Drive

I just finished doing 2 things: watching Drive and writing my final will and testament. Why did I write my will you may ask? Because after people see what I'm about to write, I don't expect to live much longer. Having said that, let's move on.

So when I made my list of favorite movies of last year, people kept telling me that I forgot to include Drive. Truth be told, I didn't forget it. The reason being that I just hadn't gotten around to seeing it yet. And in between the time that I wrote that and saw this, people told me a number of things. One of them being that I would love it because it's right up my alley. So I finally watched it and I have to say that my final opinion of the movie is as follows:

Meh

That's it. Meh. Nothing about it really wowed me the way everybody else was. I keep getting the feeling that the screenwriter of this movie wrote it after watching Memento and No Country for Old Men back to back. And I really liked both of those movies.  I've heard that this movie has kind of a cult following, which I can see, but there is one group of people that I can really see loving this movie: Arthouse loving hipsters. Being that neither art house movies nor hipsterism is my thing, I didn't really get into this movie. Though I guess that the whole world became overrun by arthouse hipsters because a shit load of people told me to see this. Oh well. Do I regret buying it? No... Because I bought it for less than twenty bucks using loose change that I found around my room. Believe it or not, I actually found around thirty dollars worth of loose change around my room.

I guess this is another one of those instances where I didn't get into a movie that everybody else liked. Though, I don't dislike this movie to the degree that I distaste Titanic or Avatar.

Yours truly,
MP

Favorite Nostalgia Shows

This last weekend at work, my comrades and I got to talking about something that is both a blessing and a curse: nostalgia. When it comes to reminiscing about high school or days when you felt like you were king of the world, nostalgia can be a bit of a bitch. When it comes to remembering favorite childhood shows, however, nostalgia is sweeter than sugar, especially when you learn that such godsends are now available on DVD. So, here I am to present my personal favorites of nostalgic cartoons. Being that I am a 90's kid, I have to say that I belong to a great generation, if not the best. We had some kickass shows, while the generation after us has Hannah Montana. Is that a downgrade? I'll let you decide (yup).

5. Recess- Ah yes, good old Recess. this was a show with a really simplistic premise that was done very cleverly. The basic plot of the show is that there is this group of fourth grade kids, each of them represents a different archetype (jock, geek, thespian and so forth) going on all sorts of wacky adventures that made us all wish our school was this removed from reality. What is so clever about it is that the show was about things that every kid goes through (detention, stress of school pictures, dodgeball warfare and whatnot), but it was done in such an over the top way that you couldn't help but be sucked in by it. There was one episode where the fourth and fifth graders are playing dodgeball against each other, and the tone and style is done like a spaghetti western. How fucking cool is that?! The final showdown is even done in widescreen with tumble weed, epic western music, the whole nine yards. And that's just one episode. Think about how the epic the rest of the show was!

4. Dexter's Laboratory- This was actually a favorite of mine for years. This was about a young boy with an absurd level of genius who had a laboratory hidden behind a bookcase in his room. Something that I never thought about, but now it kind of bugs me is that his lab is pretty huge. In fact, it's a lot bigger than his actual house! Is part of it under ground? Once again, it's a TV show, so I don't mind it being removed from reality. Seriously though, how does that work?

3. Anything related to old school Warner Bros. or Disney cartoons- I put these in the same category because they are the definitive cartoons that we think of. When people start to talk about cartoons, most of us will automatically think of either Mickey Mouse or Bugs Bunny. Some might say Tom and Jerry, but you get the point. The sad thing about these cartoons is that they were on all the time when I was younger and now they are barely on ever. They keep getting buried by Chowder, Perry the Platypus (side note: I have a friend named Perry who resented the fact that he shared his name with a platypus) and whatever the hell else they show on kids' channels.

2. Animaniacs/ Pinky and the Brain- Two words: HELL YES. These shows were awesome. I decided that they should share a spot because they were after all sister productions and had a lot of the same writers. These shows were absolute genius. They knew how to entertain kids and also be intelligent enough (and in some cases, naughty enough) to entertain adults as well. These shows were so funny that I would still watch them if they ever came on again. In fact, I'm such a fucking dork that at the time of typing this, I have just ordered a DVD of some of the best Animaniacs episodes. Why not Pinky and the Brain you ask? Simple! I already have one. So there.

1. Batman: The Animated Series- If you have been following this blog at all, you would know by now that I freaking love Batman. I will admit, I've never read any of the comics, but I freaking love all the other media that involves Batman. I've already said that he is one of my childhood heroes and have even listed The Dark Knight as being one of my favorite movies. And this show is just awesome. The characters are great, the stories are great, the animation is very fitting, it's just an awesome show. Like Animaniacs, this is also a show that is good for adults too. The action is good enough for kids but the dark stories and well thought out and developed characters are just astounding. Even some of the villains like Two-Face, The Riddler and Mr. Freeze are very three dimensional. I heard somebody describe Freeze as being almost Shakespearean, and I wholeheartedly believe that. In fact, I think it applies to almost all the villains on this show. This is also the show that has the best Joker. Don't get me wrong, Heath Ledger and Jack Nicholson were pretty dang amazing, but the Joker in this show (voiced by Mark Hamill aka Luke Skywalker) is by far the best one. Most fans will tell you that this is their favorite one. You know how Jack Nicholson was mostly clown with little demon while Heath Ledger was mostly demon and little clown? Well, Hamill's Joker is the perfect balance of both. And I have to admit that I never would have expected that out of a cartoon of all places. But that just makes it more genius.

Oscar Nominations

Just this morning, the list of nominations for the Oscars was posted, and here I am to give my thoughts. I'm going to say this right off the bat, I don't have opinions for every category, for instance, I'm not going to talk about make-up or editing, I'll just address the major ones and then talk about a few elephants in the room.

Best Picture- Once again, there was an excess of nominations handed out, but thankfully, at least one of the movies that I liked from last year was able to make the cut. As most of you know, I absolutely adored Hugo, and have decided that will be the movie that I lobby for this year. Oddly enough, in the past few years, there have been 10 nominations for best picture, and yet, this year there was only 9. Not sure why they decided to change that this year, but what the heck, I'm guessing they just ran out of ideas.

Best Director- Like I even need to say it, I'm absolutely ecstatic that Martin Scorsese got the nod for best director. Though I'm betting that as much as I would like Hugo to be the big winner this year, it seems that everybody has been looking at The Artist. I have yet to see it, and so I can't really give an opinion on it as of yet.

Best Actor- This was the nomination that really made me happy, even if this person doesn't win, it's enough that he finally got his long overdue nomination. Gary Oldman finally received a nomination for Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. That being said, I'm not sure he'll get it because he also shares this category with the lead actor from The Artist, which looks like that will be the sweeper this year. Maybe not, maybe this will be one of those cases where they give it to Oldman based on the fact that this is long overdue. Either way, I'm glad.

Best Actress- I'm torn between two of the lovely actresses submitted here. Michelle Williams from My Week With Marilyn, and Rooney Mara from The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. I haven't seen My Week with Marilyn, but it looked really good and the always talented Williams looked absolutely stunning as Monroe. As for Mara, there were a few moments where I actually forgot that she was an actress and not actually Lisbeth Salander. Keep in mind, at the time of writing this, I have yet to see the swedish version, so I don't know how she compares to Noomi Rapace, but I can tell you that at least for this version, she was perfect. When I was reading the novel, she is pretty much what I had pictured when I was reading it.

Best Supporting Actor-  I will admit, I don't have a dog in this one really, considering I only saw one of the movies listed in this category, and I never thought that the performance was THAT great (it was good, but... oscar worthy?). I am of course talking about Jonah Hill in Moneyball. However, I am a huge fan of Max Von Sydow, who received a nomination for Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, so I guess my votes on him.

Best Supporting Actress- Again, not really one that I have a whole lot of investment in, but the one that did strike me as odd is Melissa McCarthy in Bridesmaids, but I'll get to movie later.

Best Song- There are only two entrees in this category, and the one that I am seriously hoping will win is   "Man or Muppet" from The Muppets. I freaking loved that movie, and actually wished that it received more nominations


SNUBS:

Okay, last year, the big shocker was that Christopher Nolan did not receive a best director nomination, despite getting the nod for best picture and best original screenplay. This year, the big shocker is that Drive never got anything. Now I have yet to see Drive, so I can't really give an opinion on this one, but I had hear a lot of great things about this movie and really wonder why it didn't get anything. Not even best actor.

On a side note, I was also hoping that at least one person from J. Edgar would get a nod, mostly Leonardo DiCaprio, but I think Judi Dench deserved props as well as Armie Hammer.

WHAT THE HELL?

Something that has me perplexed is all the praise that Bridesmaids is getting. Now look, I actually liked this movie, but getting Oscar nominations for best screenplay? I didn't think it was THAT good. Normally, my theory would have been that we had a lot of comedies come out, and with the exception of Bridesmaids, they all sucked. But here's the thing, The Muppets came out this year, and I thought that was way funnier than Bridesmaids. If I had to give a nomination to a comedy, this would be my first, and really only, choice. Even at the Golden Globes, I thought The Muppets was severely overlooked. Oh well, Wocka Wocka

My Thoughts on the Twilight Saga

Okay, this is something that a lot of people have asked me to do, so I guess I'm just going to get this out of the way. Over the years, the Twilight saga has become a staple for pop culture (unfortunately), and has been both praised and ridiculed by critics and readers alike. When I was considering doing this particular piece, one of my friends noted that a riff on Twilight has already been done multiple times. A lot of people make jokes about these books and movies, but when you think about it, nobody actually goes into why they are so bad.  Sure, they say that there are a few too many shirtless guys in it, and make jokes about how gay Edward really is, but nobody actually goes into the actual story or the plot or characters. Well, I guess that duty has been left to me... God help me. And I would also like to make this perfectly clear: I am only speaking for myself. I am conveying MY opinions, and nobody else's. My aim is also not to sway anybody or convince people to think a certain way, if you agree with me, fine, if you enjoy these books, then good for you. If you continue to enjoy these books after reading this, then great. I must confess that this will also end up being a little long, but since literature and writing is something that I have been studying, I can't help but be analytical and even a little nitpicky. With that said, let's proceed.

Alright, I'm going to be brutally honest in this review, and to start out, I'm going to say that at the start, I actually didn't have that big of a problem with these books. At the start, these were books that girls loved and guys made fun of. I pretty much put it in the same league as Titanic, The Notebook and Jane Austin, girls love them, guys are just "meh". And then I kind of saw it as every teenage girls' fantasy put into a book, which is again, why I just kind of let it go. Sure, I made fun of it as much as the next guy, but ultimately, I had no real hatred for it. That all changed when the fourth book came out.

The fourth book/movie is really when this franchise began to think it was more than it really was. Like I said, I thought it was just something entertaining for teenage girls to read, it didn't talk about life issues, it wasn't philosophical, it wasn't preachy, it was just some teenage girl going through some shit. Even after I was forced to sit through the second movie at gunpoint, I didn't have THAT big of a problem with it. Sure, I thought the writing and acting was horrible, but I had a gun to my head when I was watching this, so circumstance dictated that I let it go. Don't worry, the parties responsible have paid... with their lives (like I would accept anything else?). But I digress. The fourth book began to touch on subjects that were a little too touchy for a book like this. This was also when the characters started to get ungodly stupid. Let's start with the subject matter.
Marriage: We've got two teenagers setting to get married. If I showed you the previous sentence without any context, you would definitely be saying "Whoa! Time out here!" Yet because this is in a book, it's okay? I don't care if you're marrying one of hell's minions, you need to think this through kid! At the beginning of the first book, she is in her junior year, which places her age at roughly 16 or 17. And by the time she is 18, she has decided that she wants to marry Edward, even though a good portion of that year (maybe it was two), was spent hitting on this other guy, Jacob. I'm sorry, but this just doesn't seem right, especially considering that, from what I could see, Jacob was the better choice. He was nicer, more outgoing, less creepy, and was a lot more supportive. I actually feel kind of bad for this guy. My point is, I don't care how much money your life story has made, 18 is still too young to make that kind of commitment. Even in the Harry Potter series, they at least waited a few years to get married. And those kids had all been through stuff together. They all faced death numerous times together. These kids haven't been through that kind of shit. Sure, she gets bitten at the end of the first book and nearly becomes a vampire, but we're soon going to find out that maybe this would have been for the better.
Sex and Pregnancy: This is where I think the characters are just getting to be unbelievably dumb. So they get married, they go on their honeymoon and have sex (which is what you do on honeymoons). Side note: Apparently, they break the bed? And in this universe, vampires are made of stone or something? I don't remember that detail from Dracula, but then again, I may have missed that. Moving on. So they have sex, without any sort of protection, mind you, and they are surprised when Bella gets pregnant... I'm going to repeat that. They have sex without any means of preventing pregnancy, and yet they are surprised when Bella ends up pregnant. Is that a surprise to anybody else? Because it shouldn't be. Typically what happens is that when you have sex without any kind of birth control, chances are, you are going to get pregnant. And on top of that, they don't know what to do when the baby turns out to be eating her from the inside out. Here'e my question: In all of the years, actually centuries, that vampires have been in existence and living amongst humans, how is it that THIS is the first time something like this has happened? And how is it that they don't know what to do? I heard at some point, they bring in a witch doctor to take a look at her, and she does the whole whispering "DEATH" routine, yaddah yaddah. Another question: How is it that there are no vampire doctors in this universe that know how to deal with this? Isn't Edward's brother or father a doctor? Why not ask him? Is it supposed to be that this has never happened before because vampires are way too careful to let something like this happen? Well, then I guess that doesn't make our main characters look that good, in fact, it makes them look really stupid. I'm guessing the idea is that a human body is not strong enough to carry a vampire child? Again, this is another hit to the lead characters because that means that they should have waited until SHE BECAME A VAMPIRE to get married. Wasn't that the whole idea? Make her a vampire and get married? Why did they wait so long to change her into a vampire? Does someone care to explain? Was it that she wanted to get married but wasn't ready to change? Well, then you should have waited until she was ready to change and get married. Why not do it all on the same day? You could have "Before and After" photos at the wedding of her when she becomes a vampire. That would be kind of cool! Again, I would really like to know what was going on when these decisions were made.
Abortion: This was the point where I thought this series was getting to be too full of itself. There is a point in the book where they consider aborting the child inside Bella. Now look, I don't care what your stance on the issue is, I think we can all agree that abortion is not something you talk about lightly, especially in a book intended for teenagers. If this was supposed to be a typical teenage girl's fantasy, then why are they throwing heavy subjects like abortion into the mix? This is also the part where I think the character of Edward has lost all credibility. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does he go so far as to call the fetus "an abomination"? He says something to the affect of "We are going to get that abomination out or you!"? Sir, you do realize you are talking about an unborn child, let alone YOUR unborn child, right? A child that you created out of sheer stupidity? Maybe this was the point where Edward realized that he screwed up big time, and like most responsible teenagers, he avoids all responsibility. Bella, sweetheart, you haven't been married a year, and already this guy is bad news. Would you care to explain to me why you chose him over Jacob? And don't tell me it's because he sparkles. Now look, I'm not saying that abortion is something that shouldn't be discussed and talked about, because it should, it's something that doesn't have a clear answer, and it may never have a clear answer, but it has no place in a novel that is aimed at entertaining teenage girls. Do Harry Potter or The Hunger Games try to take a look at this type of thing? NO, because the people writing them know who their audience is, they know they are writing primarily to teens.
Pedophilia: You read that right, this book has a pedophile in it. After "the abomination" is born, Jacob sees it and apparently feels some sort of bond with the baby... Seconds after he sees it. Apparently, he does this thing called 'imprinting' which is where werewolves mark who their soulmate is going to be... and he imprints on the vampire baby. I know that I said I actually kind of like the character Jacob, but by now, even he is walking on thin ice. I know that he is technically 16 or 17 in these books, which means that he is not technically a pedophile yet, but come back to me in a year, when he has turned 18 and the baby is 1. Is it creepy yet? To be honest, I feel offended by these characters. Both of these guys are supposed to represent the dream guys that every girl wants to be with, and yet they have both proven to be total whack jobs.
Bella: Okay, this is the part where I am going to be completely, utterly, brutally, unchristianly, unnaturally honest with you people: I did in fact, attempt to read these books. About a year ago, I wanted to convince people that I do in fact have a sensitive side that goes beyond being in love with Taylor Swift. So, naturally, I attempted to sit down and read these books, this was a while before I learned what the fourth book was all about. My thinking was that while I did riff them like a lot of other guys, I would eventually find something to like about these books after giving them a chance. But I didn't. So there. Can you give a guy credit for trying? The biggest problem that I found with the first book, or at least what I had read, was oddly enough, the protagonist herself. I found nothing worth liking about this girl. In the first few chapters alone, she complains about every single little thing that there is to complain about. She even complains that it starts to snow. It starts to snow, and she says "There goes my good day". What the hell? Is there a single thing on this Earth that doesn't depress the hell out of you? Besides demonic beings staring at you? I've been described as emotionally fragile, and not even I complain as much as you! I've met girls like Bella, who complain about everything even though things are pretty dandy, and I don't hang around with them. I think they are kind of despicable. The other thing that really baffles me about this character is that girls really look up to her... and she is a sick person! She constantly plays the two boys against each other, acts tortured even though there is nothing all that wrong with her, and just stands idly by as people start a war and kill each other because of things that she has done, all while acting like she is worth it. The pretense of this girl is just astounding. It would be one thing if she was written as a villain, who was doing this on purpose to get something she wants, maybe she has a complex revenge scheme going on or something. But this girl is supposed to be the everyday teenage girl that the reader is supposed to identify with. I'm sorry, but this is just a sick person. I guarantee you she would have made a better villain. Ladies, if you want a female character to be your pop culture spokesperson, don't look at this girl. Look at people like The Bride, Ripley, Princess Leia, Marion Ravenwood, or shit, I would say take a look at Lisbeth Salander. Sure, she was crazy, but she was written that way on purpose! All of these people got into trouble from time to time, but they didn't need men to keep on bailing them out! Leia, once or twice, but she kicked ass as time went on.
Stephenie Meyer's ego: The thing that bugs me the most about these books overall is the author's ego. When you see her in interviews, she talks about her characters like they are better written than Wesley and Buttercup, the couple from Pride and Prejudice, and even Romeo and Juliet. And the way she talks about these stories really makes me wonder if she has even read them, or researched them, or knows anything about them. The way she talks about Wesley and Buttercup has convinced me that she has never read the book, and I would be willing to bet that she skimmed the movie. In one interview, she said that the couple in Pride and Prejudice is not well written because you know that one could carry on with life if the other dies... Just like couples in real life? And then she hit my hot button when she brought up Romeo and Juliet. She goes on about how stupid the characters are and how they rushed into life altering decisions despite the fact that they are teenagers... Just like the characters in your books, Miss Meyer? But with all that aside, Romeo and Juliet were written as dumb horny teenagers on purpose, because their story was meant to be a SATIRE on relationships that people get into at that age. People talk all the time about marrying their high school sweetheart when they are still in high school, and the play is sort of a "what if" if every teenager "followed their heart" and did make those kinds of decisions. Romeo and Juliet's story is essentially Shakespeare taking a dump on all of those dumb love stories. If anything else, it serves as a cautionary tale to people of this age group. And besides, both people end up dead as a consequence of the decisions that they made. In Twilight, everything ends okay despite the fact that they have done everything WRONG. If this were a love story that was meant to be taken seriously, then there would at least be some damage, I'm not necessarily saying that every character should die, since this is supposedly meant to be for teenagers, but there should be some damage, maybe a few relationships are permanently damaged because of the decisions that the characters made. Maybe a few characters' fates are left uncertain at the end, and maybe just one person dies.

Okay, so all in all, I guess you could say that I don't really care for these books, or the movies that are based on them. I treated them fairly when I thought they were just something entertaining for teenage girls, but since they have started taking themselves so seriously, it has all gone down hill. But again, the thing that bugs me is that this crowd of characters are supposed to be people that we identify with and aspire to be, and yet they are just despicable. The main character is annoying from the get-go, and the rest just get worse over time. I guess it isn't all bad as long as the people reading these books don't take them seriously and know that they are fiction.

I think I deserve some points here, I wrote this whole thing and I never once mentioned my issues with the fact that they butchered the rules of being a vampire.

Favorite Writers

Just thought I would take a break from writing about movies to talk about literature. Even though I have a passion for film, I have just as much of a passion for literature. I guess you could say that overall, my true passion is in storytelling, rather than just narrowing it down to one specific medium of storytelling. Anyway, a couple weeks ago, I shared my favorite directors, and now I'll share my favorite writers.

1. Dennis Lehane- I'm a sucker for mystery novels, and that is the one thing that Lehane has mastered. He has written several books including Gone Baby Gone and Mystic River. Both of which were turned into great movies, one of them being amongst my favorites.
2. Stephen King- This really applies more to his work pre-2000. Since the late 90's I don't think he has written as good books as he did during the 70's and 80's. I will say that I did enjoy his latest book Full Dark, No Stars, but it doesn't nearly compare to Salem's Lot, The Shining, Misery, or Carrie. And do I even need to mention The Dark Tower? I think it goes without saying that The Dark Tower is some of King's finest work.
3. Professor JRR Tolkein- I shouldn't have to say that much about this writer, considering he is known for being one of the most influential and most beloved authors of the past century. The Lord of the Rings has practically become the Holy Bible of both geekdom and modern literature, setting the bar for both story and characters, and providing a precedent for certain archetypes.
4. JK Rowling- It would be difficult for me to avoid this entry, considering that, like a lot of people, Harry Potter was a big part of my childhood.
5. Tom Clancy- Much like Stephen King, this one really applies more to his past work more than his most recent work. I am a huge fan of the novels involving Jack Ryan, as well as other novels like Rainbow Six. The rest of his stuff is a little mediocre.
6. John Le Carre- This is what I think Tom Clancy should be more like. If you want to get an idea to what his writing is like, take all of the James Bond novels, suck out all of the action and pizazz, and you have John Le Carre. Sure, his writing is much slower than Tom Clancy's, but I think it is a bit more engaging.
7. Mario Puzo- What can I say about this guy? Well, he wrote The Godfather, does that give you an idea? Moving on.
8. Mary Shelly- Even though her work is very old, she did write one of the most well known books of all time. If you don't know what that particular book is, kiss it. The part of her novel that I really love is the idea of that constant battle between science and nature, and how there are some dastardly consequences that occur when science tries to but out nature. The idea is that either they should leave each other alone, or they should go hand in hand to work towards a better tomorrow.
9. Edgar Allan Poe- Some people may think that I am a little messed up for putting him here, but I don't care. There is a reason why Poe is considered to be one of the greatest American authors, and why his work is taught in every junior high and high school. If you want to know what that reason is, then I would refer you to The Tell Tale Heart, The Raven, or even The Fall of the House of Usher.
10. Hunter S. Thompson- This guy is one of those people who is both entertaining and insightful. When he isn't saying something thought provoking, he's just being bat shit insane

First Monster Flick Review

This wasn't brought to my attention until recently, but I have yet to review a monster flick! That being said, let's talk about the mother of all monster movies. The one that sneaks up on you when you think you've hit smooth sailing. The one that eats all other monster films right out of the water. In case you couldn't tell by those really bad puns, the film we're going to talk about today is Jaws, the movie that scared people away from the beaches for years to come. This movie was the first of many big hits to be directed by Hollywood legend Steven Spielberg, who has since made several good movies, including two of my favorites, Raiders of the Lost Ark and Saving Private Ryan. But does it hold up? Do the techniques employed still scare audiences today like they did all those years ago? Well, let's take a look!

First of all, I should point out that part of what made this movie a classic was a bit of an accident. Originally, the studio and director decided that this would be a Godzilla-type movie with people running away from a giant shark that would look terrifying on the big screen. Here's the rub: The shark that would supposedly go on to scare the living piss out of its audience kept breaking down. And it was for this reason that the movie fell into such a tremendous debt and production fell so behind. It was for this reason, among others that the movie was in danger of being scrapped altogether. Spielberg and Richard Dreyfuss (one of the stars) probably would have never made another movie, and Roy Scheider would look back on this project as just some failed experiment in an otherwise sterling career. That would have been the case... Except for one thing. Spielberg came up with the idea of instead of showing us the shark (nicknamed Bruce on the set), he would show us everything from the shark's perspective, all while playing that subtle but still heart attack inducing music... You know the music I'm talking about. I'm betting you're probably humming it right now! Duuuuun dun... Duuuuuuun dun.... You get the idea. Anyway, by combing these two elements, you wouldn't exactly have the audiences shrieking right away, but you would have them getting closer and closer to falling off the edge of their seats as we see the shark moving closer and closer to the naked lady/ 9 year old kid. And then when you actually show the victim being dragged to the bottom, that would be the moment where the aisles became flooded with the urine and vomit of a thousand saps, cascading down the steps of the theater like a river of... you know what? I'm going to drop that analogy there before even I get grossed out. But you get the point. Part of the reason why the movie worked so well is that you never saw the shark, I can recall 3 times that I can remember seeing the shark. It may be more than that, but it probably is no more than 5. The point is that this movie follows the principle of less being more. The less the audience sees, the more intimidating and suspenseful it is, and thus the reaction you get is much greater as well when things get to a head.

This technique ended up saving the movie because the scenes with the shark became few and far between, and the budget problems were nearly solved. The only thing that people were waiting on were the box office results. And wouldn't you know? The movie absolutely killed at the box office, making a ton of money and giving the studio enough reason to make not one, but THREE sequels, but we'll get to those later. According to Spielberg, there was an incident where he saw a patron start to run out of the theater in the middle of a screening. Naturally, Spielberg thought that the guest was sickened by the film and was leaving in anger. Well, one of those statements is true, and it's not what you think. The patron WAS sickened by the movie, and he left the theater to go puke his guts out. When you are making this kind of movie, that should be the highest praise you can get! Screw letter grades, forget about scales of 1-5, when you have a guest tasting his last meal, you have done your job mister! Pat yourself on the back you gruesome bastard! The movie has since become a legend, making icons out of all the people that were involved in the making and has even been parodied to death. I think three of those parodies are mistaken for being actual sequels... At least let's pray to God that's the case

When all is said and done... Does this movie still hold up? Well, yes and no. Yes, because it still scares audiences even to this day, again proving that less really is more. Some of the greatest horror films of all time have proven that. Take movies like The Shining, The Haunting, or even The Others where the fear comes from what you don't see, thus building suspense and tension in the mind of the viewer. Other movies, like the remake of The Haunting, try to get cheap scares by showing us CGI ghosts and having things scream in our faces. It's good for a momentary scare (if that), but leaves no real lasting impression on the audience. A movie like Jaws does leave an impact because of the amount of things we do see, or rather, what we don't see. For this reason, it does hold up.

The reason why I would say it doesn't hold up is this: Audiences would not be able to accept this movie if it were made today. These days, the so-called 'scary movies' are all about the ghost or whathaveyou. Jaws is more about the people that are being affected by this, and how they react to the situation. We really do care about these characters and want to see them pull through. And, since the scenes with the shark are few and far between, that makes them more special and therefore, more memorable. This was again, accredited to the fact that the filmakers were limited by the technology of the time and had to make do with what they had. Audiences these days would just be bored out of their mind and continuously ask "Where's the shark?" This has less to do with the movie itself and more to do with the audience that would be viewing it.

Bottom line: Do I recommend it? Umm... Duh! The only reason I wouldn't recommend this movie is if you list any of the Saw movies on your top ten. Even if you don't find it scary, you will at least learn to care about the characters and cheer for Roy Scheider when he says "Smile you son of a bitch!". In any case, go buy it or rent it. Especially now in January, when going to the beach is not ranking high on your to do list. And now, since I talked about this one, I feel almost obligated to talk about the rest of the movies. Expect to see that review soon... God help us all...

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Believe it or not, I have quite a few mixed feelings about this movie. I despise it, don't get me wrong, but when I actually watch it, I always go through the same cycle of emotions: Start out with hopeful, like this movie could be good. I see the opening fight, and I get optimistic. We witness the infamous fridge scene, I slap myself to see if I'm dreaming because that was really stupid. The rest of the movie goes on, I get a bit more optimistic, and then the aliens show up and I blow my brains out.

That's pretty much a summary of what I go through every time this movie is on TV. When I actually think about it, the movie as a whole isn't that bad, it has the same tone, the same feel and even the same music as the other three movies, but there is just one thing that causes me to check out of this movie every time, and it ain't Shia LaBeouf. To be honest with you people, I don't have that big of a problem with Shia. Sure, he was annoying in the Transformers movies, but then again, so was everyone, even Jesus. And here, he was actually a pretty good choice to play the young supporting character. And the thing that bothered me wasn't the fridge scene either. Sure, that scene was beyond ludicrous, but if it weren't for this one thing, I would be able to forgive that.

The thing that really turns me off to this movie is this: aliens... Sorry, inter-dimensional beings, or whatever the hell John Hurt calls them at the end. The idea of throwing sci-fi into this when all the other movies were well... not science fiction is just a turn off for me. Now I do understand that aliens and religious artifacts fall under the same category (labeled "Things we may never fully understand and shouldn't screw around with"), but in terms of a film genre, they are on completely different ends of the spectrum, and throwing them together without any sort of warning is just risky and all around unwise. The other thing that bugs me about this twist is that they try to call them "inter-dimensional beings". Not entirely sure what that means, I'm guessing they can travel between dimensions, or whatever, but here's the thing: You may not call them aliens, but they look like traditional aliens, crash-landed in Roswell, New Mexico, have mind powers like a lot of aliens do, and flew away in a FUCKING UFO!!! You may not call them aliens, but they sure do fit the fucking bill!

Other than that elephant in the room, the movie as a whole is not that bad. Sure there are scenes like the fridge and the monkey swinging scene that are pretty ridiculous but aren't all that bad. The other movies had some scenes that required us to suspend our disbelief for a short while, and these scenes weren't all that different. And this will come as a shock to nobody, but the aliens idea was George Lucas's idea. And apparently, he was the only one who wanted it to happen. Short reminder here, this was the guy who thought audiences would find Jar-Jar hilarious. Spielberg knew the idea was BS and even fought it off as long as he could, arguing that people wouldn't go for it and that he was through with making alien movies. But George insisted that this must be made and... well, the rest is history. Lucas is now credited with almost ruining two of his own brainchildren. Can we just all agree that George Lucas is the enemy of the human race?