Friday, January 30, 2009

Worlds Are (Awesomely) Colliding!

Men are different from women.

There, I said it!

And I'm not just talking physically, I mean in their likes and tastes, as well. I can't tell you the number of times my wife and I have argued whether we were going to watch a movie about princesses, unicorns, flowers and the Victorian era, or whether we're going to watch a movie with monsters, explosions, slow-motion coolness and John McClane.

Seriously, I don't get women's obsession with the Victorian era. Sure there are pretty dresses and fancy balls, but remember that under those dresses are VERY uncomfortable corsets and a SEVERE lack of deodorant used in those crowded dance halls.

However, to be honest, if I was trapped in a building with terrorists, I don't think I'd be stripping down to my undershirt and shouting "Yippie-Ki-Yay" at the top of my lungs, either.

But I'm glad to say that there has been a beautiful melding of the Victorian and the awesome. The middle ground has finally been created. Seth Grahame-Smith has taken it upon himself to blend the worlds of Jane Austen and George A. Romero. Who is George A. Romero, you ask? Well, you ignorant dolt, he's the father of the modern zombie!

Anyway, without further ado. . .

I present to you,

"Pride and Prejudice and Zombies."

No, I am not making this up. No, this isn't too good to be true. It was sent to me by, alert reader, Jeff Tromphlin. The synopsis goes something like this:

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies features the original text of Jane Austen's beloved novel with all-new scenes of bone-crunching zombie action. As our story opens, a mysterious plague has fallen upon the quiet English village of Meryton--and the dead are returning to life! Feisty heroine Elizabeth Bennet is determined to wipe out the zombie menace, but she's soon distracted by the arrival of the haughty and arrogant Mr. Darcy. What ensues is a delightful comedy of manners with plenty of civilized sparring between the two young lovers--and even more violent sparring on the blood-soaked battlefield as Elizabeth wages war against hordes of flesh-eating undead. Complete with 20 illustrations in the style of C. E. Brock (the original illustrator of Pride and Prejudice), this insanely funny expanded edition will introduce Jane Austen's classic novel to new legions of fans.

Wow! Just. . .just wow. I've read another book authored by Mr. Grahame-Smith and was quite entertained by it. And I have high hopes for this one.

Finally, the worlds of men and women can be combined! My wife and I can read this book together and grow closer as we share our feelings about heartache and heart-eating. It'll be beautiful.

I can't wait for the movie!

Thursday, January 22, 2009

And the "Winner" Is. . .

Ok, so the Oscar nominations are in.

I have my own opinions about their stupid, terrible, horrible and dumb choices, but I'll keep them to myself until you've formed your own opinions.

See the list here:

Done reading? Ok then. . .

[ rant ]

WHAT IS THE ACADEMY THINKING??? They are SO out of touch with reality! They constantly choose films that 1. No one has seen and 2. No one CARES ABOUT! If the Academy is so concerned about getting viewers to watch their award show, then they should try to stop being such film snobs and choose films that audiences have seen and want to see!

Now, I'm not saying that the general public will always watch films that are worthy of praise. Heaven only knows why some directors keep getting box office revenue. But so many films were overlooked by the Academy while others got nominations in every single category! The nomination list gets redundant and tedious even before you get to the boring/made-up categories (seriously, sound mixing AND sound editing?).

I've had a mild interest in seeing Benjamin Button, but after 13 (THIRTEEN!!) nominations I still only have mild interest in seeing it. I've had friends who have seen it and said it wasn't that good, anyway.

Changeling (which has nothing to do with the awesomely creepy horror film of 1979) only got a 59% on Rotten Tomatoes (which is considered "rotten") meaning that most critics out there didn't like it and with only
$35,707,327 at the box office it looks like the public didn't care that much for it, either. . .and yet it got an Oscar nomination. Iron Man got a 93%, made $318,298,180 at the box office and it was only nominated for Sound Editing and Visual Effects. Nice.

I'm constantly bothered by how the Academy picks films that deal with wartime. If it's set during World War II it is more likely to get an award than one that isn't. Other bothersome favoritism happens when they give awards to films that deal with the mafia, biographical flicks, or films that deal with controversial material. If it's nominated solely because it deals with one of these subjects, then it's a stupid nomination.

Also, and this happens a lot, I am bothered by the severe lack of comedic films nominated. I know I've talked about this briefly before, but I truly believe that it's harder to make someone laugh then it is to make them cry. Sure, I can't say there were a lot of good comedies that I saw this year, but still - the Academy needs to recognize how hard it is to write and perform good comedy!

The one shining star in this list of hum-drum picks was Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight. His performance gave us a character that was frightening, humorous and even vulnerable at times.

And while The Joker was an amazing character, the film was one of the best-reviewed films of 2008 (94% on Rotten Tomatoes)! It was well-received by critics, it did amazing at the box office
$530.9 million) and yet it was pushed out of the Best Picture category by films such as Frost/Nixon (91% on Rotten Tomatoes and only $8,777,776 box office gross), Milk (92% on Rotten Tomatoes and only $20,543,583 box office gross) and The Reader (60% on Rotten Tomatoes and only $7,808,169 box office gross). HUH? I wish Slumdog Millionaire the best because it is the ONLY film in that category that I feel deserves a win!!

The Academy SERIOUSLY needs an overhaul! I'm now more convinced that they choose these films because they AREN'T being watched and that they were paid off by the filmmakers to nominate them so people would actually go to theaters (because if it's nominated then it must be good, right? Right??) and pay to see these depressing and dull films!

If the Academy keeps moving further and further away from what the public wants, then they can't be surprised when the Academy Awards becomes a private ceremony for Hollywood that isn't televised because NO ONE will want to watch it!

[ /rant ]


Anyway, your thoughts?

Saturday, January 17, 2009

Don't Judge a Movie by Its Cover

Many times I have asked someone "Have you seen [insert film title here]?"

And they say something to the effect of "I've only seen parts of it on TV as I was listening to my iPod, eating food, and walking in and out of the room."

Then I'll say "You should watch the whole thing. It's pretty good."

And they'll say "Nah. I basically already know what it's all about. It's not that good. I didn't like it."

This entertaining video shows why that argument doesn't work:

Moral of the story: If you haven't seen the film, you may not know the whole story. . .and people will laugh at you.

Sunday, January 11, 2009

Roads? Where We're Going We Don't Need Roads


I'm pretty excited about this article about flying cars that I just read.

Flying cars??!?? I mean, it's not even 2015 yet!

Sure, this could make things more dangerous (especially if 16-year-olds are allowed behind the wheel), but that's probably the exact same thing they said about the automobile when it was invented - with awesomeness, there always comes a price.

And it only takes 15 seconds to convert it from a car to a plane! That's a fraction of the time it took me to get Optimus Prime back into his semi-truck form!

Now, flying cars are cool and all, but I'll tell you the real reason I'm excited about this. . . with flying cars already within our grasp, that means that the hoverboard is only a few steps away!!!

HUZZAH! Let's all start wearing our pants inside out!

Thursday, January 1, 2009

Coolest Find of the Year (So Far)!

A Choose Your Own Adventure You Tube video!

Sure, it's cheesy, but it was fun to do and I think it's the start of a trend of these kind of videos.

(NOTE: If you're having issues with your pop-up blocker not letting you choose your course of action, hold down Ctrl when you click on the choice. If that doesn't work, then tell your browser to allow pop-ups from If you don't want to do that, just go to the direct link for this video on You Tube. And if you don't want to do that. . .why are you trying out this post in the first place? :) )