Lord Vader; Rise

I've managed to get myself a reasonably priced version of a Darth Vader costume on eBay. It's by Rubies and is listed as being the 'Supreme Edition'. Based around the Episode III version of the costume it has good and bad points, not the least of which is that it arrived damaged, with postage seriously over-charged and is now the subject of a Paypal dispute because the spanner who sold it doesn't think he's responsible for selling damaged goods. That, however, is a whole other entry. This one's about the costume. It's far from perfect, but most of my issues with the it stem from the fact that it's based on the Episode III incarnation and there were changes made to that I just don't like.

I've had a Vader costume for years having bought one from the marvelous Marco Enterprises (ME version) during the time when no-one was bothering to do stuff for fans. You know; back when collecting was fun, involved some effort and wasn't about how much money you could scalp for your items on eBay. It's not the best thing Marco made, but it did the job and looked good enough that I got a few personal appearance jobs out of it which paid for the costume. What I never got for it was a body-suit making do with leather trousers and a polo-neck. So when this came out I thought it might be nice to upgrade, especially as I had used the Don Post Studios version of the mask & helmet which were made far too small.

Helmet & Mask
That's the first good thing about the costume: the helmet is excellent. True, there's an odd mould shape on the top which undermines its quality and it is based on the Episode III version which has some issues of definition on the band which goes over the head. It still looks like Vader in ways that my old helmet just never managed.

There is an electronic breathing device built into the helmet. It has a very long wire to run down the sleeve and be stuck in the glove allowing the wearer to press the button and switch it on. You can't leave it on as it's a press-stud and stops the moment pressure is released which is a really bad idea. Finding a smooth button through a glove is going to be pretty hard but to have to hold it throughout the time it's worn is stupid as is mounting the speaker in the helmet. Why? Two reasons:

1. Your hearing is impaired enough as it is in there, having a sound effect running inside with you will effectively render the wearer deaf.

2. The wire from the helmet has to be run down the sleeve meaning that you're then attached to the helmet the entire time you're trying to don the outfit. The helmet has to be the last piece and the suit the 1st. To spend the whole time with the two connected is absurd. The sound unit should have been put inside the chest plate with one of the actual switches there used to activate it. This is how it's done on the ME unit.

Chest Armour/Shoulder Pauldrons
Thankfully, Rubies have now begun to articulate the shoulders rather than being a solid piece with the chest armour which is how it appears in the film and is how the ME version is made. That was fine for Hayden who wasn't moving much in it and didn't have to raise his arms. He also needed to be made broader which is why the armour sticks out about 2" past his shoulders on either side. It also means that the end pieces are silver rather than black as they appeared in all other films and have no sculpted detail on them. This is my biggest issue with this iteration of the costume. I know Hayden pleaded with George to be allowed to play the part, but they really should have done as they did originally and got someone to fill the suit rather than make a suit to fit the man. That decision meant that the armour had to be made wide and sadly all images appearing these days are based upon that suit.

All the rest of my problems with the suit are about build quality, or rather about the quality of materials used.

Rubies claim the following for the suit:

1. Heavy twill cloak.
2. Moulded leather codpiece.
3. Leather belt.

None of these are true.

The cloaks are lightweight cotton. A little back-lighting and they'll be see through. The main one also lacks the leather collar, but this may also be the case with the Episode III original. The chain is actually attached not to the cloak but to the chest armour with the cloak hooked to either end of that. This is a great idea as the cloak will not be able to slip around out of place. Sadly, the chain used is nothing like the original which isn't actually chain at all. It's rigid and hooks onto the chest in the centre.

Both belt and codpiece are made of synthetic materials stretched over a rigid foam base. In the case of the belt this doesn't even go all the way around as it becomes a thin, nylon belt half-way around. My ME costume came with a great heavy leather belt and a metal (Rubies' is plastic) buckle. Guess which I'll be using!

The shin-guards have been given a slip-on Lycra sock to hold them in place. Pretty rubbish if you've bought leather boots to wear with the costume. I'll make some other method up unless I decide to stick with the heavier fibreglass ones that came with the ME version.

The gloves stink. They're really lightweight synthetic leather and after only a few minutes in them I noticed that the gauntlet had folded down around my wrist.

Chest & Belt Boxes

They're not bad as such just not good. Again, much of the problem is being the RotS version. The chest panel is held in place with straps which run inside the suit rather than outside as they did in all other films. The writing on the panel (originally the phrase His Deeds shall not be forgiven until he merits in Hebrew, I believe) is missing, though likely that's the case from the original. Earlier versions had this in place. The bars down either side are plastic in this version and don't look quite right as they should be metal. The ME version has these in metal, but the rest of the mouldings aren't quite so hot. The belt boxes are also slightly better on the ME version for having metal fittings.



I mainly bought this costume for the helmet, the suit and the codpiece as my old one had deteriorated badly over the years. Searching eBay I found I could get the whole thing for about the same amount as these parts. In the long term the suit and the cloaks will have to be replaced with better-made versions, the gloves and belt have been scrapped and the shoulder pauldrons will require re-painting and detailing to make them look like the ESB version which is my preferred incarnation. The SFX module will be removed an put somewhere more sensible, if not replaced entirely.

Had I paid the full $1000 for which this suit originally retailed I'd be furious. It's not worth anywhere near that. I'm not sure it's even worth the £250 I paid for it. I'm not saying it's bad, and it'll impress the hell out of most casual onlookers, but it is certainly not 'Supreme'.

Episodes I-III

So I finally got around to buying the 'first' three Star Wars films on DVD. Quite a difference from how keen I was to get my hands on the original saga.

I was waiting for them to release a box-set of all six, but having bought the recent releases of the original trilogy to get the original release versions I thought I might as well take advantage of HMV's 3 for £20 offer. Let's be honest, there was no way I was going to pay £20 each for them, especially not the Flatulent Menace.

I'll find time over the next few weeks to see if my opinions change on them, but I can't see it really. I do believe they got a bit better as they went along. I still hate the end of Revenge of the Sith. Jar Jar Binks should be excised from history forever. What I did see in the extras I've watched on Sith is that most of the stuff that made Anakin & Padme's estrangement believable ended up on the cutting room floor.

George really hates all that story & character development crap, doesn't he?

What Goes Around Comes Around

Wonder how the fanatics who complain about the likes of Jerry Springer: The Opera will react to this:

Bible targeted in Hong Kong obscenity row - Yahoo! News UK

The story just goes to show that anyone can find offence in anything if they look hard enough.

Review: Zodiac

Following the events surrounding the pursuit of the notorious 'Zodiac' killer in 1970s California this film concentrates as much on the lives of those involved as it does on the hunt itself.
As such this means that it is not sensationalist, voyeuristic or insensitive. Of the murders shown onscreen they are cold, brutal and very realistic. Human beings are rather tough creatures and being stabbed or shot once or twice rarely kills them as it does in most movies. This creep's victims suffer and many survive and that makes them more disturbing to watch than any gore-splattered slasher flick.

Actually, this is closer to a drama-documentary than it is to most run-of-the-mill cinema and has much in common with the likes of United 93 in look and tone. The main difference being a stellar cast giving credible, if all-too familiar performances throughout. Robert Downey jr reprises the kooky, alcoholic junkie once more and one wonders if it's his masochism or the crass insensitivity of the casting system that considers it wise to put a recovering addict in this role. A thought; are they just banking on it not mattering if he falls off the wagon again by casting him in roles where he could turn up as pissed as a fart and just be thought to be acting his ass off?

Even if the latter is the case then one wonders what Jake Gyllenhaal's excuse is for playing Peter Parker? Hell, apart from the lack of red jammies and being a cartoonist rather than a photographer there's not much light shining through the gap between these characters. Or is he auditioning to be Tobey Maguire's replacement?

Oh, and what's with the wig on Anthony Green? He's the spitting image of Kevin Costner in it and that can't be at all helpful for his career these days!

As for the film itself, it's far too long, too waffly and suffers badly from having no central protagonist. It's meant to be Jake Gyllenhall, but as he spends the initial 2/3rds of the film bumbling around in the background, it's hard to relate to him. Characters bow out of the story with hardly a mention and are not really noticed once they've gone. With no resolution, no threat and no tension the film suffers badly and, quite frankly, should have been a made-for-telly drama/documentary. Without the 'character development' it would have been 40 minutes quicker and all the better for it. It doesn't help that this is a story whose main impact outside of the US was in being used as the loose basis for the first Dirty Harry film. It, at least, had tension and pace.

This is getting rave reviews. God knows why as by the final reel you'll be begging for the Zodiac Killer to just get them all so you can get up and get some feeling back into your ass.

Soon to be Seen

Having been passed over for the most recent Rebus, I've just been cast by the Comedy Unit in the next series of Legit. No script as yet, but as it's only one day & the character doesn't have an actual name I'm not betting on its being a great part. Still looking forward to it, though.

Work's getting really hard to come by up here and BBC Scotland filming Scotland-based series in London, Manchester and Liverpool doesn't help one little bit. There's already less money put into regional production than is paid in licence fees, so to see them take what money they have and spend it out of Scotland is disgusting.

If Jane Tranter, who defended the practice to Equity, or anyone responsible for the decision at BBC Scotland might be reading let me reveal a wee secret to you:

Nobody was watching Sea of Souls because Bill Patterson was in it. That's why they got through the preceding series with almost no input from him.

So when the miserable little shit refused, again, to come and work in Scotland it was not necessary to pander to him and move the production South thus costing Scots actors and technicians work which is becoming as rare as hen's teeth.

Election Mumblings

So, Labour have lost their stranglehold on Scotland at long last. Or have they?

The farce that was the voting system and a number of spoiled ballots that make the 'hanging chads' controversy seem insignificant in terms of scale rather than consequences have still managed to leave the Nats as the biggest single party in the parly. Sadly it doesn't give them power. The lingering effects of the hereditary vote saw to that. "My Da' voted Labour & that's good enough for me." So there's no one party with enough seats to hold full majority. The Socialists wiped themselves out in a fit of pique about who was shagging whom and who said what about it, which was a real shame.

Wee McConnell, whilst admitting that the Nats hold the moral right to form our next administration, is essentially refusing to step down as First Meenister. You can see in his piggy wee eyes that he's hoping he'll get to keep the ba' and find a way to hold onto the job. I reckon Labour are hoping that a minority administration will be hamstrung and that they can mess with its head throughout its tenure. No doubt they reckon they can make the Nats look incompetent to govern by buggering up the real changes they want to make.

The posturing that came out of Quisling Brown's mouth in the run up to the vote was amazing. How dare the smug git say that he'd refuse to work with a democratically elected government? Doesn't he know he has to let Dubya bum him before he can make those kind of threats? Even then, he has to wait for the real bully to start the trouble before he can run in and kick the victim on the ground. Pick a fight without his consent and you're likely to be left to deal with it alone.

Nicol's Lib-Dems surprised me rather more than anything else that happened. Their blank refusal to work with the Nats to form an administration unless the Nats abandoned their whole raison d'etre opened my eyes to just how similar their view of Scotland is to Labour's. To wit; they have bugger all chance of gaining power in Westminster without a solid vote up here, therefore they cannot afford to have Scotland leave the Union. Hence, despite the clear vote for the Nationalists, they refuse to countenance asking the people of Scotland if they want to go it alone. There's a whole load of prevarication about how we didn't really want a nationalist government and how it was all just about tactical voting to give Labour a smacked botty. Because, apparently, we can't actually decide that we want to have a mature and reasoned debate on the matter, without the scaremongering and lies of New Labour, and then vote to make a decision. That's not why we voted for a party for whom that is the central policy. According to the Lib-Dems, anyway.

I often thought that I might vote Liberal once we actually had Independence.

Not now.

Review: Bridge to Terabithia

Based on the trailers I was expecting a full-fledged fantasy film. Based on what I'd heard I expected an Americanised version of Narnia. As a result I thought I'd be sitting through something derivative, saccharine and just maybe entertaining enough to pass a while.

What I got was a wonderful, tenderhearted, unbridled, passionate film. Not a movie, a film.

The acting's not always the best, there are some moments of schmaltz and, yes, some of the issues are dealt with a little glibly, but the flaws are minor and easily forgiven. The depths of a child's imagination and the power it can give them should be rich grounds for storytellers and so it is here. It deals with life from the perspective of its barely teenage protagonists and it pulls no punches. I'm not going to talk about the script, I'd give too much away that you need to see to get the impact. Let's just say that you may well need hankies.

It's beautifuly shot, Weta have done their usual wonders with the effects and the leads are stunning. Josh Hutcherson and AnnaSophia Robb are outstanding whilst Zooey Deschanel goes a long way to wiping the stain of Hitchiker's Guide from her copybook, and both ladies contribute to the soundtrack, too.

There are comparisons to be made in this film, most notably with Pan's Labyrinth and certain passages from Beautiful Things, but only in how they utilise the power of imagination as held by their principals. I'm going back to see it again because Abby will love this film. That means I'll actually have to pay to see a film and there's not much I'll do that for these days. I haven't read the book, but I shall be.

Oh yeah, and I did shed a couple of tears.

Ewe've all beaten me to it.

I've already seen too many posts about the Japanese folks taken in by the sheep scam to bother re-telling it here. I just want to join in the laughing at them and to add a sentiment to any of them asking for a refund.

Review:300 & Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

It may strike you as odd that I have decided to run two such radically different films into one review. The fact is, though, that they have a surprising amount in common. Okay, the former is based upon an incident from history and the latter on a marketing ploy, but both draw on graphic novels as their main source of inspiration and both deal strongly with issues of honour, courage, responsibility and comradeship. Despite one featuring live actors and one being entirely animated 300 is so heavily dominated by CGI that it might as well be entirely animated.

It plays so fast and loose with history and reality that it drifts into the purely fantastic realms on TMNT. The portrayal of the (self-proclaimed) god-king, Xerxes as an 8 foot tall lipstick-wearing gulch-monkey may be meant as a subtle motivation for the character; i.e., he had to conquer the world to make the rest of the planet accept him & make him feel loved, or I might just be reading a smidgeon too much into it. It has a few extra scenes inserted to expand it to full feature length because, let's face it, the story was a bit light on detail even before it got hacked back for the constraints of the narrative-lite preferences of the graphic novel fan. Mostly, these deal with a rather odd political set-up which sees the king of the Spartans undermined by politicians. This, alongside the final speeches about fighting for the 'restoration' of democracy and 'freedom' give the film a distinctly pro-war, and support-America-in-Iraq tone which must go a long way to explaining its popularity in the US.

It's entertaining enough, but it didn't need the addition of orc-like characters and freaks.It's also hard to give a damn about anyone in the film. They're all cyphers rather than rounded characters and why should we care about a king who starts a war against both overwhelming odds and the wishes of his people, who is further offered more than he could ever gain by allying with his foe and who still refuses to yield to reason?

Despite it's target juvenile audience and its far more frivolous tone, TMNT actually draws some deeper characters, whom it is possible to like. Alright, we're not talking any real depth, here and the script is far from literature. Indeed it seems to be little more than the typical Hollywood hackery I usually despise, but it's entertaining, light-hearted fun. It has a clearer and somehow deeper and more resonant morality to it and this should not be. Where 300 seems to be in a rush to get to the next fight and the next rock video-style slow-motion, blood-spattering, homo-erotic pec-fest TMNT actually has decent pace and development.

And there's a sentence I never thought I'd say!

The real reason these films are combined in one review, though is because I draw the same conclusion about each:

Perfectly pitched at its target audience, with enough to keep the rest of us entertained and engaged. Once one accepts this film for what it is - an animated roller-coaster ride - a more than happy couple of hours can be passed in the cinema with one's brain deactivated.

TMNT wins by a length, though and - again I can't believe I'm saying this - the one to choose.

Review: Outlaw

Little more than a.n.other stereotypical Brit gangster film, this poorly-paced actioner tries for originality by looking at the world from the victims' point of view. Sort of.

From the montages of news clips and shots of hoodies hanging around the streets, through those other recent staples of Brit cinema, the washed-out colour and too much hand-held photography, we are given a clear picture of the feral, thug-controlled society in which we now live. Into this picture of urban blight come the stories of our characters. Danny Dwyer's soon-to-be-married City wide-boy is successful, reasonably wealthy and living well, but is bullied at work and having violent dreams. Sean Bean's taciturn soldier who returns from the war to find the locks changed and his wife shacked up with another man is played with his usual intensity but is still little more than a cypher. He ends up in an hotel where the creepy, racist security guard has rigged his own cameras inside the rooms.

Somehow, Dyer knows the Security guard as 'someone who can get things done.' Even before said character has met Bean's who is the one who actually does the doing.

As things go on we discover that few of the characters are any different from the thugs they target. Most have dark secrets in their past and they turn on one another very quickly.

It is this film's one saving grace that the characters are not sympathetic and that their violent vigilantism is neither heroic not successful. It suffers, though, from poor plotting, little cohesion and thoroughly stupid dream-sequence in which Dyer is chased and attacked bya gang of thugs. That this later turns out to be a premonition of sorts and features people he could not have met, but who did attack another member of the group is totally pointless and out of place in this film.

Only one police officer, the out-of-touch and out-of-date Bob Hoskins, is shown as being anything other than a corrupt, self-serving bureaucrat in the pay of gangsters. It is offensive to imply that, rather than deal with violent thugs on the street, they can be turned into an armed hit-squad for a mobster.

This film is a sadly missed opportunity. The montage scenes of the brutal cess-pit into which our society seems to be descending are excellent. The smug, sneering thugs, the petty violence and yobbery depicted are perfect representations of certain areas and attitudes all-too prevalent today.
I think this was meant to be and attempt to look at how being surrounded and confronted by this behaviour and the way we seem to be geared up to protect the criminal at the expense of the ordinary person but it misses the mark by a country mile. By making the protagonists as bad sa the thugs to begin with, a chance to see how an everyman pushed over the edge is affected by descending into the mire. Too many characters dissipate the effects and not really getting to know most of them makes it hard to care about any of them. Only the lawyer is seen to be truly affected, tempted and to have any real journey or moral dilemma. Had the script concentrated on him rather than Dyer's irritating, whiny city-boy this could have been an outstanding film. As it is, it is a tedious mess that ignores the story and simply glories in its brutal violence.