Thursday, September 29, 2011

Buying "American": The Sigmac NE15AB LED TV.

The NE15AB and some of its specs.
For years, I've been using a little 13" CRT TV in my home studio, but have been feeling the need to upgrade because my cable company has recently gone digital and many of the stations offered even on the basic tier cannot be watched on an analog set.  Advancements in technology thus dictated to me the need to bring my TV, and thus my studio, into the twenty-first century.

The upgrade quest began with a quick scan of the sales flyers in my local newspaper.   This turned up an offering from a company called "Sigmac" and its Model NE15AB 15”television.  It's a 15" LED TV priced at an astounding $69 + Tax at Fry's Electronics!

 Without question, the price point got my attention and had me wondering what I could get for such a miniscule cost.  Even more interesting, according to numerous web sources, the TV is “Made in the U.S.A.”.  Yup, amazingly enough, there are STILL TV’s being made here in America and this alone had me convinced I needed to see this set up close and personal.  So off to Fry’s I went with a piqued curiosity, cash in pocket and the desire to support American jobs.

On initial inspection, the Sigmac NE15AB looks similar to other small LED TV’s in the entry level class. It’s compact, lightweight and can be stowed in tight spaces with ease wherever a TV is desired.  It’s not a bad looking piece either!  The unit is shod in shiny plastic and has a clean, efficient look about it.  On the back there are plenty of connections for anything you’d like to plug in including VGA, S-Video, Composite Video, HDMI and USB.  I thought this level of connectivity options impressive for a budget machine.

At this angle, you aint seeing much!
From there, reality set in and it became apparent why this unit is amazingly inexpensive.

A look at the screen is your first clue that this is NOT one of the top tier TV’s on the market.  While the picture was acceptable, it had to be viewed dead-on and level for it to look good.  Any deviation of one’s viewing angle to the left, right up or down resulted in color distortion and fading.  I can only assume that the screen employed in the Sigmac is older technology that was originally purposed for laptops manufactured in the recent past.  For this reason, this TV should NEVER be considered for anything other than desktop use or in applications where close proximity to the screen is not the norm.  Under these conditions, the NE15AB performed well.  The brightness and color were fine out of the box, and watching sports produced no ghosting or blurring during moments of fast action. 

In keeping with its low-end price tag, the Sigmax has a top resolution of 720p.  On a screen this small, that’s just fine since the differences between 720 and 1080 at close distances are negligible.  HD Television programming in 1080 looked fine on the little Sigmax with good color, a sharp picture and no discernable distortions.

The screen did have one annoying trait however, that did detract from its viewing pleasure.  The screen is HIGHLY reflective and will pick up every light source facing it.  Careful consideration must be made as to where to place the unit to avoid this. 
Then there’s the sound…just one listen will tell you the best that can be said about the Sigmax's audio is that it’s there.  While the speaker in the unit produces decent volume levels, the audio is of such poor quality, I suspect that anyone who buys this unit will immediately plug external speakers into the headphone jack for at least passable fidelity.  Think Mickey’ D’s Drive Through and you’ll get the picture!  Don’t get me wrong, you CAN get by with what’s built into the TV, but you’d have to be an incredibly cheap person to tolerate it over buying some inexpensive external speakers! 
That cable plug on the back is a pain!
As I mentioned earlier, the Sigmac NE15AB is a budget unit that offers many connectivity options.  All are easily accessible on the rear of the unit with ONE glaring exception: The cable television plug.  It’s jammed into a corner and extremely difficult to attach a screw-on 75ohm cable for anyone with average sized or larger fingers.  It CAN be done, but perhaps the better option is to use 75ohm cables with push-on plugs.  Once again, the Sigmac shows its true colors as a budget unit with this design flaw.

Picking up the TV reveals the Sigmac to be an extremely light unit that’s rather flimsy feeling.  The plastic of the TV’s body gives when even the lightest pressure is applied which suggests to me that moving this TV from place to place may not be the best idea if you want it to last.  If it’s portability and long term durability you’re looking for, you’re going to have to spend more than what Sigmac is asking.
The buttons on the side are nothing special, when pressed they operate well and with a tactile snap, but they look and feel chintzy.  You’ll find the typical stuff along the right side of the TV like volume, menu, channel and source. 

The options for TV operation are fairly standard.  You’ll find menus for setting channels, source programming, picture adjustment and so on.  They’re fairly intuitive, though there’s room for improvement.  Once unboxed and plugged in, I had the TV do an auto scan for the channels available through my cable provider.  This proved to be an exercise in patience.  The Sigmac chugged away for close to ten minutes before finding all of them which is excessive in my opinion.  Once locked however, the channels came in clear and looked fine.

Overall, I’d say that this TV is far from what one would call a “stellar performer”.  Its bargain basement construction and shortcomings reflect the price this TV is fetching.  However, the Sigmac NE15AB is not a unit that should be dismissed outright.  Despite what I outlined above, this unit IS a deal for the person looking for a basic HDTV and for someone not needing all the “frills” of a higher end unit.  It does what it’s supposed to better than you’d expect for such an inexpensive item.

In addition, there’s the “Built in the U.S.A.” factor to consider.  I’m always on the lookout for a purchase that will help the American worker, and was surprised to see this incredibly inexpensive TV was a domestic product.  I’m not fooling myself  though, since I’m sure the TV was merely ASSEMBLED here in America with incredibly cheap components manufactured in China.  That’s not the important thing here.  What IS important is that somewhere an American company is building TV’s for Sigmac at a price point one would not think possible to cover the costs of U.S. labor.  THAT is a major accomplishment and a trend that I hope continues.

So what’s the bottom line?  The Sigmac  
NE15AB  isn’t  bad, but it’s not great either.  It’s a flawed product that’s hampered by its crude technology and usage limitations.  If you have a darkish nook, the need for a close-proximity HDTV, you don’t want to spend a lot of cash and you want to put your money in a product that is American (To some extent), then this is an interesting option to consider.  If you’re looking for more refinement, then get ready to pony up at least twice the cash for a TV from one of the major manufacturers.

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Rebecca Black's song "Friday"...Maybe NOT the Worst Song Ever?

"Friday, Friday, sing stupid crap on Friday"!
The hottest buzz online is over some little pop tart named Rebecca Black and her tune "Friday". Most of the stories online said it was the worst song ever!  Really?  The WORST…EV-UR!?  Naturally, I had to see for myself, so I fired up youtube and subjected myself to her horrible video.

 My gosh, it's bad.  The kind of bad that one usually associates with food poisoning and herpes combined.  Yes, it REALLY is a horrid song and video, but the WORST?  I got to thinking about some of the garbage that's been foisted on the public over the years, and believe I have come up with ten songs that could possibly, maybe, ALMOST be as bad as Rebecca Black's "Friday"…if not WORSE!!!!! 

See for yourself.  (By the way, I am not liable for any injuries that may result from listening to this music!)

1) William Shatner - "Mr. Tambourine Man"
Uh…you just have to hear it to believe it!  Shatner does for music what red hot fire pokers do for your ass!!  I'm confident in saying that if this is the kind of stuff Captain Kirk were known for throughout the galaxy, he would have been spaced after performing 30 seconds of this song!

2) Gwen Stefani - "Hollaback Girl"

Truly one of the most annoying songs in history!  This proves that the brains behind the great music of "No Doubt" doubtless came from the other members of the band!  This is an audio abortion!  In the video, Gwen is  a 35 year old woman trying to pull off a high school look!  This is NOT 90210 Gwen, leave that crap for Tori Spelling!  EPIC FAIL!!

3) William Hung - "Hotel California"
I should probably be shot for including this bastardization of an Eagles classic, but damn folks, we ARE talking about some seriously EVIL music here! There's no denying it, William Hung is the devil's retarded stepchild when it comes to awful tunes.  Watch if you dare….

4) Justin Bieber - "Baby"
Justin Bieber is a no-talent hack.  Ok, he's a rich, no-talent hack.  I don't think that anyone will argue that he has zero musical talent, that this song is a study in inane lyrics and that Ludacris is now officially a bitch for singing in this song.  Nor will you argue it's proof positive that ice picks to the ears are a viable option to Bieber's "music"…

5) Wing - "Back In Black"

I must admit, I would never have heard of Wing had she not been featured in an episode of "South Park".  As I watched the cartoon, I thought she was merely another creation of Matt Stone and Trey Parker for the show.  To my amazement, Wing actually is a product of…well…maybe a black ops genetic experiment gone mad!  She's REAL!!!  Curse you Parker and Stone for spreading her fame!!! 

6) Tiny Tim - "Tiptoe Through The Tulips"
I had to go back a few decades for this one.  In case you've never heard of Tiny Tim, he was a man that looked like a zombie child molester (A molester of child zombies y'all.  Let me clarify that), who played a ukelele, and sang in a high-pitched falsetto voice that suggested his testicles were lost in a farm accident.  If you combined the DNA of Morticia Addams and Stevie Nicks, you'd have THIS! 

7) Eddie Murphy - "Party All the Time"

In the 80's, Eddie Murphy was one of the biggest comedy talents on the planet and Rick James was at the top of his game in the music biz.  Put them together and you have…DOG CRAP ON A STICK!!!  If Rebecca Black's lyrics in "Friday" annoyed the hell outta you, then prepare for an audio onslaught to your intelligence with this classic!  In the words of Rick James, "Cocane is a POWERFUL DRUG!!!"  I wonder what Eddie was on though…

8) Emily Osment - "Lovesick"
A sampling of the lyrics says it all! 

We're so mono
Together we can be stereo
St-st-st- stereo, LOVE
You look so low, low
Together we could get high, high-five

Boom boom, super sonic, Boom super sonic, Boom
You make my heart go ( You make my heart go)
Boom boom, super sonic, boom super sonic, boom
You make my heart go ( Super sonic boom, super sonic boom)

Ok, the video is slickly done.  It's pretty and shiny and everything looks colorful, but Emily Osment…well you can't polish a turd folks, no matter how much you try.  Her voice is so flat and overdone with electronic effects, you have to wonder if she's a cyborg with an Eveready D-Cell up her ass.  Oh…and she looks like her brother…but with a rack.  BLEH!

9) Lady Gaga - "Paparazzi"
AKA: "Madonna 2.0".  Everything she does has been done before!  Yet another pop diva that relies on formulaic music, hackneyed lyrics and more than ANYTHING else, shock value.  When your music sucks, you show up on stage wearing a meat dress.  Truth be told, I could have picked any song of hers for this blurb, but this was the first one that came up on youtube so I didn't bother looking any further.  Lucky me.  Not only does she sound like Madonna, she does overblown videos like Michael Jackson.  And could someone tell me WTF is going on in the vid?!?!?

10) Paska - "Oh Shit!"
What do you say about a recording artist whose Wikipedia entry starts with:

"'Women Are from Venus, Men from Anus' is the debut album and come back album by Paska. It was released in 2005. The album title is a parody of the popular psychology book Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus.

The album was planned to be released on April 13, 2005, but was delayed because of internet piratism. The band wanted to be sure that digital pirate copies of the album had spread widely before official release. Vocalist Ari Peltonen has stated that there might not be anyone who wants to listen to the record, but one may still want to own a copy."

Uh…Ok…Can ANYONE record an album?  Listen to this song and it'll make you a believer just seconds before your brain explodes!  By the way, "Paska" is Finnish for "Shit."  Go figure...

So there you have it.  Rebecca Black's song is the audio equivalent of licking a dead man's butt crack, but as you can see, there's other stuff out there just as bad!  So let's back off the kid a bit, cut her some slack and just go Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah), Partyin’, partyin’ (Yeah), Fun, fun, fun, fun...
Lookin’ forward to the weekend!

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Why "Geeks On Caffeine" Disappeared...

That's the obvious question that has been in my e-mail box from readers since the onset of the new year. Well, since y’all have asked, I’ll break it down for you.

The main motivation for me walking away from “GOC” has been the overwhelming amount of negativity that’s been cast my way from those in online forums.  “GOC” cartoons, thanks to the dedication of my various online friends, has had links posted to it   in,, mixx, stumbleupon, and so on.  For their efforts, I thank them and apologize for not doing so earlier.  Occasionally, I visit these sites to see how the cartoon is faring and what I find is interesting. 

Readers of the cartoon have nothing to say but insulting, demeaning and nasty things about “GOC”.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big boy and can handle it.  I’m not crying in the least since that’s pretty much what I expected from critics of conservative viewpoints.

No you don't!, for example, features the following “critical commentary”:

“Isn't this the nutty right wing propaganda comic where the guy projects his opinions through his characters in a pretty blatant way?” - Aleitheo

“I just checked out that...comic that the one Freeper was hawking, and...Holy shit is that a stupid and near-racist webcomic!” - jnjs

How something can be “near racist” is beyond me.  You’re either “racist” or your not!  Talk about a moronic criticism!  But wait, there’s more...

“I don't hate this guy because he is conservative/republican/what have you I hate this guy because his comic is one of the worst I have ever seen... and there are some bad ones out there. I think he thinks that because he thinks it is funny that others will find it funny but really it just shows that he has almost no sense of humor whatsoever and a mediocre drawing ability.” - warmpita

“Wow....these are really bad...horribly unfunny and bigoted shit.” - rstraigh

“It's not even ironically funny except on a meta level. You have to go through and pick out every lazy trope the creator hits and realize that the product and its message compare unfavorably even with comedy black holes like Prickly City. Everyone he disagrees with is ugly and shrill. Everyone he agrees with always gets the last word. There is no possibility that his politics, religion, ideology, or musical preferences are wrong. It's a clumsy trainwreck of Mary-Sue fantasy that the author probably sees as high satire.” - mindbleach poor, widdle feelings are hurt.  These examples of pseudo intellectual chicken scratch have brought tears to my eyes!  My ego is bruised beyond repair, and I shall now spend the rest of my life hiding from these bullies and sucking my thumb. 


I sure wish just one of them would have taken the time to release themselves from their forum anonymity and e-mail me to refute points I made in the comics.  I’m asking too much perhaps, from those emboldened by the fact that they can hide behind some screen name and rant an opinion they do not back up with facts.  Such is life, but honestly, I’m sick and tired of being hit with the “name calling card” by these children disguised as adults.  One can only be labeled as a “racist”, “homophobe”, “xenophobe” and so on before it becomes tedious.  As a result, I have told the guy who posts my stuff to quit.  Why bother passing on links to my site to those who have nothing better to do than bash it because they are hard-left hive-minders?  It’s a profound waste of his time.

Interestingly on, a forum many would consider a haven for a right-wing viewpoint, the reaction to “GOC” has been...well...just weird.  For the most part, “GOC” has been received well by those who roam its virtual halls, however, there are a few dictatorial posters and forum administrators with an oversized concept of self importance lurking on this site as well.  In their world, if someone posts a link to a “GOC” comic, it’s obviously moi “pimping my blog”.  Apparently, this is an impeachable offense on FR, and laughingly, one I’m not guilty of.  In their world, however, this fact means less than nothing.

With draconian posting rules!
Even more bizarre, has a section called “Bloggers and Personal”.  Okay, that makes sense.  It’s a place to express personal opinions and link to blogs that spread a conservative message.  Right?  WRONG!  According to a post to the dude linking my stuff in, the FR admin writes:

 “Got a news flash for you, sport. FR does not exist for the purpose of driving traffic (read: revenue generation) to your, or anybody elses, blog. What we can do is pull threads from this blog if that will help.” - Admin

In a random sampling of links on the FR “Bloggers and Personal” section, I have found links for donations, google word ads, and banner ads for various goods and services.  So WTF are they coming down on links to “GOC” for?  They are chastising my friend for doing WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING!!  Talk about an incredible level of intellectual dishonesty! 

How about another example of draconian freerepublic nonsense? “Pookie 18”, one of the freepers who posted my toons, has run into problems with administrators at FR.  So much so, he has taken his daily cartoon postings elsewhere.  According to FR, he was posting copy written material, and in doing so, he was in violation of FR posting policy.  Pookie got permission from the authors of all these cartoons, including myself, to post the strips!  This act of respect for cartoonists means nothing to the FR admin numbskulls.  Nope.  Not a whit.  He was forced to take his postings to another site and THEN post to FR.  Apparently, this is OK with the FR admins, and is further evidence of their fractured, mindless posting rules. 

Interestingly, this policy they lord over Pookie has affected me directly, but the FR dopes are unwilling to do anything about it.  As I mentioned earlier, a friend of mine is posting “GOC” links to free republic, but with one caveat: I do not want the cartoons directly hotlinked through FR.  If people want to read the cartoon, I would prefer to have them click through to the site because yes, I try to make a couple of bucks off of it (AGAIN like all the OTHER bloggers in that freakin’ section!!).  One obnoxious freeper named “humblegunner” has decided to take it upon himself to hotlink in the cartoon.  Not because he particularly like what I offer, but because he has decided that what I asked for isn’t worthy of respecting. Others have joined in on this campaign.  These folks stand in direct contrast to Pookie, and really are nothing more than FR thugs. 

So what now?

I’m doubling down and pushing back on those jerks!

More on that NEXT week!!

As of today, has eliminated the posting privileges of my friend.  It seems they are hypersensitive about being called out on their inconsistent posting policies.  What's more, after reading the comments associated with a post about this very article, it seems that the freepers cannot take criticism either.  

"The few cartoons that I saw were not funny or poignant and certainly not worthy of discussion.
It is funny to watch you and your buddy get your widdle feelings hurt though." - Eaker

"Case in point. The cartoons pimped by brycemax on this forum are the lamest crap you could ever imagine and bring no credit to the conservative cause or FreeRepublic." - shibumi

 Funniest of all, a cliche masquerading as cleverness:

"If you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen." - mlocher

WOW! You dazzled me with your wit on that one!   Breathe through your mouth much?

Being able to stand the heat is not the issue at FR.  I can take what you dish out and more.  The removal of brymax's posting ability show that FR's "kitchen" is only for those who belong to a particular clique.  Here, only ONE recipe is followed, and any deviation from that in an attempt to do something different results in expulsion.

Oh, in fairness, I did make one error in the blog, and thanks to CharlesWayneCT for pointing that out.  Yep, I used the word "laud" instead of "lord" and he is correct in pointing that out.  Interesting that he does not refute the content of the article.  For your correction, I thank you.  For your lack of anything else in the way of a counter point, I find that typical.

One more thing, thanks also to icwhatudo for this post.:

"It is somewhat strange that a homosexual pro-hillary clinton website is welcomed at FR (hillbuzz) but blogs created by conservatives, properly posted in the blogger forum, get grief.
We all have to start somewhere. Drudge was just a blog. Malkin was just a blog. I wonder if they got the “stop pimping” warning back in the day."

Truth be told, icwhatudo is representative of the majority of people at freerepublic.  It is only a small, closed-minded minority that makes this forum disagreeable.  Thanks to those who have offered support in the past and who continue to do so outside of FR.

You know, the simplest thing all of you could have done is simply ignore the strip postings if "GOC" isn't your thing.  No harm no foul.  But the FR admin and thug freepers have revealed their true nature: they're hypocrites to the core!  You want everyone to march to your drumbeat, you are intellectually dishonest and you are just like liberals who believe that if you disagree with something, you should eliminate it.  
Freerepublic..."Protecting free speech"?  Seriously?  Not a chance.

Saturday, March 12, 2011

My take on "Battle: Los Angeles"

Everything blows up nice but...
 It’s a drop-dead, gorgeous day in Atlanta.  The sun is shining, there isn’t a cloud in the sky and it looks as if spring has finally arrived in the south.  It is, without a doubt, the kind of day that should be spent enjoying some sort of outdoor activity...unless you’re a sci-fi fanboy who opted for a matinee of “Battle: Los Angeles” in a dark theatre.  I am just such a fanboy!  So without further delay, here’s my take on “B:LA”.
Dang...I'm a poet and didn't know it!


I like to start on a positive note, and this film definitely has more than a few things going for it.  First, and foremost, I have to prop up Jonathan Liebsman for making an alien invasion film that really LOOKS like an alien invasion film!  There is nothing pretty about how these E.T.’s go about their business.  From the second they land, they begin blasting hapless humans with abandon.  The Los Angeles shoreline is littered with corpses, scorched bodies line the streets, and buildings are reduced to smoldering rubble.  This is a WAR film and combat between the humans and aliens is fierce, gritty and reminiscent of “Blackhawk Down”.  Without a doubt, Liebsman was inspired by the look and feel of the aforementioned film, and for his take on an alien invasion this atmosphere is gripping and engaging.

We're here to kick ass and dish out pain!
The special effects are state of the art, which one expects of movies that rely heavily on CG these days.  Let’s face it, if a film in this genre has cheeseball effects, it isn’t worth watching.  But in “B:LA”, the aliens interact with their human adversaries flawlessly, all of the otherworldly weaponry is well rendered, and everything “blowed up real good”!  I especially appreciated the design work that went into the alien vehicles.  They were interesting to look at and lacked the “clean” ship designs typically foisted on moviegoers in the “Star Wars” or “Star Trek” films.  They are bulgy, ugly, fire-spitting death machines that look as if the aliens value function over form.

I must admit I derived what can only be called a perverse pleasure in watching Los Angeles burn from the alien attack.  I’m not fond of that city in the slightest!  Back in the late 80’s, I spent two days in that giant lunatic asylum, and wanted to leave two hours after I arrived.  Everybody is an “AC-TOR” and when you order a #1 McDonald’s combo, you receive a copy of the cashier’s latest “awesome script”.  YOU know it, I know it and most of all, Liebsman knows it!  Watching LA go up in flames DOES provide a visceral pleasure for the viewer that would not be the same had the baddies chosen a location like Phoenix, Oklahoma City or Miami to unleash their brand of hell. 

The BAD:

Let me preface this section by alerting you to THREE things GUARANTEED to warn you about just how bad a movie is.

1) Any film released between January and April or late August through mid November is one the studio knows will not stack up against the Summer and holiday blockbusters.  These are the “garbage dump” months studios use to make a quick buck off a public stuck indoors because of crappy weather.
2) Any studio that releases film with an embargo on advanced screening reviews knows they have a stinker on their hands.  Think “damage control” folks!
3) Films that plug and endless list of “Academy Award Winning” or “Nominated” actors are relying on celebrity clout because they know their story sucks.

“Battle: Los Angeles” falls into two of three categories, and that aint good.  Owing to the fact that nobody in the cast has ever won an Oscar, you know what we’re left with.

Square jawed jarhead?  CHECK!
The storyline, if you can verify that it actually has one, is paper thin and chock full of bullet holes.  If you’re looking for plot, interesting character development, backstory on the baddies or anything of substance at all, just fuhgettaboudit!  None of this exists in “B:LA”.  When writer Christopher Bertolini prepared his treatment for pitching this idea to studio execs, it merely said, “Bad aliens come to LA and good humans fight back.”  Once it got green lit, he didn’t even bother to expound on that concept.  Instead he borrowed every military and alien invasion cliche you’ve ever seen in movies past!  The retiring Staff Sergeant with days left called back into action...CHECK.  The self sacrificing member of the squad saves the rest by blowing himself up...CHECK.  Commanding officer has to win his doubting men’s loyalty...CHECK.   Aliens come to Earth to steal our stuff...CHECK.  I could go on, but suffice it to say that “B:LA’s” endless cliches will doubtless become the subject of a new college drinking game once it hits DVD.  Kid salutes marine as he gazes upward with big, brown puppy eyes...DRINK DRINK DRINK!!!

The advanced review embargo is justified.  If critics got hold of “B:LA” and reviewed it before its release, it would have killed the opening weekend box office quicker than a hooker with herpes nullifies a drunken sailor’s libido.  “But how can this be,” you ask?  Here, in no particular order are the reasons: Poor dialogue, giant plot holes, “shakey camera” filming technique, cliche characters and predictable character deaths riddle this film.  Even Aaron Eckhart, who portrayed a brilliant Harvey “Two-Face” Dent in “Batman: The Dark Knight”, couldn’t save this movie from its shortcomings.

I lack range in my acting!
Perhaps most annoying was Michelle Rodriguez, because once again...she was...Michelle Rodriguez.  This film has cured me of seeing anything she’s ever in again.  C’mon, how many more times am I going to see her take on “tough hispanic chick-warrior?”  I can assure you “Battle: Los Angeles” is the LAST TIME!!!

In closing, “B:LA” is not a bad movie, but it’s not a good movie either.  It’s the kind of flick you can kill a couple of hours with and not regret doing so, but you’ll also realize that those two hours could have been better spent doing something like mowing your lawn.  If you’re a diehard sci-fi fanatic, this film’s combination of action and outstanding eye candy will provide enough of a fix until the summer blockbusters hit.  If you’re looking for sci-fi with substance, save your cash. 


Action, atmosphere, design, explosions: A-
Plot, character development, Michelle Rodriguez as Michelle Rodriguez: D
Overall: C