Clerks II

I'm a fan of the original film, so I couldn't help but rent this one. And I can't help but compare the two, since it's a sequel. Honestly, I don't think the sequel is nearly as funny, but it has more heart. My expectations definitely played a part in how I felt about it, because I was initially expecting a level of comedy that wasn't always happening. There would be laugh-out-loud moments, but sometimes it was a long time between those moments.

It was only about halfway through the film that I truly understood where Kevin Smith was going with this. It was really about choosing a place for yourself in the world, and how making those choices effects friendships. It's not very often that you'll see a movie with a bestiality scene played for laughs that turns out to be actually touching in the end (the movie, not the scene). I very much enjoyed the ending, which brought the story started in the first movie to a perfect close.

The deleted scenes also showed an interesting thing about the movie that could have been. I found the bits about Jay and Silent Bob finding Jesus (which were almost all deleted) to be hilarious, but I suppose they would've offended a lot of people. And after Dogma, the inclusion of those bits could've created the perception that Kevin Smith was generally anti-Christian. I don't think he truly is anti-Christian; I think he just finds certain aspects of Christianity funny. I don't consider myself anti-Christian, and I certainly laughed.

I'd call this one a 6 on a 1-10 scale, bumping it up a notch or two if you're a Kevin Smith fan in the first place, and down two notches if you're easily offended (though I don't see why you'd rent a Kevin Smith film if you are). It's not as good overall as "Chasing Amy", and it's not as funny as some of his other work, but it makes some very real statements about life. I think he's capable of making a great film if he can learn to write dialogue that isn't so damn vulgar all of the time.

I've been known to sling enough profanity around myself to offend more sensitive ears, but why do some writers (Quentin Tarentino is another one) feel that everybody can't finish a sentence without at least one profanity in it? There might be individual characters who speak that way, but not all of them should. How many people do you know who really swear that much? Profanity loses all of its power when overused, and it's just not as inherently funny as some people seem to think it is.

The Host

The Host is a South Korean movie that had gained some buzz for the monster in it (shown early and often) and a compelling story. My wife loves a good monster movie, and I knew she hadn't even heard of this one, so I took a chance on it.

The monster lived up to his billing, for the most part. Some of the effects were a bit suspect, but the Lovecraftian look of the beast really worked for me. The source of the monster is only hinted at, but that wasn't really the point. The story is actually about how one family is touched by the actions of the monster.

I have to admit to laughing at most of the acting. I suspect that it boils down to cultural difference, as most of the performances seemed way over the top to me.

The pacing was slower than I'm accustomed to seeing in American movies, but that's a typical difference for most films made elsewhere. The family drama was just okay to my tastes, and I don't think you really learn that much about the characters.

I've read that there's supposed to be an American remake in the works, and as usual, I think that's a very bad idea. There are at least two plot points that I'm sure will be handled differently in the American version, and those two points are almost all of what makes this movie interesting apart from the monster itself. Much of the story focuses on a family coming together to rescue a little girl taken by the monster, and I just can't see an American family placing the same value on family that a South Korean family does. An American family would almost have to be motivated by some serious guilt to take the actions shown here.

Call it a 5 on a scale of 1-10, adding one or two if you have a particular love for well executed monsters or a particular appreciation for South Korean culture.

Shadow of the Vampire

I'd read good things about this movie, and thought the idea behind it had a lot of potential. That idea is that the actor playing the vampire in the 1920's film Nosferatu was a real vampire and only the director knew it. The director was so determined to make a great movie that he was willing to do virtually anything to achieve that. The director is ultimately more of a parasite than the vampire. Unfortunately, the execution of that idea didn't really work for me.

The best things about the film were the strong performances from Willem Dafoe and John Malkovich. The sets looked good, evoking a strong feeling of the time period in which the film is set. The script, however, didn't live up to the potential of the premise, and the directing wasn't bad, but didn't add anything.

Call it 5 on a scale of 1-10, maybe adding one if you particularly like one of the lead actors.

A Deep Breath by the Side of the Spiritual Path

I realized I hadn't written anything on the spiritual side of things for a while. I'd gotten into a good meditation routine and done a lot of inspirational reading. Then GenCon shook me out of my routine (in a good way, mostly) and I was off my game for a while after that. I became concerned that I'd lost something in the change of routine.

I finally realized that it was nothing more than that the newness had worn off, that I'd reached the part that mattered, which is truly living the path day to day. Relaxing with that thought, I found comfort again, and actually applied myself better, knowing I'd be staying on this path for a while, at least.

I've had a good week at work. I've felt very centered in spite of the usual adversity that comes with the job. I found the Washington trip inspiring, in a way, in the sense that I felt a sense of community that I don't know if I've ever had at work. I've tended to see myself as very different from the people I've worked with, and kept myself at arm's length. We're all different from everybody else somehow, and I've learned that it's better to emphasize the similiarities if you plan to get along. It's not exactly a new revelation, but each of us have to soak our lessons in over time to really assimilate them. Too often, we haven't really absorbed all of the lessons we think we have, and so we keep experiencing the same problems over and over again until we get it. I'm sure I'll need to get this one again sometime, but I have it for now. :-)

Talk Like a Pirate Day

September 19th is Talk Like a Pirate Day. I'm sure you hadn't forgotten, but just in case you had, here's a reminder.

I'd talk like a pirate in this entry, but as I write this, Talk Like a Pirate Day isn't until tomorrow, so it's just not time yet.

And if ninjas are more your style, well, December 5th isn't that far away.

Inland Empire

I finally signed up for Netflix a little over a week ago, and this was my first choice. I was supposed to receive my first movie last Saturday, and when it didn't come, I just wrote it off to the vagaries of mailing time. However, on Sunday morning, a blonde woman I'd never seen before turned up on my doorstep, explaining that she was one of my neighbors and was previously the only person in our neighborhood to her knowledge who had Netflix. She'd received our two movies, but hadn't realized it until she opened them and noticed they weren't the sort of movies she'd choose. She looked at the address and figured out where they were supposed to go, so she brought them to our house. Since she was bringing me a David Lynch film, it would've been more appropriate if she'd finished the conversation by saying something surreal, like "The owls are not what they seem", or that she was already inside my house and offer me her cell phone so I could call her, but she didn't do anything like that. I just thanked her and she went on her way without so much as a cryptic comment.

As for the movie itself, the first half was as good as anything I've ever seen by David Lynch. It was off-kilter while still being something you could follow. Then the wheels fell off, and it was just strange without being particularly interesting other than some truly unsettling images. Critics have said this is his strangest film, and I'd have to agree with that. David Lynch famously said that this movie was "about a woman in trouble", and I don't think he could really say anything more about it because he himself didn't know anything more. I truly don't understand the parts with the sitcom with the people with rabbit heads, apart from the obvious satire of having the audience laugh at inappropriate times just because they're cued to do so.

It appeared to me as though it was chiefly about an actress who was losing the ability to distinguish between fact and fantasy, but even that idea seemed to break down after a while. I don't think David Lynch really has stories to tell; I think he's a painter who falls in love with unsettling moving images.

Call this one a 7 out of 10 if you're a David Lynch fan in the first place, and a 3 out of 10 if you're looking for an actual cohesive story of some kind. I found it worth my time to watch, but it's definitely not for everybody. I'd kick it up to 8 out of 10 if it'd been even a little more cohesive, since the beginning was so strong. If you're going to try David Lynch for the first time, I'd suggest the Twin Peaks series, which is more accessible (probably because other creative minds were involved as well) or "Blue Velvet" (but be prepared for strong sexual and violent content).

It also annoyed me that there were no chapter breaks, leaving the viewer stuck with nearly a three hour movie and no way to watch it in parts. I watched it in two sittings by watching the first half one day, then leaving the first half on the TV with the sound muted while I did other things and catching the second half when it almost caught up to where I'd left off. Mr. Lynch himself believes strongly that movies are meant to be watched beginning to end (which I'm sure is why the DVD has no chapter breaks), and would probably say that the reason I didn't like the second half as much as the first is that I didn't watch it all in one sitting, and that I could have done so, since I left the first half run while doing other things another day. That much is true, but the fact is that it's physically difficult for me to sit still to watch a three hour movie uninterrupted. I'd also like to have been able to revisit parts of the second half to better understand how they fit in with the beginning, and to see how David Lynch achieved some of the more disturbing effects, which was primarily with lighting and unconventional use of sound. I'm sure there are film students who'd love to do the same. However, it's just not worth the trouble it'd take to run the whole film again just to watch a few bits.

I plan to take a lot more chances with my choice of films now, since I'm paying a flat rate and if one of those choices flat out stinks, I can just turn it off and send it back without another thought. This is going to be good.

Adventures in DC

I've complained often enough about my job, so let me say something positive about it this time. This past week, as a reward for good results the last two quarters, the company I work for gave our entire department the day off and took us on a trip to Washington, DC at their expense. Not every company would do something like that.

We started out with a continental breakfast and the actual bus trip to DC, where we boarded a large boat for an extended lunch buffet and boat ride. The boat had four decks, and we had lunch on the bottom deck. Afterward, most of us went to the top deck, which was open and allowed us to enjoy the sun and the sights. We had a beautiful day for the trip and took full advantage of that fact.

The boat also had on-board entertainment, which is worth discussing in more detail. The entertainment was three singer/dancers (one white woman and two black men) and a DJ, who provided pre-recorded tracks for the performances of the others. The choice of material was largely 70's era Cheesy Lounge Act Rhythm and Blues. Yes, it was as bad as it sounds. As a former musician myself, I have to give them credit for professionalism. They were trying incredibly hard to keep the energy level up and keep the audience engaged. On the downside, they were musically competent at best. I'll give them credit for knowing their limitations and being smart enough to work within them, unlike many performers I've seen elsewhere. I'm not qualified to judge dancing skill; I'll just say I wasn't overly impressed. They were ignored by their intended audience for the most part, but managed to get about two dozen people up to dance with them for the last two or three songs as we were pulling back into port.

In all fairness, it was a very tough audience. About a third of the audience was our group, which was far more interested in catching some nice weather topside than in paying attention to singer/dancers. Another third was an organization of elderly folks, many using wheelchairs or walkers and not likely to be hitting the dance floor any time soon. The remaining third was a birthday party for a woman who appeared to be in her late 20's or early 30's, but most of her group seemed to be elderly women who, again, weren't likely to be doing any dancing.

I found myself wondering what it would be like making a living singing/dancing to largely indifferent audiences. Yes, you're making a living doing what you love, but I know from personal experience that indifferent audiences are no fun at all. Performing for an indifferent audience is damn hard work. And I had no way to know if they genuinely enjoyed the musical material (which helps a lot), or if someone else chose it and they were just hired to do the show someone else paid them to do. Making a living in show biz ain't all it's cracked up to be.

After the boat ride, we were dropped off at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum and given about 2 1/2 hours of free time. We broke off into groups, depending on what people wanted to see, and soon we were all over Washington. I personally stayed at the Air and Space Museum with a group of women I'm friendly with at work. We initially went to a display that was only temporarily in this museum, which included various culturally significant objects from another museum that was presently under construction. We saw the hat Abe Lincoln had been wearing the night he was shot, the actual R2D2 and C3PO used in the Star Wars movies (a true moment of geek ecstasy), one of Prince's custom guitars, and the famous signpost from the M*A*S*H TV series showing how far the camp was from a number of different places.

At that point, the ladies had had enough museum experience for them and went outside to enjoy the weather, leaving me to cover the rest of the Air and Space Museum myself. This was a Good Thing in my book, since it allowed me to focus on what I wanted to see without worrying about anyone else. I was able to see most of the rest of the museum, though I'd love to see everything else another time.

The courage and stupidity that human beings are capable of often amazes me. I saw some of the spacecraft used in the 70's, and can't believe that anyone would stake their lives on absolutely everything going right with those spacecraft so far away from anyone being able to help them. You have to wonder why someone would be willing to risk their life for what amounts to intellectual curiosity, and yet I find it admirable that human beings would go so far simply to learn. I visited a display of World War I items, and was horrified by the realities of the trench warfare of the time. What could possibly be worth that price in human lives and misery?

Everyone reassembled in front of the Air and Space Museum for a trip to a superb sea food restaurant for dinner, then we went home. The trip home put a damper on what had been a wonderful day, as there had been a number of car accidents and heavy traffic that added an hour and a half to an already long trip home. I had this hilarious vision of one of the accidents involving someone insured with us, and this entire busload of people with various specialties pulling over and handling every aspect of the claim on the spot ten minutes after it had happened. We didn't get back until 11:30 PM on a weeknight, and virtually all of us had to be at work at about 8 AM the following day. Some of us lived as far as an hour's drive from home; I was fortunately far luckier than that, only living about a ten minute drive away.

Things were quiet the following day at work, but I've got to put credit where it's due and say that, as far as I know, everybody had a great time and would do it again in a heartbeat. Hopefully the next couple of quarters will go as well and we'll get to do something else as good.

Fluid the Third

The beginning of last night's Firefly session was everything I want Fluid to be. I'd brought some ideas of my own in case nobody else did, and as it turns out I used almost none of my prepared ideas.

The original idea had been that this session was going to be about the PCs disrupting a poker game being run by a powerful crime syndicate to repay a favor the PCs owed to another powerful crime syndicate. The players decided that the best way to disrupt the game was from the inside, and spent most of this session kidnapping an arms dealer who'd worked both sides during the Unification War, with the idea that one of the characters would take his place in the poker game. They created and named this key NPC themselves; I just played him. Most (if not all) of the group contributed elements to the situation, which ultimately involved literally catching the arms dealer with his pants down at a local brothel. They succeeded, but not without complications, several of them self-inflicted to add interest to the story, which was exactly what I was trying to accomplish!

On the downside, the session then bogged down into planning the actual infiltration, which everybody agreed was Not Fun. Mike H. made a suggestion that tapped into some ideas I'd read about roleplaying "caper films" on rpg.net, which is that you never actually do the planning, but play out the situation starting with the beginning of a plan (the characters board the ship to infiltrate the poker game) and spontaneously add elements that are retroactively determined to have been part of the planning all along, even though the planning never actually appeared "on screen". But of course, no plan survives contact with the enemy, and there will be complications. This is exactly the sort of thing that Fluid is intended to make possible, and I'm excited about trying it in the next session.

Mike H. also brought up another important idea, which is that it might be necessary to determine the scale of a scene before actually starting to play it out. My original idea had been that the players would effectively determine the scale of a scene by adding detail during parts of greater interest to them, and glossing over the less interesting parts. In practice, however, we tended to find ourselves at a fairly fine level of detail because that's the way roleplaying is usually done, even though the players themselves would've preferred a more "big picture" approach to the particular scene in which this issue emerged. I'd prefer to keep things more fluid if we can, but when all of the players agree that they would've preferred a result different than the one we had, then it's time to consider a different approach.

I'm very encouraged by the way the system worked, for the most part, because it encouraged exactly the behavior I wanted from the players, which tends to result in a story with maximum buy-in on their part. There are bugs to work out yet, but it feels like the right track.

Blood and Chocolate

We were actually looking for a vampire movie when we found this one, but couldn't find anything with potential that we hadn't already seen, and this werewolf flick seemed reasonably promising. Unfortunately, it was a dud. The effects weren't special, and the actors were good-looking people who didn't bring much of interest to a by-the-numbers script. The result was less than the sum of its parts, and by the end I didn't care what happened in the story. Call it a 3 or 4 on a 1-10 scale. I don't even care enough to choose between the two numbers.

Labor Day Weekend

I still hadn't really caught up on things since returning from GenCon, but this past weekend helped a lot. My wife finally accepted that she needed some down time, and took four hours to watch "Return of the King" from our new Lord of the Rings DVD set. I like those movies, but not enough to sit quite that long for them, so I was doing other things and was in and out of the room at various points.


We'd had a bomb scare at work Thursday of last week, which cost us a half day in the morning while the building was evacuated. Everybody was fairly sure it was a hoax from the beginning (and it was), but you don't want to take chances with those things. It wasn't a big deal for me personally, since I was fairly caught up on my work. So, my wife, a co-worker and I went to a nearby Barnes & Noble for a few hours, and of course my wife and I came back with a bunch of books.


I've already finished the back half of "Broken Music" by Sting (picked up during that trip), because that's the half covering the beginning of the Police, and was the part most interesting to me. Sting writes prose well enough, unsurprisingly, and is willing to be critical of his own actions in spots. It's a decent book if you're interested in the subject matter, but nothing remarkable.


I'm currently reading Neil Gaiman's "Anansi Boys". It's a lot of fun, but slow going because I'm reading it over lunches at work and don't have that much time for it.


I've caught up on some of my scenario warehouse editing duties for SJG's Men In Black, which I'd been neglecting. Now I've got to get back to some writing of my own.


The new iteration of Fluid is done and in the hands of the players in my home campaign. I've realized that it's probably nothing more than an easy and effective light generic RPG rather than the more revolutionary beast I'd hoped for, but I'll work with it a bit more and see what happens. The tricky part remains giving players more opportunity to add elements than most RPGs do without bogging them down with narrative duties most of them don't want.


Now that life is back on a more even keel, let's see what I can get done...

Curse of the Golden Flower

We picked up this one at the same time as "Casino Royale", as we've had good results with Asian films working for all three of us. My father-in-law had to travel out of the area before getting to see if, but that's just as well since he probably wouldn't have enjoyed the intricicies of the plot.


This was a historical story, with Chow Yun Fat as the Emporer and Gong Li as the Empress. The plotting of the members of the royal family is the best reason to see this film. There are many lavish visual moments, too. The individual fight scenes are adequate, but don't bother if those are the reason you'd rent a movie like this one. If you like director Zhang Yimou's "Hero" and "House of Flying Daggers", you'll probably like this one, too. Otherwise, it's worth seeing, if not especially memorable outside of a huge battle sequence, which was done with an enormous number of extras, not with CGI! Call it a 7 out of 10, going up to an 8 if you especially enjoy the director's other work and don't mind the greater focus on intrigue and reduced number of individual fight scenes as compared to other movies of the type.

Casino Royale

Allow me to preface this review by pointing out that I'm not much of a fan of the James Bond films. Oh, they're fun in a predictable, cotton candy sort of way, but I won't go out of my way to see one. Well, unless we're in search of one of those movies my father-in-law, my wife, and I can watch together.


"Casino Royale" starts out by showing us a different sort of Bond than usual. This one is more raw, brutal, and unpolished than the Bond to which we've become accustomed. It turns out that he has just been promoted to the 00 level. I enjoyed this, since it opened up the possibility that Bond might actually screw up, and sure enough, he does.


The plot, too, is earthier. There are no Bad Guys with metal teeth or razor-edged throwing hats; there's just a guy with a nasty agenda who is good at No Limit Texas Hold 'Em (notably not baccarat, presumably so more people could follow what was happening in the game itself).


There are two "Bond girls", and they were attractive enough, though one of them has almost nothing to do in the movie. The other does have real story significance, but little chemistry with new Bond Daniel Craig.


I don't want to spoil anything for those who haven't seen the film, so I won't give away any plot details. I'll just say that for once, Bond is a real character, rather than a video game cursor, and I enjoyed that. Having said that, Daniel Craig is miscast as Bond. When Vesper Lind says he's charming at their first meeting, you don't feel it, and it makes you pointedly aware that she's only saying it because the script requires it. The flaw isn't in the script. I can easily visualize a young Sean Connery saying the exact same lines and coming off as a good deal more playful.


It's sad to see that the script had real promise to reinvent Bond, but the casting missed that opportunity. The two leads just don't have the necessary chemistry to pull off this script. I still enjoyed it just because it was a different approach, and they even gave Judi Dench a real part, rather than largely wasting her as they usually do on a Bond film. I'd give it a 7 out of 10 for most audiences, but 6 out of 10 if you prefer traditional Bond, or even 8 out of 10 if you buy into Daniel Craig's performance as Bond more than I did.

Ghost Rider

You've got to admit that the Ghost Rider himself is an arresting image, even if you're not especially a comics fan. I wanted to like this movie, but have to admit that there just wasn't much to it.


This version of how Johnny Blaze becomes the Ghost Rider should have resonance. I won't spoil it for those who haven't seen the film, but while it's not lacking in dramatic elements, the execution isn't there. You just don't feel it when you watch it. It might've worked better if that story had been the film, and the whole thing had built up to him becoming the Ghost Rider, but I think a lot of people would've been more than a little annoyed if the cool visual they paid to see was just a short bit at the end of a 90 minute family drama.


Nicholas Cage played Johnny Blaze as too much like Elvis Presley for me. That aspect made it too unintentionally funny, and didn't give the Johnny Blaze character any personality of his own. Eva Mendez was fine, if nothing special, as the Hollywood-required love interest. And the actor playing Blackheart (I can't remember his name) frankly looked like a low budget vampire through much of the movie, so I found it hard to take him any more seriously than I took Cage as Johnny Blaze. Peter Fonda didn't convey the proper weight in playing Mephistopheles, but few actors can. Sam Elliot mumbled his way through his part, but that fit the character, so it worked well enough for me.


The plot twist in which Sam's part in things is revealed isn't a twist at all if you've been paying any attention, and especially not if you've seen the movie trailer. The actual Ghost Rider bits and the climax of the film have visual interest, but that's all. Maybe I just wasn't in the mood for this film, but I just didn't feel anything while I was watching it. The script wasn't bad (if predictable), so I have to lay most of the blame on the acting, and possibly some on the directing. Call this one a 5 on a 1-10 scale, rating it a little higher if you place a high priority on cool visuals, and a little lower if you're looking for an actual story.

What the Bleep Do We Know?

Dr. Aether had seen this movie and sent a copy to me via Amazon. Thanks, Doc!


This is an unconventional film. You wouldn't want to rent this one if you're expecting a typical narrative. It essentially covers the area where science (in the form of quantum physics) meets spirituality (in the form of no specific belief set in particular). The general point is that the cutting edge of science seemingly corresponds with a belief that we are all, in effect, linked to one another as part of the universe.


Probably the most interesting single point is that we can effectively practice being happy. Forget about venting anger, because what you're actually doing is practicing to be angry, and you'll find yourself correspondingly more prone to angry behavior in the future. There is scientific evidence that supports the position that, like any conventional skill, your brain adapts to get better at whatever you do. The result is that if you practice being happy, you will get better at being happy in the future, the same as if you practiced tennis every day, your tennis skills would eventually improve.


This ties in well with my recent Buddhist reading, which takes the same position without the scientific support, and I can confirm with my own anecdotal evidence that it does in fact seem to hold up. I've never been happier, and my external circumstances haven't changed significantly.


As a piece of entertainment, well, the beginning is very slow, repeating a lot of information most people probably already know, but it picks up a little further on. There is a plot involving Marlee Matlin as a photographer who isn't very happy, though the plot seems to be there just to provide continuity for the segments with various scientists discussing the places where quantum physics and spirituality come together. Marlee has an amusing experience at a wedding (working as the photographer) that helps her to understand how she can be happier, and puts it into practice.


Yes, it sounds a little sappy, but who doesn't want to learn how to be happier? The supporting scientific information and admission that there's still so much science doesn't know (though it's interesting to see where it's pointing) keeps it from being too saccharine. For a person receptive to the nature of the information being provided (which would include me), I'd call it a 7 out of 10. For a general audience, I think they'd be bored by the first twenty minutes or so, then find the wedding scenes amusing, so call it a 5 out of 10 for general audiences.

The Gamers

My friends Don and Joanna were kind enough to lend me their DVD of "The Gamers" by Dead Gentleman Productions post-GenCon. They'd just purchased it, but had seen the movie before, so were willing to let me borrow it, and so I'll start this entry by thanking them.

"The Gamers" is a short film made by gamers for gamers (it won a prize for best fan film at GenCon 2003), so it has to be judged by the standard of other films made by non-professionals. It's obviously low budget, and the acting isn't polished, to say the least. That said, it's enormously entertaining stuff if you understand the references.

The film follows a group of gamers as they're playing a session of an ongoing Dungeons & Dragons campaign, intercut with the same actors playing out their adventures in character in full costume. The game is obviously D&D, though the serial numbers have been filed off to keep the filmmakers out of trouble. The movie even begins by showing the character sheets on screen as part of the opening credits, so you know something about the D&D characters even before they've been shown on screen for the first time if you know the game. One memorable joke involves the character of a player who didn't show up for this particular session. The character spends most of his time standing around doing nothing, utterly uneffected by everything going on around him no matter what happens, because the player isn't present to say what the character is doing, but the character's presence has been established as part of the story's continuity. This wouldn't be especially funny to the average person, but for any gamer who has had exactly that thing happen in their home campaign (and it's happened to almost anyone who has played an ongoing campaign), it's frickin' hilarious to actually see it on the screen. Another of the best jokes is funniest if you're familiar with a particular common D&D rule (though they do a good job of setting up an explanation to make it work if you don't happen to know the rule).

They've hit this one out of the park, in that they obviously know their audience and play to it beautifully, knowing exactly what common elements of RPGs will look utterly ridiculous on screen. The low budget and weak acting works very much for them because it fits the context so perfectly. I recommend this film highly if you've done any amount of roleplaying, especially Dungeons & Dragons. I don't think a non-gamer would laugh nearly so hard, but it's not made for them.

The disc is filled out with a bunch of other work by Dead Gentleman Productions, which I can't recommend. The two Syphilitic Ninja Vampires sketches are mildly funny, in the way that those lame Saturday Night Live sketches involving a one-joke character beaten into the ground sometimes are. Their theme song is the funniest part of the sketches, and I suspect it was written before the sketches were. The remaining material just isn't that good. It reminded me of weak Second City TV material, and I'm not a fan of SCTV in the first place.

In short, if you've ever played D&D, pick up this disc at a convention some time and watch "The Gamers", even though the non-gamers in your life probably won't get it, but don't expect much from anything else on the disc. Call it 8 out of 10 for "The Gamers" and 3 out of 10 for everything else for the few mildly amusing sketches.