Messages

I was looking for it on the schedule today, and it's not on!

A bit of online investigation later and I found this:

In a nutshell,  supposedly due to poor ratings they're moving it to 10 on 5*. An earlier slot but hardly a more popular channel, surely? Apparently they're repeating it Tuesdays on 5 at midnight.

Ho hum. I hope FX doesn't end up the sole channel to show it in the UK. I don't get that one.

John Hurt has apparently been (somewhat) confirmed as the missing Dr between McGann and Ecclestone.
http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/trending-blog/doctor-who-john-hurts-role-revealed

Interesting! I was hoping they'd actually divulge some of that time war stuff actually with McGann's doctor* at some point although I suppose that could still happen. We don't know when the regeneration happened after all.

More of Hurt is good though.

*I liked him in that made for TV film although the film itself, not so much. Another example of what I was saying in my previous post.

Prometheus. That's all I'm saying...

Surely his acting wasn't bad in that film? Granted, he wasn't given a whole lot to do.

Plenty of great actors have been in bad times films* but I wouldn't judge their ability on that.

*Although I rather liked Promethius but I understand I'm in the minority (online, anyway) and I can also understand why others dislike it.

I'm sure that actor who played that big vamp at the start was the same guy who played Sex Machine in From Dusk Til Dawn.

Tom Savini! The special effects man on the original Living Dead series (the Romero ones of course) and the director of the colour remake of Night of The Living Dead. He was indeed sex machine

Ah yes. Thank you Charlie.

I suddenly realised I got a name mixed up in my previous post when I said:

Corey is described as 'nearly 18'

Please substitute 'Corey' for 'Nicole'. Corey is of course the first name of two of the male actors in these films rather than the name of that female character. How embarrassing. (In my defence 'Corey' strikes me as a feminine name, address but still a stupid mix-up.)

I stayed up late to watch the third film in the trilogy last night: The Lost Boys:The Thirst.
I said I didn't mind The Tribe, and I stand by that, but I think this one was better. It wasn't a retelling of the first film story for one thing. In fact I'd go as far as to say I thought it rather good! The whole vampire Rave thing was done before in the Blade films but not quite like this.

It IS very silly in places, but it's supposed to be, and it mostly works, particularly as the silliest character in these films (and the only one to appear in all of them, not including backflashes) Edgar Frog takes central stage. It's cheesy fun with a different kind of story [spoiler]with a somewhat predicted but satisfying twist at the end[/spoiler]. And endearing sidekicks too.

There are strong elements of comedy in all these films and I think it's even stronger here. I certainly wouldn't want all my horror films to be like this, but this was a fun outing.

The Lost Boys: The Tribe

I'm sure that actor who played that big vamp at the start was the same guy who played Sex Machine in From Dusk Til Dawn. I could be wrong as he doesn't look much older but there's a strong resemblance.

Anyway, this film is much derided and I think I can see why. It follows the basic premise of the original film with more sex, violence and gore. The blurb at the back of the case even describes it as a 'reboot' although it is certainly set after the events of the other film. It does feel a bit flatter to me although I found it entertaining.

Although it's not stated explicitly it appears the kids from this film could be the offspring of Michael and Star from the first film. (I thought that hard to believe but considering this film is set 21 years later and Corey is described as 'nearly 18' (her brother supposedly a year or two older) the maths actually do add up. I'm getting old. ) At least that's the implication by their shared surname 'Emerson'. Thing is: aside from the cameo at the end and Edgar Frog's reprising his role there is no reference to the previous film.  It would make more sense if the kids of each were completely unrelated. It served no purpose.

That being said, I thought the film was okay. Much too much swearing for my liking though.

Great traditional style stunt work in a biking/skate boarding cop chase scene. Some black humour that made me wince and laugh. ([spoiler]Having undead fast healing mates means you can take practical jokes to a whole new level. As long as you miss the heart of course.[/spoiler] ) I thought the vamped out makeup was a bit too close to Buffy for my liking. I can understand them wishing to improve effects since the 80s film but there wasn't much wrong with the vampire makeup in that film. The story was far from original but it served. I'd say the 80s film was far better overall although the subordinate vampires got to do more than their counterparts in the original.

It was interesting seeing that cameo from [spoiler]the late Corey Haim at the end and in the alternate endings. (Curiously he looked much more recognisable to his younger self in his vampire makeup than without it in the alternative endings!)[/spoiler]

Anyway, The Thirst is next. I understand that one is much better liked by the lost folk online.

[Mardroid]

Right, Mardroid. As a person in the past who suffered from anxiety attacks (mainly as a teenager and mainly involving exams) I can sympathise with this. I get these little episodes sometimes. I'll clench a fist and grit my teeth or get butterflies in the belly. It passes. The trick is to push them straight out of your mind the moment they strike. Have a 2 second cringe, but then focus on thinking about something else. Something happy or just plain ordinary (what's for dinner is a classic!). If you let the memory play out, or take hold, it's much worse.

Thanks for the kind words but it's not that big a deal. I felt really embarrassed at the time and strongly considered texting my friend to tell her I wouldn't make it just on the off chance I made the same mistake again before she turned up (I didn't) but on remembering I also had something important to give her I stuck it out, and then pretty much forgot about it after I was in the correct car 10 minutes . (Remembering again when I saw thread).

All considered it was an easy mistake to make and I doubt the memory will traumatise me that much. My mind does this thing though where I imagine if things had happened differently, if I'd actually opened the door and sat in the car, and etc... like I get some perverse thrill in torturing myself... I but no, I'm better dealing with these things now. I have done other things even more embarrassing because they were downright stupid when younger. They used to bother me a lot (and still make me groan inside) but not nearly as much as they used to. If anything the experiences could be positive as they make me more careful. Until the next time I drop my guard anyway.

I don't curl up in a fetal position when they strike, but yes it happens on occasion. I actually created a whole new embarrassing memory just yesterday in fact.

I was invited to attend a wedding, so one of my work colleagues offered to give me a lift since she lives near me. Anyway rather than her going out of her way to come to my home we decided to meet nearby. Anyway there I was with my eyes peeled looking for a black lady in a blue car, and I saw one stop some way back in the traffic line near the junction. She even raised her hand and waved! So I trotted up to the car...

I think you can guess the rest. Thank goodness I made sure I had a good look to make sure it was her before opening the door and entering, or the memory would be 10 times cringe-worthy but I got close enough for her to notice me and frown at me with a puzzled "who the smeg are you?" expression. (Incidental why did she wave, I wonder? Was she waving to someone else or did she coincidentally mistake me for someone else as well?)

"Sorry, wrong person!" I blurted, then ran away up the street.. (Not "sorry I thought you were someone else". "Wrong person." What a dough nut.)

Probably pretty minor embarrassment in the scheme of things but I'm pretty shy and thus easily embarrassed. At least I didn't actually get in the car. An aunt of mine actually did that thinking it was her husband's car of all things.

Where do you folks stand on ... Bagels?

Love 'em, and although I rarely have them nowadays. When I used to work in Richmond 10-11 years back I would often grab something to eat at Waterloo station for breakfast. There was a tiny stall near the entrance to Waterloo East which sold American style bagels of various kinds optionally toasted. I tried one out of curiosity and really took to them. The curranty ones were my favourite. Sadly the stall is no longer there. At least it wasn't when I checked last Tuesday.

I've had others from a supermarket since then, but while nice they were nowhere near the quality of that stall.

I recently finished 'Let the Old Dreams Guy'. Apparently from one story which made little sense to me, great stuff. Highly recommended. If you prefer the endings of Let the Right One In and Handling the Undead to remain [spoiler]ambiguous[/spoiler] (and I kinda do in the case of the former) you might wish to skip the two 'sort of sequels' in this volume. Which would be a shame as I thought them great little tales in their own right.

I've just started 'Vampire Circus'. I was curious on seeing it in the library at I rather like the original Hammer Horror film on which this is based. I'm undecided yet on how good the book is, but it's not bad so far. Changing the setting to the present day rather than retelling the period drama of the first was a curious decision.

Anyone see that Horizon programme about Super-massive black holes the other day? Apparently there's a massive dust cloud scheduled to pass close by our resident black hole this year* which should hopefully give up some interesting readings.

I particularly found the facts about quasars very fascinating particularly considering the paradoxical nature concerning what current thinking considers them to be. I'm sure a lot of you know all this already but I learnt new things watching that programme.

*Although technically I guess it must have already happened considering how far away Galactic Centre must be. I know I said it was our first 'resident black hole' but I was speaking relatively of course.

[great big laser beams]

I saw this film today and I liked it a lot.

As for certain questionable scenes: (Don't highlight if you haven't seen the film. BIG SPOILERS.)


1. [spoiler]Fighting superpowered enemies in an area full of people.[/spoiler]
2. [spoiler]Killing Zod[/spoiler]

My explanation for both of these supposed 'out of character' moments would be: [spoiler]'They were the lesser of two evils'[/spoiler] (please forgive the cliché) and 'context is everything'.


To go into more explanation.

1.  [spoiler]Sure, Superman could have flown away attempting to lead the others to somewhere less populated. And the great big space ship would have continued pummelling Metropolis and the Earth to oblivion. And the kryptonians could have stayed and massacred the population. Okay, the latter isn't certain and I think Superman should have made more effort, if only to suggest they take the fight elsewhere, but most of what I saw seemed to be very much in the heat of the situation. And much of the building bashing (on Supers part, bearing in mind Zod's guys wouldn't care less) was a matter of momentum. People may have died, but a whole lot more would have died otherwise. Not that it makes it right.

As others have said, I like to think much of the population had moved on at that point one way or the other. Land flattening space ships will do that.

I agree Superman should have made more effort in that regard though. But I didn't see it as the massive issue others here seem to considering the more realistic take of this film.[/spoiler]


2. [spoiler]He had Zod in a neck hold while Zod was blasting great big laser beams out of his eyes endangering humans, one being Clarke's good friend Lois (not that she should get possible dispensation, but the emotional attachment wouldn't help Zod's case). Yeah, I guess he could have attempted to knock Zod out by smacking his head on the ground, but bearing in mind that head had already ploughed a field and several buildings, I'm not sure that would work. It seems it takes a direct hit from a missile to knock these guys unconscious.

I suppose Supers could have let go with one hand and put his hand over Zod's eyes risking a good singeing (which, to be fair, wouldn't harm him badly) but then that risks compromising his hold on a super powerful entity who could whiz away and turn the humans to pulp in a few second flat.

So Superman weighed the odds and snapped Zod's neck. If he had done it coldly I wouldn't have bought it but it hurt him deeply to do it. Great acting. He certainly killed Zod with more emotion than Christopher Reeve's* version in Superman 2, ol' Mr. Crushy hand. (Not that I particularly blame him. It was an exciting air punching moment.) Okay technically, I think Zod squawked in pain then fell down a chasm (if I remember correctly, it's been a while.) , but Superman didn't even attempt to help him, did he? (Again, not that I blame him.)

It wasn't an ideal solution, and I wish he'd found another way too. But then again so did he.[/spoiler]


I did have a minor issues with the plot though.   [spoiler]I thought the 'phantom bomb' resolution didn't make a whole lot of sense. (Two colliding 'space folding' drives cause a black hole to suck them into the phantom zone? How does that work? I mean, I understand the concept behind the drives folding space and even drilling a hold to another dimension, but the collision thing having that specific effect seems a bit too convenient.)

Thinking about it further, I guess the fact Lois used the Kryptonian USB key means Jor-El's program could have affected the energy signature creating the desired effect, rather than just an ordinary explosion or a blackhole somewhere else (although again I don't think just colliding would do that) but a bit more explanation would have been nice.

Oh, and wouldn't a black hole have sucked everthing else in as well? Hey ho.

I think they should have stuck with the concept of Lois not knowing Clark and Superman were the same person too. I understand why they didn't do it (it's kinda silly since she spends a lot of time close to both that she doesn't recognise him) but it's an integral part of the mythology for me.

*Not meaning to knock Christopher Reeve's Superman. He was the chap I grew up with and I think he will forever be my Superman. And that second film has a particular place in my heart, possibly my favourite of the lot. Boy did it have contradictions and plot holes though. More so than this film.  If you've forgotten, maybe ol' Supers snogged your socks off too.[/spoiler]

To round off, I thought it a rather good film.
So there.

Man of Steel

There were a couple of small issues, but overall, I really enjoyed it.

Yep. That looks my cup of tea.

I don't know what you mean, I think they still let you watch movies in prison, I've heard those places are practically holiday camps now. Still, it's weird, isn't it? I just kept putting it off and forgetting about it.

I haven't seen an Bourne movies either. I just have never really felt fussed to although I usually find Bond films entertaining. (Mind you, I've yet to watch any of the new ones of those either, even despite picking up Casino Royale cheap last year. Yep, still haven't seen it.)

The Lost Boys.

I found the trilogy box set going for around £8 - 9 in a DVD shop in Bromley. (I forget the name but they sell a lot of stuff at very reasonable prices, comparable, to the internet in many cases.)

I've yet to see the sequels, which I will do soon, but I figured I'd start with the original during lunch today.

I've seen it before several times and it's still a good 'un.

I think they should have left out the prologue scene [spoiler]where the vampires are smegged off by a policeman and take their revenge.[/spoiler] I think the film works better if you meet the vamps for the first time with the family, if that makes sense.

It's a scene I think I've only seen a couple of times as I've often missed the start when I've caught the film in the past.

A small criticism though.

Anyway, I've read bad reviews for the sequels (the second anyway, although I understand the third picks up), but I look forward to viewing them and making my own judgement.

Great work.

Seeing the upper half of that guy's face makes my eyes go funny. It did in the original Moore strip and it does in your work.

Quite a strange sensation!