Tuesday, 24 February 2015

WRESTLING!................yeaaaa........TWICE IN A LIFETIME!..................yeaaaaaa

Welcome back to the Randomizer!

You may remember one of the first articles I wrote for my blog a couple years ago, named 'WRESTLING.....yeaaaaaaaaa.....'. I talked about my own status as a wrestling fan, what I loved about the entertainment when I was a child, what I hated about the entertainment and if I could really consider myself a wrestling fan after all what I said. I had decided to wean myself off wrestling for a time to see how I'd do.

Since then, a few things have changed in recent memory. I found myself more interested in what was happening backstage, amongst certain superstars and what the higher-ups had to say. Still not much interested who most of the superstars are, not too much for the product and what some fans really think about the future of the business.

It was when a certain former superstar spoke out against the company, which caught the ears of people, and wrestlers alike. You may remember I talked a little about one star that made good ground for a time, called CM Punk? If you don't, he was involved in one of the more well-feuds against the face of the WWE, John Cena, winning the WWE Championship from him, and one of the more out-spoken men to be in the business. Last year, he took part in a podcast with his good friend Colt Colbana, and reveal some pretty extensive and shocking accusations.

The most shocking being he's read the original article, and thought it was awesome! (disclaimer: might not be true)


At the time, I was quite shocked as many as others, and seriously considered dropping WWE altogether. However after much thought, I have decided to make a decision after writing the main points of this blog, some of which may not surprise, others which may bring you down a notch to question a company's policies, which has perhaps for so many years gone on too long.

So welcome back to WRESTLING........yeaaaa.....twice in a lifetime. (Little reference to the main showcase for the company, Wrestlemania. John Cena had faced off against Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson twice in Wrestlemania 28 and 29, the former being dubbed as Once in a Lifetime. Sorry for the long winded explanation but there you go!).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
·         CM Punk

Let's start with one of the obvious talking points in recent memory: CM Punk aka Phil Brooks. Here was one of the more popular stars of the business, someone who literally 'talked' his way to the top, and spoke out in character against the owner Vince McMahon and his family. In January of last year, he took part in one of the annual 'Big Four' events, called the Royal Rumble. Only a mere 24 hours later, he was literally gone, from the WWE and the wrestling business altogether. This shocked the wrestling community all around the world, surprised that 'The Best in the World', had packed up and left.

For over 10 months, no one had a clue why he had walked out. WWE were silent on the matter, as usual and business carried on as usual. Until he took part in Colt Conbana's podcast, and showed his side of what happened.

He once asked for some time off from a PPV date eight months in advance, for his friend's wedding, telling McMahon and son-in-law/future prodigy Paul 'Triple H' Levesque that he would not be available on that date. However he wasn't successful, and had to work the PPV in a 3 on 1 match against the faction 'The Shield'. He did manage to re-arrange the PPV card, so he and now wife and Diva wrestler AJ Lee could catch a early flight then back again. It's understandable to be angry at having to miss a friend's wedding, but for me it seemed an unlucky necessity to be in a business, that needs you to work for the entertainment of the fans.

He had also been asked to be involved with signing autographs with the convention Wizard World, and requested house shows off so he could take part. Those dates were given to various other superstars and Punk was denied the pay. It happened again when he was again to be involved, only to find his place taken by another wrestler, Daniel Bryan (more on him later), and that he was need on a tour, which apparently wasn't going well. The pay he received for doing that was $5,000 dollars, a quarter less than what he would have received if doing the autograph signings.

Some of his grievances could be considered to be a little picky, which I do understand. However, in this business there aren't always the arguments about money and personal holidays. It can go way deeper than you realised, especially where the term 'backstage politics' is used.

You see when he won his first title back at the July PPV in 2011, somewhere down the line was made a decision for Brooks to lose the title at the August PPV 'Summerslam' and eventually go on to face Paul Levesque at the September PPV after. He had lost that bout for reasons that aren't exactly made clear, but let's just say in the past, whenever Levesque was given a script, he asked the question: 'Am I going over?' Going over means winning against the opponent you're facing. If he wasn't, hell would break loose. Whether that was a resulting factor in facing Punk at the PPV, I can't say personally.

Nooooooo....


Another thing that came to ahead was that Brooks wanted to main event the flagship PPV, Wrestlemania. As a wrestler, just imagine being in a position to be on one of the most famous PPVs in history. Nothing can beat that. To be IN the main event meant a great deal to him. However, in his career, he never got his chance. John Cena as the main man for the company was going to face Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson for the second time, this time with the WWE title on the line. Which I always viewed as utterly pointless since Johnson isn't a full-time wrestler nowadays anyway, but that's not important. Brooks was put instead into a programme with the longest tenured legend of wrestling, Mark Calloway aka 'The Undertaker'. He reluctantly went along with it and lost, and this problem would not stray from his mind for a long time, as he would also face off against another part-time wrestler, Brock Lesnar, and lose.

In another dimension, Alice and her sister Charley were quite successful in their own right, headlining their own Wrestling/Eurovision Event


A bigger issue soon came up with the amount of injuries that Brooks accumulated over time. WWE may be 'sports entertainment', but there are different points in time where one mistake could led to a trip to the hospital, or even to death, as some fans will know to their cost. Punk had torn his knee in a match against Cena, which was causing him problems around the end of 2012 into 2013. With facing an up-and-coming wrestler called Ryback, soon came more injury problems as he took blows to the chest which caused his ribs to break, and eventually after Wrestlemania 29, he took three months to recover from his injuries, but it wasn't enough time when Vince called him back to work with Christ Jericho at the June PPV. Again, he reluctantly went along with it, and here comes the kill joy.

At some point in 2013, he discovered a lump down his back. Despite the WWE doctor Chris Amann thinking it was a fatty deposit...you figure that out, it simply grew and grew. Along with the injuries he developed, Brooks was anything but happy, when soon enough the lump became the size of a baseball and purple around the time when Royal Rumble 2014 was about to start. The doctor refused to cut it out because he was in the rumble match itself. In the process, he managed to receive a concussion, and as he went backstage, still had been refused to have the lump removed.

When he was asked to take a concussion test and a urine test the day after,  that was the last straw. He talked with McMahon and Levesque, airing his grievances at the pair of them and finally left WWE. After advice from his wife, he went to see her doctor in Tampa, Florida, and found out the lump was in fact a full blown staph infection, promptly removed that day.

If you're feeling even a little pissed off, I'd understand. I felt the same way after learning that piece of information. In fact, this was the main point in which I did consider dropping wrestling altogether. However, that was my gut reaction at the time. WWE has issued a statement saying that they take the health and wellness of their talent seriously, and there are those who have leaped to Amann's defence, saying he is a credit to the profession, namely Smith Hart, a member of the legendary wrestling family, The Harts. It has been announced that from last Friday, Amann has filed a lawsuit against Brooks and Colt Cobana for their claims, saying that they were untrue and painting him in a false light for their words, even going as far that Brooks had never showed him a lump, nor ignored requests if he had one to begin with. In addition, WWE have released a video of Brooks at the Royal Rumble with no defining lump on his back.

At this present moment, it's hard to get a grasp on whose points are better made. WWE has always courted controversy, accidently or even purposely, and has remained silent on a few matters. It's hard to not agree with Brook on some points. Yes, injuries are a nightmare in a business such as professional wrestling. Your body is wound down on multiple occasions whenever you fight, and the risk of death for art is always there if something goes completely wrong. Creatively as well, it can be frustrating when you are put in a position to lose matches, and facing the same opponents over and over, not feeling as if you will be seen as credible by fans, or even by management themselves who will have their own ideas in mind. Heathwise, it should be noted that some doctors can make mistakes over and over again. In a business like professional wrestling, those doctors must be knowledgeable and accountable if a lump is either just a fatty deposit, or an actual life-threatening infection or otherwise, to consult management if anything is up.

But there are times when people have called him out, especially Ryback who pretty much called Brooks a liar when Brooks said he broke his ribs on purpose, and didn't want to get into a war of words about the situation. Vince McMahon even stated on a different podcast with 'Stone Cold' Steve Austin that he would be willing to work with Brooks again given the opportunity, and wished him the best.

The problem remains is really, damned for whose side you stand with. I do understand the frustration behind Brook's motivation to outright quit, but maybe it's best to take some of what he says with a pinch of salt, for now. The time now, is to wait.

Nope...still waiting


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

·         WWE Deaf on all fronts?

So next question, which has irked some sections of WWE fans all around. Does the WWE listen to its own fans? The quick answer would be to say either: 'NO! NO! NO! NO!', or 'WWE has its head up its own double standard candy ass!', or even 'CENA SUCKS'. The long answer involves a certain star that everybody loves, and I do like up to a point: Daniel Bryan, and his beard. Seriously it is a bloody nest, you could fit a city of birds in it, look!

The birds are away at the minute, Bryan does ask for rent you know


But I digress.

Ever since he was in a tag team with the monster Kane nearly two years ago, Daniel Bryan's popularity has increased threefold to become one of the most popular wrestlers in the company, starting off an ever more increasing 'YES!' chant. Eventually over the course of a few months, he was storyline picked to face John Cena at the 2013 Summerslam for the WWE championship. Despite winning that match, in storyline he was not put over well by the company, having the title removed from him twice in the space of four weeks, and then put into a different feud altogether. Until that is last year's Royal Rumble.

Despite not actually taking part in the Rumble match itself, fans took it upon themselves to voice their displeasure at Bryan not being part itself. They WANTED him to be part of the Wrestlemania main event. However, management decided that returning part-time wrestler and now Hollywood actor Dave Batista would be the one facing the current champion Randy Orton, to the fans almighty displeasure. Vince McMahon is rumoured to have said that 'Randy Orton vs Batista is going to be the biggest Wrestlemania event ever'. Daniel Bryan was going to be facing Irish wrestler Sheamus instead at the event.

Seems a reasonable man doesn't he, fella?


But soon enough, the fans hijacked the show whenever they could, letting the company hear their displeasure at an event that probably wouldn't have meant anything in the long-term. Management caved in, and after working two matches at the main event itself, Daniel Bryan held the WWE Championship on the night. I do remember seeing the show itself on the TV and really getting quite tense at how Bryan would actually win out, and raising both hands in the air after Batista submitted to Bryan's finisher. The crowd finally had their champion.

However, a few months later, Bryan had lost all feeling in his right arm and subsequently had to have surgery, and once more lose the WWE Championship. But the fans didn't forget about him at all, and he made his return early this year, announcing he would be in the Royal Rumble. The triumph was short-lived, as he was eliminated, to the fan's shock. An upcoming new 'face' of WWE, called Roman Reigns has been pushed heavily in recent memory, and won the main PPV match, to face the WWE Champion Brock Lesnar at Wrestlemania 31.

The main thing WWE, or in Vince McMahon and probably some family members eyes, has in effect always visualised is the model of a superhero: Someone to always do the right thing, to never give up, and kick ass when they need to. Oh, and looking as if you have muscles is a prerequitsite. Sound like anyone familiar?

Why, hello there


John Cena has been at the top of the company for almost a decade, since he won his first WWE Championship at Wrestlemania 21. You may remember from my first article that one of the criticism I had about Cena, that I said this is not an original character. For some of a past generation, legendary superstar Hollywood Hulk Hogan was the first superhero, who made sure to eat his vitamins and say his prayers, to never give up and kick ass when he needed to. With muscles included. Nowadays Cena is slowly being wound down, to be replaced by the up and coming Roman Reigns, or at least that is the main plan in place by management.

The problem is, over at least 2 decades ago now, that superhero look was thrown out of the window, thanks to steroid and sexual allegations leading back to 1992, forcing McMahon to drop that look he, for lack of a better word, craves, and focus on younger, slimmer, more technical-styled wrestlers, marking 'The New Generation' era. Men like Bret 'The Hitman' Hart, Shawn Michaels and The Undertaker carried the business on their shoulders for the three years. But even their popularity was superseded by one man who gave the company a new light, especially when other wrestling businesses became competition.

'Stone Cold' Steve Austin still gets an f***-load of cheers, even today when he's retired. In fact he was never supposed to be touted as the most loved person in his prime. He was supposed to be one of the most hated person, attacking people whenever he felt like it and taunting the main good guy Bret Hart at the time. But after he won a 'King of the Ring' tournament in 1996, he cut a promo against Jake 'The Snake' Roberts, about how he thumped his bible and preached about John 3:16, which led to these words: 'Austin 3:16 says I just whipped your a**'. Thus was the turning point where fans began to cheer for the bad guy, and over 9 months later, became a fully-fledged face character.

In effect over the years, the heroes WWE fans have loved come in all shapes and sizes, and there have been times when McMahon has seen the potential in some wrestlers, to push them into the limelight, and some of that can be due to the fans loving some of the antics put across. But for most it seems like the image of a man who LOOKS capable of beating the crap out of you, with muscles galore, will stay at the forefront of WWE's image, at least with McMahon still in charge for the time-being.

For management, Daniel Bryan is not the person they view as the 'top guy' material. In a weird way that could mirror the real-life situation, they had him booked to lose the title and rematches at different points, and just moved him down the pecking order while focusing on Brock Lesnar and John Cena's rivalry. People can see that as someone who management really don't have as much interest in, as say Roman Reigns, who LOOKS and is pushed as someone who can beat the crap out of people. I have heard the possibility that WWE did that intentionally, pushing Bryan down so they could make him out to be not interesting. Whether that's true or not, I can't say.

I wouldn't say that WWE management doesn't listen to their fans, rather more that they don't WANT to listen. If they have a great deal of faith in pushing someone to the top, they will do all they can to do that. However, some of the promos Reigns has done in recent memory...have been comparing wrestlers with fairy tales...and Loony Tune characters. I'm not even kidding. I don't doubt his skill as a wrestler, but can you imagine a wrestler whose going to be at the top come Wrestlemania, really spouting off fairy tales and speaking like Bugs Bunny with a carrot? It's...kind of off-putting. As a personal view, I've always thought if Daniel Bryan was that popular, he should be getting more exposure. He certainly has the talent and skill to be one of the top people in the business. However, having some understanding how WWE works and their effective choosing of people, that will not be the case, at least in future.

Suffering Succotash.....what's up doc? 



Speaking of how WWE works...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

·         Backstage Drama

If you thought the drama WWE puts out every week is good...pfft come on, when was the last time something interesting happened? But seriously, what goes on inside the ring sometimes doesn't hold a candle to what happens backstage.

Over the many years, there have been so many stories that have unfolded about what happens to different superstars, what is the mentality of the locker-room, and how that mentality affects the wrestlers in the WWE in general. It would be ridiculous to list all the number of stories that have appeared over many years, much as I have done that now. But what I will do is list some of the ones that have made some people cringe and show some understanding about how such problems have arisen.

Problems? What problems?


In a recent podcast with 'Stone Cold' Steve Austin, Vince McMahon said that the roster he has, at this moment point of time, are not as ambitious, and have not reached for the brass ring like John Cena has done. The four stars he did mention as attempting to reach out included Roman Reigns, but as for the others, he feels that because they are 'millenials', a different group of people compared to those of Steve Austin's era, whom he believes will reach for the brass ring, and fail, they will be afraid of being exposed.

It's interesting to listen to those words, because you get an idea that McMahon has no faith for wrestlers under his wing. You could sort of see the point he is making, especially after what I talked about last time involving The Monday Night Wars with WCW. There is no true competition to WWE at this point of time. But delving deeper into what you read up on backstage, there are all sorts of apparent problems.

There is an argument that McMahon has created a toxic environment in his own company. For instance, there are some people who have certain influence about how things will run. Cena for instance has used this kind of power a few times, like at Summerslam 2010 when he beat the last 2 remaining members of the Nexus, and rendered their run over before it could really get started. However, I have heard that he now thought that was something he should not have used his influence for, how he instead should've listened to fellow wrestlers Adam 'Edge' Copeland and Chris Jericho to allow them to go over. Whether he has continued in that manner, or used some other power recently, I don't know.

But there have been times in the past where another certain wrestler, named Randy Orton, has been controversial at times concerning other people, and fans alike. He has talked in public about former divas wrestler Kelly Kelly sleeping around with many wrestlers, has had to take some anger management classes, main evented PPVs after it was found out he was using performance enhancing drugs and not suspended, using backstage influence to knock down wrestler Kofi Kingston's career after he screwed up a move live on TV, and made a former diva's life hell after she apparently didn't know who he was on her first day. Yet he is still with the company, seemingly rated highly among people in the business, having lost a title match back at Wrestlemania. Apparently he has mellowed out overtime, but still it's quite considerable how much Orton has got away with over the years he has been there, only really being punished for drugs and not much else.

Don't look into his eyes...he will end you


Of course, it might be rude not to mention how Paul Levesque came up through the ranks. He was part of a group known as 'The Kliq' in the 90s, along with Shawn Michaels and two main others, Kevin Nash and Scott Hall. They used their influence to push up who they felt was deserving, and keep back those they thought were undesirable to be at the top. They went separate ways when Nash and Hall jumped to WCW, but Levesque and Michaels stayed at WWE and created an interesting bubble to work in, getting into conflicts with Bret Hart and, by extension, The Rock. I would say that Levesque's growth is partially due to the considerable friends he made, and partially to being a good worker in the ring. There are always rumours attached to him, like what apparent influence he had from 2002 to around 2004, how being his friend will get you far, and perhaps a relationship with a certain 'Ninth Wonder of the World', which may never be revealed for a long time.

Nooooo.......


Nowadays, Levesque is in control of WWE's development show called 'NXT', which is getting better reviews more so than the main flagship shows are doing at the moment. However, I have read that he, like the past, has his own little clique of wrestlers coming up. As far as I know, all of them have wrestling experience before they signed up to the development show, and receive special treatment in regards to the other wrestlers on the show. Still, it makes you wonder how much some wrestlers should be given, in respects to their fellow man and women. By the way, Levesque is now approving of a few of the female wrestlers on the roster. Whether they will get a push up to the flagship shows remains to be seen.

So is there a toxic-like environment in the business? In one way, yes there is. Having a good number of people who can simply influence the outcome of a match by saying something, isn't a good thing for those can be victim to such problems. The example of outcomes shown do paint a picture about how people higher up can take you down in one swoop and you may never build yourself up again, thanks to those who can afford the protection, or have built themselves up to the top in the first place. Especially when your own boss says you don't have the balls to grab the brass ring available, it can hit pretty hard.

There is one word that does bring up some sort of defence: respect. That one word can help to push yourself up a little bit, to show respect to those wrestlers who have come before you, who have put their own bodies on the line in all sorts of matches down the years. Take Mark Calloway 'The Undertaker'. He is still winding down his career at the age of 49, wrestling only once a year now at Wrestlemania. Yet his career is not to be sniffed at. He has partook in cage matches, hardcore matches, even been in a ring surrounded by fire. All for the entertainment of the wrestling fans. In that regard, respect for those who have pushed themselves up the ladder.

Another thing is a possible alpha male mentality, to not allow yourself to pushed over and show how far YOU are willing to go for yourself, to make yourself into a brand so to speak, not just onscreen, but off-screen too. That ambition may take you down so far for many years to come, allowing you to have a glittering career, if you so chose to be in the business. However, at times it can feel that pushing yourself to your best can only go so far. Ultimately at the end, it's up to management who they will decide to push into the spotlight for better or worse. If as well, politics comes your way, you'd do well to be careful to fight for your spot, otherwise if you don't speak up, you won't get your say, or worse.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So in the end, will I stop being a wrestling fan because of these things?

I suppose in one honest way, I kind of have. As I said, I don't really find the product of WWE at the minute interesting, or engaging to a point, at least for me. Don't get me wrong, there are some parts I did have a vested interest in. Like last year with Wrestlemania 30 playing, despite having my predictions about how the results will go, I was still shocked and happy at the major results, like Daniel Bryan winning the championship, and The Undertaker's undefeated streak finally beaten by Brock Lesnar (in a poor match. Seriously, it was just poor). But really, the only way I really follow it is reading up on results on wrestling news sites. There will be sporadic moments when I will watch it on tv, but other than that, I don't really watch it anymore.

In terms of understanding the various backstage stuff to a point, I can see the different points of what the company is trying to do, and let's be fair there will always be fans who will disagree with the product yet will still watch it. But I don't necessarily see change happening on the horizon in future, in terms of competition or change of product. McMahon will obviously still appeal to children and adults, that's his target market, always has, always will be, with the years 1997-2008 being an exception somewhat. For me, there are a lot of issues that need to addressed backstage, not just with egos and influence, but wrestlers needing to speak up for what they think is wrong, and not remain silent on matters that will more or less concern their careers. If they want to move into bigger things, they need to show that however much they can, and at least try and kick ass if they can.

The thing is, I don't really find much substance in WWE itself. I just feel that, as a product on-screen and off, there is just little there for me to be going on with. Personally, I'm not a fan of this alpha-dog mentality, where one person is above the rest, and the amount of influence that can come with certain wrestlers. While I do understand that you should fight for your spot, it doesn't really feel like an equal business to go with if you are forcibly pushed down the ladder, and you feel like you cannot speak up. It's a dog-eat-dog world, and it seems for the moment, if one ever enters into wrestling, they need to know how to play.

If WWE will continue the way it has done for the last few years, management are perfectly entitled to do as they see fit. But now, the only reason I'd ever keep going back is a sense of nostalgia for the times past. But I'm not going to get that through reading up wrestling sites, or even YouTube videos. What I have to me is the memories of those events, in my head. That's really the best way of looking at it really.


So perhaps then yes, WWE is really simply not for me anymore. I've had some great times watching all that's come before me, but as the product continues on, I can just see how it will remain the same for at least a good while, at least in my imagination. WWE may be forever, and it's time may be now, but for me, my time...is up.

Oh we lost another fan, how will we ever cope?.....................................................................................................................

Tuesday, 27 January 2015

Top Ten WORST Films of 2014

Welcome back to the Randomizer, and Happy New Year!



I hope you're all well and enjoying yourselves so far in 2015. I am well for the most part, despite being relatively safe. I say relatively, it's more random laughs and awesome days with friends. How we all put up with each other I don't know!. Now back to business, and back to last year. It is that time again, and the annual Top Ten films of 2014.

2014 was actually a pretty good year for films and me. There were some nice surprises to behold, like the really good Guardians of the Galaxy, The Lego Movie, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier, along with the World of Middle-Earth finally coming to a close with The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies. Wow, Marvel had some good films for once! For me, I finally watched some films that I was under no circumstances whatsoever told I had to watch, like Alien (awesome), Elf (awesome), and Maleficent (good, not great). Two of those were suggested by a certain Beadle. That's right, Jeremy. Even though he's dead.

However, I'm feeling a little bit of making a twist this time around. Since I did the best films I've seen all year for the past two years, I thought it appropriate to shake things a little bit with the WORST films I've seen last year, with the best film I've seen at the end. Some of these films you will definitely recognise from the heavy promotion they had in advertising, some you may not from how little promoting they received, and some 'so-bad-they're-good' films.

For me, watching bad films can be as interesting as a good film. They can make you feel 'what the f*** is this?', and give you an idea about how a film should NOT be made, even if you have the intentions in the world. But on the other hand, there can be certain films that don't make you FEEL anything whatsoever, and your face probably went from this : (-_-)...to...(-_-). That will be par an investigation into my list of bad films today.

So what will this list show? Well, let's find out!

(warning there will be spoilers for some films)

------------------------------------------
Number 10: Maleficent



First and foremost, sorry Alice Beadle! It could be a lot worse, Guardians could be in this slot. Then you'd have every right to disown me.

This probably shouldn't come as a major surprise for anyone since I did a review about it last October, and I'll try not to go too overboard to talking about it.

Maleficent is a reimagining of the classic Disney film Sleeping Beauty, turning the original villain of said character into the protagonist of the story. At the start when she's only a girl, she meets a boy called Stefan, and forms a close bond with him. However, he eventually doesn't see her anymore due to the 'lures' of the human world, and when the King tries to kill her, he steps up to do the act (becoming King as an incentive) and sees her again, but can't go through with it, instead cutting off her fairy wings. Maleficent is pissed when she learns why he did it, and vows revenge, bringing it to the Sleeping Beauty story, with the twist that she does become the Princess Aurora's hero with 'True love's first kiss'.

I'm not going to say that this is a god-awful film, far from it. I like the relationship that develops between Maleficent and Aurora, as a sort of mother and daughter thing, and how the two affect each other throughout their lives, Maleficent coming to regret her actions later on. Aurora here is an improvement from the original film, just a bit more interesting, though not that much. I liked Diaval as a character, I found him to be not overbearing in terms of being advising despite being a slightly generic character in that field.

How much I think it's a good film, it is effectively wasted potential. Here we have a Disney Villain, considered to be one of the best ever that the franchise has put out, and despite having a more interesting backstory, this film really doesn't give that much thought or logic into the other parts of the film. Like with King Stefan, a character that's pretty much near as blank piece of paper as you can get, especially where the supposed 'lures' of the human world are meant to be. Could be being a fan of Justin Bieber for all I know. The fairies as well, while a little funny, are poor comic relief in terms of being very stupid, and come off as probably being worse than the original fairies to start with. Lastly, some people have said that Maleficent losing her wings is symbolic of rape. I can see that in a way, but to me, it's just her wings getting cut off. There's nothing really there for me to say 'Oh, that's rape. You horrible man'. That's really the main problem with this film. There are a lot of ideas thrown in, but none of them are really developed apart from Maleficent herself, which is a real shame.

Oh...what an awkward situation. I'm sure your friend Alice agrees too. 


That said, this is perfectly a satisfying movie for a weekend. If you want to see it, I'd say do it. Thought maybe just for the one time. There's not much else to pick up on. If you want to see a full depth review, go to the side bar, and find October 2014.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number 9: Beautiful Creatures



Beautiful Creatures is a bit interesting, yet can be so over-the-top in some places. The story follows...actually to be honest it's....(urgh) a Twilight rip-off. The story follows Ethan Wate, an Southern American drawler, who dreams about a girl that is a new arrival at school, Lena Duchannes. She is secretly a witch who can control the weather and create illiusions, living under the watch of her uncle Macon, both soon revealed to be 'Casters', powerful witches and wizards that either choose two sides in a neverending war: 'Light' and 'Dark' (isn't that just the way?). Ethan and Lena fall in love with each other, and eventually face the apparent destiny of Lena being inevitably chosen for the 'Dark'.

Strangely enough, despite being one of the many 'Young Adult' films still being released, I actually didn't mind this film that much at all. It was pretty fun, though entertainingly over-the-top at the best of times.

One of the things that do bug me when I see the film are the Southern accents the actors put up when they're speaking, especially with Emma Thompson playing the main villain. The film is set is South Carolina, but I feel the accents are really clichéd, they come across as so un-natural and more in your face than they need to be. Also in seeing how way over the top it is, there's one scene I vividly remember: After the two have an argument over Lena feeling sorry for herself and Ethan eventually snapping her out of it, when she goes to kiss him they knock into a wooden billboard and then lightning strikes it on their side. That...just made me burst out.

But I don't think it's a terrible film by any means. It had my attention in spates for how Lena was cursed: Her ancestor brought her lover back to life with dark magic, and that was a very bad idea, allowing to her turn fully dark and kill him, placing a curse on all the women in her family. Not sure it makes any sense thinking about it now because some female characters are part of the Light side in the family, so...huh? Another thing I did like was how Lena wanted to protect Ethan by erasing his memories of her so she didn't have to kill him in order to break her curse. It does have a nice flow of continuity after the big good/evil battle, until Ethan remembers her when leaving town to go to university, passing the struck billboard.

I would say again, just give the film a one-off. It's not very big and plenty of plot holes all around, but if you fancy a good old laugh at how so over-the-top it is, rent it out.

Thor's aim was really off then


-----------------------------------------------------------------
Number 8: The Amazing Spider-Man 2



Well this is quite a big one. I had liked the first Amazing Spider-Man film for the acting, particular Emma Stone and Sally Field for their portrayals of Gwen Stacy and Aunt May respectively, though the plot was a bit off-putting for my liking. The second one? Erm....Everything is pushed up a bit more further.

Spider-Man faces 'the biggest challenge of his life', as he has the prospect of being haunted by Gwen Stacy's father of getting her involved in his crime-fighting life, Harry Osborn coming home with a hereditary disease and looking for a cure, and saving Max Dillon (an abused wreck) who finds the time to be bitten by electric eels, electrocuted and blown up. All on his birthday. I'm glad my birthday was nothing like that. It was drink, bowling, films, and friends! Couldn't ask for anything better.

The good stuff is still really good. Sally Field is still awesome as Aunt May and Emma Stone still gives a really good performance as Gwen. Jamie Foxx and Dane DeHann as Electro and Harry Osborn deliver pretty good performances on their part. There is the neat little twist that Norman Osborn does actually die in the film, although with the blantant Green Goblin imagery that might be a little distracting, and the only time I did have a proper laugh was when Peter ParkThat's kind of where the good stuff ends pretty much. Boo.

The bad stuff is pretty much multipled by about ten. The characters aren't neatly as developed so much, especially with Electro. He's just made out as an awkwardly social guy with no real explanation why he is turned out this way, and turned evil just because the character itself is evil. Despite Jamie Foxx's acting ability, there's really nothing of substance there. Another problem is how bigger the film becomes as it incorporates all sorts of future plans for sequels, with the dreaded 'Sinister Six' being pushed up to take precedence...without making much note of it except for fan service. It's not too much of a bother. What is however, is what happened with Uncle Ben's killer? Was he ever caught? Who knows, and the film doesn't care to show. Wah-wah. Also, Rhino as a third villain was pretty pointless. No need for him to be in the film at all.

By the way, you may remember from my Marvel vs DC article, about how the sequel may have something in store for Gwen Stacy. Well...it did.

Just a head wound, everyone survives in Marvel right.....RIGHT?! 


To be honest, I did see this coming from the first film, whether she would eventually be axed off. But it was pretty sad to see her go, and maybe would have better for a third film (that is, if there is a third film). I don't think what helped were the little hints that gave it away in the first place, especially with the costume being shown. Dead girl walking much?

This film has been claimed by some people to have completely destroyed Spider-Man once more thanks to Sony wanting to push themselves into the light where Comic Book Franchises are our generation nowadays. It is really bad I grant you, but it's not over the border of terribleness just yet. I don't really blame Sony for wanting to try and jump on the band-wagon, but the way they've done it in this film just made things pretty worse for them. Despite being well-filmed, the overall execution really needed an overhaul. Now there's talk of another reimaging of the entire franchise once more. As if things could turn out bad a third time...something I will come to later on.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 The Human Centipede (First Sequence) (7)



Oh dear. Just...those two words pretty much sum up the shock value this film has.

Two American tourists called Lindsay and Jenny get lost on way to a party (I think) in Germany, but get a flat tyre and seek help in a house belonging to Dr Josef Heiter. However, the Doctor drugs them and uses them for an experiment, including a Japanese tourist called Katsuro, in connecting mouth to anus to create one singular digestive system, hence: The Human Centipede.

When I watched this film for the first time, I was borderline horrified at what this film was showing. It starts off as something that looks rather clichéd, as the American tourists mobiles have poor reception and forced to seek a house while arguing with each other a little. But then it goes into something a little bit more clever, as the girls are drugged and thus we are led to bear witness what happens over the course of 90 minutes. The only thing that literally comes really out of nowhere is when Katsuro says that he regrets treating his family like crap, thinking the experiment was due punishment for such treatment, and commits suicide. Well that seemed pointless to bring at such a time, especially when they were just about to escape. Idiot. I did feel like a little kid actually, cheering as two policemen do attempt to arrest him for hiding something from them, though did became annoyed because they died, killing the Doctor in the attempt.

Actually ages after I watched it, I have come to think that it might NOT be a true avocate of horror, relying more on the visual of the centipede to actually gage a reaction from its audience, instead of focusing on the characters and other hints. In one way, you can see why of course. Film is a visual medium after all, and the image of an actual Human Centipede is disgusting to say the least. However, it is a point that after that, nothing is really developed. We don't see what makes this doctor tick, other than probably being a reference to the infamous Nazi Doctor Josef Mengale (look up at your own risk). The three other characters are obviously more concerned with trying to escape, but that goes tits up because Katsuro gains conscience near when they have a perfect chance to escape.

Does that mean it is that bad a film? In one way yes it is bad. At the end, I was more focused on being horrified than thinking 'yes it's horrific but it was absolutely brilliant in many aspects'. There wasn't really anything much else that stood out for me personally, just more on the centipede than anything else. That more or less was the intention, for something inhuman to edge its way into your brain.

If this little review has put you off the actual film, I don't blame you in the slightest. If you do want to give it a go, be afraid. Be very afraid.

I watched it once.....it was actually ok........mummy?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number 6: Red Tails



This was the first one I saw in 2014, and it's just silly. What would you expect from George Lucas nowadays?

The film follows a group of African Amercian airmen in World War II, known as Tuskegees, who having endured racism in training and destroying trainlines in Italy, finally have a shot to fight the Luftwaffe in helping the Allied landings in Anzio. They are eventually pushed up to protecting bombers (meeting the most ridiculous German actor ever), but also have their own personal demons to fight, including alcoholism and hotheadedness.

For all the good intentions it has in showing racism and the difficulties faced before Black Americans, the way everything seems to be executed is in a 'Hollywood' fashion. You know what clichés will appear on-screen, you know you're going to be rooting for the good guys, and you know everything will turn out roses and flowers in the end. It doesn't make for interesting cinema, just another popcorn movie if you're feeling really bored one day. The only thing I enjoyed seeing and not in a good way, was the most ridiculous German pilot called 'Pretty Boy'. Seriously all his dialogue was pretty much 'ACHTUNG' with teeth clenched. That's one of few reasons you should this.

Another thing is I really don't remember how the acting was, although the star power this film has is quite impressive, with the likes of Cube Gooding Jr, Terence Howard, David Oyelowo before his turn as Martin Luther King Jr, even Walter White has a cameo somehow in this. In fact, I can't really think of the impression this film left me with, apart from an over-the-top bad guy. Perhaps some films can feel like a draining experience, that leave you nothing really noteworthy to FEEL good or bad about.

That's something I'll come back to later, but Red Tails is something probably to just leave altogether.

Hey I still have SHIELDs number on my phone, maybe if I call them for help...Oh wait that's right....damn it.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Number Five: I am Number Four



I will be honest I had seen this film before, but not all the way through. Only picked it up in the middle to see how bad this film really was, and it did not disappoint in said field. So I decided to watch it all the way through to get it over with. Strangely enough it still didn't disappoint.

Based on the first book of the same name, we meet John Smith or Number Four on the run from the all-conquering race called the Mogadorians. He and his guardian Henri flee to Paradise, Ohio, where they set up home again and John insists on having a proper education at school. There he meets Sarah Hart, a photographer who slowly takes an interest in him. Despite Henri's eventual suspicions that people are catching on, John does not want to leave having finally found someone he likes. However, the Mogadorians are on their trail, as is another Number.

Again, I don't practically remember this film well. Perhaps that due to certain films having a standard to conform to certain conventions. It's the same with Beautiful Creatures, that some novel adaptations will simply not work out on the big screen. I am Number Four falls into that category. It's a predictable, stupid film that has really nothing going for it. Nothing is really explained about why the Mogadorians are trying to kill him and the other numbers, not that I remember anyway. In fact, many films like this just chuck logic out of the window, perhaps just making these for the fans of the books.

That doesn't help those who haven't read it, so already the audience is lost. I didn't really care about what happened in the end, because I wasn't pulled in either time I watched this for the most part. It's just not interesting to garner much attention too, just a daft film. If you enjoy it, I'm not going to say you should hate it otherwise.

'Are you sure we're doing the right thing with these cliches, Henri? I want to be true to the books'

'Just think of Twilight'

'......ROLL CAMERAS!



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Number 4: Spider-Man 3



Yes, I have only seen Spider-Man 3 all the way through this year. Shhh. I had only seen the ending of it beforehand many years ago, I had read the plot on Wikipedia, I had seen critic videos taking the piss out of it, so many times I had not actually properly seen it all the way through, and have a valid opinion on it. Now I do!

Spider-Man 3 is the last of the original trilogy directed by Sam Raimi, following Peter Parker and his proposal to Mary Jane Watson. However everything is thrown together at once, with the introduction of Gwen Stacy, Eddie Brock, the misguided Marco Flint aka Sandman, Harry Osborn coming for revenge and finally a certain space object simply called the symbiote. After finding out the Sandman actually killed his uncle, Peter Parker connects with the symbiote, becoming a darker version of Spider-Man, and almost killing Sandman, until he hits Mary Jane and is horrified by what he becomes. He removes the Symbiote, only for it to latch on Eddie Brock and are you beginning to see how much stuff there is in this film?

To be honest, my over-riding of this film was boredom. Yeah, Spider-Man's 1 and 2 at least left me with a credible impression. Spider-Man 3 after everything people really complain about, the mistakes, and controversy of events between Raimi and producers, really was just a borefest. That might be from all the stuff I had watched prior to the film all the way through, and it's probably not very helpful. The characters aren't very interesting, especially Eddie Brock who's just...meh. Gwen Stacy in this version isn't very engaging, and the conflict between Peter, Mary Jane and Harry is pretty much nonsensical.

Honestly the one scene that did get something out of me was when Flint rises up after he becomes Sandman, seeing what he finally becomes and still deciding to do whatever he can to save his daughter Penny from her illness. That scene was just fantastic to see his expressions as he slowly realises what he has become, even after he drops a necklace with Penny's picture inside and eventually manages to pick it up despite his arms now disintegrating thanks to him being trapped in a particle accelerator. One scene out of a film, think about that.

I used to like the Spider-Man films a lot when I was younger. Now to be honest, the good stuff is far and few in between for ALL of them. I didn't exactly feel drained by this film but there is definitely a few things missing from them. I sometimes like to think of the Spider-Man series as two different universes, like some comic books have likened to do in recent times. None of them have really endeared to me at all, which is kind of sad when you think about it. One question I will ask myself in future is: why should I care anymore if Spider-Man is just going to change over and over again, which is the likely outcome in future.

Thank you for mourning Mr. Garfield



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Number 3: Plan 9 from Outer Space



How many of you have heard of this interesting little film? None of you? Ok, I'm willing to give a little back-story on this piece.

Years ago, there lived in Hollywood a film-maker by the name of Ed Wood. He created films that considered by anybody who has seen his work to be the worst ever made. THE worst, perhaps on par with Uwe Boll today. In 1959 came what might be considered to be, ironically, his magnum opus for it is the most remembered, and maybe most laughable piece: Plan 9 from Outer Space.

If you want a taste of how bad it is, here's one bit of dialogue: "...One thing's for sure. Inspector Clay's dead, murdered...and somebody's responsible'. I am not joking. That is literally the taste you get in this film, and there are plenty more shots, dialogues and really bad special effects that would make your just cringe and burst with laughter, such as the switching from day to night or vice versa, whenever Bela Lugosi makes an appearance on-screen (who had died during early production stages) and quite bad-looking UFOs that shake just before the camera as they float among a graveyard, and just the acting, the acting itself is just so half-assed, just watching the 1950s talk show host/ actress Vampira walking along hands held out, I couldn't help but take the piss, it just looks so horribly bad.

Thinking about the plot, I think you'd give up in the first second of this film, and I wouldn't blame you. Its aliens who want to stop the Earth from destroying the universe with their weapons development, by means of resurrecting corpses and killing off the humans that way. Yeah it's that painful. You'd think this was just a rip-off of 'The Day The Earth Stood Still', and you could be right I don't know.

So why isn't this film more higher on the list, not even at number one?  Well honestly, there are films that you could argue are considerably worse than this one, which I come to later, but first upon watching it, there are a few shots I did like the first time of watching, of just people pointing out to the UFOs as they go along in their cars, which might look suspiciously like stock footage anyway, considering it cuts back to shaky UFOs in mid-air, which rises the questions why are they in broad daylight? This question and any others you have will never be answered. Ever.

I would definitely say give this film a complete miss, it's really not worth your time. However if you love watching bad films and enjoy the cringe-worthy moments for their complete bluntness, get some popcorn out. You will absolutely be amazed at how bad this film can be. I had some enjoyment laughing at how bad this legendary film is, but it's still amazing crap, as Dad would say.

Other graduates in this honor are Justin Bieber, Brett Ratner, and Nigel Farage


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number 2: I, Frankenstein



.......hahahahahahahahahaha....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....(ahem) . Where do I even start?

I, Frankenstein stars Aaron Eckhart as the title monster, rejected by his creator and kills his wife before leaving for the Arctic, the creator dying while following him. As he buries him, he is then attacked by demons for some reason, until he is saved by two gargoyles, who were created to do battle with the demons in the never-ending struggle of Heaven and you've lost interest already haven't you? Don't worry I did too in about 5 minutes after this film started.

To be honest, watching the trailer for this film made me think how bad this film would, and I went to see it in the hopes of being entertained by how bad this is. You will not believe exactly how entertainingly bad this film really is, and how forgettable it can be. The dialogue is just extruciating and laughable ('Decend in pain, demon'), the plot is barely there in terms of explaining where the film is set, or why things happen, and just hardly anything was worth remembering, except for that one piece of dialogue. Despite the star power of Aaron Eckhart and Miranda Otto, even Bill Nighy, none of their characters made a favourable impression on me.

In fact, it was so boring I actually started to have a conversation during a quiet moment in the middle with my close friend Dani. That's how bad this film is. A film should try and grab your attention with something noteworthy, at least something to give you so you can say, '...actually it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be'. I, Frankenstein did none of that for me, it only made me laugh at how poorly made this film was done, how it fails to achieve anything in its 90 minute frame time to garner my interest.

The funny thing is, I'm not particularly angry at it for being stupid, it's just very harmless and doesn't give you anything in return for its service, just a few laughs and utter boredom. Although saying that, I have thought it's like the Plan 9 from Outer Space for my generation, just for the sheer badness of it. Although to be fair, it didn't make me laugh out as much as that movie did as that film was bad. Hence why it claims the Number 2 spot.

Decend into obscurity, film

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number 1: The Black Cauldron



Oh dear, and I use those two words greatly in every sense of meaning. I had some interest in watching this film because I had seen a partial amount of the beginning and middle parts, but hadn't came back across it until I was watching a certain internet celebrities take on it, and decided to again give it a go myself.

The Black Cauldron is about a boy named Taran who lives on a farm with the enchanter Dallben, and a pig named Hen Wen. This is no ordinary pig, as it has the power to whenever it dips its nose into a bucket of water, to see what is happening throughout the world. One day, Hen Wen shows that the evil Horned King is looking for said cauldron, and Dallben fears he would use Hen Wen to find the cauldron, so sends Taran with her in tow to safety. Thus through many mistakes and redemption, they defeat the Horned King in the end and go back to the farm.

This...this...this was the film that did absolutely nothing for me. I was so bored watching this film in every sense of the word, I even spoiled it on purpose because I don't care about it. I'm sorry for that, but trust me this is a waste of time. Compared to the other Disney films that I had watched during my little phrase last year, The Black Cauldron was the WORST of the bunch I had brought, more so than Sleeping Beauty.

The voice-acting was ok, but not even John Hurt could in anyway help with that, because I felt there was nothing of substance there, it all seem bland. The animation was just ok too, despite being not very impressive half the time. The characters, I don't really like at all. None of them left as much as a whisper on me, not Taran, not the princess for the day, not the pig, they all gave me the collective reason to say: meh.

So why is this number one? Because I hardly felt a thing while watching it. You could argue that though there are bad films that do make you laugh a lot, you still laugh. If a film is really bad, you might just remember it more for how it made you feel. If a film doesn't make you feel anything at all, no laughter, no anger, no happiness, no sadness, than what is the point of that film? What do you gain from watching a film that doesn't give you anything memorable at all, instead keeping your face like this: (-_-) all throughout. I, Frankenstein at least gave me something to laugh at. The Black Cauldron gives what could be the worse thing ever a film can do:

Make you feel nothing from start to finish.

That is why this film is Number One.

Well...at least I tried


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(sigh)

So after all the bad stuff I watched this year, what film stood out as being the best of the year for me? Believe me, this wasn't an easy choice. There was Alien, which I fucking loved upon first time watching it, X-Men Days of Future Past with Bryan Singer back to form (and should really stay haha), Frozen (best Disney I had seen for a good while), and Terminator 2: Judgement Day (just was so freaking awesome), and The Jennifer Lawerence Show aka Mockingjay: Part 1. Well, after a quick think and plenty of cups of tea inbetween, the one film that really, really, really stood out for me was the first film I wanted to see last year:

Gravity


Sorry Jennifer! I know I missed the trinity....come on let's hug it out. I'll get you a Burger King?



Directed by Alfonso Curon, the film follows 90 minutes in the life of Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) as she suffers through her first mission the fun times of a cloud of debris that destroys their space shuttle, being helped by George Clooney through to the International Space Station to protect themselves, and eventually coming to terms with her own personal tragedy as she has to find a way back to Earth, and subsequently back to life.

I have never seen a film that has some amazing shots, interesting characters and the best use of 3D ever. Yes, some of them are blatantly on the nose especially with some 'rebirth' imagery, but the way they are executed is just exquisite, and the way the screen is filled up right at the beginning and close to the end is beautiful to behold. I won't give away what is in those shots, for you should see it for yourself. But trust me, they might take your breath away.

The acting was really good. I had not seen Sandra Bullock in a film properly for a long time, but here she does a great job of carrying the film as the only person who doesn't just keep your attention as the main character, she keeps your attention as a person, someone who is dealing with her tragedy by placing herself literally away from the world. George Clooney was pretty good as her commander, very composed in his position, yet never talking down to her. Everything in that area just felt sublime.

The music...my god, what pieces composed by Steve Price. He had won the Oscar for his work, and you can very well hear why, especially at the end. Everything just fitted perfectly into the drama placed on screen, helping to enhance the story that little bit more, with the bombastic drumming ringing all around, the echoing 'awwwwwwww', the slow building up, the use of violins, I could just go on with listing the instruments used, but I won't. This is one of my favourite pieces of music EVER placed on them. If you ever see this sequence, whether on YouTube, I hope to GOD this music does not leave you anytime soon.

Gravity is one of those films that should NEVER be viewed at home. I know that sounds really weird, but really think about it. Films shouldn't just be on the small screen. They have a home in the cinema, where they can truly belong, not just on the TV or on Netflix. I know I collect the DVDs and Blu-Rays like many others, but the difference is you can feel a lot more in the cinema than you do in the comfort of your own home. Just seeing it on the big screen was more than enough to take in the grandeur laid before you, and in 3D no less. Perhaps even in IMAX no doubt. But this is one is definitely something to take hold in the cinema if you have the chance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's it for the New Year everyone. I hope you enjoyed my little rants!


See you all in February!