One step forward, two steps back?

While there are some people deeply engrossed in the specifics of the HD-DVD/Blu Ray battle for supremacy, it is fair to say that most people are still blissfully unaware of said battle. And many of those who are aware just don't give monkey's simply because HD DVD and Blu Ray really aren't any better than DVDs in the first place.

When DVDs first came out, everyone was wowed with the better picture and sound quality, interactive menus, bonus features, and all you had to do was buy a new video player. Now, no-one's getting excited because you not only have to choose between the two in a VHS/Betamax style, but whichever one you go for, both will give you the pleasure of having to buy a brand new TV in order to handle the even better picture quality that you really don't need.

Not only this, but because of the superior data storage you only need to buy one highly priced disc at a time. Where a regular DVD would make you go to all the effort of having to actually go to the player, and change discs in order to watch the bonus features, everything now comes on one disc (meaning you are physically getting less for your bigger price tag), so you can now sit and watch everything without having to leave your seat. Toilet breaks are left to your own discretion.

But while most sensible people are ignoring this new pointless debate, they are also ignoring the old entirely relevant one at the same time. Is all this new fangled digital stuff any better than analog in the first place. What's the point in bonus features and web links if the disc can be irreparably damaged by being left on the side. Personally I think chapter selections are a great idea, especially when you need to find the point at which you have to take the disc out and clean off the three specs of dust that made it stop in the first place.

When trying to watch M*A*S*H earlier, and after performing the stop-eject-wipe-chapter selection routine too many times, I realised the brand new disc was actually scratched just from having being loose in the box. If I was watching it on VHS, it would have fit perfectly in the box, and the vulnerable tape would have been perfectly protected by the rest of the cassette. I could also feasibly leave it lying around, not having to worry myself about splodges of jam.

And it's not just the home video that has suffered either, as any Star Wars fan will be able to tell you that a puppet can create a better performance from an actor than a soon to be CGI'd over tennis ball on a stick. And what about TV transmissions? If it's raining outside, how can the picture freezing for ten seconds in a variety of big squares be any better than it going a bit crackly? Even when it went black and white you could still tell what was going on.

So am I going buy a Blu Ray player, or an HD DVD player? I think I'm more likely to go on eBay and buy another VHS player before my current one packs up!

Shock, but without the Horror!

Whenever you hear people talking about a film, it's not uncommon to want to see it yourself in order to see what everyone is talking about. In most cases, this often happens when people talk about how good a film is. This week however, I watched a film because of people saying how disgusting, sick, and downright wrong it is. And I'm glad I did.

If you're wondering what film it was I watched this week, it was Dirty Sanchez: The Movie. For those of you who haven't heard of it, it's similar to Jackass, in that it is the movie of a TV show in which a group of people do completely outrageous and dangerous stunts for the entertainment of each other, and the audience at home. Although the scenario is similar, Dirty Sanchez makes Jackass look like children's TV, as it takes things to the extreme, and then caries on going.

Basically the film contains, to name but a few, tattoos in painful places, the consumption of what remains after a liposuction operation, and as if that wasn't enough, Keith Richards as Satan! It is possibly the sickest most disgusting film I have ever seen, and I lost count of how many times it made me cringe. . . . Which is why I loved watching it!

First, let me explain that not everything they do is dangerous or disgusting, some is just immature. For instance, whilst asleep, Pancho is given something of a make over to make him resemble both the Incredible Hulk, and then Mikhail Gorbachev. Silly and immature, but still on the level of something that could be done to anyone whilst asleep. Others however, such as the Beer enema are of an acquired taste.

And this is the reason I loved watching it. Most horror films are lucky if they make me jump, I watched The Exorcist when I was seventeen and wondered what all the fuss was about, and I've been bored watching banned so called 'video nasties'.

Because of my apparent 'immunity' to films that most people wouldn't consider watching, it takes something on the level of Dirty Sanchez to get a reaction from me. For most people, an important part of watching a film is for the different reactions that they can evoke, both good and bad. There are times I have envied people who watch horror films for the purpose of cringing from what they see on the screen, but I think I have finally been able to get a better idea of what it must be like.

Admittedly the fact that what they do is real, completely non-fictional and without the use of special effects helps with the cringe factor, but also because you can't actually believe they are doing some of the things they do. Despite the 'do not try this at home' warning, most people wouldn't try these things simply because of the amount of guts that these stunts need. I must admit that watching a fully grown man mortified if spiders, who cuts of the end of his finger to regain his pride, is actually quite humbling.

I know I wouldn't be able to.

Harry Potter and the Ranting Blog

Having just come back from the cinema, I am writing this post sandwiched between two things of which I still can't understand the amount of significance placed upon them.

The film I have just seen is Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and tomorrow night, I shall be working at midnight for the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows release. For some reason, people seem to go mad over Harry Potter, but still haven't worked out why.

I've got nothing against Harry Potter, I've enjoyed the films and the one book I have read, but don't see anything special in them. It's not as if JK Rowling is the only fantasy author out there, indeed one of my main reasons for liking the films is the recognition of recurring ideas seen through various fantasy literature, but I'd still much rather watch and/or read something by Stephen King or Clive Barker.

So with the imminent approach of the seventh and final book there are a few things that I would like to see happen. Mainly, Harry should die. This is nothing personal, I just think that the whole franchise would be better off were this to happen.

Firstly, it dramatically reduces the likelihood of someone else drawing upon and adding to Rowling's stories. And by 'someone else' read 'Warner Brother exuctives', likewise 'adding to' with 'completely ruining'. By killing off Harry, Rowling can hopefully avoid her work being spoilt for herself and her fans everywhere. If you think more Harry Potter adventures can only be a good thing, then you need to read my previous rantings about disasterous sequels.

Secondly, Harry should die because the other stories are just too soppy. Anyone who knows me will most likely know that I'm not exactly the biggest fan of anything that can be considered 'cute', and this includes cliched happy endings, especially those that only happen for the simple reason of just because. It's not that I have the emotional range of a teaspoon, it's just that there are so many stories that have happy endings just for the sake of it, and often ruin an up til then fairly decent film.

Without giving too much away, a good example of this is The Butterfly Effect. When I first saw the theatrical version, I thought it had a good ending that fit in with the rest of the story, but still seemed a little lacking. And what it was lacking, was for the studio executives to let the directors do what they do best, and not force a happy ending on the film in order to play it safe. Having seen the directors cut, I now consider The Butterfly Effect to be one of my favourite films, simply because the filmmakers made the right choice about how the film should end, unlike the studio executives who only care about getting bums on seats, and for some reason seem to think that people should be smiling when the credits roll.

Order of the Phoenix had a great climax at the end of the film, but the whole lovey dovey resolution just spoilt it for me. And yes I know it's a childrens story, but that's not an exuse. In fact that's even more reason why Harry Potter should die.

Teenagers dont get upset and moody because of hormones, they get upset and moody because they've grown up with all these promises of fairy tale happy endings, and then real life taps them on the shoulder and says 'you know how the hero always triumphs over evil, saves the day and gets the girl? Well actually . . . '

I'm not saying life is all doom and gloom, it's just not all happy endings either. If it was, studio executives wouldn't shove their 'creative' sides where they don't belong. Like The Butterfly Effect 2.

Blood and Popcorn

WARNING, MAY CONTAIN UNPOPULAR OPINIONS. . .

As a big fan of horror movies, I am regularly aware of those people who worry about us, thinking that we must be sick in the head in some fashion. I am particularly aware of this, as I still live with one of them. Whilst there are those far worse than my mum, when watching Saw II, she still had to ask if I actually found it entertaining. Although to be fair to her, she did wait until at least five minutes into the film before asking.

The scene in question was of a man who, having been kidnapped and sedated, now found himself in a situation in which he must cut out his own eye in order to survive. Anyone who has seen the entirety of the film will be able to confirm that, despite large amounts of on screen blood, it is not merely mindless violence, but can in fact be seen as mindful violence. 'Jigsaw', the 'killer' of the film places his victims in a situation from which they have every means of escape. Rather than simply killing them, he does what he does as he believes that knowledge of death will help them appreciate the lives they could lead, in a sort of 'life is wasted on the living' kind of way.

In a similar way to Se7en, it is not the violence, but the villains rationalisation for their actions that is the scariest part, particularly when they begin to sway you to understanding their point of view. Anyone who walked out half way through and missed the ending however, wouldn't fully have seen this. (I'm not mentioning names . . . )

Yes, people die in horrible ways, and I have to admit that yes, I found it entertaining, but when criticizing films like these, many people forget two things. Firstly, despite various technological advances the human race has made, we still have a long way to go before becoming advanced ourselves. Evolutionarily speaking, we are still just apes for whom violence and the seven deadly sins make up a large part of who we are. Secondly, there are far worse things than special effects that people consider to be 'entertaining'.

Working in my local WH Smiths, I have come to notice that the best selling magazines are most probably the 'Granny Mags'. The cheap weekly magazines in which members of the public have sold their stories and pictures of events that have happened in their own lives. Events like rape, violence, and murder. Basically anything less than a stabbing would just be a footnote in the corner. As one magazine proudly boasts, "Life! Death! Prizes!" The only reason I can assume people buy these are because life, death and prizes are entertaining.

Likewise with books. Our biography section has now been split into two equal halves, the traditional biographies of the rich and famous (the majority of whom should be neither), now have to be crammed into exactly the same shelving space as the 'tragic life stories'. Put simply, we now sell more books about people who had abused childhoods, than those who have actually done something positive worth reading about.

If that sounds offensive to abused children, its not meant to be and I apologise. I'm merely trying to point out that many of the people who will happily blame fictional movies for so many bad things in the world, are the same ones who are equally as happy to spend money reading about those things they are blaming the movies for.

If you think that watching movies in which people die in horrible circumstances make people like me sick in the head, then that's your opinion and you are of course entitled to it. It is absolutely wrong, but you are still entitled to it.

Given the choice of fictional pretend violence, or real life parents abusing their own children, I know which one I'd rather spend my money on.

Don't quote me on that . . .

As not alot has still not happened, and I haven't had a post with any pictures yet, I thought I would have a quote with pictures post, in the style of my friend Deb, but entirely a lot less cute.

"The television screen is the retina of the mind's eye. Therefore, the television screen is part of the physical structure of the brain.


Therefore, whatever appears on the television screen emerges as raw experience for those who watch it.


Therefore, television is reality, and reality is less than television."

- Brian O'Blivion, Videodrome

What do they do it four?

One of the great things about being a geeky film student (or graduand) is that you can better appreciate more of the great films that are out there. The flip side of this however, is that it is easier for me to find the not so great films laughable, mostly for the wrong reasons.

Perhaps the best example I can give is the film I have just finished watching, Batman & Robin. I remember seeing this film when it first released and thought it was fantastic (the only reason I'm not embarrassed to admit that is because I was only about twelve at the time), but rewatching it ten years later only reminds me how unforgivably lame the movie is.

As the last of four Batman films made in the 1980s/90s, it took the franchise down the same cheesy path dug out by the Superman film franchise before it. With Batman and Batman Returns, Tim Burton created two films that, like Superman and Superman II, were widely accepted by comic book fans and the general audience alike. And then along comes Joel Schumacher. Whilst Batman Forever wasn't quite as bad as Superman III, (Jim Carrey was perfect for the role of The Riddler), it was never going to be as good as the first two. For a start, changing the lead actor is never a good sign, and the toned down darkness, which for people like me was a major selling point of the first two films, didn't give it the atmosphere most befitting an orphan who spends him time taking out his frustration by thwarting the plans of petty thieves and deranged megalomaniacs, whilst being dressed as a nocturnal rodent.

Don't get me wrong, being camp and colourful was fine for Adam West, its just unfortunate that it was this Batman that they tried to recreate, rather than the original comics. Where Superman IV: The Quest For Peace suffered merely from a dodgy story (for which Christopher Reeve apologised) and a seriously limited budget, the fact that I could take Plan 9 From Outer Space more seriously seems to suggest that Batman & Robin was intentionally laughable. Not even Uma Thurman can make the script seem sincere, I have no idea why Arnold Schwarzenegger took the role of Mr Freeze, even less of an idea why he was approached in the first place, and a Bat-Credit Card is even more ridiculous that Bat-Shark repellent. They even make the rookie mistake of not knowing that light goes INTO a telescope. The only thing more cringe worthy is William Shatner's 'Tambourine Man'.

Admittedly being a geek does make me somewhat biased when it comes to comic adaptations, but it's not just DC who should have quit while they were ahead. James Cameron's The Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgement Day are considered modern classics, Jonathon Mostow's Terminator 3: Rise of The Machines, not so much. I am still hoping that the talked about fourth installment stays in development hell where it belongs.

But credit has to go to Marvel who seem quite content with missing out the mediocre film, and going from two greats straight to the abysmal. Not having seen X-Men: The Last Stand, I can't really comment on the fact that everyone seems to hate it, but I can confirm that Spider-Man 3 takes everything that makes Peter Parker the established character he is today, and web slings it from the roof of the Daily Bugle. And when coming from a geek point of view, the less said about The Fantastic Four, the better.

There's only one thing left to say really, and that's . . .

Thank you Christopher Nolan.

Write from the start . .

I know it hasn't been a full week since my last post, but I've actually started to do stuff this week! I did some work in the garden with my Dad (no, I'm not going to call him HG), had some more unexpected hours at smiths, and played some football with my friends. Each of which managed to make me draw blood at some point!

I also saw Stranger Than Fiction for the first time, which I have to say is a really good film. Not only is it a good story with good actors and all that gubbins, but it also helps to show how stories are constructed. When he starts to hear a narrating voice in his head, the main character Harold (Will Ferrel) visits a literature professor (Dustin Hoffman) who explains to him the structures of a story, plots, the difference between comedy and tragedy etc.

When looking at any story it is easy to just see them as a series of events where things happen which causes something else to happen, when in reality its much more complex and structured. It was only in my second year of uni when I discovered this in a writing module, and now I cannot help but watch films without analysing the different elements that make up the narrative. There is not one rigid structure that every story follows, as there is a vast array of ways in which stories develop, but the majority will nearly always follow the same basic pattern. One of the first things we learnt in this module is that all stories are essentially made from the same basic ideas, but each story will use them in different ways. The Texas Chain Saw Massacre for example, in which a group of teenagers go camping in the woods to discover a house owned by cannibals, is Hansel and Gretel. It is the fact that stories use this same basic structure but are able to adapt it for such a wide variety at the same time, is why I am considering returning to UWA as they have an excellent Masters course on screenwriting. That, and it will give me more time to decide what I eventually want to do.

First of all, rather obviously, something has to happen. If Harold didn't start hearing the narrators voice in his head, he would have carried on with his boring routine, and it would have been a boring film. Likewise if Bilbo Baggins never gave his ring to Frodo, he would have just stayed in the Shire. Basically, if nothing happens the main character would just sit at home all day and do nothing (sounds rather familiar actually. . .) and would make for a boring story.

And it can't just be anything happening either. It has to be something that gives the character a goal of some kind. If Bilbo gave Frodo an ordinary ring, he would have just said 'Thanks uncle, that's a nice ring' and still carried on living in the shire. The fact that the ring needs to be destroyed necessitates that several characters all go on the quest to achieve this goal, whilst also giving the audience the sense of 'will they/won't they, agggh, whats going to happen now??', at which point they went and bought the book before the next film came out.

Like I said each story is different, and this only covers the beginnings of the stories, but I think you get the idea. Basically nearly every story, book, film, TV etc will go along similar lines of:
Something happens, something has to be fixed, things will generally get worse before they get better.


PS: Yes, knowing this can spoil the fun of just watching a film, but I refuse to be held responsible if anyone hits you for constantly saying 'Oh, now I get it' every time you see a film from now on.

My New Blog 2: The Sequel!!!

It's been over a week since I started this new blog, and I haven't put up any more posts since. The main reason being I haven't actually done that much worth posting about. I've had a few hours at Smiths, and started unpacking all my uni stuff, but I'm guessing that not many people would consider that very interesting.

I watched A Scanner Darkly which I kind of understood but didn't really like, Pi which I didn't understand but found really fascinating, and When Harry Met Sally which I didn't understand why I particularly wanted to watch it, but enjoyed it anyway. It's pretty much the only non-British Rom Com I can actually sit through, but that's mainly just because Billy Crystal is a genius in that film. He improvised the whole thing about the pecan pie (and the woman who says the line "I'll have what she's having", is actually the director's mum as well).

I have also been trying to film some of the birds we get in our garden, but its not going that well. They very rarely seem to stay in a place that the camera has an un-obscured view of, and even if they do, they fly away before I can press the record button.

Hopefully this time next week I might have actualy done something blogworthy, and if I'm lucky I should have enough bird footage to edit something together. But we'll see how it goes.

And reading the last page of a book first doesn't sound like a bad idea . . .

My new blog!!

As a university Graduand, I have come to that point in my life where I don't really know what to do. I have just come back from studying a bachelors degree in Film and Television Studies at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth which I enjoyed immensely, but I am not entirely sure what to do next. I am aiming to have a job in the TV or film industry, but have no idea doing what. Ultimately I would like to work on my own projects, but that is a long way down the road. My current plans are learning to drive and working back at my local WH Smith, but I still need to find something to fill that gap.

And so what else is there to do, other than start a blog????

My mum and two of my friends in Canada all have blogs that they have been working on for some time, and so I thought what the hell, why don't I get one as well. Unlike Deb, Kate and Mum (Christine to everyone else, but as she has to put me up for the next who knows how long, 'Mum' is the least I can do) my interests don't tend to include gardening, cookery, Paris or anything that can generally be described as 'cute', so I think it fair to say that my blog might be rather different to theirs. As you may have guessed, my main interest is film and television, and generally anything on a screen.

There may be many people that would assume that means I am nothing more than a lazy slob, and for some part you are indeed right. But to me films are much more than mindless entertainment. When most people think of films, they probably think of the latest Hollywood blockbusters starring big name celebrities and featuring nothing but explosion after explosion, which is fine up to a point. But they can also be much more than that. I sit and down to watch a film just like others curl up to read a book. I like watching them for the stories that I can get caught up in, stories that make me think, laugh and if I was able to, cry. If a picture paints a thousand words, then film paints twenty-four thousand every second. Not all films live up to this potantial, but when they do the results can be fantastic.

The last few times I have been to the cinema I have been rather dissapointed. Spider-Man 3 had been hyped up so much prior to its release, but in the end was a really dissapointing film. Something like Inside I'm Dancing on the other hand is a film I had never heard of before seeing it on a shop shelf, but decided to watch anyway, and is one of those rare films that is perfect in almost every way.

I'm guessing this blog will be a mixture of films I have seen, and my progress on my way to making my own, so you're welcome to come back and see how I get on and/or have a go at me for my outrageous opinions that I am bound to share from time to time.

Be seeing you!