One Movie to See and Another to Skip (No. 13)

Movie to See: 50 Dead Men Walking



This was a good film.  It's a British political drama at its core, so it's not going to be for everyone.  Further, it's also based on real events in Northern Ireland during the 80's (who knows how accurately portrayed), so that might put even more people off.  The long and short of this film is that I liked it, but I didn't fall in love with it.  It was a good story, and it had a main character that I really wanted to root for, it looked good, and it had a lot of very convincing acting.  As an alternative to a documentary about the real events, I'd have to strongly recommend this approach instead.

The odd thing about the movie is just how little the main character did in order to earn his place in history.  Sure, there are at least 50 men and their families who might disagree with me on that (hence the title), but it always shocks me how trivial actions can sometimes earn the ire of some pretty whacked out violent people.  Salman Rushdie?  Kurt Westergaard?  Yeah, write a little poetry or draw a cartoon and you could have religious fundamentalists chomping at the bit to kill you, apparently.  Sturgess' character certainly did more than that, but to have them hunt you down forever?!  Geesh...

I do have one casting note.  Remember the red headed bomb shell from Patriot Games (that turned out to be a brunette) that was able to use her irresistible feminine wiles to lure any and all men into telling her secrets that would ultimately get them killed?  Rose McGowan plays the actual spy (?) on whom that character is based, but I just wasn't buying it.  They should have hired the brunette...  Rose is attractive in her own right, but she is not the kind of classic beauty that could convincingly pull that off.  Maybe I'm being nit-picky, but it's kind of like those movies where the 'everyman' is married to a super model that can't get enough of him... and then he ends up screwing it all up by sleeping with the brainless homely woman that works in his office.  Yeah, it's kind of like that.  Just not believable... in my humble opinion.

Other than that little tidbit, I have to say that I recommend this film as a thinking man's action movie.

---

Movie to Skip:  Cannibal! The Musical



Were there funny parts to this movie?  Absolutely.  Was it funny enough to go an entire hour and a half?  No, not really.  As can be expected from one of the co-creators of South Park, Trey Parker's Cannibal the Musical is full of sophomoric humor.  (Reads: fart and dick jokes.)  If you like South Park, then you'll probably like this one, but it gets a little tiresome after a while.  If this had been a long skit, or even a half hour gag reel, then it probably would have been ok.  The problem is that this one just kept going and going and going.  It was just too long for the few "bright" spots in the movie.

I realize that this was originally a school project put together with friends, but the acting was still pretty bad.  Even if you look at this like a local community theater production (a few decent actors and singers, but the majority of the roles filled with hacks), there are still some pretty stinky actors/singers that should probably have been recast. Maybe I would have been more forgiving if it really was shot as a play, with cheesy sets and the whole nine yards, I would have bought into it, but this wasn't a play... it was a movie. 

And frankly, that's all I've got to say about this movie.  There was a bit of originality (although similar in tone to other goof-westerns like Blazing Saddles), especially the fact this was a musical, and I appreciate the effort that went into it.  The script had some bright points, and the concept was funny.  It just wasn't pulled off with the professional quality that I would expect out of most movies I see...even though, yes, I'll say it again, I realize it was a class project and not a movie created for wide release.  I gave it two stars out of pity, but had it been executed better (and shorter), it could have been a solid two and a half.

One Movie to See and Another to Skip (No. 12)

Movie to See: Extract





This is a genuinely funny movie.  Yeah, it's another one of those independent films with the weak willed everyman who tries to toughen up and it blows up in his face (e.g. Office Space - another Mike Judge film, go figure), but this one is done really well.  Jason Bateman is fantastic in this film, in a role that is very reminiscent of his role in Arrested Development; Mila Kunis is a knockout; J.K. Simmons, as the factory manager, is hilarious; Ben Affleck is creatively mischievous; and the list of accolades just goes on and on.  This is a 'thinking man's' comedy, in the sense that you kind of have to watch it in order to follow everything that is going on, but it really is worth the rental.  This one is good enough that I really don't want to ruin it by talking about it too much, so I'll just say that it really is highly recommended.

---

Movie to Skip: Girly





I think you can best sum up this movie as a 'classic.'  It's from 1970's England (well more like the late 60's since it actually came out in 1970), and it had not quite adopted the typical slasher film qualities.  That is, if something naughty is going on, it will be strongly implied, but you'll never actually see it.  And when something gruesome happens, again, it will be strongly implied, but you'll never see it.  You will see some lame cartoon violence now and then, but that's about it.  So, if you're looking for naughtiness and gore, you're not going to enjoy this one.  Given some of the much more graphic films that were produced in the 70's (I'm looking at you, Clockwork Orange) I'm kind of surprised that this one was so... self censored.

The story in this film is certainly original, but I'm not entirely sure it's compelling.  I can definitely see similar films growing from this one as 'the family that slays together' is kind of a popular horror film theme (e.g. Texas Chainsaw Massacre, for one).  But I think other film makers nailed it a little better.  There is a sickening... sweetness to this film that is kind of horrific and creepy on its own.  That is, there is a kind of Mary Poppins quality that is really disturbing.  And hey, let's face it, I'm not sure anyone in this film is sane; some are just less bonkers than the others.  It creates an odd Alice in Wonderland character to the film that gives it at least a little redeeming quality.  But all in all, it really feels like a rough draft of a slasher that was ultimately filmed for prime time television.  While it wasn't the worst film I've ever seen, it wasn't the best.  It's an interesting distraction if you're looking for a 'horror' film that has no chance of giving you nightmares, but ultimately you won't be bad off if you miss it entirely.

Running a little late...

I'm running a little late with last Friday's post.  I blame it on Turkey day, but I'll make up for it with a post later today.  After that I'll return to my regular posting schedule.

One Movie to See and Another to Skip (No. 11)

Movie to See: The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day






When I first sat down to watch the first movie in this series, The Boondock Saints, I really wasn't expecting much. I was greatly surprised by the fantasy scene insertions and the way that some characters could step outside of reality in order to reenact history for both the audience and the other characters in the scene. It was a unique way of telling a story that I've seen done before (kind of), but never quite as smoothly.

Boondock II takes this little cinematic trick to another level by not only stepping outside of reality, but also inserting a fantasy element into the scenes (dressing up the head FBI investigator as a cowgirl was both hilarious and... titilating -- yeah, Julie Benz is attractive, but good night!) and lying to both the audience and the characters about what really happened. While this made for good eye candy, it did force the director to use flashbacks in order to show the audience what really went down, which is what I thought these scenes were actually created to avoid in the first movie. That was kind of clumsy and created a confusing bit of exposition within the exposition that felt kind of lazy. But overall it was still entertaining to watch. 

The real strength of this movie, like the first, is the characters. Yeah, the main characters are bloody vigilantes, but they're also good Catholic boys at heart. That's got to count for something, right? Like the first movie, the lead FBI investigator is also an oddball (although mercifully not a cross dressing homosexual Willem Dafoe like the first one), and the bad guys are gritty and deserving of their fates. The good/bad sons still look up to their invincible father, everybody still feels bad for cracking down on the only people crazy/brave enough to go after the bad guys, and the whole movie still has a good sense of humor with a palpable sense of style that doesn't have to borrow from Pulp Fiction to feel authentic. All around, this is a film for good fun with just enough intelligence and creativity to satisfy your inner film snob. 

The good stuff aside, it wasn't perfect (see the part about the flashbacks above). I thought the Mexican character was unnecessary and a little too 'JarJar Binks' for my taste. I also felt Benz had too many quirks in common with Dafoe's character -- I know why it was done this way, but it was unnecessary. The historical centerpiece of this story was a bit of a stretch, and the evil hit man's motivation was suspect, but frankly I let all of this stuff roll off my back given the solid quality of the good elements of the movie. With a little work, I think this movie could have been a five star work, but I have to cut it a little short... unfortunately. 

Boondocks II is a violent film, so it's not for the kiddies or the squeamish, but otherwise I recommended this movie to anyone that likes their action films to be more than mindless violence, and to anyone that gets a kick of of Tarantino. I liked it, and if you're bothering to read all of this, you just might too. 

---

Movie to Skip: Borderland





Although labeled a horror film, I don't feel that's really the most appropriate genre.  Gory thriller?  Occult drama?  I don't know, but it didn't quite feel like a horror movie.  Violent?  Absolutely, but that doesn't make it a horror film -- the latest Rambo flick was MUCH more violent than this one -- by far!  The movie is interesting and it has fairly decent acting overall.  The production quality is pretty good, and the storyline isn't bad, if not compelling.  I rated this one about a half star higher right after I watched it, but now that I've had time to think about it, I've taken it away.  I can't explain why, exactly, except that this film just isn't very memorable.  It's not a terrible way to spend and hour and a half, but I doubt you're going to want to buy it when you're done.  In fact, it's not one of those films that you'll likely ever watch again.  So, perhaps this film's worst crime is that it's just really forgettable.  Beyond that, not a bad film.  You won't hate it if you watch it, but you won't be missing too much if you never see it... unless you're a fan of Sean Astin.  This is, without a doubt, the darkest role he may ever play (and such a far cry from his hobbit days that Golum might want to watch his back when picking on him...).

Growing Pains: 40k Radio

Anyone that listened to the "Spencer, Scott & Chipley" days of the 40k Radio probably remembers those days quite fondly.  The chemistry between the hosts was good and there was always some interesting content.  While at the end of the show's days the casts tended to consist of three or four guys getting drunk and making fun of each other, the stuff they produced towards the middle of their run truly was good stuff.  In fact, the quality and production value of 40k Radio's content set that show apart as what a 40k podcast should strive to become -- love it or hate it, it was the gold standard that inspired many of the podcasts to come.

Unfortunately, the show came to an end following a ridiculous melodramatic display of immaturity.  I mean, we're talking about three guys sitting in a basement, drinking beer, and talking about playing with toy soldiers.  It ended with a toilet flushing anthem that would have been more appropriate for an all-geek episode of 'Jerry Springer.'  It was embarrassing for the listeners, and it was a palpable loss to both the pod-casting community, and to the 40k community in general.

And then came Romeo and Battle Foam to "save" the 40k brand.  Or, at least, that is probably the ultimate goal, but they've got a LONG, long way to go...

A Rocky Start

Resurrecting the gold standard in 40k pod-casting is certainly not a feat for the feint of heart.  But it's also turning out to be much more challenging than Romeo probably expected.  I mean, let's face it, given the embarrassing collapse of the original (full of finger pointing, not-so-secret secrets, message board flame wars, racism, and high school emotional hi-jinks) he probably thought it would be easy: find some mildly amusing hosts, maybe a voice from the old show, and try not to sling the 'N' word while streaming live.  Sounds pretty simple, but the new show is still limping along very slowly...  In fact, the "voice from the old show", George Miller, has already left... and they were only four shows into the new run!  And now, some 9 shows in, they are still showing some growing pains.

After sitting through 8 of the new shows, I kind of wonder when this crew is going to get their act together.  I can think of several shows that were able to get their feet under them in just a handful of shows, and are moving along quite well: The Independent Characters, Tabletop Hooligans, and Life After the Cove Save just to name a few.  In fact, all of these shows are at right about 10 shows in, and they have found their own unique voice.  You may not enjoy their voice, but they are certainly consistent and they are all definitely doing their own thing.  40k Radio, on the other hand, really hasn't settled on a voice.  They appear to be moving in the direction of being an 'Interview' show with just a handful of "what have you been doing in the past week" segments thrown in there for good measure.  But random elements come and go, which makes me think they really aren't sure what they want to keep and what they should purge.

The Real Problems

Besides not having a constant voice, there are a few consistent problems that the show doesn't seem able to overcome.  Unfortunately these really aren't small problems and go towards the core of the program.  And unless the show finds a 'fix', they probably won't last...

Poor Technology: 40k Radio has always been known for leading the way when it came to technology.  They had a legendary forum, and they were one of the first to adopt a quick and easy web format to show viewers what shows were coming up next.  Even more important, the quality of their shows was second to none -- great sound equipment, and cut very, very well.  And then we have the new version...

The current iteration of 40k Radio is simply not up to snuff when it comes to the technology of the show.  For instance, episode 9 just posted, but when you look at the 'show host' section of the website, George Miller is still listed as the first chair host!  He's now been gone for more shows than he was ever in, and no one has bothered to update the website.  Not that we should be too terribly surprised.  I'm sure the same web team that cobbled together the clunky Baggy's Brigade site, which has a very thinly veiled paintball community skeleton, is also taking care of the 40k Radio site.  Like Baggy's site, there are non-functioning elements, the pages are not updated, and it just looks very dated.  Contrast that with The Eternal Warriors (formerly Dice Like Thunder) and their own swanky collection of pages, and 40k Radio is really, really falling behind.  On the up side, their broadcasting is certainly getting better, but even episode 8 was posted with Romeo's countdowns to 'action' between segments.

Rampant Inaccuracies: 40k Radio, especially at the end of the show's run, was never the perfect keeper of 40k lore.  Short of reading the codex over the air waves, they screwed things up all the time.  But by the end of a segment, someone would pick up the book, read the correct interpretation of the rule, call the speaker a moron, and they would move on.  Unfortunately that tradition has carried forward into the next iteration of the show -- at least, the part where they get things wrong...

I love the 40k fluff, but I certainly don't know it all.  But I realize that I don't know it all and wouldn't pretend otherwise.  It annoys me to hear Ravenguard referred to as Night Ravens...repeatedly.  It annoys me when they offer up tactics that are essentially illegal because they're forgetting special rules (or universal special rules) that have been around since the initial publishing of 5th edition).  Why does it annoy me so badly?  Because the segments are supposed to be informative and not just speaking off the cuff.  How can you review the latest Forgeworld book and then keep forgetting (or at least woefully mispronouncing) the name of the only Space Marine chapter featured in it?  If a segment is supposed to be a "prepared" review then the hosts should do their homework.  Period.  Anything else just smacks of unpreparedness.  No, they're not professional journalists.  But if they're going to give a review, then they need to know what the hell they're talking about. If, on the other hand, they want to be three guys shooting the shit about the latest Forgeworld book, then that's something else entirely.  But that's not the image they're trying to portray.  They need to pick a path and go there... and someone should probably read the codex ahead of time rather than everyone pretending to be an expert with their own version of half remembered rules.

Poor Chemistry: The old 40k Radio consisted of three or four friends sitting around the microphone and talking about toy soldiers.  They gelled well, and they played off of each other like good friends do.  Inside jokes became common knowledge for the listeners, and it was easy to get sucked in.  The current 40k Radio just doesn't have that.

It is painfully apparent when you listen to these three chat that Rik and Kyle work for Romeo and Battle Foam.  I'm sure Romeo gave them the freedom to take the gloves off when they're on the air so that they don't 'pay' for any on air jibes at the boss man when the radio is turned off, but the result is just really, really bad.  Rik and Kyle come across as wanting to get their digs in at the boss while they can and often go way over the top to harass Romeo.  In fact, it's so bad that Romeo, on air, has to tell the guys to knock it off and get back on track so that every episode doesn't become a Romeo slam-fest.  Who wants to listen to that?

But really, I think the chemistry problems are not just boss/employee related.  Rik and Kyle often come across as mind numbingly immature.  Fart jokes - check; over-the-top homophobic butt-sex jokes - check; fat jokes - check; inappropriate and gratuitous cursing - double check; and most importantly, screwing around with your co-host while someone else is trying to tell a story or share information with the listener making it hard to hear what anyone is saying - got it!  Is this a podcast or a high school locker room?  Don't get me wrong, it isn't that I think that Rik and Kyle don't have anything to add.  In fact, generally, just when I get to the point in a podcast where I think I need to personally email Romeo and recommend that he fire one of the two morons to improve the podcast's quality, one of them will actually contribute an actual insightful comment that saves the discussion.

This tells me that all the screwing around is just not necessary.  The Tabletop Hooligans and Life After the Cover Save have got the screwing around 40k podcast genre covered -- and they're much funnier and work together MUCH better.  Why 40k Radio is trying to horn in on this genre is confusing to me.  What the podcast community really lacks is a wealth of podcasts that are genuinely contributing to the hobby in an insightful manner.  DLT/TEW does it.  11th Company does it.  But it would be really nice to see more of them get to that level.  The Hooligans and the Cover Save crew are not going to be that voice, and frankly, I prefer their own unique brand of hi-jinks (although Hooligans have devolved a little bit of late...).  40k Radio presents itself as trying to be serious, and then the hosts talk over each other trying to see who can spout the lamest put down.  It doesn't work, and it comes across as a mess.  The hi-jinks are NOT 40k Radio's strong point.  Besides, who wants to be a morning radio style hack show?  Nobody wants to listen to that.

Unfortunately, I think that 40k Radio is getting the wrong message from their feedback.  I think they're mistaking the positive comments they receive as supportive of ALL of the content they provide rather than just the shining moments that sometimes emerge from the childish crap.  When they're on, they are really on and it is good to listen to.  But the ridiculousness that they cram into every episode can be a bit much to take.  If you put aside the parts of their show where they're trying to be funny, then the content looks promising.  Unfortunately, that's only about half of the 3 hours of podcast they put out.  It's a lot to dig through to get to the gems.

I don't think 40k Radio is beyond hope, but they've got to get their act together.  The hosts need to prepare their segments.  They need to clean up the technology (someone should probably take a look at the website and dump the crap that shouldn't be there any more -- sometimes less is more).  But most importantly, Rik and Kyle need to drop the kindergarten act and start contributing intelligently.  I'm not saying they need a stick up their backsides (like Romeo sometimes appears to suffer from), but it would be nice if they would dump the crap.

40k: Dirty Tricks (No. 6) - Pincer Movement

The Pincer Movement, also known as Double Envelopment, is another basic tactic that everyone has in their arsenal... whether they realize it or not.  The concept of the pincer is actually fairly straightforward.  Jut like the picture below, the point is to take two attacking elements, split them in two, and then attack two of your enemy's flanks at the same time.



The benefits of the pincer are two fold in the game of 40k.  By attacking from two sides at once, you limit the availability of cover from your forces.  Unless your enemy is going to hunker down in cover (which is not a bad thing), he simply can't protect himself from the firing of both attacking elements at the same time.

The second benefit is that you can assault from two directions as well.  This means your enemy is not going to be able to hide weaker units from assault, and you can generally overwhelm the unit you're attacking.

The Right Unit for the Job

A popular approach for this kind of attack is to take the MSU approach.  Multiple Small Unit means you have lots of smaller units, generally in transports, that can be in several places at one time.  Good examples of this are Razorbacks with combat squads of space marines and Ork Truk Boyz squads.






The reason these types of squads are popular is because:

1. They are cheap, allowing you to take several of the same type of unit and allowing you to create multiple flanking units with ease.
2. With both guns on the transport and a good assault unit inside, one unit allows you to perform both the shooting and assaulting role in a single package.  And even if the enemy manages to take out your tanks after they bring their firepower to bear, you still have multiple small assault units to swarm and envelop the bad guy.

But MSU is not the only way to go.  You can also take a two tier approach.  Lead in each flanking element with a tank, like a predator, and then follow up with an assaulting element, like an assault squad, to jump in at the last minute to mop up whatever is left of the target squads.  Alternatively, you can also just use a more expensive version of the MSU: for space marines, put terminator assault squads in a landraider; for the orks, nobz in a battlewagon.  Whichever way you decide to go, any army can create a two prong shoot/assault screen.  The eldar version might be vipers with jet bikes.  The tyranids may have a termagaunt screen followed up by hormagaunts or genestealers.  The Tau, battle suits followed by... more suits or kroot.  Necron warriors followed by wraiths.  Imperial guard chimeras full of ogryn or hardened veterans with demo charges.  Battle sisters dominion squads followed by seraphim.  And the list goes on and on.  The idea is just a one/two punch where you soften up the target from two different directions and then swarm him with something nasty.

Defense Against the Pincer

Like every military maneuver, there IS a counter strategy... and sometimes several.  The pincer movement is no different.  It is important to know the defenses against a pincer so that you can counter your enemy's pincer movement, and also recognize when the battlefield is not set up well for you to launch your own.

The key to breaking the pincer is to remember two key factors.  First, by splitting up his forces to attack on two flanks, your enemy's forces are weaker on each side than you are in your center.  Second, by attacking your flanks, he is also presenting the back side of his forces to your own reinforcements -- essentially putting himself in the position of being enveloped while he is trying to envelop you.

Multiple Hard Points

If you often find yourself the victim of a pincer, or you're facing an army that is set up well to deliver one, your chief defense against it is to create hard pockets of resistance that are hard to envelop.  For instance, look at the picture below.  Each element, which may or may not be in cover, has a counter element to your enemy's attack: it has a firepower element as well as a counter assault element.  Because you've paired these units up, and spread them out just a little, it is difficult for your enemy to get in between your deployed units without finding himself in a crossfire situation and open to a counter assault on the back side of his forces.




And you can repeat this deployment across your entire deployment zone creating several hard pockets that are difficult to outflank without offering up a soft underbelly that you can pounce on in your own turn.  Remember that this does not have to be a stagnant deployment.  Yes, this could be a tactical squad backed up by an assault squad - both hunkered down in cover.  But it could also be a terminator squad backed up by a vanguard unit.  Or it could be termagaunts backed up by warriors.  This set up can be as mobile as you like, the idea is just to create hard pockets of resistance that can act as both fire support and counter assault to relieve any of their neighboring units.

Break Out

If you don't have an army that spreads out in pairings well, then you can also take advantage of the fact that your enemy is weaker at any one of your flanks.  As is illustrated in the picture below, if you find your larger position flanked from either side, you can pick the side you think you an overwhelm, and then create an all out assault to eliminate one of your enemy's flanking forces and then turn on the small element that is left over.





The key here is target priority.  Throw something at the rear flank to tie up the assaulting element, and then use everything else you have to wipe out the enemy's other flanking units.  This means concentrating firepower one one dangerous unit at a time so that you can eliminate the opposing force as quickly as possible so that you can then turn around and do the same thing to the other flanking force.  Or you can run if you have a mobile force that won't stand up to the other flanking attack.  The point is simply that you should take advantage of the fact that you have superior numbers against any single flanking force, and that you shouldn't try to go toe-to-toe.  You should give him a stumbling block and then overwhelm one full part of his force.  If you do it correctly, you may lose the sacrifice squad, but you'll still have the bulk of your force left over to eliminate the remaining flank.  With any luck, your opponent will see that half his force has been wiped out with relative ease, and will second guess himself into allowing you to eliminate the second flanking element as he tries to regroup rather than pressing the assault.

Wait for the Cavalry

Finally, there is always the option of castling up and then bringing in reinforcements behind one of your enemy's flanks.  The problem with this approach is that there is never any real guarantee when your reinforcements are going to arrive.  On the other hand, in a Dawn of War deployment, when most of your army is going to be in reserve anyway, then it's much more likely that an option to bring in forces behind an enemy assault is a real possibility.  The trick, however, is to keep the same rules in play that you would for a Break Out.  Slow down one element of the pincer, and then overwhelm one of the enemy's flanking forces.  If you spread out your attacks, then more than likely your enemy's troops, which he has specifically chosen for their ability to make a long range unsupported assault, will be able to outclass the reinforcements available to you.  But when you use an overwhelming attack, then the combined firepower and heavy assault by multiple units can break even the toughest of deathstar units your enemy may choose to throw at you.





Good luck!

One Movie to See and Another to Skip (No. 10)

Movie to See: Kick-Ass

The name of this movie kind of says it all... it kicks ass. I was hesitant to put this one into my Netflix cue when I read the description (and contemplating the difficulties actually saying the name of the movie in front of the kiddies, but now I'm glad I did. There was more actual violence than I envisioned, but it certainly isn't more shocking than anything else you'll see in the theaters these days. Further, this story centers around the life of a teenage boy and his relationships, so there will be plenty of crude humor and language for that set too. Frankly, that stuff never bothers me, so I can plow right ahead. 

The great thing about this movie is that the premise is kind of nuts, and the characters know what they're doing is nuts -- even those that are actually nuts! That kind of self-awareness, despite the ridiculousness of what is going on, really helps the viewer suspend disbelief enough to really get into the movie. You can really start to care about the naive boy and his silly action hero dream; and you even root for the psychopathic vigilante and his screwed up off-spring as they go down a similar path to our hero, albeit with different methods and motives. Hell, you can even care for the bad guy a bit as all he really wants to do is go out there and commit his crimes and corrupt his fellow man a little bit so he can make a comfy living. Why is that superheroes are always screwing that up, right? 

Point is, this is a story with well developed characters, a plot that is silly and yet somehow almost believable, and all the special effects and eye candy you would expect in a superhero-ish film. It's got plenty of laughs to balance out the action, and plenty of potential to do another film... which I'm actually not sure is a good thing.

One thing I DO know for sure is that it was a lot of fun to watch, and I have a new favorite pre-teen super/action hero: Hit Girl! Good stuff.

---

Movie to Skip: Enemies Among Us

Yep, you're not seeing things, this one doesn't even rate a full star.  This movie is about as big of a stinker as there is.  I did derive a little enjoyment out of this one, but it was certainly for all of the wrong reasons.  The one bright spot in this film is the performance of Eric Roberts as the policeman on the Louisiana Governor's security detail.  His character was really over the top mischievous and he was clearly enjoying his role in what was clearly a dumb, dumb movie.  And besides the innate humor in watching a movie suck so bad that you almost feel sorry for the people in it, that was about all this movie had to offer.

Here is a collection of some of the problems: the acting, the "plot", the acting, the supporting "actors", the writing, and the severe lack of preparation that went into this dog.  There were several times during this movie that the actors were CLEARLY reading from cue cards off to the side of the screen.  And those that weren't reading from cards, like Billy Zane, kept stumbling over the lines that he had clearly just tried to memorize.  Since none of the dialogue made any sense, however, it was just hard for everyone to spit out.  And let's not forget that despite FIRST BILLING, Billy Zane was probably on the screen for less time than Steven Segal was in the movie Executive Decision where he had second billing.

One of the other chief detractors from this movie was the parade of idiots that made up the supporting cast.  Apparently every hooker and trophy wife (and every guy had one on his arm) has a minimum cup size of D -- but they should have been looking for a modicum of acting talent.  How hard can it be to play a vapid moron?  Apparently it just hit too close to home, because these ladies couldn't act their way out of a paper bag.  The best of them was the prostitute/assassin from early on in the movie, but her role fell apart pretty quickly when she stopped acting like a prostitute and had to trade dialogue with the Governor character... who was not much better.  It should be pretty telling that none of these ladies got any cast credit for their performances...

I've seen worse movies, but this one certainly ranks right up there.  It's actually better than a lot of the non soft-core crap you'll see late at night on cable, but only because of just how terrible it is.  I don't recommend this one unless you just like really bad movies.

40k: Dirty Tricks (No. 5) - Refused Flank

The basic concept of the Refused Flank is to convince your opponent to spread out over a wide front (the traditional gun line formation) while deploying your own forces concentrated to a side of the table - one flank of his forces. You are thus "refusing" the other side of your opponent's force. The point of this approach is that you will be able to bring overwhelming force to one side of your opponent's army while he is forced to redeploy his forces from the refused flank to support the outnumbered side of his army.

In a perfect setting, a refused flank set up should look something like the force distribution below:

The enemy's forces are spread out in a traditional pitched battle deployment, and your own forces are overloaded on the other side. In the next picture below, you can see just how your forces will then execute this textbook attack:





As your mid-ranged units move up the side, they can take pot shots at the flank that is being attacked and then later be used to slow down your enemy's forces as he tries to reinforce his flank. Your slow units, which will be near the spearhead of the attack, should be able to lock horns with your enemy's flank while he is still playing catch up. when coupled with your medium and fast units, a well timed hit can overwhelm the offered flank and allow you to clean up the other guy's units as they either sprint in to the slaughter, or hunker down as he watches half of his army disintegrate.

The Set-up

Ok, so you've got an idea, but how do you pull it off? In a traditional 5th edition set-up, one side deploys all of his forces first, and then the second guy deploys his own. In a perfect world, your opponent wins the first turn, sets up his forces in a traditional gunline, and then you sieze the initiative after setting up your own forces in the refused flank formation. The perfect set up almost never happens because: (a) you win the first turn and will have to show your hand before he sets his own forces up, or (b) you don't seize the initiative and the enemy gets the chance to use his first turn to start countering your flank attack before you get a chance to make your move.

But all is not lost. There are certainly ways you can disguise what you're doing, or can draw your opponent into staying put and can then whittle away his forces at leisure.

1. Delay the Obvious: If it's obvious that you're trying to flank your opponent (i.e. you've already set up, and you didn't have enough forces to make it look like you were doing anything other than a refused flank attack), then delay the push. Place a small part of your force towards the middle of the table, preferably a part that can still pick off units on the targeted flank and still slow down units that move to support his weak spot. Next, only advance your slower flank units at first. When they are close to closing with the targeted flank, race your fast units behind them so that they hit about the same time. If you leave enough at home, it may not be as obvious that you're trying to overwhelm one side of the board, and he may leave the bulk of his forces 'at home' until it is too late to lend support to the attacked flank.
   
   
   
   
2. Sacrifice: Similar to delaying the obvious, try to counter his heavy hitting units on the untargeted flank with cheaper units that will keep his heavy hitters at home. For instance, if he's got a slow deathstar unit on the opposite flank, then put a small combat squad or equivalent throw away unit to confront him on that side of the board. Likewise, if he has set up with heavy weapon squads on one side of the board (like a pair of devastator squads), then put your own cheaper heavy unit on that side of the board (like a whirlwind). The idea is that you want him to commit much more expensive units to the refused side of the board while you have significantly less of your army to confront him. It will appear as though you want to trade blows, but in actuality you're trying to sucker him into leaving a flank exposed to the bulk of your army. Note that units with a scout move or infiltration can be ideal for this because they will look like a real threat and will commit your opponent's heavy hitters for longer. While he thinks you've handed him a simple juicy unit to squish, you're really suckering him out of position to where that tough unit could be doing much more harm to your forces.
   
   
   
   
3. Quick Switch: Basically, you want to set up like you would a Sacrifice, except you won't be leaving cheap units to confront him. Instead, you put your faster units on the refused side of the board. Then, when the game begins, you pull out and move them laterally to join the thrust of your forces. The faster your forces (landspeeders, bikes, ravagers, grav tanks, etc.), the better because they can turbo boost and quickly out pace the refused forces you're leaving behind. While that does mean you'll loose a turn or two of using these forces, but he'll be leaving much more expensive units behind and out of position for much longer.
   
   
   
   
4. Handing Over the Keys to the Castle: When your opponent is given the opportunity to have a piece of terrain that is perfect for an expensive unit of his own (e.g. a good berm for his mega tank, a bunker for his heavy weapons squads, a concealed approach to your own lines for his deathstar unit, etc.), let him have it and then refuse that flank. If he thinks he's got a solid defensible position, then he's not going to want to leave it, even after you start decimating the forces on the other side of the board.
   
   
5. Fun House Mirror: If you've got access to a LOT of cheap units, then you might want to mirror your opponent's across the board set-up with much cheaper units of your own. While he is evenly spread out, you'll look like you're evenly spread out, but in actuality you've got the majority of your points on a single flank. In a lot of ways, this is just a broader use of sacrifice units. But, when you've got lots of cheap sacrifice units that you can race forward, and still maintain a heavy thrust to a single flank, it may not be as obvious that you're trying to keep his forces at home.
   
   

Obviously, you should try and combine these techniques wherever possible. The idea is that you want your opponent to stay home for as long as possible before he realizes that you're trying to take him apart one flank at a time. None of these approaches are fool proof, and when the other guy figures you out, the plan could fall to pieces pretty quickly. But if you DO keep him home and are able to bring the hammer down (and the dice aren't working against you), the refused flank can be a deadly tactic.

Problems

Like I said, nothing is fool proof. Sometimes your opponent figures out what you're doing and will move his own forces to counter your effort. In fact, some armies, such as the Eldar (with Eldrad), have a built-in ability to redeploy their forces and you can easily find your big bad plan fall apart.  If your opponent can redeploy quickly and he has an assault heavy army, he may decide to overload your side of the table - forcing a bloody confrontation.  If he's fast and light, he may redeploy in the opposite quarter, making for a long drawn out battle on the longest possible battlefield.  Frankly, there are just some armies that are not easy to cage in with the refused flank tactic.  A lot of that is going to depend on what shows up on the field the day of the battle.  If you see a fair amount of slow/heavy units spread across the board, then he's prime for the refused flank.  But if he's quick and nimble, it may not be the best approach. 

Good luck!