Monday, January 25, 2010

Tooth Fairy' Movie Review




Tooth Fairy proves Dwayne Johnson will do just about anything to try and get a laugh. Don a pink tutu? No problem. Put on a pair of fairy wings and act like you're six inches tall? He's down with that also. Johnson used to be an action movie stud, but now it's all about entertaining the kiddies. Does Tooth Fairy accomplish that? Yes. Kids will most likely get a kick out of Johnson's antics in this family friendly comedy with a message.
And speaking of that message...Yes, it's great to have dreams and believe in yourself - and fairies. But a sledgehammer's used to pound home these themes to the point where adults may say enough already before Tooth Fairy's halfway over. Watching Tooth Fairy isn't as painful as having dental work performed (the title begs the comparison), but it's still not an experience adults need to sit through unless they're really into Dwayne Johnson, fairies, or have to take a kid to the movies. A scattering of smart jokes are lost amid a silly story in this predictable, campy comedy.

The Story
Johnson stars as a former big league now fading minor league hockey player affectionately known as The Tooth Fairy. Why? Come on, do you really need to ask? It's because he hits people so hard their teeth fly out of their mouths. And this is encouraged and applauded in his hockey league.

Derek's over the hill and on the downside of his hockey career, and the young stud on the team reminds him of that fact at every turn. This is a silly part of the storyline, so pay no attention to it. More important to note is that Derek has no problem shattering kids' dreams. When he almost tells his girlfriend's young daughter there is no tooth fairy, he's quickly shushed and then chastised. His tactlessness, and his penchant for bringing youngsters down, earns him a summons to Fairy Land. Fairy Land is ruled over by Julie Andrews. I don't think she's playing a character; I believe Andrews is in fact the queen of Fairy Land. She looks perfect in her wings and fairy costume



Derek's punishment for discouraging dreaming, and for stealing the money left by the 'tooth fairy' under his girlfriend's daughter's pillow in order to play poker (because $1 is going to go really far in a poker game), is to serve as the tooth fairy. For two weeks Derek's at the beck and call of his mentor, Tracy (Stephen Merchant), and those two weeks are pure hell for Derek. Equipped with fairy dust, amnesia powder, cat repellent, shrinking cream and a spray that makes him invisible, Derek has to go wherever he's called to pick up a tooth. And he has to go quickly since as soon as he's paged, he sprouts wings. And even though his nickname's The Tooth Fairy, hockey fans just wouldn't be into a 6' something hockey ruffian with gossamer wings.

So, Derek trudges through his sentence, complaining all the way, and totally not getting the lesson the fairies are attempting to pound into his head. But you know from the moment he gets the summons there will come that one pivotal moment when everything clicks and Derek the Tooth Fairy becomes Derek the Considerate, Fairy-Loving Man.

The Bottom Line
The reason to watch Tooth Fairy isn't to see the hockey action. There's a good amount of time spent on the ice, but it's not all that thrilling. If you've seen one hockey game on film, you've seen the sport portrayed better than it is in Tooth Fairy. It's also not to see the cutesy love story between Johnson and Ashley Judd, because that just doesn't work at all. They are too polite to be romantically involved. And the kids in this film, while fine, are disposable characters. The reason to see Tooth Fairy is to watch the scenes with Dwayne Johnson and Stephen Merchant. This is when the film gets cooking. The writing's snappier in the scenes in which Johnson and Merchant torment each other. Tooth Fairy's credits list five screenwriters, and whoever it was assigned the task of writing the dialogue for Merchant and Johnson did a bang-up job. The rest of the dialogue sounds as though it was written by committee.

"Dwayne Johnson, Stephen Merchant and Julie Andrews in Tooth Fairy"

Dwayne Johnson, Stephen Merchant and Julie Andrews in 'Tooth Fairy.'
© 20th Century Fox
This is definitely a Dwayne Johnson film, but credit Merchant for saving this movie from being unwatchable. Merchant's absolutely terrific as a non-winged fairy assigned to teaching Johnson the fairy ropes. Tooth Fairy could have been completely forgettable had it not been for the comic timing of Merchant, and his ability to bring out the best in Johnson whenever they share the screen.

'Edge of Darkness'


Movie Synopsis: Thomas Craven (Mel Gibson) is a veteran homicide detective for the Boston Police Department and a single father. When his only child, twenty-four year-old Emma (Bojana Novakovic), is murdered on the steps of his home, everyone assumes that he was the target. But he soon suspects otherwise, and embarks on a mission to find out about his daughter’s secret life and her killing. His investigation leads him into a dangerous, looking glass world of corporate cover-ups, government collusion and murder – and to shadowy government operative Darius Jedburgh (Ray Winstone), who has been sent in to clean up the evidence. Craven’s solitary search for answers about his daughter’s death transforms into an odyssey of emotional discovery and redemption.

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Princess and the Frog, The (2009)


* Genre: Animation, Comedy, Family
* Running Time: 95 min.
* MPAA Rating: G
* Director: Ron Clements, Rob Edwards
* Writer: Ron Clements, Rob Edwards
* Cast: Anika Noni Rose, Bruno Campos, Keith David, John Goodman, Jenifer Lewis, Ritchie Montgomery, Jennifer Cody

Synopsis

Walt Disney Animation Studios presents the musical "The Princess and the Frog," an animated comedy set in the great city of New Orleans. From the creators of "The Little Mermaid" and "Aladdin" comes a modern twist on a classic tale, featuring a beautiful girl named Tiana, a frog prince who desperately wants to be human again, and a fateful kiss that leads them both on a hilarious adventure through the mystical bayous of Louisiana.

Halloween II (2009)


* Genre: Horror, Action/Adventure
* Running Time: 101 min.
* MPAA Rating: R
* Director: Rob Zombie
* Writer: Rob Zombie
* Cast: Tyler Mane, Malcolm McDowell, Brad Dourif, Scout Taylor-Compton, Sheri Moon Zombie, Danielle Harris, Brea Grant, Margot Kidder, Howard Hesseman, Angela Trimbur

Synopsis

It is that time of year again, and Michael Myers has returned home to sleepy Haddonfield, Ill., to take care of some unfinished family business. Unleashing a trail of terror, Myers will stop at nothing to bring closure to the secrets of his twisted past. But, the town's got an unlikely new hero, if they can only stay alive long enough to stop the unstoppable.

To Save a Life (2009)


* Genre: Drama
* Running Time: 120 min.
* MPAA Rating: PG-13
* Director: Brian Baugh
* Writer: Jim Britts
* Cast: Randy Wayne, Deja Kreutzberg, Robert Bailey Jr., Joshua Weigel, Kim Hidalgo, Sean Michael Afable, Bubba Lewis, Steven Crowder




Synopsis

Jake Taylor has it all: friends, fame, a basketball scholarship and the hottest girl in school. What could be better? Enter Roger Dawson. Roger has nothing. No friends. No hope. Nothing but putdowns and getting pushed aside. Things couldn't get worse...could they? Jake and Roger were best friends when they were kids. But the politics of high school quickly pulled them apart. Now Roger doesn't fit in Jake's - or anyone's circle - and he's had enough. He walks onto campus with a gun in his pocket and pain in his heart and makes a tragic move. Jake's last-ditch effort can't stop Roger, and the sudden tragedy rocks Jake's world.

Friday, January 15, 2010

gang,s of new york

Martin Scorcese’s latest film, GANGS OF NEW YORK, is a raw and sprawling epic that teaches memorable lessons about the early development of the United States. Aside from the striking history, however, the filmmakers stretch the thin plot until it sags and almost snaps.

Mr. Scorcese offers us a richness of images and ideas in this work; his methods and results, like the subject matter of immigration and struggle, are about plurality. GANGS demonstrates the director’s mastery of camera work, scene movement, and symbolism. Opening in lower Manhattan in 1846, the narrative shows us the gang war preparations of the Dead Rabbits, a slew of hardened Irish immigrants and their offspring. Led by Priest Vallon (Irishman Liam Neeson playing an Irishman!), the Rabbits and other “foreign” factions run up against a confederation of gangs calling themselves “native Americans.” This motley consortium is led by one Bill Cutting, the “Butcher” (Daniel Day-Lewis). Toward the end of a thrilling battle scene that leaves blood and bodies across a large section of Five Points, Cutting dispatches Vallon as Vallon’s son watches.

Cut to 16 years later, when the boy, who calls himself Amsterdam, leaves the Hellsgate orphanage. It’s not hard to predict that his consuming mission will be to kill the man who killed his father. (Neither is it hard to recall other plots that feature an exiled character returning for revenge!)
A fault of the film lies in the prolonged extension of this premise: two and a half hours later we are still waiting for an end to the boy’s vendetta against the Butcher. I should add, however, that Scorcese twice avoids clichéd conclusions to this conflict. And this fresh approach ensures the impact of the story.

Stories like GANGS need good villains, and Daniel Day-Lewis portrays the most impressive bad guy in recent memory. His Bill Cutting is so many things: gang leader and crime boss, actual butcher and political bedfellow of Boss Tweed (Jim Broadbent), patriotic bigot and overt murderer. Wielding his cleavers, tapping the misshapen pupil of his glass eye with a knife tip, feverishly sharpening his blades on the long steel, Cutting falls just short of cartoonish in his characterization. Yet every year he commemorates the battle in which he defeated Vallon and forever banned even the mention of the Dead Rabbits. Most curiously, he seems obsessive about honoring Vallon’s memory; of course this preoccupation emphasizes Amsterdam’s shame at not assassinating the Butcher upon first sighting him. Clearly Day-Lewis is one of the finest actors working, and the hatred spewed by the Butcher prods along this plot and keeps matters interesting.

Leonardo DiCaprio also proves himself very capable in the role of Priest Vallon’s heir. DiCaprio’s acting is steady throughout the piece, and his character’s patience helps hold the narrative together when historical asides break in later.

Similar to DiCaprio’s performance, Cameron Diaz’s role as Jennie is solid but not brilliant. The part seems to have been written both as love interest for Amsterdam – at first reluctant but later devoted – and catalyst for jealousy. Diaz plays a canny pickpocket and mysterious follower of Bill Cutting, and engages our interest as the events of the time rip apart the lives around her.

If the American Civil War served as the birth pangs that delivered the full body and soul of our nation, then the Draft Riots of 1863 in New York City were surely some of the most difficult complications of the gestation. In a wonderful condensed scene, we witness Irish immigrants come off the boat, sign themselves into both citizenship and the Union army, and then, changed into the blue uniforms, climb aboard another ship bound southward for battle. The clincher is the ship’s crane unloading coffins from the same deck that is now filling with replacement soldiers. The message is clear that it was unfair to conscript those who did not have $300 to buy out of service. Later Scorcese sketches a moving map of the actual streets in which the protestors rioted, looted and lynched. Further, a stroke of genius appears in the way the director incorporates the government’s response to the riots into the final confrontation between gangs.

I found the computer generation to be both amazing and mildly disturbing. When are we watching real objects, and when are we fooled by fakery? I do appreciate the long virtual vistas of what the city may have looked like 140 years in the past. But a few of the shots appear plastic, and I still have not seen wholly convincing fire created by digitalization. What is plainly impressive is the actual set, built in Italy, resembling several blocks of the decaying barns, buildings, churches and even caves of early New York.

The film is every bit deserving of its R rating, for language (and some of the slang fascinating!), nudity, and especially violence. GANGS OF NEW YORK had been in the mind of its director since the late 1970’s, and now fully realized, stands as a graphic and gutsy historical study of politics and human spirit. Admirable for its brutal honesty, if a bit over-the-top at times, the film is a must-see for fans of Martin Scorcese as well as of American history.

Resident Evil

To begin with let’s forget about Romero, let’s take the Dead Trilogy and store it in the back of our minds for awhile for further usage. Although "Resident Evil" does draw a lot of influence from the classic trilogy it is not a part of it and you should not expect to see the same film. In a lot of ways it will be very disappointing to many people, especially those who read the original script.
However, "Resident Evil" has proven to be able to hold its own, without blatantly drawing from Romero. Through all its faults of which there were a few, I’ll admit, the film turned out to be a pretty fun flick. Just don’t expect to reinvent the wheel, it is Hollywood after all.

The story begins at ground zero of the whole T-Virus fiasco, which is probably why it was subtitled Ground Zero throughout most of production. It doesn’t take long at all to get into the film; right from the beginning you see how the T-Virus is let loose. From there it’s all down hill, that’s where the Red Queen comes in. The Red Queen is the Security System that you’ll love; you’ll hate, and will want to fry yourself by the time the movie ends. The Red Queen is thought to have gone insane and started to kill off its workers. However you begin to realize that the Queen is actually humanities best friend. Seeing as she’s the only one containing the virus down in The Hive.

Once containment begins, so does the violence. When I say violence don’t expect to see boatloads of blood shed either. Violence means death and destruction only. However bloodless it is, it does seem to create some damn good situations.
This includes the flooding in of some of the offices which make for some kick ass zombies later on.

Ah and the next scenes are quite nice, as you meet Milla’s character who is well, butt ass naked. Don’t get too excited though, this isn’t a porno flick, and we all know it cost a lot more these days to get actresses to show some tits. After that you begin to sense things with her aren’t exactly kosher either. Her memory is gone, and she’s sitting on top of a building full of dead bodies. This is where the obligatory commando’s come in, not the S.T.A.R.S. like in the game, but a group of elite soldiers trained by The Umbrella Corp. As chaos ensues we find a man posing as a cop, which the commando’s take hostage simply because he looks suspicious. Then you have Milla’s husband who was also brainwashed, a la Men in Black. From there on it’s a simple get in and get out operation. I’ll let you see for yourself.

One of the biggest worries people had about the film were the zombies, the CGI, and the story. Well let me start with the best first. I must say this, and I can hear the flames crackling in the background. The zombies in "Resident Evil" are the best zombies ever. Bold statement I know, but I don’t regret it. Romero’s army of the dead can’t hold a flame to these friggin’ nasties. The whole lot of them looked nasty as hell, and had creepiness about them. However don’t expect to be trembling; it’s not that kind of flick. Its frights are mostly stinger based much to my disappointment. The attacks however are varied, unlike many movies in recent years, Anderson’s prior work included. With RE you don’t know where it’s coming from, but you know its coming so it’s not as frightening. The major pit fall was the fact that there weren’t many zombie scenes. But they worked with what they had; the film was a prologue to the games and possibly another film so it’s harder to put the zombies in when you first have to make them. Manson’s score actually made the stingers work pretty well.

Next for the ugly, not the CGI per se, it had its ups and its down but the zombies wouldn’t be the same without it. I’ll be the first to tell you I would take prosthetics over CGI any day, but Anderson did manage to work with the CGI quite well. Let’s face it, studios love the CGI so there was no way around it.
Most of it was well done, mostly in the close ups. Once the camera was zoomed out it looked straight out of the game not in a good way either. One part was even worse it stooped down to the level of "The Mummy Returns." Overall they made the best of a CGI situation.

Now for the shocker, I know many people out there were disappointed that Romero’s script was booted. And well the plot behind RE is rather elementary I’ll give you that also, it’s really the simple things that make it fun and worth seeing again. Like I said before, it’s a prologue to the games and to possibly a sequel. As a prologue it does its job very well, not only does it give fans of the game more insight, but it sets everything in motion. Hell some of the things you discover, will draw that “hell yeah” reaction, and the ending will leave you hoping for the sequel. I for one am already eager to see a sequel, oh and expect a Nemesis.

Horror MOVIES

Ask any critic what their least favorite genre is and 70% of them with reply: Horror! The Horror genre is infamous for being bad, cheap and stupid. Well, it’s no surprise. Take a look at some of these titles: Vampire Vixens from Venus, Attack Of The Killer Refrigerator and Bordello Of Blood. For every Jaws there are seven Anacondas, for every The Exorcist there are ten Exorcist 2s. Many people dislike Horror films because they are often gory and depressing. Many people dislike Horror films because they are often silly and tongue-in-cheek. Then again, many people like them for those exact qualities. But a movie has to be more than gory or silly to be good. Take for instance gore-fests like Wishmaster or tongue-in-cheek movies like Bordello Of Blood! Ugh! I shudder at the thought of watching those again. But Gory flicks like Event Horizon or silly movies like Evil Dead 2 are great.

There are different types of horror films. I’ll discuss each.


The Slasher Flick or Dead Teenager Movies:

In 1979 a movie was released named Halloween. It was a very scary movie about, basically, a killer in a mask that murders baby-sitters. The film was dark in tone and bad in acting but it struck a chord with audiences and critics and became the top grossing indie film ever. It turned Jamie Lee Curtis and John Carpenter into acting and directing stars. Then came the backlash. Hollywood has a knack for taking an idea or style and doing it to death. They took the Slasher genre, created by Halloween, and re-did it many, many times. Movies like Friday The 13th and Halloween 2 were shoddy and cheap, yet they became huge hits. As the 80’s went on the movies got worse and worse and their box-office diminished as well. Slasher films were DEAD! Everyone was happy. Until 1996 when scribe Kevin Williamson penned Scream, a great, funny, scary movie that poked fun at how shallow and obvious Slasher films were. The film went on to be a huge sleeper hit. It grossed over 100 million dollars at the Box-Office. It was followed almost a year later by the terrific, I Know What You Did Last Summer, which reminded us about what we liked in the Original Halloween. I Know was a hit, as was Scream 2, a sequel even better than the original. Slasher films are back, but they won’t be for long. Sooner or later Hollywood will release too many of these movies and the entire genre will be flushed down the toilet...again.



Monster Movies:
Take a monster, a creature of any kind, put it in a strange setting and add a bunch of people to act as a buffet for the monster. That’s a traditional monster movie. A type of Horror that was revitalized in the 50’s by movies like The Blob, The Thing and The Fly. A lot of The ... Something movies. Then a resurgence of these movies in the 70's with Alien, Tentacles and of course Jaws, followed in the 80’s by Aliens (an even better sequel), a terrific remake of The Blob, The Fly, and The Thing.

The genre that couldn’t die went on into the 90’s with Alien³, Jurassic Park, and The Relic. The Monster Movie madness has become huge lately. In ‘97 we got the aforementioned Relic, Anaconda, Lost World, Mimic, Wishmaster, American Werewolf in Paris. That’s alot for one year. In ‘98 already we have had 2 movies, Phantoms and Deep Rising. Many more are slated for later this year.


Smart Horror:

Some Horror movies are smart, as opposed to some which are Deep Rising. HA! Smart Horror is usually very dramatic and occasionally slow. They rarely have to do with monsters or murderers, though some like Silence Of The Lambs, Mimic and Psycho, do. Most of these movies deal with the devil, Rosemary’s Baby, The Exorcist, Devil’s Advocate, or Inner Turmoil, The Apartment, Mouth Of Madness, and Event Horizon. Most of the best Horror films are Smart Horror.

If I’m forgetting your favorite type of Horror please E-mail me. My address is at the bottom of the page.



The Dangers Of Horror:

Horror is a genre with many fans , though many of those go to far. Horror films naturally depict grizzly murders and events to provoke fear from the audience, but some people take it seriously. Cults have been created based on Horror movies and many murders have been committed that seem to mimic those from Scream, Warlock, Friday The 13th and Nightmare On Elm Street. Horror films can be dangerous. Horor films can also be dangerous to the viewer. Be very careful on your next visit to the video store and try to avoid movies that you’ve never heard of. Straight to video movies are usually garbage, e.g. Leprechaun 4, Jack-O, Frosty.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

The Science Behind James Cameron's Avatar






It's the year 2154 and humankind has reached out to the stars in director James Cameron's new science-fiction epic Avatar. The movie takes us to an exotic jungle moon called Pandora where humans are the aliens and a clash is brewing with the natives. Cameron, who has served as an adviser to NASA to investigate a camera for a Mars mission, is known for taking the science in his flicks very seriously. So how did he do? Here we check on some of the movie's scientific bona fides with top researchers in their respective fields to see where artistic license and scientific plausibility meld.

In Avatar: For work, combat and stomping through Pandora's rainforest, the humans gear up in Amplified Mobility Platform (AMP) suits. These armored exoskeletal vehicles are very similar to the Armored Personnel Units featured in The Matrix Revolutions and the power loader in Cameron's own Aliens, but with an enclosed cockpit. From this perch in the machine, the movements of a human operator's arms and legs are translated to the suit's exterior limbs and "amplified." The operator swings his arm several inches, and the AMP's corresponding giant metal arm scythes a 10-foot arc. "The super hydraulics are all very strong so [the AMP suit] can crush buildings and do all the things that, like, a tank could do," says Avatar vehicle designer Ty Ruben Ellingson in a promotional video. The Herculean strength granted to the AMP suit's operator lets space marines tote giant 30-mm autocannons into battle as easily as one might carry a rifle. In further characterizing the AMP suit, John Rosengrant, design supervisor for Stan Winston Studios, says it is "an Apache helicopter with legs."

The Science: For decades, the U.S. military has been looking into powered exoskeleton suits that could let soldiers lug around heavy equipment—as well as bigger guns—while aiding in rescue work, construction and injury rehabilitation. The Army's research and development branch, DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) issued various grants since 2000 under its Exoskeletons for Human Performance Augmentation program, including funding for the Raytheon Sarcos team. Their machine, called XOS, weighs 150 pounds and fits around the wearer's arms, legs and back. This aluminum robot's hydraulics allow the wearer to lift 200 pounds hundreds of times without tiring, yet the XOS suit remains nimble enough to allow the man-cum-machine to climb stairs or kick a soccer ball. The key hurdle for the Raytheon Sarcos device is independently powering it. For now, the XOS remains tethered to an external power source. Other groups at MIT, Berkeley and Honda are also devising similar machines for the lower body. Meanwhile, Japanese researchers at a company called CYBERDYNE (a name shared by the fictional firm that creates Skynet in Cameron's Terminator franchise) have invented an Iron Man-style body cladding that aids in physical therapy, and is christened Robot Suit Hybrid Assistive Limb (HAL).

"Movies like Avatar are good to get us thinking about the possibilities," says David Audet, leader of the Soldier Mobility and Mission Enhancement Team at the Natick Soldier Research Development and Engineering Center in Massachusetts that has a point role in developing XOS. And while there is "a lot of Hollywood going on" with the AMP suit, it suggests the immense logistical work that such devices could render and serves as, Audet says, "an example of a foundational platform that with very little modifications can perform a large suite of attacks."


In Avatar: The white-yellow glow of Alpha Centauri A, a star very similar to our Sun, illuminates the giant gaseous planet Polyphemus and its tropical moon Pandora. On this lush world, great beasts roam the jungles and pterodactyl-like creatures soar through the sky. A sentient, blue-skinned humanoid species known as the Na'vi has evolved here and learned to live in harmony with nature.

The Science: Alpha Centauri A is one of the three stars that make up Alpha Centauri, which is located 4.37 light years away, making it our solar system's closest stellar neighbor. This proximity has inspired an intense hunt to reveal the exoplanets that could be right next door. Last January, a team led by Yale astronomer Debra Fischer began a five-year survey of Alpha Centauri using a 1.5-meter telescope at the Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory (CTIO) in Chile. Her group is looking for rhythmic, telltale patterns in the wavelengths of a star's light caused by the gravitational tugging of orbiting worlds. This "wobble technique" has already ruled out the presence of Jupiter- or Saturn-scale exoplanets (like Polyphemus) around the Alpha Centauri stars. But "there's a very good chance," Fischer says, that planets with masses near that of Earth's could grace this star system. "There's still so much we don't understand about planet formation around single stars," Fischer says—let alone triple-star systems like Alpha Centauri. So in terms of what may be out there, "it's almost an open slate."

The orbital mechanics of the two stars at Alpha Centauri's heart, often called Cen A and Cen B, indicate where planets are likely to reside. The stellar duo gravitationally tangos as close as 11 astronomical units (AUs, the average distance from the Sun to Earth) to each other before swinging as far apart as 36 AU. (The third star, a red dwarf called Proxima Centauri, circles this couple at a considerable distance and is too faint for Fischer's team to study, but it could boast small planets, too.) Given this setup, the orbits of exoplanets that formed 2 AU away and more from Cen A and Cen B would get destabilized by the other star and eventually get shot right out of the system, Fischer says.

Fortunately, if life has taken root in the Alpha Centauri system, it is not likely to suffer this fate. The habitable Goldilocks zone—the not-too-hot, not-too-cold orbital band where water can be liquid on a planet or a moon's surface—is situated closer to both Cen A and Cen B. The former, a bit bigger than the Sun, has a Goldilocks zone of around 1.2 AUs out. From Cen B, at about 90 percent of the Sun's mass, this zone is found at about 0.75 AU. Since both stars are chemically similar to the Sun, the same general mixture of elements that allowed life to develop on Earth should have been available in the primordial soups of both Cen A and Cen B's planetary brood.

For now, the jury is still out on whether the Alpha Centauri system has smaller, Earth-like worlds in life-friendly regions, but Fischer expects answers shortly. "By the end of year four [2012], we'll really know," she says. Meanwhile, other efforts led by famed planet-hunter Michel Mayor of the University of Geneva and a new initiative by the University of Canterbury in the United Kingdom may render the verdict even sooner.


In Avatar: For the interstellar journey to Alpha Centauri, humans have constructed spaceships nearly a mile long outfitted with hybrid antimatter fusion engines. These craft can cruise up to seven-tenths of the speed of light, or about 670 million miles per hour; even hurtling at these speeds, however, the voyage to our nearest star neighbor takes about six years.

The Science: As a source of energy for propulsion, you can't top matter and antimatter particles coming into contact and annihilating each other. "It's the strongest energetic reaction we know of," says NASA's George Schmidt, who has worked on advanced propulsion systems and is now deputy director of the Research and Technology Directorate in Ohio. The energy unleashed by matter–antimatter destruction could be used directly as a propellant shot out of a nozzle at the rear of a rocket, or the antimatter could induce fission (splitting of atoms) or fusion (building of atoms) reactions in other materials to produce less, though still powerful, thrust. However, getting enough antimatter for the 26 trillion-mile, one-way trip to Alpha Centauri and storing such a volatile fuel for long periods is prohibitively expensive and difficult.

First off, making the stuff is no easy task: Particle colliders at CERN near Geneva, Switzerland and Fermilab in Chicago have only ever produced around a dozen nanograms of antimatter (though it should be noted that these facilities were not designed to make antimatter in large quantities). The going rate for antimatter is ballpark $60 billion a microgram, Schmidt says, though a several-billion-dollar, dedicated production facility could crank out the antiparticles for more like $6 million per microgram. "I am happy that [the Avatar moviemakers] went with a hybrid nuclear process as the energy source," Schmidt says. "This type of concept would require much less antimatter than a pure antimatter rocket." But, Schmidt says, the combo antimatter fusion engine could not likely generate the thrust needed to get up to seven-tenths light speed.

Antimatter storage is the other serious barrier. Electromagnetic fields can store antimatter in so-called Penning traps by keeping the antimatter away from the container's walls. But this only works for a few months before the antimatter bumps into stray-matter particles in the container's holding area, which cannot yet (or ever) be made into a perfect, matter-free vacuum, says Gerald Smith, professor emeritus of physics at Penn State and founder of Positronics Research, LLC, a Sante Fe–based company looking into applications of antimatter.

All told, an interstellar mission to Alpha Centauri—there and back again—hauling a sizable payload would require thousands of tons of antimatter sequestered in a fuel tank for years, Schmidt says, which clearly presents a major showstopper. And once that's all worked out, there's the issue of slowing a ship down once it gets to Alpha Centauri. "You're going to be going at a pretty good clip," Schmidt says, and the ship could maybe swing through the stars' gravity wells in a kind of reverse slingshot effect to help decelerate.


In Avatar: Over the three decades since humans first arrived on Pandora and began invasive mining operations, tension has mounted with the Na'vi, who hold nature sacred. Relations between the races are further complicated because humankind cannot breathe Pandora's air. In an attempt to reach out to the Na'vi, the Earthlings' Resources Development Administration initiates the Avatar Program to create half-human, half-Na'vi hybrids to serve as ambassadors. By means of a sophisticated interfacing device, a human telepathically "drives" this avatar body, allowing him to experience Pandora just as the Na'vi do. Protagonist Jake Sully (actor Sam Worthington) is recruited to the program when his twin brother dies. For Jake, this tragic event does offer him a small consolation: A war injury has confined him to a wheelchair, and now, through his avatar, Jake will get to walk again.

The Science: Much research has been done on the first link in the avatar chain, which is patching biological ‘wetware' into machined hardware. The goal of much of this research into brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) is indeed to afford handicapped people, like Jake, shots at mobility. "What is in the movie [Avatar] is surprisingly similar to experiments we are actually doing right now," says Miguel Nicolelis, a neuroscientist at Duke University and lead researcher for the multinational Walk Again Project, based in Brazil. The Project is developing an exoskeletal, ‘neuroprosthethic' device that fits around a paralyzed person's body and receives commands from his mind.

Last year, Nicolelis and his colleagues provided the strongest demonstration to date of this sort of arrangement. In their lab in North Carolina, the researchers trained a rhesus monkey to walk upright on a treadmill. They then took neural signals picked up by electrodes in the monkey's brain and sent them over the Internet along with video to a lab in Japan where a robot synchronized its motions with the monkey's gait. "We are training monkeys to control their own avatar using brainwave activity," Nicolelis says.

Other work has allowed primates to remotely move robotic arms, and, in humans, electrode implants have helped generate synthetic vocalizations and mentally move computer cursors. Yet other efforts seek to reroute neural signals via wearable machine interfaces around the severed spinal cord to reconnect functional bodily muscles back to the brain.

Why Current Horror Cinema Totally Sucks

Let's say that you, the aspiring horror movie-goer, watch the original Halloween and right after go to the theater to see The Strangers... what's different?

The Answer: Everything!!!

I've done such a scenario, albeit with different horror movies, and I can tell you truthfully that both movies are definitely not the same! Why?... because age has something do with it!

In the 70's and 80's cinema wasn't as strict, so previously unviewed movies, especially in the horror genre, could be shown without any cuts for content. There's was no limit to what a director could show in his/her film, there was no movie review board, and there wasn't no big baby audience either.

Kids grew up a lot differently then, and so when such films as Halloween, A Nightmare Elm Street, The Last House on the Left, among others were viewed it might scare them half to death but there was no traumatization factor with most of the populace. Sure they would be scared out of their minds but the films were never truly traumatizing, or suspected of being traumatizing.

Now is a different age, with a different populace - and guess what this "populace" is made up of... big babies! Everyone thinks that horror is traumatizing to young minds and so needless cuts are made to already great films to make it "less traumatizing" to the big babies that make up our society. From infancy kids are thrown into this stupid happy go lucky world, made to watch T.V. shows that are stupid and too babyish for their minds... and once these kids get accustomed to that, the rest of the media has to enclose themselves around those babyish values to avoid scaring kids that could be grown up a lot faster than most of adult society thinks! It's stupid really... I mean, you have to protect your kids to some degree, but when the media makes sure they "program" a bunch of big babies there's nothing anyone can do!

Having been born in the early 90's, I've watched the remnants of T.V.'s glory days, and so am not accustomed to being a big baby... so my mind can comprehend more complex concepts. I am in no way babyfied!!!

So the big difference between horror cinema now as compared to it's glory day's is that films have to conform to the big baby society that the media and the government have created!!!

"The Hulk" Movie Review




After watching with growing interest the clips and trailers promoting the newfangled screen version of “The Hulk” that were widely distributed months in advance of the movie’s theatrical release, I discovered I’d absolutely no interest in seeing this movie. None whatsoever. I can even recall telling a friend they’d have to pay me to see this movie. Of course then I realized I do get paid for seeing movies (heck of a job, isn’t it?) and gave in and saw the film.

Growing up a fan of the TV show – and never having picked up a “Hulk” comic – I hadn’t the slightest clue that the Hulk was supposed to be larger than life. In my mind, the Hulk has always been the size of the buff and burly Lou Ferrigno. The TV version of The Hulk was so incompatible with the monstrously oversized 2003 movie version that I figured the filmmakers had it all wrong and were screwing up the project. Come to find out, the Hulk from the comics WAS larger than Lou Ferrigno (it was the TV people that messed up, not the filmmakers for once).

Once I came to grips with the idea of a mountain-sized Hulk, then it was much easier to try to like/dislike the movie based solely on the story it tried to tell. And the story part of the film is the part that totally blew it for me. Sitting through an hour of bland dialogue that plods along at a snail’s pace, all I wanted was for the green guy to make a lengthy appearance. It got to the point that I didn’t care whether or not the Hulk’s CGI was believable, whether the edges of the Hulk were blurry, whether or not his massive size remained congruent throughout his scenes, or anything else for that matter. “Just put him on the screen and forget about the human actors” (this I inwardly screamed so as not to get booted from the theater). His scenes were frantically fun whereas the scenes with his human counterparts were frustratingly slow.

The screen version of “The Hulk” provides the background story on why mild-mannered scientist Bruce Banner (Eric Bana) transforms into the green beast. Through a series of annoyingly shot flashbacks (director Ang Lee went with the comic book-style panels that just feel intrusive after the first 15 or so minutes), we learn Bruce’s dad (played by Nick Nolte with his infamous 'mug shot' hair) wasn’t such a nice guy. Because of some unauthorized experimentation, Bruce’s DNA is wrong – all wrong. So wrong that if he gets angry, he becomes a big green fighting machine. Flash forward to contemporary times with Bruce romantically involved with the beautiful Betty Ross (Jennifer Connelly), envied by Glenn Talbot (Josh Lucas), and wanted by the military. As circumstances rile up Bruce, the Hulk emerges to wreak havoc. It then becomes up to the love of a good woman to soothe the savage beast.

Eric Bana, Jennifer Connelly, and Sam Elliott do a decent job of emoting per the script. Nick Nolte’s character's long speeches left my nerves frayed so much so that even if he’d done an amazing job of delivering the monologues, I wouldn’t have noticed from all the grinding noises coming from my teeth.

But “The Hulk” isn’t a complete disaster. There are scenes that are truly memorable – the Hulk vs. the mutated dogs scene springs immediately to mind – however it flails away at building the story and seems to never quite know what to make of itself. The nearest I could figure out was that it was two separate movies forced together without much glue holding the two in place.

Monday, January 11, 2010

Terminator Salvation


In a movie filled with squandered opportunities, Terminator Salvation makes perfect use of one particular cameo, by bringing back Arnold—all the way from 1984. Instead of having the present-day California governor reprise his role as a T-800 cyborg, McG asked his effects team to resurrect the Cold War-era Arnold. Legacy Effects dug out a lifemask taken of Schwarzenegger 25 years ago, and created a cleaned-up version for Industrial Light & Magic to use as reference. ILM's digital reconstruction was then mapped onto a body double. The result is a spooky, almost existential reveal, as a nude, scowling, freakishly young Arnold confronts resistance leader John Connor (Christian Bale). McG, true to form, missed the point, telling the Los Angeles Times that the new face was based on “scans from the first picture," back when 3D scans didn't exist, and computer-generated effects were limited to light cycles. Still, it's a well-handled scene because it knows its limitations—the resurrected Arnold doesn't speak, and quickly has his skin, including his distinctive face, seared off. What's left is that equally iconic chrome skeleton, reanimated by ILM with more heft and menace than any pure CG robot could ask for.

Top 10 VFX Scenes of 2009

In the year of the great recession, Hollywood blockbusters went bigger. There were taller Transformers, wider tidal waves, and, in the case of Avatar, more dimensions with which to pummel your brain. The running times were bigger, too—of the ten movies we selected for their landmark visual-effects (VFX) scenes, five were more than two-and-a-half hours long. Call it the year of the VFX epic, or maybe the year of the director's cut. We watched every bloated minute of it, arguably more on-screen carnage than any other year at the movies. And after crawling out from under the digital wreckage of one antimatter bomb, two destroyed aircraft carriers, countless leveled cities and no less than three planets painstakingly torn apart, we're happy to report that CGI can sometimes conjure up some swell-looking alien faces, too. Here are the best VFX scenes of 2009 (about half of which are spoilers, so consider yourself alerted).

Catching Up With Avatar Producer Jon Landau


LAS VEGAS—Avatar producer Jon Landau was on hand yesterday at Panasonic's CES press conference to extoll the virtues of Panasonic's plasma monitors (which the filmmakers used for on-set playback during the film's production) and to discuss the future of 3D. PM caught up with him for a brief chat about life since the release of Avatar.

Now that Avatar has grossed over $1 billion globally since its December 18 release, it is easy to forget the mixed pre-release buzz that included doubts about whether the public would embrace a movie some described as "Dances with Smurfs," or a "Ferngully ripoff." "We had to tell the studio to relax," Landau said. "What matters in the end is the movie, and we knew that the movie works." Landau said that when he and director James Cameron decided to showcase Avatar at the BNAT film festival run by film-geek god Harry Knowles (of Ain't It Cool News), the studio advised against it: "They didn't want us to go. They said, 'those are the people who say all the mean things about you.' We said, none of that matters."

Asked if anything about the subsequent reception of the film has surprised the filmmakers, Landau said, "No surprises, really, but a sense of vindication. It's proof of what we've been saying all along—that this movie would play to a lot of audiences, women as well as men."

Like other Hollywood bigwigs at CES (Dreamworks chief Jeffrey Katzenberg made an appearance at Samsung's event to announce the 3D Blu-ray release of Monsters vs. Aliens), Landau is bullish on the future of 3D—and not just for big screens or mega-blockbusters. "It's for big movies, it's for little movies," he said. "In the future, people will expect all of their content to be 3D."

Landau seems to be enjoying a bit of a reprieve after the multi-year slog to help the notoriously hard-charging Cameron bring Avatar to the screen. His post-press conference plans in Las Vegas included going out to dinner with his wife. After all, he said, "I haven't seen her in four years."