X-Men 3

In spoilerless short: I liked it, definetly worth seeing in the theatre. I didn't like the switch in directors and it did seem like they tried to cram in too much but as this is an ongoing movie series, each movie does have to set up more stuff for later so in that respect it does feel like part of a greater story.

If you haven't seen it yet, stay til after the credits, too.
Like I said, it did feel crammed.


SPOILERS FOR THE REST OF THE FILM BELOW!

Jean & the Phoenix Saga
Obviously with Jean disappearing in the last film, the Phoenix Saga had to be addressed. The comic book version is way too sci-fi for the X-men world that the movies take place, in, which tries to make everything more realistic, so in that respect I like how they worked in this whole Jean backstory of her powers and worked it into the Phoenix just being part of her. I thought that was well done. It kind of felt like it was sort of taking too much of a back seat to the Magneto plot, though, with the Brotherhood on the one hand... On the other hand, with the Phoenix being a part of Jean (rather than a giant space opera thing) it would of been a weak film had everything centered SOLEY on Jean.

I thought her powers could of been emphasized a bit more but that could be because I'm an X-Men fan already and I'm used to the REAL Phoenix. I'd like to hear opinions from people wh haven't had much to do with the comic version of the story on this one.

Jean and Wolverine
OMG! Now, I'm a huge Wolverine fan, of course, and I have always been a fan of the relationship between Logan and Jean. I thought they've done a great job with the short span of time in the film (as opposed to the relationshpi taking a little longer in the comics). In the comics, Jean does have an element of reserve toward her own powers - and she loves Scott (Cyclops) because HE is safe and represents control and order. Logan on the other hand is wild and free - he calls to Jeans dark side.

In the film, I love how they did the paralell with Logan's memory blocks to Jean's memory blocks (something that doesn't exist in the comics). It was a fantastic way of further making their relationship a bit more believeable with the short time span. Just - the whole thing was showcased so well without being over the top, particularly with Logan having to be the one to take down Jean in the end - because he's the only one who could survive it with his healing factor compensating.

Wolverine
Speaking of the healing factor -- this film did a great job of showcasing his healing factor more. I'm used to the Wolverine of hte comics constantly being shredded to bits to where no normal person or mutant could survive. And it isn't uncommon for his flesh to give way and expose his bones (with or without adamantium). Also, Logan still feels pain despite his healing ability - and I thought Hugh Jackman did a good job of portraying that, particularly in the scene where he's fighting the dude in the woods who is pulling bone spikes from his body and impaling Logan with them. The whole thing was much more ... realistic in terms of how Wolverine is than, say, the fight between Logan and Yuriko at the end of X-Men 2.

And again, awesome acting on Hugh's part - particularly his body language. Wolverine is strong and confident but moves in an animalistic way. And they did a little bit more to showcase his animal-like senses, though they could of done more.

(For a second, I thought they were going to jump the gun on a Wolverine story when Magneto grabbed Logan by his skeleton. I thought Magneto was going to rip out Logan's adamantium right then and there, giving us a lead into a Wolverine spin-off film.)


Storm
They did a great job incorporating more Storm into this film. The character writing and the acting was awesome for the character this time around - much better than the previous films. I like how they incorporated Storm's leadership ability into this film, particularly since she WAS a team leader of the X-Men (dunno if she still is or not). Liked the hair, too.

Other X-Men
I liked the progression in Bobby/Iceman's powers. I like how his abilities finally manifested fully due to his life or death fighting situation with Pyro - that was a great way of working it out.

Angel's plot was only weakly worked in. The first scene of him as a child made me think it was going to link in more with everything else, since it was shown right next to the scene of Jean as a child. There were just SO many mutants in this film that they were showcasing it was *almost* jumbled but not quite. Like Beast being in there - I mean, he was there because he was working with the government and they hint at the fact he used to be an X-man way back in the day. And Angel's father was the one who made the cure, and he made the cure to help his son, not hurt mutants, giving the whole film less of a black-and-white feel, but it was so loosely woven I'm not sure how I feel about it.

Shadowcat/Kitty Pride -- she was awesome! Though she's a teen in the film, I like how they emphasized that she's not a fighter - she has to use her intelligence to defeat the enemy. That's how she was in the comics, too. She probably had my favorite fight/flight scenes of the whole film, too. Heh. Really stole the show from the returing characters.

Magneto and Xavier. I love the backstory on this being brought in and I loved the line, "Charles Xavier did more for mutant kind than you can even imagine". No matter their differences in approach for mutantkind nowadays, they have a healthy respect for eachother - again a great example of the shades of gray rather than black/white.

Mystique - she's an underestimated character, I think. She is very intelligent and mysterious. Kais and I discussed that part of that mystery is aided by the fact she rarely speaks in the film. It isn't because she's the "female bombshell" token character - that's how she is in the comics. With what little she did have to work with, I thought Rebecca Romijn did a good job - particularly after she was shot with the 'cure' and reverted to her original form in front of Magneto. Half of her shock was also in the fact that she's shapeshifted so much she doesn't recall what she used to look like, her past being lost to even herself.

Another point about there being so many characters -- this film has LOTS of them, it's not as isolated as the first two were. Though I'm not sure how it worked out for the movie, this IS how the comics are. A lot of the X comics are SO full of mutants it can be hard to keep track of what is going on. It really is epic - it isn't one hero isolated to one town, like Batman to Gotham. It's a whole planet of mutants struggling to find a place in the world. The first two movies do well to introduce us to the idea of mutants to begin with, and this movie acts to widen the scope.

I think that scope could of been more powerful, though. In the 2nd film, they really brought it home what it's like to find out you are a mutant by paralelling it to coming out as a gay person (the scene where Bobby tells his parents he's a mutant). That was more personal and I thought carried more weight. And when Jean was speaking to the ?senate? in the first film. This film was a bit more... cartoony feeling in that respect.

(oh, I also did like there being more mutants, if to show their teamwork better - like in the danger room scene, particularly with Rogue borrowing Colossus' powers to avoid getting hurt).


Set up for the next film?
I stayed til after the credits and it shows Moira McTaggert working in a hospital when suddenly a patient speaks out to her. It's a whiskered Charles Xavier calling her by name and she gasps and says, "Charles?" So it looks like the disintegrated characters will return (as I thought they might). I'm just not sure how that's going to work out. Did something Charles do save them? Or did part of Jean with her super abilities do something to save everyone she loved right before she died? That is definetly within her powers using the Phoenix force, for sure.

And we know that mutants who were 'cured' are regaining their powers. Before I saw the bit with Xavier at the end, I kind of thought that perhaps when his powers returned, Magneto might return to help lead the X-men like has happened in the comics. In particular it would of been a great homage to the "Age of Apocalypse" alternate timeline in the comics where history is altered because Xavier dies. The world becomes a much darker place and Magneto leads the Xmen in Charles' memory.

And Rogue... Is she going to cross paths with Mystique, the woman who raised her in other versions of things? Rogue is a hugely popular X-Character and I just KNOW fans are dying for her to obtain her invincibility and flying ability. I'm thinking they might work in a storyline where Rogue isn't aware she's got her powers back and accidentally absorbs Carol Danvers' (Miss Marvel)'s powers of invincibility and flight permanently, as happened in the comics.

But as for a greater storyline, I'm not too sure where they're going to go with it. I mean, the Phoenix Saga we all knew had to happen as it's one of the greatest Marvel stories ever told - it's quintessential X-Men. But where are they going next?

Conclusion
So, I loved all the little bits and pieces a LOT. There were lots of great moments. But that's what it felt like overall - little moments losely strung together. The whole thing wasn't as solid as the previous two films and yet it still works. It somehow feels wrong and yet ... not. Weird how that works.

Killer Bunnies

So we finally got a set of the Killer Bunnies card game on Sunday (it's full name is Killer Bunnies and the Quest for the Magical Carrot). It's a non-collectable card game that is expandable through the addition of many booster decks that add new dimensions to the game. The point of the game is to collect as many carrots as possible through the use of your killer bunnies while trying to slay as many of your opponent's bunnies as you can. At the end of the game, the magic carrot is revealed, but you have to have at least one surviving bunny in order to win (which is the point of trying to kill your opponent's bunnies - if they have no bunnies, they cannot win.)

It's kind of a strange game in that you can have the most carrots and you could of been kicking ass the entire game but when it all comes down to it, winning is a lottery since no one knows which carrot is the winner. Having more carrots gives you a better chance of having the winning carrot but so far, more often than not, someone with just one or two carrots ends up winning. Maybe it's karma. :P

Pros
So if you are ultra competitive, that might frustrate you. I rather like it as it means you can also win after having played the suckiest game ever - no matter how skilled you are, it all boils down to luck, which makes it an even game for anyone. So no matter if you win or lose, what you remember are all the bizarre ways you were able to scrape by in the game or annhiliate bunnies.

The cards are humerous and inventive and often outlandishly powerful - like the Nuclear Warhead card which automatically wipes out 5 bunnies (a LOT) or the Ebola Virus, which infects one bunny per round - and to survive, a bunny must roll a 12 on a 12 sided die to live. You cannot get attached to your bunnies as it is nearly guaranteed they will die. More often than not, though, you have to laugh at HOW they die.

Good replayability. Our first morning, Kais and I must've played it 6 times in a row. Because the cards you draw are random, you could have a really powerful game, you could have a game where all your bunnies constantly die, you could have a game where it's difficult to even GET a bunny, or maybe you get one survivor bunny that hangs in there. And of course you can never be sure who is going to win.

The cards are super durable, extra glossy and thick.

Cons
The instructions that come with the game are about as clear as mud. We played three games with what we thought were correct rules before downloading a more precise PDF version off the Official Killer Bunnies Website. So if you do get the game, PRINT OUT THE RULES FROM THE SITE!

The game artwork is a bit too simple. The illustrations and the coloring are not very complex and look a little cheap. Although some of the bunnies are hilarious - like the one in the "Containment Suit" card or the astronaut bunnies on the "Black Hole" weapon card.

The cards are super durable, glossy and thick. This is only a con if you get several of the booster decks because you end up with so many cards that it takes a LONG time to thoroughly shuffle them all. And the durability of the cards makes them too thick to use in an automatic shuffler.
________________________________

All in all, it's a really fun game. Once you have the rules down, it goes rather quick - at least, if I compare it to Settlers of Catan or Zombies!!! (which can occasionally turn into a 3 hour game), so perhaps an hour is an average length game with just the Blue and Yellow decks (the Killer Bunny decks are color coded - blue is the starter deck and each booster must be purchased in a certain order. Yellow is now packaged automatically with the blue cards.)

Killer Bunnies can be played with 2 to 8 players (possibly more with the addition of more booster decks) and is for ages 12 and up. The game is not gorey at all - not a drop of blood to be seen, just slightly violent.

The Night Watch

I forgot to mention a few weeks ago that I finished reading The Night Watch by Sarah Waters. Despite the very different era and story format, it still has the feel of a Waters novel but I found it to be a bit lacking. The story starts in 1947 and works backward - it starts off with characters in a dark place and they're given to you without any backstory -- you find out about why they are doing what they are doing, how they got to be where they are, etc. by slowly being given their story as you go back through time. It's a really cool way of filling us in, revealing the mystery.... My only problem was that I was expecting the novel to twist and pull the rug out from under me like in the previous two Waters novels. Instead, I found the story kind of predictable and the ending disatisfying. I wanted to know much more about the characters than what we were given.

Good points were that the characters were really interesting and the backward format was well done. I liked the story itself and the telling of it. I just wish the story were longer and fuller. The lack of length and depth left me wanting more in a very wistful way -- because the story starts in despair and goes backward to a more hopeful time, you do end up feeling a bit more hopeful but again in a wistful way. Maybe that was her point. That after all is said and done, we look back to better times.

Gokujou Seitokai and Azumanga Daioh

Trey and I have started watching Gokujou Seitokai which is full of more WTF-goodness (and most of it in Pucchan) than in most other anime I've seen so far. I think the whole Pucchan puppet character *alone* has more WTFness than Sana-chan of Kodocha - okay, easily. Just... WTF? *laughs* Oh, it's too good. And we've only seen four episodes. :D

Trey also started me on Azumanga Daioh which possibly has the best "pat-on-the-head" character of all time in the form of Ayumu "Osaka" Kasuga. What's great about this anime is how realistic a lot of the humor really is. For instance, at one point Osaka is spacing out in class but at the same time is like she's intently following something around in the air. The first thing that came to mind with the way her eyes were moving is when you look at the sky and see dust motes floating across your eye itself and as you follow them they dart away, so you look back to the starting point and there they are again. And it turns out that is *exactly* what she was doing! ROFL! And here I thought I was the only one. ;)

LiveJournal

When I look back at my very oldest entries, it is apparent I didn't really know what to do with myself once I obtained an LJ account during its famed "invite only" era. It has eventually evolved into an amalgam of sorts, a multi-purpose area that I use for a few things. Mainly, that would be to 1) Keep my friends updated on my life and to 2) Journal, to rant and rave and think out loud about everything. These are the two main reasons for my LJ existing. But secondarily, I keep my LJ to meet people with similar interests and to talk about and do creative stuffs involving those interests. This last element is something I simply cannot do in person so in a way this secondary reason really could be an integral reason for my LJ's being.

Beyond that, LJ is my social life in a masochistic sort of way. Masochistic in that people are generally pretty busy and response time to real time problems often doesn't line up -- which really is my own problem of needing to be a little more self-sufficient, I suppose. It's hard to quantify how much of it is my own fault/problem when I'm so isolated in my life at the moment. Like, even if I get my drivers licencse, say, where am I going to go? I don't like social places. Introverts simply don't hang out. Anyhoo, that's not really the point of my post.

Okay, we have established LJ is yay social life. :D

I don't like timeframes, I really don't. I tend to keep my life as flexible as possible so that should the mood take me or someone gives a call, I can usually take leave and go do something at a moments notice, or at least with shorter notice. I'm pretty good with email and will generally reply as soon as I read it - which is actually due to the fact I recieve so little email. But I like LJ so much better because most of the people I care to communicate with are on LJ. Not everyone has time to chat, so by posting I can tell everyone everything all at one time in a format that people can read at their leisure.

I like the comment structure. I like that it's all self-contained (although now Gmail is kind of built the same way - I find Gmail really appeals to the LJ side of me).

I love the design of LJ. Its clean, uncluttered, and easy to follow. People can make a visual mess of their journals but they generally have to really go out of their way to do so.

I love that the user info page is seperate from the blog bit of the page, kind of like the foyer from the house. Again, navigation is pretty straightforward there.

I like that communities look exactly like regular journals so there's no confusion as to how they work.

I... heh, I was going to list a bunch of other little things but thinking about it, it's all navigation stuff. Interests, communities, just -- all of it is so simple.

I also like that the basic information that you can plug into your Info page is just that - basic. And you don't have to give info you don't want to give. MySpace, in comparison, makes it look like a dating site - height, weight, age, sexual orientation.... If you WANT you can plug all that info into your user info text area but really, who cares? I'm not going to read your journal differently if you are 5'2" as compared to if you were 6'2". I mean, seriously.

To me, that lack of information makes journals seem a little more... serious, I guess. Though definetly not all journals are serious - and there are plently of blinky-meme filled LJ's just like you find on MySpace. They just seem to be a little fewer between.

I like that LJ was made by a single guy, a home grown type of thing that is run by a smallish company who is gonna keep it relaxed and not cluttered with ads and all that crap.

All in all, LJ is a place I actually feel GOOD about paying an optional $25 for a paid account. I am not much of a power user but I do like having that much more flexiblity and it just feels good to support something so well designed. :D

Feng Zhu [art]

Feng Zhu is an awesome artist. He's done designs for all kinds of things, from video games to movies, comics to television shows - including Stargate. What I really like are his digital sketches and the simplicity of them, but how he can turn them into something fantastic with a little color and strong lighting.

Symphonic/Goth Metal

Symphonic goth/metal

A Wikipedia article about Symphonic Metal
A Wikipedia article about Gothic Metal

Symphonic goth metal is basically unheard of in America. The closest thing we have is Evanescence (which I don't care for) and even then it's still not anything like its European cousin/predecessor. From the vast amount of symphonic goth/metal [sgm] bands, you'd think that's all they listened to over there. ;) It's definetly not like anything on the radio in the US, or possibly in the UK, either, seeing as how it's kind of hard to find even sgm stuff there (according to Trey, anyhow) and so for most Americans it seems to be an acquired taste.


The first I ever heard of it was when Trey showed me some songs by Dutch band Within Temptation. I knew one of their non-metal songs, "Neverending Story" from a Xena fan-vid that was made from the song. I was shocked to hear all this other music that they made. It was their not-so-metal stuff that pulled me in first. Songs like "Ice Queen" and "Dark Wings". Their older stuff contained "death growls" which are apparently typical of goth/dark metal and at first I didn't know what to make of them. The thing that got me beyond the death growls was the fact that the music was so intricately done and well performed. No two songs were alike and were all so very dynamic. The guitars weren't monotonous and were all very unique. The best part was the way that Sharon del Adel's voice (she's the female/main vocalist), despite its soprano, was piercingly strong and powerful, holding its ground with the heavy guitars and orchestra. Like a dove in the face of a storm. The immagery was fantastic and it just pulled me in.

I think the immagery is the main thing. SGM music is usually thematic. You could create an epic film using a single album from most of the bands. It's "musical" that way, almost sound trackish -- and generally I'm not big on musicals or soundtracks. I think because I saw that first Xena video I could see the power of the image within the songs. But strong immagery is part of SGM music, it seems -- usually medieval, fantasy, warriors, magic, ladies, vikings, stormy weather, lost love, romantisiced death, and all that is dark in that romantic way. This actually was not a selling point for me, but at least for Within Temptation, it did help pull the songs together. Listening to the albums like they are a story, like it's an aural film/story really helps the believeability for the American ear, I think. ;)


The next group I heard was Italian band Lacuna Coil. They're not really symphonic, just goth metal. All their albums could of been written in the same year for all the band evolves with their sound (or rather, doesn't -- it's more like they're slowly fine-tuning their stuff). They have two vocalists, one male, one female. The female sings on every song while the guy sings on about two thirds of them and sometimes does a harsher growlier voice, though genearlly never a "death growl" type of thing. With the dual dynamic, they can kind of do that stereotypical goth metal "soap operal" lyric thing, which isn't why I like Lacuna Coil. I like them because their guitars are so very unique and yet familiar. They don't sound like but they do remind me of Metallica - how you can tell a Metallica song anywhere, even if you've never heard it before, just because of the signature guitars and drums. Lacuna Coil has that same quality; the guitars and drums never get tired. Also, the female vocalist is more in the alto range and very powerful.

Some bands I've heard I really did not like at first- like Nightwish. Some SGM bands use a more operatic vocal that to me puts the music over the top into the realm of the absurd. (Wikipedia does, in fact, describe them as "opera metal"). Ugh.


In general, a lot of SGM bands I've heard seem to use soprano vocals in tandem with death growls. So far the only death growls I've ever been able to tolerate have been those in the first Within Temptation album (which, oddly, is my favorite of their albums - death growls and all). For me, the soprano vocals often tend to be too light and flighty; they don't hold their own with the power of the music.


Folk Metal: Leaves' Eyes

A Wikipedia article about Folk Metal

I recently discovered, quite by accident, the Norwegian folk metal band Leaves' Eyes when trying to find music by Lacuna Coil. They're once again interesting because of the folk element. Folk Metal tends to use native folk music elements. In the case of Leaves' Eyes their music hearkens back to the days of Vikings, and in fact their most recent album is about just that. (In fact, there is a sub genre called "Viking Metal", heh).

I made an offsite backup of their first album and for the most part it's pretty monotonous, actually. The vocalist sounds amazingly like Sarah Brightman, though not quite as strong and clear. They use some death growls here and there and they're quite badly done, unintelligible (you could actually mostly understand the death growls from Within Temptation) and just... un memorable. Leaves' Eyes' songs in general are not very strong - the songs all kind of run together and are not dynamic at all. Nothing pops out in most of them and it all sounds the same.

There are a couple jewels here and there, though, that I have become rather fond of. "For Amelie" is my very favorite, definetly more in the Folk Metal genre than in the symphonic/goth genre, and even then the guitars don't kick in til later. It's primarily a piano, fiddle, bass, and some kind of tinny folk stringed instrument - probably just an accoustic guitar. What makes it so great is the 3/4 time -- no one ever writes in 3/4 time. And 3/4 time with electric guitars (which, as I said, come in later) is even better. :D So the song overall has this almost lilting, wistful feel. I love it. If this genre sounds at ALL interesting to you, I reccomend this song.

I am working on making a backup of their more recent album, which seems a bit cleaner in terms of instrumentation, from what I can tell from four songs. So far, "For Amelie" is the lightest song by far on their first album. "Mourning Tree" is an even lighter song on their current album, mostly accoustic guitar with fiddle and flute, some keyboard strings, etc. - with no grinding guitars at all. I think they shine best when sticking closer to their folk element than to the goth/metal side of things.
____________________

I doubt anyone will find this particularly interesting; I just felt like writing. It's kind of a mini-rundown of my thoughts about European symphonic/goth metal and related bands that I've heard so far. Description of the music, what I like about it, what I don't like about it... We just simply don't have it here in America, and I wonder how many people are aware of it who might like it. Definetly an acquired taste for Far-Western ears but fun nonetheless.