Alright Buffalo Bills I Forgive You

Being a Buffalo Bills fan has not been easy over the last decade. Terrible draft picks (Mike Williams, Erik Flowers, and J.P. Losman to name a few), quarterback woes, games in Toronto, watching the hated New England Patriots whup Buffalo every year, and most significantly no playoff appearances, have caused me more anguish than a Bruce Smith blindside sack. The Bills have been like a bad relationship you can't part with. You keep going back hoping she will change but it always ends in the same fashion: disappointment. Despite all the pain, I was looking forward to this year's draft. I had my sights firmly set on Notre Dame's quarterback Jimmy Claussen at #9. And the Bills select....C.J. Spiller? WTF? We have Marshawn Lynch and Fred Jackson! We don't need a running back we need a quarterback! Even more upsetting was that Claussen was still available in the second round and Buffalo passed on him again! What is Buddy Nix thinking? After the hiring of Chan Gailey, the acquisition of no significant free agents in the offseason, and a horrible draft I said that's it, I'm done, I can't support this team anymore. Anyone who knows me knows that I completely fore swore the Bills and decided to support the other team I like, the Green Bay Packers. I was just tired of getting burned. But like any moment of pique it passed and I've had time to cool off. I also got some good encouragement from my best friend John. He reminded me that he is a New York Jets fan and aside from 1982 and a few good years in the 90s, the Jets have had some pretty slim years in the 70s, 80s, 90s, and even the early 2000s. Yet he sticks by his team. (He's also a Baltimore Orioles and New York Knicks fan so....ouch. His only saving grace lately besides the recent success of the Jets is that he's a Georgetown Hoyas fan too.) He chastised me saying that I'd been spoiled by the Bills four Superbowl appearances in the 90s. I have to admit he's right. You stick with your team through thick and thin. Look at the Bengals fans of the 1990s. Those fans are die hard. Impressive considering that the "Bungles" were mostly dead during Clinton's presidency. And so with weariness and hope I pull out my Thurman Thomas jersey and other assorted Bills paraphernalia and officially return to the fold. With one caveat. There has been much talk in recent years of the Buffalo Bills moving to another city. If that happens i cannot in good conscience support the team anymore. However until that time I consider myself officially back. I mean Ralph Wilson has gotta die some time right? Right? Go Bills!

Review: Splice

Plot: Two geneticists Clive Nicoli and Elsa Kast (Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley) researching the cures for various diseases create an animal/human hybrid. However as Dren (Delphine Chaneac) begins to develop, her increasingly violent tendencies result in dire consequences for everyone around her.

Review: Splice is the bastard child of Alien, The Fly, and Species and the resulting progeny is about as interesting as watching the reproductive habits of amoebas. Despite receiving excellent reviews at the Sundance Film Festival, Splice is nothing more than a mildly entertaining retelling of the Frankenstein story with a predictable plot and ending. The story of "scientists playing God" is more played out than the "Pants on the Ground" song from American Idol. Splice is further proof of the lack of original storytelling when it comes to the horror genre. More schlock than shock, one of the biggest problems about Splice is that IT'S NOT SCARY! Other than a few "shock you by making an abrupt sound" moments there is nothing remotely fear provoking about the film. The presence of tension or a sense of foreboding is severely lacking. Some elements are even downright hokey. Take for example the creature's name. Dren is "nerd" spelled backwards. Seriously? How did writers Vincenzo Natali (also director), Doug Taylor, and Antoinette Mary Bryant cut the Gordian Knot when they came up with this name? Why not call her Keeg or Krod? Look I don't mind revisiting old themes, but at least make it interesting and compelling for the audience. Take for example the excellent 2002 film Equilibrium starring Christian Bale and Rochester's own Taye Diggs. It includes elements of Brave New World, 1984, and The Matrix but tells the story in an interesting and thought provoking way. But I digress. One of my friend's friends who also saw the film thought it was the worst piece of trash ever put on screen. I wouldn't go that far. Splice is not without its merits. Sarah Polley and Adrien Brody's acting is very solid even though the characters of Clive and Elsa are very stock. Clive wants desperately to take his relationship with Elsa to the next level (i.e children) but Elsa resists because (surprise!) she has Mommie issues. Dren meanwhile comes across as a spoiled child throwing temper tantrums. There is no inherent maliciousness about her. This unorthodox nuclear family generates bizarre moments like Dren's obsession with TicTacs and a more than disturbing sexual attraction for Brody's character. The film's laboratory scenes possess a sterile antiseptic quality to them that contrasts well with the farm Dren is taken to. Kudos to cinematographer Tetsuo Nagata for that. The scene of Dren's birth early in the movie resonates well. After that it's all downhill. My suggestion? Skip Splice and watch David Cronenberg's classic 1986 film The Fly. It's much more compelling, interesting, and scarier than Splice.

My rating: 4/10

Sci-Fi Rebuttalhttp://http://io9.com/5551875/the-twenty-science-fiction-novels-that-will-change-your-life

http://http//io9.com/5551875/the-twenty-science-fiction-novels-that-will-change-your-life

A friend of mine the other day directed me to a list of the twenty science fiction novels that will change your life. (You can check it out by clicking on the link above.) I have read a couple on the list (Octavia Butler's "Kindred" is particularly good and Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" is an obvious classic) but it got me to thinking: what are some of the most important science fiction novels I have ever read? While I didn't come up with twenty I did think of four. I think that not only are these four important to me personally, I also think they are four of the best novels ever written in the genre.

"Battlefield Earth" by L. Ron Hubbard (1982)

Before you start, yes this is the the novel that the misguided John Travolta made into one of the worst movies ever, and yes this is the L. Ron Hubbard who spawned a religion that gave Tom Cruise an excuse to jump on couches and bedazzle Katie Holmes into marrying him and raising Chris Klein's child. (Yes that's a gay joke about Tom Cruise. I know a gay joke about Tom Cruise is as common as water rolling downhill but you gotta take your shots when you can.) Anyway don't let those facts stop you from reading this novel. At 1000 pages it is quite mammoth but only because it has so many layers to it. Set in the year 3000 A.D. the Earth has been taken over by aliens and man is all but extinct. It follows the story of Jonnie Goodboy Tyler who leads mankind's final war to take back control of the Earth. The novel tackles many topics: philosophy, economics, the environment, and the dissemination and control of information to name just a few. So what if the author was crazy for Coco Puffs? Van Gogh cut his ear off and gave it to his girlfriend. Doesn't take away from the fact that this is a great novel.

"Dune" by Frank Herbert (1965)

This Hugo Award winning novel centers around the noble family Atreides and is set on the desert planet Arrakis in the far distant future. Found only on Arrakis is the life blood of the Empire, the spice melange. A geriatric drug, melange provides a longer life span, increased vitality, and heightened awareness. Most important it unlocks prescience in humans allowing safe interstellar travel. "Dune" is more multifaceted than a Cray computer and interweaves politics, religion, ecology, technology, and human emotion. A staple of science fiction, Herbert's masterpiece spawned numerous sequels, games, and movies. A monumental achievement in the genre.

"The Man In the High Castle" by Philip K. Dick (1962)

One of the most well regarded authors in science fiction, Dick's works have inspired eleven films (9 currently out and 2 in production) including "Total Recall" and "Blade Runner." However this short novel may be the crown jewel in Dick's work. This alternative history work was the first ever novel to explore the idea of a world where WWII was won by Germany and Japan. Ironically in this version of history Germany is a technological giant having drained the Mediterranean Sea to create farmland and colonizing the moon and Mars. It is an intriguing read and deeply philosophical. The classic Eastern work of literature the I Ching deeply influenced and guided "The Man In the High Castle." It explores the interpretation and confusion of true and false realities both at a personal and global level. The progenitor of novels like Harry Turtledove's "In the Presence of Mine Enemies" and Michael Chabon's "The Yiddish Policeman's Union" Dick's seminal alternative history novel still resonates today.

"Stranger in a Strange Land" by Robert E. Heinlein (1961)

Considered by many literary critics and fans to be the best science fiction novel ever written, Heinlein's 1961 work is his crowning achievement. Sex, violence (often taboo subjects at the time it was written) and other controversial scenes dominate "Stranger in a Strange Land." Yet ironically, Heinlein's novel may be the most religious science fiction novel ever written. "Stranger in a Strange Land" centers around the life of one Valentine Michael Smith, a human being raised by Martians. Returning to Earth as a young adult "Stranger" follows Smith's interaction and transformation with Earth culture. Concepts such as war, clothing, and jealousy are (pun intended) alien to him. Ahead of its time, Smith was raised in a Martian culture where the concept of God is understood to be every living thing, whether it be plant, animal, or human. Just think of AVATAR before AVATAR and you'll get the general idea. While relying heavily on its Judeo-Christian influence, Heinlein's novel never comes across as preachy. Rather the heart of the story lies in the fascinating character study of Smith who is at once naive, and wise beyond his years. Heinlein's character embodies the idea that human beings can ultimately reshape their world for the better. The novel's conclusion is as satisfying as it is heart breaking.

Well there you have it. I highly recommend all four of these wonderful novels. In addition you might want to check out Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" and Heinlein's other famous work "Starship Troopers." Trust me you won't regret it.

Review: Robin Hood

Plot: This often told tale of the famous outlaw gets another Hollywood incarnation. This time however the focus is heavy on history instead of legend.

Review: The tale of Robin Hood is maybe one of the most often, if not the most often, stories brought to life on the big screen. Sixteen times it has graced the cinema, everything from the 1908 silent film "Robin Hood and his Merry Men" to Mel Brooks' 1993 spoof "Robin Hood: Men in Tights." The green clad outlaw has had more press than Heidi Montag's boobs. Yet in Academy Award nominated director Ridley Scott's 2010 version, the film focuses more on the events leading up to Sherwood Forest. Robin Longstride (Russell Crowe) returns to England under the guise of the deceased Robert Loxley bearing the crown of recently killed King Richard "The Lionheart." Surrendering the crown to the new King John (Oscar Isaac) Robin then returns to Nottingham agreeing to pretend to be Sir Walter Loxley's dead son in order to boost morale in the surrounding lands. Only Robin has to deal with more than he expected, including a traitorous villain named Sir Godfrey ("Sherlock Holmes" Mark Strong), bandits, overtaxed citizens, and a burgeoning love for the widow Lady Marion (Cate Blanchett). As a film goer I liked this turn from the norm. As I said the story has been told so many times it was nice to get a fresh take on the legend. The film touches more on England's war with France and the idea of liberty by law, going so far as to include the Magna Carta, the significant 1215 English document. Joining Russell Crowe in the titular role are familiar characters: Little John (Kevin Durand from "Wolverine" and television's "LOST"), Will Scarlett (Scott Grimes from "Critters" "ER" and "Band of Brothers") and Friar Tuck (Mark Addy from "The Full Monty" and "The Time Machine"). Crowe, who proves to be one of the greatest method actors since Marlon Brando, brings a gravitas and a gritty realism to the role as none of his predecessors before him have done. (Crowe actually spent 10 months reading books on Robin Hood in preparation for the role and 4 months training with a bow and arrow.) Unfortunately the supporting cast while enjoyable is severely under used, often relegated to the role of comic relief. Academy Award winning actress Cate Blanchett is solid as the strong willed and determined Lady Marion but her turn as a "warrior" is severely misguided and unconvincing. Oscar Isaac really stole the show as the sniveling and arrogant King John. Every time he was in a scene I felt like I needed a shower. Isaac played Robin Hood's primary antagonist perfectly; villainous but not in a "man in the black cloak" kind of way. "Robin Hood's" action sequences were strong and taunt with energy. Ridley Scott's pacing is decent although at 140 minutes Brian Helgeland's script could have used a little trimming. Also in some ways "Robin Hood" felt like a heavy handed way of setting up a sequel and although I liked its focus on fact, I found myself sometimes yearning for the legend. All in all however, "Robin Hood" kept my attention with its action, acting, and unique take on the often told legend.

My rating: 7/10

R.I.P. Dennis Hopper

The fact that Dennis Hopper was born in Dodge City, Kansas, the town lawman Wyatt Earp made famous, is further proof that as Einstein said, "God does not play dice with the universe." Dennis Hopper was anything if not a maverick in a Hollywood career that spanned over 50 years beginning with "Rebel Without A Cause" in 1955 and ending with the upcoming "Alpha and Omega." In an industry filled with the eccentric and the outlandish, even Hopper stood apart from the crowd, often as charismatic as he was enigmatic. "Easy Rider" catapulted Hopper into the limelight. Both writing, directing, and acting in the film, Hopper picked up an Academy Award nomination for best screenplay. His turns as Howard Payne in "Speed" and as the notorious nitrous oxide sniffing Frank Booth in "Blue Velvet" are also among his most memorable roles. That's not to say that all of Hopper's endeavors were noteworthy. For every "Cool Hand Luke" there was a "Super Mario Brothers." (Although don't let anyone tell you that "My Science Project" was a bad film. It's still a classic 80s sci-fi film in my opinion.) And as great as his onscreen performances were, his personal life was often in shambles. Married 5 times with 4 children, Hopper was one of Hollywood's most notorious drug addicts. He even hit on Paul Newman's wife once When you embrace the mode of an outlaw I guess you embrace all its facets however. From an acting standpoint three performances stand out in my mind. The first was not even a film role but a television role. In 1963 Dennis Hopper starred as Peter Vollmer, a young neo-Nazi inspired by the ghost of Adolph Hitler, in The Twilight Zone episode "He's Alive." In a show that often touched on relevant social topics, Hopper's character embodied bigotry and how citizens must guard against its malicious intents. Secondly, was a 1993 film written by Quentin Tarantino called "True Romance." (If you haven't checked this film out yet you are doing yourself a disservice. It is amazing.) The ten minute scene between Hopper's character Clifford Worley and Christopher Walken's character Vincenzo Coccotti is one of the best ever put on film. (I won't tell you the topic of discussion or the results if you haven't seen it but trust me it is epic.) But most of all I will remember Dennis Hopper as the alcoholic basketball loving father Shooter in the 1986 film "Hoosiers." "Hoosiers" is one of the best sports films of all-time and in no small part because of the Oscar nominated performance by Hopper. The writer Kenneth Elton Kesey once wrote "He who marches out of step hears a different drum." Dennis Hopper always heard a different drum and cinema history is the better for it. R.I.P. Dennis Hopper. Ride easy.

Out this Week

Releasing this week on DVD are the following: Alice in Wonderland, The Wolfman, Rescue Me Season 5, and The Man With No Name Trilogy on Blu-Ray.

Fustercluck in Middle Earth

The proposed two part "The Hobbit" film is having an uphill climb equal to that of Frodo and Sam scaling Mount Doom. It has not been a simple stroll through The Shire. I had thought that after the Christopher "I'm a bitter greedy old man" Tolkien lawsuit was thrown out in November of last year that the final hurdle had been leapt and the pathway cleared for a trek back to Middle Earth. I couldn't have been more wrong. Shortly after the lawsuit ended MGM (who shares the rights along with New Line) announced that it was "beginning a process to explore various strategic alternatives including operating as a standalone entity, forming strategic partnerships and evaluating a potential sale of the company." That's code for: "I'm broke bitch!" Since then MGM's woes have been nothing short of disastrous and "The Hobbit" has paid the price. The beginning of principal photography has been pushed back numerous times with the latest start time slated for November of this year. In the latest turn of events the film's director Guillermo Del Toro has said adios to the project. The acclaimed director of "Pan's Labyrinth" and "Hellboy" is still going to advise in a writer capacity and contribute on the special effects side, however. But you know what? I can't blame him. This movie has been in pre-production for almost two years. The freakin' guy moved to New Zealand with his wife and two daughters! I'd bolt too. The guy has other things he wants to do in his movie career and a director with that kind of talent does not deserve to be dicked around while MGM sits in the corner with their collective thumbs up their collective arses. Now the question becomes who is going to direct "The Hobbit" movies? The short list has Peter Jackson, Neil Blomkamp ("District 9"), Sam Raimi ("Spiderman"), and Alfonso Cuaron ("Children of Men"). My vote is for Peter Jackson but with all the problems surrounding this film I'm not sure any director is gonna touch this puppy with the Torch of Gondor until MGM gets its shit together. As of right now MGM's creditors have extended forbearance on their interest payments until July 14th. After MGM's creditors rejected the 1.5 billion dollar buyout offer from Time Warner, the current companies in line to buy MGM include both Summit Entertainment and Spyglass Entertainment. Listen I love the LOTR pictures and "The Hobbit" is still one of my all-time favorite books, so honestly I believe that the project is going to get done. Too much money has already been invested and you are guaranteed to get a return on your investment. In fact if these two films don't make $600 million combined domestically I'll eat Gandalf's staff. Bottom line however is that there are a lot of fans out there, myself included, who are tired of getting jerked around like this. So before MGM gets stampeded by a bunch of 40 year old virgins wearing "Frodo Lives" t-shirts, sporting plastic elf ears, carrying replica Anduril swords, and swearing at executives in Sindarin, I suggest they officially green light the project, get a new director, make some casting announcements, and sell the freakin' company already. In the meantime I'll have to content myself with watching the 1977 animated version with Orson Bean and John Huston.