I’ve gotten pickier about the films I go see in the theater. With tickets costing between $5-$9, I want the movie to be worth the money. Usually, I choose a film based on word of mouth from people I respect, or very rarely from trailers that are unique and make the film seem unmissable. Unfortunately, some movies, despite their good reviews, just end up disappointing me.

The last movie I saw in 2007 was I am Legend. I went to see it based on positive reviews from a few friends. I’m sad to say, I thought it would be much better than it was. It’s a sci-fi survival thriller minus the thriller. I expected more tension than the film provided. Normally, in the dark of the theater I find it easy to suspend my disbelief for a few hours, but I had almost no tolerance for the awful CGI mutated humans. The movie would have been more effective and disturbing if the director had kept the glimpses of the infected humans to a bare minimum. The creepiest shot of the mutated people is the very first time the camera shows a flash of their feet in the dark. Shortly afterward, the audience sees the full ridiculous appearance of an infected individual and from there on the movie loses whatever momentum it had been attempting to build. Maybe they should have reduced the CGI budget and used the money saved to hire actors in makeup. I would have been a lot more horrified of real men and women running around on-screen portraying the feral and uncivilized infected, than of the laughable computer graphics that were used. I feel like I wasted money on this film.

I do have a better review to give my first film of 2008 though. This past weekend I saw Cloverfield in the theater. This is one of those few films I decided I wanted to see just from its trailer. There was a huge viral marketing campaign for the film online and even though I avoided most of the advertising, it was hard to ignore the presence of the buzz. I know a lot of people have had trouble with the shaky and sometimes disorienting footage, but that didn’t pose a problem for me. For the most part, I liked the film.

The most personable character in the film is Hud, who serves as cameraman through the majority of the film. He seems more like the main character than anyone else because the audience is seeing the events taking place through his eyes. As to the events in the movie and the behavior of the characters, I just have to shake my head repeatedly. The characters in this film have all the survival instincts of a group of blind squirrels in heavy traffic. Running towards destruction and devastation is never a good idea. They all have a dismaying lack of common sense and obviously never play video games. In the brief moments when they are in “safe” environments with the opportunity to take stock and decide what to do next, they don’t take advantage of the situation. It’s nighttime, but none of them thinks to look for a flashlight, a first aid kit, or something to act as a “portable emergency kit” to carry food and water in. I’d like to think that I’d keep a cooler head in such an awful situation

My only real problem with the film, other than the remarkable stupidity of the characters, is that I would have appreciated better dialogue and a stronger plot. I do like J.J. Abrams work, but I also think he’s capable of better.

Maybe in the future I should keep my expectations lower. Then I might be able to walk out of a theater praising a movie instead of focusing on all the minutiae. I can think of a recent example where I had little or no hope for a movie and was instead pleasantly surprised. I’m referring to Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End. I sat down to watch the rental thinking it would be just as awful as the second film in the trilogy and discovered otherwise. It wasn’t a wonderful movie by any stretch, but it was a definite improvement over what I thought I would be seeing.

That’s it. From here on, I’m making a genuine effort to keep my movie expectations low.

I guess it was about a week and a half ago when Paul began playing a game called Portal that was part of one of his Christmas gifts. Initially I was elsewhere in the house when he popped it into the hard drive and started playing, but the acoustics in our house guarantee that any music, conversation, or other sounds that originate in the office can be heard in almost every other room. After half an hour of listening to the instructions and occasional insults coming from the game, I was so intrigued that I had to check in and see what he was playing. I ended up watching him play through a considerable portion of the training segment and enjoyed every minute of it. After finishing the game, he played through it a second time almost immediately with me acting as a full-time audience.

It’s a beautifully designed game, and one that I hope inspires developers to continue coming up with new and rewarding game concepts. Portal is very different and much shorter than the games I’m normally attracted to. It takes a handful of hours at most, and allows the player plenty of time to explore and goof around. I’m also not entirely sure what genre it falls into. I suppose it’s a cross between a first person shooter and a 3-dimensional puzzle solver. The first person shooter description is something that would normally make me a little wary since I don’t do very well in those kinds of games. However, this shooter is devoid of the stress of having monsters or heavily armed enemies jumping out at you in confined or poorly lit spaces. Games that keep the player on edge are games that fray my nerves too easily. And although I like the laid back feel of Portal, the most appealing aspect of the game for me was GLaDOS. She is the AI running the experiments at the Aperture Science Enrichment Center. She acts as guide to you as you solve puzzles in the game and it was her sarcastic comments that first drew me into the office to check out what Paul was playing.

But the absolute best part of the game is the song GLaDOS sings. It’s been stuck in my head a few times now, and I catch myself humming in under my breath and singing it in the shower.

It’s been months since I posted here, and I apologize to any and all who checked in while I was otherwise distracted.

Much to my embarrassment, it has been pointed out to me that my site has been glaringly blank for the majority of the past eight days. I’m sure we can place all blame on the programmer. However, I’m sure that in turn the finger will be pointed at me when I am told that it isn’t a flaw; it’s a feature, and if I just updated more often there would have been no problem whatsoever. The cheek of some people …

There is quite a bit that has happened since I last posted, but I’m not going to take the time to cover it all because I tend to be long-winded enough as it is. (At least in my head I’m long-winded. You’re lucky I hit the edit button in my brain before typing everything out.)

First off, I hate Christmas travel. It’s stressful and no fun especially when you have to catch a connecting flight in Chicago. O’Hare is evil, and probably designed by a madman. Also, my brother the hero has returned stateside hopefully for the remainder of his service to the US Navy. I spent Christmas with him and the rest of my immediate family up in the very cold North. He spent most of his time sleeping/laying on the couch and watching endless amounts of American football.

All in all, Christmas was great. My parent’s house is finally finished, and very cozy. Their cats are great, and I might have temporarily considered sneaking them home with me. My oldest brother liked the Cactuar pin I gave him, and has asked for a Tonberry companion piece. I guess I should get started on that soon.

I’ve spent most of my time playing/reading/enjoying my Christmas bounty. My favorite gifts are the ones that sound most like punishments. Bev gave me a toothbrush … I know, weird gift but it’s fantastic! Paul gave me four pair of socks and I absolutely love them.