So Excited!

I'm getting on with a ten-minute script at the mo. That probably seems very underwhelming to you guys BUT this one, this ten-minute script could well be made into a film by media students of Edge Hill University.

I am so excited. I might actually end up with a realization of my dream. Seems too good to be true, like a love I once had, but perhaps this will come good.

Hehe, come good...

[Please note, the picture is not a page from my script, it is just an example of a page of script I can use without copyright infringement]

(Not John Carpenter's) The Thing

Well, I saw Matthijs van Heijningen Junior's The Thing tonight. Fyi, it's the prequel to the 1982 film of the same name, directed by one of the masters, John Carpenter. It follows the Norwegian research team (the one whose camp is explored in the original film) who find a strange 'fossil' buried in the ice and dig it up in pursuit of mega-kudos. The original is one of my favourite films of all time, so here goes an impartial analysis of the brand-spanking-new one...

Well, it's not as new as you might think, there is quite a bit that's taken directly from the first. I mean, apart from the fact that both camps are from the same 'Research Centre's 'R' Us' shop (right down to the gaudy glass lampshade in the rec room). There's also the 'Norris' character (who ends up collapsing and then turning into the thing after being carried away), the 'Palmer' character (who ends up being roasted in front of bookshelves after the whole 'oh no my flamethrower is temporarily not working' incident), the hallway confrontation with the scientists (just like with Gary and Copper) and more. Incidentally, Jonathan Walker - who plays Colin in the hallway confrontation bit - really dragged the tone down with poor acting. It's supposed to be a high-tension scene where suspicions are rife and arguments ensue to try and get to the bottom of it. His lines involved some real clunky ones, pretty much "He is hiding something" and "He is not what he appears to be." He delivered them with such dullness, I kind of forgot there's a world-threatening alien on the loose. Even the soundtrack (by Marco Beltrami) is heavily inspired by Ennio Morricone's original score, but doesn't convey much of the original despair. In fact, in the end scene where Joel is torched, that kind of 'behold the heroine's triumph' music plays, but the idea of the original is that no-one wins, just life's brutality rolls on.

What was new was the way the main character Kate discerns between who is human and who is the thing. Organic matter can't produce inorganic matter, that's fair enough, so fillings are an indicator of humanity. It's not quite as tension filled as the blood test scene, and I found it baffling that the characters would refuse to simply open their mouths to prove their innocence, but I guess the writer (Eric Heisserer) was at a loss for ways to create drama at this point. But yeah, I liked that bit, and also liked the Norwegian stamp put on the film by the director. Some of the dialogue was in Norwegian and subtitled for our pleasure, just thought that gave the film a good flavour and authenticity.

I think ultimately the film is confused about the nature of the thing, which is a temptation when dealing with all the special effects we see in today's modern filmographic reels. The alien is introduced pretty early on in the film and is 'flaunted' loads throughout the film, showing off the modern doofer-computers' abilities. There's even a bit where the thing, in a sort of dog-like incarnation, stalks Joel into a kitchen. This is a shame in couple of ways; hide-and-seek scenes are basic horror, not pushing any boundaries whatsoever, and, also, the whole idea of the alien is that it's vulnerable out in the open, so it needs to be sneaky, and NOT just 'Hi I'm Alan, just another run-of-the-mill alien going out for Friday night' (or whatever...).

That kinda sums up the film in a lot of ways; it is not convinced of itself. John Carpenter's The Thing is sci-fi horror, but with a lot the tension and psychological elements associated with terror. The 2011 remake is 'pure' horror (at least in the sense that there's no terror). Basic plot, basic acting, basic chills and over-the-top special effects. Go figure. Not a patch on the original, but then I'm bound to say that as a massive fan. If you like the original, sure, go see it. Just because it's not AS good, doesn't mean to say it's not worthwhile. If you like horror films in general, also go see it. If I gave half-stars, it'd get 2.5, but I don't, so I give it 3 (without much of a grudge), so maybe any film-goer should try it. If you can get your hands on the 1982 version, it's a better film, but will not be for everyone's tastes.

P.S. Just in case this rant hasn't got enough fan-based, unqualified opinion to put you off, Mary Elizabeth Winstead is HOT.

The Hurt Locker

Sweet mother-of-Jesus, what a fantastic film! I've been wanting to watch this film SO MUCH that I have actually put off watching it for ages, in case it doesn't match my expectations. What did I expect? Well, I expected it to be harrowing, to change my view of the Iraq conflict and also I expected it to be 'pro-America'. The gauntlet was well and truly thrown down when a great mate of mine JW threw down the gauntlet/lent me the DVD.

I don't think I've ever watched a film that has really, unrelentingly captured such unwavering tension before. Not in the likes of Shutter Island, The Departed or John Carpenter's The Thing (to name a few) have I come across such dense, claustrophobic paranoia. As Kathryn Bigelow said (in the extras of the version I watched) she wanted the audience to be an extra person in the team that deals with the constant IEDs that Iraq presents to soldiers. Did it bring me to the front line? No. Did it make me feel what those soldiers feel? No. What it did do was to bring me completely out of my comfort zone, it made me fear to watch the characters live in the jaws of death and, above all, it made me re-evaluate what it is to be human.

The film was certainly harrowing. After managing to get into a good mood, the film certainly depressed me. The film definitely changed my view of the war in Iraq; I head so much about soldiers blown up by improvised bombs, little did I realise the extent to which soldiers go to try and defuse them, despite the fact they might kill everyone within a huge radius. The final, and perhaps most important question when it comes to a film of this type (given that it was from an American soldier's perspective): was it pro-America? There were very few cliche American flags flowing, and none of them were from a victorious batalion, establishing their mark on a hard-to-gain hill. Instead, the main message was about war as it happens to the ordinary man, how they become repulsed or addicted to the effects it brings about on them (i.e. the release of 'feel good' hormones, adrenaline and endorphins), and how they cannot adapt to civilian life afterwards (exemplified in the mundane supermarket shopping scene toward the end).

I bloody loved this film, despite a severe slackening of pace towards the end. That is subjective. What I can promise you, however, is that this film will be in the world's 'Top War Films' for many years to come, and that you are missing out until you see it.

Seriously

WTF is time? Seriously, what the fuck? Where does it get off telling us, being all 'high and mighty' constantly?

I'm looking at this clock on my desk, and it's like 'yeah it's ten to twelve' and, friends, I kept it real. I was like 'no it bloody isn't! It's when I say it is, and now I say it's time to mess around on the internet, casually work and disregard traditional notions that I should be in bed or actually contributing to society in any way.'

Yeah, that'll bloody well show it!

It's Official

I'm now blogging for Edge Hill University!

I just hope I don't start neglecting this little darling...

Nice One!

Liverpool 1 - Manchester United 1

What a bloody brilliant game today! Despite a goalless first half and then a draw at the end of it, I think the overall match was great and very entertaining. We deserved to win, to be fair, and it was surprising that we didn't but, as Stevie G said post-match, to get a point from the champions of the league is a decent result.

Liverpool dominated in every aspect but, as seems to be an unfortunate trend sometimes, the scoreline. Possession, shots and more were in our favour, but still it was a 'well worked' (and not at all jammy) header from United's Javier Hernandez that denied us our rightful three points. You could argue that Steven Gerrard's free-kick goal was a bit soft, but all I can say is that if you can't get the basics of a wall right (i.e. stick together so you actually block the ball from the keeper), then you don't deserve to have won the Premier League... The way we continue to be treated by referees is, as usual, disappointing but (after the mention of two or three hand-ball decisions being ignored in the box, our goal kick being given as their corner - which they scored from - and a missing yellow card) the less said about that the better!

I think Stevie G deserved man of the match, but Luis Suarez was in with a good shout again. He seems tireless and nearly found the back of the net numerous times. He has such a natural talent, I just hope he realises that and doesn't beat himself up that he hasn't scored. I feel so giddy! The heartbeat of LFC back for ninety minutes, scoring his first goal of the season against the old enemy was simply amazing. The usually underrated Dirk Kuyt had a fine chance too, and the fact he didn't score is more a credit to United's keeper De Gea than it is a discredit to Liverpool.

Keep it up lads, YNWA!

P.S. A long overdue shout out to Matt, hope your own Merseyside team is inspiring you as much as mine is!

Yes, Man!

I've been feeling lately like I'm stuck in a rut. Stuck in some superglue whilst putting together a model of the Millennium Falcon. Stuck, perhaps, in some chewing gum I just sat in on public transport. However and wherever I was stuck, I've felt like needing to shake things up a bit, to stop sitting in the gum and run forward until the sticky gum tendrils snap and I am free.

So yesterday I had a full day at uni, but instead of sitting back and relaxing after this, I went forward. Though it wasn't part of my course, though it wasn't free, I said a big 'yes' to the opportunity to see past Edge Hill Short Story Prize winners read out their work at the Bluecoat in Liverpool and have a discussion on short story writing. The two prize winners to attend were Graham Mort (Touch) and Tom Vowler (The Method).

Unfortunately, Mr. Vowler had to drop out due to illness, but Graham more than made up for this by reading out some of his poetry in the first half. I think the thing that struck me the most was the rhythm of his poetry. I appreciated the considered approach and how his exploration of an image groped forward to an interesting and thought-provoking point. His short story 'The Lesson' (from Touch) was very evocative in a sensual way, with focus on sexual relations, pervading pungent smells, the caress of the sea and so on. It made me think of life as a series of strings, leading to and from a person, so fragile and hardly noticeable that secrets and turmoils are almost necessary (at least for the characters in the story).

All in all, a fantastic experience to see such a master at work again. Imagine where I'd have been if I'd said 'nah, too tired tonight'. Stuck on a sofa with so much gluey crap feeling sorry for myself. Say 'yes' more, embrace life, you only get one!