My niece doing her best Harry Callahan impression.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
She STILL got out early!
Paris Hilton left gaol yesterday. Her sentence was halved. Disgusting.
Worse: she's set to make millions from interviews about the experience.
I thought it was meant to be illegal to profit from the proceeds of crime?
Worse: she's set to make millions from interviews about the experience.
I thought it was meant to be illegal to profit from the proceeds of crime?
Review: Die Hard 4.0
All you need to know about this sequel is whether or not it follows the template of its predecessors.
So...
So...
- Yes; it features Bruce Willis as wisecracking Det. John McClane.
- Yes; it's stupidly, cartoonishly violent.
- Yes; it features thrilling stunts.
- Yes; there's a pantomime villain.
- Yes; there are incompetent senior officers getting in the way.
- Yes; a member of McClane's estranged family ends up involved in the action.
- Yes; it's full of plot-holes and absurdities.
In short, yes; fans will love it, the rest of us will be entertained.
In truth, the wisecrack quotient is down and those which are there aren't nearly as funny, the characters are weak cyphers to the point where you don't care what happens to any of them and - since the plot revolves around the American secret service getting its comeuppance for ignoring warnings - it's hard to not want the bad guys to win. Indeed, the Live Free or Die Hard title used in the States is dropped here, wisely, because of the jingoistic tone so sadly common over the Atlantic post 9/11.
Maggie Q is criminally underused, the bad guys are - as is becoming depressingly common in Hollywood flicks concerning terrorism - mostly French and Justin Long plays the same character he always does. If you can believe Warren P. Cheswick from Ed as a hacker extraordinaire he won't irritate the arse off you as he did me. The same goes for the depiction of all computer users as sci-fi obsessed geeks.
Check your brain at the door and enjoy the big bangs.
Clangers: Watch out for the abysmal lip-synch'ing in several scenes.
Review: Hostel 2
I've never seen the first of these films. I wasn't getting to press showings when it came out and I really wasn't interested enough in the theme to pay money to see it. However, I decided to see what all the fuss was about this time around. Having gone to the sequel I have to say that my opinions have not been changed, rather confirmed.
Now, before anyone says I had made up my mind before I went along, you may well be right, but I was prepared to be persuaded so I kept my mind open. If they had managed to make anything scary, disturbing or said anything about what might motivate someone to do the things done in this script it could have been forgiven. Despite excellent cinematography, sound design and surprisingly good acting I cannot even begin to recommend this reprehensible piece of dross.
The original, along with Saw and its sequels, have coined the new genre of torture porn and that is exactly what this is. Random people are kidnapped and sold to rich perverts to be tortured, humiliated and ultimately murdered. Unless you share the mental deviance of the idle rich who indulge their sick fantasies in these films there is no reason whatsoever to watch one. There is no tension, no drama and nothing to be gained from the experience other than a voyeuristic indulgence in watching twisted mutilation and depravity of the sort rarely indulged in by anyone outside of the Inquisition.
That porn' is becoming more mainstream is one thing and whatever your opinion on it, it is here to stay. The difference is that most of us have a healthy interest in sex and can relate in some way to watching beautiful people doing it for our entertainment. Human bodies are designed to be attractive to us. Ironically, those who suppress those desires and make sexual acts out to be depraved and dirty tend to be those who wander down the paths into sado-masochism. I do not refer here to the majority of modern SM players who indulge in a bit of spanking, bondage & nipple-clamping. For someone to develop a desire to inflict serious damage and or humiliation on a 'lover' it requires misogyny, a deep-rooted hatred of sex, one's own sexual desires and the other involved who 'makes' one feel these desires. Exactly the type fostered by the religious right. The more the Victorians publicly denied sex the more perverted they became in private. (Sweeping generalisation, I know but you get the drift.)
**Spoiler alert***
Given that Manhunt 2 has just been banned by the British Board of Film Classification, which condemned its “ unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in a game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing,” and “sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed and encouraged” why has this not met the same fate?
There is no redemption, no retribution upon the bad guys (with minor exceptions) and the only motivation for this film is to 'enjoy' the pain & humiliation of the characters. The only character to survive this slaughter-fest is - contrary to the usual rules of horror films where only the morally corrupt get killed - the only one with sufficient money to buy her way out, along the way killing the guy who 'bought' her. If the implication under usual horror rules is that the immoral will suffer retribution then the implication here is that only the wealthy will survive, possibly even that only they deserve to survive. Had they not made a point of killing off the sole survivor of the first film (twice - once in a dream & once for 'real') in the opening scenes then they could have avoided that accusation, but they didn't and money and power won out over determination to survive. The added implication is that the 'heroine' is not going to do anything to end the situation which saw her friends tortured to death and finishes up with her committing a 'shock' murder in the most obvious 'twist' I've seen since M. Night Shyamalan lost his originality to ego.
If society is reflected in what we allow to be seen in our entertainment media this muck makes me very worried indeed by the state of our society. In a culture where images of adults indulging in consensual, natural erotic behaviour is considered to be the very definition of a pornographic image (defined as 'likely to corrupt or deprave the viewer' rather than the more recently accepted 'designed to sexually arouse') and therefore subject to the strictest regulation, restriction and censure but this is considered to be fit for mainstream consumption what does that say about us? Nothing good, I'm afraid.
Remember, too that one of the supposedly strongest taboos remaining about porn' is depictions of sexual violence. This is about nothing else. Just because actual rape doesn't feature, don't think for one minute that sexual gratification is not what's on these characters' minds.
Now, before anyone says I had made up my mind before I went along, you may well be right, but I was prepared to be persuaded so I kept my mind open. If they had managed to make anything scary, disturbing or said anything about what might motivate someone to do the things done in this script it could have been forgiven. Despite excellent cinematography, sound design and surprisingly good acting I cannot even begin to recommend this reprehensible piece of dross.
The original, along with Saw and its sequels, have coined the new genre of torture porn and that is exactly what this is. Random people are kidnapped and sold to rich perverts to be tortured, humiliated and ultimately murdered. Unless you share the mental deviance of the idle rich who indulge their sick fantasies in these films there is no reason whatsoever to watch one. There is no tension, no drama and nothing to be gained from the experience other than a voyeuristic indulgence in watching twisted mutilation and depravity of the sort rarely indulged in by anyone outside of the Inquisition.
That porn' is becoming more mainstream is one thing and whatever your opinion on it, it is here to stay. The difference is that most of us have a healthy interest in sex and can relate in some way to watching beautiful people doing it for our entertainment. Human bodies are designed to be attractive to us. Ironically, those who suppress those desires and make sexual acts out to be depraved and dirty tend to be those who wander down the paths into sado-masochism. I do not refer here to the majority of modern SM players who indulge in a bit of spanking, bondage & nipple-clamping. For someone to develop a desire to inflict serious damage and or humiliation on a 'lover' it requires misogyny, a deep-rooted hatred of sex, one's own sexual desires and the other involved who 'makes' one feel these desires. Exactly the type fostered by the religious right. The more the Victorians publicly denied sex the more perverted they became in private. (Sweeping generalisation, I know but you get the drift.)
**Spoiler alert***
Given that Manhunt 2 has just been banned by the British Board of Film Classification, which condemned its “ unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in a game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing,” and “sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed and encouraged” why has this not met the same fate?
There is no redemption, no retribution upon the bad guys (with minor exceptions) and the only motivation for this film is to 'enjoy' the pain & humiliation of the characters. The only character to survive this slaughter-fest is - contrary to the usual rules of horror films where only the morally corrupt get killed - the only one with sufficient money to buy her way out, along the way killing the guy who 'bought' her. If the implication under usual horror rules is that the immoral will suffer retribution then the implication here is that only the wealthy will survive, possibly even that only they deserve to survive. Had they not made a point of killing off the sole survivor of the first film (twice - once in a dream & once for 'real') in the opening scenes then they could have avoided that accusation, but they didn't and money and power won out over determination to survive. The added implication is that the 'heroine' is not going to do anything to end the situation which saw her friends tortured to death and finishes up with her committing a 'shock' murder in the most obvious 'twist' I've seen since M. Night Shyamalan lost his originality to ego.
If society is reflected in what we allow to be seen in our entertainment media this muck makes me very worried indeed by the state of our society. In a culture where images of adults indulging in consensual, natural erotic behaviour is considered to be the very definition of a pornographic image (defined as 'likely to corrupt or deprave the viewer' rather than the more recently accepted 'designed to sexually arouse') and therefore subject to the strictest regulation, restriction and censure but this is considered to be fit for mainstream consumption what does that say about us? Nothing good, I'm afraid.
Remember, too that one of the supposedly strongest taboos remaining about porn' is depictions of sexual violence. This is about nothing else. Just because actual rape doesn't feature, don't think for one minute that sexual gratification is not what's on these characters' minds.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
BBC NEWS | England | Merseyside | Game pulled over Bulger complaint
BBC NEWS | England | Merseyside | Game pulled over Bulger complaint
Why is this a big issue all of a sudden?
When I first heard the story this morning I was as annoyed by it as everyone else is at present, but having read the article I'm now more confused than anything else.
Yeah, yeah; I'm an insensitive moron etc, etc. My point here, though is that contrary to the way it's being reported the game does not show the video and does not make Jamie's abduction a part of the action. If I'm wrong about that, it's because I cannot find any reference in any of the articles about what connection the still has to the game.
Furthermore, since the game has been out for years why is this happening now? Or is it just that the white label version has just been released and this is stirring up some free advertising?
Why is this a big issue all of a sudden?
When I first heard the story this morning I was as annoyed by it as everyone else is at present, but having read the article I'm now more confused than anything else.
Yeah, yeah; I'm an insensitive moron etc, etc. My point here, though is that contrary to the way it's being reported the game does not show the video and does not make Jamie's abduction a part of the action. If I'm wrong about that, it's because I cannot find any reference in any of the articles about what connection the still has to the game.
Furthermore, since the game has been out for years why is this happening now? Or is it just that the white label version has just been released and this is stirring up some free advertising?
Daily Mail
We're just back from a weekend with the in-laws where I had the unfortunate experience of reading the Daily Mail. Several pages of Scotland-bashing at its worst.
This contemptible rag has always been discriminatory and inflammatory, with the emphasis on the last syllable. Last weekend they spent several pages whining about how NHS patients in Scotland can be prescribed drugs those in England can't. Apart from the fact that they seem to think the border somehow prevents people from each country living in the other and suffering the whims of the local NHS the articles were derogatory, factually inaccurate and divisive.
They imply that Scotland's NHS budget will increase because of the Executive's decision to prescribe these drugs. It won't. Scotland's NHS will have to find the money to fund these treatments from within their allocation. Why this becomes an excuse for such racist and unpleasant jock-bashing I can't quite comprehend. Surely, instead of bitching about how we've decided to use NHS money to save lives or improve the quality of life for some of our patients should be a cause for celebration? Or are we supposed to continue to spend the money on consultants & managers? I can see that people would be unhappy to be denied these drugs by their NHS, but that's an issue with how their MPs and local Trusts are running their local health boards, not with how Scotland is running hers.
Of course, these pathetic whinings are not printed in the Scottish version of the rag. Oh no, that might cost them readers. If they're going to have these opinions they should have the courage of their convictions and say them to our faces, not talk behind their hands. Have a mature debate about it and argue about what the real issues are, not this tripe. The more this kind of sludge is passed off as reasoned debate the more it makes the English look churlish and petulant. "If you're not playing by our rules we want our ball back." kind of thing.
Except it wasn't their ball in the first place.
This contemptible rag has always been discriminatory and inflammatory, with the emphasis on the last syllable. Last weekend they spent several pages whining about how NHS patients in Scotland can be prescribed drugs those in England can't. Apart from the fact that they seem to think the border somehow prevents people from each country living in the other and suffering the whims of the local NHS the articles were derogatory, factually inaccurate and divisive.
They imply that Scotland's NHS budget will increase because of the Executive's decision to prescribe these drugs. It won't. Scotland's NHS will have to find the money to fund these treatments from within their allocation. Why this becomes an excuse for such racist and unpleasant jock-bashing I can't quite comprehend. Surely, instead of bitching about how we've decided to use NHS money to save lives or improve the quality of life for some of our patients should be a cause for celebration? Or are we supposed to continue to spend the money on consultants & managers? I can see that people would be unhappy to be denied these drugs by their NHS, but that's an issue with how their MPs and local Trusts are running their local health boards, not with how Scotland is running hers.
Of course, these pathetic whinings are not printed in the Scottish version of the rag. Oh no, that might cost them readers. If they're going to have these opinions they should have the courage of their convictions and say them to our faces, not talk behind their hands. Have a mature debate about it and argue about what the real issues are, not this tripe. The more this kind of sludge is passed off as reasoned debate the more it makes the English look churlish and petulant. "If you're not playing by our rules we want our ball back." kind of thing.
Except it wasn't their ball in the first place.
Friday, June 08, 2007
The Hilton Shuffle
As Her Matchsticky returns to jail in California, crying & yelling for her mom, those of us who give a damn about law & order breathe a collective sigh of relief.
Nobody in their right mind believed the spoilt little brat when, on a red carpet hours before handing herself in, she avowed that she was going to face the music, use this as a positive experience and grow stronger from it.
When her own family doctor turned up, diagnosed her with a mystery medical condition condition which required her to be released from the holiday unit she was in to face a 'punishment' of 40 days grounded in her own luxury mansion, we all knew that this was a faithful family retainer or paid-off lackey working a flanker to get her out. Apparently, not only was she 'ill' but she was cold due to only having three blankets in her cell, had been crying and wasn't eating. Awww, diddums! I mean, it's not like she does much of the latter anyway!
This spoilt, talentless waste of oxygen thinks she's above the law. Her contempt for it was shown when she ignored her driving ban in the first place. How she could get time off for good behaviour when spotted still driving as she awaited sentence I never understood. So a thunderous roar of approval is due to her judge who, incensed at not being consulted on her even earlier release, has now returned her to jail to serve the rest of her full 45 day sentence. The only thing that could make me respect him even more is if he now insisted that she serve her term in the general population of a real prison.
I can bet you there will be some kind of addition to her 'reality' show where she & that other vacuous bimbo she works with go to jail, maybe with one of them as a warder. The morons who signed online petitions to 'free Paris' before she even went to jail would lap that up.
Nobody in their right mind believed the spoilt little brat when, on a red carpet hours before handing herself in, she avowed that she was going to face the music, use this as a positive experience and grow stronger from it.
When her own family doctor turned up, diagnosed her with a mystery medical condition condition which required her to be released from the holiday unit she was in to face a 'punishment' of 40 days grounded in her own luxury mansion, we all knew that this was a faithful family retainer or paid-off lackey working a flanker to get her out. Apparently, not only was she 'ill' but she was cold due to only having three blankets in her cell, had been crying and wasn't eating. Awww, diddums! I mean, it's not like she does much of the latter anyway!
This spoilt, talentless waste of oxygen thinks she's above the law. Her contempt for it was shown when she ignored her driving ban in the first place. How she could get time off for good behaviour when spotted still driving as she awaited sentence I never understood. So a thunderous roar of approval is due to her judge who, incensed at not being consulted on her even earlier release, has now returned her to jail to serve the rest of her full 45 day sentence. The only thing that could make me respect him even more is if he now insisted that she serve her term in the general population of a real prison.
I can bet you there will be some kind of addition to her 'reality' show where she & that other vacuous bimbo she works with go to jail, maybe with one of them as a warder. The morons who signed online petitions to 'free Paris' before she even went to jail would lap that up.
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Legit
So, I've been and done the shoot for this. Can't say I was thrilled. It was clearly extra work despite being paid at proper Equity rates. Another example of being used as a cheap stunt man. Not as cheap as the poor extra they got to hit me with a bottle, right enough.
I'm fast coming to the conclusion that this fight-directing lark, although making me money, is hindering my acting career. This kind of job is bad enough, but with the stuff that happened on Rebus this season I'm beginning to think I should drop it altogether.
I'm fast coming to the conclusion that this fight-directing lark, although making me money, is hindering my acting career. This kind of job is bad enough, but with the stuff that happened on Rebus this season I'm beginning to think I should drop it altogether.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
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:
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'.
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:
- Heavy twill cloak.
- Moulded leather codpiece.
- Leather belt.
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?
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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
