tooth hurty / dvd afternoon

...well, whaddya know. couldn't get problem tooth extracted due to an infection in it -- so i'll have to take this antibiotic regimen for the next five days before going back and having the molar pulled.

course, i could have had it removed today, but the dentist couldn't guarantee that the anesthetic would hold, given the infection's presence. others had tried to have teeth extracted in a similar condition; but, and to quote: "sumuko sila."

not a pleasant thought.

so, got the prescription filled, and went home to get a head start on the treatment. also decided not to chase the half-day left if i were still to go to work; sleep may help the antibiotic do its voodoo.

ultimately, didn't sleep all that long -- never gotten used to sleeping in the afternoon. what then, to do.

hmm. shrek 2. ok, let's see what they've come up with.

...there are improvements over the first installment, true. a little better "acting," the effects were also good. there were moments that could elicit a smile, but overall, it just didn't somehow "ring true." in sum, i was unaffected by it. which, come to think of it, is similar to the effect don bluth's movies have on me -- not that he had anything to do with the movie, unless i'm mistaken.

i dunno. something was missing. and the soundtrack didn't help either. perhaps dreamworks is trying to out-disney disney with formulaic productions (and song and dance numbers) -- but disney's track record with it's in-house productions is surely a sign that formula isn't the way to go. and the disney-pixar deal is mostly a distribution deal on disney's part, as far as i know -- so the movies under that banner don't indicate much by way of disney's capability to come up with compelling movies.

maybe it was the fact that despite the improvement in their technology, they didn't attempt something different. it felt more like a concerted effort to cash in on a previous best-selling attempt. come to think of it, it may well have been that.

so, in sum: forgettable movie.

another movie that may not offer a payback for time and money spent seeing it -- polar express. tom hanks' voice acting talent notwithstanding, the preview in the theater showed what seems to be a repeat of the disaster that was final fantasy: the spirits within. well, as far as the clunky effect that a pure mocap setup has on ersatz animation. heck, in the shots shown, the eyes were decidedly dead-looking -- and cross-eyed to boot.

ok, then. shrek 2 has better animation than polar express. that's probably the best i can say for that.

after shrek 2, decided to watch katsuhiro otomo's akira. still stunning after all these years. even if the edition i have doesn't have any english dub or subtitles. interestingly, the credits note the use of 3-D software. ...from wavefront technologies, to boot. yes, the wavefront of alias|wavefront fame. and that was back in 1988. amazing the progress of technology. ...and sometimes, the wierd purposes they're put to: final fantasy/polar express...

just because it can be done in 3-D doesn't mean that it should.

...

gotta watch the incredibles again.