(Insert usual excuses for not posting all that often here.)
Now then, after a gap of about a year (the last movie I went to see at a multiplex up until 2 months ago was “Star Trek”). Since then, I’ve seen, including the just-mentioned “Star Trek” are “Inception” and “Shrek Forever”
So, let’s see now.
Inception
Am I writing this post or just dreaming it? A bit of a complex movie this one. I’ve declided that as a movie it’s good, but maybe not as good as it’s being made out to be. Leonardo DiCaprio was good in this one, even though he was fairly good in Blood Diamond. I didn’t realise that Ellen Page was so pleasing to the eye. Anywho, there are some questions that need to be answered about what happens in the movie, but I suppose that’s the whole point of the movie:
Threelight’s Rating: 7/10
Shrek Forever After
This is the first movie of the new 3d craze that I’ve seen. Apart from some problem with the right of the screen, the 3D effect worked on me. So I’m kind of relieved about that. But then it comes to the movie itself. Had they run out of ideas, and made a Shrek version of “It’s A Wonderful Life”? That’s the idea I get. Yes, it was funny in places, but it wouldn’t quite beat the originality and the hilariousness(word?) of the first one. And I suppose that’s the problem. Interesting story though.
Threelight’s Rating: 7/10
And not to slow down in watching new movies, I’m supposed to be going to see “The A-Team” tonight. I’m going in with an open mind, seen as I do remember the series first time around.
As mentioned in my last post, I went to see Iron Man 2 with Polyhex and Agent. Okay, now the trouble is that I maybe enjoyed it a bit too much! I really, really liked it. Okay, not as good as Iron Man, but it sweeps you along at a fair whack. Of course, thius is where I usually tell you how I shouldn’t really divulge the plot, but at the same time telling you what happened in the movie, but not this time.
All I can say is: “Wowser! Scarlett Johannson!” My liking of Scarlett Johannson is evident, since I first began to take notice from watching “Lost in Translation”. But it’s good that she’s in more movies like these. But what an attractive woman she is. “Hubba Hubba” us another phrase to bring to mind. In another decade, I’d use the word “Schwingg!!”
Gratuitous picture below.
I was in a quiet cinema with only about 10 people in there (including the 3 of us), but still, I enjoyed it immensely. The only person I think was wasted in the whole movie was probably Gwyneth Paltrow, but good to see Samuel L. back, even though middle aged spread appears to have caught up with him a bit.
Now, when’s this one coming out on DVD. One for the collection methinks.
Rating: ****
I have quite an extensive book collection, collected over a number of years. In my library I have all the Ian Fleming-written James Bond Novels. And just the other day, I finished the last book of the entire series. It’s only taken me around about 3 years. I’ve not been reading them one after the other, but rather whenever I could read them, out came the novel next on the list. I read them in the order they were published, rather than all over the place, as I’d read elsewhere that Fleming would sometimes refer to novels gone before in whatever he was writing.
In these days of politcal correctness, some of the writing is quite offensive. But the novels are very much a product of their time. But for all their faults, I prefer the Jmaes Bond of the novels than the earlier movies. The difference is that in the last 2 movies, James Bond bleeds, and in the books he bleeds. One of the things I like about the film version of “Casino Royale”, is that it’s probably as close to the book as possible, even down to the quote of “The bitch is dead” at the end of both book and movie.
If you thought that the quote “Bond…James Bond” came from the scriptwriters of the movies, think again. It’s in the books. And also the quote, “We’ve got all the time in the world” (at the end of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service). What I’m seeing in my mind while I’m reading is a different character entirely to the one on film.
If I had to choose my favourite book out of the lot, ‘twould have to be the first one, “Casino Royale”. Excellent pace, excellent imagery, and an excellent way to torture your hero in the very first book (near enough the same in the movie, if you want to know). And the worst, has to be “The Spy Who Loved Me”. Yuck. Ugly book. Just wanted to get to the last page and forget about it. Just didn’t work for me at all.
I wonder whether the reason why they’ve put the new James Bond movie on ice, is because they’ve run out of fresh ideas?
Firstly apologies. I’m in that sort of a mood. Those who don’t like this sort of thing gracing their screens, whether they be desktop, laptop, mobile or otherwise, move away from this post now. I know it amounts to a shameless plug for a so-called “mens quality mag” but there you go.
I couldn’t resist.
http://www.dailymotion.com/videox96sfu
The stretch at 0:25 is particularly fine.
I now remove myself shamefully back to the real world.
2010 update: New video embedded
This looks…intriguing.
They’ve got a good lookalike. You’ll see who I mean.
Yes I am a fan. And yes, I am a fan of the director. Will it work? Quite possibly. Enough to make another series? I hope not. But then what do I know?
Jerry, movie afficianado extraordinaire, what do you think of said ?
Update: 4/6/09 New trailer replacing old link.
In case you didn’t now, the new Indiana Jones movie had it’s world premiere at Cannes this evening. Early reports are coming out.
Now, I’m a fan of the Indiana Jones movies, my favourite being “Raiders of the Lost Ark“. And “The Last Crusade” is being shown on television as I type this. But I sense with this one, we’ve been here before. They’ve kept things low key on the promotion side, I think. All I can think about is “The Phantom Menace“. Despite raking in all the money that it did, it was slated (either rightly or wrongly, it’s not for debate in the this post. Maybe another time, eh?). The build-up was immense. Yes, it’s going to be a good movie they told us, and then it turned out, in most people’s view, to be weak.
While this isn’t in the league of “Star Wars”, in terms of anticipation that it’ll be good, will only lead to one thing: that it’ll be a disappointment.
Unless I’m totally wrong.
I haven’t posted for 10 days.
It’s not that I’ve been ill or anything. Far from it. Sometimes life’s priorities take over, and something has to give. In my case..from my last post, you’d know that I’ve started my new job. It’s going great. There’s a few things I’m still trying to get my head round, but it’s going absolutely fine. And also due to other personal reasons, which I won’t go into, I couldn’t post.
Last Thursday, I went with Agent, Polyhex and two of their friends to see “Casino Royale”
My verdict?
Bloody hell. Why are you here reading this blog. Go and see it. Now. (If the cinema will let you). It’s brilliant. I can’t praise it highly enough. It’s fantastic. I’m one of those people who like the books. I’ve read “Casino Royale” twice. I can say that I’m quite happy with this movie adaption. It has one or two lines and one or two scenes which are in the book, and which I was sure they wouldn’t have in the movie. So, I was peasantly surprised about it.
And Daniel Craig as James Bond? Yes. He bleeds, he cries, he makes it all a bit more believeable. Go and see it. Now.
I’d arrange to meet Phil in Manchester at the weekend, but unfortunately, he has been very seriously ill recently, and wasn’t able to make it. Here’s hoping he recovers soon.
Okay, that’s it for now. I’ll try not to leave it another 10 days. Honest.
It’s getting warmer!!! Even the rain is warmer.
This weekend I saw an absolutely terrific movie, one called “Serenity”. It is so cool, so shiny, so involving, that I was begiinning to think, if George Lucas wasn’t so driven to make 3 effects-hungry movies, that is what they could have become. The surprise in the whole move, and I know I’m not giving too much away here when I say one word : “Spike”. Shheeeiiit. That one took me a bit by surprise.
Also just finished watching “A for Andromeda” on BBC4. A bit slow, but satisfying. It has one or two good things to say, which is what good science fiction is all about, yes?
No post as such (then what the hell is this then? -Ed). But expect a small book review, and the differences between that book and the movie version.
Thank you and good night.
I was toying with the idea of providing a link that provides the answer about who is in the picture.
He’s not camp, and he’s not Anne Widdecombe.
It’s Peter Jackson. Yes, the same one who directed “Lord Of The Rings”. Here’s a link anyway to the article I was reading. Apparently he’s lost 70lb over the past year. The third picture in the set looks more like him, as we know him. But it shocked me too, when I first saw it.
Atkins Diet maybe?
Comments (0) 
