Batman: Arkham City Review

I just finished playing this game and I wanted to give some impressions. Well, first and foremost, it is fucking incredibly epically amazing and I love the shit out of it. Okay, we have that out of the way.

The hype was definitely huge for this game, especially after following the excellent Batman: Arkham Asylum, which quickly became the definitive Batman game and gave us an experience in gameplay as the universally popular hero that has gone unmatched and thoroughly topped any and all Batman video games that preceded it. Arkham City manages to top it. I can’t express my joy for that.

As with most successful sequels, it brings us elements that we already loved from the original, improves upon what needed improvement, kept what worked just fine, and added on more in terms of story and characters. Arkham City is much more gigantic in its scale: the story, the environments, the gadgets, the fighting moves, the villains, the overall experience is all bigger and better. I have completed the story mode and I’m only at 38% completion. I’ve barely scratched the surface with the side missions, I haven’t touched a single bonus challenge, and I have yet to play as Catwoman. There’s still shitloads more to explore. I have a feeling I will lose plenty more hours than I already have to this game. It’s so detailed in all respects, something as minute as listening in on small-talk between the thugs has great value to it. They complain about their bosses, about the weather, share stories, I recall one goon going off on a story about how his mother murdered her entire graduating class on prom night. I mean, wow.

The story to Batman: Arkham Asylum, though exciting, was fairly straight forward: The Joker has taken over the asylum and it’s up to Batman to stop him. Arkham City has much more villainy to encounter and an evil plot that is infinitely more threatening and goes deeper than you could possibly imagine. The way it weaves its epic plot together involving villains such as The Joker, Hugo Strange, Rhas Al Guhl, Two-Face, Mr. Freeze, The Penguin, and (believe me) tons more is nothing short of masterful. It’s not just great fan service to match up against your favourite villains, it is truly put together in such a way that feels completely justified for the story, full of twists and turns and surprises along the way. Any future Batman-screenwriters should take note. This is how it’s fucking done.

Batman: Arkham City isn’t just an amazing and exciting gaming experience, but it is a uniquely great Batman adventure period. I think in the last 10 years or so video games have gotten so good that they can be respected on the same levels as other media such as comic books, novels, books, television, and movies. With that in mind I think Batman: Arkham City is a classic Batman Story. Bravo.







There is a new Spider-Man movie coming out perhaps you’ve heard


If films are the modern day myths and legends and highest forms of storytelling, then the same stories are probably going to be passed down year by year, generation by generation. Especially if there’s already some source material. Whether it’s super heroes like Spidey or Supes or Batman, or something going so far back as Robin Hood. How many damn different versions of Robin Hood are there? We all know the basic outline of the Robin Hood tale. It’s been told many different ways. It’s been extended upon in episodic form, it’s been traced to its purest possible historical origins, it’s been altered, parodied, etc., etc. But I guess since it’s not a geeky franchise not that many people will bitch about it. Nevermind, I guess a lot of people bitched about the 2010 Ridley Scott version of Robin Hood. Can’t please everybody.


Superman, not unlike Jesus, died for our sins, and was resurrected after defeating his cyborg doppleganger.


The Amazing Spider-Man seems to be telling Peter Parker’s origin story once more, which was already portrayed in the 2002 film by Sam Raimi which for some people feels like last Thursday. It looks to be a little different than before, seems darker, more serious in tone, and will probably add a little bit more regarding Peter Parker’s parents. We’ve just seen the teaser. This could occupy 15 minutes of the movie, or it could occupy 45. I don’t know. We’ll have to wait and see.



I understand why people aren’t being won over too easily by the notion of rebooting a franchise whose dead body isn’t even cold yet. Yes, it feels a little too early. And when you compare it to the Batman series’ reboot, it doesn’t feel as necessary. Batman’s origin was not part of any movie. In Tim Burton’s 1989 version, Batman already existed, ready to fight crime. Nolan’s films started from the beginning in every sense and gave the story the darker edge it deserved.


The 2002 Spider-Man film was…okay. I never thought it was all that great. The only thing I thought it did very well was the origin, which it nailed perfectly. They took their time with it and set up everything we needed to know about Peter Parker, his gift, and his curse as Spider-Man. When it came to the second half of the movie, though, I don’t know. It failed to deliver. Willem Dafoe was born to play a comic book villain, and Norman Osborne was a perfect role for him. But despite pulling off a good job he was given very little to work with. The action and situations were pretty generic, even by comic book standards, and the design of that Green Goblin suit- dear God, it was fucking dreadful. Really. What the fuck?



But it set up the groundwork and made way for the second film, which some regard as one of the best comic book films ever made, and others who say it’s pretty much on par with 1 and 3. You can put me in the former category of people. I think it is one of the best comic book movies ever. Why? I don’t know for sure exactly why, but maybe it’s just because it’s actually about something. It’s not just formula. It’s not obligations. We have the standard stuff, like mad scientist and experiments going wrong and becoming evil and putting the city in danger and OF COURSE taking the girlfriend hostage. But I think it was less fantastical elements that really struck a chord: the average kid trying to survive, dealing with school and part time jobs and unrequited love, and all that super hero crap getting in the way of his life, seriously struggling with whether or not he should embrace his powers. It didn’t constrict itself to a basic formula, it roamed free and let us observe Peter a little bit. So many people bring up the fact that it was completely pointless that they had a scene where he eats cake with his landlord’s daughter. Well, why the hell not?


Then we had Spider-Man 3 and the series imploded into itself and instead of gracefully steadying after the fumble they just went back to the drawing board and went for the reboot.


Am I really going to have watch Peter get bitten by a radioactive Spider again? Am I really going to have to see Uncle Ben die again? Is it really going to be yet another science experiment going wrong and a genius becomes a monster? So be it, that’s comic books for ya. If it’s good, then it’s good. And if it’s good, it would be downright moronic of me to complain. It’s not as if it erases what I liked about Raimi’s films. And hello, Denis Leary FFS.




But yeah looks like they may be going for gritty and realistc much like Batman. I GUESS. I mean, I don’t know for sure. I’ll bet there’ll be a good amount of humour in it. But again it will just follow the origin story. It will have all the obligations and it will follow them and it will try to keep within a fairly reality-based environment. As great as Nolan’s Batman films are, they may actually be a bad influence. Come on, gritty is nice, but I want to see Spider-Man fight giant fucking robots and explore alternate dimensions or some other crazy comic book shit like that. There’s more to Marvel’s Sci-Fi than simply “SCIENCE GONE AWRY!”


That’s what I actually liked about this year’s Thor. It was Sci-fi fantasy to the max. Space vikings. Ice creatures. Travels through time and space. Oh, and hey- giant fucking robots. Neat-o.


But since film is still a fairly new medium (at least compared to those paper things with words on em) then I’m sure we’ll have dozens of different incarnations down the road, well beyond our lifetime, provided the world doesn’t end 6 months after the films release, and the film series will be classified by their eras, and certain people will like certain series better- just like with the comics. I hope within my lifetime though, I get to see Spider-man fight a Spider Slayer Robot on the big screen.


Anyway, I guess the whole point of this rant is, doesn’t The Dark Knight Rises look awesome!?










A British actor has been cast as Superman which is probably a sign of the apocalypse.

Jazz and comic books. Two forms of art that have the distinction of originating in America. Maybe jazz is a little out of date and only enjoyed by pretentious D-bags but those comic book things are still huge, particularly the film adaptations.

Now, if the fat cats in the United States want to outsource their already wealthy, profitable corporations just to make an extra billion here and there and damn the lower-class working stiffs, that’s fine, but outsourcing your super heroes is one step too far.

Batman, Wolverine, and the new Spider-Man are not played by Americans. It was never that big of a deal, it was forgivable, “the best man for the job,” you may say, but the news has come out today that the new Superman will be played by Henry Cavill, a British actor. That just doesn’t sit right, does it?

But why is it that it’s not that big of a deal when Brits play other super heroes? I could do my homework and write a long winded essay about how Superman was on the scene long before Spidey or Bats ever showed their sorry asses and he became a symbol of hope during World War II, or that his motto is standing for “truth, justice, and the American way,” or that his very origin story is an allegory for the American dream. But I won’t. I’m too lazy to write it and you’re too lazy to read it. Short paragraphs work so much better for both of us.

Richard Donner’s 1978 film, a spectacular classic, was wise enough to embrace all of the Americana associated with Superman. Maybe that’s why his film is the only Superman adaptation to date to be considered a great work of filmmaking.

Why is it cool to not care? I’m Canadian (Superman is a half-Canadian invention by the way), but if I were American I think I’d boycott the movie. Where’s the patriotism? If they got an American to play James Bond I’m sure people would be pissed off, so why not for Superman? Why do people want to insist it isn’t an issue? It is.

But hey, it’s fine if a Brit plays Superman, it’s fine if all the companies move to India, whatever, it’s all good, as long as I have my I-Phone. It’s cool to be open to anything because I’m just so awesome.

Anyway, I think this casting is distracting from the big picture anyway, and that’s that the movie can’t possibly be any good anyway. Zack Snyder is directing it, after all. How good could it possibly be. I liked Watchmen and everything but if ever there was a “style over substance” director it’s Snyder. Seriously, since when did he become the go-to guy for comic book adaptations? I’m sure I’m not the only one who saw the Watchmen trailer and laughed so hard I peed a little when he was described as a “visionary director.”

And that got me thinking. Zack Snyder is an American, I wonder if it crossed his mind if it would be a good idea to cast a non-American for the role. I wonder if he considered whether or  not it may upset people. I’m sure he’ll give some interviews in the future to explain himself. But if he sees it as a non-issue, I can’t imagine the guy having a firm grasp on the character.

Ultimately I think it’s far more ignorant to act like it isn’t an issue at all than to at least acknowledge it. You can agree with this blog or not, but just don’t pretend it isn’t an issue and that anybody feeling uncomfortable about the casting is totally out of line. That’s like saying “When I see a person, I don’t see race or colour, I just see a person.” Yes, that seems all nice and everything but that’s one of the worst things someone can say. It’s our diversities that make us unique and every race, colour, creed, and nationality has its own rich history and ignoring Superman’s impact on American culture is pretty close-minded.

I can’t speak for Americans but if they cast anyone other than a Canadian to play Captain Canuck, I wouldn’t think twice about skipping it.

Batman 3 thoughts: new villains, Christopher Nolan’s involvement, and the late Heath Ledger

I guess since watching and reviewing all the Batman films recently, I just couldn’t get bats out of my brain. My thoughts always go to Batman 3. I think there’s a 2012 release date, but nothing else to go on. No definitie story, or actors, just that release date. And I wonder how they’re going to do, especially after the exceptional The Dark Knight. There’s rumours and everything, I’ve heard The Riddler may be in the next one, and even that there’s talks of Joseph Gordon-Levitt in the role. The Riddler seems like a logical next step, and Levitt is a great actor, and could surely pull it off.

But when I hear all these villain names being dropped, whether it’s Catwoman, The Penguin, or The Riddler, I feel a little underwhelmed. If this is going to be a trilogy, I’d like it all to go down on a more exciting note; it should have a finality to it, and shouldn’t start feeling episodic, which is the very feeling I get when I hear all those villains mentioned. Batman Begins was a great movie, and somehow, The Dark Knight topped it. I’d hate to think that The Dark Knight would be the high point in the trilogy and that the third one would be calming the waters. But The Joker is the absolute most popular villain in Batman’s rogues gallery, and seemingly his greatest challenge, so how could they possibly top the second movie?

You know who I’d like to see in part 3? Bane.

Obviously, the Knightfall story comes much later in the Batman mythology, but this could be easily overlooked and forgiven if done right. Nolan’s films never word-for-word, point-for-point followed the comics anyway, but rather just kept their spirit. If they could effectively work in Bane, I’d be one happy Batman fan, especially since the character was done such an injustice in the Schumacher film that dare not speak its name.

In my opinion, the only villain that even comes close to The Joker is Bane. He’s also an equal to Batman. He was born in prison, he spent years training his body and his mind. He’s just as smart and clever as he is incredibly strong. He defeated and humiliated Batman, leaving him crippled. Now there’s an interesting story.

There are other aspects of the Knightfall storyline that could be explored, like Jean-Paul Valley taking on the role of Batman as Bruce Wayne recuperates, and breaks Wayne’s rules by killing. It would make sense thematically, and further test Bruce Wayne in his crusade for Gotham. I’m not saying he should be in a damn wheelchair for the entire movie, but there’s something about Batman’s physical limits being found, and having to sit by powerless as his image is further tarnished that I find compelling. And Valley refusing to step down, and Bruce’s retraining, and their final battle would be very, very cool to see, and perhaps a very appropriate end to it all. Maybe.

I’d like to see other villains such as Catwoman or The Riddler included, too. It just doesn’t have to be Bane and Valley. The only problem, I suppose, would be casting Bane. Who the hell could do that? It’d have to be someone pretty built. I’d say Mickey Rourke would have been a good choice if he didn’t already do Iron Man 2. I don’t think he’d need to be cartoonishly muscly though. I can see the character being more raw and realistic, just like The Joker. Maybe it would be best to cast an unknown, and have the bigger name stars take on the Catwoman and Riddler roles. Then again, maybe…just maybe…Javier Bardem would work.

And no Robin. Who the fuck cares about Robin?

Of course, these are just my thoughts as a fan. Everyone has their own opinion and their own hopes of what to see in the next Batman film. My primary hope, above everything else, is that Christopher Nolan returns to write and direct it. Only he can do it justice at this point. I’ve heard many things about his involvement with Batman 3. I’ve heard he’s not all too anxious to do it anymore. I’ve heard since day one he’s conceptualized it as a trilogy, and that The Joker was very much planned to be a key part in the last film. Heath Ledger is gone from this world and now things are uncertain. But if this truly is Nolan’s last Batman film, and if The Joker truly is a necessary part, maybe they should do the unthinkable and recast the role. I loved Ledger as the character, he brought The Joker to life perfectly, and in new and exciting ways that I never could have possibly imagined, and in my opinion it will go down in history as one of the greatest performances on film, but it can’t possibly begin and end with Ledger. He’s not the first actor to portray him and there’s no way he’ll be the last, regardless of his popularity. Just like Batman and all the other characters in that universe, the character will always be bigger than the actor, and will live on forever.

The only question is, who would want to take on that role? Who would want to fill those incredibly daunting shoes? Some say maybe Joseph Gordon-Levitt could do it, seeing as how he is also a very talented young star and has some similar facial features to Ledger. Maybe Johnny Depp could do it. I know a lot of people have brought up his name as a possibility. Yes, Depp is much older than Ledger, but the makeup could easily hide that. The best thing about Heath Ledger’s incarnation of The Joker is that he seemed to be an indeterminate age, there’s no way you could tell that it was a 28-year-old playing him. Ledger played it far beyond the limits of his youth, displaying ageless talent. Many of Ledger’s closest friends and family members described him as an old soul. In a perfect world, Heath Ledger would still be alive. His career would have reached a point where he could do any project he desired, he would have been on that stage to accept his Academy Award for The Dark Knight, and he would have been ready and willing to play The Joker once again. But this is not a perfect world. It’s depressingly unfair. There are tragedies and heartbreaks beyond all eloquence, and there are voids that can never be filled no matter how much time passes. But we need to accept this, and keep fighting on. If the Batman movies have taught us anything, it’s that.

That’s why Nolan’s involvement for a third film is so crucial. His films are more than just fun comic book adventures. They’re morality plays in the guise of super hero stories. There are values to take out of them. They’re important. Art is important. And Nolan’s films have proven that these illustrated stories featuring a man dressing up as a bat can be seen as legitimate art. Tim Burton’s films were a step in the right direction. Joel Schumacher’s films, though entertaining and appropriate for all ages, were mostly a step back. Either knowingly or unknowingly, Christopher Nolan has sparked a revolution of the genre, and his films have set the standard by which all others will be judged. Maybe some people feel his Batman movies are overrated, and that as a director, Nolan himself is overrated, but I don’t think so. I think he and his films deserve every bit of praise they have received. Not unlike Batman, Nolan has moved forward with unflinching courage and determination in spite of impossible obstacles, and has become a figure we, as fans, can believe in. He faces more obstacles now more than ever. But our faith in Nolan as an artist has been richly rewarded so far, and I’m not alone in believing that all the faith may fade if Nolan steps down from doing the third Batman. Nolan understands the source material and has given us two great films, and even if the most talented of directors become attached it just wouldn’t be the same. After his takes on Batman, how can we accept anything less? How can we go back to anything without him? There’s no going back. He’s changed things. Forever.

Movie Review: Kick-Ass (2010)

Kick-Ass is more grim of a movie than I thought it would be, and not as much of a laugh-riot satire that I expected. It has the teenage situations, potty mouth, and pop-culture references of something like Superbad, but gradually takes a nose-dive into the morose, blood-lusting atmosphere of The Punisher.

Two stories collide in the movie. One is that of the title character, Kick-Ass, who doesn’t like the wrong that’s going on in the world and is tired of being passive, and being a comic-book geek, naturally his logical solution is to become a super hero himself. I liked this half of the story. It was unique, and very funny. The other half of the story, with heroes Big Daddy and Hit-Girl, is the typical self-righteous hero getting revenge on a mob boss plot. Can you really call them super heroes at that point? How about just murderers in capes? They’re not fighting any crime per se, just doing everything possible to make this mob boss’ life miserable. Killing everyone on his payroll. Burning down warehouses. Crushing a defenseless henchman in junk compacter. You know, the average super hero stuff. If they’re going through all this trouble, why not just skip all the theatrics and sneak into the mob boss’ house and slit his throat while he’s sitting on the john? Sometimes you gotta ask yourself: what would Batman do? Batman would not be happy with these guys.

And that really brings us to one undeniable fact: any movie released after 2008 that is even remotely related to super heroes will no doubt be compared to the quality of Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight. When one comic book adaptation does everything so well, naturally you’re going notice glaring flaws in other comic book adaptations. One huge flaw in the movie, to me personally, were the villains. Mob bosses? Really? The Super hero chain of challenge usually goes from petty thieves, to professional thieves (the mob), to super villains. I can understand that. It’s practically sacred scripture. But seriously, the main villain played by Mark Strong is not compelling whatsoever. The role is so undemanding it could have been played by a cardboard cut-out. Hell, that goddamn, greasy Russian in The Dark Knight had more personality than any villains in Kick-Ass! The entire rogues gallery in this movie is about one step away from being the type that trips over wacky traps set up by Macaulay Culkin. When the most intriguing bad guy is played by McLovin, you know you have a problem.

But relax, the movie is still pretty good. Despite all of its flaws, it works. And the characters are a hell of a lot more likable than they have the right to be. The acting is good too, particularly Aaron Johnson as Kick-Ass and Chloe Moretz as Hit-Girl. Consider Kick-Ass the revelations of these two actors, who will surely have great careers ahead of them in hopefully better movies. Nicolas Cage and his wacky Adam West impression are a welcome addition to the movie as well, and rest assured: Cage was able to work in some hilarious, hammy screaming scenes. “SWITCH TO KRYPTONIIITTTTTEEEEE!!!!”

I liked Kick-Ass. But I didn’t love it. The plot is a little stupid but it at least tries to give new twists on old ideas, but the main reason to see the movie is the action. I suppose I liked the icing better than the cake itself. The action scenes rock, especially when you see Hit-Girl kicking some serious ass. It’s absurd, hilarious, and just awesome. I predict that when the movie hits home video there will be a lot of chapter skipping just to the action scenes.

Kick-Ass finds itself somewhere in the middle of the pack when it comes to super hero movies/comic book adaptations. There are better ones out there, but there are also much much worse ones, and the fact that Kick-Ass is so un-apologetically off-the-wall with its violence and bad language is something to celebrate. It’s a wild ride. It’s funny, action packed, and features an 11-year-old girl mercilessly slaughtering bad guys. Fun for the whole family!

Mass Tweet Movie Review: The Dark Knight (2008)

Wow, it’s hard to believe that The Dark Knight was released almost 2 years ago! Time really flies. Anyway, the movie has been making its rounds on HBO lately and reminding a lot of people of how awesome the movie still is, and since we all know that most regular Twitter Users will let the entire world know when they wipe their nose, naturally a lot of people had things to say about this very popular movie.

So I have collected some screen shots of random Tweets that had anything to do with The Dark Knight– some insightful, some funny, some incoherent. Enjoy!

This is a movie that causes excitement.


That part is awesome.

The Dark Knight: It goes great with lobster.

This has neither been confirmed nor denied.

No work is more important than watching The Dark Knight. Fact.

General consensus is that Ledger did an amazing job as The Joker.

General consensus is that Batman’s voice is silly.

Batman as the spokesman for “Fisherman’s Friend” is marketing Heaven.

The consensus on Batman’s voice is that it’s silly. There are exceptions, however.

The Dark Knight: More important than sleep and you know it!

Still better than Katie Holmes.

The Dark Knight: A thought-provoking film if there ever was one.

FUN FACT: Batman, Joker, and the mayor all use the same eye makeup remover brand!

Make it happen, YouTube!

I’m not entirely sure what this means.

Women have been attracted to men in ridiculous makeup since the 70’s, so no. Yeah, suck it, Gene Simmons!

So true.

Also true.

This Tweet needs some rephrasing.

Harvey Dent: He could use a band-aid or two.

“Dick move, Alfred!”

I’ll see you in Hell, Danny Boyle!

The Dark Knight: Still better than the highest grossing film of all time.

One Hell of a recommendation.

We’re getting pretty profound at 140 characters or less…

Okay, that’s it.These screens were all taken last night. And it’s just further proof of how awesome and universally loved this movie is.

If you own The Dark Knight on DVD or Blu-Ray, make sure to watch it at least once a week to promote a happy and healthy lifestyle.  Take care, folks.

Best NES Games

Hi. Here is my list of my personal favourite games for the original Nintendo Entertainment System. Enjoy!

1. Super Mario Bros. Trilogy

So yes, #1 is a tie. It’s an amazing trilogy of games. If pressed I’m sure I would vote the third as the absolute best, but they all have many things I love about them, yes, even the “controversial” Super Mario Bros. 2. It’s great fun. Mario is the most recognizable video game character of all time, the gameplay is amazing and still holds up well today. Highly recommended.

2. Super C

Yeah, “Super C” as in “Super Contra.” A hell of a game. Tons of gun-play, dodging bullets, evil aliens, crazy machines, and cool enemies to battle. This is the kind of game the Turbo Controller was made for. That is, if you’re a pussy. The best way to play this game is to end up with bloody thumbs and blistered palms. End of story.

3.  Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2: The Arcade Game

Ninja Turles and Nintendo. These things were made for each other. Awesome game play, vastly superior to the first TMNT NES game (if you haven’t seen that Angry Video Game Nerd review of it, drop everything and watch it now!), and it’s everything a child from the late 80’s/early 90’s could ever hope for. This game made my childhood. I still love playing it every now and then, it gives you a warm gooey nostalgic feeling.

4. Dr. Mario

Hold on Tetris, Imma let you finish, but DR. MARIO is the most addicting game of all time. OF ALL TIME! Yes, Dr. Fucking Mario is an awesome and addicting game, and while I love Tetris and all, between the two I feel the game is much better.  I would play this game so much that every time I’d close my eyes I would see red, blue, and yellow germs and pill capsules floating around. It’s a very simple game but hours of fun.

5. Ninja Gaiden

This game is hard as hell. It’s frustrating, enraging, and you come to realize that it sucks being a Ninja because everything wants to kill you. But, hey- unlimited continues! Sweet! I’ll admit I never beat it, but that’s just something I’ve come to accept and it doesn’t really decrease my enjoyment of the game. It’s one of the few earlier games that actually had an interesting storyline to it and it’s full of interesting environments and enemies. It’s a challenging game game but it’s always a good idea to dust this puppy off and think, MAYBE THIS TIME I’LL BEAT IT.

6. 1942

This is just a good old fashioned arcade-style button-masher. The idea is very basic: You’re a World War II fighter plane. Shoot everything that moves. Go! You know you’re playing the game right if you develop arthritis before you hit age 20.

7. Castlevania III: Dracula’s Curse

Skeletons, Medusa Heads, and Swamp Creatures- oh my! Just like Ninja Gaiden, this game is challenging as all-hell, but it’s such fun that you desperately keep coming back for more. This is my favourite of the Castlevania NES games. I like it just a little better than the first, and Simon’s Quest is infamously horrible. This game feels like a classic mash-up of all your favourite monsters. Playing this is more worth your time than seeing the movie Van Helsing.

8. Batman: The Video Game

You know, up until the release of Batman: Arkham Asylum, I’d say this was actually the best Batman video game ever released. I never understood why they could never make a decent game based on the character, but at the time this was the best thing we got. There’s punching, unique weapons, Ninja Gaiden-style wall jumping, and the music kicks some serious ass, too. You’ll find out pretty quickly that it has barely any resemblance to anything that happens in the 1989 Batman film by Tim Burton, but that doesn’t matter. It’s a damn good game.

9. The Little Mermaid

I know what you’re thinking- WTF? Little Mermaid? Are you kidding? Well, what can I say? I guess this is just a guilty pleasure for me. The game play was pretty unique for the time, the graphics are actually very, very good- and as far as movie adaptions go, this is very very faithful to the source material, and still one of the best Disney Film based games ever. Another plus is that it’s so insanely easy that you can beat it in about 20 minutes. Good times! Don’t be afraid to check it out. I won’t make fun of you.

10. Blades of Steel

Sports games today have such advanced graphics that they can completely emulate the facial and physical features of real players, but those get outdated so quickly and you constantly have to keep buying the most recent versions, which I think is stupid and a waste of money. Blades of Steel, however, is an 8-bit classic that has never gone out of style. The sounds are great for the time, and the graphics are decent enough. It’s a fun sports game and in my personal opinion, the best sports game for the NES.

So, that’s it. That’s my list.

Have a nice day. I’m off to find some mushrooms.

  • Calendar

    • February 2020
      M T W T F S S
      « Dec    
  • Search