Major Disappointment

For those who avoided my Disappointment post for it's warning of a spoiler, the crux was there is a major event in Philip Pullman's The Subtle Knife that was dealt with very poorly.

I've just read the following section of that chapter, only to find that it is, in fact, the end of the novel!

I'm all for a cliff-hanger ending, and there's no doubt that is exactly what Pullman was aiming for here, but he is so far of the mark I could weep. A cliff-hanger is supposed to make you think, Oh shit! What’s next? What’s next?!

My only thought at the end of The Subtle Knife is, That’s it?!

Don’t get me wrong, the events at the end of the novel should certainly add up to being a cliff-hanger, but they are down-played so much, it’s as if Pullman ran out of steam and decided to call it a day. Northern Lights/The Golden Compass has a brilliant ending, which not only rounds off the story perfectly, but leaves you gasping for more. In comparison, The Subtle Knife reads almost like a necessary evil that Pullman had to get through to bring up some plot-points and move the story on. It has its moments, but in the end I’m just grateful it’s only the middle of the story.

From Bad to Worse

Okay, it was understandable that the car chosen to represent KITT in the TV-Movie reboot of Knight Rider...



...was met with a frosty reception by the old-school fans, but what, in the name of all that is good and holy, possessed them to do this?!



I've more convincing vehicles on Power Rangers...

Disappointment

For those who haven’t read Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials trilogy, and at some point intend to, look away now. A major spoiler follows (as well as a long rant).

I’m currently reading The Subtle Knife, and while it so far isn’t a patch on Northern Lights/The Golden Compass, I am enjoying the story as a whole.

However, I’ve just read the scene where Will finally meets his father, only to see him die after all those years of searching, and it is one of the most shoddily written scenes I have ever read. After building up the meeting throughout the first half of the novel, it comes and goes in the blink of an eye and in the coldest and least emotional way possible.

Feeling desperate, tired and utterly alone, Will wanders up a mountain on his own. A deep darkness descends and he’s suddenly accosted by some strange man, whom he fights and knocks the wind out of. Why this supposedly spiritual man would come across this kid on a mountain and decide to grab him and crack him across the back of the head when the kid tries to get free is beyond me.

When Will does free himself, does he call for help from the witches? Does he escape back to the camp to warn the others he’s just been attacked? No. He sits quite calmly and has a conversation with the man, going so far as to proffer him his wounded hand.

In darkness still too deep to see each other’s faces, the man applies a healing ointment to Will’s wounded hand, dresses it, then decides to light the lamp he’s carrying so he can see the boy’s face.

A brief flicker of recognition from them both, and the man’s shot and killed by the witch whose love he spurned many years previous (a plot point fleetingly referred to way back in the early part of the novel).

If it had been a cinematic scene, the moment between father and son, when the realisation dawns, would’ve been drawn out a little to show some kind of emotion between the two - confusion; relief; joy - and to allow the audience to connect with what’s happening. Obviously this is a bit trickier in a novel as simply stating, “The two experienced confusion; relief; joy,” is very dry and in no way conveys the intended emotions, but there are options. You could back-reference some of things each character has gone through to bring them to this moment; the trials they’ve overcome so they could finally find each other. You could delve into the characters’ memories of all the things they’d missed while they were apart. You could even have each character looking forward to all of the good things that will come now that they’re together again.

“But in that moment, as the lantern light flickered over John Parry’s face, something shot down from the turbid sky, and he fell back dead before he could say a word, an arrow in his failing heart.”

That’s it? They recognise each other, he’s shot with an arrow and dies?!

The confrontation between Will and the witch was well handled, but after she’s topped herself and Will has said an emotional farewell to his father, there immediately follows a bizarrely cold description of Will taking ‘the dead man’s’ things and spying his feather-trimmed cloak. “His father had no more use for it, and Will was shaking with cold.” I wonder if anyone could come up with anything more emotionally detached than ‘His father had no more use for it…’.

I know it’s only a small scene in the grand scheme of the trilogy, but that in itself is part of the problem. It should be one of the most emotionally powerful scenes in the novel and is instead dealt with as if it’s just another little obstacle along the way; as if Pullman wanted to get it out of the way so he could get to the ‘juicier’ stuff.

I such a huge and intricate story, crammed with such high quality writing, the whole scene is a massive let-down; a bizarre and confusing disappointment.

And How Do You Fight Your Demons?

I like it 'cause it's silly :D

The Wearable Motorcycle

Want one!



Check out the details.

Bit of a Dull Week

I got me new passport today. For the first time in the entire history of my photgraphic ID, I don't look like a complete tool.

The fact that this is one of the highlights of my week so far pretty much says it all.

It started on Saturday when I spent the whole day feeling frustrated, tired and boooored...

Sunday I visited my cousin and we put in a long spell of gaming (Crackdown on the 360; great fun), and watched some classic Family Guy.

Monday I finished Heavenly Sword on the PS3. I'd have probably appreciated the climax of the great story a lot more if the whole thing hadn't been such a pain in the arse, not because of the difficulty of bad-guys, but because of the crap camera and stupid design ideas.

Yesterday I watched the Olympics and played some World of Warcraft.

Today I've watched the Olympics and played some World of Warcraft.

Tomorrow I've got to sign on, after which I'll probably watch the Olympics and play some World of Warcraft.

Arrgh!!

There's another three and a half weeks to go before I can finally get out of here and get to university.

I think I need help...

Baldness, Beer-guts and Belting Riffs

After two and half decades, it's understandable that Metallica would be getting a little thin on top and wide down below. In fact, it's kinda sad to see Kirk Hammett - who's always sported long, curly locks (except for his thick-mane period of the early 90s) - developing a bald spot, which just barely distracts from the girth of his gut being shown off by an ill-advised vest.

Then again, when have Metallica ever been admired for their aesthetic appeal?

I'm presently in the middle watching the fly-on-the-wall footage of the recording of their new album. It's interesting seeing how it all comes together. I've watched rockumentaries before, but they tend to mostly consist of interview footage, with only minimal recording footage. Mission Metallica features regularly-updated studio footage, which makes for an interesting watch for someone who's always been fascinated by the process.

Of course, it also gives a sample of what's to come on The Death Magnetic and, so far, I'm liking what I'm hearing: Loud, fast and heavy :D

Unforgiven

This probably won't be big news to many of you (I know Twisty won't care one jot...whatever a jot is), but I've just heard that Metallica's new album is going to feature Unforgiven III, which I personally see as cause to post two of my favourite Metallica songs:

Believe

This was perhaps the most haunting and original of the many Halo 3 trailers around just prior to its release:



With the coming of yet another epic to the 360, the idea has been somewhat borrowed to admirable affect:

Immortel

Earth, 2095. A pyramid appears above New York and, from it, emerges Horus, Egyptian god of the sky, released from an eternal slumber to walk the Earth for seven days; time aims to use to mate with a rare woman who can bare a god's child.

Where to begin...?

This film is weird. The setting reminds me a lot of The Fifth Element with a starker colour palette. Cars float around the city, or ride around on rails. The high-rise streets are populated with a mix of humans, aliens and mutants. A lot of the designs for both vehicles and buildings have an art-deco look. It's certainly a feast for the eyes.

As is the lead, Jill; a tall, slim, white-skinned, blue 'haired' woman who can read minds, shoot people with the palm of her hand and permanently dye human skin blue with her tears.

With the exception of Jill - played by French actress Linda Hardy adopting a very convincing non-European accent - and one or two others in elaborate costume, the whole non-human cast is rendered in CGI. It seems very strange at first, given these characters are all humanoid and look as close to human as it was possible to get with CGI four years ago, but it fits with the overall odd look of the film. Because everything is coloured so starkly, and the whole thing looks so surreal anyway, the CGI characters don't look as out of place as they might've done in a more straight-forward or colourful sci-fi.

Immortel is a strange film with a convoluted plot and bizarre aesthetic, but it's captivating, atmospheric and immensely original.

From the Heart

Over in the Inferno, Dante reminded me of a little something special from our dearly departed lord and saviour, Mr. Bill Hicks (you might want to turn your speakers down just a smidge):

Early Morning Pick-Me-Up

Yet More Moozack!

Every now and then my randomised playlist lands on a forgotten gem that I love when I hear it, but immediately forget about when it's finished.

So I wrote today's on my hand with the specific intent on posting it right here for you all to enjoy:



Also, Shirley Manson really does it for me, and not just because of her antics with the blow-up doll...

Doing It With A Touch of Class

I hate perfume ads; they're so gut-wrenchingly pointless and stupid. A pair of ridiculous-looking, scrwany models in ripped jeans, whispering vapid little lines at each other that hold all the passion and romance of a cat-shit kebab, rendered in black & white in a desperate attempt to make the whole thing look artistic.

Ironic, then, that the one time they get it right, the ad is banned. Thank god for the internet :D

Yes, she's talking bollocks, and yes, it's rendered in black & white to try to make it look more artistic and less pornographic, but let's face it, it's Eva Mendes.

Who Watches the Watchmen?

On the strength of the novel, I'm going to hazard a guess at 'lots of people'.

Having finally finished the book, I can see from the trailer that many key scenes have been faithfully reconstructed, but I still wonder at how certain elements will be handled by Zak Snyder. For example, big chunks of back-story and characterisation are handled by long prose pieces - taking the form of official reports, newspaper columns, novel extracts and press interviews - interspersed throughout the novel. The story can probably be told without them, but if the writers and director are keen to remain faithful to source, then they will have to be at least alluded to in some way.

There is also something quite radical - dare I say, silly - about the maniacal scheme behind the main plot-arch. How that will translate on screen, and how audiences will react to it - especially those who haven’t read the novel - I don’t know.

Snyder and co. certainly have some tough decisions to make. However, he did bring us the excellent 300 so, whatever the result, I’ve no doubt it will be entertaining…

And all the whores and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!'...

...and I'll look down, and whisper 'no.'

And thus opens Alan Moore & David Gibbon's Watchmen. It finally arrived this morning (after two weeks of waiting) and I'm loving it. Grim and brutal, highly stylised and a fascinating read so far.

It's one of four books I now have on the go. Not bad for someone who's always been a slow reader.

The majority of my reading time is going towards Philip Pullman's The Subtle Knife; the sequel to the truly magnificent Northern Lights/The Golden Compass. It seems a lot more complex than Northern Lights, which makes it more diffuicult to get into, but Pullman's characters and style and the scope and quality of the story as a whole keep me hooked. I would focus more attention towards it, but it's part of a rather large omnibus edition of His Dark Materials, so it isn't exactly portable.

So, when out and about, I'm reading Terry Pratchett's Making Money; the sequel to the truly magnificent Going Postal. Let's face it, Pratchett's a safe bet. Making Money picks up right after the events of its predecessor and is so far just as funny, just as intelligent and just as all-round entertaining.

Finally, there's China Miéville's Perdido Street Station. I get the feeling I've mentioned this one before, but can't remember where and when. It's a very difficult one to describe, being a very dark, dour, often depressing and overtly intense, but ultimately fascinating fantasy. It's a heavy read, which is why I started reading The Subtle Knife in order to break it up, and if I'm honest, I probably won't be going back to it till I've at least finished Pullman's great opus. Still, it's inventive and original, with writing of a very high standard, and I know one or two of you out there would get a kick out of it.

I'm now off to do some shopping...

Old Men on the Corner (creeping-out the kids)

So, New Kids on the Block are back.

I'll just leave you to digest that for a moment...

...

Done?

Hollywood's current love of the reboot is understandable, given the success of the franchises that have done it, but the pop world has so far failed to repeat that success. Okay, so Take That managed a sell-out tour and chart-topping album of new stuff (which was shit), but everyone else who's tried recently has bombed. The Spice Girls, All Saints, Boyzone and the Backstreet Boys all returned to the scene with a minor blip of excitement from their now far post-pubescent fans, before quietly sinking back into the pit they'd dragged themselves from.

I get that has-beens must hanker after recapturing the old magic, and it isn't a huge surprise that four of the five would be keen on the idea of reforming, having done sweet fanny-adams in the past two decades. What baffles me is the return of Donnie Whalberg.

Shortly after splitting from the rest of the 'Kids', Whalberg became an actor with starring roles in a couple of films and a few successful series (including a fantastic turn in Band of Brothers). Whatever possessed him to agree to this god-awful heap of dog excrement…



…is beyond me.

I’ve little doubt that, on the evidence of the above, this will be another short-lived stumble back into the limelight before the world can return to being the happier place it was when they first split, but we must now live under the umbrella of fear that Donnie’s brother Marky-Mark might start reminiscing about the good ol’ days with the Funky Bunch.

Saints preserve us!

The Night is Darkest Before the Dawn

And it seems, when that dawn is 30 days away, the night is very dark!

Yes, another day, another comic-book adaptation; this time, 30 Days of Night. Josh Hartnet (who I've, till now, hated in everything he's been in except Black Hawk Down) is the sheriff of a sleepy little town in the far, frozen north that goes 30 days without sunshine. One dusk, a bunch of particularly vicious vampires roll into town and make a particularly big mess of the locals.

Continuing with Hollywood's new-found love of holding no barrs, the story-telling is kept very minimalist in favour of showing the gruesome vamps doing gruesome stuff and looking decidedly gruesome (black eyes, pale skin, long, sharp nails and a full set of very sharp teeth, covered in blood both fresh and stale throughout).

If anything, the story-telling is a little too minimalist. For example, we're never told how a nine year-old girl manages to survive almost a month in a frozen town all on her lonesome, with nothing but hungry monsters for company. Though I appreciate the idea of cutting through the crap and getting straight to fun stuff, the side-effect is certain scenes coming across as random and/or silly.

In fact, the plot movement is incredibly jumpy, with the first 20 or 30 minutes setting things up over the course of a single day, before jumping to a week into the ordeal then, without warning, 29 days.

It's also a shame the vampires aren't developed further. For all their brutality, the head of the pack is a fan of making speeches (in some undisclosed language) and everything he says and does seems to hint at some deeper story that is never told.

On the other hand, the story-telling mechanic does prevent a lot of the usual horror-movie clichés (or, at least, sweeps them aside before they wrench your gut too much) and it also helps keep the pace up, despite the number of quieter scenes, in place to crank up the tension.

All-in-all, despite its patchiness, it’s a lot of fun, with some great effects and set-pieces and masses of gore, as well as solid performances from the leads (Hartnet and the head vamp in particular).

What's Not to Love?

Robert Rodriguez directing Rose McGowan in a chain-mail bikini, swinging a sword. Yes please...

Warning: This Review Contains Gushing

How to sum up The Dark Knight...

I'll start with the negatives. Christian Bale's growling is a bit odd and Heath Ledger's performance makes the tragedy of his death all the more sour, as we'll never get to see it again.

I'm now out of negatives.

My heart pounded, my breath caught in my throat and at one point I even jumped! I never jump, which just goes to highlight the intensity of the film.

And it is intense. There's been a trend in Hollywood over the past year for film-makers to avoid pulling-punches, and Goyer and the Nolans (that’s Jonathan and Christopher, not the 70’s girl-group) are no exception.

Another Hollywood trend in recent years, when it comes to the big franchises, has been to make a hugely successful, entertaining and innovative first film, and then go nuts with the sequel, cramming as much in as possible and ending up with something convoluted and silly. With a new suit, new vehicle, new technology, two new major villains, a ton of grand set-pieces and even some globe-trotting, it would have been easy for The Dark Knight to go the same way, but the whole thing is put together masterfully.

In fact, the writing is some of the best I’ve seen in a very long time. There are plot and character developments handled better in these two and a half hours than I’ve seen in an entire franchise. Not a single character is wasted and the innovation surrounding The Joker’s motivations in particular is inspiring.

The cast, too, are all on top form. Of course, Bale doesn’t seem to have any level other than top form and the rest of the returning cast all have their roles expanded and are all more than up to the task. Indeed, it’s a good thing Katie Holmes bowed out of playing Rachel Dawes again, because there is no way she’d have been up for the type of performance required. Maggie Gyllenhaal’s Rachel was slyer, wittier, more intelligent, more intense and more passionate than Holmes could’ve managed.

As for the other newbies; I was very impressed with Aaron Eckhart. To date, the only thing I can remember seeing him in is The Core, in which he played the standard disaster movie hero, but he very much shows his acting chops as Harvey Dent who, on the surface, comes across as little more than an incorruptible do-gooder, but has layers to his personality ***POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT***even before the inevitable tragedy of his tranformation***POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT OVER***

But, let’s face it, it’s Heath Ledger who steals the show. It’s an understatement to say I was sceptical when I heard he’d been cast as The Joker. I knew him as the Antipodean, blond pretty-boy from Casanova and A Knight’s Tale. The Joker? And a Joker in a darker, grittier Batman universe? Are you mad?!

The perfect blend of twisted, crazy, savage and nutty. In the blink of an eye he can go from hilarious to horrific to unerringly calm and coherent. His physical, vocal and emotional performances perfectly tailored to the character.

Mad?

No.

Inspired.

It’s said that rumours of a posthumous Oscar nomination were a little hasty, but I struggle to see how anyone can possibly top that performance.

The bottom line is, believe the hype. This is the best ever Batman film, one of the best Batman stories ever told, the best film of the year so far and probably one of my favourite films of all time.