Prometheus (2012, directed by Ridley Scott)

- because the Alien franchise already has a large and established fanbase, there are already a lot of articles pointing out its uncleverness.  I will not write them out here as there are too many of them and they have already been covered.

As an Alien fan I was extremely disappointed.  Even as a stand-alone movie it's terrible.  It's an expensive movie that barely works as a "B" grade horror.  I paid money to see this in the theatre and I wish I could get my money back.  Don't pay money to see this movie.

The Hurt Locker (2008, directed by Kathryn Bigelow)

- the beginning sequence shows a bomb disposal team sending in a robot on wheels to deliver explosives to an IED so that they can detonate it.  However the robot breaks down.  A wheel or axle breaks or something.  So the leader puts on an armored bomb disposal suit and walks out toward the bomb to manually place the explosives.  Lo and behold the IED is triggered the the leader dies.  When the robot broke down, why didn't they just pull it back using its tether, fix the wheel and then try sending it out again?  Or send another robot?  It was really dumb of the leader to try and do it manually instead of trying to use the thousand times less risky robot alternative.

- in the middle of the movie the team gets pinned down by some snipers when they meet a mercenary group.  A lot of the mercenaries get shot and so the team takes their .50 calibre sniper rifle.  Now this is a big gun.  I'm pretty sure it takes specialized training, skill and many hours of extra training time in order for one to be capable of hitting anything that far away using that weapon.  I don't think it's plausible that anyone on the disposal team would have enough skill to use it as was shown in the movie.
- also, the .50 calibre rifle jammed because there was blood on the ammunition?  That's pretty lame if someone's design for a weapon could withstand having some blood on it... I mean especially since it will be used on a battlefield... where there's lots of blood.

This was a pretty good movie.  I'd pay a rental fee to watch it.

The Eagle (2011, directed by Kevin Macdonald)

- so the Commander's plan to save his patrol from being killed was to walk out of the fort with a platoon of legionaires, form a turtle, fight off the barbarians, rescue his patrol by forming a circle around them and then walk back to the fort?  Even if that did succeed in getting some of the patrol rescued, you'd probably lose just as many, or more men in the effort to save them.  The cost/benefit analysis shows negative and such a lame attempt should not have been made.
- in continuing with this... didn't the Romans have bows & arrows? (they clearly did in Gladiator if that's any indication)  Shouldn't there be some archers covering the turtle's advance and soften up the enemy?

- while looking for clues as to the whereabouts of the eagle, Marcus and Esca are riding their horses through the highlands minding their own business when suddenly they're attacked!  They're able to overpower their attacker and then they find out the attacker is a legionaire from the lost legion.  And so the legionaire doesn't want to get involved or give out much information.  He has a life in Scotland now with presumably a wife and two kids.  So why did the legionaire attack Marcus and Esca in the first place?  Why didn't he just hide or stay home?

- so when the painted Scottish people finally catch up to Marcus and Esca, the leader of the painted people show Marcus and Esca what happens to betrayers.  The leader drags the young boy that Esca talked to back at the village when they first left to escape.  The leader kills the young boy.  So the painted people have chased Marcus and Esca for a couple of days on foot.  Hardly any sleep (if any at all), hardly any food (if any)... and I'm supposed to believe that the young boy traveled with them all throughout the chase?  Not bloody likely.  The boy would not have been able to keep up.

- after the fight with the painted people they make a funeral pyre and burn the body of the fallen legionaire.  Where did they get any dry wood to make the pyre.  It rained throughout the entire last act of the movie.

- why does the music score sound like Scottish music?  I realize that the story takes place in Northern Britain aka present-day Scotland, but aren't the Scottish the bad guys in this movie?  Sure you have Scottish music when the painted people are on the screen to queue the audience, but why do other parts sound Scottish.  The music at the end credits goes into a jig.  The score should sound Roman to highlight the Roman hero of this movie.

It was an OK movie but I wouldn't pay money to see it.

Dead Man Walking (1995, directed by Tim Robbins)

- Matt, the Death Row inmate, his hair was perfect throughout the movie; the hair on his head as well as his facial mustache and goatee.  Does the prison allow him to have and use his own scissors (ie sharp objects) to trim his hair?  Due to security reasons he's probably not allowed access to any form of knife, blade, scissors or any metal object that could be formed into such.  So the prison barber trims it everyday for him?

This movie was pretty good and I would pay money to watch it.

Apocalypto (2006, directed by Mel Gibson)

- they should rename this movie Deus Ex Machinapocalypto.  Jaguar's Paw (the hero of the movie) is saved once by an eclipse and then again by the sight of the arrival of Europeans on the beach.  How lazy and lame for a scriptwriter.  Jaguar's Paw didn't have to do anything.  He could've just sat down and played in the mud and the scriptwriters would've had aliens from outer-space come down and save him

- after the eclipse the captives are to be "disposed" of so they use them for sport.  So do they not need any more human sacrifices?  Ever?  Was that it?  And then afterwards when the hero gets away, the rest of the movie is basically an extended chase sequence.  Not that there's anything wrong with that.  The Road Warrior and Terminators 1 and 2 end in chases.  But those chases had more at stake (such as helping a whole group of people to escape and saving the earth from a robot apocalypse).  This was just one person (and his wife and kids I guess).  Not that I'm saying the just one person doesn't matter but it was really inconsequential if Jaguar's Paw lived or not on the grand scale of things.  Maybe if he went back to rescue his people, or not just his, all the people,  it would be more interesting.

I wouldn't pay any money to watch this movie.

Insomnia (2002, directed by Christopher Nolan)

- how many cabins does that author (Robin Williams) have?  He has an apartment in the city, but he also has two other cabins?  The one cabin at the beginning of the film by the beach where he killed the girl, and then another cabin at the end of the movie where he keeps his stuff?  I don't think he made a lot of money from sales of his books so I guess cabins are really cheap in Alaska.

- this movie has an underwater action sequence.  While chasing the suspect, the main character gets caught under some logs in the water.  He was under water for a couple of minutes, does a lot of physical activity trying to surface and yet still had enough air and energy to find his way out of the water and all this while wearing a suit jacket and tie and his shoes and being in near arctic cold water.

- earlier in the film the police talk about what sidearms they carry.  This includes their primary as well as their backup weapons.  But at the end of the movie during the shootout, neither of the police officers have a backup weapon.

- why did the hotel that the LA Police officers stay in have decent drapes?  I've only stayed in hotels in cities where the sun does not stay up for 24 hours but they still had pretty good drapes that blocked out the light in the morning when the sun did rise.  Why didn't that Alaska hotel have those drapes?  (Yes, I know the point of the movie is to not allow Al Pacino to sleep...)

This movie was pretty good.  I wouldn't mind paying for it as a rental DVD.

The Postman (1997, directed by Kevin Costner)

- so the bad general drafted Shakespeare/The Postman.  The general gave lectures to the postman and even invited him to his office to talk about stuff.  Smart stuff too, not just about the weather but how smart each of them was.  Then later in the movie, when the postman goes to negotiate with the general to not raze the town, the general doesn't recognise him?  Granted that the postman shaved his beard and mustache, but still, the general didn't recognise him?  That's lame.

- Shakespeare, before becoming the Postman, is running away from the bad guys in the rain, slips, and then he finds himself inside a US Postal Service truck.  The driver is long dead and mummified.  Shakespeare rummages through the corpse's clothes and find a lighter.  And the lighter still works?  It's been years since the lighter was last refilled with lighter fluid.  After all those years the lighter fluid would have long evaporated/dried out.  I don't think the lighter would work.  But this point doesn't affect the plot at all though so I'll let it go.


Don't pay money to watch this movie.

The Lovely Bones (2009, directed by Peter Jackson)

- the bad guy dug sort of an underground bunker he used to trap and kill Susie.  He drew a sketch of this bunker and I think the figures said it was six feet deep and six feet long and I'm guessing six feet wide.  (But in the movie the bunker looks much bigger than that and in practical terms, it would have to be.)  So even if we took at a minimum the bunker was six by six by six it would take him longer than one night to dig it and then 'furnish' it.  He did it in December so the cornfield where he dug it was bare.  The corn was not growing yet.  It was an open field.  And this cornfield was in the middle of a suburb, not out in a rural area.  And it's next to the school and we see that many people pass through the field.  So no one saw a guy digging a giant hole?  And where did he put the dirt that he dug up?  There was no mound of dirt around.  I guess he could've put it in his truck but his truck would not be able to fit all of it.  He could've dumped it somewhere and made multiple trips with his truck.  But the thing is, after he committed the murder, he then filled in the bunker.  Where did he get the dirt to fill in the bunker?

- when the bad guy brought the safe to dispose of in the sinkhole, he and that other guy spend 5 minutes turning the safe on its ends to get it to the sinkhole.  Why didn't he just park his truck closer to the sinkhole?  But going back a bit, how did the bad guy get the safe into his truck in the first place all by himself?  Going back even more, how did he get it up the stairs out of his basement by himself?

- at the end of the movie Susie possesses the body of that other girl.  If Susie could possess a physical body, why didn't she possess a body right after she died and then write down the name of the bad guy (she was his neighbour and did know is name afterall) or give the police some other obvious clue or lead so that he could be caught much faster?  It's better than letting your family go through all that turmoil and also you could go to heaven faster.

I wouldn't pay money to watch this movie.  Good thing I didn't.

Hanna (2011, directed by Joe Wright)

- the main flaw in this movie was already addressed in the movie.  Eric trains Hanna for 15 years or so to assassinate a woman but Hanna doesn't have a sure-fire way of verifying the identity of that woman.  Granted Hanna asked her, Marissa (the target), a few questions.  However, as we saw, that wasn't good enough.  Hanna killed the wrong woman.

- to raise a kid in isolation for 15 years and then expect her to get captured then taken to a secret location, perform an assassination, escape, and then make it to Berlin is ridiculous.  And this kid, even though she's skilled in hunting and escape & evasion, she hasn't seen a light and a lightswitch, a television, or an airplane before in her life.  When she broke into her "grandmother's" house, she broke the window, reached in and unturned the latch.  How did she know to do this?

- why didn't Eric pick up the gun from the fight in the subway station?  He could've used it later on.  Also regarding firearms... Eric trains Hanna to use a pistol while in the arctic.  But just because you become good at one type of pistol doesn't mean you'll be automatically good at every type of pistol you come across.  Each pistol type has different characteristics (different barrel lengths, different mechanics inside, different trigger pulls) and even ammunition of the same calibre can have different characteristics (different bullet weight, powder grains). 

It was an OK movie.  I still wouldn't pay to watch it though.

Salt (2010, directed by Phillip Noyce)

- I don't know the details of the President of the United States' underground bunker and nuclear weapons control room but I hope in real life that if the nuclear control room is locked down that you cannot get into it by shooting away a part of the wall with a handheld rifle and get to the door's control panel buttons to open the door.  They made the glass observation window bulletproof (why do they have a glass observation window anyways?) but they didn't make the wall bulletproof.  The government contractors should've made the whole control room out of the glass.

- Further, the bunker's door itself, once it was closed, the SWAT team only needed a portable welder and less than 10 minutes to get it open.  They should need a barrage of artillery to get that door open but they didn't.  There must be bank vaults that have tougher doors than that.  You would think that the President's personal safety and the nuclear weapons control room would have a better door.

It was an OK action movie however I'm glad I didin't pay money to watch it.

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011, directed by Joe Johnston)

- There are some African-American soldiers strategically placed in scenes throughout the movie that would make you believe that they were not segregated during World War Two.  Are the filmmakers trying to revise history?  It would've been better if they didn't show any so as to not make one even think about this if they're embarrassed by this fact.  And then they go on to suggest that Asian American soldiers were not segregated either.  In their attempt to make the past seem better they actually made it a little white lie which is much worse.

-So Captain America's shield is made from a very, very rare metal of which all the known material of that metal on planet earth has been made into a saucer and is held in a semi-permanent army research facility in Europe?

I wouldn't pay money to watch this movie but it was OK watching it for free. 

Cowboys & Aliens (2011, directed by Jon Favreau)

- Is this movie supposed be fun adventure or serious adventure?  Raiders of the Lost Ark is a fun adventure.  Conan the Barbarian (the version released in 1982 directed by John Milius) is a serious adventure.  From the title you would think that this movie is supposed to be a fun adventure.  However, the movie didn't feel fun.  The tone felt like the filmmakers wanted us to take the movie seriously.  But when I tried to take the movie seriously, I couldn't stop laughing.  The movie did not work; it needed to decide whether or not to be a fun movie or a serious movie.

- Ella, the good alien, says that the bad aliens are kidnapping humans to do experiments on them to find out human weaknesses.  How about using that wrist-gun they use to shoot holes through a human's torso?  Or piercing their pointy fingers through a human's abdomen?  Are those weakness in humans not enough?  And then later Ella says when they're planning to attack the bad alien mining ship that humans have an advantage because the bad aliens underestimate the humans; the humans are like insects to them.  So then why do the bad aliens have a kidnap a whole bunch of humans to find out their weaknesses?

- Ella says that the mining ship is just a scouting mission.  She says that if the scouts get away, then more bad aliens will arrive and take over earth.  So Ella blows up the scout ship.  So this means no more bad aliens will ever come earth, right?  Wrong.  You would think that the scouts sent out signals to the mothership.  Or you would think that if the mothership loses contact with its scout, it would investigate why it hadn't heard back from them.  Nope.  There'll be more bad aliens visiting earth.  Sequel?  Probably not, the box office returns for this movie were low despite it's large budget and star-studded cast.

- alien spaceship uses rockets?  The aliens have conquered interstellar travel and they did it using rockets?

I wouldn't pay money to watch this movie but it's ok to watch it for free.

Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol (2011, directed by Brad Bird)

Nuclear missiles

- Why did the main bad guy only order one nuclear missile to be launched from the submarine?  There is dialogue in the movie where he says something along the lines of We only need one to do the trick.  But the submarine has more than one to launch.  I don't know the exact number available but it's more than one.  (I think it's probably 12 or 16.)  Why not launch two?  Or three?  Or a better idea would be to launch all of them?  You want it to be the end of the world anyways, what are you saving those other missiles for?  This guys was a professor and strategist?  If he was really that smart then he'd launch more than one.  He doesn't know anything about statistics?  Did he not consider that something could go wrong with the one missile?  After all, it is rocket science. 

-  The United States has many satellites (again, I don't know the exact number) orbiting the earth whose purpose is to detect missile launches.  This is so that if a nuclear strike is launched against them, the US can launch its own missiles to retaliate even before the incoming missiles detonate on their soil and the US's capability to strike back has been hampered.  Do you think that the US is going to wait for the incoming missile(s) to detonate before they launch a retaliatory strike?  Well, the US protocols for the response to a nuclear attack are top secret so we'll probably never know.

- The missile launches from the submarine.  The missile goes into orbit and then comes back down again to hit San Francisco.  The missile then careens off of a building and then splashes into the ocean.  This is incorrect.  Nuclear ballistic missiles have MIRVs; Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles.  When the one big missile points back down towards SF and it's on its way back down to earth, the nose cone detaches and ten to 12 (don't know the exact number) MIRVs deploy.  The 10 or so MIRVs are now like 10 nuclear bombs free-falling towards the SF area.  There should have been 10 or so nuclear armed objects falling towards SF ready to explode, not just one.  And I don't know for sure because it's top secret but there's probably no way to stop the MIRVs once they're detached from the big missile.

Granted this is a Mission: Impossible movie.  There are technologies in the movie which do not exist yet (that the public is aware of) and so a lot of the gadgets aren't verifiable.  But the above issues concerning the missile are.  This is a techno-thriller so they have to get the tech correct.  It is unforgivable that they didn't.

I paid money to watch this movie and I wish I could get that money back.

Basketball is a stupid sport

The clip below clearly demonstrates why basketball is a stupid sport (let's say, as compared to ice hockey)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR3NhE8fBs8&feature=g-logo&context=G299baa7FOAAAAAAAQAA

The hoop
a)  Except for the earth rotating and orbiting around the sun, the target (the hoop) in is always in the same place all the time - the x, y and z axes.  From side to side, up and down, front and back, it's always in the same place.  Concerning the front and back axis, you even get a backboard in which you can make a bankshot which makes it even easier.  Basketball players can shoot hoops; what's the big deal in hitting a predictable, single, static target that's always in the same place?
- in hockey, there's a goaltender.  Granted that the hockey net is bigger than the hoop, the goalie cannot cover the entire net, and although there are multiple targets to shoot at, those targets are always moving.  At one moment the goalie will cover one part of the net preventing a shot from getting through and leaving another target open.  But then a moment later (a moment meaning one second) the goalie will cover that target and leave another part of the net open.  Depending on the angle from where the shooter is, there may not be any targets available thereby forcing the shooter to move or pass.  In hockey there are multiple targets unpredictably changing where they are on the x and y axes.

Foul shots
b)  See point a)
- in hockey the equivalent is the penalty shot.  It's unpredictable and exciting.  It's a rare occurrence and it usually actually matters to the outcome of the game if the player is able to score a goal or not (in contrast to point e))

Lame defence
c)  In basketball, the defence is impotent.  We can see it in the clip.  The defender was set up right in front of the shooter- there was no better position in which to be in.  But all the defender could do is feebly wave his arms and jump up- and feebly wave his arms.  With any luck, maybe he could touch the ball as the shooter shoots ruining the shooter's intended trajectory of the ball towards the static hoop.  Even when the offence is on the move and is dribbling the ball (having to dribble the ball is in itself stupid), the defender has little chance of getting the ball without "fouling" the opposing player.  The only way the defence can get the ball is if the offence makes a mistake (ie loses control of the ball when dribbling) or after they shoot it.

Clock running
d)  Related to point c), the offence can just hang onto the ball and run the clock.  Having a 24 second shot clock rule just proves the point that the defence is impotent.
- in hockey the defence can strip the the player of the puck.  The defender can get right in the offence's space and go get the puck.  The offence needs skill and determination for his team to keep possession of the puck (by either fending off the defender, skating away or passing it off to a teammate).  There's no need for a shot clock because all players are in danger of losing possession of the puck at any time.

...Contrast this with the basketball player.  There were six seconds left in the game and all the basketball player had to do was just stand there to keep possession.  The defender couldn't do anything to get the ball.  The offence then just ran the clock and then took a shot at a single, unmoving target to win the game.

Easy to score points
e)  Average basketball games have scoreboards that go from 80 points to over a 100 points per game... per team!  This means each team is making 40 to 50 baskets per game.  So a player scores a basket.  How can you get excited over this when there'll probably be 40 to 50 more baskets for your team by the time the game ends?
- for the highlight reel for the evening news, for hockey you know what the feature.  You feature the goals scored.  And for a goal to be scored in hockey there're a lot of spectacular moves and skill involved.  For basketball, what do you choose for the highlight reel?  The baskets scored?  Which ones of the 40 or 50 do you show?  Because they happen so often, how the baskets are scored is so mundane.  So you choose the ones that might look cool or have some flash and then try to make excitable commentary about them.

Basketball is boring and just a sweaty ballet.

The Marine (2006, directed by John Bonito)

- I really liked the intercontextual reference bit with Robert Patrick.

- as with a lot of other movies, someone's brought back to life using CPR as if CPR is some sort of magic spell that works all the time. To all the screenwriters out there; bringing someone back to life is a cheap and lame way to create tension.  It's just lazy.  I don't have personal experience with CPR being used on a human but if it's done correctly the victim's ribs should be cracked and in the slim chance that they do revive they're probably not going to feel well enough to say anything immediately, let alone move.

Wasn't expecting much.  It did what it set out to do.

I didn't mind watching this movie for free but only because I like watching movies.

The Green Lantern (2011, directed by Martin Campbell)

- the Martin-Baker Zero-zero ejection seat has been in use since the 20th century.  The zero-zero means that a pilot can use the ejection seat a zero speed AND zero altitude.  When Hal's 21st century fight plane is falling uncontrollably towards the ground, why does the ground controller say something along the lines that Hal is approaching minimum altitude to eject?  His ejection seat will work at zero altitude.

- regarding the space alien that comes to earth to give Hal the ring... why does he need a spaceship?  Later we see that the being that can use the ring can fly through the air.  They can even fly through outer-space from solar system to solar system.  All without the use of any other type of technology.  So why does that other alien have a spaceship at all?

- Hal disguise is a mask.  The mask is just a raccoon mask that covers maybe a couple of centimetres around his eyes.  Does he really expect no one to recognize him when he turns into the Green Lantern

I didn't mind watching this movie for free, but only because I like to watch movies.