Slowly Learning...

So the other day I once again woke up with a nosebleed. This is the third time this year that it's happened to me. So naturally I came to the only logical conclusion I could: My pillow case is cursed. Of course I have evidence to back this up. I have two sets of sheets, each with it's own main pillow case (i.e. the pillow for my head, since I do sleep with as many pillows as I can in my bed). Now if each day were equally likely to result in a nosebleed, say 40:1, then you'd guess that the standard sheets would have the majority of these incidents. Not so! In fact all three times have been when I've had my backup sheets on the bed. Needless to say this doesn't look so pretty on my bed since my backup sheets are basically white, and blood doesn't come out easily from that. But let's look at the statistical rational behind my conclusion. I only have the backup sheets on for like a week per month the odds of them being on are about 3:1. Comparing these numbers it's clear to see that 40 is much bigger than 1, and even 3 doesn't compare to the might of 40. So one can only conclude that the odds of my pillow case being cursed are even, with the other major option being that my pillow is the one that is cursed insted, and a distant chance of coincidence of medical situations. So until an exocism can be done on my sheets I've decided not to leave fingerprints on anything, so the cops can't trace any crimes back to me, find that my sheets are bloody, and convict me on the spot. Of course the exorcism wouldn't really get out the blood stains, so I guess I better just burn the sheets and not touch anything ever again. You can never be too careful.

Posted by Thom at 11:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Dear Computer,

Welcome back ! I missed you so much. In the short time that you were missing I realized just how much you mean to my daily life. I wouldn't go as far as to say that it revolves around you, but you do play a pretty big part. Without you I wasn't able to do all those things that make life so complete. Please don't leave me again. Without you around how am I supposed to see what movies are playing? Or check out what the weather is like? Or keep in touch with the rest of society? Or listen to music in the bathroom? Without you I couldn't even waste those precious late-night hours playing endless games of spider solitare or freecell. Without you I couldn't even take a bath, eat Ramen noodles, and watch a DVD at the same time. Also it's really annoying to have to go through 80 emails upon your return (although you did have 10 good ones for me). So stay healthy this time.

Love Always,
Thom

Posted by Thom at 10:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

So I had a dream the other night where I was arguing with my roommate about baseball and homeruns, and I like to think that I won.

Posted by Thom at 3:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

So now that I've actually seen the movie I can give you all my edited review. I must say that I was (accidentically) close on some things in my earlier review, but I must agree with Mr. Dickinson, the actual movie was better than my version. So on to the real review...

It does start a bit weird with the whole car driving scene that was in the teasers, but I can excuse that as a Tarantino-ism. I'm not gonna go through the plot (as I did earlier) but it's rather well writen. I was pleased to see that there wasn't any overly corny or out of place dialogue that can plague Tarantino's work. It didn't have anything as stupid as the sword spanking in the first film (I'm sure some of you thought that was funny, but I just found it to be out of place and stupid). As a ironic twist Vol. 2 serves as both a sequel and pre-quel all in the same movie. While about half the film focuses on the hunt for Budd, Elle, and Bill, the other half is spent exploring the reason for the wedding/killing and some other back story to Uma's character. It was all well done too and flowed nicely. It all had a reason to it, just not random jumping around. Fans of the action packed Vol. 1 may be a bit disappointed though. This film was more of a dramic action. It didn't have any gigantic clash like at the end of Vol. 1. Insted it was a lot more divided up with shorter action sequences. Don't get me wrong though, the fights were great. In fact I enjoyed them more than in the first. The smaller one-on-one battles seemed much more fluid and smooth. I've never been a big fan of massive fights though (I thought Fellowship was the best mainly because of the more intimate action). And the lack of epic action sequences succeeded because there were solid performances all around. As Dan put it "there wasn't any bad acting" (a.k.a. Tarantino left himself out of this one). The film stylings were once again well done too. Much as Vol. 1 paid homage to Japanese anime and old time TV series, Vol. 2 manages to mimic the classically cheesy Chinese action films. Tarantino is dead on right down to the camera angles, zoom-ins, and beard-stroking. I must also note that the locals for the story were more varied than what I guessed in my earlier review. It passed from desert land to China to Latin America (a good variety not used in the first). And while there weren't any foot-cams, or extended single camera action sequences, the camera work still impressed me enough.

While the first film was Tarantino doing an all out action film (and doing it really well), this one was more of Tarantino doing a more story driven action film, which is a very rare and difficult thing to do, but he did it well. But do these really count as a seperate movie from Vol. 1? Not really. I wouldn't reccommend that you see this movie without having seen the first one first. You'll probably get lost and confused. But it's hard to say it's just one movie, especially with a total running time of about 4 hours. I'd have to categorize the two films as more of a giant, big screen, mini-series. At the same time though it is the kind of thing that you could just spend an afternoon watching straight through (and I'm sure I will at some point). In my opinion these 2 movies are collectively Tarantino's best work to date. I'd even be tempted to say that they are seperately his best 2 films (depending on how I feel about Pulp Fiction that day).

Finally, to clear some things up, I'm not praising the movies and Tarantino cause I think he's some genious God-like filmmaker. I'm not one of those fanboys with my head halfway up his ass. In fact I don't really like him that much. I think he's cocky and overparised. And while I loved Pulp Fiction, and respected Resevoir Dogs, I thought Jackie Brown was crap. And at times he just seems to fill his writing with obsessive amounts of cursing to make up for his lack of writing skill. However you have to like a man who had the gull to release 6 versions of Resevior Dogs on DVD (You HAVE to collect all the different packagings!). And I do appreciate his depication of violence, which ranges from ultra-gory (i.e. realistic) to cartoonish.

So anyway, Kill Bill: Vol. 2 is a great movie, but see the first one beforehand (within the week if possible to refresh your memory).

RATING: Worth Full Price Ticket (or Multiple Cheap Tickets), Worth Purchase.

Posted by Thom at 1:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

So I went to see Kill Bill Vol. 2 tonight. Even though I knew they'd sell out I was too lazy to drag my ass up to the mall earlier, so I didn't make it in. This may stop normal people from reviewing a movie, but anyone who's been around me long enough probably realizes that I'm not normal. Therefore I've decided to review what I imagine (i.e. makeup) the movie to be. The added advantage of this method is that this review won't contain anything close to a spoiler (unless I'm psychic, which I'm pretty sure I'm not). So without further adu I give you my "review"...

First off, I loved the first movie. It was classic Tarantino in a classic old style TV action series. And with this installment (which is just a continuation of the story) he does not disappoint. The comedy and gore are still there, but the plot twist are what really get you hooked in. Now not to give too much away, but I just have to discuss the entire story here, so those of you who haven't seen the movie yet shouldn't read any further. I suggest just skipping to the end. First off "The Bride" makes her way to find Bud. Of course she finds him in the middle of the desert, cause where else would a guy in a cowboy hat live? Now maybe I was personally expecting too much out of this confrontation, due in large part to how awsome the other fights were, but this was rather anti-climatic in my mind. Uma pulls up in the PussyWagon (still a classic vehicle) and calls out to Bud. I was thinking Western Showdown at this point, but I guess Tarantino decided to go in a different direction. Insted he had Bud stumble out, completely shit faced, ranting and raving, shotgun in one hand, Jack in the other. He then smashes the bottle into the ground and shoots himself in the foot, blowing it clear off. As he stumbles around (on his only remaining foot) he manages to trip, fall, and set off the riffle, this time blowing his head off. So without lifting a finger Uma's already got one down. What does save the scene though is superb acting on the part of Michael Madsen. He really sells the whole drunken stupor (I've heard he did a lot of research for his part in the local pub). Add to this the camera work and you have the most beautiful death scene I've ever witnessed. At the end you actually follow the bullet as it travels through the barrel and into Madsen's jaw. Graphic, but glorious.

In a very weird twist that I did not see coming Uma ends up finding Bill next. You'd think he'd be last since he's the title character, but I guess Tarantino'a done too many out of order movies that he's finally lost it (see Pulp Fiction and Vol. 1). Anyway, Uma runs into Bill (played by David Carradine) as he is wandering the American West armed with only his skill in Kung Fu. They run into each other in a bar (I guess they did a lot of drinking on set) and get into a nasty game of musical chairs. After a dispute over who got the chair first gets out of hand, the two draw their weapons and clash, hardcore. Think Matrix (the good ones) meets Furi Kuri meets every Jean Claude VanDam movie ever made (they're all basically the same anyway) and you may begin to conprehend the greatness. It's amazing how it was all shot on a single tracking camera as well, forcing the actors to do it in a single take, and leaving us all amazed. Uma loses her right arm at the elbow, but manages to run Carradine through and give it a nice twist, with the usually bloody fanfair. All of this is in tune with the most perfectly orchestrated classical arean folk as well, which builds to a massive peak and cuts right out as Bill hits the floor.

There's a little interlude as we work up to the battle with Elle, which is there for comic relief in the dry wit style all Tarantino fans are familiar with. It's nice, but nothing too special. So let's get to Elle. In a change of scenery the two decide to duke it out in an old, woody building that they can smash up (wow, creative locations). This time they're both packing, and in an homage to the subway scene in the Matrix Uma and Elle gun it out as the run towards one another in impressively cinematic fashion. of course they both unload their clips without hitting each other and proceed to duke it out by hand. Here Tarantino brings out another great new camera angle in the "foot cam." Nothing gets you quite into the action like a camera sweeping out the arch of a roundhouse kick connecting with Elle's face, or a flying kick from Elle to Uma. Ultimately fighting the characters out of order proves to be Uma's downfall, as she is hindered by her missing apendage. Elle finally gets her down and finishes her off for good this time.

To wrap things up we also learn that Uma's daughter is (in a Southpark-esques twist) Elle. This comes as a shock not only to the audience (who let out a collective gasp at that point, followed by confused looks of "what the hell?") but also to Elle herself. All of this is revealed by the horriblly disfigured Sophie, who comes in to try and stop the fight, but is a minute too late, as is always the case. Elle, in an act of disbelief over what has just happened, falls to her knees and cried in the arms of Sophie (very touching scene, but a little too lovey dovey for me at this point).

Now I know it may seem difficult to wrap up what remains, but what Tarantino does seems like a bit of a punch-out ending to me, ad the building explodes, for no apparent reason. I guess he just ran out of the other trick cliche endings. Oh well, one bad ending doesn't ruin a movie.

RATING: Worth Hollywood Spending 45.2 Million to Make So We Can All Go Out and See It For a Full Priced Ticket and Then Buy Copies of 15 Different "Special Edition" DVD's

Posted by Thom at 1:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

So I was told that I had to review this album, and after puting around with the link for the free listen I finally got it to work. To some extent I almost wish I hadn't. This is the kind of music that is so bad that it's good, until you realize that there is a whole CD of this music, at which point it takes a major plumit into the deep recesses of suck. If someone as tone deaf and lacking in vocal skills as I am (I couldn't stay on key in a hip-hop track) can tell right off the bat that Hung can't sing then anyone can. There is a certain novelty in listening to a Asian man, with no vocal talent at all, trying to sing Latin pop hits over poorly done semi-midi backing instrumentation (I swear they somehow found a way to take a midi song and make it sound like something out of an old NES game, except without the campy bonus), but that novelty wears off fast. If it hasn't worn off by the 3rd track then it'll definitely be gone by the time he starts in on Hotel California. The title is fitting, but not cause this is a CD of inspirational tracks. Insted anyone can find inspiration and hope in knowing that no matter how bad your singing is there is someone else out there that is worse than you, and he got a record deal! So buck up America, our country may be in the midst of an occupation, we may be going through that annoying time of elections, gas prices may be higher than ever, we may be all out of jobs, the economy may be taking a dive, but if you make a big enough ass of yourself on national TV you too can get your own record deal.

Posted by Thom at 10:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

For me it goes something like this: Tom Hanks = Bad, Coen Brothers = Hit or Miss, Tom Hanks+Coen Brothers = Horrible Failure or Entertainingly Good Time. With an equation like that I figured I had about 2:1 odds that the movie would suck, but then again it was a weekday, so I got my student discount. Let me first say that Fall Creek is empty on a Wed night. When I got there (at 9.25) the door was locked (I guess no one came to the 7.15 shows?) and right up until the movie started I was the only person in the building (except for the 2 people working). So I guess my point is that more people should go to Fall Creek, because they tend to play good films. But I guess I should talk about The Ladykillers too, so here goes. The Coen brothers have made some great movies (Hudsucker Proxy, Big Lebowski), they've made some ok ones (Man Who Wasn't There, Fargo), they've some I haven't seen (Raising Arizona, Blood Simple, Intolerable Cruelty), and they've made some terrible movies (most noteablly O Brother, Where Art Thou?), and I guess I'd put this somewhere between great and ok (good maybe?). I do give the brothers credit for continually blending togeter such uniquely different characters into one film. The "band" has just about anyone and everyone you could think of, and somehow it works! Since I'm lazy, and don't feel like writing a whole lot of indepth opinions about the film I'm gonna keep it short. It was funny, it was unique, it wasn't quite what I was expecting (the actual robbery is only about the first half of the movie, and not really the main draw of it, much like Small Time Crooks), and it was a bit more dark of a comedy than I thought it'd be (but then again this is the same minds that gave us the previously mentioned movies). If you're looking for what looks to be a clean-cut comedic heist movie, this isn't what you want. If, on the other hand, you want something a little darker (but still funny) then you're in luck.

P.S. - It even made me not dislike Tom Hanks as I hardly recognized the character as him, kudos for that one.

RATING: Worth a Full Price Ticket, Worth a Rental

Posted by Thom at 10:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

So another week, another couple movies. First up I saw Hellboy. Now I've never read the comics at all, in fact I don't think I've ever even seen a Hellboy comic in person, so I'm not gonna dwell on the whole "does this fit the comic?" arguement. Frankly that's pointless anyway. So having left that behind, this wasn't a good movie, but it was entertaining. It has a general comic book feel to it, which you might expect from a movie based on a comic. This fails and succeeds at the same time. First it fails cause the story is rather rushed at points, and unexplained at others (who exactly is this villian? who are his helpers? why are they helping him? why do all the germans speak perfect english? why is he hellbent on destroying the Earth? why does the fishboy have psychic? how is the supreme evil so easy to beat when we can't kill a simple demon hound? etc.). However the comic style humour and the lack of taking themselves seriously was refreshing. It was sort of like MIB without the overtop jokeiness. I must say though, it is kind of funny to label it as an "agency" that fights back against paranormal evil when it's basically Hellboy fighting evil with a bunch of people watching him. However, he does kick ass nicely, all the while flashing that Ash-like charm (I'm the ass kicking hero who doesn't really give a crap). For a decently entertaining night of comic-style humour and violence ths movie works well, but if you're looking for more you're probably not gonna find it.

RATING: Worth a Student Ticket, Worth a Rental

Posted by Thom at 10:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

A friend of mine told me to read "Survivor" by Chuck Palahniuk, so I did. And I loved it. Sure it gets a bit over the top towards the end of the story, but that's still ok. It was a very addicting read (I finished it in about 2 days) and was one of the more original stories I've read in a long time. Of course this is probably what you'd expect from the man who wrote Fight Club. I don't want to give too much of the story away, but it's basically the last surviving member of a cult confessing for his life story while riding a plane to his death over the Pacific. So if you're looking for something new to read so pick up a copy, it's a good read. As for me...next up - Fight Club and/or Fabric of the Cosmos (yes I am a dork who reads scientific books for fun).

Posted by Thom at 1:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

So musical theatre isn't normally my thing, but I thought I'd give it another shot. I mean this isn't something I had heard regularly raved about, so I figured no real word of mouth was a good thing. Not really. This is the last work of Dickens, who apparently died while writing it (I don't blame him) so it was left unfinished, leaving the audience to sort of "choose their own adventure." That may sound intriguing, but it basically comes down to voting on who you think did it for the final scene. Of course in a large group too it's rather obvious who people will vote for (and in fact you see them voting) so the end isn't too much of a mystery in the end. They did however allow us to make a happy ending as well and choose two of the remaining cast memebers to make fall in love, which led to the inevitable conclusion of choosing the brother and sister (cause as you all know Cortland loves its incest).

The whole thing is also set up as a play inside a play type thing, which is clever and adds a nice bit of humor to the whole thing as they play off this feature. I really did enjoy that part too as each actor basically plays a character who's playing a character. This leads to jockying amoung the cast memebers to get the audience to vote for them so that they can have larger roles in the outcome, which is amusing. It also lends itself to making fun of the whole overacting involved in most musicals, which is unfortunately only taken up by one memeber of the company (I guess you don't want too overdo it too much).

In the end though the novelty of having a play within a play doesn't cover up the inner play. The actual Mystery of Edwin Drood (the inner play) is boring. Quite frankly the story is dry, rather uneventful, and I lost interest in it very quickly. It suffers from what most musicals I've seen (and disliked) tend to suffer from. There is no much happening as the whole story is laid out before you without much depth to it. And of course the songs tend to offer nothing in terms of insight into the characters. Insted the songs are just there to drive home what we have already been told (and by "drive home" I mean "hammer into our skulls") and just break up what little action there is. I must also say that the music itself didn't interest me (there was one song that I did enjoy, the rest I could have done without). All this left me just waiting for the people to break character so I could see more of the interesting theatre group insted.

It wasn't all bad though, and I'm not laying the blame for any of the shortcomings on the cast/crew/orchestra. They whole crew did a fine job with it (a couple of problems here and there, but it is just a SUNY production). The blame lies with my distaste for musical theatre and the overall problems I had with the story itself. The closest thing I could compare it to is like watching Memento. Sure there's something there to enjoy with the story itself, but that's not the main attraction of the film, the way it's presented is. The story of Edwin Drood isn't the main attraction here, the presentation is. Unfortunately the story of Edwin draws so much away from the presentation that I felt like someone had taken Memento and put the scenes into chronological order, taking away all the flavor and flair.

So if you do enjoy plain stories and/or musical theatre, and/or Dickens, then maybe you'll like it. As for me, this just reaffirms my belief that musical theatre just isn't for me (other than the rare exceptions like South Park).

Posted by Thom at 2:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)