The Princess and the Frog - Film Review

I promised a while ago to look at this film, and finally remembered that I had said that!

This is a Disney film that went back to the hand drawn animation that made Disney so loved and appreciated by millions. 

This playlist looks at how they went back to the drawing board (literally) and ditched the computers in favour of the feeling of a hand drawn film. 

This was a film that was in my wife's section of the Blu-ray collection (that's not to say I don't like Disney, I really do) and we had watched long before my daughter arrived on the scene. When she was born and started to want to watch a bit of TV and then sit for an entire film, we tried her on this one and she loved it and I forgot how much I loved it.

My favourite Disney is still the Jungle Book, it has memories of growing up and my childhood, but that being said this to me is a close second (for Disney animation features).

I will now tell you why.

The cast is phenomenally put together with the mix of "names" and other voice actors you may not realise you know. Keith David plays the evil Dr Facilier and his voice is perfect. I think Keith David is a fine actor and like James Earl Jones has one of those voices that just envelops you and you know it is him (even if you don't know who he is). Jim Cummings, (who is a Disney staple and basically the voice of most characters you know!) is Ray the firefly, and is such a genuine emotional part of the story. John Goodman, Jenifer Lewis, Oprah Winfrey and others all just give the heart to this wonderful film.

Disney is known for it's sound tracks and usually has famous songs. The Lion King being a great example of this. However I feel this is again my favourite score (by Randy Newman) from a Disney film. While films like Beauty and the Beast have wonderful soundtracks, they are very theatrical pieces. As this film is set in New Orleans and the jazz, blues area of the Southern USA, its music is just that. A mix of gospel, blues, jazz and it just lifts everything. We listen to this soundtrack in the car, mixed with that of Frozen and Beauty and the Beast and it just shows how Disney does music well (even in its own way Frozen although I don't like that film!) but with Princess and the Frog they made songs that don't feel like a soundtrack, they feel like an album of just great songs.

The story is also brilliant. While it has the Disney princess, it makes her much stronger than the traditional Belle or Cinderella type. She is a strong character that drives the story line in her own way through hard work and determination, not being defined by the prince (despite it ending in the traditional fairy tale way).

As a side note, I do appreciate a small bit of Frozen, they basically do Cinderella in the first 15 minutes of the film and call it out dumb and stupid on the part of Cinderella. A Disney princess can seem like a strong role model, but actually looking at the older ones they really are subservient and little women to the main prince despite being the main character.

That aside, Princess and the Frog has a strong princess and weak prince that make the whole film beautiful from start to finish.

If you missed this lesser known Disney classic you need to watch it now. The music is amazing and the animation is both beautiful and touching to see Disney go back to classic hand drawn frames. I don't mind the newer CG Disney but it is nice to see that actually the remember every so often what they were and what made them so popular over just live action films of the time. There is a reason all Disney is listed as classic films and it's because of what they did and the work they put into the story.

Pixar have carried this on and the two are synonymous these days, but Pixar have carried on where Disney kind of left of with their films and that at its core is a story that this film (I know not a Pixar one) carries on perfectly.

Tusk - Film Review

I have for many years been a huge fan of Kevin Smith. The director that brought us classics such as Clerks and Mallrats. I know many people have slated him over the years and claimed his films have depreciated over time and that Clerks and Mallrats were in fact as good as it gets. I disagree.

I think he has always worked hard at producing a piece of work that on some level hits the intended audience, and as he states very openly (just look him up on Youtube) the longer he kept working the further from his original voice he became. He was not always able to write about his situation as he was able to with his first few films. This can be said of any artist really though. Many bands first 2 albums are great as they struggled to write and record them, after that they lose the connection to the poor kids they used to be and are now richer, more affluent and don't connect as directly with their previous message.

Now this for me only happens to Kevin Smith with Cop Out. It's not as bad as some people claim, but it certainly is not the finest or funniest buddy cop movie that is out there, but you can see what he tried to do and from all accounts the star of the film did not make that any easier.

Many derid Jersey Girl but actually I think it is quite a touching film despite the timing of the Ben-iffer relationship that was in progress.

However this review of sorts is to look at his 2014 (so only 2 years old) film Tusk. The first time he really ventured into the horror genre. After hanging up his directing hat in 2011 (bar a few short Jay and Silent Bob TV Movies) he felt that he could produce his own art again through podcasts and different mediums outside of film making. It was only through the podcast that he comes to the idea of the film that is Tusk.

The film follows Justin Longs character, a podcaster, who with his friends run an outlandish show looking at the weirdest on the web. The original trip he takes is stopped after tragic events and while wallowing in a bar finds a notice that intrigues him.

Not wanting to delve too deeply into the well that is the rest of the film and spoil what is going to happen, the original premise came from Kevin's own podcast episode where the discuss an advert put on Gumtree in the UK (Brighton to be precise) where a man was looking for someone to come and live with him for free, but where they would have to contribute dressed as a walrus.

You can imagine how a horror film would take this, and it really is an almost traditional type horror film that is not built on cheap jumps or found footage but on the psychological fears of the main character. The fear of being captured and helplessness of a situation. It is disturbing in places and I think that the "villain" of the film is perfect. Michael Parks, who was the fabulous church leader in Red State (another Kevin Smith film I love!!) has an air of weird, powerful and creepy.

The story is played from both the side of the missing person and his friends who recruit a detective played by Johnny Depp to find him.

It really got me how quickly the story progressed and the tensions I was expecting to be in play were not the there, that is not to say the film isn't tense, it does just get there quickly and push you through the jarring concepts it throws at you.

For me this is a world away from what Kevin Smith has done before and this is no bad thing. He still has a very good cinematic voice, and while he may not ever be considered a traditional auteur or one of the great directors, I don't think he should be written off either. To me he never phones in a film, or deliberately does it for the paycheck. As a fan of film, you can tell he is trying to deliver a message within a system that wants the next big thing. This is why his smaller films are seen as such a success because he had creative control and it was about the passion he had, not the pay day at the end of it.

Tusk is a clever idea, that while it may not hit on every step, I applaud the ideas behind it and think it is a film that plays well with its own rules.

I think you should make your own opinion on it as it is nothing like what Kevin has done in the past (maybe for the best) but it is something that will challenge you and even if you hate it, I don't think you can say that it didn't try to get you to question something about the nature of the human condition.

Orange is the New Black - TV Series - Review

At the moment is there nothing Netflix can't do right? Although I haven't seen it yet, Stranger Things is getting great reviews. You then have all the Marvel TV series like DareDevil, Jessica Jones and the forthcoming Luke Cage series. The one that started it all, House of Cards is a political thriller that keeps impressing and is Kevin Spacey putting in a superb performance.

Then you have Orange is the New Black. I have just finished season 4 and this show (like all the others) keeps getting better and better.

Now I recently read an article about reviewers essentially just telling you what the show/film is and then spoiling it if they don't like it.

Well firstly, there is no chance of me trying to spoil anything for you as it is fantastic. Secondly, I'm hardly a traditional reviewer or critic. I am just trying to analyse stuff that might have made it through the cracks (not that would really be OITNB).

I however, don't want to give away the best parts of the show, although if you want to look them up they will be online somewhere.

If you know nothing of Orange is the new Black, then the basic premise is it's a show about a womans prison. Taking that a small step further it initially follows Piper Chapman (the character that is loosely based on the novel by Piper Kerman) and her reasons and existence in the prison system. This by season 4 is still a factor, but as Piper Kerman acknowledges is well off her own actual life history, and it now follows the entire prison population. It looks at all the groups that make up the very dysfunctional community, this includes the guards and their interactions with the inmates.

Each season has it's own tests and tribulations that hook you and by season 4 this is no exception. Each main character is fantastically portrayed and the creators of the show have made even those that would appear unlikeable, a human. By this I mean, you feel for their situation, why they behave the way they do. You empathise with them and although certain actions are, at times, reprehensible they are understood. With Piper for instance you see her journey and start to see why she has ended up in prison and how she tries to compensate for that, which at times is more destructive. With avoiding the need to spoil her storyline, she is a character that tries to be liked by everyone. She comes from the well brought up social background that would hate to be called racist. The prison however has communities and stereotypes that are a defence mechanism and a survival trait for many of the people within the groups. This is one of the points of conflict, and as we see develop through Piper trying to approach a situation with her rationality, that is taken and warped by others. It is this that helps expand stories and the natural conflicts of the situations that arise.

In one way, some characters have evolved out of what they were and are now something more (I guess as their popularity changed). Suzanne "Crazy Eyes" Warren is a prime example of her slowly losing some of the crazy that defined her in season 1. That being said by season 4 there are few moments of her regressing back to her former self, but because you are now more invested in her (Uzo Aduba does a fantastic performance) that craziness that once kept her as a character you didn't care for so much, she is now one of the focal characters.

With this sort of ensemble work, it is hard to have focal characters as each episode will focus on either a flashback to one character and their now changed prison life, or it will look at a group as a whole and how that functions within the entire prison.

The great thing about prison as well is the fact that new characters are easily brought it and old characters that are "released" from prison can still be followed or end up back in prison. It looks at how people deal with the institution and their place in society because of it.

This show is fantastic and goes towards what makes Netflix worth its monthly fee. The fact the invest in shows like this that may not have been picked up traditionally, but have an outlet for the quirkier or more intriguing programs that have a slow burn. By releasing all the episodes at once, they can have a slower episodes that connect stories together and help make the explosive episodes more so. This does happen in "normal" TV I know. However I think they have been able to write and produce shows like this with more freedom and it has served them well.

If you have missed Orange Is The New Black, well this is your call to start it as soon as you can. If it is one you might have been going to get to, trust me, once you start it you won't be able to put it down. In my house we take it in turns to choose the series we are watching. I picked season 3 of this and as it was only 13 episodes long, my wife and I just kept going through season 4 as well. We had forgotten about it and were 2 seasons down, and in the space of 2 weeks we watched both series. It's addictive and good television. It has heart and characters that are worth investing in. It is well written and fantastically performed. This is one to watch if you have missed it. If you have missed it, what have you been doing.....?

F1 2016 - PS4 - Initial Thoughts

So there is not much more to say than what is already in the video at the moment. While I am adding this to I guess I missed that, it is obviously a brand new game. It is not going to have yet gone unnoticed. With that in mind though, F1 is actually quite niche. (As much as any multi billion dollar sport is niche). F1 has its fans. Millions of them, but in gaming terms I don't know how many people they attract. It will be enough to keep knocking out a new release every year, but it's not one of those racing games that is all that easy to just pick up for the non racer. It's not arcady, it's beautiful F1.

I am a fan of F1, along with many of my friends, it's what we talk about, watch and do as part of our social time (well that and cake!).

I have spent the grand total of 3/4 hours playing this game so I can't really give it a full review as yet. I am not in that sort of position to have found and picked through the meat of the entire game. So this initial thought is that it looks amazing, it plays quite nicely but as you will hear I have issues with where my own ability fits within the game.

If I go dark on here for a while, you know why!

Awesomenauts - Xbox 360 (Although it's on everything!) - Game Review

Awesomenauts was released back in August of 2012 and I first saw it while interviewing game developers at the Eurogamer Expo of that year. It is a MOBA (at the time I had no idea what that meant, and the developer was looking at me with a little distain), but it stands for Multiplayer Online Battle Arena. Since the advent of Twitch for streaming games, there is big money now in these games like League of Legends, and this is loosely based on this premise but is a 2D version and much more cartoony in its graphics.

I bought this game on the 360 as soon as it was released after playing it at the Expo. It took up a lot of my play time, and it is one of those games where, if you don't understand what is going on. You will lose. Guess what, I didn't have a clue!

This type of game is fantastic and works well if you have a proper team of players like League of Legends has. You play a different character in the team as each team member has a role to play in the
battle.

Your mission is to break through the automated defence tower/s (there is usually one high and one low) to get through to the oppositions energy core. Destroy that and you win.

There are a range of versions now in terms of characters, the PC version has more characters than the Xbox version and depending on the kickstarter projects you may have invested on buy now as DLC there are two add-ons in Starstorm and overdrive, each adding a handful of other playable characters.

So why is it so hard? Learning the controls and playing the basic missions to get you familiar with the game are super easy, they have designed it so well in this respect but for this game is the epitome of easy to learn hard to master. It has a very strong focus on team that if you don't know how the characters work together or who does what role in the team you can get destroyed very quickly.

This is my defining experience of this game. It is 3 vs 3 with automatically spawned bots that are more crucial than I first realised. These little guys inflict damage on anyone who gets in their way and most of the time a new player sort of just ignores them, and that can be a problem. They got me on more than one occasion! They also serve to be the reason you can attack the turrets, they are the focus of the heavily armoured towers and you need them to try to attach the tower, as without them you will die!

Once upon a gaming life I played Call of Duty MW2 on a very regular basis and would almost call us a clan. We had great players, and me. It was for fun, but we had competitive matches and we all knew our role. I was a canon fodder player, I would distract an enemy giving the better players time to attack and get the kill streaks. We used the Xbox Live chat and it worked. With Awesomenauts I never had this with anyone. I never had a community so playing it was always with random others, some good, others bad and while I think the game is phenomenal, the user experience can wildly vary according to who you play with as a team. If you get placed with a host of randoms who are as bad as you are, it can demoralise you and could tarnish your experience of what is a great game.

Awesomenauts is a great game to try and while I have written above about how playing online can be a frustrating mix of players, actually don't let that put you off. You can play a local game and it is designed to be a 3 player split screen for that experience. So next time a group of mates is over and you don't want to dig out Mario Kart (because lets face it that is a bit of a go to party game for everyone, that and Super Bomberman) you can do a fantastic game of Awesomenauts with them all. It will get over the not knowing who you are playing with as you are all together and to learn you can play against fully AI bots. You could take it online as well, if you fancy your chances against the great unknown of the gaming communities.

It is a beautifully designed game and one that for the price is great to have just as a rainy day game. You may not play it with any real regularity (although there is a massive community of players) but I think it is one of the games you have to own. I go through phases of really wanting to play it and I sit and try to improve myself, trying to learn how the classes work for each character and how to a good player, realise I am never going to be good and move on again to something else for a play through.  I then come back to it six months later, ready and invigorated to try it again.

The major downside of online games in the console world is the need to have Xbox Live Gold, or PS+ for the Playstation Network. I used to have these by default but no longer have them as my online gaming has slipped down the priority order of expenses. Apparently I need to feed my children, who knew that was a thing (do I need to put a disclaimer in here....surely not!)

I have not gone into each character that you can play and what they can do. If you are interested you can see them all in this wiki. What I will say is I seem to gravitate to playing as Clunk every time. He is the tank character. The big, slow but exceptionally powerful character than can take a lot of damage and dish out as much to the towers and other players. I think however I am a bad player (as mentioned) as he should be alive for large amounts of time, I seem to die much quicker than expected. There is a real skill to this game despite being so easy to pick up, appreciating how this type of game works and what is required of you for the whole team effort. If you are a League of Legends player, this would be like the popcorn version of that game, something light hearted in between heavy sessions of LoL. However that could just be a poor perception on my part, especially from the real hardcore Awesomenauts fans.

What drew me in first of all was the spectacular and beautiful 2D graphics and platform aesthetic, what kept me playing was the addictive game. What lost me was how I never seemed to learn how to improve as a player of the game. As with a lot of the reviews on the site, they are built around my ability to afford and buy games and films that I would be buying anyway, so there was always going to be a bias to enjoyment. I would still suggest you try this game out. It is fun, quirky and addictive and if you don't find you enjoy it, then you won't have spent too much on the game as you can buy it quite cheaply on Steam or the old gen consoles.

Ronimo Games deserves a pat on the back for their work on Awesomenauts and their continued developments through the Kickstarter investment projects. It's another fantastic indie game that is taking on main stream releases and while it will never be as big as COD or the Drake series, it has a strong following of players, of which you could very easily become one.

Community - TV Series

So Netflix now has Community available to watch. My suggestion is to sit down and get watching. There is something here to point out, they only have the first five seasons. The sixth season was produced and broadcast by Yahoo. This is why the main bulk of the Community is available, but one season is not.

This annoyance aside, it is still a fantastic piece of writing, directing and acting. Each person is perfectly cast and the dynamic of the show is perfectly set.

The premise of the show is a once high power lawyer, Jeff Winger, has been caught and found not to have graduated college. He is sent back to community college to get his degree before being allowed to practice law again.

He tries to hit on a girl in his Spanish class and creates a fake study group to try to spend time with her. This becomes a problem when a study group actually appears and so the series begins and continues with the fun and foibles of the groups dynamic playing out each week.

While the show has its main set of characters, I find that some of the side characters are just as funny (sometimes more so). For instance John Oliver plays the psychology professor that keeps dropping in for small parts in other episodes. He takes over teaching anthropology for a short time in season 2 and through all this his character arc of drunken English idiot is perfectly developed from his first episode showing as just a connection to Jeffs past as a lawyer.

Ben Chang, the crazy character of the show who starts as a teacher but evolves (or should that be devolves) has some of the funniest parts and because they were so perfect, you can see his inclusion in the later series grows as he would have undoubtedly tested well with audiences.  Ben Chang is played by Ken Jeong who as we know from the Hangover films plays crazy so very well!

The main study group however are made up of

Jeff Winger (The Leader) - Joel McHale
Britta Perry (The Millitant) - Gillian Jacobs
Abed Nasir (The Nerd) - Danny Pudi
Annie Edison (The Girly Stereotype) - Alison Brie
Shirley Bennet (The Mum) - Yvette Nicole Brown
Troy Barnes (The Jock) - Donald Glover
Pierce Hawthorne (The old confused idiot) - Chevy Chase

The characters are distilled into the stereotypes I have listed above, but are of course so much more than that, and as the show progresses unlikely friendships form and the dynamic of the group changes.

Rewatching this on Netflix has been fun, but what was interesting to notice this time is the directors of the show (for a large number of episodes) are The Russo Brothers, of Captain America and Marvel fame. They really have gone on to do well for themselves and from this body of work it is easy to see why.

It is such a self referential and self aware program that plays in the stereo types you expect from a sit-com but subverts them because of the fact it knows it's using them.

Abed is the voice of the audience in this case, the film/tv nerd that is socially awkward and aware of the conventions that others don't see. It is through his innocence that we get the charming animated Christmas episode, where only he and the audience can see it is an animation. The rest of the group keep the notion he is crazy and everything is as it should be. It is beautifully quirky and everyone is perfect for the show.

If you have not heard of Community I suggest you find it as soon as you can, as there is plenty of Youtube clips and interviews now that it is all wrapped up.

You will also find the not so nice side of it by the end. Creative fallings out and Season 4 loses the guy who created and wrote the show, only to receive such criticism for him to come back in 5 but then lose Chevy Chase because of on-set differences. This is well documented else where if you are interested in that side of this great show, but I would suggest you ignore it. Plenty of shows have dramas outside of the fun TV bubble (Castle being an example, where it is rumoured that by the end Nathan Fillion was nasty to Stana Katic. I hope it is not true as I found Castle such a fun show and think Nathan Fillion seems like such a genuinely nice and funny guy, don't burst my bubble!)

This series is perfect to fill small gaps in your TV time, but I bet once you start you will have lost a weekend and binged watched as much as you can in that time. It is worth it on every level and is a truly great series that has so much rewatchability that I am enjoying as much if not more so this second time around, and I expect when I get to the end, I will watch it again in the future. There are lovely little hidden side stories, background scenes and treats hidden on screen while the main story plays out, you will need that many watches to try to find and see them all.

Community is a great bit of television that I am sure many people will have now seen or been aware of. If you, for whatever reason missed that. Well let me tell you to get on it. Go back to school and get your education.

Million Dollar Arm - Film Review

This 2014 Disney film is not to be confused with Million Dollar Baby, a very different film!

Jon Hamm plays JB, a self centred, commitment-phobe batchelor who is driven by meaning less realationships, money and his work.

He is a sports agent, who has gone it alone with his Aash and Theresa as a small three person team.

They are down on their luck when their client list hits zero and no one wants to sign with them. They devise an idea to turn an Indian cricketer into a baseball pitcher.

 The competition is called "The Million Dollar Arm" where the winner of the competition can win the cash!

JB travels through India holding try-outs and then nurtures the winners back in the US with the traditional and expected fallouts, love interests and conflicts on the way.

As with most Disney sports films you can tell where this will end before it begins. That, however, does not make the journey any less enjoyable. While being predictable and formulaic, if you like a good Disney tale of the underdog, this will satisfy that itch very nicely.

This tale is based on a true story (and looking at photo of the real winners, Dinesh Patel has a striking resemblance to Adrian Sutil, F1 Driver).

Adrian Sutil - Taken from fanpix.net

Dinesh Patel (right) - Taken from nypost.com

The strange thing is apparently the true story is just that as well, pretty much all true. 

I am a fan of Disney and I love a good rags to riches story. Mighty Ducks (even 3!), Remember the Titans (another true story but much grittier but still Disney!) and Cool Runnings. This telling of a sporting tale is handled very well and is a perfect family film as it is inoffensive in the extreme. Which is why many may hate it. It pulls all the right heart strings and has you welling up exactly where they want you to, and some people don't like the almost cheap emotional manipulation that you get from Disney. I think the reason is because it is so structured, some would argue that loses the heart felt nature they are meant to be going for. 

I say to those people, you knew what you were getting when you put Netflix on and found this. Sit back and enjoy its simplicity and gentle nature and tone. I have had the word "Bland" running through my head all the way through this write up and I am loathed to use it but in one sense that is what the film is (and I don't mean it to sound negative). 

The predictability of the movie and classic Disney set up and resolution could have the feeling of a bland, mass produced story, but I say try to see through that. It is a lovely film about one mans self discovery and realisation there is more to this life than just the money. There is a real human quality to why you should feel for these characters and each actor does well to convince you they should be in this film. 

I would suggest watching this film as an antidote to a Saw marathon (or replace that with any other brutal horror franchise). It's easy, gentle and a perfect Disney film. Take that as it sounds. If you don't like Disney this film is not for you. If you do, it is not one of their classics but it will pass 2 hours of your life very nicely where you can let the wave of forced emotion wash over you like a cloud.

Modern Family - TV Series - Review

This one is a really personal I Guess I Missed That! Modern Family is on series 7 and I have only just found it and watched it. (I have watched 2 seasons).

This is a massive hit in America but I had never heard of it here in the UK. It is the perfect blend of satire of reality TV and sitcom,

The first episode sets it up perfectly showing you a documentary of what you think are three separate families that (spoiler alert) turn out to be one large dysfunctional. hilarious family.

Each section of the family has very relatable situations, scenarios and the reason they are all so very funny is you know someone, possibly in your family that has done something similar although maybe not to that extreme.

As a new parent for the second time, seeing Phil and Claire parent their 2 girls and a boy, each with their own hang ups and  foibles you can see the attempt by Phil to be the cool parent, the friend as something you know doesn't work, but no one likes to be hated. Claire is the more level headed and rational parent although with Luke, her little boy and almost favourite child being dumb as a box of frogs it leaves open the door for slap stick humour from Luke and despairing humour from Claire. I think that sums up most parents really.

Cam and Mitchell are a gay couple who have adopted a asian baby. Cam has the best scene so far in the entire show. He helps out his niece's boyfriends band by playing drums. His first audition is traditionally poor and cringe worthy however he claims to have the sticks in the wrong hands and then performs amazingly. It is played so well.

Jay the father to Mitchell and Claire and has a new wife and step son. She is much younger and latino and plays the stereotype so perfectly while objecting to being called out on the stereotype. Her son Manny is the true genius of the family, but is socially awkward for a self confident person, his addiction to coffee also does not help.

Each family member brings a quality to the show that we all see in ourselves to some degree and that's where we relate and find the most humour. Our own insecurities and situations seem slightly less serious with this program. I know I am only two series in but it has a stellar cast and crew (created by Christopher Lloyd and Steven Levitan) two greats in the comedy world.

It is a complete success with every aspect it delivers. This is one of the most perfect television programs and if you haven't seen I recommend getting a copy as soon as you can. It's both funny and touching, true moments that work for us as individuals and us as the general viewer. This program is something that resonates with me as I too live with the most loving, caring and dysfunctional family like we all do in some way or other.

Modern Family feels like home.

Obligatory Apology

This is just a short apology to say, that there is a very good reason apart from my crippling laziness that I have not made a post in a while.

7 days after my last post on the 11th May my Son was born. So finding the time to watch and then review anything has slowed while I look after him and his sister.

Some would call that a poor excuse. Well maybe. I hope to get some more reviews up soon, and until then please watch this very funny video as an apology.

Mini Metro - Game Review

In the previous blog post I talked about Humble Bundle and how it can enlighten you to a range of smaller games you may never have heard of, but are actually super fun to play. I had found Mini Metro on Steam and had it on my wish list but had not played it and to be honest I can't remember where I found it. So when I found it in the Humble Bundle I snapped it up. There are a few more games yet to play as well, but for now I have become addicted!!

The first time I loaded it, it went straight into a game and I had no idea what to do. however if you leave a map there is a tutorial plus a whole load of YouTube videos explaining and reviewing the game.

So the premise is that you are managing a train network to move passengers around. The stations are three basic shapes; circle, square and triangle, that must be connected for people to get around. To start with you have 3 coloured lines but you can choose these at the end of each week (runs Sunday to Sunday).

Some times you get a special shape appear (Star, Oval) and there will be one or two of these on screen as the stations keep appearing. Lines can only cross through stations, and after a while it gets very busy at one station with people waiting for the next train to take them to triangle however on that station people wanting to move to a Star have to transfer and this is where it gets problematic because if a station is too full then you lose.

There is an endless game mode, but at the moment there is a lot of fun in trying to trouble shoot where trains and carriages are and which lines they are most needed on. You do have a finite number of trains per line.

With some maps there are tunnels to cross water which is easy to start with but depending on how many lines you have and how many connections you need gets a real problem very quickly to start getting trains to outlying stations.

The problem with the game is when you fail, you don't want to give up. You think how can I do it better. Where can I improve?

There are a range of cities with their underground systems that offer different challenges and options. After providing a certain level of service (number of people moved) new cities will become available to try and get frustrated with.

It is a beautifully simple game, that looks like an underground tube map and plays perfectly. What I felt worked well is the music was relaxing but would change (or incidental music would happen) when you connected new stations, trains and things got hairy! It feels very fluid and you get lost in what you are trying to manage.

It is produced (from what I understand) by a New Zealand games studio and is a true classic indie game. Now is such a great time for people to find and try small and creative games outside of the main studios. Steam plays a massive part to this in terms of access to games you never knew existed. On my wish list at the moment I have mostly small games (because I have a computer that won't run some of the traditional intensive games) but I like this. I love discovering games like Mini Metro that are quick, fun and easy to pick up and get addicted to. With many of these games also now becoming PS+ and Xbox Live Arcade games.

I would suggest you try this game (and you can for free online here with no installation required). I warn you if you try it, that is it. You won't stop.

Humble Bundle - Website

I have to say that I don't always get time to play on the computer (or console) as I would like, or watch enough films worth mentioning. However something I thought would make a nice quick mention is a website.

I can't remember when I heard, or even how I heard about Humble Bundle but I am so glad I did. If you like older or indie games then this is the place for you. Well that's the reason I go there, however that's all they used to offer. You now get book bundles, at the time of writing there are 13 days left on the Manga Bundle. They offer mobile phone game bundles (I am not interested in mobile gaming, especially with the way the games have evolved into advert led, in game purchase ideas. I have my PSP still and there is a DS at home I can dig out if I want to play a game on the go).

Humble monthly is a subscription based model on more recent games. So for $12 (about £8) you get a package of games, that range in style tone and are usually always brilliant. I must admit that I don't subscribe. For the time being I just don't have time to play the games I have and another 10 games a month would not help this!

The Humble store is just a games shop with a decent price point on it. So it's worth a look if you are in the market for a new game.

The reason I wanted to write this is for the Humble Bundle section of the site. A range of games that you choose how much to pay for. You heard me correctly, you choose what to pay.

So for instance, this month there are 3 games Human Resource Machine, Shantae: Risky's Revenge - Directors Cut and A Boy and his Blob that you can pay any amount you like for (it's all done in dollars) so for $1 (£0.60) you get these three games. There are 3 more games, Mini Metro, Mushroom 11 and Towerfall Ascension that are available if you pay more than the average. So the longer you wait the higher the average. At the moment it is $5.01. Then finally there is a flat fee item of $10 to also get Evoland 2.

Some of the bundles I have bought in the past have also had artowork packs and sound tracks that you can download. Most games come with a Steam code so it is easy to activate. This month I gifted Mushroom 11 and Towerfall Ascension as I knew I would not get round to playing them, so I might as well share the love as the love only cost me about £3 to start with.

You can also set the sliders to choose where your money goes. So they are broken down between the developers, Charity and then the Humble tip.

It is really easy to do and although you can choose to only pay the minimum if you are on a tight budget, if you are feeling flush and generous then you can pay as much as you like for these games. After all they are worth it! Mini Metro this time round has already grabbed my attention and is just a wonderful game. I am not going to say any more than that for now as it deserves its own review in the not (hopefully) to distant future. 

For this bundle the top contributor has paid $70 for the bundle. 

Each month it changes and sometimes there will be nothing that interests you. The nice thing is I get an email reminder early on, I check and if I like it I buy it. My steam list of games is huge and I know I won't play half of these, that's why I like to gift a few of them to others through Reddit as it might make someone elses day. 

I might not be a top contributor to Humble Bundle, but one day I will save my money to make a purchase of more than the average price, as these guys are doing great work. After writing this I can see this might look like a paid advert, but I promise it's not. I write here because I love the things I write about and I hope that even if someone came knocking at the door asking me to write about something, I would always be truthful, not just write about it being nice because they asked me to. So the reason I chose Humble Bundle is because it allows me the chance to play some great little indie games in Steam for very few $£ which at the moment is really all I have time for or all I can afford. (This is also not meant as a bleeding heart, woo is me type post either.) 

So I will stop but just say I will keep looking and using this service because it allows me the chance to play games I would never normally have found. 

Draft Day - Film Review

It's been a while since I had seen a film with Kevin Costner. He is a good actor. Heck he is a great actor (who has made a few stinkers of a movie as well).

I am a UK based movie lover and I love sports movies, even though I don't always understand them. Draft Day falls well into this one. I know on a basic level what the draft is in the NFL, but actually know more about doing a fantasy draft rather than how new teams get new players.

For those who love the NFL it is a big day. College kids are ranked and rated, analysed, scouted and reviewed to see if they are any good. (Something to do with an NFL combine, I have no idea!)

The teams each year need to fill spots on their team where players retire, leave or are injured. The new college players want to get into a great team to achieve a legendary status within the sport. (There are many famous examples of teams drafting the wrong choice, the year Payton Manning was drafted is an example. Two QB's of similar stature but one has gone on to be great the other disappeared. I could look up his name but it really is unimportant).

Draft Day revolves around just that. The day where the Manager of Cleveland Browns has to make his picks for this years team to help strengthen and improve what he has. Costner plays this role of Manager (but again I am confused as there is the Owner of the team, the manager of the team and then the coach of the team. I'm not sure why you need a manager when the coach could also be the manager as he runs the players and team, much like we have in the UK with football/soccer).

The reason this film works so nicely is the fact it plays on the many aspects of Sony Weavers (Costner) life in one day and how he deals with a high stress season. He trades his 7th round pick for the first pick, meaning he can take the new wonderkid (who is a QB) but is torn by what is expected of him, and what he wants to do with the history and feelings he gets from the player he would have taken in his initial 7th round draft slot. To get his trade he gives away a large portion of the future draft power, as in this process you can trade draft picks. Again here is where I get a little hazy on how these work but he basically gives away there first round picks for three years.

As the film develops we see his family life push and pull him as he deals with the shadow of his father legacy hang over his head. An ex-wife, a pushy mother and his new girlfriend all work into how he is expected to make his decisions.

The crux of his problems is his current QB had a bad season, so with the new prospect an exciting temptation for every one around they can solve the issue they think they have. In the off season, QB has trained hard and claims to better than ever. Sonny like loyalty, but also has pressures from the owner and coach on what they think he should do.

The cast is strong with Jennifer Garner, Chi McBride, Frank Langella and Dennis Leary with other big names making appearances throughout the movie.

It leads you on Sonny Weavers struggles with what to do and doing the old cliche of is it better to do what is right or what is easy.

I don't want to go into the what actually happens as that is the fun part of this film (I mean essentially it is the entire film)!

It is a fun film that you don't need to like sport to enjoy, although it would help to have a certain level of interest in it. I keep re-watching the conclusion to the film as I think it is handled really well and in a very enjoyable way. This film is a good to sit down and turn off too. It's not a mindless action film but there is still very little that needs much processing in the process. It is all laid out for you in arguably very obvious beats that many films like this do follow, but this one does it better. It may be cliched and expected in parts, but it is also charming and interesting and enjoyable. I am not always a fan of sequels but I want to see what happens in the season after this draft has taken place. Does the team go from strength to strength? Are the decisions made ones that change the Browns future forever. Here is the difference in this movie compared to others of its type. It's not based on a real life event outside of the premise of the entire thing. It's not Moneyball where that has actual events that can be followed up for you to see what really happened before and after. This is a work of fiction set around the real world events of a manger and the NFL draft.

This does not hinder the film at all, but it did leave me wanting more from it at the end.

Into the Woods - Film Review

Into the woods is a 2014 take on the classic fairy tale. It has all the stories you know. Jack and the Beanstalk, Rapunzel, Little Red Riding Hood and Cinderella.

It has a varied and well known cast with Johnny Depp making, what I would call an inflated cameo. He plays the big bad wolf, but is not in it for all that long.

This is a film that I was asked to watch by my wife, and if I didn't like it she would watch it later. I stuck it out till the end and didn't hate it but it also didn't win me over completely.

I thought I would write about it here as so far I have covered only things I might recommend, but not done any negative reviews. It's all been positive. I thought that should not be the only reason to write my blog here. This should cover things you may have missed and might like even if I didn't.

This film has charm, appeal and a large cast of names that you are happy to pay to see. Meryl Streep, Anna Kendrick, Emily Blunt and James Cordon all have plenty of screen time to almost call them the main stars of the film with names like Depp and Chris Pine being in it for a shorter part of the films run time.

The premise of the film is a baker and his wife (Cordon and Blunt) are tasked by the witch, (Streep) who has cursed the family to be childless, to complete a set of tasks and retrieve items that she can not. The items are all from the range of fairy tales and allow the stories to mix and intertwine.

The thing I have failed to mention so far is it is a musical.

Should this make a difference? No. Is that why it didn't sit with me? Maybe.

Now defending myself a little here, I have nothing against musicals, two of my favourite films are musicals (Blues Brothers and South Park:The Movie) however it felt forced into being this. This is why I tend not to like this style of musical. I must confess to never having watched Les Mis but from the trailers and clips I have seen, this film is trying to recreate that vibe. The singing the story instead of having songs as part of the overall performance. I have seen a few stage shows that are critically acclaimed (We Will Rock You and Rock of Ages) that use famous songs as part of the story, and it feels like the same thing. I didn't enjoy those stage shows because I love the music and it was performed amazingly well, but it is shoe horned into a very loose and tenuous story. I would rather just watch the performers taking turns to perform great songs that I love and appreciate their talent rather than trying to string it together loosely based on song titles.

While "Into the Woods" does not use famous songs in this way, it feels like I enjoyed the story and the premise of the movie, but had trouble with how they tried to string scenes together and keep the music going where it didn't benefit from it or enhance the experience. Both Blues Brothers and South Park place songs into a scene that lifts the whole experience and makes you appreciate the actors/musicians talents just that little bit more.

There are a few dark moments in this film that are in keeping with the original Grimm fairy tales (the ugly sisters fate being a notable example) but nothing that makes it inappropriate for a young(ish) audience.

While watching I came to the conclusion that I don't like Chris Pine. I think he is quite a one note actor (granted it's more notes than me as an actor) and I enjoyed the Star Trek films with him as Kirk, partly due to the fact I think Kirk is quite a wooden character thanks to the history of William Shatner also playing the character. He was not the Prince I would like to see in this sort of film.

This is a good film with some good performances, however I am not going to say I enjoyed it. I can say it is not terrible it is well put together, but there are parts of it that just don't sit quite right for me in what it is trying to do and achieve. It's worth trying to be able to form your own opinion of it but I think some people may turn it off quite quickly while others revel in the attempt to retell the classic of our childhood. It's nice to get other visions of these but for me there are films that do it better. Tangled, Hoodwinked and Once Upon a Time to name a few.

Warrior - Film Review

For some reason I had always avoided Warrior, with no reason or thought behind it. It's not like I have a thing against screen violence. It's not like I have anything against any of the main or supporting actors. I just never thought about watching it.

It came to Netflix and I just thought why not. So put it on.

Firstly I was surprised that this was Tom Hardy after Inception. I had presumed it was an older film and when he was starting out, but this is not the case. It is pretty much (at the moment) in the middle of his filmography.

Hardy plays Tommy Conlon, quiet and brooding ex marine and junior wrestler that is after money to help support his fallen brother-in-arms' family. Not out for money himself but to try to right a wrong that he feels responsible for.

The dynamic between him and his father (Nick Nolte) is fantastic. Nolte, plays the ex-drunk perfectly and you feel for his attempts at retribution with his sons, but also understand their position in keeping their distance and general distrust of a man who caused so many problems in their lives.

Joel Edgerton (a face of someone that you never remember what they have done, but know you know them from somewhere! For me I think it will have been the Star Wars prequels but even then I am not sure) is the other brother that stayed in the area because of a woman (Jennifer Morrison) and the film builds on his family dynamic between both his wife and kids and the relationship between him and his brother and father.

Each actor is perfect for the role and the film is a lot more heart warming than I had expected from what I thought would just be a film about fighting. The the thing with most preconceived ideas is that you are usually well off base. (Prime example is how good Billy Elliot is, but many people avoided it because it is about dancing!)

While there is the journey of each character and why they fight, it looks mostly at relationships and how they can effect you deeply. Joel Edgertons character Brendan has been through his years of fighting to get to the family life we would all expect to see from a traditional sense. Stable job, family home, typical wife and kids ideas. The breaking point is money within the family but not because of a personal vice, but medical bills of your child. While the UK may not have the best health service in the world, I would always advocate for the NHS and the service that it provides. My main fear is what this family go through, which is the ability to provide for your kids as best you can. This may be a very specific problem to me and the stage of life I am in, but it gave me a very relatable character to empathise with where Tom Hardy's character was interesting and intriguing but I had no connection to him with any shared life experience.

I understand you don't need a shared life experience with any character in a film to enjoy it, but some films it can add to your experience of the journey that they are taking to get to the film act of the film.

The basic story is that both brothers are about to compete in a MMA tournament for money that will benefit their situation. Not wanting to spoil too much more of the film if you have missed it, I would suggest you make this a film to watch. While it contains violence, I would argue the title of Warrior is more to do with each struggle the character goes on to get to the film tournament and not just about the beating another person to win a fight.

This is a very good film, with some very good performances. If you have 2 hours 20 mins spare to watch the film you really should make the time. It is much more interesting than I had given it credit for.

Friday Night Lights - TV Series Review

A book that became a film that became a TV series. Friday Night Lights the TV Series is such a great show that I am now re-watching it as it has come to Netflix.

I watched it when it was first aired back in 2006 and tried to get my wife to watch it as well. She could not get over the camera/visual style that helped define and shape what the show was. So I watched this on the bus to work or when she was out. For a long time it was my favourite TV Show (but then I got a box set of the West Wing and that changed everything!).
It is shot in a documentary, free hand way that for me drew me into the action and into the world of characters. It's not all shaky and seems to follow the emotions and when it suits to get the closer shots of a scene.

While this is based around a High School (American) football team, not every episode contains actual football games and really does revolve around the lives of the characters in a small and highly pressurised community. It tracks the insane mentality that High School football coach can lose his job like a Premiership manager after a run of bad games.

The location of Dillon, Texas is football and that is all. It DNA is football and this is the reason for such a intense situations and why the story is fantastic all the way through.

From the very first episode, we see the fragility and expectations of the players trying to balance study, friends and football. Not being American, I have no idea how realistic the high school environment and football mentality really are, but it captivated me and keeps me wanting to watch more.

I have watched this show through about 3 times in its entirety, not always paying attention to each episode but always getting drawn into the world that it creates. I am a sucker for this genre of film and TV show. What many UK viewers might class as sappy American drama, the underdog story effect.

This example from Cool Runnings almost sums it up perfectly.

It's the fact I still get goose bumps and the sense of achievement that the characters are meant to be going through. The down by one point with 2 seconds to go cliche. You are drawn into each win and loss and feel for them every time. 

There are 5 seasons to this and while it does follow one team, it really follows a few characters and focuses on them through the show. Eric Taylor as played by Kyle Chandler and his family are arguably the main characters, the head coach of the team, and not wanting to spoil too much it's been off the air since 2011, he does not always stay in once place. It is the reasons though that make it interesting.

Saying that though it has made a few names like Taylor Kitsch, Micheal B. Jordan and Adrianne Palicki who have gone on to bigger and better ventures.

This is a great TV series that has heart, and that is what makes it so re-watchable. I think that it has a certain charm to it that makes you care for the people on screen. This is an example of where the film just could not deliver as much because of the time constraints. While this is based on the book that is based on true events, I am not sure when that starts to deviate and by how much. It is worth checking out if you Netflix, and it is one I am sure I will re-watch again one day when I have forgotten how much I enjoyed the 4th time around.

Being Ginger - Documentary - Film Review

I seem to be watching quite a few documentaries at the moment. That's not a bad thing, but it does then skew my recommended watching in Netflix to other documentaries.

This month I was suggested Being Ginger. A documentary created by Scott P. Harris and looks on the surface as a love story of what ladies actually would date a ginger man.

The set-up seem a little shallow at first as Scott tries to find the courage to talk to a random women under the guise of making a documentary. It develops quickly and the tone changes into a look into one mans life and self belief.

It takes you nicely on his journey and looks at how people get to the situation they are in. It looks at how our past shapes us even if we don't realise it later in life. Experiences that hurt us tend to be pushed down despite being major factors in how they shape us. It's only reflection can you see really how much they may have influenced you decisions.

Scott is adamant about not dating a ginger person, and interviews a few couples who are both red heads, but it is not until the 3rd act of the documentary where he travels to a major red head festival in Holland that he starts to question his own rules. The rules are there because of his own skewed notions and thoughts rather than that of the outside world.

He is helped on this journey by his friends who are also students at Edinburgh university. It is quite interesting at times to see their take on his history and what he should do trying to find love.

This is a fun little documentary that is touching, heart-warming and while having a serious reflection on one mans experiences serves to show that confidence comes from within and is driven by how much you want to expand your own self.

I really enjoyed the journey that Scott takes the viewer on and found it interesting to see how he screened multiple versions of the film from very short to where it finally ends up. It is interesting to watch the film develop within itself as well as watching Scotts journey.

It was the sort of documentary that inspires others. I wanted to grab a camera and start making a documentary too. The real question here is why not. It does not have any major research to start with and the documentaries evolution shows how you can build on what is a short film to a full blown documentary.

I would recommend this everyone, and if you don't have Netflix you can still watch it online for just a few pounds.

This has spawned another documentary (sort of sequel) to it called An American Ginger in Paris which was a Kickstarter project for Scott once Being Ginger became bigger. Through the first film he meets people that highlight France as being a ginger loving community, I expect this will follow him on the journey to find love and why France is that particular place to do it.

Ready Player One - Book Review

So I am jumping on a band wagon that is already well on the move. The novel is in pre-production to be a major Hollywood movie directed by Stephen Spielberg. It has a massive audience already and certainly won't need my help creating a buzz. However this blog is designed to talk about things I like and missed, so maybe, just maybe you did too!

So Ready Player One is set in the future. A place where resources are scarce, the real world is a stark place to live but with the virtual world of the OASIS we can be more than we are in real life. Our Avatars can be like who we really are or nothing like us. We are not limited by real world functions and constraints, magic (and not just movie magic) can happen.

The novel follows Wade AKA Parzival through his journey to find the secret prize hidden within the OASIS. A prize left as a will by the creator of the system. The prize is the system. Full control over the finances, direction and everything associated with the company that owns the system.

This novel had me gripped from the start to finish, and by then end where I would normally fall asleep reading a book at bedtime, I would stay awake and force my self to have to put it down. It was gripping, enjoyable and a fantastic mystery into the clues it lays out to the reader and the plans to get the hidden "egg".

Not wanting to spoil the novel I won't touch on too much detail, but the friendships that a formed, the risks that are taken are interesting well crafted and fun.

Wade is a true nobody living in the worst part of America at the worst point in history. His only salvation is the life he has in the OASIS, and his only friends are the few he has online (sounding familiar for this day and age?)

The mysterious recluse that is James Halliday, the creator of the OASIS dies leaving a handbook and a challenge to the world. This online world splits into factions and for 5 years after his death everyone is stumped by the clues left to start them off. Halliday was a big fan of geek, 80's culture and this novel serves as a wonderful memoir to that time. The classic references and nostalgia are painted perfectly but are being viewed from a more modern prespective. It is a very clever and well written idea, that allows those who also loved that time to immerse themselves once again. For others it just becomes part of the DNA of the book and does not leave you feeling excluded if you do not share the same level of love for the time. Ernest Cline is the author and through his writing you can see aspects of his love of all the subjects reflected in the characters. How they thrive with their friends talking for hours around old games, movies and comics. You know there are a few parts in this book lifted straight out of Clines own life, and they do say write what you know.

This novel was first published in 2011 (I said I was behind the curve on this one) and has won awards in 2011 and 2012 which I think it deserves. It won an award from the Young Adult Library Services Association, which makes it sound like a kids book and while many of the themes will touch many children's imaginations, it is also a great book for those of us who are thirty something and remember the original games and comics from the 80's.

Even if you are not a huge geek around the subjects of the book, the story does not rely on that and takes you on a fantastic adventure that I would suggest everyone reads. It is fun gripping and wonderfully enjoyable. If you have missed this, get a copy. You will not be disappointed, because while one of the greatest film makers of the time is going to be leading this film forward, as with any book to film conversion you really won't be able to capture some of what makes this book fantastic in a film. However great the film might end up being.

Read this now while the film is still in pre-production, you won't regret it!

Best of Enemies - Documentary - Film Review

Documentaries can be seen as a dirty word. It can sometimes put people off watching as they see them as boring, tired or dull. This I think stems from being made to watch a documentary with your parents on a Saturday night when you are 10 years old, or those documentaries you are made to watch in Geography class on tidal erosion.  I don't mean to pick on Geography exactly and actually programs produced these days like Planet Earth from the BBC, tend to make the subject visually stunning, enthralling to watch and flies in the face of the VHS tape that we were made to watch in 1983 recorded from the OU.

This week I found on Netflix (UK) a documentary called the Best of Enemies. I had never heard of it, and had no real reason to want to watch it, but that is the joy of Netflix these days you can just take a punt on a program and see what you think. I loved it. It is a fantastic documentary and well worth a watch. 

It revolves around events that are taking place during the 1968 US Presidential debate. A war in TV news in taking place and CBS news is near the bottom (well 3rd) in the pile of the main players at that time. They decided to change the once traditional format to that of a debate. Not between the politicians but commentators from either side of the debate.

Gore Vidal from the left and William F. Buckley from the right. When I heard the names (being the age I am), I recognised Gore Vidal but had no idea why. I had never heard of Buckley before and knew little about either persons personalities or politics.

It was an explosive time in the US party politics system with the Vietnam war in play causing massive tensions between protesters, police and politicians.

The documentary does well to provide a background to the situation and the people who were making the most waves in politics. It paints the picture of each debate on a daily basis and how they were interacting to the events of the day. From what we see, the debates, like many panels on news programs today, was much shorter than people may have wanted. It had argument and two polarizing characters that bred the controversy the channel needed for ratings. Gore Vidal was everything William F. Buckley loathed in the republicans and Vidal was as close to the anti-Christ as Buckley could imagine.

This story is shown beautifully through the archive footage; as well as interviews from friends, colleagues or commentators from the time. It showed how CBS changed the face of reporting for this cultural US event and how the TV debate grew into a antagonistic forum because it was so well received. 

The documentary develops each character and gives the viewer an insight into who they were and why they were so diametrically opposed. It takes you through the the event and why this shift in television news made such an impact at this time in broadcast journalism.

From my own personal politics, I quickly chose a side to support for the debates (as many would have done at the time) and when the debates reach their tipping point, I found the insults hilarious in their absurdness for what we hear today. What was said can not be forgiven, even back in 1968, and the documentary explores the later ramifications of these events but the way some of the speech is phrased reminds me now of a Michael McIntyre stand up routine.

When Buckley attacks Vidal as a response to being called a Nazi, he threaten to sock him in the face, and he would stay plastered (watch the documentary for the full context and quotation). It was this that strangely dated the documentary (aside for the quality of the archive footage) the most. The language was more intellectual and less dumbed down for the masses.

It is a very well produced and interesting documentary, it may not be the most riveting television for a 10 year olds Saturday night television (but I guess that will depend on the 10 year old), but now I am a little older and wiser than I was at 10, the subject matter while nearly completely irrelevant to me (not a US voter) it shows how politics can be made into a very interesting subject and one that can create such divisions in people.

The French Connection - Film Review

A classic. It was also one I had missed. The film was originally released in 1971 and was a film that cemented Gene Hackman as a force to be reckoned with. It created a character that won Hackman an Oscar for Best Actor.

It was a film that I had heard of, knew little about other than it was a film everyone should have watched!

The first thing that struck me was it was very definitely of its time. The racial language and approach to policing for a start. Now that's not to say modern movies don't have race as a theme or negative racial words are used, but this seemed different. It would be something that would have been re-worded for today, I am not saying re-written as such but how the characters approach a scene would be very different, Gene Hackman did however have trouble saying Doyles racist language without cringing. I know that policing on film is also very different to actual police procedure and approach, but the portrayal of the renegade cop who plays by his own rules is handled differently. Maybe it is that the more modern films are in some respect caricatures of these original films and people, even in the more serious versions. This then brings the question of can anything be original, but that is for another day, place and time.

Knowing about how films today can be edited even within a scene to get the best performances of an actor (there is a great video about how David Fincher does this) I want to highlight one of the opening scenes.

This chase down of a suspect and back street interrogation shows how and why Gene Hackman deserves his plaudits for the film, however about 1 min 40 seconds in Hackman is on a roll and Roy Scheider is clearly corpsing at the questioning of the suspect and "picking his feet in Poughkeepsie" (If you read the IMDB trivia page for the film you learn this was an actual tactic used but the detectives the film is based on).

A few scenes in and the movie feel more like parody than they probably should, and I think this comes down to the imitation of films such as The French Connection. If you don't see the original first, it can skew your appreciation of it when you get to it. Your own knowledge of what the film should do plays with what they were trying to do. My example here is the subway foot chase between Doyle and Charnier. The hopping on and off the subway, changing cars and trains feels almost comical now, but I know that was not the intention. It is because of it now appearing across multiple films, styles and genres that the gravitas and weight that was there for initial audiences is lost on the those of us getting to the film much later in it's life cycle. The same could be said of things like Jaws, Star Wars (Empire Strikes Back) and  James Bond. They are part of our culture and language even though we may not have seen those films. (Arguably that's the same on a greater scale with classic literature like Shakespeare).

It was not until the end that I realised that the film was based around some truth of actual events. It felt while watching it that it was "just a story" and did not do what many modern films now do to attract attention, or add weight to the subject matter by listing it as being based on a true story or true events. It does however list is as based on the book by Robin Moore and the screenplay of Ernest Tidyman.

This film is a classic and one that if you have missed you should rectify, it's on Netflix (UK) and I am sure elsewhere in the world. It has very famous scenes and set pieces that changed the world of cinema and what other film makers strive to do. It is because of the attempts to capture what Friedkin did with The French Connection that make it such a well known film through many other films and television series. That being said Friedkin himself credits other work (Z 1969) as an influence to the style of the film, and will undoubtedly contain conscious or unconscious references to that work.

Whatever the flaws are with this film today, they are only because it created it such a piece of history. That being said, while I enjoyed it, and it is something you need to watch to draw your own conclusions from, it has not made it into my top ten list of great films. It was enjoyable, it is a classic but I think there are many films that may have taken from it and improved what it started.

Jessica Jones - Netflix TV series.

If you have Netflix, I doubt you have missed Jessica Jones. In fact if you don't have Netflix I doubt you have not at least heard about Jessica Jones from someone. After the runaway success of Netflix's Daredevil (not the underwhelming Ben Affleck film), it was an easy sell for them to keep going with the Marvel cannon of work.

 Daredevil and Jessica Jones have both been commissioned for a second series, Luke Cage, Iron Fist and the Defenders are all set to appear on Netflix in the next year or two, the Marvel TV train is full steam ahead, and keeping pace with the full cinematic universe.

 Many have said they prefer Daredevil to Jessica Jones but they still both rate highly. I might agree with that, but actually there was something about Jessica Jones I think I preferred. Although the production style is similar, there is a much more film noir film to Jessica Jones, this comes from the idea that she is a private detective, but it does it very well. It brings a contemporary take on the genre and while not always following the traits of a noir piece in terms of lighting and pacing, it does use the music to perfect effect and has some very beautiful throw backs to the film genre.

I have to admit I was not familiar with Jessica Jones or Alias the comic book as I was with some of the others that we have seen on screen over the last few years. I think it there are similarities and difference between both which has been written about by others if you are interested.

The cast of Jessica Jones is brilliant, everyone feels like they are there for a reason and not just propping up the main character, is some places you could take Jessica out of the story and it will still be a compelling watch, which to me is testament to everyone involved. The writers and cast have created such deep characters you care about them and want to see where it will lead. They all add to the rich texture of the show and I hope we get to see more of their stories as we get into season 2.

With the Marvel TV world at the moment they are writing self contained series that could have no sequel as that was (as far as I know) the idea. They were there to build the worlds to get to a final series (The Defenders) but actually, the love of superheroes (especially Marvel) series is not going away any time soon, so they are going to keep producing products that appeal to a range of audiences, just like the comics. Jessica Jones is not for kids, it is dark, sexual and in places brutal but I never felt like it was violent for the sake of violence, rude just because they could swear. They have created a character you can see has troubles, issues and character flaws the traditional super hero may not.

The villain in this series is Kilgrave, a strong part of the Jessica Jones comics who actually in the comics holds less over Jessica to start with but becomes more prominent as the adventures continue. Not wanting to spoil too much, I will say that David Tennant plays bad so well, and that you do start to feel even for him. Again a sign of great writing and not just adding in a bad guy to beat up and be done with. (The same can be said for Wilson Fisk in Daredevil as Vincent D'Onofrio plays him perfectly and at times leaving you empathising with the character you should be against).

This is a great TV series and if you have Netflix one you need to add to your watch list as soon as you can. If you have also not seen Daredevil, chain them together and watch them one after the other. Netflix are producing fantastic original TV series and films at the moment and these Marvel tie-ins are great examples of how to do a series well. If you are not a fan of the super hero thing, then Jessica Jones is also for you. It is less super hero and more classic hero from a troubled but brilliant women.

Inside Out - Film Review

So to start 2016, Happy New Year and I hope you had a lovely Christmas. This year I was given a lot of lovely presents, and I may do a review of some board games over the coming weeks that I think people are more likely to have missed, however, I was given a few films on Blu-ray. Jaws, E.T and Inside Out.

It would be hard to miss anything that is put out by Disney Pixar. It's not like they are small indy films. However, there are people like myself who don't get the chance to go to the cinema anymore (with any regularity) and rely on Netflix, Amazon Prime streaming and getting Blu-rays for presents at birthday or Christmas time.

I love Pixar and Disney films, and recently I have watched Tangled, Frozen and Princes and the Frog from Disney more than I ever thought I would thanks to a 2 year old little girl. So when I was given Inside Out I was really pleased. It might be another one to add to the rotation list for her, but we thought we had better watch it first to see how suitable it is.

We sat down to watch the film knowing a rough out line of what the film might offer, but had actually (and not on purpose) avoided most of the hype when it came out.

The film takes you through the growth of a child and how the emotions in her head drive her. How each emotion controls aspects of your life and can change your perception of events.

The main focus of the story is the journey of two key emotions trying to get back to the main control room after an accident puts them into her general memory banks. It looks at their own personal approach to situations and why each emotion plays a key role in making us who we are.

It cleverly sets up the change from child into teenager and then from the parents perspective and emotions into adulthood.

Reading the IMDB trivia for this film there are quite a few really lovely notes about who controls each person and how, but the one I want to touch on is that it was born from the Director watching his daughter growing and imagining from inside her head what could be happening. It's the imagining of how we process daily information and how it is then retained and recalled later. It's the perfect look at what a child goes through in the developmental stage of their life and how our emotions change over time to form us into who we are today.

It is a lovely tale and easily my favourite film to have been released in such a long time. It hit a chord with me because of having a 2 year old and watching her learn and develop her own personality. Although I know it's not really how the human body works, like with anything Pixar does, a part of you likes to imagine it is actually true, like toys coming to life, cars being the actual driver and rats being top chefs. You don't need a child to appreciate the beauty in this film but it really did add something for me personally. I think this is where Pixar excel! Making any of their films personal to you, your life and experiences, even in the Incredibles. There is something in all their films that will connect to you on some level.

I don't want to give too much plot away as half the beauty I had was coming to it almost completely fresh and with no preconceptions (other than the "I like Pixar").

From what I have read, the film was meant to have more emotions in each head, and while I think there could have been a few more to develop other areas of the plot, I think the 5 they used are perfect and are cast to perfection. Even before they started any animation, they had Lewis Black cast as anger and his performance makes this film even more perfect. For some people they may not know the name Lewis Black, but might recognsie the face or voice, (he had been in an early episode of Big Bang Theory) but has also been a stand up comic for years.

To put a face to the name, check out this video!
(has some harsh language)

Amy Poehler from Parks and Recreation plays Joy wonderfully and it took me a while to even realise it was her. The whole cast is perfect and brings this film to life with such fun and enjoyment that it's hard to think of anyway this could be a much better film .

If you have not seen Inside Out, then I can not recommend it enough, however for a 2 year old, I think I will leave it a year or two. It's not inappropriate for children, but has a few "scary" moments that some younger viewers might not be so good at understanding or processing (the clown is much more scary in the subconscious than it is when we see them in the credits at the end).  It is also actually quite an advanced concept. The idea of these people in your head, the concept of emotion. So for now, I am destined to watch Frozen again as it is a simple thing to understand, To be honest out of the other films I had mentioned we watch most, Tangled and Princess and the Frog are so much better than Frozen, in nearly every way. These other films are simple princes tales, or are the toys / cars / animals talking which a 2 year old gets, to them the toys are people too, animals have the same feelings we do. I would argue emotions are harder to understand at this conceptual level and the reference point is not quite so clear for them. My daughter knows when she is upset but would not see it as a person quite in the same way we can for the film.

This film is wonderful and gets a full rating (if I rated films), so if you have missed this gem of a Pixar film, watch it as soon as you can.