World of Blackout

Review: Ghost Rider - Spirit of Vengeance (3D)

2012-02-18T04:09:00.002-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (3D)
95 mins / Dir. Mark Neveldine & Brian Taylor

I've done it again, haven't I? I've gone to see a sequel film without having first watched its predecessor. Sometimes that means that you won't get a proper grip of what's going on in the film, and sometimes it means that you've essentially missed out on a 90 minute warning not to bother seeing any future instalments.

The opening of GR:SoV has Nic Cage giving a voiceover to an animated sequence which explains why his head goes on fire when there are naughty people around. Given that that's pretty much all you need to know, I don't think I missed out on too much by not seeing Ghost Rider. Which pretty much leaves the second option in the last paragraph as the winner.

The Plot: Johnny Blaze made a deal with the devil (and was subsequently tricked, natch) to deliver the souls of the evil to Hell. When bad people are around, he goes all on fire and skeletal. Apparently sending bad people to Hell isn't necessarily a good thing in this film, and Johnny is looking for a way to end his curse. Oh look, a child has been kidnapped by The Devil, let's get involved…

The Good: It looks like we're finally getting decently rendered 3D in live action movies. Pretty much the whole movie has a feeling of immersion, and while it adds little or nothing to the action sequences, it's good to know that it's at least being used properly. Likewise, the visual effects are pretty damned spiffy as well. Slo-mo gunfire, flipping cars, explosions and a man with his head constantly on fire are all pulled off rather well (considering the bugbears I'm about to list, anyway).

The Bad: Erm, the plot/script. Nic Cage's half-arsed delivery makes him appear embarrassed to be there, which is saying something given his mixed filmography. The scripting is as flabby and uninspired as the plot revolving around a child being the chosen one who's been abducted by the devil (not A.Demon, The.Actual.Devil) and will be sacrificed/posessed to usher in a new age of darkness.

Somehow, the makers of GR:SoV have taken a simplistic plot, explained everything (albeit badly), and yet I still sat there for huge stretches wondering exactly what the fuck was going on. The film has been produced under the Marvel Knights banner, a subset of the main studio which focuses (and I quote) "on producing darker titles". I'm not sure how dark they think they can get with a 12A certificate, but if that means a lot of the characters wearing black, a needlessly complex screenplay, and The Devil saying the film's singular fuck-word, then I guess Marvel Knights are feeling pretty chuffed around now.

The Ugly: There's a line between fantastical and nonsensical. It's not even a thin line, it's at least a couple of feet wide. GR:SoV manages to be nonsensical to the point where it becomes dull. Yes, you read that right: After an hour of watching a man with this head on fire eat the souls of bad people, I was monumentally bored and just waiting for the film to end. Given that the bad guy in this is The.Actual.Devil, none of what transpires makes any sense. Considering that even the movie pumps him up to be a deity, his 'powers' are nerfed beyond belief, and he relies on inept thugs and a newly made (an horrendously underused) Rotting Man™.

Oh, and that bit at the start where Johnny Blaze is talking to the audience? "Oh, everyone's got something to hide! You might not have murdered someone, but what about that illegal download?" Seriously. Fuck off, Marvel. If you're going to moralise about piracy, at least clumsily paste the message into something worth pirating.

Worth £10+? You know I've got that card? Because this is in 3D, there's a surcharge and I paid £1.50 to see it. I feel robbed for that, so I can barely begin to imagine how punters who've paid full price are going to feel.

I'm not an expert (as regular readers of this blog will attest), but this isn't a good film.

The visuals alone save this from being a 1/7. Everything else here is awful.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: The Phantom Menace 3D (Third-Pass)

2012-02-16T16:29:00.002-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (3D)
136 mins / Dir. George Lucas

You know how much I love this film, as I've made no secret of it.
I've done a retrospective of the movie here, a review of the 3D version here, and a nitpick that covers all the released versions here.

So I've drawn you a picture.

Bit bigger? Oh, okay then.

The film?

But you knew I'd say that.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: The Muppets

2012-02-14T15:35:00.002-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Muppets
102 mins / Dir. James Bobin

Mixed feelings about this one, as I was never that huge a fan of The Muppets as a kid. I liked them, of course, but I wasn't necessarily keen on the segments of the show featuring humans, especially if I didn't really know who the celebrities actually were. As it turns out, I've carried those reservations forward. And with good reason…

The Plot: The famous Muppet Theatre is due to be bulldozed by an evil oil baron unless brothers Walter and Gary can help Kermit the Frog to reunite the old gang, and put on a show to raise ten million dollars!

The Good: The bits with The Muppets on-screen. The gang have still got the magic, and when this film's good it's absolutely fantastic. There were one or two bits that had me literally crying with laughter ("I can't believe I was fooled by the Muppet Man!"), and most of the rest of the scenes with the furry/felt creatures had me quietly chuckling.

The Bad: Amy Adams seems to think she's there to outshine the Muppets, not complement them, and spends most of the film overacting horrendously. Similar pointers apply to Chris Cooper as Tex Richman, the archetypal baddie (although at least he has a reason for hamming it up to 11). The celeb-cameos seem a little laboured for the most part, but that's not the end of the world. In fact, only Jason Segel seems to escape unscathed as his usual affable self with an air of innocence that fits in perfectly here.
The plot/script, as hackneyed as they are, worked fine for me when it was Muppets-only, but as soon as there was any human involvement really seemed to grind to a cliched halt.

The Ugly: If you're going to make Life's a Happy Song the recurring theme for the movie and use it three times, go right ahead, but could you make it sound a little less reminiscent of I Wanna Grow Old With You from The Wedding Singer? The kids won't notice, but their parents will.
And Tex Richman's 'rap'? Shameless. No excuse for that.

On The Plus Side: At least I won't have to watch the godawful Orange/Muppets promo before each film I see in the cinema. Four months that went on for.

Worth £8+? If you've got got kids, you'll probably be seeing it anyway. Look, it's very good. Some of the time. Well meaning, but twee beyond belief.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

First they came for my peace and quiet, but I said nothing

2012-02-14T13:34:00.002-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

"Always be polite.
Until it's time not to be polite."

I get on the train at London Paddington. About 45 minutes down the line is Didcot, where I live. I get a seat to myself (by which I mean there was no-one in the seat next to mine), get out the laptop and begin to watch the final half hour of The Dark Knight, having watched it up to that point on the train into London from Ramsgate.

About ten minutes before the train leaves, a woman gets on with three children of varying ages, a pushchair and lots of bags. She and her youngest child (who, incidentally, it way too old for the pushchair) sit directly behind my seat, while the other two and their assorted luggage sprawl across the opposite side of the carriage, so that they can talk on the journey.

Well, I say talk, I mean the children will laugh, shout, yelp, shout, babble and shout the moment they park their arses. I'll be honest, that wasn't the problem. It wasn't the designated quiet carriage, and the children weren't being obnoxious or abusive. They were just loud. Fucking overbearingly loud. But hey, I've got my headphones on and Batman's knocking seven shades of shit out of the Joker; What's it to me? If the noise level is bothering any other passengers, I'm sure they'll say something.

Then it starts. The youngest child, not content with screaming across the four or five feet to his siblings decides that his conversation needs more percussion, and starts booting the chair in front of him. The one I'm sitting in. With the first couple of kicks, I figure that he's just squirming around in his seat (after all, his mouth can't keep still, why should the rest of his body follow suit?) and he'll calm down in a moment. And calm down he does. After about a minute of constant booting. I glance round but manage to make no eye-contact with any of the party.

Fuck it, he's stopped. I'll say nothing.

Then about five minutes later it starts again. A mid-paced rhythmic distraction across the lower half of my torso to accompany the background shrieks. Not constant enough to be unbearable, but certainly not infrequent enough to be accidental. The mother of the children isn't ignoring them by the way, I can hear her talking to them, but she isn't trying to get them to quieten down at all. Can I assume that she's so preoccupied by the sheer volume of her offspring that she doesn't notice her youngest child's legs beating away at the seat in front of him? Essentially, the seat in front of her?

It's not constant, it's sporadic. I'm only on the train for 45 minutes, I'll say nothing.

This continues until Reading, where a man gets on the train, asks if the seat next to me is free, then sits and gets his own laptop out. The kicking starts again. He's listening to music on his laptop, and this will bother him way more than it bothers me. He looks around at the errant child and its careless guardian. Seeing the look on his face both before and after the glance, I figure he's came to the same conclusion as me. He says nothing.

We're at Didcot now. I pack away my things and leave the train. I'm not going to say anything on the way off, there isn't time.

And that's my journey. Home 10 minutes later, done and dusted. I don't know how far The Noisy Family were travelling, and I don't know if anyone asked them to keep it down once the train left Didcot Parkway. I said nothing. I know people who would have had a word, and I know people who wouldn't. Most of the ones who'd interject would have asked calmly and politely if the kid(s) could show a little more consideration for other passengers. Most of the ones who'd leave it wouldn't want to make a scene or just wouldn't let it bother them.

I don't care about making a scene, but there are two reasons why I said nothing:

1) Although she wasn't being gobby and obnoxious, one look at the mother's mannerisms suggested that she'd be a fucking nightmare if anyone dared suggest that perhaps her parenting skills weren't all they could be. And since I'd have to spend the rest of the journey on the same train (and more than likely have to lug my two heavy bags elsewhere should the situation escalate, walking past her to do so), it wasn't worth the grief, frankly.

And, more pertinently...

2) If this woman hasn't taught her kids to shut the fuck up and not continually kick anything within range by this point in their lives, it's hard to believe that the reasoning, concerned parent is about to appear now. Yeah, the kids weren't being abusive per se, but that was largely because they were in a 'good' mood. I bet they're a pain in the fucking arse when they're stroppy (as is their mother), and I'm not going to be the one to test that theory. This disregard for other people and property will come back to bite her in the arse when the kids are a bit older and she can't control them when she wants to. Why the fuck should I get involved? It's not my job to raise your kids, you lazy fuck. I can put up with this inconvenience; it's temporary. However, karma has rewarded your laziness with years of inconsiderate behaviour and solid unabating noise. Good luck for the future, I'm glad you don't live in Didcot.

And in case you're thinking "Now, now: Judge not lest ye be judged!", go ahead and judge me: I'm the guy keeping to himself without bags all over the seats, trying to watch a movie in peace and inconveniencing no-one. What of it?

That's why I said nothing. The journey wasn't long enough.

Related posts: Oranges, Milk.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: The Phantom Menace 3D (Second-Pass)

2012-02-13T12:33:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (3D)
136 mins / Dir. George Lucas

There'll probably be a few of these, seeing as how I said I'd document each visit to the cinema. I've written about how much I love The Phantom Menace here, and I've reviewed the 3D transfer here.

As much as I love TPM (and I do), and as much as I love the new digi-Yoda (and I do), I've got to vent a little on two things that LFL haven't fixed...

• Obi-Wan's hair braid in the 'another pathetic lifeform' sequence...

There are other (very brief) flip-shots in the film, but this is a fairly lengthy one. With dialogue. It's not enough that Ewan's face looks different in mirrored shots (as do most people's), but he's got a distinct fucking braid. Now I don't mind that it was there in 1999, or even so much that it made it to the DVD transfer. But every frame of this film has been optimised for HD and then for 3D, and still it's been left in. I don't want LFL to flip the entire shot, just move the braid.

• Solid-end / hollow-end / solid-end / hollow-end..?

It'd make sense for the blade emitter to be a hollow cylinder; they are on all other lightsabers. It just seems a bit sloppy to give Ray Park props for the wide-shots without that detail. Again, slightly sloppy in 1999/2001, but completely sloppy in 2011/2012.

Those two aren't deal-breakers, but they've been noticable since 1999.
Just sayin'.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: Star Wars Episode I - The Phantom Menace (3D)

2012-02-11T10:52:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (3D)
136 mins / Dir. George Lucas

I'm a little lost for words here, largely because I can't objectively review a film I've loved for the last thirteen years, but also because you, dear reader, have already made up your mind about going to see The Phantom Menace in the cinema.

Most people don't like The Phantom Menace. I'm not most people. I've written about why I love it here, so the rest of this post will be about the 3D conversion…

I'll be honest, I wasn't holding up much hope. The only time I'd seen the tPM3D trailer in actual 3D, it's so fast-cut that you don't really get any sense of depth, and I was worried that the conversion on the film would result in the decoupage-effect. Real-D is a system that works best for animation, not live-action (however CGI-enhanced it is), and movies that have been converted to the format from a 2D shoot are notoriously ropey.

With the best will in the world, 3D really is just a gimmick; not a reason for going to see a film in the cinema, just an enhancement. If it's done well.

In my humble and often misguided opinion, The Phantom Menace falls into that category. I liked the 3D; there's plenty of it and for the most part it works very well (although I couldn't get on with the Otoh Gunga underwater sequences). A common occurrence with conversion is that in the quieter scenes, you can lift up your glasses and the image on the screen isn't actually 'three dimensional'. tPM is constantly in 3D at some level, which I appreciate. It gives a sense of depth to all the scenes and isn't overbearing. And because the movie was made without people waving things at the screen, there's only one moment that looks deliberately 'Ooh! 3D!'

The standout sequence in the movie is the podrace. I've never been a fan of that, so anything that can make me actually enjoy it has to be good, in my book. The final saber fight looks great, but not really because of the enhancements. Most of the movie wasn't really shot to accentuate the extra dimension, so there's not a lot you can do about that.

At this point, I don't know if the 3D version will get a home release, and it's too early to tell if this experiment has been successful enough to get Attack of the Clones released at this time next year. I guess we'll see.

Ultimately, this project means that I can go to the cinema and see Star Wars again. That's all I want. I don't mind that it's in Real-D, and I wouldn't mind if it wasn't.

What can I tell you? I love Star Wars.
But you knew that already.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Hello Thunder

2012-02-05T23:24:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Click for bigger, 1076*500px, 108kb

Click for bigger, 500*667px, 66kb

Click for bigger, 500*667px, 62kb

Click for bigger, 500*667px, 72kb

Click for bigger, 500*667px, 65kb

Click for bigger, 500*667px, 69kb

…and because you've all been so good:
BONUS ROUND!

Click for bigger, 500*667px, 73kb

You're very welcome.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: Man On A Ledge

2012-02-05T05:49:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Man On A Ledge
102 mins / Dir. Asger Leth

"Surgeons have worked tirelessly for 72 hours but have been unable to separate Sam Worthington from his Australian accent."

Yes, Worthington's back - the cinematic equivalent of beige wallpaper. Able to take any role and drain it of all emotion and believability. It's not that he's 'bad' as such - he reads his lines and pulls the right faces - but he always comes off as an understudy who doesn't really want to be there.

The Plot: A cop, framed for a jewel robbery, breaks out of prison as part of a plan to clear his name. While he stages a diversion so the rest of his ruse can take place, he has to choose which of his ex-colleagues he can trust...

The Good: As a crime/revenge thriller, it's competently made. Cryptic where it should be, tense where it should be. The characters are a little cardboard, but Elizabeth Banks, Ed Harris and Jamie Bell all make the best of a mediocre job, and in the final act, you do want to see the wrongs righted and the nasty people to get their come-uppance.

The Bad: Yeah, it's a little cardboard. But with a title that's second only to Snakes on a Plane for descriptiveness over creativity, that's not surpsising. Nothing about the film feels new at all, and it's pretty much a cookiee-cutter action thriller. It's not necessarily a 'bad' thing, but when the price of entry is £8+, you'll feel shortchanged.

The Ugly: Why to people keep casting Sam Worthington as an American character? If his backstory involved his being Australian, he could have stopped trying the accent (although it's debatable how much he was trying), and just got on with looking off a ledge and acting grim and earnest.
I don't blame Worthington, I blame Asger Leth. As a director, he's well within his boundaries to stop everything and shout "You! Worthington! What in the name of flip are you doing? DO THE VOICE or you're SACKED!" or at least ADR the dialogue afterwards.

Worth a Punt? In the cinema? Not really. When it's on telly? Absolutely. The sad fact is that it could have been so much more enjoyable with a better male lead. Elizabeth Banks goes some way to making up for that, but the one-man characterisation-vacuum strikes again...

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: Chronicle

2012-02-04T12:46:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Chronicle
83 mins / Dir. Josh Trank

As I may have mentioned before, the thing that really winds me up about the 'found footage' genre is the marketing approach of "oh, this really happened! And we've managed to put it out on general release despite it being a) police evidence in an ongoing crime investigation or b) highly sensitive government property!" What pisses me off more than that is the fact that people seem to buy into it. *growls*

Anyhow, it's worth stating from the outset that Chronicle does not purport to be a record of covered-up events. The fact the film is shot in first person is a storytelling device to ensure that the audience only sees what the characters themselves (or the camera, at least) see. While some may complain that certain plot-points aren't fully explained in the film, that also comes back to the fact that the central characters don't find all the answers, and we're seeing the world from their viewpoint.

The Plot: Three teenagers, from varying rungs on the social ladder, find a common bond when they develop telekinetic powers after a mysterious underground encounter. As their abilities grow, so do the pressures to use their new gifts responsibly, which is often easier said than done...

The Good: Considering how outlandish the effects are in Chronicle, they're beautifully underplayed. If you can accept that the three leads can suddenly move objects using their minds alone, not once do the vfx look overdone. This is supported by the excellent performances of Dane DeHaan, Alex Russell and Michael B Jordan: They're excited at their abilities, but they never look like they don't believe what's happening. Because of that, you can't help but be swept up for the ride.

The Bad: There are elements of shakycam in the first 15 minutes or so, which is distracting on a cinema-sized screen. That being said, this is largely remedied when Andrew (DeHaan) gets a more modern camera, presumably with shake-control, and then starts to levitate the camera around, getting rid of all the shudder (which is also a neat device to show us what the camera sees, but also have all the characters on-screen at the same time).

The Ugly: Nothing to report. In my humble opinion.

Worth a punt? If you've ever wanted super-powers, even as a kid, you'll get a lot out of this. It's nice to see a real approach, where the characters don't go out in search of crimes to foil, but just start to enjoy their powers instead. It's also a nice how the guys set out some ground-rules for using their telekinesis in public… and then largely disregard them. Just like I would :D

At less than an hour and a half it's short, but you don't really notice as it's structured so well. Because of the nature of cam-footage, you won't lose a lot by watching this on DVD, but I recommend the cinema purely to see the clarity of the special effects.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Jet Set Windu 2: The Deeper Dungeons

2012-02-01T10:53:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

As if last year's loft treasure wasn't cool enough, look what I found at a boot fair at the weekend!

Let's take a closer look at those graphics, eh?

The game also got the front page with Computer and Video Games magazine in 1987.
Click for bigger (1271x1071px), opens in a new window.

And here's a closer look at that cover...

You're welcome.

You what? Sprites? Oh, go on then...

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

'...and you're saying it too loudly'.

2012-01-28T05:17:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

So yeah. Regular readers will have noticed a distinct lack of normal posting this month. And without off-topic posts, World Of Blackout becomes another film-review blog (which is what I don't want, largely because I don't think I do it well enough for it to be the main thread).

Bottom line is, I'm just not that inspired to write at the moment.

That's just a fact, by the way, I'm not having a teenage sulk.
Where my main focus of 2010 was reading more books, and 2011 was all about watching movies, the year's pet-project is Star Wars. All of it.

My thing for 2012 is a little bit of Star Wars every day. For 366 days in a row, I will either watch, read or play something from the GFFA. At the moment, I'm watching an episode of The Clone Wars each day (in chronological story order), and that alone will take me up 'til the end of March. After that, I've got novels, comics and games to go through (some for the first time, many not), and of course The Phantom Menace 3D comes out in a couple of weeks. Add on the figures and the trading cards and stickers, and that's a full time hobby, right there.

Anyway, my point is that it doesn't make for interesting blogging*¹, and so I haven't got much to blab about at the moment.

The cinema reviews will continue, mainly as a way of keeping me writing, and I'm aiming to post something more creative every month (although January's project will be posted at the start of February, just to keep it visible on the page for four weeks).

Normal levels of sarcasm and bad taste will resume as the year progresses.

Yen
Blackout Towers,
2012.

*¹ Although if you want interesting blogging, I'm surprised you're here to be honest.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: The Grey (minor spoilers)

2012-01-28T03:56:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Grey (minor spoilers)
117 mins / Dir. Joe Carnahan

I've been going spoiler-free for cinema viewings recently. By which I mean, I'll see the trailer (if it's shown before a film I'm watching), and that'll be it. No interviews, no featurettes, and no promo-bumf. And I don't read any reviews before I see the film. Part of this is because I like to watch the film with minimal expectations, from a clean-slate as the creators intended. The other part of this is because I see quite a lot at the cinema, and I don't have time to research everything before I sit and watch it. I'm a punter: entertain me.

So having only seen the teaser trailer for The Grey, I'd half expected either a supernatural element to come into play, or a Shayalaman style twist at the end. As you're reading a spoilery review, I'll tell you that there's neither. It's also worth noting that it's not the action-packed survival thriller that the second trailer would have you believe. There are frantic fight scenes, and chases through snowy forests, but for the most part, it's a strangely introspective film.

The Plot: John Ottway*¹ (Neeson) works for an oil drilling company in Alaska, hunting wild wolves that would be a threat to the other workers. When their plane crashes in the Alaskan wastes on the way home, only Ottway has the skills to lead the small party of survivors to salvation. But the team is made up of social rejects, and not everyone takes well to his authority. Especially the pack of wolves that are hunting them…

The Good: Some of the ideas are quite nicely explored; The wolves working cohesively as a pack have success in bringing down their prey because the humans won't team together. By the time this is resolved, it's largely too late because fatigue has kicked in. The scene at the crash-site where Ottway talks Hernandez through his imminent death is also beautifully realised. The quiet acceptance of The Inevitable is a recurring theme, and one of the film's greatest strengths. A series of gradual-reveal flashbacks fills us in on Ottway's past, and while there's nothing surprising there, they're executed well enough to work properly.

Also worth noting; there are some beautiful desolate snowscape-shots that had me thinking "Echo Three to Echo Seven, Han old buddy, do you read me?"
But you know what I'm like.

The Bad: Well, not bad, but it feels like there was some pressure to make it more of an action film, and it's really not. The adrenaline-pumping plane crash sequence works well as the movie's been leading up to that point, but subsequent chase scenes seem sporadic and out of place. There are plenty of dramatic scenes that work well without the pounding music, and it's a shame that The Grey is trying to be two different things. It's too ponderous to be an action film, but the adrenaline spikes often pull it out of drama.

The Ugly: Neeson's lines are a little mumbled at the start, what with him using his actual accent, and the lines being his internal monologue so they're quite subdued. Other than that, nothing to report.

Worth the Trip? You probably won't lose too much by seeing it on DVD, but the calmness of the photography and intensity of the crash sequence are made for the big screen.

Ten years ago, I'd have hated the end to this film. Today, I love the end to this film.

*¹ Yes, his character's actually called John Ottway. When he introduces himself to a character named John Diaz, they both chuckle, but I'm not sure if that's because they're both called John, or they're thinking "yes, like the mental songwriter".

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: Haywire

2012-01-22T14:20:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Haywire
93 mins / Dir. Steven Soderbergh

Never get a job, with an intelligence service, governmental or private. Judging by this film and all the trailers before it, they fuck you over royally. You'd be better off getting a job as a low-level officer on a Star Destroyer, I reckon.

The Plot: A black ops super soldier seeks payback after she is betrayed and set up during a mission.

The Good: It doesn't patronise the audience too much. By which I mean that I expected a dumb actioner, and as such spent a lot of time wondering what the hell was going on. The camerawork is fast and furious, the exposition isn't spoon-fed to you (see 'The Bad'), and the fight choreography is rather nicely done.

Gina Carano is a stand-out in this as Mallory Haywire*¹. As aesthetically pleasing as she is (and that's the mildest way I can put it), I'd wondered why I'd never heard of her before. As it turns out, she's a rather good MMA fighter and ex-Gladiator. While that certainly qualifies her for a role such as this, you'd expect her performance to be… well… a bit Arnie? But no, she sold it to me wholesale. Maybe this kind of part will be the extent of her acting ability, but that'll be proved in the future as she'll no doubt be offered a stream of jobs after this.

Oh, and that bit where she shoots the man in the face*²? That made me grin like an idiot. I genuinely wasn't expecting that.

The Bad: Well, not bad, but I've got a section to fill. The story is initially told by Mallory as a series of (lengthy) flashbacks. While I like arriving in media res, and while cutting back to her explaining things to the guy whose car she's stolen excuses the gaps between set-pieces, I'm not sure there was that much to be gained by this. Once the story's been brought up to the current point, her hapless, captive audience is pretty much abandoned. Add on to this that a character such as Mallory (a professional assassin working for a private organisation sub-contracted by the CIA) seems to spill the beans pretty damned quickly, giving this civilian a dangerous amount of knowledge to be walking around with.

On top of this, it's not that the plot is necessarily hard to follow, but the convolutedness feels forced. Almost as if it's trying too hard and doesn't have the credentials to back up its boasts. Although had it not been that twisted, the film would probably have been as dumb as the one I was expecting.

The film's central thread isn't fully explained until the very last scene, but by that point you've pretty much worked everything out anyway. This should feel like a back-pat to the audience for being so brainy, but instead I felt slightly irritated that they'd dragged it out for so long. And if I was a trained killer? I wouldn't just 'leave people to die' the way they do in the movies like that.

The Ugly: Ewan McGregor can't do an American accent. Although Antonio Banderas' impression of Saddam Hussein pretty much makes up for this.

All in all: I wanted to like Haywire more. As engaging as it was, it didn't quite entertain me like the trailer suggested it would. Looking at Soderbergh's directorial list, he's made a career out of cleverer things than this. A spy/action/thriller doesn't really have that much to say. This one certainly doesn't.

But, it's worth a punt once it hits DVD/Sky.
Just don't expect a linear ride.

*¹ That's right, isn't it? That's her name?
*² See? No spoilers. I haven't told you which man she shoots in the face. Hard. At point blank range. Get in.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: War Horse

2012-01-17T16:00:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

War Horse
146 mins / Dir. Steven Spielberg

So I took a chance, and braved the crowds to see Mr Spielberg's latest offering. And crowds, there were. Thankfully, the main target demographic of War Horse is grown ups, and although the screen was 4/5 full, everyone managed to concentrate on the film and not dick about on their phones. I could have hugged them for that.

So, anyway. War Horse. I'm pretty sure I enjoyed it...

The Plot: Witnessing the birth of a foal on his father's farm on Dartmoor, a boy begins a unique friendship that will define who they both are, as well as touching the lives of all around them. The film tracks an incredible journey of determination, skill and flat-out luck.

The Good: Despite what I'm going to mention in the next sections, I did enjoy War Horse. All of the cast are on great form (including the titular Ian Horse). It's beautifully shot (for the most part) and scripted, with the real standout segment for me being in the trenches of The Somme. Despite its length, each segment is paced well, and they're tied together with a score that's unmistakably John Williams.
I'd thought this was going to be hard work, but given the subject matter, it's very watchable.

The Bad: It's probably a bit too long. And a bit too mawkish. And I could have done without the humour that was scattered around occasionally. The emotional payoffs are in the right place, but as a viewer you really have to work for them. Towards the end of the film where Albert calls to Joey*¹ with his owl-whistle, the callback is so forced that you expect someone to walk on-screen with a sign saying "Do you remember that? From earlier?". In other places, the horses (plural) are anthropomorphised to the point where it's almost a Disney film. Thankfully those moments are few and far between, but they are there.

The Ugly: ...can we really only like Ze Germans when they're "being nice to animals"? The first World War was a fucking atrocity for all concerned. I'm not saying everyone on both sides was a really lovely person, but considering the message of the film is that the horse didn't choose sides, he chose friends, it seems a bit late in the day to still be banging on about The Evil Hun.
Oh, and you don't get orange sunsets like that on Dartmoor. I've been there.

All in All: Don't let that put you off, though. If you think this might be your thing, it probably is. You may have a bit of trouble suspending your disbelief for two and a half hours, but it's the themes that are important, not the details.
The cynic in me thinks that it's a little too knowingly worthy to be deserving of the awards it'll no doubt receive, but it's still a good film, nonetheless.

Final thought: Cry for the men that died, not the horses. They didn't want to be there, either.

*¹ I know. How PC is that? Calling a horse Joey. In that accent Devonshire as well. They take the piss out of him for the whole film...

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: The Darkest Hour

2012-01-14T06:14:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Darkest Hour
89 mins / Dir. Chris Gorak

Did you see Skyline? That's the best direct comparison I can make to The Darkest Hour, good or bad. By which I mean bad. Both films take an initial concept that should work, and manage to fuck it up spectacularly. Planetry-scaled invasion by an alien species that outranks us technologically has been getting people into the cinema since the 1950's. That said, it hasn't always worked, and this is another instance to add to that pile.

And I mean 'pile'.

The Plot: Four young adults*¹ are in Moscow, (the guys for business, the girls for pleasure) when pesky aliens invade! Taking an orb-like appearance, they're here to harvest Earth's mineral resources and electricity (and that includes turning people into dust to harvest their low-level charge, too). With no power supply, and a collective IQ of less than 200, our band of heroes has to get out of the city to rendezvous with a nuclear submarine carrying a bunch or survivors. If they fail, they won't be able to survive on their own...

The Good: It's short. Less than an hour and a half, including credits. That's something. In fact, let's save more time: watch the trailer, and you've basically seen the film.

The Bad: A constant bugbear of mine, this film appears to have been scripted by someone doing a GCSE project. It's amazing that a screenplay with so many lines of heavyweight exposition*² makes so little sense. When the cast aren't explaining plot-intricacies to each other in the way that you'd tell a five-year-old they should be using the toilet on their own, other pieces of drama defy all logic*³. "Electricity gives them away". That bit in the trailer where one of our heroes throws down a layer of bulbs to alert them to the aliens' presence? I don't know if you've ever dropped a bulb four feet onto a carpet, but throwing them 10 feet across a concrete floor isn't going to leave a lot of filaments to light up.
Similarly, our team later throw down mobile phones as warning devices, and sure enough; when the aliens are near, the ringtones all start going off! Because that's what happens when you put power through a phone, isn't it? Your phone constantly rings all the time it's switched on? No? Oh.

The Ugly: With the exception of Gosha Kutsenko, for a film set in Moscow, the Russian accents on display are shit. Joel Kinnaman just stops trying after about half an hour. And it's not 'Westernisation' at work, it's 'director not paying attention to the way his cast are speaking their lines'. The backstories for the central characters (however sparsely layered) can't change the fact that I didn't care if they lived or died. I didn't even want them to meet their pixellated doom*⁴, I just didn't give a shit.

In Other Words: Did you see Skyline? You'll get the same amount of enjoyment out of this, for better or worse.
By which I mean worse.

It'd be a 1, but at least the effects are competent. Used for the most pointless purpose I've seen in a long time, but used competently nonetheless.

*¹ They could be teenagers, although I doubt it. It's not really mentioned per se, but I think they're meant to be early 20's or so.
*² And not just exposition itself, but clanking great cues for it as well. "How did we find this place again?" [cue 2 minutes of irrelevant backstory which will never be referred to again].
*³ Yes, I know it's an alien-invasion film, but the plot needs to rely on internal logic, otherwise the survival or otherwise of the characters makes no sense.
*⁴ Also; no explanation offered as to why some victims are vaporised on contact, while others get dragged around by an electrical lasso which should, in theory, vaporise them. But doesn't. Pffft.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: The Iron Lady

2012-01-13T16:41:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Iron Lady
105 mins / Dir. Phyllida Lloyd

I can't honestly say I've got much beef with Margaret Thatcher personally. I was alive when she was in power but I was basically a kid so I didn't take a lot of interest in politics (not that I take much more now). All I know was that in the media at the time, a lot of people were making out she was a massive bastard, and all the grown ups I knew were making out she was a massive bastard. But that's probably because I lived in The North™.

So with that in mind, I went to see The Iron Lady as a film, not a historical document.

The film opens in the present day, with MT as an elderly woman suffering (knowingly) with the onset of dementia. The main symptom of this is that she sees and talks with her husband, Dennis, despite him having died several years earlier, which represents her inability to let go, and also her fear at what she'll find if she does. Her career is told progressively through a series of flashbacks, bringing her to the point where she can finally move on*¹.

So, how does it do? As a narrative, it's patchy. Being only partly familiar with the history, it seemed to me that they skipped over key points of MT's career in less time than they deserved. The flashbacks are, for the most part, short and frequent, and seem more like a Greatest Hits than a descriptive re-capping. The bias of the film certainly lies in her favour, with the Falklands War and miner's strikes seeming like a fuss-about-nothing. Even I remember that they weren't.

The film's real strength is in Meryl Streep's performance. She is outstanding in this. Seriously. There were only two distinct and very brief moments where my brain thought 'oh, that's Meryl Streep', but for every other second of that film, she's Thatcher*². Her present-day portrayal is the most affecting, but she deserves all the accolades she'll undoubtedly pick up for this. The rest of the cast are good enough, but poor old Jim Broadbent only seems to be able to play Jim Broadbent™ these days. Likeable, but always himself. Rather like Bill Nighy in that respect.

All in all, it's difficult for me to say that I actually enjoyed it as such, but I'm definitely glad I saw it, if that makes any sense. It hasn't given me any political insight into the times, nor made me want to research it further. It's one of those films that could have been quite happily made for BBC4 and been broadcast with far less fanfare than it's received, but still won the same amount of respect.

A very solid five. Streep's performance is a straight seven, but her co-stars can't shine like she does.

*¹ No, not like that. She's alive at the end, no matter what you were hoping for.
*² Well, okay. She does seem quite like Catherine Tate's Nan character for the last 10 minutes or so...

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: Goon (2)

2012-01-11T13:00:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Goon
90 mins / Dir. Michael Dowse

...oh, you didn't think that was my actual review, did you?

And so, January is here. In addition to the self-indulgent last-minute offerings for the Oscars, the traditional post-Christmas release pattern in the UK is for the fucking drivel the studios can't put out at any other time of year because they can't compete with mainstream blockbusters. And there are so many of those that January becomes the graveyard shift for movies.
And 2012 is no exception.

Goon is weak. How weak? Look at the poster up there. Go on, click on it and have a look.

Imagine you're in charge of the UK marketing for this one. An also-ran ice hockey comedy starring That Stiffler. I'm not saying that no-one in the UK is into Canadian Ice Hockey, but it is, at best a minority sport. Add in the cinematic qualities of this particular gem, and your only real hope is to market it for the violence. Hence the poster-quotes from Loaded, Nuts, and some website I've never heard of*¹. So, apart from the barrel-scraping demographic they're aiming at, even the people who "loved" this film could only bring themselves to give it 4 out of 5. Talk about damning with faint praise.

As for the film itself, as my other*² review said, it's not really about ice hockey, and even though I know next-to-nothing about it, I get the impression that it's about as faithful to the game as Jurassic Park is to genetic research. The opening act seems to zip by (presumably) months in Doug Glatt's life, where a guy who can't skate somehow gets a place on a hockey team. The main thread of the film comes in fits and starts as we stutter over Rhea's 12-match (ie 12 week?) suspension. Glatt's family are seemingly abandoned half way through the film, and Jay Baruchel's Pat only returns because Baruchel co-wrote the film and wanted to get his face in at the end.

Seann William Scott does bring some charm to the film, but I've seen that so many times before it doesn't really matter any more. Shcreiber's nowhere near as aggressive or wily as his character requires him to be, and he just seems bored for the whole thing. Everyone else stumbles through and phones-in performances, including Eugene Levy as Jewish Dad™, and Jay Baruchel as Swearing, Excited Geek™.

It's not consistently funny enough to be a comedy, and there's not enough feeling for it to be a drama, even when the blood's spraying across the ice. I can imagine it going down slightly better with an actual hockey-crowd, but for the UK market, this should have been straight-to-DVD.

It's not the worst thing I've ever seen (and I'm sure I'll see worse this year), but if you get anything of substance out of it, I salute you.

*² No offence to heyuguys, I just really haven't heard of you. I'll check you out but, y'know. I only wish you'd been brought to my attention by being quoted over a better film.
*² It was a piss-take. Don't quote me on the fucking DVD packaging.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: Goon (1)

2012-01-10T15:26:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Goon
90 mins / Dir. Michael Dowse

And so, January is here. The traditional post-Christmas release pattern in the UK is for the more worthy films to be aired just before the Academy Awards ceremony in February. With the festivities and their associated blockbusters out of the way, now is the perfect time to see actual film at the cinema, and 2012 is no exception.

With Goon, director Michael 'Take Me Home Tonight' Dowse brings us a tale of self-discovery and cameraderie, with the rough-and-tumble of Canadian and American mainstream sport as a background rather than the focus, per se. In many respects, it owes a lot to Rod Daniel's 1985 piece, 'Teen Wolf', with the many individual matches themselves being shown purely from the protagonists viewpoint, and often in a few minutes or less.

Sean William 'Dukes of Hazzard' Scott brings the role of Doug Glatt to life. Glatt finds his way from casual door-security work, onto the professional ice hockey circuit, not by being a gifted player, but rather by virtue of his talents as an enforcer, or the titular 'goon'. His mandate within the squad is to keep his violent counterparts on the opposing team in check. A role which he relishes at first, but with which his character struggles when he begins to extend into actually playing hockey, only to be reprimanded by his own manager and more sportingly talented teammates.

Indeed, this struggle is only one of many as Glatt is something of a lost soul, looking to find his raison d'etre. Raised in an orthodox Jewish family, the film paints him as almost an outcast from the offset, with his parents struggling to accept his job first as a 'bouncer', and later as a hockey player (in fact, the thread with Glatt's parents is never quite resolved in the film, making the dénouement particularly hollow).

Elsewhere, tensions rise within the team as Marc-André 'The Chameleon'Grondin plays Xavier Laflamme, the golden-boy of the team whose own focus and determination on the ice is slipping, and is taking out his frustrations on Glatt, whom he holds partially responsible for his waning star. A particularly touching scene sees Glatt making his peace with his enforced flatmate Laflamme whilst talking through an adjoining wall, reminiscent of two characters talking whilst in neighbouring prison cells. Of course, up until this point, the characters had been in cells, albeit of their own psychological making. Similarly, once Glatt moves north to join the Halifax Highlanders, a romantic interest emerges in Eva, played by Alison 'Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen' Pill, who is similarly confused with her position in life. The two disparate souls are brought slowly together, each being an antidote to the weaknesses and damage in the other's psyche. A particularly poignant touch from the director is the scene they share in Eva's car, with the snow outside representing her crumbling reluctance to commit to a relationship with Glatt, and the plastic cherry suspended from the rear-view mirror representing his implied virginity.

And finally, we have the St John's Shamrocks enforcer Ross Rhea, courtesy of Liev 'Mixed Nuts' Schreiber. Rhea spends most of the film as an observer, having been suspended for gratuitously violent conduct. We see Glatt's rise to fame from his eyes as he studies the matches which take place in his absence, knowing that their paths will cross eventually. Like the best grizzled old pro's, Rhea knows the time will soon come to hang up his boots for good, and it is the culmination of Glatt's story and Rhea's career that brings the film to its heart-stopping climax. As I intimated earlier, the film is less about ice hockey, and more about the violence that accompanies it. Blood is spilled frequently throughout the film, but always sparingly, save the final showdown between the last of the old generation, and the first of the new.

Each drop of blood that hits the ice is a metaphor for tears, sweat and dignity. Ice hockey is portrayed as a sport that is less about numbers and points, and more about agression and raw, primal truth. Goon isn't quite perfect, but it's a thoughtful reminder that the same can be said of any one of us. With determination, we should all strive for the goals within our reach.

I shall be sorely disappointed if The Academy fails to recognise the haunting and touching contributions that Scott, Schreiber and Grondin have made to celluloid.

Oh alright, you can read my REAL review here...

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

How to deal with a phone call from "Microsoft".

2012-01-06T07:16:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

At one point last year, I answered a telephone call on the land-line to someone claiming to be working for Microsoft. The gentleman told me (in alarmingly poor English), that Microsoft had tracked several "error messages" back to my computer, and that they could be indicative of malware, spyware and other related problems. If I could sit in front of my computer, he would guide me to a website which would be able to fix the issues.

Before we go any further, I'll summarise the contents of that link. This phone call wasn't from Microsoft. None of them are.

Now, it was the first one of these calls I'd had, although I found out later from friends that they were becoming more commonplace. Being a cynical bastard (at best), I saw through this ridiculous charade as most people would. Well, I say that, but I can't be entirely sure. It saddens me to know that some people are taken in by this, and they then visit a website and install "software" under instruction from a call centre worker, and basically sabotage their own computer, and in some cases even pay for the privilege.

But back to the phone call: One small, but strongly presented question later, and he hung up on me. The malware-salesman... hung up on me.

I've had three more calls since then, all with the same results. And it's not just one question you can ask. There are several others that'll vex them, and waste their time while you insist on an answer.

THE IMPORTANT FIRST RULE: DON'T give them any information they don't already have, and DON'T do anything on your computer that they ask you to. You don't need to be in front of your computer for the following questions to work. Remember, the only info they have of yours is your phone number, and the surname of the bill-payer, as will become apparent...

#1 - Sorry, what did you say your name was again? And your number hasn't come up on my phone; what number can I reach you on in the future?

Always ask for their full name. They'll make one up, of course, but it pisses them off that they haven't got a sheep on the line, and lets them know that this isn't going to be an easy call for them. Similarly with the phone number, they'll just make one up. Working from a call centre, they'll have an idea of how UK (or wherever you are) phone numbers work, but they won't give you a real one. I've done this one twice, and once the number was too long, and the other one was too short. This question is a delaying tactic, but it'll buy you some time to come back to this page, if you need to, or to dig out the piece of paper you've written the other questions on.

#2 - And what IP address did you log the errors coming from?

This is the big one. They'll try and palm over it, at which point you can ask the others; but if you execute this one properly, they'll hang up on you.
In short, your IP address is the number assigned to your current internet connection by your service provider. Some people's change often, some rarely, depending on that provider. You can read more about them here if you like, and you can tell (completely safely) what your IP address is by visiting here.
The important thing is, that any "errors" etc which would be logged would include this information. That's how they'd be logged. So surely, this "Microsoft Certified" company (or actual Microsoft, depending on their level of bullshit) would have this as the basis of their report? Well, these clowns haven't.
They won't be able to tell you either which IP the errors were logged from, or your current IP. If they make an address up (none have with me, so far), just deny that it's your IP address. You don't have to know what yours currently is, because neither do they. If you DO know your current IP do not give it to anyone over the phone. There's no reason to give these people any ammunition which could be used against you.

#3 - Can you tell me which operating system was generating the errors?

This is another one where 1) they won't be able to answer you truthfully, and 2) you can throw them a curveball if they try to make it up. All the information discerable from your IP address is here. There's not a great deal, but your operating system's on that list. As with the IP address, any "errors" which would have been logged would have captured that information.
The goons in the call centre (or rather, their employers) are taking a chance that you're using Windows, hence claiming to be from Microsoft. There's a strong chance you might be, of course, but they won't be able to tell you which version.
If they have the brass fucking neck to challenge you on this, tell them "well, I have several machines, each running different operating systems, I'd like to know which one the errors came from". Alternatively, if they make up a "oh, Windows 7" answer, you can tell them "Really? That's odd, because my machine's a Mac."
Again, if they fluster, press them for an answer. Don't let them move on until they admit they don't know.
It's also worth remembering that of all the info captured via your actual IP address, your phone number isn't in there. These folks are working from a phone-list.

#4 - Can you tell me what the error messages are regarding? Only my security-suite hasn't told me anything's amiss...

As above, they won't have this information. They won't be able to give you error codes or descriptions, because those answers are the kind of the thing that they can't just make up. They'll tell you that they "don't have that information", and that your current security software is malfunctioning.

#5 - Can you tell me what dates and times the errors were logged?

Wow, are they still on the phone to you after four questions? Well, if you're doing them in order, this should be the final straw. Ask them when the errors were logged and you'll get "I'm sorry, I don't have that information". Again. Then you can then really get stuck in with a:

"So, you're calling to tell me that my computer has caused errors to be logged with Microsoft (and/or a representative company), one of the world's leading IT manufacturers, and yet you can't tell me which IP address they came from, which operating system I'm running, or when the errors occurred? Are you actually being serious?"

If they're still on the line at this point, after getting nowhere for 5-10 minutes, they'll get pissed off and hang up on you. They haven't been able to back up their credentials or reason for calling, and they know now that they've been rumbled. They've given you a false name and phone number, so there's no comeback on them. They'll go and bother someone else.

In the event of them still persisting, you can hang up on them now. You've made your point.

The main idea is to keep them on the phone for as long as possible because a) they're paying for the call, b) it's stopping this particular piece of shit from currently bothering someone else, who might not be as knowledgable as us, and c) it's fucking amusing to watch people fluster. Especially someone who's trying to get you to install malware on your own computer.

You don't have to know what you're talking about, you only have to sound like you do.
If you can master that, you're already one step ahead of them.

Do me a favour, though, and spread the word, yeah?
Cheers.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

280: I've seen things you wouldn't believe...

2011-12-31T12:45:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

And here we are. On the eve of 2012.

I had two resolutions for 2011. 1) Blog more, and 2) Watch more movies. Regular readers will notice that I managed both. I decided to rate and review every film I saw in 2011. The cinema-visits have been covered in this here blog, and the home (or otherwise) ones in my Facebook albums (Parts one and two). In 2010, I managed to post things to my blog 23 times. In 2011, I did 193. I'm not saying that quantity is better than quality, but I'm more comfortable expressing my thoughts as expletive-riddled words now, certainly.

Anyway, back on target: I've been to the cinema 83 times in 2011 (thanks to Cineworld's Unlimited thing) and all-in-all, I've seen over 200 films. And because I'm an anally-retentive bastard, I've kept records of them. Apart from the reviews in the blog, I mean. To save you ploughing through an unwieldy table, I've put the results into a handy infographic. It's just a broad overview of the year.

Enjoy.

What's that? You want to see some hard data? Oh, go on then...

DATE:	TITLE:	RATING:	GENRE (1):	GENRE (2):	LOC:
02 Jan 2011	Star Wars: The Clone Wars	7/7	Sci-Fi	Animation	Home
02 Jan 2011	The Bank Job	7/7	Thriller	Gangster	Home
03 Jan 2011	The Godfather	5/7	Gangster	Drama	Home
07 Jan 2011	From Paris With Love	3/7	Action	Adventure	Home
08 Jan 2011	Star Wars: The Phantom Menace	7/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
09 Jan 2011	The Next Three Days	5/7	Thriller	Action	Cinema
10 Jan 2011	Tron: Legacy (3D)	4/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Cinema
11 Jan 2011	Solomon Kane	5/7	Adventure	Action	Home
16 Jan 2011	Gulliver's Travels (3D)	5/7	Comedy	Adventure	Cinema
16 Jan 2011	The King's Speech	6/7	Drama		Cinema
23 Jan 2011	The Green Hornet (3D)	6/7	Action	Comedy	Cinema
25 Jan 2011	127 Hours	5/7	Thriller	Drama	Cinema
26 Jan 2011	Black Swan	5/7	Drama	Thriller	Cinema
29 Jan 2011	Dr. Who & The Daleks	3/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
29 Jan 2011	American Graffiti	3/7	Drama	Comedy	Home
30 Jan 2011	Hereafter	2/7	Drama	Sci-Fi	Cinema
31 Jan 2011	Star Wars: Attack of the Clones	7/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
10 Feb 2011	The Mechanic	6/7	Action	Adventure	Cinema
14 Feb 2011	True Grit	4/7	Western	Drama	Cinema
16 Feb 2011	The Thirteenth Floor	5/7	Sci-Fi	Thriller	Home
20 Feb 2011	Paul	7/7	Sci-Fi	Comedy	Cinema
26 Feb 2011	Layer Cake	6/7	Gangster	Drama	Home
26 Feb 2011	xXx	5/7	Action	Adventure	Home
26 Feb 2011	Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels	7/7	Gangster	Drama	Home
27 Feb 2011	Snatch	7/7	Gangster	Drama	Home
03 Mar 2011	Drive Angry (3D)	6/7	Action	Adventure	Cinema
04 Mar 2011	The Adjustment Bureau	5/7	Sci-Fi	Thriller	Cinema
05 Mar 2011	RockNRolla	6/7	Gangster	Drama	Home
06 Mar 2011	I Am Number Four	3/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Cinema
09 Mar 2011	Unknown	5/7	Action	Thriller	Cinema
12 Mar 2011	The Godfather Part II	4/7	Gangster	Drama	Home
13 Mar 2011	Battle: Los Angeles	4/7	Sci-Fi	Action	Cinema
14 Mar 2011	Hall Pass	3/7	Comedy		Cinema
15 Mar 2011	Machete	7/7	Action	Thriller	Home
20 Mar 2011	The Lincoln Lawyer	5/7	Drama	Thriller	Cinema
20 Mar 2011	The Last Lovecraft: Relic of Cthulhu	6/7	Sci-Fi	Comedy	Home
22 Mar 2011	Clive Barker's: Book of Blood	4/7	Horror	Thriller	Home
23 Mar 2011	Limitless	6/7	Action	Thriller	Cinema
26 Mar 2011	From Dusk Till Dawn	7/7	Action	Horror	Home
27 Mar 2011	Reservoir Dogs	5/7	Gangster	Thriller	Home
27 Mar 2011	Sin City	4/7	Thriller	Action	Home
27 Mar 2011	Pulp Fiction	7/7	Thriller	Drama	Home
28 Mar 2011	El Mariachi	2/7	Animation	Action	Home
29 Mar 2011	Jackie Brown	5/7	Thriller	Gangster	Home
30 Mar 2011	Desperado	5/7	Action	Gangster	Home
01 Apr 2011	Inglourious Basterds	6/7	Thriller	Drama	Home
02 Apr 2011	Death Proof	7/7	Thriller	Action	Home
02 Apr 2011	Once Upon A Time In Mexico	3/7	Action	Gangster	Home
03 Apr 2011	Kill Bill Vol1	6/7	Action	Thriller	Home
03 Apr 2011	Kill Bill Vol2	6/7	Action	Thriller	Home
04 Apr 2011	Planet Terror	6/7	Horror	Action	Home
05 Apr 2011	Source Code	6/7	Sci-Fi	Thriller	Cinema
06 Apr 2011	Sucker Punch	4/7	Action	Fantasy	Cinema
16 Apr 2011	Star Wars: A New Hope	7/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
16 Apr 2011	Zombieland	6/7	Horror	Adventure	Home
18 Apr 2011	Red Riding Hood	3/7	Fantasy	Adventure	Cinema
19 Apr 2011	Your Highness	4/7	Comedy	Adventure	Cinema
20 Apr 2011	Scream 4	4/7	Horror	Thriller	Cinema
24 Apr 2011	Dogma	5/7	Comedy	Adventure	Home
30 Apr 2011	Dr Terror's House of Horrors	4/7	Horror	Drama	Home
02 May 2011	Arthur	6/7	Comedy	Romance	Cinema
03 May 2011	Fast & Furious 5	4/7	Action	Thriller	Cinema
08 May 2011	Thor (3D)	6/7	Adventure	Sci-Fi	Cinema
11 May 2011	Water for Elephants	4/7	Romance	Drama	Cinema
15 May 2011	Attack the Block	5/7	Adventure	Comedy	Cinema
17 May 2011	Insidious	4/7	Horror	Thriller	Cinema
18 May 2011	Pirates of the Caribbean 4	5/7	Adventure	Action	Cinema
20 May 2011	The Black Hole	3/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
27 May 2011	The Hangover Part II	5/7	Comedy	Adventure	Cinema
25 May 2011	Thor (3D)	6/7	Adventure	Sci-Fi	Cinema
28 May 2011	X-Men	5/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
30 May 2011	X-Men 2	5/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
30 May 2011	X-Men: The Last Stand	4/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
30 May 2011	X-Men Origins: Wolverine	6/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
01 Jun 2011	X-Men: First Class	6/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Cinema
04 Jun 2011	Indiana Jones / Crystal Skull	5/7	Adventure	Action	Home
08 Jun 2011	X-Men: First Class	6/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Cinema
13 Jun 2011	Paul	7/7	Sci-Fi	Comedy	Home
19 Jun 2011	Bad Teacher	2/7	Comedy	Romance	Cinema
20 Jun 2011	Green Lantern (3D)	4/7	Adventure	Sci-Fi	Cinema
24 Jun 2011	Bridesmaids	5/7	Comedy	Romance	Cinema
25 Jun 2011	Kung Fu Panda	5/7	Animation	Comedy	Home
28 Jun 2011	Transformers: Dark of the Moon (3D)	6/7	Sci-Fi	Action	Cinema
30 Jun 2011	Resident Evil	5/7	Horror	Sci-Fi	Home
30 Jun 2011	Resident Evil: Apocalypse	3/7	Horror	Sci-Fi	Home
01 Jul 2011	Resident Evil: Extinction	6/7	Horror	Sci-Fi	Home
01 Jul 2011	Resident Evil: Afterlife	5/7	Horror	Sci-Fi	Home
02 Jul 2011	Resident Evil: Degeneration	4/7	Horror	Animation	Home
03 Jul 2011	Kung Fu Panda 2 (3D)	5/7	Animation	Comedy	Cinema
18 Jul 2011	300	6/7	Action	Drama	Home
19 Jul 2011	Transformers: Dark of the Moon (3D)	6/7	Sci-Fi	Action	Cinema
20 Jul 2011	Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (3D)	6/7	Adventure	Fantasy	Cinema
22 Jul 2011	Horrible Bosses	5/7	Comedy		Cinema
23 Jul 2011	Fantastic Four	5/7	Adventure	Sci-Fi	Home
23 Jul 2011	Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer	5/7	Adventure	Sci-Fi	Home
23 Jul 2011	The Bone Collector	5/7	Thriller	Drama	Home
29 Jul 2011	Captain America (3D)	6/7	Adventure	Action	Cinema
30 Jul 2011	Zombie Driftwood	1/7	Horror	Comedy	Home
30 Jul 2011	Big Nothing	4/7	Comedy	Thriller	Home
02 Aug 2011	Adéle Blanc Sec	6/7	Adventure	Comedy	Home
06 Aug 2011	Captain America	6/7	Adventure	Action	Cinema
08 Aug 2011	Super 8	5/7	Adventure	Sci-Fi	Cinema
10 Aug 2011	Captain America (3D)	6/7	Adventure	Action	Cinema
12 Aug 2011	Rise of the Planet of the Apes	5/7	Adventure	Thriller	Cinema
15 Aug 2011	Captain America	6/7	Adventure	Action	Cinema
16 Aug 2011	Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith	7/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
17 Aug 2011	Cowboys & Aliens	6/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Cinema
18 Aug 2011	The Inbetweeners Movie	4/7	Comedy		Cinema
21 Aug 2011	Taxi Driver	2/7	Thriller	Drama	Home
23 Aug 2011	Conan The Barbarian	2/7	Adventure	Fantasy	Cinema
25 Aug 2011	Rocketeer	5/7	Adventure	Action	Home
26 Aug 2011	Final Destination 5 (3D)	5/7	Horror	Thriller	Cinema
26 Aug 2011	Alien	5/7	Horror	Sci-Fi	Home
27 Aug 2011	Aliens	6/7	Horror	Sci-Fi	Home
27 Aug 2011	Predator	5/7	Action	Sci-Fi	Home
29 Aug 2011	Predator 2	6/7	Action	Sci-Fi	Home
29 Aug 2011	Alien 3	5/7	Horror	Sci-Fi	Home
31 Aug 2011	Alien: Resurrection	3/7	Sci-Fi	Action	Home
02 Sep 2011	Batman: Dead End	6/7	Action	Sci-Fi	Home
02 Sep 2011	Alien vs. Predator	5/7	Action	Sci-Fi	Home
03 Sep 2011	AVP: Requiem	2/7	Action	Sci-Fi	Home
04 Sep 2011	Predators	5/7	Action	Sci-Fi	Home
05 Sep 2011	Smokin' Aces	5/7	Action	Thriller	Home
06 Sep 2011	Fright Night (3D)	5/7	Horror	Action	Cinema
07 Sep 2011	Apollo 18	3/7	Horror	Sci-Fi	Cinema
10 Sep 2011	Jane Eyre	2/7	Drama	Romance	Cinema
10 Sep 2011	An Evening with Kevin Smith	4/7	Comedy		Home
11 Sep 2011	Cop Out	4/7	Comedy	Action	Home
11 Sep 2011	An Evening with Kevin Smith 2	4/7	Comedy		Home
11 Sep 2011	Friends With Benefits	4/7	Comedy	Romance	Cinema
11 Sep 2011	Red State	4/7	Horror	Thriller	Home
12 Sep 2011	Zack and Miri Make a Porno	6/7	Comedy	Romance	Home
13 Sep 2011	Jersey Girl	3/7	Romance	Comedy	Home
14 Sep 2011	Clerks	6/7	Comedy		Home
15 Sep 2011	Sold Out: A Threevening with Kevin Smith	5/7	Comedy		Home
17 Sep 2011	Mallrats	7/7	Comedy		Home
18 Sep 2011	Kevin Smith: Too Fat for 40!	5/7	Comedy		Home
19 Sep 2011	Chasing Amy	3/7	Comedy	Romance	Home
19 Sep 2011	The Change-Up	6/7	Comedy	Romance	Cinema
19 Sep 2011	Clerks Animated Series	5/7	Comedy	Animation	Home
21 Sep 2011	Dogma	5/7	Comedy	Adventure	Home
22 Sep 2011	Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back	6/7	Comedy	Adventure	Home
23 Sep 2011	Clerks II	5/7	Comedy		Home
23 Sep 2011	Jurassic Park	7/7	Adventure	Fantasy	Cinema
24 Sep 2011	Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy	2/7	Thriller	Drama	Cinema
24 Sep 2011	Blade Runner (Final Cut)	6/7	Sci-Fi	Thriller	Home
25 Sep 2011	Jurassic Park: The Lost World	4/7	Adventure	Fantasy	Home
25 Sep 2011	Jurassic Park III	5/7	Adventure	Fantasy	Home
25 Sep 2011	Jurassic Park	7/7	Adventure	Fantasy	Home
05 Oct 2011	Abduction	4/7	Action	Thriller	Cinema
09 Oct 2011	Star Wars: Clone Wars (MicroSeries)	7/7	Sci-Fi	Animation	Home
10 Oct 2011	What's Your Number?	2/7	Romance	Comedy	Cinema
12 Oct 2011	The Three Musketeers	3/7	Adventure	Fantasy	Cinema
13 Oct 2011	The Lion King (3D)	6/7	Animation	Adventure	Cinema
14 Oct 2011	Real Steel	5/7	Adventure	Thriller	Cinema
14 Oct 2011	Dawn of the Dead (2004)	6/7	Horror		Home
16 Oct 2011	Night of the Living Dead	6/7	Horror		Home
17 Oct 2011	Johnny English Reborn	3/7	Comedy	Action	Cinema
21 Oct 2011	Contagion	4/7	Thriller	Drama	Cinema
24 Oct 2011	Outpost	5/7	Horror	Thriller	Home
26 Oct 2011	The Adventures of Tintin	7/7	Adventure	Action	Cinema
27 Oct 2011	The Sorcerer's Apprentice	4/7	Fantasy	Action	Home
29 Oct 2011	Fat Slags	1/7	Comedy		Home
30 Oct 2011	Murder On The Orient Express	4/7	Crime	Thriller	Home
30 Oct 2011	RoboCop	6/7	Action	Thriller	Home
31 Oct 2011	Ghostbusters	7/7	Adventure	Comedy	Home
31 Oct 2011	The Rocky Horror Picture Show	6/7	Musical	Comedy	Cinema
01 Nov 2011	In Time	5/7	Action	Thriller	Cinema
02 Nov 2011	Tower Heist	5/7	Action	Comedy	Cinema
04 Nov 2011	Star Wars: Return of the Jedi	7/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
13 Nov 2011	Never Let Me Go	6/7	Drama	Sci-Fi	Home
13 Nov 2011	The Help	5/7	Drama		Cinema
14 Nov 2011	Immortals (3D)	3/7	Fantasy	Adventure	Cinema
15 Nov 2011	Ghostbusters	7/7	Adventure	Comedy	Cinema
16 Nov 2011	The Ides of March	5/7	Thriller	Drama	Cinema
21 Nov 2011	Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 1	4/7	Fantasy	Adventure	Cinema
30 Nov 2011	My Week With Marilyn	7/7	Drama	Romance	Cinema
01 Dec 2011	The Punisher	2/7	Adventure	Action	Home
02 Dec 2011	Star Wars: A New Hope	7/7	Sci-Fi	Adventure	Home
03 Dec 2011	Ferris Bueller's Day Off	7/7	Comedy		Home
03 Dec 2011	Mallrats	7/7	Comedy		Home
04 Dec 2011	Point Break	4/7	Action	Thriller	Home
06 Dec 2011	Super	4/7	Comedy	Action	Home
06 Dec 2011	Burke & Hare	3/7	Comedy	Adventure	Home
07 Dec 2011	The Evil Dead	6/7	Horror		Home
08 Dec 2011	Evil Dead II	7/7	Horror		Home
09 Dec 2011	Army of Darkness	5/7	Fantasy	Comedy	Home
10 Dec 2011	Fanboys	7/7	Comedy	Adventure	Home
11 Dec 2011	Mission: Impossible	6/7	Action	Thriller	Home
12 Dec 2011	Mission: Impossible 2	5/7	Action	Thriller	Home
15 Dec 2011	The Thing (2011)	5/7	Horror	Sci-Fi	Cinema
16 Dec 2011	Mission: Impossible 3	5/7	Action	Thriller	Home
17 Dec 2011	Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels	7/7	Gangster	Drama	Home
17 Dec 2011	Die Hard	6/7	Action	Thriller	Home
18 Dec 2011	Gremlins	6/7	Adventure	Horror	Home
19 Dec 2011	Rare Exports	7/7	Horror	Thriller	Home
20 Dec 2011	Harold & Kumar Christmas (3D)	3/7	Comedy		Cinema
22 Dec 2011	Puss in Boots (3D)	6/7	Animation	Adventure	Cinema
23 Dec 2011	Trading Places	5/7	Comedy		Home
23 Dec 2011	Sherlock Holmes 2	6/7	Adventure	Adventure	Cinema
24 Dec 2011	National Lampoons Christmas Vacation	3/7	Comedy		Home
24 Dec 2011	The Nightmare Before Christmas	6/7	Animation	Fantasy	Home
24 Dec 2011	Scrooge	5/7	Fantasy	Drama	Home
25 Dec 2011	Survival of the Dead	2/7	Horror		Home
28 Dec 2011	Mission Impossible 4	6/7	Action	Thriller	Cinema
29 Dec 2011	The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo	6/7	Thriller	Drama	Cinema

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the twelfth day of Star Wars...

2011-12-31T02:40:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the eleventh day of Star Wars...

2011-12-30T07:41:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

277: Review - The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (2011)

2011-12-29T10:44:00.001-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (2011) (2011)
29th December 2011. Location: Cinema

Hard work in places, but worth it.

There are parts in David Fincher's remake of tGWtDT that are supposed to be difficult to watch, I know. Keeping that in mind, I didn't have that hard a time with those scenes. They're there to give gravity to the characters and they do the job rather well. What I did have a problem with was the first twenty minutes of the film. After a slick opening sequence, the audience is bombarded with fast-cut shots and constant dialogue from characters who aren't all introduced properly. From this, it's difficult to know what's important, what's background information and what's just filler. The best thing to do is just ride it out until Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) sits down for some semi-mumbled exposition courtesy of Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer). It's not really until this point that the whole show slows the hell down and you can start following at a reasonable pace.

After this, it's excellent. Dark, violent and moody with very little in the way of down-time, it's an intense murder thriller full of misanthropic characters. It's a good rule of thumb here that if you think a character deserves a good kicking, they're probably going to get it. Unless you're opposed to all vigilante justice, at least one moment will have you inwardly cheering.

As the story moves on, the rabbit-hole goes deeper into murder, abuse, conspiracy and family secrets without becoming heavily bogged down by the details. It's a long film (2h30m+), and it feels long, but there's little-to-nothing that could be trimmed to remedy that. As long as you know you're going to be there for a while, maybe don't drink too much coffee beforehand, and you won't miss any of it.

I say all this, of course, without having read the book or seen the previous versions of the films. As a blank slate, I found it very well made, but demanding. If you're not in the mood for actually paying attention for the whole film*, maybe come back to it later. Is the reward worth the demand? I'm not sure at this point. A slightly downbeat ending robs you of any feeling of accomplishment, but feels entirely in-keeping for the film.

Recommended with caution.

Oh, and the paperboy from that episode from Spaced where they have the party is in this. Bizarre.

* I don't mean that in a film-snob way, but seriously; if your mind wanders at all, you stand a chance of losing the thread, and David Fincher won't hand it back to you again.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the tenth day of Star Wars...

2011-12-29T08:39:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

275: Review - Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol

2011-12-28T17:52:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol
28th December 2011. Location: Cinema

I recently watched/re-watched instalments 1-3 of the M:I franchise in preparation for this. They're over on my Facebook review album, but I've posted them under this review as well. Because I watched them in rapid succession, I'll be honest, I wasn't expecting a lot from M:I:4...

...which, this year has taught me, seems to be the key to enjoyment. Ghost Protocol surprised me pleasantly. It's not without its foibles, certainly, but it's entertaining, and it's tight. As the things I enjoyed slowly disintegrated in the first three, Cruise/Abrams have gone some way to getting back to form, here.

Once again, the IMF is proved to be one of the most abysmal employers in the world. It seems as soon as you get to office level, it's apparently full of fuckwits. The film itself, however, is way better than your job prospects with those fools. It doesn't try to be twisty-turny, and it doesn't try to be confusing. With the central thread being a lunatic trying to destroy the world (yeah, like Bond used to do), the plot is linear and well expositioned (a little too well at times, but infrequently), and the explosions never overshadow the cast. Which is a compliment, as there are a lot of explosions. I could probably have done without a lot of the humour, but this is largely down to Simon Pegg being cast to play Simon Pegg™. Don't get me wrong, Simon Pegg is great at playing Simon Pegg™, but there are few films that need that. Still, as with the explosions, it doesn't overturn the cart and the rest of the cast are earnest enough to balance it out. The eyebrow raising thing for me was the technology on display. They seem to have learned from before (see my mini review for MI2, below), and rather than use gadgets that will be outdated in five years, have gone for gadgets that clearly can't exist in this day and age. That's fine, I'll take the second one.

You don't need me to tell you that the stunt and effects work is spot on (you can read that in greater detail in every other review), but what really struck a chord with me, and I can't quite believe I'm typing this, is the roundness of the acting on display. And I include Cruise in that. Yeah, I know. Given the absolute absurdity of the situations that all the characters find themselves in, this is bloody well played. Maybe not award-worthy, but everyone concerned keeps a straight face and acts like it matters. Which is the important thing. The end-sequence seems overly long, and with character appearances that the film could have quite happily done without, but by that point you're just catching your breath, so it doesn't spoil what's gone before.

So in terms of comparison, this almost comes close to the awesomeness that was Mission: Impossible. Alas, it doesn't feature David Schneider as a train driver, but it's still more coherent than M:I:3 and more tightly focused than M:I:2.

In other words, this is a good film and that makes me happy.

Not an extremely solid six, but definitely better than a five.

Mission: Impossible
11th December 2011. Location: On a train between Torquay and Oxford

Been a long time since I watched this, and I'm catching up in advance of Ghost Protocol coming out in a few weeks.

I really enjoyed this. Not 'too' twisty, not 'too' dumb-actiony, not trying to be 'too' brainy. Add in a cast of familiar faces, and you're laughing. Even Cruise is bearable in here (oh come one, you know what I mean).

For an entry-level action thriller, you could do a lot worse.

-----

Mission: Impossible 2
12th December 2011. Location: Home

Oh, John Woo. What are we going to do with you, eh? Talk about style over substance. With a more linear plotline, this film should pack way more of a punch than the first one. But Woo's wasted so much time with slo-mo, sunsets and smouldering glances, that it borders on 'slow' at times. Which is the exact thing that Woo DOESN'T want.

That said, it's still good fun, although the ensemble cast isn't quite as likeable this time around (that's down to my personal preferences, admittedly).

The other drawback is - tech ages. It ages badly. When Dougray Scott calculatingly slips a 32mb SD card into an envelope, you just want to laugh out loud (and especially 10 minutes later when you see the quality and resolution of the animated sequence that's supposed to be contained on that 32mb card).

This could be a very tight 90 minute action thriller. Instead, it's 120 minutes, and it's merely 'good'.

-----

Mission: Impossible 3
16th December 2011. Location: Home

Kind of makes you wonder why you'd do that job, doesn't it? If my place had the track record of fucking over its employees that the IMF had, I'd have retired a LONG time ago. And yet, lovely naive Ethan Hunt still hasn't learnt. Ah, well.

And you know what I loved about the first M:I movie? You'd get a location title just saying "Langley". Not "Langley, Virginia", and not "Langley USA". It's left to the audience to work it out. False flattery, maybe, but M:I3 has "Rome, Italy", and "Shangai, China". In case we thought it might be the OTHER Rome with a Vatican in it.

Other thoughts:
• Too much shakycam. This isn't fucking Cloverfield, Abrams.
• The pacing's great apart from those stretches where I'm supposed to give a shit about Ethan (Cruise) Hunt's relationship status.
• Not a fan of that saccharine ending. No good-guy casualties? At all? Hmm.

It's good. Not great by any stretch, but good.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the ninth day of Star Wars...

2011-12-28T08:18:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the eighth day of Star Wars...

2011-12-27T07:31:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the seventh day of Star Wars...

2011-12-26T07:36:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the sixth day of Star Wars...

2011-12-25T06:49:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the fifth day of Star Wars...

2011-12-24T08:15:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2, 3, 4.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

269: Happy Christmas.

2011-12-24T06:22:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Listen, thank you for putting up with my witterings all year. It's appreciated.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

268: Review - Sherlock Holmes, A Game of Shadows

2011-12-23T16:00:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011)
23rd December 2011. Location: Cinema

I don't care what anyone says, I fucking love a Guy Ritchie film. Okay, maybe apart from Revolver. Trying too hard with that one. Anyway, taken as 'an action film with Sherlock Holmes in it', I thoroughly enjoyed the first instalment of Ritchie's re-imagining, and I was expecting great things of this. I don't ask a lot; entertain me.

So, you can picture my reaction when the sequel thoroughly met all of my expectations.

Seriously. I thought this was great. Although I like the various incarnations of Holmes, I'm a civilian fan if I'm being honest. I've got no real baggage, and as I said, I'm always up for the Ritchiefication of a story. The same liberties have been taken with character names, plot points and locations as in the first film, just as the storytelling style and fast cutting have also carried over. If you didn't like the first one, you won't like this. Almost goes without saying, really.

SPOILERS FROM THIS POINT ON

Still here? Good. So, the movie's set in 1891, and concentrates on Professor Moriarty's plans to buy munitions factories and medical facilities across Europe, and then start a world war and reap the profits. In that respect, it reminded me a lot of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (which I also loved. There. I said it). This culminates in a showdown at a peace summit in Reichenbach, and I shouldn't have to tell you where that's headed.

Whereas the first movie had an initially (if debunked) supernatural element, this one steers clear of it entirely, relying instead on a series of clues, chases and bluffs. There are four distinctly separate acts, in four distinct locations. As Moriarty is fully introduced early in the proceedings, and as his modus operandi is explained at each turn, it definitely feels like more of a game of cat and mouse than the mysteries we're used to with Holmes. But as I said, I view this as more of an action-adventure which has Holmes in it, so it's no large bugbear for me. The only nagging I had was that the inevitable ending wasn't left open-ended enough for me. I'm okay with the final scene being there, but would have preferred it as an after-the-credits bonus so that the casual audience won't get it. See? I can be a bit Holmes-snobby. As it is, things are wrapped up a little too neatly for my tastes, given the potential they had.

But, I was still thoroughly entertained by it. A worthy successor.

Oh, and they filmed bits of it at the railway centre ten minutes walk away from my house. We had much fun picking out the actual-set from the greenscreened-in items. Although that's about as train-geeky as I'm likely to get, I'm afraid.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the fourth day of Star Wars...

2011-12-23T08:14:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2, 3.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the third day of Star Wars...

2011-12-22T12:49:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1, 2.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

265: Review - Puss in Boots (3D)

2011-12-22T12:17:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Puss in Boots 3D (2011)
21st December 2011. Location: Cinema

Normally, I wouldn't have bothered with this. I'm a civilian Shrek fan at best, and always thought Puss to be something of a one-trick pony throughout the films. As it turns out, Miss Magpie really wanted to give it a go, so while I wasn't exactly dragged to the cinema, I was going to take some convincing once the lights had dimmed.

And the result? I think I enjoyed Puss in Boots more than any of the Shrek films.

I was worried that there was going to be too much of a reliance on the 'combined fairlyland' aspect of its predecessor, where throwing in more characters from elsewhere in the genre seems to be a way of padding out the film, but I'm pleased to say that this is kept to a bare minimum (as is Puss's big-eyes schtick, which is only used twice in the entire 90 minutes). The story, while still incorporating facets such as Jack and the Beanstalk and Humpty Dumpty, really plays more as a mashup between Zorro, Desperado and the nursery standards I've mentioned. Because the whole thing zips along very rapidly, it feels longer than its hour and a half, which is already 10-15 minutes longer than many others in the genre.

But ultimately it succeeds on two fronts; 1) it looks and sounds beautiful, and 2) it's consistently funny and sweet.

The animation is absolutely gorgeous (better even that I'd expect), with sound design and voicework to match. Banderas and Hayek are on top form as usual, staying just shy of overdoing it (arguably unlike Banderas playing the same character in the Shrek films). The rest of the talent play their parts perfectly; ie you don't realise who the actors are until you read their names in the end credits (John Cleese, Russell Brand et al take note).

The only thing that struck me as odd is that it didn't have the emotional punch that animated kids' films usually have (whether they work or not). I think I was meant to be feeling a bit more emotional at the climax of the movie, but I was fairly ambivalent to that character anyway (because the character's designed to leave you unsure).

Not my favourite animated film of all time, but solidly entertaining, and great fun.

Providing you're okay with CGI cats, of course.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the second day of Star Wars...

2011-12-21T10:27:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

>> Click for day 1.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

263: Review - A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas

2011-12-20T15:40:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas (2011)
20th December 2011. Location: Cinema

Hmmm. In places, this is very funny. In other places, it's quite sweet. But it's slack and charmless in more places than those two combined, and no amount of insincere bromance can fix that. The 3D 'things flying at the camera' is way overdone, even for a self-referential in-joke, and that's representative of the whole film. The toddler-on-a-variety-of-drugs strand seems wrongly-funny at first, but is soon flogged mercilessly to death (the gag, not the toddler). Oh, and is it okay to laugh at racial stereotyping just because it's a Mexican guy saying it? Probably not, for the amount they keep re-using it. Yeah, I know; wooly liberal. What of it?

Not enough jokes, not enough plot, not enough interest. Some good set pieces, but this is meant to be a movie, not Saturday Night Live. Ultimately, I'd probably have enjoyed this a lot more if I'd been out of my box when I watched it, but since that's not my thing, I'll concede that I'm really not the target audience for this movie.

^^ Part of me wants to give it a middling 4/7, but the bottom line is, it's just not that likeable.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

On the first day of Star Wars...

2011-12-20T11:12:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

261 - Review: The Thing (2011)

2011-12-16T10:56:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Thing (2011)
15th December 2011. Location: Cinema

Okay, right off the bat: I saw 1982's The Thing for the first time properly last year when Cineworld screened it. I wasn't very impressed. Filled with unlikeable characters, dated effects and John 'Direct the film, write the theme tune, sing the theme tune' Carpenter's score. My main issue is that people big it up like it's one of the greatest films of all time, and I don't see that at all. At best, it's a 1980's b-movie, and they're not supposed to be great.

And so, it was with great trepidation that I ventured out to see the 2011 prequel. Yeah, I'd kind of assumed it was a remake on account of it having the same actual title as its counterpart. But it's definitely a prequel. Which I've got no problem with at all, for the record.

So it starts like some bizarre homage to AVP and Jurassic Park (bizarre when you think that AVP is an homage to JP in itself), with a palaeontologist being recruited to investigate 'a structure' discovered in Antarctica. A subterranean craft is established as the cause of the excitement, as well as 'a visitor', which has clawed its way out of the ship at some point in the last 100,000 years, only to become encased in the ice mere feet from the surface.

What follows is a very standard horror tale of one-by-one deaths and enemy-in-our-midst paranoia. That said, it's very well made. Yes, we've seen it before, sometimes better, but it's certainly got that old-school tension going on whereby you know they're going to die, but it's still a gripping ride (although, it has to be said, there's a plethora of 'silent-silent-silent-JUMP' moments). What really makes the film work is the performances from Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Joel Edgerton. Where the other actors/characters are fairly by-the-book, Kate Lloyd and Braxton Carter, respectively, are characters that you do care about, and have more than two-dimensional motivations (and lines). Also worth mentioning is the effects work which (unsurprisingly) puts the 1982 version to shame. It seems very video-game-inspired, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Ultimately, I enjoyed The Thing, when I really wasn't sure what I was going to make of it. It's not going to change my life or make me want to watch the Kurt Russell version again (even though the end sequence segues beautifully into the opening of that film), but it kept me engaged for 100 minutes, when many films haven't this year.

A weak five, but a five nonetheless.

Oh, and it it just me that thinks the threat in the movie is a horribly clunkly allegory for the AIDS virus? Maybe just me overthinking it. As usual.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

260: What about that one?

2011-12-09T12:52:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

I may have mentioned it before, but I love Star Wars. 'A New Hope'¹ especially. It was my introduction to the GFFA when I was four years old, and from that day on, it's been my favourite film of all time ever.

So why the hell did I only notice this for the first time last week?

So there we are, finally got round to breaking the seal on my BluRay Saga set, ice-cold Becks in hand, when I notice that ^^. It's not a BluRay change, it's always been there.

Let me introduce you to a couple of chaps. The one on the left is R2-D2 (you probably already know him), and the one on the right is R5-D4*². Technically, the R5 unit is of a superior specification compared to an R2, even though his navigational stats are inferior. Anyway, that's not important. These two are the only astromechs being offered for sale by the Jawas in the sale of the droids scene.

See? 1. 2. That's all. Other droids, yes. Other astromechs, no.

So anyway, Owen Lars is in the market for some automated help, and after a bit of counter-intuitive baiting with C-3PO, he agrees to buy him. He also wants an astromech droid (for reasons best known to himself), and decides to go for R5-D4, who is presumably cheaper. R5, you'll remember, is on the far side of this line-up.

So, Owen picks him, and he trundles over towards Luke. There he goes...

...and he's left poor R2-D2 all on his own!

But it's okay, R5-D4 isn't nearly as robust as Owen is hoping, and he pops a coil before he's even off the forecourt!

"Not to worry", says Threepio, "the blue one will definitely be better! The blue one all on his own."
"Really?" asks Luke, "are you SURE about that?"
"Oh yes, I've worked with him before", confirms Threepio.
"No..." says Luke, "are you sure he's on his own?"

"Of course he's on his bloody own!" retorts Threepio, "We saw him just a minute ago-"

Oops.

Oh, I know why it happened. A careless bit of editing, that's all. But there are two things I want to know:

A) Why has this never been fixed over the many iterations and releases of the film?

B) Why have I not noticed it before?

*¹ Before any of you mention it, it's had the title-header 'A New Hope' since 1979. Get over it.
*² Yeah, Luke calls R5-D4 "this R2 unit". The change was put in at a marketing level after the film's completion. It was easier to sell toys that way.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

259: Review: My Week With Marilyn

2011-11-30T15:48:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

My Week With Marilyn
30th November 2011. Location: Cinema

Things to bear in mind:

• Not normally my thing, and I've had my fingers burned with 'film' this year already.

• I have very little background/baggage with this. I know who the principal characters are, but that's about it.

• Judi Dench is in this, and plays Judi Dench. As usual.

• Dominic Cooper, fresh from his role as Howard Stark in Captain America is in this, and plays Howard Stark again.

• If the playwright Arthur Miller actually went around as if he was acting his life quite badly, then Dougray Scott's on great form.

That being said:

Film of the year.

I'm entirely serious. My Week With Marilyn is funny, poignant, and, most importantly, completely engaging from the first frame to the last. I identified with, and cared for, all the characters. Maybe I was just in the right receptive mood, but as a 'film', I can't recommend this highly enough.

Not having any great exposure to the actual Marilyn Monroe, I'd say that Michelle Williams does an outstanding job of her portrayal. Fragile without being brittle, highly-strung without being demanding, completely fucked up without being unlikeable. What's more, for the first forty-five minutes, this isn't 'the Marilyn Monroe Show'. Her character's introduced gently, and not before we've had time to acclimatise to the other leads. Eddie Redmayne's portrayal of biographer Colin Clark is heavy on the naivety, but I'm assuming that's intended. And it still makes for an excellent penultimate scene between the two.

As a side note, I'll just say that Kenneth Brannagh as Olivier is absolutely fantastic, displaying the same characteristics as Marilyn, but which manifest themselves in different ways. With the possible snags of the cast members I mentioned in the preamble, this is superbly acted all round (and Dame Judi does come off as incredibly likeable, she's just "Judi Dench" now).

On top of the acting, we've got a beautiful camerawork, locations, score and pacing. This really is the most exquisite film I've seen in a long time. It also helps that running alongside the faltering love-story, this is a film about making films. Talk of red-lights, table-readings and rushes geek me right out.

If you think this might be remotely your thing, it's well worth the £8 to see it in the cinema; the setting's perfectly suited to the content.

Movie of the year? No.
Film of the year? Without a doubt, yes.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

258: Review: Twilight - Breaking Dawn (Part 1)

2011-11-30T15:39:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Twilight: Breaking Dawn (Part 1) (Spoilers. And language.)
21st November 2011. Location: Cinema

Hello. Atrociously late in reviewing this one (but let's face it, it's not like my review was going to be your deciding factor in going to see this) for which I apologise profusely. Ramping up for the Christmas Season at Blackout Towers, and very little time on the internets. But I digress.

So. The fourth Twilight movie, and the third of which I've seen in the cinema. A good strategy seems to be Monday nights. It's not the weekend, it's not cheap-Tuesday or Orange Wednesday, so you actually get a fairly quiet crowd, as opposed to the sold-out auditorium of 14yr old girls who can't leave their phones alone for two hours*¹ (which was what I was expecting).

Skip to the End…
I'm not kidding, there is nothing (no.thing.) in the first hour of this movie that couldn't be summed up in a 3-to-5 minute montage. They get married, those two mopey arseholes square up to each other, they drive down to Rio, they get on a boat, they have the kind of sex-scene that gets more embarrassing to watch the older you are, they both fucking mope about for an hour, and then they realise Bella's pregnant and that's not a good thing (because it was always going to be, wasn't it? Mating a human with a non-human, and just blithely assuming that everything would go swimmingly).
Apparently 'the honeymoon' covers a two period. I'll be honest, it felt much longer.
Once they get back to Edward's gaff, the passage-of-time is similarly skewed (oh, they've been back for a month, but you could show that in five minutes), but at least we start getting meaningful interaction*² from other members of the cast. Considering there's slightly less than usual of Bella fucking sighing around the house even though it still happens, the second hour is good. It almost makes up for the first one.

Soundtrack Overload:
What the fuck is with the constant soundtracking? It's almost as if there was no score written for the film at all. The only time I want to hear that many songs-with-lyrics in a film is when I'm watching a fucking musical.

Subtitling of the wolves:
Or lack thereof. I understand why we need the human voiceovers when the wolves are talking to each other in full dog-mode; to carry over the inflections that are limited when your animated wolves are… well, wolves. But I'll be honest, it just comes off as silly. Which is a shame, because I'm really liking the rest of the wolf-concept*³.

Slowly Slowly, Catchee Vampee:
Home come Meyer's vampires can move faster-than-sight when it comes to packing bags in a hurry (no, seriously), but the minute they're being chased through heavy woodland by a 300-pound wolf, they fucking dawdle enough to be caught? Or were they just weighed down by the feeding they'd just done? And while I'm on there's a scene where Rosalie*⁴ comes into the room and walks past a mirror, and she's got a reflection. That shouldn't even be worth mentioning at this stage, but it still irks me:

Q: Do you need human blood to survive?
A: Well, I can manage without it, although I do get a bit sulky.

Q: Do you burst into flames in day/sunlight?
A: No. Cloudy days are fine, and in the sun I go a bit 'sparkly', I suppose.

Q: Do you have a reflection in a mirror?
A: Yes. Yes, I do.

You're not a fucking vampire. You're a goth.

Summed Up:
The first hour? Fucking awful. The second hour? I enjoyed it very much, although I can understand how other people might also think it's fucking awful. If you've liked any of the Twlight films, you'll like (some of) this. But let's be honest, you knew that anyway, didn't you?

Yeah, a four. Oh, it was alright. Eventually.

*¹ I know it's a pet peeve on mine, but during the first hour of this, I was tempted to start texting people, if only to warn them away from the cinema…
*² Okay, as meaningful as you're going to get in a Twilight movie. I know, alright?
*³ That said, full props to David Reed of Film Fandango Podcast when he pointed out that although they pull their shirts off before changing, their trousers just seem to turn into a dog.
*⁴ Oh, look at me. Knowing the characters' names...

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

257: Misplaced Props

2011-11-19T07:42:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Done for B3TA's Misplaced Props image challenge...

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

256: Magpuss P.I.

2011-11-18T12:47:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

I can't wait for this to hit the shops...

^^ Click for bigger, 800*1000px, 312kb, opens in new window.

(Not sure what inspired this, it was just rattling around in my head for a couple of weeks)

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

255: Review - The Ides of March

2011-11-17T13:50:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Ides of March
14th November 2011. Location: Cinema

Hmm. The Ides of March is a difficult one for me to review, as I have very little to compare it to. Political thrillers aren't usually my thing, and while I enjoyed this, it's done little to make me change my viewing habits.

It's a tale, as I suspect many are, about how politicians are not to to be trusted (no matter what flag they're flying), and as a result neither are the people that work for them. Or the press. Don't trust the press (but you knew that already). I think the thing I liked most about the film is the gradual reveal of the characterisation. In their own ways, the major players are all arseholes, and while they appear likeable (or at least bearable) at first, this isn't a story about how power/greed corrupts them - they were like that all along, you just weren't seeing it.

The 'political' politics is kept to a minimum (it's more of a setting than a theme) allowing some strong performances to come through to an international audience who aren't as au fait with the US system as its homegrown audience. With Philip Seymour Hoffman and Paul Giamatti on-board, you might expect it to get bogged down, but it's surprisingly boldly-paced, considering some of the subject matter. Gosling, Clooney and Wood are all on fine, fine form, too.

It's talky and it doesn't spoon-feed the audience that much (and I actually heard two people in the cinema audience give a "wha..?" when it ended the way it does) but if you're in the mood, this is a very engaging film.

For someone who doesn't do politics, I approve wholeheartedly.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

254: Review - Ghostbusters

2011-11-16T11:03:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Ghostbusters
15th November 2011. Location: Cinema

Last year it was Back To The Future, this year Jurassic Park and Ghostbusters. If I can convince Cineworld to show Weird Science and Ferris Bueller's Day Off, their education of The Kids of Today will be complete...

So yeah; Ghostbusters! At the pictures! Awesome!

It's fantastic to see this in digital projection, and for the most part, the film's been cleaned up a treat. The puppets still look fantastic, and the stop-animation still looks really clunky in places (particularly when it's intercut with the puppets, like Vinz Clortho* at Louis Tully's party), but that only really adds to the charm, for me.

There are little details you don't really see on DVD, like the Stay Puft marshmallows on the kitchen worktop when the eggs start frying themselves, and the Stay Puft billboard on the side of the building later (it really is a horrendous product placement). Also worth mentioning that Bill Murray's performance somehow comes over differently in a cinema. It's somehow much more his film when you're seeing it that big, and a lot of his deadpan lines that passed me by during home viewings are prominently on display. The downside of this, of course, is that his performance then seems whackily over-acted for the remainder of the film.

It's also bizarre to see a film where the heroes are constantly walking around smoking, apparently without a trace of irony.

ANYWAY, no matter what observations I might make, old or new, this is one of the greatest films of all time.

Oh, and Weaver's pretty damn hot in this, isn't she? O_o

*How come Vinz Clortho gets a surname, but Zuul is just 'Zuul'?

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

253: Review - Immortals (3D)

2011-11-14T16:17:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Immortals (3D)
14th November 2011. Location: Cinema

Immortals is a bit like a car crash involving 300 and The Hero's Journey. And like a car crash, no-one walks away unscathed.

It tries its hand at many things; slick bullet-time actioner, grand-scale epic, inspirational fantasy flick, bloody and brutal fight scenes, muscly men for the ladies, saucy ethereal chicks for the guys… it can't quite succeed at any of them. It does try, just not hard enough. The film's not as god-awful as many reviewers would have you believe, but you have seen this before, and done far more convincingly than this. The 3D's passable, if underused. The acting's workable, given the clunky generic script. The scenery is somehow very drab; a desaturated palette mixed with large, featureless landscapes makes it all seem like it's been autopainted in. Sadly, you can also apply this to the rest of the movie. It feels like it's capable of so much more, but no-one was really paying that much attention apart from the fight-scenes featuring the Greek gods. Now those are nicely done, but too few and far between to save the film.

There are a lot of names in here who should know better, but I guess a) everyone's got to earn a living, and b) you don't know it's a turkey until it comes steaming out of the oven.

If you want chicks, go watch Suckerpunch. If you want gods, go watch Clash of the Titans. If you want action, go watch Prince of Persia. This film tries to be a mix of the three, and it turns out like you'd expect that to.

I'll give it a three, but frankly that's generous. It's just not as fucking awful as Conan.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

252: Review - The Help

2011-11-14T16:12:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Help
13th November 2011. Location: Cinema

A bit late, I know, but we've only just got it at our local flicks. Pffft. Oh, and Usual Rules Apply: I haven't read the book of this, so I wasn't comparing it to its literary predecessor.

Set against the early stages of the American Civil Rights movement, you might not necessarily expect a lot of the humour that's written into The Help, and there are several laugh-out-loud moments. In fact, you'd probably be psyched up for a fairly earnest and hard-hitting drama with a hefty moral message. Well, its morals are in the right place, as is its earnestness, but it never seems to really pack any weight behind its punches.

Don't get me wrong, it's not a laugh-a-minute, and it certainly doesn't skirt around the central issue of racial prejudice and inequality. But the big events in the movie (like the rioting in the town of Jackson, where the film is set) are skipped over swiftly, and many events are described or alluded to without being shown.

The downside of this is that when the uplifting moments of the film reach their crescendo, they feel slightly empty, just as the tragedies did.

The aspect of the film that affected me most, however, is knowing that the frankly jaw-dropping attitudes on display in the film are part of civilised humanity's very recent history. In that respect, it's beautifully written and acted, and deserves your attention.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

251: Jet Set Windu

2011-11-11T11:48:00.000-08:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Look what I found in the loft! Old school goodness on cassette tape!

From Wikipedia:

Jet Set Windu is a computer game originally written for the ZX Spectrum home computer, and subsequentally ported onto the Amstrad and Commmodore computer systems. It was published in 1985 by UDC Digital, under license from LucasFilm Ltd, and used a modified Jet Set Willy game engine.
The game is almost identical in concept and execution to Jet Set Willy, but it set in the Star Wars universe, utilizing characters and scenarios from the films.

And a closer look at that cover...

I know what I'm playing for the Winter months...

And because I love you all so much, here are the individual characters...

Update: Fixed the resolution issues on No Place Like Homestead. The old one's here.

Many thanks to Arantor for reminding me that people will notice ;)

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

250: Review - Tower Heist

2011-11-02T16:35:00.001-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Tower Heist
2nd November 2011. Location: Cinema

Although the trailer makes it look a little whacky, most of the performances in Brett Ratner's Tower Heist are fairly understated. Sure, Eddie Murphy does his wide-eyed-shrieky thing a bit, and it's hard not to be a little slapstick when you've got a Ferarri winched over the edge of a skyscraper while the Thanksgiving Day parade trundles beneath unaware, but considering the film is constantly amusing, it's got a muted tension to it.

I daresay some of that's down to the subject matter in the current financial climate, and each member of he audience wondering what they'd do if a rogue investor swindled them out of every penny they've saved. And to his credit, Alan Alda doesn't pantomime his villain up at all; he's slimy, sure, but only in the way you see regularly on news and current affairs programmes.

Hark at me, making this all serious! Tower Heist is a very entertaining film. It's fast-paced to start with, and then slows to a more manageable level, but it doesn't fail to engage at all. A borderline-farcical crescendo gives way to a satisfying ending without being too clichéd. Ben Stiller reins in his comic-exasperation, while Matthew Broderick and Téa Leoni quite happily take a back seat to Stiller and Murphy's antagonistic double-act.

It's better than I was expecting it to be. All in all, worth a gander.

Try not to think too hard about the maximum weight capacity of your average elevator, and you'll be fine.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

249: Review - In Time

2011-11-01T13:12:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

In Time
1st November 2011. Location: Cinema

In Time is the third cinema-film I've seen this year that stars JustinTimberlake. That statistic would be worrying if it wasn't also the fifth that's starred Olivia Wilde…

A futuristic action-thriller where time is the currency of mankind, and Will Salas (Timberlake) is living day-to-day in the ghetto where most people wake up without enough on the clock to see them 'til the evening. Basic commodities cost precious minutes and life is a balancing act for those struggling through it. On the other side of this, and several time-zones away, society's elite have more time than they could ever want, and live in opulent disregard for the unfortunates. Crime is rife in the ghetto, but through a chance encounter with a philanthropist, Salas is set on a course to try and seize justice, and time, for all…

The Good: Timberlake's on fairly good form here, as is Olivia Wilde. The script, plot and pacing are all clear enough. Despite it seeming like an outlandish concept, it works quite well in context. None of the characters are completely believable, but given the scenario of the film, they're not going to be. Generally speaking, it's respectable performances all round.

The Bad: Yeah, it's a pretty heavy-handed metaphor for capitalism, and feels a little overdone in the first half-hour or so. I expected it to get quite preachy in the final act, about 'not wasting the time you have', but surprisingly they've eased off on that. As a result, though, the ending seems a little limp; and things more or less slot into place for the characters, one way or another, and it all seems a little easy.
Another downside is that in this undisclosed future-Earth (set at least 100 years after our time, but probably more), humans are genetically modified to stop ageing at 25 when their 'clock' kicks in and they have to buy time to survive. So, you just cast a bunch of 25yr olds, right? Well, for the most part it works fairly well, but it doesn't explain how Timekeeper Leon (Cillian Murphy) looks about 40 (especially as Murphy's actually 35). On the flip side of this, when you have Vincent Kartheiser playing a 25yr old-looking man who's aged over 100, and he puts on the pomp and concern that befits his character, it feels a little like a sci-fi Bugsy Malone. It's not a biggie, but it doesn't quite add up.
And lastly (I promise), there's a partially-revealed backstory about Will's father, that concerns Leon. Some details are discussed and more are hinted at, but we never get a complete picture. Cut for time?

The Ugly: Alex Pettyfer, trying to channel his best 'Ray Winstone' as a ruthless but well-spoken ghetto gangster. Sadly, he has neither the presence or the gravitas to do this. Frankly, it's a bit embarrassing.

All-in-All: Despite my moaning, there, it's very enjoyable. Although I feel they could have done more with it, given an extra half an hour and a more adventurous plot.

See if you liked: The Adjustment Bureau, Source Code.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

248: Review - The Rocky Horror Picture Show

2011-11-01T12:24:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Rocky Horror Picture Show
31st October 2011. Location: Cinema

Hmm. I can't really objectively review a film I've loved for the last 22 years (even though this was the first time I'd seen it in a cinema (even though I've been regularly watching it live for the last 15 years)).

Our nearest Cineworld screened this for Hallowe'en, so obviously Mrs Blackout and myself went along (it being our anniversary an'all). A sizeable chunk of the almost-sold-out crowd were dressed in character (not me; not my style, I'm afraid). Curiously, of the half-an-auditorium that stood up to do the timewarp, only about half of those actually knew the steps (which is an achievement when it's a song that describes the moves itself). There was also some hesitant audience participation in the form of the accepted heckling*¹, but I think the night's crowd were more used to seeing the live-production where a lot more people are joining in, and it's more... well, interactive*².

Hmm. I've made that sound a bit crap. It really wasn't. If you like tacky b-movies and musicals, Rocky Horror is an astounding movie, and a great time was had by all.

Look, it's not really that easy to explain. On several occasions, my BFF has asked me to explain what the fuss is about, and I can't really do it. The only way to know if you'll like The Rocky Horror Show is to watch it. It's sort of kill-or-cure; I don't know anyone who's ambivalent towards it.

A solid 6 because I love it to bits.

*¹ I don't know how else to describe it. It's what the audience shout at the stage during the live productions. It's evolved over the years and is accepted/expected by the performers.

*² You haven't enjoyed the theatre until you've seen David Bedella walk to the front of the stage and silently mouth 'SHUT THE FUCK UP!' to an audience member who was getting a little out of hand, even for a RH audience member.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

247: Who ARE we going to call?

2011-10-31T12:32:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Yeah, them Yanks are schooling us in how to engage our children in celebrating a festival of darkness, but who's to say we can't give it a bit of bulldog spirit, eh?

^^ Click for bigger (1000x1414px, 298kb)

Happy Hallowe'en, y'all!

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

246: In Pictures - Bowling For Soup

2011-10-29T11:16:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

28th October 2011.
HMV Forum, Kentish Town (The Town & Country, call it by its name)

What do I write about Bowling For Soup? Two awesome shows in a week. Saw them in Oxford on the 22nd, but didn't take any photographs.
I also started writing an actual gig-report, then realised it was sort of redundant. Here's the short version:

Orange: Not for me, but the kids seemed to be enjoying them.
Suburban Legends: Loads of fun, I was very impressed.
Bowling For Soup: Excellent (as usual), even though the entire band and crew are (/have been) ill with this cold-thing thats been doing the rounds.

Anyway, I figured I'd post the photos I took at the London show.
The principle's simple enough: Bad photographs look slightly less bad when they've been filtered through PolaDroid. Click on any of these to see the bigger version over at FacePage.

And big hugs to the awesome folks from the BFS Army who made it all even better:

I'm not saying that BFS have 'the best fans', but they're definitely the best people.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

245: Review - The Adventures of Tintin

2011-10-26T16:25:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Adventures of Tintin
26th October 2011. Location: Cinema

Premise: A nosey teenager, worryingly adept with firearms, finds himself in the company of an alcoholic sailor, stranded in Morocco with no passport...

Wow. No, really. Wow.

Given that I was never really a fan of Tintin, finding it a little too old fashioned for my tastes, I wasn't expecting this to really connect with me. I was prepared to be visually impressed, for sure, but the cast and crew have reached deep into the bag and pulled out a first-class action adventure movie, here.

Now if you're a fan of Tintin already, you'll be rolling your eyes and mouthing told you so. But this movie brings something new to the franchise for me; a sense of movement which the comics never really captured (again, for me). It's very easy to forget that the highly stylised characters you're watching are CGI, even though they could only be exactly that. The camerawork, script and pacing all suggest a live-action film, and the excellent voice-work backs this up. There are one or two moments where the animation becomes a little jerky and lifeless, but even then it's only reduced to the level of very, very good CGI.

With Spielberg directing and John Williams scoring, Tintin reminded me of the Indiana Jones series regularly, particularly in the Moroccan locations, and it's a credit to Moffat, Wright and Cornish that their writing is on par with those films.

After seeing one of the Thompson Twins fall down the stairs in the trailer, I was worried about the level of slapstick we'd be getting. Luckily, this is kept to a minimum (read: largely the scenes with the Thompson Twins in), as the rest of the spills are action-based. There is a lot of humour in the film, courtesy of Andy Serkis' Captain Haddock and Snowy the dog, but it's never overbearing and never overdone.

We saw this is 2D, but I'll be watching it again in 3D. The medium works best in animation anyway, and if the rest of the visuals are anything to go by, it should be stunning.

Whether you're a fan of the books or not, I can't recommend this film highly enough. A classic adventure, and a thing of great beauty.

...still got no real desire to return to the books, mind.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

244: Thank you, Twitter

2011-10-22T04:49:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Hello. Chances are you're reading this because you've been directed here by me on Twitter.

Last night (Fri 21 Oct), I tweeted that my nephew's guitar had been stolen in Oxford. He's 17, just started music college, and like I did at that age, adores his guitar. He was feeling like absolute shit about the whole thing, so I figured the least I could do was put the word out that a black SG Prophecy was 'in the wild', so that at least if it was offered for sale in a pub, second-hand-shop etc, there'd be some awareness that it was probably stolen. I don't normally ask for a re-tweet, but it seemed sensible under the circumstances.

Then Twitter (you) showed me why Twitter (you) is/are brilliant. I had what can only be described as a humbling number of RTs and enquiries/help.

As of mid-day on Saturday 22nd October, the guitar has been recovered. I don't know many more details, as my nephew's dad has gone to pick it up as I type this. I'll update this post if/as I learn any more. What I also don't know is whether Twitter (you) was/were instrumental in its recovery. I think you were, anyway.

I want to say a massive THANK YOU to the following tweeters who very kindly re-tweeted my message, so that more people had an eye out for the guitar:

@AndyMcH
@Wllmtnnnt
@MrBoffly
@TheShowerCiara
@Maisey_M
@JonnieLovepole
@parkerbats
@ellaboheme
@lolwarlol
@ElKaboing
@mcsleazy
@Arfa1969
@alanlaw
@nizbizz
@juliefon
@vengod
@craigblundell
@Danno375
@KubMartin
@minitheminx9
@ScottyBoyGooner
@AndyHoldcroft
@ganofo
@TheFinesthour
@Anita_Neet
@doddsytattack
@stevejalim
@drummerwhitey
@GemmaDrums
@yo_toots
@Stephen13Payne
@scott_guitar23
@pawwow
@MattWBP
@padster
@Phoebely
@AverageCynic
@MayaVonDoll
@MelismaMusic1
@pleasecruelty
@Jubbly_1
@FunSizeSuze
@mynameis_robyn
@RachelDonag
@BestBridesWE
@ClaireElaneW
@i_am_mclovin
@Lalaasaurus
@sofee_
@4maddy2
@garwboy
@steve_x
@bulldoxide
@JessDearrr
@STERLINGBRIDGES
@pixelsmummy
@bobdmello
@sickmouthy
@rllyquitetired
@SmoutsAbout
@DaddyPerry
@Chimpmansworth
@Denise_Meredith
@SamDaleFunkSoul
@chadsbits
@fleurdelysmusic
@quev71
@JoJo3398
@crowmogh
@restorationcake
@Jules_Clarke
@HelenArmfield
@mamacrow
@hand_of_Ike
@The_Bats
@KhandieKhisses
@GemWitchalls
@conchitamou
@ponshus
@ColonelHitch
@KhandBapa
@ProPatria46
@Stevietosh
@Major_Grooves
@EllieBrown710
@WORDright
@TabbyOnTour
@reductioadabsur
@velderia
@yellbean
@KathrynBell1
@rosepryce
@stehatch
@sebastianflyte

And a lot of those people were made aware of the situation thanks to the RT by Mr Jaret Reddick of @bfsrocks. Without Jaret's tweet, the thank-you list would be a lot shorter.

You have my sincere and heartfelt thanks for your small, yet hugely important, actions. I suspect there are more users, whose names Twitter isn't showing me, who I also have to thank. If your name isn't on the list, but you did RT my message, you also have my utmost thanks.

I'm going to delete my original tweets to stop it being RT'd any further by people who aren't aware of the updated situation.

I may have to re-think my whole "the world is full of arseholes" philosophy. The number is reduced by at least 94 people today.

You fucking humble me, Twitter, and I'm pretty sure a certain 17yr old appreciates you, too.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

243: Review - Contagion

2011-10-21T08:41:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Contagion
21st October 2011. Location: Cinema

The Premise: Wash your fucking hands. Yes, you.

As if I'm not paranoid enough about touching things that people have had their dirty paws on...

This might not be a great film to go and see if you're just starting a cold. Like what I am. No matter.
A sizeable chunk of Contagion is lingering shots of things that germy people have just touched; door handles, drinking glasses, mobile phones and what have you. Another sizeable chunk is filled with characters you can't bring yourself to like. Jude Law, for example, plays the deeply irritating Alan Krumwiede, a big-mouthed journalist and blogger*¹ who spends the whole film being annoying about "the truth" until it's revealed that he was bullshitting all along and it's okay that you found him a bit of a dick. Oh, spoilers. Did I mention? SPOILERS.

Actually, there's not a great deal to spoil, as the trailer's already done a pretty good job of that. A lot of people get poorly and die. You see 'main characters' dying in the trailer, so all that's left is details, really. Luckily, the film's not so much about the spread of the virus*², as the socio-political behaviour surrounding it. And that's not as dull as I've made it sound.

Sure, there are shades of "oh, the government's bad because they don't have cures for as-yet-unknown diseases lying around in ready-packed doses by the billion", and Matt Damon manages to be impressively dull as a character who's lost two people close to him, finds out he himself is immune, and then basically sits around the house bringing nothing else to the film, at all. Similarly, the sub-plot with Marion Cotillard as a kidnapped health worker had great potential, and then essentially came to nothing.

Given the basic fact that people who died from the new strain of Flu weren't going to get back up and bite people, I'd wondered before seeing it what the point of the film was going to be. After seeing it, a small part of me's still wondering. Other than being a 105 minute advertisement for washing your fucking hands you filthy peasants, it seems like it's pulling in different directions and covering no bases as a result. There's not enough of the humanitarian element to get you engaged on an emotional level, but there's too much of that for it to work as a thriller.

By the time the final scene rolls around, we get to see flashbacks of how the disease was first transmitted to patient zero, and it seems largely irrelevant. The stages we see unfold have been described verbally by Marion Cotillard about an hour earlier, and millions of people are dead by then, and a cure's been developed. So what does it matter?

A lack of zombie potential meant that part of me wanted to really dislike this from the outset, but when I was watching it, I couldn't do that. The other part of me wanted to really love it. I couldn't do that, either.

/// Now wash your hands. ///

*¹ Americans have enough of a problem distinguishing British and Australian accents as it is (and I can see how, to be fair). So casting British Jude Law to do an unconvincing Aussie accent isn't going to help anyone, is it?
*² Hollywood Virus Rule Number One: The first infected person must board an internationally-bound plane within five hours of contracting the virus. See also; Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

242: Review - Johnny English Reborn

2011-10-17T15:45:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Johnny English Reborn
17th October 2011. Location: Cinema

Six times.

The trailer made me think it would be a high number, but even I wouldn't have guessed six.

On six separate occasions in Johnny English Reborn, a male character either receives, or narrowly avoids, a blow to the testicular region for comedic effect. Six.

That's the equivalent of being kicked in the nuts once every seventeen minutes. Which isn't an inaccurate analogy of watching the film, if I'm being honest. You shrug it off the first time; a cheap shot in every sense. Get it out of the way, and move on, yeah? Erm, …what else have you got?

The Good: It's reassuringly charming. There are chuckles in there, just no real laughs. It's all so tried-and-tested by now that you begin to suspect it's been sitting in storage for seven years, waiting for the audience to forget that Mike Myers as already done this, and that it was better than the first Johnny English film. At one point, the introduction of some Chinese enemy-agents had me worried we'd get some old-fashioned casual racism, but in all fairness the film avoids this altogether. There are no nasty surprises in this movie…

The Bad: …there are no surprises at all in this movie. It's like the car that was carrying Ace Ventura 2 crashed into the bus carrying The Naked Gun when a truckload of Austin Powers fell onto them both. Seriously. When it's not 'oh look, my adjustable chair doesn't work properly', it's 'attack an old woman/the Queen in a case of ha-ha-hilarious mistaken identity'…

The Ugly: …at least we can rely on Rowan Atkinson to alternate between his Blackadder face and his Mr Bean face at regular intervals. Speaking of which, after about an hour, you're just waiting for it to end, really.

After the credits: Midway through the name-scroll, we get a deleted scene in which Rowan tits about in a kitchen in time to music. Think Morcambe & Wise's 'Breakfast sketch', but without the gags. Part of me is amazed they didn't just insert it into the film anyway.

All in all: It's not completely awful, you've just seen it all before. If you catch it on the telly it'll probably make you smile. If you go and shell out the best part of a tenner to watch it at the cinema? I doubt you'll be smiling as much.

The Final Word: This film is the direct result of a series of Barclaycard adverts. That should tell you all you need to know.

As harmless as it is, three's as high as I can go. I'll try harder when the film does.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

241: Review - Real Steel

2011-10-14T11:20:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Real Steel
14th October 2011. Location: Cinema

Estranged father / cocky but vunerable son / mismatched pairing / bonding / underdog in a contest / support from love interest / more bonding / one dimensional bad guys / father has doubts about final challenge / finds emotional strength in son / tears / more bonding / final challenge / will they succeed..?

Of course they bloody will, haven't you seen any films at all?

Despite this Hugh Jackman vehicle actually being ^ that ^ clichéd, this movie's so convincingly made I couldn't help but get drawn in. It's not perfect, and the sequences with Max and his robot-pal doing a bit of a dance (yes, a dance) made me cringe, but Real Steel isn't about the destination, it's about the journey.

Dakota Goyo stars as 11yr old Max, and is nowhere near as annoying as the trailer makes out (apart from the dancing). He reminded me a lot of Jake Lloyd in The Phantom Menace, and you can shut up because I know what you're about to say. Hugh Jackman also puts in a decent performance as his absentee father and ex-boxer Charlie, as they're reunited after Max's mother's untimely death in an accident.

The other (human) characters are largely cut-outs, inserted into the story to fulfill very specific roles, and as such there are no real standout performances. They're acceptable certainly, but there's not a lot you can do with 'nasty man in cowboy hat who enjoys 'yee-hawing' and beating up our hero'.

The curious-er character is Atom, the robostar of the story. Atom is the sparring-bot who rescues Max from falling to his death in a junkyard (built, for some reason, right next to a cliff in the middle of a town?), resulting in the youngster insisting they rescue (read: steal) him and clean him up. It's established fairly shortly after this meeting that Atom is sentient; in that he's not just a remote-control machine like the other boxing-bots we've met so far. Atom actually understands Max when he speaks to him, and can respond (although not verbally). The weird thing is that this isn't expanded upon at all. We see Max beg his dad to 'train' Atom using traditional boxing techniques, although Charlie doesn't seem to twig that Atom is actually learning, not memorising.

Come the film's finalé, I fully expected the remote-pad to mysteriously stop working, as Atom becomes independent of his controller, and wins the fight using the movies he's learned. But it's no great spoiler to say that the crescendo is Charlie's moment, as he regains some of his former glory as a boxer-turned-trainer. The fact that Atom is alive isn't explored at all, which seems like a shame. That said; when Real Steel works, it's absolutely on fire.

A clichéd underdog movie, but played well. And who doesn't love watching robots smack the shit out of each other?

Think of it as a cross between Rocky and the podracing sequence from The Phantom Menace. Make of that what you will, but I enjoyed it.

^^ It's not quite 6/7 material, but it's damn close.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

240: Review - The Lion King (3D)

2011-10-13T14:51:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Lion King (3D)
13th October 2011. Location: Cinema

I've been to see an Elton John musical.

I think... think... that this is the first time I've seen The Lion King all the way through. Yeah, I know. I've definitely seen bits of it before, and I know the general gist of the story, so I've never had the feeling that I've missed out.

So, yes. It's an astounding film. Mostly. I'll be honest, apart from The Circle of Life, I could have done without the songs, few as they are. I could also have done without a lot of the humour, and had a film that concentrated more on the mythology...

...but then I had to keep reminding myself that I was watching a Disney film aimed at kids.

But when it's great it's fucking magnificent, and I'm very pleased to have seen it in the cinema. The 3D's so-so. I mean, it's there, and it does its best, but it's got to be difficult to convert traditional two-dimensional animation, as they're just not 3D objects. As a result, for the most part it comes over like an animated decoupage; flat images at varying levels of depth. I wouldn't go so far as to say it detracts from the movie, but it definitely doesn't add anything.

But if you love The Lion King, make a point of catching this at the cinema; it's worth it for the digital projection alone, even if you see the 2D version. This puts most of Disney's other output to shame.

Oh, and if anyone can point me towards a version where all of James Earl Jones' Mufasa lines are processed to sound like Darth Vader, I'd be incredibly grateful. I can't be the only person who wants to see that, can I?

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

239: Review - The Three Musketeers

2011-10-12T15:23:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

The Three Musketeers
12th October 2011. Location: Cinema

The only thing that surprised me about this film is how much I didn't detest it.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I didn't like it. At its best, I found it to be astoundingly average. A bit like 'Pirates of the Caribbean' without the pirates. Or the Caribbean. Or the fun. There is humour in here, but a lot of it consists of James Corden channeling his best Ricky Gervais impression, and then making a face.

Yes; in my quest to remain spoiler free, I hadn't visited the IMDB page and noticed James Corden's face there. In fairness to the funster, once I'd gotten over the shock of seeing him and expected nothing from his presence, he was mostly just being himself. More painful was listening to the audience's guffaws as he delivered his sitcom-like lines. Then made a face.

But let's move on: There are things I want to say about the film, whilst spending as little time as possible reliving it. As has becoming a habit for this year, I'm not familiar with the original source text of The Three Musketeers. Neither the book, nor the previous incarnation of the film. Mrs Blackout is, and she rated this version more lowly than I have, so that probably tells you something.

So, Paul W.S. Anderson prod-directing, and this has his stamp all over it. No appearances from Colin Salmon or Liz May Brice, but we get scene transition courtesy of a re-locating map, and he's even managed to squeeze a laser-dodge sequence in (well barely; the mechanics behind it don't work) without any lasers. I'm not opposed to that, by the way, I actually liked Resident Evil and Alien vs Predator. But unlike those movies, there's no tension here. No blood and no death. Yeah, I know it's only a 12A, but they're clashing swords every two and a half minutes, for crying out loud. Apart from the one token (off camera) death at the end, everyone lives to badly deliver their lines another day.

Oh yeah, the dialogue. I expect better from Matthew Macfayden, I really do. When it comes to Athos' heartfelt speech to D'Artagnan at the height of the final act, he just flatly trots out some embarassed-sounding shit about 'following your heart'. If that is the best take they got of that shot, I can barely imagine how appalling the others must have been. Christoph Waltz isn't given that much to actually do, so his scenes are somehow less cringe-inducing, but everyone seems to be having a hard time of what they've been handed here; with the possible exception of Orlando Bloom, who seems to be having enormous fun as Buckingham. Arguably more fun than the audience, it has to be said.

And I know how this is going to sound, really I do, but Milla Jovovich is getting too old for this shit. She's capable of better, it's time to move onwards and upwards.

The Three Musketeers is essentially a very expensively-made pantomime for people who haven't seen that many movies. Your kids are going to love it. For some reason.

I can't find it within myself to hate it outright, though. Its worst crime (for me) is just how monumentally dull it all is. At no point was I actually engaged in the story. I spent the duration thinking about the special effects and references/homages to other films. None of which are that badly done, they're just more noticable than what you're meant to be watching.

Oh, and can someone tell me how you fire an exploding projectile into a helium-filled balloon without it exploding all to shit, please? I don't even mind that they managed to mine/condense enough helium to fill the airships, I'd just like the physics to work.

...and then James Corden made a face.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

238: Review - What's Your Number?

2011-10-10T13:25:00.001-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

What's Your Number?
10th October 2011. Location: Cinema

It's fair to say that this movie isn't really aimed at me; on account of the fact that I don't like getting smashed on Lambrini, giggling at men's bums and crying with my friends. Even so, I've paid in time and money to see this, so I'm damned well entitled to my opinion on it...

What's Your Number? is like a badly bolted together train of pantomime cliché, clanking slowly and jerkily down a rusty track towards a foregone, tedious conclusion. Despite throwing every ~~hackneyed~~ reliable staple and progression at the mix, there's nothing to make them flow together into an actual story. It's just a series of scenes you've seen before in other movies, and they were better the first time.

In fact, if you can imagine a Greatest Hits album where all the songs contained are just that little bit overplayed, and you then find out that it's a tribute band that's playing them, so that it's technically 'competent' but without any real committment or flair... that'd be this movie. The ditzy blonde, the hunky neighbour, the feuding parents, the arsehole boyfriends, the nighttime date in a deserted sports venue, the guitar serenade, the dancing on the rooftop, the realisation that 'oh, he/she is the one!'... all done with the warmth and sincerity of a Peter Kay interview.

In fact, while I'm on, what is Anna Farris actually for exactly? Not quite hot enough to compete with contemporaries like Heigl and Aniston, and not charming enough to make up for that fact. Whenever I've seen her, she tries her hand at kooky, but comes off as deeply irritating. I'd like to say the film would have been better with someone else cast as Ally, but even then it'd only be elevated to crushingly predictable. The rest of the cast try their best, presumably comforting themselves with the thought of the paycheck, but I can't see this particular gem appearing on many CVs in the future.

It's only 105 minutes, but it feels much, much longer. Which is quite an achievement when you consider that there's barely 85 minutes of material here.

If you want to remind yourself of how good Bridesmaids is, check this out.

Captain America should fucking well know better.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

237: Weston-Super-Mare Photodump

2011-10-08T16:57:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Last Sunday, my good lady and I perchanced to visit the delightful North Somerset coastal town of Weston Super Mare, by virtue of posessing complementary rail ticketure to any destination upon the First Great Western travel network.

Already in this post I have used the words 'super' and 'great' where they do not apply. I shall say no more, and present you with this; a pictorial record of our visit to the town.

^^ Click for bigger, opens in a new window ^^

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

236: Bournemouth Photodump

2011-10-07T06:12:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Hello. Back in September, me and my better half went to Bournemouth, Dorset..
Whilst there, I wrote a short piece about being followed one night.

These are some of the photos from that weekend.

^^ Click for bigger, opens in a new window ^^

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

235: Look, it's ME. From off of the TELLY.

2011-10-06T14:06:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

And so it came to pass that Mr Richard Herring posted a link via his blog yesterday, which in turn came via Mr Andy McH.

The link is to a studio tape of series two of Fist of Fun*¹, with unedited footage of Rich and Stew discussing Pancake Tuesday.
Here it is:

So why am I boring you with this? I was there when they filmed that, me.

In the final broadcast version, I appear (very briefly) on the telly.
I'm in this clip, too, at around 4m50s.

Okay, it's my long hair in the corner of the picture, and the back of my sister's head. She's on the telly more than I am there.
But I'M ON THE TELLY!

There's a longer tale about pushing in the queue at BBC Television Centre, but this isn't really the time or place. Ask me when you see me, yeah?

Huge thanks go to Andy McH for locating this, as well as Paul Dullson for originally uploading it.

Fist of Fun Series One*² will be available on DVD soon from the awesome Go Faster Stripe. It's going to be excellent, and you should buy it.

*¹ Or, as all the cool kids are calling it: FOF (fof).
*² That's the one without me in it, I'm afraid. Sorry. Series Two next year, so I'm told.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

234: Review - Abduction

2011-10-05T15:59:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Abduction
05th October 2011. Location: Cinema

Normally, I'd think twice about seeing this, or at least give it a hard time for its not inconsiderable faults. However, after the September I've had trying to watch "film", this movie is more than welcome.

If you've seen the trailer, you'll be thinking it's a fairly empty action/thriller, with The Other One Off Of Twilight™ leaping around and getting shot at and shit blowing up and that. You'd be right there, as well; but let's break it down...

The Plot: Taylor Lautner (The Other One Off Of Twilight™) is an ordinary 'should be happy' high-school jock, smug, borderline-bully dickhead, until he discovers a bizarre secret from his past which turns his life upside-down! Grinding familiarity ensues...

The Good: In terms of blowing shit up and jumping out of trains and cars, this is a perfectly servicable thriller. A little slow at the start (with a presumably deliberate "Twilight" opening shot), but after the first set-piece, the action sequences are fairly evenly paced. It's all very much by-the-numbers, but what the hell were you expecting? It's got The Other One Off Of Twilight™ in it. And Him Off Of Harry Potter™ as well. Somehow, the film's producers managed to bat way above their average and also secure Sigourney Weaver and Alfred Molina, but they didn't really give them that much to do, so I figure it's easy-money in downtime for those two.

The Bad: Being a 12A, and starring TOOooT™, there are a couple of scenes aimed directly at 15yr old girls. Embarassingly so. And around these areas, the dialogue is almost painful. The rest of the time, it's merely "standard". But I don't think any of us were there tonight for the scripting. Oh, and Heroine™ needs to do something about those eyebrows. Jeez...

The Ugly: A few massive lapses in logic here and there. Example; The assassin on the train waits until Heroine™ goes to the buffet car, then follows her almost back to the compartment that she and TOOooT™ are hidden in... but then waylays her into another carriage, knocks her around and asks her at gunpoint which compartment number they're in. Almost as if the dumb fuck couldn't have just waited 30 seconds, when she would've led him there anyway.

Also, despite having heavy product placement from Apple, each of the computers in the film has that dummy operating system that only exists in movies, where massive windows take up the whole screen, and things are typed out by the computer in... real... time... It wouldn't matter so much if they didn't spend so much time explaining how hi-tech everything's meant to be when it's clearly not.

Research Your Fucking Film: In all fucking honesty, the movie takes place on the west coast of America (Virginia, Pennsylvania). At one point in the "evening" when it's dark outside (but before TOOooT™ has had dinner), a phone call is made to "London, England", where it's apparently the middle of the afternoon. Not five hours AHEAD of the USA, so actually ALSO NIGHT.
It's not that difficuly. Seriously, it's not.

All In All: Nothing great, nothing new, but an entertaining distraction nonetheless. A DVD-job, for sure.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

233: Dino-Season!

2011-10-04T14:42:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

I wouldn't normally do a season-review for three films, but JURASSIC PARK IS ON IN THE FLIPPING CINEMA AGAIN! As part of Universal's push for the BluRay release, JP returns for a 2-week release, as did Back To The Future around this time last year. There's nothing new in there, it's just a remastered print, shown in digital projection.

So, does it stand the test of time? Is an 18yr old movie still worth watching?

Jurassic Park
On: 23rd September 2011
Location: THE FLIPPING CINEMA!!

I'll be honest, as much as I loved Jurassic Park back in '93, I haven't watched this in quite a while (only bought it on DVD a month ago… seriously), and I'd forgotten what an absolute game changer this was back in the day.
Almost every aspect of the film still stands up in 2011. An absolute joy to behold.

• Thoughts-as-I-go in the second review, below.

Jurassic Park: The Lost World
On: 25th September 2011
Location: Home (they're not all on at the flicks…)

• The weather seems variable on Isla Sorna. In the first shot, it's overcast with cloud, but a minute and a half later, blue skies with small white clouds.
• Considering how many faces from the first movie are here (even just in token catch-up appearances), and that Spielberg himself is directing, this really is a low-key sequel.
• That being said, Vince Vaughan has a role, and given his subsequent career, this is probably the least bland film he's been in.
• Julianne Moore's character is called Sarah Harding. Watching the movie in 2011, I can't help but feel that if they'd sent the Girls Aloud member, the velociraptors would have been terrified into submission…
• I find it hard to believe that InGen's trustees would send a hunting party to site-B to capture live dinosaurs, when they could just use the already documented procedures to create them on the mainland, surely? The amber used for the DNA samples wasn't native to the islands, and the tech was shipped there. Everyone concerned knows the islands are over-run, where's the sense in sending people in?
• Ooh, lots of the baddies have Brit accents. Hunter men bad! They hunt dinosaur! Goodies frown at bad man! *rolls eyes*
• Parts of Isla Sorna look suspiciously ilke Endor. Those Ewoks wouldn't have been intimidated by the Velociraptors. Speaking of which…
• …even after our heroes join survivalist forces with the hunting party (whose job it is to kill things, they journey into the centre of the island un-armed. How fucking dumb are this lot?
• Not too impressed with a smartarsed preteen gymnast outwitting a velociraptor, but as the first movie proved with hacker-Lex, if you're going to include whiny kids, they have to have one talent which will come in useful in a life-threatening situation.
• The Japanese businessmen running from the T-Rex is a nice touch.

This film would be a lot better if the characterisation wasn't so cartoonish. It's a kind of straight-to-video sequel, without the aspect of going straight-to-video.
On its own? A five or a six. As a sequel to one of the greatest movies of all time? A solid four, I'm afraid.

Jurassic Park III
On: 25th September 2011
Location: Home

• Like its predecessor, the film starts with another "oh, you guys, what could possibly go wrong?" concept…
• In fact, the main plot's a borderline rip-off of Aliens, with its let's go back to a known disaster site to rescue the colonists gubbins, coupled with finding a child who's survived purely on instinct.
• Spinosaurus? You couldn't think of a better name than Spinosaurus? Hmmmf. No-one outbadasses my T-Rex. No-one, y'hear?
• If any of the films could justify some harsh language to up the BBFC rating a little, it's this one. I'm pretty sure that Alan Grant would be giving it some "hey, how about you shut the fuck up and maybe don't attract more bastard dinosaurs, hmm?
• I can forgive Neill's moralising 'this is how you play God' schpiel, seeing as we get some raptor-action.

Despite the film's faults, (and there aren't as many as Lost World), it's still got a great sense of adventure, and it's good to see Sam Neill back in the fold.

That's a strong five, but it just ain't a six ;)

Jurassic Park
On: 25th September 2011 (yes, I watched all three in one day)
Location: Home

• The only major gripe I have about Jurassic Park is that it's in 16:9 instead of 2.35:1.
• John Williams' score is absolutely beautiful. It gives the film a gravity that many/most other adventure movies lack completely. The themes almost become characters themselves.
• In the first 'money shot' where the team see the Brachiosaur, keep an eye on the sky. Overcast one minute, sunny the next, with ground-shadows coming and going accordingly. I suppose I'm not meant to be looking up there, though.
• I love how young Lex gets into the car and exclaims "It's an interactive CD-Rom!", while these days, a kid that age would be wondering what the hell a CD-Rom is.
• I always forget that Sam Jackson's in this. Probably because of how criminally underused he is.
• Normally, I'd be moaning about the stereotype of the fat, cocky, lazy, insubordinate computer programmer, but since I do know people like that…

Even on the small-screen, this film is amazing. I never get tired of hearing the trumpeting roar of the T-Rex...

And so, the toys and the VHSs go back into the loft, encased in their own special amber (aside: cardboard), and the four-disc steelbook sits on the DVD shelf. That'll be the last time I watch them for a while. Not because they're not worth it, but just because I never want to become overly familiar with the parts I love the most.

Rumours continue to circulate about JP4, and if Joe 'Captain America' Johnston's onboard for directing, as suggested, I'll be there on the first day. Hell, I'll be there on the first day anyway.

If you've never seen any of these, you owe it to yourself to at least watch the first one.
These movies are seriously underrated.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

232: Review - Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

2011-09-30T07:55:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
24th September 2011. Location: Cinema

Hello, my name's Yen and I'm one of the only people in the world who didn't like this film.

WARNING: SPOILERS*

I'll keep this short and sweet. I didn't feel the narrative was laid out plainly enough. In all honesty, I didn't feel the narrative was laid out at all, other than "there's a mole at the top of the circus" (about six fucking times), and "oh, it's Colin Firth". In between those, is two hours of moody atmosphere shots with very little useful dialogue or anything actually happening.

• Interior, a darkened office, day. Smiley sits with one of the other central characters who somehow hasn't been introduced properly. Nothing is said for about 45 seconds until one of them quietly pipes up "...things are not in order"
Cut to:
• Exterior, a park, dusk. Smiley looks into the middle distance saying nothing for 60 seconds.
Cut to:
• Interior, Smiley's office, night. Although probably not the night after the dusk we just saw. You can't really tell, to be honest. Smiley looks at four chess pieces with faces sellotaped onto them. The camera closes on his concerned face. He says nothing.
Cut to...

Fucking etcetera. For two hours. It does have some good sequences; the flashback scene at the beginning with Mark Strong as the agent in Bulgaria, and the tale told in flashbacks by Tom Hardy. But other than that, flashback sequences are used, unannounced, where the characters and decor look exactly the fucking same as in the 'present' day. Then you get to a point where Mark Strong's scenes weren't flashbacks, but when you realise this you think back over those scenes and realise they were so largely inconsequential that it doesn't really matter when they were set.

Here's the deal: I'm not a rocket scientist. I know this. But I also know I'm not completely thick, and I know enough about narrative structure to sit through most of this film not having a fucking clue what's going on at any given moment.

Yet, evidently I'm the only person who feels like this.

I was going to give it a second watch. Benefit of the doubt, y'know?
Then after some thought, I figured fuck it. The way I see it, you've got three minutes to 'sell' a film to me with your trailer. If you can do that, I'm in. If I'm not convinced by the trailer, then why should I spend time and money watching something that doesn't seem to appeal to me? Oh, it could be a great film, but if the person who's cut the trailer's done a bad job, that's not my problem.

Then I took it a step further. The trailer for TTSS did sell it to me. It's the film itself that didn't. And quite honestly, if you can't convince me in two hours that I should like your film, then it's certainly not going to get another screening with me in the room.

On the plus side: Everything else is pretty excellent. The sets, costumes, casting, acting, delivery, photography; all exquisite. It just feels to me like it was edited by someone who hadn't read the story. Way too many aspects seemed like they probably meant more in the book or TV series, and were only in this to make up the numbers.

And y'know, if you're adapting a massive book which was a 7-hour TV series down into 2 hours, and a lot of stuff doesn't fit? Then you should probably be asking yourself if you should even be doing it at all.

Best bit: Colin Firth gets shot in the face. That will never get old.

I want to mark it more highly just because of the way it looks, but I was too disappointed with it to do that.

* Although when I say "spoilers", I mean arguably more plot-revelation than the fucking film.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

231: Three Frame Movies (part II)

2011-09-29T12:18:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

This is a continuation from yesterday's post, for the B3TA Image Challenge: Three Frame Movies:

"This week's task is to edit Hollywood classics down to the essentials, and relate the entire plot of a movie in just three frames. Easy."

Lord of the Rings

Zombieland

Kick-Ass

Star Wars Saga (from a Palpatine point of view)

Maybe more to come. Don't hold your breath, though, I think this horse is well and truly flogged for now.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

230: Three Frame Movies

2011-09-28T16:56:00.000-07:00

CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.

These pics are for the B3TA Image Challenge: Three Frame Movies

"This week's task is to edit Hollywood classics down to the essentials, and relate the entire plot of a movie in just three frames. Easy."

Jurassic Park

Back To The Future

The Rocky Horror Picture Show

Temple of Doom

Raiders of the Lost Ark

The Last Crusade

The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

...yeah, you thought I'd be doing Star Wars, didn't ya?

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.

• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.