ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE APRIL 2011 EDITION OF COASTAL VIEWS MAGAZINE, SA.
It seems that every time I sit down to write a column, that the world has been beset again with a disaster or tragedy of vast scale. From Tunisian uprising, Egypt and Libya, through to the floods of Queensland and the earthquakes of Christchurch. I want to write something positive, you see, to uplift and inspire. Something flippant and witty to evoke casual chuckling and mirth. But it’s hard to get in that frame of mind when half of Japan is being washed away on the news channel and people are being shot at their homes in the papers.
I like to think of the glass as being half full, but it is difficult to do when so many around us are without a glass to begin with.
But does that mean I should just give up and accept that the world is a writhing, seething entity, in a constant state of flux, where everything can be fantastic and wonderful one minute and in the next, it turns on it’s inhabitants, wreaking death and destruction at will?
I should definitely accept it but we can’t just give up and stick our heads in the sand like the proverbial ostrich. However, that is not to say we have to light candles and conduct vigils or offer virgins as sacrifices, no, but we really should try to be aware. And in being aware of what happens in this great big world of ours, we can try to keep life in perspective.
Don’t worry, I am not at my laptop in ceremonial robes nor am I wearing a white collar, I am not here as a preacher man, not even as the son of one. I merely plant seeds, the same as we all do one way or another. It is up to individuals whether or not we wish to water them.
What can we dare to learn from tragedy? In these epic disasters of recent times we have seen and heard stories of great human courage, sacrifice and mateship. Mothers hurling themselves over their babies to protect them, heroic rescuers crossing treacherous and raging flood waters to save perfect strangers in need. We have seen towns and cities wiped flat, but people rallying together to rebuild, to move on, united in that goal, bonded by devastation. In the darkest hours can sometimes be found the brightest lights.
But as with every yin, there must be a yang. Where there is chaos, there will be those who revel in anarchy. The looters, the deviants, the twisted. The opportunistic parasites that will always look out for themselves first and capitalise on the misfortune of others. They don’t help the shop owner who’s livelihood is in ruin, no they merely steal what he has left and leave. These are the vile creatures that attack a woman reporter trying to earn a living, telling the world of a plight, defiling her and leaving many scars that will never heal.
In disaster and strife we learn about ourselves. We see who are the strong and the good. We see those who are cowardly and corrupt. Humans are like teabags; you can’t tell how good they really are until they’re in hot water.
So how do we keep this all in perspective? Well, that’s up to you. For me, whilst watching Japan shake and Toowoomba drown, I didn’t hear the whining dog next door and I forgot all about the slow internet speed at my house. The minor trivialities of life were suddenly more manageable. That’s not to say that if a problem that seems big to us, it isn’t. No, we all have dramas in our lives, suffered or are suffering loss, some more than others. We all have problems that seem insurmountable, and yes, sometimes they really are. Sometimes we turn to things to hold us up, crutches. Some choose drink, others religion, some chocolate. As John Lennon said; whatever gets ya through the night.
We get one life to live. It’s not perfect. Far from it. The world is a volatile, scary place and we have to fit in it, together, as best we can, whilst trying to deal with all those who choose not to. But we still have to go to work in the morning, we still have to pay the bills that come from living in the society that we do, we still need to sweep the porch and make sure the streets are clean. Still tell the kids off for drawing chickens on the living room wall with pasta sauce. These things are part of being civilised.
But we who are doing alright at the minute should sometimes try to take stock of our lives and be grateful for what we do have and not take the good things for granted. So say to your wife that you love her. Give your kids words of encouragement. Pat the dog.
Appreciate it now. Just in case it’s not there tomorrow
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
SHERLOCK HOLMES Reviewed
ROBERT DOWNEY JR. RACHEL McADAMS JUDE LAW DIR. GUY RITCHIE
ACTION SUSPENSE 2009
Guy Ritchie may be best known for his geezer capers such as Lock, Stock... and Snatch, but for this reviewer, his reimagining of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s’ classic character is his finest work so far. By blending detailed sets and smooth CG backgrounds, Ritchie recaptures Victorian era London with great success, locating his characters in time without ever overshadowing them with overdone scenery.
From the first strings of composer Hans Zimmer’s hypnotic score over the opening credits, we know we are in for a treat, a piece that is original and timeless.
Robert Downey Jr embodies himself as the title character, bringing to it a wit and presence that is at once most engaging and fantastic. His delivery of the rapier sharp and staccato dialogue is never overplayed and one doesn’t ever doubt him in the many action scenes, his Sherlock having a strong body in addition to the brilliant mind.
Jude Law brings us a Dr Watson that is more related to the Watson of the original texts; tougher and more involved, clever, not the bumbling comedy sidekick so often depicted in some of the other film adaptations of the character, such as Nigel Bruce’s Watson to Basil Rathbone’s Holmes back in the ‘40s.
The on screen rapport between the new Holmes and Watson is well constructed, we believe their years old friendship, their verbal shorthand, the banter back and forth between them entertains and captures our attention, laced with subtle humour and refinement. But it is not a boys club all the way, no, the double edged character of Irene Adler brings rich colour to the oft black and grey landscape, her portrayal by American actress Rachel McAdams is balance to the testosterone of the male dominated cast. Not that she is the damsel in distress; instead she is the foil to Holmes’s logical processes.
The film style and quick cuts allow us the ability to keep up with the plot, by moving back in time strategically, so we can see what has occurred so rapidly through the mind and actions of Sherlock, almost within a slight of hand style parlour trick. The fist fight sequences are a highlight, Holmes’ mental planning of his movements is a clever device, so much you almost can feel each impact. Even the explosions on the docks scene is executed in more elegant fashion, not underplaying such an intense event, but placing the viewer right there beside the characters, the film slowed down, revealing such details that you may possibly singe your eyebrows watching it.
Some may find Sherlock Holmes a tad long, a little over two hours, but there is a lot going on and the pace is fast for the most part. There is more to come, however, a sequel is due out later this year, to continue on from the unfinished business left us in this chapter.
I, for one, shall be looking forward to it, but you of course, can make your own deductions...
****
ACTION SUSPENSE 2009
From the first strings of composer Hans Zimmer’s hypnotic score over the opening credits, we know we are in for a treat, a piece that is original and timeless.
Robert Downey Jr embodies himself as the title character, bringing to it a wit and presence that is at once most engaging and fantastic. His delivery of the rapier sharp and staccato dialogue is never overplayed and one doesn’t ever doubt him in the many action scenes, his Sherlock having a strong body in addition to the brilliant mind.
Jude Law brings us a Dr Watson that is more related to the Watson of the original texts; tougher and more involved, clever, not the bumbling comedy sidekick so often depicted in some of the other film adaptations of the character, such as Nigel Bruce’s Watson to Basil Rathbone’s Holmes back in the ‘40s.
The on screen rapport between the new Holmes and Watson is well constructed, we believe their years old friendship, their verbal shorthand, the banter back and forth between them entertains and captures our attention, laced with subtle humour and refinement. But it is not a boys club all the way, no, the double edged character of Irene Adler brings rich colour to the oft black and grey landscape, her portrayal by American actress Rachel McAdams is balance to the testosterone of the male dominated cast. Not that she is the damsel in distress; instead she is the foil to Holmes’s logical processes.
The film style and quick cuts allow us the ability to keep up with the plot, by moving back in time strategically, so we can see what has occurred so rapidly through the mind and actions of Sherlock, almost within a slight of hand style parlour trick. The fist fight sequences are a highlight, Holmes’ mental planning of his movements is a clever device, so much you almost can feel each impact. Even the explosions on the docks scene is executed in more elegant fashion, not underplaying such an intense event, but placing the viewer right there beside the characters, the film slowed down, revealing such details that you may possibly singe your eyebrows watching it.
Some may find Sherlock Holmes a tad long, a little over two hours, but there is a lot going on and the pace is fast for the most part. There is more to come, however, a sequel is due out later this year, to continue on from the unfinished business left us in this chapter.
I, for one, shall be looking forward to it, but you of course, can make your own deductions...
****
Friday, March 4, 2011
THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE review
NICOLAS CAGE MONICA BELLUCCI
JAY BARUCHEL ALFRED MOLINA
DIR. JON TURTELTAUB
FANTASY 2010
Given that Hollywood has lost the ability to come up with new and original products, it is at least refreshing to see the House of Bruckheimer has chosen to draw from a 1797 poem by German writer Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and it’s previous celluloid adaptation, a sequence in Disney’s animated 1940 classic, Fantasia, (You know the one, where Mickey Mouse casts a spell to have all the mops start cleaning by themselves) for inspiration for their latest outing, The Sorcerer’s Apprentice. Of course, being a modern fantasy adventure film, we trade the cartoons for big budget CGI effects, add in Nicolas Cage as the ancient Sorcerer and have popular awkward guy Jay Baruchel to replace Mickey. And it works.
TSA is a Disney backed film also, and as such is family friendly; there is of course the colour and spectacle of the action, but there is an underlying moral story about believing in yourself that can never be driven in to our kids too much. The romantic angle between Baruchel’s apprentice Dave and his dream girl Becky (Teresa Palmer) is sweet without being irritatingly so but the love story between Cage’s Balthazar Blake and fellow Sorceress Veronica, (an underused Bellucci) never really hits it’s peak, despite being a crucial, motivating part of the story. The action is primarily effects driven spell casting between the main protagonists and the brilliantly villainous Maxim Horvath, (a perfectly cast Molina) but this doesn't get repetitive or as tedious as it can in genre cousin Harry Potter’s films. This could be due to TSA’s much shorter running time of 109 minutes against Potter’s two and a half days…
The car chase through New York is a clever blend of live action and CG, and will prove a popular sequence for some of the Dads who will enjoy the 1935 Rolls Royce (Cage’s own vehicle in reality), Ferrari 430 and the SLR Mercedes blasting through traffic while they wait for Monica Bellucci’s next scene.
All in all, an easy to watch, family friendly slice of escapism that parents won’t mind the kids watching again and again. And again. But only once the floors are mopped.
****
JAY BARUCHEL ALFRED MOLINA
DIR. JON TURTELTAUB
FANTASY 2010
TSA is a Disney backed film also, and as such is family friendly; there is of course the colour and spectacle of the action, but there is an underlying moral story about believing in yourself that can never be driven in to our kids too much. The romantic angle between Baruchel’s apprentice Dave and his dream girl Becky (Teresa Palmer) is sweet without being irritatingly so but the love story between Cage’s Balthazar Blake and fellow Sorceress Veronica, (an underused Bellucci) never really hits it’s peak, despite being a crucial, motivating part of the story. The action is primarily effects driven spell casting between the main protagonists and the brilliantly villainous Maxim Horvath, (a perfectly cast Molina) but this doesn't get repetitive or as tedious as it can in genre cousin Harry Potter’s films. This could be due to TSA’s much shorter running time of 109 minutes against Potter’s two and a half days…
The car chase through New York is a clever blend of live action and CG, and will prove a popular sequence for some of the Dads who will enjoy the 1935 Rolls Royce (Cage’s own vehicle in reality), Ferrari 430 and the SLR Mercedes blasting through traffic while they wait for Monica Bellucci’s next scene.
All in all, an easy to watch, family friendly slice of escapism that parents won’t mind the kids watching again and again. And again. But only once the floors are mopped.
****
ABRA CADABRA
THIS COLUMN ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE MARCH 2011 ISSUE OF COASTAL VIEWS MAGAZINE. ABRA DENOTES THE ALDINGA BAY RESIDENTS ASSOC.
March issue already. Thanks to my loyal readers for your continued support and enthusiasm, I appreciate both of you. (And by the way Mum, I’ll pop round on Thursday.)
Mmmm. Support and enthusiasm. That’s what allows Coastal Views to be what it is today. A fine, informative, quality Community magazine. It needs the support of local businesses for funding, and the enthusiastic dedication of ABRA and its members to put it all together each month. Pat yourselves on the back, people. You know who you are.
But, and here’s the rub, ABRA needs your support and enthusiasm to continue in its role as a voice for the Community. Meetings are only once every couple of months, and they are a great way to get your opinion heard in regard to this little part of the world in which you live.
We all like to complain about what isn’t right in the area, and moan about that which the Council is doing all wrong and speak in disdainful tones about the locations of shopping centres. But few of us actually get the chances to say anything to the right people. We are oft too busy with that thing called life, and that is perfectly understandable. The twins need changing, the dog is smoking again or young Marjorie has tripped on a tin of Werther’s Originals and sprained her elbow and can’t play Mah Jong anymore. Hey, we’ve all been there, right?
But once you’ve done with all that, and the chickens are finally asleep, perhaps try to stop in at one of the ABRA meetings and air your grievances amongst similar, like minded locals. Members of the ABRA board may be able to pass on your complaints or issues to Council or at least point you in the right direction. ABRA wants to know what the Aldinga and surrounding community is happy about or concerned with. But they can’t raise the issues that concern us if we don’t tell them. Fair enough?
But perhaps I have put you on the spot. Maybe you’re feeling like I’m pressuring you or guilting you. Maybe you’ve already turned the page and are looking for the movie review. Relax, brothers and sisters, I ain’t the man standing over you, telling you what to think and do. We all remember the sixties, people. Peace.
Maybe I can just get you started with some ideas. What about the local nature strips? Happy with those? Happy for nature to be represented by weeds, dirt and random gravel? No? Well, perhaps we could ask Council to get on with planting some trees, some native shrubbery or the likes? You know, really get the streetscapes and roadsides looking attractive and enticing. Sunday Estate has the right idea and it’s looking quite nice through there. I believe we all pay council rates here, so shouldn’t it be everywhere? But ah, I hear the voices of the Nay Sayers...yes that’s them, with fingers pointed and brows furrowed in consternation like a rolled up quilt cover in a napkin holder. “But who would plant this greenery? The council has not the time or money, they have more pressing issues! Bah, humbug!”
A valid point, old foe. You are a worthy adversary. But alas, there could be a solution. There are local volunteer groups, but I think it would be great to use the fit unemployed contingent of society. A Work for the Dole like program for the visual and environmental improvement of the area. Rates dollars provide the trees, tax dollars provide the labour. Bring that up at meeting.
Don’t like that one? No problem. How about using this one; footpaths. Do you want them or do you not want them? This has been a point of contention in the area for awhile. The year is 2011 and the main road of Aldinga Beach down to the Esplanade is without a true footpath. And there are a great many streets and roads around here in the same condition. How much longer are we going to be behind in proper footpaths? Dare we bring up the “we all pay rates around here, why the disparity in areas with and without?” The cost issue will come up again, no doubt. So I say use Community Service crews. You know the ones, through the Correctional Department. People that don’t pay fines, or who have been sentenced for minor criminal offences. Get them out here and put some bricks in their hands. Think about the savings. Free labour again. Well, it worked back in the days of chain gangs. Laying bricks in the hot sun, they fought the law and the law won...
Well, hopefully this has your creative juices flowing and perhaps you are even considering attending a meeting or two and getting your voice heard. Perhaps you are now preparing to flick to the front of this mag again to check the date for the next ABRA meeting, just as soon as I have stopped rambling here.
Well, go on. Now you can.
March issue already. Thanks to my loyal readers for your continued support and enthusiasm, I appreciate both of you. (And by the way Mum, I’ll pop round on Thursday.)
Mmmm. Support and enthusiasm. That’s what allows Coastal Views to be what it is today. A fine, informative, quality Community magazine. It needs the support of local businesses for funding, and the enthusiastic dedication of ABRA and its members to put it all together each month. Pat yourselves on the back, people. You know who you are.
But, and here’s the rub, ABRA needs your support and enthusiasm to continue in its role as a voice for the Community. Meetings are only once every couple of months, and they are a great way to get your opinion heard in regard to this little part of the world in which you live.
We all like to complain about what isn’t right in the area, and moan about that which the Council is doing all wrong and speak in disdainful tones about the locations of shopping centres. But few of us actually get the chances to say anything to the right people. We are oft too busy with that thing called life, and that is perfectly understandable. The twins need changing, the dog is smoking again or young Marjorie has tripped on a tin of Werther’s Originals and sprained her elbow and can’t play Mah Jong anymore. Hey, we’ve all been there, right?
But once you’ve done with all that, and the chickens are finally asleep, perhaps try to stop in at one of the ABRA meetings and air your grievances amongst similar, like minded locals. Members of the ABRA board may be able to pass on your complaints or issues to Council or at least point you in the right direction. ABRA wants to know what the Aldinga and surrounding community is happy about or concerned with. But they can’t raise the issues that concern us if we don’t tell them. Fair enough?
But perhaps I have put you on the spot. Maybe you’re feeling like I’m pressuring you or guilting you. Maybe you’ve already turned the page and are looking for the movie review. Relax, brothers and sisters, I ain’t the man standing over you, telling you what to think and do. We all remember the sixties, people. Peace.
Maybe I can just get you started with some ideas. What about the local nature strips? Happy with those? Happy for nature to be represented by weeds, dirt and random gravel? No? Well, perhaps we could ask Council to get on with planting some trees, some native shrubbery or the likes? You know, really get the streetscapes and roadsides looking attractive and enticing. Sunday Estate has the right idea and it’s looking quite nice through there. I believe we all pay council rates here, so shouldn’t it be everywhere? But ah, I hear the voices of the Nay Sayers...yes that’s them, with fingers pointed and brows furrowed in consternation like a rolled up quilt cover in a napkin holder. “But who would plant this greenery? The council has not the time or money, they have more pressing issues! Bah, humbug!”
A valid point, old foe. You are a worthy adversary. But alas, there could be a solution. There are local volunteer groups, but I think it would be great to use the fit unemployed contingent of society. A Work for the Dole like program for the visual and environmental improvement of the area. Rates dollars provide the trees, tax dollars provide the labour. Bring that up at meeting.
Don’t like that one? No problem. How about using this one; footpaths. Do you want them or do you not want them? This has been a point of contention in the area for awhile. The year is 2011 and the main road of Aldinga Beach down to the Esplanade is without a true footpath. And there are a great many streets and roads around here in the same condition. How much longer are we going to be behind in proper footpaths? Dare we bring up the “we all pay rates around here, why the disparity in areas with and without?” The cost issue will come up again, no doubt. So I say use Community Service crews. You know the ones, through the Correctional Department. People that don’t pay fines, or who have been sentenced for minor criminal offences. Get them out here and put some bricks in their hands. Think about the savings. Free labour again. Well, it worked back in the days of chain gangs. Laying bricks in the hot sun, they fought the law and the law won...
Well, hopefully this has your creative juices flowing and perhaps you are even considering attending a meeting or two and getting your voice heard. Perhaps you are now preparing to flick to the front of this mag again to check the date for the next ABRA meeting, just as soon as I have stopped rambling here.
Well, go on. Now you can.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Random Acts of Compassion?
PUBLISHED IN COASTAL VIEWS MAGAZINE, FEBRUARY 2011 IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA
I was reading in the local paper about the case of Som Sawaendgee and her attempts to get a Visa into Australia. In short, Som is the Thai partner of Andrew Oake, a Seaford Rise man who was tragically murdered in Thailand.
Now, Som is applying for residency here in
Australia, with the help and support of Andrew’s parents. Furthermore, Som and Andrew have a baby daughter, Angelina. And on top of that, Som was a witness to his murder in Thailand, and looks like having to testify at the upcoming trial over there. They’re paying the fees, following the correct channels and procedures.
So, if this is all accurate, then you would think that Som and Angelina would qualify for the appropriate visa that would allow them to stay in Australia. Wouldn’t you? I would.
But at this point, it appears that the Australian Government does not. At the time of writing, a final decision had not been made, but things were not looking too promising for Som.
This confuses me.
I am an advocate for granting those in need asylum or residency under these kinds of circumstances, especially when there is a child concerned, particularly when one of the parents is an Australian.
But I fail to see why some of those refugees and asylum seekers who arrive on boats or through other non-official channels are getting in and Som is, at this point, in effect being denied.
Before you roll your eyes and turn the page, relax; I’m not going to go into another asylum seeking boat people high horse rant. No, my issue for discussion is that of compassion...
We have compassion for the mentally and physically disabled, yes? Yes. We donate to their charitable causes and buy the raffle tickets and put coins in the tins.
We have compassion towards the flood victims in Queensland in their time of need when a natural disaster ripped through their homes, leaving behind devastation and fatalities. I’m sure many of us have made donations to the appeal or the Red Cross.
Obvious and logical causes where compassion is evident and, for lack of a warmer expression, valid. But then things get, shall we say, less clear...
The Australian Government gives billions of dollars in foreign aid to its less successful neighbours, to help them get a leg up and of course, to maintain good relations. Of course, for the most part, this is rarely reciprocated to the same level, but that’s not what we do it for. These countries need assistance to control their populations, to progress and advance. It doesn’t matter how they treat Australia in return. Some can lock up our citizens without trial. Some can even send some boatfuls of refugees our way. All fine. Good for the image. This is, perhaps, compassion.
Closer to home, the Government is compassionate towards addicts, junkies and meth heads. If they admit they have a substance abuse problem, the Government provides them with free healthcare, counselling and sometimes even a house to live in. They don’t have to work or contribute to the society that provides for them, just sit back and do what they do. Yes sir, that’s compassion. Isn’t it?
Smokers, who apparently are completely unaware of any negative effects their habit may have on their health, are entitled to government subsidised assistance with quitting. Be it nicotine patches or their own special phone line. Mmm, compassion, surely.
Even those individuals who are unaware that overeating will cause you to become obese and unwell can even get subsidised medical procedures to lose weight. Compassion?
Perhaps you can see where I’m going with this. Our government hands out assistance and money all the time, and it’s labelled ‘compassion’. For the needy, the sick, the poor, the underprivileged, the weak and the foolish.
When our sportspeople play a charity match, they are legends. When our music heroes play a benefit concert, they are idols. When Mary MacKillop helped the poor and wretched, she was our Saint.
But what happens when a Thai girl sees her Australian husband killed, then wants to come to Australia to raise their baby daughter with his family, in a safer, supportive environment, following all correct procedures?
Well, we’ll just have to see about that...
I was reading in the local paper about the case of Som Sawaendgee and her attempts to get a Visa into Australia. In short, Som is the Thai partner of Andrew Oake, a Seaford Rise man who was tragically murdered in Thailand.
Now, Som is applying for residency here in
Australia, with the help and support of Andrew’s parents. Furthermore, Som and Andrew have a baby daughter, Angelina. And on top of that, Som was a witness to his murder in Thailand, and looks like having to testify at the upcoming trial over there. They’re paying the fees, following the correct channels and procedures.
So, if this is all accurate, then you would think that Som and Angelina would qualify for the appropriate visa that would allow them to stay in Australia. Wouldn’t you? I would.
But at this point, it appears that the Australian Government does not. At the time of writing, a final decision had not been made, but things were not looking too promising for Som.
This confuses me.
I am an advocate for granting those in need asylum or residency under these kinds of circumstances, especially when there is a child concerned, particularly when one of the parents is an Australian.
But I fail to see why some of those refugees and asylum seekers who arrive on boats or through other non-official channels are getting in and Som is, at this point, in effect being denied.
Before you roll your eyes and turn the page, relax; I’m not going to go into another asylum seeking boat people high horse rant. No, my issue for discussion is that of compassion...
We have compassion for the mentally and physically disabled, yes? Yes. We donate to their charitable causes and buy the raffle tickets and put coins in the tins.
We have compassion towards the flood victims in Queensland in their time of need when a natural disaster ripped through their homes, leaving behind devastation and fatalities. I’m sure many of us have made donations to the appeal or the Red Cross.
Obvious and logical causes where compassion is evident and, for lack of a warmer expression, valid. But then things get, shall we say, less clear...
The Australian Government gives billions of dollars in foreign aid to its less successful neighbours, to help them get a leg up and of course, to maintain good relations. Of course, for the most part, this is rarely reciprocated to the same level, but that’s not what we do it for. These countries need assistance to control their populations, to progress and advance. It doesn’t matter how they treat Australia in return. Some can lock up our citizens without trial. Some can even send some boatfuls of refugees our way. All fine. Good for the image. This is, perhaps, compassion.
Closer to home, the Government is compassionate towards addicts, junkies and meth heads. If they admit they have a substance abuse problem, the Government provides them with free healthcare, counselling and sometimes even a house to live in. They don’t have to work or contribute to the society that provides for them, just sit back and do what they do. Yes sir, that’s compassion. Isn’t it?
Smokers, who apparently are completely unaware of any negative effects their habit may have on their health, are entitled to government subsidised assistance with quitting. Be it nicotine patches or their own special phone line. Mmm, compassion, surely.
Even those individuals who are unaware that overeating will cause you to become obese and unwell can even get subsidised medical procedures to lose weight. Compassion?
Perhaps you can see where I’m going with this. Our government hands out assistance and money all the time, and it’s labelled ‘compassion’. For the needy, the sick, the poor, the underprivileged, the weak and the foolish.
When our sportspeople play a charity match, they are legends. When our music heroes play a benefit concert, they are idols. When Mary MacKillop helped the poor and wretched, she was our Saint.
But what happens when a Thai girl sees her Australian husband killed, then wants to come to Australia to raise their baby daughter with his family, in a safer, supportive environment, following all correct procedures?
Well, we’ll just have to see about that...
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
The Tourist - review
THE TOURIST
ANGELINA JOLIE JOHNNY DEPP
TIMOTHY DALTON RUFUS SEWELL
DIR. FLORIAN VON DONNERSMARK
ROMANCE /CRIME 2010
**
The original title for this film may well have been “Angelina Drives A Boat Through Venice”, but obviously that wouldn’t have worked. Well, not with everyone, of course there are some
people, probably guys for the most part, who would be happy to watch Angelina simply measuring floor tiles on screen. But Ange alone, continuously pouting or otherwise, isn’t enough to carry a movie. And The Tourist proves it.
Equal billed co star, the ever cool Johnny Depp, here
sporting goatee , longish hair and perhaps a couple more healthy kilos, never seems to hit his stride; instead cruising from scene to scene, safe in the knowledge that he is Johnny Depp, and just his idiosyncrasies and ‘look” will get him through this mixed up romantic caper heist thriller mystery. Except it isn’t. The audience never truly engages with Depp’s character, Frank, and as a result we can predict the “twist” ending within the first 15-20 minutes.
Bad Johnny.
Director Florian Henckel Von Donnersmark (yes, really) has attempted to craft a story that would have been right at home back in the 1960’s, with Carey Grant and Audrey in the leads, where his inspiration for flavour, at least may have come from (it’s actually a remake of a 2005 French movie) but it doesn’t quite work. It tries to be too many things. Romance, comedy, mystery, action thriller, heist caper. And as a result, spreads itself too thin, never
succeeding fully in any one style.
Visually, however, we have a feast. The exquisite streets of Paris and the breathtaking, sweeping images of Venice are flawless and magnificent. The Italian Tourism office in
particular will approve of this movie, as it is often little more than an expensive and glamorous advertisement for the floating city.
The script has some holes, Steven Berkoff’s bad guy Shaw is a well used caricature, as is Paul Bettany’s Scotland Yard investigator but the classy Timothy Dalton is under used. But it is refreshing to see a modern film that is not full of graphic violence, profanity or any such disturbing things, one that at least tries to capture that classic romance of years gone by.
But The Tourist is not a classic. Ultimately, it is about
Angelina with an English accent, walking down streets and through hotel lobbies and ballrooms, whilst everyone looks at her. All that is missing is some poor fellow swooning as she goes by.
Some will find this irritating and pretentious; others of course, will see it as a Tourist attraction...
ANGELINA JOLIE JOHNNY DEPP
TIMOTHY DALTON RUFUS SEWELL
DIR. FLORIAN VON DONNERSMARK
ROMANCE /CRIME 2010
**
The original title for this film may well have been “Angelina Drives A Boat Through Venice”, but obviously that wouldn’t have worked. Well, not with everyone, of course there are some
people, probably guys for the most part, who would be happy to watch Angelina simply measuring floor tiles on screen. But Ange alone, continuously pouting or otherwise, isn’t enough to carry a movie. And The Tourist proves it.
Equal billed co star, the ever cool Johnny Depp, here
sporting goatee , longish hair and perhaps a couple more healthy kilos, never seems to hit his stride; instead cruising from scene to scene, safe in the knowledge that he is Johnny Depp, and just his idiosyncrasies and ‘look” will get him through this mixed up romantic caper heist thriller mystery. Except it isn’t. The audience never truly engages with Depp’s character, Frank, and as a result we can predict the “twist” ending within the first 15-20 minutes.
Bad Johnny.
Director Florian Henckel Von Donnersmark (yes, really) has attempted to craft a story that would have been right at home back in the 1960’s, with Carey Grant and Audrey in the leads, where his inspiration for flavour, at least may have come from (it’s actually a remake of a 2005 French movie) but it doesn’t quite work. It tries to be too many things. Romance, comedy, mystery, action thriller, heist caper. And as a result, spreads itself too thin, never
succeeding fully in any one style.
Visually, however, we have a feast. The exquisite streets of Paris and the breathtaking, sweeping images of Venice are flawless and magnificent. The Italian Tourism office in
particular will approve of this movie, as it is often little more than an expensive and glamorous advertisement for the floating city.
The script has some holes, Steven Berkoff’s bad guy Shaw is a well used caricature, as is Paul Bettany’s Scotland Yard investigator but the classy Timothy Dalton is under used. But it is refreshing to see a modern film that is not full of graphic violence, profanity or any such disturbing things, one that at least tries to capture that classic romance of years gone by.
But The Tourist is not a classic. Ultimately, it is about
Angelina with an English accent, walking down streets and through hotel lobbies and ballrooms, whilst everyone looks at her. All that is missing is some poor fellow swooning as she goes by.
Some will find this irritating and pretentious; others of course, will see it as a Tourist attraction...
Monday, November 15, 2010
Sellick's Beach Buddhist Temple Proposal
In my opinion the proposed Buddhist Temple on Cactus Canyon Rd is a fine idea. Buddhism is a peaceful life concept that doesn’t hurt anyone. The temple would be a tranquil place where locals and tourists will be able to learn about a different culture and perhaps experience something new and pleasant. I mean, this whole local area has been built on multiple cultures really, hasn’t it?
But according to the Messenger newspaper on the 20th October, a grand total of 50 whole people (wow, count ‘em. 50. I’ve seen more people in the check out queue at Coles on a Sunday afternoon) packed the Sellicks community hall in a heated debate over this proposal.
A local councillor was quoted in the same article as saying the height of the 35m pagoda would be “... totally out of scale for the environment...” Well, that means we can’t build anything higher than a grapevine or one of the six remaining almond trees, then, if the environment in question is the flats of this shire. However, if I class the environment as the rolling hills of Willunga and Sellicks, then by that scale is the pagoda perhaps a little small?
Other Nay Sayers were concerned about the noise of a bell at prayer times. If a bell is too loud then we’d best put a stop to all aircraft taking off or landing at Aldinga airfield as well. Because planes are loud. Also there will need to be an enforced ban on all doof doof music that emanates from houses and passing cars, as that’s highly offensive to the ears of people over 35, including mine. Trucks must also use quieter mufflers and are to be blown up if they are caught using exhaust brakes anywhere. Oh, and I want the use of scare guns in vineyards abolished and tractors are to be outlawed and you can only use horses and carts at vintage time.
Another point that was raised is that the site would be distracting to motorists. Now, I don’t know about you, but if a stationary building in the near distance is cause for a driver to lose concentration from the task of controlling their vehicle, at great risk to themselves, passengers and other motorists, then I think these particular drivers should have their licences revoked. Does this mean that every time they drive through a city or past a bridge or a phone tower above three storeys high they suddenly become mesmerized by these structures and instantly veer off the road and crash? By this token, all advertising billboards larger than a shop front should be burned as they are designed for motorists to see them and read them whilst in the act of driving. In fact, why don’t we just use taxpayers money to build giant concrete walls like those that used to divide Germany to line South Rd so that no drivers with attention spans shorter than that of a cabbage can be distracted by those horridly intrusive and disruptive sunsets over the ocean and fields that plague us each day as well?
Is it because it’s of Asian background that this temple proposal has caused such concern? Would a Church of England building cause as much fuss? Because in case you had forgotten, anything or anyone that originated from England or a country other than this one is not actually indigenous to this area either, and therefore, no different to a Buddhist temple. The only group that would have actual right to complain should they need to would be the indigenous Australians, anyway.
Is it fear, perhaps? Read up on Buddhism as a religion or way of life, then. Not too many Buddhist extremists out there. No Buddhist monks launching a Jihad against anyone who uses cutlery and toilet paper instead of their hands. No pages of the history books about the Buddhist Crusades where armies of Monks and peasants marched across the lands raping and pillaging in the name of their God.
People travel miles to see such structures. And with them come tourist dollars for the surrounding area. Heaven forbid we have a tourist attraction that doesn’t involve excessive drinking and gluttony or a bunch of men in tights with shaved legs on push bikes. Interestingly enough, few people minded when an American place of worship was proposed and construction commenced. Actually, it received a warm welcome for the most part. Which makes me think no one would have cared about the pagoda if it had a McDonald’s sign on top of it.
Clearly, I despise racism in all its forms. And I’m not being all pious here, though. I judge people and have subconscious prejudices the same as anyone else, but I base mine on the merits of the individual, not their race or background. Were the proposal for a walled biker fortress with razor wire or a training camp for gun toting zealots, or a compound for those who force disciple s to wear blue tracksuits and new sneakers before drinking poison, then, yes folks, that would be out of line and highly negative for the area.
But it’s not. It’s for a place of peace and beauty.
And those are good things.
But according to the Messenger newspaper on the 20th October, a grand total of 50 whole people (wow, count ‘em. 50. I’ve seen more people in the check out queue at Coles on a Sunday afternoon) packed the Sellicks community hall in a heated debate over this proposal.
A local councillor was quoted in the same article as saying the height of the 35m pagoda would be “... totally out of scale for the environment...” Well, that means we can’t build anything higher than a grapevine or one of the six remaining almond trees, then, if the environment in question is the flats of this shire. However, if I class the environment as the rolling hills of Willunga and Sellicks, then by that scale is the pagoda perhaps a little small?
Other Nay Sayers were concerned about the noise of a bell at prayer times. If a bell is too loud then we’d best put a stop to all aircraft taking off or landing at Aldinga airfield as well. Because planes are loud. Also there will need to be an enforced ban on all doof doof music that emanates from houses and passing cars, as that’s highly offensive to the ears of people over 35, including mine. Trucks must also use quieter mufflers and are to be blown up if they are caught using exhaust brakes anywhere. Oh, and I want the use of scare guns in vineyards abolished and tractors are to be outlawed and you can only use horses and carts at vintage time.
Another point that was raised is that the site would be distracting to motorists. Now, I don’t know about you, but if a stationary building in the near distance is cause for a driver to lose concentration from the task of controlling their vehicle, at great risk to themselves, passengers and other motorists, then I think these particular drivers should have their licences revoked. Does this mean that every time they drive through a city or past a bridge or a phone tower above three storeys high they suddenly become mesmerized by these structures and instantly veer off the road and crash? By this token, all advertising billboards larger than a shop front should be burned as they are designed for motorists to see them and read them whilst in the act of driving. In fact, why don’t we just use taxpayers money to build giant concrete walls like those that used to divide Germany to line South Rd so that no drivers with attention spans shorter than that of a cabbage can be distracted by those horridly intrusive and disruptive sunsets over the ocean and fields that plague us each day as well?
Is it because it’s of Asian background that this temple proposal has caused such concern? Would a Church of England building cause as much fuss? Because in case you had forgotten, anything or anyone that originated from England or a country other than this one is not actually indigenous to this area either, and therefore, no different to a Buddhist temple. The only group that would have actual right to complain should they need to would be the indigenous Australians, anyway.
Is it fear, perhaps? Read up on Buddhism as a religion or way of life, then. Not too many Buddhist extremists out there. No Buddhist monks launching a Jihad against anyone who uses cutlery and toilet paper instead of their hands. No pages of the history books about the Buddhist Crusades where armies of Monks and peasants marched across the lands raping and pillaging in the name of their God.
People travel miles to see such structures. And with them come tourist dollars for the surrounding area. Heaven forbid we have a tourist attraction that doesn’t involve excessive drinking and gluttony or a bunch of men in tights with shaved legs on push bikes. Interestingly enough, few people minded when an American place of worship was proposed and construction commenced. Actually, it received a warm welcome for the most part. Which makes me think no one would have cared about the pagoda if it had a McDonald’s sign on top of it.
Clearly, I despise racism in all its forms. And I’m not being all pious here, though. I judge people and have subconscious prejudices the same as anyone else, but I base mine on the merits of the individual, not their race or background. Were the proposal for a walled biker fortress with razor wire or a training camp for gun toting zealots, or a compound for those who force disciple s to wear blue tracksuits and new sneakers before drinking poison, then, yes folks, that would be out of line and highly negative for the area.
But it’s not. It’s for a place of peace and beauty.
And those are good things.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)