philosoraptor42: (Default)


It's been a really tough few months and I'd been really looking forward to checking out "Dredd" which is getting great reviews and is also a comic book character I'm kind of fond of. It was going to be a great treat to reward me for all my hard work.

And now I'm having to call the whole thing off. Why? Because people have been stupid enough to make it practically impossible to find a 2D showing.

I don't enjoy films in 3D. Rewarding myself for hard work by giving myself a headache would be absolutely ludicrous. That means that there's currently very little worth seeing at the cinema and I'm going to have to wait until the DVD release before I get to see Dredd. I was worried about this being a problem when Prometheus came out, but that was absolutely fine. Hmmmph!



Update Mark Kermode uses the example of the elusive Dredd 2D to note how the 3D format is being forced on people who didn't want it. I was actually thinking "I hope they don't follow this up with figures saying how much better the 3D version did than the 2D one", because that would be plain dishonest.

(Video embedded under cut)
Read more... )
philosoraptor42: (Default)




Kermode has done his latest set of favourite movies of the year. I pointed out his previous set before (click here) and I've since had a chance to check (nearly) all of them out. Now this new one is a rather larger list (or a shorter list depending on how you look at it) for 2010 and I'm wondering how seriously to take it. My own reviews online can all be found if you click here along with further links for favourites of 2008, 2009 and 2010 so far.

Okay let's look back through Mark Kermode's old reviews, because I really can't find many of those. Back in 2007 is the earliest I can find his stating his best and worst movies of the year (link here). In 2008 he gives a list of movies, but clearly only really wants to give one of each (best here) (worst here). And so it's not until 2009 that he gives a whole selection of favourite movies (my previous post here) and in that year he similarly had a long list of worst movies in the form of his Bride Wars Challenge.

2007
Read more... )

Tangent - Movies I Couldn't Finish

Read more... )

2008
Read more... )

2009
Read more... )

Kermode's Top Five of 2010 (Click here for video)
Naturally I haven't seen all of these yet and until I do, I'm going to be in difficult position to judge. Still, I can already tell that my list for 2010 is going to be very different.
1. Inception (Not a review)
2. Of Gods And Men
3. Toy Story 3 (My review here)
4. Made In Dagenham
5. Chico And Rita

Runners Up
Kick-Ass (My review here)
Restrepo - I have seen this. Didn't review it. What can I say? It's a documentary which successfully follows the lives of soldiers in Afghanistan. It does the job well enough.
Skeletons (My review here)
Heartless
Women Without Men
Eyes Wide Open
Winter's Bone
Monsters
The Arbor
Another Year
Oil City Confidential
The Social Network
Harry Potter 7: Part One
Green Zone (My review here)
The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

Mark Kermode's Worst Five Movies of 2010 (Click here for video)
Once again I haven't seen any of these. Still, here they are....
Sex And The City 2
Fred: The Movie
Pimp
Eat Pray Love (Vomit)
Nightmare On Elm Street
philosoraptor42: (Default)


Just a quick list of the movies under the cut:

Read more... )
philosoraptor42: (Default)
Okay, so a recent interview with Sigourney Weaver has her saying that writers should just imagine that they are writing a man if they want realistic female characters. She appears to be one a series of actresses asked about "women in film". On the one hand it must be irritating for actresses like Sigourney to be asked this sort of question over and over again. (Mark Kermode mocks himself in his recent podcast for being "the umpteen shlub who's come in and said: 'So Sigourney, please tell me about the feminist undercurrent of the alien movies and the entire cycle as a metaphor for birth'" *with interview quote in squeaky voice*.) On the other hand, I guess it means she's had plenty of time to consider her answer. (Perhaps unlike Eliza Dushku who says that exploiting sexuality is beautiful and Joss agrees on this. Somehow I found that a little creepy.) So here's Sigourney's own words on the subject:


A few pointers before I give my view on Sigourney's comments:

Read more... )

Back To Sigourney
I've long viewed that there's no real difference between men and women in the same way that there's no difference between people who like or dislike bananas. Sure social pressures mean there are differences (and I similarly don't think that class distinctions are set in stone) and, as with any group, physical differences will make a difference to you (though amongst men and women this is still the case, so the fact that women are often weaker than men seems pretty unimportant). However, it doesn't seem to me that gender makes people essentially different.

As such, I think I rather agree with Sigourney on this. Writing a man and then putting a woman in the role doesn't sound like an awful idea at all. In the end the important thing is that they are a convincing person. That doesn't mean that female experience as understood from female writers isn't important. After all, to produce convincing characters, you can't just ignore social pressures any more than you can ignore class distinctions or racial prejudices. These things are part of life and good writing will encompass the various aspects of life in all their grittiness. Still, I think the idea that male and female characters are inter-changeable is a lot more healthy than insisting on characters who are hold to some ideal of essential femaleness. There isn't an essential man or an essential woman. There are people and there are cliches, so let's try to aim for the former and avoid the latter, ok?
philosoraptor42: (Default)
Yes, Terminator Salvation came out ages ago, but I'm STILL pissed off by it. My feeling on the issue have been rather complicated. While it's fairly plain to pretty much anyone who's seen it that Terminator Salvation is a terrible movie. What is less obvious however is why I think it's worse than Terminator 3.

WARNING: I am presuming that everyone has seen the first three Terminator movies and that no one will care about spoilers for the fourth movie. If you haven't seen the first three Terminator movies and/or really care about spoilers for the recent travesty do not read any further.

So back to the question: Why is Terminator Salvation worse than Terminator 3? Okay, so here are some suggestions:

Read more... )

There's a rather funny review from Mark Kermode about Terminator Salvation:

And this timeline of the movies is kinda neat:

See timeline... )

So yeah, is the Terminator franchise really dead? Well, to be quite honest the BS in Terminator Salvation screwed up so badly that I'm inclined to pretend that it never happened. If I acknowledge the existence of another movie, I'm not sure that I can really successfully pretend that this travesty didn't happen. As such, for me, the franchise is dead.

Profile

philosoraptor42: (Default)
philosoraptor42

August 2014

S M T W T F S
     12
345 67 8 9
10 1112 13 141516
171819 202122 23
24 2526 2728 29 30
31      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 12th, 2025 05:28 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios