I turned off my cable some 6 or 8 weeks ago. I got back on Netflix and started catching up on movies I missed. Some have sucked (Superbad) some have been disappointing (Revolver) and some have been really good (The Kingdom).

Doing this also got me back to the theatre a couple of times too. Those who know me know that I use to go see the latest big release every Friday night from High School thru college (even left a party once full of girls once to go see 'GO'. Huh, wonder why I didn't get laid much)

I've since slowed the process down a bit. I've been to the theatre more times this year than I have in the last 2 years combined. But that's neither here nor there. What is relevant is that in the last week I've seen 3 outstanding movies.

First, ' The Kingdom' with a whole bunch of people in it. It's a Peter Berg flick and personally I think that all of his previous work sucks balls. This one however is very, very good.

Second, MOON which I blogged about this past weekend.

Finally, 'The Hurt Locker'. It's wrong to say that this is a great movie. Movies like this shouldn't have to be made. Then again you hope that wars don't have to be fought either. 'Locker' is done by Kathryn Bigelow (Point Break, Strange Days) and I think she's the only woman director in Hollywood who can make an action movie.

This movie is good in the way that the book 'Lone Survivor' is good. It's terrible and leaves a pit in your stomach but you later have a greater appreciation of what people do in combat.

'The Hurt Locker' is not some political movie. It is a war movie told through the eyes of a bomb squad. You see some of it coming but it still hurts. I can compare it to 'Apocalypse Now' and 'The Deer Hunter'. Not to say that this movie is on that level but over time it might be.

Most movies that are made about the Iraq war are one sided. Troops complaining or wondering what they signed up for/ how terrible the situation is, etc. This isn't. The only person I can compare the main character to or at the very minimum relate him to is Robert Duvall's character in 'Apocalypse Now'. If that doesn't tell you something right there then you need to watch apocalypse Now'.

This movie is not for everybody. I hope some people I know do not see it because I think it will learn them to the 'get our troops now and never go to war again' mentality and they'll lose the point of the movie.

If you're not sure then ask me. I'll give you my best judgement on if you should see it or not.

I think it was Movies.yahoo.com where I saw the preview to MOON. It has Sam Rockwell playing a guy who is working alone on the Moon for an energy company. Kevin Spacey is the voice of the Gerty, a robot there to help Rockwell and oversee the base.

It's always a challenge with a movie like this because nothing happens outside of Rockwell's space. He's in every scene and nearly in every shot. There is no bad guy to go against per say because he is the protagonist and partially the   antagonist.

What starts off as a movie about the slow boat to madness for someone who has been in isolation for nearly 3 years (his only contact is of taped messages back to Earth) turns into something else as he meets another version of himself after an accident.

The fact is the movie wouldn't work if Rockwell sucked. He did a great job portraying a character that on paper is something we've before. But he did a great job of selling emotion when all he had to act against was a machine and himself.

The environment that the director created and the score by Clint Mansell brought it all together.

Is this a great movie? No but it's worth seeing.

In case you live under a rock you'd know that Walter Cronkite died late last week. He was that "Voice of God" newsman on the television. It wasn't news unless it came from him. JFK wasn't dead until it came from him.

The rise of TV and mix in the baby boomer generation and you see how his death can stir up a bunch of emotions among the boomers.

Ask anyone one of the baby boom generation where they were when they found out JFK was killed and they know.

On the one hand I'm impressed by that and on the other I'm a little unnerved. I guess it will be same for people of my era when it's the 40th anniversary of 9/11. However I doubt we'll remember the newcasters and I'm ok with that.

The CIA apparently had a plan to develop a small team of assassins to kill top Al-Qaeda leaders and this has caused a stir in Washington.

Why? Mainly it was approved by former VP Dick Cheney and he apparently told the CIA not to tell Congress.

Once the new CIA Director Panetta got wind of it he went to Congress.

I don't get it. What's the big deal?

Former VP Cheney wanted to keep a clandestine program secret from people who want their face in front of a video camera every 15 seconds. And why is it a bad thing to try to kill Al-Qaeda leaders or any other terrorist leaders for that matter? Isn't that what the "war on terror" is all about? Oh excuse me, it's now an 'Overseas Contingency Operation'.

...really? Who came up with that name anyway? I can't get behind that.

–adverb

1.
with a side foremost.

2.
facing to the side.

3.
toward or from one side.

4.
with a deceitful, scornful, disparaging, or amorous glance.

–adjective

5.
moving, facing, or directed toward one side.

6.
indirect or evasive.