The Ruey Review

OMAR Single Malt Sherry Cask

2016-04-12T10:10:00.000+01:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 12 Apr 2016

This evening’s whisky is a very interesting one. Apparently other than KAVALAN, there is another Taiwanese Whisky that has been winning international awards. It is the OMAR single malt whisky by the TTL Nantou Distillery. From the name of the distillery you know that this malt is distilled in Nantou. Situated in central Taiwan, it is the only landlocked county in the country.

TTL stands for Taiwan Tobacco and Liquor Corporation. It is the successor of the Taiwan Tobacco and Liquor Bureau; which was then preceded by the Monopoly Bureau founded in 1901 by the Japanese empire when Taiwan was a part of it. By now you might have already guessed that the TTL had its roots in bureaucracy and was the only organisation producing and distributing ciggies and booze in Taiwan. This had been so for 100 years until the government monopoly of tobacco and alcohol ended in 2002. The KAVALAN distillery was completed in 2005; it is all starting to make sense now doesn’t it? The fact that now Taiwan is becoming a known whisky producer also goes to show how capitalism, and privatisation can improve service and product quality eh?
Although the TTL was privatised as a corporation in 2002 when the government freed up the liquor industry, you can smell traces of Taiwanese bureaucracy EVERYWHERE. Not to be vain or anything, but the naming of the whisky, the packaging of it, looks of the distillery, the lack of marketing for it, the overall branding of this malt just screams second-class business management. In all these aspects OMAR just isn’t on par with what the King Car Corporation has done for KAVALAN. What does OMAR even mean? It certainly does not sound Taiwanese. It may mean something, but the fact that I cannot find reasons why it is named OMAR on TTL’s website or anywhere else makes the name meaningless. Its packaging looks pretend-American and lacks character. The image of the distillery is on the whisky’s packaging which looks fine until you see photos of the actual cask-shaped building. It looks like a cheap plastic structure you find at a 3rd tier amusement park. The product just has no story, or the TTL just doesn’t bother trying to present it to the public. You cannot find anything about the malt, not on its packaging, not on TTL’s official websites, just videos here and there and they are not even official videos from the TTL! Just clips and interviews by Taiwanese television shows and film studios. I think the fact that whiskies take so long to make, and the fact that they should express the characteristics of the land their distilleries are surrounded by, their stories should be told, because it is part of the whisky enjoyment experience.
Having said all these, it is an “Outstanding” 2015 IWSC Silver Quality award-winning whisky. Let’s hope the whisky itself can make up for the bad business being run by the TTL.

Scent: Definitely notes of grape, fruity but not sweet. Hint of vanilla is present.

Colour: Brownish amber, beautiful wood colour.

Palate: Now this is where the malt gets a bit interesting. The fact that it has strong dried fruits element without any significant sweetness, it reminds me of chenpi, or Chinese dried mandarin peel, and Taiwanese dried pickle plum. These are non-sweet, maybe even a little bit salty dried fruits Taiwanese people produce for medicinal purposes or for snacks. When the OMAR enters the mouth its viscosity goes to the wall of your mouth but interestingly keeps your tongue very dry. Very interesting. After this you get the hint of smoky oak in the background, then some caramel sweetness begin to appear. In the end you can even get a hint of coffee.

Taiwanese Dried Pickle Plum- Photo from 快車肉乾... I think

Verdict: The actual whisky does manage to tell its story which the flavours it packs. It is a shame that the TTL does not give the whisky the management, the care that the single malt deserves. It is like a cute girl entering a beauty pageant with managers incompetent enough to forget the make-ups and outfits the woman needs to compete in the race. The fact that this single malt brings in elements of chenpi and Taiwanese umeboshi means that at some level it tells the Taiwanese story more so than KAVALAN. KAVALAN is a line of fine Taiwanese Scotch, but the OMAR is Taiwanese whisky. However, while the OMAR is an interesting malt to experience, it is not yet refined enough to be something one truly celebrates over. I heard the bourbon cask OMAR is something that is more refined, the result of more mature whisky-making skill. I look forward to seeing whether that is true. When I do, I will be sure to share the experience with you, here at the Ruey Review.

Glenmorangie Original (格蘭傑經典)

2016-04-07T10:10:00.000+01:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 7 Apr 2016

聽到格蘭傑這個名字不管是專家還是像我這種外行威士忌愛好者都一定非常耳熟，因為它是一家喻戶曉的威士忌酒廠，是一個到處都可以看到的一款單一純麥。格蘭傑的蒸餾廠位於北高地的泰恩鎮，屬於高地產區的威士忌。過去好幾十年格蘭傑負責製造的員工數都控制在16名作業員，這16人被稱為“泰恩16男”，而且他們一整年除了聖誕節及設備保養期間都沒有休息。但是2008後因為產量的擴充這16人數被增加到24人，這些作業員現在則被稱為“泰恩的男人”。格蘭傑的酒廠也擁有全蘇格蘭最高的蒸餾器，大約八公尺高，而格蘭傑說這麼高的蒸餾器可以讓格蘭傑的酒體格外輕盈。熟成的過程只要是格蘭傑的酒都一定有睡過格蘭傑自製的美國白橡桶。格蘭傑在美國的米澤里州擁有自己的森林，他們會製作橡木桶然後租借給Jack Daniel’s及Heaven Hill酒廠讓他們熟成波本酒至少四年，然後再拿這些白橡木波本桶回蘇格蘭給自己的威士忌做熟成。格蘭傑經典十年的熟成都完全是在這些波本桶裡面熟成的。

視覺: 亮麗的金黃色。

嗅覺: 非常的甜，棉花糖、蜂蜜、太妃糖的味道都是非常明顯的，非常多水果的甜香味。

味覺:入口極為滑順，很溫暖，是一支油脂成分很高的酒。再次的說明，這是一支非常具有甜味的單一純麥。入口有如塞了一把棉花糖到嘴裡一樣，很香、很甜。

總結:不愧是“經典”，這款酒能夠一度成為蘇格蘭銷售最好的單一純麥並不是沒有道理的。他的口感非常的順、而且非常的甜，所以接受度比較高，很大眾。而且最重要的事他的價格非常非常的便宜（在威士忌的世界來說），所以把他購買當每天晚上用餐後飲用的單一純麥是非常可行的。當然，“大眾酒”並非一個極致的稱讚，Toyota Yaris是一台開起來不會有什麼問題的車子，穩定性高、價格平易近人、容易得手、街上到處都是，但是他在人們心中的地位總不會是“頂級車款”吧？不管他實質上品質多好、CP值多高。格蘭傑經典也是一樣的，大眾的東西會顯得沒有個性、所以威士忌迷就算把他當成非常好的“每日一品”酒款、也不會把他當成是跟朋友分享、討論的單一純麥吧... 畢竟拿來分享討論的酒應該要更有個性、跟稀奇，不才更有話題嗎？格蘭傑經典留在家裡自己好好享受就好，因為你朋友們應該也已經喝過、或者櫃子裡已經有開了一瓶了。

Suntory Kakubin Black 43° vs Johnnie Walker Black Label

2016-03-01T10:10:00.000+00:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 01 Mar 2016

In Japan, people who are not fans of beers or sours, but still enjoy a few drinks with their buddies, tend to go for highballs when at the Izakaya with their friends. A highball is a whisky cocktail. It is whisky mixed with carbonated water. However, there are many variations. For example, you can mix ginger ale with whiskey which is ginger-high, Oolong tea mixed with whisky to get oolong-high, brown sugar carbonated water mixed with whisky to get Koku-high, or black-high.

One of the most notable choice of whisky for mixing highballs is the Suntory Kakubin blended whisky. A Kakubin Highball is referred to as Kaku-High. Since I have a “Black 43°” version of the Suntory Kakubin, I thought I’d drink it straight and write a review on it.

Then I thought, such a review just wouldn’t be interesting enough. Why not pit the Suntory black kakubin against the world-dominating blended whisky, the Johnnie Walker Black Label?

The Johnnie Walker Black Label is an iconic blend which helped the brand to become the Darth Sidious of the whisky universe. It is one of the best-selling scotch in the world today. Many whisky-lovers believe that the Johnnie Walker Black Label is too premium to be a mixer base, and that it should be enjoyed neat. However, since the Suntory Kakubin Black 43° is two up from the standard Kakubin and one up from the White Kakubin bottles, maybe similar to how Black Label is one up from the Johnnie Walker Red Label, I thought it would still be fair to line the two black-labeled blended whiskies up against each other.

This is Suntory vs Johnnie Walker, East vs. West, the Emperor of Japan vs the Emperor of THE Empire. I’ll have them neat, not mixed, and see how they fair against each other.

Colour:

Both of yellow whisky colour with the Johnnie Walker Black Label just a tad bit darker.

Nose:

Kakubin Black 43° - Alcohol, not much else. Very very very faint fruitiness in the back, raisin.

Johnnie Walker Black Label- Horrible scent. It is the THE whisky smell I hated before I became a whisky connoisseur. It is the smell of the poison I put in ginger ale to consume with my highschool friends in order to fit in. When I smell this I can almost get what I got from the Johnnie Walker Gold Reserve but then before I get there I get stopped by this coarse wall built by bricks of grossness; bringing back very unpleasant decade old high school memories. Some of these memories consist of me puking through my mouth as I struggle to get home after parties at my friends’. What is that grotesque element that I despise? Is it licorice?

Palate:

Kakubin Black 43° - Gentle, vanilla, and very fruity. It is a sweet piece. Definitely packs more taste to it than its scent. There is definitely malts that had been finished in sherry or port casks. It can in my opinion, actually pass as a bearable low price-range single malt. It can do fine by itself, just fine.

Johnnie Walker Black Label- Taste is much better than it smells. However, as the dried fruits are just getting out of their doors to say hello to me they get quickly slapped by the grossness that gives me the about-to-barf sensation near my diaphragm. There is some nice whisky smokiness in the finish but then again the bad taste is just way too distracting for me. I think again that the demon of distraction is the bastard child of licorices and maybe chenpi- dried tangerine peel- gosh I hate both these blasphemous things. Johnnie walker says this is a blend that consists of various elements of fruits, sweet smoke and gentle peatiness… well I say why don’t you just get a proper single malt to enjoy each of those flavours whole-heartedly? Such monster blend consisting of 40 different malts is just a very distracting bottle and I don’t get why it is so revered. Maybe contrary to what some scotch lover say, it really is meant for cocktails and the mixing with sodas, but I really don’t understand how people can enjoy whisky by mixing it with sodas… anyway, that is a different world I do not live in.

Verdict: Do I need to say more? I enjoy whiskies, not whisky cocktails or whisky mixes… so why am I even writing this piece? My verdict is, you can enjoy the Suntory Kakubin neat, but not the Johnnie Walker Black Label. At least that is what my body tells me, very strongly.

Bruichladdich Islay Barley 2009 （布萊迪艾雷島大麥2009）

2016-02-23T10:10:00.000+00:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 23 Feb 2016

布萊迪艾雷島大麥2009是位於艾雷島中部海岸的布萊迪蒸溜所推出的一支非泥煤煙燻的單一純麥。這支酒的重點比較不在於它的蒸餾過程，透過這款單一純麥，布萊迪是要將某一年份的農作物原料以及當年的氣候以及地勢環境呈現於最後成品的享用體驗裡，從這個角度來看，它的的概念比較接近釀造葡萄酒的理念。布萊迪艾雷島大麥2009用的是2008年收割的大麥，來源是四個位於艾雷島中央的大麥農戶，大麥的品種為英國的“酒館老闆”以及“津橋”種。

這是在威士忌界裡面非常新的一個概念。通常威士忌蒸餾廠會著重於他們製程的一致性以及他們保留原味，也就是自己維持自己酒廠特別味道的一致性的功力。但是在葡萄酒的世界裡，年份、環境及葡萄的品種才能夠主宰一支葡萄酒的價值。而特定年份的酒的味道呈現出來之後以後就不會再有一樣的味道了，這才是標榜年份風土條件的酒的價值所在。布萊迪想要將這種觀念導入威士忌的世界裡，推出了這些年份酒... 至於是否真的能夠釀成一波威士忌革命，我們還是得拭目以待了。

視覺: 中等深暗的金色。

嗅覺: 酒精味明顯但是淡淡的甜味是確實存在的。雖然味道是帶有甜味的威士忌，鹹味、礦物味、以及不可忽略的煙燻味像背景音樂一樣讓人無法無視他們的存在。

味覺: 在喝艾雷島的威士忌時，鹽巴、礦物的味道當然是我們可以預料到的，入口前聞它的時候已經照著這樣子的順序一一聞到了，入口後這些味道也是以一樣的順序一一呈現。布萊迪2009大麥當然也有自己的特色，唅它在口中能夠感受到它有如奶油般滑滑的感覺，能夠知道它是一支油量較高的威士忌。後勁是充滿了木頭煙燻味、享用者無疑能夠感受到火的元素在這支酒裡面。所以雖然它沒有艾雷島最為著名的泥煤味，不過因為它還是一個非常具有煙燻味的威士忌，所以剛喝下去可能會讓人誤以為它還是有受過泥煤煙燻，但是其實這支酒並沒有將麥用泥煤去煙燻的製程。這是一支能夠讓你的口腔內充滿暖暖熱氣的艾雷島單一純麥。

總結: 根據包裝上面的說詞，2008的春天特別的乾爽，大麥也吸收了非常多的陽光，的確，在喝布萊迪2009大麥單一純麥的時候彷彿真的能夠感受到北半球暖和舒服的太陽。所以布萊迪想要將當年艾雷島的風土條件呈現在這支威士忌裡的這個目的算是有達成了。就算去除了泥煤煙燻的過程，加上艾雷島單一純麥本身就非常聞名、具有個性的特色，讓這支酒成為一個非常溫暖、充滿熱情、熱誠的一個單一純麥。但是這種溫暖並不是那種在冰冷又潮濕的大西洋海島中取暖的感覺，看到的是在大太陽底下享受被久等的太陽用陽光撫摸著的海岸邊大巨岩。它的確是一支艾雷島的威士忌，但是它帶給你的感覺是輕鬆及開心的，而不是平常好的艾雷島單一純麥提供的那種沈重、成熟的享受。

KAVALAN Concertmaster Single Malt Whisky

2016-02-16T10:10:00.000+00:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 16 Feb 2016

The first post of 2016 on the Ruey Review is on the King Car Distillery in Yilan, Taiwan. It is a thorough description of the very beautiful distillery but we never did provide comments on the actual whiskies it produces now did we? Well today’s whisky review is on the Kavalan Concertmaster, one of many King Car Distillery-produced whiskies.

The Concertmaster is the entry level Kavalan whisky- I mean it is the cheapest whisky Kavalan has to offer… but it is not cheap at all just so you know. It is matured in American Oak and finished in Ruby, Tawny, and Vintage port casks. The malts coming from these different finishes then get blended at the distillery into the Concertmaster.

There is no age statement on the Concertmaster as is the case for all Kavalan whiskies. The distillery only began operation in 2005, it would have been a bit odd to state 3 year-old malts (Kavalan whiskies began selling in 2008). However, just because Kavalan whiskies do not stay in maturation casks as long as most Scotch do, it does not mean that they are not ready for malt fanatics to enjoy. As mentioned in “KAVALAN Whisky Distillery”, Taiwan sits beneath the Tropic of Cancer. Having a much warmer, humid environment, Kavalan whiskies receive more vibrant interactions with the casks, helping the whisky mature much faster than those sitting in the casks in Scotland.

Colour: Darker Brown.

Nose: Port casks finish very obvious, very notable scent of Vanilla.

Palate: Fruity, one can tell right away that this whisky had been in a cask formerly containing fruit-based alcohol. The sweetness that comes from the port casks is obvious. Later on that sweetness, in combination with strong vanilla, becomes marshmallow candy, very sweet.

Verdict: It is very funny I did not initially enjoy this piece by Kavalan. I thought it was a bland malt which lacks layers. However I received all the different types of fruity, candy-like sweetness upon second tasting. The Kavalan Concertmaster is definitely decent whisky, yet I am not sure if I would put the Concertmaster on my “Like” list. It is just not memorable enough, or special enough for me. It does not live up to its price tag. With the addition of another 3 dollars or so you can buy a bottle of 16 year Lagavulin, so why would you bother paying for this?

The Revenant

2016-02-05T10:10:00.000+00:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented

Updated Feb 05 2016

THE REVENANT Official Trailer 2 (2015)

Don’t you just love it when, at the movies, you get to relax, forget about the stress from the everyday life, and be in somebody else’s shoes for just a brief moment? These tiny breathers the moving pictures provide can be such pick-me-ups. People go to the movies to escape from reality so they can continue to bear reality.  Stress-relief is vital on this journey we call life.  

So......yeah this movie does none of that. It’s like, super gruesome. I am like, so serious.  If you are short on stress in your stock, look no further, this movie supplies plenty. 

Inspired by a true story (amazingly), The Revenant  is the new film by acclaimed director  Alejandro Iñárritu. It tells the story of a badly injured hunter/scout Glass (Leo DiCaprio), finding strength and courage under extreme circumstances, to his road of revenge on those who left him for dead, betrayed vows and honour, namely Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy).  This is a tale  of both survival and revenge.  So yeah...some heavy shit. 

This is of course by no means a bad movie. From a technical standpoint this was such an awe-inspiring film. The cinematography was nothing short of breathtaking. Every shot and  frame of this film exudes the characters’ conviction, their beliefs, and the weight they bear. After viewing one can not help but to have a much deepened respect for this world, and to a deeper degree, life itself. 

But as a movie goer, it is tough to explain the reason for this film's existence. It isn’t trying to raise awareness of any major issues (watch out for bears when you are in the woods perhaps?), it does not aim to entertain, and when it does impress, it does under such a heavy tone that’s borderline dreadful. Sure it was shot beautifully but it came with the weight of a thousand anchors.  The dialogues were powerful but the supply of them were so scarce it’s almost a moot point. 

AP/20th Century FOX

DeCaprio is as strong as ever. What he had to endure to portray Glass deserves a special kind of respect among actors. Tom Hardy is rolling right along as one of this generation’s best character actor. Domhnall Gleeson, who seems to be in everything these days (Ex-Machina, Force Awakens, The Revenant...), is also solid as the good-hearted captain of the group. 

Alas, performance alone could not make this movie enjoyable, unlike what Meryl Streep did for The Iron Lady (2011). Watching this movie was like trying to enjoy a nap with 10 tons of bricks neatly placed on your chest.  The film gives no breather, sheds no light, and provides no real redemption or growth in any of the characters. The best part of the film, other than it’s principal photography, was the dual between the bear and Glass. How did they shoot that scene? I do not know. Is it impressive? Absolutely. But the reality is, there’s no joy to be had watching a man being mauled to death by a mama Grizzly bear.  

Movies like Requiem for a Dream (2000), Schindler’s List (1993), or even documentary like The Invisible War (2012) , are all very tough movies to sit through. And yet the viewing process was extremely positive. The difference, I suspect, is that all these movies had a point to make. They are disturbing for a reason, and you “enjoy” these movies, but would seldom choose to see it again if given the chance. The Revenant lacks that “point” behind all of its gruesomeness. It whips you but does not tell you why, and that can be very frustrating. 

It is tough to label The Revenant as a bad movie, because it really was an experience viewing it. Impressive technically, but a good movie it is not. If your film does not differ much from that of  an episode of National Geographic, then that’s probably a good indication that you are in desperate need for a proper writer. My name is Danny and I endorse this review. 

Johnnie Walker Gold Label Reserve (約翰走路金牌珍藏)

2016-02-02T10:10:00.000+00:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 2 Feb 2016

由蘇格蘭生產的威士忌中，有九成是調和式威士忌；而其中全球銷量最好的莫過於大家熟悉的約翰走路（Johnnie Walker）了。今天要跟大家分享的威士忌就是屬於該系列，也可說是主宰威士忌世界的霸主級酒款之一：「約翰走路金牌珍藏」（Johnnie Walker Gold Label Reserve）。

金標的約翰走路的調和比例其實是來自於公司創辦者約翰沃克（John “Johnnie” Walker）的孫子亞歷山大二世之筆記；這是亞歷山大二世為了紀念約翰走路創業百年而特地調和出來的味道。這個味道包含了15種不同的單一純麥，但在第一次世界大戰期間，某幾種酒源短缺，所以始終無法正式推出。所幸，後人於1997年依照亞歷山大二世所留下來的調和筆記、並以15年~18年以上的單一純麥下去調和，終於推出了「約翰走路金標」。不過，到了2013年，約翰走路改變策略，為這款酒去除了原酒年齡的門檻，而以原酒的製程及味道為主要篩選單一純麥的條件，重新推出了這款Non-Age Statement（不標榜酒齡、而是標榜酒味）的調和式威士忌：約翰走路金牌珍藏。

視覺: 金色... 啊就金色啊，不就跟你說金標了？

嗅覺: 酸酸的，像水果嗎？還是說像橙類作物呢？結果都不是，好像比較像發酵的肉。很多人認為這是類似青蘋果的果香，但我覺得是一種酸掉的食物味…但是，真的一點點的貶義都沒有，因為對我來說這是種特殊的風味。還是修飾一下，說它讓我想起歐洲的熟成肉之類的會比較優雅一點嗎？

味覺: 很有奶油味，像是一片塗滿奶油的烤土司，甚至有一點點培根或熟肉的味道，不過並沒有令人不適的油膩厚重之感，反而是好的風味。它的味道並非屬於果香甜食一類，反而讓人想起鹹食盤。不過，雖然剛開始都是鹹食的味道居多，最後還是會悄悄的出現一抹蜂蜜的餘韻。

總結: 不錯喝，是一支可以搭配餐點的酒。正因為它不甜，而且味道的層次豐富、韻味雄厚又有趣，所以不喜歡偏甜酒類的人可以把它當成日常飲用酒；餐前、餐中、餐後各喝個幾口，蠻舒服的。

The New Non-Aged Yoichi (Launched Sept. 2015)

2016-01-26T10:10:00.000+00:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 26 Jan 2016

The Yoichi single malt series by Nikka Whisky has been one of the most sought-after malts in Japan in 2015. While it had already been a well-revered Japanese whisky, the sudden spike in demand last year was mainly due to the broadcasting of Massan, a popular TV show about the Father of Japanese Whisky- Masataka Taketsuru and his wife Rita Cowan, from September of 2014 to March of 2015. Remember how we mentioned that Taketsuru also contributed albeit indirectly to the creation of Mars? This sudden surge in demand causes the the depletion of certain malt reserves within the distillery thus the discontinuation of the old Yoichi single malts the world had known until to 2015 autumn. Now the new Yoichi is a single malt under the same brand name with apparently different content than what was before September of 2015. This review is of this new version of non-aged Yoichi Single Malt.

The Yoichi distillery is the most northern whisky distillery in Japan. It is the first distillery Taketsuru founded upon his return from Scotland, also making it the first distillery of Nikka whisky. The vision he held is to create in Japan a whisky that is truly Scottish. To do that, he chose a location in Japan that most resembles the Scottish highland. Taketsuru found such a place in Yoichi, Hokkaido in northern Japan. The distillery is located at 1,500 sea level, in an area that is covered in snow during the winter and where the snow melts in the spring. Taketsuru also chose the location of his distillery to be close to a water source that is enjoyed by Ayu fish and salmon. More importantly, Yoichi allows the distillery access to coal and peat, essential to the smoky flavor Taketsuru wanted in his “True Scotch Whisky”.

Some of the whisky-making methods at Yoichi distillery, most notably the usage of coal-fired pot stills, are legacy Scottish whisky-making processes that are today extremely rare even in Scotland itself. This single malt is supposed to be the product of old Scottish Scotch-making traditions and the cold of the Japanese Hokkaido wilderness.

Colour: Light Golden Colour

Nose: Very obvious scent of burnt wood.

Taste: High in viscosity. The whisky puts forward the taste of oak with a pleasant sweetness that follows directly behind it. This paradoxical yet working combination of rugged smokiness and sweet caramel taste may come from the direct coal-fire during the distillation and the usage of peat in the making of this malt. There is an element of dried fruits in the background as well.

Finish: The caramel sweetness becomes ever-more apparent upon finish. Then the aroma of the aged wooden barrel comes up into the olfactory and out through the nostrils after the liquid enters the oesophagus.

Verdict: This is definitely way better than the non-aged Yoichi that discontinued by Sept. 2015. The old non-aged Yoichi was a disappointment especially because I had first tried the older aged Yoichi. The new Yoichi is no disappointment, although I cannot compare it with the old 10 Year Yoichi as I do not remember exactly the taste of the old 10 year Yoichi (I just remember being very much wowed by how good it was; I was not such a serious whisky drinker and did not bother to take notes). However, by accounts of most Japanese whisky bloggers, the older 10 year old Yoichi beats the new non-aged Yoichi the way Germany beat Brazil in the 2014 FIFA World Cup semi-final.

Ardbeg Ten Years Old (阿貝十年)

2016-01-19T10:10:00.000+00:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 19 Jan 2016

Since in the whisky section of this blog we want to share Eastern Whiskies with people in the West, and Western Whiskies with people of the Far East, this review of an Islay single malt will be written in Mandarin for the people of Taiwan to use as reference. This is also the first non-English post in this blog, here it goes...

Ardbeg Ten Years Old, 也就是「阿貝十年」，號稱是世界上最有泥煤味、最富煙燻味的一支威士忌。這支酒來自蘇格蘭的艾雷島產區，蒸餾廠位於島的東南海岸，而這座蒸餾廠的參觀評價也相當的高。此酒廠於西元1798年即開始產酒，曾於1981年一度面臨停廠的命運，後來得到金主支援得以重新開業。現在酒廠則隸屬格蘭傑集團，也因此間接被納入路易威登集團旗下。回到酒本身吧，因為Ardbeg的酒精濃度高達46%而且並沒有經過冷過濾的程序，所以蒸餾廠認為，這款酒可說是完全保留住單一純麥所應該有的最原始、最完整的味道與層次。

視覺: 又淺又亮的黃色

嗅覺: Ardbeg的泥煤味之重，居艾雷島威士忌之冠。我個人非常鍾愛這個氣味，但多數人無法接受，也有人把這個味道形容成皮革味或甚至是藥味。一開始可以聞到非常強烈的煤炭味，細聞到最後甚至還有一絲金門高粱的高粱香氣，非常奇特。

味覺: 艾雷島威士忌那獨特的個性，呈現在Ardbeg上最為強烈。入口時有種特殊的甜味，甜味一閃而過，緊接著被此產區特有的藥物味給取代。這種所謂的藥物味，有蘇格蘭人把它跟氯黴素相提並論；而台灣也有人說這個泥煤的味道令人想到臭藥丸仔味，不過筆者年紀沒有那麼大還真不知道臭藥丸仔味到底是什麼，只好給年紀較大的讀者參考。品嚐過程中也有微微的酸味。當Ardbeg在你嘴裡沖漱時，味道之濃烈，若你閉上眼睛，幾乎可以看到北大西洋冰冷的海水打在艾雷島深色沿岸的畫面。入喉後試著用舌頭抓住殘留口中的餘韻，彷彿還可以嚐到粗糙的海岸邊那種鹹鹹的海水味呢！就好像跪在都是石頭、沒有沙子的海邊，趴下來舔一口被海水打濕的石頭，膝蓋好痛喔～艾雷島威士忌的特色放大十倍送給你，這就是Ardbeg。

總結: Ardbeg無疑是寒冷的北大西洋海岸的產物，是很有個性、味道強烈的一支酒，在惡劣溼冷天氣與環境裡讓人感受到一股熱勁，我非常喜歡。當然，這是因為我本身非常喜愛艾雷島威士忌那獨特的泥煤味，但大多數人是無法輕易接受的。若真想嘗試艾雷島特有的風味，不妨先從相對平易近人的Bowmore入手，若還是願意繼續挑戰與開拓這一味，我推薦來試試這瓶Ardbeg，它可是讓朕這個艾雷愛好者龍心大悅的一支酒，所以看看它能否也那麼的討您味蕾的歡心。

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

2016-01-12T10:10:00.000+00:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated Jan 12 2015

Since the glory days dated way back between 1977~1983 with the much revered original trilogy (A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi) , the Star Wars franchise got hauled over the coals, fairly or unfairly, after the release of the notorious prequel trilogy between 1999~2005 (Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, Revenge of the Sith). Now, 30+ years later, George Lucas’ space opera is re-introduced by J.J. Abrams of the Lost/Star Trek-reboot fame. Finally it is here, the 7th film in the Star Wars saga: The Force Awakens (2015).

To avoid spoiling anything for you, my royal reader of none, I will refrain from writing about the synopsis like I always do. But this review WILL contain spoilers, so proceed with caution. Basically tread forward like the Night-fox did when he stole the egg in Ocean’s 12. Remember the laser-field? Ahh forget it you youngsters, remember nothing.

To review this movie turned out to be much more complex than I originally thought it’d be. We must separate Star Wars the cultural phenomenon and Star Wars the 7th movie to properly evaluate each’s significance. Unnecessary to do so you say? This is why I am the pretentious self-proclaimed movie critic and you are not.

If we look at The Force Awakens as a stand-alone movie, then the review is much easier to write: it is a top-notch sci-fi/action fantasy with well-choreographed chase sequences and special effects. The acting is rock-solid and the dialogues are well-versed. Audiences got a healthy dose of nostalgia with Han Solo, princess Leia, and Chewbacca reentering our lives. But a balance of intriguing new characters like Kylo Ren, Finn, and the new protagonist Rey was also present. J.J. Abrams proves again he is very skilled at reviving old materials and making it relevant to today’s viewers while also pleasing the original fans. Such balance isn’t easy to handle and he does it again after the successful reboot of the Star Trek franchise.

In many ways, The Force Awakens is exactly what the series needed: a new look at both the evolution of the Star Wars entity and the perfect reminder of how rich the story actually is. A fantastic blend of both the old and the new, as a stand-alone film, it is without a doubt a success.

But as part of the Star Wars phenomenon, this newest instalment does not really offer a continuance of the culture Lucas created 30 some years ago. One would be hard-pressed to find a defender of the prequel trilogy, and with good reasons. The prequels’ (1, 2 &3) got some fun moments but they were in essence horrendous. The acting was terrible across the board, some characters were possibly racist portrayals of social stereotypes, and the dialogues were worse than your average grade-school level essays (any scene between Queen Amidala and Anakin were basically the verbal equivalent of waterboarding). However, conceptually, you also get a lot of new things/characters like Darth Maul & his double-edged/stick-like lightsaber, General Grievous & the clone army. Audiences got to see a proper lightsaber dual (Qui-Gon Jinn/Obi-Wan vs Darth Maul) instead of the snooze-fest we got in A New Hope (Darth Vader vs the old Obi-Wan Kenobi). And we finally got to see the master of all masters, Yoda in action. Bad movies though they were, the prequels were at the very least innovative and that’s no easy feat. Lucas might have lost his touch as a film maker, but he was at the very least imaginative with the prequel trilogy.

The Force Awakens, without George Lucas’ influence, for better or worse, does not attempt to be original. The story is remarkably similar to A New Hope (1977), in fact the progression of the 2 movies are almost identical. Even the new characters can be viewed as rehashing of old ones: Rey is, for all intent and purposes, Luke. Kylo Ren is exactly like Vader (subtle hint: he idolizes the faded evil grandpa…ok not so subtle in fact), and there’s no real difference between any Sith Lord and Snoke (perhaps Snoke will turn out to be a Sith Lord). A nice way to phrase it is to say The Force Awakens is paying tribute to the old greats, but one can easily accuse it of being unimaginative, which of course is the anti-spirit of what any Star Wars story is supposed to be: imagination on steroid. A Star Wars film that lacks Luca’s creative input or any real creativity involved, one can view it as concrete evidence as it being a departure of Star Wars’ founding approach.

That is not so much of a criticism than an observation, to be clear. Abrams was tasked with a difficult job and you can see from the film that he is a true avid fan of the Star Wars story. Much passion was injected and you can see it in every frame. But to leave the bad taste of the prequels behind, Abrams needed to take a safer approach with this sacred material. He choose to go with the formula that worked when the franchise was first introduced. But he is skilled enough to put enough spin in it so that the film felt new and refreshed rather than tired and plagiarized.

I view The Force Awakens as a nicely constructed bridge between the older generation and the new one. This film brings back old memories that reminded us of the good old days when Star Wars wooed us. It reminds us of the 1st time we saw a lightsaber, the 1st time we see an X-wing fighter, the 1st time we saw Darth Vader and heard his theme music…epic moments indeed. If you have not seen the originals, this film also serve as a great intro to this hollow fantasy: you care about Kylo Ren and his relationship with this mysterious Vader person/machine, you root for Rey and wonder what will happen between her and Luke, the last of the once great Jedi Order, you want to know what is the history of the apparently legendary Millennium Falcon and its owner, the fantastic Han Solo and his furry sidekick Chewbacca. All these elements inspire great curiosity in viewers and I would not be surprised to see a revived interest from the younger audiences to re-discover Lucas’ Star Wars. More than making just a fun movie, this inspiration would be a triumph on a much larger scale, and isn’t that what greatness is supposed to entail?

The Force Awakens paints a new future for the Star Wars saga, and it is a bright one. It was a bitter-sweet experience however, as we bid fare-thee-well to Lucas’ take on a story he created. He handed over the rein to a younger director in Abrams who loves his baby, and I think that is a hard but wise decision. Now we have the 8th and 9th film to look forward to base on a very solid 7th. As a devoted fan of films, being hopeful is a great disposition to have.

My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

Mars Iwai Tradition Blended Whisky

2016-01-05T10:10:00.000+00:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 05 Jan 2016

Mars Iwai Tradition Blended Whisky 720ml 40% is a Japanese blended Whiskey. The blend comes from both malt and grain, and it is distilled at Japan’s highest distillery, located in a mountain range of Nagano, at 798 meters.The Mars distillery was originally founded in Kagoshima before it moved to Nagano.

This blend is named after Kiichiro Iwai. He is a mentor of Masataka Taketsuru. As a 14 year senior graduated from the same technical school, Iwai brought Taketsuru into the same brewery, then became his mentor in the company. Along with others in management, Iwai sent Taketsuru to Scotland to learn the art of whisky-making. As the first Japanese to learn the art, Taketsuru returned to Japan and presented a whisky-making report- the Taketsuru Notes- to Iwai. Taketsuru later went on to found Nikka Whisky, and then created Suntory Whisky. Years after that Iwai founded Mars Shinshu distillery with Taketsuru’s notes. As the mentor of The Father of Japanese Whisky, Iwai is referred to by some as The Silent Pioneer of Japanese Whisky.

Colour: Dark caramel

Nose: Very strong scent of grape. Very similar to Brandy or Tawny port.

Taste: Very high in viscosity. You can tell its richness that comes from its oily characteristic when you chew it in your mouth. It is very sweet indeed. Again, initially one can find strong similarities in it with grape-based spirits. However, things can become quite different upon second tasting.

Finish: Upon finish, the aroma that comes back to the nostrils resoundingly similar to Bourbon whiskey. Then on that second tasting, the taste of Bourbon overtakes the initial fruity characteristic of Iwai.

Verdict: The blend is very easy to go down. It is very fruity, and has many layers to its taste. While it is very pleasant I am just not sure if I can say I enjoy a whisky that turns into grape-based spirit like Brandy or Port when it enters my mouth. It is just too unwhisky for me.

Location of the Mars Shinshu Distillery, in Shinshu (Old name for Nagano)

KAVALAN Whisky Distillery

2016-01-01T10:10:00.000+00:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 01 Jan 2016

How appropriate it is for us to begin a new section here for the Ruey Review on the first day of a brand new year. While Ruey is no expert in Spirits, and is alcohol intolerant, he is nevertheless fascinated by the history, the making, and the tastes of whiskies. We wish to share with you our joy in exploring this popular subject and will start this journey with a visit to the most well-known whisky distillery in Taiwan, which produces the famous Kavalan whisky.

Kavalan, meaning “flatland”, is the old name for the great plain of Yilan county, northeastern Taiwan. This name not only belongs to the land, but also the aborigines who inhabited in the area, the Kavalan people. Today, the Kavalan name also belongs to the prestigious single malt whisky.

The King Car Distillery that produces Kavalan whisky was named at the San Francisco World Spirits Competition the 2015 distillery of the year.

It belongs to a foods manufacturer owned by a local family of Yilan. When operation commenced in 2005, the company had in mind to build a hundred-year distillery with long-term, uncompromising pursuit for quality whisky. However, by the end of their first decade, they have already received countless medals in competitions across the world. Most importantly, in 2015 the Kavalan Solist Vinho was given the World’s Best Single Malt title by the World Whiskies Award.

Located near the northeastern coastline of Taiwan, the distillery enjoys access to water from Taiwan’s second tallest mountain at 3,886 m- Mt. Hsueshan, and the island’s Central Mountain range. It also receives everyday the Pacific Ocean breeze. Unlike Scotland and Ireland which belong to the northern Atlantic Ocean, this island on the Pacific Rim that sits beneath the Tropic of Cancer has a much warmer, humid environment. This allows the whisky faster and more vibrant interactions with the barrel, making the whisky more mature than other whiskies of similar age. With an area of just over 36,000 km², Taiwan contains of areas with temperate, subtropical and tropical climates, this unique environment allows Taiwan to produce various types of fruits, making it a fruit kingdom.

Such characteristics of the plain of Lanyang and the nation of Taiwan are adequately expressed via the Kavalan whisky. While there are various series of Kavalan from King Car, most carry a warm and soothing personalities with obvious- but not overpowering- fruity elements.

In comparison to the older distilleries in Scotland, Ireland or Japan, the distillery for Kavalan Whisky is situated in a much more spacious ground. It is part of a large King Car foods factory complex.

The route of the tour starts you off at a “conference centre”, where there includes a small theatre that plays a video introduction to the King Car group businesses. It is totally skippable. Then the distillery suggests that you go to distillery No.1, the only production site open to public. It provides a brief history of Whiskey, and Whisky. One can see there the machines that perform the mashing, distillation, and fermentation, bottling processes, and the barrell storage.

The tour walkway also allows you to smell the unsmoked and smoked wheat. One can also see there Kavalan’s choice of barrells and the burning process the distillery performs inside them before they are ready to age the new-makes. You hardly ever run into people working in the production of the spirit (perhaps because I almost always visit on weekends?). The distillation walkway is short, simple, easy-to-understand, but I really wish there to be a couple of tour guides to answer questions and perhaps provide further explanation and story-telling.

After the tour of the distillery itself it is time for the Whisky Castle, a large visitor centre with a cafe, whisky-tasting area, and a big Kavalan store. The building is quite new, as it is, like the distillery; it is also quite large and spacious so there is less of that homey, historic atmosphere. The main hall of the castle is also overcrowded by tourists. Several whisky tasting sessions are being held each day, each session lasting about 15 minutes. On the second floor, there is a large Mr. Brown cafe, a large coffee brand in Taiwan under King Car. However, what is more interesting is that there is a DIY whisky blending class that costs about $37US and you get to go home with a 300ml bottle of blended whisky with a label that says Master Blender: YOUR_NAME.

If you are a fan of Whisky, definitely pay a visit to the King Car Distillery, home to the 2015 Best Single Malt Whisky in the World- Kavalan whisky. The distillery lacks history, and operates differently than distilleries of the old world. However, is this not what Kavalan is about? Opening up a door for Taiwanese whiskies, and furthermore new-world whiskies, for whisky-lovers from around the world to explore and experience. It is relatively easy to access, mere 90 minutes from Taipei by car, if one ever comes to Taiwan, it is a good idea to take a day trip to Yilan, enjoy the pacific ocean, the local foods, the scenery, and definitely visit the King Car Distillery.

Rare Exports (2010)

2015-12-28T10:10:00.000+00:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated Dec 29 2015

Holiday season is yet again upon us. Rather than the mainstream Ho-Ho-Ho Santa with a belly full of jelly story, I urge children and adults of all ages to treat themselves to a different look at the man on the sleigh. An unique take on the man behind all the elf-laboured toys, and interestingly, a very applicable example of finding re-employment after involuntary termination (what? yeah what is right). Suffice to say , this is not going to be your ordinary Christmas tale. I, the expert of nothing, present to you: Rare Exports (2010).

Rare Exports is a Finnish film by writer/director Jalmari Helander. A re-telling of an age-old tale: a drilling team funded by a mysterious American scientist/anthropologist (?) started digging at a nearby mountain next to the homes of a group of reindeer herders. After using considerable means to get the “sample” that they wanted, strange events started to happen in the village and caused the herders to suffer significant financial damage. While the herders are convinced that it is the American who is responsible for their financial woes, the son of one of the locals, Pietari, (Onni Tommila ) knew better. A precocious child, Pietari investigates and realizes that their enemy isn’t the American, but a force much more ancient and far more sinister than the world knows it to be.  

When one is dealing with a re-telling of a well-known story, it can be a tricky business. Because the original is so familiar to most, a different take on it can be hard to swallow. On top of everything else, this movie was very weirdly marketed judging from its trailer and DVD cover.  Based on the trailer, you’d think this is yet another stupid holiday season slasher/horror film with idiotic characters doing silly things and having incomprehensible reactions in life & death situations. But once you get past the packaging, underneath is a well-written story about courage, family, and ultimately, what it means to be a hero. I can think of no better way to sum up the holiday spirit. 

So gather your love ones, sit by the fireplace and try a different cup of tea. A true family film for a family themed holiday, Rare Exports will provide you with some rare good time. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

The Best Offer

2013-12-05T10:10:00.000+00:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated Dec 04 2013

A masterful job of storytelling through the cinematic lens. Unfortunately, the story told really just isn't worthy of such delicate care. Beautiful plate serving a mundane entree, wasted opportunity.

The Best Offer is the latest work by the Academy Award winning director Giuseppe Tornatore. It tells the story of a well-respected but lonely connoisseur named Virgil Oldman (Geoffrey Rush) who runs an auction house. Though Oldmand is Greatly revered in his field, it is not beneath him to use unethical means to procure master paintings with his partner in crime Billy Whistler (Donald Sutherland). One day he is contacted by a mysterious woman named Claire Ibbetson (Sylvia Hoeks) who wishes to sell her inherited collection of antiques & art works but can't meet Oldman because of her agoraphobia. With the help of a young mechanic (Jim Sturgess), Oldman begins to form a relationship with Claire and his world is subsequently and ruthlessly turned upside-down.

Really a very well-directed tale. Director Tornatore uses carefully measured pace to set the necessary mood for every scene. Each dialogue, every phrase, is perfectly placed. Nothing seems out of order , and everything serves a purpose. As far as storytelling goes, it is a wonderful job.

But the story itself is simply undeserving of such attention. The plot seemed old & told. The twist can be seen from a mile or two away. Its climax is so far-fetched it fails to stir any genuine surprise. When constructing a film, the theme of the movie is incredibly important & vital to its success. The Best Offer is a classic case of top-notch directing ruined by the wrong theme.

This wasted piece of cinema is nevertheless powered by strong acting from the always fabulous Geoffrey Rush. Along with Philip Seymour Hoffman & Paul Giamatti, Rush is one of my favorite character actors today. Sutherland senior is always reliable, & Jim Sturgess, though not a fan myself, is commendable as the protagonist's confidant. All the film needed was a viable plot, and it received none. A shame.

Not a great film, but still interesting enough to see, just maybe not in the theater. The Best Offer is hardly the best they could've offered, but hey, maybe I am just greedy. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

Iron Man 3

2013-05-27T10:10:00.000+01:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated May 27 2013

I suppose the streak had to end at some point, and 3 is as good a number to end it as any. Just one more evidence to support the old saying: Two is company and three's a crowd. John Ritter, damn your funny and classic lie! Oh yeah, suffice it to say, the movie was forgettable. But I got to use a three's company reference. Salvation at last.

Iron Man 3 is the third and probably not the last installment of the Marvel superhero cash-cow. Barely surviving the mass alien invasion in New York, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) now suffers from post-traumatic-stress-disorder. Even with the presence of girlfriend/one true love Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), Stark cannot find peace and does nothing all day other than building iron man suits. With new threats looming in: The Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) and erratic scientist Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce), Stark must find strength and more importantly, himself, to even have a shot at defeating his arch-nemesis. And he better do it fast, because, after all, Winter is Coming! Oh wait sorry, wrong Stark.

Oh yeah in case you've been living in a cave and have not yet seen Iron Man 3, spoiler alert, because I am going to spill the beans.

Really a wasted effort, Iron Man 3 not only failed to live up to the expectation of the masses (the masses of one, moi), but it killed off an intriguing plot-line with an incredible potential in its womb. The Mandarin is arguably one of the most fascinating enemy of the Iron Man series. Supposedly Stark's arch-enemy, you'd think the studio would at least attempt to explore the possibility of an onscreen conflict between Tony Stark and his most feared foe. The Mandarin's ability (ten rings with powers, don't know what I'm talking about? yeah there's this thing called Google) is also coincidentally perfect for the big-screen. Ten rings with different powers?? A special effect team's ultimate fantasy. Spare me the "too unrealistic" argument. "Ohh the way Iron Man 3 portrayed The Mandarin was more believable and plausible", "woo Iron Man 3 is more of a character driven flick, special effects be damned!". People please, they've already introduced ALIENS and GODS in both the Avengers & Thor, you mean to tell me a villain with ten superpower ring is so inconceivable that it was right for the writers to dumb him down to a 3rd rate con-man with a drug problem? Give me a break.

And let's not forget that you've got BEN FREAKING KINGSLEY to play the role. My god what a ridiculous waste of talent. Kingsley is one of the few actors who can play multiple types of character with credibility (see Gandhi, Schindler's List, Sexy Beast). He could've and should've been given the chance to make the Mandarin menacing, not clownish. Can you imagine if Kingsley combine the ferocity of Logan and the sincerity of Itzhak Stern to create a villain with superpowers?? I shiver at the mere thought of such awesomeness. Alas, regrets.

And by the by Sir Kingsley, The Love Guru, The Dictator, and now a clown in Iron Man 3, seriously? I mean, seriously, SERIOUSLY???? WTF. Hire me as your manager, now, right now. I am so serious. Like Al Gore.

Usually I don't mind holes in plots for big-budget action flicks , but the ones in Iron Man 3 are so glaring they border-lined comical. The events in the film happened AFTER New York, so why wasn't SHIELD called to help? Where was the Hulk? Captain America? The Black Widow? Hawk Eye? Thor? How much sense does this make? I suspect with each hero getting their own movie coming out in the next few years, the explanation would be that everyone was busy with other foes parallel to the Iron Man story arc. Fine, but no communications at all? no calls? no emails? What is this the Flintstones? Doesn't Tony Stark own like a billion high-tech jumbo mumbles? And this is a problem to no one but me? really??

Urgh... it bothers me so the irrationality of it all. I am not even going to bring up the absurdity of Pepper Potts becoming an martial arts expert just by the injection of the super juice, or Rebecca Hall's sudden regaining of conscience after a 5 second speech from Stark. The sad fact is that Iron Man 3 missed the mark greatly and the problem lies with the script. It is a nice thought to aim for a more human-drama based direction (like what Nolan did for the Dark Knight series). But not only did they do a poor job with the writing, the team scarified most of the entertainment value built up from Iron Man 1 & 2. Is this why Jon Favreau relinquished his director seat ? Because he knew better? Maybe. The studio built an identity for the franchise with 1 & 2, and decided to be something else with 3. The route was changed, and sadly they made the wrong turn and the series fell off a cliff and into a pit of crap. Can I paint an image or what.

Truth be told, I was more or less being hyperbolic but that doesn't make me wrong. The fact that this movie is well-reviewed bugs me so much that it made the movie worse than it actually was. An admirable attempt but an uninspiring result, I can only hope the stink doesn't carry over to the inevitable Avengers 2. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

Silver Linings Playbook

2013-02-24T10:10:00.000+00:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated Feb 24 2013

In a world filled with junks and crap and collections of gibberish calling themselves movies, the real silver-lining is that works like Silver Linings Playbook still exist, rare though they are. A true gem, this is a movie that inspires with courage, with love, with laughter and with tears. In both the most quirky and yet conventional way, the film gives you hope, which is of course the only silver lining we need in life.

Silver Linings Playbook is an eccentric love story between Pat (Bradly Cooper), a person with bipolar disorder who was just released from a mental institution for almost beating his wife's lover to death, and Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence), a young widow who lost not only her husband but also her job for dealing with her loss in the most inappropriate possible at the workplace. With their emotional baggage, both Pat and Tiffany are constant worries for their families and friends. How they help each other through every hardship, every turmoil, every breaking point, is the backbone of this amazing tale. A journey filled with unexpected turns, the pot at the end of this rainbow is a treasure of immeasurable joy.

A tour de force, director David O. Russell (I Heart Huckabees, The Fighter) brings all the craziness of every character and plot & subplot into a perfectly timed and paced stew. The film is fast but it slows when it's appropriate to allow the audience the time to soak everything in. Prolonged shots of scenery are used periodically in between conflicts and encounters to properly distribute the richness of the narrative. Storytelling of the highest caliber, this movie is Mr.Russell's magnum opus.

It's as if it wasn't enough to have a perfectly told story, the level of acting is nothing short of amazing as well. Bradly Cooper has his breakout role here as far as I am concerned with the erratic performance as the earnest but hotheaded Pat. Robert De Niro is the football-maniac dad who loves his son, and his speech near the end of the film is heart-meltingly beautiful. The performance serves as a timely reminder to the younger generation that ,De Niro can still be great when he wants to be (yes I am still haunted by Stardust, my goodness what were you thinking???). Chris Tucker as Pat's friend Danny did an impeccable job rather than his usual Rush Hour nonsense, great to see him be subtle when needed. Jacki Weaver gives a remarkable performance as Pat's mother. She did not have many lines, but every look she gives her son Pat is filled with infinite love and limitless care and just a restrained hint of longing for Pat's happiness.

But the brightest of the brights is the unmatched Jennifer Lawrence. To stand out in this amazing ensemble cast seems impossible but she does it with haunting ease. She is a vision, she is a sight, she is the eighth wonder of the world. At the mere age of 22, she is a bona fide STAR. Not only was she breathtaking in the movie, she lets her emotion run wild in a measured and calculated manner, and she does this while looking fabulous in every, single, shot. A performance of manipulated madness and tenderness, only a truly great actress is capable of delivering it. To give the Academy Award's Best Actress to anyone else will be sacrilege.

What I loved most about the movie is that it has no villain, no de facto antagonist playing against the protagonists.The closest thing that can be called a menace is perhaps Pat's bipolar disorder, or Tiffany's grieve, or to an extent Pat Sr.'s gambling. But somehow all these so-called "negatives" served at one point or another as tools to bring every character together, closer than ever. And that is real beauty. In real life, we don't run into Anton Chigurh or Hannibal Lecter. Like Pat and Tiffany, what most of us (not including you, Mr. Clooney you beautiful creature you) do is try to get through each day by dealing with life's obstacles in the best way possible. We make compromises for people we love,we accept the flaws of those we cared about, and likewise they do the same for us. We find silver linings in every frown and every cloud, and we do so by holding tightly to the hands of those dear to our hearts and souls. This is the essence of Silver Linings Playbook, and it is miraculous.

A great story, with a great cast, and possibly the best dance scene since Pulp Fiction, this movie is the very definition of a must-see. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

Skyfall

2012-11-29T10:10:00.000+00:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated Nov 29 2012

6 James Bonds, 23 movies, and 50 years later, the franchise has evolved into something that resembles very little of Bond. For someone who bought the ticket to see him, it is the first time I hoped evolution is a myth.

Skyfall, the latest film of the legendary Bond series, tells the story of a battle of both wits and strength between James Bond (Daniel Craig) and a former MI6 agent turned super villain named Raoul Silva (Javier Bardem). The film begins with Bond and another filed agent called Eve Moneypenny (Naomie Harris) chasing an assassin who has stolen a disc containing vital information. During the chaos Moneypenny shoots Bond by mistake and the film would've ended right then and there BUT WAIT! Bond survives the shot and is now on the quest of finding out who the mastermind is behind the disc heist. Emerges Silva, the former operative of MI6 seeking revenge after being abandoned in a mission-gone-wrong by M (Judi Dench), the head of MI6. With great intellect and a ruthless will, Silva pushes both M and Bond to the brink and the survival of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service is threatened like never before. Your garden-variety doomsday scenario, fun fun.

The problem with Skyfall isn't about the quality of the film. Sure the chase sequence is not on par with the Bourne franchise (what is?) , the plot is no more exciting than Haywire, and Judi Dench's M is even less interesting than Jeffrey Tambor's Tom Manning (Hellboy 2004). But all in all the film still works as an action thriller. The structure of the story is sound, several shots are breathtakingly beautiful (the building nightlight fight between Bond and the French assassin in particular, poetry without words that was), and the direction of Sam Mendes holds everything afloat. Also, having Javier Bardem playing your villain is almost like cheating, the man is that good.

So what went wrong? the answer to that riddle lies in the essence of the movie. Skyfall, while an above-average action film, really isn't a James Bond film. In the most classic Bond movies, the franchise indulged the audiences with cool cars, fancy tux, beautiful women (plural), smooth dialogues, and mysterious characters. These elements may not be necessities in most movies, but they are unquestionably vital to any Bond movie. James Bond is supposed to be cool, he is supposed to be graceful, he is supposed to drive cars that make you go daaammmmmmmmn, date women you'd never dream of approaching and speak in ways that make people want to remove their pants, regardless of their gender. Almost none of these were met. The Skyfall Bond is less interesting than the antagonist Silva, much less. When Bond speaks it's usually reactionary which makes his words less charismatic. He did not get to drive any cool vehicles (save for a super vintage Aston Martin) nor did he get to use any interesting gadgets (save for a palm-print handgun). His only real "love-interest" was Severine (Berenice Marlohe) and she holds as much intrigue as a glass of water does to the Honey Boo Boo child (or common sense does to Ann Coulter). Above all, Bond felt more like a supporting character to M, as Silva cares only about M, not at all Bond. When the villain doesn't give 2 hoots about Bond, why should the audience? If James Bond isn't the driving force of the film, then why should I pay to see a James Bond movie? The franchise is selling you a character, not a story. And in the absence of the character, the movie inevitably fails.

A fine action movie but not a Bond movie. Perhaps the biggest crime was that Bond didn't get to be Bond, and that was one threat not even James Bond could've rescued us from. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

Premium Rush

2012-08-27T10:10:00.000+01:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated Aug 27 2012

Just like anyone who enjoys living, I hate bikers. And to think bicycle messenger is a legitimate profession? My gosh, if that is not the first sign of the Apocalypse, I don't know what is. GOOOOOSH DARN IT I hate bikers, I mean, seriously, you are a danger to pedestrians, cars, yourself, and most importantly, ME! .........the movie's ok though. Ooooh a twist, bet you didn't see that coming did ya you silly rabbit, trix are for kids.

Premium Rush, along with its cheesy name, tells the very cheesy story of a mother Nima (Jamie Chung) trying to save her son but in doing so has to fight off a corrupted cop named Bobby Monday (Michael Shannon) who is in some serious gambling debt. Nima enlists the help of two bike messengers Wilee (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Vanessa (Dania Ramirez) who just happened to be a couple fighting so naturally they have to solve their relationship problem while fighting off the evil cop, all at the same time. A plausible premise? Not if you treasure logic and common sense like the rest of us normal folks.

I often wondered why directors/actors/producers make movie of this caliber. It is clear that you won't win any awards and the gross number won't be anywhere near impressive. Best case scenario is that the film gains marginal acclaims and makes enough profit to avoid a loss, but seriously, what'd be the point? Is it really worth all the trouble of months and months of production efforts just to beat mediocrity all the while knowing you'd never achieve greatness with it? This type of film falls in the no man's land of movies. It isn't good enough to wow, but it isn't bad enough to piss you off either. It has a clear commercial objective but it is neither innovative (Star Trek 2009) or crappy-but-proven-formula worthy (Anything Adam Sandler has done after 2000 except for Punch Drunk Love) to make any serious dough (dough here means money, for my street-cred-lacking readers, you are welcome). What's even more perplexing is that it is CLEAR the director David Koepp and his casts know exactly what they have to work with and decided to make it anyway. Life is full of mysteries evidently.

Still, though never great or stimulating, Premium Rush is exciting enough to keep you entertained for 91 mins, which is the perfect length for it. The story is corny and more or less predictable, but the bike chases are respectably shot and sequenced. Gordon-Levitt is as likable as he's ever been as the protagonist Wilee. It isn't a role that requires a lot of emotions, but he is a fine actor and has that Matt Damon patented earnest look going, which is a wonderful thing to have. Michael Shannon continues to be a force to be reckoned with. He was mesmerizing in Revolutionary Road and the HBO series Boardwalk Empire, and he remains vastly underrated. Oh yeah, Dania Ramirez and Jamie Chung? Super hot, the end...... Look I am not being a sexist, their roles really are that limited. Besides, there are worse things to be called than super hot, like chubby or flat out fat. Trust me, I know (weeping).

Not so premium but it sure did ended in a rush, Premium Rush is still a relatively fun cinematic experience. If you have some time to kill and cash to spend, why not. It still beats seeing Transformer replays on cable any day of the week. Booya Bay, Booya. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

The Bourne Legacy

2012-08-24T10:10:00.000+01:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated Aug 24 2012

So evidently there's still milk in the Bourne franchise's teet, and I am glad they invited me to suck it with them. Yeah that sounded wrong, let's move on.

The fourth and latest installment of the Bourne series, "The Bourne Legacy" tells the story of not Jason Bourne (Matt Damon), but a new protagonist named Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner). Just like Bourne, Cross is a trained government "asset" (or operative, or assassin, or I-can-kill-you-with-my-nose-hair bad ass), but unlike Bourne, Cross is not from Operation Treadstone, but another program called Operation Outcome. After the Bourne story is brought to the public's eyes by Pamela Landy (Joan Allen), Eric Byer (Edward Norton), a high level intelligence director-type, decides to wipe out every Outcome agents to prevent the project from seeing the light of day. Byer managed to wipe out everyone related to Outcome, all except for Cross and a scientist named Marta (Rachel Weisz) who was involved with Outcome's medication development. Now on the run and out of meds that enhance Outcome agents' physical strength and intelligence, Cross must find a way to save Marta, survive from the relentless chase from Byer and his goons, and most importantly, remain Aaron Cross at all costs.

An admirable directorial effort from Tony Gilroy (the pen responsible for every Bourne movie), the film kept its trademark excellence in producing some of the the best fight scenes in Hollywood. The choreography of the action sequences is as good as they come, with flawless movements perfectly assembled in an electrifying fashion. The roof-top and the car chases are impeccably designed as well. Watching the characters leap from buildings to buildings and jump from floors to floors is nothing short of breathtaking. However, the story is clearly not as strong as its three predecessors. While still captivating to an extent, Legacy lacks the mystery and the designed confusion seen from the previous films. WIth Legacy, Cross knows exactly who he is, and his goal is to stay that way. This is still a viable plot but if the central character is not searching for an identity (the major premise of the Bourne series), then the film is without a sense of intrigue and the journey as the result would seen a bit bland, which is exactly what happened.

Jeremy Renner gives a worthy performance as the new hero Cross. It is wise of Renner to not portray his Cross as another Bourne (quiet, confused, and emotionally unstable) because Renner lacks the sincere look that Damon has perfected. Renner's Cross in contrast is more talkative, more sensitive, and more human. But it is also because he is more relatable that Cross is a less interesting character than Bourne. This is of course not to take anything away from Renner's prowess. He is still a capable actor on the rise and I will be following him closely (now if someone would pay me to do this, that'd be great, wink wink Hollywood). Rachel Weisz is dependable as ever but her role is quite frankly not relevant enough for me to say anything vital. My biggest beef with the film is the lack of Edward Norton. Yes he was in the movie but not nearly enough. Such an amazing force in anything he's ever been in, Legacy could've used more of Norton's fascinating ability of turning any monologue interesting. Alas, regrets.

This was nevertheless a worthy fourth attempt and money well spent at the cinema. The fight/chase sequences alone are worth the admission price. Do I want to see a fifth? Not exactly, but with the weak summer lineup in 2012 thus far (not including The Dark Knight Rises), The Bourne Legacy was a much welcomed relief. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

Mulholland Drive (2001)

2012-08-06T10:10:00.000+01:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated Aug 06 2012

Do you know why we do not have topless women walking about at all times, awesome though it may be? Because that would be logically incomprehensible. Logic is our friend, it keeps the world from falling apart (It and George Clooney). In Mulholland Drive, logic was ran over, backed up and ran over again, and then finally abandoned by the side of the road and what was left for the audience is one of the most irritating film I've ever seen. Which of course explains why on the right hand side of this retro reel review you don't see the usual picture of a DVD because, gladly, I don't own this piece of... work.

How can I possibly do a plot overview for this time waster? No one can, not even if you bring me everyone (Yeah I know that joke doesn't work but I love Oldman! the actor, not actual old man...this joke does work incidentally). Nothing makes sense in this movie. Every plot line, every subplot lines, every relationships, every actions, every reactions, every smile, every stare, every set and every one involved ultimately do not matter because nothing is connected to anything. What is perhaps the most frustrating thing about this film is that it actually managed to disguise its "nonsense"ness well enough for about 2/3 of the whole movie. Only at the end does the film reveals its true nature: a pile of scenes and dialogues that served no purpose, none whatsoever. When the end credit start rolling, you the audience will immediately realize that everything you've just seen made absolutely no sense at all. What director David Lynch did was that he made hints along the way implying that the audience will have an explanation in the end. In fact the entire film is constructed in this fashion: using Naomi Watts and Laura Harring to play two roles each so you'd think the characters are connected to each other in some mysterious and fascinating manner because they are played by the same person, cutting scenes in a way that you'd see the same person from a previous plot showing up in a later story so the two parts seemed to relate to each other, and placing an irreverent but consistent character in different settings to string the many different bits together so they seem to be in the same storyline. It is a solid buildup, only the prophet turned out to be false and the buildup was to a vast galaxy of nothingness where sense goes to die.

Let's imagine a friend of yours ask you to do 3 things for him, and all three are out of the ordinary: first he asks you to give him all your savings, then he asks you to sign over your house to him, and lastly he asks you to let him kick you in the balls. Now naturally you'd refuse, being a sane person and all. But this friend promises you that after you've done all these, he will give you the reason to why he asked this much of you. You see the sincerity in his eyes, and you feel the emotion in his words. You are reluctant but you agreed. You transferred every single dime you own to his account, you sign over your house to him despite protest from your wife, and closing your eyes, you let him kick you in the balls. While you are rolling on the ground in excruciating pain, you ask him why. He turns to you and smiled "Because I am David Freaking Lynch", kicks a pile of dust into your face, and then stroll away. That is exactly what it felt like after watching this movie, I sh*t you not.

Now some may argue that this film doesn't make sense but it is still beautiful to look at. Sure it is a pretty sight, but so what? It is well made but is it as pretty as any Tarsem Singh movies? No. And though I am not a fan of Singh either, at least his movies make sense. Some may argue that the movie DOES make sense, you just need to go look up what David Lynch's intentions were when he made the film, listen to the director's interviews explaining the movie, or go to forums to see discussion of the film to get "it". Well why should I? Every filmmaker has a 2-3 hours window to tell a story in each movie he/she makes, and if you can't get your point across in that window, you failed. Your audience should not be required to go do further research after the movie to get the complete experience. I know some critics gave extremely high praises for this movie. But I challenge anyone to give me an explanation of why he/she liked this movie that is comprehensible. This is what I now call the "Tree of Life" syndrome. Some film critics or movie goers pretend to like certain movies they don't understand because they are afraid to be called ignorant. "Ohhhh you don't get that movie? Well you are just not intellectually deep enough", "Wooo you didn't like that film? I guess you just haven't seen enough movies to appreciate the artistic values shown in that piece of brilliance", "Hahahaha, your fart stinks, mine doesn't". They are so afraid to hear these remarks that they'd go to great length to praise a film just to avoid looking silly, which is ironically the very reason they'd appear to be silly. If you don't get something, it's probably not because it is awesome, it's more likely because it sucks. If a movie doesn't make sense, then it is a failure, pure and simple. It is much harder to construct a comprehensible story than to just put irrelevant scenes together that expresses nothing. "It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense", David Lynch, you just got "Twained", ohhhhh yeah I went there.

Other than the infamous Naomi Watts/Laura Harring scene, Mulholland Drive was a gigantic, dinosauric waste of time. I wouldn't go as far as to call this movie a travesty (I save that for the Tree of Life BOO YA), but it is pretty close to it. Do I even have to tell you this one is Gruesome? My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)

2012-07-30T10:10:00.000+01:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated July 30 2012

The start of it all, the ultimate comedy, the original of the originals. These are the only descriptions worthy for arguably the funniest movie ever made."Monty Python and the Holy Grail" is the triumph, the victory, or perhaps more fittingly, the holy grail that every comedians should aim to achieve.

Written, directed, and performed by the legendary British comedy group Monthy Python, the film follows King Arthur and his knights of the round table on their quest to seek the holiest of grails. On the journey the band of warriors encounters a castle full of desperate women, faces off with a group of French soldiers who must have majored in the art of taunting back in college, assaulted a wedding and subsequently killing almost everyone, burned a witch, met an enchanter named Tim, and battled a beast so foul and so cruel it will leave you in tears with nasty, pointy teeth. The tale is as old as time, but the telling of the story, even 37 years later, is still as fresh as mentos. Unbelievably funny, this film is the embodiment of everything that makes us laugh and giggle. Sure we never did get to see the round table itself or Camelot for that matter(just as well, it is a silly place; see if you saw this movie already you'd get the joke), and much of the movie doesn't make sense logically. But director Terry Gilliam and the geniuses in Monty Python managed to turn a bunch of nonsense into something that is bizarrely sensible in this ridiculous world they created. When Sir Lancelot (John Cleese) stormed a castle by himself, you don't feel absurd but rather assured. When King Arthur battled the black knight, you don't see irrationalities but comedic probabilities. When Sir Bedevere (Terry Jones) educated a mob on witches, you don't feel cheated but you are almost led into believing that what he said really is how you identify a witch...the list goes on and on. A genuine masterpiece, this film is a must see if you love comedy.

I've limited the movie clips to only one in this review because I don't want to ruin the experience for you. But oh kids there are so many things I wanted to show you (the holy hand grenade, the knights who say "Ni!", the historian and the riding knight, the bridge of death, the relentless Black Knight....). There will be plenty more Michael Bay explosion extravaganzas before the world see another magnum opus like Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Go rent it, borrow it, or beg for it if you have to, this one is a must see. Definitely rated as awesome, your world will be brighten within 1 min into the film. Oh and children, just wait till you see their horses, just you wait. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

The Dark Knight Rises

2012-07-23T10:10:00.000+01:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated July 23 2012

No movie is perfect, but this one is pretty darn close. The Dark Knight Rises is the best movie of the year thus far and I do not expect its status to be challenged anytime soon.

This third and final installment of director Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy picks up 8 years since where the second movie left off: after the death of Harvey "Two Face" Dent and Rachel Dawes, Bruce Wayne aka Batman (Christian Bale) went into retirement as Gotham City is now a peaceful and organized crime-free sanctuary... or so it would seem. A new threat named Bane (Tom Hardy), a former member of the League of Shadows so extreme in his thinking that even the league's former master Ra's al Ghul (Liam Neeson) felt necessary to cast him out. Armed with an army of undyingly royal followers and an unshakable belief inherited from the fallen league leader, Bane arrives at Gotham aiming to take everything down and will stop at nothing to achieve this goal. Despite the heartfelt urging from Alfred (Michael Caine) to stay away, Bruce decides to put on his mask and become the crusader once again to save his beloved city. Along the way he encounters a cat burglar Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway), meets up with his trusted friend Fox (Morgan Freeman), helps an old ally Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), sees the future for Gotham in John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), and embraces a new love interest in Miranda Tate (Marion Cotillard). Making a last stand against an enemy of unprecedented strength and cunning, the batman pushes all his chips forward in this final showdown. If that didn't give you goosebumps, then you are the tin man without a heart.

Quite simply the best film of the trilogy, The Dark Knight Rises redefines the word "epic". The story is told at a speed so perfectly timed that it can only be described as impeccable. The music is deeply moving without being contrived. The characters are all crucial to the film's development with rich back-stories to keep us engaged. Not a single minute is wasted and every second serves a purpose. The car chases are thrilling, the fight sequences are exhilarating, and the big stadium explosion scene almost brought tears to my eyes it was so flawlessly stringed together (see? Michael Bay, you can't even do explosion justice the way Nolan can). It's nearly 3 hours long but you'll crave for 3 hours more. Some may argue that the second installment (The Dark Knight) is the superior film, but I disagree (and remember, Danny is always right, it's science). While the previous film was a fantastic movie, "The Dark Knight Rises" is by far a more completely told tale. The biggest difference perhaps is in character development. The villains in The Dark Knight (Harvey Dent played by Aaron Eckhart and the Joker played by the late Heath Ledger) were brilliant, to be sure, but we knew very little about them. They were given to us as they were and just took off from there, which was fine and the end product is now a legend. However, in The Dark Knight Rises, every new character has a story about them that is fascinating and vital to the development of the plot. They were given to us as seeds, grown throughout the course of the film, then blossomed finally as the film comes to an end. A more difficult approach and needless to say much more time-consuming, but well worth the investment as the payoff is evident. Christopher Nolan left no questions unanswered and every loose end is tied up in satisfying fashions. A more than worthy finale to the series.

Nolan directed the trilogy as crime/action/drama thrillers, not as a superhero franchise, which is most likely the reason for its success. You would call the Avenger series (Iron man, Thor, Captain America, The Hulk) immensely entertaining and fun and you'd be right, but you wouldn't call them masterpieces. The structures and designs of superhero films and traditional crime-dramas are vastly different in nature. While the former's main goal is to entertain, the latter's most important focus is to make the audiences believe. Believe in the struggle, believe in the crime, believe in the evil and believe in the redemption. By taking this approach, Nolan has made the Batman real: we understand his dilemmas, we understand his pain, we understand his thinking and we understand who he ultimately is. Nolan has blew everything from Tim Burton's respectable Batman and Batman Returns to Joel Schumacher's hideous Batman Forever and Batman & Robin right out of the water with his Dark Knight films.

The acting is superb all around. Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman (aka Mr. Bring Me Everyone) were as good as they've been in the previous two films. Michael Caine's Alfred was especially brilliant in this one: to watch him try desperately to keep Bruce Wayne safe with his speech was as close to heartbreaking as I will ever feel at a theatre. The new comers were just as brilliant. Anne Hathaway is a fantastic Cat Woman, she portrays the very "adaptable" Selina Kyle with an elegant smirk and unstoppable allure. It is impossible not to fall in love with Hathaway's Selina. Joseph Gordon-Levitt gives a genuinely moving performance as John Blake, the cop with a heart of gold. I've always liked him (ever since his 3rd Rock from the Sun days) and with roles like this and his Arthur in "Inception", he is on his way to a very solid career. Marion Cotillard is full of grace and class as Miranda Tate, even the most subtle twinkle in her eyes seem to tell a story worth a thousand words. And finally Tom Hardy as Bane, one of the most dangerous villain Batman has ever faced (both in comic and film, known as "The man who broke the bat" in the comic book series), is as good a choice anyone has ever made in the history of cinema. Hardy delivered his monologues with a fierce force in a calm and terrifying manner that I feel a chill every time he spoke. Everything he did as Bane, from the way he moved to the way he stood, was sincerely haunting. Mr Nolan sure knows how to pick his bad guys.

There will never again be another Batman series like Nolan's and it ought to be a crime if anyone dares to make another one. Christopher is one of only 3 filmmakers active today that guarantees quality. With Inception in 2010 and now The Dark Knight Rises in 2012, Nolan seems to be on a roll which I hope it never stops. The cinematic world is a better place with you in it and that is as high a praise as I can give to any filmmaker Mr Nolan. Now had I mattered more, someone would actually care about the praises I give, but alas. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.

Feeling Old in a Club

2012-07-20T10:10:00.000+01:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 20 July 2012

Cindies, the notoriously trashy club in Cambridge

Last week a very good friend from my undergrad and banking days came to visit me in Cambridge. He was a very shy guy in university but then he later became a club-dwelling party-animal, some may even call him a “club-rat”. Anyways, he was very very excited about the notion of heading to a night club even in a medieval town like Cambridge so I took him out to a trashy night club famous for its unpleasant smell and skanky, classless under-aged girls. The club is called “Cindies”. However, from this point the ridiculing of this crass lame excuse for a night out shall stop as any further comments can be interpreted as insults on my dear friend considering the amount of fun and excitement he had on that night.

This story is about me feeling incredibly old at a night club filled with young trashy girls. I am sure many guys my age, or even many older than me would be excited about the idea of heading to a club full of extremely young girls in skimpy outfits. However I am not one of them. Young trashy girls, or even young girls for that matter, just don't arouse me the way a sheep can arouse a male Kiwi.

Putting the issue of the quality of females aside, I am at the age where I realized the reality of a club NOT being a good place FOR ME to meet women. I envy the people enjoy meeting members of the opposite sex but I am not one of them. This is because I can never hear what anyone is saying with the music so loud. Also, because I simply lack what many people refer to as... "game". Even when I encounter females who try to pick me up (Yes, even I can attract women, clubs do tend to lack lighting ok?), I feel very intimidated. After all, they are strangers in the dark.

The one thing that made me feel very out-of-place and extremely old was the MUSIC. I realized after a while that I recognized only 20% of the songs played in the club. Moreover, these 20% that I recognized I didn't even know their titles and artists. I had only heard those songs from the previous nights out, which I do perhaps once every one or two months. I cannot even tell you which songs I heard because I really don't know them.

So, that was my grumpy old man's rant on a club that youngsters go to. There are people who can continue enjoy clubbing going into their 30's. Unfortunately I am not one of them. I am too old to be anticipating "getting lucky" at a night club and too old to be recognizing what music is "in" these days. Yes, I'm a hater and I'm old and grumpy, bite me.

Cambridge May Balls: Trinity vs. John's

2012-07-17T10:10:00.000+01:00

Written by Ruey of The Ruey Review
Updated 17 July 2012

"May Week is the name used within the University of Cambridge to refer to a period at the end of the academic year. Originally May Week took place in the week during May before year-end exams began. Today, May Week takes place in June. The end of exams is a cause for heavy celebration amongst the students of the University. Highlights of the week include May Balls, June Events and garden parties. A May Ball is a ball at the end of the academic year that happens at any one of the colleges of the University of Cambridge."

-Wikipedia-

St. John's New Court all Lit-up, very Pretty

As it is the Ruey man’s one and only year in Cambridge, he decided to go big in this one and only year. This year I bought tickets to two of the world-famous Cambridge May Balls; held by Trinity College and St. John’s College. The two rivalry colleges are the richest colleges in Cambridge and their May Balls are often said to be the most extravagant and they often compete with each other in the organizations of their May Balls. As a part of this competition, the two colleges usually hold their May Balls on successive evenings. Therefore, attending both colleges’ balls made May Week 2012 very tiring indeed for me. Each ball can cost from £145 first hand (college members only) up to more than £300 second hand. Today, the Ruey Review will provide a comparative review for both balls in hopes of helping you decide which one of the over-the-top bourgeois party you may attend in case you want to experience just ONE of the two most well-renowned Cambridge May Ball in the future. (Other May Balls and June Events are great to attend as well but I ain’t got the time and energy to go to all of them in one year. Also, it is physically impossible as some colleges have events on the same nights)

Fireworks at the 2012 Trinity May Ball

Fireworks is one of the biggest draws for the May Balls at Trinity and St. John’s. The fireworks at both colleges were amazing. They were both choreographed with music. It still boggles my mind to this day how University-affiliated colleges like the mentioned two go to such lengths to arrange firework shows that are more extravagant and elegant than the ones put on on national days in most countries around the world. So, the two colleges are quite competitive over the issue of who has the better fireworks each year. Apparently St. John’s college, usually having its May Ball the day after Trinity’s , holds money in reserve each year to “up” Trinity upon observing the Trinity fireworks the previous night. Therefore, the conventional understanding is that John’s has better fireworks than Trinity. Personally, this year I thought it was a tie. I think it is true that John’s fireworks is more EPIC, but that does not make Trinity fireworks any less impressive in terms of extravagance and elegance. In the Trinity May Ball you do get a much better view of the fireworks as you can watch on one side of the river while the fireworks shoot up into the sky on the other, at very close range. Whereas in John’s you just get to watch a very impressive show on a large field without the River Cam being a part of the experience. At Trinity you can see the plebs who are not in the actual ball sitting in their punts on the River Cam looking up into the sky wishing that they can one day watch the fireworks on land. Moreover, Trinity had flamethrowers which were big pluses. I personally enjoyed the Trinity May Ball fireworks better because of the venue, but I do recognize that John’s fireworks was much bigger and Michael Bayer. So I say the fireworks showdown was a tie.

Queue for Food at St. John's

In terms of food selection at the ball, Trinity has a decisive victory over John’s. At Trinity you get oysters, truffles, nice champagne, great-tasting crepe. At John’s I only remember having bad kebab and mediocre steak and frites. Trinity definitely had more food selection and the quality was much more bourgeois, which is what balls are all about, right? In foods Trinity gets a clear win.

Musical Performances at Trinity

The musical concerts at both colleges were great. The main act at Trinity was the Vengaboys and at John’s was Magnetic Man. The cowboy and the sailor in Vengaboys made my night incredibly gay (happy) with their gayish gayness (cheerful homosexuality). The dub stepp'n by Magnetic Man made me feel incredibly gangster. I do think John’s has a better venue even though the concert stage at Trinity was much better-looking. Because of the way the Trinity concert stage was shaped, you cannot see much if you go to the sides. While at John’s you can go to the sides where there are less people and still get a perfect view of the band. I had much more fun at the John’s concert but because Vengaboys is much more internationally known I call this battle a tie. In some ways both colleges were losers anyways because Sidney Sussex College managed to get Kelis to perform at its May Ball. Regardless of the fun I had, Vengaboys and Magnetic Man cannot top Kelis, she’s got the milkshake.

Food Tent at Trinity, with Music of course

In terms of the contents of the variety of tents, one can definitely tell that each college focuses on different things. Trinity had more interesting, high quality “shows” for people to enjoy. There was even one tent where Burlesque shows were performed!! Yes, Burlesque. John’s had a comedy tent which I thought was not a great idea for a Ball. When you are at a Cambridge May Ball, you want to walk around, and see many things. Therefore I feel that it is more appropriate to have shows that are more visual and musical. Comedy stand-ups and sketches require focused attention, which is something that can be burdensome at a May Ball. Although it is important to note that I was a lot more drunk at the St John’s May Ball and therefore did not get to see all the tents present at the ball. I would give Trinity the win on the contents in the tents. Most tents at Trinity were more nicely decorated, with performances of more visually and musically impressive shows. John’s had fun tents with photo booths, massages, casinos and so on, however, the Trinity ones were much more impressive in the end.

Bumper Carts, NOT "Dodge'em", at John's

It is important to note that at both balls there were bumper carts! Yes, bumper carts, on college grounds. This is how over-the-top these Cambridge May Balls are. In the U.K. they call it “Dodge’em” though, which makes absolutely no sense. In the arena you try to bump other cars and f*ck them up. You don’t “dodge’em”. The name is just so incredibly British. Both bumper carts were great at both colleges, both with very appropriate speed, and appropriate duration for each round of play. However, in terms of silly fun stuff like this... if I had to pick a winner, I would pick John’s. Because while both colleges had great bumper carts, John’s also had a giant inflatable slide for people to climb and slide down. Whoo~ hoo~~ yes. It was a lot of fun, don’t judge me.

Trinity College's Nevile's Court

It is almost cliche in Cambridge to say, in comparing the May Balls of Trinity and St. John’s college, that Trinity is a ball and John’s is a party. I heard this before attending the balls from undergraduate students of both colleges, and this was true. The Trinity May Ball was very classy, bourgeois, and impressive; whereas John’s was also impressive but it had more of a “let’s have fun” atmosphere than the “let’s hold champagne and suck on oysters while we enjoy our time at this delightful event”. Having said this, this cliche is exactly the reason why I recommend you to go to the Trinity May Ball instead of the John’s one if you are going to only one for a Cambridge May Ball experience. This is because you can have a crazy fun party in any setting, but to experience a proper May Ball at Cambridge, you want to go somewhere as bourgeois, as over-the-top European upper-class, and as pretentious as possible. These are all something you will experience to the fullest at the Trinity May Ball. Trinity will not fail to impress you and blow your mind away. (My mind was truly blown away by the scale at which this college ball at a collegiate university was thrown) Although the St. John’s college May Ball was no less impressive, it was in the end, a ball that was dubbed a “party”, and if you came to a ball, you ball, don’t party!

This is Spinal Tap (1984)

2012-07-15T10:10:00.000+01:00

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated July 15 2012

The mother of all mockumentaries as far as anyone should be concerned, in today's entertainment scene with the unstopping flow of shows like The Office (UK/US), Parks and Recreations, Trailer Park Boys, Modern Family, and Reno 911, it is time the world once again recognize this piece of greatness, that is, Spinal Tap.

This trailblazer of cinema tells the story of documentary film maker Marty DiBergi's (Rob Reiner, also the director) making of a "rockumenatry" featuring the British heavy metal rock band Spinal Tap, which is led by the trio of David (Michael McKean), Nigel (Christopher Guest), and Derek (Harry Shearer). Neither the film maker nor the band is real, but the film's authenticity is shockingly genuine and the performances are incredibly believable almost to the point of absurdity. The film follows the band during its US tour and we witness it's fall from grace with laughs and giggles all the while forgetting that it is all made-up. The songs were well written, so well written in fact that I would've bought the record believing it to be a real rock album (though one probably would've had a hard time finding it at a record store) had it been available when I saw the movie. The grand achievement of this timeless classic, apart from it's unbelievably hilarious nature, is the fact that it presented its jokes with legitimate emotions and relationships, resulting in us believing in Spinal Tap so much that we cheer for the band to succeed, feel hurt for its failures, and rejoice for its comeback. In other words, we ended up feeling for a fictional band. In today's cinematic world, how many movies can inspire in this fashion? A rare few, if any. Genuine inspiration is impossible to fake, but Reiner managed to very nearly pull it off. To engage your audience, is that not the dream of every film maker and actor?

With classic bits like the 1-11 amplifier, smell the glove, small bread, and the Stonehenge screw-up, it is a crime that this movie isn't shown on cable more often (HBO, you need me as your consultant, seriously). A film that is as funny in 1984 as it is today, this one is definitely AWESOME. My name is Danny and I endorse this message.