Twin Films–The Definitive List Part #5

The Day After (1983) Vs Threads (1984)

These two are quite possibly the earliest examples of twin films I have come across as it seems to be a phenomenon that didn’t really kick off until the late 80s. Both films are about communities dealing with the aftermath of a nuclear war and both were made around the same time comfortably qualifying them for twin film status. Now given the grim subject matter, you'd think you couldn't best the Day After which puts a pretty fine point on how fucked we'd all be but Threads somehow manages to be a notch darker still by pointing out how truly fucked we'd all be. It's been a long time since I've seen either but I remember the documentary style and general narrative of Threads being somewhat comparable to The War Game (1965) which was banned for 20 years. The Day After despite being dark didn't descend into the absolute hopelessness that Threads dared to portray, although everything was a mess - The Day After seemed to offer the hope that some form of civilisation could conceivably emerge from the chaos. Threads definitely did not offer this and the last scene of that film said it all really. I should also mention Testament (1983) which is another film released around the same time dealing with the same theme.

IMDB Rating: The Day After 6.9, Threads 8.0
Verdict: Pretty harrowing films on both counts given that this could realistically happen. Threads bests the Day After. Similarity Rating 8/10

Gone in 60 Seconds (2000) The Fast and the Furious (2001)

Perhaps I'm stretching it again with these two but they do have a very similar feel in a fast cars and nitrous oxide sort of way. Maybe they shouldn't qualify because Gone in 60 seconds is a remake and The Fast and The Furious came out over a year later. In any case I've decided to twin them because of the similarities - criminal gangs with supercars, police hot on their tails and at the end for one reason or another the police officer pursuing them decides to let the criminal go because of mixed loyalties. True the plots of these films aren't that much alike - in 60 Seconds the objective is to steal 50 cars in one night whilst in Fast and the Furious, the objective is for an undercover cop to infiltrate a gang of street racers who are suspected of stealing expensive electronic equipment. The common theme remains though - criminal gangs and fast cars.

IMDB Rating: Gone in 60 Seconds 6.1, The Fast and the Furious 6.1
Verdict: Think I preferred The Fast and the Furious more which may explain the soon to be 5 sequels. Similarity Rating 5/10.

No Strings Attached (2011) Vs Friends with Benefits (2011)

Two romantic comedies released relatively close together that both offer a commentary on the 'fuck buddy' theme and how it leads to complications. It's almost cliché so it's maybe not majorly surprising that films with this theme would turn up at some point, but weeks apart? Chic Geek will disagree with me here but Friends with Benefits has to be a better film because it stars Mila Kunis whilst No Strings Attached stars Natalie Portman. Sorry but there is no contest here, Mila Kunis is more attractive by a country mile and it therefore stands to reason that Friends with Benefits is a better film.

IMDB Rating: No Strings Attached 6.2, Friends with Benefits 6.8
Verdict: Even IMDB agrees with me. Similarity Rating 7/10

End of Days (1999) Vs Stigmata (1999)

Two films which dealt with Christian mythology and deeply religious themes released in the same year just months apart. One stars Arnold Schwarzenegger in a fist fight with Satan and the other features an atheist showing signs of the stigmata - both highly likely occurrences in my opinion. I watched Stigmata once at the cinema and End of Days in bits and pieces and didn't particularly enjoy either film. Both star Gabriel Bryne in a major role, so I'm guessing it must have been confusing when trying to remember his lines that year.

IMDB Rating: End of Days 5.5, Stigmata 6.1
Verdict: Stigmata I would say but neither is particularly great. Similarity rating 6/10.

1492: Conquest of Paradise (1992) and Christopher Columbus: The Discovery (1992)

It's not surprising that 2 films about Christopher Columbus were released in 1992, after all it was the 500 year anniversary of the voyage and movie studios naturally decided it was cash in time. So these films are really twins to the letter since they're both biopics about Columbus released at exactly the same time and are about the same voyage. Never seen either one but every list I've seen twins them. The Discovery stars Marlon Brando, Tom Selleck and a very young Catherine Zeta-Jones whilst Conquest of paradise stars Gérard Depardieu as Columbus and Sigourney Weaver as Queen Isabella. Whilst Discovery concentrates more on the voyage itself, 1492 deals with the effect the discovery of the new world had on the native Americans. 1492 also features a fantastic soundtrack by Vangelis who has a nasty habit of composing music that becomes far more memorable than the film it scores.

IMDB Rating: 1492: Conquest of Paradise 6.3, Christopher Columbus: The Discovery 4.4
Verdict: I'm gonna go with IMDB on this and say that 1492 is a reasonable film whilst Discovery is shocking. Similarity rating 8/10.

Madagascar (2005) and The Wild (2006)

Kids films frequently make this list much to my chagrin because I've never usually seen any of them. I think the chic geek should offer some input on these as he has children and has consequently been forced to endure watching films that no sane male would ever consider watching. 

So anyway both films star a troop of animals in a New York zoo that for one reason or another go to Africa  and find that the wild isn't all it's cracked up to be. They're both computer animated kids flicks, that's it. Twin films in every sense.

IMDB Rating: Madagascar 6.7, The Wild 5.3
Verdict: Madagascar is superior according to the consensus held by adults crazy enough to watch it. Similarity Rating 8/10

Capote (2005) Vs Infamous (2006)

Want to know how similar these two are? Consider this conversation that actually took place between screenwriter Douglas McGrath and film producer Bingham Ray regarding McGrath's screenplay for Infamous:
McGrath: Good news, I finished my script!
Ray: I know, I've got it on my desk!
McGrath: Uh, no you don’t, because I have it on my desk.
Ray: No, it's right here, Capote by Dan...
McGrath later commented “It’s very strange, I mean, generally I have my finger on whatever the opposite of the Zeitgeist is. What are the chances of two scripts about Truman Capote going out at the same time?” This would kind of lend credence to the idea that the collective unconscious stumbles across at least some of these ideas at the same time. Both films focus on the life on journalist Truman Capote who whilst researching his novel 'In Cold Blood' develops a friendship with one of the killers Perry Smith leading him to become conflicted in wanting execution for the prisoner - the only sort of closure which will do his book justice. It seems a little eerie that two films about a relatively obscure subject matter landed on Ray's desk at exactly the same time.

IMDB Rating: Capote 7.5, Infamous 7.1
Verdict: After 2 years of working on his script, McGrath has never seen the TOM (The Other Movie) which the voters on IMDB have rated as a slightly better film. I'd cry, I really would. Similarity Rating 9/10

The Cave (2005) Vs The Descent (2005)

What can be said about these, well both are horror films, both about a group of potholers exploring a cave system and both films feature monsters or flesh eating predators of some description, oh and both were released at the same time. Did I miss anything? Ok, so they were directed by completely different studios in completely different countries but the similarity of the plots might lead someone to believe that both films were working from the same brief. Neither film features anyone fantastically famous, the cave has Lena Headey who is vaguely noteworthy but from all counts is a terrible film. The Descent on the other hand is supposed to be a fairly decent horror film that is well worth watching. I've never seen either because horror films aren't really my cup of tea and tend to have a bore me to death kind of effect but I think given some of the reviews I've read, Descent might be worth a watch.

IMDB Rating: The Cave 4.8, The Descent 7.4
Verdict: The Descent has it. Similarity Rating 7/10

Jurassic Park (1993) Vs Carnosaur (1993)

I feel guilty listing these as twins because I feel that a twin film should be roughly equal in box-office stature or at least budgetarily comparable to its twin which is clearly not the case here. Both films are about the resurrection of dinosaurs from ancient DNA or in Carnosaur, a mishmash of the DNA of modern organisms to resurrect them which I suppose is vaguely plausible on some level. Jurassic Park was a critical and commercial success and one of the biggest blockbusters of all time, Carnosaur was none of these things. Jurassic Park starred Sam Neill (Awesome), Jeff Goldblum (Awesome) and was directed by Steven Spielberg (Douche) whilst Carnosaur had nothing comparable in terms of casting or directorship. Nevertheless I've twinned them because of the dinosaur resurrection theme.

IMDB Rating: Jurassic Park 7.9, Carnosaur 3.3
Verdict: Would probably be stating the obvious. Similarity Rating 5/10.

STILL MORE TO COME IN PART 6!

Pink Mountaintops - While you were dreaming

Twin Films: The Definitive List Part #4

It has occurred to me that a few more twin films have popped up on cinema screens in the last few months which has prompted me to write another article on the subject. There are also several more that I’ve been made aware of recently so it’s only fair that they too should make the list. Further explanations for this phenomenon include two studios wanting to capitalise on a current trend and word of mouth spreading to other studios about the plot of a film subsequently leading to a duplicate. So far in attempting to build a replete list of these films, there are more than a few which stretch the boundaries of what can be considered a little and also quite a few that I’ve never seen so can’t offer any kind of comment on how similar they might be unless they are obviously similar from the synopsis alone. I’m still in two minds over whether to include these in the list or just stick to the obvious ones.

Skyline (2010) Vs Battle: Los Angeles (2011)

Two films about aliens invading Los Angeles, both released within a year of each other, Hollywood surely not? Yep these two are twins, without a shadow of doubt. Both films are also repeatedly compared to video games, not only that but the same video games (Quake, Gears of War, Halo, Crysis etc) so I can only assume that was part of the twin films original brief that both scripts were based on. It’s difficult to know what else was in that brief since both films lack something often considered important in movies, a plot. In Battle: LA, we do have Aaron Eckhart’s chin which is good because I don’t think the human race would be safe without it. In Skyline, we have… some really famous people and a film which is undoubtedly one of the best films ever made, so much so that you should put your pristine movie reputation on it and tell us all that it’s going to be one of the best films ever. The major disparity between these two films is in the budget, Skyline had a budget of just $10 million whilst Battle: LA had a budget of $70 million and it really shows. In Skyline the digital effects are well done, but Battle: LA takes to computer gaming movie experience to a whole new level with the whole Cloverfield / Independence Day / Black Hawk Down hybrid thing that it had going for it.

IMDB Rating: Skyline 4.5, Battle: LA 5.9
Verdict: To get a film rated 4.5 on IMDB, you truly have to be an artist. Battle: LA for the win. Similarity Rating 8/10.

Melancholia (2011) Vs Another Earth (2011)

Well wouldn’t you know it, two invading planet films released just months apart. Eerie how similar the ideas that get made into movies at the same time are. So both films feature the sudden appearance of another planet right next to Earth and both are also used as a plot device in emotive family drama. I haven’t seen either film yet so can’t comment on the similarities beyond what I can garner from reading reviews and watching the trailers. But from all counts I think these two are correctly classified as twin films since the similarity of the concepts is very much in line with what you would expect. Beyond this though and from the reviews I’ve read, both films take their own very different philosophical routes with the ‘Nibiru’ concept given. Another Earth starts off with a sense of despair and builds to a hopeful ending whilst Melancholia takes the other road towards hopeless doom. Hopeless doom has to be for the win for sure and as I understand it DOOM is how the film ends and the director has made no secret of that fact. So aside from the films spinning off in different directions of their own, I’m reasonably sure that both will have their own charm and that in all likelihood I’ll enjoy both films. Melancholia has Kirsten Dunst which is automatically a win and big name stars such as John Hurt and Kiefer Sutherland which should drag in the numbers. Another Earth has unknown Brit Marling and William Mapother who played a character in Lost I really really hated but will probably nevertheless work its own magic on people.

IMDB Rating: Another Earth 6.9, Melancholia 7.9
Verdict: Too early to say, probably Melancholia is superior but Another Earth may have value of it’s own. Similarity Rating 8/10.

Entrapment (1999) Vs The Thomas Crown Affair (1999)

I just really never thought about these two films being twin films, never thought of them at the same time or in the same context until I came across an obscure site listing them as twin films. I’m still not 100% sure they should be listed as twin films but the similarities are obvious. Both films feature a master thief, both films also feature someone who is tasked with capturing that thief and in both films the person tasked with capturing that thief falls in love with said thief. Ah bollocks, ok they’re twins alright. So which is better? Well Zeta-Jones was the hot new commodity when Entrapment was first released but we never hear anything of her anymore. Rene Russo whilst no Zeta-Jones always makes a pretty good leading lady and has a decorous style of her own which very much compliments Pierce Brosnan’s Bond-esque debonair suave bastard billionaire playboy style. Sean Connery is amusing in Entrapment even if they did give him the most cliché name in the history of cinema, I mean Robert MacDougal lol. But really which is the better heist film? I’d have to say Entrapment just for the unrealistic antics around the Petronas towers. But which is the better film? Thomas Crown just because the story caught me more. Both films end in roughly the same place as well. Wonder how many more twins like this have slipped under the radar? Addendum: I’ve been told that these shouldn’t count because Thomas Crown is a remake but the similarities  between the two make me wonder if Entrapment isn’t also a loose remake. Possible?

IMDB Rating: Entrapment 6.1, The Thomas Crown Affair 6.7
Verdict: Entrapment is glitzier but Thomas Crown is a more down to earth, feel good affair which ultimately I preferred even over Catherine Zeta-Jones. Similarity rating 7/10

United 93 (2006) Vs World Trade Centre (2006)

2006 was the year Hollywood finally felt confident enough to approach 9/11 so it’s not surprising that a number of films about that came out this year. I’m not entirely sure they should be considered twin films but they obviously have a similar theme and were made by different studios, curiously enough around the same time. There is also another film in this mix – Flight 93 which from all counts is overly melodramatic and not a great film. I haven’t seen WTC so can’t offer an opinion on how good it might be, Hollywood has a tendency to overdo the melodrama sometimes, especially when a film is based on real life events and it’s not difficult to imagine that WTC might fall into this trap. United 93 refreshingly didn’t and was a well told recreation of the heroism and events that led to crash of flight 93, this film was especially gripping and has you rooting firmly for the passengers despite the fact you know what their ultimate fate is going to be.

IMDB Rating: United 93 7.8, World Trade Centre 6.1
Verdict: United 93 is an excellent film, doubtful that WTC is anywhere near as good based on IMDB ratings. Not really that similar but studios did release them around the same time. Similarity rating 5/10

Happy Feet (2005) Vs Surf’s Up (2007)

I find it cretinous having to include this on any list of films I write about but they are without dispute twin films, so like Finding Nemo, and Antz and a Bugs Life, I must include them if I am to do this list justice. So again not having seen either of these films, I promise you I haven’t! It’s difficult to really say how similar they are. Happy feet is about a penguin who can’t sing but can dance and Surf’s Up is about a penguin surfing championship. Both are animated feature films about penguins that were released around the same time consequently both are twin films. Happy Feet to its credit does seem to have some big names doing the voice acting including Elijah Wood, Brittany Murphy, Robin Williams, Hugh Jackman, Nicole Kidman and Hugo Weaving. Both films would also seem to be a cash in attempt on March of the Penguins which was released in 2005.

IMDB Rating: Happy Feet 6.6, Surf’s Up 6.9
Verdict:  Gotta be honest I don’t care although the ratings seem to suggest that Surf’s Up is slightly better. Similarity rating 7/10.

Green Street (2005) Vs Football Factory (2004)

I don’t know whether Green Street was an attempt to cash in on the success of the Football Factory or not. If it was, it wasn’t a very successful one. Although Green Street did pull in more cash than the Football Factory, it didn’t accomplish this feat by much. I’m not sure what the need was for two films about English football hooliganism and I’m not sure how the plot of Green Street even qualifies as remotely realistic. A Havard dropout joining the Chav underworld of football hooliganism. I mean you see some far fetched films come out of Hollywood about aliens and the end of the world but surely this is taking it too far? Also how the hell did such a low budget film as Green Street manage to get Elijah Wood in it? Elijah Wood and no-one else of note whatsoever. Both films also feature Millwall FC fans. Mysterious.

IMDB Rating: Football Factory 6.8, Green Street 7.5
Verdict: Green Street but Football Factory is a well made film as well. Similarity Rating 8/10.

Scary Movie (2000) Vs Shriek (2000)

I liked scary movie, it was a stupid but ultimately enjoyable film. It has to date spawned 3 sequels which were also insanely enjoyable in their own way. The fact I’ve never seen the film they were originally spoofing also doesn’t detract greatly from my general enjoyment of them since I pretty much get the idea. But really Scary Movie was hilarious – especially the scene where the serial killer gets stoned with his victims. It also features Anna Faris – the gorgeous dumb blonde who reminds me of someone who works at KFC. She seems to be pretty much typecast into this role which might explain her appearing in all of the three sequels and the fifth film which I believe is also on the cards. I’ve never seen Shriek and had previously believed it was a spoof of Scary movie – a spoof of a spoof before finding out that it was like Scary Movie, a spoof of Scream. This qualifies these films as twin movies since they were both released by different studios and are both parodies of the same original film. I’m not 100% confident as to how similar they actually are but I’m guessing pretty similar since I’ve seen them listed as twin films from other sources.

IMDB Rating: Scary Movie 6.0, Shriek 3.7
Verdict: Scary Movie by a country mile, any film which gets 3.7 on IMDB has to be truly shocking. Similarity rating 6/10.

Stir of Echoes (1999) Vs The Sixth Sense (1999)

Hadn’t really thought about these two as twins. Not entirely sure they qualify but people seem to draw a lot of parallels between the two, they were both released months apart and both feature a main character who can talk to the dead and must do so to solve a crime. I don’t remember Stir of Echoes spectacularly well since the last time I saw it was probably the year it came out, I watched it on a VHS rental from the shop, that’s how long ago it was. As I recall Kevin Bacon puts in a solid performance and the movie was really quite creepy. The Sixth Sense was the first time I watched it, similarly creepy and the twist ending was at the time something everyone raved about. It is also arguably the only decent film M. Night Shayamalan ever directed, took the box office to the cleaners and earned Shayamalan the coveted ‘Do what the fuck you like’ cheque which he subsequently bollocksed up with every film he made from that point onwards.

IMDB Rating: Stir of Echoes 7.0, The Sixth Sense 8.2
Verdict: Sixth Sense is better and had an original ending which has since been copied ad nauseum but Stir of Echoes is a gem of its own. Similarity rating 7/10.

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

Not a bad effort at all from director Joe Johnston here. He has in the past directed earlier favourites of mine including Honey I shrunk the kids, Jumanji, The Rocketeer, October Sky and Jurassic Park III if I really stretch it. I have to say I really quite enjoy the retrofuturistic angle he employs, a very similar angle to the one he employed in the Rocketeer. He also really knows how to cast a leading lady for these types of films, in the case of the Rocketeer Jennifer Connelly who realistically couldn’t have been cast any better. In this film Hayley Atwell and even though I haven’t the faintest idea who she is, she was perfectly cast. These World War II noir type films he directs also seem to carry a heavy sense of nostalgia for the imagined America that was which even has me missing the old days. Chris Evans nails his role as Steve Rogers and doesn’t come across as the cocky arrogant character of his previous films such the Fantastic Four and Sunshine but rather as the archetypal American that the world wishes was really true. Hugo Weaving was good as Red Skull even if he did sound too much like Victor Meldrew at times, enough that I was expecting him to shout ‘I don’t believe it.’ any road. Still it’s almost as if every bad guy role in movies was specifically written for him as he does essentially come across as a walking amalgam of every Bond villain since Dr No. And finally Tommy Lee Jones fared well as the comically uptight General in charge of the project. Even though he’s essentially the same character in every film he’s ever been in, he’s always a welcome addition I suppose. The CGI was pretty good, maybe a little too Star Wars and I’m never overly keen on it in movies but still it was well done. But overall the general feel of the film was good. Go see.

In Time (2011)

It’s with a heavy heart that I write to tell you that I’m reviewing the trailer for another film… and that it stars Justin Timberlake. Ok he’s not that bad really but the plot of the new film he’s in that’s set to be released this October possibly is.

Directed by Andrew Niccol of Gattaca fame, In Time depicts a future where everyone stops aging at 25 years old and will die one year later unless they are able to purchase more time. Time is the universal currency of this film and the more a person has, the longer they’ll live. When the title character (Justin Timberlake) inherits a massive amount of time from someone he soon finds himself on the run in an attempt to keep it. Or something along these lines anyway. It sounds very much to me like a twisted version of Logan’s run (which was decent to be fair).

Despite the concept of this film sounding a shade crap, I have faith that Niccol will do something interesting with it and faint hopes that it will be as good as Gattaca – very faint hopes I might add. With names like Olivia Wilde, Amanda Seyfried and Cillian Murphy it does have a chance. In truth I think it will end up feeling a bit more like Limitless than being a classic but no doubt it will be a good yarn anyway.

Duke Nukem Forever (2011)

So after 15 years of waiting, was it worth it. Erm… nope. It might have been if this game had been released ten years sooner. Unfortunately the game just betrayed the amount of time it had been sitting around on the drawing board not getting made. Don’t get me wrong, it was still Duke Nukem and it was still fun, the boss stages were truly a pain in the arse, the quips of Duke were highly amusing to listen to. But in terms of graphics and gameplay it felt like a game of a bygone gaming era. The game is a very generic and very linear shoot-em up with little in the way of storyline and certainly no decisions that could ultimately change the outcome of the game. The graphics are lacklustre and reminiscent of a first generation X-box game, certainly nothing to write home about. The character models were poor and lifeless as was any dialogue with them, perhaps even harkening back to Duke Nukem II a little in some cases. But the real question is, did I enjoy the game? You bet your ass I did. The nostalgia value was high and although this game is still bested by its predecessor I think there may be something for LAN gaming parties on the PC in future here. The final boss felt pretty epic as well, if a little too easy.

Transformers: Dark Side of the Moon (2011)

Don’t even know why I’m posting a review of this, it’s absolutely terrible. I didn’t like the first one much, it was watchable but not fantastic. It had some semblance of a storyline and a fair amount of CGI. The second one I haven’t seen all the way through but from what I’ve seen, it’s just CGI and no storyline. This one is the same thing, oodles of CGI like that on its own has the capacity to make a good film. A good film doesn’t necessarily have to have any CGI and any director worth his salt will use it very sparingly (see Christopher Nolan). A really great film can hold its weight without anything other than dialogue (see The Man from Earth). I think ultimately I’m just bitching because I think Michael Bay is a poor director, so much so that I’m hard pressed to think of a single decent film he’s been associated with save for maybe the Island, perhaps half a point for Armageddon although I think that is a truly terrible film except for the absurdly amusing interactions of the characters. So are there any reasons to like this film? Well there’s Rosie Huntington-Whiteley but she’s not a spectacular improvement over Megan Fox in any way. There’s the very cool introduction to the film which uses a sequence of American presidents sitting in the oval office and other events from bygone eras cleverly recut to imply an alternate motive behind history. Then there’s… Leonard Nimoy and I had to wait until he quoted The Search for Spock before I finally realised it was him. Epic fail. Ultimately not a complete waste of a film, it had some cool moments but is sorely lacking in terms of what $100 million should really buy.

Old World Blues

Can’t believe this has been out six days and I didn’t even know. From all counts it is also the strongest expansion pack across both FO3 and FO:NV. Awesome. There is also one further DLC pack to come – Lonesome Road. And then years of no more Fallout. Epic fail. Still at least I’ve got FO3 for the PC now, maybe some heavy modding experiments to come.

Mass Effect (2007)

Well this caught me off guard. Having been goaded into going to PC world and having a conversation with someone I thought was American but in fact just had an American accent, I ended up buying this game being assured that it was the best science fiction RPG out there. I’d seen the cover for the game and various advertisements a million times but nothing about it ever particularly caught my eye. Anyway on the advice of two salesmen and a £5 price tag I decided to give it a shot and see what all the hullaballoo was about.

I honestly wasn’t expecting to like it at all but after the introduction cut scenes you end up on Eden Prime, a human colony recently invaded by a sentient race of robots known as the Geth. And from that moment, the vista and music tell you this game is going to be something else. The game really just throws you into the action and initially you have no clue as to the nature of the galaxy you’re in. A complex plot unfolds rapidly though and draws you in very quickly. As to the nature of the plot, I would have to describe it as more or less a space opera a la Babylon 5. In fact the parallels between Mass Effect and Babylon 5 are obvious even from the beginning – a galactic community of races who don’t necessarily get along with each other, complex human politics adding to the problem of galactic relations, the citadel vs the babylon stations, jumpgates vs mass relays, and the most obvious parallel – a first contact war between humans and the most powerful race in the galaxy – the Turians. In Babylon 5, it was the Minbari although in Mass Effect the war wasn’t as one sided and humans were begrudgingly given considerable recognition in the galactic arena after a very short amount of time because they inflicted more casualties upon the Turians than they suffered themselves in this war. This of course leads to resentment amongst the other races who view them as dangerous upstarts already seeking to control everything despite being newcomers. Ultimately though the game takes a turn for the dramatic even with the background of political intrigue as an unknown race known as the Reapers threaten to wipe out all life in the galaxy. Trying to convince the council that one of their own special forces agents is responsible is tricky but this level introduces the citadel which is essentially a giant space station built by an extinct ancient race known as the Protheans. As the game progresses, the fate of the galaxy would seem to rest firmly in your hands and the nature of the RPG allows you to make either renegade or paragon decisions which will ultimately carry over and affect the next two games.

As for the actual RPG mechanics, they’re not perfect and initially seem too complex to get to grips with – in fact it took several hours of gameplay before I fully understand exactly how they worked. Once understood they do however enrich gameplay. But where this game really shines is the graphics and score. The graphics are majestic on every level and planet and this is only further augmented by the haunting score that accompanies the game. Every aspect of it feels very finely crafted right down to the superb script and voice acting. I would even go so far as to say this was the best £5 I ever spent. The game weighed in at about 33 hours gameplay for me which is longer than I suspect it takes most people but I did select my class as vanguard allowing me to use biotic abilities – which feel as though they have limited usefulness. I wouldn’t quite say this was the best RPG I’ve ever played as incarnations of Fallout still beat it but in honesty, it’s damn close and I sincerely wish there were a few more games out there that set the quality bar this high. Of course upon completion, the fun didn’t stop because it took me less than 24 hours to buy the next instalment in the saga which I will review shortly.

A bit of SEO

Just building some inbound links for a client website so mostly ignore this post.

www.handsworthfencingservices.co.uk

The Social Network (2010)

This film was recommended to me a while ago but like most things lately, it’s taken me an age to get around to watching it. And I must say I was very impressed with it. Directed by David Fincher (Alien 3, Fight Club, Se7en, The Game), the film chronicles the development of Facebook and the legal battle that ensued because of the epic levels of corporate backstabbing that took place during its early days. Truly the film is a mostly accurate telling of the site that rewove the fabric of society even as it unravelled the friendships of its creators.

There were a couple of reasons I liked it so much really – the first being Jesse Eisenberg’s portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg. Somehow he manages to convey a synergy between uber nerd and ice cool that I’ve never seen before – and it works. His character is just awesome. In fact the arrogance his character displays when dealing with others throughout the movie is above par legendary. Some of the quips are hilarious such as when being sued by the Winklevoss brother’s – “You know, you really don't need a forensics team to get to the bottom of this. If you guys were the inventors of Facebook, you'd have invented Facebook.” or when asked by a lawyer if he was paying attention during his deposition “I think if your clients want to sit on my shoulders and call themselves tall, they have the right to give it a try - but there's no requirement that I enjoy sitting here listening to people lie. You have part of my attention - you have the minimum amount. The rest of my attention is back at the offices of Facebook, where my colleagues and I are doing things that no one in this room, including and especially your clients, are intellectually or creatively capable of doing. [pauses] Did I adequately answer your condescending question?”.

Other characters in the movie are similarly great. Justin Timberlake puts in a decent performance as Sean Parker and manages to convey the appropriate level of douchebaggery for his character although now that I think about it, I’m not sure he was acting. Not really I’m just talking shit because his ex-girlfriends are Cameron Diaz and Jessica Biel, what a rank A bastard. Andrew Garfield who plays Eduardo Saverin is the tragic character of the film who assists Zuckerberg in founding what is to become a business empire only to get royally fucked over at the first hurdle.

The film does take some artistic licence with the way events really unfolded in real life but I personally feel they add to the point that the film is trying to make – which is the perhaps cliché money can’t buy you happiness idea. I agree more with Woody Allen that no it can’t but it gets you a damn good bargaining position, but that’s just me. The film illustrates this best by showing Mark at the end sat alone in front of the website he created sending a friend request to the girl he betrayed at the beginning. In a way the ending feels kind of tragic and bittersweet.

The soundtrack is perfect for the film and utilises some of the 8 bit samples from games like Mario to give it the digital effect. The cinematography is similarly beautiful. And finally – this probably wouldn’t have been a gripe for many but it’s something I had to congratulate this film on because I’ve never seen it in any film that involves computers ever – an accurate portrayal of what computer hacking actually involves instead of the graphical bullshit seen in films like hackers and swordfish. Wow he was actually using Linux and referred to things like PHP script, PERL and EMACS. Even the code on screen looked accurate from what I could glean as did the CBA factor when something was evidently going to be too much of a pain in the arse to do.

Overall this is a cinema landmark and an exceptionally well told story for something that could otherwise be considered quite a boring and dry tale that no one would really care about. IMDB Rating: 8.1 / 10

Change of Focus

When I originally set this blog up, I had intended it to be a pure consciousness stream. In practice though I just don’t have that much time to blog. This problem has been further compounded the last couple of months by being a slave to randomenglishman who is busy building his empire. When this empire is complete, we will all become creationists, staunch death penalty advocates and quasi-national socialist daily mail readers hell bent on exterminating every last magpie purely to see if it’s a good idea.

Anyway I digress, to counter this problem I’ve decided to change the focus of the blog to being purely a media review site for movies and gaming. That way it’ll be a bit more manageable. I’ve also deleted all the discussions that were clogging it up to give it a feel more in line with what was originally intended. Watch this space.