Short Review: Before The Devil Knows You're Dead.

Premise: Two brothers plan a bank heist on their parents’ jewelry store. It was the perfect set up. Everything went wrong.

Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Ethan Hawke, Albert Finney, and Marisa Tomei

My Reaction: This has to be one of the single most depressing movies I’ve ever seen in my life. This movie is the epitome of a modern Greek tragedy (Hell, maybe that’s what it was going for). Heist films are supposed to be fun, even when they go bad (Reservoir Dogs or Dog Day Afternoon, the latter of which shares the same director as this film). I’m almost speechless at what to say about the film besides 'great acting'. I can’t score this film. Let me just say one thing: the movie literally opens with Philip Seymour Hoffman going doggy style on Marisa Tomei. ‘Nuff said.

WTF

LKMYNTS: Unknown.

So a few years ago, I believe, I see this trailer in theater and think it looks pretty awesome. I saw the trailer in theater maybe twice ever. And then I never hear anything about the movie again. I never saw it released to theater. I never heard it advertised for DVD. I’ve never seen it in a store. Almost as if the movie itself is defined by its title, the thing is freakin unknown. And it was so strange, as it has a pretty decent cast and is even relatively well-scored on imdb. So now that I got Netflix, I was able to track the dang thing down and finally watch it after all this time. So was it all worth it? I think so.

The movie kinda reminded me somewhat of Reservoir Dogs, but only if it were hostages instead of a robbery, and all of the involved was stuck in the warehouse all together without remembering who they are or what’s going on. Like I said, five seemingly random men wake up in a very secure warehouse with short-term memory loss and no idea what’s happened or who they are. The first is Jean Jacket (Jim Caviezel), who soon discovers a man tied to a chair (Joe Pantoliano). But before JJ can untie him, Rancher Shirt (Barry Pepper) shows up and says they might not want to trust him because he is, after all, the only person tied up so he has to be on the opposite side of whatever side they’re on. Then there’s also a man with a broken nose (Greg Kinnear), and another man who is shot and bleeding to death while handcuffed to a rail (Jeremy Sisto). After working together a few clues, the five men realize that two of them are hostages while the other three have to be the hostage takers. Unfortunately, none of them know which is which. Meanwhile, Eliza Coles (Bridget Moynahan) is working with the police to send out the ransom money for her husband and track the people who kidnapped him, two of which are played by Peter Stormare and Mark Boone Junior.

So with that lengthy plot description given, let’s first talk about the acting, since we have quite the cast. Everybody does really well, honestly, but the two best were Barry Pepper and Jeremy Sisto, which is almost ironic. It’s ironic because, even though Jim Caviezel is clearly the main character, Barry Pepper almost has the most screen time (or at least the better presence), while Jeremy Sisto has the least screen time and fewest lines. Though the performance Sisto is able to give is a really, really good one.

The plot, on the other hand, can be a bit confusing. It moves very fast, so if you even blink or you have trouble with auditory learning (say, if they do the plot exposition really fast and only in one scene, leaving you behind on what you just heard), you’ll miss it. I was able to catch the gist of it (hostage situation), but the whole scenario behind it with bankers or whatever was totally lost to me. I’ll have to watch it again to catch it. And then comes the ending, which has so many twists you’ll be lucky not to have your neck snap. And this is where I have my almost-issue with the movie. It has those types of twists where they just kinda pull them out their ass in order to pull one on the viewer, and never really sets up any clues whatsoever. So within the span of about 5 minutes, you’re thrown fifty ways from Sunday and have no idea what to think about what just happened. But at the same time, I still found the twists to be pretty cool (for the most part). I don’t know. I was really close to just having this be an ‘un-scorable’ movie because I was left unsure of how I actually felt about it.

But I think in the end, the acting and the basic story won me over. It’s a good little thriller/mystery piece that almost feels like a heist-gone-wrong film (a la Reservoir Dogs), but without any actual heist. So I guess I’ll just leave it at that. It’s just one you gotta see yourself.

I Am McLovin!

(P.S. Coincidentally, this is the second LKMYNTS I've done that involves both Jeremy Sisto and Peter Stormare).

2 In 1: I'm Reed Fish and Adaptation.

This 2 In 1 focuses on two movies that play with similar narrative ideas. I don’t want to go into too much detail here, but this first movie did remind me of the second (which I saw a while back, and am going to finally review). So without dragging this out too much, here you go (Oh, and the second review might be slightly spoilerous only if you have no idea what you're getting yourself into and/or have never heard of the movie or Charlie Kaufman).

I’m Reed Fish.

While this movie’s plot makes it sound like your average, run-of-the-mill romantic comedy, it’s really anything but. Instead, it’s more of a dramedy with a bit of narrative flair. Reed Fish (Jay Baruchel) is the local radio show host/news anchor for the incredibly small town of Mud Meadows, working along side best friend Frank (Victor Rasuk) and the small town mayor, Maureen (Katey Sagal). He’s soon to be married to the lovely Kate (Alexis Bledel), as well, and everything is going to plan. But then an old childhood crush, Amy (Schuyler Fisk), returns for the summer, and everything turns to chaos. Also starring are the likes of DJ Qualls, Shiri Appleby, Chris Parnell, A.J. Cook, and Blake Clark.

If ever there were a movie with an ensemble cast full of underused and/or unappreciated actors and actresses, it’s this one. But it really is Jay Baruchel who holds the whole movie together, finally getting some time to shine in a leading role as opposed to his supporting roles in most Judd Apatow films (or the like). Though, for fans of Alexis Bledel, she’s actually not in the film all that much, despite being the main character’s fiancé (well, for a little while).

And what I mean by that last statement is this: You know how in basically every romantic comedy, there’s the build up between the romantic leads that just builds and builds until the end of the movie when it reaches a point where there’s a big fight and the guy has to try and better himself and fix everything? Well, that moment happens in this movie, too, except within the first thirty minutes. The rest of the movie is built around the relationships that Reed has with his small town, while he also tries to patch himself together and fix things. The relationships between Reed, Kate, and Amy, on the other hand, were the weakest point of the movie. It almost felt as if the film were not really a love story, and that the romance part of the film was one of the lesser aspects that needed to be brought forward. But I felt this only hurt the film in the end, when it tried to tie up all the loose ends and fix relationships. I just didn’t feel the character connections, and I even felt confused as to certain character reactions.

But confusion ran high toward the end (and a little ways into the beginning) when you’re thrown for a pretty interesting loop. Not only is this not your everyday Rom Com, but it’s not your typical narrative telling. It really did get into some weird Adaptation territory (or a better example, even though I haven’t seen it, but to compare it to things I’ve heard about the plot, is Synecdoche, New York). And similar to Adaptation, Reed Fish is actually the writer of the film (much like Charlie Kaufman was the writer for the aforementioned film, as well as the main character). But this is no Adaptation. This is maybe Adaptation Lite. But it’s still a fun little film.

So whatever your preference is, whether you’d like to see Jay Baruchel really get a chance to carry a film, to see Alexis Bledel outside of Gilmore Girls or those Pants movies (and don’t feel like watching the broody Sin City), to see Schuyler Fisk in something for what feels like the first time since Orange County, or just because you’re a fan of wacky narratives, I would recommend the film. It’s no masterpiece, and it could have used a bit of tweaking in the story department, but it’s a good little film.

I Am McLovin!

Adaptation.

When I first saw this movie a while back, I thought it was a total mind trip. Well, I finally got around to seeing it again so that I can review it. So how exactly do you adapt a book that can’t be adapted? You make it into a movie about your struggles adapting it into a movie and add in all the Hollywood-esque romance and conflict you didn’t want to add in the first place, but this time as a straight-up commentary on the idea of Hollywood screenwriting. Nicolas Cage stars as Charlie Kaufman and (fake) brother Donald. Charlie struggles with adapting the book “The Orchid Thief” for the big screen while Donald flourishes with a common thriller that includes everything Charlie hates about modern cinema. Meanwhile, in flashbacks, we are shown the relationship between the author of “The Orchid Thief,” Susan Orlean (Meryl Streep) and the man she interviewed, John Laroche (Chris Cooper).

Just the mere thought of this movie is enough to make one’s brain hurt. It’s a fictionalized version of Charlie Kaufman’s attempt to adapt a non-fiction book without fictionalizing it. And then it throws in everything that Charlie claims he wants to stay away from. Events that occur in the movie are later established by Charlie as he attempts to get over his writer’s block, making you wonder if anything you’ve seen thus far (or have yet to see) actually happened within the realm of the film or is just the adaptation of the adaptation about the adaptation (I had to think about it just to figure that out). And then there’s the whole mystery about whether or not Donald is real or just a split personality based on a conversation they have about multiple personalities being a Hollywood cliché (which is a perfect thing to add into this movie), so as to juxtapose it next to Donald’s screenplay about a serial killer with multiple personality disorder. But then you see Donald interacting with other people, but then you wonder if those people actually exist, too. This movie messes with your head so much it’s quite literally insane. And I love every bit of it.

The acting is done so well. This has to be Nic Cage’s best movie (or at least one of them). Just to see his range difference between the characters of Charlie and Donald is amazing enough. And I read that Mr. Cage decided to go against acting instincts for this movie and just do the character exactly as the director (Spike Jonze) told him to. And he got an Oscar Nom for it. I think that says something. Meryl Streep and Chris Cooper also do a fine job, especially Chris Cooper, who I really didn’t recognize at all in the film despite his large role. And then, of course, you have the brief supporting roles of Tilda Swinton, Maggie Gyllenhaal, and Ron Livingston, all of which do just fine.

I can’t say much else. This movie is all about the story and the acting, though especially the mind-freak of a story. Funnily enough, both Charlie and Donald (who doesn’t even exist) Kaufman are both credited as writers of the movie, adding to the zaniness. If you haven’t seen this one already, I really do recommend it at least once. It’s worth the ‘trip’, especially if you know who Charlie Kaufman is and are a fan of film.

Royale With Cheese

LKMYNTS: Watching The Detectives.

I thought I’d start out the New Year with a Little Known Movie You Need To See. This has to be one of the most original romantic comedies that I’ve seen in a long time. Neil (Cillian Murphy) is a film buff who runs a video rental store with his friends and lives his life based on the classics and B-movies. But one day, Violet (Lucy Liu) shows up in the store and completely changes his life around. Violet does everything in her power to turn Neil’s life upset down and chaotic, which is almost too much for him to handle. And unfortunately for Neil, Violet becomes like the girl who cried wolf, so he never really knows if whatever situation he’s in is actually real or staged.

To start with the acting, the only two you would recognize in this film are Cillian Murphy and Lucy Liu. But were they really some inspired casting choices or what? To see Cillian in a comedy was a sight to behold, and he really pulled off the movie buff dork very well. In fact, I haven’t felt so in tune with a character before this one. I really felt like I could really relate to him, because he was a lot like me (sadly enough). So whenever something uncomfortable happened to him that played on his gullibility, I felt uncomfortable, too (mostly because Lucy Liu’s character reminded me of a much more extreme version of one of my exes). And speaking of Lucy Liu, she was absolutely perfect for the role. It reminded me somewhat of her role in Lucky Number Slevin, except not as hyper and much more out-there. But both played their roles very well.

And then there’s the supporting cast who are always around and made me wonder why none of them are bigger stars, because they were all pretty funny. One of my favorite scenes involved them trying to figure out what scene a movie was stopped at just by looking at the tape reel inside the VHS cassette. And then there’s all the little movie conversations that are had throughout. This really is a movie for movie lovers, as there are all sorts of references and what have you, even in the background with movie posters. I even saw a magazine sitting in the background that had an image of Oh Dae-su from Oldboy. It’s just detailed stuff like that that when you catch it, it makes it that much better.

If I have any issues with the movie, there are only two, and one is much more minor than the other. To start with the minor issue, there’s a scene toward the end that’s a crying montage from Cillian Murphy that almost killed it for me. The crying was so over-the-top and ridiculous that it totally took me out of the movie. There’s a similar crying moment at the beginning, too, but it’s the montage toward the end that got to me. The more major issue was the plot… or lack thereof. There really isn’t a tight plot to pull everything together. It’s mostly just random antics from Violet toward Neil, and you’re just watching and wondering if it’s real this time or not. HOWEVER, it is all made up for at the end when there’s a nice little twist that suddenly has everything make sense. It’s just awkward to have you wait the entire movie before you realize what the plot was. To get all English-y on you, it’s kind of like writing a research paper and waiting until the end to introduce the thesis statement: sure you can do it, but it takes a talent to pull it off correctly. And did this movie pull it off? For the most part, yeah.

So if you’re a fan of Cillian Murphy (and who isn’t?), and you would like to see him do a comedy, I’d check this out. It’s not your average movie experience at all, which is ironic because the whole thing is about and an homage to movies. I thought it was great, anyway.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

End Of The Year Best/Worst Spectacular!

Because every other movie blog in existence does it, why shouldn't I? Yes, it's time for my 'end of year' list of the best (and worst) everything of the year. And let me say now that these lists will only include movies that I've actually SEEN. And due to where I live, I haven't seen a lot of the higher-praised films of the year, such as Gran Torino, Milk, The Wrestler, Frost/Nixon, Doubt and Let The Right One In (though I've tried with this last one... but that's a long story).

And the total count for movies I've seen in theater this year is... 53. And then there were at least 5 or so that I saw afterward (on DVD or what have you) that came out this year, but I didn't get a chance to see in theater. So if you count those, I'm in the upper-50s. But otherwise, I've basically seen (in theater) about the equivalent of one movie a weekend, and that doesn't count all the movies I saw more than once. Anyway...

Just a few side notes before we get to the lists, however:

- This is the same list (just extended on in a few cases) for the LIONs for LAMBs poll over at the LAMB.

- I included The Orphanage in my list of options because it was released in January, even though it was up for Oscar noms for LAST year (and I guess is therefore considered a 'last year' movie). But as it wasn't officially released in the US until THIS year, I felt okay to include it.

- When it comes to the 'Worst' films of the year, it was somewhat difficult, because I often stay away from films I know are going to be bad, so I can't honestly say what the worst films of the year are except for those that I've actually seen. There's only one (well, three) exceptions, and those are the three Uwe Boll films that came out this year, but I didn't include those on the list because it's an automatic knowledge that this man's movies are always the worst of the year.

So without further ado, here are the lists:

The Top 10 Best Movies of the Year

10) Hellboy II: The Golden Army - Just some all-around great fun, much like Iron Man was.

9) Changeling - Not everybody loved it. In fact, there were quite a few people who didn't like it at all. I don't think it'll win any Oscars, but I thought it was a great movie with some amazing acting.

8) Iron Man - Downey Jr. rocked. Nuff said.

7) The Orphanage - Again, it's a bit iffy whether this could be counted under 2007 or 2008, but as it's wide release was January 2008, I'm going with that. And I felt it was one of the best movies of the year at the beginning of the year. I still feel that now.

6) Burn After Reading - A slow start, but a great ensemble cast and some fun comedy about absolutely nothing. Brad Pitt was on a role this year.

5) The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - Either you loved it or you thought it was a bit too sentimental for your tastes. Personally, I loved it.

4) Role Models - Hands down the best comedy of the year. I don't care what others say. Yes, it was better than Pineapple Express and Forgetting Sarah Marshall.

3) Kung Fu Panda - The second best animated film of the year. It doesn't have the deepest most intricate story, but the animation was great, the characters were great, the comedy was great... it was just great all around (and really, truly surprised me when I went to see it expecting not to like it).

2) The Dark Knight - In a close second, the movie didn't reach my number one position because I felt some of the actual Batman/Bruce Wayne scenes that did not include The Joker were lacking at times.

1) WALL*E - Not only the best animated film of the year, but I think the best overall film of the year. There's nothing about this movie I really dislike.

Top 5 Worst Movies of the Year

5) The Ruins - I saw this due to a trade-off. I would see this movie so that another fellow blogger would see a movie I wanted him to see. We both hated the respective film the other made us watch.

4) The Strangers - Either you think this movie was incredibly stupid and the most unscary thing you've ever seen... or you think it's simply the scariest movie ever made. Obviously I'm in the former group.

3) The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor - I knew it was going to be bad, but I was promised a Harry Potter trailer that I didn't get. So I got stuck with a bad movie without the good part to make up for it.

2) The Spirit - Hahahaha.... where to begin...

1) Diary of the Dead - Similar to The Orphanage, it could be a little iffy on the exact release of this film, but as its rather limited release was a few months into 2008, I went with that. And George Romero, I'm ashamed of you. What happened? This was just beyond awful.

Acting
(Note: Nobody from Diary of the Dead or The Spirit will be listed, as each entire cast would be under 'worst').

Best Actor in a Leading Role - Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark - Iron Man
(Again, he just owned the role).

Worst Actor in a Leading Role - Hayden Christensen as David Rice - Jumper
(Pure cardboard).

Best Actress in a Leading Role - Belén Rueda as Laura - The Orphanage
(I don't often notice acting in foreign films, but I noticed her. And that says something).

Worst Actress in a Leading Role - Liv Tyler as Kristen McKay - The Strangers
(It was between her and Zooey Deschanel in The Happening, but Zooey is my woman, so I just couldn't do it. So I went with Liv. How blank can you get? Well, there is Hayden Christensen...).

Best Actor in a Supporting Role - Heath Ledger as The Joker - The Dark Knight
(Well, who else did you expect?).

Worst Actor in a Supporting Role - Luke Ford as Alex O'Connell - The Mummy 3
(No acting ability at all).

Best Actress in a Supporting Role - Amy Ryan as Carol Dexter - Changeling
(She wasn't in it much, but she stole the show every time).

Worst Actress in a Supporting Role - Maria Bello as Evelyn O'Connell - The Mummy 3
(She was no Rachel Weisz).

Misc.

Best Cast - Burn After Reading
(Great year for Brad Pitt, though I think it was a great ensemble effort that was pushed that little extra to making this spot due to J.K. Simmons).

Best Movie Poster - The Dark Knight
(It was between that, Vantage Point, and Saw V. Regardless of what your opinions were of the latter two movies, they had some pretty cool looking posters. But I went with The Dark Knight because that movie had about a million different posters, and every one of them was awesome).

THE SPIRIT.

Oh, God… I don’t even know where to begin. I’m not even going to bother with a plot summary, because I just saw it and even I don’t know (or care).

This movie was bad. Really bad. Horribly, horribly bad. I didn’t even want to see it, really, but one of my friends called me up last night, and she was feeling bored and a bit down, so she dragged me out to see this movie (even against my warnings of low ratings). There were only about 4 other people in the theater. 2 minutes in, and I’m staring at the screen like “What the hell is this? Please don’t tell me she’s liking this.” About 10 minutes later, she turns to me and says “This is the worst movie I’ve ever seen in my entire life.” And from there, the movie experience was heavenly.

We totally MST3K’d this bad boy. And I don’t even think the others in the theater cared, either, because they laughed along with us half the time (I mean, we weren’t doing it super loud or anything, but it occasionally dipped into ‘hearable’). If I had seen this movie alone, I might have even walked out for the first time in my life. But since she was with me to experience it and riff on it, it made this literally one of the funniest movies of the year.

I can’t even pull out samples of what was bad. Just pick any of the 103 minutes and there you go. The only good parts I’d say were Jaime King as Lorelei the glowing face of death, which probably made up about 1 minute (maybe 2, as she does have a little chunk of time toward the end) of the whole film. Oh, and the women were hot.

But everything was terrible. The dialogue, the constant monologue to NOBODY (even the CAT walked away), the acting, the story, and even the visuals. With Sin City, the color scheme was used artistically. In this movie, it was used randomly and with no real rhyme or reason. The movie was meant to be cheesy, but it didn’t work at all like, say, Speed Racer did. But I do admit that it will be a nice quotable movie like Napoleon Dynamite… except, you know, Napoleon Dynamite was actually good and re-watchable.

I’ll just end it here. This movie was just plain awful. It’s only watchable if you’re with friends (at least one) that you can sit there and riff on it with. And there’s so much to work with, too, that it’s just ridiculous. It’s like Frank Miller took a third of the cast from an asylum, a third from hobos on the street, and the last third from anywhere and just made them drunk. Some of the cast probably a mix of the three (just see the mud pit fight between The Spirit and The Octopus toward the beginning for further proof). But once he had that drunken, crazy cast, he paused every 30 seconds and asked “Okay, how can we make this movie as terrible as possible?” The result was The Spirit. I don’t know how to rate this movie. I’m just going to rate it on the quality of the film, not the entertainment value that my friend and I personally made from it. I still have no idea what I watched.

She's Gone From Suck to Blow!

Short Review: Nightwatch.

Premise: A law student takes a job as a night guard at a morgue, and he starts to notice odd things happening. Meanwhile, a serial killer continues his streak of murder.

Starring: Ewan McGregor, Nick Nolte, Josh Brolin, Patricia Arquette, Lauren Graham, and John C. Reilly.

My Reaction: How can a movie with such a cast be so… bland? The first half is pretty good with some decent suspense/spookiness, but if you’ve had any experience with any thriller ever, you know that the person being set up as the killer is so freaking obvious it can’t be him, which takes away all the mystery (because you then know who it has to be). And because of that, along with the second half of the movie, everything turns into a venture into the non-logical and plot holes. I would rate it pretty average, and I can’t understand how it has such an above-average score on imdb. And I only rate it as high as I do because of some pretty entertaining scenes early on, some particularly creepy moments, and some good acting from Josh Brolin in particular.

Stop Saying Okay! Okay.

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON.

When in most films with a gimmick, if you take the gimmick away and just have the story play as normal, the movie would be boring. The case with this movie is half and half. During the backdrop of Hurricane Katrina, a young woman (Julia Ormond) reads a diary to her dying mother, which tells the story of one Benjamin Button. Benjamin Button (Brad Pitt) was born old and grows young as his life goes on. His father Thomas (Jason Flemyng) abandons him thinking him some kind of monster, and he’s adopted by a young black woman named Queenie (Taraji P. Henson), who runs an old folks’ home. But when Benjamin meets a young girl named Daisy (Elle Fanning, Madisen Beaty, Cate Blanchett), he immediately falls in love. The movie tells the story of their lives when they’re both with and without each other, with one getting older and the other younger.

Let me first discuss my opening statement. There were times when the movie’s story was so captivating that it would have been interesting with or without the reverse aging in play. But the other half of the time, the plot relied heavily on that idea. To make a long story short, the story was good, but it was really long with some parts that were probably unnecessary and could have been cut out. I was really into the movie most of the time, though. But during the last hour or so (maybe more like thirty minutes), I was really looking down at my watch, wondering how much longer the movie had. And a lot of what could have been cut came from the beginning of the movie, as it really was a slow start getting to the main plot of the story (though there really isn’t a plot, honestly. It’s more of a character study).

And the acting was good overall, especially with Brad Pitt (who I think is good in just about anything). But the most curious part of all dealt with the ages of the characters as the movie went on and how they looked amongst each other in correspondence to how old they should have looked. Now, it would take a lot more concentration on my part to really nit-pick at that, so I’ll leave that be. But there was one thing about the acting that I really didn’t like, and that was Cate Blanchett’s narration as an old woman. I could hardly understand a word she said, and she would always narrate important parts of the story, which upset me as I only understood half of what she was saying. And there is one age discrepancy I’d like to bring to attention, which is the young Daisy. When she’s first introduced, imdb has her listed as 7, though she’s played by a 10-year-old and talks like she’s older. And then toward the end of the movie, during some voice-over narration, there’s a mention of how she would have been about 5 when she first met Benjamin, and that threw me off completely.

And speaking of more visual aspects, and with Daisy, there was another discrepancy that bugged me. Benjamin makes note of how he’ll never forget Daisy’s bright blue eyes, and he repeats that a few times at the beginning. And Elle Fanning had these gorgeous bright blue eyes. But throughout the movie, Daisy’s eyes are continually changing color. The Daisy played by Madisen Beaty looked like her eyes were nearly brown, and Cate Blanchett’s eyes would go from pale blue to light blue. With all the money spent on Benjamin’s looks, they could have least thrown a few dollars in for some contacts. Though on the more positive side, the visuals were excellent. The older Benjamin (in looks) reminded me of the CGI from the Final Fantasy movies with such attention to detail. But the visual effects that blew me away the most weren’t of the older Benjamin, but of the younger. The way they made Brad Pitt look so young made even the similar process at the beginning of X-Men 3 look shabby.

But my favorite moments of the movie were the smaller moments. First, the man who had been struck by lightning and all his stories. Those had my audience laughing, and I thought they were a fun touch. But my favorite part in the entire movie was the brief segment around the middle of the movie, I suppose it was, when Benjamin tells a story of intersecting lives and how changing one thing could have changed everything, so therefore how every little action causes a greater reaction. I really loved that scene, and it really stuck with me during and after the film.

I really don’t see how people are comparing this to Forrest Gump (I guess that’s just for people who haven’t actually seen it), as I don’t think they’re anything alike at all. Not to mention that, technically, Benjamin Button was written first. I had no idea until the credits that it was based on a short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald. But then again, who the heck knows anything about what F. Scott wrote outside of The Great Gatsby. So the movie does have some faults, but it is an all-around great movie and great experience, especially during all the scenes with Katrina raging in the background, when you know what’s going to happen, even if the characters don’t (dramatic irony!). But anyway, I’d recommend the film. Another Brad Pitt success.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

Unrelated to Movies: Yet Another Finished Book.

It's that time again! Another novel has been completed (my fifth to date). My one main test-reader is still to finish reading the final chapters, so I have yet to find out what anybody thinks of the finished project/rough draft. But anywho, I really like how it turned out, even though I took a lot of risks with it. But you don't care about all of that right now. You just want to know what it is and all the stats and whatnot. So here we go!

(And before we begin, let me preface by saying that the book is largely based around and/or inspired by the poem "Annabel Lee" by Edgar Allen Poe).

Page Count: 341.
Word Count (According to WORD): 73,261.
Chapters: 27.

(NOTE: Ironically, it is the same number of chapters as my previous novel. And also, in comparison to the rough draft of my previous novel, while it is a whole 9 pages shorter, it is only a few hundred words shorter, almost beating it out in the word count war for longest first draft. Anyway, onto more interesting things.)

Title: The Kingdom by the Sea.

Story synopsis (as of right now, anyway):
---------------------------

The world had come to an end—just not in the way anybody foresaw. When the world became overrun by mythical creatures and other strange monsters, humans were driven into hiding in their underground Safe Havens until they could once again re-claim the planet. And the only hope the human race has in doing such a thing resides in the New Military, a faction of individuals who work together to both keep others safe as well as find a way to clear the Mainland. Annabel Lee, raised by the New Military from infancy, is one of the best, and nothing truly tested her skills until 8-year-old Melanie was discovered traveling the Mainland with no clue to her past.

But a Faerie warrior by the name of Kailen, who has the ability to see Annabel Lee in his dreams, knows a secret about both her and Melanie of which neither are aware. And after Melanie's catalytic arrival, the cycle of fate begins to turn, starting the change needed in order to reclaim the planet. There are two heroes—one in the Human Realm, one in the Magical Realm—and both are about to learn that the one place they need to go to discover truth and bring peace back to an anarchic world is the heart of both realms, the ruins of the ancient Faerie Kingdom, the Kingdom by the Sea.

-------------------------

Yes. It's a novel about Faeries and other mythical creatures. But these are not your Tinkerbell Faeries or happy-go-lucky faerie tale creatures. I based them all on the original source material, the original folklore, wherein Faeries lived in hierarchies and could be more fearsome, even warrior-like. And they are not small and pixie-like, either. They are very much like humans.

And then there are the other creatures throughout the story. I borrowed from many different mythologies, bringing in such nasty monsters such as Wendigo (zombie-like creatures) and Redcaps (ferocious, blood-crazy goblin-like creatures). There's the middle-ground creatures, too, such as the Will-o-the-Wisp (AKA Spooklights). And then there are the more benign beings, such as Sprites and Nymphs (the Sprites being quite similar to the Faeries). Of course, there are more that I haven't mentioned on all levels, as well.

That's it for me for now!

Twas The Knight Before Christmas...

This was just too awesome to pass up posting...