Those who have read my blog know that I am a big fan of Angel, for two reasons really. One is that it's got Vampires in it, and I'm a big "Vampiro-fiction" (my term, sounded good at the time!) fan, but also the quality of the writing was second to none, in my opinion, beating Buffy big time.
I am also a big fan of David Boreanaz, so it was with some hope that, about a fortnight ago, I watched the first episode of Bones, starring David Boreanaz as FBI agent Seeley Booth and Emily Deschanel as the forensic anthropologist assigned as his partner. Well, what a superb TV series. I got the
box set and have just (as in, about 20 mins ago) watched all of series 1.
Absolutely brilliant. Now, don't get me wrong, some of the plots require some extreme
"suspension of disbelief" moments, especially in the science of the forensics involved, computer generated holography which sometimes has to be seen to be believed, for example, but get over that, although it doesn't detract in the slightest, and what you end up with is a well-written and gripping hybrid between
CSI, X-Files and Waking the Dead.
The interplay between the cast, especially between Boreanaz and Deschanel, is enthralling, with the supporting roles, Brennan's team and the rest of the FBI, being
almost as important as the leads themselves. Again, the X-Files "will-they-won't-they" tension is built and built, and there's definitely an emotional rollercoaster, not only for the characters, but for the fans as well, with
episodes ranging in subjects as diverse and emotional as childhood cancer,
Iraq war veterans, racism and, of course, murder and suicide.
A stunning series, am now trying to catch up on series 2, currently showing on Sky One.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Shed 2a
I have a mate who's deadpan humour is equalled only by his astounding knowledge of
world history. For example, not many people know the level of detail of the jacobite rebellion, or the Wat Tyler revolt as he, and yet still work in IT (I told him, "forget IT, use your knowledge for good, young paduan, wear plaid and/or corduroy and represent
Fragfest college, Oxbridge on University Challenge", but he ignored me... wise, he is not).
Anyway, when you have a close interaction with people like this, you pick up certain traits and concepts. One of his favourite concepts is cultural osmosis, the idea that you pick up tidbits of information just from living your life in a given culture.
This information is not learnt in the traditional sense, but soaked up like a sponge, just by living. For example, we all have general knowledge, i.e. trivia that we can't seem to identify where we got it from, we just "know it", such as knowing the words to "Maybe Tomorrow" by Terry Bush, and knowing that it comes from the TV series / film, "The Littlest Hobo". You're not sure why you know this, you just do.
As part of my ongoing cultural osmosis, I learnt a very interesting fact today ( and this has been verified by http://www.amazingstoriesthatarealmostcertainlytruewethink.com (well, actually, Bill Bailey's 2001 show "Bewilderness")), and that is that in the 1960s, Buckingham Palace was moved (for "security" reasons) to behind the Authorised Personnel Only door in the little chef on the A1 near Leicester.
In it's place, stands a shed. But, not just any shed, no sir... but a shed with a
holographic cloaking device, allowing it to pass for the real Buck Palace.
MI6 know this shed only as "Shed 2a" (Shed 2b, of course, being the
real Buckingham palace). A further bit of information for those shed-trivia-hungry
blog readers out there, is that the shed is really a Malmesbury 400GL with optional twin gabling.
This will probably stay with me for life. I hope it does for you as well.
world history. For example, not many people know the level of detail of the jacobite rebellion, or the Wat Tyler revolt as he, and yet still work in IT (I told him, "forget IT, use your knowledge for good, young paduan, wear plaid and/or corduroy and represent
Fragfest college, Oxbridge on University Challenge", but he ignored me... wise, he is not).
Anyway, when you have a close interaction with people like this, you pick up certain traits and concepts. One of his favourite concepts is cultural osmosis, the idea that you pick up tidbits of information just from living your life in a given culture.
This information is not learnt in the traditional sense, but soaked up like a sponge, just by living. For example, we all have general knowledge, i.e. trivia that we can't seem to identify where we got it from, we just "know it", such as knowing the words to "Maybe Tomorrow" by Terry Bush, and knowing that it comes from the TV series / film, "The Littlest Hobo". You're not sure why you know this, you just do.
As part of my ongoing cultural osmosis, I learnt a very interesting fact today ( and this has been verified by http://www.amazingstoriesthatarealmostcertainlytruewethink.com (well, actually, Bill Bailey's 2001 show "Bewilderness")), and that is that in the 1960s, Buckingham Palace was moved (for "security" reasons) to behind the Authorised Personnel Only door in the little chef on the A1 near Leicester.
In it's place, stands a shed. But, not just any shed, no sir... but a shed with a
holographic cloaking device, allowing it to pass for the real Buck Palace.
MI6 know this shed only as "Shed 2a" (Shed 2b, of course, being the
real Buckingham palace). A further bit of information for those shed-trivia-hungry
blog readers out there, is that the shed is really a Malmesbury 400GL with optional twin gabling.
This will probably stay with me for life. I hope it does for you as well.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Viruses, closed systems and Bill Bailey.
Well, it's been a while since I last posted, and for that I apologise whole-heartedly, but it's been a bit hectic at home. To say that for the last couple of weeks it's been like a plague-pit in the household would be an understatement. I suppose it's the problem of viral / bacterial infection(s) and closed systems, really. Kids go to nursery / mums and tots group, pick up god knows what, the office has air conditioning and the worse feng shui I can possibly imagine ;-) I think you get the picture.
Anyway, back to the posting. I'm a big fan of most stand-up comedy (with the exception of Jimmy Carr!), my faves being Eddie Izzard and Peter Kay, although I'm partial to Lee Evans and Jack Dee as well. One comic which I never really got into, although I thought he is ace in Buzzcocks, is Bill Bailey. However, all that changed recently with the purchasement of his 1996 Bloomsbury Theatre show on DVD,
Cosmic Jam. What an astonishingly funny show, a combination of "rock opera" ("Insect Nation" : investigating what life would be like if insects ruled the world),
and hilarious cockney music / rock fest (yes, really...). It's not often that I say this, but it was hilarious. It also gave him a great forum for showcasing his cracking skills with both the guitar and the piano, didn't actually realise just how
good he was at both instruments really. The DVD also has a bonus disc of a 2001 show ("Bewilderness"),which I'll watch asap. Highly recommended.....
The other thing I've finished watching, finally, is all five series of Angel. I don't mind saying that this is one american TV series I simply can't get enough of. True enough, there's some weak episodes, but that's going to happen with any long-ish running TV series (yes, even Torchwood... ;-)), but thankfully they're in the minority. The long running story arcs are brilliant scripted and executed (Joss Whedon has to take the credit here), it's gritty, dark, yet witty and it's far enough away from the Sunnydale teen-angst to make it amazingly watchable. I'm just sad that
there's only 5 series, and what's more... no more Charisma Carpenter as Cordelia.....
Anyway, back to the posting. I'm a big fan of most stand-up comedy (with the exception of Jimmy Carr!), my faves being Eddie Izzard and Peter Kay, although I'm partial to Lee Evans and Jack Dee as well. One comic which I never really got into, although I thought he is ace in Buzzcocks, is Bill Bailey. However, all that changed recently with the purchasement of his 1996 Bloomsbury Theatre show on DVD,
Cosmic Jam. What an astonishingly funny show, a combination of "rock opera" ("Insect Nation" : investigating what life would be like if insects ruled the world),
and hilarious cockney music / rock fest (yes, really...). It's not often that I say this, but it was hilarious. It also gave him a great forum for showcasing his cracking skills with both the guitar and the piano, didn't actually realise just how
good he was at both instruments really. The DVD also has a bonus disc of a 2001 show ("Bewilderness"),which I'll watch asap. Highly recommended.....
The other thing I've finished watching, finally, is all five series of Angel. I don't mind saying that this is one american TV series I simply can't get enough of. True enough, there's some weak episodes, but that's going to happen with any long-ish running TV series (yes, even Torchwood... ;-)), but thankfully they're in the minority. The long running story arcs are brilliant scripted and executed (Joss Whedon has to take the credit here), it's gritty, dark, yet witty and it's far enough away from the Sunnydale teen-angst to make it amazingly watchable. I'm just sad that
there's only 5 series, and what's more... no more Charisma Carpenter as Cordelia.....
Friday, October 06, 2006
Nochnoi Dozor
Almost in an effort to prove that vampiric tendencies and the battle between good and evil isn't just confined to Sunnydale or Los Angeles, the acclaimed Russian director, Timur Bekmambetov released Night Watch, a movie adaptation of the russian novel of the same name by Sergey Lukyanenko, and starring, amongst others, the popular russian actor, Konstantin Khabensky.
It is the first in a trilogy, the second in the series released in russian cinemas in early 2006, called Day Watch. However, it has not yet been released in the UK.
The plot goes something like this. Two types of "other" (vampires / shape-shifters etc. etc.) exist, the "lights" and the "darks", and a delicate truce exists between them (and has done for a while, blah blah). This truce is maintained by both the "night watch" and the "day watch", kind of good and bad police forces each ensuring the other side obeys the rules of the truce. However, the most powerful "other" ever conceived is born in Moscow, causing a flurry of activity to try and "recruit" this boy over to which ever side he chooses.
The film follows the exploits of a single member of the "night watch" (i.e. the "lights") as he tries to protect the boy from the various vampires and shape shifters that exist everywhere (as they do in reality of course).
The plot itself is definitely the "see the outcome coming a mile off" kind, but that doesn't detract. It's an excellent film, and one of those foreign films, like Crouching tiger, hidden dragon and House of flying daggers before it, that is better watched (and i've seen both versions now) with subtitles rather than the english language dubbing (unless you can speak fluent Russian of course, but I can't). That's not to say the dubbing is bad, however, it isn't.
All in all, an excellent addition to the vampire DVD collection, one which, I might add, only adds weight to my theory of "increased vampire attractiveness" (which I blogged about earlier), in this film, vampires are definitely stylish.
It is the first in a trilogy, the second in the series released in russian cinemas in early 2006, called Day Watch. However, it has not yet been released in the UK.
The plot goes something like this. Two types of "other" (vampires / shape-shifters etc. etc.) exist, the "lights" and the "darks", and a delicate truce exists between them (and has done for a while, blah blah). This truce is maintained by both the "night watch" and the "day watch", kind of good and bad police forces each ensuring the other side obeys the rules of the truce. However, the most powerful "other" ever conceived is born in Moscow, causing a flurry of activity to try and "recruit" this boy over to which ever side he chooses.
The film follows the exploits of a single member of the "night watch" (i.e. the "lights") as he tries to protect the boy from the various vampires and shape shifters that exist everywhere (as they do in reality of course).
The plot itself is definitely the "see the outcome coming a mile off" kind, but that doesn't detract. It's an excellent film, and one of those foreign films, like Crouching tiger, hidden dragon and House of flying daggers before it, that is better watched (and i've seen both versions now) with subtitles rather than the english language dubbing (unless you can speak fluent Russian of course, but I can't). That's not to say the dubbing is bad, however, it isn't.
All in all, an excellent addition to the vampire DVD collection, one which, I might add, only adds weight to my theory of "increased vampire attractiveness" (which I blogged about earlier), in this film, vampires are definitely stylish.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Beyond Cyberspace (aka Hollywood's interpretation of Computing)
I would like to put it on record that I like The Lawnmower Man, a 1992 film starring Pierce Brosnan and Jeff Fahey. Supposedly based on an original Stephen King short story (although, Stephen King does not recognise this, since he deems it too far away from the original source), the film wasn't actually that bad. Okay, so it suffered from the "Hollywood" idea of computing, i.e. big flashing red and yellow login pages with enormous "ACCESS DENIED" images, but the story itself
did carry it somewhat.
Now, there are many words in the english language but, however, not one of them can truly convey the absolute feeling of despair while watching the sequel, Lawnmower Man II. I think it would be grossly flattering if I called the film an absolutely pile of
horse manure. This incarnation starred Matt Frewer (yes, of Max Headroom fame, and more recently, Eureka) as Jobe (the eponymous "Lawnmower Man"), and Patrick Bergin as the good Doctor Benjamin Trace.
This is the plot (in a nutshell... it almost seems like a waste of blog ASCII going on too much about it) : Set about a minute after Lawnmower Man I, Jobe is resurrected and (again) is improved by Virtual Reality (VR) to be an absolute genius again. Enter Dr Benjamin Trace who invents a pyramidal chip which can (somehow) enable access to any computer system.
The rest is mind-numbingly obvious, blah blah blah... access to all systems, blah blah blah.. The £2.99 I paid at Morrisons for the DVD is about £3 too much.
But, what does fascinate me (and I suppose more so since I work in IT) is the public "face" of computing from a Hollywood point of view. I've come up with the following requirements for whenever a computer system is shown on a blockbuster film, it's always made to these specifications :
Anyone who's even vaguely knowledgeable about computers are usually sat there wondering... "where do I get this software from?".
I'd therefore like to maintain a list of all films have computers which follow these specifications.
Here's some to start us off :
Any more examples of complete computer related hollywood idiocy?
did carry it somewhat.
Now, there are many words in the english language but, however, not one of them can truly convey the absolute feeling of despair while watching the sequel, Lawnmower Man II. I think it would be grossly flattering if I called the film an absolutely pile of
horse manure. This incarnation starred Matt Frewer (yes, of Max Headroom fame, and more recently, Eureka) as Jobe (the eponymous "Lawnmower Man"), and Patrick Bergin as the good Doctor Benjamin Trace.
This is the plot (in a nutshell... it almost seems like a waste of blog ASCII going on too much about it) : Set about a minute after Lawnmower Man I, Jobe is resurrected and (again) is improved by Virtual Reality (VR) to be an absolute genius again. Enter Dr Benjamin Trace who invents a pyramidal chip which can (somehow) enable access to any computer system.
The rest is mind-numbingly obvious, blah blah blah... access to all systems, blah blah blah.. The £2.99 I paid at Morrisons for the DVD is about £3 too much.
But, what does fascinate me (and I suppose more so since I work in IT) is the public "face" of computing from a Hollywood point of view. I've come up with the following requirements for whenever a computer system is shown on a blockbuster film, it's always made to these specifications :
- Login screens have to be in red or yellow with the words "PLEASE LOGIN" in bright green letters.
- Failed login attempts should be met with a bright-red "ACCESS DENIED" page, and always with an accompanying female voice repeating it.
- Once access has been granted (usually at the last possible second), then navigation through the computers "memory" (this term is intentionally kept woolly) should be either by a 3D city-scape, or via geometric shapes which only fit together in one way, thereby unlocking the information in the "file" (again, term kept intentionally vague), or indeed via green random ASCII characters falling down the screen on a black background.
Anyone who's even vaguely knowledgeable about computers are usually sat there wondering... "where do I get this software from?".
I'd therefore like to maintain a list of all films have computers which follow these specifications.
Here's some to start us off :
- Lawnmower Man (I and II)
- Wargames (and all done via acoustic dial up modem as well, cool....)
- Jurassic Park (the classic line, young girl navigating a 3D cityscape trying to find the "file" she's after, quotes the classic line "This is UNIX... I know this!". Honestly, love, you'll have to tell me what flavour of UNIX you're used to!
- Swordfish (ha ha ha, 'nuff said.)
- Matrix (original, "Reloaded" / "Remixed" / "Rejuvenated" (or whatever the hell the sequel's are called. (yes, I do know that they're called "Reloaded" and "Revolutions", I was being facetious)). Yeah, right, Cypher, you can see that text floating down the screen and understand it can you... clever boy.
Any more examples of complete computer related hollywood idiocy?
Monday, September 25, 2006
Sos Fantomes II
Well, as promised, I've just finished watching Ghostbusters II. Okay, it's nowhere near as good as the first one, but i'd truly forgotten just how funny it is.
Again, the "guys", i.e. Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd, Harold Ramis and Ernie Hudson, are
in fine form, with some excellent humour injected by the supplementary cast, i.e.
Sigourney Weaver, Rick Moranis and Annie Potts. Peter MacNicol (a.k.a. "him out of Ally McBeal") also makes an appearance as the rather bizarre Dr. Janosz Poha. The supreme casting of the film, though, must go to Wilhelm Von Homburg, a 6' 3" german boxer / actor (who, unfortunately, died in 2004) as Vigo the Carpathian, 15th century ruler of "Carpathia", a fictional place assumed to be in the Carpathian Mountains.
In some ways, it feels more of a Bill Murray vehicle than anything, but
that doesn't detract from the enjoyment. If you suspend your disbelief, and try and control the urge to vomit at the "far too easy to defeat the bad guy" finale, for the whole 104 minutes, then it's a fine bit of 80s nostalgia.
I suppose the whole "15th century tyrant from Carpathia" attracts the interest, to me, because of my interest in the whole vampire mythos. Vlad Tepes (a.k.a. Vlad the Impaler), Prince of Wallachia (now part of Romania), was, of course, one of the sources of the Dracula story.
Which led me thinking about bad guys in general. I'd love to see some "celebrity battles". We've already had Aliens vs. Predator (okay, a bit of a bobbins film, but one up to Predator (sort of)) and Freddie Vs. Jason (very tongue-in-cheek funny, and one up to Jason (sort of)), but what about
some classics we'd like to see? I'm therefore running a bit of a fun idea about
"bad guy battles".
Here are my suggestions with an opinionated probable outcome :
-> Gozer vs. Vigo
Gozer wins by a mile (Sumerian god vs. Carpathian magician, it's got to be one to Gozer here...)
-> Darth Vader vs. Magneto
Difficult one to call this, but it'd go for Vader. True, Magneto could affect the
machinery of Vader, but the force could enable vader to affect magneto even with that silly "i'll protect the wearer from psychic attack" hat.
-> The ghost girl (Samara) from The Ring vs. The ghost woman and boy (Kayako and Toshio) from The Grudge
You've got to go with Kayako and Toshio on this one, it's simply 2 to 1. Also, Samara has this unswerving ability to get trapped in wells all the time, which (I'm sorry to say) is simply not what a cool, rock hard ghost should let happen. I also get the impression that Samara simply hasn't made it into the 21st century yet, still relying on VHS to get her message across, come on Samara, what's wrong with DVD, or even better, a good MPEG that can be downloaded via P2P???
Any more "celebrity bad-guy scrap" ideas?
Again, the "guys", i.e. Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd, Harold Ramis and Ernie Hudson, are
in fine form, with some excellent humour injected by the supplementary cast, i.e.
Sigourney Weaver, Rick Moranis and Annie Potts. Peter MacNicol (a.k.a. "him out of Ally McBeal") also makes an appearance as the rather bizarre Dr. Janosz Poha. The supreme casting of the film, though, must go to Wilhelm Von Homburg, a 6' 3" german boxer / actor (who, unfortunately, died in 2004) as Vigo the Carpathian, 15th century ruler of "Carpathia", a fictional place assumed to be in the Carpathian Mountains.
In some ways, it feels more of a Bill Murray vehicle than anything, but
that doesn't detract from the enjoyment. If you suspend your disbelief, and try and control the urge to vomit at the "far too easy to defeat the bad guy" finale, for the whole 104 minutes, then it's a fine bit of 80s nostalgia.
I suppose the whole "15th century tyrant from Carpathia" attracts the interest, to me, because of my interest in the whole vampire mythos. Vlad Tepes (a.k.a. Vlad the Impaler), Prince of Wallachia (now part of Romania), was, of course, one of the sources of the Dracula story.
Which led me thinking about bad guys in general. I'd love to see some "celebrity battles". We've already had Aliens vs. Predator (okay, a bit of a bobbins film, but one up to Predator (sort of)) and Freddie Vs. Jason (very tongue-in-cheek funny, and one up to Jason (sort of)), but what about
some classics we'd like to see? I'm therefore running a bit of a fun idea about
"bad guy battles".
Here are my suggestions with an opinionated probable outcome :
-> Gozer vs. Vigo
Gozer wins by a mile (Sumerian god vs. Carpathian magician, it's got to be one to Gozer here...)
-> Darth Vader vs. Magneto
Difficult one to call this, but it'd go for Vader. True, Magneto could affect the
machinery of Vader, but the force could enable vader to affect magneto even with that silly "i'll protect the wearer from psychic attack" hat.
-> The ghost girl (Samara) from The Ring vs. The ghost woman and boy (Kayako and Toshio) from The Grudge
You've got to go with Kayako and Toshio on this one, it's simply 2 to 1. Also, Samara has this unswerving ability to get trapped in wells all the time, which (I'm sorry to say) is simply not what a cool, rock hard ghost should let happen. I also get the impression that Samara simply hasn't made it into the 21st century yet, still relying on VHS to get her message across, come on Samara, what's wrong with DVD, or even better, a good MPEG that can be downloaded via P2P???
Any more "celebrity bad-guy scrap" ideas?
Saturday, September 23, 2006
Die Geisterjager
People who either a) know me, or b) read this blog will know that I like cult tv and movies. On that front, have decided to re-watch some of the older films in my collection that, unfortunately, tend to get forgotten about in lieu of the more recent blockbusters.
Over the last few days, I've re-watched the Indiana Jones trilogy and the phenomenally good Ghostbusters, which i've just finished watching. Okay, by todays standards, some of the effects are a little dated, but it's still a cracking film. I've always been a big fan of Bill Murray, some of his films rate highly in most "funniest films"-type surveys, such as Groundhog Day (although, i'm not even going to mention Charlie's Angels).
It's probably Ghostbusters II tomorrow night, followed by (in no particular order), Blues Brothers and Time Bandits.
Wish me luck.
Over the last few days, I've re-watched the Indiana Jones trilogy and the phenomenally good Ghostbusters, which i've just finished watching. Okay, by todays standards, some of the effects are a little dated, but it's still a cracking film. I've always been a big fan of Bill Murray, some of his films rate highly in most "funniest films"-type surveys, such as Groundhog Day (although, i'm not even going to mention Charlie's Angels).
It's probably Ghostbusters II tomorrow night, followed by (in no particular order), Blues Brothers and Time Bandits.
Wish me luck.
Monday, September 11, 2006
Silent Hill
Just watched the movie adaptation of Silent Hill, a Konami / Team Silent computer game, available on platforms, such as PC, Playstation and XBox.
It stars Radha Mitchell (the female lead in one of my favourite films, Pitch Black) and Sean Bean, and was directed by Christophe Gans.
The story concerns a family, who's adopted daughter sleepwalks and has nightmares of a place called Silent Hill. To cut a long story short, the daughter and mother end up (via a car accident) in the small town in West Virginia, decimated by coal fires thirty years prior, and long since evacuated. Although, of course, no such town exists in reality, in fact, most of the movie was filmed in Canada (Ontario, to be precise). The mother (and a female cop who also finds herself in the town) then heads out to rescue her the daughter from a bunch of witch-burning puritans, led by a fanatical leader, Christabella (wonderfully played by Alice Krige, she of star trek / borg queen fame).
To be honest, the movie (as is unfortunately the case with computer game adaptations) is far from the best film I've ever seen, but it's certainly not the worst. The effects (mostly physical effects, rather than CGI) are good, even very good in places, some of the scenes are quite eerie, whilst the acting from most of the cast certainly doesn't do them any injustice. It's let down, I suppose, by being a bit, how can I put it?, daft. Even the suspension of disbelief, in places, isn't enough to overcome certain problems, not least of which is believing how a small town police department would be able to keep the "truth" about the events leading up to the major fire from either the authorities and / or the media.
The ending (spoiler alert) lends itself to the "film with a twist ending" genre, in the same style Sixth Sense, or The Others, with all of the town being dead, stuck in a "limbo" of sorts, even the girl, mother and cop, although you don't realise this until the end when the two return "home".
All in all, (as per usual), it's worth the rental fee, and certainly won't be the worst movie you'll see this year.
It stars Radha Mitchell (the female lead in one of my favourite films, Pitch Black) and Sean Bean, and was directed by Christophe Gans.
The story concerns a family, who's adopted daughter sleepwalks and has nightmares of a place called Silent Hill. To cut a long story short, the daughter and mother end up (via a car accident) in the small town in West Virginia, decimated by coal fires thirty years prior, and long since evacuated. Although, of course, no such town exists in reality, in fact, most of the movie was filmed in Canada (Ontario, to be precise). The mother (and a female cop who also finds herself in the town) then heads out to rescue her the daughter from a bunch of witch-burning puritans, led by a fanatical leader, Christabella (wonderfully played by Alice Krige, she of star trek / borg queen fame).
To be honest, the movie (as is unfortunately the case with computer game adaptations) is far from the best film I've ever seen, but it's certainly not the worst. The effects (mostly physical effects, rather than CGI) are good, even very good in places, some of the scenes are quite eerie, whilst the acting from most of the cast certainly doesn't do them any injustice. It's let down, I suppose, by being a bit, how can I put it?, daft. Even the suspension of disbelief, in places, isn't enough to overcome certain problems, not least of which is believing how a small town police department would be able to keep the "truth" about the events leading up to the major fire from either the authorities and / or the media.
The ending (spoiler alert) lends itself to the "film with a twist ending" genre, in the same style Sixth Sense, or The Others, with all of the town being dead, stuck in a "limbo" of sorts, even the girl, mother and cop, although you don't realise this until the end when the two return "home".
All in all, (as per usual), it's worth the rental fee, and certainly won't be the worst movie you'll see this year.
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Time Travel
Films concerning time travel is my second favourite film genre, the first (as people who know me will tell you) is the whole vampire / paranormal mythos. Ever since Back to the future was released in 1985, at the ripe old age of 12, time travel has been an absolute fave. In a past incarnation, i.e. at university ('92 - '96), I was heavily involved in the Quantum Leap phenomenon, authoring an email mailing list, and attending various different UK and US conventions, where I met many interesting people! ;-) More modern films like Donnie Darko and the wonderful Primer add a much deeper, and far cleverer, style of writing to the genre as well.
However, the main problem with most of these programmes / films, are the HUGE holes, which are obviously unintentional, but through which you can put a very large critical eye. This, I suppose, is inevitable with this subject, since the whole concept of paradoxes makes any logically sound idea very difficult indeed (if, indeed, you can even apply logic to such a situation!). Take a few situations in Back to the Future, why did George McFly (at the end of the film) not think "Hang on! Why does my youngest child look identical to a guy who helped me at school?", indeed, leading to the conclusion, "Is it my youngest child?" ;-) What about the scene with playing the guitar on stage, both Marty's elder brother and sister both have disappeared (and presumably don't therefore exist), how does he know them? Does time travel / interference really work this way? Who knows, but these are the types of question which lead you to have to suspend your disbelief with a lot of these films, otherwise you'll end up analysing the whole thing and not (as is presumably the directors vision) to enjoy the film.
It was in this light that I watched A Sound of Thunder, a CGI-laden movie adaptation of one of Ray Bradbury's short stories of the same name from 1952. Directed by Peter Hyams (the same director of the other time travel film (and Van Damme vehicle) Timecop, and starring Edward Burns, it features a future where Time Travel is invented and used to allow very rich people to travel back in time and participate in a carefully controlled safari hunt of an already doomed Allosaurus. So as not to alter the future the Allosaurus was chosen to be killed and left in a swamp which it originally died in. This event was then replayed many times for many different people. Of course, things go wrong in one of the "time jumps", one of the paying participants accidentally steps on a butterfly (presumably an allusion to the butterfly effect), and ends up seriously affecting evolution.
Now, with a critical eye, the CG effects, whilst averagely good, aren't very well tied in with the real actors, so in certain situations, it's very obvious that the "green screen" is used, and the computer used to control the jumps, TAMI (Time Alteration Mainframe Interface), is, to be honest, mostly annoying, smacking of Ziggy from Quantum Leap, but not nearly as well written. Another thing that immediately springs to mind is why if it's exactly the same period in history every time, do the people not meet themselves every jump? It's glossed over very neatly (i.e. completely), or indeed why the need to "slingshot" 65 million years is necessary to fix the damage, when a simple 72-hours "jump" to tell the team not to go would presumably be a lot easier?
The ending (spoiler alert) of managing to retain a video of the whole event, even though it technically never happened since they changed time, is a bit of a stretch of plausibility as well.
On a positive note, the film is quite enjoyable. The concept is very interesting, Ray Bradbury's genius for a good story (even from the 50's) is the film's saving point. Hammering home the butterfly effect from chaos theory (years before the concept was common) sets the mind racing about what super strict controls would have to be in place if time travel ever was invented in "reality", a person from the future even existing, never mind interacting, in the past would introduce bacteria / cells (cold viruses to name but one) from themselves which could seriously affect the mechanisms of evolution of the planet.
I admit, it's ended very quickly, and overly neatly. Is it worth the rental fee? Yeah, I think so. Just.
However, the main problem with most of these programmes / films, are the HUGE holes, which are obviously unintentional, but through which you can put a very large critical eye. This, I suppose, is inevitable with this subject, since the whole concept of paradoxes makes any logically sound idea very difficult indeed (if, indeed, you can even apply logic to such a situation!). Take a few situations in Back to the Future, why did George McFly (at the end of the film) not think "Hang on! Why does my youngest child look identical to a guy who helped me at school?", indeed, leading to the conclusion, "Is it my youngest child?" ;-) What about the scene with playing the guitar on stage, both Marty's elder brother and sister both have disappeared (and presumably don't therefore exist), how does he know them? Does time travel / interference really work this way? Who knows, but these are the types of question which lead you to have to suspend your disbelief with a lot of these films, otherwise you'll end up analysing the whole thing and not (as is presumably the directors vision) to enjoy the film.
It was in this light that I watched A Sound of Thunder, a CGI-laden movie adaptation of one of Ray Bradbury's short stories of the same name from 1952. Directed by Peter Hyams (the same director of the other time travel film (and Van Damme vehicle) Timecop, and starring Edward Burns, it features a future where Time Travel is invented and used to allow very rich people to travel back in time and participate in a carefully controlled safari hunt of an already doomed Allosaurus. So as not to alter the future the Allosaurus was chosen to be killed and left in a swamp which it originally died in. This event was then replayed many times for many different people. Of course, things go wrong in one of the "time jumps", one of the paying participants accidentally steps on a butterfly (presumably an allusion to the butterfly effect), and ends up seriously affecting evolution.
Now, with a critical eye, the CG effects, whilst averagely good, aren't very well tied in with the real actors, so in certain situations, it's very obvious that the "green screen" is used, and the computer used to control the jumps, TAMI (Time Alteration Mainframe Interface), is, to be honest, mostly annoying, smacking of Ziggy from Quantum Leap, but not nearly as well written. Another thing that immediately springs to mind is why if it's exactly the same period in history every time, do the people not meet themselves every jump? It's glossed over very neatly (i.e. completely), or indeed why the need to "slingshot" 65 million years is necessary to fix the damage, when a simple 72-hours "jump" to tell the team not to go would presumably be a lot easier?
The ending (spoiler alert) of managing to retain a video of the whole event, even though it technically never happened since they changed time, is a bit of a stretch of plausibility as well.
On a positive note, the film is quite enjoyable. The concept is very interesting, Ray Bradbury's genius for a good story (even from the 50's) is the film's saving point. Hammering home the butterfly effect from chaos theory (years before the concept was common) sets the mind racing about what super strict controls would have to be in place if time travel ever was invented in "reality", a person from the future even existing, never mind interacting, in the past would introduce bacteria / cells (cold viruses to name but one) from themselves which could seriously affect the mechanisms of evolution of the planet.
I admit, it's ended very quickly, and overly neatly. Is it worth the rental fee? Yeah, I think so. Just.
Saturday, August 19, 2006
Doom
Just watched Doom, the movie adaptation of the computer game (yes, I know it's been out for ages, but I don't get much time to go to the flicks these days). Being a big fan of this game going back years (and many sleepless nights on multi-player games while at Uni) , I was concerned this would just be a cash-driven tie-in, and while it is that to some extent, the movie itself isn't as bad as I expected. Sure, "The Rock " is no Larry Olivier, but this movie suits him, all action, playing the big tough marine-type.
Plus, there's the cracking "in-game" sequence towards the end, which is a great touch, and the special effects (as you may expect from modern film-makers) are great too. Okay, it's not as
atmospheric as films like Aliens, which pretty much cover the same ground, but it does work.
Yeah, all in all, well worth the rental money.
Plus, there's the cracking "in-game" sequence towards the end, which is a great touch, and the special effects (as you may expect from modern film-makers) are great too. Okay, it's not as
atmospheric as films like Aliens, which pretty much cover the same ground, but it does work.
Yeah, all in all, well worth the rental money.
Friday, August 18, 2006
The vampire mythos (are we being groomed?)
Having just watched UltraViolet again, and it's only after the second or third viewing that you realise just how good this series is, it brought to mind a theory I had about 3 years ago when I was watching a re-run of Angel on syndication here in the UK.
The Vampire. An interesting concept. The legend tells of entities who become immortal after death, sustaining themselves on human blood. We all know this. We probably also know that the "modern" concept of the vampire grew up in eastern europe , places like Romania, Hungary and Slavic countries, all had the concept of the undead, in some form or another, although entities with some of the characteristics of vampires can be found in much older texts, the Romanian Strigoi (vampire) has it's origins in Roman legends of the strix, a bird inhabiting the underworld who devoured human flesh and blood, even old sanskrit texts reference the Vetalas, ghostly beings who inhabit corpses.
Mostly fuelled by ignorance and paranoia, coupled with
influences of so-called "Vampire" bats (although, the bat was named after the vampire, not vice versa as many people believe), the legend compounded and expanded. In our modern society, we now understand a lot about things which previous societies knew very little, pathology being the most obvious. We now understand that the human body can survive in the right conditions
pretty much unchanged (to the human eye, at least) for many months. We know that piercing the human body after death (the "stake through the heart") can cause muscular contractions and gaseous emissions that can be misconstrued as pain and screams of agony. No wonder then that the legend persisted, and persists even to this day.
So, what's the theory? Well, I reasoned that there is a social bias in the media to portray the vampire as being "cool". Previously, the vampire was definitely depicted in the media as an evil monster, think Nosferatu and Dracula, to name but two. Now look at the current state of the media, vampire's have come out of the monster-closet and are now successful business people, coordinating efforts rather than ripping some young virgin's throat out (although, this can still be an option). Think Underworld, Angel, Blade, UltraViolet, The Lost Boys, Interview with the vampire, the list goes on and on. All these shows / films are pretty much about one thing, vampires being cool.
I also reasoned that maybe there's a controlling influence behind all this. Maybe, we're being
prepared by entities to accept vampires as cool entities, as opposed to blood-sucking monsters.
In the same way that there are conspiracy theories floating around about the existence of shape-shifting lizards controlling our destinies, again which we are being prepared to accept with shows like V, maybe vampires are an alternative and opposing force. Behind the scenes, who knows, maybe there is a battle between vampires and other forces for our attention and respect.
Maybe.
The Vampire. An interesting concept. The legend tells of entities who become immortal after death, sustaining themselves on human blood. We all know this. We probably also know that the "modern" concept of the vampire grew up in eastern europe , places like Romania, Hungary and Slavic countries, all had the concept of the undead, in some form or another, although entities with some of the characteristics of vampires can be found in much older texts, the Romanian Strigoi (vampire) has it's origins in Roman legends of the strix, a bird inhabiting the underworld who devoured human flesh and blood, even old sanskrit texts reference the Vetalas, ghostly beings who inhabit corpses.
Mostly fuelled by ignorance and paranoia, coupled with
influences of so-called "Vampire" bats (although, the bat was named after the vampire, not vice versa as many people believe), the legend compounded and expanded. In our modern society, we now understand a lot about things which previous societies knew very little, pathology being the most obvious. We now understand that the human body can survive in the right conditions
pretty much unchanged (to the human eye, at least) for many months. We know that piercing the human body after death (the "stake through the heart") can cause muscular contractions and gaseous emissions that can be misconstrued as pain and screams of agony. No wonder then that the legend persisted, and persists even to this day.
So, what's the theory? Well, I reasoned that there is a social bias in the media to portray the vampire as being "cool". Previously, the vampire was definitely depicted in the media as an evil monster, think Nosferatu and Dracula, to name but two. Now look at the current state of the media, vampire's have come out of the monster-closet and are now successful business people, coordinating efforts rather than ripping some young virgin's throat out (although, this can still be an option). Think Underworld, Angel, Blade, UltraViolet, The Lost Boys, Interview with the vampire, the list goes on and on. All these shows / films are pretty much about one thing, vampires being cool.
I also reasoned that maybe there's a controlling influence behind all this. Maybe, we're being
prepared by entities to accept vampires as cool entities, as opposed to blood-sucking monsters.
In the same way that there are conspiracy theories floating around about the existence of shape-shifting lizards controlling our destinies, again which we are being prepared to accept with shows like V, maybe vampires are an alternative and opposing force. Behind the scenes, who knows, maybe there is a battle between vampires and other forces for our attention and respect.
Maybe.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
The quality of education....
It's that time of year again. Many extremely intelligent students get their A-Level result(s). Personally, it's been a long time since I did my A-Levels, 1992 in fact (14 years????), but one thing never changes.... the ability of other people to criticise. How many times do you hear it on the news? "A-Level's are getting easier", "They were harder in my day". The fact is that every year, thousands of students say to the world, "Yes! I've shown what I can do".
In my mind, the people who criticise the exams are the kind of people, usually much older, who will one day say "Oooh.... the youth of today!", or "They don't know they're born!". It's almost like some people are so insecure of their own intelligence, and defensive about the quality of their own education, that they seek to cast dispersions about the current batch of students. It's a real shame.
I honestly can't see why certain people can't understand that younger generations may actually (shock, horror!) be getting more intelligent. I consider myself intelligent, but that doesn't mean
I don't think that my two kids will easily surpass me in years to come. On the contrary, I expect them to significantly eclipse their old man. Teaching improvements and resource improvements (where was the Internet / Google Earth etc. when I was at school?) all contribute to a major improvement in society. Average IQs increase year on year, every other metric increases.
Okay, so there may be an element of 'knowing how to pass the exam', but why is that a problem? Most exam / learning situations in life are about getting an advantage, I didn't pass my Oracle Certified Professional (OCP) without looking at the scope of the exam (such as the Oracle curriculum), nor did I pass my driving test without reading the highway code).
One of the best quotes I heard was on the BBC website, stating "So, exams are getting easier because more people are passing them? More people are reaching the summit of Mt. Everest, it doesn't mean that it's getting smaller". Perfectly said.
In my mind, the people who criticise the exams are the kind of people, usually much older, who will one day say "Oooh.... the youth of today!", or "They don't know they're born!". It's almost like some people are so insecure of their own intelligence, and defensive about the quality of their own education, that they seek to cast dispersions about the current batch of students. It's a real shame.
I honestly can't see why certain people can't understand that younger generations may actually (shock, horror!) be getting more intelligent. I consider myself intelligent, but that doesn't mean
I don't think that my two kids will easily surpass me in years to come. On the contrary, I expect them to significantly eclipse their old man. Teaching improvements and resource improvements (where was the Internet / Google Earth etc. when I was at school?) all contribute to a major improvement in society. Average IQs increase year on year, every other metric increases.
Okay, so there may be an element of 'knowing how to pass the exam', but why is that a problem? Most exam / learning situations in life are about getting an advantage, I didn't pass my Oracle Certified Professional (OCP) without looking at the scope of the exam (such as the Oracle curriculum), nor did I pass my driving test without reading the highway code).
One of the best quotes I heard was on the BBC website, stating "So, exams are getting easier because more people are passing them? More people are reaching the summit of Mt. Everest, it doesn't mean that it's getting smaller". Perfectly said.
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
The difficult first post....
Well, it's the first post time! Almost as difficult as The Office's "difficult 3rd season", almost. I started this blog to allow me to go in a different direction than what I blog about on my Oracle technical site (http://www.oratechinfo.co.uk). While I find it easy to blog on there about things not necessarily about Oracle, such as my passion for cult / retro tv, it really doesn't belong there. Also,
as a "static" site, it's not possible to post comments / follow-ups, which is the real reason why you blog anyway, otherwise, it's more of a noticeboard, rather than a true weblog. Hence, this.
In general, this will be my review point of cult TV / Films which I've watched recently, or indeed anything pertaining to this general subject area.
For those of interest, the kind of cult telly I'm pertaining to are classic programmes such as Robin of Sherwood, Ultraviolet (no, not the recent film, the classic vampire six episode series from 1998, starring Susannah Harker et al.), Quantum Leap, Red Dwarf etc. Yes, there'll be a sci-fi / fantasy basis, but it won't necessarily stop there.
All my opinions are, of course, mine and mine alone. If you agree or disagree, or indeed just want to voice your opinions on whatever subject, you're more than welcome to do so.
as a "static" site, it's not possible to post comments / follow-ups, which is the real reason why you blog anyway, otherwise, it's more of a noticeboard, rather than a true weblog. Hence, this.
In general, this will be my review point of cult TV / Films which I've watched recently, or indeed anything pertaining to this general subject area.
For those of interest, the kind of cult telly I'm pertaining to are classic programmes such as Robin of Sherwood, Ultraviolet (no, not the recent film, the classic vampire six episode series from 1998, starring Susannah Harker et al.), Quantum Leap, Red Dwarf etc. Yes, there'll be a sci-fi / fantasy basis, but it won't necessarily stop there.
All my opinions are, of course, mine and mine alone. If you agree or disagree, or indeed just want to voice your opinions on whatever subject, you're more than welcome to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)