The Squeee

Elizabethtown (2005)

2012-02-24T08:22:00.000Z

Film review: Elizabethtown (2005), directed by Cameron Crowe

Life kind of sucks for Drew Baylor (Orlando Bloom). He's just made the shoe manufacturer he works for lose a heck of a lot of money (not entirely sure why the shoes had to be recalled, though), his girlfriend (Jessica Biel) doesn't seem to want to be his girlfriend any more, and the boss (Alec Baldwin) insists he does an interview with a business magazine and take the full blame for the disaster. It will be in the next issue, which will be out at the end of the week, and then everyone will know what a failure he is.

Basically, life can't possibly get any worse for the poor man. Except that very same night, his sister (Judy Greer) phones him to say their dad Mitch (Tim Devitt) has suddenly passed away, and their mother (Susan Sarandon) is beside herself.

It's decided that Drew is to travel to Mitch's side of the family in Kentucky, where he died, to arrange a memorial service and also to bring him back to the family in Oregon. Well, not like he has anything else to do, right?

On the very quiet night flight, Drew doesn't get much sleep, as a chirpy flight attendant (Kirsten Dunst) insists on talking to him. Turns out her name is Claire and she's from Kentucky. She gives him driving instructions, because Elizabethtown can be difficult to find, if you don't take the right turn-off and so on. She ends up giving Drew her contact details.

In Elizabethtown, Drew is like the lost son who has returned. Okay, the family keep saying he's from California (where they lived for about three months 27 years ago, before they moved to Oregon, where they've lived ever since), and his cousin's (Paul Schneider) child is a little brat, and it's all very complicated. The Kentucky side of the family want one thing when it comes to saying their goodbyes, and Drew's family want other things. But they're all very friendly.

Still, he misses home, and as no one picks up the phone, he ends up spending the entire night talking to Claire, and ... the rest, as they say, is history.

Also stars Bruce McGill as Bill Banyon, and when I saw him, I went "hey, it's THAT guy!" and was completely thrown when I saw the name, because it meant absolutely nothing to me. Bruce McWho? Turns out he was MacGyver's roguish pilot pal Jack Dalton. THAT guy! :)

Elizabethtown is a film full of heart. It's a little bit quirky, a little bit dark in places, and while it's not a film of big laughs, it's touching and rather enjoyable. Some people would say it's incredibly dull, but it's sweet and romantic, and ... a "chick flick", admittedly. Nowt bad about chick flicks, though. They do their trick, as does this film.

4 out of 5 blue suits.

The Design of Everyday Things by Donald A Norman (1988)

2012-02-23T08:24:00.000Z

Book review: The Design of Everyday Things by Donald A Norman (Basic Books, 2002 [1988]), originally released as The Psychology of Everyday Things

In this entertaining and insightful analysis, cognitive scientist Donald A Norman hails excellence of design as the most important key to regaining the competitive edge in influencing consumer behavior.

Expanded and updated, with a new introduction by the author, The Design of Everyday Things is a powerful primer on how - and why - some products satisfy customers while others only frustrate them.

This time I'm doing coursework, I'm reviewing the literature that goes with it, hah! Two birds with one stone!

Psychology is fascinating, and you don't normally realise that it can go hand in hand with design. For instance, if you look at something as simple as a door, you might not think too much about it, but how often do you encounter doors where your instinct is to push instead of pull, and find the door won't budge? That would be because the door and/or handle design is flawed, not that you're stupid ... which is inevitably how you end up feeling.

Had that feeling recently, when I was doing something for this course. Was going to use the Facebook app for Android as an example of something to improve, because not only is it painfully slow in general, I found it impossible to comment on an image when it was in fullscreen mode. However, while poking around the app in order to take photos to illustrate the issue ... I discovered that oh, all you had to do was to click the image. Simple as that. D'oh ... There I was, poking around the menus! Ho hum.

This book was first published under the title The Psychology of Everyday Things, but in later editions, it's changed to The Design of Everyday Things. There's a reason for this, listed in the beginning of the book, but I don't recall why just now. Not all that relevant for reading it. Either way, the point is, the book was written in the late 1980s, and this shows. I'd say that's the let-down of the book, because everything else is very informative and interesting, but when you keep coming across examples of things where you think "I'm sorry, are you from the past?" it gets a bit ... meh.

Written before the Internet Age, when computers were bricks ... and about as high-tech as an Amiga (if that) ... you just wish the book had been re-written to take modern day into account. Yes, underlying principles are still the same, but nowadays, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a car that doesn't beep at you if you forget to switch the headlights off, for instance.

At one point, the author mentions being able to put information on CDs, because imagine how incredibly handy that would be for encyclopaedias, and the likes. Been there, done that, dude. That's why Encarta and Cinemania never worked very well - they weer out of date by the time you got them. (We had the '95 versions of both, back in the day, because they came with our then totally super awesome mega-computer: 75 MHz Pentium processor, 8 megs worth of RAM and a massive 520 meg harddrive. It had Windows 95, man! Technology at its most impressive!) Today, we have Wikipedia and the Internet Movie Database, and I do not want to go back!

So yeah, it misses out the whole thing about computer programs, because what existed in 1988 ... well, times have changed. It misses out websites, it misses out mobile phones ... things we today take very much for granted. And that's a shame.

For timeless things like door knobs and office telephones, though, it's great. Very interesting to read, and has really made me start to think more about how things are designed and how we instinctively know how to use some things, but struggle with others.

My favourite example from it is the last (7th) chapter, where the author writes about British trains, and how he really couldn't fathom why on earth anyone would want to put the door handles on the outside only - you have to open the window and lean out to get to the handle. I experienced that when I was on a train to or from Reading last December, because I too was thinking "WTF?!" at that. Luckily, you'll only find those on the old style train cars. New ones have a simple button which slides the door open. Like you'd expect. We are, after all, in the 21st Century ...

4 out of 5 design flaws, because while it's easy to read and quite entertaining, it's very, very dated.

Ghost Rider 2: Spirit of Vengeance (2011)

2012-02-22T08:37:00.000Z

Film review: Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2011), directed by Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor

A few years ago, stunt motorcyclist Johnny Blaze (Nicolas Cage) sold his soul to Roarke (Ciarán Hinds), an incarnation of the devil. Because of this, at night, he turns into Ghost Rider - a burning skeleton of a demon bounty hunter, out to claim souls of bad people. This is not something he's particularly keen on, so he's hiding out somewhere in Eastern Europe.

In a monastery, a young boy called Danny (Fergus Riordan) is held in secret with his mum Nadya (Violante Placido). The boy is one of prophecy and it would be best for the world if he was there and just waited for a prophecised time to pass. The devil disagrees, and has sent Ray Carrigan (Johnny Whitworth) and friends to collect him.

Mum and son run, chased by Moreau (Idris Elba), a priest ... However, Moreau loses them and turns to Johnny Blaze to help find them and bring them to safety, which is of course not as simple as it would first seem, and even when they've gotten to the safe place, is it all that safe? And so on. Also, Blaze is in it for the chance to get his soul back.

With notable appearances by Anthony Head as some kind of monk, Christopher Lambert as a more hardcore monk with facial tattoos and Vincent Regan as a weapons seller.

The Squeeze and I are agreed on this. He went into the cinema hoping he'd like it, I went into the cinema hoping I'd at least enjoy it. Both came out with a "meh" feeling. The storyline in itself was okay, but the film didn't flow. It felt like "Scene 1, end of Scene 1, Scene 2 begins", very ... episodic, almost. The whole film put too much emphasis on special effects, in a "LOOK, IT'S 3D! ISN'T IT JUST AWESOME?!" way, meaning prolonged bits of this:

And this:

Especially this. Just eat his soul, already.

It got boring. Especially when he hovers over people like that for a good three minutes without doing anything else ... I mean, if you're going to claim the guy's soul, bloody do it already! It was equally groanworthy when it was so painfully obvious that he would not kill Carrigan, even though he had the chance and Carrigan is a bad guy. He had the opportunity several times, and I was thinking "and he's going to let him get away again, because Carrigan has plot armour".

When people manage to get away by the skin of their teeth, fair enough, but when they're seconds from certain death and then miraculously, the would-be killer decides not to kill, even though it would pretty much solve the protagonists problem once and for all, you go, "aww, come on!" If Carrigan is chasing after you, surely killing Carrigan would at least stall Roarke for a bit, as he then has to find someone else to continue the chase. So yeah, makes perfect sense to let the guy go and continue his chase. Sorry, but that's just plain dumb.

I'm also wondering about the young couple in the minibus somewhere in "Eastern Europe". Did they just get a foreigner to say something foreign because no one would really know the difference between Romanian (pretty sure I saw a Romanian flag at one point) and, oh, Swedish? We all sound the same to you because we're all "European", right? No, please do tell, because I realised that I didn't need the subtitles when the minibus guy spoke his one line, which he repeated a couple of times. I haven't suddenly learned to understand Romanian - the guy was speaking Swedish! No explanation for it. And let me tell you, Romania and Sweden aren't anywhere near each other geographically, and they sure aren't similar in languages either.

The other thing about the unspecified "Eastern Europe" is that they're racing against time, and one minute, they're in - yeah, let's just run with it - Romania, as that's where it was shot. The next, they're somewhere in Turkey. Now, they're not a million miles away from each other, but they still have the whole of Bulgaria to get through. If you're driving, we're not exactly talking five minutes down the road. (Bucharest to Turkey is about a 6.5 hour drive according to Google Maps.)

There are currently two cinemas in Nottingham showing this film, neither had a 2D option. It was 3D only. We're not fans of 3D, as we see it as something that doesn't add anything to the experience, except giving you a headache. The 3D on this film wasn't even particularly good - there was very little of the actual effect most of the time, and when there was any, there was a lot of "shadowing" (when it doesn't line up properly) and it just felt completely pointless. But no, 3D is what we're all having to put up with from now on. As much as I want to see The Avengers when it comes out, if they don't have a 2D option, we might well wait for it to come out on DVD instead.

If you've seen the trailer and been worried a lot of time is going to be spent on peeing fire, don't worry. It's a short and pointless glimpse when Blaze answers Danny's question about what he does if he needs to pee as Ghost Rider. "It's awesome, like a flamethrower!" Cue five-second clip.

So no, I wasn't grabbed by Cage or any of them, and how old must Nadya have been when she gave birth to Danny anyway? Fifteen? Considering the age of the actor playing the child's father, that's a little squicky even by my age-gap-romance-loving standards. That being said, always a delight to see Ciarán Hinds, even when he's the creepy Devil incarnate.

My recommendation would be that if you're wanting to see this movie, but not absolutely desperate to see it right now, save your money and wait until it comes out on DVD. Even if Anthony Head is in it.

2.5 out of 5 avenging angels.

Swedish Ways: Fettisdagen

2012-02-21T19:37:00.001Z

Shrove Tuesday, you say? Fat Tuesday (fettisdagen) we say! Instead of pancakes, we eat something called a semla. The semla is a cardamom spiced bun (try finding a sweet bun in Sweden that isn't, I dare you) hollowed out and filled with an almond paste, topped with whipped cream, the lid left from the hollowing out and finished with a dusting of icing sugar. The buns I baked yesterday turned out rather small ... so I'm going to pretend it's deliberate and call them "calorie controlled".

Today is the "correct day" of eating them, but nowadays, bakeries start making them shortly after Christmas. A little wrong, I think.

The eating of the humble semla dates back centuries - in fact, we once had a king who ate himself to death on them. It even made it on to Horrible Histories! It's one of the deleted Stupid Deaths on the series two DVD, check it out. :D Their buns even looked fairly authentic.

The attached picture are the ones I made today to bring with me to our roleplaying group for people to try. [Will edit this post when I'm on a computer next.]

Also, we had pancakes for breakfast. Lent is not observed in this household, and not in Sweden in general. Unless you've caught religion.

P.S. I skipped Valentine's Day. Partly because I forgot, partly because ... well, "same as you guys, really".

For My Daughter's Honor / Indecent Seduction (1996)

2012-02-21T08:28:00.000Z

Film review: For My Daughter's Honor or Indecent Seduction (1996), directed by Alan Metzger

One of my guilty pleasures is TV channel True Movies. Every made-for-TV "based on reality" you could ever hope for. This one caught my eye because it promised Alyson Hannigan and the oldest child from The Nanny. And Gary Cole, which I didn't realise until I started watching. Apparently it also had a young Sean Murray (McGee in NCIS) as "Ralph", whoever that was. Oh, if only I had known that beforehand, I would've kept an eye out!

Somewhere in Oklahoma, Amy Dustin (Nicholle Tom) is starting high school along with her two best friends Kelly (Alyson Hannigan) and Kimberly (Sara Rue). The school's Biology teacher is also the coach of the football team - Pete Nash (Gary Cole), who has a reputation to be flirty with the pretty girls. Happens every year with someone in the freshmen, who become the teacher's pet.

Amy happens to be pretty. Guess who gets blatantly groomed by the dashingly handsome football coach? And because her parents (Mac Davis and Mary Kay Place) are too busy fighting with one another to give her the time of day, guess who ends up falling for the dashingly handsome man who is so kind to her and says she's special and all that?

It's not as if the signs aren't there, but the principal (Tom Virtue) brushes it all aside, not wanting to admit that there's a problem in his school. Yeah, Coach Nash is very friendly and popular with the students, and so on ... and neither librarian nor a friend of Amy will make him believe that he has a textbook paedophile in his ranks.

Ah, watching True Movies is one thing ... another thing to actually admit to liking what you're watching. And I did. It wasn't a fabulous script, the acting will not earn anyone an Emmy but I think Tom did a good job as the awkward teenager. What I really think was done well, though, was Gary Cole's performance. He freaked the crap out of me!

"You're accusing little old me? I would never have
sexual intercourse with your daughter, sir. Not in
your house, anyway. Mine, on the other hand ..."

Yes, he's darn handsome, but I was completely gobsmacked by his creepy manipulations. From the first tentative steps like passing her a note in the returned schoolwork, saying "you look pretty today :)", which in itself is way out line, to inviting her on family camping trips so he can sneak her out of the tent and have his wicked way with her in the woods. She knows it's not right what he's doing, but she doesn't dare to go against him. Then he brings out guilt and threats. Dispicable son of a bitch!

When her parents finally find out, I think her mum does a great job. Of course children should be safe from sexual predators in school! Well, teenage horndawgs you can't do much about, but at least students should be safe from their teachers. It's amazing that this was not actually part of the law before the family's lawsuit. You would've thought it was obvious right from the get-go!

Then there's the whole matter of public opinion, because the story is sort of known at school amongst the kids, but when it comes out in public and the coach is suspended, the town turns against the girl and her family. Because then she's a trouble-maker who is trying to sabotage their high school football team's chances in the state league. So you'd let a paedophile run free to shack up with girls too young to resist just so you can win a sporting trophy?! WTF is wrong with you?! If this happened to one of my nieces, you can bet your ass that I would not rest until the guy was safely tucked away in a prison, where he belongs!

Eww, the story was not a pleasant watch at all. Having a schoolgirl crush on a good-looking teacher is one thing. If the teacher not only encourages it for the sake of his own ego, but actually preys on vulnerable young teenagers (let's not forget we're talking about a 14-year-old girl here) ... that's just wrong. But, I guess it means that this TV film did its job - raising emotions in the viewers ...

4 out of 5 cars you're too young to drive. (What's with that anyway? She's too young to get a driving license, but she's allowed to drive a car completely unsupervised?!)

The Secret Diaries of Miss Anne Lister (2010)

2012-02-20T10:33:00.000Z

Film review: The Secret Diaries of Miss Anne Lister (2010), directed by James Kent

When I read what this film was about, I was intrigued. A businesswoman in the first half of the 1800s, who is also gay. You rarely hear about businesswomen in those days, regardless of their sexuality. Unfortunately, the showing I caught on TV had a bloke gesticulating in the corner (it was the sign language time of night), which was very distracting.

Anne Lister (Maxine Peake) lives with her aunt (Gemma Jones) and uncle (Alan David) somewhere in Yorkshire. She has an affair with Mariana (Anna Madeley), and they're passionately in love ... which comes to an abrupt end when Mariana agrees to marry the old Charles Lawton (Michael Culkin). Anne is heartbroken by this betrayal, and starts grooming Miss Browne (Tina O'Brien) in a rather creepy fashion.

Meanwhile, Anne's best friend "Tib" (Susan Lynch) has the hots for her too, but Anne is still focused on Mariana. When aunt and uncle Lister decide it's time for Anne to consider marrying, they put her in touch with their next door neighbour, Mr. Rawson (Dean Lennox Kelly), whom Anne is completely unimpressed by. She's still in love with Mariana, and is waiting for her old husband to die so that they can be together. However, he seems in better health than Mariana gives the impression of. The film ends some time after Anne goes into a business venture with Ann Walker (Christine Bottomley).

And I guess I just gave a synopsis or plot summary rather than basic premise. Easy to do with things that are based on historical people, I suppose.

The Secret Diaries of Miss Anne Lister is a story of love and passion, and gives a great sense of the times. You could live as "companions" together, but realistically, as a woman, you were required to marry a man to secure your fortunes. Love and marriage? Strictly heterosexual. Firing a gun? Well, just the sort of thing A Lady should not be doing, but which of course Anne Lister did.

Why did I say "grooming" rather than "courting" the young Miss Brown? Because it wasn't courting, it was manipulating her and trying to make her into something which the girl had perhaps never intended. Not to mention how very uncomfortable she seems with Anne's advances. It's not something that develops naturally (like with Ann Walker), but is rather forced, and that's never a good idea.

The diaries were written in a code, based on some form of mathematics, and it took about 150 years before they were fully decoded. In those days, you really couldn't write honestly about your homosexual love affairs, because if anyone ever caught you, there would probably be hell to pay. Perhaps not being burned at the stakes, like you would probably be 200 years earlier, but your reputation would be shot to pieces and I guess no one would want to do business with you. Thank goodness that's changed!

Thank goodness women are free to do as we like now, at least in the society where I, and you most likely (going by this blog's stats), live. If we want to shoot a gun, own a property or run a mine, or just simply not get married at all, we're free to do so. I admire Anne for sticking up for herself and going against the established rules of society and doing her own thing. My kind of person!

As for the production itself, it felt a little confusing at times, as to how things happened and why, but the script as such was good, the acting really good, and they weren't exactly shy about sex either. Not in a voyeuristic "let's watch the lezzos get it on!" way, but in a way that if it had been a man and a woman doing what was done, no one watching would've batted an eyelid.

All in all, a fascinating look into a part of history we normally associate with very prim correctness. This is the time Jane Austen came from, but if you're expecting Jane Austen's emotional restraint, you are sorely mistaken. This is wild and free, like the Yorkshire moors the Brontës were so fond of.

3.8 out of 5 wedding rings.

Avada Kedavra - unforgivable yet satisfying!

2012-02-18T08:55:00.000Z

This week's weekend video is brought to you by Albino Blacksheep and a chorus of Lord Voldemort, Draco Malfoy and Wormtail, putting on a spectacular Lion King parody for your amusement. :D

The Bodyguard (1992)

2012-02-17T08:54:00.000Z

Film review: The Bodyguard (1992), directed by Mick Jackson

After the initial shock and surprise to hear Whitney Houston was found dead, the next step was to see if any of the TV channels had decided to show The Bodyguard in response. Maybe it was already going to be shown anyway, but one of the ITV channels had it on. Now I just feel a bit awkward writing this review ... you'll see why in a bit.

Frank Farmer (Kevin Costner) is a bodyguard for hire who is very good at what he does and takes his job very seriously. In fact, he doesn't even want to tie himself down to becoming a permanent employee of a client because he doesn't want any potential attachment cloud his judgement.

He's contacted by Devaney (Bill Cobbs), who would like to pay him good money to protect singer and actress Rachel Marron (Whitney Houston) and her son Fletcher (DeVaughn Nixon), because there have been some threatening letters sent, and some creepy dude managed to get into her mansion, where she lives with her sister Nicki (Michele Lamar Richards).

For Farmer, it's not as straightforward as he'd hoped. Rachel's manager Sy (Gary Kemp) wants her to perform at all cost, Rachel herself doesn't want a babysitter/prison guard, and Tony (Mike Starr), hired muscle, doesn't take kindly at being left behind in the rain. Luckily, Farmer gets along famously with Fletcher, and trains Henry the driver (Christopher Birt) to be his assistant.

And then it's two hours of Costner trying to save Rachel from doing stupid things that endanger her, with Tomas Arana as a former colleague of Farmer's, Ralph Waite as Farmer's dad (same guy plays Gibbs's dad on NCIS, I thought he looked familiar) and with a cameo in the end by gorgeous Nathaniel Parker.

Unintentionally funny moment arises when Rachel gets an Oscar nomination for Best Actress. Yeah, in your dreams. Houston's not bad, but her strength is definitely her incredible singing voice, not her acting. Costner never sings, but I'm starting to wonder if he'd be better at singing too. Is he related to Keanu Reeves at all? It's just that he didn't exactly sparkle in Rumor Has It ... but he was okay, it was that kind of role. Here, I'm just struck by how incredibly dull he is. I like Farmer as a character, he does his duty and is kinda handsome, even if his hair is unflattering, but at times, it's like watching paint dry.

When we also get lashings of music video clips of Whitney Houston, it feels more like an out-drawn advert for one of her albums, and it really feels like the film goes on for a lot longer than is called for.

I've probably only seen this film once, in the early-to-mid-1990s, and it didn't take long to start grasping who the bad guys were. It's always the weird-looking ones. Stalker dude? Looks like a weirdo. Killer dude? Has weird eyes. I thought the manager was going to be one too, simply based on his English accent, because we all know Brits are bad guys in Hollywood films. Faking a psycho stalker to increase publicity? Wouldn't be the first time. But oh, it was much simpler than that - why do some people look a bit weird? Because they are weird, obviously! Yes, I'm leaving out the "mastermind" here (not a weirdo), but I'd be surprised if you didn't work that one out yourself very quickly. Heck, even I did, and I'm normally shite at spotting the killer in mystery dramas. (Unless it's the formulaic NCIS: see "Chekhov's Gunman".)

This week, I've heard comments about The Bodyguard being mediocre, and I thought nah, they just don't like the idea of famous singer/actress falling for her bodyguard (and the other way around), but I agree. It's not a particularly good film. It's too long, too dull and Rachel was annoying to the point where I thought Farmer should just call it a day and let her get assassinated, as she's so hell-bent on not following his directions anyway. I liked Fletcher, up until the Boating Incident. Why do kids in films always have to do Stupid Shit for No Reason when they are Old Enough to Know Better?

Oh well. This film could have been a lot better, but alas, it was rather wooden and nothing short of an excuse for Whitney Houston to sell more albums. I'm not denying the fact that she was a beautiful and very talented woman with a fantastic singing voice ... I'm just saying The Bodyguard as a film isn't particularly good. Even the romance felt very meh, and that's why I wanted to watch it in the first place!

2 out of 5 security cameras.

The Gathering Storm by Robert Jordan and Brandon Sanderson (2009)

2012-02-16T09:16:00.003Z

Book review: The Wheel of Time #12: The Gathering Storm by Robert Jordan and Brandon Sanderson (Orbit, 2009)

Tarmon Gai'don, the Last Battle, looms. And mankind is not ready. Rand al'Thor struggles to unite a fractured network of kingdoms and alliances in preparation for the Last Battle, as his allies watch in terror the shadow that seems to be growing within the heart of the Dragon Reborn himself.

Egwene al'Vere is a captive of the White Tower and subject to the whims of their tyrannical leader. She works to hold together the disparate factions of Aes Sedai, as the days tick toward the Seanchan attack she knows is imminent. Her fight will prove the mettle of the Aes Sedai, and her conflict will decide the future of the White Tower - and possibly the world itself.

The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass. What was, what will be, and what is, may yet fall under the Shadow . . .

When Robert Jordan passed away in September 2007, I, like a lot of Wheel of Time fans, was very sad for his family and friends, but also left feeling disappointed. One of my favourite series of books, so close to the end, and now we'd never find out the ending! Some time later, Brandon Sanderson, author of the Mistborn trilogy, was approached by Jordan's wife Harriet and asked if he wanted to finish the fantasy epic, based on notes and recordings made by Jordan before his death. Sanderson, a WoT fan himself, agreed - this is the result.

I bought it as soon as it came out, but the Squeeze read it first, and for a long time it was left untouched. Then I started reading, maybe the first four chapters, and then left it for the better part of a year before I decided it was time to get crackin' over Christmas and New Year's. And then I couldn't put the bloody thing down!

No, really.

As far as the story goes, we're used to the books going something like "nothing really major happens" for about 80% of the book, and then WHAMM! The last 20% is explosive. Well, not so! Stuff happens in this one, and it happens a lot. I won't go into detail much, because that would be too full of exciting spoilers, but surmise it to say that shit goes off with Rand in a big way, Mat ... okay, he's still heading toward the Tower of Genji, Perrin ... saved Faile in the previous book, now he's just brooding about being a leader, Aviendha is still being punished by the Wise Ones, Elayne doesn't feature at all, Gawyn pops up and Galad doesn't, Egwene tries to sort the White Tower out from the inside still (stuff really happens to progress this plot, though; don't worry), and Tuon is a bitch. Oh, you knew that already? Well, she gets worse, considerably worse. And what "Tuon" is short for made me giggle, it's so silly. (It's "Fortuona" ... I mean, really?)

I've heard people are generally satisfied with Sanderson's portrayals of the characters, although Mat seems to get the harshest criticism. I can understand this. He's always been a whiny git, but somehow, it's different now. Lovable Rogue is what he's normally like, and here, he's just ... I don't know, less lovable? He's still on the road with Thom and the others, and he starts by moaning about women a lot, and they don't really get to where they're going.

The biggest disappointment for me were the Perrin chapters. I love Perrin as a character, he's my kinda guy. It's just that his chapters don't really go anywhere. One could definitely be summed up as him brooding over having saved Faile, "and now what?" with lots of angst about being a leader of a bunch of people when all he really wants is to hide away in a smithy like a good Two Rivers lad. I know you're prone to brooding, Perrin, but come on! Faile gets one little chapter as well, which I suppose is meant as closure or something about her time as a Shaido captive, but other than that, nothing really happens. Oh well.

Nyneave, Min and Cadsuane are still trying to figure Rand out, and what happens to him ... may we live in interesting times, shall we say? Just ... wow. It has some interesting implications to how the Final Battle might have to be fought, at least if my theories are anything to go by. If only I didn't have course books to try keeping up with every week until June, or I'd be all over book #13 like a rash!

Everyone who reads the Wheel of Time books will have their own favourite parts, and I don't mean favourite characters to read about, but favourite ... settings. I like Aviendha, for instance, but I also like anything else about the Aiel, even if the chapter doesn't focus on her. For me, it's anything about the White Tower, and we get both sides - Egwene inside the actual Tower, and Siuan with the rebel Aes Sedai. So many interesting things happened that every time a chapter ended and it switched to focus on another character, I felt like saying, "heeey! I was reading that!" only to approach the next Aes Sedai-based chapter with an excited, "oh yay, we're back!"

What about Sanderson writing instead of Jordan? Most of the time, I didn't really notice. In the beginning, which is probably why I struggled getting into it, I was too aware that the book had not been written by Jordan's hand only, but once I got going, that faded away and I got sucked into the story instead. Well done, Sanderson! You made me forget everything except what was happening to the characters. :D

It was meant to be just the one book to finish everything off, but the story couldn't be contained in just one novel, so instead, it's been split into three. I believe a lot of people went, "oh FFS!" when they heard that, but I think it's brilliant. Yes, it might mean that we get Perrin brooding and doing sod all else for three or four chapters, but it also means that things aren't rushed. There's no "let's just get this over with!" feeling, but one of "let's finish this properly and in style, the way Jordan would have wanted", and I like that. Also, this book is massive, the next one's just as big, and the final one is meant to be even bigger. This is good. The whole attraction with this world is that it's so incredibly detailed and immersive, and to shorten it to "and then Rand saves the world, like the prophecies said he would" wouldn't be right, and it wouldn't be half as much fun to read.

Anyway, I loved The Gathering Storm, I'm itching to start Towers of Midnight and can't wait for A Memory of Light - due out later this year at some point - even though the Squeeze might get to read it before I do (he read #13 pretty much as soon as it arrived in November 2010). This is epic fantasy at its very best. While I know some people are reading the books now just out of a sense of obligation ("well, I've read all the others, so I might as well") and nostalgia ("these books meant so much to me ten years ago"), I'm not one of them. I still genuinely love this world and its inhabitants, and I'm both waiting for and dreading Tarmon Gai'don and what will happen on the final stretch before we get there.

Meanwhile, I might just decide to read the two roleplaying books the Squeeze once got me (signed by Robert Jordan - squeee!!) and see if I can convince my roleplaying group we should run it in the future.

4.9 out of 5 Oath Rods, and if you spoil Towers of Midnight in the comments, I'm-a balefire yo ass, are we clear?

P.S. Isn't it just "burn me", not "burn me, but"? That annoyed the crap out of me throughout.

Hellboy 2: The Golden Army (2008)

2012-02-15T09:05:00.000Z

Film review: Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008), directed by Guillermo del Toro

In the 1950s, Professor Broom (John Hurt) reads young Hellboy a story about the Elven King (Roy Dotrice) and how the Faerie Realm fought the humans in days long gone. The King's son wanted a Golden Army to be created, to win over the humans, and the King agreed.

However, the Golden Army was so devastating that a truce was called. The humans would dwell in cities and the Faerie folk in the woods. The crown that controlled the army was split into three parts: two for the Elves, one for the humans. The Prince went into exile, swearing he'd be back when his people need him the most.

Modern day America, and the piece of the crown is up for auction, but Prince Nuada (Luke Goss) interrupts the auction and takes what is rightfully his. Because of the supernatural creatures he's left to wreak havoc, Hellboy (Ron Perlman) and his team are called in to deal with it. However, Hellboy is tired of the boss (Jeffrey Tambor) always telling him what to do, and decides to make a public appearance that really can't be explained away.

To control him, a highly skilled operative, Johann Krauss (voiced by Family Guy's Seth MacFarlane) is called in. Not that the son of the Devil and the ectoplasmic entity get along very well ... which is also what you could say about Hellboy and Liz (Selma Blair), who are now a couple. It's not easy being in a relationship ...

Following a lead, ending up in the Troll Market, Abe Sapien (Doug Jones) encounters the Prince's twin sister Nuala (Anna Walton), who has the third piece of the crown and is trying to keep it away from her brother. Will Hellboy's team be able to keep the vengeful Prince Nuada from awakening the devastating Golden Army and destroy the humans?

After the initial fairytale to young Hellboy, we're transported to somewhere underground, modern day, where a long-haired bloke with impressive abs is practicing his moves. If this is pretty much the opening scene, no wonder it draws fangirls.

And fan art. Lots and lots of fan art.
(This one's by JustineArt, whose skill is amazing!)

When we saw this film at the cinema back in the day, it made me realise why one of my roleplaying characters fancies the crap out of someone else. I seriously hadn't thought about his body being a big part of the attraction! So yeah, there's eyecandy here. If we also bring big, hunky Hellboy into the mix, not as if he's immune to being shirtless either (and at one point, he's in the shower) ... woah, there's some Estrogene Brigade Bait right there.

If you then take into account that Nuada isn't so much a villain but an anti-villain, it's no wonder the guy has such a devout following. That's the thing, first time I saw it, I couldn't help but feel a slight "hah!" at a certain event, because my sympathies were fully on the side with the renegade Prince. Second time around, I did notice the baddie tendencies more, but the fact still stands - Nuada isn't evil. He percieves a very real threat to the lives of his people and he won't just sit idly by and wait for humans to wipe out all the Fae and destroying their habitat. I'm totally with him on that. Humans are an incredibly destructive species, and it's a wonder we've made it this far.

So aside from fangirling characters and thinking the make-up and scenography is amazing, I really enjoyed the Troll Market. We played a Goblin Market in our Changeling game some weeks ago, so to see what one of those actually looked like was great fun. If I had seen the film before we played that, I think I would've done a bit more with it. But never mind.

The story is good, although now, I wasn't very convinced by the Abe/Nuala pairing, and Liz/Hellboy annoyed me a bit, but it got better. Manning needs to lighten the fuck up, and Krauss with his superbly haughty matter-of-fact voice ... guh. Aside from that, The Golden Army is a very enjoyable film, and there are so many things set up for a third film, but that probably won't happen. I have my fingers crossed for a prequel set in Bethmoora instead. Then maybe we'll find out what Nuada really meant with his "Father always tried so hard to shield your heart from mine" ...

4.6 out of 5 toothfairies.

Time Bandits (1981)

2012-02-14T08:38:00.000Z

Film review: Time Bandits (1981), directed by Terry Gilliam

Kevin (Craig Warnock) is a boy living with his parents somewhere in suburban Britain. One evening, a knight bursts in through his wardrobe ... and then mysteriously disappear, as if it never happened. Next time, Kevin is ready ... only to find a group of dwarves (David Rappaport, Kenny Baker, Malcolm Dixon, Mike Edmonds, Jack Purvis, Tiny Ross) bursting in on him instead. They claim to be robbers and have stolen a map of time holes from the Supreme Being.

The Supreme Being is not very happy about this, and chases them through a time hole. Kevin has ended up coming with them, and finds himself stealing from the rich: Napoleon (Ian Holm), and giving to the poor: Robin Hood (John Cleese). All the while, trying to outrun the Supreme Being.

At one point, they get separated, with Kevin ending up at the court of King Agamemnon (Sean Connery), where he wants to stay. The robbers have another idea, though. Meanwhile, an Evil Genius (David Warner) wants to break free from his dark fortress and take over the world, and that map would certainly be helpful ...

Also starring Ralph Richardson as the Supreme Being (when he's finally seen in the flesh), Michael Palin (who co-wrote the film with Terry Gilliam) as Vincent, Shelley Duvall as Pansy, Jim Broadbent as a Compere and Peter Vaughan and Katherine Helmond as the ogre couple.

It seems this film is set to be re-made in 2015, from what I can gather. We'll see how that goes. Aside from the dated special effects, there's really not much else to improve. I mean, how can you possibly hope to improve John Cleese's brilliant Robin Hood portrayal? It's more akin to a royal who has no clue about the world whatsoever, and I found it very amusing. Ditto Michael Palin.

This is a kids' fantasy adventure film, and it's coherent, funny - in a sort of not hysterically funny but still quite amusing type way - and quirky. It's everything Brazil wants to be but isn't, and it's a much better watch because of it. There was no need to yawn and look at the clock here at all.

What I didn't like about it was Kevin as a character. The young actor was fine, even though his lines were a bit ... well, repetitive. Just that he shows up in ancient Greece, takes a shine to the king, who takes a shine to him, and decides just like that that actually yeah, he'll stay there and become the adopted prince. "Won't you miss you friends?" the king asks. "Nah," says the boy. Err, okay, well, I suppose he could make new ones; he's young after all. But what about his actual parents? "Whatever." Eh? That's not right. Sure, they weren't model parents by any stretch of the imagination, but they weren't exactly the Dursleys either! Not to mention the very end of the film, which was beyond belief. No, that was a bit creepy.

Other than that, a fun little adventure film with some of that Pythonesque bizarreness to it. Fun to see Kenny Baker outside of the R2D2 getup, and I really liked the banter amongst the dwarves. Napoleon was a lot of fun too, and okay, I can see the appeal in having a kind and just Sean Connery as a dad. The explanation of what the dwarves were before they were robbers was ... interesting, shall we say? Time Bandits is an imaginative twist on the age-old tale of God and Satan. Who'd a-thought it?

3.75 out of 5 time holes.

The Hitcher (2007)

2012-02-13T08:27:00.001Z

Film review: The Hitcher (2007), directed by Dave Meyers

This film in a sentence: College kids on road trip pick up psychotic hitchhiker who tries to kill them. Eyecandy (and yucky gore) awaits!

Jim (Zachary Knighton) picks up Grace (Sophia Bush) to go visit her parents in New Mexico. It's a very long drive, but everything seems to be going well. Then there's a dark and stormy night and they almost hit a guy standing in the middle of the road by his car. Instead of getting out to talk with him, they get scared and drive off.

At the next petrol station, where they've conveniently stopped, the man in the middle of the road turns out to be Sean Bean, who calls himself John Ryder, and asks for a lift to the nearest motel. Oh if only Jim hadn't agreed to it ... because in the car, Ryder turns out to be a creepy killer who wants to, well, kill them. They manage to kick him out of the car and drive off in the night.

And then a dangerous game of cat and mouse begins, because Ryder is not satisfied with Grace and Jim still being alive, so he chases after them, leaving a trail of dead bodies behind him, which eventually leads to Lieutenant Esteridge (Neal McDonough) with the state police to join in. And of course, the police suspect the two college kids for the murders.

This is apparently a remake of a film starring Rutger Hauer. I've not seen it, nor do I wish to, so judgement is based on this film alone. And having said that, I wasn't really taken with this film. There were gorgeous landscape shots, gorgeous actors, and ... that's about it.

The plot felt contrived and often ridiculous. Like driving up to a diner with a dead family in the car, the father is still alive (barely), and they run in to get ... paper towels from the bathroom. Surely you'd run in shouting "HEEEELP!! WE NEED AN AMBULANCE STAT!!" rather than "Excuse me, please, could you point me in the direction of the lavatory facilities? I wish to get some paper towels. Over there, is it? Why, thank you ever so much, you are very kind." Ever heard of the Golden Hour, dumbass?

Things like that, all the time, they add up. Although, as the opening credits didn't just promise Sean Bean (kinda why I recorded it), but also Neal McDonough, I was sitting tight waiting. Not disappointed in the eyecandy department. McDonough as the police who instantly has a hunch about "there's no way two college kids could've done this" and then he's like some knight in shining armour. A girl could get ideas, man.

Of course, Bean is considerably less Boromir or Ned Stark and more ... Chucky. Which is less nice to feast your eyes on. He might be handsome, but he's deadly and he wants to slit your throat. Yeah, no, doesn't work for me. Played creepy-as-hell rather well, though.

The two lead actors were okay, but I didn't like their characters very much. I mean, come on, "I'm just popping out for ten while you're in the shower and as I don't have a key, I'll leave the door unlocked". If you had had any sense, you would've left the shower at the same time, gone and bloody locked the door behind him, and then resumed the shower. You know, reasonable self-preserving behaviour when you're being hunted by A PSYCHO KILLER.

If you like your men handsome and/or a pretty girl carrying a gun (it gets bigger by the end of the film), fair enough. Plot-wise, more of a yawn. I found myself googling images of Dr. Horrible on my phone for a bit, and updating apps - and installing the super-slow GetGlue app (it's like the Facebook app, so slow to respond to clicks it would be quicker to boot up a computer and visit the site itself). And when my mobile is more fascinating than the film, it's not a great film.

1.8 out of 5 broken mobile phones.

Time for tea?

2012-02-12T08:53:00.000Z

Epic tea time with Alan Rickman. (Thanks Leffe! :D)

Prince Nuada film? Aww, HELL YEAH!!

2012-02-11T08:32:00.000Z

Came across a site where you can watch a trailer for a film the Hellboy fandom thinks should be made. I'm not exactly in the Hellboy fandom, but the best thing about Hellboy II: The Golden Army was Prince Nuada (Luke Goss). I agree with the site's creators slash makers of the impressive trailer that there is a lot more that can be said about that character. Like his (and his twin sister's) entire backstory, squeee! That would be MADE. OF. AWESOME! :D

So go check out the trailer and sign the petition and cross fingers that this film will be made. Director Guillermo del Toro is aware of the petition, and sounds like he'd want to make it, if the studio funds it. According to the site, Luke Goss is also positive to play the guy again. (Fans, feel free to squee as appropriate.)

Tropic Thunder (2008)

2012-02-10T08:30:00.000Z

Film review: Tropic Thunder (2008), directed by Ben Stiller

We didn't know a lot about this film when it first came out, but for some reason, we ended up seeing it at the cinema ... and bought it on Blu-Ray pretty much as soon as it came out. "Yeah, so?" you might say, but we generally just buy DVDs, and only when they've come down in price, so we're talking special treatment here. Basically because we nearly wet ourselves laughing in the cinema ...

One of the best things about Tropic Thunder is the very beginning. Starting with an ad for a soft drink and an energy bar, we're introduced to hip hop star Alpa Chino (Brandon T Jackson). Then we get trailers for three very different films: The Fatties: Fart 2 introduces Jeff Portnoy (Jack Black), a chubby comedian acting in low-brow comedies based on fart gags, essentially. Then there's action hero Tugg Speedman (Ben Stiller) with his dwindling Scorcher franchise - the 7th film even comes with the tagline "this time it's different". Third and final trailer, Satan's Alley, features the critically acclaimed method actor Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr) in a period drama about two monks with a Big Secret.

We then cut to a film set, where a Vietnam movie is being filmed in all its gory detail, starring aforementioned characters. It's not going well, and when special effects guy Cody (Danny McBride) blows up half the jungle, things go from bad to worse. Director Damien Cockburn (Steve Coogan) is told to shape up or ship out by studio boss Les Grossman (Tom Cruise in a fat suit, which is funnier than it sounds) and his assistant (Bill Hader).

After getting an idea from Four Leaf Tayback (Nick Nolte), the author of the book on which the film is meant to be based, Cockburn decides to shoot the film guerilla style: drop the actors off in the jungle and film them in secret, as they sort of LARP the film. It's going to be the best movie ever!

However, with French land mines around ... they're left to their own devices. The only one of the cast that actually attended boot camp is rookie actor Kevin Sandusky (Jay Baruchel), who is also the only one to have read the book ... not to mention the script. And there they are, stranded in the jungle: a coke addict going through withdrawal, a white character actor from Australia who has undergone a surgical procedure to make his skin black so he can play a black character - much to the chagrin of the genuine African American of the group - and then there's the failing diva whose manager (Matthew McConaughey) can't even get him TiVo.

Not only are they stranded, they also get lost, and stumble into the Golden Triangle, and the Flaming Dragons (headed by young Brandon Soo Hoo, with Reggie Lee and Trieu Tran as officers) ... and shit just got real.

With cameos by people like Tobey Maguire, Tyra Banks, Christine Taylor, Jon Voight, Jennifer Love Hewitt, Jason Bateman, Lance Bass and Alicia Silverstone.

One of the great joys of Animaniacs was not just that it was funny for both young and old, but that it poked endless fun at Hollywood. Tropic Thunder does this mercilessly, which has meant it's been criticised a lot because of a number of controversial topics. "It portrays black people as stereotypes!" is one criticism, "it makes fun of the mentally disabled!" another. Those groups of people saying that don't get the point of the film.

The stereotyping of black people is something that Lazarus and Alpa Chino come to blows over a number of times (hilarity ensues), because Lazarus is a white man acting a black stereotype, and Alpa Chino, actually black, rightly takes offense. Like he says at one point: "they had one good role for a black man, and they gave it to Crocodile Dundee"). If anything, it rather points at how racist Hollywood is. Give a starring role to a black man? Perish the thought!

With mentally disabled, while we're meant to laugh at "Simple Jack", we're laughing because Speedman's performance is so ludicrously over-the-top, and the point is that some actors will take just about any role, no matter how ridiculous, just to prove to others that they can do drama and be "proper actors" too.

Then again, to enjoy this film, you really need to be equipped with a fairly dark sense of humour anyway, and be able to laugh at things that others will consider "no laughing matter" (as specified above). If Frankie Boyle has you in stitches, nothing in Tropic Thunder could possibly offend you.

It's also a seriously quotable film. One of us can't use the phrase "you people" without the other one immediately responding "What do you mean, 'you people'?!" and so on. It's a very long list of things the Squeeze and I are likely to spontaneously say to each other, to be honest. Plenty of one-liners. Yeah, you get crude words, but it's managable.

Two actors you might not instantly recognise are Robert Downey Jr and Tom Cruise. The former is blacked up and wears a wig and looks very unlike his usual self. Tom Cruise is in a fat suit, and while the character Les Grossman is quite funny here, because he's only a bit part character and not on screen a lot, it works. There has been talk of a Les Grossman movie, which I think would be a mistake. A bit here and there, funny. An hour and a half of "hobo's dick cheese" is going to sink like a stone.

When we told a couple of friends about this film, they looked at each other and went "Ben Stiller? We don't like him." Our response? "We're not crazy about him either, but THIS SHIT'S REALLY FUNNY!" Because it is. There are few films that have made us laugh as hard as this one, even on re-watches.

Having seen it twice in about a week, yeah, it's not outstanding as movies go, but it is still a very funny film that takes everything about Hollywood - the film industry, managers, studio bosses, directors, special effects and of course actors of all kinds ... and artists wanting to break into film - and rips it a new one. If you like that sort of thing, odds are, Tropic Thunder is a film you'll enjoy. If not, you're probably going to hate it, in which case, I'd probably recommend staying clear of it.

Still, one of my favourites. 5 out of 5 jelly beans.

Zombies Ate My Muslim by Ted Mahsun (2011)

2012-02-09T08:53:00.000Z

Short story review: Zombies Ate My Muslim by Ted Mahsun (Amazon Kindle, 2011)

All he wants is to have a simple life.

And that simple life he wants to spend with his celebrity girlfriend, Barbra Streisand. But unbeknownst to him, his darling Barbra has become a Muslim... which isn't a bad thing. Except for the rampaging zombie horde outside his front door who only want to eat Muslims.

Between the Muslim-hungry zombies and the Google Robots that want to steal his Brussels Sprouts, can he save the woman he loves before she gets eaten? Will things ever be simple for him?

WARNING! Parental Advisory: This short story contains content not suitable for minors.

Ah yes, it does say "short story". Fancy that. It's only 128 locations, for those of a Kindle persuasion, which mean that after having read a delightfully quirky description, thinking "what the ...?! LOL!" at the title, read a raving review saying it was HILARIOUS, I was thinking "this I have got to read!" Paid £0.77 ($0.99 I think) for it, downloaded it, opened, and went "wait, I thought this was a novel ... it's only 128 locations! *sadface*"

So yeah. If it had been every bit as fantastically awesome as the review I read made it sound, I probably would've said "okay it's short, but y'know, still worth it". HEY YOU CAN NEVER GUESS WHAT!!

I didn't think it was fantastically awesome. It's about the narrator having a sexy girlfriend (Barbra Streisand) that he enjoys screwing - insert some crude descriptions of how he wishes to explore parts of her anatomy with a part of his - and how she went and decided to become Muslim. No reason. He finds this out when there are zombies at the door, because in this world, there are Muslim-chasing zombies.

Man and Streisand get attacked by Muslim-chasing zombies while there are robots that like to dig up the man's brussel sprouts. Basically, the description, but in a lot more words. The bizarre concept sounded a lot funnier than it actually was. I appreciated the screwball alternative world thing, where an attempt at national security spawned zombies, but the short story itself is a bit ... well, only absurd for the sake of being absurd.

Even if the title is eyecatching and the premise funny, it just falls short. If you have a particular fondness of zombies, there's a bit of gore for you. If you're not particularly a zombie fan, you're probably wondering if Barbra Streisand's people should be notified of her name being used "in vain" so to speak. Did like the "so disappointed" comments, it was very suitable and fitted the otherwise chatty tone.

Didn't work for me and it was too short. 1.9 out of 5 Googlebots.

Rumor Has It... (2005)

2012-02-08T08:38:00.000Z

Film review: Rumor Has It... (2005), directed by Rob Reiner

In the early 1960s, a book called The Graduate was published. Rumour around Pasadena said it was based on a true story, about a scandal in a local family, but no one knew which one. Then there was the film, and so the story has been forever immortalised.

In the mid-Noughties, Sarah Huttinger (Jennifer Aniston) and her fiancé Jeff (Mark Ruffalo) are on a plane back home to Pasadena. Her sister Annie (Mena Suvari) is getting married. Under the pretense that she doesn't want to steal her sister's thunder, Sarah won't wear the engagement ring, or even announce the engagement to the family in private. Truth be told, she's just not sure Jeff is the one.

When she gets to her family, because of an off-handed comment by Jeff, Sarah starts to question her parentage. Didn't her mother run away to Mexico with some guy the week before she got married to her father (Richard Jenkins)? As it turns out, her eccentric grandmother (Shirley MacLaine) is actually the person inspiring the "Mrs. Robinson" of The Graduate. Does that mean Sarah's real father isn't the man she's always known as her dad?

She has to find out the truth, and tracks the guy down. Beau Burroughs (Kevin Costner) is a well-off businessman these days, with a private jet and everything, and what follows is a story that raises a question which is fairly unique when it comes to RomComs: "OMG, is she going to shag her DAD?! o.O"

That's actually what makes the film memorable, to be honest. I would never have expected a RomCom to raise feelings of squick. The idea of potentially shagging your dad, even if he is a darn handsome Kevin Costner ... eww? Well, I won't go into details, but of course it turns out not to be squicky. In fact, rather romantic.

And then it has to go and be ruined by a more realistic and sort of moralising ending. Blegh. They're doing escapism wrong! Even if Mark Ruffalo is even more handsome than Kevin Costner!

If you're familiar with The Graduate, perhaps you would appreciate this film on more levels. My knowledge of it is basically a young Dustin Hoffman saying "Mrs. Robinson, are you trying to seduce me?" to Anne Bancroft. (Even though I think I might have it on DVD. Needs investigating.) So for me, I can just giggle at the general idea of The Graduate having been based on the Huttingers. The Pasadena jokes probably works best if you're familiar with the area. (I just know of Slappy Squirrel, heh.)

So yeah, it's romantic, it's nice - if squicky at times - and it has some funny moments but it's not quite escapist enough, even though I suppose the escapist route would have been the obvious ending, and they didn't want to go with that. Bonus points for Kathy Bates, though. I love her and got all excited when I saw her appear on screen, even in those hideous clothes. Brilliant actress, and very funny she is too.

3 out of 5 private jets.

Happy birthday, "greatest composer since ever"

2012-02-07T09:53:00.002Z

Thought I'd wish the man a happy birthday, basically because I woke up this morning, saw it was 7 February and my first thought was not "in 2005, I started working in a callcentre - in 2007, I had a breakdown because I was still working there, and handed in my resignation two days later". My first thought was "7 February? That means something. OHH, I remember now! It's Dieter Bohlen's birthday!"

So here ya go, big guy. Happy 58th birthday, Dieter! Biggest composer "since ever" in Germany. :)

[Source: Weidungs Welt! and what a blast from the past that is. ♥]

The Cat and the Canary (1978)

2012-02-07T08:56:00.002Z

Film review: The Cat and the Canary (1978), directed by Radley Metzger

Based on a play by John Willard, The Cat and the Canary is a film in the style of the boardgame Cluedo, but with a more sinister twist. In 1914, an old man called Cyrus West (Wilfrid Hyde White) records a film of his last will and testament. This film is to be locked up for twenty years and then his relatives are meant to gather to hear who has inherited the big house and the fortune.

The will is safely locked away by his legal representative Allison Crosby (Wendy Hiller) and the housekeper, Mrs. Pleasant (Beatrix Lehmann). Twenty years pass, and on a dark and story night in 1934, the remaining relatives start to turn up, summoned by an invitation.

After dinner, it's revealed who the heir or heiress is, and how that person will only inherit everything if he or she can stay the night and be of sound mind (there is insanity running in the family). If not, everything will pass to the person next in line ...

When Hendricks (Edward Fox), a doctor from a nearby lunatic asylym, shows up to tell them there's a madman broke loose, believing himself to be a cat and will attack and shred people to pieces, the mood isn't exactly lightened. Especially as people start to disappear and then turn up dead ...

The potential inheritees are Honor Blackman as Susan Sillsby, Michael Callan as Paul Jones, Olivia Hussey as Cicily Young, Carol Lynley as Annabelle West, Daniel Massey as Harry Blythe and Peter McEnery as Charlie Wilder.

This was described as a mystery/crime comedy, so I think I expected something more akin to Clue, as in, a parody of exactly these types of films. But that's not what it is. It's this type of film, just that it has some lighthearted moments, which is different.

People going missing, killers hiding in hidden passageways, and people re-appearing dead ... a dark and stormy night ... an old, disused mansion and a group of people summoned for a common purpose ... you've seen it all before, many times. This is the stuff that made Agatha Christie's career, let's not forget.

However, to think you know exactly what's going to happen because you're familiar with Christie et al, not quite so! Okay, there was one thing that was a fairly obvious lie, realistically, but I still found the outcome not just a lot darker than expected - it is, technically, also a thriller - but also "okay, well, I didn't quite expect it to go that way."

Actor-wise I enjoyed the cast. Most of them were unknown to me (as far as I know, anyway), except for former Bond girl Honor Blackman, whom I associate more with the grandmother in The Upper Hand than James Bond; and the stunningly beautiful Olivia Hussey - Rebecca in the only version of Ivanhoe I've seen (the 1982 one with Sam Neill, go fig). She seems to have been fairly big in the 1970s and early 1980s but appears to have kept a low profile since, doing mainly voice acting. Still a remarkably beautiful woman to this day, and I hope we get to see her on screen again, even though she always seems sort of quiet and unassuming.

All in all, The Cat and the Canary is an okay film, but it also feels like you're always waiting for something to happen, which it then doesn't, or happens too late. The characters themselves weren't particularly interesting, as you never really got to grips with either of them, as they're too busy trying to not get murdered. And really, who puts on a necklace that's spent the past twenty years in the freezer? You'd get frostbite!

2.8 out of 5 black cats.

Anna and the King (1999)

2012-02-06T08:20:00.000Z

Film review: Anna and the King (1999), directed by Andy Tennant

In the 1860s, a British widow, Anna Leonowens (Jodie Foster), and her son Louis (Tom Felton), come to Siam (Thailand) to teach the King's many children. Anna is completely unaware of Siamese customs, and this causes a lot of friction with her new employer and his family. Louis and Prine Chulalongkorn (Keith Chin) quickly come to blows, and the Prince is not used to having people tell him what to do, let alone a woman. A foreign woman at that!

King Mongkut (Chow Yun-Fat) is not a horrible man to begin with, but he's very set in his ways. Lucky for Anna, not enough set to not want to listen or to bring around some change. For Anna, the new life is frustrating, and being a Christian woman in a land where it's perfectly okay for a king to have twenty-odd wives just to ensure the throne ... it's very uncomfortable with her. Certain customs is so alien that she feels compelled to protest them. She might be a small woman, but if you think she's just some meek little governess, you're in for an almighty surprise!

So is the King, who finds himself falling for her. As for Anna, she's still grieving for her dead husband, but she starts to live again, slowly realising that she, too, has feelings for the handsome king ...

This is a fairly long film, but I couldn't stop watching it. There's something special about governesses falling in love with their employer - like Jane Eyre and Sound of Music - and this is based on a true story as well. Anna Leonowens was a real person, and the film is based on her diaries.

In fact, it probably has more in common with Sound of Music than Jane Eyre. Near the end, they actually end up getting chased - not by Nazis, but by people wanting the throne of Siam. They don't flee across the Alps to neutral Switzerland, and the "happily ever after" didn't work out quite the way I wanted it to, but at the same time, life normally has very little to do with fairytale endings.

One of the best things about it, aside from a very handsome Chow Yun-Fat, is little Tom Felton. One of the best child actors from Harry Potter, he has been in a few things before he became a household name playing Draco Malfoy. And he's good, really good, as Louis. I wish him a brilliant continued career. :)

As for the film, it's quite lovely. I really enjoyed Anna and her sometimes totally inappropriate westernisms, and the culture clashes it caused, and I liked the King's calm response to it all. It's sweet, sometimes a little Cinderella-like (without ugly stepsisters), and the landscape and architecture are both breathtaking. For a romantic story that isn't a romance, Anna and the King is great.

4 out of 5 white elephants.

Camelot - series 1 (2011)

2012-02-03T08:24:00.000Z

TV series review: Camelot, series 1 (2011)

Sometimes you look at a show and you think "well thank Gods for that" when you hear they've been cancelled after, or during, the first series. Others, you think "aww, they never even got a proper go at it". Camelot ... I'm undecided about.

We're in ancient Britain, where there's a sorceror called Merlin (Joseph Fiennes, one of many familiar faces), a king called Uther (Sebastian Koch, which made me want to jump up and down like a monkey yelling "OOOH OOOH OOOH!!" but I settled for the more dignified, "Oh I wonder ... *IMDb app* oh, so it is") who has a beautiful wife called Igraine (Claire Forlani) ... and a beautiful but evil sorceress daughter called Morgan (Eva Green). Morgan is not a fan of Uther, and sneaks poison into his food. Daddy dies, but Morgan doesn't get the throne, because she also has a half-brother nicely tucked away at a farm. Arthur.

Arthur (Jamie Campbell Bower) lives with his adoptive brother Kay (Peter Mooney) and adoptive father Ector (Sean Pertwee, and yes, more familiar faces still to come!), believing them to be his real family, until he's whisked away by Merlin to go be King of the Britons. This was not on young Arthur's agenda for the day, shall we say.

The boy king - okay, well, he looks barely out of his teens - comes to the ruins of a place called Camelot and has to try to build up his kingdom, and fulfil a few prophecies along the way, aided by the scheming Merlin. And, also has to deal with his half-sister wanting to be the One Queen to Rule Them All.

When more characters are added, Arthur's life doesn't get any easier. There's [the handsome, manly, chivalrous and all around dreamboat] Leontes (Philip Winchester, haww), who is betrothed to the beautiful Guinevere (Tamsin Egerton), and gosh darnit, doesn't Arthur fancy the chemise off her? Good thing other handsome knights happen to come along, like the surly Gawain (Clive Standen - you might remember him as Archer Locksley/Gisborne in BBC's Robin Hood).

Meanwhile, in Evil Corner, Morgan is joined by Sybil (Sinéad Cusack, and yes, I did pretty much squee at this point), a nun from the convent where Morgan spent her formative years. Yeah, Morgan learned her magix by nuns, yo, that's pretty badass.

And in the evil corner ... Evil Genius, Evil Wannabe and Evil Sidekick!

Sybil's manipulative scheming makes Merlin's look lame by comparison. Actually, she puts people like Darken Rahl and Salazar Slytherin to shame. And all the while, she looks like such a nice old lady in that habit. Little do people know!! (Who would harm an innocent nun? The nun herself, of course, paying someone to beat her up!) Probably my favourite character, all told.

Also: Daragh O'Malley as Leodegrance and James Purefoy as King Lot. I could probably go on. Camelot was delightfully choc-a-bloc with familiar faces, most of them very easy to rest your eyes on as well.

Sooooooooo ... am I sounding pretty positive so far? Good. I actually liked this version of the Arthurian legends. Well, sort of. Unlike BBC's Merlin, where I looked sceptical after five minutes, cried "WHAT?! NOOOO!" after about ten, and yet another five minutes later, I finally walked over to the DVD shelf, snatched down Merlin (1998, the one with Sam Neill), curled up in a corner of the sofa, clutching said DVD to my chest, wheezing "my preciousssss" at life in general. BBC's Merlin I cannot abide. If they had done the decent thing, they would've renamed the characters to something less Arthurian and then it would just have been a shoddy fantasy bromance series, but no, they had to use Arthurian legend names and totally ignore the tradition. It's even worse than Robin Hood! (Yeah, there, I said it. :P The only reason to watch that show was, and still is, Guy of Gisborne. Don't get me started on Robin and Marian!)

I'm not even an Arthurian snob - I have seen and read way too little for that, but at least the stuff I've seen before (and after) have had some resemblance to a common purpose. Which is why I enjoyed Camelot. It still takes the legends and changes things around a whole lot, but in an interesting kind of way. Like how Merlin got the sword, and why it was named Excalibur ... and drawing the sword from the stone. That wasn't a "they did WHAT?!" but rather an "oh I see, that's quite clever, actually".

"Hi, I'm the King."
"You don't look much like a king."
"Look, I started growing this beard five years ago and I've finally achieved fluff!"
"Good for you. My husband can still kick your ass, though."

The biggest thing that confused me was Guinevere. According to tradition, she marries Arthur and has an affair with Lancelot. In this, she marries Leontes and has an affair with Arthur. "So they swapped the two and called Lancelot Leontes", is what both the Squeeze and I thought, but as the series went along, we're now thinking that's not strictly the case. See, I reckon that if they'd been allowed to continue the show, she would've eventually had the opportunity to marry Arthur, and then who would turn up? Lancelot. Meaning Guinevere was a two-timing hussy all along. I could see that being a plot development further down the line, but alas, we shall never know now.

Not that I could quite understand what she saw in Arthur. If I was presented with a free choice of Arthur or Leontes as a hubby, I wouldn't have picked the king, tell ya that much. I'd be too scared he'd break if I hugged him, whereas Leontes ...

Yum! ... Sorry, where was I?

I rest my case. No, I really don't care for Arthur at all, he's too weak a character (or too weak an actor?) to be the lead, even if he's supposed to be like a fish out of water.

And then there's Merlin. Brooding McBroodypants, whose brooding face has a tendency to become comical at inopportune times. "Lookit my ANGST!" "Hey, Merl, you're pulling that face again, LOL!" Still, I like the character. I like several of the characters. I even have a bit of sympathy to spare for Morgan at times. Very little, admittedly, but still. You can't doubt her being evil, because she keeps doing stuff that screams, "LOOKIT ME BEING EVIL! MWAHAHAHA!!" More like a charicature than anything else, realistically.

One of the funniest things about the show was that it was made for American cable TV, meaning every ten or so minutes, there had to be gratuitous nudity or shagging. One or the other. It became a bit of a sport for us to predict when people would get their kit off next, like "hmm, it's been ten minutes fully clothed, someone will get their kit off right about ... yeah, there we go." It got very silly very quickly. Sex being shoehorned in for sex's sake is not something I like, and in fact is one of the reasons I really dislike The Tudors and after Sam Neill left it, so did I. Gratuitous shagging, no thanks. If you can work it into the plot, that's one thing, but you don't have to be graphic about it. Except they do, lots. Ew. "Hi, I'm Guinevere. This is me in a wet chemise. No reason. My nipples just need to be showing at least once in every episode, it's in the contract. I should've asked for TiVo."

"I'm making that face again, aren't I? Well, I can only do two expressions.
It's either this or SUPERBROODY. Your choice. I'll overact either way."

So yeah, it's silly, it's not exactly brilliant, it's fairly predictable, and it's certainly clumsy with storytelling at times, and often borders on the ridiculous, but I still enjoyed it. Loved the costumes, loved playing "spot the actor you've seen before" and loved the general idea of it.

And now, having written this, am I sad that it's not renewed for a second series? Yes and no. I'm slightly disappointed about not getting any more episodes, but I'll live, you know? Also, considering what happened to some characters, who shall remain nameless, I'm not sure I would like the next series without them. It's a flawed show, but it was enjoyable, even if they did put too much emphasis on serving naked flesh at regular intervals.

3.4 out of 5 scrolls, just because I enjoyed it despite all the reasons why I shouldn't. Like killing off ~~that hunky German dude~~ Uther way too quickly.

Piccies from the Camelot Wiki on Wikia, except for the top one, which is from another page.

Spy - series 1 (2011)

2012-02-02T08:10:00.000Z

TV series review: Spy, series 1 (2011), directed by Ben Taylor, written by Simeon Goulden

One of the unexpected pleasures of 2011 was finding Sky1's new comedy series Spy. I caught it almost by accident one Friday afternoon as I had left the TV on (rare), on Sky1 (even rarer these days). Having seen a trailer or something for it before, I sat down to watch, and was hooked. Not just because "HEY IT'S MAT BAYNTON FROM HORRIBLE HISTORIES, YAY!" but because it was actually really funny.

Tim (Darren Boyd) is an ordinary, fairly boring, guy who enjoys Sudoku-puzzles and works in an electronics store with his probably only friend Chris (Mathew Baynton). He's bored and decides to quit to improve his life, because his ex-wife Judith (Dolly Wells) thinks he's a bit of a loser.

The local Jobcentre find him an interview for a job as a civil servant ... and because he's good with computers and puzzle-solving, he gets the job ... as an MI-5 agent. Surprise!! He gets to have a gun and everything! Tim the loser is suddenly pretty cool! ... If only he could actually talk about it. So at work, he's now in Her Majesty's Secret Service with a somewhat unhinged boss (Robert Lindsay), and a nice colleague, Caitlin (Rebekah Staton), whom he quite fancies.

At home, he has to deal with son Marcus (Jude Wright), who is far too smart for his own - and everyone else's - good, not to mention having to put up with cringeworthy counselling sessions with Marcus, Judith, and Judith's new partner Philip (Tom Goodman-Hill), who is headmaster of the school Marcus goes to, and is way too keen on man-hugs.

Doesn't sound so bad, right? No, it wouldn't be ... if it wasn't for the fact that Paula (Rosie Cavaliero), the councellor, psychologist, social worker or whatchamacallit, has developed a major crush on Tim and turned into a stalker.

When I say Marcus is smart, we're talking boy genius, on par with both Phineas and Ferb (only less keen on inventing things), although Family Guy's Stewie would be a better match verbally and ... well, in sheer evil-genius-taking-over-the-world-iness.

There are absurd parts, too many to mention, perhaps, but I like that. Lindsay is hilarious as the boss, Wright is great as the little mastermind, Goodman-Hill delightfully cooky and Baynton ... well, he's just brilliant full stop. Cavaliero makes me chuckle and Boyd ... marvellous. The whole show is a delight to watch, especially since parts of it are quite dark ... which in turn I love.

The good news is: Spy will return some time this year - Sky have ordered ten more episodes and a Christmas special. Can't wait, it's going to be brilliant. A surprising 4.7 out of 5 Sudoku-puzzles.

Thomas Anders - Strong (2010-2011)

2012-02-01T10:03:00.001Z

Music album review: Thomas Anders Strong (Oriflame, 2010 + Amazon MP3, 2011)

Why Do You Cry? (Strong Version) (03:44)

Stay With Me (04:01)

Make You (03:46)

Stop! (03:14)

You Will Be Mine (04:13)

Suddenly (03:34)

Music, Dance (03:30)

My Angel (03:40)

I'll Be Strong (03:46)

Clear Sign (03:48)

One More Chance (03:45)

I Wanna (03:03)

Sorry, Baby (03:31)

All You Need (03:20) (I Miss You (03:56) instead & final track on physical album)

Dynamite (03:03)

Right Here, Right Now (Century of Love) (03:11)

Love You A Lifetime (02:59)

The Best of Me (03:22)

After the second split of Modern Talking (2003), Thomas Anders had released two albums: the one I really liked, This Time (2003), and the one I can't even remember the title of without looking it up, Songs Forever (2006), because I never cared much for it anyway, being full of covers. So when a new album was announced, I was thrilled and couldn't wait for it to come out. It just never seemed to have a release date for a year or two, and then it came out in 2010 ... in Russia, because it's an album written and produced over there. Herr Anders is very big in Russia, bless him. :)

When would Strong be released in Germany so I could actually buy it? And so the waiting game continued ... Until I finally had the idea to look for it on eBay in August 2011 ... and not long after, it was released as a digital download on Amazon. With bonus tracks not on the disc I had only just received. Gah!!

The second thing that confused me, both in trying to order the physical album and putting together this review was the tracklisting. My edition, according to the back cover, is the Oriflame version:

Alongside the Premium/Basic Edition, a special edition of the "STRONG" album has also been released for the Swedish cosmetics group ORIFLAME. Thomas Anders is the advertising face of ORIFLAME for the year 2010. 100,000 copies of the version of STRONG exclusive to ORIFLAME customers have been sold. This version of the album contains an exclusive extra track entitled "I miss you". In the wake of the considerable success achieved by this special edition, Oriflame is considering a further pressing of another 100,000 albums. In 2010, Thomas Anders will exclusively present Oriflame’s new male perfume "Giordano - Dolce Vita" as well as promoting other products from the collection. For more information on the group, please visit www.oriflame.com

What's wrong with that? Nothing. Except according to Wikipedia, the Oriflame version is listed as having nine songs plus the bonus song. The original, or "Premium" version, has 14. So I had ordered the one I could find for a reasonable price on eBay didn't even have all the songs?! What the hell! Looking at the tracklisting, though, my album definitely says Oriflame on it and it has 14 tracks, just that track 14 is I Miss You and not Why Do You Cry? (Acoustic Piano Version). It also has the same cover as the "Premium" version Wikipedia lists. Well, I'm just glad to have 14 tracks instead of ten, so whatever you want to call it, that's fine by me!

My version also came with a little DVD containing a trailer for the album or the song or something like that, the video of Why Do You Cry? (shot in a club, how very original) and a five-minute Making Of documentary about the music video. This DVD disc, brief though it is, is still nice to have, and is not included in the MP3 album, so I guess it was worth getting both, especially since the MP3 album comes with five previously unreleased tracks (14-18 on the list above).

The important question, of course, is "well, is it any good?" Yes, yes it is. It's upbeat, but perhaps not quite as catchy as Two, where I could start singing along on the second listen, and a lot of the beats are the same: a similar sort of handclappy beat that quickly spoiled Hooked on Classics for me when I finally got it (could be down to me getting a compilation as opposed to the original albums, though).

There are a few ballads: Stop!, My Angel, I Miss You, and The Best of Me, and I've never been a fan of ballads - on the Modern Talking albums, they were skipped nine times out of ten ... but these aren't bad. I love singing the chorus of My Angel (the verses are a bit meh), and The Best of Me is probably one of the best tracks on the whole album. (Me saying that about a ballad is high praise indeed.)

If you can't abide songs like King of Love and Juliet, stay clear of Clear Sign. Yeah, I'm not crazy about that particular 70s disco kinda sound either.

Some of the best songs are, strangely, the previously unreleased ones. All You Need is about a star urging a non-famous partner to ignore what the papers say, because they just make stuff up. I'm perhaps not enamoured with the melody, but the lyrics kind of make it worthwhile. "Don't you listen to that shit they spin you". Yeah! Dynamite is a catchy dance song, and The Best of Me I've already mentioned.

Love You A Lifetime sounds SO MUCH like a Eurovision song. That it clocks in just under three minutes reinforces that impression. Perhaps they made it for that purpose and then thought better of it? Really, you can picture the stage and the background dancers. That being said, it's a nice pop song, but it does feel like something you've heard many times before.

My favourite is Right Here, Right Now (Century of Love). It's a perfect example of the sort of song that has me squealing with delight. It's light and bright, sprightly, positive, and has a simple, wonderful, catchy melody. Lyrics-wise ... well, c'mon, I'm a Modern Talking fan, for goodness sake! My standards in that department are pretty low. ;) But so what? Songs about love don't have to be great works of poetry, they're just there to put words to a melody. That being said, these are deeper than your average Modern Talking song anyway.

Because I had the album in the car on the way to work, I can still look at the tracklisting and not be sure which song is which, as I didn't have the tracklisting available to learn the titles that way. There's also the issue that the songs aren't necessarily named how you'd expect. Take The Best of Me as an example, where the chorus repeats "I'm mooooooving on" a number of times. Listening to it, I would expect it to be called I'm Moving On or something, but it's not. Suddenly could just as easily be called Shake Me, or Make Me Feel, or Something Unreal, or a number of other options. I'll Be Strong could be called just about anything, because the title isn't easily recognisable within the song.

And that's what I mean by not being as catchy as Two (the 2011 project with Uwe Fahrenkrog, it's like having Modern Talking back, only with more grammatically correct lyrics) - the lyrics aren't as simple and "what you see is what you get", which means it doesn't feel as strong as Two, where the songs are instantly recognisable, but Strong is still a good album, and it's been done very well. Not sure if I prefer Strong or This Time, but I definitely prefer Strong over Songs Forever.

If I may be so bold, I prefer this modern Thomas Anders solo to the 80s-90s solo projects. Those albums were good too, but they lacked the certain something Modern Talking had in the 80s. The modern Thomas Anders songs are closer to Modern Talking in style, which is why I suppose they appeal to me and probably a lot of others who wouldn't care about his previous solo projects. So his career with Modern Talking is perhaps both a blessing and a curse for Herr Anders.

Without it, he would not have the career he has today, let's be honest, but that he "has" to make songs similar to Modern Talking rather than anything else he'd like to do ... well, that's a shame, if he would like to do something radically different but feels he can't because people expect a certain style from him. If he's fine with what he's doing anyway, then that's peachy, keep it up. I'll be buying it regardless.

That being said, I hope he does more with Fahrenkrog because DANG, I loved that album. This is a good second to it, though. 4 out of 5 Russian producers.

Back to the Secret Garden (2001)

2012-01-31T08:38:00.000Z

Film review: Back to the Secret Garden (2001), directed by Michael Tuchner

This is the sort of thing Hallmark will come up with if you give them half a chance. Which obviously someone did. If that person was a Facebook friend of mine, I'd de-friend them, oh yes! But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

It's the 1940s or so, and Misslethwaite Manor is an orphanage. Martha Sowerby (Joan Plowright) is still around, as the manager or caretaker or what have you, while Lady Mary (Cherie Lunghi) and hubby Colin (Leigh Lawson) are somewhere in America doing something. I didn't particularly care what they were up to, to be honest.

In America, Lady Mary comes across orphan Lizzie Buscana (Camilla Belle), and sends her to Misslethwaite because she appears to have green fingers. At Misslethwaite (if you at any point feel like exclaiming "hey it's Downton Abbey!" you'd be right - they filmed it at Highclere Castle), Lizzie quickly finds the Secret Garden and tries to get it to live again because it seems to be dying. Martha has had the audacity to install a door, and not just the secret hidden door like before, yadda yadda.

Also starring: Aled Roberts as Robert, Florence Hoath as Geraldine (Kitty in Lost in Austen), Justin Girdler as Stephen, and David Warner as Dr. Snodgrass.

Back to the Secret Garden is a 2001 sequel to Hallmark's 1987 adaptation of The Secret Garden. This is important to point out, because if you're expecting Dickon, he died in World War I, and Mary and Colin have ended up marrying, because it's not like they're cousins or anything.

I loved Frances Hodgson Burnett's original novel. It was wonderful, charming, well-written and magical. This production lacks everything of that, and insults it by completely misunderstanding the point of book. The Secret Garden was not actually a magical garden with magical portals to access it - it was a long neglected, dormant garden which was found through synchronicity and which plenty of hard work turned it into a flourishing garden once again. Yes, it was magical, restorative place, but only in the same way a rose is magical to behold, and beauty restores the soul. In this fluffy clatrap, they make the garden out to actually have magic powers, where half-dead plants miraculously come to life and blossom in the blink of an eye, no work involved. It's not right.

That the main character is American wouldn't be a problem, if it didn't feel so bloody contrived. I imagine it like this:

"O hai, we're Americans doing this and we can't have y'all just be English people, so we're gonna take this sweet li'l Brooklyn girl and squeeze her into the story for no other reason than hey, we really ought to have an American in there, because how else can we possibly relate to all of that British stuff? Let's make sure she's constantly talking about coming from America and that people think she talks funny, because actually, it's the Brits who talk funny, so it'll be hilarious. And let's make sure she's like the only sane one."

At one point, it's gasp, you're a feisty girl from across the ocean, just like Lady Mary once was! Yeah, except Mary was a grumpy git who couldn't get on with anyone for a good long while, until Martha finally started to break through her stubbornness. Oh yes, and for that matter, good ol' Yorkshire Martha suddenly speaks with a very posh Queen's English. It just doesn't work.

As for Lady Mary and Colin being married (erm) and using Misslethwaite as an orphanage ... well, I'm not convinced. But anyway. This story could have had potential, but it just didn't work. The storyline - "boo hoo the garden's dying and I don't know what to do about it but darn those animals, who can suddenly get into a walled off garden for no reason, are cute!" - is silly and unengaging, the acting doesn't work, even though the kids to as good a job as they can, and Martha is nothing like I'd picture the grown-up Martha to be.

Everything about this is wrong, and it has very little to do with the wonderful novel on which it is meant to be a sequel. 1.8 out of 5 white roses.

Gearing up for FanstRAvaganza 2012

2012-01-30T16:21:00.001Z

Back in 2010, there was an idea for a fanblogging event, where the current Richard Armitage fanblogs would participate, highlighting Richard Armitage's work and/or his fans for a whole week, and this venture was named FanstRAvaganza. You might recall this:

Then, in 2011, it was decided that the FanstRAvaganza, having been a big success and plenty of fun for everyone involved, should return, and return it did. With more participants than the year before.
Remember this?

If you're new to the RA fandom and have never heard of FanstRAvaganza before (man, that's an awkward word to type!), or if you're hungry for another, and you wonder if there's going to be a third one ... why yes, yes there is. :)

FanstRAvaganza 3 will be held 12-18 March 2012, and if you like Mr. Armitage, you're gonna get your fill right here! :D I'm still doing my daily reviews, but all the ones that week will be of productions involving Richard Armitage ... and a few RAndom thoughts inspired by said productions. We'll see how it goes.

[Banner courtesy of BccMee]

This year, we're aiming high, and have got both a Twitter account (@FanstRAvaganza), the Twitter tag #FanstRA and a Facebook page (FanstRAvaganza) and everything. You really won't be able to miss it even if you try! (Okay, maybe if you don't touch a computer that week ...)

We're also doing something a bit different this year. Instead of having a bunch of blogs, we're splitting it into a) a group of anchor blogs that will have a daily(ish) update - this is one of them - and b) a tag chain for those who wish to participate but only want to do one post. It means one poster links to the next one in the chain, and so on, and it's going to be awesome.

Here are all the anchor blogs:

An RA Viewer’s Perspective from 33° 0′ South of the Equator (mulubinba)
bccmee’s Richard Armitage Fan Vids & Graphics (bccmee)
Confessions of a Watcher (judiang)
DistRActed musings of one ReAlity (Fanny)
me + richard armitage (Servetus)
RAFrenzy (RAFrenzy)
Richard Armitage & History & Spooks (CDoart)
Richard Armitage Fan Blog (Nat)
The Squeee (Traxy) - o hai, that's me! :)

We'll all be posting daily during the event, so stay tuned! :)

Do you blog or Tumblr about Richard Armitage and didn't get an invite? Give us a prod on Twitter or Facebook so we know you'd like to join in, or email blog (at) traxy.net and I'll pass the message on. If you're not blogging or don't Tumblr or perhaps you do but not about Richard Armitage, but would like to say a few words about him, my door's always open for guest posters. Again, blog (at) traxy.net would be a good way to get in touch for that. :)