Saturday, 5 March 2011

Anthology of Idiocy VI

Yup, everybody's favourite anthology series is back once more! We kick off this month's edition with an review for the Humphrey Bogart starring, Raymond Chandler adaptation The Big Sleep. Regarded as one of the finest pieces of film noir ever made, this movie seems to have few detractors. I did find this one though...:
Aptly named- this was a BIG sleep (Oh ha bloody ha. What a great title. I certainly didn't expect that witticism to come up...)
This movie was appropriately named (Yeah, you've done that bit already), as I kept falling asleep (Do you have narcolepsy?). My sister had to keep waking me up. It made NO sense whatsoever ( I was never ACTUALLY asleep, my sister kept pinching me, so I didn't miss anything (Thanks for clearing that up. But you obviously weren't paying much attention. It's complicated, but it does make sense)). Usually I like to give a breif summary of the plot- the only problem is, there was no plot, so that's hard to do (There was a plot. Marlowe tries to resolve gambling debts for a client, which then leads to him solving a murder. There, done in one sentence.). It was very, very, very boring (In what way was it boring? Because there wasn't giant robots attacking each other every few minutes?). I don't see why these other people who have reviewed it like it so much (Because it's beautifully shot and acted with an engrossing story is part of the reason...), but I know a lot of people who feel the same way I do (Are they your teddy bears?). And I have no idea why this was called the big sleep, truthfully, even my sister, who liked the movie (for whatever reason (It's because she got the brains in the family...)) was stumped (The 'big sleep' is a euphemism for death you moron.). The people who named it were just asking for people to fall asleep! (Oh piss off and jump in a well.) Augh THIS WAS THE MOST BORING 2 HOURS TIME OF MY LIFE (You must have had an exciting life). STAY AWAY FROM THIS MOVIE!!! (Or not) Don't say no one warned you! (But no one warned me!)
Here's a crap review from of one of the greatest American films of all time (and a personal favourite to boot), Martin Scorsese's Taxi Driver:
You talkin' to me?
A film classic (apparently (No, not 'apparently'. It is. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, it is regarded by professional critics and filmmakers as a cinema classic.)) about a Vietnam veteran who becomes a taxi driver and then lets himself be broken down by the misery and the meaninglessness of modern society (Pretty much yeah.).
Seen with Year 2000 eyes, »Taxi Driver« does not have a great deal of appeal. It has purely historical value. (What? Are you suggesting that society has stopped being miserable and meaningless? It is as potent now as it ever was. Replace Vietnam with Iraq/Afghanistan and it could have been released half an hour ago.)
The best things you can say about this film is the very beautiful photographing and cameraing, plus that it is interesting to watch very young Robert DeNiro's and even younger Jodie Foster's already then great talents (Well, those are things that are great about it, but there is so much more to be enjoyed here. The story reflects the troubled America of the post-Vietnam era, and the alienation felt by many of the war's protagonists. It also highlights an America that is often forgotten about, the prostitution, racism and gun-culture that make up the underbelly of society. And that's without mentioning Scorsese's direction. How Scorsese failed to get even a nomination at the Oscars while Rocky's director won is a mystery...). You also get glimpses of Harvey Keitel and Jeff Goldblum (Harvey Keitel is indeed in it as a pimp, but where did you  get the idea that Jeff Goldblum was? He isn't. Not even in a cameo.).
Do watch »Taxi Driver«, 'cause it is one of those classics that you have to have seen. But don't expect too much. (I suppose if you don't expect much you will be absolutely blown away, but if you have high expectations they will be more than met. Well, if you have at least half a brain they will be anyway.)
Here's a review for one of America's greatest novels now, Mark Twain's Adventures of Huckleberry Finn:
I do not understand the status of this novel (Really? You don't get that it's superbly written, easy to read and a stand against the racism that was so prevalent at the time of its publication?). Firstly, it's racist, but we know that already (Apparently not. It isn't racist. It is the story of a racist boy, who realizes over the course of the novel that racism is wrong. How is that racist? Some of the characterization of black people can be a little stereotypical, but it can be argued easily that even this was a subversion of the stereotype.). What really gets me is the weird language that one is expected to 'learn' in order to get the story (The 'weird language' is the dialect of the place and time in which it is set. It is one of the very reasons it is held in such high esteem. And it's pretty easy to understand really. I bet you're one of those troglodytes that complain that Shakespeare isn't written in a modern style. Myb ths wld b mr up yr st...). And lets be honest, it is a story for children (That'll be why its studied at Universities then...) with little subtle comment (Little subtle comment? Are you deliberately being a moron, or does it come naturally?) and no depth of character...everyone is 'Twain' (Yup, it's not like Huck Finn changes as he goes on his adventures. No. He stays exactly the same. As does Jim.)! Do not waste your a Graham Greene novel instead. (What? Graham Greene is also one of the greats of literature, but his and Twain's books are hardly interchangeable. Now fuck off and fall from a pier...)
Well, I hoped you enjoyed that. I shall see you soon!

1 comment:

  1. Loved your "mb ths is mr up yr st" bit. That probably resonated quite well with this particular idiot.


Related Posts with Thumbnails