Month: July 2007

So for those who didn’t hear my story of woe, I tried seeing “Transformers” on the 4th of July at the Des Peres Wehrenberg Theater. There were a few “projector issues” at the beginning (of course, after sitting through commercials and previews…), but the movie got started about 10 min late. Then, about 2 hrs into the 2.5 hr movie, it died. And by “died,” I mean that screwdrivers and wrenches were coming out in the projection booth. Needless to say, we were not pleased with this development, but were given passes to see it again at another time…

…so we saw it again last night, but this time at the Wehrenberg Galaxy theater, where they have digital projection and a “Mega Screen” (not as big as IMAX, but noticeably bigger). Now, this is the way to watch a special-effects ridden movie, lemme tell ya… It’s like the jump from 25″ standard-def and TV speakers to 50″ high-def with THX-certified surround…

Oh yeah, so the movie itself was quite good, even with having to see the first 2 hours twice. The story (simplified) is about bad-guy robots that are after information a guy contains, and then good-guy robots (nearly all of which come from General Motors vehicles…) are protecting him. There’s plenty of comedy (you know, when your car starts chasing you and helping you get dates…things like that…) and plenty of action, whic is to be expected. The story itself makes a general amount of sense, and translates relatively well from the 1980s television show to the big screen.

The special effects have been described as “the best ever” for a movie, and while I’m not sure if they’re the absolute best, they come damn close… The acting, on the other hand, I’m unsure about. The main character, Shia LaBeouf, was really good and makes me excited for “Indiana Jones 4,” where he’ll play Indy’s son. A few other bit part actors were alright, but then there were others that seemed to either “call in” their performance, or were just given crappy lines…including Jon Voight, Anthony Anderson, and John Turturro. It’s not like they were acting badly, but something seemed a bit “off” about their performances…amongst others…

Anyway, it was a great action movie with damned incredible special effects…to the point that, frequently, the Autobots looked very realistic. It was only in that last climactic fight scene where I really started noticing the CGI effects, when you’re getting really close in with the actors and the robots… Still looked good, but wasn’t perfect…

If you plan on seeing the movie at all, you need to see it in the theater… Otherwise, you can borrow the DVD from me when I buy it in a few months… 😛

We saw the new Michael Moore flick, “Sicko,” last night at the Chase Plaza Theater. A guy played an organ before the movie started and I could buy a beer at the concession stand…and after the matinee movies started, they brought out the full bar for mixed drinks… I think we’ll be going back there… 😛

The movie itself is a documentary about the health care “system” here in the United States, about corporate profits and buyoffs of government officials, about how people in the middle class that had insurance were denied claims, and about how socialized health care (i.e. Canada, France, England) isn’t the evil that the right-wing wants us to believe.

Personally, I thought the movie was really, really well done. The main criticism of the film, however, is that it’s “one-sided” and that the health care industry as a whole doesn’t have the opportunity to rebutt. In my opinion however, after seeing what was presented in the movie, I find it hard to believe that an argument against these claims even exists. One is that socialized medicine will mean longer waits and less choice over doctors. Moore goes to Canada and shoots that one down quickly (20 min to 1 hr waits at any hospital). One is that, due to socialized medicine, you get higher taxes. He goes to France and shows a couple that makes the equivalent of $100,000, pays their taxes, and still travels all over the world (i.e. Sri Lanka, of all places…), has a new plasma TV, leather couches, etc. Another criticism is that doctors don’t make as much in Canada or England as they do here. Yeah…they still drive Audis that sell for $50,000 here…

Also, the movie isn’t all about health care. For much of the movie, he discusses other socialized systems in goverment. For example, in France, if you have a job, you get 5 weeks off a year minimum. That’s full-time or part-time. It’s required. If you’re sick, you get to take time off…paid… 65% from the government, 35% from the business. A guy had cancer, took three months off and went to the south of France…and was paid the whole time. It’s just a different mentality over there, and they’re all about preventative care.

So yeah, it was good, and I think the arguments were well thought-out and thoroughly established…let alone the fact that it was a highly entertaining and funny movie, too. It was also pretty depressing. Without explaining completely, let me just say that Moore takes some sick people to Cuba…and they get better treatment…and cheaper drugs… The examples of what people have to go through here, and that living somewhere else (and not necessarily in poverty) gets you better health coverage, is simply sad.

Thus, I ask you…see if you can find some rebuttals to this movie (whether you agree with them or not), ’cause I’m rather curious what could possibly shoot down what I saw. Sure, I bet Moore did some picking and choosing as to the examples he showed, but obviously we aren’t getting the whole story from our government (i.e. crazy right-wing Republicans) or the media (i.e. FOX News)…

Edit: CNN ran a little blurb about the film bringing up “fudged” facts… For those that care, Moore got to respond to it to Wolf Blitzer right after it aired, and then posted a full retort on his website later. Moore’s response to Blitzer is somewhat entertaining in the beginning, but his response on his website includes full citations for his claims about the report CNN ran just before his interview. If you have concerns about Moore’s statistics, it’s worth a read.

First of all, I’ve only seen the original “Die Hard” and neither of the other sequels, but I went and saw the fourth installment, “Live Free or Die Hard” anyway… (note: that title, by the way, seems to make very little sense given the plot of the movie…)

The movie centers on a group of hackers that are trying their best to bring down the entire U.S. infrastructure, and take advantage of the confusion to get rich. The only thing that stands in their way? Bruce Willis. And, for a guy that may be 80 years old by now, he still kicks crazy ass… Justin Long (whom you know from the “Mac and PC” commercials) is also quite entertaining as Willis’ plucky young side-kick, and Timothy Olyphant (he’s been in a few movies, including the up-coming “Hitman“…) is the crazy bad guy… The acting was perfectly fine, but I was really only there to see Bruce kill people and blow stuff up…and, by golly gee whiz, he sure did… (note: Kevin Smith also has a nice cameo…glad to see that genius is keeping busy…)

I was also rather impressed about the effects, in general. The only thing that was obviously CGI was the F-35 they sent after Willis…which he subsequently destroyed… All the rest looked like it involved old-fashioned pyrotechnics and guns, which is always welcome in today’s more “modern” action films…

Overall, the movie is a big explosion fest, with an ample amount of comedy interspersed, to boot. If you’re a fan of the series, I’m sure you’ll love it…and if you have never watched the others, this one will still be more than entertaining enough for you… Don’t expect anything Oscar-worthy, but then again, I’d imagine most fans of the “Die Hard” series (or action movies, in general…) couldn’t care any less…

Go buy some popcorn and see it… Then go see “Sicko“… 😉