Thor

I was convinced that I would not go see this movie, yet last Monday I found myself sitting in the theater admittedly with a bit of anticipation. This is one of the rare occurrences where reviews have actually changed my mind about seeing a movie. The first time I saw the trailer for this I was unimpressed. It seemed to me as if the movie was going to try too hard, and take itself way too seriously. I was unfamiliar with Hemsworth (aside from his brief roll as George Kirk in J.J. Abrams Star Trek), and the Thor storyline was rather unknown to me since I didn't follow it as a kid. However, before seeing any movie I check out Rottentomatoes.com out of curiosity. Most of the time the ratings and reviews play no part in my emotional attachment to seeing, or avoiding a movie, but Thor was a different story. For some reason the rave reviews it received created a sense of anticipation to see the movie. So I took my wife to see it, and we both walked away with no regrets. In fact, my wife added the movie to her top favorites list, equal with 300. I don't know if I'd go so far as to say it's THAT good, but still it was a fantastic movie. Chris Hemsworth nailed the role of Thor, and the supporting cast equally filled out their parts. The storyline was informative for those unfamiliar with Thor's character, and the special effects were astounding. Perhaps the most surprising element of the movie was the fact that the movie did NOT take itself too seriously by any means. In fact, the humor throughout the film really helped make the movie stand out from the shadow of most superhero films (though most unsuccessfully attempt to incorporate humor). One thing that Marvel studios has really done right is incorporating other heroes from the Marvel universe into each movie. Of course this is really a device setting up the Avengers film, but it's a nice touch to the film. A reference to Tony Stark (Iron Man), and cameos from Hawkeye and Nick Fury (post credits scene) makes the film that much more intriguing. This film gets....

3 out of 5 stars. Rarely do superhero films get higher than a 3 star rating in my book, so from my perspective Thor is at the top of the mountain for now. Sadly the fate of this movie is chained to 2011, and will fade with passing years, but it is an extremely enjoyable film while its shelf life lasts. Worth the price of a movie ticket? Yes, at matinee price. Worth a Bluray purchase? Absolutely.

The Quran Burning, Constitutional Rights, and Radical Religion

For the past several days the front pages of news sites around the web have been plastered with pictures of  Rev. Terry Jones. Terry Jones is a Florida pastor who sparked controversy late last year for threatening to burn a stack of Qurans on 9/11, and ultimately video taped the burning of a Quran a few days ago which gained widespread attention through Youtube. Terry Jones actions caused a violent series of protests from Muslims in Afghanistan which saw several deaths, including UN workers, and even reports of some of the victims being beheaded. I don't believe everything that is reported by the news, so the claim that there were people being beheaded during the riots should be taken with a grain of salt, though it is not unlikely that this may have happened. The actions of Jones and his church have gained criticism from the majority of media outlets, and the ire of many U.S. citizens who believe Jones actions have cost the lives of innocent people, and possibly put the lives of U.S. soldiers at unnecessary risk. It seems that Jones is being blasted from all sides with charges of irresponsible behavior, extremest actions, conduct unbecoming of a U.S. citizen, and single-handedly putting our military in harms way, as well as embarrassing the tolerant nature of the United States culture. The issue itself really comes down to three very specific topics: Free speech, consistency, and radical religion.

First is the issue of free speech, which is clearly a constitutional right. No supreme court ruling necessary to interpret that one. The problem here is that people are blaming Mr. Jones for the actions of others. Sure Jones burned the Quran, the holy book of muslims, but he did not force them to murder a human being. That blame is squarely on the shoulders of those that performed the action. I may not agree with what Jones did, but the fact of the matter is that he has the right to burn the Quran if he so chooses. Saying that Jones is directly, or even indirectly putting our troops in harms way, or causing the murders of innocent people is absurd. Think about it; one man in Florida is putting an entire company of soldiers in danger because he is burning a book. Never mind the fact that the troops are in a war zone in the first place, the real danger comes from the man burning the book in Florida....Really? Well, I guess maybe Jones is actually traveling to the middle East himself, holding a gun to radical Muslims heads and ordering them to murder innocent people....wait, he's just burning a book in Florida. We have become an overly sensitive nation to the point of censoring basic rights. I have the right to disagree with anyone I choose, as long as I don't threaten them, cause them physical harm, or invade their privacy. It's that simple. What separates us from animals is civility. We can disagree with each other, and still respect them as human beings. Rev. Jones is simply choosing a crude medium to display his objection to a certain belief. IT'S HIS RIGHT.

This leads me to my second issue with the whole Quran burning media circus that has been going on. Never mind the fact that you can do a quick search on youtube for "Bible burning" and find hundreds of videos within seconds that documents none other than someone burning a Bible, which if you don't know is the Holy book of the Christian faith. How many Christians in the last 100 years have rioted and murdered people because the Bible was burned? Answer: 0. Why? Because people have fought tirelessly for the right to demonstrate their beliefs without ramifications. Yet we find the media lambasting Mr. Jones for do the same thing. So what's the difference. RADICAL RELIGION. Sure Christians have a few black marks in their past regarding Radical violence in the name of religion, but that is not an accurate representation of what Christianity is all about. The crusades have little to do with Christianity, and more to do with greed than anything else. The fact is we are excusing radical Muslim rioting because it was provoked by the burning of the Quran, all the while people are burning Bibles, posting the videos on the internet, and blatantly mocking Christianity through several media outlets (Jesus is depicted in many cartoons, and not in a good light mind you) all with no violent reaction from the Christian community. But when a Christian pastor burns a Quran he is treated like Hitler. How could he do such a thing? Does he have no respect for other peoples beliefs? Hopefully by now you are beginning to get the picture of this whole mess. There is no consistency in the U.S. on free speech. Anyone can burn a Bible, but no one can burn a Quran. Anyone can protest, as long as it's not a Christian doing the protesting. Killing people is never okay, unless someone burns a Quran.

In closing it is important to note that I don't think Mr. Jones used wisdom in his actions. Burning the Quran accomplished nothing, much like protesting in general in today's culture, especially if you're doing it in the name of Christianity. Jesus was about people, even if he didn't agree with their beliefs. Protesting only makes people mad. If you want to really make a difference then show people that you can get along with them, despite the differences between you. We are all entitled to our opinions, and I believe we have the right to express those feeling without being labeled as hate speech.

Tron: Legacy

When I first saw the trailer for this movie, which premiered at Comic-Con, I nearly jumped out of my seat. The teaser trailer was simply a light-cycle race, which ended in an execution by disc. It had me captivated from the first moment. I was a fan of the original movie, and a remake with today's technology was every nerds dream. If you haven't had the pleasure of seeing the first Tron movie, I would suggest that you do. Not so much for the fact that the movie itself is incredibly interesting, but simply to use as a comparison to the new Tron movie. That's not to say that the original Tron was irrelevant. On the contrary, Tron was ahead of it's time. It was the Matrix before the Matrix. The only problem is that compared to today's technology it is completely out gunned. So with all the technological advancements since Tron was released in 1982, how would a Tron movie look if made today? Incredible!!!! The visual experience of Tron: Legacy is enough to give this movie a high rating. But as visually stunning as the movie is, the storyline, and acting are equally as impressive. Although some reviewers have cited the movie as slow and boring, I found the movie quite riveting. The true star of the movie was Jeff Bridges. Maybe it's the fact that I had also seen him in True Grit, but it seems that Bridges is one of those actors that just makes the movie. Garrett Hedlund and Olivia Wilde were solid in their performances, but not exactly standout either. Finally, perhaps the biggest selling point for me in the movie was the soundtrack. Daft Punk lent their unique style to the movie which was a throw back to 80's Sci-Fi movies, and video games. The haunting techno sounds that floated about during the Grid scenes were nothing short of perfect. If you liked movie soundtracks like Escape From New York, then you are for sure going to love the Daft Punk score to Tron: Legacy. It is important to note, however, that Tron: Legacy MUST be viewed in IMAX 3D. I'm not a big 3D fan stated in the Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader review, but that changed with Tron: Legacy, and will most likely die with Tron: Legacy. Watching Tron: Legacy at home, or in a regular movie theater would not do it justice, but it would suffice if it were your only option. I give this movie...

4/5 stars. While it has all the elements of a perfect movie, it has the potential to be forgotten in the next 3 years for the simple fact that technology changes, and the storyline isn't enough to carry it into classic status. I would put this movie on par with the Star Trek remake from a couple of years ago, which was an awesome movie, but has faded with time. All in all, it is worth, watching, buying, and watching again.

True Grit

Though I've only seen the original once on TV, and to be honest I don't remember much of it, I was really excited to hear about a remake. Then, once I saw the trailer backed with Johnny Cash's God's Gonna Cut You Down I became obsessed with seeing it. Judging from the trailer True Grit looked to be a Western done right. Gun fights, gun fights, and more gun fights is what I expected after seeing the trailer. Well, after actually seeing the movie I can safely say that this movie is not at all what the trailer portrays it to be. I hate it when movie's are deceptive when it comes to trailers. Why not just show everyone what the movie is going to be like in the trailer so no one gets expectations that are completely opposite of what the film is? The problem with making the trailer portray something different than what the movie actually is, is that the movie is often times really good but is overshadowed by what people thought it would be. The same thing happened The Village was released. It was marketed as a horror film, but is was not a horror film at all. It was more of a dramatic thriller/mystery. It was an incredible movie, yet everyone hates it because it's not scary. Well that's what happened with True Grit. Sure the critics loved it, but general audiences went away disappointed because they thought they were going to see a shoot-em-up Western. The movie itself is really good, but it's not a shoot-em-up Western. After about the first 45 minutes of the film I got over my initial disappointment of the wrong expectations I had and really started to enjoy the artistic value of the film. For one, Jeff Bridges is phenomenal in this film as Rooster Cogburn. But the real surprise comes in the form of Hailee Steinfeld's performance as Mattie Ross. Overall this film gets...

 

4/5 stars. Simply put the movie is very entertaining. The acting is extremely well done, the cinematography is refreshing, and the action is pretty good, although it is few and far between. Perhaps the driving force behind the movie is Bridges and Steinfeld's performances, but that's not to say the movie doesn't stand on it's own. Be aware the this movie is NOT a Western action film. It is however a well written period piece that dabbles with the idea of revenge, and independence.