A Return & Summer Movies

First off, I apologize for not blogging much in the past couple of years.  I had a few different things going on and I didn't feel like A) posting rants about stuff I'd already ranted about and B) raging on the internet (because too many people do that already and I didn't want to add to it).

It's been a pretty good summer for me (movie wise) and I thought I'd share my top 3 films of the summer with any of you who are interested.

First up: The honorable mentions.  These films were enjoyable, but they weren't my favorites of the summer.

HM1: Despicable Me 2 - When I saw the first film a few years ago, it was funny.  But I wanted more antics from the minions (Gru's knee-high, yellow, gibberish-speaking workers).  They stole just about every scene they were in.  Thankfully this second film has them in spades!  If you need a fun film that anyone in your family can enjoy, this is the one for you.

HM2: World's End - The third film from the creative force behind Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, and the TV series "Spaced" is an interesting, humorous, somewhat tragic film that delves into the effects of alcoholism without ever becoming an after-school-special (or Lifetime movie, if the first reference goes over your head).  It focuses on five friends from school who haven't hung out at all since they graduated.  Four of them have grown up, and one is still stuck in the past.  They attempt to re-create an epic 12-tavern pub crawl in their old haunt only to find out that things aren't what they used to be (not only in terms of their friendships and their adult lives, but also in regard to the hamlet from whence they came).

OK, The following are in alphabetical order simply because I enjoyed them all immensely and had trouble discerning which one I liked the most.

1) Man of Steel - While I'm annoyed that Hollywood once again chose to use General Zod instead of an alternate villain from Superman's rogues gallery (like Darkseid, or Mongul or Brainiac), Director/Co-writer Zack Snyder did a fantastic job bringing our favorite Kryptonian back to the big screen.  I'll admit that when I heard that Warner wanted to go with a darker approach to the character, I was worried.  Superman isn't Batman.  He doesn't need to be a dark and gritty character motivated by tragedy.  Thankfully, the writers did a great job with the character and kept most of the core elements that make him Superman.

And then there's the cast.  With perfect actor/character match-ups like Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent and Amy Adams as Lois Lane, it showed that the filmmakers weren't just trying to cast anyone in any role.  They saw what was done in the Dark Knight movies by Christopher Nolan and followed that template.  Now, take that great cast, combine that with a great story, amazing visuals, and (for the first time since Christopher Reeve) a Clark Kent who actually looks like Superman and you have the makings of a great Superman film.  And for comic fans, they threw in a lot of references from Superman and DC Comics lore, so that was a nice little bonus.

2) Much Ado About Nothing - Take one of Shakespeare's excellent romantic comedies and give it to dialogue whiz and geek guru Joss Whedon and the result is nothing short of brilliant.  Whedon casts the film primarily with actors that he has worked with before (both on his multiple television series and "Marvel's the Avengers" film) in addition to bring in some new faces.  And while he cut various scenes from the original text, the story still flows perfectly (and humorously) to it's ever so happy conclusion.

The setting has been changed in this film, as Whedon has transplanted the tale from Italy to modern day California (having filmed the tale entirely in and around his own home) however, nothing feels or sounds out of place.  Whedon and Shakespeare seem to be a match made in cinematic heaven.  And while all of the cast members play their roles perfectly, there is one who I feel was the best of all: Nathan Fillion.  Much like he does in each episode of "Castle", Fillion steals every scene that he's in as Constable Dogberry and leaves you laughing as he does so.  It's like the role was made for him.  Nonetheless, if you are a Shakespeare fan or a fan of Whedon's own series "Angel", it's worth your time to check this film out if you get the chance.

3) Pacific Rim - Growing up during the 80's, Mecha cartoons were everywhere.  From Transformers to Voltron to Macross to Mighty Orbots (yeah, I went there) to Robotech, giant robots in media and pop-culture were everywhere back then.  Even in recent years, shows like Neon Genesis Evangelion, GoDannar, the myriad of Gundam series, and the Michael Bay Transformers movies prove that mecha is still popular.  Writer/Director Guillermo Del Toro takes the classic concept of giant robots and brings it to us in an amazing, live-action film set in the somewhat near future.  He took the old "Godzilla Vs. Megalon" film and used it as a template for this film (while incorporating elements from the aforementioned mecha cartoons and the film "Independence Day").

To say that it's a film about the "Triumph of the human spirit" would be somewhat accurate, but that's just a (somewhat flimsy) narrative device that gives us a reason to watch giant robots fight giant monsters and honestly, I'm ok with that.  The cast is likeable (at least the ones you're supposed to like).  The backstory is given to you in flashbacks (when needed).  The humor is good.  And the action is amazing!  From the beginning to the end, this film took me back to what it was like as a kid watching heroic robots battling these horrific giant creatures who came to annihilate us in grandiose battles where everything we held dear was at stake (each and every time).  It was awesome!   


And with that, another entry comes to a close.  I'm hoping to get back to posting some more, so please check back from time to time.  See ya soon!

Season Finales

Another season of television has come to an end (at least until September). And as I thought back on the handful of season finales that I've watched, I came to the conclusion that they needed to be graded. Because some were horribly deficient while others were quite exemplary and the people who made these need to be made aware of what worked and what needed more work. And before anyone pipes up about my level of influence over Hollywood studios (or lack thereof), I'm making it clear that I'm under no delusions that anyone in Hollywood reads this web log. This is just for fun and to help me get back into review mode. By the way, SPOILER WARNING. I will be revealing what happens during the shows discussed as part of my critique, so if you don't want to know, skip the rest of this entry.

Castle
Finale Grade: D+


I love this show. It's equally fun, funny, dramatic, and action-packed. And it features one of my favorite performers: Nathan Fillion. But this finale was weak.

What worked:
1) The cast. Everyone played their characters admirably and believably.
2) I also liked that we got a little more info about the identity of Kate's mother's killer and the motive for the killing.

What didn't work:
1) The killing of one of the main characters AFTER sullying their reputation by making them part of the team that killed Kate's mom. Not cool. Not cool at all. Since this person was a friend of Kate's (which is to say, if the writers didn't pull this plot twist out of their hindparts), they should have come clean to Kate a lot sooner.
2) The cliffhanger ending (surprise, surprise). Honestly, do they really expect us to believe that the lead actress in the series WON'T be coming back next season?


Chuck
Finale Grade: C

He loses the intersect again?!!! They need to make up their mind on this show. Either he has it, or he doesn't. Stop being all wishy-washy.

What worked:
1) The resolution of the Volkoff storyline. It felt like the story had been dragged out longer than it needed to be (despite featuring Timothy Dalton), but they gave viewers some good closure.
2) The set up for next season with Chuck, Sarah, Casey, & Morgan becoming spies for hire looks like it'll be a lot of fun. Especially with Morgan having an intersect now.

What didn't work:
1) Clyde Decker (a CIA bigwig). He shows up for the first time in this episode and apparently knows more about Chuck's life, his parents lives, and the intersect than anyone else. As an audience member, I was left scratching my head and asking where the heck did this guy come from? And he was such a big part of the finale, that it would have made sense for the producers of the show to introduce him sooner (even if it was just in the shadows).


Cougar Town
Finale Grade: A+

A double-length finale that actually DIDN'T cliffhanger. Who knew it was possible? Oh yeah, that's right, everyone who's ever watched TV from the 1960's through the 1980's (not that I'm jaded about it).

What worked:
1) Just about everything. It picked up from the previous episodes, but they explained what had been happening early on so that any casual or new viewer wouldn't be lost. The jokes were hilarious and the drama that each of the characters had to deal with didn't feel forced or rushed (when the solved the problems). And I thoroughly enjoyed the cameo of Ted from "Scrubs" (Cougartown creator Bill Lawrence's previous show).

What didn't work:
Aside from the season being over and having to wait a while until the next one begins, nothing.


Hawaii Five-O
Finale grade: F

Really CBS? You actually aired this piece of fecal matter and expect me to come back next season?

What worked:
1) Chin-ho finally got back in good standing with the Hawaii Police Department. Yay.

What didn't work:
1) Everything else. You kill off a character we've seen once before and expect us to care about her. Then you reveal that the Five-O team's benefactor is in cahoots with the villains? What the #%&@?! Then you have her killed too? On top of that, you have half the team arrested, while the only real remaining member of the team might be leaving for the U.S. mainland? Seriously? Nevermind that the villain got away and went into hiding. I understand that most shows like to do a cliffhanger at the end of each season in hopes of luring fans back the next season, but this was a clear case of over-egging the pudding. I've honestly lost all interest in this show since the P. Diddy episode, and this finale didn't help renew my faith. So long, gang, I won't be watching this series anymore!


Justified
Finale Grade: A

Wow. Just wow. It's rare that I feel comfortable with the way a season ends, but Justified did a bang-up job with the way it wrapped up its second season.

What worked:
1) The resolution of the Bennett/Givens feud. After the way things were in the episodes leading up to the finale, I didn't think it would be resolved, but they wrapped it up in a tragic, yet fitting conclusion that brought the season full-circle.
2) I also enjoyed Boyd coming to Raylan's rescue. Every scene between Walton Goggins (who I still remember from Major League 3) and Timothy Olyphant, is brilliant! They have such great chemistry on screen as former enemies who used to be friends (if that sounds complicated, believe me it is), that I love to watch them work.
3) Another important element that I liked was the way this show set up cliffhangers. Unlike most series that tell a story and then end with a cliffhanger, this one gave you a few cliffhangers in the middle and then ended with the main story's conclusion. Additionally, their placement in the middle of the episode still helped to further the story, instead of detracting from the main story.

What didn't work:
Honestly, I don't think there was anything that didn't work for this one. The cast and crew all brought their A-game and gave viewers a great finale. The only downside is that we probably have to wait about a year until the next season starts.


NCIS
Finale Grade: B+

Thankfully, my favorite show didn't disappoint. It wasn't perfect, but it was still entertaining television.

What worked:
1) The Port to Port killer storyline was concluded quite nicely. Not only did we get some explanation of why he was after EJ & her team, it was finally revealed why she had been getting promoted over Gibbs for the past few weeks (hint: Nepotism).
2) The funeral for the Gibbs' mentor and friend was nice and the reveal of what he had been working on in his basement for the past couple months was touching.

What didn't work:
1) The cliffhanger. Most of you who read this web log know that I'm not a big fan of cliffhangers. However, this one was just kind of a let-down. I knew it was coming, because every season of NCIS has had a cliffhanger finale. But this one was just "meh". How am I supposed to be concerned when we don't even know who Tony is supposed to be shadowing in his new undercover mission. I would have been more invested in the cliffhanger if they had ended with the reveal of his target.


NCIS: Los Angeles
Finale Grade: D+

This season, the show just wasn't as good as it was in the first season. Heck, it's not even as good as it was in the 2-part backdoor pilot episodes of NCIS!

What worked:
1) Hetty stepping out of her administrator role and into that of an awesome agent of espionage.

What didn't work:
1) Callan, Sam, Kensi, & Deeks all resigning and going rogue in an effort to bring Hetty back.
2) Also, the new hint of Callan's identity is annoying. I know that they're probably gonna stretch the mystery of what the "G" stands for and who he is for the length of the series, but it's just annoying. Even Bellisario didn't keep Ari alive past season three of NICS, because he knew that audiences want resolution. Shane Brennan should take a page from that aspect of Bellisario's playbook.


And with that, I wrap up my first ever season finale report. I hope you all enjoyed it. See you next time!

Update on the tooth situation

Well, the specialist took a look at my tooth and did an x-ray and looked at ti and then told me that I need to come back to have him drill a hole in the crown of the tooth, pull out all the filling materials that he had put in, replace them with new filler materials and then seal up the tooth. And he put me on antibiotics because my gum area is infected. Unfortunately, the procedure is going to be very expensive.

Then, on top of that, my tooth started feeling loose. I thought it was the crown and I made an appointment with my primary dentist to see about re-gluing the crown back on. He and his hygienist looked at it and determined that the crown wasn't what was loose. It was the tooth itself! He asked me about what the specialist was planning to do and I told him. However, he was surprised that the specialist was charging me for redoing a procedure that he'd already done before. But he also agreed with the course of action that the specialist wanted to do and sent me on my way, telling me that he'd be in touch with the specialist and with me. So we'll see what happens.

Teeth

Teeth can be so frustrating sometimes. Like when they inexplicably start aching. I have a tooth that has had a root canal done to it and a crown put on top of it. So I would think that it wouldn't be able to cause any pain, because the nerves and blood vessels have been removed. And yet, it began doing just that about a week ago. I've since gone to my dentist and he was unable to determine the cause of the pain (despite taking new x-rays and examining the area). So he has sent me to the specialist who performed the root canal on me in hopes that the specialist will be able to figure out what's happening and provide a solution. However, my appointment with the specialist isn't until Monday. So I have a few more days to deal with this. But on the bright side, it has started to feel better. Maybe it'll heal itself up. Who knows? In the meantime, I'll be here dealing with this annoying tooth ache.

Times, they are a changin'

So I just purchased the latest edition of "Resumes That Knock 'em Dead" (9th edition). The previous edition that I was working from was the revised 3rd edition, published in 1998. And after reading through the new book (and making notes on important items), I've come to the conclusion that the resume that I've been working from for the past two years is wrong. According to the book, a resume should be about two pages long instead of the one page length I had learned previously. I had figured that since HR departments were getting inundated with resumes these days, they'd want them to be brief. I figured wrong.

Another thing that employers don't want is any dense reading material. They don't want your life story. Which I knew, but kind of sucks when it comes to writing out details and selling myself. I'm apparently limited to bullet points and two-word key phrases to describe my skills and what I bring to the table (if I want to find work).

So resumes need to be longer, but use small "sound bites" for most of the text. Does that sound kind of oxymoronic and insane to anyone else? In a world where our own televised news is relegated to brief clips and even shorter sound bites that are supposed to inform the viewer, places of employment have apparently decided to follow that trend... on twitter.

Ok, maybe I'm oversimplifying (with some added snark). It's just kind of annoying. So not only do I have to deal with prejudice from potential employers about being out of work for a period of time, but I also have to overhaul my resume in order to get through their computerized keyword filters and into the hands of someone who works in the human resources department. It's like they don't even want us to apply in the first place.

Regardless, I'm rebuilding my resume from scratch (using the book as a guide) and hopefully I'll be gainfully employed in the very near future. Wish me luck.

I should know this… my uncle’s a painter

Math can be overwhelming. Especially calculus. Every day we learn something new in class, and I can grasp certain elements of what we’re being taught, but there’s still a lot that I’m not quite getting. Granted, upon doing the homework, and talking with some of my classmates and the professor, I manage to get a better grasp on the subject matter as the week progresses.

However, there are still those days where he’ll teach us something new that just completely leaves my mind reeling. And it’s at those times that the line I used for the title of this entry keeps popping into my head.

The quote itself comes from a 1994 film called “Little Big League” about a young boy who inherits the Minnesota Twins Baseball Team when his grandfather (the team’s owner, played by Jason Robards) passes away. Naturally, hi-jinks, hilarity, and life lessons ensue and the team makes it to the big game at the end of the season to see if they’ll advance to the post-season playoffs. However, since the game in question occurs in September, the film’s young protagonist is back in school and dealing with homework.

A few hours before the game, he’s working on a story problem (in the team's locker room) that states “If Joe can paint a house in 3 hours and Sam can paint it in 5 hours, how long does it take for them to paint the house together?” As he tries to solve it, more and more of the players are brought in to brainstorm and come up with an answer. During their discussion, one of the players quietly says to himself “I should know this… my uncle’s a painter.” And another player asks the obvious question “Why don’t they just get a house that’s already painted?”

Now, I’ll admit that those lines popping into my mind probably aren’t the most helpful for me when I’m trying to comprehend the speed and distance that two ships are sailing in two different directions and how to create the equation that states how they relate to each other (or some other equally complex computation), but it does help me relax and see about approaching the problem with a clearer head, so it’s not all bad.

And for those that were wondering. It takes 1 and 7/8ths hours for them to paint it together (according to the film).

Leave me alone.

So I went down to the bank today. I was planning on just using the ATM to get a little cash and then go on about my business. This typically takes about a minute or two of my time. Unfortunately, the ATM was "unable" to give out cash when I was there. Since it was during business hours, I figured that I could go in and just do a withdrawal.

So I entered and grabbed a withdrawal slip. But before I could fill it out, one of the bank's non-teller staff (I don't know what they're called and after this encounter, I don't care) came over to me and asked if I was doing a withdrawal and offered to help me with it. I know, I should have just said no, but I wasn't thinking so I said "ok". We get to his desk, and he looks up my account info and helps me with the transaction, by taking the slip over to one of the tellers. And in doing so, he became a middle man (who should have been cut out). But when he returned, he started talking to me about my accounts and asking if I wanted to make any changes to my existing accounts. He went so far as to ask about my 401k from my previous employer. I told him "I don't want to talk about that". He "acknowledged" that, but kept right on talking about how I should talk to their guy (named Steve) and get a free financial consultation and evaluation and how I should consider moving the 401k to them.

Getting a little fed up, but still having to be polite because the teller hadn't finished processing my withdrawal, I declined his offer. I went on to say that my Father is a financial professional who used to audit banks and that I trust his advice on my financial investments. But this apparently went in one ear and out the other for this tool (who by now, I was sure the bank had hired right out of "the Pushy Car-dealership sales school for high pressure sales"). He continued to talk, making an assumption that my 401k was in a mutual account and some other type, which in his mind was "totally wrong for someone at my age". So now he's ignored my request to not talk about a topic, insulted my family by assuming that my Dad didn't know what he was talking about when he advised me financially, and made incorrect assumptions about me (possibly in an attempt yo bait me in to talking about it), thereby insulting me even further.

At this point, I wanted to say the following, but he never stopped talking long enough for me to get a word in edgewise:
1) I told you I don't want to talk about my 401k. So stop trying to get me to talk about it.
2) Make all the assumptions you want, I'm still not gonna talk to you about my 401k.
3) Ergo, stop trying to get me to give you any more money than you already have from me. You're not gonna touch my 401k.
4) You owe me and my father an apology for the assumptions you just made.

As the teller took her time and finally brought my money over, she handed it to him, instead of me. He proceeded to tell me more about how I should strongly consider talking with their financial guy, Steve. Realizing that I wouldn't get out of there with my money if I didn't at least give him something to hope for in his dismal life, I said "I'll think about that and give you a call if I decide to do that." But this wasn't enough for the tool. He re-iterated his points and re-stated that they could really help me with my financial future and managing the 401k. But I wasn't budging. I re-stated my "I'll think about that and let you know" answer. At which point he finally gave me my money, my ID, my receipt and one of his business cards. I picked it all up, made sure it was all there and that it was correct and stuffed it in my pocket (not even trying to put it away in it's places in my wallet (because I could do that later and I just wanted to get on with my day). He thanked me and I was out the door with a curt "thanks".

Now thanks to this tool, I had spent about 5-10 minutes of my day instead of the 1-2 minutes that stop should have taken. Granted, 5-10 minutes isn't a lot in the grand scheme of life. But when it's spent listening to a pushy salesman trying to get you do things you don't want to and talk about stuff you'd rather not, those minutes can feel like an eternity.

I swear, the next time I go into a bank one of the non-tellers comes up to me, I'll just tell them "no thanks". And if they keep pressuring me, then I'll tell them to go do something inappropriate to themselves and leave the branch. All I wanted to do was a quick withdrawal. But thanks to guys like this one, it took a lot longer than it should have. Seriously, I thought it was understood that pushy salesmen were NOT GOOD for business, because customers don't like them. I'm considering using this guy's business card and calling the head office or corporate line to report him for poor salesmanship or something. What do you think? Should I report him or not waste any more time on him?