Movie Review Round-Up - A Furiously Tangled Trek Into the Oblivion of Iron Man 3

It's summer time which means it's also movie time, and for that reason it's one of my favorite times of year. I could do without the heat and humidity seeing as how it tends to turn me from being a big, hairy beast into a big, hairy sweaty beast with questionable hygiene. It's 138 degrees outside this time of year and there are bugs whereas in any given theater it's 70 degrees and there are nachos readily available. Sure, there are annoying little kids and their unqualified and ineffective parents to deal with (sadly I've had experiences in theaters that have left me questioning how some adults have lived as long as they have and wanting to punch a child), but is it any wonder why I'd sooner stay inside and watch movies?

Star Trek Into Darkness

Picking up where JJ Abrams' reboot of the classic Star Trek mythology left off, Into Darkness sees Kirk (Chris Pine), Spock (Zachary Quinto), and their cohorts plunged into battle with a foe that is both mysterious and familiar. Through perceived acts of terror, this villain reveals that Star Fleet has realized a threat exists in the form of the Klingons and that scientific exploration is no longer the sole purpose of their operations.

Pine and Quinto are the obvious headliners of this movie but for my money Benedict Cumberbatch is the true star. His portrayal of Khan is absolutely brilliant - he has an amazing voice, which is a lot like that of Jeremy Irons only somehow more visceral in its delivery. Like all great villains, he has charisma to rival that of his protagonist counterparts. Combine that with the fact that his character's back story involves a legitimate effort at revenge and you can see why there are points in this that I was genuinely pulling for Khan instead of the crew of the Enterprise.

Longtime Trek fans will quickly realize that the plot of Into Darkness is something of a re-hashing of 1982's Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. This take on Khan is more relevant to today's audiences as the concept of a character seeking vengeance on an assumed political or government entity is certainly identifiable.

One of few issues I have with the movie is the finale of Into Darkness in that it tidies up a bit too well. There was an effort to send everyone home happy here, or so it seems. That and the fact that there are still parts of the Enterprise's interior that look altogether too much like a boiler room are all that bothered me. I'm looking forward to seeing where this new Trek is headed, even though it may be a while before we see another one since Abrams' focus is now on a different universe, one far, far away from this.

/5 Tribles

Iron Man 3

The world has changed for Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.) since his encounter with other-worldly beings in The Avengers. He's a man so distraught with fear over being unable to protect the one person he cares for more than life itself (Pepper Potts/Gwyneth Paltrow), he's dedicated his every waking moment to advancing his Iron Man armory by building dozens of specialized configurations. Try as he might to use what he knows to satiate his fears, they're realized when Stark encounters an international terrorist known as the Mandarin.

I don't get Stark as a haunted man who's suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, even though it's a topical subject that's gotten a lot of attention now that so many members of our Armed Forces are returning home from combat with symptoms of PTSD. Downey is still the only person I ever want to see play Tony Stark, I just think the well is running dry on Iron Man now that he's done his job in serving as a conduit for The Avengers to assemble. What's more, the relationships that exist between these characters doesn't feel as fluid as it has in the past.

I hate to say this - IM3 is my least favorite of the Iron Man franchise. There was a lot of fanfare about Shane Black (who's best known for having created the Lethal Weapon series) coming aboard to take the helm once Jon Favreau decided not to return as director after having lead the first two films, but I don't think Black's writing or directorial style have improved matters. If anything, he's managed to take the canon a few steps backwards. IM3 has too many moving parts that aren't that interesting. This is particularly disappointing because there's a decent chance this is the last dedicated Iron Man film starring Downey, Jr.

/5 Shellheads

Tangled


Tangled is Disney's interpretation of the Grimm fairy tale Rapunzel, and like many of the Disney translations this story has been modified to make it more consumable for younger audiences. By that I mean it has a happier ending where evil has been vanquished and good prevails, as opposed to almost everyone involved dying a horribly tragic death. But what else should we expect? This is Disney, after all.

Rapunzel (Mandy Moore) is in her late teens here and, like most girls her age, she's beginning to feel the urge to strike out on her own. In Rapunzel's case, her need is more legitimate than most seeing as how she's been held captive under the pretense that the outside world is a terribly dangerous place by the woman she thinks is her mother, Gothel (Donna Murphy), in a tower where the only other being she has contact with is her pet chameleon Pascal. Her desire to flee is enabled when a bungling burglar (Flynn Rider/Zachary Levi) finds his way into the tower. He inadvertently sets off a series of events that not only gets Rapunzel out of the tower but reveals her true identity as well.

I think a lot of people are under the impression that Disney and Pixar are the same entity but in watching Tangled I can tell you that a number of differences can be spotted. The style of animation, most notably, but what stands out the most is the writing. I'm of the opinion that Pixar's films are some of the best written movies, animated or otherwise, you'll ever see. I'm not saying that material like Tangled isn't penned well but the fact that this is an adaptation versus a novel concept does hurt it somewhat as there's already a "tower" in place from the start which confines where these characters can go.

There's not an overwhelming sense of star power here, and I appreciate that. It seems like a lot of A-list Hollywood talent do an animated feature for the heck of it. Here, you have a main character voiced by Mandy Moore, a singer and actress who's more than capable of handling the musical elements while also breathing life into Rapunzel. Zachary Levi does a great job with Rider as he's not only the comedic center of the film but also a character with a number of dramatic scenes as well. Donna Murphy is yet another evil pseudo-mother in the annals of Disney mythology; she doesn't have that much to hang her hat on as the character isn't as involved as some of their other villainous matriarchs have been.

This may seem odd but my two favorite characters from Tangled are ones that have no actual lines: Pascal the chameleon and Maximus the horse. Seriously, they're fantastic - I'd probably watch an "Adventures of Pascal & Maximus" if it ever happened.

 /5 Frying Pans

Fast & Furious 6


I have to apologize to anyone who's a fan of this series because I don't particularly see the need to spend a whole lot of time reviewing this movie. When you are talking about a franchise that's on it's sixth iteration, it stands to reason that the movies have become paint-by-number in terms of their assembly and that's exactly the case here. There are criminals, there are cops, there are fast cars, and a whole heaping helping of absurdity to tie it together.

Vin Diesel and essentially all the other original members of the Fast & Furious cast have returned. Their characters have more or less sunk into lives of hiding in order to stave off heat from various international crime fighting organizations, but as it turns out it's those same groups that were hunting them that now need their help. There's a new bad guy in town, one with a similar penchant for being fast and furious about it, and there's apparently no better team to throw at this new threat than an aging group of street racers.

I'm one to talk when it comes to criticizing movies and TV shows where an ability to suspend what's plausible in this realm of existence is necessary, seeing as how that's more or less everything that I watch. Be that as it may, Fast & Furious 6 has a number of scenes where you have to take everything you've ever learned about physics and the durability of the human body and throw it out the window. More than that, you have to take it and light it on fire with kerosene - it's that crazy, and it's that distracting. For example, if Fast & Furious 6 is to be believed, there exists a runway somewhere in Europe that is approximately 300 miles long.

Don't worry, they're already working on Fast & Furious 7 which will add Jason Statham to the cast.

/5 Vin Diesels

Oblivion

In the not so distant future, humanity has fled planet Earth as a result of the rock we once called home having been ravaged by an alien race (who went so far as to blow up the moon, just for good measure) that sought to annihilate our species and strip-mine the globe of any useful resources. We were somehow able to overcome the odds and defeat the invaders but we did so at the cost of losing what once was our home world as Earth is too far gone to remain habitable. Now only a few humans remain on Earth, support crews in place to oversee a mining operation to provide fuel for the colonizing effort on one of Saturn's moons (where the survivors of our kind are holed up) and protect it from attacks by alien survivors, now known as Scavs (short for "scavengers").

Tom Cruise leads the cast of Oblivion as he plays Jack, a character who is a mechanic but also a soldier, tasked with maintaining a batch of automated mining platforms and a squadron of airborne drones that protect them from Scav attacks. Imagine Ethan Hunt from the Mission: Impossible series but with more knowledge of engines than international espionage. He's flanked by Victoria (Andrea Riseborough), whose role in the operation is similar to that of technical advisor and overwatch, meaning she's Jack's eyes and ears when he's out in the wasteland.

Visually speaking, Oblivion shares much with director Joseph Kosinski's only other film, that being TRON: Legacy. That's not a complaint as I loved Legacy and I can't wait to see what Kosinski does with the announced sequel to that film.

I don't feel like I can justifiably get into discussing the remainder of the cast because, to put it quite simply, there's a whole lot of ways I could spoil the plot and I don't have enough cleverness within me to skirt the material without blatantly stating what happens. That said, I will tell you that while there are a number of twists to this story the sum of the entire thing is very derivative. There are elements of films like Moon, Terminator, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Independence Day, and a sprinkling of classic Twilight Zone episodes. It's not a bad mix of inspiration as sci-fi goes these days but the more the movie goes on the more imitative it seems to become.

/5 evil super computers

Movie Review - GI Joe: Retaliation

Like pretty much every other little boy who had the distinct privilege of having been born in the 1980s (a truly epic decade in terms of cultural and technological advancements), I played with Hasbro's GI Joe toys and I truly loved them. To me, they were awesome - I found them so appealing because they combined cutting edge military technology and exciting possibilities for battlefield carnage thanks to the assortment of vehicles & weapons available to both the heroic GI Joes and the villainous forces of Cobra. I would stage battles routinely, both indoors and out; truth be told, I had a sandbox in my Grandparents back yard and I would quite often have burial ceremonies for fallen combatants after the war of the day had concluded. (PRO-TIP: Don't bury GI Joe figures in wet sand, it ruins the joints.) I went so far as to get characters from other series involved in the mix. I know I wasn't the first kid to have He-Man fighting side by side with Snake Eyes or to wonder what would happen if Star Scream hooked up with Baroness.

Okay, that last one might have been a bit weird (not to mention physically impossible), but the point of that opening paragraph was to say that the GI Joe toys were a big part of my childhood. It goes without saying that the live-action GI Joe movies are of significant interest to me, if for no other reason than the fact that they project the kind of nostalgic sensations that are, fittingly enough, generally reserved for hero worship. Throw in some of the most well-known action stars in the modern era of movie-making with a whole bunch of explosions and you've got the makings for a fine afternoon of cinema - or, as is the case with GI Joe: Retaliation, an entertaining but ultimately mindless and rather disjointed movie that doesn't live up to the expectations of little boys like me who've gotten older but haven't necessarily grown up yet.

Set not too long after the events of its predecessor, GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra, Retaliation's plot picks up with the world of the Joes mirroring that of our own. Occurrences in countries like Pakistan and North Korea are creating instability in different regions and the Joes are doing what they do best - fighting under the flag of the United States as a group of highly trained and outfitted soldiers using special tactics and covert techniques to prevent dangerous munitions from getting into the hands of the enemies of freedom. Trouble rears it's ugly head when Zartan (Arnold Vosloo), a Cobra operative masquerading as the President of the US since the actual President (Jonathan Pryce) was kidnapped during The of Rise of Cobra, begins setting into motion a plan that will set free Cobra Commander from a suspended animation prison and completely decimate the Joes. Having been set loose by Storm Shadow (Byung-hun Lee) and Firefly (Ray Stevenson), Cobra Commander lashes out with a diabolical strategy to simultaneously disarm the world's nuclear powers and destroy them using a series of satellites serving as weapon platforms equipped with armaments capable of laying waste to entire cities. With minimal resources and personnel, the surviving Joes - Roadblock (Dwayne Johnson), Lady Jaye (Adrianne Palicki), Flint (D.J. Cotrona) and Snake Eyes (Ray Park) - must fight back to reclaim America and, in fact, the rest of the world from the evil clutches of Cobra.

I can't talk about Retaliation without mentioning the fact that it sat on a shelf in a somewhat completed state for almost a year before finally being released in theaters. Originally, this movie was supposed to have debuted in June of 2012 but it was delayed by Paramount Pictures as they saw fit to convert the film to 3D and also re-shoot part of the thing in order to increase Channing Tatum's involvement. I fail to understand the benefit of either of these moves. As a moviegoer, 3D does nothing for me - I still see it as a gimmick designed to bilk people out of a few extra bucks at the box office. And regarding Tatum, ladies, please don't kid yourselves - he's not naked in this one. For that matter, he's barely in the movie at all. That's not necessarily a bad thing as I was growing tired of his portrayal of Duke as the cocky high school quarterback by the point in time that he gets blown up (darn, my spoiler alert button appears to be malfunctioning).

Dwayne Johnson is the real star here although with a line-up this big he's got a lot of other players competing with him for screen time. Roadblock is a good role for him as it fits and plays to his abilities, but there's not enough substance here to give him something worth hanging his hat on. Despite his many acting gigs, Johnson is still waiting for the part that makes him an icon, in my opinion. He hasn't yet found his Terminator or Die Hard, is what I'm getting at, but even so he's plenty capable of being entertaining.

On another note, me being the pro wrestling fan that I am it still feels odd to have to refer to him as Dwayne Johnson and not The Rock - even Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson is weird, although not as bad.

As for the rest of the cast, Bruce Willis is the most recognizable face and definitely the one with the most credentials. His part here is that of the grizzled veteran who knows better than to stand down even though he's been long since taken out of active duty. For all intents and purposes, Ray Stevenson is the most prolific villain in Retaliation but that's mostly due to the fact that his cohorts are all wearing masks of some sort or another. I'm a fan of Stevenson's, even though he's definitely not a household name. If you're into zombie movies or gritty horror mixed with sci-fi, find a copy of a film Stevenson starred in called Outpost - I think you'll be glad you did.

Speaking of actors in masks, Ray Park reprises the role of Snake Eyes in Retaliation, a part which sees him donning a full helmet as was the case with the character originally in the cartoon series. Park is best known for his work as Darth Maul in Star Wars - Episode I: The Phantom Menace and also for having played Toad in Bryan Singer's X-Men. He's the type of actor who doesn't receive much fanfare (stuntmen rarely get the respect they deserve), and unfortunately Snake Eyes doesn't get much to do here. There's a major sequence in which he participates but it didn't have any sort of impact upon me. It's an example of a scene that should really grab you by the seat of your pants yet manages to feel mostly flat because of it being rushed and poorly plotted.

D.J. Cotrona is more or less here to fill out a part as his work with Flint isn't at all distinctive, but I blame the script for that more than I do him as an actor; he can only do what's on the page, after all. Adrianne Palicki adds some much-needed femininity to the core group of surviving Joes, however there's not a whole lot of effort put into establishing her character outside of a rather typical "girl who wanted to work hard to prove she could do it" back story. Palicki, if you weren't aware, was cast to play the title part in a Wonder Woman TV series for which NBC filmed a pilot episode but never went further than that.

Shame to see that costume go to waste.

For me, the plot of this film and the writing behind it is a big part of why Retaliation is ultimately rather dull. (Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick penned the script; they had a hit in the form of Zombieland but that magic isn't anywhere to be found in Retaliation.) This is the sort of thing that happens when you're dealing with a story that is trying to include 10 or more primary characters packed into a movie that's not even 2 hours long. You can't establish emotional connectivity and get everything else in, so what gets sacrificed? The emotional connections, I'm sad to say. Oh, Duke died? Go figure! (Spoiler Alert Button Status: still malfunctioning.) It winds up being action and explosions for the sake of having action and explosions, not because there's any substantive reasoning for either. Maybe I'm off my rocker for expecting more out of this material, but I persist in the thought that even something as silly as a kids cartoon can be converted into a piece of work suitable for all audiences that manages to have heart and logic included.

One of my biggest pet peeves about an action movie like Retaliation is the music, specifically the lack of anything resembling recognizable, thematic scoring. Consider classic action heroes and their musical accompaniment. Superman has theme music. Indiana Jones has theme music. James Bond has theme music. Harry Potter has theme music. Hell, for that matter, Forrest Gump has theme music. Why then do the GI Joes not get theme music? The closest thing I heard to a consistent piece of music herein was something that cropped up a couple times in battle sequences which, to my ears, sounded a whole heck of a lot like Rammstein's "Reise Reise". That doesn't pass muster for a true theme, though, not in my book. A theme should be bombastic, consistent, and immediately recognizable - the sounds I point out weren't any of that. I know it would be corny but I'd have sufficed for a revamped version of one of the themes from the GI Joe cartoons - something, anything to add to the ambiance of the movie.

 

GI Joe: Retaliation isn't a terrible movie by any means although I'd say it certainly does fall into the category of mindless Summer-time action flicks. I've read some criticisms of Retaliation wherein the writer opines that this movie is better than GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra. Personally, I liked The Rise of Cobra better. With all the technology and gear flying around in addition to the colorful personalities involved, it just felt more like a true GI Joe story whereas Retaliation comes across as being GI Joe interpreted through the eyes of someone who's played a bit too much Call of Duty.

Knowing what I know now, would I pay money to see it again? Probably not, and I certainly wouldn't pony up the extra $4-$5 for the 3D "experience". This is the kind of movie that I would more often than not reserve for an occasion where I'm browsing Netflix at 6 AM on a Saturday because I can't sleep and need something to kill time until my wife is up and around.

WrestleMania 29 Predictions

It's that time of year again - WrestleMania weekend. A weekend during which professional wrestling fans from across the globe flock to the site of an annual event that will either leave them completely floored by how awesome the whole thing was or wondering why in the world they spent so much money on being a part of it all. I'm fairly certain I'd fall into the latter category. Seriously, I love pro wrestling (well, most of the time) but my status as a sufferer of buyer's remorse causes me to go into a state of shock when considering the financial ramifications of attending WrestleMania.

First and foremost, you've got to have tickets to the event. The face value price range for WM29 tickets starts at a fairly modest $49.50 (including taxes & vendor fees), however I think it's safe to assume that those seats will have you watching the show from a distance so far from the ring that you might be able to high-five the crew of the International Space Station. (By comparison, it'll cost you $69.95 to watch WM29 at home via pay-per-view in high definition.) The cost of tickets goes up from there with the most expensive ones being a select group at ringside which are valued at $2,000. Yes, you read that right - 2 grand per ticket (my wife's engagement ring and wedding band cost me just a smidge over that), but on the plus side you get to keep your chair from the show as a bonus. If you figure in other factors such as airfare, cab fare or rental car fees, a hotel stay, food, etc. I would hazard a guess that you're probably looking at a list of expenditures that will set you back between $1,500-2,000. If you treated this as a vacation that might not be such a bad thing. I can't say that I wouldn't consider it, however given that I could spend less money and do something like take a cruise for example I'd more than likely take the cruise - even with the probability of the boat breaking down being at an all-time high right now.

As of this writing, there are 8 matches on the card which, of course, is subject to change. At this point, the Intercontinental, United States, and Divas championships are not scheduled to be defended - I do not expect them to be included on the card unless, that is, they wind up getting added to a pre-show, if that even happens. I think that should give you a real idea as to how important those titles are viewed as being within the realm of existence that is the WWE Universe. Unfortunately the Divas division is paper-thin right now and the two mid-card titleholders - Wade Barrett (IC) and Antonio Cesaro (US) - seem to be perceived as the best enhancement talent available for guys on the upper-tier.

All that said, here are my winning picks for the matches to be featured in WM29. "Winning" meaning that I'm so certain of these outcomes that you could certainly put money on each of them and expect a return on your investment because I think there are a few sports books out there that actually allow lines on an event like this. In all seriousness, if you are a person equipped with enough disposable income that you'd put a bet on a pro wrestling match I would encourage you to instead send that money to me. I promise to do something important with it, like pay my property taxes or take my wife out to a nice steak dinner and not something totally frivolous like buying a fainting goat or getting an absurd tattoo (a pig with wings wearing a tiara and Crocs, for example).

- Ryback vs. Mark Henry

This is the match I have the least amount of interest in. Why? It's more or less just here for the sake of putting two big brutes against one another - there's nothing all that organic about it, in other words.

Ryback is essentially a less charismatic version of Goldberg wearing Rob Van Dam's gear. He's been presented as a good guy but to be honest he carries out the part more like a villain. I don't think he has it in him to make Ryback out to be a likeable character. On the other hand, I do like Mark Henry; his character has shifted from being a buffoon to a monster and he's been able to do great things since the change. Henry's been with WWE for almost 17 years and this is the first time I've ever expected great things out of him. That may be asking too much here, unfortunately, given who he's working with.

I'm trying to think logically when picking a winner in this match but WWE and logic go together like mashed potatoes and strawberry jelly; that being a palatable product but not what you were most hoping for. Henry could use the win seeing as how it would elevate him into a position where he could feud with John Cena, Rocky, or anyone else seeing as how there aren't many other top-tier villains right now. Ryback has been something of a work in progress for a while, though, and I don't see him losing.

Projected Winner: Ryback

- Fandango vs. Chris Jericho

Not every wrestling fan is aware of this but WWE maintains what amounts to a farm system similar to what Major League Baseball does through associations with minor league franchises. It's essentially a training program for wrestlers WWE have recognized as being potential stars which works to mold them into talent fit for the main roster. Just because you're a member of WWE developmental doesn't eventually guarantee you a spot on RAW or Smackdown, though. Sometimes things don't pan out, and sometimes a guy will spend years in training before getting an opportunity to move up. Such is the case with Fandango.

The Fandango character is that of a flamboyant and extremely arrogant ballroom dancer; think one of the professional trainers from Dancing With the Stars if they had the most ridiculously inflated ego imaginable. Before he was Fandango he was Johnny Curtis, and Johnny Curtis was in WWE developmental for right at 7 years - a fact that blows a lot of observers minds seeing as how he's known as a truly talented guy (he won one of the seasons of WWE's NXT program when that show was still featured as a competition instead of the stand-alone show that it is now). In all that time, this is the best gimmick the creative minds in WWE could come up with for him.

All I can say is that it's a good thing Chris Jericho hasn't retired yet. He's one of few veterans WWE has around who can not only make Fandango look like a legitimate competitor but who doesn't mind putting over a young talent like Fandango for the sake of furthering the product. This will be one of the better matches on the card, even though it will be one of the least hyped.

Projected Winner: Fandango

- WWE Tag Team Championship: Team Hell No (Kane & Daniel Bryan) (c) vs. Dolph Ziggler & Big E Langston w/AJ Lee

Tag team wrestling has become an often ignored element of WWE's programming in recent years. Gone are the days of tag teams like the British Bulldogs, Demolition, the Midnight Express and so many others - nowadays the idea is to throw two guys together at random and work out the details as they unfold. (It's the Lethal Weapon approach to tag team formatting, if you will.) Such is the case with this match as we're dealing with 4 individuals whose personalities have no natural attraction to one another.

Kane and Daniel Bryan have been engaged in the Team Hell No gimmick for what seems like forever. It's been an entertaining run for the both of them but you kind of get the feeling that it's grown stale. At the same time, Dolp Ziggler and Big E Langston are a fairly fresh pairing, with Langston more or less being the Virgil to Dolph's Million Dollar Man.

The wildcard in this scenario is the fact that Ziggler holds the Money in the Bank contract, which allows him to challenge the World Heavyweight Champion at any point in time - he only has until roughly the middle of July to cash it in, though, as the opportunity must be used within one calendar year or else it's nullified (he won it July 15, 2012). As much as I like Dolph, I don't think WWE is going to hand the belts to him & Big E if he's potentially about to feud with the WHC.

Projected Winners: Team Hell No

- Six-Man Tag Team Match: Sheamus, Randy Orton & Big Show vs. The Shield (Dean Ambrose, Seth Rollins & Roman Reigns)

Here we have a feud that's been built out of a necessity to get the top stars in the company on the biggest show of the year. Sheamus, Orton and Big Show are all main-event stars who've had significant roles at WM in the past. By contrast you have Ambrose, Rollins and Reigns, three members of the roster who've made a name for themselves via their roguish actions but are still definitely on the rise.

In predicting a match like this, you have to try and take a long-term perspective on things. What happens if The Shield loses? To me, they're dead in the water - not to say they couldn't pick up steam again but having them lose now would be a major hit to their progression, as a group and as individuals. What happens if Sheamus, Orton & Big Show lose? Suddenly two good guys (well, one good guy - Sheamus - and one guy who could go either way at any point in time - Orton) and a villain have a reason to feud with one another. There's more to be gained from a creative standpoint from them losing than The Shield.

Projected Winners: The Shield

- No Holds Barred: Triple H vs. Brock Lesnar w/Paul Heyman (added stipulation that if Triple H loses he must retire)

This match is the culmination of a feud that's almost a year in the making, which is something of a recurring theme for WM29 seeing as how Cena & Rocky have been going back and forth with each other for at least that long (more on that later). Between the two builds, I have to say I'm looking more forward to seeing how this one pans out.

Lesnar, as a pro wrestler, is still climbing out of a deep hole in my opinion. I still remember his send-off match at WrestleMania 20 against Goldberg and how much of a disaster it was. The match was a poor payoff involving two guys who, at the time, were huge stars and it was also proof that neither one of them cared enough about what they were doing in the moment to make the match what it could've been. Afterwards, both of them seemingly disappeared; Goldberg retired and Lesnar went off to pursue his various other interests. Now, having exhausted those outlets, Lesnar's back in WWE, working a schedule that makes him a part-time member of the roster at best.

Is Lesnar the guy to retire HHH? That's the real question here, and it's a matter of ego versus ego in the grand scheme of things. Is Hunter satisfied enough with his in-ring career that he is willing to let this be his swan song or does he want to leave things open so that he could have another go-round? If this is the end for Hunter, and I think it should be, he has done everything one could possibly do in the business of professional wrestling. There is literally nothing else he could do to further solidify his legacy. It's time to put down the sledgehammer, once and for all.

Projected Winner: Brock Lesnar

- CM Punk vs. The Undertaker

There were rumors posted on pro wrestling news websites for months that at WM29 CM Punk would challenge the Undertaker and his perfect WrestleMania winning streak of 20-0. Punk was WWE Champion then, and it seemed like only a matter of time before he'd be dethroned by either Rock or Cena so that those two men would be able to use the title as a feudal point. So it was that Punk would lose the WWE title to Rock earlier this year at the Royal Rumble, setting all the pieces in place for Rock to face Cena and Punk to face the Dead Man.

While it sounds great on paper, there wasn't a natural transition from Punk having been WWE champion for more than a year to suddenly going after Undertaker's streak. Then, tragically, Undertaker's legendary manager Paul Bearer passed away and suddenly Punk, one of the greatest villains in pro wrestling history, had a means to assault the Undertaker on a level so dastardly it made many (even within the confines of WWE) question whether or not having him do so was in good taste.

Having Punk use Bearer's death as a means to make his feud with Taker more organic may come off as a disrespectful maneuver, but I think it's a very powerful tribute to the man himself. Bearer was a brilliant manager and he would've understood that this is all ultimately about making the show better. The developments that have occurred in the weeks since Bearer's death have made Punk vs. Undertaker a much grander spectacle than it would've been otherwise.

I think it's a safe assumption that when Undertaker's streak ends, so too will his career. Could it be this year? Could CM Punk be the 1 in 20-1? I highly doubt it. This will be an epic match but it won't be the last time we see the Phenom in action.

Projected Winner: The Undertaker

- World Heavyweight Championship: Alberto Del Rio (c) vs. Jack Swagger w/Zeb Coulter

Jack Swagger is one of the more gifted athletes WWE has in their employ. He's a former All-American amateur wrestler, having garnered much attention for his collegiate career at the University of Oklahoma. His WWE career has been interesting, to say the least. He's been the ECW champion, United States champion, and World Heavyweight champion but he'd been noticeably absent since September of last year. He returned in February sporting a new attitude (which is more or less a mash-up of extreme Libertarian political views) and flanked by a manager/mouthpiece in the form of Zeb Coulter (who's perhaps better known as Dutch Mantell).

In between Swagger's return to competition and now, he was pulled over for speeding. When the officer involved searched his vehicle he was found to be in possession of marijuana and other drug-related paraphernalia. Swagger was arrested and charged with driving under the influence. This turn of events lead many to believe it might result in his being fired or otherwise buried (wrestling terminology for someone being demoted from a position of prominence). Fortunately for him, the push towards his facing Alberto Del Rio was already in play and it seems to have saved him from what likely would've been a major hiccup in his advancement - for the time being, anyway.

Alberto Del Rio has recently made a transition from villain to good guy. It hasn't exactly been the smoothest move in the history of the business as ADR had become one of the top bad guys around. There was no obvious inspiration for his character to change which made the shift feel clunky and forced. What's worse is that the feud with Swagger hasn't exactly set the wrestling world on fire. The whole thing stands to likely come out as a wash in the end with Swagger getting reprimanded in some way, shape or form and ADR moving on to whoever's next.

Projected Winner: Alberto Del Rio

- WWE Championship: The Rock (c) vs. John Cena

When Rock and Cena faced off last year at WM28, it was a matched billed as being "once in a lifetime". So much for that, I guess.

Having this match as the main event at WM29 is WWE's way of betting on a sure thing. This is a match that guarantees them mainstream attention. In one corner you've got John Cena - the face of the company, has been for a solid decade, isn't going anywhere any time soon. In the other corner you've got Rock - a hugely popular professional wrestler from the "attitude" era who's successfully transitioned into being a household name thanks to his having been embraced by Hollywood as a bankable action star. It's the kind of match that makes a man like Vince McMahon salivate at the mere thought of the thing.

To me, it's a fairly dull combination that has very little allure or mystique to it. Rock is a part-timer at most these days. He's an actor now, not a wrestler. As soon as he's done promoting GI JOE: Retaliation he'll vanish and won't be seen or heard from again on WWE programming until he needs to promote something else. That's not fair to the fans or the business, in my opinion.

John Cena will walk out of WM29 as the WWE Champion. He's the most consistent thing WWE has had throughout the modern era and there's a large chunk of the fanbase (read, women and children) that will flock to him no matter how repetitious he and his work may be. It only makes sense that he takes the belt from Rock because, as I said previously, Rock goes back to making movies when this show is over and done with.

If it sounds like I'm sour to the whole arrangement, that's very observant on your part. Quite frankly, I'm not a huge fan of either of these guys nor do I particularly care for the angle.

Projected Winner: John Cena