Oh College Football Postseason Tournament, How I Love Thee.

Nothing beats this time of year. Stressing over what gifts your loved ones and friends will accept/tolerate. Stocking up on a "special" supply of eggnog, hot chocolate and cider. Listening to endless number of covers of classic Christmas songs. Enduring bad Lifetime and Hallmark holiday-themed movies. Commiserating over family dysfunction during a time that's supposed to be filled with positive personal reflection and cheer.

When it comes to the NCAA Division I football national championship, over the years the holidays collectively had been a time to debate the fairness of the Bull Crap Series, errr, umm, Bowl Championship Series or previous incarnations, or simply the Associated Press picking the No. 1 team. Now we’ve reached an era I never thought I’d see in my lifetime: a semblance of a playoff. The four-team “tournament” is a starting point. It had better be. Sure, the current weekly rankings appear to have been a red herring before the playoff committee finally picked four schools it deemed worthy to duke it out for a national title. But it’s got people talking, week to week, until the end about who gets in and who’s left out.

Before the four-team system was created, I’ve played out in my head a scenario. What if we go to the furthest extent possible and create a 16-team playoff system? Even better, no heavy drinking was required in the making of this scenario in my head. Having such a tournament is a better way to truly determine, on the field, a “one true champion” … to rule them all. (See what I did there?) Way better than a computer helping to determine a No. 1 and No. 2 team. You BCS apologists may call that fair, but IT’S A FREAKING COMPUTER. I dunno but I like it when champions are crowned in a final game, on a field. And we Americans, for the most part, love us some playoffs.

A championship tournament of some type exists for most every other level of sport out there. Wow. What a startling concept. Even the Kazahkistani kick-goathead league has a playoff. I’ve won some money there. I've lost even more money there. Without the NCAA basketball tournament, schools such as George Mason and Butler likely would have never made it to the Final Four. You have seen Gonzagas and Marquettes make their mark on the national scene. Without the College World Series, schools such as Cal State-Fullerton and Long Beach State -- not so much a Texas or USC -- get to shine and quite often.

My hypothetical 16-school playoff system would not mess with the current bowl system. Well, not half of it. Such a system wouldn’t screw with the “bowl games are a tradition” and “schools will lose money” and “you can’t make the student-athletes play that long or late into January” philosophies. Or that December playoffs would complicate things for students studying for finals. Welp, a tournament hasn't hurt FCS or Division II or III or NAIA schools. None of those arguments really work.

In most existing playoff systems/postseason tournaments, the most "deserving" teams make the playoffs, not necessarily the ones picked "the best." There's a difference. We can debate all we want about good losses, bad losses, strength of schedule, etc., during the regular season, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty to determine an absolute champion, why not go the way of a full tournament?

This is what I'd do to create a 16-team tournament. You start with automatic champions from FBS (Football Championship Series) conferences, be it regular-season champs and/or championship game victors. Yes, I know some of you have trouble with the existence of a conference title game. I see both sides of the debate have valid points, but I’ll stick what exists for the moment.

If there are co-champions, it’s up to the affected conference to determine who gets what we’ll call an FBS bid. You could combine the final regular season total average poll ranking with regular-season head-to-head outcomes for a tie-breaker. (Sound unfair? Good. You get to retain some semblance of unfairness in the process of arriving at a final national champion).

You could average the rankings of the AP, ESPN power, USA Today and Legends polls, emphasizing which schools get the most place votes, add the Congrove computer rankings, and arrive at a final aggregate Top 25 poll (a de facto old BCS-style ranking system, if you will, without the computer interference). Those are arguably the strongest, long-standing, most popular and credible of Division I polls.

Here’s what a final 2014 FBS aggregate poll would look like, with current conference titleholder status and final regular season record:

1. Alabama (12-1 SEC champion, title game winner)

2. Florida State (13-0 ACC champion, title game winner)

3. Oregon (12-1 Pac-12 champion, title game winner)

4. Ohio State (12-1 Big 10 champion, title game winner)

5. Baylor (11-1 Big 12 “co-”champion, LOLz)

6. TCU (11-1 Big 12 “co-”champion, LOLz)

7. Michigan State (10-2 Big 10)

8. Mississippi State (10-2 SEC)

9. Georgia Tech (10-3 ACC title game runner-up)

10. Kansas State (9-3 Big 12)

11. Ole Miss (9-3 SEC)

12. Arizona (10-3 Pac-12 title game runner-up)

13. Georgia (9-3 SEC)

14. UCLA (9-3 Pac-12)

15. Missouri (10-3 SEC title game runner-up)

16. Arizona State (9-3 Pac-12)

17. Wisconsin (10-3 Big 10 title game runner-up)

18. Clemson (9-3ACC)

19. Auburn (8-4 SEC)

20. Louisville (9-3 ACC)

21. Boise State (11-2 Mountain West champion, title game winner)

22. LSU (8-4 SEC)

23. USC (8-4 Pac-12)

24. Utah (8-4 Pac-12)

25. Nebraska (9-3 Big 10)

Marshall (12-1 Conference USA champion, title game winner)

Northern Illinois (11-2 Mid-American champion, title game winner)

Georgia Southern (9-3 Sun Belt champion)

Memphis, Central Florida, Cincinnati, (9-3 each, co-American Athletic champions)

Ultimately, FBS automatic bids would go to Alabama, Florida State, Oregon, Ohio State, Boise State, Marshall, Northern Illinois, Georgia Southern, Baylor (after winning the head to head with TCU), and Central Florida, or UCF (having the stronger Congrove computer power ranking over Cincinnati and Memphis).

You add any top independent team ranked high enough overall in polls for an FBS bid and/or four (or five) other highest-ranked schools, overall in polls. So this year these schools get an at-large bid: TCU, Michigan State, Mississippi State, Georgia Tech, Kansas State, Ole Miss

The ultimate FBS tournament seedings in a 16 vs. 1, 15 vs. 2, 14, vs. 3, etc. format would be:

1. Alabama

2. Florida State

3. Oregon

4. Ohio State

5. Baylor

6. TCU

7. Michigan State

8. Mississippi State

9. Georgia Tech

10. Kansas State

11. Ole Miss

12. Boise State

13. Marshall

14. Northern Illinois

15. UCF

16. Georgia Southern

Take into account the oldest, popular, most lucrative, traditional bowls and mix in some regional flair and considerate schedules. (I still await the Roady's Truck Stops FreeCreditReport.com Pomegranate Cherry Salad Bowl presented by Franklin American Mortgage Company, but I digress.)

All joking aside, use 15 of those prestigious, richest, most famous (i.e. powerful, established) bowls as the FBS bowl matches. All other bowls, may remain independent and ongoing aside from the FBS contests, some may provide comedic fodder to those of us snarkiest bunches on Twitter. No changes needed there.

Rotate the FBS bowls as quarterfinal, semifinal and final games, all of which could retain and maybe even increase the number of ticket-buyers, TV viewers and payouts. One reason? There’s even greater incentive to play in such a bowl. Not just one bowl. But a series of true head-to-head games where all the conference champions (not just the typical, known powerhouses) and other top-ranked squads have a genuine (and fair) shot at an undisputed national title. Throw in serious regional, tie-in considerations and, voila. Imagine that!

The younger, Decemberish bowls host quarterfinals on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, given this year’s calendar: 1 vs. 16, 2 vs. 15, 3 vs. 14, 4 vs. 13, 5 vs. 12, 6 vs. 11, 7 vs. 10, and 8 vs. 9.

Tuesday, Dec. 16

Boise State vs. Baylor -- TicketCity Catcus (formerly Copper, Insight, Buffalo Wild Wings); Tempe

Georgia Southern vs. Alabama -- TaxSlayer (formerly Gator); Jacksonville

Wednesday, Dec. 17

Georgia Tech vs. Mississippi State -- Buffalo Wild Wings Citrus (formerly Tangerine, Capital One); Orlando

Northern Illinois vs. Oregon -- National University Holiday; San Diego

Thursday, Dec. 18

Marshall vs. Ohio State -- Outback (formerly Hall of Fame); Tampa

Kansas State vs. Michigan State -- Valero Alamo;

Friday, Dec. 19

Ole Miss vs. TCU -- AutoZone Liberty; Memphis

UCF vs. Florida State -- Duck Commander Independence; Shreveport

Probable winners?

Baylor, Alabama, Georgia Tech, Oregon, Ohio State, Kansas State, Ole Miss, Florida State

More bowls in following week's semifinals involve 1-16 vs. 8-9; 5-12 vs. 4-13; 6-11 vs. 3-14; 7-10 vs. 2-15.

Friday, Dec. 26

Kansas State vs. Florida State -- Goodyear Cotton; Dallas

Baylor vs. Ohio State -- Allstate Sugar; New Orleans

Saturday, Dec. 27

Georgia Tech vs. Alabama -- Chick-fil-A Peach; Atlanta

Ole Miss vs. Oregon -- Hyundai Sun; El Paso

Probable winners?

Florida State, Baylor, Alabama, Oregon

Final Four of sorts/Friday, Jan. 1

Baylor vs. Alabama -- Rose Bowl, Pasadena

Oregon vs. Florida State -- Fiesta Bowl, Tempe

Probable winners?

Baylor, Oregon (haha)

Championship game, Tuesday, Jan. 12

Baylor vs. Oregon -- Orange Bowl, Miami

Who wins? Forget all your worries about health care, immigration, ISIS, the Philadelphia 76ers and the Kardashians. Well, let this unfold in reality.

"Interstellar" has much heart but far from perfect

Let's get this out of the way. I do like "Interstellar." A lot. I don't love, love, love it. It's not in my top 10 best movies ever. It's not director Christopher Nolan's best. I had high expectations going in to see "Interstellar." It's a good/bad thing. People already comparing it to "2001" or "Gravity." Once you've seen the movie, it's either the greatest or worst thing you've seen and seemingly there's no in between.

In the previous films, Christopher and brother/regular film partner Jonathan Nolan are responsible for blending tense action with explorations of morality, philosophy and what is real and what is an illusion. In a sense, that's no different in "Interstellar." The special effects and cinematography are stunning and what you'd expect from a Nolan cinematic spectacle, like we've seen in The Dark Knight trilogy, Insomnia, Memento and Inception.

The acting, for the most part, is solid. But being a geek you can't help but wonder what could have and should have been when it comes to the science, the inevitable plot twists/holes and those aforementioned explorations into existentialism.

I'll do my best to spare you spoilers. It's the not-too-distant future where Earth's environment has gone awry. The planet is drying. Agriculture is wasting away. Many parts of the world have become a dust bowl. Animal and plant species are going extinct fast and, apparently, wars have become obsolete. So has the need to preserve the best of what humanity had accomplished in the way of exploration, especially into space, the final frontier. School textbooks have been edited, and even NASA officially has been deactivated.

Enter Cooper, played well by Matthew McConaughey, a former hot shot NASA test pilot/engineer who never got to venture into space. He's a farmer now, an among many who are trying to save the world through primarily corn crops.

With help from his own dad (John Lithgow), Cooper raises his two kids. His daughter Murphy is a spark plug of sorts. One day she complains to her dad about a "ghost" in her bedroom, an unseen force that knocks several items from her large book shelf. Eventually we learn there's not really a "ghost" in Murph's bedroom (spoiler alert) but something else...and a larger anomaly, a mysterious message that leads Cooper to a nearby secret (and rather gigantic) NASA lab.

There, Cooper's former colleague, a physicist named Dr. Brand (Michael Caine) and others have been laboring to respond to a wormhole that was discovered years ago. Inexplicably, an officially shuttered NASA has managed to dispatched manned crafts deep into space to find the wormhole and see if there's a way to a new place humanity could possibly call home.

The previous missions have turned up essentially nothing and Cooper is mankind's best last chance to pilot a successful mission. I won't go further into detail but suffice it to say, the trip - visually - is stunning. It is thrilling, adventurous and makes one wonder about the mysteries of wormholes, gravity, black holes, time relativity, dimensions and what may or may not exist on other worlds.

Moreso, there are debates about what aspects of the human condition. Admittedly this is where the script gets a bit clunky. The science isn't precise as a nerd would want from even a movie like this, in spite of the involvement of renowned astrophysicist Kip Thorne. The script leans heavily on Thorne's work and, what mankind has learned from centuries of scientific research. From there, "Interstellar" exhibits things like Einstein's curvature of space and time relativity like no movie has previously demonstrated. But like with everything else in entertainment, a few things must be shortchanged for the sake of dramatic license.

Visually and musically, the Nolans tip their hats to "2001" and a hodgepodge of previous movies (good and bad) that, like "Interstellar," strived to be profound and visionary in their examination of human existence and mankind's place in the cosmos. There are robots that appear like an homage to HAL 9000 and even the clunky ones in Disney's "The Black Hole." Hans Zimmer's score sounds like a hybrid of a Philip Glass overture and something more similar to his works in the Dark Knight films and "Inception."

The third act, while appropriately intense, has a subplot/twist that I'm unsure whether it was necessary. I did roll my eyes. Ultimately, the heart of "Interstellar" is the father/daughter relationship, a bond broken seemingly for the worse once Cooper leaves his young girl behind to save the world. That young girl, while feeling initially shattered at the thought of never again seeing her father, grows up strong and becomes key to Cooper's efforts to save humanity.

I may need a second viewing of "Interstellar." Probably a few more viewings as time goes along. Is it impressive as "2001"? No. Nothing can really top that but "Interstellar" tries its hardest to aspire a tribute, and I admire that. But those McConaughey Lincoln commercials and his role in "True Detective" are making a lot more sense now.

Wrapping up comic-con, Alamo City 2014-style.

I almost forgot to link my blog to the final of my 2014 local comic-con pics.

And here's my Express-News story about local horror author Tim Miller, who appeared at the recent Fantom Fest at the Menger:
 

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/communities/alamo-heights/article/Local-author-pushes-boundaries-of-horror-5797142.php

And my report on the professional cosplay panel discussion at Alamo City Comic-Con:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/communities/alamo-heights/article/For-cosplayers-sometimes-it-s-a-lot-of-work-5797141.php

This 'Congress' you'd at least consider over the real Congress

Isn't it fun stumbling upon a work of art...movie, book, TV show, static art...that confounds, angers and delights you all at the same time? Then you try to explain it to someone else, much less yourself, and find that you simply can't. It just is. That's "The Congress" for you. It's a daring film by director Ari Folman of "Waltz with Bashir" fame and loosely based upon Stanislaw Lem's book "The Futurological Congress."

The set-up is basic but provocative enough. Imagine a world where Robin Wright plays herself who indeed shot to stardom in 1987 with "The Princess Bride." (Gawd, has it really been that long ago?) Her star has fallen over the years. With no mention of her being in "House of Cards," "The Congress" envisions Wright as a single mom of two kids, living in an abandoned structure near an airport. Few if any movie studios want to work with her, and her longtime agent Al (an unusually restrained Harvey Keitel) struggles to find her work. But there's one final option and it's a doozy.

Miramount Studios (get it...a play off of Paramount and Miramax?) wants to scan Wright, literally, all of her physical and emotional features and preserve them in digital form. Wright herself won't have to work anymore, but gets paid a hefty sum to have her younger, digital version play roles such as a short-cropped, weapon-slinging rebel of the future. Her new "roles" make millions for the studio; one such role is almost a parody of Ben Stiller's Tugg Speedman character from "Tropical Thunder." Wright balks initially at the thought, but thinking of her children, the ugly reality of her situation, the creepy studio head (Danny Huston) puts it bluntly: The digital version of Robin Wright will do things the real Robin Wright wouldn't do, especially the one now in her 40s.

Twenty years later, Miramount is a world-dominating megacorporation - more than a movie studio - and it's unleash its latest, most powerful product at its cultural confab, The Congress. Miramount has figured out how to reduce an actor's chemical makeup to a drug. Yes, you as a fan can literally eat/drink/inhale your favorite performer and imagine yourself as someone/something else. Everybody else does. Heck, at this point Hollywood has become an animated zone, as in Roger Rabbit's Toontown on steroids. In effect, the entertainment business has become an opiate for the masses that yearn to retreat from an increasingly ugly real world.

Wright is asked to speak to the greatness of what's happening and, well, I'll spare you the rest of the plot. The story doesn't really matter. What matters in "The Congress" is what is seen and done. Visually, especially the animation part, is stunning. Some of the satirical characterizations are hilarious. Some people online criticize the animation part, calling it cheap. I think it's partially because it's meant to be inexpensive. This is an indie/art house flick, after all. So much of it recalls classic cartoons of old, but more so it speaks to some people's desire to escape from their reality and enjoy how they want to be seen/perceived rather than how they are in real life.

Folman touches upon so many themes in his film: Identity, one's hold on reality, free will, capitalism, imagination. The film is a critique of the movie industry, how it treats aging performers, and its plans for a more digital universe. There's a critique about overmedicating our population. "The Congress," visually, is filled with inspiration ranging from "Inception" and "2001" to "What Dreams May Come" and "Solaris."

Wright herself portrays "herself" well but appears a bit distant. I'm sure if she's directed by Folman to be a tad distant or she's just that way, as she was in many of her previous films. With its mish-mash of live action and animation. "The Congress" says something on the whole, but it does feel incoherent in bits and pieces. I'm still trying to figure it all out. Maybe there's a point. Maybe there's not! But it's a philosophical, entertaining, mindblowing trip all the same.

Guardians of the Galaxy equals geekgasm

I would've posted a review much sooner this past weekend if it weren't for my crazy attempts to keep up with coverage of Wizard World Comicon and San Antonio Film Fest. Plus, there was that trip to Austin for the grand opening of Oasis Texas Brewing Company. Hooray, beer.

But I digress. In previous months I had read, with some interest, people discussing concerns about a Guardians of the Galaxy movie. The comics were fun without being silly but, in the greater Marvel comics to cinema universe, GotG isn't up to the level of Thor, Iron Man, X-Men, Spider-man or Captain America. That seemed to be a consensus of many online informal chats leading up to the release of the first trailer of the movie.

The trailer was hilarious and entertaining, but also positioned the movie just right. What a treasure trove awaited the fans. Judging by debut weekend box office numbers, many, many fans took in Guardians of the Galaxy and loved it. I did, too. One person remarked "It's basically Raiders of the Lost Ark in space." Sure, but it's also parts Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon and all the exuberant sci-fi comics, movies and TV shows from my childhood (well, mine anyways) that were swashbuckling, daring, edgy but not overboard in any particular way.

The casting is almost pitch perfect. The special effects, action set pieces, cinematography are beautiful and don't look so overly CGI'd or gaudy (you hear me, Spider-man?!). As with most comic adaptations, it's the little things that make a big impression: Peter Quill's/Star-lord's memory of his mother kept alive by songs you know and will be humming for weeks. Quill's devil-may-care attitude. A better look around The Collector's collection, a longer look than in Thor: The Dark World. ESPECIALLY in the post-credits, which is almost a jab at DC/Warner's fumbling around with comic cinematic adaptations. Baby Groot. Rocket pouring his torn, jagged heart and soul out after a drunken fight with Drax. Yondu's redass personality (a perfect fit for Michael Rooker, long a fan of the comics character). Drax with his heart of gold and despair. Gamora's ass-kickingness that briefly disappears when she's almost won over by the charms of Quill. Lee Pace bringing the pain as Ronan the Accuser. Josh Brolin growing clearer and clearer (in the Marvel movie universe) voicing Thanos. Hell, even with her villainous character Nebula, I've grown more in love with Karen Gillian. It's all there in its splendor.

Guardians of the Galaxy is one of those comic adaptations that perfectly makes fans out of those new to the material. But it doesn't dumb things down for the hardcore fans. The audience could connect, in a sense, with this bunch of outcasts, misfits and criminals. I loved Captain America sequel, I was fine with the Thor sequel, and from the sounds of things, Avengers 2 will be tremendous. I'm worried about what's happening with Ant-Man, how Marvel bungled that in the wake of Edgar Wright's departure. But with James Gunn, the Guardians are in the right hands. I hope to see it again soon, and eagerly await the sequel.

Toast to The Rise of The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

For a summer blockbuster, "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes" offers nuanced direction, pulse-pounding music, astounding art direction, a basic but driven storyline, and terrific special effects that don't ruin it all. While the acting isn't award-winning -- well, not from the human characters -- you do have characters you come to like or dislike. But you do learn to appreciate them. In other words, this isn't the loud, bombastic, non-sense that is the latest Transformers film, which has ruined my childhood -- again.

"Dawn of the Planet of the Apes" picks up a little where we left off with the "Rise of the Planet of the Apes." A quick, unnerving beginning scene uses real shots of riots and people addressing outbreaks to quickly take us through the history of the fictional simian virus, which has killed off most of humanity in a decade and leaving Caesar and his genetically-enhanced fellow simians to evolve to become almost dominant species on Earth. A scouting trip for a small band of humans from the ruins of San Francisco into the forests of Northern California triggers conflict with Caesar in his clan.

How far have special effects come in the last few years? Astounding work by WETA Digital in putting realistic touches to the variety of apes portrayed. But Andy Serkis deservedly gets top billing as Caesar. The first film was more about humanity's hubris.... a drive to create a cure for a disease turns into a death sentence for mankind and gives way to simians to assert their power--maybe reassert is the proper term.

This film is about Caesar, raising his family, attempting to educate the rest of the simians. Loyalty, love and knowledge as power quick emerge as traits mutually shared between humans and simians. But not all the simians are interested in educating themselves and leaving the remnant of humanity to live in the ruins of its creation in some sort of uneasy coexistence. Some, if they have the opportunity and feel pushed, use revenge as a reason to kill humans.

But back to Serkis...he's more than the go-to guy for slo-mo capture effects acting. The guy can act, period. He has more than Gollum and King Kong in his arsenal. Caesar emotes strength, leadership, loyalty, perspective, compassion in his facial expressions, vocalizations, body language, the few words he learns to speak.

The few action scenes in the first hour and a half are relatively brief but filled more with suspense and drama then pure traditional action. As one ape turns on another in the build up to the climax, it's all leading to a pay off. It's like a war movie where the fate of every character, in the end, is unknown until the final sequence. It's parts thrilling, shocking and disheartening, the violence of it all.

Some of the music by JJ Abrams regular composer Michael Giacchino, and intricate direction by - yes- JJ Abrams colleague Matt Reeves, "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes" pays a bit of tribute to the old, classic "Planet of the Apes" flicks while preparing a new generation for a new slate of "Apes" films that look just as exciting. And we've almost erased the memory of Tim Burton/Mark Wahlberg's unfortunate "Planet of the Apes" remake.

Revenge is a dish best served Spurs

Yeah, I'm massively late in posting these here. No need for further words. It's all self-explanatory: The feelings of relief and redemption of Spurs nation after dethroning the Heat.

It's the freshest championship, but it's probably the strongest Spurs NBA title next to their 2005 seven-game defeat of Detroit, and just as memorable as the first Spurs crown claimed in 1999 over New York.

Aside from beating the defending champs, the Heat, the Spurs rolled over them, sticking to pure team play, the kind of play that has symbolized this organization's rise to greatness especially over the last 20-25 years. Everyone had a role to play.

For Lebron, there's one championship, there's two, there's...oh wait, you may want to step back a bit. The black and silver may be often written off by many, but there's always a game to be played, and they've got scoreboard and skins on the wall to prove they're one of the best pro sports teams around. For the haters, suck it.

X-Men: Days of Future Past: Presently The Best Comic Adaptation You Will Have Seen

"X-Men: Days of Future Past" doesn't totally adhere to Chris Claremont's famed story, but it's inspired by it and doesn't do it a disservice. What it does do is it almost erases the stains of "X-Men 3" and "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," further invigorates the X-Men movie franchise and lays a solid groundwork for a wider X-Men cinematic universe.

"X-Men: Days of Future Past" is pure fun even while providing glimpses of horrible fates that await the few remaining mutants in the distant future if one thing doesn't get prevented from happening one day in 1973. Inexplicably, director Bryan Singer and his colleagues masterfully weave a complex storyline spanning nearly 50 years, past and future selves of the likes of Charles Xavier, Magneto, Wolverine and Mystique, among others.

Time-travel is, well, a time-worn plot device used in movies for heroic and villainous means. Instead of traversing some kind of wormhole through space and time, current/future Kitty Pryde transfers current/future Wolverine's consciousness to his early 70s self. Once 1973 Wolverine awakens, it's action-filled, brief and hilarious all at once. It almost looks inspired by any number of time-loop-associated flashbacks in "Lost."

The overarching goal for the future remaining X-Men is simple enough an idea: Stop Raven/Mystique from killing - no, not Senator Kelly - but Bolivar Trask, the scientist/industrialist. His death in one timeline convinces the government to expand his Sentinel program to hunt down all mutants, even humans who merely carry a mutant gene but have yet to realize their powers.

The mission is difficult in the early 70s: Wolverine tries to suppress his angry nature or risk his mind being pulled apart in the transference of consciousness that Kitty Pryde holds together in a dark, danger-filled future just barely. Then he must try to convince 1973 Charles Xavier to "fight the future." Problem is, Charles is emotionally broken from Raven's departure, Eric Lehnsherr going down a dark path, and the depletion of his academy by the Vietnam draft. He's using a specialized drug (back then, who wasn't?) to enable him to walk. Otherwise he remains paralyzed. And he's not yet the Charles Xavier we know, mentally superstong. He's connected to all other mutants but it's at times he cannot bare...back then.

When Xavier, who's cared for by a young Hank McCoy/Beast, is finally convinced (and even then he feels some doubt), they must break Magneto out of prison, which happens to be several stories beneath in the Pentagon. He's there because he directed the magic bullet that killed JFK. Or so goes the official government line. Enter Pietro (OK, Peter) Maximoff/Quicksilver, arguably the most fun sequence in the movie. The rest of the flick is not necessarily sheer spectacle, tiresome and wearing out its welcome like with "Man of Steel."

Instead, emotions play a big part in the climax of 1973. But oh my, the "final" battles between the remaining future X-Men and the evolved Sentinels -- the robots that have fully adapted to every mutant power, turning those powers onto the mutants themselves -- is a joy to watch. See Iceman/Bobby Drake creating and surfing upon one of his famed ice bridges. Colossus in his steel rage. Blink creating dimension-warping portals. It's pure comic book teamwork for the remaining X-Men as they try to stave off disaster.

The acting is, well, what you can expect from a comic book ensemble. There's actually not much screen time for Patrick Stewart or Ian McKellen in such a busy flick, but at this point in the X-Men cinematic universe, there doesn't need to be. Hugh Jackman has fun again as Wolverine, and James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender fully make young Xavier and Lehnsherr their own. Jennifer Lawrence? I am in love with her, which would probably make Emma Stone jealous. At one moment, her Raven/Mystique is laser focused on doing what it takes to reach and kill Trask. At another moment, she's conflicted.

Halle Berry RECEIVES a big check for her "portrayal" as Storm. Does she EARN it? Nah. Again, it's not necessary at this point. But oof, Evan Peters as Quicksilver. He's a revelation. He wrapped up all his characters from "American Horror Story," mashed them up with a liberal dose of cockiness (why shouldn't he be?) and I want him to be Quicksilver in the expanded X-Men cinematic universe. And yes, there's a post-end credits scene and it sets up nicely for what lies ahead.

So many X-Men characters from the previous films, all in one masterstroke of a new movie, even in a cameo...makes me feel giddy. Excited again for X-Men movies. It's busy but feels effortless. It nearly corrects all that went wrong in X3 and Origins:Wolverine and shows there's much more greatness that's coming up in X-Men on the big screen. See? Bryan Singer has some decent stuff as director leftover after "Superman Returns" and "Jack the Giant Slayer."

Let Us Be Thankful "Godzilla" Is Like "Godzilla" and Not Like "Godzilla"

The reviews of "Godzilla" (aka 2014) on Ain't It Cool News best sum up my feelings. This movie is better the old-fashioned way, a slow burn to the full reveal. Sure, Roland Emmerich tried the same approach in "Godzilla" (aka 1998), but once we see his monster and his personality, it's so far removed from what we've come to expect, what we remember from the old "Godzilla," it's disappointing and troubling on every level.

With "Godzilla" (2014), director Gareth Edwards positions the audience in the best way possible to await all that we know the mutant monster will bring to the table. It's an origin movie. It's not supposed to be filled with behemoth monsters fighting or stomping cities into smithereens from wire to wire. Wait until the sequel.

For some, characters and storyline are a disappointment in "Godzilla" (2014). Since when did we as audiences, and since when did the moviemakers, really worry about the depth of actors, plot and script in Godzilla...or any monster flick? Sure, there's no Oscar-worthy performances in "Godzilla" (2014). That wasn't in the works. Perhaps Bryan Cranston and Ken Watanabe bring the most passion of any of the main actors. Alas, they're just in supporting roles while Aaron Taylor-Johnson (who was so good in the "Kick-Ass" films) is our Tom Cruise from "War of the Worlds." Wherever he ends up or wherever he puts himself, crap happens. (His character, named Brody, definitely scores some Spielbergian points with me.) Not much can be said for Elizabeth Olsen's character (you know, the Olsen sister who can actually act), but again, that's to be expected.

In most monster movies...and it's no different with "Godzilla" (pick your decade)...the characters react. They run, they hide, they scream, they cry, they die. That's what happens when strange things unfold, in this case, stories-tall beasts battle in metropolitan areas. I am there to see Godzilla, no longer a guy in a rubber suit stepping onto miniature model cities. I'm there to hear his iconic roar. I'm there to see Godzilla literally warm up to breathe fire, or something like it, onto attacking armies, towns and other monsters. (Here, the two MUTOs Godzilla 2014 fought were like hot-to-trot hybrids of Mothra and the Cloverfield critter.) I'm there to see humanity truly humbled by this natural anomaly that we've come to know as Gojira.

With that, I was giddy. It felt like I was rewatching the old Godzilla flicks from the 50s through the 70s. Yes, even the purely bad ones with his dopey-looking son, Jet Jaguar, Mechagodzilla, the miniature 12-inch twins, the smog monster. It made my inner child go crazy and was nostalgic. Heck, I've got a little plastic toy model of him someplace. Sure, Godzilla (2014) didn't do a happy dance, but he kicked some MUTO butt. This "Godzilla" looks as if he's visited one too many taquerias. No matter. This "Godzilla" (2014) is filled with wonderful images and sounds, many of which harken back to the older films.  Like last year's "Pacific Rim," it's fun. It is darker than "Pacific Rim," and while we may have felt more for human characters in monster flicks such as "Jurassic Park," the star we go to see fills space so amazingly.

There's a sequel in the works, maybe two. Perhaps Gamera, or a version thereof, will show up. In the end, it's all about Godzilla smashing things up real good.

Amazing Spider-Man 2: So Much to Do and Say, Not Much to Really Love

It's a classic case: I want to truly love a comic book movie such as "The Amazing Spider-man 2." It's good. It's enjoyable. But I'm not hankering to rush to see it again. Running almost two and a half hours, "The Amazing Spider-man 2" is filled with exciting action sequences and impressive special effects. But the storylines are contrived, characterizations are rush, and practically everything feels like it's truncated in preparation for what lies ahead in The Amazing Spider-man movie franchise.

That's because Part 2 is deliberately stuffed with, well, stuff. Sony has committed to more Spider-man flicks and lots of ground to cover. Heck, secondary characters and images (eggs, if you will) seen in the sequel's climax and in the end credits clearly set up a universe in which we could see the Sinister Six.

In the meantime, we see Max Dillon, played by Jamie Foxx, turn into Electro in a rather unoriginal, uninspired way. It's not Foxx. He does well in portraying the lead villain, but Dillon/Electro's conversion is fast and a little lame, given Dillon's connection to Oscorp.

Ah yes, Oscorp, where we many more connections made in this rushed, overriding storyline. The link with Peter Parker's parents, one of many subplots in the movie. Here, Peter -- played again by Andrew Garfield in an exemplary manner-- goes full-on detective, connecting dots to discover the truth about his parents -- their scientific research and their fate. The reveals here are a tad disappointing to say the least.

Back at supposedly big bad mega-corporation Oscorp, we see a huge missed opportunity: Chris Cooper could have made a fantastic Norman Osborn to rival that of Willem Dafoe's portrayal in the Sam Raimi versions of Spider-man. Yet, Cooper's Norman is reduced considerably. He is the original, most well known Green Goblin.

Harry Osborn takes on the title of actual Green Goblin in this movie, rather late and in a convoluted manner. Don't get me wrong. Dane DeHaan had a polarizing presence in the movie "Chronicle," which I enjoyed, and in "The Amazing Spider-man 2," he seems well suited as Harry Osborn, the heir to the Oscorp empire. But his introduction and development is relatively brief and I almost don't care for it.

It's said that Harry is an old friend of Peter's, but the way director Marc Webb's Spider-man universe is set up, it doesn't seem like such a friendship genuinely exists. You could feel/see that in Raimi's Spider-man films, the dynamic between James Franco and Tobey Maguire. When DeHaan finally appears as Green Goblin, created that way by a serum, he's almost over the top in his performance. Again, not DeHaan's fault. He gets the short end of the stick here, but yes, this is a transitional sequel...meant to serve for more introductions, and sure enough we'll see more Harry Osborn/Green Goblin in "The Amazing Spider-man" cinematic universe.

At last there's Aleksei Sytsevich, or Rhino, played all too briefly yet with glee by Paul Giamatti. His appearances, exciting as they are, literally bookend the film. Giamatti is on record, saying Rhino has been one of his favorite Spider-man villains, and he'll get more chances to be Rhino in "The Amazing Spider-man" cinematic universe. Now, Rhino with automatic guns and missile launchers? That takes more getting used to.

Ultimately, what works for me in the sequel? Garfield as Spider-man/Pete and Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy. Webb and the writing teams give Garfield to insert his charm and wit into the Spidey we all know and love. Sure, he's a bit mopey and constantly wondering about trying to keep from harm's way those he cares about the most. But Peter Parker loves being Spider-man. It's fun. He loves helping people and carries a bit of a cocky attitude. That is on full display in this movie.

There's also no denying the chemistry between Garfield and Stone. (Of course, in my eyes, Stone can do absolute no wrong on the big screen. I'd have her babies if I could.) Stone inserts more confidence into Gwen this time around. Webb works best when it comes to romance, or the building up or collapse of it all. He demonstrated that clearly in "500 Days of Summer." The interaction between Stone's Gwen and Garfield's Peter demands your attention. Sometimes it brings a smile to your face, other times it's depressing. Their shared emotions run the gamut on screen.

In comic book movies these days, some editions are designed to give full introductions to allow for the expansion of crucial characterizations and storylines for upcoming sequels. I understand that. But it takes true talent to NOT make a film feel/look so hurried of saddled with subplots. This isn't Raimi "Spider-man 3" bad. Far from it. Webb and his team have learned from any mistakes Raimi and his team made from the previous movies and are doing their best to improve upon them. Still, "The Amazing Spider-man 2" falls short of amazing.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier, or A Game of Drones

The reviewers are right. "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" is exactly like a 1970s spy thriller pumped up on steroids. It's complete with the never-ending post-9/11 paranoia about terrorism, the ethics of a society under constant surveillance (fear for the sake of freedom) and the ability to pick off our enemies in mass numbers without declaring all-out war.

The second Captain America film also feels breathtaking and effortless. While it's filled with its fair share of CGI effects and stupendous action pieces, the movie has the advantage of simply taking off from where it's predecessor left off. Admittedly, while great and fun, the first flick lacked humor and, while having to go through the paces of "setting things up" -- (re)introducing the hero and famed sidekicks and villains -- the climax felt a bit rushed.

The sequel is confident and has enough room to give solid stories to each main character from top down.  Steve Rogers struggles with his role as a superhero, born into the "greatest generation" but now living/serving in the modern world where enemies are not all simply supervillains, the line between good and evil is blurred. Those enemies could be the very ones charged with protecting America and the world but may have their own hidden agendas.

There's more humor, particularly with geeky/pop cultural references that you can't help but laugh at. That's amazing given that this movie is also darker than it's predecessor, and arguably the most violent of the Marvel PG-13 films. I'm thinking, considering all the gun play and the climax, the total body count of "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" isn't off-the-charts like DC's "Man of Steel" but it's stunning.

It's a Captain America movie and Chris Evans serves the part well, but it's not his vehicle. The well-paced film, in its unique ways, gives Scarlett Johansson, Sebastian Stan, Samuel L. Jackson and Anthony Mackie a chance to shine. And given his real-life politics, Robert Redford revels in an intriguing, pivotal role. As for the action scenes --well, if you get physically sick from deliberately jerky, close-up camera maneuvers (think "Saving Private Ryan"), this isn't for you, especially if you sit in the front row of the theater. It is meant to make you feel that much closer to the violence, immersed in it. One scene involving Nick Fury only reminds me one of the best action sequences of the 1990s, in "Clear and Present Danger." You'll know what I mean when you see it.

Post "Avengers," "Iron Man 3" and "Thor: The Dark World" each have more pros and cons, but admittedly, while entertaining, IM3 ended up being all over the place. Not IM2 all over the place, but close. "Thor 2" was fun but felt silly at times...silly not in the best way even for a comic adaptation. Here, Captain America deals with a much more grounded, Earth-bound yet equally serious threat to the world. Seemingly, more than just lives are at stake. Principles and reputations of whole countries, governments, are, too.

Then there's the real fun...the possibilities that "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" helps to reveal  in the ever-expanding Marvel Comics-movie universe. Marvel Studios has a brilliant game plan, as famed characters begin to pop up and develop, and references are uttered (or even seen slightly), whetting our appetite for lies ahead in future Marvel films. This happens in "The Winter Soldier" and even currently in the story arc of ABC's "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." Even as X-Men and Spider-man movies presently operate in studios different from the mainline of Marvel movies, cameos and lines (usually during the end credits) make one's inner geek more excited for what the tomorrow holds in the Marvel cinematic universe. And it makes you wonder what the hell is happening at Warner Bros./DC Comics. One last thing: I do want a hellicarrier for my birthday.

South by Southwest 2014 Round 2

Home at last and the work continues. No rest for the weary. My first full South by Southwest experience is complete. Was it a success? How do you define success in a sprawling marathon of an event such as this?

If that means being better educated about social disruption for a greater good, as Chelsea Clinton spoke about in her keynote? Sure.

If it's learning that album reviews can still be used in a way as a transformer of people's tastes in music? Perhaps.  

Was it Rackspace's Robert Scoble talking today's tech trends (wearable tech) and tomorrow's innovation (driverless cars, home automation)? Fine.

Was it listening to George Takei discuss his embrace of social media, and being known for more than just the original "Star Trek"? Indeed.

Was it the Edward Snowden virtual chat, and how his whistleblowing has helped to make the Internet safer, raising the topic of tech privacy to a new level? Could be.

Was it listening to the members of Blondie about being musical pioneers and staying relevant more than 30 years after they came onto the scene? Of course.

Was it watching Blondie, 50 Cent, St. Vincent, Quiet Company, Grupo Fantasma, Damon Albarn, Soundgarden, Urge Overkill, La Femme, Sleigh Bells and Gary Numan perform live? Most definitely.
Was it watching a film, "Space Station 76," that has much potential and some good laughs (Verbot robots all over the place) but meanders without plot? OK, maybe not.

And I can't forget the tragic turn of events Wednesday night, not but a couple of blocks from where I was attending a concert. To think of the two people killed and the many others injured, it's painful to consider and my heart goes out to their families. Helping to cover a 2 a.m. press briefing near the crime scene, seeing my news tweets get retweeted in a story gone national, is still surreal.

SXSW2014, for me, was an overall solid event, but not spectacular. Many hard lessons learned for next year, and my knees are begging for a vacation following at the walking. See you next year, better prepared, but even that may not help toward success.

South by Southwest 2014 Round 1

It's nearly the end of South by Southwest Interactive. A good time for a blog update, no? I mean, four days after it started, right? By no means does my SXSW blog come even remotely close to capturing an effective fraction of South by interactive compared with most others, but I'm a journalist and I gotta post...something.

It's perhaps not the most original thing to say, that changing the digital/web landscape is a dominant theme in keynotes and sessions in this year's SXSWi. But those leading changes, politically and culturally, are no less notable. They have had a positive impact in their respective realms and even have uplifting news to report in areas that have been swamped with pessimism.

My biggest takeaways so far: In Latinos and new media sessions, according to one panel that - not a surprise -- many Latino advocacy/civic organizations and politicians for the most part still use Facebook to get their messages across the web. However, panelists say Twitter will soon take that role over. Some surveys of Latino tech users state such users are less political and more inclined toward cultural aspects on the web -- arts and entertainment -- but there is hope this will be leveled. There's also a petition drive, as part of the new Cesar Chavez movie, to have the president establish March 31 as a national call to action day of service.

Another Latino new media panel focused on Latina bloggers and how they're transforming not only various web platforms but overall cultural dialogue, how the mainstream public perceives Latinas. "I think it's given me a digital platform that wasn't there 10 years ago. As Latina bloggers, I think we have a powerful voice," said speaker Nicole Presley of Presley's Pantry.

Sara Calderon, a reporter turned president of Mas Wired, has a YouTube channel. One of her videos is of verbally smashing stereotypes of Latin women. "The digital landscape allows Latinas to set the agenda in a kind of way. I know in mainstream newsrooms, it's not very woman or Latino dominated," she said. She added whereas, in many newsrooms, an editor may not appreciate a story or beat of a particular cutlture. But when you have your own digital platform, "You think of what kind of Latino stories are important to you. Now people want to come to you and your agenda."

Native San Antonian Stephanie Guerra, founder of Puro Pinche (woo!), created the blog site as a means to spotlight events, individuals, organizations and other cultural aspects that are truly San Anto and perhaps less known, if at all, even by locals. "The gap is where people hadn't really seen this other side of San Antonio. The connection between our city, which is primarily Hispanic, and the culture that runs our town. Puro Pinche exposes the underground, the true identity," she said. These and other digital outlets are helping marketers to better understand Latinos, their communities and consumer power.

The leaders of xoJane, Jane Pratt and Mandy Stadtmiller, producer Issa Rae, and writer/performer Kristina Wong were in a panel about how women are using a variety of digital outlets to bring their personal brands of humor to the masses. Stadtmiller, Rae and Wong each told an anecdote that reflect not only their personal upbringing, but also adventures (or misadventures) in romance and sex. I'm a fan of Stadtmiller, and if you follow her on Twitter, she doesn't shy away from addressing the matters of sex and relationships with a sharp sense of humor.

Scott Havens, president of the long-standing Atlantic magazine, addressed how his publication has successfully transformed from a print news/commentary mag that's been around since the 1800s into a cross-platform that reacts quickly to news and doesn't tease readers with front paywalls. He criticized those print newspapers and magazines who have launched (and most not successfully) digital products mainly as a knee-jerk reaction to our transforming world. "A lot of the new things that newspapers and magazines did contained data hardly anybody wanted, it was just something they wanted to do," he said. Havens said now we're overloaded with data, but much of it useful and effective in helping readers to make a variety of decisions.

Havens said, like with The Atlantic, as long as the right of team of people is in place, performing the correct tasks in print or digital, can help curate solid content and lure readers with the promise of more quality content to come. "People will pay for quality content," he said, adding that media outlets should diversify revenue streams, roll out products faster yet more carefully, and embrace the art of high velocity and high impact. Havens also addressed daily metro newspapers, many of which he said have lost sight of their mission when mixing in national news. He suggested such papers to refocus on their communities and determine how to reenfranchise their community. "People will pay for information that they need and would help them.," he added.

Eric Carvin, social media editor for the Associated Press, and Mandy Jenkins, managing editor of Digital First Media, suggested there are ways to overcome challenges associated with ensuring ethics, accuracy and fairness of social/citizen journalists. Carvin cited two classic examples of so-called viral news that was literally wrong, such as a retweeted photo of Edward Snowden boarding a plane - a photo proved a fake - and a picture of a shark swimming post-hurricane in a city street, a piece that seems to have become the norm during coverage of big storms. "I've seen this same photo after four different hurricanes," said Jenkins who added it's right to do your best to verify by seeking out the original source of said photo or report, and ask about their identity, intent, and how they got into position to get said picture or report.

She pointed to several digital tools available that can aid editors in tracking down the original source of social news photos and stories, and best determine their veracity. Traditional legwork works, too, as in the case of a YouTube video that popped up during Election Day 2012, an image in which a supposed voter attempted several times to press a touchscreen voting machine in Pennsylvania in favor of Barack Obama only for the selection to turn out as Mitt Romney. The video proved authentic, and voting officials in the polling place in question had to remove the defective machine.

Prolific inventor Dean Kamen made his presence known in a keynote speech and in a meet-up involving For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). As select young FIRST members assembled as teams to showcase their skills in engineering and controlling robots in the meet-up, Kamen pointed to the youngsters, saying it's up to them to realize their interest in technology into careers to help the United States to remain a progressive technological power. "Where are the superstars of technology and telling these kids to take an interest in these careers? How do we reach them, give them a reason to study hard and work hard, so they can take on these careers and make sure the world doesn't fall into chaos?" he asked.

Kamen, sang the praises of organizations such as FIRST, which supports activities such as robotic competitions among primary and secondary students, and IEEE, which advocates tech innovation. "There's no reason why FIRST can't be in every school," Kamen said. "SXSW is an intersection of communication, technology, art, culture and media. I hope that it's not just a place talk about things, but after this is done, do things."

Speaking of young minds at work, the MakerFair was a sight to behold as many children and teens put their minds and hands to work, creating the fun stuff such as duct tape wallets to controlling toy drones and robots. The do-it-yourself attitude is getting re-emphasis at SXSW.

Science can be funny and fun, and the appearance of Bill Nye the Science Guy, and Tory Belacci and Kari Byron of "Mythbusters," among others, kept a small, cold, rainy wet and yet vocal crowd jazzed throughout the night at Stubbs about...science!

Trying to soak up the rest of the SXSW experience, there was my racing to the Jason Bateman interview (a failed bit on my part), and to the Neil Degrasse Tyson interview (in which he not only updated us on the latest scientific discoveries but reemphasizes the importance of being a scientifically knowledgeable culture). In other entertainment...funny how somebody recently on Twitter remarked "What has Josh Hartnett been up to lately?" The answer is in the form of a new Showtime series "Penny Dreadful." And just before a late-night drive back home, I got to see one of my local favorite (S.A.) bands, Nancy Silva Project. The gaming expo, with its coverage of contemporary and retro games, and the Game of Thrones exhibit left my inner nerd quite satisified.

And of course we can't forget Julian Assange, who did a satellite video chat. The founder of Wikileaks said new leaks are forthcoming, and called the intrusion of the Internet by the NSA and the surveillance state is tantamount to "militarization of citizen space," but that citizens, independent journalists and other like-minded whistleblowers can do much to help stem the tide. "I've realized you can achieve justice by exposing injustices," he added.

Last but certainly not least: While I couldn't personally be there, I enjoyed Edward Snowden's livestreamed virtual conversation...brought to us thanks to seven proxies.  My biggest takeaways from that: "Encryption does work. It's the defense against the dark arts in the digital realm," Snowden said. He added his whistleblower efforts were meant to inform the public so we could make better decisions about how we can best protect our communications. There's a growing feeling that Snowden's disclosures about rising government digital surveillance and cyber vulnerabilities have actually improved the overall security of the Internet, and not weakened it as some government officials suggest. "The goal is to make it so the government cannot spy on innocent people," added ACLU Principal Technologist Chris Soghoian.

Not really journalisting today on this Monday -- it's editorial deadline time here in San Antonio for my main job. But I'll be back in Austin for the end of interactive and the trade show. And then it's time to fully focus on film and music. Pray for me.