Iron Man 2: My thoughts and impressions

After catching Iron Man 2 yesterday, I'm rating it a solid C, or 5.5/10. It's a passing grade; perfectly enjoyable and decent, but not great.

My main problems with the movie was the pacing was a bit off, and that there were missed opportunities for some of the characters.

The first quarter of the movie focused on many of the ancillary, inconsequential goings-on in Tony's life. While it is good to establish a context, it went on for far too long. The middle sections were quickly glossed over before the big battle at the end. There wasn't a sense of time to the whole sequence of events. I wasn't able to gleen whether all the events happened within days, or weeks or months, giving me a disjointed feeling by the end.

At the end of the first movie, Tony seemed so self-assured about his purpose that his actions in Iron Man 2 seemed out of step. The movie explained it as a way of coping with his gradual poisoning by the miniature arc reactor, and his way of leaving behind his possessions to his inheritors. But I felt the portrayal of Tony was a bit over the top, and turns into a caricature of himself.

Pepper Potts, once a capable strong young executive, comes off more as a overly harassed wet nurse, which is true to character. But the portrayal grates on me.

I also felt that the antagonists were a wasted opportunity. And they really lacked the level of menace and threat that Obidiah Stane presented in Iron Man. Stane was a amoral calculating,cold, cunning business man. Justin Hammer was more akin to a joke, a buffoon and a wannabe.

Ivan Vanko could have also been a far larger threat; he is supposed to be on almost equal footing with Tony in terms of intelligence. During his first monologue, where he talks about making God bleed, I was really hoping he'd be a far more interesting opponent and an antithesis to Tony.

The highlight for me was the Black Widow, Natasha Romanoff. She was deadly as her moniker suggests (the scene in which she and Happy breaks into Hammer's facility is gold), and she's smoking hot without being trashy.

I did enjoy the movie, although I was disappointed in some areas. It's not often that a sequel surpasses the original, so there's no real surprises here. I was hoping for a "Dark Knight", but instead it is more of a "Die Hard II".

Busy weeks, an injured hand and The Ghostbusters

It's been a very hectic couple of weeks. There's a mountain of work to be done, and there's more coming on. The events calendar is pretty light for the next two weeks, but there's more to do about work systems and new projects. I'm in the midst of writing a proposal for a new project, as well as having to do an intensive cleanup of our contacts database. In addition, I've got my annual review coming up. I'm hoping that not only will I continue to have my job, I'll get a pay raise too.

I injured my hand recently, so that's a bummer. It's been hurting for over a month now. The doctor says that the tendons in my left wrist is probably inflammed, so rest and pain medication are the best things for it. It also means I have to reduce my playtime with videogames. Grasping the gamepad, and manuvering the thumbstick seems to be exacebating the problem.

I did have time to give Ghostbusters: The Videogame a good play through. And I've got to say that the game is living up to expectations in some respects, and disappointing in others. It's very much the Peter Venkman character in the movies. Eminently charming but ultimately lacking in some substance. The writing is very funny, making me laugh out loud on multiple occasions. And seeing the original cast reprise their roles elicits a strong feeling of nostalgia. And catching ghosts are quite a blast. The primary problems I have with it are that some parts of the game are terribly frustrating. Especially so when facing the swarms of tiny ghosts that overwhelm you. With the movement and controls feeling a little sluggish, facing those swarms gets really old really fast. The overall story of the game stretches the Gozer theme from the first movie a little too thinly as well. I'll get back to it soon, as I'm wanting to play with the multiplayer mode.

Star Trek & Bioshock

Saw Star Trek last night, and I really quite enjoyed it. It established a good balancce between introducing the show to a new audience, paying homage to the old classics, being an action flick whilst still maintaining a sense of drama and camaraderie between the crew members. The special effects were good without being overwrought. So overall, in terms of narrative, pacing, casting & production values, it was really a good movie.

But I just don't get the overlapping timelines. It seems like that's a common theme in Star Trek storylines, with alternate realities and something about the space-time continuum. So Kirk and Spock know that they are going to be friends because Spock from the future came back and told them about that? And then that ties back into the original series when Shatner and Nimoy portrayed those characters back in the 70s? Gahh...

I also finished Bioshock. It's was a really enjoyable experience, though the ending left a little to be desired. The city of Rapture was absolutely captivating. The stylings, the music, the lived-in feel... The whole atmosphere was unforgettable. But two things troubled me... the premise of the story and the way the ending is decided.

1) So Fontaine, posing as Atlas, manipulates my character, a person he had originally brainwashed and sent to the surface world. And some 20 years later, my character is involved in an airplane accident, falls into the sea and lands directly onto the entrance into Rapture. I am then tasked by Atlas to elimiate Andrew Ryan who is a rival to Fontaine. I find Andrew Ryan, who despite knowing the keyphrase to exert control over me, allows himself to get killed, thereby relinquishing control over Rapture, a lost, burnt-out, abandoned city, populated only by mutants to Fontaine. Sounds a little ridiculous? I think so...

2) I got the bad ending. Because I harvested one of the Little Sisters. And I get the "evil person" ending for that. My problem with that is the absolute nature of the choice... you're either a saint or a devil. Any decision can only have one of two possible outcomes. It attempts to elicite a moral response, but morality in Bioshock deals only in absolutes, black and white, yes or no, right or wrong. And in doing so, loses much of the impact that the games presents: That there is no right or wong, but only the will to do.

Sir Lord Baron Von Vaderham

I find the lack of Penne ala 'Arrabiata disturbing... Enjoy!

GTA IV versus Iron Man

A very interesting article just surfaced over at Next Generation. According to the article, at least one analyst has proposed that the launch of GTA IV will eat into the ticket sales of the Iron Man movie when it opens a few days later.

Ostensibly, this is due to the fact that both products are targeting the same demographic: The young male gamer. And this would not be an isolated event, as earlier in September, Hollywood executives blamed the release of Halo 3 for poor ticket sales during that same period.

I guess one could probably see a correlation between the two, though not necessarily a causation. And it is not a stretch of the imagination that if a person is presented with two equally excellent choices that some would choose one over the other.

But let me tell you how this situation would affect me personally. And I think that it will... quite profoundly. Once GTA IV is released, I'm going to play the shit out of that game. And then when Iron Man opens, I'm going to take a break from my hours-long vigil and watch it. And then I'm going to go back and play some more GTA. And if Iron Man turns out to be as excellent as I hope it to be, I'll probably go and catch it again that same weekend. And maybe a third time.

Food, sleep and toilet breaks are not mandatory.

Iron Man

I have such a man-crush on Iron Man. And by extension, Robert Downey Jr.

There here is a brand new trailer for Iron Man. Enjoy.

Beowulf

Did you know that Beowulf is an animated film? Meaning a cartoon? I sure didn't. Imagine my surprise as I sat there looking upon a screen full of animated characters. I honestly searched for my ticket stub to make sure I was sitting in the right cinema.

But I think it works, using animation to tell a fairly mature theme. This is not one for the kiddies, I can tell you that. By freeing the film from real-world physical limitations, this film is able to accomplish much more in portraying a fantastical world. And it helps the audience to effectively suspend disbelief, which in turn would draw oneself further into the story.

Another uncanny thing about the movie is how realistic everything looks. Aside from a few tell-tale signs of animated movement, one could almost swear that one was watching a live-action film. Each frame is shot beautifully, and the quality of the scenes and characters must be seen to be believed. Look upon the face of any character, and you'd be fooled into thinking it was the real actor. Hrothgar, portrayed by Anthony Hopkins, looks frighteningly real.

The film also has a good story in it, and one can draw immense pleasure in the way it is told. I can't say for sure how closely the movie mirrors the myth of Beowulf; I've read the myth once before, but I can't remember much aside from some character names. And I think there are holes in the plot, but this may be inherent in to myth proper.

There are a number of things that leave me scratching my head, such as why Grendel would suddenly and viciously and continously attack the great hall of the king after years of peace. And why does the hearth fire turn blue when he appears? And whether Beowulf's illegitimate son was really a dragon, I can't say.

But all in all, this film was very enjoyable. The music is done very well, and match the tempo of the film excellently. Some scenes were truly exhilarating, and especially so in the final action sequence. The well-portrayed characters, which were also ably voice-acted, make it easy to identify with them. And scenes are carefully created, and there aren't any throwaway scenes; everything moves the plot forward. I also thought that the film is very well-paced. And I would heartily recommend this film.

Lars and the Real Girl

I saw this movie yesterday, and it was a most excellent film. I strongly recommend all to catch it, and enjoy the sheer joy that is Lars.

I wrote a few words about it on my Facebook, but I feel compelled to elaborate on it.

The movie is excellent on two fronts; both the technical and artistic aspects are both very well done. The scenes are very well composed, and evocative, and the music compliments the film very well.

But more than that, the story is absolutely heart-warming, in a quirky, off the wall way. The story will simultaneously make you laugh out loud and tug at your heartstrings. The simplicity of the story, of a man trying to come to terms with the inability to communicate, and the growth that he makes, draws you in and never lets go. It makes you an intrinsic part of his personal journey, his personal struggle. And as you delve deeper into the film, you start to identify with his inadequacies, and you're constantly hoping that he'll be able to dig himself out, re-discover himself, and find the qualities that were inside of him in the first place.

The fortitude that he shows, and the care and patience shown to him by those around him, will re-energise you, and make you feel great hope in all things. Go watch this show.