So Avatar had its first day in cinemas today and I couldn't care less. Not only that, I don't know anyone who does actually care. Yes, the fact that it's James Cameron making it does raise an eyebrow but the plot is the same standard Technology vs A Natural Way of Life which has been done so many times it's impossible to count.
Avatar kind of sums up this year. It's been a really shit year. Granted, any year was going to look terrible after 2008. 2008 was a cracking year. We had The Dark Knight, Iron Man & Wall-E, all 10/10 films. We also had breezy fun films like Hancock, Tropic Thunder, The Sontum of Quolace and Eagle Eye.
So I thought I'd go through the films I've seen this year, from best to worst.
Zombieland (10/10)
I re-watched Zombieland recently and it is still utterly fantastic. It's such a fresh take on the genre. It makes you feel good to watch it - and that's pretty damned rare in a film. The action scenes are good, the characters are briliant and it has a marvelous sense of humour. This years only 10/10 film.
The Men Who Stare at Goats (9/10)
Some briliant performances from Ewan McGregor & George Cloony make this a hilarious film with a lot of heart and a fucking briliant final act. It's a *little* bit long in places and I'm not sure how well it'd stand up to re watching but definitely one of the more original films this year.
Moon (9/10)
Moon is my Clever Film Of The Year. Watching the trailer, you'd be forgiven for thinking you can map out the entire plot of the film just from that. Oh no you can't. Sam Rockwell and Kevin Spacey are absolutely fucking briliant as well. And it's a British film, which is cool. It is very slow paced though.
500 Days of Summer (8/10)
Zooey Deschanel and Joseph Gordon-Levitt prove that they're fucking briliant actors. 500 Days is a briliant feel good film... an epic love story that does a pretty good job of showing what it's like to actually be in love. It's not as good as Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind but that's not really saying much.
Up (8/10)
I was expecting a reasonable film and got a really heart warming story about the importance of following your dreams whilst at the same time being realistic. It also has a dog. The dog is awesome. Not as good as Bolt but still awesome. It's all a conspiracy to make me want a dog.
Push (7/10)
Push is inventive, briliantly directed and realised. It's very flawed, though. There's no real ending, some of the plot moves don't make much sense and whilst there is a kick arse action scene at the end, it still leaves you feeling a bit unfullfilled. It's definitely worth seeing, though. It's basically the X-Men but... good.
The Good, The Bad, The Wierd (7/10)
TG, TB, TW takes every western ever made and updates them in a kick arse, very silly manner. The acting and directing are top notch, the story is silly but entertaining - it may well be too long but it's still definitely worth seeing.
Slumdog Milionaire (7/10)
It's Danny Boyle, so this film was always going to be good. I was a little disapointed, though. I was hoping for something... more. Ah well.
Frequently Asked Questions About Time Travel (7/10)
Another very fun comedy - a time travel film that actually makes sense, who would have thunk it?
The Hangover (7/10)
The Hangover takes the standard amnesia/road movie comedy format and does it... pretty close to perfectly. It loses out to the Harold and Kumar films in terms of sheer surreality but it's still very good.
Crank 2 (6/10)
Five words can sum up Crank 2: "Not as good as Crank". Yes, it has the same hyper-kinetic style as Crank and is still pretty goddamn hilarious but a lot of the impact is lost in making a sequel. It's also a little too surreal for its own good. The constant flashbacks and wierd sections get confusing. Still fun, though.
Let The Right One In (6/10)
This is one of those films which is briliant but I didn't especially enjoy watching. Everyone involved did a fantastic job, there's no doubt about it, but it never really grabbed me. I'd definitely recomend it to anyone who hasn't seen it though.
Gamer (6/10)
Gamer is what Crank 2 should have been. Surreal, action packed and awesome - but Gamer gets the balance right. It's much better than Crank 2. Why doesn't it score higher then? Well, the problem is that Gamer has Gerard Butler in the lead role and he's just not as good as Jason Statham. Sorry.
Cirque Du Freak (6/10)
Cirque Du Freak is in many, many ways a bad film. The plot is entirely predicatable, there's nothing really tying the film together and generally it feels a bit meh. I liked it, though. There was something basically original about it that made it feel fresh. Someone frisbees a gravestone at someone else, for Thor's sake.
Watchmen (5/10)
Now, I loved watchmen when it first came out but on the re-watch I found many problems. Length is one. Watchmen is telling far too many stories. The story of Dr Manhatten, the Ozymandius arc, Silk Specter 2 & Nite Owl, Rorscarch... not to mention the numerous sub-sub plots. Most of the elements of Watchmen are briliant but it's just *too fucking long*. Watchmen needed to be made by someone who wasn't so in love with the original - that way they could have cut some of the less good bits.
Triangle (5/10)
It's well done but it doesn't make any fucking sense. Seriously, it's infuriating. It's really predictable but annoyingly abtuse at the same time.
Bruno (4/10)
Bruno has moments of briliant satire and moments of awesome stupidity. It was so cringe worthy and so embarrasing I couldn't say I enjoyed it at all. If you like this sort of thing, it's utterly briliant, though.
9 (3/10)
9 is one of those briliant films where if the main character hadn't gotten involved, life would have been much better for everyone concerned. The plot is entirely predictable, the characters are steriotypes... the design work may be very good but that kind of works against the film. 9 doesn't know if it wants to be a kids film or an adults film. It's too dark for one and too simplistic for the other. I hope the artists go on to do great things whilst the writer never gets near anything else.
Inglorious Bastards (2/10)
Inglorious has a briliant opening scene. Then it all falls apart. I get that it's supposed to be a hyper styalised version of World War 2, but seriously, who introduces Hitler like this? Subtlety? Have you heard of it, Quinten? Every character in Inglorious is seen through the eyes of a blue blooded American. It has Eli Roth skipping around a field hitting nazis in the head with a baseball bat whilst whooping like the most horrible frat boy you could hope not to meet. Seriously, this is an all american depiction of World War 2. To the point where these ten fictional americans succeed in killing hitler and ending the war three years early. So basically, what Quinten is saying is, if ten Americans had gotten involved in World War 2 earlier, the whole mess would have been sorted out much sooner.
Terminator 4 (1/10)
I honsetly thought I was watching a transformers film at points in T4. It's so fucking stupid I don't have the words for it. It has a 100 foot tall terminator that has terminators on motor bikes in its shins. It's the wrost sort of action film imaginable - dumb, unimaginative, CGI riddled and utterly lacking in any soul.
Public Enemies (1/10)
Remember when Johnny Depp used to be good? It was a while ago wasn't it... Public Enemies could have been quite good if the writers had bothered to create some characters to go along with the wizzy camera work. Sadly, the characters aren't even 2-d, most of them are completely absent. The means the plot has no impact and as the film stretches into its third hour, I got so bored I walked out.
A Serious Man (0/10)
I honestly have nothing good to say about this film. It was boredom in a can. Nothing fuckin happened. At all. There was NO PLOT. NOTHING HAPPENED. I can't put this strongly enough, seriously. NOTHING HAPPENED FOR THE ENTIRE FUCKING FILM. Nothing. Nada. Zip. NOTHING. I've never been this bored in the cinema, before, and I've been to see Munich. It astonishes me that this film's been getting 5/5 reviews from Empire & The AV Club... did they see a different film to me or something?
I think what my little list says is: It's been a good year for the smaller films like Moon and the comedies but we've had no decent action flicks bar Zombieland. Bah.
Wednesday, 16 December 2009
Tuesday, 15 December 2009
Cover Versions
I've blogged about cover versions before, specifically Goldfinger's version of 99 Luftbaloons and Orange's take on Karma Chameleon.
I have, however, found the king of all covers.
It's a piano version of Sweet Child of Mine - it's currently featured on a John Lewis advert.
This song encapsulates what I love about cover versions. It takes something many people love (including myself) and puts a different spin on it. In this case, it takes a kick arse yet beautiful song and turns it to something.... delightful. It's absolutely fucking lovely to listen to. It helps that the singer is clearly a very talented woman.
I'm coming round to the idea of seeing cover versions as an art form in and of themselves. The aforementioned covers of the punk songs are a great example of good songs being updated for modern tastes in music. Dope have done this with Billy Idol, as have the Muderdolls. These versions are successful adaptations to suit a generation raised by Cradle of Filth.
Even subtle improvements can make a brilliant cover. Take Scarling's version of Creep. It's pretty much identical to the original - a little heavier in places yes, but broadly similar. The crucial difference, though, is the singer. Radiohead's singer always sounds like a moaning tosser. Taking him out of the song and replacing him with someone who can actually sing improves it immeasurably. Johnny Cash did exactly this with a cover of NiN's Hurt
The best covers, though, are the ones that change the song musically, possibly to a different genre. The version of Sweet Child of Mine is a brilliant example. Another is Bear McCreary's version of All Along the Watchtower.
Take this cover of I Touch Myself. The original was a breezy, catchy romance song. Very good in its own way, brilliantly used in a certain spy spoof. The version by the... the cover version (I'm dyslexic, I really can't spell their name) though is fucking masterful. It takes a bit of breezy fun and turns it into something... darker, more obsessive. It's odd this song. My reaction to it is slightly different every time. Sometimes I think it's creepy, sometimes I think it's really sexual. Genius.
Granted, covers can go horribly wrong. When I think of shit covers, I think of Madona's version of American Pie, which takes a good (if not great) song and makes it incredibly fucking bland and soulless.
The thing is, that's giving covers a bad name. It's pop music. Pop music is supposed to be bland and horrible and pointless. That's what it's there for. There hasn't been a decent pop song in the last ten years that I can think of.
So I say thank the musical gods for cover versions. They can make a good song better, they can make a bad song good, they can take a great song and put a new spin on it, they can take a great song and make it utterly shit. And this is a good thing, without experimentation none of these songs would have been made.
I think it takes a lot of bravery to make some of these cover versions... a lot of them are really established songs in their own right - like Green Day's version of the Bobby Fuller Four's classic I Fought The Law (If you thought The Clash did the original, get the fuck out) and Social Distortion's version of Ring of Fire. To take classic songs and change them, make them your own is... egotistical but brave. If it works, you've created something fantastic.
So that's what I think. I'm going to leave you with possibly the best cover created - Sonic Clang's version of E1M1 from Doom.
I have, however, found the king of all covers.
It's a piano version of Sweet Child of Mine - it's currently featured on a John Lewis advert.
This song encapsulates what I love about cover versions. It takes something many people love (including myself) and puts a different spin on it. In this case, it takes a kick arse yet beautiful song and turns it to something.... delightful. It's absolutely fucking lovely to listen to. It helps that the singer is clearly a very talented woman.
I'm coming round to the idea of seeing cover versions as an art form in and of themselves. The aforementioned covers of the punk songs are a great example of good songs being updated for modern tastes in music. Dope have done this with Billy Idol, as have the Muderdolls. These versions are successful adaptations to suit a generation raised by Cradle of Filth.
Even subtle improvements can make a brilliant cover. Take Scarling's version of Creep. It's pretty much identical to the original - a little heavier in places yes, but broadly similar. The crucial difference, though, is the singer. Radiohead's singer always sounds like a moaning tosser. Taking him out of the song and replacing him with someone who can actually sing improves it immeasurably. Johnny Cash did exactly this with a cover of NiN's Hurt
The best covers, though, are the ones that change the song musically, possibly to a different genre. The version of Sweet Child of Mine is a brilliant example. Another is Bear McCreary's version of All Along the Watchtower.
Take this cover of I Touch Myself. The original was a breezy, catchy romance song. Very good in its own way, brilliantly used in a certain spy spoof. The version by the... the cover version (I'm dyslexic, I really can't spell their name) though is fucking masterful. It takes a bit of breezy fun and turns it into something... darker, more obsessive. It's odd this song. My reaction to it is slightly different every time. Sometimes I think it's creepy, sometimes I think it's really sexual. Genius.
Granted, covers can go horribly wrong. When I think of shit covers, I think of Madona's version of American Pie, which takes a good (if not great) song and makes it incredibly fucking bland and soulless.
The thing is, that's giving covers a bad name. It's pop music. Pop music is supposed to be bland and horrible and pointless. That's what it's there for. There hasn't been a decent pop song in the last ten years that I can think of.
So I say thank the musical gods for cover versions. They can make a good song better, they can make a bad song good, they can take a great song and put a new spin on it, they can take a great song and make it utterly shit. And this is a good thing, without experimentation none of these songs would have been made.
I think it takes a lot of bravery to make some of these cover versions... a lot of them are really established songs in their own right - like Green Day's version of the Bobby Fuller Four's classic I Fought The Law (If you thought The Clash did the original, get the fuck out) and Social Distortion's version of Ring of Fire. To take classic songs and change them, make them your own is... egotistical but brave. If it works, you've created something fantastic.
So that's what I think. I'm going to leave you with possibly the best cover created - Sonic Clang's version of E1M1 from Doom.
What I have been playing
Holy shit, I haven't updated this blog in ages. Work. Mental.
Excuses, excuses. Anyway. I refuse to turn into Christopher Livingstone so UPDATE TIME:
LEFT 4 DEAD 2
The officail verdict has been out on this one for a while so I won't bore you all with my thoughts. Suffice to say: It improves on the original in every way I could think of. It even includes several things that dramatically improve the gameplay (dismembering zombies etc) which I thought would be mere gimicks.
Valve did good.
And there's DLC coming in the new year - which sounds fecking awesome.
Modern Warfare 2
...
This one is less clear cut.
Put it this way, I fucking hate Modern Warfare 2.
This section is going to contain severe spoilers.
Okay, so alarm bells started ringing for me when, in the intro sequence, they say that the baddie from the first game - Zakayev - is now heralded as a hero by the Russian people...
Okay...
I thought the point of the first game that Zakayev was leading a fanatical group of Russians who had the support of some of the populace but, crucially, were not officailly sanctioned or anything. Hence why the Russian gov't gives Price the abort codes at the end of MW1.
Anyway, minor glitch, I thought.
We start with a fucking excelent level in an ice storm. You infiltrate a base, plant explosives and generally sneak your way around in the best traditions of MW 1. The ending where you escape on snow mobiles is a little silly but whatever.
There are then a couple of... reasonable but very scripted levels. Warning sign number two was that the SAS were no longer referred to as the SAS but as "task force 141". Or, if you prefer, this.
There's then the notorious airport level.
I actually liked the airport level. It's nice to see standard FPS staples like blasting everything that moves subverted. It was well designed and fairly disturbing - in a good way.
Then things go extremely fucking wrong.
Russia invades the united states.
It's such a stupid move for any game to make, I can't even begin to start talking about what's wrong with it. If I had to pick just one reason, it's that MW 2 at this point starts following the plot of Patriots: A Nation Under Fire - a game I had to review when I was working for a games review site.
It boggles the mind how Infinity Ward can have produced one of the most mature and politically aware games ever - Modern Warfare 1, can produce something which is a cross between Team America World Police and Patriots.
There are other things wrong with it - the levels are far too linear, the characters are 2-d, it's too difficult, the cinematic sections are fucking stupid and the new gimicks they bring in - like the riot shield - are crow barred in at every available oppertunity.
Modern Warfare 2 is a terrible, terrible game. The multiplayer may make up for it but it's the sort of multiplayer I really hate anyway. I played some of the multiplayer in MW 1 and was far from impressed.
Dirt 2
I'm not really sure why I bought this. Codemasters make very good racing games, admittedly, but I never finished Dirt 1 or Grid because they suffered from what practically every racing game suffers from. Viz: when you reach the half way point, the developers have run out of ideas for tracks so you have to visit the same ones again but you have to do six laps round them instead of two. This gets annoying very quickly.
Dirt 2 is very good, though. It's incredibly good looking (possibly the best looking game I've ever seen) and its gameplay has that magical quality to it that all briliant racing games have. For the first month or so.
It does have a very appealing front end to it and it is very, very polished. I don't feel bad about the £30 I spent on it but I am dreading the day I suddenly find I'm not interested in it any more.
Excuses, excuses. Anyway. I refuse to turn into Christopher Livingstone so UPDATE TIME:
LEFT 4 DEAD 2
The officail verdict has been out on this one for a while so I won't bore you all with my thoughts. Suffice to say: It improves on the original in every way I could think of. It even includes several things that dramatically improve the gameplay (dismembering zombies etc) which I thought would be mere gimicks.
Valve did good.
And there's DLC coming in the new year - which sounds fecking awesome.
Modern Warfare 2
...
This one is less clear cut.
Put it this way, I fucking hate Modern Warfare 2.
This section is going to contain severe spoilers.
Okay, so alarm bells started ringing for me when, in the intro sequence, they say that the baddie from the first game - Zakayev - is now heralded as a hero by the Russian people...
Okay...
I thought the point of the first game that Zakayev was leading a fanatical group of Russians who had the support of some of the populace but, crucially, were not officailly sanctioned or anything. Hence why the Russian gov't gives Price the abort codes at the end of MW1.
Anyway, minor glitch, I thought.
We start with a fucking excelent level in an ice storm. You infiltrate a base, plant explosives and generally sneak your way around in the best traditions of MW 1. The ending where you escape on snow mobiles is a little silly but whatever.
There are then a couple of... reasonable but very scripted levels. Warning sign number two was that the SAS were no longer referred to as the SAS but as "task force 141". Or, if you prefer, this.
There's then the notorious airport level.
I actually liked the airport level. It's nice to see standard FPS staples like blasting everything that moves subverted. It was well designed and fairly disturbing - in a good way.
Then things go extremely fucking wrong.
Russia invades the united states.
It's such a stupid move for any game to make, I can't even begin to start talking about what's wrong with it. If I had to pick just one reason, it's that MW 2 at this point starts following the plot of Patriots: A Nation Under Fire - a game I had to review when I was working for a games review site.
It boggles the mind how Infinity Ward can have produced one of the most mature and politically aware games ever - Modern Warfare 1, can produce something which is a cross between Team America World Police and Patriots.
There are other things wrong with it - the levels are far too linear, the characters are 2-d, it's too difficult, the cinematic sections are fucking stupid and the new gimicks they bring in - like the riot shield - are crow barred in at every available oppertunity.
Modern Warfare 2 is a terrible, terrible game. The multiplayer may make up for it but it's the sort of multiplayer I really hate anyway. I played some of the multiplayer in MW 1 and was far from impressed.
Dirt 2
I'm not really sure why I bought this. Codemasters make very good racing games, admittedly, but I never finished Dirt 1 or Grid because they suffered from what practically every racing game suffers from. Viz: when you reach the half way point, the developers have run out of ideas for tracks so you have to visit the same ones again but you have to do six laps round them instead of two. This gets annoying very quickly.
Dirt 2 is very good, though. It's incredibly good looking (possibly the best looking game I've ever seen) and its gameplay has that magical quality to it that all briliant racing games have. For the first month or so.
It does have a very appealing front end to it and it is very, very polished. I don't feel bad about the £30 I spent on it but I am dreading the day I suddenly find I'm not interested in it any more.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)