What's Green and Stinks?

Here's piece I did for the Irish Times about the critical reaction to Green Lantern...

Green Lantern, a hugely expensive comic-book adaptation starring Ryan Reynolds was unlikely to have become a critical darling. But somewhere along the way, something magical happened: Green Lantern ’s unique blend of eccentricity and ineptness has stoked critics’ collective creativity, prompting some entertaining, imaginative reviews.

The most inventive has to be Mike Ryan’s review for Vanity Fair, which takes a unique interview format like this:

“Q: How could a superhero movie be so bad that you would consider quitting your job and getting a memory wipe?

“A: It’s not like Green Lantern is the worst movie of the year, or even the worst movie of the summer, it’s just so f**king bloated and lazy.

“It’s the Norm Peterson of summer movies. It’s as if it’s presented to us as ‘Hello, America. You like superhero movies. Green Lantern is a superhero. Please pay us a lot of money to watch Green Lantern do superhero-type things.’ If a movie is not going to even try, why should I try?”

Elsewhere, Dana Stephens of Slate.com believes Green Lantern is “a powerful contender” for worst film of the year. “Even by the standards of the current run of mediocre comic-book movies, this one stands out for its egregious shoddiness,” she moans. “Its characters, dialogue, and pacing recall a destined-to-be-cancelled Saturday morning cartoon from the early ‘80s or possibly an extended Hasbro infomercial.”

A separate issue, according to The AV Club’ s Scott Tobias, is the film’s shameless aping of Top Gun in its earthier moments. “Reynolds plays a hotshot fighter pilot who rides into the danger zone at every opportunity. He also ignores the rules of engagement, has more raw talent than anyone has ever seen, is haunted by his pilot father’s tragic legacy, falls for his superior (Blake Lively) on the tarmac, and would likely serenade ladies with You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feeling if Anthony Edwards were his wingman.”

In fairness, Jason Solomons of the Observer shrugs that it’s “thoroughly alright”, but acknowledges that its timing is a big problem, arriving as “the latest movie scraped from the barrel where studio execs store their childhood comic collections.” Ouch.

LA Noire review

Another Irish Times game review by me...

The opening credits for LA Noire set the circa-1947 scene: young men buying their dream home, shiny automobiles promising a new kind of freedom, queues of doe-eyed women lining up for open auditions. But we know that there’s more to the city than tall buildings and big dreams. From the first instant, it’s clear that the game will be as ambitious as anything Rockstar has done before, including Grand Theft Auto IV and Red Dead Redemption.

There’s violence, casual racism and a real sense of sleaze and danger in the city at night. LA Noire’s graphics and music are both gorgeous and cinematic, and the detail is astounding; this brand-new LA of diners and art deco offices feels like a real city, and the inhabitants, from barflies to starlets to politicians, feel authentic.

You play the idealistic, ambitious Cole Phelps (voiced by Aaron Staton from Mad Men ), a newly minted detective. Your tasks (in a familiar third-person, open- world scenario) involve finding clues, interviewing witnesses and taking in suspects.

For this gamer, the interrogations are the highlights. Reading body language, facial expressions and checking their answers against evidence, you must decide whether or not they’re telling the truth. Although there’s plenty of walking and searching, it never feels leaden – the pace is good and the gameplay intuitive.

The action involves punch- ups, shoot-outs, car chases and (my least favourite) tail- jobs. Thankfully, if you mess up an action scene a few times you’re given the option to skip to the next scene.

The most appealing characteristic of LA Noire is its tone. Phelps is refreshingly noble for a modern game hero, but he’s not without depth, and the game takes its plot and characters seriously. It all adds up to rich, engrossing narrative with compulsive gameplay.

Portal 2 review

My review of Portal 2 for the Irish Times...

Last week (according to Terminator mythology) was the week that Skynet computers started to turn against their human masters. That makes the release of Portal 2 pretty appropriate.

Like its predecessor, Portal 2 is a first-person puzzle game, pitting a human against a machine (the malevolent GLaDoS). Trapped once again in a crumbling giant maze, your individual tasks involve solving puzzles so you can pass through each room, while your mission is to shut down the main computer.

GLaDoS, speaking in a staccato, synthetic voice, is a passive-aggressive monster. Think Tony Soprano’s mother crossed with HAL from 2001, offering taunts and barbs as you work through the game.

The puzzles are mostly solved using your portal gun. You fire at one surface for an entrance, and another for an exit, forming (yep) a portal. This is handy for crossing rooms or transporting tools and objects. The physics are consistent and sound. So, for example, if you fall into a portal from a great distance, you’ll exit the next portal at greater speed.

You’re required to place objects on buttons, manipulate machines, and use lasers strategically. These tasks can be taxing and frustrating, but every one of them is logical and ultimately satisfying.



It’s a horrific premise, but Portal 2 is witty, and also somehow cute.

Stephen Merchant’s voice-over work is fabulous (he appears as a helpful robot drone), injecting some much-needed warmth to the artificial setting. As well as the single-player campaign, Portal 2 can also be played in a two-player co-operative mode, improving on its forbear.

This is a clever, captivating and sometimes hilarious sci-fi game, with compulsive gameplay. Here’s hoping I don’t have nightmares about GLaDos.

Original Pirate Material

And here's a piece I wrote for The Irish Times about the realism (or otherwise) of Pirates in the movies...

X marks the spot, peg legs, West Country accents – is there any factual basis for these silver screen pirate cliches, asks JOE GRIFFIN ahead of the release of Pirates of the Caribbean 4

With Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides due next week, it’s a good time to ask two pirate experts (yes, they exist) about the old stereotypes. Meet Andrew McClelland, a comedian and history graduate who once hosted the one-man show A Somewhat Accurate History of Piracy , and Connie Kelleher, whose doctoral research is The Confederacy of Pirates in Southwest Ireland in the Early 17th Century.



BURIED TREASURE
“The pirates could have buried goods to recover them again, but not necessarily treasure,” says Kelleher. “The reality is that they were mostly dealing in cargo. Treasure would have included spices, linen, brandy or other commodities like ivory. Piracy was a commercial venture, and the pirates were looking to trade, albeit illicitly. Jewels and money were also plundered, but the whole concept of ‘x marks the spot’ for buried treasure is a myth.”

McClelland answers with a question. “If you were a pirate who had just stolen 10,000 golden doubloons would you: (a) bury it where nobody can find it, possibly including you (and bearing in mind that the average pirate died within two years of taking it up), or (b) go to Port Royal or Tortuga and spend it on drinking, whoring and fruit machines?”

WOODEN LEG
Kelleher: “The image of a pirate with his wooden leg is very much Treasure Island , but it can have a basis in fact. Most pirates were sailors first and foremost, and it was often the ex-naval or ex-merchant crew member who was injured. Individuals like deck hands, cooks or galley slaves may have had an eye patch or a wooden leg. In reality it is more about injured sailors than hobbled pirates.”

McClelland: “Some pirates did have lost appendages back then – eyes, hands and legs – but it certainly wasn’t everyone. When people dress up as pirates, however, they seem to attempt to lose every appendage possible. Some pirates also had syphilis and crabs, but nobody feels it’s necessary to fake those problems, do they?”

THE ACCENT
Kelleher: “Yes, the ‘arrrr’. My studies focus on English pirates based in west Cork – some English, some Irish, some Flemish, but mostly English. Many would’ve had the Cornish-Devon accent, as they came from southwest England. King James I had outlawed privateering, so legitimate sailors were forced to turn to piracy to make a living. When they clamped down on piracy in England, the pirates moved to Ireland. The accents might have been based on that, but a pirate crew could equally be cosmopolitan, with evidence of prostitutes in ports learning different languages in order to be able to ‘trade services’ with the pirate crews.”

McClelland: “Pirates spoke in as many different accents as there were seafaring nations. The cliched pirate tongue is actually just an adaptation of the Cornish accent, however. Many 16th- and 17th-century sailors came from this area, so it became the most common of ship-board English-language accents. Cornish is also the accent of Long John Silver in Treasure Island – the most influential work of pirate fiction bar none. This salty accent obviously survives in Cornwall even today, and if you enter a pub in the region you can close your eyes and imagine you are surrounded by the fiercest of pirates. It’s as if Silver himself is talking at the table next to you . . . about last night’s episode of Glee .”


BIRD ON SHOULDER

Kelleher: “It’s for the most part a media construct capitalising on Treasure Island . It was all to do with seeing pirates as free, apolitical, different and wild. They were presented as heroes: a social attitude to non-governance. The parrot added the novelty factor.”

McClelland: “It’s possible that this happened occasionally. Multicoloured parrots of the New World were highly sought-after in Europe, and a pretty penny could be made in their trade. It’s unlikely it was common on a pirate’s shoulder, however, particularly when you consider that pirate ships were often at sea and a parrot on the shoulder could just fly away.”

BLING
Kelleher: “If the pirates wanted to be accepted locally, the captain would display his position as leader to command respect. The later Golden Age pirates, the time depicted by Captain Sparrow in the movies, dressed according to fashion. Calico Jack [English pirate Jack Rackham, 1682-1720] made an effort to dress in flouncy clothes or like a gentleman. Most ordinary pirates and sailors were dirty and had only one set of clothes. The likes of rubies and pearls were for sale, not for wearing.”

McClelland: “Much like the modern rapper, the olden pirate did indeed like a bit of bling. Nothing gets across that ‘I’m nasty and yet doing well’ vibe like a sword, teeth or eyeball made out of gold.”

That's an alien, bruv!

Some housekeeping - here's a link to my recent article for The Guardian. It's a dos and do-nots of alien invasion, written to tie in with (the rather good) Attack the Block.

The pic is of one of my favourite alien invasion movies Mars Attacks! (which I know lots of people didn't like), as I'm sure you know...

TV's least inspring ad...

TV commercials are supposed to inspire us, to give us a glimpse at a life we wish we had, and to convince us that purchasing particular products will make our lives better. But one ad makes this writer relieved to be living in the real world, a world in which I can sleep in on Saturdays and fulfil such basic human needs as finishing a shower and eating a meal…

The opening shot is a shower-head flowing with nice, steaming water, while a young man is having a relaxing scrub. A soothing voiceover asks “do you see Saturday as a chance to slow everything down”. Yes we do, Mr. Voiceover, oh god yes. Then without warning the water is turned off. The man, caked in suds, frowns in confusion. The shower curtain swings open (privacy be damned) and the man’s partner (having turned off the water) throws a towel at him. “Or [are Saturdays] a chance to get everything moving” the voiceover continues, as the young man gets dressed while walking down the stairs, and then attempts to eat breakfast while his partner snatches away his coffee and plate.

“At Ulster Bank, our customers told us that time really matters to them,” Mr. Voiceover purrs, as the lady prevents her partner from so much as glancing at a shop window before he’s grabbed by the arm and dragged down the street. She bounds to the bank branch and tugs impatiently and ineffectually at the door (all of this is taking place on a Saturday, remember), before her partner calmly opens the door beside it and swings it open. After their Saturday bank visit they’re seen walking into town, and the woman hits her partner over the head with a newspaper like he’s a disobedient dog.

The men-are-morons ad genre is a prolific one – try watching a commercial break that doesn’t contain a man who can’t make a dinner, find a restaurant or make it to lunch without running through a pond (all real examples) but this writer is not sure what the bank ad is supposed to be saying. “Control your finances like you control your man,” perhaps. Or “gosh, isn’t it funny how different men are from women?” Ads that paint men as idiots and women as their nagging carers do neither gender any favours, but at least this particular bank commercial serves one purpose; it makes me grateful that I can enjoy my Saturdays in peace.

Sucker Punch review

So Sucker Punch has gotten some pretty bad reviews, eh? I vowed to go in to the screening with an open mind. In its defence, it’s got an attractive (and in places, talented) cast, fire-breathing dragons, robot samurai and Nazi zombies – how bad could it be? Pretty damn awful, as it turns out.

Emily Browning plays “Baby Doll” a young woman (supposedly 20, but looking about 15) who, following some contrivances that involve a wicked stepfather, finds her self in a mental institution for the insane(ly hot). It’s within these walls that she’s forced into prostitution and coerced into dancing for the asylum/brothel’s clients and staff. While dancing (bear with me) she closes her eyes and escapes into a fantasy world that initially gives her clues as to how to escape the asylum, and then form metaphorical parallels for her friends’ actual schemes.

So, for example, while her friend Rocket (Abbie Cornish) is stealing a map in the real world, Baby Doll is fantasising that she and her friends are fighting zombie Nazis (I’m not making this up), for their map. So it continues, in an episodic, videogame-style fashion until its finale.



Why doesn’t the film work? Well, for starters, because Baby Doll’s fantasies are just that, there’s exactly zero sense of danger or peril in these lengthy, opulent scenes. Also, as other critics have pointed out, why would she be daydreaming about giant samurai warriors and dragons? Why not imagine she’s sunbathing in a meadow or shopping with her friends? The dialogue (in a script co-written by its director) is awful, but, considering that the entire female cast is decked out like extras in a Prince video, it would be hard to take the actresses seriously no matter how well it was written. The tone is ugly and misogynistic – did we really need three attempted rapes in a fantasy adventure? – and hypocritical to boot: the film's grotesque villains leer at the young female cast, but the filmmakers themselves were only delighted to deck out these talented actresses in increasingly tiny costumes.

What’s more (SPOILER ALERT in this paragraph) – most of the girls in the film would be better off had they never met their hero, Baby Doll! If I’d made any emotional investment in these characters, I’d be seriously pissed off!

It’s a shame that Sucker Punch a- sucked and b- flopped. Warner Brothers took an $80million punt on an eccentric action movie that was neither a sequel, a remake nor based on a comic. They were rewarded with a laughing-stock of a film that will likely make a loss. The failure of this film, on every level, will be used as a reason for studios to think twice before taking a risk.