Let the Bullets Fly

Waking up early to see a bad film is probably one of the biggest punishment that one can get, and unfortunately I got punished like this for nothing. Although I have never liked westerns, comedies or I’m not a great fan of Chinese cinema, I have decided to wake up at 7am to see Let the Bullets Fly during this year’s London Film Festival. I was very disappointed. Mainly I was disappointed with the fact that although the seats in NFT1 at BFI are much more comfortable than my bed in my own bedroom, the sound was so loud in the film that I simply could not get any sleep. Instead I was made to follow this pointlessly complex plot presented in the smallest, white subtitles often on the white background. Throughout the whole film, I was just sitting there thinking that at least I will have something to write about, especially if it’s a bad film, but the problem is Let the Bullets Fly is a bad, but horribly boring film. Because it was really boring, I did not focus on it much so I cannot really complain about anything specific because I have no specific knowledge about what was happening. I could read the description on IMDB, but I don’t think I really care to discuss this film as much. Let’s get some things straight though, because some notes have been taken during this screening, so I can at least tell you why you should not waste your time on it. And boy was it a waste of time...

I cannot really tell you what Let the Bullets Fly is about, because it involves too much talking in white letters on the white background and because of the most background stories ever told, including political issues that one’s brain does not consume easily when they are served with flying trains and sliced stomachs. The combination of the latter is what really makes Let the Bullets Fly so surprisingly boring, I think. If it was a sort of political western (if something like this can even function) I would be fine, or if at least it was a political comedy. But boring us to death with politics and then once in a while present us with a nice action sequences or incredibly dark and gore humour, creates an uneatable mixture. I could take one or another but not both at the same time. Like the rest of the audience I expected The Good, The Bad and The Weird and got some bad CGI and much too long monologues instead. The lack of an individual character does not help the film. You can say something about three characters in the movie, but it is not enough to make their vivid image. They are either good or bad, and the rest of the cast just stands or fights in the background.

I might have a different cinematic sensitivity from Chinese audience, but to me Let the Bullets fly does not fulfill its promised function. It dragged on for ages and not one scene’s finale satisfied me. Please LFF, keep the film baddies for the later hours. I hate the feeling of disappointment so early in the morning.

2/10

Carnage

From trendsetter of filmmaking Polanski has turned into movie making machine. His technically perfect films are deprived of humanity and small imperfections which make a film interesting, unique and innovative. But he just won't break the rules of directing 101 it seems.

At some point in the film, Christoph Waltz says that he believes in god of carnage. But how can we believe in real carnage if it is presented in such a conservatively boring way? Don't get me wrong, the film is not boring; it is light and funny, a little charming and definitely well performed, however, the way it is all shot is simply boring. There is nothing edgy or risky about Polanski's direction. The actors (and he got some god damn good actors) walk around as if they were on theatre stage and often seem to have as much knowledge about filling the screen space or interacting with each other and the props around them as a theatre club student.

Carnage is based on the play and I will never understand what has tempted Polanski to turn it into a movie. Even working with the writer of the play did not help it. It even might have made it more theatre like. Carnage is a story of four parents (two couples) who meet after their sons get into a fight (or rather one hits the other after being called names). Jodie Foster and John C. Reilly (who is stalking me) play the parents of a suppose victim, and Christoph Waltz and Kate Winslet try to protect their supposedly guilty son. There is lots of 'ifs' in Polanski's film, but he manages to solve them nicely and prioriotises what really keeps our interest. Thus from the boys' fighting we go to marriage problems and personal tragedies. Every one of the actors pulls their performances well, however, the characters they play are again a very stereotypical choices for these actors. John C. Reilly plays a good, fun to be with husband and father who is willing to compromise, although his jokes might hurt some; Jodie Foster is a defensive mother who cares for human rights and world peace and even when she breaks down, she still cries about African babies starving; Kate Winslet is a successful and confident woman who hides her roughness under romanticism; and Christoph Waltz is an intelligent asshole. What a shocker.

The main problem with Carnage is that it fully relies on the performances, however, no performance can make an averagely written film good. It will still remain just average. The jokes are good, but they are too repetitive; the lines are well delivered but they simply sound written. The only thing missing in Carnage is the theatre stage. It works, but only in a theatre.

It might be the matter of age, laziness or being too confident. but it seems like Polanski has lost the power to change the cinema. He sticks to the rules in the world where we want to break the rules. Overall, Carnage is pleasurable to watch but a forgettable film.

6/10

We Need to Talk About Kevin (and about Tilda)

With her almost lizardy face, almond shaped eyes, doll like paleness and boyish expressions, Tilda Swinton is simply hypnotising type of beauty. And so is her performance in the almost perfect adaptation of Lionel Shriver's disturbing novel, We Need to Talk About Kevin.

Here, Kevin is eating his sister's eye

This book is not for everyone, as so is not the film, however, Lynne Ramsay seems to have exactly the same sensitivity as the author of the novel. It's almost scary how with gentle perfection she manages to reflect the atmosphere of the book. Her Kevin speaks with the sentences that could have easily been written by Shriver; he is inhumanly conscious and intelligent, just as he is in the book. Her Eva is my Eva too. Tilda Swinton is casted so perfectly that it literally took my breath away seeing her on screen. She is the strong, ambitious mother of a monster whose life has been broken, but never completely destroyed by the massive murder committed by her son, Kevin. Although Ramsay is often very ascetic when it comes to showing the story on the screen; the events are reflected on Eva's face rather than showed directly to us; she still manages to persuade us that Kevin cannot be stopped, even as a baby.

This atmosphere of the inevitable combined with the intelligent black humour makes this dark story disturbingly entertaining. Ramsay uses symbols, yet they are so subtle that We Need to Talk About Kevin can be watched without any horrible pretentious preparations; it is light enough for the audience not familiar with London Film Festival's programme as well as challenging enough for a critic. There is a lightness in making the weirdness of this seemingly simple story.

We Need to Talk About Kevin is the first film during this year's London Fil Festival that did not disappoint me. It was everything I expected plus a little more. And if you don't think this review is persuasive enough, then I beg you, see this film and write one yourselves.

8/10

Real Steel

Omg, where do I even start...
Real Steel might have been one of the worst movies, if not the worst (well, there was Soul Surfer...) of the year. It has big machines, annoying child, Hugh Jackman as an asshole father and no point of existence whatsoever. I have no idea why this film was made, because having a budget like this and a big ass robot, I can think of so many other scripts that would work better than Reel Steal. I don't even have to think about them, to be honest, because Cracked.com has already done so:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/9-better-uses-giant-robot-from-real-steel/

                   There are also ways in which you should never use robots, you creep


In Reel Steel, Hugh Jackman is a robot trainer of some sort and spends his life participating in robot vs bull fights as well as being a neglectful father to his only son that to be honest, I would myself neglect for being the most annoying child in the history of cinema. Of course he is made to spend a summer with his son and obviously their relationship changes rapidly as soon as Hugh Jackman discovers the boy's talent. And what is it exactly? The fact that the boy is able to restore an old generation robot? The fact that just by playing video games he is able to control the big machine? The fact that he is able to communicate with the robot? Or the fact that he is inhumanly powerful and is able to drag himself a full three ton heavy robot for a very long distance up the hill, in the middle of the night after almost losing his life?

If you think, these were impressive, you don't know anything about impressive. According to both Max's father and his girlfriend as well as the whole robot fighting audience, the most amazing thing about Max is his
annoying dance.

It's been a long time since I've seen something THAT irritating. Congratulations, movie

After discovering that his son is so good at robot dancing (literally), Hugh Jackman decides to give him a chance at the real competition, where some redneck punk guys get overexcited about beating some ten year old kid's ass. Although Max's robot is old, he manages to win all the fights up to the point where he meets Zeus- the ultimate robot killing machine that no robot in the entire world has ever beaten. It is designed by a hot japanese guy and run by a hot russian girl. And you probably have guessed, who wins this fight...

It is not that I can only be entertained by an emotionally deep film, because I have to admit- I like robots. I loved Terminator, I liked Transformers (I risk loosing my press pass by making this declaration, I'm aware of this), I like I Robot, I liked half of the A.I. I like brainless entertainment very often and sometimes it is enough to show me some badass special effects (Mr. Cameron) in order to make me a happy bunny. But this happy bunny can turn into a Monty Python bunny when watching so called movie about a friendship and love and forgiveness where the only persuasive character is dr pepper. By the way, has anyone noticed how many dr peppers there are in the entire film? I haven't seen that many in tescos and it's a large tescos I live next to. And it's not just doctor pepper that they put everywhere. Real Steel seems like it's trying to beat Michael Bay's record of the amount of product placement in one scene. And it works. I will never drink Dr Pepper thanks to it.

Reel Steel 1/10

Before I publish my review of Real Steel

Let me for just one more moment enjoy myself with this funny Modern Family clip.

OMG

This is the greatest...

What Am I Missing Today?

I've never wanted to complain about my private life struggles, but fuck it, I have nothing to lose at this point (meaning: no audience to lose haha)...So basically, London Film Festival has now officially started and I have written maybe six or less articles about the films, because I've been looking for a flat. So while everyone is watching 360 today in the morning, I'm calling rude agents at the estate agencies while desperately learning London's tube map by heart. So please, sympathise with me.
I bet 360 was an outstanding film, but this I will hear from other nasty bloggers who have managed to see it. Let us see what else have I missed out today:

1. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1827512/
The Kid with a Bike
What do I think I would rate it? Well, it might be a slightly depressing, but in a french, quirky way film, so I think it would be at least 6/10, but if shown after a good film, it might have even moved my heart to mark it 8/10. Will I ever find out?

2. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1456472/
We Have a Pope
Awwwwwwww it has a polish actor in it (Jerzy Sztuhr), so now I will feel like a traitor to my own country. Although topically it has been analysed much too many times, I would still see it, fuck it, after missing out for so long, I would see all the films today.

3. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1658820/
Sket
Almost everything, I meant. I would have a lunch while this new british wave disappointment lasts...

4. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2050561/
Louise Wimmer
film so hipster that it doesn't even have a synopsis on IMDB. And I would go and see it too, wy not.

Unfortunately, I won't see any of them. I will see Snowtown tomorrow though and hope I won't hear from others how good 360 was.
You lucky bastards....

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark

Even if I used to be, I'm not anymore, thanks to this film. I could have even said that it might be the first horror movie that does not fulfil its function at all and instead, it does the opposite. The trailer I have to say was good. The moment from the trailer put in the context of the whole film? Well, not so much anymore...

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark is a remake of a film I haven't seen myself so you cannot blame me for comparing the two version and thus favorising the latter. I also like Guillermo del Toro as a writer and I believe he is creating a new subgenre of horror movies which is dedicated to a very specific target audience- a mentally grown up eleven year olds. I don't know how he manages to sell so well, especially when I never see a mature eleven year old, but it seems to be working and everyone loves his films. Or maybe we love them because they are in Spanish. Whichever it is, Don't Be Afraid of the Dark seems to fail in every aspect that his other films succeed. So who takes the blame first?

Let's start with the least experienced one and that is the director of the movie himself- Troy Nixey. Troy has done a short film before and now suddenly has been trusted with a pretty tough job to do- scaring children who are too old to be afraid of a monster under the bed (although can one really stop being afraid of it?) but not old enough to consume naked bodies in gore scenes. Troy Nixey is definitely trying to satisfy his younger audience. We follow the steps of Sally, played by surprisingly good Bailee Madison and throughout the whole film he presents us with the world as seen by this girl. As a director, he lets her guide us through the old buildings and magical gardens and the scenes in which we focus on Sally, the film manages to keep us interested. The problem appears when we see other characters and Sally interacting with them.

Although I am young enough to still be able to identify and emphasise with children characters in films, however, the girl from Don't Be Afraid of the Dark is one of these kids I have never been or seen. She comes from an obviously wealthy environment and can afford to spend her whole days playing around not worrying about anything. Her parents treat her like an adult but don't give her any responsibilities at the same time. She has this weird independence that I bet no other children apart from "del Toro's children" experience. However unpersuasive this character is, it is only when Sally is shown in interaction with others that we really see how impossible her existence is. Her father literally does not care about her at all, however, she still prefers him to any other people in her life. She is jealous of father's new girlfriend, but at the end of the film easily changes her attitude and in the most terrifying circumstances she learns about love, death and sacrifice, however, this experience does not leave her traumatised. I'm sorry but this is a girl I will never be able to identify with.

Troy Nixey struggles with storytelling, especially when the plot is developed by showing Katie Holmes' and Guy Pearce's characters. The shots are completely random in these scenes and it seems like the director was bored with them himself and decided to leave both of them in front of the camera and just went for lunch. There is no chemistry between the two of them and neither of their performances is even satisfying. Although the film is shot on a wonderful location, Troy Nixey seems to have no idea how to use its potential.

The special effects are hugely disappointing. I won't reveal what really lies in the dark, because before it is shown, the film builds very nicely, so I let you enjoy it yourself. Both Pan's Labyrinth and the Orphanage (and I'm mentioning these two films because not only are they produced by Guillermo del Toro but also they seem to belong to the same subgenre) have managed to hypnotise us with creep, but magical atmosphere. Don't Be Afraid of the Dark simply lacks the magic. It is filmed in a beautiful location, however completely ignored by the makers. It is supported by the amazing soundtrack which will remain underrated because of the picture it accompanies.

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark is a big disappointment. I would recommend just watching the trailer and imagining what this film could have been life if it only was in Spanish...

THE FUTURE better don't come 1/10

This is one of these films where being memorable is not necessarily a compliment for the creators. Unfortunately I still remember The Future well enough to write a review on it, but I secretly hope that with every word, my memory will slowly get cleared from Miranda July's pointlessly abstract images. The Future overdosed quirkiness, originality and surreality and was left with bland and awkward skeleton of story. I haven't seen July's debut film and after The Future I don't think I ever will. I am a fan of independent cinema but some filmmakers cannot handle the freedom of uniqueness and get lost in the labyrinth they draw themselves. But let us start from so called plot.
It is a story of a confused couple who decides to adopt a cat. However, the animal adoption is not that simply (for unknown reason) and they have to wait a month for the arrival of their future pet. Unfortunately for the audience we find out about all this from the cat itself, who we hardly ever see because Miranda July found it hilarious for some reason to only shoot cat's fake paws (or paws paws rather). Although male, the cat speaks in female voice and irritates the hell out of audience. The Future might actually be the first film where the fear of death of the animal does not affect us that much.
Sophie and Jason are as ready for the cat as I am ready to kill Miranda July for this awful film. I wish I could, but I would never do it. Unfortunately for us they decide to change their lives radically in order to welcome Paw Paw to their weird world. Describing their world as weird, would actually be a compliment. Sophie's and Jason's life is just awkward.
There is a limit of awkwardness that I can take and I am sure it applies to every film viewer. Miranda July has no idea where to set the border and so we have to listen to the couple's pointless conversations that sound like they simply had too much time on their hands and can waste it making the most irreverent arguments filled with as many awkward gaps and pauses as possible. I don't mind them having pointless conversations, but the way they deliver their lines is even more irritating than the lack of topics they discuss. They say everything in monotonous voices with no expressions in their faces. Overall it is a very awkward depressing couple that I cannot identify with. Very well, Miranda July, very well indeed.

As for plot, because obviously the couple's conversations do not move story forward, there is still hope in random images and scenes presented in the movie. Sophie becomes obsessed about uploading a video of her dancing on youtube, even though (quote) nobody cares for it and gets involved in an affair with ex soldier, and Jason plants trees while talking to a slightly pervy old man. Does it help the story get more involving? Not at all. The only part of the Future that I enjoyed (if I manage to ignore the main characters and the lines said) was the fragment when the time stops and visually it becomes pretty stunning. It might be that The Future has the potential to be a quirky short movie, but definitely fails as feature.
The main problem with The Future lies in making the characters and the story so awkward that we just couldn't care less about it, thus it fails to keep our attention for the duration of the film and rather than fascinating us, presents itself in a rather annoying light. I don't care for your pretentious pseudo existential monologues, Miranda July and to be honest, I think that hardly ever cares.

Day One London Film Festival

The first day of London Film Festival can be called a little depressing morality lesson. I don't know if it is just me, but I think that for the first day, and for such early hours, the choice of press screenings today was probably made by a sadist. Instead of writing three different reviews, I have decided to review a day itself because there ,definitely was a reason for such selection. So what do these films say about this year's London Film Festival?

10.30 NFT1 BERNIE
It all started too early, at 0.30. Doors opened about fifteen minutes before it and I have chosen the seat in the middle of the row, in the middle of the room and in one of many chairs that are too comfortable for such early hour. Fortunately for me, the morning film was a comedy drama, in which there was more comedy than drama (which surprised LFF audience so much it seems, that every single joke was met with burst of laughters, even though overall Bernie wasn't THAT funny, it was ok).

Bernie is, like I Love You Phillipe Morris, based on a true story about a man who not necessarily should be, but still is in jail. Bernie, played by Jack Black is a very refreshing Jack Black film. He obviously sings but he sings Christian songs and even though it is Jack Black, and no performance of his can stop me from seeing him playing someone instead of this someone, his charming campiness in this film asks us for forgiveness. And I forgive. Also, the form of the film is pretty refreshing. It is made in a documentary style which makes it more identifiable and persuasive. After the screening, I heard mostly positive opinions, I think Bernie doesn't go pass 7/10 rating. It is ok but come on, it could have been so much better.

And I promise, Shirley McLaine is a female Mickey Rourke

1.00 NFT1 Junkheads
And that was it for a funny refreshing morning films. From then on, the press screenings became torturous heroin trip presented in two films- British Junkheads and Swedish Oslo, August 31st. At this point of the day I was already pretty hungry, so seeing suffering people on screen did not help me forget about my very own stomach moan. Junkheads is definitely independent movie and it is trying so hard to remain seen as independent that it simply forgets about the characters and story it is trying to tell. Instead, it is just about showing London from its darker side, with all the Brick Lane drug addicts and teenage runways.Although the story tends to get lost very often and some shots are pretty random it seems, Junkheads defends itself with good performances. Still, the characters are not developed strongly enough for actors to make them remarkable. Junkheads looks and feels like a heroin trip, but it is a moralising, depressing and forgettable trip, I think. Give them 3/10

3.00 NFT2 Oslo, August 31st
With only twenty minutes in between the movies and in starving mode already, I went to the smaller room (with less comfortable chairs) to see Oslo, August 31st, another drug addicts tale. Our main protagonist is having a very bad day. He fails to commit suicide he planned, he fails his job interview and finally, although sober for 10 months, overdoses on heroin. You might now say it's a bit of a spoiler, me revealing all these details but trust me, from the first scene you can easily predicted how the story is going to end. It is a pretentious trip to the inevitable. I enjoyed it much more than Junkheads.

Oslo was subtler and colder, but in its coldness and lack of drama, it managed to say more. Still, only 4,5/10 to me.

I promise to write some proper reviews of the above films, or at least one of them. Let's hope tomorrow will bring better films.

The Challenge

Because of BFI's London Film Festival starting tomorrow for press, I will be surrounded by pretentious films every day for the next few months, thus I have decided to take on this challenge. I will watch all the bigger films that came put in 2010, according to this list.
http://www.movieweb.com/movies/2010?pg=1
Some of them, I have seen and unfortunately some reviews that I wrote for these films are in Polish and I'm simply too lazy to translate them now, but I might stil put the link here. Others I've always wanted to see but for some reason missed it. And there is also a group of films I hid from and I prayed never to see. Unfortunately for me, the challenge includes all of them. And if I manage, I will dedicate a new page on this blog, where I will keep all the ratings of the films I've seen.
Below, Page NUMBER ONE

Page Number One

Resident Evil Afterlife 2/10
Iron Man 2 haven't seen yet
Clash of the Titans 1/10
Predators 1/10
A Nightmare on Elm Street 4/10
Harry Potter and the Death;y Hallows Part One 7,5/10
Sex and the City 2 1/10
Alice in Wonderland haven't seen
Inception 7,5/10
Tron:Legacy haven't seen
Don McKay haven't seen
The Twilight Saga: Eclipse 1/10
The Last Airbender haven't seen
The Karate Kid haven't seen
Toy Story 3 9/10
The A-Team 3/10
The Losers haven't seen
The Expendables 3/10
Kick Ass 8/10
The Wolfman 3/10

It's time to start the
London Film Festival

Soul Surfer Has No Soul

I am not a fan of any of the things that Soul Surfer contains- I don't like Helen Hunt, I have never seen a potential in Charlie and Chocolate Factory's blueberry spoiled girl nor am I a fan of surfing; however, the day I went to see Soul Surfer I was definitely more open minded than when I went to see 30 Minutes or Less. It's not because there was any hope in this film. It's simply because I didn't bother to read anything about it before. The only thing I knew was that it was based on a true story of a girl whose hand was bitten off by a shark. So basically, I thought,

but no, my dear audience which probably never even thought about going to see Soul Surfer. Soul Surfer is about a robot girl whose arm is bitten off by a shark. I'm not even sure if the shark is real (it surely didn't look real to me). But let's start somewhere...
Bethany is an angel who accepts everything in her life as a gift from God. I can actually understand why, because from what I saw, she lives in Hawaii and does nothing else but surfs all days long, so I would say God likes her a lot. She has no family problems, has nice Christian friends and a handsome guy appearing in two scenes, who is probably going to be her husband in the future that this film does not show. She wins surfing competitions, plays ukulele and looks hot in a swimming suit. She lives every girly girl's dream until...actually, it never changes.
A shark bites off her arm and Bethany...continues to live consoling everyone around her, calming her parents down and not even sharing a tear over the lost arm. And what can I say...I find it amazingly irritating.
I can understand the whole message this film tries to communicate. In the worst circumstances there's always the way out and whatever horrible happens, it might always turn out good. But do I really need to see inhumanly perfect robot girl on screen for over 90 minutes (and films like this should never ever exceed 90 minutes) in order to get this message? To be honest, I got so much more from watching James Franco constantly failing before succeeding.

It's not only that I could not identify with emotionless teenage girl who has no problems accepting the lack of her arm, but also it's simply a bad film overall.
The story is terribly written- the lines are dry, predictable and cliche. It seems like actors don't know the story well themselves so they play the most stereotypical versions of their characters there are. Most of the scenes serve only one purpose- to show people surf and when they surf it's actually not that bad. The editing in surfing scenes is ok, the soundtrack is pretty powerful and the slow motion is used nicely, BUT I do not care for paper characters surfing. I do not care for surfing enough to enjoy the music videos of them performing some tricks on waves. It was suppose to be a film, so have some sort of story, for christ's sake. I have no empathy towards Bethany, so the fact that she wins or loses does not affect me in the slightest. She is the new Jesus Christ and good for her, but I don't buy it.
Soul Surfer wasn't disappointing because I had no expectations towards this film. It was bland, silly and tiring. And sorry film, but she is not my hero

1:0 to Danny Boyle

Warrior

I couldn't stop myself from reading some reviews before I entered the cinema, thus I knew beforehand that Warrior would be one of these epic Academy Awards films that most of people will like. I normally just watch these kind of films and remain totally indifferent towards their emotional value. I see the technical advantages, but it is usually difficult for these films to make me feel emotional. Warrior has made my throat dry.

It is definitely not a film of the year, nor is it the best film about fighting. I can come up with at least three titles that impressed me so much more than Warrior (The Wrestler is the film that stunned me completely, and to be honest I don't believe there is any other fighting movie that will ever make me feel like The Wrestler did); however, Warrior is a very strong film. Technically it obviously glows. The direction is excellent, every shot tells a story, every use of camera is a spot on and what is the most important, not one fight is boring. And trust me, in Warrior there is a lot of fighting. The script is much more complex than what the poster suggest. Below the story, there is another one and another one and some of them always remain uncover. Although we focus on the main story, and that is the story of two brothers separated in childhood and reconnected on MMA cage in the final battle of the film, however, each of the brothers has layers of stories and reason to become a fighter. Because the film is so well shot, we don't get confused by the amount of information and even after being presented with lots of supporting roles, we never lose interest in the main characters. In the final hour of the film, filled with action and intense fighting, every new fighter is presented so well and every action sequence is so well shot, that I literally couldn't take my eyes off the screen for one second.

As it happens always in Oscar nominated films (and this one will be), Warrior relies on strong performances. Tom Hardy proves that he is so much more than just a supporting actor from Inception and that he can easily take on the whole film and succeed. His character is an asshole, but he is an asshole for a reason. Although we are angry with him, it is difficult not to emphasise with him at the same time. We want him to win as much (or even more) as we want his brother (played by Joel Edgerton) to win. Not only do we support both of the brothers, but also we hope for their father's life to turn out good. It is another ambiguous character, who as an ex alcoholic decides to bury the hatchet with his sons. He is the father that failed in the past, like the father that Mickey Rourke is in the Wrestler, but here there is a hope for him to still win.

Every one of the characters in this film is the warrior deserving to win. Unfortunately, although perfectly shot and well acted, the filmmakers decided to broader the audience of the film by not showing any blood on screen. To me, this was more than distracting. Very realistic fights seemed a confusing when lacking bloody brutality. That is why it is The Wrestler, and not Warrior which wins this fight for me. Still, it is a film worth watching.

LFF programme

Has just visited my house. Exciting news is
There's a lot of George Clooney in it
less exciting news is
Roland Emmerich is Hebron's choice? The world might end if his film is screened during the festival
the weird news is
George Clooney wasn't always handsome
He used to look like this

RESTLESS is a new Gus Van Sant film

There are a good few directors I really like and most of them are louder than bombs when it comes to promoting their new movies. Gus Van Sant isn't like that. He is almost invisible in between movies, but when he appears, he comes back in style.
And here it is, a trailer for his new film.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9DIR0PGB04&feature=youtu.be
yep, he sees dead people.
And it looks very sentimental and doesn't have any long shots of people walking in the trailer, but god damn it, I bet it will be good.

and this is an awesome picture

Four Days in Poland

I'm leaving to Poland for four days and of course, I have got press invitations for the movies I mostly wanted to see. Trying not to be pessimistic, I focused on the ones I can (after I come back), and so I will definitely go and watch and review this

even though I fucking tend to hate Helen Hunt.
I can also go and watch West Side Story for three hours the morning after I come back, so I guess I'll just pass on this one and if ever, then just review it from my DVD player (or worse, my laptop).
Besides that awful surfer movie shown within the surfer movies festival, there is literally nothing I want to see. Crazy Stupid Love is shown within these four days, The Debt as well and I just need to stop moaning I think. I still have to finish watching Lilo & Stich that I've started yesterday and it's not that bad...
so maybe Helen Hunt surfer movie won't be that bad either.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is a title that I will never remember

But everything else tells me that I will definitely remember the content of it. This is what my e-mail says about it:
John Le’s classic tale of treachery and espionage, directed by Tomas Alfredson, features a stellar cast including Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, Tom Hardy, Kathy Burke, Benedict Cumberbatch, Ciarán Hinds, John Hurt, Toby Jones, Simon McBurney, David Dencik, Roger Lloyd Pack, Stephen Graham, Svetlana Khodchenkova, Konstantin Khabensky and Mark Strong. The must-see big-screen version of John Le Carré’s best-selling Cold War novel, TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY, set in the 1970s, finds George Smiley (Gary Oldman), a recently retired MI6 agent, doing his best to adjust to a life outside the secret service. However, when a disgraced agent reappears with information concerning a mole at the heart of the Circus, Smiley is drawn back into the murky field of espionage. Tasked with investigating which of his trusted former colleagues has chosen to betray him and their country, Smiley narrows his search to four suspects - all experienced, urbane, successful agents – but past histories, rivalries and friendships make it far from easy to pinpoint the man who is eating away at the heart of the British establishment.

I mean, look at the cast! It's like they know they are getting Academy Awards nominations for it.
And even the poster...

is like the child of The Social Network poster with letters all around it with Inception poster with Tom Hardy looking on the side (or any other Oscar nominated film).

Shall we wait for more or put in on the list already?

Guillermo del Toro and how many films I have seen...

Because I have received the invitation for the press screening of Don't Be Afraid of Dark today, I have decided to write as much about Guillermo del Toro as I can without actually looking for trivia about him, and surprisingly the only thing I can think of is that most of the films I've seen thinking they were directed by Guillermo del Toro WERE NOT directed by Guillermo del Toro. It's because of this horrible line saying 'by the creator of' everywhere on the posters and trailers that I have been mislead for so long. Thus, I have checked IMDB to see how many films DIRECTED by Guillermo del Toro I have actually seen (and if I liked them).
(bear with me, I am only know learning how to use iphoto):

(and no, I haven't seen Devil's Backbone)
So overall I have seen two films and these are Hellboy 2 and Pan's Labyrinth and I liked Pan's Labyrinth more than Hellboy 2.
So why is he so famous again?

Because he is a great writer.
So next time someone you know chooses Guillermo del Toro as their favourite director, tell them they don't know shit.

P.S. He didn't direct Don't Be Afraid of Dark either! That bastard!

Is it just me?

Or all Scream murderers are pretty disappointing?

One Day (someone might make a better film out of this book)

I haven't read the book, so I am probably the closest to the perfect audience for this film as you can get. My mind hasn't been influenced by beautifully written material and I have no requirements when it comes to cast, locations and anything really.

And it still sucks.

I have no idea where to start, to be honest. One Day is just a horrible film. There is nothing about it that was persuasive, identifiable or heartbreaking to me. I have read different reviews (after I have seen the film, so my mind stayed uninfluenced during the screening), and some people cried. I didn't even cry.

It is very poorly written and because it has been written by the author of the book, and even though people have been calling it a book of the decade, I am not sure if I want to read it now after what I have seen. The characters are irritating assholes, the story is monotonous and badly paced and everyone just seems to be trying much too hard. I hate how years have been distinguished by so called important events. In 1993 everyone was watching Jurassic Park and in 2000 everyone was listening to S Club 7. It's like badly written '80s film. Nobody will see these references in ten years, guys, so you have just made your film appealing to very limited audience.

Why isn't Emma played by an English actress? Is it really too hard to find anyone? Or is it because otherwise the American audience will ignore the film, if their people aren't involved? Also, Anne Hathaway is a pretty horrible choice, I think. She has become really lazy recently and focused on repeatedly playing the same role over and over and over again. And here, we see her as exactly the same protagonist as usual, just more irritating and less naked.

Beautifully romantic story (I guess, it was supposed to be) has simply turned out to be a story of people wanting to sleep together. And they do. But they never show us! It's not that I am some sort of a pervy member of audience who just wants to see Anne Hathaway naked (I've had enough, I've seen Love and Other Drugs so I know her body better than my own), but if it's so crucial that they sleep together, let us enjoy this moment with them.

But enough about the plot. Technically the film was even worse. I sincerely can't believe the director of An Education could have done something so bad. The direction is simply dreadful. It's just like they were too lazy to change the camera lense and every fucking shot is filmed in medium angle. You have Paris, London, charming cafes and hills, and everything is medium shot. It's just ridiculously how much potential has been lost in this film.

Jim Sturgees is ok, I think but he still too much of an asshole to me to like him. Soundtrack is just begging us to cry and dialogues are dreading with fakeness. Every single supposedly funny like delivered by Anne Hathaway dies immediately; she seems to have an amazing talent to make all jokes lame. So overall, did I like it?

I fucking hated it.

And it will take more than a week for me to even look at the book.

Woah...

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/771206468/
And I'm waking up at 7am for this?

FILMS I WATCH LATE: Going the Distance

I get some guilty pleasure from watching romantic comedies, but it hurts when I see the one which would actually be a good film, if it wasn't a romantic comedy. This is the case of Going the Distance to me. Now imagine it has been done as a comedy drama instead, maybe directed by some indie director like Jason Reitman. It is charming, well-written, well acted and witty but filled with unnecessary jokes about bums and baby pigeons.

Drew Barrymore fells in love with Justin Long whom she meets in a pub. Their relationship can only last six weeks because she's going back to her hometown. However, they are so perfect together that they decide to keep in touch by making their relationship long distance. And it only lasts for a year but it's still too long for them to survive it without doubts, worries and little fights.

I like their relationship. It's honest, straightforward, it has problems normal people struggle with and it works. There is a nice chemistry between Drew Barrymore and Justin Long and even though for the first half of the film, I had the feeling that it's badly casted, I got used to them in the second half and I liked both of them as characters. They were easily identifiable and likeable.

Interestingly also, the love struggles they are going though are not only presented from female point of view, which is so typical for romantic comedies. Actually, Drew Barrymore is sometimes more masculine than Justin Long and she makes logical decisions and even though romantic at heart, she does not leave her career behind for a man, like women usually do in romantic comedies. She is a strong, independent woman and he is a strong, independent man and that's why it works.

But because Going the Distance is trying to hard to satisfy Jennifer Aniston's audience, it fails to satisfy me completely (even at 2 am in the morning). Thus it only gets 6/10 today.

30 Minutes or Less

30 minutes or Less isn't disappointing. It might be because so many people have hated it already so going through Rotten Tomatoes and websites alikes, I have only encountered really bad reviews (which obviously influenced my attitude towards this screening). I liked it. It wasn't Zombieland of course, but the editing was almost as fun. It wasn't Zombieland either when it comes to acting, but Jesse Eisenberg was good as always and even this guy

was funny.
And this guy was the main fear of every single member of the audience.

So although not quite like Zombieland, 30 Minutes or Less has its LOLs and OMGs. It is definitely much better than most action comedies that I've seen (and yes, it's like a horror mixture of my least favourite genres, so who am I to judge). And there was free pizza on the screening. Fuck yeah.

No blog I'm following has posted a review of 30 Minutes or Less and it keeps me thinking why. There is this weird conspiracy theory that makes me think that people (especially critics) are a little embarrassed to like it. Especially when everyone seems to hate it. Well, I'm not a saint, so I can risk my lack of reputation in the world of British critics and say that 30 Minutes or Less was the film I enjoyed the most this week. And I've seen three, so give it a go.

and I will keep posting the images on this blog on its left side

Turnout turned out not so bad

Sophie and George come from too different environments. She is a middle class girl who goes to work in the City every day, has sushi for a lunch and shops at Mark Jacobs. George lives in a council building with his mum, drinks with his mates while Sophie is at work, and deals drugs. Weed mainly.
Sophie wants to go for a holiday to Barbados, and so they have been saving some money to go. George stops being enthusiastic as soon as the letter informing them to pay the rest of the sum with a deadline appears. George doesn't have a job. And the weed he sells doesn't bring enough money.
Gerge decides to take the money Sophie has been saving and invest it into some new type of cocaine (cheaper mix with novocaine) and earn more money on that. Of course the plan is stupid, and George is being fucked by each one of his friends repeatedly and remains with nothing.

Is this a film about the relationship between Sophie and George? How from happily in love they turn into untrusting and paranoid couple? Or is it a story how drugs destroy love and how you can't keep too if you really care about one? Is it a story of how living in a big city doesn't guarantee successful life? How you can be on the top but be digging your own grave every night? How there's no such thing as real friends when you are dealing with illegal? What is this film about?

It could be about anything. Plot wise this film is just confusing. It could have been a tragic love story and as we know, it worked before in the US (Requiem for a Dream), it could have worked here if the chance was given. Throughout the whole film I have been thinking that it would have been so much more interesting if the story was told from Sophie's point of view. even though he is less involved with all the exciting drug action, her character is much more identifiable for me and so much more interesting than George. Because her story is just a story of her relationship, it's much more subtle and easy to relate to. And the way this story is shot is simply beautiful.

Interestingly, Lee Sales both directed and co-wrote this film. I have to say that based on Turnout, he should focus on directing only. As the director, he makes amazing choices of shots, his wide shots are simply beautiful and Sophie's '60s type filming is very classy. when he directs George's life, the camera is handy, shaky and claustrophobic. Every shot is so well thought and the film is because of it engaging and fascinating to look at.

Script on the other hand is just confusing. There is too much focus on minor characters, the story seems too general and there's not enough time for characters to develop. It surely will bring Hoxton indie audience to cinemas, but when Sophie and George look both like in their mid thirties, I'm not sure if many hipster twenty year olds will actually be persuaded by it.

Turnout wasn't bad, but wasn't balanced enough to be seen as good. The direction is definitely worth seeing and in future maybe it's good to keep your eye on Lee Sales. But please, don't make more audience-driven films. Just do it for yourself.

Turnout vs 30 Minutes or Less

Because I attend both of the screenings this week (Turnout tomorrow and 30 Minutes or Less), I will be writing two reviews (even though I'm the laziest person in the entire world) this week. There is just one problem with these films:
Turnout is a hipster English production that doesn't even have a trailer online (or I can't find it, if anyone can send me a link, I would be more than grateful), and
30 Minutes or Less has bad reviews. Even though it has geeky Jesse Eisenberg who basically doesn't fuck up ever, it's apparently not a good movie. And not a funny one either. Because it's under the action-comedy genre, I am just worried that it might turn like this:

Because t has a white guy and an Indian guy even, so god save us.

This
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/30_minutes_or_less/
doesn't look promising either. It is apparently worse than Cowboys vs Aliens (which the critics raped so brutally but I still want to see it and it still sounds awesome to me).
I like the fact that Sony asks to give them my twitter name in order for me to tweet my thoughts on the film. My boyfriend was surprised by this demand saying that if the movie is crap, how are the bad reviews going to promote it. But I guess it's too late anyway. So Sony is actually bravely telling us to go and spread bad word because they can take it. They are fucking sony. And they have Jesse Eisenberg. What do you have!

So, if you want to follow me on twitter, my twitter name is queerdelys. My specialisation is retweeting cooler tweets and linking my blog. And now also reviewing 30 Minutes or Less on Thursday.

And I still can't say a word about Turnout. What a mystery.

What is it even about?

Scala Forever Opening

So it is today. And it seems like I've waited forever for this day to come. the day when trash cinema meets cult cinema, the day where tickets are cheap and all nighters tempting even if you have to wake up at 7 the next day. And it starts with a bang, with King Kong, the one without Jack Black in it.
The one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0WpKl2A_2k
when youtube was still black and white.

I'm still learning the program by heart in order to remember where to go and what to see but from what it seems like, I ain't goin nowhere for some time now. My holidays remain in London and in London I want to be when this happens:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvS3ZXZRSsk
I almost came watching this trailer.
I still don't understand (quite) the idea of Floating Cinema, if the boat is only capable to take six people maybe, then what;s the fun? I know it's free but if noone is going to get to this boat, then free isn't that tempting. It's just some people watching a film on their boat. Cool.

And there's also Turkish trash film called Death Warrior. And it's being played on my birthday. It's like Scala knew I would have to spend my birthday at their festival so they gave me the offer I could not refuse.

Well, now it's only three hours away. Let it begin

Scala Forever Opening

So it is today. And it seems like I've waited forever for this day to come. the day when trash cinema meets cult cinema, the day where tickets are cheap and all nighters tempting even if you have to wake up at 7 the next day. And it starts with a bang, with King Kong, the one without Jack Black in it.
The one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0WpKl2A_2k
when youtube was still black and white.

I'm still learning the program by heart in order to remember where to go and what to see but from what it seems like, I ain't goin nowhere for some time now. My holidays remain in London and in London I want to be when this happens:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvS3ZXZRSsk
I almost came watching this trailer.
I still don't understand (quite) the idea of Floating Cinema, if the boat is only capable to take six people maybe, then what;s the fun? I know it's free but if noone is going to get to this boat, then free isn't that tempting. It's just some people watching a film on their boat. Cool.
And there's also Turkish trash film called Death Warrior. And it's being played on my birthday. It's like Scala knew I would have to spend my birthday at their festival so they gave me the offer I could not refuse.
Well, now it's only three hours away. Let it begin

The Legend of 7 Golden Vampires

Although it doesn't fully presents how i feel about this film, here is the link to Cinemassacre's review of The Legend of 7 Golden Vampires:
http://cinemassacre.com/2010/10/12/legend-of-the-7-golden-vampires/
Besides the link?
well, this film is pretty paradoxical because by having nothing at all (no plot, no special effects, no characters development, no potential), it manages to have it all (blood, jolie English gentlemen and Chinese Dracula).

count himself

Although it has moaning virgin, boiling blood and a Swedish princess, it hasn't won the heart in my top best worst movies. It is too forgettable and too pointless. There has to be more drama than just fighting random guys in order to fulfil my rotten b-class taste. It must be something worse, like lamer dialogues or mission to save the world.
I'm not saying it's not worth checking out. I did it sober and maybe that's why it didn't leave a clear scar on my mind.

and maybe if these guys was a little jolier too

Did you know...

"Smurfette (Katy Perry) says "I kissed a smurf and I liked it", a reference to Perry's first hit single, "I Kissed a Girl"."
Thank you IMDB. One more news about this rape of my childhood film and I'm going to hang myself.

Beautiful Lies

First of all, and I have no idea how many times should I repeat it, so everyone gets it- Beautiful Lies is nothing like Amelie. The only thing that is common for both of these films is Audrey Toutou, nothing else. So if you loved Amelie and it is one of your favourite films (like mine), then ignore Beautiful Lies. Think more Priceless or Heartbreaker than Amelie when you go to see it. I hope I made it clear. Any mentions of Amelie will make this film even more disappointed than it is already.
French romantic comedies are like a separate genre in the genre of romantic comedies. Not only do they have European freshness and characters that we can actually identify with, but also they are usually very quirky. So quirky they are, that sometimes they reach the edge of being disturbing and uncomfortable to watch when we actually think about what we are watching. This is the case of Beautiful Lies to me. So first, the synopsis as presented by Trinity, because I am too lazy to come up with my own (and because it is a film about copying):

30-year old Emilie runs a hairdressing salon, and provides an endless stream of well-meaning advice to her clients and friends...(I have only noticed that she cuts of the fringe for a customer who obviously doesn't want it to be cut)
Sadly the one person she can't seem to help is Maddy, her mother, who has given up the will to live since being left by her husband.
Jean, a young man who works for Emilie is secretly in love with her but a pathological shyness prevents him from declaring his feelings (it doesn't prevent him to sleep with both Emilie and her mother). Finally (five minutes in, unable to contain himself, he opens his heart in a passionate anonymous letter. (which content we learn by heart almost, so many times they repeat it in this film).
Entirely untouched by this confession and terrified to see her mother slipping deeper and deeper into despair, Emilie concocts a crazy plan: she'll change the name at the top of the letter and send it to Maddy.
Deeply touched by this beautiful declaration of love, Maddy rediscovers the will to live and begins to watch for the mail (I wouldn't really call it a will to live if your whole life revolves around a post box). While she's over the moon to see her mother returning to life, Emilie is fully aware of the problems that lie ahead. Not only must she supply Maddy with more love letters, she must also find someone willing to play the author...


dot dot dot, and it's Jean of course. Why has it be Jean we never find out, but obviously this leads to uncomfortable situations. And I really was all prepared to laugh cheerfully, but when I discovered that the theory of love letters is taken into a practice, I suddenly started feeling uncomfortable. Lying in this film seems to be more than acceptable. Even though Jean teaches Emilie a lesson, he agrees for her to lie at the end of the movie. And why is she so grateful when her mother's revenge is so over the top cruel? What is wrong with these French passionate people who just search for more complex way for their intrigues? It is like some sort of an obsession because otherwise life won't be interesting enough. And it's with every romantic comedy- words unspoken, spies, cryptic letters and symbolic allusions. Nobody can actually live like that and in French romantic comedies, nobody lives differently.
It freaks me out.

instead of following another guy, this woman should seek psychological help.

and here, the one on the left, she really suffers from some serious depression, but nobody ever cares. What the fuck is wrong with you people?
Instead of romantic comedy, we get some pretty serious types of problems hidden in a little love intrigue which isn't half as interesting as Emilie's drinking problems. I would watch a film about that.
So Beautiful Lies for me is just 5/10. But I can imagine that most people will find it brainless and pleasurable to watch. To me it's just disturbing

Raindance Festival

Filmaster (the website my main blog is located on- queerdelys.filmaster.com is an official sponsor of Raindance Film Festival so now more than ever I feel like promoting it.
http://www.raindance.co.uk/site/
It's a nice mixture of overpriced technical courses for aspiring filmmakers and some underground films people forgot they wanted to see. Not only are they ultra hipster, but also they somehow have managed to combined it with mainstream still remaining hipster, thus you can get such gems as the visits from Christopher Nolan or Ken Loach (not anymore though, they are too mainstream now for the festival).
Films still haven't been announced for this year, so we can still bet what they choose to show. I bet it's some Korean short films and British lesbian romance in the style of '80s films.
So, anyone's attending?

Scala Forever

I don't know how much time I spend now just admiring the programe of the festival, especially because I didn't apply on time to get a press pass for Fright Fest so I need consolation, and what can I say- Scala offers a better consolation than the biggest spoon of nutella.

and just imagine eating this nutella while watching all the films they offer.
My top favourite is of course all the horrors, but also Russ Meyer (yes, I love big tits and that's why) and John Waters (if it did have Pink Flamingos, I would pee my pants, promise). Also, they have Bunuel, whom I adore and will see just to see anything by him on a bigger screen than my telly and Herzog. I can go like this foreever actually, because everything they have is simply sublime.
This is the website you can masturbate to
http://scalaforever.co.uk/

Who's going?

Horrible, horrible bosses

I should start with the information that I am not very keen on comedies. Actually, there are hardly any that I truly like so for me writing a review on one and persuading you, my dear audience that my opinion is worth your notice, might be an overstatement. Sure I know stuff about films that apply to any genre, but I am not a person who laughs at American jokes. And Horrible Bosses is an American joke.
I must say what is surprising about the film is the cast. It's actually a very good cast and each of the actors/ actresses in a way plays a role they have already played before but which is presented in an unsympathetic and extreme form. Jennifer Anniston is trying to play a one sexy fox, but she turns out to be as sexy as Rachel. Kind of not that sexy really. Kevin Spacey is a Swimming With Sharks boss, but without emotional depth and background story and Colin Farrell plays himself, I think.
And then we have the victims of these horrible bosses. If there is a group of three men in their thirties-forties, there is always the same scheme going on. it seems like some men only hang out with other men to keep the rules going.
1. A responsible one- he is there to control the situation, normally he would go to the most extreme lenghts in order to achieve the aim set in the film;
2. A funny guy- usually fat as well. He isn't actually that funny or doesn't really have this amazingly witty sense of humour. Mainly he is awkward or plain stupid. And it's funny as hell
3. The main guy- he's cool, he's single, he's perfect. He will get the girl, even if he's not looking for one at the moment

So it's the same here.
The Lol of the film relies on the premise. Our heroes hate their bosses so much they come up with the idea that they will kill each others' bosses. So it's not suspicious. I don't know how not suspicious is it to check their connections if they are best friends and every day people see them drinking at the same bar, but fuck it, let's say it's persuasive enough.
Fortunately and and unfortunately for them, this asshole Kevin Spacey kills Colin Farrell thinking his wife is cheating on him, but it's our lost boys who get in trouble for it. I don't have to tell you how it all ends, but it involves the super intelligent recording gadgets. Like in real life.
Even though it has a nympho, a psycho and Colin Farrell, some dirty language and killing scenes, to me Horrible Bosses could be easily watched by children of all ages (of course if removed all of the above). it's just so unrealistic that I can even identify more with the Hangover team. Also, the characters seem all very black and white and I am still waiting for a comedy who will actually have dimentional characters. And when their dimention isn't based on their action only, but actually personality traits.
As I said though, people laughed and probably some fans of comedies will actually enjoy this one more than the producers have expected. After all, it didn't get that little on IMDB.
For me it's meh.
But at least it doesn't have Adam Sandler.

Then killing them is the answer

Film Addict: Blogs I'm reading

Film Addict: Blogs I'm reading: "There is a number of film blogs on the internet that one can get easily addicted to, but just few of them I can't stop myself from visiting ..."

Blogs I'm reading

There is a number of film blogs on the internet that one can get easily addicted to, but just few of them I can't stop myself from visiting almost every day. They are funny, witty, unique and make me lol a lot. Here we are, ladies and gentleman, queerdelys top something film blogs:

1. Ultra Culture

http://www.ultraculture.co.uk/
I'm not even gaining pleasure from it anymore. It's so good it's addictive and I simply have to go on it almost every day (and sometimes twice a day even though there are no new posts added- but there is a random post button). The guy who writes it is one young smart guy and his reviews and articles are always provoking some pre-high laughter in me. It's this laughter that I get just thinking about how good getting high is. This is how good Ultra Culture is.

2. The Shiznit
http://www.theshiznit.co.uk
When I first visited this blog I read one article, two articles, three articles, four...seventeen articles...You can easily spend the whole day reading articles and then articles related to them. And this guy's admiration of Nicolas Cage and Mark Whalberg monotonous styles is just what I identify with. This blog makes my day. Every day.

3. Picturehouse Podcast
http://picturehouseblog.co.uk/category/podcast
I still haven't met these guys and I still want to. They are witty, from London and all about films. It's a friendly conversation about the movies and this is what I want just before I see anything at the cinema. They are always positive, even when they are negative. And their Oscar special was better than what you get from any other media.

4. The Incredible Suit
http://theincrediblesuit.blogspot.com
I like this blog because it tends to be so specific sometimes that it's like reading about one background character in a movie. It's good, it's funny and it's hugely entertaining. Most importantly, it's a blog on blogspot, so it gives hope to people like me that you don't have to own a website for people to like you. True?

5. Lawrence and Julie and Julia
http://lawrenceandjulieandjulia.blogspot.com
Fucking hell, this guy is torturing himself for our entertainment. I don't know how you can ignore him. He is watching Julie and Julia every day for a year, the film I couldn't watch once because it's just so fucking irritating it just makes me swear too much. But this guy sacrifies himself. I hope he will still have mental stability in a year.

So that's it. My top 5 (it seems) film blogs I read notoriously. I would love to find more so suggest them in comments if you have any recommendations.

Super rip off

What if we take a not-that-charming forty year old, a crying Arwen on drugs and nymphomaniac Ellen Page and put them all in a total rip off of Kick Ass? Well, I think we will get a bad rip off of Kick Ass.
Super is not super. It has a potential (or giving it its right name, it’s ripping off already existing script), it has some good acting and it has some nice graphical editing. But besides that it literally has nothing. Except for two rape scenes, on of which I might never forget about.
It tries to be smart and witty, but it turns out absurd and ugly. I have nothing against violence in the movies, actually I am a big fan of gore horror films, but if violence is the only thing that takes Super one step further from Kick Ass, then I will just say thank you very much for a free film but I am never willing to pay anything for your dvd release. And it’s sad because Kick Ass is definitely one of my favourite films. When I went to see Super I still hoped it is just the inspiration that they took from Kick Ass, but I promise, they literally use the same lines.
I can’t be bothered to spend time describing the plot because it’s basically

and it makes me so angry
but the only different lies in (as I have already said), the amount of violence
Super has this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44rUlHYg-MU
and under these circumstances it seems it has been written.
Do I hate it? Of course I don’t. I am just indifferent towards bad rip offs.
I hate you, James Gunn.
You and your Scooby Doo 2 film. If you at least did the first one, I might have had some respect left.
Fuck you.

Biutiful, Dilemma or Hereafter?

Favourite director
Clint Eastwood
or
a comedy?
I'm too lazy to even check them on Rotten Tomatoes.