Add me on Brawl!
2406-6019-9186

My other blog:
http://spillaglassofwater.blogspot.com (I don't know how to HTML link)

• 24Aug 08

  Nintendo sued again

  The last time Nintendo got sued, it lost. That was the Anascape case. Now, it's Hillcrest Labs doing the suing. They say that they too have a remote that is also a "three-dimensional pointing device" called The Loop, and they have a patent for it as well!

  Nintendo's response to it was, well, nothing except that Hillcrest hasn't given notice to Nintendo.

  This just brings me to anger. After the success of the Wii, every single company has been going after Nintendo with their lawsuits and trying to get their share of the fortune. Some failed, others succeeded. I mean, if it indeed infringes their intellectual property, why didn't they sue Nintendo even before the device was released?

  And another question: Will Anascape, and all the other companies, sue each other as well?

  There's a visible trend here: Everyone has a patent for a "three-dimensional pointing device" nowadays. And most of these companies are even obscure! Maybe it's a publicity stunt?

  Heck, I'm wondering: Will other companies sue Nintendo for infringing copyrights for another kind of pointing device with a three-dimensional body called the mouse? Will Apple sue Nintendo for using accelerometers as well?

  Just pure stupidity and greed. For shame.

  • Posted Aug 24, 2008 11:36 pm PT
  • Category: Games
  • 7 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 22Aug 08

  Finally iPhone day over here, but it's overpriced.

  Of course, what can you expect from Apple?

  Then again, I'm ironically a Mac user, but I found these computers to be of much value for money, especially since their famous for supporting an OS that'll get released 10 years from now.

  But anyway, this is about the iPhone, but when I saw the prices in my country my plan totally got permanently trashed away, never to be found again.

  Of course, it's got something (mostly) to do with the 12% taxes. Meaning that it's overpriced by at least 50 dollars. And then there's the shipping charge (of course), and then there's the carrier charge.

  I mean, basing from the famous 199 dollar price, I thought it would apply to our country's plans, but no, it doesn't, we have to pay 100 dollars a month so we don't have to pay for the unit itself.

  But since I'm more of a prepaid user than postpaid, the prepaid kits our carrier offers are even more off the scales: 763 dollars at least! OMG, I'd rather buy a MacBook!

  Anyway, the week's been a bit busy, but I'm not gonna be busy in the next week because I've got 2 additional days from school due to local holidays. So I'll finally be able to catch up on Bioshock!

  Well, just a life update, nothing special .

  • Posted Aug 22, 2008 6:57 am PT
  • Category: Technology
  • 3 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 15Aug 08

  Exam week is officially over; Movie review overload

  I'm finally free from exam week, and tomorrow will officially be the freest Saturday yet. I'm glad to say that I actually passed with nearly flying colors, especially Geometry with a perfect score due to an additional 14 points given by the teacher.

  Basically, I wasn't able to catch up on all your blogs for the past few days even if I wanted to, especially since GameSpot was probably applying the redesign when I was attempting to log on but to no avail. I may catch up with all your blogs in a few hours after I sleep, since it's basically 1am over here.

  So to close this post up, I give you a literal overload of movie reviews that will ensure you a hard time scrolling down to the comments section XD.

  The latest movie I saw in a theater

  Mamma Mia

  Whoever doesn't know at least one ABBA song is a caveman. Surely at least you know the tune of the chorus to Dancing Queen, maybe Mamma Mia, because it's like you're born with it because it exudes this sense of nostalgia even if you haven't heard it before, yes it's that popular.
  
  So if ABBA was this influential to our everyday lives for some reason, why not make a musical right? And that's when the original Broadway show was conceived, and has become one of the most successful, long-running plays on Broadway, which is why it's not much of a surprise to even think that a movie adaptation wouldn't be far off. And come on, Meryl Streep and Pierce Brosnan? What a draw.
  
  Although we were planning to see it the day Dark Knight came out, those plans were halted since Mamma Mia became one of those movies that share a theater with another movie, thus having a divided timeslot that we weren't able to reach so... even though the same holds true in today's (August 3) case, we were able to reach the showing time.
  
  So on we go to the story. Well, there's not much to it but a story about a girl who's betrothed to this guy with a British accent and is on a mission to find her father because she found her mother's diary revealing 3 possible candidates, all whom her mother "loved" at around the same month, so she can be "given away". Of course, this is without her mother's knowledge, so all hell breaks loose when she does find out, and you know people don't mess with Meryl Streep, but this girl just had to, and now look what you've gotten her into!
  
  OK, OK, maybe it's not really a bad movie, just a smidge above mediocre. Why? Well, I'll cover it in the proceeding paragraphs...
  
  Now, ABBA songs are always pleasant to listen to, so thank heavens that the lyrics weren't changed at all, and they're put right in the middle of a good situation. But the movie executes plenty of these sequences in a mixed-up, sloppy fashion because it feels as if they crumpled up together many almost irrelevant situations so that they can sing an ABBA song. For example, what does "romance for an older woman" have to do with "trying to find my real father"? Well, unless it's Ashton Kutcher we're talking about, nothing.
  
  And yeah, choreography is nice, the set is just beautiful (it's in Greece!), but is the cinematography? Well, I guess you can say it's better than average. At times, it's good, at other times it's just, you know, not so creative. Of course, it's a pretty minor gripe, but I would've enjoyed it better if they took even more advantage of the wonderful locale.
  
  But still, the film's cinematography sometimes suggests that the entirety of the movie is merely in the confines of the theater, and the choreography makes this theory rock solid. Why? Well, the extras who also serve as back-up singers can apparently jump to the top of the roof of a building of several stories, swim to shore from thin air, and suddenly multiply near a tropical bar. It's just crazy.
  
  And now, I've saved the worst gripe for last, and that's Pierce Brosnan. Admittedly, most of the actors here need some fine-tuning in their voice (except Meryl Streep- she's a goddess no question) but Pierce Brosnan by far is the worst singer in the bunch. Yeah, casting for his character would've been pretty good (but made one thing really obvious, but I won't divulge it so as not to spoil the movie) except that his voice is too... I don't know. You know what? I'll just say that the expression on Meryl Streep's face when Pierce Brosnan sang the first line of the song "SOS", was similar to the expression I made. I thought during that moment, "Yeah, Meryl thought he was terrible too.". Oh, and the crackling speakers so did not help.
  
  The real star of the show here is, of course, Meryl Streep. Yeah, she's merely relegated to a mother role, but she always seems to stand out and take over. I mean, in Streep standards, she could do this role in her sleep. And the fact that she sings flawlessly, and cracks her voice during the most appropriate of times, like when she's crying.
  
  Of course, it was supposed to be Amanda Seyfried's movie. Ironically, she's not even listed in most of the posters I've seen even if she plays the protagonist. Her acting is so-so, and her face, especially the part around her eyes, makes her look like she cries buckets every time she isn't on-camera.
  
  The movie may be full of flaws, but it's undeniably fun, and come on, ABBA songs are catchy! And if you're pretty down, maybe this movie could cheer you up to some extent. And come on, the ending could make you laugh because of its utter, but intentional, corniness.
  
  It's pretty advisable viewing if you're with your family, but it still depends on the kind of stuff you like. If you like musicals, or just plain ABBA, this one's for you. If you haven't even heard of ABBA but are fascinated, this could also be an accessible introduction (although you can also travel to New York and watch the play version). And if you simply don't like musicals, or don't like camp, maybe you oughta watch The Dark Knight again... or try The Bank Job, I heard it's good.
  
  Rating: 6/10 (It could've been a 7 were it not for Pierce Brosnan.)

  An officially boring movie that I didn't rate (and typed during its opening week)

  You Don't Mess With The Zohan

  Oh great, another Sandler flick. And it's about an Israeli this time with mad fighting skills but aspires to be a hairdresser. This is what's great about Sandler flicks, it always presents a fresh story that makes a person curious. But at just the first few minutes of the flick, you'll realize it's still the same concoctions: sexual jokes, corny jokes, some funny moments, more bad jokes, Disney ending.
  
  So it wasn't a surprise to see myself sleeping halfway around the movie. So even though I won't be able to give a proper review (I won't be giving it a rating either), I'll just give you my thoughts on what I saw.
  
  It starts out like this: the Zohan is partying with other people, shows off his butt, then gets called by the military to fight terrorists. So, he fights terrorists in an awfully corny manner just to emulate he's strong and all, and by this point I've lost interest.
  
  Anyway, he fakes his death, goes to America and pursues his hairdressing dreams initially in a big beauty parlor, but winds up in an Arabian salon in an obscure part of town. He first acts as hair sweeper bla bla bla and oh, a Filipino actor, and then bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla, and then he finally gets a chance to cut someone's hair and does it in a rather special (and stupid, disgusting, yawn-inducingly repetitive manner) manner that makes the salon popular.
  
  However, his past comes back to haunt him as someone gets to recognize his real identity, because Zohan came to the US and changed his name to... something Coco.
  
  He also develops a relationship with his 20-something female employer (and after screwing with old ladies, why wouldn't he?) and they ponder about the Arabian-Israeli war or something. And after this part, I just couldn't resist sleeping.
  
  I mean, come on! It's predictable!
  
  You know what? I have a challenge. Go watch Zohan on opening week, and tell me if the following will be true:
  1) There will be a huge fight near the end between the Phantom and Zohan because Phantom will go to the States.
  2) Zohan will still be running that Arabian salon despite Paul Mitchell's pleas.
  3) The stuff in between will be filler.
  4) Zohan will engage in a homosexual relationship. (OK, a bit too farfetched.)
  
  Basically, Sandler's other vehicle from last year, I Pronounce You Chuck and Larry managed to make me laugh more in the same period of time than this piece of bollox.

  COMING SOON... to DVD

  Wanted

  Wesley Gibson is an ordinary man who has an excruciating accounting job and a "girlfriend". Not bad for such a recluse. And every time his lady boss makes a sermon because her billing statements haven't been done yet, the guy always suffers some psychological anxiety problem, and drugs are the only thing that can suppress it.
  
  But later, after meeting a mysterious (hot) girl named Fox, played by Angelina Jolie, he discovers that his father, a secret assassin, was killed by a rogue of their fraternity called, well, The Fraternity which is composed of skilled assassins whose base is guised in a facade of a textile factory.
  
  Wesley also learns that his "anxiety attacks" are actually him producing adrenaline, thus being able to bend bullets and do stuff in bullet time. Of course, the other members of the Fraternity have this skill as well, but after a rather surprising twist here and there, Wesley finds out about the real truth, and all hell breaks loose.
  
  It's actually mindless action fare, but something just takes it far above from mediocre. Is it the jaw-dropping special effects? The subtle comedy of the keyboard? The actors? Well, it's all of them, and to be honest, this movie I liked, and it's a really fun experience. Angelina Jolie's back-side was a plus.
  
  Unfortunately, I watched this only on DVD. If I had fun on that alone, what more if I watched this in a theater? Too bad it's not showing anymore around here though.
  
  And yes, Morgan Freeman is also awesome, and he shows that Binary numbers can indeed be a life-and-death situation.
  
  Sorry for the rather short review, but simply put, it's all I can say. If you want some fun, Wanted is your destination. With effects that are on par with The Matrix, and comedy that's funny as hell, as well as a surprising performance by the usually dramatic James McAvoy, it's simply the summer movie that you've been waiting for (post-Iron Man).
  
  Rating: 8/10

  RENT THEM FIRST

  The Mummy 1

  Let's go back to 1999 and look at this movie called The Mummy. Now, it was probably intended for the summer audience back in the day, because it's full of mindless fun and hammy acting (courtesy of Brendan Frasier).
  
  Some regard it as simply a fun time, and yes, I pretty much agree. It had great effects for the time, yes, but it's used a bit too extensively, and I guess even a person who's made Transformers the standard for CGI, will still probably be able to appreciate this flick.
  
  So how does this start out? Well, it starts out with a brief history lesson about the priest Imhotep and his forbidden relationship with the queen. The pharaoh catches them, and the queen is killed, while Imhotep is mummified alive (along with his subordinates). Plenty years later, we shift to Brendan Frasier (I forgot the names) who is a treasure hunter. He sees the "lost city" or something but he is arrested. Yet another flash-forward later, we go to Cairo and meet a librarian played by Rachel Weisz. She also has a brother who's a treasure hunter as well, and what he finds changes their lives forever. The two hunt down the jailed man who claims he knows the way to the "lost city" and the warden consents but only for a share of the treasure. So why "The Mummy" and not "Duck Tales"? Apparently, the curious librarian reads a passage from a certain dark book, and Imhotep awakes, skeleton and all.
  
  The journey starts here, and you'll more or less know what happens from this point.
  
  The happenings are kinda predictable, and most of the characters here are rather disposable, literally, since there's quite a huge body count throughout the course of the movie. And frankly, there's not much human emotion going on in the movie, and because the characters of Rachel Weisz and Brendan Frasier seem to hate each other so much, you just know that they're gonna end up together -eyeroll-.
  
  I have not much to say to be honest, and frankly, this movie is just conventional and disposable and not to mention, forgettable. Of course, you'll still remember the stars, since this movie is what made most of them big in the first place, but whatever, it's just mindless and mediocre, and really a rip-off to Raiders of the Lost Ark.
  
  Would I pick a melting Nazi head in stop-motion rather than the sandy head of the vengeful Imhotep? Yes.
  
  Rating: 5/10

  The Mummy Returns

  6 years ago saw the release of the sequel to the box-office hit The Mummy. I reviewed that one and gave it a 5/10, how about this one?
  
  Frankly, I think this one's better.
  
  Now, I'm not exactly the type of person who puts special effects as a basis for a great movie, in fact, I just had to laugh at them because they are so overused to the point that they look unconvincing. I mean, they are better than say, The Forbidden Kingdom which is ironic in contrast, but the eye candy will indeed put a few people off, and maybe engage the youngsters as well.
  
  But anyway, the film made me remember the O' Connell family's names now, so if that's not an improvement I don't know what is.
  
  So let's start with the story: More than 8 years after the first movie, Rick (Brendan Fraser) and Evie (Rachel Weisz) get married and get a child called Alex who conveniently has a knack for learning and memorization and conveniently knows most of the Egyptian hieroglyphics that his mother taught her. Now, there are also quite a few more returning characters such as that guy who has an army that protects the ancient Egyptian artifacts, Imhotep whose body gets dug up and revived by a few people, the girl who first played Imhotep's love (and Pharaoh's wife) gets a reincarnation in the modern day, and... Jonathan, Evie's brother.
  
  What connection do they all have? Well, the thing is, their fates are once again united by The Scorpion King played by The Rock (and had a standalone movie) because he is going to rise again. Thing is, Imhotep wants to kill him again so he can gain the power to command the army of Anubis, which is apparently driven by numbers, and the only way to find him is by finding the Bracelet of Anubis, which is just the artifact the O' Connell's find in the first scene, and so that he wouldn't be as disposable, Alex wears it by accident.
  
  So what does the film do that's quite better for me, you say?
  
  There are simply more thrills and chills to be had in this one, and thank God they're choreographed better and that the people, especially Evie, don't chicken out anymore. But that's where the irony once again lies. I mean, some of the characters here didn't even know how to fight in the first film- especially Evie- and here, you'll see that she's suddenly going Elektra-****on our butts, what with that forky sword thingy going on.
  
  More ironies are abound as you'll see that there are indeed continuity issues, and damn, some of the side comments they crack about something being generic doesn't make the characters in this film any wiser, in fact, they just point out the flaws in this film- and the last.
  
  Come on, like its predecessor, it's still a popcorn movie that doesn't do anything else with the genre as it's predictable, the characters are still disposable (especially since the body count is higher than ever) and the random flashbacks and the reincarnation mumbo-jumbo, just don't seem to be as seamless as the filmmakers wanted it to be at all. It could even be confusing the first few times, but you'll get the hang of it eventually, although Rachel Weisz as Queen Nephertiti? Not a good choice at all.
  
  It might be better in some aspects from the last one, but it still overuses much of the special effects they have at hand and thus gives it an unspectacular, unrealistic feel that makes the viewer feel a disconnect from the characters and the exotic locales. Overall, this one's a bit more watchable than the last one, even though it still retains the aspects that made the Mummy 1, well, The Mummy 1. Brendan Fraser's hammy acting, for starters.
  
  Rating: 6/10

  • Posted Aug 15, 2008 10:32 am PT
  • Category: Movies
  • 6 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg

See Previous Blog Posts