Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2014) Review

With recent life events, I've been thinking about my childhood and the events and programming that moulded me into the guy I am today. Ask my four year old self what I wanted to be and, apart from telling you I don't talk to strangers unless bribed, I'd likely tell you I wanted to be a Ghostbuster when I grow up.

Needless to say, this didn't inspire me to get into the pest control business, much like that no matter how much I loved the eighties cartoon adaptation of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (or Hero Turtles in the UK because the word 'Ninja' was deemed too violent) I didn't turn out to be a ninja (although I do eat far, far too much pizza).

Why 2015 is the Year You Shouldn't Buy a Wii U

*Copypasta first four paragraphs from previous post*

However, the system has some, shall we say, quirks and Nintendo's practices from the last generation have come back to bite them hard.

This post will look at the various reasons why you shouldn't slap an indeterminate amount of monies on Nintendo's current generation release and perhaps stick with your old console...or new console...or a gaming PC.

Why 2015 is the Year You Should Buy a Wii U

Haha, the Wii U. Look at it, with it's second screen, it's lack of graphical prowess, it's a last generation console that thinks it's a current generation console. How we laughed when the shovelware reared it's head in the form of NintendoLand , how companies dropped support when they realised selling 3rd party titles simply didn't happen and how the everything was falling apart at the house of Mario.

I've given Nintendo's black or white box of tricks and tablet controller a hard-time in private, although on the blog, it's mostly boiled down to how little an appearance the console has made on my E3 posts since it's inception.

However, like the monstrous hypocrite I am and like every console generation I've been alive for, I always end up coming around, although it took far less persuasion than the Wii.

Feeder - Generation Freakshow Review

Ask a Feeder fan if they can pinpoint the moment the band went from one of the UK's most prosperous and consistently entertaining bands to another casualty the old age foe called Father Time and you're liable to get one of three answers. Joe public will ask you not ask them about the fetish over combining their partner's spiralling diabetes and obsession with combining gorging hot dogs and doggy style. You then give them several "famous" songs and immediately, they wonder "What ever did happen to the band that did Buck Rogers?"

The logical fan will say they blame the midpoint of Pushing the Senses; when the band's attempt at capturing Coldplay, Snow Patrol and Xenu forbid Take That's audience with melodic and harmless pop-rock from their previously well established NME Rock/early nineties grunge routes didn't simply not work, but demonstrated every shortcoming the band managed to patch over with their previous four very good/excellent albums.

Then there's the cult follower who can't believe you would insinuate the band is anything other than the bestest, most greatest thing in the whole world and that you must be a total microscopic flaccid dick for thinking anything other, before they and the surprisingly quick mob appear with pitchforks and torches to vivisect you with immediate intent.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part Two Review

Lets get this out of the way; reviewing Harry Potter is as useless as a chocolate teapot because lets face it, you’re either in Camp A: The large, vocal and rabid fanbase whose admiration for Harry and chums can range from playful fanboyism to the terrifying depths and depravity of slash fiction authors.

Or you’re in Camp B: People who sneer and roll their eyes at the thought of the most successful series of books for the past twenty years being the mind-numbingly simple yet overwrought tale of good versus evil which has somehow been accepted into the world of adult adulation and said books have now also become the highest grossing film series of all time.

But avoiding the release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part Two is avoiding the proverbial elephant in the room. It is, as mentioned earlier, the highest grossing film series ever and yes, I not only have seen each film (in a marathon session with the missus prior to this review), I fount them to be relatively decent (despite only reading half of Prisoner of Azkaban as a youngster and being bored to tears).

And it slightly pains me to say this but; Deathly Hallows Part Two is the best summer blockbuster of 2011.

Beginning immediately after the events of Part One, Part Two continues Harry, Ron and Hermione’s quest to destroy Voldemort’s splintered soul and save the wizard and real world from his evil clutches. That’s the film’s plot in its simplest terms but obviously for the sake of time, I’m not going to explain how Daniel Radcliffe’s seven year education at Boarding School and Ralph Fiennes and co wanting to take over the world tie together (tl:dr; Wikipedia it!).

So naturally this being the final entry of a long running series; Deathly Hallows Part Two has the “joy” of not only wrapping up the story in a nice neat bow but also explaining any long running plot threads with a cohesive and satisfying conclusion. Normally, this is where said finale falls out of flavour with fanbase/audience as it can never live up to expectation.

But Deathly Hallows Part Two somehow does, partly due to the original source material being split into two films therefore giving Warner Brothers more revenue…I mean, allow the story to breath and not feel constricted to time restraints. Although the more hardcore Harry Potter fans still might be annoyed that “said character didn’t do such and such”, Deathly Hallows Part Two for the casual fan covers all the major bases and gives a satisfying conclusion to all the major character arcs.

It also addresses one of the biggest criticisms with Part One which was rightly summed up as “the one in the woods”. Part One was a necessary story in the long run but didn’t make action packed viewing. It was a build-up which crammed in some last minute character development and showed the effects and strains of the story on individuals rather than the world at whole.

Part Two however goes all LotR on us with huge, encompassing and visually stunning battles. Although no longer innovative as nearly every historical film has utilised some form of crowd capturing, but what helps is the audience’s attachment to the established setting and the characters involved. Ok, it helps that the film has a few moments of innovation (although as strange as it sounds, we’ve all seen large trolls knocking people off bridges), it’s the story that makes the action all the more exciting.

However, by far the best moments in the film are the intimate character moments. To avoid spoilers, the resolutions of two characters in particular (who you’ll know about when actually seeing the film) may potentially choke you up by playing on the emotions of unrequited love and the idea of death being something to acknowledge rather than fear.

It’s these moments where you can see why the series has become such a juggernaut but at the same time, when it all boils down to it, the story is relatively simple. You can argue that accusing a children’s story for lacking depth in terms of characterisation is about as easy as it gets but the fact the story boils down to good versus evil in such simple contrasts of black and white and where the only character with a shade of grey sticks out like another annotation lacking creativity in this review, one wonders why something like Harry Potter succeeds where others fail.

But if Michael Bay has taught as anything; story means nothing in the big picture. Visually, Deathly Hallows Part Two continues the grey and miserable setting established in Part One to evoke the enveloping evil that has spread across the land and credit to Warner Bros for allowing David Yates to continue his previously established motifs made with his previous three entries to the series. Composer Alexander Desplat returns from Deathly Hallows Part One and continues where Williams and Hooper left off with reimaginings of previous themes and creating sombre and dark themes that suit the picture.

Special effects are non-surprising but at least consistent with the tone of the film. The 3D is surprisingly effective and unlike other films, is not particularly distracting. I feel strange for saying this, but if you’re a fan of the previous films, definitely see this one in 3D as it does heighten the experience.

The principle players after have come along way since the almost farcical debuts in Philosopher's Stone and one can only hope they don’t find themselves typecast as wizards for the rest of eternity. The adult cast’s all star line-up are undeniably great and seem to have a lot of fun revelling in their roles. Ralph Fiennes in particular steals the show as the terrifying Voldemort which is made all the more frustrating as, like the previous films; only his presence is consistent, the character himself appears sporadically but when he does, it’s always memorable.

On the whole, after nearly nine hundred words, this review is pointless as you’ve no doubt already seen Deathly Hallows Part Two several times judging by it’s profit intake or mocked said individuals for giving this over-hyped drivel your precious monies.

Jumping on at this point is relatively pointless as the film is a pretty if very confusing tale which lacks any emotional punch and will show the film’s plot for all it’s simplicity despite going on for eight films.

For fans of the series, the accolade of “the best one” sums up Deathly Hallows Part Two nicely. It wraps up the story in a satisfying way, has a lot of great action and special effects and whilst no doubt lacking a few bits and pieces from the book, it’s as good as a Harry Potter adaptation on the big screen will ever get.

…Until the inevitable reboot takes place. Don’t say I didn’t warn you kids.

8/10 (for fans of the series)

6/10 – (for everyone else)

H

Radiohead - The King of Limbs Review

2011 is the year of the entity. Oh sure, you could say that like every other year there might be one record that stands head and shoulders above the rest, chest pushed out, standing tall like a god whilst it’s contemporary counter-parts cower behind the mountains of shit, hoping for a breakthrough or crack to appear that they can fill the void.

I say this as the aptly titled The King of Limbs, the long awaited release from alternative band Radiohead finally saw release two weeks ago to the screams and adulation of its increasingly devoted/demented fanbase. As always (well, since Kid A), no one had any idea what to expect other than perhaps the greatest thing released ever.

So, now that time had past and we can get past the confetti and deafening screams, what does The King of Limbs bring to the table?

Minimalism, no structure and the least accessible album since Kid A.

So yeah, what was hinted as a heavily acoustic-piano based record with around twenty known songs in the pipeline has evolved into eight (count ‘em, eight) tracks, running just over half an hour and with no real instruments prevalent.

It’s a strange scenario as The King of Limbs has more in common with Thom Yorke’s solo debut than any Radiohead album before it. Opening track Bloom, a scattery, non-structure relative to OK Computer's Airbag begins our strange journey through the proverbial woods. It’s a decent opener, if a bit too long.

From there, the songs get gradually easier on the ears. Morning Mr. Magpie; an Amnesiac left-over which began as a Beatles-esque acoustic pop song has morphed into a nervous, jittery wreck. Little by Little, one of the only radio-friendly songs on the record brings themes raised in Jigsaw Falling into Place from In Rainbows with Yorke’s strangely playful voice telling a lover how they work well together.

The album gets to the halfway point with Feral which in an album of relations, is a much more pleasant descendent of The Gloaming. Although there are vocals, they’re incomprehensible and utilise Yorke’s previous comments on using his voice as an instrument.

Finally, five songs in, we reach Lotus Flower, the first song with a common structure of verse, pre-chorus and chorus and it’s hear the record finally becomes to the same standard of Radiohead we’ve come to know and love.

In the theme of keeping things similar but different, we come to Codex (or Pyramid Song part two). It’s a slow, sombre piano song with the occasional French horn. Give Up the Ghost, a live favourite finally makes its studio appearance, Another slow but sombre song with Yorke’s voice sampled throughout.

The album quickly reaches a close at Separator (or formally known as Mouse Dog Bird). The song starts off slowly but picks up around the middle with lyrics hinting at a continuation (or what isn’t clear at this stage but optimists are hoping for new tracks).

So, upon first listening, The King of Limbs isn’t anything particularly special. It sounds intentionally difficult to listen to and even after an eleven year gap, Radiohead have somehow made Kid A easier on the ears.

If however you’re like me, you’ll give it a second listen immediately and from here, the record sounds different and far more pleasant. It’s a strange experience as the album isn’t droning enough to be classified as drone music but the ambience and brief breaks beyond the repetitive beats and difficult structures are far more noticeable. Eventually after multiple listens it becomes easier on the ears and can be looked in a favourable light.

The biggest problem with The King of Limbs is it doesn’t feel like a band effort. There’s nothing here that suggests the band is working as a cohesive unit and anything here could have just as easily been used as a follow up to Yorke’s solo effort The Eraser.

Another is anyone who’s listened to electronica recently will see similarities between songs on the record and the sound of other artists. Lotus Flower, one of the best songs on the record is an amalgamation of anything Four Tet have released and Feral sounds like a proverbial cover of The Gloaming by Burial.

It’s not the first time Radiohead have done this and to be honest, all music is basically inspired from one another but I can’t help but think, if this wasn’t a Radiohead album, it wouldn’t have received the same adulation and praise and simply would have been left in the dust.

So where does this leave The King of Limbs? Is it the best Radiohead album? Not by a long shot (that accolade will probably remain with OK Computer forever). Is it the best album they’ve released using a laptop? Only time will tell.

Is it good? No, it’s very good but it lacks the organics of In Rainbows or the revolution of Kid A and after a four year wait, it’s only just worth waiting for.

8/10