Stoh80 Reviews

The Great Gatsby (2013)

Not good, not terrible

[5/10 · 11 May 2013]

First off, my biggest complaint is how they changed the narration of the story unnecessarily. Throughout the movie, the real story, the story involving Gatsby and Nick and Daisy, is continually interrupted by Nick later on at a psychiatric ward—something that wasn't in the book. Nick being at a psychiatric ward was entirely made up the director, and as it doesn't contribute anything to the movie, I honestly can't see why they put it in there. Now, I can understand how they might want to change up the story to make it different and fresh, but this narration "story within a story" technique added nothing to the movie and only served as an annoying break from the real plot.

I also got the feeling they were trying to "modernize" a lot of the story, especially with their choice of soundtrack, but most of the time came across as anachronistic. Of course, it is not a bad thing at all to have songs from out of the time period. But there are so many more appropriate, actual 1920s songs they could have picked for the movie, that they would have gotten across the theme of partying and excess a hundred times better.

However, the cast and acting was good. Leonardo DiCaprio and Toby Maguire played their roles pretty well, and there wasn't a moment in the movie that I felt that they should have picked another actor for their parts. Every character in the movie is how I could have imaged a character from the book.

The movie just tries too hard. It hits you over the head with symbols like the green light and the optometry billboard that should have way more subtle. Several scenes are overdramatized, with tons of effects and music and overacting thrown in there that it makes the viewer dizzy.

It was very over stylized. Words fly around the screen in a few scenes in line with the actors' dialogue, which just looks more silly than anything else. It felt like they were trying to replace any actual meaning of the book with glitzy parties and (albeit stunning) visual effects. It wasn't a bad movie, but it could have been way better done.

Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009)

A vastly underrated quirky, funny, perhaps even slightly profound animated film

[9/10 · 25 November 2012]

Wes Anderson's very unorthodox take on Roald Dahl's classic Fantastic Mr. Fox really shows what animation can do. Here, fabled director Anderson, known for his hipster-esque style and dry humor, portrays the story of a fox who, going through a mid-life crisis, decides to get back into his old line of work and start stealing chickens again. Though the story is simple, the aesthetics and overall emotional appeal of the movie is astounding.

Some might scoff at motion-stop, but the animation really does fit well with the film. The world it is set in is charming and colorful, and the movement of the characters is realistic when it needs to be, and cartoonish when it doesn't. The whole barrage of stars that lent their voices for this film is pretty impressive—George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Bill Murray, Owen Wilson. These actors portrayed their respective characters very well, making their lines sound natural and lifelike. From Davy Crockett to the Beach Boys, this film also features an eclectic, yet appropriate, range of songs.

I found Fantastic Mr. Fox most memorable for all of the little things. Every gesture, every facial expression, every under-the-breath comment from one of the characters adds to the film. In just about every scene you can find something interesting going on in the background, things you probably won't notice the first run through. The movie beckons you to pay close attention so you can truly get all of its emotional undertones and quirky character nuances. These little things may not ultimately contribute to the overall story of the movie, but that's not a bad thing. It's refreshing to see a movie that includes these unnecessary details that adds depth to the characters and environment (even if they are puppets!). In fact, I found these characters to be more lifelike and relatable than those in many live-action films. The chemistry between them is great, and even casual, seemingly unimportant conversations among these woodland creatures left me chuckling ("No you're not. You're disloyal."). Though a dry and somewhat awkward comedy, it can also be touching or even profound at moments, making it a very enticing film indeed.

Though marketed as a children's movie, it is obvious that this film has something for people of all ages. For anyone a fan of Wes Anderson, Roald Dahl, or animation in general, I wholeheartedly recommend this vastly underrated film. Anderson is off on the right foot for this genre, making me await any animated film he hopefully comes out with next.

Project X (2012)

A party movie, with some moments—but not many

[6/10 · 16 May 2012]

I was not disappointed with this movie, but I wasn't impressed either. I went in expecting to see a somewhat humorous teen party movie, and that is exactly what I got, with "party" being a bit of an understatement. The first half of the movie is about three high school friends who, tired of not being popular, decide to throw a party of their own. After that it is basically nothing but partying, with a few funny but not very memorable moments.

I found it very similar to Superbad, except WAY more over the top and exaggerated. Even Thomas, the main character, reminded me a lot of Michael Cera's character in Superbad. However there is nothing "more" to Project X. There are no serious parts, no lessons to be learned at the end, as was the case with Superbad. The movie seems to try and make it feel genuine by throwing in some conflict between the characters, but in the end it really adds nothing to the plot, which is nearly non-existent. The movie simply progresses as the party gets more and more out of control.

One thing I found unique was the way the movie was filmed. Much like the movie Chronicle, which I happened to see right before Project X, it is in a first-person point of view. Most of the filming is done by the character Dax, whom the three friends higher to record the night's events. Some shots are done by flip cameras, cell phones, or even news cameras, all which are being held by actual characters in the movie. The director Nima Nourizadeh said he did this to make the audience feel like they were actually participating in the party, and for the most part, it was successful.

I saw this movie for free at a prescreening, and I'm glad I did. It was worth seeing with friends, but I definitely would not pay to go see it. If it happens to be on TV, or if you want to get in the mood for partying, I might recommend passively watching this with a group of friends.

War Horse (2011)

An exciting adventure, a heartfelt story

[8/10 · 14 May 2012]

When I went to go see this film, I have to say I did not have very high expectations. Directed by Steven Spielberg and taking place in 1914, it is about a young English farm boy who befriends a horse whom he names Joey. I thought that it was going to be a somewhat cheesy, boring movie filled with clichés about the power of love and friendship. And, for the first 30 minutes, I was right. But, while the beginning was rather slow and uneventful, it was definitely worth it, as it set up what was to come next.

When the family has to sell Joey to the British army to fight the war going on the European mainland, the movie takes on a whole new tone. Death and violence fill nearly every scene. To my knowledge, other than the classic All Quiet on the Western Front, not many movies go into depth about World War I the way War Horse did. It shows the way German, English, and French troops and civilians lived while the First World War raged on, without making one side the "good guys" and the other the "bad guys." I applaud the movie for getting the historical accuracies of this grim war right, while at the same time still making it interesting and relatable for someone who may not be a history buff.

The music score, done by John Williams, was amazing and always matched with the mood of the scene. The cinematography was great, and the editing and camera angles worked to make the movie flow perfectly. The special effects, costumes of the actors, and setting/props were excellently done. As far as the technical aspect goes, I was engrossed the entire time, and not once did I feel like it was fake or cheaply done. Of course, as it was Spielberg, no expenses were spared in visually impressing the audience, and yet it never seemed too over-the-top.

Overall, this was a pretty good movie, and I was happy that I went to see it. At over 2 hours, it was kind of long, but it didn't seem to drag on. The plot was very well executed, and though it began slow, it did not feel like as if there were any unnecessary scenes or characters making it stagnant. This is definitely a movie that you have to actively watch and become involved in, and casually watching it would not make it as satisfying. As both a heartfelt film and an exciting, violent war movie, it was very well done.

Primer (2004)

Confusing plot, but a good independent film

[7/10 · 3 November 2011]

This is definitely one of those intellectual films that requires the utmost attention from the viewer if they wish to fully understand it. Directed, written, edited, staring, and done pretty much in every way by Shane Carruth, Primer is an independent film about two engineers who discover that they have created a machine that can travel through time. The theme of time travel has already been done countless times, but Primer shows us how dumbed down it actually is in the other movies. The plot is complex to say the least, and some people say that you have to watch this film about six times before you can start to know what's going on, though I never went that far. This is a "think outside the box" film that is not for everyone, and was most likely aimed at an audience with a good background of scientific knowledge.

The acting is okay. The actors are not professional, and as far as I know this is all of their first film. Most of the time the characters are relatively stoic and calm, with only interludes of them being excited. The overall lack of emotion in the film may not make it as dramatic, but it does make the amateur acting practically unnoticeable. The dialogue between the main characters is filled with technical and scientific jargon, and at time I felt like I only understood every other word they were saying. It was also hard to keep tract of what the intentions of the characters exactly was at points in the film, and what their reasons for going back in time were.

What amazes me is how this film was made with a budget of $7000, and it wasn't even noticeable. It never looks "fake" or like a B-movie because Primer never pushes the limit of its budget. There aren't any cheap special effects or costumes or excessive CGI, and I never felt like the film was any less for it. As far as independent films go, this is a rather good one. And though the plot was more confusing than that of Pi or Donnie Darko, I still found that I enjoyed it.

Avatar: The Last Airbender (2005–2008)

Smart, funny, dramatic, action-packed, and all from a children's cartoon

[10/10 · 1 November 2011]

With all the cartoons Nickelodeon has come out with in the past few years, I have to say Avatar: The Last Airbender definitely takes the cake. From the very first episode to the last, Avatar never failed to impress me. Even though I was never a huge anime fan, I applaud the good quality, Asian-style animation. The mature themes in Avatar also make it stand out from Nickelodeons other shows. The show addresses serious subjects like what is good or evil, the balance between man and nature, and spirituality. Being partly a comedy, there is plenty of humor that at times made me literally laugh out loud, but it also a drama, with the characters being very memorable and lifelike.

I find the fact that the people of this world can "bend" elements very original, and well executed. There are natural laws that the cartoonists set for this world, like how one can only bend the element of their respective Nation (water, fire, earth, or air). Only the Avatar, chosen to protect the balance of the world between the four Nations, can bend all four elements. In this show, the Avatar is an Airbender named Aang, who along Sokka and Katara from the Water Tribe, set off to stop the imperialistic Fire Nation from taking over the world. The characters are in constant life-or-death situations, which makes it part of the action/adventure genre. The fight scenes look cool, and watching the characters use psychic martial arts to manipulate their environment is awesome. Unlike most other children's shows, the main characters, the "good guys," don't always win against the "bad guys," or if they do it might be at a price. The characters, being flawed and human, sometimes find themselves questioning what is right or wrong, or even if what they are doing good or evil.

The creators of this show borrow elements of culture from the Chinese, Japanese, Indians, and Inuits. The world of Avatar is unique, complete with its own history and visually stunning natural landscapes and cities. Some people make fun of it by calling it a "fake anime," saying that it was a bunch of American animators who copied Japanese cartoons. But I fail to see how this is a bad thing. They are simply blurring the lines between Western and Eastern animation, and in the end making a product that takes the best of both worlds.

I can't say Nickelodeon has had any cartoons this good since this show has ended. They made a live action movie off of the first season directed by M. Night Shyamalan, which was absolutely terrible and nearly ruined the show for many fans. Hopefully they can redeem this franchise with the upcoming spin off series The Last Airbender: Legend of Korra, set to come out in mid-2012. If they keep the humor, great animation, and mature themes as they did in the first series, I will definitely watch Legend of Korra when it comes out.

Beavis and Butt-Head (1993–2011)

It's coming back!

[8/10 · 25 October 2011]

It must take a cartoon genius to make a show like this work as wonderfully as it does. This show is about two idiotic metal-head high schoolers who spend most of their time watching TV, with intervals of them getting into some kind of trouble. Butt-head is the smarter of the duo, but just barely. With characteristic trademarks and catchphrases, such as their recognizable laughs, this show is a cartoon classic, even though its animation isn't anything special.

Beavis and Butt-head understand very little of the world that they find themselves stumbling around in. This is where most of the humor comes from, and usually it's very entertaining. Later episodes have Beavis and Butt-head give commentary to music videos, and like all of their commentary it usually involves "this sucks" or "this is cool." There are also a number of other, much more subtle sources of humor in the show. Though Mike Judge explicitly stated he tries to stay away from politics and other controversial subjects, you can still find him subtly poking fun at conservative talk show hosts or modern artists.

I don't think this is a show you can watch a lot of in one sitting. It does get a little repetitive after a few episodes these two dimwits getting into the same idiotic predicaments. But if you're bored and willing to turn off your brain for a little bit, this is a perfect show. After 14 years of being off the air, this classic 90s show is coming back to television. If it ends up having the same originality and brain-cell-killing stupidity as before, but with updated references and current topics, all I can say is that I recommend it.

Red Dead Redemption (2010 Video Game)

The Wild West is back

[9/10 · 19 October 2011]

Read Dead Redemption is an open-world, first person shooter set in the American old west in the year 1911. This game, simply said, is amazing. The plot, characters, action, and scenery are all very impressive. You play John Marston, a retired outlaw who wants to give up his old criminal ways in pursuit of a quiet life with his family, but finds that the government is forcing him to go after former members of his gang. I find the theme of the game similar to GTA IV's—you can never truly escape your past.

Some have called this "GTA set in the old west," and while it's very similar to Rockstar's most popular series, it has a very different feel to it. Not set in a bustling, dirty city, and instead in a wild, diverse landscape, RDR is a beautiful game. The graphics are excellent, and you can travel from a Mexican desert to a snowy redwood forest all without a loading screen. The map is huge, and you can always fast-travel, but I wholeheartedly recommend using your horse so you can enjoy the graphics or even find a few extras. There is plenty of shooting to be done as bad guys run amok in this lawless country. There is a wide range of guns and other weapons to choose from, so killing people is always fun. I found their Deadeye system, kind of like Fallout 3's VATS, a good way of changing up the traditional point-and-shoot method. The online multiplayer is pretty fun, but I found most of my enjoyment came from the single player campaign.

Like most of Rockstar's games, the game isn't very replayable. You don't make many decisions that affect the storyline, so the ending is the same every time. However, you can still get hours and hours of gameplay out of RDR by doing all the sidequests and extras without it feeling repetitive. It's not as easy to go on rampages and kill random people like in GTA, but something that I found just as fun was getting on your horse and simply riding around the landscape, seeing who or what you run into. The characters, especially Marston, have complex backstories, and I actually found myself sympathetic towards his intentions. The game is overall amazing. Full of drama, comedy, action, and a biting critique of the traditional way of thinking about the "American dream," this game is a must-play.

Regular Show (2010–2017)

Yet another fresh, hilarious cartoon on Cartoon Network

[9/10 · 18 October 2011]

I have to say that I'm loving Cartoon Network's new style of shows. Chowder, The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack, Adventure Time… and of course Regular Show. A surreal animated series created by J. G. Quintel, Regular Show is anything but your regular show. It stars a walking, talking blue jay named Mordecai and his best friend Rigby the raccoon who work as groundskeepers at the city park. They are very lazy and constantly get into trouble to the distraught of their boss Benson. Some criticize it for being too random and for having mature themes for a kid's cartoon, but it is because of this that I think it's clever and original.

The animation is well done, clear, and very colorful, an overall treat for the eyes. The characters have great chemistry with one another and are completely original (a hotheaded gumball machine, an albino yeti who skips everywhere). The humor in the show is very clever and witty, and the plots are creative. While there isn't much continuity (characters never seem to reference specific events that happened in previous episodes), the characters have a reliable routine episode to episode, often centered on Mordecai and Rigby somehow doing something that will destroy the park. Many characters only make a one-time appearance, but this also means that each episode has a different plot and at least one new character from the last. This show is fun, fresh, and short, being only 11 minutes an episode.

I would say this cartoon is definitely not for Cartoon Network's younger audience. The language was the first thing that surprised me. The characters say things like "crap" and "this sucks" or "this blows" all the time, something I've never heard before on Cartoon Network outside of Adult Swim. There is even references to drinking alcohol and partying, and some suggestive sexual themes. The imagery can sometimes be scary for a children's show as the characters often get injured, and sometimes even die, graphically. However, for young adults I think this show is hilarious. I only hope CN turns out more shows like this in the near future.

Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job! (2007–2017)

Chaotic, outrageous, and awesome!

[9/10 · 17 October 2011]

Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job! lies at the extreme end of the comedy spectrum spectrum. Never before I have I seen a show that maxes out on outrageousness, goofiness, and non-jokes as this one does. A surrealistic, satirical campy sketch show hosted by comedians Tim Heidecker and Eric Wareheim, this show cannot get any more ridiculous, and that is why I love it.

Tim and Eric is a parody show, but what does it parody? The simple answer is everything. From faux-commercials, to news programs, to random musical numbers, the viewer soon finds that Tim and Eric does not spare anyone. Many reoccurring actors and guest stars make sure that each episode, and more importantly each sketch segment, is radically different from the last. Even mid-segment the mood can drastically change, going say from a campy mattress commercial to a demonically dark dream sequence. With outrageous, completely unbelievable characters and plenty of just as ridiculous costumes and makeup, the visuals alone are enough to have me cracking up. Though there is hardly a coherent plot, each episode does an overall theme that more or less connects the individual sketches to one another.

I fully understand that Tim and Eric is not for everyone. Most will probably find it way too over the top, but it is exactly because of that I find it original and enjoyable. Though their show is very chaotic, after watching a few episodes one will see that Tim and Eric have created their own extravagant world, complete with overlapping and reoccurring characters and stories. Cinco, Channel 5 News, and Spagett are just a few of things that the viewer will find in Tim and Eric. This is definitely a show that I had to give a few episodes, but after I gave it a chance I can see why it has a cult following. I now eagerly await Tim and Eric's Billion Dollar Movie, which I hope will be every bit as outrageous and surreal as their show.

The Colony (2009– )

A realistic interpretation of what could really happen in a post-apocalyptic world

[10/10 · 16 October 2011]

A question that many of us ask, but few seriously consider, is what would the world be like after society collapsed? The Colony, a reality television show on Discovery, addresses just this, and I have to say it far surpassed any expectations I had for a reality show.

In both seasons, The Colony takes a group of a dozen people or so, each with a specific skill that may or may not be useful for survival—electrical engineering, medicine, even modeling. They tell these people that a virus has wiped out 90% of the Earth's population and that they must band together to try and rebuild society. They start with the basics like food, water, and shelter, but as the season progresses, the survivors get more creative and intricate with their colony and start building things for self-defense and electricity. Season 1 took place in an abandoned warehouse in Los Angeles, while season 2 was in a hurricane-ravaged neighborhood in New Orleans. Though the colonists obviously know they aren't in any real danger, the obstacles they must overcome are very real, and it only takes them the first few days to forget that they are, in fact, in a reality show. If society was to collapse as described in the show, I think The Colony offers a genuine look into how people would respond to the stresses of rebuilding society.

This post-apocalyptic reality show is as real as you can get without putting the contestants in any real danger. They're pushed to their limits, and never once does the crew step in to help them. Actors are even hired to harass our colonists, as gangs and marauders constantly attack the colony, never giving the survivors a moments rest. The Colony is recommended for survivalist fanatics or any person looking for an original, realistic reality show.

The Walking Dead (2010–2022)

More than just a zombie television show

[9/10 · 14 October 2011]

This is more than just your average zombie show. The Walking Dead, on top of its action filled gore, also has drama, some comedy, and believable characters. The writing and acting makes us, the audience, actually believe that this is how survivors would react if society collapsed to a zombie apocalypse. The characters have complex backgrounds and relationships with one another, so the moments between when they're killing zombies are actually interesting.

The costumes and effects are top notch. The zombies look authentic, all without the use of CGI. They do an excellent job of making this post-apocalyptic world look chaotic and utterly destroyed, and most importantly real. This isn't your average B-movie zombie program, or even (no offense to George Romero fans) another Night of the Living Dead knockoff. Every episode is different from the others, so it isn't just the same mindless zombie killing routine every time. Not only is The Walking Dead a great show, but it being a zombie television show period is something that, in my knowledge, hasn't been done before, at least successfully.

I'm looking forward to the second season starting up. I heard that they fired most of the writers over the summer, and on that I don't know why. I just hope that this doesn't screw thing up too much, and if they just keep doing what they were doing first season, I think that season 2 shouldn't disappoint.

Encounters at the End of the World (2007)

A stunning documentary about a very little known place

[9/10 · 13 October 2011]

Encounters at the End of the World is a beautiful, visually stunning documentary about the End of the World, also known as Antarctica. Directed by renowned filmmaker Werner Herzog, it explores two aspects about this little known continent: the freezing and ethereal environment which dominates the landscape, and the few humans that have made temporary residence in the American McMurdo base.

From the dark underwater depths of the Southern Ocean, to an active volcano in the Transantarctic Mountains, to the bustling scientific community of McMurdo, Herzog seems to explore all there is to see in Antarctica. With plenty of breathtaking camera shots and a soft, instrumental soundtrack, Herzog does a good job of conveying the emotions associated with this strange land to the viewer. An interview with a linguist on a continent with no language, a penguin walking in the opposite direction of the ocean to most likely die—there's something extraordinary about this film.

Many people criticize Herzog for his cynical views on human civilization. Even though he is a peculiar man, I find that it actually adds to the documentary. Herzog is exploring the only continent on which there are no permanent human residents, and his alternative way of looking at things allows the audience to experience Antarctic nature from a different perspective. Not as a wild landscape that needs to be conquered, but a fragile, otherworldly environment in which the very presence of humans is destroying it.

I very much recommend this film to any documentary lover, or anyone interested in getting to know a little more about the 7th continent. So many people don't know anything about this seemingly different world (except for that's where penguins live), and Herzog does a great job of exploring the highlights of what Antarctica has to offer.

Troll 2 (1990)

Do I give it a "1" because it was so bad, or a "10" because it was so good?

[1/10 · 12 October 2011]

You often hear of movies that are so bad that they're good. It's hard to point to a single movie that is like this though. What some may say is "so good it's bad" may come off to others as just plain bad. However, everyone I have talked to who has seen this movie has agreed: Troll 2 is so horribly, shamelessly bad, that it is good.

The writing for film is more than awkward (take the redundant "Stonehenge Magic Stone"), and the character dialogue sounds so incredibly unnatural they might as well be robots. The reason for this is because the man who wrote the script and directed it, Claudio Fragasso, is a native speaker of Italian. He wrote the script in English when English was (barely) his second language. The acting is absolutely terrible, but who can blame them? This was most likely the first (and last) film any of these actors have been in.

The costumes and special effects have that wonderful B-movie quality to them. While there are many blaringly obvious errors, I find that the smaller ones are actually funnier. Actors shaking when time is supposed to be "frozen," or flies on their face during the climatic scenes. There are so many continuity mistakes that I sometimes found myself wondering if the director was putting them in on purpose. It was like every time the camera shot changed, the crew completely forgot how the previous shot was set up, and had the actors give their best guess on where they're supposed to be.

I think everyone needs to see at least a few horrible movies in their lifetime. Troll 2 is entertaining and hilarious, especially when watched with friends. The plot is ludicrous, but at least you never know what's going to happen next. Many scenes seem completely unnecessary, and this film simply does not bother to justify any of the things that happen in it. The end result is a horror B-movie that ends up being so horrible that you can't help but laugh. The only question I find myself asking now is do I give it a "1" because it was so bad, or a "10" because it was so good?

Children of Men (2006)

A beautifully grim future

[10/10 · 11 October 2011]

Based on a 1992 dystopian novel, Children of Men is one of the most well made science fiction film of the 2000s, if not one of the most well made films period. Clive Owen plays Theo, a government bureaucrat who, through happenstance, finds himself the reluctant hero to what could very well be humankind's last hope. With an all-star cast of Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, and Michael Caine, the acting in this movie does not disappoint.

The idea of this movie is so seemingly simple and far-fetched—"What if humankind became infertile"— and yet Alfonso Cuarón does such a good job of making this nightmarish world a reality. It takes place in the year 2027, but unlike other futuristic films, Children of Men depicts the technology of the future as not too different from ours. This is often my complaint of movies that take place in the near future: the technology is ridiculously over advanced. This movie focuses more on social changes, such as societal collapse and role of the government, while having enough small technological differences to keep reminding the viewer that it is a future that could be just right around the corner.

And, of course, the cinematography of this film. If not known for anything else, Children of Men was praised for its several uses of single-shot sequences, the longest of which was a seven-minute battle scene. The effects and overall style of the world in Children of Men are excellent, and the camera always makes sure it is in the right place to make the audience feel as engrossed in the movie as they possible can. The unrelenting poverty and urban decay adds as a constant reminder that humankind is on its last breath. The visuals are stunning, and the soundtrack of the movie fits perfectly.

This film has several religious and cultural themes to it, but I feel that some viewers can never be aware of them and still enjoy it. The action, drama, and strangely enough comedy should be enough for any moviegoer, casual or otherwise. Cuarón does an exceptional job bringing this depressing but beautiful interpretation of the future to life, and I recommend it as one of the best films of the 2000s.

A Hard Day's Night (1964)

Ladies and Gentlemen: the Beatles!

[8/10 · 9 October 2011]

If you go into the movie expecting more than a few great musical numbers and some good uncomplicated fun, you will be disappointed. The plot is simple—it is all about the Beatles preparing for an upcoming show. This simplicity, however, allows the audience to truly experience John, Paul, George, and Ringo in all their unrestrained quirkiness. We get to see what the Beatles lives are like in between shows, exaggerated of course. The lack of a full plot actually adds to the comedy, something that not many films do successfully.

Even though the dialogue is scripted and the situations they find themselves in are ridiculous, I feel that there are times in the movie where we are actually getting an inside look at the life of the Beatles. Alun Owen, the screenplay writer, spent some time traveling with the band, and concluded their lives are like "a train and a room and a car and a room and a room and a room," never slowing down and never resting. I think this movie portrays that aspect of the Beatles life quite well; they never seem to be in the same place for more than an instant.

Overall, this movie was a fun time with this wacky band. The acting was done pretty well by the Fab Four, and Paul's weasel of a grandpa was especially fun to watch. The soundtrack was great—it's the Beatles of course. If you go in without any expectations of a fully formed storyline, you should be pleasantly pleased.

Cosmos (1980)

One of the greatest educational programs of all time

[10/10 · 8 October 2011]

From the Big Bang to the first humans, from the smallest atoms to the grandest of galaxies, Cosmos: A Personal Voyage does it all. Carl Sagan, an astronomer and one of the greatest popularizers of science of all time, addresses in this 13 episode series some of the more profound questions that humans sometimes find themselves asking. "How did we get here?" "What lies out in space beyond the Earth?" Sagan does it all through a scientific point of view, while still keeping it personal and easy to understand for the audience.

Don't think that just because Cosmos is from 1980 that it is outdated. It is a very well done series, and the themes that it addresses are just as relevant to today's world as it was when this program first came out. While it mostly focuses on scientific topics such as space exploration, evolution, and the human brain, it also brings up topics like nuclear disarmament and the danger of believing in superstition. While Sagan makes sure that every statement he says is supported by evidence, he is not afraid to say that, at least at the time, there are some things in the universe that science simply does not know.

Using plenty of visuals and layman's terms, Sagan does a good job to make sure the viewer doesn't feel alienated from the complex issues that this series tackles. Cosmos is not some cold educational program. It is also very emotional, showing us how small we are in the universe and how fragile our planet actually is. Watching this series has allowed me to understand some basic things about the universe that I never even considered—"In order to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe." I wholeheartedly recommend this program to any human capable of thinking. Even if you think science is only something that a small, eggheaded elite can understand, watching Cosmos: A Personal Voyage should be more than enough to change your mind, and give you more of an idea exactly what our place is in the universe.

Arrested Development (2003–2019)

After five years off the air, it's finally coming back!

[10/10 · 7 October 2011]

The most likely reason Arrested Development wasn't so popular when it came out was that you have to watch the few first episodes to truly appreciate its humor. Viewers went in expecting side-splitting comedy from the get go, but when all they got was a dysfunctional family in uncomfortable situations, most people didn't want to give it their patience. Once you get about a third through the first season though, you find that the humor exponentially rises with each episode. Because of a beautiful thing called "continuity," each episode perfectly builds up on the last, resulting in a constant flow of inside jokes that viewers can laugh at—if they've seen the prior episodes.

All the characters, even the most minor ones, are funny and original. From awkward George Michael to no-nonsense lawyer Bob Loblaw to jock meathead Steve Holt!, what else can you do but laugh when you see these outlandish characters interacting (or more like trying to interact) with one another? The ludicrous, unique, and more than often uncomfortable situations that these people find themselves in makes for your better-than-average TV sitcom.

I'm more than happy that it's coming back for another season and a movie. After five years of Arrested Development being off the air, all I can find myself saying is "Finally!"

Just Go with It (2011)

A predictable and stale "comedy"

[4/10 · 6 October 2011]

I used to like Adam Sandler's movies. Billy Madison, The Wedding Singer, even 50 First Dates. They were funny, and though they weren't in the least sense intellectually stimulating, they were at least entertaining. I can't say any of these things about Just Go With It. This is one of my least favorite movies of 2011, and that's no exaggeration.

This is a "brainless comedy," only without the comedy. The jokes are stale and have been done countless times in other, better movies. The plot is disjointed and unbelievable. The reason the audience suspends their disbelief is so they can be rewarded with comedy, or in the very least some form of entertainment, but when that isn't provided, all we are left with is a very pathetic Adam Sandler trying to impress some random woman so he can (I guess?) marry her. The characters are as dumb as can be, and none of the main actors Adam Sandler, Jennifer Aniston, or Brooklyn Decker share chemistry. It seems like none of the characters can think five minutes into the future, which has the potential to be funny if the audience wasn't expected to feel sympathetic towards Adam Sandler's character. Save your time, for this could very well be Adam Sandler's worst film yet.

Dexter (2006–2013)

Sixth season and still going strong

[9/10 · 5 October 2011]

Dexter is, without a doubt, one of my favorite television shows currently on the air, in its sixth season and still going strong. It is a crime mystery told from the killer's point of view but, unlike any other dark show or movie of its kind, actually has the audience rooting for the macabre protagonist of the series, Dexter Morgan.

Set in the extravagant city of Miami, Dexter uses his job as a blood splatter analyst at the police department as a way to find info about his next victim. But Dexter has a code: he only kills those who are guilty of killing innocents, but who have, for one reason or another, slipped through the cracks of the justice system. Dark, dramatic, action-packed, and often morbidly humorous, this show is bound to please.

The acting and writing is top notch. Michael C. Hall's performance is phenomenal—he acts a demented serial killer who, in turn, has to act like an everyday joe in order to blend in with society. Dexter lacks things that most other people possess, like feelings, morals, and a sense of connection with other humans. Through his constant struggle to control his desire to murder, one episode of Dexter can show us, the audience, more about the dark side of human nature than most other television shows can do in a season.