Sometimes I Don't Miss High School

I got an invitation to my five-year high school reunion today, and I'm debating on whether or not I should go. As much as I'd like to, there's quite a few things stopping me. One is that I've accomplished absolutely nothing since high school. I flunked out of college, I haven't had a job, I have pretty much nothing that resembles an active social life, and I don't even have a driver's license. Plus there's the fact that I had exactly two friends in high school; one of them isn't going because he hated everyone but me, and the other graduated the year before I did, so he can't go. So why would I want to go hang out with a bunch of people that really didn't care much for me to begin with? I'll admit, there are a few classmates that I liked back then, and would enjoy getting to see again. But what about the other 110 people in my class that wouldn't have given me the time of day back then? They've accomplished things. What do I have? I'm a 23-year-old unemployed loser who still lives with his parents. Whoopee.

More on this sometime later, I guess. Out.

Random Thoughts

I don't really have a lot to talk about, so I'll just jot down some quick random thoughts.

I did some editing on my reviews of Batman Forever and Batman & Robin to fix some errors in grammar and spelling, plus I noticed that I didn't even finish sentences in some places (so I fixed those too). Geez, some Super Saturday that was.

WWE's flagship show Raw ended its run on Spike TV this past Monday, and it'll be back home on the USA Network next week. At least that gives USA something to air besides Adam Sandler movies, Monk, golf, and Law And Order reruns. And if you weren't around during WWE's first run on the USA Network, get ready for dog shows and the US Open. You'll find out what I mean.

So Buffy creator Joss Whedon made a movie about Firefly, only he called it Serenity. Something about copyright issues. But the thing that gets me is that nobody watched Firefly when it was free, so who's going to pay to see it?

Am I the only person that thinks Arrested Development isn't all that great?

Anyway, that's all the random thoughts I've got. Out.

War And Peace, Starring The X-Men

Quick shout-out to my sister, who's 19 today. Happy happys.

I know I haven't exactly been making frequent posts here lately, but there's a perfectly good reason. Okay, so it may not be "perfectly good," but it's the only reason I have. And just what reason is that, you may be asking? I've been busy working on a new review for "Sutton At The Movies," that's why. And since inquiring minds want to know, the movie is none other than The Exorcism of Emily Rose, the heartwarming tale of a young woman who has seizures so severe that those Japanese kids that spazzed out watching Pokémon look like they had a mild shiver. Check it out, and I hope you enjoy it. Was a two-week wait with no posts worth it just for one of my reviews? I hope so, although as always, your mileage may vary.

Not much else is going on for me to talk about, that I know of. I wanted to go see Cry Wolf and Venom, but only one theater within 40 miles is showing Cry Wolf and I don't know of any showing Venom. Word is Venom only at opened at 400 theaters, which is so sparse, I'm surprised it even got a theatrical release at all. Though don't hold me to that last sentence, since I'm not sure exactly how wide its release was. But if you're only going to give a movie full of nobodies a release of just 400 screens, why bother putting any heavy advertising into it? I could understand if it had A-list (or even B-list) talent, but the cast if full of people I've never heard of. The only "name" in the movie I recognize is Method Man, and if the cast list on IMDB.com is any indication, it's just a bit part. That'd make the idea of promoting the movie around him like how Miramax put Drew Barrymore and Jada Pinkett Smith on the posters for Scream and Scream 2. Sure, those two are famous, but getting killed in the first five minutes doesn't put you on the same level as the stars of the show. Makes no sense, if you ask me. But I'm not a big-shot Hollywood executive, so what do I know?

I was doing some reading about X-Men 3, and with a cast as huge as X3's, there's going to be too much room for any character development. If there is, the movie is going to be at least three hours long. Or maybe they just need to trim some fat because the movie is starting to look like War And Peace with mutants. Check out the cast of characters...

1. Professor Xavier
2. Magneto
3. Wolverine
4. Mystique
5. Cyclops
6. Storm
7. Jean Grey/The Phoenix
8. Rogue
9. Iceman
10. Pyro
11. Kitty Pryde
12. Colossus
13. Angel
14. Jubilee
15. Beast
16. Juggernaut
17. Leech
18. Avalanche
19. Siryn
20. Omega Red
21. Gauntlet
22. Multiple Man
23. Scarlet Witch
24. "The X-Kid," whoever that is

Throw in the Sentinels and Moira MacTaggart (and the chance that Gambit may or may not have a cameo), and that's a loaded cast. I know the X-Men series has a huge cast, but how many people want to see some of the nobodies they have listed? I know they want to get as many franchise characters in there as they can, but come on now. I've never even heard of Gauntlet or Avalanche or Leech. If they want to have so many characters, they should just quit doing movies and start a television show instead. I loved the first two X-Men movies, but this sort of thing is why the movies with singular superheroes have a slight edge over them. You get to know and understand them and what's in their heads. At least there's only four members of the Fantastic Four. But counting Moira MacTaggart, X3 has twenty-five characters. Twenty-five! Even if most of them are only in one or two scenes, that's HUGE. It's why I'm looking forward to seeing the Wolverine and Magneto solo movies, just because they'll actually have room to breathe.

Okay, folks, I'm stuck for things to talk about. Sutton out.

Where's Linda Blair When You Need Her?

Hey hey, another quickie review. I saw The Exorcism of Emily Rose this afternoon, and it's something else. Loosely based on the true-life story of Anneliese Michel, the movie is quite different in that the titular Emily Rose (played by Jennifer Carpenter) isn't even the main character. She's like Keyser Soze from The Usual Suspects, where she drives the plot despite never really being around. Instead, the movie focuses on an attorney (Laura Linney) trying to acquit Emily's priest (Tom Wilkinson) of manslaughter charges stemming from Emily's botched exorcism.

The film is a bizarre amalgam of The Exorcist and an episode of Law & Order, though it doesn't truly get into a groove until the third act. We never really learn much about Emily as a person prior to her possession, there's a subplot that goes nowhere after a couple of scenes, and all that camera shaking during the exorcism scene made my head hurt, but the movie is pushed by some awesome performances from its cast. Everyone in the cast does a good job, especially Jennifer Carpenter. Her screen time is limited and she doesn't have much dialogue outside of some Latin phrases and a mighty crapload of screaming, but she's very effective. Is Emily schizophrenic? Is she possessed? Either way, she's absolutely freaky. The movie is also aided by a tense, chilling score by Christopher Young. I hope that the movie's DVD has a music-only track, just so I can crank it up at Halloween and scare the pants off people. But when it's all said and done, I'm going to give The Exorcism of Emily Rose three and a half stars, and that's that.

Tom Cruise Wasn't Always Crazy

Once again, welcome to Blog-asy Island, I'm your party host Ricardo.

I went to the doctor last week, and all he did was suck blood out of my neck. Don't go see Dr. Acula.

I really can't think of much to talk about, but I do have a new review up: the Tom Cruise/Jamie Foxx flick Collateral. Good movie, and I hope you like the review.

That's all I got, Sutton out.