Review: True Grit

Over my Christmas break, I decided there were a number of movies I wanted to see.  It started out with about three and then grew into seven movies.  So far I have seen four of those movies and I'm catching up on reviews as we speak.  The movies are as followed: Black Swan; True Grit; Tron: Legacy; I Love You, Phillip Morris; The Fighter; The King's Speech; and 127 Hours.  Here is my review for True Grit.

I undoubtedly misconceived True Grit at first: I thought it may have been something along the lines of Jonah Hex except... well, good.  The only part I may have gotten right was the western aspect of the movie (that and the fact that Josh Brolin is in both).  True Grit tells the story of  Mattie Ross (Elizabeth Marvel), a young fourteen year old girl who is looking for Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin) who murdered her father over a petty argument.  In her searching for Chaney, she decides to hire a U.S. Marshal to search for him, Chaney having left the town and no longer in the jurisdiction of local authorities.  The man she chooses to hire is Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges), a man she later describes as having "true grit."  Cogburn initially turns her away and as Mattie waits for him to change her mind, Texas Ranger La Boeuf (Matt Damon) finds her and offers his assistance in capturing Chaney.

True Grit is the second adaption of Charles Portis' original novel of the same title, written in 1968, the first being the 1969 rendition starring John Wayne.  The movie is directed and produced by the Coen brothers and is also produced by Steven Spielberg.  While Joel Coen also directed The Big Lebowski (1998), Jeff Bridges character shows no signs of "The Dude."  In fact, the characters in True Grit are what make the movie so great.  Jeff Bridges' character, Rooster Cogburn, is gross, smelly, and, as he often describes himself, "fat and old."  However, the dry, often deadpan humor of Rooster lightens the barren wasteland that is the west.  In fact, what surprised me most about this movie was how much humor it actually contains: Bridges is hilarious throughout; the interactions of Damon and Bridges consist of them berating one other either for being either old and fat or for not being able to shut up; Mattie Ross even has her moments when she stuns the male leads with her quick witted tongue. 

While all of the lead actors do a stupendous job, what makes the movie feel so believable is the tertiary characters.  Lucky Ned Pepper (Barry Pepper), a gang leader traveling with Chaney, although only on screen for a short amount of time, is instantly recognized as a ruthless, cold blooded, yet intelligent killer.  Brolin, unfortunately, wasn't on screen for as long as I would have liked, but manages to convincingly transform himself into a slow, dumb man who only looks out for himself.  By far my favorite character in the movie, however, is one that Rooster and Mattie meet in passing known only as The Doctor (Ed Corbin), who wears a full bear skin coat, sells teeth, and tries to heal anyone who will allow him to come near.

The movie overall is a breath of fresh air.  It seems as though within this past year there has been a bit of a cowboy craze (what with Jonah Hex, Red Dead Redemption, and now True Grit) and True Grit, without doubt, makes for a meaningful and spirited revival of an old book.  The story is engaging, the cast is fantastic, and the overall mood is what it needs to be, which is convincing and authentic.  Bridges does an excellent job of being both disgusting and endearing and Marvel, while not the strongest performance overall, does an excellent job seeing as how this is her first full length feature film to date.  True Grit is more fun and comedic than I expected, yet still maintains the bad ass-ness I had originally anticipated;  All I have to say is that Jeff Bridges shoots people, a lot of people... and some cornbread too.

Review: Black Swan

There have been few movies this year that I have told myself I needed to see.  There have been even fewer of those movies that I have actually managed to drag myself out to see.  One of the movies that I knew I had to see this year was Black Swan.  Not only did the premise of the movie entice me, but evermore did the director.  Darren Aronofsky's last movie, The Wrestler (2008), was an incredible story of anguish and I still think, to this day, that Mickey Rourke should have won over Sean Penn for Best Actor.  Suffice to say, Aronofsky has taken a much more psychological twist with Black Swan; where The Wrestler crushed your spirit, Black Swan plays with your mind. 

Black Swan stars Natalie Portman as Nina Sayers, a veteran ballet dancer in New York city.  The movie begins at the start of another fiscal year for the dance studio and Portman is striving to be The White Swan in their production of Swan Lake.  However, once she arrives at the first day of rehearsal, her director, played by Vincent Cassel, informs them that instead of casting two people as the White Swan and the Black Swan, he will be casting one person as both.  Portman embodies the White Swan perfectly, but can't manage to carry the weight of the Black Swan.  As her director puts it, Portman is precise and has perfect form, but the Black Swan loses herself in dance and seduces the audience.  The entire movie goes through the motions of Portman struggling to embody both Swans at once and become the Swan Queen.

As the audience watches Portman's struggle it is often hard to tell what is reality and what is not.  Quickly you become aware that Portman's passion for dance is more of an obsession that engulfs each breath she takes, so much so that it beginning to take a toll on her body and mind.  This, without doubt, is the strongest part of the film.  You want Portman to succeed in becoming the Swan Queen, but in order for her to do so, you must watch her crush the person she once was and become someone entirely different.  The movie is wrought with emotion and Portman is convincing for each and every second of it.  Her supporting cast does a decent job as well, although it is clear that none are of the same caliber as Natalie Portman (save for Barbara Hersher, Portman's controlling mother and former dancer).  Mila Kunis doesn't do anything spectacular through out and is used more as a pivot point to facilitate Portman's gradual transformation. 

The cinematography of the entire film is great as are the special effects.  The cinematography plays with various angles and lighting effects which heighten the psychological thrill of the movie.  The special effects, while never exceptionally grand, meld into the scenery of the movie flawlessly and continue to play with the audience's mind.  However, possibly the strongest extra to the movie is its score.  While the whole movie is based around a ballet, the ever present symphony orchestra makes it seem as though Portman is constantly on stage.  As she runs through the streets of New York, she is contantly followed by the timbre of strings and brass. 

Black Swan, up to this point in time, is the best movie I have seen this year.  The concept and thrill is refreshing, as is each and every psychological twist.  Portman excels at the part she is given and I would be shocked not to see her name appear as a nomination for Best Actress in a Leading Role at the 2011 Academy Awards as it is easily her best performance to date.  (In fact, I would consider Portman winning an apology for Mickey Rourke not winning in 2008.)  Aronofsky's should also be up for Best Director, as should Clint Mansell, the composer of the film's score.  While the film may make some people uncomfortable and may leave others scratching their heads, it is undeniably one the best movies released this year and should be appreciated not only as an incredible film, but as a work of art.

2010 Game of the Year Preview

Alright, I wanted to get a jump start on this before everyone else starts coming out with their various Game of the Year talk.  With that being said, this year I have arguably played more video games than I ever have in my life, some from years past, but a large amount that were released this year.  While this isn't a comprehensive list of all of the games that are out there, I'm going to make a Game of the Year list to the best of my ability.  The list will include an overall Top 5 as well as three runner-ups.  In addition to those eight games, I will include other games that I have done research on, know are great, but haven't had the opportunity to play.  With that little intro out of the way, now I will go on a long, unorganized rant about the various games that I have played.  Before that though, I would like to mention, for those that read this blog or even this article, please, please, PLEASE give me your input.  I would like to know what YOU think the best games of the year are.  I will be putting a poll on the side of the page so you can leave your input, but I would also like you to leave comments with your opinion.  If I have enough feedback from people, I would like to do some sort of Viewer's Choice Award.  If anyone poses a strong enough argument as to what they think is the GOTY I will also give them a spotlight to share their opinion.  Please participate, I love talking about games, and I would love to hear from you.

Alright, off we go.

Needless to say, 2010 hurt my pocket book.  Not only did I buy roughly fifteen games over the course of the year, increasing my collection by over 50%, but the fact that I got a PS3 last Christmas allowed me to play catch up on all of the great PS3 exclusives.  Like I said in the previous paragraph, this isn't going to be a comprehensive list in the slightest; I play primarily 360 games, some PS3 exclusives, and a few PC games.  I don't play hardly any Wii, Nintendo DS, PSP, iPhone, or anything else of the sort (although I think I covered my bases), if any at all.  To make things easier, let's start with a list of the games I've played this year that were released in 2010: Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, Battlefield: Bad Company 2, Bioshock 2, Call of Duty: Black Ops, Dante's Inferno, Dead Rising 2, Fallout: New Vegas, God of War III, Halo: Reach, Heavy Rain, Mass Effect 2, Red Dead Redemption, and Star Craft 2.  It's a good thing I'm not doing a Top 10 because I would have to include every single game I've played with the runner ups.  So, let's start with a bit of jibber jabber, shall we?

I would have to say that the game that took me by surprise most would be Red Dead Redemption.  When this game was first being hyped up, I thought it was dumb.  A cowboy game seemed stupid to me and I didn't even know it was being made by Rockstar at the time.  All I kept associating it to was Red Dead Revolver which never really appealed to me.  Fortunately enough, the day came along when Red Dead Redemption got incredible reviews and I was forced to buy it.  I have to say that snagging that game was one of the best gaming decisions I have ever made.  Never before in a game have I actually stopped playing and said, "Wow... that's beautiful."  For example, after having crossed the border into Mexico, I got on my horse and started riding toward my objective.  As I slowly rose over a hill, I saw the purple sky covering the plains, with the faint burst of an orange sun setting behind the mountains.  All while this was happening, the sound effects of the game died down to a muffle and a soft, romantic song created specifically for the game was playing as I galloped toward my destination.  That scene was easily the most beautiful and most atmospheric of any game I have ever played.

Next, the game I probably had the most fun with was Mass Effect 2.  Like it's predecessor, ME2 is incredibly engaging.  The characters are fun and interesting, the story sucks you in, and the game play and graphics are great.  Not to mention they completely got rid of the atrocious vehicle aspect of the game, something that without doubt made the original Mass Effect suffer.  The game I couldn't put down was Heavy Rain.  The story kept you on your toes and while it may have been incredibly depressing (so much so that I had a friend stop playing for a bit because he needed a break) you have to know what is going to happen next.  More so than any game I have ever played I found myself rationalizing two, three, four times that "Ah... I'll just play this next part and then go to bed."  Before I knew it, it was five in the morning and I had beaten the game.  Another game worth mentioning that arguably had the grandest scale and best graphics is God of War III.  What was great about the conclusion to the epic trilogy was that the Kratos you saw in the movie cut scenes was the Kratos you played as (this was actually something the developers consciously tried to achieve).  Often developers have cut scenes with much better graphics than those in game because there isn't any extra coding needed; with in game graphics, there is tons of coding to make things move, respond, interact, etc., but with cut scenes it's just like watching a movie.  That being said, the graphics of the game are gorgeous and are only surpassed by the immense scale of the game as a whole.  Two particular instances place you scaling the sides of a Titan, a beast more than one hundred thousand times your size, a landscape that provides for an epic battle.

In terms of multiplayer, three game stand out above the rest: Halo: Reach, Battlefield: Bad Company 2, and Call of Duty: Black Ops (consequently, all of which I have written a review for).  Reach manages to improve on its past multiplayer system by adding several customization options, as well a points system to level up rather than winning or losing matches.  Black Ops expanded on their system by adding currency that can be used to purchase upgrades rather than someone having to unlock them.  Furthermore, Black Ops took a hint from Halo and added the option for people to play with guests online (Finally!).  Bad Company 2 has arguably the most seamless online system with host failures and errors few and far between.  Getting onto a match has, for the most part, always been quick and painless.  Although, the online community doesn't seem nearly as engaging or friendly as Black Ops or Reach (in fact, I don't think I've ever heard anyone's voice in Bad Company 2).

Alright, well, that was just me going through the motions, giving you a taste of what I'm thinking.  Even more, this post is so I can let everyone know that I will be doing a Game of the Year post and that I would LOVE for people to participate.  The poll will be up shortly and if everyone could leave comments with their insights, I will respond as soon as possible with feedback.  This is both in hopes to get a bit of a community going on this forum, but also because I just like talking about games with people.  So, closer to the end of the year, most likely sometime after Christmas, I will be releasing my post about 2010's Top 5 Game's of the Year.  Depending on feedback I may add more categories, but we'll see what happens.  Until then, we will still be posting movie recommendations and reviews and I have a game review for Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood that I want to crank out.  Hope to hear from you soon!

Review: Call of Duty: Black Ops

I can't remember a year in the past ten years when a Call of Duty game wasn't released, can you?  The Call of Duty franchise started out with primarily World War II based games, but more recently they've moved into more contemporary conflicts.  Over the past few years, two developers have switched back and forth every year with the Call of Duty name.  Arguably the most ground breaking Call of Duty series to date was Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (2007) developed by Infinity Ward.  The next game to come out was released by Treyarch, Call of Duty: World at War (2008), which still clung to the WWII genre, but added a new feature, Nazi Zombies.  The next year, 2009, Infinity Ward released Modern Warfare 2, which, while still maintaining a fantastic single player experience, had a revolutionary online multi-player system.  This year, Treyarch hyped up their newest release, Call of Duty: Black Ops.  Black Ops is Treyarch's first shot at a more modern game, but they took a spin on it and placed it during the Vietnam War. 

After all of the great Call of Duty games over the years and the numerous additions year after year, Black Ops had a lot riding on it and, for the most part, it has delivered.  I will admit, that before Black Ops came out, I was incredibly hesitant about buying it.  I never got World at War and I know a large reason most people got it was because of Nazi Zombies; essentially, the campaign was nothing special.  However, with Treyarch's newest addition, Black Ops has one of, if not the best, campaign of any Call of Duty game to date.  Like other CoD games, Black Ops switches you between several characters through out the game, but you play primarily as a special forces operative named Alex Mason.  This puts a huge fix on one large complaint I've had about the games over the years: while you come to love some of the characters, you never really identify with the character you play as.  The entirety of the plot is placed in the mind of Mason while he's strapped to a chair being interrogated by an ominous voice about "the numbers."  The in game graphics are incredible and some of the interactive scenes are really dynamic, expanding on those that were featured in MW2.  On top of that, the in-game characters are great, in particular Viktor Reznov, a former Red Army soldier that Mason befriends while held captive at Vorkuta Gulag.  The voice acting of Reznov is superb and the character developement makes you love him and defend him til the end.  Certain scenes are particularly nerve racking and almost eerie, so much so that I think Treyarch could make a very successful horror game. 

While the campaign is incredibly well done, the multi-player falls a little short.  While it has all of the elements of MW2s online play, for some reason the graphics are not nearly as good as the in-game graphics.  Something about it looks rough and unpolished.  One helicopter I saw looked so bad that it was more of an awkward green trapezoid than a helicopter.  To make matters worst, Black Ops has several host issues which have yet to be ironed out, making finding a match overly difficult, with players some times waiting more than ten minutes before they find someone to play with.  Where the multi-player falls short in graphics, it makes up in game play.  The wager system is a lot of fun, most notably the Gun Game in which, for each kill, you upgrade to a better gun.  Whoever gets 20 kills first wins and the top three players receive more credits than they put in.  The overall system is relatively the same as previous games with Team Death Match and other game types.  Players also have a wide array of customizable options ranging from their logo (which can be virtually anything from a kitten to a work of art consisting of various layers) to the type and color of your cross hairs.  Zombies is also a great addition, especially because with two players, you can play as JFK and Nixon. 

Call of Duty: Black Ops is definitely more impressive than I had initially anticipated.  The campaign is, in my opinion, the most exciting and engaging to date.  While the multi-player is essentially the same and has tons of customizable options as well as the wager system, the graphics are surprisingly lack luster and are no where near the quality of the in-game graphics.  Fortunately, Black Ops has several additions such as zombies and even a hidden arcade style game that make it more than worth your time and money.  Black Ops may not be the greatest Call of Duty game to date overall (in fact, according to Raptr, more people are currently playing Call of Duty 4, Modern Warfare 2, and World at War), but it is definitely a game to add to your collection if not for the campaign alone.

Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1

After years of anticipation and excitement, it is finally the beginning of the end.  Since the release of the first book in 1997, people have been absolutely enthralled with Harry Potter and for good reason.  With the first of eight movies being released in 2001, part one of the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was released last week and has already accumulated $125.0M (Over $100M higher than the runner up, Megamind).  Just as a refresher, or for those who haven't seen the movies or read the books, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is placed just shortly after the death of Albus Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) and follows Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) on their quest to vanquish Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) once and for all.  After having seen the sixth movie last summer, I was skeptical as to whether or not this movie would do the book justice.  When I found out they were splitting it into two parts, I was somewhat relieved; a great downfall of the sixth movie was that it cut out moments of great importance and didn't seem to really do The Half-Blood Prince justice.  However, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 was pleasantly surprising and left me in anticipation for the coming of the conclusion that is Harry Potter.

One clear improvement from the movie released last year is that they gave themselves room to really touch on all of the important details.  Certain details are still shut out and others are even ignored, but the movie really manages to touch each and every important moment and only skips over less important aspects of the movie.  What is even more impressive is that the movie manages to fill out the two and a half hour time block while seemingly nothing is going on.  For those that have read the book, the entire first half is essentially comprised of major events separated by long spans of time where the three main characters are trying to figure out what their next move is.  The same feeling translates into the movie, but not at any point in time do you feel that the movie is dragging its feet.  The movie successfully fills up the time slot and ends at a point which will not only fuel viewers anticipation, but may also be a surprising stopping point to readers.

While the movie still falls short with certain character interactions (such as that between Harry and Ginny) and doesn't utilize some of their stronger actors as much as one would hope (Bill Nighy and Alan Rickman among them), it finally makes that turn from a kid's movie to a more adult drama.  In Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince there was a large amount of opportunity to make this turn and even have viewers on the edge of their seat in fear.  However, it seemed as though they tried to compensate the feeling of fear with awkward teen interaction and fluffy love triangles.  What Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 1 finds strength in is that it knows when and how to make you feel sad/fearful/anxious/etc.  The depressing moments are sad and don't turn the corner with a quick one liner;the genuine moments make you feel the trio's friendship; and most importantly, the frightening moments have such a large scale and truly dark mood that they create scenes wrought with tension. 

Other standout points in the movie are the special effects and the cinematography.  The special effects have really taken a large leap and blend into the world almost seamlessly, and while you know some of the creatures and scenes are merely CGI, at times it's hard to pry yourself away from fantasy.  Never before have I been able to say anything about cinematography with any of the Harry Potter movies, but for this one, certain shots and angle make you notice how great the direction is.  The acting is still nothing above and beyond what it should be for a Harry Potter movie, but outside of Radcliffe's grimacing, you can tell that the primary acting cast is finally starting to fill out their adult shoes.  Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 is a huge improvement from the let down last year.  It manages to transform into more of a drama while still keeping true to its fans.  It touches on just enough from the book to make readers feel as though they weren't cheated.  The special effects and directions are much better than in past films and the film was truly a joy to watch.  Without question, the whole world will be eagerly anticipating July 15, 2011 when Harry Potter finally comes to a close.

Fallout: New Vegas

Alright, I've been meaning to get this review up for a while, but Fallout: New Vegas is a big ol' game and I had to get a good amount of hours in on it before I felt qualified to write a review on it.  Fallout: New Vegas is the newest RPG released from Obsidian Entertainment, a followup to their 2008 hit, Fallout 3, although not a direct sequel.  For those that aren't familiar with the Fallout series, the game places you in post-apocalyptic America.  In Fallout 3 you were placed in Washington D.C. and various expansion packs sent you to Pittsburgh and even space.  As you can probably guess New Vegas places you in Vegas.  More specifically, you'll spend more time wandering around the Mojave Desert and using New Vegas as a hub where you'll receive a large portion of your missions.  The story is very different from that of Fallout 3 and places you in the shoes of a courier who was shot and killed for the package he was carrying.  Luckily, a robot named Victor saves you and takes you to a doctor in order to fix you up.  The first portion of the game is played trying to get revenge on Benny (voiced by Matthew Perry), the man that killed you and took your package, the platinum chip.  As you progress, you find out that the platinum chip is very valuable to several people and you are placed in a situation where you can take about three or four different paths, all of which will have different consequences, story lines, and endings.

The graphics of New Vegas aren't anything different from Fallout 3.  The graphics are essentially recycled, although certain textures and environments seem a bit sharper than in the game's predecessor.  The setting of New Vegas is enormous and will give you plenty of things to discover and lots of time to roam around.  New Vegas, in particular, is a strong contrast from any city in Fallout 3 in that it is heavily populated and booming with prostitutes, gamblers, and belligerent drunks.  While New Vegas is a lot of fun, it could be a lot more free flowing.  The city is divided into various segments and large buildings which makes for a lot of loading times while wandering around New Vegas.  Outside of that, however, there are little to no loading times across the Mojave Desert, save for when you enter a building.  On a similar note, the loading times are pretty reasonable and are never excruciatingly long, which is surprising for how much needs to be loaded in the game's massive environment. 

The story line of New Vegas doesn't relate you to your character as much as Fallout 3 did, but tosses in a new element that Fallout 3 didn't have.  The route you took in Fallout 3 was pretty straight forward and not until the very end did you really have a choice to stray from that path.  In New Vegas, almost immediately you have to choose between three different factions to side with or to just rebel on your own as a vigilante.  This not only makes the story more engaging, but makes it unpredictable.  Another new factor in New Vegas is the various factions that you can either side with or rebel against.  This makes the game more engaging, giving you the option to manipulate certain groups while working with others, gaining favor with some for protection, or even getting everyone to side with you only to turn on them in the end.  This factors into the main storyline with the three biggest factions: Caesar's Legion, the NCR, and Mr. House.  Playing these factions against one another is difficult, but can make for a very independent and unique storyline. 

Possibly the most interesting aspect of New Vegas is hardcore mode.  As would be expected from venturing across the Mojave Desert, one needs to stay well hydrated and have a constant supply of food as well as necessary rest.  What hardcore mode does is make it so that you have to drink water, you have to eat, and  you have to sleep.  In Fallout 3, the only time you had to eat was if you needed some health; you drank water if you needed health; you slept if  you needed health and were near a bed.  In New Vegas, you have to drink water or else you'll suffer from dehydration sickness; you have to eat otherwise you may die of starvation; you have to sleep or you'll be sleep deprived and, yes, all of these things will affect your character gradually from moving slowly, limping, or even losing strength.  Other factors play into hardcore more such as ammunition has weight to it, stimpaks and food heal over time (as opposed to instantly), and you can only be fully healed and fully rested if you sleep in your own bed.  Hardcore mode definitely makes the game more difficult and makes you monitor your actions and well-being more closely than before.

One large complaint among critics, however, has been the mass amount of bugs and glitches in the game.  I will agree that New Vegas does have its fair amount of bugs and glitches, but I commend Obsidian for coming out with patches within days of the game's release.  However, even though updates have been put out, I still experience a glitch every now and again.  Now, I'm not talking about your simple AI character getting stuck in a wall glitch; let me give you an example.  At one point I went to my Pip-Boy (which is an in-game device on your wrist for those that aren't familiar) and exited only to find myself flung twenty feet in the air.  Another time, I was shooting at a mole rat at the bottom of a hill and suddenly saw it flying in the sky.  Needless to say, with a game that is so expansive and leaves a lot of decision to the player, there are bound to be some bugs.  However, for so many bugs to be present in the game at the date of release is somewhat unforgivable. 

Looking past the little bugs, Fallout New Vegas is a fantastic game.  While it does recycle a lot from Fallout 3 in terms of graphics, it is by no means Fallout 3.5.  New Vegas is a game entirely in and of itself.  The unique storyline allows players to choose their own adventure with an incredible amount of flexibility.  The game play is as fun as ever with the continuance of various guns, VATS, and followers (some make a reappearance from Fallout 3 and those familiar with Dogmeat will enjoy the robotic dog Rex in New Vegas).  New Vegas has an expansive environment that will please those who played Fallout 3 and will guarantee several hours of game time (I've already racked up 15 and I'm no where near finishing the main storyline).  Newcomers should definitely give New Vegas a shot if they've never picked up a Fallout game.  Various improvements are made from Fallout 3 while still maintaining the same level of fun and enjoyment.  Other perks in New Vegas include a great soundtrack with artists such as Dean Martin, Bing Crosby, and Nat King Cole making an appearance.  The list of voice actors is expansive as well including Matthew Perry as Benny, Ron Pearlman (who has been a narrator for most of the franchise's existence), William Sandler as Victor, and Wayne Newton as the radio host Mr. New Vegas.  Fallout: New Vegas may have its flaws, but they pale in comparison to the expansiveness and versatility of the overall game.  Fallout: New Vegas is definitely a game any RPG fan should pick up and should be a game that everyone should at least try.  It holds true to the Fallout feeling, but separates itself from Fallout 3 as a spectacular game in and of itself with unique environments, characters, and storyline.  Thanks for reading and check back for reviews on Call of Duty: Black Ops and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood in the coming weeks.

Review: The Social Network

I've been meaning to review this for a while but haven't had time, so here's my review of The Social Network.

Consider, for a moment, the first time you ever logged onto a social networking website. What thoughts crossed your mind, entering that sphere of information, so vast yet so deeply personal? Who told you to join? Why did you do it? What parts of yourself did you put into that system, trusting that its unseen makers would connect your virtual being to thousands of others like you?

These are some of the many questions raised by David Fincher’s astounding new film, The Social Network. The movie follows Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) through the process of creating and founding the social giant known as Facebook. It is created in the style that Fincher has made all his own, drawing on the best parts of his best films (Se7en, Fight Club, Zodiac). It is unremitting in its movement, churning forward through its 120 minutes with lightning speed and mechanical precision. The film, unlike many of Fincher’s previous works, is immune to spoilers, because though a great deal happens, it all moves towards an inevitable conclusion. There is no great payoff here, no last-minute twist. Though Fincher showed in Se7en and Fight Club that he is more than capable of executing these tropes, The Social Network finds him at his most mature, working with restraint instead of shock and spectacle.

The Facebook story is well known enough: Zuckerberg, a brilliant Harvard student, creates a social networking engine in his spare time that comes to be a billion-dollar entity. Along the way, questions arise concerning whether or not Zuckerberg stole his idea, specifically from the Winklevoss twins, two wealthy Harvard rowers who are just perfect enough to be creepy. The film smoothly entwines the story of the past with that of the present, where Zuckerberg faces two separate lawsuits over the origin of the Facebook concept.

Such a story might seem more history than drama, but screenwriter Aaron Sorkin has managed to create a script that his so engrossing that one will barely notice that two hours have passed between the film’s credit sequences. His dialogue is harsh, witty, and arrogant, and is delivered expertly by Eisenberg and his costars, most notably Andrew Garfield, who plays Zuckerberg’s best friend and colleague. His character is at once a sympathetic victim and a helpless obstacle, frustrating in his ignorance of Zuckerberg’s workings.

Technically, The Social Network is nothing short of a masterpiece. Every aspect is polished and seamless, woven with unmatched attention and lucidity. One scene in particular, a beautifully photographed rowing race, captures a sequence of speed and brute force in elegant detail, and is matched perfectly by the film’s excellent score. The music, composed and recorded by Trent Reznor of the industrial outfit Nine Inch Nails, is uncanny in its sonic representation of Fincher’s themes, meticulous and technologically innovative throughout.

Though the film is extremely well-crafted as a whole, its most notable achievement lies in its ability to capture what social networking is really all about. The concept originally relied on its exclusivity, drawing users only through others who already had access to the site, and then only if one had an email address from a member college. Eventually, Facebook became open to everyone, but its allure remains. It is exciting, it is cool, and everyone wants to be a part of it. Therein lies the paradox of social networking: despite its hipness, something lingers under the surface that is somehow vulgar, ugly, ominous. We join the networks and control our appearance there, but in truth, we allow them to access our lives, to penetrate those secrets and desires which we ourselves sometimes do not recognize. In the end, though, we are all too willing to continue. In today’s world, after all, what choice do we have?

Due Date (2010)

 Released just this past Friday, November 5th, 2010, Due Date pairs Iron Man's Robert Downey Jr. with The Hangover's Zach Galifianakis for a trip across the country.  Robert Downey Jr. plays Peter Highman, an architect working on a project in Atlanta who is about to fly home to L.A. just before his wife gives birth to his first child.  On his way to the airport, a reckless driver smashes the door to his chauffeur's car right off its hinges and out steps Ethan Tremblay (Galifianakis).  From the very moment they meet and switch bags, Tremblay does everything possible to rub Highman the wrong way.  After being put on the no flight list, Highman must figure out a way to get home to his wife and, having left his wallet on the now airborne plane, has no choice but to embark on a cross country road trip with Tremblay.  The entirity of the movie circles around the odd couple sort of interactions between Downey Jr. and Galifianakis.  Galifianakis relies on a dead pan, inappropriate, almost demented humor at times, which is quickly juxtaposed against Downey Jr.'s more harsh, blunt comedic delivery.  Galifianakis' most funny moments come with his inappropriate laughter and through Ethan Tremblay's atrocious acting skills of which his favorite line seems to be "What are you, a girl or something?"  Downey Jr.'s more funny moments, however, come when he is "seeing red" and tearing Tremblay a new or, my favorite, when he hits a child and says, "Play cool or I'll thump you again."

The comedic duo seems to play off each other relatively well throughout the entire movie, but never really seem to click as a dynamic all that often.  Rather, they play as two separate entities with their own individual moments.  However, one particular strength of the film is its unexpected sentimental moments.  Throughout the movie, Galifianakis mourns over the recent death of his father, and at times it is incredibly heart wrenching.  These moments are often broken up with quick one liners, such as Tremblay saying "Dad, you were like a father to me," but more often then not they linger around to really make the audience feel something.  There are some great shocker moments as well, as can be expected with Galifianakis.  Downey Jr. brings a bit of class to the movie, but also counteracts the ignorant, well intentioned Galifianakis incredibly well by being almost the exact opposite: intelligent, blunt, and impatient.  Other cameos in the movie make the movie more enjoyable such as the brief appearance of Jamie Foxx, Juliette Lewis, Danny McBride, and Matt Walsh.

While Robert Downey Jr. and Zach Galifianakis manage to make an interesting duo they don't really accomplish anything that any other odd couple type of movie hasn't.  They can, however, be placed on par with other favorite odd couple movies released this year such as Dinner For Schmucks and The Other Guys.  There are definitely some wow moments and to see the relationship between the two protagonists develop is both entertaining and heart warming.  I would recommend going to see Due Date in theaters, but if you want to wait for it to come out on DVD/Bluray, I wouldn't hold it against you.  Without doubt, though, you should see it.  No?  "What are you, a girl or something?"

Dead Rising 2

To further increase not only my posts for the month of October, but to further talk about Halloween related things, I thought I would write a review for Dead Rising 2 released by Capcom late last month.  Dead Rising 2 places you in the role of Chuck Greene, a single father whose daughter, Katy, was bitten by her zombified mother and became infected.  In order to keep her from turning, he must continually give her a shot of Zombrex every twenty four hours at the same time everyday.  To earn the money he needs to afford the Zombrex, Chuck participates in a zombie killing related game show called Terror is Reality.  Shortly after you take part in one of these games, the zombies break out and the zombie plague starts all over again.  Chuck and various others lock themselves in the boiling room underneath a large casino/mall area in Fortune City and must wait three days for help to arrive.  Shortly after, Chuck sees a new report pinning him as the scapegoat for allowing the zombie outbreak to occur.The gameplay resolves around this time frame during which Chuck must try to clear his name, find survivors, obtain Zombrex for Katy, and, most importantly, kill lots and lots of zombies. 

The gameplay is pretty much the same as the original Dead Rising released in 2006, however, there have been several adjustments and changes to improve and make Dead Rising 2 more enjoyable.  In Dead Rising there were two major complaints: the first was that the save system was terrible and the second was the way it was formatted.  The latter of the two issues I'll address first, seeing as how it wasn't the biggest issue, it was more of an issue for me.  Dead Rising was formatted strictly for an HDTV.  Nowadays, that wouldn't be a problem for me, but when I originally played the game, I was using a tube TV.  The way it was formatted was like watching a movie in widescreen on a standard definition television.  What this resulted in was all the in game text being incredibly blurry and small.  Most of the time this wouldn't be a problem, but, save for cut scenes, every character talks through text in the story.  That wasn't a problem for most people, but was a huge inconvenience for me.  On to the bigger issue, the save system.  Save points were few and far between, not to mention the enemies were in the hundreds between every area.  Save points, while still some what inconveniently placed, are much greater in number in the second game.

Various other improvements make the game more enjoyable, such as the combat and weapon customization.  The combat is smoother and less glitch ridden than in the first, making sure that you actually hit the zombie you're trying to hit.  The weapon customization is by far the greatest improvement, allowing you to find various "Combo Cards" throughout the game and use them to make unique weapons.  These weapons can range from a canoe paddle with chain saws on each end to a spiked baseball bat or from a light saber to an electrified wheel chair.  The benefit of making and using these weapons is two fold: first off they do more damage and secondly they earn you more points for every zombie you kill.  This is helpful because the more points you earn the quicker you will level up.  As you level up, Chuck's skills increase and every-so-often you're rewarded with a new combo card.

Another improvement on the game is the multitude of bosses.  While there isn't much variance among them in terms of fighting style, they provide another enemy to prove more difficult than the endless horde of zombies.  The bosses are called psychos and are surviving humans who have lost their minds and decided to torture any other survivors they come across.  The psychos range from a former contestant of Terror is Reality, a peace protester, a nut job chef, and a child's toy mascot.  Unfortunately, the bosses prove to be relatively difficult; unless you know what you're doing in the game, have the right weapons and the right foods/drinks, and have saved recently, the psychos can be incredibly, almost unnecessarily difficult.  If you get killed during the fight, you have to start over from when you last saved, another inconvenience if you hadn't planned on fighting a psycho.  Fortunately, to avoid this problem, the player can stock up on various weapons and food/drink to prepare themselves.  A problem that was more annoying, but gradually got better as time progressed, was the loading times.  Every time you go into a new major area (outside, to a new casino, the safe house, etc.) and whenever a cut scene starts or ends, there is an unreasonably long loading time.  This is particularly annoying when you first start playing, but eventually you get used to it.  However, the loading times that occur both before and after the cut scenes are annoying throughout the entire game.

Overall, Dead Rising 2 really manages to improve on the problems of the original Dead Rising and tosses in a few extras to make it even more fun.  The game is exciting as well as comical (you can dress Chuck in anything from an Elvis outfit to his underwear or, my personal favorite,  a tuxedo and a coon skin hat), and is sure to provide for hours of fun.  On top of that, a second play through is almost a must.  To follow the story on the first play through would be difficult and what many have recommended is to spend one play through just killing zombies and saving survivors and then play a second time through actually following the story line.  This isn't what I did in particular, but it would make the story play through a lot easier.  The multi-player also adds a fun element, allowing you to either compete against other players in Terror is Reality competitions and earn money for your in game character, or play through the campaign in co-op.  While certain aspects of the game are annoying, such as the load times and the save system, and it isn't the most enticing game, it is a lot of fun to run around and kill zombies in the most creative way possible.  I would recommend maybe renting or playing this at a friend's place before buying it to see if you like it, but I can definitely say that once I was done, I had put in almost fifteen hours of play time, a lot more than I had anticipated.  If you've played it (or when you do), let me know what you think of it in the comments.  Thanks for reading and have a Happy Halloween!

Halloween Movie Suggestions

I refuse to let October be a month of nothingness!  In saying that and with it being the last day of October, I thought I would talk about something Halloween-y.  I thought I could suggest some horror movies, both new and old, for you to enjoy on your Halloween, especially considering that this year it's on a Sunday, so some people might want to stay in.

First, let's start with the newer movies.  Metacritic recently wrote an article about the "Best Horror Movies Since 2000."  Now, while I don't entirely agree with some of the movies on the list (such as Sweeney Todd, Shaun of the Dead, and Zombie Land; not that these aren't good movies, but I think they're more of a horror hybrid than a true horror movie), overall, the list has some strong movies, some of which I have seen and others that I've been meaning to.  At the top of the list is "Drag Me to Hell" (2009) which received surprisingly high reviews for a horror movie, averaging an overall score of 83.  I actually had the opportunity to watch this last night and found it interesting to say the least.  The back story is stronger than most horror movies and it really manages to surpass your typical scary movie that just pops things out at you accompanied by loud noise. Some parts of the movie are gimmicky, but it's hard to tell whether or not that's because its cheesy or because some parts of the movie are seemingly so disgusting that you trick yourself into laughing at them (just imagine an old woman gnawing on your face with her gums all while spewing phlegm on you).  While the ending may be predictable to some, it's quite the interesting twist and should please audiences of the genre.

Another movie I would strongly suggest seeing that is still in theaters is "Let Me In" (2010).  This movie, starring, Chloe Moretz, an up and coming child actress from movies such as "(500) Days of Summer" and "Kick Ass!," is a remake of the already popular Swedish film "Let the Right One In" made in 2008.  Why I suggest this is not because it has been receiving rave reviews (averaging an overall score of 79 from critics and an 83 from viewers), but because it seems as though it's a true vampire movie.  In the past few years, the Vampire phenomenon has been bogged down by Twilight, which sparked a frenzy of other cheesy vampire movies and books, where vampires would rather make you swoon and kiss you than suck your blood and kill you.  While I haven't seen this film yet, it's definitely at the top of my list of movies to see.

Now, onto the older movies.  Since I was young, I have always been a fan of horror movies, in particular the "A Nightmare on Elm Street" franchise.  The fascination began when I saw a showing of "Leprechaun" (1993) on basic cable at my dad's house when I was about eight.  After that I decided I loved horror movies and Freddy Kreuger was my go to guy for a good scare.  With that being said, I would recommend watching the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" (1984) (although the movie poster is atrocious).  Along with the time frame, while in my opinion not as good as "A Nightmare on Elm Street," some other classics that came out around this time are "Halloween" (1978) and "Friday the 13th" (1980).  I still have to watch "Halloween," but having watched "Friday the 13th," while some of the death scenes are laughable, the overall story is a classic, the ending is incredible, and is a horror movie everyone should watch at some point in time.  On another, yet similar, note each of these movies has been re-made recently.  "Halloween" was remade by Rob Zombie in 2007, "A Nightmare on Elm Street" was remade this year (2010), and "Friday the 13th" was remade in 2009.  Why I mention this is because each of these remakes, as can be expected, has received lower reviews than the originals.  Another fun part to these movies is that they have some big name actors who got their start from doing 80's horror movies.  "Friday the 13th" was only Kevin Bacon's fifth film and both "Halloween" and "A Nightmare on Elm Street" were the debut films for Jamie Lee Curtis and Johnny Depp respectively.  While the originals may be a bit out of date in terms of cinematography and special effects, they're drop dead classics and can surely be appreciated not only by film buffs, but casual viewers as well.

If you're looking for a new age scare, I would check out "Drag Me to Hell" for a more in depth, yet comical scare and check out "Let Me In" for a darker, true vampire horror film.  If you want to do a throwback, check out "A Nightmare on Elm Street," "Halloween," and "Friday the 13th."  All of these movies may not scare you, but they're sure to entertain you and will definitely make your Halloween more enjoyable on this Sunday night.  Here's to having a Happy Halloween, and posting in the month of October!

The Town (2010)

The Town is something of a surprise.  At first, one would expect it to be on the lines of another late summer action movie, looking to make one more quick buck before the season ends.  However, upon closer inspection, even before seeing the movie, it has potential to be a great film.  With a cast that includes Jeremy Renner (Academy Award nominee for Best Actor in The Hurt Locker (2009)), Jon Hamm (multiple Emmy Award Nominee for Best Actor in a Drama Series for Mad Men (2008, 2009, 2010), and Chris Cooper (Academy Award Winner for Best Supporting Actor in Adaption (2002)) you can't really go wrong.  I guess Ben Affleck won an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay for Good Will Hunting (1997) too. 

The movie's main characters are a group of friends who work together to rob banks and armored trucks.  The one thing all of these men have in common is that they're all from Charlestown, Massachusetts, a town that only seems to produce criminals.  Surprisingly enough The Town manages to deliver not only in action, but also in drama and suspense as well.  None of the car chases or shoot outs try to distract you from the poor acting or the uninteresting plot.  The plot doesn't focus on one big bank job much like other movies of its type, but rather focuses more on the intense development and interactions of characters, the most explosive being that between the rational thinking  Ben Affleck and the hot headed Jeremy Reener.  Every bit of the movie plays its part and plays it well.  Dialogue scenes are just as suspenseful and interesting as the action ones.  Furthermore, not only the big names, but the smaller ones carry their weight.  Blake Lively in particular does a great job of pulling herself out of her typical teeny-bopper persona from Gossip Girl and Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants (2005) by conveying some real raw emotion.  Jon Hamm in the beginning feels out of place among the slew of Boston accents, but manages to really standout as an anti-hero.  In fact, in an interview with Jon Stewart he even mentions that after the premier of The Town an old Boston woman used as a speech coach for the movie said, "I don't know if you played your part too well or what... but I don't like you."

While The Town as a whole is a surprise not only in plot but in acting, where it manages to be most surprising is with the directing.  Having only directed one film before (Gone Baby Gone (2007)), Ben Affleck does a surprisingly impressive job with The Town.  While none of the cinematography is incredibly impressive and doesn't necessarily do anything new or innovative, the opening heist scene as well as one of the later ones shows Affleck's courage as a director.  The shots are bold and setup some wonderful imagery, in particular one heist where the group robs an armored truck adorned with nun masks, something that manages to be haunting rather than comical, a scene that will linger with you after leaving the theater.  The movie draws you in and is absolutely enticing throughout.  While there's no definite chance Jeremy Renner will be getting a second Oscar nomination from this film, its definitely a film he can be proud of.  If there's one last movie you see this summer, it should be The Town. 

Halo: Reach

For the past decade, Bungie has been cranking out exclusive Halo titles for Microsoft since the very first XBOX.  Starting with the original Halo: Combat Evolved (2001), both Bungie and Microsoft saw overwhelming success with their interplanetary first person shooter.  Follow up titles such as Halo 2 (2004), Halo 3 (2006), Halo Wars (2009), and Halo 3: ODST have come in waves over the years, each one adding a different element to the franchise (although I fail to see what Halo Wars added).  Now, at the culmination of the series comes a prequel to the original Halo, Halo: Reach.  Reach seemingly tries to take everything that was good from past games and put it into one game, while at the same time removing those things that infuriated gamers in past titles.  While they may not succeed in making the perfect Halo game (Halo: CE is still at the top of the charts in reviewers' eyes), it is definitely a satisfactory conclusion to the decade long series that has drawn in millions of fans over the years. 

In Halo: Reach you're placed in a group of elite Spartans referred to as Noble Team.  The group is comprised of six members, each with a particular specialty such as heavy weapons, sniping/stealth, technology, etc.  You play as the nameless Noble 6 who rounds out the original group of five.  While no Master Chief, Noble 6 will eventually grow on players as a heroic character and will not only gain favor with gamers, but each player will be able to identify with Noble 6 thanks to Bungie's innovative customization options.  As in past Halo games, players can customize their Spartan to individualize themselves amongst the torrent of online players.  However, in Reach, your character not only looks unique online, but also throughout the campaign.  Immediately, I saw my character in the Reach campaign, the one I created, my Spartan.

The story for Reach is much more fleshed out than in previous games and makes an attempt at character development, however, it falls short due to the short play time.  While the campaign isn't infuriatingly short for a FPS, it definitely isn't an RPG where dialogue options are available, something that really boosts story and character development.  With that being said, some characters are very hit or miss.  Jorge (Noble 5), the heavy weapons specialist, was immediately a character that grew on me with his burly, yet teddy bear like attitude.  Unfortunately, other characters such as Catherine (Noble 2) really drove me nuts and not until towards the end of the game did I appreciate her;  I blame this in part because of the poor character development on her part, not pointing out that she had a biotic arm in place of a real one, something I had to notice myself from video cut scenes.  Another thing that made me hate Cat was her stupidity; the AI at times has to be some of the worst I've seen in a game.  At times, Cat would sit in a Warthog and stay there while I got out to shoot enemies across the map. At one point in particular, we had fought off some Hunters, yet there was still an Elite in the room.  Instead of helping me fight him off, she ran by him and stood at the objective waiting for me.  Other AI would wait in a plane for me while I seized a base, yet would communicate to me that they had my back and were going to "kill all you alien bastards."  This may be because I was playing on Legendary difficult, but regardless, Legendary is when you need the most help.

Graphically, Reach surpasses its predecessors in detail and expansive environments.  Each level is different and unique (with some exception) and really keeps you in awe of the change to the your surroundings due to the relentless invasion of the Covenant.  In some instances you'll even revisit a space that, at one point, was clean and polished, only to return and see its walls charred by flames and its ceilings blown wide open.  Minute details can be seen far off in the distance and as you get closer have a great deal of detail.  The only point at which Reach falls short graphically is its character models.  While they look exceptionally better from past games, they still pale in comparison to games such as Mass Effect 2 and Red Dead Redemption, two games, which in my opinion, have some of the best graphics I have ever seen (not to mention both are in contention for Game of the Year this year).

Despite some of Reach's set backs, who can question Halo's multiplayer experience?  Without question, the Halo franchise has always had a firm grasp on gamers as one of the most enjoyable and most widely played competitive online games.  Reach, by far surpasses each and every online Halo game to date.  With the edition of load outs, each with their own special ability (sprinting, a jet pack, active camouflage, armor lockup, drop shield, evade, hologram), multiplayer brings an element of unpredictability that has yet to be seen in the Halo series.  You never know when an enemy may fly overhead or if the enemy you're attacking is actually an enemy or a hologram.  The leveles are new and refreshing, something that was much needed since Halo 3 has gotten stale.  Gamers have the option of choosing from three different level and game type options at the start of every match.  If none of these options appeal to the players, a fourth option is available to get a new list of game types.  This makes level decision a bit more democratic and leaves the option for vetoing without the fear that you'll get stuck with "fucking Snowbound."  The ranking system is much improved using a points system like that seen in Modern Warfare, which doesn't penalize you for losing, but rather rewards you for winning and less so for losing.  By playing games, players earn points that they can spend on various customization options for their spartan such as armor, voice types, and even special effects that will occur when you die ,such as confetti flying out of your head.

While certain positive aspects can be expected of a new Halo game, such as a magnificent score and addictive online play, Reach brings new elements which are not only exciting and innovative, but breath life into a game that has plagued the XBOX for ten years.  Reach ties in the beginnings of Halo well, but at the same time makes you feel as though you're playing something fresh and new.  Customization puts you in the driver seat of not only your online character, but how you see yourself in the campaign as well.  While there are certain drawbacks like the disappointing friendly AI and the enemy AI who seemingly never runs out of ammo, the anticipation for Reach will not disappoint audiences.  The campaign is engaging and sucks you in from the beginning (I should know, I completed the game in two days); the multiplayer will have you addicted not just for competitions sake, but because there are so many more elements to it, such as a multitude of customization options and online Firefight.  Halo: Reach, much like its predecessors, is a game you won't be able to put down for months once you start and is, without doubt, a must buy for every XBOX owner.

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)

When I first heard about Scott Pilgrim vs. the World I got pretty excited, solely for the fact that it was being directed by Edgar Wright, the same man who both directed and wrote Hot Fuzz (2007) and Shaun of the Dead (2004), two movies that are easily in my Top 25, if not Top 10 favorite movies.  However, as time progressed, I got less and less interested to see it for one reason in particular: Michael Cera.  Now, I know a lot of people like him and I have to admit, I used to as well.  I thought his awkward teen persona was excellent in Arrested Development and I thought he did a pretty good job in Super Bad (2007) and Juno (2007).  However, since then, Cera has released at least two movies a year, each of which puts him in the role of the awkward teen: Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist (2008), Extreme Movie (2008), Year One (2009), Paper Heart (2009), and Youth in Revolt (2009).  For me and many other people I know, Cera's awkwardness has begun to take a toll and I wasn't necessarily looking forward to seeing Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.  However, because of Wright's immense success in my personal opinion, this outweighed my disdain for Michael Cera.

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World puts Michael Cera as Scott Pilgrim, a twenty-two year old man-boy who lives in Toronto, Canada and plays bass for a band called Sex Bob-omb.  The supporting cast for Cera is excellent with stand out characters such as Kieran Culkin who plays Pilgrim's gay room mate, Wallace, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead who plays Pilgrim's edgy crush, Ramona, each of which are sure to be audience favorites.  However, with Ramona comes some baggage, seven evil exes to be specific.  In order to date Ramona, Scott Pilgrim must defeat all seven of her exes, each of which has a back story that adds to the movie.  Each ex is well cast as well and brings something else to the table, whether it be the first ex, Matthew Patel, who dresses like a pirate, or Roxy Richter, a self-conscious half-ninja who was part of a "phase" Ramona had.

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World starts off a little slow, but once the exes start to come at Scott Pilgrim, the movie gets infinitely better.  The cinematography is great, as is common with much of Wright's work, but what is even more impressive is the artistic direction.  Throughout the movie is a constant video game/comic book sort of theme, which is not only well executed, but doesn't begin to overwhelm the viewer.  When calm scenes such as dialogue are taking pace, its at a minimum; when the fight scenes begin, however, it comes into full effect with bright colors, lightning bolts, giant monsters, and points flashing across the screen for every kill.  Video game references are also strung throughout the movie, such as the Zelda theme song playing at times, Scott Pilgrim learning the bass line to Final Fantasy II, and Scott Pilgrim's best pick-up line concerning Pac Man.  Other pop culture references are played into the movie well such as one scene including Pilgrim and his room mate Wallace in their underground apartment.  The scene begins with the Seinfield theme and throughout their dialogue a laugh track is played intermittently, making this one of the funniest scenes of the entire movie. 

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World successfully drives at what it's trying to accomplish.  Anyone who is under twenty five is surely to at least appreciate the movie.  Some of the action scenes and visual effects are awe inspiring and pull you into Scott Pilgrim's comic book style life only making you wish you could do some of the things in the movie.  The plot on the surface is solid and straight forward, but at each and every turn you're still anticipating when the next ex will pop-up unexpectedly.  Michael Cera is, unfortunately, the most disappointing part of the film, not because he doesn't do a good job, in fact, I don't think anyone could play the part better, but solely because the character of Michael Cera has been worn out.  Had he not done any movies in 2009, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World as a follow up to Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist would have been incredible.  Cera's supporting cast and Wright's incredible cinematography coupled with an artistic directing style, however, really save the movie and make it a pleasure to see.  After watching the movie, the seven evil exes, the bright lights, and flashing colors are sure to wash out Cera's bland, awkward teen type cast personality, and all you'll be able to think about are swords, 1-UPS, and giant apes.

Heavy Rain

In 2010 so far there have been some highly anticipated titles: Starcraft II, Red Dead Redemption, and God of War III among others.  However, only one game this year has been anticipated because of its dynamic storyline and radically different game play.  Heavy Rain (2010), released as an exclusive titles for the Play Station 3, is a murder mystery game that involves four main characters that the player switches between throughout the story.  The first of these characters is Ethan Mars, a father of two whose life comes tumbling down after a series of unfortunate events; Ethan is the character you will familiarize yourself with the most and is the primary protagonist.  The other three are Madison Paige, a woman suffering from insomnia, Norman Jayden, an FBI agent, and Scott Shelby, a private detective.  All of these characters are tied together by the most important piece of Heavy Rain: the Origami Killer.  Without giving too much away, the Origami Killer is an elusive who has been kidnapping young boys for over three years; every time one is murdered, they are found with no visible wounds, but have been drowned and are also in possession of an origami figurine as well as an orchid. 

The story line of Heavy Rain is absolutely enthralling.  I can easily say, without doubt, it is by far the first game I have absolutely not been able to put down.  It's the only game I have beat in less than two days with over 15 hours of game play.  While it is a murder mystery "game," Heavy Rain seems more like an interactive movie.  There's a lot of dialogue, some well written, some not.  What makes it more intriguing though is how immersive it is.  You feel for Nathan during his turmoil and most of all, when a character is in danger of dying (and believe me, there are more than enough opportunities for them to die), I can honestly say I got frightened and tense.  Some people may not enjoy as much dialogue as is present in Heavy Rain, especially people who are not fans of the RPG genre, but don't take that to mean that there isn't any intense action.

Heavy Rain's game play consists of a system focused on QTE's or quick time events.  What this means is that while playing, the game will flash a button the player has to push.  The player must then push the button within a certain amount of time or some negative consequence occurs.  This system is similar to Guitar Hero games and the like, but is a bit more complex.  For instance, if in a gun fight the player doesn't push square in time, the character might get shot.  Furthermore, the game makes use of Play Station's Six Axis motion controller by making gamers shake, tilt, and rotate the controller in addition to the QTE's.  Heavy Rain also allows the character to move around the world and stumble upon interactive objects.  With FBI agent Norman Jayden, you can interact with clues, finger prints, suspects, etc.  However, the most enticing interactive aspect of Heavy Rain is Jayden's virtual reality system, ARI.  ARI, or Added Reality Interface, by far provided the most "Holy Shit" moments for me of Heavy Rain.  ARI can completely alter Jayden's surroundings or simply provide him with a baseball to toss against a wall.  In order to really understand it, you'll have to play the game.

Heavy Rain's graphics are incredible close-up, especially during loading sequences when you're shown a character's face and the detail is overwhelming.  There are some visual glitches I experienced, such as smoke emanating from a non-existent cigarette, but overall, the graphics were relatively smooth and impressive.  The score for Heavy Rain also sets the mood incredibly well, playing soft melodies for sympathetic moments and heavy orchestral pieces for intense fights or impending doom.  The triggering system for this isn't always accurate though, seeing as how the "impending doom" score started playing while I was warming up a bottle of milk; not exactly the most dramatic of situations.

Overall, while most gamers may not know if they want to play Heavy Rain or not, most feel like it's a game they should probably try.  As a serious skeptic of motion controls and QTE's, I can say that I thoroughly enjoyed Heavy Rain.  While the control system is radically different than what many may be used to, Heavy Rain is a radically different game.  The motion controls at times seem a bit tacked on, but when trying to kick the window out of a sinking car, slamming your controller in a downward motion only feels natural.  The intense story line keeps the player on their toes with every QTE.  If you're not quick enough, one of the main characters could be dead for the rest of the game.  With various possibilities to every chapter of the game, Heavy Rain has several different plot lines as well as endings.  Because of this, the replay value is incredibly high making every gamer want to play through at least twice.  You may still be skeptical of Heavy Rain, what with its long winded dialogue, QTE's, and motion controls, but if I've convinced you of anything, let it be the story.  Heavy Rain, out of any game I've ever played, has the most intriguing and interesting storyline I've ever experienced, making you care deeply about every character throughout the game.  Heavy Rain has some of the most dramatic, intense, and nerve wracking scenes I have ever witnessed and you should play it.

The Other Guys (2010)

Time for a shorter movie post this time.  Let's keep it around 700 words:

The Other Guys (2010) stars Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg as Detectives Allen Gamble and Terry Hoitz respectively.  Other star characters such as Samuel L. Jackson (Highsmith), Dwayne Johnson (Danson), Michael Keaton (Captain Gene Mauch), and Derek Jeter as himself also make an appearance.  The basic plot of The Other Guys consists of Ferrell and Wahlberg trying to gain the top spot in the NYPD chasing the financial blunderings of David Ershon, played by Steve Coogan, a stock broker of sorts who has lost a lot of money for some very powerful people.

What is most impressive about The Other Guys lies mostly in the duo of Ferrell and Wahlberg: their chemistry is surprisingly convincing, their characters compliment each other well, and while seemingly different on the surface, Gamble and Hoitz are incredibly similar.  Hoitz is your typical tough cop, but is held back by one major mistake in his past and because of it, is stuck as partner to Gamble, a cop who would rather sit at a desk and do paper work than go out on the field.  While Hoitz is held back by a mistake, Gamble is held back by a deep dark alter ego named Gator.  Hoitz, while tough on the surface, has a surprisingly endearing soft side; for Gamble, however, while soft on the surface, shows his brawn and intelligence later in the movie.  Surprisingly, throughout the film, audiences will only see traces of the most well known Will Ferrell (loud, obnoxious, and hit or miss one liners) seemingly because he makes an attempt at playing a more down to earth character, much like was seen in Ferrell's most highly reviewed film, Stranger Than Fiction (2006).  Wahlberg on the other hand helps fill in the comedic gap and really manages to carry his weight, all while maintaining his macho cop attitude.

While the time that Jackson and Johnson appear in the film is short, their time on the screen is exciting and hilarious.  Of the guest appearances, however, none is better than Michael Keaton.  Keaton's character, Captain Gene Mauch, is for the most part a hard ass, but subtle aspects of his character make him more memorable and subtly satirical; for instance, he works another job as a Bed, Bath, and Beyond team leader.  Keaton's character also has the best running gag throughout the movie as well, ignorantly quoting TLC lyrics while giving pep talks to Hoitz and Gamble ("Don't go chasing waterfalls").  While there aren't many prominent female roles in the movie, Eva Mendes plays Gamble's wife, Dr. Sheila Gamble, and some of the interactions between Mendes and Ferrell are witty, several of them circling around Ferrell's delusion that his wife is a plain Jane and dresses like a hobo.


The Other Guys successfully manages to blend action and comedy, which is another strong point.  Unlike other cop spoof movies released this year, such as Cop Out, The Other Guys succeeds in having adrenaline pumping chase scenes, high impact explosions, as well as slow motion gun fights.  While the action scenes are taking place, you don't feel as though you're watching a comedy, let alone a movie with Will Ferrell in it; each and every action scene really feels like its from an action movie, not some cop parody film.  Furthermore, The Other Guys also manages to set-up a few sentimental moments, even though these are quickly broken up with a zing or an awkward interaction between characters. 

While not the best movie released this summer by far, The Other Guys is definitely one of the better comedies.  Will Ferrel picks up his act and doesn't rely too much on his loud, obnoxious persona;  he really plays the character of Allen Gamble well, being mild mannered and conventional.  There are certainly several quotable lines throughout the film, but not all of them rest on Will Ferrel (in fact, one of my favorites comes from Damon Wayans Jr.: "I hope you like prison food!... and penis!").  The comedic burden is definitely spread throughout the cast and a significant portion of it is taken up by Wahlberg, who does an excellent job of playing the loud, angry, sarcastic cop  who just wants to fly like a peacock.  If not in theaters, definitely check out The Other Guys when it comes out on DVD/Blu-ray.  Its more than worth a viewing and I promise that you'll find at least one quotable, much like any Will Ferrel movie I've ever watched.