Call of Duty: World at War (Originally posted 05/03/09)

Reviewed Platform: Xbox 360

Other Platforms: PS3, PC, Wii, Mobile, DS, PS2

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare was a great game. In my own opinion it was possibly the strongest game in the entire Call of Duty series. It decided to no longer stick to fighting the Nazis. Now we were to fight today. This was Modern Warfare. We were fighting the perceived enemies of the West in the 2000s.

All was well and happy as we saw our fellow Englishmen die right in front of us in the final battle and the Americans being brutally massacred within a nuclear explosion. Both of these moments took my breath away as I felt so connected to these well rounded characters. Thank you Infinity Ward for a fantastic game that I have played many times.

Now it is Treyarch's turn. It would seem that Infinity Ward and Treyarch take it in turns to develop Call of Duty games for Activision. Because I was so enamoured with CoD4 I decided to play Call of Duty 3, developed by Treyarch, which was alright as a game, but not fantastic. I know it was made with technology that was not as good as the technology used for CoD4 but that was not the problem. Firstly, the story was bad in that I felt no attachment to any characters, which didn't make me enjoy the experience.

And then there is my pet peeve with games like this that are set during World War 2, and that is this: you end up fighting off half of the German army within each trench you enter. Now, it really doesn't seem historically accurate to me that a mere Private ends up attacking what appears to be the place where Nazis spring up from the ground to rip your nipples off. I am so glad that within CoD4 there was no moment (to my recollection) that every single member of the Ultranationalist party comes along to brutally sodomise you whilst you hold on to Captain Price's moustache. But I digress.

Now on to the game I am actually going to review. It follows Call of Duty FOUR in the series so evidently I am reviewing Call of Duty FIVE. Sorry, but it isn't. It is Call of Duty: World at War. Not Call of Duty 5: World at War. Just Call of Duty: World at War.

Okay, so they have now decided not to number the sequels from now on. I can see their reasoning behind this as, sadly, World at War is actually set in World War 2. So Treyarch have decided to take a step back and not continue with Modern Warfare. Okay, okay. Fine. I can deal with that. It'll make new members of the series confused but okay, whatever.

I think I may as well get off this petty stuff. Hopefully it won't harm the rest of the series.

This game has also tried to be a special one within the series as it now takes us away from the European front, but now we get to go to the Pacific Theatre. Cool, that worked really well for Medal of Honor: Rising Sun. I had a lot of fun with that game. But now they have decided to ruin fighting in Japan for me by giving me three recurring characters who are absolute gits (who made such an impression on me that I forgot their names and didn't care when two out of three of them died on me), Banzai troops that knock you to the ground and give you half a nanosecond to actually kill and finally, you guessed it, millions upon millions of Tojos (their words, not mine) to dispatch before deciding that we should bomb a tonne of places and then go home.

Then we have the fact that every single American soldier decides to swear like a sailor whenever they stub their toe. I mean seriously! The swearing within this game could not be any more gratuitous. The word “fuck” is constantly chucked about as if we were going into battle with a battalion of chavs who had to swear after every word, including the curses. I don't mind swearing, I just find it pointless. It never seems to fit in with what they are saying. “Abso-fucking-lutely” Why not absolutely? CoD4: Captain Price can't get a helicopter to the bridge in time: “Useless Wanker!” The shit is about to hit the fan. Of course he'd swear! 

Then we have the terrible AI. Your team mates fail at killing any of the enemies. By the end of the first mission your character should end up becoming Lord High Ruler of the Universe for the amount of Japanese warriors he has killed. This wouldn't be so bad if there weren't so many warriors coming after you. And when I say coming after you I mean YOU and only YOU! Emperor Hirohito must have put a bounty of your head for 10 trillion Yen. You play on Veteran and they will all be chasing after you with bullets with a heat seekers on them, which won't fare well with your health. But don't worry, hide for a bit and you'll be back to normal. I love that about these games. I guess you just assimilate the bullets into your system and rebuild yourself with the materials, giving yourself a metallic organs and bones (which would explain why you can take so much punishment, I suppose). 

Oh, and then we have the grenades. My God the grenades. I need a paragraph on its own to talk about grenades. Even on Recruit they have some form of homing device on them. No matter where you are, no matter how many enemies there are, you will have four or five grenades drop at your feet. You can't throw them back because once you send one on its way to the nearest enemy you'll have the others blow you into tiny pieces. None of your team get 'naded. Just you. They must have something that repels these grenades, because they are always safe. You get no time to shoot. You get a grenade up the arse. They are annoying. That's the reason the Japanese lost the war. They put all their war effort into creating as many grenades as possible rather than better weapons.

Well, that's out of the way. Now on to the other half of the game.

Then we have the other half. The Russian part. And... I liked it. The characters were well rounded and the plot was interesting. Walking forwards to slowly put the Red Army's flag on top of the Reichstag was a good touch, especially as you are wounded, and it made me feel as if I were a part of the war. It kept more to the old formula within CoD4, but wasn't as good. All I can really say. It was a better part of the game.

By the way, where are the British? We played a major role in the war, with all of 1939-1945 having the British fight in it. We were there for it all. But we never crop up at all within this entire game. I hear the British are in the PS2 and DS versions, but why not on the Xbox or PS3 versions? Confuses me.

Now, the online element of CoD4 was absolutely amazing. I played it constantly and went through several prestiges. Yet now I feel that Treyarch has let the series down yet again. They used predecessor's online gameplay and made the maps massive and open. Now, one of the great things about the CoD4 online, I felt, was that it was very close quarters and there was cover to hide behind. World at War decided to take this element and throw it into the bin, introducing vast landscapes that allow snipers to see everyone and kill them. However, sometimes the problem is  actually not being able to find anyone. The maps are so big that everyone tends to be on the other side of the map, eliminating any sort of tactics that include flanking and... flanking. Actually, the only tactic is to flank, but that can get some kills. 

The dogs are a bitch, too. I like that it's easier to kill the replacement of the helicopter, but we still have very little chance against them. And they should definitely not put points for killing dogs on the score. I do, however, like the fact that experience for assists is given relative to the damage given to the enemy. A lot fairer than +2 every single time. Basically, the online was like Halo 3: fun, but only with friends and only if played fairly rarely.

Nazi Zombies is a good mode, but can get boring after a few goes, and Co-op absolutely sucks. It just does unless you put on cheats to make it a little bit challenging. That's all the can be said for those.

As you can tell I am not an absolute fan of this game. There are some really good points but it is just extremely adequate. Very, very adequate. Playable, but not for long periods of time. I'd rather play CoD4.

God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen - Annie Lennox

I didn’t plan on doing a blog specifically for Christmas. I’m personally not into Christmas as much as many people seem to be. However, there is one thing I love about Christmas. Call me a traditionalist if you will, but one of my favourite aspects are the Christmas Carols, one of my favourite of these being the song “God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen”.

I don’t know why, it just is. I love the lyrics, I love the way it is delivered. It just seems right. So as you might guess, I’m quite particular about how a version of this song might be sung. Not always can these Christmas Carols be sung well or with the right amount of emotion by bands and artists.

However, Annie Lennox has somehow made “God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen” a much more accessible song to the public.

I don’t know what it is about it. I suppose everything is right about this song. The chorus in the background, the feeling that this is a ‘big’ song, the variety musical instruments cutting in and out when they are needed. It’s just wonderful.
 

The video is great too. I get a feeling that this is still very much Christmassy. The video has a Victorian feel about it. But then we also get a little bit of sass. There’s a feeling of cheek in there. Not only this but the video doesn’t look overblown, it just feels that way. It’s an amazing combination of auditory and visual mediums.

This song is off an entire Christmas album by Annie Lennox called “A Christmas Cornucopia”, released this year. For a Christmas album it's pretty darn good!

So enjoy this song and enjoy your Christmas, everyone!

Tron: Legacy (2010)

Tron was a revolutionary film. It featured both live-action and computer animation within the same scene utilising some very interesting and seemingly complex filming techniques. Though at times criticised for its fairly slow and dull storyline, it was nevertheless a marvel of film-making. Its success and cult following even led to a world in the game Kingdom Hearts II. Now a successor has been released: Tron: Legacy.

Tron: Legacy opens to Kevin Flynn, reprised by Jeff Bridges, talking to his son about the world of The Grid, where Tron and Clu, two programmes, are helping him build a stable and perfect system.  He mentions a ‘miracle’ but tells his son that it is a story for another time. True to Hollywood tradition Flynn goes missing, so we have no idea what this miracle is. 

The film cuts to 20 years later, where Kevin’s son, Sam Flynn (Garrett Hedlund), is now acting exactly like Chris O’Donnell in Batman Forever: riding his motorcycle really fast, being cheeky, and wearing a t-shirt to show off his muscles. However, where Dick Grayson was purely annoying, Sam is actually somewhat likeable. He’s not trying to live up to another; he’s just trying to do what he feels right and to make a mockery of a sham of a company. 

In fact, the behaviour of Sam in this is similar to Kevin’s in Tron in a way. That is to say, he is breaking into a large company in order to enact justice. However, unlike Kevin, these seem to be for less selfish reasons as we are shown straight away that ENCOM, Kevin’s old company, is extorting people for the software that it produces.

Suffice to say, Sam achieves what he sets out to do and is later contacted by a friend of his father’s: Alan Bradley, reprised by Bruce Boxleitner, the man who created the programme Tron. He says he’s been contacted by Kevin, so Sam goes to the arcade seen in the first film and whilst there is sucked into The Grid. 

Note that some of this plot has been used before in Tron: big corporation doing naughty stuff, person feels the company has done wrong, they go to stop them and then through a series of events get sucked into The Grid. However, this is all very brief.  It is from here that we get an all new story and my word is it amazing!

We are taken through the games, which have been upgraded since 1982, and we are introduced to the main villain. From here there is a story detailing betrayal, discovery and destruction. Through a multitude of twists and turns we see both sides of the conflict between an authoritarian regime and just three who are fighting back, all in the aims of getting back to the real world and stopping the villain from the outside. This leads to a spectacular climax that leaves you wanting more, and hopefully you will get more as the ending is open for a sequel!

The effects of this film are perfect. The world, though computer generated, felt like it had weight, as if it actually existed. This is more than I could ever say for Avatar, where the world looked far too fake to be real. In The Grid we see the building, the technology in that world, the landscape, and it all looks so real, as if the creators of the film had actually built this world out of data, gone into the system and filmed on location. Also, surprisingly for me, I found the 3-D effects to be very good. In fact, the 3-D is used artistically, as the real world is shown in 2-D, whilst The Grid is 3-D, showing a difference between the two worlds, not only aesthetically but in the way we actually perceive it.

The effects don’t just stick to the landscape, however. There are many vehicles in the film that were computer generated that, yet again, looked realistic. The effects even went so far as to be an actor, as a younger version of Kevin as well as Clu, the computer programme created by him, are both computer generated. However, for the majority of the film I was fooled into believing this was actually Jeff Bridges.

The acting within this film was spot on. The actors delivered every line perfectly, which furthered the connections we had with the characters. However, this was accompanied by an absolutely superb script. One scene of note is the dinner scene, where the conversation flows perfectly and shows an awkward connection between the father and son who have not seen each other for 20 years. (Whilst on the subject of the dinner scene, I would like to bring up the fact that we have no idea where any of the food comes from. We see a lot of drinks, but they seem to fit in with the world. The food eaten here is pork as well as vegetables, which do not look even slightly like they fit in with the world nor do they seem to make sense.) We see throughout the film the growing connection between the father and son, which is quite endearing and builds up very well, unlike the clunky father-son connection in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

Music-wise we have nothing to complain about as Daft Punk has delivered with a pretty atmospheric soundtrack. Daft Punk even had a cameo in the film as two MP3 programmes. Though initially confusing as to why they might be there (cameos in The Grid would seem strange) they seem to fit in with their robotic look.

Though Tron: Legacy can seem somewhat derivative of Tron within the opening I advise you stick it out and keep an open mind as the story is pretty good and the effects are amazing. You don’t need to be a fan of the original to enjoy this film, as any exposition needed is delivered early on, so newcomers can also enjoy the film. It’s received fairly mixed reviews, some saying it’s not ‘intellectual’ enough, but I have to disagree. Both serious and fun, Tron: Legacy is a film that can be enjoyed by most people. I suggest you go see it soon!

Final Verdict: 9/10

Faces of Facebook: The Duck Face

In this series I will be looking at the "faces" you would see on Facebook, Myspace and other such social networking sites. These "faces" are the styles of photograph you often see on these sites that baffle people. Why have they done this? What is the purpose? Why that angle? Why that face?

You'll most likely know what I am talking about, but maybe not. Nonetheless, let's check out our first offender:

The Duck Face

This face consists of pouting of the lips. In and of itself it isn't that bad. Angelina Jolie seems to have her lips in a constant pout and people are fine with that.

No. No, this is no ordinary pout. This is pouting to the extreme.

This is the Duck Face

This, of course, is nothing new. Girls were most probably the first offenders. I have no idea why. It's not attractive and it definitely doesn't make you dignified. No one can do the Duck Face and retain any form of dignity.

So many people hate the Duck Face. They don't get it. And yet people continue to do it to this day. Just go on Facebook. Do it. Now look for that girl in your friend's list who wants to look hot. If you look in her album you will no doubt find a Duck Face. When I kept seeing this pop up on my News Feed I was certain it was only girls who did it. Heck, any celebrities seen doing it were all female, so it must only be them. Surely.

Then the guys started doing it:

I've tried as hard as I can to not put any photos on here of my friends. I think it would be remiss of me to do so and they would probably slap me. But they do it. Oh yes they do. It's upsetting to see the pictures of these people and realise they think it is meant to look sexy or something along those lines.

Maybe Zoolander is the cause of this all. I am sure that the Duck Face did not exist before this. But sadly, I am probably wrong. Nonetheless, the 2001 film used the Duck Face as a joke, that it is meant to look sexy but really doesn't. That was the whole thing about Zoolander: everything the character did was a mockery of the real fashion industry!

So it's quite industry how something that was mocking of those people who think they were sexy by pulling certain faces actually became a face that people thought they would pull to look sexy.

This face can bring out a syndrome so evident on the internet's social networking websites. It isn't a face in itself. It's the way someone depicts themselves in photos. And this is it:





One has to enquire: WHY?! Why does this happen? That when someone gets photos taken of them they always pull the same face. That every photo they are in looks like they weren't there, they were just photoshopped in.

Why!?

This face is also utilised in conjunction with three other techniques often used by people to increase their "hotness", or so one assumes:

1. Take the photo using a bathroom mirror (because you look sexy in the place where you crap).
2. Use a "gangsta" symbol for extra points.
3. Take the photo from a high angle (we'll be covering this later).

So, I ask you all: why does the Duck Face prevail? Very few people seem to like it, yet it still appears to show up everywhere. Where a girl may look pretty she is suddenly turned into Pete Burns. The popular website Anti Duckface has an entire archive full of silly looking people doing the Duck Face. If you still think it looks sexy then check this website out and tell me that this is so.

Please, ladies and gentlemen, stop this. It looks stupid, not sexy. If there is any way to turn someone off then just do the Duck Face

Brad Jones Film Reviews: Cheap

The last in this series of reviews.

Everything in this film is disgusting, but that's why I feel this way about it!

Cheap

Cheap can be found at thecinemasnob.com

Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood

Reviewed Platform: Xbox 360

Other Platforms: PS3, PC

There was some speculation prior to Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood that it would be a worthless addition to the series. Some believed that it was pointless as it would be Assassin’s Creed 2.5 rather than Assassin’s Creed III, that it would offer nothing to the overall plot and instead just continue the story of Ezio Auditore da Firenze rather than the story of the Templars and Assassin’s in 2012. Desmond Miles and co. would not receive any forms of development and everyone would be disappointed at some form of recycled gameplay.

I was not one of those people. I have always had faith in the Assassin’s Creed series and was certain that AC:B would be a welcome addition to the series. There were naysayers but I would not listen to them and I was looking forward to the new game.

I was absolutely right.

I tried to go into the game with as little information as possible. All I knew was that you would control Ezio again and... that’s it, actually. I tried as hard as possible to get no information off of anyone so that anything that happened in-game would be a surprise to me.

AC:B takes place directly after AC II, having Desmond and the other Assassin’s arrive at the Mario’s villa. Through a secret passage into the villa you control Desmond using the parkour that we would see Altaïr or Ezio use. It’s a welcome inclusion to have a full section of the game devoted to utilising Desmond and his new-found abilities outside of a warehouse and now in the outside world and helps show the development Desmond has gone through mentally.

At the beginning of the game as Ezio we are shown one of the new inclusions of the game: using weaponry and machinery. The sections using these are not common and only last for a short period of time, but they do well to break up the game and show us the many skills Ezio is capable of, as well as showing the extent of Ubisoft’s game-making capabilities. The villa is attacked by Rodrigo Borgia’s men after Ezio chose not to kill the pope. The villa is destroyed and Ezio is shot. He escapes to Rome and, with Machiavelli, sets to rebuild the Assassin brotherhood within the walls of Italy’s capital and destroy the Borgia influence in Italy, and thus in Europe.

The entirety of the game takes place within Rome, apart from a few asides. This at first seems like it may be a touch less open world that the other games in the series, however it suits the story perfectly. Ezio is focusing purely on Rome and taking out the Borgia. The rest of Italy is not necessary to keep tabs on. Rome is a fairly large map, so the player does not feel too hemmed in and sections of the city open up depending on the DNA Sequence you have accessed.

A new feature added to the game, due to the fact that Ezio is creating a brotherhood, is recruiting and training new Assassins. This is done through a guild management screen, in which you can send your recruits to different parts of Europe to go on missions in order to weaken the Templar influence. Though you do not embark on these missions the mere feeling that you are able to lead this group of Assassins makes the player feel as if they are truly a leader.

There are many parts of the game that are not story based, however take your attention. There are several side-missions to take your fancy, as well as a very interesting back story, telling the tale of Ezio and his past love, Cristina. Though not essential, this adds a lot more depth to the character of Ezio and shows us how much he has changed over the years of being an Assassin.

Rome can be renovated by buying different shops and landmarks, similar to the upgrading system in AC II. This part of the game is a good addition and makes you feel as if you are having an effect on the city, however it can be extremely infuriating when you get to a shop to but some more ammunition or some medicine and you find it has not been bought yet. Spending all your money on that shop, you then discover you do not have enough money to buy what you wanted. Nonetheless, it’s a nice way to integrate the player into the city of Rome.

It is evident that the developers have put a great amount of time in developing the city of Rome, as it looks beautiful, from the surrounding green land to the more urban areas. Furthermore, the game controls wonderfully, though there are still some of the niggling problems with some parts of the free-running, though these problems are few and far between.

Combat is far superior to the combat in any of the game’s predecessors, with Ezio being able to deal with more enemies at once and the range of weapons allows for more enjoyable fights. The game even includes the crossbow, which was missing from the first game in the series, which allows us to be able to deal with distant targets more effectively, keeping with elements of stealth that the game likes to try and force upon us. The stealth aspects are sometimes lacking, however are pretty solid.

The game overall features an astounding storyline and develops all characters, with an ending that is nothing short of mind-blowing. Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood is the strongest in the series (on consoles, at least, though I doubt the handheld games are anything compared to the three console games). If you have the chance to get this game then do so!

Final Verdict: 10/10

Brad Jones Film Reviews: Freak Out

The second review in the series.

We've seen a light-hearted comedy, now for a dark and gritty thriller!

Freak Out

Freak Out can be found at thecinemasnob.com

Skyline (2010)

If I were a real critic, a man who was praised by the masses for his critical work, then I would probably have fallen ill of many people for my review of Unstoppable. So far as I have seen I have been outweighed by a majority of people. Its current rating on Rotten Tomatoes is “fresh” at 85%. Due Date I was also wrong, it may have seemed: having loved the film and rating it so highly I am told I am an idiot by the “rotten” rating of 38% on RT. And yet again with Paranormal Activity 2 we see my 3/10 rating being spurned as the critical approval is at 60%, “fresh”.  And I’d like to put a side note here that almost all of my feelings towards films are not reciprocated by one Roger Ebert, a highly respected critic and one whom I do, indeed, consider the opinion of.

Why am I saying this? Because I want you to realise that what I review is based upon my own biased opinion. That how I see the film is personal to me. Even with this being said I look into the film with as much depth as I can, focusing on all elements from directing to soundtrack to acting.

The reason I say this is because no one likes Skyline. It's currently on 14% on RT.

But I loved the film.

Okay, maybe saying that I loved the film is taking it a bit too far. The film was immensely enjoyable. All of the naysayers out there seem to think that this film has a terrible plot, terrible script and terrible acting from actors who have the gall to not be Tom Cruise, Jennifer Aniston or whoever they feel should be in this movie as they are considered an A-list celebrity.

The fame of a celebrity does not make the film. In fact, it sometimes ruins it as you constantly feel you should compare this role to all their other roles. So was the problem with Donald Faison, who I shall refer to as Turk (anyone who doesn’t know why should stop reading as they are not worthy to be reading this). The fact that we know him as Turk takes away from anything that he may have to offer with his character. I detached myself from remembering him as Turk, but I still could only think of him as Turk, not Terry.  Through the brief moments of non-Scrubs related thinking I was able to see he wasn’t too bad at portraying his character. In fact, he was good.

And so was everyone else. They all were. Everyone made their roles extremely convincing. I believed that this is exactly how people may react to this form of invasion. This wasn’t just due to their acting, though, but also due to the script, which, believe it or not from what everyone seems to be saying, was good.

Seriously. You look at it. Okay, maybe it is very derivative of a lot of alien invasion films, War of the Worlds being the obvious one. But it still took a new angle on the genre. In no film involving an alien invasion have I seen such a wide-scale abduction. War of the Worlds faltered in this sense, just showing us pretty SFX instead of delivering a solid narrative. The aliens in that seemed to sporadically choose to do something new with the humans every now and then, throwing them around, then zapping them, then harvesting them. But we don’t find out what they are doing these things for.

Skyline shows us what they do, but it’s through slow build-up and pacing that we find these things out. The film constantly has us asking “Why?” and it delivers. It may not be the full answer, but we make up the answer in our minds, leaving it open to interpretation. We are given enough information to attempt to make a judgement, but we are not force fed the answers.

The effects in this film are fantastic and compliment the plot amazingly. There are a couple of times where the SFX falter, but overall they are astounding. It is only through these SFX that we can also be shown the aliens (what they look like and their ships). The designs for the aliens appear to be somewhat like that Sentinels from the Matrix trilogy, being a strange combination of what I took to be organic matter and flesh.

Sadly, at times the film can be somewhat laughable. The way in which the humans are sucked into the UFOs are a little bit comedic, with the bodies of the people just floating about as if being brought into the land of Oz. Not only this, but at times there are some pretty silly looking slow motion sequences that are just far too slow.

This film is also extremely bleak. If you do go see it you will understand what I mean. Most invasion films seem very triumphant at the end (I’m looking at you, War of the Worlds) and seems to suggest that HUMANS ARE AWESOME! But, when it comes to technological and evolutionary terms, the aliens are far superior to us. Yes we have nukes and guns and all the business but they have great big aggressive beasts, the ability to fly, a form of rejuvenating factor and technology far superior to our own. In all terms of the words: we are screwed.

Some people complain that this film is too centralised on the people living in the flat. That it doesn’t show the true scope of the invasion, that the effects of the invasion aren’t shown within the city. I have to bring up a few points concerning this:

1. There are scenes showing people fighting back, if only one or two scenes.
2. The whole point of the film is to focus on how this small group of people try to survive, somewhat reminiscent of George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead.
3.  Almost every single person in the city is sucked into the spaceships. How can there be widespread fear and panic in the city when there is no one to cause the panic?

I will be completely honest, though: this film isn’t great. To be honest it’s probably just above average in my books. It had the feel from the very start of a SyFy original movie. The CGI isn’t as bad, but the cast and the actual feel of the movie make it seem so (I know I said the cast didn’t matter, but when a film already feels like it could easily be a made-for-TV film you can’t help but notice these things).

However, Skyline is extremely enjoyable. If you like B-Movies involving aliens or the likes then you should love this film. It isn’t a B-Movie in itself (maybe a B+/A- movie) but it feels slightly reminiscent of one. I wouldn’t be surprised if this gained some sort of cult following in years to come, but I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if it just fell off the radar and no one ever talked about it ever again.

Go see this film. If the critics are to go by then you will hate it. However, if you go into the film with an open mind and let the drama take you in, notice that this is not about the alien invasion per se but more so about the interactions between the survivors, then you should have a fun time. 

Whether you find it funny, horrific or you are actually enjoying the film for what it is, Skyline is a wonderful looking flick that may actually entertain you.

Final Verdict: 6/10

Brad Jones Film Reviews: Game Boys

I look into the films that were made by Brad Jones, a.k.a. The Cinema Snob.

Introduction

Does Brad Jones hold up as a comedy scriptwriter in this story based around 80s video games? 

Game Boys

Game Boys can be found at thecinemasnob.com

"A Protest for Students, by Students" by a Student: what went right, wrong, and how the media gave out the wrong idea

I’ll be honest with you all: I am not very politically driven. I have opinions on politics and am aware of which political parties I do and don’t like, but politics in itself does not dictate what I think of people and is definitely not in any way associated with me grouping people together. Nonetheless, I attended the 50,000-strong march in London on the 10/11/2010.

Why was this? Well, being a student I know what it is like to be one and go through the troubles of funding, banking and all that jazz. Not only this but I know that for an educational establishment to run it needs money.

If you take this money away from spending in education universities (as well as other educational establishments) will need to make up the shortfall elsewhere. Even with raised fees the budget a university could spend would fall greatly and thus there is a possibility that parts of the university would fall into disrepair, both physically and in the sense of the quality of education and facilities.

Now for a bit of explaining behind this rant:

Following the Browne review the current coalition government in the UK has decided to cut public spending, an important factor in this being in education. Higher Education funding is being cut by 40%, a removal of teaching grants for most subjects, and there is now to be a cap of £6000-£9000 for tuition fees (from £3290). This will, of course, deter possible university students from pursuing higher education. Not only this, but Undergraduates wanting to pursue a Ph.D. or a MA/MSc will be deterred due to their current student debt.

So we marched.

With 300 people from Coventry University, and 6 coaches, we set off to become a part of a massive march through London to protest against these changes, not only for ourselves but also for future students and education in general.

Contrary to what any of you may have heard from the news the protest was generally peaceful. With our chants (the most popular being “no ifs, no buts, no education cuts”), placards, banners and various musical instruments we walked from the Houses of Parliament to outside the Tate Gallery, where higher ups in the various student unions gave rousing speeches on the issue, as well as showing some amusing and interesting videos made by the unions and universities, and then a return to the Houses of Parliament.

Many of the protesters were very light-hearted. Being students we often joke about things that are very serious and there was much humour to be had on the placards: “Harry Potter doesn’t pay for Hogwarts”; “The government cut my sign budget”; “Fuck this, I’m moving to Scotland”.

Sadly, along the way there was some violence. The group I was in were passing the Millbank Tower, which we later discovered was the Conservative Headquarters, when we saw people leaving with what appeared to be smoke coming out of the foyer. Eggs were thrown. Then people with hoods up and scarves over their faces started to hit the windows, smashing them.

Some people cheered, some people jeered. There were many calls to them to stop doing it (with me personally yelling at them “This is a fucking peaceful protest!”). This violence later turned into a storming of the building followed by protesters getting onto the roof, though by that time we were long gone, not wanting to get in any way involved and join the many other people leaving the area to continue the protest in peace.

Of course, the media picked up on this. The only thing that mattered were the thousands of youths tearing up our nation’s capital, setting it on fire and destroying the buildings. At least, this is what we apparently did, as some people seem to think.

No, we did not do this. The majority of students marched on, continuing their chants, letting the government realise that though we were angry at what they were doing we would not go so low as to resort to violence, we would still show passion. One group is reported to have made a placard saying “Break the cuts, not the windows.”

Let’s look at the numbers. Going by a Guardian article there were 200 violent protesters, leaving 49,800 peaceful protesters. That’s 0.4% of us being violent bastards! And they account for all us students? OF COURSE NOT! Apparently this rose to a thousand, though that was mainly the crowd that was outside watching the spectacle.

 “I am appalled that a small minority have today shamefully abused their right to protest”

-       London Mayor Boris Johnson

“This was not part of our plan. This action was by others who come out and used this opportunity to hijack a peaceful protest.”

-       NUS President Aaron Porter

(Quotes from the BBC)

And what of the violence? Did it help put across our cause? Well, maybe. They may have shown that students are bloody angry. But we all were, we didn’t take it to such an extreme. Personally I feel, as well as many of my colleagues, that what happened was detrimental to our cause. That it would show the student off as a yob, a hooligan, and, possibly, a terrorist. Do we negotiate with terrorists? Of course not. Despite the violence I feel that we did make an impact.

But I have to re-iterate: this was not the reason we were there. We wanted to show the government, through peaceful protest, that we were pissed off and that we did not agree with the government’s choices.

Through our peaceful nature we showed the coalition government that we are not happy and that there is still room for them to change their minds. The sheer number of people that moved on from the violence and watched and listened to the speakers shows how we students are not violent, even in our passion.


To read a more opinions on the NUS demonstration visit: Teodora's Blog

The Hooker with a Heart of Gold (Part 1)

I’m a great fan of Brad Jones’ work. From The Cinema Snob to Kung Tai Ten Brad’s voice just keeps you calm as you watch some of the worst films ever. And even his episodes of Brad and Jerrid are well written and acted well enough to pull off a fair bit of comedy. And now he’s brought something new.

The first episode in a mini-series, The Hooker with a Heart of Gold is a dark comedy written and directed by Brad Jones. The series revolves around a prostitute know as Hooker (Sarah Lewis) who no longer wishes to be in her line of business due to the treatment she receives from her pimp (Jones) as well as... well, just being a prostitute isn’t very nice. At the same time as this a scientist (Brian Lewis) has created an artificial heart made of gold that runs on electricity. As we can tell by the title things aren’t going to be too pretty.

This first 26 minute segment of the series features a very well written script which is enhanced by some pretty good acting. The actors play their roles with enough dark humour that they are all somewhat believable, even if completely ridiculous. There’s even a small insight into the mind of Brad Jones at one point, who notorious for collecting terrible films.

This series seems like an homage to these films, not in bad writing or acting or anything that appears in these films, but in the ridiculousness of the plot. It is very tongue-in-cheek, being aware of its slightly less than normal premise and turning it into something hilarious and entertaining to watch, with some pretty good drama thrown in there.

The choice of music for this episode is nothing short of awesome. It captures the feel of what is happening at the time and adds to a slight camp value, creating drama and comedy at the same time.

The only thing that sometimes seems off about the episode is the directing and editing. For the most part it is pretty good, but some close-ups that are far too close and dodgy editing during a conversation (maybe due to changes in audio) seem to take away from the experience.

However, as a whole The Hooker with a Heart of Gold is completely hilarious and is well worth checking out if you are at all into dark humour. Here’s hoping the rest of the series will be as good as this episode, possibly even getting better. I’m interested to see what will be done with this twisted tale.

Final Verdict: 7/10

More of Brad Jones' work can be found on http://www.thecinemasnob.com/

Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions

Reviewed Platform: Xbox 360

Other Platforms: PS3, PC, Wii, DS

Spidey suffers with his games. The Marvel superhero has appeared in some great games, such as Spider-Man 2 and Ultimate Spider-Man, but sometimes falls short of greatness, Spider-Man 3 being a prime example of this.

Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions takes place in four of Marvel’s Spider-Man universes: Amazing, Noir, Ultimate and 2099. People unfamiliar with the concept of each one may be confused, though knowing the backgrounds of each universe isn’t necessary as they are basically disregarded.

The plot is as follows: Amazing Spider-Man (the one we all know and love) tries to stop Mysterio from stealing a stone tablet from a museum, which Spider-Man accidentally breaks. Conveniently, this tablet is magical and its fragments spread to other dimensions. Thus, the various Spider-Men need to get these magical fragments before the villains use the powers to grow stronger. This is pretty weak, feeling more like a B-Movie than Spider-Man. This magical MacGuffin allows the level’s boss to have both a normal form and a stronger form. This is Spider-Man, not Final Fantasy!

The voice acting in the game is good, but even then the characters are unlikeable due to the bad scripting. The only character that seems to be likeable is Ultimate Spider-Man, his story being darker compared to the rest with some great levels.

The gameplay itself is average. Spider-Man is well known for his web-slinging, but this game takes place within linear levels that have little to no room for web-slinging. The only parts of the game where web-slinging is of any use is in some parts of the 2099 levels and the Deadpool stage (Ultimate Spider-Man), which is probably the best part of the game.

The Noir segments of the game are the only parts that feel different, being because it is a bad clone of Batman: Arkham Asylum. These segments are the only respite we get from the samey gameplay of the other sections (going against the advertised four different styles of gameplay).

Combat feels very heavy at first and takes some getting used to, but even then it isn’t the standard we expect. The game also features many bugs, ranging from being able to swing through the level design itself to missing dialogue and enemies that won’t die.

This game has absolutely no depth. There’s no continuity between the Spider-Men, feeling more like four XBLA games in one disjointed mess. At times it does redeem itself and is quite fun. It isn’t exactly bad, but it’s still not good. If ever you feel like playing this game it’s a rental, or at least wait until it is cheap as it is definitely not worth full price.

Final Verdict: 5/10

Unstoppable (2010)

Unstoppable is about a train that goes too fast with hazardous materials aboard. No one is on the train to stop it whilst it is on full throttle, so obviously something bad might become of this. Evidently, people have to try to stop it. That is the plot in a nutshell.

The film was utterly dull, with no sense of excitement at any point. Though the music tried to make us feel excited the visuals did not show this.

There were attempts to develop the main characters, but interactions between the two that lead to character development was sparse and amounted to very little. There was nothing that made me like any of the characters at any point, all of them seeming as if they only had flaws and no redeemable characteristics. Indeed, all these characters were one-dimensional, displaying a single character trait throughout and offering no depth.

 Though the film attempted to be realistic it was not so - especially the ridiculous explosion of a derailed carriage which would never have happened in any reality unless the carriage was filled with several tonnes of unstable dynamite. The only thing that made the film at all watchable was the directing and acting, neither of which were too bad, with Denzel Washington outperforming Chris Pine by a mile, though Pine still pulls off a good performance. Sadly, the acting could not save the poor script and the directing faltered at many points, such as too many shots of underneath the train as well as a fetish for zooming.

Unstoppable did not deliver the high-octane disaster thriller that the trailer tried (but failed) to show. I didn't think the film would be worse than the trailer but somehow that happened.

Utterly bland with no form of excitement, Unstoppable is a film that you would do well to miss as it offers nothing in its attempt to revive a stale genre that was overdone in the 90s.

Final Verdict: 2/10

Fable III

Reviewed Platform: Xbox 360

Other Platforms: PC

Lionhead Studio’s Fable series is awesome. Yes, that’s a biased opinion, but so many people would agree. Fable was an amazing game, and whilst Fable II was lacking the first one’s charm it was still a good game. They featured good controls, a great morality system and, most importantly, brilliant voice acting and lashings of the British wit and humour mixed with truly fantastic plots. So does Fable III pull it off?

Fable III starts in a strange way compared to the rest of the series: you are a fully formed adult and a prince or princess, no less. Seeing as the other games have you as a poor child this is quite a shift. However, this shift allows you to be dropped right into the plot, starting off the chain of events that will eventually lead to the changes within Albion.

You are the son/daughter of a great Hero king who reshaped Albion into its newfound glory. However, not all is not well as Albion is going through an industrial revolution and the tyrant king, Logan, your brother, does nothing to help, in fact plunging the land into further poverty. Through a chain of events you are set to lead a revolution against Logan and become the new monarch. This leads to a game with a truly epic plot, taking you across all of Albion and to other lands to save the world from its untimely fate.

In this game your actions really do have consequences. This doesn’t show so much at first, however in the latter half of the game you will have to make some decisions that you would rather not make. This is a game where the moral choices seem truly like your own personal choices, with some decisions being so hard to make as they go against your own personal morality, but they still need to be made.

The audio in this game is superb, ranging from the great voice acting (featuring Simon Pegg, Stephen Fry and John Cleese!), allowing you to connect with the characters, as well as the beautiful music (some of which I swear is lifted directly from Fable II). The graphics are also pleasing, though look a slightly dated compared to some games being released at the moment.

Combat is fairly intuitive, if a little bit heavy, and the new style of magic (using magic gauntlets) allows for more interesting fights. However, the magic does seem a touch overpowered at times, which sometimes makes things a little too easy.

The plot, the humour and the gameplay are all key parts in probably the best Fable game so far.

Final Verdict: 9/10

Due Date (2010)

It’s hard to not draw some sort of parallel with The Hangover when watching Due Date, both being directed by Todd Phillips and both starring Zach Galifianakis as a clueless imbecile with the wit of a rock, but he’s still such a nice guy that you have to like him. This doesn’t mean, however, that Due Date is a clone of The Hangover.

The story is Peter Highman (Robert Downey, Jr.) is an expectant father on his way to Los Angeles to be with his wife (Michelle Monaghan) when he meets Ethan Tremblay (Galifianakis). Through a series of events Peter is unable to fly to LA so must go on car journey across the south of America with Ethan to get to the birth of his child in time. Through this we are subject to non-stop gags and are treated to some spot on acting.

The talent of Downey, Jr. and Galifianakis adds a tremendous amount to the film, playing off one another to keep the laughs coming thick and fast, if sometimes a bit too lewd for some people’s tastes, and cameos from the likes of Jamie Foxx and RZA just keep the laughs coming. The only times we are not laughing are when we are treated to some heart-warming moments that make you feel connected to the main characters.

Being a buddy film we are, of course, led through the formula of one not liking the other but eventually growing to accept them. Though this has grown somewhat stale the way in which it is carried out keeps it fresh, showing a lot of character development from both Ethan and Peter.

Due Date is an amazingly scripted film with a great plot featuring actors who can work together in a hilarious fashion. This comedy is something that you shouldn’t miss out on.

Final Verdict: 9/10

RED (2010)

This film is cool. That may as well be the review! But with a cast of Bruce Willis, John Malkovich, Helen Mirren and Morgan Freeman you know it’s going to be cool; I don’t need to tell you that!

The story revolves around Frank Moses (Willis), a retired CIA agent who is being pursued by a hit squad, along with his love interest, Sarah Ross (Mary-Louise Parker). The two are chased across America by CIA agent William Cooper (Karl Urban) whilst gaining help from other ex-agents, Joe Matheson (Freeman), Marvin Boggs (Malkovich) and Victoria (Mirren). This leads to some terrific humour, intense action scenes and great interactions between the stars.

Though at times the plot can be somewhat hard to follow as so much is going on, it all adds up to a climax that goes from feeling like a deadly episode of Hustle to firefights that will get your heart racing, assisted by Robert Schwentke’s sublime directing.

As an adaptation of the original comic book it isn’t very good. Don’t take that in the wrong way: the comic was somewhat bland up until the last issue. If Red were an accurate adaptation of the comic then we would have a very serious story with no truly likeable characters. Though the film lacks the message of the comic – by which I mean it misses it entirely – it’s still a fantastic ride.

Red is a must-see action-comedy that will keep your interest through the entire film. The cast’s performance shows that these elderly actors should never retire!

Final Verdict: 8/10

Paranormal Activity 2 (2010)

I didn’t like Paranormal Activity. It was an interesting concept which tried to re-introduce something within the horror genre that hasn’t been seen for a while, i.e. psychological horror rather than jump scares. Nonetheless, I felt that it was carried out fairly poorly but passable for a low budget film.

Paranormal Activity 2 has an upper hand over PA with its vastly greater budget, yet doesn’t use it to a good enough effect, turning out another poor performance.

It’s quite tragic this film was so bad as it has some pretty good elements. The film provides a fantastic link to its predecessor, showing what happened to the sister of Katie (the lead in the first film) and her family. This gives a greater understanding as to why the demon haunted Katie and Micah, creating an interesting and disturbing tale in conjunction with the first film, with enough being left vague to leave an air of mystery.

The best part of the film was the ending sequence, which used a Blair Witch Project-style shaky cam to deliver an exceptional finale, as well as showing some of the events that occurred post-PA. Also, the use of multiple cameras rather than a single camera helped the film show events all over the house.

However, these points do not redeem PA2, as there is much wrong with the film. The characters are in no way likeable and the child appears to grow up too quickly (going from a new-born to a few months old in a badly done montage). Characters names are hard to pick up, with one character changing names from Kristi to Kirsty and back again.

PA2 takes a long time to build up to anything good. Though this turns out to be worthwhile, it still took too long for any good advancement in plot and throughout the majority of the film the audience feels bored and cannot be fully immersed. This is combined with lazy jump scares that detract from the psychological element of the film. In fact, some seem funny rather than scary, with many people in the cinema laughing at the ridiculous effects.

Though better than its predecessor for plot, albeit less scary, it just doesn’t deliver where it should. The best points of the film come within the last 10 minutes, leaving 81 minutes of boredom.

Final Verdict: 3/10

Alan Partridge's Mid Morning Matters: Episode 1

I am a lover of anything Alan Partridge. I’ve watched the majority of Alan Partridge related programming, from The Day Today all the way to I’m Alan Partridge. Everything featuring him is utter genius and the actor who portrays him, funny man Steve Coogan, is hilarious.

So with fan-boy glee and much a-ha-ing I was completely excited when I was shown a trailer for Alan Partridge’s Mid Morning Matters. These couple of minutes showed me what I expected to be more hilarity from Norfolk’s

Alan is back on the radio for North Norfolk Digital, showing he has fallen even further, his dreams of going back to TV dashed! Mid Morning Matters is shown through two static cameras that act as webcam feeds to the live show on the internet. It also seems ironic that this show takes place on the Foster’s website (yes, the Australian lager) rather than on TV, adding to the comedy that Alan is completely worthless, though Coogan still pulls it off to the same level as before.

Alan is joined by his co-host, Simon, played by Tim Key. Simon is somewhat smarter than Alan, and therefore Alan always keeps him down, attempting to cling to what little authority he has left.

Through the interactions between the two, as well as with a guest, we find that Alan has not grown to accept the people of this world and remains as insensitive as ever, even going so far as to ride a bike for 30 minutes just to prove his guest wrong.

Mid Morning Matters is a perfect addition to the Alan Partridge series, this first episode of a new series appearing promising for a great set of well-written webisodes.

Final Verdict: 9/10

Find more on www.fostersfunny.co.uk

Despicable Me (2010)

At the time of seeing the Despicable Me trailer this is what I knew: Gru (Steve Carell) is a failure of a super-villain who plans to steal the moon with his little yellow minions and somehow three girls, Margo (Miranda Cosgrove), Edith and Agnes, come into the fray and he adopts them, even if he isn’t good at looking after them. 

First impressions: entertaining, but nothing entirely special, just a basic recycled plot hidden under something trying to be original.

If you think this then in some ways you are right. The plot is a fairly standard formula of an unwilling parent caring for unruly children, who at first cause havoc but are suddenly sweet and caring when Gru shows them affection. In fact, the film at times seems to borrow from films rather than be an homage to them, The Incredibles at times springing to mind.

However, within this there is something genius. Yes, the film has cheap laughs, but they are nothing compared to the bigger jokes that surround them, which are truly hilarious! The plot carries forward at a constant pace, never stalling for any longer than it should, with underlying themes throughout: from Gru’s mother issues to the difficulties of fatherhood, though attempts to tug at your heartstrings sometimes aren’t successful (the girls’ mistreatment, sadly, was funnier than it should have been).

The animation and art styles are simply wonderful and aesthetically pleasing. Though the 3D does not offer too much to the film as a whole, there are some times where it looks pretty good - especially when the film takes us to space!

The voice acting is great, with all voice actors pulling in a fantastic performance and the character design matching the personality and voices perfectly. The only character that doesn’t have any impact seems to be Margo, who appears to have no personality and Cosgrove falls short of making this character in any way memorable. Nonetheless, the performances of Carell, Russell Brand and Jason Segel make up for this.

Though the plot is nothing exactly special, Despicable Me is a great looking film with constant laughs and a top-notch cast. All of this as a whole makes this film one of the best animated films this year.

Final Verdict: 7/10