Somehow, they’ve avoided doing this the way you would expect Hollywood to do it: instead of a ridiculous Jim-Carrey/Dr-Seuss style farce, this film has the guts to try to do something meaningful. It doesn’t shy away from exploring a slightly darker side of the story, and I wasn’t surprised to hear a couple of the littler children in the audience crying from fear at a couple of points.

The film does a great job of capturing what it feels like to be a 9 year-old boy, taking you into his real world at first, and then bridging into the fantasy world without any winks or nods: the fantasy world is portrayed as just as real; it’s more melancholy than fantastic. It’s the kind of movie that would do well to have a child psychologist as one of the bonus disc commentary tracks; there’s a lot of unspoken depth to some of Max’s interactions with the wild things… which represent aspects of his own troubles and emotions. The film’s tagline suits it well: “There’s one in all of us.”

There are a lot of poignant moments, the only problem is that these were sometimes far between — the film did feel a little bit long at times, and probably could have been tightened up a bit more with some judicious edits.

This film began it’s life as a short by director Neill Blomkamp called “Alive in Joberg” — well worth checking out if you’d like to get an feel for this film ahead of time. In fact, that short attracted the attention of Peter Jackson, who brought Blomkamp on board to direct a film based on the Halo franchise. That fell through — perhaps investors were nervous about this unproven director? — and Jackson and Blomkamp instead turned “Alive in Joberg” into District 9.

I bet the people who dumped the Halo film are kicking themselves now.

The ending leaves open the opportunity for a sequel; I just hope that if they do one, they find a way to make it feel as real and gritty and contemporary as the original.

Early on in the film, I was unimpressed by the characterization of the children; they seemed far too mature and “western” — they acted and spoke in ways that children their age would never do. During the bulk of the film, the oh-so-American Who Wants To Be A Millionaire setting and music killed a lot of the drama (incidentally: the game show company co-produced this film, so it’s not surprising if it feels like feature-length product-placement.) But finally, in the end, the romance just wasn’t there for me — they only knew each other as little children, and yet we’re expected to accept that their relationship is infinitely deep and meaningful. I just didn’t feel it.

Really, this is the game that should have been released on Xbox Live in the first place — the first Xbox 360 Worms game was just too stripped down and simplified; I don’t think I had ever played a Worms game with less weaponry, backgrounds, and soundbanks. Worms 2: Armageddon adds back some of the classics, such as the Holy Hand Grenade and Super Sheep, while keeping the options simplified to ensure more fair on-line competition. If you want to relive the glory days of 90s gaming, or are looking for a fun game for the whole family that isn’t about twitchy reflexes, this game is easy to recommend at just 800 Microsoft points.

Back in the day, Team 17 was exciting and innovative, but how long can they go on just remaking and releasing Worms 2? Hopefully the rumours about an upcoming Xbox 360 version of Alien Breed are true…

I’m pleased to tell you that the game was not a disappointment! It’s been getting consistently good reviews, averaging around 80% scores, and I would definitely agree. It’s a solid Triple-A title, good both as a game, and as a sequel to the Ghostbusters franchise.

This isn’t your typical FPS run-and-gun style game… rather, the most unique thing about the Ghostbusters has to be their ghostbusting equipment and tactics, and that’s what I find the most fun about this game: you bust ghosts just like they do on-screen in the films. Your proton pack fires an eratic beam which is used to wear down and eventually capture the ghost. You then toss out a trap, and work to wrangle the ghost over top of it, and hold him there while he is sucked in. This all works wonderfully in 3D, and adds an almost sport-fishing adrenaline rush to most encounters.

The script is not quite “Ghostbusters 3″ as some had been billing it — Aykroyd and Ramis didn’t really write it, they just tweaked the script written by the game company. It’s a sequel, but tied very heavily to the events of the films; there is a lot of “fan service” here. The plot revolves around re-busting a lot of the ghosts from the films, and learning more about some, like the librarian. The ultimate villain is Ivo Shandor — the architect of the building in the first film (who, incidentally, was originally planned to be the final form of Gozer in that film… but now I’m getting too geeky for ya probably…) In the end, the script is amusing and interesting, and there’s nothing quite so cool as hearing the original actors play these roles again after all these years.

Games like these usually have multi-player modes that are just “tacked on” and unsatisfying, but not so with Ghostbusters… they have well thought-out modes and activities — you’re not shooting at each other of course, but working cooperatively (and sometimes competitively) to trap ghosts and accomplish goals. The only downside — and I would say this is the biggest strike against the game as a whole — is that it doesn’t feature split-screen play — neither in the main campaign, nor in multi-player mode.

I highly recommend this for any gamer that likes the Ghostbusters franchise; you won’t be disappointed! And even if you’re not willing to pay top dollar for a new game, keep it in mind when they reduce the price later on! It’s definitely a unique gaming experience.

Starting with the old man’s backstory was an interesting decision; I kept thinking it might have played better if we didn’t know him at all at first, with his backstory coming out as flashbacks later in the film…

I used to watch the original 1960s Star Trek series on Saturday mornings as a kid, and always enjoyed it. Later, I really came to love The Next Generation in the early 90s, and Deep Space Nine in the late 90s, and read many of the paperbacks based on those series. Unfortunately, Voyager and Enterprise were both huge disappointments to me; I always hoped for them to try something new with the franchise, as they had with DS9… would have loved to see the long-rumoured Star Fleet Academy series, for example.

The films have always been really hit-or-miss — The Wrath of Khan and First Contact are my favourites, and the only ones I rewatch regularly. When I heard that J.J. Abrams of Lost fame was going to reboot the Star Trek franchise, I definitely took interest. The early trailers and promotional material looked very promising, and definitely got my hopes up that we could finally see Star Trek done right.

I walked into the new film with high expectations, and still managed to come out of it completely blown away. It returns to the action-packed roots of the original television show, with a relentless pace and some fantastic action set pieces. The casting is pretty much perfect: Chris Pine is a fantastically watchable Kirk, and works very well in the slightly more Indiana Jones-style role (meaning, as a believable hero who doesn’t always win fist fights). Although I was worried about Zachary Quinto (Sylar on Heroes) playing Spock, I found him totally believable in the role, and not at all distracting. Karl Urban (Eomer in The Lord of the Rings) was a lot of fun as Bones, and a great choice. The remaining characters were clearly cast with less of a worry about them being carbon-copies of the original actors, and that’s probably a good thing; definitely look forward to getting more time with them in future films.

The story is pretty tight the whole way through; very well focused on Kirk and Spock’s stories, though mainly from Kirk’s point of view. There are some plot points that strain credulity a bit if you think about them, but in all cases you can see that they are done for the sake of keeping the story moving. To my surprise, I think the only aspect I found less than awesome was the elder Spock’s presence in the film — maybe we’ve just done this with Leonard Nimoy one too many times? — but I do appreciate that it was mainly intended as “fan service” to tie the original franchise and new film together.

It’s definitely worth seeing this film in the theatre; there have been so many films lately that have seemed overhyped to me when I finally saw them… but Star Trek does not disappoint. I cannot wait to own this on DVD, and am already eagerly awaiting more films with this cast.

4 out of 5 stars

I’ve always thought of board games as a fun thing to do together; but I have to admit, it drives me crazy to sit and play a board game that is based 100% on the roll of the dice, with little or no skill or personal choices involved at all. As a parent, I’ve come to realize that almost all of the “traditional” American boardgames for kids are extremely unsatisfying, and in an era of video games, even the kids get bored of them. But parents still buy games like Sorry and Trouble because of the nostalgic feeling that “I played that when I was a kid.”

The basic premise of Carcassonne is that each player draws a tile piece in turn, which is used to create a little medieval countryside. You draw the tile at random, and it can only fit in certain places — that’s the random “every time you play it’s different” part. But where you place it is your choice, and then you have an option of placing a “follower” on the piece which can score you points. You only have a certain number of followers to put in play (though sometimes you can get them back and use them again) — and therein lies the strategy. Do I place a follower on this piece, or wait in hope of a better move later? If I place him, how can I place him to score the most points?

The beauty of it is that it is simple enough for a child to learn, and yet interesting enough to keep adults entertained as well. Furthermore, if you like the basic game, there are over a dozen expansions available to it, to expand the game and change up the rules, etc.

We first played Carcassonne on the Xbox, actually, and got quite into it — this past weekend, I picked up an inexpensive “travel” version of Carcassonne which fits in a little cloth sack. The Xbox version had lead me to think that the scoring, etc., would be difficult — but I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was actually very simple and straightforward. The average Carcassonne game (without expansions) lasts about half an hour, which is comfortably within the attention span of my kids.

I just can’t find any fault with this game; it’s fun, straightforward, and addictive even. Well, I guess there is one thing: every board game suffers if someone knocks the board, and this game is particularly easy to mess up in that fashion; perhaps best to play on carpet or something that helps prevent the tiles from moving very easily… anyway, give it a try!

Lightsaber Duels

So, when the game doesn’t allow you to actually swing a lightsaber, you have to ask yourself — what was the point?  If you love the cartoon, and are having kids over, you might have some fun renting it… but can’t recommend purchasing it when the core single-player “campaign” can be completed in about half an hour.

Too much Diaz, not enough Winslet.

A fine family adventure film — particularly enjoyed Ronan’s performance. Alas, the plot was just a tad shallower than I would have hoped.

You get what you would expect from Knightley — a good performance of the sort she excels at; but Fiennes impressed me more. I never really felt any chemistry between the Duchess and Charles, and that basically undermined everything for me.

Makes you realize how important Rachel Weisz was to the franchise. Have to applaud them for coming up with a new idea for a Mummy, but unfortunately, it never gets better than an idea.

Been a fan of Ledger since Roar, and his Joker was definitely enthralling — but this film was too long, and not really enough of an improvement over Batman Begins.

4 stars (out of 5)

(You might think at this point that I’m going to continue this post by stating, “I agree with this policy, but not this,” and “I understand this point of view, but not that” — but that’s not what it’s about.)

We are confronting a lot of really big issues in our times, and it is understandable that these kinds of issues can get folks really riled up — whether it’s health care, or global warming, or abortion, or the economy, or something else — chances are, if you have any political interest at all, then there is probably at least one thing that you consider to be of pinnacle importance.

Lately though, it seems like more and more folks — when they find that one pinnacle issue — just completely jump whole-hog onto that party’s bandwagon. “If I agree with them on this one thing, then they must be right about everything else, right?” For example: you aren’t allowed to be against both abortion and global warming, because one party champions one of those causes, and the other party champions the other. The party’s supporters say, “you’re either with us, or against us,” so you’re going to have to give up your position on one of those issues if you want to fit in.

I’m weary, so very weary, of all the groups who claim you must vote based on their one issue… if you don’t vote for precisely whom they tell you, then you are going to risk being ostracized, or worse. Heck, they might be right about that issue: but constantly beating me over the head with the notion that I’m not allowed to vote any way but their way is maddening to say the least. If I really truly and honestly “have no choice” but to vote for a certain party, then what’s the point of living in a democracy at all?

Thankfully, our political systems in North America have some how managed to keep some semblance of balance in place… but I find myself wishing more and more that there were more than just two viable parties to vote for. (Emphasis on “viable”… there is a little more choice in Canada, in theory, but not in practice lately it seems.)

I’ve never taken any sort of political science course, but I have to wonder what will happen if this partisan divide keeps growing… and I often wonder whether modern technologies and knowledge will ever bring us a new or revised democratic system completely unlike those in practice now… (could there ever be, for example, a system where we vote directly on issues, instead of for representatives?)

P.S. When I moved down to the U.S., there was a lot of talk about how most folks are either a registered Republican or a registered Democrat. The idea of “registering” as one or the other seems like a horrific invasion of privacy to me — almost like a voluntary surrendering of the basic and arguably most important freedom that democracy gives us. (I know, technically you can change your vote in the privacy of the booth — but still.) I understand the notion of throwing your support behind the party that you believe in — but in the modern computerized world where everything about us is tracked and shared among government agencies, I’d rather not have my political “orientation” on file for them to use to discriminate against me, thanks!

1 star (out of 5)

4 stars (out of 5)

4 and a half stars (out of 5)