John Cleese who never stops coming up with great new inventive ideas has now arranged a 15-stop tour of Scandinavia where he will - get this - be alone on stage and talk about his fantastic career for two hours.
He will also have clips of some of his famous films and television shows which will be shown on a big screen. The same clips most people have bought several times over on VHS and DVD and have instant access to on YouTube.
Tickets start at over $100 and Cleese is predicted to make over $100,000 per gig.
People really liked Fawlty Towers - what there was of it. Twelve episodes made over a six year period. Contrast that with Friends that ran in realtime for ten years with 238 (count 'em) episodes all filmed before a live audience after a full week's rehearsals. 238 times.
People liked Wanda too. But it was just another film.
People generally don't like most of the other crap Cleese has come out with. And most importantly: Cleese only did Fawlty Towers in the 1970s and Wanda a few years later. That's it. That's really all.
Ever since then Cleese has been granting interviews where he tells people how amazed he is at his own talent.
Cleese had a cowriter (and for a while there a wife) on Fawlty Towers. But she's not seen anywhere, nor is she ever interviewed on one of these nauseatingly endless recycled editions of Cleese's Greatest Hits.
It's time to put Cleese in the rain barrel where he belongs. It's time to boycott his delusional tour of Scandinavia. It's time to tell him to his face: 'John, you were never that funny or talented but your wife was and the few times you were really funny are so few and so long ago SO WILL YOU JUST SHUT UP AND GO AWAY?'
Wednesday, 17 February 2010
Tuesday, 9 February 2010
It's Tough to be a Chicken
Today is Denny's 'Grand Slam' day in the US. This follows on Super Bowls: from 06:00 to 14:00 they offer free breakfasts around the country. The breakfasts are two eggs, two rashers of bacon, two sausages, and two pancakes. It's free.
Sounds like a bit of charity. Which is timely considering in the US there's really no social system (or any ambition for such a system) to take care of the unfortunate. If there's one thing they're still #1 at, it's homeless people. And do they ever excel at that!
Now check this link out.
http://dennys.com/superbowl/splash2.html
Yeah it's tough to be a chicken alright. It's also pretty tough to be anyone in the Americas if you're not in the US. 910,000,000 people and only 307,000,000 million of them are entitled to call themselves 'American'.
It's chickens, it's turkeys, it's Nicaraguans, it's Chileans, it's Argentinians, it's Ecuadorians, it's Guatemalans, it's Cubans, it's Bolivians, it's Peruvians - the list goes on and on.
They stage coups. They murder elected leaders. Heck - they murder period. They assassinate Salvador Allende and then push in a dictator to replace him, they stand behind persecutions and imprisonments and torture and more and more murders. That's OK. We're AMERICAN!
And we like our chickens and we like our turkeys and WE LIKE OUR OIL! And we like our BANANAS! And we'd really like some good Cuban cigars goddammit but we have to support freedom around the globe right now. We're famous for that, right?
Right.
Then there's @stevez33 (Steve Zebrowski) formerly of Connecticut and now of Florida who is really incensed that the homeless are queueing outside Denny's for a good free meal for the first time in who knows how long. And he asks how they can even know when they don't have houses to live in and probably can't have televisions either?
Then someone suggests they might have found out on Twitter and @stevez33 goes ballistic. They have computers too now? Ugg!
Let's hope he's joking. Let's close our eyes and hope Denny's were also joking. And that the imperialism was also a joke. That rendition was a joke. That all the millions of deaths and ruined lives these people have caused - that it was all just a joke. So we can open our eyes and nobody's ever heard of that gross place called the US.
Sounds like a bit of charity. Which is timely considering in the US there's really no social system (or any ambition for such a system) to take care of the unfortunate. If there's one thing they're still #1 at, it's homeless people. And do they ever excel at that!
Now check this link out.
http://dennys.com/superbowl/splash2.html
Yeah it's tough to be a chicken alright. It's also pretty tough to be anyone in the Americas if you're not in the US. 910,000,000 people and only 307,000,000 million of them are entitled to call themselves 'American'.
It's chickens, it's turkeys, it's Nicaraguans, it's Chileans, it's Argentinians, it's Ecuadorians, it's Guatemalans, it's Cubans, it's Bolivians, it's Peruvians - the list goes on and on.
They stage coups. They murder elected leaders. Heck - they murder period. They assassinate Salvador Allende and then push in a dictator to replace him, they stand behind persecutions and imprisonments and torture and more and more murders. That's OK. We're AMERICAN!
And we like our chickens and we like our turkeys and WE LIKE OUR OIL! And we like our BANANAS! And we'd really like some good Cuban cigars goddammit but we have to support freedom around the globe right now. We're famous for that, right?
Right.
Then there's @stevez33 (Steve Zebrowski) formerly of Connecticut and now of Florida who is really incensed that the homeless are queueing outside Denny's for a good free meal for the first time in who knows how long. And he asks how they can even know when they don't have houses to live in and probably can't have televisions either?
Then someone suggests they might have found out on Twitter and @stevez33 goes ballistic. They have computers too now? Ugg!
Let's hope he's joking. Let's close our eyes and hope Denny's were also joking. And that the imperialism was also a joke. That rendition was a joke. That all the millions of deaths and ruined lives these people have caused - that it was all just a joke. So we can open our eyes and nobody's ever heard of that gross place called the US.
Wednesday, 20 January 2010
Nikitas
UK satellite channel CBS Action started recently. And they're showing the television series La Femme Nikita. To fans of either the original or the US Badhman remake, this might be a bit much.
It's very high tech and actually plays like a soap opera rather than a drama.
The Besson original established the story; the US Badham remake faithfully reenacted the story and added a bit of pizzazz to it.
The story is what it's all about. Those who prefer the Besson original are firmly entrenched in their camp. Those who've seen the Besson original first are more likely to prefer it. Those who by chance encounter saw the US Badham version first are likely to prefer it.
Besson wrote the story. He gets credit for coming up with the stark plot. But John Badham who was tasked with directing the remake took the original to new heights.
All through his version you can see how a bit of reflection improved the original. The scenes are more precise, the music is infinitely superior, and there's an accent on acting not found in the original. Badham's motto has always been 'character, character, character' and it shows here. Moreau was excellent in the original but Bancroft literally jumps out at you in the remake. Parillaud was screechy in the original (and probably got the part because she was Besson's squeeze at the time) but Fonda is punky and sexy and imbues her role with the kind of stuff they taught her at the Lee Strasberg school.
There are scenes in the remake that are absolutely amazing. That when you look at them and freeze-frame them show you what filmmaking is really all about. Watch for the restaurant scene in the beginning where Fonda's character jumps off a stair handrail with one hand for leverage, lands firmly on a dinner table on the level below, then jumps again to the floor all the while she turns around to check on her pursuers. Besson had no balcony and his followup on the scene, whilst dramatic and a good shot, was easily implemented.
There are some really dumb things in the original too. Besson could have done with a proofread and a rewrite. The waiter bringing the bottle of champagne says for no reason: 'Taittinger - the king of champagnes'. Why would he do that? Was Besson getting paid for product placement? It just looks and sounds stupid.
The kitchen chase is also very abrupt and lacks the 'dripping off the walls' tension and pathos of the remake's version. And so forth.
Besson seems to have learned his lesson after Badham remade his classic: he took his crew to New York City for half a year, scouted for good locations for six months, and then brought in Jean Reno and Natalie Portman for the iconic Leon. He even wrote the story to fit around Reno who doesn't speak English too well. It was brilliant. And in this movie the music of Eric Serra actually works. Sort of.
But in Nikita? It's all a pale washout actually. Purists who believe the original is better because 1) it's the original; and 2) it's FRENCH will never get it. Hans Zimmer wrote one of his most memorable scores; the plot is taught and never lets up; Fonda and all the rest are spot on throughout; and some hundred minutes later you realise you witnessed perfectionist movie making.
And it's all about 'character, character, character'. It's not enough to tell actors 'sit here, do this, say that' - you have to get into the characters yourself as a director. You have to make the actors feel secure enough so they don't mind if they fail; you have to discuss their characters with them and get them to bring it all out. For all the action of Badham's Point of No Return, it's actually a movie about character- much more three dimensional than Besson's original.
But of course Besson wrote the story.
And as for the television series currently transmitted on CBS Action? Try Gone with the Wind. It's a soap opera too but it almost has a point.
It's very high tech and actually plays like a soap opera rather than a drama.
The Besson original established the story; the US Badham remake faithfully reenacted the story and added a bit of pizzazz to it.
The story is what it's all about. Those who prefer the Besson original are firmly entrenched in their camp. Those who've seen the Besson original first are more likely to prefer it. Those who by chance encounter saw the US Badham version first are likely to prefer it.
Besson wrote the story. He gets credit for coming up with the stark plot. But John Badham who was tasked with directing the remake took the original to new heights.
All through his version you can see how a bit of reflection improved the original. The scenes are more precise, the music is infinitely superior, and there's an accent on acting not found in the original. Badham's motto has always been 'character, character, character' and it shows here. Moreau was excellent in the original but Bancroft literally jumps out at you in the remake. Parillaud was screechy in the original (and probably got the part because she was Besson's squeeze at the time) but Fonda is punky and sexy and imbues her role with the kind of stuff they taught her at the Lee Strasberg school.
There are scenes in the remake that are absolutely amazing. That when you look at them and freeze-frame them show you what filmmaking is really all about. Watch for the restaurant scene in the beginning where Fonda's character jumps off a stair handrail with one hand for leverage, lands firmly on a dinner table on the level below, then jumps again to the floor all the while she turns around to check on her pursuers. Besson had no balcony and his followup on the scene, whilst dramatic and a good shot, was easily implemented.
There are some really dumb things in the original too. Besson could have done with a proofread and a rewrite. The waiter bringing the bottle of champagne says for no reason: 'Taittinger - the king of champagnes'. Why would he do that? Was Besson getting paid for product placement? It just looks and sounds stupid.
The kitchen chase is also very abrupt and lacks the 'dripping off the walls' tension and pathos of the remake's version. And so forth.
Besson seems to have learned his lesson after Badham remade his classic: he took his crew to New York City for half a year, scouted for good locations for six months, and then brought in Jean Reno and Natalie Portman for the iconic Leon. He even wrote the story to fit around Reno who doesn't speak English too well. It was brilliant. And in this movie the music of Eric Serra actually works. Sort of.
But in Nikita? It's all a pale washout actually. Purists who believe the original is better because 1) it's the original; and 2) it's FRENCH will never get it. Hans Zimmer wrote one of his most memorable scores; the plot is taught and never lets up; Fonda and all the rest are spot on throughout; and some hundred minutes later you realise you witnessed perfectionist movie making.
And it's all about 'character, character, character'. It's not enough to tell actors 'sit here, do this, say that' - you have to get into the characters yourself as a director. You have to make the actors feel secure enough so they don't mind if they fail; you have to discuss their characters with them and get them to bring it all out. For all the action of Badham's Point of No Return, it's actually a movie about character- much more three dimensional than Besson's original.
But of course Besson wrote the story.
And as for the television series currently transmitted on CBS Action? Try Gone with the Wind. It's a soap opera too but it almost has a point.
Monday, 18 January 2010
The Google Hop, The Microsoft Sidestep
What's wrong with our world when leading computer security experts cannot say publicly how much they detest Microsoft products but only reveal their true feelings when communicating in private?
Haiti
There are some people on Twitter who are concerned with Haiti. Like Alyssa Milano. She mobilises people like mad. Then there are people who post things like I just got back from the hairdresser, I had a wonderful time.
There's been a terrible catastrophe on Haiti, you dipshits. How the fuck can you think people are interested in or have time for reading about your stupid fucking two hours at the hairdresser?
It really gets good people how so many arseholes are impervious to what's going on around them. As if they don't care at all.
These people need to be removed from the gene pool.
There's been a terrible catastrophe on Haiti, you dipshits. How the fuck can you think people are interested in or have time for reading about your stupid fucking two hours at the hairdresser?
It really gets good people how so many arseholes are impervious to what's going on around them. As if they don't care at all.
These people need to be removed from the gene pool.
Friday, 18 December 2009
Rage Against Scowl
There's a campaign on against Simon Cowell and the X Factor as most know. The idea is to use a song by RATM to keep the X Factor single from the Xmas #1. Cowell has repeatedly attacked the campaign, insisting it's unfair to the X Factor artists and it doesn't affect him personally at all.
That's a lie. And it also sidesteps the question why such a campaign would materialise in the first place.
The campaign materialised because people are sick and tired of the way Cowell and the organisations backing him have taken 'art' out of popular music. All people get now is schlock - this year it's a horrid cover of a horrid song by a horrid artist that actually is a horrid copy of yet another song. It's all shit and what worries people is that idiots still go out and waste their money on it.
Cowell's and Fuller's shows - the Idol and X Factor franchises - were purportedly to find talent that somehow didn't get recognised by the 'music industry'. The first thing you have to ask yourself is where the music industry fits into a British Xmas #1. There's no promotion to speak of - that's all taken care of by the shows themselves - and there's precious little need for 'plastic'. Today everything is digital. An Xmas #1 in Britain is the equivalent of a successful act with a MySpace page who muster up the fans to fill Wembley Stadium. The record companies have no role in the greater scheme of things anymore. Neither the artists nor the fans need them or want them.
And what 'talent' has been found in all these years? Ask Cowell himself. He says Leona Lewis is the only talent his shows have ever found. Leona's the exception to the rule. Look at all the rest and where they are today. They're nowhere. Does Simon Cowell care? Of course not. A flash in the pan Xmas #1 is still money in the coffers of Sony BMG and Cowell's and Fuller's corporations. The investments in these ephemeral acts is minimal. The revenues gained - especially from the obscenely lucrative voting - are ginormous. It's not about music and it's certainly not about art - it's about making a quick fortune year after year and the collateral damage of the 'artists' exploited for those ends is something none of them bother about.
Which brings us back to the first part of the question - the fact Simon Cowell is lying. For not making a #1 does in fact impact on Simon Cowell and his friends personally. It breaks the bubble. It means the 'magic' of the X Factor and the Fuller 'Idol' shows is broken. It means they're finally exposed for the trash they are. It means contestants have that much lower incentive to try out for next year's competition. It means the lure of the show - instant (but brief) success for whoever wins - is ruined.
Simon Cowell says he's been in this business of reality television pseudo hunts for 'talent' for nine years. That's about enough. It's about time music got back to being the business of sharing art.
That's a lie. And it also sidesteps the question why such a campaign would materialise in the first place.
The campaign materialised because people are sick and tired of the way Cowell and the organisations backing him have taken 'art' out of popular music. All people get now is schlock - this year it's a horrid cover of a horrid song by a horrid artist that actually is a horrid copy of yet another song. It's all shit and what worries people is that idiots still go out and waste their money on it.
Cowell's and Fuller's shows - the Idol and X Factor franchises - were purportedly to find talent that somehow didn't get recognised by the 'music industry'. The first thing you have to ask yourself is where the music industry fits into a British Xmas #1. There's no promotion to speak of - that's all taken care of by the shows themselves - and there's precious little need for 'plastic'. Today everything is digital. An Xmas #1 in Britain is the equivalent of a successful act with a MySpace page who muster up the fans to fill Wembley Stadium. The record companies have no role in the greater scheme of things anymore. Neither the artists nor the fans need them or want them.
And what 'talent' has been found in all these years? Ask Cowell himself. He says Leona Lewis is the only talent his shows have ever found. Leona's the exception to the rule. Look at all the rest and where they are today. They're nowhere. Does Simon Cowell care? Of course not. A flash in the pan Xmas #1 is still money in the coffers of Sony BMG and Cowell's and Fuller's corporations. The investments in these ephemeral acts is minimal. The revenues gained - especially from the obscenely lucrative voting - are ginormous. It's not about music and it's certainly not about art - it's about making a quick fortune year after year and the collateral damage of the 'artists' exploited for those ends is something none of them bother about.
Which brings us back to the first part of the question - the fact Simon Cowell is lying. For not making a #1 does in fact impact on Simon Cowell and his friends personally. It breaks the bubble. It means the 'magic' of the X Factor and the Fuller 'Idol' shows is broken. It means they're finally exposed for the trash they are. It means contestants have that much lower incentive to try out for next year's competition. It means the lure of the show - instant (but brief) success for whoever wins - is ruined.
Simon Cowell says he's been in this business of reality television pseudo hunts for 'talent' for nine years. That's about enough. It's about time music got back to being the business of sharing art.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)