A Clockwork Orange is set in the future, in a world where the youth is corrupt and violent against the old. The world is a place of injustice. The main character is a teenage boy named Alex. He is the leader of a gang of boys who commit various crimes. One night, Alex accidently murders a woman who he is robbing and his fellow gang members turn on him. Alex is caught by the police and put in jail. Alex remains in prison for two years until he is put into a new program that is designed to make cure criminals of their negative social behaviors. Alex undergoes the treatment and from that point on becomes violently ill whenever he tries to do something “evil”. Alex is released into society again, but finds only hardship. Eventually he tries to kill himself when being tortured by a man he had done wrong to in the past. Afterward, the hospital works to undo the treatment and Alex returns to normal.

The plot of the movie and the book are almost identical, save one very key scene. The film does do a good job conveying the visual elements of the novel. The world that Kubrick creates looks exactly like what one envisions when reading A Clockwork Orange. However, there are certain elements that can never be recreated in the film, and therefore make the film far inferior to the novel.

            The film presents Alex as quite a different young man than the one portrayed by Burgess. The Alex in the film appears to be all on his own, with not a friend in the world. The whole world is against him in the film. (Kael) This is laughable, for anyone can see that Alex is a horrible criminal who assaults, steals and rapes on a regular basis throughout the story. However, the presentation in the film makes the reader sympathize with Alex and overlook his villainy. However, the first person narration in the novel actually makes Alex seem more of a hoodlum than the film does. The sheer contradiction between Alex’s narration and his actions are so absurd that the reader cannot help but detest Alex and his wicked ways.  In the first few chapters of the novel, Alex casually describes an evening out where he and his gang perform various atrocities. In one scene, Alex and his droogs beat an old, drunken homeless man. “So we cracked into him lovely, grinning all over our litsos [faces], but still he went on signing. Then we tripped him so he laid down flat…Then we went on our way” (Burgess 18). The nonchalant attitude that Alex describes the mayhem with is absurd to the point of a kind of black hilarity. The film cannot accomplish this feat. What comes across instead is one of two things. The viewer feels that either Alex is a poor young man forced into his position by a society that offers no alternative, or that he is nothing but a sadistic rapist who believes himself to be the only one that matters in the world; the only sane individual. (Ebert)

            The idea of Alex as the only sane individual is also captured in the film through Kubrick’s use of camera trickery. Kubrick uses shots and lenses that distort anything they look upon. He uses movie magic to make almost every scene that does not include Alex in it be skewed and bizarre, thus enforcing the viewer’s idea of Alex as the victim of a deranged society. Wide angle lenses were used to give the world a stretched or imperfect look to it. Also, in shots where Alex is present, Kubrick uses a special lens that can focus on one object while distorting everything else. Alex still remains the strong focal point and character through this technique. (Ebert) This is quite contrary to the novel. In the novel, Alex is often seen just as menacing as the society he is a part of. He commits any act he wishes without regard for anyone but himself and is as thoroughly twisted as anyone. Alex does not even heed moral guidance in the novel. When Alex has a surprise visit from his “probation” officer, Alex is warned not to continue in his delinquent ways. Alex’s officer even asks him about his morals when he says, “Is it some devil crawls inside you?” (Burgess 43) However, Alex ignores the advice of someone who is actually trying to help him. In the film, this guardian figure is comical and unhelpful. He tells Alex to behave while drinking from a glass containing dentures. The ridiculous behaviors of the characters around him show that in the film, everyone is insane; save little Alex, that is.

            In the film, A Clockwork Orange is a mysterious and enigmatic idea. In fact, throughout the entirety of the film, the phrase only appears once (aside from the title sequence). It appears in passing on a piece of paper in Mr. Alexander’s typewriter.  This is one of the most profound differences between the book and the film. How can the film be called A Clockwork Orange when no one who sees it knows what A Clockwork Orange really is? There is frequent discussion of what A Clockwork Orange is and its significance in the novel. A Clockwork Orange is best described as when an individual does not have the ability to choose between good or evil. Burgess said, “It is as inhuman to be totally good as it is to be totally evil” (Burgess VIII). What Burgess means, is that a human being, by definition, is a creature of free will. If a human acts only good or only bad, then they are devoid of free will and therefore inhuman. A Clockwork Orange is the elimination of free will. This is the fundamental idea behind the novel: the importance of free will. Without an explanation of such a key principle, the film is lacking in its delivery of what A Clockwork Orange is really about.

            That is the most important difference between the film and the novel: the meaning of A Clockwork Orange as a whole. The conclusion of the film shows a rehabilitated Alex, free from the horrible treatment that the state put him through. Alex is once again able to engage in any kind of sex and violence he pleases. The film ends with a scene where Alex envisions committing acts of sex once again with his new found “freedom”. Kubrick seems to push the idea not of a man who has seen the evils of society and tries to be above it, but rather the idea that is society is criminal then the individual should be criminal as well. (Ebert)

The movie Alex is a savior who rescues the viewer from oppressive control. Is this concept true to the novel though? It is actually in direct contrast with what the author of A Clockwork Orange believed. This is demonstrated in the twenty-first chapter of A Clockwork Orange when Alex has a change of heart about his life and demonstrates that he has free will. This chapter was left out of the film for some reason. In this chapter, Alex is running with a new crowd of droogs and expresses his lack of interest in the violent life style he’s leading. Then, Alex meets an old member of his gang and learns that his former droog has settled down and been married. Alex becomes filled with thoughts and emotions. He decides to become a more moral individual and leave behind his old ways of delinquency. This illustrates the idea of free will and A Clockwork Orange all at once. Before Alex’s treatment, he was A Clockwork Orange, because he had no choice in his youth but to be a violent crook. Then after his treatment Alex had no choice but to be a saint. However, after he was cured, he finally became a free man. Little Alex grew up. He was presented with both worlds, that of a delinquent and that of an honest man and he made the choice on his own. (Carey) The novel is a tale of maturation and free will, while the film stands out as dark humor directed toward the backward thinking of, “Do unto others as they do unto you.”

            Truly, what an individual takes away from A Clockwork Orange is entirely dependent upon how they experience it; through film or through text. Will the individual see a tale of free will and adolescence or the twisted depiction of a corrupt society and its foul creations? Either way, I, your humble narrator ask you droogs to viddy what you will and to make sure that you have a good rassoodock about it when it’s all through, lest you too become A Clockwork Orange.

Burgess, Anthony. A Clockwork Orange. New York: Norton. 1962.

Carey, Scott. “A Clockwork Orange: Human Freedom.” Clockwork101. http://clockwork101.tripod.com/info/id6.html

Ebert, Roger. “A Clockwork Orange.” RogerEbert.com. Feb. 1972. http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19720211/REVIEWS/202110301/1023

Kael, Pauline. “Stanley Strangelove.” The New Yorker. Jan. 1972. http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/0051.html

"Twilight", headed by director Catherine Hardwicke ("the Nativity Story", "Thirteen"), had a generally low budget, was picked up by a barely-known production studio (Summit) and had a cast of mainly dark horse actors. It's story is based on the best-selling novel, in which a teenage girl falls in love with a vampire.

Plot

    The plot of "Twilight" is a bit heavy to handle. The audience is met with a whole new way of seeing vampires (no more garlic and coffins). Most of the specifics are too quickly explained in the film to be understood by those new to the series, so I would suggest going with someone who is familiar with the story.

The storyline moves at an incredibly slow pace, a great development tool that has sadly been neglected by modern cinema. The exposition is shot much like a normal movie, so that it doesn't even seem as though you're watching a fantasy tale. Once the vampires are introduced, the story then steadily begins to evolve.

Acting

    Kristen Stewart ("Into the Wild") plays Bella Swan, the heroine and narrator of the story. Stewart does well in depicting this level-headed, yet clumsy teenage girl. Unlike many of today's actresses, she knows how to be modest, smart, and yet somehow humanly flawed at the same time. She is a true insight to the modern teenager in the midst of a thousand incorrect stereotypes.

    Robert Pattinson ("Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire") does an excellent job in displaying the dark, confused soul of Edward Cullen. As much of the film was based on close-ups, it was important that his facial expressions properly showed what he was thinking. He gives a great performance of one who is lusting to kill, yet is struggling against his instincts to protect the one he loves. Where Pattinson lacks, however, is in his ability to do action work. The faster-paced sequences near the end seemed someone unnatural and forced. This aspect could have been improved, perhaps, with more training for these scenes.

    More notable performances include Billy Burke, who is perfect as Bella's lonesome, police chief father, as well as Tyler Lautner as Jacob Black, an optimistic teen from the nearby reservation who has some secrets to share. Peter Facinelli fits into the role of Dr. Carslile Cullen, Edward's concerned, yet charismatic father.

Editing

    Editing was spectacular, especially when juggling so many close-up shots among establishing and movement shots. The credits also add a great end to the film, collaging the film's best moments in an artistic manner.

Special Effects

    The special effects were adequate at best. Some of the tree-jumping and quickened running didn't look realistic at all. The baseball scene, however, managed to push away most of these problems with a much clearer arrangement of shots. The film's climax is well-coordinated as well, and it seems as though most of the film's special effects budget was saved for this one scene. These shots would also seem more difficult to film, since it takes place in a room full of mirrors. It would be very difficult to avoid getting your own camera's reflection in a shot.

What makes it unique

    The most important aspect of this film is that it gives an honest, un-"Hollywood"ized look at the American teenager in the form of modest Bella Swan. It also concentrates on the idea of the battle against one's inner demons, which is always a fascinating subject to observe. Look deep enough, and you can find a lot of psychology in this film.

Overall

    Though "Twilight" is far from a perfect movie, it should be appreciated for its artful storytelling and intriguing characters. It should not be dismissed as an average teenage film, or a 'chick-flick'... in fact, it's a very difficult film to place in any particular genre. See it, and you'll understand.

Right now my sisters and mom are voting Team Jacob. I think anyway. I saw a few commercials for Twilight and I had to say I was impressed. It looked really good! The commercials really got me to want to read the book. Commercials didn't look all love/romantic so that helped. Reviews everywhere saying it was amazing also had a bonus. I have all the books, well at least my sister does. My sister is re-reading Eclipse for the second or third time now. I want to read it because it's about vampires but then people might make fun of me because it's more of a girl book.

I like reading especially series of books that turn into movies, like Harry Potter. I've read all the Harry Potter books. So what do you think? Should I read Twilight and the rest of Stephanie Meyer series and risk get made fun of by my family? Please leave a comment and click the “I like it button” Thanks =D .

The Daleks

“Exterminate!”

From: Dr Who.

What's the story?

One man can be blamed for unleashing the Daleks on the universe- Davros. They originated on the planet Skaro, a world ravaged by a millennia long war between two peoples, the Kaled and the Thal. Over the course of the long conflict, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons where used by both sides. The Kaled where starting to suffer from mutations, and Davros, their chief scientist decided to capitalize on this. He began analyzing their mutations, identifying the strongest and encouraging them, assuring the Kaled commanders that it was to predict what they might one day become. What he was really doing was preparing to create a new master race to enslave the planet is his own image.

He isolated all the characteristics he needed in his new perfect race- Ruthlessness, lack of emotion and a burning hatred for anything that was different from them. Once this was achieved, he designed the “Mk III travel machine” (Part life support system and part armored tank) to house them in- and the Daleks where born. They then promptly began to kill everything in their path, a genocidal campaign that was not confined to their own planet. They soon spread to the stars, and even killed Davros in the process (though through various time tampering he was saved). The rest of Dalek history is the subject of many episodes of Dr Who, so I won't say too much more for fear of spoilers.

What makes them great villains?

The Daleks are ruthless, uncompromising, and genocidal. They don't believe they are the supreme beings, they know it. Killing anything that isn't either: A) Dalek, or B) Useful, is as natural to them as breathing is to humans. Daleks are devoid of almost all emotion and conscience, the one exception being fear- and even that is only brought out in situations where defeat is almost certain (It stops the Dalek's hubris from destroying them by ensuring they are wary of superior foes).

Aside from being tenacious to the point where the entire race has rebuilt itself from one survivor, they also have the technology and skill to carry out their campaign of genocide very successfully. Daleks are one of the few races capable of time travel (Leading them into a great war against the time lords), their ships are powerful, their knowledge of biotechnology is supreme (At one point they bred a clone army), and the individual Dalek is easily a mach for a squad of human soldiers. Even when their chassis are destroyed, if the Dalek survives it will go to ground and fight on, using its toxic bite and small size to slowly pick away at the enemy. And each Dalek itself is a certifiable genius.

Do they have a weakness?

Daleks have two main weaknesses. The eye piece on the top of the Dalek can be destroyed, blinding the creature inside. Later Daleks used energy shields to protect themselves, but if enough bullets are concentrated, at least one should get through.

The other is the Movellan virus. The first crushing defeat the Daleks had was against the Movellans. The story goes that the Daleks and Movellans where in a stalemate. Their battle computers where perfectly matched, and neither could outthink the other. So the Movellans went and devised a new strategy independently of the computer. They created a virus that specifically targeted and killed the Daleks. A large number of the race was infected, and the kill rate was 100%. The effects where so devastating it caused the Dalek Empire to fracture, but again, spoilers.

With the destruction and rebirth of their race with a new genetic code however, it seems the Daleks are now immune to it.

They can be killed using the standard approach though. Guns. Lots and lots of guns. Make them big guns. Lots and lots of very big guns.

“The Daleks are the supreme being! We do not require assistance!”

Rating: Nine out of 10 death rays.

Cherubael.

“Shut up so I can hear myself kill you.”

From: The Eisenhorn trilogy (Warhammer 40,000).

What's the story?

He's a Daemon prince from the 41st millennium, serving the powers of chaos. Cherubael has existed for a very, very long time. Known by many names, Cherubael has appeared throughout history, and throughout the imperium of man, subverting faith in the God emperor and turning the faithless to his will. He met his match on the world of Clanar II, where a radical imperial inquisitor found him and bound him into a body. Cherubael was

reduced from a Demi God, to become a daemon host, the weapon of a madman. But he had a plan, oh yes, he had a plan. For in the realm of the daemons (the warp) time has no concept. He knew in the future there would be a man who would defeat his master, and set him free from his prison of flesh. Slowly, piece of piece, Cherubael put a centauries long plan into motion. And it came so close to working too…

What makes him a great villain?

Cherubael is ludicrously powerful. Even when bound within a physical body, he's capable of feats of extraordinary destruction and chaos. In fact, even by daemon prince standards he's as hard as nails. At one point in the trilogy, he takes out a battle titian- a friggin' titan. Feel free to Google “Warhammer 40,000 battle titan”, and realize he basically killed a mile tall walking tank.

But in the entire trilogy, we rarely see him use this level of power. Like many great characters, Cherubael's true greatness lies in subtlety. Everyone's heard of the stories of deals with devils, and the sweet temptations of evil. Cherubael plays up to these stories magnificently, forming long complicated plans to get even the most devout and pious individuals to do exactly what he wants, and corrupting other, easier targets to his will. Although in the end it could be argued that he succumbs to his nemesis/chief pawn, Inquisitor Gregor Eisenhorn, Cherubael can at least claim a moral victory on account of the fact that he turned Eisenhorn from a devout puritan “All chaos is evil!” type of inquisitor, into a radical “We shall use chaos and control it!” type.

But perhaps what makes Cherubael such a great villain is the fact he rarely takes centre stage. He's a controller and manipulator, a puppeteer running everything from behind the scenes. In all the Eisenhorn books, he only features prominently in a few key scenes. In each book the "true" enemy is always someone else, but Cherubael is always there, always watching, always pulling the strings…

Does he have a weakness?

Like all Daemons, Cherubael is repelled by symbols of faith in the hands of the truly faithful. But not for long, as he can quite happily summon enough power to destroy them once he's got over the initial shock.

If the body he is bound into is injured, it means little to Cherubael. He can regenerate it quite happily. Even if it is destroyed, Cherubael remains bound to his master, waiting to serve in a new body.

Delivering a large psychic shock, or the appropriate rituals can release a daemon host from its bonds, but then you just have it wondering around obeying no orders, and with no limits put on its power.

Theoretically, there's one way to "kill" a Daemon. Deliver a MASSIVE psychic charge into it. The kind of power required to enslaves the minds of an entire city. That might, theoretically, annihilate it, rather than send it back to the warp. Maybe.

The only way to really ensure Cherubael isn't a problem is to bind him yourself, and then lock him up somewhere, never to be seen again. But having all that power at your disposal… sometimes there's no other way out of a situation other than to make a deal with the devil.

And then he's got his chance.

“Cut me free from these pentagramic bindings and we'll call it even…I'll go, and we'll never bother each other again… I promise…”

Rating: Eight out of ten tormented souls.

The Jem'Hadar.

“I am First Ikat'ika, and I am dead.

As of this moment, we are all dead.

We go into battle to reclaim our lives.

This we do gladly, for we are Jem'Hadar.

Remember: Victory is Life!”

From: Star trek (Deep space nine)

What's the story?

The Jem'Hadar serve the founders, a race of shape shifters who spend all their time in what they call "the great link" (half hive mind, half opium trip), to fight all their wars on their behalf.

The Jem'Hadar are all genetically engineered monsters who rapidly reach to maturity, at which point they are sent into battle to build the dominion; Empire of the founders. Their ranking system is simple with the "first" at the top, the "second" below him and so forth. Controlling the Jem'Hadar are another species of genetically engineered aliens, the Vorta. The Vorta are the officers and diplomats, keeping the Jem'Hadar in check and distributing the means by which the dominion control and feed them, the Ketracel white, or "White" for short.

What makes them such great villains?

In many ways, the Jem'Hadar are similar to the Daleks. They are bred for battle and born for war. Every aspect of the Jem'Hadar physiology and psychology is geared to one simple thing. Serving the founders, and more often than not in the case of the Jem'Hadar, that means killing lots and lots of people.

Examples of Jem'Hadar physiological advantages include chameleon like colour shifting they can use as camouflage (Which they rarely do, they are shock troopers rather than commandoes), enhanced muscles, endurance, enhanced senses, tough scaly skin and a fearsome appearance to demoralize their enemies.

Jem'Hadar have a life expectancy of nil. Few live past fifteen years, twenty years is an amazing feat, and thirty years is unknown. You see, despite the fact they are so tough, the dominion use the Jem'Hadar as a steamroller. It only takes three days for one to grow to maturity, so for every one that falls, there are another dozen ready to take its place.

They don't eat. They don't sleep. They don't take time out. In this respect, they're a lot like professional chefs. They pretty much share the same temperament as well, grouchy, violent and aggressive, with a dash of psychosis.

The Jem'Hadar are very well equipped, their clothing meshes with their physiology so when they "shroud" (think active camouflage), their clothing shrouds with them. Their weapons have three settings; stun, kill, and vaporize. Oh and the kill setting causes any wounds it administers to bleed profusely, so if the beam doesn't kill you, the blood loss will.

Do they have a weakness?

Only one: the white. And even then, it's hard to use this weakness against them, except on a strategic scale. The Jem'Hadar are bred to lack the ability to produce certain enzymes essential to life. These are present in the white. The white itself is also the only nutrition the Jem'Hadar require. So, in theory, you can starve them to death by stopping the flow of white, right?

More or less correct. You see there's one little problem. They don't starve to death quietly. A Jem'Hadar deprived of white behaves a lot like a heroin addict going cold turkey at first. They twitch, they mutter, they loose hand eye coordination and the ability to do their chameleon trick. But then afterwards they fly into a berserk rage, killing anything they come across, friend or foe. Given the fact that the dominion can simply abandon the Jem'Hadar as easily as anyone else abandons a tool, the berserk monsters then become the problem of the enemy again, even if the dominion where forced to retreat from the theatre of war. Finally, after the berserk rage, the Jem'Hadar croak.

The only other thing you can do is keep shooting and praying, as while each individual is tough, they are far from invincible.

Rating: Eight out of 10 prisoners of war.

“Obedience brings victory. Victory is life.”

The Terminators.

From: The TwoTerminator Movies. No, there was no third movie. There was no third movie! Lalalala I can't hear you!

“I'll be back.”

What's the story?

This one really is a classic, everyone, even people who don't normally like science fiction have seen the terminator. The story goes like this. A computerized defensive system called Skynet is built in America, in the near future. The only problem is Skynet becomes self aware, and when it does the controllers try to "pull the plug". Needless to say, Skynet does not appreciate an attempt on its "life" and strikes back, nuking all the major cities of the world. The survivors call is judgment day, but the horror doesn't end there. Skynet unleashes its foot troops, the metallic skeleton like robots called the terminators.

The humans fight back and are on the verge of defeating Skynet when it decides it's had enough. It starts to send terminators back in time to try and kill the leader of the human resistance, John Connor, and/or his mother Sarah. The idea being if the humans don't have a figurehead to gather around, then history will be different. Paradoxes aside, the rebels send one of their men back in time to protect Sarah, and a reprogrammed Terminator back to protect John.

The Terminators in the films come in two flavors, the T-800 which is the bad guy in the first film and John's body guard in the others (Not that there was more than one other film!). These guys are your basic metal terminator, but then overlaid with living tissue. It's almost impossible to tell them apart from a real human unless you cut them open. They where originally designed for infiltration, but Skynet's time portal could only transfer living things, so suddenly they took on a new purpose. As the terminator was housed INSIDE living tissue, the machine COULD send it back. And send it back they did…

The Next is the T-1000, which was sent after John Connor. This badass was made of living metal. Think of mercury which could think and pull itself into any shape it wanted. It could mimic different humans right down to the voice, and turn parts of its body into knives and other instruments of destruction. Blowing holes in it doesn't do much good either as it's like trying to stab water.

What makes them such great villains?

They just don't stop. They are as inevitable as the tides and moon; they just don't stop once set on a task. Between them, T-800 and T-1000 have been shot, burned, beaten, frozen, melted, blown up, skinned, crushed and God knows what else. Only a couple of these things proved to be anything more than a mild irritation.

Terminators are very good at what they do, they have a knowledge of human anatomy so they know how to kill with maximum efficiency, they are proficient with any weapon they pick up, can drive any vehicle, they let no one stand in their way, and simply take whatever they need as they need it, all the while marching relentlessly towards their target.

You can run, you can hide, but in the end you are only human. Sooner or later you'll need to stop to catch your breath. Sooner or later you'll need to sleep. The terminator doesn't. The only way you will ever be safe if a terminator is set on you is to either re write history, or find a way to kill it. And with the latter, you'll probably get another one sent after you anyway.

Do they have a weakness?

Only Arnold Schwarzenegger's acting skills. No seriously, by conventional means, the T-800 is VERY tough to beat. In theory it's still only a robot, so you can put it down if you can get your hands on armor piercing weapons or explosives. You can however beat it if you get creative. For example, crushing it in a metal press.

The T-1000 is even more of a nightmare. Conventional weapons do little more than annoy him, blowing him up just causes him to recombine slowly and even hiding is next to impossible as it can look like anyone, and pour itself through tight gaps to get in anywhere. Extreme cold (Being frozen) seems to cause it to go a little haywire, only extreme heat (thousands of degrees c) seem to be able to actually kill it.

Rating: Nine out of 10 lever action shotguns.

“I need your clothes, your boots, and your motorcycle”

The Xenomorphs.

From: The alien films.

“It's got a hell of a defense mechanism, you don't dare kill it.”

What's the story?

There's not much of a story to tell with these guys. They're aliens but unlike many aliens in science fiction, these guys are not super intelligent, they have an animalistic mind, but can learn surprisingly complex tasks if trained properly. While not as smart as a human, the average alien drone can think its way around problems with basic animal logic, which can be scarily effective. The two aliens escaping from the cell in alien 4 anyone?

The alien life cycle begins as an egg laid by the queen. From the egg comes the face hugger. This little thing scurries around looking for a large animal, say… a human. When it finds one, it jumps on the target's face and forces a large amount of flesh down your gullet (Like porn but scary) -and then dies.

Now that you've been implanted, your death is almost certain. In the space of only a few hours, the fetus (for lack of a better word) grows into the aptly named "chest buster", a large grub/snake like creature that eats its way out of you, then scurries off looking for a hiding place.

The chest buster then eats, and molts. And eats and molts, and so on until it grows into the most common alien, the drone. The drone will then hunt and feed, and then start a colony.

Where the drone goes from here varies depending on the amount of aliens present. Some will continue to mutate and become praetorians, the guardians of the queen, some may even become queens themselves. Many will stay as drones.

They're animals though, they don't hunt because they want to destroy the world or enslave you, they're just hungry- and need you to breed. It's this strange thing that makes the Aliens at the very least an interesting concept in science fiction, a predator above humans in the food chain, not due to technology or flinksome super powers, but simply being more evolved and better suited to do what they need to do.

Plus their look was designed by HR Geiger! What more could you ask for?

What makes them such great villains?

The alien drones are very fast, very agile, can climb walls, rip apart metal with their claws, have a highly corrosive acid for blood and swim like fish. In short, they are almost perfectly evolved as the top of the food chain.

It's hinted that they are slightly telepathic, and can sense each other's presence and state, creating a sort of hive mind within the colony, so if one sees you, they all know where you are. Ever poked a wasp's nest? Imagine what happens when the wasps are eight feet tall and have a second mouth on the end of their tongues.

Even one of these things is a problem. It's smart enough that it won't jump out in front of you when you're carrying the BFG, and stealthy enough to instead lurk on the ceiling and then drop down on you. Plus if there is a well established colony in the area, they will zerg rush you, swarming you with dozens of high speed, chitinous snarling horrors.

Do they have a weakness?

Yes, standard weapons do work on them. for all their speed, strength and agility, the individual alien drone is quite fragile. Being insectoid, they have a tough exoskeleton, but once this is breached their insides will leak out through the hole if it's large enough. The exoskeleton isn't exactly bullet proof either, and the standard weapons everyone seems to be toting round can quite happily put a hole in an alien.

The problem arises though because the aliens will rarely give you a chance to shoot, swing your wrench, or do anything in response to an attack. They ambush you when you are at your most vulnerable, or least expect it. Perhaps the best defense therefore, is a sharp set of eyes and ears.

The other weakness is the fact they need to use another species to procreate. If they don't have a being of large enough mass, they can't breed and the colony goes into a sort of hibernation. Problem with that is that any disturbance and you wake them up.

If you can kill the colony queen, then you deal the aliens a seriously blow as they can no longer get fresh eggs and it takes a lot of time and energy for a new queen to mutate.

Oh, and they REALLY don't like fire. A flamethrower will keep a wall between you and the alien, and is great for clearing out rooms willed with eggs. A word of warning though, an alien on fire goes berserk. Be somewhere else.

Rating: Nine out of 10 mangled corpses.

“If they're going to be anywhere it'll be… here. Where the meat is.”

So, don't forget to pack your ray gun next time you go out people! You have been warned!

Need some heroes to protect you? Look no further than here!

Copyright information: Pictures and quotes are used under fair usage policy, or with the permission of the copyright owners.

It's not very often that I enjoy a sequel as much as an original, which is really unfortunate since that's all Hollywood seems to want to make lately. This is a great film. It's not even overly dependent on the first film. If you had seem the first film you'll enjoy it a bit more but you won't be lost like you would in a lot of sequels. It also sets up a third movie although it does so in a rather creative manor instead of just chopping the plot in half or having the bad guy get away, etc. Nobodies going to win any awards for this, but it was fun. Go see it.

What about the PG” Rating?

Mostly for violent sequences. Our society has become so risk averse that very concept of adventure means it can't be general admittance.

What if I hate Nicolas Cage?

I personally love Cage as an actor. I think he's brilliant, but I created this category because many popular actors aren't popular in every demographic. They are liked by women but not young men or vise versa. Some just rub you the wrong way.

This is a standard Nick Cage movie. If you like him you'll like the film. If you don't like him he'll annoy you. Last time I reviewed Cage I listed “ConAir” and “Leaving Los Vegas” as atypical Cage movies that are worth seeing. This time I'll add “8mm.” I'll put it right next to “Leaving Los Vegas” as a fantastic/wonderful/amazing film I hope to never see again and kinda wish I hadn't seen the first time.

Larger Story

In addition to the adventure aspects of this movie, which are pretty obvious, I love it for the same reason I loved its predecessor. It's a film about a man's passion. And what better to be passionate about than US history. This film ignites the imagination, excites the our core need for adventure and sets a standard of patriotism I used to believe in as a boy.

Ok, sure, the treasure represents wealth and fame, but it could stand for anything including the “pearl of great price.” An adventurous journey, unlocking secrets that lead to what you've always believed could be real. That's life abundant. That's something that calls out to every man or woman and something deep inside us aches to answer that call. Plus, there is a great exchange between Gates and the President of the United states.

Writers: Cormac Wibberley, and Marianne Wibberley.
Directed by Jon Turteltaub
Running time: 1 hr 4 mins.
Rated PG