October 2008 - Izmovies - Watch Full New Movies movies Youtube

BIG NEWS!

Wow, this is cool. I've had to wait awhile to tell anyone about this, but now that I can I'm still pretty overwhelmed by it.

"The Escapist" (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/) is best known these days as the website home of video-game critic Yahtzee Croshaw's hugely popular "Zero Punctuation" weekly series. But it's ALSO a full-blown webzine of it's own with lots of other content. As of this week, that content now includes a weekly gaming/geek-culture news series called "The Escapist Show." You should be watching, it's awesome.

Anyway, "The Escapist Show" features along with it's regular content and contributors short humor segments provided by independent web guys, and next week (episode #2, tentatively planned to air on November 4th) the contributor will be... ME! I'll be doing a movie review - can't tell ya which movie yet. Cool, no?

I encourage everyone to check this out. Not just for me - the series looks really good and off to a great start. And if you like seeing my stuff on there, send some feedback over to Escapist telling them so, and maybe I'll get asked to come back for more. Look for it next week!

I'm back

The computer is basically back to life, yay. Need new printer and to fix something stupid I did trying to re-install Windows, but otherwise not bad. Updates should become frequent once more.

Seen Saw

BTW, this damn thing might actually get fixed soon. Yay, fixed.

I'm pretty sure I was done taking the "Saw" movies seriously after #4. It's not a bad franchise, just desperately played-out. #5 is basically 4 all over again: Lots of dull policework, increasingly uncreative traps, too much backstory on Jigsaw. Can this be over, now?

W

Hey, look! It's working for another five minutes or so tonight!

I'm going to say that "W" is worth seeing, though it's really not spectacular or incendiary enough to be any kind of classic. It's basically a re-enactment of "big moments" we all remember hearing about, with acors playing the now-infamous big player parts - think SNL meets downtime at an Oscars telecast.

You've heard by now that the supposed "surprise" is how affectionate the film is toward George W. Bush as a character - displaying an obvious fondness for his black-sheep-made-good origin story and treating his self-willed triumph over alcoholism and Christian re-birth in sincere, non-mocking terms - presenting him as a decent if none-too-bright man who dug way, way, WAY over his head in an attempt to please his father. It's all true, but what seems to be missing is how "fair" Oliver Stone's film plays it with nearly ALL of the main-characters. As it unspools, not only Dubya but also Paul Wolfowitz, Karl Rove (!), George Tenet and especially Collin Powell are the largely-sympathetic "good guys" of the piece while Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice and (of course) Dick Cheney are the villians. Rove's defferential presentation is what stood out the most for me - it's easy to villianize him as a character, but here he comes off as a brilliant yet unfairly-overlooked political nerd for whom a symbiotic relationship with the charismatic but details-challenged Bush was his overdue ticket to the big time.

It's also pretty intriguing how the film ends up in ADORATION of Bush the Elder despite the broader theme of Dubya immolating himself in plea for fatherly approval, setting him up as a Truman-esque missed-opportunity historical figure: The Republican president who shunned the Religious Right and knew the wisdom of not trying to occupy Iraq the first time. Fascinating stuff, overall.

Popmatters Interview

VERY QUICKLY before this peice of shit computer crashes AGAIN:

A little under 2 months ago there was apparently so little news going on that I was interviewed about the "Game OverThinker" video series by LB Jeffries of PopMatters. The interview - the first time I've ever been interviewed by a national (international, really) publication Internet or otherwise - is now up at their site. Link here: http://www.popmatters.com/pm/feature/64317/the-new-youtube-game-criticism-an-interview-with-moviebob/

No time for any more cleverness on my part except to say... wow, this is pretty cool.

In honor of "Bioshock" belatedly coming to PS3...

This is going to get me cyber-lynched, but it's a necessary preface: Whatever you think of her philosophical ideas, as a novelist Ayn Rand was kinda scattershot. She had her strong suits - story structure, scope, management of characters, Dickensian bad guy names (Ellsworth Tooey?) and an undeniable skill for stories of slowly-revealed systemic collapse. But, on the other hand, she quite simply seldom - if ever - cared to grasp not only how actual people behave or speak... but how characters in hyper-real books/movies behave or speak. It's one thing to have your characters exist primarily as avatars for philosophical ideals, it's another to have them act like walking speakerphones. Her characters don't speak, they ORATE in every situation regardless of context.

Which is why it was probably NOT the best idea to have her write the screenplay for the (appropriately wacky) 1949 adaptation of "The Fountainhead" and DEFINATELY not the best idea to agree to let her have absolute final-say on dialogue (though, given then theme of the work what the hell else would you expect?) And it's also why the only part of the film where the dialogue and mandated-delivery really WORKS is in the climactic "summation" scene wherein Gary Cooper's Howard Roark defends himself in court for the charge of destroying a building he'd been comissioned to designed after discovering that the agreement that his edgy, ultra-modern design not be altered without his consent has been violated (the book/character are basically a lionizing of Frank Lloyd Wright, if you've not read it.)

It still doesn't FULLY fit - this clearly isn't Cooper's natural diction and it's obvious he (and the rest of the cast, really) are working heavily from memorization. Still, it's quite a moment overall and, while I can't really get behind Objectivism in total THIS one speech is one I find to be a pretty fine presentation of ideas I'm generally pretty down with. Taken as a statement of personal integrity in general and the rights of artists/creative people in particular, I'd even call it somewhat inspiring. In any case, it's been on my mind, it says things I'd like to say better than I can say them, and it IS kinda the only part of the movie anyone needs to see. So, if you've never seen this, give it a watch (it's only about five minutes):

P.S. The YouTube link is the best-quality clip I could find, if you click it and the guy who put it up has other stuff on his setlist that you don't like I'm not endorsing it and I'm not responsible for it.

It lives

So... the computer which has been DEAD since about Friday is "back," so to speak... and thus so is what passes for my online "presence." Yay.

For what it's worth? "Max Payne?" Don't bother. Y'know what the problem with 90% of video game movies is? It's not that they're based on games... it's that they're based on the WRONG games.

There are PLENTY of games with original or at least uniquely-realized worlds and stories - Mario, Zelda, Bioshock, Dragon Quest, Prince of Persia, Fallout, Sonic, No More Heroes etc. all come to mind. Make a faithful adaptation of any of those and you'll probably get a good one. Trouble is, there are plenty of OTHER games that are basically just unofficial knock-offs of stuff that already existed - popular movies, for example - with the in-game benefit of interactivity. It's not exactly a new thing, either: Rastan, after all, was just Conan but you could PLAY it.

So one shouldn't REALLY be surprised when, for example, you make a Resident Evil movie and you get a Romero-ripoff... thats what Resident Evil IS. Likewise, since "Max Payne" was basically just a (very good) playable composite of every hard-bitten cop cliche from Mike Hammer to Dirty Harry to Martin Riggs, there's really no point in making a movie out of it and expecting anything OTHER than a generic cop thriller.

blegh...

I know it's impolite to ask this, but... Adobe? Guys? Is it possible for Flash 9 to NOT crash Explorer? Just asking.

Sorry for lack of updates this week. Reason: Computer went nutty, had to fix. Still working on that.

"He is a decent man..."

I'm not big on faith or belief. That's not to say I'm an atheist or even particularly anti-spiritual, I just prefer thought and knowledge 9 times out of 10 when I have the choice. Specifically, I'm not big on investing "faith" in things that exist in the physical world - you don't NEED to "believe" in real things because they're right there - you can see them, touch them, KNOW them and render a concrete personal verdict.

Which is sort of a long preface to explaining why there tends to be, in almost every major world event, a single key moment that stands out and reminds me why I tend to invest so little faith in, for example, my fellow man. Last week, that moment finally came for this year's U.S. Presidential Election:

Watch the whole thing.

Seen above: John McCain. War hero. American patriot. Distinguished United States Senator. A man more qualified in character and "on paper" to hold the office of President than any Republican or Democrat nominee who's run in my lifetime. A man who, by my accounting, was cheated out of the nomination by his own party in 2000 - a year in which I believe (yes, I said it) he would have won, would've been one of the great Presidents of history and would've left the country in a HELL of a better state than the man who won instead.

A man who - when confronted in the above clip by audience members at his one of his own speeches throwing lies, mischaracterizations, conspiracy theories and veiled racial/cultural epiteths at his opponent Barack Obama - responds by telling them that they are WRONG. That his opponent is not their enemy, that he is not a villian, that Obama is a good man and that, while he wants to win himself, they do not need to be AFRAID of an Obama victory.

Mark where you were when you saw this, because it'll be one of the only times you'll EVER see it: A candidate for President of the United States telling his supporters to, essentially, grow the fuck up. That they should vote for him because they think he's the better candidate or because they agree more strongly with his positions, not because of some trumped-up "battle between good and evil" pandering fear-mongering bullshit. He spoke to them like one adult to another, telling them they were behaving badly and expecting them to do better. You know, the things we used to expect LEADERS to do.

The audience's response? They booed him.

Every election we throw our hands up in exasperation over "mudslinging" and "negative campaigning." We put on our best Hamlet and wail about "why do they act like this!? WHY!!??" And we're completely full of shit about it. We know EXACTLY "why," and we're just trying to deflect the blame. Politicians campaign like spoiled, angry, entitled children because we MAKE THEM. We reward them when they do (i.e. George W. Bush gets to be the Republican nominee and later President after spreading a lie about McCain having an illegitimate black child in 2000) and when they do the right thing (see above) we PUNISH them. Because at the end of the day, sleazy and simplistic campaigns about character-assassinations and make-believe "good vs. evil" stagings WORK. Because enough people in this country are sufficiently ignorant, small-minded and intellectually WEAK for this to be the only way to stir them to political action.

We get the campaign we deserve.

Oh, BTW... MSNBC? Yeah. I'm the last guy to prattle on with the myth of the "liberal media boogeyman." HOWEVER, putting "McCain forced to defend Obama..." in the news blurb there? That's bad form. I know it makes for better copy and, let's face it, boogeyman bullshit or not we know he's not 'your' candidate, but that's poor sport plain and simple. Anyone watching the clip can see "forced" is a leading and contextually incorrect term to use here, not in the least because it's needlessly dismissive of a sincere action that you NEVER see presidential candidates take. Uncool.

Briefly...

QUARANTINE: No, I haven't seen "[REC]" yet, but this U.S. remake (same basic story: "last known video footage" of a news crew, firefighters and residents trapped in a building as an outbreak of weaponized super-rabies is turning everyone into feral cannibalistic crazies) has the stuff. I should preface this by mentioning that I absolutely DETEST "found-footage" movies on basic prinicipal - I regard it as the single most one-note, laziness-encouraging subgenres in all of modern filmmaking. There ARE standouts like Blair Witch and Cloverfield, but the VAST majority of the genre is absolute trash. But "Quarantine," in a single solitary scene (trust me, you'll know it when you see it, and if the scene occurs in "[REC]" the praise should apply retroactively) justifies the ENTIRE fucking genre. Seriously. As far as I'm concerned, every single "found footage" movie made thus far from "Cannibal Holocaust" to "Last Broadcast" all the way up to now has been building up to this ONE moment. Bravo.

BODY OF LIES: Poor Leonardo DiCaprio. Just when he was starting to hit the point where he no longer appeared too young to be playing men his own actual age along comes Ridley Scott to drop ANOTHER impossible physical acting job on him: An American spy who can convincingly disguise himself as an Arab terrorist in Iraq. Granted, he's only asked to do this in one scene, but it strikes a serious false-note in an otherwise pretty damn good War on Terror spy movie. It's basically a cops vs. feds vs. crooks deal set in the Middle East - DiCaprio is the field agent who immerses himself in the culture and street-level reality of enemy territory to take the fight to Al Qaeda, butting heads with Russell Crowe as the older CIA lifer who'd rather do things via smart-bombs, GPS satellites and his cell phone. Mark Strong gets another big "hey, who THIS now?" supporting part as the Jordanian Intelligence officer who's help they seek in setting up an anti-terror sting operation. Nothing Earth-shaking, but decent.

THE EXPRESS: True story of Ernie Davis, first black player to recieve the Heisman Trophy. The movie you're imagining as you read that sentence is the movie you get here, not a single surprise or stylistic shakeup. But it's a well-worn formula for a reason, and it more or less delivers. Dennis Quaid gets all the big lines as the tough-but-fair coach with a heart of gold. Extra points, at least, for concentrating almost exclusively on the football scenes and their direct external components and not weighing us down with extraneous backstory.

So close

(hat tip: http://www.joblo.com/bride-wars-poster )

To help understand why this blog is... like it so often is, here's a little peek into how my mind works. Pictured below, ALMOST the poster for the best movie ever made:

Sadly, as it turns out "Bride Wars" is NOT in fact a movie wherein Kate Hudson and Anne Hathaway star as a pair of strong-willed lesbian life-partners fighting the "war" over their right to legally marry and (one can only hope) embark on an eminently-photographable honeymoon - a film which, were it to exist, would be BOTH a powerful socio-political statement in the chief Civil Rights struggle of the age... a "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner" for our time... AND ALSO almost-unquestionably the most astounding never-thought-I'd-live-to-see-THAT image to be captured on film since man setting foot upon the moon.

But, 'tis not to be. Instead, the movie is about two longtime gal pals fighting to see who can plan the most elaborate, opulent wedding. Oh, well.

Hey... y'know what would be a great twist, though? If, at or around the end of the second act one or both women crossed some kind of "line" in terms of their scheming and alienated their spouses-to-be and/or one another; setting in motion some soul-searching and an eventual realization that getting too wrapped up in the material trappings of such things can cause one to lose sight of what's really important. No one would see THAT coming ;)

REVIEW: Appaloosa (2008)

In the big strokes, in the trailers and at first glance; "Appaloosa" looks like a well-done entry in the subgenre of Westerns focusing on the strong, mostly-silent bond of friendship between a pair of lawmen. And that it is, but with a unique twist at the center that turns it from a straight-up Old West drama into something that's one part romance, one part buddy movie and very nearly one part cynical pitch-dark relationship comedy - John Ford meets Neil LaBute and Kevin Smith.

Ed Harris (who also directed) and Viggo Mortensen are a pair of mercenary gunslingers running a martial-law-for-hire business, contracted by the dusty mining town of Appaloosa to deal with murderous carpetbagger/land-grabber Randall Bragg (Jeremy Irons) and his gang of thugs. Harris' Virgil Cole is a two-gun sly-talker while Mortensen's Everett Hitch is the quiet man with the big 8-gauge shotgun. In the kind of quiet, well-observed character beat that typifies the film, Cole constantly pours over the works of Emerson... but relies on Hitch to explain what the big words mean. The bottom line of the relationship - at work or otherwise is just as simple: Cole does the talking and takes point, Hitch always has his back; even if that means holding him back when his volatile temper gets the best of him (there's a definate "Searchers"-style post Civil War PTSD undercurrent to both men.)

The re-establishment of law in town and the confrontations with Bragg's goons all go according to plan - not just Cole's plan but the "plan" of the apocryphal laws of the Western genre (the two are nearly one and the same) right down to the one part that doesn't: The arrival of Renee Zellweger's Allison French - the innevitable beautiful, classy, too-fancy-by-far East Coast widow who - innevitably - stirs Cole's stony old heart and gets him to start fancyin' it's time to give up the killin' life and settle down. But then, the film takes a major left turn...

SPOILERS FOLLOW

She's a total slut.

No, really. That's the big "oh by the way" curveball of the story: Cole's idealized perfect lady - who astounds him with such alien ways as bathing before bed, playing piano and introducing him to window treatments - is something akin to the Old West equivalent of a nymphomaniac (or, as Hitch puts it, "I think Allie NEEDS to be with a man.") Not in mean way, not in a "liberated womanhood threatening the frontier tradition" way, not even in a mentally-unstable way... the gal just can't seem to stand sleeping alone. She throws herself at Hitch first change she gets, doesn't seem to need much coaxing to surrender to the bad guys and even seems capable of hooking up with Bragg - whoever the top man is at any given moment. THIS, of course, is a predicament that throws Cole into utter beffudlement.

The presence of this dynamic in an otherwise intentionally formula Western turns the whole world on it's head, and the heart of the film is watching what's essentially a "dude, my girlfriend is NUTS" movie play out between two old-school cowboys in the middle of an on-and-off shooting war with the bad guys. Harris' unparalelled expressive acting betrays enough pain to keep it from being outright "hillarious," but it's definately a comic sight to see these two weathered gun-hands sussing out the situation as though Allie were a mysterious, strangely-afflicted breed of horse - sounding at times like a grim, well-spoken Old Timey Dante and Randall from "Clerks:" Cole loves her, wants her, even admires her but, as he puts it "seems she'll fuck anything that ain't a goat." "She loves me when I'm around, then she loves you" he continues. Hitch agrees in the "simplest sense," but offers that "I don't think that's love in strictest sense." In many ways, this is every bit the "cowboys in uncharted territory" story that "Brokeback Mountain" was.

This is also where the film gets it's ultimate dramatic final thrust: Hitch always has Cole's back, it's his function in life to protect him from threats he might not see coming. So what, if anything, can he do to stop Allie's "condition" from hurting him when Cole is dead-set not to abandon her - and is it something he's willing/able to do? After all, the Old West offers solutions to the problem of "my best friend is in love with the wrong woman" that the modern world doesn't...

This was a nice surprise: An "offbeat" Western that works both as an action/drama and a slightly-skewed relationship piece. I liked it, I think a lot of you will, too.

FINAL RATING: 8/10

An American Carol

Yes, I saw it. Overall, considering I'm on the opposite side of most of the political points it's lecturing on behalf of, I don't think it's awful. The out-and-out jokes mostly land funny, and as individual vignettes they work just fine. The problem is the structure and the intent: The imposition of the "Christmas Carol" narrative and the fact that director David Zucker has a point to make that, for him, supersedes the jokes causes too many of the "skits" to go flat. You end up with several genuinely amusing, clever "bits" that just DEFLATE before your eyes as Kelsey Grammer shows up in a General Patton costume to explain the premise of the joke, sagely intone the message and deliver the lesson he wants us to take from it. What's more, it tries to go maudlin and serious in the third act, which is DEADLY in a movie like this. It's a unique kind of failure, though.

In case you hadn't heard of this (and, according to it's DISASTEROUS opening weekend take, there's a damn good chance of that) it's David "Airplane!" Zucker's satire of "liberal" politics, celebrities, interest-groups and Michael Moore in particular. It borrows the basic plot of "A Christmas Carol," with Moore look-a-like documentarian Michael Malone (Kevin Farley, Chris Farley's brother and actually very good in this) as he's visited on the eve of July 4th by the ghosts of JFK, Patton, George Washington (Jon Voigt) and Trace Adkins as Death who try to show him the negative impact his anti-patriotism has on his own life and the rest of the country.

During the "journey," some stopover skits include a visit to an alternate-reality South where Slavery still exists because Lincoln was against war, zombie ACLU lawyers, a dance number with aging-hippie College professors gleefully singing about how assured they are that the world situation today is EXACTLY the same as it was in 1968, Malone recieving the "Leni Reifenstahl Award for Documentary Filmmaking" and a visit to a pre-Pearl Harbor 40s anti-war "peace" rally (get it?) An interwoven secondary plot involves a trio of hapless Islamist terrorists (led by Robert Davi!) who are funding Malone's next movie (unknown to him) as a front to stage an attack.

On their own, the sketches themselves are mostly funny... but the follow-up attempts at seriousness kill it. And when it gets into the ALL-serious stuff - like Washington taking Malone back to a freshly-collapsed Ground Zero to lambaste him for his actions and worldview - are just dead in the water. They stop the thing cold, agree or disagree with what's being said.

Anyhoo... the punchline here is that it's a dud. A huge flop. 0pened at #9, despite massive promotion to it's target audience - in the "let's make it a hit to prove a point" vein - on talk radio, Fox News and the web. Here's the abridged version of some figures I dropped over at "Dirty Harry's Place" - a largely sociable and open-minded Republican-leaning movie site - earlier tonight: (original link: http://www.dirtyharrysplace.com/ )

"I mean, after all, I’ve been reading boxoffice analysis on the right-wing blogosphere for YEARS whenever a “liberal” film fails to outgross “Titanic,” along with the repeated talking points about how this proves that A.) box-office is the only real indicator of quality because it reflects how “da folks” feel, that B.) “liberal” Hollywood is out of touch and that C.) they’re pissing money away because a “conservative” movie would be HUGE if only they made one. So it only seems right and proper to look close at the numbers on this one."

"So, #9. Just to put that in some perspective: It opened behind - and made about 310,00 dollars LESS - on it’s heavily-promoted (on Fox, talk radio and the web) opening weekend than the Kirk-Cameron-fights-fires-for-Christ-movie made in it’s 2nd week PLUMMET. Know what else? It was only one spot ahead of “Religulous”… which was playing in less-than HALF the number of theatres. In fact, in terms of per-screen average Maher’s movie was the second highest ticket-seller, surpassed only be “Beverly Hills Chihuahua.”

"Boxoffice Mojo is FUN, innit? Let’s do s’more. Here’s some movies that opened better than “An American Carol.” See if you can detect a theme:

STOP LOSS: $4,555,117

LIONS FOR LAMBS: $6,702,434

CRASH: $9,107,071

THE CONTENDER: $5,303,900

TRAITOR: $7,868,465 ($10,006,327 when adjusted for three-day weekend)

JARHEAD: $27,726,210

RENDITION: $4,060,012

THE GOOD SHEPHERD: $9,912,110 ($14,142,760 when adjusted for three-day Xmas weekend)

It’s also, BTW, the lowest-grossing opening weekend EVER for a film directed by David Zucker. “Scary Movie 3″ - the absolute worst entry of it’s respective franchise - opened 10.6 TIMES as big. Even “My Boss’s Daughter” - the worst film Zucker has ever made - opened a full thousand bucks higher."

Now, what does all that mean? The same thing it "meant" when all the so-called "liberal" anti-war movies tanked: Bupkiss, really. Not a damn thing, other than that marketing still matters and that American audiences will, given the choice, generally avoid movies that want them to THINK regardless of what type of thoughts are in question. So maybe this can be where BOTH sides put the box-office-tally-to-prove-a-point thing to bed? Please?

New OverThinker episode...

Oops. Totally slipped my mind to post this, but a new Game OverThinker episode is up at Blog Numero Dos:
http://gameoverthinker.blogspot.com/2008/09/episode-thirteen-and-there-came-review.html

Also: "Blindness?" Nowhere near as bad as you've heard. Pretty good overall, actually. It's kind of choppy in a narrative sense, and what's left of the now-infamous Danny Glover narration is just SHOCKINGLY awful... but as a super-grim, allegory-heavy spin on the "outbreak" genre it works pretty well. I think for most audiences the big problem - as opposed to all the minor ones that keep it from being especially great - will be the structure: It's two hours long, bangs the first act out in a couple of minutes, settles into what would ordinarily be a bridge-story for the entirety of the (very, very long) second act, then charges into what looks to be an "all hell breaks loose" third act but instead it just kind of drifts into a kind of melancholy ambiguity. Easier to admire than it is to like.

Oh, and while I'm here: Happened to catch the start of SNL as I was getting home tonight. Just lemme say: Tina Fey playing Sarah Palin? Yowza. It's like the Reese's Cup of Hot Librarian Fantasy (y'know, if Peanut Butter was funny as hell and Chocolate was from Alaska and staggeringly obnoxious.)

Punch-Out etc

90% of the time when there's no new post for a day or two, it's because A.) nothing interesting is going on or B.) I'm having a really, really shitty day. Amazing how often those two intersect.

In any case, the 2-Disc "Iron Man" DVD is absolutely worth it, even with the near-criminal lack of commentary, just for the feature-length making-of doc on the 2nd disc. Some pretty interesting stuff in there, most notably a VERY candid Robert Downey Jr. who seems like the most "into-it" actor in any of these superhero movies so far. I mean, it's one thing to READ all the business when it was coming out about how grateful he was for the opportunity, and how seriously he approached the role... it's something else entirely to actually see him talking about it (in stuff taped BEFORE the film had opened and become a major hit) and realize "wow, yeah, he's totally sincere about this.) Also, it's fun to see how much this major-studio film seemed to resemble a seat-of-it's-pants indie production in the actual making: major script revisions post-casting, crisis/opportunity weather, and sooo much awesome footage of actors and stuntmen stomping around in suits of prop-armor. Great stuff.

Speaking of great stuff, Nintendo of Japan just now (as in an hour ago) held a press-conference to show off upcoming material. The biggest news: New DS with camera and mp3 capabilities in 09, plus access to a DS version of the Wii Virtual Console to download oldschool Gameboy games. Most AWESOME news? Apparently, the rumored "classic-franchise revival" for Wii next year is... PUNCH-OUT!!! Yes, Punch-Out with (presumably) Wii-boxing controls. Glorious. Also from the "whoa" department: A new-gen sequel to "Sin & Punishment," the legendary N64 shooter that non-Japan fans only got to (legally) enjoy via the Virtual Console last year. Wow.

Izmovies - Watch Full New Movies movies Youtube