Looking Forward: The Man of Steel

Directed by Zack Synder (300/Watchmen) and starring Henry Cavill (The Tudors) as Superman, this movie sounds like it could finally restore Kal-EL to the top of the comic book movie world. Not since watching Christopher Reeve don the Superman suit have I been so excited about the prospect of another film staring the Man of Steel. I'm not dismissing Superman Returns, it just didn't really work for me. For starters, Superman should not have a child, but that's only one thing this Superman film needs to make sure of. Here is how I would direct The Man of Steel.
1) Get him in the suit quickly. People have little patience these days. Aside from the destruction of his home planet Krypton, Superman's origin isn't really that exciting. Whilst his origin should definitely not be ignored, it should be dealt with at a quick pace. With Russell Crowe announced as Superman's father Jor-El however, things might move along a bit slower than expected.
2) The movie should go dark, but to a certain extent. They need to draw upon how Superman is an outsider, and will always be a loner because of that. Superman is not Batman. He isn't trying to avenge the death of his parents by installing fear in his enemies. He's just trying to help a world in need. Warner Bros need to remember that. Don't have Superman moping after Lois in a depressing love deprived fashion (Superman Returns). Instead they should have him refrain from a relationship because of the fact that he is incapable of living a normal life. Superman has often been criticised for being un-relatable. The fact that he is an outsider trying to help people is what makes him more relatable than people think. He can't have normal relationships with human beings and Man of Steel needs to showcase this.
3) Superman needs someone to fight. Now Michael Shannon has been cast as General Zod, the film needs to make sure they create some impressive fight scenes. For all their might, comic book movies never seem to pack epic boss fights. General Zod has proven to be an incredible villain on screen and I can't wait to hear the famous line: KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!
4) CGI Suit. Yes, I know that risks infuriating fan boys across the globe, but if Man of Steel is going to have any hope of succeeding it needs to move away from the nostalgic classic suit. Plus using CGI may actually give us a suit that looks like something an alien would wear. This also means there would be no more Clark Kent ripping his shirt open to reveal the S logo.
5) A new role for Clark Kent. Surely working as a journalist would allow no time to be Superman? What decent newspaper would allow one of their staff to keep running off in this day and age? If Man of Steel is going to draw from reality, it needs to bring the tough job climate into account. Whist Clark should still work in a newspaper firm in some capacity; he should definitely not be a reporter. I would go the Peter Parker route and have Clark as a free-lance photographer, with his powers enabling him to capture pictures from all over the world quickly.
6) The movie needs a new sound score. Throw out the John Williams score for if this Superman film is to succeed, it needs to establish a new identity and move away from the nostalgia vest that plagued Returns. Much like what Batman Begins did with the score by Hans Zimmer. In fact, a Hans Zimmer score would work perfectly well for this film. It would be dark when necessary but it will add some real gravitas to proceedings.
Finally... The movie needs to set up a sequel. It needs to get people excited at the prospect of seeing Superman again. I think they should set up Lex Luthor for the sequel. Luthor should not be seen however, instead they should just hint at him. (Similar to what was done with the Joker card in Batman Begins). Audiences now want superhero franchises with consistency that delivers every time. Warner Bros are no strangers to creating on going franchises, so Superman should be marketed heavily.
These are just my ideas. If you're reading this and disagree about how The Man of Steel should play out then please feel free to comment.

DLP Vs LCD Televisions

When choosing a high-definition television consumers are often faced with the choice of a DLP vs LCD set. A newcomer to the television market can easily become overwhelmed by this prospect. There are several factors for you to consider during your decision to choose between a DLP vs LCD television including price, performance and overall display quality.
An LCD TV screen, standing for Liquid Crystal Display, operates by illuminating millions of red, green or blue liquid crystals that change turn off and on to produce the proper color on your screen. Why red, green and blue you ask? These are the primary colors of light that make the visible color spectrum as we know it. LCD televisions tend to be very bright, making them ideal for a well lit room in your home as external light will not likely cause many issues with glare.
Most LCD televisions are between 2 and 4 inches in depth, which is ideal for wall mounting your television. Unfortunately, LCD screens are rarely seen in models greater than 50 inches in diameter due to the difficulty in producing large LCD displays in a cost effective manner. One common criticism regarding LCD televisions is that over time, typically 70,000 - 80,000 viewing hours, the green crystals will begin to fade, causing a red-blue tint to the screen. There is currently no option to fix this issue without replacing the television. Many 720i - 1080i LCD televisions below 40 inches in diameter can be purchased in the $300 - $800 price range, which gives the LCD display an initial cost effective advantage in the DLP vs LCD dilemma.
A DLP TV (Digital Light Processing) operates by reflecting light onto a microchip covered in thousands of small mirrors. These mirrors send the reflected light through a color wheel which then projects the correct color onto the screen, similar in fashion to rear projection televisions of the past. This technology is often put to use in digital projection movie theaters to enhance the picture color and clarity.
Although typically more expensive, DLP televisions do not suffer from the green crystal degradation that is common in cheaper LCD televisions. In addition to this, DLP television bulbs are replaceable for approximately $250, a much more reasonable replacement cost than the upper end LCD televisions. While the DLP televisions can produce a much more vivid picture and boasts an extended life span compared to LCD models, some people report a "rainbow effect" if they are too far off from the center of the television. Another issue to consider in the DLP vs LCD debate is the size of the DLP televisions. DLP sets range between 6 and 16 inches, making them more obtrusive and difficult to wall mount than their LCD competitors.
DLP vs LCD Conclusion
When considering your next television purchase keep these pros and cons in mind as a guideline when deciding whether to get a DLP or LCD television. When in doubt about the DLP vs LCD dilemma you can always view both types of TVs in similar lighting conditions in the room you tend to display it in to help you to make a decision.

Mid-Summer TV Line-Up

You gotta love Asylum who makes these "mock busters" of the real movies. They did this before when "Battle: LA" and they did "Battle: Los Angeles". This time they did "Almighty Thor" the day after the summer blockbuster "Thor" flick. People this movie is really bad but the trailer is funny when Thor uses an Uzi to take down Loki! I HAD to watch it just to see that!
The film is about Loki (Richard Grieco) who wants Thor's magic hammer to control Asgard and earth! Grieco didn't go over the top like I expected but it was still terrible performance. Thor (Cory Deal) is a new comer to the movies and he did audition for the theatrical movie. He is a big guy but needs a few more acting lessons. Wrestler Kevin Nash is Ordin and he is killed in the beginning. He does his best raspy Dark Knight impression. Special effects are good to poor! See it for a good laugh and on cable! People who are wondering why Syfy are doing Thor movies all the time is because Norse mythology has no copyright!
HAWAII 5-O--FINALE
I must tell you that the finale of this TV show was awesome. McGarrett (Alex O' Loughlin)is set up for killing the governor Pat Jameson (Jean Smart) Danno (Scott Caan) doesn't go home with his family, Chin Ho (Daniel Dae Kim) is now lieutenant and Kono (Grace Park) is arrested! Wo Fat (Mark Dacascos) makes a fatal guest appurtenance. I can't wait for the 2nd season!
SINBAD AND THE MINATOR
ORIGINAL SYFY MOVIE-MAY 21, 2011
ACTION/ADVENTURE/FANTASY
This movie is the usual low-budget for Syfy but it has a very handsome lead Manu Bennett (30 Days of Night and The Marine)who is very Australian. One day Hollywood will use an Arab-American to play Sinbad for this character is of Middle East decent! The two reasons to watch this is Steven Grives (Beastmaster) as Al-Jibar. He is good at being an over the top bad guy and Pacharo Mzembe is the black man is part of Sinbad's crew who lives through the ENTIRE movie!
SINGLE LADIES
ORIGINAL SERIES ON VH1-MONDAYS AT 9:00PM STARTING MAY 30, 2011
ROMANCE/COMEDY/DRAMA
The show should be on BET or TVOne! It is about two sexy, smart black women Stacey Dash and Lisa Raye McCoy living and loving in Atlanta. It is worth seeming at least the first episode for the one of the creators and producer is Queen Latifah! The other writer and producer is Stacey Littlejohn who is one of the few black female successful producers. She did All of Us, the Wanda Sykes show and Cedric the Entertainer Presents. It is only eight shows and it is the first scripted show on VH1 in history. It is good if you like soap operas with some 'flava.' I hope it stays on for awhile.

Reviewed: Something Borrowed [2011]

Something Borrowed follows Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin) as she meets Dex (Colin Egglesfield) at university where they become best friends with feelings clearly developing but neither of them acting on said feelings. So when Rachel's best friend the selfish and obnoxious Darcy (Kate Hudson) shows up and asks Dex out, Rachel gives her blessing, Dex says yes and several years later they are engaged to be married.
This leaves Rachel distraught for letting Dex slip through her fingers and with the cowardly and wimpish Dex (I'm sure just what ladies look for in a man) still conflicted as to what to do next. After Rachel's birthday celebrations though, she and Dex end up sleeping together and supposed hilarity ensues as they try yet again ignore the chemistry between them and just let life run its course.
Thank god for Ethan (John Krasinski) Rachel's friend who gave a voice of reason to proceedings by at least attempting to beat some sense into the main characters who seemed to be oblivious to everything around them. I think my main fault with the movie was the storyline and the way we are supposed to feel for Rachel despite the fact that she didn't make a go of it with Dex, everything that happened to her was self inflicted and she has slept with her best friend's fiancé; and given that Darcy isn't a very nice person to say the least that either of them hung around with her in the first place.
The supporting cast outside the four main characters didn't add to the film in any way shape or form. With some movies you get the token celebrities who show up for 10 seconds, say a line and then leave again and this is how the rest of the cast felt to me for the entire movie. They were just written in for one line and then would disappear never to be seen or heard from again.
Apart from a few witty remarks here and a bit of slapstick, there was not much comedy in the film with the overall feel of it leaning more towards a drama with a bit of comedy rather than the other way around which I feel is the better mix for this genre. There was nothing wrong with the acting with Goodwin and Egglesfield doing their jobs and creating some chemistry but it was merely a minor consolation which can't cover up the rest of the issues highlighted.
As romcom's go this was one of the worse that I've seen so much so that even if your an avid fan of this type of movie you'll have a hard time getting any pleasure out of watching it. Time to forget about this and move onto another one.

Movie Review: True Grit (2011)

The story of True Grit is an excellent source for a movie adaptation and the Coen Brothers retain the storytelling prowess they've always possessed with their vision of this epic tale of retribution. It still feels like a remake though, with every major event (as well as most of the minor ones) from the 1969 film finding its way into the script. Little has changed, save for the cast, and while the characters are handled well by the seasoned crew, it's unlikely their performances will hold up against the adoration of John Wayne and the original film. Even without comparing the leads between the two, this latest Rooster Cogburn is afflicted with such slurred speech and sonorous grumbling that intelligently written banter is lost to humorously unintelligible ramblings - this vocal setback plagues many of the other characters too. Hailee Steinfeld offers an entertaining precociousness and Matt Damon revels in his arrogant Texas Ranger, but it's nearly impossible not to recall the performances of Kim Darby and Glen Campbell. Perhaps the Coen Brothers' True Grit will find favor with those unfamiliar with the original - unfortunately those viewers have already missed out.
When her father is gunned down in cold blood by the treacherous Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), fourteen-year-old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) determines to see justice done no matter the cost. Searching out the meanest, orneriest Marshal she can find, Mattie hires Reuben J. "Rooster" Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) to hunt down Chaney in the harsh wilderness of Indian territory. Much to the lawman's dismay, Mattie insists on accompanying him, as does cocky Texas Ranger La Boeuf (Matt Damon), seeking out his own unrelated bounty on the man, leading the mismatched trio to begin a dangerous quest for vengeance.
The Coen Brothers' newest film is just begging for comparison to both the original novel by Charles Portis and the 1969 film adaptation. It's incredibly difficult to judge it on its own merits considering just about everything it accomplishes is immensely derivative. While this version follows the book closely, the changes aren't different enough from Henry Hathaway's earlier film, resulting in an attempt that for all intents and purposes, might as well have been a shot-for-shot remake. Many of the scenes are nearly identical, and much of the dialogue is the exact same, including the climactic showdown catchphrase which is cringe-worthy for fans of John Wayne's unforgettable delivery. It can't even top Strother Martin's minor supporting role, this time portrayed by Dakin Matthews.
Jeff Bridges' Rooster Cogburn isn't so much a new interpretation of the marshal from the book, but a variation on John Wayne's performance. This is unfortunate because while Bridges portrays a memorable, likeable character, he hasn't really displayed something creatively fresh for audiences. The language used is perhaps more authentic, but resultantly harder to understand, and the strained lack of spoken contractions doesn't flow well with the contemporary camerawork, lighting and effects. The only real improvements are the costumes and props, which were undoubtedly blessed with larger budgets and extensive attention to details.
True Grit is an exciting story with intriguing characters and therefore exceptional material for a screenplay. But it doesn't mean that it should be redone when it was already successfully adapted 41 years ago with an indelible actor that won an Oscar for his efforts. Especially when the filmmakers have nothing new to bring to the table, outside of an alternate cast and bringing back the bookending of familiar characters with detached, older versions of themselves, for the sake of following the novel - a trick that sadly distances viewers from the roles they're accustomed to.

Movie Review: Unknown (2011)

Last time, they took his daughter - this time they're after his identity. While not an actual sequel to 2008's popular film "Taken," "Unknown" follows a similar pattern of action and suspense centered around a grizzled warrior trying to stay one step ahead of ruthless villains. The tension remains consistent and the spattering of action sequences impresses, yet Unknown can't maintain the same level of thrills as its predecessor due largely in part to a plot that starts to waver with each new reveal. It's certainly not predictable, but the rather tired stolen identity and amnesia angle isn't nearly as satisfying as the rescue and revenge path. Liam Neeson proves once again, however, that watching him kick ass doesn't get old.
Dr. Martin Harris (Liam Neeson) and his wife Elizabeth (January Jones) arrive in Berlin for a biotechnology summit that will feature several high-profile world leaders and scientists. When Dr. Harris realizes he's left his briefcase at the airport and attempts to return for it, his taxi is involved in a car accident that leaves him in a coma. Upon awakening four days later, Martin learns that another man has assumed his identity and that his wife no longer recognizes him. Battling with his fractured memories and the surmounting evidence pointing towards his own insanity, Harris begins an exhaustive search for answers that leads him to the cab driver that saved his life (Diane Kruger), a former German intelligence agent (Bruno Ganz), and those that would attempt to silence him forever.
The film opens with a few bizarrely coincidental similarities to the incredibly obscure 1991 Tom Berenger film "Shattered," but then vaults full swing into a taut, white-knuckle mystery that takes identity theft to whole new levels. The doppelgangers, paranoia, overlooked details, memory loss, general confusion and Hitchcockian switched identity dilemmas culminate in a grand conspiracy theory that is as engrossing as it is improbable. Harris must not only deal with cops, doctors and business associates that don't believe him, but also surviving in a foreign country with a language barrier, no friends, no place to go and general isolation - plus a few assassins. It's a supremely engaging premise for a thriller.
Every character is interesting and nothing is what it seems. Hand-to-hand combat, destructive car chases (unfortunately topped off with CG vehicles) and knife-wielding killers complete the formula for a Liam Neeson actioner, along with the increasingly generic elements of nightclub locales, disbelieving security guards, and an attractive woman who becomes unwittingly involved in death and mayhem but still expresses uncommon bravery. With a few more films like this, Neeson will be a regular action hero.
The setup is so smartly achieved that even scenes comprised of nothing more than two elderly men calmly, casually conversing manages to be nerve-wracking and unpredictable. Sadly, it's a difficult act to follow, so the consistency begins to falter toward the conclusion; explanations, realizations and motives are revealed as contrived, foiling its lasting power. There's simply no good way to end Unknown without being overly neat and tidy - or at least screenwriters Oliver Butcher and Stephen Cornwell couldn't come up with one while adapting the novel "Out of My Head" by Didier van Cauwelaert, a story that desperately wanted to be a movie.

Movie Review: I Am Number Four (2011)

If you've enjoyed a steady diet of Twilight films, superhero movies, and sci-fi television shows, you might like I Am Number Four. But probably not. The film, based on the young-adult novel of the same name, derives almost its entirety from other related materials, leaving individuality a permanently absent entity. The most disconcerting problem is that Twilight does the high-school romances better, the comic-book movies handle the action with more finesse and the television shows contain fewer cardboard characters. If this is number four, I'm just thankful we didn't have to wallow through one, two, and three.
After their homeworld of Lorien is besieged by the Mogadorians, a ruthless race of alien intruders, only nine gifted youngsters escape to Earth and await their destiny. John (Alex Pettyfer) is one such survivor, who, along with his guardian Henri (Timothy Olyphant), must constantly stay on the run to avoid being found by the Mogadorians. After learning of the assassination of another Lorien, John and Henri head to Paradise, Ohio where they hope to lay low and discover a way to make contact with their remaining allies. When John falls in love with Sarah (Dianna Agron), a pretty photographer at his high school, he decides to stay and fight rather than continue running - a decision that will pit him against a relentless team of brutal alien executioners.
Sometimes, (though rarely) mediocre dialogue can be forgiven in the presence of great action. Unfortunately, I Am Number Four has neither. The direction of conversation, if not the actual exchanges, can probably be guessed before anyone has spoken and the revelations often rival those found in an episode of Scooby-Doo. The dialogue drifts into extremely awkward territory on a number of occasions and can't even grasp realism when the conversations are supposed to be maladroit. Friendships, fatherly guidance, antagonistic threats, and confessions of love never felt so lame.
Perhaps even rarer yet, humdrum dialogue can be dismissed when uttered by intriguing characters and inspiring demeanors. Still nothing here. In John's defense, he is supposed to be trying to blend in and become invisible. He succeeds, but that does the audience the disservice. Sarah lends an arguably pretty face, but certainly no more, and Timothy Olyphant's Henri tries ever so hard but can't overcome the tedium of the script. The otherworldly villains are perhaps the most cringe-worthy, spitting broken English over harsh alien speech and committing the cardinal sin of talking too much before killing their victims.
A few interesting shots during combat do make an appearance, though their ingenuity quickly vanishes beneath the shoddy special effects and the behemoth beasts that look to be the lovechild of a flying squirrel and the Cloverfield monster. If inexplicably powerful teenagers, giant sugar glider-creatures, and hokey glowing flashlight hands are your cup of tea, this one's for you.