Last night we went to Blockbuster (something we don’t often do anymore) and rented a bunch of DVD’s. One of them was the newest Die Hard … Live Free or Die Hard. We hadn’t seen it yet.

We have seen the first three Die Hard movies several times. We are the kind of folk that actually like this genre flick. So we put the DVD in last night and cranked the speakers and had a very enjoyable … however long it was. We both agree, the new Die Hard fits in and works, it has the hard hitting violence that is met with the grumpy John M. doing what he does best, doing what he has to do. With eye rolling sarcasm and good humour, getting the young guy through the day alive, and finding that the young computer-savvy-geek isn’t as wimpy as they both had thought.

It is something that is different from the earlier incarnations of Die Hard, it’s a successful addendum with what could have been a total flop, but it really honed in on what would work, a cyber story of what could be devastating to a society –with our dependence on computers for so much of our daily living needs– and it boils down to the same old angst … it’s not about that, not really, nope, the same old green greed is behind it all.

Now bothering me is the villain in the movie. I’ve seen him in something before, but haven’t seen anything else that he has credits in. On a wikipedia page though he is said to have had an uncredited role in Wedding Crashers. We saw that on DVD when it came out. It was a mess of a movie, but maybe that’s where I remember him from. I don’t know for sure, and have no desire to see that movie again to figure it out for myself. Anyway, he was a good villain for McClain to go after. It worked.

The special effects were good, many things too fantastic/fake to be believed, but that’s the fun of the fantastic Die Hard movies.

We saw Eragon (2006) on opening day, December 15, 2006. It was good, but not the book. Parts of it bothered me, like changing the ending to work differently than the book, and in the beginning having soldiers in the town near where Eragon lived, which is NOT part of the book, their town had been “out of it” not affected by the troubles in the realm up to then. Cousin Roran left home for different reasons in the movie, from the book, yes in the movie it was the “soldier issue” –he was leaving to go “who knows where” in order to avoid “conscription” basically. Also, the thing about the she-elf Arya was all different from the book, in Durza’s grasp in prison, poisoned, and how Eragon learned of her and then eventually saved her. The book and the movie are so different in most ways about it. Then the journey from the prison to the Varden hideout, it was a long journey in the book, and it took two-second in the movie, and it wasn’t that they just flashed forward in time for these fast events, they truly left OUT the journey’s.

The other thing is that things were condensed together and whole sections of the book twisted. What was missing? Character building. Eragon and Brom sparring every night on their jouney. Oh, yeah, the journey is missing. All of it, basically. It’s a movie that could have been longer, and more from the book actually added to have it make sense to everyone. It was 1 hr. 38 min. or so, too short, too fast, too “painful”.

It was good though, it’s hard to say why, except for to say, “Sapphira” was magnificent.

I’d love to see the movie done over, like that’s possible. It could be so much better. It seems to be a flash, flash, quick film, suitable for the hyperactive one that can’t even get into a movie with more than a few ‘down time’ scenes, slower character building scenes, and a complex journey. :rolleyes:

It was something special to see the dragon come to the big screen. We had been waiting awhile to see this film, and to finally see it: and it was too short, too quick, too action oriented, not enough character building, missing characters, changing ideas, towns, and cutting out the journeys, it’s hard to say that it was good, but it was on some level. FWIW

I picked up three new “used” CD’s the other day.

The Smithereens: Blown to Smithereens, Best of the Smithereens
Depech Mode: People are People
Rush: Moving Pictures

I looked for something from The Smithereens on purpose, and found a couple of other things, but decided to get the “compilation” as it contained the three or four songs I was most familiar with (from the 80′s.) I had been flip-flopping through the four radio stations in the Atlanta market and found that 99x was playing some better alternative stuff for a bit, and yeah, some Smithereens came on. I hadn’t heard any for a long time, so it was an obvious thing to me I wanted to get what I could find.

An aside to that is, once I came home I loaded my ‘new’ disc onto my laptop, it hit me: “Pat DiNizio” “The Smithereens” which connected me to VH1Classic, hearing in my head the VJ going on about ‘This is Pat DiNizio’ and it was a complete circle. I found that on his website and now that’s another CD I want.

I watched a “Hanging with Depeche Mode” on VH1Classic sometime earlier this year, and had wanted to get something of theirs, since I had none and it was just another one of those things, I liked them in the 80′s but never “bought any”, as with The Smithereens, that being the same case.

So I wanted to for sure find a disc from them. I ended up getting what is their “US Debut” –a mix of new and compilation of UK hits, in 1984, that is. There was more there at the store (CD Warehouse) and I’ll delve deeper into Depeche Mode (and their newest CD came out this past year, which looks pretty good.)

I also have been on a “Rush” kick (also hearing them on the local radio stations, well just two songs), not having any of their albums, but liking them from the radio from way back when. So I did look for them and found a few things, which getting “Moving Pictures” was more important to me than getting a compilation of any sort. The album is one that someone around me must have had [back in the early 80's,] it’s familiar, beside the very well known tracks that had air play.

As I stated above somewhere, I was at CD Warehouse, which is a store I really like, finding good used CD’s is a form of recycling that is great. We also find DVD’s and Playstation 2 games there. Not that we don’t get any of these things “new” for we do elsewhere, or there. They just have a good flow of used material that is awesome to take advantage of.

We saw the movie “Cars” yesterday.

It was a really good family movie, and without a doubt I know I would have seen it if I was an adult or even teen, without children of my own. It was a better movie than I had hoped for too, it really, really flowed well, and made us laugh out load hard in a few places, laugh regular in more places, and even wipe the eyes in saddness, I cried a bit near the end, and two of my children, the two older, 10 and 7, both said they cried several times during the movie. I did read one review online before I saw the movie that was harsh, and it seems that it was even more harsh now that I have seen the movie.

The movie has morals and that is that. The movie has a great view of selfishness and consequences that can come of it. It shows a “person” going down a bad road, and resolving to learn finally, and reform and be a “person of character” ,which is meant to mean a person who cares for others and does things for more than their very own benefit, will think of others ahead of themselves, and treat “people” with kindness, no matter who they are.

The movie is more than that though. A hillarious movie here and there, rightly so, and a joy to ride along on for the whole trip.

That’s my opinion, as a Pixar liker, an adult, an adult that is still a “kid” inside, a liker of stories that mean something, and a Mother to three young children — I don’t let them see “just anything” at all.

This movie is a “buy” once it comes out on DVD. A long wait.

Lightning McQueen is a cool dude. (Owen Wilson, his voice, was great in his part! He’s a down to earth, funny, sweet guy in any movie, but really “shone” in this one, from selfish to thoughtful.)

There is a funny “short” before the movie. Don’t get there late. See it too!

All the “kid” movies were previewed too, and every one was horrid, and then the Pixar and Disney stuff came on, and wow-ie, blew that other junk away big time. Amen.

Cars (2006) – Pixar: Ten Thumbs Up.

Underworld: Evolution came out on DVD this past week. DH got it for me, I have the first movie, and wanted to see the sequel in the theatre, but it never worked out. I love collecting movies, so it’s kind of alright overall to never go to the theatre since I want to get the DVD for any movie I’d choose to see anyhow, and it saves money in the long run, and sometimes it’s alright to go to the theatre, but just not feasible for THAT sort of movie, it’s not for children, ’nuff said about that angle.

So I did watch the movie on Tuesday night, actually it was Wednesday by that time. I’d fallen asleep for an hour or two and awoke, and so I started the movie. I intentionally hadn’t tried to watch it earlier since I instinctively knew I’d awake and be able to enjoy it while everyone slept. DH was still here then, and didn’t have to suffer through it. Let’s put it this way, it’s the kind of movie that I’ll watch more than once, and he will only watch it once if I “make him” watch it, so I’d rather see it a time or two or three on my own firstly.

I knew I was really tired when I started to watch it, and didn’t imagine that I’d NOT fall asleep during it, but I stayed wide awake the whole time and it felt like the movie was 10 minutes long. That is language to describe how focused on it I was — it was good.

I put the first movie in the DVD player to the left of the new movie, last night, and watched the first one, then the sequel. I did fall asleep during my second viewing of Underworld: Evolution. FWIW. (It was a long night of awakedness and female misery combined.)

I really like how they did the sequel — it goes back in time to show some important things at first, and then back to “current time” literally starts right up where the first one stopped. Will there be a third movie? I haven’t paid a whit of attention to the buzz surrounding it, or the lack of buzz, whichever one it might be.

I’ll probably watch the movie again tonight, just the sequel this time, to get a full second viewing under my belt. I did notice that the parts I saw the second time were intensely interesting, deeper things to notice for sure, worth exploring. This goes right up with the other “cult classic ish” movie series, LoTR, Matrix, Star Wars, Pitch Black/Chron. Riddick, etc. There are, in my book, other single movies of high stature, of course all in either the “fantasy” or “science fiction” genres and in my mind they are all in a category together.

If you haven’t seen the first Underworld, you should see that before viewing Underworld: Evolution. If you don’t like the sci-fi/fantasy sort of films that are action/vampire/war/werewolf oriented in some way, don’t bother. Yes, there is blood, violence, some level of gore … but I don’t like “GORE” in those movies of “Gore stature” … normal “gore” in “war-ish” movies has value to the story, and isn’t particularly horrid, just what it is, bites, blood, bullets, shooting, swords, heads lopped off in some manner. That’s enough talk about it. I haven’t given anything away about it, just warning off the squeamish, or the dislikers of such movies. This is not meant to be a review, just a record about it, that I watched it, liked it, and how I am glad to have a sequel of a great movie, so that means a good 2-movies in a row viewage time again and again in the future, another to add to the cycle of two-or-more-sets.

We saw Eight Below yesterday. I highly recommend it. It’s the best piece Disney has put out in a long time IMO. Our children are 9, 7, and 5 and they all loved it, but it’s not just for children, being rated PG it does have INTENSE situations, some children might have problems with it. Adults will be engaged through the entire film, children as well. Some of you might need tissues. I can vouch for my daughter and I in need of tear wiping, and DH admitted to it later.

If you’ve seen the goofy commercial for the movie, just know “it’s not like that”. The normal promo for the movie, the one that would have been seen in the theatre as a preview (as we had first seen it) is moreso how the movie is, but it’s better than that. The things about the movie that may be hard for some folks are the heartwrenching things that happen and I won’t give plot away. The dogs are fantastic, the settings great. This is a film for our personal movie archive, DVD, can’t wait! Exiting the theatre the children were wowing over it and asking if we “were going to buy it?” [something I just wonder how it seems from their perspective, as I can't wrap my head around "movies come out on DVD pretty fast", when I was a kid it was movies or tv, and then VHS movies were a novelty, even when they came into being it wasn't that every movie came out for the homeowner to buy, that's more a recent innovation of DVD and we are being flooded by massive backlog going onto DVD now. :rolleyes: ]

This is a movie ‘inspired by a true story’ and that being something I’ve not seen, a Japanese docudrama from ’83. Typical Disney slant, this story is wonderful for it’s ability to bring people in a story to aide animals, but this time without making it truly animal sappy, bleeding hearts of tree huggers, blah, blah, blah. This film apparently isn’t for “true antarticists” and I admit that I’m not one … I was thrilled with the antartic views, however it was condensed. It worked. The heartwrenching came from both sides of the story, the dogs and the humans. I loved Maya from the first time we met her onscreen, on the line. She’s my favorite from the movie. All the dogs are beautiful though, gorgeous.