The Paradise

I've been meaning to watch this series for a long time. 
You'll probably hear me say that a lot. 

But it's true, and mainly because of Matthew McNulty, who I came across (read: fell in love with) in Misfits Season 2, 3 & 4 where he played the very likable "bad boy" Seth. I think it's something about his accent, I could never resist a rough English accent. And what girl can resist a bad boy that has this sweet, soft, hidden side that he only shows to the girl he likes. His rugged handsome looks don't put me off much either - the soft brown eyes and gorgeous . . . wait, what was I talking about? Oh yeah, right, The Paradise. 

I have only watched the pilot so far, and to be brutally honest, I found it really boring. Usually I absolutely love period/costume dramas but this one just seemed so run of the mill. I don't feel like there's anything new here. There is a Mary-Jane character, the new girl Denise (played by Joanna Vanderham), who just can't put a foot wrong, and although at the beginning she is seen as a simple minded country girl, she is quick to impress those around her. That is, except for the one jealous girl who just can't deal with being upstaged and tries her best to sabotage Denise, only managing to increase everyones opinion of her. There's a dotty girl who is quick to befriend the new girl. There's a creepy guy that sees and knows everything. There a mysterious death that no one talks about, and a main guy who is a bit of a man-whore. That is, until he lays his eyes on the pretty Denise, and instantly falls for her country charms and pretty looks. It seems like the writers have felt that this was a recipe for success because they'd seen it done before. That everything ties together very nicely and audiences will fall for its perfect charm. 

I was so bored in some parts that I actually started dusting my desk while I was watching it. The set is very cardboard looking and scream budget restraints. The costumes are hardly anything to rave about, which is quite often the reason I love period dramas so much and so I was very disappointed about this. Emun Elliot, who plays the man-whore I mentioned before (more commonly referred to as Moray in the series), does nothing to convince me he is as attractive and charming as his female companions find him or at all deserving of all of their fawning attention. Perhaps Elliot should swap with McNulty and play his character, Dudley, who seems to be the part of "nice best friend" to Moray. Am I bias? Probably, but I do think it would have been an improvement, even if only slightly because a lot of it is the script they have to work with too. It's just cliche and dull. 

All that said, I'm probably going to watch the remaining episodes. Yes, I know, why rant about how it's boring and then say I'm going to watch the rest of the series? There was a line that got me a little hopeful of better things to come. At the end, the dotty friend tells Denise that it's very clear she's in love with man-whore Moray (she doesn't quite put it like that, though - now that wouldn't have been dull!) and Denise quips that she doesn't want to marry Moray, "I want to be him". If the show explores this path, then I am hopeful by the end it could turn into something far more bearable. Also, Arthur Darvill is in episode five. I don't think I have to explain why I want to watch the rest of it now, Darvill pretty much explains himself. 

It's a 4 out of 10 for me for the pilot (2 points for casting Mc-Dreamy-Nulty). 

Catch Up

Hey guys, 

Hope you had a fantastic Monday. I love Mondays because I don't have to work, and starting in two weeks I'll be  at university, but just for an hour tutorial. Next Monday, however, is the Oscars (for people in Australia)! Jess & I are going to spend the day watching to Oscars and eating junk food and I couldn't be more excited! We've both got our predictions ready which I might write down on Sunday night in preparation. 

Today I went DVD shopping. I was hoping to buy Peter Pan but alas, it's special release hasn't come to Australia yet (does anyone know if it will?). Or even to buy the Avengers, but it's still priced at $37. I refuse to buy a film for over $20. A television series, I understand as you get more hours worth, but for a movie the answer is always no. So that was a bit of a let down. Then I was looking at the BBC section, to see how much Misfits Season 3 was, and that's when I saw it . . . The Hour Season 2. I had to have it. I hadn't even bothered looking for it because I had assumed it wouldn't be out in Australia yet - it only finished last week on ABC. $32 well spent. 

guess what's inside? 

the list of dvds to come and when they're expected.
right down the bottom is skyfall (27/03)
can you spot game of thrones season two (6/03)

did you guess correctly? 

Other than that, I've been mucking around on the computer and catching up on some trailers for new films coming out. I just thought I'd jot down a few that I am super excited about, and will definitely be seeing in the cinema. 

rooney mara plays emily taylor in side effects

Side Effects 
(Released 28th February in Australia)
Rooney Mara. She is amazing. This movie looks like my kind of movie, I mean, who doesn't love a good thriller? I am also a huge fan of Steven Soderbergh (director of all the Ocean movies, Contagion, Magic Mike - the list goes on). Jude Law, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Channing Tatum are also cast, so I know it's going to be good. 

at the new york premiere 

at the berlin film festival

at a berlin press conference for side effects

The Lone Ranger
(Released 4th July in Australia)
Watching the first few seconds of the trailer and spotted Ruth Wilson. It couldn't be? Then she flashes quickly again and it's either her or she has a doppleganger who is also in the acting business. I can't believe I didn't know she was going to be in a Johnny Depp movie! I am so happy that she's getting more recognition because she really is an amazing actress. Other than Ruth, I'm excited for this movie but I don't think I'll have to see it on the day it comes out or anything. 

The Place Beyond the Pines

(Released 9th May in Australia)

The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones

(Released 22nd August in Australia)

Stoker

(Released 29th August in Australia)

I also checked the movies coming out over the next month:

• Amour (21st February)
• Beautiful Creatures (21st February)
• Cloud Atlas (28th February)
• Broken City (7th March)
• Great Expectations (7th March)
• Oz: The Great and Powerful (7th March)

I have to admit the one I am most excited about this month is definitely Cloud Atlas. And yes, it is because Ben Whishaw is in it, but it also looks like a very intriguing film that will have me on the edge of my seat. Hopefully it lives up to my very high expectations of it. 

What films are you guys looking forward to at the moment? 

Star Trek

Okay, so I have a confession to make: I never would have seen Star Trek if Benedict Cumberbatch hadn't been in the sequel. It's my life mission to see all of BC's movies, and so he sort of forced my hand with appearing as the villain of it's sequel Star Trek: Into Darkness, didn't he?

I tend to do this with a lot of things in my life, not just films and television. I'll judge something massively before I've even had a chance to look into it. One of my friends recently observed that everything in my eyes was guilty until proven innocent. I have to stop doing that. One example (that does happen to be a television series) is that I used to HATE (see how I've not only capitalised it but also underlined and bolded it?) Doctor Who. I had an argument with one of my friends boyfriends over it when I was seventeen. He had just unsuspectingly stated that he enjoyed watching it, totally unaware that he'd walked into a minefield. How could he? How dare he? He couldn't understand how I could judge something so hard without having seen an episode. I couldn't understand how he could be such a dickhead as to watch a stupid sci-fi show about some crazy doctor in space. 
Now it's not only one of my favourite shows on television, but my actual favourite show of all time. 
Harry, if you're reading this, I'm sorry. 

That's not to say Star Trek is now my favourite movie of all time. However, it's definitely changed my opinion. I found it fast-paced, funny and was perfect for someone with absolutely no understanding of the Star Trek world/universe. Chris Pine worked well as James Kirk, although I feel he always plays the same characters. The last movie I saw him in, This Means War (2012), he played FDR, a secret agent who is pretty much Kirk with a different name. That same confident intelligence, self assured, always on the lookout, good looking guy who is charming with the ladies but still has something to prove. I love Zachary Quinto as Spock. It would be hard to play someone who is meant to have show no emotions, but actually does feel a lot beneath the surface. I think he pulled it off wonderfully, and I want to see him in more films soon. I also love it when films have a great minor cast too. Hello Chris Hemsworth, Winona Ryder and Simon Pegg. If I hadn't IMDB'd the movie before I saw it, I never would have known Nero was played by Eric Banner, but it was great to see him too. My biggest love casting wise was Leonard Nimoy as the future, older Spock. I'm sure all of you know this already but Nimoy was the first Spock and I think it's a perfect nod to the original. Nimoy also plays William Bell in Fringe (2009), and anyone in Fringe is loved by me. 

Star Trek: Into Darkness is due in Australian cinemas on the 16th of May. Will you be seeing it? Is there a movie or television series you've judged before watching it? 

I'm on Tumblr!

I have some very exciting news! You might have guessed it from the very cryptic title for this post but I'll spell it out for those of you who haven't got it yet: I've created a tumblr for this blog!
You can follow me here. 
Come and say hi, I'd love to hear from you, so don't be shy!

sunday afternoon reading

latest purchases

So in other news, I watched Star Trek last night and so will be posting on that later today if everything goes according to plan (read: my brother doesn't make me pick him at some ungodly hour in the morning again). Also, the pictures are just a little taste of my week. Hope everyone is having a lovely week too!

1. valentines with anna

2. night in with oreo cupcakes while watching four weddings

The Carrie Diaries

I'm so annoyed! Where was this show when I was sixteen? Why did I have to be born in the early nineties? 
I was far too young for Sex & the City when that was out, and now I feel a little too old for The Carrie Diaries. Why can't I win with Bradshaw? That said, despite the horrible timing of both shows, I have seen every episode of SATC and definitely plan to with TCD after watching the pilot last night. 

So I'm a little late to jump onto this one, as I think there are about eight episodes out at the moment, but knowing me, it won't take me long to catch up. Last night I wasn't in the greatest mood (another Valentine's alone) and I thought a brand new show would cheer me up. One of my older friends at work had commented that I would love TCD, and that even though she was in her early forties, and a die hard SATC fan, she was thoroughly enjoying it. So I gave it a go, and I'm still so glad I did. By the end of the first twenty minutes my mood had changed dramatically. It's one of those uplifting, colourful, lots of fun shows that are good to watch to relax and unwind, totally unlike Homeland which I am currently in two episodes into the first season, and struggling to motivate myself to start the next episode. 

Although I did thoroughly enjoy it, I'm definitely not its target audience, which I would place around the same age as Carrie, who is sixteen and living in the early eighties. It hardly matters though, if you are a little older and go into with the right expectations, I'm sure you will enjoy it just as my work friend and I are. It's got a fantastic, boppy soundtrack (can anyone resist a little Madonna?) and excellent, vibrant, eighties feel costumes that make me want to trawl through the internet looking for exact copies.  

I'm giving the first episode a 7 out of 10 because I feel there is definitely potential for the series to blossom into something truly great, and I'm excited to see where they take it. I'll definitely be writing more on this show, and soon.

Anna Karenina

There can be no peace for us. 

Only misery, and the greatest happiness. 

Source: mmorrow

Allow me to preface this post by telling you a little about my relationship with Anna Karenina. We first met at a bookstore just before Christmas in 2006, when I had just turned fifteen. Sadly, I had to leave her there though, but we were quickly reunited on Christmas Day by my parents. I took her with my to school on library reading day, and my adorable English teacher was very impressed that I knew her. A couple of weeks later my teacher passed away and I couldn't bear to see Anna anymore. It was years before I saw her again. This year, actually. I am particularly fond on Keira Knightley and my heart will always belong to Aaron Taylor-Johnson so when I heard they were to be the stars of Joe Wright's adaptation, I felt I could no longer shun Anna. 
I devoured the rest of the book in a matter of days. 

All that said, I don't want to spend my time comparing the movie to the book constantly, but I feel like the book had a major impact on how I viewed the movie, as I'm sure it did for many other viewers. 

What gets people really talking about this movie are two main things. Firstly, the costumes and secondly, the setting. It's easy to see why the costumes are a main talking point. It's simply because they are stunning. Jacqueline Durran has done it again (she's the one we have to thank for that green dress in Atonement) with her exquisite costumes, taking inspiration from 1950's France and putting it into the 1870's Russia. Somehow it works. It's no wonder she won the BAFTA just last Monday, and here's hoping she finally wins that Academy Award she's been nominated for. There are so many stunning costumes that I cannot choose my favourite (please don't make me!) although the black ball gown Anna wears when she first dances with Vronsky is certainly a standout. There is also one that I loved simply because it seemed to be the only one that was a more "typical" Russian dress of that period that any of the others. 

Talking about the costumes was the easy part - I don't think anyone can say the costumes aren't magnificent. The hard part is the setting. For those of you who don't know, the movie is set in a theatre and much of the actors movements are like they are performing a ballet. To be extremely dull and boring, I have to tell you that I still have not made up my mind whether I liked it or not. I love the boldness of the idea and in many of the scenes it worked perfectly (I particularly loved it in Stiva's scenes). My best friend, who I went to see it with, said she felt the theatre/stage setting worked because it made her think that all the people who were in Russia's "high society" were just putting on an act. I loved that thought. I've heard that many others found it distracting and sometimes confusing, but I didn't get that. I liked that it  added theatricality to the story, and was more in depth than just recounting the story of Anna, because lets face it, that's been done before. At times I felt it was reminiscent of Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet (1996), with some characters and scenes overly melodramatic and the settings so richly decorated. My slight problem with it was that sometimes it was crystal clear that you were in a theatre (such as Vronsky's race scene or when Anna humiliates herself at the opera) while others there was no suggestion of it at all, and it was as though there was no theatre and there never had been. Perhaps I've missed something and I will spot it when I watch the dvd, but it was not obvious to me on the first watch. 

  

The performances were all amazing, and it was lovely to see so many well known actors in it, including the lovely Ruth Wilson whose scenes I thoroughly enjoyed. For me the stand out was Aaron Taylor-Johnson. I felt that his performance of Vronsky was perfect. It's just as I imagined it. In many parts the film actually had me aching in the same sort of way Romeo and Juliet makes me ache. I know many people (in fact, probably the majority) don't believe that what Anna and Vronsky had was love, but rather lust, however I am not one of them. The movie, and especially Taylor-Johnson's performance, proved it all over again for me. This brings me to what I feel was the biggest let down and mistake of the movie. And it was not what they put in, but rather what they left out. ***SPOILER ALERT*** It also brings me back to the book again. In the novel, there is an small part at the end where it shows how Vronsky is dealing with Anna's death: simply, he is not. Even though a significant period of time has passed since, he himself is suicidal and it is obvious that he is not coping with her absence in his life. The movie did not even hint at this. There was no ending where Vronsky was shown. I could not believe it, and I think the movie suffered for it. It's one of the clear ways I know how much Vronsky loved Anna. 

Other than that, however, I thought the movie was a triumph. I am impatiently going to wait until the dvd is released and would definitely see it again in the cinema if asked. 

It's an 8 out of 10 from me.