JJ Abrams' Lost Revolution

There may not have been a more compelling pilot on television than the initial episode of JJ Abrams' Lost. The first scenes of the airline disaster, played over and over from the points of view of the different characters, demonstrated the incredible tapestry of interwoven lives and connections at that single moment in time, and foreshadowed the way in which, throughout the series, the larger island story would be told.

Lost was simply made for DVR and internet technology as fans searched for and found connections left behind for them by the writers and directors. You did not just watch the show. You participated in it by scanning the background for information or comparing dialogue. Every episode was a source of clues in a world-wide puzzle contest.

I fear that Abram's newest offering, Revolution, created by Eric Kripke and currently on Monday nights on NBC, may suffer a similar activity for just the opposite reason. Revolution presents us with an alternate reality. The initial moments of the pilot episode jerk us immediately from the world in which we live, into a pre-Thomas Edison existence in which items using electricity have been rendered useless. Cars, planes, lights, televisions, computers - all of it fades to darkness. Then, after a pause to sell us car insurance or whatever, the story advances 15 years into the future. The United States government has fallen. Strong arm militia groups vie for control of their little piece of the country side. What population that has not killed itself trying to stay alive has huddled together in little xenophobic groups spattered about the countryside.

On the island in Lost, everything about the story could be controlled by the writers. Want a smoke monster? No problem. Want time travel? No problem. Move the entire island? Again no problem, because the framework of the laws associated with the island were entirely in the minds of the writers to be revealed, as needed, to the audience. We accepted the premise that we did not have complete information about the island so we allowed the story to take us where normally we would refuse to go.

Great pains have been taken in the first episodes of Revolution to inform the audience that the setting of the story begins, near our own time, in the United States of America - mostly in and around Chicago, Illinois. We see shots of a rundown Wrigley Field and Michigan Avenue as our heroes trek from an equally dismal and overgrown O'Hare airport.

And therein lies the problem. We know things about this world that the writers apparently do not. We see a small stockade in a suburban cul-de-sac with a few gardens of corn surrounded by countryside gone wild and we think, "What are these people eating?" I don't care if there is no electricity, 15 years implies that they might just have learned a little something about survival.

If they are resorting to being hunter-gatherers, then the little group would not be in permanent dwellings. Permanent dwellings imply food production and we do see some little gardens planted with corn. Now corn may indeed currently be the most significant crop in the country but, as Scientific American blogger Melissa C. Lott points out in this post from October 2011, only 20 percent of all the corn produced in the US is for human consumption, a quarter of which is for highly processed syrup. The other 80 percent is split between livestock feed and ethanol production. Besides, according to the USDA Nutrient Data Laboratory, as a staple, corn is a poorer cousin to wheat, containing less protein and fewer minerals. And considering we see no livestock, why do we see so much corn in the food supply?

Or should I say so little. In 1862, Congress passed the Homestead Act, giving an individual 160 acres of land as long as he lived on, and improved the property for five years. Much of the middle portion of our nation between the Mississippi River and the Rocky Mountains was placed under cultivation, to varying degrees of success, by men and animals plowing up these 160 acre tracts, all done without electricity. By all rights then, the little outpost we see at the end of the cul-de-sac should have been surrounded by 800-1000 acres of wheat, corn and livestock.

Then, just as in 1862, trains, with steam engines, using no electricity, could collect those crops and bring them to feed hungry people in the cities. And finally, between 1861 and 1865, the United States government transported hundreds of thousands of soldiers along rail lines, using steam locomotives to wage war and defeat a civil uprising, mostly without the use of the emerging electric telegraph. And let's take a close look at some of the equipment used to defeat that uprising. The catalyst for the action in Revolution is the death of Ben Matheson, the father of "Charlie" who is the heroine of the story. Ben is shot by a muzzle-loading rifle in an encounter with a local warlord's militia. The muzzle- loader appears to be standard issue amongst the soldiers. Assuming that the equipment of the militia represents the highest average available technology, it represents yet another serious failure of the eye-test of plausibility.

The modern muzzle-loader looks nothing like the guns Fess Parker carried playing Daniel Boone and Davy Crocket on television. But on Revolution, Monroe the warlord's soldiers appear to be carrying a weapon that looks very much like a Model 1842 Springfield caplock musket.

Why? What prevents the militia from all carrying a modern firearm? The caplock has all the component parts of a modern rifle. Earlier flintlock muskets used a flint and steel combination to ignite a small portion of powder which, in turn, ignited the gunpowder within the chamber forcing the bullet down the barrel and on to the target. But the caplock improved on that design, replacing the awkward flint and steel combination with a nipple that held a small cap containing fulminate of mercury. Yes, the caplock was a cap gun. The hammer struck the cap and the cap ignited the powder and shot the bullet. The process of firing this weapon uses up bullets, gunpowder and caps. A flintlock would use up bullets, powder and eventually, flints, which being rocks, are pretty readily available.

Creating caps, or primers, requires a chemical process involving the metals mercury or silver, combined with nitric acid, and in a technically reduced society it might make sense that they become scarce enough to force the flintlock's return as the typical firearm. However, the appearance of caplocks, not flintlocks, on the show, implies that there exist adequate supplies of gunpowder, bullets and caps.

So what is missing from a caplock that is contained in a modern firearm? Oddly enough, the only difference of consequence is the cartridge. Every muzzle loader takes the three individual component pieces - bullet, propellant (gunpowder), and ignition (cap or flint and steel) and places them together within the weapon. The brass cartridge brings the bullet, the propellant and the ignition primer together and holds them in readiness, separate from the weapon itself. When the cartridge is placed in the chamber and the gun is fired, the action which occurs at that time is essentially identical to the caplock, destroying the component pieces and leaving the empty casing.

But ironically, this is what the writers of Revolution have missed. The key item that has brought technology backward to the caplock in the story is in fact, the one item that is actually recyclable. Clean it up, replace the primer, pour in powder, press on a new bullet and you are ready to fire again. Technology has made the process easier certainly, but the lack of technology does not make it impossible, or even difficult.

And these are only a couple of problematic background points. What is being used for currency at the bar the group visits in Chicago? Where does the sugar come from for the bar's whiskey making operation? The list just keeps growing.

There are many good, alternate history stories where the authors seem to have actually done a little research. And when we read Harry Turtledove, or Orson Scott Card, we are swept along for the ride, amazed at the small moments in time that result in major swings of history's pendulum. Abrams and Kripke have failed to sweep us along with Revolution. Their blatant disregard for reality is overwhelming any possible chance for their story to become compelling.

My prime reason to watch, after the first ten minutes, was simply to find fault with it. What might have been another Lost is just lost. Providing useful articles, reviews and writings on movies and films online.

The Rise To Fame of Classic Zombie Movies

When it comes to classic zombie movies, everyone has their own favorites, and most can still remember the first time they sat in front of the television, watching a black and white portrayal of the undead slowly, but determinedly, chasing down their bumbling prey. Classic zombie movies are still a favorite amongst diehard fans, because they lend an element of gritty morbidity that pop culture based movies seem to lack these days; while this shouldn't take away from the latest releases within this genre, it definitely adds to the authority of the films that preceded them.

The reason why classic zombie movies seem to come with the tag line this is what actual zombies are supposed to look like, is because the archetype for these creatures stemmed from the Voodoo religion, which is, in essence, Haitian. When William S. Seabrook returned from his voyage to Haiti and published his travelogue, The magic island, westerners found themselves enthralled with the concept of a creature that rises from the grave due to the powers of a sorcerer called a Brokor. This fascination led to some of the best classic films on the subject, and all within a matter of a few decades.

Bela Lugosi's 'White Zombie' is perhaps one of the most famous classic films on this subject. It follows the story of a prosperous businessman by the name of Murder Legendre, based in Haiti, who has the power to transform men into zombies. When a man falls in love with a woman who is to marry someone else, he approaches the voodoo master for assistance, who then turns his beloved into a zombie. The movie itself is said to closely follow the writings of Seabrook, even going as far as mentioning the potion that was supposed to turn corpses into the undead slaves of the voodoo priest.

George Romero's 'The Night of the Living Dead' was another classic which altered the face of this genre, and remakes of this film continue to be released up until today. The film was released in 1968 and its reception was marked by shock and outrage, although when this subsided, it quickly became one of the penultimate favorite films on the subject. One of the reasons for its initial negative reception was the fact that it was gory, contained nudity, and the protagonist of the film was ultimately killed in the end. Basically, this film was unlike any other that had been released in the past, and it remains one of the most popular films based on the undead to date.

'The Night of the Living Dead' did not only alter the horror genre; it also added to the lore and myth surrounding these supernatural creatures. In the past, zombies were the creation of dark voodoo priests, but in this feature, they could transfer their supernatural abilities to others through a bite. The film also references methods on how to kill these creatures - shoot them through the head- which has become the first method of defense against the undead in countless films and games to date.

While classic zombie movies might have changed slightly during the first few decades when they began making their debuts on big screens all over the world, one thing remains certain; they inspired a fascination with these creatures that continues to thrive today. Providing articles, reviews and writings on movies online.

Best Scary Flicks for Family Fun

The latter part of 2012 featured the release of a trio of films that delivered family friendly frights. "ParaNorman" followed a young boy as he learned to adapt to his ability to communicate with the dead. "Hotel Transylvania" features hotel owner Dracula, who invites all of the famous monsters to his daughter's birthday party, only to find a human in the mix. In "Frankenweenie," a young scientist uses the power of electricity to bring his dead dog back to life. Though these movies are all animated, the list of scary movies suitable for children includes both live-action and animated classics.

Tim Burton directed "Frankenweenie" as well as "Beetlejuice," a 1988 film that sounds rather dark on paper but is comedy, right down to its unforgettable dinner dance scene. Geena Davis and Alec Baldwin star as the Maitlands, a married couple who are killed in a car accident and return to their former home as ghosts. When a new family moves in, led by insufferable parents (Catherine O'Hara and Jeffrey Jones), the Maitlands decide to spook them out of the house. The couple's gothic daughter Lydia (Winona Ryder), who can see ghosts, complicates matters. Michael Keaton's titular character is a smarmy "bio-exorcist" the Maitlands hire to help get rid of the family. Keaton is only onscreen for about 20 minutes, but those are the most iconic scenes of the film.

Tim Burton was behind another hair-raising family friendly film, though he served as the co-writer and co-producer on this title. "The Nightmare Before Christmas" is a stop-motion animated film featuring Jack Skellington, the Pumpkin King, as he pursues his dream of being Santa Claus for a change in holiday pace. The residents of Halloween Town are darkly rendered but have a wide range of personalities that make it easy for children to find a favorite. Sally, Jack's love interest, assembled like Frankenstein's monster out of rag doll parts, has a sweet and protective disposition. The only character that might spook small children is Oogie Boogie, a singing and dancing bogeyman who threatens Santa. This film achieved cult status, and is particularly popular around the Halloween season.

"Hocus Pocus" is another popular film with a Halloween theme. The 1993 live-action movie starts in the past, during the times of the Salem Witch Trials, and introduces the Sanderson Sisters. The trio of sisters (Bette Midler, Sarah Jessica Parker, and Kathy Najimy) is caught sucking the life out of children to gain eternal youth and beauty. While attacking one girl, the witches turn her brother, Binx, into a cat. The witches are killed by a mob, but issue a curse that if a virgin lights a candle during a full moon, the sisters will return. That happens in the 1990s when Max (Omri Katz) lights the candle to impress a girl and lures the witches onto the trail of him and his kid sister Dani (Thora Birch). The children, aided by the talking cat Binx, attempt to outwit the witches.

"The Witches," Jim Henson's classic film based on a Roald Dahl story, is much more sinister than "Hocus Pocus." A young boy (Jasen Fisher) stumbles upon the fact that a group of women has formed a witch society and is planning to turn all the world's children into mice. It is up to the boy and his plucky grandmother (Mai Zetterling) to take down the head witch, portrayed by a delightfully evil Angelica Huston. There are some genuine scares in this film as the witches' true appearances are less than pretty.

"Gremlins" has a pair of teenagers spending the night evading creatures somewhat more scaly than the characters in "Witches." After Billy (Zach Galligan) receives a mysterious Mogwai named Gizmo, he's told three rules for the upkeep of his new pet: don't get him wet, don't feed him after midnight, and never expose him to sunlight. After the first two rules are violated, Gizmo sprouts some new Mogwai, who have a much meaner disposition. It's a race across town for Billy to destroy the evil Mogwai and keep his friends and family safe.

When selecting a family friendly movie with scary elements, it's important to consider the ages and specific fears of the children involved. While "Arachnophobia" is appropriate for most ages, it wouldn't be wise to show it to a child who is already afraid of spiders. For the best message, choose films where the heroes, with the help of family or friends, win in the end. Providing useful articles, reviews and writings on movies and films online.

Watch Movies Online, How to Protect Yourself

Movies are the excellent stress busters that never let you fall prey to boredom. You can enjoy them wherever you want, in a cinema hall, at home on DVD player or online. Whereas these ways accompany varied benefits, they also have certain associated pitfalls. For example, visiting a theater and making all those expenditures on tickets, popcorn and soft drinks could take a heavy toll on your pocket. Likewise, the quality of DVD you play at home may or may not be up to the mark. Interestingly, the freedom to watch movies online without paying single penny sets you free from adopting the first two options. But whether this method is safe or not, let us find out.

Security concerns while watching flicks online:

Like all the other activities you perform online, enjoying online movies as well demands sedate security measures. Unfortunately if you lag behind at any step, you are likely to get trapped in the network of hackers and consequently your computer data could be at grave risk of being stolen. In addition, copyright owners could file lawsuits against you on the offense of copyright infringement. You would definitely not like the idea to get caught amid such hassles, would you?

Suitable protective measures:

With so many demerits of accessing movie websites, and downloading one to enjoy in your free time, you can easily decide to avoid this activity. But if you can bear a little bit patience and follow certain essential tips, protecting yourself from online hassles during your stint with online movies won't be that hard affair. Below are some important tips in this context:

• Keep distance from unsolicited links that ask you to download your preferred movie, they can trick you to open doors for the malware to enter into your system

• Utilizing a Virtual private network could let you add an additional security layer towards your endeavor of relishing a movie over the internet. It will hide your real IP address with a different IP and hence will keep you anonymous online.

• Browse through websites that allow you to watch or download movies legally. Prominently two types of films fall under this category, viz a viz, public domain flicks and movies that are licensed for online viewing.

Insight into safe film categories:

Public Domain Films: These types of motion pictures are copyrighted but have their links over the web for a very short span of time. You are free to enjoy them through live streaming or by downloading them, to watch later on. These films mostly belong to classic genre and hence could be of interest for a selected category of movie buffs. You may be asked to register with the concerned websites before moving ahead.

Licensed Films: This second category of legal films is duly licensed to be watched online. Compared to the first type, movies falling under this class are latest, laced with superseding sound feature and own high quality graphics. These flicks are often accompanied by short duration commercial ads, which could be termed as one the downsides to this film type. You would not be asked to register while accessing any such site, offering licensed films. Providing articles, reviews and writings on movies online.

Reviews of Famous Martial Arts Movies, The Duel

"The Duel" is more of a canvas soaked in blood rather than a movie and it is filled with moments of rage and bloody encounters, filling each scene in the movie with decisive death blows and displays of ultimate fury. Directed by the legendary Chang Cheh under the Shaw Brothers banner, the dialogues and the conversations between the characters in the movie seem to be an excuse to move from one bloody encounter to another. Apart from the mindless butt-kicking, "The Duel" also touches the sensitive topic of corrupted politicians and politics, thus forcing the protagonist to over-ride the law at all points to take down a bunch of power- hungry politicians trying to destroy peace and harmony.

The opening scene shows Tan Jen-chieh (Ti Lung) getting a huge butterfly tattoo drawn onto his chest, as a show of his affection for Hue-dieh (Ping Wang). But the happiness doesn't last forever, as Tan gets involved in a war between his gangster grandfather and a fierce rival. Chang Cheh tries to create a western impact with such a violent crescendo as a gang of assassins stroll down the streets butchering innocents. When knives and swords start being thrown meaninglessly, "The Duel"transforms itself into a cinematic butchering playground, bursting arteries and cutting through bellies as if there is no tomorrow. The screen is filled with carnage, bashed up faces, torn shirts and blood.This blood bath results in the exile of Tan and his grandfather getting murdered.

"The Duel" is violent although the climax reveals the director's honest attempt to take on the political world. Tan ultimately takes down each and every bad guy in a bloodbath. However, the evil Senator manages to escape the punishment. Chang shows that no matter what the degree of violence is, it will not be able to vanquish the real masterminds manipulating the government. This was a well realized fact and was beautifully presented in the climax of the movie. Instead of letting the bruised and battered protagonists stand upright at the end of the movie; Chang shows them trying to stand up and surprisingly freezes the frame. This was done probably to show the shadow of mortality looming on all mankind, no matter who they are. The battle against mortality can never be won, no matter how good you are at Kung Fu.

The glamour that is usually associated with Shaw Brothers is very evident throughout the movie, more during the numerous bloody scenes. All other colors have been used brilliantly throughout and the audience is left spell bound at one point. Quality sound, which is a vital factor for the success of a Kung Fu film, is amazing throughout the movie. The screams, slices and the gushing blood leave a long lasting impression on the minds of the audience.

Successful both as a movie based on Kung Fu and as a take on the political world, "The Duel" is a movie worth watching. Providing useful articles, reviews and writings on movies and films online.

Bond Less then Suave

What is wrong with these people?

For the last three outings (Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace and now, Skyfall), the people behind the franchise chose to present Bond, Commander James Bond in a different form- a hunky assassin, nothing more.

James Bond, of course, is the fictional spy created by Ian Fleming, made infinitely more entertaining with slapdash additions from a multitude of writers who co-opted the character through the screenplays of now, 23 outings.

The last three movies portrayed Bond as more of a killing machine, licensed to kill, with a penchant for speedo rather than a highly sophisticated spy posing as an executive for Universal Exports who goes about unearthing schemes of world domination hatched by crazed master criminals that takes him globe trotting to exotic locations,.

So in Casino Royale (2006), Bond engages terrorist-bomb maker, Mollaka in a cardiac-arrest inducing, crane-hanging, parkour style, impossibly long chase that ended in the obligatory explosion scene. Reviews generally gave the film a positive rating, even citing the chase, the best bond sequence. Ah, that maybe true for some. For me, the chase in 'Tomorrow Never Dies' (1997) featuring Bond handcuffed to a female Chinese agent while riding a motorcycle, negotiating the ledges and canopies of a residential area of a Vietnamese town still stands as the best.

For that particular sequence of Casino Royale, my alternate sequence shows Commander Bond, wearing a bush jacket from Saville row, Walther ppk in hand, waiting on the other side of the crane for Mollaka. Smiling at the dumb founded, totally exhausted, sweat drenched terrorist, Bond speaks with something like " My dear chap, I would have brought you Gatorade but I've a bit of a credit card glitch." spouted in that Bond-patented nasal, low-pitched,clipped Brit accent.

Why would Bond be traipsing atop buildings and cranes? He is an intelligence officer of her majesty not part of the British Olympic team.

I heard somebody ask " wearing a bush jacket from Saville row? why he would have been spotted a mile away". My dear chap, Bond would not be caught dead in anything less chic. In "Tomorrow Never Dies" Bond sneers at the clothes worn by Wade consisting of an odd Hawaiin shirt and slacks when he meets the American spy on board a carrier. Now that would tell you Bond is also a fashion police.

Because James Bond is the most élite spy, a spy's spy, he can't be spotted even if he comes off the oddest thing in a given environment. Remember "You Only Live Twice" (1967)?

Custom made Saville row suits and funny quips define the Bond flair. Who is Bond without suave? If Bond were not suave; if Bond were vulnerable, sartorially inadequate and aging., he might as well be Jason Bourne, Ethan Hunt and Aaron Cross, maybe even pinoy super spy, Tony Falcon.

The thing I like about Bond is the idea of a guy who knows what he's doing and showing class while at it. In Dr. No, Bond immediately finds out that the driver supposed to fetch him from the airport was really an enemy spy sent to kill him by merely making a telephone call. In 'Die Another Day' (2002) Bond knows all too well about a Chinese spy ring in a Hong kong Hotel but only exposes his knowledge at exact time, after putting on custom tailored clothes. In all the Bond films I have seen, the commander always possessed some background knowledge of elements of a case.

Diametrically opposed to that particular Bond concept, in Casino Royale, Bond losses all his money in a poker table to a guy called le Chiffre because he assumed the opponent was bluffing. Any fool poker player knows that in a tourney, one does not risk tilting on the assumption of a bluff. It is not just done.All these years Bond possessed incredible luck at the tables.In the Fleming novel, Bond wins. Why they would chose an alternate version is again beyond me.

There is nothing wrong with Daniel Craig. He is as good as his predecessors, except maybe the bad hair. In Skyfall, Craig wears a scruff which looks totally unsuave. Even on vacation Bond is never scruffy. The only other time Bond looked scruffy was In Die Another Day, where he was captured and kept prisoner for a long time and so grows a beard and long hair (though being beaten thoroughly by the Koreans, he should have lost weight a bit).

Writers of the last three Bond films removed the suave side of Bond for no valid reason I can think of. They just made Bond ordinary.

Probably the writer lost track of Bond's cover, a well-traveled executive of Universal Exports (which I think might need updating. It's not really known what it exports, cigars maybe as in 'Die Another Day'?). As such, Bond has to look the part, custom clothes (should fit well, they would be custom tailored after all), cigarettes (555 was the Bond brand until 'Live and Let Die' in 1973), Smirnoff, most expensive watch and Aston Martin.

Bond would also have to be not just literate in computers, he would have to be a techie, as most executives today. As such, Bond would be well verse in broad range of subjects.

And as techieness goes, Commander Boothroyd (or Q) is the mother of all techies (even before the word came about) and in that, Bond can never be without a new gadget.

Skyfall (2012) meantime shows signs of Bond aging, sensitive (he took personally M's order for moneypenny to take the shot that fell him in a struggle on top a moving train) and unable to hit targets. I don't think 007 is authorized by her majesty to age, be sensitive, even sweat or miss targets, let alone non-moving ones during practice. those traits belong to a lower paygrade, I suppose, definitely not for double Os.The secret service recruited Bond from the Navy from which he earned the rank Commander. At that rank, he should be in his thirties or there about. The franchise having thrown away the time line of Ian Fleming (that he was recruited after the 2nd world was) abandon the age question entirely (as an example, in Casino Royale Bond just earned his double 0), it then stands to reason that he is still in his thirties, strong, sharp and cocky.

And what about the famous Bond girls? They lost their catchy names like Pussy Galore, Octopussy, Dr. GoodHead, Major Onotop and Honey Rider? But I like the idea on Moneypenny being a trained operative, although she should have disrobed for a sneak peek on what Bond is missing. The occasional appearance of Moneypenny should beg the question, will they?

And then there are the more ordinary villains that Bourne could kick with one hand tied.

My list of first-rate villains include Jaws and Oddjob, almost industrutable. I like 006 as a villain as well, more gripping when it is two equal forces and suaveness. Silva in Skyfall is not comparable to 006 even when it is indicated that he is a top spy as well. How can a trained operative miss M at the hall?

All in all, the Bond franchise moves rather splendidly, if it were judged by the box office return. But for the old Bond followers like me,come on then, give us back old James. Providing useful articles, reviews and writings on movies and films online.

Jim Parsons: Stage, Screen and Television

Jim Parsons' role of Sheldon Cooper in The Big Bang Theory may be the only place you've ever seen him. But Parsons is a stage-trained actor who's been in plays since the age of six. Parsons has received two Emmy Awards, a Golden Globe, a Critics' Choice TV Award and a Television Critics Association award for playing Sheldon Cooper.

Growing up in Houston, Texas, he appeared in Noises Off in his junior year of high school. At the University of Houston he appeared in 17 plays in three years. After graduation he moved to New York, working on off-Broadway and in TV appearances.

While The Big Bang Theory was on hiatus in 2011, Parsons was on Broadway in The Normal Heart. From May until August of 2012, he's starring in Harvey. He's remarked that he has never seen Harvey on stage, nor has he seen the James Stewart movie. It's his 30th stage appearance.

He's also appeared in 11 films. Two were cameos. The Big Bang Theory is Parsons' 10th TV series. You can't really call them all his series, since he appeared in only one episode of six shows. He has said he auditioned for between 15 and 30 pilots. Sometimes when he was cast, the shows weren't picked up by networks. But that's how you work your way up.

The role of Sheldon Cooper changed everything. The character is a scientist and a genius, having completed college in his teens. He's surrounded by three nerdy friends whom he constantly criticizes. He is obsessive about routine, especially certain dinners on certain days of the week, and he's very upset with any change. The waitress who lives across the hall confuses him, since he's the only one in the group not attracted to her, and he never understands sarcasm from her or anyone else. Despite his narcissistic personality, he is devoid of social skills, and he intensely dislikes being touched. (He's virginal at 31.) He spouts arcane scientific details -- and his own opinions -- in rapid-fire speech. This is undoubtedly a big reason for his Emmys. The scripts must be incredibly challenging.

Fans are fascinated by the difference between Jim and Sheldon. Jim smiles a lot more than Sheldon does. Actually, Sheldon practically never does. He has an almost nonexistent sense of humor. Parsons was hilarious on a recent interview with Jon Stewart on the Daily Show. (Harvey will close in August..."get your tickets now!") His Emmy acceptance speeches were humble and grateful. And he smiled!

He loved school, and he loves his career now. He's worked hard for his success. Providing articles, reviews and writings on movies online.

We All Know That The Sun Rises, But What Else Rises?

We all know the sun rises, but what else rises? What else rises? The "Dark Knight Rises" will be released on July 20, 2012! Now I am 99.99% positive that I can refrain form asking this next question, but for fairness sake, I will ask it anyways. Are you excited? Ahhhhhhh, I am so excited! I can barely hold it in! But, there may be some people out there who do not share my passion and anticipation. That is why I am writing this blog; Well really I am writing this blog for a two-fold reason. 1. To critique "Dark Knight" and share my opinion on "Dark Knight Rises" and 2. To hear your opinion about whether or not you think "Dark knight Rises will be a success.

So let me begin with my critique on "Dark Knight" (MINIMAL SPOILER ALERT HERE) I absolutely loved it, from the intelligent script, to the genius of a director, and to the elegant cast of actors. If you read my earlier blog on the movie "Inception", you will all ready be aware of my love for director Christopher Nolan. He is a genius when it comes to directing because he know how to relate to his audience. Nolan is aware of what his viewers want to see and how to convey that in his pieces of work. And the actors? Simply put, how can one go wrong with names such as Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. Bale is known for his role in the first two Batman movies and of course, will be performing the role in the new and upcoming "Dark knight Rises." But another movie he played an excellent role in was the movie "Prestige"(also directed by Christopher Nolan) But, that is a whole different story and will without a doubt be fully critiqued in one of my future blogs. And Heath Ledger....If you have not seen "Dark Knight", Ledger is enough reason to go see it. I am a huge fan of Christian Bale and his ability to relate to his character's emotion and feelings, but I have to honestly say that Heath Ledger is the aspect that changes this movie from amazing to outstandingly amazing. Ledger hit the nail perfectly as he played the role of the Joker. There was no convincing needing to take place in my mind. He played the role perfectly. If you are fan of this movie I am sure you will remember this quote of his which sends chills down my spine...

"The Joker: Come here. Hey! Look at me. So I had a wife. She was beautiful, like you. Who tells me I worry too much. Who tells me I ought to smile more. Who gambles and gets in deep with the sharks. One day, they carve her face. And we have no money for surgeries. She can't take it. I just want to see her smile again. I just want her to know that I don't care about the scars. So... I stick a razor in my mouth and do this...
[the Joker mimics slicing his mouth open with his tongue]
The Joker:...to myself. And you know what? She can't stand the sight of me! She leaves. Now I see the funny side. Now I'm always smiling!"

What a great moment in this film among several others. Before I ask some questions about the upcoming "Dark Knight Rises", I just wanted to share a short summary of "Dark Knight" for those of you that for some strange reason, have not been able to see it yet. "Dark Knight" portrays Batman as he teams up with Harvey Dent to bring down the opposing vigilante mob and bring peace to the disparaging city of Gotham, but in attempting to accomplish this, let the cat out of the cage so-to-speak. Joker, with his hell-bent passion to turn Gotham against itself, does everything in his power to stop Batman and bring his heroic qualities down to his level.

So questions for "Dark Knight Rises." 1. Do you think this movie will be the last movie in the Batman series? 2. Are you upset that the Joker will not be in it? 3. Do you think it has potential to be the movie out of the series? 4. Will this movie be a success? Providing articles, reviews and writings on movies online.

Is It Any Wonder That Movie Piracy Sites Are Thriving?

It was a rainy day today, so my wife and I decided that we should go and see a movie. We called up Grandma and asked if she would be willing to look after the kids for a few hours, and she was happy to spend some extra time with the little ones. So, after finally agreeing to go and see the new Men In Black 3 movie, we got into the car and headed to our local Cineplex theatre. When we arrived, we walked up to the ticket machine, requested 2 general admission tickets and then proceeded to pay. For the two tickets at this particular Cineplex, the grand total was $21.00, which seemed pretty reasonable. Next, we proceeded over to the concession stands to consider our options for a snack. We didn't want to get too elaborate, so we settled on a large popcorn, 2 regular sized drinks and a small bag of candy.

Fortunately, my wife has a 'SCENE' card (a promotional card that rewards purchases with points and lowers the cost of some goods when presented at time of purchase). However, even with the card, the snacks cost us another $21.00!! Now, we're not talking about pizza and fries, or hot dogs and energy drinks here....we're talking about one of the cheapest snacks known to mankind....due to the sheer abundance of raw materials available on this continent, popcorn costs mere pennies to produce, but apparently commands a GIANT price tag to consume when purchased at a movie theatre! As well, those large cups of soda are quite expensive as well (after they fill your cup with Ice, there might be the equivalent of one standard can of soda in that cup). The way I figure it, we probably got the equivalent of 1/4 a cup of popped corn kernels, 2 cans of pop and a bag of candy that could be purchased at a local grocery store for about $2. Based on some quick research that I have done, a pound of popcorn kernels is equal to about 4 cups of kernels, and a 1/4 cup of kernels will yield approximately 8 cups of popped popcorn.

So 4 cups of kernels will yield about 128 cups of popped popcorn! Oh and wait!, it's important to note that a pound of popcorn kernels costs about $2.00, so as you can see, you can produce approximately 128 cups of popcorn for about $2.00! Keeping these figures in mind, it cost the movie theatre approximately 13 cents for our large bag of popcorn, another couple of bucks for our soft drinks (calculated at a retail cost of $1 per can of soda), and about $2 or $3 for the bag of candy...for a grand total of about $5! In turn, they charged us $21.00 for those snacks!! That represents a mark-up of over 400%! As a result of this, it cost my wife and I just over $40.00 to see a movie today...and that was at a Cineplex where the price of the general admission tickets are much lower than those found at the same theatres in larger cities, where it's not uncommon to find admission prices ranging from $12 to $18 per person!

With pricing like this, it is little wonder why piracy has become such a large issue in today's society. After all, imagine if instead of Men In Black 3, my wife and I had decided to take our kids to the movies with us and take in a children's movie. Even with the cheaper kids ticket and concession costs factored in, the costs associated with such an endeavor would balloon to somewhere between $70 - $90! In the current economy, families are looking for affordable entertainment, and I do not believe that our local movie theatres are doing a very good job of providing that. Instead, families are more likely to download a newly released movie, pop up some popcorn on the stove and crack open some beverages found in the fridge... then curl up on the sofas and lazy boy chairs and have a family movie night. The costs associated with the stay at home movie night are likely under $10 bucks, and you don't have to worry about the obnoxious teenagers 3 rows behind tossing popcorn at you, while texting and speaking on their cellphones!

In the past 5 years alone I have witnessed the costs at the concession stands rise nearly 40%! I understand that some food industries have had to suffer through shortages due to issues related to weather and environment, but corn has remained very affordable throughout those 5 years. The costs associated with soda and candy has gone up slightly, but certainly not enough to justify a 40% hike at the movie concessions. So, is this just a matter of corporate and shareholder greed? Is the never ending appetite for ever increasing profits starting to get to a point that average families now face exorbitant costs just to take their loved ones to a show? Is it any surprise that movie theatres have to plaster large signs at the doors declaring "No Outside Food or Drink Beyond This Point"?

Obviously they are trying to protect their very large profit margins and thus their investors returns.....not to mention the fat salaries and bonuses awarded to their top executives! In 2010, the CEO of Cineplex received over $4.5 Million in total compensation - most of which was received in additional incentives beyond his base salary based on performance and profit targets! His base salary was just $803 Thousand dollars.....but he earned over 5 times this amount once all of the additional bonuses and incentives were paid....and you can bet your bottom dollar that those rising ticket prices and exorbitant concession prices factored largely into his compensation package....but hey, who can live on a paltry base salary of $803,000/year anyways right?

Here is an idea for Cineplex that would result in continued growth of profits and thus, investor delight. Why don't you drop your prices 40%, encouraging more families and individuals to visit your theatres and grow your business through expanded ticket and concession sales! As a result, you could positively affect the employment figures and employ more people to serve the influx of customers who can now afford to come to the movies, and more people could enjoy the magic of watching movies on the big screen, rather than downloading those movies to hard drives at home that are hooked up to their large screen televisions. I think you will find that people are more willing to pay a fair price for the entertainment you are providing, than stay at home and watch their free downloads because they cannot afford to pay your unfair and outlandishly exorbitant fees.

Furthermore, the movie industry going after the websites that provide free downloads of your movies will never yield any great blows to the infinite community of piracy sites that exist out there in the wild of the world wide web....but charging people affordable prices to visit your theatres will slowly start to win back customers who are tired of being overcharged to watch movies that rarely live up to their trailers! While the cost of your tickets and concessions have been steadily going up, the cost of large screen televisions and the technology used for downloading content has been steadily going down. If that trend continues, theatre companies like Cineplex will continue to see their viewership decline (Between the years 2000 - 2010, cinema attendance has dropped by over 22%, while during the same period, ticket prices have increased over 15%!), and large electronic retailers like Best Buy, Future Shop and Amazon will continue to benefit from the increased demand for new big screen TV's!

The bigger concern for companies like Cineplex should be...how long can they continue raising prices to offset the decline in ticket sales before they begin seeing massive drops in cinema attendance! Only time will tell, but if I were the CEO of Cineplex, I would be very concerned with the long term prospects of my job. Of course, the question remains whether the current CEO has enough foresight and courage to challenge the traditional business model that has over the past 10 years continued to show steady declines in attendance! Personally, I hope the industry turns itself around, and many more generations of people can continue to experience the magic of the big screen at an affordable price. Providing articles, reviews and writings on movies online.

Snow White and the Huntsman Movie Review

If you're unfamiliar with my movie reviews, here's the way it works: I go check out the latest movie everyone is talking about, drink an astonishing amount of diet soda, and then report back to you, looking for as many things to make fun of as this space allows, while trying to strike a balance with the positive highlights. Welcome. Let's get started.

THE GOOD: What we have here is an attempt at taking the most mild-mannered and somewhat pathetic princess in history, and giving her a backbone. This is not your childhood fairy tale version, with whistling dwarves and a helpless girl in a dress, running around with her hand over her mouth, always looking surprised. It's a much darker and creepier scene playing out, which frankly adds to the appeal in my opinion.

Left motherless as a small child, Snow White (played by Kristin Stewart) has to adjust to life with her stepmother Raveena (Charlize Theron) who is the epitome of the word, "self absorbed". When it becomes clear that Mommy Dearest has nothing good in store for her, Snow White escapes into the forest where she encounters all sorts of creepy things brought on by hallucinogenic spores, and where she also first meets the Huntsman (Chris Hemsworth), who is somewhat a nice hallucination of sorts himself. Sent to kill her, the Huntsman is faced with the decision of serving the wicked Queen, or helping Snow White escape. And as the bad boy he is, you can imagine what he chooses to do.

There were a lot of positive's in this film for me - the visual effects were stunning, and Charlize Theron is so terrifying as the Queen that I found myself considering ways to make myself less attractive so I wouldn't risk encountering her soul sucking vanity. I even have to admit that Kristin Stewart, who I am not particularly impressed with as an actress, was perfect for the role - not only because it required very little facial expression, but because THIS Snow White isn't exactly "girly" - and let's face it, Ms. Stewart has never been known for acting ladylike. And to round things out, Chris Hemsworth with a Scottish accent is the stuff dreams are made of. Thank you.

THE BAD: I mentioned previously that there were no whistling dwarves in this version, but rest assured that dwarves ARE present and accounted for - they just aren't particularly cute and snuggly little buggers. I didn't mind the fact that they were all a little rough looking, but I found myself completely unable to understand what they were saying from time to time. I'm still not sure if it was the British accents or if they were all, in fact, a bunch of mumblers.

THE UGLY: There was certainly no shortage of icky things to see in this movie: Stabbings, internal organ removals, and the Queen eating the still warm heart of a dead animal to name a few. Still, when you are faced with the glaring possibility that the Queen and her weirdo brother seem to have some sort of incestuous thing going on, all else pales in comparison. I don't have a brother, but if I did, I'd like to think that he wouldn't feel the need to watch me take a bath, nor would I feel inclined to chat it up with him as I step into a giant pool of milk. But that's just how I roll.

Bottom line, if you like your fairy tales on the darker side, with the fair maiden being less "helpless" and more "ragged mess", then this is the version for you.

The Trophy Wife gives this movie 4 trophies.

Snow White and the Huntsman has a running time of 127 minutes and is rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action, and brief sensuality. (No F words used) Providing articles, reviews and writings on movies online.