Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Spider-Man 3 (2007) in Movies
Sep 24, 2020 (Updated Sep 24, 2020)
The third and final entry in the Sam Raimi trilogy of Spider-Man films is arguably the most well known, unfortunately for all the wrong reasons, and it's a real shame as there are flashes of greatness, but the finished product is a hot mess.
One of the main issues is of course the three big villains all battling for screentime. Sandman (Thomas Haden Church) is a great villain to add to the series, but his story is executed poorly, and includes a dumb retcon in a half arsed attempt to link him to the original film. It's just unnecessary and soils something that could have been good. And then there's Venom - A huge fan favourite villain who Sam Raimi apparently doesn't like, and it's evident. Eddie Brock (Topher Grace) is rushed into the narrative, and his reasons for hating Peter Parker feel forced as a result. Venoms inclusion feels a bit tacked on, and unfortunately reaks of studio meddling.
Other than that, there's also the issue of over confidence - the assumption that an audience wants to watch an edgy version of Tobey Maguire's Peter Parker swanning and dancing down a street is bold to say the least - I could even forgive the infamous scene if it wasn't immediately followed up with a second dance number in a jazz bar. I get that it's designed to portray the symbiote suits hold over Peter and his deteriorating character attributes, buts it's a massive shitty swing and a miss (much like the whole movie in general) that makes me want to scream.
It's not all bad though. All of the cast, new and familiar, are good. I think Bryce Dallas Howard is a great Gwen Stacy. It has some decent set pieces as well - the scene where Sandman is discovering his new powers is brilliant, as is the fight between him and black suit Spider-Man in the underground. I also quite enjoy the final showdown when we (finally) get to see Venom properly.
It's not enough though, and Spider-Man 3 ultimately is a flawed if ambitious comic book sequel.
One of the main issues is of course the three big villains all battling for screentime. Sandman (Thomas Haden Church) is a great villain to add to the series, but his story is executed poorly, and includes a dumb retcon in a half arsed attempt to link him to the original film. It's just unnecessary and soils something that could have been good. And then there's Venom - A huge fan favourite villain who Sam Raimi apparently doesn't like, and it's evident. Eddie Brock (Topher Grace) is rushed into the narrative, and his reasons for hating Peter Parker feel forced as a result. Venoms inclusion feels a bit tacked on, and unfortunately reaks of studio meddling.
Other than that, there's also the issue of over confidence - the assumption that an audience wants to watch an edgy version of Tobey Maguire's Peter Parker swanning and dancing down a street is bold to say the least - I could even forgive the infamous scene if it wasn't immediately followed up with a second dance number in a jazz bar. I get that it's designed to portray the symbiote suits hold over Peter and his deteriorating character attributes, buts it's a massive shitty swing and a miss (much like the whole movie in general) that makes me want to scream.
It's not all bad though. All of the cast, new and familiar, are good. I think Bryce Dallas Howard is a great Gwen Stacy. It has some decent set pieces as well - the scene where Sandman is discovering his new powers is brilliant, as is the fight between him and black suit Spider-Man in the underground. I also quite enjoy the final showdown when we (finally) get to see Venom properly.
It's not enough though, and Spider-Man 3 ultimately is a flawed if ambitious comic book sequel.
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated A Boy and His Dog in Books
Nov 30, 2020
I was very saddened to hear the news of Harlan Ellison's passing. While I didn't agree with him on some things, I did agree with him on a great number of them. Cantankerous, but not snarky or mean-spirited, in his writings and conversations. I found him to one of the best writers on the planet. Now, he's joined the likes of Shakespeare, Emerson, Vonnegut, all at God's assembled roundtable of literary greats! :)
Okay, that's enough of my tribute-of-sorts to Harlan Ellison. Now, for my review of A BOY AND HIS DOG.
This was a a quick, fun read. Quite literally, it is the adventure of boy (Vic) and his telepathic dog (Blood). The two rely on each other, sharing bond that comes through in all of their exchanges. A four-legged friend who became so much more than just a "canine companion".
The tale was written in 1969 and was later adapted for film by L.Q. Jones. Despite the time written, the book still reads as if written yesterday. And that was something unique about Ellison: his writing felt timeless, as if it was not tied to any particular time during which it was written.
Yes, the language can be deemed coarse at points, but still far less offensive than anything written today. The use of profanity is given to the way Vic speaks, a product of the post-apocalyptic world he was born. It never feels forced or anything approaching offensive. It just feels, for want of a better word, natural.
Again, this is a fun short story about a boy and his dog. It may not appeal to everyone, but I surely liked it and I hope that maybe you will, too.
Also, stick around after the story, as "AHBHU: The Passing of One Man's Inspiration and Best Friend". It is Harlan Ellison's tribute/memorial to his rescued dog, a Puli (essentially, a Hungarian sheep dog), and how much he meant to him, so much so that he was whom Ellison based Blood's character on. I challenge you to NOT tear up by the conclusion!
By all means, good people, please check this one out!
Okay, that's enough of my tribute-of-sorts to Harlan Ellison. Now, for my review of A BOY AND HIS DOG.
This was a a quick, fun read. Quite literally, it is the adventure of boy (Vic) and his telepathic dog (Blood). The two rely on each other, sharing bond that comes through in all of their exchanges. A four-legged friend who became so much more than just a "canine companion".
The tale was written in 1969 and was later adapted for film by L.Q. Jones. Despite the time written, the book still reads as if written yesterday. And that was something unique about Ellison: his writing felt timeless, as if it was not tied to any particular time during which it was written.
Yes, the language can be deemed coarse at points, but still far less offensive than anything written today. The use of profanity is given to the way Vic speaks, a product of the post-apocalyptic world he was born. It never feels forced or anything approaching offensive. It just feels, for want of a better word, natural.
Again, this is a fun short story about a boy and his dog. It may not appeal to everyone, but I surely liked it and I hope that maybe you will, too.
Also, stick around after the story, as "AHBHU: The Passing of One Man's Inspiration and Best Friend". It is Harlan Ellison's tribute/memorial to his rescued dog, a Puli (essentially, a Hungarian sheep dog), and how much he meant to him, so much so that he was whom Ellison based Blood's character on. I challenge you to NOT tear up by the conclusion!
By all means, good people, please check this one out!
Chloë McTaggart (48 KP) rated The Circle in Books
Oct 19, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Circle is Eggers 10th fictional work and through dystopian world building, goes to highlight some of the key modern day issues - specifically those surrounding technology and social media. Unlike other dystopian novels Eggers sets about showing the ‘positive’ side of what could be, ficionally speaking, as opposed to novels such as The Handmaids Tale and Divergence and such books that set themselves in a destroyed-dystopia.
Despite being set in a dystopian world full of technology we currently only see on the Syfy channel, it somehow clings to our ideas of reality and what is possible. By doing this, it soon offers a dangerous look at what technology may become as it highlights the impact it already has on our lives. The protagonist, Mae, lands a job at a technology company named “The Circle” which is comparable to brands and companies such as Apple, Google and Samsung. Eggers takes the ideas of the main technological companies of the twenty first century and rolls them into one; producing an unstoppable powerhouse of sharing, transparency and sociability overseen by a trinity of male bosses that we never really connect to. While Eggers sets the scene, and development of society, through his use of The Circle as an interdimensional power house, he fails to develop a relatable character in his protagonist.
From the start of the book the protagonist, Mae, comes across as weak and unmotivated with some parts of the novel serving almost as a pity party for her. If she’s not complaining, she’s raving about ex-boyfriends or how hard a life she has as though she’s the only one in the world that matters - though I suppose to Eggers she is the most important. Through this self pity, the reader struggles to find a point of contact with Mae; she offers no escape from the real world and instead becomes a motivation to stop reading the novel.
However, despite the lack of character development, the novel does raise relevant questions concerning technology and social media. In the film adaptation, it serves to show us just how much of an impact we can have on others without realising it; and how even when we do realise it the popularity or reward is too enticing to stop.
Despite being set in a dystopian world full of technology we currently only see on the Syfy channel, it somehow clings to our ideas of reality and what is possible. By doing this, it soon offers a dangerous look at what technology may become as it highlights the impact it already has on our lives. The protagonist, Mae, lands a job at a technology company named “The Circle” which is comparable to brands and companies such as Apple, Google and Samsung. Eggers takes the ideas of the main technological companies of the twenty first century and rolls them into one; producing an unstoppable powerhouse of sharing, transparency and sociability overseen by a trinity of male bosses that we never really connect to. While Eggers sets the scene, and development of society, through his use of The Circle as an interdimensional power house, he fails to develop a relatable character in his protagonist.
From the start of the book the protagonist, Mae, comes across as weak and unmotivated with some parts of the novel serving almost as a pity party for her. If she’s not complaining, she’s raving about ex-boyfriends or how hard a life she has as though she’s the only one in the world that matters - though I suppose to Eggers she is the most important. Through this self pity, the reader struggles to find a point of contact with Mae; she offers no escape from the real world and instead becomes a motivation to stop reading the novel.
However, despite the lack of character development, the novel does raise relevant questions concerning technology and social media. In the film adaptation, it serves to show us just how much of an impact we can have on others without realising it; and how even when we do realise it the popularity or reward is too enticing to stop.
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated The Wendy (Tales of The Wendy #1) in Books
Dec 29, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
If I am being completely honest, Peter Pan has never been my favourite Disney film. Oh sure the lost boys and Michael were cute; Tink was sassy and Hook was a good villain but why did everyone moon over Peter so much? And Wendy was always a bit, well a bit wet!
Enter Erin Michelle Sky and Steven Brown with their Tales of Wendy series to prove me wrong! The Wendy is the first in this series but I am already desperate to finish the second book, The Navigator before their third is released at the end of this year.
The Wendy, as you may expect, centres around Wendy Darling. However, this is not the prissy, mother-idolising figure I love to roll my eyes at: oh no, this Wendy Darling is growing up in the late 1700s in a London orphanage. In a world where her sole career option seems to be to become a mother, this feisty ten-year-old would prefer to “marry Davy Jones than grow up and look after babies”. This Wendy Darling is the one I have been waiting for.
Wendy’s dream is to join the Navy and sail the world. Unlike the rest of 18th Century Britain, she doesn’t see why being a girl should prevent this.
Therefore, over the years she becomes adapt at mathematics, science, navigation, marksmanship and swordsmanship. Nevertheless, despite being just as good, if not better than her childhood friend Charlie, he earns the rank of Officer in the British Navy whilst Wendy is assigned to the Home Office as a Diviner, one who can detect the presence of magic: a post to be filled only by women and dogs.
It is here that the reader meets John and Michael: Wendy’s “brothers-in-arms but in no way related, despite what you may have heard”. They are all stationed in Dover Castle, along with the Brigade’s dog Nana (who else?!). Their mission: to protect Britain from a magical threat, the innisfay or “everlost”, whom are known to kidnap orphans. Sound familiar?
The Wendy is definitely the best retelling of Peter Pan I have read so far. Despite the presence of all our favourite names, the characters are a far cry from their animated counterparts. Michael and John are wonderfully dry and sarcastic; Hook is powerful and attractive; Tink is a shape shifter; Peter, despite possessing a pair of wings and armour, is essentially the same and Wendy is an ambitious, feisty, yet beautifully flawed protagonist.
There are many little nods to the film which are greatly appreciated. Wendy “moving out of the nursery” means leaving the orphanage and gaining an apprenticeship and “thinking happy thoughts” as a means of flight is a practical joke by Peter to make Wendy smile.
Sky and Brown’s conversationalist style of writing makes this a very easy read, despite Wendy galloping all over the South of England with a variety of characters. It also allows the reader to really bond with Wendy and empathise with her and her struggles to achieve the employment she has longed so for since childhood.
As you may have gathered, sexism plays a large part in Wendy’s uphill struggle: as the only main female character she is constantly undermined in her ambition to become a sailor. Even when she proves to be useful in her post within the Home Office she is removed to the country “for her own safety”. Those men whom do not undermine her moon after her romantically: it truly is infuriating.
In some situations, this ingrained attitude was slightly heart-breaking but equally a sign of the times in which this novel was set: Wendy’s thoughts often returned to the propriety of her actions and the danger she experiences just through wearing “men’s clothes” is powerful moment. However, Wendy never lets these attitudes halt her ambition, ending her first novel as a true inspiration to girls following in her footsteps: Navigator Darling.
I can’t wait to discover the next step in her journey which, conveniently, lays past the second star to the right and straight on till morning!
Enter Erin Michelle Sky and Steven Brown with their Tales of Wendy series to prove me wrong! The Wendy is the first in this series but I am already desperate to finish the second book, The Navigator before their third is released at the end of this year.
The Wendy, as you may expect, centres around Wendy Darling. However, this is not the prissy, mother-idolising figure I love to roll my eyes at: oh no, this Wendy Darling is growing up in the late 1700s in a London orphanage. In a world where her sole career option seems to be to become a mother, this feisty ten-year-old would prefer to “marry Davy Jones than grow up and look after babies”. This Wendy Darling is the one I have been waiting for.
Wendy’s dream is to join the Navy and sail the world. Unlike the rest of 18th Century Britain, she doesn’t see why being a girl should prevent this.
Therefore, over the years she becomes adapt at mathematics, science, navigation, marksmanship and swordsmanship. Nevertheless, despite being just as good, if not better than her childhood friend Charlie, he earns the rank of Officer in the British Navy whilst Wendy is assigned to the Home Office as a Diviner, one who can detect the presence of magic: a post to be filled only by women and dogs.
It is here that the reader meets John and Michael: Wendy’s “brothers-in-arms but in no way related, despite what you may have heard”. They are all stationed in Dover Castle, along with the Brigade’s dog Nana (who else?!). Their mission: to protect Britain from a magical threat, the innisfay or “everlost”, whom are known to kidnap orphans. Sound familiar?
The Wendy is definitely the best retelling of Peter Pan I have read so far. Despite the presence of all our favourite names, the characters are a far cry from their animated counterparts. Michael and John are wonderfully dry and sarcastic; Hook is powerful and attractive; Tink is a shape shifter; Peter, despite possessing a pair of wings and armour, is essentially the same and Wendy is an ambitious, feisty, yet beautifully flawed protagonist.
There are many little nods to the film which are greatly appreciated. Wendy “moving out of the nursery” means leaving the orphanage and gaining an apprenticeship and “thinking happy thoughts” as a means of flight is a practical joke by Peter to make Wendy smile.
Sky and Brown’s conversationalist style of writing makes this a very easy read, despite Wendy galloping all over the South of England with a variety of characters. It also allows the reader to really bond with Wendy and empathise with her and her struggles to achieve the employment she has longed so for since childhood.
As you may have gathered, sexism plays a large part in Wendy’s uphill struggle: as the only main female character she is constantly undermined in her ambition to become a sailor. Even when she proves to be useful in her post within the Home Office she is removed to the country “for her own safety”. Those men whom do not undermine her moon after her romantically: it truly is infuriating.
In some situations, this ingrained attitude was slightly heart-breaking but equally a sign of the times in which this novel was set: Wendy’s thoughts often returned to the propriety of her actions and the danger she experiences just through wearing “men’s clothes” is powerful moment. However, Wendy never lets these attitudes halt her ambition, ending her first novel as a true inspiration to girls following in her footsteps: Navigator Darling.
I can’t wait to discover the next step in her journey which, conveniently, lays past the second star to the right and straight on till morning!
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated X-Men: First Class (2011) in Movies
Jul 28, 2019
Back on form
Fox made a smart move with First Class. After just four movies, the X-Men movie franchise had already started to feel a bit stale. The solution? Take the story way back for a 60s adventure.
The casting here is pretty strong. James McAvoy is great in the role of a younger and cockier Charles Xavier, and Michael Fassbender seems like perfect casting as Erik Lensher (even if his Irish accent slips into his dialogue now and again!)
The relationship between the two friends, sadly destined to become enemies, is the beating heart of First Class. A lot of the action we've become accustomed too throughout these films is sidelined to explore their friendship, and their conflicting ideologies. As the plot comes to a head, and these two really pull in opposite directions, the emotional impact is well earned and hard hitting.
Elsewhere, we have Nicholas Holt as Beast and Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique. They also fit the billing pretty well, and are a welcome addition to the cast.
As an X-Men comic fan, it's a lovely touch to see less known characters get screen time such as Azazel, Havoc, and finally - Banshee!
We also get an adaption of Emma Frost, although she is criminally underused, merely present as a glorified henchwoman.
Kevin Bacon is the big bad this time round, playing Sebastian Shaw, a relatively minor X-Men villain, who plays his part well in First Class - he never feels like a huge threat, but that works as it doesn't steal the limelight from Erik's descent into Magneto.
The final action scene is enjoyable comic book fun - the small X-Men team clad in yellow and blue outfits (a nod to the original comic costumes), and the setting is full of colour. Its pretty damn glorious.
First Class is a stand out entry into the X-Men franchise, and certainly worth your time, even if you've never seen another X-Men film!
The casting here is pretty strong. James McAvoy is great in the role of a younger and cockier Charles Xavier, and Michael Fassbender seems like perfect casting as Erik Lensher (even if his Irish accent slips into his dialogue now and again!)
The relationship between the two friends, sadly destined to become enemies, is the beating heart of First Class. A lot of the action we've become accustomed too throughout these films is sidelined to explore their friendship, and their conflicting ideologies. As the plot comes to a head, and these two really pull in opposite directions, the emotional impact is well earned and hard hitting.
Elsewhere, we have Nicholas Holt as Beast and Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique. They also fit the billing pretty well, and are a welcome addition to the cast.
As an X-Men comic fan, it's a lovely touch to see less known characters get screen time such as Azazel, Havoc, and finally - Banshee!
We also get an adaption of Emma Frost, although she is criminally underused, merely present as a glorified henchwoman.
Kevin Bacon is the big bad this time round, playing Sebastian Shaw, a relatively minor X-Men villain, who plays his part well in First Class - he never feels like a huge threat, but that works as it doesn't steal the limelight from Erik's descent into Magneto.
The final action scene is enjoyable comic book fun - the small X-Men team clad in yellow and blue outfits (a nod to the original comic costumes), and the setting is full of colour. Its pretty damn glorious.
First Class is a stand out entry into the X-Men franchise, and certainly worth your time, even if you've never seen another X-Men film!
TA
The Actors' Crucible: Port Talbot and the Making of Burton, Hopkins, Sheen and All the Others
Book
The town of Port Talbot has long been seen (quite literally) as synonymous with the steel industry....
A User's Guide to Copyright
Tom Rivers, Clive Thorne, Jonathan Cornthwaite and Michael Flint
Book
A User's Guide to Copyright, 7th edition is long established as one of the key texts in the field....
The Secret To Money
Lifestyle and Finance
App
The Secret to Money is an app that is designed to change the way you think about money, and to...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Rum Diary (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
For those unfamiliar with Hunter S. Thompson’s work (as I am), you may not recognize that this movie is based on his book of the same title, first published in 1998. Hunter S. Thompson is the same author who gave us the novel for which the film Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas was based on.
The Rum Diary follows Paul Kemp (played by Johnny Depp), a failed novelist turn journalist, who finds himself at a critical turning point in his life. Having written two and a half novels that were never published, he was having trouble finding his voice, in that he needed to find a way to “write like him” as Paul put it himself. So he decides to do some freelance writing for a small publication located in San Juan, Puerto Rico in 1960.
The movie opens with Kemp waking up in a hotel, and you can immediately, and clearly, see that he partakes in certain pleasures of life. After reporting to work at San Juan Star, Kemp meets Sala (played by Michael Rispoli), the photographer for the Star who quickly becomes his cohort. The editor-in-chief of the San Juan Star, Lotterman (played by Richard Jenkins) indicates to Kemp that the publication is only a few months away from being closed down, and that there really isn’t much to look forward to. He assigns Kemp to do some fluff pieces and the horoscope section of the paper.
Kemp is not content with this as he is looking at this experience as a way to put his career back on track. Over the next few days, during his adventures with Sala, he comes across a few different story ideas that are immediately shot down by Lotterman, as they emphasize the things that are wrong with San Juan, and Lotterman feels that the focus should be on the good things (like bowling alleys).
During one of his nights of boozing, he meets Chenault (played by Amber Heard). She’s aloof, mysterious, and of course… Kemp falls immediately in love with her. She just happens to be the girlfriend of Sanderson (played by Aaron Eckhart). Sanderson immediately recognizes the talents that Kemp has and begins recruiting him for a real estate scam. The idea is to get a foothold and build a new hotel on a private island that is used for United States military testing, but will soon be relinquished from that purpose. Sanderson and a group of investors want Kemp to put a brilliant positive spin on the hotel investment so that the public opinion, and that of those in a position to block the development, is a positive one.
Things begin to unravel as Kemp and Sala’s shenanigans keep getting them into trouble, culminating in a heated night where Kemp, Sala, Chenault and Sanderson end up at a bar during the St. Thomas Carnival.
The Rum Diary was highly entertaining with a great supporting cast. Giovani Ribisi provides an excellent distraction from some of the more serious events of the movie as he appears every now and then as Moburg, another reporter for the San Juan Star. The movie played like a great alcohol-induced, drug-fueled adventures of a journalist in the 1960s. Definitely some quirky moments, and you will find yourself laughing at many of Kemp and Sala’s exploits.
My only gripe with the movie is how it ended. The build up to Kemp printing the story and putting it out there leaves you wanting more. While I don’t think the film will reach the same cult-status that Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas will, it is definitely entertaining (all the way until the end). It is a good nod to Thompson and fans of his books and movie adaptations are sure to enjoy.
The Rum Diary follows Paul Kemp (played by Johnny Depp), a failed novelist turn journalist, who finds himself at a critical turning point in his life. Having written two and a half novels that were never published, he was having trouble finding his voice, in that he needed to find a way to “write like him” as Paul put it himself. So he decides to do some freelance writing for a small publication located in San Juan, Puerto Rico in 1960.
The movie opens with Kemp waking up in a hotel, and you can immediately, and clearly, see that he partakes in certain pleasures of life. After reporting to work at San Juan Star, Kemp meets Sala (played by Michael Rispoli), the photographer for the Star who quickly becomes his cohort. The editor-in-chief of the San Juan Star, Lotterman (played by Richard Jenkins) indicates to Kemp that the publication is only a few months away from being closed down, and that there really isn’t much to look forward to. He assigns Kemp to do some fluff pieces and the horoscope section of the paper.
Kemp is not content with this as he is looking at this experience as a way to put his career back on track. Over the next few days, during his adventures with Sala, he comes across a few different story ideas that are immediately shot down by Lotterman, as they emphasize the things that are wrong with San Juan, and Lotterman feels that the focus should be on the good things (like bowling alleys).
During one of his nights of boozing, he meets Chenault (played by Amber Heard). She’s aloof, mysterious, and of course… Kemp falls immediately in love with her. She just happens to be the girlfriend of Sanderson (played by Aaron Eckhart). Sanderson immediately recognizes the talents that Kemp has and begins recruiting him for a real estate scam. The idea is to get a foothold and build a new hotel on a private island that is used for United States military testing, but will soon be relinquished from that purpose. Sanderson and a group of investors want Kemp to put a brilliant positive spin on the hotel investment so that the public opinion, and that of those in a position to block the development, is a positive one.
Things begin to unravel as Kemp and Sala’s shenanigans keep getting them into trouble, culminating in a heated night where Kemp, Sala, Chenault and Sanderson end up at a bar during the St. Thomas Carnival.
The Rum Diary was highly entertaining with a great supporting cast. Giovani Ribisi provides an excellent distraction from some of the more serious events of the movie as he appears every now and then as Moburg, another reporter for the San Juan Star. The movie played like a great alcohol-induced, drug-fueled adventures of a journalist in the 1960s. Definitely some quirky moments, and you will find yourself laughing at many of Kemp and Sala’s exploits.
My only gripe with the movie is how it ended. The build up to Kemp printing the story and putting it out there leaves you wanting more. While I don’t think the film will reach the same cult-status that Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas will, it is definitely entertaining (all the way until the end). It is a good nod to Thompson and fans of his books and movie adaptations are sure to enjoy.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (2018) in Movies
Jan 18, 2019 (Updated Jan 18, 2019)
The Illusion of Choice
Contains spoilers, click to show
I should preface this review by saying a few things. First of all, I don't like Black Mirror. I have watched a handful of episodes from the first season and always felt like it wasn't as clever as it tried to be. I do however like Charlie Brooker, I am a fan of his 'Wipe,' shows and I like his no bullshit personality. Lastly, I am not a fan of games or books where the audience is asked to choose the path they want to take. I believe that the writer of the movie/game/book should be the one to dictate where the story goes, not Joe Bloggs sitting on his couch covered in Doritos powder.
With all of that said, I decided to give Bandersnatch a go last night. I was intrigued by the whole choose-your-own-adventure concept and did go in wanting to like this thing. Unfortunately, following all the hype that surrounded its release a few weeks ago, I came away pretty disappointed.
As for my spoiler free thoughts, I thought that Will Poulter was the best thing about this film and that Fionn Whitehead's performance was okay, but felt forced and cheesy at times. However, in order to discuss why Bandersnatch ultimately left me disappointed, I am going to have to spoil the movie, so if you haven't went through it for yourself yet, you should probably look away now.
3,2,1... SPOILERS!
So, it turns out that the choices that you make while watching the film don't really matter for the most part. After spending 2-3 hours with it, I discovered that there are only really 2 endings. Either Stefan kills his dad or he goes to the therapist and she breaks the fourth wall. Every other ending is not really an ending and forces you back into the last situation until you make the choice that the filmmakers clearly want you to make.
As we are pretty much controlling Stefan during the course of the story, I chose to pick the best decisions for him, rather than choosing the more cruel, sick settings just to see what would happen. However Bandersnatch doesn't want you to do that and as soon as you make one of these more pacifist decisions, it punishes you by giving you an anticlimactic non-ending and sends you back to your last decision. Being forced to make these destructive choices forces you down the narrative path set out by the writers to the two endings that I discussed earlier and that's your lot. That's really all that there is to see here other than a few surplus arbitrary scenes.
The only things that you really get to decide on is trivial nonsense that has no impact on the narrative, like what cereal to eat or what record to buy. So, why bother making this a choose-your-own-adventure story in the first place rather than just a regular episode of Black Mirror? Because, if this was just a regular episode of a TV show, it would be extremely fucking boring, monotonous and trite.
The show tries to defend itself in these aspects. It insinuates the idea that just as we are controlling Stefan and forcing him to make certain decisions, Charlie Brooker as the writer is controlling us and forcing us to make certain decisions, hence the absence of any real choice for the viewer. I call bullshit on this idea, it's just down to lazy writing to be honest. When the therapist breaks the fourth wall, she also suggests that if this was a TV show that someone was watching for entertainment, it would have to be more exciting and less bland and dull. Pointing out that your show is bland and dull doesn't save it from being just as fucking bland and dull as it would be if you hadn't highlighted it in your script.
The show puts these elements in so that when it is questioned, it can respond saying that you as an audience member are just not clever enough to get it. Unfortunately the fact is that Bandersnatch, - just like Black Mirror - before it, isn't as clever or as cool as it thinks it is and works far better as an idea than it does in execution.
Overall, that's what this is; it's a cool idea executed poorly. I really wish that they had done more with it. It does seem to be a hit though, so for better or worse we can probably expect to see more and more of these crop up on Netflix. Will Poulter was the one saving grace of this thing and he inexplicably vanishes halfway through the story in most of the threads. It did get a reaction out of me though, which is probably what Brooker and his team wanted, it was just an extremely negative reaction due to the realisation that I had wasted my time going through this thing. If you like Black Mirror, you will probably enjoy this, but I'm afraid that it's just not for me.
With all of that said, I decided to give Bandersnatch a go last night. I was intrigued by the whole choose-your-own-adventure concept and did go in wanting to like this thing. Unfortunately, following all the hype that surrounded its release a few weeks ago, I came away pretty disappointed.
As for my spoiler free thoughts, I thought that Will Poulter was the best thing about this film and that Fionn Whitehead's performance was okay, but felt forced and cheesy at times. However, in order to discuss why Bandersnatch ultimately left me disappointed, I am going to have to spoil the movie, so if you haven't went through it for yourself yet, you should probably look away now.
3,2,1... SPOILERS!
So, it turns out that the choices that you make while watching the film don't really matter for the most part. After spending 2-3 hours with it, I discovered that there are only really 2 endings. Either Stefan kills his dad or he goes to the therapist and she breaks the fourth wall. Every other ending is not really an ending and forces you back into the last situation until you make the choice that the filmmakers clearly want you to make.
As we are pretty much controlling Stefan during the course of the story, I chose to pick the best decisions for him, rather than choosing the more cruel, sick settings just to see what would happen. However Bandersnatch doesn't want you to do that and as soon as you make one of these more pacifist decisions, it punishes you by giving you an anticlimactic non-ending and sends you back to your last decision. Being forced to make these destructive choices forces you down the narrative path set out by the writers to the two endings that I discussed earlier and that's your lot. That's really all that there is to see here other than a few surplus arbitrary scenes.
The only things that you really get to decide on is trivial nonsense that has no impact on the narrative, like what cereal to eat or what record to buy. So, why bother making this a choose-your-own-adventure story in the first place rather than just a regular episode of Black Mirror? Because, if this was just a regular episode of a TV show, it would be extremely fucking boring, monotonous and trite.
The show tries to defend itself in these aspects. It insinuates the idea that just as we are controlling Stefan and forcing him to make certain decisions, Charlie Brooker as the writer is controlling us and forcing us to make certain decisions, hence the absence of any real choice for the viewer. I call bullshit on this idea, it's just down to lazy writing to be honest. When the therapist breaks the fourth wall, she also suggests that if this was a TV show that someone was watching for entertainment, it would have to be more exciting and less bland and dull. Pointing out that your show is bland and dull doesn't save it from being just as fucking bland and dull as it would be if you hadn't highlighted it in your script.
The show puts these elements in so that when it is questioned, it can respond saying that you as an audience member are just not clever enough to get it. Unfortunately the fact is that Bandersnatch, - just like Black Mirror - before it, isn't as clever or as cool as it thinks it is and works far better as an idea than it does in execution.
Overall, that's what this is; it's a cool idea executed poorly. I really wish that they had done more with it. It does seem to be a hit though, so for better or worse we can probably expect to see more and more of these crop up on Netflix. Will Poulter was the one saving grace of this thing and he inexplicably vanishes halfway through the story in most of the threads. It did get a reaction out of me though, which is probably what Brooker and his team wanted, it was just an extremely negative reaction due to the realisation that I had wasted my time going through this thing. If you like Black Mirror, you will probably enjoy this, but I'm afraid that it's just not for me.