To put this review into context: I’ve never been a fan of the original Star Trek, and though I’ve seen maybe two of the films, I know next to nothing about the series. That being said, I’ll say this: this movie was terrific.

J.J. Abrams manages to not only revive and revitalize the Star Trek franchise, but he does it in a way that’s very appealing to non-fans. There’s enough visual and vocal backstory to help build the setting and help you figure out what’s what in the Star Trek universe, and enough action and special effects to keep those who don’t care about the story watching for the full time. The casting, at least in my opinion, is very well done; it was fun seeing Leonard Nemoy playing his original character.

Frankly, the narrative is what I liked most about the film. Despite the suggestion that this film is a reboot of the franchise, one could easily argue that it fits within the continuity of the series. I don’t want to spoil anything, but to those that have seen the film: think about it. I chuckled to myself in the theater when I first realized this.

I can’t think of many shortcomings of the film from my end, though it does feel a bit less epic than I originally envisioned. Heck, the film didn’t even feel as long as IMDB says it is, which may or may not be a bad thing. At any rate, it’s a popcorn flick really, but one that at least has more substance to it than, say, 300. Expect a sequel probably sometime in the near future.

As much as I like David Lynch, Eraserhead is the kind of movie that’s only good in hindsight, after you’ve already familiarized yourself with his themes and tropes. Sure, it’s easy enough to read about it and listen to Lynch’s own comments about how it’s all about alienation in an industrial town, but if you can’t get that from the movie itself it kind of defeats the purpose.

To Lynch’s credit, Eraserhead is very, very different. It certainly earns the title of “experimental”, but two other adjectives come to mind when placing it alongside the rest of his work: unfocused and unrealized. The narrative is completely boggling to even the most patient viewer, and it’s hard to distinguish between fantasy and reality for the most part. It’s more surreal than a Haruki Murakami novel, and the gnarling soundtrack certainly helps this image.

Artsy film students will naturally continue to praise Eraserhead as a classic experimental film from one of the more eccentric filmmakers of the world, but only because of Lynch’s reputation. It doesn’t make Eraserhead any easier or fun to sit through.

Airframe was an interesting read, much like Crichton’s earliest work, The Andromeda Strain. And, like The Andromeda Strain, both fall into the category of what I’ve been calling “scientific mystery” novels that tend to focus on the science of a particular subject rather than the tense action of, say Jurassic Park or Prey. With Airframe Crichton chooses to focus on – as if you couldn’t tell – airplanes, and the way they’re constructed and function.

It’s hard not to keep comparing the two novels despite the fact they were written almost 30 years apart. Airframe kick-starts with a catastrophe that brings in the protagonist of the novel, tasked with figuring out what went wrong. Although I haven’t read all of Crichton’s novels, this just feels way too familiar. Still, the characters are written well, and the information is presented in a way that – at least to those who know little about the way aircraft function – makes sense. Half the fun is trying to figure out the mystery.

The biggest problem I had with Airframe is that it didn’t stand out as much as its predecessor, and often times felt a bit too simple despite the constant barrage of technical information. Its scope is much narrower than you’d think, and the book overall just feels a tad uninspired (as much as it pains me to say). That’s not to say it isn’t worth reading, or that it’s badly written in any way. I’m simply comparing it to some of Crichton’s other works.

In the end, Airframe is the kind of novel that will make you rethink about aircraft safety and investigative journalism (you’ll see why, if you read it), but it’s unfortunately also the kind of novel you probably will soon forget about after awhile.

If you’re a fan of the zombie sub-genre, Lucio Fulci’s Zombie is a classic. Although it’s a little campy at times, its shortcomings are more than outweighed by its merits, including some beautiful cinematography, terrific action (including an underwater fight scene between a zombie and a shark!), and bloody good action.

Sure, the effects sometimes look a bit fake, like they just threw some dirt on a paper mache head, but I found that it doesn’t really detract from the experience. Mostly because of the overly dramatic and bland acting, coupled with the annoyingly distracting dubbing job. All of these give the film a B-movie kind of feel anyway, so cheesy effects can be overlooked.

Although not as engaging or captivating as George Romero’s zombie flicks, Zombie goes back to the roots of the sub-genre by looking at its voodoo origins. Sadly, I don’t seem to recall the film ever really explaining what causes the zombie outbreak. Ah, well.

Well worth the experience.

Don’t get this Resident Evil movie confused with the Paul W.S. Anderson produced series starring Milla Jovovich. This here is the genuine Capcom franchise, complete with some familiar faces to fans of the video games. So already you know it’s got to be a hell of a lot better, right? Well, sort of.

When it comes to giving fans what they love, Degeneration definitely makes a better attempt to deliver than Anderson’s trilogy. Staying true to the series, the film actually takes place in the world of the games – presumably between Resident Evil 4 and the upcoming Resident Evil 5, and seven years after the events of Resident Evil 2. That’s always a good start, unlike what Square tried to do with Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within.

Stylistically, it makes more sense to make a CGI film based on the franchise, especially when attempting to differentiate from the (horrible) live action ones. That being said, I was actually disappointed with how the film itself looks. Compared to how good RE5 looks, Degeneration feels more like a one and a half-hour long cut scene from a last-generation game. After awhile it’s bearable, but at first it was overly noticeable. Again, not as bad as the live action trilogy.

Another gripe I had was the often wooden voice acting, which was often bogged down by cheesy one-liners and too much exposition. Instead of acting showing additional scenes – which they seem to do for other, less important scenes surprisingly enough – characters tend to talk and talk about certain things that have little bearing on the actual plot. Guess I should have figured, being a Japanese-made film and all. I’m wondering if the Japanese voice acting is any better though.

Overall though I kind of enjoyed Degeneration. It’s a bit like Dead Space: Downfall in a way – an animated adaptation of a game meant to appeal to fans of the series (in Dead Space’s case to help market the game) rather than be a real work of art on its own. It wasn’t a bad experience though, and I’d honestly like to see more films like this in the future. Having decent CGI films made by the actual producers of the games are better than shoddily made live action adaptations made by people who’ve probably never even played them before. You go, Capcom.

If you’re ever seen American Movie then you’ll know what this film is, and you know you want to see it. The only thing I really have to say about Coven is that it’s nowhere near as bad as you’d expect, especially considering the circumstances surrounding its creation.

Mark Borchardt is a pretty talented guy when he puts his mind to it, and it’s inspirational to see a project completed despite its path being barred with so many obstacles. Good going, man.

The problem with the whole “fair trade” trend is that people think too much of the circumstances and less about the quality. As much as I like Peet’s coffee, this blend in particular reminds me why I don’t follow the crowd when it comes to fair trade.

I found out that practically all of the coffee Peet’s sells is grown and bought at fair trade prices. In fact, the company pays top dollar in order to maintain the quality of the beans; they support the farmers and cut out the middle man in order to keep the farms sustainable. Despite this fact, the only certified fair trade blend is the only one that is not reliant on quality. It doesn’t matter if the crop for the year is good or bad, the farmers are still paid the same wage. To me, that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. This isn’t Starbucks here.

From what I’ve tasted, the blend is strongly earthy and bitter, and even a large amount of milk and sugar couldn’t hide a lot of its characteristics. Heck, I’m reluctant to actually have another cup. Why bother with a bad blend when I have something better like the Holiday Blend? Bleh… still, can’t let it go to waste.

Truth be told, the only reason I wanted to give this album a shot was because my friends and I love playing “Crushcrushcrush” on Rock Band (I think at our best we were in the top ten for PS3 bands, haha). Kind of glad I did though.

Riot! shows that Paramore plays some decent pop-punk, a genre that’s undergone some changes over the last decade or so. There are some genuinely catchy songs on this album that’ll get your foot tapping, and personally I like Haley Williams’ vocals, which aren’t all nasally and whiny sounding like a lot of other singers – who are all really just going for that old school Tom DeLonge sound anyway.

I guess the only other thing I have to say is that although I kind of like Riot!, there aren’t enough “stand out” songs that really stick, and the few that do are really only because of Rock Band, sorry to say. Don’t get me wrong, it’s worth a listen, but it’s definitely not revolutionary. Check it out first before you buy.

Though not nearly as captivating or thrilling as the late author’s Jurassic Park, _ The Andromeda Strain_ is a strong first novel that shows off Crichton’s unique, scientific style that he became known for throughout his career. And I say that in a completely positive way.

I’m not sure I fully understand some of the things talked about in the novel, but Crichton does a good job attempting to fully explain every little detail where he deems it necessary, and it often ties in directly with the current events in the plot. This helps the pace as it allows readers unfamiliar with scientific terminology keep up with the story. Still, it’s a very confusing narrative if you can’t keep pace.

Plot-wise the narrative felt somewhat thin at times, as much as I hate to say it. The novel’s less like a thriller and more like a record of events, though in a way that seems to be the approach Crichton was going for all along. Not a whole lot happens until the end, and the resolution had a bit of a negative impact on me much like The War of the Worlds.

Despite all this, I’d have to say that The Andromeda Strain is a definite must-read for fans of Crichton’s work. It’s a strong start to what turned out to be a relatively successful career, and shouldn’t be missed especially now that he’s gone.

Rest in peace, Mr. Crichton.

I’ve always been a skeptic when it comes to things I like, George Romero’s Dead series being one of them. I had high expectations for his last film, Land of the Dead and came away fairly disappointed in it. I had pretty low expectations for Diary when I heard it was going to be shot in a mockumentary style similar to The Blair Witch Project, but it turned out to be an interesting film in its own right. Perhaps better than Land turned out to be.

Sure, a film centered around a bunch of film students using camcorders to record the early days of the zombie outbreak is going to be amateurish, dull, and hard to believe or follow – which Diary is – but at the same time it really does kind of fit perfectly for this style of shooting. Film students know what it’s like when you just pick up a camera and shoot things/people; it’s hard to follow what doesn’t get picked up by the camera, and therefore the viewer has to use his/her imagination to pick up the missing pieces. That’s how I saw Diary.

Essentially Diary is meant to be a reboot of the franchise, much like Batman Begins or Casino Royale for their respective franchises. It wouldn’t make much sense otherwise, given that the first three films took place in the 1960s-1980s, back when there was no Internet, when cell phones weren’t prevalent, when camcorders weren’t so accessible to the general public. As a stand-alone film Diary’s narrative does provide an interesting new idea: that of a zombie outbreak that can and does occur in our present time, a time where most people think they’re relatively safe from any sort of disaster. It’s a good commentary on our overdependence on technology and the media, just like how Day of the Dead was a commentary on the military.

Does that make Diary of the Dead stand up there alongside the better Dead films like Day or Dawn? Not really. While it’s an interesting new direction to take, one gets the feeling that George Romero may just be messing around a bit, trying to find the right ingredients to take the often stagnant zombie genre to the next level. Mockumentary isn’t the right direction, so here’s hoping Island of the Dead turns out to be a much more rewarding experience.