Recent Viewing Part IV

Just watched Harry and Paul's Story of The 2s ( on BBC i-player ), Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse do an irreverent look at the history of BBC2, this was the funniest program I've seen all year and I highly recommend it.

I will say though, that unless you're familiar with many of the ground breaking, famous and infamous shows from BBC2s past then some of the parodies will be lost on you.

It is. And very moving at the end, surprisingly.

I finally saw STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE last night. It was the only Trek film I hadn't seen. I had heard lots of negative things about it, so I watched it more out of a feeling of obligation than anything. It is certainly slow (I fell asleep at what I think was supposed to be the climax). Most of the movie feels like it's in slow motion. Those exterior shots of the ship are forever long - especially that shuttle ride that goes all the way around the ship for half an hour. It was also missing a lot of the wonderful interpersonal relationships that made the original Star Trek cast so great to watch.

Goldsmith's score is the great redeeming virtue of the film. At least all those long shots gave Goldsmith a chance to write a bunch of music that was highlighted wonderfully in the film. It's weird, though, that I had never realized how slow his arrangements of the main theme were for most of the film. I've heard the score on CD repeatedly, but not until watching the film did I realize how slow it moved at times. And then when the end credits hit I was kind of shocked to hear it played so quickly again. It sounded like someone had just let the theme off it's leash and it finally was able to run at whatever speed it wanted.

It's interesting to me that Goldsmith's theme became the theme that Star Trek is known for. The film wasn't terribly well liked, yet it is that theme, and not Horner's theme from the next two films (which were far better liked), which because the theme that almost everyone would associate with the series. I wonder why that is. Is it just because it was first? Is it because it's so good? Is it because Goldsmith came back and used it again in the other Star Trek film that nobody likes? I wonder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYPMU-q9Wn0 (5:15 in, though you may enjoy the whole thing)

Yes, I think its use in TNG got into the social conscience in a big way. But why did the shows creators choose Goldsmith's theme over Horner's?

I honestly don't see how Superman Returns can fail for so many people. It is a wonderful ode and tribute to the old Superman films, a nostalgic reminder how laughter, adventure and chemistry can still work in a movie of today. Okay, so Bosworth is not Kidder and Routh is not Reeve, but they bring enough chemistry on screen. Plus Spacey is good as Lex Luthor and the many small hints in the film are a pure joy for a Superman fan.

Add to that a believable story, great special effects and a score that truly pays homage to the source and you have a quality film. People can continue to enjoy the onslaught of fights of Man of Steel, but give me this thoroughly entertaining movie any day. A movie that has a heart and a lot of laughs for the Supie's amongst us who grew up with the good old Christoper Reeve films (well the first and second at least)

Ps, I like Jimmy and Perry White as well, much more than in Man of Steel

8 out of 10

Even later as an adult Jakanory could be brilliant, what a shame this seems to be the only bit of Tom Baker reading THE IRON MAN

The Space Bat Angel Dragon

The Terminator 1 & 2

It's hard to say which is the best film (but not impossible, the first one is), but as original and sequels go, it's even harder to find a better example. These are the sorts of films I would aspire to make were I a filmmaker. (I like to think these films exist in the same universe as The Matrix )

Finally saw Godzilla. Yeah, it's great. Nicely done in all areas of production.
Oh and especially the score! Nice one Desplat!

However, it still gripes me that this movie along with quite a few other films over the last decade have this "anamorphic"(?) stretching in some scenes that makes the aspect ratio just a tad squashy. I feel like I'm the only person on earth who notices this or even cares. All of JJ Abrams films have it too. Whyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!

Her

A little artsy fartsy, but very interesting nonetheless. I love how subtle its vision of the future is, things are downplayed so as not to become distracting, but believable enough to provide a proper setting for the story. And what an interesting story it is, and very relevant. Everything is just handled so well in order to tell its story. Brilliant.

Hhhhhhwwwwwkkkkaquin Phoenix's performance is, unsurprisingly, excellent.

HER had a cute promise and it was fine enough for the first half hour or so. After that, it just became irritating and repetitive, IMO.

Agree with Thor. HER is well-written and engaging in its first act, but when the film needs to take its premise to places, it turns out it doesn't really know what to do with it. And while the premise brims with relevance for a lonely digital age, scenes like the threesome or some plot developments in the last act just sit there without any (symbolic) heft. It's not really saying anything, it's just like the tag line promises: a Spike Jonze love story. Which might be fine in any other film, certainly when it's got the dreamy vibe it has, but with a premise like this, it's just wasted potential.

Wot Michael sed.

I think Phoenix's performance and the concept was what sold me on this film, regardless of its pitfalls.

And he talks to other people a lot in the film.

One thing I couldn't figure out by the way was what he'd done that was so bad in the past relationship. He was very hard on himself, but most flashbacks showed him and Rooney Mara having a good time together. (Again, probably intentional.)

The thing I wasn't so keen on was their stalking horse strategy with Amy Adams. I saw it coming a mile away, but the way they made it happen felt a bit perfunctory, despite the gorgeous closing imagery.

Spacecamp?!

-Erik-