76. Monstrously Sexy
I was amused to see in the ad breaks to the film Monster (on Seven), there were ads for Sexy Chat over the phone. I’m aware that that always happens during late night films, but seriously, during Monster? How the hell could you feel like that after seeing Charlize Theron in her hideously ugly whoresome self, regardless of whether she’s kissing a necrophiliac or not*? And even if you did like that look, why would you be turned on by an ad that showed five bimbos? Hmm?

*Christina Ricci is a necrophiliac, not a lesbian. Just accept it. Indeed, just as you can trace some actress’ careers these days to how often they kiss girls gratuitously in their films/shows, you could trace Ricci’s corpse-surrounded career in the same manner, I suspect.

77. Meandering Mutterings about Monday
Contrary to what I’d asked for, I was unfortunately (out of necessity – that’s a legal disclaimer) called into work on today due to desperate measures, even though I needed the day off to finish my other work. So I have to do it all tomorrow, all that audio transcribing. Meaning that I’ll have to cram about seven hour-long interviews in tomorrow. That’s, what, fourteen hours’ work, at worst?

And yes, being called in due to desperate measures is how I’m always called into work. Naturally. They wouldn’t have me otherwise.

Okay, I’m being flippant. Curiously, Tamara-the-other-person-in tonight said of my chicken slicing skills that I should “give up transcribing and become a chef”. God. I seem to have little skills that I could develop either way in different areas – though admittedly I screw up from time to time in the kitchen, as many people do – almost like a character in an RPG like Deus Ex that you can augment in any way possible. But Player One has decided I’ll be in the “creative” side of things, which means I’ll be shot to death because I’m a weak little shit. At least as a chef in an RPG you could cook people.

And no, I’m not trying to suggest we’re all living in the Matrix. Indeed, the very idea of living in a world constructed by the Wachowski brothers scares the shit out of me far more than the concept of the film itself, because we’d constantly freeze quite slowly, refer to each other by tryhard names (and sometimes just “Mr Kelly” or something like that) and we’d all think wearing sunglasses and wearing long coats is automatically cool. But on the plus side, at least I wouldn’t be Keanu “White rabbit? More like red-tailed hawk” Reeves.

See? I told you I’m tired. When I get nasty and snarky about everything, it means I’m tired. It also means I approach that special something called “funny”, making it a double-edge sword.

Why would you bloody well fashion a double-edged sword anyway?

But, thinking about it, how Matrix­-y WAS that Animorphs run of episodes where Tobias found that group called something like the Band of the Hawk (okay, that’s Berserk, but it was similar) that he followed the symbol of, to be asked to touch a special disc, to discover that all is not what it is and that he’s actually an Andalite...? I’m assuming, too, that it came out before The Matrix, making it even weirder. And, by the way, if you didn’t get it, this explains why I gave Keanu Reeves that bit about a red-tailed hawk before, because the guy who plays Tobias, Christopher “I almost wrote Robin, which is appropriate because Rachel’s often a bear” Ralph, looks insanely like Keanu Reeves. Indeed, I’m still surprised that of all of them, it’s him that’s disappeared into the most obscurity, whilst Shaun “I’ll just freeze the Yeerks” don’t-remember-his-last-name was in the X-Men films, and Brooke “I know where you shopped last summer” Nevin was in that I Still Bloody Well Know What You Did A Couple of Summers Ago and Whilst I’ve Forgotten the Details I Could Still Testify... Maybe... So, Ner. Well, it’s called something like that.

Interestingly – and I know this because I forgot Keanu Reeves’ name and had to look it up in this 1001 Films book – The Matrix is on page 911 of said book. Make of that what you will. Maybe George W Bush stands for George Wachowski Bush. Who stars in W For Wanky-epic.

(Again, I’m just being nasty for the sake of being nasty. Barring Natalie “...” Portman, V for Vendetta holds up pretty well throughout)

78. Cunting on the River
…Eragon is also in my 20 Favourite Films list. Sorry, did I say “favourite”? I meant “fuck-awful”. Which is a great word, one I’ve never heard someone say before, and therefore one I’m going to use more often. I really should start sculpting swear words in unusual ways, because, as Regan (The Exorcist) and drill sergeant (Full Metal Jacket) have proved, it can be very funny.

Regan, because apart from the conventional “fuck me!” and “Let Jesus fuck you!” (though even that’s grammatically normal, it’s not exactly normal per-se), she also says, “Do you know what she did? Your cunting daughter?” which is incredibly strange. “Cunting”. Not only is it something I’ve never heard apart from in The Exorcist, it also sounds like a companion sport to punting, except possibly involving sperm li-loing up... well, yeah.

“Li-loing” is how you spell it, not “lilowing”. I was told this today, in reference to the transcriptions. Annoyingly, of course, neither come up as correct in this spellchecker. You gotta love this Vista, love this Vista, gotta love it, love it. Love it, dammit!

79. My Collection Grows
B ecause of the 1001 Films thing, I absolutely intend to actually watch these things I talk about. Indeed, I almost bought Mad Max today at Big W, but instead I bought:

The Omen (newer version)
Forbidden Planet
Shakespeare in Love
Scream
The Nutty Professor (original version)
Dr Strangelove
Rear Window/Vertigo
A.I.

I’ve already got Rear Window, I know. But I don’t have it on me, and this was the only way I was going to be able to see Vertigo, so... annoyingly, there’s another Hitchcock double which is The Birds and Psycho, which means I should have bought this one and that one instead of the trio. Never mind. Bloody Nirvana, I made the reference again!

It’s a fairly diverse list, I must admit; I did get a strange look from the person who served me, as she was constantly surprised. “Oh, The Omen and Scream, so you’re a horror f... oh, god, Forbidden Planet and A.I.? I mean, that’s just so lame, and... Dr Strangelove? Shakespeare in Love? Hitchcock films? Okay, maybe you do have good taste, and... Jerry Lewis? God, you’re a freak!”

That never happened, it’s what I imagine to have happened. And I’ve no idea if Jerry Lewis is any good or not, it’s just that the cover is beyond silly in its attempt to portray that elusive thing called “comedy”.

Reading the back of the Scream DVD, I notice that it says “Don’t answer the door, don’t leave the house, don’t answer the phone, but most of all don’t SCREAM!” Was that the film’s tagline? If so, ‘Blink’ stole it, and I didn’t even realise. Man. Considering this and The Exorcist thievery in ‘Fear Her’ (not to mention ‘The Deadstone Memorial’, er... so I will and just did), that’s tad weird.

Also, I didn’t actually realise that the new The Omen stars Liev “I support Hitler, but not the devil” Schreiber. That’s very interesting.

80. Fragmented Thoughts About a Few of the Films
… Speaking of direction, as well as doing about five transcriptions (five hours, plus three give or take for the films... man, no wonder I’m so tired. But at least I don’t have a headache), I watched Scream, Rear Window and Vertigo. I’m too tired to make any big analyses of them, but just to put in a few points;

(SPOILERS, by the way)

The cast of Scream kept surprising me – in fact, Neve Campbell was the only one I was expecting, which is odd considering she was the only one I hadn’t seen in a film before. “Wait, Drew Barrymore!” “Wait – that’s the girl out of Charmed!” “Hey, it’s the guy who hangs around with Scooby Doo!” “Wait, Liev Schreiber, again?! What’s with that bloke?”

Rear Window was utterly brilliant in its scope, its setting, and the way Hitchcock used it. Its only problem was very simple; I’d seen the Simpsons episode ‘Bart of Darkness’ which is a takeoff. That’s not to say it’s better or it ruins it completely, but it means that I spent the whole time watching Rear Window thinking – particularly because on the back it says “events that ultimately lead to one of the most memorable and gripping endings in all of film history” – that it would have a twist ending and he wouldn’t have killed his wife. Nope, it’s as simple as that. This disappointed me a tad, as Hitchcock is usually able to add some sting to the tail of his films. That said, Psycho and Vertigo are my frames of reference here; The Birds doesn’t exactly progress either, but for me it had an advantage over Rear Window. And that was, quite simply, that it didn’t have an entire Simpsons episode parodying it. I’ve said this to Liam, but the Hitchcock films I’ve seen begin in ways that have nothing to do with what the film’s ultimately about (well, except Vertigo, arguably), and ultimately it’d be better if we knew absolutely nothing before going into see it (I mean, you could watch the first ten minutes of The Birds and think, title included, it’s just going to be a story about silly pranks. That said, maybe that’s a bad thing, as you’d turn off). But it’s even better not seeing a parody of it.

I would have had the same problem with Scream, too, because I’ve seen Scary Movie. Except... Scream doesn’t need parodying. It’s so postmodern about it being a horror film that I find the concept of it needing parodying genuinely bizarre. I mean, a parody of The Shining worked in The Simpsons because it’s ultimately a comedy laced with horror (in the Treehouse of Horror episodes, anyway), whereas The Shining has dark comedy but is still definably a horror. Scream treads the line into self-parody so often that I was unsure what to think. The 1001 Films book said that audiences laughed and screamed at the same time – and maybe that’s just typical hyperbole that I shouldn’t believe (like the ending-to-Rear Window thing, which I just misinterpreted to my own peril), but maybe they get it, and I don’t.

That’s not to say I thought Scream was crap or anything, and I perfectly understand why people would like the postmodern stuff. Personally I found some of it very clever (the “look behind you” scene was great because it actually cleverly fuelled into the plot, as the journalist’s cameraman watched it), but some of it was a tad annoying, like all of the “yeah, okay, you want me to play the virgin?” stuff. I know, it’s probably meant to be annoying, and I’m not saying it was hideous or anything, but it just made the film uneven for me. Particularly since Wes Craven apparently made his name for horror films long past (Nightmare on Elm Street and The Hills Have Eyes), and it seems that he’s taking the piss in his older film career. Which is fine, yeah, but it’d be nice if he could find a way to move on rather than point out that his previous films were po-faced.

Though of course, maybe they weren’t – maybe, like Hitchcock, he made suspense/horror films with excellent dark comedy. Though perhaps not; they don’t seem to strike me as that, and I wouldn’t describe any of the comedy in Scream as “black comedy”. As I said, “parody” more than anything else.

In Vertigo, there’s a scene where Jimmy Stewart dreams his head going through a tunnel. This surprises me because it predates Doctor Who – and, indeed, way predates Doctor Who using a face in its opening titles. I suppose the difference is that there was nothing on television like the DW titles at the time, but it’s still sort of a surprise. As was the use of colour over an eye, which spoke to me of 2001, even though obviously Kubrick’s film came later. That was another surprise.

By the way, I laughed a while ago about a film starring Sean Connery being called Marnie. I’ve only just discovered that it was directed by Hitchcock, which makes it feel even weirder.

Also, according to the 1001 Films book, Hitchcock’s Rope adopts a way of telling a story that Lars Von Trier’s Dogme95 movement and The Blair Witch Project set out to do. This astounds me, as does the bit about Hitchy having one of the first non-silent films and leading the way there. I suppose it shouldn’t, but I find it hard to believe that someone could always be at the forefront of innovation, and yet release, god, how many films was it? He was releasing at least one a year from 1953 to 1960, if I remember rightly, and the same sorts of patterns were there before too.

It seems to me that one of Hitchcock’s traits, too, is a love of buildings and the way you can use them in a film. Not architecture as such – in the way that, say, Tim Burton likes gothic things – just in the manner of how they’re used. From the Bates Mansion of Psycho, to the bell-tower in Vertigo, and the back street of Rear Window... I thought for a minute or two that I was imagining this connection, but in the 1001 Films entry for Hitch’s Rebecca it says “Hitchcock transformed the Manderley mansion into a character unto itself – later the inspiration for the imposing Xanadu in Citizen Kane.” Which seems to confirm my theory. And the latter part, again, surprises me.

Already, I feel I’ll have to juggle around the Hitchcock films on my 20 Favourite Films list. Blatantly, The Birds, as brilliant as it is, isn’t as uniquely special as Rear Window, and it’s not as emotionally charged as Vertigo either (the only Hitchcock film so far, I should note, that I’ve genuinely felt the love plot had any merit and wasn’t just here because it’s, you know, a film. Not that I’m complaining; being a Bond viewer of sorts, I’m always used to that sort of thing, and indeed that sort of thing being in movies in general. At the very least, Hitchcock’s women are at least quite interesting on some level – particularly in Psycho and Vertigo).

Also, Rear Window, Psycho and Vertigo all rhyme. Just thought I should share that.

And yes, I’m now determined to watch all of Hitchcock’s films... even is this adds an even more painful burden to the “watch every film in the 1001 Films book” (after all, a lot of them aren’t listed in that book). But I will, I swear. I just need to find them, as I only really found the ones I’ve watched at Big W. Elsewhere, perhaps...

Oh, I noted before of Vertigo’s beginning being central to the rest of the film. I should also point out that it’s the first Hitchcock that goes for a set piece straight away rather than starting out with nothing and building up.

And I didn’t count Rear Window’s opening, by the way, simply because of the title sequence and overall mood, which, even though it obviously shares the same setting and viewing of the neighbours, could still lead you to think you’re about to watch something silly.

81. Quoth Liam: “I had a weird dream last night…”
Strangely, living in Singleton has meant in increase in not only dreaming, but actual dreams. Maybe it so happens that one of the farms next door owns a marijuana plantation and it’s drifting in to my nose whilst I sleep. Maybe this is all a bad dream. Who knows?

I should state what I mean by “not only dreaming, but actual dreams”. Firstly, I used to have, at best, two dreams a week. Certainly no more than one a day. But now, since I have to get up at about 9, my body does a weird thing of waking at 7, going to sleep, and then at 8, and then going to sleep. And somehow, it fits dreams into those times. As for the “dreams” bit, well, my dreams beforehand were mostly normal. I’d be at school (well, okay, being still at school isn’t normal, because I’m not in real life. But it’s hardly exciting, is it?) and I’d just talk to people, or I’d do something else mundane (some dreams had me flirting, which is again mundane as hell. No raunchy sex in my head, for some reason).

I had a really bizarre one this morning. It was a Simpsons episode where they went away to (I don’t even remember where), but for some reason, at the end of the dream, as Homer ran away and his kids chased him, everything changed. Suddenly I was there, for a start, and I was with Yeardley Smith and Nancy Cartwright who play Lisa and Bart respectively. We were still chasing Homer, but yeah. Weirdly, Nancy Cartwright looked like Rosamund Pike, in her Die Another Day fencing scene outfit. Whereas Yeardley... was a schoolgirl. I’m now rather worried. Also, Marge, throughout the “episode”, kept changing accents – even mid-speech – going from posh British to cowboy in five seconds.

Although the first dream has no bearing on anything, the second is blatantly there because I’ve been watching too much Simpsons lately, and the fact that Yeardley and Nancy were there means I’ve been listening to too many commentaries. Similarly, at one point, I said to Nancy that “I love catchphrases, uh-ha-ha!” was my character’s catchphrase, which at first I dismissed this morning and then realised it’s probably there because the one episode I watched last night that I hadn’t seen before, ‘Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie’, is full of postmodern jokes.

So apparently I’m now very attracted to “Nancy Cartwright”. Huh. And no, I hadn’t actually been thinking about Rosamund Pike yesterday other than briefly seeing that she was in a film coming out according to IMDB, so I’ve no idea where that came from. Sure, she’s attractive, but I’ve never really had a thing for her. Goddammit, why I can’t I dream about Carey Mulligan?

82. Yet More Films to Look Out! For…
So, continuing on because I’ve unearthed new stuff, here’s some more things to look forward to in 2008 and later years:

West 10 LDN
I’m cheating, this is TV (I cheat on my first entry?). But from the plot: “A collection of tower blocks and concrete expanse, it has its own rules and codes, its own distinctive languages and culture, both old and new. It is a tightly knit community that is on call to protect those within its boundaries. It is an intense, turbulent, passionate world, rarely depicted other than when the antagonisms and struggles of its young lives spill out onto the surrounding streets and into the news. West 10 LDN invites us into this territory, and delves into the big stories of the lives of the young, multi ethnic generation who live there – with a blast of energy and power, with dynamism, wit and blistering vibrancy.” Okay, that’s long and sales-pitchy, but it’s pretty interesting if done right (remember that Rear Window doesn’t exactly have a huge setting either). Anyway, the reason I knew about it was because it stars Noel “Shutup you chav bitch!” Clarke. Which reminds me...

Adulthood
The sequel to Kidulthood. Apparently this one follows Sam (as played by Noel Clarke) more than any other character, which is welcome in my eyes. So it stars and is written by Noel, of course, but it appears that it’s also directed by him this time. Yeesh, he’s involved.

The International
“An Interpol agent (Owen) attempts to expose a high-profile financial institution's role in an international arms dealing ring.” Naomi Watts and Clive “Oh my god, you’re pregnant! And so are you!” Owen.

In 2009...

Demons and Angels
Goddammit. A Dan Brown book adapted to screen by Ron Howard again. Tom Hanks again. Naomi Watts as the assistant. I’m not all that happy.

The Birds
Yes, it’s a remake, with (it’s rumoured) Naomi Watts taking over the blonde woman role (I make that sound as generic as possible because, really, that’s what it tends to be in Hitchcock films). The director is Martin Campbell, who directed many things including Casino Royale, Goldeneye and The Mask of Zorro. Not bad, then, but we’ll see. I don’t have an ambivalence on the level of “HOW DARE THEY REMAKE THIS?!” – probably because I haven’t seen the colour Psycho – but I just don’t think it’ll be worth all that much, really.

Need
“A prosperous New York therapist (Watts) discovers that one of her patients, a suicidal woman (Kidman), is having an affair with her husband.” That doesn’t sound in the slightest bit interesting. I only know about it because Naomi Watts and Nicole “My husband is in Dorksville” Kidman are in it.

Kicked, Bitten and Scratched
This sounds rather boring; from memory, it’s a comedy about zoologists. Good on them. It happens to star Naomi Watts.
Anyway. More when I come back after today’s shift.

67. Not Gonna Wed Us!
As if to confuse me even further, it turns out that one of the members of t.A.T.u. – the reddy/browny/curly-haired one – married her girlfriend recently. So... she genuinely is gay. God, I’m so confused (though probably not as much as they are). So she was being gratuitous about her sexuality with someone who wasn’t lesbian, to promote pro-lesbian values, and... god. What’s more confusing is that Liam informs me (he linked me to the t.A.T.u. blog that said about the wedding in the first place) that it was Shapovalov, their manager, who came up with the lesbian imagery, and it’s therefore seemingly coincidental. Bizarre. The pop world is ever more fascinating. But I wonder if the wedding will have an appearance in the upcoming Finding t.A.T.u.? Probably not. Unfortunately.

Though allegedly she’s going to post pics soon, so I’m waiting around for that.

I know, this sounds colossaly pervy, but as Liam said yesterday on MSN, “It’s a different sort of pervy... being interested in pervy things, without any sexual intentions at all.” That’s not entirely true all the time for me, because (very rarely, I have to admit; sorry, girls) that I do find some lesbian erotica stimulating, but as I said, rarely. I certainly have nothing for t.A.T.u. Except amusement.

68. Sex with Cats
I’ve just seen a film that many people I know, and many magazines I read (Hyper, basically, but other DVD mags like Empire that I occasionally read), despise beyond all measure, calling it one of the worst films ever. That film is Catwoman.

I honestly don’t see what all the fuss is about.

Alright, I do, but only in terms of understanding why people would hate it, rather than agreeing wholeheartedly. Liam, for instance, often cites the “Cat got your tongue?” line as being indicative of the film as a whole – indeed, it’s even listed as one of the bloody chapter points on the DVD. Thing is, I agree with him, but I’m unsure as to whether he meant it’s indicative of the film’s quality (i.e. he thinks it’s shit), or indicative of a gaping flaw right at the centre of the film. I’d definitely vouch, in my opinion, for the latter being the case.

Before I go on, a little bit of background. Catwoman has also appeared, of course, in many Batman productions beforehand, including the cheesy 60s version of the show, and the 89 onwards Batman set of films. In those films though, she’s often a celebrated character by the audience, someone who is amusing and enjoyable to watch, particularly in the films. And yet... she isn’t really that much different in Catwoman. Even her sexuality remains apparent. It’s exactly the same scenario as the Bond films, where a spy is seen as a likeable, watchable character, and yet a quipping spy in another action film will be automatically frowned upon. Even though Bond’s the misogynist one. And even though Catwoman is purely a love interest in Batman Returns, but is her own woman in Catwoman. So what’s the issue?

Well, neglecting the desire to blame people for being a tad “it was on a while ago, so it’s better” in their views, I think the problem is the setting, and the surroundings. Bond may be misogynist, but he’s also genuinely funny (even being genuinely funny about his misogyny), and that separates him from the norm. In terms of Catwoman... well, it’s that inbuilt cheesiness factor. That’s evident in the 60s show (which is deliberately cheesy, of course), but the Batman films exhibit them too. It’s difficult to pinpoint, but at the same time, it’s easy to see a world of difference between Jack Nicholson acting as a crazed Joker in Batman and a crazed joker in The Shining. So whilst the Joker in Batman is disturbing in the scene where he shoots the guy to death, it’s also very funny because... well, it’s dark. It’s something nasty presented as something funny (which is unusual and rather classy for Burton – it’s something you’d expect more from Kubrick – but never mind). In that sense, the Batman films have many layers, where they treat their subject matter seriously, know they’re cool, and yet know they’re inherently silly and cheesy at the same time. That’s a great balance to have, and they master it.

Catwoman doesn’t. I’m more than happy to point out, to support the film, that the overt sexuality and crap lines like, “Cat got your tongue?” and the quips can really be seen as merely part of the character. To take the Batman comparison further; who actually laughs at the jokes that Jack Nicholson and Jim Carrey come up with? Do you? Well, I don’t know anyone who does, but they still say they’re “funny”. That’s a hard distinction to make, but yes, it’s perfectly possible to be funny without actually making any jokes at all, and it’s something they pull off. So Catwoman’s jokes aren’t funny either, but... well, the problem is this: whenever the Joker or the Riddler makes a joke, Batman just regards the jokes with indifference, and often takes them seriously. In that sense, we know that they find themselves funny but Batman and the rest of the world doesn’t, and therefore it’s obviously part of the character, and therefore we can enjoy them. Catwoman, on the other hand, doesn’t have anyone like that. There’s no-one around her who for a second thinks she isn’t funny, or is annoying, or who takes her too seriously. Even in the fights she has with Tom Lone and Sharon Stone’s character, they quip back at her. Therefore, it suddenly becomes less of a case of the main character thinking they’re cool, and the director and production team thinking they are. Which is most definitely what ruins it.

Indeed, the direction decides it’s going to play around with the audience’s motion sickness like a cat plays with its prey, and it’s all in the name of being cool. Another obvious thing about the movie is the use of CGI which, even though it’s fairly close to being real, never looks anything but fake. Again, in the hands of a production team with – dare I say it – a bit more intelligence, this could have been an ingenious attribute to the film. The shots of the buildings, which are gloriously fake CGI, could have been a way of clicking the audience into the fact that the world being presented is fake. Because it is; the plot is about cosmetics, and Patience is called into the director’s office simply because she chose the slightly wrong colour red. In that sense, the director should have kept that world fake, and been consistently real with everywhere else, hence adding to the at-an-angle-to-reality feel that the world of cosmetics (and, by extent – even though I know there’s fundamental differences, don’t get me wrong – plastic surgery). Instead, he litters the rest of the film with pointless CGI sequences as well, and the illusion is lost, making nothing seem real. And that’s a huge problem. Worse, they’re not even dramatic or visually fulfilling on an artistic level. Early in the film, when you first see the cat lady’s house, the camera sweeps onto a building and then its reflection, seeing the house. This is a great shot, because it reflects the “bars” thing going in the film (Patience slipping through bars... breaking out of the metaphorical bars of the modern world) as well as setting us up to pay attention to reflection, which is also very important in this film. But every other CGI shot is a waste of time; every time Catwoman looks out over the city, it’s meaningless. I didn’t even get a sense of “it’s her world to explore” like I did with Spiderman, which is annoying beyond belief. I mean, even The Birds had a slightly-dodgily realised overhead shot with a bird looking down at carnage below, which is exempt from anything but petty criticism because it’s so important to building the menace and creepiness. But no, the CGI sequences in Catwoman are pointless. End of story.

Now; sexuality as power. I ranted about this a while back, and it’s a point here; the women throughout Catwoman use their sexuality to get what they want. If that was seen as a bad thing, then I’d be happy to watch it, but as it stands, I don’t actually see a criticism of that. Oh no, don’t get me wrong, there’s a criticism of cosmetics, but not of kinky S+M cat costumes, or strutting around like Catwoman does. We’re clearly meant to feel she’s empowered, and whilst she is, she is because of her sex and it annoys me greatly because this is never looked down upon. Indeed, everyone in the film is obsessed with sex, even Patience’s best friend, which is a stupid decision. Had her friend not been in the same mindset, it might have worked, but as it stands the characters in Catwoman have basically two mindsets: you either go for cosmetics, or you go for natural yet kinky sexiness. Oh, a big round of applause. Worse, this is complimented by the soundtrack. I noted a while ago that Destiny’s Child, singing ‘Independent Woman’, for Charlie’s Angels, was the most amusingly ironic thing I’d ever heard. Because at the end of the day, both the Angels and Destiny’s Child are selling themselves for men, no matter what their attitude is, and it’s this misguided view that they’re sexually free from male society that brings them down. The same is true of Catwoman, and unfortunately, the soundtrack is the same sort of stuff; lots of “Ahh! Ahh!” R ‘n’ B stylings during the fight scenes. Again, had this been a criticism of that, I wouldn’t have minded, but as it stands there’s not a shred of evidence that this is anything but a championing of it.

And Halle Berry’s costume embodies this perfectly; whilst, as is pointed out, it’s very obviously a catty like costume, it’s also very obviously a sex symbol costume. I’m aware that cats are graceful, and slinky, and have power over people, but... not through sex. Pardon me for not being into bestiality, but I don’t find cats sexually attractive in any way, and the costume is blatantly meant to be sexy, so... it’s pandering to the audience. So again, instead of criticising it, it’s celebrating it, because the audience are meant to enjoy such a costume. And man, maybe some do. Personally it had nothing on me, but then I’ve never understood why Nicole Kidman has such fascination for a guy in a stupid bad suit in Batman Forever, or how the fuck anyone can possibly find Superman attractive. And this sexuality problem is compounded further by Patience seeing previous women changed by the Maus, because none of them are sexual in any way, simply powerful.

Speaking of which, whilst the opening “cats through history” thing is nice, it reminded me of Cats and Dogs, which didn’t help it in the credibility stakes. Ironically, I do find cats far more fascinating in their treatment throughout history than bats, and yet I think Batman is a far more watchable and understandable character, in his semi-vampiric-but-not-really way. He’s into the vampiric love, she’s into the S+M. Maybe it’s just me, but at least the former has a tiny indication of love inherent.

That said, she just leaves Tom at the end of the film to his own devices, an ending I wasn’t expecting, so points for that. And whilst I’m at it, other positives; the two evil characters are great, and Halle Berry is unbelievably good at capturing the feline effect. And yes, I much prefer her catty touches to the strutting leather-suited freak she becomes later.

But whilst I’m at it, one thing that was truly awful was the direction during some of the fight scenes. As well as the wholly undramatic soundtrack which pulled you out of the film rather than into it, the jerky, split-second edits were unbelievably bad. They didn’t seem cat-like in any manner to me, just annoying.

At the end of the day, Catwoman isn’t the so-bad-it’s-good film I wanted to see, and I’m actually even more disappointed, not to mention bored. Its biggest horrible problem is that it has such huge, massive, awesome potential, and it could have been by far the best and most coherently themed comic book film of all time. Instead, its themes get buried under a misguided attempt at being cool, and it just ends up being an irritating failure. But not overtly without merit, let me admit that.

69. Today Tonight (in a parallel universe)
I was annoyed when watching Today Tonight – my fault, of course, in the first place – when an item about Generation Y being lazy and crap came up. Yes, yes, we have it better, no, no, that’s not a bad thing you stupid twats. But more importantly, you just can’t generalise. A woman remarked about how they text, which means they’re like aliens to her. “Aliens”, of course, usually referring to something horrible, such as a dislike of foreigners, or a Ridley Scott film*. And again, it almost feels like an attempt at assimilation to me, as if we’re so confusing and complex that we should be simplified. I’d like to point out that flourishing businesses, and I mean flourishing ones, use the internet as often as and in as many ways possible to their advantage – those few weeks working for Nett# in Sydney taught me that (which reminds me, why I haven’t I got any more transcription work from them? I don’t honestly care much, but a little bit of extra cash wouldn’t hurt...).

What’s worse is that they gratuitously said something like this at one point to illustrate the point: “...coupled with the exploits of Corey, shows that...” Now, I forget his last name, so don’t mind that, but you know who I mean (if you’re reading this recently) – that partying, dyed-blonde-haired, sunglasses-wearing dickhead from Brisbane who won’t even face his parents. Yes. Now, to say that Corey is indicative of an entire generation is the most grossly stupid thing you could ever do, like saying that Hitler is representative of every soldier who fought in WWI and felt wronged by Germany’s loss. I mean, come on. And yes, that’s a fair comparison, because Hitler’s views are an extreme extrapolation of the current mood of the time, and Corey’s antics are an extreme(ish) extrapolation of the flaws inherent in Generation Y. But that doesn’t for a moment mean they can be offered as a fucking example of anything barring that one or two people can be utterly stupid and/or evil and end up being on TV because of it. God, Australia’s Funniest Home Videos has been running for years now and hasn’t gotten any stupider since it began (only more annoying, but that’s purely because it needed to “shake up” its format. As if that helped...). It’s stupid TV showing stupid people. And the reports of Corey were reports showing a stupid idiot. Not Generation Y. Corey’s not representative of fucking Generation Y. Perhaps Queenslanders, but not Generation Y**.

*I’ve never seen Aliens, and being the sequel, it may not even be Ridley Scott. But Ridley’s always seemed second-rate to me, and... ah, what the heck. It was just an opportunity for a nasty joke that I took, regardless of whether I meant it or it’s true. You know it, I know it.

**Alright, I’m making another nasty and silly joke. Take it as read that I don’t mean it. Even though I do genuinely dislike Queenslanders more than them-from-Victoria and them-from-NSW. Or Tasmania, for that matter. I can’t speak for any of the states though; Adelaide, for me, is the home of Kate Steinberg and Shaun Micallef, but that’s hardly indicative of what the people are like. If anything, it just shows that they’re capable of an extremely sexy person and an extremely funny person (you know which one’s which. Yeah. Hopefully).

70. I, Bond
…I, Lucifer is a film I found out about on IDMB that’s coming out in, if I remember rightly, 2010, starring Daniel Craig as Satan being forced to live as a human. This sounds boring, but it also sounds amusing, considering that he’s also Lord bloody Asriel.

71. Two Words I Haven’t Used Since 2006
Apeshit. Now there’s a word I haven’t used in a while. I think I stopped using it because I realised I’d never seen apeshit before and therefore didn’t have much grounds to use it as a derogatory term, whereas I did with dogshit. Well, no, not really, I just stopped using it because everyone else uses it. You know how it is. That said, I haven’t heard anyone say “apeshit” for ages, not even Hikaru.

Recharacterised. There’s another word I’ve not used again, and that’s probably because it’s a) not a word and b) if it is a word, a neologism (god, I even know the bloody terms), then it’s a shit one. An apeshit one, at that.

72. His American Failure
… Ooh, the thing about the His Dark Materials movie. I’m assuming I never ever talked about this, so here it is; allegedly, Liam was the one that got Chris Weitz, director of the film (and American fucking Pie; sorry, but a derogatory name for a derogatory and unfunny film felt appropriate and heart-warming, or should I say dick-warming. Disdickened. That’d be an even better show; where you, judging from interpretation, either get your penis chopped off, or stop reading Charles Dickens), originally detached to the project. Weitz left because of pressures from fans, apparently, but as it happens, it seems likely that Liam was responsible. What he did was post, on the main HDM fan board, a skit that we’d come up with called His American Failure, which was His Dark Materials in the style of American Pie. So, you know, Will stuck his subtle knife in Lyra’s vagina which opened up another world in there. That sort of normal thing to write about. It made quite an impact, and yes, allegedly got him off the project originally. Unfortunately, he came back. And unfortunately, I can’t prove that this happened. Suffice to say that I tell the truth in this Journal, and I wouldn’t make up a story like that if it wasn’t true (I know, the old challenge-the-doubter trick, but still, it’s true). Like, say, it’s true that I’ve swapped Private Messages with Andrew Hansen on the Doctor Who Club of Australia forum a couple of times. Unfortunately, whilst this is true, I’m unlikely to admit it in public – certainly not to his face – because I think I scared him off with my slight sycophantic fawning and such. Which is annoying, because I only put that sucking-up thing on not because I was genuinely awed – even though I was – but because I wanted to sneak my way into the world of Australian TV using him as a connection.

73. A Spelling Mistake I Made All Through 2006
Inconsequential though it may seem, I used to spell the Egyptian God “Re” as “Rah”. This may seem alright, as you’d think it wouldn’t come up that often, but considering I was writing a Mudbloods script that had him in it, I really should have known how to spell it. I mean, I know how to spell Harry Pooter, after all. But thankfully I was taught how to spell it by Dr Sarcophagus, who pinned me to a tree with a knife and wrote “Re! Re! Re! Re! Re! Re!” in black paint on other trees until I memorised how to spell it properly.

74. Films to Look out for in 2008
As in, “LOOK OUT!” because they’ll kill you. Oh ho ho, I kill myself. Wait, that’s another pun. Anyway. The following films, which I’ve researched unthoroughly, are either very interesting or incredibly dull. Enjoy!

Jackboots on Whitehall
An animated film about World War II, only an alternate timeline where the Scottish defeat the German invasion of England. That’s all I know about the plot, but its cast includes Ewan “McGrin” McGregor, Rosamund “Oh Bond, you’ve been so blind” Pike, Timothy “Ho ho, ain’t my voice funny?” Spall*, Richard E “The Biggest Loser” Grant**, Richard “If there was a pie in the sky, I’d eat it” Griffiths and Pam “Men have children, did you know” Ferris. That’s an amazing cast list, and coupled with the fact that it’s no doubt Ewan as the main character, and it’s an animation, well, it just sounds great.

*That’s not a comment against his voice, which is actually pretty funny. Honest.

**Because he’s really thin.

Mary Queen of Scots
Now, I don’t know the cast of this one, and it’s fair to say that considering Elizabeth II: The Golden Age, this film will look really out of place. But it’s written by Jimmy McGovern (presumably based off the TV series he wrote about the same thing), and that’s enough for me to get interested.

Telepathy
Two psychic twins; one’s sent into space to test if they can still read each other’s minds. It sounds a bit silly, but it could be really interesting. And the cast includes Cillian “I’m not Jonny Greenwood, dammit!” Murphy, Sam “I wish my name was as interesting as I was” Neill, and Miranda “I’m sexier in the role than Cate” Richardson.

The Dark Knight
I mean, come on. Heath “Oh, I’m dead. I forgot” Ledger’s last role? Cillian Murphy’s in this one too, of course. It’s a must see for any self-respecting Australian, and even those who don’t have self-respect as an Australian, like me (and unlike me).

The Edge of Love
This looks utterly boring; one of those oldy-worldy romantic films. To cement this, it’s got Keira “Pout” Knightley in it. And Cillian Murphy, again.

Hippie Hippie Shake
Goddammit, I’ve forgotten what this one’s about. It’s about something reasonably important, anyway. The life of someone. Anyway, the cast is another stellar lineup, including Cillian “Me again? What are the odds!?” Murphy, Sienna “I’m dull” Miller, Derek “I... am... Claudius!” Jacobi, Lee “Arrr, Ricky Gervais bain’t be my captain” Ingleby, Chris “I’m better than Dylan Moran, trust me*” O’Dowd and Sean “Hahaa, Oliver Wood. My name is so appropriate” Biggerstaff.

*And actually, I’d be inclined to agree with him. Just.

Lost in Austen
Actually, this is a TV miniseries. I raise it because, um, it’s bloody Austen, again. Aren’t we sick of her yet? I bet she’s rolling in her grave... which would be a very amusing image, actually. Anyway, this one stars Christina “I’m not playing a witch again, am I?” Cole, and Jemima “I fancy Chris so I follow her around everywhere” Rooper.

The Brothers Bloom
“The Brothers Bloom are the best con men in the world”. A con film, then. Its cast includes Robbie “Recreation blob” Coltrane, Rachel “I only know her from DW fan-fics” Weisz and Adrien “How the hell did I become a mainstream success? I look like an f***ing spider!” Brody. Its director is a bloke called Rian Johnson, who directed a film called Evil Demon Golfball from Hell!!!. No, really.

In Bruges
After a difficult job, two hit men are holed up in Belgium, and they begin to differ on their views on life and death due to the local customs. Interesting. The cast includes Brendan “I could beat the Knight Bus in my zombie-proof taxi” Gleeson, Ralph “Billy Corgan? Never heard of him” Fiennes and Clemence “Hang on, this cast is all from Harry Potter” Poesy.

The Hurt Locker
Iraq. That’s enough. And it’s got Ralph Fiennes again, along with Guy “Bite me, Bobby” Pearce.

The Duchess
Dammit, another of those oldy worldy romantic films, again! Starring Keira Knightley, again! It also stars Ralph Fiennes (again), and Hayley “The north has shadows, don’t you know. And lights” Atwell.

Churchill at War
Brendon Gleeson stars as Churchill. I mean, come on.

La Conjura de El Escorial
It’s a Spanish film, about King Phillip II of Spain and his deceitful court. Fair enough. Strangely though, it’s got Jason “I bet I’m a villain, again... *is depressed*” Isaacs.

Good
The rise of national socialism in Germany (and no, I don’t think the production team thinks that’s “good”). It’s got Viggo “The history of violence, Middle Earth, and now Germany!” Mortenson, and again, Jason Isaacs.

Agent One-Half
Well, yes, it sounds horrible. Directed by Brian Bero, who directed Terminator 3 (I haven’t actually seen that, so I can’t rubbish it). But it does have Warwick “I’m small, but it’s not an issue because I take on comedy roles that point out I’m small” Davis. Who’s Flitwick in Harry Potter, don’t you know.

Finding t.A.T.u.
Mischa “I’m NOT a lesbian!” Barton with t.A.T.u. (“We ARE lesbians!”). That’s got to be worth seeing.

Prince Caspian
It’s probably going to be crap. Not because the first was necessarily crap (though it didn’t try massively hard), but because it’s based on my least favourite Narnia book. The cast is pretty much the same as last time – including Liam “I’m racist against blue people, but I like Jews” Neeson as Aslan again – except for some guy playing Prince Caspian. Who sounds as interesting as Prince Caspian actually is... therefore making him an ideal casting choice!

The Meat Trade
Robert Carlyle and cannibals. If not him being a cannibal in the first place. I mean, come on. If that’s what the movie’s actually about (I’m guessing from the title), and considering his performance in 28 Weeks Later, I think this’ll end up being marvellous.

That’s that, then. But just wait until I go on about films coming out in 2009. Oh, boy, some of them sound interesting.

75. 2009!
Okay, well then, here are some films coming out in 2009 that sound pretty interesting (or not)...

Dali & I: The Surreal Story
From IMDB: “The biopic covers the life of Salvador Dali through the eyes of Stan Lauryssens, an art dealer who knew Dali and his wife Gala personally.” Excellent. And it’s got Al Pacino as Dali, and Cillian Murphy (again).

Now, there’s three Alfonso Cuaron films scheduled for 2009 (three!) as well:

Mexico ‘68
“A drama, based on Mexico’s violent student revolt of 1968.”

The History of Love
“The story of a long-lost book that mysteriously reappears and connects an old man searching for his son with a girl seeking a cure for her mother's loneliness.”

The Memory of Running
“The story follows an obese Vietnam vet who, still reeling from the death of his parents, finds out his sister has died in Los Angeles. He sets out on a cross-country trip on his bicycle in a bid to reclaim her body.”

A trio of interesting things. And now, something not so interesting...

Prince of Persia: Sands of Time
This is negotiations apparently, but is scheduled for 2009 if it does happen. Well, we’ll see. It seems strange though, particularly since the director of it is Mike “Four Rom-Coms and a Fantasy” Newell. He did Harry Potter, yes, and he did well, but it just seems odd. He’ll probably cast Matthew McFayden as the Prince.

From Time to Time
“While staying at his grandmother’s house, a boy is magically transported back in time to appear as a ghost to solve an age-old mystery. Based on Lucy M. Boston’s series of books, The Children of Green Knowe.” Never heard of them, and I’m suspecting another boring fantasy epic film. It’s got Timothy Spall in it, though, and his track record with this sort of thing is more sound than most (i.e., he did HP3, which Alfonso Cuaron directed).

Speaking of Harry Potter...

The Journey is the Destination
“The story of the life of Dan Eldon, artist and photojournalist.” Now, who plays Dan Eldon? Daniel Radcliffe. My god. And apparently the director, Bronwen Hughes, has directed a bit of The L Word, and... Harriet the Spy. That’s, um, strange.
So there you have it. Look forward to those (or don’t) in 2009. More when I find more.