Thursday, 31 January 2013
Wednesday, 30 January 2013
Tuesday, 29 January 2013
Monday, 28 January 2013
Wednesday, 23 January 2013
Video Schpiel: Saturday Night Live - Puppet Class
This was one of my favourite SNL sketches (along with Lord Wyndemere) last year. Only posting it cos Hulu have FINALLY allowed us Europeans access to (some) material!
Video Schpiel: When The Zombies Come
Anyone else think they'll just end up killing yer man and letting someone a little less "energetic" take over???
Video Schpiel: 'This Is 40' Bloopers
Not that I ever want to see this film but the Blooper Reel did make me laugh!!!
Friday, 18 January 2013
Video Schpiel: Pro-Wrestlers vs Zombies
The prospect of Kurt Angle, Raven, Roddy Piper, Terry Funk, Matt Hardy & Hacksaw Jim Duggan vs Zombies - well who wouldn't wanna see that!!!!
Video Schpiel: Snubbed 2013 - An Oscar Tribute
The Grey was probably my film of the year last year. Absolutely great drama and Neeson was immense!
Tuesday, 15 January 2013
Film Review: Django Unchained
Going against the grain in so much as that I did not seem to enjoy Django Unchained as much as the rest of the people out there in the world.
While it is true that I very much taken while watching Django Unchained, I think Quentin Tarantino has only made a semi-cohesive series of 10 minute shorts - as opposed to an actual full length film. Some scenes feel like they were randomly put in the film- mostly for comedic value - and this did not work for me at all. Some other scenes were just so out of place it made no logic at all and added nothing to the grand spectacle that is Django Unchained. There seemed to be a mish-mash of what was actual necessary to the plot and what was disposable.
Perhaps Tarantino could use a better editor to shorten these overblown masterpiece's down to a more reasonable, viewer-friendly cut and save the pompous bloated edition for the Director's Cut on DVD. There is a good two hour film in there somewhere but Tarantino just needs to whittle out the crap and concentrate on producing the best film he can produce. If he can not actually do this then he needs someone beside him with the testicular fortitude who can.
EDIT: After investigating deeper it has come to my attention that long-time Tarantino collaborator and editor Sally Menke passed away in 2010 so that could indeed explain my feelings towards the overblown Django Unchained.
Also I thought the whole film was very musically heavy, like Tarantino could not go from one scene to another without using some sort of irregular choice of song. Yes, you are smart, we know. Just make the fucking movie though and stop trying to sell us the CD too.
With his previous track record of musically inclined films it felt like he was pastiching himself as I counted three consecutive songs back to back. That is terribly unprofessional film-making anywhere yo go - it does not matter if you are Quentin Tarantino or the director of a TV soap-opera, you just do not do that sort of thing. Ever. It certainly shows a lack of creativity and maybe, just maybe, the director can not physically tie together scenes anymore - hence his over-reliance on the soundtrack.
All those criticisms being being said Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio and Samuel L. Jackson all were fantastic and worth the admission price alone - but overall Django Unchained just didn't sit well with me as it has with plenty of others out there. I much preferred Inglorious Bastards truth be told and that in itself was guilty of being over-blown as well.
Overall Django Unchained is certainly an enjoyable watch - but one that's about half an hour to long. Also if Tarantino could manage to not be so reliant on the soundtrack then that would be great [Bill Lumbergh style]. A self-indulgent film, but one that has some truly great performances inside.
A befuddled, muddled, straight down the line 3 / 5.
Friday, 11 January 2013
Wednesday, 9 January 2013
Web Schpiel: Read All The Walking Dead's Online
Episodes 1-53 http://www.scribd.com/collections/2849035/The-Walking-Dead-comic-english
54-102 http://www.scribd.com/collections/3940517/The-Walking-Dead-English
From episode 62 onwards they don't work but if you just follow another similar link here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/118657401/The-Walking-Dead-61-65 and then just scroll down to the bottom and click next and you'll get them all :-)
EDIT: Apparently some of those links don't work:
Ep1: http://www.scribd.com/doc/118296232/The-Walking-Dead-01-English
From there on in just follow the links at the bottom of each episode.
So Ep2 is: http://www.scribd.com/doc/118296258/The-Walking-Dead-02-English
Ep3: http://www.scribd.com/doc/118296275/The-Walking-Dead-03-English
And so on and so forth.
Then Episodes 20-103 come in a big bundle: http://www.scribd.com/collections/4093518/The-Walking-Dead
AND just in case - another link to a different copy of them:
http://www.scribd.com/collections/4198495/The-Walking-Dead
FINALLY the best way to keep updated I find with all the recent comics is through a fellow called photoshoppercs3 on YouTube who uploads all the recent issues instantly.
Definitely should subscribe to his channel here and read them all as soon as they come out!
https://www.youtube.com/user/photoshoppercs3/videos?view=0&live_view=500&flow=list&sort=da
Tuesday, 8 January 2013
Monday, 7 January 2013
Sunday, 6 January 2013
Film Review: Hitchcock
Films like this are confusing because regardless of how good they actually are they just seem to have "Oscar" written all over them and that can influence your opinion greatly. Remember Meryl Streep as Maggie Thatcher in The Iron Lady or Leonardo Di Caprio as Howard Hughes / J. Edgar Hoover. Both of those actors got nominated for academy awards even though the films they were in were not that great themselves. Your brain can make you believe what you are watching is actually much better than it is. That, ladies and gentlemen is called the "hype" and Chuck D advocates in not believing it. Thankfully this film does not suffer from that. This film-within-a-film does a good job of telling the story of how Hitchcock's most famous film "Psycho" came about.
Anthony Hopkins & Helen Mirren will no doubt be at the fore-front come award season, and justifiably so - as their performances in Hitchcock are truly astounding. I was about to write how Helen Mirren owns the film until I realised that Hopkins (who I really dislike as a person) did such a good job of playing Hitch that I genuinely forgot it was him under they fat-suit for pretty much the duration of the film.
The rest of the supporting cast are equally excellent and are full of recognisable faces: Danny Huston, Toni Collette, Michael Stuhlbarg (Arnold Rothstein from BWE), Kurtwood Smith, Ralph Macchio and Jessica Biel as Vera Miles. Her role really is the only one I felt ho-hum about, mainly as I felt they did not deal with her previous back-story in the correct way - then one has to remember this is not the story of the strained relationship between Vera Miles and Alfred Hitchcock - but rather the story of "Psycho".
The other two supporting actors who are sure to get the plaudits in the reviews are Scarlett Johansson as Janet Leigh and James D'Arcy as Anthony Perkins. I do not know if Johansson will get nominated for her supporting role as, well, the part itself could have been meatier (that seems to be my feelings towards the whole film) but regardless of the amount of time he had on screen I think D'Arcy should be recognised for his outstanding portrayal of Anthony Perkins. Honestly, the man just becomes him. If you did not know better you would swear it was Perkins himself. The only critique is that I felt he did not have enough screen time - but that is not the fault of the man at all as he was truly excellent.
For Hitchcock fans and film historians some of the material will not ring true. They have changed Hitch himself and instead of an odious, creepy, semi-sadistic leering pervert we now have a watered down, Hitch-lite version of the man. The troubles with his leading ladies are only hinted at briefly and the control he liked to bestow upon women is barely worthy of a back-story in the whole film. Mirren plays his devoted wife, Alma, ans her character is given much more of a backbone that I was lead to believe she ever had in reality. Maybe Helen Mirren just cannot play meek, I do not know. Anyway - of these changes are not really surprising as if Sacha Gervasi had represented the actual events and characteristics of the man then he would just come across as unlikable instead of, how shall I put it, "particular".
Overall I enjoyed Hitchcock. I enjoyed it much more thinking about it today though. Knowing what I do about the man himself I knew he was a torturer to the leading ladies he employed and sadly I felt that that could have been dealt with in a different tone in this film. Saying that I am aware that this film really had nothing to do with that - but it is hard for me to break the ties between them both. The script is fast paced, full of moment of genuine emotion and humour in equal doses. The cast really are excellent and it would not surprise me if there was nominations dished out come academy season.
Alas however I felt that certain elements have been altered in order to present a more well-rounded piece of celluloid. This I can not get past. I have learned about him in great detail and knowing what I know it was hard to not let that grate on me throughout. It would be like remaking a film and turning a genuine asshole (think Tim Roth in "Rob Roy") into a likeable asshole. Films are films but liberites should not be taken on certain occasions.
Anyway, in conclusion - this film really is well worth the watch. Even Anthony Hopkins is decent in it. A very enjoyable watch and at barely 100 minutes one that you can just let fly by. A good solid (if slightly liberty-taking) film. 3.5 / 5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
