It's funny how patterns repeat themselves in your life sometimes. Even if you've been badly hurt by one before, if you're anything like me, you tend to repeat them anyway. My particular brand of Asperger's Syndrome/High Functioning Autism comes with a very strong Obsessive Compulsive side, to the point that my neuropsychologist was uncertain for a time which I had: OCD or Autism Lite.
In the end, she determined Autism Lite is the primary, and OCD secondary. I have accepted this and have been doing my best to cope with knowing I have these mental disorders.
But very recently--the last couple of days in fact--it has come to my attention that I have been repeating a destructive behavior.
When I was a child, I was bullied very badly. This resulted in my being removed from the public school system and schooled at home using electronic means of education. It also gave rise to my using more electronic means to socialize as well as some 'real life' means. My first true best friend was someone I met in an RPG chatroom based on my favorite book series at the time. She and I were friends for eight years...
But over the years I soon began to become aware that this friend's behavior towards me was harmful. Because I was so socially awkward at the time I assumed I was simply being too sensitive or that I was overreacting to the various things she did and said and that I should be a better friend. And I pushed it aside.
Things came to a head in early 2010 when my father was in the hospital nearly dying (He is fine now, he's alive and doing fair well) of complications from surgery meant to save him from lung cancer. The first day she was supportive and caring.. but when things took a turn for the worse and I really needed the additional emotional support she was completely gone. The void was huge for me as she had been my best friend for years and years! I had done my best to be there for her when she was going through hard times. She ignored my every message I sent online as well as texts I sent her via phone. This went on for a week before she finally replied.
"Jo, you wear me out. I need a break from you."
That was the end of our friendship. I clung to it for a month or two more before finally deciding to rid myself of the toxic friendship.
Fast forward two-three years and again I find myself getting into similar relationships. People who claimed to understand things like anxiety, anxiety attacks and various neuroses and yet...
I may add more details later, but I overall want to say that no matter how lonely you are, no friends are better than bad friends.
Friday, January 3, 2014
Friday, December 6, 2013
Here we are again
Well, been a couple of months. No longer been seeing so many movies, brother had to be laid off from the lovely Edison 8 Cinema due to the economy sucking the life out of anything that isn't franchised.
As for ME... a lot of things have been happening. Emotionally I've been getting things under control slowly but still could use some assistance with it. Finally managed to see some doctors about my plethora of diseases.
And I might actually have a new one or two. Seeing a new rheumatologist prompted a bunch of varying blood tests and urine tests and MANY TESTS. This included an opthalmology visit in order to be sure my eyes were not damaged before starting me on new medications.
I expected to get an all-clear, nothing wrong, start the pills. Instead, it turns out that there is pallor on both of my optic nerves. This can indicate a lot of things, but the two biggies I'm concerned about are Lupus and Multiple Sclerosis. Now, we'd been testing me for Lupus, and the medications I was going to be starting on an all clear from the eye doctor were for Lupus. Lupus fits a lot of the symptoms I've been living with for most of my adult life and would pick up explaining things where Fibromyalgia left off. Unfortunately though, MS would also explain quite a bit and with my family history (Paternal side) MS seems the more likely culprit.
The idea that I may have a severe disease (or two) is scary, but right now the most surreal thing for me is having a symptom/sign that is visible to a doctor. Something they don't have to take my word on. Optic disc pallor is not something that can be faked. And it's something that I was shocked to hear I had. Or that it was fairly serious. All of my life I've had pain that had no visible cause... and now? I don't feel like a hypochondriac. It's amazing and terrifying at the same time.
I'll try to keep things updated here, no promises on amusing content or interesting content. But, that's me for ya. :)
As for ME... a lot of things have been happening. Emotionally I've been getting things under control slowly but still could use some assistance with it. Finally managed to see some doctors about my plethora of diseases.
And I might actually have a new one or two. Seeing a new rheumatologist prompted a bunch of varying blood tests and urine tests and MANY TESTS. This included an opthalmology visit in order to be sure my eyes were not damaged before starting me on new medications.
I expected to get an all-clear, nothing wrong, start the pills. Instead, it turns out that there is pallor on both of my optic nerves. This can indicate a lot of things, but the two biggies I'm concerned about are Lupus and Multiple Sclerosis. Now, we'd been testing me for Lupus, and the medications I was going to be starting on an all clear from the eye doctor were for Lupus. Lupus fits a lot of the symptoms I've been living with for most of my adult life and would pick up explaining things where Fibromyalgia left off. Unfortunately though, MS would also explain quite a bit and with my family history (Paternal side) MS seems the more likely culprit.
The idea that I may have a severe disease (or two) is scary, but right now the most surreal thing for me is having a symptom/sign that is visible to a doctor. Something they don't have to take my word on. Optic disc pallor is not something that can be faked. And it's something that I was shocked to hear I had. Or that it was fairly serious. All of my life I've had pain that had no visible cause... and now? I don't feel like a hypochondriac. It's amazing and terrifying at the same time.
I'll try to keep things updated here, no promises on amusing content or interesting content. But, that's me for ya. :)
Sunday, July 28, 2013
From The Back Row: Pacific Rim
Alrighty! For those who are not fans of spoilers, please discontinue reading this post, and remember that if it's from the back row, it's going to contain spoilers. Also, these reviews are all my opinion. If you disagree, please state your difference in a polite manner or take it elsewhere.
Okay, are they gone? Good
Entertaining?: Braingasm. Yes.
Quality acting/scripting?: Absolutely AMAZING.
Engaging Story?: I was gripped from start to finish. I had to pee REALLY REALLY BAD by the end but I could NOT leave my seat for even a SECOND.
Relatable Characters?: Delicious future century fighter pilots? Yes please. But seriously, these characters made me want to cry from how emotionally engaged I became with them.
Stuck to Story from Book it came from?: N/A
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: Not sure it applies here, considering it's science fiction.. but I felt that should the Kaiju ever truly invade our world in a century or so this might be plausible.
My Rating: A+
My Take: Please pause for fangirl squealing.
AAAAAAAAAAAAGH OHMIGODOHMIGODOHMYGOSH THIS WAS AMAZING, THIS IS SOMETHING I COULD SEE FIFTY TIMES AND NOT GET TIRED OF IT AAAAAAHHH!!!!!!!!!
*clears throat* End fangirl squealing.
Let's get down to it! I have to say, this is in my top three movies of the year. If not the very top. (I plan to see RED 2 this week as well, so we'll see how THAT goes. >:3)
I will be honest about something: At first? I had no real interest in seeing this movie. I confess I thought that it was a revamp of some old war movie and since I'm not a grand fan of those my interest was not piqued.
Then my brother explained what it was. His words were 'Basically Godzilla meets Power Rangers.'
He gained my curiosity, and the movie got my attention. In every way. Even the first introduction scene for the Kaiju--destroying Golden Gate Bridge--was done amazingly. The way that the Jaegers were introduced, showing just what they did for the world? Uniting the nations, giving all of humanity a front to fight against... Is it bad that it made me wish that we could have something that could so completely blend nations? To put aside our old hatreds and look to the common good rather than our own petty human dooky?
Ahem. Anyway. I liked how with the introduction, they made the Kaiju attacks an established reality. They had been fighting them for years, and with that established they laid the groundwork for the world having giant robots to fight these ginormous monsters. With the pacing they had, it did not feel rushed at all. It felt like solid storytelling with a concise military tone.
The naming of the ginormous robots--Jaegers--felt VERY fitting. What better to name a monster killing machine than after a hunter? I would like to know what the reasoning was for using the German word. But then I am a details person. :)
I was very intrigued by the way that they set up the fact that every Jaeger required a dual pilot system. The way they introduced Raleigh (I THINK that's his name, my apologies if I heard it wrong.) and his brother, it put into my head just how deep the bond had to be between the pilots if they were to be the very best they could be to fight these monsters. Even with the narration explaining the fact that the better the bond, the better the trust was between pilots, I could have gathered that concept just from the way the Jaegers' interfaces were set up. The justification for needing two pilots made absolute sense to me. After all, humans have two hemispheres of their brain to share the work to operate our body. The design of a Jaeger is very interesting. They follow a lot of the same design that the human body has, only with mechanical parts rather than organic ones. The sheer massiveness of a Jaeger... sometimes you can't run a computer with a processor that isn't powerful enough to drive it. And a single human does not possess the neural strength to really pilot a Jaeger solo, at least not for a hugely sustained amount of time. It makes sense to me, at least.
The visuals of the combat going on INSIDE the Jaegers mirrored by the Jaeger's own movements was pure fun to watch. The implied level of synchronicity needed to properly drive and fight with the machine was mind boggling to watch. And the concept of 'The Drift' was... very heavy. I could not imagine having to not only be able to fight alongside someone, but be able and willing to share everything that I knew, had experienced and remembered with that other person. I could never picture myself doing that, so I'd probably be a TERRIBLE Jaeger pilot. Intense paranoia of people and all. >:3
I did find something a LITTLE hinky about the method they used for trying to match Raleigh up with a new copilot. Purely going on compatibility of style when it comes to combat seems a little strange--I mean I was glad that due to a little exposition from Mako it made more sense. I just would have liked to see a little more of the details behind the curtain rather than just the sparring in the dojo between Raleigh and Mako. I dearly hope there is more elaboration on this element of the compatibility process and that it's on the DVD/Blu ray deleted scenes or special features when it comes out.
And then came the first 'Drift' these two had. This was interesting to watch, as you had already been introduced to a proper 'neural handshake' (I LOVE the jargon used in this film. It made it that much more fun to watch.) between partners who had been working together pretty much forever, the contrast between that handshake and the trial run of the Gipsy Danger with Mako ... the difference was at first fine. Then the similarities ended when Raleigh had a flashback and then Mako became lost in her memories in a post-traumatic stress induced trip down memory lane.
Aside from Mako and Raleigh, seeing the other Jaeger pilots was very fun. The whole vibe of them being much more like the fighter pilots of older wars, the machismo of nearly every pilot introduced was delightful!
The rest of the cast was incredible as well. I especially adored seeing Mr Burn Gorman coming to the silver screen as the mathematician. I may have loathed the way Torchwood ended, but he was one of the highlights of that series, and he was just as much a treat to watch here as he had been there.
The fact that he along with the other scientist, were able to put aside their scientific pissing match to come together to try and gain vital information pertaining to how to FIGHT the Kaiju had me wanting to cheer in my seat. So rare is it that in a scifi/monster flick that such things are accomplished, it seems.
Overall, this is a movie I would LOVE to see again, and fully intend to if at all possible. Take your kids, take your family, take your current significant other--I don't care who you take but SEE THIS MOVIE. SEE IT.
SEEEEEEE IIIIIIIT.
Okay, are they gone? Good
PACIFIC (FREAKIN') RIM
Entertaining?: Braingasm. Yes.
Quality acting/scripting?: Absolutely AMAZING.
Engaging Story?: I was gripped from start to finish. I had to pee REALLY REALLY BAD by the end but I could NOT leave my seat for even a SECOND.
Relatable Characters?: Delicious future century fighter pilots? Yes please. But seriously, these characters made me want to cry from how emotionally engaged I became with them.
Stuck to Story from Book it came from?: N/A
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: Not sure it applies here, considering it's science fiction.. but I felt that should the Kaiju ever truly invade our world in a century or so this might be plausible.
My Rating: A+
My Take: Please pause for fangirl squealing.
AAAAAAAAAAAAGH OHMIGODOHMIGODOHMYGOSH THIS WAS AMAZING, THIS IS SOMETHING I COULD SEE FIFTY TIMES AND NOT GET TIRED OF IT AAAAAAHHH!!!!!!!!!
*clears throat* End fangirl squealing.
Let's get down to it! I have to say, this is in my top three movies of the year. If not the very top. (I plan to see RED 2 this week as well, so we'll see how THAT goes. >:3)
I will be honest about something: At first? I had no real interest in seeing this movie. I confess I thought that it was a revamp of some old war movie and since I'm not a grand fan of those my interest was not piqued.
Then my brother explained what it was. His words were 'Basically Godzilla meets Power Rangers.'
He gained my curiosity, and the movie got my attention. In every way. Even the first introduction scene for the Kaiju--destroying Golden Gate Bridge--was done amazingly. The way that the Jaegers were introduced, showing just what they did for the world? Uniting the nations, giving all of humanity a front to fight against... Is it bad that it made me wish that we could have something that could so completely blend nations? To put aside our old hatreds and look to the common good rather than our own petty human dooky?
Ahem. Anyway. I liked how with the introduction, they made the Kaiju attacks an established reality. They had been fighting them for years, and with that established they laid the groundwork for the world having giant robots to fight these ginormous monsters. With the pacing they had, it did not feel rushed at all. It felt like solid storytelling with a concise military tone.
The naming of the ginormous robots--Jaegers--felt VERY fitting. What better to name a monster killing machine than after a hunter? I would like to know what the reasoning was for using the German word. But then I am a details person. :)
I was very intrigued by the way that they set up the fact that every Jaeger required a dual pilot system. The way they introduced Raleigh (I THINK that's his name, my apologies if I heard it wrong.) and his brother, it put into my head just how deep the bond had to be between the pilots if they were to be the very best they could be to fight these monsters. Even with the narration explaining the fact that the better the bond, the better the trust was between pilots, I could have gathered that concept just from the way the Jaegers' interfaces were set up. The justification for needing two pilots made absolute sense to me. After all, humans have two hemispheres of their brain to share the work to operate our body. The design of a Jaeger is very interesting. They follow a lot of the same design that the human body has, only with mechanical parts rather than organic ones. The sheer massiveness of a Jaeger... sometimes you can't run a computer with a processor that isn't powerful enough to drive it. And a single human does not possess the neural strength to really pilot a Jaeger solo, at least not for a hugely sustained amount of time. It makes sense to me, at least.
The visuals of the combat going on INSIDE the Jaegers mirrored by the Jaeger's own movements was pure fun to watch. The implied level of synchronicity needed to properly drive and fight with the machine was mind boggling to watch. And the concept of 'The Drift' was... very heavy. I could not imagine having to not only be able to fight alongside someone, but be able and willing to share everything that I knew, had experienced and remembered with that other person. I could never picture myself doing that, so I'd probably be a TERRIBLE Jaeger pilot. Intense paranoia of people and all. >:3
I did find something a LITTLE hinky about the method they used for trying to match Raleigh up with a new copilot. Purely going on compatibility of style when it comes to combat seems a little strange--I mean I was glad that due to a little exposition from Mako it made more sense. I just would have liked to see a little more of the details behind the curtain rather than just the sparring in the dojo between Raleigh and Mako. I dearly hope there is more elaboration on this element of the compatibility process and that it's on the DVD/Blu ray deleted scenes or special features when it comes out.
And then came the first 'Drift' these two had. This was interesting to watch, as you had already been introduced to a proper 'neural handshake' (I LOVE the jargon used in this film. It made it that much more fun to watch.) between partners who had been working together pretty much forever, the contrast between that handshake and the trial run of the Gipsy Danger with Mako ... the difference was at first fine. Then the similarities ended when Raleigh had a flashback and then Mako became lost in her memories in a post-traumatic stress induced trip down memory lane.
Aside from Mako and Raleigh, seeing the other Jaeger pilots was very fun. The whole vibe of them being much more like the fighter pilots of older wars, the machismo of nearly every pilot introduced was delightful!
The rest of the cast was incredible as well. I especially adored seeing Mr Burn Gorman coming to the silver screen as the mathematician. I may have loathed the way Torchwood ended, but he was one of the highlights of that series, and he was just as much a treat to watch here as he had been there.
The fact that he along with the other scientist, were able to put aside their scientific pissing match to come together to try and gain vital information pertaining to how to FIGHT the Kaiju had me wanting to cheer in my seat. So rare is it that in a scifi/monster flick that such things are accomplished, it seems.
Overall, this is a movie I would LOVE to see again, and fully intend to if at all possible. Take your kids, take your family, take your current significant other--I don't care who you take but SEE THIS MOVIE. SEE IT.
SEEEEEEE IIIIIIIT.
From The Back Row: RIPD
Alrighty! It's that time again! Time for those who are not fans of spoilers, to discontinue reading this post, and remember that if it's from the back row, it's going to contain spoilers. Also, these reviews are all my opinion. If you disagree, please state your difference in a polite manner or take it elsewhere.
Okay, are they gone? Good
Entertaining?: Not especially
Quality acting/scripting?: Not really.
Engaging Story?: Absolutely not.
Relatable Characters?: Nope.
Stuck to Story from Book it came from?: N/A
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: None at all.
My Rating: D
My Take: Just... just don't waste your money on it. This movie had so much potential! But it wasted ALL OF IT. The story was rushed, there was no setup for any sort of emotional investment with the characters or story... it... it just... there were no RULES for their universe. The whole movie just had a vibe as though it were a bunch of kids playing make believe and were making it up as they went along. The only thing I really liked in the movie was Kevin Bacon, and that's it. Not worth ticket money at all. GO SEE PACIFIC RIM INSTEAD.
Okay, are they gone? Good
RIPD
Entertaining?: Not especially
Quality acting/scripting?: Not really.
Engaging Story?: Absolutely not.
Relatable Characters?: Nope.
Stuck to Story from Book it came from?: N/A
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: None at all.
My Rating: D
My Take: Just... just don't waste your money on it. This movie had so much potential! But it wasted ALL OF IT. The story was rushed, there was no setup for any sort of emotional investment with the characters or story... it... it just... there were no RULES for their universe. The whole movie just had a vibe as though it were a bunch of kids playing make believe and were making it up as they went along. The only thing I really liked in the movie was Kevin Bacon, and that's it. Not worth ticket money at all. GO SEE PACIFIC RIM INSTEAD.
Thursday, July 4, 2013
From The Back Row: The Lone Ranger
Well, this should be an interesting installment. I had heard a lot about this movie before I saw it. Primarily about certain issues with casting...
Let's get the show on the road, shall we? As always, I shall warn those who are on the Spoiler Police Squad need not get their panties in a knot, I am giving you ample warning before I begin my review! Turn back now or your butthurt comments about spoilers will be ridiculed generously.
Again, those who are not fans of spoilers, please discontinue reading this post, and remember that if it's from the back row, it's going to contain spoilers. Also, these reviews are all my opinion. If you disagree, please state your difference in a polite manner or take it elsewhere.
Okay, are they gone? Good.
Entertaining?: YES
Quality acting/scripting?: Yes
Engaging Story?: Definitely
Relatable Characters?: Very much so
Stuck to Story from Book/Show it came from?: I'm too young to have seen the original Lone Ranger series.
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: Decent
My Rating: A
My Take: WOW. This was a VERY interesting ride.
And I better delve into this first: I LIKED JOHNNY DEPP AS TONTO. I am sorry to all my friends who think a full Native-American actor should have been put into the role, but I think their choice was justified. And I will explain why.
Just not right away. I have to say first, the device they use to put Tonto in as the narrator was clever. I very much enjoyed the way the movie would at times cut from the story back to where Tonto and the young lad he was telling the story to were. ...In fact I couldn't help but laugh my ass off a bit. Especially the points where Tonto apparently demonstrated some truly magical 4th Wall Smashing abilities. (Lol Peanuts bag)
Anyone who knows me knows that I LOVE me some well done villains. And Butch Cavendish? Oh. My. Goodness. This man was pure evil with a lovely set of scars and a tendency towards cannibalism. This jacked up, evil cowboy was a joy to watch. Cole on the other hand? He was evil... but he was far too gentlemanly and subtle an evil for me. Sure he was half of the team, but his being part of it was much too obvious. He might have been the overall brains of their outfit, but he did not have the same 'love to hate him' quality. He was more a '...Okay, when does this asshole die already?' kind of villain.
The first arrival of John--Armie Hammer--was nothing but pure, clumsy, goodhearted but in no way street-smart comedy. Every move he made, from trying to make a good gesture by rescuing a child's dolly to coming to the rescue of Tonto in the prison car... goodness. This boy is as green as Kermit the friggen Frog. I couldn't help but 'D'aww' at his blundering about as he and Tonto made their way through trying to foil the train robbery/jailbreak.
And he maintains this quality, even as he goes through watching his brother die at the hands of Tonto's wendigo, seeing this monster devour his brother's heart raw and even up to when he THINKS he's bringing all the misdeed by Cavendish to light and justice. John is very stubborn and has that childlike idealistic view of how justice and the world works and it's very endearing! And all the more heartbreaking when he realizes that his vision of how justice is served has been horribly wrong. I fell in love with his character from the moment that dolly went flying.
Tonto... goodness. I was confused at first about how the shriveled up old Injun could be standing in a San Francisco sideshow and not be some sort of wax model. But that didn't make the character unlovable at all. In fact, some of Tonto's more interesting tics are demonstrated in the first few moments of the film: Trading and feeding his dead crow-hat. And the MOMENT he called Cavendish a wendigo it had me squeeing a bit. (Sure, it brought to mind the Supernatural episode involving one, but it also brought forward memories of reading the book Pet Semetary in my youth.)
I will now explain why I think casting Johnny Depp as Tonto was a smart move. Yes, yes, he's an A list actor and always brings in a crowd but that's not why I feel he was a great fit.
When you get to the point where he and John end up in contact with a tribe of the Comanche, and get more of a background on his character, to me it is made so clear that he was meant to stand out as NOT QUITE RIGHT. He wasn't supposed to seem as though he was always this badass indian who was wise and stoic. Tonto is not right in the head entirely, and is an outsider even to his own people. This to me is why they had to cast someone who did not fit. Yes, in the end Tonto does end up being right about the majority of things--especially the 'stupid horse'--but that does not change the fact that much like John ends up being, he is not a fit even with his own people. I applaud their casting choice and I think that Depp pulled it off remarkably. Especially with that stupid bird-hat.
Their dynamic and how it ends up molding them into a near perfect corruption-fighting duo is a joy to watch. Especially as John sheds his innocence and realizes that Tonto was right: Sometimes the good men must wear a mask. That one aspect of the film that is well followed through was strong and very expertly reinforced when John discovers Cole's involvement and is betrayed by the general of the US Army in favor of the corruption. That moment when he and Tonto are finally on the same page, in a way they had not quite reached until the moment they are sitting by the river and watching as the blood of the slaughtered Comanche... it twisted my heartstrings all up in knots, but I was glad to see it. The turning point was clear and well orchestrated. The fact that the makers of this film did not shy away from making it clear that the Native Americans were the ultimate victims in this ordeal is something I deeply admire them for.
The supporting cast was just as amazing as the main characters! Flamboyant Frank, Red, Rebecca--they were all very enjoyable. Rebecca's accent alone actually had me swooning a bit. She might not have been as gorgeous as your typical love interest lady, but she certainly was more than a match for those who stood in her way than most might have thought. After all, she was a western woman who had to know how to use a gun to defend her family and her people.
Helena Bonham-Carter's role as Red the Madame was certainly interesting. The fact that her entire leg was made of ivory and could function as a gorramn rifle? I liked that quite a bit. Her simple statement about 'What Butch Cavendish took from me' and the pan up to the portrait of her as a ballerina... it not only said a lot about her character--for all she was not a main or core character, but a supporting one--but it said a lot about the character of Cavendish.
Of course, I have to give a bit of text to the horse. Silver. Goodness, Tonto is not kidding when he says 'something is very wrong with that horse'. And the beast's apparent ability to leap flaming barns in a single bound, appear on a tree branch or even to guzzle his share of whiskey, Silver is a helluva character in his own right.
I very greatly enjoyed this movie. I think it was almost up on the same level as Pirates of the Caribbean. Maybe not QUITE, but it was just as much fun a ride as PotC was.
Next Time: Despicable Me 2
Let's get the show on the road, shall we? As always, I shall warn those who are on the Spoiler Police Squad need not get their panties in a knot, I am giving you ample warning before I begin my review! Turn back now or your butthurt comments about spoilers will be ridiculed generously.
Again, those who are not fans of spoilers, please discontinue reading this post, and remember that if it's from the back row, it's going to contain spoilers. Also, these reviews are all my opinion. If you disagree, please state your difference in a polite manner or take it elsewhere.
Okay, are they gone? Good.
The Lone Ranger
Quality acting/scripting?: Yes
Engaging Story?: Definitely
Relatable Characters?: Very much so
Stuck to Story from Book/Show it came from?: I'm too young to have seen the original Lone Ranger series.
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: Decent
My Rating: A
My Take: WOW. This was a VERY interesting ride.
And I better delve into this first: I LIKED JOHNNY DEPP AS TONTO. I am sorry to all my friends who think a full Native-American actor should have been put into the role, but I think their choice was justified. And I will explain why.
Just not right away. I have to say first, the device they use to put Tonto in as the narrator was clever. I very much enjoyed the way the movie would at times cut from the story back to where Tonto and the young lad he was telling the story to were. ...In fact I couldn't help but laugh my ass off a bit. Especially the points where Tonto apparently demonstrated some truly magical 4th Wall Smashing abilities. (Lol Peanuts bag)
Anyone who knows me knows that I LOVE me some well done villains. And Butch Cavendish? Oh. My. Goodness. This man was pure evil with a lovely set of scars and a tendency towards cannibalism. This jacked up, evil cowboy was a joy to watch. Cole on the other hand? He was evil... but he was far too gentlemanly and subtle an evil for me. Sure he was half of the team, but his being part of it was much too obvious. He might have been the overall brains of their outfit, but he did not have the same 'love to hate him' quality. He was more a '...Okay, when does this asshole die already?' kind of villain.
The first arrival of John--Armie Hammer--was nothing but pure, clumsy, goodhearted but in no way street-smart comedy. Every move he made, from trying to make a good gesture by rescuing a child's dolly to coming to the rescue of Tonto in the prison car... goodness. This boy is as green as Kermit the friggen Frog. I couldn't help but 'D'aww' at his blundering about as he and Tonto made their way through trying to foil the train robbery/jailbreak.
And he maintains this quality, even as he goes through watching his brother die at the hands of Tonto's wendigo, seeing this monster devour his brother's heart raw and even up to when he THINKS he's bringing all the misdeed by Cavendish to light and justice. John is very stubborn and has that childlike idealistic view of how justice and the world works and it's very endearing! And all the more heartbreaking when he realizes that his vision of how justice is served has been horribly wrong. I fell in love with his character from the moment that dolly went flying.
Tonto... goodness. I was confused at first about how the shriveled up old Injun could be standing in a San Francisco sideshow and not be some sort of wax model. But that didn't make the character unlovable at all. In fact, some of Tonto's more interesting tics are demonstrated in the first few moments of the film: Trading and feeding his dead crow-hat. And the MOMENT he called Cavendish a wendigo it had me squeeing a bit. (Sure, it brought to mind the Supernatural episode involving one, but it also brought forward memories of reading the book Pet Semetary in my youth.)
I will now explain why I think casting Johnny Depp as Tonto was a smart move. Yes, yes, he's an A list actor and always brings in a crowd but that's not why I feel he was a great fit.
When you get to the point where he and John end up in contact with a tribe of the Comanche, and get more of a background on his character, to me it is made so clear that he was meant to stand out as NOT QUITE RIGHT. He wasn't supposed to seem as though he was always this badass indian who was wise and stoic. Tonto is not right in the head entirely, and is an outsider even to his own people. This to me is why they had to cast someone who did not fit. Yes, in the end Tonto does end up being right about the majority of things--especially the 'stupid horse'--but that does not change the fact that much like John ends up being, he is not a fit even with his own people. I applaud their casting choice and I think that Depp pulled it off remarkably. Especially with that stupid bird-hat.
Their dynamic and how it ends up molding them into a near perfect corruption-fighting duo is a joy to watch. Especially as John sheds his innocence and realizes that Tonto was right: Sometimes the good men must wear a mask. That one aspect of the film that is well followed through was strong and very expertly reinforced when John discovers Cole's involvement and is betrayed by the general of the US Army in favor of the corruption. That moment when he and Tonto are finally on the same page, in a way they had not quite reached until the moment they are sitting by the river and watching as the blood of the slaughtered Comanche... it twisted my heartstrings all up in knots, but I was glad to see it. The turning point was clear and well orchestrated. The fact that the makers of this film did not shy away from making it clear that the Native Americans were the ultimate victims in this ordeal is something I deeply admire them for.
The supporting cast was just as amazing as the main characters! Flamboyant Frank, Red, Rebecca--they were all very enjoyable. Rebecca's accent alone actually had me swooning a bit. She might not have been as gorgeous as your typical love interest lady, but she certainly was more than a match for those who stood in her way than most might have thought. After all, she was a western woman who had to know how to use a gun to defend her family and her people.
Helena Bonham-Carter's role as Red the Madame was certainly interesting. The fact that her entire leg was made of ivory and could function as a gorramn rifle? I liked that quite a bit. Her simple statement about 'What Butch Cavendish took from me' and the pan up to the portrait of her as a ballerina... it not only said a lot about her character--for all she was not a main or core character, but a supporting one--but it said a lot about the character of Cavendish.
Of course, I have to give a bit of text to the horse. Silver. Goodness, Tonto is not kidding when he says 'something is very wrong with that horse'. And the beast's apparent ability to leap flaming barns in a single bound, appear on a tree branch or even to guzzle his share of whiskey, Silver is a helluva character in his own right.
I very greatly enjoyed this movie. I think it was almost up on the same level as Pirates of the Caribbean. Maybe not QUITE, but it was just as much fun a ride as PotC was.
Next Time: Despicable Me 2
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
From The Back Row: Monsters University & World War Z
Hello hello. Today I had the pleasure of seeing two films back to back, courtesy of my brother and the theater he works for. Those films are: Monsters University and World War Z. So, those who are not fans of spoilers, please discontinue reading this post, and remember that if it's from the back row, it's going to contain spoilers. Also, these reviews are all my opinion. If you disagree, please state your difference in a polite manner or take it elsewhere.
Okay, are they gone? Good.
Entertaining?: Yes
Quality acting/scripting?: Yes
Engaging Story?: Sort of
Relatable Characters?: Yes
Stuck to Story from Book it came from?: N/A
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: N/A, Animated Film
My Rating: B
My Take: Having grown up on Disney/Pixar stuff, I was of course excited for this. (I would have watched Monsters Inc beforehand but our DVD of it was watched so many times my DVD player can't pick it up anymore. Hnnnngh!) I actually almost persuaded my brother to buy the DVD/Blu Ray combo because it came with free tickets at one time to go see the prequel. ...How serendipitous that then my brother gets a job at our new favorite theater in our area? (Edison 8, awesome place. Big screens, great sound, great prices on concessions/tickets.)
Moving on. I was disarmed by just how adorable Mike Wazowksi was as a child. I was disappointed however that a certain gigantic purple & turquoise monster did not make an adorable childhood appearance, but that's just me.
Being a detail-oriented person, I definitely loved seeing more behind the scenes things about another world. Their schools, their childhoods. How even as monsters they aren't immune to the most human of experiences: Being social outcasts, which is the primary focus of the film, it would seem. Another aspect is how if you rely on your family name/reputation but don't put in the work you're not going to succeed in a college setting.
This film pretty much hit all the 'prequel' points. Set up why they ended up where they are in the next film, established motivations, history and even showed how Randall and Sulley ended up archenemies in Monsters Inc. ...BUT... I have to agree with my brother's take on this one. This movie did not hold the same magic, the same spark that made Monsters Inc the standout, amazing film that it is. (Basically, it isn't the same Pixar amazing-sauce product we all adore and desire more of.) Don't get me wrong, it was plenty of fun to watch--especially rooting out which monster Nathan Fillion was the voice of.--but... eh. It wasn't as great. Fun to watch, in several years I'll have fun watching it along with the two baby cousins I have along with the rest of Disney and Pixar's work.
Though the great Nathan Fillion's character was enjoyable, I admit, my favorite of the 'new' characters in this movie was Dean Hardscrabble. Her design was brilliantly done, and the voice actor definitely captured her character. She was just creepy enough to justify her position as Dean and head of the Scare program, but elegant and graceful enough to still have an element of femininity. LOVED her wings!
Looking forward to seeing Despicable Me 2, while on the subject of animated movies...
Entertaining?: Meh
Quality acting/scripting?: Eh...
Engaging Story?: Sort of
Relatable Characters?: Not really
Stuck to Story from Book it came from?: Not that I've heard, pretty certain it bastardized it.
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: Believable to me.
My Rating: B
My Take: First and foremost, I love horror films. I love thrillers. I enjoy this genre in much of its incarnations and I am fascinated by the fictional subgenre of the Undead (vampires, zombies, etc.) I have been for years. I geeked a bit when the 'Rakshasa' was mentioned, a throwback to Eastern mythology relating to the undead maneaters. BUT. I think it was improperly used.
MOVING ON. This movie was ... a good time killer? I don't know that I'd go see it again. I remember the first time I saw 28 Days Later... I raved about it for weeks and weeks and it provided me with hours of enjoyment. (Cillian Murphy, mmm...)
World War Z was something I was interested in seeing if only because I enjoy zombie flicks. (I want to see Warm Bodies. It intrigues me.) But once I was actually watching WWZ? My brother and I both agree that they paced it poorly. I think they did not allow for adequate time for the viewer to become invested in this family, other than perhaps the girl who has asthma and the little boy they end up adopting into their circle.
Sure, Gerry Lane is an interesting character and he definitely has some badass moves. I liked that he seemed smart enough to be willing to throw himself from the apartment building roof in order to not put his family in danger of his possible infection. That was actually refreshing! Usually the main character or those around the main character are stupid enough to think they can hide it or fight it off. But the only reason that I felt any sort of connection with him is because A) Brad Pitt and B) They went through some effort to establish that he was the main character in this film. Other than that and his apparent previous employment with the UN, he did not seem all that interesting. He was the most interesting character IN the movie, other than the Mossad commando chick he amputates the hand of. She was definitely an interesting one, and I was very glad to see she didn't survive the siege of Israel just to get her face gnawed on for making too much noise in the WHO vaults.
Since I'm a medical nerd, I did like the fact that Gerry was able to put together that some folk were left alone because they were terminally ill. And that he was able to apply it to the situation and basically defense weaponize it? Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. My hat is off to the writer or whoever came up with this device.
Overall, my impression of this film I think has been said by other reviewers, but I have to agree. This was a B list movie with an A list budget.
Next time: The Lone Ranger
Okay, are they gone? Good.
Monsters University
Quality acting/scripting?: Yes
Engaging Story?: Sort of
Relatable Characters?: Yes
Stuck to Story from Book it came from?: N/A
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: N/A, Animated Film
My Rating: B
My Take: Having grown up on Disney/Pixar stuff, I was of course excited for this. (I would have watched Monsters Inc beforehand but our DVD of it was watched so many times my DVD player can't pick it up anymore. Hnnnngh!) I actually almost persuaded my brother to buy the DVD/Blu Ray combo because it came with free tickets at one time to go see the prequel. ...How serendipitous that then my brother gets a job at our new favorite theater in our area? (Edison 8, awesome place. Big screens, great sound, great prices on concessions/tickets.)
Moving on. I was disarmed by just how adorable Mike Wazowksi was as a child. I was disappointed however that a certain gigantic purple & turquoise monster did not make an adorable childhood appearance, but that's just me.
Being a detail-oriented person, I definitely loved seeing more behind the scenes things about another world. Their schools, their childhoods. How even as monsters they aren't immune to the most human of experiences: Being social outcasts, which is the primary focus of the film, it would seem. Another aspect is how if you rely on your family name/reputation but don't put in the work you're not going to succeed in a college setting.
This film pretty much hit all the 'prequel' points. Set up why they ended up where they are in the next film, established motivations, history and even showed how Randall and Sulley ended up archenemies in Monsters Inc. ...BUT... I have to agree with my brother's take on this one. This movie did not hold the same magic, the same spark that made Monsters Inc the standout, amazing film that it is. (Basically, it isn't the same Pixar amazing-sauce product we all adore and desire more of.) Don't get me wrong, it was plenty of fun to watch--especially rooting out which monster Nathan Fillion was the voice of.--but... eh. It wasn't as great. Fun to watch, in several years I'll have fun watching it along with the two baby cousins I have along with the rest of Disney and Pixar's work.
Though the great Nathan Fillion's character was enjoyable, I admit, my favorite of the 'new' characters in this movie was Dean Hardscrabble. Her design was brilliantly done, and the voice actor definitely captured her character. She was just creepy enough to justify her position as Dean and head of the Scare program, but elegant and graceful enough to still have an element of femininity. LOVED her wings!
Looking forward to seeing Despicable Me 2, while on the subject of animated movies...
World War Z
DISCLAIMER: I have NOT read the books.
Quality acting/scripting?: Eh...
Engaging Story?: Sort of
Relatable Characters?: Not really
Stuck to Story from Book it came from?: Not that I've heard, pretty certain it bastardized it.
Balance between Movie/Real Logic?: Believable to me.
My Rating: B
My Take: First and foremost, I love horror films. I love thrillers. I enjoy this genre in much of its incarnations and I am fascinated by the fictional subgenre of the Undead (vampires, zombies, etc.) I have been for years. I geeked a bit when the 'Rakshasa' was mentioned, a throwback to Eastern mythology relating to the undead maneaters. BUT. I think it was improperly used.
MOVING ON. This movie was ... a good time killer? I don't know that I'd go see it again. I remember the first time I saw 28 Days Later... I raved about it for weeks and weeks and it provided me with hours of enjoyment. (Cillian Murphy, mmm...)
World War Z was something I was interested in seeing if only because I enjoy zombie flicks. (I want to see Warm Bodies. It intrigues me.) But once I was actually watching WWZ? My brother and I both agree that they paced it poorly. I think they did not allow for adequate time for the viewer to become invested in this family, other than perhaps the girl who has asthma and the little boy they end up adopting into their circle.
Sure, Gerry Lane is an interesting character and he definitely has some badass moves. I liked that he seemed smart enough to be willing to throw himself from the apartment building roof in order to not put his family in danger of his possible infection. That was actually refreshing! Usually the main character or those around the main character are stupid enough to think they can hide it or fight it off. But the only reason that I felt any sort of connection with him is because A) Brad Pitt and B) They went through some effort to establish that he was the main character in this film. Other than that and his apparent previous employment with the UN, he did not seem all that interesting. He was the most interesting character IN the movie, other than the Mossad commando chick he amputates the hand of. She was definitely an interesting one, and I was very glad to see she didn't survive the siege of Israel just to get her face gnawed on for making too much noise in the WHO vaults.
Since I'm a medical nerd, I did like the fact that Gerry was able to put together that some folk were left alone because they were terminally ill. And that he was able to apply it to the situation and basically defense weaponize it? Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. My hat is off to the writer or whoever came up with this device.
Overall, my impression of this film I think has been said by other reviewers, but I have to agree. This was a B list movie with an A list budget.
Next time: The Lone Ranger
Monday, July 1, 2013
Movie Reviews
Hello again, whoever happens to be reading this. Since I have been going to an increasing number of movies lately, I have been tempted each time to write a review of whatever flick I was able to go and see. Since I have found myself without full-time employment, I need something to feel productive.
SO. Not sure what I'd call my reviews other than possibly "From the Back Row" because that's where I always try to sit for movies when going to the cinema.
And also, since I don't in believe going by the popular opinion about a movie, I have my own little checklist of criteria when going to a movie to gauge it.
How I judge a film:
Entertaining? Yes/No (Primary means of judgment)
Quality acting/scripting? Yes/No
Engaging Story? Yes/No
Relatable Characters? Yes/No
Stuck to Story from Book it came from? Yes/No/A little
Balance between Movie/Real Logic? Adequate/Imbalanced
So far I have seen/Shall Review:
Star Trek: Into Darkness
Iron Man 3
Now You See Me
After Earth
The Purge
I am going to be seeing/Shall Review:
Monsters University
World War Z
Red 2
The Lone Ranger
SO. Not sure what I'd call my reviews other than possibly "From the Back Row" because that's where I always try to sit for movies when going to the cinema.
And also, since I don't in believe going by the popular opinion about a movie, I have my own little checklist of criteria when going to a movie to gauge it.
How I judge a film:
Entertaining? Yes/No (Primary means of judgment)
Quality acting/scripting? Yes/No
Engaging Story? Yes/No
Relatable Characters? Yes/No
Stuck to Story from Book it came from? Yes/No/A little
Balance between Movie/Real Logic? Adequate/Imbalanced
So far I have seen/Shall Review:
Star Trek: Into Darkness
Iron Man 3
Now You See Me
After Earth
The Purge
I am going to be seeing/Shall Review:
Monsters University
World War Z
Red 2
The Lone Ranger
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)