My Top 100 Movies -- 20-16

20. Toy Story 3. The Toy Story saga defied the odds by having each movie actually be better than the one preceding it. The third movie is funny and deeply touching, and has the most adult story of the series -- it deals with what happens to your toys when you're too old for them. I raved about the movie when I first saw it, and my regard for it hasn't lessened in the slightest.

19. Dark City. I have written before about Dark City, how I feel it "out-Matrixes" The Matrix on all the most important levels. It must be brilliant, because I generally despise film noir, and despite the sci-fi trappings, this movie is honestly as deeply film noir as it gets. The visual style of the film is amazing, but not simply for its own sake; everything fits into the incredibly tight plot.

18. Up. Yes, two Pixar films ended up in my top 20. (Which shows you just how far they fell in my estimation with Cars 2; it soured me so much that I have yet to even see their latest, Brave.) The opening sequence of Up is as emotionally wrenching as anything ever produced in a live action film. The characters are wonderful, the scenery breathtaking in its detail, and the vocal performances evocative and entertaining. This is my pick for the best animated film ever made.

17. The Empire Strikes Back. Star Wars deserves praise for being revolutionary, but I think The Empire Strikes Back deserves even more for taking the formula and improving on it. George Lucas never relinquished more creative control in his franchise than he did here to director Irvin Kershner and screenplay writers Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan. Brackett and Kasdan breathed new life into the character relationships, particularly between Han and Leia, and Kershner got franchise-best acting performances from the cast. Add to it all a kick-ass battle sequence in the first act, a jaw-dropping plot revelation, and a brazenly downbeat ending where the good guys don't win. Plus John Williams upping his game even farther from the original film, creating Vader's iconic march and the sweeping love theme for Han and Leia. It would have been impossible for it not to all go downhill from here, but did it have to go downhill so sharply?

16. The Prestige. Christopher Nolan blew my mind with this wonderful adaptation he and his brother Jonathan did of a twisty and dense novel by Jonathan Priest. It's dark tale of revenge and misdirection with unexpected sci-fi accents -- perhaps something of a precursor to Inception, in a way. The exceptional cast includes Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Scarlett Johansson, and an effective turn by David Bowie. Loved it in 2006, still love it today.

Joining the Dark Side

It was right around four years ago that I bought my first smartphone, and discovered what an "indispensible luxury" it is -- something you can get by just fine without, right up until the moment you have one. And, in the very epitome of a "first world problem," each of the two smartphones I had in that period started out great, and then became unbearably bad by the end of my two-year contract.

I'm now on to smartphone #3, and I have at last joined the Dark Side: after two Android phones, I've switched over and bought an iPhone, the new iPhone 5.

I'm still in the process of getting adjusted to all the things that work differently (or use different terminology) to things over in Androidland. But I'm far enough along at this point to decide that overall, I'm very happy with the new purchase.

As for the phone itself, I'm very pleased with the battery life so far. My old phone was pathetically weak in this department, with even sparse use draining it down in a matter of hours. I haven't yet had what I'd consider a "heavy use" day on the iPhone, but with moderate use, I have yet to drain the battery even halfway before it's the end of the day and I'm charging it again.

The camera is a huge upgrade. The photos are great, and the reaction time of the shutter is blazing compared to what I had before. I've tinkered with the touted "panorama" option as well, and while I'm not sure how often I'll actually want it, I'm pleased with the results. I've used various "photo stitch" software before with some older digital cameras I've owned, and this is so easy by comparison that it's like a completely different thing.

The world of apps has some adjustments that will take some getting used to. One of the things that seemed appealing about iPhone was that it seemed to have a broader array of more useful and better looking apps than Android generally has. But you do get what you pay for. On Android, I always found it quite easy to find at least a reasonably useful tool for whatever I wanted that cost nothing; the Android side of the universe seems populated with altruistic programmers who are simply happy to know people are using their free software. The iPhone side of the universe, by contrast, is populated with companies of all sizes actually trying to make money. There are few truly free apps, just hopelessly disabled free versions of apps trying to convince you to upgrade to the paid version. (I would pay, if you gave me enough of a taste to know if it's good!)

As for using the phone, I would say that overall I'm fast becoming a believer in the way Apple is doing things. That said, there are a few minor things that I come across now and then that were absolutely done better on Android. (And because Google and Apple are fighting tooth and nail, don't expect them to change any time soon.) They're almost always little things, but little things can add up.

For example, the keyboard. The keys on Android would display lower-case letters most of the time, and only turn caps when you actually pushed the shift key. On Apple, the letters are Capped all the time, making it far less obvious at a glance whether you're about to type a capital letter or not.

Or even something as simple as arranging your app icons on a screen. Android gives you total freedom in this, positioning any icon anywhere you want. Apple forces you to fill a screen one slot at a time from upper left to lower right, not allowing you to leave any gaps in between.

Like I said, little things... but the truly perfect phone would incorporate the best of both worlds.

Much has been made about the buggy Apple Maps software, though I have yet to make much use of that. I have come up against an entirely different bug, though -- one that has apparently been in the iOS software literally for years now. My old iPod is capable of having Live Updating smart playlists based on when the song was Last Played. (That is, as soon as I play a song, the list automatically removes the song and replaces it with another.) I've read online that since iOS 3, this functionality hasn't worked on iPod Touches or iPhones; you have to plug into a computer and resync to iTunes to have Smart Playlists update on any characteristic other than song rating itself. On the one hand, I didn't use my old smartphone as a music player before, so it's hard to complain. On the other, my spiffy new iPhone that's supposed to do everything doesn't function as well as my years-old iPod. Why Apple hasn't fixed this bug after all this time is beyond me.

But in so many other areas -- text message interface, e-mail interface, web browsing -- I'm definitely liking my new iPhone better. So I guess I'm saying "one of us," "drink the Kool-Aid," "give in to the Dark Side." If you're in the market for a new phone, I'm very happy so far with the iPhone 5.

Of course, ask me again in around a year and 8 months, when I suppose it will be unbearable and I'll be counting down the days until my contract expires.

Bad Music

Even though Breaking Bad is probably my favorite show currently on television (for another eight episodes next year, at least), I don't regularly talk about it here on the blog. But I couldn't pass up the chance to mention the wonderful soundtrack album of the score that was released not long ago.

Composer Dave Porter assembled an album of 20 songs taken from all five seasons of the show. They showcase the unusual nature of the music, fitting for an unusual show. It blends folksy elements almost reminiscent of Firefly (as highlighted in the title theme), industrial percussion that sounds like it could have been taken from Stomp, and atmospheric strings dancing in an unsettling free time.

The strange cocktail works as well off the screen as on. Sure, it helps that the composer could curate more than 60 episodes for just one hour of music, but he did by and large make the right choices. I found the album to be loaded with 4- and 5-star tracks. I'd say they were taken from some of the best episodes of the show, but anyone who watches Breaking Bad will tell you that nearly all of them are the best episodes of the show.

I'm disappointed that this amazing and tense final season of the show has been broken in half, and even more dismayed that there's been no word yet on exactly when those final episodes will air. But having this soundtrack has been a pretty good way of filling the wait. I grade the soundtrack album a B+.

A Giant in Film

For a long time now, I'd heard good things about the animated film The Iron Giant. Directed by Brad Bird years before he joined Pixar and helmed The Incredibles, The Iron Giant was a traditionally animated film adapted from a 1960s novel. A young boy in Maine discovers a massive alien robot that fell to Earth, losing its memory in the process. The boy tries to care for the robot as a pet and teach it right and wrong, as a government agent zeroes in with hostile intentions.

Watching the movie really made me sad that you just don't see many hand-animated films anymore out of the U.S., because this one is gorgeous. The first 20 minutes are loaded up with amazing sequences both flashy and nuanced, but each truly impressive -- a hurricane tossing about a poor ship at sea; a crowded diner in chaos when a wild animal gets loose inside; a night trek into the forest lit by flashlight. The level of detail and complexity here is staggering.

There's solid voice acting here too. The young boy is voiced by an actual child actor, Eli Marienthal (Stifler's younger brother, American Pie fans), lending an air of authenticity to the film. His mother is voiced by Jennifer Aniston, with soft but effective charm. Cool beatnik Dean is embodied by Harry Connick, Jr. A great group of veteran actors round out the cast, including Christopher McDonald, John Mahoney, M. Emmet Walsh, and Cloris Leachman. And from the "it's weird, but it works" file, the Iron Giant itself is voiced by Vin Diesel.

The story is a bit lightweight, but it works overall. There are some good, sweet moments scattered throughout, though nothing that wrenches at the heart quite like, say, Finding Nemo or Up. Overall, the film does deserve the good reputation it has among critics. I give it an A- myself. Lovers of the art in animation in particular should check it out.

TNG Flashback: The Naked Now

"The Naked Now" is, as the otherwise nonsensical title suggests, a take on a classic episode of the original series called "The Naked Time." An infection spreads throughout the crew that makes everyone behave as though strongly intoxicated. (Frankly, it's more like a drug trip, but try getting that reference on television in the 1980s.) The disabled Enterprise is then threatened by debris from an exploding star, and will be destroyed if a cure can't be found to restore the crew's normal judgment.

It's frankly baffling and bizarre to me that this was the second episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation. That's not to say it wasn't entertaining. But if you were setting out to do a modern spinoff of a beloved classic cult show, why oh why would you have your first regular episode copy the plot of one of the more beloved episodes of the original? What if the audience concludes that every episode is just going to be a copy of an old one, but without the classic characters they know and love? And how meaningful can it be to show the characters "behaving out of character" when there really hasn't been any time yet to establish what "behaving in character" is like for them?

But perhaps weirder than all that is the fact that the episode mostly works. In fact, it's one of the better ones of the first season. The dialogue is a bit goofy at times (I mean among the characters who aren't supposed to be "drunk"), but the plot unfolds well, and the suspense beats generally work.

What really makes it all come together are the performances by the cast. Everyone seems to bring their A game here. LeVar Burton is strong in Geordi's moments of woeful self-pity. Gates McFadden is great in showing Crusher's fierce determination. Wil Wheaton is convincing as a young teenager experiencing his first high. And of course, Brent Spiner kills as the intoxicated Data.

But about that. How in the world does Data get infected? Even Picard doesn't believe it, challenging the android that such a thing should be impossible. Clearly this was a case of logic be damned; Spock's reaction to the infection was the best element of the original series episode on which this is based, so dammit they were going to have Data -- the "new Spock" -- do the same thing. And honestly, the writers probably weren't wrong here. The joke about Data being "fully functional" was a gift that kept giving to fans that met Brent Spiner or Denise Crosby at Star Trek conventions for years (decades!) to come, and even set up for more dramatic moments involving the relationship in future episodes.

This was the first episode scored by Ron Jones, who would last for nearly half the series before essentially getting fired by producer Rick Berman for writing music that was too interesting. His score here is fantastic, incorporating the Star Trek themes of other composers, the bombastic sensibilities of the original series music, and plenty of his own flair.

Some other random observations about the episode:

• The transporter has a "decontamination" setting meant to prevent disease from spreading. But as any disease-based plot would then need to address why the disease-of-the-week wasn't caught by the transporter, I think they never mentioned this again.


• Speaking of disease, Dr. Crusher goes for a shockingly long time without touching anybody and contracting the infection herself. Physical contact just isn't a part of 24th century medicine.


• The writers of the 1980s had no way to conceive of something like Google. Data spends hours searching for the logs of the original Enterprise's encounter with this similar situation.


• The other ship in this episode, the Tsiolkovsky, spent eight months doing research at one collapsing star. That's quite the reject assignment.


• I don't think people reacted negatively to Wesley being so smart, such a prodigy. But the fact that he commandeers the ship so easily in this episode (at a time when most of the crew isn't even infected yet) makes everyone else look dumb more than it makes Wesley look smart. And I think that's what primed the pump for "shut up, Wesley!" to catch on like wildfire a few episodes later.


• Man, it takes a long time for the engineer to basically just unplug the power feeding Wesley's force field. Off switches are complicated in the future. And on a related note, there's a giant window right there. Did no one think to just cut through it?


• Does this episode give us insight into how well each of the characters can hold their liquor? If so, Picard is truly a cheap date. Riker, by contrast, must have partied so hard in his youth that he needs half a keg to get drunk.


• The moral of the story seems to be: it doesn't matter if you're responsible for putting the entire ship in danger; if you get it back out again, you're a hero.

It's far from the most logical episode, but it really is one of the more fun ones, certainly of the first season. I grade "The Naked Now" a B. Nevertheless, I'm glad The Next Generation chose to avoid any further direct, self-referencing takeoffs of classic episodes after this.

The Break-Up

It's October on FOX, which means a baseball-enforced hiatus for most of its TV series. That includes Glee, which tonight ran only its fourth episode of the season. But if it's going away for a while, at least it ended with a strong episode.

There was a couple misfires in the episode. I was distracted by the bizarre split-screen moments that popped up throughout, as though it was an episode of 24. They were particularly bad in the otherwise excellent "Don't Speak."

The Left Behind Club also didn't work for me. It seemed both too light and comedic compared to the rest of the story arcs, and also just too light in general, considering how cruelly another character was being treated. (I don't question that a group of high school students could conspire to be that mean, but that doesn't mean the show needed to take such an "isn't it funny the way she's sitting there rocking and moaning?" attitude about it.)

But I thought the rest was great. I don't think the Rachel/Finn breakup scene quite matched the intensity of the one in the third season finale, but Lea Michele certainly gave it her all. I also appreciated that the script gave her an actual scene to play here, rather than falling back on the emotional cry-singing they often give her character. Don't get me wrong, she does that well, but it was nice to see something different here.

Besides, other actors had emotional singing covered in spades this week. Naya Rivera was fantastic in her choir room break-up scene (as was Heather Morris), and Darren Criss gave his best performance ever on the show in his edge-of-breakdown acoustic "Teenage Dream."

The song selections were rock solid. I've already mentioned the effectiveness of "Don't Speak" (powerful despite the photography) and the revisiting of "Teenage Dream." "Barely Breathing" was also a good performance (the first ever Blaine/Finn duet?). And the staging of the final number, "The Scientist," was great -- particularly the final shot that pushed in on Finn from the whole group, then pulled out in the same single take to reveal an empty stage.

The best episode of the season so far, I'd give it an A-. I think I'll be looking forward to the return of new Glee episodes more than I have for a long time now.

Get Your Freak On(omics)

In 2005, economist Steven D. Levitt and journalist Stephen J. Dubner caused a bit of a stir with their non-fiction bestseller, Freakonomics. The book tried to apply data mining and the study of incentives to a half-dozen examples of human behavior and sociopolitical issues. In 2010, a number of documentary filmmakers -- including Morgan Spurlock and Eugene Jarecki, among others -- each contributed a short segment to a film adaptation of the book.

Freakonomics does come off a bit like the hodgepodge it is. While the book's authors are featured throughout as interview subjects (and occasional narrators), each of the film's roughly 20-minute segments has a different tone, depending on the sensibilities of the documentary director responsible for that piece. But that's not to say the pieces -- each based around a chapter from the original book -- aren't compelling and provocative.

The first segment analyzes the importance of people's names. It looks at the different trends in naming (particularly among different races), and tries to address the question of whether a baby's name can have an effect on opportunities in later adult life.

The second segment looks at data proving a culture of match fixing in sumo wrestling, a sport noted for its honor and purity. It also draws some connections between this and economic manipulations that brought about the banking crisis of 2008.

The third segment -- certainly the most controversial in the film -- tries to determine the cause for the sudden drop in the U.S. national crime statistics at the start of the 1990s, a drop which the book authors believe cannot be explained by the reasons often cited by politicians and journalists. Their conclusion is sure to open your eyes, and then either tickle your brain or provoke a rage, depending on your sociopolitical leanings. Skip the rest of this paragraph if you don't want the SPOILER: they posit, with rather compelling supporting data, that the legalization of abortion in 1972, leading to fewer unwanted pregnancies, resulted in a crime drop two decades later when a large group of likely criminals simply didn't exist to be at the peak of their criminal activities.

The final segment follows a study that attempts to determine if struggling high school students can be bribed with cash incentives to improve their grades.

Each of these segments attempts to take a dispassionate view of a subject that few people could actually discuss dispassionately. It's the film equivalent of throwing a live grenade into a powder room and slamming the door. The authors and the filmmakers walk away, leaving you and any other friends you see it with to pick up the mess.

I was actually rather entertained by their suggestions, and intrigued by the explanations of their methods. Basically, it's a good movie to see if you want to pick up some provocative dinner party conversation material -- but it should be deployed only in an environment where you believe your fellow guests are either: A) like-minded politically; or B) capable of a civil debate of differences.

In other words, it's probably not the right movie for election season. But if you want to make a mental note and take a look some time after November 6th, I think the documentary is worth a look. I grade it a B.

A Trilogy Begins

Green Day has been back in the recording studio this year, and unusually prolific. Apparently, the band members surveyed their efforts and decided they had enough worthy songs to fill not just a double album, but to attempt a trilogy. Over a period of just a few months, they'll be releasing three albums of material. The first arrived last week, and is appropriately entitled ¡Uno!

I was more than a bit skeptical when I heard about this rock album trilogy. One of my favorite bands, Barenaked Ladies, did a similar two-album thing a few years back with "Barenaked Ladies Are Me / Barenaked Ladies Are Men," and I was forced to conclude that it was collectively one album's worth of good music and one album's worth of "B-sides at best" that probably shouldn't have been released. But I'm still a fan of Green Day, and decided I would have to at least take the plunge on this first album and see if it was any good.

If I was expecting for maybe one out of three songs on the album to be decent, then I was very pleasantly surprised indeed. ¡Uno! is shaping up as one of my favorite albums of theirs; given time to listen more to the tracks, I could maybe even see it becoming second only to American Idiot in my mind. In a welcome change of direction, they've abandoned the "concept album"/rock opera approach of American Idiot and 21st Century Breakdown and simply offered up a number of catchy, stand-alone songs.

But what makes it particularly enjoyable is that they haven't quite abandoned the formula completely. In fact, whatever past Green Day album is your personal favorite, you'll find at least one new track here that you really love; the album feels almost like a sampler of songs you could imagine were recorded at different past points in the band's long history.

Album opener "Nuclear Family" is slightly evocative of "Nice Guys Finish Last," and calls up the feeling of the album Nimrod. The anthem-like "Carpe Diem" is reminiscent of 21st Century Breakdown's "Before the Lobotomy." "Let Yourself Go" is a high-octane track more punk than anything the band has done in years, and will take you back to Shenanigans (or the exclusive track "Maria" from their Greatest Hits album). It's all there... tracks not exactly like, but comfortably similar to, those found on Dookie, American Idiot, Warning -- you name it, it's here.

That includes a little bit of experimentation, too. At the moment, my favorite track on the album is "Kill the DJ," a song that sounds almost more disco than punk, a four-on-the-floor dance track that I saw one reviewer compare to Franz Ferdinand (to the point of being a deliberate parody?).

I suppose Green Day's newest experiment still has two albums yet in which to possibly fall apart, but I'd say it's off to a great start. I give ¡Uno! an A-. Fans of the band should definitely rush to pick it up.

A Thinking Man's "Terminator"

Yesterday afternoon, I went to see the new film Looper. Set a few decades in the future, it's the story of an assassin paid to kill people sent back in time from his future. When he fails to kill his own older self, he becomes hunted by his own associates.

There's actually a good deal more at play in the plot than this intriguing but simple "man on the run" premise, but I enjoyed the way the film gradually unfolded its deeper themes, and would rather not spoil any more than necessary. Suffice it to say that the movie is an interesting exploration of what a person driven to extremes will do, and leave it at that.

The script, by writer-director Rian Johnson, is well-written and keeps its focus on the characters even as it explores most aspects of its high-concept sci-fi premise. I say "most," because it doesn't answer the one question that a friend of mine posed after first seeing the preview: "if there's more than one of these 'looper' assassins, then why would you send a person back to be killed by his younger self if you could send him to someone else instead?" (Though the movie does provide a vivid explanation of why the younger self would be highly motivated to go through with actually killing his older version.)

Assuming that question doesn't gnaw at you, then you can enjoy Looper as a "thinking man's Terminator." Not that the original Terminator was a dumb movie, by any stretch. (In fact, I might even say that the fun action sequences of the Terminator makes me like it slightly more.) But Looper is more interested in tickling the brain than releasing the adrenaline, and does what it sets out to do very well.

The cast is wonderful. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, in particular, is exceptional. He endured a lengthy (and seamless) makeup process on this film to make himself look more like his character's older version, played by Bruce Willis. But he doesn't let the makeup do all the work. JGL alters everything about his performance, adopting the soft-spoken whisper Willis deploys as his trademark, effortlessly mimicking many of Willis' facial expressions, and even walking with a different physicality. Despite the fact that we know exactly what Bruce Willis looked like 30 years ago, you never for a moment doubt JGL as being a 30-years-younger version of Bruce Willis.

It could go without saying, but Bruce Willis is also very strong in his role. His character is not merely "the hunted," but takes on a specific mission in the past for intensely personal reasons. The actor has to convey a lot of this emotion and motivation without dialogue, and does so very well.

The supporting cast is filled with a variety of wonderful actors. Emily Blunt is strong as a determined mother of an unusual little boy. Jeff Daniels plays a powerful crime kingpin with relish. Fans of the TV series Covert Affairs will recognize Piper Perabo, while indie movie lovers will enjoy a memorable appearance by Paul Dano. There's also a great and tense turn by the wonderful Garrett Dillahunt, who has excelled in Deadwood and Raising Hope, and every stop in between on the drama-comedy spectrum.

But making perhaps a bigger impression than any of them is young Pierce Gagnon, as the boy being raised by Emily Blunt's character. The story calls for him to be a perfect blend of cute and creepy, of wise and vulnerable. He pulls it off wonderfully, delivering one of the best child actor performances I've seen on film in quite some time.

Those expecting the more wall-to-wall action affair the trailer implies may find the middle chunk of the film a bit slow, but overall Looper is a very compelling and enjoyable movie. I rate it a B+. It's well worth checking out in theaters, or certainly worth catching later when it comes to DVD.

A Stroll Through the Park

The new TV season continued to unspool tonight with the debut of 666 Park Avenue on ABC. The ads for the series put out that common horror vibe -- could be good, could be bad. But I was willing to give it the benefit of the doubt for the cast.

Well, for one person mainly. Terry O'Quinn was not only a highlight of Lost in his performance as John Locke, but he's been the best thing about a number of movies and TV series both middling (Millennium) and terrible (Harsh Realm). His nuanced acting elevates just about everything he's in, which to me made this series worth checking out.

That said, there were other people in the cast I've seen before. Vanessa L. Williams is well known, of course, most recently wrapping up a stint on the final seasons of Desperate Housewives. Dave Annable gave a solid performance on the drama Brothers & Sisters. And Rachael Taylor is no stranger to horror, having given a decent performance in the not-all-that-decent film Shutter.

But despite connections to all those films and series, 666 Park Avenue can best be compared to another show entirely: American Gothic. That brilliant-but-cancelled one season show from the late 1990s starred Gary Cole as the evil sheriff of a small North Carolina town, capable of wielding demonic powers against the town's inhabitants in his apparent quest to simply be diabolical. His deliciously wicked performance was just the best of many reasons to tune in. (Too bad most people didn't.)

Unfortunately, this sets a rather high bar in my mind for 666 Park Avenue to hurdle. Essentially, the rural town setting is swapped here for a New York highrise, but the premise seems the same: a man with apparently demonic powers tries to corrupt innocent people into doing evil.

Being on ABC, the network that has perhaps launched more successful "genre" shows than any other, this new series may well go on to a longer life than American Gothic -- but the question is whether the content itself will improve. For the moment, I'm willing to give it a couple of episodes to see if it gets there. On the short list of actors that could compete with Gary Cole in presenting a thoroughly evil character in a fun way, I believe Terry O'Quinn could make it.

But judging just from the pilot, I'm skeptical. Basically, if this series hasn't shown significant improvement by the time the new incarnation of American Horror Story starts up in a few weeks, I'll probably just drop it and move on.

Resort Review

Thursday night also saw the debut of the new series Last Resort on ABC. It was co-created by Shawn Ryan, creator of The Shield and showrunner for The Unit. The series chronicles the rogue crew of a submarine, the Colorado, whose captain questions a suspicious order to fire missiles on Pakistan and winds up hunted by the United States.

The pilot was a taut and very slickly produced hour of television. It reminded me of the pilot episode of Lost, in that it seemed to achieve film-quality production value on a television budget. The sets and the visual effects were all a cut above what is typical for television. The episode also had a film director, as seems to be the new custom for debuting high concept TV series. Martin Campbell, director of many action films (more notably the James Bond films GoldenEye and Casino Royale), was at the helm of this first episode.

I mentioned The Unit earlier because this show seems to have a few connections to the show. Besides the obvious military setting, the two central characters seem cut from the same cloth and cast with similar actors. Andre Braugher plays the submarine captain, a powerful leader who can project authority with calm grace (much like Dennis Haysbert on The Unit). Scott Speedman is his executive officer, a soft-spoken younger man who is largely unaware of his own authority (much like Scott Foley on The Unit; interesting that both Scotts themselves were together on the show Felicity long ago).

Both series include Robert Patrick in their cast, but here is where the apparent similarities fall aside. His character here is a much more skeptical and down-to-earth man (rather than the beyond-reproach leader of The Unit). The are several other characters in the main cast, though only one has a significant part in this first episode -- Daisy Betts as the sub's navigator. She's part of an interesting subplot dealing with women in a position of authority aboard a submarine, but it remains to be seen how that will play out in future episodes. I was also intrigued to see Dichen Lachman, from Joss Whedon's Dollhouse, though we barely get a taste of her character in the first hour.

I found the first episode to be very entertaining, but I'm left somewhat skeptical about what the series itself will be. The plot of a rogue submarine seems very much made for a film or a novel, a story with a finite and set ending. Telling an open-ended story about it seems to me to present a great challenge -- though the final few minutes of the pilot very methodically (and somewhat awkwardly) tried to lay out exactly what the weekly premise will be. Also up in the air is whether the show will be able to maintain the high price tag appearance on a regular basis.

But all that said, if the show can deliver the same kind of fun and excitement (maybe with a few less scenes of awkward exposition), then it could be a fun weekly thrill. For now, I'm planning to stick with Last Resort and see how it develops.

An Element of Surprise

I couldn't help my curiosity over last night's premiere of the new TV series Elementary. The BBC's Sherlock series is so incredibly brilliant that the mere idea that someone else would also try to do a modernized take on Sherlock Holmes seemed somewhere between foolish and insane. But what then seemed truly insane was that many critics who sampled the first episode reported that Elementary was actually one of the stronger pilots of the new TV season.

I will say right up front that comparing Elementary to Sherlock does indeed leave Elementary lagging far behind. But that said, I actually found it not all that difficult to set aside the desire to make that comparison. Sherlock comes across like an ongoing series of feature films, because of both the 90-minute format and the sky-high production values. The pilot episode of Elementary, on the other hand, felt very much like the kickoff to a procedural crime show. Taken on that level, I found myself comparing it not to Sherlock, but to other crime shows -- particularly other CBS shows like the incarnations of CSI.

In that comparison, Elementary is exceptional. The mystery of the hour was more intriguing. The methodology of solving it -- the observations and deductions of Holmes versus the lab montages -- was far more compelling. And the focus on character was far greater. The back stories of Holmes and Watson were both well developed, as was the relationship between them.

Of course, you can't talk about that relationship without noting the significant change made here by series creator Rob Doherty -- he changed John Watson into a woman, Joan Watson. Fortunately, this seems to have been done with no intent of doing the typical "will they be a couple?" tension typical of most TV series; the script in fact sets up and mocks this very notion in an early scene. Instead, the change to Watson seems to be most useful in altering how that character will interact with the rest of each story; having a woman in the mix will provide a vehicle for different observations, different communications with clients and suspects, a helpfully different sensibility.

When it comes to evaluating the performances of the lead actors, Jonny Lee Miller and Lucy Liu, it does become impossible not to want to stack them side by side with Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman. Those two men are doing such brilliant work on the BBC show that I simply accept them as the real Holmes and Watson, almost as though the 19th century version imagined by Arthur Conan Doyle had never existed first. That said, Miller and Liu do seem to be establishing an interesting rapport right from the get-go in this first episode. And again, the work is far and away better than that on any other CBS crime procedural.

So the bottom line is, I really did like Elementary. It's good in a different way, sufficiently different from the BBC's Sherlock that maybe it will become a regular show for me. We'll see.

Not that I won't be chomping at the bit when series 3 of Sherlock finally arrives.

Makeover

I thought tonight's new episode of Glee was the weakest of three so far this season, though still more enjoyable than some of the scattershot messes we were getting last year. There were plenty of pieces working well this week; they just didn't blend together quite as neatly as things in the first two season 4 hours.

The best element for me this week -- and it almost shocks me to say this -- was Sue Sylvester. She was caustic without being overly nasty, adversarial without being villainous. And she was funny as hell. Her pep talk to Schu, astute analysis of the teachers in the faculty lounge, annoyed participation in the debate, and snarky reading of the results -- any one of those scenes would have been the funniest moment of an episode.

Funny though she was, however, what she had to say about the class president storyline (and the nonsensical addition of vice presidential candidates) was essentially spot on. The plot was recycled from last year and even less interesting than it was then. At least it was resolved in one episode. And at least it was the grease in setting up what might be a good friendship between Blaine and Sam.

What it all meant for Blaine and Kurt was interesting too. I am the sort of person who likes to see some realism and sometimes unhappiness for the characters in the shows I watch. I don't necessarily want to see all the established couples break up, but I think it's a truthful thing to show that long distance relationships are hard, and that high school relationships rarely last. (And I'm a big fan of getting Blaine to take off the bow ties.) We'll see how this one plays out.

The relationship between Rachel and Brody continued to develop, leading to the moment we all knew would come -- the return of Finn. Personally, I'm looking at that comparison and not seeing any way Brody isn't a major upgrade. Maybe this is how people end up being on "Team [Somebody]." Dammit, Glee, for making me care about such things!

Sarah Jessica Parker's introduction to the show was a bit strange. It strained credibility to have her so quickly open up to Kurt and confide her wishy-washiness in him, though I do think it's an interesting storyline for Kurt to have him realize that maybe his big Broadway dream isn't really what he's meant to end up doing. There's another interesting and truthful story -- to be so sure of something, only to find out that something else is a better fit. I'm interested. (Though to proclaim Kurt a leader of fashion in the same week that he wears his weirdest ever outfit -- that wolf shirt with tail hanging off the belt -- was wild.)

As for Schu's storyline, applying for a temporary position outside the high school? Not sure what to make of this one. It felt like it might just be a way of making artificial conflict down the road for Will and Emma. Then again, it might be a vehicle by which Gwyneth Paltrow or Idina Menzel comes back for a guest spot later as substitute teacher. I'd be okay with that.

The songs this week were mostly drab, I thought. "Everybody Wants to Rule the World" was one of Darren Criss weaker performances, and the staging was full of total weirdness including a bizarre LARPing/miniatures hybrid. "Celebrity Hole" had some awesome choreography (especially with the flags), but the song choice seemed a weak stretch to fit the plot. "The Way You Look Tonight / You're Never Fully Dressed Without a Smile" felt awkward; singing all the lyrics of one song, then inserting the last line of a chorus from another, doesn't come across as a true mashup. "A Change Will Do You Good" was probably the winner of the night for me, though the steamy dancing was far more effective than the stuff outside the dance studio -- particularly the creepy old guy taking photos.

I'd call this episode a B. Not bad, but Glee has me expecting better these days (I'm happy to say).

My Top 100 Movies -- 25-21

25. The Fifth Element. This movie is a masterful blend of things that are often mutually exclusive in movies. It has pulse-pounding action, but is always smart. It has eye-popping visuals, but there's substance in the plot. It's driven by a science-fiction premise, but it's quite basic in story and very accessible. It also has an exceptional cast. Alright, so Chris Tucker is definitely a "you'll love him or hate him" element, but Bruce Willis and Milla Jovovich are wonderful leads, Ian Holm a delightful comic foil, and Gary Oldman a wonderful mustache-twirling sort of villain. This is one of only a handful of movies I saw twice in one day in the theater -- and I would gladly go see it again if a theater was doing a retro screening of it.

24. Se7en. Director David Fincher has made several great movies, but this one is his finest. I've raved about it before. The tone is perfectly dark and unsettling. Though less overtly violent than many films, this movie makes you feel the weight of the violence it depicts, and it is horrific. Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman are exceptional, and play perfectly off one another. The unexpected twists in the normal structure of a detective movie are riveting. And the climax with Kevin Spacey is one of the best movie endings ever.

23. The Ring. I've seen dozens of horror films. Most are cheesy and terrible. A few manage to offer up one or two solid scenes of creepy suspense that make the ride worthwhile. But none offer as consistent a level of unsettling dread as The Ring. The creepy, lurching, long-haired girl of this movie's twisted and mysterious video tape comes from a long line of "creepy girls" in horror movies, but I find her to be the best of the lot. I think this is the perfect movie to watch alone at home with the lights -- and the phone -- off.

22. Star Wars. Though there are times when it seems like George Lucas has been spending the last 35 years aggressively trying to destroy everything that was ever cool about the Star Wars saga, the original film is still transcendent. I'm not sure I could ever sour on it so much as an adult that it would make me forget just how much I loved it as a kid, and it's still through those child's eyes that I watch the film today. Star Wars is loaded fantastic swashbuckling thrills, and heroes of many types for everyone to enjoy or imagine being. This is also the film that began my love of movie soundtracks with John Williams' indelible score.

21. Edward Scissorhands. Tim Burton's best film is this surprisingly emotional tweak to the Frankenstein story. The mash-up of gothic horror with vintage suburbia is a visual and narrative treat, and the performances from the entire cast are excellent. I could continue to gush, but it would likely be a replay of my review from a few years ago.

TNG Flashback: Encounter at Farpoint

Back in July, I wrote about the release of the newly remastered Star Trek: The Next Generation on Blu-ray (and the special one-night theater event to celebrate the release). This year is the 25th anniversary of the series, and this new release has rekindled my love of the show that essentially set my career path in game design by leading me to Decipher, makers of the Star Trek Customizable Card Game.

In fact, that 25th anniversary is this very week. And on this occasion, with my rekindled love, I've begun watching the episodes again from the beginning. And I plan to talk a little bit about each episode here on the blog (assuming I can find time for it between all the other in-progress, incomplete article series I have rolling here). Given the recently announced December release date for remastered Season 2, I'll have around five months between each release anyway, so my rather leisurely pace should work out just fine.

The series began with the two-hour episode "Encounter at Farpoint." The newly launched Enterprise is sent to pick up members of its crew at Farpoint Station, a mysterious base constructed by an alien species and almost miraculously suited to Starfleet's needs. On the way, the powerful being Q intercepts the ship and charges the crew with proving they are no longer the "dangerously savage" human race of centuries past, by unraveling the mystery of how the station was built.

The episode is a peculiar blend of competing elements. It simultaneously wanted to demonstrate how the new series would follow in the mold of the original, but clearly wanted to "one-up" the original and be more impressive and modern. It clearly wanted to include many personal moments to establish all the characters, and yet in many cases those characters weren't much like what they'd become.

Even the story is a bit schizophrenic; I've read that the episode was originally planned for one hour, but a last minute request was made to expand it to two hours. This led to the addition of the Q character and subplot -- ironically the far more effective and memorable element of the episode.

That said, there's more than Q padding this episode out to its full run time. The pace of the pilot is very unpolished, with lots of scenes that include oddly lingering camera shots and loosely timed dialogue. There are long, panning shots that show off sets and models. Several scenes are completely unnecessary to the plot, serving only to demonstrate how the new show is "bigger and better" -- Look, the ship separates in half! How cool is this holodeck thing?!

Some of this awkwardness comes from the director. There are several noticeably odd placements of the camera, and oftentimes the editing choices within a scene don't depict a natural emotional arc for a character (a character will be at one emotional level in a first camera angle, but a different intensity in the next). But a lot of the strangeness is baked into the script -- particularly in the scene in Q's courtroom, which includes an uncharacteristic joke from Data and an odd outburst/monologue from Tasha. Many "act outs" arrive with no dramatic tension whatsoever, presenting a commercial break even in the middle of a scene.

But of course, the grand rebirth of Star Trek couldn't have begun here if it was really all that bad. There's plenty here to like. Patrick Stewart gives a wonderful performance of many layers -- hard edges toward Riker and Q, softer moments with Beverly and Wesley. The "handoff" scene with DeForest Kelley as McCoy is a perfect representation of the old doctor, and has extra poignancy in knowing that he was actually the first actor of the original cast to pass away.

Composer Dennis McCarthy does what's probably his best score work on the entire series. Producer Rick Berman ultimately pushed for a quiet "musical wallpaper" approach to the show, and McCarthy would ultimately comply. But here at the beginning, his score is bombastic and entertaining, the only odd moment being when the entire theme song (by Jerry Goldsmith) is tracked in straight from the main title to score the saucer separation sequence.

As I noted when I watched those two episodes at the movie theater, the acting pool of the 1980s wasn't very talented. There are a number of painfully bad line readings from a variety of no-name characters. But there is a hilarious moment from a random female crew member who totally checks out Riker's ass, plus the first appearance of Colm Meaney (in a red uniform!) as the then-unnamed O'Brien. (No wonder they kept using him; everybody else was terrible.) Guest star Michael Bell as Zorn gives a performance that is simultaneously over the top and completely forgettable.

But John de Lancie as Q is excellent. Not only does he establish a character that would be brought back almost every season (and in two other Star Trek series), but he's more nuanced here than some of the main actors still trying to find their roles. Particularly impressive is the opening sequence on the bridge, in which Q switches into different costumes from different periods of Earth history; with each costume change, he adopts a noticeably different persona.

Some other random observations that I found worthy of note:

• Poor Marina Sirtis had it tough in this episode. The script wrote Troi as practically bipolar in her expression of the emotions she sense empathically. Sirtis gave it her best, acting many scenes with real tears brimming in her eyes. But it read so strangely in the finished product that I think it actually crippled the writing of her character for several years of the series. No one wanted to see that kind of thing again -- not the writers, not the fans, and probably not even the actress herself.


• The Ferengi are mentioned in this episode, as a worthy menace with cannibalistic tendencies. Needless to say, they went in a different direction.


• Worf actually comes off less aggressive than Tasha in this episode.


• Jean-Luc Picard apparently did not get to pick his own first officer, nor did he even seem to have sought the Enterprise for his command. (He says at one point that Starfleet "has given me a ship with children aboard," implying he was just following orders by taking the flagship assignment.)


• The episode ends with a button so typical of the ending of a classic Star Trek episode, you half expect Alexander Courage's original theme to start playing over the end credits.

I also have to say again that these remastered episodes are truly spectacular. The newly engineered 7.1 audio track is wonderful, and the visuals are truly stunning. For example, I never realized before that the two creatures at the end of the episode were of slightly different colors (implying a male and female, I think). And some of the model shots of Farpoint Station and the Bandi city are really almost too clear in their restoration; you can tell that they're models and can perceive their miniature size on screen.

Encounter at Farpoint was a bit of a rocky start for the series in many ways, but with enough hints of greatness in it to get the ball rolling. Certainly it pulled me and many other fans in back in 1987. I'd grade it a B-. By the standards of the rather weak first season, that's actually a pretty good mark.

A Hole Day

I've lived in Colorado most of my life, but there are a good number of tourist attractions around the state that I've never been to see. On Saturday of this past weekend, I crossed one off the list, driving the two hours with my boyfriend to see the Royal Gorge.

A 1,000-foot deep canyon carved by the Arkansas River, Royal Gorge became a tourist spot in 1929 when the Royal Gorge Bridge was built. It was the highest bridge in the world for the rest of the century, and even today remains the highest bridge in the United States. And indeed, the view is stunning:

But impressive though it is, there is something that rings a bit false about the place, and a quick internet search revealed why. The bridge wasn't built out of any need to get from here to there; it was built specifically to turn the place into a tourist attraction, to make it the "Grand Canyon of the Arkansas."

There are attractions there -- an air tram you can ride across (we did), an inclined railway you can ride to the bottom of the canyon (did that too)...

...and other activities. But apparently the place is a "through Labor Day" sort of attraction, because a lot of the food stands and other areas were already closed down for the season. And some of what's open is a bit lackluster. Walking across the bridge, for example, we could hear the sounds of someone committing karaoke homicide on "Two Tickets to Paradise." Or so we thought. When we rounded the corner and saw an actual performer with his name on the sign... well, let's just say that song is never going to be the same for me.

Ultimately, I felt glad that I live here in Colorado and spent only a few hours to get there. If it was the sort of thing I'd traveled across the country to see, I think I'd have been underwhelmed. It's no Yosemite, I guess I'm saying. Or maybe I'm saying that the view was beautiful, but no more so than the view from the top of a Colorado 14er -- and there's something about earning that view through a challenging hike that made the drive-to-Royal-Gorge experience less special.

If you live in Colorado, by all means put the Gorge on your list. (For a summer month.) You shouldn't go as long without seeing it as I did. But don't expect to make a whole day of it.

Or maybe I'm just jaded by all the gorgeous scenery in Colorado.

2012 Emmys Snark

As is tradition, a few friends gathered at my place to snark at this year's Emmy Awards. Here are some of the better comments and other random observations:

The callback to the disastrous "reality show host"-hosted Emmys was inspired.

One of the Downton Abbey actors is SUPER sunburned. You can't let Brits out in the sun.

Do you suppose that Louis C.K. was a last minute replacement for Will Arnett to present with Amy Poehler?

If Eric Stonestreet wasn't actually getting hairy chest pictures for fans before, you can bet he will now.

Aaron Paul is wearing a 70s wedding tux.

Julie Bowen manages to overcome the "deceased favorite" vote for Kathryn Joosten. She also appears to have dressed to glow in the dark at a rave after the ceremony.

Looking at the other amazing actors in the Best Comedy Actor category, it seems to me people came together to give Jon Cryer a "You Deserve This For What You Put Up With In The Last Two Years" Award. And no one seemed more surprised by it than Jon Cryer.

Every year, Amy Poehler is part of a great presentation gag. This year's with Julia Louis-Dreyfus is no exception.

Tom Bergeron shows why he won, accepting his reward with humor AND a plug for his show all in under 30 seconds.

Claire Danes might have the worst dress of the night. It's the color of a squash, the texture of a bathmat, and the cut of a sack.

I would have been happy with most of the Best Supporting Drama Actor category winning. Aaron Paul was certainly deserving.

"Hold my nunchucks" was really the only funny thing from that Tracy Morgan thing.

No one can go up against Maggie Smith.

I hope Jeremy Davies' hair is that way because he's filming more Justified episodes.

Julianna Margulies is wearing drapes.

When Tina Fey and Jon Hamm walked out, they played the Mad Men theme instead of the 30 Rock theme. He's been on her show, she hasn't been on his -- I think the band made the wrong call.

The only thing harder to do than go up for an award against Maggie Smith is to go up for one against The Daily Show.

It's goofy that the band is even trying to play the theme from American Horror Story as Jessica Lange walks to the stage.

Way to go with the callback joke, Ellen DeGeneres.

People start to applaud during the In Memoriam montage before remembering that the trend now is not to applaud during the In Memoriam montage at award shows.

Lucy Liu wins best dress of the night. In a few days, we'll see if her new show is equally good.

I will only accept Jonathan from Buffy the Vampire Slayer winning a writing award over Steven Moffat.

Julianne Moore won what she was up for, apparently making her a better Sarah Palin better than Sarah Palin.

Who sold Julie Bowen, Claire Danes, Julianne Moore on this dayglo yellow-green idea?

Ginnifer Goodwin and Emily Van Camp came to the stage straight from clotting blood and haunting a mansion, respectively.

Kevin Costner just shiny objected staring at his own Emmy.

I saw Game Change. Sherlock was robbed.

I certainly would have picked Breaking Bad over Homeland for Best Drama Series... but I'm glad the Emmy voters finally woke up from their only-sometimes-rational love for Mad Men.

The people of Modern Family have to take their Emmys with them to go get more Emmys.

Cheap Love

Most people are aware of the daily "Gold Box" deals at Amazon.com. Occasionally, these deals are for MP3 album downloads; one such deal recently offered several bestselling albums of the year-to-date for just 99 cents a piece. And while current pop music isn't much my thing, I did find one selection I was willing to chance a buck on, the newest album from Jason Mraz, Love is a Four Letter Word.

I wouldn't call myself a "fan" of Jason Mraz, but I do have a sprinkling of his earlier music. The bulk of it borders too much on Easy Listening for me to get truly excited about it. However, some of his songs pick up the pace and serve up machine-gun-fire lyrics full of clever rhymes. I do enjoy listening to those tracks, for the way they really do require active listening to keep up.

Fortunately, I spent only a dollar on this new album. It skews heavily toward that sleepy, overly introspective (and phony feeling) material I don't like. Quiet percussion and soothingly strummed acoustic guitar chords dominate the songs -- though "dominate" seems like a far too active word to properly convey the laid back tone of the music.

There are a handful of tracks that step out a bit from the pack, but none that are likely to make it into regular rotation for me. "Everything Is Sound" is kind of schmaltzy but also fun, with an effective and bouncy melody that pulls you in. "Frank D. Fixer" has nice music, but is a drop in an ocean of love songs with on-the-nose "I wish I could fix you" lyrics.

This isn't an "I want my dollar back" situation, but I certainly feel like I should be warning people not to pay full price for this album unless they're die-hard Jason Mraz fans. (In which case, you must already have the album.) The two or three better tracks pull the whole up to maybe a C- average in my book, but that's certainly nothing to recommend.

Low Valley

Of the Sherlock Holmes short stories I've read thus far, I found "The Boscombe Valley Mystery" to be the most disappointing. I'm not sure its flaws could have been held against it at the time of its original publication, but it is certainly a story that has not aged well.

This story has Holmes and Watson traveling outside of London (to a fictitious location) in response to a man who has been wrongfully accused of a murder by none other than Inspector Lestrade. It is up to Holmes to find evidence of an alternative culprit and exonerate the client.

The problem is, this story just doesn't do well in the CSI age. The unraveling of the mystery doesn't hang on any brilliant deductive leap that Holmes makes, but rather hinges on Lestrade just having done an implausibly shoddy job of investigating his crime scene. The Scotland Yard detective overlooks blatantly obvious evidence, the omission of which inevitably leads to his incorrect conclusion. And it didn't even really take the sharp eyes of Holmes to see what Lestrade had missed; Watson himself in his narration picks up on some of the vital clues in the footprints left at the scene. I've found Doyle's stories to be best so far when he doesn't have to dumb down other characters to make Holmes seem brilliant by comparison; this story is the poorest yet in that regard.

But it's not all bad. For one thing, there's the interesting change of setting. This is the first time Holmes and Watson venture outside of London. It's also the first time that Holmes truly invokes his friendship with Watson; he specifically contacts Watson (now living with his wife) and asks for him to come along on the journey, whereas previous stories had Watson coincidentally showing up to become involved.

Also, as I noted earlier, Watson is able to notice some of the vital evidence himself. He's not quite able to reason what it all means, but has now watched enough of Holmes' methods that he seems to know what to look for, and anticipates in a rough sense how it could be relevant. So even as Lestrade was dumbed down extra for this story, Watson grows smarter. It's nice to have a bit of growth there.

But overall, I'd call this one a mostly forgettable Holmes adventure worth no more than a C.

Britney 2.0

Tonight's installment of Glee revisited the idea of a "Britney Spears theme week" first done exactly two years ago as the second episode of season 2 -- and across the board, this second take was superior. Where the previous episode was a loosely woven excuse to restage Spears videos and show kids getting high on visits to the dentist, this episode deftly juggled several character-driven storylines.

Brittany was having a meltdown over Santana drifting apart from her, and decided to funnel it into a full-on pursuit for rock bottom. It led to solid scenes with Sue and, oddly enough, Sam, and also ended on the nicely ambiguous note that while Brittany may have begun putting her life back together, it may not be a life that will have Santana in it.

In New York, Rachel's battle against her dance teacher continued. The past of Cassie's failed Broadway career wasn't surprising (though the details were fun), though I much prefer that Glee portray its characters with a logical internal consistency as opposed to trying just for surprise. The same goes for the growing flirtation between Rachel and Brody -- not surprising, but entertaining. Welcome, in fact. I haven't missed Finn in these two new episodes at all.

It was a bit of a stretch to have Puck fly all he way out from L.A. for a two minute talk with a half-brother he'd never met, but let's face it -- we'll have to accept some strained believability in moments like this, I think, to have graduated characters turn up on the show. Having got Puck there, they did at least give him a good scene with Jake.

Actually, I'm enjoying how much all the new characters seem to be working all across the board. Jake, Marley, and Brody are all proving interesting; Unique is an interesting fit with the group. I'm also digging the increased song time for underused characters like Tina and Artie

That said, I do think this episode still fell into the trap of past Glee theme weeks -- there were a few too many songs in the hour, crowding out the plots just a bit. Still, I'd be hard pressed in this case to suggest just which songs I would have cut. Every song this week hit on at least some level: they had great staging ("Hold It Against Me", "Oops... I Did It Again", "Gimme More"), fit fairly well into the plot ("Womanizer" and "Everytime"), or were arranged differently enough from the original to be intriguing (the surprisingly decent mashups of "Boys / Boyfriend" and "Crazy / (You Drive Me) Crazy"). Actually, many of the songs hit two or even all three of those categories, and all of the vocal performances were solid.

In short, I'm continuing to enjoy the newly revitalized Glee. I give this week's episode a B+.