Dirty Harry series - A retrospective

I think of the Dirty Harry series as one of the greatest film series of all time. Maybe there's only one great, definitive classic in it, but there's no weak entry. All five films are very entertaining action movies revolving around a great character.

While everybody is familiar with Dirty Harry, not many people nowadays seem to have actually seen any of the films. They just know he's Clint Eastwood and he has a .44 magnum and says "Go ahead, make my day."

Dirty Harry (1971)
This is easily the best of the series and one of the greatest action films of all time. Hell, it's one of the greatest movies of all time. It introduces Eastwood as Inspector Harry Callahan, a San Francisco cop who isn't big on traditional methods. The most memorable scene in the movie actually has nothing to do with the plot, but it is a great action scene and establishes how badass he is with his famous line: "You've got to ask yourself one question: do I feel lucky? Well do ya, punk?"

This is a very funny movie, too. Callahan's a racist, misogynist pig, and yet you like him the entire way. Another great thing about this film is the villain. Loosely based on the Zodiac killer, Scorpio is probably the most underrated villain in movie history. He's completely insane and pure evil, a worthy adversary of Callahan's, and they meet a few different times.

This was a huge hit, perhaps surprisingly so, due to its R rating. Actually it was the most violent film ever made when it came out, with plenty of deaths and a good deal of blood. It has some great scenes, like the bank robbery early on, and the climax. If anything, this film is more relevant now than when it came out, with torture constantly being questioned by the law. Just a great movie overall.

Magnum Force (1973)
Magnum Force is clearly a step down from Dirty Harry but still a solid film. In it, Callahan has to take down a few renegade cops who kill criminals who have gotten off. It's quite similar in a lot of ways to the first film, with the action scene early that has nothing to do with the plot, and a new Callahan catchphrase: "A man's got to know his limitations."

The film slows down for a while but picks up with an outstanding climax involving car crashes and motorcycle chases. Still a very good action movie and better than 90% of the crap that comes out today.

The Enforcer (1976)
The Enforcer is the 2nd best of the series in my opinion because it deviates from the formula a bit, despite being gimmicky at first glance. It introduces Tyne Daly as his female partner, who gives a great performance as a good character. While the film is a little more politically correct than the previous films, we know Callahan well enough to know he doesn't want to work with a woman, whether he says it or not.

This film also deals with Callahan not just fighting with his superiors, but with the media. His partner supports him and he begins to respect her. It's simplistic character development, you could say, but it's done well. As is the action in this film. Another great climax.

Sudden Impact (1983)
The look of the series is updated well to the 1980s, but this is probably the series' weakest entry. It's still decent, but a step down from the first three.

Eastwood is badass as always, and this time he runs across a rape victim who looks to kill her attackers. The action in this film isn't that great, but it's made up by some great lines like "Go ahead, make my day," and some more character development.

The Dead Pool (1988)
I just saw this the other night and it's a good conclusion to the series. It has more in common with Sudden Impact than the '70s films, but the character is as strong as ever.

This movie is paced great, and while that's true of the entire series, somehow it's most evident here. This is more of a mystery than the other films; previously we've seen the killers do their thing, and now there are scenes shot from the killer's point of view.

All that having been said, this is probably most notable for appearances by two future big-time movie stars: Liam Neeson, who plays a film director and the primary suspect, and Jim Carrey, who plays a junkie rock star. While they're not great roles, both men make their presence felt.

This also features a hell of a lot of Harry Callahan fighting with the press. It's almost as main a conflict as the one is with the killer, but it's good, and it allows for some more character development for Callahan and the female lead, played by Fordham alum Patricia Clarkson. She makes a good character as well, one of the better supporting ones in the series.

CONCLUSION
This is really a great and underrated series. It has five entertaining, well made films, and a great character in Harry Callahan. Compare him with the other big action franchise characters like Indiana Jones and James Bond, and you'll probably find him to be actually the best character. With the exception of the Lazenby and Craig films, Bond is just a spy who has sex a lot. And Jones? Well he's far from complicated.

It's also difficult to not see the influence this series, primarily the first film, has had on action films. The 70s saw a huge amount of rogue cop action movies, all of which were inspired by it. The lines of dialogue are legendary, and they've been referenced by varying sources from Ferris Bueller's Day Off to Mystery Science Theater 3000.

Bottom line is if you haven't seen these films, see them. I'd recommend the entire series, but there's quite literally no excuse to not see the first film at the very least.

Upon Watching Prometheus...

I finally saw Prometheus, and I was probably as confused as everyone else. Now this film has gotten a lot of criticism from everyone, and if there's bitching about a movie, I must be involved, so I saw it.

First of all, I'm kind of surprised Prometheus was this appealing to people. The name doesn't scream franchise like "The Avengers" or "The Hunger Games" does, and it wasn't even like 100% clear if it was a prequel to Alien. Nevertheless a bunch of people were looking forward to it, and eventually it came out and sparked a bunch of complaints.

The opening scene turned me off. Big-time. The opening shot might as well be 2001: A Space Odyssey's opening shot, except less interesting. I suppose if you're going to steal from a science fiction movie, steal from the best, but it just really turned me off. Following that there were a bunch of shots of an apparent alien landscape, and then the introduction to our film's first character: a big ripped albino humanoid alien thing that drinks a bubbly liquid and dies in the most horrible way. This had me laughing uncontrollably because it's just ridiculous and so bizarre. That wasn't a good sign for this movie from the beginning. You might think this scene would make sense later, but not really. It just kind of happened.

Now eventually the plot kicks in, and it's the exact same plot as 2001: A Space Odyssey--a team of scientists travel throughout the universe to go to a specific spot that appears to have connections with the origins of humanity. And then there's a guy named Dave wandering around a spaceship alone, while everyone else is in hypersleep or whatever. Sound familiar? That's because it's from 2001: A Space Odyssey.

The team of scientists--most of which act like idiots--arrive at this moon or planet or thing and go explore this seemingly non-God-made structure. And here's where it gets confusing as hell. Almost nothing following this makes sense.

While I've been mostly negative on this movie so far, I must say I enjoyed it. It was good, but far from great. Some of the scenes worked really well and there were some great make-up and visual effects, and some good performances.

Some weird shit happens and some people die in more horrible ways, one important one being unexplained. It's an infection and don't ask questions. And someone's mutated and kills other people. It doesn't make sense but it's interesting to watch. And then the main character, Elizabeth Shaw, is pregnant with an alien thing and in horrible pain. Despite her not being in pain until after she is told she's pregnant, her desperate attempt to get rid of the fetus thing is the most disgusting, disturbing, frightening, and also the best scene of the film.

Then later they find one of those albino things alive, and it's clear that it's of the race that created humans, and is also human, based on its DNA. Which is interesting, considering pre-humans didn't have human DNA. In a movie that has the main character being an archaeologist, I expect some goddamn archaeology research to be done.

As far as the characters, there's not much. Noomi Rapace struggles with her British accent as the lead character, whose only trait is that she kind of has a religious faith. There's the beautiful Charlize Theron as some bitch who might as well be an alien. Let me put it this way; after I win an Oscar, I hope to get better roles than Theron. There's a biologist and geologist who are both total idiots and were created for one reason: to be killed. The captain, although he's kind of a minor character, is probably the most interesting, except for of course Michael Fassbender as the robot dude. Fassbender is one of the best actors working today, and many claim his performance in Shame was the best of 2011.

The film is a bit anti-climactic and it doesn't end. Upon the ending, you'll wonder why the movie was even made. Overall, however, it's pretty good. It makes you think, which is what the best science fiction films do. I've mentioned 2001 numerous times in this review and while this film had a similar plot and ideas, the biggest difference is certainly the ending. While both films' endings are left open, one feels 2001: A Space Odyssey at least had a point to make.

I thought it was decent. I'm sure it's not for everybody, as its plot is overly complicated and there are some gross-out moments.

QB Power Rankings

This is my list of the 30 best QBs in the game today. Of course, there are questions about Peyton Manning and a few of the rookies, but whatever.

1. Aaron Rodgers (Green Bay Packers) - This isn't just me as a Packer fan. Last season's MVP and he just might be leading the best team in the NFL
2. Tom Brady (New England Patriots) - Been a staple towards the top of this list for a long time
3. Drew Brees (New Orleans Saints) - He set the record last season for most passing yards
4. Eli Manning (New York Giants) - We saw last season how great this guy can be when he doesn't turn it over
5. Peyton Manning (Denver Broncos) - More question marks than any other QB. If he's old Peyton, he could probably be #2 or 3.
6. Ben Roethlisberger (Pittsburgh Steelers) - Don't think he's that great, but he's won two Super Bowls...
7. Matt Ryan (Atlanta Falcons) - Been solid statistically since he's been in the league but struggles to win the big game
8. Matthew Stafford (Detroit Lions) - When healthy, he's great, and he's got the best receiver in football
9. Philip Rivers (San Diego Chargers) - Coming off a terrible season, otherwise he might be #5 or 6
10. Tony Romo (Dallas Cowboys) - Same thing as Matt Ryan, just a little more experienced and turnover heavy. Also a bad kick holder
11. Cam Newton (Carolina Panthers) - Young and a bit unproven in terms of winning games, but he's a passing yards machine
12. Jay Cutler (Chicago Bears) - Before the injury he may have had the best year of his career. If he comes back strong, he could be a top 10 guy
13. Michael Vick (Philadelphia Eagles) - That "Dream Team" thing didn't work out too well, but let's not forget the year he had two seasons ago.
14. Matt Schaub (Houston Texans) - Had a great year last year until the injury, which hurt Houston a lot in the playoffs. If he remains healthy, they're Super Bowl contenders
15. Andy Dalton (Cincinnati Bengals) - While Newton's stats were amazing everyone, this rookie led his team to the playoffs with a great season himself
16. Joe Flacco (Baltimore Ravens) - His career record speaks for itself, but it was clear in the playoffs that was due more to the people around him
17. Andrew Luck (Indianapolis Colts) - I think he'll be a great quarterback, but it may not happen overnight
18. Josh Freeman (Tampa Bay Buccaneers) - Had a bad season last year but quite a good one two years ago
19. Matt Cassel (Kansas City Chiefs) - While he had a disappointing year last season, this man led the Chiefs to the playoffs a couple years ago, which is never easy
20. Robert Griffin III (Washington Redskins) - Another rookie, should be interesting how his athleticism translates to the NFL. It took Michael Vick a while, but Cam Newton started out great...
21. Ryan Fitzpatrick (Buffalo Bills) - He led the league in interceptions last year but he is in a pretty tough division...idk
22. Alex Smith (San Francisco 49ers) - Far from great, but productive with good players around him
23. Carson Palmer (Oakland Raiders) - His brief prime seems like a long time ago now. Probably because it is.
24. Sam Bradford (Saint Louis Rams) - Had a sophomore slump last season; let's see if he has a comeback
25. Matt Hasselbeck (Tennessee Titans) - While this perennial Seahawk is now in a Titans jersey, he brings tremendous experience that can make up for him being past his prime and short on the skills. Maybe.
26. Matt Flynn (Seattle Seahawks) - As unproven as any of the rookies, Aaron Rodgers' former backup, in just his second start, he set the record for a Green Bay Packer with 6 touchdown passes. Impressive, but still plenty of question marks.
27. Matt Moore (Miami Dolphins) - Had a decent year last year but is faced with a quarterback controversy nonetheless. I vote Ryan Tannehill's wife.
28. Mark Sanchez (New York Jets) - Last year he proved how useless he is without a running game. Could find himself benched halfway through the season for Tim Tebow
29. John Skelton (Arizona Cardinals) - This Fordham alum has proven a few times that he can win games on a terrible team. Unfortunately, the Cardinals overspent on Kevin Kolb and insist that he's the starter.
30. Jason Campbell (Chicago Bears) - He'll be backing up Cutler, but he actually played okay for Oakland if you'll remember, not too long ago. Okay, not great.

My 100 Favorite Athletes of All Time

My 100 Professional Favorite Athletes of All Time. I decided to take only from the 4 major sports and then golf, because those are really the only ones I follow.

1. Lou Gehrig
2. Derek Jeter
3. Roberto Clemente
4. Babe Ruth
5. Patrick Roy
6. Oscar Robertson
7. Stan Musial
8. Padraig Harrington
9. Bill Russell
10. Roger Staubach
11. Jackie Robinson
12. Phil Mickelson
13. Yogi Berra
14. Pete Maravich
15. Don Hutson
16. Hakeem Olajuwon
17. Alan Page
18. Donald Driver
19. Johnny Bench
20. Mariano Rivera
21. John Havlicek
22. Bobby Orr
23. Brooks Robinson
24. Hank Aaron
25. Patrick Ewing
26. Mickey Mantle
27. Joe DiMaggio
28. Hank Greenberg
29. Larry Bird
30. Wayne Gretzky
31. Julius Erving
32. Joe Frazier
33. Ray Allen
34. Joe Greene
35. Joe Montana
36. Walter Payton
37. Bill Dickey
38. Ernie Banks
39. Barry Sanders
40. Peyton Manning
41. Reggie White
42. Walter Johnson
43. Jerry West
44. Marshall Faulk
45. Gary Carter
46. Harmon Killebrew
47. Sandy Koufax
48. Stan Mikita
49. Ernie Els
50. Forrest Gregg
51. Ray Nitschke
52. Ralph Kiner
53. Jim Brown
54. Jack Nicklaus
55. Craig Biggio
56. Frankie Frisch
57. Chris Chelios
58. Mario Lemieux
59. Tim Brown
60. Arnold Palmer
61. Jim Taylor
62. Mike Weir
63. Joe Sakic
64. Shaun Alexander
65. Michael Strahan
66. Chris Mullin
67. Yao Ming
68. Bob Gibson
69. Kurt Warner
70. Tony Gwynn
71. Willie Mays
72. Whitey Ford
73. Curtis Granderson
74. Vince Carter
75. Duke Snider
76. Jerome Bettis
77. Wilt Chamberlain
78. Steve Nash
79. Jason Kidd
80. Vijay Singh
81. Aaron Rodgers
82. Champ Bailey
83. Charles Woodson
84. Tom Seaver
85. Jimmie Foxx
86. Tracy McGrady
87. Kevin Durant
88. Bob Cousy
89. Michael Redd
90. Cal Ripken, Jr.
91. Jerry Rice
92. Ronde Barber 
93. Jim Ringo
94. Steve Largent
95. Dominique Wilkins
96. Mike Piazza
97. Nate Archibald
98. Elgin Baylor
99. John Elway
100. Matt Hasselbeck

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo - Review

This is a review of the posthumously published Stieg Larsson novel. I did not see the Swedish or American movie.

This was quite an effective mystery novel. Overall it certainly wasn't flawless, and I found the ending a bit disappointing and unrealistic, but it was pretty good.

I knew very little about this book coming in. I only knew that it was a huge international sensation and that there was this character named Lisbeth Salamander or whatever, who's supposed to be badass or whatever. It turns out, however, that the plot is quite interesting. Henrik Vanger is an old guy who's niece disappeared decades ago, and he believes someone killed her and is trying to drive him insane. It's a bit unclear how he's being driven insane because he's just getting flowers every birthday, but apparently that affects him strongly. So he hires a journalist who just lost a libel case to find stuff out.

For a while, Lisbeth Salander carries on a parallel narrative. Eventually she's brought in by the journalist (Blomkvist) and they team up to find the killer.

The setup of the crime is great. First of all, they're uncertain what the crime was. Secondly, it took place on an island where only so many people could have been. Thirdly, it was nearly forty years ago. It's an intriguing premise, to say the least, but Larsson writes to that you never truly doubt that Blomkvist will find out the truth. He comes across a setback here and there, but you know he'll get to the bottom sooner or later, particularly when he introduces Salander as this dirt-digging machine.

You hear a lot about the Lisbeth Salander character, and to be honest, I'm not 100% sure why. She's a good character, fleshed out rather well, and quite interesting and mysterious. But she's not like amazing or whatever. She actually does a few pretty stupid things in the novel, if you ask me. She's without doubt the novel's most interesting character but I don't think she deserves the attention she's gotten.

Of course, a great deal of why she's gotten so much attention is because of the feminist themes of the novel. While I applaud Larsson for applying a theme to an otherwise basic mystery novel, aside from the traditional "you can't trust anyone," I found the feminism to be just about bashing me over the head while I read it. There are statistics about how many women are abused by men at the beginning of each part of the novel, and aside from the thematic connection, there's really nothing these have to do with the plot. With the lack of subtlety I almost felt like a victim of domestic abuse.

Overall, this was quite good. The ending was a little disappointing but I acknowledge that the novel was more about the characters than the plot. Unfortunately, I think the plot might have been more interesting than the characters. Blomkvist for example, we never know too much about, and he ends up having far more resolution than Salander and Henrik Vanger, who are far more interesting. I have some nitpicks, I guess you could say, but I don't like nitpicking about things I like. Overall it was one of the better mystery novels I've read.

Harry Potter Alternate Titles

I've always felt the Harry Potter films have been inappropriately titled. Therefore I took the liberty to change the titles myself.

1. Harry Potter and the Three-Headed Dog That Doesn't Really Do Anything
2. Harry Potter and the Giant Fictitious Snake That Shares Its Name with a Real Lizard
3. Harry Potter and the Flying Eagle Thingy
4. Harry Potter and the Death of Edward Cullen
5. Harry Potter and the Wizard Fight Club
6. Harry Potter and the Constant Use of the Word "Snog"
7. Harry Potter and the Excessively Long Camping Trip
8. Harry Potter and the New-Found Usefulness of the Previously Worthless Neville

10 Movies I Hate That Everyone Else Seems to Love

10. Return of the Living Dead (1985)

I begin this list by loosely defining “everyone.” Not everyone loves this movie, but for some inexplicable reason this is considered a horror classic and has gone on to become a cult hit that defined a generation, albeit a very small one of the “splatterpunk” scene. Yes, that’s actually a word.

It’s your basic zombie apocalypse movie except with some of the most obnoxious characters ever conceived. Ironically, the characters are what many critics point to being the movie’s strongest attribute. Nevertheless it’s a bunch of ‘80s punks hanging around in a graveyard, obsessed with sex, leather, and chains. And that’s it. It might be good for a laugh or two, but it certainly doesn’t warrant an entire film. It’s like a basic sketch comedy scene of what-would-happen-if-zombies-and-punks-mixed.

9. Burn After Reading (2008)

While not a huge hit, this was hailed as another “masterpiece” by the masters of dark comedy, the Coen brothers. I found it to be nothing more than a ridiculously pointless movie that lacked the humor of something like The Big Lebowski.

Despite a great cast, Burn After Reading is a huge disappointment. It basically answers the question: what would happen if a couple idiots came upon a bunch of spy information? But the problem here is that everyone is an idiot, including the spy, played by the iPhoneless John Malkovich. Not a single character is relatable, or believable. While the Coen brothers typically specialize in quirky and unique characters, I was very annoyed by all of these.

This is basically a plotless movie, and it goes on for far too long. I must say, though, that there was one part that had me laughing hysterically, but that was really the only part I enjoyed of this movie. And on top of that, the ending has all the action take place offscreen. I’m not a huge fan of the Coens but this is easily my least favorite of theirs.

8. School of Rock (2003)

I remember when this came out and all my friends were talking about how great it was. I liked rock music, so I kind of wanted to see it, but for some reason I didn’t until about 2008 or so. And I was disgusted.

It’s a Jack Black movie, first of all, so that means you’ll have to put up with some over-the-top obnoxiousness. He does tone it down a bit, considering he is doing stuff he’s clearly interested, and he allows the kids to take over a bit. But if you’re like me and you hate kids, you’ll hate this movie.

The movie has no purpose other than to reference classic songs and have stupid kids play them in a much worse way. It follows your basic premise of the main character lying about something in order to get money (or a job), becomes very well respected, until it’s revealed that he lied. It’s been done hundreds of times, and in far better films.

The ending concert is a bore, and I don’t know, but there’s just something weird about seeing a ten-year-old with a Flying V trying to look cool. Or a ten-year-old drummer with spiky hair. It’s just strange. And then there’s the over-acting of Joan Cusack and one of the worst performances EVER by the guy who plays Jack Black’s best friend. Minor complaint for a film that doesn’t focus on him, but it’s just painful. As is a great deal of this movie.

7. The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974)

I was excited to see this movie. One of the most influential horror films of all time, this helped pave the way to the slasher subgenre, but was itself extremely flawed.

It just kind of begins after some creepy narration, and before we ever get to meet the characters, they’re stuck in the middle of nowhere, Texas, and getting killed off. Movies like these shouldn’t try to be too heavy on plot, but we need some kind of introduction to engage us. I guess they picked up the creepy hitchhiker to set the mood or whatever, but that’s it.

There’s like a séance or something, and then not much else happens except a few people die. Modern audiences will be disappointed at both the lack of kills and the lack of gore. I don’t care about that so much, just as long as the movie is engaging. For instance, the original Halloween is not very gory at all and does not have too many deaths, but it’s a great movie because of how well it’s paced and how everything builds up to the final couple scenes.

This movie doesn’t build up to anything, really, but has a chase at the end. And then it ends. I guess maybe it ends to give the viewer kind of an uneasy feeling like the killer is still out there, or whatever, but this was the worst part of the movie for me. It ended literally right when it was getting good. I didn’t enjoy the movie at all until about an hour and fifty minutes in, and then it ended two minutes later.

This movie left me pissed off when it ended, and that’s why it’s in this list.

6. Beetlejuice (1988)

I hate Tim Burton. While I can’t say I hate every one of his films and some of them are actually pretty good, I just hate his style. He abandons narrative conventions purely for his visual style, which is quite amazing, I’ll admit. His best films, however, have some thread of an interesting story, like Edward Scissorhands, for example.

Beetlejuice, however, is not one of these films. It’s an unfunny mishmash of colors and abstract sets, stupidly written and overacted. It actually has a good cast, including Geena Davis, Michael Keaton, and a young Winona Ryder, but the actors outstretch themselves to bring some shred of character to an otherwise flat script. I found myself hating the titular character the first time he spoke, for instance.

Eventually it’s good ghosts against bad ghosts or whatever, but really who cares? Apparently a lot of people did. This was a very popular film that brought Tim Burton into the spotlight and predated films like Batman and Edward Scissorhands, which would use his vision far better.

5. Friday Night Lights (2004)

I remember when I played football freshman year of high school. My team’s quarterback said I couldn’t play football if I didn’t like Friday Night Lights. I guess that’s why I quit at the end of the year, because I will NEVER like this movie.

This movie has so many problems. For one, it focuses on so many characters that the audience never gets a chance to really know a single one of them. Even the lead, Billy Bob Thornton, is just a face and a voice to say coachy dialogue. And Boobie is there just to get injured and kind of inspire the team because he was the best player or whatever.

On top of all this, the football scenes were filmed horribly. It was all shaky cam. And while I know this was more about how football affects everyone’s lives, it clearly was about the game itself, too, because it climaxes in the state championship. So it’s pretty important to have well-filmed and exciting sports scenes, but that is all sorely lacking here.

And my final point on this one will be a small but important one. It’s on the villainization of opponents in sports movies. Sometimes it’s used well, but it’s such a simplistic way to get the audience to support the protagonists. After Boobie is injured, two players from the opposing team are shown fistbumbing each other, implying some kind of New Orleans Saints bounty thing, or maybe just people who don’t give a shit about other people’s safety. And then in the final game, we’ve got some asshole kicking a helmet into a guy’s face and making him bleed. Of course it goes uncalled. I hate movies that do this kind of shit.

4. Batman Begins (2005)

After The Dark Knight, people have pretty much forgotten Batman Begins, but at one time it was widely thought to be the best Batman movie and among the best superhero/comic book films of all time. But that didn’t fool me. This movie sucks.

My biggest complaint here is yet again the shaky cam. In every action sequence, the camera shakes violently like the cameraman is getting his ass kicked. It’s so bad that you can’t tell what’s going on. What’s the most important thing in a movie? Being able to see what’s happening!

So this movie violates rule number one, but it also fails at its own game. Because it’s one of those origin stories, about half the film focuses on how Bruce Wayne becomes Batman, which I really didn’t care about to begin with. Not only that, but we don’t learn anything about Bruce Wayne as a character. He was afraid of bats so now he tries to scare criminals by being like a bat, is virtually all I got from him. Batman and Batman Forever, flawed as they may be (Forever in particular), both managed to be far more interesting about Batman’s origins in just a few brief flashbacks.

And like many origin stories, this falls victim to having a stupid plot and antagonist after the origin is revealed. In this case, we’ve got a bad Liam Neeson (for some reason, even though he seemed pretty good in the beginning; it’s never explained well), Tom Wilkinson playing a mafia dude, and Cillian Murphy as a psychiatrist who makes people insane by spraying them with LSD or whatever. Murphy probably gets the most attention, which is another misstep by the film, because he’s the most ridiculous. Despite this movie trying to be an ultra-serious and realistic Batman film, we still have to put up with the character of Scarecrow. While his motivations are clear, the character itself is so ridiculous. And I’ll add, too, that Cillian Murphy is only good when he’s playing someone from his native Ireland, or at the very least the rest of the British isles.

Thankfully this movie is kind of forgotten, but the damage has already been done.

3. The Boondock Saints (1999)

I shouldn’t even have to say anything because this is a shitty movie and critics know it. For some reason, every dude around my age loves this movie. I don’t know. It’s just an extremely violent and vulgar Tarantino rip-off, replacing wit for the most problematic and stupid message ever put to film.

There are two Irish-Catholic brothers who go around murdering criminals. I guess we’re supposed to like them because they’re taking the law into their own hands. FALSE. While characters like Batman do the same thing, he has a strict code of ethics that doesn’t allow him to kill anyone. Here the two brothers have this one rule that they don’t kill anyone who doesn’t deserve it. Oh. So who puts them in charge of saying who deserves death and who doesn’t? If these guys were serious Catholics, they’d realize that only God has that right, and there is always potential for redemption, even for the most horrible criminals (like them). This is why this movie is so fucking offensive to me as a Catholic.

Oh but they pray in Latin when they kill someone—isn’t that cute!!!!

Done before. Samuel L. Jackson with his Ezekiel passage in Pulp Fiction.

Oh, a gun accidentally goes off in a normal conversation scene, splattering a cat’s brains all over the wall.

Done before. Pulp Fiction again, this time with a human, making it a hell of a lot funnier actually.

They escape and then it’s showed in flashback how they escaped! It’s being nonlinear!

Done before. Every Quentin Tarantino movie ever.

And Willem Dafoe’s in it. Now seeing as how he’s from my hometown, I’m inclined to like him a lot. And he’s done some flat-out amazing performances in movies like Platoon and Antichrist, but here he plays such a stupid character who cross-dresses for some reason and screams out some of the dumbest lines ever written.

This movie is not just not good. It’s terrible.

2. Dazed and Confused (1993)

The soundtrack is all this movie has going for it. It begins in what feels not like a plot but like just an introduction to the main and supporting characters. And then ten minutes in, it hits you: this is the entire movie. People going around acting like idiots, being unlikable, and doing drugs and drinking.

The characters just about all suck. Slater is good for a laugh or two, the Jewish guy from Saving Private Ryan and his John Denver lookalike friend are alright, despite Denver having a creepy pedophilic obsession with a freshman—one of the many problematic messages in this movie, in terms of morals—and the main guy Pink Floyd is somewhat relatable and not an asshole. That’s as big a compliment any of the characters can get for this piece of shit. The main freshman, played by a young Tim Lincecum, is cocky sack of shit who I want to punch in the face every time he’s on screen. The guy who wears the overalls is an annoying sack of shit, and I literally found myself groaning whenever he was in a scene. Matthew McConaughey delivers his inexplicably classic line, but is far too creepy to be found funny, really. And Ben Affleck manages to be more of an asshole in this movie than he is in real life, somehow.

But the characters are the least of this movie’s problems. This movie has no plot. It’s just a movie about people getting drunk and high, with absolutely ZERO consequences. I might have found myself caring about something if there was a threat of them getting caught or busted, but probably not even then. I don’t give a shit if this movie “captures the 70s really well,” as everyone says it does, because it’s just a stupid, pointless movie. Nothing happens and this movie makes no effort to make me care about any of the characters or about anything that happens.

1. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)

I hate this movie more than life itself. While I can’t say I love any of the Potter movies, I consider myself a bit of a fan of the series, liking all the movies except for this one and Azkaban, ironically the two considered by many critics to be among the best.

I hate the style of this movie. The direction is just off. One can look back at the first two films and complain how they’re two kiddy and stuff, but let’s face it: it’s a story about a boy who was 11 and 12 and it’s a story about magic and stuff that appeals to kids. Starting with the third, they took a much darker tone, and the series suffered briefly as a consequence, in my opinion.

My biggest complaint about the Potter series is that there are so many awkward moments. They exist in I think all of the movies, perhaps the exception being the last, which I’ve only seen once, so I can’t be sure. But it’s never more prevalent than in this film. The humor is still quite childish, but it sticks out like a sore thumb because this movie isn’t trying to be for kids. It’s PG-13, for Christ’s sake!

Now if you don’t know what I mean about awkward moments, I’ll do my best to describe a few, but there’s no way I can make you squirm and cringe the way I did while watching this movie. There’s one part where Ron is forced to dance with Professor McGonagall because he was talking or something. The entire Quidditch World Cup scene is just strange, how it’s painfully blunt in its foreshadowing of the importance of Viktor Krum and in its having the Weasley twins have to tell the audience which team is which, when we can clearly tell who’s Irish and who’s Bulgarian, and then in its tease to show you the game only to not show one second of the goddamn game (in hindsight probably not a bad idea, considering the Quidditch scenes started sucking after the second movie). The girl students from France or whatever with their stupid entrance trying to look like sex objects, and the Russian guy students quite literally announcing to all of Hogwarts upon their entrance that they’re evil. Then there’s that scene where Snape kind of pushes on Harry and Ron’s heads and they make noises of pain, and I’m just like “that doesn’t actually hurt at all.” There’s Filch running for some reason like he’s got shit in his pants. There’s the guy that looks like Hitler, who I find myself laughing at whenever I see him. There’s that pointless scene of when they eat the crackers or something that make them make animal noises. And that’s only scratching the surface.

All these awkward moments make the film into such an indescribably uncomfortable viewing experience. All the good moments like the dragon scene are completely overshadowed by glimpses of Neville dancing by himself and a stupid fucking wizard rock band. That people like this movie simply astounds me.