Oh for Fu*k's sake!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7748284.stm
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Monday, November 24, 2008
Horror, I just don’t get it.
To an extent I’ve just said all I need to say in the headline to this post but, luckily for you, I’ll soldier on and exhaust the point anyway.
I’d like to think that I’m someone who enjoys a little bit of everything when it comes to films. I can find something to like in almost any genre, even the really pretentious ones…
However, horror just never appealed to me. If I’m honest I suppose it’s because I think that most horror films are badly written, badly made, badly acted and, on the whole, just plain bad.
I never understood why George A Romero got so much praise for those nonsense Day/Dawn/Diary of the Dead movies, I never liked Freddie Kruger and you’ll never catch me anywhere near a Saw film.
The reason behind this post is that the lady in my life is a big fan of horror movies and in recent months I have been subjected to more than at any other time in my life, which might just be the reason behind my disliking – I never watched it when I was young.
Horror movies were never part of my childhood or adolescence. When I started loving films I was watching action, comedy, drama etc. I was probably already well over 20 years old when I watched my first real horror film.
So if one of my friends had somehow gotten a hold of Hellraiser when we were teenagers, would I be queuing up to watch Jigsaw and his nasty traps along with so many others? Maybe, but probably not.
Of course it is now necessary for me to point out my own hypocrisy by saying that it is possible that I have enjoyed some horror movies.
I really enjoyed the first two Scream films. However, I’m not sure they even count as they are more of a lampooning of the horror genre (at least I think so).
I’m also quite a big fan of vampire movies. Although I’m fairly sure that they also don't necessarily count as I’m not sure that films like Interview with a Vampire, Blade, Lost Boys or Buffy can even be classified as horror.
Then again, maybe they can. Perhaps I just class horror movies as gory films that I don’t like.
Either way, if that woman ever forces me to watch another Rob Zombie film then I might be driven to acts of mindless violence!
I’d like to think that I’m someone who enjoys a little bit of everything when it comes to films. I can find something to like in almost any genre, even the really pretentious ones…
However, horror just never appealed to me. If I’m honest I suppose it’s because I think that most horror films are badly written, badly made, badly acted and, on the whole, just plain bad.
I never understood why George A Romero got so much praise for those nonsense Day/Dawn/Diary of the Dead movies, I never liked Freddie Kruger and you’ll never catch me anywhere near a Saw film.
The reason behind this post is that the lady in my life is a big fan of horror movies and in recent months I have been subjected to more than at any other time in my life, which might just be the reason behind my disliking – I never watched it when I was young.
Horror movies were never part of my childhood or adolescence. When I started loving films I was watching action, comedy, drama etc. I was probably already well over 20 years old when I watched my first real horror film.
So if one of my friends had somehow gotten a hold of Hellraiser when we were teenagers, would I be queuing up to watch Jigsaw and his nasty traps along with so many others? Maybe, but probably not.
Of course it is now necessary for me to point out my own hypocrisy by saying that it is possible that I have enjoyed some horror movies.
I really enjoyed the first two Scream films. However, I’m not sure they even count as they are more of a lampooning of the horror genre (at least I think so).
I’m also quite a big fan of vampire movies. Although I’m fairly sure that they also don't necessarily count as I’m not sure that films like Interview with a Vampire, Blade, Lost Boys or Buffy can even be classified as horror.
Then again, maybe they can. Perhaps I just class horror movies as gory films that I don’t like.
Either way, if that woman ever forces me to watch another Rob Zombie film then I might be driven to acts of mindless violence!
Monday, November 10, 2008
The Biggest Films of 2009
Last week, my fellow movie blogger Head Hero wrote this post about movietickets.com’s top ten most anticipated films of 2009. Like him I was very surprised that the list seemed to miss out some pretty big titles while including the latest Ice Age film. I know family films do well these days but I’m pretty sure something has gone wrong with that list.
Fortunately Michael Moran at The Times has also had a look at what is coming up next year and come up with 'The 50 Biggest Films of 2009'. This list makes much more sense, with Harry Potter at number 1 followed by Public Enemies, Star Trek, Watchmen and X Men Origins: Wolverine.
Now I can only hope and pray that Harry Potter will do well enough to beat Mamma Mia's current box office record so, by this time next year, I won't feel quite so ashamed.
Fortunately Michael Moran at The Times has also had a look at what is coming up next year and come up with 'The 50 Biggest Films of 2009'. This list makes much more sense, with Harry Potter at number 1 followed by Public Enemies, Star Trek, Watchmen and X Men Origins: Wolverine.
Now I can only hope and pray that Harry Potter will do well enough to beat Mamma Mia's current box office record so, by this time next year, I won't feel quite so ashamed.
Monday, November 03, 2008
Quantum of Solace
You may have seen this post I made back in September, lamenting the lack of good movies coming out this autumn. The situation has been so dire that, until yesterday, I hadn’t been to the cinema in almost two months, my longest drought in about 3 years – a shocking state of affairs!
Not only was I unable to find any good independent films to keep me going, but I also had to sit back and watch as Mamma Mia became the UK’s biggest ever film at the British box office. It was almost enough to throw me into a deep depression.
Fortunately, just as things were at their worst, I was saved by the man from MI6. It’s no secret that I’ve always been a bond fan. I’ve been hooked since watching Goldfinger when I couldn’t have been much older than 6 or 7 years old. I loved Sean Connery and hated Roger Moore, was indifferent to George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton, and just felt sorry for Pierce Brosnan who was given nothing to work with after his fantastic debut in Goldeneye.
When it was released Casino Royale very quickly made it into my top three bond films. I’m almost certain that it will become my number one and remain there for a number of years, but I need to make sure that it holds up to the test of time first. Having watched it about 10 times now, most recently a couple of weeks ago, the signs are pretty good.
All of this meant that Quantum of Solace had some pretty big shoes to fill. How do you follow up such an excellent debut? Like many fans I was expecting a lot and, on the whole, I was not disappointed.
The people in charge of Bond certainly aren’t afraid to break the mould and they’ve taken another big risk this time around. Instead of making another stand-alone film they have decided to continue the story that began in Casino Royale with a direct sequel.
The film starts just moments after 007 has made his introduction to the mysterious Mr White with a car chase through the Italian mountains. This is high adrenaline stuff and it sets the pace for the rest of the movie. There is a lot of action and we are quickly reminded of Daniel Craig’s cold, brutal Bond as he investigates the mysterious organisation responsible for the death of his beloved Vespa.
However, this is not a simple revenge film and we are shown a complicated investigation which throw up a number of political obstacles that concerns everyone except our James, who proves a rather focused and tenacious chap to say the least.
The best thing about Quantum of Solace is the same as the best thing in Casino Royale – Daniel Craig. Not only does he have an incredible amount of style, but he is also a very good actor. I’m not sure any of his predecessors could have pulled off the dark, haunted 007 that he portrays in Quantum of Solace.
The supporting cast is also very good, particularly Judi Dench as M and Giancarlo Giannini as Mathis, even if the latter’s screen time was rather brief. Mathieu Amalric was fine as Dominic Greene, but was perhaps a little too sinister for my liking. I know Bond villains are supposed to be particularly ‘evil’ but, in my opinion, the archetypal, cat stroking baddie doesn’t really belong in this new, grittier style.
Despite coming out of the cinema with a smile on my face, I do have some criticisms. I had heard beforehand that the director had gone for more of a Bourne style when it came to the action sequences and it’s certainly true. There are lots of quick cuts used to give an impression of frantic chases and fights. I didn’t really like this, it felt like a gimmick. Marc Forster seems to be of the opinion that you shouldn’t film a sequence from one angle when you can shoot it from 17.
While this is a relatively large complaint I was still very happy with Quantum of Solace. It’s a worthy follow up to Casino Royale thanks to an excellent cast and a great script, which provided some nice moments of humour despite the serious story. There’s also a nice little Goldfinger homage thrown in there with a modern twist, which made me smile.
So if you’ve also been waiting for a film worth returning to the cinema for after the long autumn drought, this is it. Enjoy!
Not only was I unable to find any good independent films to keep me going, but I also had to sit back and watch as Mamma Mia became the UK’s biggest ever film at the British box office. It was almost enough to throw me into a deep depression.
Fortunately, just as things were at their worst, I was saved by the man from MI6. It’s no secret that I’ve always been a bond fan. I’ve been hooked since watching Goldfinger when I couldn’t have been much older than 6 or 7 years old. I loved Sean Connery and hated Roger Moore, was indifferent to George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton, and just felt sorry for Pierce Brosnan who was given nothing to work with after his fantastic debut in Goldeneye.
When it was released Casino Royale very quickly made it into my top three bond films. I’m almost certain that it will become my number one and remain there for a number of years, but I need to make sure that it holds up to the test of time first. Having watched it about 10 times now, most recently a couple of weeks ago, the signs are pretty good.
All of this meant that Quantum of Solace had some pretty big shoes to fill. How do you follow up such an excellent debut? Like many fans I was expecting a lot and, on the whole, I was not disappointed.
The people in charge of Bond certainly aren’t afraid to break the mould and they’ve taken another big risk this time around. Instead of making another stand-alone film they have decided to continue the story that began in Casino Royale with a direct sequel.
The film starts just moments after 007 has made his introduction to the mysterious Mr White with a car chase through the Italian mountains. This is high adrenaline stuff and it sets the pace for the rest of the movie. There is a lot of action and we are quickly reminded of Daniel Craig’s cold, brutal Bond as he investigates the mysterious organisation responsible for the death of his beloved Vespa.
However, this is not a simple revenge film and we are shown a complicated investigation which throw up a number of political obstacles that concerns everyone except our James, who proves a rather focused and tenacious chap to say the least.
The best thing about Quantum of Solace is the same as the best thing in Casino Royale – Daniel Craig. Not only does he have an incredible amount of style, but he is also a very good actor. I’m not sure any of his predecessors could have pulled off the dark, haunted 007 that he portrays in Quantum of Solace.
The supporting cast is also very good, particularly Judi Dench as M and Giancarlo Giannini as Mathis, even if the latter’s screen time was rather brief. Mathieu Amalric was fine as Dominic Greene, but was perhaps a little too sinister for my liking. I know Bond villains are supposed to be particularly ‘evil’ but, in my opinion, the archetypal, cat stroking baddie doesn’t really belong in this new, grittier style.
Despite coming out of the cinema with a smile on my face, I do have some criticisms. I had heard beforehand that the director had gone for more of a Bourne style when it came to the action sequences and it’s certainly true. There are lots of quick cuts used to give an impression of frantic chases and fights. I didn’t really like this, it felt like a gimmick. Marc Forster seems to be of the opinion that you shouldn’t film a sequence from one angle when you can shoot it from 17.
While this is a relatively large complaint I was still very happy with Quantum of Solace. It’s a worthy follow up to Casino Royale thanks to an excellent cast and a great script, which provided some nice moments of humour despite the serious story. There’s also a nice little Goldfinger homage thrown in there with a modern twist, which made me smile.
So if you’ve also been waiting for a film worth returning to the cinema for after the long autumn drought, this is it. Enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
