Announcer sacked over spoof messages - Yahoo! News
Shame on London Underground. I hope Equity are going to do something about her case.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Monday, November 26, 2007
Review: Beowulf
Let's be honest, unless you're a serious scholar you have no more than the vaguest clue about the story of Beowulf. An Old English poem written practically before there was literature may be a great work, but it's totally impenetrable and utterly tedious as far as most of us are concerned. I've tried to read it several times and never got terribly far with it. So let's dismiss the criticism this film has suffered because of the 'liberties' it has taken with the original. The vast majority of the audience are never going to read it and if this keep s the tale alive and in the minds of a new audience then only good has been done. It's not like the mess Hollywood made of William Wallace's story which was a) history rather than legend and b) better in the original than in the adaptation. It will no doubt encourage a few to read the original, too, and that is even better.
It is, though, the film I am concerned with here and I find it as flawed as I do the source material.
There are points, such as the race with Breca, where the pace dips and the narrative flow is interrupted for no really good reason other than making an attempt to appease the 'stick to the source' faction. Without them it would be quite a bit shorter and much punchier. Despite some stunning sequences, some excellent vocal performances and a much more accessible version of the story it does still drag on a bit.
The animation is absolutely stunning, and that is not hyperbole. The level of detail on the characters is incredible, fight down to pores, flaws and little hairs growing out of the old men's noses & ears. Photorealistic is a term too often used to describe animation but this is actually there. At some points you won't be sure whether or not it is animation or film. The 3D is excellent and, apart from a smattering of the usual effect shots, is used to enhance the film rather than for cheap thrills. It never, though, feels like reality rather like being immersed in a really good computer game. It's never more than an animated feature (despite how real some of it can look), and that's down to how good we are at identifying fakery. The animation always suffers from the same flaws, even at this superlative level; Things just don't quite touch each other somehow, certain movements don't look right (Especially the horses for some reason. The fictional dragon seems to move more 'realistically' somehow.), hair and fur still aren't quite there
and eyes just never look alive. The latter is always the most telling and in addition to occasional lip-synch'ing problems are what keeps us actors safe for the time being.
The ability to age a character, have flawless makeups, and better creatures is the strongest argument for this kind of project and Beowulf uses all of them to its advantage and credit.
Ray Winstone, as fond as I am of the man as an actor, is wrong for this character. Perhaps it's because his voice is so distinctive and you know he doesn't look like that, but his voice from Beowulf's mouth just doesn't look right. It's like watching Jimmy Sommerville sing. Wrong. Perhaps it has to do with him having a totally different accent to everyone else in the film. True, he's meant to be from outside, but so are his men and he sounds different to them, too. Elements of the character are also rather unpleasant. Arrogant, rude and openly covetous of his host's wife this is likely just how such a hero would have been, but when added to the lies we see him tell it makes one wonder how much is boast and how much is reality. And what is all this fighting naked business? If he's going to do that why does he wear armour in the first place? Oh yeah, as an excuse to do a striptease. This is then followed by a, frankly, ludicrous sequence of objects being conveniently placed to block any view of his tackle that would have looked more at home in a sit-com. Considering it's his armour that saves him in the poem the whole nudity thing is just daft.
It also leads to a big continuity error.
Beowulf brings with him fourteen warriors as his crew and companions. In the poem one is killed by Grendel. Here Grendel kills at least five of them. After the battle Beowulf and his remaining crew are seen standing in front of the wrapped corpses. There are still thirteen members of his crew with him.
It's a big, bold, mostly exciting, novel and entertaining film. The 3D version makes it much, much better and where you have a choice is the only one to pick.
One more thing. It has a 12a certificate. It is not suitable for young children. Especially the sequences with the horribly deformed Grendel whose attacks are violent, brutal and gory. Yet another example of studio pressure overriding common sense for the sake of getting to a 'wider' audience.
It is, though, the film I am concerned with here and I find it as flawed as I do the source material.
There are points, such as the race with Breca, where the pace dips and the narrative flow is interrupted for no really good reason other than making an attempt to appease the 'stick to the source' faction. Without them it would be quite a bit shorter and much punchier. Despite some stunning sequences, some excellent vocal performances and a much more accessible version of the story it does still drag on a bit.
The animation is absolutely stunning, and that is not hyperbole. The level of detail on the characters is incredible, fight down to pores, flaws and little hairs growing out of the old men's noses & ears. Photorealistic is a term too often used to describe animation but this is actually there. At some points you won't be sure whether or not it is animation or film. The 3D is excellent and, apart from a smattering of the usual effect shots, is used to enhance the film rather than for cheap thrills. It never, though, feels like reality rather like being immersed in a really good computer game. It's never more than an animated feature (despite how real some of it can look), and that's down to how good we are at identifying fakery. The animation always suffers from the same flaws, even at this superlative level; Things just don't quite touch each other somehow, certain movements don't look right (Especially the horses for some reason. The fictional dragon seems to move more 'realistically' somehow.), hair and fur still aren't quite there
and eyes just never look alive. The latter is always the most telling and in addition to occasional lip-synch'ing problems are what keeps us actors safe for the time being.
The ability to age a character, have flawless makeups, and better creatures is the strongest argument for this kind of project and Beowulf uses all of them to its advantage and credit.
Ray Winstone, as fond as I am of the man as an actor, is wrong for this character. Perhaps it's because his voice is so distinctive and you know he doesn't look like that, but his voice from Beowulf's mouth just doesn't look right. It's like watching Jimmy Sommerville sing. Wrong. Perhaps it has to do with him having a totally different accent to everyone else in the film. True, he's meant to be from outside, but so are his men and he sounds different to them, too. Elements of the character are also rather unpleasant. Arrogant, rude and openly covetous of his host's wife this is likely just how such a hero would have been, but when added to the lies we see him tell it makes one wonder how much is boast and how much is reality. And what is all this fighting naked business? If he's going to do that why does he wear armour in the first place? Oh yeah, as an excuse to do a striptease. This is then followed by a, frankly, ludicrous sequence of objects being conveniently placed to block any view of his tackle that would have looked more at home in a sit-com. Considering it's his armour that saves him in the poem the whole nudity thing is just daft.
It also leads to a big continuity error.
Beowulf brings with him fourteen warriors as his crew and companions. In the poem one is killed by Grendel. Here Grendel kills at least five of them. After the battle Beowulf and his remaining crew are seen standing in front of the wrapped corpses. There are still thirteen members of his crew with him.
It's a big, bold, mostly exciting, novel and entertaining film. The 3D version makes it much, much better and where you have a choice is the only one to pick.
One more thing. It has a 12a certificate. It is not suitable for young children. Especially the sequences with the horribly deformed Grendel whose attacks are violent, brutal and gory. Yet another example of studio pressure overriding common sense for the sake of getting to a 'wider' audience.
Main Page - Dickipedia - A Wiki of Dicks
My kinda site.
Main Page - Dickipedia - A Wiki of Dicks
And, no, it's not quite what those of you with dirty minds are thinking.
Main Page - Dickipedia - A Wiki of Dicks
And, no, it's not quite what those of you with dirty minds are thinking.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Review: American Gangster
Biopic affair about a cop & the drug-dealing gangster he pursues and ultimately befriends, starring Russell Crowe, Denzel Washington and a whole cast of A & B list stars. Directed by Ridley Scott this is an at times leisurely, often brutal and always classy piece of celluloid. The period is captured well, the performances are fine if not electrifying and the story is captivating though lacking in any real depth.
For me, the trouble with this project is that it involved the real protagonists in the production. This is fair enough as it is their story and if you're playing someone it's good to have them around for research and reference. In the case of Frank Lucas, Denzel Washington's character, this means that a vicious, drug-dealing murderer who brought misery to the lives of thousands is given credibility and a sensitive treatment. Whilst the film doesn't shirk from showing some of his brutal excesses the effects on the lives blighted by him and his trade are not reflected. The female workers forced to cut & pack his drugs naked so they can't steal all seem very happy to be working for him, we don't see the damage he's causing nearly enough. There's one very clever sequence where we go from Lucas's Cosbyesque family Thanksgiving to the junkies shooting up and the squalor and misery of their lives. It's powerful and beautifully pitched. It's then followed up with Lucas having an altercation with one of his dealers who has been cutting the drugs too much giving a clear impression that it was this which caused the misery & damage & not anything Lucas was doing.
His 'redemption' at the end when his house of cards came tumbling down is pretty much also dealt with in one scene. Whilst it may be true that the dealer & the cop became friends the switch seems to be very easy. Surely having this man on the set and involved must have gained him an easier ride?
Crowe's character almost seems the usual cliche and if it wasn't for the historical content it could have been dismissed as such. Straight cop, shunned by other for being too honest, divorced, fighting to keep contact with his son, partner turned to drugs and killed by the product of the man he later hunts down, blah, blah, blah. But it was this guys life and stereotypes come about for a reason. Crowe is reputed to have requested tapes of Richie Roberts to get the voice right and Roberts has said he got the walk spot on. Sadly, the accent was shaky with moments of pure Australian creeping in. Not the worst I've heard, but Crowe can do much better.
Washington is clearly a powerful and talented actor. Sadly, I think he's becoming very lazy and it is hard to see the difference between this portrayal and most of the other characters he has played recently. Repetitive physical tricks, like the chewing gum when he wants to be angry, but controlled, the tilts of the head etc etc have all been seen before. Repeatedly. Denzel, you need to watch your DVDs and break some of these habits.
Worthy, watchable and witty in places there are a great many worse ways to spend some time. It would just have been better if you could give a stuff about any of them or there was any real sense of threat towards the hero.
Bloopers. Denzel's character buys a big mansion and moves his whole family into it. Apart from the fact that it doesn't appear to have a drive up to the door forcing the whole crowd to walk across the lawn where they've parked their smoking bangers the sequence of scenes is weird. The family arrive, then there's a big dinner scene and everyone's got changed. Then Denzel shows Mom to her bedroom. After they've been in the house for hours? Where did she change? Why does she act as if it's a surprise she has a room there? They all brought their belongings strapped to the back of their cars like the Clampetts at the start of Beverly Hillbillies.
For me, the trouble with this project is that it involved the real protagonists in the production. This is fair enough as it is their story and if you're playing someone it's good to have them around for research and reference. In the case of Frank Lucas, Denzel Washington's character, this means that a vicious, drug-dealing murderer who brought misery to the lives of thousands is given credibility and a sensitive treatment. Whilst the film doesn't shirk from showing some of his brutal excesses the effects on the lives blighted by him and his trade are not reflected. The female workers forced to cut & pack his drugs naked so they can't steal all seem very happy to be working for him, we don't see the damage he's causing nearly enough. There's one very clever sequence where we go from Lucas's Cosbyesque family Thanksgiving to the junkies shooting up and the squalor and misery of their lives. It's powerful and beautifully pitched. It's then followed up with Lucas having an altercation with one of his dealers who has been cutting the drugs too much giving a clear impression that it was this which caused the misery & damage & not anything Lucas was doing.
His 'redemption' at the end when his house of cards came tumbling down is pretty much also dealt with in one scene. Whilst it may be true that the dealer & the cop became friends the switch seems to be very easy. Surely having this man on the set and involved must have gained him an easier ride?
Crowe's character almost seems the usual cliche and if it wasn't for the historical content it could have been dismissed as such. Straight cop, shunned by other for being too honest, divorced, fighting to keep contact with his son, partner turned to drugs and killed by the product of the man he later hunts down, blah, blah, blah. But it was this guys life and stereotypes come about for a reason. Crowe is reputed to have requested tapes of Richie Roberts to get the voice right and Roberts has said he got the walk spot on. Sadly, the accent was shaky with moments of pure Australian creeping in. Not the worst I've heard, but Crowe can do much better.
Washington is clearly a powerful and talented actor. Sadly, I think he's becoming very lazy and it is hard to see the difference between this portrayal and most of the other characters he has played recently. Repetitive physical tricks, like the chewing gum when he wants to be angry, but controlled, the tilts of the head etc etc have all been seen before. Repeatedly. Denzel, you need to watch your DVDs and break some of these habits.
Worthy, watchable and witty in places there are a great many worse ways to spend some time. It would just have been better if you could give a stuff about any of them or there was any real sense of threat towards the hero.
Bloopers. Denzel's character buys a big mansion and moves his whole family into it. Apart from the fact that it doesn't appear to have a drive up to the door forcing the whole crowd to walk across the lawn where they've parked their smoking bangers the sequence of scenes is weird. The family arrive, then there's a big dinner scene and everyone's got changed. Then Denzel shows Mom to her bedroom. After they've been in the house for hours? Where did she change? Why does she act as if it's a surprise she has a room there? They all brought their belongings strapped to the back of their cars like the Clampetts at the start of Beverly Hillbillies.
BBC NEWS | Scotland | Glasgow, Lanarkshire and West | Bike sex man placed on probation
BBC NEWS | Scotland | Glasgow, Lanarkshire and West | Bike sex man placed on probation
I wonder what this guy rates on the Purity Test?
Seriously, though, why was he arrested for this never mind convicted? He was in the privacy of his own, locked room. Deviant and shocking as his behaviour may be to some (and I do actually include myself in that group) he wasn't harming anyone.
He should be appealing that decision.
I wonder what this guy rates on the Purity Test?
Seriously, though, why was he arrested for this never mind convicted? He was in the privacy of his own, locked room. Deviant and shocking as his behaviour may be to some (and I do actually include myself in that group) he wasn't harming anyone.
He should be appealing that decision.
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Passport incompetence
My passport's up for renewal and, as I'm off to Kyiv just before the baby's due, it had to be done early enough to sort out visas for a side-trip to Chernobyl. (I thought that glowing in the dark might make it easier for baby to recognise Daddy). So, rather than pay the post office to look at my form and send it in, I did it all myself. After all, it's only a renewal and there was little to do on the form. Before you go down that train of thought, I haven't got it wrong, but my passport is still not renewed after over two months and I got another call from them this morning telling me it still hasn't begun processing.
The first couple of times I didn't know why here was a hold up other than that they said my cheque was 'invalid'. I called after the first letter to ask why and was told that they couldn't say why, just that it had been rejected. So I wrote another and got the same response. This time I got a call from a manager telling me that it had been rejected because I had written it in Gaelic. The manager was rather apologetic as, she admitted, there was no legitimate reason to reject a cheque presented in this fashion. However, since they had rejected this one also could I please provide another? Since the postal strike was on I went into the office, suffered the near-strip-search they subject people to these days and stuck it - clearly marked with their own 'urgent' label into the box and left.
I got another call from the manager this morning asking why I hadn't sent them another cheque.
Not only that, but it turns out they still have my first cheque, haven't done anything to begin processing my passport. Why? Because they were waiting for the cheque.
At the moment the manager is 'trying' to get the original cheque onto the system, but this may not be possible as they have cancelled it. Surely I'm the only one who can cancel my cheques? Not only that, but why do they still have a cheque of mine which they rejected? It should have either been returned or destroyed.
Incompetent, careless, useless, time-serving, jobsworth prats.
The first couple of times I didn't know why here was a hold up other than that they said my cheque was 'invalid'. I called after the first letter to ask why and was told that they couldn't say why, just that it had been rejected. So I wrote another and got the same response. This time I got a call from a manager telling me that it had been rejected because I had written it in Gaelic. The manager was rather apologetic as, she admitted, there was no legitimate reason to reject a cheque presented in this fashion. However, since they had rejected this one also could I please provide another? Since the postal strike was on I went into the office, suffered the near-strip-search they subject people to these days and stuck it - clearly marked with their own 'urgent' label into the box and left.
I got another call from the manager this morning asking why I hadn't sent them another cheque.
Not only that, but it turns out they still have my first cheque, haven't done anything to begin processing my passport. Why? Because they were waiting for the cheque.
At the moment the manager is 'trying' to get the original cheque onto the system, but this may not be possible as they have cancelled it. Surely I'm the only one who can cancel my cheques? Not only that, but why do they still have a cheque of mine which they rejected? It should have either been returned or destroyed.
Incompetent, careless, useless, time-serving, jobsworth prats.
Hitachi finger-vein scanner to replace car key News - PC Advisor
Hitachi finger-vein scanner to replace car key News - PC Advisor
Sounds like a great idea until you read that different fingers will be programmed for different functions. Makes you wonder which finger most people would programme for paying congestion/parking charges...
Sounds like a great idea until you read that different fingers will be programmed for different functions. Makes you wonder which finger most people would programme for paying congestion/parking charges...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
