Elementary

Conditions: Cloudy and cool

Fighting Oil with Oil

In a move designed essentially to try and get some leverage, the Iranian parliament is considering a bill that will penalise any European companies that are owed Oil by the Iranian Oil industry through having the agreements canceled. If you recall, about a week ago countries in the EU zone voted to stop importing any more oil from Iran by July to try and force the Iranians back to the negotiation table over their nuclear plans.

Iran's parliament is due to debate a bill on Sunday that would cut off oil supplies to the EU in a matter of days, in revenge for a decision last Monday by the 27 EU member states to stop importing crude from Iran as of July 1.
[...]

By turning the sanctions back on the EU, Iranian lawmakers hope to deny Europe the six-month window it had planned to give those countries most dependent on Iranian oil - including some of the most economically fragile - time to adapt.

The EU banned imports of oil from Iran on Monday and imposed a number of other economic sanctions, joining the United States in a new round of measures aimed at deflecting Tehran's nuclear development programme.

- reuters.com/article/

This is continuing to get stupider and stupider. "We won't buy your oil". "Well we won't sell you our oil". “Oh yeah?" “Yes yeah.” “Oh yeah?" “Yes, yeah.” In the face of the looming massive European recession we’re now facing, forcing the oil prices up at gunpoint is almost tantamount to cutting your own throat. With oil. Sigh.


Film Review: Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows

Unlike the first outing of director Guy Ritchie's Holmes, a film that took it's time to explore the fragility of Sherlock's nature as well as his brilliance at detection, the second film is in more of a rush. It has already set up it's bad guy, Moriarty, in the first film, and has a lot for him and Holmes to do, so we are quickly off and away. An exciting train ride brings us to Paris, and a failed attempt to prevent a bombing, then we're off again to Germany to dabble ineffectively in a munitions factory, then finally to Switzerland to try and stop an assassination that could trigger a world war. It's exciting stuff, and Watson and Holmes seem quite at ease with each other and their rather rough and tumble life style. It's been a while since I read the books, but I seem to remember rather more deductions, and rather less fistfights, gunfights, and explosions, in a typical Holmes story.

Still, it's the twenty first century now, and we want our heroes to be at least as tough as they are cerebral. Hence the increased usage of howitzers, I suspect. But while there is less in the way of mystery solving, we are still treated to a fairly good puzzle of sorts as we untangle Moriarty's scheme. And while eventually that scheme ends up making Game of Shadows read very similar to the League of Extraordinary Gentleman (very, very similar when you'll recall that was also run by Moriarty), Holmes at least is more prepared to engage his opponent with wits as well as fists.

Featuring an enjoyable appearance by Stephen Fry as Holmes' brother, Game of Shadows is fun, fast paced and stylish while still holding on to that more gritty and careful manner ensuring you pay attention to the ins and outs of the plot as it unfolds. I must say I did enjoy how they worked out the finale, having Holmes and Moriarty confront each other over a chessboard while their respective plans are carried out in the other room was pretty good. So while we may have lost a bit of the measured and odd from the first film we have picked up more speed and style, while not making things too dumbed down, I hope. Three disguises out of Five.


- Peace out

Forever This Way

Conditions: Warmingly warm.

Anniversary!

I believe there is a lot of blame in the Costa Concordia liner disaster to go around. Certainly blame for the captain if, as it seems so far, he veered his ship off course in order to do a drive by of a particular island where family of the crew worked, then abandoned ship while passengers were still trying to work out how to get off. But there's also blame to be placed elsewhere, concerning the ship itself. Four thousand people on that ship were faced with the Titanic scenario, 100 years after that liner sank. How to evacuate thousands of people from a sinking ship when there is a shortage of lifeboat capacity.

Veteran mariners say the Concordia wreck - particularly the problems the passengers encountered in launching lifeboats as the ship listed to one side - proves there are problems the industry, try though it might, still has not solved.

"The regulations rely on untrained and frightened passengers being able to deal with life rafts in the absence of trained crew members - including having to board them from the water," said John Dalby, a former oil tanker captain who now runs maritime security firm Marine Risk Management.

"The whole point of the Titanic regulations was to avoid what happened with her, and it has now happened again with Costa - that is, the difficulty, if not impossibility, of launching lifeboats from the 'high side,'" Dalby said, referring to the side of the boat tipped into the air.

In the wake of the Titanic disaster, maritime regulations make it mandatory for all ships to have a minimum of 125 percent lifeboat and life raft capacity, comprising 50 percent on each side of the ship plus an additional 25 percent available. According to the International Chamber of Shipping, they are designed to be ready for use within 5 minutes and to be filled as quickly as needed.

But all of that is for naught if the lifeboats cannot get into the water, or if the ship finds itself in distress in adverse conditions - late at night, in a storm or far from land, for example.

- reuters.com/article/

Titanic taught us that regarding the ship itself as it's own lifeboat was incorrect: that no matter the size, the ship had to allow for a full evacuation to the lifeboats. Surely there is an issue here with a ship that can carry over four thousand people? How can you expect four thousand people to be able to evacuate a ship in a couple of hours - a similar time line for both Titanic and the Concordia. Especially since the ship will likely be damaged and listing, and it's dark or possibly even in storm conditions. They've kept building these ships bigger and bigger, and I suspect have focused more on the "unsinkability" factor of the Titanic legend with hull design and computer assisted navigation systems and the like, rather than the "failed lifeboat evacuation" factor, wherein the nature of a crisis prevents the perfect conditions from being able to happen, and you cannot fill the lifeboats to their capacity.



Film Review: The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn

Seems there are two kinds of people in the world, those who know all about Tintin and his adventures, and those who do not know him at all. I am firmly in the former camp, having eagerly read all his books from a young age. Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson have combined forces here to present an amalgam of Tintin adventures, roughly focusing on the Secret of the Unicorn, rendered through computer graphics to present a sort of living comic book. And the effect works fairly well, mostly avoiding the danger of the uncanny valley, where computer-designed faces look more creepy the more lifelike they appear, by sticking to how the characters looked in the comic books.

Of course the essence of a Tintin story is adventure and action, and Spielberg has taken this to heart, with a rip roaring adventure tale that simply doesn't let up. Ocean journeys, daring escapes, french foreign legion, hidden treasure, car chases, plane crashes, gunfights, and even a pirate battle is thrown into the pot. It's about as solid and true to the comic stories as you could hope, and I guess that's where I have an issue. Herge may have known how to write a good adventure, but he doesn't seem to have concerned himself too much with characters or relationships. Being very true to the source material, neither has Spielberg, and I guess that was fine when I was nine years old. But I've been around the block a few times since then, and frankly I'm looking for a little more in my blockbuster entertainment than just non stop action.

Call me nit-picky if you like, and I realise the source material has the same failings, but I feel that a movie that is all action sequence is really only half a movie. The digital effects are superb. The actors are top notch. The settings are brilliant and even the plot is pretty darn good. But where's the heart? Where's the actual risk? Yes the captain drinks too much and Tintin is trying to get him to cut down, but why? Other than the fact that these characters are famous, why should we really care who wins the race to find the treasure? It shouldn't get a pass just because it's old. Three head injuries out of five.


- Peace out

Should You Choose

Conditions: Gusty


Film Review: Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol.

Director Brad Bird steps into the big chair for the latest installment of the adventures of super spy Ethan Hunt. Having proved he has a flair for action movies with The Incredibles, Brad takes a similar stylish brush to Cruise's super hero franchise. More flair and a bit more humanity from the characters are a welcome influence on proceedings. Brad talked recently of how he wanted to have honest character reactions to the things that are happening, and that part really comes across well. However I feel that in this latest installment there's something that's gone missing. The plot revolves around a fanatical nuclear scientist who believes that what the human race needs is world war three, because in order to make humans stronger you have to first kill off most of the population. So he sets up the Impossible Mission team to take the blame for bombing the Kremlin, in order to steal Russian launch codes so he can fire a retaliatory missile at America.

Cruise and co, now disavowed and on the run from everybody, have to try to intercept the codes but, oddly and for no real reason worth 6 billion lives, are forced to essentially give them to the madman instead - and so the second part of the film involves chasing after the bad guy in order to try and stop him from launching a missile. As plots go it's about par for the course, but I have to say it really feels like a lot of the film is merely setup for various action sequences. I realise a lot of action movies are precisely that, but this one felt a lot more obvious about it. One of the things never addressed in these kinds of films is what happened to the romantic interest from the last film. However, this time around Michelle Monaghan's wife character from M:I 3 does actually get discussed.

And this is where the movie stumbles. Not explaining anything for the first half of the film, including why Ethan is stuck in a Russian prison, we're left to guess as to what must have happened between the films. Finally we're clued in and it looks as if the happy ending of MI:3 was not so happy after all, and Ethan Hunt is supposedly bitter and wanting vengeance: a theme of the movie as another character is also seeking vengeance. But then at the end we find out it was just a trick, which I think really upsets the whole film. For a start, it turns out that without any romantic interest at all a Mission Impossible film is actually kind of a lifeless animal, despite the stunts. And secondly, messing about with the characters like that ends up confusing the audience as to what anyone is fighting for. I think the nuts and bolts of the film are fine, but there's not really any heart in it, despite all the style. Two busted gadgets out of Five.


- Peace out

Boots Made For Stomping

Conditions: Warm, Sunny

The Dog of War

After spending the last decade hip deep in the middle east, you would think America would be looking forward to some quality peace time, a chance perhaps to unwind, or at least reload, especially while staring down the barrel of a double-dip recession. However to think that would be to ignore the seemingly central tenant of the American way of life. First always be preparing for war. So it is that this week president Obama announced that while he may be cutting half a trillion dollars out of the defense budget, he still wants to keep tensions ramped up, and has decided to increase them in Asia.

The new defence strategic document titled 'Sustaining US Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defence' calls for the US military to strengthen its presence in Asia-Pacific and identifies China as a security threat in long term. The military review says US economic and security interests are "inextricably" connected with the area and the US military accordingly will "of necessity rebalance toward the Asia- Pacific region" , including strengthening Asian allies and investing in the strategic partnership with India, state-run China Daily reported. China's state media also accused US of being a "troublemaker" .

- timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/

I can't see how this is the time for re-posturing against yet another nation and ramping up yet more tensions. The only thing this really plays to is 2012: the US election year. As though the only way Obama can win back the presidency is to ensure everyone continues to remain on a war footing. We criticised this when it was George W Bush doing it, and I see no need to stop criticising it now.





Film Review: Puss in Boots

The famous cat from the Shrek franchise gets his own prequel/origin story. And it turns out to be a pretty nice origin story. An orphan raised in a small Spanish town, Puss befriended Humpty Dumpty - a shrewd character who's always had a dream to find the fabled magic beans and use them to get to the giant's castle. There he will find the famous goose who lays golden eggs. And while he doesn't say much about what happens after that, Humpty allows Puss to be his partner. Years pass in the orphanage with the two getting into and out of all sorts of trouble, until Puss inadvertently becomes a hero and receives his boots as a reward.

Now Humpty has a problem, because with Puss going straight he no longer has a partner in crime. So he sets Puss up to take part in a bank heist, which all goes wrong. Outraged, Puss leaves Humpty to be arrested and escapes town as a fugitive. Now, a long time later, they team up again since Humpty has finally found the magic beans, in order to get the golden eggs, in order to finally repay the debt. Oh, and Salma Hayak also is in there as a sassy cat-burglar, to make a third partner. Its actually a fairly complicated back story for what's a fairly well-plotted movie. It's essentially a western, with a rogue character looking for redemption in order to restore his name, while there's also a long-term debt and revenge to be worked out.

The animation is top notch, but while it is humorous I wouldn't call it a film that is constantly reeling off one joke after another. In fact given the western setting and the boots, it kind of has the feel of a one-gag film that is stretching that gag out as far as it possibly can. And every now and then you get a glimpse of the strain. But at least it doesn't pander too much to the audience, and it has a reasonably good ending. Two and a half boots out of five.


- Peace out

Oh, The Things I Have Seen

Conditions: Not too damn bad

The Horribilis of Annus

Well another year has ended, of which we are supremely grateful. So many things went wrong this year it's actually difficult to summarise them all. So instead of bothering, let's have a look at the films of 2011 instead.

The Good.

Tangled. Brilliant, warm-hearted retelling of the old Disney standard that stands toe to toe with anything Pixar can do, but in Disney's own grand style.

The Fourth Kind. Shockingly terrifying portrayal of alien abductions in Alaska

The Tourist. Stylish and fun heist movie, with Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie, who are also stylish and fun.

Sucker Punch. Ultra stylish, exciting action fest with a solid core about insanity and escape.

World Invasion. Battle: Los Angeles. Solid war drama, only with aliens instead of nazis

The Adjustment Bureau. Sweet drama where true love has to conquer fate, as well as everything else.

Fair Game. Solid if exhausting drama about the CIA lies behind the Iraq War.

True Grit. Very realistic and strong western yarn.


The Okay.

Pirates of the Caribbean - On Stranger Tides. Fun, but maybe Orlando and Keira were needed after all to give more of a balance to Jack?

Immortals. Stylish to a fault. That fault being a lack of character development or a cohesive plot.

In Time. Cracking good idea, but leading to a bit of a muddled Bonnie and Clyde theme, and a non-ending.

Hanna. Bizarre, haunting, odd, illogical.

Senna. Very good documentary, but not actually balanced at all, which is unfair.

Thor. Likeable, but so very bland.

X-Men First Class. Well executed prequel, but somehow lacking in actual characters to care about.


The Bad.

Drive. Stylish as hell. But ultimately pointless and barren.

The Three Musketeers. Yeah, who needs sword fighting heroics when we could just have a giant airship battle instead. A movie pointlessly upstaged by itself.

Cars 2. A plot about spies and racing could work, but when it's concerning a fool and a cipher, no one really cares.

Fast5. Hateful, vicious, stupid waste of time and money

The Green Hornet. Overbearing and stupid, despite having the right idea it just simply doesn't do enough with it.

Limitless. Awful, awful movie that ultimately endorses drug culture and the healing power of greed.

Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon. Oy. I swear, if Michael Bay had actually put any effort into this thing it could have destroyed society as we know it. As it stands, it is a monument to incoherence and chaos. A film that barrages the audience until they are so battered they will limp out of the theater thinking they were entertained, perhaps in the hope that then the torture will stop. A movie I am ashamed to share the planet with. A movie that, billions of years from now when it finally is received by any intelligent life on the other side of the universe, will condemn us as a species undeserving of any pity or consideration. So thanks, Bay, for cursing us once and (hopefully) for all with your relentless hackery.



Film Review: Immortals

Immortals refers to the Titans and the Olympians, who battled each other in the time before time. The Olympians won and imprisoned the Titans inside a mountain, where we see them at the start of this film. This story is actually about Theseus, a young peasant who is apparently destined for great things. To get to those, as in the way of most old legends, great suffering first must occur. Hence King Hyperion, played by Mickey Rourke, attacking village after village, building up his army in search of a magical bow he can use to release the Titans from their prison. His family were killed despite his prayers to the gods, so now he's out for revenge. Naturally Theseus's village is yet another one to be conquered, and Theseus is enslaved. He teams up with a thief, a monk and a prophet and together they escape and go off to try and find the bow first.

Now the Olympians could come down at any point and put a stop to this, but under the rule of Zeus they are not allowed to. Zeus has this new policy of not interfering with mortals, so it's up to Theseus and the gang. How do they do? Well, terribly actually. They essentially stumble over the bow with a tip off thanks to the prophet, then subsequently lose it to Hyperion five minutes later, then spend the rest of the film not being able to stop him and his army from attacking the fort/mountain where the Titans wait to be released. It all ends up in a series of massive fight sequences, where one army battles another, Hyperion knocks the stuffing out of Theseus, and the Olympians having to fight the released Titans.

I had to watch this film through 3D, which I found annoying and distracting, as per usual. The visual look of the film is stunning, as would be expected of director Tarsem Singh, but I can't help but think the script needed more work. The characters in it are paper thin, with the conflicts between them not really getting a chance to air. I wanted to know who the Titans were, and why they fought the Olympians. I wanted more for the thief, the monk and the prophet to do - they essentially just tag along the whole second part of the film. I wanted some kind of resolution between Hyperion and the Gods he so hated - after freeing the Titans he never gets to see what happens. The characters are all so disconnected it's dissatisfying. The only person who really stands out is Rourke as the evil tyrant. He can do menacing in his sleep, and he's given a character who's simply pure evil, and hence is pretty effective to watch. In contrast, the gods are played by kids in golden armour, and struggle a bit to show the full weight of the Olympic gods. While the film is enthusiastically violent and blood soaked, I don't really think it tries to be more than a spectacle. And while it is quite a spectacle, that's not enough. Three magic arrows out of five.


- Peace out