Review of Movie 2012 - WARNING - May contain spoiler information -
I saw the 2012 movie on opening day and I wasn't disappointed. However, I went to it expecting exactly what it was; an action adventure film set in the "end of the world" genre of films. I didn't go expecting to see Oscar winning performances or an incredibly stellar storylines. I went expecting Roland Emmerich to put out another disaster film - and boy did he.
This movie was the epitome of disaster films. It reaches the apex of that genre. I really don't see how anyone can top this film when it comes to the end of the world and/or disaster genre. It delivers with panache, style and incredible special effects. Though practically the entire movie is CGI driven, there was not one place in the entire film where I could point to the screen and say, "Oh, that's CGI." Visually it was a feast; you see every dollar spent on the screen. If I was the producer I'd be pretty happy with the way Emmerich spent his money. I saw it in a digital projector theater, which is very unforgiving for mistakes, and was stunned at the clarity and quality of the effects. The soundtrack meshed well with the film and enhanced the disaster sequences (which is almost the entire film from beginning to end).
I expected it to crawl in a few places, but it didn't. Almost from the beginning of the film to the very end, you are gripping your seat with tension and expectation. A very suspenseful and driven film, it takes you on a wild, white water adventure that feels at times as though you are experiencing a fantastic Universal Studios ride. Well worth the price of admission for that alone, the film also mostly delivers in the story and acting department as well. While no Oscar winning performances are given, I enjoyed Danny Glover as the President and several other actors performances as well including Woody Harrelson as an delightfully kooky conspiracy theorist so in love with his own theories of conspiracy and destruction that you can practically see him orgasming with ecstasy as his predictions of destruction begin to come true. For me, Woody Harrelson is a dish best served in small doses, and this was the perfect dose. Overall, the quality of the story and acting didn't diminish until the very end of the movie, and I'd say it made it 80% of the way to being a really good film that way. Unfortunately at the end Mr. Emmerich fell prey to the urge to put in some very sappy feel-good scenes that ruined the overall quality of the film. In particular there is a sequence of a woman (Beatrice Rosen playing a Russian beauty; certainly no stretch for the beautiful Ms. Rosen) saving her little dog in a forced looking cliff hanger situation. Unfortunately it is scenes such as these, which mercifully don't occur until the last 15 minutes of the film, that ruined my overall assessment of the film as a good piece of cinema. I'm not complaining however as I feel I got my moneys worth in the film before these sequences take place.
In fact, if I had one complaint about the film, it would be this; why did they use John Cusack in the starring role? In all honesty, Mr. Cusacks talent was wasted in this film. You don't get enough of his personality for him to have any of what I call those, "Cusack moments" that are so memorable and you get tastes of in films such as High Fidelity and Grosse Pointe Blank. Not that Cusack didn't perform well, he did; the role just felt like you could have plugged any action adventure hero into that spot with just as successful a result. However, with that said, you do get very minuscule doses of Mr. Cusacks talent in short scenes he has with Woody Harrelson and a handful of other places in the film, so not all is lost.
Overall I'd give the film a B- but as a genre film I'd have to give the film an A+. I think it's worth the price of a theater ticket. In all honesty, don't wait for this on DVD - It just won't have the same impact without seeing it on the big screen.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Windows Mobile OS 6
Windows mobile OS 6 has a lot to say for it. Much more stable then its predecessor, Windows mobile OS 5, it still has some bugs and flaws that prevent it from being a ‘trouble’ free operating system. In its defense, it has come a long way and is pretty far ahead of its ancestors, and does make for relative ease of use on a mobile system. It doesn’t offer anything that I would call ground breaking, most of the apps and abilities it has have been on previous versions, but the stability factor it has over OS 5 has a lot to be said about it by itself. It does offer you some new shortcuts that weren’t previously available and that is nice. There are some of its features that have additional functionality too. Email ability has been improved (HTML Support now…need I say more!) Also, the calendar seems easier to use now with some added functionality not available in earlier versions. The fact that it has mobile Office added to it as well is a welcome addition that I think is long overdue.
One thing that I’m glad they didn’t change is the interface. It looks pretty similar to OS 5, and I like it. It has a nice look to it, very Vista like. It is soft and functional. In fact, OS 6 looks much more Vista like than its ancestor, OS 5. Most of your shortcuts are available at the top of interface, and with the new Google mobile app it adds some much needed functionality to the interface. For one thing, all your most recently used applications are lined up at the top. Overall I’d have to say that the Windows mobile OS 6 is much more user-friendly then previous versions have been. Now that it has been out a couple of years, Microsoft has worked out most of the kinks and I would recommend it. Of course, now they are almost ready to unveil OS 7. It is supposed to come around the mid point of this year. We’ll see if it offers significant improvement over OS 6. In the meantime, enjoy OS 6. I recommend it as a mobile device operating system.
One thing that I’m glad they didn’t change is the interface. It looks pretty similar to OS 5, and I like it. It has a nice look to it, very Vista like. It is soft and functional. In fact, OS 6 looks much more Vista like than its ancestor, OS 5. Most of your shortcuts are available at the top of interface, and with the new Google mobile app it adds some much needed functionality to the interface. For one thing, all your most recently used applications are lined up at the top. Overall I’d have to say that the Windows mobile OS 6 is much more user-friendly then previous versions have been. Now that it has been out a couple of years, Microsoft has worked out most of the kinks and I would recommend it. Of course, now they are almost ready to unveil OS 7. It is supposed to come around the mid point of this year. We’ll see if it offers significant improvement over OS 6. In the meantime, enjoy OS 6. I recommend it as a mobile device operating system.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Ipod Touch
I've been using the IPod Touch now for around 8 months and I can say definitively that it is at the top of the food chain when it comes to MP3/4 players out on the market at this time. That is not to say it doesn’t have its share of problems; a (sometimes) confusing interface, limited usability for its WiFi feature, just so-so music quality. However, the benefits far outweigh the negatives.
For one thing, I said the interface could be confusing. To be fair, it has never been confusing to me. I’ve always felt it was fairly intuitive as far as user interfaces go. But I have heard some people say the interface is confusing. So for some, there might be a steeper learning curve. It is true that the WiFi feature is somewhat limited. You have to be in a hot spot to use it, unlike its big brother, the Iphone, where you have Internet access anywhere you have phone access. For me, this is a minor annoyance and hardly worth mentioning. I didn’t buy it primarily for Internet access, though I do have to say that is part of what went into my decision making process. Finally, it is true that the music quality is only average when it comes to playback. But let’s face it, the nasty truth is, you are not getting the full sound from music with digital files anyway. A digital signal is flat and doesn’t give you full sound; if you want that, then go back to vinyl.
OK, let’s list the positives; plenty of space for music. For me, someone who has over 70GB of music, the touch doesn’t have enough space. For someone like my wife who has fewer than 10GB of music, the IPod touch is perfect. She has the 8GB model, which costs a little over $200.00. Videos play fine, there are some fun games, you can carry photos, podcasts, get your email and there are a plethora of apps for the IPod touch that are useful and fun (There are also a lot that are a colossal waste of time but that is part of the fun as well). You can get an 8GB model for around 200.00, a 16GB for around 300.00 and a 32GB for around 400.00. Overall, the IPod touch, though more expensive than its more limited brethren in the market, has features no one else does and is, frankly, a much superior product. I highly recommend it.
For one thing, I said the interface could be confusing. To be fair, it has never been confusing to me. I’ve always felt it was fairly intuitive as far as user interfaces go. But I have heard some people say the interface is confusing. So for some, there might be a steeper learning curve. It is true that the WiFi feature is somewhat limited. You have to be in a hot spot to use it, unlike its big brother, the Iphone, where you have Internet access anywhere you have phone access. For me, this is a minor annoyance and hardly worth mentioning. I didn’t buy it primarily for Internet access, though I do have to say that is part of what went into my decision making process. Finally, it is true that the music quality is only average when it comes to playback. But let’s face it, the nasty truth is, you are not getting the full sound from music with digital files anyway. A digital signal is flat and doesn’t give you full sound; if you want that, then go back to vinyl.
OK, let’s list the positives; plenty of space for music. For me, someone who has over 70GB of music, the touch doesn’t have enough space. For someone like my wife who has fewer than 10GB of music, the IPod touch is perfect. She has the 8GB model, which costs a little over $200.00. Videos play fine, there are some fun games, you can carry photos, podcasts, get your email and there are a plethora of apps for the IPod touch that are useful and fun (There are also a lot that are a colossal waste of time but that is part of the fun as well). You can get an 8GB model for around 200.00, a 16GB for around 300.00 and a 32GB for around 400.00. Overall, the IPod touch, though more expensive than its more limited brethren in the market, has features no one else does and is, frankly, a much superior product. I highly recommend it.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Digital Camera's - The Canon S2 IS
The heir to the throne of the S1 IS, the S2 is more than just a pretty face and improved image stabilization. The Canon PowerShot S2 IS has an upgraded sensor, from 3.2 to 5 mega-pixel, it’s gone from a 10X zoom to a 12X zoom, and a beautiful LCD display that expands a bit upon its predecessor with a lovely 1.8 inch display surface compared to the slightly smaller (but still functional and useful) 1.5 inches of the S1. Also on board are full manual controls for complete control of all you need to do with this camera. This is in addition to the ability to shoot high-quality video with stereo sound. I’m sure this camera is going to continue to be big with the amateur photographer and photo enthusiast as it has a decent on board zoom and pictures from it in my experience look fantastic, print fantastic and in general are just stellar. My overall feeling about the Canon PowerShot S2 IS is one of comfort. It feels good in the hands, looks great and is easy to handle. I’ve even done some decent one-handed shots with it, even backwards shots and upside down. The LCD display rotates in many directions making odd angle shooting easier than any other camera I’ve used. If I had any complaint about the camera it would only be this; when jostling and running around taking pictures, which I do quite a bit as I like to do a lot of nature and animal shots, the lens cap has a tendency to pop off on its own. A small complaint but one I hope they fix in the future. This camera is well designed overall and feels well balanced, even for one-handed shooting. This camera is a bit dated now with recent additions to the Canon line improving upon its performance, however I still highly recommend it for the amateur photographer. I believe it to be a wonderful addition to any amateur enthusiast’s camera bag, and for the price it cannot be beat.
Friday, May 15, 2009
7UP vs. Sprite
7 UP vs. Sprite – The Lemon-Lime Battle
I know a lot of people who tell me that 7 UP tastes the same as Sprite. They swear they both taste essentially the same. I, however, do not agree.
7 UP, once the largest player on the block when it comes to lemon-lime soft drinks (7 UP, introduced in 1929, competed against 600 lemon-lime soft drinks on the market at that time and beat them all) has been largely eclipsed by Sprite since around 1980. Much of that is due to Sprite’s being forced on the public by Coca Cola corp. When I say forced, I mean that literally. Back before the 1980’s most bottlers were distributing 7 UP until Coke forced their hand and demanded that they carry Sprite instead of 7 UP. This began the end of 7 UP’s reign as the undisputed king of the lemon-lime soft drink set. 7 UP is still very much alive and well, and is distributed by Dr. Pepper Corp. here in the U.S., and by Pepsi Co. in the rest of the world.
A lot of Sprite’s popularity comes from the fact that they are distributed so widely now, part comes from a series of brilliant marketing strategies and advertising campaigns. Sprite has at different times appealed to a large teen to young adult demographic and has also appealed to a smaller but more affluent adult demographic. The beauty of marketing a soft drink is the fact it costs so little that influencing a demographic such as teens to buy it is great; all they need is pocket change.
However, let’s get back to the subject of taste. Personally I don’t care for the taste of Sprite nearly as much as I do the taste of 7 UP. Now I know for a fact, and I state this to be fair, some of that comes from the fact that I grew up with 7 UP being the primary lemon-lime drink of my generation. You couldn’t always get a Sprite in a store, where you could always find a 7 UP. But beyond that, 7 UP doesn’t taste as “sweet” to me. Sprite has a very sweet taste that seems to cling to my palate. It’s kind of like the Coke/Pepsi argument that has been going on forever. (Ironic since it’s exactly the opposite with Coke and Pepsi – Pepsi is sweeter than Coke) For whatever reason, 7 UP tastes cleaner to me, less cloying and sweet. Unfortunately, the world has definitely turned, for now it is 7 UP that is not always found in the stores, and one can always find a Sprite.
I know a lot of people who tell me that 7 UP tastes the same as Sprite. They swear they both taste essentially the same. I, however, do not agree.
7 UP, once the largest player on the block when it comes to lemon-lime soft drinks (7 UP, introduced in 1929, competed against 600 lemon-lime soft drinks on the market at that time and beat them all) has been largely eclipsed by Sprite since around 1980. Much of that is due to Sprite’s being forced on the public by Coca Cola corp. When I say forced, I mean that literally. Back before the 1980’s most bottlers were distributing 7 UP until Coke forced their hand and demanded that they carry Sprite instead of 7 UP. This began the end of 7 UP’s reign as the undisputed king of the lemon-lime soft drink set. 7 UP is still very much alive and well, and is distributed by Dr. Pepper Corp. here in the U.S., and by Pepsi Co. in the rest of the world.
A lot of Sprite’s popularity comes from the fact that they are distributed so widely now, part comes from a series of brilliant marketing strategies and advertising campaigns. Sprite has at different times appealed to a large teen to young adult demographic and has also appealed to a smaller but more affluent adult demographic. The beauty of marketing a soft drink is the fact it costs so little that influencing a demographic such as teens to buy it is great; all they need is pocket change.
However, let’s get back to the subject of taste. Personally I don’t care for the taste of Sprite nearly as much as I do the taste of 7 UP. Now I know for a fact, and I state this to be fair, some of that comes from the fact that I grew up with 7 UP being the primary lemon-lime drink of my generation. You couldn’t always get a Sprite in a store, where you could always find a 7 UP. But beyond that, 7 UP doesn’t taste as “sweet” to me. Sprite has a very sweet taste that seems to cling to my palate. It’s kind of like the Coke/Pepsi argument that has been going on forever. (Ironic since it’s exactly the opposite with Coke and Pepsi – Pepsi is sweeter than Coke) For whatever reason, 7 UP tastes cleaner to me, less cloying and sweet. Unfortunately, the world has definitely turned, for now it is 7 UP that is not always found in the stores, and one can always find a Sprite.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Coffee is Coffee...or is it?
Good coffee is hard to come by.
I've never been a big Starbucks fan. Starbucks to me has been ok in general. I’ve not ever had a bad cup of java there but then again I’ve never had one I’d write home to mom about either. They are expensive, as well as just being “OK”…a double whammy. I usually only go to Starbucks when there is nothing else available. If I’m going to spend five bucks on a cup of joe it had best be one darned good cup of coffee! However, strangely enough, lately I’ve been looking in places I’d given up on years ago and found that they have greatly improved their performance. Specifically I’m talking about McDonald’s and 7-11, once both known for their lack luster coffee, weak and virtually tasteless.
7-11 has really stepped up their game when it comes to coffee. They have a great variety of flavors available and some really tasty ones at that. They are also diligent in changing coffee out when it gets old, something they certainly were never famous for before. In a pinch, I’m not afraid to go to 7-11 for a good cup of joe.
McDonald’s has also stepped up its game as well. I’m going to go out on a limb and say that McDonald’s coffee is one of the best cups of coffee I’ve tasted in quite some time. That is saying a lot for someone that absolutely loves his coffee. McDonald’s finally got wise to the fact that they were missing out on this huge demographic that, guess what, loves coffee! Not to mention the fact that it is actually affordable. That’s right; I paid less money and got a far superior product from a fast food joint than I did from Starbucks, the self proclaimed coffee king. Well, I won’t give up hope on Starbucks, but for now McDonald’s is my coffee stop of the day.
I've never been a big Starbucks fan. Starbucks to me has been ok in general. I’ve not ever had a bad cup of java there but then again I’ve never had one I’d write home to mom about either. They are expensive, as well as just being “OK”…a double whammy. I usually only go to Starbucks when there is nothing else available. If I’m going to spend five bucks on a cup of joe it had best be one darned good cup of coffee! However, strangely enough, lately I’ve been looking in places I’d given up on years ago and found that they have greatly improved their performance. Specifically I’m talking about McDonald’s and 7-11, once both known for their lack luster coffee, weak and virtually tasteless.
7-11 has really stepped up their game when it comes to coffee. They have a great variety of flavors available and some really tasty ones at that. They are also diligent in changing coffee out when it gets old, something they certainly were never famous for before. In a pinch, I’m not afraid to go to 7-11 for a good cup of joe.
McDonald’s has also stepped up its game as well. I’m going to go out on a limb and say that McDonald’s coffee is one of the best cups of coffee I’ve tasted in quite some time. That is saying a lot for someone that absolutely loves his coffee. McDonald’s finally got wise to the fact that they were missing out on this huge demographic that, guess what, loves coffee! Not to mention the fact that it is actually affordable. That’s right; I paid less money and got a far superior product from a fast food joint than I did from Starbucks, the self proclaimed coffee king. Well, I won’t give up hope on Starbucks, but for now McDonald’s is my coffee stop of the day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
