more films

hey

so, yes, then, following on from the post what i gone done earlier this month, yet more films it is that i have watched. a grand(ish) total of 6 (six) of them shall be commented on here, look you see. yes, i do appreciate that mostly, or for most, watching a film is not all that special; at the least not so special that they feel compelled to commit it to internet comment. my time for doing this most normal of things is limited, however, so forgive the indulgence. 

as with the previous post (as mentioned) i had a rare bit of time free, with said time being (or happening) around, during or in that whole Christmas and New Year thing. the one of 2023 that turns into this year (at time of writing), 2024. for something of an unusual (if not peculiar) change, it was a lot of films i had not seen before, well, mostly. one of these here is one i am pretty sure i saw once before, but would not gamble on it being so. 

these all got watched, as you can (kind of) see above via the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode, in fancy video. which would be blu ray. no, i am not ever switching formats again. my suspicion is that this "4K" fiddles so much with older films that they are likely to be no longer what the maker(s) of such film(s) intended. being honest (as i normally would be here) the only reason i sought to move to this blu ray format was because it was the only way you could get a proper version of Mad Max 2, for only on that disc can you get it complete (uncensored) and with the right name on it. 

which conveniently leads into the first of these films that i shall comment on (review implies an expectation i cannot deliver on), being Three Thousand Years Of Longing. no, it isn't really a film in the same feel or genre of Mad Max. yet it happened to be made by the same person. 

by no means is it that i know much of anything about marketing (or advertising), but still. i am really not sure that having "by the maker of Mad Max Fury Road" on the box is wise. yes, it is a true statement, the same person directed both. anyone watching this video (disc) on the basis of that comment, though, would be (i suspect) somewhat disappointed that Three Thousand Years Of Longing lacks any sort of barbaric post apocalyptic wasteland violence. 

quite simply this film, this Three Thousand Years Of Longing, is a truly beautiful, uplifting, breath of fresh air sort of thing. i was recommended this off of someone and i shall always be grateful for such a kind gesture of suggestion. so yes, i recommend it too. 

ostensibly the plot is a kind of vague yet direct variation of an Aladdin or rudimentary 'genie in a bottle' with the requisite three wishes sort of thing. ultimately it's a kind of love letter, or love film if you will, to the perpetual importance (and beauty) of storytelling. not since The Princess Bride have a watched a film so wonderful dedicated to the sheer joy of telling a story. 

now, then, the one (1) of these films i am not entirely sure if i had seen before. or previously. for some reason i have a hazy (possibly wonky) memory of watching this one, Escape To Athena, on the tele one 80s era Christmas. i could be mistaken. what i do know is that i am in a Sir Roger appreciation group on one strand of social media. mostly we just share images of Sir Roger, or post a statement like wasn't Sir Roger great, and we all say yes. of late a few promo stills from this one have featured in that group, so i decided to pick up a copy. besides, Christmas is a time to watch Sir Roger films. 

plot? hmn. something something Greece in World War 2, something something prisoner of war camp, something something valuable Greek relics and artefacts, something something steal them and escape. mostly this film appears to be an excuse for a quite impressive cast to get together for a good time and put together an almost coherent film. one of those ones you can watch again and again, especially when you get to see Richard Roundtree do this - 

well, you will (or did) get to see him if you pressed play on the video above. and indeed that was no less than David Niven you get a glimpse of, in a most dapper cardie. the remainder of the cast features the likes of Telly Savalas, who(m) played, as he always seemed to, a Greek sex machine god, Elliott Gould (post-Streisand version), Sonny Bono (that one, and not that one) and, of course, Sir Roger, when he was simply addressed as Roger Moore. 

deferential respect is very much at the fore with the latter, for the name of he (Roger Moore) comes up in massive letters during the credits. as to his part in the film, he plays a German soldier of some high ranking. yes, Roger does play the part with what one could reasonably define as a German accent. it is an accent what appears to come from the Shatner school of acting. interpret that as you will. certainly, yes, of course, Escape To Athena is one i would strongly suggest you watch. 

a bit of a (kind) of double bill presentation here, then, as i am assured by certain (news and what have you) outlets that Oppenheimer and Barbie were (are) the "best" of cinema 2023. i see. well, from what i recall, this is likely true in the financial sense, for i believe both made lots and lots of money, more than was anticipated and an awful lot in regards of the "new normal" since all of that plague stuff. probably up there with how much the excellent Top Gun Maverick made, as well as that Avatar 2 which, like the original, everyone appears to have forgotten about. no, i did not watch that one and really have no intention of doing so, the original being so dull. 

going left to right, then, and Oppenheimer was quite the perplexing paradox. for a start it is a Christopher Nolan film. the phrase "in Nolan we trust" exists for a reason. make no mistake, this film is made with the quality he is associated with, you are talking of an effortless peer of (and i do not say this lightly) Kubrick. acting is also outstanding, with Cillian Murphy surely in line for awards, followed closely (in a supporting capacity) by Robert Downey Jnr. Matt Damon is also good, but strictly in a Matt Damon doing Matt Damon way. yet, ultimately, my sense was "why make this"? a three hour epic about a famous scientist type. showcasing any personal proclivities he had is a footnote to history; that he may regret what he did with his theory is a given. i suspect this shall go on to become the most celebrated, in terms of awards, film what Nolan does, but ultimately will be the least fondly remembered of his works. but that is not to take away from the rewarding experience of watching. 

conversely Barbie was clearly made to make money, via the medium of being a comedy with some musical numbers and a lurking (somewhat darkly) wry satirical comment on society, values, etc. a suspicion i had was that all of the jokes, if you will the value, were right there in the trailer. yet people, not that many speak to me, said no, see it, it's really, really goo. and, you know what, it is. if it had to be a choice between these two for "best" of 2023 then i would be full tilt Barbie. a film that makes one, or in this case moi, laugh, smile, cry, feel elevated and be served pause for thought, all in less (or fewer, if you like) than two hours. excellent. 

undoubtedly other media (news) outlets have picked something different from these two as the by default or ostensible "best" of last year (2023). someone somewhere shall have made a hardly seen film about how brilliant lesbians and/or the EU all are, and that is the film the likes of Guardian, Observer, Metro and so on will have triumphed. once again i have not seen either Napoleon or Killers Of The Flower Moon. both are films i hope are good, but how it all went very quiet about them once they actually got me released has me somewhat hesitant. 

hesitant would be a very good (as in accurate) way to describe my approach to Indiana Jones And The Dial Of Destiny. whereas i thoroughly enjoyed the original trilogy on release in the 80s, and still fondly consider Raiders Of The Lost Ark and The Last Crusade, i never really thought or felt further was needed. not a great deal of Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull said there was much, if any, story left to tell, did it? 

opportunity, and indeed temptation, existed at the time of its release to go and see it at the cinema, or if you like at the pictures. this i declined. mostly due to the reported running time, being given as north of two hours, but that was backed up with reviews (and comments) of it being rather (somewhat dull). quite a few people declined to see it too, which led (i read) to it being quite a financial disaster. oh. when i have asked people why they did not see it, some said "because it will be streaming on Disney+ soon", which proved to be the case. most, however, said "Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull", as in they had no wish to get f****d over again. i did stand and consider the purchase in the shop for a bit, but of course eventually i bought the video (disc), but also didn't rush to watch. 

it turns out that this film, Indiana Jones And The Dial Of Destiny, is actually pretty good. not exactly as great as the original three, but vastly superior to the 4th one. for context, it was entertaining viewing on Boxing Day morning (say around 10am), sat on the couch, when i could pause two or three (or 4) times and go for a cigarette. perhaps in a cinema it would have led to a numb backside and a yearning for it to end soon so i could appreciate Marlboro. 

without going into the plot (ancient lost relic of power sought after, etc), the "twist" at the end was sort of kind of worthy of that in Raiders Of The Lost Ark. that was my initial thought. on reflection, though, it did occur to me that the plot could be seen as a second rate Da Vinci Code (remember that?) knock off. either way, it works. 

now that they own vast swathes of cinema it will be interesting to see where, exactly, Disney goes in the pursuit of money. which is the only reason they make films. from what i can tell the Marvel films have reached saturation point and one of their major actors planned to be used for the next few years has got into some trouble. also, they have discovered that simple nostalgia is not a way to print money, with this one and the last two Star Wars films not going down too well. maybe they will just focus on making a quality product people actually wish to see, but far be it from me to suggest such. 

finally, then, or in conclusion for here, The Flash. sort of kind of linked to something in the previous paragraph, i believe this film "failed" mostly as one of the actors (i believe the ostensible title character, by default the protagonist) is now considered one of those "not nice" people what get boycotted, or cancelled in modern language. that's a shame, as i believe the "test audiences" ranted and raved at how excellent this film was. and they were not wrong, at all. 

truthfully i wasn't at all @rsed about this film. i am very much feeling fatigue from all these hero or super hero films. of course there was some curiosity about Michael Keaton returning to the role of Batman, but i assumed (as it turned out incorrectly) that all there was to that was right there in the trailers and related promotional material. both James and William spoke highly of it, so seeing it on sale for £8 (or a penny fewer than that) at HMV had me go sure, why not. 

glad that i did, really. this was excellent. as in really, really f*****g good. i have no interest at all in the character The Flash (or the actor), so it was just as well they decided to make this pretty much just a straightforward Batman film, in all but name. all the ingredients which led to the "superhero" boom at the box office are here - it's witty, perfectly paced, full of tense action (with surprises) and superbly acted by all. further, the plot features one of the best, more intelligent explorations of the challenges of messing about with time / history that i have seen. this is a film i shall certainly watch again. might even dig out the original two Keaton Batman films on the back of it. 

what a shame the ostensible lead did whatever he did, or got accused of whatever (no i have not read up, i am not particularly interested) it was that seems to have ended any chance of major success for this film. it would be fair to say that the DC comics films, at least since Dark Knight Rises (yet i really, really liked Man Of Steel) haven't won over audiences. this could have been a turning point for that, as truly this really was brilliant. unexpectedly so. 

phew. well, that's that for this post. six (6) films i was overall very glad to have had the chance to sit down and watch. but now, alas, duty (as in verk) calls. my chances of getting to watch all that many more films in an immediate sense are somewhat limited, but you never know. it may be so that i take the odd break here and there, and use that time to watch a few more. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

an e for an i, an i for an e

heya

just another observance (or sighting, look you see) from my travels. also a kind of, bit of object lesson in not assuming that what you see turns out to be what you saw. or something like that; a bit profound but with more better wording that i would seem incapable of would be nice. 

as fate would have it (or just a plain simple decision) i got to ride in the passenger seat for a while. or i was "shotgun", as our American friends like to term it. this allowed me to look more closely at my surroundings, and indeed take images (pictures) off of my phone with a camera welded to it. like, for instance, this one. 

you can probably guess what happened here, and why i scrambled (or rushed) to take images. it was indeed so that eye and mind combined to fill in things that were not there. so yes, i did in the first moment or so see this as "Jane Austen", and not the "Jane Austin" it actually is. oh. right. 

well, most, or the majority, of what i could write here would very much have needed that i to be an e, really. all sorts of comments would have been available, mostly related to using a celebrated author not known for her interest in electricity being used to endorse electrification. but, obviously, no. sure, i could speculate if this Austin of Jane had any association with (or connection to) either of the famous Steve Austin people, with six million dollar man of course being the best one. that feels like it would be a fair waste of your time, allowing for mine being there to waste. 

in regards of what exactly goes on at this place, well, i am not entirely sure. going on the signs and the description, probably teaching people how to put electric in (or on) the various railway lines what are all over our nation. putting electric on (or in) railway lines is, presumably, one of the many ways them what do the trains find reason to actually not have trains running. just as, say, that squatter mayor, Sadiq Khan, absolutely hates London (innit) and the people of the place, them what run the trains really hate the idea of trains running and people using them. very strange. 

right, well, if i see anything else of remote interest (and should we be honest this is a most curious benchmark for such) i shall be sure to present it here. what else would i do? 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

restoration

hello there

not really (or quite) one of my moans about people what have gone done changed things which they should not have, to be honest. this is more a celebratory (albeit qualified, look you see) consideration of what appears to be someone putting things back to the way they were. or making a restoration of better times. 

i had reason to procure, or if you like purchase, some new shampoo. well, obviously new i suppose, for one would take as a given that there's not much of a second hand (or "pre loved") market for this. not that i was immediately "out" of shampoo, mind. the bottle i was currently using was close to a point of exhaustion, and i did have another ready anyway. but, well, one never knows what the next panic buy craze shall be, so i felt it best to get another.

delight, or sheer unbridled joy, descended upon me when i saw a most dearly beloved name back on the shampoo shelf. very much back where it belonged. yes, as you can (unusually) see above in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode, the greatest shampoo of all, timotei, is back. kind of. i looked and alas, no, the pinnacle of timotei shampoo, the one what has lemon in it, appears not to have been restored. but i shall accept this as a step towards a return to this. 

long term, if not regular, readers shall be aware that i am a devout discipline in the school of thinking that the best (greatest) shampoo ever is the type what has lemon shoved in it. this is based on a casual comment passed by Jason Donovan (that one) made in an interview in the 80s, when he revealed that he was partial to such shampoo. i have endeavoured to use this type (shampoo with lemon in it) ever since, but sadly most manufacturers of the stuff have ceased this practice. 

this is a purifying shampoo, then, as one can read (reasonably) clearly in the VHS mode image above. my thinking, or assumption, is that green tea extract (rather than just green tea) might be some sort of new century variation on lemon. granted, it may not be, but i am prepared to try. also i am prepared to look for the address details of timotei on the bottle and write to them, asking if they have plans to once again shove lemon into the shampoo what they do. 

slowly and only in a few ways it is so that a return to more sensible times comes. even if only briefly there was those instances where we got marathon bars and opal fruits back with proper names. the decision to bring back timotei is, however, a bit of a game changer. once again we, the people of this nation, can use a proper shampoo. bravo. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

paradox shatner

greetings

it is quite rare that i get to watch much, if any, television on a sunday. whereas i am not really going to discuss why here, know that it doesn't particularly pertain to any sort of religious concern. just one of those things, look you see. 

on, or during, the rare instances when i have a sunday as my own (to do with what i will) then a particular treat is the one channel here (UK) that basically shows Columbo repeats all day every sunday. quite class it is. which is even better when they show one (for i believe there are two) episode featuring the magnificence of Shatner. 

sometimes it is so that when i am indeed left to my own devices on a sunday they don't show one of the two (or however many) episodes what he blessed with an appearance. happily i am now able to counter this. a recent trip to a charity shop saw me find, and immediately (more or less) purchase a video (disc) what has three (3) episodes of Columbo on it. one of them is the celebrated edition off of the 70s what has Shatner in it, as pictured above. so far as i am aware this was his first ever appearance in the show. 

why is this episode so celebrated? it just so happens that Shatner is cast in the role of playing the greatest ever actor what the world has witnessed in it. needless to say this causes some (mass) debate and heated conversation. many would argue such a role is an absolute breeze for him, for by just turning up and consenting to be filmed he has immediately portrayed the world's greatest actor doing his thing. others may (and do) disagree, suggesting that accepting Shatner (in character) as the world's greatest actor calls on too much of a suspension of disbelief; that it disparages other actors too much. let me let you guess which side of this conversation i am on. 

from what i recall Shatner agreed, or consented, to be in a second episode (or edition) of this particular show, Columbo, in the 90s. mostly, or for the most part, i get distracted by his dapper pencil moustache when i watch that one. but i think he played the world' greatest writer, or lawyer or doctor or something in that one. 

here is where i shall more or leave this, then. you are free to continue thinking of the Shatner paradox, or if you like paradox Shatner, though. i do (obviously), frequently. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tolchocked by millicents

hi hi hi there droogies

well, no, that above is not true. it is simply not the case, look you see, that your friend and humble narrator, being moi, was assaulted by the constabulary. my choice of title was purely for needless dramatic purposes. appy polly lodgies. 

but still, you know, i did (indeed) have an encounter of sorts with a law enforcement official. recently, as in the past, not the future. i got stopped as part of what looked like a massive operation to catch people who may have been at the controls of a vehicle whilst intoxicated. or, in somewhat different words, they were doing a sting thing to try and catch drink drivers. 

pictured above, in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode (of course), is the bit of the breathalyser test what i had to blow into. the member of the constabulary who gone done tested me said i could keep it as a souvenir. cheers for that, since my taxes had likely paid for it. quite a curious test thing, and it took me a few goes to register a reading. so as to avoid any further needless drama, indeed it was so that my reading was zero, or whatever it is that reflects no alcohol present in my system. had there been, well, i would have had serious words with who(m)ever manufactured my coffee. 

the vagaries of language come to the fore again. our friends in America reading this shall no doubt be confused (and bewildered) by the term "breathalyser". for them the spelling, for some reason, is breathalyzer. beyond getting rid of perfectly good "u" letters in words they do seem to have a tendency to replace "s" with "z" in seldom used (yet key) words. 

another look at the bit off of (or out of) the breathalyser what i was allowed to retain, then, but in this instance in VHS mode. no, i have no idea at all what i am supposed to do with it, beyond take a picture of it and place it here. 

did i mind, or object, to the constabulary stopping me and testing me so? not really. it is a minor inconvenience, true, but still, for the greater good, etc, if it helps get clearly dangerous drivers off the road, so much the better. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

don't do it

welcome frankie fans

yes, indeed, for the last two (or so) years i have suggested that no, i won't commemorate or celebrate the anniversary of certain gigs any further. for years i have done so, look you see, and there is perhaps a finite number of words i can command which are different to the ones used before. 

but here we are. it is so that on this date, at least in regards of the date this is published, i got to see Frankie Goes To Hollywood in a very real and live sense. well, this date in 1987, which i think (or believe to be) is now 37 (!!) years ago. one would think i would have lost this information from memory or mind, if the two are different, yet it would seem not. 

it might be if not prudent then wise for you to leave this post now, reading no further. well, no, by all means read, but the video (yes, we have got a video) below is unlikely to please or impress anyone. 

for those who have declined to heed the above, well, here is your reward. behold, for the video below presents fragments of me (moi), your humble narrator, performing a tribute (of sorts) to Frankie. done whilst out on the town on karaoke night. 

perhaps i should have taken, or found, the time to edit down some further sounds from the bootleg i have of the gig and added that instead of the above. or simply added no sound or video. still, done now. 

my memory of actual, proper Frankie doing Relax at the gig was Holly introducing it as "a blast from the past". that was 1987, barely 4 years after it was released and 3 years after the halcyon days when it was back in the chart (on sales alone, no streaming sh!t back then) at number 2, just behind Two Tribes by the same band, of course. well, if it was a blast from the past then, of what is it now?

should this sort of thing (ahem) be of interest to you then i would encourage you to look at posts i have made on this date over the years. one or two of them might be more better than this one. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

incident in a public lavatory

heya

no, no, no, not (so far as i am aware) that kind of incident, look you see. i have every confidence that my chum Spiros really enjoys the short term, mutually beneficial friendships what he strikes up with like minded men in general public restroom facilities but such isn't really my sort of thing. what i write of here, and indeed present images of, is an incident that i did not witness but can only wonder of. 

so, i was, i think, in a place called Marlborough. you would think that i would really (really) like such, going on how the spelling is close to Marlboro. for the most part it was all right, i suppose. people living there tend to be a bit full of themselves, and slightly @r5sey with one when one points out they are essentially a suburb of Swindon, and not some rather posh, exquisite province in its own right. 

as is (or would be) so often the case when i am on my travels, when in this place i felt a compelling need to visit a bathroom. i found, with the help of an associate, a suitable place where one, for a somewhat nominal and as it turned out optional fee, could do just that. 

quite a peculiar set up at public restroom facilities found, in truth. from what i could ascertain, or otherwise work out, one was required to pay a fee of 20p (or if you will a fifth of £1) if they wished to make use of the lavatory with the door locked. i did not think to try such, but it appeared that if one was happy to do as they will in there without a locked door, no coin(s) needed to be placed in the machine. oh. well, i opted for some privacy. 

let me refrain from speaking (or rather writing) of the specifics of what went on in there. the interest here was rather the sign what i saw as i stood there, generally doing my business (so to speak). it was one of those moments where i had to do a sort of double take, to check that what i believed i was reading was actually written there. indeed it was, as you can see in the above image, presented in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode. and somewhat clearer below. 

where does one begin with this? most of the sign makes great sense, with the good people of Marlborough having no wish for their sewage system to become blocked like it is in that there London place. but, then, priority is given to (politely) requesting that people refrain from flushing tea bags down the toilet? taking as a given that tea bags are not some sort of euphemism in areas of Swindon, exactly how many people were engaging in the practice of flushing tea bags down the toilets to prompt or otherwise warrant this sign? and, frankly, why? i saw no facilities there to make a cup of tea, so i am assuming people were taking boxes of tea bags in and flushing away? 

indeed yes, i am aware of the (rather) clumsy if not poor phrase or sentence structure there, for it suggests that tea bags are regarded as "sanitary disposables". maybe they are there. weird. 

unfortunately i don't believe there's much in the way of other observations to add. at the least not from my side of this screen what you are looking at. do feel free to ponder on the above information, making of it what you will. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

films

greetings

so, i have watched a few more films. five, look you see, to be somewhat specific. actually likely a few more, but these ones (the 5) are the only ones what i can specifically remember. with some time on my hands i am quite likely to watch some more, but comment on these shall do for now. 

a thing what absolutely everyone loves is statistics. this is all the more true when such is (or are) presented via the medium of percentages. if you are one of them types of who(m) this is true, then get ready. from these five (5) films, a staggering 80% were ones i had not seen before. some overlap exists, but also it was so that 80% were watched on the vague promise of nudies. not too vague in one, for a film from that particular 80% was also the 20% what i had seen before. oddly 40% of the films were in that language what they comically use in France. and i think that's it for stats. 

do i need to put, or is there a requirement for, one of them *** SPOILER WARNING *** things? well, i suppose such is done now. oh, another of those statistic things for you is that the BBFC, who are right miserable types and understand this century even less ("fewer") than what i do, have deemed 60% of these films are suitable only for those over the age of 18. which i am. so you may find that around 3 sets of comments here relate (or pertain) to mature adult themes and nudies. 

righty ho, off we go, in no particular order........

for a fair while i deliberated watching the new (or most recent) take on Dune. i mean, i was (or am) vaguely aware of some television adaptation, but leaving that aside i wasn't sure if i felt the need to see a different interpretation, with the David Lynch version, flaws and all, being fine. often i had stood going, ok, should i get the new one or get a fancy video (disc) of the Lynch one, and then ended up with neither. but then my preferred tape (disc) seller down the market had it (new variation) for £3.

i appreciate this version has had loads (and loads) of good reviews. my take is not that it was bad, but it was decidedly "meh". one comment i saw again and again was that it was "visually stunning". no, it is not. the visuals are quite bland, really, and not as iconic as the Lynch version. also this is "part one", with the conclusion (so far as i am aware) coming March 2024. so this took longer than the entire story being presented in the Lynch version to give (roughly) one half of the story. and nothing within it gave any indication that the expanded amount of time provided any extra stuff of consequence, with the key scenes or moments remaining pretty much the same. 

yes, the "ensemble" cast is quite the line up, but most of them just stand around looking poignant. only Javier Bardem (sp) seemed to get to act with any consequence, and even then it was little more than rehashing what he'd done in, say, No Country For Old Men or even Skyfall. certainly there was nothing like Sting in space underpants. it is likely i will rather just pick up the blu ray tape (disc) of the Lynch version and watch that again rather than rush to see part two of this. 

on the subject of market finds, Maitresse next, then. an early 80s (i think) French film with an 18 certificate. it was on offer (in a blu ray and dvd set) for £2, so i went yeah, all right, there is likely to be some nudies in it. which there very much is, but alas (and this is the French for you) of a most decidedly male nature. thanks for that. 

plot? quite breezy, best you go with the flow sort of stuff. a generally loathsome gent (played by that one famous French actor no one seems to like no more) forms an unlikely relationship with one of them mistress (hence the title) dominatrix types, with it starting via him (with a chum) breaking into her house and finding all sorts of unusual bondage, s&m stuff. it is peculiarly compulsive and compelling viewing, despite rarely showing anything sordid. it is at least true that the French would appear to make much better films than they do cars, or anything else. 

the best way to consider this film, i suppose, is within the context of the time it was release. it would be very fair to say that the sexual proclivities on display (as it were) here were very much an underground thing and not in the mainstream so much as such is in this brave new world. a glance at a world of pleasure many would be unaware of as existing would have been a rare, unusual experience back when it came out, which i think was early 80s. that said, i am not sure how glad many (i wasn't) would have been with the bit where a chap gets his (ahem) private parts nailed to some wood (or similar). much of the extras on the disc seem to concern arguments with the bbfc about letting that scene stay in. one can undoubtedly see "worse" or more graphic things on that "internet" now, but few scenes of such made today would match the artistic skill or merit on display here. as an avant garde, symbolic sort of look at what makes a "strange relationship", whilst giving a glance at human nature, oddly i would find myself recommending this motion picture. 

here we are with the 20% of the films what i had already seen. predictably enough that would be the 80s film The Howling II. oddly it is one that i have wished to watch again for a while now, but a random advert on social media offering it for somewhere south of £10 on the fancy video (disc) format meant i went ahead and embraced the wish. 

exactly why did i wish to watch this, which is trash by any standard measurement, again? let's go back to my teenage years. i first saw it probably out of a mix of loving horror films, in particular werewolf ones. there's also the presence of Christopher Lee, and it's worth noting (in terms of how bad the film actually is) he apologised for being in it. for good measure Jimmy Nail is in it too, and i was (quite) sure that Timothy Spall was too, but he isn't. must have been some other horror film. but why i would go back to the film is as simple as how much time in it Sybil Danning is in a state of undress, with particular (precise) emphasis on the infamous end credit scene, where they just loop (or repeat) the scene where she rips her shirt off. 

should it be so that anyone tells you they propose watching Howling II under the guise of it being one of them films described as "so bad it is good", well. no. the only reason to watch (or endure) this motion picture is for the scenes of Sybil Danning in states of undress. ok, it might be that they are determined to watch every Christopher Lee film ever made, but that shall be quite the minority. there is every chance i shall watch it again, and i think you know why. 

which kind of leads on to how i came to, eventually (or at last) see the motion picture Slaughterhouse Five. this is a film i have wished to watch for around forty (!!) or so years, but never got the chance, or around to it. and why did i wish to watch it? because it's based on a classic of literature? due to it being relatively celebrated as a work of cinematic art? or because i saw a magazine article which gave every indication that Lex Luthor's girlfriend out of (proper) Superman had a nudies scene in it?

a chance trip to Fopp in that there London (innit) saw me see it for sale on fancy (video) disc for a most agreeable price. the standard video (disc) was even more agreeable, but on inspection it seemed that the fancy version had a slightly longer running time. which in my mind translated into every chance, or potential, for more nudies. yes, this is how my mind works. 

quite an interesting film, and concept. perhaps (maybe) i should find a copy of the novel and read it, if only to find out exactly how many times the protagonist in it says "and so it goes", which i believe is a lot, despite the phrase not featuring in the film. the whole thing of the hero being "unstuck in time", with the vague notion of him really being either remembering places and fantasising things to escape the horrors of world war two, was intriguing enough. as for the actual, real and main (if not only) reason i got the film (and watched it) oh yes, very satisfactory to have such an itch scratched after so very long, thank you. 

finally, then, and also off of Fopp, the second (of two) French films. i had not ever heard of this film before, but a quick glance at the cover of Benedetta said it was about the forbidden love of lesbian nuns in the seventeenth (possibly sixteenth) century, so it was sold. further inspection said it was made by him off of RoboCop and Starship Troopers (and Showgirls), Paul Verhoven, so yes please. 

watched it expecting to get some exploitative titillation (ahem) dressed up as some obscure, avant garde kind of "social commentary" black comedy as is the case with just about all Paul Verhoven films. if i am indeed spelling his name proper. let me check oh should be Verhoeven. never mind. anyway, soon found myself quite gripped by this. films, or other forms of art, what tend to challenge preconceptions or notions surrounding faith, expressions of christianity and what have you do fascinate me. despite the usual Verhoeven elements here (the nuns just happen to be stunningly beautiful with shaved armpit and trimmed you know what) what nudity there was, and scenes of that sort of thing, were actually tasteful and entirely relevant to the story. just why Verhoeven has decided to be all mature and sophisticated is a mystery of sorts, unless he intended this to be a laugh. 

i would, in a positive way, place this film alongside The Devils and The Last Temptation Of Christ as quite magnificent works destined to forever be controversial but at heart pushing confrontation and conversation around faith. should this subject be of interest then there's every chance you have already seen it, if not then Benedetta is very much worth seeking out. often disturbing watching, but stick with it. 

right, that's that for this. who knew that i would ever (sort of) praise two French films? as i have said before, i am not entirely sure i understand this century, for i find myself forever doing things that i was reasonably sure that i would not. highly unlikely that any comments around any films here would be of a practical use, but thanks for reading anyway. so it goes. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

see my stumble see my fall

hello there

and so it goes with another year starting, or if you will commencing. this one happens to be 2024, look you see, on the off chance you are looking at all of this from some future date. rather than a past one. 

indeed my wrestling with the concept of owning a calendar has (or rather had) continued. my challenge, or should you prefer quarrel, is of a two (2) pronged attack. first is the (mass) debate as to whether i should get one, with me likely to gaze upon it for considerably less ("fewer") than half of the days. then after that is resolved there's the question of which one to get. 

both have, of course, been resolved. hence us being here with this. and here it, the calendar, is. 

perhaps, for some (those few who know me) there's not that much surprise that i went and gone done bought a Bowie one. yet, i feel, there is. to start with i went and paid full price for this, with such being just one singular penny south if £10. i suspect that is more than i have spent on calendars entire in the last four (4) or so years. also it would not be all that normal for me to get a "favourite". usually i would go with the cheapest. sometimes that works out kind of all right, like that one time i got a Star Wars one. 

so, what drew me to a Bowie calendar? no, that's not a fair wording. what drew me to this particular one would be a more better proposition. quite simply the excellent choice of images. and it being around or close to £1 cheaper than the "official" one. have no sense of mistake, for i did consider the officially issued one. it was terrible. first off they had made a decision to go "plastic free" with it, so all copies of it on the shelves are right battered and sort of floppy-foldy in quality. should one get over that, well, the images selected for the official one are, mostly, rubbish. well, ok, there is only so bad a picture of Bowie can be, true, but for some reason they went and selected lesser (fewer) striking images of him, as if to prove some point no one wished to have elaborated.

one resoundingly (exceptionally) solid point of sale to (or for) me was the selection of the "shhhh" image for february. as this month is kind of important to me, it has been a constant source of frustration that weak, poor or dull pictures normally get used. like, for instance, as and when i have had a Star Wars calendar it has been so that february seems to forever feature the gay robot and his bin. seeing what has come to be one of my favourite images of him (Bowie) for that month was a win.

going on, and there's a trilogy there, in the form of june, july and august, which reflects three (3) of the best pictures what i have ever seen of Bowie. the remainder are not bad as such, and the whole this looks more satisfactory than the derisory official one. 

maybe one day someone who actually likes Bowie will take control of what stuff with his name on gets offered for sale. surprised that this has not happened as such, but we can hope. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!