Britain is famous for its criminal stories and its comlicated criminal sceinarios that interest the people when it comes to both television productions and writtings. Works from the urban legends such as Jack the Ripper, Dr Jeckyl and Mr Hyde and others are famous all over the world and definitely proclaim the idea of perfection Britain has for introducing and creating works in that genre.

Recently BBC has introduced a new TV series called Luther -an interrogating criminal story around the police inspector John Luther who copes with comlicated cases of murders and violance. The main aspect is directed in the different criminal plots that police is to cope on a daily basis, revealing in each episode the colimplicity and the responsibility that police officers face every time they have to resolve a hard and a complicated case.

John Luther is a police officer that not only has to resolve different criminal issues, but has a pretty complicated personal life too. Followed in each episode by a female murder the guilt of whom cannot be proved, Luther is forced to cope with the different situations she puts him through. On the other hand, the police officer has a complex relationship with his ex wife who lives with another man. Burned by the love he still feels for her, John will have to learn how to treat her and how to regain her love again while still balancing his timesheet on the job.

In a typical English style, the series fans will see the darker side of London, the places where once the feared death by the different famous London killers and criminals. The programme will introduce the old image of London police forces -people aiming to reduce crime, to fight injustice and to apply the approaches in dealing with crimes in order to preserve the purity and the social order in the densely populated English capital.

ShareThis

Despite the hours of programming devoted to food – whether restaurants or recipes – on terrestrial and satellite TV, there are precious few shows that celebrate the joys of culinary excess. In today’s health-conscious climate, fast food and big portions are normally only seen in a damning light – either spread over a table and sternly condemned, or linked to ill-health, stress and disease. While it’s right and responsible that programme makers seek to enlighten viewers on the dangers of a poor diet, the argument has felt one-sided. Just as any balanced diet can have room for the odd trip to McDonalds, surely there is room in food programming for a positive look at unhealthy eating.

Man vs Food, a U.S. show currently playing on the Travel Channel, may be the show to fill that hole. It follows host Adam Richman visiting a host of what he happily describes as “pig-out spots” across America. The restaurants are usually enormous and packed to the rafters, whilst the portions are super-sized and loaded with what are best described as hearty ingredients. The half-hour show culminates with Richman taking on a restaurant’s own food challenge. Recent episodes have seen the avuncular host eating giant burritos, downing ice-cold milkshakes and consuming white-hot spicy chicken wings without so much as a cold beer to take the edge off.

It’s worth pointing out that the show is certainly not about junk food – in virtually every restaurant, the food is fresh, locally reared and follows traditional recipes. The dishes range from the outlandish – 18 pounds of Alaskan crab legs – to more familiar burgers and sandwiches. Richman clearly loves his work, his appreciation of home cooked, greasy delicacies shining through in each instalment. What Man vs Food celebrates is food that may not be good for you, but is well-made, lovingly prepared and totally delicious. It celebrates a type of food that America is famous for, and which 90% of the population loves to tuck into – once in a while.

If you are curious to find out about these ’American delights'for yourself, or even try your and at cooking them, there are many ’down home'chicken recipes that can be found on multiple sites online. Although, I am satisfied just watching Richmond have his way with these American dishes and resturants. Tucked away amidst the tiresome doom-mongering and health-conscious food programming, it’s an essential part of any balanced TV diet.

ShareThis

We’ve all heard of it raining cats and dogs, even if we don’t know what that really means, but raining meatballs? That’s just bizarre!!

Welcome to Swallow Falls, a tiny Atlantic Island whose entire industry revolves around fishing. But Flint Lockwood thinks big. Too big for a small island, some say, but when he invents a machine that can turn water into food we know that life will never quite be the same again.

Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs is a real triumph for Sony, who have struggled to really compete with Disney Pixar and Dreamworks in the realm of animated movies for some time. Perhaps it didn’t achieve the success that it deserves, but don’t let that put you off it.

It marries a simple plot, with likeable characters and a good deal of typical childish humour with enough clever stuff to keep adults interested. It has long been a bugbear of mine that children’s movies, and indeed TV shows, have nothing in them but entertainment. That’s all very well, but throw in something for the adults and what you have, as in this case, is something that is not only entertaining but potentially thought provoking and mind expanding. Exactly what children should be watching.

Of course, there is a love story thrown in - the island scientist and geek Flint and the mainland weather girl (and a geek herself) - who combine to save the day after Flint’s machine gets out of control. But the real message of the film is carried within their characters. That you should pursue your dreams, never doubt your abilities, and you will one day do amazing things. And you should never have to change who you are for other people. Just be yourself, and things will work out just fine.

All in all, and excellent film with an excellent message, and worth making a bit of storage space on your shelves for, because you will be watching it over and over!

ShareThis

If you are anything like me (and hope not for your sake…) in your taste of horror films, then you will absolutely love ‘Dead End’ (2003). It is not too big budget to be silly and there is just the right amount of gore. But the best thing about this movie is the script.

It centres on a family’s night-time car journey to their relatives’ and the whole film takes place on a lonely stretch of road. This may not sound particularly exciting, but this is no ordinary piece of highway… Without saying too much and spoiling the whole thing, there are plenty of twists and turns in a piece of road that you were sure would be pretty straight. Script-wise, it has several blind curves and more than one terrifying hairpin bend.

There is also a great deal of black humour in ‘Dead End’. It is difficult to give you any examples as it may give the game away, but there are quite a number of truly hilarious moments (one to do with misplaced DNA Testing). Not many films will have any more than a couple of good one-liners, but ‘Dead End’ has heaps of them. And it isn’t your standard brand of black humour either; these jokes are laced with generous helpings of cynicism, sarcasm, narcissism and pessimism.

Much of the film concentrates on the irritating habits of each family member; in many ways you could actually describe the movie as a ‘character study’. There is a lot of amusing bickering between the actors and much of it will take place at the most inappropriate of times.

I love this type of movie because it takes its audience into far more imaginative territory. The only other film I can think of comparing it to would be the equally brilliant, ‘Identity’(also 2003). However, in terms of humour, ‘Dead End’ wins hands down.

ShareThis

Another year, another re-make. What is it with the movie industry’s obsession with re-making classic films? I can understand the need to re-make bad movies but I never get why there are re-makes of good movies. It is a little insulting, I think, to do this. Anyway, this time around it was Clash of the Titans that was re-made. I will always have great memories of the original Clash of the Titans from 1981 because of the work of Ray Harryhausen. The stop motion monsters and the mechanical owl were brilliant to watch.

The latest version of Clash of the Titans is far less memorable. The producers and writing team seem to have taken everything good about the original and replaced it with blurry action scenes, wooden acting and CGI monsters (albeit, very impressive CGI monsters).

At times, the new version is very nice to look at, the scenes with Medusa especially are very nice, as is the Kraken. However, it isn’t all fantastic. Some of the sets were very dodgy and the photography was hardly spectacular. The aforementioned action scenes were rather frustrating to watch at times as the camera panned in and out and jumped from one angle to the next far too quickly.

The acting was stale and pretty much showed that Gemma Arterton is not much more than a pretty face. Sam Worthington tries to be a lead actor but ultimately fails and Liam Neeson just looks awkward throughout, he fits into the era just about as well as paper towels would.

This movie isn’t terrible, and in parts is actually quite enjoyable, but it falls short of capturing the imagination like the original did. With a better lead cast, this movie could have been a little better, but it suffers more from poor writing than anything else. Clash of the Titans (2010) is the product of a modern world, all style and little substance.

ShareThis

Shocking, stomach-churning moments are the hall-mark of cinema both new and old. Forget the laughter, the romance and the action–the thing which people remember is always the bit that makes your jaw drop open and the words “No–That didn’t just happen!” come out. Here are a few legendary moments best forgotten–Or so you wish–

1: The end part of The Hitcher (the original): When the Rutger Hauer starring film appeared, it caused outcry. Strange, considering that you don’t actually see the bit at the end, where the victim is tied up between two enormous trucks–and the truck in front threatens to pull away. But there is sound, and that was enough for this piece of cinematic nastiness to stick in the mind forever.

2: Saw: This film hit big, and for good reason, it was the first film in an age to actually show the viewer that most grisly of things: someone severing their own limb. Sadly, the rest of the film isn’t quite as captivating, although nobody can argue that it won’t live forever as a classic of its genre.

3: American History X: It’s hard to know what to say about this film that hasn’t been said. Beyond brutal, and featuring arguably the most horrific scene of any film ever, Edward Norton made this film one to remember. Strangely, the director of the film, Tony Kaye, severed all ties shortly after, citing artistic differences.

4: (REC): This supernatural shocker—dark and brooding and shot in the first-person— came seemingly out of nowhere, and features one of the best ghostly endings of any movie ever. It’s hard to pin-point what makes this movie so creepy…but you won’t waste much time wondering that while watching it. Don’t like being trapped in to the dark? This may not be the film for you–

So I have finally been paid for that last writing job that I did, you all know what that means, it’s about time to hit the store and pick up that new pair of mizuno running shoes that I have been waiting to get. Catherine, are you up for a trip to the high streets this week?

ShareThis

Writing a ’best of'list is hardly new and there are so many of them out there that they start to pale into insignificance. However, despite all that, I am going to present my top ten movies of all time. They are spread throughout several genres and offer something for everyone’s tastes.

10. 2001: A Space Odyssey - The first of Kubrick’s entries into the top ten. This movie provides some of cinema’s best moments and one of its greatest villains in HAL.

9. Dr Strangelove - Kubrick’s second movie of the top ten is one of the most quotable movies of all time. This dark comedy about the cold war could be Kubrick’s best

8. The Usual Suspects - This gangster epic has a great cast, great story and one of the best twists ever seen in film history.

7. Pan’s Labyrinth - There were several foreign movies that could have made it into this list, but Del Toro’s dark fairytale masterpiece was too good to beat.

6. Withnail and I - The most quotable comedy ever made. Richard E Grant’s career took off after his perfect portrayal of Withnail; the drunk, out of work actor.

5. Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back - The best Star Wars movie. Take out the epic story and great action and it would still be in here because the bad guys won this one.

4. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers - The battle scenes in this movie were flawless as was the set and costume design. It was an excellent production.

3. Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - A great movie that followed in the footsteps of its predecessor. The epic finale of the story is perfectly translated to the big screen.

2. Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring - The best of the trilogy. Jackson created a realistic fantasy setting and stayed true to the novel. A great story and a great cast.

1. Blade Runner - The movie that defined the look for all sci-fi movies that followed. This film is a masterpiece in photography, something Director Ridley Scott would later be famed for. The story is dark, thought provoking and tragic.

By the way, just before I go, I have just updated the text on the homepage for red diesel suppliers, I know that it will surprise you that I am doing some stuff for an oil company; but I don’t think they are as enviromentally irresponsible as I once assumed. Plus, I’ve sold out, I need the compensation!

ShareThis

Many a stuffy comedy critic will tell you that to make a great sitcom, there are certain rules you have to follow. You can’t overload the show with superfluous characters, drop narrative trails unexpectedly, or ignore the comedy appeal of the situation itself. Such a show, they would claim, would simply never work.

There have been, of course, any number of sitcoms in recent years that have pushed the envelope in different ways. They have generally sprung from this side of the Atlantic, from the Mighty Boosh’s surreal settings (don’t mention the third series, though) to America, the impeccable Seinfeld moved the tone of sitcoms from cosy and reliable, towards a more cynical bent. That said, aside from a few landmark episodes, Seinfeld did not push too hard on the boundaries of narrative and setting, opting instead to ramp up the intricacy of the plot to great effect. 30 Rock, the creation of SNL head writer Tina Fey, is a sitcom that initially appears to justify the critics. Character relationships appear fuzzy, the scene is not set accurately and the viewer can’t really tell what’s going on. 30 Rock’s saving grace is that it relaxes these rules in order to pack even more jokes in. The result is a show that reveals itself to be fast moving, direct, varied and guarantees at least three proper laughs per episode. Edgy enough to have earned a cult following, it still plays at prime time on NBC, comedy show that bears heavy resemblance to Saturday Night Live. She is portrayed by the show’s creator, Tina Fey, and is to all intents and purposes the main character. She is hardly Basil Fawlty though; aside from a few slightly clunky references to disorganisation, she coasts through the early episodes, almost as a conduit to the more gregarious personalities in the show. This could have been intentional, or it could be that Fey was overshadowed initially by the knockout performance of Alec Baldwin. Either way, it has allowed Liz Lemon to develop as a main character, and by Series 3 she feels connected and relevant to every other part of the show; an unassuming, sympathetic presence without ever taking centre stage.

Rule 2: Don’t fill the script with characters
Sitcom tradition dictates that you should restrict your pool of characters to half a dozen. Several shows have brought in minor characters in large numbers to provide additional laughs (The Simpsons, for one), but it’s hard to recall a show with such a consistently large cast. Fey seems to draw different characters to the front at will, lending the show a realistic feel, whilst giving the show time to pick out its strongest characters. Grizz and Dot Com, Tracy Jordan’s initially under-used entourage, are brought into the spotlight in later series, whilst the more rounded character of Pete, Liz’s sidekick in Series 1, becomes almost an extra, appearing occasionally as a character we know and like. As a result, over just three and a bit series, I have personally had five different favourite characters.

Rule 3: The situation matters

Many a comedy writer has put this at No.1 on the list of sitcom essentials, but it’s one that I have never agreed with. Some shows, like The Office, depend on their environment, but there are plenty of others where the setting is almost irrelevant. Take Red Dwarf – for all the episodes about changeling alien carnivores, and backwards bizarro worlds, my highlight has always been the simmering dialogue between two people who just don’t like each other, whatever planet they’re on. 30 Rock is the latest show to embrace this idea – a risk, given that it is written by a former SNL head writer, is about making an NBC comedy and is even named after NBC’s head office. There are plenty of jokes aimed at the industry, but the relationships at the heart of the show work in any situation – Liz as Jack’s protégée, and Liz in turn managing increasingly wayward employees. The moments you remember are personal rather than satirical, and as the series develops, the jokes are drawn almost exclusively from the characters.

Rule 4: Stick to one style30 Rock veers wildly between styles, employing catchphrases, slapstick and satire at different times. Cameos from Ben Stiller and Salma Hayek show that ultimately, 30 Rock’s aim is to entertain the viewer by any means. Whether it is leading us towards a cliché and then veering in a different direction, or reverting to old sitcom tricks like surprise guest stars, Fey seems most concerned in getting as many laughs in as possible. The result is a show that delivers more laughs in half an hour than some of the most finely crafted sitcoms can produce through a series. By breaking so many of the outdated rules of sitcom, 30 Rock has emerged from a slow start to prove that rules don’t matter, as long as your show makes people laugh.

ShareThis

OK, so I’ve done some serious thinking. It’s hard to show that with only a sentence but trust me, I have. Here’s where I’m at–I’m going to go the non obvious route (mainly because I am still stumped): I’m going to say that somewhere, hidden in all those TV shows and films, is a clue or two as to what could challenge the Hulk; I’m thinking not along the lines of some mean monster or piece of government technology, no, that’d be far too obvious—I’m thinking of some baked goods which bring terrible memories flooding back to the Hulk…or a certain kind of awful toilet-paper—probably the tracing-paper kind which is extremely abrasive and would give any kind of monster the willies—which reminds of those horrible pre-Hulk school days.

Hang on a minute–all this thinking is finally going somewhere. Maybe the Green Giant—the infamous man on the tins of sweet-corn—would give the Hulk a run for his money? I can’t imagine the Hulk would be particularly pleased if someone turned up impersonating him and smiling his massive head off as if to rub the insult in further. The man / monster gets angry for much less, after all.

Who knows if we’ll ever find out? That tends to grate on me to be honest; I loved the Edward Norton film but I need more of the Hulk. I think we all do. No matter how old I get, I’ll never be too old to appreciate a good bit of old fashioned Hulk carnage.

ShareThis

Why was I hoping that The Wicker Man would be any good? I ask myself that question every time I walk past a wicker basket–which happens far too much–see Nicholas’s Cage’s mug on TV–ditto–or hear the hallowed name Alan Whicker. I suspect the ending was only part of it; more than anything—even more than the bit at the very end where the terrible thing happens which should not happen to anyone, however naive—I was looking forward to seeing how the concept had dated, and if a modern twist could inject some kind of spice into the concept which might make the young ones of today like the old film as much as I had when I first saw it.

My hoping, as it turns out, was for nothing and I very much doubt that anyone who watched this film and hadn’t seen the original went rushing out to buy a vintage copy. Turns out the famous British broadcaster and journalist may have been better in the leading role of what should have been more than decent remake.

This time around, as aforementioned, Nicholas Cage steps into the role of the determined yet all too unseeing police-man—American, this time, would you believe?—searching for a missing girl; like in the original film, it’s extremely clear from the off-set that the villagers of the remote island would rather stick large pins in their eyes than aid the police-man in his quest. Once again he goes from banging his head against one brick wall to another slightly harder one, until time runs out.

Add some odd language, lots of women who frown a lot, a decent helping of ritualistic strangeness and an attempt at being deathly serious which implodes from the get go and there you have it; a tortured remake of a classic film with far too little to offer.

So, as you all should know, it is my birthday soon and in case you are wondering what to buy me (that means you Ruth) I have been looking at that dvd set for Murder She Wrote, just in case you couldn’t think of anything…

ShareThis