CyberD.org
C:\ Home » 2017 (Page 8)

Turbulence (2016)

Turbulence (2016)

This one was clearly a TV movie.

You notice it in the music. In the actors. In the stretched-out dialog, and suspense, and the loosely tied plot elements. For example: Sarah Plumber is an FBI agent. It seems unlikely her next-seat neighbor would be able to put such mental pressure upon her with a simple hostage scenario that she completely forgets her training and lets the villain get the upper hand.

I also can't help notice the unnaturally square plane windows, and wonder if it's a real plane at all. Due to air pressure and turbulence cracking windows with corners, they made them round, so if that really is a real plane... well I hope it's old and out of commission. Just like stewardess.

Reading up on the IMDB goofs page I'm made aware of many more inconsistencies, regarding how the FBI work, and the technology they use, and details like these, but disregarding those it's a pretty good thriller.

It keeps the suspense high, and the characters are convincing enough even if their actions sometimes feel badly scripted. Dina Meyer and Victoria Pratt play the main characters, and Brent A. McCoy the main villain. The latter really isn't presented in as shady light as he could have though, and in the end you almost feel sorry for him. He just seems like such a sorry guy. Sorry. That might be the impression they're trying to give, but when justice is finally served I wish it felt all the more just. Of course he shouldn't get away with what he did, but I just wish they'd made him seem a bit more powerful; a bit more sinister...

The adventure all starts when he kills a young lady, and a camera catches the act. FBI agent Sarah Plummer jumps on a plane to take care of the trial, but gets an interesting neighbor on the plane, who after initial chit chat lets her know her family's been taken hostage, and she has to delete the video or they'll all die.

Though the entire premise is a technical error (see above) you can feel the tension well enough, and the plot takes a few twists before you know how it'll really end. For a moment the situation really does seem hopeless - Sarah's frustration and despair is perceptible, but then things happen and you know how the rest is about to go...

All in all a good thriller, though the script feels hasty and unresearched, and the atmosphere not as gripping as it could've been if it was made for the movies. It's in the small things.

 rated 2/5: decent

Ben & Gunnar (1999)

En Liten Film Om Manlig Vänskap (1999)

AKA En Film Om Manlig Vänskap (A Film About Manly Friendship).

I watched this movie with a buddy recently. He searched for comedy, and found this short thing (just an hour long), which was titled simply A Little Film, featured two well-known Swedish comedians, and is now that I've researched it apparently the third of four short films starring a group of actors/comedians who basically decided to try something new.

It really is new. Well it's old now, of course, but it really wasn't what we were expecting. These guys usually don't do movies like this... or maybe that's exactly what they do do? They do just about anything. Be wary.

It started out alright, with a short trip to a Bruce Springsteen concert in 1965. Just two strangers in a small car heading the same way. They talk a bit. One guy's a bit weird. That one guy says something out of line, the other guy gets upset, they keep driving, and you think that's the end of it but... ten years later they meet at the airport again, and this time that one guy has a beard. A beard, you know? Next time he has an even bigger one.

It got weird fast, yet at the same time it was captivating. The film's divided up into a few different chapters. Encounters. Phases of life. A group of guys with beards speak about their beards between these segments of the film. I'd say movie but it says film in the title btw, so I say film. It's the one international word.

Comedy feels like the wrong genre here. Comedy is too light. It seems just random and crazy at first but it gets serious. Tension. Despair. I'm not sure there was a message, but it definitely goes deep. You see that? That's the kind of comedy this was. It made you sometimes smile and sometimes just want to look away. It made you feel for the characters, but then just laugh it off. It was about beards, and friendship between men... that turns into more than friendship. Probably not the best film to watch with a good friend with a beard if you're not up for awkwardness, but props to Robert Gustavsson and Johan Rheborg on really taking things to the next level! When they go in for something they really dive in all the way.

Great characters. Great filming. Great in every way but the ending which eh... well I really can't critique it on anything but being uncomfortable... and beautiful. It's a happy end for Ben & Gunnar, and I'm happy for them. And btw I am straight. No doubt. No beard - not a real beard. Not even a craving. Not that it has anything to do with anything but just so you know.

Good watch.

 rated 3/5: not bad

Winning Winning Winning

Winning Winning Winning

(more…)

Musicalish #224

Have some new music! And sketches with mainly music in them. One. Yeah.

(more…)

I Had A Dream

Post-apocalyptic scenario.

It all ended on a road, after a turn, with a bear standing there. I told him to keep on going. We'd ram the bear, and be rid of at least ONE of those creatures, but he didn't think that'd kill it. He went out with the other guy instead, the retarded one, and told me to take care... I'm not sure if he was about to sacrifice himself or the other guy, because that's when I woke up.

We drove around a lot in the dream.

We had two cars, and we were two drivers, so that if something happened with one the other could always take over. Though we'd lose a car.

Usually we just scavenged, but today we'd visited a settlement with a mission... though I'm not sure what that mission was. We sat around a fire in a ring, and put forth our demands, but the leader wasn't forthcoming at all. He didn't understand our problems, so we headed back.

Our own settlement was somewhere cold. There was snow. It was high up. Woods surrounded us on all sides, and we didn't have to defend ourselves from people, but rather from infected animals. I remember wondering how we survived, in the dream, if all animals were infected. Did we fish? Was there food to grow? The moose were trouble, but the bears were the real killers. You didn't want to run into those.

I remember a bit from some construction place. An industrial area. Death Race-like. We had a meeting there. Some kind of trade. It went bad... but my dream's in shambles now, and that's all I remember. It was a barren world, but not bad, just beware the bears.

The Save Game Strategy, Part III

On the topic of saving games again! It's strange.

Even though I know I should save often I find myself trying to play for as long as possible without. Like it's a challenge. Like I want to see how long I can go resisting the impulse to save, and the longer I go the more satisfying it feels when I finally do.

Other people might go to casinos, and gamble away their material wealth on the dream of a brighter future... with even more material wealth, but this is how I gamble instead. With time. With the prospect of losing progress, instead of just saving it and retaining it.

There is no potential surplus. It's not like the longer I go without saving, the more I can earn. I can only lose more if I lose, and the bigger the wager of time the bigger the potential loss.

So why does it feels like a victory when I do?

At first thought it didn't seem so different from a regular gamble, since time is money, so whichever you choose to wager would have the same potential for loss. But here... there's no way to win! Why do it? Am I settling for less, when I could wager bigger things, outside games? Change my life?

That latter question's a different topic entirely, but I guess by not saving I am placing a bet on the time I save by skipping each save point, so the longer I go without saving the more time I might save, yet if I lose the wager then it's all the more time lost.

The chance of losing is on the one hand much more calculated than throwing chips at lady luck, but on the other hand the potential time you win doesn't seem worth the risk in the first place. And you can only calculate so much. Boss fights: can I beat the boss easily at my current level? System errors: how common are they? Battery death: there's little risk I won't see the blinking red light in time to reach a save point, even if a local power surge makes simply connecting the power supply undoable.

What are the odds? How much time can you save? How much of that time you might be saving do you instead spend thinking about when to save? And if you do save your game, how often should you do so if checkpoints are common, and you have the ability to save more than once at any major point of the adventure? At which point does saved time outweigh the risk?

The more I consider it... the more meaningless a gamble it seems.

Moral of the rant: save your games while you can if you can't save your game all that often, cause every game not saved is an unnecessary gamble.

Privacy   Copyright   Sitemap   Statistics   RSS Feed   Valid XHTML   Valid CSS   Standards

© CyberD.org 2019
Keeping the world since 2004.