It occurs to me every once in a while to keep this thing updated with news and reviews, so, hello again.
Right, the Bachelor's Degree is in the bag with a 2:1, so that's 3 years of life well spent. It was a hard and at times downright weird slog, but it's done now. Time to see what the future holds.
Am into the new flat, and aside from Internet issues (i.e. not having any) it's good. Right next to the docks, but barely ever hear them, just down the road from work (no more paying for taxis on a close) and it's away from the raucous Polygon. Were it not a flat share I'd be sorely tempted to make it a permanent residence. That, however, is something for the future.
Right, back to the reviews.
Dances with Wolves.
As if Avatar wasn't long-winded enough.
Right, Civil War Hero John Dunbar (Kevin Costner) is posted to the frontier. He finds his post deserted. He encounters a tribe of Sioux, including Mary 'I'm about as Sioux as JCVD's talking nipples' McDonnell, and that guy from Maverick (Graham Greene). Dunbar learns their ways, joins them and defends them from his own people.
That is probably the shortest synopsis of this film available that will do it justice. Make no mistake, this is a film of epic proportions. So much so that I had to watch it over 2 discs.
Anyway, this film is supposedly Costner's best, being not only his directorial debut, but the film in his filmography that won the most Oscars. Now, back then the Academy weren't quite so formulaic as they are now *cough* King's Speech *cough*, so it was a time when a film had to stand out even more than perhaps it does these days. Which leads me to my first point.
Why...why is this film so sodding long!?
Now I am a fan of long films, such things are no secret. Things like Amadeus, Lawrence of Arabia, Ben-Hur and Gandhi adorn my DVD shelf, and they'll all get a watch every now and then. But this? This film basically consists of Kevin Costner, a wolf and a horse. With some other people thrown in when you're about to be driven nuts with boredom. They make it interesting, but we're not around them enough to actually give a shite because we're too busy with Kevin Costner on his own (no giggity's please). My main gripe with this movie is that empty space where it's just him, the animals, and his flaming voice-over. It's unnecessary, time-consuming and at times bored me to tears. Not to mention probably the most annoying voice-over this side of Twilight. Did Kristen Stewart take acting lessons from the Costner? I leave that to you to decide. It was either him or Keanu Reeves.
Anyway, I do malign this movie, but for what it is, it's not bad. The development of Dunbar's relationship with the Sioux was good (if a little overdone) and Graham Greene, Mary McDonnell and the other support cast put in a very convincing showing. The sets were great, everything was put together very well. I guess I just have a massive problem with Kevin Costner. I reckon if this film were a script nowadays and it were sent to a studio they'd turn it down flat. If Costner didn't have half the influence he did back then, he'd have been laughed back to the drawing board. Instead he got to make it and for some reason it was Oscar-worthy. Probably because it was up against the likes of Ghost and The Godfather Part 3 (also Goodfellas, and that didn't win?).
To be fair, this was probably the first modern film to portray this type of story well enough. I just think that compared to this, The Last Samurai is more involved, more emotionally charged, and just better. Although, to be fair to the Costner, this monster of a film is still better than that one with blue people in it that used the same underlying storyline.Well done Kev! You fought off lanky Smurfs!
Next up - Hansel & Gretel.
