Movie Review, Drag Me to Hell 9/10.

Sam Raimi do us all a favor and unentangle yourself from that Spider-Man franchise and get back to making the movies you were meant to make.  For the last few years I have seen just about every horror movie that has come out.  That means I have seen a lot of bad horror movies.  In fact, I can't recall the last time I saw an American horror movie that was worth the price of cereal price. (well grindhouse was good, but almost more of a comedy than a horror movie) There have been a few foreign films of quality, but on the whole the American genre has gone to just remaking Japanese and Korean Horror/Thrillers, well,  horribly.  Finally there is horror movie that I was glad I went to the theatre and watched.  This movie is a perfect combination of campy and funny (something Raimi does very well, Army of Darkness anyone?) and extremely scary.  This is an awesome and hard to obtain combination.  Alison Lohman is good as the main protagonist, although she does have the body of a ten year old boy.  Justin Long is equally good, and the product placement around him is hilarious.  If you don't recognize him by name, you will recognize him when you see him, as he is known not only for acting, but for starring in a certain products commercials. The supporting cast is good as well, although don't be looking for any A listers in this film.  If you like horror movies do yourself a favor and go out and see this one, its a rockin good time and worth the trip to the theatre.  Prepare to laugh, be scared, and be grossed out all at the same time.  

Five Best Works of Literature from the 20th Century.(excluding Theatre, Thats a different list )

Those of you that know me understand that I have a bit of a bias towards certain authors, but I guess that is just the way it is in regards to literature, we tend to like what we like and hate what we hate and often there isn't a lot of reason for which category it goes in other than we like it, or don't.  Regardless, here is my top five.  

5.   Let Us Now Praise Famous Men by James Agee and Walker Evans-  This work probably hits home more if, like me, your parents are older.  My Mom was born as sharecropper in circumstances very similar to the farmers that are featured by James Agee, and it gives some unique and touching insights to what life was like back then.  It is also unusual because Agee wrote the words, but Walker Evans was actually given co-authorship for his photographic work.  The images tell the story just as much as the words do, and I might be a bit biased because I am a photographer and Evans is my favorite.  Either way it is recommended reading.

4. Winesburg, Ohio by Sherwood Anderson-A wonderful collection of intertwining short stories that encapsulate the good and the bad (mostly the bad) of living amongst colorful characters in small town Ohio.  Anderson in this work is an exquisite writer, and just reading the words he puts on the page is a treat.  

3.  Catch-22 by Joseph Heller- Dark, scary, hilarious, touching, and socially provocative.  Those are all ways to describe Joseph Heller's one literary success.  Quirky characters immediately pull you in and let you know that war is in fact hell.

2. Bluebeard by Kurt Vonnegut-  With him the question is which one do you pick?  Most people tend to pick Cat's Cradle or Slaughterhouse-5.  Myself, I tend to enjoy Hocus Pocus, Bluebeard, and Breakfast of Champions more.  I decided on Bluebeard, because it is the closest he comes to creating a real character, not a caricature of one.  I immediately became attached to the elderly painter with a very real idea of his own mortality and the fascination with panty lines.

1. The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway-  I have been told that I am obsessed with this book, and that could very likely be true.  I read it for the first time when I was very impressionable, and I still remember the first time I realized that Jack Barnes was, how to put it, damaged.  Its a wonderful written novel that really shows us the meaning of torment and escapism.  

Five Best's.........Characters from the Fantasy Genre.

I love lists. I love reading them, I love making them, and I love debating them. I have decided that I am going to start periodically rating the five best (insert topic here) lists on a variety of random things that I enjoy, or find interesting or important. To start it off I have decided on listing the five best characters from the fantasy novel genre. Literature is to strong a word for what most of these characters come from. This a list not containing the characters from Tolkien or Rowling's worlds, but rather the ones that come from the type of books that are put out by Tor Publications. They are are the characters that generally will only be known by fans of the genre, not by the ones who only know characters that make it into popular culture.

5. Artemis Entreri (Forgotten Realms, R.A. Salvatore) A master swordsmen whom upon his first appearance is evil incarnate. He lives to be the best assassin there is, and has felt that to be a deadly master of the blade that means crushing all emotions inside him. However, his character grows and his comes to terms with what he has done and what it means as he grows older and looses his edge.

4. Matrim Cauthon (Wheel of Time, Robert Jordan) Lazy, gambling, womaning, the type that avoids work whenever possible. However, he is also is nigh unbeatable with a quarterstaff, by any swordsmen, and has the devils own luck (or rather the dark ones, as they call it in the series) throw in the fact that he has 10000 years of memories from former generals filling in the patches of his own swiss cheesed memory and he is a very formidable opponent and a very interesting character.

3. Vin Venture (Mistborn Trilogy, Brandon Sanderson) I was debating which character from this series to include as their are at least 3 possible candidates, I still ended up with two. I went with Vin because she is somewhat unusual amongst fantasy characters, or rather at least the ones that are the primary protagonists. And that is because she is a she. But not only is she the female, but she is also is truly a strong character, both in strength and in force of will.

2. Croaker (The Black Company, Glen Cook) Truly my favorite character from any movie, comic book, fantasy novel series, or anything really. Part soldier, physician, historian, general, and full time cynic. He is aware that he is the one writing the history, and although he tries to stay neutral, he can't help but transfer a little bit of himself into the histories he writes. His interactions with the Lady are some of the best uncomfortably romantic scenes in fantasy literature. And of course their flirtation spans about 40 years.

1. Sazed (The Mistborn Triology, Brandon Sanderson) He gets the nod because he is the most interesting and unusual character in any story I have read. First of all he is a eunuch, and it just gets more interesting from there. I can't really go to much into detail about his awesomeness without giving away the entire twist to a fantasy trilogy.

Batting Average vs. OBP., Where is the Value?

This is an always interesting debate and one that in the last ten or fifteen years has made a tremendious shift.  Of course the discussion goes hand to hand with the one on the value of the RBI and the Run Scores.  For years the stats that were most valued by GM's, Managers, and most everybody in baseball were these three categories.  Within the last few years however, sabermetricians have been preaching loudly that all three of these catergories were being over valued.  Batting average was considered by these people unimportant compared to the more all encompassing On Base Percentage.  RBI's and Run scored were considered poor measures of evaluation because they are so contingent on who is in the lineup around the specific player.  There are, however, some hangers on to the older ways of thinkg.  One of which is Analyst and Hall of Famer Joe Morgan.  He complete disregards stats like OBP, and I find it hilarious.  He may be the single player in history that has benefited the most from sabermetric stats.  

The question in regards to batting average is this.  Based on this lines which player is more valuable.  Player A who hit (keep in mind I am leaving SLG out, and these stats are real lines, not made up speculative stats) .341 with a .375 OBP.  Or Player B who hit .293 with a .411 OBP.  Now there is a lot of things that go into the value of this players, such as slugging, speed, and yes, even runs and RBI's.  But this isn't in itself comparing two complete players, but rather comparing the value of the the statistical catergories  themselves.  The problem with analyzing this players value also has to do with the team they are on.  Sometimes a team doesn't need another OBP guy and they really do need a guy who can drive in the runs, and sometimes what a team truly needs is players that can get on base.  However, its best in the long haul to evaluate a players ability looking purely at the stats as if he was not on a particular team.  Teams are fluid they change over the years, so its hard to compare one players career to another based on team needs.  

With little exception I fall on the side that says the OBP is possibly the one most valuable stat in determining a players worth.  Of course truthfully the holy grail of determination is the OPS.  This is as most of you who read this know, a combination of OBP and SLGing. This is without a doubt the most important measure of a players offensive value.  Far supassing cumulative number counts.  Of course with any statistical measure there are always anomalies (Adam Dunn for one, his OPS is way higher that his actual offensive value in a run producing spot in the order) but this is the best that we have, and is the most efficient way of comparing players quickly and accurately.  

Movie Review Terminator: Salvation 7.5/10

I am different from most people.  I go and see a movie then I check Rottentomatoes to see how it is doing.  After watching it tonight I expected to log onto Rotten Tomatoes and see it with at least a decent rating.  I was very surprised to see how poorly it was doing.  I really liked this movie, which is odd, because I really, really dislike all of the Terminator movies.  This one however, got my attention.  Maybe it was just because of the nice flashy special effects, and see a huge robot on the screen.  Or maybe it was the fact that it had the kid who played Chekov from Star Trek and Charley Bartlett in it.  The weakness of the movie is its storyline, and a few of the acting performances.  Moon Bloodgood won't be winning any awards she was in it because she is hot (although oddly I think Bryce Dallas Howard is way hotter) and neither will Michael Ironside.  The plot is a bit thin, and the storytelling a bit wooden, but honestly, I don't think most people are watching this movie for the screenplay.  Christian Bale is good as usual, but it was a bit annoying that he dropped into his Batman voice from time to time, he really needs to avoid that.  Sam Worthington put in a surprisingly good performance, and is a bit of a scene stealer, he is definitely a less is more type of actor though.  The kid, Anton Yelchin, is really good and he is without a doubt a rising young talent.  It must have been a hell of a month for him with both this movie and Star Trek coming out.  Its good to be him, must be a tough life for a 20 year old.  He has come along way since Hearts of Atlantis.  All in all a good film, great special effects, some decent acting, its a popcorn flick, but hey that doesn't mean it isn't enjoyable.  

Broglio for Brock

Back in 1964 there was a trade between the Chicago Cubs and the St. Louis Cardinals.  Lou Brock was trade for a pitcher named Ernie Broglio.  There were some other players in the trade, they were inconsequential, then and inconsequential now.  This trade comes up fairly often in blogs, lists, and books listing the worst trades ever.  Ernie Broglio was pitcher that injured his arm and never really amounted to much and Lou Brock went on a tear, helped the Cardinals win the pennant (took a collapse by the Phils, but thats a blog for a different day) and helped them beat the Yanks in the World Series.  He then went on to set the record for stolen bases (since broken by Rickey Henderson) and to collect 3000 hits.  However is it really fair to call this a historically bad trade?  The answer is no.  When looking at trades to determine if they are really bad you have to look at what the GM was looking at during that season.  At the time Broglio was a young pitcher who had already won 20 games.  He by all account had good stuff, and looked like he would be a good pitcher.  Brock on the other hand had never really been much of a hitter.  On top of that he wasn't much of a fielder.  Actually he didn't really have a position.  At the time, weak slugging speedy guys were expected to play center.  He didn't have the arm to play right field, and left field really needed to be reserved for guys that could slug the ball, but were weak defensively.  Brock was considered expendible by the Cubs and given the sample so far, although he had hit the ball in the minors, that probably was not a bad call.  The Cardinals already had Curt Flood in Center, so they didn't mind playing another speedy guy in Left, and in fact were just looking for someone to steal some bags.  At the times in truthfully looked like a win, win situation for both teams with maybe even the Cubs making out better.  No one could predict that Broglio would have arm issues and lose his stuff.  Its not fair to judge trades with hindsight.  Sometimes a deal just doesn't work out, its not the GM's fault and the Cardinals didn't have some magic 8 ball.  Sometimes trades are just stupid and people get fleeced, and those deals deserve to be torched.  But deals like this, which weren't really bad at all given the scenario do not deserve to be remembered in infamy. 

In case any of you were ever going to get me a present....

So I was thinking of things that would be awesome presents for me. Yea I am just that self centered :) And I came up with ten baseball books that I really want, but are hard to find and have never managed to add to my collection. Figured, heck why not, I love lists, I might as well make a list of my top ten most wanted baseball books.

1. Wicked Curve: The Life and Troubled Times of Grover Cleveland Alexander by John C. Skipper

2. Three Finger: The Mordecai Brown Story by Cindy Thomson

3. Ed Delahanty in the Emerald Age of Baseball by Jerrold Casway

4. Connie Mack: A Life in Baseball by Ted Davis

5. Frank "Home Run" Baker: Hall of Famer and World Series Hero by Barry Sparks

6. Eddie Collins A Baseball Biography by Rick Huhn

7. Money Pitcher: Chief Bender And The Tragedy of Indian Assimilation by William C. Kashatus

8. Rube Marquard: The Life and Times of a Baseball Hall of Famer byLarry D. Mansch

9. Christy Mathewson by Michael Hartley

10. Tris Speaker: The Rough and Tumble Life of a Baseball Legend by Timothy M. Gray

Franchise History, Cards and Cubs.

I have been very active in this baseball game called APBA for say 15 years or so. My cousin Joey approached me when I was about 14 with the idea of purchasing this game via mail order. It is an in depth statistical replay game, with different variables and numbers applied to just about every aspect of historical replay. It is VERY accurate in regards to replaying seasons from the past. It is different from video games that are out there, which use stats to form ratings for how that player WILL perform in the next season. Instead it uses its ratings so that players will perform close to the stats that they had in any given season. It works very well, and its very fun to take a team and see if you can improve their records via better bullpen usage, lineups, or by hitting and running more or stealing more bags. My cousin and I have decided to replay 108 seasons so far, with each new season of course added to that with I taking the St. Louis Cardinals and he taking the Chicago Cubs. We are playing the seasons at random, with a number generator, and so far we have completed 1951, 1989, 2003, 1993, 1995 and 2001. Currently we are playing 1907, 2008, and we soon get 1986 underway. So far I have managed to improve on the Cardinals records and won the world series in 1989 when I shouldn't have made the playoffs, made the playoffs in 1993, won the world series in 2001, and made it to the World Series in 2003. I have improved my record in 1995, and so far in 1907 with some really bad teams. In 1951 I managed to improve from third place to second place. Its proved to be very entertaining, but it will likely take us several years to get caught up to where we only have to play the new seasons when they come out.

A last bit of rebellion.

So I was thinking of getting my other ear pierced this summer as a last bit of rebellion before Law School. I pierced my left ear my freshmen year of college and I have worn an earring on and of in it for, geez nearly ten years now. So most people that know me would find me odd in a type of job where I had to wear a suit more often than say, once a decade or so. I am not really that type of personality. But I decided that was the type of career that I wanted for my life. I know that for the most part I will not be able to wear them very often in the not so distant future, but I think it will make me feel a little better about this transition if I have just one little act of rebellion left.

John Lackey. 1, 2, Ejected.

When it comes to officiating, the umpires of Major League Baseball are about the best there are. When compared to the officiating of the NBA they are better, and when compared to the pathetic excuse for officiating that operate in the NFL they come out far superior. However, that does not mean they don't have their issues. When it comes to umpires their problems are with their memories, vindictiveness, and their requirement for numerous subjective calls with every outing that they make. Saturday Umpire Bob Davidson made one of these interesting and rarely precedented subjective calls. John Lackey made his season debut last night, fresh off of the disabled list. This was the first time he had pitched in six weeks, the last time being in spring training. His first pitch was over the head of Ian Kinsler, the second one plunked him. Immediately, no warning given, no conversation whatsoever, Mr. Davidson ejected John Lackey after two pitches. Lackey seemed to be shocked by the occurence and had this to say about it:

"I haven't pitched in six weeks, and I was amped up. I was trying to come in on him, but there was no intention at all to hit him or throw behind him."

Now there are a lot of things going on here. The Rangers and Angels have a history, lots of beanings and lots of retaliations. I am sure that Bob Davidson saw that this had the chance to be an escalating situation , and here was his oppurtunity to keep the chaos in check. However, their are some problems with this sort of pre-emptive attack. The warning rule was initiated to try and prevent escalating situations like this. You throw out the warning, and the next time a batter is hit in even remotely questionable circumstances and BAM both the pitcher and the manager are ejected from the game. Its a pretty good deterrent usually. Why then did Davidson decide to eject Lackey after two pitches without a warning? Good question, he must have felt that Lackey unquestionably was throwing with purpose, and he very well could have been. It was wrong though to eject, because there is this thing called reasonable doubht, and there was plenty in this case with him not being on the mound in so long. The warning rule was designed for this very situation, one in which the umpire is pretty sure he did it on purpose, but their are some questions about whether or not he can say that with 100% certainty. In this case Bob Davidson should have shown more restraint. This sort of thing has a lot of ramifications for the Angels. Firstly, Lackey could be suspended for this, which he probably wouldn't have been without the ejection. Secondly, Major League teams are not designed to have their starter knocked out while facing only one batter. This sort of thing exhausts the bullpen and keeps them from being at their best for several games. It was an interesting situation thats for sure.

If you want to check it out for yourself here is the link from the MLB network.

http://losangeles.angels.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=4597465&c_id=ana

3rd to 1st, a softball to the side of the head.

So last weekend I had an exciting experience. I was at a softball tournament in Lake City, Arkansas, where there are no lakes, playing with my normal softball team. It was my third at bat of the day, and I did not make good contact with the ball and I grounded it somewhat weakly to third base. As is usual for me, having joints that are about twice my age, I wasn't running very hard out of the box. The third-basemen didn't field the ball cleanly though, so when he bobbled it I started running much harder to first. Bad Idea, the throw and the side of my head reached the same spot at the same time, and since two objects can't occupy the same space, it hurt. The guy had thrown the ball wildly, and for some reason the 1st basemen who could have come of the base and caught the ball decided not to. The result was an impact right against my left temple. I did not black out, I did not even get dizzy, but I knew right away that given the spot it had hit that I was going to go to the hospital. For some odd reason the coach of the other team seemed to want to try and talk me out of going to the hospital. At first I was worried about damage to my head, but as I started for the vehicle I realized I was a afraid that I had broken my jaw because frankly it hurt like hell. My cousin drove me to the hospital at good ole St. Bernards ( no I didn't get staph for all you people out there that think the disease originates there) and as usual the waiting room had about 15 people in it. When we got sat down a nurse came out and said ok you guys can come back and see him, and everybody single person in the waiting except for us went back to see some guy. I will tell you this, if I am ever sick or injured in the nursing room, I do not want to wake up to seeing 15 different people standing around my bed in a small room. So with the ER apparently vacant I went right back. Fun times, I got poked and prodded a bit and was given a CAT Scan. Apparently I checked out all right and was told I had a mild concussion and a small inconsequential facial fracture and home I went. I had never been hit on the noggin like that before so I didn't really know quite what to expect. The headaches over the next couple of days were not pleasant, nor was the blurry vision in my left eye, but those symptoms went away and now I am fine to go out and get hit in the head by some new guy that can't throw to first. It was sadly, about the most excitement I have had this year. I took the picture with my iphone while I was waiting for my CAT scan results. It doesn't do a very good job of showing the swelling and please excuse my not being clean cut, I was at a red neck softball tournament after all.

Movie Review In Bruges 9/10

This is a beautifully acted, directed, and filmed movie, but the real strength of this film is the excellent script. Movies this well written don't come along that often. Normally I am not that bit a fan of Colin Farrell, in fact I really think that he has tossed up some stinking piles of dung in his acting career, but here he is masterful playing of Brendan Gleeson's calmer character wonderfully. For some reason, Farrell just seemed so much more natural and comfortable in this role, and I think honestly its because he gets to be an Irish guy, essentially getting to act with his native accent. Its funny how as American's most of the time we praise American actors when they pick up a foreign dialect, but we hardly ever appreciate when a foreign actor flawlessly pulls of an American accent. Back to the subject at hand, the story is masterful, making you feel a wide range of emotion, while connecting with the characters in a personal manner, and sometimes in very odd ways considering they are in fact hit men. Ralph Fiennes is both disturbing and scary in his role as Harry, and its a performance worth watching. If you haven't seen it and enjoy dark comedy and compelling stories go out and rent it tonight.

Repost of My ASU Law Enforcement Blog

So I am taking a class at ASU and it is an online graduate class on the History of Medicine. One of our discussion topics was Medical Testing in prisons. Here is what one of our brilliant and ranking ASU police officers posted in the discussion board.

"Well this week discussion is a tossup for me. The men and women in prison are there for a reason, they have been convicted of a crime. I’m not saying that everyone in the prison system is guilty, but they have been tried and convicted and sentenced to prison. Once convicted the inmates loses their right to anything.( Examples- right to vote, right to carry weapons, ect). I think that the companies should use the men and women in the prison systems especially the ones on death row. I don’t think the inmates need consent to do this. Yes, you can in return for participating in the study give extra commissary. I think that most inmates are educated, being in law enforcement, we deal with the same people a lot on the street from the prison system and they come out smarter than when they went in. Most men and women in the prison system get their GED or read law books to try and make them smarter. I don’t think they should be asked for consent."

Brilliant, not only does a law enforcement officer think they all prisoners no longer have any human rights, but he is under the delusion that apparently prison is good for them, and that it is an improvement for them. He thinks they are essentially animals. Actually maybe not that highly... this is another quote on the same thread.

" Its not that I am a bad police officer cause I take my job very serious. I have been in Law Enforcement since 1992. The thing that gets me is that once someone's convicted and sent to the state prisons, that they belong to the state. which means we have to pay for all there meals, all there doctors appointments, everything, even though they are locked up and guarded 24 hours a day seven days a week, we have to foot the bills. You are right they are humans,and I can see where some of the men and women have the right to consent.

I am a big animal lover to, so why test the animals, they have rights too. I don't think its right to do the animals either.

sorry to get the class stirred up, but just to let you all now that I do take my job very serious to protect and serve the state of Arkansas. Everyone has there own feelings about this, I knew this one would be a tough week for me. I just know that arriving on some of the scenes that I have in the past, just gets to you sometimes. Again I hope you can accept my apology for stirring things up."

Apparently he actually value animals to a greater extent than human life. Pretty amazing really.

I realized something this semester

I was sitting in class during my last semester of courses here at Good Ole Astate, finishing up my Masters in History and I had a revelation of sorts. Actually the revelation came from two of my classes, not just one, but I happened to be sitting in my Early Christianity class when the idea really started to form. I have, for a good part of my life, always wanted to be involved in academia. I am interested in a wide variety of academic interests, such as folklore, literature, and history. The beginning of my unrest this semester came while sitting in my documentary class with Dr. Wilkerson-Freeman. She fancies herself a film maker, and we were having a discussion and she said no one else was really doing movies like she was at Astate where I mentioned a folklore professor who had made documentaries, has a background in media, and actually published in the area and she said that didn't count because he was a folklorist and that historians can make movies because they follow the facts, but a folklorist can't and their work is inferior. She went on to say a person with a PhD in folklore can't make a factual documentary because only historians have the background to do that. It was really ridiculous honestly, and it bothered me because I really consider folklore to be more of my passion than history. In one of my not so great moments I decided to inform her that history was a rather distant second for my choice in masters degrees and I only chose it because Astate didn't have a folklore masters, and that I was accepted to a M.A. in folklore program, but only came back to Astate because my mother was ill. I admit not a good thing to tell a professor, but it was one of the few times lately that I have really lost my temper. What I really got from this conversation some days later was a realization that this sort of bickering was truly inconsequential and really doesn't matter to life, and sparing tremendous amounts of energy to it does nothing to better this world. Apparently this is the sort of thing that goes on in academics, which ends up with people focusing on lots of things that really don't matter without ever really doing anything. This brings me back to my Early Christianity class. Dr. Popst was lecturing, and this is by no means a bad reflection of her as she is a very dear and caring lady, but she was going on and on about some little detail in the text. It was something very small, and I won't bore you all with the details as it is only pertinent to hard core historians. However, she was going on about how the details like this are the most important to historians and what the focus should be on, etc, etc. I realized that it didn't matter. It didn't matter one little bit. With the economy bad, and crime, torture, and death the world over these little details, that she had poured hours into were inconsequential. They were of interest and importance to very few people, and would have been inconsequential to even someone of moderate to heavy interest in the subject matter. It was that moment that I discovered that continuing my education in history was not something I wanted to do. A life of publishing papers on minuscule details in history that do nothing to better anybody, and are just hours of my life spent studying something that affects nothing in today's world is a waste of what God had gifted me with. I have never been called modest, and have often been called arrogant, but I know I am gifted and that I will be good at what I choose to do. Should I waste it applying it all to something that does nothing to live the world a better place than I entered? No, the answer is no. I decided right then and there I wanted to do something that at least made life better for someone, somewhere, and it was right then that I made up my mind that I was going to Law School. Not to be some defense attorney and make lots of money, but to work doing things that made my community a better place. It was Law I decided that was the best place for my particular skill set and abilities. In another one of my not so great moments, Dr. Wilkerson-Freeman had discovered that I was going to Law School instead of going on in history, and she said that when she was in college her professors had wanted to go to Law School but she wanted to do something that was more challenging academically, I responded that I had wanted to be a college professor but I decided I wanted to do something that made a difference. Not my best moment, but I have never really known so one to go that far out of their way to try and push my buttons, I still got an A in the class though.

Star Trek Movie Review 8/10

I really liked this movie, and I don't even like Star Trek. It had a great feel to it, and some good action sequences. Chris Pine is great as a young James Tiberius Kirk and how can a movie with Simon Pegg in it not be good? It is a great homage to the television show, and creates a feel that truly gives the impression that they are boldly going where no man has gone before. Oh yea and Karl Urban is great as Bones. Not bad for a Rider of Rohan.

Angels & Demons Rant! 0/10 Rating

First of all I have to give warning that this review will contain spoilers. I have always been the type of person that is never to put out by the adaptations of books to the silver screen. I have always said that they should be viewed as two separate entities and as long as the spirit of the story and characters were intact. Dan Brown is not a great writer, I enjoyed his books marginally, but I understand both as a folklorist and historian (yea I know they seem at odds) that there are major points of inaccuracy in his books. However, he deserves better than this. I have never said this about an adaptation before, but this is a PERVERSION of his work, and this, keep in mind is not a work that I am overly passionate about. This movie was an abomination, I wanted to get up and leave for the first time ever in my rather ridiculously long list of movies that I have seen in the theatre. Those that know me understand what this means, I like all movies, and generally can enjoy just about anything. Now lets start this long critique of this horrible movie.

First of all the assassin is absolutely horrible. In the book this character although not deep was fleshed out enough to be a terribly frightening villain. In this movie he is bland and faceless. In fact bland and faceless might be giving him to much credit. Also he is mostly neutral, when given the chance to kill Langdon and Vittoria he doesn't, instead he just walks off. It could have been terribly scary, instead he was a total zero.

The Camerlengo first of all is a horrible character in the movie. For some reason they changed his name to Patrick for no good reason what so ever. He is supposed to be an impressive figure, able to control any room he is in by the shear force of his personality. His is portrayed in the movie as almost simpering and about as charasmatic as Keanu Reeves on a downer.

The character of Leonardo Vetra is not present which is amazing as he is a key central character. He is shown once in the movie at the beginning but his name is changed and he is not branded, he is murdered and his eye taken out but that is it. He and his duality of priest and scientist was key to the plot, as well as the fact he was Vittoria's father. It was ridiculous that he was not in the movie and his key parts of the plot missing.

Maximilian Kohler is not present in the movie and he to is integral to the plot, and he is somewhat replaced by Commander Rictor, he is a major character in the movie, but was not present at all in the novel.

The key fact that is missing from the movie and is the absolute cornerstone of the novel's plot is the fact that the Camerlengo is the biological son of the late pope. This was the whole reason for the book in the first place, THIS WAS THE PLOT. It was the why this book was written it was the most key part of the plot and it was just gone. There was no explanation in the movie for why he did what he did, no explanation at all. He just ends himself by fire with no explanation what so ever. It was horrible, it essentially meant that the movie had no point, no explanation for why the events took place. It also means that along with Vittoria's father not being mentioned, that the most interesting parts of the characters were left out. It was ridiculous, I can't put it into words really, its like having a Harry Potter movie with Voldemort not being there. It was just silly.

Also the fourth cardinal was killed in the book, but saved in the movie, in a very dramatic scene that shouldn't have been there. He then became pope and the man who became pope in the book became a very old camerlengo. And more on that man, in the movie he was supposed to be a liberal progressive priest who was wise, open, and a very good character. In the movie he was portrayed as an arrogant old man stuck in his ways except for the last 2 minutes of the movie where he makes a sudden and a 180 of a character shift.

This movie was horrible, and if you liked the book at all avoid this at all costs. It barely has any resemblance. It seems they were trying to make a buck on the name but didn't want to give the book true representation. Oh yea, and they made it seem in the movie that this happened after the Davinchi Code, which is false and unneeded and just plain stupid. This is the first movie ever that I wish I had never seen, and the number of movies I have seen requires a number with 4 digits in it.