The Dark Tower (2017)
Stephen King’s body of work has proven to be an invaluable source of material for film and television over the last forty years. The results have often been as varied as the books themselves. Because of the inherent differences between the respective mediums, sometimes the complexity and sheer scope of King’s work can be lost in translation from one to the other. It’s happened before with several high-profile adaptations and it will no doubt happen again. The Dark Tower is a classic example failing to capture the essence of King’s work. Trying to distil and convey a mythos that is spread over eight volumes, into a single movie is a tall order for any director and screen writer. It can be cogently argued that material of this sort is better suited to television where lengthy, complex story arcs can be indulged and characters can be explored at leisure. In fact, during it’s time in development hell, The Dark Tower was at one point destined to be adapted for the small screen. However, the desire to create a lucrative film franchise ultimately prevailed.
Stephen King’s body of work has proven to be an invaluable source of material for film and television over the last forty years. The results have often been as varied as the books themselves. Because of the inherent differences between the respective mediums, sometimes the complexity and sheer scope of King’s work can be lost in translation from one to the other. It’s happened before with several high-profile adaptations and it will no doubt happen again. The Dark Tower is a classic example failing to capture the essence of King’s work. Trying to distil and convey a mythos that is spread over eight volumes, into a single movie is a tall order for any director and screen writer. It can be cogently argued that material of this sort is better suited to television where lengthy, complex story arcs can be indulged and characters can be explored at leisure. In fact, during it’s time in development hell, The Dark Tower was at one point destined to be adapted for the small screen. However, the desire to create a lucrative film franchise ultimately prevailed.
As an action fantasy, The Dark Tower is rather traditional in its themes, use of archetypes and narrative structure. Teenager Jake Chambers (Tom Taylor) has recurring dreams involving a Man in Black (Matthew McConaughey) who seeks to destroy a Tower and bring ruin to the universe. He also sees a Gunslinger (Indris Elba) who opposes him. Jake's mother (Katheryn Winnick) and stepfather believe that he has been traumatised by his father's death the previous year and arrange for him to be taken into psychiatric care. However, Jake recognizes the Doctor and her staff from his visions. They are in fact monsters wearing human skin, so he subsequently escapes. Finding a portal in an abandoned house, Jake travel to Mid-World where he meets the legendary Gunslinger Roland Deschain. However, Deschain is a broken man who only seeks revenge for the death of his father (Dennis Haysbert). Can Jake convince him to save the Dark Tower and universe that it protects?
Although I have read many of Stephen King’s book, I am not familiar with the source material in this instance, beyond its initial premise. Therefore, I approached The Dark Tower with little or no preconceptions and a distinct lack of fan based baggage. What became very apparent while watching the film, was the pacing of the story and the flow of the narrative, which were very fast. Characters were introduced, plot points were explained and the story arc was propelled forward at an unusually quick pace. All of which smacks of a movie that has been excessively re-edited and retooled. I suspect the original vision of the movie was changed in post-production and revised for a different demographic.The film as it currently stands has a very simplistic and linear trajectory. There is little or no depth to any of the central characters and no insight into Mid-World beyond what we are shown. As a result, the film lacks any tension or dramatic hold over the audience. The Dark Tower does look like a high budget movie but its overall narrative has precious little substance. Its ninety-five-minute running time is far too short and the film needs at least another twenty to thirty minutes to expand upon its themes.
There are only three action sequences of note in The Dark Tower but they lack impact due to their arbitrary nature. The movie is also somewhat shy of violence and I suspect that a lot material was edited out. The camera moves way from such content, rather than substituting it with more bloodless material, as is the norm with PG-13 rated movies. The devil is in the detail. At one point a sniper is shot through the telescopic sight of his rifle. The optics shatter, his head whips back and then there is a fast cut to the next step in the action scene. It feels like there is a specific bullet hit missing and the rhythm of the scene just feels off. The net result of this lack of gritty action, as well as the condensed narrative, is that the entire film is somewhat indifferent. Rather than feeling enthused by the characters and their fate, there’s a distinct air of “so what” when the film ends. It’s a shame because The Dark Tower could have been a welcome change to the usual fantasy and super hero driven franchises. However, it looks increasingly unlikely that we’ll see a sequel to this movie in the immediate future due to its poor box office and critical reception.
Operation Avalanche (2016)
Conspiracy theories and found footage movies. Two genres with infinite scope to be tedious and uninspired on a low budget. Yet writer and director Matt Johnson manages to do something quite clever with both cinematic styles in his recent movie Operation Avalanche. He takes the basic conceit of the two formats and uses them to tell a tale based upon one of the most iconic moments of twentieth century history. Namely the moon landing of 1969. The results are surprising, intelligent and thought provoking, although a little uneven. Furthermore, I discovered this enjoyable curiosity via the GoodBadFlicks on You Tube. If you are interested in obscure and niche market genre creations then do check out this channel. It is informative, well presented and entertaining.
Conspiracy theories and found footage movies. Two genres with infinite scope to be tedious and uninspired on a low budget. Yet writer and director Matt Johnson manages to do something quite clever with both cinematic styles in his recent movie Operation Avalanche. He takes the basic conceit of the two formats and uses them to tell a tale based upon one of the most iconic moments of twentieth century history. Namely the moon landing of 1969. The results are surprising, intelligent and thought provoking, although a little uneven. Furthermore, I discovered this enjoyable curiosity via the GoodBadFlicks on You Tube. If you are interested in obscure and niche market genre creations then do check out this channel. It is informative, well presented and entertaining.
Back to Operation Avalanche. Director Matt Johnson, casts himself along with Owen Williams and Josh Boles as three graduate film makers hired by the CIA for their “A/V program”. Their work is not taken particularly seriously by senior staff and the trio soon find themselves facing dismissal. However, thy manage to talk their way into joining an ongoing operation searching for a Russian mole at NASA. Posing as an official government documentary crew they soon discover that there isn’t a mole but there is a major design flaw in the Lunar Module. This effectively makes the entire moon mission impossible and therefore a political and propaganda nightmare. It is at this point that Johnson’s character suggests that they fake the moon landing, thus guaranteeing the United States’ standing on the world stage. His bosses are initially sceptical but soon back the idea when they see how the plan can be carried out.
The central plot is great idea and the movie has sufficient plausibility to allow viewers to suspend their sense of disbelief for the first two acts. There are many popular culture and historical references during the course of the film which bolster the proceedings. Perhaps the cheekiest plot device is the referencing of Stanley Kubrick who is already a prime suspect among conspiracy theorists for “faking” the moon landings. In this instance, the team of CIA film makers pose as journalists and talk their way into an interview with Kubrick. A subsequent visit to the set of 2001: A Space Odyssey, allows them a chance to steal his special effects secrets and directly use them to help fabricate their own moon landing footage. I must admit this really did provoke an ironic chuckle from me. However, the estate of the late Stanley Kubrick did not see it this way and were singularly perturbed that his likeness had been used in such a fashion.
Unfortunately, the denouement of Operation Avalanche is somewhat disappointing. The CIA decides to clean house and eliminate any lose ends and the film develops into a formulaic chase scenario. This sadly mitigates the found footage angle of the plot. Up until this point the logic behind the plot device of continuously filming all that is happening is quite credible. Exactly why you would continue to do so when being pursued and shot at by government agents is questionable. Another minor niggle that works against the film is that the lead character, played by Matt Johnson, is not very likeable. He is bombastic, manipulative and a self-centred risk taker. These may well be necessary qualities in an agent but they’re hardly required traits in a cinematic hero. However, irrespective of its flaws, there’s a lot of creativity present in Operation Avalanche and it is sufficient to propel the movie forward at an entertaining pace. If we must have movies from such genres, then Operation Avalanche sets a solid precedence for the type we’d like more of.
Strictly Come Dancing 2017: Part 1
Yes, we’re three weeks into this year’s season of the BBC’s flagship entertainment show, Strictly Come Dancing (that’s the UK version of Dancing with the Stars for the benefit of US readers). The tabloid press has already started obsessing, dissecting and outright lying about the antics of a handful of minor celebrities as they struggle with the rigours of learning to dance. From now until Christmas, prime time Saturday night viewing on the Beeb will be suffused with the superficial glamour of showbiz, a barrage of camp innuendo and a mixture of well-honed muscles and wayward flesh as well as far too much make-up. You also get to choose whether to laugh along with heavily scripted and contrived comments from the professional judges. If we’re particularly fortunate we may even be blessed with a professional dancer meltdown as they balk at a “ill deserved” poor score (yes, we’re looking at you Brendan Cole).
Yes, we’re three weeks into this year’s season of the BBC’s flagship entertainment show, Strictly Come Dancing (that’s the UK version of Dancing with the Stars for the benefit of US readers). The tabloid press has already started obsessing, dissecting and outright lying about the antics of a handful of minor celebrities as they struggle with the rigours of learning to dance. From now until Christmas, prime time Saturday night viewing on the Beeb will be suffused with the superficial glamour of showbiz, a barrage of camp innuendo and a mixture of well-honed muscles and wayward flesh as well as far too much make-up. You also get to choose whether to laugh along with heavily scripted and contrived comments from the professional judges. If we’re particularly fortunate we may even be blessed with a professional dancer meltdown as they balk at a “ill deserved” poor score (yes, we’re looking at you Brendan Cole).
Now I have watched Strictly Come Dancing since 2005. It is ideal family viewing and is better than other reality shows because at its core, it's about people learning a very difficult artistic skill. As long as you accept it for what it is, which is an entertainment show rather than a straight dance contest, there is a great deal of fun to be had. Or that's the theory. I’ve been somewhat burned out on Strictly Come Dancing for the last three years and the prospects of watching another season was not especially appealing earlier on in the year. Because of the nature and more importantly, the popularity of the show, it has become a somewhat slickly oiled machine which follows an established formula. As a result, the last few seasons have left very little impression on me. There have been some outstanding dances but the celebrities have been somewhat bland and there has been a lack of anyone having a distinctive “journey”.
The judges until recently, have all become caricatures of themselves, which is exactly what the audience wants. However, the recent replacement of Len Goodman with Shirley Ballas has somewhat redressed the balance. Shirley seems to be both technically astute, as well as understanding of the human factor. So far, she has shown no penchant for pickling walnuts. However, we have seen in the last three shows, a broad spectrum of scores. And as ever the judges tend to have their favourites and seem to be encouraged to show this. So, if you’re expecting a broadly non-partisan experience from Strictly Come Dancing then you’re barking up the wrong tree. Nothing goes down better with the Great British public than binary choices and believe me, this show can get very tribal when it comes to public support of the dancing couples.
Another facet of the Strictly formula are the celebrity contestants, who also seem to follow a clear pattern. To date, those from a sporting, musical or TV background seem to have the best chances of claiming the trophy. Age and physical fitness is also plays a key part. So, it becomes very easy to guess which specific role each of the celebrities will play. Who will be the front runner (s) exhibiting a natural ability right from the get go. Who is wild card and which non-professional will assume the role of the self-improver. It is these individuals who often have the best “journey”. Then there is the pivotal position of the crowd-pleasing fool with no sense of rhythm. As long as they give it their all they usually remain on the show as far as Blackpool. And of course, let us not forget those who just can't dance and aren't even amusing. Plus, the show offers a great opportunity to judge people for the heinous crime of ageing without due care and attention.
Until this year, I thought that even Schadenfreude has its limits, so I was expecting to end my love affair with Strictly Come Dancing. But we live in proverbial “interesting times” and the world of late has become a very bleak and dark place. Hope is a scarce commodity at present and it is in such circumstances that I see the virtue in populist entertainment. That and the fact I absolutely adore Susan Calman and her entire approach to the Strictly phenomenon. Plus, I have a gut feeling that we’re going to have a controversy of some kind, shortly. I do like a controversy, especially if it’s of the magnitude of Sargent-gate. If a crap performer is kept on the show by the public at the expense of a more talented dancer, then there is scope for a national tabloid meltdown. Questions may well be asked in parliament. Then there’s the whole celebrity tittle-tattle of who’s having a sordid sexual dalliance with whom. It’s worryingly entertaining. So just to re-iterate, I'm not yet done with Strictly Come Dancing despite what I initially thought. I look forward to this year’s wardrobe choice that pushes the boundaries of "public decency" and live in the pious hope that someone will slap the smug grin of A J Pritchard’s face. Long live prime time, Saturday night, light entertainment.
Gaming Heresy: Part 1 My Gaming Epiphany
It’s been a while since I’ve had a rant, frothed at the mouth and vigorously shaken my clenched fist at clouds. If you do this too often when running a blog you can paint yourself into a corner. Ranting then becomes the defining aspect of how your writing is perceived. Another reason why I don’t want to write an endless succession of irate screeds about the failings of the gaming industry and its associated player communities, is because as I get older, I simply do not care as much about these things. The recent debacle about microtransactions in Middle-earth: Shadow of War, garnered nothing more than a raised eyebrow from me. A decade ago I would’ve been marshalling a restless lynch mob, armed with hoes, rakes and flaming torches. Time and old age have a habit of cooling one’s ardour. However, letting off steam can be very cathartic, so I’ve decided to inaugurate this infrequent column in which I shall vent my spleen about the things that displease me and express views that may well fly in the face of the prevailing consensus.
It’s been a while since I’ve had a rant, frothed at the mouth and vigorously shaken my clenched fist at clouds. If you do this too often when running a blog you can paint yourself into a corner. Ranting then becomes the defining aspect of how your writing is perceived. Another reason why I don’t want to write an endless succession of irate screeds about the failings of the gaming industry and its associated player communities, is because as I get older, I simply do not care as much about these things. The recent debacle about microtransactions in Middle-earth: Shadow of War, garnered nothing more than a raised eyebrow from me. A decade ago I would’ve been marshalling a restless lynch mob, armed with hoes, rakes and flaming torches. Time and old age have a habit of cooling one’s ardour. However, letting off steam can be very cathartic, so I’ve decided to inaugurate this infrequent column in which I shall vent my spleen about the things that displease me and express views that may well fly in the face of the prevailing consensus.
So, let us begin. Here’s a thought. Gaming is just another commercial leisure industry that is of no greater merit than TV, Movies and popular music. It’s driven primarily by commercial considerations, with art are ethics being secondary issues. Like other entertainment mediums it can be pitched at various ends of the intellectual spectrum and made to varying degrees of quality and professionalism. Although gaming can highlight specific issues and offer social commentary it has no more significant power to impact upon events than other artforms. Games themselves can on occasions be “art” but by and large, most products are just disposable entertainment. Just like a sitcom, an action movie or a pop song. Games are not special, important or unique, when compared to other leisure activities. The social aspects that so many extol exist because of the players themselves and the games are merely a conduit. Essentially, the expression “it’s just a game” is true. It’s not a denigration but simply a statement of fact.
Richard Nixon has no relevance to this article...
And if gaming per se is simply a commercial exercise in mainstream leisure and thus nothing exceptional, then surely the same must be said for fandom? Therefore, claims of gamers being problem solving savants and alternative, high end achievers are bogus. Gaming and its subset of related fandom is a breeding ground for a myriad of unpleasant opinions and facilitates antisocial behaviour. It is a microcosm of the entire “first world problems” mentality that blights Western popular culture. It contributes to the growing infantilization of public discourse and social interaction as well as playing directly into the hands of the “bread and circuses” policies of the political classes. Why waste your time campaigning, lobbying and fighting for universal healthcare, affordable housing and accountable government? Someone on a game development team has nerfed the Sword of Kagnazax and gimped your build, so why not send them death threats?
I was walking around a very large branch of WHSmith recently. Despite the proliferation of digital media, magazines have not yet vanished from the shelves. In fact the number of fan and enthusiast based publications available is still prodigious. Gardening, fishing, mud wrestling are all represented. It’s a similar story if you go online. There are forums and subreddits for every conceivable leisure activity. If you decide to dip your toe in the respective waters of each community you will find one common factor in them all. Drama. All discuss the minutiae of the object of their affection as if it were the meaning of life itself. It soon becomes very apparent that it is not really fandom that is the issue but people. The bastards. Show me a problem and I’ll show you someone called Colin who’s responsible. All of which is just further evidence that gaming is merely another facet of humanity’s habit of slapping itself on the back, while simultaneously kicking some other poor sod in the nuts. When put in such a context, the reality is clear. Gaming ain’t all that.
This is my gaming epiphany. It’s not something that happened on the road to Damascus or overnight in a Premier Inn outside of Chester. It has come about over a period of time in which the iniquities, trivialities and pomposities of both the gaming industry and its fans have been dripped upon me like Chinese water torture. Don’t get me wrong, irrespective of this rant, I enjoy gaming and do not regret the time I’ve spent pursuing it. I just see it for what it is; an amusing diversion, an enjoyable challenge and one of the many pointless activities we fill our lives with before death cold embrace and the inevitable void. Sadly, it is because my perspective is not a common one, that the gaming industry acts with the impunity that it does and treats its customer base so poorly. I wonder if there will be a major shift in perception among fans, in another twenty years? Only time will tell. In the meantime, a percentage of gamers will continue to shriek “Git Gud” and I’ll continue to shake my head at their misplaced sentiments and watch as democracy is dismantled around them.
The Purge: Anarchy (2014)
The Purge: Anarchy is an example of the curious and rare cinematic beast, a sequel that is superior to its predecessor. This time round the movie makes a greater effort to explore the themes associated around its premise and takes to the streets to show the impact of the purge upon the working class. It’s a far more political movie and all the better for it. You can’t have a story about a national event designed to implement social engineering in the most visceral of manners and try and keep it free from social commentary. Furthermore, The Purge: Anarchy features a far more agreeable and accessible group of protagonists this time round, creating a far more plausible sense of trepidation for audiences. The film is also more violent than the first instalment given the scope of its narrative.
The Purge: Anarchy is an example of the curious and rare cinematic beast, a sequel that is superior to its predecessor. This time round the movie makes a greater effort to explore the themes associated around its premise and takes to the streets to show the impact of the purge upon the working class. It’s a far more political movie and all the better for it. You can’t have a story about a national event designed to implement social engineering in the most visceral of manners and try and keep it free from social commentary. Furthermore, The Purge: Anarchy features a far more agreeable and accessible group of protagonists this time round, creating a far more plausible sense of trepidation for audiences. The film is also more violent than the first instalment given the scope of its narrative.
Shane (Zach Gilford) and Liz (Kiele Sanchez), a couple on the verge of splitting up, are driving home when their car breaks down just as the purge commences. They decide to try and make it across town, avoiding the various predatory gangs that are now roaming the streets. Meanwhile, waitress Eva (Carmen Ejogo), goes home to her sick father Rico (John Beasley) and teenage daughter Cali (Zoe Soul) and prepares to secure their apartment. She politely refuses offers of assistance from the building manager Diego. Later that night the tenement is assaulted by a paramilitary squad and Eva and Cali are captured. As they are being loaded into a truck, they are rescued by a rogue Police Sergeant (Frank Grillo) who is using the purge to seek revenge on the man who killed his son. Upon returning to the Sergeants car, they discover Shane and Liz hiding. The five people slowly make their way through the streets and attempt to survive the night in Los Angeles.
The Purge: Anarchy manages to maintain a credible air of tension. The set pieces are tight and because the lead characters are more than two dimensional, you can become emotionally invested in them. But the films greatest asset are the vignettes of associated purge culture that are offered to the audience. Eva’s father, Rico, sells himself to a rich family who wish to have a risk-free purge experience. In return his family receive a large cash sum. The movie goes on to highlight again and again that the poor are the group that bear the brunt of the purge. There are for example roving kidnap gangs that round up victims to be sold to the wealthy. The rich then auction off the prisoners so that they can be hunted in a controlled environment. However, the film does show that the door can swing both ways. While travelling through the financial district our protagonists come across a dead banker with a very contemporary message hung around his neck.
Out of the three movies that make up this franchise The Purge: Anarchy is by far the strongest. It tackles the subject of the purge effectively and through a series of dramatic threads, provides insight as to what the real ramifications of one night of state sanctioned anarchy would be. The disgruntled “super” Diego is a microcosm of all that is worse about the purge as a concept. He nurses a wealth of misconceived and unfounded grievances and uses them as a justification for his basest instincts. That is essentially where the horror of the purge lies. It shows how extremely thin the veneer of civilisation actually is and that abhorrent behaviour is not confined to any one specific demographic group.
Game Graphics: A Question of Aesthetics and Personal Taste
The "cartoon versus realistic graphics" debate is a perennial one and regularly appears on gaming websites, often on slow news days. A variation of this question appeared on Massively Overpowered yesterday and reminded me once again that a games aesthetic is a really important selling point and that players tastes are far from universal. There’s a lot of buzz at present associated with the indie run and gun platform game, Cuphead. The game has a striking visual design inspired by the work of Polish-American animator Max Fleischer. Think Betty Boop, Popeye and Color Classics (which were a direct rival of Walt Disney's Silly Symphonies). It certainly gives the game a charismatic look and feel, making it stand out from the crowd. However, choosing such a radical style can also have a very polarising effect. Where some may find a quaint charm in the graphic design, others may abhor it.
The "cartoon versus realistic graphics" debate is a perennial one and regularly appears on gaming websites, often on slow news days. A variation of this question appeared on Massively Overpowered yesterday and reminded me once again that a games aesthetic is a really important selling point and that players tastes are far from universal. There’s a lot of buzz at present associated with the indie run and gun platform game, Cuphead. The game has a striking visual design inspired by the work of Polish-American animator Max Fleischer. Think Betty Boop, Popeye and Color Classics (which were a direct rival of Walt Disney's Silly Symphonies). It certainly gives the game a charismatic look and feel, making it stand out from the crowd. However, choosing such a radical style can also have a very polarising effect. Where some may find a quaint charm in the graphic design, others may abhor it.
There are many reasons why a developer may elect to choose a specific visual style when creating their game. Firstly, it may be a question of choosing a visual aesthetic that matches the idiom of the content or genre. Would an ultra-realistic Mario Kart be as charming as the its present incarnation? Production design (or whatever the appropriate gaming terminology is) sets the tone and can greatly influence consumers perception of the game. When WildStar was in development, I remember watching various videos that promoted the game. They had a very knowing and tongue in cheek tone. Despite the games science fiction setting it expressed this in a very satirical manner. That allowed for all established genre tropes and clichés to be utilised under the blanket of postmodern irony. The new MMO Wild West Online has elected for a more graphically realistic aesthetic. However, it has chosen the look and feel of the Hollywood West, rather than an historically accurate one.
Graphics also have an impact upon such things as a games rating, which can be an important factor when it comes to sales and marketing. Although a percentage of parent and stores are oblivious to ratings, there are those who do take a keen interest in a games content. Characters exploding in a puff of smoke, followed by a cartoon skull falling to the ground in a comical fashion, is a different kettle of fish to wall to wall blood and gore. A game graphic style, if cleverly done, can mitigate violence, potential offence and fosters an entirely different atmosphere. Conversely, the hyper realism of some games, particularly those in the RPG and FPS genres, bolsters the drama and th atmosphere that they are trying to create. It becomes a selling point in itself. This is why Lego games opt for the former and titles such as Middle-earth: Shadow of War and World War II, latest instalment of Call of Duty, elect for the latter.
Then of course there are technical factors to consider. Cutting edge PC graphics often need cutting edge hardware to run on. Not everyone has high end gaming rigs at their disposal. Console systems have set specifications that cannot be upgraded and therefore can only perform up to a certain standard. By opting to create a game that has a very stylised graphics, performance overheads can be lowered and developers can produce a product that can run on a very broad range of hardware. Increasing accessibility is always good for business. Excluding customers or forcing them into a hardware upgrade is a riskier strategy, although PC gamers do tend to embrace the notion of change more freely than other groups. This is one of the reasons why the MMO genre often has a look and feel that is somewhat dated compared to single player games. It has to ensure that its product is scalable to a broader set of customers and can accommodate the additional technical pressures that multiplayer environments create.
However, logical arguments aside, gamers often have preferences regarding graphics based on far more emotive considerations. One must never under estimate the power of consumers personal preferences and tastes. We are a species that rightly or wrongly, place a great deal of stock on aesthetics. Our choice of foods, clothes, interior design, even those we form relationships with is frequently influenced by our own personal views of beauty, or prevailing cultural trends. I personally like the realism achieved by Frostbite 3 engine from DICE. The preview footage available for Star Wars Battlefront II is outstanding. I would love to see an MMO powered by it, although that is unlikely to happened due to licencing costs and the impact it would have on the minimum specifications required to run the game. Conversely, this is why World of Warcraft looks the way it does. I’m not a fan of that particular design style, although I totally understand why the developers elected to make such a choice.
On a positive note, there are many players who will side line their personal graphical likes and dislikes if a title offers good game play. Then there is the recent trend of remastering games and giving old classics a fresh paint job. And let us not forget those titles that are mod friendly. These offer players a further opportunity to correct those visual aspects they don’t like. All of which goes to show that beauty truly does lie in the eye of the beholder. Game developers cannot please everyone, all the time and the reality is that they recognise that they’ll always lose a percentage of potential sales over a game’s looks. As much as I like the merits of logical thinking it is not the driving force behind human decision making. Therefore, the cartoon versus realistic graphics debate is ultimately redundant. There is no right or wrong answer, just individual preference.
Playing PC Games with an Xbox Controller Instead of a Keyboard and Mouse
To fill the gap in my current gaming activities, I decided to try one of the various titles that I have stockpiled. Often these have been bought on a whim but there’s always something of interest to try and explore. So, having recently enjoyed the open world of Mafia 3, I decided to return to GTA V. I’ve owned this title since December 2015 but have never seriously played through in story mode. Last time I dabbled with it was when I bought it and I just fooled around with the various cheat codes that are available and spent a few hours causing mayhem. This time round I’ve decided to apply myself to all facets of the game. However, I ran into one issue with GTA V that I can usually ignore with other titles. Namely, the control set up. I’ve previously played many games that have been developed for multiple platforms or have been direct console conversions. Although such games are intended to be played with traditional games controllers, I have happily managed to play them using a keyboard and mouse. Sometimes I’ve had to spend a lot of time re-mapping keys but I've always got by.
To fill the gap in my current gaming activities, I decided to try one of the various titles that I have stockpiled. Often these have been bought on a whim but there’s always something of interest to try and explore. So, having recently enjoyed the open world of Mafia 3, I decided to return to GTA V. I’ve owned this title since December 2015 but have never seriously played through in story mode. Last time I dabbled with it was when I bought it and I just fooled around with the various cheat codes that are available and spent a few hours causing mayhem. This time round I’ve decided to apply myself to all facets of the game. However, I ran into one issue with GTA V that I can usually ignore with other titles. Namely, the control set up. I’ve previously played many games that have been developed for multiple platforms or have been direct console conversions. Although such games are intended to be played with traditional games controllers, I have happily managed to play them using a keyboard and mouse. Sometimes I’ve had to spend a lot of time re-mapping keys but I've always got by.
However, on this occasion I found that that was not the case. The games driving mechanics simply do not lend themselves to keyboard use. The weapons system and object interaction also consist of a very esoteric selection of keys. I spent a considerable amount of time trying to relocate specific functions but it simply wasn't viable. Often, I would solve one problem only to create another. GTA V with its combination driving, third person shooting and point and click narrative simply favours a bespoke device. So eventually I gave up my experimenting and simply fetched my Xbox controller. As this Xbox peripherals is compatible with the PC, it was no problem to install it and set up the device. However, the next stage was not so easy. Namely, becoming accustomed to using the Xbox controller. It’s a major mental and physical change. I found that driving vehicles was an easy transition to make. Using the left and right triggers to brake and accelerate is extremely intuitive and feels very natural. Controlling my avatar was far more challenging. Walking, climbing and interacting with objects felt far more sluggish and unwieldy. Aiming via the thumb stick takes a long time to get used to. It doesn’t feel as accurate or as responsive as using a mouse.
This “problem” is very much a case of “conditioning” and “muscle memory”. I made the transition from console gaming to the PC in the middle nineties. There was a time when I use to play both platforms but the PC ultimately won because it’s a multifunctional tool. So, for over twenty years, the keyboard and mouse have been my primary means for interacting with games. I assign the most commonly used keys around WASD, so they could all be easily reached with my left hand. My right operates a five-button mouse. The system works for me and trying to change such a mindset is a big ask. However, it can be done. I am now able to navigate the open world of Los Santos using my Xbox controller. The key is patience and perseverance. You have to stop relying your reflexes and get into the habit of thinking in advance, exactly what it is that you want to do, then implementing it via the Xbox controller. I’m reminded of how Nigel Hawthorn told Clint Eastwood in the movie Firefox to “think in Russian”. However, I cannot see myself playing all future titles with a game controller. It is something I have done out of necessity to accommodate GTA V. A keyboard and mouse remains my primary choice for playing games, although using an Xbox controller has been an interesting experience.
Ouija (2014)
It boggles my mind that the American multinational toy and board game company Hasbro, currently holds the copyright and patent to a device that is essentially designed to communicate with the dead. How a tool of spiritualism became a commercial toy that was then marketed to a strongly Christian nation is a blog post in itself. However, this post is about the 2014 horror feature film based upon the Hasbro game. Hasbro like many leisure companies, has in recent years looked at ways to expand its business portfolio. Subsequently, in 2009 it set up a film division and licensed TV shows and movies based upon its toy and game back catalogue. Like their traditional products, these forays into film and television have proven lucrative. If you haven’t noticed, we’re already up to our fifth Transformers movie, with several more in pre-production.
It boggles my mind that the American multinational toy and board game company Hasbro, currently holds the copyright and patent to a device that is essentially designed to communicate with the dead. How a tool of spiritualism became a commercial toy that was then marketed to a strongly Christian nation is a blog post in itself. However, this post is about the 2014 horror feature film based upon the Hasbro game. Hasbro like many leisure companies, has in recent years looked at ways to expand its business portfolio. Subsequently, in 2009 it set up a film division and licensed TV shows and movies based upon its toy and game back catalogue. Like their traditional products, these forays into film and television have proven lucrative. If you haven’t noticed, we’re already up to our fifth Transformers movie, with several more in pre-production.
The box office success of Paranormal Activity back in 2009 has led to a wealth of low budget, PG-13 rated, jump scare horror movies. The production cost to earnings ratio of this niche genre is often very favourable. Thus, it was logical from a business perspective for Hasbro Films to try and adapt the “Ouija board game” into a potential box office franchise. However, Ouija proved to be a troubled production and the movie went through extensive reshoots after test audiences reacted poorly to the initial edit. If you watch the various teaser trailers for the movie there is evidence of material that has been deleted or replaced. Certainly, there are continuity issues present in the Blu-ray version that I watched. Most of these are related to the cast appearance and hairstyles and don’t have any serious impact upon the narrative, although that itself is not without flaws.
When teenager Debbie (Shelley Hennig) commits suicide unexpectedly, her five best friends are profoundly troubled. Laine (Olivia Cooke) discovers that Debbie has been using a Ouija board and recording her experiences. Suspecting that this may have contributed to Debbie’s death, she convinces the rest of the group to hold a séance so they can contact her. They succeed in communicating with a spirit that claims to be Debbie, however it soon becomes apparent that the group has roused a malevolent force instead. Laine strives to learn the origins of this evil spirit as her friends start to die, one by one. Research subsequently reveals that Debbie’s home was previously owned by a celebrated medium Alice Zander and her two daughters. Once of whom, Paulina (Lyn Shaye) is currently incarcerated in a psychiatric hospital. Is Paulina the key to the mystery and can Laine find a way to defeat the evil force that pursues her?
What is striking about Ouija is that is so noticeably contrived. The screenplay has obviously been retooled numerous times, to accommodate the reshoot and then to facilitate the plot devices and the set pieces that the producers wish to utilise. For example, Laine’s father is introduced and within minutes leaves town on business, providing a convenient reason as to why five teenagers can have a supernatural adventure, free from the interference of the usual authorities. Although there is some meat on the bones of the central characters, others are simply cinematic placeholders and present purely to provide an adequate body count. Furthermore, although Ouija does provide satisfactory scares within the parameters of its rating, the set pieces are devoid of any originality. The imagery is all very generic, with its emaciated computer-generated spectres and sinister ghost children.
Despite its problematic “film by committee” production, Ouija is not a bad movie per se. It is competently made, has a satisfactory pace with an appropriate amount of scares throughout its running time. However, it commits perhaps the worst sin a genre move can. It is dull, perfunctory and very disposable. By the time I got around to watching the inevitable sequel (which is in fact a prequel), I had forgotten most of the events of Ouija. I had to refresh my memory via Wikipedia. It is this homogenous nature that is most saddening because it speaks of a genre that is being distilled down to an ever-decreasing number of tropes. Simply making a movie by arbitrarily including these aspects, does not make for great cinema. Nor does it improve the wider public perceptions of the horror genre. Yet, irrespective of these criticisms, Ouija made over $100 million at the box office. It cost just $5 million to make.
The Vietnam War (2017)
After watching several hours of the documentary, The Vietnam War, one has to wonder at the utter inability of the US government of the time, to think outside the box during the period of that conflict. Seldom does a military, political, and social analysis of an historical event go this deep. During its eighteen hour running time directors Ken Burns and Lynn Novick cover a wealth of issues associated with this conflict, exploring it from multiple perspectives. Not only do they shine a light upon the hubris and folly of both respective governments, they manage to keep a very intimate and human perspective. Personal stories from both sides are told and if there is a common theme, it is sadly one of tragedy and regret.
After watching several hours of the documentary, The Vietnam War, one has to wonder at the utter inability of the US government of the time, to think outside the box during the period of that conflict. Seldom does a military, political, and social analysis of an historical event go this deep. During its eighteen hour running time directors Ken Burns and Lynn Novick cover a wealth of issues associated with this conflict, exploring it from multiple perspectives. Not only do they shine a light upon the hubris and folly of both respective governments, they manage to keep a very intimate and human perspective. Personal stories from both sides are told and if there is a common theme, it is sadly one of tragedy and regret.
The Vietnam War attempts to seek answers and to do so, starts the tale with the French colonization of Indochina. Burns and Novick then progress through the policies of three U.S. Presidents: Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon. But they also ensure that a Vietnamese perspective is maintained so they do not neglect the political turmoil and machinations of both North and South Vietnamese governments. There are numerous talking heads, both great and small during the course of the narrative. Soldiers, politicians and families provide candid insights into how the war impacted upon their lives. The documentary doesn’t forget the wider history of the time and there is much screen time dedicated to the US protest movement and how the war was greeted internationally.
There is a wealth of original news footage from the conflict, wisely chosen to highlight each point of discussion. It is often quite graphic and bleak. Yet this is how the news played out each night in homes around the world. The Vietnam War is not only a documentary about a military conflict but also one of how rolling news reshaped public opinion and brought an abstract, remote war starkly to the attention of the world. Something the US government did it best to contain but due to social and technological change, ultimately failed to do. There’s also a lot of audio recordings made by the US government, detailing meeting between the President LB Johnson, The secretary of Defence Robert McNamara and such like. These are utterly chilling because you soon get a sense that events have gone beyond their control, yet political considerations tie their hands and predetermine their course of action.
For me, what makes The Vietnam War stand out is the way it maintains a human perspective, despite the international nature of events. The story of Denton “Mogie” Crocker Jr runs throughout several episodes, following the honest dreams of a young man who believed in the moral rectitude of the war. Sadly, the reality of the situation soon became apparent to him and his tale ends in tragedy; just one tragedy among thousands on both sides. It’s a reoccurring theme, that so many soldiers were conscripted from small towns, frequently chosen from a specific social economic background and sent into a “no win” situation. Their commendable honesty and wholesome naivety is sharply contrasted by the hubris and obstinacy of both governments.
The Vietnam War is presented in ten substantial episodes. Like that definitive World War II documentary, The World at War, each strives to cover and explore a specific period of time and a particular milestone in the conflict. The events of the time are seen from multiple views and the documentary endeavours to be as even handed as it can. The soundtrack by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross embellishes the proceeding without being too intrusive. There is also a healthy mix of popular music from the era, as well as news footage and commercials that help give the viewer a sense of the times. It would be remiss of me not to mention Peter Coyote’s narration, which never descends into melodrama. He clearly and succinctly describes the history of the war, subtly conveying the magnitude of events, allowing their own significance to give them weight. Overall, a major and often ignored part of American history is finally given the scrutiny that it deserves. It’s far from easy viewing but then again, the truth seldom is.
Insidious: Chapter 2 (2013)
James Wan is a clever film maker who knows and fully understands the mechanics of his trade. Perhaps a little too well, because therein lies the problem with Insidious: Chapter 2. It is a succession of well-crafted set pieces that seamlessly follows on from the previous movie. Yet it is a little too enamoured with its own cleverness. I found myself frequently praising the director after a well-constructed shock, instead of revelling in the unease a horror movie is supposed to create. A great deal of scares and jumps are due to the clever sound design, superb editing and the creepy score by by Joseph Bishara, who previously collaborated with director James Wan on the first movie as well as The Conjuring. Fortunately, the film still provides viewers with a family that are likeable and an ensemble cast that help lift the story beyond its somewhat formulaic limitations. As I've mentioned before, Wan has an eye for depicting families.
James Wan is a clever film maker who knows and fully understands the mechanics of his trade. Perhaps a little too well, because therein lies the problem with Insidious: Chapter 2. It is a succession of well-crafted set pieces that seamlessly follows on from the previous movie. Yet it is a little too enamoured with its own cleverness. I found myself frequently praising the director after a well-constructed shock, instead of revelling in the unease a horror movie is supposed to create. A great deal of scares and jumps are due to the clever sound design, superb editing and the creepy score by by Joseph Bishara, who previously collaborated with director James Wan on the first movie as well as The Conjuring. Fortunately, the film still provides viewers with a family that are likeable and an ensemble cast that help lift the story beyond its somewhat formulaic limitations. As I've mentioned before, Wan has an eye for depicting families.
The original film’s twist ending suggested that the spirit which haunted Josh (Patrick Wilson) throughout out his life had finally possessed him. Insidious: Chapter 2 picks up the story immediately and the story has to deal with the narrative complexities that have been imposed upon it by the previous instalment. However, the movie expedites the plot quite well and we see via flashbacks how paranormal investigator Elise (Lin Shaye) first met Josh as a child and the subsequent investigation by the police regarding the exact circumstances of her death. The story then focuses on the Lambert family, who are now living with Grandma Lorraine’s (Barbara Hershey). It's not long before Josh's wife Renai (Rose Byrne) is seeing and hearing spirit manifestations, once again centred around their young son Dalton (Ty Simpkins).
As I mention earlier, there is a lot of well thought out and smart aspects to Insidious: Chapter 2. A key scene from the first movie is revisited and explored from a totally different perspective. It certainly adds to the sense of continuity between the two movies. There is also another foray into the "further" but this time with a subtle role reversal as it is Dalton this time, trying to rescue his Father. Despite the Scooby Doo like sub-plot as the family and paranormal investigators delve into the reasons behind the hauntings, there is still plenty of solid scares to be had. The protagonists are still well defined and the suburban setting adds to the unsettling atmosphere. Because the balance between scares and running time is equitable, most audiences may overlook the increasing silliness of the central story during the final act.
There is a tipping point in Insidious: Chapter 2, where the audience has a choice of whether to roll with the plot developments or not. It is to the credit of actor Patrick Wilson, that his performance does much to carry the movie forward after this point. Fans may also be disappointed to learn that the story this time round is more to do with the creepy old lady ghost, rather than the Darth Maul lookalike Demon. However, director James Wan and screenwriter Leigh Whannell (Saw, Dead Silence) still manage to craft a disturbing and unsettling experience, which eschews the obligatory clinical horror of recent years. These modern homages to the classic haunted house genres (think Legend of the Hell House and Poltergeist) are a laudable undertaking. For the more casual views Insidious: Chapter 2 will prove a scary experience. For the more jaded horror fan there is still a lot to enjoy in this well-crafted genre outing.
Insidious (2010)
Shortly after moving to a new house, parents Josh (Patrick Wilson) and Renée Lambert (Rose Byrne) life is shattered when their eldest son Dalton (Ty Simpkins) slips into a coma. Doctors are unable to explain their son’s medical condition and the family subsequently assailed by a series of supernatural happenings. Eventually, Josh’s Mother Lorraine (Barbara Hershey) invites paranormal investigator, Elise Rainer (Lin Shaye) and her team, to help the family. Her investigations soon determine that Dalton has the gift astral projection and has become trapped in “the further” by a demonic force. Lorraine reveals that Josh had a similar when he was a young, that he has subsequently forgotten about because it endangered his life. Can he revive his gift, enter "the further" and rescue Dalton before he his lost forever?
Shortly after moving to a new house, parents Josh (Patrick Wilson) and Renée Lambert (Rose Byrne) life is shattered when their eldest son Dalton (Ty Simpkins) slips into a coma. Doctors are unable to explain their son’s medical condition and the family subsequently assailed by a series of supernatural happenings. Eventually, Josh’s Mother Lorraine (Barbara Hershey) invites paranormal investigator, Elise Rainer (Lin Shaye) and her team, to help the family. Her investigations soon determine that Dalton has the gift astral projection and has become trapped in “the further” by a demonic force. Lorraine reveals that Josh had a similar when he was a young, that he has subsequently forgotten about because it endangered his life. Can he revive his gift, enter "the further" and rescue Dalton before he his lost forever?
Director James Wan seems to have an eye for interesting depictions of families or individuals under pressure. Both Saw and Death Sentence explored these themes, producing strong performances and genuine tension in each respective movie. With Insidious Wan once again returns to this subject, viewing it through the prism of a family being preyed upon by a malevolent supernatural force. The director demonstrates a good understanding of how to build atmosphere and tension, as well as coaxing strong performances from his cast. The script is tight and the characters are likeable, a trait so often absent from many current horror films. The shocks are well constructed and not over stated. It is not until the third act when the film adopts a more theatrical approach as the hero enters "the further", in a finale reminiscent of Tobe Hooper’s Poltergeist.
Insidious provides very traditional genre material packaged in a way that makes it more accessible to a mainstream contemporary audience. If you have not watched a great deal of horror films and are not familiar with specific classic titles from the seventies and eighties, then Insidious will certainly prove entertaining and scary. Viewers with a wider exposure to the genre will have to be content themselves with a polished, modern take on numerous tried and tested themes. I did enjoy Insidious and certainly think it is superior to a lot of the recent competition. I simply did not find it to be the "frightfest" that so many others claimed upon its initial release. However, others may well think otherwise.
Star Trek: Discovery
Finally, it’s arrived. The first new Star Trek TV show for twelve years. Star Trek: Discovery became available for Netflix UK customers to watch at 8:00 AM this morning. Needless to say, I cleared my schedule in advance so I could sit down and watch this much-anticipated show. Furthermore, I made it my business to avoid Twitter and the internet until I had finished viewing the first two episodes because I knew in advance that Star Trek: Discovery was going to be controversial and divide fans. Having now seen The Vulcan Hello and Battle at the Binary Stars and taken time to reflect upon both episodes, I have reached the following conclusion. From what we’ve seen so far, the spirit and emotional heart of Star Trek, is reflected in the new show. I found the characters to be interesting and well defined. Lead performances by Michelle Yeoh, Sonequa Martin-Green and Doug Jones were good and there’s an intriguing crew dynamic. The story has already touched upon numerous canonical themes and I am eager to learn more about the main characters and the universe they inhabit. I therefore shall continue to watch Star Trek: Discovery. However, not everyone feels the same, as my subsequent forays online have shown. Much has changed in this new iteration of Star Trek and as we know, some fans do not like change in any way, shape, or form.
Finally, it’s arrived. The first new Star Trek TV show for twelve years. Star Trek: Discovery became available for Netflix UK customers to watch at 8:00 AM this morning. Needless to say, I cleared my schedule in advance so I could sit down and watch this much-anticipated show. Furthermore, I made it my business to avoid Twitter and the internet until I had finished viewing the first two episodes because I knew in advance that Star Trek: Discovery was going to be controversial and divide fans. Having now seen The Vulcan Hello and Battle at the Binary Stars and taken time to reflect upon both episodes, I have reached the following conclusion. From what we’ve seen so far, the spirit and emotional heart of Star Trek, is reflected in the new show. I found the characters to be interesting and well defined. Lead performances by Michelle Yeoh, Sonequa Martin-Green and Doug Jones were good and there’s an intriguing crew dynamic. The story has already touched upon numerous canonical themes and I am eager to learn more about the main characters and the universe they inhabit. I therefore shall continue to watch Star Trek: Discovery. However, not everyone feels the same, as my subsequent forays online have shown. Much has changed in this new iteration of Star Trek and as we know, some fans do not like change in any way, shape, or form.
Two standout alterations that become very apparent after watching Star Trek: Discovery are its narrative format and visual aesthetics. This new show has opted for longer-form, serialised storytelling, rather than the traditional, self-contained, story per episode format. Star Trek has always had long term narrative arcs, especially in later shows such as Deep Space Nine and Enterprise but this is different. Star Trek: Discovery has chosen to take a different route, opting to pitch a single and hopefully multi-faceted narrative split over fifteen episodes. However, it is the decision to deviate from the established aesthetic style that is proving to be the biggest stumbling block for purist fans. The visual design of specific races, ships, uniforms and period technology has been clearly established and maintained since the eighties. Thus, fans have specific pre-existing notions of what this period in Star Trek history should look like. This is the era of Christopher Pike, Captain of the Enterprise a decade before James T. Kirk. However, all of this has been effectively jettisoned. Klingons have been redesigned and look far more alien now. The aesthetic of the ships and technology looks far more like that seen in the Kelvin Timeline, despite the new show being set in the prime universe.
![Star Trek Discovery S01E02 Battle at the Binary Stars.mkv_snapshot_21.38_[2017.09.25_18.01.26].jpg](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/54e310f0e4b0f4a6ba3ac899/1506359677594-87VFFU39Q5TUG5SO42RX/Star+Trek+Discovery+S01E02+Battle+at+the+Binary+Stars.mkv_snapshot_21.38_%5B2017.09.25_18.01.26%5D.jpg)
Star Trek: Discovery has had a troubled journey to our screens. Show runner Bryan Fuller left after a “difficult relationship” with CBS. The production was delayed and there have been constant rumours about arguments over what direction the story should take. Certain executives have balked at being restrained by the established canon and it would appear that they have won the argument because Star Trek: Discovery has a very different look. However, there is a counter argument to be had for creating a show with a broader appeal, so as to guarantee the future of the franchise. Core Star Trek fans are ageing. New blood can revitalise a declining show. Take Doctor Who for example. From what we’ve seen so far from Star Trek: Discovery it has certainly not set the barrier to entry to high. The show is accessible to those who are not overly familiar with the lore. In fact, I have spoken to several colleagues who have opted to watch out of curiosity. So far, their feedback has been overwhelmingly positive. However, it is unrealistic to expect those purist fans who are unhappy about the changes that have been made, to simply shrug their shoulders and leave quietly. There will be social media drama.
I have always enjoyed Star Trek in all its manifestations. However, as a fan of this and other genre franchises, I find myself becoming less zealous in towing the perceived status quo, the older I get. If I was given a preference, then I would have liked to have seen a new Star Trek show set after The Next Generation. But I wasn’t and so I’ll content myself with what’s on offer. I consider myself, sufficiently mature and emotionally literate to be able to accommodate the stylistic changes the producers wish to make. As long as their current vision of Star Trek stays true to Gene Roddenberry’s ideals, as well as the socio-political tone that the show established throughout the eighties and nineties, then I can be flexible. Jettisoning the established aesthetic is a big ask but ultimately for me it is not a deal breaker. Sadly, for some it will be. Once again, we return us to the thorny issue of fandom and whether it does have any moral claim of influence over an intellectual property. Should a new show be made with fans in mind first and then a wider audience second, or vice versa? The answers to these and other questions are ultimately dependent on what audience figures are like. If Star Trek: Discovery proves to be a critical and commercial success, then the complaints of naysayers will fall upon stony ground. If the show alternatively bombs, then the future of Star Trek may well be in jeopardy.
![Star Trek Discovery S01E01 The Vulcan Hello.mkv_snapshot_07.19_[2017.09.25_17.54.13].jpg](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/54e310f0e4b0f4a6ba3ac899/1506359625650-D976K1OBW47HSSSFN2S2/Star+Trek+Discovery+S01E01+The+Vulcan+Hello.mkv_snapshot_07.19_%5B2017.09.25_17.54.13%5D.jpg)
Unlocked (2017)
CIA specialist interrogator Alice Rancine (Noomi Rapace) is on secondment to MI5 while she nurses her guilt over a previously failed operation that left civilians dead. Her old boss Eric Lasch (Michael Douglas) thinks it’s time she returned to what she does best. Rancine then receives a request from the CIA London Station to crack a terrorist courier who can provide access to a major cell. However, it soon becomes clear that the operation has not been officially sanctioned and Rancine has been duped by rogue elements within the Agency. Alone and on the run from the CIA, MI5 and independent contractors, Alice finds an unexpected ally in ex-Marine Jack Alcott (Orlando Bloom) who she finds robbing her apartment. Together, the pair pursue the lead she obtained while interrogating the courier and attempt to stop a biological attack from happening on UK soil.
CIA specialist interrogator Alice Rancine (Noomi Rapace) is on secondment to MI5 while she nurses her guilt over a previously failed operation that left civilians dead. Her old boss Eric Lasch (Michael Douglas) thinks it’s time she returned to what she does best. Rancine then receives a request from the CIA London Station to crack a terrorist courier who can provide access to a major cell. However, it soon becomes clear that the operation has not been officially sanctioned and Rancine has been duped by rogue elements within the Agency. Alone and on the run from the CIA, MI5 and independent contractors, Alice finds an unexpected ally in ex-Marine Jack Alcott (Orlando Bloom) who she finds robbing her apartment. Together, the pair pursue the lead she obtained while interrogating the courier and attempt to stop a biological attack from happening on UK soil.
Unlocked, despite having the veneer of a contemporary story is a somewhat old school thriller. That is not in itself a bad thing. It is directed by veteran film maker Michael Apted in a workman like fashion and is functionally entertaining. It contains all the usual tropes found in the espionage genre, yet the screenplay written by Peter O’Brien manages to add sufficient difference to keep viewers interest. For example, Alice Rancine works as a legal advisor, doing pro-bono work among London’s immigrant community. Her work allows her to do “some good” as well as gather intelligence. Subsequently Unlocked features some interesting location filming in some of the poorer parts of London. It is welcome break from the usual US-centric material we’ve come to expect from thriller of this kind. The film is bolstered by a solid and reliable cast, featuring the likes of Toni Collette and John Malkovitch. Their presence makes the narrative a little more plausible and palatable.
Critics were not so impressed by Unlocked upon release and it garnered mix reviews. Some accused director Michael Apted of being out of touch. His last foray into the traditional spy film genre was Gorky Park, back in 1983. The main handicap with a film of this nature trying to find a fresh perspective or approach. Sadly, the Middle-east narrative has been done to death over the last twenty-five years and it’s worn a little thin. However, despite this flaw Unlocked does compensate in other areas. The UK and European settings do add a different narrative perspective and visual aesthetic. Unlocked benefits greatly from Noomi Rapace’s performance. Female leads are still not so common place in this genre. Furthermore, Unlocked is yet another of a handful of recently released action movies that have not sought the box office comfort of the PG-13 rating. Bad things happen in the world of espionage and Unlocked is happy to show them.
The Driver (1978)
Walter Hill is a much underrated director, whose back catalogue is often overlooked. After several years as a writer, Hill moved into directing. His second major film, The Driver is a neo-noir, minimalist thriller, with characters named by their profession (The Detective, The Driver etc.) and a plot that extols Hills favourite theme, of a man being defined by his actions. The title character (Ryan O’Neal) a professional getaway driver, plays a game of cat and mouse with "The Detective" (Bruce Dern), who is determined to bring him down. “I’m gonna catch the cowboy that’s never been caught,” he tells "The Driver". "The Detective" becomes so obsessed with his foe, that he sets up a bank job in order to trap "The Driver". Yet the plan does not run smoothly and "The Driver" learns that he being set up. Does he walk away or does he take the bait and face the inevitable consequences?
Walter Hill is a much underrated director, whose back catalogue is often overlooked. After several years as a writer, Hill moved into directing. His second major film, The Driver is a neo-noir, minimalist thriller, with characters named by their profession (The Detective, The Driver etc.) and a plot that extols Hills favourite theme, of a man being defined by his actions. The title character (Ryan O’Neal) a professional getaway driver, plays a game of cat and mouse with "The Detective" (Bruce Dern), who is determined to bring him down. “I’m gonna catch the cowboy that’s never been caught,” he tells "The Driver". "The Detective" becomes so obsessed with his foe, that he sets up a bank job in order to trap "The Driver". Yet the plan does not run smoothly and "The Driver" learns that he being set up. Does he walk away or does he take the bait and face the inevitable consequences?
The Driver is a spartan film with a clear message about the people living by a code. It also contemplates another classic theme, that of the individual who has become an anachronism and is out of step with the world that they live in. The Driver is also a prime example of the cinematic philosophy of show don’t tell. Ryan O’Neal has only three hundred and fifty words of dialogue. His character’s is intriguing but enigmatic. Despite the large fees he commands for his skill, he lives a frugal life in cheap motels. Clearly, he is not in it just for the money. Bruce Dern's obsession drives him to break the very law he’s sworn to defend, in the tradition of Greek tragedy. Hill’s original cut of the film was over two hours, but he decided to pare the plot development and motivational back story to the bone, with a final running time of 91 minutes.
This is very much a product of its decade. The seventies were a time that allowed directors to experiment and pursue philosophical subtexts. The production design and cinematography by Harry Horner and Philip H. Lathrop are excellent. The stunt driving is superbly staged and edited. The scene where "The Driver" surgically dissects an orange Mercedes to prove his credentials is amazing. Sadly this sort of experimental film making just does not get made anymore. You cannot adequately compare a philosophical gem like this, with the vacuous, commercial, disposable film making that is The Fast and The Furious or Need for Speed. Sadly, box office returns suggest that the public no longer have an interest in allegorical films of this nature either.
Is Shared Fandom a Bridge to Reconciliation?
There are and always will be books that have a clear political agenda or make a very particular statement. Orwell’s 1984 springs to mind as an obvious example. Then there are also books that attract political interpretations by the nature of their plot or the subjects that they explore. Whether the author intended such a debate about the work or not, is a secondary issue. I have always taken Tolkien’s work at face value and to be what he stated they were. Epic and intricate faux histories, free from allegory. Furthermore, I appreciate that the moral position and themes of his work stem from the authors world view, personal experiences as well as the prevailing social dogma of the time. I find it interesting how his work attracts praise and adulation from a wide variety of groups. Catholics will naturally gravitate towards Tolkien’s writings due to his faith and that is the prism through which they will critically view his work. There are of course other examples about how The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings appeals to different people in different ways. It is a common aspect of fandom.
Fandom by Tom Preston
There are and always will be books that have a clear political agenda or make a very particular statement. Orwell’s 1984 springs to mind as an obvious example. Then there are also books that attract political interpretations by the nature of their plot or the subjects that they explore. Whether the author intended such a debate about the work or not, is a secondary issue. I have always taken Tolkien’s work at face value and to be what he stated they were. Epic and intricate faux histories, free from allegory. Furthermore, I appreciate that the moral position and themes of his work stem from the authors world view, personal experiences as well as the prevailing social dogma of the time. I find it interesting how his work attracts praise and adulation from a wide variety of groups. Catholics will naturally gravitate towards Tolkien’s writings due to his faith and that is the prism through which they will critically view his work. There are of course other examples about how The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings appeals to different people in different ways. This is a common aspect of fandom.
Bearing this in mind, it should not come as surprise to learn that Tolkien’s writing also has fans among the political class. The UK Conservative Party MEP Daniel Hannan is one who has written essays on his love of the Professor’s work and its literary merits. For example, Mr Hannan says “Here is a book that, as much as any I can think of, needs to be read aloud. Tolkien, like many Catholics of his generation, understood the power of incantation. He knew that—as, funnily enough, Pullman once put it—a fine poem fills your mouth with magic, as if you were chanting a spell”. Upon reading more of his analysis of Tolkien’s work, it becomes apparent that several of his political colleagues share his passion. It would seem many Conservative MPs find that Tolkien’s writing contains themes and concepts that they equate with their political ideology. Curiously enough what they see in the Professor’s work, I have never experienced. Again, they view it and quantify it in a different way to myself. This raises some interesting points about when you discover that you share a liking for something with a group you didn’t expect.
I suppose the optimistic way to interpret this situation is to focus on how fandom can build bridges and that there is now theoretically common ground between both parties concerned, despite their obvious differences. However, I feel that it’s a more complex situation than that. In this instance, I do not hold with a lot of the opinions and world view of this particular group of people. I think that many of the policies that the Conservative party have implemented since they came to power in 2010, have been harmful to both individuals and to society. Therefore, does simply having a shared passion for one specific thing bridge an otherwise, vast cultural, philosophical, political divide? I do not think that it does. If I were to meet Mr Hannan in a social situation, I would endeavour to be civil to him and focus on our common ground but ultimately our shared love for Tolkien is not a path to reconciliation. He would still remain at odds with my political sensibilities and continue to be a Conservative party member.
Reflecting upon this example and other comparable ones, certainly raises some interesting questions. It is a timely reminder that fandom does not give you any sense of ownership towards the object of your affection. Nor do you get to decide who can like or not like the thing in question, or who are “true fans”. The reality is that what appeals to you about the thing you love, is not necessarily the same for everyone and that we all interpret and respond to art as well as literature in a different way. Furthermore, when you do find out that you share a common love for something with those who are radically different to yourself, their presence should not spoil that very thing for you. Irrespective of the fans and their differences, the object of affection (in this case Tolkien’s writing), remains untouched. Overall, I guess this matter is a timely reminder about tolerance and sharing.
The analogy that springs to mind is one regarding religion, specifically Christianity. It is a faith that is rife with different denominations. All allegedly cleave to the same fundamental principles, yet interpret the scriptures differently. Is this situation about the differences between fan bases not dissimilar to the divide between Anglicans and fundamentalist Evangelicals? Also, history shows that many fine things have been liked, embraced or advocated by the morally questionable. So, it would appear that a shared love is not an assured ticket to harmony and reconciliation. The divided nature of the gaming community is an ongoing testament to that. The fallout over the recent casting of a female actor as Doctor Who is further proof that fandom is a broad but far from united church. As for Tolkien, I shall simply content myself with my own personal enjoyment of his work and leave others to do so in their own way. However, what I will not allow unchecked is for others to usurp his writing and claim it justifies something that it empirically does not.
Elysium (2013)
Dystopian futures, oppressive regimes and the inequalities between the haves and have nots, have been the mainstay of science fiction for decades. The political dimensions of such narratives are usually glossed over and seldom garner any attention from critics as they are simply plot devices, designed to set up a more specific story. Yet for some reason Neill Blomkamp's Elysium, seems to have been labelled "sci-fi socialism" upon its release by certain institutions. In today's unsophisticated language is meant to have negative connotations. Such comments should be dismissed as they frequently come from quarters that have a poor understanding of what exactly socialism is and little interest in genuine film reviews.
Dystopian futures, oppressive regimes and the inequalities between the haves and have nots, have been the mainstay of science fiction for decades. The political dimensions of such narratives are usually glossed over and seldom garner any attention from critics as they are simply plot devices, designed to set up a more specific story. Yet for some reason Neill Blomkamp's Elysium, seems to have been labelled "sci-fi socialism" upon its release by certain institutions. In today's unsophisticated language is meant to have negative connotations. Such comments should be dismissed as they frequently come from quarters that have a poor understanding of what exactly socialism is and little interest in genuine film reviews.
Elysium is simply a movie about inequality and the consequences that arise from such a state of affairs. It touches upon such weighty themes as faith, private healthcare and immigration. Yet rather than preach about these issues they are mainly plot devices to be explored cinematically. So, Elysium is filled with imagery such as a Los Angeles reduced to a favela and public services outsourced to robots. The depiction of poverty, segregation and crime is worryingly plausible as it is so clearly based upon contemporary news footage that we can see on any TV channels at any time of day. This is vividly contrast by the clinical beauty and corporate order of orbiting space station of Elysium, were the wealthy reside.
Enter Max De Costa (Matt Damon), a paroled professional thief, struggling to stay upon the straight and narrow. After an industrial accident renders him in need of healthcare that can only be found on Elysium, he reluctantly takes a job to kidnap an industrialist (William Fitchner). The plan is to steal data directly from his head that will allow earth-bound citizens access to Elysium. However, head of defence Secretary Delacourt (Jodie Foster) has no intention of seeing her exclusive community overwhelmed by illegal immigrants and dispatches sleeper agent Kruger (Sharlto Copley) to clear up any loose ends. What starts as a personal journey for Max, with his own life hanging in the balance, soon becomes a mission with far wider implications and much higher stakes.
Neill Blomkamp excels at setting up a vision of the future that is credible, despite showing quite little. There are some wide CGI shots of a decaying city but he mainly manages to reinforce the concept by the finer details of the production design. Litter strewn streets, smothered in graffiti, hospitals with precious few resources, overwhelmed by patients. Civic offices populated with automated machines dealing with endless lines of the public. Think of a downbeat version of Johnny Cab from Paul Verhoeven's Total Recall and you'll get the idea. The depiction of military technology is also based upon ongoing contemporary research, with a focus on drones and VTOL based weapons platforms. The CGI is particularly cutting edge, making the law enforcement robots worryingly realistic.
Although there are many familiar tropes and conventions used in Elysium, Neill Blomkamp brings a fresh eye to interpreting them. This is a pleasantly non-US-centric movie, with an international cast adding flavour to the plot. Los Angeles is shown to be predominantly Hispanic with a use of both English and Spanish. Elysium itself is also multicultural, with its President Patel reflecting the growing wealth of India. The final act does to a degree paint the story into a corner and leads to an outcome that is fairly predictable. Yet the ending raises a great many questions and certainly doesn't give the audience a convenient conclusion to all plot strands. It is worth reflecting upon Secretary Delacourt's final dialogue for example, as well as the potential corporate response to events in the final act.
Director Neill Blomkamp again proves that he is a film maker to keep an eye on. If you have not seen his previous Movie District 9, then do so. It is equally as innovative, international and thought provoking. Although far from perfect, with some instances of curious editing, Elysium still provides an above average character and plot driven science fiction movie. It also eschews the current trend for bland PG-13 rated action with a robust R rating. It certainly has the most memorable cinematic villain we’ve seen for a while.
Classic Movie Themes: Zeppelin
Zeppelin is an often overlooked, World War I action movie made in 1971. Michael York plays a British Officer of Bavarian decent, who goes under cover for British Intelligence to thwart a German plot involving a new prototype dirigible. It's a very straightforward ripping yarn, that benefits greatly from Alan Hume’s superb cinematography. The visual effects credits are a veritable "who's, who" of British artist from the time, featuring the likes of Cliff Richardson, Cliff Culley and Wally Veevers. One of the stand out elements of this movie is the fine score by Roy Budd. Budd was a completely self-taught musician who was hailed as a child prodigy. Over the course of his career Budd wrote a diverse selection of film scores and was adept at many different styles.
Zeppelin is an often overlooked, World War I action movie made in 1971. Michael York plays a British Officer of Bavarian decent, who goes under cover for British Intelligence to thwart a German plot involving a new prototype dirigible. It's a very straightforward ripping yarn, that benefits greatly from Alan Hume’s superb cinematography. The visual effects credits are a veritable "who's, who" of British artist from the time, featuring the likes of Cliff Richardson, Cliff Culley and Wally Veevers. One of the stand out elements of this movie is the fine score by Roy Budd. Budd was a completely self-taught musician who was hailed as a child prodigy. Over the course of his career Budd wrote a diverse selection of film scores and was adept at many different styles.
Roy Budd's score for Zeppelin is an exercise in smart minimalism with its leitmotif. The main theme with its simple melody, key change and use of military snare drums works wonderfully. It doesn't need to be more complicated than this and beautifully compliments the traditional approach of the movie. Sadly, the tapes of the original recording have subsequently been lost so the main theme is the only piece of music from the soundtrack currently available. It's a shame because the movie has some very robust cues such as the prelude to the German attack on the castle, as well as the assault itself. Perhaps a full re-recording may be made in the future.
Diary of a Podcaster Part 9
As I surmised, in its current state Squarespace has proven an inadequate host for my current podcast. After exchanging several emails with Apple support, I was informed that “the server for your episodes does not support HTTP HEAD requests. To enable streaming playback of episodes, ensure the hosting server allows HTTP HEAD requests and has byte-range requests enabled”. To cut a long story short, there is no scope for me to alter any of these things at present within the Squarespace dashboard. Nor did I want the work involved in using a third-party feed managing service such as FeedBurner. So, I decided to open up an account with a commercial hosting service. After some research, I determined that PodBean could cater for all my needs and at a competitive price. Submitting the new RSS feed was easy and Apple approved the podcast within 36 hours. As of today, the Contains Moderate Peril podcast is back on iTunes.
As I surmised, in its current state Squarespace has proven an inadequate host for my current podcast. After exchanging several emails with Apple support, I was informed that “the server for your episodes does not support HTTP HEAD requests. To enable streaming playback of episodes, ensure the hosting server allows HTTP HEAD requests and has byte-range requests enabled”. To cut a long story short, there is no scope for me to alter any of these things at present within the Squarespace dashboard. Nor did I want the work involved in using a third-party feed managing service such as FeedBurner. So, I decided to open up an account with a commercial hosting service. After some research, I determined that PodBean could cater for all my needs and at a competitive price. Submitting the new RSS feed was easy and Apple approved the podcast within 36 hours. As of today, the Contains Moderate Peril podcast is back on iTunes.
I could have continued to using Squarespace as a host but effectively this would have meant not having any statistics available regarding the podcast and not having a presence on iTunes. Although the show is not a commercial endeavour, I still wish to grow the audience so I feel that both of the aforementioned requirements are essential. iTunes is an important platform and invaluable means to gain exposure. However, having moved to a service such as PodBean, I have now incurred an additional overhead of $14 a month. The hosting package offers unlimited audio storage and unmetered bandwidth as well as a comprehensive statistical analysis. There is a substantial knowledge base and FAQs. Overall, this is a reasonably priced and functional service. For customers simply interested in podcasting, you can create and manage a bespoke landing page.
In other news, in preparation for a return to regular podcasting, I’ve been doing some test recordings. The scissor arm desktop stand I bought for my microphone is proving a little unwieldy in the limited space I have. So, I purchased a simple tripod as an alternative. This frees up valuable desk space and means that I can easily relocate to an alternative location to record, should the requirement arise. I also received some invaluable advice regarding the placement of my pop filter when I posted a picture of my new set up on Twitter. The subsequent changes that I’ve made have had a positive impact upon sound quality. With the technical and logistical side of podcast production now resolved, I need to focus on drawing up a recording schedule and tackling the complex issue of organising guests. International time zones are sadly one of podcasting’s perennial Achilles Heel.
The Darkest Hour (2011)
The Darkest Hour should have been more appropriately titled The Stupidest Hour, or Darwinian Natural Selection in Action. It really is a microcosm of all that is wrong with mainstream Hollywood at present and it saddens me that this film was made by director Chris Gorak. His previous movie Right at You Door was the exact opposite of The Darkest Hour, being intelligent, well scripted and focused. Prior to directing Gorak has had a successful career as an art director, working for such luminaries as David Fincher, the Coen brothers, and Terry Gilliam. His flair for the visual is present in The Darkest Hour but it would appear that the production design and visual effects were given priority over a good script. I shall endeavour to summarise the plot and provide a brief overview of the films respective merits, although there are precious little.
The Darkest Hour should have been more appropriately titled The Stupidest Hour, or Darwinian Natural Selection in Action. It really is a microcosm of all that is wrong with mainstream Hollywood at present and it saddens me that this film was made by director Chris Gorak. His previous movie Right at You Door was the exact opposite of The Darkest Hour, being intelligent, well scripted and focused. Prior to directing Gorak has had a successful career as an art director, working for such luminaries as David Fincher, the Coen brothers, and Terry Gilliam. His flair for the visual is present in The Darkest Hour but it would appear that the production design and visual effects were given priority over a good script. I shall endeavour to summarise the plot and provide a brief overview of the films respective merits, although there are precious little.
Americans Ben and Sean (Max Minghella and Emile Hirsch), a pair of two dimensional, uninteresting software engineers go to Moscow to look for investment in their smartphone app (oh how very modern). However, their Swedish business partner (Joel Kinnaman) and singularly unpleasant representative of humanity steals their intellectual property. Subsequently Ben and Sean seek comfort in a night club and meet two equally unedifying examples of womankind; Natalie (Olivia Thirlby), an American, and her Australian friend Anne (Rachael Taylor). It is at this point in the proceeding’s that invisible aliens decide to pop down to earth for a bit of an invasion and some global asset stripping, which proves to be a bit of an inconvenience. This unprepossessing bunch then lurch from cliché to cliché, continuously making bad choices. Imagine an episode of Scooby Doo in which all of the characters are recovering from major head trauma and you'll get the picture.
So, where to start? Well The Darkest Hour has a fundamentally bland and uninspired screenplay. The basic idea of energy beings is in principle better than the usual bipedal aliens that we see in such films. However, the idea runs out of steam quickly, especially when we see one outside of its invisible shield. They give the creatures anthropomorphic faces which immediately kills off any credibility. There is also no attempt to flesh out characters back story, beyond the functional. The Moscow setting although striking, doesn’t offer any new perspective on such standard genre material nor do the Russian characters. The films major flaw is that the plot is so unremittingly stupid it beggars belief. I appreciate that people do not always make the wisest decisions while under pressure but the most basic notions of rational thinking are jettisoned to create faux drama. The only innovation shown throughout the films eighty-nine-minute running time are the visual effects and the way the energy being are depicted. Apart from this, The Darkest Hour is pure dot to dot movie making.
The Darkest Hour feels like focus group film making. You can imagine someone standing at a whiteboard taking notes, as a room full of studio executives brainstormed what are the essential tropes of a PG-13 rated action sci-fi movie. As a result, the movie feels like it is working through a list of narrative points and lacks any personal connection of wider depth. What could have been an interesting variation on a theme, is simply an exercise in insincerity and stupidity. If a studio is happy to sell such a product then it doesn’t say much about what they think about their target audience. I hope in the future, director Chris Gorak distances himself from such companies and returns to producing material of the quality of his previous movie, Right at Your Door. Films such as The Darkest Hour do nothing for the genre apart from accelerate the pace of the race to the bottom.
Tradesmen
I don’t care for the popular interpretation of the “Renaissance Man”. IE someone who attempts all jobs around the house. I’m a firm believer in deferring to professionals. If I need electrical work carried out, then I’ll happily hire an electrician. The same goes for plumbers, builders and decorators. I even employ a handyman for those niggling trivial jobs. There are several reasons why I take such an approach. First and foremost, I am fully aware of my limitations and what I can and cannot do. It’s a philosophy espoused by Harry Callahan, so who am I to contradict? If I want a job done, I want it done properly and not bodged. Secondly, if you formally employ someone to undertake a job that has been fully costed via bona fide quotation, then you have legal recourse should things go south. Thirdly, I do not care for manual labour. That is not to say I think it’s beneath me. Quite the opposite. I admire anyone who earns their crust through their physical toil. Nope, I just don’t like such work. I prefer using my mind not my back. Finally, I value my leisure time and do not want to see such a precious resource squandered. So, considering all these points, whenever certain jobs or chores arise, I pay others to do them.
I don’t care for the popular interpretation of the “Renaissance Man”. IE someone who attempts all jobs around the house. I’m a firm believer in deferring to professionals. If I need electrical work carried out, then I’ll happily hire an electrician. The same goes for plumbers, builders and decorators. I even employ a handyman for those niggling trivial jobs. There are several reasons why I take such an approach. First and foremost, I am fully aware of my limitations and what I can and cannot do. It’s a philosophy espoused by Harry Callahan, so who am I to contradict? If I want a job done, I want it done properly and not bodged. Secondly, if you formally employ someone to undertake a job that has been fully costed via bona fide quotation, then you have legal recourse should things go south. Thirdly, I do not care for manual labour. That is not to say I think it’s beneath me. Quite the opposite. I admire anyone who earns their crust through their physical toil. Nope, I just don’t like such work. I prefer using my mind not my back. Finally, I value my leisure time and do not want to see such a precious resource squandered. So, considering all these points, whenever certain jobs or chores arise, I pay others to do them.
Now I fully recognise that some people will undertake certain jobs around the home purely due to financial reasons. Hiring tradesmen to build or fix something is costly. This post is not intended to be critical of such individuals. I consider myself fortunate that my finances allow me to contract others. Furthermore, having worked in IT for nearly twenty-five years, often in a self-employed capacity, I understand the nature of market rates and the need to try balance your financial overheads with offering your client a competitive price. Therefore, I like to think that when I hire tradesmen myself, I am not a cheapskate. My own experiences over the years have lead me to conclude you get exactly what you pay for. So, considering all these points, I deem myself to be fairly well disposed toward tradesmen, at least in principle. By hiring them I am helping the wider economy, as well as myself.
Now that we have got all the measured prerequisites and caveats out of the way, in which I have hopefully established myself as a non-prejudicial, even hand and benevolent customer, let me now proceed to catalogue some of the problems I have had of late with tradesmen and the associated culture. My parents have not done any major home improvements since the late eighties. This means a lot of things are now breaking, failing and in need of replacement around their home. In the last few months, several electrical sockets have stopped working and some reading lights developed an intermittent fault. So, an electrician was required. Naturally my first port of call was to look online. I looked for those local to my parents and then once a short list was drawn up, I then tried to establish their reputations. There are many review sites around and although you can game the system, I think these sites can be broadly used as a benchmark.
Having found five electricians that met the criteria, I then proceeded to phone and discuss the work required. Let it suffice to say that four of those five, didn’t seemed especially enthusiastic about the work offered. To cut a long story short, I was brushed off with varying degrees of subtlety because the jobs were deemed to small and not generating sufficient revenue. Luckily the fifth was happy to do the work, which was carried out efficiently and to my complete satisfaction. Needless to say, this particular tradesman is now on my preferred list. Furthermore, I’ve discussed with him this concept of small jobs being trivial. He is aware that many of his colleagues take such a view but he personally takes a more pragmatic approach. I live in an area with a high percentage of elderly, retired homeowners. This means there is a substantial and reoccurring market for minor jobs. It’s a market that this particular individual is happy to serve. It yields as much, if not more revenue in the long run. Yet it is a market that is frequently ignored as tradesmen pursue the “big jobs”.
Another issue I’ve had of late is trying to ascertain what the current market rate is for certain types of work. My parents front garden is finally being turned in to a drive after fifty-seven years. This is mainly being done to accommodate the nurses and health visitors that care for my Dad and visit daily. Because this job is not classified as “trivial work”, I’ve not had problems finding companies willing to tender for it. However, I have had a very broad spectrum of quotes ranging from £4,000 to £10,000. I find this disparity, troubling. Someone is either quoting too cheap, which then infers substandard work. Or someone is charging too much which then makes me question their personal integrity and that of their business. Again, I have tried to do some research online to get a feel for current market rates but as this kind of work is out of my field of expertise, then it does feel like I’m making a calculated guess at times. Plus, the UK is a country that has major regional cost variations. Any service within Greater London, which is where my family live, is always more expensive.
In the immediate future, I have a gardener scheduled to do some clearance work in my parent’s garden. If their work is satisfactory, I’ll happily employ them myself to excuse me from mowing the lawn and pruning bushes. This particular tradesman was recommended to me by a colleague so I suspect that he will be sound. However, this nebulous referral system that so many people rely upon is far from bullet proof. What one person considers good work, may not be the same for another. Plus, not everyone has access to a network of friends and colleagues to make recommendations to begin with. Hence, we have seen an increase in review sites but as I mentioned early, these are not perfect. My concerns are not about dishonest reviews but simply that some trades and business types are represented. My son recently hired a plasterer. Tracking them down was an extremely difficult process. To cut a long story short, when asked why the he didn’t advertise, the plasterer replied he got sufficient work through word of mouth. Their work was so good that they always had another gig to go to. Such a business approach is fine for the tradesman but no so beneficial for potential customers out of the loop.
I believe that tradesmen should be free to find business in whatever fashion they see fit (with the usual caveats about working within the confines of the law). However, I do feel that the present process of finding and hiring them leaves a lot to be desired. I only say this anecdotally but during the course of my recent enquiries, I found that only half of those businesses I researched had an adequate online presence. Some only had a small website or Facebook page with contact details. Others had absolutely no online details apart from reviews written on third party sites. So far, those that I have employed have all had a solid online footprint, detailing professional credentials, prices and references. Furthermore, they have also used a lot of other technology for notifications and billing. So perhaps the change and gradual cultural shift from old school methods to modern practise is underway. Or at least I hope so. Because I need a gas fitter soon to replace an old boiler with a modern alternative and I don’t want to be chasing my own tail.
