the day with James Cameron, but we didn't want to stick around for Twilight in the middle...that thing really should have been first thing to clear those people out. Also we wanted to make sure we got in line early for the Dexter panel later since that was one of our keystone things that we could not miss. We had a couple hours to kill before that so we wandered around the exhibit hall some more, once again constantly giggling. We made our way over to the Image Comics booth and it turned out that Robert Kirkman (writer of the Walking Dead...one of my favorite writers, period) was signing there pretty soon so we said sweet and jumped in line for that. It also happened that the new hardcover Walking Dead, vol. 4 just came out, so I bought that. We waited in line for about an hour until he showed up. I talked to him for a bit while he was signing my book and he was totally awesome. Super nice guy, and hilarious. I always read his letters column at the end of the Walking Dead issues because hes so funny, so it was really cool to see that he's that funny in person.

I was pretty stoked after that, then we went ahead to jump in line for Ballroom 20 for the Dexter panel. Ballroom 20 is big. Not as big as Hall H obviously, but it's still about 4000 people, so the line was massive. It was outside, but it was covered so thats good, but it went alllllll the way down the side of the convention center about 5,000 feet (probably a little less than that...I'm bad at estimating) then came all the way back, then you went in. It moved pretty fast though, the line stopped when the room filled up for the Burn Notice panel, then apparently a lot of people left after that so we ended up getting in the Psych panel which was only one before Dexter. So we were only in line for like an hour and a half. Not too bad. I had never actually seen Psych, I had only heard of it offhandedly on USA at some point, but apparently a LOT of people like it as evidenced by the attendance there, and really the cast and producers that were there seemed really funny and interesting so I might give it a shot.

The Dexter panel was all I could have hoped for. We got a trailer for season 4, which looks fantastic. I like that not only are they introducing the family aspect for him to juggle but also bringing back a familiar “adversary” for him that could put some pressure on him as well. The panel was great as well. Michael C. Hall, his wife/sister Jennifer Carpenter, Julie Benz, John Lithgow, and the producers were all great. This panel probably had the best Q&A of all too. Great questions and all the guys on the panel answered well. The funniest thing to me was that Jennifer Carpenter acts exactly like her character Deb. I expected her to be completely different, but she was up there and so nervous and funny. It was very endearing. Oh Deb...

So that was that! After that we went back to the hotel, grabbed some food, and passed out. Another down, and 2 more to come!