tonygoodson

Slapshot

One of my favourite movies was on tonight.  Slapshot with Paul Newman, infamous in the UK for being banned from some (most?) cinemas for the bad language.  I haven’t watched the film for years, but it’s as fresh and funny as ever, helped by the language!

I was laughing out loud at some of the scenes, something I don’t usually do.  A mix of nostalgia for what I remembered of the film, and it’s outrageous sports fights. 

Flushed Away

Took Georgie (Aged 5) to see Flushed Away yesterday.  She liked it.  In fact she was the loudest laugh in the cinema.
A very good film.  But I fear this type of film is being flushed away.
It seems that DreamWorks who help produce and distribute the film, aren't going to work with Aardman (Wallace and Gromit etc) again - "creative differences".

What that seems to mean is American humour,  Big Success = Biggest Cash.

I was shocked to hear a few weeks ago, that making movies isn't about making great movies.
It's about making money.  Big Corp movie industry is an investment house sinking in Big Corp money of $100m+ and expecting to double the return.  Anything less is failure, regardless of if the film is any good.
You can have both.  Shrek3 was being previewed.  No doubt it will be very good, and a much better merchandising proposition than Flushed Away.

Flushed Away is based on quirky British Humour.  It's like EastEnders on speed. There are lots and lots of in-jokes, just on the genre, as well as other film references.  I feel proud to have spotted many of them.

As I've said, it's a very good film, and a must-buy DVD.  There's so much going on, it's worth several looks and the kids will play it again and again, without tiring of it.  It would be excellent as an iMax movie on a very big screen, because they take advantage of the 3D animation to produce sweeping scenes which are at times breathtaking.

So what next for Aardman if they need $100m but can only generate $150m return!!
Does that mean no more Wallace and Gromit full length features.
I'm prepared to buy the Wallace and Gromit boxers to keep them afloat!

Crossing a Field with Julie Andrews

Q: What do you get if you cross a field, with Julie Andrews?
A: Nothing!
It's an old joke, now illustrated by this clip!!

You Tube Addiction

Damn, I have a new addiction.  You Tube.
Starting with the Top 100 or Favourites or Most Highly Rated.
Love the old ones.  Chinese Boys and Evolution of Dance.
But then you realise you can search on almost anything and find old classics.

An hour plus of Eddie Izzard (oops that's on Google Video!).
My absolute favourite Football Sketch - Charles "Charlie" Charles with Harry Enfield.
And then I just keep searching and searching.  Sham 69, Eddie and the Hot Rods, Sex Pistols.
Eddie and the Hot Rods are interesting, because it was the first sign that Punk was coming.  So whilst they weren't mainstream punk, you could hear the energy and double speed rhythm, which was very different at the time.

And they don't make music like this anymore - Cat Stevens - Maybe You're Right.
Now that is unbelievably good.  Am I getting old and sounding like my parents' generation going on about Sinatra or Nat King Cole?
Blimey, it just gets better and better.  Teaser and the Firecat!
And why are Cat and His Family sitting on a squash court playing chess??
And an Older Cat (are his feet playing the second guitar?)
And Cat teaching that punk Ronan Keating, that the "Father" bit of Father and Son is sung an octave lower coz he's the Daddy, oh and the counter tune and lyrics coming from Cat, just to put the (slightly scary) Boyzone Damage right.
What a Laugh!!

Da Vinci Code and Film Critics

Grrrrr, I can't believe after all this time this is the one that gets me blogging again.
I went to see The Da Vinci Code film last night.
I've read the book, and I've heard about all the negative film critic reviews.
So I went expecting to see a turkey.

But in fact the film is very good.  It follows the book almost exactly.  The screenplay is good, the direction is good, it's well shot, the casting is good, and the acting is good.  So what the hell is going on with the critics, and why are they acting like gutless sheep, too frightened to stand up and say the film is good?

I met a couple I know, coming out of the same showing, and they expressed a similar surprise, at how good the film was, relative to the "critics".  Yeh, Audrey Tautou is cold, Tom Hanks is slightly wooden, but that's called acting, that's what the characters are supposed to be like.  And some critics have complained there is no chemistry between the Audrey and Tom characters, well isn't that a well directed film where there's a hint of chemistry but nothing else, just like in the book.

And as for the plot.  IT'S FICTION.  It's supposed to be fiction.  It's a Ripping Yarn.
And most of the negative stuff seems to be about the book plot, and confusing Tom Hanks with Forrest Gump, and the criticism on IMDB has been written early, in line with the critics.  But once most people have seen the film, the positive reviews have picked up.

And finally. Don't you think that if you agree that Jesus was around, 2000 years ago, that the main premise of the The Da Vinci Code, is reasonably likely? 
And the true measure.... Would I watch the film again?  Yes.

Sin City

I just saw Sin City, and I'm still recovering.
It must be one of the greatest films ever.
I'm still trembling and my jaw is still dropped.
Difficult to put into words, but it will go down as a classic.

Beautifully shot and over-acted!
Good script, and the pace never lets up.
A bit over-violent for my liking, but there's so much violence (tastefully done!) it's almost funny.
One of those films you can watch over and over again, so it must be great.

Mr and Mrs Smith

Annie dragged me kicking and screaming to see Angelina Jolie last night!
Mr and Mrs Smith is a good film, well good enough to see, just so you can watch Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, not having sex.
And the film turns out to be a sort of biography of Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston's marriage, in a weird way.

But what I wanted to say is, why is a good film stopped from being a great film, with all the formulaic crap.  Why does there have to be an implausible car chase?  Why does there have to be an implausible shoot-out at the end?  What is it with big movie shit in the USA that big movie moguls insist on formulaic shit, that ruins good films.  The script was mostly good, the acting good, well shot, well edited, but yet again, the big money ruined what could have been a great film.

I'll go back to my Harry Shearer (Simpsons) interview, the reason why The Simpsons has lasted so long and been of consistent outstanding quality, is, NO INTERFERENCE FROM THE NETWORK.  It's the same with big movies.  If the big money backers just butted out, we'd have some great high budget films.  Not likely though, is it.
Meanwhile, Pixar and Dreamworks, are laughing all the way to the bank, by making films that actually have some creative control.  Come to think of it, The Incredibles is everything Mr and Mrs Smith should have been, and a similar storyline as well!!

My Fantasy Woman Dies

Mrs Robinson died on Monday.  Very sad.
My favourite film.  The Graduate.
Here's to you Mrs Robinson!

Walk On Water

I saw a very good film last night.  Walk on Water.
If you're all or any of the following, the film will hit home hard.
Jewish/Israeli/Arab/Moslem/Palestinian/German/Nazi/Gay/Straight!!
And the rest of you may enjoy it as well!

The film plays hard with your prejudices.  Funny, sad, poignant.

New Babes on the Block

Time to add 2 new babes to my list.  One of them can do things I didn't think were possible!
And a great wikipedia description and links, including both babes.
Oh, and I love the film/DVD.

Come to think of it, the guys are pretty damn sexy as well!