Change Your Image
legolas-greenleaf-uk
Reviews
Most Haunted (2002)
Strangely addictive nonsense
I first got interested in Most Haunted when it started a couple of years ago. It is an interesting idea - take a film crew, a self-proclaimed "parapsychologist" and "spiritualist medium" to some of the country's allegedly "Most Haunted" locations for a night and see what happens. This show has quite a strong following here in the UK, where it is probably the No. 1 programme on the Living TV channel which, given its programme lineup would be more accurately described as the "Psychic Telly Channel".
I have to say that I now suspect that all is not quite as it seems here folks. Presenter Yvette Fielding and husband Karl Beattie (also the "director" on this show) are behind the production company that make this programme. As I see more of these shows I've come to realise that this is purely populist entertainment chasing ratings rather than a vehicle for serious investigation of the possibility of real paranormal behaviour. Nothing wrong with that really I suppose - those ratings show that there is a market for this stuff and that is what commercial TV is all about. This is a product, and originally it was quite cleverly packaged and presented and even had a certain (limited) seriousness attached to it.
But the game is up I think. Most of the time the crew seem to be intent on scaring themselves by poking around in dark corners with all the lights deliberately turned out because "the ghost's prefer the dark". Yeah right - and it adds atmosphere for the viewer's at home doesn't it?. The crew seem to be trying to recreate a kind of "Blair Witch lite" on primetime TV". Yvette may be a likeable enough TV presenter, but she's a totally hopeless investigator of the paranormal. She (and most of the rest of the crew) seems to get completely freaked out by the smallest noise and at the first signs of any real possible activity they run in the opposite direction. What is this, a serious investigation or some kind of live action Scooby Doo? If you are seriously looking for evidence of the paranormal, you don't run away from it when you find a few hints that it may exist. "Spiritualist medium" Derek Acorah is generally unconvincing. I don't believe him and I find it hard to believe that he is not briefed in advance by the production crew before he arrives at the "haunted" locations. After all, the purpose of this show is to generate ratings and so they need their "medium" to "produce the goods" in order to make it all look convincing. Sorry if that sounds cynical people, but nothing in this program is done scientifically, no matter how may "EMF meters" get waved about. This show is not investigative - it is entertainment and that is all.
You only have to watch one of the (increasingly frequent) Most Haunted Live shows to make you suspicious that things could very well be engineered behind the scenes of this programme. These live shows are "Dumb TV" at its very worst. Painful viewer phone-ins of "weird" events at home - stopped clocks, barking dogs etc. Stage psychics doing "automatic drawings". Webcams on which online viewers report seeing things for which there is no subsequent evidence. Yvette supposedly complaining about why she has to go poking around in the dark (possible answer: for the money honey?) Sending the "sceptical scientist " Matthew out into the cold and dark as some kind of "punishment" while the audience brays... this is Trash TV.
As for their "evidence" - it also doesn't really seem to have occurred to anyone that those "orbs" (visible only on night-vision video cameras, and the only "evidence" that the crew ever find) could be due to the way that these cameras operate. Anyone ever think of trying some simple tests like putting two cameras side by side and see if you get the same result on both? No. Or put two cameras at different angles focused on the same area and see if they both pick up the same thing. No. Never happens. A few noises and air draughts in buildings that are many hundreds of years old does not constitute evidence for the paranormal no matter how much Derek, Yvette et al may try to play it up. This is showbiz folks - the 21st century, satellite TV equivalent of telling ghost stories around the camp fire. Watch with a healthy dose of scepticism and don't accept at face value everything, or indeed anything that you see here. Remember the objective of these programme makers is to sell their product at the highest possible price. These people are salesmen, not scientists.
Mylène Farmer: Mylenium Tour (2000)
Angelic
Wow! This is an amazing concert performance by Mylene Farmer.
Watching and listening to this incredible performer give a series of perfect renditions of her best-known songs is a feast for both ears and eyes.
One of the thoughts that came strongly to mind when watching this concert was "how can this amazing woman continue to be practically unknown in the UK?" It is a language issue, of course, but all credit to Mylene for continuing to sing in her native French, rather than try to reach the larger English-speaking market.
This really is quite a combination - one of the most beautiful voices in the world singing in the the most beautiful language.
People of Britain (and the US for that matter) - stop being fed a diet of mindless commerical pap of the likes of Pop Idol etc. and expand your minds a bit. Mylene has a voice that can take you anywhere - from animated, high-energy tracks like the brilliant "Desenchantee" to ones that could break your heart, such as "Pas le temps de vivre" into which Mylene puts such emotion here that she has much of the audience in tears.
Go find it. Now. It will improve your French too!
The Neverending Story (1984)
Flawed but interesting
I saw this movie may years ago, and I loved it like many of those here who love it still.
With hindsight though, it is a rather muddled and confused affair. There were legal wranglings with the book author who hated the screenplay (and it kind of shows in the finished product). The ending is abrupt and screams that the budget ran out.
Really though, it works because of Noah Hathaway's on-screen presence. For sure, some of his acting is a little shaky, but this must have been a *huge* project for an eleven year old to carry. I imagine there must have been a lot of pressure on the kid at the time.
He is, to put it simply, beautiful. I think the fact that he looks so androgynous is no accident - the director must very much have wanted him to look that way. Long before Peter Jackson brought his fantastic Tolkien adaptations to the big screen, I remember thinking that Atreyu/Noah looked very much how I imagined Tolkien's Elves would be - sort of too perfect and almost in-human in a way.
Basically Noah single handedly carries this whole movie - along with some nice set pieces (swamp / oracle) and matte painting art work (which was very good for its time).
But the story? Am I the only one here who gets the irony of a story about the power of reading and imagination being made into an Americanised movie for a popcorn audience? And what is with that ending? Completely inappropriate, hurried and nonsensical after the previous hour and a half.
Lets be honest here folks, the source material is no great work of literature either, even if it was a best-seller in Germany (popular with adults and children). The "message" is about a subtle as being hit over the head with a plank of wood, and reads as rambling neo-romantic sentimental prattle. "Do what you wish?" Err, more than a little naive applied to most of the population of planet Earth I think!
So watch it for the extraordinary Atreyu, for the visuals, and if you're my age, to remember your childhood.
But there are no great insights into the meaning of life here (or in the book either).
And please Hollywood, can you now just leave it the hell alone? Two crappy sequels, some lame cartoons and a "re-imagined" TV series? Does the word "originality" mean anything to anyone out there in la-la land? Move on please!