Thor Is A Sequel but Is It Thunderous?

Allow me to rant for a moment.  I will get to the movie, Thor: The Dark World, but I need to set something up.

One thing you need to know is I will generally forgive adaptations be they novel or comic book providing they do a few things.  Tell me a good story and stick to the essentials of the original story.  They need to capture theme and mood that transports me just as the original did.  Do this, and I will forgive a lot of indiscretions. If you are going to do a show called Sleepy Hollow then changing Ichabod Crane into, oh I don't know, say a resurrected Revolutionary War Soldier who married a witch and is now working with a cop who happens to be one of two of the witnesses of the coming Apocalypse, I may be a bit less forgiving.   I mean why bother naming your characters after those in a famous story?  Don't get me wrong, I like Sleepy Hollow.  It's just that it has zero to do with the original story.  I digress...

I did not regularly read Thor comics as a kid, teen or adult.  I have read perhaps only handful total.  I always found him too egotistical for my taste and thought his over-sized hammer kind of silly, even for a comic book.  That said I have liked the movies.  I feel that, from what I know of the comics, the movies do meet my requirements for an adaptation. The first had that majestic spectacle of a great play, a clear mark of its director, Kenneth Branagh.  It had a powerhouse actor, Anthony Hopkins in the form of Odin and pretty straight storyline.  So what makes Thor: The Dark World different? It has more character and less over-driven action sequences.  Although I didn't see it in 3D, I am pretty sure it would be pointless pay the extra money so I could wear the glasses.

THERE BE SPOILERS HERE!!!!!

Thor: The Dark World is a comic book movie.  It takes its time to find its legs, and it doesn't really take any risks except one at the end that I thought was pretty pointless.  There was something though that once it does start moving draws us into the story.  Like most comic book movies some things are never going to make sense.  It is the nature of the beast plus the fact there is probably a ton of different back stories and alternate stories and other world stories from the comic book world to sift through.  It is probably why all comic book movies eventually must make their own way much to the fans' chagrin.  The other thing is this: this Thor movie is darker and at the same time not as serious as the first movie was.  Like Tony Stark in The Avengers, we have moments of fun such as the intern's intern and their sudden romance, the naked professor and, of course Loki suddenly becoming Captain America.  There are some moments of nudge, nudge, wink, wink fun.  Just ride it.  I was also not over-whelmed by the battle sequences.  I have to admit that in several of the comic book movies, the battles are almost too long.  Yes, I know every Avenger needed screen time, but it just seemed to go on and on.  The battles in Thor: The Dark World are tight and creative.  There was also more character and back story, but the narration at the beginning was over the top, but then again, IT IS A COMIC BOOK MOVIE.

THERE ARE HUGE SPOILERS COMING!!!!!!

I want to take a moment's thought and point to the Loki storyline.  There are moments when the movie is not Thor's but Loki's.  I loved the whole idea of a redemption storyline.  Tom Hiddleston has played the character to the hilt.  He owns the screen when he's on it.  The killing of Loki was from a comic book/morality tale point of view perfect and then...it is just completely trashed with Loki suddenly becoming Odin in disguise.  Let's face it, the movies have pretty well set up future villains, and unless we desperately need one for Thor 3, the noble death of Loki should have stood. Did Loki fool Thor by being stabbed using illusion and then play dead? Did he replace the guard sent to find Thor and him and then replace Odin, and as the trickster god fool everyone including King Odin, Thor and all his buddies, even though Thor told Loki to stop the illusion?  It did not need to become a clever plot twist. It wasn't. It stole the moment from the audience.


Stay for the credits.  Half way through the credits we meet The Collector and have a statement about the Infinity Stones which connects the Thanos appearance in Avengers, and the upcoming Guardians of the Galaxy.  We now have two stones (there are six): the Tesseract and Aether.  The Collector is one of the oldest aliens as is Thanos who originally collected all six stones to make the Gauntlet of Infinity a Guardian story. The last scene after the credits is like the one in The Avengers, just kind of a treat.

Overall, I liked the movie.  Is it the best, no, but it is fun to watch, and it was nice to have some story rather than one continuous action sequence. I will buy the DVD when it comes out.

The Election

I've actually got very little to say.  What passed and failed yesterday was not unexpected.

 Off year elections are usually dominated by issue-driven and older voters. These voters tend to be conservative. It's why unattached recall elections work and why states nation wide frequently see the more radical elections in the off year.  I had hopes that Amendment 66 to fund schools would pass, but I knew that given the off-off year of the ballot issue and the state's abysmal record on supporting school bills or for that matter any tax bill it was highly unlikely. In all honestly the only way to help our schools, roads, and many other state issues is to find a way to repeal TABOR.  It was also true for the only tax issue likely to pass because most of the folks who passed the legalization of marijuana were also the group not likely to show up to oppose the taxes on it while those who were opposed to the original issue were.

I am also glad that reason ruled on the secession vote, and most of the counties involved voted no. As one news writer I read pointed out that given traditional turn out in the eleven counties the actual number of people who might support this issue was really about two percent of the Colorado electorate.  Although given the political nature turn out in an off year, I must admit some surprise that it was not closer in several of the counties. Still, many also had to realize the futility of the attempt since it was unlikely the state congress would support it or the national congress who can currently barely tie its metaphorical shoes would even take it up.

The fact is that if you wanted 66 to pass or to change out the extremely conservative board in Douglas County or pass even the most basic of sales tax bills, EVERYONE needs to participate in more than the regular presidential elections.

How to Turn Ender's Game into Movie

It has probably been 15 or 20 years since I last read Ender's Game. I am not going to spend much time on the differences between the novel and the movie.  Nor will I spend much time on the controversy about the author of the novel, Orson Scott Card, and his political and moral views.  I believe that art can be and should be separated from its creator's personal views.  In a way, even the artist is separate from his or her individual life.  A work of art stands on its own.  Poe was a binge alcoholic and married his thirteen-year-old cousin.  Hemmingway would have knock down drag out fights with the women in his life. If the Agony and the Ecstasy is to be believed, Michaelangelo was no walk in the park to deal with, and if we go by Amadeus by Peter Shaffer, Mozart was a "giggling dirty-minded creature." I am not comparing the work of Ender's Game to Don Giovanni, but art must stand for its viewer.

And so to the movie...

The problem has always been what to do with Ender to adapt the novel into a movie without killing its incredible spirit.  In the novel, Ender is only seven and the book is brutal.  To put such brutality on the page is one thing and to put it on film, quite another.  How do we make Ender's Game without the audience becoming turned off by the brutality used on a seven year old?   Making Ender a young teen for the movie is still a risk.  Perhaps, with movies like Hunger Games paving the way, the audience could be more accepting of the training of Ender Wiggins.  Perhaps it was that so much of the violence between the children was toned back for the big screen.  It was possibly more though that the young actor Asa Butterfield exudes absolute innocence mixed into an incredibly violent culture. His interactions with his fellow characters are well-crafted. Ender is so likeable and so driven by his need and his innocence, we forgive the character of Ender his many indiscretions.  It was that tone that carried the novel, and it was that tone that is captured in the movie.

The problem with any adaptation is capturing not just the plot lines of a work, but capturing the emotional tone of a work.  When the Lord of the Rings movies were made, the success was not just following the important plot lines of the trilogy. It was also that Peter Jackson had done something no one else had. He captured the magic and wonder for every fan of Middle Earth on film.  The same is true for Ender's Game.  The characters of Colonel Graff, played by Harrison Ford as both father figure and enemy, and Mazer Rackham, as the legendary war hero played by Sir Ben Kingsley, are just right for fans of the book.  If a book has a feel to it that is then captured by its movie adaptation, even those who have not read the book will understand why people are drawn to it.  While personally, I would have liked to seen more growth of character particularly between Ender and the other children like Bean and Petra, the idea of the relationships are in the movie, just not quite as complex.  It is an unfortunate reality of a film that it must compress time and story where a book can take it out and examine it from all sides. The movie captures that feeling for fan and newbie alike.

The other issue is the theme which is blatantly stated up front.  War is not a game, and to win a war, one must understand his enemy.  The problem is, as Ender puts it in both movie and book, "In the moment when I truly understand my enemy, understand him well enough to defeat him, then in that very moment I also love him." It is that love - that understanding - which will nearly destroy Ender.  While the movie simplifies its statement about the horror of war, it does capture the intent of the original work.

All in all, Ender's Game is a strong movie and involves us as an audience, especially in the IMAX format. We understand Ender.  We feel for him.  We want him to succeed and understand his reactions when he does.  No small task to put on the shoulders of Asa Butterfield because ultimately the young actor must carry the theme, the emotions, and the weight of this movie.  Well done.  Ender's Game is all that it should be. This is one I will definitely add to my DVD library.

Last Vegas: Four Legends Who Still Have It

It's a buddy movie. No, it's a date movie. No, it's farcical comedy.  No, it's romantic comedy.

No. It's all these.

Last Vegas is advertised as more or less a buddy movie.  I have to admit that I have never been a real fan of the genre.  They always seemed a little forced and a bit unreal.  Still though, Hollywood continues to crank them out because despite the predictability of the genre, they tend to make money. I am sure that Last Vegas will be no different.  What makes Last Vegas different is that it is also a romantic comedy or what has become known as a date movie.  It is actually too bad that the "love story" is really not advertised in its trailers.  Surprisingly, the two genres blend well, and that is probably because of the ability of the "buddies" who can turn their talent in any direction they want. Without the talent of the five very talented leads, the movie would most likely die a horrible death of stereotyped old people and predictability.


This is where the leads come in.  They are played by five of the best actors to grace the silver screen and despite their age, they still can turn on the comedy, charm and emotional charge. This is what happens when you take screen legends Robert De Niro, Kevin Kline, Morgan Freeman, Michael Douglas, and Mary Steenburgen and turn them lose with a funny and cockles of the heart warming story.  They know what it takes. Predictable? Yes. But actors with skill can look into that camera and turn from curmudgeon to loving best friend in a heartbeat. De Niro  plays that role. Kline can still turn on the pirate charm or the off-beat comedic side-kick.  Morgan Freeman is ... well, Morgan Freeman.  He can play even the most subtle line to most outrageous moment with the same believable intensity.  Meanwhile, Michael Douglas still plays the romantic lead, but this time with the idea that the romantic lead is past his prime.  Mary Steenbergen as the "girl" or love interest plays the aging lawyer turned lounge singer is perfect. Who knew she can sing?


The plot is a simple one. Four lifelong friends of over sixty years gather in Las Vegas for the bachelor party of the one bachelor of the group Billy (Douglas) who is marrying a girl that is well over 30 years younger.  The jokes abound from the friends about Billy marrying an infant. Two of the friends, of course, Billy and Paddy (De Niro) have had a falling out. No,  I am not going to tell you what it was about.   Archie (Freeman)who had a minor stroke has snuck out from his over-protective son's house, and Sam (Kline) has lost the sparkle, and his wife sends him on the trip telling him that he needs to get it back.  When the friends arrive in Vegas, they meet Diana (Steenbergen) who is a lounge singer and "the girl."

It is a fun movie.  Old friendships will be renewed.  Love will be discovered.  Youth will be recaptured, and a long hidden secret revealed. You will laugh and tear up a little bit.  You will, in short, feel good when it ends, and all because a very predictable plot is put in the hands of actors that know how to use their talents.

Speaking of Hate

At the risk of sounding like a hater myself, this is the sort of meme that  riles my sense of justice.  I've seen this one twice in a week.  "I dare you" to share? What are you? 12?

I believe that in order to convict someone and send them to prison, one must first have a trial.  In order to have a trial a law needs to be violated.  There should be evidence that said law was broken.  Please give me one law that is broken.  You can dislike anyone for any silly reason, but to announce someone should be in prison in violation of due process because you don't like him, or you've seen some extreme pundit say it's true, is the height of posting hate.  Due Process is in the 14th amendment  of the Constitution by the way.

"Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

You really should read the Constitution.  I have little doubt that you have yelled about it often enough.

Stop spreading hate!

It's Halloween!

Today is Halloween.  When I was a kid, we all dressed as Hobos for school.  Hobo day was one we looked forward to and then that night, we would put on our costumes, be they store bought or homemade, that our parents had tried to keep us from playing with for the week or so leading up to the big day. Then we would head out into our small town and move from house to house trick or treating hoping that we didn't get the nasty candy.  When we got home, there was perhaps a special like It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown or a Bugs Bunny Halloween special on TV. The older kids would later go out after all we younger ones were home and play the traditional pranks such as soaping windows or maybe even T-P a tree or even throwing an egg or two.


It was fun times and maybe there would be a party at someone's house or the church where we would eat popcorn and bob for apples.  We never worried about the germs of bobbing in water for the apple It was good times, and none of us worried about Halloween being "an occult holiday." Such ridiculous ideas were never considered and were foreign. So with those days in mind I wish you all a very Happy Halloween and may the Great Pumpkin fill your treat sack with the best candy.

Engage Brain, Please.

I try to check my information very carefully.  Unlike some, I do not see Snopes or Factcheck.org or Hoaxslayer or Politifact or mainstream media as some sort of conspiracy.  I visit a lot of sites of various political persuasions, and if the only place I find a story is on the same political style site, I dismiss it as inaccurate.  There are few sites that I would ever post from on that website's reporting alone.  I will not post from  sites like The Blaze or Britebar or MSNBC or Fox without outside corroboration.  Years ago, I might have posted from Fox, but when they actually started to post news stories from other sites re-written, I decided I would never use them as a source without documentation again.  For example, with the recent government shutdown, they actually took Associated Press wire stories and replaced the word shutdown with the word slimdown.  This isn't just tilting the news, this is rewriting another's work for political advantage.  It is propaganda.  I look for what's missing when I see a post from a political site.  It is often not what is being said that's untrue, but what is being left out. For those of you who don't know, that's still a lie.  It's called lying by omission.



Take these two stories about Far Right Spokesperson, Sean Hannity.  Both took place in the past couple of weeks.  Hannity interviewed three couples about how Obamacare ruined their lives.  The problem was that not one of the couples had even checked, and two of the couples said they would not check, to see if the ACA would help them. It would.  True story.  A few nights later Hannity called the ACA hotline and had an operator on who said many of her callers were unhappy with the rollout.  She was fired for violating her media clause which she was apparently unaware of.  Hanity offered her a year of her salary to make up for the firing and then advertised on his show to help her find a new job.  Also, a true story.

A meme with factual information,
but politically spun. 

Both events have been spun by the various conservative and liberal groups for advantages.  I am sure that there are memes for both, but this is the only one I could find to give  you an idea.  The facts of the meme are true.  It's the question at the end of the meme that lacks support.  Be sure to note the unflattering picture which is also a wonderful and typical propaganda tool. I chose this story not because I support Hannity.  I don't.  Generally speaking, he is a very divisive figure and spends time trying to enrage the far right base. Still, I wanted to show what would happen if you only went with far left or far right reports.  You might miss the bad reporting on the ACA or the supportive gesture that he made when his anti-ACA phonecall cost someone her job.  I verified both of these stories not on biased sites but through sites like the Huffington Post or other mainstream news sites.

And what was that lie exactly?

If you see a post that says something like "Why aren't the mainstream reporting on this?" You can be pretty sure they are reporting on it.  The post is relying on the fact that most of their readers will blindly spread it as if it were true. They are usually relying on the idea that their reader has bought into the idea that the media is either government controlled or too liberal to tell the truth.  Ironically, they are more than willing to use the report when the report supports their position, but when it doesn't, the mainstream is liberal or not reporting the "correct" facts.  This is actually a propaganda technique, by the way.  It's called "scapegoating." I remind you, "You are entitled to your opinion. But not you are not entitled to your own facts." (Patrick Moynihan) Honestly, most mainstream outlets are almost too concerned about equity in reporting.  CNN, according to the Economist, is so worried that they may appear biased, they are actually losing ratings and their reporting has become ho-hum.

Really? Have you even turned on a
TV recently?

Finally, consider what you are reading and posting.  If you only see a story on all the "patriot sites" without a link to anything except another "patriot site" of the same nature, you need to get out of your comfort zone and look elsewhere or realize the story is most likely biased or untrue.   I've even followed stories that are not verifiable but word for word the same story on every biased site.  And try to remember what you've checked.  I find the Huffington Post, Time, even Rolling Stone are good places to check.  Be sure that you are also actually looking at news and not editorials.  Editorials, good ones anyway, will support with actual links to actual sources. I saw one editorial  that sited a "study." The study was from a conservative thinktank and the writer of the editorial was a lead on the study.  Hardly unbiased, but if I hadn't followed the link, I would have never known the bias.  Follow the links too.

To give one some of the more bizarre examples of how little people pay attention here are one or two that happened to me.  A friend posted the hoax headline that Jackie Chan had died. I posted the Snopes link that this was a hoax.  The person thanked me for having her back.  Two days later, she posted the exact same hoax again.  In another instance, I had a person who posted a blatant statistical lie about something.  I don't remember what it was about, but I reposted the links to what the statistics exactly were from a  reliable source.  What did he do? Rather than admit that it was inaccurate, he deleted the links and kept on posting the lie.

We all want to be right, but the fact is that too often we post things that aren't.  It takes time to become informed and sadly, too many people just blindly post undocumented facts. We don't check, we don't verify, we just think it sounds good.

It isn't.