I am giving this movie a 3.5 because it wasn’t bad, and I have of late been on a streak of really bad documentaries. Or it seems that way. Or I don’t like documentaries. I don’t know.

This movie is about four people who work as superheroes on the hollywood walk of fame. They stand there all day, all year round, and take photographs with tourists. They do accept tips, sometimes more forcefully than the tourists would prefer. Superman is absolutely obsessed; Wonder Woman actually seemed sort of normal, but can’t quite pull off being an actress; Batman was old, did sort of look like George Clooney, and had rage issues; The Hulk used to be homeless, but actually does pretty well for himself now. It is interesting enough to watch, and done well, a bit artsy, that was nice.

There is another movie coming out, supposedly this year, called The Reinactors, it is the same movie, again. The same Superman & Batman are in it, so that is pretty exciting. It is like a sequel to a documentary, except made by different people, and really isn’t that much further along in time, so it will likely be the exact same thing again. So maybe I shouldn’t watch it. Or maybe I should, and then tell you all which one is better.

This is the best one.

The image you see above is “Professor” Scotty talking to an original Macintosh Mouse. Because the mouse is where you talk to the computer so it can hear you, like a microphone. It really is a logical assumption when you are used to computers that are sort of voice activated (I say sort of because they do pretty much always need like fifteen people touching those touch screens with the crazy honeycomb visualizations).

People who don’t really care about Star Trek can enjoy this movie. They will enjoy this movie. There are real humans in it. Not the kind in silly starfleet-tight uniforms, but real people who you can tell are straight out of the 80s. It’s fun and exciting and there are whales! You couldn’t ask for more (except maybe you might ask for them to build the Enterprise on Earth, if you ask for that, if you say that will be there best – that movie will beat the whales – then you need only wait till 2009 my friend).

Update: Forgot I wrote this earlier, the short version of the post, wanted to add it: Whales! This movie is really good. Like actually genuinely good. It’s funny and occasionally clever and it only has a few places with bad special effects like when Kirk “dreams” of everyone on his crew as badly rendered 3D heads floating in milk. It has the mom from seventh heaven and some interesting interface choices like the test machine that quizzes Spock and also the giant and quite pixelated display screens at Starfleet headquarters.

Spock! Where are you? Quick snap! I will check my lifeform detector. Oh there you are, you metallic mass 2 meters long. There you are all cylindrical in shape. There you are, not just metallic but made of Terminium which I am told is what they case photon torpedoes with. Silly computer, just saying “metallic mass” when you really know what metal it is! I bet you even know the mass.

But Spock, there you are, in a pile of giant slug snakes. No wait, that is not you – there you are a few feet away in the middle of a snowy desert place. Oh and you are a little boy, and the young grow so quickly these days. Spock to find you, I sacrificed my son, and blew up my starship, but now you are back and the movie is over.

Also can anyone name three real-world devices that actually have a self-destruct? And I am talking serious explosion, not just a stop working permanently button.

Jean-Luc Godard!

Everybody was all like “Yo Patrick you gotta see this movie man dog” and I was all “?” and they were all “It’s like the best animated movie and you gotta watch watch watch” and I was all “…”

But then I saw it and got even more confused. I mean it is alright, it has some interesting metaphors and exciting scenes, but I was pretty underwhelmed. To me the best animation is done when the story works well and uses the animation as a tool. The Howl’s Moving Castle and Paprika and others that I find wonderful push the limits of the animation, creating dream-like and fantastic things, and it just wasn’t here for me.

This is a nice example of a movie with heart. It has a short and straight-forward story to tell, which is what it does. No special effects, no overly dramatic scenes, just people and their actions and the repercussions of those actions. Yeah short review, sorry all the words are sucked from me when working on a PC.

Well considering how easy my standards were set after that first movie well Mr. Wrath of Khan you had it easy. Sure, you had the benefit of a better script and better effects. Sure, you had some experience under your belt, and by experience I mean you ripped scenes frame for frame from your predecessor. And aren’t you a strange bird, the only Star Trek movie where the “bad guys” aren’t aliens, assuming you don’t count genetically modified super humans as aliens, which you shouldn’t. So Mr. Wrath of Khan, I applaud you for setting Star Trek right, even with your silly life giving biblical rocket proto-energy-cheating machine and that wonderful flare-y planet graphic which we get to keep seeing that looks like stereo volume projected on a sphere.

From some of the worst movie special effects I have seen to the absolute best comic book to film translation I have seen, beating out even my personal X-Men love, with an overdose of attitude, a decent story, amazing graphics, well thought out future interfaces (OK, some), and the promise for this to just be the first in the series. This is a movie that I found tolerable enough to see two weekends in a row (I know, I never do it, but Ben & Allison & Elliot wanted to go, and so as they say: when in Chicago, go see a movie … again).

Gosh but if you haven’t seen this movie, you probably should. I mean what else are you really doing with your time that is so important that you can’t go see Iron Man, it certainly isn’t Prince Caspian or Indiana Jones, and it better not be Speed Racer, so I expect you will be getting on seeing this. Alright. Good.

David thought it would be a good idea to watch all of the Star Trek movies, I consented – watching through a set of films that are certainly part of the backbone of American-dork-sci-fi-culture seemed prudent, especially with the release of the new J.J. Abrams: “Hey Look We Are Building The Enterprise On Earth Because We Can Even Though It Is Clearly Non Canon,” sometime next year. As the movies go, I have firm memories of all the The Next Generation films, and then some brief memories of whales and caves, also knowing that I certainly had not seen all of the older movies. But while this seemed like such a good idea at the time, within about ten minutes of the first movie I was seriously questioning what I got myself into.

The first installment of Star Trek on the silver screen is not good. At all. It does all the things that are frequently complained about of bad science fiction movies of the last few years: it has a poor script, no character development, an unrealistic (OK, maybe they all are) story, and most severly puts all of its marbles into special effects. Unfortunately special effects, and definitely 70s era special effects look so childish forty years out that this is painful to watch. The music visualizations in Windows Media Player outshine these scenes which just drag, and drag, and drag you down into the heart of an early voyager probe which has transformed into a monster killing, Milkdrop cloaked, machine that just wants to hang with the creator.

A semi-random (I had pushed for it more than once) Netflix View Instantly choice 13 Tzameti was a pretty great film, which someone who enjoys taxonomies would likely classify as a psychological thriller. Filmed in black and white, by a first time director, Géla Babluani, with his younger brother (Georges, above) starring in the film, the style, the look, the acting fits harmoniously with the story. So even with an ending that I found excessive, this was easily worth a few hours. If you really can’t stand the foreignness that this movie requires I am told that Babluani is currently working on an American version, which will be done in color and have many script changes, which therefore might work for you or might end up being an entirely different film. I don’t know if Georges is involved with the project, and if he isn’t then this one is still required viewing.

It was easy to trick Marissa into watching this movie, a simple slight exaggeration that the film, while being animated, was about Lincoln, compelled her to see it. However The Amazing Screw-On Head, which actually concerns Abraham Lincoln’s top spy and right-hand man, who happens to be just a head that can screw in to a number of bodies. This short episode, a pilot, for a never green-lighted tv series is pretty great, however no need to go through Netflix, the whole thing is available online.

This photograph is not actually a still from the movie but is a photograph by Seamus Murphy who documented the making of the movie – read more about that here and see the rest of his pictures. Super interesting article about how much of this was filmed in Palestine and the environment wasn’t exactly friendly.

Now, I was sort of exhausted while watching this movie and had some issues getting through the first third totally … err, awake. But then I think it picked up or I found some reserve energy, and I did enjoy this. It is a very artful take on suicide bombing, while at the same time goes through pains to make it as truthful to the process as possible.

I had a lot more hope for this movie than I should have. I guess Caro & Jeunet are allowed to mess up sometimes. But seriously, this is just really, average – or it just hasn’t held up for thirteen years – I am glad that I watched it on a whim or I would have seriously been disappointed.

This movie is rated NC-17. You can tell that because her awesome 40s style dress (I love those) is all pulled up and you can see skin. I like this movie though, even with the basically excessive sex. I mean, it has Tony Leung and he is really good at poignantly looking at people … so how can you go wrong with that?

Also it turns out I might like Ang Lee, which maybe I should have realized sooner but it has thus been decreed that I must go back and watch Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and The Hulk both of which I have not seen!

Also I liked this article however I really don’t think Lust, Caution has saved the curse of NC-17.

Again a movie I thought was meant to be horrible. But it wasn’t so bad. I mean SURE the original had French people going to Thailand, and this is stupid Americans going to Japan. But we love Japan right? Japan is sooo cool. It had to be there. But if you can get past that, and the fact that Pacey will always be Pacey and never anyone else, this movie is not completely horrible. Plus Pacey could have grown up and become a photographer. Also I like Rachel Dawson. Also it wasn’t really scary.

The real question: Why have I not seen this movie till now (or, last weekend as it were)? Where were my friends who should have been saying, Patrick – don’t you want to see Gattaca? Where was Netflix, telling me that I had missed a movie which is full of actors and actresses I like, has an interesting sci-fi plot, is well written, and pretty to watch? Where were all of you?

So yes, I enjoyed Gattaca, and if you like Uma Thurman or Jude Law (or even Ethan Hawke, though I wasn’t sure I liked him till now I suppose) or if you need a good science fictiony movie where they can print out your entire genetic code on a piece of paper only eight feet long, or you are just bored, you should likely spend some time with Gattaca.

For those of you who like complaints or possibly want to hate this movie, I will now provide two possible reasons:

1. I personally can’t stand movies where the entire set-up leads you to believe something bad must happen and you must sit in constant foreshadowed terror for the inevitable. And they did this a whole lot.
2. Whenever there is a mystery, and there is a slight keyboard to the head bashing mystery going on, you need a bunch of possible characters who could have committed it. This movie only has one. Right, just one. So it isn’t exactly a stumper.

I expected so much more from this movie. And by that, I think I mean, I expected more narrative and less event. Though upon further reflection, I sort of liked the simplicity that the event allowed. It just meant that while watching I was sort of waiting for more. The scenes of walking through alleys, the scene of what needs to be described as bourgeois conversation at dinner time, the conversations between the girls, all of these create the intended reality of the film. And so in the, it was minimal and almost refreshing, but certainly upsetting, at the least for the starkness, at most for the content; and I decided it was worth it.

Also Google tells me this movie is worth 144.7474 days, oh the trials and tribulations of modern living (and web search).

This movie is strange for the following reason: it is very very very pretty (cinematography, the actors and actresses, the colors, the landscapes, and of course, the water) yet – it deals with a very controversial political issue, the traditional place of widows in society.

How controversial? The film was originally meant to be made in 2000, but …

The day before filming was due to begin, the crew was informed that there were a few complications with gaining location permits. The following day we were greeted with the news that 2,000 protesters had stormed the ghats, destroying the main film set, burning and throwing it into the holy river. (source: interesting essay by camera assistant)

The film was eventually made in 2004, released in 2005. It was nominated for best foreign-language film at the oscars (for canada, in hindi), but lost to The Lives of Others, though still very much worth seeing.

What do these four people have in common?

Almost nothing. Though I am told that their life stories can be told following a Euripidean dramatic structure though I don’t really know what this means and wikipedia is not pulling its weight. But really this just means that as these four tell their stories in parallel strange yellow and black flashing and generally creepy greek-looking animations will break up the talking.

The best part of this movie is frightening wood-carved puppets, which do strange things (like rob banks). But seriously, you probably shouldn’t watch this movie, even if Netflix tells you to.

Ok, back to catching up on movies now that my site looks … interesting (so many colors!). Over break I watched Hotel Chevalier (again) and The Darjeeling Limited. Which was fun. Except Katie was tired and went to bed during it, and I think Phluff also missed some chunks. It made me decide that I really like Anjelica Huston. I enjoyed it but it is not the best ever. I also like Adrian Brody I think.

Oh also, Hotel Chevalier was much better than the real movie.