REVIEW: Get Smart

I have a confession to make. I’ve been looking forward to Get Smart since I saw one of the early trailers and laughed out loud. I also have little to no knowledge of the TV series it’s based on, with the exception of the facts that it was created by Mel Brooks (whom I idolize), starred Don Adams, and probably invented the “spy spoof” genre, along with Man from U.N.C.L.E. Get Smart seemed to be right up my alley: physical comedy, joke-a-minute, and light tone. Walking into the movie, I expected to laugh, but I didn’t expect an engrossing story or characters I’d want to do a study on. I got exactly that.

Steve Carrell stars as Maxwell Smart, a role he was almost born to play. Smart is an agent for CONTROL, a secret government organization whose full-time job is hunting down shadow organization KAOS, whose full-time job it is to be a thorn in CONTROL’s side. Smart is a desk clerk who dreams of being a field agent and, surprisingly, has some natural talent. However, Smart is also naturally clumsy, like Frank Drebin, Inspector Cleuseau, and a hand full of other characters, and this is his defining characteristic. After a mole inside of CONTROL (heeeyyy… what a rhyme, eh? The movie people didn’t think of that!*) trashes the office and leaks the identities of undercover agents across the world, The Chief (Alan Arkin) has no choice but to enlist Smart to sniff out KAOS and foil their evil plan.

If you think you’ve seen this kind of movie before, you have. The plot is coherent enough to keep the film together and moving forward, and really exists only as a vehicle for jokes. That’s not in and of itself a bad thing. I implore you to tell me what the plot for The Naked Gun was? Didn’t think so. But sadly, there’s really nothing here in this movie except for the jokes and Steve Carrell’s performance. Don’t go looking for theme or interesting characters. There are a few tense situations which I appreciate, so the film at least has that. If they didn’t have the airplane scene or the laser trip-wire scene, I might’ve felt gipped out of my 11 bucks. The fact that I did pay that much money to see this movie is kind of a joke in its own right.

There are some cool appearances by Dwane Johnson (apparently shedding his “The Rock” moniker, which is okay now. Enough people know who he is), Anne Hathaway and Alan Arkin. My personal favorite was Masi Oka (Hiro Nakamura from Heroes), who has a lot of potential for comedy if Hiro ever winds up Quantum Leaping his way out of his current series. All these people do their jobs without seeming like they’re rolling their eyes once the camera stops, but it’s Steve Carrell’s show. He leaps into Maxwell Smart with a lot of enthusiasm, bringing the character to life off the small screen. It’s a good performance, but there’s not a lot of innovation here on any level. I was reminded a lot of the first Austin Powers movie, which is okay because Austin Powers is a guilty pleasure for me. Differences between the two films in terms of tone and execution are almost nil, with Austin Powers being a bit more tongue-in-cheek, and having the story device of a fish out of water, which gave me something to latch onto as an audience member. Get Smart doesn’t have either qualities, which means that it will lose people a lot easier if they’re not into the comedy. The question I have to ask myself is would it have been better if the film shot for the moon? In baseball, there are times when a batter has to stop focusing on getting a grand slam and worry about just getting a base hit. With Get Smart, the film just had to work and be funny, which it does fine.

Final Verdict: 3 shoe phones out of 5

There’s a very simple test to take in order to find out whether or not you’ll like Get Smart: watch the trailer. If you laughed, then you’ll probably like the movie. If you thought it was stupid and too over-the-top, then give it the widest birth you can afford. I liked it simply because I thought it was funny, even though some of the jokes were a little hit-or-miss. It won’t be as revered as The Naked Gun, Airplane, or any of the Monty Python movies, but it could get a chuckle out of you. My recommendation would be to either wait for DVD and rent it or take a large group of like-minded friends to go see it. And of the Don Adams franchises, this film is a thousand times better than either of the Inspector Gadget films.

REVIEW: Metal Gear Solid 4 – Guns of the Patriots

"I couldn't get distilled water in my trailer. Why do I even bother?"

I don’t care if people call me a fanboy at this point, because that’s what I am and I’m not ashamed to admit it. I’ve collected Metal Gear games that I’m not able to play because I don’t have the right hardware (or the hardware has dropped its fucking backwards compatibility, leaving your PS2 library to serve as coasters and cock rings from here on out.) I’ll just come out and say it: I love the Metal Gear series, even to the point where I paid an insane amount of money for my copy and stood on a line for 4 hours to get Hideo Kojima’s autograph. Time well spent, in my opinion. That being said, you might think that this presents a conflict of interests; I love all the other games, so isn’t it a foregone conclusion that I won’t be as critical as I would for something like, say, Haze? Not true, I say! I did like Metal Gear Solid 4, but perfect this is not. The experience is one that’s hard to categorize, but easy to enjoy. The game doesn’t have a whole lot of “OMG!” moments, but it looks pretty, handles well, and is innovative enough to keep people playing. The best thing is that it stays true to what the series has always been, while trying to open it up to new players, at least on a technical level. It’s Metal Gear Solid, and with that, you’ve been warned.

Guns of the Patriots is the final chapter in the Solid Snake Saga. Snake, now looking more like a Wal-Mart greeter than hunky Special Ops guy, must throw himself back into battle one last time to save the world from his nemesis, Liquid Snake, who has taken over the body of another antagonist, Revolver Ocelot. Ocelot is after SOP, a micromanaging combat system which allows Private Military Companies to operate more efficiently, effectively controlling the soldiers’ bodies and minds. I won’t get into the story much because, as you can tell, it’s a tough nut to crack, and almost impossible for someone who isn’t familiar with every single Metal Gear game, with the exception of Portable Ops. And now, here’s where I’ll get scholarly on your ass:
According to lectures I’ve gone to on storytelling, the most important element of a video game is graphics. If a game looks like crap, then nobody’s going to want to play it. Here, the graphics of Metal Gear Solid 4 are beyond exceptional. They make you wonder why HD wasn’t integrated sooner. The best way I can describe how this game looks is to polish Metal Gear Solid 3. The characters have the same build and recognizable skin polygons, but it’s bumped up to the current-gen standards. In game graphics work and don’t offer that much of a gap between cutscene and gameplay. But graphics serve to hook the player, while the next step holds them in.

The gameplay in MGS4 is a thing of beauty. The top-down gameplay of the original Metal Gear Solid has been cast aside in favor of a more “Western” approach. The camera is over-the-shoulder and you have the option of (finally!!!!!) moving and aiming in First Person. People who couldn’t get through the first few games will definitely enjoy the Call of Duty influence on this game. At least Snake isn’t fighting Nazis (yet). If you recall my Metal Gear Online review, I did gripe a bit about the button layout and combos being a bit daunting at first, but after a few hours, they become second nature, and the control system is so nuanced that even CQC moves can be studied and mastered, leaving the player able to complete the entire game by using CQC against every baddie. Also joining Snake is the Metal Gear Mk. II, a droid that you can use to scout enemy locations and even knock enemies out for easier sneaking, and OctoCamo, a sneaking suit that automatically mimics the surface it’s against. These new additions to gameplay will help to shock Metal Gear veterans and bring them into a new experience, and the gameplay has so many layers that you can play through it several times with emphasis on different tactics. In fact, a rewards system is set up in the game to encourage multiple play-throughs, which ups the stock of the game in my opinion. It is in the multiple play-throughs that the game shines. Once you’re not worried about the story and concentrated on just getting through the game to meet a certain set of criteria, the tense moments become more tense, and the more tracks you find for your in-game iPod will make revisiting Metal Gear Solid 4 maybe even more fun that playing it through the first time.

And finally, we have story. If you’re a Metal Gear Solid fan, you know how twisted and convoluted the story can get at times. It’s had its high moments (death of The Boss) and its low moments (reveal of The Patriots). With this installment, I feel the story is ambitious, almost to the point of being detrimental. Kojima talks about many real-world issues, the main of which deals with Private Military Companies and the rise of the proxy war, but what fans care about (Solid Snake vs. Liquid Ocelot) can be a bit dodgy at times with all the double crosses and confusing character motivations. There are times when I feel that the heart of the story is crushed by how intellectual it is, and by that I don’t mean smart. Smart is good in a story, but here, you are spending most of your time trying to connect the dots as to why someone is doing something, or about the little details of the plot that probably no one thought of (or I just missed. This is what a second play-through is for). And energy spent trying to figure out the story** is energy not spent enjoying the story. I spent most of the game hanging on by an intellectual thread, but the game does offer the ability to pause and skip cutscenes, which is very welcome, considering I need time to talk my way through what just happened.

(Author’s Note: I have a theory about Western audiences. I believe that we can only handle up to one double-cross in a story and still be humming along merrily on our way. We can understand that a person is on Side A and then changes over to Side B. Once you start getting into a triple-cross or a quadruple-cross, heads start to spin. A person is on Side A, goes over to Side B, and then reveals that he was always on the never-before-mentioned Side C. Sounds like that old Eggo commercial.)

Apart from the twisting story, the big thing that fans have been worried about are the rumors of insanely long load times and cutscenes over 90 minutes long. I’m here to say that some of the cutscenes can stretch close to (and as I’ve heard, beyond) the one-hour mark, but none of them come close to 90 minutes I didn’t notice the length, though. I was engaged in what was going on and it looked so damn pretty, too. As for the load times, the most time you’ll spend waiting for the game to install is 5 minutes, and Snake will be there to keep you company the whole time. Are these problems? Nope. I only have three legitimate gripes with the game outside of plot. The first is that the mechanic for turning over and firing can use some work. One of the coolest things you can do in the game is lie down, and press the Triangle button to quickly turn over. When you’re using it as a stealth tool, it’s cool to lie in wait as your prey passes right by you, and then you deliver the coup de grace. But, when you turn over and ready your weapon, Snake instantly reverts back to the direction he was facing before he turned over, meaning you have to quickly rotate the camera into the right position in order to pick off your targets, who by then have probably gone off to eat some ice cream or something. Also, I had hoped for more tense gameplay with the feeling that the enemy was constantly breathing down your neck and one wrong move would lead to finding yourself the recipient of the PMC’s lead generosity. It’s almost embarrassing to say, but the original Metal Gear game for the MSX2 has more of those moments than this installment, and for me, that’s a problem. The only other thing I can say about MGS4 that I wish was different was that they used the motion-controls of the Sixaxis (or DualShock 3) more.

These are really minor gripes in a game that otherwise is stunning. You’re in the thick of it from the moment you take control of Old Snake, and on tougher difficulties, you can feel the stress of staying hidden amongst super-nosy soldiers. Kojima is able to make a game that is accessible, but also spends most of it’s time dropping little prizes and moments for the fans that have been there forever. This game feels like Kojima taking a victory lap of where he’s been before, the graduation ceremony before the euphoria of being able to toss your cap in the air. Some moments are sublime, such as tracking Naomi Hunter’s footprints and using OctoCamo to stay hidden. That reminded me of what a real Special Ops guy does! And, even though it’s a short level with not a whole lot of enemies to encounter, I could play through that level three or four times in a row and still find it fun. The moment where Snake, at the end of his rope, walks through a room filled with microwaves while the outside world goes to hell is so heartbreakingly beautiful that it epitomizes what games can make us do. That’s the contribution Metal Gear Solid 4 has on the gaming world.

Final Verdict: 4.5 nuclear-equipped walking battle tanks out of 5

This is one of those games that people will talk about for a long time. It gave the Playstation 3 it’s first knock-out exclusive. It opened the door for more narrative expansion in video games. It closed out one of the defining game characters since Mario and Donkey Kong, and it’s a damn good game. I wish I could give it a perfect five out of five, but I felt I wouldn’t be true to my feelings if I didn’t take one half point away for story. Regardless, it’s worth your time and money if you have a Playstation 3 to get this one and keep it a treasured part of your library.

REVIEW: The Incredible Hulk

I know my reviews tend to get long-winded and unnecessary, so I’ll start of with a very quick summary to get the grunt work out of the way: if you are not a fan of flat-out, larger-than-live, energy-packed action movies, then there’s a good chance you will not dig The Incredible Hulk. If so, then you are in for a treat, because The Incredible Hulk, is awesome awesome awesome awesome awesome. Did I say that enough times? I hope I did, just to drive home the point of how awesome the movie is.

A lot of this film feels like it belongs, which is it’s biggest strength. Even though the intelligent side of your brain is telling you that something’s amiss, the images of a big CGI man stomping the ever-loving crap out of people 1/10th his size make the “entertainment” side of your brain tells the bookworm to fuck off. Sure, this is entertainment, and it’ll probably never make its way into a festival run by Roger Ebert, but seriously, the mark of a good director is to show you something you’ve already seen before and make you not care. If you’ve seen any of the Die Hard films or even Transformers (which I haven’t seen), then you’ve probably seen the bulk of what the Hulk can offer. But it’s so much fun to be in there, being bombarded by the surround sound, soaking up the images and riding this roller-coaster. There are of course times when the film loses its balance on the Tightrope of Believability and threatens to plunge into the Chasm of Absurdity, but director Louis Leterrier keeps you moving forward and never looking back. As for the CGI, I thought it’s a great improvement, and even though it can get obvious at times, the CGI looks like it was pulled straight out of the comic book and it fits within the frame, even though there are a few edges still showing.

The Incredible Hulk is a remake/reboot/sequel to the original Hulk which was made by Ang Lee. Frequent readers or people who know me are aware that I’d rather take a bath in a tub filled with the Scarabs from The Mummy before I would watch Hulk again. It follows Bruce Banner, played surprisingly well by Edward Norton. Note that it’s not a slam against Edward Norton; I think he’s one of the best actors in Hollywood, but I didn’t know if he’d pull of the finer nuances of the Banner character. The film assumes that we at least have some knowledge of the history of the Hulk, but fills in the ignoratti in the audience with style and mastery. I was seriously inspired by that opening sequence. It reminded me a whole lot of Red Dragon, but done without being so obvious. Banner is on the run from the law and trying desperately to contain and eventually cure himself of his green inner pal. To combat him, General “Thunderbolt” Ross hires Russian elite soldier Blonski (Tim Roth) to hunt down the Hulk. Along the way, we’re introduced to Banner’s former love interest and “Thunderbolt”’s daughter Betty Ross (Liv Tyler, beautiful as ever) and a few other side characters that will have fans of the Hulk franchise getting stuck to their seats after the multiple nerdgasms.

In fact, this whole movie could be seen as one big nerdgasm. The opening of the movie draws so much from the old TV show that Kenneth Johnson might want to ask for residuals. Dr. Samuel Sterns and Doc Sampson all appear, as well as real-world creator Stan Lee and actual “Hulk” Lou Ferrigno. Beyond the lip-service being paid to the fans, which all comic book movies have to do, the rest of the film has a 50-50 chance of standing on its own. The action scenes are great, the set design and frame construction can get really beautiful at times, and the film has some real tension. I love the “man on the run” story of Bruce Banner, and I think one thing that they get right in this film, which also alludes to the TV show, is that being The Hulk is not a good thing, similar to someone blacking out and experiencing a homicidal or hallucinatory episode. I also really drew myself to the reconnection of Banner and Ross because it spoke to me and situations I’m going through in my life currently. There is something to this movie. It isn’t all explosions and action. But like an apple or grape, the film tastes very sweet while at the same time being imperceptibly good for you.

Aside from the problems with plot and motivation, where the writer seems to guide things a bit too much at times, the only other gripes I had with the film was that it was so obvious an action film and its apparent lack of theme. I won’t give away any spoilers, but there are a few moments in this movie that are scripted to sneak catchprases or iconic images into a script that might reject them like a transplant patient’s body. Those moments are rare, though, and at times, it’s so cool to hear it that you don’t freaking care. The final problem I had is that I don’t know what this film is about. I like that I can’t feel the plot moving underneath me (too much), but I also can’t spot the themes or ideas behind this movie. There are a bunch of mini-themes, dealing with power, failure, life on the lam, etc. but none of them are developed enough to get into the front part of the picture. I don’t mind this, though, because I’d rather it be good on its own merit and have no theme rather than try to shove a theme down its throat because you think you have to. It doesn’t get into the way, so I don’t miss it too much.

Final Verdict: 4 “I Promised I Wouldn’t Say “Hulk Smash!”s out of 5

There is a lot going on in this film, between General Ross’ history to the King Kong-esque relationship had between Betty Ross and Hulk, that I feel that people will revisit it. It is a popcorn movie, no doubt, and those who don’t like big action sequences will probably dislike The Incredible Hulk for being mindless and loud, and they’re probably right. But the movie is a lot of fun, has some pretty good performances by Norton, Tyler, and Roth, and isn’t too outlandish to make people laugh at the wrong moments.

One last note before I leave: this is not a movie kids should see in theaters. The audio is extremely loud, and there are a few cures words (hence the big PG-13 rating.) That said, I sat in the theater and watched as a 3-4 year old climbed the stairs next to me. Now, I’m all for treating kids with respect and intelligence, but a 3-year-old? One of the reasons why theater attendance is down is because of the loud kids that kick the back of your seat. I never understood it until I saw this movie. Kids can make you do insane things, and I was ready to have a Hulk-out of my own in the middle of the theater because of this adorable little snot-nosed chatterbox behind me that kept asking “Which one is the Incredible Hulk?” and kicking the back of my seat during the action sequences. As comedian Bobby Collins points out, “Kids are great, but sometimes you’ll just wanna fuckin’ punt ‘em.” I rarely do this, but I’ll implore parents and guardians to keep kids under 9 out of The Incredible Hulk. Not just for their sake, but for the sake of everyone else in the room. Take them to see The Happening instead.

REVIEW: Speed Racer

Here he comes. Here comes Speed Racer. He is a demon on wheels, but at the box office, he may be better off in the spectator stands.

There are a few things I’d like to clear up before we get too far into the film itself. First of all, I’m not a fan of the original cartoon series, preferring to skip it on Saturday Mornings to instead watch the old Rocketship 7 show on WKBW. (Author’s note: if you remember that show, please find me because we are truly kindred spirits.) Second, I’m a fan of most of the Wachowski Brothers’ work. I love The Matrix, like any decent human being should, I thought Bound was a brilliant little indie movie, and I greatly enjoyed their script for V for Vendetta. The Wachowskis are confessed Japanimation fans, so I thought that the choice of them to adapt a cult cartoon favorite would be about as brilliant as putting ice cubes in beer. It turns out that this may be like putting LSD in beer. Sure, the new sensations are kinda enjoyable, but do you really need them?

Emile Hirsch, whom I got a good vibe off of after viewing Into the Wild, steps in as Speed Racer, a bright-eyed young lad with dreams of going fast and going far in the racing world after idolizing his older brother, Rex Racer. As the name implies, the entire family from Mom (Susan Sarandon), Pops (John Goodman) and the pet monkey (Chim Chim) are dedicated to the field of auto racing. Speed of course hits it big, and gains the attention of Royalton Industries, who want to sign Speed to their team. After Speed turns down their offer, he uncovers a large conspiracy with corporate owners fixing races and a plot to eliminate him from the sport. With the help of gal pal Trixie (Christina Ricci) and mysterious racer/secret agent Racer X (Matthew Fox), Speed sets out to save his family’s reputation and the sport of racing itself.

The only way to describe this movie is the first live-action anime. And I don’t mean that in the sense of Kill Bill or my hobby script for a Hellsing movie; I mean that this is really a Japanese cartoon with real people in it. It even has that thing that I hate where a person meaning to run fast or put a lot of force into something is shown against a rushing background of lines and colors. Faces wipe across the screen spouting commentary or exposition and the action is so far over the top that it leaves the planet and goes into orbit. If you look in a telescope at night, you can still see the big kung-fu fight with the entire Racer family and the bad guys circling the planet with its big KA-POW!!! graphics overpowering the Big Dipper. This may work for some very specific people, but for me, I found myself flashing back to Ang Lee’s awful Hulk movie. Believe you me, you do not want an audience watching your movie to be thinking about Hulk unless they are thinking, “Wow, this really isn’t like Hulk!”

You’ll also notice that the color scheme of the film is a bit… how to put it… extreme. By that, I mean that if you took Pixar’s Cars and force-fed it an entire bag of sugar, you’d get Speed Racer. This world is obviously computer generated, but it helps to separate Speed’s world from ours. Personally, I didn’t mind it; I knew this was based on a cartoon and it didn’t burden itself with weighty realism. In fact, this film does to realism what Vincent Vega does to Martin in Pulp Fiction. At times, it can get annoying because you wish that the film didn’t try so hard to impress us. It’s very impressive in more ways than one, but it just overdoes it… and then overdoes it some more.

The primary fault I can find with Speed Racer is that the film, pardon my pun, has a sporadic transmission. In other words, the film acts like it wants to go fast, but in reality is bogged down by the visual style and the weight of the storytelling. When watching the movie, you realize that the scenes that didn’t need a whole lot of explaining were hit over the head so hard that your dog could understand them. These usually have to deal with small moments in a scene, or a bunch of commentators verbally orgasming over Speed’s performance. For example, the opening scene ping-pongs between present and past, giving us all the exposition on the Racer family while Speed, in the present, races against the ghost of his brother’s old car. At the end, the two merge and Speed is a superstar. On the flip side, some of the emotional moments (i.e. Royalton’s interesting relationship to the racing world, Speed and Trixie’s relationship, a particular moment of double-crossing that I won’t give away, and the vigilante behavior of Racer X) could’ve used a lot more emphasis. Make no mistake, this doesn’t have any of the philosophical overtones of The Matrix or the political overtones of V for Vendetta. This is the very antithesis of subtle. More than that, it felt to me as if the filmmakers didn’t trust us to pick up on things and decided to blow them up like the Death Star. To me, it was a little bit insulting because I feel like the filmmakers were treating me like a child. There’s a scene where Speed, Trixie, and Racer X have a conversation from three separate cars, and when a new character starts to talk, the camera zooms us to that character and then back again. There’s not a single cut in that conversation! Someday, maybe film historians will jabber on about that sequence like they currently do about the crane shot in Touch of Evil, but in the here and now, I sat in the theater thinking, “Cut the damn camera already!”

That’s not to say that Speed Racer is a total stinker. It isn’t, and the film has a lot of good going for it. First of all, the performances are excellent. I can’t think of one actor that brought the movie down or was uninteresting to watch. Speed Racer also has some very tense moments during the driving scenes, and it’s never boring. Kind of like my complaint for Hulk, Speed Racer is at its best when it stops trying to dunk the basketball and will settle for shooting it. The Wachowski Brothers have a brilliant eye and the editing in some of the race scenes (not counting all the wiping heads and aerial acrobatics) is spectacular. The film certainly isn’t boring, and you can get a cheap thrill out of watching these cars go fast, as people have for nearly a century. It’s almost recommendable just for these racing scenes alone, but the serious reviewer in me can’t allow that, so I hereby bestow upon Speed Racer:

Final Verdict: “Go, 2.5 out of 5, Go!”

I didn’t enjoy Speed Racer as much as I did Iron Man. Speed is entirely forgettable in the sense that it’s not the sort of film that warrants repeat viewings. But I loved the overall color scheme, even though I could’ve done without a few embellishments to make the race track and the racing more flashy, and there are some rock-solid performances being made. It’s a fun film to take the kids to, and any youngster will probably get a kick out of Speed Racer. However, if your child feels that Speed Racer wasn’t interesting enough, you either have a kid with serious ADD or a future film critic. Either way, seek professional help immediately.

UPDATE: I do have to take back some of my words after renting Speed Racer for Blu-ray. I enjoyed it a lot more than I did in the theaters and I consider the movie a guilty pleasure now. The HD looks damn good and I liked the ending sequence much much more now as opposed to then. Maybe it’s because I rented it for 5 dollars and didn’t spend the 30 bucks buying the Blu-ray, so I have to give the film a bit more credit than I did when I first wrote this review. It does warrant multiple viewings, and I hope that Speed Racer gains a cult following. The problem it had at the box office was that it was a cult movie that was given The Dark Knight’s budget and expectations.

REVIEW: Super Mario Galaxy

There are a few things in life that are constant. Death is one of them. Taxes are another. The final thing is that whenever Nintendo launches a new console, a Mario platformer will be there to push it. Super Mario Galaxy, a game that’s been out for a while but I’ve only recently had a chance to sample, has been earning much praise from the critical community, snagging more than one “Game of the Year” award and getting near perfect scores in the press. After playing it, I can see what they mean, but I’ll warn the few people just emerging from their bomb shelters that haven’t had a chance to play it to not take this game as a golden calf (or in this case, a golden Koopa). It is good, but not without its flaws.

Super Mario Galaxy is the game that was meant to showcase what the Wii is capable of. I will say that the graphics of the cutscenes and even of the gameplay itself are pretty impressive for a machine that is graphically last-generation. The colors are vivid and pop out of the screen at you as if to say “screw you, realism!” It accents the playfulness of the tone, less like a feature film and more like a Saturday Morning Cartoon.

The controls, however, are a different story. Few games in the current-gen are able to get motion control right. The “point-and-grab/shoot” mechanism works great, but the shaking mechanism can fail you at times. Perhaps this is just operator error, and I will admit that I’d rather have a shake mechanism with a high threshold for movement rather than a low one, so that way I’m not accidentally spinning my butt into the nearest black hole whenever my wrist gets a nervous twitch. The camera also isn’t flawless. I like the way it follows Mario most of the time, but there are times when it gets a case of “Resident Evil Syndrome” i.e. the camera will not allow you to see what’s in front of you and so you are walking blind into an area that could possibly be bogie-infested. By the same token, it takes some time to learn how to control Mario around a spherical object. By that I mean that I’ve effectively finished the game and I still haven’t gotten it. I’ll run in one direction and find that I’m running backwards when I want to run forwards, up when I want to run down, etc. In the midst of a boss fight, this is highly frustrating, but I figure that playing so much that you earn a doctorate in Super Mario Galaxy would be enough to correct this problem.

And just for the record, the swimming levels still suck. If you’ve played a water level in Super Mario 64 it’s kinda like that. Here, we get the added bonus of shell propellent and spinning in mid-water. Again, I have to decipher between bona fide flaw and simple operator error. For the record, I’m terrible at games with inverted directions (up is down, down is up). My monkey brain isn’t evolved enough to handle complex instructions like that easily. So, when swimming through the water, trying to avoid obstacles and hitting the air bubble before you gargle your last precious breath can be frustrating. In fact, I’m already looking at a new HDTV because I’m anticipating throwing my Wiimote through this one during a water level.

I’m not going to even get into the story, because Mario stories, even the one for the feature film, can be generated by computer. It goes a little something like this:

1) Princess Peach is kidnapped.
2) Bowser is probably behind it somehow.
3) Mario must save her going through various theme-based levels and collecting Mushroom Kingdom contraband that have different functions but are always shaped like stars.

Everything else on top of this is meant to misdirect from the fact that we’ve been here before, but probably during a different season or driving in a different car, so the feeling of deja vu isn’t as strong. And at this point, Bowser has essentially turned into a Batman villain: not very conspicuous and everything he does is a crime somehow. At least Batman villains have the explanation that they go to jail and somehow escape! In the Mushroom Kingdom, the average attention span is so short that once Bowser taps out and Princess Peach is supposedly safe, everything is hunky-dory. By this point, you’d think that even the most liberal of Toad would be calling for Mario to pull one of his Smash Bros. moves and bring Bowser’s head back on a stick. And Princess Peach must have some (metaphorical) balls! Few people can overcome even ONE kidnapping! After the umpteenth time you’ve been abducted by a huge spiky turtle with a mohawk, you’d either barricade yourself in a reinforced bunker or grab a Fire Flower and turn into Sybil. Yet Princess Peach can withstand one kidnapping after another and still be the same smiling patriarch. 20 bucks says that it isn’t long before the Mushroom Kingdom News finds her huddled in the corner, caked in blood, clutching Mario’s severed head in her arms and mumbling over and over, “Your princess is in another castle… your princess is in another castle…”

For my final story point: at first I wasn’t enthusiastic about sending Mario into space. It seemed like a step backward to me. Do you remember in the ‘90s, when every sitcom either had a newborn baby in it or sent its cast to Disney World in order to boost its ratings? I feel the same way about sending Mario into space. It’s trying something new, but feels like the Idea Well is starting to run even more dry than it already is. Like Ben “Yahtzee” Crowshaw said in his review: “After you’ve gone into space, there’s really no place to go unless your next adventure teams you up with Freddy Krueger.” But, playing the game, you don’t care one little bit that it’s in another galaxy; the level design makes up for it, making Mario feel more fresh than he has in years.

Final Verdict: 4.5 Italian Plumbers out of 5

Super Mario Galaxy is super fun, and perhaps a must if you own a Wii. It’s bright and easy enough to be accessible to young kids, while people who’ve grown up with Mario will find it a spiritual successor to the shining moments of the franchise and challenging enough to not breeze through it. It’s a rule of math that if you keep repeating the same action enough times, it will surprise you at least once. After the dirth of Mario Party games, Mario Kart, and the Super Mario Sunshine debacle, Super Mario Galaxy has taken the formula and created something cool with it.

REVIEW: Iron Man

Marvel movies seem like a fad to me, another go-around of the same train we were riding after 1989 gave us Tim Burton’s Batman, just this time with a different company leading the helm. Sure, great stuff gets made (X-Men, Spider-Man, Daredevil) and some bad stuff gets made (Hulk), but to me it seems like Marvel is willing to let Hollywood borrow its characters, kinda like someone letting you borrow your car, with the distinct difference that when Hollywood totals a franchise (again, Hulk), Marvel can still fall back on the established market of the comic books.

My griping aside, the next stop on the Marvel Train is Iron Man, a second-tier character for the House of Ideas that over the years has grown into a fan favorite due to its flawed, alcoholic, bum-ticker lead character Tony Stark. I will admit to being not interested in the Iron Man franchise one tiny little bit, outside of Stark’s involvement with Marvel’s Civil War. So when I heard that they were adapting Iron Man to the screen, my reaction was a resounding “eh”. I fully agreed with the casting of Robert Downey, Jr. as Mr. Stark – to me it was like asking Christopher Lloyd to play crazy – and I went about my days not interested in the development of the movie. This all changed when I saw the promos.

The film looked beautiful, like a shiny new Lamborghini, and I enjoyed the comedic tone of the trailer. But anyone who knows cars knows that Lamborghinis, while being beautiful machines, are incredibly difficult to drive. I felt the same way about Iron Man during the preview stage. It seemed like they were trying to cram a lot into the film. You had to set up Tony Stark, have him be captured, build the first Iron Man suit, build the second Iron Man suit, build the third Iron Man suit, and fight a villain which needed his own setup all while seeming like its not marching to the tune of a drill sergeant’s command. As the weeks past, I waited to see how Jon Favareu was going to pull this off.

Friends and loyal readers, Iron Man is a lot of fun.

The great thing about Iron Man is that it knows exactly what it is, and performs up to those expectations. The film starts off with the kick-ass riff from AC/DC’s “Back in Black”, and it sets the tone for the rest of your two hours. Bigger than life, in-your-face, and a rockin’ good time. It’s not even five minutes into the film before we get our first huge explosion, and while Favareu choses not to take us down Schwartzenegger territory, there is more than enough pyro, gunfire, and mech-on-mech action to satisfy the average popcorn moviegoer. The special effects are amazing, and the pace rarely slows down. But if you want more than just a shiny coat of paint on your film, we may be getting onto thin-ice. However, unlike most balls-out action films, this one might have some substance to it.

Obviously, it’s Robert Downey, Jr.’s show. His Tony Stark doesn’t have a whole lot of demons, but is instantly identifiable as a character we’d like to be around. He’s the sort of guy who could capture an entire room with a smile and hold it until he was blue in the face. We open with Stark cracking jokes to the team of camouflage-wearing redshirts whose untimely snuffing on the battlefield sets the plot in motion, and sure enough, the first thing we see of Stark is his hand holding some sort of alcoholic beverage. I thought I had as I was leaving the theater was that if Liam Neeson in Schindler’s List was a superhero, it’d be Tony Stark. The man drinks like a fish and has more tail than a tree monkey. But beyond the obvious playboy characterization, Stark is the heir of a huge weapons corporation and gets his obsession with weaponry and power from his father, who worked on the Manhattan Project. After an incident with some Middle East radicals and seeing who exactly is buying his weapons, Stark has a change of heart and spends the rest of the film building what will become Iron Man.

I thought the character arc was a bit stock: a business man comes down out of his ivory tower to see life on the ground floor, and the screenplay missed out on a great opportunity for pathos and character motivation. If you’re wondering what that blue, glowing thingy on Tony’s chest is in all the previews, it’s essentially an electromagnet that is keeping shrapnel from burrowing into his body and killing him. Thus, technology is keeping him alive, and every moment is precious because he’s operating on an unsure timetable. But the script favors a more “external” source of Tony’s character development. It doesn’t detract from the film as a whole, which I will get into in a bit.

Leading the supporting cast is Terrance Howard as Jim Rhodes, a military man and the closest thing Tony has to a best friend. I have to say that Howard’s work is, in a word, brilliant. He does a great job breathing life into a character that is, for the most part, lifeless. He exists as Tony’s friend and a view of the outside world upon him. Period. But Howard gets into the character and makes him likeable, almost disappearing into the role. There comes a scene in the film where Iron Man is under attack by two F-16s, under command of the army. Rhodes is naturally there, and carries on a conversation with Tony Stark over the phone, while simultaneously working with people that are trying to shoot Tony out of the sky. It’s probably not the best scene in his career, but it’s a highlight of this film. Rounding out the supporting characters are Gwyneth Paltrow as “Pepper” Potts, Stark’s personal assistant and Jeff Bridges as Obadiah Stane, the connection between Stark Industries and Tony Stark himself. Bridges looks a hell of a lot different than he did in previous years, and no matter how seriously I tried to take him as a villain, I always flashed back to his work in The Fisher King or The Big Lebowski. That’s probably just me, though.

The best thing about this film is that it doesn’t take itself too seriously. You can look at X-Men as a study of the outsider in contemporary culture and Spider-Man as the story of a teenager gaining courage, but Iron Man doesn’t have that kind of thematic depth. What it does have is a very good sense of humor about itself. I take, for instance, a scene where Stark tries out his hover technology for the first time. He says very clearly that he’s not sure what’s going to happen, and will start out at 10%. If you know comedy like I think I know it, there’s no question what’s going to happen next, yet the way it was executed still got a laugh from everyone in the theater. Gags are plentiful throughout the film, at times making light of the absurdity of the situation. Yet the film doesn’t become a parody of itself. In a way it becomes similar to Raiders of the Lost Ark: an action-adventure with a sense of humor. I enjoyed the sense of humor, because it felt like the film wasn’t trying to do something it wasn’t going to be good at anyways. And it distanced Iron Man from other superhero movies, which may have a joke or two to lighten the mood, but are ultimately straight-faced and dour.

The film is not without its flaws, though. As I mentioned before, if you’re not looking to be simply entertained at this film, I’d seriously re-think your weekend plans. But beyond that, there are some huge leaps of faith you have to accept in order to not burst out laughing at what’s going on. You can buy all the characters as being authentic, but there comes a point where with heroes like Batman or Iron Man who have an unlimited amount of resources, you begin to hit technological critical mass. In other words, there comes a point where it seems that someone has too much technology at their disposal. The credibility also takes a hit when it comes to some properties of physics. I can accept the Iron Man suit with no problems, but when Iron Man can collide with and rip off the wing of an F-16 and still walk around, I start to get epileptic seizures. Any other human being who did that would either be killed instantly or turned into Stephen Hawking but without the intellect. A side effect from this is what I call “Superman Syndrome.” It’s present among many costumed superheroes when they’re essentially invincible. The Iron Man suit is like Batman’s utility belt or a magician’s hat: it can hold or do anything at any time, depending on the context. Not only that, but it can take a 50 caliber machine gun round and shrug it off like a mosquito bite. As a result, some of the tension of the battles is lost because you can tell that Tony Stark with that suit could decimate an entire army easily. There was a point earlier on in the film where some rogue gunmen found weak spots in the armor and were able to momentarily incapacitate Iron Man. I love that kind of crap! It makes every battle a struggle because, as we all know, technology has a tendency to fail us when we need it the most. For the record, though, I didn’t hear anyone either in my party or the entire theater complain.

The rest of my critiques are nitpicky stuff. For example, I thought that Tony Stark’s transition from doubting war-monger to armed defender of the people felt quick. I also felt that the character of Obadiah Stane could’ve used some more development. He didn’t seem like a “Stan Lee villain”, or a bad guy who has a justifiable point of view that leads to his villainy, like Magneto or Harry Osborn. Finally, the ending seemed a bit rushed, but those are just my opinions. With the exception of the Obadiah remark, I can live with everything else in the film.

Final Verdict: 4 and a half Black Sabbath song references out of 5

Iron Man signals the official start of the Summer Movie Season, where Hollywood puts out its biggest hitters. This movie certainly isn’t The Godfather or something that film theorists are going to be analyzing and gabbing about until Armageddon collectively shuts them up, but for my money and for yours, too, this isn’t a bad way to spend an evening. And for Marvel, I’m not hopping off the train just yet. Next stop: Incredible Hulk!

UPDATE: Some may notice that the score (previously a three) has changed. Iron Man has been promoted into my pantheon of “favorite films.” It’s a film that knows no context; I could put it on at any time no matter what’s going on in my life or in the world and I’d still have fun watching it. The three I’d bestowed upon it right after coming home from the theater felt a tad bit harsh after spending months riding the Blu-ray like a toy horse.

REVIEW: Metal Gear Online Multiplayer Beta

I’ve never been one for online games. It’s a fad that has totally left me behind, like the Latin Invasion of the Late 90s. My dislike of online games boils down to a few undeniable truths: I suck at them and the people online can get aggressive. You know that kid who accidentally scores in his own basket in gym class, earning glares of scorn from the other, more athletic and popular kids? Imagine that kind of situation, but those athletic kids now have shotguns.

To be honest, I was going to give Metal Gear Online the biggest pass I could possibly imagine. I loathe online multiplayer games such as World of Warcraft or even games like Matrix Online for their lack of story and my aforementioned habit of being bad at multiplayer games. But I decided to give this online beta a shot when I learned it was open to those who pre-ordered Metal Gear Solid 4, which of course I did. I didn’t expect anything except a primer for MGS4’s controls. Perhaps it’s because of that lack of expectations, but I’ve found Metal Gear Online to be a lot of fun to play.

I seriously recommend going into the training sessions because if you just jump straight into gameplay, you might as well run into the battlefield wearing a purple jumpsuit holding a banana and screaming Rhianna’s “Umbrella” at the top of your lungs because you’ll be just as easy to shoot. The control scheme for Metal Gear Online is very confusing at first, multiplying the number of buttons the Playstation 3 controller has exponentially using context-sensitive commands. For example, R1 fires your weapon (after holstering your weapon with L1). However, if you have a weapon with a “CQC” label on it, pressing R1 punches with your weapon while holding R1 enables a choke hold, from which you can drop your opponent to the ground with the X button, and a-hey-nanni-nanni-and-a-ho-ho-ho. Get the idea? Metal Gear Online opens up a world of possibilities from the simple run-and-gun style of games like Halo 3 or Call of Duty, but because of that, it takes some time for these moves to become second-nature. Therefore, if you’re not some kind of Metal Gear prophet, expect some boneheaded moves on the battlefield while your opponent gives you a lead suppository. One of my favorite moves so far involves “playing dead” and then plugging an opposing player as he runs past you. You can’t do that in Halo!

The maps of Metal Gear Online have the standard “urban plight” feel to them, but with a nice aesthetic, looking straight out of Metal Gear Solid 4. I’m not a connoisseur of multiplayer maps, but with enough study and tactical experience, you can have some fun creating choke points. Some maps are great for sniping, while others work best for straight-up one-on-one dogfighting. The one complaint I have about the maps themselves is that ground cover is about the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen. Unlike Gears of War, where cover is near essential, the only things cover is good for in this game are looking pretty and running behind. You can’t tactically use cover to poke out from behind, but only as a brief reprieve from the bullets. As a sniper, I’m doubly pissed that you can’t use cover with a sniper rifle. But arial cover does work somewhat. Besides, most of the players I meet chose not to use cover anyways, unless they’re under sniper fire. Instead, they’ll chose to just face you down one-on-one.

The last thing about Metal Gear Online that I can comment about is the game modes. There are the standard Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, Capture the Flag games, which are made fun through the controls and the new ways of waging combat. Other games are just about how many bullets you can put into the air at one time, while Metal Gear Online, ever the subtle game, puts as much emphasis on CQC and use of SOP tactics (which allow you to easily identify where teammates and enemies are). One mode that I’m looking forward to play is Sneaking Mode, where one character plays as Solid Snake himself and must collect dog tags from all the other players before they kill him three times. This is a unique mode of gameplay that is total Metal Gear Solid.

Beta Verdict: 3 Cardboard Boxes out of 5

The big question about this game is how much fun is it? Well, from my perspective, I spend half my time dying, so it’s quite frustrating, but I enjoy the tactical nature of Metal Gear Online and the familiar Metal Gear aesthetic. It feels like I’m actually playing Metal Gear Solid 4 months before anyone else, and in the end, I guess that’s what the point of Metal Gear Online is would be to drum up more interest for MGS4. You can certainly come back to the online multiplayer gameplay again and again for the basic fun of shooting other people, but if you don’t play Metal Gear Online and start to salivate over the eventual release of the final Metal Gear Solid game, you are functionally dead.

Oscar Noms… and some Predictions

Today, the nominations for the 2008 Academy Awards were released to the unsuspecting public. They eventually grew beyond their barriers, terrorized New York City, and bit the head off the Statue of Liberty like that monster in Cloverfield…

Or they just found their way onto my website.

There’s not a whole lot to be excited about with this go-around, unless you’re a real indie freak. No Country for Old Men has raked in the most nominations, with 8 including Best Picture. Tied for the top was There Will Be Blood, the Daniel Day-Lewis movie. I’ve seen neither, altough they both look awesome. George Clooney got a few nods for Michael Clayton, Tommy Lee Jones was nominated for Best Actor, and even The Golden Compass found its way into the list of nominees. Not a bad cross-section of movies from the past year. So, where do we go from here.

For starters, I don’t give a fuck if the televised ceremony gets cancelled because of the Writer’s Strike. That’s not a big issue for me, since in a previous blog I’ve noted that the Oscar ceremony is like the world’s longest baseball game, one with no score and no threat of being rained out. But I like seeing the winners after it’s all said and done. So, let’s cut the bullshit and get right down to brass tax. I’ll give my predictions on who will win and why, and afterwards, we’ll see if I have to give up my Clairvoyant License (which I got after eating three boxes of “Cocoa Crisps.”) I will admit that I’ve based my predictions not entirely on whether or not I like a movie or if I’ve even seen the movie, but what I predict will happen when the time comes. I will say that my old roommate once picked the entire Oscar ceremony, while I had a success rate of below chance, so take that into consideration before running off to Vegas.

[NOTE: *** = A Correct Prediction]

Best Picture: No Country for Old Men
This is kind of like betting on the Patriots to win a football game, but this movie has the momentum behind it. It’s pretty much a coinflip on whether it’ll win or lose, so I’m betting that it will win based on the sheer momentum. ***

Best Actor: Tommy Lee Jones for In the Valley of Elah
I hate betting against Johnny Depp in Sweeney Todd, and I wish with all my heart that he does win, but I don’t think that his performance was enough to sway voters. Granted, he’s damn good, but I think that TLJ’s performance in Elah is more of the flavor of Oscar. If I’m wrong, I hope Depp takes it, but if George Clooney wins for Michael Clayton, I’ll really have egg on my face.

Best Actress: Ellen Page for Juno
This comedy is gaining a lot of steam in the public eye, and Page has gotten a lot of press with her name attached. In the film, she plays a vulnerable young girl who gets pregnant by that guy in Superbad. That spells “Oscar” in my book. And none of the other performances were of real note like the one in Juno. I’d say she’s a pretty safe bet.

Best Supporting Actor: Javier Bardem for No Country for Old Men
This is the actor whose face is most associated with the movie. I hear he gives a good performance, so he’s who I’m throwing my weight behind. Casey Affleck looked good as well, as did Phillip Seymour Hoffman (always an Oscar favorite), but The Assassination of Jesse James came and went like a jet airplane and Charlie Wilson’s War, while carrying good Oscar subject matter, doesn’t feel like a winner to me.***

Best Supporting Actress: Ruby Dee for American Gangster
Totally arbitrary. I just know her and she did a good job in Stephen King’s The Stand. Also, American Gangster was a big movie when it was out.

Best Director: The Cohen Brothers for No Country for Old Men
The Cohen Brothers are great filmmakers, and a movie like No Country… needs good people at the helm to make it work. The fact that this is on so many “Best Of…” lists should be an indication that they’ve got “Best Director” in the bag already.

Best Original Screenplay: Michael Clayton
I haven’t seen or read any of the nominees, so I’m going with the thriller on this one. Juno is a good bet, as is Ratatouille. However, I think the intrigue of political thriller will be impossible for voters to resist.

Best Adapted Screenplay: There Will Be Blood
No Country for Old Men seemed like another winner here, but my gut is saying otherwise. The Cohen Brothers are great at visualizing a script, but I fucking hated Raising Arizona. (Granted, I think Fargo is pretty cool). Instead, I’m opting for this underdog to take it all.***

Best Cinematography: Atonement
This is a total hunch, since I don’t feel that No Country for Old Men or There Will Be Blood are strong enough to make the cut. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford could pull an upset, since westerns require good cinematography to work, but I’ve got my money on the indie film here.***

Best Editing: The Bourne Ultimatum
It would please me to see this rock ‘em, sock ‘em action movie to take it home, and these movies require good editing, so that’s what I’m picking. Although, I have sneaking suspicions that the big Hollywood blockbuster may be overlooked.***

Best Art Direction: Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
This is an absolute no-brainer. The art direction on Sweeney Todd was instrumental in achieving the gothic tone of the film, so this is what I’m going for. It’s the one category where Sweeney Todd deserves to win.***

Best Costume Design: Elizabeth, The Golden Age
For the intricate period costumes and the fact that Across the Universe shouldn’t win anything but a Razzie.***

Best Makeup: Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End
For the squid-man and the fact that Norbit shouldn’t win anything but every single Razzie it’s nominated for.

Best Original Score: Atonement
Again, a pure guess. I like 3:10 to Yuma’s chances, but I think that spaghetti western isn’t en vogue unless Ennio Morricone is involved.***

Best Original Song: “Thats How You Know” from Enchanted
Frankly, this movie is up for three out of the five nominations in this category, so I’m hedging my bet on the one that sounds like the best winner. For the record “Happy Working Song” doesn’t stand a chance. But then again, what do I know? I’m still pissed that “Blame Canada” was beaten by Phil Collins.

Best Sound: 3:10 to Yuma
This one feels like a real challenge, getting all the horse sound effects on set. This movie, unlike Bourne Ultimatum and Transformers has little to no CGI, so I think it has the best chance of winning.

Best Sound Editing: Transformers
I really dislike Michael Bay, but if you can make gigantic robots who beat each other up believable, then you deserve something.

Best Visual Effects: Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End
Crappy movie, but good effects. I would also lump The Golden Compass in as a frontrunner, but somehow I think that the squid-man can beat the giant bear. (Now there’s an internet forum topic nobody’s seen yet)

Best Animated Feature: Ratatouille
C’mon, how can this not win? Coming to the Oscars with a Pixar movie is like coming to a peace conference with a nuclear bomb. It may not be fair, but you’re guaranteed to decimate the competition.***

Best Documentary: Sicko
I don’t know about the merits of this movie as a movie, but it was effective when I saw it and Moore’s got a good track record in Liberal Hollywood with Fahrenheit 9/11. Also, the fact that it’s on such a controversial subject matter is Oscar gold.

And that’s it! I’ll check back with the results of my totally random predictions. Feel free to add your predictions below in the comments section.

REVIEW: Assassin’s Creed

This much-hyped about game has finally hit store shelves, and has been getting mixed reviews. Some mainstream publications give Assassin’s Creed 9 to 9.5 out of 10 scores, while others declare it a disappointment that is flying off the Ishtar scale. How does one insignificant gamer with a website find it? Pretty darn good.

I picked this game up on a whim, mainly because I had a few extra bucks to spare for Blockbuster, and wanted to check the game out. To be honest, I wasn’t in the best position to play the game, since I’m back home and hundreds of miles away from my beloved HDTV. And playing Assassin’s Creed in Standard Definition sucks rhino balls. This played a minor part in my initial frustration with the game, coupled with the really kooky way the developers chose to open the game’s first few moments. It makes absolutely no sense when you’re involved in it, but once you’re past it, you really enjoy the new take on the standard “tutorial level”. Plus, trying to read text in SD may put me back into glasses.

The gamer assumes the role of Altaïr, a skilled assassin during the time of the Third Crusade, who must assassinate nine key members perpetrating the Crusades in the Middle East. (Supposedly, these targets actually existed around the time of the game’s setting, and either died or mysteriously disappeared. None of them were actually assassinated, though.) The gameplay is a free-explore variety, allowing the player to chose the manner in which to complete the game’s objectives: slow, thorough, and stealthy, or fast, sloppy, and high-profile. Stealth is a key aspect, with the game’s AI rigged to become alert if you do something out of the ordinary, such as scale a building or cause too much of a ruckus, and send you running for cover. Logically, you’re best off infiltrating the crowd surreptitiously, waiting for the right moment, and killing only when necessary, or when no one’s watching. Combat is re-tooled as well, making flashy sword kills easy, yet not quite as easy as single-button. Apart from all of this Assassin’s Creed is almost breaking the fourth wall by making the player well aware that what they’re doing is controlling a virtual reality representation of life. In truth, our main character is not Altaïr, but Desmond Miles, a bartender who is a direct descendent of Altaïr’s, and is forced to undergo a VR regressive memory therapy for some shady scientists. Throughout the game, little “glitches” occur in the memory, giving the player a new point-of-view on the action in front of them.

While playing the game, I couldn’t help feeling the influences of the Metal Gear Solid series on Assassin’s Creed. The main idea is almost exactly the same as in MGS: stay hidden and strike quick. Although, Assassin’s Creed gives you much more lenience, since you aren’t totally relegated to the shadows and can walk freely without much hassle, provided you don’t hassle anybody else. Apart from this stealth element, there is a definite RPG side of the game, with sidequests the gamer can either take part in or ignore for the sake of the bigger mission. This helps expand the playtime, and makes Assassin’s Creed play much like Knights of the Old Republic, another game I could spend days with.

The best part of Assassin’s Creed is, I hate to say it, killing people. Assassinations have been sanded down and polished to a clear shine, making every time you stick your hidden knife into anyone, even someone as insignificant as a rooftop archer, a joy to experience. Regular sword combat is okay, too, but I’d much rather take someone out silently than try to tango with five guards at once. The interactivity with your environment will also keep the gamer involved with the experience, making it one of the best 3rd Person games I’ve played since Gears of War. It’s easy to lose yourself in the world of Assassin’s Creed, and spend way too much time playing it.

There are some downsides, though. If you stick to one strategy, the gameplay becomes rather formulaic as time goes on. Run up the towers to survey the land, rescue some citizens, perform some pickpockets, kill your target, repeat. After the first few assassinations, you realize that the gameplay isn’t going to vary much, but the storytelling aspect of the game makes you not care that killing people hasn’t evolved. Sure, you gain some new abilities as you go on, but really, all you’re doing is playing through a section to get to the next part of the story. It doesn’t bother me personally, because I enjoyed the gameplay so much that I went through almost all the sidequests I could before actually attempting the assassination. And the great thing about the game is that you can play it as fast or as slow as you want, as long as you’re good at getting away from the guards. I also found the “free-step” and “scaling” mechanisms a bit awkward, which can definitely cause trouble in escape situations and later stages, where finesse is what keeps you alive.

Final Verdict: 5 amputated ring fingers out of 5*

Assassin’s Creed should be in every gamer’s library, and I’m so glad that it was opened up to the Xbox 360 as well as the PS3 (even though I purchased a PS3 version in order to keep me from playing it) so more gamers can share the fun of its gameplay. In fact, a little birdie on the grapevine told me that a DS version was in the works, and I welcome that as well**. Assassin’s Creed is meant to be the first part of a trilogy, as most game franchises are, so we can only hope that there is more bloody goodness to come courtesy of Altaïr.

* If you look at the picture above, you can see that Altaïr is missing his ring finger in order to properly use the hidden blade. While you don’t actually see that done, it’s damn cool.

** I’m back. After a few months of this review being out, I came across a review of Assassin’s Creed: Altaïr’s Chronicles. Hoo boy, does it suck…

REVIEW: Rock Band

I’m not writing this one because I used to work with MTV or because I’m a music nut. I’ve been intrigued by Rock Band ever since I saw a live demo at E3. The game has been championed as “Guitar Hero for the whole band” and was even developed by the company responsible for the first Guitar Hero. First looks have been promising, and the multiplayer aspect hinted at a party game that could blow Guitar Hero right out of the water. However, the game is not available with individual parts, meaning that a total rock experience will set you back about 180 bucks until early 2008. Is it worth the green?

The answer is yes, plain and simple. Rock Band offers an experience unlike anything Guitar Hero has to offer, namely, drums and a microphone. It may not seem like much, especially not for a hundred dollars in difference between Rock Band and Guitar Hero III. But playing Rock Band is a joy since the new peripherals add a new level of skill. Unlike the Guitar Hero controllers, which at time may feel like a controller, the drums feel like real drums, and there’s no way to fake using the microphone. In order to get the big points, you have to sing, which was the real fun for me. There may be a few songs in Guitar Hero that’d I’d get into and really rock out on, but with singing in Rock Band lets out the frontman in everybody. But the guitar isn’t forgotten. The new Fender Stratocaster model is larger than the Gibson models, and feels more like a real guitar around your shoulders. The buttons are the same color as the fretboard, which the guitarist in me appreciates, but it may lose some people not accustomed to Guitar Hero. Also, the guitar offers a 5-way toggle switch for adding effects to the solos, which can now be played on the upper fret buttons for easier shredding.

The big draw to these kind of games are the songs you can play. As the name implies, these are great songs for a band to play, ranging from “Don’t Fear the Reaper” by Blue Oyster Cult to “Green Grass and High Tides” by the Outlaws to “Say it Ain’t So” by Weezer. Most of the songs are originals, with covers being the rare exception to the rule. If you’ve never heard the song before, you’re in a tight spot, but the game offers a practice mode, so you can squeak like a 13-year-old boy in the privacy of your own home. And with downloadable content available on Xbox Live or the Playstation Network, the song list can continuously grow. (MTV has even hinted at offering entire album downloads, such as Who’s Next by the Who.)

Technically, the game is pretty much the same as games that came before it, but with a few unique modifications. On the superficial side, the dots in Guitar Hero are replaced with bars. The real innovation comes with Overdrive (the Rock Band equivalent of Star Power). One of the things I hated with Guitar Hero was that activating Star Power caused the on-screen fretboard to jump, which increased your chances of hitting a bad note. With Rock Band, the transition into Overdrive is smooth and almost unnoticeable. And unlike Guitar Hero, you can continue to keep Overdrive up by hitting the charged notes during your Overdrive session. Vocals are just like Singstar or other vocal simulators, with Expert performances being very, very unforgiving (think Simon Cowell after a cold shower).

While I’ve been touting the advantages of multiplayer, I will confess that I haven’t jumped online much (read: at all.) But I have played with a group of people at the MTV store, making an idiot out of myself by singing, and that’s where Rock Band excels. The true joy of the game is rocking out with a bunch of your friends, pretending like you’re Aerosmith even though your talent is similar to Air Supply. Players get three strikes (i.e. two “fails” before you are out completely) and failed players can be brought back into the game with another going into Overdrive. So yes, it’s possible for a guitar player to carry an entire band (even though Van Halen proved that.)

Even though Rock Band is a hell of a lot of fun, there are a few drawbacks. First of all, if you have an HDTV, like yours truly, you may have to calibrate your system in order to eliminate any lag, and calibration is a bitch. I’ve had the game for over a month, and my drum system still is a bit off. As you’ve probably guessed, that really puts a wet towel on the rockage. Also, the drums make a little bit of noise. In fact, a lot of noise, so much so that you’ll have to turn the volume on the TV up just to compensate. Personally, it makes my neighbors hate me more than my habit of listening to porn at obnoxiously loud levels. (Don’t ask…) However, many internet forums have found out a solution for that. The other problem comes with the guitar. To be blunt, I hate the strumbar. It feels great when you hold on to it, but to actually use it is like trying to manually bend a hockey stick. It’s certainly useable, but it actually makes you long for the old Guitar Hero controllers.

Final Verdict: 4 “Hello Cleveland!”s out of 5

This comes with an addendum. If you want to get more into multiplayer, then Rock Band is certainly your game. If you think you’ll be spending more time in singleplayer more, then I’d seriously look into Guitar Hero III, unless you really want to sing or play the drums, and even then, I’d wait until the individual peripherals come out. But for my money, this is a step above the usual fare, and a great game worth every penny you may pump into it.