Is the man.

I first read this as a teenage boy. Maybe 13 or 14. I wouldn’t say that the characters are three dimensionsional or anything. I wouldn’t say the plot is any great innovation in literature, but I do reread it about once a year.

But what the book does is to tell a fish-out-of-water story and tell it well. It also plays on actual historic events to make a great hypothetical history of a popularly unknown era.

Oh. And I secretly hoped this would happen to me.

The tricky camera and editing tricks got old fast. I think they were there only to cover how bad/dumb/poorly conceived the plot was. Every frame without the Hulk was bad, every frame with was enjoyable.

In the end, what turns me against this movie is the lack of Hulk.

I like Dobber’s in Escanaba, Michigan the best. But that’s just my opinion.

I liked that the movie relied on story and character and plot, as opposed to effects. It didn’t cover any new ground or have any truly though provoking moments, but the pacing and writing were good.

I think my wife didn’t like the story, characters or plot. That’s all.

This was awful. Tom Cruise is not a bad actor in the league of an Ed Wood cast member or anything, but he wasn’t at all believable in this movie as a port worker. And what was up with going to Boston? Yeah, the apocolypse is here, and I want to go to Boston. Lame.

I was shocked when I saw Speilberg directed this dog. He certainly put the bar low for the next remake.

Yeah, I was expecting violence, slightly silly story. What I got was so much violence, a story so empty and characters I disliked so much that I turned it off 25 minutes into the movie.

Which is a shame, because it was so visually stunning. But I had better things to do with my time. Like wash dishes.