Work has been interrupting the fun here, but just to show you I still care, here’s a piece of animation that should blow you away.
Some people have far too much time on their hands.
-K
I saw this over the weekend and was simply blown away. Iron Man is the best movie adaptation of a comic book character since Batman Begins and one of the best, period.
The story of industrialist Tony Stark (played to the hilt by Robert Downey Jr.) as he invents the “Iron Man” armor as a way of escaping terrorist agents of the Mandarin (updated from 1960s North Vietnamese communists) is smart, funny and bold. Downey’s performance is a showpiece and from the opening moments as he banters with G.I.s in a Humvee convoy, he never fails to impress. Gwyneth Paltrow (as his assistant Pepper Potts), Jeff Bridges (as Obadiah Stane) and Terrence Howard (as Stark’s best friend James Rhodes) give good performances themselves and serve to establish the microcosm that is Stark’s world.
The effects are fantastic, with Industrial Light and Magic once again proving they can create the impossible. The armor looks incredible and, most surprisingly, plausible. The attention to detail was astonishing and watching it in action a delight. ILM really outdid themselves here.
The story is a classic origin story, complete with the obligatory bad guy. However, unlike the Fantastic Four, a good balance is struck between exposition and action, which gives the movie a great sense of inertia. Not once did I feel everything slowed to the point where I was hoping something would happen just to get things moving again. The dialogue is dry, sarcastic and Downey does a great job with it.
After having to endure a slew of mediocre comic book movies over the last couple of years, Iron Man was refreshing. Not only is it a great comic book movie, it’s a good movie over all. Director Jon Favreau should be given the green light for the remaining two films in his proposed trilogy yesterday and Downey may have found the role which will be his Captain Jack Sparrow.
-K
Author: Stephen R. Donaldson
Pages: 480
Year Published: 1992
Here’s where the story really begins. Forbidden Knowledge takes everything from The Real Story, treats it as prologue and Donaldson really begins to explore the character and personalities of Morn, Nick and Angus.
Along the way, we’re introduced to an alien race called the Amnion, who apparently have humanity completely terrified they will invade and take over. This, of course, doesn’t stop humans from doing business with the Amnion in the black market. Just that in addition to everything else, this alien foe looms like a Sword of Damocles.
We’re also introduced to more characters from the UMCP: Min Donner, Hashi Lebwohl, and Warden Dios. As I mentioned in the review for The Real Story, the saga is supposed to play out using themes from Der Ring des Nibelungen. If you look closely at the three names above, you can get a glimpse of what that really means.
Forbidden Knowledge is a faster paced book than The Real Story. However, it does have its moments where the exposition gets a bit out of control and you’re waiting for something to happen. I’d also say about 80% of the novel takes place on one set. This surprisingly gets really old when you’re imagining characters in locations. Other than that, the book is a good continuation of the Gap Cycle.
-K
Oh yeah. A new theme after I spent what must have been at least an hour on the old one. However, I think everyone will pretty much agree it had problems. Serious problems.
However, I stumbled across this one yesterday, so forgive the mess while I get it cleaned up and if something doesn’t work, don’t worry. It will soon enough.
-K
Americans aren’t big on accolades for the second person to do anything. We don’t remember the second Pope (it was St. Linus); the second man to invent the telephone (Elisha Gray), and never mind the silver medal winners in the Olympics. Gold medal winners get their faces on a Wheaties box. Silver medal winners, not so much.
Much to my chagrin, I would be forced to admit I felt much the same way about our second president: John Adams. Of the first three presidents, he always seemed to be the least interesting when I was a kid. As I got older and studied history more and more, I would find interest in the events during which he lived, but not the man himself.
Well, that’s at an end. Over the last six weeks, HBO has been airing a seven part mini series on the life of John Adams, drawn from historian David McCullough’s book by the same name. The conclusion aired last night, with Adams and Jefferson both dying on the same day, July 4, 1826, the last survivors of those who, fifty years before, signed the Declaration of Independence. So it seems appropriate to write a bit about it.
Paul Giamatti (American Splendor, Sideways) gives a powerful performance as Adams, in turns brilliant and passionate, vain and arrogant, tired and bitter. Laura Linney (Love Actually, Mystic River) gives an equally wonderful performance as his wife, Abagail who also served as his most valuable counselor and friend throughout fifty-one years of marriage.
Both the book and the mini-series draw heavily from the extraordinary correspondence maintained between John and Abagail over the course of their relationship. As fortune would have it, the letters have been preserved and are even available in collected form. It is a singular window into one of the collected minds of our founding fathers. It’s also a prime reason why, although it has its own inaccuracies, John Adams is one of the most accurate depictions of the early history of our country. I have always been fond of quoting a history professor of mine when he said, “Never get your history from a movie.” While the rule still holds, Hollywood could certainly do a lot worse than to use this mini-series as the new watermark of achievement.
John Adams won’t be for everyone. There’s very little in the way of battles or action. It is a biopic, and this particular subject wasn’t a general in an army. He actually spent most of the war in Europe. However, for anyone with a modicum of interest in early American history, it is highly recommended. If your view of Adams is changed as much as mine, that should be counted as a success.
-K
