Virtue Is Knowledge . com
A Dialog on the Meaning of Excellence (Movie Reviews, Philosophy, Poetry, Guns, Guitars, Computers, etc.) with Brad Newton.

Virtue Is Knowledge . com

The Crazies: Must be something in the water.

March 2nd, 2010 . by Brad Newton
George Romero is apparently remaking all his old movies for a new generation. I will take the cynical view that making money is easier than taking a chance on a new movie. I have yet to see the original 1973 version (I just added it to my Netflix cue) and am interested in making a comparison once I do. This a rather standard government lets something bad out and has to clean it up story and the only questions are who survives and how long it takes. This is slasher type stuff and the only thing you wonder about is how gruesome the next guy or gal’s demise will be. There is little suspense and we find out very early what is going on. Most of the movie is just our lead characters dealing with crazy after crazy and having fewer and fewer characters left. Will our hero and heroine survive? Will the crazy menace be contained? Will the government do the right thing? Will I spend money on the next movie with this same premise? I don’t know, maybe.

Cop Out: Not a homerun, a solid double maybe a triple.

March 2nd, 2010 . by Brad Newton
Kevin Smith fans might think it a bit timid and some folks will think it too raunchy. Either perspective is probably right. I would have liked some edgier material and thought some of the potty humor a bit boorish. Nevertheless, I thought Cop Out was an OK buddy film with some funny bits and some not so funny bits. Bruce Willis can do comedy and Tracey Morgan is very good and really carries this film. His skills are lost on the small screen. His facial expressions are some of the best parts of the movie. The chemistry is pretty good and both play off each other well. Willis is the straight-man or Abbott to Morgan’s Costello. Seann Thomas Scott adds a third dimension and his scenes are probably the best in the movie. For Smith this is an attempt at a real mainstream type comedy and he largely succeeds. It is entertaining mostly and there is some over the top raunch that you would expect, but overall it is rather tame and you wish Smith would let it all out with Willis and Morgan. It would be risky, but could have been brilliant. We’ll never know. Maybe there are some cut scenes that will show up in an unrated version down the road. Hopefully this will get Tracey Morgan exposed as a real screen talent and we’ll see him more on the big screen.

Shutter Island: Scorsese, Kingsley, Dicaprio…oh my!

March 2nd, 2010 . by Brad Newton
Martin Scorsese knows how to make a movie. He has a huge respect for the work and it appears, the audience. Actors want to work with him and he gets consistently great performances from them. Shutter Island is a classic psychological thriller. It is not a horror flick. It draws the viewer in and keeps you guessing throughout the movie. You think you have it figured out and it changes. The performances are  brilliant. Kingsley as the head psychiatrist and Max Von Sydow as another doctor are wonderful. Dicaprio is very good, he continues to suffer from boyish good looks, which makes it hard to accept him in mature roles. The setting of a 1950′s asylum is beautifully rendered and the costumes are delightful. The music is great, as in all Scorsese films, and is skillfully used to add tension much more subtly than modern horror movies. There are images that may be disturbing to some folks, especially the back story scenes of Dicaprio liberating a concentration camp in WWII. Nothing to me was gratuitous and was meaningful in establishing context and history of the character. You can’t say very much about the movie without spoiling things for those who’ve yet to see it. See it you should. Scorsese has another hit in a genre you don’t associate with him. A fine film that is engaging and entertaining and makes you think in very Kafkaesque ways.

From Paris with Love: The Bourne Identity meets Pulp Fiction.

February 24th, 2010 . by Brad Newton

While not quite as good as either, this movie is solid action fun. The plot has has enough twist to keep it interesting and Travolta is very good as the manic ‘operator’ who specializes in wet work. Jonathan Rhys Meyers is the wannabe agent who gets more than he bargained for when assigned to help Travolta on a mission. The Paris background is not bad to look at and there is enough action, gun play, and violence to keep most males entertained throughout the movie. I would wish the gun handling was more realistic, but this is an over the top caricature of cloak and dagger work and realism doesn’t sell tickets. There is the obligatory car chases and explosions of course, drug cartels and bad guys of every ethnicity. You’ve seen it before and you’ll probably see it again. If it’s done well with some witty dialog and memorable characters, then I’ll spend the money and enjoy the ride.


The Wolfman: Lon Chaney Jr. where are you?

February 22nd, 2010 . by Brad Newton

Part costume drama and part horror flick, this movie is entertaining and pays homage to those great horror films of the 1930′s and 40′s. The first shot we see of Benicio del Toro resembles Lon Chaney Jr. to a remarkable degree. The story is vaguely similar to the 1941 original in that there is a gypsy camp (but no Bela Lugosi or Maria Ouspenskaya) and Larry (or Lawrence) Talbot gets bitten by a werewolf. The real homage is to the makeup. The original Wolfman is so distinct to those of us who were terrified by it as kids in late night reruns that anything too different would spoil it for us. Benicio’s wolfman is updated, but in the vein of the original. The transformation scenes parallel the classic, and add some new technology to make it somewhat more realistic. Why Sir Anthony Hopkins is in this I can’t explain. As the father, he takes the plot wildly out to left field and it fails for me in that sense. If you have no knowledge of the original, then this may make no difference to you. The gore and violence of modern movies do not make them scarier. What they did 70 years ago with lighting, sound, and camera angles created more tension than we see today. I liked this Wolfman, but there really is only one and that will always be Lon Chaney Jr.


Crazy Heart: Oscar worthy? I don’t think so, but I don’t get to vote.

February 22nd, 2010 . by Brad Newton

This is a very good movie. It was even better and more original when it was Tender Mercies (1983) and Robert Duvall gave an Oscar winning performance. Jeff Bridges does a great job and is worth a nomination to be sure. These small character studies are not big money makers. Duval was also listed as a producer and had a cameo to add some more star power to the mix. The big surprise was Colin Farrel as a country music star. A small role and he seemed a bit out of place. Still that shows that this is an acting movie and actors like good roles and working with good actors. We see these riches to rags to riches stories and we like seeing people redeemed and getting their act together and this is a worthy production. The music and soundtrack are wonderful. Homage is paid to legends  of country music and the educated will hear a snippet of the great Townes Van Zandt which is more than fitting as his tale didn’t have such a positive ending. Does the Dude deserve an Oscar? Maybe, maybe not, but we can appreciate these performances and this fine film.


Edge of Darkness: Nothing edgy here.

February 11th, 2010 . by Brad Newton

Do we ever get tired of big evil companies and government conspiracies? I don’t know, but Edge of Darkness is mostly a retread of any number of political thrillers like The Parallax View, Three Days of the Condor, Enemy of the State, and a host of others. In this one Mel Gibson dons a wicked Baaastin accent and does his best to unravel the mystery of his daughters death. You’ve seen it all before. The car chases, the killing of everyone connected, corrupt politicians, shadowy government entities etc, etc, etc. So, does this measure up to say Frank Sinatra in The Manchurian Candidate? No, but it’s not so bad either. Gibson does OK as the grieving and gritty detective. The weaselly villain is easy to despise and the action scenes are well done. The story is rather James Bondish and makes suspending disbelief  that more difficult. Mediocrity may rule these days, so Edge of Darkness fits right in.


Legion: What possessed me to see this movie?

January 30th, 2010 . by Brad Newton

Another end of the world flick. This time angels come to finish us off and there might be a story in there somewhere, but this movie misses on almost every level. I was tricked by the trailer, which is better than the whole movie. Whoever edited the trailer, should have done the whole movie. The collection of stereotyped characters was embarrassing. A black hoodlum, a white yuppie family, an old man who lost his faith?? Come on, show us some respect. And the setting for this morality play is a little diner in the desert called Paradise Falls. Not too subtle folks. Lots of guns, but no training for the actors, just never ending magazines as they shoot from the hip and hit what they want. The acting was OK. Kudos to Dennis Quaid and Charles Dutton for being able to do a take without laughing at themselves. It must have been difficult. Thankfully all the sinners are redeemed, usually by a gruesome death, and the film ends with a climactic angel vs. angel fight that they put a lot of effort in and apparently thought the audience would take seriously. I couldn’t. At least the human race was saved by the birth of a baby sometime around Christmas. I wonder if that is supposed to mean something? This may be a top contender for Rotten Tomatoes best of the worst.


The Book of Eli: Mad Max vs. King James.

January 17th, 2010 . by Brad Newton

It seems film makers are obsessed with the end of the world these days. Maybe with the stagnant economy folks like to see an even bleaker future than their own. If The Road was dark and colorless, then The Book of Eli is just black, and that’s not referring to Denzel Washington’s skin color. If Viggo had run into Denzel on the road, then maybe The Road would have been more entertaining. In this film Denzel is the drifter on a quest. He carries a book and his mission is to deliver it to some unknown enclave of humanity to the west. He is one badass road warrior and demonstrates it throughout the movie. He’s Rambo, Jason Bourne and Shaft all wrapped up in one. Gary Oldman is the villain and you can hardly find one better. His trademark psychotic laugh tells the story. He knows the power of the book. With the right words, he can takeover what little pockets of society remain. One man is ruthless, one might be called righteous and together that makes for conflict which advances the story along. The visuals are stark, nothing you haven’t seen before, color is deliberately muted or filtered. There may be a twist you didn’t expect or maybe you saw it early on. Denzel makes the movie because you believe his character even in an unbelievable time and place. The parables poor forth and you can pick them out yourself. Without Denzel’s performance, this would be just another end of civilization story like the the half dozen others this past year, but he and Gary Oldman carry it a cut above the standard fare and I thought it a rather enjoyable film and story.


Youth in Revolt: Teenage angst that’s not so revolting.

January 12th, 2010 . by Brad Newton

I had low expectations about this film and was very pleasantly surprised by the wit and humor. The offbeat characters and basically cameo performances by the likes of Jean Smart, Ray Liotta, Steve Buscemi, Fred Willard, Justin Long (I’m a Mac), etc. play off our sad hero Michael Cera wonderfully. It’s almost like a very disturbed Alice in Wonderland with all the bizarre characters. Cera plays dual roles as the dweeb and his alter ego Francois, the bad boy he thinks he wants to be. Portia Doubleday is his love interest and is adorable in a teenage psychotic way. What lengths he goes to to win her heart is the basis of the movie and it is sweet and funny and cynical and schizoid like most of us will admit our teen years were.I thought the film was well made and innovative in the use of animation at interesting points. The soundtrack is excellent and you may or may know the songs, but you think you do. This isn’t a Porky’s at all. It’s a smart inventive comedy that I enjoyed more than I thought I would.


Daybreakers: Don’t give up your night job.

January 10th, 2010 . by Brad Newton

What happens when vampires takeover? Well, just like humans they poorly manage resources and have trouble feeding themselves. Ethan Hawke is a reluctant vampire and is trying to find a substitute for blood. Willem Dafoe is a former vampire who found a way to reverse the vampirism in a most improbable way. Humans are in short supply and that sets the stage for all kinds of wacky vampire drama. Lots of time is spent on showing how vampires cope during the day and how society devolves when starvation threatens. Wooden stakes still work somehow when they pierce the unbeating heart and of course prolonged exposure to sunlight is a killer. Leaving behind the folklore problems, the story has some sense and the acting is good. Sam Neil is the head corporate vampire and capitalist villain. There is plenty of gore and action and some stupid attempts to startle you with bats aflying. Vampires smoke a lot too, I guess it can’t hurt them and what else are you going to do for an eternity? I get the point: dead white men are the real vampires and a socialist utopia would mean plenty of blood for everyone. Give me my stakes, garlic and holy water, I’m agoing hunting.


Favorite Tech and Gadgets of 2009

January 7th, 2010 . by Brad Newton

Here is some of the stuff I have used throughout 2009 and liked a lot. In no particular order…

ZOOM H2: a hand held recorder that I use to make recordings. It’ll record in WAV files and has multiple microphones for stereo and surround. It uses SD memory cards and does a good job. Great for noodling or recording riffs before you lose them. One downside is the USB 1.1 interface that is too slow and should have been 2.0.

DROBO: How I love the Drobo. Redundant expandable storage that is beautiful to look at. Right now I have 3 terabyte drives and one 750gb drive in it and have beau coup storage for all my music and other media.

Ipod Touch: 32GB model does everything I can think of. Games, photos, audiobooks, podcasts and tons of music. I hate trying to use it to surf, but when I need to connect it’s there and works.

FACEBOOK: Connecting with old friends is great. I have concerns with its privacy controls, but still think it the best social site out there.

Audible.com: I love books, but spend a lot of time in the car. I’m not sure I’m an aural info processor, so I use it for entertainment books mostly.

NetFlix: I’m using the watchnow feature for the most part and stream content to my TV using the Windows Media Center interface. I’m very close to ditching DirectTV and getting all my TV over the internet.

Windows 7: Latest and greatest Microsoft OS to date. It works and is still compatible with almost everything I have no matter how old.

BlueAnt Supertooth Light: Simple bluetooth speakerphone for the car. If your car doesn’t have a hands free system, you need to get one. This is stupid simple and inexpensive. New models have more features, but this is all I need. If you hold a phone while driving anymore, you are an IDIOT!


Sherlock Holmes: The case of trying to start a franchise.

December 31st, 2009 . by Brad Newton

Hyped as THE holiday premier blockbuster extravaganza is a high expectation to meet. Sherlock Holmes is entertaining and a decent movie, but falls short in the end. Had I seen it before Avatar and Up in the Air, I may have thought differently. Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law are very good in their roles and actually worked very well together. There was a chemistry that I didn’t quite expect and that really carried the film. The storyline was a bit over the top in the National Treasure sort of way that is distractingly unbelievable. Holmes’ powers of deduction are center stage and used for comic relief on occasion. The scenes of Elizabethan London were visually appealing and the costuming and set dressers deserve much credit for their work. Guy Ritchie knows how to put a movie together and seems to be doing some good work since the material girl is gone. The insinuation of a love interest for Holmes didn’t quite work for me and Rachel McAdams just didn’t come up to the level of Downey and Law. The Nefarious Moriarty is introduced as a shadowy figure and is clearly the basis for a sequel. The audience was enthusiastic and appeared to thoroughly enjoy the entire movie. I was hoping for a bit more. Nevertheless, Sherlock Holmes is worth seeing and it will probably be successful enough to spawn another adventure, if someone can manage to bring Law and Downey back together again.


Up in the Air: Depressingly humorous and an Oscar caliber performance.

December 31st, 2009 . by Brad Newton

Think of the most depressing and thankless job (besides your own), put George Clooney in it and you have a dark, dark comedy that will certainly get him an Oscar nomination. The key to this movie is the script. The dialog is so intelligent and clever, you can see yourself in the conversation. Clooney makes it even more natural with his talent. Smart films are not common these days and certainly not at the time of big holiday releases. The movie sets up a number of contrasts between youth and maturity, love/lust, compassion/callousness, alienation/inclusion, and we get a sense of the characters motivations for their particular viewpoints. Clooney is the centerpiece that you follow through a personal journey that is often funny, sometimes depressing, maybe heart wrenching, but always interesting. The supporting cast is great with Jason Batemen as the boss, Vera Farmiga as the romantic interest, and Anna Kendrick as the protegé. Clooney is consistently putting out very good work and I really hate him for his talent, smile and politics. If he continues to make quality films like this, I’ll overlook the other stuff.


My first “Assault Weapon”

December 29th, 2009 . by Brad Newton

Since gunpowder was discovered there have always been those who have tried to increase the firepower of weapons. With single shot weapons you had to increase the number of weapons, whether artillery or shoulder mounted musket/rifle, to increase the odds of causing casualties. (Lines of artillery or men shoulder to shoulder) You could add additional projectiles to the weapons at the expense of accuracy in an attempt to achieve the same thing. Canister and grape shot were used to great effect at close range in cannon and ‘buck and ball’ rounds were found to be of some use in muzzle loading long guns up through the Civil War period. Modern armies have experimented with multiple projectiles per round in small-arms to enhance hit potential. The goal has always been to send more “lead” downrange in the shortest period of time with some precision so as to be effective in either causing injury or disrupting the intentions of the enemy. To fulfill the need for firepower inventors have tried multiple barrels, multiple loads in one barrel, rotating barrels, the classic revolving cylinder and culminating in today’s magazine and belt fed weapons.

Today we see most militaries and security forces armed with the so-called “Assault Rifle” typified by the M4/M16 family and the many variations of the Kalashnikov AK series of rifles. These are magazine fed weapons usually capable of firing semi-automatic, automatic, or 3 round burst in the case of most of the US military issued rifles. These weapons typically fire a medium power round that is a compromise between power, recoil, and effective range. Civilian versions of these rifles are flying off the shelves of gunshops across the country and every good citizen should acquire one (or more) and support the rights of all law abiding persons to own the same. Now I have my ‘Black Rifle’ (an original Colt AR-15 sporter post ban w/ 16″ barrel sans flash hider and bayonet lug), but not everyone can afford these weapons and may find them politically incorrect for their neighborhood or jurisdiction. The ancestor of the assault weapon is still readily available and maybe even more practical for urban, suburban and rural environs.

Spencer Rifle
Spencer Rifle

One could say that the first truly practical assault rifles that saw relatively widespread use appeared during the Civil War. These were the Spencer and Henry repeating rifles. They were both lever actions and fired metallic cased rimfire rounds, but each operated a bit differently. The Spencer was loaded through the buttstock. To operate, the hammer was brought to half-cock, the lever brought down, forward and back which moved the .52 caliber cartridge from the magazine tube into the chamber, the hammer was brought to full cock and the trigger pulled. This could be done 7 times before reloading the magazine tube. The Spencer was famously tested by Abraham Lincoln who essentially forced a reluctant ordinance department to order significant numbers for Union troops, primarily cavalry units. The Henry was introduced in 1860 and bought in small numbers by the Union, but was an usually an individual purchase. Some units that had wealthy members or patrons outfitted their men with Henry rifles. At the time there was no weapon that could equal the sustained rate of fire of the Henry. It held 15 rounds under the barrel. It’s lever action cocked the hammer and moved a cartridge from the magazine tube into the chamber in one smooth motion. Pull the trigger and repeat until ammunition is exhausted. The Henry utilized a .44 caliber rimfire round that propelled a 200-215 grain bullet around 1000/fps and was considered somewhat anemic even in its own day compared to the rifled muskets of most regular troops, but it was effective enough at the ranges armies were engaged in during the Civil War. The Henry was the rifle “you could load on Sunday and shoot all week” and soldiers used to single shot muzzle loading muskets were quick to acquire these weapons whenever they could. Ammunition to feed these weapons were their major drawback and one reason why the ordnance department was hesitant to procure them in large numbers. There were already a myriad of weapons and calibers in the supply chain and new ones just added to the logistical problem.

Henry Rifle
Henry Rifle

After the Civil War the Spencer sort of faded away. With surplus Spencers on the market, new rifles didn’t sell and the Army went to single shot breechloaders converted from surplus muskets and eventually becoming the trapdoor Springfield. It’s action compared to the Henry was crude and when relying on civilian markets, crude rarely sells well. The Henry on the other hand fared much better. There seems to have been a steady demand for a reliable repeating rifle. Now the gun that really ‘won’ the West was the lowly shotgun and single shot hunting rifle as these were the most common weapons settlers possesed. Handguns were expensive luxuries and of limited use on a farm or ranch and a repeating rifle even more so. Still, there was a market and the well heeled lawman, cowboy or rancher would purchase quality firearms when they could. A shirt maker named Winchester was the largest investor in the Henry company and eventually took over. The Henry rifle was improved and became the classic Winchester lever action rifle. General Custer discovered the hard way that an enemy with superior numbers and significant numbers of Henry’s, Winchesters, and even some Spencers could over whelm  and wipeout even the most well trained and experienced cavalry unit foolish enough to split its forces and attack without proper reconnaissance.

Collectors will talk about various models and rare chamberings, the 1866, 1873, 1876, 1895, the 1 of 1,000, engraved by Tiffany, the take-down and trapper models, etc. Books abound and may spark your own desire to acquire or collect. But the quintessential Winchester has to be the 1894. It became available in many calibers, but is most remembered as chambered for the new smokeless powder powered round the 30-30 Winchester. Some have said more deer have been taken by Winchesters in 30-30 than any other rifle/caliber combination in history. Especially handy in the wooded Eastern US, the Winchester is a familiar sight during hunting season. The lever action rifle is a familiar weapon to almost everyone through the westerns we all watched all through our lives at the movies or on TV. They are not as ‘menacing’ as those black rifles and as sad as that thought is to some of us, the reality is that in some areas a Winchester or Marlin will draw no attention in a gun rack or cabinet, while an AR-15, M1A1, SKS or Romanian AK will label you a “gun nut” or “Rambo”.

Before I could afford an AR-15 system, I picked up the next best thing in my opinion, a poor man’s assault weapon in the form of a new Winchester 1894 chambered in .357 magnum. It is a “Trapper” model with a 16″ round barrel. Having several revolvers in .357/.38 special allows me to feed a number of guns with the same ammunition. This can be important in a zombie apocalypse and maybe even in a real world disaster/survival scenario. Being a newer Winchester (2000ish) it has the hideous cross bolt safety at the top rear of the receiver and is a side ejector, unlike the original 19th century Winchesters, which is useful if optics are to be used. Compared to my Colt AR-15 it is roughly the same overall length and both are in the 6-7 pound range depending on sights and ammo load. The 1894 will hold a good 10 rounds of the .38 special +P’s I carry in my revolvers and am fully confident they will do the job if I do my part out to football field distances. For backwoods travel I would certainly look at some heavy cast loads in .357 magnum. The 1894 is svelte and handy. It carries well and could be fitted with a sling if you wanted. Don’t get me wrong, given a choice I’ll grab my AR and bugout bag, but if I only had the Winchester, I wouldn’t feel much at a disadvantage. Sure you can pull the trigger faster on an AR, but only hits count and the first shot from either is going to come within an eye-blink of each other. Follow up shots will be slightly slower with the 1894, but with practice you can expect to achieve a

Winchester 1894 in .357 magnum

round per second AIMED fire. Watch a cowboy action match and you’ll see maybe 2-3 rounds per second hitting the targets with the lever guns from the top competitors. Keeping an AR fed is also easier. In a couple of seconds you can go from open bolt to fully charged with 20 or 30 round magazines. In a couple of seconds you can feed probably one round into the Winchester. So, you should treat the Winchester as  a shotgun when it comes to ammunition management. That means shoot one, load one whenever possible and top off at every opportunity. You and I are unlikely to encounter a situation where we will expend large numbers of rounds, but you don’t want to be the unlucky one to find yourself in such a circumstance. Practice keeping that tube filled.

Now with Winchester gone my Trapper has a little more value and I’m going to keep it. My Black Rifle may become an outlaw if certain political groups have their way and as I’ve explained the century and a half old design can still fulfill its defensive/survival role and I wouldn’t think I was under gunned in the least.

Zombies beware!


« Previous Entries Next Entries »