HAVE YOURSELF AN EERIE LITTLE CHRISTMAS...BLACK MIRROR – BLACK MIRROR WHITE CHRISTMAS

I know. It’s kinda unfair going on and on about something mainly shown on British TV. But you know, the internet is a wonderful thing these days, as is Amazon, Ebay etc – you can easily find the DVDs for this and order it – and oh my darlings, you should!! I mean, yes it’s really not to everyone’s taste – not really. But you guys have been around for a while now. I assume you know and like my taste. So let’s just dive in, shall we

Now, I’m thinking “anthology” type TV series are becoming a thing – think American Horror Story (I definitely will be in the coming weeks, I am officially obsessed with the series – you know, series where every episode (in this case) or every series (like American Horror Story) is a standalone story. There are various ways of tying the series together, in American Horror Story it’s the cast – it’s the same cast, they just play different parts every series. In Black Mirror it goes even further. There are a few actors who move around from part to part (though not “consistently” in every episode), and there are songs and details tying them together for the wise, but basically every episode is its own story. What unites them is the theme.

The creator of these unholy little darlings is British Tv personality Charlie Brooker. Those who are in the know may already be a fan of his dark humour and his pessimistic outlook as to the future of the media generation for which he is, rather ironically, such an icon. If you are a Charlie Brooker fan I’m assuming you’re already a fan (either that or living under a stone). If you’ve never heard of him, ask yourself this, do you need a series full of dystopias about an overly technological world, dark humour and not overly fond of “happy” endings in your life. You know you do. Step right over and take a look in the Black Mirror.

Every episode basically takes a look at some form of technology “gone too far”. Be it an Aldous Huxley type world where people have to pay to not watch commercials, electronic “eyes” that allow you to rewind the future and review it or using the internet to topple presidents… Every episode serves up a goodly portion of “what could happen if it all went too far”. The series is not, however, completely devoid of Christmas spirit – a special feature length Christmas episode – “Black Mirror White Christmas” – has been aired and is not available on 4OD. I have to say, I loved it. I really did.

This episode stars John Hamm of Mad Men fame alongside a British cast in a haunting Christmas tale. In a barren looking snow scape, two men seem to be ensconced in a cabin with no other company for miles around. With nothing else to do, the two men begin swapping stories about their lives before the cabin. Now, those who know the series know better than to try and find out more. And unfortunately, as the series functions mainly around “shock value”, I will be giving you little more than that there blurb as far as the story goes. Like good movies (QT for example) and good horror stories, the whole thing hinges on gut-wrenching plot twists and I wouldn’t spoil it for you for the world!
Here, however, is a spoiler-free taster:

 I will tell you this much, this is definitely a Christmas special. The way the series operates allows a sort of “two stories in one” type of dealio. John Hamm is absolutely brilliant (but he’s one of those actors who I personally think always is brilliant hehe) and the premises of the stories are both imaginative and spine-chilling as always… Ok here’s one for those who watched the episode though. Did you think John Hamm’s characters punishment ended up being a little too harsh… I mean ok maybe that’s the point but…  I mean those last scenes really, really hit me. Not to mention Potter basically being punished for something he didn’t do. Not really. Think about it – or just hit me up on Twitter if you don’t get what I mean by that.

So my darlings, have a spooky Christmas and a haunted New Year! I’m off to Cambridge to visit my family for a few days but I will soon be back with musings on movies!

MAYHEM, MAGIC AND JACK THE RIPPER

I am a strong believer in bargain basements, as you probably already know. I am the same with books; you will often find me scanning the bookshelves marked ``two for the price of one`` with an intent expression trying to work out if there is a bargain to be found in there somewhere. I often do this at airports. It passes the time, there are often special ``airport editions`` to books otherwise only available in hardcover and well… Everyone loves a bargain. This is how I came to pick up Mayhem by Sarah Pinborough and came to discover a new writer and series that will no doubt afford me hours of enjoyment. You see I love fantasy and magic in my books. I also love crime. But if I come across a successful combination of the two… Well that is by far the best… J

Dr Thomas Bond is a normal police surgeon living in abnormal times. It is London, the year is 1888 and that mysterious killer called Jack the Ripper is prowling the streets of Whitechapel. Dr Bond is known for his success and ability in such cases and thus starts working on the case when another series of murders starts taking place in Whitechapel. Bodies, brutally mutilated, missing limbs and internal organs, more brutal than the Ripper has ever been… But why are there suddenly so many predators prowling the streets of London? And more importantly are they the real problem or the symptoms of something, much, much worse to come…  

I really loved the way this story wove the strands of the story together. Of course, thanks to television and DVDs, we are no strangers to the concept of merging crime as a genre with fantasy. Neither are we unfamiliar with the concept of an everyman brought face to face with a gang of supernatural crime fighters and villains who turn out to be bona fide monsters. So in a sense, Pinborough has taken on a rather daunting task – not only must she write an example of a genre tried and tested multiple times, thus creating very fixed expectations in the fans, she must also somehow achieve the same effect without the aid of special effects and on screen ``magic`` that makes it that much easier to suspend disbelief and dive straight in.

This has largely been achieved by structuring the novel pretty much in the same way one might structure a TV series. Every chapter is narrated by a different character, you know, in the same way the camera follows first one character and then another in those series where we have multiple heroes and heroines. Of course, here (as in most such narratives), we have one main protagonist, but we have a quite a few secondary characters knocking about who get a good dose of ``page time`` too. The flip of perspective is most refreshing and gives, in my opinion, a much more all-rounded sense of where the story is going. The other thing is that of course the setting is 19^th century London. Opium dens are ``all the rage`` and suffice to say that said dens play quite large parts in our story. Not only does the way the story flits from character to character at some point begin to resemble those rambling dreams brought on by the drug and so aptly described in the book, it also adds a completely new dimension to the character of Dr Bond, who is the ``hero`` of the book and at the same time, a bona fide opium addict. This makes him a bit of an anti-hero in a way, as Pinborough makes a very, very good job of describing his mental process as the addiction takes a firmer and firmer hold – and that in itself is an interesting portrait. But on the other hand, it also adds a dreamlike quality to everything Bond experiences, adding another dimension to his disbelief. I mean, I need to add that a lot of the other, secondary characters are not exactly painted in black or white either. There are a lot of greys, a lot of unusual traits and questionable attributes… But then again, that`s a bit like real life I suppose. The ``good guys`` often have their own scars and crosses to bear, and may not seem as ``snow white`` as prime time TV would have us believe.  

Another thing I admired in the book was the mastery with which the true stories of the epoch were mixed with fiction. Jack the Ripper enthusiasts will find it interesting reading in parts, possibly not because they will discover a lot of new information, but because Jack prowls the pages of the book along with our own killer, as large as life, and if the information about him is not new (because in truth, unless some historical artefact is unearthed, I don`t see how there could be any new info on him at the moment,)it is very well redacted and very well melded with the fantasy world of Dr Bond and Mayhem.

In short Mayhem is a sensitively written book where reality and fantasy collide to form some truly breath-taking results. It`s the kind of book that would make you miss your stop on the tube. Just sayin`. J

ESSIE RANTS ABOUT AND ASKS QUESTIONS ABOUT "CLOUD ATLAS"

The moment I found out that Cloud Atlas was a story involving reincarnation, souls meeting in different lifetimes etc. I felt a worry beginning to brew in the pit of my stomach. I know this kind of film only too well. Full of grandiose messages about life, “the truth” and the universe. So packed full of metaphors and similes you need a dictionary of filmography to work your way through it all. Coming out way too pleased with itself at the end. This kind of film often annoys me because, well, firstly I don’t believe there is a single, easy “unifying theory of everything” so I get annoyed with films that claim they’re it. Secondly, while I do appreciate double meanings and depth in a film I certainly don’t think I should need to actually have to do research to figure out what exactly is being said.

Now I will not say Cloud Atlas is easy to follow. I mean there are six stories, separate yet interwoven, with the same characters (or rather the same souls) changing bodies, sex and race in practically each one and the stories are of course in true Buddhist style, repetitions, variations or rather, on the same theme, each one evolving with time, adding something, taking something out, some mistakes being repeated through the ages, other ones being changed, and changing history. I have gained infinite respect for the Wachowskis, not least because it must have been a complete mind-f.ck to write, never mind to film. But shall I tell you something? Unlike Donnie Darko (who I watched once and then discarded on the basis of having entire websites dedicated solely to deciphering the story) I will watch Cloud Atlas again. The Wachowskis have tried something rather daring and, would you believe it, they have pulled it off. It comes together beautifully, just like a symphony.

The film is, of course, full of grandiose emotions – but we all expected that, right? Concepts like eternity, everlasting love that survives death, immortal souls that death cannot separate… But never fear. It never reaches the point where it begins to get sickly, and we do go to this kind of film precisely for a dose or two of this kind of emotion, after all. In short yes, there is a certain amount of the preaching mentioned in the introduction, but not too much. Just enough. The same actors are often used, especially in the minor roles, as the same “type” of character, or rather the character that has the same role from one story to the next. Our heroes however, seem to almost change with every story, which doesn’t seem to make sense, but then again don’t try and read too  much cold logic into it. The whole point of the story is to give us a feeling of transcendent love, and this, the film manages very well.

I need to re-watch the film to clarify this point, but one thing I am not entirely sure of. As the same actors are not always used to represent the same souls, I did not quite get the pattern in how the bodies changed around. I am pretty sure the Wachowskis didn’t simply pull names out of a hat. There is, for example, the curious case of Tom Hanks. Now I know he’s meant to be the bad guy who evolves into a hero in the last story – or at least I think that’s what he was meant to be – but then there are discrepancies. I mean Ok, up until the very last story but one (chronologically that is) (and here it starts raining spoilers so look away now if you’re sensitive) – i.e. the one with Sumi, the clones and the Purebloods etc – I have to presume he is the third party who is trying to thwart our couple, the one who is trying to ultimately harm or use the protagonist (whichever character who was born with the shooting star mark in that particular story). If we follow that pattern, we have to assume he is the government official that Sumi “turns” just before her execution at the end of her sequence. Well ok, then it makes sense that he would be reborn as a good person in the next chronological sequence – you know the post-apocalyptic, cannibalistic humanity bit starring Tom Hanks and Halle Berry. I mean ok, sure, he evolves, he becomes a hero, he gets the girl in the end and that’s all very nice but here’s the problem  - what happens to the other protagonist? You know, the love interest. And if you tell me that was Halle Berry, well what happens to the original hero then? Ok another thing, let’s assume he has been evolving through the story, in the sequence in the ‘70s, he is the scientist who actually decides to help Halle Berry (as Lisa Ray the journalist) so I mean, ok, he’s becoming a better person etc, right? Wrong. Fast forward to the ‘90s, he murders a book critic in cold blood and then, albeit as a different character in a comedy sequence clearly inserted for comic relief more than anything else, he is also the brother who locks our protagonist (Jim Broadbent) up in the first place. There has to be something I’m missing here. Because we KNOW Tom Hanks is the protagonist of the (chronologically) last story as he has the birthmark. But then, THEN, the whole premise of love everlasting falls apart as he was the bad guy in like, 4 of the other 5 stories (in the ‘30s story the main big baddie is Jim Broadbent, Tom Hanks is the inn keeper, not a nice guy but not a major player either). So ok, then it was completely random, in fact he doesn’t evolve at all, the bad guy Tom Hanks was playing somehow just vanishes and they put Tom Hanks as the last hero to make it a nice, Hollywood-style beautiful couple for the closing scene with the shooting star in the sky and all that… Because, I would like to point out, that the 6^th story does not actually have a proper, focal “bad guy”. You might argue the cannibalistic tribe, but no, their actual equivalents in the other stories are the “muscle” baddies, you know the racist captain in the first story, the hit man in the ‘70s sequence, the CEO in the Sunmi sequence, Nurse Noakes in the comedy sequence…

So yeah. I mean maybe we’re not meant to puzzle over it too much. But worst case scenario, the 6^th story only kinda fits in with the other five. A good job as been done with hammering it in, but it is still a square peg in a round hole. One thing we can stop and admire is the commentary made on the universality of love, as the souls seem to change body indiscriminately, Forbischer comes back as a young black woman, Lisa Ray and actually sees  her/ his true love again. I found the sequences where she puzzles over the letters she herself wrote in her previous lifetime particularly touching. She is then reborn as a clone waitress – making a rather neat comment about artificial intelligence and the future of machines.

Like I said, I’ve got every suspicion that I am missing something here and it will all come clear if I watch the film a few more times. Either that, or I am really loosing myself in details. But in any case, rest assured the film is an incredibly enjoyable and emotionally charged way of spending a couple of hours. 

"LUCY" THE NEXT, "NEXT GENERATION" HUMAN...

When I began bemoaning my utter disappointment upon watching Lucy, I was met with loud protests from my male friends. I was amused by their argument : “Did you watch it on a small screen? Well that would be it then. It’s an action film, you’re supposed to watch it in cinema!”. I do realize that action as a genre is supposed to be heavily visual. You know, don’t ask too many questions. Enjoy the spectacular fight scenes and the big explosions. OK fair enough, the genre has its fans, and I am just as capable of appreciating a good explosion as the next man. But when putting Lucy into this context, two questions spring to mind. Firstly, since when have “pretty action sequences” been a legitimate saving grace if the rest of a film has gone awry? Secondly, my main point would be that Lucy is actually trying to be more than that. It’s just… You know… Failing.

The story of Lucy is told quickly enough. “Baddies” have discovered a new drug. Oh the kids are going to love it! It is the synthetic form of a hormone produced naturally by pregnant women and induces growth. Lucy is the typical “innocent stander by” roped into a dastardly situation. She, along with a few other randoms, are chosen by what looks suspiciously like the Yakuza (but we are in Taipei so possibly not) to be the couriers of this drug to European capitals. The thing is, Lucy’s trip goes horribly wrong, the packet she is carrying in her abdomen bursts and the drug starts seeping into her body, which in turn allows her to unlock the “unused” parts of her brain. This… Well… It has unexpected results…

Now, here’s my argument as to Lucy trying to be more than just an action movie. I mean, before I get into it let me underline this, the action sequences are nothing short of stunning. I am not; as you may know by now, the biggest fan of one single hero steamrolling every single opponent without so much as breaking a sweat but… You know. Let’s not get lost in details. It’s a genre, and in its own way its very well done – it’s just not to my own personal taste.  But come on. This is Luc Besson we are talking about. Since when has he been into making “just” action films?

From pretty much the get-go we are surrounded by hints that the film is trying to ground itself very firmly in science. The action in the film interspersed with what appear to be stock images from a David Attenborough documentary that “cleverly” parallel the action. You know, we cut from Lucy just before she is attacked in some way to a group of deer grazing in the Savannah, then she is attacked and we see a lion attacking the group of deer. That kind of thing. Rather too  much of it at that – but ok, you have to be blind to see what the film is trying to do, we are grounding ourselves in natural history, disenchantment of the world and all that jazz, humans are animals, predators in fact, and we should not “separate” ourselves from it by pretending any “mystic” side. Okey dokey. Then we get a looong explanation of the whole “humans only a limited percentage of their brain… Let’s imagine what would happen if we could use it all” theory. The saving grace of the whole “lecture” (both as a filmic device and in the actual storyline) is that it is delivered by Morgan Freeman. By that time, of course Lucy is now rampaging around the globe, able to control electronic devices from a distance (I’m still not exactly sure how that conversation between her and the doctor from Taipei to Paris actually worked on a technical level but ok, moving on) and her aim is to get to the Professor so she can pass on the “information” she has gained to the next generation just like any other mammal. OK HERE COME THE SPOILERS. Then she spectacularly kills all the baddies, she reaches 100% brain capacity, this makes her immune to the concepts of space and time and we finally see that she is tantamount to becoming God, as she sends a last message to the cop who has rather ineffectually being “assisting her” (he at least has the good grace to point out that he is not being much help) “I am everywhere”. Yeah, so she becomes God. It’s a wonderful atheist / humanist parable of how God is a construct of our own minds and if humans would only unleash their own capabilities they would be the only God they would ever need… There is even a slightly Nietschean rant in the film about how men limit themselves from realizing their true potential etc , just in case you missed the actual point of the film.

To make a complete aside for two seconds, in an age where we are seriously debating uploading our consciousness onto computers this is definitely a matter to be discussed. I mean the concept isn’t even new, think of Ghost in the Shell, think of Neon Genesis Evangelion – the Japanese, true to form, saw this coming 20 years ago. My point is that Lucy tries to clunk a very complex ontological concept onto a very flashy action movie packed with clichés and add it weight with a mock- David Attenborough documentary. Oh and to get this whole thing across in 80 minutes. Err… Yeah.

And if you thought that our final “God” is a woman is some kind of saving grace, think again. Lucy is pretty much the only speaking female part in the film (her flatmate hardly counts, she is only on for 2 minutes and has about 20 lines, almost all, incidentally about her date the previous night so yeah. It barely passes the Bechdel test because Lucy ends up giving her some advice about her health – but does it count if the other party doesn’t respond? Weigh in here someone… ). We barely get to know her anyway, apart from one conversation with her mother and the mention of exams, so she is some form of student... So yeah, she is the only woman literally surrounded by male gangsters, academics and police officers and she can only “outsmart” them by becoming less and less human and decidedly less feminine. So her whole empowerment actually amounts to beautiful blonde beating up a bunch of guys which, I believe, is considered a fun night out in some circles…

 We have had quite a few ones about computer-human hybrids and how we as humans would cope with consciousness  levels amped up infinitely, haven’t we? There are clues in this film that it is possibly meant as tongue in cheek, ranging from the very fact that Morgan Freeman’s iconic voice is used to lecture us to the fact that the secrets of the universe actually end up on a USB stick… I dunno, maybe I’m taking this a tad too seriously… But… I mean lay aside the pretty action sequences… You do see what I mean, don’t you? Go on… I know you do… 

THE LONG AWAITED STORY OF A VERY BAD FAIRY... "MALEFICIENT"

What a sensation this one caused when the trailer first hit the web. It came in with a whole wave of “backstories” for fairy tales although we can sit down and argue how good of a job the various Snow White variations did. So Maleficient is the story of Sleeping Beauty. But of course, true to form, it’s the story of “what really happened”. Starring a particularly striking looking Angelina Jolie, among other things, Disney has done a good job of bringing a new angle to a very classic fairy tale.

Maleficient (Angelina Jolie) was not always an evil fairy. She was, once, young and strong and good. So good in fact that she became the protector of the fairy folk. However, like most of us, she had an Achilles heel. Her heart belonged to someone else, a human boy called Stefan, to be precise. The fairy folk are different from humans in many ways and do not understand the lust for power and riches, but Stefan is ambitious. In fact more ambitious than most. In time, Stefan’s political ambition turns him against Maleficient. Love turns to hate and so begins a supernatural war between the lovers that spans decades and draws the lives of other innocents into its midst… Has Maleficient’s heart turned to stone? Or is there a spark of good left in her to allow her to put things right?

I mean ok, as far as the storyline goes this is a pretty bog standard Disney film. I mean all the questions in the previous paragraph are, as we all know, rhetorical. We all know what’s basically going to happen in the end. But I still love the way Disney frames and ends it. Maleficient (and here comes a spoiler) actually holds the key to Aurora’s cure, and quite easily pushes aside the “love interest”, Phillip, proving that the only true love that is possible in this life, comes from our families. This is, of course, in part a response to the success of Brave with its play on the bond between mother and daughter. I mean, of course, Aurora is the daughter Stefan and Maleficient SHOULD have had (incidentally, was it me, or was it slightly unfair the way Stefan’s queen was so summarily gotten rid of without us having so much as learnt her name?). And if we had any other doubts left, Aurora has taken to calling Maleficient Godmother (which is almost Mother anyway), so there we are. Of course the other twist in the tail of this tale is that, in the same way that Prince Charming turns out to definitively NOT be the answer to Aurora’s problems (the film rather cynically stresses “there is no such thing as true love” throughout), Stefan who actually should be the one we sympathise with, in a way, becomes the unadulterated villain, so much so that we don’t really feel that upset when he falls to his death at the end. But I can’t help but wonder – if it’s about parental love, would a kiss from Stefan woken her up too? Hmm… I think I may have found a loophole.

Angelina Jolie is, it has to be said, rather magnificent as Maleficient. Of course she is a story book villain for quite a bit of the film and the effect does rely a bit on the visual. But we do see glimmers of her actual talent here and there, so it is not just built on posturing and posing. And of course, apart from giving us the rather liberating message that a woman’s salvation does not only come through finding a man (incidentally, there is something about Maleficient’s turning good being parallel with her regaining her wings that begs an analogy of women finding their own feet, love giving you wings and the like but the exact wording escapes me), there is another message in there. An important one in our divisive times. Namely, that no one is actually completely black. We are all grey. Some are a darker grey than others, but we all have streaks of white along with the black in us and in life, these are the streaks one should aim for. This is why you can, in life, find the most unexpected people become your friends through the most unlikely circumstances, much like the case of Maleficient.

Incidentally there is a wonderful cast of side characters in this one too, I was so happy to see Sam Riley (who I just LOVED in Control) as Diaval, the voice of Maleficient’s conscience (and also her servant but let’s not get lost in details) and the trio of pixies led by Imelda Staunton also provide a good giggle.

I can safely say that Maleficient is the perfect combo of serious food for thought and family friendly fun. I mean heck, I watched this on a plane, with no “excuses” in the shape of kids around and I loved it J

THE BEGINNING OF A QUEST - AN EARLY APPRAISAL : `PENNY DREADFUL`

Now, I told you guys I`m keeping more on top of things as far as film and TV goes. Or at least I told you that this was the intention -  the results have been patchy to say the least. But I was so struck by the first episode of Penny Dreadful I simply had to chat to you about it. Even though there are inherent dangers of starting a review of something based on a single episode. But then again, there could be fun in re-evaluating my review in a couple of weeks…

We are plunged into the dark streets of Victorian London. A mysterious woman leads our hero, an American one time performer, now odd-jobs man (and very odd indeed his jobs are) on a quest with their mysterious patron. On the way they will encounter monsters we thought were mere legend. Blood-sucking monsters, a certain Dorian Gray and an ambitious young doctor, Dr. Frankenstein all await your attention… Hold onto your hats gentlemen, it`s going to be a bumpy ride.

Now, so far we have all the staples a series like this should have. An `everyman` character in the shape of our American , Ethan Chandler (Josh Hartnett). He is both handsome and believably talented and fit enough to survive the battles with the monsters – as you may have guessed, he is an ex-soldier who now makes a living in one of the many `wild west` shows doing the rounds in Europe back in the 19^th century. I mean I like the fact that he`s not just unbelievably lucky or magically talented - he actually has army training and thus survives his first encounter with a vampire. Of course we have the femme fatale character too.  Vanessa Ives (Eva Green) who is a beautiful and mysterious woman with a dark secret. They will `drag it out` for an episode or three but so far we know it involves reversed crucifixes and spiders so I think may well be a curse of some description in there somewhere. Then the rich patron and explorer, Sir Malcom (Timothy Dalton) whose quest we are on. It`s a tad bit banal and predictable unfortunately, his daughter has been kidnapped by vampires. And the fact that he is pretty sure she has not become lunch means that there is another dark secret involved in the story somewhere. So there we have it. We have a believable protagonist (I love the fact that even in a British series the hero ends up being American. Or it may simply be the fact that there is a subtle irony on the fact that the British having explored the USA before that now an American comes back and explores the `undiscovered` world of the UK). God I need to stop going off on tangents, ok, we have a believable and handsome protagonist, a love interest, curses, magic and a source of inexhaustible wealth that removes money as any problem as far as adventures go. We`re all set for some serious adventures, groundwork is first class.

And I mean so far it`s all very believable. Very clean and tidy. I love the fact that Dr Frankenstein who is ostensibly a good guy  (although it is early days of course) borders on the unpleasant. He is not an idealist at all, he is after making the `biggest conquest` science can make : conquering death. Thus he is overambitious, snooty and bordering on the anti-social. I sense a very dark British take on a lot of classic horror characters coming up. Just the sort of thing I love. Another thing the series has managed to do is to get some very disparate monsters to coexist. It is all very much part of the `Victoriana` ethos and has a very good theme running through and tying them together. It bodes well as we have more supernatural creatures due to come on board, I will be curious to see if it gets at all messy though. God knows it has the potential to do so though.

So I mean yeah, for its first episode Penny Dreadful has done an alright job. It is definitely full of promise. I have been looking for something to get my teeth into since I got disillusioned with Game of Thrones (I`m a purist and got cross with the TV series for going off script with the book so stopped watching it at the beginning of season 3). Now I`m a bit picky with my TV series. But I have a sneaking suspicion that my personal quest may have come to an end… I`ll keep you posted. 

THE UNEXPECTED JOURNEY CONTINUES : "THE HOBBIT 2: THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG"

Hehehe. I literally squeaked when I saw this on the in-flight entertainment on the way back from Japan. I missed this one. I don’t know how it happen – well I do. I wanted to see it in 3D or IMAX. One wants to save up, make it an occasion, go with friends. But as it often happens when you try and “overcomplicate” things I just couldn’t organise it somehow – and then, as it were, it was gone. So now that we have given in and watched the film on a tiny in-flight entertainment screen,  what can we say about the second half of our unexpected adventure?

Well, our party has crossed the Misty Mountains, but that is by no means the end of their troubles. They have to get through the infamous Mirkwood Forest to arrive at the human settlement at Lake-town, all this in time for the one appointed day where the secret door to Lonely Mountain can be discovered. And even then, although it seems to be a simple matter of Bilbo fulfilling his contract, well, it’s easier said than done. I mean, we’re talking about finding a single magical stone in an unimaginably large hoard of treasure, without waking out a sleeping, terrible dragon.  And all of this would have been a good deal simpler if Gandalf had actually stayed with them but he has… Gone off somewhere… Yeah, actually, what’s with that?

So if you’re a fan, you know exactly where we are in the story – isn’t it getting exciting! This chapter of course introduces us to Legolas. And on a side-note I had completely forgotten how much of a proverbial “badass” Legolas was. Watching him and Tauriel fight was definitely one of the highlights of the film for me. I know , I know, I moan a lot about special effects and the excessive usage thereof, but come on. We are watching this film so we can be transported to a magical world of elves, dwarves and hobbits. Movie magic literally goes without saying. And come on – most if not all of us rather likes the elves. (Oh yes we do. )And I (still) have nothing but praise for the magical world Peter Jackson has created for The Hobbit. It is not quite the same reaction I had to the Harry Potter films. For those, bizarrely a large part of the characters and settings looked almost as if they had been plucked directly from the inside of my head (the one notable exception being Lupin – he was so unlike what I had imagined it actually upset me and made it hard to concentrate on the film for a short while, but that’s a completely different story). But this world is so beautiful, so organic and so sensitively created that even if I (probably) didn’t quite see it like that myself I literally can’t imagine it being any other way. Just open the door and step right in.

Acting-wise, of course everyone is on point. I find it hard to imagine Sir Ian McKellan as anyone OTHER than Gandalf and Martin Freeman is the perfect everyman trying desperately to keep up with the otherworldly madness going on around him. There is a certain “Britishness” to his acting that I think really “makes” Bilbo. Not least, it mustn’t be forgotten, because Tolkein himself was British – so surely that fits? And of course we have a few new additions to the “family”. The most talked about was, without a doubt, Smaug, voiced over by Benedict Cumberbach. Firstly, I genuinely wouldn’t have known it was him if the fact hadn’t been bandied all over the known world for months. Ok that sentence looks weird but you know what I mean. It doesn’t sound like him. And bizarrely it sounds just as absolutely terrifying as a talking dragon should. And, all humans out there (ehm) we finally have someone representing us too! Yay! We finally get to meet Bard (Luke Evans) face to face and we even have an appearance from Stephen Fry as the rather oily master of Lake-town. So basically what we get is a wonderful magical world reconstructed lovingly by Peter Jackson, with a goodly dollop of Britishness and British humour injected in. That’s basically my idea of perfection in so many different ways.

But the thing about a film like The Hobbit is that it is one of the best representatives of a very specific genre. If you like fantasy (you probably couldn’t tell, but I do) you’ll love this. If you don’t, you’ll steer well clear and honestly feel as if you haven’t missed a thing. I don’t blame you. I mean, I don’t understand where you’re coming from at all, but I don’t blame you. It takes all sorts to make a world. I just need a sojourn or two in different worlds from time to time that’s all.

SOMETIMES, AT CHRISTMAS, YOU WANT TO SHAKE THINGS UP A BIT : "MY NEIGHBOUR TOTORO"

Christmas is one of my favourite times of the year. It has very little to do with the religious side of it. For as long as I remember my family has celebrated Christmas despite there being at least three different religions (not counting sub-divisions) and a whole slew of atheists in the mix. It’s an excuse to get together, eat, drink and exchange presents. I mean of course, all families are complicated and no doubt there is at least one family member you would have rather avoided until, oh I don’t know, next Christmas. Or the Christmas after that. But you have got to put those differences aside. It is the season of Peace and Love. And you just can’t get into fights over whether animated movies “count” or not over the dinner table – for some reason people seem to find it awkward…  Besides, it’s always good to not sweat the small stuff and let a bit of the season’s magic into your life. It has been a long year. It’s time to unplug and relax for a bit.

This is why I think that this film is, in a bizarre way, an ideal Christmas movie. It’s definitely for the whole family, it involves magic, wonder and all the good feelings you associate with Christmas. I mean ok, it’s an anime movie. Not what you would initially think of as a Christmas movie. But it is an anime classic, courtesy of Hayao Miyazaki, master of anime. Trust me, it’s worth giving a whirl. Let me try and convince you.

Satsuke and Mei  have just moved to the country. It’s a lovely old house with loads of nooks and crannies to explore. It’s a bit of a mixed bag as far as emotions go and the girls’ mother is very ill and has to be in hospital. But their Dad is doing his best to cheer them up and between exploring the surroundings and meeting their neighbours the girls have a lot to occupy their minds.  Speaking of neighbours, some of them are a little bit stranger than others. Satsuke isn’t quite sure what to make of her little sister’s claims of seeing a giant grey furry creature in the woods… But as time goes by she begins to realise that there are more to her little sisters’ claims than she initially thought… The question is what will happen when this magical world collides with the two sisters’ real world problems?

Now first of all, let me just say how happy I was to see this fellow on television as part of the Christmas season films! I love this huge international world we live in where cultural niblets from all over the world find their way into our living rooms. Granted, Miyazaki is about as big and international as it gets for anime; if you know one director it will probably be him and if you know one studio that specialises in anime it will be “his” studios – Ghibli. That said, I am confident that this may well be the first step of a voyage of discovery for some. Anime gets a bit of a bad rep. Well, sometimes this is justified. But come on, there are many “unsuitable” films out there – we don’t brand the entire film industry as “unsuitable” do we? My neighbour Totoro is a beautiful film with heart-warming characters that younger viewers with empathize with and that the “big kids” in the audience will simply adore. Just enough excitement and home again in time for tea. We have all the “trappings” of “big brand” animated entertainment but with some local flavour and a personal twist as opposed to the studio films we have grown to love but also anticipate down to the finest detail. I can personally guarantee this film will be a welcome addition to the film cabinet of anyone who wants to take a step away from the every day. A small step. But just enough J  

IN WHICH OTHER WORLDS ESCAPE TO US... "THOR"

I know, I know, this is mainly one for the fans. A film I mean. Not  blog post. I may have mentioned that on a normal day to day basis, Hollywood action – adventure films do not feature high on my “to watch” list. But there comes a time when even my interest is piqued. I’m guessing if you’re a fan of Marvel comics and all that that franchise entails, you have already seen this one. If, like me, you’re not THAT into comic books and the like, you may or may not be  contemplating watching it for a bit of a change one evening when you want to watch something fun but not out too much effort into philosophical analysis or complicated story lines. This is the first film of the series, the special effects are spectacular, the actors and actresses beautiful, it is everything modern Hollywood is today. What did I think of it? Well, I’m seriously considering watching The Avengers            later on this week so yeah; this should probably give you a clue…

In this first “episode” of the series, we are introduced to Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Loki, Norse “gods” who live in the peaceful kingdom of Aasgard ruled by their wise and benevolent father Odin (Anthony Hopkins). Thor is the elder and natural successor to the throne – and frankly he can’t wait. He’s an outstanding warrior, handsome, popular and a born leader. He is, on the other hand reckless, hot-headed and has a dangerous tendency to rush into situations without considering the consequences.  And when he opens his whole world up to the possibility of war with their eternal enemies the ice giants, Odin can find no further alternative but to banish Thor to Earth, minus his powers, to teach him a lesson in humility if nothing else. But if this is not painful enough, with Thor gone, forces within the palace that are not as friendly as they claim to be set to work… The danger of war is merely the tip of the iceberg as far these forces go. Thor may be adapting well to his new world and even making friends, especially in the person of the beautiful scientist Jane Foster (Nathalie Portman) but will he find what it takes within his soul to help him return to his duties back home and save his world?

I will not bang on and on about the entertainment value of this one. Like a lot of Marvel films, we are transported to a world of super-heroes and beautiful maidens and it is perfect, seamless, unadulterated escape from your daily woes for all of two hours. We know what we are getting and we get a good quality load. Romantic comedy, action, drama and a very well choreographed “alien getting used to our world” type comedy all rolled into one, and finished off with all the high sentiment and pumping adrenaline of classical storytelling and fairy tales. Now now, don’t get upset I called it a fairy tale. That is what it is, after all…

But there was one point I found particularly fascinating about this particular film. I loved the fact that Jane Foster is a scientist ( I do realise this is probably less to do with the film and more to do with the original storyline). But more importantly I love the fact that we are not told to just suspend disbelief and go “oh so Thor and the Norse gods are real after all – now, moving swiftly on”. The character of Jane Foster means that there is a voice constantly questioning the veracity of what is going on on screen and asking the question “well how can this be?” And sure enough, the film (or, like I said, the story itself. I haven’t read the comics so I’m not entirely sure which) provides an explanation based on physics. Now I know less about wormholes and the theory of parallel universes than I do about Marvel comics. Thus I have no idea how much the physics “stands up”. But I think it is a fascinating point that in the 20^th Century science has become so pervasive in every day life that even what would once be classed as “fairy stories”, now feel the need to provide at least a semblance of a scientific explanation for fear of alienating the audience. The mystification of the world is truly dead people, there is no mystery and no wonder… Or I mean, there is, but we are not very tolerant to it anymore. We MUST know the REASON. For some reason we simply can’t just kick back and enjoy the story…

And I mean, don’t get me wrong, perversely, I LOVED the fact that there is a scientific, “real life” explanation for it all in the film. But I just can’t shake this nagging feeling that this has become more of a “necessity” than anything else. And that we may have irretrievably lost an important part of our collective imagination… Then again, maybe the answer is to kick back and enjoy the ride. Because, if nothing else, Thor does provide a most entertaining ride. Highly recommended. 

IN WHICH WE SEE ANGER MANAGEMENT ISSUES CAN BECOME CONSTRUCTIVE : "THE AVENGERS"

The whole thing really began with my being pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed Thor (2011). Having the second film close to hand, it seemed really silly not to just go ahead and watch it. I have been taking a few days off recently. A weekend away with my friends, a few “mental health” days here and there…  It’s tough work working in events in the Christmas season. Sleep is not as much a part of my schedule as I would like, nor is “down time”. In situations like these, as the film so eloquently puts it “people need a bit of old fashioned”. Oh and well… Christmas is coming. It’s the season for a little old fashioned. I mean, ok, I do realise that The Avengers is not necessarily the first thing that occurs to one when you say “Christmas Movie” but I think there’s an argument to be made there. The film is, after all, all about everyone coming together for a common good, putting differences aside, learning from each other and concentrating on doing good in the world. Not sure you know what I mean? You may have a point, I am getting ahead of myself slightly. Let’s take this step by step…

At the end of Thor, we see Loki cast into an abyss, vanquished… This, it seems, was merely a hiccup in Loki’s attempts to climb to the top. Not only has he been rescued, he has been given an army. The destination? Earth. Loki is determined to conquer the planet and claim it as his own – he will have the kingdom Asgard denied him. And the attack is so ferocious and the power he has gathered so great that it will take every single super hero the Earth can muster, ranging from the incredible Hulk to Captain America to conquer him… But even with Thor, Loki’s own brother, joining the fight, what are the odds of a handful of heroes against an entire army that is truly “out of this world”?

The answer to that question lies, of course, in the word “heroes”. The Avengers is everything a superhero movie should be – and then some. The only thing that was missing from the conventional mix was a “love interest” story which I found rather refreshing to be honest. Forcibly inserting a rather “out of the blue” love affair usually seems a little unnecessary to me.  I mean ok, there is the “attraction” between Natasha Romanoff and Hawkeye but there is a lot of military style “loyalty” mixed into that. I mean, yes, there is the hint that there may be something more to their relationship, but her will to save him is based largely on her wish to redeem her past sins. Oh and there is of course Pepper Potts and Iron Man (I think he is my favourite Avenger by the way. I find him the most “human” of the lot. I know they all have their token faults but Iron Man has actually personality issues and borders on the dysfunctional. Plus Robert Downey Jr.’s rendition of him is HILARIOUS.  ). One might argue that all of this makes to film rely a little too much on explosions, special effects and “boys toys” as it were. But honestly… Who watches The Avengers for the philosophical messages and character development?   

Another thing I noticed is that the place of humour in the movie has been notched up quite a bit. It is mainly Loki’s domain – but this is of course Character creation 101: a believable villain has to have at least one quality that we deem positive. Between him and Iron Man, the film provides quite a few genuine giggles  - always a plus in my book.

One last thing I noticed in the film is the several references to God and religion. One is when Captain America says in reference to Thor and Loki “There is only one God and I am sure he doesn’t dress like that”. The second more open reference comes towards the end when we see the clips of the aftermath of the war when a man says “it feels nice to have someone watching over us”.  The Avengers are clearly not a Parthenon of gods, but guardian angels? Possibly… It all links in to the “bit of old fashioned” the film points out we all need some times. I don’t necessarily mean the film is promoting religion in any way shape or form. I think the message is that of return to what we perceive as “old fashioned values” in the face of chaos and negativity. Things represented largely in the film by Captain America : loyalty, obedience in a soldier, self-sacrifice… He is, in fact, a stark contrast to Iron Man who is the flippant and egocentric millionaire at the beginning of the film. At the end he has learnt the value of teamwork and is even prepared to take quite a significant “one for the tem”… Heck, even the Hulk learns to use his.. “considerable anger management issues” to the greater good.

It is interesting that this model of film was so popular in the time of the Second World war – Captain America’s epoc : A disparate, unlikely crew rub each other the wrong way at first, but learn to pull together to fight a common evil… I am not really surprised that the theme has re-emerged in these days of economic uncertainty…

Of course I may be overthinking the whole thing – and I do strongly encourage you to not think about it too much and get stuck in the movie and have a good time… But I guess I’m saying there is interesting stuff to think about in there if you are inclined to a bit of post-watching analysis… 

THE DRAGON, THE WITCH AND THE SUBMARINE : "ATLANTIS"

And now a bit of Tv. Because, let’s be frank, we watch one heck of a lot of it. You know how I say you sometimes need to come back to a comfortable classic. Like comfort food. You don’t expect, nor indeed want it to be complicated, you want to be carried away by the story for an hour or so and rest your head from all the “adult world” related nonsense that is going around in it. You also need something like this, I discovered, when you’re in bed with the flu. Unable to get out of bed , go to sleep or do anything constructive for several days I found that I was in severe need of having my mind taken off things – which is where Atlantis came in.

Atlantis is one of the newer productions of the BBC and follows the fate of Jason (Jack Donnelly), a young man from the modern world whose father had got lost in an underwater expedition. Heading fearlessly down to unplumbed depths in a one-man submarine, Jason finds himself in another world. And by that, I do not mean the next one. I mean a mythical land where magic is real and ancient civilisation continues unabated without a touch of modernity and “all it brings”. Jason’s arrival in this magical land is not, however, mere coincidence. Not only does Jason have ties to this land that he never even knew existed, the fate and happiness of many people rest on his shoulders. The question is, can he be the hero Atlantis needs him to be?

Now, first of all let me just say how much I love this series. For those of my generation, guys, it’s basically Narnia for adults. Only it’s for adults and kids – or at least younger audiences. It’s definitely family friendly – which is welcome news for any Game of Thrones fans with young ones. This is definitely one you can sit down and watch all together. Jason is every bit the shining hero and his faithful sidekicks (I’ll let you discover them in your own time haha) are both hilarious and endearing.  If you want to go on an adventure from the safety of your sofa without the added trauma of worrying about your favourite character getting killed off – this one is for you folks. This is goodies vs baddies pure and simple. And I don’t mean this as a bad thing.

Another point I would like to make is, credit where it is due, when you watch the six episodes aired thus far, you can clearly see the writing improve in leaps and bounds. Now come on, enough with that frown, just because I like something, it doesn’t mean I’m not going to point out its faults if I see any. And besides, at this particular point I’m saying it overcame a fault. I couldn’t help noticing the sheer mass of “exposition” going on in the first couple of episodes. You know those scenes where two characters have a lengthy conversation about something and have the sole purpose of providing information for the viewer before you take the next step in the story proper. Now, these are useful but more often than not, an able director can easily weave information into the story itself without taking a step away from it for what we might call a short “instructive video”. Atlantis suffers from a bit of a “public information video” syndrome in its first episodes but credit where it’s due the writing is getting a lot tighter in the latter ones and the story is advancing at a really good pace.

Then again, bizarrely, for a series that had too much exposition at one point, Atlantis does leave quite a few serious plot points unanswered. I mean, come on. I know we’re not actually meant to take our focus off Jason the shining hero but we don’t even know WHAT his father was doing in a sub in the first place? Geology? Zoology? Biology? Testing the sub? Oh and incidentally, Jason is in his early 20s so what exactly are his qualifications to be allowed to take a submarine down on a mission that probably cost the life of an experienced crew member BY HIMSELF? Fine, fair enough, these are all “modern world” problems, we can overlook them. (*SPOILER ALERT – skip to the next paragraph now to avoid it). My other major “thing” is Jason’s superpowers. Oh by the way yeah, in this world, he has superpowers – kind of. Very little is made of them and what they really are – ok fair enough it adds surprise value, kind of puts us on a par with Jason who had no idea he had superpowers either or what exactly they are. But come episode 6, not only has Jason not learnt anything new about their origin or extent (unless he knows something we don’t) – he has completely adapted to them and uses them unquestioningly. I don’t know about you but I’d be freaking out. Big time.

And speaking of adapting (and if you "skipped here, take my word for it, I was), ok, he has ties to this land, he’s not just anyone he is special, he has a destiny but I mean, is it realistic that he has completely adapted to a world with no electricity, running water, phones, cars or heck, even jeans when he was manning a submarine (so I assume some form of engineer at the very least) a matter of hours ago? There is SO MUCH potential for comic relief right there – and it only gets used briefly in the first half of episode one. Not that the series lacks in comic relief. Pythagoras and Hercules (Robert Emms and Mark Addy respectively) are positively hilarious - but you know… Adding a slightly unsure Jason to the mix would be the cherry on the top.

I totally get what they are trying to do with Jason though; he is the “shining hero” that can do no wrong. Precisely the kind of hero you want when you’re in bed with the flu or after a long, hard slog at the office. But, for those who have watched it, admit it, wasn’t it refreshing to watch him fumble over his words and knock things over as he tried to impress Ariadne? Would it not have been awesome to have him develop slowly into a full-fledged and magnificent hero by the end of the season as opposed to having him “express grown” by the end of episode one? A bit of character development, methinks, would not have gone amiss.

I mean, let’s give the series its due. It’s not over yet. There may be reasonable explanations to all of this. In fact, I may to a re-cap when the series has ended. Trust me I’ll be in a good position to make the judgement. Because I don’t intend to miss a single, solitary episode. 

LOSING MYSELF IN PAPER, NOT SCREENS : "RIVERS OF LONDON"

Ok. I need to tell you all about my latest obsession. This series. This series right here. See, reading-wide I was at a tad bit of a loss as to what to do after I finished reading Game of Thrones. I know some of you sympathise, a lot of people I have spoken to have gone through the same “syndrome”. I mean come on, you’re immersed in thousands and thousands of pages of gripping narrative and suddenly “bang” you have to wait for the next one for God only knows how long. I mean, the latest one was released 2 years ago apparently (I say apparently because I wasn’t following it “live as it were. I waited for the prices to be reduced and bought the lot).  The writer, George  Martin has admitted he has to pick up the pace but that’s about as far as it went . No dates, no nothing. So I have to resign myself to the fact that I’m going to be waiting on that book for a while and find a replacement. Yes but how? I actually wanted to go on with something fantasy-related as it were. My films and work tend to be very “real life” these days, so bizarrely the more fantasy my books are the better. I dunno, it’s probably just a phase. The point is, there I was:  Looking for a fantasy novel and in possession (so to speak) of rather high standards, courtesy of Tolkien, George Martin and the likes. I heard the raves on Rivers of London. Some of them actually emanated from my friends. I tentatively picked up the first book – well, it couldn’t hurt. And my God… Not hurt? Not since the Harry Potter books have I read anything at the speed of a hundred pages a day. Definitely not things I wasn’t writing a dissertation on. Rivers of London came and went in a flash and you will doubtless see me stumbling out of a bookshop near you armed with everything Ben Aaaronovtich has written. Look for someone quite short in a purple raincoat. Yep, that’s me.

Meet P.C. Peter Grant. He is pretty much a young man of our times. He is just starting out on a career in the police force and having finished his initial training and obligatory bout of “grunt work”, he is about to be “recruited” to his destined department. Thing is, what with his ability to get so easily distracted and all, he is headed straight for a desk job, as far from action as the force can put him , much to Peter’s disappointment and despite all his grand dreams. That is, until, after a particularly gruesome murder, he ends up taking a statement from a ghost by mistake. Realising he has just met a witness who has been dead for 200 years startles Peter, but when he tells his superiors, it startles them even further. The result, however, is not a padded cell as Peter suspected it might be. He is, instead, recruited to a secret department of the police that deals with the supernatural. The good news is, Peter is no longer destined to be a pen pusher. The somewhat confusing news is, he will be an apprentice wizard instead.

As you have probably guessed this book is a combination of Harry Potter and the X files. Nothing beats a good hybrid, and I honestly can’t think of two better shows to “hybrid” (yes, this is a verb. Well it is in my universe. Mom, don’t block my creativity). I love the character of Peter Grant. Aaronovitch does a FANTASTIC  job of writing how a real person from our century would actually react to coming face to face with magic. What I like the best is, that Peter actually tries to come up with something as close to a scientific explanation as he can under the circs. This is good. Because often magic has a kind of dogmatic “it was so and cannot be explained” aura, which it shouldn’t, not in a century of science and discovery. Not to mention the fact that dogma of any kind is generally a bad thing and has no place in a novel – that’s my view anyway. And he has very 21^st century problems that centre largely around his smartphone. But I’ll let you discover those as you go along.

Aaronovitch also imbues Grant with a dry, British sense of humour which I love. And he also clearly has extensive knowledge of London and life in the city. As a Londoner myself there were so many actual locations I know and so many situations I am familiar with. All this of course adds to the “realism” of the book, especially if you live in London. But shall I tell you something? If you live in a big city, you’ll probably know what he means in a lot of cases, even if you don’t live in London.

So the book accomplishes the rather extraordinary job of bringing together a beautifully realistic snapshot of 21^st century London and magic, mystery and mythical creatures. Honestly, if you love one or the other – or possibly even both – you need to take a look at this series… 

P.S Don't get confused by the links of a book called "Midnight Riot" on the blog by the way, it is the exact same book, it was just published under a different name in the States. And I can't seem to be able to find a link to the UK version :/ 

RECAPTURE THE MAGIC ON "THE POLAR EXPRESS"

I know. We’re in august. It is in no way, shape or form near to Christmas. But what can I tell you, it was a tiring day. I know I ranted and raved about realism and happy endings in the last post but it really wasn’t a “realism” and “minimalism” kinda evening. I had had a little too much of that in my day already. What I needed was to settle down and be transported to a world where I knew everything would turn out alright in the end. Preferably a magical world – I needed it to be as far from “reality” as possible. This may be the main reason I gravitated towards a Christmas film, I’m not exactly sure. I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that if you have had that kind of day, or alternately if it's actually Christmas and you want a seasonal film that you don’t watch every day, this is the fella for you.

Now, this is quite a modern little number. Not only is it made, in its entirety, in computer animation but it adopts the rather cool “anonymous hero” stance. Our hero is a little boy. He is just approaching that age when the magic is about to leave his world. And the exodus of magic has begun with father Christmas. The little boy wants to believe, but everything around him seems to be telling him loud and clear that there is no such thing as Santa. So that Christmas eve, when he closes his eyes and pretends to sleep, trying to catch Santa out as he does every year, deep down inside he doesn’t have much hope of it happening. Until he hears something quite extraordinary going up his street. A train. The magical Polar Express has come to take him on a journey… After all, anything is possible on Christmas Eve…

I think Christmas and New Year bring out the “mushiest” in us because they are much like the ends of long, tiring days. Just like a particularly rough day at the office, a whole year has gone by. You are tired. You want to see your loved ones and rest your brains – and bones. You have had reality by the bucket-load. You want good feelings, a hearty meal a drink or three and a few days off… Surely you see the parallels? That’s why films like this go so well with Christmas.

Of course one has to remember that this film was made in 2004 – which is “way back when” by technological terms. I feel that the storyline would benefit a lot from a big special effects overhaul. Heck, it could even be a combination of CGI and real actors as opposed to a “cartoon” from beginning to end. I’m not completely nuts about big explosions and fight scenes with magical weapons but magical lands… You’ll always get my heartstrings with that one. Especially at the end of tiring day.

But the thing is,  will it ever be a classic? I’m not that sure. I think the problem is, the story is sweet but the message is slightly outdated. In complete opposition to the previous film, we are encouraged to “believe” in this one. And we all know kids today. They are just as likely as us to smile at that message understandingly and with an air of superiority. It’s sad really, but I wonder how many kids today really believe in Father Christmas? We live in an era where mothers quiet their crying toddlers by giving them their smartphones and tablets to play with. The tiny tots can browse better than we can and I find that scary seeing that hooking up the printer ended up becoming a major challenge for me. I am yet to purchase a smartphone – or a tablet. And of course it’s great that children have so much knowledge at their fingertips so quickly. It is also great that we live in an era of science where we know more about the world around us than ever before. Still, must this mean that all sense of “magic” must be knocked out of children at as early an age as possible? The jury is out in my opinion. I mean, I’m an adult, and I physically need magic and fantasy in my world. It’s computer generated magic, that I grant you, but given the realities of this world… I reckon it will do… 

A NEW TWIST ON AN OLD TALE : "JACK THE GIANT SLAYER"

I really could potentially not have seen this film at all. The fact that it is here at all is a complete and utter fluke. I am a bit of a regular at a certain pub in south London that offers free film screenings of a Monday night. It’s quite a good deal really – combined with 2 for 1 cocktails during happy hour and various other tempting tit-bits, me and my friends have become semi-regulars there. The thing is though – much like this blog – we are rather dependent on the pub-owner’s whim and selection at the time. Not that I’m complaining, I have watched many recent productions here, some of which have made it onto this blog. But this of course means that things are apt to change quite unexpectedly. When my friend and I arrived at the pub that Monday everyone fully expected to watch a rather artsy black and white number, and it was probably going to prove a bit of a challenge to watch. It attracted a crowd that was up to the challenge. Imagine everyone’s surprise when a staff member offhandedly announced that the film had changed – they hadn’t been able to rent the DVD. The contrast between the films could not be greater - there was a mild stampede to the door. My friend and I stayed. We had just ordered food and there had already been quite a bit of gin involved. And although Jack the Giantslayer  is not the challenging artsy number some may have been hoping for, we loved it.

It is, as you may have guessed, basically the story of Jack and the Beanstalk. This is of course waay back in ancient times, when magic was still a part of the human world. There is not one giant but in fact a whole army of invading giants simply waiting to shimmy down the beanstalk and eat us all. There is a beautiful princess to be saved from mortal danger and an evil villain to be outmanoeuvred – for he fully intends to use the army of giants to take over the world (the popularity of that life goal has always amused me. I specifically remember an episode of the Ninja Turtles where our heroes travelled to an alternative universe where Shredder had succeeded in taking over the world. He hated it – he was buried alive in paperwork. And before you start shaking your heads, LOOK IT UP. I imagined a lot of bizarre things as a child, but this was not one of them). But anyway. I digress.

Now, if you look Jack the Giantslayer up, you will find that reviews on it are incredibly lukewarm.   There is a reason for this. The film is up to its eyebrows in INCREDIBLY British humour. And I mean, I see how this happened. The film is playing on a rather overdone storyline : “the real” story behind a fairy tale. It started a good few years ago with a rather lovely adaptation of Cinderalla (I’m thinking of Ever After but also another, older one whose name I can’t remember that took the step sister’s side on the matter, very cleverly). In fact, what with films like The BrothersGrimm, one could argue that Jack arrived a tad bit late. Of course fantasy landscapes and CGI are a must but still – it is a must of the genre. You might as well pack up and go home if you’re not going to come up with terrifying giants. No, when you are literally last in line you have to do something to make yourself stand out. For his sins – and ours – director Bryan Singer has decided to steep the entire film in British humour. And I mean the cast just plays into his hand. There’s Ewan McGregor (a wonderful army officer with the most “pip pip old bean” accent I have heard in a while), Ian McShane as the king (Lovejoy as king! Of all people!) and as Jack we have Nicolas Hoult. Confused? You recognise him from somewhere, right? He’s the little kid from About a Boy. Yes he HAS grown quite a bit =) . I mean, we found it HILARIOUS. But then again. I do see that it may not be the case for the rest of the world. Because apart from the rather spectacular humour, the film doesn’t stand out much at all. In fact the ending… Well it’s downright forced. It actually gives the impression they ran out of film and noticed at the last moment – and were forced to make something up rather quickly. But I mean it’s an adventure. If you like British humour it’s downright hilarious. And it goes down very, very well on a Monday night with a mate and a drop of gin. 

AN ADVENTURE WE HAVE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR: "THE HOBBIT : AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY"

I am not going to even pretend to be objective about this one. I, like many other diehard fans, have been waiting for it for a long, long time. Like a lot of said fans, I watched the film within days of it being released to cinemas. I intend to see it a few more times. The same way I did with the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. So if you’re expecting an honest critique of Peter Jackson’s cinema, boy oh boy are you at the wrong post. Oh come on. Be a love. I am brutally honest in a lot of stuff I write. I’m allowed to rant and rave about a film or two. Besides, at the end of the day, who can say their opinions are completely objective? We are all shaped by our own personal experiences in life and have our own subjectivities and… Yeah. You get the picture ;)

So, this, as you know (probably) is the first film in the trilogy that will make up The Hobbit trilogy. I am not about to tell you the story in complete and utter detail, the chances are you already know it off by heart (ehm) or  don’t mind just finding out at the cinema when the time comes (in which case, I really don’t know what to do with you). Basically, The Hobbit is the story of the discovery of the Ring that will form the backbone of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. It is the story of Bilbo Baggins (played by Martin Freeman, one of my favourite actors EVER) who first went on an “unexpected adventure”. The main aim was to help a dwarf prince and his loyal band reclaim their fatherland. This, as you can imagine, is not a straight forward matter to start with. But then, just as they finally escape the lair of the Orcs, a mysterious ring makes its way into Bilbo’s possession. The first film leaves off at this point, but as you know, this is the sinister beginning of a whole different can of worms.

I can promise you one thing. I have heard this from complete novices to the franchise and from purists much stricter than myself alike: it just flies by. Logic coupled with all the time measurement devices known to man tell us we have almost spent three hours watching the film. I would happily watch a second Hobbit film at least that long without stopping. The story combined with the effects creates a universe so engrossing that you are just sucked in. It is a wonderful opportunity for escapism for all my fantasy junkies. And this is also a brilliant opportunity to get introduced to the genius of Tolkein if you haven’t already done it.

Cinematically of course, Peter Jackson is completely and utterly the man for the job. He is the number one name I think of when I think of epics, films on a grand scale. People criticise him about a lot, from being shallow to combining and mismatching concepts. I think, although some of the criticisms may have a foundation, he is overall a brilliant entertainer. And this is why he has done such an amazing job with The Hobbit. And of course, the acting. Martin Freeman is getting a bit typecast I feel, as the “everyman” that, bewildered and quite unwilling, gets pulled into an unbelievable adventure. But I also feel that this ability to portray this role “makes” a lot of films too. Think about it, who is he representing as this “everyman” swept off his feet? Why, us of course! The audience! The people who, quite literally, walked in off the street to watch the film. Suddenly, we are grabbed out of our everyday lives and immersed in a world of fantasy. Now, our immersion is metaphorical (or psychological. Not sure which concept goes better to be honest) and Mr Freeman is often, if not always, physically immersed in his adventures. But he reacts exactly in the way we probably would have. And having such a wonderful “representation” of ourselves on the screen in front of us immerses us in the film even further.

And lastly, but my no means least; I cannot possibly close this entry without saying a word or two about the AMAZING Sir Ian McKellan. I read somewhere while the film was still in production, that Sir Ian actually broke down and cried from frustration on one of the sets because he was actually the only “live” person in the scenes and he had to act with a lot of his companions being represented by tennis balls on sticks, later to be “converted” into real people. I read in the comments to this article that “oh he’s old, he should “get with the new generation”.  Oh I could not disagree more. His true talent lies in his ability to adapt and change. It seems he was frustrated; he was pushed to his limits. Yet in the finished product, he is Gandalf as we all know him. He pulled it off. Could a younger actor be so versatile? I doubt it. This kind of thing does have a serious amount of experience involved. So the moral of the story is people, don’t be ageist. Respect your elders.

But first, if you haven’t already, PLEASE go see The Hobbit. It is definitely an adventure you will not forget in a hurry. 

FROM GAME TO REALITY (SORT OF) : "PRINCE OF PERSIA – THE SANDS OF TIME"

Now, admittedly, this is going to mean a lot more to those of you who actually play video games. I have an announcement. I don’t play video games. No, not one bit. In short, I honestly have no idea how it compares to the game, what the overlaps are, etc. I should actually ask a friend who does this regularly. I may do that still. But actually, no. I mean, these films shouldn’t, from a business perspective, cater ONLY to gamers, right? I reckon not. So here’s a non-gamer’s perspective on this little number. And she happens to be smiling on the movie.

Destan (the rather yummy Jake Gylenhaal) is the adopted son of the King of Persia. He and his two brothers and their uncle, the brother of the king(Ben Kingsley) are out on a mission of conquest and they happen upon the holy city of Alamut. Recent intelligence from the spies says that this historically neutral city of great historical importance is actually supplying weapons to their enemies. The Persians invade the city. Destan is among the most successful warriors there. However, he very quickly finds out that the story about spy intelligence is all a decoy. There is a villain in their midst. And he is after a mythical magic dagger that would allow him to reverse time, putting himself in power. Destan, along with Tamina, the princess of Alamut and the keeper of the sacred dagger, must form an uneasy alliance to stop him. The fate of the entire world may well be at stake.

Ok so basically, you know what this is? It is a road movie, where too initially completely dissimilar protagonists learn to love each other, bond and fight for a common cause on the way. That coupled with the type of romantic comedy that is as old as Shakespeare (I’m thinking Taming of the Shrew). You know, sassy girl gets “tamed” into femininity by the wit and courage of a truly good man. Ladle on a good dollop of special effects (come on, it is based on a video game at the end of the day) and voila. Prince of Persia. Now, I know that thus far I have not  exactly waxed lyrical about the topic. This is precisely why I rarely review Hollywood films, unless they are massive “event” films that is, these days. I am slightly sick of the (in my view) regurgitated storylines. The independent works, the European cinema, the more experimental directors actually have the capacity to offer you something you cannot “foresee”.  Things that really catch you short and make you think. I mean, Aeon Flux, that I reviewed the other day, has elements of this. I did not mention it much in the review because if I did a massive spoiler and the end of the film would come crumbling down but it is there. This film does not have that though. Sorry.

Ok rant over. This being said, why on EARTH did I put it in the blog then? Well, because, credit where it’s due, it is good at what it does. It is an action film. It stars Jake Gylenhaal and has a massive amount of him doing fighting scenes (eye candy alert!). I pretty much like Ben Kingsley in every single thing he does. It is classic Hollywood amusement. Ideal to watch with your mates of an evening. I enjoyed it. It just virtually contributed nothing to my film culture thingy. Not every film needs to…  

A TRIP TO YOUR PAST AND YOUR IMAGINATION : "WILLOW"

Now, was this a major childhood film where you grew up? I had never heard of it to be honest. My boyfriend, however, grew up on this apparently. As in he actually knows most of the film word for word. When I disclosed that the closest I could think of to “Willow” was the iconic “Wind in the Willows”, that would never do. I was promptly sat down to watch the film then and there, because frankly, how did I survive to 29 without having seen the film in the first place? If there is one thing I love, it’s a good fantasy film with a good dollop of ‘80s nostalgia as you guys know by now, and so we settled down. But then the credits started… Hang on, Lucasfilm? Ron Howard as director? (director of Angels & Demons, Frost / Nixon, The Da Vinci Code, Cinderella Man and A Beautiful Mind among other things). George Lucas himself as executive producer? Er, OK hang on, this is not some lost children’s flick from the ‘80s. This is serious stuff with potential to be a classic.

So, what is the story here? In a land far, far away, where magic still rules the earth, there is an evil queen called Bavmorda (I LOVE all the names in this film by the way. They would give Dickens a run for his money). She is an unjust tyrant that rules the land with much cruelty; however, all hope is not lost. There is a prophecy. A prophecy that tells of a very special baby girl whose destiny it is to topple Bavmorda and put an end to her tyranny. (I know, it’s not the most original storyline in the world, but hey… Ok, what was the basic storyline for Lord of the Rings? Thank you. Moving on).  Our queen Bavmorda however, is not one to leave things to chance. She gathers all the pregnant women in the kingdom in the hope of finding this special baby and perform a ritual that will “exile her soul to oblivion”. The baby is indeed found; however, the midwife-  being a brave and clever soul - smuggles her out of the castle. Hereby starts our adventure. It falls to Willow Ufgood, a dward, Madmartigan (Val Kilmer) a rather hot-headed swordsman of dubious intent, two brownies (having stopped reading Enid Blyton a while back I had clean forgotten about the existence of brownies. Shame on me!) and an unfortunate sorceress who herself has been changed into a muskrat to get the baby to the safety of a good kingdom where she can grow to fulfil her destiny. Willow has magic, the power of good and justice on his side. But will it be enough to conquer the evil magic and barbarian hoards of Bavmorda?

Ok, I know. There is a lot in this film we have seen before. And then again, it is because of instances like this, when they are done so well, that we want to see this type of thing again and again and again. Willow does it well. All of it. The requisite bouts of comedy are well done and still hilarious. The atmosphere and the magical world constructed are superb. I mean, yes of course if they had the technical possibilities we have today it would be a whole different story. But shall I tell you something? It is no substitute for imagination. I honestly think that special effects are well and good but it’s making us lazy. I mean, when I was a child we had entire imaginary worlds – built out of thin air! We used very little in the way of props, we often “pretended” everything existed and we were fine. We loved it! Think the classic scene in “Hook” where they sit down to dinner and seemingly there is no food there at all. Only when the characters start using their imaginations they see that there is food on the table and you know what? It is as filling as you please. This is the strength of imagination. And this is that makes this film an absolute joy to watch. It is not that the film is “lacking” in comparison to modern films where all the (visual) gaps are filled in for you. You just have to use a different skillset. A skillset we don’t use as often as we should in the modern world by my reckoning. I guess this is why some of us really enjoy ‘80s fantasy movies while others find them pointless. If you are of the latter group I strongly encourage you to give this a whirl. Exercise your imagination a bit. Go on… You’ll enjoy it once you get into it you know…

MY NEW OBSESSION: GAME OF THRONES (all of it)

Ok, I know. I generally do not “do” series. I have been chastising myself about being not “artistic” enough. But I have to do this, I really do. I got into Game of Thrones pretty early. First season. I watched a single episode and I was hooked. Completely hooked. Not only did I watch all the episodes with semi-religious fervour, I failed to withstand the withdrawal and started on the books as well – something I never do. My boyfriend is still sticking to “doing one or the other” and therefore is starting on the books but is steering clear of the series – for now. For now.

I know that anyone who hasn’t categorically been living under a stone has dipped their toe in this and made their judgement but then again, there are quite a few who have not. And I want to get those stragglers. Because seriously, you have no idea what you are missing.

Now, the story of Game of Thrones is a little hard to qualify and explain. Honestly. It is convoluted, complicated and nail biting. It takes place in an alternative universe, in a world where knights and chivalry still exist, as do magic and dragons. But men are still, fundamentally men. And that means things like politics, intrigue all still exist. The story starts with Eddard Stark, a man of honour and justice, becoming “hand of the king” – his Prime Minister if you will. Eddard does not want this rise to power but the king is a childhood friend he cannot refuse. And just as he suspects it will, his new position means the discovery of many secrets, secrets Eddard simply cannot ignore. Here the story begins but wither it goes, discover for yourself. I might add at this point, in the spirit of a tagline, that so many thousands of people simply cannot be wrong.

I mean they can. But not in this particular instance. The good thing about this series that it casts its net really wide. I mean, there is just about enough chivalry and magic to assuage the fantasy fans but at the same time these are, in a sense, incidental. The main bulk of the story reads like a political intrigue basically. It’s just that the political backstabbing takes place in more Medieval times. Oh and the stabbing can sometimes take quite a literal sense. I have watched this series with bated breath, the cliff-hangers are absolutely first class and the acting, the general artistic performance, well... Suffice to say the whole thing carried me away so much that I had to invest in the books and then read them to find out what happens next. Now that, is saying something. 

NOW IN CINEMAS - A NOVEL TAKE ON A CLASSIC: "SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN"

Now, you know how I was kind “meh” about the previous film? Well, I’m positively annoyed with bits of this one. I have a feeling that the blog may (only from time to time) turn into a place where I sit and gripe to you lot about what annoys me about films. I will not make a habit of this. And I will never put stuff that is so bad that I genuinely think you shouldn’t watch it. But still, why not be honest about bits you don’t like in something? That’s kinda what I’m doing with Snow White and the Huntsman.

Of course, Snow White and the Huntsman is the latest attempt to “revamp” the story of Snow White and the seven dwarves. I mean personally, I feel that the film is worth watching for this reason alone, I really like the idea of “what really happened” sort of versions of these things, I mean Cinderella has had her fair share of re-vamps, why not Snow White? I mean, here the basic tenets are all there. But in addition to the usual, Snow White does not “keep house” for the seven friendly dwarfs. She is “the chosen one who must save the land”. And when she comes back from the dead (she is not “asleep” like the fairy tale but actually dead here), she leads an army against the evil stepmother /witch and destroys her. Badass. Right?

Well, hmm, maybe. There are a few matters to be discussed though. First of all, Kristen Steward. I mean, no offence to the actress but I actually had to google her. No, to find out her real name. I thought and thought, and all I could come up with was Bella Swan. But there is the other matter of, well, she obviously isn’t worried about being typecast at all. Think about it, weak /normal and beautiful female character no one expects much of goes on to conquer hearts /become something super human and extraordinary / conquer hideous enemies. Fine, the second one doesn’t involve rather large wolves that are calling themselves werewolves. (I will not get started on Twilight. I respect everyone’s choice whether to like it or not but I will say one single thing : classic literature clearly states , VAMPIRES DO NOT SPARKLE IN THE SUN, THEY BURST INTO FLAMES. It’s my pet peeve about that series. Moving on).

Yes, so Snow White. It doesn’t take much experience in film analysis here to figure out that the Snow White here is very clearly a Christ figure. I mean she actually dies. And is brought back from the dead. Ok, there is true love’s kiss involved, but then the true love melts into the background, Snow White remains as white as snow as far as matters of the heart are concerned. It’s an interesting tack, but firstly it may be a little too serious for a film that is a fantasy film based on a children’s story. I don’t know, it just seems inappropriate somehow.

And then there is some stuff in the film that just popped out at me and my friend as we watched it. For starters, Snow White  is trapped in a tower for many long years until she comes of age. Then, her step mother must kill her to remain the fairest in the land for ever, when Snow White escapes and her adventure begins. The thing is, she is very athletic and able for someone trapped in a small cell for the best part of 15 years…  To the best of my knowledge, her muscles should have atrophied and stuff, no? Unless being “the chosen one” makes you some sort of exception. I mean this kind of omission of logic would be ok once in a while if it was tied together by this brilliant fantasy film that takes your breath away. And I mean there are some truly epic bits of this film (The bit with The White Heart for instance? I mean, Ok it has religious overtones but still... Pretty epic.). Oh and Charlize Theron is brilliant as the stepmother. Just awesome. But not as many as I would have liked. And a few too many of the afore mentioned errors in logic. I mean, suspension of disbelief is well and good but honestly, one shouldn’t push the matter.  Still, like I said, the concept is interesting. There are some seriously good bits. It’s a fun watch. Just watch it at home, on DVD with a couple of friends over. So you can point stuff out and gripe about it to each other J