Tag: film

Posted on

Pet Sematary

I’m having a cup of Earl Grey tea as I write this because for some reason I want Earl Grey tea. I’m not sure why but I had to go and buy a box of tea bags just to satisfy this craving.

This afternoon I went to the cinema at Rochester, the Cineworld one, the one I always go to, and I watched another horror film. I’ve a number of things I want to talk about here but first there are some formalities to get through. The tide was quite low and I did’t take a photograph this time but I did look at the lovely murky water as it journeyed past to the Thames Estuary.

I also rated this film on IMDB. I then used the app feature to share my opinion with the world because I know the world wants to know what I think.

So, the things I want to say are in broadly two themes. The first is what I thought of the film the other is why I think I dislike horror movies.

I haven’t read the book and I haven’t seen any other film version. So, this film was a bit shit. But that might because of what I write in the next paragraph. My issues are the following:

  • IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A PET CEMETERY. A cat nearly gets buried there. That’s it. All the rest of the action happens upon a special fucking hill which people only go and visit when it’s night time because otherwise they’d see it’s just a hill. WITH STEPS. This place you aren’t meant to go has STEPS.
  • This is surely a love story? The ending seemed perfect for a sort of “let’s get together” type of film. I’m not sure I was meant to empathise with  anyone, I didn’t really. I did like John Lithgow though, it’s hard not to.
  • A cat being evil isn’t a surprise. We all know they can be evil fuckers. It didn’t really seem that evil in the end. It just scratched someone.
  • They did kill a kid and well done to the film makers.
  • Trees aren’t scary.

While I was watching this film I was trying to work out why I don’t enjoy horror movies. It’s not like when I was a young teenager and I saw loads of classics and each one affected me quite a bit back then:

  • The Omen (all parts)
  • Poltergeist
  • Amityville
  • And probably a few others

I think I struggle with these themes now because I don’t believe in any form of soul or afterlife. I don’t believe in anything after death. There’s no evidence and all religions which offer the afterlife are cons.

I am subject to jumps and foreboding but I think in horror films it’s not done subtly enough for me. It’s obvious when there’s going to be a pop-scare. The music seems too leading, I guess these slasher flicks seem to grate rather than entertain. I mean, if you lived in this sort of universe you’d fix up all lights and basement rooms during the day time and make sure everything worked well in the house. Who’d walk around a house in the dark when they hear the noises of the undead?

Do you know what I watched last night that was better than the last two films I saw at the cinema:

UNDER SIEGE

It was amazing. I enjoyed every minute of it and I have every time I’ve watched it since seeing it at the cinema in 1992. There might be too many bullets in each magazine but as films go it is great fun. Well done to those who made it. It still works well twenty seven years later [it hurt writing those numbers]. Except Steven Seagal is clearly a nutter now.

Posted on

Us

Yesterday I drove to the western half of Kent to see the film Us. I had to cross the Medway, much like the Romans about two thousand years ago but without the battle and invasion part. The cinema I went to is the Cineworld at Rochester. I picked the film Us because it was lowest on the list of films I’d least like to see that were being shown.

M2 Eastbound Medway Bridge
M2 Eastbound Medway Bridge

If you look carefully at the picture of the bridge you can see the work done to strengthen it. It has been reduced from four lanes to three due to the increased sizes of lorries allowed on UK roads by previous governments leading to a drop in rail freight and an increase in traffic. You can see the tide was middling.

As is custom I rated the film on IMDB and tweeted the result, this communication deals with the rating system:

I rarely go to see horror films because most of the time they are stupid. Once you accept that supernatural stuff is just that – outside of natural and therefore doesn’t exist – you find ghost stories quite terrible. I’m still working through what I thought about certain aspects of this film, I guess it has got me thinking.

This film crossed many genres and I was surprised by that. But overall I found it a little boring and tired. Maybe I’ve seen too many of these types. Maybe I haven’t seen anything new for a long time. The reason I went to see this was I had heard it was meant to be pretty good. Shortly I am going to read some proper reviews to see what they say, to gain some insight into why other people thought the film really good. I can’t write too much here without spoilers.

There was a bible passage mentioned a few times throughout this film, it was Jeremiah 11:11. This is what it says:

Therefore this is what the Lord says: ‘I will bring on them a disaster they cannot escape. Although they cry out to me, I will not listen to them.

Not sure what it’s about but it does seem that the Lord is being a bit of a malicious prick.

I suspect this film is full of metaphor and I’m just missing the point.

 

I have just been and read the review of this film written in The Guardian. I don’t think there’s a great deal of insight in the review. It got 4 stars and I’m not really sure why.

UPDATE: I found someone who’s better at metaphor than me so if you want please read Eli Bosnik’s blog post.

Posted on

Captain Marvel

This afternoon, St Patrick’s Day, I went to the cinema to see the latest Marvel super hero offering – Captain Marvel. I noted the state of the tide and it was low, but there was also a new area of the mud bank that had been dredged and two barges were anchored in there properly afloat. I rated this film on IMDB and there’s a communication dealing with how the system works here.

I note that the poster for this film outside the cinema had an F-15 Strike Eagel based at RAF Lakenheath on it and this excited me, I thought I might get to see some decent military flying by the USAF but there wasn’t really any. Also, all the flying action took place in sandy places, even when returning from space because it would be impossible to associate any other kind of land type with aliens.

I really enjoyed this film. The first thirty seemed a little slow and I did think about having a nap but I didn’t want my head to lay on either person at my side so I forced myself to stay awake. I’m glad I did because I really enjoyed this film. Well worth watching.

The best thing about this movie was the positive and strong female role models within. Most of the soundtrack was by female artists and the whole thing effused oestrogen. This is how films should be. Strong positive female role models. Women should be doing these roles and they will kick your butt. Such a force for good in society.

Obviously there’s still all those issues about winning by hitting someone until they don’t get up. I’m not keen on those messages. I think we see enough of that from the G5 in the world. Oh, there was Jude Fucking Law, yeaugh.

Posted on

On The Basis Of Sex

Yesterday there was a bonus few hours in the day as work was shut because of a lack of water supply. It’d be nice to have another day off, but we shall see what happens. I expect to be working and anyway, I’ve got a trip out to a mathematics competition so that will still need to go ahead.

As I gained some time yesterday I decided to go to the cinema in the evening as I got done some things earlier in the day. I visited the Cineworld cinema at Rochester and went to see On The Basis Of Sex. I forgot to look at the state of the tide on the way in but I can tell you the river levels were low on the way out with only the centre channel showing a liquid covering.

As is custom I rated this film on IMDB and there’s a complete guide to the rating system within this communication. You should read that before having a major breakdown about a score I gave a film. I then tweeted the result.

I might make a joke a bit later about this film, I’m working on the wording of it but something along the lines of “I went to see On The Basis Of Sex last night and I can tell you it was NOT the kind of film I was expecting”. You have to trust me that with my reputation this would be funny or at least vaguely amusing.

I liked this film and really wanted to give it 8/10 on the Parish IMDB scale but I realised I probably wouldn’t watch it again and so therefore, no matter how good, it gets a 6. This film covers the early life and career of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She is currently trying to save the USA from the religious right wing views of the other judges on the USA Supreme Court [SCOTUS]. It is, I fear, not going to work because they appointed a sex-fiend to the bench recently rather than Merrick Garland. It is a disgrace what the GOP are doing to politics and human rights in the USA at the moment and I can’t go on about it for too long or I’ll get depressed about it.

I enjoyed this film. It’s a court room drama, sort of though as there’s only courtroom stuff right at the end, I guess this more likely shows the struggle to try and make sure that everyone has equal rights. You know, everyone should have the same protection under law and everyone should be treated the same. I mean, you’d think this would be an easy choice, it’s a simple question to answer. But, it took a long time and the fight still isn’t finished. There’s plenty more work to do, not only in the USA but also this country and most definitely around the world. Just have a look at how many countries still have homosexuality against the law.

I enjoyed this film. I don’t have a huge amount to say about it though. It was a nice little review of how people have fought for the common cause of good. It was nice to see RBG at the end.

What I do want to say is that whenever it gets dark in our world the producers in Hollywood and other film makers around the world try to make a difference. They try to make political statements by pushing films with messages. This group of flamboyant people who live in a bubble of acceptance of each other attempt to release films to show the good side of humanity. It’s like saying “fuck you” to those in authority. It’s a way of getting a message out there to the world to say “you aren’t alone and we care”.

This film is a slap in the face to the current presidential administration in the USA. It aims to show how we can improve as a society and what damage is being done. It’s a reminder of what things were like five years ago when politics wasn’t binary, divisive and aggressive. Hollywood tries its best to get the message of hope out there, to slap the face of those in authority. It attempts to change the world for the better by highlighting the stories of those who suffer or those who have done good.

Recent Oscar winners show how these liberal elite try to change the world with their messages:

  • 12 Years A Slave
  • Spotlight
  • Moonlight

Hollywood and films help because they start the discussion. They allow people to talk about subjects that might be uncomfortable while at the same time they normalise those things that many might find strange or wrong. These films give hope to the world, especially in these dark times.

Posted on

Colette

The other night I drove from my half decent B&B to Boston town in the fens to go to the cinema. I was here about a year ago when I saw The Shape Of The Water. I’m not sure what I wrote about the area but having spent some more time driving around South Lincolnshire I can confirm that pretty much everywhere worries me. There’s not much traffic, it’s quiet and the roads are too straight. I drove six miles earlier and didn’t go around a single corner. The fact that Boston was really quiet at just before seven pm was really worrying and the roads were dead. I mean there was another car on the road but it was a good mile behind me and stayed there. This is country completely countryed up.

Straight Roads - Highlighted
Straight Roads – Highlighted

To give a sense of scale the runway at Coningsby is 2.7km.

After parking in Boston, where all the car parks seem broken and leave me in a state of worry for my car, I went to the Savoy cinema after a small excursion to a kebab shop for dinner. I went to see Colette and I rated the film on the IMDB website. There’s a communication nearly five years old that explains the scoring process.

Well, what did I think. I definitely enjoyed the movie. I think it portrayed many of the issues still facing our society today. Women’s place to make their own money, people to be gendered however they wish etc. I enjoyed all of it. I always like these historical films because once I’ve seen them I spend a little time learning more about the characters the film was based on and learn that the real story is much more real and interesting than the film version.

Much like the other historical drama I saw recently I was somewhat surprised at the level of lesbianism within this film but if I had bothered to know a little more before I went I would probably have understood what was going to happen. There wasn’t a use of the word “cunt” in this film unlike in The Favourite.

Overall I thought this film was well acted and the setting and story were good. A nice little film with a relatively nice ending.

Posted on

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

Took a short trip to the Cineworld cinema at Rochester to see Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse. What an awful title, it’s too long and clumsy but then, given how many times Sony have tried to fix the Spider-Man franchise this isn’t a surprise, they’ve tried to make it right this time.

The tide was about two thirds but I don’t know whether it was waxing or waning. I could look it up but I can’t be bothered. I will say that the sun was out and the view was lovely. Not too cold either coming in at about 10 Celsius.

So, I rated this film on the IMDB website, which is customary now. You can see a communication explaining the scoring system somewhere on this site, or you could click here. I then tweeted my result:

I really enjoyed this movie. I liked nearly all of it and I thought it was good. This result is probably a bit of a shock to regulars to this website. I haven’t rated a superhero film as good for a long time. I find them all incredibly poorly written and boring. Also they tend to be sexist and reinforce toxic behaviour. I know, I know, I read too much into all of it, but these films help normalise poor behaviour towards each other. They also rely on the idea that we, as humans, accept a higher power looking out for us, or a better social class trying to help us. That’s not the reality.

Anyway, I loved the style of this film. The animation was beautiful and original. It really aimed for a style of its own and won. I was mesmerised with the beauty of it all. Such a wonderful job.

It had a Spider-Pig.

The story was pretty good all over and I enjoyed it. There was some lovely many-worlds theories there and it all fitted together nicely. Yeah, I could find many flaws if I tried but I don’t want to. I want this film to be allowed to just be.

I don’t think this film will change my overall opinion of superhero movies because I am pretty convinced they suck. However, when films like those regularly make over five hundred million at the box office who am I to complain about the social problems of them.

Posted on

Alita: Battle Angel

I’ve been to see the film Alita: Battle Angel at Rochester Cineworld cinema. It was a clear day and one where I actually managed less than 2000 steps so that’s quite impressive. I’ll tell you what’s not impressive: this film. But first, before I moan about this film I need to cover the height of the river. It was high when I went into the cinema, high enough for me to assume the tide was high. The river was lower when I left so that fits with my assumption. I wonder if the amount of rain affects this part of the river which is mostly tidal.

I rated this film on the IMDB site and there is a guide to the rating system, see this communication.

I’d had some hope for this film given it was written by James Cameron but I did know it was directed by Robert Rodriguez, when I saw his name in the credits an awful lot of this made sense. Apparently this film is based on a Manga series and I guess it shows to a certain extent. I like Manga and I like Manga films. Akira is a film I have seen numerous times and there are Manga Blu-ray in my collection. I love what comics do to film. However, this film was shit.

Virtually every plot line of this film was cliche. I couldn’t really see anything new. I got bored about half way through and after that I just kept moving in my seat and wondering when the film would finish. It is not a good film.

I’ll tell you what irritated me most. And that’s apart from the superfast battle scenes [which I’ve moaned about constantly within these communications, just because computers mean we can doesn’t mean we should] and stupid games of rollerball, the terrible dead daughter plot line, the weird emotionally dead like father, the strange nurse, the stupid fucking love interest, the murderer father who isn’t, the references to characters I didn’t understand, Jennifer Connelly is still very attractive which didn’t annoy me but just wanted to hide that fact in text, the poor plot, shit cybernetics, high-tech but poor society, falling rubbish from the sky city, and the what is that jewel in her head???????

I’ll tell you what irritated me. The URM irritated me. The United Republic of Mars might have sounded cool in the test rooms but it’s a stupid acronym and should never be spoken of again. Each time a character said it, URM, it sounded just like a natural pause in their speech. Stupid.

What is it with people falling in love in these films, being betrayed and lied to and then they continue to do their best for these people. If you get betrayed or lied to move on. Tell that person to jog on. Get them out of your life they aren’t worth it. You’ll be happier in the end. These stupid films and their infatuations. She’s a teenage girl with her first crush and yet she’s prepared to die for the twat? Get real, dump the loser and get yourself a decent lad who’s not going to lie or cheat. I was happy when he died. It gave her the chance to get on with her plans.

Why does Alita have to “win” her way to the massive city? She’s an URM [?] battle warrior, she could just go and destroy it. Oh, how I hated this film. why does her heart pump liquid? She’s a cyborg, why would it do that? It seems quite inefficient to me. Why is her heart “heart” shaped? Why is it in her chest? Why is there a panel that opens easily to her heart when it’s her power source? Why isn’t it the most protected part of her body? I hated it.

Get online and watch Rollerball and The Running Man I can assure you those films will give you better ideas of the future than this pile of poo.

Posted on

Vice

It’s taken a couple of days to calm down after a trip to the cinema to see Vice. This film is from the same director who gave us The Big Short which again made me angry for a long time. Also, I watched The Big Short quite close to seeing “Spotlight”, that’s not a combination to be taken lightly.

I went to the cinema at Rochester on the west bank of the river Medway. In this area the Medway is still tidal and so possibly brackish although I would need to look that up. I’m slightly fascinated by the idea of where along the river does the salinity change to make it more sea water? It has to be between Sheerness and Allington lock but where? Also, I imagine it depends on what the tide is doing and how much rain we’ve had. There must be a mathematical model somewhere.

The tide was pretty high when I went to the cinema. I remember looking to make sure I could report it on these pages. Although it was dark I could see a shimmering reflection of lights across the valley in the lapping water close to the wharf.

I went to see Vice and as is customary I gave the film a score on the IMDB site. I use the iPhone app to score these films and then the application then tweets the result. It’s interesting how the language around computing had changed over the years. I would still call these things programs along with calling folders directories. I do come from the generation that understands most about computers and such. Younger generations, on the whole, don’t have to worry about the mechanics of these things as they tend to work straight out of the box. Who in the future will know the delights of messing around with config files? The nerds and geeks.

To understand the rating system used you should read this particular communication as it explains how a 1-10 system doesn’t work. Here’s the tweet:

Angry. that is what this film does to me. It makes me angry and raging inside at a political system that doesn’t care about people. It shows how people claim to be doing the right thing even though the evidence is clearly not there to prove that is what happens. I’m still angry and I watched this film about three days ago. It highlights the motivations of people in power and how much they are happy to screw over the little people.

This film is great. The acting is brilliant and the make-up is amazing. I really enjoyed it and the few moments of humour within. What I don’t like is the republicanism [USA type] that it shows. These right wing religious zealots have controlled the government for so many years trying to transform their own society into one that they think is the best. This is largely about making themselves richer and maintaining power to keep themselves rich. They don’t give a shit about the poor or the fact the people exist.

Things to be angry about and keep moaning about:

  • George W Bush STEALING the election in 2000.
  • Antonin Scalia being a religious zealot who did his best to remove rights from all people.
  • The complete fucking lack of evidence for the justification of the Iraq way.
  • How the UK bent over backwards to follow the USA into the Iraq war.
  • How military intervention in Gulf War I wasn’t enough and caused the next 50 years of stability.
  • The complete power vacuum in Iraq.
  • The EMAILS for fucks sake. [Republican emails from 2000s]
  • The religiosity of the leaders which means they already think they are supreme [Blair – catholic, George W – religious, Cheney – right wing religious]
  • Why the right-wing appeals to the poorest when that is who they mess up.

The Iraq war WAS illegal and no evidence existed for it. What a sham. I’m angry. I’m coming around to the idea of a revolution to remove the existing power hierarchies. I’m not completely stupid to understand that another thirty years or so after we smash the institutions we’d have to do it again but maybe that is how you make society as fair as possible.

Posted on

Things Change

I watched Raiders Of The Lost Ark yesterday. It’s still a great film if you ignore the glaring inconsistencies and “Indy” problem. I think it’s one of those things you should just enjoy rather than tear it apart. Having said that I have an issue with it, something that had never struck me before but bothers me now.

Indiana Jones is a university lecturer who has young women swooning over him in lectures. This is made clear by the number of women in the lecture theatre when he is lecturing, this is 1936 and women weren’t commonly at university then, and the young lady with “Love You” written on her eyelids.

Later in the movie Indiana travels to Nepal to meet with his ex-girlfriend Marion. After an initial greeting she hits him [wrong thing to do]. This is the exchange just after that:

MARION: You son-of-a-bitch! You know what you did to me, to my life? This is your handiwork.

INDY: I never meant to hurt you.

MARION: I was a child!

INDY: You knew what you were doing.

MARION: I was in love.

INDY: I guess that depends on your definition.

MARION: It was wrong. You knew it.

Quite clearly in this situation we have a college lecturer taking advantage of his position of influence over a younger female student. She has every right to be angry at him. He’s even quite dismissive of her feelings in this situation.

You can see that in the early 1980s when this was released this was an accepted form of abuse. We now recognise the problems with this behaviour and treat it accordingly. Let’s be clear, I am not asking for the film to be withdrawn, I’m not saying you shouldn’t watch it but I am saying that times have changed and we need to understand how society is generally self improving over time [or at least the last seventy years].

Given the way things are going in this country and the USA I am worried that society will regress in acceptance and understanding of moral codes over the next twenty years. I mean I’m optimistic about it, but I do worry.

Posted on

The Favourite

Yesterday I took a saunter over to Rochester so visit the cinema. I’d been looking at what’s on during the week and there wasn’t a huge amount that impressed me. But, I decided to go and see an historical drama. I don’t really like any form of period dramas. The idea that someone has scripted what *might* have happened and been said really bothers me. It moves those imaginations into the common collective about what really happened. It seems that these sorts of things are really popular with The Crown on Netflix and other things always being watched on classic television. I don’t mind fiction period drama as much, although I’m still not keen, because you can say what you want, it’s your story.

I noted that the tide was pretty low as I arrived at the cinema. Lots of the mud bank on the west of the river was showing and the boats seemed below average protuberance. As is usual I rated the film on IMDB, there’s a system so perhaps you should read this communication which explains that.

While watching I normally fixate on three or four things and try to remember them to write here. This isn’t perfect and I often forget what I was going to say. I guess I could take a note book into the theatre but I’m quite convinced that would be rude and somewhat professional, I don’t want to raise these reviews of movies to a level where object criticism could be placed at me. These reviews are mine they don’t represent any form of global ratings. If you know me then they probably make sense, if you don’t then your experiences of a movie could be vastly different to mine.

For the first thirty minutes or so of this film I didn’t even think about what to write here. That probably means the film was pretty good. If it was terrible I would have been pondering my context of this communication for a long time. I wasn’t really sure where this film was meant to be set or when Queen Anne reigned over us. A quick Wikipedia reading left me to understand that the action takes place at Kensington Palace and she was queen at the start of the 18th century. I am slightly worried that this communication will descend into a rant about society, hierarchy and the feudal system but I will do my best. You can read previous film reviews to see what I mean.

My short summary about this movie would be thus:

More lesbianism than I was expecting.

There should be other things to say about this film and so I shall put them here. I had three main points to say once I left the environs of the cinema. Firstly, not knowing anything about the movie on the way in I was slightly surprised at the level of lesbianism contained within.

Next, there were quite a few establishing shots where a fish eye lens was used, which in itself is fine but then they moved the camera and it felt like watching a VR film somehow and if the shot had gone on much longer I think I would have felt slightly sick.

The next thing that surprised me, but I guess shouldn’t have, was the fair usage of the word “cunt”. I am not bothered by usage of this word and it is interesting knowing the general reaction of the populace now compared to what was probably common usage three hundred years ago.

This film was probably more “arty” than it needed to be. There were plenty of lingering, holding shots that could be different and I guess the director wanted to make a statement. I’m not sure what the intention was but a statement was made. At times the soundtrack consisted of quiet repetitive sounds that slowly increased and stayed in the scene minutes more than would normally be expected. This was slightly irritating and a purely artistic choice, possibly one that I would not have made. It made it feel quite “my first art film”.

A quick read of Wikipedia about Queen Anne and you can see how much of this film is fiction. How much of it is speculation rather than being a well sourced historical film. I would rather have an as-close-as-possible film than this, but I guess it made a good story. Queen Anne is a fascinating subject and more complex than could be shown on film. I will state that Olivia Coleman was stunning and her facial acting in one scene was outstanding, you can read the emotions and thoughts of this queen perfectly, it was all so subtle.

This is the second film with Rachel Weisz in period costume that I have seen in the last year. I don’t think that’s enough for a trend but given I didn’t know she was in the film I think I’m excused.

A lot of the filming was done at Hatfield House, which I have never been to see, but my mate’s mum used to work there so I’m claiming a personal connection to that. It turns out that Abigail Masham is buried in a village near where I grew up, High Laver, and so I think I will visit the grave and see the church as it turns out that John Locke is buried there too.

Privacy Policy Proudly powered by WordPress