Time For A Rant

It seems like a long time since I posted anything that wasn't a film review, Hell it has been a long time since I posted much of anything really. Often finding myself just not being in the head space for doing a post. At one point I was determined to review every film I watched, which being a raging film geek like myself proved quite difficult.

But today I just wanted to go on about people for a bit.

To preface all this, I understand that people have their own lives to live but in recent times I have found people to be so much more selfish and ignorant to other people than they used to be.

I pride myself on trying to be a good friend to people. Case in point - my friend Stacey passed her driving test today, and as I was coming to Thetford to visit my Mum I tried to nip round to her flat with a congratulations card I bought. This was no big deal for me, I didn't feel like I was going out of my way to do it. It's just the sort of thing people should do right?

Well if it is, I'm the only one doing it. Where did this wave of selfishness come from?

Example - my BlackBerry was sent away to be repaired and I had none of my numbers on the courtesy phone so using Facebook (and I feel this place is a prime reason for what I'm talking about) I put up a couple of statuses and sent a message to the people I text most, and to say the response rate was poor was an understatement.

I get that message and I take the what? 30 seconds? To quickly send off a text. But no, this seems to be too big a deal for some.

Although I still find it a useful tool (mainly for collecting photographs together as you're not going to get all your Facebook friends to jump over to Flickr lets be fair) although it is grating on me. Since when does the fact you have a Facebook profile mean you don't have to send a birthday card or something like that? Obviously I have 89 friends on there and they aren't all going to get birthday cards but people just seem to use it so they don't need to make an effort anymore.

That isn't saying I don't use Facebook as a shortcut sometimes. Take the chat application on there. It is a fast and easy way to keep in touch with people but you have to ask yourself what the point is when people don't even reply on that. Can't be bothered/too busy to talk with someone? Fucking TELL THEM. It requires about 5 seconds of effort but even that seems too much these days.

I know I was brought up slightly earlier than most of my friends but I refuse to believe that its a generational thing. Although it is probably getting there. It just seems in the last year or so people I know, or people friends tell me about, hell even customers where I work are more self involved and rude than before!

As I said, I know people have their own lives but it takes the piss royally. Take this story, based on true events. The names have been changed...

W has a friend, lets call them X. It's X's birthday on a Saturday and although W has had a heavy night the night before and feels like shit he goes out for it, but takes his friend Y and heads out early unless he falls asleep at home. A venue is pretty much decided on. W and Y sit in this place for almost 3 hours, not really feeling 100% (and by the way texting X to let them know they are there) only to see X and their contingent walk past (and looking straight in at W and Y) and go somewhere else without a word.

And when they are called on it the next day X lays a guilt trip on W.

That is an actual example of something that happened to me. And they said to me that I seemed to want something more from them, a pressure of kinds. And THAT, pardon the upcoming pun is the X Factor - reliability. That isn't something you should have to pressure people into. People should treat people how they would like to be treated.

The above isn't an isolated event but its a particularly potent example of how people just live in their little bubbles with their own little agendas and its not just one person, two people but everyone. I should also point out that the friend isn't the only one, I'm not just picking on one person a lot of people can be guilty of it. I could have actually used as different case study but that wasn't my story to tell.

I seem to have to walk a fine line. I don't want to become a pity case because of my Father passing away earlier in the year. I get generally uncomfortable when people show sympathy and that, I appreciate it but don't know what to do with it. But I feel people around me (and people around others) should just make an effort. And I don't want that to be mixed up with "Feel sorry for me!"

Send a text, make a phone call, send an email. Hell, I know this is 2010 and human contact seems to beginning to get frowned upon - but go out for a drink with someone, catch a movie, you can even sacrifice a goat if you want to!

So that is my rant about that. Apologies go out to the people in my life who are reliable. They know who they are.

Till next time.

Film Review: Paranormal Activity 2

SPOILERS ABOUND.

Last year Paranormal Activity arrived seemingly out of nowhere to cinema screens and made a huge splash as well as a shed load of money for Paramount (made for around $11,000 it went on to make over $100 million in the States alone) and even more impressively I found a horror film that actually made me jump on multiple occasions.

Dealing with what you didn't see over what you did, PA1 masterfully ramped up the tension and delivered real shocks and a hell of an ending.

But, of course it made over $100 million so a sequel was bound to happen. But how do you follow on from a film shot with handheld cameras with only 2 main characters (And one of them is killed off at the end)?

Simple it seems. Prequel, baby.

Starting around 60 days before events of the first film this focuses on the sister of Katie from the original and her family (Husband, step daughter, dog and baby). Spooked by what appears to be a break in the family invest in 6 hidden cameras to be dotted around their house to prevent it happening again. What we see on screen is a combination of that 'footage' and camcorder hijinks normally to do with the baby, but is used as things get worse in the house.

Appearances from Katie and Micah from the original are made and groundwork for what happens to them is laid quite nicely surprisingly. They are in about 3 or 4 scenes total, more of a guest spot than actual starring roles.

The slightly silly plot that sets up the reason for the demon visitation this time around is that if you make a deal with a demon they can claim your first born child. References to Kristi (Sprague Grayden) and Katie's mother are made, and eventually a transfer of the hauntings to a blood relative sets up the events of the first film.

So with the plot out of the way...how is the paranormal activity?

The use of sound is still there, but a lot less of the footsteps this time. The subtleties are still there, a door opening, the babies carousel moving slowly on it's own. The big jumps are still there but a lot less for me this time round (2 in fact - the first thump and all the cupboards in the kitchen both got me), I'm sure another would have happened in the climatic basement scene but it seemed a bit too much like REC for me but in a basement instead of an attic.

Something else that bugged me throughout was that they deviated from casting unknowns. I find that these films worked a lot better when you don't recognize anyone in them. Obviously, you know it's not real but it adds a sense of reality to it that you wouldn't get if Bruce Willis showed up.

As I watched it I thought the lead actress who played Kristi did indeed look a bit like Sprague Grayden who was in Six Feet Under and played the President's daughter in Season 7 of 24 but thought that it was just a similarity but the credits revealed otherwise which will really take me out of the film the next time I watch it.

But overall it was a worthy, albeit rather pointless sequel. The few questions that were left from the original like 'Why did the demon return when it did?" and "Where did the photo come from?" didn't REALLY need answering but they were answered in a very satisfactory way without getting silly.

Silly, though, is a worry I start to get should a third in the series emerge (and Paranormal Activity 2 made $20 million on it's FIRST DAY OUT in the States, it seems like a inevitability). Surely they can't use the CCTV or camcorder stunt again, but on the other hand - they can't film it like a regular film. That takes away the franchises gimmick.

Of course there may not be a sequel- the demon Katie has the baby, the debt is paid and common sense may win out over money for once. But if they do I'm wanting it called Paranormal Activity 3: Babies Day Out.

***

An unnecessary sequel but aren't they all? PA2 still provides some great shocks but let's hope they leave it there.

Film Review: The Human Centipede (First Sequence)

Quite how this film escaped my attention for so long is a mystery. I always seem to pride myself in finding the most messed up, controversial films long before anyone has heard of, let alone seen them. But The Human Centipede (For brevity's sake I shall drop the 'First Sequence' portion of the title for the rest of the review) only came to my attention just over a month ago, and since it was made in 2009 I made it my mission to try and see it as it was getting a UK release.

Only problem was due to the controversial nature of the film...where the hell would I see it? I was looking at a wait till October where it lands on Region One DVD!

Thank God then for the obviously unbalanced folks at Cinema City in Norwich who elected to show it for one night only this weekend.

The film tells of 2 American tourists (who, as this is a horror film, are exceedingly dumb) who are on a road trip of holiday of Germany and while looking for a nightclub they get a flat tire and are stranded in the middle of nowhere. Without a phone signal, obviously.

After a disturbing (but hilarious) encounter with a fat bloke, the girls retreat from their car and find the house of one Dr. Heiter (played brilliantly by Dieter Laser) who unfortunately for the girls is a retired surgeon who specialized in separating Siamese twins but now...lets just say he likes to mix things up.

The girls are summarily drugged and fastened to hospital beds in Heiter's cellar laboratory where...well I think its best explained by the dialogue itself, I don't think I could do it justice somehow.

"I'll explain this spectacular operation only once. We start with cutting the ligamentum patella, the ligaments of the kneecaps, so knee extension is no longer possible. Pulling from "B" and "C" the central incisors, lateral incisors and canines from the upper and lower jaws, the lips from "B" and "C," and the anus of "A" and "B," are cut circular along the border between skin and mucosa, the mucus cutaneous zone. Two pedicelated grafts are prepared and lifted from the underlying tissue. The shaped incisions below the chins of "B" and "C" up to their cheeks connecting the circular mucosa and skin parts of anus and mouth, from "A" to "B," and "B" to "C," connecting the pedicelated grafts to the chin-cheek incisions from "A" to "B," and "B" to "C," creating a Siamese triplet, connected via the gastric system. Ingestion by A, passing through B, to the excretion of C. The human centipede, first sequence"

And apparently '100% medically accurate" (The directors father in law was a surgeon who helped him with the details) But what of the film?

First of all I'm unsure if it was director Tom Six's intention but the film is hilarious. It really shouldn't be and at some points ("Mein leiber 3-hund") who ask yourself whether you should be laughing at this at all, but the film is so ridiculous and the character of Heiter is so over the top (think a German Christopher Walken at his most extreme...then double it) you just can't help but laugh.

But it also works as a decent little horror movie, although the humour factor does take the edge off some of the horror but I guess that is subjective. The audience in the screen I saw it in were roaring with laughter all the way through - obviously understanding how demented the whole thing was, but some people would take it more seriously and not see the hilarity of a man training a human centipede to bring him his newspaper. Weirdos.

Overall the film works. You don't get to see too much of the surgery (but you see quite a bit) and once the operation is complete you can't really see whats going on there - a lot of it is in your head, especially when the 'front piece' needs to go number two...

But again, the humour is what takes it above your generic 'torture porn' kind of film. Let's hope the quality is maintained in 2011's sequel The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) where we have been promised a 12 person centipede and for the film to be '100% medically INaccurate' ... can't wait!

****

The humour blunts the horror most of the time but this is still a messed up masterpiece.

Film Review: The Expendables

It has been almost 2 years since I first heard about The Expendables. At first it was just Sylvester Stallone making a massive action film, but then as the weeks progressed and turned into months the cast started coming together and every announcement seemed to top the last.

First modern day action favourite Jason Statham was cast, then martial arts legend Jet Li, then a man who has been off the big screen and languishing in DTV hell for years - Dolph Lundgren. And the names kept on rolling - UFC champion Randy Couture, WWE Champion 'Stone Cold' Steve Austin, Eric Roberts - another man who gets a long deserved big 'bad guy' role, Dexter's David Zayas, Former NFL star Terry Crews...

And not forgetting 3 unforgettable appearances from Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

I remember well about a year ago being gutted that the release date of May 2010 had been pushed back to August. Late in 2009 we got a rough trailer which showed us what to look forward to, and well here we are!

The Expendables is the first non-Rocky or Rambo film Stallone has directed since 1983's Staying Alive and tells of a group of mercenaries sent to overthrow a dictator. Thats it really. And I'm not saying that as a negative.

The film starts with the team - Barney Ross (Stallone), Lee Christmas (Statham), Ying Yang (Li), Gunner Jensen (Lundgren), Toll Road (Couture) and Hale Ceasar (Crews) saving Americans from evil Pirates.

Just as a side note here - obviously Stallone and co-writer Dave Callaham were having a bit of a laugh with the characters names here - Steve Austin's character is simply called Paine, Mickey Rourke's Tool...

After the scene is set, we follow Ross to a meeting with potential client Mr. Church (Bruce Willis), which also involves another leader of a group of mercenaries Trench (Arnold Schwarzenegger). Not to give away too much about this scene, but it's going to be one of those that go down in movie history. It's not a long scene but seeing the 3 action movie legends bouncing off each other is just brilliant and almost has a surreal quality to it.

That scene sets up the main plot of the film (such as it is) which involves The Expendables travelling to a South American island to overthrow a dictator (Zayas) but the dictator is being controlled by a ruthless American (Roberts).

Obviously when all the Expendables arrive at the island all hell breaks looses and culminates in a breathtaking action sequence in the underground of the dictators palatial residence. And when I mean breathtaking - I'm not kidding - a kind of hush fell over the cinema audience at this point as some of the most brutal fighting was uncorked in front of them.

The end also did expose a flaw or two - mainly down to some ropey CG which I won't detail as both instances are spoiler ridden, but you'll know what I mean.

In short The Expendables was the film I hoped it would be and more. Great action, cheesy dialogue and the return to the big screen of some people I'd never thought I'd see there again (especially Dolph Lundgren who looked like he was having a blast making it and was responsible for the second best line of the film - "Warning shot!")

And it seems to be catching. Apparently Bruce Willis saw a rough version and after all this time of distancing himself from the franchise (and only doing sequels when he can get something in return) he wants to do a proper old school style Die Hard film!

And what of The Expendables? It's left wide open for a sequel and after an impressive opening weekend in the States where it trounced Julia Roberts vehicle 'Eat, Pray, Love' and Edgar Wright's 'Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World' its bound to happen and Sly himself has already said he is thinking of ideas (apparently he has scrapped all plans for Rambo 5 in order to do a sequel) one of which is to introduce new Expendables.

So we can only hope for Steven Seagal, Jean Claude Van Damme, a return in some way for Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis (entirely possible for Arnie - he is out of office in November) or maybe even the holy grail of 80s action stars...Chuck Norris?

But for now, enjoy what we've got and go see this film repeatedly. You don't get many chances to see something like this on the big screen.

*****

Sly and co. do not dissapoint in this adrenaline packed mammoth. Miss it at your peril!

Crikey Mel!

Just as the dust was starting to set on the infamous anti-semitic 'sugartits' rant from a few years ago (Sugartitsgate?) foul mouthed bigot Mel Gibson has done it again! And got taped doing so. Check this out...but not at work seriously there is some totally fruity language.

And also...

I think we need to send Gazza round for a little chat.

Till next time...YOU SHOULD JUST SMILE AND BLOW MEEEEE!

Thom's Tangents III

It's back! A forum for me to mouth off about various subjects. Quite a lot has caught my ear and eyes (that's all the orifices, mind) the last week or so, and rather do blogs of various shapes and sizes I thought I would resurrect the Tangents.

And apologies to my Facebook acolytes - I will be reusing 2 jokes I made in statuses in the last week. I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me. If not - fuck off. There's about a 20% chance I don't like you and am friends with you for the sake of things not being awkward anyway...

The big news story this week was Rothbury gunman Raoul Moat, who after evading capture after shooting his ex, killing her boyfriend AND shooting a policeman, was finally tracked down. And he ended up shooting himself after a 6 hour standoff (apparently involving John Locke from Lost - see here > http://bit.ly/bw4oe6).

Not to make light of what happened at all. It seems like a pretty fucked up situation and it's never good when someone gets shot and killed for no real reason.

BUT.

Paul Gascoigne showed up at the scene of the stand off.

He brought lager, KFC, a dressing gown and a fishing rod for Raoul Moat.

Then he gave a radio interview. This radio interview...

Hard to follow that up really. Just brilliant. How much better was the whole situation after Gazza showed up? Yeah Moatie shot himself but a pissed out of his head Gazza showed up with some chicken and a fishing rod for him!

That's it for news stories now. They need to be of a lighter tone. We need Paul Gascoigne to show up when things are looking their darkest. With props where appropriate.

Middle East conflict looking a bit grim? Gazza In Gaza.

Staying with Moatie for a moment - the saturation coverage that the news channels gave this was unbelievable! I'm not saying a tense stand off is an everyday occurrence but it happens a fair bit, I'm sure. Why was this one given the full treatment by the media?

Prime time Friday night we had 6 hours of a bloke lying on the grass, while the news commentators desperately tried to fill the boredom talking about anything from Moat's hat to the drainage system. It just wasn't THAT newsworthy. Well, except the Gazza thing- that was fucking priceless.

Talking of dragging things out for a fucking eternity - the World Cup finally ended last night with (SPOILER ALERT) Spain winning, beating the Netherlands. Germany - who you may remember handed England their arses a few weeks ago - came third.

Whilst on break at work on the Sunday of the final (or yesterday as some people may prefer to put it) Sky Sports News anchor Sam Matterface (yes...Matterface) asked the question "What would you have been doing today if England had made it though to the World Cup finals?"

Having thought about it, I offer this as what I would have been doing if England had made the World Cup finals...

Having kicked Christina Ricci out of bed for farting, I'd have nipped into the kitchen and made some breakfast. After that I'd make a few phone calls and sorted out the Israeli - Palestine conflict. After lunch, I would pop down to the lab and cure AIDs. And seeing as I would have a few hours to kill at the end of the day, I'd fuck Scarlett Johansson on the back of a bright green unicorn.

Bringing things back to a more local scale - check out these dickheads > http://bit.ly/de6HVq

Yes I work at the branch in question, but the question has to be asked...would you really go running to the local paper because you got I.D'd in a shop? I have been I.D.'d when I haven't had any on me before - the first thought that crossed my mind was "Crap - forgot it!" not "I wonder how much the Mirror will give me for this gem?"

Not sure if the Evening News would pay money for that story though. It must have been a hell of a slow news day when they decided to run the 'Girl Gets I.D'd In Shop' story.

Not to turn into Worky McWorkington but if you work on a checkout and you suspect someone is buying alcohol for a minor you don't allow the sale. Simple as. The girl in question looks younger than 25 and that's the way the cookie crumbles!

And crying about it in the car park? Get a grip love, you got I.D.'d. That shit happens. I think that bit was made up to try and get some sympathy anyway. Obviously that died on it's arse when it gets to me...

One of my friends this week spent the day doing one of the most pointless activities I have ever heard. A cake decorating course. No, really. I'm pretty sure that once you know how to decorate a cake...well that is pretty much it. There's nowhere else to go. It's kind of like learning to ride a bike. That's it. You can't like...ride a bike upside down.

And so it was. A bit of cake decorating was followed by a healthy dose (or unhealthy dose I'd wager) of box decorating. For the cakes to go in. I would want my money back and I'd want my time back.

Well that's about it for the third collection of tangents. Sure there will be more soon. Very soon in fact - I'm pretty convinced I have forgotten something I was going to write about. PRO.

Gig Review: Ozzy Osbourne at The Roundhouse. July 3rd 2010.

My recent spate of good luck with gigs that began with snagging a pair of tickets for Rage Against The Machine's historic Finsbury Park last month continued with managing to win another pair of this tickets - this time for Day 3 of the itunes Festival, taking place at the Roundhouse in Camden.

Stepping inside the Roundhouse, the main space where the bands play that is rather than the lush and rather nice looking exterior built around it is like stepping into the past.

In the late sixties and early seventies a 'who's who' of bands played there - David Bowie, Pink Floyd, Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, The Clash and the only UK appearance of The Doors. The venue closed it doors in 1983 until 1996 where it re-opened as an arts venue. Then it closed again in 2004 for the refit and expansion we see today. It is truly dripping with history. But strangely as Ozzy himself later pointed out - neither he or Black Sabbath ever played there!

Promoting his new album 'Scream', Ozzy seemed a weird choice for the generally 'scene' lineup of the rest of the days (which promises the likes of many 'here today, forgotten next month' acts like Foals, Ellie Goulding, Mumford And Sons etc. - the only exception to that rule being Foreigner and Europe) but here he was in all his glory!

First though was a band who had won a competition on Ozzy's MySpace (yes, MySpace still exists) Black Spiders who I have actually seen before, supporting The Wildhearts last year at The Waterfront. And they helped in assisting getting us backstage that night, so I will always have a lot of time for them.

The sound system in The Roundhouse is fantastic, probably the best I have heard in a small venue, and the Spider's sounded great. Hopefully this will lead to bigger gigs for them in the next couple of years.

Next up were The Sword who were a odd lot. Sort of sounding like Clutch with the big riffing but with more fantasy - based lyrics. I really don't think they went down to well. Musically they were tight and the riffs sounded spectacular but the vocalist couldn't be made out at all when singing which was pretty bad considering how good the sound was in the venue.

But all that was kind of superfluous to what was next. The Prince of Darkness himself - Ozzy Osbourne. I last saw Ozzy back in 2005 at Download when he was playing with Black Sabbath. While liking Sabbath, I have always preferred Ozzy's solo material so was busting with excitement. And with fresh new guitarist Gus G with him, the band should be sounding good. Just as long as Ozzy was on form!

Was he ever! Granted he doesn't move around the stage as much as did when I saw him running from one end of the stage to another with Sabbath at Download 2005, but for a guy who has been through what he has it's a miracle he is here at all! Of course that may have been because the stage was a lot smaller. Taking to the stage and kicking straight into 'Bark At The Moon' was a hell of a good start.

After that he played the only new song of the evening 'Let Me Hear You Scream', but after that it was a trawl through the greatest hits of his solo career - mainly focusing on the Blizzard Of Ozz and No More Tears albums (arguably the best albums of his solo career) - and some Sabbath songs thrown in for good measure.

Ozzy seemed to be getting a lot of pleasure chucking buckets of water at everyone (and he got us a good one too, we were soaked through!) which he did throughout the show, and at one point actually threw one of the recently emptied buckets into the crowd for good measure. Security did try and reclaim the bucket but to no avail.

A great thing was that after all these years the voice remains the same, pretty much. No one ever accused Ozzy of being a great singer (a great frontman yes) but his inimitable voice still sounded the same.

At various points during the evening it kept on occurring me as to how damn lucky we were to be seeing a legend (and yes, I know that word is thrown about way too much but in this case it's true) like Ozzy in such an intimate venue. The place wasn't even full. After the ticket winners had been admitted (and given a wristband and lanyard) others were let in to sit in the seating area upstairs - but that wasn't even full.

So if you wanted to see Ozzy Osbourne for free...you totally missed out!

The band, which also included former Rob Zombie bassist Blasko, were on top form too and did a great, extended version of Sabbath instrumental number 'Rat Salad'.

Coming back on stage for an encore, we were teased with each song being the last before Ozzy got a "one more song!" chanted and launched into another. Obviously all set up but great fun nonetheless.

Business finally wrapped up with the obvious 'Paranoid' which ended a great show. One that proved that for now at least Ozzy has still got it. But for how much longer? You to have to question that anytime an artist in their 60's are still performing.

Here is 'Shot In The Dark' from last night...

Ozzy played...

1. Bark At The Moon
2. Let Me Hear You Scream
3. Mr. Crowley
4. I Don't Know
5. Fairies Wear Boots
6. Suicide Solution
7. Road To Nowhere
8. Shot In The Dark
9. Rat Salad
10. Iron Man
11. Crazy Train
12. Mama, I'm Coming Home
13. I Don't Want To Change The World
14. War Pigs
15. Paranoid