I've never really warmed to Danny McBride. In everything I've seen him in, he's played a bit of an unlikeable character, and after a while you begin to wonder how much he's acting. So it's a great relief to see that he hasn't broken form here, and his portrayal of Thadeous is pretty irritating for just about the entire movie. Even at the end when he's meant to be on the other side of some character development.
McBride's first and last lines in the film are both swearing. This, for me, sums up perfectly the major flaw in this movie: saying "fuck" isn't funny in its own right. Oh, believe me, in the right context I've been known to literally cry laughing at a flurry of bad language, or even just a single well-placed expletive. But 95% of the swearing in the movie (and there is a lot) is out of character, out of context and seems to have been put in because the writers couldn't think of a punchline to end the scene. I feel so grown up when I moan about this, but I get the impression they were pushing the envelope to get the 15 Certificate and make the film seem edgier. It'd have made a perfectly acceptable 12A without the language, but hey-ho.
I'm also not sure that Danny McBride is ready for a lead-role just yet. Other than me not being able to like him (which could just be me), he doesn't really have the charisma he needs, and is constantly overshadowed by James Franco and Natalie Portman. Had he played the role of Thadeous' man-servant Courtney, he'd have fit in a lot better I think.
Apart from those gripes, it's fairly enjoyable, if somewhat run-of-the-mill. Some great casting of British and American acting talent (the US ones with varying degrees of Brit-accent-stability, which I'm going to assume is deliberate), and beautifully choreographed and shot action-scenes. The effects work was also particularly nice for a movie like this where it's often pushed to the back of the budget. Zooey Deschanel seems largely wasted in her role, but as long as she got paid, who cares, right?
Some nice homages to Star Wars, Clash of the Titans (the 1981 one), and I think I saw a Ghostbusters one towards the end.
This will probably work best on DVD after you've had two or three pints. That'll certainly be the only time I'll watch it again.
DISCLAIMERS: • ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Oh, I've only gone and done it again, haven't I? You'd think that after three Twilight films and I Am Number Four, I'd remember that I'm not a fourteen year old girl. FFS.
Catherine Hardwicke's fairytale reboot lumbers to cinemas with all the subtlety you'd expect from a film aimed a core-demographic of Claire's Accessories customers. In some places over-acted, and in others just horribly scripted, this was never going to have (and I can't believe I'm going to say this) the depth of Twilight.
Now I'm not one for second-guessing movie plots. The whole "oh, I knew from the start that he was the killer" thing just pisses me off and I prefer to see the film through the eyes of the characters, so each reveal has its proper impact. But even so, the red-herrings as to the identity of the werewolf are slammed down so ham-fistedly, that when an obvious tell is given during the village celebration scene, it almost seems subtle, and will probably be lost on a lot of the audience. Enough plot-clues have been laid down before that point that it instantly becomes clear who the wolf is, and further red-herrings just look clumsier by comparison. (Here be spoilers: It's the guy at the party with the sheep's-head-costume on. Literally a wolf in sheep's clothing. Yes, THAT obvious)
Other points:
• In one five minute sequence, I thought I saw an homage to the Empire Strikes Back scene in Yoda's hut, then an Evil Dead homage with the first-person-demon-cam and skewed-zoom-shots of stuffed animal heads on the hut wall, and then even a reference to the Attack of the Clones scene where Anakin is confessing to killing the Tusken Raiders and throwing his tools around in a strop. Add this on to the obvious references to Sleepy Hollow and Witchfinder General, and I had to stop looking for comparisons or I'd have started crying in the cinema. Oh, I'm sure they were all coincidences.
• Just as in Amanda Seyfried's successful outing Mamma Mia!, some shots in this have been filmed on location and some on a soundstage. The visual difference between these is painfully obvious, and when they're intercut in the same scene, it's headache-inducing. Thankfully (I guess), most of Red Riding Hood's dialogue scenes were shot in the studio, and the result is that the outdoor scenes just don't look at all real.
• I liked the casting of Virginia Madsen and Julie Christie as the older generations of Valerie's family. It was visually convincing. Madsen's still looking pretty hot. Jeez, in a couple of shots, even Julie Christie's still looking great.
Bottom line: There's a lot of potential here, but I feel it's been wasted on trying to get a 12A certificate. Once you get past the obvious flaws, it's actually not that bad. But you will have to forget you've seen/read any other werewolf fiction if you want to be engaged at all. For the younger audience who haven't seen a lot of supernatural horror, this is a great place to start. But come back when you're ready and I'll show you Dog Soldiers...
It wants to be a fairytale, but comes off more like a pantomime.
DISCLAIMERS: • ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
CAUTION: Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
Q. When is it okay to sympathise with a man-eating, savage (yet highly intelligent) animal? A. When they've got their own cartoon!
Ahh, the Ewoks. Upon a time, these cute little funsters were derided by fans of the saga, claiming they were an indication of the kid-friendly marketing-bias of the franchise in its later years (like there's ever been anything but). This viewpoint seemed to pale in 1999 when the Gungans from The Phantom Menace took their place, and the Ewoks suddenly seemed cool again.
In all honesty, I've got no issue at all with the cuddliness of the Ewoks, or the cartoon spinoff and plush toys. I understand why they're important to the narrative of Return of the Jedi, and I get that they're there to represent the triumph of teamwork and community over the cold, impersonal Empire. I don't really mind that cute things exist in the GFFA, and an animated series aimed at kids is absolutely fine in my book. It's more that, as a species, they seem to be blowing hot and cold, and to me, this contradicts itself...
They appear very primitive when we first meet them in RotJ. Living in the forest, wearing skins and baiting traps with raw meat. But they're not total savages, they have a complex society, with social structures and heirarchies. They've mastered building techniques, fire and weapons. They even have a system of verbal communication and they mourn the dead. They're actually very advanced.
But let's not forget, folks, that the Ewok tribe featured in RotJ were about to EAT our heroes before Luke intervened and made them believe that C-3PO was a god. They'd already had a negative experience with the Imperial forces on-planet, admittedly, but remember Leia is in the hut (more about that later), so they know that not all humans are evil invaders. Even when C-3PO tells them that their dinner just wants to be friends, they're STILL going to roast them alive until they're scared out of it. Ignoring the fact that dinner is still wearing its clothes (I don't think the inclusion of naked rebel heroes would help with the 'U' certificate), they're going to roast people alive and eat them.
Have you ever wondered about that party at the end of RotJ? They're using Stormtrooper helmets as musical instruments. What do you thing happened to the heads that were in them? It looks to me like the Rebellion brought the beer and wine, and the Ewoks supplied the nibbles. By this point in the film, we know that they're a noble species, proudly standing up against the tyranny and colonisation of the Empire, teaming up with the good guys (not terrorists, no), and reclaiming their land for freedom. They were still going to eat a bunch of strangers, though. Probably without cutlery or napkins. What I'm veering toward is; why are the Ewoks so different from the Sandpeople?
"[they're] esaily startled, but they'll soon be back, and in greater numbers." Ben Kenobi, 0BBY
"[They] walk like men, but they're vicious, mindless monsters." Owen Lars, 22BBY
"They're animals, and I slaughtered them like animals." Anakin Skywalker, 22BBY
The above quotes wouldn't seem out of place coming from an Imperial trooper or officer on Endor. As a species, the Ewoks are proud, territorial hunters with strong rituals and traditions, just like the Tusken Raiders. Now, granted, in 2002's Attack of the Clones, we see that the Tuskens have captured Anakin's mother Shmi, and are basically torturing her to death (along with who knows what else). While I'll admit that this type of sadism doesn't seem likely of the Ewoks, in an Original Trilogy context, there's very little difference between the two species. The Expanded Universe cites a long, antagonistic history between the Sandpeople on Tatooine and the human settlers, the accumulation of which has resulted in deliberate attacks on human settlements like the one in which Shmi was kidnapped. Who's to say that a few thousand years of inconsiderate human colonisation on Endor wouldn't lead to the same situation?
From an in-universe perspective, I'm amazed the Empire didn't destroy everything on Endor within a 500 click radius of where they built the Death Star's Shield Generator. It's not like they needed anything from the surface of the planet, and the surrounding foliage and wildlife only led to trouble anyway. It can't have been for camouflage, as you've got a building broadcasting a stream of energy into space - a few trees aren't going to hide that from the most basic scanner.
The only thing separating the Ewoks and the Sandpeople seems to be their moralistic outlook. And if there's anything that the Star Wars saga has taught us, it's that morals are fairly subjective. Rebels or terrorists? Jedi Council or a religious sect, functioning as a police-force for a corrupt government? Indiginous population or savages? Take your pick.
Just think twice when your local Ewok tribe invite you and your friends round for dinner. Oh, and while I'm on about this timeframe in Endor history; you know when Luke and C-3PO convince the Ewoks not to eat the Rebel scout party? When Leia finally comes out to see what all the commotion is, why is she wearing that dress?
• It's not like Leia was dressed 'inappropriately' when she was brought to the village and needed covering up. • The Ewoks have no reason to have a human-sized dress lying about, someone must have made that for her, and pretty quickly. • It's not like her combat fatigues were irreparably damaged, she's seen wearing them again for the final battle.
Traditionally, multiple costume changes have been criticised as a vehicle for selling more/different action figures. But this outfit wasn't produced in the 1980's Kenner/Palitoy line. We didn't get this figure until around 1998.
It just seems like an enormous waste of time considering there's a major ground-battle imminent, and Leia's busy in a hut somewhere going "oh, that's nice, I'd love a dress made out of that..."
DISCLAIMERS: • ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Photos and videos appearing in this blog post are for informational and reference purposes only, and no ownership of copyright is claimed or implied by me. The intellectual and physical copyright of such material belongs to its creators and owners.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
After seeing BFS's acoustic show twice last April, I had a pretty good idea what to expect this time round. At least I thought I did. Whereas last time, there were separate support acts (I saw We Sunk Atlantis in Oxford, and Bob Schneider in London), this time there were four separate acts, but all from the same family, so to speak. Four acts, four people, all helping each other out throughout the night makes for a very cohesive show and really feels like "an evening with".
Erik was up first, playing solo acoustic songs from his upcoming Erik Chandler & The Mulberry Street Socialites project. Well, I say solo, he was joined by Linus for a couple of songs at the start. Erik, as you may or may not know, is the bass player/backing vocalist of Bowling for Soup, and the other half of the BFS acoustic shows. Erik's songwriting contributions for the band tend to be more introspective than the collaborative works, and this follows suit in his solo work. It's very mellow and very heartfelt, and suits Erik down to the ground. It was a short set of around six or seven songs (as were each of the first three acts), followed by a 10 minute break before the next band.
I'll take this moment to say how much I like the concept of a 10 minute break between bands. Literally 10 minutes. The thing I dislike most about live shows is the standing around while seemingly nothing happens on-stage (with my limited experience in the live music industry, I know there are things to be done, but there's not half and hour's worth. That's what the sound-check is for).
So, next up was People on Vacation, the side project of BFS's Jaret Reddick with Smile Smile's Ryan Hamilton. When you put it back to back with Erik's project, it's at the other end of the spectrum completely. The lyrics still dip towards dark sarcasm occasionally, but musically it's more pop oriented and very upbeat. Ryan and Jaret's upbeat personalities work well together as a counterpoint to Erik's set, and I'm looking forward to hearing the fully produced People on Vacation. Linus helped out on electric piano towards the end of the set.
Next up was Linus Dotson (aka Linus of Hollywood), who's been a collaborator with BFS for some time now. He did a few solo songs, then Jaret joined him on stage for a couple, including a modified version of the song Claire Danes Poster (which was very funny, but also falls into my "down points" by virtue of the subject - see below). I really like Linus' material, there's some great songwriting there, although the acoustic setting didn't seem to do it justice some of the time. Highlight? Dotson's version of Rebecca Black's "Friday, Friday, sucking dicks on Friday...". I seriously want to see BFS do a full-band version of this, but I fear that by October when they tour the UK again, the meme will be dead.
And finally, Jaret and Erik from Bowling for Soup, with a surprisingly chilled-out set. As I hinted at above, because both guys had already been on stage, it felt like a continuation of what we'd seen, not a 'new act'. And rather than playing BFS songs on acoustic guitars, a lot of the material feels like it's been properly converted to 'an acoustic version' this time around. Numbers like Emily and The Bitch Song have been slowed down and added to in terms of musical detail. There was no rendition of Guard My Heart, surprisingly, and I didn't think we were going to get the perennial Belgium until it came in at the end of the (beautifully lengthy) set. Other than that, all the hits were present-and-correct, with Linus joining them on electric piano again towards the end.
Also worth mentioning: some great interaction when BFS selected a couple of young ladies to help out with No Hablo Inglés. Sarah to hold Jaret's kazoo (not a euphemism), and a slightly-scared-looking Rosa on tambourine. I wonder if Jaret ever thinks about The Tambourine of Death and the terrible work it's still carrying out to this day (I knocked it the other week looking for some comics. Two days later? Elizabeth Taylor).
By then the crowd was livened up, but on the lead-up to this point, they seemed fairly quiet (but good-natured nonetheless) for a BFS show, which was noted a couple of times by the guys, but I can't help thinking that they were surprised by the relaxed nature of the evening (as I was), and stunned into a chilled-state.
All in all? Excellent. As usual. But you knew that already. I'm not going to give a bad review to a BFS gig any more than I'm going to put down a Star Wars movie, y'know? What can I tell ya? Fanboy.
The only down-points of the night: • I'd been told the curfew was around 10pm (usual for this venue). The doors opened about half an hour late, and there were very short gaps between sets as I've said, but the show still went on until 11. I'm not moaning about just under 4 solid hours of entertainment, it's just a bit awkward when you've arranged a lift, that's all. • Linus and Jaret dedicated a song to James Corden, the fat unpleasant dickhead (wickedly funny song, but the thought of laughing because of James Corden fills me with comedy-guilt). • £4.05 for a pint of Guinness? This isn't fucking London, O2. You already rip the arse out of me over my phone tariff, you robbing bastards, now you're trying to fuck me over at the bar as well? Bunch of arse.
^^ None of these points reflect on the bands, obviously.
DISCLAIMERS: • ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organizations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
