Best in Movies 2014 Preview

     Despite a lot of narrative-driven articles written about the demise of 2014, this was a very good year for films.Were there any bad movies during the year? Of course. Any year is going to have its crop of bad apples rotting the crop, as always. For every Interstellar or Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, there's a A Million Ways to Die in the West or Godzilla. On a recent episode of my podcast, I talked about a certain movie that didn't meet my expectations because of the trailer, explosions, exposition, etc. After thinking it over with myself a few months later after its June release, that year, I gave it a second chance when the hyperbole died down a bit. That movie, by the way, was 2013's Man of Steel. A thing I learned from that film, was to never allow people to under or oversell expectations, whether good or bad. It's always better to come with a clear mind and decide for yourself if a movie is worth your time. Besides, if you let other people dictate to you how to enjoy entertainment, you're living vicariously through boring people.

     Throughout the month of January, I'll be chronicling the best films of 2014 from 20-1. I'll do the same for the most overrated and worst of 2014, except, those will have just only the worst or overrated of the year. It's hard enough doing a "best of" list, anyway. Numbers 20-6 will have a word count of 200-400 each, while 5-1 will have a range from 700-1,000.

      Currently, I'm in the process of developing this list and may do some film reviews on the podcast for time reasons, considering that, I'll be doing a lot of this for January. So, if you're wondering why you haven't seen a written review of The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies or Top Five, it could be profiled on here or on the podcast in some way, so I'll do the best I can to incorporate written and audio reviews on here. Here's how I'll spread the list throughout January:

      Best of 2014:

• 20-16 on Jan 5th 
• 15-11 on Jan. 19th 
• 10-6 on Jan 26th
• 5-1 individually from Jan 25th-TBD. 

      Worst of 2014:

•   Jan 28th

       Overrated of 2014:

•  Feb 2nd

The Theory of Everything (Quickies)

     Editor's Note: This was watched on November 29

     After reviewing Interstellar, I wasn't expecting another film that discusses the elements of time and space. The Theory of Everything comes just in time during my Thanksgiving malaise. Drama was once my favorite genre up until recently, because there's more out there besides the usual tearjerkers or academy award winning acting. Theory is probably one of the best dramas I've seen in years. It's a film filled with many noteworthy performances, well-executed scenes and the man who was multi-dimensional enough to do Stephen Hawkings: Eddie Redmayne. If he went to the school of Daniel Day-Lewis, he certainly learned from one the best. To put it simply, he becomes Hawkings in all facets. Felicity Jones plays Jane Hawkings, and very good, too. It's well-directed and has a great script. I was thoroughly surprised I enjoyed this one as much as I did. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if even Jones, herself, would get a lead actress nomination alongside Gone Girl's Rosamund Pike.

Good: Just about everything

Bad: I saw it after I watched Interstellar twice (IMAX & IMAX 70MM)

5 out of 5

Birdman or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance (Quickies)

 Editors Note: Watched on November 8th

     Before I discuss any praise for Michael Keaton, it's good to see Edward Norton back on the grind where he rightfully belongs. He's had a rough outing with films that didn't fit a man of his talent. Now, he was fine in Grand Budapest Hotel, but he was basically a supporting character in a movie that featured a bevy of other great performers. Here, he's grabbing scenes, even overshadowing Keaton. Birdman is really at how your past isn't your best benefit. Keaton plays Riggan Thomson, an actor who used to play Birdman for three successful films (Keaton was once Batman from 1989-92). As with all actors, he decided to venture into a different direction, so he goes to do Broadway shows and creates a production, in which, he stars, writes and directs. Unbeknownst to him, he's able to levitate and use telekinesis, something his alter ego was able to do.

     Having known very little about it, I was pretty much able to pick up many of the elements here to understand what was going on here. The casting is outstanding, especially the key actors in this production. A big round of applause, once again, to Emma Stone. I don't think there's anyone in Hollywood who uses their facial muscles in the way that she does. There's one scene where she and her father, Riggan's, are arguing over careers and other things, and the way she emotes her lines really added to the depth of her character. You can't say that about a lot of actors, and that speaks strongly of her strengths. Naomi Watts, Andrea Riseborough, Zack Galifianakis, and Amy Ryan are all strong for their roles. As for Keaton? This is probably his best role in years. He was fine in this year's Robocop reboot, but here, he owns the portrayal of an actor trying to stray away from his past. I don't know if he'll get an Oscar nomination, but I hope he gets one. Same for Norton.

     Director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu direction is interesting because the entire film is one long "long shot" where there minimal cuts and edits to the way a scene is processed. My guess is, sense much of the film takes place in the production of a play, it's directed like one. It's quite novel, really. The movie doesn't have a noticeable flaw other than that long shots may not be for the casual cinema viewer. Otherwise, you have a pure Oscar contender with this one.

Good: Direction, Strong performances throughout, excellent cinematography

Bad: May not be for casual viewing (i.e Inarritu's long shots)

4.5 out of 5

Big Hero 6 (Quickies)

    Editors Note: Originally saw on November 6th

Unexpectedly, I had a lot of fun with Big Hero 6. I saw it only as a last-second decision, since, Interstellar only had one IMAX showing at a nearby theater in Sunrise, FL. While it doesn't tilt the animation genre toward new heights, the core fundamentals are intact. The animation is fluid, personable characters, and a simple, but entertaining story are enough to satisfy. Speaking of the story, it's a boy-meets-robot story. There's more to it than that, as well, as some events spawn the creation of the Big Hero 6. The team consist of Hiro Hamada (the main character and brother of Tadashi Hamada), Baymax, Fred, GoGo, The most likable character out of the six is Baymax, a healthcare assistant for those in need of help with injuries or medication. Eventually, his usefulness to the team is maximized for take on threats.

      Plot is mostly predicable merely because you'll notice the turns coming from many directions. It doesn't hurt the movie much, but it's obvious to the adult who is watching this movie with children. Voice-acting is top-notch and it's a beautiful movie, too. Also, totally surprising: It's not corny. It wasn't as tongue-in-cheek like other animated films, though, that's fine. Not that I was asking for something worthy of charm and gumdrops, it just surprised me in that respect. Hopefully, if there are plans to expand on this property, I look forward to a sequel, if that happens.

Good: Visually colorful, great voice-acting

Bad: Predictable story

      4 out of 5

Interstellar (Movie Review)

 

      I like to think of myself as an open movie viewer who's willing to watch anything, even if the material is bad, indifferent or just plain interesting. Curiosity is my vice, I can't help it. Take Christopher Nolan, for example, who has yet to make a bad movie, in my opinion. I'd like to think of him as the blockbuster avant-garde who tries things that people who are more concerned with not changing up ways of making movies. Some appreciate his unconventional methods, while others think he's overbearing and overly meticulous. Someday, that streak of critically acclaimed, blockbuster draws will bite him one day, but, for now, he can add this masterpiece to his exceptional career. When coming into Interstellar, I knew very little about the project other than that it's a space movie with top-notch actors and the usual Nolan idiosyncrasies. Even for him, this is his most ambitious project, since, it covers something that fairly complicated, which is the concept of space. Time was a big part of Inception and its being put to use once more here. Set in the near future, Earth is no longer able to sustain humanity, because of an occurrence called "blight." A phenomenon so substantial, it causes all kinds of irregularities like dust storms and burning crops. Jobs desired by many, are merely dreams of a time long ago. Farmers of any creed, race or gender are needed to preserve anything organic. Cooper, played by Matthew McConaughey is an ex-NASA pilot who is among those keeping the population healthy since his last mission for NASA. Eventually, he discovers the issue along with his daughter, Murphy to investigate possible solutions. What he discovers, could be something that could save mankind from its pending extinction. It could take years, eons, even. Professor Brand is the one who's been searching for answers to find life elsewhere, but he doesn't have the right formula to finish it. His crew consist of 2 robots (TARS & CASE) and 3 other crew members. One of them being Professor Brand's daughter Amelia Brand, played by Anne Hathaway.

      Initially, there was a moment where I was like, "this could be the one that fails for Nolan". Even for director Christopher Nolan, this is an ambitious project, more so than Inception, which shares some plot cues from this movie. Gladly, I can say he hasn't made a bad film yet, and this is easily in the discussion for one of his greatest films. Now, I was expecting a good movie here, just not one that has me appreciating it more after seeing a day after I watched Big Hero 6 before I saw this not even a day after. Never have I been so anxious towards seeing a nearly 3 hour film in its various formats that aren't just digital. It's also shown in 35 and 70 mm in select theaters if you still have a thing for film projections. As of this review, I've only seen it in IMAX 70 mm, but not the 35 mm version. I'll probably put an update on how these versions compare with one another to add to the style of direction; otherwise, it's looks great on the format that I watched it in. Visually, it's a distinctive looking film from ground to air. A lot of attention went towards the space scenes and the look of the space ship, albeit from its interior than the exterior. Since Nolan is known for not relying on Computer Generated Imagery, he's very practical in the way he does a movie. For example, the robots are based on a mathematical philosophy. The design of them seem basic at a close glance, but are rather versatile in action. As for the various planets visited throughout the film, then too, are also spectacularly design, giving each of them their own characteristic. Nolan does a great job at letting a story build from beginning, middle and end and Interstellar meets every act. The payoff in each segment can take a while due to length.

    

 As for the acting? It's first-rate from start to finish. The core performances are really the selling point here. McConaughey continues his acting rebirth with yet another excellent performance. Hathaway as well is great. Both of them allow themselves to be extremely vulnerable in some key scene, which depicts the condition of their mission is going on-board the Endurance. Before I mention other known actors on this project, I have to give a call to David Gyasi's Romilly. Now, he was the MVP for probably being the most interesting character on-screen. Bill Irwin and Josh Stewart are effective as TARS and CASE, respectively. Matt Damon was the only surprise here, cause, I wasn't expecting some kind of swerve coming along. Things change when his character becomes a pivotal role. The actresses that play Young (Mackenzie Foy), Adult (Jessica Chastain) and Elder (Ellen Burystn) Murph are great, too. Michael Cain is, well, his usual self in these movies, which is great. Some characters are undercooked and could've used some further explaining, but it wasn't much of a distraction from the bigger goal here,

      Another problem Interstellar has is, its long length could make even some of Nolan's most devoted fans skeptical to sit through 169 minutes of this film. Weird, considering a good portion of his nine motion pictures are over 2 hours long (134 minute average). Depending on what theater you venture to, there could be some problems with the sound mixing, as one could miss spoken dialogue. My suggestion? Listen very carefully. Of course, explaining time and relativity can be a little much because these a lot to mentally digest, then again, there was a reason why I said this film was Nolan's most ambitious to date. 

      In a year filled with great movies, I'm proud to put this somewhere among my top five of movies of this year. It's emotionally draining, wonderful, elegant and deep. Even as I'm typing, I just want to go and explore more into the deep hallows of space, regardless of the state of humanity and all. I just don't want to get choked up again. Because if I see that ending again? Maaaaan listen.....

Good: Visually alluring, powerful performances, Nolan's direction

Bad: Could be lengthy for some, some barebone characters

The perfect: Hans Zimmer's use of the organ player. So good.

   

5 of 5

PROJECTOR UPDATE: During my review of Interstellar, I was going to assess the various formats of the film, which uses 6 different camera types (35mm, 70mm, Digital, D4K, IMAX, & IMAX 70mm). Basically, if you're into old film strips, go for the 35 or 70 without the digital gimmicks. If you want the higher-end experience, you'll have to spend a good penny to get the best experience. I caught 3 versions of the film and, as for a discernable difference? IMAX 70mm is one I enjoyed the most, since, I found it to provide the most immersive experience. Soundwise, I had a bit of a hard time listening to the dialogue in moments, but it wasn't anything that would cause me to lower my grade of this film any further. IMAX Digital is as good as its 70mm counterpart, but that's it. Digital 4k holds it own well and is in high-resolution. Clear picture and sounds clearer than its IMAX brethren, but I wouldn't trade it for the IMAX ones. 

Nightcrawler (Movie Review)

   

Jake Gyllenhaal is Lou Bloom, an unemployed man who stumbles into video journalism

     What a weird movie this was. Jake Gyllenhaal is known for role turning performances that have either kept us guessing, but, I mean, he was superb playing a creep. Jake plays Louis Bloom, a persistent, if awkward guy looking for any job that he could be useful for. Sometimes, if things don't go as planned, he might either try to bribe or steal from a person. He plays rough. Then, one day, he finds something that supports his lofty ambitions: video journalism. Except, the way he does it, is not ethically sound compared to his peers. For instance, he's goes into a crime scene, where the ambulance workers are tending to an injured person, and rather than get a clear shot of the entire crime scene, he goes directly to the medical workers tending to the person. He submits his information to the morning news director Nina, played by Rene Russo, who tells Lou to keep at this and come with better equipment to sublimit his talents. The more controversy he sells to her and the local station, the better his reputation grows. And as his videos go for higher profits, he wants more power.

     Nightcrawler showcases how Journalism has changed over the last 20 years in America, and that the usually objected, fair approach to the craft, has become something different. The fascinating part about how a lot of this is portrayed, is Gyllenhaal's character doesn't care about the repercussions that he'll face from outside forces, whether it be LAPD or the feds, he's sending these tapes because it'll helps his bottom line and be in the graces of the people who respect him. Integrity comes last for Lou. He's a hustler who only sees video journalism as a hustle, not as a means to maintain its dignity.

      I liked the direction of this film a lot, really. First-time director Dan Gilroy (brother of Tony Gilroy) did a good job of scenery, acting and some cool looking car chases. The acting was anchored by Gyllenhaal and Russo, but the co-stars were pretty good, too. Bill Paxton has a role as a cameraman, but I would've loved to have seen how his character Joe progressed against the friendly rivalry of Lou in the waning moments of the film.

      Length-wise, it could've been a tad shorter, and the film did seem to go for an Oscar nomination in the best actor category. Gyllenhaal was certainly excellent and if he gets one, good for him. As for the rest of the film? Just proceed to this weird underbelly. One of the better films of 2014.

Good: Jake Gyllenhaal's superb performance, well-directed, solid score by James Newton Howard

Bad: Some supporting characters could use more development..

4.5 out of 5.

John Wick (Movie Review)

   

Don't "keep thinking I'm back," Neo. YOU. ARE. BACK!

     At this point, considering the resurgence of the action movie genre, it was only a matter of time before Keanu & action movies reemerged together to create something interesting, to say the least. The plot of John Wick is basic if you merely just consider the obvious: His dog gets killed early on and he wants vengeance. Though, there's a bit more to it than losing a companion, he loses something else in his life that serves a much bigger purpose. His wife, played by Bridget Moynihan, dies of cancer and as her dying wish, gives John a dog to cope with the pain. Basically, the dog represents some form of humanity from a guy who once was a part of a criminal syndicate. Unfortunately, this brief moment of peace is interrupted when a couple of men break into his house and proceed on stealing his car, kill his dog and bring out the monster that was once buried away beneath his psyche.

    There really isn't much to say about the acting and the story other than that it's good. The actors and the plot do enough to execute on the simplicity of the film. But, if you came here for a dense narrative, you're in the wrong place. The main attraction is the gun-play. They're well-choreographed and well-shot. A lot of time seemed to have been dedicated to getting a certain tempo to those particular moments in the movie. All of them have a certain fluidity and are surprisingly distinctive.

     Also, it's a short movie (101 minutes) that knows when to end at the right time, so it doesn't prolong into an unnecessary new story arc. As for any faults? Nothing significant to speak of, really. Yes, stilted Keanu is here in all its glory and some lines are a bit off, but that's nitpicking to the max. There's only one way to enjoy a movie like this, which is to allow it to be an action movie, nothing else. Kinda makes me wonder, if there's a sequel to this movie, I do wonder if they'll to explore the criminal market more depending on the film's royalties. 

     If you thought The Equalizer was brutal in its violence, John Wick makes it look like a small accident. It doesn't take much for Wick to lose his mind. Otherwise, welcome to the new paradigm of action movies, Keanu.

Good: Superb action, simple story

Bad: Really nothing

5 out of 5

Gone Girl (movie review)

      

Here, you see, a very lost man, not knowing the game is rigged against him.
  

       David Fincher has a way of playing with an audience with his anti-"good guy always win" stance. Gone Girl is another example of him pulling the strings on all of us expecting that one character is going to finally get one over the other, only for the tables to turn against him again, just in a more subtle fashion. Based on the novel, written by Gillian Flynn, who also wrote Gone Girl is about how typical murders are treated in the mainstream press and how married relationships fall and could get resuscitated. You have your accused killer, Nick Dunne, played by Ben Affleck and your "victim", Amy Dunne, played by Rosamund Pike. These roles are played out as a satire of how murders are portrayed by perception from media companies, people misconception and the portrayal of marriage by the two, as one plays a game with everyone just to make a point to a loved one. Is it exaggerated? Yes, but that's really the point in all these scandals being covered on various media outlets that do this for money: Use exploitation as a weapon. Not that's a bad thing, though, it happens a lot with whatever court case you happen to be watching on television.

      The thing that Gone Girl succeeds at, is how Pike basically plays everyone into thinking how she was the one who suffered through the ordeal that her husband put her through; one push was too much for her, so she plotted how to smear him in order to take me back into my arms without criminally implicating herself. It's honestly some of the crazies stuff that I've ever seen in cinema history; and, the way she does it without the narrative changing against her was interesting. Fincher, time and time again, gets the best out of his cast, which I think is why you see such superb performances from Rosamund, Affleck and Tyler Perry (no joke, he's great here). Neil Patrick Harris give a great performance as he plays a character who was once Amy's boyfriend.

      I can say flatly that, I haven't read this book, as of this blog post, but I will be in due time, because there is more that I want to know after learning the tropes of this film. Some publications have criticized it for being misogynistic and accusing some of the actors of having overwrought lines, but, I didn't really come across much of those complaints. That being said, on the other hand, sure, some of the people may come across as cold and not capable of having compassion. Then again, that's usually what troubled people would sound like if he or she may sound if they, you know, lack compassion.

      In closing, for such an awesome movie, I did a lot of laughing, not for "hate-watching" but the scenarios that took place were sort of out of a place from cable news programs. Sela Ward & Missi Pyle play caricatures of cable news personalities and it's humorous because that what Cable TV is: humorous with a large splash of ridiculous. Also, don't worry about trying to read the book before you see the movie; it stands on its own if you aren't inquiring the context of the book. It's that good.

     

Good: Stellar cast, intriguing premise, Fincher's direction.

Bad: That you might fall for the sociopath at the end.

     5 out of 5

The Equalizer (Movie Reviews)

     

"What do you see when you look at me?" Badassery.

     Ever since Olympus Has Fallen made the Action genre matter again, it has restored my faith with all of these movies that have come out in recent years. So what if they don't feature hi-caliber acting or nuisanced stories, they do what they do best, and that's entertain me. Denzel Washington has been familar to this branch of films for a decade. Yeah, there was a past in which he did "Ricohet" & "Virtuosity" back in the 90s, but he got a headstart into this genre before Liam Nesson became a household name in the action game.

     As random as it seems, but The Equalizer is based off an old 80s TV show with the same title from the 1980s. Denzel plays Robert Mc Call,  retired black ops government operative who's just settling into civilian life. Then, one night a friend he meets from a diner gets abused by an escort service that's cover for a massive Russian, it becomes a problem for Mr. Mc Call. And, as they say, it's just the tip of the iceberg from there.

     Waiting for the calamity to take place isn't really a chore for this movie. Yes, it's story formulaic and basic, but all action movies are; it's all about payoff, The things that McCall does to his foes in this are brutal. Also, he used one bullet for the entire film, which makes him way better than America's favorite improvisational ass-kicker MacGuyver. In one scene, for example, he uses a nail-gun to impail a hired gun who's about to kill one of his friends at a mock Home Depot shop; and, I'll just say, the result is simply painful.

     I really enjoyed this movie. There were some writing hiccups and some story issues, but, I didn't care about that, really. If you manage to stick it out for the first 30 minutes, which is meant for developing the story, the payoff is worthwhile, and that's all that matters. As for the side characters? They do what they can, which is fine for me. It's an action movie, not a leading Oscar nominee for "Best Leading Original Villain" with Marton Csoskas being the main man sent to take on Denzel's Mc Call. Also, Chloe Grace-Moretz isn't in the movie for a long period of time, but her role is defined enough that it makes sense for the story.

     Not for the squeamish, but it wasn't meant for them anyway.

4 out of 5

   
  Good: Denzel swag, solid action scenes & nice setting

  Bad: Story & dialogue is basic, but I didn't care about that, really.

   

   

Tusk (Quick Movie Reviews)

    

I'd say that, this poster, backs up the imagery of the film quite nicely. 

     

     Tusk is a weird film about a podcaster's adventure to Canada to visit a man who tells many stories about all of the adventures he went on from his past. Justin Long plays Wallace Bryton, the podcaster in pursuit for a big interview discovers a note in a bathroom at a bar, which gives Bryton the motivation to pursue a huge interview. The subject's name is Howard Howe, played by Michael Parks, who once connected with a Walrus when he was younger and now wants a subject to embody one. Weird stuff.

      Despite some of the weird subject matter and some long exposition that wasn't necessary, Tusk is a movie about animalistic instincts and one's hatred for humanity. The acting is solid, Kevin Smith does a good job with the film's direction. It's a worthy rental, if you're curious about this wayward movie. Also, it's pretty impressive to know what you can do with a $3 million dollar budget, which is the amount of money this film cost to make.

3 out of 5

Good: Nice cinematography, well-acted

Bad: Some needless exposition

Ugly: When you witness Justin Long as Man-Walrus, it's jarring stuff.

Love is Strange (Quick movie reviews)

     This review is a little late, since, I meant to do it on the same day that I watched it, though, things happen when you lose track of time. Love is Strange isn't even strange, so to speak, but, it doesn't mean that it's a solid, well-paced drama-comedy on the issue of gay marriage. Alfred Molina & John Lithgow play a couple who's been with one another for 39 years, and, then, suddenly, living issues cause the two of them to separate from one another because their not able to afford the lease together due to their financial situations. The cast is solid, Ira Sachs does a good job shooting much of the scenes. It runs at under 95 minutes and it flows by fairly fast too without any more needed exposition.

**** out of 5

Good: Great cast, solid direction

Bad: Really nothing that's significant

The Drop (Movie Reviews)

     I must confess that, I wasn't planning on seeing this movie, not because of it being James Gandolfini's final film, but it simply wasn't on my radar. That being said, I'm glad that I watched this. While I was expecting some predictable, by-the-numbers crime drama, The Drop had some key surprises that I wasn't expecting. I never read the book Michael Lehane, but, people who aren't that familar with the source material can do fine without any knowledge from its literature. Much of the movie stems from money being dropped off at bars as distribution for a cover up for a powerful mob, but one, a robbery at a high-end establishment changes the one Bob Saginowski & Marv, Bob's cousin and the owner of a high-profile bar, in which, they take care of; and, if they don't have the money back for the chechens, it's going to end bad for the siblings. Now, the story isn't groundbreaking nor does it reinvent the crime drama genre, but, the performances make this film, particularly Tom Hardy's Bob. While his performance stands above the rest, I do swear the people behind this were like, "lets get all the bad-asses of their respective camps" Yes, Noomi Rapace is one of them, but I did feel like her role here wasn't as interesting as James or Tom's but, she does what she can here. Otherwise, many of the roles here convey an emotion of dread, as if, any one of them is expecting to be shot because a drop wasn't met or some deranged lunatic is coming back to rekindle an old time that was once respect, before something bad happened. Visually, it looks like a crime drama; so, expect many of the usual tropes in this genre to pop up one time or another. I'll say this much, though, with many of the fall releases parlaying Oscar buzz or not, it's worthy upon you to check this movie out. Plus, the surprise is a bit of a surprise.

Good: Tom Hardy's great, sharp story

Bad: Story elements may seem familiar to some

**** out of 5

Dale Jr's Crash Relapse (A NASCAR Chase for the Cup blog post)

That bunny was too fast for you, Son.

   

2004:  Chasing a dream, then a wall

     After suffering a 33rd-place finish at Martinsville, Dale Earnhardt Jr looked to piece together ground lost from the events that took place from that week and rebound with a win at Atlanta. So, what all happened at Martinsville? Everything, including lost the handling just about midway, had a flat-tire, spun out a competitor, lost a pinion; then, to punctuate it, clipped the back bumper of a moving car, which hurt the left-side enough that the 8 team called it a day. Atlanta was all in the cards for Jr, because, with Kurt Busch (42nd) and Jeff Gordon (35th) sidelined with separate engine issues, all that was needed was to come away the track with either a win or a solid top-5 to take the point lead. Then, he wrecked off the backstretch when he attempted to clear Carl Edwards for 3rd-place. Jr was also 33rd the week before at VA. Then proceeded to shake off the bad two races with a win at Phoenix, but, alas, it was simply too much to overcome after that. He finished 11th at Darlington and capped off the season with a 23rd place finish at Homestead in a race where he was no better than 8th, yet no worse than 23rd during the running of that race. He ended the year with 6 wins, 16 top-5s & 21 top-10s, but that Atlanta wreck and some questionable performances (i.e. flat tracks, for example) took the sting off an otherwise successful season. The wreck at Atlanta was a metaphor of sort for the last 10 years for Junior Nation. For every big gain from a win comes devastation with a crash or an all-out bad performance. After the 2004 season was over, Dale Earnhardt Incorporated gave Tony Eury Sr. (Jr's former crew chief and uncle) a team manager role for day-to-day operations. Also, Jr had different chassis for 2005, with his 8 cars going to Michael Waltrip's team and vice versa. It's been a long ten years since Jr has seen consistent success; but, lately, things have indeed turned around for him since the acrimonious end of 04. After enduring some hard times on the track, things have finally clicked for him at Hendrick Motorsports. It took awhile, but it took some hard lessons to get there.

"Think I'm ready to join the dark side now".

2005-2007: The Beginning of the end with Dale Earnhardt Inc.

     

     2005 was the hangover year after living off the high of multiple wins from the previous year. Add in higher expectations, three different crew chief, new chassis from your sister organization, and a new gear rule and you have the worst year of your life since your rookie campaign. Pete Rondeau replaced Tony Sr as Dale Jr's crew chief early in the year with the elder going to a more prominent role at DEI. Things started out well at the Daytona 500 with a hard fought 3rd place finish by Jr who wasn't much of a threat in that race until the closing stages. Then came the worst stretch of their relationship for the tandem. 3 finishes of 24th or worse dropped them from the top-5 in points to a season-low of 26th for the time being, but things got better from that point with 7 consecutive top-15s starting with a 4th at Bristol, which ended at Richmond with a 14th place finish. The experiment lasted only 11 races into the year. Rondeau released from his crew chief role and replaced by competition director Steve Hmiel. While they won at Chicago, those 8 finishes of 20th or worse in their 14 races were a deciding factor towards making the Chase. Only once did the group have a stretch of consecutive finishes inside the top-10, which started once they won Chicago and ended with a 9th place run at New Hampshire Motor Speedway; otherwise, they didn't run well enough to be contenders for another championship run. Tony Eury Jr replaced Hmiel for the rest of the season and the foreseeable future, as well. 

 Crew Chief Imbalance 2005

Crew Chiefs w/Dale Jr.	Average  Start	Average  Finish	Top Tens	Combined Loop Data
P. Rondeau (11 starts)	26.1	15.3	5	76.7
S. Hmiel (14 starts)	29.4	23.6	5	70.3
T. Eury Jr. (10 starts)	19.9	24.1	3	77.1

    

     2006 felt like an extension of the 2004 season, and perhaps Jr's most underrated year besides his 2013 season. They only won Richmond, but made incremental gains at flat tracks and could contend when need be in key races. There were times when they struggled with communication, pit stops or adaptability, they found a way to build on mistakes from 2005 and make the most of it. 2007 was a different story, however. While the overall performances were on par with 2006, but the team failed to finish 8 races, most of them due to engine failures. Add a terrible stretch that saw their advantage on Kurt Busch dwindle from July-August for the 12th and final chase spot, the team couldn't recover from their inconsistency.

   

2008-2011: Beginnings and Hard Times at Hendrick

 So, where are my "wins & championships," Dale?

         Jr's first year at Hendrick was more of a "potential pending" season rather than a "we're close" kinda year. Sure, they had some excellent result, but the issues from DEI were the same with keep up with adjustments on the race track or bad communication between driver & crew chief. While they did win Michigan, the strategy planned by Tony Eury Jr almost didn't work (Jr went 55laps/110 miles on a tank of fuel) as a perfectly timed caution on the last lap sealed the win for the program. The rest of the season was misfortune. They'd either lead a race and then get shuffled back in the running when the car isn't good on a long-run or have an untimely tire failure (Happened twice at Charlotte on separate occasions). This was a constant trend that followed the 88 team for a few years, even with Eury's predecessor, Lance McGrew. Jr and McGrew weren't able to fix the balance issues with NASCAR's Car of Tomorrow. The years after 2008 were pretty terrible, actually; and, the predictions of contention were an afterthought. However, 2011 provided the needed optimism for the program, as Steve Letarte came over from Jeff Gordon's 24 team to be the main crew chief for Jr. The success wasn't necessarily immediate but given that Jr couldn't hit the right setup with McGrew or Eury Jr, Letarte's easy going attitude was a welcome change. After 4 season at Hendrick Motorsports the 88's best points finish was 7th. Not bad, considering the first 3 season, but, alas, far below expectations. 

2012-2014: So, This Is What Contending Looks Like?

Jr's first multiple winning season since 2004

     The last three season are what this team should've been since Jr left DEI in 2007. 2012 was a great year in which he also ended a four-year winless drought by winning at Michigan. Unfortunately, that year feels incomplete because of a sustained concussion at Talladega during the Chase. He subsequently finished 12th in points that year, The last two seasons, however, have shown that the 88 are bonafide contenders for a championship, including 3 wins (Daytona & Pocono x2) for 2014. Only thing missing from his 2013 campaign was a victory; however, he did have 5 2nd place finishes for that year with a 5th place finish in points. If Jr is going to win a championship, he'll have to keep making gains on the competition & do enough to avoid elimination from championship contention. It won't be easy.

Video Review: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

   

At least y'all look hard.

       Let's just say I wasn't feeling this one. I actually wish Michael Bay was more involved with this project, knowing it's his production company, Platinum Dunes. I originally planned on review it here on Blogger, but something happened to the video, so I don't know. Anyway, check it out on Youtube: http://youtu.be/rb2j8DY6Stk

Video Review: Guardians of the Galaxy

     Given that I haven't published many film review as of late, I wanted to incorporate more film review to this blog site, starting with Guardians of the Galaxy. I haven't done one of these in a few years and the rust show as to why I was a little flustered, but; hopefully, I'll get better and so will everything else. Here's the link to the Guardians review:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfGJuD9abv4

'Championship form' in the Summer isn't always ideal, you know?: Race 20, Indianapolis Motor Speedway (A NASCAR commentary)

   

Brad Keselowski has finished 9th twice at Indianapolis. He was 21st there last year.

      As we approach the second-half of the Sprint Cup, there are those already setting up threats to Jimmie Johnson's throne from the ones who aren't unrealistic contenders. We've seen 11 different winners hoist a trophy in 19 races and we have yet to define a clear favorite. Well, I guess since everyone is on the Brad Keselowski, I guess we'll go with him, right? But, that's the thing, we don't have a clear favorite. Since JJ stopped winning, the best option is usually the hottest guy right now, which Kes is among right now (Only Dale Earnhardt Jr & Jeff Gordon has been better than him, as far as performance goes). Reason for why he's being picked as a title contender at the moment:

1.) Jimmie Johnson has finished 42nd for two consecutive races (Completed 20 laps at Daytona & 11 at New Hampshire)

2.) Brad has finished in the top-10 in 6 of the last 8 events, including 4 top-three finishes

3) Hyperbole, as always.

      I'll say this much about Brad's performance lately, he's been great. Really great. But, you know the thing with peaking at the wrong time is, eventually, bad fortune can come at an unfortunate time. Kes knows this as he experienced a season, in which, his championship defense was a disappointing for him, but is still among his better seasons in an ever-establishing career in Cup. Until the end of time, Brad's 2013 season was really a "regression" year, where he overproduced his worth in 2012. Sure he got better in 2011 by winning 3 races and made significant gains from his first full-time year with Penske Racing, but figuring out his evolution is one that requires a little input to offer the proper reasoning. For starters, he had only 2 top-tens in 2010. Stunning, right? The man who stunned NASCAR by winning his first race at Talladega in April 2009, only contributed to just 2 top-tens the following year (Both of them were just 10th place finishes). Now, that same 2011, was a tad better than his past year, though, Keselowski wasn't a threat to win races, till Kentucky and from there after, which is when the legend of Brad was growing. He finished 5th in points, an improvement from being  Ironically, he had the same year in 2013 and still didn't make the chase, because of a really bad summer stretch. None of us expected an upstart, such as Brad, to achieve so high and didn't really think he could win the championship in 2012. It's a crazy thing to consider, really. Can we consider them to be a championship threat? Sure. Championship form? Were not there yet, because, the main attraction has yet to commence.

Thanks, LeBron

     

LBJ isn't MJ. Who cares?

       It's always best to give thanks to someone who was there to provide 4 superb years to the state of Florida and to the state of Pro Basketball. In 2010, the Miami Heat acquired the talents of Chris Bosh and LeBron James to assist Dwayne Wade in taking a stranglehold not just in Miami, but the world. Long-story short, people hated them for partaking in a bold movement to play together while appearing in 4 straight Finals (winning 2 of 4), which hasn't been done since the 1980's Boston Celtics. Then, like all relationships, they do eventually end. One player leaves for passions beyond chasing a 90's legend, while two stay in Miami to rectify the rest of the organization. Before we get into the banal discussions of what this'll means for LeBron's "legacy" and who won mattered more during Miami's 2012 & 2013 championship runs, those were some captivating years seeing the three of them go through the pendulum of highs and lows. Dwayne Wade may have had that championship in 2006, but let us not forget who struggled to get out of the first-round of the playoffs after that time before acquiring the talents of LBJ. Chris Bosh also struggled with this, too, but he knew the role this was going to be compared to his time with the Toronto Raptors. So what did I get with James? A better Game 7 Finals than Kobe Bryant's Game 7, A 27-game winning streak, 61 points against Charlotte, Cramp-3 against OKC in the 2012 Finals, Game 4, versatile defense, lots of unselfish plays. While that's merely microcosm of what I was able to gather, those items speak volumes of one man during those 4 years. Sure, I could mention the one year he failed and produced below his usual output against the Dallas Mavericks, but, oh well; you learn from your mistakes and do better.

     His letter was pretty telling in what his true intentions are for the Northeast Ohio and not the city of Cleveland. Forgiveness is one thing, but finding it is even more difficult. Sometimes, chasing a legend is more than just the construct of rings, ego, or having "killer instinct," because that stuff plays into the role of perception and not reality. He's going back to Cleveland not just to win one, but for something bigger, something greater than championships will ever buy you, which is inner peace. The hard part's over, at least right now, but rebuilding this Cavaliers team will be a bit of a work-in-progress. It'll take time, though, Bron knows that if something bad happens between he and Dan Gilbert, Gilbert might be the one to question his "decision" to bolt his franchise. Go get yours, King.

   

     

   

Transformers 4

           

That's right, critics, BE MAD! 

       
A positive rant:


              Four movies, yet people aren't entertained by the unholiness caused by Sire Michael Bay's Transformers franchise? hmm, I understand the concerns of many who's childhood was robbed by one obsession by stripping the series to what it's really about, which is seeing big, giant mechs beat the crap out of one another. To that, I say fine; let 'em fight. My opinion on this film isn't hard to consider, because I was here for the absurdity, regardless, if the characters motivations were a bit non-descriptive, like with an object called "The Seed." Also, it's a long movie that feels like it has to justify the action. It took awhile for me to get into the fun of these movies, having realized this is a Bay movie and, sometimes, it's best to not treat his movies seriously. Mark Wahlberg is a downgrade to Shia LaBeouf in terms of acting, but he's a bad-ass when it comes to action. Anytime a Transformer needed a human assist, here comes Cade Yeager shooting things, fighting even to help out a fellow bot. Kelsey Grammer even takes this role with seriousness, and it's wonderful with his baritone lines of dread. Pretty much all of the actors hammed up the movie for a cause, a great cause. Out of many of the Transformer films by Bay, this is my favorite. It's the most frantic, loudest, and mindless Transformers film ever, which is weird, because, two is my least favorite, though, was more insane than the critically loved first one. Here, there's a lot of "I don't care" with the action, sequences, editing, script and direction. Once again, I say fine; because I'll be back for movie number five. I have no apologies for this. NONE. Just make sure you can fit 165 minutes of your time, that's easily the hardest part.


Good: Fun!, Destruction, Scrappy Mark Wahlberg, Villanious Kelsey Grammer, unhinged Stanley Tucci                                              
Bad: It's a Bay movie, we already know the bad; Lengthy.
   

**** out of 5

Bittersweet Champagne: Quaker State 400 recap & Daytona preview (A NASCAR commentary)

    Quaker State 400 recap

    

We should've popped them bottles with some Redd's instead, guys. 

           If you sum up Brad Keselowski's weekend at Kentucky, it's that "it's just right" on the third try. After two crushing losses in both the Camping World & Nationwide races, Kes pretty much took control of a race that was his for the taking on Saturday night by leading 199 of 267 laps (Penske Racing as an organization led 236 of 267 laps with Joey Logano lead 37 circuits.) It was a dominating effort by the 2 team scoring its second victory of the season, virtually locking them into the Chase for the Sprint Cup....then he bust his hand on a champagne bottle, which required four stitches; though, Brad doesn't think that'll stop him from racing at Daytona this weekend. As for teammate Logano, he lost a cylinder in the closing laps, but was able to finish 9th despite a fading engine. Hendrick Motorsports had all of the drivers finish in the top-10 for the third consecutive week, led by Dale Earnhardt Jr's fifth-place finish. Jeff Gordon was sixth, Kasey Kahne was 8th & Jimmie Johnson in tenth. Roush had two drivers in the top-20 with Greg Biffle (14th) & past week winner, Carl Edwards (17th) proving that his two wins haven't fixed much at that organization. Ryan Newman (3rd) got his first top-5 of the season since Race 26 at Richmond, where he also finished third. Stewart-Haas Racing had 4 drivers finish in the top-25 with Kevin Harvick leading the way at 7th and Joe Gibbs Racing featured Kyle Busch (2nd) & Matt Kenseth (4th) scoring top-5, but Denny Hamlin finished last in the field with a crash off turn 4 due to a flat right-front tire. Kenseth's night was pretty eventful, to say the least, as he recovered from a flat-tire of his own and salvaged a great finish out of it.

           As for the race itself? I didn't enjoy it because of how strung out it gotten and everyone seemed to have a hard time passing. Some of it has to do with the aerodynamics, some of it has to do with the track's age. If they've paved the track, I'd probably be uttering these same concerns; it's just hard to make moves because the action gets so strung out after restarts.

Will Earnhardt Jr Sweep Daytona?

           Jimmie Johnson broke a 31-year streak for race sweeps with his wins in the Daytona 500 & the Coke Zero 400. The last individual before him to perform a rare feat was Bobby Allison in 1982. Jr hasn't been dominating DIS since the days of Dale Earnhardt Incorporated, when you expecting the 8 & 15 cars in contention for wins; but, that's what happens when everyone else around got better at the restrictor plate racing. Now, this isn't to say that he hasn't been in contention for these races, it's that it became difficult to produce usual results back in the early 2000s. Sweeping isn't easy, since, there are always going to be things out of your control, which is what every driver is always up against. Since 1959, there have been five Cup sweeps at Daytona in those 55 years of racing at Daytona International Speedway. Plus, the night has belonged to Tony Stewart more than anybody. In the last 10 Daytona night races, Tony Stewart has won 4 of them; most recently in 2012. Jr's last (and only) win in this event was in 2001, which is one of his more popular wins. But, CAN HE pull off a sweep? I say no because it's simply a rarity to pull off an outcome like that. Sure, he won in February under weird circumstances (They raced in the evening because of precipitation), led 54 of the final 70 laps (Carl Edwards & Greg Biffle both led 8 laps in spurts) and won, but again, sweeps don't happen often. They're outliers. Wonderful outliers that JJ produced last year, so there's a modicum of respect for it. But, Dale Jr has some high odds to overcome if he were to win on Saturday night.

           Prediction

            

            Jr has a shot as long as he's in position to win it. Given that he has the 2nd best average finish, it wouldn't be surprising to see him up there contending for a victory, but I say Jeff Gordon takes this one on Saturday night. Jr will probably get a top-5, which would match his total for the last two seasons for Hendrick Motorsports (10 top-5 finishes in '12 & '13). I expect this race to have a similar pace as that of this year's Daytona 500. Expect a long run where everyone is feeling out the track and the handling, then things will get tight in the closing stages. Yeah, it'll be one of those races, and people don't like that kind of racing when you have to wait for the good stuff.

X-Men: Days of Future Past

Whoever wins the war between mutants & machines, better hope that machines conquer the world. It'll be a gloomy future, folks.

“The best comic-book movie ever”, proclaimed by some of the America’s top critics, huh? Eh, let’s try “respectable.” X-Men: Days of Future Past is an enjoyable, if clumsy film that still has continuity issues with dealing with 14 years of source material that either counts or doesn’t anymore. The movie is set in the near future, 2023, to be exact, as mutants and humans have either been eradicated or put into internment camps in a world ruled by Sentinels, the robots who play the role of judge, jury & executioner. In order to stop these events from advancing or taking place, Wolverine is sent 50 years in the past by Kitty Pride to prevent this bleak future from ever taking place. It's a pretty screwed up situation for both time periods either dealing with political upheavals of dealing with the mutant race and the desolate future.

This is, perhaps, the first X-Men film where I can say that the group works well as a team battling against all odds with moments of them battling just to survive the brutality. While it would've been nice to have back stories of characters Bishop, Warpath and Blink; but, alas, we get no knowledge of their motivations to help out. They’re just there with no explanation to serve the story proper. I mean, cool, you want to move stuff along to input more narrative into this movie, yet, we can't even get an explanation of Kitty's new-found powers to send younger version of people to the past? Again, the continuity problems that are in this movie and the franchise doesn't get covered enough. Simply put, I was confused in spots. Given that First Class seemingly rebooted the franchise quietly, I'd expect that some events from that film would be the launching pad for this series, and, while, there are attempts to stretch the stories from the first three movies, though, it all feels weird. The special effects, especially, feel that way through a couple of sequences; the Quicksilver moment, in particular, is among my complaints when it comes to this. The scene, itself, isn't that bad; however, the effect of his power is lacking. Honestly, I saw more visual fidelity with that character during the after credits of Captain America 2.

The acting is as good as the performances from First Class led by the core performances by James McAvoy & Michael Fassbender. They once again build on their relationship from their first movies portrayals of Charles Xavier/Professor X and Erik Lehnsherr/Magneto, respectively, than their elder counterparts. Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen have their own moments in the present, just not to the same effect, given that the actors are offered little to do during their portrayals. I also must give props to Hugh Jackman, who's usually status quo as Wolverine, this is easily his best performance as the character, in my opinion; and, Jennifer Lawrence is fine as Mystique. The writing isn't the best, but the performances make up for it. Also, the future Sentinels are pretty entertaining, as you witness some of your favorite X-men be dealt with in ways that are unimaginable. 

This isn't the greatest comic-book film of all-time or the only fun you’ll have at the theaters all summer, but after some installments of this series that left me to question its worth, Days of Future Past is a step in the right direction. It's not better than First Class or even X2, but it's a doable experience. Now, whoever helms X-Men: Apocalypse (since director Bryan Singer has some legal issues to tend to), lets ease off frequent teases; slow pacing would be nice.

Good: Very good acting, solid action, Nice-looking Sentinels

Bad: The plot is all-over the place, Some corny lines

Quicksliver scene? Meh, I've seen better.

*** out of 5

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (Movie Review)

            

Spider-Man's either helping out with a certain villain or has been playing too much "Brave Firefighter" from Sega.

            The Amazing Spider-Man 2 picks up a year after the events of the first movie, where Peter Parker has gotten into his role as Spider-Man. Also, from the first film, we finally uncover what ended up happening with Parker’s parents, which, I have to say was a highly intense sequence, because of the stakes that led to them being found by one of Oscorp’s hired assassins to take out the two of them to prevent Oscorp from being compromised. From there, I was anticipating what I was in store for the rest of my viewing and little did I know, I was actually astonished at how strong much of the framework is with this movie.  

Clearly, a lot of time was taken to develop Peter into a character that is more multi-faceted than just his love life with Gwen Stacy. Those moments are grand, don’t get me wrong, but the problem with the past Spider-Man movies was they did go for the hackneyed routine once too often either to force a couple of meaningless story elements (i.e. Paying rent, Raimi’s adaptation of the Stacey family, so on). Here, they don’t tend to force their love story like the other movies did and to add to that point, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone’s chemistry is damn good. Besides the chemistry between those key leads, Garfield is a way better Peter Parker/Spider-Man than Tobey Maguire ever was. While, I’m not knocking Maguire for his performances, but seeing his movies in comparison to these films is light years compared to the many compilations of “Maguire-face.” If there’s an actor who tried to act “too cool” on-screen, it was Garfield’s predecessor (see: Spider-Man 3) and not him. Andrew conveys believably and trust as the Web-Slinger and that’s all without overplaying the role. Emma’s role is more exemplified, profound and varied. And, she’s always there to help out her man, even in battle. But that speaks to the level of depth that these actors are given here in a realistic setting. Both actors understand the stakes that their individual character is given.

Jamie Foxx, Dane Dehaan and Sally Field give strong performances as Max Dillon/Electro, Harry Osborn and Aunt May. I haven’t gotten a chance to observe Dehaan much other than his performance in Chronicle, but the guy has range. Same for Field, who seems to have excellent rapport with Garfield; there was a scene where I nearly teared up because her character was in a desperate place with her nephew. And, of course, Foxx who seemed to be enjoying the hell out of his respective role as the delusional Dillon who wants acceptance, even if it’s faint. Whenever Sinister Six or Amazing 3 comes out, Give Paul Giamatti a raise, please? He only has two scenes as Aleksei Sytsevich/Rhino, yet, they’re so, so good. Did I mention that he has a hammed up Russian accent, as well? Even better.        

Even the way the film sounds with its original composition by Hans Zimmer, Arturo Sandoval, Johnny Marr, Pharrell (though, he’s the “voices in Electro’s head), Mike Einzinger (from Incubus), & David A. Stewart (from the Eurythmics). A team so big, that they’re called “The Magnificent Six,” a nod to the supervillain team “The Sinister Six” of Rhino, Doctor Otto Octavius, Vulture, Mysterio, Kraven the Manhunter & Sandman. Zimmer is a natural at producing thematic material and here, he shows why he’s a master at his craft here. If you want to understand a thematic theme for a character, I implore the reader to listen to “Electro Suite” and “My Enemy” from the Amazing Spider-Man 2 soundtrack for more background. The craftsmanship from the entire crew of those two scores are delightful as they are haunting. It doesn't surpass the Man of Steel composition from Zimmer last year; though, it’s its own thing.

As I close this review, I don’t have a definitive problem with Amazing 2 except that it does harbor Raimi fan boys who cling to the older films like people who hold on to outdated technology, so, in that respect, that’s my only flaw with the production that was directed by Marc Webb and crew. Otherwise, I’m struggling to figure which comic book movie is my favorite, at this point: This one or Cap 2? It's a good time for comic book films.

Good: Superb storytelling, action, acting, direction, music.

Bad: Snobby people struggling with the fact that the "Amazing" franchise is better than the other Spider-Man films

***** out of 5

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (Movie Review)

        Man, I swear that Chris Evans is trying to go out in a Blaze of Glory, with all of the events that took place in the latest Captain America film. Then again, spending nearly 70 years on ice can bring a lot of aggression, too. I'll start off my saying that, The First Avenger, the Winter Soldier's predecessor, seems to get a bad rap from people who seemed to expect something more than just an origin film, which is what it's meant to be. Granted, it was steeped in 20th century lore with a story that took time to compel and was basic, did its job. Many of the main characters, particularly Hugo Weaving's Red Skull, was great, in my opinion. Though, I felt like it got an unfair shake from critics and others who thought of it sorely as just more Marvel filler. That being said, The Winter Soldier is superb in every way compared to its predecessor.

     In terms of just aesthetics, The Winter Soldier feels like it has a divergent setup from much of the Marvel entries. SHIELD is treated like a real agency, sort of like the Central Intelligence Agency collects data on a particular case or an individual, same goes any part of the US military that gets the resources to create incredible weaponry or aircraft. Even the stakes appeared to have cost during the movies big moments in either peril or a character from Rogers past that's not related to Bucky. Captain Steve Rogers is a different man from the untrained, brave soul upgraded by the blessings of the Super Soldier serum. He is a more formed person and a more confidence one when compared to the days of defeating Skull and the entire Hydra regime in the first film.

     Evans appears to have more control and command in this film than he did in First Avenger or The Avengers, because his character and the stakes of everything that could happen, has that extra level of meaning. The plot is consistent and blends in the tension, action and melodrama very well. Same goes for the acting, in which, everyone plays his or her part well. As for the best actor out of the bunch besides Robert Redford, Sam Jackson, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johannsen or even Falcon's Anthony Mackie? Sebastian Shaw. It's no secret that Bucky Barnes plays an unexpected foe to Captain America in a huge plot twist that is explained in throughout the movie. While he doesn't have much dialogue, the way he emotes in moments of dealing with his severe consequences of being the anti-hero was a deep one, not just because of his "loss" in movie 1, but with him trying to figure himself out with this new-found persona of being a sleeper cell among-st SHIELD's ranks. Choreography is well-detailed, particularly with fights that are in close-quarters but are outside from offices or ships. My only problem with the film is with parts of the direction, but only with some of the action being too fast at times; otherwise, it's a top-notch effort by the Russo Brothers. But, I guess that was the point of this sequel and its direction: raise the intensity in all the area of this production, no matter the costs. If anything bad happens to something major, keep the tempo up and then lower it for to handle the narrative. Have a good time, because, I sure as hell did with this film.

   

     

The Most Anticipated Goodbye

If I was mimicking a particular comedian with my "bitterface" grimace, let me know.

   
   
      A journey that spanned for nearly a decade with misfortune and triumph, is finally over. I can reflect on much of the good that was offered to me at Broward College. Admittedly, there was a time where maybe this day wouldn't come and neither would much of the jubilation that comes with accomplishing something as big as getting a Journalism degree. Unfortunately, the market options for a writer are small, but I can make something, requiring that I test my versatility; but, honestly, I don't feel like this is daunting at all, really. I have some concerns about dealing with the technical aspects of the industry, as some things can seem to be complex, but you deal with the learning curve that life hands to you, for better or worse.

     I've already given up on going to grad school, since, I feel that I don't need to give up more money or time to deal with stretching this on much further; this is my choice, end of story. So, while I have nothing in particular that I'll miss about my time at Broward College (besides The Observer), I will miss their lunch rooms, though; because, they've expanded that, nicely. Sure, you have the assist from chains like Dunkin Donuts and Subway, yet, the stuff that they get from Food Services Inc. is an upgrade too. I'm not saying that the previous suppliers were bad, just that I like these options better.

     In closing, all I have to say is, that I have A LOT of work to attend to, a lot to learn and make some new things happen. That being said, I don't have a lot of time for the usual "hope and dreams" speech, same goes for tears or slumped shoulders. Basically, I'm just awaiting the fun part of the value of choosing such a profession, that's usually where you feel like you've earned something.