Tom Ramcigam (magicmarmot) wrote,
Tom Ramcigam

So I was making a salad for a late-night snack when suddenly it went dark. Power outage.

I went outside to check, and the power was on at 37th st (one block south), and a couple of blocks to the east and west of us, but to the north as far as I could see (about a half mile), nothing. And lots of sirens.
So I'm figuring a substation went somewhere around Lake Street. It was snowing/raining, and the roads are really slick, so best guess is that a car crashed and took out a major subsystem.

Because of this, my DSL is down, so I am not able to surf currently. I am however able to write, so you bear the brunt. Although if I had a 12v battery, I could be up and running.

I made a DVD purchase that I consider noteworthy. House of the Dead. I consider this noteworthy because it was suppose to be Mark Altman's baby, and when I was talking with him about it, he was having some problems with the production. Bear in mind that the budget for the movie was about $12 million, and that the movie actually made money in the US theatrical release.

It is perhaps the biggest turd-burglar of a movie in the multi-million dollar range that I have ever seen.

Don't get me wrong. I really wanted to like this movie. But it smacks of many things that are antithetical to what I want to see in a movie:

I want a semblance of a story.
I want character development.
I want character consistency.
I want competent filmmaking.

HOTD has its moments. Both of them. It has some neat special effects. And for the most part, the lighting is... competent. I have some issues with the overlit night look, like some sort of thermonuclear moon. But the story is unbearably thin-- for instance, there is a historical part when the Spanish conquistadors were thick and heavy in the Vancouver area. And there is a house on the island, some huge victorian tardis-mansion that is never explained, it's just there. It's like the producers decided that the movie would be better off without all of those pesky details.

There is a scene in the movie that takes place in the previously mentioned Conquistador times, and in the scene is a shot which has a lantern as a supposed source of light. Apparently, someone thought it would be good to have the lantern flicker, because it's set up with a light bulb inside with someone offstage handling a light switch to turn it off and on. Unfortunately it's not a convincing effect. Apparently somebody forgot to tell the guy on the switch that flicker is different than slow on-off-on. I could forgive it, but for the fact that it's in the MIDDLE OF THE FREAKING FRAME.

And then there's the shot with the missing actor. Like one of the two key actors in the scene simply isn't there in a cutaway. How on earth do you miss an actor?

Okay, fine. It made money. It shouldn't have, but it did.

And now they are making House of the Dead II ($11 million), and III is in the works.

Okay, power is back on. You are saved.

  • Blast from the past

    2003, the Guardian of Forever. Me, Barb, vorrant, and Roadkill. Thanks to mle292 and ethel for the pic.

  • (no subject)

    Home briefly. Haven't been to bed yet. Heading back to the hotel to sleep, perchance to dream. lio is stashed on the couch in my room for…

  • made of fail

    The second project was a miserable failure that leaked all over my living room floor after running for a good thirty seconds. Basically an…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.