Because Everybody Else Has One

Here's yet another article, I did for my course: As film budgets soar and creative bankruptcy plunges new depths (yes, I’m looking at you Michael Bay, on both counts), some movie buffs may well be tempted to write off modern cinema as a pale shadow of its former self. Indeed, as Hollywood’s unholy crusade to remake every 1970s horror movie, it’s hard not to look back at that particular decade with rose-tinted glasses. After all, that was the decade of Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola and William Friedkin. As for the big Hollywood blockbusters: can you get much more classic than Star Wars and Jaws? Can today’s films possibly hope to measure up to the heady days of the ‘70s? Or, for that matter, to those equally classic decades that surrounded it? Well, yes, of course they can. Oh sure, with the release of every new lame-duck comedy or overly noisy but brain-smashingly dull “blockbuster”, those previous decades can’t help but look like a true Golden Age for...

Here's another quick review that I wrote recently for my course: As I walked out of the mid-afternoon showing of Pixar’s latest sure-fire winner of the Best Animated Film category at next years Oscars, I was left with a slight feeling of, dare I say it, disappointment. The worst part was that I wasn’t entirely sure where that disappointed came from. Up had everything that I have come to expect from Pixar: the lush, at times breathtaking animation; the well rounded characters; the faultless voice actors; jokes that work for people of all ages; the simple but effective plot and, of course, oodles of heart. How could I possibly be left disappointed by so seemingly perfect a piece of filmmaking? A few hours later and after far more time spent dwelling on my feelings about the film than is probably healthy, I came to a surprising conclusion: Up is a wildly uneven affair. Of course, it’s uneven in a way that only a Pixar movie can be. It’s not that the quality of the film fluctuates wild...

OK, so clearly I haven't posted here for a while but then most of my writing has gone towards my actual journalism course. Still, I figure that some of my "day job" writings would make decent blog posts and here's the first of them: a less than favourable review of Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People : Dale Carnegie is a perfectly readable writer. With the good bits out of the way, let’s move onto why Carnegie’s “classic” self-help book, How To Win Friends and Influence People , encapsulates everything that’s so wrong with the so-called self-help genre. First published in 1936, How to Win Friends and Influence People (or Balderdash, for short) is generally accepted to be the first self-improvement book ever written. One could only wish that it was also the last. Nominally, aimed at young business-people, Carnegie’s “insight” into human nature promises, as the title does indeed suggest, a guide to mastering your social domain. It is a b...

Superman Returns, the most recent attempt to bring The Man of Steel to the big screen was a relative box-office failure and drew more than its fair share of criticism from fans and casual movie goers alike. Personally, I rather enjoyed it (note: as of 2012, I can honestly say that this is not a movie that has aged all that well so take the next bit with a pile of salt) thanks to some wonderful direction, spectacular set pieces, good performances and a real grasp of the sense of wonder and hope that Superman should elicit. Sure enough though, on a script level, it was a bit of train wreck. I am more than willing to take on board that the script was illogically structured, badly thought out and featuring some real head-scratching decisions in the form of Lex Luthor's moronic masterplan and the distracting inclusion of the Super-kid. On the other hand, one criticism that has been levelled at the film time and time again that I have absolutely no time for is the idea that it was a we...

Just to finish off my review of my favourite stuff from a few weeks ago, here's a few thoughts for my music pick of the week: Tonight at the Arizona by The Felice Brothers. As anyone who even remotely knows me might be able to tell you I generally prefer music from the 60s and 70s to what's being produced today. I do need to stress the word "generally" though because I am finding more and more stuff recorded more recently that I really enjoy - though, sure enough, very little of it gets much in the way of play on mainstream, Top 40 radio or MTV. One complaint that I still have about a great many of these newer acts (and indeed, new releases from many music veterans) is that even if I really like the music the way it's recorded leaves a lot to be desired. The latest and greatest in recording technology should in theory make music sound better than ever but a hell of a lot of the time it makes things a whole lot worse. Far too many albums released in this digital ag...

OK, so, as per usual, I've fallen a bit behind here. The week that was is quickly becoming the week that was two weeks ago. As such, I'm going to keep the reviews of the three films that I want to talk about rather short - at least for the first two, any way. Film of the Week: Sunshine Cleaning Every poster, trailer and promotional item for this film have made it abundantly clear that it is by the same producer as Little Miss Sunshine. They even included the word "sunshine" in the title just in case you didn't yet understand that this was by the same people who brought you (in this case supplied the financing for, rather than actually making) that Oscar-nominated little indie flick from a few years back. The good news is that it's actually a better film than the somewhat overrated Little Miss Sunshine. It is also much more noticeably a drama than its not-really-predecessor and I don't really understand why so many people have labelled it a "black come...