h1

The Stand by Stephen King

April 30, 2015

Note: I’m no book reviewer so I’m not going to dig too deep into this, but since I posted my thoughts on a separate website, I figured I might as well post them on my blog.

Just finished listening to The Stand. For what it is commonly considered the best Stephen King book ever, I have to say, I was a bit disappointed. Maybe it was the format – I do feel like I lose some the experience by listening to a book instead of reading it myself. Maybe I space out for a period. Maybe I have a more difficult time creating a picture in my head through the audio format. Maybe it just isn’t as good as people have made it out to be. I’m not sure.

lots of spoilers

I think my main concern is that it is supposed to be this epic battle of good versus evil and there is all this build up, but then the confrontation with Flagg is over before you even realize it. They show up in Vegas, briefly interact with Flagg, and then Trash Can Man nukes everybody. Game over. End of story. I didn’t think that could possibly be the end of it – but then it was. Also, when Nick Andros died, I felt like I was getting duped. Up to that point, I had viewed him as the main character and then I felt like he died before doing anything super important. In fact, after his death, I posted on Facebook: “If Nick Andros really just died in The Stand then I know nothing about writing.” Was his main purpose to send Tom Cullen out to be a spy? What exactly did Tom Cullen uncover anyway? I feel like the only critical thing that happened out of all that spy stuff was that Tom found Stu on his way back.

Obviously, at 48 hours of listening time, I had to enjoy the experience overall. I liked the characters and I was intrigued by the story, but in the end, I just felt incredibly let down. This would be a whole lot less surprising if The Stand wasn’t so highly lauded. In the Stephen King catalog alone, It is far, far superior.

h1

Franchise Four – Baltimore Orioles

April 28, 2015

I have to admit, I’m quite fascinated by MLB.com’s Franchise Four campaign, in which people are encouraged to vote on the four players that best represent each franchise. Since I love baseball and I like sharing my opinion, I’ve decided to not only participate in the voting, but to share my thoughts on my blog. The aim here is to make my picks for one team a day for the next month, so stay tuned and we will see who the voters picked at the All-Star game in July.

Cal Ripken Jr.

The Argument: No surprise here. Ripken is still the face of the Orioles franchise long after he has retired. A career Oriole and Hall Of Famer, he was the 1982 Rookie Of The Year, 1983 MVP, and 1991 MVP and helped the O’s win a World Series in ’83. He was also a 19-time All-Star and is the all-time leader in HR as a shortstop. He finished his career with over 3,000 hits and is the career leader for the Orioles in basically every offensive counting stat. Oh, and he also played in more consecutive games than anyone else in baseball history.

Brooks Robinson

The Argument: Another lifelong Oriole and Hall Of Famer, Brooks Robinson is widely considered as the best defensive third baseman of all-time – and his 16 Gold Glove awards would be hard to argue against. He also ranks 2nd to Ripken on the Orioles all-time list for hits, runs, and RBI. Robinson helped lead the O’s to titles in 1966 and 1970 and was named the MVP of the ’70 series. He was a 15-time All-Star and a league MVP in 1964.

Jim Palmer

The Argument: Palmer is another Hall Of Fame Oriole that never played for another team. During his tenure, he helped the Orioles reach the World Series six times and finished his career with three rings, something neither Ripken or Robinson can lay claim to. Palmer won three Cy Young Awards and was an All-Star six times, logging 268 wins and finishing his career with a ridiculous 2.86 ERA.

Frank Robinson

The Argument: It was such a tough call between Frank Robinson and Eddie Murray that I almost considered tossing a coin on it. Ultimately, while Murray played more years for the O’s and has the sexier counting stats, Robinson’s years in Baltimore were unquestionably better. Not only did Robinson post a .944 OPS as an Oriole (Murray had an .868 OPS) and win the Triple Crown in 1966, but his arrival in Baltimore seemed to trigger a run of perennial success that led to two titles and four appearances in the World Series during his six year tenure.

h1

Nightcrawler (2014)

April 28, 2015

Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Rene Russo, Riz Ahmed
Director: Dan Gilroy

Bottom Line: Nightcrawler is one of the best films of 2014. Jake Gyllenhaal gives a knockout performance as Louis Bloom, a sociopath that has absolutely no moral compass and will go to any length to reach his goals. In this case, the goal is to become Los Angeles’ most prominent nightcrawler – a job that requires him to listen to police scanners so he can be the first person on the scene with a video camera in order to take exclusive footage he can sell off to local news stations. And what do they want? White people in good neighborhoods – dead – and preferably killed by minorities. Or gruesome accidents. It’s a perfectly sleazy job for a seedy person like Louis Bloom. It’s amusing watching him flounder while figuring out the ropes of nightcrawling, but he’s sharp, so he quickly becomes adept at it. Of course, he needs just a little bit of help, which he gets by hiring a homeless man named Rick (Ahmed) for $30 a night to help him navigate to crime scenes. And it’s his relationship with Rick that best illustrates exactly how self-centered Louis is – this is a man that has no friends and truly cares about no one other than himself. Rene Russo checks in as the graveyard news editor for Channel 6, the company Louis exclusively sells his material to. Although it’s more subtle, she’s no less despicable than Louis – she cares more about putting out product than her own self-respect and she also appears to have no line she won’t cross for a scoop. And she’s certainly willing to air whatever Louis shoots no matter how questionable it may be. It’s a decent performance from Russo, but the character is more interesting than the acting is.

Director Dan Gilroy does a great job in his directorial debut. Watching Louis and Rick navigate the streets of L.A. really brings you into the city and almost makes it a character all of its own. He keeps Nightcrawler intriguing before reaching one of the most intensely suspenseful climaxes I’ve seen in quite some time. Nightcrawler really pulled me in from the opening scene and didn’t let me loose until the end credits. It was probably the most riveting film I saw in all of 2014. I think it’s borderline criminal that Gyllenhaal didn’t receive an Oscar nomination for his acting work here. While I haven’t seen some of the nominated performances (soon!), it’s pretty clear that he does better work here than Bradley Cooper does in American Sniper. He’s creepy. He’s unsettling. He’s a sociopath to the T. It’s truly great work from Jake here.

Nightcrawler is a great film with a stunning performance from Gyllenhaal. It’s as entertaining as any film I saw in 2014 and the climax is breath-stoppingly awesome. Much like the car crashes and murders Louis films, it’s a film so grimy you just can’t take your eyes off it.

Replay Value: Seen it twice… it’s probably worth owning. I loved it, but it does lose some of its suspense the second time around.
Sequel Potential: Not the kind of film that should have a sequel.
Oscar Potential: Nominated for Best Original Screenplay, but Gyllenhaal probably should have gotten an acting nom and I have seen Best Picture noms I liked less than this movie.

Grade: 8/10 (Excellent)

h1

Ex Machina (2015)

April 27, 2015

Starring: Domhnall Gleeson, Alicia Vikander, Oscar Isaac
Director: Alex Garland

Bottom Line: Ex Machina is a strong sci-fi film that will keep you interested even though it lacks action and is slowly paced. Oscar Isaac and Alicia Vikander are excellent in their roles. Isaac plays a passive-aggressive and manipulative CEO that has created a revolutionary human-like AI named Ava. Gleeson is well cast as Caleb, an expert computer programmer summoned to interact with Ava and see if she can pass a Turing Test, which is essentially a test to see how the AI reacts to human interaction – whether she is adapting on her own or just doing what she is programmed to do.

It’s a small film, set in a secluded fortress in Alaska, that features only four principle characters, but it works well in its contained atmosphere. Certainly, Isaac’s billionaire appears to be the kind of person that would be better off programming humanoids than actually interacting with real ones. He’s not a likable person, even if his accomplishments may provoke admiration – a realization that Caleb has shortly after arriving. It’s a film that is centered around Caleb’s interactions with the icy, yet unquestionably sexy Ava and his attraction to her creates the core dilemma of the film: is she genuinely fond of Caleb or is she just behaving how she is programmed to behave.

There is little to complain about concerning Ex Machina but, for me, it lacked the “wow factor” that many seemed to take away from the film. Still, it’s a solid film with quality performances that should leave audiences feeling satisfied afterwards.

Replay Value: I might watch it again some day but it doesn’t feel like a movie I’m anxious to see again.
Sequel Potential: I don’t think so, but it’s certainly possible.
Oscar Potential: With an April release, it’s highly unlikely the Academy will remember it come Oscar season – and it’s hard to compare it to what hasn’t been released yet – but Isaac’s performance is strong enough to keep in mind and Vikander is also really good. There may also be some Visual Effects appreciation for this film.

Grade: 7.5/10 (Recommended/Must See)

Edit: Upon further reflection, I have raised my grade for this movie a full point. The more I think about the movie, the more I realize how riveting it was. It’s absurdly suspenseful, but it’s so subtle you barely even notice.

h1

The Raid 2 (2014)

April 26, 2015

Starring: Iko Uwais, Arifin Putra, Yayan Ruhian
Director: Gareth Evans (The Raid: Redemption)

Bottom Line: Honestly, I feel like that poster says it all. The Raid 2 deserves any and all praise heaped upon it. Gareth Evans – who already wrote and directed the excellent original – has now established himself as the premiere action director in the industry – at least for anyone paying attention. While stars Iko Uwais and Yayan Ruhian deserve a lot of the credit for the phenomenal fight choreography, Evans’ ability to make everything look stunningly real is nothing short of amazing. I can assure you, you have never seen fight scenes as awesome as the ones in The Raid series.

The Raid 2 continues the story of Rama (Uwais), a rookie police officer in Indonesia that is now being recruited by a secret task force to go undercover as a prisoner and befriend the son (Putra) of a known crime lord in order to infiltrate their organization and gather evidence against dirty cops. What results is an action epic with a surprisingly swift 2.5 hour run time that rarely takes a breather from its astonishing action sequences – we’re talking prison mud fights, baseball bat and hammer action, and possibly the best car chase scene ever captured on film. Gareth Evans is a true master of his craft. How his films haven’t attracted more mainstream attention boggles my mind.

The Raid 2 is every bit as good as the original when it comes to action, but packs significantly more substance. The more I ponder it, the more I think it might be one of the greatest action movies of all-time. It’s a clear classic in its genre and one of the best and most overlooked movies of 2014. A clear must see and probably a future classic. I can say with confidence that I’m eagerly looking forward to anything Gareth Evans has planned in the future and if Iko Uwais is really in Star Wars: The Force Awakens as he is rumored to be, I have a feeling people are going to be talking about his character afterwards.

Replay Value: I had to watch it twice before I sent it back to Netflix. Possibly a must own film.
Sequel Potential: The Raid 3 has been announced (directed by Evans but Iko Uwais is not attached) and an American remake is on its way.
Oscar Potential: None.

Grade: 9/10 (Potential Classic)

h1

The Babadook (2014)

April 19, 2015

Starring: Essie Davis, Noah Wiseman
Director: Jennifer Kent

Bottom Line: The Babadook is an extremely strong horror film from first time director Jennifer Kent. It’s a story about a mother and her young, troubled son dealing with grief several years after her husband died in a car accident driving her to the hospital to give birth. In the midst of the mother struggling to keep her son from acting out in basically any public setting – particularly school – a mysterious children’s book appears in their home, filled with disturbing pop out pictures and a sinister message. Soon after, the son becomes obsessed with The Babadook and the mother begins to unravel as the book’s monster begins to haunt their home.

Kent utilizes atmosphere and a slow build to create scares and tension in The Babadook and the result is quite easily the best horror film of 2014 and one of the better movies overall. The film feels like a cross between A Nightmare On Elm Street and Jumanji, but back when Freddy Krueger was still scary and a bit of a mystery. The monster is pretty unique but, although it gets title billing, mostly takes a back seat to the relationship between son and mother and Essie Davis’ remarkable transformation. Davis was so good in The Babadook that I think you’d be hard-pressed to find a better performance in a horror movie. In fact, I was so impressed that I kept thinking about how much her acting reminded me of Ellen Burstyn’s work in Requiem For A Dream, which is one of my all-time favorite performances. Davis genuinely steals the show.

The Babadook is smart, unique, and genuinely scary. It ranks up there with The Conjuring and It Follows as the best horror movies of the past five years or so. Complete with a knockout performance from its lead actress, it’s a must see film for horror fans and highly recommended for all but the most squeamish filmgoers.

Replay Value: I’d watch it again.
Sequel Potential: This is the kind of strong film that typically launches a franchise that eventually becomes completely watered down.
Oscar Potential: No Oscar attention, but lots of accolades from everywhere else – particularly as a debut film and for Davis’ acting.

Grade: 7/10 (Must See)

h1

Life Itself (2014)

April 19, 2015

Starring: Roger Ebert
Director: Steve James (Prefontaine, Hoop Dreams

Bottom Line: I was expecting a bit more from Life Itself after seeing it ranked as the co-#1 movie of 2014 (along with Whiplash) by Coming Soon’s . Still, it was an enjoyable documentary that chronicles the life of famed film critic Roger Ebert, detailing his rise from college newspaper editor to famous film critic, his partnership and strained relationship with Gene Siskel, his battle with alcoholism, and, ultimately, the fight for his life. It’s a good film and Ebert had an interesting life, but it obviously didn’t resonate with me emotionally in the way that it has for others and my feeling after watching it was that I would enjoy reading Ebert’s book of the same name significantly more. If you love movies and appreciate Ebert’s work, you will probably like this, but it’s not exactly a must see.

Replay Value: One viewing will be enough for me.
Sequel Potential: N/A
Oscar Potential: Not even a Documentary nomination…

Grade: 6/10 (Recommended)

h1

It Follows (2015)

April 5, 2015

Starring: Maika Monroe, Keir Gilchrist, Olivia Luccardi, Lili Sepe
Director: David Robert Mitchell

Bottom Line: It Follows is hands down the best horror movie I’ve seen in a movie theater in many a year. That’s partly because I’ve been mostly skipping horror movies for the past decade, but mostly because it was very good. The concept is unique – a curse is passed on via intercourse and the monster follows that person until it kills them or they pass the curse on to someone else, but if that person dies, the monster follows the previous again. The film gets most of its scares out of building tension and the fact that literally anyone could be a potential threat – the monster has the ability to look like anyone, including friends and family, so any person in the background shot is worth keeping an eye on. It’s admittedly creepy and plenty fun.

It Follows benefits from the fact that everyone involved seems to be taking things seriously. Often in horror movies the actors seem to be playing caricatures of people rather than actual human beings, but the kids in It Follows feel like genuine teens and, although they occasionally make questionable decisions, they don’t come across gregariously dumb. Maika Monroe, who plays Jay, the girl with the curse, is especially good and this movie should propel her to future stardom. While her acting range remains to be seen, she certainly can crush the horror genre and I’m looking forward to whatever she does next.

It Follows is essentially director David Robert Mitchell’s debut film and he will be another name to look out for. It Follows is one of the more original horror films to come out in years and Mitchell deserves all of the credit as writer and director. The monster is scary and quite a bit ambiguous – everything is pretty mysterious here. Mitchell also creates plenty of tension through his wide lens shots and a score so prominent it might as well be part of the cast. It Follows takes a big cue from John Carpenter’s Halloween, relying on small scares, music, and a slow, methodical threat.

I thought this movie was great. It’s everything you’re looking for in a scary movie and it delivers on all levels. It Follows is the first must see film of 2015 and has potential to be a classic in the horror genre.

Replay Value: I think this will be good over multiple viewings.
Sequel Potential: There is a lot left to be explored here – it’s perfectly set up for both sequels and prequels.
Oscar Potential: I would say no.

Grade: 7.5/10 (Must See/Excellent)

h1

2015 Poker Goals – March Wrap Up

April 3, 2015

Every month I’m going to reflect on the previous month of poker and see how well I’m doing at accomplishing my 2015 goals:

Log 1200 live hours

As I noted in my February Wrap Up, I have upped my goal from 750 hours to 1200 hours. Since I’m frequently playing when I’m working, I am still able to play nearly full-time hours despite having a day job. In March, I played an absurd 174 hours, my largest output since the first half of 2012 probably. That kind of pace is unlikely to continue, but I think I can average about 120 hours most months.

focus on how well I played, how well I controlled tilt, and how well I paid attention to game flow instead of how well I ran.
continuing taking notes throughout all my sessions and combing through them later.

One of these days, I will really start paying attention to the game when I’m playing. It is quite easily one of my biggest weaknesses. I kept accurate notes for most of my $8/$16 sessions, but I continue to struggle to pay attention when I’m not in hands.

I’m also learning how to go through my notes in a more efficient manner – skimming past hands that seem totally standard and focusing on the ones that gave me trouble. It should be noted that the statistics I’m about to post are for $8/$16 sessions only and don’t include notes from one of my more important sessions of the month – where I started off stuck $700 and stayed in the feeder game playing short-handed for several hours (and thus unable to take notes between hands). I ended up crushing the short-handed game and then went on an absurd run after the game broke and I finally made my way to the main game. At that point, with so many hands unrecorded – and it being the first of the month – I decided to continue not keeping notes for the session. So for a period where I went from stuck $700 to cashing out over $1300 sugar, I have no hands logged for an absurd amount of positive variance. I also played 65 hours of $4/$8 where I did not keep notes.

Here are the hands I have decided to track to keep variance in perspective:

AA – 4/8 (50%)
KK – 4/12 (33%)
QQ – 7/14 (50%)
JJ – 7/12 (58.3%)
TT – 4/8 (50%)
77-99 – 14/43 (32.5%)
22-66 – 8/28 (28.6%)
All Pairs – 52/125 (41.6%)
Sets – 16/18 (88.9%)
AK-AQ – 25/65 (38.5%)
AKs-ATs – 12/30 (40%)
KQs-KTs – 5/13 (38.5%)
QJs-JTs – 4/17 (23.5%)
Flush Draws – 19/40 (47.5%)

Thoughts: Running at over 40% for all my pairs seems like a pretty favorable result. Running at less than 50% for AA-QQ is definitely below average, however. It’s also worth noting that I made a set 18 of the 125 times I played a pair, or 14% of the time – which is almost exactly average. More importantly, I almost never lost with my sets and I nearly always got an abundance of action when I had one. I’m curious to see how the smaller suited Broadway hands do going forward. I completed nearly half of my flush draws which is a highly favorable result – although I lost some of those hands. Between the sets and flush draws – and running above average with my pairs overall – I would have to say variance was mostly on my side in March.

spend less than 20% of my total hours in 4/8 games

I played 66 of 150 cash game hours at the $4/$8 level – or 44%. However, subtracting 34 hours as a floor man, that total becomes 32 of 116 hours – or 27.6% – a reasonable result. For the year, I’ve played 191 of 403 total hours (47.4%) and 95 of 308 (31%) of my non-working hours at the $4/$8 level. Including my tournaments hours, it probably comes pretty close to my 20% target.

log 100 hours of spread limit

I played some small stakes NLHE when I was in Vegas this past month and my conclusion is that I’m still not very good at that format of poker. Obviously, at 11 hours of play logged for the entire year, this is an incredibly small sample size, but the results are consistent with an ongoing pattern of performing poorly in no limit cash games. In Vegas, I lost every session I played and it should have been worse – I jammed 100+ bigs preflop with 99 vs AA and rivered a straight. Over my past 163.5 hours of no limit/spread limit, I’ve won slightly less than 50% of my sessions and I’m running at almost -10 big blinds per hour. I have been unlucky in some hands, for sure, but the biggest problem I’ve identified is that I play overly aggressive and try to win every hand I play rather than being selectively aggressive and picking my spots more wisely overall. Starting this month, I want to log at least one 8-10 hour session of no limit and focus on correcting these mistakes.

continuing reading about mental game, develop mental game profiles, and improve my c-game

focus my learning — don’t study multiple variants at the same time or games I’m not playing frequently

I finally finished the series of questions in Jared Tendler’s The Mental Game Of Poker designed to pinpoint potential problems and give an outline of my current mental game. This can be referred to and adjusted as I improve or discover new concerns over time. Working on this had halted my reading for the most part, but I should be able dedicate time for that soon. With the Pendleton Spring Round Up and World Series Of Poker coming up, I’ll probably adjust my focus to studying Omaha 8 or better and tournament play over the next few months.

treat poker like a job with set hours and not like a hobby

With 445 hours in roughly 12 weeks, I have been playing full time hours despite the fact that I work 20-30 hours a week on top of that, so my poker playing is like a second job these days. My work off the tables has suffered a bit, but for the most part, I’m taking my poker time very seriously and putting in the hours unless I feel like I’m not playing near my A-game.

watch opponents closely in tournaments and develop exploitative styles for each of them instead of playing laggy for laggy’s sake

take my time in critical pots and really think things through before acting

set a new career high tournament score

I played 5 tournaments last month, but one of them was a freeroll and two others were very small, local tournament, so I’ll focus my attention on the bigger events I played.

I played the $150 daily tournament at the Venetian and I dominated my table for most of the day, feeling like I was really playing well. I got lucky in some spots to dodge a couple coolers, but I consistently increased my stack throughout the event without much resistance until I got in a blind vs blind situation late where I flopped trip aces and my opponent turned a gutshot straight. I ended up betting the turn, re-raising my opponent when he raised me, and ultimately calling off against his 5-bet jam. I had completed with A8 from the small blind so I figured my opponent was never giving me credit for an Ace – and I surely wasn’t giving him credit for one – and I had a decent amount of outs against any hand that was beating me. In retrospect, calling his initial raise makes a lot of sense because I’m not getting action on a 3-bet unless he’s committed to a bluffing line or I’m crushed. Instead, I lost a decent portion of my stack on the hand and my momentum disappeared soon after. I managed to make the final table, but ultimately busted out in 9th in a tournament that paid 8. I busted when I shoved my short stack from the button with the big blind away from the table. I don’t even remember my hand, but the small blind woke up with AJ and that was good enough to bust me. It was my second final table in a medium-sized tournament that didn’t even pay. Even though the end result was poor and I may have misplayed a big pot, I felt very good about my overall play and thought the style I chose for this event would be profitable in the long run.

I followed that deep run up by playing in the Muckleshoot Spring Classic $750 Main Event and finished 14th of 226 runners, ending a nearly year long drought of not cashing in a $150 or higher tournament. Once again, I played well and ran pretty good before getting cold late and losing a couple crucial pots. Midway through the tournament I was moved to an extremely tough and loaded table: multiple WSOP bracelet winner Rep Porter, Adam Coats – who got TV time on ESPN during the main event and made multiple deep cashes in the 2014 WSOP – and a couple of other local players I’m pretty sure play for a living. Not only did I outlast all four of these tough players but I held my own in a couple of difficult pots against Rep, including one where he put me in an extremely tough spot and I found the correct call. And then I busted him. It’s not that I beat a top pro in a couple of pots, it’s that I was able to make the correct decisions because I knew what he was thinking and how he perceived me and that is something to be happy about. Obviously, I was a bit disappointed to fall just short of some serious money ($45,000 for 1st!) and I had a very real chance of crossing off my goal of a new career high tournament score, but I feel like my tournament play is improving and things are trending in the right direction. I feel something big is about to happen. I believe.

double my current bankroll size

maintain a 1 BB/HR win rate at 8/16

start playing 20/40 regularly by end of year

I finally had a month where my bankroll saw serious growth. It’s probably been a year or longer since I’ve seen a 10% increase in a single month, but I did much better than that in March. Doubling the bankroll I started 2015 with should be a very attainable goal and honestly, I hope to do much, much better.

I had an amazing month of $8/$16, running at 3.48 BB/HR for the month overall, and an absurd 5.27 BB/HR in the $8/$16 at the Palace in Tacoma. It was a month where I set a new personal record for an $8/$16 win on the 1st of the month – and then I absolutely annihilated that new record just a couple weeks later when I had this session:

For the year, I am now running at:
1.68 BB/HR in $8/$16 LHE
1.04 BB/HR in $4/$8 LHE
1.3 BB/HR in all limit games

In April, I will be making a 4 or 5 day trip to Pendleton, Oregon for the Spring Round Up – a tournament series I haven’t attended since Fall 2012 and never with a sizable bankroll – and I am currently planning on playing the $225 O8 and $225 H.O.R.S.E. tournaments. I may play a few other events, but I’ll likely focus on cash games the rest of my stay. Also, anyone interested in buying up some of my WSOP action, I’m ready to start selling. You can e-mail me at maccent17@gmail.com or PM me on Facebook. I’m currently planning on playing the Casino Employee Event and the Colossal, but I will be there for at least a week and if things go really well, I would be interested in increasing my stay.

Here’s to more run good!

h1

Big Hero 6 (2014)

April 1, 2015

Starring: Ryan Potter, Scott Adsit, Jamie Chung
Director: Don Hall (Winnie The Pooh), Chris Williams (Bolt)

“On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your pain?”

Bottom Line: Big Hero 6 is solid animated entry from Disney that explores the world of San Fransokyo – a hybrid of the two obvious cities that is beautifully rendered here – and a group of young, genius-level student/inventors. At it’s core, it’s a film about the relationship between brothers Hiro and Tadashi, tragically cut short by a fire and explosion at a convention, but continued on through Tadashi’s invention Baymax – a loveable, inflatable robot programmed to serve as a walking, talking first aid kit and medical assistant. Watching Baymax and Hiro bond – similar to John Connor and the T-800 20 years ago – is the highlight of the film. When Hiro bands the group of inventors together to form a high-tech superhero team, things get a bit less focused and therefore less interesting. The film works better as a character study than as the superhero team origin story that it actually is. As is, I thought Big Hero 6 was a fun movie that lost a bit of steam in its climax.

Replay Value: Not the keeper I was expecting it to be.
Sequel Potential: Lots of potential for further adventures here.
Oscar Potential: Winner of the Best Animated Feature Oscar – but really not even as good as The Lego Movie, which wasn’t even nominated.

Grade: 6/10 (Recommended)