E3 Recap Part 3 - Do we even care about Microsoft?

Makes you want to turn 360... you know the rest, and it's still funny.

Now I know what you're thinking, "Chiko, wasn't E3 like two weeks ago?" And yes, it was. But in all seriousness, Microsoft wasted it's time there so it just took me a week or so just to think up something to write about them.

If there's one thing that all three companies proved this year is the importance of first party titles. Nintendo has always been ahead of the pack, establishing generation defining franchises like Mario, Zelda and a metric shitload of other games from the start. Sony has somehow established itself as well, with Uncharted leading the pack of a number of smaller yet still great titles.

Here lies Microsoft's problem. Now that Mass Effect is pulled what I'm calling a 'reverse Final Fantasy' and is playing for both teams, the Xbox 360 is really only left with two big first party titles: Halo, and Gears of War. With the GoW franchise about to close down it's trilogy (even though we all know it's gonna keep going), and Halo starting to re-hash, they should know they're in trouble.

So, how do they solve this problem? Well, they start their press conference with Modern Warfare 3, a game that's going to be on every single console under the sun. Followed mere moments later by Battlefield 3, another game that will be on every competing console. I'm not doubting that in the over saturated FPS market today these two titles are the obvious kings, but you can't base your big moment on things other companies have.

Not only am I saying that they should have based their conference on soon to be released GoW3 and the newly announced Halo 4 and Halo: Combat Evolved remake; I'm also flat out saying that Microsoft by far has the weakest first party lineup, and it shows.

So, how did they attempt (and fail) to balance this all out. If you guessed Kinnect, you are correct (and probably disappointed). MS is finally throwing some weight behind their motion system, unfortunately it's mostly dead weight. There are a lot of games you would never play, some you will play for a couple of hours and get tired of them, and then there's Dance Central, which is also available for the PS3 and the Wii (I sense a pattern here).

To sum it all up. Microsoft fell (way) short of the competition. Even the Konami video had more punch in it that the Microsoft conference. It left gamers wanting to say the least. I do believe that both the 360 and the PS3 still have ways to grow as consoles, but unless MS starts to expand it's exclusive library towards a hardcore audience instead of marketing to six year old's with Kinect they're just swimming in circles. For a console that touted itself as a machine for dedicated gamers, it sure seems to have folded quick after seeing the Wii's success.

One more thing... If you're biggest competition just dropped the ball right before the biggest gaming event of the year, and you have little to show... I would poke the soft spot... With a cattle prod.

'Falling Skies' Premier Review

I have to admit, I was fairly excited about this premiere. I've always been a fan of sci-fi shows and anytime we get a new one, I'm excited about the possibilities. To me, sci-fi has always been about just that, possibilities. This show though, had absolutely none of that excitement and sense of wonderment at seeing something different and interesting. TNT has been promoting the hell out of this new show but instead of an interesting and wonderful new show, what we got instead was a rehash of every single alien invasion/post apocalyptic show ever.

It stars Noah Wyle as Professor Tom Mason who is so obviously the good guy that he bleeds rainbows and ponies. He is the father of three, one little kid, another older one that fights alongside him and a middle one that has been 'harnessed' by the aliens (its some sort of mind control thing that the aliens stick to the kids spinal cords and if taken out, they die). There's Moon Bloodgood as Dr. Anne Glass, she is a strong independent woman that speaks for the civilians that the resistance protects. Will Patton is the military veteran who is very tough and will do what he has to do to protect everyone but in the end is just a softie trying to make the tough decisions. The other host of characters are so pathetically cliched that you feel like you can see the rails that move the cardboard cut-outs.

There are probably two characters that interested me the most and show that the show does have some potential. First is the 13 year old Jimmy (Dylan Authors). This kid is taken on missions with the rest of the cast like he was a soldier. This can bring some conflict as we saw on the first episode, but after it happened, they didn't touch on it at all. I'm interested to know why there's only a couple of women fighting and they have 13 year olds with automatic rifles. The second character would be Sarah Carter's Margaret. She is the only one where we actually hear some back story on and the only one I ended up caring about. There is a big problem with this premiere in that it never really wants us to connect to any of the characters.

The biggest problem with the premiere to me was the story. How many times has the outlaw leader holding friends hostage for ransom has been done before? I don't dare count. Other than your run of the mill father looking for son, aliens trying to kill humans, humans trying to survive, this episode has nothing else. It's worse than bland.

There are some ideas that interest me and could do for an interesting series. First, the whole mind/body control thing. Why would the aliens want to control kids? I don't know, but I'm interested in that. Also, one of the characters (the teacher) tells Wyle's character that normally humans always think of their robots as human-like and that it was interesting that the aliens has many appendages and their robots had only two. I hope they didn't just tell me that only to forget it in the future. Also, I have to admit that it was creative to explain what happened through the drawings of the little kids.

There's a lot of work to be done in the next few episodes. The series has potential, but in this cut-throat tv life, you don't get many chances. We'll see what happens. As far as premier's go, though, this one was bland, weak and underwhelming.

"Darn it! How am I supposed to kick alien ass when I left my balls in my man-purse?"

3 out of 10

Netflix Reviews #1

I got Netflix a couple of weeks ago and so far its been pretty cool. I think its kind of ridiculous that we can't stream here in Puerto Rico, but I hope that will come soon. So, I will be doing Netflix reviews every three movies I watch and it will have everything from new arrivals to foreign and classics. If you have a movie that you want me to review, let me know and I will try to get it done. So, without further ado...

Never Let Me Go

This movie is based on the novel by acclaimed Japanese author Kazuo Ishiguro (The Remains of the Day). I have the novel and actually had started reading it before I went on a trip to Madrid and only took my e-book reader with me which made me stop. It stars Keira Knightley, Carey Mulligan and Andrew Garfield as three friends who have spent most of their young lives together with each other(in one way or another). They were raised in a sort of boarding school that sort of felt like they kept them naive for the simple reason of just keeping them naive. I liked that this was in a way a sci-fi movie, but the sci-fi aspects are so very subtle and almost irrecognizable. Carey Mulligan's Kathy is the main character and the narrator of the story. She is so likable in giving an aura of resolution and likability in the face of their destiny that the other two characters lack. Actually, I thought Garfield's character was the weakest of the three and a real waste. I was worried that director Mark Romanek (One Hour Photo) wouldn't have the skills to tackle this movie, but I was impressed by him. The thing is, this movie is depressing. I never expected it to be such a downer. I also wish some questions had been answered instead of never asked at all by the characters of the movie. This is a good movie, just make sure you have a fair amount of rainbows and puppies ready for you at the end.

6.5 out of 10

The Next Three Days

After the Academy Award winning Crash, Paul Haggis did another good movie (In the Valley of Elah) but he has never been a prolific director. The Next Three Days stars Russell Crowe as John Brennan, husband and father of one boy as he plots and plans to spring his wife Lara (Elizabeth Banks) from prison where she is being held for the murder of her boss. Suddenly, Crowe's John Brennan goes from being an everyman to suddenly planning the escape of her wife from prison. I did like the fact that not everything goes right for him, it shouldn't as he is not an expert on escaping or anything like that. I also like that he used the internet to find how to do most of the stuff he did which I can really see someone doing. The biggest problem with this film for me was that I just never felt tied to any of these characters. Crowe is subdued for most of the film and we never really get to see a great performance from him. I'm not sure Elizabeth Banks was the best choice for this character. Sure, she's a fantastic comedic actress, but unless she's doing comedy or a psycho, then I don't really buy it. In the end this film lacked something. I think it lacked soul (for lack of a better word).

5 out of 10

The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest

Everyone has heard of Steig Larsson's Millenium trilogy of books. Larsson died in 2004 and the novels were released posthumously. The books became bestsellers in no time and in no time the Swedish cinematic scene were ready to make the novels into movies. Books like this one make for perfect movies and it was insteretsing how all three of the films are different at their cores. The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest is a political thriller whereas the previous films where more action and mystery. Noomi Rapace is back as one of the main characters of the films, Lisbeth Salander. I started reading the first one, but haven't finished the books yet, so I'm not sure how much the movies are in terms of their source material, but I always felt Rapace was a perfect Salander. Along with Rapace, the films hang on the shoulders of experienced Swedish actor Michael Nyqvist. He plays the maverick reporter Mikael Blomkvist who helps Salander on her quest to redemption. His unending loyalty for Rapace is what keeps the movies going. Also, I am a bigger fan of political thrillers than most other genre's so this was right up my alley. It also had some courtroom drama which was really interesting. I don't know if the source material is as good as the trilogy, but the movies are really worth a watch, especially this one.

8 out of 10

Ladyboys~!!!!11: The Hangover Part II Review

The Hangover came out of nowhere and took the world by storm. It was one of the best laugh out loud movies of the last ten years. It had it all (except for one thing that we got in the sequel). In the first movie, Doug (Justin Bartha) was getting married and his boys Stu (Ed Helms) and Phil (Bradley Cooper) decide to have a bachelor's party in Las Vegas. Alan (Zach Galifianakis) tags along since he's the weird soon to be brother-in-law. A night of epic proportions occurs and they can't find Doug to get him to the wedding. The movie revolves around the remaining three guys trying to figure out what happened the night before so that they can find Doug and get him to his wedding.

The Hangover Part II doesn't stray away from that formula at all. Doug, Stu, Phil and Alan go to Thailand for Stu's wedding where he is getting married to Lauren (Jamie Chung). Stu doesn't want to have the big bachelor's party and instead decides to just have a nice quiet couple of beers with his friends. Of course, madness ensues and they end up missing Teddy (Mason Lee) who is Stu's soon to be brother-in-law and the bright star in the eyes of Lauren's father.

This is not much different from the first movie. Which is good or bad depending on what you felt for the first movie. There is not much to differentiate it other than more of Ken Jeong and the thing that the first one was missing (ladyboys). Galifianakis is still the most lovably annoying character ever. You can't help but be annoyed at the stupid things he does, but since he does them in a totally sincere way, you can't help but laugh and say 'aww'.

The cast is all funny and great in their delivery. Ken Jeong was pretty damn hilarious. Cooper and Helms really work great together with one being the nervous mess and the other trying to be more of a calming force.

What I liked about both movies is that they are able to balance out Galifianakis' over the top performance with the rest of the characters. It feels like everyone is part of the movie and that they are not only there to react to Zach's shenanigans. Jeong was incredibly loud and funny but also over the top. Thankfully, he's not there for too long and he doesn't end up being completely unbearable. I also liked the small cameo by Paul Giamatti. He's one of those people that can play the real asshole really well even though he doesn't have the look for it.

I would have liked to have seen the filmmakers throw some curveballs and not just do the same movie but in Thailand. There are some things that worked well for the movie. The scenes with Stu's soon to be father in law who really hates his guts and he doesn't really care that anyone knows about it.

The big scene at the end was funny for a bit (something you might or might not be expecting) but not as awesome as the most awesomest wedding band ever.

Candy Shop - Full Version

Now THAT is a way to get married!

So, in the end, I can't possibly give this movie a higher score than the first one. The first one was fresh and new and this one at times feels like a re-hash, but The Hangover Part II is funny, crass, disgusting and all those bad things some critics shun. But the movie is a great buddy movie and its a worthy sequel.

7 out of 10

E3 Recap Part 2 - Sony says they're sorry.

"Umm, whoops?"

Even before E3 started, Sony seemed to be cemented in the second or third place spot. Nintendo had the announcement of a new console, and Microsoft recently stated that the next Xbox is in the beginning stages of development. So it did seem like Sony, being the only one without a rumored hardware announcement, was dependent on that the competition would do to see where it would land in the 'rankings.'

On top of that, they've fucked up big this year. The Playstation Network was down for almost two months, account information was compromised, and no one but Sony is to blame. They messed up bad. So for the first time in as long as I can remember, an E3 presentation was almost as much about "Sorry," than, "Hey, look at this cool shit."

"Did we mention, we're sorry?"

In my opinion, they also addressed this situation in the wrong way. Sony President Jack Tretton was not the man to talk about this. He did do a good job with what he had. He apologized, and then began to gloat about the apparent glorious return of the PSN.

The 'Welcome Back' gifts that Sony is giving us are almost decent at best. Don't get me wrong, there are some good games in there, but that's exactly the problem. Most gamers I know already own, played, finished and maybe even 'platinumed' half the games on the list of freebies. And I don't even know a PSP owner who hasn't hacked it and is getting the games for free. So aside from a month of PSPlus, we're not getting much.

I really do think Kevin Butler should have addressed the PSN situation, shed some humor on it all. I mean he didn't even make an appearance after he arguably stole the show last year. I'm just surprised that the marketing geniuses at Sony didn't think that humor was the answer to their situation. A heartfelt apology isn't really up the gaming community's ally. We are a group known for being cold and heartless, but we can appreciate a good laugh. And that's what KB does for us, I'm just saddened that he wasn't there.

VP of apologies

Now onto what really mattered... Around six months ago Sony announced what the called the NGP or Next Generation Portable. Doesn't really roll off the tongue as easily as Wii U now does it (hooray sarcasm). Everyone was expecting a spectacular showing from the much anticipated successor to the PSP.

I can't wait to hac... I didn't say anything.

That's not exactly what we got. What did we get?

A name: PSVita (much better)

A price: $249 - Wi-Fi     $299 - 3G/Wi-Fi (not too bad)

And really that was about it.

Ok, we got some gameplay footage of Uncharted: Golden Abyss which looks beautiful for a handheld, we got confirmation that Street Fighter x Tekken is going to be on it, and that Cole form inFamous will be a playable character. Everything else they showed on this powerhouse of a handheld seemed like a waste of time. I remember saying the same thing when the PSP launched. It was just a handful of decent titles followed by a hailstorm of crap, and it's been that way for the PSP every year since then. So for now, I'm not excited for the PSVita, they need to show me more.

To me, the most interesting of Sony's announcements (and the overall theme of E3) is the interconnection between the handheld and the home console. Sony announced bland looking action RPG titled Ruin. Honestly the game doesn't look like much, but it is completely transferable between the PS3 and the PSV, similar to what Nintendo is doing between the Wii U, the Wii U controller, and the 3DS (confusing).

Also adding fuel to this fire is the fact that Konami announced last week that they would be releasing a Metal Gear Solid HD Collection, containing MGS2, MGS3, and both MGS PSP titles. Again, the interesting thing here was revealed to be that Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker had a function where your save could be transferred back and forth from your PS3 to your PSP (not PSV). Which leads to my hope that Konami will backtrack and opt for PSV connections with the entire collection instead of the one game. Also announced along with MGS is a Zone Of The Enders pack, and I should mention that both collections will also be on the Xbox 360 (minus the handheld stuff of course).

The whole HD collection, and PSP upgrade seems to be the path Sony's headed down lately. Along with MGS and ZoE we'll be getting a God Of War Origins pack with both PSP games, and the much anticipated up-scaling of the Ico and Shadow of The Colossus.

We also got a shitstorm of 3D an Move junk that really feels like a rehash of last year's press conference. I'm going to leave it at that on this subject. Blah.

PS3 titles had a much smaller role that I expected. We got new looks at Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception, Resistance 3, inFamous 2, and Bioshock Infinite, to name a few. But nothing really surprising here. I see no point in showcasing inFamous because the damn thing comes out this week. We've seen as much about that thing as we need to. The other games look great, especially Bioshock which looks to be as good as the first one.

And I do believe that was the big problem of the Sony press conference. There was no real shock to it at all. They were going through the motions. At least last year we got the big Twisted Metal reveal. But this year we got everything we expected and not much more.

When it comes to 'winning' E3, Sony isn't far behind Nintendo. But with the announcement of a game as huge as a new Smash Bros, the 'big N' just trumps anything Sony threw at us.

If we had only gotten Kevin Butler.