Name that Equation #1

Introducing a new feature, entitled Name That Equation! I will somewhat often post an equation and see who guesses first. Whoever guesses first will win the pride attached to such an honor including a mention in the body of the post of the next post.


You might have to ask your feline friend for help on this one.

12/10 is less than Perfect

So many of you have probably been wondering about how can my reviews make any sense since I somewhat routinely score things higher than a 10. Allow me to explain my rubric:

Firstly, you sock cuz you don't understand it. Second, the 10 is really just a kind of a scale height of a score, rather than a maximum. Think of it like this. If the scores for a random population of movies were to expressed as say frequency of score = A exp(-x^2) [scaling to some mean value as its center of course] then 10 would be approximately where the the frequency of the score dropped to a value of exp(-1)*A.

I hope that helps.

Robert's Review #3: Pathfinder Misleads Me

It's a story about Vikings...

No not those Vikings... Nevermind, let me just start by quoting the back of the DVD case:

"Experience a new world of graphic, hard-core action with this Unrated Extended Edition of Pathfinder - packed with extreme battle footage not shown in theaters, plus an army of kick-ass deleted scenes and special features!"

Got the picture? Good, cuz now I know what I'm in for. A movie with blood flowing and insane , muscle-pumping blood-boiling gore that was too brutal to be seen in theaters. Unrated Gore Even!



No not that kind of gore...

First begin there are a couple of featurettes included with the movie but I cannot begin to call them an army of kick deleted scenes and special features. It also wasn't really that incredibly super-violent. Sure people were killed (I mean heck they were Vikings) but it was not super over the top. Not even the level of 300.

Well let's get on to the review without further ado.

Plot: 1.5/2 Interesting take on an old Native American legend that perhaps has a basis in actual history. However don't let that scare you, there is plenty of action. Good pacing keeps this story moving and interesting. However a little predictable

Originality: 1.5/2 While this is a remake of another film, this is one of the best adaptations of a 1987 Norwegian film I've seen in months. In actuality the story is new and presented in a way that doesn't feel entirely too campy. It was fresh but not groundbreaking.

Actiing: 2/2 Solid acting all around. Plus it had Clancy Brown in it (Lex Luthor from Justice League) who is an all around amazing actor. Although for some reason I don't understand Karl Urban is always in these kind of movies (like in Chronicles of Riddick, Doom, Lord of the Rings, and some others I cant remember [he was also frequently in Hercules an Xena])

Cinematography: 4/2 Wow! Well they actually stunned me. This movie had a feel and it ran through the whole movie. The angles and shots were innovative and made this movie just fun to watch. However without this, the movie would stuggle to be anything. It had an identity that made is pleasure just to watch.

Execution: 2/2 Solid for the reasons listed above. Clean and crisp.

Bonus Points: 1 It gets one for just how awesome they portrayed the Vikings.

Total: 12/10 A solid movie that was pleasure to watch. However it was not the bloodbath it tried to bill itself as. I think it would have had more success if they had billed it as what it was. A movie in a similar vein of 300 (it was even made into a graphic novel) in that it has utterly brilliant stylistic choices, but is vastly lower on the the bloodometer (seen to the right).

All in all very good and worth the watch.



The next movie to be reviewed very well could be one that was so great that the largest image on the back cover is that of a rather drab menu with the caption: "Interactive Menus" scrawled beneath it....