Tom Cruise
Not that this day is coming soon or anything but I have just read this fact:
"In 2006, October 10 was declared Tom Cruise Day in Japan, making him the first Hollywood star to have a special day named in his honor. The Japan Memorial Day Association said that he was awarded with a special day because he has made more trips to Japan than any other Hollywood star."
To add to this, I have just watched Jerry Maguire (Sarah had not seen it before) and I am going to rip apart Jo's "favourite film" some time soon ...
(Although, I do like the film ... Awards aside, I shall state how I can see why some people wouldn't like it ...)
Jade Goody and Big Brother 2007
My views are this, as stated on the BBC 'Have Your Say' thing:
"When Jade attacked Shilpa I do not believe she was racially motivated. The way Jade used Shilpa's race and background as a use for insult IS racist. No-one would turn to a caucasian human and state race-related insults, whereas it was race-related insults that Goody decided to use. I think she is stupid enough to not clearly understand how offensive that is, but her ignorance should be highlighted so that other people will learn."
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
A Titanic mistake.
In the hope of changing the current film debate, I move on to bigger and better things that have arisen from the past few topics of conversation ...
Ridley Scott
I noticed that there seemed to be some harsh criticism behind Ridley Scott - a director who once was an artist - who, in my humble opinion, might be one of the best directors around.
He, as stated, is first and foremost an artist and that means he assumes the actors can act and the script writers can write - other than that he, as a director, aims to make a feast for the eyes in his films. 'Alien' being his standout piece is virtually a moving Giger film - a way to get into the depths of darkness that Giger depicts in his art. 'Gladiator' brought the Romans back into the movie trend - a genre that has been ignored for a while before hand (Cue 'Troy'...), then there is 'Black Hawk Down' that builds a 2hour plus film around one mission, that was intended to be so small. Personally, I can vividly remember the Bids Eye View of the streets as the twog groups 'homed' in on the crashed Helicopter. 'Kingdom of Heaven' was extensively cut for the version that I saw, but visually it captured a very specific time - even though the actual plots were weak and unstructured.
The first half of 'Hannibal' (Up until he leaves Florence) is absolutely brilliant and depicts the beauty and class, so effortlessly a part of Lector himself, of Italy itself. I cannot help but think the detraction in the second half is more a fault of the script writer rather than Scott. Ted Tally was not writing it, and if I recall the finish was completely different to Thomas Harris' finale.
If Ridley Scott has the right people to support him in his position, than he can create a masterpiece everytime.
Titanic
Just a quick start to this, in terms of Genre, I personally believe that 'Titanic' is first and foremost a Romance. The problem most people have with the film - especially quote-un-quote butch men - is that they don't like Romances and expect 'Titanic' to be something else. They might expect it to be a 'disaster' film (whatever that means) or a 1900 'Independenace Day' set on a boat - maybe even a cross between Camerons previous efforts: 'Titanic: True Terminate Aliens' - but alas it is none of these. It is a Romance, and only when people either say "aaaah, thats why I didn't like it: because I hate Romances" or they say "If I'd realised it was a Romance I would have liked it so much more" then people will realise the genius that is James Cameron. A director so in love with Titanic that he created a film for us all to see the true majesty of the ship.
Furthermore, I personally never thought Leonardo DiCaprio was that bad an actor - and because until 'Gangs of New York' I only had the basis for the view from one film, whereby he received a pin-up 'cute-boy' tag from the ladies, I was hardly going to go around saying "Yeah, the guy on the cover of Bliss is a great actor". Now he has continued to act to a high standard in, as I said, 'Gangs of New York' and 'The Departed', and I have had the chance to rewatch 'Romeo and Juliet' I can safely say that the man cast as 'Jack' was a fine choice. So, the main actor is in the clear.
Secondly, Kate Winslet was always a fox and her role in 'Titanic' cemented this fact. Her acting never seemed a problem and, although I haven't seen 'Hideous Kinky', I am aware there is a bath sequence with Winslet in - and that intreigues me furthermore. Her Oscar nomination for 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' was well deserved and this confirms her acting abilities. So, the lead Actress is in the clear also.
The range of supporting actors - from Kathy Bates ('Misery') through to Victor Garber ('Alias') - they all suit the roles perfectly. Jonathon Hyde ('The Mummy') could have been better and Paxton didn't give his best performance, but their roles were limited and didn't deter from the focus point of the film - akin to Jar Jar Binks in 'A Phantom Menace'.
The plot running straight through it - Jack and Rose - was told in a way that gave the entire event a context to view it in: The opportunity to see the beauty of the wreck, while also viewing the reality of viewing the new, shiny ship also added to the dynamic of the story. The build-up and celebration in Southampton as it left the dock, the class issues that are raised, the introduction of the Captain - who went down with the ship - and Murdoch and theString Quartet - the myth surrounding such characters, the fight for the final boats and the amazing spectacle of the ship sinking in the middle of the Atlantic - so much to watch.
Flawless.
(Ratner and Gibson have made very few films - they may suprise us yet ... )
Ridley Scott
I noticed that there seemed to be some harsh criticism behind Ridley Scott - a director who once was an artist - who, in my humble opinion, might be one of the best directors around.
He, as stated, is first and foremost an artist and that means he assumes the actors can act and the script writers can write - other than that he, as a director, aims to make a feast for the eyes in his films. 'Alien' being his standout piece is virtually a moving Giger film - a way to get into the depths of darkness that Giger depicts in his art. 'Gladiator' brought the Romans back into the movie trend - a genre that has been ignored for a while before hand (Cue 'Troy'...), then there is 'Black Hawk Down' that builds a 2hour plus film around one mission, that was intended to be so small. Personally, I can vividly remember the Bids Eye View of the streets as the twog groups 'homed' in on the crashed Helicopter. 'Kingdom of Heaven' was extensively cut for the version that I saw, but visually it captured a very specific time - even though the actual plots were weak and unstructured.
The first half of 'Hannibal' (Up until he leaves Florence) is absolutely brilliant and depicts the beauty and class, so effortlessly a part of Lector himself, of Italy itself. I cannot help but think the detraction in the second half is more a fault of the script writer rather than Scott. Ted Tally was not writing it, and if I recall the finish was completely different to Thomas Harris' finale.
If Ridley Scott has the right people to support him in his position, than he can create a masterpiece everytime.
Titanic
Just a quick start to this, in terms of Genre, I personally believe that 'Titanic' is first and foremost a Romance. The problem most people have with the film - especially quote-un-quote butch men - is that they don't like Romances and expect 'Titanic' to be something else. They might expect it to be a 'disaster' film (whatever that means) or a 1900 'Independenace Day' set on a boat - maybe even a cross between Camerons previous efforts: 'Titanic: True Terminate Aliens' - but alas it is none of these. It is a Romance, and only when people either say "aaaah, thats why I didn't like it: because I hate Romances" or they say "If I'd realised it was a Romance I would have liked it so much more" then people will realise the genius that is James Cameron. A director so in love with Titanic that he created a film for us all to see the true majesty of the ship.
Furthermore, I personally never thought Leonardo DiCaprio was that bad an actor - and because until 'Gangs of New York' I only had the basis for the view from one film, whereby he received a pin-up 'cute-boy' tag from the ladies, I was hardly going to go around saying "Yeah, the guy on the cover of Bliss is a great actor". Now he has continued to act to a high standard in, as I said, 'Gangs of New York' and 'The Departed', and I have had the chance to rewatch 'Romeo and Juliet' I can safely say that the man cast as 'Jack' was a fine choice. So, the main actor is in the clear.
Secondly, Kate Winslet was always a fox and her role in 'Titanic' cemented this fact. Her acting never seemed a problem and, although I haven't seen 'Hideous Kinky', I am aware there is a bath sequence with Winslet in - and that intreigues me furthermore. Her Oscar nomination for 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' was well deserved and this confirms her acting abilities. So, the lead Actress is in the clear also.
The range of supporting actors - from Kathy Bates ('Misery') through to Victor Garber ('Alias') - they all suit the roles perfectly. Jonathon Hyde ('The Mummy') could have been better and Paxton didn't give his best performance, but their roles were limited and didn't deter from the focus point of the film - akin to Jar Jar Binks in 'A Phantom Menace'.
The plot running straight through it - Jack and Rose - was told in a way that gave the entire event a context to view it in: The opportunity to see the beauty of the wreck, while also viewing the reality of viewing the new, shiny ship also added to the dynamic of the story. The build-up and celebration in Southampton as it left the dock, the class issues that are raised, the introduction of the Captain - who went down with the ship - and Murdoch and theString Quartet - the myth surrounding such characters, the fight for the final boats and the amazing spectacle of the ship sinking in the middle of the Atlantic - so much to watch.
Flawless.
(Ratner and Gibson have made very few films - they may suprise us yet ... )
Sunday, January 14, 2007
How the topic can change so swiftly...
Brett Ratner
Just to rectify some details. I have only seen two Brett Ratner films - 'Rush Hour' and 'Red Dragon'. As far as 'Rush Hour' goes, its alright although not really my type of comedy. So that is not so much a directorial problem - more a personal preferance on comedy because the film was successful enough - thus funny enough across the board - to warrant two further sequels.
'Red Dragon' on the other hand is AWESOME! Ratner uses a script written by Ted Tally, the writer of 'Silence of the Lambs' script, and there is a huge influence of the stand-out director Jonathon Demme - director of 'Silence of the lambs'.
Yes, yes, It's all preference. I get that, but I would be interested to see how Brett Ratner - a director who is no Tarantino or Fincher - gets so much criticism from Mr Jo Gudgeon. Ratner has never claimed he is brilliant - unlike Shyamalan who, although I like him, I can see why he can rub people up the wrong way with his really arrogant attitude. Brett Ratner is a director who seemed to do a good job with 'Red Dragon' - he didn't try to 'make it his own' he simply studied 'Silence of the lambs' and tried to make it live up to that, which, I think it comes close.
I have friends who think that 'Red Dragon' is in fact the best one of the three.
Nevertheless, looking at Ratners directing credits on IMDB (a whopping 16!), very few of them are that successful. X-Men 3, I have heard, is not great - but everyone cocks up at one point and it hardly warrants a lifetime of disgust from avid film fans - such as Mr Jo Gudgeon.
Is it possible that I can get an informed, fair and just review from Mr Jo Gudgeon stating why Ratner is such a bad director? Has Gudgeon seen enough of Ratners films to put together a whole-hearted opinion on the subject? I can admit that I have seen very, very few on the whole of Ratners film - and music videos - to really claim whether he is any good or bad. I am really waiting to watch X-Men 3 before placing any kind of offensive or insulting judgement on the man.
I doubt that the film is as bad as 'Cube' though.
I await peoples responses (that goes for everyone!)
P.S. The single point I was making about Mel Gibson was: How can you say he is a bad director when you have only seen one film? Could it just be a fluke bad film? Or a film that simple 'wasn't-your-thing'?
Just to rectify some details. I have only seen two Brett Ratner films - 'Rush Hour' and 'Red Dragon'. As far as 'Rush Hour' goes, its alright although not really my type of comedy. So that is not so much a directorial problem - more a personal preferance on comedy because the film was successful enough - thus funny enough across the board - to warrant two further sequels.
'Red Dragon' on the other hand is AWESOME! Ratner uses a script written by Ted Tally, the writer of 'Silence of the Lambs' script, and there is a huge influence of the stand-out director Jonathon Demme - director of 'Silence of the lambs'.
Yes, yes, It's all preference. I get that, but I would be interested to see how Brett Ratner - a director who is no Tarantino or Fincher - gets so much criticism from Mr Jo Gudgeon. Ratner has never claimed he is brilliant - unlike Shyamalan who, although I like him, I can see why he can rub people up the wrong way with his really arrogant attitude. Brett Ratner is a director who seemed to do a good job with 'Red Dragon' - he didn't try to 'make it his own' he simply studied 'Silence of the lambs' and tried to make it live up to that, which, I think it comes close.
I have friends who think that 'Red Dragon' is in fact the best one of the three.
Nevertheless, looking at Ratners directing credits on IMDB (a whopping 16!), very few of them are that successful. X-Men 3, I have heard, is not great - but everyone cocks up at one point and it hardly warrants a lifetime of disgust from avid film fans - such as Mr Jo Gudgeon.
Is it possible that I can get an informed, fair and just review from Mr Jo Gudgeon stating why Ratner is such a bad director? Has Gudgeon seen enough of Ratners films to put together a whole-hearted opinion on the subject? I can admit that I have seen very, very few on the whole of Ratners film - and music videos - to really claim whether he is any good or bad. I am really waiting to watch X-Men 3 before placing any kind of offensive or insulting judgement on the man.
I doubt that the film is as bad as 'Cube' though.
I await peoples responses (that goes for everyone!)
P.S. The single point I was making about Mel Gibson was: How can you say he is a bad director when you have only seen one film? Could it just be a fluke bad film? Or a film that simple 'wasn't-your-thing'?
Smokin' Aces and Jo ... again
Smokin' Aces
It's really good and I'll write more about it when I get the chance.
Jo Again
Interestingly enough, Jo had a fair-enough comment in response to my Open Letter. Problem is, he followed it up with another comment and this is in response to that ...
First off, I shall quote Jo;
"I went on IMDB to check where else my dislike for Gibson comes from. I have seen six of his movies and not a single one of them contains a performance that I feel justifies his reputation. And the seventh is Passion."
Right, I also went on IMDB and had a gander because I was sure that Gibson hasn't directed that many films - let alone seven. Turns out he has only directed five projects:
1) The Man without a Face
2) Braveheart
3) The Passion of the Christ
4) Three episodes of 'Complete Savages'
5) Apocalypto
I think I did watch 'The Man without a Face' but I cannot remember much from it so I shall say nothing. 'Braveheart' and 'Passion' I own and have watched a few times - and think they are worthy of reputation. 'Apocalypto' I have recently watched. Funnily enough I did not get the chance to watch any episodes - let alone Gibsons - of 'Complete Savages'.
I have a funny feeling that the 'Gibson' films you have watched are only the ones he has acted in (and 'Passion' being the 'seventh' film of his you watched - Gibson didn't act in that so ... ). Mel Gibsons reputation as an actor is not huge - he has never won an Oscar for acting roles - although he did earn two awards from the AFI (The Australian equivalent to the Oscars) for his acting roles in 'Tim' and 'Gallipolli'. He also earned critical praise when acting in 'Hamlet' in 1990 - but alas, no Bafta of Oscar. I have not seen 'Tim' or 'Gallipolli' so I would not know whether his acting was brilliant in them. Suffice to say, I make no judgement.
Personally, I think Mel Gibson is a high class DIRECTOR, for which this is reflected in Braveheart 'for which he won two Oscars for Best Picture and Best Director'. I thought 'Passion' was well directed and, considering the limited and bias source, it attempted to show the story as 'real' as possible - all whip lashings and thorny crowns included. Again, 'Apocalypto' is yet to earn awards, if it will earn any at all as it has some very strange plot points (As pointed out by Elisabeth, there is absolutely no need for the birth of child at the end. Very shit) and a wealth of inaccurate historic references. But visually and cinematically it is as epic and impressive as the deserts of 'Lawrence of Arabia'.
Now, here comes the twisted knife Jo - You have only seen Passion. You may have seen 'The Man without a Face', but if it was as long ago as when I saw it, then I reckon it would be difficult to really form an informed judgement. And 'Complete Savages'? I doubt it.
For one, the whole "I have to confess that I have never been a fan of his work probably because I have seen very few of his films" - you have seen ONE film that was higly criticised across the board, a film that earned no nominations and had a bias box office opening. It might be better to say that you are not a fan of 'Passion' rather than grouping all his directed pieces into one box without viewing them.
You stated yourself that 'I did catch some of Braveheart the other day and it did look motivationally interesting' and this is the film that earned him his initial reputation - and it is that epic scale that he has become famous for directing.
I advise you to watch 'Braveheart' and 'Apocalypto' because they really are worth the watch at least, but the chance of you doubling back on yourself and stating 'Wow, Gibson is a great director' are slim to none because your (un)informed opinion on why you shouldn't/wouldn't watch 'Apocalypto' says alot about how you form a judgement before watching a film.
I reckon the latest edition of 'Heat' probably didn't give 'Apocalypto' the greatest of reviews though - although it may have stated that there are topless guys and girls running around throughout the film - woo hoo! Five Stars. As legitimate as 'Empire'. (Game, set, match)
It's really good and I'll write more about it when I get the chance.
Jo Again
Interestingly enough, Jo had a fair-enough comment in response to my Open Letter. Problem is, he followed it up with another comment and this is in response to that ...
First off, I shall quote Jo;
"I went on IMDB to check where else my dislike for Gibson comes from. I have seen six of his movies and not a single one of them contains a performance that I feel justifies his reputation. And the seventh is Passion."
Right, I also went on IMDB and had a gander because I was sure that Gibson hasn't directed that many films - let alone seven. Turns out he has only directed five projects:
1) The Man without a Face
2) Braveheart
3) The Passion of the Christ
4) Three episodes of 'Complete Savages'
5) Apocalypto
I think I did watch 'The Man without a Face' but I cannot remember much from it so I shall say nothing. 'Braveheart' and 'Passion' I own and have watched a few times - and think they are worthy of reputation. 'Apocalypto' I have recently watched. Funnily enough I did not get the chance to watch any episodes - let alone Gibsons - of 'Complete Savages'.
I have a funny feeling that the 'Gibson' films you have watched are only the ones he has acted in (and 'Passion' being the 'seventh' film of his you watched - Gibson didn't act in that so ... ). Mel Gibsons reputation as an actor is not huge - he has never won an Oscar for acting roles - although he did earn two awards from the AFI (The Australian equivalent to the Oscars) for his acting roles in 'Tim' and 'Gallipolli'. He also earned critical praise when acting in 'Hamlet' in 1990 - but alas, no Bafta of Oscar. I have not seen 'Tim' or 'Gallipolli' so I would not know whether his acting was brilliant in them. Suffice to say, I make no judgement.
Personally, I think Mel Gibson is a high class DIRECTOR, for which this is reflected in Braveheart 'for which he won two Oscars for Best Picture and Best Director'. I thought 'Passion' was well directed and, considering the limited and bias source, it attempted to show the story as 'real' as possible - all whip lashings and thorny crowns included. Again, 'Apocalypto' is yet to earn awards, if it will earn any at all as it has some very strange plot points (As pointed out by Elisabeth, there is absolutely no need for the birth of child at the end. Very shit) and a wealth of inaccurate historic references. But visually and cinematically it is as epic and impressive as the deserts of 'Lawrence of Arabia'.
Now, here comes the twisted knife Jo - You have only seen Passion. You may have seen 'The Man without a Face', but if it was as long ago as when I saw it, then I reckon it would be difficult to really form an informed judgement. And 'Complete Savages'? I doubt it.
For one, the whole "I have to confess that I have never been a fan of his work probably because I have seen very few of his films" - you have seen ONE film that was higly criticised across the board, a film that earned no nominations and had a bias box office opening. It might be better to say that you are not a fan of 'Passion' rather than grouping all his directed pieces into one box without viewing them.
You stated yourself that 'I did catch some of Braveheart the other day and it did look motivationally interesting' and this is the film that earned him his initial reputation - and it is that epic scale that he has become famous for directing.
I advise you to watch 'Braveheart' and 'Apocalypto' because they really are worth the watch at least, but the chance of you doubling back on yourself and stating 'Wow, Gibson is a great director' are slim to none because your (un)informed opinion on why you shouldn't/wouldn't watch 'Apocalypto' says alot about how you form a judgement before watching a film.
I reckon the latest edition of 'Heat' probably didn't give 'Apocalypto' the greatest of reviews though - although it may have stated that there are topless guys and girls running around throughout the film - woo hoo! Five Stars. As legitimate as 'Empire'. (Game, set, match)
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Just quickly ...
First off, if you haven't checked this board for ages and suddenly see this new post - I have written daily for the past three days and the following brief note is in relation to one of the first posts I done this year - 2007.
The 'giving up drinking' for a year has already ended. In all fairness, I didn't take it too seriously and it was a small thing I was considering in order to detox my system in a teeny-weeny way. The other night we (the flat) all ended up down the pub and it was then I realised that drinking itself was not such a problem, just the horrible horrible hangover the following dayafter a big night. The quiet drink down the pub is the thing I missed - and that was what I wanted to do. I shal stop getting wasted for a bit at least though - maximum drinking of 3 pints. So far my maximum is 2, so hopefully I won't screw this goal up. (On a sidenote, if I do begin to become an alcoholic, I would apreciate people telling me.)
This next sentance was going to be a short explanation about how Guinness is, in fact, good for you ... turns out (much to my horror) that it is not.
And I quote: "Contrary to popular belief, Guinness is not a good source of iron, containing only 0.3 mg per pint. Given that the RDA (recommended dietary allowance) of iron is between 11 mg and 18 mg, the amount contained in a pint of Guinness is trivial. In comparison, a bowl of Weetabix contains 4.2mg of iron, meaning that a person would have to drink 14 pints of Guinness to get the same amount of iron contained in one bowl of Weetabix."
I understand that to mean that getting wasted on Guinness does have its advantages ... but apparently NOT for friends like Richard and Rachel because ...
"Guinness is not suitable for vegans and most vegetarians due to the use of a fish-based fining agent called isinglass."
It is a sad day for the entire world.
The 'giving up drinking' for a year has already ended. In all fairness, I didn't take it too seriously and it was a small thing I was considering in order to detox my system in a teeny-weeny way. The other night we (the flat) all ended up down the pub and it was then I realised that drinking itself was not such a problem, just the horrible horrible hangover the following dayafter a big night. The quiet drink down the pub is the thing I missed - and that was what I wanted to do. I shal stop getting wasted for a bit at least though - maximum drinking of 3 pints. So far my maximum is 2, so hopefully I won't screw this goal up. (On a sidenote, if I do begin to become an alcoholic, I would apreciate people telling me.)
This next sentance was going to be a short explanation about how Guinness is, in fact, good for you ... turns out (much to my horror) that it is not.
And I quote: "Contrary to popular belief, Guinness is not a good source of iron, containing only 0.3 mg per pint. Given that the RDA (recommended dietary allowance) of iron is between 11 mg and 18 mg, the amount contained in a pint of Guinness is trivial. In comparison, a bowl of Weetabix contains 4.2mg of iron, meaning that a person would have to drink 14 pints of Guinness to get the same amount of iron contained in one bowl of Weetabix."
I understand that to mean that getting wasted on Guinness does have its advantages ... but apparently NOT for friends like Richard and Rachel because ...
"Guinness is not suitable for vegans and most vegetarians due to the use of a fish-based fining agent called isinglass."
It is a sad day for the entire world.
Oh yeah, and I now wear glasses.
Sunday, January 07, 2007
An Open Letter to Jo
Dear Jo
I knew this shit would resurface. First off, I am not a Mel Gibson freak although I was baptized Roman Catholic I have alot of differences with the religion itself also. But, this is an open letter to you Jo about your battering and problems with Gibbers. I think his films are of a high class and he deserved an Oscar for 'Braveheart' - although I personally think that both follow-up films from Braveheart were alot better. I stated that "because of Gibson's anti-semetic views - if indeed they are true?" may deter you from watching the film. I specifically used the word 'view' because it is something that he has strongly denied - and so may - or may no be - true.
Mel Gibson did confess he made Anti-Semetic comments and apologised for those comments because he does not agree with the comments, and his apology was accepted by the Jewish Community. The Rehab he had to attend was because of his drink problems - not because of his Anti-Semetic statements. If you were brought up by a fucked up Father like his - with all the books his Father has written he knows a fair bit of Jew-bashing info - you may state some drunken crap when blasted out of your skull.
Although, on his fathers views, Mel Gibson states that his father views do not amount to Holocaust Denial. Hutton Gibson, according to Wikipedia states "He questions aspects of the Jewish Holocaust, especially the commonly accepted statistic that between five million to seven million Jews were killed, arguing that it would have been impossible for the Nazis to have disposed of so many bodies. He further claims that most of the Holocaust was "fiction," that the thousands of Jews who disappeared from Poland during World War II "got up and left", and that census statistics prove there were more Jews in Europe after World War II than before (a claim that is disputed by historians)."
Personally, I think Hutton Gibson is a loon because he also believes "the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were not carried out by Islamist terrorists aboard the planes, but rather by an unknown party using a "remote control,"." and, furthermore, that "every Pope elected since Pope John XXIII have been illegitimate anti-popes".
Its funny, because Hutton thinks that Jews want to take over the world and have a 'one world religion', which is really, I imagine, what most people - including Traditionalist Catholics such as Hutton - with a conservative, religious stand think.
In conclusion, I think Mel Gibson has had a fucked-up family background and with his Christian belief that stresses "Honour thy Father and Mother", Gibson has a tough cross to bear. This difficult strain to his life will, inevitably, affect his attitude when drunk and his reputation in due course but it is important to remain neutral and respect his films for what they are - and not use money-spinning material on his Father and his personal honest mistakes to be a part of the artistic judgement.
I personally wanted to find out what the big deal was and what specifically was the problems and I think this sums up a fair bit.
From, Simon
I knew this shit would resurface. First off, I am not a Mel Gibson freak although I was baptized Roman Catholic I have alot of differences with the religion itself also. But, this is an open letter to you Jo about your battering and problems with Gibbers. I think his films are of a high class and he deserved an Oscar for 'Braveheart' - although I personally think that both follow-up films from Braveheart were alot better. I stated that "because of Gibson's anti-semetic views - if indeed they are true?" may deter you from watching the film. I specifically used the word 'view' because it is something that he has strongly denied - and so may - or may no be - true.
Mel Gibson did confess he made Anti-Semetic comments and apologised for those comments because he does not agree with the comments, and his apology was accepted by the Jewish Community. The Rehab he had to attend was because of his drink problems - not because of his Anti-Semetic statements. If you were brought up by a fucked up Father like his - with all the books his Father has written he knows a fair bit of Jew-bashing info - you may state some drunken crap when blasted out of your skull.
Although, on his fathers views, Mel Gibson states that his father views do not amount to Holocaust Denial. Hutton Gibson, according to Wikipedia states "He questions aspects of the Jewish Holocaust, especially the commonly accepted statistic that between five million to seven million Jews were killed, arguing that it would have been impossible for the Nazis to have disposed of so many bodies. He further claims that most of the Holocaust was "fiction," that the thousands of Jews who disappeared from Poland during World War II "got up and left", and that census statistics prove there were more Jews in Europe after World War II than before (a claim that is disputed by historians)."
Personally, I think Hutton Gibson is a loon because he also believes "the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were not carried out by Islamist terrorists aboard the planes, but rather by an unknown party using a "remote control,"." and, furthermore, that "every Pope elected since Pope John XXIII have been illegitimate anti-popes".
Its funny, because Hutton thinks that Jews want to take over the world and have a 'one world religion', which is really, I imagine, what most people - including Traditionalist Catholics such as Hutton - with a conservative, religious stand think.
In conclusion, I think Mel Gibson has had a fucked-up family background and with his Christian belief that stresses "Honour thy Father and Mother", Gibson has a tough cross to bear. This difficult strain to his life will, inevitably, affect his attitude when drunk and his reputation in due course but it is important to remain neutral and respect his films for what they are - and not use money-spinning material on his Father and his personal honest mistakes to be a part of the artistic judgement.
I personally wanted to find out what the big deal was and what specifically was the problems and I think this sums up a fair bit.
From, Simon
New Year and New Plans ...
Okay, first off the recent news:
Apocalypto
I watched Apocalypto at the cinema and I really liked it - the obvious comparison with the pride and possible slow-destruction that we may be inflicting on our own society is an interesting idea. visually it is amazing, although I am told they do take liberties with various types of art that are separated by hundreds of years shown in the same place. I think it has to be seen as a 'inspired by true events' type of story to set up an allegory on our own civilisation. I won't go into too much depth though because I can imagine people not watching it because of Gibson's anti-semetic views - if indeed they are true? or the extreme-graphical violence depicted. If you're brave, I think as long as you can sit through the destruction of the little village in the first 20 minutes, you should be okay for the rest of the film. Although I think I am going to change my MSN name to Jaguar Paw - Rudy Youngbloods performance is brilliant!
Rear Window
I had never seen this film and only watched it recently through my 'rental' list. What a great film!! James Stewart is so cocky and Grace Kelly is, indeed, quite beautiful. I think I am going to go through a Hitchcock period - maybe get Vertigo, North by Northwest ... etc etc next. Peter Bogdonavich explained on the documentary his style and technique and how he uses it throughout his own career.
U2
Okay, I do-o-o-o go on a fair bit about U2, but I have been reading the 'U2 by U2' book and I am in awe. Bono explains how alot of people want to take away your dreams when they have given up on theirs. I think that is true - as I head towards my own dream - I can only really agree if I reach it. Larry Mullen Jnr explains how he had the 'Jnr' part added to his name because when they released 'Boy' (The first U2 album) the tax forms were coming through to his house and his Dad would have to explain to the tax office how it wasn't HIS tax, but his Sons. Adam Clayton is a bad ass - he was told it wasn't worth him sticking school out because he was obviously going to fail. He used to set up a coffee canister in his lessons. Edge, on the other hand, nearly left the band - with Bono -after releasing 'Boy' because crazy Christians who Bono, Larry and Edge were praying with were telling them that being in a rock-band and being a christian is not really possible. Crazy fucking Christians may be the worst group of people in the world - they could easily have deprived the world from the best rock band ever. Madness.
Secondly, go to the U2 website and check out both videos to 'Window in the skies' - someone has mixed footage from loads of great musicians - Kurt Cobain, Elvis, Johnny Cash, Ray Charles, Bob Marley, etc - to make it look like 6they are singing the song - which i great in itself. The second video just has a really cool 'slide-player' showing loads of pictures from the ol' days when U2 were starting out.
The Future
So, yeah, Pete and Rebeccas wedding coming up, putting together some short-films hopefully, learn Italian, go T-total for a few months and get a job teaching in London. Thats the future. If anyone can help me out with these goals, throw me a 'line'.
It'd be nice to write a script and rewatch Rocky I to V, finish reading John Dickie's 'Cosa Nostra' book and Julian Spaldings 'The Art of Seeing/The Wonder of Art'.
Apocalypto
I watched Apocalypto at the cinema and I really liked it - the obvious comparison with the pride and possible slow-destruction that we may be inflicting on our own society is an interesting idea. visually it is amazing, although I am told they do take liberties with various types of art that are separated by hundreds of years shown in the same place. I think it has to be seen as a 'inspired by true events' type of story to set up an allegory on our own civilisation. I won't go into too much depth though because I can imagine people not watching it because of Gibson's anti-semetic views - if indeed they are true? or the extreme-graphical violence depicted. If you're brave, I think as long as you can sit through the destruction of the little village in the first 20 minutes, you should be okay for the rest of the film. Although I think I am going to change my MSN name to Jaguar Paw - Rudy Youngbloods performance is brilliant!
Rear Window
I had never seen this film and only watched it recently through my 'rental' list. What a great film!! James Stewart is so cocky and Grace Kelly is, indeed, quite beautiful. I think I am going to go through a Hitchcock period - maybe get Vertigo, North by Northwest ... etc etc next. Peter Bogdonavich explained on the documentary his style and technique and how he uses it throughout his own career.
U2
Okay, I do-o-o-o go on a fair bit about U2, but I have been reading the 'U2 by U2' book and I am in awe. Bono explains how alot of people want to take away your dreams when they have given up on theirs. I think that is true - as I head towards my own dream - I can only really agree if I reach it. Larry Mullen Jnr explains how he had the 'Jnr' part added to his name because when they released 'Boy' (The first U2 album) the tax forms were coming through to his house and his Dad would have to explain to the tax office how it wasn't HIS tax, but his Sons. Adam Clayton is a bad ass - he was told it wasn't worth him sticking school out because he was obviously going to fail. He used to set up a coffee canister in his lessons. Edge, on the other hand, nearly left the band - with Bono -after releasing 'Boy' because crazy Christians who Bono, Larry and Edge were praying with were telling them that being in a rock-band and being a christian is not really possible. Crazy fucking Christians may be the worst group of people in the world - they could easily have deprived the world from the best rock band ever. Madness.
Secondly, go to the U2 website and check out both videos to 'Window in the skies' - someone has mixed footage from loads of great musicians - Kurt Cobain, Elvis, Johnny Cash, Ray Charles, Bob Marley, etc - to make it look like 6they are singing the song - which i great in itself. The second video just has a really cool 'slide-player' showing loads of pictures from the ol' days when U2 were starting out.
The Future
So, yeah, Pete and Rebeccas wedding coming up, putting together some short-films hopefully, learn Italian, go T-total for a few months and get a job teaching in London. Thats the future. If anyone can help me out with these goals, throw me a 'line'.
It'd be nice to write a script and rewatch Rocky I to V, finish reading John Dickie's 'Cosa Nostra' book and Julian Spaldings 'The Art of Seeing/The Wonder of Art'.
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Telford Times Part 2
The Sopranos
You will all be happ to know that we are now up to Episode 4, Series 5. Both Pete and I have not seen any more episodes so we are unsure what will happen but, because of what is written on the back of the Series 6 box, we do know that Tony and Carmella get back together at the end of the Season.
Seems that Uncle 'Junior' is getting very ill indeed. Dominic Chianese is a brilliant actor and you really feel for ol' Corotto (sic?) Soprano. Poor dude. Tony is hitting on the psychiatrist although she knows that he can't face rejection because he has always got what he wants. Chris and Paulie are friends again but Tony's cousin ... Tony B (Steve Buscemi) is back in time and wants to go straight and massage peoples backs. Tony Soprano thinks thats not cool and chaos ensues.
I shall update as I go. Currently Pete and I are upset that we know Tony and Carmella get back together. The back of boxes should be as tact as possible for fans. (To be fair, Pete didnt read the back of the box, he just happened to catch an episode and saw that they were back together - as I did read the back of the bx I know what is going to happen in other plot lines ... goddamn)
Out n' About
Last night I was at Pizza Hut with Rachel, Richard, Tom W, Amy, Lewis and Sean. Twas a good night and didn't cost much because we have a friend who works there. Brilliant stuff.
Pete didn't want to go because he is skint. I tried, but he said he is saving up specifically for Christmas Eve and New Year to go mental with his money.
Presents
Loads of presents (of thers) arrived and I have to wrap them all up. Sadly, todays bulk were delivered at 8am and no-one opened the door for the dude (Ma'n'Pa must be at work) and I now have to go down to the Post Office to pick it up before 1.30pm.
Pete didn't think 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' was funnyalthough I think it is brilliant.
You will all be happ to know that we are now up to Episode 4, Series 5. Both Pete and I have not seen any more episodes so we are unsure what will happen but, because of what is written on the back of the Series 6 box, we do know that Tony and Carmella get back together at the end of the Season.
Seems that Uncle 'Junior' is getting very ill indeed. Dominic Chianese is a brilliant actor and you really feel for ol' Corotto (sic?) Soprano. Poor dude. Tony is hitting on the psychiatrist although she knows that he can't face rejection because he has always got what he wants. Chris and Paulie are friends again but Tony's cousin ... Tony B (Steve Buscemi) is back in time and wants to go straight and massage peoples backs. Tony Soprano thinks thats not cool and chaos ensues.
I shall update as I go. Currently Pete and I are upset that we know Tony and Carmella get back together. The back of boxes should be as tact as possible for fans. (To be fair, Pete didnt read the back of the box, he just happened to catch an episode and saw that they were back together - as I did read the back of the bx I know what is going to happen in other plot lines ... goddamn)
Out n' About
Last night I was at Pizza Hut with Rachel, Richard, Tom W, Amy, Lewis and Sean. Twas a good night and didn't cost much because we have a friend who works there. Brilliant stuff.
Pete didn't want to go because he is skint. I tried, but he said he is saving up specifically for Christmas Eve and New Year to go mental with his money.
Presents
Loads of presents (of thers) arrived and I have to wrap them all up. Sadly, todays bulk were delivered at 8am and no-one opened the door for the dude (Ma'n'Pa must be at work) and I now have to go down to the Post Office to pick it up before 1.30pm.
Pete didn't think 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' was funnyalthough I think it is brilliant.
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Telford Times
Yeah, just quick - although I will update this post with what is happening:
Last night Pete and I were up until 2am watching Sopranos.
Tom and I are hooked on Xbox 360's 'Gears of War'. You can saw people do death really well, and it is great to 'sniper' people down. Town just comes charging so its a good combo.
Last night Pete and I were up until 2am watching Sopranos.
Tom and I are hooked on Xbox 360's 'Gears of War'. You can saw people do death really well, and it is great to 'sniper' people down. Town just comes charging so its a good combo.
Saturday, December 02, 2006
If 'The Balls Films' mean anything to you ...
Enter discussion about the future of 'The Balls' films!
The DVD will also be available to buy soon from Bleak Horizon supplies (ask me about that if you want a copy... I have no idea how much it will cost, but its not free!)
http://tripleftheballs.proboards77.com/index.cgi
The DVD will also be available to buy soon from Bleak Horizon supplies (ask me about that if you want a copy... I have no idea how much it will cost, but its not free!)
http://tripleftheballs.proboards77.com/index.cgi
Saturday, November 25, 2006
Casino Royale
Casino Royale
I thought Daniel Craig was a brilliant choice for the role of James Bond - if anything, he will take James Bond down a different alleyway. His roles in Road to Perdition, Layer Cake, Munich and Endruing Love showed me the amount of skill he has to offer - not to mention, as a blond man myself, its nice to think that we blonde folk can be used to play 'sexy' characters.
Nevertheless, I hotly anticipated this next offering. The time had come to stop the crazy hollywood-version, mindless-explosions, post-Speed type of films Brosnan offered us. Don't get me wron, it was brilliant while it lasted (Even now, I think Renard ("a bullet, lodged in his brain - he feel nothing", "He push himself, harder and longer than any normal person") was an awesome bad guy, Zao wasn't great - but he looked cool, especially Halle Berry, not to mention Jonathon Pryce and Michelle Yeah pre-Crouching Tiger - the one I've missed out, Goldeneye, would stand comfortably against Goldfinger, Spy Who Loved Me and You Only Live Twice as best Bond film ... ever), so it was simply time to change.
I don't want to give too much away for the few who haven't seen it (and you call yourself 007 fans. Pish), but I firmly believe that the three reasons they have made this film is as follows:
1) It was a chance to make the one Ian Fleming book they had not yet turned into an official MGM James Bond film, but not only that ...
2) It was an ideal opportunity to introduce a new James Bond, using the 'first ever story' to actually reimagine the role.
3) Not to mention, the filmmakers want to make James Bond films go further than cliche action films. What makes The Bourne films good, is that there is the interesting depth to them - by starting the franchise again, they have the opportunity to revisist old characters - characters they can create now, rather than going back to the Connery days. Not to mention, they want to give James Bond 'depth' - alongside thi same point, it is worth pointing out that alot of people thought Brosnans 'torture' intro on 'Die Another Day' was a bad move - "James Bond doesn't get tortured". Yet, Casino Royale reimagines James Bond in a world where, not only can he be tortured - but lives of his loved ones hang in the balance and James Bond himself may actually need a resucitation machine to stay alive: has he ever used one of those before?
Fact is, this James Bond film is brilliant as an action movie, but the finale: Once we realise that James Bond, for the final five minutes, is te James Bond we know and love - we want more. So, you think 'I have sat through some two hours of 'not-exactly-James Bond-yet' action, and you are just begging to see Daniel Craig as the bad ass James bond himself.
In closing, if I watch a really good film - I feel like I cannot wait to watch it again. With 'Casino Royale' I felt more excited about the next film, rather than watching Casino Royale again: But, saying that, since watching the film i have wanted to watch it again now just for the new 007 actions sequences: the jumping dude, the fight inside the truck-front, the M-James bond banter, so... in time it may become alot better. Who knows. Another watch is in order! Woo hoo!
I thought Daniel Craig was a brilliant choice for the role of James Bond - if anything, he will take James Bond down a different alleyway. His roles in Road to Perdition, Layer Cake, Munich and Endruing Love showed me the amount of skill he has to offer - not to mention, as a blond man myself, its nice to think that we blonde folk can be used to play 'sexy' characters.
Nevertheless, I hotly anticipated this next offering. The time had come to stop the crazy hollywood-version, mindless-explosions, post-Speed type of films Brosnan offered us. Don't get me wron, it was brilliant while it lasted (Even now, I think Renard ("a bullet, lodged in his brain - he feel nothing", "He push himself, harder and longer than any normal person") was an awesome bad guy, Zao wasn't great - but he looked cool, especially Halle Berry, not to mention Jonathon Pryce and Michelle Yeah pre-Crouching Tiger - the one I've missed out, Goldeneye, would stand comfortably against Goldfinger, Spy Who Loved Me and You Only Live Twice as best Bond film ... ever), so it was simply time to change.
I don't want to give too much away for the few who haven't seen it (and you call yourself 007 fans. Pish), but I firmly believe that the three reasons they have made this film is as follows:
1) It was a chance to make the one Ian Fleming book they had not yet turned into an official MGM James Bond film, but not only that ...
2) It was an ideal opportunity to introduce a new James Bond, using the 'first ever story' to actually reimagine the role.
3) Not to mention, the filmmakers want to make James Bond films go further than cliche action films. What makes The Bourne films good, is that there is the interesting depth to them - by starting the franchise again, they have the opportunity to revisist old characters - characters they can create now, rather than going back to the Connery days. Not to mention, they want to give James Bond 'depth' - alongside thi same point, it is worth pointing out that alot of people thought Brosnans 'torture' intro on 'Die Another Day' was a bad move - "James Bond doesn't get tortured". Yet, Casino Royale reimagines James Bond in a world where, not only can he be tortured - but lives of his loved ones hang in the balance and James Bond himself may actually need a resucitation machine to stay alive: has he ever used one of those before?
Fact is, this James Bond film is brilliant as an action movie, but the finale: Once we realise that James Bond, for the final five minutes, is te James Bond we know and love - we want more. So, you think 'I have sat through some two hours of 'not-exactly-James Bond-yet' action, and you are just begging to see Daniel Craig as the bad ass James bond himself.
In closing, if I watch a really good film - I feel like I cannot wait to watch it again. With 'Casino Royale' I felt more excited about the next film, rather than watching Casino Royale again: But, saying that, since watching the film i have wanted to watch it again now just for the new 007 actions sequences: the jumping dude, the fight inside the truck-front, the M-James bond banter, so... in time it may become alot better. Who knows. Another watch is in order! Woo hoo!
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Must ... stop... spending ... money...
Pete and Rebecca
Rebecca has just had her 20 week scan and all is good - they are havin a kid! Congratulations guys, I cannot wait. I am so glad its a [just in case somebody doesnt know the sex] and if it was a [the other sex] then it wouldn't be as much fun. Subtle aye. Again! Congratulations! I can't wait to visit America in y'ol Kentucky and meet the boy/girl [delete as appropriate]
Right, Saw 3 then ...
I finished watching it thinking awesome, but of the three people I was with I was the only one who thought that so the entire journey back was spent discussing what was wrong with it ... changing my view. Personally, lets be honest, the franchise itself is not a 'classic' (Well, maybe in the horror, post-Scream/Seven-era, how-gory-can-you-get-a-movie way...) and I have always thought that my passion for the franchise is a guilty pleasure in itself ... so, yeah, I liked it. I won't give away anything but put it this way: If you want to see the characters and plots from first resurfaced in some way then you will be happy)... The opening sequence was so-o-o grim, but so great to see good ol' Donnie back. New Kids on the Block will be proud.
Jo, Al and Beth...
Friday night Jo and Al were up and we spent the evening chatting and having fun, it was memorable. To top it off we watched saw 3 together in the evening (the half 11 showing).
Saturday, Beth came up - and it was fantastic to see them and venture, briefly, round the pubs and dodgy clubs of Reading. I got incredibly drunk and vaguely remember dancing, alone, on the stage and hugging random friends frm my Art & Design class (Lex) and and certain events that will be brought up in the future. It was the first time I had been to 'After Dark' and to be handed a can of guinness at the bar wasn't that cool. OOOh, I remember being felt up by a big guy before we went in and he was humming and as soon as he found out I didnt have a bag of cocaine shuved up my arse we both laughed like you would if you had been abused... wait a sec ... was I abused? I was really gutted because when we got back to the flat everyone was hanging out in the kitchen and I simply passed out pretty much so missed the banter that normally finishes the night. Seriously ... I wish I was there. Next time, i have to stop drinking when I get to a certain point because I keep finding myself missing out on things.
Sunday, I ventured to Oxford with the clan and that was really cool. Oxford is a beautfiul place and I advise people to go there for weekends away - as I shall. Fact is, I was a boring sod while I was there because I ate the starchiest, saltiest crisps before catching the train and felt rough the entire time. - I swear, Beth, I shall visit and be a bit livelier next time.
On a sidenote, it was only on the train back did I recieve Rhys' text asking if we were all together - so it was too late.
Nevertheless, it was a brilliant weekend.
Al - can you email the one picture you took and I shall put it online if I can!
Blogs
Okay, something on my mind ... what are peoples views on blogs. I really am stuck, i mean, I personally like keeping a record of things and by putting the record online i can discuss stuff which is on my mind with my friends. I know through discussion with friends that the Entertainment reviews are not going down a storm (I've heard 'really boring' being used), and thats cool because if i am not thinking about the reader then why bother having a reader? Please, people who have read the blog so far and are happy telling me their opinions please tell me now your opinion! Reviews? if they are boring, why? As I am not an actual critic is the views kinda void? I'm not really fussed to be fair, it was just something that I thought would be fun and I don't want to be writing it in vain. So, post a comment saying your views because I really want to know! As Jigsaw says: Let the games begin.
Rebecca has just had her 20 week scan and all is good - they are havin a kid! Congratulations guys, I cannot wait. I am so glad its a [just in case somebody doesnt know the sex] and if it was a [the other sex] then it wouldn't be as much fun. Subtle aye. Again! Congratulations! I can't wait to visit America in y'ol Kentucky and meet the boy/girl [delete as appropriate]
Right, Saw 3 then ...
I finished watching it thinking awesome, but of the three people I was with I was the only one who thought that so the entire journey back was spent discussing what was wrong with it ... changing my view. Personally, lets be honest, the franchise itself is not a 'classic' (Well, maybe in the horror, post-Scream/Seven-era, how-gory-can-you-get-a-movie way...) and I have always thought that my passion for the franchise is a guilty pleasure in itself ... so, yeah, I liked it. I won't give away anything but put it this way: If you want to see the characters and plots from first resurfaced in some way then you will be happy)... The opening sequence was so-o-o grim, but so great to see good ol' Donnie back. New Kids on the Block will be proud.
Jo, Al and Beth...
Friday night Jo and Al were up and we spent the evening chatting and having fun, it was memorable. To top it off we watched saw 3 together in the evening (the half 11 showing).
Saturday, Beth came up - and it was fantastic to see them and venture, briefly, round the pubs and dodgy clubs of Reading. I got incredibly drunk and vaguely remember dancing, alone, on the stage and hugging random friends frm my Art & Design class (Lex) and and certain events that will be brought up in the future. It was the first time I had been to 'After Dark' and to be handed a can of guinness at the bar wasn't that cool. OOOh, I remember being felt up by a big guy before we went in and he was humming and as soon as he found out I didnt have a bag of cocaine shuved up my arse we both laughed like you would if you had been abused... wait a sec ... was I abused? I was really gutted because when we got back to the flat everyone was hanging out in the kitchen and I simply passed out pretty much so missed the banter that normally finishes the night. Seriously ... I wish I was there. Next time, i have to stop drinking when I get to a certain point because I keep finding myself missing out on things.
Sunday, I ventured to Oxford with the clan and that was really cool. Oxford is a beautfiul place and I advise people to go there for weekends away - as I shall. Fact is, I was a boring sod while I was there because I ate the starchiest, saltiest crisps before catching the train and felt rough the entire time. - I swear, Beth, I shall visit and be a bit livelier next time.
On a sidenote, it was only on the train back did I recieve Rhys' text asking if we were all together - so it was too late.
Nevertheless, it was a brilliant weekend.
Al - can you email the one picture you took and I shall put it online if I can!
Blogs
Okay, something on my mind ... what are peoples views on blogs. I really am stuck, i mean, I personally like keeping a record of things and by putting the record online i can discuss stuff which is on my mind with my friends. I know through discussion with friends that the Entertainment reviews are not going down a storm (I've heard 'really boring' being used), and thats cool because if i am not thinking about the reader then why bother having a reader? Please, people who have read the blog so far and are happy telling me their opinions please tell me now your opinion! Reviews? if they are boring, why? As I am not an actual critic is the views kinda void? I'm not really fussed to be fair, it was just something that I thought would be fun and I don't want to be writing it in vain. So, post a comment saying your views because I really want to know! As Jigsaw says: Let the games begin.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
The plans for the weekend!
To begin ...
This weekend Jo and Alistair are staying from Friday to Sunday so that will be alot of fun! I have not seen Alistair in over a year and, since then, he has travelled all around Canada, a little bit of American I think, a little bit around Europe - Belgium and Germany if I recall - and, for a short period, he even grew a beard. I have seen the picture and he looks like a40 year old man. That means wise, not old. Jo, I saw in Telford last and we had a barrel of fun while he was staying with Rachel and Richard. Jo tells me that Beth may be coming up on Saturday, depending on her workload - so that is quite exciting. I also spoke briefly to Rhys Jones and Richard recently and attempted to coax them in coming and:
For Richard: Its only a family, just bail on it! They'll understand! Or ... argue with Rachel and storm off in a huff and although she will spend the night in tears wondering where you are, the following day when you get back just say you needed to 'clear your head' and that you 'acted like a fool', blah blah blh. In a years time it will be water under the bridge. Ho ho ho
For Rhys: Its just your parents! You haven't seen the clan for a-a-a-ages! Like I said, just come up after work! I'll buy you a toothbrush and three pints if you 'suprise' us. I live in hope.
Anyway, last night I got very drunk (Its half term and today everyone has the day off) on wine and guinness. Needless to say that I nearly died this morning. Eeueueegh. I didn't get sick though - so that must be a good thing. But I shant be getting drunk until Saturday night now!
Friday night though - SAW 3! Fuck, I cannot wait ... it will be awesome!
This weekend Jo and Alistair are staying from Friday to Sunday so that will be alot of fun! I have not seen Alistair in over a year and, since then, he has travelled all around Canada, a little bit of American I think, a little bit around Europe - Belgium and Germany if I recall - and, for a short period, he even grew a beard. I have seen the picture and he looks like a40 year old man. That means wise, not old. Jo, I saw in Telford last and we had a barrel of fun while he was staying with Rachel and Richard. Jo tells me that Beth may be coming up on Saturday, depending on her workload - so that is quite exciting. I also spoke briefly to Rhys Jones and Richard recently and attempted to coax them in coming and:
For Richard: Its only a family, just bail on it! They'll understand! Or ... argue with Rachel and storm off in a huff and although she will spend the night in tears wondering where you are, the following day when you get back just say you needed to 'clear your head' and that you 'acted like a fool', blah blah blh. In a years time it will be water under the bridge. Ho ho ho
For Rhys: Its just your parents! You haven't seen the clan for a-a-a-ages! Like I said, just come up after work! I'll buy you a toothbrush and three pints if you 'suprise' us. I live in hope.
Anyway, last night I got very drunk (Its half term and today everyone has the day off) on wine and guinness. Needless to say that I nearly died this morning. Eeueueegh. I didn't get sick though - so that must be a good thing. But I shant be getting drunk until Saturday night now!
Friday night though - SAW 3! Fuck, I cannot wait ... it will be awesome!
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Online Exhibit #1
Exhibition at Rowleys
All my paintings are oil on canvas and were all completed while I was at University, between 2003 and 2005. In most cases the pieces are final pieces so they reflected a constant growth in observation and self-portraiture.
First Proud, 2003
This piece is at the exhibition and it is the first one you see when you walk into the gallery. Richard said it was his favourite - so it is strange because it was painted in the 1st year at University!
Left View, Centre Piece and Right View, 2005 (Triptych)
These three were in my Graduate exhibition, while the centre piece was actually put up at the Telford and Wrekin Open Exhibition 2006.
I won't load too many pictures up yet, so i shall try to - every now and then - show a work of mine with a little discussion or explanation beneath it.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
About how I am ...
I noticed that everyone (Pete and Rebecca) have updated their blogs - so i shall do the same ...
Sarah, first off, is okay. The course is pretty mental - every day it seems another deadline is given. But, as long as you balance your work and playtime I think you can cope. Up until last thursday we were at schools monday to friday, and then we had our observations to hand in - along with typing up all the notes up from the day. So, now we are spending 2 days at Uni and then 3 days at the school - so its alot nicer now.
I'm going through a U2 phase - watching DVDs and listening to the CD's, and - my god - they are the best band in the world. I cannot see why people don't realise - stranger than that, they were the best band ever a decade ago. Nevertheless, U2 are releasing a new album - U2-18 - which is a greatest hits album and two new tracks, one of which is on the website. It's U2 and Green day ... TOGETHER! I always thought that Green Days punk beginning seemed similar to U2, and then 'American Idiot', akin to U2's 'War' has put Green Day into the big leagues ... it will be interesting to see how successful Green Day will become. Not to mention how, as much as I love them, Coldplay have only made three albums and - as brilliant as they are - can they move to a more obscure music style? can they change their style successfully? Obviously Green day have adapted - though not completely erased - their teeny, bad-ass sound to a more politically-influenced -dare-i-say-it- mature sound. Only time will tell. Nevertheless ... U2 ... www.u2.com (you can hear the Green Day/U2 song on the site ... awesome!)
I attended the opening of the 21st Century Graduates Exhibition at Shrewsbury Art and Museum in Rowleys House, Shrewsbury. I must say, it was very strange -though made me want to paint more. Rachel and Richard joined me, and I thank you guys so much for that, and I think they enjoyed it too. I tried not to stand too close to my pictures (being self-portraits), and when the photographer wanted pictures I didn't know what to do! How can you not look like a complete arse when standing next to - in fact- posing next to big-ass pictures of yourself. God, I felt like a wally. I vow not to make another self-portrait unless/until something dramatic happens to me which would warrant a portrait. (E.G. A car accident). If yu are interested to see either exhibition, check out the following links (There are loads of different artworks, everything from photography and print-making to oil portraits (Me) and abstract expressionistic paintings) ... So, the preview gallery link is http://www.belmontartscentre.org.uk/html/galleries.html and the main one at Rowleys House is http://www.mediamaker.tv/documents/pr_exh01.html
I have just read Mark Haddon's 'The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time' and thats really, really good. I am in the process of doing another entertainment review - and any feedback is greatly appreciated - and in the next review there is: Cinderella, Annie Hall, Scissor Sisters and the finale of Extras (watch the episodes on the bbc website - they are awesome! http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/programmes/?id=extras).
Adios.
Sarah, first off, is okay. The course is pretty mental - every day it seems another deadline is given. But, as long as you balance your work and playtime I think you can cope. Up until last thursday we were at schools monday to friday, and then we had our observations to hand in - along with typing up all the notes up from the day. So, now we are spending 2 days at Uni and then 3 days at the school - so its alot nicer now.
I'm going through a U2 phase - watching DVDs and listening to the CD's, and - my god - they are the best band in the world. I cannot see why people don't realise - stranger than that, they were the best band ever a decade ago. Nevertheless, U2 are releasing a new album - U2-18 - which is a greatest hits album and two new tracks, one of which is on the website. It's U2 and Green day ... TOGETHER! I always thought that Green Days punk beginning seemed similar to U2, and then 'American Idiot', akin to U2's 'War' has put Green Day into the big leagues ... it will be interesting to see how successful Green Day will become. Not to mention how, as much as I love them, Coldplay have only made three albums and - as brilliant as they are - can they move to a more obscure music style? can they change their style successfully? Obviously Green day have adapted - though not completely erased - their teeny, bad-ass sound to a more politically-influenced -dare-i-say-it- mature sound. Only time will tell. Nevertheless ... U2 ... www.u2.com (you can hear the Green Day/U2 song on the site ... awesome!)
I attended the opening of the 21st Century Graduates Exhibition at Shrewsbury Art and Museum in Rowleys House, Shrewsbury. I must say, it was very strange -though made me want to paint more. Rachel and Richard joined me, and I thank you guys so much for that, and I think they enjoyed it too. I tried not to stand too close to my pictures (being self-portraits), and when the photographer wanted pictures I didn't know what to do! How can you not look like a complete arse when standing next to - in fact- posing next to big-ass pictures of yourself. God, I felt like a wally. I vow not to make another self-portrait unless/until something dramatic happens to me which would warrant a portrait. (E.G. A car accident). If yu are interested to see either exhibition, check out the following links (There are loads of different artworks, everything from photography and print-making to oil portraits (Me) and abstract expressionistic paintings) ... So, the preview gallery link is http://www.belmontartscentre.org.uk/html/galleries.html and the main one at Rowleys House is http://www.mediamaker.tv/documents/pr_exh01.html
I have just read Mark Haddon's 'The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time' and thats really, really good. I am in the process of doing another entertainment review - and any feedback is greatly appreciated - and in the next review there is: Cinderella, Annie Hall, Scissor Sisters and the finale of Extras (watch the episodes on the bbc website - they are awesome! http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/programmes/?id=extras).
Adios.
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Entertainment Review #2 (Part One)
Just a short litttle bit ona couple of films I have watched recently ...
Gangs of New York
I purchased this from a charity shop for £3.50, to start off with, and I only watched it for the first time about 6 months ago on the rental DVD site 'LoveFilm' (If you want to join the site, quote me as your 'friend' and i'll get a free month of DVD rental - as you will too.) After recently watching 'The Departed', I though I would have a Scorcese craze and watch 'Gangs of new York' and, next week (hopefully) 'Casino' - Maybe, move onto 'Mean Streets' and 'The Last Temptation of Christ' soon after. Nevertheless, 'Gangs of New York', after a second watching is awesome! Again - like in 'The Departed' - you can see why Scorcese likes Leonardo DiCaprio, and Daniel Day Lewis is by far the best actor in this film. The few problems lie in the 'Irish' characters. Cameron Diaz's accent fades towards the end of the film strangely enough, and Leonardo DiCaprio just isn't convincing - not to mention 'Elliot-from-E.T.' (I can't remember his actual name) also has a dismal Irish accent. Why don't they just cast Irish actors?? Daniel Day Lewis and Martin Scorcese had done a bang-up job, they were just let down by what appears to be production choices - all star cast = big money. the finale though is brilliant, and if anyone knows how I can get a copy of the film version of 'The Hands That Built America' by U2 I would greatly appreciate it - the orchestra-based start to the song sounds absolutely stunning, and it is alot better than the radio edit start that i can only seem to get hold of.
Cinderella
Sarah mentioned to me months and months ago how her favourite Disney film was 'Cinderella' because she watched it with her Dad when she was really young, but she loved it so much and never bought it - and I bought it for her for her birthday recently and, thus, had to watch it with her. I would not say it is the best Disney film (Lion King, Aladdin...), but it is a brilliant film and sometimes, if you stop watching Classic family films, you step out of the loop and forget about what simple, good entertainment is. Every now and then I do like to sit back and watch some cheesy family film and it does always put a smile on my face. 'Cinderella', like most Disney films, has the beautfiul art sprawled across every film cell while each note in the soundtrack reflects every movement of the animals. As amazing as it has always been. The songs themselves were tracks that seemed alien to me (how long ago did I watch it?), but I did recognise Bibbity-bobbity boo ... as pathetic as that actually is.
Gangs of New York
I purchased this from a charity shop for £3.50, to start off with, and I only watched it for the first time about 6 months ago on the rental DVD site 'LoveFilm' (If you want to join the site, quote me as your 'friend' and i'll get a free month of DVD rental - as you will too.) After recently watching 'The Departed', I though I would have a Scorcese craze and watch 'Gangs of new York' and, next week (hopefully) 'Casino' - Maybe, move onto 'Mean Streets' and 'The Last Temptation of Christ' soon after. Nevertheless, 'Gangs of New York', after a second watching is awesome! Again - like in 'The Departed' - you can see why Scorcese likes Leonardo DiCaprio, and Daniel Day Lewis is by far the best actor in this film. The few problems lie in the 'Irish' characters. Cameron Diaz's accent fades towards the end of the film strangely enough, and Leonardo DiCaprio just isn't convincing - not to mention 'Elliot-from-E.T.' (I can't remember his actual name) also has a dismal Irish accent. Why don't they just cast Irish actors?? Daniel Day Lewis and Martin Scorcese had done a bang-up job, they were just let down by what appears to be production choices - all star cast = big money. the finale though is brilliant, and if anyone knows how I can get a copy of the film version of 'The Hands That Built America' by U2 I would greatly appreciate it - the orchestra-based start to the song sounds absolutely stunning, and it is alot better than the radio edit start that i can only seem to get hold of.
Cinderella
Sarah mentioned to me months and months ago how her favourite Disney film was 'Cinderella' because she watched it with her Dad when she was really young, but she loved it so much and never bought it - and I bought it for her for her birthday recently and, thus, had to watch it with her. I would not say it is the best Disney film (Lion King, Aladdin...), but it is a brilliant film and sometimes, if you stop watching Classic family films, you step out of the loop and forget about what simple, good entertainment is. Every now and then I do like to sit back and watch some cheesy family film and it does always put a smile on my face. 'Cinderella', like most Disney films, has the beautfiul art sprawled across every film cell while each note in the soundtrack reflects every movement of the animals. As amazing as it has always been. The songs themselves were tracks that seemed alien to me (how long ago did I watch it?), but I did recognise Bibbity-bobbity boo ... as pathetic as that actually is.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Entertainment Review #1 (Part Two)
The Killers: Sam's Town
When I first heard the single release "When You Were Young" I thought it was really good and got me excited enough top buy the album, and after good reviews in Q (4 stars) and knowing that they worked with Flood (U2's 'Achtung baby') and had Anton Corbijn (Designed the cover to 'The Joshua Tree') design the cover, I bought it - and I haven't looked back. The Killers are growing in grandeur, and seem to know where they are going. I can honestly say that the first eight tracks are brilliant and the tracks after that I can't fully recommend - purely on the basis that I have not listened to them as much (I kept flicking back to previous tracks goddamn)
I thought the first album was brilliant, although it took longer to 'get into' in comparison t 'Sam's Town'.
'Bling (Confession of a King)' is a great track to follow on the superb 'When we were young' that, from the moment you hear Brandon Flowers voice you know that he is pushing his voice that little bit further than he did on the 'Hot Fuss'. A personal favourite track on the album 'For Reasons Unknown' shows the variety of Flowers voice. 'Read My Mind' is step down from the speed of the opening few tracks, and 'Uncle Jonny' then shoots you back up to the speed tht you are used to with The Killers.
I don't think I know enough about music to make too many comparison. Enough reviews seem to link Bruce Springsteen with this album (I should really get into Bruce Springsteen then ... ), the bonus track on the UK edition reminds me a little of Marc Bolan though, and U2 is in there somewhere too ...
Editors: The Back Room
The first I heard of 'The Editors' was at The Isle of Wight festival, as there is only one stage there, whatever artist is on, you watch - and 'The Editors' were on and some memory was embedded I my head. Sarah told me she listened to the album at her workplace and she liked it (alongside the 'hint, hint' to me). then I heard that 'The Editors' were also performing at V Festival (Though they were on at the same time as 'Beck' so I missed them) and were also nominated for the Mercury Music Prize. So, they were constantly in my mind and eventually - after taking the hint from Sarah for a present - I personally have only just got round to listening to the album myself and, I have to admit - it is awesome. Originally, 'Munich' was the only track I heard (on the National Mercury Music Prize CD), and that had already won me over.
Stand out tracks are 'Lights', 'Munich', 'Blood', 'Bullets' and 'Distance'. Tom Smith's voice does remind me of another vocalist (Some Eighties guy - Duran Duran? Erasure? A-Ha?)... but nevertheless, it is his voice - and how he sings the songs - that make each track so good!
Bic Runga: Drive
This album was released in 1997, but after buying her second album 'Beautiful Collision', and then seeing her live at V2006, I had to buy this debut album. The first two tracks - 'Drive' and 'Sway' are absolutely beautiful. Her voice simply glides over the acoustic guitars and, after these two tracks (that I am sure most people have heard before)
I won't go on too much about this one because I have been told to cut these down (Jo, Richard, etc), and also this is a pretty old CD - so, quickly, this album is not just for the softly-singing female-voice fans, she also has a very subtle 'rock' edge. I prefer the softer tracks, but you can see the range of vocal talents she has on this one album - obviously, for 'Beautiful Collision' she realised that the softer tracks really are more her thing, but it is a nice debut album that does justice to her.
James Newton Howard: The Village OST/Signs OST
Briefly, these two soundtracks were not bought on a whim (Well, one was). I watched 'The Village' and subsequently bought the DVD and the composer stated how he specifically wanted to use the violinist Hilary Hahn on the soundtrack because she was one of his favourite violinists in the contemporay classical scene. When the DVD showed her play the violin, I realised that this soundtrack stood out because it could stand spearately to the film - unlike many scores that base themselvesa round excactly what happens on screen, this soundtrack uses the violinist to play a part, and bases the soundtrack around her - no doubt Hilary Hahns Violin symbolizes Bryce Dallas Howards character in 'The Village'. Nevertheless, the soundtrack is not set in the order as it is used in the film, so I feel that obviously Howard does want to stand the score out separately from the film. It is a short CD (45mins approx) so it has no tracks that continue for way too long, it consists of the short themes from the film and nothing more.
'Signs' on the other hand is your standard soundtrack - and you will only really like it if you are very fond of the film (As I am), so it brings back the feelings and emotions you felt when watching the film. If anything, it does stand out as a cracking score, but with no knowledge of the film I have a feeling it would simply appear to be the repetetive sticcato strings and big bangs that, in many ways, it is.
When I first heard the single release "When You Were Young" I thought it was really good and got me excited enough top buy the album, and after good reviews in Q (4 stars) and knowing that they worked with Flood (U2's 'Achtung baby') and had Anton Corbijn (Designed the cover to 'The Joshua Tree') design the cover, I bought it - and I haven't looked back. The Killers are growing in grandeur, and seem to know where they are going. I can honestly say that the first eight tracks are brilliant and the tracks after that I can't fully recommend - purely on the basis that I have not listened to them as much (I kept flicking back to previous tracks goddamn)
I thought the first album was brilliant, although it took longer to 'get into' in comparison t 'Sam's Town'.
'Bling (Confession of a King)' is a great track to follow on the superb 'When we were young' that, from the moment you hear Brandon Flowers voice you know that he is pushing his voice that little bit further than he did on the 'Hot Fuss'. A personal favourite track on the album 'For Reasons Unknown' shows the variety of Flowers voice. 'Read My Mind' is step down from the speed of the opening few tracks, and 'Uncle Jonny' then shoots you back up to the speed tht you are used to with The Killers.
I don't think I know enough about music to make too many comparison. Enough reviews seem to link Bruce Springsteen with this album (I should really get into Bruce Springsteen then ... ), the bonus track on the UK edition reminds me a little of Marc Bolan though, and U2 is in there somewhere too ...
Editors: The Back Room
The first I heard of 'The Editors' was at The Isle of Wight festival, as there is only one stage there, whatever artist is on, you watch - and 'The Editors' were on and some memory was embedded I my head. Sarah told me she listened to the album at her workplace and she liked it (alongside the 'hint, hint' to me). then I heard that 'The Editors' were also performing at V Festival (Though they were on at the same time as 'Beck' so I missed them) and were also nominated for the Mercury Music Prize. So, they were constantly in my mind and eventually - after taking the hint from Sarah for a present - I personally have only just got round to listening to the album myself and, I have to admit - it is awesome. Originally, 'Munich' was the only track I heard (on the National Mercury Music Prize CD), and that had already won me over.
Stand out tracks are 'Lights', 'Munich', 'Blood', 'Bullets' and 'Distance'. Tom Smith's voice does remind me of another vocalist (Some Eighties guy - Duran Duran? Erasure? A-Ha?)... but nevertheless, it is his voice - and how he sings the songs - that make each track so good!
Bic Runga: Drive
This album was released in 1997, but after buying her second album 'Beautiful Collision', and then seeing her live at V2006, I had to buy this debut album. The first two tracks - 'Drive' and 'Sway' are absolutely beautiful. Her voice simply glides over the acoustic guitars and, after these two tracks (that I am sure most people have heard before)
I won't go on too much about this one because I have been told to cut these down (Jo, Richard, etc), and also this is a pretty old CD - so, quickly, this album is not just for the softly-singing female-voice fans, she also has a very subtle 'rock' edge. I prefer the softer tracks, but you can see the range of vocal talents she has on this one album - obviously, for 'Beautiful Collision' she realised that the softer tracks really are more her thing, but it is a nice debut album that does justice to her.
James Newton Howard: The Village OST/Signs OST
Briefly, these two soundtracks were not bought on a whim (Well, one was). I watched 'The Village' and subsequently bought the DVD and the composer stated how he specifically wanted to use the violinist Hilary Hahn on the soundtrack because she was one of his favourite violinists in the contemporay classical scene. When the DVD showed her play the violin, I realised that this soundtrack stood out because it could stand spearately to the film - unlike many scores that base themselvesa round excactly what happens on screen, this soundtrack uses the violinist to play a part, and bases the soundtrack around her - no doubt Hilary Hahns Violin symbolizes Bryce Dallas Howards character in 'The Village'. Nevertheless, the soundtrack is not set in the order as it is used in the film, so I feel that obviously Howard does want to stand the score out separately from the film. It is a short CD (45mins approx) so it has no tracks that continue for way too long, it consists of the short themes from the film and nothing more.
'Signs' on the other hand is your standard soundtrack - and you will only really like it if you are very fond of the film (As I am), so it brings back the feelings and emotions you felt when watching the film. If anything, it does stand out as a cracking score, but with no knowledge of the film I have a feeling it would simply appear to be the repetetive sticcato strings and big bangs that, in many ways, it is.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Entertainment Review #1 (Part One)
The Departed
I have not seen all the adverts for it (though I do know they are doing some beast campaign, "Scorcese is going for box office figures, not Oscars this time") and I only remembered when Sarah and I were 'umming' over what to see and remembered that it was Martin Scorcese and a remake of Infernal Affairs. Bear in mind though, I personally have not seen Infernal Affairs. Anyway, I though the film was absolutely brilliant - possibly the best film Scorcese has done since Goodfellas. I was not too fond of The Aviator (Though I should really give it another chance) and I liked Gangs of New York alot too, but this is a modern Gangster movie that is just as good as - if not better than - any Tarantino movie. Tarantino does kind of home in on the movie-buff, twenty-something, action-before-thinking type of film watcher. Whereas Martin Scorcese always wants to get the balance so the action/violence is justified - and maybe gives you something to think about afterwards, alongside a film that has a wide spectrum of characters that seem personal to every audience member. The characters are not so-much cliches or cardboard cut-outs, as they al have different sides - as if at any point in the film, their attitude could change direction. The Good guy might actually become the bad guy, the girlfriend will not neccessarily stay with the person she loves. The actors give the characters justice, and Scorcese paints the picture so you have no idea what will happen next. You know characters will have their come-up-ance, but who is going to deliver the fatal blow? and why? I think it has, so far, been my favourite film of the year. 5/5 (Again, note, I have not seen Infernal Affairs...)
House of Flying Daggers
I bought this a while ago after watching it at the cinema, and this second viewing reaffirmed my faith in Zhang Yimou. Every shot could be framed, and maybe shots - one after the other - could be framed to make either a diptych, triptych or simply and huge array of images. I never really realised how the story takes away masculine pride from the film it self - the fact that the two soldiers are constantly so cocky about how they will use the girl and capture the Flying Daggers, and yet, ultimately they both end up being completely controlled by Mai herself. In fact, the only man who actually was 'in the loop' was also the freak who attempting to rape, and successfully kill the innocent 'girl-in-love'. You do not see whether the Flying Daggers are killed - we simply know that they are surpisingly confident and are, therefore, well prepared (Even though the leader has been 'training' at a Brothel for who knows how long), so again, the group that appears to consist solely of women in green dresses no doubt win the day, whereas the men - who begin the film sharpening their even-so-butch knives - kill themselves over love, and consequently, as a group, are unprepared and fall into the Flying Daggers 'trap'.
The visuals are stunning, and the plot itself is very intriuging and has enough sides so that you keep coming back to it. After a fair few watchs, still a 4/5
A History of Violence
I have been told I should watch this for the past year and have had it at the top of my 'rental' list for the last six months, and since being told to watch it, most of the people I know have bought it. This is an awesome film and has got to be watched, but once you have finished watching it, keep an open mind.
Remember it is a film that is more to be reflected upon, rather than a film to entertain you for an hour-and-a-half. I think, after the first watch, you cannot be 100% clear on how good the film is(which, in a way voids my entire praising of 'The Deaprted'), because your first impression will remain as it is until the second watch. The problem is that if you don't like the film, you won't watch it the second time - so it will stay really crap until some huge fan constantly tells you how great it is, leading up to eventually watching it again and realising what the 'fan' was saying. For example, the first time I watched The Matrix Reloaded, I wasn't sure what to make of it. I didn't completely get it and was confused because nothing came to mind that made me think it was crap. The second and third (I really wanted to like it) time I watched it, I still came off thinking 'I kinda like it... but i don't feel like I really get it' - and, if i'm not careful, I might actually think that because (the supreme intellect that I am) if I don't get it, I could argue that the film hasn't been explained very clearly and so it is bad screen writing and bad direction, but I try not to think that - I'd rather assume I am pretty stupid, and have to research it, to 'get' it. Hopefully that makes sense to you (if not, read it again, because you don't get it).
Anyway, after watching A History of Violence, as much as I liked it, I thought alot about the character and his 'arc', and whether he redeemed himself - so I was not sure what to think, but after a brief look on the internet (IMDB no less) I found out that it is about second chances, redemption, family and violence - is it right to be violent? was he right to do what he did? should his family - either one - forgive him? should he have told them the truth? etc. After I found this out, my whole view on the film shifted - and hopefully, when you think about those questions and apply them to yourself and your life, what do you think? Top mark s 5/5
Friends (Series 1 - Series 3)
Briefly, Sarah hasn't seen them so we are rewatching the series. She thought the whole Ross/Rachel relationship was awesome. Favourite episode so far, for Sarah, is when Ross and Rachel broke up - and I think if you don't like the way the programme does drama, than a huge chunk of the ten seasons will never be that good, because the programme makers try and balance the comedy and drama. I personally love the end of Series 6, and the whole Ross, crying when he is saying "those arms, these hands" and he is in tears - I find it all really good. Though I know some people (Jo...) who hate any drama whatsoever in 'Friends' and when any of the guys cry - its lame. Damn you Jo ... anyway, I will tell you how Sarah reacts at the future 'moments' which most normal people actually remember vividly when it was on channel four on a Friday night.
Green Wing (a few episodes of Series 1)
Only watched one episode in full and half another episode and I think it is really good. A bit random, and at 40minutes per episode (one hour on TV with breaks) it does get a bit tedious. comedy has to remin in small, 30minutes bitesize chunks.
Nevertheless, it is really funny simply due to the fact that half of the non-regulars from 'The Office' are in it, alongside Olivia Coleman from 'Peep Show' and the odd girl from 'Smack the Pony'. I think it will just take a little getting used to - and all the slow-motiony bits could be cut down. Well - who knows. I'll make a more informed opinion when I've watched a little more, which I am only so happy to do.
Extras (Series 2)
Ricky Gervais is a God and this second Series is alot better than the first. I remember when I watched the first episode of the second series there was alot less laughs, but that was because there were less jokes, not because it was not so funny. But I think people who watch Extras are split into two categories - people who are laughing at the comedy Gervais has set up, while, at the same time, realising the interesting aspects of the media industry Gervais is trying to illustrat. Then there are others who simply laugh at every joke that the canned laughter (during 'when the whistle blows') laughs along to, while thinking that any 'serious issue' Gervais tackles just takes the comedy to a lower level.
The irony is that the canned laugher, if anything, is showing how shit 'When the Whistle Blows' is - the comedy I find in the show is the embarressing shiteness of the programme - not, say, 'Ching-Chong-Chinaman' as a joke, but the fact that the show steeps down to the lowest form of comedy to get a quick buck - namely, Racism. But, bear in mind that is 'When the Whistle Blows' - Extras, as a programme is still absolutely brilliant.
That Mitchell and Webb Look (a few episodes and excerpts of Series 1)
Okay, I won't lie, I think I had a bit of difficulty watching this first time round. My argument went a little like this: I think Mitchell and Webb don't want to have catchphrases and become a poor mans version of Little Britain, when I personally feel that, in some ways, catchphrases are important to sketch shows, as they keep the audience coming back. People want to see Andy and Lou doing something daft, "I want that one", etc - and people want to see the old man try, in vain to get to his love, until - again - "Bugger". Because Mitchell and Webb are so intent on not having too many catchphrases, they don't have you wanting to come back.
But, then again, I will have to admit there were some highlights - Numberwang, by far is one of the best (possibly because stating random numbers and then stating 'thats Numberwang' is becoming a catchphrase itself, so i could be completely off base with the whole 'catchphrase' argument), BMX Bandit and - God? - is it? (again with the 'I summon a horde of angels' becoming a catchpharse, my argument gets weaker as I type...), Sir Digby Chicken Ceasar and the guy in green with the flute. I also really liked the way they 'film' Mitchell and Webb after they have shot a scene. Really funny.
To be fair, I feel that the more I watch it, the more I will like it - as with many sketch shows.
"Here is a guy buying a house after selling his old one ..."
I think I will have to keep these things that little bit shorter. After a while it is a little too much to read (and write, I don't think anybody really cares about Sarah and I watching Friends...). And I really have to actually do some work ...
I have not seen all the adverts for it (though I do know they are doing some beast campaign, "Scorcese is going for box office figures, not Oscars this time") and I only remembered when Sarah and I were 'umming' over what to see and remembered that it was Martin Scorcese and a remake of Infernal Affairs. Bear in mind though, I personally have not seen Infernal Affairs. Anyway, I though the film was absolutely brilliant - possibly the best film Scorcese has done since Goodfellas. I was not too fond of The Aviator (Though I should really give it another chance) and I liked Gangs of New York alot too, but this is a modern Gangster movie that is just as good as - if not better than - any Tarantino movie. Tarantino does kind of home in on the movie-buff, twenty-something, action-before-thinking type of film watcher. Whereas Martin Scorcese always wants to get the balance so the action/violence is justified - and maybe gives you something to think about afterwards, alongside a film that has a wide spectrum of characters that seem personal to every audience member. The characters are not so-much cliches or cardboard cut-outs, as they al have different sides - as if at any point in the film, their attitude could change direction. The Good guy might actually become the bad guy, the girlfriend will not neccessarily stay with the person she loves. The actors give the characters justice, and Scorcese paints the picture so you have no idea what will happen next. You know characters will have their come-up-ance, but who is going to deliver the fatal blow? and why? I think it has, so far, been my favourite film of the year. 5/5 (Again, note, I have not seen Infernal Affairs...)
House of Flying Daggers
I bought this a while ago after watching it at the cinema, and this second viewing reaffirmed my faith in Zhang Yimou. Every shot could be framed, and maybe shots - one after the other - could be framed to make either a diptych, triptych or simply and huge array of images. I never really realised how the story takes away masculine pride from the film it self - the fact that the two soldiers are constantly so cocky about how they will use the girl and capture the Flying Daggers, and yet, ultimately they both end up being completely controlled by Mai herself. In fact, the only man who actually was 'in the loop' was also the freak who attempting to rape, and successfully kill the innocent 'girl-in-love'. You do not see whether the Flying Daggers are killed - we simply know that they are surpisingly confident and are, therefore, well prepared (Even though the leader has been 'training' at a Brothel for who knows how long), so again, the group that appears to consist solely of women in green dresses no doubt win the day, whereas the men - who begin the film sharpening their even-so-butch knives - kill themselves over love, and consequently, as a group, are unprepared and fall into the Flying Daggers 'trap'.
The visuals are stunning, and the plot itself is very intriuging and has enough sides so that you keep coming back to it. After a fair few watchs, still a 4/5
A History of Violence
I have been told I should watch this for the past year and have had it at the top of my 'rental' list for the last six months, and since being told to watch it, most of the people I know have bought it. This is an awesome film and has got to be watched, but once you have finished watching it, keep an open mind.
Remember it is a film that is more to be reflected upon, rather than a film to entertain you for an hour-and-a-half. I think, after the first watch, you cannot be 100% clear on how good the film is(which, in a way voids my entire praising of 'The Deaprted'), because your first impression will remain as it is until the second watch. The problem is that if you don't like the film, you won't watch it the second time - so it will stay really crap until some huge fan constantly tells you how great it is, leading up to eventually watching it again and realising what the 'fan' was saying. For example, the first time I watched The Matrix Reloaded, I wasn't sure what to make of it. I didn't completely get it and was confused because nothing came to mind that made me think it was crap. The second and third (I really wanted to like it) time I watched it, I still came off thinking 'I kinda like it... but i don't feel like I really get it' - and, if i'm not careful, I might actually think that because (the supreme intellect that I am) if I don't get it, I could argue that the film hasn't been explained very clearly and so it is bad screen writing and bad direction, but I try not to think that - I'd rather assume I am pretty stupid, and have to research it, to 'get' it. Hopefully that makes sense to you (if not, read it again, because you don't get it).
Anyway, after watching A History of Violence, as much as I liked it, I thought alot about the character and his 'arc', and whether he redeemed himself - so I was not sure what to think, but after a brief look on the internet (IMDB no less) I found out that it is about second chances, redemption, family and violence - is it right to be violent? was he right to do what he did? should his family - either one - forgive him? should he have told them the truth? etc. After I found this out, my whole view on the film shifted - and hopefully, when you think about those questions and apply them to yourself and your life, what do you think? Top mark s 5/5
Friends (Series 1 - Series 3)
Briefly, Sarah hasn't seen them so we are rewatching the series. She thought the whole Ross/Rachel relationship was awesome. Favourite episode so far, for Sarah, is when Ross and Rachel broke up - and I think if you don't like the way the programme does drama, than a huge chunk of the ten seasons will never be that good, because the programme makers try and balance the comedy and drama. I personally love the end of Series 6, and the whole Ross, crying when he is saying "those arms, these hands" and he is in tears - I find it all really good. Though I know some people (Jo...) who hate any drama whatsoever in 'Friends' and when any of the guys cry - its lame. Damn you Jo ... anyway, I will tell you how Sarah reacts at the future 'moments' which most normal people actually remember vividly when it was on channel four on a Friday night.
Green Wing (a few episodes of Series 1)
Only watched one episode in full and half another episode and I think it is really good. A bit random, and at 40minutes per episode (one hour on TV with breaks) it does get a bit tedious. comedy has to remin in small, 30minutes bitesize chunks.
Nevertheless, it is really funny simply due to the fact that half of the non-regulars from 'The Office' are in it, alongside Olivia Coleman from 'Peep Show' and the odd girl from 'Smack the Pony'. I think it will just take a little getting used to - and all the slow-motiony bits could be cut down. Well - who knows. I'll make a more informed opinion when I've watched a little more, which I am only so happy to do.
Extras (Series 2)
Ricky Gervais is a God and this second Series is alot better than the first. I remember when I watched the first episode of the second series there was alot less laughs, but that was because there were less jokes, not because it was not so funny. But I think people who watch Extras are split into two categories - people who are laughing at the comedy Gervais has set up, while, at the same time, realising the interesting aspects of the media industry Gervais is trying to illustrat. Then there are others who simply laugh at every joke that the canned laughter (during 'when the whistle blows') laughs along to, while thinking that any 'serious issue' Gervais tackles just takes the comedy to a lower level.
The irony is that the canned laugher, if anything, is showing how shit 'When the Whistle Blows' is - the comedy I find in the show is the embarressing shiteness of the programme - not, say, 'Ching-Chong-Chinaman' as a joke, but the fact that the show steeps down to the lowest form of comedy to get a quick buck - namely, Racism. But, bear in mind that is 'When the Whistle Blows' - Extras, as a programme is still absolutely brilliant.
That Mitchell and Webb Look (a few episodes and excerpts of Series 1)
Okay, I won't lie, I think I had a bit of difficulty watching this first time round. My argument went a little like this: I think Mitchell and Webb don't want to have catchphrases and become a poor mans version of Little Britain, when I personally feel that, in some ways, catchphrases are important to sketch shows, as they keep the audience coming back. People want to see Andy and Lou doing something daft, "I want that one", etc - and people want to see the old man try, in vain to get to his love, until - again - "Bugger". Because Mitchell and Webb are so intent on not having too many catchphrases, they don't have you wanting to come back.
But, then again, I will have to admit there were some highlights - Numberwang, by far is one of the best (possibly because stating random numbers and then stating 'thats Numberwang' is becoming a catchphrase itself, so i could be completely off base with the whole 'catchphrase' argument), BMX Bandit and - God? - is it? (again with the 'I summon a horde of angels' becoming a catchpharse, my argument gets weaker as I type...), Sir Digby Chicken Ceasar and the guy in green with the flute. I also really liked the way they 'film' Mitchell and Webb after they have shot a scene. Really funny.
To be fair, I feel that the more I watch it, the more I will like it - as with many sketch shows.
"Here is a guy buying a house after selling his old one ..."
I think I will have to keep these things that little bit shorter. After a while it is a little too much to read (and write, I don't think anybody really cares about Sarah and I watching Friends...). And I really have to actually do some work ...
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Rictus Grin
Briefly,
I am writing this after my half day (well, three periods) at school and I am going back this evening to assist in the open evening. I have loads of 'Observations' to write up too! So, I tell you now, I am only getting this information in now because (a) I have a brief bit of freedom and (b) some of it I found fascinating.
First off, the Rictus Grin. In period 3 today, the group of PGCE students at School A had a lesson together with a teacher who was going to explain classroom management to us. He arrived 30 minutes late because he had to exclude a pupil. What an introduction.
He then proceeded to tell us probably the most fascinating insight into Secondary education I have ever heard. First off, the layout of the classroom:
At the back of the class, you have the noisy pupils (who may/may not do their work, but often know their stuff whenever there is a classroom discussion. The centre 'chunk' of pupils normally can get rowdy, but when they are interested, they get involved and whenever they aren't - they don't get involved. This centre chunk is your standard, average student. Right on the front row you have the pupils that want to look clever - though they are not neccessarily clever. Possibly dumb-asses (Napoleon Dynamite would sit here I would imagine).
Okay, the left and right aisles really depends on where you teach the class. Okay, if you can imagine the white board at the front of the class, in the centre. The teacher will stand on either the right or left hand side when using the board. The pupils closest to him, and the aisle going back, are the worst behaved (from after the second row, because the one student at the front will be quiet and wants to be segragated from the class). These pupils use this space because they can do alot of things and get away with it, because the teacher has his/her back to them. Therefore, the students on the opposite aisle are generally pretty knowledgeable - and towards the back they become more 'social', so they probably know their stuff but don't want to appear to be geeks.
Problem is, I teach Art whereby the class layout is completely different.
Most of us in the class were fascinated - because where ever we came from, whatever school we went to, in classes set out in such a way that was exactly the case. I never even noticed at the time.
Now, the guy spoke so fast we were all writing as much as we could because every single thing he said mattered. This is so far the only point in the course where I wish I had my dictaphone.
The Rictus Grin though is the grin, laugh or smile that a pupil may give after being told off. It is akin to a twitch and it is purely reactive - if a pupil feels scared or embarressed, the automatic emotion is the 'rictus grin' and if you are unaware that it is automatic (rather than a cheeky grin at the teacher or a laugh directly at the teacher) then normally - and if unaware, understandably - you will tell the pupil off again for being cheeky or rude, when that is not to be done. It is an automatic reaction. In many cases it is the alternate reaction before he/she is about to cry. Fascinating stuff.
I am writing this after my half day (well, three periods) at school and I am going back this evening to assist in the open evening. I have loads of 'Observations' to write up too! So, I tell you now, I am only getting this information in now because (a) I have a brief bit of freedom and (b) some of it I found fascinating.
First off, the Rictus Grin. In period 3 today, the group of PGCE students at School A had a lesson together with a teacher who was going to explain classroom management to us. He arrived 30 minutes late because he had to exclude a pupil. What an introduction.
He then proceeded to tell us probably the most fascinating insight into Secondary education I have ever heard. First off, the layout of the classroom:
At the back of the class, you have the noisy pupils (who may/may not do their work, but often know their stuff whenever there is a classroom discussion. The centre 'chunk' of pupils normally can get rowdy, but when they are interested, they get involved and whenever they aren't - they don't get involved. This centre chunk is your standard, average student. Right on the front row you have the pupils that want to look clever - though they are not neccessarily clever. Possibly dumb-asses (Napoleon Dynamite would sit here I would imagine).
Okay, the left and right aisles really depends on where you teach the class. Okay, if you can imagine the white board at the front of the class, in the centre. The teacher will stand on either the right or left hand side when using the board. The pupils closest to him, and the aisle going back, are the worst behaved (from after the second row, because the one student at the front will be quiet and wants to be segragated from the class). These pupils use this space because they can do alot of things and get away with it, because the teacher has his/her back to them. Therefore, the students on the opposite aisle are generally pretty knowledgeable - and towards the back they become more 'social', so they probably know their stuff but don't want to appear to be geeks.
Problem is, I teach Art whereby the class layout is completely different.
Most of us in the class were fascinated - because where ever we came from, whatever school we went to, in classes set out in such a way that was exactly the case. I never even noticed at the time.
Now, the guy spoke so fast we were all writing as much as we could because every single thing he said mattered. This is so far the only point in the course where I wish I had my dictaphone.
The Rictus Grin though is the grin, laugh or smile that a pupil may give after being told off. It is akin to a twitch and it is purely reactive - if a pupil feels scared or embarressed, the automatic emotion is the 'rictus grin' and if you are unaware that it is automatic (rather than a cheeky grin at the teacher or a laugh directly at the teacher) then normally - and if unaware, understandably - you will tell the pupil off again for being cheeky or rude, when that is not to be done. It is an automatic reaction. In many cases it is the alternate reaction before he/she is about to cry. Fascinating stuff.
Sunday, October 01, 2006
Morning All ...
Well, I have decided to get up that little bit earlier today (10.30am ... ) and hopefully get my body a little bit back in sync before I have to start another week of school observing.
Last night Sarah and I joined a housemate - Simon - with his friends Mike and Girlfriend. We enjoyed the night but decided at about 11pm that we would escape early. Sarah had been in
London all day and I was just a bit knackered, so I attempted to finish my Guinness and head for the 11.30 bus but, surprise surprise, we missed it and I ate a footlong subway meatball marinara to pass the time. Sarahs a vegetarian, so she wasn't best pleased.
Today, my aim is to type up all my notes from school observing ... this typing now should get me in the mood for a type-a-thon later.
Pretty boring blog today. Apologies.
To compensate I shall put a picture on the page. It is another attempt of getting a profile picture of me ... but one which isn't too big. (It keeps telling me it is too big ...)
Last night Sarah and I joined a housemate - Simon - with his friends Mike and Girlfriend. We enjoyed the night but decided at about 11pm that we would escape early. Sarah had been in
London all day and I was just a bit knackered, so I attempted to finish my Guinness and head for the 11.30 bus but, surprise surprise, we missed it and I ate a footlong subway meatball marinara to pass the time. Sarahs a vegetarian, so she wasn't best pleased.Today, my aim is to type up all my notes from school observing ... this typing now should get me in the mood for a type-a-thon later.
Pretty boring blog today. Apologies.
To compensate I shall put a picture on the page. It is another attempt of getting a profile picture of me ... but one which isn't too big. (It keeps telling me it is too big ...)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)