tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23843008424866765932024-02-21T16:19:02.185+00:00The Sprog BlogSproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.comBlogger70125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-33244982560844133202011-01-17T17:52:00.002+00:002011-01-17T17:53:17.174+00:00I'm moving.So yeah. To here.<br /><br />http://the-mind-dump.blogspot.com/<br /><br />Gone is the sprog stuff. Gone is random crap, annoyingness, and general pointless posts. I'm basically consolidating all my online stuff into one, useful google account. It won't be serious, but it won't be plain stupid either.Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-32973060450204667262010-04-24T16:29:00.007+01:002010-04-24T16:36:55.749+01:00New UpdateHoly shit. An update. This is a rare occurance.<br /><br />Oddly, there's not much for me to post really. I've done all my final exams and am waiting for results to come through (should be next week), if I pass, voila, qualified veterinary nurse. Then just got to get registered with the RCVS.<br /><br />As I've done all my exams I've finished on placement, which is a bit lame. Started my new job which has slightly insane hours but I'll get used to it eventually. 24/31/48 hour shifts and the like. Gonna be... interesting!<br /><br />That's it really. Means I'll have less free time and stuff but hey, it's a job for now.<br /><br />If you have a free couple of minutes, watch this... It's really cool and trippy.<br /><br /><object width="350" height="250"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0zYGxb5kFjI&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0zYGxb5kFjI&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="350" height="250"></embed></object>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-12168761309957870462010-04-24T00:41:00.001+01:002010-04-24T00:42:05.326+01:00I really ought to update this more often....Maybe I'll do it tomorrow when I have time.Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-67662166032105374592010-03-04T23:54:00.001+00:002010-03-04T23:56:22.113+00:00I swear this is a real songLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL....<span style="font-weight:bold;"> LOL<span style="font-style:italic;"></span></span>!<br /><br /><object width="320" height="265"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hI3mRJSu9DQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hI3mRJSu9DQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="320" height="265"></embed></object><br /><br />For the full thing, go <a href=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oavMtUWDBTM>Here</a>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-63270748327580615072010-02-26T00:16:00.002+00:002010-02-26T00:16:51.005+00:00Some rambling thoughts on Tilikum, SeaWorld, and Orcas in captivity<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHd_x6PK9_HAyZ5vZNVXkI3rpZzq7qdz9Bmz_rcXI655oW287CpkK6ei_YWuzX5ghhsL0H3G24Pahwt5JL5c7fLQ3Z8YFJw4QUddHSG5kCeEbkP7GxuzvxOtE4ky4ra3gvaDhU3zlI9Q/s1600-h/3527375126_fc85bfbde9_o.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHd_x6PK9_HAyZ5vZNVXkI3rpZzq7qdz9Bmz_rcXI655oW287CpkK6ei_YWuzX5ghhsL0H3G24Pahwt5JL5c7fLQ3Z8YFJw4QUddHSG5kCeEbkP7GxuzvxOtE4ky4ra3gvaDhU3zlI9Q/s320/3527375126_fc85bfbde9_o.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5442339412178600114" /></a><br /><br /><br />I've been reading up on this since it happened, thanks to Josh for sending me a link about it otherwise I would have probably missed it last night. The Orlando Sentinel has written up an interesting article about it all, which you can view <a href="http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-seaworld-orlando-shamu-injury-20100224,0,6337535,full.story">here</a><br /><br />It's an interesting story, perhaps overplayed slightly with hysterical headlines and exaggerated eye-witness reports (because of course, the whale is going to JUMP out the tank, grab her and drag her in!), but I think it highlights some major points with regards to keeping Orcas in captivity and human interaction with them.<br /><br />The fact Orcas are kept in captivity is a debate, in itself, far too large for me to even attempt to cover in a few paragraphs. But I'm going to try it anyway, even if it's far too complex. There are definate Pros and Cons to each side of the argument, but I will openly admit I don't take either side, sitting on the fence inbetween. Having been to SeaWorld a few times, I can see they do the damn well best they can for their Orcas. The Orcas have a lot of stimulation and interaction, and a much larger tank than you would perhaps expect, and appear in good health. Compared to somewhere like Miami Seaquarium, where Lolita is kept in a tank roughly 1.5 times her size and spends all day circling, vocalising for her pod, SeaWorld is effectively captive Orca heaven.<br />However, there are questions with regards to SeaWorld that this incident has raised, some of which have always been in my mind since the last time I visited (I was 16 at the time), a few coming from spending a good 45 minutes walking up and down alongside the window on the tank and having Tilikum follow me back and forth, before then just sitting and watching him for a while.<br /><br />Something I've always wondered is why SeaWorld continue to house Tilikum and use him in shows.<br />Captured off the coast of Iceland in 1983, he is roughly 30 years old now and has been in captivity for most of his life. He literally dwarfs the other Orcas, coming in at over 22ft long and 5.5 tonnes, and is the largest Orca in captivity. His history includes no human interaction at the first park he was kept at, resulting in him accidentally drowning a trainer when she fell in his tank. You cannot condemn him for this, as he had no knowledge that humans don't survive underwater for prolonged periods of time and that they also don't particuarly take well to being held on to by an Orca. It's not because he is violent or a killer, as if he had been attacking it would have been a much more violent event, it is most likely because of his lack of interaction and his brief early life in the wild.<br />It is also not the reason he was moved to SeaWorld, this was due to the fact that the 2 females he was kept with began acting aggressively towards him.<br /><br />So, when a non-SeaWorld employee decided to sneak into his tank one night, the same thing occured, Tilikum wanted to play. Whether this happened again or this was infact some kind of territorial/aggressive thing cannot really be said at this stage, however the fact he pulled on the trainer's hair and again wasn't particuarly violent suggests that it was more playing. Or at least I hope it was, but the fact SeaWorld now keep him separate from other Orcas due to his "aggressive nature" towards them is troubling. He appears to be allowed frequent but short interaction with the pod, rather than being totally banned from them.<br />Perhaps this could be seen as cruel, unfair and perhaps inhumane. However, the fact is, (in my opinion) he is better off being kept on his own in captivity. If kept in the pod, he could cause serious injuries to the others, and any attempt to release him into the wild would probably be seriously flawed and detrimental. This is an animal that has been kept in captivity for most of it's life and more than likely lacks the skills, both socially and as a hunter, to survive in the wild. The case to look at here would be that of Keiko, the Orca who was used in the Free Willy films. After much rehabilitation and teaching, he was lost on a supervised swim in the open ocean, preparing him for a return to a pod. But he still had no real skills to hunt or look after himself, resulting in pneumonia and eventually death, and perhaps this shows that even after years of extensive work to rehabilitate Orcas to the wild, it may simply not be possible for it to ever work.<br />The fact Tilikum is also aggressive towards other Orcas could also potentially be a bad thing, but (throwing ideas around here), perhaps this is a dominance or territorial thing, it may change in a pod in the open ocean. I really have no idea, hence why I generally end up with no real conclusions on the situation (and in which case, if you're hoping for one, you really ought to stop reading now).<br /><br />However, the fact he was taken from the wild again raises more questions - should this have ever been done in the first place, was it really necessary, and what does it say about us?<br />I have no real problem with SeaWorld housing Orcas born in captivity, because they don't have any notion of the wild and have constant human interaction. With Orcas like Tilikum, taking them from the wild and dumping them in a tank will surely have psychological effects, and incidents are bound to occur due to a lack of understanding from both the Orca and the trainers.<br />It can be argued that without taking them from the wild, there would be no Orcas born into captivity, and therefore maybe it was necessary. But then is it necessary to keep them in a tank and entertain people? Necessary to make a profit, perhaps, but not necessary for the animal or, indeed, the customers. There is also a slight argument about research into the species and behaviour, but surely this is flawed as studying them in the wild would provide much better and realistic results?<br /><br />The 45 minutes of him following me threw up various questions with regards to why he was doing it. I would suspect boredom would be part of it, being kept on your own in a tank can't be much fun. Was he playing? Part of me thinks so. The fact he constantly tracked me along the windows was enjoyable, but made me wonder, was this also enjoyable for him? Surely it must have been for him to continue to do so. I will always look back on that moment in time with awe and amazement, as I only found the viewing area by going "what's down this path?" and dragging my parents and brother down it. For 30 minutes or so, we were the only people there and it was simply amazing to have this Orca follow me back and forth along a giant pane of glass<br /><br />I'm not sure where I'm going with this any more, as I'm simply trying to show the two sides to the story and the ideas behind them. I've probably asked more questions than I have answered. Maybe I ought to tie this up.<br /><br />I will admit, I find Orcas fucking awesome, they are brilliant, intelligent, majestic creatures. If I ever had the opportunity to work or interact with them, I would do it instantly. But, these things are killing machines, and as such there is an inherent risk. The staff at SeaWorld understand this, and perhaps that is the most important point: The trainer knew there was a risk, but she did the job because she loved it. And as such, it is neither her fault, that of SeaWorld, or, realistically, that of the Orca. It was simply an accident. If you think badly of SeaWorld or their staff, I highly suggest you do some research into their conservation efforts and compare the care of their Orcas with those kept in other parks.<br /><br />On a side note, there is also an interesting quote in the Guardian from the head of Animal Training at SeaWorld, about Tilikum's training and the general actions of staff, which you can read <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/25/florida-animal-welfare">here</a>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-4911050972532559972010-01-12T22:38:00.010+00:002010-01-12T23:19:12.812+00:00Tech Support Helpline<div>You know what? I promise never to get angry with tech support people due to the fact they're treating me like an idiot. I now see the world from their perspective, here's the transcript of a conversation I had tonight....</div><div><br /></div><div><br /><hr /><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:19):</div><div><i>hey, my mum has forgoten her password and we cant remove it cuz you need a password. is they anyway of gettiing round that i have tryed safe mode ?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:19):</div><div><i>you need to log on as a system administrator and then change it via user settings on the control panel</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:19):</div><div><i>she is an adminstertor</i></div><div><i>lucky shes got a finger print on it so thats how shes singed in but the finger print has fucked up befor </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:20):</div><div><i>a what?</i></div><div><i>well if she's signed in</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:20)</div><div><i>finger print thing you can sign in by finger print </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:20):</div><div><i>go start > control panel > users</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:21):</div><div><i>"Change your password"</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:21):</div><div><i>yer we have done that but when we try to remove the passwoprd you need your old password</i></div><div><i>she dosent know it </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:21):</div><div><i>right hang on</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:22):</div><div><i>thnaks shes haveing a right stress</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:22):</div><div><i>right</i></div><div><i>are you on vista?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:23):</div><div><i>yer </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:25):</div><div><i>start > run > cmd</i></div><div><i>This <b>SHOULD</b> work</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:27):</div><div><i>yer doint you have to type you user name </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:27):</div><div><i>then type "net users"</i></div><div><i>it will list all users on the system</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:28):</div><div><i>find your mum's account name</i></div><div><i>type in "net users [NAME] <name>*"</name></i></div><div><i>if the name has a space in it, you need to put it in quote marks</i></div><div><i>like.... net users "debbie southern" *</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:29):</div><div><i>ok</i> </div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:29):</div><div><i>type in the new password CAREFULLY</i></div><div><i>cmd won't show it</i></div><div><i>then hit enter</i></div><div><i>then retype it</i></div><div><i>and it should, theoretically, change it</i></div><div><i>i'd advise changing it to something simple and memorable</i></div><div><i>like her birthday, or whatever</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:29):</div><div><i>ok trhanks </i></div><div><i>brb</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:36):</div><div><i>ok i got it with me </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:37):</div><div><i>do i put "net users"(deb)</i></div><div><i>or "net users deb"</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:38):</div><div><i>you put "net users deb * "</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:39):</div><div><i>it says its not an recongised comand </i></div><div><i>?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:41):</div><div><i>ok it says C;/users/deb></i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:42):</div><div><i>Right, have you got the command line interface open?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:42):</div><div><i>if you on about the thing with the black backgorund and white writting yes</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:43):</div><div><i>ok</i></div><div><i>just type</i></div><div><i>"net users"</i></div><div><i>and hit enter</i></div><div><i>without the </i>"</div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:43):</div><div><i>ok </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:43):</div><div><i>like this</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:43):</div><div><i>now hat </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:43):</div><div><i>it will show you the users</i></div><div><i>yes?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:43):</div><div><i>yer </i></div><div><i>with admistor on the top </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:43):</div><div><i>yep</i></div><div><i>You want the name of your mum's account</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:44):</div><div><i>which is...</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:44):</div><div><i>deb</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:44):</div><div><i>ok</i></div><div><i>now type "net users deb *"</i></div><div><i>without the " again</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:44):</div><div><i>ok </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:44):</div><div><i>asks for new password</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:44):</div><div><i>yes loads of stuuf has come up now i do the password ?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:45):</div><div><i>it will say</i></div><div><i>"Type a password for the user:"</i></div><div><i>right?</i></div><div><i>type in something easy, like 1234</i></div><div><i>hit enter</i></div><div><i>it'll ask you to retype, do it again</i></div><div><i>hit enter</i></div><div><i>bada bing bada boom</i></div><div><i>password changed.</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:46):</div><div><i>it says loads oof stuff about what the password used to be </i></div><div><i>well when it was changed </i></div><div><i>what what it use to be </i></div><div><i>like password set </i></div><div><i>password exspirs</i> </div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:47):</div><div><i>then when i typed new password it said jjbjjb is not rconsied </i></div><div><i>jjb bing the password</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:49):</div><div><i>well i have no idea what is going on then</i></div><div><i>I just did it fine on here</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:49):</div><div><i>ok what i do </i></div><div><i>net user </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:50):</div><div><i>net user deb </i></div><div><i>then it says nothing about changeing password </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:51):</div><div><i>did you put the * afterwards?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:51):</div><div><i>no </i></div><div><i>when do i put that </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:51):</div><div><i>afterwards</i></div><div><i>you put net user deb *</i></div><div><i>I did say....</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:52):</div><div><i>oh i thoughtit was by acident </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:53):</div><div><i>ok thenn it says user name </i></div><div><i>password then user name 3 time underneth each orther </i></div><div><i>?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:54):</div><div><i>what?</i></div><div><i>it should just say "Type a password for the user:"</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:55):</div><div><i>so for acount nmae i out </i></div><div><i>net users de *</i></div><div><i>and thats the only time i put the star</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:55):</div><div><i>yes</i></div><div><i>right close cmd</i></div><div><i>then re-run it</i></div><div><i>just type "net users"</i></div><div><i>then type "net users deb *"</i></div><div><i>then, type your new password</i></div><div><i>that's all you have to do</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:57):</div><div><i>dam i follow all that stuff egsactly but it always says </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (21:59):</div><div><i>NET user </i></div><div><i>[username [some stuff </i></div><div><i> username some stuff</i></div><div><i> user name some stuff </i></div><div><i> user name some stuff </i></div><div><i>c;/users/deb></i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (21:59):</div><div><i>what is the some stuff</i></div><div><i>send me a screen shot</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:00):</div><div><i>i will have to log in to msn on mums laptop i am on mine brb i will swap </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:02):</div><div><i>ok </i></div><div><i>is screen shot ctr f12?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:02):</div><div><i>no</i></div><div><i>it's "prt scrn"</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:03):</div><div><i>oh yer soz</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: normal;">jarrad says (22:06):</span></div><div>thats frist part </div><div>then i </div></i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:04):</div><div><i>just print scrren </i></div><div><i>or crt?</i></div><div><i>and printscree </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:05):</div><div><i>just the button</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:07):</div><div><i>do you want them bigger</i></div><div><i>?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:09):</div><div><i>no thats fine</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:10):</div><div><i>ok</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:10):</div><div><i>ok</i></div><div><i>so now type into that section</i></div><div><i>net users</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:10):</div><div><i>ok</i></div><div><i>do i dlo that from my last stage /</i></div><div><i>cuz i have </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:12):</div><div><i>yes</i></div><div><i>http://photos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs142.snc3/16972_404179295091_884665091_10704194_1287500_n.jpg follow that</i></div><div><i>except change "Ash" to "deb"</i></div><div><i>once you've typed net users deb *</i></div><div><i>send me a screenshot</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:13):</div><div><i>ok so what do i do with your link </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:14):</div><div><i>CLICK IT!</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:14):</div><div><i>yer i know but after that its just a screen shit</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:15):</div><div><i>Yes it is.</i></div><div><i>it shows you what it should look like</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:14):</div><div><i>yer i never get there</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:15):</div><div><i>oh right i get it </i></div><div><i>oh dw about tht one </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:17):</div><div><i>about WHAT one?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:17):</div><div><i>oh did it not come i thought i did dw</i></div><div><i>ok this is what keeps happeng</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:18):</div><div><i>you keep sending the same screenshot...</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:22):</div><div><i>ok well it says comand complet </i></div><div><i>but no password settings </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:23):</div><div><i>did you press enter after net users deb * ?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:23):</div><div><i>yer </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:23):</div><div><i>and it just says "command complete" ?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:23):</div><div><i>yer </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad sends:</div><div><i>paint dw.jpg</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:24):</div><div><i>same shot</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div> </div><div>jarrad says (22:24):</div><div><i>thats what it dose </i></div><div><i>no it ant</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:25):</div><div><i>Yes it is...</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:25):</div><div><i>mine never dose what yours dose </i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i>Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6001]</i></div><div><i>Copyright (C) 2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i>C:\Users\deb>net users</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i>User accounts for \\DEBBIE</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------</i></div><div><i>Administrator deb debbie2</i></div><div><i>Guest</i></div><div><i>The command completed successfully.</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i>C:\Users\deb>net users deb*</i></div><div><i>The syntax of this command is:</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i>NET </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:26):</div><div><i>thats what minesays </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:26):</div><div><i>YOU NEED A FUCKING SPACE!</i></div><div><i>NET USERS DEB [SPACE] <space> *</space></i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:27):</div><div><i>omg i am such a dumb ass</i> <b><- HIT THE NAIL RIGHT ON THE HEAD.</b></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:27):</div><div><i>type this EXACTLY</i></div><div><i>Net Users Deb *</i></div><div><i>NOW.</i></div><div><i>type the new password.</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:27):</div><div><i>yes its come up </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:27):</div><div><i>ok</i></div><div><i>now type the new password...</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:28):</div><div><i>ok it wont let me type ?</i></div><div><i>it flashes but nothing comes up </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:29):</div><div><i>no it wont come up</i></div><div><i>as it's a password</i></div><div><i>so it wont show you</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:30):</div><div><i>so the flashing line stays in one place ?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:30):</div><div><i>I TOLD YOU... Ash says (21:29):</i></div><div><i>type in the new password CAREFULLY</i></div><div><i>cmd won't show it</i></div><div><i>yes. exactly.</i></div><div><i>Whatever you've just typed is the new password</i></div><div><i>So. Close the window. and start again.</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:31):</div><div><i>yer i have </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:31):</div><div><i>ok</i></div><div><i>changed?</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:32):</div><div><i>will i say acsess denied </i></div><div><i>?</i></div><div><i>i type in jumping </i></div><div><i>2 times </i></div><div><i>then it gose acsess denied </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:34):</div><div><i>system error 5 has ucoreid </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:34):</div><div><i>well you're clearly not logged in as the admin then.</i></div><div><i>RIGHT.</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:34):</div><div><i>it says she is on users</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div> </div><div>Ash says (22:34):</div><div><i>Windows > all programs > accesssories > COMMAND PROMPT</i></div><div><i>Right click it</i></div><div><i>select "run as admin"</i></div><div><i>hit ok when the box comes up</i></div><div><i>then redo all this</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:35):</div><div><i>doneeee it </i></div><div><i>my mum says she loves you lol </i></div><div><i>just going to check it </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:36):</div><div><i>i got sony vagus 9 asswell </i></div><div><br /></div><div>Ash says (22:37):</div><div><i>good.</i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad says (22:37):</div><div><i>cuple of weeks ago its alsome i am makeing and intro at mo </i></div><div><i>i know how to animate it so its going to look cool </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad Signed out. (22:37)</div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad is online. (22:40)</div><div><br /></div><div><div>jarrad says (22:40):</div><div><i>ok it worked</i></div><div><i>now i am going to bed </i></div><div><i>bye </i></div><div><br /></div><div>jarrad Signed out. (22:41)</div><div><br /></div><div>Ash (22:41):</div><div><i>You're welcome...</i></div></div><br /><hr />Now here's something that made me laugh, it's like a harsher version of You've been framed<div><br /></div><div><br /></div><br /><object width="320" height="265"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QNbpIwS_kCA&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QNbpIwS_kCA&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="320" height="265"></embed></object>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-83510177930065636052009-12-28T19:13:00.001+00:002009-12-28T19:13:57.289+00:00The muppets just keep getting better and better...<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://widgets.nbc.com/o/4727a250e66f9723/4b3902cb6c479235/4b33a4ab07fca12a/268d2c61/-cpid/807d3eac49b7ec7e" id="W4727a250e66f97234b3902cb6c479235" width="384" height="283"><param name="movie" value="http://widgets.nbc.com/o/4727a250e66f9723/4b3902cb6c479235/4b33a4ab07fca12a/268d2c61/-cpid/807d3eac49b7ec7e"><param name="wmode" value="transparent"><param name="allowNetworking" value="all"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></object>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-34961528791331053372009-12-16T00:05:00.002+00:002009-12-16T00:30:21.535+00:00Remakes, Rehashes, and... something else beginning with R.I really do hate mainstream Hollywood. <span style="font-weight:bold;">I HATE IT</span>. In the past 10 years, Hollywood cinema, in my opinion, has become bloated, lazy and tiresome. Everything is just a retread of something else, everything is bounced off the back of something else's success, and it's annoying.<br /><br />But something has REALLY pissed me off recently, and that is the insistence of Studios remaking foreign-language films. Does it need to be done? No. People can read subtitles!<br />I guess it really took off with the success of The Ring, the remake of the film Ringu. It was alright, but not a patch on the original. And BAM, Studios worked out that remakes of unknown foreign horrors make money. Why? Because mainstream studio audiences haven't heard of them! So in recent years, there has been a steady stream of shoddily made, poor-quality "remakes" of foreign films.<br /><br />I don't have a problem with companies remaking films, per se, but some of the best films I've seen in recent times have been foreign language movies, especially The Orphanage and Let The Right One In. Both are currently in production for remakes, and I just don't get why rather than snapping up distribution rights and shoving them out there for audiences to see, companies instead insist on remaking them. Surely it would be better for mainsteam audiences to experience foreign-language films, and perhaps gain an interest in wider cinema.<br />Another one that stands out to me is when they remade [•REC] into Quarantine. I've watched both, and they're pretty much the same damn movie, dialogue and shot-wise. What is the point in spending all that money remaking it, when they could just buy the distribution rights, release it and make an even bigger profit. Both the audience and the companies lose out!<br /><br />Pretty much what I am saying is there is no need to remake foreign-language films into English. Just sub them, or at worst, dub them across. Studios should give audiences the opportunity to experience foreign-language film and enjoy it how it is meant to be seen, in its original form.<br /><br />I think the Director of The Orphanage summed it up pretty well when asked about them remaking his film... "The Americans have all the money in the world but can't do anything, while we can do whatever we want but don't have the money... The American industry doesn't take chances, that's why they make remakes of movies that were already big hits"<br /><br />An additional point on dubbing films - As much as I hate it, it gets the film across in pretty much it's original form to the audience, which is good. However, I still will not pay to see it because quite frankly, dubs are generally pretty bad (Even the John Lasseter Directed ones on Studio Ghibli films), and I much prefer the original audio with subtitles.Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-24575071573706103322009-12-14T13:41:00.003+00:002009-12-14T13:42:55.035+00:00For the angry peopleI did write a huge long blog about consumerism and market saturation and various other things that annoy me. Then I noticed everyone else's blogs are very similar, ranting about stuff.<div><br /></div><div>So instead, here's a video that will make you smile. If you don't smile, you are a cold, ugly, horrible person. Or, as Russell Howard says, a paedophile.</div><div><br /></div><br /><br /><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ErMWX--UJZ4&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ErMWX--UJZ4&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-4866086067407100492009-12-02T00:11:00.001+00:002009-12-02T00:13:23.055+00:00The Twilight Saga: New Moon<div>For those of you after a quick-fire review, here it is:</div><div><i>New Moon is the most boring, monotonous and stupid film I have seen this year. And I've seen transformers 2.</i></div><div><br /></div>Fro those of you looking for something with a bit more body and depth, here's the full review:<div><a href="http://www.facebook.com/notes/ash-moors/film-review-the-twilight-saga-new-moon/191751359405"><i>http://www.facebook.com/notes/ash-moors/film-review-the-twilight-saga-new-moon/191751359405</i></a></div>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-29605552138226373972009-11-23T00:57:00.003+00:002009-11-23T01:01:20.867+00:00A Christmas Carol 3D<div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSNB5DOLWupXMEpDviyOGFPDoTWFLkmDWCu4S6JWRYeCZbUgwJLqV6UlNC56tzumqe2lSV-f19v3HdetuJZcZSOWmy-t8786Raff9T0X2UeoL2gHygAfvjlUUHzafp3PARpkP0Q_K4Vw/s1600/carol+top.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 179px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSNB5DOLWupXMEpDviyOGFPDoTWFLkmDWCu4S6JWRYeCZbUgwJLqV6UlNC56tzumqe2lSV-f19v3HdetuJZcZSOWmy-t8786Raff9T0X2UeoL2gHygAfvjlUUHzafp3PARpkP0Q_K4Vw/s400/carol+top.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5407097243169838242" /></a><br /><div>Robert Zemeckis has a slightly worrying performance-capture fetish. He hasn't made any live-action films since 2000's Castaway and What Lies Beneath, and it doesn't look like he's going to be making another one any time soon. His remake of The Beatles' Yellow Submarine is set to be a 3D motion-capture adventure, and Rodger Rabbit 2 is leaning heavily in that direction too, the current idea doing the round that it'll be drawn toons interacting with performance capture "humans". But anyway, I'll shove my disappointment that the guy who made Back to the Fucking Future and Forrest Gump is no longer making live-action films to one side for a moment.</div><br />There's no point in me really attempting to cover the plotline of the film, because it's been done 18 times before with Muppets, Mickey, and Albert Finney (Rhyming was amusingly unintentional). If you haven't seen some adaption of it you've clearly never turned on your TV over Christmas. Well, maybe I should cover it, just so this doesn't end up looking like I'm jerking off over 3D and performance capture, and just incase you don't own a TV.<br /><br />The plot is the same as always, Scrooge is a mean old git who hates christmas and the world in general, and as such is visited by the ghost of his dead associate, Jacob Marley, who warns Scrooge that he is living his life wrongly, and if he does not change his ways Scrooge shall end up like him (A ghost covered in chains, formed from all the bad things he had done). So Scrooge is visited by 3 spirits who show him his past, his present, and his future, and thereby demonstrate how he has changed, what he is missing out on, and the possibilities of his future (that aren't that great). As such, Scrooge shits himself, and then changes his ways. It's a long, old tale of redemption, pretty much.<br /><br />And that's the main downside of the film, it's been done so many times and as such there's really nothing new here other than the flexibility that performance capture allows and the possibilities that 3D allows. That's not to say it's a bad film, it's rather enjoyable and doesn't seem to drag at all, it's just ground that's been covered so many times by so many different people.<br />Zemeckis' reason for making the film was that it was his "favourite time-travel story", something that confused me, because let's be honest, there's really not that much time-travel in it (Infact there's none, as it's all just visions and "shadows", it's not like Scrooge actually gets thrown back or forward through time) and therefore it seems a bit of a shit reason to make the film.<br /><br />HOWEVER, what Zemeckis has managed to create is something fun and lively, a nice adaption that doesn't drag. I'd say that's mainly down to Jim Carrey's performance as Scrooge, who through the use of performance capture not only takes on Carrey's voice but his mannerisms and looks as well (even if they are skewed in a cartoonish, over-the-top way). He manages to create wildly different characters in the forms of the various ghosts of christmas, as well as the different variations of Scrooge that are shown by the ghosts. The majority of the rest of the cast, including Bob Hoskins and Gary Oldman, also take on a number of roles. This allows a large number of characters to be portrayed by a much smaller number of actors, something that doesn't detract from the film as the actors clearly had fun creating various voices and behaviours for each character, something that comes across well on screen as you're not always aware it's the same actor (infact looking on imdb i'm impressed that Gary Oldman was not only Bob Crachit and Jacob Marley, but also Tiny Tim, something I didn't notice at all in the film).<br /><br /><br /><br /><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 238); -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: underline; "><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfoQWtDpoQVjNkud0Icj-US0X3hP15q6FS9NtwI-7NDxXVKrHlZMq0CkYgdf3yUDBii_awfdDuDLoLXiASt-xzfFJbq2azj7Gy7gecnEMzWi21mSUnEBlCDdZTNvLB_hsf7VbitckRDQ/s200/1492132_f260.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5407097460002737410" style="float: right; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 160px; height: 200px; " /></span>There's also the fact Zemeckis has perhaps learnt from mistakes with previous CG and motion-capture ventures that attempt to portray humans (Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, Polar Express, Beowulf), all of which stumbled into the uncanny valley, and aimed for a less realistic look for his characters, hovering at a point where they are clearly human but could quite easily drop into a shrek or pixar film and not look out of place. I guess the easiest way to explain the Uncanny Valley is that section in the appearance of things where they stop being a cartoon or parody or rough portrayal of human, but do not quite reach the level of what we accept and perceive to be human. Things in the Uncanny Valley lack the subtleties of human beings. All this add up to something that we reject, as we cannot accept it as it does not fall into either category of 100% human or 100% not-human. Thankfully, Christmas Carol does not enter this area, resulting in it being more easy-going on the eye and perhaps all the more believable to the audience.<br /><br />Like all animated 3D films I've seen this year, the 3D was nicely used, subtle in places but more obvious in others (flying through the streets of london and over fields was impressive), with only the occassional 3D "pop-out" event, but nothing that was part of the "let's make that pop out simply because we can" school of film making that marred Final Destination 4.<br />My only fault with it (and this was probably due to the fact the projector blew up at the start and was displaying wildly out-of sync images complete with a nice red area on one side the screen) was that there was a hell of a lot of ghosting going on in some scenes, which is where you get a vague, translucent image of one of the viewpoints, about a cm or so off to one side, in this case the Left eye as far as I could tell. Happens a lot with anaglyph displays, it's something I've not seen before with Polarised Light. It was especially evident on scenes with a lot of depth or things largely out of focus in the foreground, such as snowfall or fixed shots of long streets with lots of characters on them, and really detracted from the scenes. But like I said, I'm going to blame it on the projector as before it blew up, the 3D trailers for How To Train Your Dragon and Avatar were perfect with no ghosting or anything else, so it clearly wasn't the fact I was using the Real-D 3D glasses I got when I went and saw Final Destination at uni, rather than using the re-recyclable, dirty, scratched ones Tower Park give to people and then collect back in at the end.<br /><br /><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 238); -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: underline; "><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnBHx_dY-bojzVCPMH-fzuVFs8ChjJ6EI7Dh8Ji520-MDXhRijvxPqbv4XXNSyWvqpzDdXbYN8kurOpN9LzZxAL7yrW6JwHDWxKjrk4Idk7ElDgg9VzxRATTpqqxoUEbIAUeWctODbWA/s320/a-christmas-carol-2009.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5407097673489041202" style="display: block; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: auto; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 135px; " /></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><div style="text-align: center;">Scrooge and Tiny Tim: The more cartoon-like appearance of characters in A Christmas Carol</div></span><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><b>6/10</b> - <i>All-in-all, Bob Zemeckis has managed to make a good film out of something that has been done-to-death. The various technology creates a living, breathing, cartoonish world that is enjoyable to watch and immerse yourself in, even if sometimes it feels a little repetitive because you've seen most of it before but with a little talking frog with someone's hand up his ass. In some ways it's a nice show-reel for 3D and performance capture, and a good introduction to both for people who are perhaps weary of 3D and not quite accustomed to seeing real-life actors rebuilt inside a computer... But I have a feeling that the stuff on show here will be blown out of the water come December 17th.</i><br /><br />On a side note, Avatar looks totally and utterly insane, I was sold on the most recent 2D trailer but seeing it in 3D blew me away.</div>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-27903238957047520752009-11-17T11:29:00.007+00:002009-11-17T18:51:58.808+00:00Don't give a damn about my bad reputationOh yes. I went there.<br /><br /><object width="384" height="236"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WtW_mqZjzsA&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WtW_mqZjzsA&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="384" height="236"></embed></object><br /><br />Originals:<br /><br /><object width="384" height="236"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5BYmN02kVT0&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5BYmN02kVT0&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="384" height="236"></embed></object><br /><br /><object width="320" height="265"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ho9-tgcRGzE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ho9-tgcRGzE&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="320" height="265"></embed></object>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-81668965093115066432009-11-11T21:00:00.003+00:002009-11-11T21:03:20.338+00:00Russel Howard's brilliant argument.I saw this on Russel Howard's Good News, where he was talking about games.<div><br /></div><div>They showed a clip from Fox news in which a reporter was shown saying <i>"In Grand Theft Auto your son, or husband or boyfriend, or whoever can hire a prostitute, have sex with her and then beat her to death with a baseball bat"</i></div><div><br /></div><div>His response <i>"Doesn't mean it happens in REAL LIFE. I've played Tiger Woods Golf, doesn't mean I've blacked up and won the US open! It's ridiculous isn't it? 'Where's your brother rus? He went looking for some rings dressed as a hedgehog'."</i></div>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-32685426769316992572009-11-10T22:44:00.002+00:002009-11-10T22:58:43.849+00:00She said "what?" and I told her that I didn't knowI don't know what to write.<div><br /></div><div>Ideally I need portfolio done this week, which is looking more and more possible, but still an uphill struggle. I also need to revise more, but I currently have a horrible addiction to a combination of Rock Band drumming, Beautiful Katamari, and facebook chat, and find it hard to tear myself away from them and actually revise. Damn fun games and interesting world.</div><div><br /></div><div>That's about it. Goodnight.</div>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-82534106693059978542009-10-20T23:18:00.002+01:002009-10-20T23:46:42.043+01:00English Motherfucker. Do You speak it?Oddly, I'm not going to go on a massive rant about English again. I just like that line from Pulp Fiction, it always makes me smile.<br /><br />I have a feeling my blog is going to soon slide into the realms of Brawny's and Az's, that is a rant against the world and just about everything in it, punctuated by light moments of sarcasm and irony. So what's on the cards today? A LOT. So much that it won't all fit into one deck/hand/blog.<br /><br />The two things bugging me today are University and University. "But that's one thing!" I hear you cry. Not so. My university course is run by 2 separated establishments, the RVC and CAW. Apparently they stand for Royal Veterinary College and College of Animal Welfare. We're going to change that to Rectal Violation Club and Collection of Absolute Wankers.<br />You may be seeing where I'm going. You might not. Here, have a torch, it might help you.<br /><br />I've become tired with university. I've become tired with the whole studying and exams and pointless crap that we do. I love being on placement, I learn so much more than at uni and I get on with everyone really well at work. I don't give a shit that I don't get paid, I enjoy it and that's the point. The point is also for me to be competent in some things before I arrive at placement so 1) I don't look like an ass 2) it doesn't waste people's time and money.<br /><br />For example, with urine samples a lot of the time you do microscopy. Pretty much involves getting some piss, spinning it in a centrifuge so the debris in it separates from the majority of the fluid, then taking that debris, plonking it on a slide, shoving it under a microscope and off you go looking for cells and crystals. All sounds fine and dandy and interesting. At uni, we get given real blood to work with for slides and stuff. But oh no, we don't get urine. We get Apple Juice, with bicarbonate of soda in. Great for learning the vague process, but utterly USELESS for actually learning what to look for on the slide and the different shapes of crystals and things. So on placement the first few times I'm there asking "So what's this" "Can you give me a hand with..." etc. If we got real stuff to work with at uni, that wouldn't have to happen, and wouldn't waste people and time on placement. Part of it is down to the fact my self confidence with such things isn't exactly great, but the other part is due to lack of useful resources on uni's part. They can build this fantasmical LIVE centre and yes, it is damn good with a lot of useful bits in it, but other stuff in it is... well, useless to a point.<br /><br />Yeah, there's certain stuff you only learn on placement (like... radiography, for example, you can work the theory at uni but practically it's kinda hard to do what with ionising radiation and needing live animals to work on), but when your university campus also happens to be home to one of the largest animal hospitals in the UK, you're really left wondering HOW FUCKING HARD IS IT TO LET US HAVE THE LEFT OVER URINE SAMPLES. It's not like they'll be losing money.<br /><br />So that's the RVC out the way. Now for CAW.<br /><br />I got a nice letter from CAW last Monday. Telling me my portfolio had to be in 100% by last Wednesday. Helpful of them. I sent them an email "We've been having problems with the post, they were sent out weeks ago!". Yeah, postage problems? Surely common sense therefore says for useful and important things with deadlines.... FUCK THE SNAIL MAIL AND EMAIL ME INSTEAD. It will arrive in a matter of seconds, not weeks. The people at CAW aren't not massively supportive and generally completely up their own asses. The only person who has really been helpful is the IV that comes and visits me. The rest are rude, obnoxious, have a very much holier-than-though attitude. Maybe that's just my experience with them, but it really puts me off ever contacting them because it's usually just "Talk to your assessor" "I HAVE".<br /><br />Another problem is the obvious lack of communication between CAW and RVC, half the time neither have any idea what the other is doing, CAW seem to have no clue when I am on placement and RVC seem to enjoy changing dates for exams and other shit as much as they change their underwear. Which I <span style="font-style: italic;">hope </span>is daily.<br /><br />It's just annoying, stressful, and frankly I can't even start to think about exams in December when I still need to shift portfolio out the way first. At least good times at placement keep me going, I wouldn't change that for the world.<br /><br /><object height="344" width="425"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zdL7N3wkpco&hl=en&fs=1&"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zdL7N3wkpco&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425"></embed></object>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-72627420302171239352009-09-19T19:14:00.005+01:002009-09-20T17:27:07.518+01:00Going to war with IlliteracyI haven't posted a proper blog in a while. It's mainly all film reviews. So here's a kind-of almost real blog.<br />You know what's getting at me at the moment. Illiteracy. The inability to correctly formulate a basic english sentence. I don't understand how people can go through 13 years of schooling and come out the other end still writing like a retard. Of course some people have dyslexia and aspergers and other similar things, and for that they can be forgiven, but a lot of the time it's not people like that. The majority of people I know with such conditions try their hardest to write properly and do not use it as an excuse to write in poor english.<br /><br />For an example of what's getting to me, see how many errors you can spot in the following sentences:<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">well this will be a good day live band's. dancing. stall's. beer tent's. bock's.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">bmx. skate's and lot's more</span> <span style="font-style: italic;">it's 11 till 4 albert road portsmouth sorry have no link so have to look up</span> <span style="font-style: italic;">i met the guy that run's the event and he want's us 2 do a bit of a display</span> <span style="font-style: italic;">for them so let's give them a good year but sorry i was on unicycle but when i said to him about us he loved it.</span><br /><br />Number of required apostrophes? ONE. Number used? NINE. Nine fucking apostrophes where they aren't needed. <span style="font-weight: bold;">That's like me deciding to sit down. And then choosing to start... writing sentence's; With as much pointles's, needles's punctuation as is humanly possible!!!</span><br /><br />Number of commas required? AT LEAST SEVEN. Number used? ZERO. Instead, there's overuse of full stops in a list, and then none for the paragraph.<br /><br />Capital letters required? TEN. Number used? ZERO.<br /><br />Also, 11 TILL 4? A Till is something you put money in. So it's 11 lots of Till number 4? IT'S UNTIL, or if you really need to shorten that and look even more like an idiot, 'til. NOT TILL.<br /><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">had a grate day wiv peple!! but woz nakared bi da end of da day!!!</span><br /><br />So you grated something during the day with peples? What's a peple? And then you were a naked bisexual at the end of the day?<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">y r deleviry servasiz so FUKING SLOH! they r loosing me monie hear!</span><br /><br />Yeah Deleviry Servasiz, They're sloh. WHAT?!<br />And they're loosing monie hear. Loosening what from hearing what?<br /><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Sum-how gotta bild up somat similer in bournmoth/pool ara nxt yere-not shure howe -answers ona postkard plese pepole. Well yes I kinda fink ansor is havin a coar to go out un just be reguelery out an havein fun, and ,evan if ownlee fleatinglee ,sum1 lik blue hoo keyps da websight livly and gose wrounding up up pepoles ,startin mets an all-ways been their.</span><br /><br />Sum-How? Bild? Somat? Yere? Shure? Pepole? Ansor? Coar? Reguelery? Fleatinglee?! Keyps?! WROUNDING?!<br />And this was written by a 47-year old who claims to hold 2 university degrees.<br /><br />I'm not sure if people are just lazy, or plain stupid. Typing stuff isn't hard, and you don't need to make short cuts. Infact, Bi, Grate, Sloh, Monie and Hear aren't even short cuts, they're just obvious examples of incompetent spelling.<br /><br />Seriously, what the fuck.<span style="font-weight: bold;"> PEOPLE, GO TO TESCO, AND BUY A FUCKING DICTIONARY. OR GO BACK TO SCHOOL AND RE-GAIN YOUR ENGLISH LANGUAGE GCSE, AND MAYBE SOME SELF-RESPECT TOO.</span><br /><span style="font-size:78%;">All of the above things are written by people between the ages of NINETEEN (19) and FIFTY (50).</span><br /><br /><br />And in a change to the previous shown programme, here's a bit of fun for you, from a stupidly talented man.<br /><object height="344" width="400"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5de9KxDdE5s&hl=en&fs=1&"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5de9KxDdE5s&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="400"></embed></object>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-90664849958993156382009-09-18T23:34:00.003+01:002009-09-18T23:48:30.253+01:00District 9<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.district9movie.com/downloads/district9_wallpaper01_1600x1200.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 406px; height: 304px;" src="http://www.district9movie.com/downloads/district9_wallpaper01_1600x1200.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br /><br />I don't know what to write about District 9 without filling it with spoilers or words like "AWESOME" "INSANE" and "THE BEST FILM THIS YEAR". I love it, it's brilliant, and proof you don't need a big budget to make a good film. The visual effects are photorealistic, stunning, and never used to wow the audience or go "look at me! over here!". They compliment the film and add a degree of believability to it all, with convincing interaction between the CG aliens and human actors. And all on a budget of $30m. Take your $200m, Transformers 2, and burn it. At the stake.<br />The level of detail is amazing, this is a fully-formed world, set only a few years in the future, and manages to deal with a multitude of issues, from racism to self-preservation to genetic experimentation.<br /><br />What makes it even better is that the lead character had no scripted dialoge, everything is improv. How the hell they pulled it off I have no idea, but it makes it even more convincing as a docu-drama, as Sharlto Copley's Wikkus seems even more genuine and unsure of himself infront of a camera.<br /><br />The only downsides I can think of is that whilst the change from Documentary to actual Drama at around the 40 minute point is very good, towards the end it starts pulling back in the Documentary parts, making a jarring and sudden change from the flow of events. Alongside this, there are a few plot holes that you don't notice at the time but come back to haunt you a few hours later, and the occasional pantomime-style baddies, but they can be forgiven slightly.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">10/10 - Fucking awesome, insane, and the best film I have seen this year. Stop whatever you're doing, and go see it. NOW.</span> <span style="font-style: italic;">Further testament - I've paid to see this film TWICE. How often do I pay to see a film ONCE, let alone a second viewing?</span>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-32647541016643350722009-09-18T21:29:00.002+01:002009-09-18T23:24:46.233+01:00Adventureland<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.shockya.com/news/wp-content/uploads/adventureland_half_page3.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 426px; height: 319px;" src="http://www.shockya.com/news/wp-content/uploads/adventureland_half_page3.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />I've never really been into the whole romantic-teen-comedy-life-transition genre mashup movies, bar a few that are genuinely funny and silly like American Pie and the first half of Superbad before it descends into chaos. But I've had adventureland sitting on my hard drive for a while, purely because it has Kristen Stewart in it, and decided to watch it after wrestling for over 3 hours with Windows last night in an attempt to make a DVD copy of it along with District 9 for people at work. I feel slightly bad not paying for a low-budget indie movie, as it's the main genre of cinema I really support, but frankly i've spent so much on dissapointing cinema this year I don't really feel like stumping up the cash anymore. Hollywood can go take one of those big Ls on the side of that famous hill and shove it so far up her ass that only the horizontal section is visible and she ends up looking like she has a tail, especially after the dismal fayre this year with the likes of Wolverine, Final Destination 4, Tranformers 2, and similar popcorn movies made on millions of dollars where the majority seems to have been spent on either overused CG whizz-bang effects or a mountain of crack and weed for the director and his producer chums. Or both, in the case of TF2. But that's enough of a rant against Holly Wood. I mean Hollywood. Apologies if anyone named Holly Wood reads this, please do not sodomise yourself with 50ft-tall letter.<br /><br />I don't know what it is about Adventureland that appeals to me (other than the fact it has Kristen Stewart, who also happens to be the only reason twilight is good), maybe it's the slight innocence about it all, the way James Brennan (Jesse Eisenberg) is so utterly hopeless with Em Lewin (Kristen Stewart), and the fact it's set in an 80's themepark.<br /><br />Maybe it's because I see some of myself in James (mainly the innocence and hopeless bits)<br /><br />Maybe I like the fact Adventureland shows Greg Mottola has grown up and on from Superbad. Thanks to a nice script, gone are the dick-jokes (Bar one, but it's actually vaguely relevant to the scene), gone are the purely joke-based characters, like Seth Rogen and Bill Hader's cops, and gone is the entire purpose of the plotline being about losing your virginity before college that dominated Superbad.<br />Instead the jokes are a bit wider, more mature, and generally reflect more of the actual scene and the character's feelings, as opposed to simply being the normal male adolescent classroom jokes. Characters feel like they have more depth, they simply aren't there to sprout jokes, all have an effect of the way James grows and changes over his time at Adventureland.<br /><br />Admittedly Bill Hader is back and mainly there for joke reasons, but he does have some nice screen time and the jokes are less brutal and immature, and the plot is set in the run-up to college, but that's about where the similarities end.<br />But of course all of that is down to the scriptwriter, but Mottola's direction with it works wonders and takes something that could have been dull and boring and made it interesting, quirky and funny instead.<br /><br />The focus of the latter half of the plot on attempting to cope with your emotions and teenage angst is great, somehow managing to make you really feel for the characters whilst making it funny, something I found Superbad failed to do (You just end up finding it all stupid or funny, and thinking "Haha. Tosser. You lose." or "Yeah. Whatever." with that film). Maybe I should stop drawing comparisons with Superbad.<br /><br />So yeah. I don't really know what I like about Adventureland. It's a funny, quirky, and interesting take on life/relationships in general really, the characters are really likable and also, it has Kristen Stewart.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">8/10 - I have no clue what to put here as I have no idea why this film appeals to me so much. Other than Kristen Stewart.</span>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-87162463456885852282009-09-10T00:41:00.003+01:002009-09-10T01:18:58.233+01:00Dorian Gray<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.cinespacio.pe/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/dorain-gray-poster.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 427px; height: 324px;" src="http://www.cinespacio.pe/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/dorain-gray-poster.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />The Picture of Dorian Gray is probably the last of the 19th Century gothic horror novels, and has so far avoided a big-budget, big-screen adaption (bar a 1945 adaption by MGM Studios, but that doesn't really count). The only time I can recount Dorian Gray ever appearing on-screen is in the god-awful film that is The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (aka LGX aka The League aka A steaming pile of shit).<br /><br />Rather than updated for modern times or twisted beyond recognition, Dorian Gray sits neatly in the "period" genre and manages to make itself into an intriguiging and enjoyable film. From what I remember of the book from reading it about 5 years ago, Dorian wishes to remain young like his painting, and this wish is granted by some other force (hinting towards the devil). He then commits a few sins, under the guidance of an older friend, with the painting absorbing these sins and showing what he would really look like. He realises this and off he goes on a life of sin. Yadda yadda yadda, painting grows old and ugly with each sin, Dorian stays young, but you never learn what said sins are. He then realises his mistakes, destroys the painting, and dies after taking his "true form". Painting reverts to him being young. The End.<br /><br />Rather than focusing on the fact the painting ages rather than Dorian, as the book does, the film gives a slight hint then shoves the painting away in an attic, keeping it hidden from both characters in the film and the viewer. The only suggestions that the painting changes as shots of Dorian's expression looking at it, and the slight hints at the painting absorbing his sins. Replacing all of this suggestion of sin is actual shots of sins. Drug Taking. Excessive Drinking. Nights with Prostitutes. Cheating on his girlfriend. Murder. The list goes on...<br />It sticks to the book pretty closely I feel, from what I can remember of it.<br /><br />Some of the visual effects in the film are poor, with some horrendously obvious CG London Shots and Greenscreened pieces, but the low number of them, couple with good acting from the majority of the cast means it has no effect on the actual enjoyment factor. The only major effects shots are where time jumps forward and whilst Dorian has not aged, everyone else has, and these are impressively created through clever prosthetics and make-up.<br />In keeping with the gothic-horror feel of the book, the film features largely dark and dingey shots of London Alleys and backstreets, displaying 1890's London as a dirty and occasionally dangerous place, and the 1920's version is shown to be no better either, with a short-lived chase sequence through an underground station and partially along the railway lines too, as well as visits to previous locations showing no changes to the general vibe of the areas or their populations.<br /><br />The only downsides is the ending feels rushed, but it does add more detail to the plot, and a large amount of it is a good and improving addition, adding a nice twist and lengthening an otherwise relatively short story.<br /><br />One could argue that the shift in focus does reduce a lot of the horror elements. By keeping Dorian's sins secretive, the reader could see their own sins in Dorian, which was a major element of the book. By showing them on screen, a lot of this element is lost, but it does add a great more detail to the film and shows his bad choices in life.<br />Like the book, the underlying subtones is that every action has repercussions, and the worst actions cause the most damage. Which whilst blindingly obvious, manages to be thought provoking and an interesting moral point.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">7/10 - Whilst the levels of horror in the film are lowered significantly from the book, a large volume of time is spent following Dorian on his adventures and the factors which influence his behaviour, which proves to be an interesting and clever choice. By moving the focus from the painting to the actual man, and adding additional plot points, the film manages to be much more engaging than a direct adaption could ever be, as simply seeing a painting age on screen whilst Dorian fucks off would probably be pretty boring.</span>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-82271481520336868642009-09-02T00:31:00.006+01:002009-09-02T00:58:23.628+01:00The Final Destination<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.entertainmentwallpaper.com/images/desktops/movie/the_final_destination02.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 350px; height: 262px;" src="http://www.entertainmentwallpaper.com/images/desktops/movie/the_final_destination02.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br />And it sure as damn well better be the final one.<br /><br />Final Destination was an interesting movie, combining horror, gorefests and thriller into an imaginative and interesting idea.<br />Final Destination 2 took the first movie, and pretty much made it bigger, bloodier, and better. It is simply brilliant, and tied in nicely with the first film.<br />Final Destination 3 got a bit silly, but was still enjoyable with some interesting deaths and general humour.<br />The Final Destination is the point where you know they banged out another for less money with no attention or imagination. The deaths are gory, but boring, the majority having appeared in previous movies (hit by vehicles, things through eyes, nailguns firing into bodies) or other movies. The 3D is the cliche, things popping out, crazyness that dominated cinema in the 80's. It's not cool or interesting, it's just damn annoying.<br /><br />With a running time of just over 70 minutes, it's also ridiculously short, and obviously made just so they could make a film in 3D. Infact, where it is so short and stupid, it feels more like an experiment by the studio, as if they were playing with 3D and made this in the process, rather than an actual film. The major problem is the lack of ideas, not only is the main plot device recycled, it's over-used, with the lead character now having blindingly obvious premonitions before every death, all in poor CGI with everything in the scene throwing itself out the screen at you.<br />The ending feels rushed, especially after a mid-way pause of "way, we cheated death, oh shit no we didn't", and the poor-quality effects and overzelous use of 3D, screen-popping events all add up to a horrible, cheap mess. By far the worst film I've seen this year (worse than Wolverine, if that's possible)<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">3/10 - Overuse of 3D and low-budget CGI, wooden acting, and a lack of imagination lead to a 70 minute movie that drags, making it feel incredibly boring and like a 2hr+ film, and leaving you feeling like you just wasted £7.50. They get 2 stars for Shantel VanSanten wandering around in her underwear for at least 10 minutes of the movie, and 1 star for a vaguely decent score that raises the tension to the level of "As exciting as watching paint dry".</span>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-57193845145398935782009-08-26T10:25:00.001+01:002009-08-26T10:27:43.398+01:00Inglourious Basterds - Quite glorious, actually.<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwp-bx87W-hY7Cdqkcpbn73JEeY_tjP6penyb1-0RRlXRjpljA9MwCn_vs9wKUi9TEiwyHjDTKzpgjzmzIAHNovNhedC3lQ6-WeZ4OUaRCoiOLwWwV-oasBnAiVHFPG8Xcacq0SN5Sjw/s1600-h/6254_241572350091_884665091_8571388_7423043_n.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5374201706783139858" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 200px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwp-bx87W-hY7Cdqkcpbn73JEeY_tjP6penyb1-0RRlXRjpljA9MwCn_vs9wKUi9TEiwyHjDTKzpgjzmzIAHNovNhedC3lQ6-WeZ4OUaRCoiOLwWwV-oasBnAiVHFPG8Xcacq0SN5Sjw/s320/6254_241572350091_884665091_8571388_7423043_n.jpg" border="0" /></a> <p>If ever there was a title that instantly linked to Quentin Tarantino, that's it, as it appears scrawled across the screen in 4-foot high bright yellow handwriting that is distinctively his own. He's always had a bit of a OTT hyped following, ever since resevoir dogs and pulp fiction, which admittedly he probably deserves as the majority of his films are pretty damn awesome. But since Pulp Fiction, nothing has quite reached the same level of downright brilliance... Until now.</p><br /><p>Opening with a classic 70's Universal Studios globe, and a basic Weinstein company logo, before launching into one of the most basic title card sequences of recent films (Yellow text on a black background), and then dropping you into France, introducing you to a gruff Frenchman and some Nazis, the first chapter starts off on a roll, and from there-on it just keeps on tumbling along under it's own power.</p><br /><p>Oddly for the guy with the highest billing, Brad Pitt certainly doesn't have the most screentime, not appearing until the second chapter and again completely vanishing for chapter 3 and only being a minor character in chapter 4. The same applies for the rest of the Basterds too, which leads to the question "How do they get the movie named after them when they're only in half of it and don't appear until 25 mins in?".</p><br /><p>The fact is though, it doesn't matter. The chapters without them are possibly some of the best, introducing some great characters and really fleshing out the entire world the movie is set in. Two of the best turns in the film are Mike Myers as General Ed Fenech, ordering the deaths of the third reich, and Christoph Waltz as Standartenführer Hans Landa, the "Jew Hunter", both clearly relishing their roles and playing them with brilliant gusto and slight sarcasm.Along with them are Til Schweiger as Hugo Stiglitz and Mélanie Laurent as Shosanna Dreyfus, both giving brilliant performances, one with very little lines as a German Nazi-Killer, and the other as a vengeful Jewish Girl whose family was killed by Landa. These characters, backed up by storming performances from the cast of Basterds, who manage to pull off being completely and utterly serious, heartless, violent killers, focused entirely on their jobs, whilst mixing in some hilarious set-pieces and lines (Brad Pitt's Tennessee-accented Aldo Raine attempting to pull off an ee-talian accent is pure genious, whilst Eli Roth's Donnie Donnowitz is frankly slightly psychotic, leaping around like an 8-year old and using a baseball bat to beat in the heads of Nazis in one of the most graphically violent scenes this year), result in the whole film gelling together and never losing pace, constantly flicking between various character groups until all their arcs converge on the final set-piece.</p><br /><p>What with the film being heavily placed in France, with both French and German characters, there are many sections of the film where the cast of characters on screen is entirely French or German. Rather than rely on English accompanied by stupendous accents, Tarantino goes all the way and puts full conversations on screen in foreign-language, accompanied by subtitles. In sections where the focus is on a French character who doesn't understand German, all German conversation has no subtitles, leaving the audience in the dark as much as the character is. This results in some nice tight spots, accompanied by a roaring soundtrack which really racks the tension up to breaking point, before either blasting it all away or letting it drop slowly.</p><br /><p>I don't really want to go too much into the plot and spoil it, as it all jogs along at a good speed, never slowing down or working up too much of a pace and managing holding your interest throughout, but the final barnstorming set piece involving mis-construed plans, explosions, crazed Machine-gun weilding basterds, and a hilarious section involving Lando interviewing Aldo and another basterd brings together everything Tarantino is well-known for, and improves on it. Clearly he's learnt his lesson from Kill Bill 2 and Death Proof, and it certainly shows in this film.</p><br /><p>All in all, it's nice to sit in a cinema, and watch a full-scale (almost 3-hour) romp, without having your nervous system assaulted by a barrage of computer generated mess (See Transformers 2, Harry Potter, GI Joe, Wolverine, etc, etc).So what if it's historically inaccurate, instead what you get is an epic, hilarious, brutally violent, interesting, partially foreign-language, occasionally minimalist, and downright enjoyable film, which is what cinema has seriously lacked for a few years.The Closing line of the movie is "This might just be my masterpiece", and you know what? It probably is. Bravo QT, Bravo.</p><br /><p></p><br /><p><em>5/5- Tarantino is back on form with his best film in years. A rip-roaring adventure through Nazi-Occupied France, the film flicks constantly between characters, locations and mood, resulting in a continually shifting movie that never loses pace</em></p>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-45534671022479328262009-08-12T13:41:00.001+01:002009-08-12T13:42:36.899+01:00Where The Wild Things Are Full Trailer<object width="360" height="231"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/13075"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/13075" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="360" height="231"></embed></object><br /><br />IT. LOOKS. AWESOME. I'll post a full blog later.Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-65962081157538428182009-07-22T00:30:00.004+01:002009-07-22T01:11:18.399+01:00Harry Potter and the epic failure of a movie<span style="font-size:180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">WARNING: HERE BE SPOILERS</span></span><br /><br />I'm going at assume if you're reading this, you've read Harry Potter. All 7 of them. Or up to 6 at least. I mean, c'mon, 90% of the population of the UK must have, what with those special "Adult versions" so people can read them on the train without looking like a weirdo reading a kid's book.<br /><br />I'm amazed at the hack job Steve Kloves has done on Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. His adaptions for Books 1-4 were pretty much brilliant, although he did cram a little too much in to each. Sadly, the same doesn't apply for book 6 (He didn't adapt book 5), instead he appears to have taken the opposite approach and included FUCK ALL from the book whilst dreaming up his own scenes (which whilst quite cool, don't really add much and also destroyed the plot for films 7 and 8).<br />A lot of the film focused on the teenage relationships, which whilst amusing, were drawn out too long and clearly aimed at people who are completely retarded and never had a relationship in their life. For example, the way the script was written probably looked like this:<br /><br />OBVIOUS GINNY LIKES HARRY SHOT<br />OBVIOUS HARRY LIKES GINNY SHOT<br />GINNY LIKES HARRY<br />HARRY LIKES GINNY<br />GOT IT YET? NOPE, OK.<br />GINNY. YEAH. HER. RON'S SISTER. SHE LIKES HARRY. YES, HARRY POTTER!<br />HARRY. YES. THE TWIT WITH THE LIGHTNING SCAR. HE LIKES GINNY. YES, RON'S SISTER.<br />GINNY. LIKES. HARRY.<br />HARRY. LIKES. GINNY.<br />GOOD. GOT IT? YES? OK.<br /><br />Now repeat that with Ron/Hermione. Yeah, the entire film is like that. It gets incredibly annoying after a while, being treated like you have the emotional range of a teaspoon (Ah! You see what I did there?).<br />So, that rant over. What else is wrong with it? The distinct removal of about 80% of the main plot from the book. Admittedly yes they have to cut parts, but it's getting beyond ridiculous now. I've always wondered about how they'd cope with bringing Dobby back after him being absent for 4 films, but now they've got a hell of a job on their hands re-introducing old characters and bringing in new ones, as about 75% of the people in the final book are vital to the plot.<br />Even in this film, Major characters such as Hagrid and Snape had ridiculously lowered screentime. Yes it's called "Harry Potter" for a reason, but at the same time the entire plot doesn't revolve around him. The distinct removal of Bill, Fleur, Scrimgeour, the history of Voldemort, and countless other parts left me severely dissapointed and confused as the plot hurtled along, jumping massive sections of the book and either assuming you'd read the book so knew what was going on, or just didn't give a shit what you were watching. Overall, scenes felt stripped down, confused, and generally rushed, resulting in multiple scenes with NO emotional depth at all. The massive scene in the book of Dumbledore's death is cut short in this, with no following battle or chase through Hogwarts. Whether this was to attempt a sharp, shock ending, I don't know, but it just falls flat as you've had no chance to grasp at what exactly is going on or why. All this leads up to a very short running time (2hrs 14mins - I was expecting close to 3 hours to be honest), leaving an abrupt ending and a bit of a sour taste in the mouth, even with a bag of sweet popcorn and a pint of cider.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">6/10 - Probably the poorest film so far when focusing on pure adaption and plotline, sadly lacking the depth and darkness of the book. On the plus side, it's not as odd as film 3, and quidditch makes a welcome return after being absent from film 5. Watchable, but by no means the exciting adventure film portrayed in the trailers, it instead ends up feeling like a bit of a rom-com.</span>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-88825908603184592912009-06-26T18:14:00.004+01:002009-06-26T22:48:53.417+01:00Revenge of the incredibly poor movie tie-in game<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.bscreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/revenge-fallen-game-cover.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 350px; height: 472px;" src="http://www.bscreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/revenge-fallen-game-cover.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a>The original Transformers movie game was possibly the first movie game I actually rated as good. Mainly because it had pretty nice graphics, some fun gameplay, and somehow managed to combine driving and beat-em-up gameplay without completely fucking it up. That's not to say it's without flaws, it did have some, like the inability to transform in midair and some nasty camera bugs. Sadly, the same cannot be said for its sequel. Bare in mind I've only played 60% of the autobot campaign and a fair bit of online so far, I've not yet started on the decepticons.<br /><br />The first major problem with the game is the new control scheme. The first game had the brilliant notion of assigning transforming to a single face button, so you could toggle in and out, and acceleration and braking were assigned to the triggers, as per normal games. Instead, in revenge of the fallen, transformation is applied to the trigger. As well as acceleration. Thus meaning, you can't be in vehicle mode without accelerating. Which is the biggest pain in the ass, as half the trigger needs to be pushed down to transform into the vehicle, then the other half varies speed. A whole 3mm varies your speed. Thus making it impossible to go slow or stop whilst in vehicle mode at all, leaving you speeding along, careening round corners and smashing into any oncoming traffic. The left trigger controls "drifting", so you can drift around bends and pull off 180 handbrake turns, but it doesn't allow you to brake gently or with any form of precision. I'm unsure as to why it is even assigned to a trigger, considering you have to pull the trigger on full to even activate it.<br />These can be combined with some fiddly other button moves to allow some interesting transformations. Hold R trigger, then X, then release R whilst still holding X and you transform into a flying kick. R + A using the above rules = Crazy transformation jump. R + B = angry stompy move. None of these are particuarly useful though, as the fact your hurtling along at god knows what speed makes actually taking off at the right time and firmly planting your feet into an enemy bot excruciatingly difficult.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/986/986593/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-20090526023740145_640w.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 349px; height: 196px;" src="http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/986/986593/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-20090526023740145_640w.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br />The next big problem is the new "War Room", where you can view a holographic globe and pick the mission you want to play, thus avoiding the linear plot of the first game. Whilst this seems like a good idea, it results in you still playing a linear plotline due to the fact only one mission is available, and then completing this unlocks another single mission. The entire game continues in this way, so you are always stuck with only one new mission to play. You can go back and re-do missions to gain more points, but that was in the first game and it's hardly removing the linear aspect.<br /><br />Combat is neither on par with the first game, where you could pretty much rip anything out of the street and use it to beat your enemies round the head with. Wielding a lampost like a golfclub or a giant donut like a frisbee made the first game a lot more interesting and allowed for a bit of variation in combat. The new game does away with that completely, instead allowing you to either punch your enemies, or whilst in bot mode, hold down L trigger to go into "combat mode", and then use RB to select your weapon (Each character has 2), before using the R trigger to fire. Yes. The R trigger serves just about every purpose in the game apart from jump (That's A).<br />Each character has their own melee weapon, but for the most part it feels like the same animations are used, simply reskinned to a different character. The only person who feels vaguely different is optimus, because he gets his TWO GIANT ENERGON BLADES to slash the shit out of everything.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/982/982864/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-20090514100043099-000.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 350px; height: 196px;" src="http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/982/982864/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-20090514100043099-000.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br />For a game coming 2 years later, a graphical improvement is expected. Instead, the graphics are seemingly worse, not helped by the majority of levels being rather dark and murky, making it rather difficult to see anything. Transformations are no way near as interesting as before, although you no longer have to be on the ground to do them, which is a marked improvement. In the original, you couldn't jump off a building, transform on the way down, then land and speed off as a car. Or even jump off and transform into a plane whilst falling. You had to wait to hit the floor. Same for going from vehicle to bot (apart from planes, obviously). In this one, you can transform whenever the hell you like, which makes moving around a bit easier.<br /><br />Making up for it a bit though, is the online multiplayer, something the initial game was sorely lacking. Whilst it doesn't allow you to play campaign through with a team of 'bots, it does allow a variety of multiplayer battles, ranging from team deathmatches, capture the flag, and base assaults. It's good fun and adds a lot to the game, but still uses the same awful controls. The addition of extra 'bots to play as is nice, and the levels are quite nice, with big open areas, heavily defended areas, and tight corners to fight in.<br /><br />The game also sadly lacks the fun factor of G1 from the first game, where you could unlock G1 colours for Prime, Jazz and Starscream, as well as full G1 Versions of Prime and Megatron. This allowed for a bit more fun, charging around levels as the original prime and generally causing havock. Like so:<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgi38r7srkDslkSy3xFAuRjfb0y7trolw3wM6NNZQ3MZ8Pf_GgL5DhwiYfdGVz6M2w6H5BBR9OWwhuDPWzNQ6dSiWqA9of-UFpTMG1AkIZjwlfYC2R5WpiMYiBiustsS3OZEJdCM-VRug/s1600-h/g1_optimus.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 299px; height: 224px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgi38r7srkDslkSy3xFAuRjfb0y7trolw3wM6NNZQ3MZ8Pf_GgL5DhwiYfdGVz6M2w6H5BBR9OWwhuDPWzNQ6dSiWqA9of-UFpTMG1AkIZjwlfYC2R5WpiMYiBiustsS3OZEJdCM-VRug/s200/g1_optimus.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5351756455483537122" border="0" /></a><br />This one instead brings only one G1 colours unlockable, for ironhide, and let's be honest, who wants a bright red GMC pickup? G1 colours for Ratchet or Bee would be better. The rest of the unlockables are G1 episodes, which is nice for original fans, but I suspect the majority of younger fans playing will unlock them and go "What the hell is that?". Rather than G1 episodes, G1 versions of all the characters would have been a lot more rewarding.<br /><br />Personally, I'd give it 5/10 so far. This score might bump up depending on how the rest of the game goes, but once I've completed both campaigns, i'm trading it in for prototype or Left4Dead.Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2384300842486676593.post-40927472994629758832009-06-21T01:17:00.010+01:002009-06-22T14:09:18.853+01:00Revenge of the Explosions<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_5lL1y9ELMFM/SftatUrDT2I/AAAAAAAAHko/N74aAklSZ8U/s1600/bumblebee-rampage%5B2%5D.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 397px; height: 166px;" src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_5lL1y9ELMFM/SftatUrDT2I/AAAAAAAAHko/N74aAklSZ8U/s1600/bumblebee-rampage%5B2%5D.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />That is the title Michael Bay should have given his new movie. Transformers: Revenge of the giant fuck-off insane explosions. I think he may have set a world record for the most number of explosions on screen in a single film.<br /><br />It picks up 2 years after the end of the last movie, with the autobots having set up a goverment team with Captain Lennox and Co, hunting down decepticons across the globe, apart from bumblebee who seems to live in Sam's garage doing bugger all. By picking up 2 years later, the film can happily skip over explaining details of new Autobots and Decepticons, and instead pretty much taking the attitude of "They're here. Deal with it.". Which in some respects works, but also throws up a lot of questions. Namely how did they get there, WTF is NEST, and what the hell happened to John Voigt?<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwBM3CPWBhiwc1D16j7vYZdlMfsGy0mvxDcku7VuWFWU0Eib3yOTfCftcCdRwZmGe9g2e2q48gvuBYejqaoOrjZ8wvHsOvcos9h1szj7umeDP6uPg9cFh42R85x3gTdX21Wq9hQNtPsA/s1600-h/MV5BMjIyOTc2ODIyM15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODYyMDg1Mg@@._V1._SX267_SY400_.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 122px; height: 181px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwBM3CPWBhiwc1D16j7vYZdlMfsGy0mvxDcku7VuWFWU0Eib3yOTfCftcCdRwZmGe9g2e2q48gvuBYejqaoOrjZ8wvHsOvcos9h1szj7umeDP6uPg9cFh42R85x3gTdX21Wq9hQNtPsA/s320/MV5BMjIyOTc2ODIyM15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODYyMDg1Mg@@._V1._SX267_SY400_.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5350138150052443618" border="0" /></a>The entire film pretty much hurtles along at breakneck pace after this, hopping across the globe as things explode, things collapse, and robots go on the rampage and beat the shit out of each other.<br />It pauses about an hour and a half in to explain about Optimus Prime, The Fallen and the other 12 original transformers, but then quickly throws you back into the action again. The problem with the last hour of action is that an explosion occurs about once every 20 seconds. Which is nice and all that, but seriously, there is only so much Bayhem the brain can take before it becomes a pile of quivering mush amd you simply give up caring. After seeing forests explode, paris explode, and then being sent to a desert that, yes, exploded, my brain was ready to explode.<br />Complimenting the explosions are more explosions, robots exploding, pyramids exploding, vehicles exploding, and yes, people exploding. Exciting stuff. It's hard to tell who gets more screen time, the CG Robots, or the CG Explosions.<br /><br />On the plus side, the 'bots have a lot more screen time than the previous outing. This provides a lot more interaction and involvement on their part, and gives a bit more of a feeling the film is about the robots, not the humans. It also allows for some nice talky bits by prime, and some more interaction between bumblebee and Sam.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJVIQcPKBdA8tgxpbSHyZmP0enrXS5Xw6gltfpGdt2rSUS5mZq2pnl_YoulvxeMTlLnPQP0AhY1AE6lSBglZji_p0ezNUnb5qJFUXv4a8DprGC0clfl6fw0grMEow7zLwwV77jPXrGpw/s1600-h/MV5BMTkwMjE4ODYwMV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwOTYyMDg1Mg@@._V1._SX267_SY400_.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 102px; height: 152px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJVIQcPKBdA8tgxpbSHyZmP0enrXS5Xw6gltfpGdt2rSUS5mZq2pnl_YoulvxeMTlLnPQP0AhY1AE6lSBglZji_p0ezNUnb5qJFUXv4a8DprGC0clfl6fw0grMEow7zLwwV77jPXrGpw/s320/MV5BMTkwMjE4ODYwMV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwOTYyMDg1Mg@@._V1._SX267_SY400_.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5350138041532880690" border="0" /></a>On the downside of this, there are now so many robots that some barely get any screentime before being thrown away/killed/ignored in favour of newer ones (Including fan favourites such as Arcee, Soundwave and Sideswipe, as well as a pretender who is never explained at all - each gets about 2 lines in the film, and no introduction), and flaws in the animation are a lot more obvious as you have more time to notice them (One epically long scene with Optimus and Megatron going all Medieval on each other looks oddly un-natural and too smooth compared to the real shot of sam and the forest they're in. It is as if the film was shot at 24fps, and then somebody at ILM decided to do all the animation in 60fps, and convert the entire movie from 24 to 60fps to fit with the animations, rather than fitting the animation to the film). Also, a lot of the 'bots screentime is taken up by jokes or poor sterotypes. Most annoying are the autobot twins, Mudflap and Skids, who are generic, afro-american wannabe gangsters, complete with generic afro-american "Hoooooo-ey" accents and gold teeth, followed by Wheelie, a decepticon RC Monster Truck, who proceeds to call Megan Fox a "Crazy Bitch", "Warrior Princess", and then later on in the movie gets an overly long and slightly disturbing shot of him dry humping her leg. As much as any guy in the world would like to do that, seeing a 1ft tall robot do it is downright weird. I can only assume this kind of humour and characterisation is to appeal to a larger audience.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6-kIIW80HUP_j5rwMRlWbfawRbHAGgAM7zp3ElXN_Qb7FixYrw4Frj95XNYW2tRxF3THbTddqF_034LkaA_IJMbIGUBBsOelR8TgnUzybct7P5-oRiZufGy_tkyRjHplgHClFCesmeA/s1600-h/MV5BMTg3ODc1NTEyNV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzc3NDU2Mg@@._V1._SX548_SY400_.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 234px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6-kIIW80HUP_j5rwMRlWbfawRbHAGgAM7zp3ElXN_Qb7FixYrw4Frj95XNYW2tRxF3THbTddqF_034LkaA_IJMbIGUBBsOelR8TgnUzybct7P5-oRiZufGy_tkyRjHplgHClFCesmeA/s320/MV5BMTg3ODc1NTEyNV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzc3NDU2Mg@@._V1._SX548_SY400_.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5350137906484477938" border="0" /></a><br /><br />Thrown into the mix this time was the Matrix of Leadership, which was a bit odd and completely off kilter with the majority of the franchise. The matrix of leadership is what is in Prime's chest that makes him the LEADER. And what makes Hot Rod become Rodimus Prime and the LEADER. And is generally considered to be what makes a Prime PRIME.<br />Instead, in this film it's a key to powering some machine that the Fallen wants to use to blow up the sun to make energon (Don't ask why, this is never fully explained other than he wanted to blow it up years ago and still wants to now - despite the billions of other stars in the galaxy). Queue a race across the globe to find it. It's never fully explained why Energon is needed either, but is declared by Starscream in a scene reminiscent of the human farms in the matrix, except with decepticons instead, so I assume it's to do with making baby 'bots.<br /><br />There are a lot of plot holes in revenge of the <s>explosions</s> fallen, but the film attempts to overcome them by instead throwing so many things on screen at once that it vaguely covers them up, albeit poorly. However, you'll be hurtling along at such a speed, with so many explosions going off in your face that by the end, you won't actually remember much of what is going on, so you really won't care.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoPEvDXxzYMyuRNJA1NbrYSCfMmRZ_nZPtvxXbSHvLp9Q62L25dsmHPS5oamjtCmNohQ7XPbn0DT3UNnnpPw_U1rEBh25oqPnJZ-faZ-Pua0VB_N1Jt0MPLtSV_A4yCpGwp3zkYVTCsQ/s1600-h/MV5BMTI4OTIzNTIyMV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMjgyMDg1Mg@@._V1._SX600_SY332_.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 177px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoPEvDXxzYMyuRNJA1NbrYSCfMmRZ_nZPtvxXbSHvLp9Q62L25dsmHPS5oamjtCmNohQ7XPbn0DT3UNnnpPw_U1rEBh25oqPnJZ-faZ-Pua0VB_N1Jt0MPLtSV_A4yCpGwp3zkYVTCsQ/s320/MV5BMTI4OTIzNTIyMV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMjgyMDg1Mg@@._V1._SX600_SY332_.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5350137958003708194" border="0" /></a><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">6/10 - Whilst visually overwhelming at many points, with more explosions than you can shake a stick at and a plot like a slice of swiss cheese, Revenge of the Fallen somehow manages to make itself watchable by having giant robots beating each other to death with their bare hands, and almost as many shots of Megan Fox as there are of explosions.</span>Sproghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16358047097838265438noreply@blogger.com0