Déan scannán de seo led' thoill!

Sa chuid seo, déanfaidh mé trácht ar rudai ba chóir dóibh déan scannáin ar.
Sa mhi seo, tosnóidh mé le ceann dos na dhaoine is cáiliúla sa domhain: Richard Sharpe.

Mura bhfuil a fhios agat cé hé, mo náire sibh! Scriofa ag Bernard Cornwell(m'údar is fearr riamh!) Is scéaltai ficsean iad faoi shaighdiúr darbh ainm Richard Sharpe, i rith cogaidh Napolean san 18ú haois.
Is scéaltai go han suimiúl iad is ceapam go ndeanfaidh scannán rathúil as.
Seachas mé féin tá na milte lucht tacaiochta ann a léann faoi eachtrai Sharpe is a
Raidhfilli 95ú: Na Seacéidi-Ghlasa.



Is fear giorraisc é, fear a chuaigh ón gnáthballra go dti leiftenant-chornal in airm a shoilse bhreatnach.Mura gceaptar gurb scéal suimiúl atá ann, ni mór duit ciall a bhuail id' cloigeann, 's féidir liom a dhéanamh más gá...
Is aoibheann liom an sraith seo, tá gach leabhar scriofa faoi agam. Tá siad scriofa go réalaioch, len alán greann le fáil is gnéithe diffriúl de dhaoine i rith ham cogaidh.

Len alán caractéiri tacaiochta fresin, mar shampla a chara uasail, Éireannach mór darbh Patrick Harper, is fior rud é go bhfuil go bhfuil go ndótháin ábhar ann a choinneáil suim an lucht féachanna.

Tá caint san idirlion faoi cupla leabhair eile ó Bernard a chur ar an scannán mór ach tá nios mó daoine ina bhfuil ar suim acu i Sharpe ná, mar shampla, i scéal nua faoi Arthur (nach raibh na céadtha diobh déanta cheana féin???)
An t-aon rud a chuirfidh critheagla orm faoin bplean seo ná: an ndéanfaidh siad go leor ceartas de?

Ni mór duit rá liom, tar éis féachaint ar Harry Potter nó The Golden Compass, go dhéanann Hollywood praiseach de leabhair a raibh ar fheabhas is lán le draiocht san sli inar scriobhadh iad.Tógann siad gach rud maith ann is cuireann siad an rud ata comh imeaglach sin "cirte polaitiochata!"

Go dóchasach, léann Peter Jackson an phost seo agus treoritear é cosúil le chonas a rinneadh The Lord Of The Rings.
Féach ar an spás seo...

What I Would Have Done Is...

Reboots and re-imaginings and the wonderful web they weave. One prime example of this being obviously the new Spiderman 4, which promisies to be grittier, more contempory(whatever the hell that means)and darker.

Reboots can be a good thing, so for all those spidey fans claiming this as some sort of movie business version of jesus christs crucifiction, take heart.
The thing with movies is, once they're shot and distributed, there's nothing you can do about it. Anything you may have wanted to see in it, it's too late now.
So on the subject of things we'd like to see in films, in these-"What I would have done is..."-segments is I'm going to talk about films that I would like to have changed somewhat and the stupid most annoying parts. For the first one I'll start off small.

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END.

I don't even know where to start with this one, so I'll just do my most annoying two:

1. Tia Dalma is Calyspso.

They deliver this twist with about as much subtlety as KKK member at the Million Man March so that by her end scene you not only know about her past relationship with Davy Joens, you also couldn't give two f***s.
I'd have prefered if they'd kept the devil-may-care attitude she had in the previous film. In this one she has all the makings of a serially depressed ex-girlfriend of a maniacal pirate.
Also, despite being all-knowing, all-mysterious in the Dead Man's Chest, she seems to be out of her depth(excuse the pun) and out of her gourd in this feature.
They even gave her the magical abitiliy to grow big, shout gibberish at people and explode, this being one of her "highlights"

What I would have done:I would not have made her Calypso but kept up with the freaky Vooddoo lady thing she had goin on. The Calyspo revelation was not needed and over-used in the film. If it had been a shocking sudden revelation as opposed to a gradual, ball-breakingly slow reference, then I would have been okay with that.
I would also have made her Jack's love interest and definitely not Davy Jones and kept his love as some faceless damsel who broke his heart. I feel this would have made it more poignant; that he couldn't reconcile and thus make him a kind of anti-hero of a certain extreme.
Cutler Beckett should have been the main bad-guy and they tended to make the love-lorn Davy-Jones out to be some kind of monster because he literally tore his own heart out and went on a jilted-lover killing spree.We all have our issues, it doesn't mean we're bad people. Maybe a redemptive moment for Davy Jones as opposed to getting killed by Will(inadvertantly though not for lack of trying)should have been done.


2.James Norrington Dies.


A man out to reclaim his honour.Unrequited love.Complex character developement. These are the things not asscociated with any of the so-called "leads".
James Norrington was an upcoming British navy Captain before he met jack sparrow. After letting free this (career making) pirate and also giving up his love to Will in the first movie's end scene("How To Self-Sacrifice,Chapter one")he was to be cemneted in my mind as one of the most underrated characters in movie history.
The one where you feel he could carry a film all on his lonesome.

He then chases after said freed pirate, even sailing through a hurricane (thouroughly bad-ass) and resigned his comission in shame when he couldn't catch him. He ends up a drink-sodden mess and this is where we're introduced to him again as he becomes part of Sparrow's crew and what he'd always spent his life hunting: a pirate.
Out to reclaim his honour as I've said above, he then makes a deal with the devil and regains his comission. That is until the Devil,Cutler Beckett, gives him his old sword back.
This has the undesired effect of reminding Norrington of how honourable he once was and his connection to Will(who forged the sword)Elizabeth(his love) and by extension Jack(the enemy and erstwhile hope for redemtion).
He then turns to the side of good once more and after saving Elizabeth (again)he gets the shank by Will's dad of all people and refusus Davy Jones' offer of immortality to die with honour intact.

To be honest, I think in the end he essentially dies a broken man and his death is utterly swept under the rug and not mentioned again by any chracter for the rest of the film.
The only good thing about his death is that he didn't have to take part in this travesty of potential anymore and got a heroes send-off if not a heroes return.

What I would have done: Given him his own series goddammit!

DVD REVIEW:Shank

Shank, the latest offering in the post-apocalyptic-themed batch of films to hit theaters, sees a 2015 London overrun by gangs.The main commodity is food and the means are less than lawful.

The rules are simple; get hard or get beaten. That is the lesson that Fourteen-year-old Junior , played here brilliantly by newcomer Kedar Williams-Stirling, has to learn when his brother Rager (played here by Grime superstar Bashy ) is murdered by gang rival gang members.He then sets out with his gang The Paper Chaserz,with only one thing on his mind:revenge.

Directed by music video producer-cum-film director Mo Ali,this is a typical grimy street drama but with a dystopian twist. The London accents are as thick as spoiled gravy whether it be in the dialogue or the pumping Grime soundtrack so be prepared not to understand everything the characters say unless you happen to be from london or familiar with the slangand the cinematogrophy is indie in feel.

The setting and acting (for the most part) is realistic, as is the violence.The first half of the film sets the tone with every character from different walks of life contributing to the emotional nitty gritty, marking as close to a political statement on federalism and capitalism as it is ever going to get.

Then the second half plods along unsure of where exactly it’s going so ends up giving the intended audience what they want/love from a film of this caliber; sex, booze, video game graphics and beatings.

Let that not deter you from watching it though as it is a thoroughly watchable film. Even though most of it may come off as a slightly eccentric polictial statement on gang culture, it's through the eyes of the disadvantaged in a world gone literally to hell that is the focus of the film.

RATING:***
DVD FEATURE:three behind-the-scenes featurettes, cast and crew interviews, footage from the premiere, a photo gallery, and a short film and music video.

DVD REVIEW: Kick-Ass

The latest offering from director/producer Matthew Vaughn (Who also produced Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, and directed hit movies Layer Cake and Stardust) and none other than Brad Pitt, is Kick-ass, the new kid-on-the-block for the superhero movie genre.
Based on the comic book series by scottish scribe Mark Millar, the film takes a more realistic(if somewhat goofball) take on the philosophy of and what it means to be a superhero. SO don't expect to see heroes dodging bullets(or cars for that matter) or even having an iota of responsibilty.

Dave Lizewski, the movies main protaganist,played here by Nowhere Boy star Aaron Johnson,is a typical teenage boy, who wonders why no one has ever decided to become a real-life superhero like the heroes in his favorite comic books. His friends at a comic book store tell him that if anyone did become a superhero, they would literally get their "asses kicked". unperterbed, Dave dons a green wetsuit to fight crime.
After a disastrous first attempt his resolve is set and he meets other costumed heroes in his battle for justice, namely Big-Daddy (Nicholas Cage in brilliant form playing a Gun-toting knock-off Batman) and his foul-mouthed daughter Hit-girl(relative newcomer Chloë Grace Moretz)




The whole philosophy behind the rights and wrongs of vigilante justice and what it truly means to be a superhero take a back-seat somewhat to the awesome fight scenes with the antagonists and witty,albeit at times crude, dialogue.

This movie is funny and as true-to-life as it is possibe for a superhero movie to be and a great joy to watch.The humour is sharp at times and is a breath of fresh air after a slew of disappointing super-hero themed movies, proving their may be life yet in the genre.

No doubt a sequel will be (or is already) in the works and we get to see more of Kick-ass' antics in the future. Watch this space.

Rating: *****
DVD Features: Audio Commentary with Writer-Director Matthew Vaughn; Featurette: It's On! The Comic Book Origin of Kick-Ass; The Art of Kick-Ass Gallery

WORLD CINEMA- LA HAINE



This is a French black-and-white film directed by Mathieu Kassovitz(also the director of Gothika and Babylon A.D)
It is about three teenagers living in the banlieues of Paris and all the stigma and bleakness that it entails.

The title derives from a line spoken by one of them, Hubert: "La haine attire la haine!"-"hatred breeds hatred."
It has Vincent Cassell in one of his earliest roles playing the hot-headed gangster-wannabe Vinz. His main goal throughout the film is to kill a cop to gain respect (as you do).




Acting as his foil is Hubert (played fantastically by little-known actor Hubert Koundé), an Afro-French boxer friend who contemplates all the hate he sees around them with a wisdom beyond his years. He represents the more level-headed of the three friends. Finally, primarily to add a little comic-relief is Sayid (Said Taghmaoui)the middle-ground to the Vinz-and-Hubert dynamic.




Over the course of a day, the trio get caught up in a veritable urban adventure. From stealing cars and dealing with skinheads in Paris to coping with near-absolute poverty and the outside view of those living in the banlieus, mostly made-up of immigrant families. The latter is the focal point of the film, and the drivng point for all the characters that eventually brngs them into conflict with each other.

Without spoiling [more] things for you, this is a gem of a film, with Cassel particularly giving an electrifying performance.

Buy it, rent it, borrow it or steal it, because I guarantee you will love this film.

*****

If you don't recognise this guy, you've either never had a television, access to a library, a book-shop of any kind or a childhood(well, a redeemable one at any rate). Yes it is Tintin and his faithful companion snowy and they are due to get a silver-screen re-make helmed by Spielberg himself. The film also has a host of british talent such as Jamie bell(playing our man Tintin in all his quiff-sporting glory),Andy Serkis(Captain Haddock, bit bemused by this choice to be fair), and Simon Pegg and Nick Frost to play the hapless Thompson twins(another head-scratcher alright, but I have faith) also Daniel Craig as Red Rackham.
That probably gives you a clue as to which story from the Tintin compendium they've chosen to make into a movie. Yes it is indeed Secret of the Unicorn.
Another thing to note is that it will be all in motion capture(much like Beowulf) as opposed to live-action or 2d animation. Not sure where I stand on this, gonna have to wait on the day the trailers come out to make a final decision on whether it's a good idea or not it could go disastrously wrong.



This image(left) is a shot of them actually doing the motion-capture, so it all looks professional enough(hopefully it's more Lord of the Rings than Tron kinda effects though, plus that Snowy doll they're using looks a bit freaky)

All in all, although I'm always hedgy around re-makes(see my Scream post) it has the right ingredients for a summer blockbuster and will no doubt rake in a few coppers on opening night with enough interest to warrant the sequel(there has to be a sequel!) but I'm praying to my Atheist-god that He (Spielberg) won't destroy the Tintin franchise like he did Indiana Jones and include aliens for the hell of it. So take my advice Sir Spielberg: Keep it grounded and there'll be no problems!(or I will destroy you)

It's hard to find someone who does not at least half-like the Scream trilogy. It's toungue-in-cheek approach to 90's horror flicks were a milestone in the evolution of horror films today.
Ten years on, and it looks like we'll be seeing a lot more of the Ghost-Face Killer, with producer Bob Weinstein set on making another 3 Scream films. Yes, that's another trilogy they're planning on milking out of this cult-hit. I have many reservations about this, namely being the question "What more can they do?" And that is testament to the superbity(I hope that's a word) of the Scream trilogy and how dangerous it could be to mess with it.
The plotline of the 3 films was all tied up nicely at the end, with no gaping holes left to be filled (except how they're going to use time travel to bring back Randy, still scratching my head over that one, yet still hopeful)
The main premise, so far what we are told on Wkikipedia is that:

"ten years that have passed between Scream 3 and the upcoming fourth film and there have been no "real life" Ghostface murders but have been numerous sequels to the movie-within-a-movie Stab. [Wes]Craven stated on the life status of Sidney Prescott, "She's done her best to move on from the events that occurred in the previous films, even releasing a successful book". Craven said that endless sequels, the modern spew of remakes, film studios, and directors are the butts of parodies in the film. The main characters have to figure out where the horror genre is in current days to figure out the modern events happening to and around them"

Hmmm sounds like an interesting idea, although I'm still hedging my bets whether this is just another "Hey-let's-remake-classic-horrors-and/or-pointless-sequels-to make-money-type-situation.
The Arquettes and Neve Campbell are up for another jaunt so maybe it'll be good. Still I want more info on the storyline and how they're gonna bring back Randy(I'm now betting on a DVD Randy made before he died, and before they were in circulation or even able to get) before I part with my money to go see this film.Watch this space.
Pfft who am I kidding I work at a cinema, I won't pay.

Iron man 2 pulls no punches. Its premise is the alcoholic playboy millionaire Stark’s illness and pressure with being a one-man army. Straight off the bat, Don Cheadle is introduced as Terence Howard....I’m sorry James Rhodes, with a cheeky wink to the audience with the line “yeah it’s me, just deal with it and let’s move on”
The pace of the film would suit a Porsche with the witty banter between downy jr and Gwenyth Paltrow’s characters being just one of the movies highlights.
Improved special effects combine with an increasingly more human side to tony stark and his battle with keeping the Iron man identity, even if it kills him. The alcoholism and blood poisoning mirror Downey Jr’s experiences in real life too and one can’t help but wonder if he’ll end up snorting coke of a prostitutes crack somewhere along the film, kid’s film be damned.
Sam Rockwell does seem a little uncomfortable being on a blockbuster yet he does a superb job as Hammer, Tony Stark’s rival.
He teams up with Russian-accent-spouting Mickey Rourke playing, well to be honest, himself...if he was Russian...and had a weaponised suit.
Scarlett Johansson fulfils her role, eh amply as the requisite eye candy in the lovely form of super-spy Black Widow. I personally don’t think anyone gives two flying figs that she neither looks nor sounds Russian in any shape. Still in fairness, when you can fill a cat suit like that, all regional differences become very blurry indeed anyway.
The end scenes, while not spoiling anything, are awesome. The flight scenes and fight scenes are really well done and almost make you forgive that the final boss fight lasts about as long and as hardcore as a playground duel for ownership of a swing set.All in all it is a decent enough film and after watching it twice I can say its worth the tenner to go see it.
I also won’t spoil anything about the teaser after the credits, which leads into the next hero in the Avengers saga to be given the silver screen treatment....