I Am Legend

To round off the year I think I just about have time for one last film review, moving to this new format of the blog has made it a lot easier for me to put up reviews and with the decision not just to review films from the cinema I have a lot more material to write about than before. Of course this does mean that I still probably see two films for every one review I write but I will try to correct that next year even if it means slightly short but more frequent reviews, I think it would be nice to build up a picture of my film viewing for the entire year and next year is one where I hope to catch up on a lot of older classic films that I painfully admit I have never seen before, so it should be a healthy mix of the old and new. I am Legend is the third filmic adaptation of Richard Matheson’s classic 1954 novel of the same name, the plot as you are probably aware concerns Robert Neville (Will Smith) the last survivor of a deadly virus living in New York City, which has become desolate and overgrown. But as he desperately searches for a cure and to maintain his sanity it becomes clear that he is far from alone in the city. To reveal much more would be a shame as I went into the film knowing very little and it made the experience much richer to come to it cold. One of the first things to mention with the film is Will Smith, over the years I have constantly been impressed by his performances, making the usually awkward transition from comedy to serious drama look easy and for generally even outside the movies coming across as one of the most decent and likeable people you could hope to meet. Here he impresses once again, and it’s no mean feat given that he has to carry the entire film on his shoulders, Smith is in almost every shot of the film and for 90% of the running time has no co-star but his faithful dog. Yet he keeps Neville an engaging and real character, flawed and struggling with keeping up his day to day routine, so much that he becomes fascinating to watch. Some may find the early pace of the film slow but I thought it was a brilliant decision to spend the time building a picture of this man’s world and how he has come to cope with a seemingly hopeless situation. Another brave decision was also not to downplay the mental instability that comes with extreme isolation and there is a great pathos and sadness in the fake conversations Smith has with the various mannequins he has set up around the city to simulate human contact. However once the second half of the film kicks in it switches up a couple of gears and the action and scares come more frequently. Don’t get me wrong, this is a pretty scary film in places and director Francis Lawrence expertly cranks up the tension in several scenes, the quiet nature of the beginning help offset the shocks that come later and there is a feeling of dread always lurking in the background unseen. In fact one of the films only flaws is that it lets this menace be seen and though some of the CG work is good is still looks rather fake and is a bit of a let down in places, being far too cartoony and feels a tad disjointed from the reality established early on. Still at the end of the day this is a very solid and surprisingly deep and sombre character piece that still manages to entertain but that makes a potent effort at digging below the surface and putting us in the shoes of an engaging protagonist. A welcome change and definitely a film worth checking out on the big screen for the spectacle and the experience. Will Smith cements his status as one of the biggest stars on the planet with this accomplished and moving ode to loneliness and humanity. Big issues for a blockbuster but they are tackled well, and the pondering never gets in the way of the action when it kicks in. Just a few less CG monsters next time and you’re all set.

Christmas Greetings

Hello again! It’s been rather slow on the blog of late and will be slow over Christmas due to me not being around but never fear I am still planning on expanding it next year, but have been so busy with other things that its rather been on the back burner, but I have loads of ideas and will try and keep hitting my mental target of 10 posts a month (or more... y'never know!).

But it’s Christmas time, a time of year I love unabashedly, yes its horribly commercial and it will never be as good as when you were a kid, but because of the great memories I have of it and my close friends and family it is a time of year I always look forward to.

This year we are splitting the duties between households again, but as they live 10 minutes apart its not much of a problem (plus the potential of two Christmas dinners is nice!). Both houses will be full this year (19 between them!) so it will be a fun and crazy few days! We go down on Sunday for most of next week and after work on Friday I am off until the 31st, which is a welcome break I can assure you!

So wherever you and whatever your plans are I hope you have a fantastic time this year and enjoy yourself, eat far too much and get some cracking presents.

- Dave

Perfume: The Story of a Murderer

Rarely does a film come along that tries to challenge the accepted way of approaching narrative or character, generally the accepted ways are upheld, but in Tom Tykwer’s adaptation of the 1985 novel Perfume he tries something as yet much untested in cinema, telling a visual story through the ideas of smell. The story is a dark fairy tale set in 17th century France, concerning the life of Jean-Baptiste Grenouille, a man born with an extraordinary sense of smell. As he grows this talent consumes him, his callous nature forming from the hard life he is forced to grow up with, and his growing obsession over being able to capture and preserve the variety of smells he is able to distinguish and catalogue. Needless to say the film descends into darkness as Grenouille discovers his true talents but Tykwer keeps the dark humour flowing throughout; take note of the untimely end that befalls all those Grenouille leaves the company of. There is also a seeming lack of interest in the murders themselves, the focus is on Grenouille and unlike many serial killers he does not do it for the pleasure of the kill or the power, he is commanded by his gift, seeing his victims as stepping stones on his way to achieve greatness, a greatness that ultimately will betray him.

Visually the film is spectacular, 17th century Europe is perfectly recreated, and the filth and muck equally so, Tykwer masterfully fills the screen with the objects Grenouille senses, and in doing so prompts the audience’s imagination into it as well. It is a bizarre and slightly unnerving feeling, much of the film is spent focusing on Grenouille’s reaction and the sensuous nature of smells are fully realised here. The film is a tad long however and episodic, but despite the awfulness of Grenouille’s character you can’t help but empathise with him. He is a pathetic and lost man who is outcast from society, and it’s a testament to both the performance and the direction that despite his evil deeds, we route for him to continue, in order that we may see the ultimate rewards of his efforts.

The film features generally great performances from a lot of relative unknowns; Dustin Hoffman and Alan Rickman lend some experience, though the proliferation of British accents can be distracting, it hardly takes way from the story.

Ultimately what will divide audiences the most is the films ending; it embraces the fantastical nature of the premise and is evoked through an almost dreamlike and surreal series of events. Faithful to the book the events that unfold may be too much for those who have been grounded by some of the films more realistic elements, the knowledge that this is a dark almost Grimm-like fairytale is necessary if you are not to be thrown by the final 15 minutes. If you can get over this and embrace the film for what it is tough then you are left with an ultimately tragic and haunting tale about humanity and love, but one that is unlike any film you may have seen before and that is not afraid to take risks. Recommended to those seeking something a bit different, and those with strong stomachs and a penchant for thinking outside the conventions of typical narrative.

A visual treat and a success at translating olfactory pleasures to the big screen. While some may be thrown by the final third this is an unusual yet captivating film that tells a unique tale without bowing to conventional narrative.

Strike!

It may have come to your attention that in the US at the moment there is a writers strike on. Now equally this may well have passed you by, but if you don’t know much about it then ponder the fact that a few months down the line and the effects will be felt by all. Currently all members of the WGA (writers Guild of America) are on strike, they will produce no writing during this time. Of course this has led to productions being shut down of many of TV’s big shows, 24 has already announced it has been postponed indefinitely and will not start in January as usual, writers also from Lost and nearly every major TV drama have joined in meaning that while the companies may have a certain amount of materials stored up, if the strike continues for a while this will soon run out and the lack of programming on TV will be all too obvious during much of next year.

So what’s the fuss all about? Why are the writers striking? Well many much more knowledgeable bloggers than myself have answered this very question eloquently and I shall link to a number of articles on this subject in a minute. But in layman’s terms, and from my limited understanding, it comes down to the subject of residuals and the internet. Currently a writer is paid in two ways, they get an initial fee for a piece of work and in exchange for signing the work over to the studios (so they become the recognised legal authors) they are entitled to residuals. These are basically royalties, the same as what artists get for music and authors get for books. So every time a TV episode is repeated on TV, or bought on DVD the writers gets a small share of the money (currently 0.3%). The systems works well because the media is an uncertain beast, when writing a pilot for a TV series or a screenplay both the writer and the production company have no idea how big (if any) a success the finished product will be. Consequently a better received, and thus promoted, watched and sold, product leads to more money both for the studio and the writer, the risk of the new remains but it is now shared. After all if there was simply a set fee it would unfair for a studio to continue to make millions from the property years later and have the writer lumped with nothing.

The internet is where the problem lies. You see the future will see convergence between TV and the internet and eventually the two will become one. Already stations are streaming whole episodes and series on their websites and even offering them for download from places like iTunes, and yet the writers have no residuals when it comes to the internet. The production companies claim these streaming broadcasts are merely ‘promotions’, and yet they feature adverts (which make the studio’s money). The strike has happened now because writers got stung a few years back with the proliferation of DVD sales, whereby the studios were very reluctant to negotiate a residuals deal. Rather than make the same mistake twice the guild has decided to sort out internet residuals now, rather than down the line. You see already it is costing money, by streaming episodes or offering them for download the networks don’t need to repeat old shows anymore, in realty they’ve found a way of bypassing the writer and keeping all the profits to themselves. The studios argue that they don’t make any money off of the internet, an argument that is irrelevant especially as residuals deal with a portion of the profits made from a property, hence if the studio makes a loss, the writer doesn’t get anything. The trouble is neither side wants to budge and in the long run it is the viewers who will pay. Writers get a rough enough deal as it is sometimes, they also have pretty amazing jobs, but anyone who views them as whining spoilt rich kids needs to get acquainted with the way things really work. It is a justified and long established idea that creative artists are entitled to royalties and for the muti-billion dollar networks who already control so much of the media and even the production of that media to play the innocent victim in all this is unacceptable.

A deal will be done, and at the end of the day the writers probably will get slightly screwed over once again, but the strike is as much about the result as it is taking a stand. It is heartening to see so many actors and producers supporting the writers, they are the lifeblood of the entertainment industry and are so easily overlooked. If someone asked you to name 10 TV writers could you? I think even I might struggle. Writers fade to the background, many intentionally, but they deserve the proper credit and reward for the job they do. From these people come all the thousands of hours of free entertainment we enjoy every year, some of which affect us in real and life changing ways. Without the writers there would be no TV, and if things continue the way they are, the executives are going to find this out sooner rather than later.

If this story interests you at all then do read up on the stories below, I frequent some of the blogs and they are always entertaining and insightful and, being an (aspiring) writer myself something to look up to and learn from.

The Artful Writer – Blog of Craig Mazin screenwriter of Scary Movie 3 and 4, his site is a veritable goldmine of info on the WGA and the strike and is well worth reading.

John August – Screenwriter of Big Fish and Go details more about residuals and the strike on his blog.

John Rogers – Screenwriter and TV writer whose blog constantly makes me laugh has a lot on the strike as well.

Ken Levine – Legendary writer of shows such as Cheers, Mash and Fraiser keep daily updates of the strike amongst his other humorous posts.

Josh Friedman - Elusive scribe has his own unique take on events, read if you dare.

Article by Damon Lindeloff, one of the key writers from Lost on the strike.

Ratatouille

Two years ago Brad Bird made my favourite film of the year, it was an animated film called The Incredibles, his first film for animation giants Pixar, and barring some extraordinary films passing my way in the next two months, he’s gone and done it again with Ratatouille. The film began life under director Jan Pinkava before Brad was brought on board, normally this is cause for concern, but somehow Bird and Pixar reached deep down and pulled out their A-game. This truly is a magnificent film, funny, touching, absolutely gorgeous to look at and full of heart. What Bird is so good at is working on many levels, all Pixar films have this and it’s what makes them so special. No other production company in recent memory, aside from maybe Studio Ghibli, has produced such a diverse, and high quality series of films and seemingly they just keep getting better, the fact that they churn these masterpieces out at a rate of one a year just makes the films more astonishing. Remy (Patten Oswalt) is a rat that dreams of bigger things than simply eating garbage. He longs to be a chef and loves food. Sure enough when the chance comes he teams up with hapless garbage boy Linguini at Paris’s most famous restaurant and gets a chance to shine. The way that this unusual premise is built upon and established is great, it feels natural and that’s no mean feat when the mere idea of a rat in the kitchen is enough to put most people off their food. Remy himself is a great character, astute, ambitious and torn between his calling and his nature, once again the people (and the rats) of the world feel completely real, there is nothing artificial about them and once again the subtle bits of animation convey so much without the need for words. People always talk about animated films being for kids but there is much here for everyone to enjoy, the deeper meanings of the story and the lavish attention to detail appeal to cinema lovers of all ages, it is obvious that Bird practices what he preaches; the love care and attention are worth it for quality. There is no settling for second best and this striving for greatness is what fuels the film, its message that greatness can come from anywhere is surprisingly heartfelt and a great call to arms for creative people anywhere. The simple act of putting yourself out there and chasing your dreams is celebrated here, a heady message for an animated film about talking rats. As usual the animation is peerless, Pixar have become so accomplished so talented that they make it looks easy. In fact the animation fades into the background, not because it isn’t good, but because it’s so good that you forget about it, you become engrossed in the story and the characters and the fact that they only exist in a computer escapes your mind. This is a living breathing film and on a technical level it amazes, but on an emotional level it accomplishes something else entirely. Paris has never looked so inviting, food is rendered to look mouth-watering and there is seemingly nothing these guys can’t do. There are so many thing I could talk about relating to the film, but I don’t want to spoil it, least of all the hilarious short film that accompanies it beforehand. This is a film best discovered knowing as little as possible, a film that feels fresh and original and in the current cinematic climate that in itself is something to be proud of. I’m sorry if this review sounds like gushing but there is nothing more I can do. This is one of those films that leaves you on a high, reminds you of the magic of cinema and that you keep revisiting for days afterwards. Like the perfect meal Ratatouille somehow mixes all the right ingredients and creates something truly special. This may well be Pixar’s best film, and one I know I will savour and cherish for years to come. A masterclass in storytelling, animation as well as an entertaining and heartfelt ode to creativity, passions and the talent that is uncovered from the most unlikely of places. The best film of the year and yet another reason why Pixar remain one of cinemas greatest treasures.

Reviews, scores and sequels – far from perfect?

There has been a air of muttering and discussion in the gaming community recently with regards to game reviews and scores, in my opinion very welcome discussion as to whether the current model and system is effective and accurate and indeed a fair way of rating and judging the plethora of new releases that hit the shelves every week, some with every increasing hype and publicity surrounding them. Now that we are in November there are two months coming up packing to the gills with big releases, and that’s after such big titles as Halo 3, Bioshock, Metroid Prime 3, Heavenly Sword, Guitar Hero 3 and the Orange Box have already been released within the last couple of months. With all these titles competing for your hard earned money reviews will play a big part in many people’s purchasing decisions, so what exactly is the problem with the way things are at the moment? Well one of the big things people are quite rightly contesting is the scoring systems favoured throughout the industry. Typically games tend to be rated either out of 10 or 100 (as a percentage) but when it comes down to it who decides if a game is worth 86 or 58 or even quite how a 77 game is better than a 76 game? Personal choice? Along with these rather meaningless numbers that can be associated with a game, comes the belief that anything below 70-ish is rubbish. This comes from having too wide a spread of numbers, logically a 50 game should be average, not bad but not great either, however in reality these games are marked in the 60s or 70s. Very few games tend to score below 50, So why have these numbers as an option? Even the magazines and sites that score out of 10 don’t avoid this problem, naturally a game rated 5 will be seen as bad, and best avoided, so average games scores get a bump as a result. Then comes along the issue of perfection. Scoring on a numerical scale implies that a perfect score is possible, it also implies that a game that received this mark is therefore perfect. This is, of course, a load of old rubbish, there is no such quantifiable thing as a perfect game, no such measures exist to mark such a thing, even without such heavy weighing factors as personal opinions there are millions of variables which cannot be measures in such a way. I mean what in life can be? Have you ever had a perfect meal? A perfect date? The term can only exist in quantifiable situations, a perfect score on a maths test for example, a perfect score on the snooker table etc. But while games remain scored this way reviewers will be reluctant to hand out 10s, equally a scoring system out of 100 will never give out the 100 score, meaning that there are scores that will never be used as part of the rating system, it’s crazy. Logically a 10 game should be a rare occurrence, but not impossible. A game that stands head and shoulders above others, that represents the pinnacle of the genre or platform should be applauded as such. One solution is to adapt a similar rating to that used with relation to films, a scar system out of 5, as some have commented a pictorial system doesn’t imply perfection and therefore is less psychologically limiting. However many would argue that scoring at all does games a disservice, how often have you looked a review score first without paying attention to the writing of the review? After 500 words of carefully selected prose, all that matters to some is the number at the end, similarly after years of hard work and thousands of man hours poured into a 20+ hour gaming experience, for many people it boils down to the review score. In this respect I have sympathy, gaming has become such a lucrative hobby and with so many games vying for your attention often review scores are all they have. But equally this leads to rushed reviews, heavily weighted scores for the most hyped games and a general unbalancing of the system. Big magazines and websites fight to get their reviews of the big games out first scrambling to deadlines, are they giving the games a proper run through? How can you just such things as the online service and longevity of the ingame features when you have a couple of days to complete the game and get your review up? Yet these articles are so sought after, and so lucrative that the cycle continues. Unfortunately because of the nature of the beast review scores are here to stay, like them or not. Without a measurable way of rating a game the power would be lost. Central to much of this debate, and what certainly sparked these thoughts in my own mind was the subject of sequels. Unlike films, where sequels are often viewed as inferior and money driven, gaming suits itself to sequels and they have been, in one form or another, it’s backbone for many years now. Yet as new generations of games roll around there are cries to old days of innovation and creativeness, but what many fail to realise is that such a leap is not possible any more. How can any game simulate the jump from 2D to 3D. From pong to Mario? When any art form is in its infancy the leaps are huge and revolutionary, but become less as time progresses. Film critics do not criticise films because they fail to replicate the same sense of shock as the first time they saw Star Wars, or watching a film in colour, or with sound? So why do a lot of game reviews begrudge such a thing? A recent review of Mario Galaxy in Games TM magazine praises the game highly, in fact I spotted barely a negative comment, so why did it not garner a maximum score? What else would it have needed to do to make this jump? The review claims that it is more of an evolution than a revolution – similar claims were recently made of Halo 3 recently. But what else could the developers do? There may well have been justifiable reasons for the score the game received but they were not clear in the review. Sometimes it feels like sequels are actually punished for building on work established in their predecessors, especially if their predecessors are celebrated. No game can replicate what Mario 64 brought to the table, so why mark them down for this? If Galaxy can improve this, add new ideas and show genuine innovation and be celebrated as a better game in itself, why should it be marked down? Surely it should be marked up? I admit that games should be punished for not showing innovation and merely being carbon copies of what has gone before (many EA sports game spring to mind) but the notion that a game could never score as highly as Zelda Ocarina of Time or Mario 64 purely because they are not as revolutionary now is ridiculous and basically trips up all new games at the first hurdle by saying ‘no matter how good you are, you can’t match up to this’ which limits the reviewers opinion from the off. A game that is a sequel needs to be looked at in light of its place in a series, but also as a game in its own right. If the previous game had not existed, what would you think of it? Without the hype and the previews and the claims of the developer, how do you feel when you play the game? How does it compare to similar titles? If the bias of the familiar is clouding out your opinion, ask yourself whose fault that is, the games or your own expectations? This is not an issue that will go away any time soon, but in the future when looking at games, take time to read the reviews, read a few not just one and from a variety of sources. Ultimately games are to be enjoyed, worrying about which games are better than others, or certain games place in the all time rankings is missing the point, as I have said before the games are meant to be enjoyed, savoured and appreciated and with such rich picking this winter, there should be plenty out there for everyone, regardless of the reviews.

Get Corrupted

Just a quick one today with some impressions of Metroid Prime 3: Corruption. I have been a huge fan of the series thoroughly enjoying the first two games in the series on the Gamecube and as such have been hotly anticipating this third game on the Wii. Having played through about the first hour or so I find myself in the position to make some initial impressions. Firstly this game starts very differently to the other Prime games, with a more obvious and involving story it draws you in nicely and makes a great change from the minimalist style of storytelling of the first two games. Immediately the thing you notice is that the game looks stunning, a definite step up from the first two games (Which both looks amazing also) Prime 3 has an amazing level of detail and architecture and the game benefits from the added grunt of the Wii. Now the Wii is never going to have Xbox 360 level graphics in purely technical terms but stylistically this is one of the best looking games I’ve seen. Added to this is the fact that it runs perfectly smoothly and the invisible loading once again helps the whole world feel connected. The controls are the biggest overhaul in the game and they work very well indeed. Utilising the Wii remote the controls are responsive and accurate, the at times frustrating slowness of the Gamecube game is gone and this is a much more fluid scheme. It does take a bit of getting used to (I’d recommend putting the sensitivity settings to advanced) but after just an hour I already much prefer it to the Cube layout and for that matter all other console FPS’s. Like I said the game starts very differently, there is a lot more interaction and team work with the Alliance which feels a bit odd, the Metroid series has always been about isolation, but it’s so well executed and feels so fresh that it really works in giving you something new. Along with the overhaul of the graphics some design elements have been re-jigged also, the visors are handily located on one button allowing you to quickly choose, and the new look to the power ups, doors and general items help the game feel new and not as cut as paste as the first two did at times. Still it is early days yet and the prospect of another giant game world to explore as Samus fills me with excitement. If you are a Wii owner who bemoans the lack of decent games you owe it to yourself to get this game, it is involving, beautiful and above all fun to play. As I have previously mentioned there is a distinct lack of advertising in relation to this game which is a massive shame, I hope that I can do my bit to spread the word and help this do well enough to justify more challenging hardcore games to be released on the Wii.

Where Nintendo is going wrong

But that’s the wrong title, you protest, surely you mean Sony! ‘Where Sony is going wrong’. Can’t be that hard to mix up the two names, can it? Well no, and I have in fact typed the correct one, for, whilst Nintendo are proving to be very successful at the moment, and Sony have had what the very generous would call a ‘difficult year’, that does not exclude them from the mistakes and pratfalls that befall all big companies. In fact were the DS and the Wii not proving to be so popular there may be some serious questions being asked of the Kyoto giant, rather than rapturous praise. However don’t get me wrong, I think Nintendo have been very clever and made a lot of good and wise decisions in the past few years, they have somehow turned around a flagging business into the model of success and done so without seemingly breaking a sweat. Through this they have remained humble and true to their core values, backing away from the proverbial slagging match that becomes technological warfare amongst the cutting edge. The fact still remains though that the console race, as many dub it, is far from over and there are several areas that Nintendo have been slow to correct or act on, that could hurt them in the future. Once the Wii is no longer new and exciting it will need a strong foundation, Nintendo’s job is to build that now for when the inevitable come-down occurs. In this article I will look at some of the questionable decisions of the past year or so, but also at action the company should be taking, but is not, remember a mistake can be one of omission as well as perpetration. 1. Attracting 3rd Parties Nintendo have always struggled in their relationship with third party developers. The reason for this is that historically Nintendo gamers have tended to buy Nintendo products over those from other companies. This trend was obvious back in the days of the N64 and continued throughout the life of the Gamecube despite many exclusive and top quality titles being released. However it must be noted that amongst these were an awful lot of rubbish games as well. Still the fact was that for whatever reason multiplatform games sell better on other systems, which led many third parties to discredit the Wii early on. When you are next in town take a look at the Wii games shelf. See all those party games, ports of older games and rubbish looking film tie ins? That is the result of this discredit. As soon as the Wii was proving to be a massive success third parties wanted in, unfortunately because they were late to the game, and making games takes quite a long time, many rushed ports and half finished games to shelves, desperate for some of the success. However it hasn’t exactly worked out for them, being that consumers can be more wary than some think. Charging full price for a port of a PS2 game is beyond cheeky and Wii has been sullied by these bad games. Still Nintendo should have been more vocal from the start in attracting these developers. While it is true that some companies only started developing for the Wii when it was launched others were on board beforehand, but Nintendo were slow releasing development kits and licenses and offered little help. Recently they have been improving third party relations but it’s a two sided coin. Third parties need to ensure they release quality products on the Wii, but Nintendo need to support them, advertise them and the public need to buy them. Once third party games starts to sell more will come, if the dearth of multiplatform releases with badly implanted control remains, then Nintendo, despite the huge console sales, could still be struggling software-wise. 2. Growing the attach rate So how does a console that has outsold everything consistently all year, struggle to sell games? Well it comes down to attach-rate. This is the number of games per console that is sold. This is a good figure to be able to see whether people, after buying a console, are keeping up by actually buying games for it. The Xbox 360 leads the way in this field with its more hardcore user base buying between 5 and 10 games each, Sony has struggled but bundles and such have meant more game sales. Nintendo however have always struggled, with the Wii it is a slightly different matter, with such a wide reaching console those elderly grandma’s who love playing Wii Sports are unlikely to rush out for the new Madden football game, but it is still a problem if, with a such a big user base your games are being outsold. Using Madden as an example, even though it was released on all three next gen systems at the same time the Wii version got trounced in sales – the message was clear, the Wii has a vastly different user base. Developers are cottoning onto this though and with original games such as My Sims and Zach and Wiki as well as EA’s upcoming Wii Playground developers are, more and more trying to connect with the Wii’s audience to create the next ‘big hit’. I only hope this happens soon before developers get tired of trying, there seems no logical reason why, with so many more units in homes, games can’t be huge sellers on the Wii, especially those games that offer something other consoles can’t, it’s just a case of finding the right formula. 3. Advertising One reason game sales may be down is advertising, or lack of it. Many posts have been made recently in online communities about Nintendo’s lack of aggression when it comes to marketing their titles, for example Metroid Prime 3 is released in Europe on Friday but I have yet to see a single advert or announcement relating to this. Nintendo have said that they are trying a new strategy of advertising games in the few weeks before launch so as not to jump the gun, but they seem unwilling to pay for the big advertising that may push games such as this into people’s hands. Nintendo are making a killing from console sales at the moment yet need to be more aggressive in selling the games, third party games as well. The introduction of the Metroid 3 channel you can download to the Wii is good start, but it needed more fanfare and more to back it up with. Nintendo may hope such games will sell on name alone, but until they get out of these bad habits (advertising has never been a strong point) sales will continue to be disappointing. Case in point is Guitar Hero 3. This will be a huge game, the first two were amazingly popular, this is the first time the game has been on a Nintendo system, with the guitar accessory that fits the Wii-remote neatly inside and online options the Wii version could be a massive hit, moreso than the PS3 and Xbox versions, but people need to know about it. There need to be ads highlighting the differences and getting the message out there, to miss something like this is to miss a trick and customers Nintendo can get buying games now, will pay off in the future in terms of loyalty and developer commitment. If Guitar hero 3 sells a million on Wii, that’s a guarantee that more games of its ilk will make their way in the future. 4. Embracing online gaming The Wii has online gaming, however while this is alright and with Mario Kart and Smash Bros. coming up, about to be expanded, it is still a shadow of what you can get on the PS3 or through Xbox Live. Now I’m not saying Nintendo should copy those schemes, but more commitment to downloadable content, demo’s for example, and the removal of friend codes for games (along with the introduction of voice chat) would allow their games to be at least comparable. As it is the Wii has a good basic set up, but feels ancient next to the competition. Online may not be the focus of the Wii but there is so much that could be done with it that it feels as if Nintendo aren’t bothering some of the time. Again if developers were given more tools and access we might stop seeing games that are online for other consoles but not for Wii, there is no excuse for this and the removal of online functionality may be a good reason why some games fail to sell on Nintendo’s console. 5. Alienating the hardcore Finally Nintendo need to be wary that in attracting casual gamers and people who have never played before they risk alienating the gaming fans they first attracted. For this they need games, and a wider variety, preferably with some of the aforementioned online functionality included. The Wii may be less powerful than the competition but it’s no reason why shooters, RPG’s and action games won’t work on the system. The Wii may not be the hardcore console of choice, but can work well as a backup. For example not many people will own an Xbox and PS3, but many may have either and a Wii. The variety in games means it is not directly competing, but Nintendo still need to support these people, as do third parties. For this reason I hope that come Christmas we see some big sellers on the Wii, games such as Pro Evolution Soccer (coming to Wii for the first time) should make a difference, but as I commented before it is a fine line to walk. Overall Nintendo remains in a strong position and will continue to sell out over the holidays, but can’t afford to rest on its laurels. As games get more advanced on Xbox and PS3 and the second and third generation of titles are released Nintendo needs to make sure it has enough up its sleeve to keep the magic going. For the start of a consoles life lazy ports and party games are to be expected, if the landscape remains the same in 12 months we will have a problem on our hands. The question to ask is, once you’ve changed the face of gaming – what do you do next?

Starter for Ten

On holiday this year I found myself, at a point, stuck with nothing to read. Anyone familiar with the concept of British holidays knows this is an occurrence worthy of dread, fortunately the place we were staying had a bookshelf for guests, a random assortment of collected works assembled over many years, and as I browsed it one book caught my attention, Starter for 10. This was partly because I had heard about the film, but soon enough I was caught up, the book was excellent and was finished by the time we left. So when I recently had the chance to see the film I was intrigued, as I have often commented before the perils of book to film conversions lie (usually) directly upon the viewers first exposure to the story. Those who have already enjoyed and grown close to either form find it much harder to accept the other. Set in 1985 the film tells the story of Brian, a boy from Essex who makes his way to Bristol Uni and his quest to get onto the local university challenge team, but more importantly it deals with the search for knowledge and truth and the growing pains that come with moving away from home, and discovering yourself. James McAvoy, who is making quite a name for himself in Hollywood now, plays the titular Brian and again impresses. His acting skills are without question but it was the subtle humour and comic timing he possesses that really shone in the film, he manages to really sell Brian’s earnest nature and self-destructive side. The rest of the cast are made up relative unknowns, boosted by some recognisable British comic faces, Catherine Tate plays his widowed mother, and the University Challenge host Bamber Gascoigne is aptly played by the League of Gentlemen’s Mark Gatiss. Adapted from his own book by David Nicholls (who is a scriptwriter by profession) the film is pretty faithful to the themes and ideas of the book and plays out the story well, always entertaining and with a keen eye for the detail of the time, with a great 80s soundtrack as well full of the Cure and Tears for Fears. However in adapting the book for the big screen many of the more realistic and enjoyable aspects of the book have been rounded off, like the sharp corners of a piece of furniture. Obviously films have more traditional conventions but the cheerier tone leaves many of the books key characters somehow dulled, primary to this is Rebecca, the local activist Brian meets at Uni, in the book she is marvellously scathing and defensive, her exchanges with Brian are both bruising and hilarious, however in the film she is a much nicer character, the obvious conventions of the romantic comedy genre forcing these character into archetypes and so somehow depriving them of their spark. That’s not to say the film does a bad job at all, like I said it is a faithful representation of the book, and in fact in some places neatly trims the unnecessary plotlines and actually improves the ending, something that was rather to abrupt in the book, its just that after enjoying the frankness and distinct characters in the book, it is harder to see them as the same as their celluloid counterparts. Still, like I said these are faults that lie more with the fact that I enjoyed the book so, than any particular fault of the filmmakers. The setting and ideas of the film help distinguish it from other films of its ilk and unlike many there is a genuine honesty about the piece that makes it refreshing and enjoyable. At the end of the day the film doesn’t re-invent the genre, but it does offer up some new ideas and its inherent Britishness has a unique charm of its own. This is a genuinely funny and romantic film that, despite its watering down of some of the books elements, retains enough of what that so great to be worth watching. Recommended.

A small but affecting film about adolescence and possibility that struck a chord with me and, despite the slight sugar-coating of the books rougher edges, this is still recommended as an amusing and heartfelt ode to youth and knowledge.

7/10

Five is the magic number

Well according to Sony it is anyway. With the announcement of a 40GB version of the Playstation 3 due for release in Europe this week, sans a couple of USB slots, memory card reader and backwards compatibility (more on that later) the console will go on sale for £299 and be the fifth SKU or version of the PS3 released so far into the wild. Along with this announcement was the news of a price drop on the existing 60GB model to £350, however along with this came the news that, like when a similar drop was announced in the US a couple of months ago, this is basically a clearance sale so that when all the consoles are sold they are gone, leaving the 40GB model as the only one available in Europe.

So if you are wanting to play any of your old PS2 games now is the time to get a PS3, of course it’s possible that a larger fully specc’d version of the console will replace the 60GB model (most like the 80GB version now on sale in the US) but as of now there are no plans. Obviously this is a move born from sluggish sales and poor yearly performance and to be fair to Sony they haven’t just sat back and watched the train-wreck that has been the PS3 this year, they have responded, but their decision making has been baffling at best leading to the aforementioned 5 models of the console, each slightly different, each in different territories. The message that simple, clear and transparent business is good for the customer has obviously been lost amongst the scramble to get the PS3 to sell.

I understand the concept of different models of a console, when the full package is too expensive then it makes sense, but the cheaper 20GB version that launched alongside the main 60GB in the US flopped massively, leading it to be canned within months. The proof was obvious; when faced with a choice between the full product, or a version that it cheaper but missing features, people will splash the extra cash. The difference between the new 40GB version and the existing one is now just £50, and you get 2 games with the 60GB one. Obviously Sony want to get rid of their 60GB stock by having this price but, but if consumers are willing to splash out that sort of money for something, they want to feel like they are getting what they pay for, rather than an almost version. Yes the price should make the PS3 more competitive this winter, but the consequences of this decision are more than sales oriented, in fact as some have commented it seems like a shift in their whole business strategy.

But first a little history, flash back to 2006 when Sony revealed the details about the PS3 to the world. There Phil Harrison proudly stated that: "backwards compatibility, as you know from PlayStation One and PlayStation 2, is a core value of what we believe we should offer. And access to the library of content people have created, bought for themselves, and accumulated over the years is necessary to create a format. PlayStation is a format meaning that it transcends many devices -- PSOne, PS2 and now PS3.".

These remarks were echoed by Sony Head honcho Ken Kutaragi who went on to say that: "the PS3 will feature backwards compatibility with PS and PS2 games from day one. I'm emphasizing this because, from what I hear, there are some platforms that haven't been able to completely do this. It's costly in terms of hardware, but we'd rather invest firmly on compatibility from the beginning, rather than to have issues later on.". The message to those listening was clear, the Playstation 3 is about the brand, it is about rewarding loyalty and consistency from one generation to the next. In fact Sony were subtly mocking Microsoft who’s Xbox 360 had limited backwards compatibility. I wrote an article for my old website a while back that complained against companies misleading and treating customers unfairly and this kind of doublespeak and going back on ‘core principles’ is at the heart of what got me riled up. The trouble is that Sony are stuck, trying to promote all these new developments as positive, when everyone knows what is really going on. When talking about the new model Sony Europe president Nick Sharples said: "We have made clear on many occasions that our priority is on developing innovative new features and services for PS3 and not on backwards compatibility." Many occasions? I’d like to see one!

What frustrates me is not necessarily the decisions made, but the naïve business talk that accompanies them. Everyone knows that if the PS3 were selling like hotcakes and had been since launch we would not be in this situation. There would be no other models, no gimped backwards compatibility, so spilling some spiel about how it has always been Sony’s interest just doesn’t cut it. Thanks to the internet now people can easily keep track of everything your company executives say, and more than a few times this year that has come back to bite Sony.

When I talked about a new business strategy this is what I meant. Sony are shifting their focus and trying to leave the PS2 behind. It’s immense success this year has been a stone around the PS3s neck, and whilst it was probably bringing Sony some much needed income the truth is that as long as the PS2 kept selling, the PS3 wouldn’t. By supporting the PS2, allowing people to play cheaper PS2 games on their PS3 Sony were handicapping themselves; no-one was buying PS3 games. Sony boast about having 65 titles available at Christmas for people to choose from, somehow implying this is better than a catalogue of thousands. As Bill Harris, in his excellent weekly console post, rightly points out the price and the PS2 have been holding Sony back, this new SKU is their attempt to correct that, and it may, just may, work. But it’s a heck of a risk, the risk of alienating PS2 owners, frustrating fans and gamers alike. What this move more than anything sends out is a lack of confidence in the product, tweaking it and re-releasing it in the way that film companies do with DVDs these days. The only company to be worried about this is Microsoft, at £299 the PS3 is very close the Xbox price and with a Blu-ray drive included, if Microsoft want to keep their lead and attract the tech-savvy consumers they need some good PR, Halo 3 will have helped them recently but persistent problems with consoles failing do not help, especially against the PS3 which, in this regard at least, has been flawless.

It will be interesting to see how things pan out in the short term future, Sony’s real hope will be that when the dust settles people will forget all the fuss and with some more software and the new lower price the PS3 can move forward in its own right, no longer dwarfed by the success of its younger brother.

Oh and what about Nintendo you might ask, what to make of them with this whole business? Well right now they are that little spec in the distance, riding high atop the sales charts wondering what all the fuss is about.

Knocked Up

Comedy films seem to come in waves, like any form of entertainment the shifts come about generally from the success of one specific film, that then influences countless others. The biggest recent example of this is the whole American Pie subgenre of gross-out teen comedies, which unfortunately still run on to this day. Invariably the efforts that follow the original are uninspired and markedly similar, studios cashing in rather than catching on. Luckily Knocked Up does not follow this pattern.

Following on from director Judd Apatow’s 40 Year old Virgin, which was a surprise hit in 2005 Knocked Up follows in the same vein as its predecessor, mixing realistic, often crude, depictions of friends and relationships with a real heart and message. It seems a simple formula but it’s really one of the hardest things to do, to match up an interesting and crafted story whilst maintaining the humour and integrity of your characters. The humour in the film derives from reality, conversations, exchanges and conventions, rather than playing on these for cheap laughs and slapstick. By removing many of the easy tools for creating laughs the team have had to work hard to up the quality of the whole film, imbuing it with the right amount of emotion, whilst maintaining its funny bone.

Of course all this is easier when you have the likes of Seth Rogan taking centre stage, relatively unknown before Virgin he has with this and the upcoming Superbad become a bona-fide star. He is constantly engaging, hilarious and really helps ground the film. His Ben is far from perfect, but never unlikeable as he deals with the repercussions from a one-night stand with upcoming TV reported Alison, played wonderfully by Catherine Heigal. Formerly known from TV’s Grey’s Anatomy Heigel impressed me immensely with the film filling Alison with a real sense of humanity and reality as she is forced to also come to terms with her pregnancy and the man. If there is one thing the film excels at it is finding the balance between the sexes.

The success of 40 year Old Virgin and now this are not accidental, these films appeal to a vast majority of people, they are relatable and real, there is very little sugar-coating which is a welcome relief from the happy go lucky reality that accompanies most romantic comedies these days. These films appeal to both men and women and treat all their characters with reverence. The women are just as centre stage in Knocked up, another far cry from the teenage wish-fulfilment found in many of the aforementioned gross-out comedies.

The film also has a lot to say about the current state of relationships, society and marriage, Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann (Apatow’s wife) play Alison’s sister and brother in law who she currently lives with. Bickering and troubled they paint an at times heartbreaking depiction of marriage at its best and worst, but are used wonderfully to comment on this, rather than fill in as comedy sidekicks. The care and attention that goes into the supporting cast, including Ben’s bunch of stoner friends who spend all day cataloguing movie nudity for an upcoming website (blissfully unaware that such sites already exist). There is a great comradary between the guys, and the films tale of growing up and accepting responsibility is naturally presented, rather than overly hallmarked.

At the end of the day Knocked Up is an impressive and surprisingly moving film. Beneath its vulgar exterior and frequent tangents’ it manages to tell a simple story in a new and relevant way whilst respecting and trusting its audience. Never afraid to pull the punches when you aren’t expecting or hit you deep down there is a lot more going on here than may first appear. Apatow and Rogan are names to watch out for, stars who can connect with a wide audience and who have an honesty about them that demands respect. Knocked Up is more than a comedy, though it is frequently very funny. It is a tale about growing up, about modern life and about the humanity and heart that, deep down, we all share. In its own way, this is the most romantic, and entertaining film of the year, and it does it all with the minimum of fuss. If this is the new wave of comedy then it comes as a refreshing, and very welcome change.

A warm hearted and surprisingly moral comedy this pushes all the right buttons and finds a happy medium between honest home truths and wisecracking buddy humour. Few films treat their characters with such respect and appeal to the human in each of us. Guaranteed to leave with a warm glow, long after the credits have rolled.

Relient K - The Videos

Following on from my Relient K post from the other day I have tracked down a bunch of their vidoes for your viewing pleasure below starting with their newest single: Must have done something right Who I am Hates Who I've Been Be My escape Pressing On

Xkcd

If people can have a new favourite band, then consider Xkcd my new favourite website, or webcomic certainly. First brought to my attention through John Rogers excellent blog Xkcd describes itself as ‘a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math and language’ and for whatever reason it just appeals to my sense of humour. Simple sketches are all the site consists of but it’s full of creativity, humour and randomness that just puts a smile on my face. So if it sounds like your thing go check the site out and, as you start trawling back through the archived comics, prepare to lose great chunks of your time. - Xkcd

INLAND EMPIRE

Few filmmakers these days have such a distinctive and singular style and vision as David Lynch. Following up his 2002 masterpiece Mullholland Drive he has, this time, pretty much abandoned the entire Hollywood system, instead crafting the film on the fly on a consumer level handheld Digital DV camera over the past few years. Working closely with Laura Dern the film started as a series of shorts for his website, but quickly evolved into something much bigger. Against this background of unusual development and the freedom that the DV camera allowed him, Lynch could instantly think of something, grab the actors and just go film it, the film somehow remains a masterfully crafted and haunting experience. A three hour fractured narrative INLAND EMPIRE's (Lynch has insisted the films title be capitalised) spiralling logic and frequent tangents all make up part of the bigger whole, negating the usual filmic conventions in lieu of smaller moments, the films emotional resonance is in the experience, the twisted unease that Lynch so wonderfully creates even without his usual bag of stylistic tricks. More than any other of his films since Eraserhead this feel like his true vision, the world according to Lynch with its inherent nightmare visions, but also its moments of comic lightness and absurdity.

The film starts following Dern as an actress looking for a way back into the big time, being offered a role in a new film called On High in Blue Tomorrows. The film is a remake of a Polish film that was based on a legend; however that film was shut down as the two stars were murdered. As she starts to inhabit the part of a cheating woman the lines between the film and reality blur and her sense of self and identity are tested as her world crumbles and vanishes. The first hour slowly builds the basis for the remaining film in which Laura Dern, whose work in the film is stunningly brave and who helps ground the entire story, plays a number of characters, switching effortlessly between them trying to find herself, or her purpose. Of course as well as this we get other storylines thrown in, flashbacks of what could be the original basis for the legend in Poland, a group of prostitutes who hang around smoking and do the locomotion and a barren sitcom starring rabbits with banal dialogue and inappropriate laugh track. What amazes me about Lynch is not only the images he creates but the way he manages to tie the disparate threads of the story together, creating a narrative that may seem random and unintelligible but that manages to remain watchable and progressive, building towards a masterfully crafted finale.

As usual there are no easy answers here, compared to this Mullholland Drive feels like a walk in the park but this is not weirdness just for the sake of it. Identity is a theme Lynch frequently looks at and the story is more about how it is told, and the journey than a satisfactory neatly tied up conclusion. Once you learn not to expect this and to enjoy his films for what they are, a unique, disturbing and fascinating experience, then the images take a hold of you and stay with you for days afterwards. The low budget constraints of the film initially jar, like some amateur home video, but as the story continues Lynch uses this to his advantage, stripping the world bare of this decoration and his actors too, there is no hiding behind technology; the dark corners of his mind are laid out for all to see. But whilst the film has intense and dark elements, in some ways it remains an optimistic film with an almost happy ending, the closing credits take place over an oddly staged dance routine whose mood feels like one of relief, to be past the confusion and into the light, the reward for enduring Dern’s journey into herself.

Of course there could be endless hours spent analysing the film, some will dismiss it as cold and nonsensical, and many will echo these thoughts, there are a lot of seemingly redundant scenes and editing that could be done, and the film does drag a little in the middle where some of the less memorable scenes occur, but still for fans of Lynch or those seeking a unique cinematic experience this is a must see, if only to expand your minds to what cinema could be, to take you out of your comfort zone and show you the one guy who continues to rail against the system and who seems rejuvenated by the freedom modern digital technology gives filmmakers. This film is the exact opposite of those safe, conventional Hollywood blockbusters and like it or loathe it cinema is better off with people like Lynch stretching the boundaries and telling stories in new and challenging ways.

A deep and dark mystery that delves headfirst into itself, this is a challenging and disjointed film that is difficult to get into but that rewards those who do with a myriad of memorable scenes, characters and moments that are unlike anything else you would have seen. Unique, meticulously crafted and inspired this is Lynch at his most baffling, but also at times, his absolute best.

Relient K – Five Score and Seven Years Ago

Back in 2001 I was introduced by a friend to this band called Relient K, they were a Christian rock band of sorts with a penchant for catchy tunes, pithy lyrics and some really great tunes. Their current album at the time, The Anatomy of the Tongue in Cheek, became a frequent resident of my CD player and I was hooked. Since then Relient K have gained quite a reputation in America, their constant touring and devotion to their fans and their music have quietly gained them a following and it was only with 2004’s ‘Mmhmm’ that they approached the mainstream. With that album came not only success but a new maturity in their sound and song writing, unlike some bands that stagnate over time Relient K have never been afraid to mix things up and a combination of heavier and more emotional tracks was neatly balanced with the lighter catchier songs more akin to their early days. What always separated them for me was the blend of great music, with meaningful and interesting lyrics. Whilst they have a similar style to many other bands I have liked in the past, Blink 182, New Found glory et al. they have always attempted to put a fresh spin on pop/punk tracks, and applying subtle and interesting reminders and messages about their faith in relation to everyday life has made their songs relevant and meaningful So often Christian music is all lumped into a specific type and it’s nice to see someone breaking the mould and talking about these issues in a real way, rather than repeating worn out idioms and mantras.

This week I purchased a copy of their latest album Five Score and Seven Years Ago, their fifth album (in seven years, hence the title) and after a few listens I already love it. It is another step forward for the band, sound wise it remains close to Mmhmm, but the songs seem to come even easier now, each is great and in terms of variety, consistency and pacing this album already stands out from their others. Of all the bands I like Relient K have had probably the biggest impact on my personally, a combination of the right music at the right time I guess and in fact it’s from a Relient K song that I found the title for this blog, Forward Motion was a track that resonated strongly with me and I think it sums up my attitude to life and the approach I take day by day.

So if you’ve never heard of Relient K I recommend you check them out, unfortunately they are relatively unknown in the UK but check out their website here and thanks to the internet it’s easy enough to buy or download their albums from the likes of Amazon and iTunes. Well now that this shameless plugging is over with I’ll get back to my flurry of movie reviews, apologies that they have been rather flooding the blog ahead of other stories lately but I want to keep up to date with my movie viewings. Anyway I’ll have some more of them soon but also a piece on Super Paper Mario, the latest news on No Saints my five-a-side football team and maybe, just maybe, some original writing - you never know…

Evan Almighty

I find within film criticism there are two camps of people, those who like easily, and those who hate easily. Those that like (and I would include myself in this category) look for the good in films, try to see past any initial faults and generally go into a film wanting to like it, wanting to be impressed. Those who easily hate on the other hand go into films wanted to dislike them, they easily pick up on the bad and can be very hard to please. Those people will not like this film. At all. Yet for me it is hard to hate this, like all of Tom Shadyac’s films (Liar Liar, Bruce Almighty, Patch Adams) it wears its heart on it’s sleeve, it can be really overly cheesy and sappy and relies heavily on family friendly broad slapstick, but it has a good moral message and so to hate it seems like kicking a puppy – unnecessarily mean and with no real purpose.

A sort of sequel to Bruce Almighty, Evan sees former anchorman Evan Baxter (Steve Carell) moving to Washington with his family having recently been elected as a local Congressman. To be fair the film tries to tie this story in to the original film but Carell’s character bears little resemblance to the rather mean reporter he played before, it is clear with his newly found fame the makers chose to elaborate on the original rather than develop an entirely new character which may have worked better, but the discrepancy is minor and doesn’t significantly affect the film.

As in Bruce Almighty Even may be a success at work but he has bigger problems with his family that he if unaware of, until God appears to him and charges him with making an Ark in the neighbouring housing lots, and saving himself in the process. At first Evan protests but as eventually becomes convinced as he becomes the laughing stock of the neighbourhood and his antics begin to threaten his home life as well. These early sections of the film are fairly amusing, as Carrel’s quest for a quiet life come a cropper as tonnes of wood is dumped on his lawn and pairs of animals begin to follow him around In fact the whole film could be summed up thusly, fairly amusing. It was watchable and Carrels natural charm lends a lot of likeability to the character, especially when people turn against him, the message about perseverance and trusting in God is well handled without being overly preachy. What’s a shame is that virtually no-one else is developed at all, Carell’s family are bland and left with little material other than for minor family drama, Morgan Freeman sleepwalks through his role as God once again, but still outperforms most people and Evan’s work colleagues tend to annoy more than entertain (Wanda Sykes take a bow) whilst John Goodman hams it up as an evil senator.

Still the film boasts some impressive special effects at the end and a timely, if overly simplified message about the environment and religion and some good jokes as well that seem broadly placed to as wider audience as possible (though the mere thought of the combination of cute animals + children + religion has probably already put those of a certain disposition into some kind of hate fuelled coma.) I guess that’s one of the problems with the film, how safe it plays it, everything in the film is black or white, problems get solved, people are made ok again and everything works out for the best. It is a very simplified version of reality that will no doubt infuriate some, and yet it is done with genuine feeling, something rare in mainstream movies these days, which somehow makes it work, there’s nothing shameless about a positive message if you mean it, and you get the feeling that Shadyac really does, whether you agree with him or not.

And yet with all these reasons not the like the film, I kind of did. This is the kind of film I can imagine watching in the future with my family and children, and so to hate on it for the kind of film it is seems rather moot. As much as there is a place for serious emotional drama, and violent horror there is a place for films with a message, films that put a smile on your face and make you feel good about humanity for a while. Evan Almighty is not a masterpiece; neither is it a particularly great film in itself, but it has enough winning charm and sincerity to work despite this.

Predictable and obviously targeted as wide as possible Evan should have been a disaster but through Carell’s charms and a solid message (and some impressive effects) this manages to just stay the right side of overblown sappiness and provide an entertaining enough feel good film that will definitely not be to everyone’s tastes.

Cars

After a couple of horror reviews it feels nice to lighten the tone with a look at Pixar’s latest offering (bar Ratatouille which is yet to be released over here) the aptly named Cars. In the same way that previous Pixar films could have been named ‘Toys’, ‘Bugs’, ‘Monsters’ and ‘Fish’ Cars takes the premise of a world populated entirely by automobiles, but unlike their other films, in which the objects always existed in a world where humans also exist, here the cars seem to be the only characters, something that actually takes something away from the film, that layer of reality and believability that always tied these stories to our world is missing here, and while it is an animated fantasy the niggling questions about how are cars made, how do they exist, how does the society as a whole work, are never answered.

However this doesn’t totally detract from the rest of the film and while it never quite scales the heights of some Pixar efforts this is still a cut above all other animated films with a look and attention to detail that once again push the boundaries of the medium.

The story concerns a young hotshot race car by the name of lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) who, on his way to the final championship race of the season, gets stranded in Radiator Springs, a small desolate town on Route 66. Like all Pixar films there is a focus on character and story at the heart of the film and the contrast between the high speed fast cutting world of NASCAR racing and the quiet idyllic nature of Radiator Springs is well realised and the beautiful scenery and locations make the place a convincing and endearing place. The characters that inhabit it, whilst amusing and at times very funny, don’t match up to, for example, the toys from Toy Story, there isn’t all that much to some of them and there are places in the film where the laughs are thin on the ground.

Luckily the main characters are wonderfully realised and voiced and while the film moves at a fairly slow pace it is never boring, always keeping the momentum of the story going and revealing a deeper side to the story and the nostalgic feel that perpetuates the film is more likely to appeal to adults than the kids. Of course being Pixar there is plenty here for everyone to enjoy and the visuals are absolutely stunning, from the subtle reflections and detailing on the cars to the luscious almost photo-realistic scenery (complete with car shaped mountains and clouds) the films is a visual tour-de-force and again proof that Pixar lead the bunch when it comes to computer imagery. It’s not just the technical aspects that impress, it’s the subtle details and care and love that goes in to all of their products, the fact that these talking cars work at all and convince as people with feelings and emotions is an achievement in itself.

However compared to their previous films Cars is a bit of a letdown, it can drag a bit in the middle and a lot of the humour is lacking, resulting in smirks but no big laughs (aside from the end credits joke which is hilarious). It’s hard to put my finger on exactly what doesn’t fit in the film, but I think it all stems from my initial point, that by making these Cars exist in their own world it alienates the audience and we never really connect as much as with their previous efforts.

But when the faults of a film are so slim and rely so heavily on the impeccable quality of Pixar’s back catalogue then there is little really to complain about. Compared to other animated films this is still leagues ahead and there is much to enjoy here, if you can get past your expectations.

As creative, gorgeous and detailed as you would expect from the Pixar stable, however under the hood Cars lacks the instant likeability and hook of its predecessors. Regardless this is a high quality product that manages to avoid a sluggish mid section for a thrilling finale and that works even when, technically, it shouldn’t.

Hostel

Hype can do a lot for a film, in the case of some it can lead to disappointment and overblown expectations, but for others it can bring them on to people’s radars and create a hit from nowhere. Hostel, when it comes down to it, is not the film I expected, nor really the film it is advertised as. Eli Roth’s fratboy sensibilities don’t mingle well with the ideals for a full blown serious horror film and the end result is proof that having grimy posters and shoving Quentin Tarantino’s name above the tagline do little to alter what is in essence a tarted up splatter movie, with ideas above its station. Most people know the premise of the film, some friends that are backpacking around Europe for their summer are drawn into a seedy world where people pay to torture and kill people, and despite the protests of the makers that this is somehow a highbrow effort looking at truths about how we treat each other, the exploitation of people (how the guys objectify the women is how they themselves are objectified by the end) and the good old notion of naivety breeding ignorance, this is little more than an immature, if at times very watchable, revenge film. Hostel starts out in the vein of various teen movies, guy friends looking to get laid and have some fun, and whilst normally this portion of the film is used to build character and set up the events of the film to come, here it seems an excuse to show women wearing very little and clumsily composed scenes of lads being lads that seem like they wear dreamed up by a bored teenager. Roth may be good at shooting the horror elements of the film, but he clearly struggles to make much of the rest rise above mediocre, characters don’t ring true, the dialogue is pretty lacklustre (the overemphasis on swearing in this case seems to genuinely indicate a lack of imagination) and there is a falseness to it all that feels like a cheat and stops you getting at all attached to these characters. Add to this the fact that they come off as unlikeable jocks and there is little tension built towards the horror. The most misleading aspect of the way the film has been sold and promoted was the focus on the torture, while those scenes are rather graphic and intense they don’t last long and in fact the focus on the film is not this at all. That said the scenes are the best directed and executed in the whole movie, as if you could feel Roth gleefully relishing the fact he gets to put these images on screen after faffing about in Amsterdam for the first half an hour. Like it or loathe it he constructs the environment well and the way the factory was realised and presented was the most effective part of the film. The torture I bought, but it seems like that was all Roth cared about as well. As soon as it passes the film changes gear again into a chase / revenge thriller with some unintentionally funny moments and bizarre character decisions. It’s hard to say why I was so put off by this, but again I think it comes back to insincerity. I just didn’t believe it and so the tension is lost, the pay off is unnecessary (though that may have been the point) and by the end the whole thing is verging on farce, its attempts at serious moral choices come off as ridiculous leaving the exercise floundering. The overly serious tone conflicts with the fanboyish sense of glee at all the violence leaving the message murky at best. Ultimately Hostel falls short because it just can’t come clean about its true colours. Taken as an over the top gore fest this could have worked for the niche horror market, but as a mass market horror film that falls woefully short posing as something more serious but without anything beyond the bluster. Eli Roth is clearly a horror fan, but the human aspects of the story clearly don’t interest him and that emanates from the whole film leaving a rather nasty taste in the mouth. A triumph of marketing over substance this is average horror fare endowed with the requisite shallow characters and teenage sensibilities, but that it aims for a higher moral ground makes it more offensive than if it had simply stopped pretending it had anything important to say.

The Grudge 2

Takashi Shimizu must be a man who loves the idea of The Grudge, well either that or he’s tied to some hellish contract that demands he make these movies for the rest of all eternity. Counting the Japanese sequels and remakes he has now made 7 (count ‘em) Grudge films, and with this latest effort you can almost feel the cogs spinning as he goes through the motions. Creepy dead people appearing to certain characters? Check. Characters entering haunted houses for a laugh, then being punished? Check. Lots of silent built up tension followed by loud noise? Check. What makes this film even more unremarkable is that it isn’t really a new story. Confusingly (bare with me here) this is not a remake of the Japanese Grudge Sequel (Ju-On 2), instead it takes the elements from the first Japanese film that were left out of the first remake, and mixes them with new plots. So it’s basically Ju-On the remake, part deux.

What seems to have got lost in translation is any kind of cohesion in the story elements. Shimizu seems to think cutting between three separate stories automatically links them together, but instead all it does is cause frustration and confusion. In the film we follow a group of schoolgirls who visit the house, Aubrey, the sister of Karen the main character in the first film who has been sent to Japan to bring her sister back, and a mysterious family who have also seemingly been exposed to the Grudge as it affects their life (I have since found out that this thread of the story takes place in Chicago not Japan and is set after the other events of the film. That fact that I had to find this out now speaks volumes for the cohesion of the films plotlines). However that is about all you get in terms of narrative drive and character exposition. Characters don’t talk in this film, well not about any deep, or much at all. They meet up, split up and get creeped out in predictable ways.

As with the previous Grudge movies the victims of the initial series of murders haunt those who have been in contact with the house, a little boy and a woman, and yet the impossible and random nature of their attacks somehow make them less scary. They can seemingly manifest at will, and yet often just appear to freak out individuals rather than harm them. They can appear anywhere at any time and yet there is no pattern, no reason seemingly for their behaviour. The nearest we get to an explanation in the lot is that it cannot be stopped and it will keep growing, the kind of ominous threat that serves as evidence of the Shimizu / hellish contract theory. The trouble is that the film once again is well made, it had good art design and direction and some of the ideas and scares are pretty effective. Despite the best efforts of the script writer and the story team some bits of the film are pretty effective and reminds you that the actual premise can be fairly scary if used effectively, the trouble is it is used very rarely in this film.

So at the end of the day I think it’s fair to say that this is one series that really should either be put to rest or radically altered. It is stale and repetitive and nonsensical and whilst Shimizu will probably go on to make these movies in his sleep for the rest of his life he is clearly more talented than that. This film is a waste of all the talent involved and the redeeming features are quickly washed away by the horribly vague characterisations and seemingly random story developments (clue: there are none). If this was the first in a series then I might be more forgiving but even more so than the other recent Japanese remake sequel (The Ring 2) this feels like a hollow effort, an excuse to slap the memorable scares around yet more people for no good reason other than to establish a franchise, and that really is the kiss of death for any horror film. There is nothing frightening about the familiar and unfortunately there is no better word that sums up this film.

A tired and confused mess this is an all too familiar film that adds little to the mythos of the Grudge and whilst is has some good ideas and sequences it falls down at the first hurdle by having characters you don’t care about in situations that aren’t explained. A waste and a sure sign of a series in dire need of killing off itself.

My Games #1: Super Mario 64

A new regular feature I have decided to add to the blog is a retrospective look at some of the games and films that have influenced me or that I have particularly enjoyed or connected with over the years. Often these may not be critically impressive, but each has impacted a certain part of my life in a very real way and looking back it is interesting to see what games and films have such an impact upon me and how they have shaped the person I am now and to share those memories on this site.

Back in 1997 Nintendo released the Nintendo 64 games console, off the back of the massive success they had with the SNES. However this was the generation that Sony would enter the console race releasing their Playstation console a year and a half previously. Whilst the N64 was more powerful it struggled with its choice of cartridges over CDs and to match Sony new and fresh take on the industry. However it was the release of Mario 64 with the console that brought it worldwide attention, simultaneously re-inventing the platform game and exemplifying the potential within 3D worlds the game was a landmark title and one that proved to be my real introduction to console video gaming. Whilst my family had owned an Amiga back in the day the first console me and my brother ever got was the N64 for the Christmas of 1997, almost 10 years ago. Until the point I had no particular bias to choose Nintendo over Sony, the only reason I can think of choosing it was that the games appealed to me more, and I distinctly remember playing a demo of Mario in a local shop and deciding that was the game I wanted to play.

So Christmas rolled around the N64 and Mario was turned on and I was hooked. It’s easy now to look back and forget what was so revolutionary about Mario 64 at the time, it was the first game to really take advantage of the concept of 3D worlds but retained the tight platforming and level design that made the older Mario games such classics. What remains amazing about the game today is how much it accomplishes that had never been done before. The game is huge with 15 distinct worlds each with their own challenges, enemies and secrets. Add to this the castle which was the perfect ‘hub’ world and showcase for the graphics and controls. Rather than walk you through a 20 minute tutorial on how to the play the game Mario 64 brilliantly lets you work it out for yourself at the start as you simply explore the landscape. It is an inspired idea and something that, even now, few games tend to implement successfully.

What makes Mario stick in my mind so much is that it is one of the few games I continue to go back to. There is something wonderfully fun and enjoyable about the game that I find myself itching to play it every now and again, not just play it mind, but complete it. It is just the right side of challenging and the collecting element of the game allows you to decide between completing the game, or continuing to get everything before the big finish. The game is also remarkably solid in design and feel, there are a few glitches but generally the rigorous testing that Nintendo employ is visible in the sheer quality of the game. In a way it is sad to look back nearly ten years on from Mario 64 and see that the platform game has not greatly evolved or changed in that time, in fact platform games are much less common these days with more realistic shooters and racing games prevailing as the dominant genres within gaming. But, largely due to this single game, it will remain a type of game I always have a soft spot for, and as a result of this the reason I still look back at the N64 with such fond memories.

Nowadays platformers seem to be the easy choice for film tie-ins and it seems once again it has taken Nintendo to really play about with the conventions in the upcoming Mario Galaxy which is due for release in November and which may be the first game in all this time to eclipse Mario 64. Of course nothing can really replace the change that Mario 64 represented within the industry or the impact it still holds today. It was the first console game I ever owned, played and completed and remains to this day one of the best. If you have never played it I urge you to check it out either by buying an old copy or downloading it from the Wii’s Virtual Console, like good films and music great games will always remain great despite the primitive graphics and technology and there is no finer example of this than Super Mario 64.