Archive for June, 2007

Happy Summer Solstice

Thursday, June 21st, 2007

I spent my Summer Solstice at the ancient art exhibit at the Toledo Museum of Art. Once again, as it happens each time I venture into that room, I found myself captivated by the Greek pottery most of all. Ah, to have such pieces on display where I could see them every day… Would I appreciate them as much? I think I would. If they were presented to me new I would appreciate them as much, and I would use them as they were intended.

Suddenly, I want to visit museums and ancient sites in Britain. Now.

Alas.

Ships of Star Trek Survey

Wednesday, June 20th, 2007

The ongoing addition of Star Trek ships to the Spaceships of Film and Television page has proved unwieldy, so I have transferred them to the newly established Ships of Star Trek page in the Cuparium. Do not, however, expect to see any vessels from Star Trek: Enterprise, for it is anathema as far as I am concerned. The spin-off series are bad enough (except for Star Trek: Voyager, which has its merits), but a prequel series? Bah!

I shall desist from ranting further on the subject… for now.

Briefly, Bond Bastardizations Bludgeoned

Thursday, June 7th, 2007

Is it possible to make a more inaccurate film adaptation of a novel than the James Bond 007 atrocities? True, the films have a few merits in the form of good music and fetching lasses, but let’s be honest: the screenplays were obviously written by someone whose familiarity with the source material extended no further than skimming the first half of someone else’s notes. They highlighted a character’s name here and a place name there, mixed a few references from other novels, and dashed out some action scenes and one-liners. Presto! Here’s another big budget bastardization for consumption by the gullible masses.

I just watched Diamonds Are Forever (1971) for the first time in years, this time with the perspective of one who has read the novel. Don’t worry about having the novel spoiled if you have already seen the film — there’s nothing to spoil because the two bear only the most superficial resemblance to one another, especially with regard to their endings.

What kind of mind is capable of believing that these screenplays are in any way an improvement over Ian Fleming’s already rather cinematic style of writing? The moronic kind, evidently.

Spider-Man 3 Reviewed

Thursday, June 7th, 2007

The most eagerly awaited Spider-Man movie is also the least satisfying of the three. There are too many villains, too many origin stories, too many superfluous CGI shenanigans, and too many cheap and easy plot tricks. Perhaps our expectations are too high. Perhaps we have been spoiled by the quality of its predecessors. No, I don’t think so. The action scenes seemed consciously choreographed for adaptation to the lucrative computer game market — although “seemed” is probably phrasing it charitably — and the rest of the movie is a melodramatic muddle. It isn’t all bad, but too little of it is good.

Whereas my appreciation for Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 grew with subsequent viewings, Spider-Man 3 engenders in me no desire to see it again. It rates 5 on a scale of 1 to 10 and leaves me indifferent.

  • Writing: Poor
  • Directing: Mediocre
  • Acting: Fair
  • Cinematography: Fair
  • Special Effects: Good

Overall Rating: Mediocre/Fair