"The Town" or "I've already seen 'The Deaparted' and 'Heat'"

"The Town" is by no means a bad film. It's got some solid performances and directing. The only problem I have with Affleck's film is that I've seen this done before. Yes I know cinema is bound to repeat it's self but there is so little here that is fresh. Alot of reviewers have given this film 5 stars and hailed Affleck as a director to contend with in Hollywood and honestly I just don't see how.

Like the title says if you saw "Heat" so long ago or more recently "The Departed" then nothing in the "The Town" will come off as being clever or new. So it baffles me how so many critics are treating this like it's a masterpiece. It is by far the most overrated film this year, nothing has been as underwhelming as this crime drama. That said I still havnt seen "The Social Network".

I think what annoys me most about "The Town" is not what it gets wrong but the opportunities it misses to distance its self from other films in the genre.

Anyway the plot basically follows a crew of bank robbers that pull a bunch of "Point Break" style hiests. However on one job they take a hostage as collateral but release her soon after they getaway. Soon after they realise that the hostage lives a few blocks a way. This is apparently a problem because...I don't know she might run into one of them or something. So Ben Affleck must "take care" of her by seducing her...I dont know how this is supposed to help but...

Anyway there is some underplayed cat and mouse stuff and the group commits another robbery on an armored car leading to a fairly good getaway chase scene that ends on a hilarious moment. eventually the inevitable happens and Affleck's love interest finds out he was one of the robbers who took her hostage. There's one more robbery which goes badly but Affleck escapes to Florida. Oh and it's hinted that our hostage/love interest still has feelings for him even though he put her through the most traumatic experience in her life.

That's the briefest summary I can give it but inbetween there's the whole 'ghetto kids with no hope' story thread that gets used in every film with sympathetic criminal characters. Because all criminals are so because of their bad childhoods....wait maybe but still.

What annoys me most is that this is a paint by numbers crime drama that takes alot from previous films in the genre without adding anything new. Even more so it is incredibly easy and there are plenty of hints that this film could have diverged into Neo-Noir rather than the typical happy ending. There is alot here that makes you just wish they had done something a little more like Affleck's previous effort "Gone Baby, Gone".

Still there is alot of fun to be had it's just not the masterpiece of cinema some have made it out to be. A solid watch but it will fade so quickly into that massive mess of other crime drama films.

Academic Blog Mk Eight: So...this is it

Well we have come to end of this blog series to do with Digital Media Cultures...It goes by so fast. Anyway this blog series has been a great help in many ways with the subject I've been doing. It's allowed for a great deal of mulling over the subject material which is great...that and being able to go through some essay ideas and hopefully make a much more refined argument than normal. The only downside from this was the lack of response from fellow classmates, although I must say I didn't comment on anyone Else's blogs so I guess I can't complain about it. Overall I think have these blogs as an assessment is a great way of demonstrating online community, as is the class wiki.

The wiki was a good exercise too, however I don't know how effective it was in creating a back and forth editing system. Alot of the time I found myself not wanting to edit a page because I knew the person who had originally wrote it and didn't want to offend them. Whereas a real wiki has the anonymous factor the ability to see other members made things a little more difficult. Also it didn't really seem to take shape till about week 11 where people really started working on it (including me). However I still think the wiki was a great thing to work on and hope it gets to go online for everyone to see. Overall the wiki was actually the piece I enjoyed working on even though I was hesistant to begin with.

So with that we bid farewell to Academic Blogs and you will be returned to the regular scheduled posts with my review of "The Town" up soon...well after I finish my last essay.

Academic Blog Mk Seven: Some of the old Ultra Violence

Ok so the premise of "Gamer" has been done to death. That's a given, even "Surrogates" had the whole issues with avatars. However "Gamer" has the link with video games and online social gaming, really being an extremist technopohibic take on the whole situation. What "Gamer" plays on to work though is that you must believe that watching violent media makes you less prone to act "properly" to real violence as some do. This ascertation really in my view is a very closed minded take on the media, borrowing alot from the old passive audience theories of broadcast media. What it fails to even try to understand is the fact that humanity could already have an instinct for violence. Obviously violence happened before violent media did.

Films like "Gamer" try to argue that as a society we are totally desensitised, to the point that having real people in the game dying wouldn't even phase us. As a gamer and being well versed in the violent cinema I can say that I'm pretty damn sure I couldn't send people to their deaths as easily in "Gamer".

Here in lies the problem with the film's argument in the sense that while it is clearly marketed to video game players it also insults them. Along with the added irony that it is just another piece of violent cinema to further desensitise us. Clearly they are taking their own message seriously. Yes I know it's just an action film but still. Unlike the film I won't generalise and say "yes all gamers are normal and no one like to kill things" what I will say is that I don't want to. I don't think I know anybody who would. Maybe I'm just talking to the wrong people.

Academic Blog Mk Six: Determination vs Pre-determination

In the late 90's massive advances in genetic manipulation lead to the first sucsessful cloning experiment, Dolly the sheep. Oddly enough "Gattaca" also came out in the late 90's. huh. "Gattaca" perhaps presents the most terrifying outcome of gene manipulation seen in science fiction. Sure we all expect an army of genetic supermen to be used in some evil way to conquer the world, what we don't expect is that world would become more "perfect". However in the perfect world of the film there are no people who strive to reach their destiny, just those who have been pre-coded to become that. Those who are not genetically enhanced are pushed down as a sub-class to do menial work.

In the world of "Gattaca" free choice has been practically eliminated in the sense that those who are genetically enhanced are predetermined to become something someone else wants them to be. Control over a life is taken away from the individual and given basically to the parents. While those who are on the other side of the coin can do little to alter the circumstances before their birth that lead them to be considered inferior. Steven K. George puts it like this, "The only future available to them is unskilled labour, reguardless of their skills and intelligence".

Though while free will is almost eliminated in those enhanced members of society, we see in the protagonist "Vincent" that what one could call the human spirit can overcome the genetic inferiorities. The film perscribes to us that vision and determination to achieve are what make us human and that technology and science can perhapse take that away from us. Meaning that the flaws of what we are can make us stronger. This is exhibited in the scene where by "Vincent" races his brother in the sea, overcoming him even though he is weaker. "Vincent" opens up a new future for himself and shows that not all are doomed to be but into a hopeless future. The human spirit triumphs in the end.

While this is only very little on the subject that "Gattaca" deals with, it is an absolutely massive topic that can't be dealt with in one post. However one thing seems to be quite striking with both "Blade Runner" and "Gattaca", both lead to a society where technology has created a raceless and genderless sub-class. Next post I will be looking at "Gamer" to see if this is always the case.

Academic Blog Mk Five: Do Humans Dream of Sheep?

ok so in class there had been a whole mention of Ridley Scott's masterpiece 'Blade Runner' so I thought that seeing as this was primarily a film blog before (and will be again) that I could do a little analysis of the film. Now I sorta talked in an earlier blog about technophobia in film and how especially in the genre of science fiction, we get very different views on how technology will affect humanity. Not just how it will affect us in our everyday function but how it will change what it means to be human. Or not change it, there's varying situations put forth in many different films.

'Blade Runner' though stands quite clear on the side of the argument that 'yes, technology will change humanity'. This is quite clear as the narrative constantly throws the out the question of "what is human and what is technology". In fact the title of Dick's book is that very question. Do androids dream of electric sheep? If they do what does this inherently mean? Does the ability to dream make us human or is the soul something that can be replicated in a computer.

Sean Redman puts forth an argument in the book "The Blade Runner Experience" that the film purposefully creates a binomial opposition between nature and technology or in more specific terms, Humans and Replicants. Stating that nature is banished from the visual style giving only the dark foggy streets of the city as an indicator of this. This style clearly indicates a dystopia that would seem to be a product of the technology that has been implicated in society.

But at the same time the film sits on the fence by constantly addressing that technology can be the same as nature, therefore adding a little bit of technophilia to the narrative. The sparkling lights and intoxicating feel of the same dark city show that it clearly is not all so gloomy.

It could be argued that the film warns of both the dangers and benefits of technology but ultimately does not show which is the greater. This is probably best seen in the ambiguity and heated debate over "Deckard's" true nature. The fact that this one key fact can still put in ambiguity plays to the ultimately ambiguous answer the film gives to the question. By the end we still don't know what is "human" and what is technology.

Though "Blade Runner" is not the only film to deal with these issues and in the next blog ill be tackling "Gattaca".

Academic Blog Mk 4: One Second Photo

Here on the interblag we tend to (as producers of content) create very important online identities. I think anyone who has ever been on a chat room or forum can clearly see the alter egos some people portray on the web. Anyone can say they are...well anyone. This is why so many celebritiy twitter accounts seek some sort of vaildation. I remember in the glory days of myspace, high school students would make up fake profiles of teachers to slander them (and im sure people still do that on facebook). But that said, it is easy to pretend to be someone else on the internet but how do you communicate who you are in the real world?

Just signing up to a facebook account we asked to basically define who we are in a short amount of space and in most cases that definition comes via a profile picture.

However this "Definition" of ourselves is usually altered or at least manipulated in some way to present the most attractive view possible. BBC News reported a study contducted on Facebook porfile pictures and found some very interesting results you can read on the link. One being that men were 50% more likely than women to have their profile photo retouched. I can't be the only one who finds that suprising?

When I look at my own choices though at what I choose to display on public profiles, I can't pretend they are not carefully chosen to present me in a good light. I'm fairly certain most people would find the same. But is the carefully selected photo of ourselves really who we are or just what we think other people would like to see?

Academic Blog Mk Three: High 'Tech' Anxiety

Technophobia is just another one of those topics that draws my attention especially in film. When you think about how many times science fiction uses technology as a catalyst to destruction or the very antagonist its self, you tend to see that technology will ultimately destroy us. Or it will be our Savior. This is a classic dichotomy in the science fiction genre, technology (and science) will either doom us or create the needs to save us. If you look back at the golden age of science fiction film there is a clear reflection of the anxiety in society over nuclear science and technology. One example of this would be "Them!" (1954) which featured a nest of radioactive ants caused by atomic fallout. In the height of atomic testing it's clear to see why there was an anxiety over the effects atomic testing was having at the time. A counter to this though would be "The beast from 20,000 fathoms"(1953) where nuclear science saves the world from a giant dinosaur.

Personal computers, video games, the Internet and many others have been used as plot devices in cinema to play off the inherent anxiety we have over technology. The more our lives become dependent on something the more nervous we become that it will fail us or worse, actively turn against us. We see this in films like "The Terminator"(1984) and "The Matrix"(1999) where advanced technology has destroyed all human civilisation. Though the impact of online social media hasn't really been explored in science fiction...at least not to the point where the world is a post apocalyptia because of it. Digital media in science fiction always seems to serve as a background device, just an extra problem in dystopian world that pacifies the populous. "Gamer"(2009) is a good example of this where the concept of "Second life" is taken to an absolute extreme.

So basically what I'm trying to get at with this is that if we look at the reflection of technology in science fiction we kinda get a glimpse into out collective fears. This is nothing new because...well...all art is a reflection of some feeling we have as a society.

Anyway that's all I got for this week, I think there was just too much running through my head to fit into a post without it being an essay. anyhow till next time.

Be Seeing you

Academic blog Mk Two: the mis-information highway

It's that item again for the second in the new installment of blogs and this time I've decided to have a look at the credibility of of online sources of information (in relation to the reading on trust and trasperancy). This topic has always been an issue for me, especially when trying to get the latest news on films and TV Shows one can see the pure amount of bull spread by supposed "inside sources". Sure entertainment news is already a muddy mess of mis-information without the aid of the Internet, take the British tabloids for one. The internet is full of these kind of rumors though, whether it be that some celebrity has died or what a new episode of a TV show will feature. Another blogger on Helium.com suggests that these rumors come about through a few different ways but only one of those really pertains to the Internet. Todd Pheifer (the blogger in question) says that the questionable standards of fact checking on the net are to blame. Though while this is true some of the information that is pure fiction reported on the web is not always verifiable.

The one example that keeps coming to my mind is from when "Terminator: Salvation" was in pre-production and a rumor was reported about the film's apparent ending. While at the time the "spoiler" was largely rejected at being so ludicrous it just could not be true. That no sane film maker could possible use this proposed ending. However the rumor was actually true and it was only the bad reaction from the leak that got the producers to scrap this part of the script.

I guess what I'm trying to get at in this is though there is that even with trust earned from news sources there will always be times where secrets are leaked and not only because there is too much information available and if every piece of news from an unnamed source was not published well...let's just say we'd have a pretty terrible terminator film on our hands (though some would say it's terrible anyway).

Well that's all I've got to say on that matter for now, oh and for those coming here for the film reviews I promise I'll get one up soon.

Academic Blog Mk One: The anti-social media.

Basically for those who do tune in regularly, there will be one new segment placed on this blog due to it being a requirement for a Media subject. Simply, instead of making a new blog for my academic scrawlings I thought it would be much easier to host them on here. So expect a weekly installment....

To kick things off I thought I'd address a little statement that really interested me last Monday in class. When a correlation was made between the current habits of consuming food and consuming media. That both, which were a perhaps a family event (especially things like dinner) have become a more individualised or isolated activity. I can say that I rarely sit down and eat dinner together with my family...or any meal for that matter at home. In the same regard we also consume our media separately in different parts of the house. I never watch television in the living room, I do it on my own in my study.

What made intrigued by this is the issue of which was the byproduct of which. Was I in here because I didn't like eating with my family or because I didn't like the television they watched. Then something sprung to mind from a few years back when iPods where all the rage in the schoolyard. A Current Affair (or Today Tonight, I don't rightly remember which) ran a story about child psychologists suggesting that the new technology was causing anti-social behavior. That children during lunch time where just plugging in the headphones and not having any social interaction. I then initially blew it off as technophobia (which I still believe it is) but now I can see that it does have some validity. Well at least the concept that the consumption of media is become more isolated.

Now...I do believe that if I had no computer and only one television in the house I'd probably be watching it at dinner time. However I don't think being isolated in my study is such a bad thing. My family hasn't broken down, I'm fairly close to them and spend more time doing more meaningful things with them than watching Television.

So...I guess my point here is that while ACA might say that technology will cause us all to be anti-social I believe the opposite and that it can actually create more social interaction. providing we do actually get out of the study at some point.

So that's it first in this series...and stay tuned for my next non-academic blog on "Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World".

"Predators" or "How 80's action returned"

I love 1987's "Predator". I mean love it. I have since I can remember. Even "Predator 2" was awesome. In my view that is. Since 2004's "Alien vs. Predator" both franchises have taken a tail dive into pure exploitation (AvP:R) and lost all the cinematic glory that they once had. "Predators" restores all the menace and fear the interplanetary hunter once carried, while also bringing something new to the table. So from here on in....Spoilers

The film starts off badly. And I mean really badly. Our main hero "Royce" is freefalling, for no explained or apparent reason. He freaks out and finds he can't open a parachute he's wearing before a light goes on and the chute automatically opens. Landing in some trees, the chute rips apart and Royce falls to the jungle floor. Cue title card. Literally the opening on this almost made me laugh just due to the sudden cut to the title card which then cuts back to basically where we were before like nothing happened. Anyway soon Danny Trejo falls from the sky and threatens Royce when suddenly Gatling gun fire appears. Royce flanks our Russian character and the trio are greeted to our token female character, Isabelle. Eventually a group forms with more of the cast running into each other with an African RUF fighter and our death row inmate (Stans) found fighting each other. Also our Yakuza character (Hanzo) is stalking the group. Edwin (Topher Grace) completes the cast and plays the totally normal guy who has no idea why he's there. The group does alot of searching and walking before realising something is very wrong. They do alot of walking and Edwin saves our Russian friend from a deadly flower and earns his protection in return.

Eventually they reach a cliff and see a group of planets in the atmosphere that really shouldn't be there. Now concluding that they are screwed they are attacked by a sorta dog like creature with tusks. We finally get some shooting happening before a whistle blows and the attack dogs are called back. The group looks around to find that Danny Trejo has disappeared but are able to hear his cries for help. They find him sitting in a field injured with his back facing them. Royce realises it's a trap and the group departs before it is revealed that a predator is mimicking the cries for help. Royce decides to follow the alien attack dog trails which lead the group to a encampment where one of the alien hunters is tied up. Turns out this is a trap and our African member is killed. The Russian looses his mini-gun due to a plasma caster exploding it. The group flee and fall down a hill and into a lake (much like we've seen before). Our Token Female has a go at Royce for leading them into a trap and he turns it back on her asserting that she knows what's hunting them. She recounts the story of Dutch's team from 'Predator' and the group decide to trap the hunters themselves. Here we get some character development and very funny lines but they notice that something is out there avoiding the trap they've set. Edwin is sent out as bait and is chased by another alien creature when Laurence Fishburn's Noland shows up to save the day.

Noland leads the group to his hideout which is in some sort of crashed ship. The group rests and it becomes clear that Noland is insane with him talking to voices in his head. Noland sheds some light on the situation stating that they come every season and hunt in threes and that also there is a blood feud between the smaller hunters and the larger ones. He also lets on that there is a ship near the predator encampment and that he has been watching them all along. That night Noland turns on the group and tries to kill them using smoke but Royce shoots something which causes part of the ship to explode alerting a near by predator. Noland runs off and is killed (or more vapourised) by the predator. The group escapes but Edwin gets lost in the ship's hallways, alerting the group they find him trapped and leave him there but the Russian goes back for him due to the whole deadly flower thing. The predator hot on their trail catches the Russian by stabbing him through the chest, however there just happens to be an anti-personal mine on his stomach. Things go boom and the group escapes through tunnels to the surface where two other predators are waiting.

Stans jumps one of them and the group runs off. Stans then gets thrown to the group and has his spine ripped out. Yay gore! The Yakuza assassin decides that he will stay behind in a grassy field and attempt to fight with a samurai sword. Here the movie starts the become kick ass with Hanzo fighting off and killing the second predator in a damn sword fight! However Hanzo is also killed and now we are left with three. Edwin is caught in a trap designed to maim, Isabelle wants to carry him along with them but Royce believes it will slow them down way too much. This causes the group to part ways. Royce makes it back to the camp and frees the tied up predator from before hoping that it will help him get off the planet. It does and programs the ship to auto pilot back to Earth. Meanwhile Isabelle and Edwin get trapped in a net and our last "bad" predator drags them back to camp. They are chucked into a hole cave thing and the "good" predator starts up a fight with his alien blood feuding brother. Seeing two predators beat the crap out of each other is worth seeing this film but eventually the good one is decapitated. Aww. The ship starts to take off apparently with Royce onboard but is self-destructed by that last "bad" predator.

While in the hole Edwin attacks Isabelle with his scalpel, poising her with the neurotoxin still on the blade from the deadly flower. Edwin reveals he is a serial killer and feels at home with the monsters on this planet. Royce shows up (not dead obviously) and pulls them out of the hole. Edwin goes back to playing innocent before attempting to sneak up on Royce, however this fails and Edwin ends up with a scalpel through his chin. Royce uses Edwin to set up a trap attaching something like 10 grenades to Edwin's chest and leaving him in the middle of the camp. As the last predator finds Edwin the grenades explode and Royce ignites a ring of gun powder he had placed around the camp, using the fire to mask his heat signature. He starts to smash the hunter with a bone, getting in some well timed strikes. However the creature switches to an audio mode and locates his heartbeat. The tide of the fight changes and Royce is beaten into submission...but Isabelle is starting to regain control of her limbs and uses her sniper rifle to distract the predator by...well shooting him in the chest. The alien hunter now distracted, launches some blades at Isabelle which pisses Royce off. Going nuts he attacks and beats the crap out of the creature eventually decapitating it. Now the fight is over the two survives share an embrace. Come morning, cages are being dropped onto the planet with Royce and Isabelle determined to find a way back home.

And that's it. 20 years in the making and let me say this was not a disappointment, sure it's not as good as "Predator" but it's damn close. The cast could have been better but they work out well. There are some problems but overall it's an atmospheric auctioneer that really captures the feel of the previous two films. Also the music is almost exactly the same as the original which is awesome. I give it 4 out of 5 "Spines ripped out".

so untill next time...

Be seeing you


On a side note that scene in the trailer where 20 lasers are on Royce NEVER HAPPENS.

Stalling...or Mini-reviews.

ok so I haven't been to cinema lately. or watched a bad film....per say. So I thought that because it seems unlikely I'll get out to the cinema this week or watch anything terrible that I'd give a few small recap of some awesome films I got to finally see over the last couple of weeks.

Black Dynamite - 2009

This faux blaxploitation flick is the most awesome thing my eyeballs have viewed since "Equilibrium". Funnier than any film Ive seen in a long long time and full of film cliche's that lovers of the exploitation genres will adore. However that said I can see how some people might not find this funny, it's a certain type of humor and if you get it you're awesome as well. Anyway check it out.

5 out of 5 Ninja stars.



A Film With Me In It - 2009

Another comedy if been trying to see for ages. Dylan Moran is the main attraction here in this black as black comedy. Other than that it's a fairly by the numbers comedy which for the price I got it at was well worth it.
However this not in the style of Moran's other work (IE Black Books) and may seem a little dissapointing if that's what you were expecting (I was). Still worth the watch and is fairly short so even if you find it boring at least it wont be three hours long.




The Rookie - 1990

This film seems to be fairly forgotten amongst the classics of Clint Eastwood with many not remembering it due to it's cliche' story. However just say "The one where Eastwood gets raped" and I'm sure it will peak interests. Yes a villianess in this film does rape Clint but that's not important, what is though is the fact that Raul Julia is in this. Also Charlie Sheen burns down a bar and shoots a dog....interested yet? see it but don't expect too much of it and you will enjoy. Totally worth seeing a plane chase Clint on the ground.


Scorpio - 1973

This typical 70's spy thriller vehicle for an ageing Burt Lancaster is actually quite satisfying. While normally I would have dismissed this film I was intrigued by the presence of then French superstar Alain Delon...who is awesome. He gives a cool slick performance as usual and Lancaster gets the job done but overall the film is needlessly confusing and boring in parts. Nothing really happens and when it does you feel quite conflicted on which character you should be supporting. However if you like Delon it's well worth seeing.


There's a few others I've seen but seeing as I plan to go to the cinema this week hopefully I'll have a new review up in a few days.

Stay tuned for my review of "Predators"

Be Seeing You

Retro-Vision: Robocop 3 (1993)

well...well...well. Nothing I say in the following review could possibly sum up just how much I hate this movie. Nothing. Some of you out there may remember the destruction of the Robocop franchise which followed with a television series and a mini-series both of which failed to be anything like the original two films. Anyway this isn't about that but I just thought I'd point out how this film effectively sent the franchise to hell leading even to Robocop appearing in the WWF (who says wrestling is fake). Right well without further stalling I better explain the plot...If you could call it that.

Basically the film follows the trend of civil unrest that first two films played on, being that the company OCP (Omni Consumer Products) is now facing an army of pissed off homeless-ish people. Basically the company try to relocate some people in order to build Delta City but those impoverished people don't want to be moved. So for no real apparent reason OCP create a special task force known as Rehabs to deal with the problem under the leadership of our antagonist Paul McDagget. Also we are made aware that OCP is now being controlled by some Japanese company who supply a robot to help deal with the poor people as well.

So well okay makes sense...some robots to obviously fight Robocop later in the film, I'm cool with that. At least I would be if the robots were not ninjas. Ninja robots that look exactly humans. Ugh. What kind of retarded company would invest money in building Ninja Robots? What kind of market could there possibly be for that? Anyway Robocop helps some of the OCP resistance but is prevented by a magical fourth prime directive. Lewis from the first films is killed off and Robocop goes into hiding with the resistance. Robocop's efficiency levels begin to drop and is taken to the resistance base where we find Dr. Lazarus. They begin to fix the Murphy and then somehow he is able to delete the forth prime directive. Um ok...that really would have been helpful in the first film...and the second. So now the resistance finds a kick ass jetpack designed for Robocop while he shares some bonding time with a small child. Robocop heads down to the police station and uses a kick ass hand-gun-missile-flamethrower to burn down the Rehabs base. Then we get Robocop riding in a pimp-mobile, chasing McDaggett. yep. Finally when some action happens...and we get this. Anyway some pissed off guy tells McDaggett where the resistance base is and the rehabs go in and either kill or capture most of the resistance. Robocop arrives back at the now empty base and is confronted by...JAPANESE NINJA ROBOT! a pretty crap fight ensues and basically the robot's gets all explodey. However Robocop looses a hand and again replaces it with the gun-flamethrower thing. Then in a move of defiance, the police decide to side with the resistance and fight against OCP. Hmm what ever will they do now to fight the resistance? HIRE PUNKS! That's right an army of punks comes rolling into help fight against the resistance. And somehow...I'm guessing because the punks have been given tanks...they are winning. But then Robocop shows up with his kick-ass jetpack and missile hand, blowing everything up. You can watch the whole scene here. So Robo flys to the OCP building, deciding to smash through the control room window. McDaggett brings in two more otomo ninja bots but a little girl hacks them with a computer making them kill each other. McDaggett reveals that the robots are rigged with a self-destruct and will explode in seconds, Robocop jumps into his jetpack and flys away with the little girl and Dr. Lazuraus while the building explodes. That's it..that's as far as I'm going with this.

If you don't understand by now just how stupid and silly this movie is then maybe you should leave right now. This film is the antithesis of what the original "Robocop" was about...corporate greed, media and consumer satire and very over the top violence. Here we just get robot ninjas and pimp-mobiles. See someone decided that the franchise should be aimed at children and rather than hold the hard R +18 ratings of the previous films, drop down to M+15. And that's just the first issue, I mean sure you could probably have a decent M rated film...it might not be as gory but maybe it will work. Ok well how about the fact that the jetpack and gun-hand are purely introduced as a way to sell new robocop action figures. I know because 4 year old me bought that damn action figure. And the role playing dress up gun-arm. Anyway the second problem this movie faces before you even press play is the knowledge that Peter Weller (The actor to play Murphy in 1 and 2) was absent from this so he could go star in movie about talking typewriters. Robert Burke does try very hard in the role but seems to blend in with the suit, not being able to convey and real humanity from the cyborg. Then we get to the main big bad enemy robot that was in each film, first being ED-209...then Robo-Cain. Logic would suggest that this film would have an even bigger, badder robot then that but...no we get the damn robot ninjas who are about as intimidating as a robot puppy. What the hell were they thinking here. Then there is also the stupid add on of the child computer wiz who befriends Robocop and really unless your movie is "Kick-ass" you really shouldn't have a child character. I'm gonna end this here I could rant on and on about how bad this film is because it really is that bad. Then again it must be said that the studio, Orion was going though massive financial troubles at the time and....

ah screw this. they still made a bad movie.

1 star out of a hundred.

Stay tuned.
Be Seeing You


Also I'd like to add again this is the second movie I've reviewed where by someone has used a bomb against an enemy who can fly. Idiots!

"Iron Man 2" or "How to make a sidekick actually kick ass"

Well...Well....Well...yes this yet again not my review of "Hot Tub Time Machine" and I doubt there will be a full review of that one so let me just say I really liked it. Now on to Marvel Studios first comic book helping for us this year, "Iron Man 2".

Spoilers as usual

The film starts off with us seeing Mickey Rourke's terrible hair and cracked up face watching his father die while news reports of Tony Stark pour in. So the incredibly Russian looking Rourke plays Ivan Vanko who's dad apparently had some ties to Tony's father aswell. Ivan builds himself an arc reactor and the opening titles begin. The story then jumps to Tony jumping out of an aeroplane and into the Stark Expo with fireworks everywhere. Tony gives a speech and ect ect before being served with a supena to appear before the United States Senate who want Stark to hand over the Iron Man suit. Here we are introduced to another villain, Justin Hammer who owns Stark's rival company. After some witty banter Tony gets to keep his suit for a little while longer and leaves the sen. Also by this point we are made aware that the arc reactor in Stark's chest is slowly killing him.

So of course Tony decides to go to Monaco to watch a car he has entered into the race. For some stupid reason Stark decides that he is going to replace the driver who is very unhappy about the replacement. Enter Ivan who goes out onto the track and smashes a few cars with his energy whip things before cutting Stark's car in half. A brief battle ensues and Ivan is subdued. While in prison Ivan tells Stark about how their fathers were working together and about how Stark can't erase his warmongering past. This is followed by Ivan being broken out of prison by....Hammer. Turns out that he wants to use Ivan to design some armoured suits so he can supply them to the US military. By now we have also been introduced to Scarlet Johanssons Black Widow character as well.

Stark also hands over the company to Pepper Potts as he believes that he soon will be dying and won't be able to run the company from the grave. Anyhow Stark throws what he thinks will be his last birthday party and gets a little wasted leading to him doing some very stupid things with the iron man suit. Rhodes shows up and intervenes by borrowing the Mk II suit from the first film. A fairly awesome battle rages through the house destroying almost everything. Rhodes takes off with the suit and hands it over to the military believing that Stark can no longer have sole responsibility for the technology. In the morning we finally get to see Nick Fury as he shows up and gives Stark the mid movie motivation to try and solve his problem of dying soon. Eventually after we get the standard "no one likes you any more because your a dick" scenes he finally figures out that he needs to create a new element to power the iron man suit. He achieves this and seems to be getting back on track and has a new kick ass suit to boot.

I should also say that this is intercut with scenes between Hammer and Ivan that are quite funny and also supplying the weapons needed to pimp out Rhodie's suit. Hammer plans to launch his new technology at Stark's expo that we see at the beginning of the film so that the company can ensure its future as America's weapon supplier. The show goes along until Ivan seizes control of the drones he has created and the War Machine suit leading to a very un-interesting chase scene that lasts way too long. Black Widow and Happy Hogan race to Hammer's factory and get the War Machine suit back under Rhodie's control. This leads to the two taking on the drones which don't take long to finish off. Eventually Ivan shows up in a new kick ass suit of his own (Surprise!) and a fairly boring and anticlimactic fight takes place. Ivan blows himself up and ect ect. That's all you really need to know plot wise.

So what did I think? Well for a sequel the film is pretty much on par with the first "Iron Man" but that said it still suffers many of the faults the first film had as well. The climax is again one of the main problems, the main battle (Iron Man Vs. Whiplash) is maybe about a minute long. Instead we get the fight with the drones which takes a ridiculous amount of time. Again like in "Clash of the Titans" we get another boring chase sequence where nothing really happens, there is no drama in that chase sequence at all. Another problem is Ivan. While Rourke's performance was well done the character really makes little sense, especially when we are supposed to buy he's a physicist. You'd think he'd maybe be working in a university or something rather than plotting petty revenge on a man that really didn't do anything to him directly. Also Stark clearly decides at the last minute to enter the car race himself.... so why was Ivan going to destroy the car in the first place? He couldn't have known Stark would be there. Even if he was trying to get Iron Man's attention he didn't have to go Monaco to do it. He could have just gone to the Stark expo before this and smashed everything up. A lot of things really don't add up in the narrative. The movie also feels alittle long at times and really if it wasn't for the very talented cast the movie would be boring. And again while the film stays true to the first one there isn't any real building on what's going with the characters honestly seems to have nothing new to bring to the table.

Besides this the characters are well handled, War Machine becomes the most kick ass sidekick ever (take that Robin) and Sam Rockwell gives an equally impressive performance as Robert Downey Jr.

3 out 5 stars. (Ok, but not great)

Stay Tuned for another Retro-vision next week.

Also something else that troubles me...If your enemy can fly away at any moment, how would blowing yourself up with a self destruct kill him? Stark just flys away and you get blown up. Some physicist he is.

Top 10 Worst/Laziest Movie Posters of All Time...So Far

No I have not titled my review of "Hot Tub Time Machine" wrong and yes I have decided not to review yet therefore this is filler to distract you from that. Basically this topic has been on my mind for quite some time and I thought it might be fun to look back at some of the worst film posters that have graced cinema walls. For this though I will be excluding films that would not have had the cash to launch credible marketing, so no B-movies or the like will be included on this list. Just pure Hollywood trash that was either very badly designed or just a lazy photoshop job. So get ready and prepare your eyes for the worst movie posters I have ever seen.

#1o - Superman 3

If you care to look at any other "worst posters" lists you will generally find this monstrosity at number 1 but I've dropped it down to 10 simply because the art it's self really isn't that bad. By that I mean the quality of the art not the content. Speaking of the content, that is what puts this on the list. Just think about this for a second...Superman is carrying a terrified Richard Pryor through a canyon. What? While yes Superman III has a ridiculous premise, yes the studio thought that Richard Pryor would boost ticket sales and yes this does happen in the movie near the end...why on Earth would Someone decide that this sequence would be what brought the audience into the movie. Superman fights himself and a super computer in this movie and the most exciting part is supposed to be him kidnapping an African American comedian? I can't imagine how many dreams of a good follow up to Superman II would have been shattered when this poster was released.

What it should have been: Superman fighting Evil Superman with the menacing giant super-computer in the background.

#9 - Wanted

As a film, I love "Wanted". I really do but this poster is damn disgraceful. Why? Well for one, what exactly is the focus of this poster? Is it the fact that Angelina Jolie is a Co-star in it or the fact that there is nothing really exciting happening in this movie? Really this film has some awesome action moments and basically all they want to show you is the very expensive actor they got to be in it (no, not Morgan Freeman) and that there will be guns. Wow guns and an A-List actress! What is even more insulting is how they push James McAvoy into the corner like he's so unimportant to the film. Hey, no he's only the main protagonist he's not important. This is just one of those trends where the studio thinks that the star factor is so important that it is all people will need to go and shell out money to see the movie. Bad Hollywood, Bad.

What it Should Have Been: James McAvoy in the same pose with some exciting things around him.


#8 - Bangkok Dangerous

Y'know that time old tradition when advertising an action film of putting your star looking cool and holding a gun? Well the person who created this mess didn't and decided it would be much more exciting if the star didn't hold a gun and just pretended like they were. perhaps they were some hippie pacifist but whoever they are I hope they got fired for this mess...or at least made to pay up the 4 million dollars this film needed to break even. However I must confess that I haven't seen this 2008 turkey so maybe there is a scene where Nick Cage goes around being shot at while pretending to hold a gun. This the best example of photoshopping run amok, the poster is just messy and unexplained and that is somehow supposed to excite the viewer. I guess it's a current trend to do posters like this but Cage holding thin air is just so silly it looks like a mistake.

What it should have been: The same thing with a gun.


#7 - Jerry Maguire

From this poster alone could someone tell me the story of this film. Sure Tom Cruise must be happy in it (probably from all the money he made) but what is it about? As far as I know there is nothing to this head shot of Tom to tell me why this is a good film or why I should spend my money on it. That's it, I got nothing more on this one.

What it Should Have Been: Anything else, heck even a shot of Cruise yelling into a phone would tell me something about what his character does other than just sit around looking happy.

Oh and what did I say about using the star as the main draw to the film...damn you!



#6 - Old Dogs

Oddly enough I couldn't find an English version of this particular poster, it's so damn lazy that it went to the effort to hide it's self in another language. Why do I hate this so much? three good reasons. First, It doesn't tell the audience a damn thing about the movie other than the fact that somewhere a gorilla comes into the picture. Sure it tells you who it stars but shouldn't a poster tell you that anyway along with something about the plot. Oh yeah hey lets go see that movie where Seth Green gets molested by a gorilla! what the hell were they thinking, at least put a dog or something on the poster. Second is the stance John Travolta is in, it's like he knows in he's in a piece of crap movie and just shrugging it off. Like he doesn't know what he's doing in the poster either, ugh. Finally and really this more a general trend that I'm pissed off with and that's the lazy thing of just putting a white background with the stars. Like that's all we need to know to want to see this film. Case in point "The Break Up Plan", "She's out of my League" and even "Hot Tub Time Machine". That's why this poster and all like it suck.


#5 - The Bourne Ultimatum

What the hell!? Couldn't they decide on which poster they were going to use? Don't get me wrong separately these poster look okay but when have you ever seen a poster that is just clearly two separate posters merged into one? It baffles me that someone somewhere though that this was smart. It's not smart or cool, it's damn lazy and it tells me that you (the studio) don't really give a damn about the promotional material. Heck if you look into it all the posters for this movie range from good to awesome yet the one I most commonly saw was this monstrosity that made about as much sense as putting Richard Pryor on a Superman poster. Even so, one poster is supposed to be in colour and the other is in black and white...why would you combine these two! Why would you combine two separate posters at all!?

What it Should Have Been: Non-existent...which will apply to all of the follow posters.


#4 - Killers


Other than the fact that Kutcher clearly doesn't know what he's doing in this movie I have the same problems with it as with Old Dogs. Well minus the gorilla issue. It's worse than Old Dogs though because it has Ashton Kutcher on it. That's a scientific fact too.


Also Doesn't that purple font just screams "Killers".



#3 - World's Greatest Dad

From what I hear this movie is supposed to be pretty good. huh. I never thought a movie about Robin Williams being crushed by giant letters would be good but...shows what I know. The oddest thing about this poster though is the words "Sundance" and "Robin Williams" being on the same image. Not much to say about this, it just looks silly and I think anyone can see that...




#2 - Ghost Town

Where to start on this one. from the photoshopped looking head of Gervais to the fact that it looks like a dentist is about to give someone a prostate check. So what exactly does the "This is how we do it, baby" have to do with dentists?...or Ghosts? It makes the prostate checking dentist even creepier. Oh look there's another tagline..."Get into the Spirit". Wha?

Not only is this creepy but it is confusing and tells you not a damn thing about the fact that the film has Ghosts in it! Sure it has Ghost in the title but did you see any Ghosts in "Ghost World"? ugh

Oh and once again we have the star and a white background. very creative guys.


#1 - Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.

And there you have it people, the vastly under looked teaser poster for the worst Star Trek movie ever made. Seems the suckage from the film was so powerful that it pulled in even the promotional material. Hell, this a Star Trek film and the poster is about...what exactly? the film will be going so fast that you might fall out of your chair? No that's stupid...Wait It's probably more likely that they wanted to force you to watch the whole film so you can't ask for a refund. Oh yes no one will be walking out on Star Trek V this summer. Well that's what they would have been thinking back in 1989. Also why is the chair floating in space? shouldn't it be in a theatre? The text should read "Why is Captain Kirk attaching seatbelts to chairs and ejecting them into space this Summer?". On a side note I would actually want to know the answer to that question. And...theatres didn't actually put in seatbelts in so...damn this poster is stupid. A stupid poster for a stupid film...no wonder they never let Shatner direct again. Then again what do you expect from the film that gave us this....

"The Book of Eli" or "Denzel Washington is Cooler in Slow Motion"

So as promised I did go and see "The Book of Eli" this week, which I had been looking forward because really there has been a fair lack of post-apocalyptic films recently. Then again I believe in times of economic down turns the general public tend to move towards more optimistic cinema rather than depressing hell holes. Anyhow come along with me now as we enter into a world quite like our own except everything is blown up, rapists roam the roads and a single man will bring hope. Sounds like "Mad Max 2" ey?

SPOILER TIME

The film starts with a dark forest and a very hairless cat feasting on a dead body while a man in a gas mask lays on the ground aiming a bow at the clearly staving animal. The bow fires and from the first minute we see the thing that annoyed me the most about this movie, unneeded slow motion. The arrow slowly moves with bad CGI before impaling the cat and fading to a different scene of Denzel's Eli walking down a long long road very very slowly. Yes apparently Denzel Washington looks so cool walking that we need to see it over and over. Some might argue that it's to show his incredibly long journey and how far he has traveled. Fair enough but that doesn't explain why the hell it's in slow motion, only cool things like arrows flying trough air are supposed to be in slow motion, its a law of cinema! Anyway Eli slowly makes it to a shake where in he finds a dead body and makes camp for the night also choosing to barbecue the cat he had killed earlier. Morning comes and Eli walks yet again through this over exposed wasteland leading him to a girl with a broken shopping cart who wants help with repairing the cart. Anyway it (obviously) is a trap and Eli quickly hacks and slashes through the men before leaving the shopping trolley bait girl to die I guess. The road takes Eli to another situation where by another gang is attacking a couple and instead of dropping down to save them he just mutters about "keeping to the path" while they preceded to rape the girl.

The gang then rides their motorbikes to a town where they report to our clear bad guy Gary Oldman, who is always evil unless it's a "Batman" movie. Apparently our villain, Carnegie is sending these scavengers out to collect books in hopes that he might find one very powerful paperback. Eli walks into town to recharge his ipod and get something to drink but runs into the rapist book collecting gang while in the bar, who don't take kindly to...well anyone it seems. Eli again kills them all with ease and gets Carnegie's attention who tries to hire him but to no avail. Carnegie suggests the Eli stay the night and sample some local hospitality *wink wink* and gets a girl named Solara (Mila Kunis or the chick from "That 70's show") to seduce Eli. Solara fails because Eli would rather just eat and teach her how to pray which she later teaches to her mother. Carnegie hears them communing with God and realises that Eli must have the all powerful book that he is looking for, Eli however escapes before Carnegie can question him. But Eli has one very important thing to do before he leave, collect his still charging ipod. Carnegie and his men intercept Eli before he can leave but again Eli kicks the crap out of everyone and leaves town.

Solara follows him and the two share some buddy time before Eli dumps her because its too dangerous or something. She tries to catch up to Eli but runs into...the same girl with the broken shopping cart. The new group of scavengers capture Solara and try to rape her, lucky for her though Eli appears and kills the rapists with arrows to the crotch. Carnegie and his men give chase as well by this time and Solara and Eli continue walking. The unlikely pair reach a house owned by two old survivalist cannibals who serve them tea and play records. Carnegie though doesn't like tea parties and decides to crash it, leading to a stand off with the group. The old cannibals are killed and both Eli and Solara are captured. Carnegie shoots Eli and takes his Bible and companion. Solara however kills some of Carnegie's men and hijacks one of the cars, speeding back to aid the now dying Eli who she finds is still walking out west. Carnegie decides not pursue them and go back with his all powerful prize while Eli and Solara make it all the way to San Francisco. Eventually the two make it Alcatraz where a group is trying to retain culture and would be able to keep the Bible safe if Eli had it.

Fortunately for Eli he has memorized the whole Bible because in a dramatic twist it turns out he's been blind this whole time. you know what that means, the Bible is in braille and Carnegie can't use it. Eli recites the Bible so it can be rewritten and dies while Carnegie's empire crashes because too many of his men had died pursuing the now useless book. Solara takes Eli's weapons and heads back out into the world to...do something. The End.

Ok. Firstly I did enjoy this film greatly, it had enough action and great performances to keep my attention and want more. However that said this film does have numerous faults in it's story line that should not have really been there and the major one is the suggestion that Eli has been blind for the whole movie. Now I can buy a blind guy kicking the crap out of people that's all cool, what I don't buy is the fact that throughout the whole film we can see the Eli can clearly see. We see him look at the sky in the morning, look at things around him and look at the people he's talking to. It doesn't detract much from the story but it certainly takes you out of the film and go "hang on a minute what about when...". This and the stupid use of slow motion in almost every walking scene got on my nerves.

Other than that though I quite enjoyed this and it had many homages to previous post-apocalyptic auctioneers and even had a cool little reference to the film that basically spawned the genre "A Boy and his Dog" which most people have never heard of. The action is smooth and well handled along with some very in depth characters, even Ray Stevenson's henchman seems clearly uncertain about following his employer's every wish.

I'm gonna give it
4 out of 5 stars...


Be Seeing You

"Kick Ass" or "Nicolas Cage Imitates Adam West"

Well I finally made it out to cinema to see the adaption of Mark Miller's "Kick Ass" and got what the title promised. This film has been the first to break the spell of fairly forgettable and mediocre films that I've seen this year. Even "Shutter Island" didn't do it for me. However "Kick Ass" did and I'm still reeling from the awesome.

BEGIN SPOILERS
Basically the film revolves around loser kid Dave who reads comics and spends alot of time wishing he could get the girl of his dreams etc etc and decides to become a superhero. . Eventually it becomes a fad and we get a supporting cast of heroes coming into the picture. Alot of the film follows Dave's struggles with...well being a competent hero which becomes the central comedy of the piece. Oh this isn't an out right parody as some have been lead to believe, it contains alot black humor. I don't really want to go in depth about the plot because it is fairly straight forward. What makes this an above average comic book movie is the performances, especially Nicolas Cage who plays "Big Daddy". Cage has gone on record saying he tried to imitate the same dramatic pauses Adam West used when he played Batman way back in the 60's and it makes for some hilarious moments...but it's only really funny if you know that. Really if the movie was only about "Big Daddy" it would have been the most awesome thing ever, kinda like if there was ever a "Star Wars" movie just about "Boba Fett". Cage does a fine job even when his character sadly meets his end he manages to pull a somewhat funny but painful moment. It's good to see Cage finally get to play in a good comic book movie rather then his previous films in the same genre. With him being a huge comic book fan he deserved it.

Chloe Moretz who plays "Hit Girl" also does a stand up job but that might be due to the shock of seeing an 11 year old cuss and shoot people. But hey that's the dark humor for you. Moretz also manages to pull off a maturity that many of the other characters don't have, which is impressive for an actor of her age.

One of the oddest things about this movie for me at least is that the film score steals pieces from John Murphy's film scores. Music pieces from both "28 Days Later" and "Sunshine" appear in the film with some great effect but it left me feeling alittle annoyed. I don't know if it's because I love both those scores so much or what but it did put me off a little. Also a part of Ennio Morricone's score for "A Few Dollars More " pops up too but I feel didn't work as well as the others. On a side note it also annoys me that John Murphy and Clint Mansell's scores are constantly used in trailers for movies that they dont appear in.

Really that's my only criticism and other than that the film was practically perfect in what it tries to be. It is a funny but dark action packed comic book movie with some great performances. It captures the spirit of the comic and translates it the screen with ease and director Matthew Vaughn does as good a job here as he did with "Layer Cake" (one of my favourite films actually). It seems that the better a film is the less I have to say about it. Oh if you like jetpacks and bazookas you will definitely love the climax of this movie.

So if like with "Watchmen" if you like comic books, violence or little girls beating the crap out of people, "Kick Ass" will satisfy all your needs.

5 out 5 Stars

Tune in soon for my review of "The Book of Eli"

Also coming soon "Hot Tub Time Machine" and more retro-vision.

Be Seeing You

Retro-Vision: "The Lost World" (1960)

I was planning on getting out to see "Kick-Ass" last week so I could review it but things have prevented me from doing so. Anyway instead I'm giving the gift of retro-vision, an occasional (ie. when I haven't got something new to review) series on the films of old. So sit back and continue reading as we begin our journey into ye olde movies with the 1960's Irwin Allen production of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Lost World".

Oh and of course...SPOILERS

Basically the film starts with our possibly mad Professor Challenger (Claude Rains) arriving in London and hitting our lead on the head with an umbrella. Seriously. Ed Malone (David Hedison) is a reporter bothering Challenger and he consequentially hits him and then announces a meeting with the London Zoological Society. Ed then meets our female lead Jennifer Holmes (Jill St. John) and together they attended the meeting where Challenger claims that he has found an isolated plateau in South America where dinosaurs still roam. Challenger then dares rival Professor Summerlee (Richard Haydn) to send an expedition to confirm Challenger's claims, because that's how all scientific expeditions start off. Anyhow, after some convenient plot developments the expedition team ends up consiting of Ed, Challenger, Summerlee, Lord Roxton (Michael Rennie) and later Jennifer and her brother David (Ray Stricklyn) squeeze in there too.

The team heads to South America and is again joined by yet another member Manuel Gomez (Fernando Lemas). Who basically has the soul purpose of creating unnecessary drama later on. Oh and he's a pilot...or a guide or something that is apparently usefull. That said he is one of the more interesting characters.

The team takes a nice helicopter ride to the plateau and soon they discover that Challenger is not insane and that the dinosaurs are not only real but also hate helicopters. The team's one way off the plateau is destroyed and they are trapped. They discover that along with the prehistoric life there is also giant spiders and a primitive tribe of people who somehow know how to use guns. Along with this shocking development is the discovery of Burton White's diary, another explorer who went with Lord Roxton on an earlier expedition to find diamonds. Oh and it turns out Manuel's brother was also on the expedition with Roxton and that Jennifer now has a love interest in Ed. The rest of the movie unfolds on these lines with one dinosaur battle thrown in and the group being captured by the primitive tribe who also turn out to be cannibals. After being captured the team are lead by one of the befriended tribe women to the now blind Burton White who informs the team of a way out that just happens to be incredibly dangerous. Manuel also learns his brother is dead and intends to take revenge on Roxton. Thus begins a harrowing journey through the pathway out which involves lava and eventually diamonds. Manuel eventually decides not to kill Roxton and sacrifices himself to save the others and the plateau explodes for one reason or another. Jennifer and Ed hook up and Challenger somehow snuck a dinosaur egg out of the lost world to prove to the rest of the world that he was right. The End.

Really there's alot more to this but its the basics that you need to know. This is in no way a great film, everything just bearly works. The acting is average, the "special" effects are poor even for the 1960's and over all the film fails to really give the audience anything to be amazed at.
The film takes way too long to get to the plateau and then to see one of the creatures, there is way too much filler put in to set up the internal tension the expedition has later on. I would not have a problem with this if the story needed internal character tension but in a film where people are surround by giant spiders and dinosaurs it is not really necessary. This fact made me incredibly frustrated when watching simply because I wanted to see some dinosaurs killing people rather than David trying to get it on with primitive woman. Another problem is that none of the team are killed until the very end of the film (where Manuel's assistant is eaten by dinosaur) and this makes it very hard to feel that the characters are ever in any real mortal danger.

As I said the special effects are fairly silly, mainly being lizards with horns glued on and then projected behind the actors. I know it was the 60's but I feel stop motion animation would have worked much better here, it's hard to take the lizards as dinosaurs and therefore harder to believe in the world that the film is trying to create. Heck even if it looked remotely like a T-Rex I could buy it and just write it off due to the film's age.

The size of the cast can also be annoying but I guess this also ties into the whole "no one being killed" problem. Usually in a film like this with an cast of this size you would expect maybe 2 or 3 to make it out but here everyone (except Manuel and his assistant) make it out to a happy ending. I just don't buy that. It's about as believable as someone telling you a small lizard is a baby T-Rex.

Overall "The Lost World" has it's camp value and charm being from Irwin Allen's golden age but there are just too many problems to make it truly enjoyable. Maybe I'm nitpicking and I'm sure people who saw this as kids loved it but ultimately it falls flat on it's face.

2 out 5 Stars

Well that's all for Retro-vision, tune in later for (hopefully) my review of "Kick-Ass"

Be Seeing You

"Clashing Titans" or "How I returned to being bored enough to blog about stuff"

Well I really have let this blog go havn't I? Well good news everyone, this is the first installment of what I'm hoping will be a weekly onslaught of my reviewing of what popular culture I have recently partaken of. Cinema, Musics and Comic books. So welcome aboard and get ready to spin the wheel of culture and listen to me ramble on about the last films I've seen.

If you havnt been living in a cave or a small African villiage you might know that the 1981 film "Clash of the Titans" has been remade to star Sam Worthington and that guy who bruised James Bond's balls. Thats Mads Mikkelsen by the way. Oh also this will be a fairly in depth review so I'm gonna have to write spoilers in big capital letters and some alerting colour. SPOILERS.

So the film follows a baby in a crate (Perseus) who gets found by an old fisherman who takes him in as his own son as another Bond star (Gemma Arterton) narrates the special specialness of the baby in the crate. Flash forward past some random bonding scenes and murmers of unrest between man and the gods untill Perseus and his family arrive at the statue of Zeus...which just happens to be in the process of being destroyed by some soldier guys. Hades (Ralph Fiennes) shows up in the form of some flying demon monkeys and slaughters the soldiers before reforming into his human-ish form and killing Perseus family with his powers. See where this is going yet? Hades goes to Mount Olympus and gets permission from Zeus to do damage to man in order to get them to love the gods once again...riiiggghhhtt.

Perseus is found by the surviving soldiers and taken to some Argos city or something where the revolution against the gods has begun. Hades shows up again and kills a bunch of soldiers and reveals that Perseus is a demi-god. Some stuff goes on about a sacrifice of a princess to the Kraken. So Perseus (now seeking revenge against Hades), Mads and some other two bit actors go out on a quest to ask some witches about how to kill the Kraken in order to spare the princess' life. While out on this quest, Hades approaches Acrisius who wants vengance on Zeus for banging his wife. After Zeus had basically raped Acrisius' wife she gave birth to Perseus. Anyway Hades blows black smoke into Acrisius and gives him magical powers to go and hunt down Perseus. So Acrisius attacks Perseus and his troop of men before truning to a chase in a desert where by Acrisius' blood turns the sand in to giant scorpions. So obviously the smoke gave him the "turn sand into giant scorpions power" instead of say...cancer. A fight ensues and some people die and basically Acrisius gets away and a bunch of wood skinned sand people come to save the day. The wood people have some magic powers aswell and tame the surviving giant scorpions so that they can ride them to their destination.

Finally they get to these 3 witches who try and eat some people but eventually get forced into telling Perseus how to beat the Kraken which is basically using the gaze of Medusa. So 1 + 1 = 2, Perseus and the gang travel to Medusa's lair where they are all killed bar Perseus who wins Medusa's head. Perseus then fights Acrisius and finally bests him. With time running out he rushes back to Argos and after a long drawn out chase scene involving a pegasus and Hades flying demon monkey form Perseus turns the Kraken to stone and leaves Argos forever.

Thats basically the plot in a nutshell...Oh theres some underplayed and badly handled love story between Perseus and IO our former narrarator...And some subplot involving Hadews betraying Zeus and wanting to rule over man himself (like you couldnt see that one coming).

Two major issues I have with this movie.

1. Killing off everyone in one fight that IS NOT the end battle. Seriously, everyone dies in the Medusa battle. Each character is dispatched fairly easily and oddly IE our wood skinned character exploding for some reason while Medusa is crushing him. Mads' Character dies to give Perseus the edge which would be fine if every other supporting character did not die as well. It's like seeing the entire cast of "Friday the 13th" film being killed off 5 minutes into the movie. Someone should have survived.

2. The Climax. The fight after this against the Kraken is rediculously easy. So easy that Hades has to show up and steal the Medusa head before Perseus can use it, allowing for a boring chase scene. It's so predictable and annoying that the whole climax falls apart (much like the Kraken). WHY? We didnt even have some soldiers trying to fight the Kraken in vain, just people running and being squashed. The drama of an action scene is about the possibility of the supporting cast being killed but when they are already dead who gives a damn! Hell, if they had left...say Mads' character alive he could have been doing some fighting with the Kraken while Perseus is playing chasey with Hades. This is a terrible way to end an epic film and really just annoyed me to no end.

This movie falls from being a solid popcorn film to just being passable as a film.
3 stars out of 5

Anyway thats it from me for now, guess ill take another movie and rip the hell out of it next week. untill then...


Be Seeing You