Inception is a film that is much cleverer than it really is. This was the only thing I could relate to in the entire four billion hours it felt like I spent watching the fucking thing.
Alright, yes, Leo Didlidi Caprio is a good actor - for example he can do intense...and...also...intense...and sometimes he also plays really intense characters and, er, oh..
I'm not even going to say spoiler alert at any point in this interview because if you can't see how obvious the film is when you innevitably go along to watch it then you are stupid.
Several times over it tries to make you think something else, but it is essentially equivalent to watching Dick Dastardly turn road signs around in Wacky Races - every times its painfully obvious what dream they're jumping into or who exactly is asleep or whatever. And the stale old trick of putting the end of the film at the beginning didn't sodding fool anyone (or rather it did, but shouldn't have). Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind did the same thing. It was obvious from the start too!
Oh and then Inception, in what is a really very desperate attempt to bloody mistify the audience, ends with a stupid little spinning doo-hickey that Leo uses to see if he is in a dream or not, BUT, aaah, aaah, oooh, AAAH - DARGH, oh no, the film has cut to credits and I'll literally NEVER know if it stopped spinning or not! So many questions! Was he out of the dream? Was he ever in a dream? WAS HE EVER OUT OF THE DREAM? If only I cared enough, because Inception is a long fucking film and my bladder has exploded all over the aisle.
Inception is like the pseudo-intellectual bastards you get at university who like to name drop all sorts of bloody novelists and sound all enthusiastic about them, without ever knowing anything important about them or having any real opinion about anything - those people are Inception - it seems impressive on the surface, but it becomes quickly obvious that this person has little of worth to say. Inception doesn't raise any philosophical questions or make me question my own reality or anything like that at all, and that would be fine, only it REALLY thinks that it DOES make you question those things. This would be Inception when it was at univeristy:
"Hm, that Hemmingway reference I made really struck a chord with every tonight at the cheese and wine social - I must be sure to always mention how much I love Hemmingway, they thought I was the bomb after I used the name Hemmingway...GOD, I JUST HOPE THEY DON'T ACTUALLY ASK ME ANYTHING ABOUT HIS BOOKS"
Except Inception wouldn't have that level of self-awareness.
Look, the Matrix worked because it immersed you into its world, slowly. Plus it was true to itself, it made no qualms about the fact that it was asking the audience to believe that we could go inside computers or that this world isn't real, blah, blah, blah - but it took the time to build this all up and we all said "this is new, THIS is good"...Inception on the other hand gets far too excited about its 'ideas' and shoots them all off in your face. As a caveman, Inception would have invented something like...cheese toasties...before inventing fire...cheese toasties are ok, but without fire (or heat or whatever) it's not a cheese toastie, now is it Inception.
"Noowh.. I guess not"
Darn tooting. So we the poor, saps of an audience have to be all like "What? Yeah, no, I totally instantly buy Leo didlidi Caprio being a 'dream agent' of sorts and launching himself around the place and yes I also believe that all these characters would take to his ideas straightaway and I also buy these instant-noodle rules that exist in the dream world, sure, why not" - here's why not, BECAUSE INCEPTION HAS NOT EARNT OUR BELIEF. It all just gets flung at us like a load of diving gear and then we're expected to jump into the reef...good greef*
*sorry.
And just, I have to give mention, to the dickhead from 100 Days of Summer, he's in the film being a stupid faced stupid and that stupid girl from Juno is also in the film, being a stupid faced stupid. Boy, those indie films of yours sure were ready made contrived crap guys - but at least you stayed true to your indie roots by featuring in this GIGANTIC PLACEBO BLOCKBUSTER.
So, in conclusion, if you see one film this year, don't, because it could all be a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream - or not, whatever, who can say, but I bet you're totally questionning reality now.
p.s. Toy Story 3 is incredible, go and see that and see how a film should be made. I experience every emotion going. Top notch stuff.
Saturday 14 August 2010
No More Shit Please Sherlock
The usually reliable Guardian managed to cram this little gem onto the cover of its G2 supplement the other week: "SHERLOCK: It keeps getting better!". Hmm. DOES it though Guardian? Does it ACTUALLY keep getting better, really, or has it maintained and even dropped its standards as it has gone on? LET, me stop you from answering; I already know the answer.
A lot of people seemed to have bought into this programme and I have given it a fair run of three full episodes. Now, the reason you think it's great (but, let's keep in mind that it's not) is because you probably like Dr. Who. What the BBC have cunningly done is identified that the reason 10% of the public don't like Dr. Who is because they dislike sci fi. So they wrangled up "Sherlock" - not Sherlock Holmes you understand, I mean, you're not stupid are you, one word should tell you all you need to know. Oh, and plus, ITS AS EDGY AS FUCK TO USE ONE WORD AS THE TITLE OF A PROGRAMME. Anyway, the actor who plays Sherlock Holmes was indeed up for the roll of the new Doctor (Matt Smith, now) and I also understand the the lead writer of Dr. Who has a hand in writing Sherlock...HAVE YOU ENJOYED SWALLOWING A SECOND RATE, RECYCLED DR. WHO EVERYONE? Watching Sherlock Holmes is like eating a nice meal, eating the resultant shit and then commenting on how nice the shit tasted; somehow familiar...somehow different.
So, edge and lack of creativity established, we can see that Sherlock is very much an Emperor's New Clothes situation. To the show itself then...
Basically, Sherlock doesn't quite get society - dooowh. But he sure does get crime! Yeeeah! You know what he needs is a - oh Martin Freeman what are you doing here, sit down - I was just explaining how Sherlock needs a foyle who gets reinvigorated by him but who also offers him a human connection with a society who he otherwise feels isolated from...and it goes without saying of course that the actor playing this role, this Dr. Watson, would have to be a recognisable and highly likeable British actor. What? YOU? DONT MAKE ME LAUGH. This contrived relationship is ridiculous to the extreme, down to the fact that Sherlock has a souless modern armchair to sit in when the pair are at home, whilst Watson has a comfy, soft chair; mmm - British!
"Urgh - Sherlock - why is this a human head in the fridge?"
"Yes, why?"
"People don't usually keep human heads in the fridge"
"Most people aren't doing important research"
Ooooh, SHEEER-LOCK - dear oh dear, what is he like eh? And it goes on like this! They're the original odd couple. Good old imaginative writing there.
When these engaging, three dimensional characters aren't bantering away like Punch & Judy, they're solving crimes. Sherlock does this by watching words, in the style of a text message usually, appear before his very eyes all over a victims face or a crime scenes walls. No one else can see this and it is of course actually for the audiences benefit. Boy do I feel immersed! As a young person, I felt alienated by a character who I always felt was a little antiquated for modern crime fighting, but your texting-come-deducting has hooked me right in. Plus I saw the movie of Sherlock Holmes with Robert Downey Jr, so I'm, like, well into all that shit now. Excuse a moment, I have to pull this face:
¬_¬
The storyline of "Sherlock" is not that hard to swallow due only to the fact that any pill holding this level of shoddy plotting would surely come as a suppository. A big suppository. That you then accidentally swallowed. Are we seriously to believe that a man of no employment would be permitted to mosey around the police force and various crime scenes, casually talking in riddles and being eccentric. Note to anyone else raping the literary nuance of Sherlock Holmes...this is you too Hollywood...Sherlock Holmes is not:
(a) An action hero
(b) A Topman model
Sherlock Holmes is:
(c) A detective
This BBC show asks a great deal of its audience and at first I said, ok, fine, take me on your ride I'll allow this to slide...and this...and this...and this...until eventually it was just taking the piss when it turns out that Moriarty is a gay guy that Sherlock had met briefly in the episode for a single minute. Oh, and we find this out at the local swimming pool. Which he easily breaks into (apparently)...and Dr. Watson has a bomb tied to him...and about twenty snipers are concealed somewhere around the swimming pool. I mean, by this logic, it will probably turn out that the whole thing was a dream and that Sherlock himself was actually a pot plant all along. It would make for better conversations in the show. A real detective could use Sherlock to spruce up his office.
There are a billion more things wrong with this programme, but it essentially it just takes the fucking piss out of the audience watching it. If you are one of many idiots having a whale of a time with the whole thing and if you're defending it right now with phrases like "it's a bit of fun" or with words like "romp", then next time you're sitting at home watching it, imagine the BBCs big gorping face, pointing out from the screen and laughing at you. HA-HA-HA.
A lot of people seemed to have bought into this programme and I have given it a fair run of three full episodes. Now, the reason you think it's great (but, let's keep in mind that it's not) is because you probably like Dr. Who. What the BBC have cunningly done is identified that the reason 10% of the public don't like Dr. Who is because they dislike sci fi. So they wrangled up "Sherlock" - not Sherlock Holmes you understand, I mean, you're not stupid are you, one word should tell you all you need to know. Oh, and plus, ITS AS EDGY AS FUCK TO USE ONE WORD AS THE TITLE OF A PROGRAMME. Anyway, the actor who plays Sherlock Holmes was indeed up for the roll of the new Doctor (Matt Smith, now) and I also understand the the lead writer of Dr. Who has a hand in writing Sherlock...HAVE YOU ENJOYED SWALLOWING A SECOND RATE, RECYCLED DR. WHO EVERYONE? Watching Sherlock Holmes is like eating a nice meal, eating the resultant shit and then commenting on how nice the shit tasted; somehow familiar...somehow different.
So, edge and lack of creativity established, we can see that Sherlock is very much an Emperor's New Clothes situation. To the show itself then...
Basically, Sherlock doesn't quite get society - dooowh. But he sure does get crime! Yeeeah! You know what he needs is a - oh Martin Freeman what are you doing here, sit down - I was just explaining how Sherlock needs a foyle who gets reinvigorated by him but who also offers him a human connection with a society who he otherwise feels isolated from...and it goes without saying of course that the actor playing this role, this Dr. Watson, would have to be a recognisable and highly likeable British actor. What? YOU? DONT MAKE ME LAUGH. This contrived relationship is ridiculous to the extreme, down to the fact that Sherlock has a souless modern armchair to sit in when the pair are at home, whilst Watson has a comfy, soft chair; mmm - British!
"Urgh - Sherlock - why is this a human head in the fridge?"
"Yes, why?"
"People don't usually keep human heads in the fridge"
"Most people aren't doing important research"
Ooooh, SHEEER-LOCK - dear oh dear, what is he like eh? And it goes on like this! They're the original odd couple. Good old imaginative writing there.
When these engaging, three dimensional characters aren't bantering away like Punch & Judy, they're solving crimes. Sherlock does this by watching words, in the style of a text message usually, appear before his very eyes all over a victims face or a crime scenes walls. No one else can see this and it is of course actually for the audiences benefit. Boy do I feel immersed! As a young person, I felt alienated by a character who I always felt was a little antiquated for modern crime fighting, but your texting-come-deducting has hooked me right in. Plus I saw the movie of Sherlock Holmes with Robert Downey Jr, so I'm, like, well into all that shit now. Excuse a moment, I have to pull this face:
¬_¬
The storyline of "Sherlock" is not that hard to swallow due only to the fact that any pill holding this level of shoddy plotting would surely come as a suppository. A big suppository. That you then accidentally swallowed. Are we seriously to believe that a man of no employment would be permitted to mosey around the police force and various crime scenes, casually talking in riddles and being eccentric. Note to anyone else raping the literary nuance of Sherlock Holmes...this is you too Hollywood...Sherlock Holmes is not:
(a) An action hero
(b) A Topman model
Sherlock Holmes is:
(c) A detective
This BBC show asks a great deal of its audience and at first I said, ok, fine, take me on your ride I'll allow this to slide...and this...and this...and this...until eventually it was just taking the piss when it turns out that Moriarty is a gay guy that Sherlock had met briefly in the episode for a single minute. Oh, and we find this out at the local swimming pool. Which he easily breaks into (apparently)...and Dr. Watson has a bomb tied to him...and about twenty snipers are concealed somewhere around the swimming pool. I mean, by this logic, it will probably turn out that the whole thing was a dream and that Sherlock himself was actually a pot plant all along. It would make for better conversations in the show. A real detective could use Sherlock to spruce up his office.
There are a billion more things wrong with this programme, but it essentially it just takes the fucking piss out of the audience watching it. If you are one of many idiots having a whale of a time with the whole thing and if you're defending it right now with phrases like "it's a bit of fun" or with words like "romp", then next time you're sitting at home watching it, imagine the BBCs big gorping face, pointing out from the screen and laughing at you. HA-HA-HA.
The New Intro on MotD
I just have to ask the BBC who designed the new intro sequence on Match of the Day...I really do...hang on...ok I've asked them.
Instead of being greeted properly by actual footballers what I got was some floppy disk rip-off computer generated nightmare that tried to cram too many presents into my eyes. It was like the entire history of football had puked up on the screen and then wiped it all around a bit with it's hands, sat back and in it's furious drunken smuginess gone "weeeroah - yeah man - jawesome".
Putting up all the past players of the Premiership doesn't instill Match of the Day with some semblance of heritage, instead, it highlighted how much extra cash they must be sitting on, that they can piss all of it away on some bloody brainiac to clip art a few dead footballers in alongside Eric Cantona. Ooo it makes me mad.
ALSO, everytime something is analysed in a match now some new futuristic analysis logo+noise comes into play, as if Match of the Day is still trying to convince me that I am living in the future. Dear BBC; I am not living in the future. If I were you'd be charging me for oxygen as your strangle hold on the media reaches an all time high and humanity crummbles in your hands like the Channel Five of today, but until then, keep all your bleeding special effects for Dr. Fucking Who and let me watch the football in peace.
Thanks! Sincerely, Charles Meyrick
Instead of being greeted properly by actual footballers what I got was some floppy disk rip-off computer generated nightmare that tried to cram too many presents into my eyes. It was like the entire history of football had puked up on the screen and then wiped it all around a bit with it's hands, sat back and in it's furious drunken smuginess gone "weeeroah - yeah man - jawesome".
Putting up all the past players of the Premiership doesn't instill Match of the Day with some semblance of heritage, instead, it highlighted how much extra cash they must be sitting on, that they can piss all of it away on some bloody brainiac to clip art a few dead footballers in alongside Eric Cantona. Ooo it makes me mad.
ALSO, everytime something is analysed in a match now some new futuristic analysis logo+noise comes into play, as if Match of the Day is still trying to convince me that I am living in the future. Dear BBC; I am not living in the future. If I were you'd be charging me for oxygen as your strangle hold on the media reaches an all time high and humanity crummbles in your hands like the Channel Five of today, but until then, keep all your bleeding special effects for Dr. Fucking Who and let me watch the football in peace.
Thanks! Sincerely, Charles Meyrick
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)