Change Your Image
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjQ4MTY5NzU2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDc5NTgwMTI@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
Agedapocolypse
Reviews
The Interview (2014)
Well worth a viewing or two.
I will have some spoilers. There is a lot of criticism for this movie in that it was so horribly written and executed or that the acting was bad, but I feel people are being too nit-picky about the movie. It's a comedy, it's not supposed to be taken seriously in any sense of the word. This movie was very funny because while it does make fun of some of the outrageous beliefs that North Korea is said to have towards their leader(s), it also makes a valid point when Kim Jung Un talks to Franco about how he actually never saw any cruelty taking place when he was physically in N. Korea, but he still pushed the envelope that the regime was oppressing people. There was a US reporter going through the Soviet Union and parts of Ukraine when they were accusing Stalin of committing genocide against the people of Ukraine during the Holodomor, but the reporter never actually saw any starving people although he did say he saw tonnes of food sitting in piles rotting and not being sent to the people of Ukraine to aid the hungry (identical to the movie where their trip was planned perfectly to show them around, but never showing them anything that wasn't authorized). This movie is very funny, but it's not like in other movies where every statement is a laugh or something. There's build-up to the laughs and it makes them all the more rewarding instead of having a chuckle at everything being said and done so you become desensitized to the humor. If you know anything about International Politics/Relations or the Theory on War as an area of study, you'd know there is an entire part of them that is dedicated to understanding why countries go to war and they try to explain why so many countries go about saber-rattling (North Korea with Kim Jung Il/Un). The Interview actually does a very good job at showing how international criticism has led Kim Jung Un to pushing for nuclear war. Being a dictator, Kim Jung Un has to follow very closely to Machiavelli's *The Prince* in that it's great if you can get people to like you, but if you can't then you'd best make sure they fear you. That has been how dictators have kept their power throughout the millennium and so you can see that the pushing and prodding of North Korea can force its ruler's hand because if they are seen as weak, they will be ousted. Whether it's by the people or someone that works for them who is willing to try and grab a higher office. One of my favorite parts about this movie is how King Jung Un was "seducing" Franco, the media, so that he can have a 'fair' interview about his nation and Franco buys into it all because of the little fanfare he is given upon his arrival (ignoring Rogan telling him that it's all lies as per what other parts of the media say). I saw this as a wonderful play on how the media can be twisted by just about anyone and then they go out and spread that twisted "truth" they were shown. Not to mention that it also reminds me of Jane Fonda and her time with the VietCong as a media starlet to tell people the US was evil for what it was doing to those 'wonderful' people. From reviews I have been reading this movie got a lot of bad criticism, but I feel it was a very well done movie and so far my favorite of Seth Rogan's outside of *This Is The End*. It is very entertaining. Is it the greatest movie of the year? No, of course not. Then again, when is any comedy the best movie of the year? Being what it is (a comedy), it was very good and in no way disappointing. The only reason this movie didn't get a 10/10 by me is because Rogan didn't get his happy ever after in the end after he sacrificed his appendages for a cause that wasn't his.
Saints and Soldiers: The Void (2014)
An entertaining movie worth the watch
For those looking for a massive budget film like Fury, this is not it. It has some very good Hellcats and Pzs and it was a real good show of how to take down a tank. I enjoyed the movie for the most part, but there were some pet peeves that got to me. Everyone on the American's side not using a sub-machine gun seems to be using an M1 Carbine or maybe an M1 Garand. If they were fighting on the front lines, someone would have been using a M1903 Springfield since it was the primary weapon given to those on the front until 1944. It's nothing major, but a little peeve I had that does nothing to detract from the rest of the movie. Another thing that sort of ground my gears was how slow the Hellcat seemed to move at all times. It was the fastest tank of WWII and one of the most maneuverable (the turret was painstakingly slow though and they kept that), so Hellcat drivers would drive like mad to get shots at the German tanks' weaker side and rear armor. They would not try to actively go head- to-head against any tank due to the fact that 1-inch armor is not very protective and so moving was its only means of surviving. Add into that that the 76mm cannon on the Hellcat was very finicky about penetrating the front of the Panzers and Tigers, they tried to avoid frontal assaults as much as possible. The later Panthers were impossible for a Hellcat to penetrate from the front because their armor was simply too thick so that meant having to move for side/rear shots. All in all, these are just my personal pet peeves and I find the movie to be very good and beyond my expectations.