Sunday, 27 May 2007
A Hasty Confession
In reference to my earlier blog about the state of cinema I would like to confess that I have come up with a synopsis for Waynes World 3. Not that it's needed or will ever happen all the while Mike Myers is happy as an ogre. If you would like to know how I feel it should go drop me a line, I'm happy to sell my idea to fund my great film noir
Why are all the heros back?
I’m sure I’m not the only one to say this and no doubt I’ll be the last but: “where has all the originality gone in film?”
For those of you that don’t know I used to work at the cinema in Ashford and took full advantage of the free films and saw an awful lot of good films. Since I left all those years ago I’ve slipped out of the practice and thought about going to the cinema over the Bank Holiday weekend and catching up, I soon changed my mind.
Looking at the ‘big’ films of the year it’s sequel heaven, the main offenders being Spiderman and Shrek’s third instalments – and confirmation that a 4th Shrek is in process and I’m sure another spidey film will arrive in 18 months. I know why it happens – a film of a certain nature gets picked up by a studio and green lighted for two. Judging by the success of the first instalment a third is green lighted and the fourth according to the performance of the sequel. Am I the only one who thinks that’s nuts?
Surely The Godfather 3 is enough of a lesson for film makers about where to draw the line? No - They’re filming a follow up to Batman Begins yet… technically isn’t Batman the follow up? Another Superman film is also in discussion. The annoying thing about Batman Begins is, for me, the idea of Christopher Nolan becoming part of a franchise when he was once such a great writer and director with Memento and Insomnia to his name.
Then there’s this. Tintin, the Belgian comic, is to be made into 3 films with Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson to direct. Not that I’m going to sit here and criticise the choice (though one will make it an epic and the other overly sentimental) more the notion of it needing to be done.
Why must directors and writers chain themselves to sequels instead of original ideas? It’s not like they’re hard to come by – I’ve written three screenplays myself including one about a narcoleptic backpacker.
I’m currently reading a book called Easy Riders and Raging Bulls about the golden age of the writer / director when Scorsese and co were just starting out and recommend it to anyone with even a passing interest in films.
I’m not saying that films of quality don’t get made anymore but they’re getting harder and harder to see – especially living in Ashford. If it’s not a sequel it’s another stupid horror / thriller film that’s identical to the last or another Will Ferrell movie. I blame Jerry Bruckheimer and Don Simpson.
For those of you that don’t know I used to work at the cinema in Ashford and took full advantage of the free films and saw an awful lot of good films. Since I left all those years ago I’ve slipped out of the practice and thought about going to the cinema over the Bank Holiday weekend and catching up, I soon changed my mind.
Looking at the ‘big’ films of the year it’s sequel heaven, the main offenders being Spiderman and Shrek’s third instalments – and confirmation that a 4th Shrek is in process and I’m sure another spidey film will arrive in 18 months. I know why it happens – a film of a certain nature gets picked up by a studio and green lighted for two. Judging by the success of the first instalment a third is green lighted and the fourth according to the performance of the sequel. Am I the only one who thinks that’s nuts?
Surely The Godfather 3 is enough of a lesson for film makers about where to draw the line? No - They’re filming a follow up to Batman Begins yet… technically isn’t Batman the follow up? Another Superman film is also in discussion. The annoying thing about Batman Begins is, for me, the idea of Christopher Nolan becoming part of a franchise when he was once such a great writer and director with Memento and Insomnia to his name.
Then there’s this. Tintin, the Belgian comic, is to be made into 3 films with Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson to direct. Not that I’m going to sit here and criticise the choice (though one will make it an epic and the other overly sentimental) more the notion of it needing to be done.
Why must directors and writers chain themselves to sequels instead of original ideas? It’s not like they’re hard to come by – I’ve written three screenplays myself including one about a narcoleptic backpacker.
I’m currently reading a book called Easy Riders and Raging Bulls about the golden age of the writer / director when Scorsese and co were just starting out and recommend it to anyone with even a passing interest in films.
I’m not saying that films of quality don’t get made anymore but they’re getting harder and harder to see – especially living in Ashford. If it’s not a sequel it’s another stupid horror / thriller film that’s identical to the last or another Will Ferrell movie. I blame Jerry Bruckheimer and Don Simpson.
Friday, 18 May 2007
Brooke's Alphabet
I saw it again today and this time I've done a bit of digging. And I can only say "phew" as it's not just me that's puzzling over this whole "Brooke Shields Alphabet" graffiti thing.
Seems they've been popping up all over London - north and sarf - and with the variant of "Alphabet of Brooke Shields" amongst them. Where once a google shearch for the phrase resulted in nothing - much like googling for "Chuck Norris getting his arse kicked", because it ain't ever going to happen - it now returns a flurry of debates and fellow puzzled heads pondering the meaning of this nonsensical phrase.
Check out this article for further bemusement. If someone has any idea please put the misery to an end.
Seems they've been popping up all over London - north and sarf - and with the variant of "Alphabet of Brooke Shields" amongst them. Where once a google shearch for the phrase resulted in nothing - much like googling for "Chuck Norris getting his arse kicked", because it ain't ever going to happen - it now returns a flurry of debates and fellow puzzled heads pondering the meaning of this nonsensical phrase.
Check out this article for further bemusement. If someone has any idea please put the misery to an end.
Wednesday, 16 May 2007
Baby's Got A Gun
This has got to be one of my favourite news stories of late and, surely, one of the biggest indication that American intelligence rivals that of a bowl of Frosties:
Illinois, U.S.A - apparently home to some of the strictest gun laws and the Ludwig family. Howard Ludwig decided to apply for a gun licence for his son after the son's grandfather gave him a shotgun as an heirloom. The problem, as far as common sense goes, is that Howard's son is only 10 months old. That's right, this kid isn't even a year old.
To compile the stupidity into one big mountain of sheer comical genius, the licence was approved! The only rejection was because Howard had failed to tick a box that declared his son as a US citizen, not the fact that the now licenced owner of a shotgun still needs someone to change his nappy. The licence in question bears the toothless photo of the child complete with a squiggle as signature. Genius.
Howard Ludwig has said the licence "makes an adorable addition to his baby book."
This article I read was actually written by Howard Ludwig himself in which he looks at the whole thing like it's all a great joke. Sure a 10 month old gets a gun licence. Yeah it's stupid but not in that way. It points out the pure ease with which anyone - regardless of age - can be licenced to carry a gun.
What kind of a system are the Americans running?? In a country, if not world, where the recent Virginia Tech killings are still able to provoke outrage at gun control a toddler can get licensed to own a shotgun.
To be fair he's not exactly sat on his doorstep weilding it, in fact Howard has said the gun is likely to remain at the grandfather's house until his son turns 14. That's ok then. A 14 year old with a gun. Just what we need.
Oh, and the babies name? Bubba. I kid you not. A bright looking future if ever I saw one.
Illinois, U.S.A - apparently home to some of the strictest gun laws and the Ludwig family. Howard Ludwig decided to apply for a gun licence for his son after the son's grandfather gave him a shotgun as an heirloom. The problem, as far as common sense goes, is that Howard's son is only 10 months old. That's right, this kid isn't even a year old.
To compile the stupidity into one big mountain of sheer comical genius, the licence was approved! The only rejection was because Howard had failed to tick a box that declared his son as a US citizen, not the fact that the now licenced owner of a shotgun still needs someone to change his nappy. The licence in question bears the toothless photo of the child complete with a squiggle as signature. Genius.
Howard Ludwig has said the licence "makes an adorable addition to his baby book."
This article I read was actually written by Howard Ludwig himself in which he looks at the whole thing like it's all a great joke. Sure a 10 month old gets a gun licence. Yeah it's stupid but not in that way. It points out the pure ease with which anyone - regardless of age - can be licenced to carry a gun.
What kind of a system are the Americans running?? In a country, if not world, where the recent Virginia Tech killings are still able to provoke outrage at gun control a toddler can get licensed to own a shotgun.
To be fair he's not exactly sat on his doorstep weilding it, in fact Howard has said the gun is likely to remain at the grandfather's house until his son turns 14. That's ok then. A 14 year old with a gun. Just what we need.
Oh, and the babies name? Bubba. I kid you not. A bright looking future if ever I saw one.
Monday, 14 May 2007
It seemed like a good idea - 1.2
Here we go with a small update on the whole bike ride thing...
I have bought my bike to a rideable standard. It seems there's no puncture in the back wheel afterall. Have tightened the brakes so that they stop the bike and sorted the front wheel.
I even went for a ride for a few miles. My legs still work without a problem but the saddle... it seems to be a bit personal for a first outing if you ask me.
I shall need to get myself down to Halfords soon to get some new brake blocks, a new saddle and a helmet.
Though it's a shame I can't get a hairmet like this:
I have bought my bike to a rideable standard. It seems there's no puncture in the back wheel afterall. Have tightened the brakes so that they stop the bike and sorted the front wheel.
I even went for a ride for a few miles. My legs still work without a problem but the saddle... it seems to be a bit personal for a first outing if you ask me.
I shall need to get myself down to Halfords soon to get some new brake blocks, a new saddle and a helmet.
Though it's a shame I can't get a hairmet like this:
For technology's sake
A bit of a rant, but.. a couple of things have caught my mind lately when it comes to the ever-growing fascination with in car technology. I'll state this now: I'm against it.
Firstly there's this article in which one woman's sat-nav failed to inform her that, while driving at night to her boyfriend's house, she had been directed onto a railway crossing. Her car was promptly destroyed. She claims to have had no idea that she was on a railway crossing.
I have a couple of questions regarding this matter. Firstly, did she not notice a different texture to the road when she got out to open the gate? A certain... railway track type quality? Secondly, surely her car was fitted with those new age things called headlights that should have quite clearly illuminated the area around her car and revealed... again.... a certain railway track type quality?? Was this woman honestly expecting to tell her something she could've looked out the window and seen herself? Did she need it to tell her she was wearing blue jeans too? Or has it now become the case that unless the sat-nav says something is there it's not?
What happened to looking at a map before you set off or using street signs? The government spends huge amounts of our money each year on those huge things that point the way to our destinations, why not use them? Tom-Tom? how about a map? or look at the road signs?! Next it'll be "is that traffic light red, Tom-Tom?"
As a 'valued member' of the AA I was recently asked to complete a survey on in-car technology and whether I would find various bits of kit useful. I closed it down halfway through - technology to alert the car going past in the opposite direction of hazards, a computer to tell me the weather at my destination... pointless. Why do I need a Wi-fi connection in my car? If I want to check my emails I'll do it at home or work not sat in a car in a car park or have the temptation there to try and check it while lobbing down the motorway. I can almost see the Land Rover Discovery hurtling past me at 90mph, driver with one hand on the wheel and the other on his / her laptop logging onto hotmail.com with barely half their attention on the road.
If it's illegal to sit and text on a mobile while driving surely it's illegal to sit and push buttons to tell an oncoming car that there's a dead badger in the road ahead?!
Last night while I was driving home in the crepuscular light I was stuck behind a car with dvd screens set in the back of the front headrests. Sure it may keep little Britney and Keanu quiet for the trip home from Asda but it's distracting as hell for the car behind. As attentive driver as I am I kept finding my eyes drawn to the penguins on screen in the car in front - weirdly enough it was a Toyota. I only knew it was time to move forward at the traffic lights because the penguins started getting farther away.
I know it's not exactly Pimp My Ride levels of insanity - though a fully functioning fireplace in the back of a car may also prove a bit distracting - but surely potential safety infractions should be thought about as much (if not more than) as the gadgetry goodness of half these things?
I'd rather have a safe journey than know where the nearest AA approved hotel is to my current GPS position. I'd also rather the kids in the back we playing I-spy or even pulling faces at each other than think the car behind was likely to rear-end me at the next set of lights because Charlie and Lola were more enthralling than the rest of the driving environment.
Firstly there's this article in which one woman's sat-nav failed to inform her that, while driving at night to her boyfriend's house, she had been directed onto a railway crossing. Her car was promptly destroyed. She claims to have had no idea that she was on a railway crossing.
I have a couple of questions regarding this matter. Firstly, did she not notice a different texture to the road when she got out to open the gate? A certain... railway track type quality? Secondly, surely her car was fitted with those new age things called headlights that should have quite clearly illuminated the area around her car and revealed... again.... a certain railway track type quality?? Was this woman honestly expecting to tell her something she could've looked out the window and seen herself? Did she need it to tell her she was wearing blue jeans too? Or has it now become the case that unless the sat-nav says something is there it's not?
What happened to looking at a map before you set off or using street signs? The government spends huge amounts of our money each year on those huge things that point the way to our destinations, why not use them? Tom-Tom? how about a map? or look at the road signs?! Next it'll be "is that traffic light red, Tom-Tom?"
As a 'valued member' of the AA I was recently asked to complete a survey on in-car technology and whether I would find various bits of kit useful. I closed it down halfway through - technology to alert the car going past in the opposite direction of hazards, a computer to tell me the weather at my destination... pointless. Why do I need a Wi-fi connection in my car? If I want to check my emails I'll do it at home or work not sat in a car in a car park or have the temptation there to try and check it while lobbing down the motorway. I can almost see the Land Rover Discovery hurtling past me at 90mph, driver with one hand on the wheel and the other on his / her laptop logging onto hotmail.com with barely half their attention on the road.
If it's illegal to sit and text on a mobile while driving surely it's illegal to sit and push buttons to tell an oncoming car that there's a dead badger in the road ahead?!
Last night while I was driving home in the crepuscular light I was stuck behind a car with dvd screens set in the back of the front headrests. Sure it may keep little Britney and Keanu quiet for the trip home from Asda but it's distracting as hell for the car behind. As attentive driver as I am I kept finding my eyes drawn to the penguins on screen in the car in front - weirdly enough it was a Toyota. I only knew it was time to move forward at the traffic lights because the penguins started getting farther away.
I know it's not exactly Pimp My Ride levels of insanity - though a fully functioning fireplace in the back of a car may also prove a bit distracting - but surely potential safety infractions should be thought about as much (if not more than) as the gadgetry goodness of half these things?
I'd rather have a safe journey than know where the nearest AA approved hotel is to my current GPS position. I'd also rather the kids in the back we playing I-spy or even pulling faces at each other than think the car behind was likely to rear-end me at the next set of lights because Charlie and Lola were more enthralling than the rest of the driving environment.
Thursday, 10 May 2007
Getting excited
Two words: Simpsons Movie.
Ok, when word first reached me that this was gonna be made my initial reaction went along the lines of "oh for God's sake." I admit that I wasn't too impressed nor could I see the need. I thought that Fox had just allowed them to make it to ensure another few years of 25 minute epsisodes. What plot could justify an hour and a half of the yellow guys and gals? and Moe.
To me it's seems like they've been running low on ideas lately: weak guest appearances and things that don't make sense even for a cartoon - Homer sleeping with his motorcyle before putting it through the roof.
Yet... a couple of things have made me think otherwise. While the show has been putting out episodes that make me snore there's been some quality stuff. There's also 2 outstanding animated 'feature lengthers' that were worthwhile: Family Guy's Stewie Griffin and the South Park movie.
And there's this:
I know a good trailer isn't indicitive of the film but it's made me pay attention and think there may be more to this one than a host of guest voices. I am now holding my breath and hoping for greatness.
Ok, when word first reached me that this was gonna be made my initial reaction went along the lines of "oh for God's sake." I admit that I wasn't too impressed nor could I see the need. I thought that Fox had just allowed them to make it to ensure another few years of 25 minute epsisodes. What plot could justify an hour and a half of the yellow guys and gals? and Moe.
To me it's seems like they've been running low on ideas lately: weak guest appearances and things that don't make sense even for a cartoon - Homer sleeping with his motorcyle before putting it through the roof.
Yet... a couple of things have made me think otherwise. While the show has been putting out episodes that make me snore there's been some quality stuff. There's also 2 outstanding animated 'feature lengthers' that were worthwhile: Family Guy's Stewie Griffin and the South Park movie.
And there's this:
I know a good trailer isn't indicitive of the film but it's made me pay attention and think there may be more to this one than a host of guest voices. I am now holding my breath and hoping for greatness.
Wednesday, 9 May 2007
Automatic Tills
This is just a quick one really as it's on my mind thanks to a near argument with a pushy supermarket worker yesterday evening.
I refuse to use those automatic tills. Fair enough they may well be very flash and new- age... BUT how many times have you been stood next to one when somebody has tried to put alcohol through? Or the machine's confused itself? On top of that there's a little mathematics that I don't like.. Where once 2 tills stood 4 automatic self service satanic creatures now dwell. With 1 member of staff looking over 4 tills. That's at least 1 member of staff's worth of hours cut back. Now, if these things spread out across the store that means an awful lot of reduced hours. Not that I'm championing the service I receive at.. this particular supermarket - there's a reason it's not my preffered shop - lately it's been thorougly lacking. I'm not, however, going to champion technology for the sake of it when it puts people out of work. I may well be way off the mark here but that's the joy of thise things. Correct me if I'm wrong
I refuse to use those automatic tills. Fair enough they may well be very flash and new- age... BUT how many times have you been stood next to one when somebody has tried to put alcohol through? Or the machine's confused itself? On top of that there's a little mathematics that I don't like.. Where once 2 tills stood 4 automatic self service satanic creatures now dwell. With 1 member of staff looking over 4 tills. That's at least 1 member of staff's worth of hours cut back. Now, if these things spread out across the store that means an awful lot of reduced hours. Not that I'm championing the service I receive at.. this particular supermarket - there's a reason it's not my preffered shop - lately it's been thorougly lacking. I'm not, however, going to champion technology for the sake of it when it puts people out of work. I may well be way off the mark here but that's the joy of thise things. Correct me if I'm wrong
Tuesday, 8 May 2007
It Seemed Like A Good Idea - 1
Those famous words - "it seemed like a good idea at the time..." prefix so many unfortunate tales I'm hoping this really won't be one of them.
Not too long ago and for reasons I won't go into (mainly my inability to say 'no' when put on the spot) I signed up to take part in this years London to Brighton bike ride. Sounds fine, right? But then factor in the fact that I haven't ridden a bike since I passed my driving test some... 8 years plus ago. Then factor in the fact that I don't even own a bike. Now it's sounding like one of those unfortunate events.
Anywho, I managed to borrow a bike a little while ago. Although... the brakes on the back don't work, the front brakes take a small ice age to work, the front wheel feels like the bearing's loose and the saddle is... intrusively uncomfortable. And it now seems to have required a flat tire.
I am, however, determined to get this bike fixed up to a rideable standard, get a helmet to protect my head and hair and actually do this. I realise I'm cutting it fine but by putting my intent somewhere relatively concrete I'm trying to cut off my chances of backing out quietly.
I will be looking for sponsors. And some kind of physiotherapy / rubdown after the 56 miles of saddle sore riding.
More to come on the chronicles of an un-fit person preparing to compete in an endurance event or on an un-fit person making hasty excuses and backing out....
Not too long ago and for reasons I won't go into (mainly my inability to say 'no' when put on the spot) I signed up to take part in this years London to Brighton bike ride. Sounds fine, right? But then factor in the fact that I haven't ridden a bike since I passed my driving test some... 8 years plus ago. Then factor in the fact that I don't even own a bike. Now it's sounding like one of those unfortunate events.
Anywho, I managed to borrow a bike a little while ago. Although... the brakes on the back don't work, the front brakes take a small ice age to work, the front wheel feels like the bearing's loose and the saddle is... intrusively uncomfortable. And it now seems to have required a flat tire.
I am, however, determined to get this bike fixed up to a rideable standard, get a helmet to protect my head and hair and actually do this. I realise I'm cutting it fine but by putting my intent somewhere relatively concrete I'm trying to cut off my chances of backing out quietly.
I will be looking for sponsors. And some kind of physiotherapy / rubdown after the 56 miles of saddle sore riding.
More to come on the chronicles of an un-fit person preparing to compete in an endurance event or on an un-fit person making hasty excuses and backing out....
Saturday, 5 May 2007
Graffiti
Not so long ago I was at a presentation by some company who bought up the impact of graffiti - not as in how bad it is environmentally but its impact on memory and how it's used as a form of advertising. The idea in the presentation was that a simple bit of well placed graffiti could be more effective than a big billboard or advert as we tend to ignore those.
The example given was when BigBrother used someone who drew the BB eye logo in the dirt on motorway signs.
There's one bit of graffiti that's been stuck in my head for about a month now and I've only seen it twice (both in the same location). I have abosulutely no idea what it means which is probably why. I was on the M20 on the way back from London and on one of the flyovers were 3 words, not too big, "Brooke Shields Alphabet." I'm baffled as to what it means - and, yes; I've googled it. Surely somebody must know?
The example given was when BigBrother used someone who drew the BB eye logo in the dirt on motorway signs.
There's one bit of graffiti that's been stuck in my head for about a month now and I've only seen it twice (both in the same location). I have abosulutely no idea what it means which is probably why. I was on the M20 on the way back from London and on one of the flyovers were 3 words, not too big, "Brooke Shields Alphabet." I'm baffled as to what it means - and, yes; I've googled it. Surely somebody must know?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)