Issue 5 - The Price of Reason

There are certain things in life I wish someone would just get right. Simple things, which the majority of the Western World uses every day, like staplers and photocopiers.

I have been three years in my current job and not once, in all that time, have I had a stapler that staples. As for photocopiers: don't get me started. The current model I am forced to work with has a feeder that is capable of dragging the entire Yellow Pages through at once (completely unbidden) and then jamming on a piece of fluff. My relationship with a new photocopier does not reach a truce until I have worked out the exact position to place The Boot. In photocopier terms, I have discovered, The Boot is far more expedient than calling in an engineer. It also has the advantage of simultaneously relieving stress and letting the photocopier know who's boss.

You would think, by now, with the amount of usage these things get, somebody would have come up with a design that actually works. You know why I think they haven't? Because too much of the developers' time is wasted trying to unjam their office staplers and photocopiers.

Take jeans, as another example. I do not know one woman who doesn't struggle to find jeans that fit. Jeans are all designed for the Kate Mosses of this world, or, if those of us with a larger derrière do discover a pair that we can wriggle our way into, what do we find? The designer has automatically assumed we also have a beer belly to rival Homer Simpson's. We're women! We have curves! The general rule is hips: out; waist: in.

Starbucks' spoons. How hard can it be to come up with a type of plastic spoon without a razor-sharp edge that strikes mid-muffin and leaves you vaguely resembling The Joker?

Toilets! If Australia can make toilets that flush properly and don't require plunging at the first reminder of last night's curry, why the heck can't Britain and the USA do the same? This makes no sense to me. (On a personal note: WHY OH WHY does Britain have this insane policy of not allowing power-points and light switches in bathrooms?! I hate drying my hair in my bedroom!)

While we're on this subject of nonsensical things, why do they fill olive jars right to the top, so that you cannot possibly open the lid without getting covered in garlic-y brine?

Why don't they fill chip packets up? I don't ever recall asking for “half a packet of delicious, crispy, artery-clogging, potato-y goodness and half a packet of air, please.”

Why do they always discontinue the nicest-smelling fabric softener/perfume/air freshener/deodorant? And the best colour lipstick/nail polish/eye shadow/foundation?

Why do software upgrades always remove the best features of the programme and make it more unstable and completely incompatible with all your other programmes?

Think how wonderful it would be if producers actually made products that did what people wanted them to do! Surely, this is not too much to ask? Or is the price of reason in design just too high? Personally, I think the man who could make a common product using a bit of common sense would be raking in the cash.

But hey, what would I know? I'm just the consumer.

Issue 4 - Hair Maketh The Man

(Here's one for the ladies and for discerning men.)

Hair.

Not the musical, but the organic stuff we all have growing on us.

People spend millions trying to get rid of it; people spend millions trying to get more of it. Some people really need to spend some of their millions doing either/or (Donald Trump, I'm looking at you).

I am most fascinated by the role that hair plays in the consideration of a person's attractiveness; not only that, but how popular culture influences that consideration.

Particularly for men. Remember the undercut? Or the shave-and-peroxide phase?

Over the last 12 months or so, I have noticed a gradual shift in the popular perception of what is "hot" in a man and what is not. For several years, every teen idol and pin-up boy sported a variation on the Emo Fringe - the more side-swept, the better. The current poster child for the Emo Fringe is Zac Efron (although he stole the title from Pete Wentz, who was too busy having babies and Twittering about his personal life to notice). The Emo Fringe in its purest form was complemented by skinny jeans and layers of eyeliner. Oddly enough, tattoos would also get you points. In a way, it was the slick, modern, commercialised version of punk, with a hefty dose of glam rock thrown in.

And chest hair? Pffft!! Don't even GO there! A man didn't get anywhere in the fashionable world unless he was waxed and buffed to a shine. Only the most attractive of the most attractive could afford to get away with anything different. For a while there, it looked like Hugh Jackman was the only one managing to hold his own - ironic, really, considering his all-singing, all-dancing background.

Now, I'll be the first to admit that I like a pretty-boy*, but I did feel like the look had become a bit tired. Then, one day, I opened a magazine and found not one, but two fashion adverts featuring very manly men with very manly chest hair proudly on display. What had happened?

Back-track about a year. Enter a certain young vampi-- sorry, a certain young actor by the name of Robert Pattinson. At first, Twilight fans were horrified. This was not the Edward Cullen of their fantasies! He was…scruffy! His hair had not been touched by a pair of straighteners! And what was that growth beneath his shirt?! But, he was…funny…and he sang like a tortured angel…and he played piano…OK, so maybe he didn't sparkle, but that was part of his charm…

Cue screaming girls and massive over-exposure.

There were other signs, too, that made me suspect the winds of change were blowing, bringing female affections back around to the more manly physique: Gerard Butler suddenly surged in popularity after bulking up for "300", mo's and beards were appearing here and there at random, I had never seen so much gush about a pair of thick eyebrows as I was seeing about those belonging to a certain supervillain named Sylar (and if Zachary Quinto grew a bit of facial hair? Look out! Fan girls everywhere were suddenly volunteering to have his babies).

My suspicions were subsequently confirmed by the attention surrounding a particular King. A King of Leon, to be precise. What's interesting here is that the Followill clan has always been a hairy bunch. In truth, they used to look like lumberjacks who had stumbled across 70s fashion a couple of decades too late. But one member, in particular, made some drastic follicular changes and - voilà! - all sorts of things were on fire.

You might be forgiven, at this point, for thinking I mean the bass player, Jared. He is the obvious heartthrob of the band: the cut jaw, the eyes, the cool movie star confidence; he's also formerly a proud supporter of the Emo Fringe - even Miley Cyrus loves him. But, no.

Instead, take one blue-eyed lead singer named Caleb, shorten his ridiculously long hair, grow and cultivate a nice tidy beard/longish stubble and you have a man who looks as good as he sounds. And, boy, is that good.

Now, if only we could get Dave Grohl to see that less is more, all would be well with the world of rock.

I've been thinking through my knowledge of pop history and have decided that I cannot picture any of the following without thinking of their iconic hair:

Jennifer Aniston - "The Rachel"
Salvador Dali
Prince Harry
Tom Selleck
Kurt Cobain (single-handedly responsible for the grunge mop)
Slash
Farrah Fawcett (RIP)
Danny Masterson as Steven Hyde
Freddy Mercury
Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow or Edward Scissorhands
Princess Leia
Amy Winehouse
Albert Einstein
Victoria Beckham (don't hate me, just face it - whenever she changes her hair, the whole world stops to look)
The Beatles
The Queen of Simple Chic, Audrey Hepburn.

Wanna get noticed? Storm the charts? Start a revolution? Then either get with the hottest hair trend, or start one.

*Although Harrison Ford will always be top of my list.

-------------------------------------------
RIP MJ

Issue 3 - T4 - Salvation?

I'm torn between my head and my heart.

But I'm also fascinated by something...

Let me start at the beginning.

JOHN CONNOR x CHRISTIAN BALE
= AN INSPIRED MELD OF 2 OF MY FAVE THINGS, WHICH INDUCED A HAPPY SPASM OF ANTICIPATION

Next, it was:
TERMINATOR + McG = MEH, BUT I WAS WILLING TO GIVE HIM A CHANCE

Then, out of America, came:
BAD REVIEWS + BAD REVIEWS = PANIC - WHAT HAVE THEY DONE?!

Followed by:
EMPIRE MAGAZINE + DECENT REVIEW = SLIGHT RELIEF...maybe

Eventually:
ME + VIEWING = PLEASANT SURPRISE(MUCH ENJOYMENT ÷ NEAR-FATAL PLOT FLAW*)

*...but we will get to that

Shortly thereafter:
SALES DOWN IN THE U.S. + TOP OF THE U.K. BOX OFFICE = MY UTTER BEWILDERMENT

Why the disparity in response between the two countries? Was it, simply, that England's large Welsh and Australian contingents were feeling patriotic about Bale and Worthington? Unlikely.

Is the British audience more willing to accept mediocrity? Possibly - look at the majority of its TV programming. But, then, I'm not British, and you won't catch me watching East Enders, either.

Are the English less hard-core nitpickers when it comes to their sci-fi? Not really.

Or...had they just been smart enough to avoid "Charlie's Angels" and therefore had no deep-set prejudice against McG? Strangely enough, I think this may be closer to the truth.

The more reviews I read, the more I noticed something: the majority of the haters weren't giving a solid reason for their thorough dislike of the movie.

• "Too loud" - um...what?
• "Not violent enough" - OK, perhaps. That was definitely one of the problems with Alien vs Predator 1 & 2, but hardly a killing stroke (pardon the pun) in this case.
• "Too much action vs too little story" - sorry, but there actually was a story there, flaws aside (yeah, yeah, I'm getting to that).
• "Christian Bale's Connor wasn't engaging" - fair enough, but this is the first of three movies - he's got to give the character some room to grow. Besides, as Bale has said, this really wasn't John's story - it was Marcus' - and one of the things I've always appreciated about Bale as an actor is his understanding of when to hog the spotlight and when to let someone else shine.
• "The franchise is dead without Arnie" - are you crazy? Would you seriously have wanted The Governator wandering around, trying to equal his former glory? Remember Rambo 4, people...remember Rambo 4...

With each new review, I was left with the uncomfortable impression that the critics really only had two things on their minds: McG's name and Bale's rant.

Now, don't get me wrong. The movie wasn't the best thing I've ever seen, but it was enjoyable. As it should be. It certainly had far more of the "feel" of a Terminator movie than T3 did. I also appreciated the fact that, as with Star Trek, CGI was used sparingly and effectively. In other words, I don't think McG did too bad a job. Sure, the ending felt like it had been stuffed into a VacuSac and had the air sucked out of it (I'm guessing that had to do with the multiple versions and edits that were reportedly trialled), but at least we didn't have to put up with things exploding unnecessarily all over the joint and multiple close-ups of the hero's knee-cap throughout the most crucial moments, as we undoubtedly will get with Transformers 2 in a week or so.

hmmm....Bale's uncontrolled, f-bombing outburst on set. It's interesting to me how much this has set people against the movie itself. And how it comes up in every single negative review. Why? It has no impact on the tone of the movie. More likely it was the other way around - when you watch John go through intense situation after intense situation, you begin to understand the pressure Bale himself must have been under, day in and day out. I'm not excusing his behaviour, but I do understand how the mood of a role can easily rub off on you. It seems, however, that the Americans have taken this mis-step more to heart than the Brits have. Perhaps it's just that, as one of my friends said, the British don't mind a really good rant every now and then.

It does go to show just how a bit of bad (or good) publicity, or a pre-conceived notion, can taint the consumer reaction to something.

Sigh.

Now - as promised - to the problem with the story. Whilst most of the objections I've seen in online forums can be easily debunked, there is one thing that has been troubling me since the day after I saw the movie (yes, it took me awhile to realise this - don't laugh).

[spoiler alert]

Kyle and John are numbers 1 and 2 on Skynet's "most wanted" list...but, John is not yet the leader of the resistance and Skynet doesn't know that Kyle was/will be his father. How does that work? Now, I can accept that maybe John was number 2 for other reasons - something to do with the opening sequence, for example. Or, perhaps, the Terminatrix conveyed her mission to Skynet when she activated the machines at the end of T3. Either of those are perfectly plausible. But nobody (except John and Kate) knows what Kyle will become. Because it hasn't happened yet. The T-800s from T2 and T3 knew, but they were both destroyed in the past. The only explanation I can come up with is this: Dr Silberman and the staff at the institution where Sarah was locked up were the only other people who would have known about Kyle. Cyberdyne Systems is obviously dabbling in medical research at the beginning of the movie, so, perhaps that gave Skynet access to Sarah's medical records.

It's a stretch, but it will have to do.

To be honest, there are other problems with the story - there usually are, in time-travel movies - but they are relatively minor. However, the whole story hangs on this one. Hence, I am torn between my head and my heart. On the one hand, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie; on the other, I will have to turn my brain off the next time I watch it.

P.S. Sam Worthington: we love you and you're a fabulous actor, but next time you might want to get Christian Bale to give you a few lessons in "how to keep up your fake American accent". ;)

P.P.S. Anton Yelchin. I just couldn't finish this post without mentioning him. I liked him as Chekov, but he seriously made an impression on me as Kyle. Unassuming, unflashy, amusing; he plays the character exactly the way he should be played, and he creeps under your skin. Just like Michael Biehn did. My final, overwhelming impression as I left the cinema was, "Man, I could have kept watching him all evening." The kid's got a future. More, please.

Issue 2 - Never Without Controversy: The MTV Awards

The MTV Awards are usually an interesting study, but this year's Movie Awards, in particular, confirmed a number of things for me:

• Sandra Bullock is still one of my favourite celebs (and one of the most down-to-earth).

• I have no desire to see any more of Sacha Baron Cohen's naked backside than I already have.

• Kings of Leon are one of the best rock bands of my generation. (Good to see America is finally waking up to them.)

• Keeping the camera trained on expressive faces – like Rob Pattinson's and Zachary Quinto's – during comedic moments is always good value.

• Kristen Stewart has a better sense of humour than people give her credit for.

• Ben Stiller can actually act – he managed to look engaged, even interested, all the way through the longest, most rambling and ultimately strangest introduction I've ever witnessed. Oh, and he has great hair. That's completely irrelevant, but true, nonetheless.

• J.J. Abrams is now even closer to the top of my list of people I desperately want to work with.
  

• Somebody needs to teach Lil Wayne a few home-truths. Like, "That ego-trip of a speech made you look even more like a dope than you already do."

• Plugging family members' careers irritates the heck out of me. I don't care if you are Denzel Washington.

• I like Jim Carrey more and more as time goes by.

• Twilight rip-offs are funny, even if you're a Twilight fan.
  

• I think I just inadvertently and very publicly admitted that I'm a Twilight fan.

• Damn.

The MTV Awards (...actually, most award shows...) has never really been known for the quality of its comedy. Still, perhaps it's time to consider a different style of host. Andy Samberg can range from hilarious (e.g. one of the night's highlights, for me: the song, "Explosions") to pathetically un-funny (e.g. whatever-the-heck that piece of stupidity/waste of talent with LeAnn Rimes, Chris Isaak and Forrest Whitaker was). Unfortunately, the un-funny moments seemed to outweigh the genius ones - unless I'm completely missing something, I just don't find fairly well-respected celebrities singing expletive-packed nonsense particularly original or entertaining.

I've been mulling over some options for hosts...Hugh Jackman did a stellar job at the Academy Awards, so I suppose the MTV Awards would be a bit of a step down for him...I would suggest Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto - the most refreshingly natural comedic team in a long time - but, considering the incredible success of Star Trek, I imagine they'll be too busy accepting awards next year to hand them out...David Tennant? That'd be cool, but the humour might be a bit too sophisticated for some viewers...seeing as Twilight is likely to dominate the Awards for the next few years, maybe they should just go the whole hog and have "the Cullens" host it. There's 8 of them - at least there'd be something for everyone...Paul Rudd. We love Paul Rudd...or how about we go back to one of the greats? I'd give a lot to see someone like Bill Cosby in the hot seat...arghh...who am I kidding? Like that'd ever happen.

Some final thoughts:

• Biggest controversy - The internet has been buzzing with speculation for the last two days. Everyone had their opinion about the Eminem/Bruno stunt. All I can say is, props to Eminem for putting himself through it. Nice to see he (apparently) has a sense of humour.
  

• Biggest beef - Megan Fox: you get to make movies with both Optimus Prime and Shia LaBeouf. This means your life is pretty good. Please smile.

• Weirdest date combo - What the heck was Catherine Hardwick doing there with Billy Zane?

• Best outfit - The little number J.J. Abrams wore for his keyboard solo.

• Best "D'oh!" moment - Kristen Stewart dropping her trophy (nice cover, by the way). Honorary mention to Shia LaBeouf for not checking beforehand how to pronounce "Cam Gigandet".
  

• Pet hate - To everyone, on every award show ever made: you don't need to bend down - the microphone can pick you up!!

Issue 1 - A Child of Two Worlds

I will never admit to the number of times I have already seen "Star Trek". It would not help my social ranking - not that that's ever been much to speak of. I will say that I've not watched a movie with such child-like glee since the first time I saw the Star Wars trilogy as a kid.

Now, I know what you're thinking: those two franchises should never be discussed in the same blog. But I don't hold with the idea that you need to be either a Star Trek fan or a Star Wars fan. I've always loved both...forgiving the last few years of "Deep Soap Nine" and the disaster that was "Enterprise" (what was with all those anti-bac gel baths??)

And so, for me, I can quite happily exist as a child of two worlds. Unlike Spock. Ahem.

Spock. Now there's a blog-worthy subject. Only now am I discovering that I'm not alone in having hankered after Spock in days gone by. Women all over the world are suddenly coming out of the ready-room to admit that it was the pointy-eared one, not the sleazy Shat, who charged their dilithium crystals. (Side note to Trekkers/Trekkies: don't try to tell me the Spock/Uhura relationship came as a surprise. Any woman, at least, who was a fan of the show, picked up on the vibes between those two and, if it wasn't for heavy censorship - courtesy of 60's studio execs and Shatner's ego - they would have had their chance at romance in the original timeline.)

Ahhh, yesss. In this movie, there's none of this nonsense about killing off Spock and then concluding, "That was actually a bad idea. We'd better regenerate him." Oh, no. In THIS movie, we get two for the price of one.

Speaking of which, major kudos to Zachary Quinto. Imagine the pressure: not only do you have to re-define an iconic character, but you have to do it in the very presence of the actor who created him. Yet, apparently, no sweat. We know the man can evince the most magnetic serial killer in TV history; he also has the ability to utter a sincere-sounding, "Live long and prosper," with his lips whilst projecting a reverberating, "Up yours," with his eyes. Yes, there may have been others who could have convincingly played Spock, but, I think, only Zachary Quinto in all his Zachary Quintoness could have played him with such a delicate touch.

In fact, my hat is off to the entire cast and crew. I heartily agree with a fellow blogger's suggestion that The Academy should give the casting director an Oscar.

It's tragic, but the moment Greedo tried to shoot Han first in that &*@%! Special Edition of "Star Wars", I lost my faith in my movie-making hero, George Lucas. J.J. Abrams might just have stepped into that vacated position. Time will tell – but, George, take note: this is what Episodes I to III should have been. An over-reliance on CGI = a sensational suicide. One of the reasons we loved the original trilogy? Because it felt real.

I confess, I was privileged enough to walk the Starfleet-Blue carpet at the London premiere, and was immediately transported into the J.J. fandom. He appears to be a man whose fires of imagination are well-stoked. I swear, you can feel the creative energy leaking out of him. I remember thinking, as he and the stars left the cinema and I resisted the urge to call, "Oi, Poida!" to a bored-looking Eric Bana, that I was in for a ride of Guinan's-hat-proportions.

I wasn't disappointed. It's heart-wrenching, it's fun, it's hilarious, it's sexy. And Kirk didn't even have to get his shirt ripped. Not once.

If you'll excuse the indulgence, I feel I must now take a moment to address a few comments from my fellow Trekkers/Trekkies who did not like the movie:

WERE YOU PEOPLE EVEN WATCHING IT?? Or were you too busy being suffocated by the weight of your own pseudo-scientific nitpicking?

Oh...er...my apologies for that little outburst. (This blog isn't called "The Rant" for no reason.) But, seriously, some fans must have gone in searching for things to hate about it, instead of simply enjoying J.J.'s enchanting storytelling.

Enough has been said about the time-travel aspect of the movie. If you didn't like it, or fully understand that it's a stroke of genius which frees us up for more voyages with the Enterprise crew - without the sapped tension-level that would result from already knowing their fate - then you're screwy, or perhaps you don't remember the Doc's explanation about tangent timelines in Back To The Future. It's the best thing they could have done for our beloved and slightly beleaguered franchise. So build a bridge. Get over it.

Oh, yes – the re-designed bridge. What? Would you have preferred the dot matrix printer that – I swear – Kirk had in one episode?

Now, admittedly, there may have been as many plot holes as black holes, but don't try to tell me there were never any in the series. For example, can someone please explain to me where Voyager's never-ending supply of shuttlecraft came from? Or why, no matter which hostile alien race was currently holding the Enterprise crew hostage, they never thought to guard the Jefferies Tubes?

Now, to the greatest and most consistent complaint I have heard: that Gene Roddenberry would be turning in his grave at the lack of negotiating and philosophising in this re-booted universe.

Firstly, Gene Roddenberry doesn't have a grave.

Secondly, themes of friendship, teamwork, making something of yourself no matter the hand life dealt you, the nature of love, learning to be honest with yourself, the bitter root of hatred, revenge, genocide – are these not enough for you? Or do you need to spend three hours watching the crew float around whilst they try to figure out V'Ger? (Did they ever figure out V'Ger? I think I fell asleep.)

When it all comes down to it, these are not the things that stick in our consciousness.

What does stick?

Klingons. The Borg Queen. Data's love for his (apparently) sequentially hermaphroditic cat, Spot. "Everybody remember where we parked." Exploding consoles. Q. "Tea, Earl Grey." Geordi's VISOR. Odo's bucket. Seven's - erm - assets. Whales. "He's dead, Jim." Holodecks. Vulcan nerve pinches. Q. Those earwig thingys. "I'm giving her all she's got, Cap'n!" Ferengi lobal massages (shudder). "Khaaannn!" Q.

"Space, the final frontier…"

If Chris Pine can continue to make me smile whenever he steps onto the bridge in that gold shirt and exclaims, "Bones! [pause] Buckle up!", I'll continue to make the trek to let him do it, for as many movies as he and the rest of this crew are prepared to give us.