When Time Expires (1997)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

When Time Expires is one of those movies that I’d always manage to catch the last third of on TV.  I was always curious to see how it started. It seemed like I could never find it on Netflix.  It seems that the movie, by itself, was only released on VHS.  I had to wait for Netflix to get the DVD double feature that pairs this movie with Tell Me No Secrets.  (I’ll be watching that in the near future.  I’ll let you know how it turns out.)

Richard Grieco stars as Travis Beck.  Beck works for some sort of intergalactic planetary federation or something.  There are two main ministries.  One makes predictions about the future.  The other sends people back into the past to make calibrations.  Beck’s job is to put a quarter in a parking meter.

You’re probably thinking that this is a menial task, which it is.  Apparently, Beck used to work for the other ministry and made some sort of big mess.  (Actually, he didn’t make the mess, but he was blamed for it.)  Now, he’s sent to some remote town to do some small task.  He’s given what’s called an Interface as a partner.  The Interface hooks up to a cable-ready TV and captures a human image, which it then takes as its own so that it can communicate with the human that it’s partnered with.

Around the same time that Beck shows up, two hit men also arrive in town.  Beck doesn’t learn of this until later.  What raises Beck’s eyebrow is the arrival of his ex partner, Bill Thermot.  (Bill Thermot is played by Mark Hamill.)   Considering how hard it is to go back in time, it can’t be a coincidence.  Even among the Interfaces, no one really wants to deal with Beck after what he supposedly did.

Beck just can’t shake the feeling that something more sinister is up.  This feeling is reinforced when he learns that there really are hit men out to get him.   He has his Interface do some digging and sure enough, something is up.  No, I won’t ruin it for you.  It is an interesting movie and I would recommend it to people.

For those that are whining about not liking science fiction, I will say that this isn’t your typical sci-fi movie.  You don’t get any technical stuff about time travel or people from other planets.  I got the impression that Beck isn’t human, but there’s no talk of how they go about taking on human form.  (We do learn that it’s a popular model, though.)  I’m actually surprised that he has a human-sounding name.

The acting is at least decent, even if the picture quality isn’t great.  The only attempt at any sort of special effects is someone disappearing when they die, which is at least done well enough.  The dialogue is a bit cornball at times.  It was a made-for-TV movie from 1997, so I don’t think that you can really expect much on any particular front.

According to Netflix, both movies on the disc are actually made-for-TV movies.  I’ve never heard of the other movie, which follows the pattern that I’ve noticed with these bundles.  I’ve usually heard of one movie, yet have absolutely no interest in the other.  (In this case, the other title doesn’t sound familiar at all.)

If you can rent the movie from Netflix or at your local rental place, I’d say go for it.  If you happen to catch the whole thing on TV, it’s worth watching to the end.  I don’t think I could really recommend buying it as I don’t think it would have much replay value except to lend out to someone.  I’d give the movie three stars. 

IMDb page

Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner -- Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.


Economics isn’t really about money. At least, it’s not solely about money. It’s really about what motivates people. People generally want to get the most while giving up the least. That doesn’t always involve cash. That being said, you may ask what motivates certain people to do certain things. Freakonomics takes a look at that.

Some do deal with money. In one chapter, the authors look at why drug dealers live with their mothers if they’re supposed to be so rich. (Many have to take a second, legitimate job.) Others aren’t directly about cash at all. Sumo wrestlers, for instance, have something in common with teachers: both are motivated to cheat. Chapter four deals declining crime due to abortion. (The authors admit that this is a touchy subject, but handle it well.)

The last two chapters deal with the effects of parents on children. In the fifth chapter, the authors explain certain safety scares and why they’re really nothing. In the last chapter, the authors mention two brothers, one named Winner and the other, Loser. There’s also the story of a woman who named her daughter Temptress. (One story has expected results and the other is the opposite.)

My brother got this for me, thinking that I would like the offbeat nature of the issues discussed; he was right. There is a politically incorrect angle to the book. The authors feel that Roe v. Wade was the biggest help to fighting crime. That statement is bound to get people thinking the wrong thing, but you can’t always take things at face value. People will sometimes give into their names and sometimes, they won’t.

Steven D. Levitt is a professor of economics; Stephen J. Dubner writes for the New York Times. These are two people that have some sense of what they’re talking about, or at least how to say it. I got the impression that the book was well researched and well planned out. The pairing of a writer with an economist worked out pretty well.

I’d give the book five stars. It’s an easy read, especially for a book about economics. Even though it’s 242 pages, each of the six chapters is well written. I couldn’t put the book down until I was finished with a chapter. You won’t come out of this book understanding economics much better, but it’s still a good book. I’d definitely suggest reading this book all the way through. You may not agree with a lot of the initial statements, but you should at least read their arguments before dismissing them.


 Web Site

The Sticky Fingers of Time (1997)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

Movies involving time travel tend to fall into one of two categories.  Either the main characters can change the past or they’re fated to live out what they know to have happened.  Occasionally, you’ll get a movie where some of the historical facts were wrong, thus allowing someone an out.  However, most time travel movies have some sort if major event (almost always someone’s death) that can’t be avoided.

In the case of Sticky Fingers of Time, Tucker Harding is a writer from the past who comes to the present only to find a news article foretelling her murder.  The article falls out of a book that she’s working on and is apparently published and eventually purchased by Drew, an aspiring writer who doesn’t think she’s very talented.

Eventually, the two meet.  Tucker wants to see the book so that she can see how the story ends, but Drew threw the book away.  (She just wanted it for the cover art.)  Drew also meets Isaac, a time traveler who has a bit more experience.  It turns out that Isaac has already met Drew, although Drew hasn’t met Isaac until now.  (One of the complexities of time travel is meeting people out of order.)

It turns out that Drew is also a time traveler, although she doesn’t have much control over it.  There have been a few times in her life where she’s apparently blacked out when she was actually jumping ahead in time.  (It turns out that no time traveler has much control over when or where they jump.  Any strong emotional event will send you to some other point in time.)

The time travelers call themselves time freaks.  Their soul has some sort of anomaly that allows them to live time in a nonlinear fashion.  Drew and Tucker have the ability naturally.  Isaac, on the other hand, has had a set of things implanted in his fingers that adds the necessary code.  There’s also Ofelia, Tucker’s roommate/girlfriend, who’s apparently from our future.  Not much is said about her except that she has a prehensile tail that’s shown only once.

To explain the entire movie would be difficult, mostly because it’s hard to understand on the first viewing.  Part of the problem with a complicated time-travel story is that things happen out of order for most of the characters.  Even when the events are shown from one character’s perspective, many of the other characters are shown experiencing things out of order.  (Like I said, the first time that Isaac meets Drew isn’t the first time that Drew meets Isaac.)  You may have to watch it two or three times to understand the whole thing.

The writing is definitely good, even though the movie takes a few minutes to really get in to.  It starts with Tucker writing and Ofelia looking for some coffee to make.  All of a sudden, Tucker is in the present trying to chase down Isaac.  Most of the beginning shows Tucker and Drew going about their business.  It isn’t until everyone starts meeting everyone else that it gets really interesting.

Also, the acting is uneven.  Some of the lines were delivered a little too stiffly.  I could see this turning off a lot of potential viewers, which would be unfair.  There is some good acting in the movie; it’s really just one or two actors that brought it down.

The movie was just under 90 minutes, which proved to be a good length.  Any longer and I probably wouldn’t have stuck with it.  Any shorter and it probably would have suffered.  I’d definitely recommend sticking with it.  Sometimes, it’s fun to watch an independent movie. 

IMDb page

 

John Brockman - The Next Fifty Years: Science in the First Half of the Twenty-First Century

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

I’ve always held that if predicting the future was an easy thing to do, all psychics would be millionaires.  I’m reminded of a commercial for IBM with Avery Brooks.  He started the commercial by asking where his flying cars were.  The science fiction of decades past showed everyone going around in their flying cars.  Unfortunately, predictions are vague at best, predicting a trend here or a general direction there.  (This is why I tend not to believe the 2012 doomsday ‘prophecies’.)  Even with vague predictions, we do occasionally get our flying cars.  Not always, though.

Someone had the idea to get together 25 scientists to predict what the future will hold for their respective fields.  Each person wrote an essay about what major advancements they foresaw or what might be necessary for the field to advance.  Since there are 25 different essays, I’m not going to go into detail about each for two reasons.  One, some of the essays tend to be technical or beyond the interest of the average person.  Two, each essay is so short that any detailed analysis would pretty much require me to give away the bulk of it.

The book is divided into two sections.  The first part has to do with theoretical stuff.  For instance, there’s an essay by Martin Rees where he deals with the possibility of life elsewhere in the universe.   There may be a high degree of probability of life existing, but what can we expect in terms of receiving proof?  The second half is more practical.  Paul Davies has an essay about life on Mars.  If there is to be colonization of other planets, Mars is a good candidate.  If there was life on other planets in our solar system, Mars is also a good candidate.

As I said, each essay is rather short.  The book is 300 pages total, meaning that each essay is about 12 pages.  I was able to read one or two essays in a sitting, which is about average for me.  This doesn’t mean that it’s going to be an easy read.   It’s not so much that their technical as it probably won’t be of any interest to someone not in the  field.  Most of them don’t get all that technical.   Some of the essays, like those on psychology, are relatively easy to understand if you can get past a few technical names.  It’s just that you may not want to read 300 pages of scientific predictions if you’re not into science.

My sense was that the book was meant for the general reader.  The essays don’t go into a lot of detail on their subject.  Since many of the scientists have overlapping fields, there will be some overlap in the essays.  (The Human Genome Project is mentioned in several, mostly in those dealing with disease and psychology.)  If there are a few topics that you’re interested in, like math or computers, you could easily get the book from the library and read just the essays that you want to.

All of the authors did a pretty good job of writing.  There weren’t a lot of technical terms, but it didn’t insult the reader’s intelligence, either.  I think the assumption may be that putting science in the title will scare off a few people.  Because the book deals with science, there does have to be a certain assumption of prior knowledge.  Quantum computing will require a certain understanding of science.

It would be interesting to come back in the year 2050 and see how many of the essays have come true.  Yes, some do speak in vague terms, but a few do have specific predictions.  Richard Dawkins predicts that everyone will have their DNA sequenced, as the technology to do so will become cheaper.  It won’t be uncommon to give your doctor access to this information to see how best to treat you.

You could probably get a book out of each essay.  If I had been asked to do this project, I probably would have done it as a series of books, or at least several volumes.  There could have been one on psychology and medicine while another handled math or quantum physics.

All things considered, I’d recommend checking the book out of the library.  I don’t know that you’ll be able to follow enough of it that it would justify the purchase price, but it’s definitely worth a look. 

Beyond the Rising Moon/Outerworld (1987)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

In 2054, an alien ship is found.  This ship is salvaged and the technology studied, thus giving us a whole bunch of nice technology, like faster-than-light travel.  When another one is discovered, a loophole in salvage law allows anyone to claim it, provided they get there first.  Norwegian Interworld knows where it is.  Pentan is some sort of genetically engineered cyborg sent in to steal the data from the company’s couriers for a rival company.  She steals the information as promised, but runs at the last minute, hoping to claim the ship for herself.  To do that, she finds a pilot willing to take her for the right amount of cash.

Since she’s artificial, Pentan has no real rights to speak of.  Being artificial also means that her creators were able to create a literal kill switch.  As soon as she runs, her handler presses said switch, giving Pentan 72 hours to change her mind or she’ll have a stroke.  This is a problem because the shipwreck is about 50 hours away.  She’d never be able to get there and back.  Unless, that is, she goes to meet one of her creators, who is able to shut off the device that will kill her.

Her former employers are able to follow her.  They find the planet and the shipwreck, meaning that this covert operative, who was trained in combat, has to fight against the people that trained her.  It’s the only way out other than to go back to work for them.  Given all the effort she put into getting this far, Pentan decides to fight it out.  I don’t want to totally give the ending away, but I will say it doesn’t end favorably for her former employers.

This is one of a great many movies that Netflix has available to watch online, assuming you’re a member.  I think this is one of those movies where they didn’t have to pay a lot for the rights to do so.  I don’t want to say that it’s bad.  Consider that the film was made in 1987.  There were a lot of things you might expect from a low-budget film from 25 years ago.

The most obvious is the special effects.  There were several scenes where it was incredibly obvious that they were using a green screen.  There were also a few times that I caught them reusing CGI.  It might not have been so bad if they didn’t try to reuse something from five minutes prior.  (During the final battle scene, there’s one shot from the inside of a cockpit.  Notice two asteroids floating outside the cockpit that look like they’re going to collide.)  Also, when a ship landed, the ‘ship’ that was landing appeared to be a toy.  It was so obvious, I was looking for a little rod to the side holding it up.

I can forgive the CGI because the story and script were at least pretty solid.   This is one of those cases where you’re thinking that 78 minutes is kind of short, but it’s just the right length.  It didn’t drag, nor did it feel rushed.  My only concern was the ambiguity of what Pentan was.  It was said that genetic material was taken from the best and the brightest, which led me to believe that she was entirely human.  However, she was said to have programming.  There was no talk of any sort of mechanical body parts, but she’s said to be a cyborg.  Also, the device that would kill her was said to be a bomb, yet later in the movie, it was revealed that it would give her a stroke.  I suppose it could be a very small explosive.  I certainly wouldn’t want to risk innocent bystanders, especially considering that they could be used as hostages.  (“Turn off the bomb or I’ll take them with me!”)

The acting was also pretty good.  We’re not talking Academy Award material, but I did get a sense of what the people were feeling.  Consider, though, that of the first ten people listed on IMBb, only the first four have any other acting credits.  The next six were only in this movie.

I don’t know that I’d buy this movie.  I doubt I’ll be watching it again any time soon.   If you have Netflix or can get this free on demand, definitely watch it.  (It was originally released as Beyond the Rising Moon, so you may see it under that title.)  Despite the flaws, I think it was well done, all things considered.  It’s one of those movies you can watch and be amazed how far special effects and CGI have come. 

IMDb

BellSouth 8801-X Single Line Phone

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

Note: I wrote this review a while ago and had to rewrite it for the past tense, since I don't usually use this phone any more. It is still in use at my house, but if I change tense, this is why. I also have the 8801-X. The only difference is the color of the phone.



I like to look through the Sunday circulars to see if I can get any good deals. Towards the end of one Summer, I came across this phone. Office Max was selling it for $10 and offering $10 in rebates. (All I had to do was pay tax on it.) The phone had caller ID and I figured that will all of the people calling me with incredible business opportunities, I just had to have this product. (Note to people with incredible business opportunities: please don't call me. I generally won't pick up if I don't know who you are.)

I couldn't wait to rip this product out of the box and set it up. The first thing that I have to warn you about is that not all phone plans come with caller ID. I have no idea what will happen if you don't have caller ID included in your phone plan. It's possible that the caller ID function won't work. It's also possible that you'll automatically get charged for the service. I have no way of knowing. There was nothing on the box that would indicate what would happen if I didn't have caller ID and I hooked the phone up. Fortunately, the phone plan in my house already has caller ID included. I had just never purchased a phone with caller ID yet.

That being said, my first priority was getting the phone set up. It's like a normal phone in that you just plug the unit into a phone jack using a normal phone cord. It has the standard number pad and everything. The caller ID is in a small display on the back of the phone handle. You don't even have to set the time and date. When the first person calls, the phone does this automatically. (I don't really know how. I'm just happy that the time and date are correct.)

The next thing I wanted to know was how I could program names into the phone. Again, this is done automatically. It seems that the phone (or the phone service) can access information on who's calling. When a person calls from within the county, it shows the phone number and the name of the person on the phone bill. If Jane Smith calls you and it's John Smith that's on the bill, the caller ID will show John Smith. Pay phones generally show up as “pay phone” and companies will show as the company name.

It seems that callers from outside of my area or is using a cell phone, it usually shows the city. When my father calls on his cell phone, it just shows “Miami, FL”. When I was using this phone, my brother was going to college in Ithica. At the time, he was using a VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol) phone. The number was a Syracuse number, so it would show as “Syracuse, NY”. Occasionally, I would get a call that showed as (000) 000-0000 and is listed as a blocked call or an unregistered user. This usually means that it's a telemarketer or a recorded message. I usually don't pick up.

If you get home and you missed a call, it will record the incoming phone calls. (I don't remember, but I think that the phone is supposed to have a memory for either 50 or 100 numbers, but it seems to have stopped at 70.) This feature doesn't work if you have call waiting and get a call while you're on the phone with someone else. The phone has to actually ring to be able to get the number. If you do get a call, a little red light will flash and the display will show number of new calls. You can scroll down and see who has called while you were away. You have the option of keeping the number or deleting it. (You have to press the delete button twice, presumably to keep you from accidentally deleting a number.)

There's even a redial feature. The phone has two buttons: Local and L/D. (I'm assuming that L/D stands for long distance.) When trying to use this feature to call a long distance number, the long-distance button worked fine. However, when I tried to call a local number by hitting “local,” it doesn't work. The phone put a 1 in front of the number. It's a minor inconvenience, but it's not worth returning the phone since I know most of the local numbers I need to dial. The problem may be caused by the fact that I live in a county that has two area codes. (This means that we have to dial the area code before all calls.) It's also possible that it's because the phone is programmed poorly. After all, I got it for 70?.

I tend to go with the second statement since I've noticed one other problem with the phone. There's a green light for voicemail. We do actually have an answering service, which some might call voicemail. I'd assume that the light is supposed to indicate when someone has left me a message. So far, the light has never started flashing, even though I have received quite a number of messages. I have no idea what this light is for. It's no big deal since I can normally tell when I pick up the phone. (The dial tone sounds different.)

The phone works for the most part. The caller ID works and I can use the phone to place and receive calls like I would with any other phone. I still go through the Sunday circulars and I've seen Office Max offering the same deal. I've thought about getting this phone for my grandmother, but I don't know that she'd ever use the caller ID function. I'd definitely recommend this product to a friend.

Hyperspace (2001)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

I really haven’t been watching too many movies since I started working. The problem is that I sometimes get home at 7:00 and have TV programs that start at 8:00 or 9:00. Factor in dinner and I really don’t have time for a two-hour feature.

When I came across Hyperspace, I figured I’d give it a shot. The description that NetFlix gave said simply that Sam Neill hosts and that it covers topics like black holes and the birth and death of stars. Ok. I like astronomy and I’ve liked some of the movies that Sam Neill has been in. The entire thing was on one disc and had six episodes, each thirty minutes in length. I figured it was the perfect combination.

I liked the fact that each episode was 30 minutes long and the presentation was great, but content left something to be desired. The DVD amounts to three hours of eye candy. What information the DVD has is mostly speculation about what else is out there or where we might end up once the Earth is destroyed.

On that note, each episode has a theme. One is on black holes and how they might destroy the Earth. Another deals with the threat that errant asteroids pose to Earth. One is on the life and death of stars, including our own and how our star will eventually destroy the Earth. Notice a pattern? The documentary repeatedly points out how extremely lucky we are just to be here.

I really can’t recommend this for anyone who’s looking for something really informative. It looks like something that came out of a sci-fi movie. The DVD looks like it’s perfect for a high-school class. The only other time I would tell someone to watch it is if they’re just getting into science or if they really like CGI.

I’d give the DVD four stars. I liked the fact that it was all on one DVD, allowing me to watch the whole thing without wasting any rental positions. It ended up being something that I was able to watch before dinner or while I was waiting for my next show to start. If you’re looking for a documentary that’s easy to watch, this is the one.

IMDb page

Santa Claus Conquers the Martians (1964)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

I’ve seen some bad movies in my time. Some are bad in an enjoyable way, much like Riki-Oh: The Story of Ricky. Others leave you wondering why the movie was made in the first place, much like Santa Claus Conquers the Martians.

The story is simple. Kimar, leader of the Martians, notices that his children are sad and not doing what Martian children should be doing. He’s distraught over this and seeks the advice of the eldest and wisest Martian, Chochem. Chochem tells Kimar that the children of mars have little reason to be happy. They study too much to the point where they have the minds of adults trapped in very young bodies. They need someone like Santa Claus to bring them joy and happiness.

Kimar takes it a step further and decides to actually kidnap Santa. He takes a crew to Earth and lands somewhere a major city where they find all sorts of people fitting the description of Santa. They meet two children, Billy and Betty, that direct them to the North Pole. Since the Martians can’t trust the kids not to rat them out, the kids have to go along for the ride.

The Martians arrive at the North Pole, but the kids escape and plan on warning Santa. The warning comes too little too late for Santa, as the Martians put Mrs. Claus and several elves in suspended animation. Santa has no choice but to go with the Martians.

Things aren’t all that great on the ship. Kimar has a dissenter named Voldar who tries to throw Santa and the kids out of an airlock. He thinks that Martians would be to soft and cuddly to be effective warriors. Once they get back to Mars, he’s arrested and told he’ll stand trial for going against his leader.

Once back on Mars, Santa gets an automated plant to make toys for all the good Martian boys and all the good Martian girls. Billy and Betty help Santa in his new workshop. Everything seems to be going fine until Voldar decides to shut down the factory and kidnap Santa.

As luck would have it, Kimar has an assistant named Dropo that tries to dress up as Santa. Voldar ends up kidnapping Dropo, not realizing that Santa isn’t a Martian. (This is despite having seen both Dropo and Santa up close and that Martians look nothing like humans.) After a toy fight, Santa saves the day and Kimar realizes that Dropo could be as effective a Santa as the real Santa. Santa, Billy and Betty are allowed to go home in time for Christmas.

I ended up watching the entire movie just to see how bad it was. It was pretty bad. Even the names aren’t that creative. Another reviewer pointed out that Kimar may be King Martian. Notice that he has a wife, Momar, and two kids, Bomar and Girmar. I’m assuming that the names come from Mom Martian, Boy Martian and Girl Martian respectively. I’m thinking that Dropo may be the Martian Marx brother. As for a lot of the other names, I can’t quite figure those out. The movie isn’t worth that much thought.

I couldn’t get the Martians. There were maybe two Martians that had any intelligence at all, yet they’re capable of flying across the solar system to Earth. I mean, Dropo was an idiot and yet two other Martians mistook him for Santa. Granted, there may be more intelligent Martians that built the space ships, but you don’t put just anyone in a plane and call them the captain. Just to fly the thing requires intelligence.

The costumes look like something out of a thrift store reject sale. The people doing the makeup must have seen them and done an appropriately bad job. There was nothing redeeming about either. I cant’ even get a decent sized paragraph out of it, that’s how bad it was.

As for the plot, it left a lot to be desired. Santa and Co. don’t fight back at all. Even when Santa’s told that he’s going to be staying on Mars permanently, he’s just like, ‘oh, well!’ The kids mope around, which is to be expected, but they, too, go along with everything. There’s no resistance of any kind. Santa never comes close to attempting to conquer the Martians. I guess the conquering part of the title comes from the fact that the Martians adopted that part of Earth culture.

There was no real redeeming quality to this movie. The lighting was horrible, the makeup and costumes were horrible. The movie looks like it was done on a budget of $5 including the actors’ salaries. This is truly a one-star movie in every sense of the term. Even the opening/closing music was annoying. I got the movie as one of the Free One Demand selections and even then, it was overpriced. Avoid this movie.

IMDb page

Elizabeth Moon - The Speed of Dark

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

The Speed of Dark is about Lou Arrendale. Lou is autistic, but is able to function in society. The book is sent somewhere in the (presumably) near future. Shortly after Lou was born, treatments were developed to prevent children from being born with autism. Lou was able to benefit from some treatments for adults, but still requires accommodations at his job, where he analyzes patterns for a large pharmaceutical company.

Pete Aldrin supervises Lou’s group. (All of the members of the group have autism.) He seems nice enough. The one that Lou has to worry about is Mr. Crenshaw, who seems to have it in for the group. He wants to eliminate the division or at least get rid of the special accommodations, stating that it would cut costs. No one in Lou’s group can figure this out, citing that most of the accommodations have been bought and paid for; the cost of upkeep is very minimal.

Eventually, Lou figures out that there must be something bigger going on and he’s right. Crenshaw is pressuring them to take an experimental treatment. Lou and several others don’t want to take part in the experiments. They also realize that it’s illegal to be pressured. (Crenshaw tries to choose his wording carefully, so as to hide behind technicalities.)

The new treatment makes up most of the plot, although Lou does have other problems to worry about like someone that’s out to hurt him. (The person actually plants a bomb in his car.) Most of the book is narration by Lou. It becomes obvious early on that Lou doesn’t use contractions, which is somewhat distracting. During the narration, Lou points out several things he doesn’t get, such as phrases that he takes too literally. He also doesn’t understand facial expressions.

I thought the plot was thin. Lou went between home, work, a fencing club and church, with the primary focus on work and the fencing club. The primary story line was the experiment; the stalker ended up being sort of a side note to reinforce the main point, which is that autism isn’t something that should necessarily be ‘cured’.

The procedure that Lou and the others were being coerced into taking would essentially eliminate any traces of autism while leaving the rest of their personalities unaffected. The procedure had yet to be tested on humans, which only added to the desire to resist. It was entirely possible that the procedure would fail on humans and have undesirable side effects or that the people performing the experiments would try to do more than just eliminate their autistic attributes.

The real focus of the book is to ask what normal is. Is it right to say that Lou would be cured of autism? Granted, there are those that have severe limitations, but is it right to change them? (Pete Aldrin had a brother who is very severe and under professional care; hopefully, the procedure would help him.) However, just as Lou has a rigid view of the world, there are those that have a rigid view of abnormal. 

elizabethmoon.com

Terry McMillan -- It's OK if You're Clueless and 23 More Tips for the College Bound

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

In my quest to find really easy things to review, I decided to go to several local libraries to see if they had any small, easy-to-read books.  Scanning the stacks for books that were physically small, I found this one.   It looked like a simple read, so I checked it out and brought it home.

The book is based on a commencement speech that she gave at her son’s high school graduation.  As you might have gathered from the subtitle, there are 24 pieces of advice that Ms. McMillan has to give to prospective college students.  The title refers to her advice that you don’t need to know what to major in right away.  (Chapter 11 is called “It’s OK if You’re Clueless About What to Major In.”)

Yes, it’s been a while since I’ve been out of high school.  You may be wondering why I’d read this book to review it.  It hasn’t been so long that I’ve completely forgotten college.  I do remember going to classes, although I didn’t go away to college.  This is going to affect my perception of the advice given here.  Chapter 16 is called “Bring Your Dirty Laundry Home”.  This chapter wouldn’t make much sense to someone who is living at home throughout college.

Some are universal.  Chapter 9 is “Success Should Not Be Based on Fame or How Much Money You Make.”  Here, she points out that there are plenty of miserable rich people.  There are also plenty of happy people that no one knows about.

There’s one chapter on moderating alcohol intake.  It seems a little lax for a parent to not ban alcohol and drug use outright.  I’m wondering if there were some officials at her son’s high school that were having heart attacks while no one was looking, but the chapter is more an admission that alcohol will be available to college students and as a warning that going overboard with drugs is not the responsible thing to do.

It’s kind of hard to recommend such a short book that’s geared towards such a limited audience.  If I was going away to college, I don’t know that I would have bought a book like this.  Instead, I think it would have been a nice gift from someone.  It’s a quick read and while it’s not necessarily wisdom for the ages, I probably would have picked up some useful information from it.

I’m not a parent, so I don’t know how parents would view the book.  There’s one section advising students to call home frequently.  I’m wondering how many parents got this book for a child only to have them call every five minutes.  (There’s also a section advising children not to listen to their parents, but it’s meant as a warning to not let your parents relive their own glory.)

As I said, the book is short.  The version I got is only 43 pages long.  With an introduction and 24 chapters, each section will be very short.  Chapter 17 is only two sentences long.  (I call them chapters; each is a different piece of advice.)  If you have a child going away to college, I’d consider getting this book, but you might want to give it a read before you give it to them.  Chapter 17 advises students to beg for money every chance they get.

terrymcmillan.com

R.I.P.D. (2013)

I usually have a pretty good sense of when I want to see a movie.  When I first heard of R.I.P.D., it looked like an interesting premise.  A Boston police officer dies and, rather than be sent to Hell, is given a chance to police the afterlife.  When someone dies, they’re normally sucked into this huge vortex.  It was designed when Earth’s population was much smaller.  In 2014, people manage to slip through the cracks.  Nick is partnered up with Roy, who’s been doing this since the Civil War.

It’s pretty easy to find someone who hasn’t crossed over.  Just look for death and decay.  Anything like a cellular dead zone indicates that a possible ‘deado’ is nearby.  It isn’t long before Nick and Roy uncover a rather nasty plot to bring back the dead.  As if that weren’t enough, one of the recently deceased has transformed and is wreaking havoc on the greater Boston area.

This ended up being one of the few times that I was kind of disappointed.  The movie was apparently based on a series of comics.  This usually means that many of the background details have been worked out.  Even a relatively short run should give you enough for a decent two-hour movie.  Instead, it goes through the motions.  It seemed more like a pilot for a TV show.  We get to see Nick’s moment of death.  We get to see the Rest In Peace Department’s office.  We get to see the two detectives try to do their jobs.  Given how serious the situation was supposed to be, I didn’t get the sense that they were taking it all that seriously.

If you’ve seen other similar shows, such as Dead Like Me, you can guess that Nick and Roy don’t appear as themselves to normal humans.  Nick is played by Ryan Reynolds, but appears to be James Hong to the living.  Roy is played by Jeff Bridges.  When a living person approaches him, they see Marissa Miller.  This means that we get to see some guy try to flirt with Jeff Bridges a few times.  Each time, he has to play the part of an uninterested woman.

Also, we get a few undead/afterlife jokes.  When R.I.P.D. officers go bad, they have to deal with Eternal Affairs.  There’s also a scene where Nick goes to his own funeral, only to be kicked out when no one recognizes him.  I should also warn you that Roy likes to talk about his own death, where coyotes and vultures had their way with his corpse.  This is not something that small children will necessarily enjoy.

Nick is supposed to be the new guy.  Even though he was a police officer in life, he has things to learn about the afterlife.  This lets him be a stand-in for the audience, yet be good enough to do his job.  Still, it doesn’t quite work.  Like I said, the movie comes across as too simple.  We don’t get to see much of the afterlife.  We don’t get to actually see Heaven or Hell.  There’s no commentary on who or what actually awaits you.  (Nick’s new boss makes reference to him being pulled down, despite his being a relatively good person.)

Also, curry is used as a test for deados.  I’m not sure what the significance is.  I’m sure this is something that’s explained in the comics.  When Nick and Roy approach someone they suspect as being dead, they have to ask a series of questions about how the suspect would handle a series of similar situations.  If I understood, the person becomes a caricature of their sins when exposed to curry.  One such person becomes rather large with a grotesquely deformed mouth.  He’s referred to as Fat Elvis throughout the rest of the movie.

There are also scenes where Jeff Bridges tries to hard.  I won’t say overacting, but his performance does come across as a bit strong.  I don’t know what the director was trying to pull off there.  It wasn’t to the point where I couldn’t stand it, but it did get to be a little annoying at times.

This is one of those situations where I’m glad I was able to get the movie for free.  (I was able to rent it through Redbox from a code I won on Listia.)  The plot is interesting, but I think it could have been handled better.  If this had been a pilot episode, certain aspects could have been pushed back to later in the series.  Nick left a widow, who you know will eventually find out the truth.  Nick is killed by his partner, which involves at least some foreshadowing.  These are things that might be left as ambiguous in a movie.  Instead, it seemed kind of forced.

Official Site (Universal Studios)

IMDb page

TransAct Ithaca 153 Point of Sale Dot Matrix Printer

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

A receipt printer isn’t necessarily something you would normally purchase in the course of a day. Most people can go their entire lives without asking what they should look for in a receipt printer. Some people do need to look for one. The only reason I’m writing this review is that we use two of them at work. Had it not been for that, I probably never would have thought of receipt printers, either.

The Ithaca 150 printer is pretty standard. You put in a roll of receipt paper, load it in and press the reset button. Loading the paper is a little tricky for us since we use paper that’s taped in place. To start a new roll, we have to tear the paper, which makes it a little harder to load. If you feel like working, you can use a pair of scissors or a paper cutter. If not, you can just fold it over and load it in. My only real complaint about loading paper is that you’ll end up wasting a few feet of paper between tearing off the outer layer and the amount of paper that it feeds through when done. Also, you have to remember to hit the reset button on the far right, or else it won’t work.

Once that’s done, you don’t really want to have to think about the receipt printer. You just want it to work. That’s why I decided to write the review in the first place. We have two of these printers and one works well whereas the second doesn’t. The one that works is on the primary register, which I suppose is good.

The one on the secondary register has a bad habit of freezing up whenever there’s a power spike. I often have to call someone to get it working again. This isn’t good. I hate seeing the lights go out for a second and hearing the printer making that distinct sound for a second. It means I have to call it in and get the printer working again.

I can be pretty certain that it’s not the printer, though, because we’ve replaced that one. (If I recall, it had one too many power spikes and crapped out permanently.) The old one had the same set of problems. Not only did it freeze up, but it also seems to print a little more slowly. There are also some minor things that escape me at the moment, but I think many of them stem from the register, which we’ve had for a while. I’ll bet if we switched the printers, they’d take on the characteristics of the other instantly.

Overall, they’re reliable printers. As I said, we’ve had the same major problem with one, but the other has never given us any grief. I’d give the printer four stars. 

TransAct Web site

David Wilton - Word Myths: Debunking Linguisitic Urban Legends

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

There are many theories on where words and phrases come from.  Few are entirely correct.   For instance, there’s a certain four-letter word that’s said to stand for Fornication Under Consent of King.  Or is it Fornication Under Command of King?  Or, maybe it’s For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge.  (No, wait… that last one’s a Van Halen album.)  Whatever your acronym of choice is, you’re wrong.  The word goes way back to a Germanic root.

Word Myths deals with all sorts of urban legends and stories concerning words, terms and phrases.  The whole nine yards is said to have to do with the amount of cloth necessary to make a kimono or a kilt or some other garment.  It may also refer to the length that machine-gun bullets come it, meaning that to go the whole nine yards is to expend all the rounds.  There’s no proof that any of these are true.

The book goes deals with so many different myths that it doesn’t really spend much time on any given term.  At most, you may get a page or two and the pages aren’t really that big.  It doesn’t seem to be meant as an in-depth study of anything.  Instead, it’s more for a casual reader that’s interested in word origins.  (If you want something with more detail, there are other books and movies you might want to look into.  The aforementioned curse word has its own documentary, as does the N word.)

The introduction was a little boring and repetitive.  It took me several false starts to get into the book for that reason.  Once I got past that, it wasn’t so bad, mostly because of the short sections.  That and the small size of the book make for an easy read.  I could see where it would get boring, though.

I apologize for the short review, but there really isn’t much to review.  As it’s nonfiction, there’s no real plot to discus.  The subject matter is pretty basic.  It’s not like I can give you a rundown of characters or a brief plot description.  If I were to go into even a small amount of detail on each myth covered, there would be no point in reading the book.  The best I can do is give you a general idea of what the book is like.

This is one of those books I’d recommend getting from the library rather than buying for yourself.  If you’re going to buy it, get it as a gift for someone else.  Yes, it could be used for reference, but there’s not enough detail on each myth that I think it would be worth it.  I think the overall theme of the book and the message I took from it is to bee a little more skeptical when someone tells you a story or forwards a story to you.  You never know how much of it is true.

wordorigins.com

 

Evil in Clear River (1988)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

Lindsay Wagner plays Kate McKinnon, the mother of a high-school student who loves his history class. Most of the students worship Peter Suvak, played by Randy Quaid. Suvak is also the mayor of the small town in which the movie is set. Clear River, Alberta, is a close-knit community. That’s why it’s so hard for Kate and her husband to believe that Suvak is spreading what’s called revisionist history.

She finds out about it when her son is studying for history class. She notices that there are a lot of references in her son’s notes to Jews and a Jewish conspiracy. She confronts Suvak about it and he plays it down like it’s no big deal. He even offers to lend her some books on the subject. After reading them, she knows that Suvak is trouble. She takes the matter to the principal, who doesn’t really seem to want to do anything about it. She takes the matter to the school board twice and eventually gets Suvak fired.

Along the way, McKinnon finds that there are three groups of people in the community. First are the people that agree with Suvak. This includes most of his students and fellow teachers. The second group is made up of people that don’t want to get on the bad side of the first group. McKinnon’s neighbor doesn’t like Suvak, but says that she and her husband depend on the first group of people for business. The third group of people is made up of those that don’t really see what the first two groups are talking about. They don’t really know what’s going on.

The last group is the first group to join McKinnon’s cause, but there really aren’t that many willing to risk everything. McKinnon and family have to endure the hatred of the community. Some people from the second group join, but many of the second group are only made more afraid seeing what the McKinnons have to go through. Eventually, Mrs. McKinnon gains momentum. The matter eventually catches the attention of the media. This leads to a visit from a prosecutor who informs McKinnon that Suvak has violated the law. Jews are a recognized minority in Canada and Suvak has incited hatred of them. He’s arrested and people begin to see the light.

The story is one of good versus evil. Suvak believes that evil has taken the form of the Jewish people. McKinnon believes that evil has taken the form of Suvak, who she voted for twice because she felt that he’s a good man. He’s been good for the community for many years and everyone is able to look up to him.

I’m guessing that this was a made-for-TV movie. First, some scenes fade out and another fades in; this occurs about every fifteen minutes. (Essentially, the DVD is missing the commercial breaks.) Second, the movie ends with Suvak stripped of all power and the son, despite hating his parents, realizes the error of his ways. There’s definitely a feel-good sense to this movie.

There’s also some blatant and some subtle references to the good-versus-evil debate. McKinnon is focused on bringing down Suvak. She’s as convinced that she’s right as he is that he’s right. The thing that separates Suvak from McKinnon is that Suvak is in a position of authority. He has a responsibility to teach his students to think rather than to feed them his version of history. (Every major book on the subject, by the way, refutes his version of history. Suvak claims that the media are censored.)

I have to wonder if she went too far by trying to bring him down as mayor. It’s not that I think he wasn’t a bad man. To me, it seemed like more of a personal vendetta at that point than anything else. I know that he was evil and McKinnon couldn’t trust him, but as she had pointed out, many of the people felt that they could trust him as mayor even if he couldn’t be trusted as a teacher. McKinnon was trying to totally ruin him. Suvak’s conviction on the charge brought against him led to his downfall. Even though McKinnon’s effort to recall him had failed, Suvak had eventually been removed as mayor.
  

IMDb page

Robot and Frank = Abort Fond Rank [Robot & Frank (2012)]

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

Frank Weld used to be a burglar.  He’s what’s called a second-story man.  (Basically, he’d try to gain entry using unconventional means, like through a second-story window.)  He’s retired now and somewhat forgetful.  He can remember where he lives, but seems to forget that a favorite restaurant of his closed and is now a beauty shop.  His son, Hunter, visits every week, but is worried about him.  Enter, Robot, an unnamed robot that’s meant to serve as Frank’s personal assistant.

Yes, robots are usually given names, but Frank is understandably upset about his gift.  He doesn’t want this machine telling him what to eat, when to wake up and how to spend his free time.  This changes when Frank realizes that Robot knows the law, but doesn’t understand it.  He can define breaking and entering, but doesn’t realize that he’s not supposed to do it.  This means that Frank can use Robot to break into a library and steal a book.

You wouldn’t think that a book would be worth stealing, even if it is an antique copy of Don Quixote, but the library is being made into a community center.  (The movie is set in the near future; books have become obsolete.)  He wants to steal it to impress the librarian, Jennifer.  Frank and Robot go on to burglarize the home of a pretentious developer and his wife.  This draws the attention of the police, mostly because the developer doesn’t seem to like Frank.  It’s up to Frank and Robot to do what they can to foil the police.

When I saw the page for the movie on Netflix, I figured it was one of these odd-couple buddy-type movies where the two grow closer to each other, or at least Frank comes to accept the robot.  Robot points out several times that he’s really the sum of his programming.  Anything else is in service to his primary directive of keeping Frank healthy.  (This leads to a dilemma: Does Frank wipe Robot’s memory or risk getting caught?)

There’s also the issue of worrying about a parent that has deteriorating health.  Frank’s memory is going.  Hunter doesn’t like the prospect of leaving his father home alone, but the alternative is a ‘brain center’, which is basically a nice way of saying nursing home for people with mental issues.  The solution is Robot, but even that has issues.  Frank’s daughter, Madison, has moral objections to having robotic help.

I found the premise to be very interesting.  It’s a problem that we’ve all had to worry about if we have older relatives, making the story relatable.  Frank’s memory loss isn’t to the point where he’s a joke.  It’s not a string of forgetful-old-man jokes.  Also, the robot does seem to mimic human behavior quite well, to the point that you can accept it as a character.  When Frank leans back against a wall to avoid being seen, Robot does the same.  It also has the ability to learn what Frank likes and is even able to negotiate.  Robot is aware that Frank may be caught and sent to prison, but is also aware that his cognitive health is getting better now that he has purpose.

There’s also not a lot of futuristic stuff.  Frank lives in a normal house with some moderately advanced technology.  (He has a flat-screen TV with the ability to have a video conference.  Cell phones look like transparent iPhones.)  It doesn’t try to oversell us on the futuristic stuff.  The two recurring reminders of that are the presence of the robot and the looming absence of the library.

I think most of all, it’s a simple story.  If you’re looking for something without a lot going on or things you might miss, this is a good movie to watch.  I’d like to get a friend or relative to watch this only because I’d like to talk about it with someone.  There are aspects of the ending that might leave you wondering. 

IMDb page

Official Site (Japan)

'Robot & Frank' Trailer HD

THX 1138 (1971)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

Imagine a world where love and sex are both crimes. Instead of names, people are assigned an alphanumeric designation. Deviation from the norm is either ‘cured’ or results in the abnormal person being isolated from society.

THX 1138 is an average ‘person’ in such a society. He works in a factory making robots. His roommate, LUH 3417, monitors things. He and she both lead the life that the state wants them to, for the most part, until LUH starts altering THX’s diet. He starts to notice a change. He goes to a cookie-cutter confessional, where an image resembling Christ lights up and a recorded confessor plays. It’s very generic; people don’t seem to notice that it’s the same thing every time. (“Yes…Yes…I see…Please explain…”)

Eventually, THX gets to a point where he’s able to love his roommate and even have sex with her. SEN 5241 knows what’s going on. He wants to be THX’s roommate, so he reassigns LUH and puts himself put in her place. (He’s not supposed to be able to do this, but he’s very good at hacking into the computers.) THX and SEN end up turning each other in; both end up separated from society with a group of people that are deemed incurable. (Basically, everyone is medicated. I assume that these are the people that have problems that can’t be medicated.)

SEN wants to lead the people back into society, or at least to establish himself as their leader. THX simply wants to get out. Anyone who wants to come along is more than welcome to follow so long as they don’t bother him. SEN and THX set off to find the way out. The trick is that their prison is pure white in every direction. You can’t even see where the floor meets the horizon. Eventually, they meet a hologram who is able to show them an exit. (I’ll explain about the hologram later.)

The three of them leave and find themselves in a busy walkway. SEN gets separated from the other two and manages to get as far away as possible. THX and the hologram go in another direction and find their own way somewhere else. I won’t tell you what happens because I don’t feel it’s necessary to do so in order to discuss the movie. (Why should I ruin it for you?)

The society that you see in THX 1138 is a cross between Gattaca and 1984. Everything is controlled by a government or authority. There’s little or no room for deviation. Those that have seen Gattaca will remember it as being a very dark, dismal portrayal of the future. THX 1138 is a very bright, well-lit portrayal of the future, but is still rigid. Everyone is bald. Almost everyone is white and wears white clothing. One exception is the previously mentioned hologram, who’s black. I don’t think that he’s an actual hologram, per say. Rather, he’s an actor on a program that’s projected as a hologram. (He’s being called by what he does rather than what he is.)

It’s a very sterile-looking society. Almost everyone looks the same with very little differentiation between the genders. One of the recurring lines throughout the movie is that consumption is being standardized. Everything is ordinary, down to what people eat and what people watch. (Well, ok. Entertainment does some variation, but there don’t seem to be too many choices.)

The special edition contains two discs. One has the movie and some commentary on the audio. The other has trailers and all sorts of commentary on the movie. I definitely recommend watching the commentary on both discs. When watching the movie, you’ll find no explanation provided as to where the society is or how it got that way. It’s simply presented to you. The viewer is left to interpret the society and figure everything out. The commentary goes into what the filmmakers wanted and how they were trying to present the movie to you. There’s also some history of the film company, American Zoetrope, and how THX 1138 came to be as a movie.

This isn’t a movie for children. There’s not much nudity and what nudity there is isn’t really that erotic. However, I don’t think that many children will be able to understand the movie. (It took me maybe about five or ten minutes to really start understanding what was going on.) Also, even though everything is bright, there is a depressing aspect to the movie. Much of the movie deals with wanting to break free, either in a literal or figurative sense. This society is controlled. There’s almost no room for individuality. People just eat, sleep and work. I really don’t think a child would be able to handle this.

Even among adults, I don’t think that this movie is for everyone. I’m actually going to recommend this movie to my brother, who I think will like this. However, most of the people that I know would probably wouldn’t really be able to fully appreciate it. 

Official Site

 THX 1138 (1971) - Original Trailer

Bill Moyers - Welcome to Doomsday

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

 
I decided to look for some small books that I could read at the library without having to check out and take home.  I came across Welcome to Doomsday, which is apparently a transcript of a speech given by Bill Moyers.  In the lecture, he speaks of the religious right and their presence in American politics.

He feels that such a presence is dangerous because someone who believes the rapture is upon us doesn’t have proper motivation to protect the environment.  Forget the belief that God gave us a planet to use as we pleased.  If Jesus is going to come tomorrow and take you to Heaven, what do you care if the planet is shot today?

The speech refers to it being Bush’s sixth year, which would make it about four years old.  Things have changed a little.  We have a different President in office, but we do have a midterm election coming up, if I recall.  The president isn’t the only one with political influence; Moyer points out  that there are plenty of senators and representatives that have strong Evangelical constituencies.

There’ s a preface by Bill McKibben.  McKibben seems to agree with Moyers in that the Republicans worry him.  The book seems to indicate that Evangelicals and/or Republicans are solely to blame for the environmental mess we’re in now.  The Bush Administration, according to the book, is the one that wants to roll back all of the environmental legislation like regulations governing clean air and water or protection for endangered species.

I’m a liberal atheist.  I don’t belong to any political party.  I think it’s too easy to blame Republicans or Democrats or Evangelicals.  What we need is elected officials that will help protect the planet.  I’m also curious as to how many Evangelicals actually believe in rapture and how many of those don’t actually think it’s necessary to protect the planet.  (In other words, how do Evangelicals feel about how they’re portrayed in the book?)

One of the problems with a speech, especially such a short one, is that you can throw out some facts and innuendo.  There may be truth to what Moyers says, but I’ve learned not to take one person’s take at face value.   The book is worth reading, but I wouldn’t stop here.  I’d recommend getting several viewpoints on the subject.

It’s a very short book, which is why I chose it for review.  It’s only 56 pages; each page is relatively small, making the book easy to read in one sitting.  This book doesn’t really give any solid facts like statistics.  It’s more of a warning not to take the Bible literally as some people have.  It seems to be the opinion of Bill Moyers.  I’m not saying that this is good or bad.  As with any subject, I’d recommend getting at least a few different sources, whether or not this is one of them. 

 

 

Moyers & Company 

 

Bill McKibben's Web Site

The Human Stain = A Hint: Shun Mate [The Human Stain (2003)]

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

Life is full of difficult decisions. It's also full of foolish mistakes that you wish you could undo.

Anthony Hopkins plays Coleman Silk. He's got a great position at a college that he is said to have taken from being mediocre to being great. One day, he's teaching class. He calls on two students who happen to not be present that day. It's the fifth week of class and Silk can't recall having ever seen them. He asks if any of the students have seen these two mystery people or if they're simply "spooks." He uses the word to mean ghost, but both of the students (both of which are African-American) take great offense at the word, which also has a derogatory use. Despite the fact that Silk couldn't have possibly known what the two students looked like, a hearing is formed. Silk resigns in protest. When he tells his wife what happened, she can't handle the stress; she dies of an aneurysm several hours later. Thus, the story is set in motion.

Silk contacts a reclusive writer, Nathan Zuckerman, who is played by Gary Sinise. Zuckerman encourages Silk to write his own story, but Silk can't get the words right. In the meantime, the two men form a friendship. Silk also meets Faunia Farley at the Post Office where she works. (She also milks cows to pay for rent and has another job at the college where Silk worked.) The two end up sleeping together, which isn't a good idea considering her psychotic and possessive ex-husband, played by Ed Harris.

It took me a while to get into the movie. It had gotten to the point where I was so invested in the movie that I simply watched the rest of it because I didn't have that much time left in the movie. It isn't until the end that you really begin to appreciate it.

It's a very complicated plot. The movie has a lot of flashbacks as Silk tells his story to Zuckerman, but it's not hard to keep track of. The timeline is either pretty evident or becomes evident quickly. You do have to pay attention to the movie. You really can't watch it while doing something else.

There's also a very depressing aspect to it. Silk had a lot of decisions to make and a lot of his choices brought him enemies. "Spook" may have been a poor choice of words, but no one stuck up for him. When it came down to it, he was on his own and a lot of Silk's isolation had to with the decisions he made.

If you think that I've given away too many details, then you haven't seen the movie. There are still a few surprises left for you. Do not take your children to see this movie. There's sex, derogatory terms, violence and all sorts of adult themes. Children couldn't possible understand much of the movie. It's also not for everyone. This isn't a feel-good movie. It's a movie that's going to make you look at certain things and really think about them. 

Official Site (Mirimax)

IMDb page

Clue (1985)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

Being born in 1976, there were a lot of movies that I was aware of.  Some were movies that were talked about, but I was too young to see.  (The Godfather was released a few years before I was born, but I had to wait to be able to see it.)  Others, I saw, but didn’t remember that well.  Clue was one such movie.  The movie is based on the board game of the same name.  I think most of what I remember of the movie came from having played the game.

For those that have never played the board game, the basic idea is to figure out which of several characters committed a murder.  You also have to figure out which of several weapons were used and which of several rooms the murder took place in.  It was one of those games that I never cared for, mostly because I could never really get the hang of it.

The movie borrows the characters, weapons and rooms.   It’s set in 1954.  We start with a butler named Wadsworth, who wasn’t in the game but is used for the sake of the story.  He’s invited several people to the house where he works, but for secrecy, he’s decided to give each person a pseudonym from the game.  (Colonel Mustard, Professor Plum, etc.)  He then reveals that Mr. Boddy has been blackmailing each of them for various reasons.  (Colonel Mustard was a war profiteer.)  An assortment of weapons (gun, lead pipe, etc.) are provided.  When the lights go out, several expected sounds (a gunshot, a thud, etc.) are heard.  The lights come back on and we have a dead Boddy.

To add to the suspense, several other murders take place.  (A police officer, a distressed motorist and a singing telegram show up, putting them in mortal danger.)   It’s up to the remaining people to figure out who did what to whom with what and where.  Not only do the main characters know each other, but the three uninvited guests are not random.

The game carries over well to a movie.  This is probably because the game was one of mystery.  All you’re really doing is taking the names, weapons and locations provided and working them into a story, which could easily have been written as a independent concept and modified slightly to fit the details of the board game.  There’s also a lot of comedy, which is a bit unusual for a murder mystery.

There are a few adultish aspects to the movie.  Many of the secrets are somewhat adult in nature, although nothing explicit is mentioned.  (Miss Scarlet tends to the desires of men.  Mr. Green is gay, which was probably more of a big deal for someone in a position of power in the 1950s than today.)  Also, there’s a maid that grownups will probably react differently to than children.  Again, there’s nothing explicit, but it is worth mentioning.  We’re talking PG-13 at worst.

One thing that I wondered about was the multiple endings.  Those that have seen it on TV or on home media know that there are three endings, each with a different set of murderers.  The movie, with all three endings, runs about an hour and a half.  (IMDb has it listed at 94 minutes.)  From what I’ve read and heard, the movie was released in theaters with each ending separately.  (Theaters had the endings marked as Ending A, Ending B or Ending C.)  This would have made the movie much shorter.  I realize that there’s no law saying that a movie has to be of at least a certain length, but the endings take up about half of the movie.  I was thinking that the movie would have had to have been something like 60 minutes if you took out two endings.

I was able to get the movie streaming through Netflix.  The only option is to watch all three endings, although you may have the option to play the endings individually if you get the DVD.  It looks like the option is available on DVD, but I’m not sure if this is something only available on certain versions.  I’d say watch it streaming or, if you get the DVD, watch the combined version.  I don’t know if you’re going to want to sit through three iterations of the movie just watch the endings separately. 

IMDb page

Clue - Trailer

Explorers (1985)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

There are a lot of movies that I remember from growing up.  The problem is that I don’t remember any of them well enough to write a review of them.  This is where Netflix comes in handy.  I’ve recently been going through movies that I remember from years past.  I had actually all but forgotten about Explorers.  One day, while goofing around on Wikipedia, I came across the movie and decided to look it up.  Lo and behold, there it was, available for streaming.

I remembered very little about it, except that it was about three teenagers that manage to build a spaceship based on some dreams that one of them was having.  They manage to leave Earth and are taken aboard an alien spaceship, where they make some new friends.  There were a few throwaway lines and jokes, but that was about it.

Ben Crandall is the kid with the dreams.  Ben sees himself floating over what he believes is a circuit board.  He remembers enough of it to show to his nerdy and unfortunately named friend, Wolfgang Muller.  Wolfgang recognizes enough of it to build something.  Along for the ride is Darren Woods, a kid that helped Ben with some bullies.

Amazingly, the prototype is able to work.  It even downloads some instructions.  Wolfgang manages to figure out what’s going on; it’s creating a stable force field.  He can even manipulate it.  They make it big enough for a small home-made vessel to fit in.  When it develops a mind of its own, they shut it down, but make another attempt not long after.

The vessel is brought on to an alien ship.  After being split up, they meet some aliens.  The aliens really like Earth (read: American) culture.  All they want to do is meet some humans.  The five of them hang out for a while before the humans are basically told that it’s time to go.

I have to admit that nostalgia played a huge part in rewatching this film.  I probably would have passed on watching it had I not seen it as a child.  I remembered liking it when I first saw it, but not so much now.  From what I’ve read, it was rushed to theaters, but it does have a complete look to me, even if just barerly.  I’m wondering if there were other scenes that were meant to be filmed but left out.

It’s kind of weird to think of a few teenagers making a functional spaceship off of a lucid dream.  (Granted, they did have help.)  It’s the kind of thing that, if done well, could have spawned a sequel or a TV series.   It seemed to me that the aliens got a small amount of screen time.

It’s definitely a movie that children could enjoy.  There’s not much violence, other than Ben being beaten up.  You don’t have any adult themes.  It’s just three kids going on an adventure.  Do they give up after a few setbacks or do they go into the great unknown?  There is a great deal of trust in restarting the project.

All things considered, I don’t regret rewatching the movie.  It was still kind of fun to see.  I’d recommend checking it out if you have kids.  The aliens are kind of goofy, but I don’t think would be scary for children in grade school. 

IMDb page

Howard the Duck (1986)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

Shortly after digital cable was installed in my house last week, I began flipping through the free On Demand stuff. I found Howard the Duck. Now, some movies I see because I want to. Others, I see because others lock me in a room and force me to watch them. Then, there are movies that I just end up watching. Howard the duck is part of the third category. I had seen the movie many, many years ago and vaguely recalled the plot details. I sort of remember liking the movie overall, but disliking a few parts. I decided to give it a second shot, mostly because, as I said, it was free.

The movie is about an evolved duck named, of all things, Howard T. Duck. He lives in Marshington, D.C., on a planet remarkably like Earth. He has an apartment, likes cigars and reads Playduck. Just as he’s settling in for the night, he apartment begins to rattle. He’s ripped out of his building and across the galaxy to our planet. He lands in the middle of Cleveland only to find two guys harassing a woman. As any gentleman would do, Howard steps in and uses his massive Quack Fu skills to save the day.

Grateful, the woman takes him in. She’s the lead singer of a band called the Cherry Bombs and goes by Beverly Switzler. (For those that think she looks a bit familiar, she’s played by Lea Thompson.) Howard tells her of his plight and, despite wanting to go home, knows he’ll have to blend in until he can figure out how he can do that. The thing is that she knows someone who actually knows the guy responsible for bringing Howard to Earth.

Doctor Walter Jenning is more than happy to send Howard back. There’s just one slight problem. Before Howard can get to the lab, there’s a slight accident in which Dr. Jenning is taken over by an Evil Overlord From the Edge of the Universe. The Evil Overlord From the Edge of the Universe is intent on bringing his Evil Overlord friends to rule Earth and they need human hosts to survive in our environment. Howard must stop the possessed Jenning from allowing Evil Overlords to possess Beverly.

Now, Howard the Duck wasn’t a bad movie. It just had a few issues. The one thing kept bothering me about the movie was the obvious duck puns, such as the aforementioned Marshington. The movie doesn’t rely on it, but does occasionally beat you over the head with it. There’s even some duck nudity that might be hard to explain to a small child.

Another thing that kept bothering me was how everyone was scared of Howard. I’m sorry, but a duck just isn’t that scary. He’s three feet tall and talks. Big deal. Get used to it. He’s going to be around for a while. There are a few passersby that don’t take him seriously. This, I can understand. This would even be my reaction. You see something like Howard and think it’s a guy in a duck costume. (Yes, I know. It is actually several guys taking turns in a duck costume, but you get my point.)

The movie was based on some comics done by Steve Gerber. I’ve never seen the comics, but I’d like to look into them. I don’t think the movie was translated that well. It’s not the acting, exactly, nor is it the fact that the movie is dated. I don’t think it did that well in its own time. I think it’s just that the movie didn’t seem to take itself seriously enough to be a serious contender as a movie.

For instance, none of the science is really explained. You’re basically told that there’s this big ray gun that can suck people off of far-distant planets for no good reason and can even send them back. It can also suck Evil Overlords From the Edge of the Universe and put them inside of a person. You just have to accept this. There’s nothing about transdimensional rifts or space-time anomalies.

It is an interesting story, which opens with a narrator saying that given an infinite universe, an infinite variety of planets exist. Had the movie been done well, I could have seen it being made into a TV show or at least spawning a few sequels. The trouble is that it’s kind of hard to take the duck costume that seriously. It looks unrealistic to the point of being distracting.

Overall, the movie is decent if you don’t take it that seriously. I can’t give it more than three stars, though.

IMDb page

Official Site (Lucasfilm)

Marvel Site

Galaxy Quest (1999)

It’s funny how one show or movie can become a cultural icon while others of similar quality are never noticed.  Even those who have never seen Star Trek would probably know the names of the ship and at least a few of the characters and main races.  This is what makes it perfect for parody.  Everyone gets the joke on some level.

Galaxy Quest starts off at a convention for a show called, appropriately enough, Galaxy Quest.  The main actors didn’t have much of a career outside of doing conventions, promotions and whatnot in character.  (Alexander Dane, played by Alan Rickman, is never seen without his prosthetic forehead, even during the one scene where he’s in normal clothing.)

Tim Allen plays Jason Nesmith.  Jason Nesmith plays the captain of the NSEA Protector.  At a convention, he overhears what a washed-up, good-for-nothing, unpopular person he his.  He realizes that it’s true and takes it out on a group of fans.  On his way out, he talks a group seeking his help.  This group happens to be actual aliens in need of actual help.  When they approach Nesmith at his house, Nesmith is hung over.

He still agrees to go with them, thinking it’s some other job.  Little does he realize that he’s actually supposed to negotiate with a hostile alien named Sarris.  It isn’t until he’s sent back home that he realizes that any of it was real.  His fellow actors dismiss him as drunk until the aliens show up again, requesting further help.  Everyone goes, including an actor who had appeared only as an extra in one episode.

They soon realize that the Thermians are advanced enough to build a replica of the ship from the show, but have no idea that the show was a work of fiction, which apparently doesn‘t exist in their culture.  They refer to the episodes of Galaxy quest as historical documents, thinking that the actors are actually astronauts.

The actors play along until they realize that all Nesmith did was to aggravate Sarris and subsequently get his ‘crew’ into danger.  The second incident with Sarris goes poorly, resulting in a badly damaged ship, which they do manage to repair.  Sarris eventually attacks the ship again, nearly winning.  With a little help, the day is saved.

Very few of the jokes are specific enough that you’d have to watch the series to get them.  Some of them are more generic, like having to race through an improbable obstacle course.    Some do require a bit more knowledge, like references to particular characters.  (Sigourney Weaver plays Gwen DeMarco, shown to be little more a love interest for the captain.)

The movie is almost like an accidental A-Team movie with a Star Trek twist.  Sure, the abducted-by-naïve-aliens thing has been done before.  Sure, coming through despite not really being able to has been done before.  Sure, I’d love to see if they try a sequel.  (So far as I know, the last one is still in the speculation stage.)

It comes across as a movie that makes its point without being preachy.  It pokes fun at the people without being insulting.  (Isn’t it every fan’s dream to help out the star of their favorite show?)  I don’t know that it would make my list of top ten films, but it does find that balance of being fun and being smart.  I’d recommend watching it if you get a chance.

IMDb page