New host

We're now 100% off blogger. If you are seeing this page, please update your bookmark and head to http://www.kneelbeforepod.com

Thanks!

An update

It has come to our attention that another podcast has started producing episodes under the name "Kneel Before Pod." This is not the return of this Kneel Before Pod. These people are in no way affiliated with us. While we left the show open for us to return, we currently don't have any new episodes in the works.

I am not sure if these guys bothered to even Google the name, but I can say they made no attempt to contact me and as far as I know, no attempt to contact Ryan.

If/when we return, everything will go through this website still. We will never change the url.

Tim Jennings Solves the Immigration Problem

Gree-Mor: The inbred Jedi

Friend of the show Tim Jennings provides the voice for Luke Skywalker in this very funny cartoon. Check it out!

Inception: A Movie Review.

On Wednesday I saw "Inception." I have been really quiet about this fact, because frankly, I didn't want to talk about it. Did I think it was a bad movie? Not in the slightest. Did it frustrate me? Yes, yes it did. I am going to break this review into two segments. The first segment will deal with the movie itself and will have little to no spoiling. The second part will be a review of concept and will likely be spoiler heavy. I will indicate when we reach segment two. So with that said, lets begin.

As with most of Nolan's movies, it's very pretty. It will have a familiar visual tone and vocabulary if you are a fan of his previous work. When it comes to visuals, Nolan is one of my 10 favorite directors. If asked to describe his style in one word, I would have to go with "muted." In a world of Michael Bays and McGs, Nolan has a way of restraining himself when it comes to colors. Every scene seems to have a color palate, and none of them include neon pink.

The story of the movie is inspired. Unlike Avatar from last year, I don't think anyone will be able to accuse this movie of being light on story and plot. If anything, it might try to do too much. The movie at times almost felt overly complicated. Don't mistake that for being "hard to follow." I followed the movie just fine, but it just felt like the movie was trying to do too much at times. There are two completely separate missions for the main character, each almost felt like they could have been their own movie. Leaving a third movie to be made just for the main character's more personal conflicts that appear by the end of the movie. I appreciate Nolan's apparent attempt to avoid a franchise, but sometimes too much story is just too much story. It also left me wanting more character development and interactions, which felt neglected at times in favor of moving the behemoth of a plot forward. With the movie reaching just over the two hour mark, I wish Nolan would have nutted up and either made it a franchise or an honest three hour movie.

The acting is stellar. DiCaprio is powerful, Joseph Gordon-Levitt is likable despite not enough character development and Ellen Page is just a joy to watch. Even Cillian Murphy (Scarecrow from Nolan's Batman series) appears and does a great job. The only actor I really didn't connect with was Marion Cotillard. For some reason, I just didn't feel her in this movie. Any time she was on the screen, it felt like the energy was sucked from the scene. She wasn't bad. It might have just been everyone else was just so good.

This movie also hosts what I think might be one of the best fight scenes ever in a movie. Joseph Gordon-Levitt has a fight where gravity is shifting. You may have seen bits of it in the trailer. Believe, it's as cool as the trailer makes it look. I personally think it's better than most, if not all, the fights shown in the Matrix movies.

At the end of the day, Inception is a well made movie and is entertaining at the very least.

Rating
4 out of 5

Segment 2

Inception is a high concept movie. Much like the work of Philip K. Dick, this movie at it's core is a study of human perception. Is the world what we make it? Is the world what it really seems? What makes our dreams any less real than the waking world around us? These are questions that are not new. People have been asking them, and similar questions, since man has first begun asking questions. So does Inception add anything to this dialog? Not in the slightest. The movie is almost all riddle and no solution.

With the movie's ambigious ending, I found myself trying to follow the movie's own rules and come to a conclusion. The problem being that the rules would only apply in the movie's "real world" setting and are void in movie making. Did Cobb and Miles just "appear" at the house or did the film maker just cut from the airport to the house to save time? Are the children appear to be the same age because they were constructs of his memory or is it just because the scenes were all shot in a single day? I don't mind that the story is left open, I mind that the details are so vague that it's hard to even draw your own solution.

While discussing this movie, I actually said "I'm done talking about it. They filmed it so the problem is unsolvable, so there's no point in trying to solve it." The basic principles of film making break the rules of this established world, so there is no weight to the rules. Unless a character verbally points out "I don't remember how we physically got here," there is no way to tell when the rules are being broken as a viewer. For me, that's very frustrating. I listened carefully to the dialog, noticing repeated phrases and themes such as "leap of faith." But by the end of the movie, I felt there was no reward for being attentive. All the things you notice might just be the short comings of the movie or the medium of movies themselves.

In the end I felt like I was being taunted for being a dedicated and observant viewer. I don't mind an open ending, but when you even leave the clues open... I draw the line.

Ryan, I think we have a topic...

Tim Jennings at Comic-Con 2010

Friend of the show, and all around awesome guy, Tim Jennings went to San Diego Comic-Con 2010! What did he see? Find out in the video below!



Be sure to subscribe to Tim's Youtube channel so you see all his future videos!!!!

Tron Legacy: Easter Egg in new Comic Con trailer

It's that time of year again. Comic Con is upon us yet again and that means it's time for shit to get real. Not ones to let a Comic Con to slide by without getting some face time, Tron Legacy revealed a new trailer.

Looks pretty awesome right? Well, there might be something you missed. Remember the Disney science fiction classic The Black Hole? Did you see it in the trailer? You might have missed it. In case you did, here it is.

Now why is this so interesting? Those in the know, or at least people that listen to our show, should remember that Tron Legacy's director, Joseph Kosinski, has been attached to a remake of The Black Hole. He doesn't even have his first movie in the bag and he's already dropping nods to himself! I forgive you though Joe... I would be excited too. Tron Legacy looks like it's shaping up to be breathtaking and I can only hope this new take on The Black Hole will show everyone why I love the original so much.

The Last Airbender: The Largest Conspiracy Since the Moon Landing

About two weeks ago I made a post on my personal website about how I didn't think "The Last Airbender" could possibly be as bad as the critics were saying. I compiled a list of movies with better ratings on Rotten Tomatoes' freshness meter. A list of movies that critics were more likely to agree are better than M. Night Shyamalan's latest flick. I said that it is hard for me to comprehend that a movie could be worse than "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen," which happens to be my absolute zero when it comes to movies. It is impossible for movies to go any lower and everything is freezes by the time it gets there. Transformers 2 is flawed on so many fundamental levels, I find it unwatchable. I talk about it a lot, but it's one of the few times I am not exaggerating or joking around. I really loath that movie.

But this isn't a write up for Transformers, it's a write up for The Last Airbender. Like I explained, I didn't think there was any way this movie could be as bad as people said. I saw the movie today and I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong... but this is not one of those times. Was Airbender a great movie? No. Was it a wretched demon of a film that will eat your soul and then defecate in your now empty husk of a body? Not even close.

I'm not sure what movie all these critics were watching, but it wasn't the same one I saw today. I have heard rumbling for years that M. Night isn't very good at making friends. He has quite a few people that tell stories of not having a good experience with him either on the set or in an interview. That's fine. Sometimes assholes make good artist. It's a fact that has been time tested. But you can't blackball a decent movie just because you don't like the guy that made it. Especially when there have been a lot of movies that have came out recently that are worse than Airbender. This seems to me a clear cut case of "critics be hatin'." Don't take my word on it, in fact, don't take anyone's word on it. Check it out sometime and decide for yourself.

In my opinion The Last Airbender is a decent movie. The plot makes sense, the acting was at least passable most the time, the special effects had some cool moments and it was overall not hard on the eyes. There were some times when the acting fell flat or was slightly hammed up, but it didn't ruin the movie for me. The dialog wasn't artistic, but got the point across. The plot moved forward and there was never any question why characters were doing what they were doing. There was never a point where you asked yourself "Why did the Decepticons need to kidnap Sam's parents and take them to the desert?" ARGH! NO! NO MORE TRANSFORMERS!!!!

Anyways, this movie isn't going to change how we look at the cinema and the only reason people might study it in years to come is to learn about how the bias of critics can completely slag an otherwise mediocre film. I personally enjoyed it and am sad that I might not get to see how this story unfolds on the big screen.

Now, I think it's safe to say I am not the intended audience for this film. This movie is targeted towards a younger audience. My showing wasn't packed, but there were a lot more people there than I thought would be. There were quite a few younger pre-teen kids there. What did they think of the movie? Well, a couple of them were mimicking the tai-chi like moves the characters did when "bending" the elements. They really seemed to enjoy it even if Roger Ebert didn't.

Lastly, the race issue. Get over it. There were people that flipped out when a tongue in cheek campaign was started to get a black comedian casted as Peter Parker. These people were of the strong feeling that Peter Parker couldn't be black simply because he was never black before. There were many, myself included, that called those people racist. Maybe not conciously, but they were racist all the same. My answer remains the same. If you think these characters, that from totally fictional lands can only be played by actors of a certain race, you're a racist. There is quite a deal of racial diversity through out the cast and people from common regions seem to share heritage. That's enough for me.

Frankly, to my eyes, Aang doesn't even look "Asian" as some people have said. His attire does look to be influenced by some Asian cultures, but he actually looks pretty Caucasian to me. Also, he can't be Asian because there is no Asia in this fictional world.

Anyways, I give the movie a 3 out of 5. If there's nothing else to watch, you might enjoy this. If you're under the age of 15, you might really enjoy it.

Episode 69: Kneel Before Pod!: The Movie

Kneel Before Pod returns! We start the show off with a little reflection on this year's E3 and the fate of conventions like it. Then in the second part of our show we talk about adaptations. Whether it's your favorite comic book or video game, I can guarantee that there is someone out there working to make it into a TV show or a movie. Then we top it all off with a big heaping helping of Fucking News.

PUT IT IN YOUR EARS!!!

Music featured in this episode:
Devo - Fresh
Goldfrapp - Happiness

Play Episode

Direct Download: Right Click and Save Podcast Home: http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/23055 RSS Subscription: http://feeds.feedburner.com/kbpod or just look us up on iTunes!

Project $10 - Get over it.

Today I was reading Game Informer magazine and I happened to see the little segment they call "The Good, the Bad, the Ugly." In this they label EA's most recent sports Online Pass as ugly. They claim it is going to hurt the poor little kids that are only saving a few bucks by buying a used game. I must say, I really don't care about those "kids."

If you're not familiar with the Online Pass, it's real simple to break down. To take advantage of EA Sport's rich and ever expanding online features, you will need an online pass. This pass is included with every new copy of their sports games. If you buy it used, you can buy a pass for a one time charge of $10. Recently some people have really been getting up in arms and saying this is nothing more than an attempt by EA to price gouge.

EA claims that this move is just to help support the cost of the online services. If you've played an EA sports game lately, this might make sense to you. Every year they add more interconnectivity between their games and website. For example, in the latest Fight Night and FIFA games, I uploaded a picture of myself on the EA website. I then connected my Xbox to their online service via the in game menu, downloaded my picture and then applied it to my custom player. So in both games I had custom players that looked like me.

Another feature that is offered in FIFA is uploadable instant replays. So if I score an amazing goal, I can pause it and then upload the video to the EA website. To illustrate this feature, here is my custom player that looks like me (though you can't see his face) scoring a really cool goal.

EA Sports: KC Wizards 0 - 2 Columbus Crew

When I was playing Fight Night, my menu would load audio updates from ESPN.com and play them as if I had a radio on in the gym. So I would get updates about other sports such as football and baseball. And I mean real life updates, not some silly pre-recorded fluff.

All of these features were made available to me for no additional cost. As long as I was connected to Xbox Live, I could access all these features. This is all well and good, but now EA is claiming that they are going to be stepping up their online game even more.

During EA's E3 presentation, they unveiled some of the details for their upcoming MMA title. To say they're ambitious is an understatement. EA is planning on more or less creating their own gaming league. In this league, gamers can cut promo videos to trash talk their opponents, participate in tournaments with real life prizes and be involved with live events. These live events will be broadcast over the internet to PCs and consoles with live commentary from real life MMA commentators. It is an unprecedented online presentation that combines the game itself and multimedia.

I see this as being a first step for a massive change in how EA presents their sports games and how players will play online. It will be risky and costly. Which now raises the issue of money. EA will have to pay for the bandwidth, the hardware and the staff to keep these online services going.

When you buy a used game, none of that money goes to the publisher. When you buy that used copy of Madden 2008 at Gamestop, all that money goes straight to Gamestop and no one else. That means someone could use EA's online services and they haven't paid a cent towards the upkeep of that service. Why should I, someone who mainly buys new games, have to pay towards the upkeep of these services while others don't?

So in the end, EA is saying it's fine to buy a used game. Feel free to play the variety of single player modes while we don't get a cent for it, but we draw the line. The line being they will not provide a maintained service to someone that hasn't even given them $10. It seems more than fair to me.