Empire of My Arse

Will this waste of paper be any good? Read on to find out.

Thankfully I had a break from the monoteny involved in 'lying low' as Dave calls it when I went up to see him in Aylesbury this weekend. He's been away at his nan's house in Bristol for a week with his mum and dad, but that was a cover story as he was actually lying low as well, but from the Yakuza.

Apparently he went to Bristol Zoo and a kid somehow got into the gorilla enclosure. Everyone was freaking out and the zoo keepers (all girls) were too scared to go inside the enclosure because the male gorilla is very territorial and was going to kill the kid. So Dave jumped over the fence and stared down the gorilla, until it backed off and then got the kid out safely. This is because with gorillas you need to show them who is boss, and then they don't mess with you. Dave also got off with the zoo keepers who were really impressed by his bravery.

Now most reviewers of things would consider kidnapping a reason NOT to carry on providing reviews of things. I'm pretty sure Terry Waite sat around doing nothing for four years whilst in captivity, then wrote a book about it when he came out. But honestly, what would he have to write about? "Monday: Nothing happened. Tuesday: Nothing happened. Wednesday... etc." Imagine if Terry Waite had written a 'choose you own adventure' book based on his experiences. No matter what page you turned to, sod all would happen, well except for the last page which would read 'went home'. I, however, used the time of my captivity to read magazines with the intention of reviewing them later. Admittedly there were only two magazines to read; Empire Magazine and Heat.

As most regular readers will know, I'm an open-minded guy, so I thought I'd cast any previous misgivings about Empire Magazine employing poorly experienced disabled people scientists as reviewers rather than somebody whom to date has written nearly ONE HUNDRED reviews of things, aside. And done it for free (Paypal has thus far provided me with ZERO finances, even though I'm providing up to the minute reviews of all sorts of things. Can YOU find another review of 'Weapons of the Gulf War'? I doubt it because I'm pretty sure I'm the only one. And just because I haven't been paid doesn't make me an amateur film reviewer. I'm a professional. I used to work in a video shop for crying out loud. Did Claudia Winkleman ever work in a video shop? Erm... NO).

Neonsamurai's 'Empire Magazine' Review.

Just looking art the cover I knew that the magazine was going to be rubbish. It tries to stay current, advertising the latest films and previews, with big name interviews and behind-the-scenes specials, but let's be honest the shower of hacks they've got doing the reviews are living in the past. For a start they could all do with reading 'Neonsamurai's Guide to being a Reviewer', an excellent starting point for any 'would be' film reviewer.

Virtually every film that they review takes an almost polar opposite view of how good or bad a film is, when compared to those of neonsamurai.kicks-ass.net, and doesn't even mention Tim Lovejoys Football Heroes. Sure, I didn't like it either, but I acknowledge it (OH, BUT YOU CAN'T EVEN ACKNOWLEDGE A JOB APPLICATION CAN YOU EMPIRE?). It's almost as if the people responsible are of a completely different mindset to myself, or dullards as I like to call it. They even had preview of the latest Ang Lee film; 'The life of Pi', which goes something like this:

Based on the novel by Yann Martel, is an adventure story centering on Pi Patel, the precocious son of a zookeeper. Citizens of Pondicherry, India, the family decides to move to Canada, hitching a ride on a huge freighter. After a shipwreck, Pi is found adrift in the Pacific Ocean on a 26-foot lifeboat with a zebra, a hyena, an orangutan and a 450-pound Bengal tiger named Richard Parker, all fighting for survival.

You read that right. A 450-pound Bengal tiger named Richard Parker. I went to school with a kid call Richard Parker and he got stuck under one of the prefabricated huts because somebody told him there was a gold statue under it. Well I told him there was, but what was he doing listening to a 12 year old in the first place? Idiot. Turns out it was part of a Kit Kat wrapper that had somehow blown into the entrance to a badger warren that was under there. Besides, the fire brigade got there fairly quickly, and girls love a scar.

Anyway, Ang Lee's film sounds rubbish already. Quick question: What do you get if you put a child, a zebra, a hyena, a monkey and a tiger in a confined space? Answer: Bloody carnage. Oh but I bet Ang won't be showing that will he? Oh no. In fact judging by his previous films we won't even see 'Richard Parker' in the finished movie. To be honest, 'Richard Parker' sounds like some kind of euphemism for somebody having some kind of embarrassing medical complain.

Bystander 1: "Oooh. That bloke's just had a 'Richard Parker'."

Bystander 2: "Oh no. What all the way?"

Bystander 1: "Yeah. Right up."

Bystander 2: "Jesus."

That's how crap you films are Lee, if people start turning your characters into metaphors for bottom problems.

I'm too angry to carry on. This review is over.

Cloverfield Review

"Quick! Let's do everything that 'tard Rob says."

Scope delivers, again. £3.50 and I can keep the film forever. Blockbusters don't do that do they? Today I'm reviewing 'Cloverfield', but I almost got the film 'Doom', although I've got the game and sort of know the storyline. They also have clothes and books and other tat in there. I can buy a DVD, a blanket, a candlestick holder and maybe some ladies underwear, all in the same shop.

Neonsamurai's 'Cloverfield' Review

What's the first thing you think of when I say 'Cloverfield'? It's butter isn't it? Those dancing and singing cows, which for me is a bad start. I am a simple man who enjoys simple pleasures, and one of those is knowing what sort of film I'm watching based on the title. Imagine my displeasure when I watched the debacle that is the Ang Lee celluloid accident 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon'. Hmmm... What could that film be about? Well judging by the title, a tiger and a dragon. Well as a big fan of dragons I chose to watch this film, and became enraged when I found there to be ZERO dragons within it. Oh there was a sword called 'dragon'. Oh yes, that makes it all right if there's a sharpened lump of steel called dragon in it. Oh no you can't have your money back. Well Odeon cinemas, that decision cost you a customer. Eventually. After I took that deformed woman to watch 'Silence of the Lambs'.

Let's say you were in a video shop and the world was about to end and you only had enough time to watch a film before the sun exploded or something, so you didn't have a large enough window of opportunity to actually read all that stuff on the back of the DVD about who is in it, or what it's about and you could only choose it on the basis of the movie title? Well, you'd be screwed if it was an Ang Lee film because it'd probably be called something like 'Strike Force Battle Robots', and you get home and put it in your DVD and start watching only to find out half an hour in that 'Strike Force Battle Robots' was the name of a chip shop, and you were watching a drama about infidelity or something boring. Wouldn't that piss you off? It makes me REALLY angry and I'm only thinking about it. If it happened for real I'd go absolutely crazy.

That's right Lee. You'd better hope that the sun explodes or you're a DEAD MAN.

There's this guy called Rob and he's going to work in Japan so his friends throw this surprise party for him but mid-way through the party a monster attacks New York. So they cancel the party and everyone goes home. At least I presume they do. It's not actually shown in the film, probably because it's some of the worst camera handling I've ever seen. Half the time you can't really tell what's going on. Now I'm not a film maker, I'm a film reviewer, although some of the movies I used to make using a camcorder were clearer than what you see in this effort. That's taking into account that I was often disturbed half-way through making a film and had to either fight off an angered husband or escape from a police canine-response squad. Yet I could easily make out what the women were or weren't wearing upon later viewing. They were part of a study I was doing into women's bodies. It's an ongoing study that I intend to continue in the near-future.

Anyway, this monster is attacking New York, the party has been cancelled and basically it's gone from being a fun night, to a really bad one, compounded by a frankly appalling cameraman. Rob and some others decide to go looking for this woman he went on a date with, rather than getting out of the city. I won't spoil the ending but basically Rob gets everyone killed, something he feels compelled to record on video for posterity. When is he ever going to watch that again? Oh, nothing on the telly. Hmm... Think I'll watch those appalling choices I made that resulted in everyone getting killed by a giant monster.

Dullard.

Does that strike anyone else as strange? If I hadn't had my camcorder seized for evidence, I'd only film myself doing cool things. I certainly wouldn't make sure that there was a video diary of my choices leading to everyone dying. If there was, I'd record over it, rather than leaving it for somebody to find and watch.

This, I'm afraid, forces me to give 'Cloverfield' zero Oscars. I'm going to take it back to Scope and demand a refund.

If you're going to rip me off, do it properly

"Hmm... I think I'll become a reviewer, even though I don't know the first thing about it."
"And I'm mental."

What the hell is this about?

NeonReviews

"-personal reviews of just about anything"

Who does this guy think he is? NeonReviews? My name's Neon and I review things! This guy's some kind of copycat imposter! Let me show you what 'Mr Imposter' probably percieved circa November 2003:

"Hmm... What an insightful and revealing review of 'Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring' I have just read on IMDB. Although I have never done any film-critic work before I think it looks really easy, therefore I shall create my own website and review things. And I'll name it NeonReviews, because I have no imagination."

If reviewing films was easy IMDB would be crammed full of peoples self-opinionated nonsense. And although I am slightly flattered that he's named his site after me I cannot abide dishonesty or amateurish reviews (YOU PAYING ATTENTION EMILY?). For those of you thinking about becoming film reviewers here's a set of guidelines I suggest you stick to:

1) Is whatever you're reviewing worth reviewing before you review it? This is important. Everyone knows that romantic comedies are rubbish; predictable script, little or no nudity, rarely any explosions and ultimately the woman marries a non-violent man without any emotional instabilities. Boring. So why waste your time watching it? Answer: Don't. Simply look at the DVD box, make a note of some of the actors or characters names and then just write something like 'a lacklustre film with no boobage'. Using this this system I was able to review all six series of 'Sex and the City' in less than ten minutes. It was a 'rubbish, lacklustre series with no boobage'.

2) You can't make an omelette without kicking-ass. Sure, the 'LOTR' trilogy was rubbish and probably a massive flop, but it could have run on for at least another three or four films, much like the 'Police Academy' movies. Luckily I stood up to those big-city movie types and told it like it was, not only exposing the films flaws, but also what was wrong with Jackson's face. Did they make any sequels? Duh? No. Bruce Lee used to always try and punch two inches beyond his opponents face, to do maximum damage (Dave punches 2 feet beyond his opponents faces). That's what you should do metaphorically with a film review, aim beyond what you're trying to do for maximum effect. Let's say you're reviewing a film by (picking a name at random) Ang Lee. It's rubbish and really he should just give up film making, why not go beyond insulting him and start ridiculing his family? If you don't he will continue making films.

3) Don't be afraid to be a maverick. What do all these people have in common; Lt Christopher Blair, Lt Pete Mitchell and Bret Maverick. Answer they were all mavericks who lived by their own rules and slept with lots of women. And two of them were pilots. Most reviewers fall waaaay short of this impressive milestone, which is why nobody reads their stuff. I on the other hand don't play by 'their' rules. And by 'their' I mean the film industry with their various regulations concerning trespassing and a forms of indecent exposure. Boo hoo Hollywood. Rules are made to be broken, and I'm a rule-breaking sledgehammer of a film-reviewer. Deal with it.

4) Never admit you're wrong. Let's say that you went to see a film that you thought was a black and white silent movie because some googly-eyed girl you met on line liked that sort of thing, only to find out it was a visceral horror movie. So scary in fact that the police canine unit turned up and you had to escape via the toilet window (a very good escape route). Now some people might email you saying 'it's the most famous horror film of the 90's you moron' and 'a decent film reviewer would have known what it was about'. But only a third-rate movie critic would concede. A decent one would write a very aggressive letter to Ridley Scott demanding he change the name of the film to something like 'Scary Hannibal Eats Faces' or 'Not a Silent Film with No Lambs'.

Hopefully if any of you are thinking about writing a film review then you can take all of this into consideration. It'll completely change the way people perceive film reviews.

New Oscar Awards

"And winner of Most Stupid Face goes to..."

Best Actress, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Best Supporting Actor, Best Writer, Best Screenplay, Best Editor etc. That's a pretty boring list of categories for the Oscars. No wonder nobody bothers watching it these days. I mean, honestly who cares? If the Hollywood wants to make the Oscars popular again then they need some kind of maverick, loose-cannon with a great deal of film knowledge to shake things up and get people tuning in again. And by maverick, loose-cannon I mean me.

Here are my suggestions for new awards that we should have at the Oscars, including people whom I believe should have been this years winners.

Biggest Stupid Idiot: Ang Lee - Oh dear. Looks like Ang Lee is the biggest stupid idiot in Hollywood. How did that happen Ang? Well maybe because some of us remember 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon'. To be completely honest it was a miracle that the Hulk actually made an appearance in 'The Hulk'. And I saw 'Brokeback Mountain' a few weeks back, which made me feel very uncomfortable, particularly when Dave started going back to watch some bits again.

Rudest Actress: Nicole Kidman - FIVE LETTERS AND ONE TWEET KIDMAN. I'm not a mathematician but that's 6 attempts I've made to contact you and have had zero response. Know what? I'm going to tweet Hugh Jackman and tell him how rude you Americans are. How'd you like that eh? Oh what's that? No response? Well there's a surprise.

Most Ridiculous Name: Mo'Nique - Is that you're first name or your last name? I'm pretty sure you can't actually have a name like that. I tried changing my name years back, but they don't let you choose names that make you sound like a spaz. Well clearly they do in America.

Most Stupid Face: Peter Jackson - Out of all the people in Hollywood it turns out that Jackson has the most stupid face. Ha! Take THAT Jackson! Maybe then you'll realise how offensive the whole 'Lord of the Rings' series was to everybody. Oh look, it's Jesus on a horse. Oh look there's another Jesus and now some trees have come alive. I can't believe you wrote that rubbish.

I've got loads of other awards that I can give to 'Dr' Stephen Hawking, Jewel from 'Jewel in the Nile', 'Free Willy', John Nash and Emily Stephenson, so it's clearly something I've put a lot of thought into.

Yet another review IMDB couldn't handle

Years ago when people wanted to learn about the latest movies or check out latest industry buzz they'd visit IMDB, but times are changing and instead they're coming here, I presume. That's because unlike IMDB neonsamurai.kicks-ass.net isn't afraid to hit people with hardcore movie facts. It wasn't always that way though, it used to be that IMDB had some of the best reviews on the internet, but some of them they just couldn't handle. Here's one of them:

Neonsamurai's 'Time Machine' Review:

Guy Pearce shouldn't be allowed to use a time machine, because he wastes it. He's got this great toy. I mean scientific instrument, and he just wastes it on moping about his dead girlfriend and trying to save her life. Duh! You're such a spaz guy!

Luckily when I've finished my time machine I'll be travelling all over the place. But the first place I'm going is back to will be the last US election where George Bush beat Al Gore. That'll teach you George! That'll teach you for not answering my emails and not popping in to see me when you were in the UK last year. My mum had cooked fish fingers and chips for you and you didn't turn up! That's rude! Al Gore would have turned up! We even had arctic roll for pudding.

The other thing I'm doing when I go into the very far future is taking a gun with me. I'll probably steal a gun in 2177, probably like a pulse rifle from 'Aliens' or a phaser from 'Star Trek'. That way, when I arrive in 47,008 and some morlocks turn up and try to catch me I'll be like:

`BRAKKA! BRAKKA! BRAKKA! DOOO! DOOO! FWOOOSH! BOOOOOOM!'

But if they don't understand what I'm saying I'll just open fire. I'd then go back in time to when Famke Janssen was 23 and marry her and then head into the year 1066 and defeat the Norman invasion of England.

Then I'm going to beat up Mike Oldfield so that Richard Branson won't create Virgin Records and ultimately Virgin Airways, who made a fuss over nothing with my Koala. After that I'm going to steal a dragon form medieval England and then make it 'magically' appear during the shooting of 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon'. THERE'S YOUR FREAKING DRAGON ANG! HOW'D YOU LIKE THAT?

`Oh! But you won't be able to travel back as they don't have electricity in the far future.' You might say, thinking you're scientific and clever, but the very fact that you've even opened you mouth has proved that you're an idiot!! My time machine will be coal powered! They have coal in both the future and the past.

In summary I'd say that Guy Pearce handles himself fairly well in the future, but needs to eat more.