Are You Freaking Kidding Me?

Microsoft and really the whole gaming anti-piracy thing has finally crossed a very creepy, very 1984-y line. For a while, the story on everyone's lips was that the next Playstation and Xbox consoles would block used games but it seems that this may have been thrown out; which I'm thankful for because it just made already greedy-appearing companies appear even greedier.

I'm a dedicated gamer. I buy the games I want, used or new. I buy DVDs, too, rarely going in for downloads due to an obsession with physical copies of things lest the Internet collapse in on itself and my computer simultaneously explodes - at least I know I'll always have the hard copy.
And like anyone who owns a console, I use mine to watch films. Sometimes - shock! horror! - with more people than just myself and my girlfriend.

Well, looks like Microsoft is putting out a new patent which is going to make viewing films with 'too many' people more or less impossible, without buying an extra license. Yeah, that's right. In case you didn't click on that there link (you should), the article basically informs us that, well, here's a quote:

The abstract describes a camera-based system that would monitor the number of viewers in a room and check to see if the number of occupants exceeded a certain threshold set by the content provider. If there are too many warm bodies present, the device owner would be prompted to purchase a license for a greater number of viewers.From the abstract: “The users consuming the content on a display device are monitored so that if the number of user-views licensed is exceeded, remedial action may be taken.”

 This. Is. Ridiculous. While I may understand that copyright states I can't show a DVD on a jumbo screen in the middle of the city center, it is a whole different matter for it to tell me that I can't have a big group of over to watch it for a movie night. Now, admittedly, it doesn't say how many people is "too many" but still, I can't help but feel that this is just further shoving down our throats that we do not own the content we buy, we are merely renting it from the copyright owner, despite spending the money and being given a physical copy of the product.

On top of the legal mumbo-jumbo that's involved in this - which would make someone buy numerous licenses for one film/game/whatever as if it were a highly guarded piece of software like AVID or Adobe Creative Suite - I just simply don't like the idea of Microsoft having a direct camera into my living room without me knowing if anyone is watching at any given time.

Also, what's to prevent me from unplugging the damn thing when I watch a film? Will it not work? Will it be compulsory? Even worse. If it is, they sure won't be getting my business.

Mahalo.

Good Job, Dr. Watson

In my recent quest to have my girlfriend watch more or less everything on my DVD shelf in our spare time, I recently finished re-watching the Steven Moffat series Sherlock. Besides enjoying the clever - and sometimes a bit cheesy - re-imagining of Sir. Arthur Conan Doyle's classic stories and characters, I got to appreciate the performances of some pretty tremendous actors.

For those of you who don't know, besides writing, my dream is to act. I love to act. I love pretending to be someone else and say things and do things that I wouldn't normally do. To make people feel something. To make them laugh or cry or even just smile. I love it. Entertainment is the best thing ever. A lot of the time, when I watch films or commercials or TV shows, I pick out which character that not only I'd like to play but - more realistically - which one would I be cast as. When I watch Criminal Minds, I can see myself in the role of Dr. Reid portrayed by Matthew Gray Gubler. I always imagine that I could do any role given to Michael Cera or Jesse Eisenberg or Jay Baruchel.While watching Sherlock, I liked to pretend that I could play Holmes or Watson or Moriarty. If I just looked older.

But that's not really true.

Maybe I could do a decent job with Holmes or Moriarty (again, given I looked older than I do) but upon re-watching the final episode of the second season, I was struck once more by the simplicity and the haunting of Martin Freeman's delivery of Watson's final monologue in the graveyard. Martin Freeman was not only subtle but delicate, emotional but restrained. In short, it was perfect. Freeman evoked waterfalls of tears by the simplest intake of breath, always stopping himself short of out and out weeping. Because that's not what Watson would do.

I just wanted to say that Martin Freeman is an incredibly underrated and wonderful actor, and I look forward to The Hobbit.

Mahalo.

The Dark Knight Rises: Gotham's Reckoning

Since the end of The Dark Knight, like any fan, I have been eagerly anticipating The Dark Knight Rises. It was like seeing The Empire Strikes Back and waiting so long to know the end of the story as it comes in Return of the Jedi. I don't think I could make this paragraph any geekier. Sufficed to say, I was excited.

I was concerned though, too, that I was hyping myself up too much and that - because my expectations were so high - I would ruin the movie for myself. It's the same trap we all fall into for a highly anticipated movie - especially a sequel to a much loved film.

In all honesty, however, I was not disappointed. The sheer scale of TDKR is one of the things I found so astonishing. Christopher Nolan said he wanted to make a large scale film in the behind-the-scenes featurette and how he has prevailed.

In the film, Gotham is about to get its comeuppance by criminal mastermind Bane (Tom Hardy). Batman (Christian Bale) has been off the streets for 8 years in the wake of Harvey Dent's (Aaron Ekhart) death in The Dark Knight. Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) is the only one who knows the truth and is tortured by it. Meanwhile, hothead cop and idealist Officer Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is on the streets, believing that Gotham needs the Batman again.

Anne Hathaway does a magnificent job as Catwoman - the best ever rendering of the character on film to date. She embodied the sensuality, the slyness and the violence that accompanies the character in the comics, and did so without ever making one bad cat pun, or purring.

This was definitely Christian Bale's best Batman performance, starting with a weakened Bruce Wayne and back into the swing of Batman. He portrayed a depth and brooding to the character that was remarkable.

But truly, my hat must be tipped to Tom Hardy. His performance as Bane was not only magnificent, but terrifying. Those who have read the comics know what Bane can do and has done. He is a monster of the highest calibre, and Tom Hardy did not disappoint. Honestly, if the track was laid down by Heath Ledger for his performance as the Joker, it's all set for Hardy to receive his own Oscar nomination (at least).

This film was so epic in scale, it was mind-boggling. The sheer number of extras required, the amount of story that occurred, character arcs coming to conclusion! The sheer Dr. Zhivago-esque grandeur of the film is unmistakeable.

If you are a comic book fan - and I speak as one - thenthis movie was pretty perfect. Elements of Batman: Knightfall, The Dark Knight Returns and Gates of Gotham. A glance of some of the comics that influenced Nolan during filming are outlined here. Even if you're not a comic book fan and merely enjoyed the first two movies, this film will not disappoint you. It is a fitting ending to the trilogy and does so in a way that we've come to expect from Christopher Nolan. 9/10

Mahalo.

The Rum Diary Nails It

As a rule, I am always wary of film adaptations of books I thoroughly love. I was disappointed in the One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest film - despite it being, in and of itself, a good film - and I fear I will be disappointed by the upcoming On the Road film. In spite of this, I am tremendous fan of Terry Gilliam's adaptation of Fear and Loathing in Leas Vegas; not only because Johnny Depp was astounding as Hunter S. Thompson/Raoul Duke, but because the film captured the insanity of the text, the essence, the spirit.

To this end, I was (perhaps to my own surprise) not disappointed with Bruce Robinson's adaptation of Hunter S. Thompson's The Rum Diary.

Initially, I was incredibly skeptical due to the overtly comedic take that the trailer seemed to imply. The Rum Diary's not an overtly funny book, I thought as I watched it, what have they done? Robinson is also the man responsible for Withnail and I, a British Fear and Loathing-style film that I was not too keen on.

So, from the get go, we're off to a bad start.

Not only was I proved wrong, I was proved so thoroughly wrong; the film was so effective, so emotive, that I was literally left in a speechless daze after I left the cinema.

Paul Kemp (Johnny Depp) is a struggling novelist and journalist who is trying to make it and takes a freelance job at the San Juan Star, a local newspaper in Puerto Rico. Once there he meets his boss Lotterman, played perfectly by Richard Jenkins (Six Feet Under, Burn After Reading), and his eccentric co-workers Sala, portrayed by Michael Rispoli (Kick-Ass, Rounders) - whom incidentally was the performance I was by far most impressed with - and the infamous Moberg, classic weird guy Giovanni Ribisi (Avatar, Saving Private Ryan).

He must deal with the local culture of seemingly endless madness and the imposed culture of the ex-patriots who live there, like money-hungry Sanderson, stylishly pulled-off by Aaron Eckhart (The Dark Knight, Thank You for Smoking). Wading through this, he meets beautiful blonde Chenault (Amber Heard) and deal with his feelings for her.

"You smell that?" Kemp asks Sala and Moberg. "That's the smell of bastards."

Johnny Depp can do so much with the smallest of movements, and he captures perfectly the essence of a Hunter S. Thompson protagonist - keeping in mind, of course, that this is pre-Fear and Loathing Hunter. Kemp is an understated, frumpy fellow with a drinking problem whom I found thoroughly likeable.

The real joy, however, came in watching Michael Rispoli be constantly sweaty and grimy Sala, the staff photographer. His constant talking at Kemp is a real joy of this film. Ribisi's performance, too, as Moberg- the crime and religious affairs correspondent - echoes deeply classic Hunter S.; madness with a very thick coating of depth.

It was wonderful to see Eckhart portray a real bastard in this film, one of the few times we get to see this handsome all-American be a tight-jawed money-grubber. And no, he was more Wall Street evil, not Two-Face evil.

For her part, Amber Heard held up her role well and she was a perfect choice for the character; a outgoing and spontaneous woman, with more than a hint of sheer danger.

There is practically nothing I didn't like about this film; the dialogue was tight, it was beautifully shot and it had a great mix of humour and serious depth reminiscent of Gilliam's Fear and Loathing. I did find at times that the comedy was sometimes taken a little too far, such as a certain car-and-stairs sequence, but in general I found it was a well-thought-out and well-constructed adaptation of a great book that clearly came from the heart. 8.5/10

Mahalo.

Flashback: The Mario Bros Movie

New "segment" I want to do which is called FLASHBACK: having a look at stuff from our

childhoods.

We all grew up with the awesome and, in many ways, delightfully camp films from the late eighties  and early nineties. They are cinematic classics. Films you know, like the Back to the Future trilogy,  the Indiana Jones trilogy - which was unfortunately and unforgettably molested recently - and the original Tim Burton Batman films. And some films which stood on their own like The Goonies, Beetlejuice and Ferris Bueller's Day Off among many others.

Combined within this, for us as a lucky generation, were those classic video games which started off the modern gaming identities held within PlayStation and Xbox and Wii. Games such as Pacman, Space Invaders, Donkey Kong and the all time favourite, Super Mario Brothers. None of which, upon reflection, make any sense concerning their stories, but were fun nonetheless.

After all that was said and done, there was a phase in cinema history which continues on to this day, and that is making films out of the games we love so much. Some of them are kind of okay, though none really come to mind right now, and some are just downright embarrassing. Most of them come to mind right now. But one film from my childhood, which in some ways seemed pretty great then, comes to mind right now. And that film is the critically despised, and generally disliked, Super Mario Bros film.

For those of you who haven't seen this film - I urge you, please, please do. It is truly one of the best achievements in 90s camp cinema. Notice in films like Back to the Future: Part II and Batman and Robin and many others, that there was a certain level of puppetry and bright neon colours and garbage involved in the scenes. If you've seen any of these 90s camp movies, you know what I mean. This film does it best. What's worse really, is that it uses some truly fantastic actors to capture it all. Actors who, probably, had significant damage done to their careers because of it.

This film, which boasts a whopping 3.8/10 on IMDB.com and an astounding 13% on RottenTomatoes.com, hosts John Leguizamo as Luigi, Samantha Mathis - yes, she was big news in the 90s - as Daisy (a princess), acting heavyweight Bob Hoskins as Mario and original Easy Rider Dennis Hopper as King Coopa. Yes. Seriously. Also, an animatronic Yoshi. Rotten Tomatoes gives it the brief review of 

"[d]espite flashy sets and special effects, Super Mario Bros. is too light on story and substance to be anything more than a novelty".

That's more or less right, but it's also so much more. It is truly ridiculous.

Princess Daisy is a woman born from the dinosaur-ruled world of King Coopa - a parallel universe in which mankind evolved from the lizards instead of primates - and she is the only one who can save it from the evil king. Mario Mario and Luigi Mario - again, no, I'm not kidding - help her out while being plumbers, apparently bad ones at that. Meanwhile, the idiot lackeys of Coopa kidnap Mario's girlfriend Peach (a-ha) and so it turns out he must rescue her, too.

I'm not kidding. Seriously, see this movie. It is by far one of the funniest and most amusing films you will ever enjoy…with the gift of hindsight.

Mahalo.

In Memorium: A Quiet Eulogy

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rage at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

- Dylan Thomas

There is a death permeating, slowly - over the course of the past year especially - that
hasn't really been spoken about and, unless you're in the business, you wouldn't really know to think about it. Really, to a lot of you, this kind of death seems like an obvious transition, something that of course makes sense in our modern times but there is something distinctly sad about this death, this passing.

I speak, in no uncertain terms, about 35mm film projectors.

In cinemas.

Back in high school, I used to work at the Cinemas in Chatswood. It was a pretty good job for  someone my age, with a decent wage ($10.50p/hour) and the staff benefit of two free movie tickets every day. They didn't stack, but still, it was pretty great for dating.

At the bottom of the food chain were people like me - snacks salespeople, ticket tearers, cinema cleaners - and then supervisors and managers. But somewhere in the middle, were the mysterious folk known as Projectionists. These guys got to dress in black polo shirts and spent the whole day up in the Projection Room where they would stick the reels of film onto the projector and click on, making sure to change the reel at the right time. For every film. In every cinema.

I had only ever seen the Projection Room once, on my tour of the cinema when I first got my job. It was at the top of the fire stairs. It was the goal of almost every popcorn monkey on staff to become a Projectionist.

You worked with the films.

You were the bringer of magic to the masses!

And, more importantly, you worked on your own.

Away from other staff.

Away from the managers.

Away. From. The. Public.

It was basically Hoyts' version of Living the Dream.

Movies are such a big part of who I am that this job was perfect for me. Unfortunately, I ended up leaving Hoyts before I got to Projectionist, but that's a story for another day.

I remember being awed by the dark, musty room at the top of the fire stairs, above all the cinemas. It smelled like film varnish and sticky tape. The loud "click-click-clicking" and shuttering of the projectors echoed throughout the cement walls of it. It was the tiny, magic place where dreams spewed forth in a stream of light, onto the screen and into my brain.

There was something inherently - again, for lack of better words - magical about seeing the reels change, sticking the different parts of film together to make sure the film was snipped together right. There was also a joy in keeping tiny, discarded pieces of snipped off film as a memento from whatever film - it was usually the "3, 2, beep" from the start of the film, but still, it was a part of the film and it was yours.

A friend of mine - we'll call her Emily - still works as a Hoyts Projectionist. Recently, she told me something upsetting.

"We're getting rid of all the old projectors," she said. "They're replacing them with digital versions."

"What?" I could hardly believe it.

"Yeah, it's all going onto hard drives. We even called our distributors to tell them not to send us anymore film."

It was impossible. Replace the Projectionist?

"They have me working candy bar now," she said, taking a sip of her drink. "I get to wear a manager's uniform and boss the underlings around, but still."

"But you still have to go up and press the play button, right?" I edged closer. "Right?"

"Nope," she sighed here. "It's all on an automated schedule. We just sometimes have to go up and make sure it's all running okay."

She said she wanted to show me, and that she had something to give me. We left the bar and we walked to the cinema. I hadn't been in the building in years but I remembered the smell of the trash room elevator. She swiped her card and we went up. Magical Projection Level 3A.

I got a small nervous excitement - I was going to see the Projection Room again! The elevator doors opened onto the cold. I remembered the constant air conditioning to keep the projectors cool and to prevent the film from burning or catching alight. But this was a different cool. I knew this cool.

This was Server Room cool - the air conditioned sanctity of the IT guy's domain. Emily switched the light on and where there were once rows of these huge, classical behemoths stood boxes with flashing lights and a small screen, shooting out the film onto the screen. Next to it stood another giant black box that I recognized as a hard drive hub.

"Oh, geez," I said, looking at it. "It's so cold."

"Yeah, doesn't have the same mystique, does it?"

"Not at all."

I turned and Emily fetched something out from her locker. An bright, orange wheel wrapped in dark brown.

"Here," she said, handing the weighty thing over to me. "I found it in the garbage and I just couldn't leave it there. I saw it and thought of you and knew you want it."

What I held in my hands, dear readers, was a reel of 35mm film.

"What's on it?" I didn't take my eyes off it.

"Nothing," she said, closing her locker. "It's a dud reel, nothing on it, a tester or whatever. We always get at least one. And they always have that lady in the first 3 frames."

I looked at it in the light and, sure enough, a lady in a red blazer smiled back at me and then an endless nothing of varnished brown.

"It's heavy, but it's yours if you want it."

I couldn't thank her enough. 
I rode home on the train with it in my lap, smiling. Scrawled on the side was, "STOP! Do not put BLUE FILM on here." And I smiled. I didn't know what blue film was, but I didn't care. There was something about it all that made me smile.

So, goodnight, I say, to you Projectors and Projectionists and 35mm film. Rest easy. No more are the days of cigarette burns at the top of the screen to indicate the change of reel; no more are the days of scratches and burns and character in the film print; no more can Tyler Durden splice into you single frames of pornography to shock the movie-goers and their children.

It may seem like a little thing to you, dear readers, but to me, it's everything.

Mahalo.

The AMAZING Spider-Man

So I just had my second film nerdgasm of the week. Hopefully those of you keeping track of the upcoming superhero films are aware of the new Spiderman adaptation, The Amazing Spider-Man directed by the aptly named Marc Webb. If you are not then you must immediately check out the trailer.

Webb is a fairly unknown director, but you'd recognize his name if you've seen (500) Days of Summer or the video clip to Green Day's "Waiting".

Now, when I first heard tell of a new Spiderman film being made, I was skeptical. Skeptical because we had had three mediocre films prior to this in an attempt at a reboot of the franchise. Now, director Sam Raimi (Evil Dead) did a pretty good job with the first film - the origin story, of course - and Tobey Maguire did a fairly good job as nerd Peter Parker. Strangely, this does not equate to a great Spiderman.

The second film was sub-par and the third was an insult - especially to those legion of us who couldn't wait to see Venom finally on screen.

Because of all of this and more I was wary of the (gritty) rebooting of a franchise that was barely a decade old. Of course, it didn't help that there were rumours that Twilight star Robert Pattinson would be taking over Maguire's role as Peter Parker.

With the new trailer, however, there is hope. The Social Network's Andrew Garfield is playing the titular character, with Emma Stone playing his first love - not redhead Mary-Jane but blonde Gwen Stacy. That's right, folks, they're sticking to the comics!

The film seems to be taking its source material very seriously, and I couldn't be happier. And yes, they are making the web-slinging a result of the Parker-made web shooters - not from glands on his wrists! Hurray! Accuracy!

Finally, I am looking forward to Spiderman again!

Mahalo.

You Sunk Battleship

I don't know if you guys have seen this, but I think you should. Not because it looks good, but because it looks so damn stupid.

That is the trailer for the upcoming film adaptation of the game Battleship by Hasbro. No, I'm not kidding and I wish I was. Surprisingly, no, it isn't directed by Michael Bay, but by Peter Berg - director of the unfortunately unimpressive film Hancock.

Is this really happening? And if so, why? I think Battleship is as unfilmable a game as you can get besides Monopoly, and even that has (substantiated) rumours of a film adaptation by Ridley freaking Scott. Yes, the guy who gave us Gladiator.

Looking at the trailer for Battleship, it frightens me that there are such talents as Alexander Skarsgård, Liam Neeson and Peter MacNicol. Liam Neeson doesn't need an IMDB link, you all know who he is! I mean, I know actors have to do some films for fun, but really? The Battleship movie? Come on. It just looks like a poor man's Transformers - and even those films weren't very good!

Mahalo.

The Avengers Coming at us with A Vengeance!

It's very likely that anyone out there remotely interested in superheroes, nerd culture or film will have seen the latest trailer for the upcoming Joss Whedon production of The Avengers.

Seriously, does this movie not look fantastic? Robert Downey Jr. is beyond dreamy.

Though I was incredibly disappointed to hear that Edward Norton was being replaced by Mark Ruffalo for the role of Bruce Banner some time ago, I have to say that Ruffalo really looks like he is going to step up to the plate. I think that he'll be able to pull off the same awkward and brooding scientist that Norton produced and that original actor Eric Bana failed to do.

Mahalo.

TV Killed the Movie Star

At least, for the time being.

It is unlikely that it has gone completely unnoticed how much amazing television has been cropping up within the last ten years. I mean, there's always been good TV, don't get me wrong, but it seems that with increasing budgets for TV - especially HBO productions - TV has only been getting better and better.

There was a time not too long ago that being called a "television actor" was a derogatory term amongst actors. Everyone wanted to make it big on the Silver Screen, be a movie star, beloved the world over on that giant screen with those plush seats. Sure, there was a time when being a film star was disregarded by theatre actors, but that changed. And so, too, I think the time of the Television Actor as a second class citizen.

Shows like Six Feet Under seemed to mark a new trend that being in a television series was not a bad thing at all, compared to their film star counterparts. This time saw the rise of a shows that seemed more like a collection of films, a series of moments that could be more deeply explored due to their increased time frame. The medium allowed for more character development, longer and deeper plot lines and more exploration of the world these characters exist in.

It isn't hard for me to name, off the top of my head, shows that fall into this category of A Series of Films, shows like Dexter, True Blood, Boardwalk Empire, Castle, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, shows that you feel you must own on DVD to watch and rewatch. These shows become an obsession, something to be spoken about, speculated about. And that's not even mentioning series that have finished like Lost and Detroit 1-8-7. And, yes, Firefly, of course.

Even shows that are just starting like Boss, Luck, Homeland and, in a more pulpy sense, Spartacus and American Horror Story are taking over the airwaves and capturing us with film-like episodes.

This doesn't even speak to the quality of actor who are now taking part in these. It seemed to start in the late 90s with first Michael J. Fox and then Charlie Sheen being the leads in Spin City but then big actors becoming "TV actors" was still a fall from grace in a sense. What I truly believe was the turning point was twofold: Tim Roth on Lie to Me and shortly after Jeff Goldblum on Law and Order: Criminal Intent. With these two big-name actors moving to television, it was clear that was a revolution. And people noticed. Even Laurence Fishburne joined the cast of CSI.


Then it started becoming obvious the talent that lay in these television actors - Michael C. Hall (from both Six Feet Under and Dexter), Michael Pitt (Boardwalk Empire), Peter Dinklage (Game of Thrones), Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad), Nathan Fillion (Castle) and that's only naming a few.



I haven't even mentioned the household names like Steve Buschemi in Boardwalk Empire, Kelsey Grammar in Boss, Sean Bean in Game of Thrones and John Hannah in Spartacus.

It seems like the prejudice towards being a television actor is over and people are starting to realize that it's not a fate worse than dearth. In fact, it seems to be better than being a film actor seeing as how poor the quality of films have been lately. This truly is the Golden Age of Television.

Mahalo.

The Muppets Do It Again!

Last night I had the pleasure of watching the new Muppets flick, co-written, co-executive produced and starring Jason Segel. First, let me say, I never thought that at my age that a Muppets movie would be able to make a tear roll down my cheek. I was sorely mistaken in thinking that.

The movie centres around Gary (Segel) and new Muppet Walter (voiced by Peter Linz). Gary wants to take his girlfriend Mary (Amy Adams) to LA for their anniversary and they invite Walter with them to go and see the old Muppet Studios. When they find it in disrepair and an evil oil magnate, Tex Richman (Chris Cooper), buying up the plot to tear it down, they decide to seek out Kermit and bring the gang back together for one last show to try and raise money to keep the plot. Hilarity, insanity and self-referential humour ensues!

Segel was seemingly born to play this role. With his enormous smile, happy eyes and a permanent look of childlike wonder on his face, it's amazing how well he seeped into the Muppet universe. Adams, too, was astounding her role, being a beautiful, Smalltown, America kind of girl and performing some wonderful songs alone and with the occasional Muppet.

As is the custom with Muppet films, celebrity cameos abound! Alan Arkin, Whoopi Goldberg, Neil Patrick Harris and Bill Cobbs to name a few. I won't spoil them all for you!

If you ever loved the Muppets as a kid or now, you will very much enjoy this trip down nostalgia lane, with its fresh new take on the Muppets and some wonderful songs composed by Bret McKenzie of New Zealand comedy duo Flight of the Conchords. And if you need any further convincing as to seeing this movie, it's purely for the AMAZING casting choice for Walter's human counterpart and these three words: Chris Cooper rapping.

A solid 8 out of 10 for being able to keep The Muppets for both children and adults, keeping it in tune with the original, brilliant Muppet releases.

Mahalo.

Limitless Ltd

"Limitless" was pretty much going to be the drug movie of the new age; the "Requiem for a Dream" of the 21st Century. It didn't really turn out that way. While it may have prompted me to read the book, it delivered some other, stranger messages. One of them seeming to be "drugs are great" and "if you do enough of them, you'll be president someday" which I find a little odd. But, I'm getting ahead of myself.

The film is about Eddie Morra (Bradley Cooper), a writer who is creatively-blocked, unkempt and just got dumped. He is glowering in the worthlessness of himself when he runs into his ex-wife's brother (Johnny Whitworth) and is given a mystery drug that bestows upon him more or less superhuman abilities. Of course, from here, things can only go up. Nevermind that the brother was, at a time, a derelict drug-dealer who should never be trusted.

Bradley Cooper was, as he always is, excellent in this role. He broke out of his normal role to play someone with a lot more depth and emotion, while also remaining a stylish and charming son of a bitch.

About halfway through the film, though, I couldn't help but ask: wait, wasn't Robert de Niro supposed to be in this movie? And he is. For very little of it. It kind of looks like they just got him in because it was a big name that would draw crowds, but he was still great in the role of tycoon Carl van Loon.

Sure, bad things do happen to Eddie even after he's taken the super-drug - most of the bad things caused by it - but I didn't feel there was any kind of evolution. He was a failure, he took drugs and became awesome. Period. I'll leave it up to you whether this fits the mould of a redemption or evolution story, but I don't think it does - and to its detriment. Usually, I'm all for subverting a genre and changing things up, but this just didn't seem to gel with me. Still, watching Bradley Cooper act for 2 hours up against de Niro was definitely worth the money and the cinematography and music were both excellent. 7.5/10

Thor: A Hard Look At

Everyone shoule be pretty much aware by now of the newest comic-book-superhero-to-film-superhero film "Thor" that is currently gracing our cinemas. The film is the newest link in the chain that wukk eventually culminate in the superhero extravaganza "The Avengers", to be directed by Joss Whedon.

First, let me say how surprised I was to find out that this was directed by directing giant Kenneth Branagh - yes, the one and same who did "Frankenstein" with Robert de Niro. The film is so far out of his style it's in another world - which, I suppose, suits the fact that these characters are not from Earth. By the way, that's not a spoiler. Promise.

Second of all, I want to express how impressed I was by Australian "Home and Away" star Chris Hemsworth. Despite his humble beginnings on an Australia after-school soap that's been running for so long, he's come to Hollywood poised and ready. The first time I saw him, which was not on "Home and Away" but as George Kirk in the 2009 J.J. Abrams "Star Trek", I was immediately impressed. The fact that his role in that film last only about 12 minutes shows just how grabbing he was. The emotions were palpable.
Unfortunately, the emotional range for a character like Thor is a little less diverse. He is a prince from an alien world whom visited Earth and whom the Vikings worshipped as gods. So, he's arrogant and boastful, but his comedic timing when exiled too Earth sans-superpowers, is priceless. Also, it helps that he developed himself into some worthy eye-candy for all the gay and female movie viewers - hot damn did I feel inadequate.

The film is supported by the ever beautiful Natalie Portman and Kat Dennings, who play his science-nerd friends once on Earth, and the always enjoyable to watch Anthony Hopkins as his father Odin. Stellan Skarsgård was fun in his father-like role to Portman and Dennings, and newcomer Tom Hiddleston was impressive and believable as Thor's mischievous brother Loki.

Story-wise, it was a typical evolution/redemption story with some elegant action scenes thrown in for kicks. Admittedly the story seems lifted right from the comic book - and I knew that this hero would be the hardest to adapt to film because he was so, well, brazen. The dialogue is, at times, a little trite and couples itself with the wafer-thin storyline, but it does end in a way that I felt it should end - you'll see what I mean when you see it; and for the love of god stay after the credits!

Of course, while most of you are aware of my dislike of 3D as a medium, it can be done well. This film didn't need to be in 3D, but it wasn't too intrusive. The beautiful, sweeping landscape shots of Asgard are worth donning the 3D glasses, but anything on Earth - which is the majority of the film - isn't helped along at all by this new, hyped medium.

This film is an enjoyable, light movie and I do think is as good an adaptation of the comic as we're bound to get. 7/10

Paranormal Activity

Ok, so I know I'm a little slow on the uptake as this movie came out some time ago, but still, bear with me.
First of all, I want to say that this movie was fantastic. It was very well put together, simple and effective - the simplicity is what made it scary. Kind of in the same way "Buried" was. The effects were simple and I couldn't figure them out, which was a nice, fresh perspective on the horror/haunting genre.
Sure, most people would say "oh, it's just "The Blair Witch Project" but set now" and to them I say, fuck you and shut up. ANY movie that uses first person camera as part of the film is going to be seen as Blair-Witch-esque because, no matter your thoughts on that film, it started off a style of genre (known as the "found footage" genre) that wasn't really used before - outside of the 1980, not-too-well-received, Italian movie "Cannibal Holocaust" which was the first recorded instance of a "found footage" film. Also, I think "Paranormal Activity" did it better. The characters weren't as annoying.

Now, on the characters, this is important. Fuck. Me. The boyfriend is a dumbass in this film. I know, I know, if he wasn't, the climax wouldn't be the same and, hell, the whole film would probably be really different and less exciting. But damn.
Ok, I mean, obviously he doesn't know he's in a horror film, but after the first few experiences of the title's events, you'd think he'd be a little more aware or at least say, "ok, some shit is going down, let me call a professional" or "maybe I shouldn't piss it off". But now. He decides to take the "hey, this should be fun - let's piss it off and call it names" route.
That's not a spoiler, that's just the whole movie.

Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat, who play characters by those names, are excellent and it really is great to see some talent in a small budget, enjoyable horror flick like this. They are understated and believable.

Go and see it!

Note: this post doesn't have anything to do with "Paranormal Activity 2" or the apparently upcoming 3rd installment, seeing as they both return in those films - or, at least, Katie is slated for the 3rd so far. You'll see why this seems dumb and counter-intuitive to the first, and kind of ruins the whole experience of it.

Buried...

...is probably the scariest, most stressful movie I have ever seen. It was also cinematically brilliant. For those of you unaware, Buried is a film where Paul Conroy (played extremely well by Ryan Reynolds) wakes up to find himself bound in a coffin and buried alive. With him is a cell phone, his lighter and a flask of liquid, among other things. He has 90 minutes before he is left to die and must figure a way out.

Now, this sound like it's just a lame horror movie which ends in a Kill Bill-esque "punching through the coffin and crawling up and out of the ground", but you'd be wrong. The movie is an intricate exploration of loneliness, the American society and mortality.

The film is brilliantly shot never leaving the confines of the coffin - ever. All shots take place within the coffin and because of this, you feel like you're in there with Conroy. The lighting is only whatever the cell phone or lighter provides and the film is mostly quite silent, bar Conroy's talking on the phone and the occasional piece of dramatic music.

While I admire the excellent execution of the film and performance by Reynolds, and also the film-maker's ability to keep the audience interested for 90 minutes while never leaving the coffin or the single actor, I do not recommend it for the faint of heart. If you are claustrophobic or have a fear of being buried alive, this film is probably your worst nightmare and even had me - generally unaffected by films - shaking for a while afterwords, haunted.

Make no mistake, this is not a life-affirming movie, but is a great study of what it means to be alive.

Last One, I Swear

Ok, this is the last article for IF Magazine that I wrote, and will write. The internship's over. It's about an Australian film called "The Makeover".

If I had a Twitter, I'd Let People Know About Things Like This

THIS is actually quite an interesting film project being undertaken right now. If I had a Twitter...but I never will. Never.

First Article for Inside Film Magazine

Hello loyal and numerous followers (har har)! I have just has my first article published on the Inside Film Magazine website and if y'all want to head on over by clicking on that there link, I'd sure appreciate it! Hell, you might even enjoy it!

It's a write up on a new and upcoming Australian film called Needle. Mahalo.

Alice in Blunderland

Those of you who know me know that I am a great lover of Tim Burton's films. I find that he can practically do no wrong. Even though I was a massive fan of the original "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory", I find Burton's was still good and as the two were so different, were practically incomparable. However, this is not the case with his new film "Alice in Wonderland".

The story is basically what happens if bad stuff happened after Alice left Wonderland, and so the various characters plot to bring her back to be their 'champion' against the Red Queen - or more famously known as the Queen of Hearts. But, alas, Alice has no recollection of ever being in Wonderland and she must relearn her lessons all over again. The film had promise to be an interesting follow up story to the events after the original "Alice in Wonderland" - the definitive version, I find, to be the Disney animated classic, but that's just me. Unfortunately what ended up happening was Alice was turned into an annoying teenage leading character who did nothing but complain and the plot may as well have been The Narnia Chronicles...in Wonderland.

Mia Wasikowska (Alice) can not be blamed I find for the poorness of the character, as she was mutated into a traditional misunderstood youth. Wasikowska first dealt performed in the Australian television show "All Saints", an episode directed by Robert Marchand. The role I find her best so far was in the short film "I Love Sarah Jane", in which she plays a young girl in a zombie apocalypse setting. Definitely worth a watch, it's available here.
Johnny Depp's performance as the Mad Hatter was clearly the best in the film. Though I am generally hard pressed to find a Johnny Depp performance I have disliked, this one was once again something new for the actor. The costume, voice and general physical movement of the character was so well carried out that simply watching him on screen was the saving grace of the film.
Anne Hathaway's performance as The White Queen was amusing in its own right because of her freedom to do with the character what she wanted, "When I was trying to work her out, I kept saying to myself, ‘She is a punk-rock, vegan pacifist.’" the actress said in an interview for Azrael Merrylan's blog.
What disappointed me most was by far the lackluster performance by Helena Bohnam Carter as The Red Queen. Now, normally, I am an incredible fan of the actress - I find she was practically flawless in "Fight Club" and "Sweeney Todd" - but this performance was simply not up to scratch. Albeit her subtle comedy in the role was well done, the screaming and general foolishness became frustrating to watch.
Voice work by Alan Rickman and Steven Fry in (respectively) the Blue Caterpillar and Cheshire Cat were very much up to scratch.

What annoyed me first about this film was that it did NOT need to be in 3D. Not at all. This is not "Avatar" where its only saving grace was the 3D used to make it and was basically just an exhibition of the possibilities of 3D animation. "Alice and Wonderland" and Tim Burton are a perfect match because ANYTHING is possible in both of their worlds (to paraphrase Anne Hathaway from the aforementioned interview) but Burton seems to have simply made a blockbuster film for the sake of it, not including the traditional Burton feel into it like in any of his other classic films. All in all, a massive let down. Mahalo.

Funny Games Hedges Its Bets

As I type, I have just finished watching perhaps one of the most disturbing films I've ever seen. Written and directed by Caché's Michael Heneke, Funny Games is a powerful deconstruction of the presentation of violence in the media, and the expectations of the audience. Those of you who have seen either Caché or any other of Heneke's films know that he likes to disrupt the audience's experience by giving them the unexpected in the most powerful way possible, and Funny Games does just that.

A happy, wealthy suburban family George (Tim Roth), Ann (Naomi Watts) and their son Georgie (Devon Gearhart) are just beginning their holiday in their beautiful summer home when two creepy and soft-spoken teenagers, Paul (Michael Pitt) and Peter (Brady Corbet) invade their home and proceed to toy with the family for their own twisted amusement.

Ann: Why don't you just kill us?!
Peter: Never underestimate the importance of entertainment.

Exactly. Heneke is clearly toying with the audience's desire to see a film where the family is tortured (physically and emotionally) with the real possibility of death. This is done in a fashion which can only be described as "soul destroying" as you watch the family desperately trying to get free from the grasp of these insane people, whilst simultaneously making the audience uncomfortable with some very unexpected moments of breaking the fourth wall from Paul. The film comments on how violence is seen in film and on the news, how the audience is separated from the violence by the television screen, but that doesn't stop it (philosophically) from being real.

Paul: [Fiction] is just as real as reality because you can see it too.

Overall the film is stylistically brilliant and very well scripted, but definitely not for the faint of heart. Although the viewer is uncomfortable for almost all of the film, it is still (for lack of better terms) an enjoyable watch - that is, if you don't mind your soul being just a little destroyed. Mahalo.