Inception

I recently watched inception for the second time. This time while sober and not irritated by the other idiots occupying the cinema alongside me. Now then, the word that's being bandied round about such a film is its "intellegence", how it doesn't make the audience feel stupid. I beg to differ, with its constant plot point explanations and insulting to us, the more discerning viewer. If it were a Japansese or European film would these intellectual insults be as well recieved. I think not. Prime example being "Let the right one in" or "the girl with the dragon tattoo" which had about 5 people watch them. (Myself, I watched a fool of a couple walk out on the former due to its subtitles). Anway, back to the film. Well acted, fantastic premise, amazingly executed, beatifully shot. But, the comparisons between Kubrick and Nolan should really stop. For me, Nolan seems to be far easier with the human being as an entity. Kubrick always had issues, especially in later films, with relating, or even setting, his films in a element of reality. Nolan, alternitvely, managers to both create and endear characters however big or small their roll. You consider the role os Animal Mother in Full Metal Jacket to that of Tom Hardy's Eames. Both are likeable character, the latter far more so. Both are heroes. But, such people don't really exist in reality, but do in nolans. He has a notion that hope, humanisation, friendship, heroism and love still envelops man. Kubrick, i feel, never agreed. He knew the bitterness and twisted mind of a man. Hence Clockwork orange being a black comedy when it should have been a something quite more strongly devoid of humour, such as a horror. It's meant to be a lament on consciousnous for fuck sake. Inception though, I wonder how many people "got it". What was there to "get" in the first place. Did people over complicate things just to make themselves feel more intellectual? Did intellectuals tell themselves that they loved it just because Nolan has become the most important film makers in the world after shunning him for the "the prestige" (about which they're all fuckwits). In my lucidity, I don't think that there is a point "to get". This move just dares to ponder aspects of our minds, and even fears of how our mind is something which can be manipulated. Imagine someone fucking with our minds? Scary? These themes were tackled in the relationship universe of Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind. Can our dreams be manipulated? Can our thoughts? I found the differences in time between various dream states an interesting concept. But, if this were the case, wouldn't it be like the matrix. Everyone in some drone like state where days seem like weeks etc. What the fuck would happen to humanity. Back to the film, I digress. The lead, as much as I hate to say it, is very strong. I would like to see a Tom Hardy led side franchise. That man is a legend, and you got to love that accent. Better than bond. Fuck that ginger twat, bring in Tom Hardy. Again, I do actually think that this film insults the intellegence of the audience quite a bit. I heard one person say that the whole film is the leads wife's dream. If they think that, then good luck to them. The real thing with this film is telling us that there is sense in our dreams. This is not the case. You look at dream psychology. It's rubbish. None of it means anything. It's just random images and themes. People make sense of them as they will, for people as people need to find reason in things. I always used the metaphor that it's like defragmenting your hard drive for the cumpter literate in you. Inception - I hope I haven't given anything away, and I apologise for my spelling mistakes, is on the whole good. Does it have the subtext of Dark Knight - NO. Does it have the personality of The Prestige - NO. Memento, for which it's most similar to, possibly more high concept but not as satisfying. Also, her from Juno needs a charisma injection in it. Lifeless to say the least.

If.... - The greatest film of all time

As my friends will testify, I have always maintained that Lindsey Anderson's "If..." is the finest piece of work to find its way to screen. I am adiment that it is cinematic art at its highest. I have read countless articles, disections, interviews; so I doubt if I will ever be able to say anything about it that hasn;t been said previously. That said, I think that maybe a more personal recount of my love for this film may be more appropriate. I recall being 14 when I first watched If.. on the now defunct "Sky Movies Gold" at the height of my obsession with "A clockwork orange". I had its poster adorning my bedroom wall, soundtrack regularely on heavy rotation in my stereo. This need led me to watch anything that starred Malcolm McDowell. I'm first to admit, most of his films are terrible, but I cannot deny his brilliance in his early work. Anyway, this is largely seen as his first real screen role. The character of Mick Travis displaying the major shift in Britain at a time when people were finally going to stand up against the establishment. It was pure punk rock. A fuck you to the hypocrasy that was so prevelant. I had a friend sayto me that the film was "the gayest film he has ever seen". It is most definately not. Yes, there is some homosexuality in the film, but it shows how homosexuality, though a criminal offense at the time, was quite ok to do in an institutionalised setting. But, the real story of this arc, in my eyes, is one of tolerance to those whom share a different sexual preference. This is displayed in how the "rebels" never question their friends quite open homosexuality. He's one of them, a human being, and there's nothing wrong with being different. Having at one point been unfortunate to have been to a boarding school, I fully empathise with how the rebels felt. I was told "cut your hair", given abuse for my nationality and somewhat shunned for being from a different economic background to my fellow pupils. So, I watched this at quite an impressionable stage in my development, having just left the school and gone back home. As I found, some 30 or so years after If.. was released, such issues still remained in these institutions, as they almost certainly still do today. The film is surreal, romantic and violent. I still don't really know why the vicar turns up in the drawer after the shooting incident. But, the film continues to have a relevence in todays climate. You look at all the school shooting that appear; the feeling of isolation from the crowd that many a teenager will feel. This leads to feelings of passion, rage and a need to vent. The films romanticism stems from the love felt between all the friends, the hope that all of them have in the outside world outside of the four walls in which they have found themselves.

Me and "Just for Men"

The “just for men” advert may just be the most offensively shallow, sexist, derogatory, dim-witted piece of fecal rubbish I have seen in many a year. Does a man who is or going grey really have any less virility than the other? Should we as a sex really tolerate such a host of shit? Should we discriminate? Fuck, women’s adverts aren’t as frank as this. They wouldn’t stand for it. If you haven’t seen the advert, it goes a little something like this: (Woman knocks on door) (Man looks through eye hole(or whatever it’s called)) Woman – “Hello, can I borrow some milk” (man goes to check fridge for milk. Doesn’t have milk, so goes to the pharmacist and gets some “just for men” and spends half an hour (while the woman waits) then answers the door) Man – “Yes, here you go” (here is where she should’ve said to herself “Why the fuck have I been waiting here for 30 minutes while this twat has obviously been dying his hair as it’s running down his face and he has skin stains all over the place. Who is he trying to impress) Instead was a slightly sexual flirtation between the obviously superficial blonde and the newly brunetted twat of a man. And as for the “science” of the advert.............please. In my experience with hair dye, no matter how much I pay, no hair dye has the intelligence to figure out for itself where’s a different shade of hair to any other, and for £5:50, I doubt if “Just for Men” has research department that has advanced intelligent molecular technology to that level, especially for that price. If so, surely a Nobel prize should be on offer. If so, I’m sure it would have a better use. As a matter of fact, this isn’t the first time; the last “Just for Men” advert was as offensive. I mean, who gains a job just on the colour of their hair. I knew a guy in school whom was grey at 15, unlucky bastard admittedly, but did that stop him becoming accepted and successful in his vocations? No. Did it stop Steve Martin, no. Fuck, being bald is surely worse, but that wouldn’t stop you from getting a job (admittedly it’s a funny episode of Curd Your Enthusiasm). Does being a man with a full head of artificially coloured hair (which looks like a fucking wig most of the time) actually benefit any man? In a word, no. As someone who dyes their hair regularly, in many different colours, I can actually see that there’s a detriment to the quality of hair one has. Prior to colouring my hair, my hair was not curly, yet now it is. The peroxide in said products has dried my hair out to such a state that that’s the way it goes. It’s the price one pays for being, or the hope of, being different. But, for such a product to pronounce that it can actually enhance a male’s prospects and life is completely irresponsible. Particularly in these apparent hard times. It reminds me of a “Simpsons” episode where Homer gets promoted purely on his hair, where then when his medication gets suspended, he starts losing his hair, and then no-one takes him seriously. Is this reality? As a male, we get supplied with some absolute abhorrently destructive advertising. The lynx adverts for example, is there any need for a “Nuts” magazine orgy of females. No. Especially not to promote smelling nice. That “Millionaire” advert gets my goat something chronic. Is success only purveyed by money? Well, personal wealth or success should never be judged by such. Clicking your fingers, being thin, having a gold coloured bottle of aftershave doesn’t mean shit. When you employ Jude Law to advertise your company, surely they must have realised that pretty much every man think the guy’s a cunt. But, admittedly, try the scent he’s advertising, it’s very nice. But got for the Gucci or Chanel instead, far nicer. Anyway, my abject rant on male biased advertising could go on further. I really should have a go at the Redknapps Thompson adverts, which make me want to vomit. Do they actually think that we feed into their £100,000+ lifestyle? Why should we? Is this something to which we should aspire? NO. Not all of us have the applicability to hold such luxury. But that’s not to say that there should be discrimination. The patronisation is ridiculous. At the end of the day, I kind of missed xmas TV, in another way, I’m glad I did. At least then I’ll have a higher opinion of it, without a basis. Hope you enjoyed fuckwits. P.S. Chasing Cars got given best song of the “noughties” by viewers of E4. E4 viewers are cunts and idiots obviously.