So, I do not know how many people still read this blog (or if anyone even does anymore) but as of today, I've decided to revive it! Today's post might eventually have something to do with movies (I am making this up as I go) but really is just a way to vent some emotion into something I loved and let go by the wayside. I need something in my life where I can just poor my thoughts and ideas out into so that I do not go crazy. Reel Geekz was something that I had big plans for. It was originally conceived as a Podcast where I and my friends could just chat about current topics and what we thought about movies and the entertainment industry...
You know what, the above moment of honesty has in fact given me an idea about what to write about! Everyone has something in their lives they wanted to do, a secret desire! This could be a dream job, a special project they've always wanted to complete, or a life milestone they want to achieve. For me, my secret desire is to direct a short film that I have written. Either through lack of time, energy, motivation, money, etc. I have yet to realize my true calling as a filmmaker but have made small strides towards such a dream. I have in fact penned my very own script, a zombie picture in fact, and I am very proud of it. I am happy to explain to anyone who will listen, including you dear reader, my thoughts on amateur filmmaker and having a zombie picture under their belt. Basically, every filmmaker needs one so I figured get it out of the way first. Now, I'm not saying that my zombie movie HAS to be the first film I make! It was just the most enjoyable to write. I have many other ideas for short films, however I lack the motivation to actually write them. I am not sure if this is because I truly am lazy or if fear that I cannot turn my good ideas into a GREAT script keep me from proceeding, but the outcome is the same. I have yet to make a film, nor do I see it happening anytime soon.
However, that is the point of this post. I am annoucing my secret (albeit no longer) desire to the world. By being open and honest, I cannot hide my lack of progress on this project from the world. I refuse to look back on my life and say, I never once seized an opportunity to achieve my goals. Starting today, I want to take time to myself! I want to care about things that I want as much as I care about the people in my life. I have a beautiful wife and a baby on the way and how good of role model would I be if I never really tried to fight for my dreams.
So...world...are you listening. I, Steve F, herby state that I will not be afraid to write a story. I will not be afraid to take steps to one day film those stories. And (yes I started a sentence with AND), I will not be afraid to share my stories with the world!
Today is a game changer!
Showing posts with label Films. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Films. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Friday, July 23, 2010
Life In A Day - MUST DO FOR JULY 24, 2010!!
Hey all, heard about this amazing event happening tomorrow. It's a movie about "a day in the life of.....YOU!"
Kevin MacDonald and Ridley Scott are putting together a movie based on video submission from everyone around the world that showcase their lives on one day, July 24th! You have until July 31st to submit your video to YouTube and the most distinctive ones might get put into a YouTube movie. The best part if you will get credit if your submission is selected.
There are some guidelines described on the website, but the most important things to include are:
Step 1) Film your day!
Step 2) Answer these three questions;
- What do you love?
- What do you fear?
- What makes you laugh?
- What is in your pockets? Do the objects mean anything?
Otherwise, make the video your own. I plan on submitting a piece tomorrow, and I hope you all do too!
Check out this following link for more information, http://www.youtube.com/lifeinaday!!
Kevin MacDonald and Ridley Scott are putting together a movie based on video submission from everyone around the world that showcase their lives on one day, July 24th! You have until July 31st to submit your video to YouTube and the most distinctive ones might get put into a YouTube movie. The best part if you will get credit if your submission is selected.
There are some guidelines described on the website, but the most important things to include are:
Step 1) Film your day!
Step 2) Answer these three questions;
- What do you love?
- What do you fear?
- What makes you laugh?
- What is in your pockets? Do the objects mean anything?
Otherwise, make the video your own. I plan on submitting a piece tomorrow, and I hope you all do too!
Check out this following link for more information, http://www.youtube.com/lifeinaday!!
Friday, July 16, 2010
Reel Questions - July 16th, 2010
What was the Weekly Question, has been reborn as the "Reel Questions". Post your answer below as a comment!
IN THIS ERA OF REBOOTS AND REIMAGININGS, WHAT MOVIE WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE REMADE?
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
The Quest for Cash
Here is an article I wrote for the University of Waterloo's campus paper, IMPRINT, about my attempt (and failure) at getting bursaries. Hope you enjoy, it is impregnated with movie references.
Anyway, back to the quest for cash. With no OSAP acceptance or rejection I discovered a line on the bursary form further down that stated, “If you did not apply for OSAP, please provide parents Notice of Assessments and proof of extenuating circumstances”. It seemed to this hero that the first trial could be passed. All I have to do is show with the Assessments that my parents made much more money and tell the administration my reasoning for the expected rejection. With this victory under my Utility-less belt, I applied to Twenty-one different bursaries. Some were UW’s, while others were corporate or volunteer based. Content, I went back to studying and awaited the assistance sought by my quest.
Two weeks later I got my answer back…REJECTED; Failure to provide proof for not applying to OSAP. I felt like Indiana Jones might feel if the Germans got both the Ark and the girl. It seemed to me that my quest had failed. However, not willing to accept defeat, I called a Financial Aid Counsellor to talk about this rejection and provide support for my stance of “Expected Rejection by OSAP”. With an appointment three days hence, I called my parents again and asked them to take time out of their day (early morning no less) and bring me T4’s, pay stubs, notice of assessments (again), anything that could be used as weapons in my crusade against the administrations decision. Lastly with a printout of my OSAP rejection (along with my financial projects for that year) and an expenses budget showing an expected $2000+ debt form school expenses alone, I went to my appointment.
Surely with all this proof, this hero could have triumphed…WRONG! Upon entering the dragon’s lair, the belly of the beast (Needless Hell) I was rejected again in under two minutes. I was told that rejection is not an extenuating circumstance (something that was not well defined on the form). So to recap, I’ve now wasted hours of my time, and my parent’s time, preparing documentation for a defence that could have been rejected over the phone, or explained better on the form. I was told that only parents refusing to sign OSAP forms or an allergy to paper and technology (actually the latter is made up out of frustration) classed as good reasons.
The bad guy has won, the fire was extinguished, the princess has died, and this hero has failed. All because the University would much rather have students take government money that they have to pay back than to give them funds that have been allocated by themselves, alumni, corporations, etc. for students anyway. These funds will not cause worry to students because they do not have to be paid back. Bursaries sit unclaimed every year, and will again this year because of the apparent greed (seemingly to this hero) of the University to not give up more money.
Twenty-one bursaries applied to, one total and utter rejection. While my faith in this University has fallen to the lowest it has ever been, my faith that students will never get a break has further been strengthened. I should have gone to Mac; they offered at least a $750 scholarship.
Hollywood has drilled the idea of happy endings for any quest embarked upon by a main character. From “The Quest for Fire” with primitive humanity to Shreks epic quest to save Princess Fiona - happy endings are what we are used to. However, a happy ending was not waiting for me at the end of my quest for financial aid. All that awaited me was wasted time, no solutions, and loss of respect for this University.
It all started over a month ago when I began filling out a bursary application, and realized after reading the first line, that alas I had not previously applied for OSAP assistance. Not that this financially burdened hero (hero in my saga anyway) had not thought about it, on the contrary, I had put great thought into it. As first year (I am now a second year scholar/hero) I applied for OSAP but was declined because I fell into that income bracket between, “I have more than enough money and can laugh at tuition costs” and “I don’t have nearly enough to even laugh at the price of my lunch”. According to OSAP both my parents and I made too much and could effectively pay tuition. However, when Residence fees alone takes 95% of your bank account what is left for tuition, and more importantly, alcohol! Concordantly (Matrix, eat your heart out), I did not apply this year because everyone involved made more money and expenses were down.
Anyway, back to the quest for cash. With no OSAP acceptance or rejection I discovered a line on the bursary form further down that stated, “If you did not apply for OSAP, please provide parents Notice of Assessments and proof of extenuating circumstances”. It seemed to this hero that the first trial could be passed. All I have to do is show with the Assessments that my parents made much more money and tell the administration my reasoning for the expected rejection. With this victory under my Utility-less belt, I applied to Twenty-one different bursaries. Some were UW’s, while others were corporate or volunteer based. Content, I went back to studying and awaited the assistance sought by my quest.
Two weeks later I got my answer back…REJECTED; Failure to provide proof for not applying to OSAP. I felt like Indiana Jones might feel if the Germans got both the Ark and the girl. It seemed to me that my quest had failed. However, not willing to accept defeat, I called a Financial Aid Counsellor to talk about this rejection and provide support for my stance of “Expected Rejection by OSAP”. With an appointment three days hence, I called my parents again and asked them to take time out of their day (early morning no less) and bring me T4’s, pay stubs, notice of assessments (again), anything that could be used as weapons in my crusade against the administrations decision. Lastly with a printout of my OSAP rejection (along with my financial projects for that year) and an expenses budget showing an expected $2000+ debt form school expenses alone, I went to my appointment.
Surely with all this proof, this hero could have triumphed…WRONG! Upon entering the dragon’s lair, the belly of the beast (Needless Hell) I was rejected again in under two minutes. I was told that rejection is not an extenuating circumstance (something that was not well defined on the form). So to recap, I’ve now wasted hours of my time, and my parent’s time, preparing documentation for a defence that could have been rejected over the phone, or explained better on the form. I was told that only parents refusing to sign OSAP forms or an allergy to paper and technology (actually the latter is made up out of frustration) classed as good reasons.
The bad guy has won, the fire was extinguished, the princess has died, and this hero has failed. All because the University would much rather have students take government money that they have to pay back than to give them funds that have been allocated by themselves, alumni, corporations, etc. for students anyway. These funds will not cause worry to students because they do not have to be paid back. Bursaries sit unclaimed every year, and will again this year because of the apparent greed (seemingly to this hero) of the University to not give up more money.
Twenty-one bursaries applied to, one total and utter rejection. While my faith in this University has fallen to the lowest it has ever been, my faith that students will never get a break has further been strengthened. I should have gone to Mac; they offered at least a $750 scholarship.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
The Best Movie You've Probably Never Seen - July 7, 2010
Hey all, here's a new section for Reel Geekz about really good movies that most people have never seen (I say probably in the title because some of you may have in fact seen them at some point).
The first movie for this topic is entitled The Tao of Steve, and for the record, "tao" is pronounced "dao". This is a 2000 romantic comedy by Jenniphr Goodman starring Donal Logue and Greer Goodman.
The first movie for this topic is entitled The Tao of Steve, and for the record, "tao" is pronounced "dao". This is a 2000 romantic comedy by Jenniphr Goodman starring Donal Logue and Greer Goodman.
Donal plays an overweight "womanizer" named Dex that always gets the girl with the foolproof "Tao of Steve", at least until Greer's character Syd comes to town. The Tao is simple:
- Eliminate your desires.
- Do something excellent in her presence, thereby proving your sexual worthiness.
- Retreat, for as Martin Heidegger said, "We pursue that which retreats from us"
This movie is based on the life and personal experiences of a college friend of Jenniphr. Impressed with his apparent success with women despite being an overweight kindergarten teacher (hey, I'm not knocking overweight kindergarten teachers, just saying it is surprising) and his life philosophy, decided to draft ideas for either a movie or a one-man TV show. After many revisions and delays, financial backing and the right mix of actors (which included Jenniphr's sister Greer) the movie began shooting on this day in 1999 (July 7th).
This is a must see movie for all movie lovers for many reasons!
- Donal Logue
- Great story
- The Tao!
Another reason I had for intro'ing with this move is because of a theory a good friend (and amazing Trivial Pursuit and Scene It player) of mine has. The theory is that EVERYONE must own at least one movie with their name in the title! He owns The Life of Brian and I therefore own The Tao of Steve. However, despite this reason for owning it, I would have bought it anyway since it is a great movie. So go out right now and find it, I promise you will love it!
Warning: Reel Geekz cannot actually promise you'll love it, just highly suspect that you will thoroughly enjoy it. However, if you do end up loving it, we promised you would! If you hate it, then oh well, there is always one.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Follow-up to 'Doc Ock'
For your reading pleasure, here is the awesome follow-up to my friend Melissa's article on being friends with Doc Ock. Read on for the answers to many of the issues introduced in the first one. Enjoy!
Okay, so, 'Doc Ock'... not so cool. Getting over the fact that he could potentially smack me around like never before, I was actually quite amped for our hangout. Let me tell you, my friend(s?), he is so boring! Not only was he unwilling to do anything remotely cool with his [six] arms (like get me my damn ingredients for baking cookies - he doesn't even like cookies!), but, he also just whined about how he wasn't as cool as Alfred Molina (Who portrayed him in the second installment of the most recent Spider-Man series). Come on! That guy didn't really have six arms! That guy was just green screen cool (though, his name is Alfred).
'Doc Ock' then went on about how being a doctor was "Mad boring" and that he truly wanted to "Be a magician!" Um, yes please! A magician with six arms sounds totally awesome, right? Well, he stinks at it. You can only watch a man pull out polka-dot scarves from a hat while using all six arms for so long. He could have the best slight of hand(s) trick(s) if he put in the same amount of effort as he does complaining about Spider-Man (Spider-Man partied with us, too, and was totally careful with his webbing). Totally called it on that guy complaining. He couldn't even entertain my roommates, and, believe me, at least one of them (Ryan) is easily amused - though, I heard that Ryan requested to be tickled by all six claws at once. Seriously, Ryan?
Anyway, back to 'Doc Ock's' issues (we can talk about Ryan's another time). As soon as he informed me that his favourite show was Jersey Shore, I knew I had to ditch him - he actually suggested that we go get Jersey Shore tans (Sidenote: I cannot tan). Jersey Shore tans! Ugh! I do not think that orange would suit me... or him, for that matter.
'Doc Ock': Boring; a cry baby; Jersey Shore lover; and, White Sox fan. Never be friends with a White Sox fan. Ever (Ha, ha, Dan!)
When he asked if he could play drums, people were pretty excited. That was until he decided to use all [six] arms at once, without drumsticks. Eff. That being said, it still sounded better than Fred Durst's attempted guitar solo (For your viewing (dis)pleasure: http://www.youtube.com/wat
As if that wasn't bad enough, he broke into Vince's room - now you know why the hinges were off, buddy - to "Be rid of that insipid noise [music]." Sorry, Vince. He also stole some of Enis' beer (I'm so not paying you for that).
The final straw was bringing him into the daycare. He didn't change [6] diapers; he just held [6] kids upside-down until they screamed "You're cooler than Spider-Man!"
Rest assured, the next time I get the bright idea to befriend a comic book villain... I'll just pick a better one.
Okay, so, 'Doc Ock'... not so cool. Getting over the fact that he could potentially smack me around like never before, I was actually quite amped for our hangout. Let me tell you, my friend(s?), he is so boring! Not only was he unwilling to do anything remotely cool with his [six] arms (like get me my damn ingredients for baking cookies - he doesn't even like cookies!), but, he also just whined about how he wasn't as cool as Alfred Molina (Who portrayed him in the second installment of the most recent Spider-Man series). Come on! That guy didn't really have six arms! That guy was just green screen cool (though, his name is Alfred).
'Doc Ock' then went on about how being a doctor was "Mad boring" and that he truly wanted to "Be a magician!" Um, yes please! A magician with six arms sounds totally awesome, right? Well, he stinks at it. You can only watch a man pull out polka-dot scarves from a hat while using all six arms for so long. He could have the best slight of hand(s) trick(s) if he put in the same amount of effort as he does complaining about Spider-Man (Spider-Man partied with us, too, and was totally careful with his webbing). Totally called it on that guy complaining. He couldn't even entertain my roommates, and, believe me, at least one of them (Ryan) is easily amused - though, I heard that Ryan requested to be tickled by all six claws at once. Seriously, Ryan?
Anyway, back to 'Doc Ock's' issues (we can talk about Ryan's another time). As soon as he informed me that his favourite show was Jersey Shore, I knew I had to ditch him - he actually suggested that we go get Jersey Shore tans (Sidenote: I cannot tan). Jersey Shore tans! Ugh! I do not think that orange would suit me... or him, for that matter.
'Doc Ock': Boring; a cry baby; Jersey Shore lover; and, White Sox fan. Never be friends with a White Sox fan. Ever (Ha, ha, Dan!)
When he asked if he could play drums, people were pretty excited. That was until he decided to use all [six] arms at once, without drumsticks. Eff. That being said, it still sounded better than Fred Durst's attempted guitar solo (For your viewing (dis)pleasure: http://www.youtube.com/wat
As if that wasn't bad enough, he broke into Vince's room - now you know why the hinges were off, buddy - to "Be rid of that insipid noise [music]." Sorry, Vince. He also stole some of Enis' beer (I'm so not paying you for that).
The final straw was bringing him into the daycare. He didn't change [6] diapers; he just held [6] kids upside-down until they screamed "You're cooler than Spider-Man!"
Rest assured, the next time I get the bright idea to befriend a comic book villain... I'll just pick a better one.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
The Vampire Epidemic - a prelude to the release of "Eclipse"
You'd have to have been living under a rock for the past few years to not notice that there's been a surge of vampire stories in various media: books, movies, tv shows, comics, the list goes on. I believe the surge happened just at the tail end of my second semester in college, or at least that's when I started to really notice it myself.
That semester I took a course called "Living with the Undead" and it was taught by the amazing Robert Price at Sheridan College. He taught us about the origin of the vampire myth, beginning with the eerie tale of Vlad the Impaler, touching on Elizabeth Bathory (shudder), and exploring a lot of fiction. We read Carmilla by Le Fanu, Anne Rice's Interview with the Vampire, and of course Bram Stoker's Dracula. We only briefly touched on the more recent film-flop-turned-successful-tv-series "Buffy the Vampire Slayer."
Since then of course I noticed the Twilight craze going on around me. I was at least five years older than the majority of my classmates so I chalked their fanaticism up to the same teenage excitement I had over "Buffy" and resisted. As I tried my best to ignore the ever-present Twi-hards, I got sucked into the world of Alan Ball's "True Blood" on HBO, based on the Sookie Stackhouse novels by Charlaine Harris (which I've now started to read).
Instantly I was drawn to the character of Bill, the tortured vampire struggling to mainstream in a world that just realized his kind existed. He was romantic, albeit from a completely different century and therefore had a thing or two to learn about a 21st century woman. But it was the old-fashioned, Southern Gentleman romanticism and charm that tugged at my heartstrings: holding open the door, guiding her with his hand at her back, defending her honour - sigh, I was a puddle of goo. So I think it has nothing to do with the fact that they're vampires - the vampire state is just a vehicle to make the story reach a wider audience than just hopeless romantics.
At this point, I will admit that I began reading the Twilight series by Stephenie Meyer, just to know what the fuss was all about (and to see if I might be too old to understand my younger counterparts). I was hooked. I read all four books in a matter of a week. I read them so fast that I bought the first one and was able to exchange it for the second and so on, not expecting to want to own them. By the time my birthday rolled around, I owned the box set and the first film on DVD. Edward is every woman's fantasy of a vampire or even a man. He is innocent and tortured at the same time. A little bit like Louis from Interview or Angel from "Buffy." Or even Stefan from the sleeper drama tv series "The Vampire Diaries" based on the books of the same name.
I put Louis, Angel, Edward, Stefan and Bill on the same plateau - the good guy you'd want to bring home to mom, if you could get Louis' diet under control. But then there's that whole other kind of vampire that can tug on your heartstrings and your libido at the same time - the bad boy. Lestat. Spike. Stefan's vampire brother, Damon. Eric. The vampire that makes you want to be the one that makes him want to be a better man, who makes you want to be Buffy, Bella, Elena or Sookie. (Or who makes you want to learn more about Vikings and the Scandinavidan culture).
It's a passing fantasy, but a really fun one. What makes you come back down to Earth is the realization that, save for Spike, these characters were written by a female. Spike was created by a man, but his lines were inspired by the female audience. It's definitive proof that they are a woman's fantasy man, because what man knows how to write like that, or shape a character like that? If anyone knows of a heterosexual man who writes this way, let me know. Maybe, if we're so drawn to these characters, it is evidence of a deeper need in women globally: a need for passion and desire and to be cherished and loved and completely ruined for any other man.
With that said, the Twilight series' third film "Eclipse" is coming out a week today, on June 30. I know I'll be there with some girlfriends despite my firm dislike for the second film as a piece of drivel, not exactly bringing the story to life in the way that I'd hoped. Apparently I'm very much alone in that opinion, save for the poor saps who were dragged to go see it by their girlfriends or wives - sorry Sean. So here's hoping that "Eclipse" is everything I want it to be, including the proposal and tent scenes - you know what I'm talking about.
That semester I took a course called "Living with the Undead" and it was taught by the amazing Robert Price at Sheridan College. He taught us about the origin of the vampire myth, beginning with the eerie tale of Vlad the Impaler, touching on Elizabeth Bathory (shudder), and exploring a lot of fiction. We read Carmilla by Le Fanu, Anne Rice's Interview with the Vampire, and of course Bram Stoker's Dracula. We only briefly touched on the more recent film-flop-turned-successful-tv-series "Buffy the Vampire Slayer."
Since then of course I noticed the Twilight craze going on around me. I was at least five years older than the majority of my classmates so I chalked their fanaticism up to the same teenage excitement I had over "Buffy" and resisted. As I tried my best to ignore the ever-present Twi-hards, I got sucked into the world of Alan Ball's "True Blood" on HBO, based on the Sookie Stackhouse novels by Charlaine Harris (which I've now started to read).
Instantly I was drawn to the character of Bill, the tortured vampire struggling to mainstream in a world that just realized his kind existed. He was romantic, albeit from a completely different century and therefore had a thing or two to learn about a 21st century woman. But it was the old-fashioned, Southern Gentleman romanticism and charm that tugged at my heartstrings: holding open the door, guiding her with his hand at her back, defending her honour - sigh, I was a puddle of goo. So I think it has nothing to do with the fact that they're vampires - the vampire state is just a vehicle to make the story reach a wider audience than just hopeless romantics.
At this point, I will admit that I began reading the Twilight series by Stephenie Meyer, just to know what the fuss was all about (and to see if I might be too old to understand my younger counterparts). I was hooked. I read all four books in a matter of a week. I read them so fast that I bought the first one and was able to exchange it for the second and so on, not expecting to want to own them. By the time my birthday rolled around, I owned the box set and the first film on DVD. Edward is every woman's fantasy of a vampire or even a man. He is innocent and tortured at the same time. A little bit like Louis from Interview or Angel from "Buffy." Or even Stefan from the sleeper drama tv series "The Vampire Diaries" based on the books of the same name.
I put Louis, Angel, Edward, Stefan and Bill on the same plateau - the good guy you'd want to bring home to mom, if you could get Louis' diet under control. But then there's that whole other kind of vampire that can tug on your heartstrings and your libido at the same time - the bad boy. Lestat. Spike. Stefan's vampire brother, Damon. Eric. The vampire that makes you want to be the one that makes him want to be a better man, who makes you want to be Buffy, Bella, Elena or Sookie. (Or who makes you want to learn more about Vikings and the Scandinavidan culture).
It's a passing fantasy, but a really fun one. What makes you come back down to Earth is the realization that, save for Spike, these characters were written by a female. Spike was created by a man, but his lines were inspired by the female audience. It's definitive proof that they are a woman's fantasy man, because what man knows how to write like that, or shape a character like that? If anyone knows of a heterosexual man who writes this way, let me know. Maybe, if we're so drawn to these characters, it is evidence of a deeper need in women globally: a need for passion and desire and to be cherished and loved and completely ruined for any other man.
With that said, the Twilight series' third film "Eclipse" is coming out a week today, on June 30. I know I'll be there with some girlfriends despite my firm dislike for the second film as a piece of drivel, not exactly bringing the story to life in the way that I'd hoped. Apparently I'm very much alone in that opinion, save for the poor saps who were dragged to go see it by their girlfriends or wives - sorry Sean. So here's hoping that "Eclipse" is everything I want it to be, including the proposal and tent scenes - you know what I'm talking about.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Why I want to be friends with 'Doc Ock'
Found this on a friends Facebook page and loved it. Thanks to Melissa for giving me permission to post it here for all of you to enjoy.
People are endlessly going on and on about how cool Chuck Norris and Mr. T are. Not me, though. I'm all about - at least for today, anyway - 'Doc Ock'. That's right, the bad dude from Spider-Man. Really, I wouldn't consider him a bad dude; just a really smart, yet misunderstood dude. I mean, the guy has six arms! Think of how hand that is. "Hey, 'Doc Ock"', I would say, "I need you to grab me these specific ingredients [insert specific ingredients here] from the cupboard so that I can bake cookies. Do you mind?"
"Obviously, I do NOT!" he would respond, enthusiastically, of course. Clearly, the man loves cookies (My cookies are awesome, FYI).
He would also be awesome for assisting at the daycare. Six arms to change diapers. Six arms to separate fighting kids with. If we had [6] swings, six arms to push kids on swings with! Mind blowing, right?
I could get six puppies and he could walk them all. No one would dare approach us. I mean, really, I'm hanging with 'Doc Ock', yo.
I would also like to think that he would be able to explain everything. Cause he's smart, you see. Really smart. Doctor smart.
Obviously, we'd have to work on his feud with Spider-Man; cause, Spider-Man also seems like a rad dude - although, I imagine that when he's drunk, he's not so careful with his webbing. Gross. I also don't want to listen to endless whining about how Spider-Man won, yet again; and, how he ruins everything. Seriously, not my problem, guy. Of course, I wouldn't dare say that to 'Doc Ock'. That guy totally has six arms that he could potentially smack me around with.
Hm. Perhaps I need to rethink this possible friendship.
People are endlessly going on and on about how cool Chuck Norris and Mr. T are. Not me, though. I'm all about - at least for today, anyway - 'Doc Ock'. That's right, the bad dude from Spider-Man. Really, I wouldn't consider him a bad dude; just a really smart, yet misunderstood dude. I mean, the guy has six arms! Think of how hand that is. "Hey, 'Doc Ock"', I would say, "I need you to grab me these specific ingredients [insert specific ingredients here] from the cupboard so that I can bake cookies. Do you mind?"
"Obviously, I do NOT!" he would respond, enthusiastically, of course. Clearly, the man loves cookies (My cookies are awesome, FYI).
He would also be awesome for assisting at the daycare. Six arms to change diapers. Six arms to separate fighting kids with. If we had [6] swings, six arms to push kids on swings with! Mind blowing, right?
I could get six puppies and he could walk them all. No one would dare approach us. I mean, really, I'm hanging with 'Doc Ock', yo.
I would also like to think that he would be able to explain everything. Cause he's smart, you see. Really smart. Doctor smart.
Obviously, we'd have to work on his feud with Spider-Man; cause, Spider-Man also seems like a rad dude - although, I imagine that when he's drunk, he's not so careful with his webbing. Gross. I also don't want to listen to endless whining about how Spider-Man won, yet again; and, how he ruins everything. Seriously, not my problem, guy. Of course, I wouldn't dare say that to 'Doc Ock'. That guy totally has six arms that he could potentially smack me around with.
Hm. Perhaps I need to rethink this possible friendship.
Friday, June 11, 2010
The Search for the Coco Loco
Please check out this stupidly fun little documentary that Laurie and I made in Cuba. It's about a drink we saw around called a "Coco Loco". Basically its a drink the gardeners make by collecting fallen coconuts from the grounds of the resort, then using a machete to cut a hole in the top and flatten the bottom. I think they then add Rum (or leave it to us to add rum, we've not sure). It was shot all on the last day and then pieced together with other unrelated clips we had but I think it turned out okay.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Reel Talk with...
So Reel Geekz is launching a new section. We will be taking your suggestions of people in the movie business to interview!!!! This could be filmed, over the phone, via webchat or email. You pick the person (with a few suggestions thrown in by us), we attempt to get a hold of them and you enjoy the experience as we blog about our success and failure along the way.
If successful, we will then take suggestions for questions (within reason as there may be some topics that are taboo). If you were the first to suggest the interviewee (or gave us a hand in securing an interview), then we will make sure your question gets asked for sure (again, within reason).
There is however, one major rule. A rule by which we will abide by while attempting to get a hold of the possible interviewee.
If successful, we will then take suggestions for questions (within reason as there may be some topics that are taboo). If you were the first to suggest the interviewee (or gave us a hand in securing an interview), then we will make sure your question gets asked for sure (again, within reason).
There is however, one major rule. A rule by which we will abide by while attempting to get a hold of the possible interviewee.
We will not pester them! No more than 2 follow ups in regards to the same contact attempt.
Other than that, we will do whatever it takes to try and set something up with them. If the need for other rules come up or you suggest a rule that makes the section "more entertaining", then we reserve the right to augment the rules. So stay tuned to Reel Geekz as we will be announcing the first person on our list (oh yes, we have a list already!!!) very shortly.
Friday, May 14, 2010
A Nightmare on Elm Street, 2010
Hello! This is my first post on Reel Geekz and I'm super excited. First, because I have a lot of opinions that I usually refrain from sharing, and second, because my first post is about a topic that I usually do not enjoy discussing. Ever.
Growing up, I was not a fan of the horror genre. My first experience with a scary movie was Pet Cemetery 2 (yeah, I know, not even the original) at a birthday party when I was about 9 or 10. I had to not just leave the room, but leave the party. I raced home on my bike, in the middle of broad daylight, only stopping when I was forced to at a traffic light. I felt like I was being watched and followed, and of course I imagined I was being followed by a big dog with glowing yellow eyes. I turned and nearly had a heart attack at the sight of a squirrel about 5 feet behind me. Yeah, I was that bad.
That wasn't even the worst experience. When I was about 13, at another birthday party the movie for the night was A New Nightmare, my first Freddy Krueger film. Needless to say, I didn't last long sitting for that movie either. I ended up in another room playing cards with my friend's sister. I suffered weeks of sleepless nights (and extremely annoyed parents) as a result of that night.
Since then I've become much more comfortable with horror films. Sure, I might be kept up an hour or two after I would normally go to sleep, but being scared is part of the fun. I've since seen almost all of the Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the Thirteenth, Scream, Halloween, and Saw series of films. Most recently, my husband and I went to see A Nightmare on Elm Street, the reimagining of the original. So let's get to the review:
Freddy Krueger? Check.
Nightmares? Check.
Elm Street? Check.
Make you jump out of your seat scenes? Check.
Gory death scenes? Check.
Cheesy one-liners? Check.
If you were hoping to see any one or more of these things when you bought your ticket, then you got what you paid for. The story was essentially the same as the original 1984 version, only updated to fit in the 21st century, and there was ample opportunity for your date to cling to you in fear. Let's face it, that's the only reason you'd bring a girl that's not your sister to a movie like that. Worked for my husband.
This film was the epitome of a cheesy horror franchise revival: lots of fantastically gory effects, and groan-worthy one-liners. What I found endearing about the film was how it embraced and owned the cheese and made no efforts to claim otherwise.
Anywho, what was different about this film was the explanation of the back story. If you've seen the original films, you know what happened to Freddy and why he picks on the Elm Street kids. This time around, you get to see more of the past and Freddy becomes humanized...for a short while anyway.
Another fantastic difference is the leading actor. Of course Robert Englund will always be "Freddy Krueger" but the man is in his 70's now. The mantle was passed to whom I consider to be the best choice: Jackie Earle Haley. This man has played some real creepers lately and has the best voice for inducing chills. I'd love to meet this man in real life; he's probably the nicest guy in the world, which would mean he does his job well. I was reading a story shortly after seeing Nightmare and in a really tense scene I picture Haley as the bad guy and it totally creeped me out. Again I was up until about 4am...I guess some habits die hard.
***SPOILER ALERT***
I'm not going to tell you how the movie ended, though it was very similar to the original. What I am about to tell you is how it didn't end in a segment I'll probably be sharing with you often: "How My Husband Thinks it Should Have Ended". He's not much for the reviews of how the film was, but how the film should have played out. In sharing these ideas with you, I might imply how the film did end so if you haven't seen it, STOP READING NOW!
So, he thinks it should have ended with the father of the lead boy being the actual pedophile and Freddy is getting revenge for being framed and killed by said father and the other parents, by terrorizing and killing their children in their dreams. At the end, the kids discover that the father is guilty and bring Freddy from the dream world into reality just in time for Freddy and the father to come face to face. Freddy would make quick work of the father but, in order to keep the franchise alive, will decide he prefers his hack n' slash self.
I hope you enjoyed my first review! More to come.
Growing up, I was not a fan of the horror genre. My first experience with a scary movie was Pet Cemetery 2 (yeah, I know, not even the original) at a birthday party when I was about 9 or 10. I had to not just leave the room, but leave the party. I raced home on my bike, in the middle of broad daylight, only stopping when I was forced to at a traffic light. I felt like I was being watched and followed, and of course I imagined I was being followed by a big dog with glowing yellow eyes. I turned and nearly had a heart attack at the sight of a squirrel about 5 feet behind me. Yeah, I was that bad.
That wasn't even the worst experience. When I was about 13, at another birthday party the movie for the night was A New Nightmare, my first Freddy Krueger film. Needless to say, I didn't last long sitting for that movie either. I ended up in another room playing cards with my friend's sister. I suffered weeks of sleepless nights (and extremely annoyed parents) as a result of that night.
Since then I've become much more comfortable with horror films. Sure, I might be kept up an hour or two after I would normally go to sleep, but being scared is part of the fun. I've since seen almost all of the Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the Thirteenth, Scream, Halloween, and Saw series of films. Most recently, my husband and I went to see A Nightmare on Elm Street, the reimagining of the original. So let's get to the review:
Freddy Krueger? Check.
Nightmares? Check.
Elm Street? Check.
Make you jump out of your seat scenes? Check.
Gory death scenes? Check.
Cheesy one-liners? Check.
If you were hoping to see any one or more of these things when you bought your ticket, then you got what you paid for. The story was essentially the same as the original 1984 version, only updated to fit in the 21st century, and there was ample opportunity for your date to cling to you in fear. Let's face it, that's the only reason you'd bring a girl that's not your sister to a movie like that. Worked for my husband.
This film was the epitome of a cheesy horror franchise revival: lots of fantastically gory effects, and groan-worthy one-liners. What I found endearing about the film was how it embraced and owned the cheese and made no efforts to claim otherwise.
Anywho, what was different about this film was the explanation of the back story. If you've seen the original films, you know what happened to Freddy and why he picks on the Elm Street kids. This time around, you get to see more of the past and Freddy becomes humanized...for a short while anyway.
Another fantastic difference is the leading actor. Of course Robert Englund will always be "Freddy Krueger" but the man is in his 70's now. The mantle was passed to whom I consider to be the best choice: Jackie Earle Haley. This man has played some real creepers lately and has the best voice for inducing chills. I'd love to meet this man in real life; he's probably the nicest guy in the world, which would mean he does his job well. I was reading a story shortly after seeing Nightmare and in a really tense scene I picture Haley as the bad guy and it totally creeped me out. Again I was up until about 4am...I guess some habits die hard.
***SPOILER ALERT***
I'm not going to tell you how the movie ended, though it was very similar to the original. What I am about to tell you is how it didn't end in a segment I'll probably be sharing with you often: "How My Husband Thinks it Should Have Ended". He's not much for the reviews of how the film was, but how the film should have played out. In sharing these ideas with you, I might imply how the film did end so if you haven't seen it, STOP READING NOW!
So, he thinks it should have ended with the father of the lead boy being the actual pedophile and Freddy is getting revenge for being framed and killed by said father and the other parents, by terrorizing and killing their children in their dreams. At the end, the kids discover that the father is guilty and bring Freddy from the dream world into reality just in time for Freddy and the father to come face to face. Freddy would make quick work of the father but, in order to keep the franchise alive, will decide he prefers his hack n' slash self.
I hope you enjoyed my first review! More to come.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Artistic Licence
Alright so I saw Iron Man 2 last night and I must say "AWESOME F'ING MOVIE". However, it does brig up a topic I want to talk about. Artistic Licensing according to Wikipedia (I know, not a great source) as "a colloquial term, sometime euphemism, used to denote the distortion of fact, alteration of the conventions of grammar or language, or rewording of pre-existing text made by an artist to improve a piece of art." Basically when a director or writer change details of something from the source material.
Recently this can be seen in the majority of comic book, novel, televisions and video game adaptations or movie remakes. Often these the details of these movies do not match the original work or are pieced together in a way that changes the overall look, feel or message of the story. I won't say exactly how this applies to Iron Man 2 as many of you reading this may not have seen it yet, but rest assured, some characters are not exactly as they were in the comics (*cough* Mickey Rourke's character). Another example is Spider-man shooting webs from his wrists. This did not happen in the comics until after the movie came out (and in fact, has since been ret-coned out of existence) and Spider-man had mechanical devices that shot the webbing from cartridges. The reason he makes the characteristic hand motion in the movie and comics is in reality based on the fact that the mechanical devices relied on a pressure button in his palm to activate. However, this is an example of good artistic licensing. Whats the difference? Let me example.
Good Artistic Licensing
This is when details are changed due to copywrite laws on the source material, to modernize a story or to make the story more believable. Such examples are Spider-man's webbing. This was done to make the story more believable as it was felt that a teenager being able to develop a substance like his webbing when the government could not was a problem. This type of licencing I am okay with as it helps the story out. However, the other side of the coin is changes made for no apparent reason or that twist the source material.
Bad Artistic Licencing
In the Transformers comics, the Matrix of Leadership is possessed by Optimus Prime as a symbol of his leadership not a key to start a machine. Or how the Allspark is transformer heaven, not an advanced jumpdrive and source of all transformers. Or in Spider-man, the character Venom speaks in the third person because it's a combination of the symbiote and the mind of Eddie Brock. However, in the movie he calls himself "I". There was no reason for these changes and I say they tend to ruin the movies for die hard fans. It could be said that changes in the source material are sometimes for the benefit of the new audience rather than die hard fans so that they can better understand whats going on or enjoy the work with no idea of the history already established. However, some changes like in Transformers or Spider-man does not make the movies any easier to follow or get into and just anger fans (like me). I am sure there are more examples of good and bad artistic licencing but right now those came to mind. If you don't have to make a change....DON'T!!! The source material is good, that is why people make them into movies!
Place a comment below if you have any other examples of good or bad licensing.
Recently this can be seen in the majority of comic book, novel, televisions and video game adaptations or movie remakes. Often these the details of these movies do not match the original work or are pieced together in a way that changes the overall look, feel or message of the story. I won't say exactly how this applies to Iron Man 2 as many of you reading this may not have seen it yet, but rest assured, some characters are not exactly as they were in the comics (*cough* Mickey Rourke's character). Another example is Spider-man shooting webs from his wrists. This did not happen in the comics until after the movie came out (and in fact, has since been ret-coned out of existence) and Spider-man had mechanical devices that shot the webbing from cartridges. The reason he makes the characteristic hand motion in the movie and comics is in reality based on the fact that the mechanical devices relied on a pressure button in his palm to activate. However, this is an example of good artistic licensing. Whats the difference? Let me example.
Good Artistic Licensing
This is when details are changed due to copywrite laws on the source material, to modernize a story or to make the story more believable. Such examples are Spider-man's webbing. This was done to make the story more believable as it was felt that a teenager being able to develop a substance like his webbing when the government could not was a problem. This type of licencing I am okay with as it helps the story out. However, the other side of the coin is changes made for no apparent reason or that twist the source material.
Bad Artistic Licencing
In the Transformers comics, the Matrix of Leadership is possessed by Optimus Prime as a symbol of his leadership not a key to start a machine. Or how the Allspark is transformer heaven, not an advanced jumpdrive and source of all transformers. Or in Spider-man, the character Venom speaks in the third person because it's a combination of the symbiote and the mind of Eddie Brock. However, in the movie he calls himself "I". There was no reason for these changes and I say they tend to ruin the movies for die hard fans. It could be said that changes in the source material are sometimes for the benefit of the new audience rather than die hard fans so that they can better understand whats going on or enjoy the work with no idea of the history already established. However, some changes like in Transformers or Spider-man does not make the movies any easier to follow or get into and just anger fans (like me). I am sure there are more examples of good and bad artistic licencing but right now those came to mind. If you don't have to make a change....DON'T!!! The source material is good, that is why people make them into movies!
Place a comment below if you have any other examples of good or bad licensing.
Friday, April 23, 2010
To 3D or Not to 3D? That is the question!
WE'RE BACK....so I have finally got my affairs in order enough to post again. I thank those who stuck with us here at Reel Geekz and hope we can win back those who may have lost interest.
So lets get right to the point...so 3D is here! It started officially with the release of Avatar which was filmed with a special camera as to give it a sense of depth, and has now expanded to the newly released 3DTV's and a slew of other movies. However, is the technology really that good? Well, that is a bit of a yes and no answer.
A recent visit to a local Futureshop that had a Samsung 3DTV on display was an eye opening experience. The picture is incredible. Media designed specifically for 3D is smooth and crisp and literally appears to jump off the screen. The TV even has a mode that will convert your favourite 2D TV shows into 3D. Imagine Baywatch in 3D??? eh??? I know the scene you are picturing too. Pam Anderson or the Hoff running in glorious slow motion 3D. Sorry, I digress. True you have to wear special glasses in order to see the 3D effects and these can give some a slight headache (yours truly included), but incredible none-the-less. When combined with movies such as Avatar makes for a truly amazing viewing experience.
However, the problem arises when other movies try to capitalize on the 3D phenomenon that were never originally in 3D. Take Clash of the Titans for example. The movie was filmed in traditional 2D with 2D effects and were never originally meant to be in 3D as the Director felt the technology was too expensive. However after witnessing the conversion process, felt the 3D enhanced the look of the film and the movie was converted for theaters. I am here however to humbly disagree with the Director. There are many points in the movie where the film looks better when you take the glasses off. Whenever something passes between the main subject and the viewer, you loss your focus for a moment. This is particularly bad during the movies many fight scenes...in fact, it is so bad that sometimes you cannot tell who is winning until the very end. Furthermore, the glasses have a slight tint and darkens the film noticeably.
Overall, I saw if you are interested in seeing this 3D craze, then go see the movie. It is still an enjoyable movie that differs much however, from the original AND the source material. As more movies come out that are filmed in 3D, my opinion may change but right now I think a great 2D movie is far better than a mediocre 3D.
So lets get right to the point...so 3D is here! It started officially with the release of Avatar which was filmed with a special camera as to give it a sense of depth, and has now expanded to the newly released 3DTV's and a slew of other movies. However, is the technology really that good? Well, that is a bit of a yes and no answer.
A recent visit to a local Futureshop that had a Samsung 3DTV on display was an eye opening experience. The picture is incredible. Media designed specifically for 3D is smooth and crisp and literally appears to jump off the screen. The TV even has a mode that will convert your favourite 2D TV shows into 3D. Imagine Baywatch in 3D??? eh??? I know the scene you are picturing too. Pam Anderson or the Hoff running in glorious slow motion 3D. Sorry, I digress. True you have to wear special glasses in order to see the 3D effects and these can give some a slight headache (yours truly included), but incredible none-the-less. When combined with movies such as Avatar makes for a truly amazing viewing experience.
However, the problem arises when other movies try to capitalize on the 3D phenomenon that were never originally in 3D. Take Clash of the Titans for example. The movie was filmed in traditional 2D with 2D effects and were never originally meant to be in 3D as the Director felt the technology was too expensive. However after witnessing the conversion process, felt the 3D enhanced the look of the film and the movie was converted for theaters. I am here however to humbly disagree with the Director. There are many points in the movie where the film looks better when you take the glasses off. Whenever something passes between the main subject and the viewer, you loss your focus for a moment. This is particularly bad during the movies many fight scenes...in fact, it is so bad that sometimes you cannot tell who is winning until the very end. Furthermore, the glasses have a slight tint and darkens the film noticeably.
Overall, I saw if you are interested in seeing this 3D craze, then go see the movie. It is still an enjoyable movie that differs much however, from the original AND the source material. As more movies come out that are filmed in 3D, my opinion may change but right now I think a great 2D movie is far better than a mediocre 3D.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Site Changes
Hello all readers,
So I know I haven't posted anything for a while and I apologize but life is making it hard to keep up with he pace I set for myself when I created this blog. My goal is to post something by the weekend and then make a post a week instead of three.
I there is anyone interested in being a writer with me please let me know. Maybe as a team or small group we can produce a steady flow of material and expand our reader base together. Not that I don't appreciate each and every one of you already following the blog from the beginning. THANK YOU EVERYONE!
Anyway, heading to bed after a long night shift. I'll have something posted shortly, I promise.
So I know I haven't posted anything for a while and I apologize but life is making it hard to keep up with he pace I set for myself when I created this blog. My goal is to post something by the weekend and then make a post a week instead of three.
I there is anyone interested in being a writer with me please let me know. Maybe as a team or small group we can produce a steady flow of material and expand our reader base together. Not that I don't appreciate each and every one of you already following the blog from the beginning. THANK YOU EVERYONE!
Anyway, heading to bed after a long night shift. I'll have something posted shortly, I promise.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
DVD, HD and Blu-Ray...oh my!
So, you may be asking yourself "Self..what is the difference between my current DVD's and the new HD format disc?" Go ahead, I'll wait for you to ask.
Finished? Good, okay well I happen to have found the answer. In the new world of HD digital media there were two main formats produced: the failed HD-DVD and the champion the Blu-ray disc. Described in this post is what makes the formats different from regular DVD's and from each other. We will also discuss why the Blu-ray media format won the HD format war.
The Basics
So, if you've ever seen inside a CD or DVD player you will know that there is a little red laser that reads little pits on the surface of the disc. In the case of rewritable media, the pits are replaced by burn marks (hence, burning a disc!). The laser of a CD driver has a wavelength of 780 nanometers (nm) and general use recordable DVD is 640 nm. The CD laser reads the pits/burns as 1's and 0's, or binary and translates that to the information the computer displays or the stereo projects. The need for a new HD format was answers by Sony and Toshiba. Sony created the Blu-ray and Toshiba created the HD-DVD. The main difference between regular DVD/CD's and HD media is the type laser used. HD media use a blue laser with a smaller wavelength, 405 nm to be exact. This means that smaller pits can be used since the laser is smaller and more information can be saved. However, both HD-DVD's and Blu-rays discs use the same 405 nm blue laser. If this is true, what should you ask, is the difference between the two? Furthermore, why did Blu-ray win over HD-DVD? Good questions, you ask and I'll wait right here.
Good to go? Okay, lets continue.
The Difference
The distinguishing difference between these two formats is the coating on the disc. HD-DVD's have the same coating as regular DVD's. The coating is 0.6 mm thick and allows the HD-DVD to focus at a certain length close to the surface and record so much information. The coating of a Blu-ray disc is 0.1 mm thick and allows for a longer focus length and therefore store more layers of information. In the end, Blu-ray won the format war because it could store more information, the production methods were new and the technology to record them was not available to the public (which would limit the ability of criminals to pirate the media) and with the adoption of the format into the Sony PS3, the backing of several prominent movie companies and Disney pushed the market in Sony's favour. The War was over.
Finished? Good, okay well I happen to have found the answer. In the new world of HD digital media there were two main formats produced: the failed HD-DVD and the champion the Blu-ray disc. Described in this post is what makes the formats different from regular DVD's and from each other. We will also discuss why the Blu-ray media format won the HD format war.
The Basics
So, if you've ever seen inside a CD or DVD player you will know that there is a little red laser that reads little pits on the surface of the disc. In the case of rewritable media, the pits are replaced by burn marks (hence, burning a disc!). The laser of a CD driver has a wavelength of 780 nanometers (nm) and general use recordable DVD is 640 nm. The CD laser reads the pits/burns as 1's and 0's, or binary and translates that to the information the computer displays or the stereo projects. The need for a new HD format was answers by Sony and Toshiba. Sony created the Blu-ray and Toshiba created the HD-DVD. The main difference between regular DVD/CD's and HD media is the type laser used. HD media use a blue laser with a smaller wavelength, 405 nm to be exact. This means that smaller pits can be used since the laser is smaller and more information can be saved. However, both HD-DVD's and Blu-rays discs use the same 405 nm blue laser. If this is true, what should you ask, is the difference between the two? Furthermore, why did Blu-ray win over HD-DVD? Good questions, you ask and I'll wait right here.
Good to go? Okay, lets continue.
The Difference
The distinguishing difference between these two formats is the coating on the disc. HD-DVD's have the same coating as regular DVD's. The coating is 0.6 mm thick and allows the HD-DVD to focus at a certain length close to the surface and record so much information. The coating of a Blu-ray disc is 0.1 mm thick and allows for a longer focus length and therefore store more layers of information. In the end, Blu-ray won the format war because it could store more information, the production methods were new and the technology to record them was not available to the public (which would limit the ability of criminals to pirate the media) and with the adoption of the format into the Sony PS3, the backing of several prominent movie companies and Disney pushed the market in Sony's favour. The War was over.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Weekly Question - Mar. 25th, 2010
Feeling uncreative this week, sorry all.
WHO IS YOUR FAVOURITE MOVIE HERO?
Post your answer below.
WHO IS YOUR FAVOURITE MOVIE HERO?
Post your answer below.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Lights, Camera....Problems with Action!
Alright so, this week I felt like writing an opinion piece, more specially, my thoughts on some common action movie issues.
The first major problem (especially in 007 movies) is that the bad guys always have such bad aim. I mean seriously, is there no marksmanship criteria for henchmen? What would happen if the first time Bond pops out from cover he gets killed with a head shot? Or what is the German sniper in Enemy at the Gates got the Russian officer on the first attempt (now I admit I've never seen the movie completely, so I am partially guessing here)? In fact, one of the only movies I can think about where the bad guy (we are initially lead to believe he's bad) has amazing marksmanship is Phone Booth. Kiefer Sutherland plays a sniper who keep Colin Farrell trapped in a Phone Booth (creative name eh?). In a good deal of action movies, the villains will run through entire clips and never once hit the protagonist, yet often with a single clip the protagonist can eliminate a room full of henchmen. Wheird! And yes I am aware of the "h" in "wheird"! Watch the movie Hot Rod.
Another major problem the henchmen cannot seem to get is logistics of a group fight. It is not uncommon for the hero to find themselves surrounded by henchmen who then proceed to attack ONE AT A TIME. I mean come on! Of course you will lose since this now becomes a series of one-on-one fights in sort of Mortal Kombat styled series of battles. If they had any sense, they would swam the hero all at once. True, a few henchmen might get injured but it would be minimal and the hero would be taken no problem. If I ever get jumped by a gang of people, I hope they follow this common action movie issue (and of course they don't know martial arts or carry weapons).
Not all of the problems in action movies are the fault of the henchmen. Sometimes the issue is the people making the movie. I love movies with montages. The point of a montage is to show progress of the main character through progressive clips that give the illusion of time passing while at the same time, remind the audience about what is going on. Listen to "You Need a Montage!!" from the movie Team America:World Police if you require more help with montages. The audience is basically left with one conclusion...that the main character is somehow allowed to learn and improve in a Matrix like fashion and speed by being a part of a montage. If that was all it took in real life I'd learn every though montages. I would be a super genious and have awesome soundtracks playing in the background while I do.
Anyway, these are just of the few great things about action movies. If you think of one, we would love to hear about it. Post a comment below with your thoughts below and thanks for reading.
The first major problem (especially in 007 movies) is that the bad guys always have such bad aim. I mean seriously, is there no marksmanship criteria for henchmen? What would happen if the first time Bond pops out from cover he gets killed with a head shot? Or what is the German sniper in Enemy at the Gates got the Russian officer on the first attempt (now I admit I've never seen the movie completely, so I am partially guessing here)? In fact, one of the only movies I can think about where the bad guy (we are initially lead to believe he's bad) has amazing marksmanship is Phone Booth. Kiefer Sutherland plays a sniper who keep Colin Farrell trapped in a Phone Booth (creative name eh?). In a good deal of action movies, the villains will run through entire clips and never once hit the protagonist, yet often with a single clip the protagonist can eliminate a room full of henchmen. Wheird! And yes I am aware of the "h" in "wheird"! Watch the movie Hot Rod.
Another major problem the henchmen cannot seem to get is logistics of a group fight. It is not uncommon for the hero to find themselves surrounded by henchmen who then proceed to attack ONE AT A TIME. I mean come on! Of course you will lose since this now becomes a series of one-on-one fights in sort of Mortal Kombat styled series of battles. If they had any sense, they would swam the hero all at once. True, a few henchmen might get injured but it would be minimal and the hero would be taken no problem. If I ever get jumped by a gang of people, I hope they follow this common action movie issue (and of course they don't know martial arts or carry weapons).
Not all of the problems in action movies are the fault of the henchmen. Sometimes the issue is the people making the movie. I love movies with montages. The point of a montage is to show progress of the main character through progressive clips that give the illusion of time passing while at the same time, remind the audience about what is going on. Listen to "You Need a Montage!!" from the movie Team America:World Police if you require more help with montages. The audience is basically left with one conclusion...that the main character is somehow allowed to learn and improve in a Matrix like fashion and speed by being a part of a montage. If that was all it took in real life I'd learn every though montages. I would be a super genious and have awesome soundtracks playing in the background while I do.
Anyway, these are just of the few great things about action movies. If you think of one, we would love to hear about it. Post a comment below with your thoughts below and thanks for reading.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Weekly Question - Mar. 17th, 2010
Nice and easy this week. Post your answer below as a comment!
WHAT PIECE OF WORK (NOVEL, COMIC, PLAY, FABLE, ETC.) WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE MADE INTO A MOVIE?
WHAT PIECE OF WORK (NOVEL, COMIC, PLAY, FABLE, ETC.) WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE MADE INTO A MOVIE?
My Rational
Hey guys, sorry there was no post on Sunday. This has been a crazy weekend with work and life. I will be posting something shortly and a new Weekly Question tonight. Stay Tuned!
In the meantime here is a picture from the Our Lady Peace concert I went to last night plus my rational for why it works on a blog about movies, enjoy!
Picture = Jeremy Taggart = OLP Drummer = Naveed Album = Starseed = Armageddon Soundtrack = A MOVIE = Reel Geekz material!
In the meantime here is a picture from the Our Lady Peace concert I went to last night plus my rational for why it works on a blog about movies, enjoy!
Picture = Jeremy Taggart = OLP Drummer = Naveed Album = Starseed = Armageddon Soundtrack = A MOVIE = Reel Geekz material!
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Weekly Question - Mar. 10, 2010
For this weeks Weekly Question I want everyone to look deep into their soul and answer this from the darkest part of yourselves. The area inside yourself that is so deep that only one movie has ever entered. What I want to know is....
WHAT IS THE WORST MOVIE YOU HAVE EVER SEEN?
This can be a movie that had a horrible story, bad acting or major plot holes. It could even contain all of those and others only you can think of. Post your answer below as a comment!
WHAT IS THE WORST MOVIE YOU HAVE EVER SEEN?
This can be a movie that had a horrible story, bad acting or major plot holes. It could even contain all of those and others only you can think of. Post your answer below as a comment!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)