Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

Rating:	★★★★★
Category:	Books
Genre:	Science Fiction & Fantasy
Author:	J.K. Rowling

I started reading the “Harry Potter” series when there were just three books out. I had heard how this book about a boy wizard was really cool, and that once I started reading it, I wouldn’t be able to stop. Well, during a brownout one afternoon in the early 2000’s, I began to read “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone”. True enough, I couldn’t put it down. I think it took me just a little over a week to run through this book as well as “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets” and “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban”. Author J.K. Rowling had opened up a world of wizards and goblins, hippogriffs and centaurs. This was not your ordinary children’s book.

As time went on, Harry matured in every book and we, his audience, saw him grow up. Even as the movies featured Daniel Radcliffe wearing Harry’s glasses and robes, we were allowed to attach a real face to Rowling’s words. When it was then announced that there would be 7 books in this series, anticipation for every succeeding volume grew. More people got on the Potter bandwagon, and those of us who were there early would brag that we were ahead of the curve. Still, one couldn’t help but feel a tinge of sadness when Rowling completed “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows”. For her series finale, J.K. pulls out all the stops, resolves every hanging plotline, and gives us the final fate of Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Lord Voldemort.

SPOILER WARNING!!! I might as well put this up now because I don’t think I can avoid writing any spoilers from here on. “Hallows” ties in directly with volume 6 of the series so it is advisable that you read “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” again right before reading volume 7. After the death of Hogwarts Headmaster Albus Dumbledore, the wizarding world is in a state of panic. Lord Voldemort has made his full-fledged return and is consolidating his power. Nothing would give him greater pleasure than the capture and eventual death of Harry Potter. Of course, Harry and his friends are a clever lot and they aren’t going to go down without a fight.

Within the first few chapters, a few of Harry’s friends have already been killed, namely Hedwig his owl and the auror Mad-Eye Moody. Although Ron’s brother Bill Weasley is able to marry Fleur Delacour and give some measure of normalcy, everything is torn asunder when Voldemort’s Death Eaters attack. Forced to run and complete the task Dumbledore left to him, Harry must find the Horcruxes that hold parts of Voldemort’s power. Even with Ron and Hermione by his side, the task seems impossible and tedious yet with a little luck, and with some help from unlikely sources, the trio gain hope.

Though they are betrayed by Luna Lovegood’s father Xenophilius (since Luna was captured and only the capture of Harry would gain her freedom), Harry and friends learn of the Deathly Hallows. This opens their eyes to another of Voldemort’s plans to cheat death and be the most powerful wizard ever. With a battle to end all battles within Hogwarts itself, Harry must summon the courage and the wisdom necessary to defeat the Dark Lord while also saving his friends and the wizarding world in the process.

As arguably the most anticipated book in history, “Hallows” proves to be a fun, frenetic, and fearful finale to Rowling’s Potter adventures. Most of the books leaves you guessing, whether it be “Who died?” or “Where is the next Horcrux?” or “Was Dumbledore more sinister than we thought?” With all those mysteries as part of the plot, Rowling masterfully keeps the reader glued to each page, hurriedly going from chapter to chapter while hoping that Harry and his friends figure everything out before it’s too late. I had once feared that Dumbledore’s death would render this final volume as anti-climactic but instead, Rowling makes the late headmaster’s mysterious past another delight that we must slowly unravel. The result is that where once we saw a grandfatherly genius of a wizard, we end up seeing a once-ambitious, still brilliant, yet all-too-human man.

Rowling doesn’t kill off characters just because she feels like it. You clearly feel pain when each of these people (some we’ve known since book 1, others we meet right here in “Hallows”) meet untimely ends. Particularly painful for me were the deaths of Fred Weasley, Remus Lupin, and Nymphadora Tonks. Fred, after all, was one of the eternally joking Weasley twins, a staple of the series since “Philosopher’s Stone”. Lupin and Tonks were finally married and just had a son, yet they sacrificed themselves so that little Teddy Lupin might actually have a future. These deaths make Harry’s final confrontation with Voldemort all the more dramatic, particularly after Rowling shows that the Dark Lord’s hubris and arrogance all serve to be his undoing.

The epilogue, set 19 years after the fall of Voldemort, gives us readers a proper farewell to Harry and his merry group. It is the quintessential “happy ending” as Harry is married to Ginny, just as Ron and Hermione have wed. I found it particularly poignant that Harry’s second son was actually named “Albus Severus”, named after one wizard whom Harry always admired, and another whom he actually loathed. I always felt that there was more to Severus Snape than met the eye, and his thoughts in the pensieve proved me right. I can’t wait to see the great Alan Rickman play him once this final novel is translated to film.

And so, we bid a sad farewell to Harry Potter and his magical adventures. From a scared boy of 11, we see him mature, to even become Head Auror at the Ministry of Magic at the age of 36. “The Boy Who Lived” proved that he indeed was the hero that everybody hoped he would become, as he was the one wizard who toppled “He Who Must Not Be Named”. As I closed the pages on “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows”, I was very satisfied with the ending, yet, like most everyone who has followed Harry from the start, there was a tinge of sadness in the air. Such is the feeling we inevitably have when one great series comes to its end, and it is the same feeling we have when we bid goodbye to good friends.

The Simpsons Movie

Rating:	★★★★
Category:	Movies
Genre:	Animation

It has been called a movie 18 years in the making. Ever since they debuted on TV in 1989, Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa, and Maggie established themselves as the funniest, most dysfunctional, yet most loving family on the tube. Now, they’re finally hitting the big screen with “The Simpsons Movie”. So, does it merit the long wait?

As has been the case in their long-running series, this film revolves around Homer Simpson (Dan Castellaneta) and his family bumbling their way through life in America. In this instance, Homer finds himself saving a pig from being killed, then proceeds to cause the death of the Springfield river by dumping pig excrement while rushing off for free donuts. Along the way, Lisa (Yeardley Smith) meets an Irish boy who’s as big an environmentalist as she is, Bart (Nancy Cartwright) thinks about moving to the Flanderses, and Marge’s (Julie Kavner) patience with Homer is tested like never before when the family is forced out of Springfield and head to Alaska. Yeah, I know it sounds ridiculous, but can we expect anything less from “The Simpsons Movie”?

I’ve been a fan of “The Simpsons” as far back as I can remember. I have the season recap books (from season 1 leading all the way to season 14), and I’ve watched a whole plethora of the series over the years. Like many, I’ve become familiar with Homer’s brood, as well as what seems to be the thousands of Springfield residents and guests. From Professor Frink to Comic Book Guy, Krusty the Clown, Cletus the Yokel, Mayor Quimby, Carl and Lenny, Bumblebee Man, Kent Brockman, Mr. Burns and Smithers, and so many others, these have been characters that have made “The Simpsons” the longest running situation comedy in history. Therefore, when the Simpson family finally got themselves a movie, I was eagerly anticipating it. Now that I’ve seen it, I found myself enjoying it, yet at the same time feeling a bit disappointed.

Call it having high expectations, call it expecting too much from one of your favorite TV shows. Call it what you will, but I really expected more from this film. Sure, it was great seeing Ralph Wiggum tooting along to the classic 20th Century Fox theme and logo before the film, and it was cool to see each character painstakingly drawn with shadows and with more depth than before. Simpsons creator Matt Groening, producer James L. Brooks, and the rest of their cadre of writers have written so many great episodes through the years that I fully expected them to hit a homerun with this motion picture. However, I must admit that I was a bit underwhelmed.

SPOILER WARNING!!! I don’t know, maybe I felt that the “giant dome” that Russ Cargill (voiced by Albert Brooks) and President Arnold Schwarzenegger (one of Harry Shearer’s many voices) placed around the environmental hazard known as Springfield was a wee bit over the top. Or maybe Homer actually uprooting the family and moving to Alaska was what got to me. It all just felt a bit forced since the filmmakers knew that they would be given more than just a half hour to tell their story.

Please don’t get me wrong, I still enjoyed watching this film and continue to be a “Simpsons” fan. It’s just that, after thinking it over, I felt that it was lacking. Maybe I was too much of a fan in the first place, that it left me looking for loopholes rather than enjoying the film for itself. If that’s the case, consider this review useless. I do hope that was the case, but I doubt it. Still, I remain a fan of the show and will continue to watch it whether they be new episodes or trusty old re-runs. “The Simpsons” is a television institution and I’ll always love it, movie or no movie.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Rating:	★★★★
Category:	Movies
Genre:	Action & Adventure

This isn’t the cute Harry Potter you first saw in 2001. The boy wizard played by Daniel Radcliffe returns to the big screen with “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix”. Based on J.K. Rowling’s novels, “Phoenix” is volume 5 in the seven-part saga that has enamored fans for nearly a decade. Just as the books have grown progressively darker after each volume, so have the films become gloomier as Harry and his friends have achieved puberty. It makes for an interesting subtext as Harry’s adolescence is shown amid the return of the dreaded Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes).

In his fifth year at Hogwarts School for Witchcraft and Wizardry, Harry Potter is troubled. Not only did he witness Voldemort’s murder of Cedric Diggory, he’s also attacked by Dementors outside the campus, in “the Muggle world”. Even his mentor, Prof. Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) is under scrutiny from the Ministry of Magic due to their own paranoia. When the Ministry appoints Dolores Umbridge (Imelda Staunton) to teach at Hogwarts, Harry and his classmates are reduced to learning basic defense, far less than what is needed to face the Dark Lord. Thus, Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson) convince Harry that he must teach them how to defend themselves. In doing so, they don’t just practice wizardry, they unwittingly start a rebellion which leads to a battle that will ultimately seal the fate of someone close to Harry’s heart.

As each “Harry Potter” movie has been shown, each director has proceeded to place his respective stamp on his particular installment. For this film, director David Yates was tasked with compressing over 800 pages of source material into a two and a half hour picture. It was no easy task, and fans of the books will undeniably point out the disappearance of the Quidditch matches as well as greater explanation behind Dumbledore’s Army and the gathering of Voldemort’s Death Eaters. Since I last read the novel version of “Phoenix” over two years ago, I was still surprised with how some scenes came across on film. Still, even as Jo and I filled in the blanks on how some scenes progressed, I couldn’t help but wonder how non-Potter fans would react to those same scenes. Something tells me they may end up more puzzled than enamored.

Undoubtedly, Radcliffe and his crew have taken this acting thing quite seriously since they started. With more depth to their acting comes a sense of desperation and anxiety as the shadow of Voldemort slowly rises once again. Surprisingly enough, it was a newcomer to the series who steals the scenes where she is in. Evanna Lynch was perfect as the eccentric Luna Lovegood and her portrayal really does do justice to Rowling’s original idea. If not for Cho Chang (Katie Leung) and Ginny Weasley (Bonnie Wright), one would think that Lynch’s Luna might have a shot at stealing Mr. Potter’s heart.

It really was a treat to see Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) interact with Harry for longer stretches. SPOILER ALERT!!! Thus it was even more painful when Sirius is taken away at film’s end. In that sense, Yates succeeds in capturing the essence of the novel and translating it onscreen. Still, I found myself yearning for longer scenes to capitalize on Oldman’s talent and mesh that with Radcliffe’s rising acting ability. END OF SPOILER ALERT!!!

Despite these drawbacks, I still feel that “Phoenix” has been the best book-to-film translation of a Potter novel so far. When the Order comes to recruit Harry and flies across London, you get the same sense of awe as in Disney’s classic “Peter Pan” when Peter first took the kids to Neverland. The culminating fight scene at the Ministry of Magic is the closest we’ve gotten yet to a “Star Wars-type” of fight between wizards and witches. For this scene alone, the movie is a winner. To see Voldemort and Dumbledore throw down like the bad asses they are was a great adrenalin rush that I felt cemented this film’s coolness factor.

I’ve come to realize that rarely are these Potter films as good as their original source materials have been. That being said, I still feel that “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix” is the best of the five Potter movies to date. The combination of darker shades, deeper story, and underlying dread all add to this film’s mystique and gives me hope that when “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” comes out next year, that film will be just as good if not better.

Prime Time

This is actually Convoy, the Japanese name of Optimus Prime

One of my favorite toys as a kid was the old Optimus Prime toy from "The Transformers" series. My dad got me this around 1985 and it was one of the few toys I kept when we moved houses in 1991. Now that "Transformers" is a blockbuster live action movie, my original Optimus just got cooler. I even bought a new Optimus so I could compare. After 22 years, it's still one of the coolest cartoon characters ever!

Bobby

Rating:	★★★★
Category:	Movies
Genre:	Drama

He was part of royalty. Where his brother had fallen, he was supposed to pick up the baton and continue the family tradition. There was so much hope when he thrust his hat into the 1968 presidential campaign that people were expecting a landslide win once the primary was over. Yet on June 5, 1968, that promise was extinguished and Robert F. “bobby” Kennedy was gone. In writer/director Emilio Estevez’s motion picture “Bobby”, we see how America dared to hope for a brighter future as Kennedy made a run for the White House. We are also shown how, in the blink of an eye, that hope was taken away.

Set in the historic Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, the ensemble cast represents different ethnic groups and social classes in the United States. This comes across as poignant when one considers how RFK gave such importance to race relations and civil rights during his lifetime. The cast includes veterans like Anthony Hopkins and Harry Belafonte, Sharon Stone and Martin Sheen, as well as relative youngsters like Shia LaBeouf, Nick Cannon, and Lindsay Lohan. With such an eclectic cast, it is quite a surprise that Estevez (more well-known for his acting as well as dad Martin and brother Charlie Sheen) was the driving force behind it.

It’s even more surprising that Estevez and his crew pull it off. Apparently, Martin’s love for RFK during the 60s also affected young Emilio, so much so that Emilio was obsessed with making this film. It took him seven years to get the film made and he had to sell some original artwork and other items to finance the picture. If there was ever a labor of love, this was it.

Make no mistake, “Bobby” is a fictional account of the events that occurred on the night of Bobby Kennedy’s assassination. The cast are mostly fictional characters, amalgamations of other people or prevalent notions of the time. Still, Estevez was able to come up with a film that captures the tensions, the anticipation, the fears, and the social upheaval of 1968.

It might be too much of a stretch to say that one man could have changed history or the way America would progress if he had lived. That hasn’t stopped fans and people who have always loved the Kennedys from thinking that way for over 40 years. Although Robert F. Kennedy never ascended to the White House like his brother John F. Kennedy did, his tragedy was in some ways more painful for the United States. People back then saw in Bobby a solid chance to fix the racial divide and heal the country over the disaster of Vietnam. When he was gunned down by Sirhan Sirhan, hope seemed to just dissipate for an entire nation.

Estevez’s cast runs the gamut from old hotel employees to LSD-using junkies and FBI agents, from has-been entertainers to baseball-loving Latino busboys. Each person reflected an archetype, an issue that America faced and RFK was supposed to change if he won the election. We aren’t shown what happened to them after the assassination, this was a fictional account after all. We are only left with the haunting audio of Bobby Kennedy’s speeches, echoing across time as a sad farewell to a time of innocence and of hope unfulfilled.

Live Free or Die Hard

Rating:	★★★★
Category:	Movies
Genre:	Action & Adventure

Some guys are just born unlucky. That was one of the things everybody thought about Bruce Willis’ iconic character of John McClane when the first “Die Hard” came out way back in 1988. McClane was the hero who just stumbled onto a terrorist plot, came out dirty and grimy, yet still managed to save his then-estranged wife (Bonnie Bedelia). Two sequels followed in 1990 and 1995 as each time, McClane was caught in a bad situation yet managed to come out saving the U.S. from terrorists. Now, almost 20 years after the first “Die Hard”, Bruce Willis returns to the role that made him a movie star. I was concerned that this might be another aging action star trying to make a comeback by returning to a role that he made famous, but I was still keen on seeing how the film would be.

In “Live Free or Die Hard”, McClane has become a senior New York police detective. His wife has left him, and he hardly has any interaction with his kids. When he’s assigned to fetch computer hacker Matt Farrell (Justin Long), he’s caught in a plot that sees hackers and techno-freaks sending the United States into a frenzy. The “fire sale” plans to bring down the economy and send America back to the Stone Age through computers. Of course, the terrorists didn’t count on John McClane.

Most everyone thought that Bruce Willis was way past reprising the John McClane character. After all, he had lain dormant for over a decade already and Willis wasn’t getting any younger. However, it seems Willis was convinced he still had some kick left. This fourth installment of the franchise delivers the flat out big explosions, flying vehicles, and kick-ass action that the first three once gave us. To return to the action adventure genre meant that Willis had to compete with much younger stars and the fact that the explosions have progressively gotten bigger in part because of Willis’ first adventure in 1988. Still, with the genre seemingly getting stagnant, I wondered if it would take an old veteran to shake it out of the doldrums.

Lucky for us, Willis and his trademark smirk reminded us what good old fashioned blockbusters are all about. This is John McClane at his grimy, in-your-face, trash-talking best. I miss his interactions with actors like Reginald VelJohnson and Samuel L. Jackson in the first films, but Justin Long is funny enough that his exchanges with Willis come across as more than mere father-son ribbing. A nice cameo by Kevin Smith helps the humor quotient as well. Perhaps my main beef with “Live Free” is that villain Thomas Gabriel (Timothy Olyphant) just didn’t seem sinister enough. Give me Alan Rickman or Jeremy Irons any day, because Olyphant was like your typical run-of-the-mill actor who just happened to play a villain. He just lacked the creepiness of the other big bads in the series.

For the most part, the film was fast-paced with the expected explosions and fight scenes placed right where you expect they should be found. Maggie Q as the evil Mai Lihn gave us a view of what a female Terminator from Asia might look like as she proceeded to open a can of whoop ass on McClane. I for one think she was an even better villain than Gabriel was. It was an interesting plot device to use a technological attack to bring America to its knees, yet I couldn’t help but feel that this has been used before. I guess we should just be thankful that Willis even agreed to do another “Die Hard” in the first place, but there were times when I felt this film lacked the John McTiernan directorial touch that was in the first and third films. Len Wiseman (who directed the “Underworld” films) lacked enough oomph to push this film as far as it could go.

Jo told me that she thought the ending was a bit anti-climactic and I tend to agree. I won’t spoil that here for you, but with all the buildup and action in the first three quarters of the film, I was expecting a bigger pay off with the conclusion. Still, I can’t say I didn’t enjoy seeing old man Willis still chugging along with all the dirt and grime we’ve seen him put on as every “Die Hard” film progresses. But in the end, I believe it could have been done better.

Hot Fuzz

Rating:	★★★★
Category:	Movies
Genre:	Action & Adventure

It’s been argued for the past couple of years that there have been too many action movies with big explosions. Purveyors of this genre include directors Michael Bay, John Woo, Tony Scott, and Joel Schumacher, as well as producers Jerry Bruckheimer and Joel Silver, and Hollywood superheroes such as the Governator, Sylvester Stallone, Steven Seagal, Will Smith, and many, many more. With all of the explosions and grisly ways these action stars dealt death in films, it seemed that the newest flick was just trying to outdo the previous one, plot be damned. How then do we describe the little flick titled “Hot Fuzz”?

Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is London’s most prolific police officer. His arrest record is 400% higher than any of his contemporaries. In fact, he’s so good that he’s making his bosses look bad. Thus, he’s promoted to sergeant but reassigned to the countryside, in Sandford. Here, the crime rate is low but the accident rate is surprisingly high. For a small town, Angle starts noticing that they have some rather large secrets. Partnered with the overeager Danny Butterman (Nick Frost), Angel tries to solve a series of murders in the village, all while trying to prove Sandford isn’t as clean as people would have you believe.

Director Edgar Wright re-teams with Pegg three years after the huge success of their horror comedy “Shaun of the Dead”. If “Shaun” was their tribute/satire of horror movies, “Hot Fuzz” is their love letter to the big budget blockbusters which most of us grew up watching with a decidedly English slant. Nick Angel is an over-the-top portrayal of the supercops in those films, someone so superhuman that when he interacts with regular people, everyone sees him as odd. It’s Frost’s Danny who serves as the audience’s reference point, after all, he’s the one who has a mundane life and who longs to have some excitement like he’s seen in the movies.

Wright’s quick editing mixed with graphic shots and witty dialogue keep one on edge when taking in “Fuzz”. With a great cast of veteran actors like Timothy Dalton and Jim Broadbent (and blink-and-you’ll-miss-them cameos from Cate Blanchett and director Peter Jackson), Wright seems to now have a bigger budget at his disposal than in previous works. The humor, though very dry and British, is quite funny and hits at the right spots. The action and the whodunit mystery are necessary elements to push the story forward and none of them are sacrificed in favor of other elements.

In crafting a film tribute to Hollywood’s action monsters, Wright, Pegg and company have come up with something uniquely their own. Though not working with as big a budget as those blockbusters, the end results is a funny movie with sharp dialogue, great action scenes, and an actual plot that you oftentimes wished the Hollywood equivalents had in the first place.

Transformers

Rating:	★★★★★
Category:	Movies
Genre:	Action & Adventure

For a kid growing up in the 1980s, there was probably nothing cooler than playing with robots. When these robots could actually transform into vehicles, guns, cameras, etc, the coolness factor went up by a factor of 50. “Transformers” was one of the best cartoon series of the decade, and it gave thousands of kids the unbridled happiness of seeing giant robots transforming into everyday things while trying to conquer or defend the Earth. The toys were just as cool as the cartoon if not more so. Thus, when rumors first hit of a live action “Transformers” movie being made, there were a lot of varied reactions.

Some were excited at the prospect of the heroic Autobots and evil Decepticons actually being rendered beside normal human actors. After all, today’s movie-making technology could possibly finally make that scenario a reality. However, there were also those who wondered out loud if their childhood memories might be tainted by Hollywood tampering with these great robotic icons. Producer Steven Spielberg was a popular choice of course, but director Michael Bay left “Transformers” fans with a bit of a bad taste in their mouths. This is of course the same Michael Bay who gave us explosive testosterone-fests like “The Rock” and both “Bad Boys” films… as well as stinkers like “Pearl Harbor”. I’m glad to report that for his version of “Transformers”, Bay redeems himself.

Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) is a geeky guy who finally convinces his dad to buy him a car. With their meager savings, they get a beat-up, used 1978 Camaro. Sam starts noticing strange things about his car (including changing radio stations automatically to set the mood for him) but isn’t prepared when the yellow car actually transforms into a giant robot. Sam then finds himself being hunted by another robot disguised as a police car as he and friend Mikaela (Megan Fox) meet more robots who have been sent to Earth to both protect humans, stop the evil Decepticons, and destroy a cosmic device known as “the Allspark”.

I’ll say it now and I will keep saying it: “Transformers” was very, very, very cool. There is no other way to say it. This is the film I and my fellow fanboys have been waiting over 20 years to see hit the big screen. Bay didn’t overextend himself with the action scenes and the plot actually moves at a fast pace. Actors like LaBeouf, Fox, Josh Duhamel, Tyrese Gibson, Jon Voight, and Anthony Anderson do enough while they are onscreen, but they are keenly aware that the real stars of this film are the Transformers themselves. A big part of what made this film work was getting original Optimus Prime voice actor Peter Cullen to reprise his role. Hearing Cullen’s voice coming from Prime’s ultra-cool CGI-body gave a lot of credibility to the film, and he looked awesome too!

Though I was among those who were apprehensive about Prime as a blue Peterbilt truck with red flames, I was completely swept up in seeing Prime, Megatron, and the rest of the Transformers moving and interacting with each other, as well as the humans. The animation was seamless, and the gears that were constantly in motion made you believe these robots could actually exist and work in this day and age. Though Sam and Prime provide crucial to the story, it is Bumblebee (voiced by Mark Ryan) who steals the movie. Therein lies the secret of Bay, and screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman: they made you care about Bumblebee and his fellow Autobots like they were living, breathing human beings.

The premise of alien robots trying to conquer Earth while having the ability to change into CD players, cellphones, or stealth fighters is really out of this world. However, that’s why the old “Transformers” cartoon and comics worked in the first place. In the realm of science fiction, anything is possible. To finally be able to translate all of what we grew up with to a three-dimensional computer-generated character left me breathless at certain points of the movie. Indeed, when Prime and company first show up and change from their vehicle modes, all I could recall saying was “Cool!”

This film was so cool that it got me to dust off my classic Generation One Optimus Prime toy (actually the Japanese variant known as “Convoy”) from his box and play with one of my favorite childhood toys. I’m even thinking of going out and buying the new version of Optimus Prime being sold at toy stores today! The old toys with the tagline “More than meets the eye” promised us almost two toys for the price of one, so the new ones have to live up to that. If this film is any indication, “Transformers” are going to be a successful film franchise for the foreseeable future, and I couldn’t be happier.