The Star Wars Prequel Soundtracks

When the original Star Wars trilogy was re-released in its 20th Anniversary special edition in 1997, new 2-disc editions of John Williams's classic scores were released as well, featuring nearly every minute of music written for the trilogy. The three albums are amongst my favorite soundtracks, with the first pretty much accomplishing perfection. Ever since, these three albums have been released in different forms with different covers and booklets, but musically it's the same album.

The same cannot be said for the prequel trilogy. While the scores for the prequels aren't as magical as the original trilogy, they're still better than most scores out there. It's too bad theither available albums are disappointing.

The only one of the three prequels to receive more than one album is The Phantom Menace, but that's been pretty much a travesty. George Lucas did so much last minute editing of Episode I that there wasn't time for Williams to redo his score. As a result, it was chopped up and heavily edited to match Lucas's changes, particularly the third act which is a mess. There was such an outcry from fans for a more complete release that Sony (who owned the release rights at the time) released an "Ultimate Edition" of the score in 2000. The result; the score was presented as heard in the movie, complete with butchered edits. It was pretty much a mess.

The same editing technique was used for Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith, but nowhere near as exstensively.

Still, there has yet to be a really satisfying release of the scores for the prequel trilogy.

With the new trilogy about to debut, I think it's time for this to be rectified. I believe all three scores should be released as complete editions as recorded for the movies, especially The Phantom Menace, before George Lucas cut it up. I think it would be interesting to hear how John Williams originally intended his scores and a be get an idea of what the first movie was almost like.

I'm not sure who currently owns the rights to the prequel scores. I know 20th Century Fox still owns distribution rights for the original six movies but I thought I read somewhere that Disney now owns all the soundtracks. If so, hopefully someone at Disney sees an opportunity (especially for a nice profit) and pushes to release complete editions of John Williams's fantastic scores. That's something I'd happily pay to get!

I mean, come on! It's Disney! How could they not pass up an opportunity like that?

Is the Confederate Flag Racist?

One hundred and fifty years later, we're still fighting battles from the Civil War. The tragic shootings at a South Carolina church of nine African Americans at the hands of a white man touting white supremacy has reopened a debate that has plagued our country since it's darkest days more than a century ago. Though the first black President currently resides in the White House, racism is still a part of our society. As President Obama rightly pointed out, just because it's not as visible doesn't mean it's no longer there. After pictures of this young man were found where he poses with the Confederate flag, the debate has begun about whether or not it stands for racism.

This is a debate that I believe deserves mature and honest discussion. It's not as simple as black and white (pardon the pun) as there is plenty of grey on this issue. I've spent a lot of time pondering this question in recent weeks. As the Confederate flag is taken down from flying over the capital of South Carolina, I find myself agreeing with the decision though I don't believe the flag stands for racism.

At least, not originally. But over the years, the Confederate flag has been warped into a symbol of racism and white supremacy. When the stars and bars were first flown, they represented a country that wasn't fighting for slavery but for the power of individual states. While Lincoln and Republicans (in a case of historical irony) believed in the power of the federal government, southern states (ironically led by Democratss) believed that the states should be allowed to govern themselves. While this did entail being allowed to own slaves, the Civil War was about states rights more than anything else. The Confederate flag was a symbol of freedom. Indeed many brave men died fighting for their beliefs under that flag. Fighting for the Confederacy does not mean that they were racists.

But in recent decades, it's been used for other purpose. The flag that has flown over the capital of South Carolina was originally put up in 1962 as a way of protesting federal-enforced desegregation. Today the flag is used by KKK groups across the country and by people who view themselves as white supremists. Many African Americans are understandably justified in their feelings that the Confederate flag has become a symbol of racism, just as many Conservatives and southerners are also correct when argue that it's not. I think it's important to recognize that both sides are justified in their feelings even though they each allege that the other is wrong.

I personally believe that the Confederate flag should no longer be flown because it's been transformed into something that it's not. As long as it's embraced by those who wish to use it for their fight to dominate other races, it's no more appropriate for any state to use the Confederate flag than it is for them to use the German swastikah, itself viewed as a symbol of hate and genocide.

It's important to acknowledge it's place in our history as it originally represented the honorable notion that people have the right to question their government, a belief and freedom that the Southern States exercised during the Civil War. I'm saddened to say that the Confederate flag, which once represented freedom and liberty just as much as the American flag, has been reduced to a symbol of hate and racism.

I'm Being Sued By the IRS For $20,000

So I was spending time with Nicholas the other afternoon when I got a voice message from a phone number I didn't recognize; I'm being sued by the IRS, please call back right away. Now, I could easily have panicked and freaked out about this but I've been expecting this phone call for a few months now so was prepared on how I would handle it.

I called the number left for me in the message, which according to the caller ID on my phone was located in Texas. I get ahold of a man with a heavy Indian accent who gives me his name, Aaron Hall, and proceeds to give me his batch number as I hear numerous voices in the background in what sounds like a call center. After confirming my name, he looked up my record and then tells me that they are an auditing company. My tax records from 2008-2013 were audited and they discovered that there was a miscalculation on my income taxes; I owe $20,000 to the IRS who is now filing a law suit. "Aaron" give me an arrest warrant number, letting me know that if I don't comply immediately the warrant will be issued and a sheriff will be at my house to arrest me in 25-30 minutes.

I had two options; try to fight the law suit. This would result in my arrest, facing up to five years in prison and having my driver's lisence revoked. Option two; agree to make a payment through this agency who would then help me schedule a court date to try to work things out with the IRS.

What would you do?

I don't have $20,000. In fact, I don't think I've even come close to having half that amount! So I remained calm, even maintaining a bit of levity in my tone. I'd go as far to say I was somewhat jovial with Mr. Hall, with a southern accent so thick he sounds like he's from India. Keeping calm, I said to Mr. Hall from the Texas call center:

"I don't have $20,000, so my options are limited. But I'll tell you what I'll do...you can go ahead and issue your arrest warrant. I watched ABC News a couple months ago and I know that this is a scam."

The call was ended from the other end. I'm still waiting for the police three days later but I have a feeling they won't be knocking on my door any time soon.

You see, ABC News (amongst others) recently reported on this very scam a few months ago. The IRS does not have the authority to issue arrest warrants nor can they revoke your lisence. They also wouldn't delegate something like this to a third party agency. A spokesman for the IRS issued a statement saying those very things, warning people that if someone calls saying you're being sued it's likely a scam. The IRS might not have the best reputation, but they deserve a little more credit than that.

The problem is that because so many people don't trust the IRS and have been led to fear them that a scam like this preys upon that mistrust and that fear. As a result, this scam has cost uninformed tax payers millions of dollars because they've fallen for this scam. I have to admit, it would be pretty easy to panic upon hearing all those threats. But even if I wasn't already informed of this scam, it seemed pretty shady from the call center background to the India-accent with a very American name. Even the extent of the threats seemed pretty far-fetched, not to mention the dollar amount that was being claimed. I don't think I even got that much back from the IRS during that 6 year period!

Still, once fear and panic set in it's easy to fall prey to something like this. So be warned that if Mr. Hall calls saying you're being sued by the IRS and could be arrested in 30 minutes, it's a scam.

Just a little side note...this is my 100th posting on this blog! Wow!

Nicky Won't Be Going to College in Texas

Nicholas is two-years-old. We're currently working towards getting him into a Fairfax County Public Schools preschool program this fall. So college should be the furthest thing from our minds.

At least, until today.

Moments ago, I read an article on POLITICO that reported that the state of Texas has passed a law giving students and teachers in Texas colleges, who are 21 or older and licensed, the right to carry guns on campus. I, personally, am appalled by this maneuver. The NRA would have you believe that this law will make their college campuses safer because people will think twice about opening fire on campus of there's the chance that they will be shot themselves.

I find this argument flawed. If you look at the history of shootings in colleges, high schools and (sad to say) elementary schools, most of the gunmen involved have taken their own lives. Death is something which these people are already prepared to face. So why would the possibility of being shot by someone else dissuade them from this act when they already intend to take their own life?

It's sad that not even three years after the shooting at Sandy Hook we're talking about the easing of gun laws as opposed to their restricting.

Gun rights activists are so caugh up in their right to own whatever gun they wish that they don't stop think about how times have changed since the Bill of Rights was first written. I seriously doubt that the Founding Fathers had laws such as these in mind when they drafted the Second Ammendment. In fact, I'm sure they would have endorsed gun restrictions following the murder of two dozen five-year-olds in their own classroom at school.

When the Second Ammendment was written, many people lived on farms and plantations. Their closest neighbors were miles away. Local law enforcement was scarce and not a 911-phone call away. So many people who lived outside of the cities were isolated and on their own, without the security of relying on help from anyone but themselves. Thus, the Second Ammendment was written to guarantee that these people and their families who lived miles from civilization could defen themselves. After all, relations between Colonial Americans an Native Americans weren't exactly rosy, in addition to the threat of outlaws. These people had to be allowed to defend themselves.

So I seriously doubt that the Founding Fathers would look at today's law enforcement officials and believe that the average American needed an AK-47 to defend themselves. Gun rights activists love to tout that they should be armed to defend themselves from our own government, but I think that argument is an insult to the men and women of our Armed Services. After all, I really doubt that any uniformed soldier would obey an order to attack their fellow Americans on American soil. They'd sooner accept dishonorable discharge, which wouldn't be so dishonorable if they're standing up for what's right.

I find the arguments of the far right to be deeply flawed and based in irrational fear. These new development in Texas colleges is quite alarming and I wouldn't be surprised if these schools see both fewer students and teachers. I guess time will tell. As far as I'm concerned, if this law remains in Texas when we're looking at colleges with our kids in fourteen to sixteen years, Texas colleges and any other state that passes similar laws in the future will not be on our list for consideration.

It'll be their loss.

DWTS's Missed Opportunity

This week was big for Dancing with the Stars for a couple of reasons. In a season that has been rather tame, Monday night was not only the strongest night all season but for the last few seasons as well. The dancing was terrific and the night overall was very emotional with multiple occasions where most of the audience was in tears. At one point, host Tom Bergeron was also in tears! Six of Monday night's right dances received perfect scores, something I don't think I've ever seen after watching for eleven seasons.

It was also a big week because it saw front runner Nastia Luikin and pro partner Derek Hough voted off the show. Luikin's last three dances (including her final one from last week) all received perfect scores from the judges. Fandom has been get vocally upset about this elimination, a bigger surprise than the mid-season elimination of Willow Shields. Many have voiced that Nastia should have made it to next week's finale while Noah Galloway (the Army vet missing one arm and one leg) should've been sent home.

Dancing with the Stars is no stranger to controversy when it comes to which stars stay and which are sent home. Conspiracy theories abound that it's all arbitrarily decided by the show's producers and not by fan votes as is advertised. I, however, believe that the producers don't directly choose who stays but merely "stack the deck".

I point to Season 18 when pro Max an partner Meryl won the Mirror Ball Trophy. Meryl certainly deserved to win and is a fantastic dancer. However, much of the season's narrative centered on Max who had been absent for several of the show's previous seasons and was regarded as the "Bad Boy of Dance". However, the entire season portrayed Max as having changed and gave him a much softer image. So the only resolution to the story crafted by the producers was for Max to finally win. I say Max and not Meryl because ultimately it was more about Max's journey that season than it was about Meryl's, which is the usual storyline. Max's image was changed to make him more appealing to voters, thus stacking the deck in his favor.

This season, however, the anger over Nastia's elimination has been focused on Noah. While Noah is certainly no great dancer, he's been inspirational and a fan favorite. But, the deck wasn't stacked in his favor so much as it was against Nastia in favor of Val, Max's brother. Nastia has never had the greatest image since her days as an Olympic gold medal winning gymnast, earning the nickname of "Nasty" Luikin. The early weeks of the season seemed to change that perspective and showed a softer side of her...until a few weeks ago when the tone of her video packages shifted negatively. She was shown as frustrated, irritable and not getting along with Derek. People started to see the hard-to-like Nastia they remembered. Derek has gone public to defend his partner by not only saying that those are brief moments that don't truly represent what really goes on, but saying that producers were intentionally pushing her buttons. As a result, people started to dislike Nastia.

Meanwhile, the video packages about Rumer Willis became more centered on Val and softening his image and making him more sympathetic. Val has always been more likable than brother Max, but has always fallen just shy of winning. From the beginning of this season, Rumer's talented dancing looked to change that until she stagnated and her scores dropped. That's when the narrative for Val and Nastia changed.

If the producers truly are stacking the deck, than they missed a huge opportunity for a wonderful finale. No offense to Noah, but this week should've been his last. That would've left Rumer, Nastia and Riker all competing for the Mirror Ball in what would've been easily the most competitive finale this show has likely ever seen. Any of these three could've won and deserved to win, something I can't say for any of the final three I've ever seem during my time watching this show. Instead, with Nastia gone the finale won't be quite so thrilling. While Noah touch's peoples hearts, he's not as talented a dancer as the other finalists. The producers would've had the most genuinely suspenseful finale this show would've ever seen. Instead, in order to help deliver a win to Val, they may have just stacked things against Nastia who likely would've won if she made it to next week.

Now, in case anyone is wondering, no, I don't think Nastia should've won. In fact, my wife and I both believe that Riker should win (even if Nastia had stayed) because he's the best dancer this season. However, that probably won't be the case.

My prediction? If the producers are stacking the deck, I believe that it's Val who will win...oh, and Rumer too.

The Great Star Wars Debate

Since 2005, there have been two debates that have riddled Star Wars fandom; 1) Han Shot First! And 2) In what order do you watch the Star Wars movies? This is a debate that I'm sure will continue, especially with the upcoming Sequel Trilogy and the subsequent spin-offs that are likely to take place at different points throughout the Star Wars timeline. But until then, there's just the Original and Prequel Trilogies to debate.

1. Chronological Order

The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, Revenge of the Sith, Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi

There are fans who subscribe to this order because it keeps the upbeat ending of Return of the Jedi as opposed to the more solemn, downbeat ending of Revenge of the Sith. Two big problems however is the difference in filmmaking techniques. The visual effects of the Prequel Trilogy are much more advanced than those of the Original Trilogy and will be especially noticeable if you "jump back" in time. The biggest drawback, however, is the big revelation at the end of The Empire Strikes Back. While very few people don't know that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father, Empire's big reveal won't pack the emotional or dramatic punch if the viewer already knows this because of the Prequels.

2. Release Order

Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi, The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith

This is the viewing method with which I subscribe. It's the order each of the films was released so most people saw it in this order already and Empire's big reveal is kept for new viewers. Of course, the one drawback is finishing the Saga on a downer note with Revenge of the Sith. Still, I think this method is best and that drawback will be obsolete once the new trilogy comes out later this year.

3. Splitting the Original Trilogy with the Prequels as Flashbacks

Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, Revenge of the Sith and Return of the Jedi

This is the most convoluted viewing order that tries to counter the cons of both previously mentioned orders while keeping their pros. Empire's reveal is maintained while still ending the Saga on Jedi's upbeat note. However, narratively it interrupts the flow of the Original Trilogy by splitting it up. The momentum will be lost by jumping back to the Prequels and then returning to Jedi as the finale. Of the three methods, I consider this to be the weakest.

However, the release of the new trilogy will render the downbeat ending of Method 2 obsolete as there will be a new set of films to watch after Sith. Of course, the debate will continue because even though there will be a new trilogy, there will be spin-off films that will take place at various points between these movies. Thus, fans will try to figure out when to watch those films so that they form one long narrative.

Ah, the life of a geek...

A Visit with the Family

Here are some recent pictures of the family!

Dancing with the Stars Isn't for Teenagers

Maggie and I have been fans of ABC's Dancing with the Stars for about five years now. We started watching during Season 10 and haven't missed an episode since...due mostly to DVR, without which we could not live. We've seen highs and we've seen lows but have always been able to enjoy the show. Oftentimes it's predictable; it was clear from the get-go last season that Alfonso would win. Occasionally it manages to surprise us, such as last night.

I must admit that this twentieth season of Dancing with the Stars has been surprisingly underwhelming. There are fewer strong dancers than in recent years and a number who just aren't very good. Their Disney Week was bland and last week's Spring Break Week was...ok. Early on I predicted that the finals would feature Nastia and Derek, Riker and Allison, and Rumer and Val. But there was a surprising wild card; Willow Shields (of The Hunger Games series) with professional Mark Ballis. At fourteen, she's the show's youngest competitor yet did surprisingly well. I thought that if anyone had a chance to upend the results, it would be here.

Last night, that came crashing to a halt.

In the most shocking elimination of the season, Willow was sent home. Everyone was astounded, especially the judges. Willow was in tears. It occurred to me as Maggie and I watched Willow crying in Mark's arms, surrounded by the rest of the consoling cast, that Dancing with the Stars had finally gone too young.

Dancing with the Stars has proven to be not only physically challenging but emotionally as well. It's overwhelming even for the most mature adult, including many of the professionals who have been dancing their entire lives. The show has featured teenagers before; last season's Sadie Robertson (17) finished third while season 16's Zendaya almost won it all, finishing second at age 16! Both these young ladies possessed a maturity  beyond their years that enabled them to endure the brutality of the competition that stretches across three months non-stop.

Young Willow, however, is not Sadie nor Zendaya. That's not a knock against her. She's a sweet young girl who displays both an incredible talent and determination that made her enjoyable to watch, even though Mark's high-creativity concepts slowly got in the way of the dances they performed. But at the end of the day, she's only fourteen and there's a striking difference between a fourteen-year-old and a sixteen- and seventeen-year-old. Fourteen-year-olds are still in a very delicate phase as the change emotionally and physically. They get overwhelmed enough as it is with their everyday lives with school and friends and even with their own families.

Because she's so young and still in that delicate phase of maturity, Willow wasn't prepared to endure the emotional roller coaster of Dancing with the Stars. In a couple years, sure, but the producers should've exercised better judgment before casting her, clearly trying to gain the youth viewership because of her attachment to the currently-hot Hunger Games series.

Dancing with the Stars is basically a popularity contest where one has to sell themselves both personally and in talent. The ones who have gone on to win have all been able to win the public not just because they could dance well but because they could get people behind them and like them. Willow did an excellent job week-in and week-out. She's clearly a wonderful young girl and had a shot to make it to the finale. She just didn't sell herself well enough to gain enough fan support to vote her through to the end. It devastated her more than it has anyone else Maggie and I have watched over the years. Teenagers dread rejection and this young girl got rejected on a very public and national level.

As we watched her cry, I turned to Maggie and said, "She's too young. Dancing with the Stars is not for fourteen-year-olds."

Review: Interstellar

Courtesy of Wikipedia

Directed by: Christopher Nolan

Produced by: Emma Thomas, Christopher Nolan & Lynda Obst

Written by: Jonathan Nolan & Christopher Nolan

Executive Producers: Jordan Goldberg, Jake Myers & Thomas Tull

Cinematography by: Hoyte van Hoytema

Production Designed by: Nathan Crowley

Edited by: Lee Smith

Costumes by: Mary Zophres

Music by: Hans Zimmer

Cast: Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, Michael Caine, David Gyasi, Wes Bentley, Casey Affleck, John Lithgow, Matt Damon

2014 / 169min / Rated PG-13

Summary
In a not-too-distant future where everyone is a farmer, mankind is on the verge of extinction. It's only hope lies in the stars. A former-pilot-turned-farmer must make the sacrifice of leaving his children behind on Earth in order to lead a mission to other worlds in the hopes of finding a way to save the Human race.

Review
Over the past decade, Christopher Nolan has proven himself to be a filmmaker of big ideas. Even his Dark Knight Trilogy was filled with ideas that transcended the comic book superhero genre and made them much more substantive than any other film in the genre. With Interstellar, Nolan sets out to create a film that's this generation's 2001 and fills it with the big ideas for which he has made his name. He sets his ambitions high. Perhaps a little too high as with Interstellar Nolan bites off more than he can chew. However, a film by Nolan that missed the mark is still far better than most of the other films that pack the theaters these days.

Nolan and his brother Jonathan create a future Earth where mankind is on the verge of extinction but doesn't even know it. Humanity leaves in a global Great Depression under constant threat of monster sand storms. Everyone is a farmer as the population struggles to grow enough food for survival. With each passing year, they hope that the next will be better, unaware that their situation is only growing worse and that they may only have a generation or two left to live. Professor Brand (Michael Caine) leads a NASA that literally operates underground to avoid scrutiny for wasting tax payer money from a public that believe the Apollo moon landings were a hoax to bankrupt the Soviet Union. Brand has discovered an artificially-created wormhole near Saturn that leads to a solar system in another galaxy that may be home to a planet capable of sustaining human life. His belief is that humanity's best hope for survival is not on Earth but in the stars.

Matthew McConaughey plays Cooper, a hot shot pilot who discovers NASA's compound following a seemingly supernatural event in his daughter, Murph's bedroom. Brand believes Coop's arrival is no coincidence and enlists him to pilot the mission to find a new home for humanity. The catch is that he must leave behind his son and daughter without knowing when he could return. Due to the laws of physics and relativity, Coop could likely return to find that while only a few years have passed for him, decades may have passed on Earth. Coop accepts the mission with the hope that he will ensure his family's survival.

Unlike most science-fiction films, the plot of Interstellar is based heavily on real science. The dialogue is laced with physics and talk of relativity yet isn't confusing and doesn't detract from the enjoyability. It adds a sense of authenticity and serves to raise the stakes as, in true Nolan fashion, time becomes as valuable of a resource to the characters as water and good. Nolan has always displayed a fascination with time and the way we perceive it and the laws of relativity are used to great effect to show how our different perceptions of time can greatly vary. The worlds that are visited are fascinating as they're depicted as truly alien worlds that are quite different from our own.

The influence of 2001 is often on display. Like 2001, space scenes are depicted realistically with no sound mix present aside from the musical score. The two robot characters are also an homage to 2001's HAL, though infused with more personality to have them better relate to the human characters. Even the docking sequence feels like a reference back to Stanley Kubrick's earlier film.

Nolan's films have often been described as being cold and lacking real human emotion and Interstellar threatens to be the same with all it's realistic science. Yet with Interstellar Nolan seeks to break from that mold by packing in real human emotion and melodrama. The results are decidedly mixed as he sometimes borderlines going overly mushy and sappy. But he keeps things reigned in just enough thanks to wonderful performances by McConnaughy and Anne Hathaway who plays Brand's daughter. The affect of Nolan's time manipulation are taken on the characters while what's only a matter of hours for them is decades for everyone else. A powerful scene features McConaughy watching messages from home in which he literally watches his children grow into adulthood before his eyes while he's only aged a couple of years. McConaughy conveys the powerful toll that's taken on Cooper who's children mean everything to him.

Despite those efforts to keep the story grounded by the human element, the jumps back and forth between the scenes in space and those on Earth are sometimes jarring. Though the Earthbound story following Chastain's adult Murph is necessary to the overall story, something about the back and forth shifting doesn't flow naturally. It takes a few moments to readjust to the different narrative. These jumps are something that Nolan has perfected in his other films, but here it doesn't feel as effective.

The characters also lack real depth. Only McConaughy and Matt Damon feel like real people. When Damon shows up, he brings a very real take on basic human instinct and emotion. Though his appearance is unexpected and could remove the viewer from the experience, the exploration of humanity in it's most primitive state is fascinating to watch and Damon sells it with brutally raw performance. The rest of the characters, including Hathaway's Brand and Chastain's Murph are sadly underdeveloped despite their substantial roles. The performances of the cast are excellent, especially Caine and John Lithgow in very dignified turns, but they serve little purpose besides offering exposition.

It's only in the third act where things threaten to unwind as a film that spends most of it's almost-three hour runtime grounded in science makes a departure into being borderline fantasy. While it avoids jumping the shark, it feels like liberties were taken to wrap things up neatly and provide a happy ending. It's far from a bad ending and doesn't ruin the picture, but it feels almost disconnected from the rest of the movie.

Interstellar is always engaging, though, never feeling overly long as Nolan keeps the pace moving but never feeling rushed. From shots of ships traveling through space dwarfed by massive planets, to planetary vistas and depictions of wormholes and blackholes, the visual effects are breathtaking, flawless and seamlessly integrated into shots involving real actors. Nolan strives to use practical effects whenever possible, especially with the robots that accompany the crew, using computer effects only when necessary. Interstellar is one of the most strikingly beautiful movies I've seen in a long time.

Hans Zimmer accompanies with a score that predominantly features the organ. Though he doesn't use a full orchestra, Zimmer's score is epic in scope and most enjoyable.

Interstellar is an incredibly ambitious effort by Christopher Nolan. His attempts to keep emotion at the heart of the story only undermine him but not enough to ruin the film. It's still far better than most movies out there these days and Cheistopher Nolan shows his passion for filmmaking as an art form. Tackling big ideas to make one think, Interstellar is an excellent movie that delivers a memorable experience.

Writing
Story: 5 / 5
Plot: 8 / 10
Dialogue: 4 / 5

Characters
Development: 7 / 10
Growth: 7 / 10
Acting: 20 / 20

Entertainment
Pacing: 4 / 5
Tone: 4 / 5
Overall Enjoyment: 9 / 10

Production
Music: 8 / 10
Visuals: 10 / 10

TOTAL: 86 / 100

Star Trek To Go "Beyond" In 2016?

Next year will mark the 50th Anniversary since the original Star Trek series premiered on television. To mark the occasion, Paramount Pictures is naturally planning the next Star Trek movie.

Getting the thirteenth film in the series has been tumultuous so far. JJ Abrams (director of 2009's Star Trek and 2013's Star Trek Into Darkness) will be tied up with the new Star Wars movie until the end of this year and unavailable to direct, though he's staying on as producer along with his production company, Bad Robot. I won't go into all the details of the trouble the film has had getting off the ground so far, but it's included a change in both director and writing team. But with the hiring of Justin Lin (director of four Fast and Furious movies) and both Doug Jung and Simon Pegg as writers, the next Star Trek film seems on course for it's debut next summer.

While I don't know much about Lin or Jung, I personally am a fan of Pegg's work. He's proven himself a strong and witty writer and is a fan of Star Trek. Critically-acclaimed actor Idris Elba is rumored to be the film's villain. So I'm optimistic.

According to TrekMovie, a title may have been set: Star Trek Beyond. Pegg has said that after Into Darkness ventured away from the spirit of the series, he wants to bring the next movie "back to it's roots". Hopefully this title is an indication of the Enterprise crew boldly going instead of staying camped out in Earth's backyard.

I like this possible title and have found myself thinking about each of the previous titles of the Star Trek movies. To be honest, the only one that's not that good is Into Darkness. The Search for Spock is a little too revealing and while Insurrection is an overstated title, it's still kinda cool. So I'm glad that Star Trek Beyond is a good title after the klunker of Star Trek Into Darkness.