You know what's hard? Deciding whether you're athiestic or agnostic. From what I've heard/read/etc, labelling yourself an atheist is just as bad as believing in God(s). How can you believe that an all powerful being exists without any kind of proof? Aversly, how can you not know that there is an all powerful being that made and controlled everything? The evidence is on the side of the atheist, although there is no way of knowing for sure, so I'll stick with agnosticism until I'm convinced otherwise. I know I've made this argument terribly well. To be honest I had no intention of writing it at all when I started. I just wanted to write a skit about the Virgin Mary. So I'll do that now.
Thomas Friedman believes Google is God. Or something. I don't know, I just heard about it on the web and you know how people tend to twist things for their own motives. I don't even know who Friedman is. I just know he has a silly name. Anyway, I think I prefer Google to God. At least the God of Judaism, Islam and Christianity. It's all wrath and in the case of Christianity, knocking up virgins. Why exactly did He choose a engaged virgin? Was it because of the purity? Nah. Any virgin is as pure the next. It's because she was involved with Joesph. God wanted to see some sparks fly. I'll bet he was looking in when she finally told poor ole' Joe.
"Joesph, I have something to tell you."
"What is it Mary, love of my life?"
"I'm pregnant."
"But, but, you said you were a virgin. Have you been sleeping around? It's that fruit seller isn't it? I knew I couldn't compete with that guy. Hawking his shiny dates everywhere. You couldn't help but fall for him."
"No! It was God. He wants me to carry his seed into out mortal realm or something. I couldn't hear very well. He must 180 cubits tall."
"Oh yeah! God chose you to carry his child into this world. I've heard you blaspheme a few times carrying the water home."
And I think I'll leave it there. Anymore would just be stretching a bad joke beyond all elastic limits. And I'm not doing that already. Oh no.
I've been resting myself. My holidays are nearly over after all.
But I'm back, badder than ever. By badder I mean, of course, better.
Yeah!
So, does anyone actually read this thing? I was thinking maybe that that link on the Flick Filosophers (link there-->) would bring some new people in, but I never actually wrote anything to follow it up. Just got an advance of the new Muse album. I like it. It's, erm, Muse. A fine blend of piano, guitar and the distinctive warblings of the lead singer, Matt Bellamy. I don't believe he has any relation to David Bellamy. I could be wrong however.
I know I may have said somethings about your constantly positive reviews, but please do something to save us from the ongoing asinine 'reviews' of Johhny Vaughan. I don't know. Maybe I shold stop reading the Sky Active movie reviews. They make me a little mad.
I, along with a few others on B3ta people, have been given the opportunity to write reviews for Knockout Reviews. It should be a good chance to practice writing and something to put in a Uni application. They already had a Hulk review, so I'll stick mine up here. With any luck I'll get a chance to do lots more soon.
When I first heard there would be a Hulk film, I just dismissed it as an attempt to cash in on the comic book movie phase Hollywood was going through. I could digress on why these genre phases are good for the industry and bad for originality, but I have neither the time or ability. That and it would be wholly pointless. I then heard (well, read) that Ang Lee would be directing it, which I though was an odd choice for a summer action blockbuster film, but it wouldn't really make any difference.I was wrong, very wrong. I heard some good reviews from The Flick Filosopher and a few other people and decided to see it. Right from the beginning I knew it was special. The way the credit sequence fills you in on the back story is unlike anything I've seen before and I loved it (particularly the time-lapse parts). The cinematography is striking, the comic book split screen panels in particular. While not being new (see 24 and Spooks), the way it is used definitely adds to the character of the film. The CGI and other visual effects are well done, even if the idea of a 3 metre tall green monster is hard to believe. The fact that the Hulk is green is probably the biggest issue with believability that I had. There wasn't enough contrast in the skin tones in my opinion, and that the flesh underneath is red (he gets wounded). Anyway, it looks amazing and the transformation sequence looks quite convincing.
It's not all looks either. There is some very interesting character development, especially (and obviously) when it comes to Bruce Banner. The dichotomy of Bruce's personality is interesting in the way that he not only repressed his memories of his childhood, but also his emotions and an entire personality. The Hulk is not just the result of a mutation, but all the emotions Bruce has refused to acknowledge. When he says he likes it (the transformation), it's not just the power, but the ability to feel anger and rage once again.
My only complaint is that I'll have to wait for the sequel.
This was originally written for the IMDb comments section, so it's more personal and less objective. And really not very good, but I've learnt from this so the others will be better.
Mental note: Don't get caught up in revenge. It's not big and it's not clever.
It may not have been very nice of the preson living here to be so, for want of a better word, cruel to Mr Hammer-Time, but I've decided not to get involved again. It's not really me and I, as always, regret it a few days later. I didn't even do very much, but the point remains. I'm staying fluffy for the forseeable future.
Normal service may resume soon. My dog is trying to pull me out of the door by my ankles to play ball with him. I could get used to this weather, I really could.