Neonsamurai Kicks Ass: FACT!

I am still in hiding.

No sign of Burian (or Rufus) since the 'incident', which we've all agreed was not my fault. If he wants to press charges then he's going to look pretty stupid taking a koala to court. And let's be honest, it wouldn't get that far when the judge realised that Rufus was actually a small, aggressive marsupial and couldn't give evidence. Although I don't think that matters in Pakistan, where people marry goats.

Needless to say I've been having to find things to keep me occupied during my time in hiding. Firstly I tried calling Thames Valley Police, as I'm on their witness protection scheme, but they denied all knowledge of this. In fact they went as far as to say that they don't actually have a 'witness protection scheme', which meant I was either speaking to an idiot, or it's actually so top secret that they deny it exists, which I think is probably the latter. Although in all fairness, even Littlehampton Police deny the existence of it too. Very professional.

As I've not been able to return 'Cloverfield' to Scope, and get a decent film out (probably 'Doom'), and my research into women isn't possible unless they walk past my flat, I've been watching day time television. Now most of it is rubbish, but some of the shows are good. One of the best is Jeremy Kyle.

Basically 'The Jeremy Kyle Show' works by getting a bunch of morons on the show, getting them to argue and then having Jeremy tell them they're all dullards. For my money, it's a formula that works as there are loads of complete retards out there who are always opening their stupid gobs and coming up with all sorts of ill-considered opinions. Oh look. Here's some of their emails (to me):

"The point of Avatar was that we shouldn't impose on other races for profit, and that corporate greed is destroying the environment and indigenous societies, not that people in wheelchairs can't be trusted. You are honestly the most-untalented, self-opinionated hack I've ever read. No wonder nobody will give you a job reviewing films, you don't even know what they're about."

-squaaaaal1988

"are you for real!!?!??!?!! noone could be as dumb as you are!!!!! i feel sorry for youre koala. if i knew where you lived i would tell the cops that you mistreat that animal and you should be arrested. never dress him up in human clothes and feed him drugs. you are a FREAK!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

-JoZo-lol-

"I'm not going to warn you again. Sonja Wade has told me where you live and if you write one more thing about Emily I'm coming over to give you a bloody good thumping!"

-Alan.Stephenson

Crazy huh? Jeremy Kyle would have them for breakfast. He'd be like "Avatar was about the incompetence of the disabled: FACT" or "a koala could pull your face of you idiot" or "where I come from that's a threat!" If they were on his show it'd almost be embarrassing to watch as he pointed out their sub-normal intellects.

For these reasons I support Jeremy Kyle. He's insulting thicko's because he cares.

Oh god. She's writing again.

So far I have received ZERO contributions to my PayPal account. Oh you think that's bad do you? Well look at this:


Oh a movie review and competition. Big deal? Well guess who they got to 'review' this film:

EMILY STEPHENSON

Doesn't anybody read my blog, because I'm pretty sure that I made it perfectly clear here that she's rubbish at reviewing films? Oh but what do I know, seeing as I've more or less dedicated that last 12 years of my life to being a professional film critic. At last count I'd reviewed over 80 films, which now I think about it doesn't sound like that many, but I don't just make up stuff off the top of my head. Well, not for every film anyway.

And how much did she get paid for writing that film review? Three or four thousand pounds probably. What's a child going to spend four grand on? A lifetime supply of Smarties? That's the reason kids aren't paid a fortune in pocket money, because if they did they'd probably destroy the economy but spending the money on nonsense. I'd use the money to buy my fiancé a plane ticket. How's that for sensible?

Since I apparently can't be trusted to write film reviews for the Littlehampton Echo, I'm going to have to rely on YOU my loyal and generous readership (but not the women, who can't be bothered to have free food and sex with me) to send money to my PayPal account so that I can give Natalia twenty thousand pounds.

Please be generous.

WTF (x3)?!?!?!?!

Neonsamurai's 'A Fish Called Wanda' review:

Who makes decisions at the BBC? Is it:

a) A board of experts who carefully consider every option.

Or

b) A spaz.

Here's a clue, it's not 'a' and they've probably got stuck in a telephone box this morning. How do I know this (not the telephone box bit, that's just a theory)? Well I'll show you how I know this right here.

Claudia Winkleman has been confirmed as the surprise choice to replace Jonathan Ross on Film 2010.

What? Winkleman? Why? Why choose Winkleman? Oh I know, I'll go check out some her previous film reviews... Oh wait a minute... That's not possible because SHE'S NOT DONE ANY. Whereas I've done OVER 70. This is beyond a debacle. Why on earth would anyone, even someone who is a spaz, choose a non-reviewer with zero experience to helm 'Film 2010'? That duck-obsessed hack Emily Stephenson has more film review experience than Winkleman and even then it's been universally agreed that her review of 'Fantastic Mr. Fox' was rubbish. But let's see what Winkleman has to say for herself:

"I am completely over the moon about being given this enormous
honour and am incredibly proud to be presenting the new look Film 2010. It's an
honour to follow on from the brilliant Jonathan Ross."

Oh of course you're proud and 'over the moon' to be presenting 'Film 2010', and I'm sure I would be the same if I was chosen to host 'Strictly Come Dancing', but I'd also be bloody amazed that they'd chosen me FOR NO APPARENT REASON. Also because I allegedly 'stalked' two of the contestants. Did you even write to the BBC for the job Winkleman? I did and I didn't even get a sodding response. No "we're sorry Neonsamurai, but although you're perfect for the job we're giving it to Winkleman, for no apparent reason", or "no you can't present 'Film 2010' but we'll let you do 'How to Look Good Naked' instead".

Oh and if Ross is so brilliant, how come he never responds to my tweets?

Seeing as the spaz who made this decision made zero effort to research myself, (or I suspect any other film reviewer other than Winkleman, who isn't a film reviewer) I thought I'd post some of the feedback I've had over the years about my film reviews:

"I'm glad the RSPCA had you arrested." Lynlyn81

"You missed the whole point of the film." W4rr10r

"I demand you remove it from the internet at once!" Derek Palmers

"If you email me again I will notify Blogger." JenDZR

"UR mazziv ghey!!!!!!!!!!!!!" BAUER91

Face it, it's a sad day for film reviews everywhere when the person at the helm of the world's greatest film review show knows nothing about films, actors, producing, key grip and all that other stuff they have to do to make a film.

Complete Basterds

Neonsamurai's 'Inglourious Basterds' review:

Today I have decided to review a film called 'Inglourious Basterds', which I think was supposed to be called 'Inglorious Bastards'. Not a big problem for me as I knew what they were trying to spell, but other, less intelligent or younger viewers might have been confused. I mean imagine if you were 10 years old and you were trying to review this film? You firstly wouldn't understand the title and also you won't be able to review it FOR ANOTHER 8 YEARS.

It's an '18' certificate you see.

The film is about an elite squad of Nazi hunters who are parachuted behind enemy lines and run around killing as many Germans as they can. As an adult I can deal with a concept like this because I know that the real world is a dangerous and violent place, much like a Jean Claude Van Damme movie, but for somebody much younger they'd probably just freak out and go mental. Let's say there was a gala premier and there was all these important people like royalty and members of parliament and Brad Pitt said “And once we're in enemy territory, as a bushwhackin' guerrilla army, we're gonna be doin' one thing and one thing only... killin' Nazis.” then this ten year old goes berserk because she can't handle it. They'll just have to cancel the premier AND arrest the ten year old for sneaking into an 18 rated movie. Well sorry Quentin Tarrantino, but some kid has just blown your Oscar chances. Are you sure you want an under-age film reviewer watching your movie? Answer: No.

Whilst killing Nazis behind enemy lines the special forces squad find out that the Germans are putting together a gala performance of a new film about war hero Frederick Zoller, at a cinema run by a Jewish woman who wants revenge for her families murder (obviously the Germans don't know the last bit, or if they did they're really thick). But what really gets the Nazi hunters attention is that the whole of the German high command will be there, including Adolf Hitler, making it the kind of target that could allow them to end the war with one fatal blow. Brad Pitt and his men join forces with a famous German actress who attempts to smuggle them into the cinema, ready to deal death to the Nazis. I don't want to spoil the plot, but imagine if a 10 year old had sneaked into the gala premier, saw Pvt Zoller killing loads of allies, freaked out, went mental, let go of her duck and it started flapping through all the German dignitaries? They would cancel the movie and the Germans would have all gone home and the special forces team couldn't have killed them all and ended the war. All because some 10 year old film reviewer couldn't handle real life. Brilliant. Nice one Emily, you've just extended World War Two by another four years, which leads to countless deaths and human misery.

I don't mean to tell the BBC how to do their job, but do they want that sort of thing happening at the Cannes Film Festival, because their recruitment team thought a 10 year old could do an adults job? Of course not.

Luckily though, there were no 10 year old, duck-owning, wannabe film reviewers in the movie (clever move Quentin) making it a far more enjoyable experience for everyone involved. I think the film was well acted, funny and also brutally violent. Another tour-de-force from America's no 1, non-child-friendly film-maker.

Review Review

Today I've decided to review a review done by another reviewer, as a kind of workshop for those of you thinking about becoming a professional reviewers like me. Picking one at random I decided to review one recently produced by Emily Stephenson for a recent competition in the Littlehampton Echo. Apparently she's some hot-shot new film critic who's as good as the BBC's premier film reviewer Jonathan Ross. Let's find out. Firstly here is the review in its entirety:

Fantastic Mr Fox Film Review by Emily Hopkins.

I really enjoyed Fantastic Mr. Fox because my daddy used to read me the book at night when I was in bed and I was really excited when it was made into a film. It's very different from the book, but really good and very funny because both daddy and I laughed a lot when we saw it at the cinema. My favourite character was Felicity Fox who kept telling Mr. Fox off for being so silly. I also liked the way that when the animals were arguing they would say 'cuss' rather than use naughty words. I will definitely ask for the DVD of the film for my birthday.

If I had to sum up Fantastic Mr. Fox in one word, it would be FANTASTIC!

Now let's take a closer look at this 'review' just to see if it's as good as the delusional staff of the echo think it is, starting with the title:

"Fantastic Mr Fox Film Review by Emily Hopkins."

Well duh? Who do you think wrote it Emily? Hitler? I also find that the title is the best place for the reviewer to set the tone for the rest of the critique, so if the film is rubbish why not use a play on words like 'Fantastic Mr. Arse', 'Spazmodic Mr. Fox', or even 'Spazmodic Mr. Arse'. That saves people reading the last paragraph instead.

"I really enjoyed Fantastic Mr. Fox because my daddy used to read me the book at night when I was in bed and I was really excited when it was made into a film."

Emily this is a film review not a book review, and nobody cares what goes on whilst you're in bed. Stick to reviewing the film. And what do you mean 'really excited when it was made into a film'? Where you skipping around gleefully at the idea that a book about a criminal fox and his lipstick-smeared hag-of-a-wife had been transferred to celluloid, or is that just something you used to make up the required number of words for a valid entry?

"It's very different from the book, but really good and very funny because both daddy and I laughed a lot when we saw it at the cinema."

Stick to reviewing the bloody movie, not the sodding book that nobody read. What's next? Are you going to start basing your film reviews on the toys you get in a McDonalds Happy Meal? "Oh. It was a good film, but nothing like the little plastic monkey with spinning arms I got with my McFlurry." You should know this! It's basic film-review knowledge! And what's your dad got to do with 'Fantastic Mr. Fox'? Stick to the film.

"My favourite character was Felicity Fox who kept telling Mr. Fox off for being so silly."

Felicity Fox was rubbish.

"I also liked the way that when the animals were arguing they would say 'cuss' rather than use naughty words."

What? naughty words like arse, bum, willy, tadger, knob, hooters, wah-wahs, winky and bottom juice? That's right Emily, I don't hold back with profanities, I tell it like it is and if the people can't handle it that's their problem. You play it safe and that's why you fail.

"I will definitely ask for the DVD of the film for my birthday."

YAWN. Bored already. Pretty lame review so far.

"If I had to sum up Fantastic Mr. Fox in one word, it would be FANTASTIC!"

Oh well done. What a clever way to end a review? Using a descriptive word used in the film's title to describe the film. But what what would you have done if there were no adjectives for you to use in the title? Oh what then Emily? I'll bet you'd just give up and go to play with 'Mr Quackles' or demand that your father reads you a story whilst you laze around like the Queen of Sheba. It's pretty obvious that you can only review certain types of films that tell you what to think in the title. Here's how I ended my review of 'Fantastic Mr. Fox' for the Littlehampton Echo:

"So in summary the kind of people who will probably like 'Fantastic Mr. Fox' are violent gypsies, or people who'd murder an old lady in her sleep then dress up in her clothes and then withdraw all her life savings and then spend it on drugs that they'd sell to primary school kids."

Which one are you Emily? Which one are you?

WTF (x 2)?!?!?!

What in the name of Hitlers ring-piece does the Echo think it's doing? Firstly they promote a competition with scant information on the rules, engineering it so the few members of the 'elite' under 12 film review society (which must number about five) can enter. They then declare Emily Stephenson the winner of this tuppeny-ha'penny charade that claims to be a competition!

She's not even a proper film reviewer, she's a sodding wannabe vet! AVET! What's next? Are we going to see plumbers writing opinion columns or maybe hairdressers running the classifieds? I've read her review and it was rubbish. It wasn't edgy or engaging, and you certainly didn't come away afterwards having your very way of life challenged (THAT'S RIGHT GOTHS, DRACULA WAS A RETARD. YOU DON'T SCARE ME), in the same way that my reviews do. Hers was, at best, pedestrian and she won a trip to Disneyland. I WANTED TO GO TO DISNEYLAND.

Let's cut to the chase here; she won because she's cute, and she's got a duck. I can take the truth and maybe if the Echo had said "hey Neon. Brilliant review. Yes that fox was a selfish spaz, and his wife did look like a men's club's bog brush. But you know what? We wanted the winner to be cute and holding poultry", I'd have been cool with that.

They didn't though, did they? The bastards.

But it's not the Echo I feel sorry for, it's Emily 'the Vet' Stephenson. Imagine if she read this article and thought "hmm... Maybe I could do what Jonathan Ross does and present 'Film 2010'" and so she writes in the to the BBC, only for them to completely ignore her letter. BOOM! There goes her childhood right there. BANG. Destroyed in a second because someone at the Echo (probably Sonja Wade) decided she'd let a child think she could write a film review.

WRONG!

Face it Littlehampton Echo, your publication is on the rocks and if your readership was in jeopardy of leaving imagine how they're going to react when they read this.