The movie is everything they say it is.  The three hours flew by.

Since everyone else has already reviewed Avatar by now, it doesn’t seem a good use of my time to post another review, so I’ll just say that it is definitely worth seeing.  The CGI is amazing, the 3D is a blast and the movie is action packed without going over the top.  The story has been done before a whole bunch of times, but what story hasn’t.  If you go to see it, make sure you see the 3D version.  Although the movie would stand up well without 3D, you’d still be missing a whole lot of the experience.

Before it leaves the theaters, I think I would like to see it one more time at an IMAX theater.  I’m not a big fan of IMAX, but I suspect in this case it might be worth doing.

Code appears after the break…

I didn’t have a whole lot of hope for Scott Brown being successful in this election.  My wife had been talking about him for some time and was pretty impressed by him.  Feeling like Charlie Brown with Lucy holding the football, I refused to get my hopes up, fearing that once again my heart would be torn out. 

I was wrong.

Brown was the right person in the right place at the right time.  People have been frustrated with the arogance of the Democrats.  The taxpayers (as opposed to the leaches) have let them know that we did not want the Democrats vision of health care.  We warned them.  We showed up at teapartys.  We wrote letters and e-mails but we were ignored and looked down upon.

The arrogance of Obama is astonishing.  The man has accomplished little in his life yet he still believes that he’s smarter than us and we should just shut up and do what he says. 

That’s not the way that it works Mr. President.  Consider this a warning from the people in charge.  You work for us.  We don’t work for you. Remember that.

Congratulations to Scott Brown.  You had the courage to take on the Democratic Machine in Massachusetts when the rest of us had given up.  Thank you.

A few days ago, it looked like it was over for the USA as we knew it.  Tonight, that has all changed.  Who would have thought that the Second American Revolution would begin in Massachusetts.

Timescapes Timelapse: Learning to Fly from Tom Lowe @ Timescapes on Vimeo.

If you haven’t already seen this, you should check it out.  It’s a really cool timelapse nature video set against some music by Pink Floyd.

Don’t forget to turn up your sound!

Before I make any major purchase I do a lot of research and for the price we were willing to pay, this appeared to be the best model available.  People that owned it seemed to think highly of it.

The unit has worked well.  On average, I probably use it two or three times a week and although I still weigh more then I’d like, it has done a pretty good of keeping me fit.

Tonight, I was about half way though my thirty minute session when I heard a strange noise coming from the bottom of the pedal arm.  I didn’t stop immediately, as I probably should have, but it didn’t matter because within a few seconds, the pedal arm had jumped out of the track and was moving on the floor.  I got off the unit and knelt down to see what was going on and found that the axle on the inside right wheel had sheared off.  Bummer.

I’m not surprised that something is broken on the unit, because it does take a lot of abuse in it’s day to day operation, but I am surprised by the part that did break.  It seems like it shouldn’t be a high stress area.  The wheel just moves back and forth in the track and shouldn’t really be taking a lot of abuse.  I suspect the part was just defective.

I’ve sent an e-mail to the company to see if that part is covered under the warranty and also inquired as to how much it will cost if it is not.  Hopefully I’ll get a response tomorrow and have the thing fixed in the next week or so.

It must be my day for breaking things.  Shortly after the elliptical broke, I was attempting to cut off a piece of cheddar cheese with a knife an the wooden handle snapped in two.  Maybe I’m just getting too strong from all the work I’ve been doing on the elliptical.

It’s quiz time. Which of the following best describes the reason that Steven Spielberg’s War of the Worlds was produced:

A. The original movie wasn’t all that good and the new version improves on it.
B. The original movie was good but the director has a new take on the film
C. The original movie was good, but If we put out a new version we’ll make a lot of money

Let’s see it’s not A because the original version of War of the Worlds was actually a pretty good movie and the new version didn’t improve on it one bit.

And it’s not B because the new version tells the same story as the old version; the new version breaks no new ground.

So it must be…

You guessed it C. Dollar signs were apparently foremost on the mind of Spielberg and his DreamWorks buddies when they decided to produce this picture.

It’s not really a bad movie, it just wasn’t really needed. The 1953 movie had already told this story quite well and the 2005 version does absolutely nothing to improve on it.

In the original version, Gene Barry plays the part of scientist Dr. Clayton Forrester, who has been sent to investigate a number of meteors that have crashed on the outskirts of a small town in California. While investigating, he meets Sylvia Van Buren, the daughter of a local minister, who is played by Ann Robinson. While waiting for the meteors to cool sufficiently to allow them to be analyzed, the meteors hatch and reveal alien ships that rise from the ground and proceed to attack and kill all in their path.

Forrester and Van Buren flee to Los Angles, gathering information about the aliens along the way in hopes of finding a way to stop their onslaught. While the military discovers that their most advanced weapons are useless against the aliens. Just when it seems all is lost, the aliens begin dieing on their own because they are not resistant to the microbes on our world.

In the Spielberg version the characters of Forrester and Van Buren are replaced by a dead beat dad Ray Ferrier, played by Tom Cruise, and his two kids, Rachel (Dakota Fanning) and Robbie (Justin Chatwin). All three are trying to find their way back to Boston so the children can reunite with their mother and step-father during the alien onslaught.

Instead of arriving in meteors, the aliens are transported to Earth in “lighting bolts” which inserts them into their ships that have been hidden within the Earth for millions of years. Like in the 1953 version, the aliens start killing all in sight and are once again brought down through the mysterious magic of microbes.

As you can see, the two films a pretty similar.

The acting in WOW 2005, was decent. Cruise does a pretty good job with his character as do Fanning and Chatwin but it’s not much of a stretch for any of them; these are pretty one dimensional stereotypical characters so there is only so much that can be done with them.

Special effects were good, with the early sequences involving the rise of the aliens from the Earth being the most impressive. The scene taking place in a New York neighborhood with the people coming out into their yards to watch the massive lightening storm was actually quite terrifying. I found myself anxiously waiting for the characters to get back into their homes because I knew the worst was yet to come.

The trek to Boston, that made up the majority of the movie allowed Spielberg to showcase a lot of special effects but beyond that it didn’t add much to the movie. During the trip, Ferrier and his daughter are befriended by a man, played by Tim Robbins, who in the end turns out to be a right-wing survivalist nut case, which once again demonstrates that Spielberg will leave no stereotype unturned.

The end was pretty much anti-climactic with the family reuniting in Boston as the alien ships start falling from the sky accompanied by a voice over letting us know that the invaders couldn’t stand up to our microorganisms.

There were a couple of things that really annoyed me with this film.

First, the aliens apparently had scouted out Earth millions of years earlier and had buried their attack ships in preparation for the invasion. This just seems plain stupid.

Why would they be planning this so long?

Does any species really have the patience to wait a million years and if they did would they remember where they planned to attack?

And if they had visited here in the past, wouldn’t they have figured out the whole microbe thing already?

Next, what was the purpose of vacuuming people up, grinding up their bodies and spraying their guts all over the Earth?

Since Spielberg gave no explanation for this, I will assume it was just to add a gross out factor and make the movie a little scarier and bring in the teens. I just found it annoying.

If Spielberg really had to make this film, I would have hoped that he would have changed the ending in some way to make the payoff better for those of use familiar with the original. I had two controversial ideas that I think would have made this a much better film:

1. The aliens die, not from the naturally occurring microbes, but from all of the pollution that we’ve added to our to our planet. They could be sensitive to hydrocarbons, and the fact that we now have billions of cars on the Earth renders our planet useless to them. Oh the irony!

2. And this one is real controversial. During the trek to Boston Cruise’s character is abducted by the aliens and he finds he is able to destroy a ship from the inside, using hand grenades. What if to rid their planet of the alien menace, people start strapping explosives to their backs and become suicide bombers. (I told you it was controversial) Alright, given the current political climate this probably wouldn’t fly, but unlike Spielberg, at least I was trying to be creative.
So here’s my advice. If you really want to see War of the Worlds (2005), then by all means do. It’s not a great movie but it’s somewhat entertaining. While your at it, make sure that you rent the 1953 George Pal version; although the special effects aren’t in the league with Spielberg’s version, the movie has a lot more heart and in my opinion is the definitive War of the Worlds movie.

6 out of 10 Stars

White Heat is one of those rare old movies that actually lives up to the hype. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard great things about an old movie but when I finally get to see it, I end up disappointed. This isn’t the case with White Heat however; it’s just as good as everyone says it is.

The story is about a psychopath, tough as nails gangster, Cody Jarrett, who has a weird, child-like attachment to his mother. Jarrett thinks nothing of robbing trains, stealing payrolls and killing people, but when times get tough, he needs the love and encouragement of his mom.

The story begins with Jarrett and the boys staging a train robbery during which Jarrett brutally kills the train engineers. During the heist, one of the gang members is seriously injured and his later death gives the Feds the ability to link the train robbery back to Jarrett. Jarrett sensing that the Feds now have the evidence needed to put him in prison for a long time confesses to another crime that he did not commit, but which serves as a alibi that prevents him from being implicated in the train robbery.

Jarrett later escapes from prison, and goes on to plan and execute a payroll heist that ends the movie with a spectacular finish.

The movie is much more involved but I’ve left out a lot of details so as not to spoil the movie for you.

James Cagney does a masterful job playing Arthur ‘Cody’ Jarrett. He mixes brutality, insanity and charisma in just the right proportions. I know of Cagney mostly through the various impressions I’ve seen done of him over the years and although the impressions are pretty much spot on and comical, when he does the act he is totally believable.

Another great performance comes from Margaret Wycherly who plays Cody’s mom, Ma Jarrett. She comes across as a cold, calculating evil women who totally loves her son and wants what’s best for him. Unfortunately her view of what’s best for him involves robbery and murder.

Virginia Mayo also does a fine job playing Cody’s cheating wife Verna. She’s a self-absorbed glamour girl, who gives no indication of being in love with Cody but hangs around to reap the rewards that result from a life of crime.

This movie is filled with memorable scenes and tag lines and for these alone it is worth the price of admission. The DVD is currently available for under $20 dollars but if your willing to wait you might be able to catch it on Turner Classic Movies as I did.

“Top of the world, Ma!”

Highly recommended.

10 out of 10 Stars

You’ve probably already heard people say that this movie is good and they are right, it really is.

This movie is the conclusion of the trilogy telling the story of Anakin Skywalker’s transformation into the evil Darth Vader.

As you already know, the original Star Wars (the first movie) was actually episode four of the series. It was followed by two sequels Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back and Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi that told the story of the restoration of the Jedi knights and the fall of the evil empire. The latest movie, Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith is the conclusion of the second trilogy which was actually the prequel of the first trilogy. Confused yet? This might help:

1. Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (Movie #4 Released 1999)
2. Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (Movie #5 Released 2002)
3. Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (Movie #6 Released 2005)
4. Star Wars (Released 1977 Movie #1)
5. Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (Movie #2 Released 1980)
6. Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (Movie #3 Released 1983)

Now that we have the history out of the way, back to the movie.

The computer graphics are amazing. With each Star Wars movie, George Lucas has taken the art to a new level and this movie is no exception. The CG characters seem quite real with Yoda being the real standout. In the original Star Wars, Yoda was brought to life as a Muppet and the expression of his character was limited by this crude technology. Now, with the advances in computer graphics, Yoda is a fully functional character that really comes to life and is just as capable as all of the other characters. Unlike in the original movies, Yoda now seems real.

Where the CG really shines though, is in the creation of environments. The Industrial Light and Magic team has created vast cities and worlds in incredible detail, which are truly spectacular. I’m not exaggerating when I say that the artwork in the movie belongs in a museum. ILM should render prints of the various CG locations and put together an exhibit that could tour museums. I can’t describe how good this work is, you really need to see the movie the fully comprehend the beauty of the CG work. From the small details to the lighting, this work is extraordinary.

The acting in this movie is interesting. All of the actors do a really good job with their parts with the exception of Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman. Both of them seem like they’re just reading the script for the first time. It gets really bad when the two of them are doing a scene together; it seems to exacerbate the problem. It’s a shame, because the most emotional exchanges in the movie are supposed to be between these two characters, but their performances just kill them. As good as the movie is, it could have been so much better if the performances by Christensen and Portman were on par with the others.

I don’t get it. I’ve never seen Christensen in anything but Star Wars, so I can’t judge his capabilities, but I have seen Portman in other movies and she is a pretty decent actress. So what happened here? Maybe it was Lucas direction, but if that’s the case, how did he get decent performances from the other actors? It could be because the others are older and more experienced and were able to pull it off in spite of Lucas direction. I just don’t know and it will probably forever remain a mystery.

Other performances were quite good, the best being Ewan McGregor’s portrayal of a young Obi-Wan Kenobi and Ian McDiarmid as the diabolically evil Chancellor Palpatine. McDiarmid was extremely well cast; he exudes a creepiness that makes your skin crawl.

The script itself is solid and well written. Lucas has done a good job in the past movies of setting up Anakin Skywalker as a flawed self-centered character, so his decent to the dark side of the force seems quite believable. The script strikes a nice balance between action sequences and dramatic exposition, which allows the movie to move along at a good pace. The story is involved but not so much that it become confusing; even if you haven’t seen the other films you could watch this one and have a pretty good understanding of what’s going on.

You have to give Lucas credit; this was a very hard movie to write. From the beginning of this trilogy, everyone has known what the eventual outcome would be so Lucas had to write a story that still was able to have impact even though the ending was already known to all. Add to this the fact that the original Star Wars movie is now considered a classic and has set the standard to which this movie would be compared. These were pretty big obstacles to overcome, yet Lucas was able to pull it off.
The original Star Wars movie will always be considered the best. In spite of it’s simple story and crude special effects, It had a magic that none of the others have been able to recreate. Episode 6 revenge of the sith, comes in a close second. What it lacks in magic it makes up in scope. It is an epic movie that is beautifully executed and is a fitting ending to the Star Wars movie saga.

9 out of 10 Stars

Don’t get me wrong, the story was OK, but much of it had been recycled from “Star Trek - The Wrath of Kahn” and other assorted episodes. And as advertised, there were a lot of action sequences but most of them seemed poorly choreographed and because of this were much less suspenseful then they should have been. It also didn’t help that the peek sequences in the action had been used as part of the commercials for the movie so I knew what was going to happen before it actually occurred. A great way to kill the suspense.

The movie also dragged somewhat in the beginning and could have been helped out by a little bit of judicious editing.

Patrick Stewart looked to me to be tired during the whole film. He has aged quite a bit since the last film four years ago and that might be part of it, but he also just seemed to lack the energy and drive that he has exhibited in other Star Trek outings. I got the feeling that this was nothing more then a big paycheck for him.
Tom Hardy, who played the villain Praetor Shinzon did an excellent job with the part. He was quite believable and evil and will go down in history as one of the better villains in the Star Trek universe. The only problem was that we were expected to believe that he was an exact clone of Jean Luc Picard, and with the exception of being bald did not look much like him at all. The script tried to cover for this by pointing out that he had lived a much harder life, being beaten and such while growing up, but it just seemed like a pathetic attempt to rationalize the difference in looks. I thought it was an insult to the audience to attempt to convince them that a few beatings could change the appearance of the clone as much as was presented. They would have been much better off just not mentioning it and leaving it to our imaginations why the differences existed.

If you’re a Star Trek fan, the film is worth seeing. Just think of it as a Star Trek movie of the week and you won’t be too disappointed with it. If you’re not a Star Trek fan don’t bother with it, or you’ll just come away thinking that the of us are a bunch of whack jobs for being so into the show. If you’ve never ever seen a Star Trek movie (I can’t believe such people even exist) and want to see it at it’s best, go to the local video store and rent Star Trek - First Contact. You won’t be disappointed.

4 out of 10 Stars

Casting can make or break a movie and in the case of Prime it definitely makes it.

Uma Thurman plays Rafi Gardet, a recently divorced women in her late thirties who is seeing a psychoanalyst to help her through her troubled times. The psychoanalyst, Lisa Metzger, played by Meryl Streep has a good relationship with Rafi and in some ways they appear to be more like mother and daughter then doctor and patient.
Rafi is somewhat depressed about the future and things appear bleak until she meets what she believes is the perfect man. The only problem is that he is much younger then her.

She continues to attend her therapy sessions, expressing her concerns about the age difference in the relationship and sharing with Lisa all the steamy details of her sex life. Lisa encourages her. Telling her that she deserves the best and that the age difference is not a problem. With her approval Rafi moves forward and things are going great until one day, Lisa discovers that the man that Rafi has been dating is her son. Then the fun begins.

As I said in the beginning, casting makes this movie. Uma Thurman is totally believable as the older women that a young man might get hooked on (hell, she’d be totally believable as the younger women that an older man might get hooked on, but enough of my problems).

Meryl Streep, who I usually think is overrated, is just perfect as the frumpy but concerned psychoanalyst / mother. You can really sense her inner turmoil as she deals with what she thinks is best for the son she loves and what is best for the patient who has become like a daughter to her.

While doing some background research on this film I noticed that it had a fairly low rating from reviewers on the Internet Movie Database. The biggest complaint that people expressed about this movie is that they didn’t like the ending and that it spoiled the rest of the file for them. If you like your movies to be in the mold of “Pretty Women” where everyone lives happily ever after, then you probably won’t be happy this movie. On the other hand, if you have no problem with a little realism in the movies you attend, this film will probably work for you.

9 out of 10 Stars

How come it takes forever to lose a pound, but you can gain a whole bunch of them in a week?

Anyway, it was time to pay the piper and I was determined that I would get the weight off fast. I decided to try something different this year. Years ago I tried out a diet that included meal replacement shakes. I bought a six pack of these pre-mixed things with the best of intentions, but after sampling the first one I decided it was not for me. It was pretty awful. The mixture kind of resembled a shake but was chalky and had a strange after taste that’s best described as a cross between sulfuric acid and Indian food (I might be being redundant here). It wasn’t in the least bit pleasant tasting and the remaining five cans of this stuff ended up in the trash.

Recently, I came across an article discussing the latest meal replacement powders and according to the author; they have come a long way. Not only do they taste better, they also contain better ingredients and are much healthier then the earlier versions.

This sounded encouraging so I decided that I would give one of the new shakes a try.

I headed over to Shaw’s and made my way to the health food section (an area of the store in which I don’t usually spend a lot of time). Examining the shelves I found that there were all sorts of options including whey based drinks, soy based drinks, and protein powders. Since I had no clue as to what I was looking for, I used the scientific approach; I picked the cheapest.

What I ended up with was one 17.88-ounce can of Naturade Total Soy Strawberry Cream Meal Replacement. Reading the back of the can, I learned that a single serving contained 150 calories and when mixed with the required 8 ounces of 2% low fat milk (130 calories), a meal of this stuff would only add up to 280 calories and would contain roughly one third of just about every nutrient that I would need in a day. Ah, the magic of engineered foods.

I purchased the can and headed home with growing anticipation of sampling my first artificial food.

When I got home, I opened the can and found it contained a powder resembling flour in texture and was tinted an off-white color. This kind of surprised me because I thought it would have a strawberry look like the mixture on the side of the can. I grabbed a measuring cup, poured out eight ounces of non-fat milk and added in two scoops of the soy mix. With a spoon I stirred like crazy for a couple of minutes because the last thing that I wanted was a lumpy shake and watched as the off-white colored powder mixed with milk magically turned into a pink colored strawberry shake.

I grabbed the milk carton, placed it back in the refrigerator and when I turned to consume my shake I found that my cat Neutrino had magically appeared and was chug-a-lugging my strawberry soy shake. He seemed to like it a lot. So much so, that when I poured it down the sink, he jumped in after it and started licking the sink basin.
I cleaned out my glass mixed another batch of the stuff and retired to the living room to watch Rachael Ray cook a thirty-minute meal, while I drank my sixty-second one.

So how was it?

Not bad. It had a rich creamy strawberry flavor (I guess that’s why they call it Strawberry Cream) and it left no aftertaste. Although it tasted quite good, the mix itself was very thin; very much like the low-fat milk from which it as made.

When I got to the bottom of the drink, I found that not all of the powder had gone into solution and a creamy gel was sitting on the bottom of the glass. Since it looked a lot like ice cream, I decided I would taste a spoonful of it. Bad move. It tasted like strawberry but had the consistency of Styrofoam packing peanuts. Learning my lesson, I added some additional milk to the gel and finished off the drink.

Overall, it was enjoyable and satisfying and I think that it will make a decent substitute supper for a short period of time. Honestly, I would prefer to have a cheeseburger or a plate of lasagna, but until I drop a few pounds that’s no longer an option.

7 out of 10 Stars

The fruit in the salad consist of a number of apple slices with a handful of grapes thrown in for good measure. For some reason I expected more then this. It’s probably because they bill it as a Fruit & Walnut Salad so I expected it to have multiple types of fruit. I guess technically two type of fruit constitutes “fruit” but I must say I was a bit disappointed.

The quality of the apple slices were decent, nothing spectacular here; just average quality apple slices. The grapes were a bit on the tart side and did not have a lot of flavor, but this could vary from salad to salad so your experience may be different.

The walnut portion of the salad is a small bag (0.75oz) of Diamond Candied Walnuts. These were tasty, but again nothing to kill for. I’ve had better nuts on plane flights. They also add significantly to the caloric content of the salad, the small bag coming in at 140 calories.

As a dipping sauce for the fruit, McDonald’s includes a small container of their low fat yogurt. Since I really love McDonald’s yogurt, this was the high point of the salad for me.

With tax included, the Fruit & Walnut Salad cost $3.15, which seemed to me a bit on the high side considering the relatively small portion of food.

The salad also seemed to be a bit higher in calories then I would have expected. As mentioned above, the walnuts contain 140 calories; add to that 60 calories for the yogurt and 100 calories for the apple slices and the whole thing contains 300 calories. (They don’t seem to be able to add on the McDonalds website, their nutrition listing for the salad says that 140 + 60 + 100, equals 310)

So considering all of the above factors, I could not recommend this salad. The ingredients are limited, taste is adequate and both the price and caloric content don’t make it worth it.

If you are looking for a healthy dessert option at McDonald’s, I’d recommend the Fruit ‘n Yogurt Parfait instead. It has better flavor, is less expensive and has only 160 calories. It’s also a much better bang for the buck.

3 out of 10 Stars