Thing is, there's *gratuitous* and *non-gratuitous* nudity.

The Terminator example? Of course I wouldn't go for the nudity. And I would probably avoid it specifically because of the nudity... I would conclude that the director probably felt he *needed* the nudity to draw people in, and that the story wasn't good enough to do so.

Eyes Wide Shut. I was upset they cut it in America. It was not just necessary to the story, but the orgy scene was absolutely shocking. The graphic nudity added an emotional impact, quite the *opposite* impact that most movies go for when including nude scenes!

The Reader is another recent example. I think the graphic sex scenes added to the emotional impact of the film, though to a far lesser degree than Eyes Wide Shut. But certainly that was an important aspect to the story.

Oh, I left out *stupid* nudity. That would be Titanic, and Kate Winslet taking off her top to illustrate her liberation. Yeah, instead of telling her fiance to go jump in the ocean, she shows her breasts (making all the men in the audience immediately think "oh she's liberated now!"). Good one, Cameron. Way to build a strong female role model.

-Pie

Twilight has a very, very, very specific audience target. And that audience really likes it. Everyone else doesn't get it, and it becomes easy to be a judgemental hater.

This is especially true when half the human race (the male half) doesn't relate... and a lot of *females* over 30 also don't relate. It's a *girly* movie... not "chick flick" but movie for girls.

I read the books and was actually disappointed by this revelation, since I read them in preparation to see the movie... but they convinced me otherwise, being male. And, yeah, I thought a lot of stuff was silly (the sparkle scene just killed me!). (However, the last book was supremely awesome.)

Anyway, all this from someone who is the in the Twi-hater demographic... just trying to say...

Right on! Movies should be fun! Forget the stupid haters. Dress up and enjoy!!

-Pie

The Matrix was as much cultural as Twilight, and I am surprised you missed that. It became something of an Internet "meme" to cry "Matrix: Reloaded sucked!" I even saw one site whose forums had a sticky at the top "No more Matrix threads." It was just all the cool kids hating the Matrix.

I very much enjoyed the final two installments, as they did exactly what needed to be done: took us to Zion, and fought the war outside.

Transformers II certainly made tons of money, but it's pretty much universally reviled. Ask five people you know if they liked it, and dollars to donuts you'll get "it sucked" type responses on five out of five. I've never experienced a phenomenon quite like it: a movie that made massive amounts of money because tons of people saw it, but it's virtually impossible to find someone who actually thought it was a decent movie!

I liked the movie when I saw it, but I had rock bottom expectations (and Bay even went BELOW those at times!). BTW, the Blu-ray is absolutely OUTSTANDING, one of the best out there in terms of Audio/Video quality. I recommend it even to people who didn't like the movie.

-Pie

Okay, negativity out of my system...

Zach's comment's are actually great. His genuine excitement is totally worth reading, totally contagious, so I highly recommend clicking the link.

Be great if he really did produce something worthy of a screenplay. I've liked all the T(n) movies, and another written by someone so into it sounds like it'd be awesome!

-Pie

"Whoa, so Joss Whedon is NOT really writing Terminator!"

That's the REAL headline.

Cinematical's title, and the whole article until almost the very last paragraph are about JOSS Whedon, when he as absolutely nothing to do with this. Nothing whatsoever. I even had to follow the link to verify this because it's not even clear in the article (due to it being so Joss-heavy).

I don't mind having a little fun with titles and articles, but this definitely went too far, where it's hiding the truth until the very very end. Much more sensationalism (hey! look at this article!!) than fun.

-Pie

Did anyone actually pay attention to how HARD the digital transition was? It was delayed so many times, it became a joke. And given that the last broadcast transition was from B&W to color, we have a long way to go before we have *another* transition. And recall that the converter box vouchers sold out twice before you want the government to subsidize/manage *another* "free" transition.

Add to this that all the locals WANT to broadcast OTA, and do not want to change (again), they will be lobbying against the FCC removing this capability. (Just take the number of local OTA channels you have and multiply by 100 -- which is still pretty short of the real total -- and you get how vast the deployment is.)

So when all's said and done, the poor (and my grandmother!) have nothing to worry about.

-Pie

Knowing doesn't deserve to be on this list.

First off, it wasn't *sold* as an apocalyptic film... I certainly had no idea that's what it was before seeing it. And you don't even realize that's what's happening until at least half way. It's more a mystery/thriller by far than a disaster movie. Heck the description called the apocalypse a *spoiler*!

And were they angels or aliens. This isn't Babylon 5 after all!

-Pie

Lektropaks has something similar, but just a single HDMI pass-thru and 5.1/7.1 analog out. You will need to put this between your PS3 and TV's HDMI in order for it to work (it has a bug in that it *only* acts as an HDMI pass-thru, not as both an HDMI end-point/pass-thru like most receivers). The advantage is that it's about $150 USD.

You definitely full resolution from your PS3, rather than buying a separate BD player. PS3 games actually include lossless audio: Drake's Fortune for example. So you want to take advantage of lossless for games too.

-Pie

Huh?

You don't like Scorcese's movies, but what does that have to do with ANTYHING? I mean... OMG! Michael Bay makes retarded movies! What right does HE have releasing one of the best Blu-rays this year in terms of Audio and Video quality??!?!?!

Sheesh.

Scorcese is a film maker, and he wants to see his movies reproduced with film-like quality. He even mentions reproducing grain as a good thing -- a lot of his films are grainy -- so he obviously knows what he's talking about. It's actually great to see a director passionate about creating a great home video experience that reproduces the intended look in a way that *nothing* has done before.

-Pie

First off, you could not see this in the theater for less than $24.95 unless you went by yourself. Anyone with a family, and it was a lot more than that.

However, that doesn't justify this price. You'd really have to be impatient to not wait the month for the 1080p high bitrate, lossless audio Blu-ray... at probably $20 to $22 from Amazon.

I'm glad to see the article recognizing that 720p is sub-par compared to 1080p. Keep fightin' the good fight! :-)

-Pie