Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit (2014)
When I was first introduced to the character of Jack Ryan, twenty-seven years ago, I liked the fact that he wasn't the usual sort of Hollywood hero. The emphasis on analysis rather than action in The Hunt for the Red October (1990) was very engaging. The fact that Jack Ryan is a retired Marine who was desk bound made him far more credible and interesting. However, even back then the movie industry struggled in bringing Tom Clancy's work to the big screen in an effective manner. Alec Baldwin was replaced by the more likable Harrison Ford, yet the two sequels Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger struggled to find the right tone. The last entry with Ben Afleck, The Sum of All Fears (2002), fell awkwardly between two stools trying to be both an action movie and a complex thriller.
When I was first introduced to the character of Jack Ryan, twenty-seven years ago, I liked the fact that he wasn't the usual sort of Hollywood hero. The emphasis on analysis rather than action in The Hunt for the Red October (1990) was very engaging. The fact that Jack Ryan is a retired Marine who was desk bound made him far more credible and interesting. However, even back then the movie industry struggled in bringing Tom Clancy's work to the big screen in an effective manner. Alec Baldwin was replaced by the more likable Harrison Ford, yet the two sequels Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger struggled to find the right tone. The last entry with Ben Afleck, The Sum of All Fears (2002), fell awkwardly between two stools trying to be both an action movie and a complex thriller.
Kenneth Branagh's reboot Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, initially smacks of a somewhat contrived undertaking. Casting a notably younger actor, Chris Pine, seems like an obvious pitch to the youth audience. I suppose you can't blame the producers for trying to create a successful mainstream franchise similar to the Jason Bourne movies. However, the film does feel a little artificial at times as if it were carefully put together to meet the requirements of a focus group, rather than a film that was made because everyone was invested in it. Don't get me wrong, that is not to say that Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit is a soulless undertaking. It is professionally made, with a strong cast and perfectly serviceable entertainment. Yet it is nothing more than that.
The latest incarnation of Jack Ryan (Chris Pine) depicts him as a former marine now working as an economist. He is recruited into the CIA by senior operative Thomas Harper (Kevin Costner) to keep an eye out for irregular financial matters globally. He subsequently uncovers a plot by Russian businessman Viktor Cherevin (director Kenneth Branagh) to destabilize the US and Chinese economies bringing about a global financial depression. Realising that the CIA are close on his heels Cherevin kidnaps Jack's fiancée Cathy (Keia Knightley). Jack has to adjust to his new field operative status if he wishes to rescue Cathy and thwart the Russian nationalists plan.
The main problem with Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit is the movie's specific genre. Those over a certain age will remember the Cold War and will identify with the traditional spy plot elements. Thus, a third of the audience during the film’s opening weekends were over fifty. However, the youth market that the studio was specifically seeking, were not sufficiently engaged and conspicuous by their absence. Box office performance was adequate but no more, so future sequels now hang in the balance. It’s a shame as Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit is not a bad film and there is still mileage in Jack Ryan as a character. If the production had focused on the correct audience for such a movie, delivering a more complex and possibly R rated picture, it may well have fared better.
Non-Stop (2014)
I don't know what it is about the planes but they do seem to lend a certain "je ne sais quoi" to movies. Whether it's the claustrophobic environment with its shared intimacy or our general familiarity with air travel, staging a film on a commercial flight can often improve its chances to entertain. Zombies, snakes and terrorists have all benefited from this plot device, with varying degrees of success. So bearing this in mind, if you put Liam Neeson on a plane, you know that there's going to be more than just some in-flight turbulence. That is exactly what director Jaume Collet-Serra and writers Chris Roach and John Richardson have done with Non-Stop; a surprisingly entertaining action movie.
I don't know what it is about the planes but they do seem to lend a certain "je ne sais quoi" to movies. Whether it's the claustrophobic environment with its shared intimacy or our general familiarity with air travel, staging a film on a commercial flight can often improve its chances to entertain. Zombies, snakes and terrorists have all benefited from this plot device, with varying degrees of success. So bearing this in mind, if you put Liam Neeson on a plane, you know that there's going to be more than just some in-flight turbulence. That is exactly what director Jaume Collet-Serra and writers Chris Roach and John Richardson have done with Non-Stop; a surprisingly entertaining action movie.
I say surprisingly because on paper the plot does seems rather workmanlike. Federal Air Marshall Bill Marks (Liam Neeson) is a burnt out drunk, still grieving over the death of his child. Whilst on an international flight to London he starts receiving text message threats from an anonymous source, claiming that a passenger will die very twenty minutes unless one hundred and fifty million dollars is paid into a specific bank account. His colleagues and immediate superiors quickly become skeptical when it is discovered that the account is in his name. Marks soon finds that he is the main suspect and that the passengers and crew are turning against him. Throw a bomb into the mix and you have a very contemporary but far from unusual narrative.
However, Non-Stop ups it's game in several ways and proves to be a very enjoyable one hundred and six minutes. First off Liam Neeson is incredibly watchable and carries movies such as this. His soft but assertive voice is compelling and he has a genuine screen presence. He also acquits himself very well with the movies physical demands. Non-Stop has some very good hand to hand fight scene, the standout one taking place in a toilet. The supporting cast is very competent with Julianne Moore playing a supportive passenger who backs Bill Marks when things start going south. There is also an eclectic collection of characters aboard the plane and it is pleasant to see the writers play with the concept of stereotypes and try to do something different.
Non-Stop also manages to bring a curious "whodunnit" vibe to the proceedings. Although the plot does become increasingly convoluted and fanciful, it doesn't lose the audience. In some ways, there is an element of Agatha Christie to the story as viewers ponder who on the plane is the villain of the piece. After all there's been a poisoning by this point (just not in the library). The bomb is another plot device that is handled with difference. "Isn't there a wire to cut" one of the passengers remarks. Not this time round and Mr. Neeson elects for a controlled explosion introducing one of Alfred Hitchcock's basic tenets about film making.
Despite the terrorism motif of the story, Non-Stop avoids anything more than a brief reference to 9/11. This is fast paced action movie and not an in-depth study in geopolitics. The speed of the narrative does have some down sides. Some of the cast have little to do beyond the functional and there are the usual logical plot flaws and willful ignorance of the laws of aerodynamics and physics. "It doesn't make any sense" laments Bill Marks as matters go from bad to worse. The thing is it doesn't always have to, as long as it's done with conviction. The primary motivation of Non-Stop is to entertain. Because it offers sufficient difference and the presence of Liam Neeson, who has become a seriously bankable action star, it achieves its goal.
Games We Cannot Play
I have written in the past about how certain games can be very appealing conceptually but the reality is quite different. Often the fundamental disappointment doesn't lie with the game itself but with our inability to play them. For me the Battlefield franchise is a prime example of this and more recently For Honor. The trailers for these games are frenetic, focusing on action and spectacle. The associated marketing certainly sells the idea of “awesome action”. Sadly, my personal experience of Battlefield has usually been running across an inordinately large map, only to arrive at the hot spot to get one-shotted. As for the planes, helicopters and vehicles; I can't fly them or drive them effectively so team mates tend to abandon me. I can only describe my experience in For Honor as being a flesh piñata for other players. The fun experience depicted in the advertising was as elusive as a good, odd numbered Star Trek movie.
I have written in the past about how certain games can be very appealing conceptually but the reality is quite different. Often the fundamental disappointment doesn't lie with the game itself but with our inability to play them. For me the Battlefield franchise is a prime example of this and more recently For Honor. The trailers for these games are frenetic, focusing on action and spectacle. The associated marketing certainly sells the idea of “awesome action”. Sadly, my personal experience of Battlefield has usually been running across an inordinately large map, only to arrive at the hot spot to get one-shotted. As for the planes, helicopters and vehicles; I can't fly them or drive them effectively so team mates tend to abandon me. I can only describe my experience in For Honor as being a flesh piñata for other players. The fun experience depicted in the advertising was as elusive as a good, odd numbered Star Trek movie.
This is one of the reasons I gave up on EVE Online after a fortnight free trial. I simply could not progress in the game through a lack of skill and a chronic tolerance and patience deficit. With other game genres such as first person shooters or massive online battle arenas, I broadly have the same lack of success. Often with titles such as Overwatch and Guardians of Middle-earth it boils down to twitch gaming. Sadly, this is the prerogative of youth. For someone my age, by the time I’ve adjusted my Pince-nez, taken a sip of Madeira and pondered on the matter in hand, I find that I’ve been defeated. And don’t even get me started on flight simulators. What could possibly be cooler than flying a classic warplane or an iconic commercial airliner? Yet the complexity of such titles is beyond me. Nope, with the best will in the world, these sorts of games are not for me. As Harry Callahan said in Magnum Force, "A man's got to know his limitations".
I think most gamers of sound mind eventually arrive at a similar conclusion. Through trial and error, we establish what we can and cannot play. There are a few alleged renaissance men and women that claim otherwise, although most of these are delusional. As for those who genuinely can succeed with all game genres, well they deserve nothing more than a slap for making the rest of us look bad. Yet despite this reality, as humans we like to occasionally take leave of our senses and buy a game that’s sale that we have no hope in hell of succeeding at. I did this several years ago when I bought Ace Combat Assault Horizon Enhanced Edition for the PC. In my defense one of the first reviews that I skimmed through described it as "Call of Duty takes to the skies". At the time my first play through was a dismal failure and I didn’t reach the end. This weekend, I dusted off Ace Combat Assault Horizon Enhanced Edition for round two.
In many respects the CoD analogy is quite accurate. The game has a scaled back control system for the various planes and helicopters and is designed to be used with a game controller. The central campaign storyline is like Modern Warfare in so far as it has a generic World War III narrative filled with caricatures. There's then co-op and multiplayer online missions to be played in various permutations. The thing is, even with the game difficulty dropped to the lowest setting, I still found controlling the planes exceptionally taxing. At one point, I felt I may gain better results if I put a bag over my head and trusted to luck. It took hours before I realised that the on-screen messages that I was berating for blocking my view, were giving me hints. Upon taking the advice there was a significant improvement. However, I still found myself struggling with such things as orientation and situational awareness. For a second time, I have abandoned Ace Combat Assault Horizon Enhanced Edition only half completed.
It's an odd thing, coming to terms with the fact that there are some games that just aren't for you. We quickly learn while growing up that we can't be good at everything in life. Music, art, academia or sport are not for everyone. By and large we get over these things. Well, most of us do. Furthermore, we adapt. If you can't hold a tune, it’s no big deal. If you find yourself in a situation that requires you to sing, just mime. Half your church congregation does this regularly. Not especially good at sports? No worries; you can still enjoy them on TV and your lack of ability certainly is no impediment to being an armchair expert. But the notion that you can't be good at a game is troubling to some. I wonder exactly how many titles fill the average gamer's library that remain uncompleted, abandoned and forgotten; due to the realisation that they were crap at playing them? I’d hazard a guess it’s far more common place than you think.
Crowdfunding Fatigue
After approximately a decade, crowdfunding has become an established medium for raising finances. Particularly with regard to projects associated with the leisure industry or “geek culture”. Game developers seem to be especially fond of using this service as a means to raise capital for their projects. If you have a dream you wish to realise, the successful crowdfunding campaigns of Star Citizen or Star Trek: Axanar are a strong incentive to look to fans for financing. As a result, we regularly see articles on websites such as Massively OP for new games under development. At first it was novel, even exciting. Then it became ubiquitous. Now it’s just tedious. Consequently, I believe that “crowdfunding fatigue” is a genuine thing and that I certainly suffer from it.
After approximately a decade, crowdfunding has become an established medium for raising finances. Particularly with regard to projects associated with the leisure industry or “geek culture”. Game developers seem to be especially fond of using this service as a means to raise capital for their projects. If you have a dream you wish to realise, the successful crowdfunding campaigns of Star Citizen or Star Trek: Axanar are a strong incentive to look to fans for financing. As a result, we regularly see articles on websites such as Massively OP for new games under development. At first it was novel, even exciting. Then it became ubiquitous. Now it’s just tedious. Consequently, I believe that “crowdfunding fatigue” is a genuine thing and that I certainly suffer from it.
Like so many online practices, successfully crowdfunding has been distilled down to a base formula, just like TED Talks, You Tube videos and podcasts. There is a now a broadly established process that can be applied to any crowdfunding campaign. Although I can see the merit in sticking with what works, it also results in a great degree of homogeny. Thus, we are exposed to a nonstop barrage of hype, spin and hyperbole when it comes to crowdfunding. Furthermore, campaigns often focus only on the positive, resulting in sizeable information gaps. In the absence of facts people tend to fill in the blanks themselves, ending in unrealistic expectations.
However, there is another element to this situation, beyond that of marketing, disclosure and semantics. I believe that fandom often causes a form of “myopia”. In the past market forces and commercial checks and balances meant that products would never get off the drawing board. If the bank said no that was the end of the matter. It can be argued that a lot of good ideas have been ignored due to a lack of vision or risk aversion. Yet I’m also sure a lot of dumb ideas have been legitimately dismissed. Crowdfunding bypasses to a degree, the filters of business acumen and common sense and instead often relies on emotional appeal. Fans and aficionados have love and affection in spades but not necessarily economic sense as well. Hence “internet outrage” over crowdfunded projects that have not cut the mustard is common place.
Another contributory factor towards “crowdfunding fatigue” is it’s increasing use by corporate entities that have sufficient financial resources already to develop their product. Again, this is something that seems to happen more with gaming related projects. Why do development studios affiliated to big publishers need to look to fans for money? I find reasons such as “we’re trying to gauge support for the product” to be spurious and consider crowdfunding by such institutions to be nothing more than profiteering. Sadly, such practices are allowed to continue, mainly due to the aforementioned shortsightedness of fans. The desire to have the finished product seems to outweigh all other considerations.
Although I and others may well be weary of crowdfunding per se, I cannot totally dismiss it out of hand. I have contributed to several projects and benefited from the end results. I have backed several documentaries and film related projects in recent years, mainly because the funding has been for very specific goals. Usually the money required is for licensing costs or other legal services. As a result, I have not personally been disappointed by any of the projects I have donated to. I also think that specific term is very important. Contributing does not make you an investor, backer or stakeholder. You are simply a donor who may or may not be granted a reward for your support. You have no creative input or leverage. Until this concept is fully embraced, I’m sure we’ll still see a continual tide of failed projects that have overreached themselves and consequently more “crowdfunding fatigue”.
Classic Movie Themes: I Hate You (From Star Trek IV The Voyage Home)
Leonard Rosenman's soundtrack for Star Trek IV The Voyage Home, is a subtly different beast to James Horner's or Jerry Goldsmith's scores. But it is not Mr. Rosenman's work that I wish to discuss in this post. Instead I’d like to focus on the unforgettable faux punk rock song "I Hate You", that was specifically written for the movie by actor and associate producer Kirk Thatcher. The scene with the punk on the bus has become a seminal part of both Star Trek lore and pop culture. It still raises a wry smile, over thirty-one years later Yet according to Kirk Thatcher, the song that was originally going to be used was quite different.
Leonard Rosenman's soundtrack for Star Trek IV The Voyage Home, is a subtly different beast to James Horner's or Jerry Goldsmith's scores. But it is not Mr. Rosenman's work that I wish to discuss in this post. Instead I’d like to focus on the unforgettable faux punk rock song "I Hate You", that was specifically written for the movie by actor and associate producer Kirk Thatcher. The scene with the punk on the bus has become a seminal part of both Star Trek lore and pop culture. It still raises a wry smile, over thirty-one years later Yet according to Kirk Thatcher, the song that was originally going to be used was quite different.
We shot the scene with no sound – there was no music playing. I was just miming to a beat. After we wrapped the movie, the music department was coming to us, and they were playing...like...Duran Duran, or whoever Paramount had some deal with. I said, "That isn't punk rock music. Punk rock is really raw and gritty and dirty." They said, "Well, we don't really deal with the Sex Pistols and stuff." I said to Leonard, "You know, let me write you a song. I can do a song."
Luckily common sense prevailed so Kirk Thatcher hastily formed a band, The Edge of Etiquette and "I Hate You" was recorded and used in the final edit of the movie. The song also featured a year later in the 1987 Frankie Avalons and Annette Funicello beach party comedy Back To The Beach. Allegedly Mr. Thatcher earned more from the rights than he did for his work on the Star Trek movie.
What makes "I Hate You" so enjoyable is that it manages to achieve a tongue in cheek approach to the punk genre without descending into total parody. It has an undercurrent of erudition with its articulate lyrics. "I hate you and I berate you" roll off the tongue. As does "I eschew you and I say screw you". Then again, good satire is always smart. The song was unavailable until recently, when it was included in the 2011 expanded release of the movie soundtrack album.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 (2017)
First off let us take a moment to reflect upon this movie’s very title. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 has a very episodic ring to it and gives the audience the impression that we are experiencing another tale from an epic series rather than a just another humdrum sequel. Semantics are at times a big deal and I think it’s relevant that Guardians of the Galaxy is marketed this way. It really seems to tie in with the franchises comic book roots.
First off let us take a moment to reflect upon this movie’s very title. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 has a very episodic ring to it and gives the audience the impression that we are experiencing another tale from an epic series rather than a just another humdrum sequel. Semantics are at times a big deal and I think it’s relevant that Guardians of the Galaxy is marketed this way. It really seems to tie in with the franchises comic book roots.
As for the movie itself, well once again we find that seventies and eighties popular music dominate not only the soundtrack but seem to actively shape the narrative. I’d even go so far as to say that the writers and director may have a deliberately picked the songs in question and then reversed engineered the narrative around them. Not that I’m complaining, as it all works incredibly well. There’s an opening battle with a space Cephalopod set against Mr Blue Sky by the Electric Light Orchestra which pretty much sets the tone. The soundtrack then goes on to feature Fleetwood Mac, Glen Campbell and even David Hasselhoff. Brandy by Looking Glass, is also used liberally in key scenes.
The plot is somewhat arbitrary because it’s merely a vehicle to develop the central characters. Marvel press releases have managed to distil it down to the following. The Guardians must fight to keep their newfound family together as they unravel the mysteries of Peter Quill's true parentage. Old foes become new allies and fan-favorite characters from the classic comics will come to our heroes' aid as the Marvel cinematic universe continues to expand. Let it suffice to say that the main plot device is the Starlord AKA Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) discovering that his father is none other than a Celestial being called Ego (Kurt Russell). Cue Mr Russel revisiting Snake Plissken’s greatest hits. They even use digital effect to de-age him for flashback sequences.
The movie then proceeds with what appears to be two distinct storylines One feature Quill, Gamora (Zoe Saldana) and Drax (Dave Bautista) and another set around Baby Groot, Rocket Raccoon and Nebula (Karen Gillan) as they fall foul of space pirate Taserface (Chris Sullivan). The return of Yondu (Michael Rooker), Quill’s blue-skinned mentor from the first movie brings the various strands together. I was actually surprised by the genuinely nuanced and dare I say, moving story arc director James Gunn brings to the table. But then again it was the depth of character and the credibility of their friendship that made the first movie so good. It’s all here once again.
Jaems Gunn cut his teeth in the movie industry as a protégé of Lloyd Kaufman, at Troma Entertainment. Thus, he has a knack for low budget creativity. Yet none of these skills are lost when translated to a $200 million franchise driven blockbuster. Throwaways scenes, small character foibles and telling dialogue elevate Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 above the usual sterile and dry narratives of other entries in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Gun gives us not only the thrill and action we crave but does it in a far more colourful and playful universe. It is such a breath of fresh air to dispense with the flawed and brooding anti-hero and to have them replaced by the chipper and likeable Peter Quill.
It would be remiss of me if I didn’t take a moment to mention Dave Bautista and his incredibly strong performance as Drax. As a character with no sense of sarcasm, or understanding of verbal metaphor there is great scope for humour. Yet because Bautista seems to have an innate sense of comic timing many throwaways gags grow to become much more. I cannot remember the last time I last out loud so much in a cinema. Baby Groot is also a source of great amusement, despite his single line of dialogue. As with the first movie the balance between action, humour and pathos is skilfully handled.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 is certainly a robust and entertaining second instalment and shows the flexibility of the MCU, when skilled film makers take the reins. The vivid production design, with its explosion of colour and the playful use of popular music, paints a vibrant universe, despite the peril and impending doom of the story. The movie at times looks like the artwork you’d find on a seventies progressive rock album. If there is a weakness in the production it would be in the film’s final act, where the surfeit of characters do seem to slow the proceeding a little.
Yet, at its heart Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 is a further exploration of the complexity and importance of family and identity. It explores themes that are common to all viewers and does it so honestly and with a great deal of affection. As a result, I was thoroughly entertained and uplifted. It’s been a while since a movie has done that for me. So, I wholeheartedly hope that all concerned can maintain this emotional momentum for the next instalment of Guardians of the Galaxy.
Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)
I had my doubts about Guardians of the Galaxy when I first saw it back in 2014, mainly because it's a franchise that I wasn’t familiar with. Also, because the movie is a throwback to a genre that has been conspicuously absent for several decades; namely the “space opera”. Readers over a certain age group may well have fond memories of movies such a Battle Beyond the Stars or The Last Starfighter. They may also have bad memories regarding Ice Pirates and Lorca and the Outlaws. The other thing that was a talking point about Guardians of the Galaxy upon its release, was the fact that it represented a somewhat of a gamble for Marvel Studios (Disney) and the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe). Taking a punt on a lesser known franchise at a cost of $170,000,000 is not something you do lightly.
I had my doubts about Guardians of the Galaxy when I first saw it back in 2014, mainly because it's a franchise that I wasn’t familiar with. Also, because the movie is a throwback to a genre that has been conspicuously absent for several decades; namely the “space opera”. Readers over a certain age group may well have fond memories of movies such a Battle Beyond the Stars or The Last Starfighter. They may also have bad memories regarding Ice Pirates and Lorca and the Outlaws. The other thing that was a talking point about Guardians of the Galaxy upon its release, was the fact that it represented a somewhat of a gamble for Marvel Studios (Disney) and the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe). Taking a punt on a lesser known franchise at a cost of $170,000,000 is not something you do lightly.
Director James Gunn is an interesting film maker who until this movie has not achieved the level of success he deserves. Slither, an enjoyable and quirky horror/sci-fi movie, was somewhat overlooked on its release. Mercifully, Guardians of the Galaxy rectifies this situation. Gunn along with co-writer Nicole Periman, find a great balance between action, drama and humour. The script is full of amusing banter, pop culture references and unabashed nerd bait. The characters are actually likeable and accessible, while the story has a strong positive message about the power of friendship. Deliberately avoiding big names in the lead roles works very well and the cast acquits themselves admirably. Chris Pratt and Zoë Saldana fulfil their roles but don't overwhelm them as some "A" list actors do.
Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel provide voice and motion capture for their CGI characters, while wrestler Dave Bautista is surprising good as Drax, a warrior who takes all comment literally. Then with a second tier of character actors such as John C. Reilly, Michael Rooker and Glenn Close, the movie is more than equipped to tackle its initially complex storyline. Establishing who's who takes a while but the pieces soon fall in to place. Furthermore, Guardians of the Galaxy has a great sense of pace and moves forward through the narrative with assured ease. The visual FXs are outstanding and the production design is inventive and different but it never relegates the story or dialogue to the passenger seat.
Perhaps directors Gunn's best trick is managing to entertain on multiple levels. It's something the animation industry has managed for decades but it’s more difficult to achieve in a live action movie. There is plenty of spectacle, hardware and explosions to appeal to the young, where older viewers will revel in the pop culture references of mix tapes, Footloose and dance offs. Gun also uses sentiment wisely and to good effect. Groot and Rocket have an especially good dynamic. The more mature members of the audience will know that they're getting their emotional buttons pushed with Pavlovian mastery but it's all part of the ride.
Overall, there's not a huge amount to complain about with Guardians of the Galaxy. It is a well-conceived, polished example of a summer blockbuster. Lee Pace fans may be a little disappointed as he spends his time on screen swathed in cowl and under a lot of heavy make-up. I would also point out that younger children may find this movie quite scary. A person’s face crumbling in a cloud of purple hued plasma is still quite a potent image, so parents be warned. The screenplay is also liberally laced with minor profanity, which although I found quite amusing, I was somewhat surprised by.
What I took away the most from Guardians of the Galaxy was the feeling of being thoroughly entertained. There is a good ethical foundation to the story as it wrestles themes such as loyalty, redemption and self-sacrifice, yet they are presented in an engaging fashion with humour and wit. I laughed a great deal which seldom happens when watching movies these days. If we must have a steady diet of big budget blockbusters can we not have more like this, created by people such as James Gunn? Who knows, we may even see a return of the space opera genre. Would that be such a bad thing? I think not, as long as Michael Bay isn't involved.
NB The post credit scene with The Collector (Benicio Del Toro) still raises some interesting possibilities (even after my second viewing). I hope it means what I think it means regarding a certain iconic character.
Contains Moderate Peril Podcast to Celebrate 10 Years of LOTRO
Over the last ten years, both Brian and I have had a long and at times tumultuous relationship with the MMORPG, The Lord of the Rings Online. Yet we both have a great deal of affection for the game along with many fond memories. It has been a subject that we have regularly discussed on our various podcasts. Therefore, we thought it would be a great idea to dedicate an entire episode of the Contains Moderate Peril podcast, to LOTRO and reflect upon its highs and occasional lows. Furthermore, rather than just reminiscing from our own perspective, we feel it would be far more interesting to hear the opinions of fans and wider the community. Therefore, we are formally inviting you, as players of LOTRO, to tell us about your memories and experiences of this truly enduring MMO.
Over the last ten years, both Brian and I have had a long and at times tumultuous relationship with the MMORPG, The Lord of the Rings Online. Yet we both have a great deal of affection for the game along with many fond memories. It has been a subject that we have regularly discussed on our various podcasts. Therefore, we thought it would be a great idea to dedicate an entire episode of the Contains Moderate Peril podcast, to LOTRO and reflect upon its highs and occasional lows. Furthermore, rather than just reminiscing from our own perspective, we feel it would be far more interesting to hear the opinions of fans and wider the community. Therefore, we are formally inviting you, as players of LOTRO, to tell us about your memories and experiences of this truly enduring MMO.
To try and make this process as accessible as possible, we’re happy to accept submissions in any of the following formats.
1.) Comment on this post. Potentially the easiest way. Tell us about how you started playing LOTRO or what has been the most memorable experience you’ve had in the game. What do you like about the LOTRO and its community. What are your hopes and aspirations for the games future development. It’s up to you what exactly you want to tell us about. We’d love to hear from you.
2.) Email. Why not drop us a line care of rogeredwards@containsmoderateperil.com and recount an anecdote about the game. Again, it’s up to you what you want to share with us about LOTRO. There is no right or wrong way to do this.
3.) Audio file. If you’re feeling a little more adventurous, why not record your reminiscence about LOTRO or send us a message from your buddies or kinship? Most smart phones have a voice recorder these days. We won’t be too picky about the audio quality. WAV or MP3 files are the preferred format.
Please note, although we intend to produce a longer than average podcast to celebrate the 10th anniversary of LOTRO, it is inevitable that we shall have to make some editorial decisions about content. Therefore, please bear in mind that submitting material does not guarantee its inclusion in the shows final edit. The usual legal caveats regarding content also apply.
Because Standing Stone Games anniversary celebrations for LOTRO are scheduled to run throughout the next two months, we’ve set a deadline for content submissions of Sunday the 7th May. Provisionally the release date for the finished podcast is Friday the 12th of May. This may be subject to change depending on the response we get.
Brian and I have wanted to do some kind of vox pop with our listeners for several years now and feel that combining this with the LOTRO anniversary is a great opportunity. Therefore, we’re both looking forward to hearing from fellow LOTRO players and enjoying your stories, vignettes and anecdotes. I’m sure there are many familiar voices to be heard but I’m especially excited by the opportunity to hear from those who have quietly player over the years and have yet to speak out. Here’s your chance to share your thoughts and to celebrate ten years of The Lord of the Rings Online.
Grave Encounters 2 (2012)
Sometimes you have to admire persistence. I really didn't think that Grave Encounters merited a sequel but apparently, it's financial returns indicated otherwise. So today I found myself watching Grave Encounters 2 with a certain sense of déjà vu because like the first movie, it tries to do something different and only partially succeeds. Once again, the writers (The Vicious Brothers) manage to jump the shark at the midway point and the movie ceases to innovate and just ticks boxes. The only major difference this time round is we get a little more of everything, because it is a sequel. So, there's more jumps, more ghosts and more violence. Is there more entertainment? May be.
Sometimes you have to admire persistence. I really didn't think that Grave Encounters merited a sequel but apparently, it's financial returns indicated otherwise. So today I found myself watching Grave Encounters 2 with a certain sense of déjà vu because like the first movie, it tries to do something different and only partially succeeds. Once again, the writers (The Vicious Brothers) manage to jump the shark at the midway point and the movie ceases to innovate and just ticks boxes. The only major difference this time round is we get a little more of everything, because it is a sequel. So, there's more jumps, more ghosts and more violence. Is there more entertainment? May be.
The movie starts with a series of faux YouTube reviews of the original Grave Encounters. This is a fun way to start proceedings because not all the vloggers give favourable opinions. Then we meet indie horror film maker Alex (Richard Harmon) and his respective crew, who is convinced that the movie is in fact true. The more he digs for clues, the more his theory is validated. It is this first half of the story that works the best. Alex receives anonymous tip-offs via text and email from Deathawaits6. He also tracks down the producer of the first film and via a hidden camera, uncovers a chilling secret. As with the first movie, although the cast is mainly comprised of a bunch of unpleasant characters, they do all ring true.
It takes thirty-eight minutes before the action arrives at the asylum. Curiously enough as the spooky stuff starts my interest in the movie took a sharp dip. The gadgets, cameras and technological paraphernalia used by such reality shows are all present here and this does embellish the proceedings to a degree. A thermal imaging camera is used this time, introduced via a rather obvious and crass gag. There are also some further explorations of the building's ability to change shape and alter its layout. Whilst running in panic, one character turns a corner into a corridor but their friends take the same turn only to find a brick wall.
However there reaches a point in the story, not unlike the original, where the writers take too many liberties with the audience’s suspension of disbelief. Again, the first-person narrative give ways to material that feels much more like conventional third person cinema. The moment that happens the main selling point for the production is lost and mediocrity sets in. Grave Encounters 2 also ends with a rather more violent incident that seems a little out of place with what has previously transpired. It's rather gloating and mean spirited. The final resolution of the plot is somewhat obvious and worryingly paves the way for a third instalment.
I found myself reminded of Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 when watching Grave Encounters 2. Both sequels attempt to do something tangential to their predecessors, rather than rinse and repeat but both seem to get lost after initial bursts of creativity. Overall I would say that I enjoyed Grave Encounters 2, more than the first part, mainly because of its self-referential and self-deprecating first act. As I said at the beginning, persistence can be an endearing quality. Although I really am getting exasperated with the found footage sub-genre, one should acknowledge effort, even if it is misplaced. The Vicious Brothers have tried more so than other film makers to experiment and even managed to raise a wry smile. Their tongue must have been planted firmly in their cheek when one of the characters describes Hollywood as "the film Mecca of the world".
Diary of a Podcaster Part 6
Professor Beej recently tweeted about consolidating all his various blogs and online activities into a single entity. I naturally agreed with him and encouraged him to do so because I did something similar back in 2010. I had a gaming blog and a site for movies reviews plus a podcast to manage. It ultimately made sense to put all these thing in one place, despite their respective differences because the common factor in all of them was me. To coin a rather nauseating phrase “you are your own brand”. This is how Contains Moderate Peril came to be. In recent years, I’ve embraced this concept further and will now write or podcast about any subject that really takes my fancy. I try to stick to the things that I like but from time to time, I do stray in to wider real world subjects.
Professor Beej recently tweeted about consolidating all his various blogs and online activities into a single entity. I naturally agreed with him and encouraged him to do so because I did something similar back in 2010. I had a gaming blog and a site for movies reviews plus a podcast to manage. It ultimately made sense to put all these thing in one place, despite their respective differences because the common factor in all of them was me. To coin a rather nauseating phrase “you are your own brand”. This is how Contains Moderate Peril came to be. In recent years, I’ve embraced this concept further and will now write or podcast about any subject that really takes my fancy. I try to stick to the things that I like but from time to time, I do stray in to wider real world subjects.
Since June 2015 I’ve been using Soundcloud to host The Burton & Scrooge Podcast. The cost is not huge, being £8 per month but it’s still another of the many minor expenses that come with having an online presence. So, I’ve been considering alternatives of late, not only for reason of fiscal prudence but also for reasons of brand continuity. Despite the fact that The Burton & Scrooge Podcast broadly does exactly the same thing as it predecessor, the Contains Moderate Peril Podcast, it has never generated the same sort of numbers. I’m beginning to think that the name is one of the contributory reasons for this. A comment left on a previous Diary of a Podcaster lent credence to this line of thought.
I then discovered recently that the Squarespace subscription that I use for this blog, also supports podcast hosting. I can use the feed and submit it directly to iTunes. Because Squarespace has robust infrastructure, there are no bandwidth and processor usage issues to consider, thus no extra costs. So, I have decided to start hosting future podcasts right here on Contains Moderate Peril. Furthermore, I managed to revamp the old Feedburner RSS feed that was used on the old podcast and link it to Squarespace. Finally, to ensure that the branding is uniform, Burton and Scrooge will gracefully retire and be replaced by the all new (and therefore completely the same) Contains Moderate Peril Podcast. If all goes well these changes will be made by the end of the month and a new show should be available in early May.
These branding changes have also presented me with the opportunity to revise the site logo and order some new podcast artwork. I also have new voiceovers being recorded for the new podcast. I’m also not giving up on the side projects I’ve mentioned in prior posts. They will simply be subsets of Contains Moderate Peril Podcast. Therefore, Brian will feature on some shows but not necessarily on others, depending on his interest in the featured topic. I’m also hoping to strong arm a few of my “retired” colleagues into participating on occasions. Show notes will also be making a return. Sadly, the only thing I cannot offer is a weekly recording schedule. That is still off the table due to “real life” etc. So, this is the current plan. Let’s see if it pays dividends.
Grave Encounters (2011)
I had high hopes for Grave Encounters after I saw the Trailer on You Tube six years ago. It got quite a lot of attention online, due to it jumping on the found footage bandwagon and by cashing in on the popularity of supernatural reality TV. The movie poster takes great pains to reference that fact. Shows such as Ghost Hunters and Most Haunted still pull in big TV ratings. Even I've been guilty of watching them in the past. So the idea of a TV crew investigating the paranormal and genuinely encountering it sounded very promising. Alas, Grave Encounters fails to reach it's potential in my opinion, although my primary objection hinges on a very subjective preconception. One that other viewers may not share.
I had high hopes for Grave Encounters after I saw the Trailer on You Tube six years ago. It got quite a lot of attention online, due to it jumping on the found footage bandwagon and by cashing in on the popularity of supernatural reality TV. The movie poster takes great pains to reference that fact. Shows such as Ghost Hunters and Most Haunted still pull in big TV ratings. Even I've been guilty of watching them in the past. So the idea of a TV crew investigating the paranormal and genuinely encountering it sounded very promising. Alas, Grave Encounters fails to reach it's potential in my opinion, although my primary objection hinges on a very subjective preconception. One that other viewers may not share.
The first act sets the scene very well with the documentary crew arriving at the Collingwood Psychiatric Hospital where unexplained phenomena has been reported for years. Front man Lance Preston (Sean Rogerson) is a self-obsessed individual and more than happy to contrive material just to make a good show. He bribes the caretaker to make false anecdotes and colludes with medium Houston Gray (Mackenzie Gray) to get the right shots and dialogue. After setting up their equipment and getting locked in for the night a series of progressively more disturbing events begin to unfold. At first these are the standard sort of ambiguous happening that are common place on these reality shows. Doors are slammed, object are moved and footsteps are heard. The movie works very well up to this point.
After an incident with EVP and the female crew member having her hair pulled, the team are genuinely startled. It is obvious that up to this point they have never truly believed in their work. So they decide to leave the building and are forced to break through the locked front doors. It is at this point in the plot that a perfectly adequate concept is abandoned for something much more ambitious. Instead of the finding the drive and grounds on the other side of the entrance, the crew finds yet more hospital corridors. The subsequent search reveals that the building is in some sort of Möbius loop and that despite the passage of time, it remains dark outside.
It is this very bold and possibly over reaching idea that I found to be the main problem with Grave Encounters. If this had been made as a traditional horror movie, shot from a third person perspective, then such a plot shift may well have been acceptable. Because Grave Encounters is shot as a faux documentary, such a major jump in the scope of the plot simply strains one’s sense of disbelief too much. If the movie had confined itself to just a single night with some low key supernatural encounters, it may well have been a superior piece of work. As it is, it jumps the shark within the idiom of the genre, offering predictable and clearly telegraphed shocks, culminating in a rather obvious ending that steps into the realms of the occult.
People have criticised Grave Encounters for its two-dimensional characters, bad dialogue and cheap digital FXs. I think this is somewhat missing the point because these have always been the mainstay of the horror genre over the last six decades. For me the film fails because it over reaches itself and ends up falling between two stools. One critic labelled it the "bastard child of The Blair Witch Project and House on Haunted Hill" which certainly sum ups what the film makers where trying to achieve. My advice is to only watch this movie if you are prepared to be forgiving. Grave Encounters in spite of its poster tagline, is neither one of the scariest or memorable movies of the year. It is adequate but flawed.
I Am Bruce Lee (2012)
Because of Bruce Lee's iconic status within popular culture there has been a wealth of material produced about him since his death. The problem lies in trying to determine what is relevant, genuine information and what is hearsay and cant. To put not too fine a point on it, there is an entire market dedicated to peddling bullshit about the man. So, I was suitably sceptical about the 2012 documentary I am Bruce Lee when it was first released. However, as Bruce Lee’s daughter, Shannon, was an executive producer and the film was officially sanctioned by the Lee estate, I felt that there was some scope for further insight in to the man.
Because of Bruce Lee's iconic status within popular culture there has been a wealth of material produced about him since his death. The problem lies in trying to determine what is relevant, genuine information and what is hearsay and cant. To put not too fine a point on it, there is an entire market dedicated to peddling bullshit about the man. So, I was suitably sceptical about the 2012 documentary I am Bruce Lee when it was first released. However, as Bruce Lee’s daughter, Shannon, was an executive producer and the film was officially sanctioned by the Lee estate, I felt that there was some scope for further insight in to the man.
Having now watched the documentary, I do feel that the results are somewhat varied. I am Bruce Lee covers a lot of familiar ground initially, referencing his youth in Hong Kong, his "legendary" fights and his subsequent move to the US. It also explores Lee’s frustration with the film and TV industry. The script is concise but hardly new. It also glosses over certain facts pertaining to his marriage and family life. There is also a very broad selection of talking heads, offering their take on the man, his skills and philosophy. Some are edifying and others are not so. However, what is highlighted is the influence that Bruce Lee had and continues to have with a broad spectrum of people. Particularly musicians and performing artists, as well as those dedicated to martial arts. His ethnicity also seems to play a key role, casting him as the "outsider" to the perceived establishment.
Where I think I am Bruce Lee specifically fails is with regard to Lee’s impact upon mixed martial arts in the US. Not being an expert myself, I was confronted with differing opinions and not given any clear insight about which point of view was right. If the conclusion was that the debate is still ongoing, then even that gets lost in the overall white noise. Furthermore, this aspect of the documentary was a stark contrast to the philosophical musings of Bruce Lee. For me this was the best part of the documentary, as it portrayed him as a genuine thinker and artist across many disciplines. Lee was a keen believer in adapting and assimilating any knowledge and skills that were beneficial to his life. His musing on simply “being human” were quite scholarly.
Overall I am Bruce Lee is a good starting point for those who are interested in the man and wish to go beyond the apocrypha and myths. It certainly is not the definitive exploration of his legend but it may well inspire people to look further. It does confirm, through a wealth of vintage interviews and home video footage, that Bruce Lee had an inherent star quality and was a deep thinker as well as a superb martial artist. His words still speak clearly for themselves today and there really is no requirement for further testimony to this affect from Mickey Rourke and a host of other curiously chosen pundits.
The Songs of Middle-earth: Part One
Tolkien's use of song and verse are an integral part of his writings. I am not musically talented myself, nor am I a scholar of song structure but I appreciate how he uses them for plot exposition and character development. In The Lord of the Rings, the medium of song is also used as a means of conveying the enormity of Middle Earth and the wealth of history therein. They give us a sense of the realms lore and heritage, stretching back over millennia. The respective sophistication of each song also reflects the culture that created them. Songs from The Shire are rustic and quaint. The songs of Men are bombastic and bold. Whereas Elven music is often melancholy and complex.
Tolkien's use of song and verse are an integral part of his writings. I am not musically talented myself, nor am I a scholar of song structure but I appreciate how he uses them for plot exposition and character development. In The Lord of the Rings, the medium of song is also used as a means of conveying the enormity of Middle Earth and the wealth of history therein. They give us a sense of the realms lore and heritage, stretching back over millennia. The respective sophistication of each song also reflects the culture that created them. Songs from The Shire are rustic and quaint. The songs of Men are bombastic and bold. Whereas Elven music is often melancholy and complex.
Norse and Anglo-Saxon Mythology were immensely important and influential on Tolkien. Thus, many of his songs are in the idiom of Norse poetry. He often uses literary devices such as the pitch of repeating vowel sounds (assonance) as well as the resonance of repeating consonant sounds (both in alliteration and in consonance). Tolkien himself sanctioned composer Donald Swann (of Flanders and Swann fame) to set some of his work to music and it met with his approval. Yet there are no definitive musical versions. This leaves a great deal of scope for artists from all musical disciplines to interpret his work.
A Google search will provide you with a wealth of artists that have attempted to bring Tolkien’s songs to life. From Rick Wakeman, Daniel McCarthy to Sir Christopher Lee. I have selected a few of examples of these for your consideration. Some are the exact songs as they were written by the Professor himself, with accompanying music. Others have been cleverly adapted or abridged. I have even included some material that was simply inspired by Professor Tolkien's work.
The BBC radio adaptation of The Lord of the Rings in 1981 was a milestone in radio drama. Composer Stephen Oliver made an immeasurable contribution to the production with his intelligent and musically literate expressions of Tolkien's written work. O Elbereth Gilthoniel is a paean in reverence of the star Queen. Oliver cleverly adapts the Sindarin text into a beautiful and expressive song, sung in the style of a madrigal. It is a bold interpretation yet it works superbly, reflecting the artistic dignity of the Elves.
A Elbereth Gilthoniel
silivren penna míriel
o menel aglar elenath!
Na-chaered palan-díriel
o galadhremmin ennorath,
Fanuilos, le linnathon
nef aear, sí nef aearon!
A Elbereth Gilthoniel
o menel palan-diriel,
le nallon sí di'nguruthos!
A tiro nin, Fanuilos!
O Elbereth Starkindler,
white-glittering, slanting down sparkling like a jewel,
the glory of the starry host!
Having gazed far away
from the tree-woven lands of Middle-earth,
to thee, Everwhite, I will sing,
on this side of the Sea, here on this side of the Ocean!
O Elbereth Starkindler,
from heaven gazing afar,
to thee I cry now beneath the shadow of death!
O look towards me, Everwhite!
Now this may be a controversial choice, coming from the 1977 animated version of The Hobbit. It is not a film held in high regard. In the Valley, Ha! Ha! written by Jules Bass and performed by Glenn Yarbrough is based upon the song the Elves sing as the Dwarves, Gandalf and Bilbo ride down into the Valley of Rivendell for the first time. The musical arrangement is very much a product of the seventies and the warbling voice of Mr. Yarbrough is not to everyone's liking. Yet it catches the light-hearted spirit of the source text very well and it is worryingly hummable. I have warmed to it in recent years and consider it a good example of less being more.
O! What are you doing,
And where are you going?
Your ponies need shoeing!
The River is flowing!
O! Tra-la-la-lally
Here down in the valley!
Ha ha!
O! Where are you going,
With beards all a-wagging?
No knowing, no knowing
What brings Mister Baggins,
And Balin and Dwalin
In June in the valley
Ha ha!
O! Will you be staying,
Or will you be flying?
Your ponies are straying!
The daylight is dying!
To fly would be folly,
To stay would be jolly!
O! Tril-lil-lil-lolly
Ha ha!
O! What are you doing,
And where are you going?
Your ponies need shoeing!
The River is flowing!
O! Tra-la-la-lally
Here down in the valley!
Ha ha!
Mithrandir by Leonard Rosenman with lyrics by Mark Fleischer, comes from the 1978 animated version of The Lord of the Rings. The score by veteran composer Rosenman is not considered to be a particularly innovative piece of work but it is both functional and adequate. Director Ralph Bakshi found it clichéd and wanted a soundtrack by led Zeppelin. The song is somewhat traditional in its style, starting with elements of a holiday choir and ending in a Miklos Rozsa style biblical idiom. Yet despite its clumsy implementation the lyrics are a curiously accurate summation of Gandalf's character. The song is sung in Lothlorien as a lament to the Grey Pilgrim and is moving in a rather honest and simple fashion.
Let the night never cease to call you
Let the day nevermore be the same
Though you've gone where we cannot find you
In each heart you have set your name
Mithrandir far you wander
And long may your name be sung
Through kingdoms of starlight
And realms of the sun
Mithrandir though you're hidden
We're still guided by your light
You're walking beside us
A friend in the night
We were lost when the dark descended
And the light gathered into a storm
You appeared like a sunlit morning
At the winds of a world at war
Mithrandir far you wander
And long may your name be sung
Through kingdoms of starlight
And realms of the sun
Mithrandir though you're hidden
We're still guided by your light
You're walking beside us
A friend in the night
Mithrandir rising through the shadow
Like a star shining deep in its home
You will dwell in our hearts forever
Nevermore will we stand alone
Argo: Declassified Extended Edition (2012)
If you are looking for a factually accurate account of the "Canadian Caper" then it may be advisable to read a book on the matter. If you’re happy to suffice with an entertaining movie that explores the complexity of international relations, the phoney nature of the movie industry and the machinations of the intelligence community then Argo has is for you. It's well written with solid performances and achieves that unique cinematic goal of keeping the viewer in a genuine state of tension, despite knowing in advance the historical outcome. Very few movies have successfully done this.
If you are looking for a factually accurate account of the "Canadian Caper" then it may be advisable to read a book on the matter. If you’re happy to suffice with an entertaining movie that explores the complexity of international relations, the phoney nature of the movie industry and the machinations of the intelligence community then Argo has is for you. It's well written with solid performances and achieves that unique cinematic goal of keeping the viewer in a genuine state of tension, despite knowing in advance the historical outcome. Very few movies have successfully done this.
The plot revolves around an elaborate scheme to rescue six American Embassy staff who managed to escape the 1979 siege, who end up hiding out in the Canadian Ambassador’s residence. Central Intelligence Agency operative Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) devises an ingenious cover story in which the US diplomats take on the guise of a Canadian film production team who are scouting Iran for location for a Sci-Fi movie entitled "Argo". Despite the incredulity of his superior in the intelligence service and the State Department, Mendez seeks the aid of make-up artists John Chambers (John Goodman) and Hollywood producer Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin). Eventually circumstances and a lack of alternative options means the plan is put into effect but will it fool the Revolutionary Guard?
For me Argo is at its best when it explores the fake production for the movie that doesn't exist. The popularity of Sci-Fi on TV and in movies during the early eighties is cleverly referenced. A visit to Burbank Studios shows Cylons from Battlestar Galactica take a break and drinking coffee between scenes. The offices of Lester Siegel are adorned with genre movie posters and John Chambers trailer is filled with prosthetic memorabilia including a chimpanzee mask from Planet of the Apes. Alan Arkin and John Goodman excel in their respective roles and the banter between the two is priceless. When discussing a low budget movie he is working on, Chambers quips "The target audience will hate it". "Who's the target audience" Mendez asks. "People with eyes" retorts chambers.
The scenes in Tehran have an authentic feel to them and the production has gone to lengths to recreate a lot of the footage that was originally shown on network television at the time. The dynamics of the group of diplomats is very credible as they begin to panic over their fate. The final act as the group try and board a Swissair flight in the guise of a film production team is genuinely tense, especially when their credential are checked and an attempt is made to call the studio offices. The finale features a chase between troops in a truck and a Boeing 747. It is somewhat melodramatic but doesn't go so far as to jump the shark. After all this is a thriller and one expects a degree of tension.
The Declassified Extended Edition of Argo adds an additional ten minutes to the theatrical release. The material is mainly back story and character development, yet there are some crucial scenes that are expanded that shed a little more light into how Mendez came up with his idea for "Argo". These revolve around the CIA operative phoning his son and discussing what he's watching on television. This lead to an epiphany that Mendez has while channel surfing and catching a re-run of Battle for the Planet of the Apes. The extended edition does add a little more to the movie and makes for a more rounded cinematic experience.
Argo is an intriguing and dramatic story. It finds an even balance between nationalism and entertainment. The production values are high and the ensemble cast are outstanding. For anyone with a love of cinema who's over a certain age, then the early eighties setting will particularly resonate. It is interesting to revisit an era when movie hype was controlled by the industry trade press and that a full page promotional poster in Variety was sufficient to sell a production. It's also worth remembering that "Argo" was at one point, scheduled to be a genuine movie. The screenplay was based on Sci-Fi writer Roger Zelazny's novel Lords of Light and the storyboard and production art were created by legendary artist Jack Kirby. The production went into turnaround and the script ended up being procured by the CIA. Truth is often stranger than fiction.
LOTRO 10th Anniversary: Remembering LOTRO Part 1
On Monday 22nd December 2008, I visited the Game store at Colliers Wood, South West London. I was working at St George’s Hospital in Tooting the time at and the nearby shopping centre was an ideal place to spend the lunch hour. As I perused the shelves in the PC gaming section, I spotted a “compilation pack” that contained not only the MMORPG The Lord of the Rings Online but it’s recently released expansion pack, Mines of Moria. Although I was aware of the MMO genre at the time, I had never played one beyond a trial of Star Wars: Galaxies. However, as I had recently moved and was living alone, I was in the perfect position to start playing such a game. So, I decided to take the plunge and buy LOTRO for the bargain price of twenty pounds. There was also a sizeable display for World of Warcraft in the shop, which was by far the market leader at the time. Yet because I’ve always been a Tolkien fan, I just naturally gravitated toward buying LOTRO and it never crossed my mind to buy another product.
On Monday 22nd December 2008, I visited the Game store at Colliers Wood, South West London. I was working at St George’s Hospital in Tooting the time at and the nearby shopping centre was an ideal place to spend the lunch hour. As I perused the shelves in the PC gaming section, I spotted a “compilation pack” that contained not only the MMORPG The Lord of the Rings Online but it’s recently released expansion pack, Mines of Moria. Although I was aware of the MMO genre at the time, I had never played one beyond a trial of Star Wars: Galaxies. However, as I had recently moved and was living alone, I was in the perfect position to start playing such a game. So, I decided to take the plunge and buy LOTRO for the bargain price of twenty pounds. There was also a sizeable display for World of Warcraft in the shop, which was by far the market leader at the time. Yet because I’ve always been a Tolkien fan, I just naturally gravitated toward buying LOTRO and it never crossed my mind to buy another product.
I installed and started playing the game that very night. It should be noted that the European version of LOTRO was distributed and administered under license by Codemasters at the time. So, I set up a subscription and on a whim decided to create my first character on Gilrain server, which met my language and social requirements. Having spent some time reading about the various classes in LOTRO, I can remember now that I was still a little confused by it all. Yet there was something about the Lore-master that just seemed to appeal to me. Perhaps it was the pets, or its semi-magical status. Although I wasn’t that au fait with control classes, I found the explanation of how the Lore-master fought intriguing. “The Lore-master uses his knowledge of ancient wisdom to stave off the advance of the shadow for a time. He can use his knowledge to attack his foes or to treat the wounds and suffering of his companions. He can even communicate with animals and request their aid”.
Let it suffice to say that the tutorial quickly got my orientated in the game. Having been a gamer prior to LOTRO, meant that the learning curve was not so steep. The other advantage I benefitted from by playing LOTRO at this particular time, eighteen months after its launch, was that there was a wealth of online resources for the game already in place. This proved invaluable because things were pretty different in LOTRO back in late 2008. For example, the location of quest objectives were not directly marked on the map. The quest bestowal details usually referred to a specific area which you then had to find and search. Sometimes this would be a very intuitive process but from time to time there would be frustration. Thus, fan sites and blog would often have map coordinates to aid this process. Obtaining a mount was also a challenge. A player didn’t become eligible to purchase a horse until level 35. It also cost a tidy sum of gold and was dependent on a somewhat convoluted quest.
Looking back now at these early days of LOTRO, the most pronounced difference was the fact that much of the game was designed to be completed in a group or fellowship. The Epic storyline frequently had group content as did a percentage of the regional quests. Zone chat was filled with requests for fellowships. Yet because of the volume of players in the game and that fact that Middle-earth had not yet grown to the size that it has now, finding a group was never an issue. There was also a prevailing sense of camaraderie. If a random stranger sent you a tell, you’d more than likely answer it. For the most part, the game was populated by mature Tolkien fans and as a result, things remained mainly civil. Plus, the concept of multiplayer gaming was still novel.
It took me nine months of to reach the then level cap of sixty. That meant playing most evenings and investing a considerable amount of time into LOTRO. There were occasions over weekends where I’d spend a whole day playing. There were also plenty of late nights, although I never did this at the expense of my personal life or work. However, let me be clear, LOTRO at the time became my primary means of entertainment and therefore I was happy to lavish it with attention. As I’m not the sort of player to experiment with multiple alts, this time was exclusively invested into my Lore-master. Lore-master crowd control skills were a key part of group play back then, so I found myself regularly grouping. As a result, friendships were formed and eventually I found the right kinship for me. Eight years on I’m still an active member of it.
Kinships always have been the heart and soul of LOTRO. They come in many shapes and sizes, catering to all types of gameplay. Yet they all have mutual support and friendship in common. What I particularly like about my kinship is its diversity and inherent good humour. It includes people from all over Europe and various walks of life. As a result, interacting with such a cross section of people has been a very positive experience and has certainly broadened my horizons. Then of course there’s the community outside of the game itself. The bloggers, podcasters, streamers and such like. Many are still active today but seven or eight years ago the scene was much bigger and very lively. Because of that community I changed my existing website to a LOTRO blog and instantly it got traction. LOTRO also inspired me to podcast. I can honestly say I’ve not encountered anything similar in all the subsequent MMOs that I’ve experienced.
To be continued.
The Grey (2012)
Contrary to its rather obvious marketing, The Grey is not just a black and white, testosterone fuelled, action movie. It has far greater philosophical aspirations. Beneath the survivalist storyline is a narrative that explores the nature of hope, human determination and the inevitability of death as well as its place in the natural order of things. This is surprisingly cerebral for a film of this genre. It is sombre and dour but totally justified in adopting such tones. Director Joe Carnahan initially sets out a traditional scenario of a rag tag group of oil workers, desperately trying to survive the Alaskan wilderness, after a plane crash. They look to Liam Neeson to assume the alpha-male role for their group. However, we soon discover that he is wrestling with his own personal demons.
Contrary to its rather obvious marketing, The Grey is not just a black and white, testosterone fuelled, action movie. It has far greater philosophical aspirations. Beneath the survivalist storyline is a narrative that explores the nature of hope, human determination and the inevitability of death as well as its place in the natural order of things. This is surprisingly cerebral for a film of this genre. It is sombre and dour but totally justified in adopting such tones. Director Joe Carnahan initially sets out a traditional scenario of a rag tag group of oil workers, desperately trying to survive the Alaskan wilderness, after a plane crash. They look to Liam Neeson to assume the alpha-male role for their group. However, we soon discover that he is wrestling with his own personal demons.
It is here that the film shows some interesting strengths and weaknesses, by exploring the back story of the various survivors and how each copes with the hopelessness of their situation. Neeson softly calms a dying man, explaining the nature of death and helping him accept his fate. It is a scene that works well. But some of the other survivors do seem to lack credibility and are somewhat arbitrary. They serve as red shirt wolf fodder and are primarily there to expedite the plot. The wolves themselves, although ferocious are treated more as an allegorical device, rather than a traditional foe. The attacks are rapidly edited and much of the violence depicted is of the aftermath of these encounters.
The Grey reminded me of several classic Hollywood films, not so much by direct comparison, but simply though similarity of themes and ideas. The Flight of the Phoenix, Sands of the Kalahari and even Zulu sprang to mind. But the films greatest asset, irrespective of these cinematic homages, is the central performance by Liam Neeson. His commanding on-screen presence is utterly convincing and binds the film together. There is genuine dignity in his character as he grapples with his obligations to those that look to him for leadership. A lesser actor would have rendered the film nothing more than a story of man versus the environment. Neeson elevates it to a different level; a thought provoking, existentialist parable.
Christianity and the Easter TV Schedules
As a child growing up in the seventies, Sundays had a distinctly different feel to the other days of the week. The entire pace was more sedate and there was atmosphere of restraint. My parents would chide me for excessive noise. Activities such as reading or drawing where favoured over playing outside. The TV schedules reflected this as well. At the time, there were three terrestrial channels and only one of them was a commercial business. However, Sunday mornings would always have a televised service and there would often be a show offering some moral or ethical debate around midday. The early evening saw a similar broadcast of worship. Christianity was still an integral part of the television.
As a child growing up in the seventies, Sundays had a distinctly different feel to the other days of the week. The entire pace was more sedate and there was atmosphere of restraint. My parents would chide me for excessive noise. Activities such as reading or drawing where favoured over playing outside. The TV schedules reflected this as well. At the time, there were three terrestrial channels and only one of them was a commercial business. However, Sunday mornings would always have a televised service and there would often be a show offering some moral or ethical debate around midday. The early evening saw a similar broadcast of worship. Christianity was still an integral part of the television.
Unlike the US, the UK does not have (and never has had) a direct separation of Church and State. For centuries the Church has had a direct influence over the political agenda and has shaped the cultural landscape. During the seventies, nothing was open on a Sunday, as the trading laws were still subject to a strong Christian lobby. Obviously due to my age at the time, I didn't see or understand the integral role Christianity played within UK society. Yet it was always there, be it at school, on TV or in the newspapers. Any vox pop at the time would always have a member of the clergy contributing. The ubiquitous presence of Christianity was such that it became reflected in popular culture. Most sitcoms would include a vicar at some point. I have fond memories of The Reverend Timothy Farthing (Frank Williams) in Dad's Army.
Roll on forty years and much has changed. The Church of England is in decline and certainly the lobbying power of the Christian community has diminished. The UK has become a far more secular nation and Sundays feel pretty much like any other day of the week nowadays. As a result of this shift, religious content on terrestrial network TV has similarly been reduced. As it is currently Easter, I made a cursory check of the TV guide for faith based content and apart from a few broadcasts of church services, there is precious little on to celebrate Easter. Even the traditional Hollywood religious epics such as The King of Kings with Jeffrey Hunter or George Stevens’ The Greatest Story Ever Told, with its distinctly Caucasian depiction of the Holy Lands, are missing from the schedules.
Since the advent of digital satellite, cable services, VOD and You Tube, is that faith based programming has moved to these new platforms and has to compete with the sheer volume of alternative TV that is available. Something that many other TV genres has had to do. I will leave it to you to decide whether this is a good or a bad thing. However, I would like to make this point. One of the most important weekly shows for me as a child was Top of the Pops. It featured a selection of artists every Thursday, depending on what was doing well in the UK singles. Due to the lack of alternative shows, viewers would watch thirty minutes of a variety of different music. Not all of it would be to their taste but it exposed the public to a broad cross section of musical genres. Nowadays there are niche market channels that provide audience with just the music they want, thus insulating them from anything else. It is this very proliferation of choice that means that many people are simply no longer exposed to any religious content on TV.
I think that it’s beneficial for people to have a broad knowledge of multiple belief systems. There is a great deal of misinformation about the Christian faith and other faiths. The public as well as a lot of Christians themselves are not very well informed about the doctrines and fundamental underpinnings of Christianity. Perhaps at times such as Easter, rather than just showing traditional TV fodder such as church services or re-enactment of The Passion, perhaps it would be wiser to have more documentaries and current affairs programs that explore what it is to be a Christian in the in the twenty first century. What it can and cannot offer. In the meantime, Happy Easter to all, whether you enjoy it as a public holiday or whether it is the focal point of your religious calendar. As for me, I'm off to watch Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ. A challenging and intelligent exploration of Christ's final hours. And don’t forget, chocolate eggs will be half price on Tuesday.
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016)
I thoroughly enjoyed the first Jack Reacher upon its release in 2012. It was a stylishly made, well written, character driven thriller with solid performances and great action sequences. I think a lot of the movies success came down to director Christopher McQuarrie who patently had a good grasp of the source material and how the genre works best. Therefore, when I noticed that he was conspicuously absent from the recent sequel Jack Reacher: Never Go Back, I was curious as to who would fill his shoes. Edward Zwick, an experienced film maker who has worked with Tom Cruise before, directs this time round. All the elements that were present in the first movie are here again. The cast is robust and the narrative concise. Reacher is still an engaging protagonist. Yet for some reason that I can’t exactly put my finger on, the pieces just don’t seem to fit together.
I thoroughly enjoyed the first Jack Reacher upon its release in 2012. It was a stylishly made, well written, character driven thriller with solid performances and great action sequences. I think a lot of the movies success came down to director Christopher McQuarrie who patently had a good grasp of the source material and how the genre works best. Therefore, when I noticed that he was conspicuously absent from the recent sequel Jack Reacher: Never Go Back, I was curious as to who would fill his shoes. Edward Zwick, an experienced film maker who has worked with Tom Cruise before, directs this time round. All the elements that were present in the first movie are here again. The cast is robust and the narrative concise. Reacher is still an engaging protagonist. Yet for some reason that I can’t exactly put my finger on, the pieces just don’t seem to fit together.
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back starts with a vignette which establishes the character’s credentials as an ex- Military Police Officer who now lives off the grid. Despite his drifter lifestyle Reacher still has links to the US Army and over time develops a bond with Major Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders). While making an impromptu visit to Washington, he discovers the Major has been relieved of command pending a court martial for murder and espionage. As Reacher investigates, he finds himself up against rogue military contractor Parasource and an assassin who is more than his match. Matters are further complicated when Reacher learns that he may have a daughter (Danika Yarosh) and that her life may be in danger from Parasource.
Neither the plot or performances seem to be the problem with Jack Reacher: Never Go Back. The overall production despite a budget of $60 million, seems a little underwhelming. Edward Zwick doesn’t stamp any particular tone or feeling on the proceedings. Washington and New Orleans are usually interesting and charismatic settings for a motion picture, yet precious little is done with them on this occasion. Director of photography Oliver Wood has shot several action movies over the years (Die Hard 2, The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum) and can usually utilise locations well. In this instance, the character of the surrounding is conspicuously absent from many scenes. The cinematography is somewhat stark and the production spends too much time in warehouses and government buildings.
Another aspect of the film that seems off, is the editing. Billy Weber is an editor of note and has worked well with such directors as Terence Malick. He certainly has constructed some robust action scenes in previous movies such as The Warriors, 48 Hrs and Extreme Prejudice. Yet here the fights sequences seem poorly constructed often obscuring what is actually happening. Beyond these set pieces the whole movie has a somewhat stilted and awkward feel to it. At times the production has a distinct television feel to it and I wonder if there were time constraints when filming or whether much of the work was delegated to understudies and journeymen crew members.
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back lacks the polish of its predecessor. The ingredients are all present yet the end product is not of the quality one was expecting. The film also contains some unnecessary genre tropes that a director of Zwick’s standing shouldn’t need to use. “Red shirt” henchmen wear sunglasses for example. The main villain played by Patrick Heusinger sports black leather driving gloves to denote his evil status. Again, it smacks of someone else with less experienced, involvement. However, in all fairness the film is not a total disaster. Cruise manages to do most of the heavy lifting and still turns in a watchable performance. The plot is acceptable and the film works well as evening-in entertainment. However, if I had paid to see this at the cinema I would have been deeply disappointed.
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back made a profit at the box office but nowhere near as much as the first movie. The critics were also split on the films virtues. Therefore, the future of Jack Reacher’s cinematic adventures remains in question. However, if a third movie is commissioned I’m sure Tom Cruise could carry it off, being a good shape for a man in his mid-fifties. The alternative is that the franchise sits on the back burner, while the suits ponder which direction it should take. Then like Alex Cross, there could well be a reboot rather than a continuation. It’s a shame because Lee Child’s books lend themselves well to film, yet after a great start their cinematic adaptations seems to have stumbled somewhat. Perhaps a TV show on cable would be a more suitable medium.
Jack Reacher (2012)
There is often scope for controversy whenever a well-known literary figure is brought to the big screen. Physical descriptions previously established by the author are often ignored in favour of casting a known star. However, books and film are very different mediums so such changes can be done in the name of artistic license. Furthermore, if they are done with intelligence and integrity they can be beneficial. The casting of Tom Cruise as Jack Reacher is a bold step because of the obvious difference between the actor's and fictional character's stature. Yet it works extremely well. Tom Cruise simply excels in the role. It should also be noted that author Lee Child endorsed his casting, stating that “Reacher's size in the books is a metaphor for an unstoppable force, which Cruise portrays in his own way."
There is often scope for controversy whenever a well-known literary figure is brought to the big screen. Physical descriptions previously established by the author are often ignored in favour of casting a known star. However, books and film are very different mediums so such changes can be done in the name of artistic license. Furthermore, if they are done with intelligence and integrity they can be beneficial. The casting of Tom Cruise as Jack Reacher is a bold step because of the obvious difference between the actor's and fictional character's stature. Yet it works extremely well. Tom Cruise simply excels in the role. It should also be noted that author Lee Child endorsed his casting, stating that “Reacher's size in the books is a metaphor for an unstoppable force, which Cruise portrays in his own way."
So now that we have that matter out of the way, what exactly does Jack Reacher have to offer as a mainstream Hollywood thriller? Well for starters it has a tightly written, intelligent script filled with interesting, plausible characters and a story-line that doesn't strain ones sense of incredulity. Secondly, it is well paced, beautifully shot, showcases strong performances from all involved and keeps the audience emotionally invested and engaged. Finally, unlike many movies that cynically exploit the confines of the PG-13 rating, trying to peddle adult themes to a younger audience without dirtying their hands; Jack Reacher successfully depicts acts of violence with restraint and skill, portraying dark and quite shocking events in a dramatic yet unexploitative manner. Simple put this is very good cinema.
After an ex-military sniper appears to shoot five innocent people in cold blood, the Police and D.A. think they have an open and shut case. The only request that the suspects makes is "get Jack Reacher". Within a matter of hours, the said Mr. Reacher arrives but to the defence councils surprise, not to exonerate the accused but to "bury him". Surprised by the accused's request, Reacher then embarks upon his own investigation and it soon becomes apparent that all it not what it seems and someone powerful wants Reacher’s enquiries shutdown. However, Jack has no intention of being sidelined and uses his experience as a former Military Policeman to penetrate the ongoing mystery.
At the centre of the movie is Tom Cruise, who brings Jack Reacher to life in a very natural performance. Reacher is not a traditional hero, nor is he as binary as many other alpha male stereotypes. His appeal lies in his keen mind, which stems from his military training. His strong moral code and direct manner also make his character both credible and likeable. Writer/Director Christopher McQuarrie does not add any unnecessary Hollywood tropes to the screenplay. There is no superfluous romance between Reacher and defence lawyer Helen Rodin (Rosamund Pike). Rodin is also a credible female character and bereft of the usual stereotypical baggage. The dialogue is candid and direct, with Reacher especially speaking his mind. The hand to hand combat and the use of firearms are depicted realistically. The movie makes no concessions to lazy viewers and expects the audience to concentrate and think.
If this wasn't enough, we are also treated to an extended cameo by Robert Duvall, who as usual makes great acting look so easy and natural. Frankly I was surprised at how good this movie was and the impact it had. It reminded me of many the great thrillers produced during the seventies; films such as Three Days of the Condor and The Taking of Pelham One Two Three. Movies that were lean, streamlined and driven by strong scripts and performances. Jack Reacher most definitely has that vibe to it as well as the sumptuous visual sophistication that modern film making can have. The dialogue is littered with dry quips and asides which enhances the characters. They're relatively profanity free which is a rare thing these days, yet still very effective.
I have never read any of Lee Child's novels so I was able to watch this movie adaptation without any major pre-conceptions. From my perspective, Jack Reacher is a breath of fresh air and a welcome improvement on mainstream studio thrillers. For those who have a strong connection to the source text, I would urge them to temporarily put aside their preconceptions and give Jack Reacher an objective viewing, bearing in mind the key word “adaptation”. I think people may well be pleasantly surprised, especially in light of the authors own personal endorsement.
CMP Giveaway: Win a Copy of Mass Effect: Andromeda for the PC (Closed)
It’s been a while since there’s been any giveaways on Contains Moderate Peril. I won’t bore you with the details why. Legal complexities although pertinent are exquisitely tedious. So, to cut a long story short, here is a chance to win a copy of the popular RPG Mass Effect: Andromeda (standard edition) for the PC. Do I really need to write a potted summary of what this game is about? I think not. Despite the controversy surrounding aspects of the game upon its launch on the 21st March, it would appear that this title has still found favour with the gaming community. So, I thought it the perfect title to feature as the first Contains Moderate Peril giveaway of 2017. Keep checking the site, we have more to come over the month ahead.
It’s been a while since there’s been any giveaways on Contains Moderate Peril. I won’t bore you with the details why. Legal complexities although pertinent are exquisitely tedious. So, to cut a long story short, here is a chance to win a copy of the popular RPG Mass Effect: Andromeda (standard edition) for the PC. Do I really need to write a potted summary of what this game is about? I think not. Despite the controversy surrounding aspects of the game upon its launch on the 21st March, it would appear that this title has still found favour with the gaming community. So, I thought it the perfect title to feature as the first Contains Moderate Peril giveaway of 2017. Keep checking the site, we have more to come over the month ahead.
Here are the minimum and optimum PC requirements to play Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Minimum System Requirements
OS: 64-bit Windows 7, Windows 8.1, or Windows 10
CPU: Intel Core i5 3570 or AMD FX-6350
RAM: 8 GB
GPU: Nvidia GTX 660 2 GB, AMD Radeon 7850 2 GB
Hard Drive: At least 55 GB of free space
DirectX: DirectX 11
Recommended System Requirements
OS: 64-bit Windows 7, Windows 8.1, or Windows 10
CPU: Intel Core i7-4790 or AMD FX-8350
RAM: 16 GB
GPU: Nvidia GTX 1060 3 GB, AMD RX 480 4 GB
Hard Drive: At least 55 GB of free space
DirectX: DirectX 11
To enter follow the instructions below:
There are two ways to enter the draw. You may use anyone of them or both for a chances to win.
Method 1: Simply leave a comment on this post using a legitimate email address that you can be reached on.
Method 2: Follow @ModeratePeril on Twitter, then use your Twitter account to tweet this exact phrase: Win a copy of Mass Effect Andromeda @ModeratePeril http://bit.ly/2nNh5lI #MEACMP #Giveaway #Competition
The competition will close on Sunday 30th April 2017 at 18:00 GMT.
Terms & Conditions:
1.) One entry per person, per method (comment or Twitter) please. Total of 2 possible entries per person. To comply with UK ratings regulations all entrants must be 18 or over.
2.) Any entry using an IP address that's already logged will be deleted. Effectively only one set of entries per household.
3.) The actual text of your comment has no bearing on the competition, although it is sensible to be polite. It is irrelevant whether you post a unique comment or a reply to another person.
4.) Contains Moderate Peril's decision is final. There will not be a debate, steward’s enquiry or inquest into who won.
5.) The winner will be contacted by email or Twitter Direct Message. If they do not reply within 2 days, the prize will be re-allocated.
6.) The prize will be in the form of a region free game code for the Origin game platform. The winner will need to have or create an Origin account.
7.) Contains Moderate Peril contributors cannot enter.
8.) By entering you accept responsibility that the prize is compatible with your hardware. If you win and it's not, that is your problem and you have no recourse to Contains Moderate Peril.
9.) The winner may not request that the prize be transferred to any other person. No cash alternative or alternative prize is available on entrant's request but in the event of the advertised competition prize being unavailable we reserve the right to offer an alternative prize of equal or greater value.
10.) Entry in the competition implies acceptance of these rules
Good luck.