Doctor Recommended
100% Natural

Last night I watched Oliver Stone’s film, W. I thought it was pretty good and recommend it to any other news junky. Despite good acting and a well-written script, I’d give it a 4 out of 5, because it was made a year too early and misses Bush’s ridiculous response to the global financial meltdown.

Why was Stone in such a rush to get it done before Bush was gone?

Do not bother watching Eagle Eye. Total waste of time. 0 out of 5. Nothing redeeming, unless you want to learn Morse code from the flashes of a cell phone.

Same goes for Knowing, with Nicholas Cage. Craptastic. 1 out of 5. You can use it to practice your English skills.

Push was not much better, although at least the crazy special effects were plausible given the circumstances. 2 out of 5.

The new Fast and Furious was so-so (about the same as the others) and way too predictable.

Madagascar 2 was good, although not as good as the Shrek series or those from Pixar.

Oh and because a Chinese friend forced me to watch it, Anacondas 4 receives my first negative score for this year, at -1337 out of 5. Unbelievably bad. I could make better special effects with soy sauce, kung pao chicken and some chopsticks.

There’s no reason not to say it: Tropic Thunder is a great movie. Everyone does a great job fulfilling their stereotype.

Plus, if you’ve seen any of the war movies it parodies, then you’ll like it that much more.

Also, Tom Cruise did a really good job (intentionally) being a dick producer. Totally makes up for Lions for Lambs (though, not others like craptastic War of the Worlds).

Verdict: 4.5 out of 5. Stiller is of course top-notch and Downey is the personification of method-man extraordinaire. How’d he do research on it? Watch Cosby Kids?

I recently had a chance to watch Expelled and it left a sour taste in my mouth.

Regarding Sternberg, Egnor, Marks, Gonzalez and others, the website Expelled Exposed does a good job detailing why you shouldn’t feel sorry for them. So while the movie paints them as victims in some huge evil conspiracy, each one of their cases is actually much different than you are led to believe.

The overall content of the movie goes from talking about a grand debate regarding intelligent design, to one that involves eugenics and the Inner German Border of the Cold War.

Wrong on all counts

First, the analogy with the Berlin Wall and Inner German Border is total bupkis. I have written on these in the past regarding North Korea (and why I refuse to patronize the DMZ), and ID proponent Stephen C. Meyer is historically wrong in the movie. The wall was not built to keep out ideas or invaders, rather it was specifically built to keep Eastern Germans from flooding over to the West.

It was the teutonic equivalent to the Soviet refusenik policy made possible only because of the government, not scientists.

Which brings up the other issue of eugenics and ethnic cleansing. Stein and the producers go to great lengths trying to connect Darwinism with Nazism and involuntary eugenics. However, they totally miss the forest for the trees when all of these violent policies were instigated and carried out by the government.

Sure the politburo and the Third Reich used propaganda from various scientists (e.g. Deutsche Physik), but that doesn’t mean a particular theory is valid or not. In fact, we see this same issue alive in terms of climate change policy. Regardless as to whether there is a consensus by scientists it is the action by governments that should ultimately be judged because they are the ones enacting and enforcing policies.

Thus Stein should have been condemning statism in addition to pin headed scientists. In fact, to be even handed Stein should have brought up all the atrocities conducted by organized religions, most notably the Crusades and Inquisition. Teach the controversy, right?

Jump rope

One of the questions stated is “that we don’t even know what a species is?” I humbly submit the thorough answer provided by wikipedia. Be sure to read through speciation and transition fossils.

The various quotes that linger in and out throughout the movie make it fairly obvious that it was made by theists, so it really hurts the cause of ID whose proponents claim it is agnostic and secular.

In fact, the whole movie is fairly erratic, jumping from topic to topic. Biological evolution and the origin of life are two separate topics entirely, yet Stein tries to lump them together as one.

Furthermore, modern biology has only been around for at most 150 years so it is unfair to expect researchers to have fully fleshed out every aspect or have an ironclad law for every phenomenon. Organized religions on the other hand have had millenia to play mental gymnastics in answering the hows and the whys for how the cosmos works. But again, this still misses the bigger point. Intelligent design was not fleshed out.

In fact, the PBS show Intelligent Design: Judgment Day was not only more even handed, but really did a good job focusing on the specific scientific arguments involved in biological evolution versus intelligent design.

In reality, what Stein should have done is made a movie without talking about religion or deities. Instead, he should have simply focused on the scientific claims of ID. Yet none of that was done. In fact, the only real science shown was a 3D CGI sequence of cell processes that actually was ripped off a Harvard presentation… on evolution.

And worse yet, by quoting Pamela Winnick the producers demonize and erect a strawman for someone like myself. I do not condone death and have made the case that if you really think you are pro-life, then you have to be anti-war. But again, that is a topic for another day in a different forum.

Spinning around

Fortunately for humanity, irrespective of what political tendencies or religious beliefs you have, there is always the night time sky. It cannot be regulated or purged (yet). And as a result, provides the most unbiased evidence against Young Earth creationism and probably most ID supporters.

Or maybe I’m speaking too soon. Perhaps in the future Stein will link mass democide with the abandonment of geocentricism. Think of all the awful things that have happened after the Earth-centered worldview was questioned and abandoned!

Final verdict: 1 out of 5. The historical archives were at least cleverly interwoven throughout the vignettes. The music does a good job setting the mood sought by the Discovery Institute the producers. And fortunately for me, I didn’t have to endure being expelled from the premier like PZ Meyers.

See also:
Why Intelligent Design is not Scientific
Stellar Appreciation Day
How long did it take for the rings to form around Saturn?
Long distance phone calls in outer space
Are Half-Lives Legit or Just Something Sagan Liked?
Fighting debris with debris creates more debris
Admitting You Are Wrong On Easter
Intelligent Design and the Light-Year

Well, you could have. Maybe your best friend accidentally screwed up your wedding like in the new Sex in the City movie (yea, I watched it, sue me).

But in the event that you think everyone else is living in greener pastures, you could’ve:

- owned a basement condo in Galveston
- purchased LEH stock two weeks ago
- drafted Tom Brady in your Fantasy Football team
- bought tickets to the uber low scoring (3-2) game between Auburn and Mississippi State
- been a fan of Kid Rock and then watched his propaganda

While neither one of them will probably give you that warm fuzzy feeling of security, I recommend watching Iron Man or A Scanner Darkly when you get a chance. Both are fairly creative and entertaining. Plus, Robert Downey Jr. is just a damn good actor.

Have you had more than your fill of fake sports?

Looking for some real sweaty action that doesn’t involve judges?

And… you’re a history buff?

Then you might be interested in Assembly (Ji Jie Hao). It’s a new movie, based on the story of a captain in the Chinese Army (PLA side). It takes place during the Chinese civil war (specifically the last major battle in the Northern campaign) as well as some skirmishing in Northern Korea.

If you liked Letters from Iwo Jima (the Japanese-side of the conflict directed by Clint Eastwood; which was also well-done), then you’ll probably like this, as it provides a more humanistic look through the eyes of a non-politicized soldier.

My only beef with the action sequences is during the main artillery bombardment at the beginning, none of make-shift mortar or machine-gun emplacements were destroyed. Super realistic, eh?

Verdict: 4 out of 5 stars. Definitely worth grabbing at the video store. Or if you grab a torrent, there are plenty of websites that provide subtitles to it.

Then I recommend watching Redbelt. There’s actually more drama/character development than action scenes, so it might not be your cup of tea if you have posters of Steven Seagal hanging in your room.

It has some unexpected twists and turns, and Chiwetel Ejiofor does a great job as the lead actor (you might remember him as the sword-brandishing enforcer in Serenity).

I’d give it a 4 out of 5 as the ending could’ve had a coda to wrap things up.

And speaking of martial arts, for those looking for some funny kicking and punching, be sure to check out Kung Fu Hustle. It’s by the same guy behind the creative Shaolin Soccer.

I liked Sixth Sense. I kind of liked Signs, at least until the end. But his other movies are just ridiculous. In fact Lady in the Water didn’t make any sense whatsoever as it was completely anticlimatic.

And unfortunately, his latest — The Happening — doesn’t do much for the audience goer either. It combines the most annoying cliched arguments of intelligent design with the sky-is-falling environmental alarmism that would make Al Gore blush.

So, skip it at both the theater and from the local rental store.

Verdict: 1 out of 5. It helped me keep up with my English speaking skills.

Yea, it is definitely worth the hype. By far one of the best written stories. Lots of twists and turns. Very fast paced and the action sequences are actually more believable (considering it is based on a comic book) than other action flicks like Die Hard.

I hadn’t seen the first one since I saw it in the theater several years back, so I watched Begins just before watching the Dark Night.

As a result, the one thing that disappointed me was replacing Rachel (Katie Holmes) with a new actress. The new one wasn’t bad, but it’d be like replacing April O’Neal mid-stream. Heretical!

The script was very witty and actually provided a good aura of mystery throughout its entire duration. Heath Ledger was fantastic, so much more engaging than Jack Nicholson’s portrayal two decades ago. And Aaron Eckhart also provided a pretty good performance, although I didn’t really buy his “attitude” later on (he was fantastic in Thank You For Smoking).

Thus, in retrospect, the Tim Burton films were awful in comparison. What was that guy thinking?

Note to self: when I get a butler, they must act and talk like Michael Caine, at all times.

Verdict: 5 out of 5. Watch this one in the theaters.

Four quick movie reviews:

Do not bother downloading the new Speed Racer. The whole thing felt like it was written and designed by a group of nine-year old’s that were high on pixie sticks. What were the brothers thinking? Verdict: 2 out of 5

Under no condition should you think about watching the straight-to-DVD sequel to War Games. The latest one – the Dead Code – is beyond awful. I took one for the team, the nerd team because… holy cow was the script terrible. If you thought that computer jargon and capabilities in movies like Swordfish or Firewall were retarded, you’ll be amazed at what the old WOPR can do. On second thought, watch it and look at the cool new supercomputer — because it is so incredibly realistic in all its naked PCB glory. Verdict: .75 out of 5

And while the action and special effects were cool, the plot of Wanted was hilariously dumb. A magical loom? Good god maybe all of the supernatural plot devices have finally all been used up. Verdict: 2.5 out of 5

Lastly, Hancock. Decent story, good action, not too much sappy romance. A bit better than My Super Ex-Girlfriend. I’d say it is one of Will Smith’s better films (primarily because it suits his strong side as a goofy/witty rapper). Plus it is not very long, so you can get back to watching reruns of a very funny show: Arrested Development (which stars Jason Bateman, the supporting actor from Hancock). Verdict: 3 out of 5

… at least in recreating the first 3 episodes (those were so bad).