Change Your Image
M0KUJIN
Imagine if JK Rowling decided to create the "Church of Hogwarts", or if George Lucas declared that "The Force" was a real phenomenon and people worshipped that. It would be no different.
So, Scientology? A CULT.
Reviews
Unbreakable (2000)
Unpalatable. Unbearable. Un-everything.....
I viewed UNBREAKABLE on the recommendation of a friend.
STUPID.
The movie was tedious from beginning to end. An exercise in ULTIMATE patience, which even the Dalai Lama would ultimately fail.
The movie starts off with the birth of a baby boy named Elijah (Samuel L. Jackson) but taking a closer look at him his arms and legs are broken for some reason, and through out life he gets the name Mr. Glass because he breaks easily. Fast forwarding to the present an unhappy married security guard named David (Bruce Willis) discovers that he is the sole survivor in a train crash and surprised he doesn't have a scratch on him, but when Elijah discovers David he is drawn to him, whilst David doesn't seem to be interested in what he is capable of. Seeing how the two are the opposite of each other Elijah talks about heroes, villains and comic books trying to..........Y'know what? F*CK IT! I cannot be ass'd explaining the shitty non-existent plot. The story starts off 'old man' slow, gets even slower and then just slips into a coma.
This movie is not worth renting, or even watching for F-R-E-E. I am totally serious. I didn't begin to write this review/opinion piece just to bring down the movie's rating but to inform the level-headed individuals of the world, as to how much of a steaming pile of elderly woman's turd UNBREAKABLE genuinely is.
Its a total excremental mess from the get go. The kind of movie you are glad not to have spent money about, but regret wasting your time with. I wonder how many people came out of a movie theater literally swearing about this ridiculously slow, inconclusive, mass of nonsense.
It's rare to see a film that has absolutely no redeeming qualities at all, but UNBREAKABLE achieves this with EASE.
Congrats Shyamalan.
Rant OUT!
Firewall (2006)
Gotta Save that Pesky Family................AGAIN.
In "PATRIOT GAMES" (1992) Ford is.... the "everyman" good guy, who saves his family from the ruthless IRA. Family re-unites.
In "AIR FORCE ONE" (1997) Ford is.... the "everyman" good guy, who saves his family from cold-blooded Russian terrorists. Family re-unites.
In "FIREWALL" (2006) Ford is.... The "everyman" good guy, who's perfect family are kidnapped by a bad man.... good guy kills bad man at the end of the movie. Family re-unites.
Now, I maybe onto something here, and call me cynical, but there seems to be a pattern forming. Just when have we seen this process before?
This movie perfectly demonstrates exactly everything wrong with modern day Hollywood. Washed-up, has-been actor, lack of experience of the topic of the movie and the recycling of old movie B.S. plots and clichés.
If you're really a fan of - Mr. Harrison "GOTTA SAVE MY FAMILY YET AGAIN!" Ford, and want to actually sit through this chor of a movie, rent it (with someone else's money) first, or if you're desperate to purchase it, wait until you can find it in the garbage bins out back at the local Wal-Mart / Costco / Target store/s. As it is right now, it ain't worth $HIT.
Harrison Ford.....your career is OVER. The sentence is BOX-OFFICE DEATH.
Leading man no more.
Signs (2002)
Passion of the Aliens
Mel Gibson plays a rural Pennsilvaniya farmer. A rural Pennsilvaniya farmer who doesn't do a single second of farming during the entire movie.
It gets worse.
Mel's mundane celibate existence is rudely interrupted when 7 foot furry green aliens, who fart at the wrists, decide to invade the planet...but more specifically, have set their nefarious EXTRA TERRESTRIAL sights on seeking "THAT" global strategic position that every nation on Earth is vying for...yup, that's right...RURAL "P-e-n-n-s-i-l-v-a-n-i-y-a". (sarcasm laden heavy sigh~~~~~~)
However these are no ordinary aliens. No sir! They've managed to travel billions of light-years through space, only to be stymied by the uber-complex technology of boards and nails that Mel has erected around his home.
Yes, a race of beings for whom water is as caustic as INDUSTRIAL STRENGTH ACID select as the target of their invasion a planet whose surface is no less than 70% covered by water, inhabited by beings whose bodies contain more than 90% water.
(Just how did they traverse through Mel's dew laden cornfields at night without being burned to a f**king crisp?!?!?)
The humans are no Einsteins either, the radio communications used by the aliens, easily picked up by a common baby monitor, somehow escape the higher tech scrutiny that you'd expect from the scientific community or the military. And where is the military? At no time are there big explosions from the usual response to a threat, oh, say invisible hostile alien spaceships hovering over major cities all around the world.
Nope, it's a "wait and see" approach here (maybe they were praying for rain). And what were the aliens going to do with the planet or us after we'd been conquered? A planet covered mostly by water,which is hardly an ideal vacation paradise for them is it? Perhaps they were going to tow it away and Ebay it. I dunno....and neither does M. Night Shymalan I bet.
Furthermore, keep in mind that human beings are made of mostly water, so these invaders can't exactly devour us, nor can they enjoy the pleasures of sex with us. So maybe they'll burn us as fuel. Or Ebay us. Given these aliens observed level of technical sophistication, you could suppose their spaceships might have been of the steam powered variety.
Of course, the Shymalan-fans-deep-in-denial are going to come back with howls of outrage that I "DON'T GET IT!". I can hear them now... "Dumbass! It's not about sci-fi or horror, it's about family, faith and spirituality!".
Nah....
It's a pathetically crap drawn-out hack written / directed drama pretending to be Sci-Fi. Both this movies alien attack plot and themes of faith and religion fall apart under the slightest bit of scrutiny (and I ain't even trying). SIGNS is another overly self important film by the most overrated HACKS of his time. Shyamalan fanatics and apologists will eat it up like excrement, while normal folks will retch violently and then upchuck.
Oh, did I happen to mention that the aliens fart at the wrists?
War of the Worlds (2005)
Re-make No.1,781,691.........
Stop me if you've heard this one before:
The Earth has been overrun with Aliens with little to no motivation beyond the complete extermination of the Human race.
Well, that's the PLOT outta the way.
The acting?
Well, Tom Cruise (CHECK!) plays Tom Cruise (CHECK!), in a Tom Cruise movie (CHECK!). No big shock there.
As for Dakota Fanning, I really wanted to put a "KILL ME FIRST" sign on her. She spends the entire movie S-C-R-E-A-M-I-N-G. She screams at her father, she screams at her brother, she screams at the Aliens, she screams when she's reunited with her mother. And when there is a lapse in the movie (and there are many) she screams as a filler. Does she even talk in normal decibels?
When was the last time you saw refugees running TOWARD an ensuing battle? Well, Ray's teenage asshole son is inexplicably caught up in the patriotic rush to destruction along with a lot of other unknown dead-from-the-neck-up civilians. We're also faced with refugees streaming out of one large alien-ravaged city (NEW JERSEY) only to stream into another alien-ravaged city (BOSTON). Go figure.
Meanwhile, the aliens for reasons unknown, have taken to invading the rural areas at a concentration of one Tripod per acre. While on their coffee break from all the HARD HARD work, the aliens find the cellar of an old farmhouse fascinating. Then, when the steam whistle blows, it's back to work snaring/drinking/eating/vaporizing humans.
As for a nice happy-happy ending, Mom and her family are safe and sound in their untouched upper-class Boston neighborhood (they appear dressed for an imminent "War of the Worlds" party.)
I guess War of the Worlds rounds-off Spielberg's - "New Millennium SCI-FI Turkey Trilogy"...A.I., Minority Report, and now this utter sh*t-fest.
War of the Worlds (2005) - takes more minutes off your life than smoking.
Trust me........AVOID.
Chôjin densetsu Urotsukidôji (1989)
Tentacle Sex....................&.....................Super Sperm.
This movie is prevalent with scene's of extreme sex and sadistic violence. Women / Girls are repeatedly raped through every orifice by what appear to be huge tentacle penises, causing their body to violently erupt into bloody pieces. Penises that are miles long and fire a constant stream of projectile semen more powerful than the atomic bomb dropped on Japan during WWII. Creatures with more penises than fingers. Slashing, dicing, ripping, beating, decapitation and raping of women / girls. This is NOT animated afternoon fun for the children, or even adults with any morals. To sit through this amazing animated adventure, and the others in the series, one must throw any sense of morality outta the window....
From the opening credits with the picture of a red-skinned demons, every muscle group shaded, doing what you might imagine demons to do with an ominous narration about the legend of the Overfiend (also known as the CHOJIN) and the collapse of the three worlds in the background, the story is completely entertaining. These opening credits also serve as a good warning as to the adult content of the rest of the movie - if you are already feeling queasy or covering your eyes, I recommend you avoid anything in this genre.
The characters are fully developed throughout the film, changing over time as one might expect with the sudden addition of paranormal forces into their ordinary lives. It is a story of love, war, desperation, misunderstanding and ultimately change, following the lives of children becoming adults in a world where demons, super-humans and gods can interact with humans on a very intimate level.
In the beginning of the actual story, a sharp contrast is drawn between the demon world experienced in the prologue and the brightly lit world of the humans. Nagumo is a silly pubescent Japanese high school kid, whom enjoys peeping into the female locker room, obsessed with the girls in his school and enamored by a beautiful Japanese cheerleader named Akemi. Akemi is a carefree, smiling girl-next-door in these opening scenes, when she is summoned in for a conference with a teacher, the true horror begins. The teacher, a Ms. Togami, turns out to be a Makai, a demon from one of the three realms explained in the opening narrative. This is the audiences first introduction to Amano Jyaku, the 300 year old anti-hero from the world of the Jyujin-kai, or "man-beasts", battling the now demonic - Ms. Togami.
From here the story takes off as Amano Jyaku and his sister Megumi search for the Chojin, each following a different character. Nagumo is Megumi's pick, although he seems a small and weak introvert compared to the star basketball player Ozaki (his complete opposite), whom Amano is convinced is the true Chojin, an thus decides to pursue. The story follows the lives of the characters, and although there are strong scenes of extreme violence and rape, none are excessive or distracting from the plot. The violence that surrounds the characters is what drives them, it is the force that promotes the changes necessary to live in the ever changing world of the story itself. A lot would be lost to this story were the violence to be removed or even toned down. However, keep in mind, that it is strongly present before watching this movie, or showing it to others.
To tell any more of the plot would reveal entirely too much of the story. Much of the enjoyment is following Amano and Megumi on their 300 year closing quest for the all powerful Chojin, a search which leads them to a shockingly unexpected conclusion.
If you can forgive the English dubbing (I recommend watching this with subtitles if you can locate the uncut PERFECT COLLECTION DVD), it's a classic piece of Japanese animation.
Not for the faint hearted or easily offended....or those of a nervous disposition.
Mission: Impossible II (2000)
"Squeeze a Child by It's throat."
Devoid of any sense at all, this movie does its best to insult the intelligence of any living human whom views it. It's the type of movie that leaves a 12 year old orgasmicly gasping, while leaving any rationally level headed individual with a deep sense of the "MISSING TIME" phenomenon.
The original 1996 "Mission: Impossible" movie showed just how an intelligent (while yet entertaining) espionage movie could be made, without a single gun battle, although with several good break-ins and chase scenes. The 1996 "Mission: Impossible" was about sabotage, agents, betrayals, heists, set-ups, shake downs and the mission. The plot was intricate and intelligent. It had twist's and turns. The conclusion was great, the ending was great, and the climax was intense. By contrast in this sequel, probably the only people in the world whose heads move fast enough to plan maneuvers like the ones CROOZE improvises in this film are the scriptwriters.
Let me speak to some of the far more child-like idiotic elements of this movie that just left me completely embarrassed, and certainly anything BUT impressed.
In an action sequence, in which a lone Tom Cruise is gunfighting with the villains at a biotechnology compound, the bad guys happen to be perched underneath some barrels labeled - "DANGEROUS, HAZARDOUS / MEDICAL WASTE". So what does our innovative Ethan Hunt (played by Tom Cruise) decide to do? He shoots out the barrels and "KA-BOOM!" they explode, eliminating the evildoers in a single engulfing explosion.
Now what exactly do movie producers believe constitutes medical waste? C4 explosive? Napalm? How does a barrel full of petri-dishes, used diapers, test tubes, dirty syringes, tainted glassware etc, etc, all of the sudden become an explosive weapon of mass destruction, that takes out a fortified enemy position? If so, can we please kill two birds with one stone and just drop hospital medical waste barrels from B52's in George W. Bush's foreshadowing war against either North Korea or Iran, and save our tax dollars?
There are numerous other inane parts but the above example is illustrative of the movie's approach which is -- F-CK any form of a plot, believability and any form of common sense - full speed ahead on CROOZE appeal and CROOZE facial close-ups with flowing of hair!!!
If you can deal with pointless dialog and non-existent storyline enough to appreciate some CROOZE action sequences and constant CROOZE scenery, and more slow-motion than can be found in the complete catalog of John Madden's Football Highlights Specials, this might be for you.
Otherwise save your time, do something more constructive, such as surfing the net for....."STUFF".
Star Trek: Voyager (1995)
A word to the wise ain't necessary, it's the stupid ones who need the advice.
The vultures who took over the Star Trek franchise upon Gene Roddenberry's death are aware of two certain facts.
1: Star Trek fans and fanatics will watch ANYTHING so long as it contains the title "STAR TREK". (These are NOT discriminating people)
2: No matter how stinking corpse like rotten a Star Trek show is, the Executive Producer/s never has to be in front of the camera for the audience to see.
Executive tag team duo - Rick Berman & Brannon Braga, are without a shadow of a doubt contenders for the most talentless creative team in all of television history.
It's hard to say, simply because when your track record contains as much HACKERY as these two nitwits, you're usually not remembered. But these two seem to defy the rules. Mind boggling.
Star Trek was originally intended to be written from an intellectual perspective, to appeal to and respect the audience's intelligence, but just how many episodes of ST:Voyager were simply lifted/adapted plots from ST:TNG?......7?.....45?......861?.......Sorry, I've lost count.
ST:Voyager was simply a lame attempt by Paramount to keep the Trek ATM spitting out money at the fans expense. Do you honestly think or believe that Paramount cared about the quality of this show? Nah, they were busy planning the next low-budget, plot-free NextGen film.
I was once a fan of Trek, but enough is enough. Let Star Trek rest in peace. If in reality, we were to keep excavating things when they got old and died, our world would stink just as repugnantly as the Trek world does.
The final word on ST:Voyager?
Garbage.
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
No anal probe or implants today, Mr. Dreyfuss.
Once Upon a time...
"Stars Wars" and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" were both released in 1977, and were enormously successful films, both critically and commercially.
This began a new era in Hollywood, in which special effects became much more important as a lure to bring customers to the theater. Thus began the golden age of cinema through the 80's.
But anyway, I digress...
The plot to Close Encounters of the Third Kind involves aliens visiting the Earth with a fleet of ships. Scientists discover how to communicate with the aliens through musical and mathematical codes. The big bad naughty evil U.S. Government, naturally, launches a massive conspiracy, inventing a deadly nerve gas leak story in order to relocate the local population away from the nearby area the aliens have chosen as the point of contact with humanity.
Richard Dreyfuss is well cast as an average joe who happens to coincidently encounter a flying saucer one evening. This close encounter causes him to soon lose his job, his sanity, and his wife (Teri Garr) and kids. Melinda Dillon is a mother of a young child (played by wide-eyed and mute Cary Guffey) who, without reason is abducted by the aliens. Dreyfuss and Dillon are both strongly and deeply compelled to visit Devil's Peak, not knowing or fully understanding why.
Steven Spielberg wrote and directed "Close Encounters". As with his later film "E.T.", the aliens are benevolent, and the special effects are used to create a mood of childlike wonder. This mood is ultimately manipulative, however, and the jaded viewer may not be especially impressed with hairless, big-eyed, unisex aliens and glowing spaceships. Ethical considerations, such as the rights of aliens to kidnap whomever they wish for close inspection, are not addressed.
Tellingly, "Close Encounters" won the Academy Award for Best Cinematography, but was not nominated for Best Picture or Screenplay. While it is a very good film, it is not outstanding.
The story succeeds as a drama, but there is more form than content.
Scary Movie 2 (2001)
Expulsion of seminal fluid from the urethra of the penis during orgasm....this movie ain't.
"No mercy. No shame. No sequel." If only those two groups of brothers--Wayans and Weinstein--had heeded the last part of that tag-line for the original Scary Movie.
Scary Movie 2 is an all new low in modern comedic cinema. Anna Faris's only talent is making men mass-ejaculate. Shawn Wayans is homosexual. Marlon Wayans is a pot-head. Tori Spelling performs fellatio on a ghost, and Christopher Masterson does zip. Yes ladies and gentleman, these are their main character traits.
For a supposed comedy, the film fails on every single level.
It's quite ironic, because in the first movie, the Wayans brothers wanted to not only parody horror movies but also the countless teen movies that have recently come into existence since the mid 90's. Now, they too, have befallen the same trap that they once set out to destroy through comedy -- they're coming up with half-brain ideas, full of young actors, making a comedy movie simply because they can and in the foolish belief (although at least 60% of the time it's not financially foolish) it will sell lots of tickets/DVD's.
Face it, the Wayans brothers have become what they most feared -- cheap writers making teen movies for the mere purpose to make a few bucks.
More power to them but sellouts nonetheless.
83 minutes too long.
Avoid.
George W. Bush: Faith in the White House (2004)
Delusions of Omnipotence.
What is this documentary? This is a film that attempts to show that George W. Bush is a man of faith (not a tool of the Christian Coalition) and that his faith in Jesus Christ makes him a strong man and the only right leader in these tumultuous times.
And that's it. Without going into my feelings about "Fahrenheit 9/11" ,there are two hugely important differences between "George W. Bush Faith In The White House" and "Fahrenheit 9/11." In "Fahrenheit 9/11," Michael Moore has incredible impact because HE does not make allegations, he simply replays what Bush and his top aides said and puts forth the evidence we now have to disprove their misstatements and outright lies. That is to say, Moore doesn't damn the Bush Administration; he lets the Bush Administration damn themselves. By contrast, "George W. Bush: Faith In The White House" is a group of people (many of them the most reactionary evangelical Christian leaders today) spouting how great and genuine George W. Bush is.
In short, this documentary is garbage.
I make that statement without any political bias and here's why: this movie is a bunch of crap. First of all, the opposition (those who disagree that George W. Bush is either a man of faith or more than just a tool pushing the agenda of the Christian Coalition) has no say in this movie. Not a single one of the people who have publicly opposed Bush and his faith-based agendas agreed to appear in the movie. Yet, quotes from Al Franken and Richard Gere are used in the movie as the voice of the opposition. The problem is how they are presented. Not a single opposition voice over is done without sounding sniveling or sarcastic. The film immediately illustrates its bias by insulting the opposition in the way it presents their material.
Moreover, this is a factually problematic movie that is only supportable by those who agree with the Bush-style politics. Bush rules using innuendo and threat without having a firm grasp on facts or reality. Similarly, "George W. Bush: Faith In The White House" mentions incidents that are bizarre and random without ever being specific enough to be truly credible. For example, the film cites an incident (which I had never heard about) where George W. Bush was approached by a campaign worker while working on his father's presidential campaign. The movie applauds Bush for resisting the temptations of the advance and credits his character and religion (an obvious attempt to contrast with Clinton). The problem is the incident comes across as entirely without credibility as it involves no names, times or other specifics. Instead, it seems like a made up incident used to prove a point. Similarly, the movie shows an incident where a senator solicited Bush for a program and Bush rejected him the moment that the senator tried to show how it would benefit Bush personally. Again, the incident was left too vague to seem real or credible.
Moreover, the Bush administration has done everything possible to disprove the credibility of such an incident. Could any informed viewer truly believe that Bush would reject a proposal because it benefited him when his administration has made so many closed door deals with companies that directly benefit George W. Bush and Dick Cheney? But the thrust of the movie is that George W. Bush is a man of faith and that faith has made him strong. The producers of the film are also hoping it has made the viewer pliable and stupid. Why do I say that? The producers are very careful to arrange incidents out of order so as to make George W. Bush appear as good as possible. For example, they cleverly gloss over his drinking until the age of 40 (completely neglecting his use of CRACK COCAINE in the 1970s!) and then tell how he found faith. The problem is, anyone taking notes will instantly find the hypocrisy of their argument. Why? The movie is honest about dates and it says that George W. Bush quit drinking on his 40th birthday, in July 1986. However, George W. Bush met with Billy Graham and became a man of strong Christian faith in 1985.
See the problem? This film wants us desperately to believe that George W. Bush's evangelical Christianity saved him from a life of debauchery and drinking and made him into a strong, steadfast, righteous leader, but instead, it shows the opposite. Even Bush's suddenly strong Christian faith could not stop him from drinking. He kept drinking for at least a year after he found God again! And that, then, begs the question: what's to stop Bush from relapsing? If God wasn't enough to make Bush stop abusing alcohol, what's to keep Bush from starting up drinking again when the job gets tough? Moreover, "George W. Bush Faith In The White House" is filled with a lot of other very problematic logical fallacies. For example, the movie insists that because George W. Bush is a man of faith, he is trustworthy. One need not go back so far to the Inquisition, but rather to the recent scandals in the Catholic Church to be able to render that argument invalid. The truth is, faith does not equal trustworthiness. Religious leaders and congregates can be exceptionally corrupt, especially in Christianity where God offers absolution and forgiveness. Pardon the possibility of sounding jaded, but when a faith offers the opportunity to clean your moral slate on a weekly basis, it lowers the chance of moral accountability.
Bush's Brain (2004)
President Rove
When I first glimpsed the title to this documentary, I must admit that I was indeed a little taken aback. I never knew George W. Bush had a brain.
However, "Bush's Brain" shows that Georege W. Bush does indeed have a brain working for him; it just happens to be within the head of another individual. The premise of the film is that Karl Rove may be this generation's Senator McCarthy. Rove is to pro-war activities as Senator McCarthy was to communism, both real or imagined, in the early 1950's. By equating genuine questions by everyday citizens about the legitimacy of the war in Iraq with not being patriotic, Rove has set up a dynamic where intelligent discussion of foreign policy is difficult, if not almost impossible. Bush is shown as being co-ruler with Rove, or should I say Rove is co-ruler with Bush?
Rove is part of Bush's advisory team and several people in this film see Rove as wielding as much influence over Bush's decision making as a prime minister. Rove is seen as having marketed the Iraq war as the defining moment for Bush, whom he calls 'the War President'. The war in Iraq, then, is something which legitimizes the presidency for Bush and pushes all other issues aside.
The Rove doctrine, simply stated, is that 'A true American either supports Bush and the Republican party or he is labeled a traitor' (Democrats and dissenting Republicans included). If these statements sound like something from one of George W. Bush's speeches, that is because both Rove and Bush say very similar things, sometimes word for word. The film makes it a point to reveal that it is difficult to know where Bush and Rove differ as individuals; the title of the film is meant to inform us that Bush and Rove are a team and Rove is 'the brain' behind the operations, the power behind the throne.
Rove has a history, according to the film Bush's Brain, of destroying people politically and disrupting the personal lives of those who attempt to oppose him. Rove does these dirty deeds because 'he needs to win at all costs' and Rove lives by the philosophy that 'the ends justify the means'. Many people in the state of Texas have been hurt by Rove. Rove is accused of running dirty campaigns against such people as Ann Richards (former governor of Texas), John Hightower (a Texas commissioner), and several other people in various public offices. One of the most interesting anecdotes concerning Rove's political methods is that Rove once planted a 'bug' in his own office during a campaign and alerted the press so that his candidate would receive sympathy votes. The FBI concluded that the 'bug' was not likely used or even operational, but the political damage to the person challenging Rove's candidate had been done and Rove and his team won the election. Rove is alleged to be the brains behind the smear campaign against John McCain (Republican presidential candidate in 2000).
The script of this film was taken from research done by journalists James C. Moore and Wayne Slater. While it is possible to follow the film without reading the book by these two journalists, which I will paraphrase as Bush's Brains: How Karl Rove Won the Presidency for George W. Bush, I suspect that reading the book would enhance the viewing of this film. A lot of Texas politics are covered in the first half of the film, the particulars of which I was only vaguely familiar. The film does show a pattern of dirty politics which Rove seems to use consistently. It is interesting that Karl Rove declined to be interviewed for the film but he did send a fifteen page letter to the book's authors taking issue with some of their research. One or two people who are presently on good terms (i.e. speaking terms) with Karl Rove were willing to defend Rove's actions during political campaigns. Even his friends admit that he becomes overly consumed with winning. The film was fair and balanced because of this inclusion of people who left their association with Karl Rove on good terms. People who had once been friends with Rove but had fallen from his good graces also were interviewed. They admitted that he is a bright fellow but that he has a deep dark side when it comes to competitiveness - Rove is determined to win at any cost. Where other campaigners would draw the line, Rove will boldly sling excrement and escalate the attacks until he has outright assassinated the character of the opponent unfairly.
After listening to several people who were interviewed about the history of their dealings with Rove, one gets the impression that Rove is a genial man to those he encounters until someone dare crosses him. Rove is very much a hard worker for the Republican candidates for whom he campaigns and represents. If Rove senses or believes that his candidate may lose an election, he is not in the slightest bit hesitant to play the very dirtiest and darkest politics. He is alleged to have been responsible for the complete character assassination of John McCain, where McCain's sanity was called into question during the presidential election back in 2000.
From the interviews of both friends and detractors of Rove, one gets a sense that Karl Rove and Machiavelli would agree that expediency is of the utmost importance in attaining one's goals and outweighs any ethical concerns.
Hannity & Colmes (1996)
Lie or TRUTH?
Let me ask:
What scares extremist radio talk show host & FOX News star Sean Hannity to the bone?
Freedom? Free speech? Free thought? Free people? He feels insecure in an uncertain universe. Extreme right wingers such as sh*t-eater Sean Hannity crave order and simplicity, and will impose these things where they are not and should never be.
Extreme right wingers such as Sean Hannity care about their feelings, not facts. Facts must either support rigid extremist right wing beliefs, or else the facts must be wrong. Those who present facts which contradict right wing dogma must be evil.
Extreme right wingers such as Sean Hannity support idiotic, even fatal policies because they place utter nonsense over knowledge. They believe using condoms increases the chance of pregnancy and STDs. They think racism is OK, but pointing out racism is "playing the race card."
They want to punish anyone who strays from the fold. They brutally suppress anyone who questions authority, and they always obey abusive controllers.
What scares extreme right wingers to the bone? Essays like this, people like me who write them, and people like you who read them and pass them on.
They are afraid of their own freedom. They are even more afraid of yours.
Avoid Hannity's mockery of a "debate show" as you would an oncoming speeding vehicle.
Tekken 5 (2004)
Tekken 3½
"Heihachi Mishima
is dead", Or so the opening scenes of TEKKEN 5 would have you believe. But not to worry; you're in for a (weak) "surprise" as the antagonist and mascot of the famed Sony PlayStation fighting series, rises from the grave (literally) almost as immediately as he's (supposedly) assassinated.
The latest iteration of the Tekken franchise gets back to its "roots" Namco have proudly and loudly stated. The truth is, Namco, the game's developer & publisher, has made a quick and cowardly retreat from the new and exciting territory it explored in TEKKEN 4. The result is sadly unfortunate, because where as TEKKEN 4 felt new and fresh with it's multi-tiered & asymmetrical environments, wall-tech, position change and balanced damage levels, TEKKEN 5 basically plays as an updated TEKKEN 3 (1997).
By removing many of the superfluous characters in TEKKEN 4 and adding a few new faces, the game felt like a much needed ground-up revision of a series that, though great, previously demonstrated little in the way of innovation. And then there were the interactive environments. The "Garage" stage sticks out in my mind, where the combatants attempt manoeuvres on each other against a car or cement pillar for a damaging combo and win.
But hey, that's all gone now. The stages of TEKKEN 5 are completely flat, symmetrical, bland uninspired plains, just as they were at the beginning of the series back in "TEKKEN" (1994). Apparently, some of Tekken's older, newer and less experienced fans prefer the unornamented environs. I say they're either heavily retarded, boring or simply lack the gaming skills (and grey matter) to adapt and appreciate the complexity of navigating and battling within interactive multi-tiered asymmetrical environments.
Then there's the reintroduction of what can only be thought of as complete & utter nonsense. Remember Roger, the boxing kangaroo from TEKKEN 2? Or Mokujin the fighting tree of TEKKEN 3? Well, they're back as unlock-able characters which the player must earn, to which I ask a resounding "Why?". The minimalist approach of TEKKEN 4 as with TEKKEN 3 before it, with its smaller cast, has also been done away with in favor of bringing back just about everyone ever featured in the TEKKEN series, albeit Dr. Boskonovitch and Kunimitsu. Yes, even those who were supposedly killed (Baek Doo San) or were long thought of as dead (Wang Jinrei). I suppose it's hard to argue against a bevy of selectable characters, but it feels extremely overdone...like a very badly unorganized and unnecessary school reunion.
The mitigating factor behind all of my gripes against TEKKEN 5 is that the game for what it is, is actually enjoyable. I mean, come on it's TEKKEN! Personally, I would have preferred the series to follow and continue along the trail blazed by the previous game (TEKKEN 4), but hey, whatever. TEKKEN 5 is more of the same the way that every 'Nightmare on Elm Street' or 'Friday the 13th' is more of the same. When you get right down to it, the gameplay is fun. If you've either never really bothered with the previous Tekken games, you will most likely find favor with TEKKEN 5, probably in part due it's over simplification since the previous installment...erm...uh...sorry, I mean - designed to be more "accessible" and "user friendly" for 'new/general gamers' and PlayStation2 owners alike.
Some of the returning cast absent in TEKKEN 4 (Ganryu, JACK-5, Bruce) are more than welcome back. And maybe somebody out there actually likes trying to win using (a mockery of a character) the kangaroo in boxing gloves?
To be fair, it's not all old hat. TEKKEN 5 introduces three totally new characters, one of which is Blade. Oops! Did I say "Blade"?! I meant "Raven", the complete and utter rip-off of Blade, the anti-hero played by actor Wesley Snipes, in the movie of the same name. We can forgive this borderline copyright infringement as Raven is totally hip, just like Blade, therefore awesome. Without a doubt, he's the slickest black video game character to date, who has fortunately been spared the type of horribly typical (Japanese) stereotype that's befallen black video game characters of other fighting games, past and present. (Mohawk hair or Boxer's, anybody?)
Also new on the scene is the infuriating final boss, Jinpachi Mishima (whom makes his first ever appearance in the intro), the supposedly long dead father of Heihachi Mishima. Jinpachi is uber cheap - if he decides HE wants to win, well, there's really not a lot you can do in the way of dissuasion. It's a non-negotiable situation. Just bite down on something hard, It'll be over soon.....and then press start to continue, and try again.
Fortunately, Jinpachi's Achilles heel turns out also to be the very cheapness that makes him reviled. The battles against him are not actual fights ; but in fact are experiments to discover your selected character's few strategies Jinpachi can't seem to avoid or block.
TEKKEN 5 also comes with an "Arcade History" mode which contains TEKKEN (1994), TEKKEN 2 (1996), TEKKEN 3 (1997) in complete playable arcade perfection! A nice bonus for those not familiar with TEKKEN's rich history and former glory days.
The side game included with TEKKEN 5, named "Devil Within", is nothing short of an utter waste of time. Where as previous mini side games found on TEKKEN 5's predecessors (TEKKEN Ball, TEKKEN Bowl and TEKKEN Force) where short, fun and to the point; Devil Within is - painful, repetitive, overly-long and NOT fun in any way shape or form. A complete chor with absolutely no replay value.
Costume/Character customization is a neat idea (ripped off from Virtua Fighter 4:Evolution), but as to why the purchasable items are so few in number and limited to particular outfits only is a completely mystery.
Anyway...just know that TEKKEN 5 is good for what ails you, especially if you didn't like TEKKEN 4.
Alien³ (1992)
Serial Killer's, Child Rapists...and Sex Starved Fundamentalist's....help Ripley (kinda)
1992, and 20th Century Fox gave the world ALIEN³.
For the director's chair, Fox hired silver screen virgin -- David Fincher; who was at the peak of a successful career directing music videos and television commercials, while also having worked at George Lucas' ILM (Industrial Light & Magic) during the 80's.
The tale of ALIEN³ takes place on one of the most inhospitable environments (asides from Los Angeles) ever portrayed on film. Human criminals and an Alien scream away at each other in the cinematic equivalent of 'Hillary Clinton Vs. Condaleeza Rice' in a Bangkok backstreet prostitute fight. The location is Fury 161, an evacuated lead mine and prison colony with only a fraction of it's original population wishing to voluntarily remain of they're own accord.
There, some of society's most wretched and vile convicts have been isolated; murderers, child rapists, serial killers and loons have formed a sort of monastic order, living in the lead mining facilities. The prisoners (logically) have no weapons, no escape vehicle, no booze, no pornography, no TV, no internet access, no HBO and to make matters even worse, are all inclined to regularly shave their head and body hair, as the planet is infested with "future" lice. On this delightful planet arrives Lt. Ellen Ripley (played by Sigourney Weaver), the future equivalent of Typhoid Mary.
No sooner has Ripley shaved, deaths immediately begin occurring throughout Fury 161 with a rather suspicious Xenomorphic air about them . Realizing what she may have inadvertently brought Fury's unsuspecting residents from her visit to LV-426, Lt. Ellen Ripley goes about doing what must be done in order to save Fury's quickly dwindling prison population, and perhaps - humanity itself.
From this point onwards, the rest of the film is spent franticly running around, strenuously arguing, overly screaming and weeping through the depressing Fury 161 facility, while awaiting Bishop II (played by Lance Henriksen) to arrive to make his (gimmick) guest appearance.
On a more serious note, the plot does takes time to advance. The first half of the film is short on action, BIG on character introduction, development, tension and suspense. The thought of having weapons taken away adds even more to the terror as the theme goes into that of vulnerability/helplessness/defenseless. The power structure is reversed and the frustration is evident, and seeing how a group of prisoners, who's crimes are based on those of assumed power, deals with it is a very strong concept. Without the sympathy for Ripley from the previous ALIEN movies and only minor flashes of humanity from the prisoners themselves, the film is without sympathetic characters worthy of redemption. A truly wonderful change from the traditional film status-quo B.S..
Asides the undeserving criticism the film received on it's debut, ALIEN³'s superb intermixed UK & US cast, cinematography, excellent production values, beautiful art direction, flawless editing, menacing score, visually stunning set designs and not forgetting of course - skillful directing; make this an underrated masterpiece, that continues to find itself in greater appreciation in a modern day sea of mediocre Hollywood productions.
Despite the constant high level daily studio interference throughout the troubled production of ALIEN³ (back in 1991), Finchers directorial (debut) brilliance continues to shine throughout ALIEN³ in the above noted departments. All in all, this movie is a worthy conclusion to the ALIEN trilogy. It's my personal favorite in the series due to the multiple themes and concepts presented. Brilliantly acted and directed, and the prison/Gothic industrial setting is haunting and eerily beautiful.
ALIEN³ is akin to a fine wine; it matures with age.
An underrated if somewhat misunderstood masterpiece.
Tekken (1994)
Genesis of the Legend
The year was 1994, and no-one other than SNK could match the arcade 2D dominance of CAPCOM.
Namco wisely took a different direction, and decided to hire the architect of SEGA's 1993 3D hit "Virtua Fighter", Mr. Seiichi Ishii, (and a other former SEGA employees connected to the development of Virtua Fighter) as well as utilizing it's own in-house staff to help develop Namco's own (and first) 3D fighter.
Thus was born "TEKKEN". (originally under the development title of "RAVE WAR")
The basic wafer thin plot revolved around the "Iron Fist" (the literal translation of the games Japanese title "TEKKEN") tournament in which various contestants entered for numerous motives and reasons, bizarre or otherwise.
The game? In comparison to the likes of "Street Fighter II", "The King of Fighters '94" and "Mortal Kombat II", which were highly popular during the time, TEKKEN lacked the speed and glitz of it's 2D rivals. However, it DID have great, yet highly memorable 3D character designs, fascinatingly unique fighting styles and more importantly played like a dream. Released when Sega's Virtua Fighter was also wowing the arcade crowd, TEKKEN offered a depth and intuitiveness of play not found in any other game. The simple idea of four buttons corresponding to each limb and hold the joystick backwards to block made triggering complex attacking and defending maneuvers almost instinctual. Pure genius.
Fast Forward...
The date: March 31st, 1995. The place - Japan. A mere three months after it's original arcade debut, TEKKEN was released alongside Sony's first video game console - the PlayStation. The transition from arcade to PlayStation was almost nigh-on flawless. With the inclusions of a new rendered opening introduction, individual character ending movies, an optional arranged soundtrack, all exclusively and painstakingly created for the Sony Playstation release of TEKKEN, not to mention the extended number of playable characters which were not available in the arcade version...it was indeed TEKKEN nirvana for those able to afford Sony's behemoth. Namco had surpassed any and all expectation, as TEKKEN went on to become a global best seller....and the rest as they say, is history.
Ultimately, TEKKEN, was and is the game that would give Namco a worldwide franchise, following and recognition that only few other video game companies could perhaps ever match or hope to achieve.
A franchise that continues to this very day, on todays generation of PlayStation.