You are browsing the archive for 2010 April.

Force Yourself to Write with Write or Die!

April 5, 2010 in Novel, On Writing

One of my readers recently brought to my attention this website called “Write or Die” (created by Dr Wicked)

My biggest problem as a writer is my tendency to procrastinate and self-edit whilst writing.  What Write or Die does is force you to write.  You set yourself a word target and a time limit, the consequences of failing to meet the target within the time, and away you go!

I’ve only used it a couple of times so far, but it really works!  Of course, I had to set realistic targets and limits, but once I did, my productivity went through the roof.  Not much of the stuff I wrote was any good, but at least I am getting words out, writing freely and letting my words take me wherever they want.

I’m hoping Write or Die can help me finish the first drafts of my novels before the end of the year.

Give it a try by clicking on the link above.  You can also purchase a desktop version for 10 bucks.

Movie Review: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2009)

April 5, 2010 in Movie Reviews

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Swedish name:  Män som hatar kvinnor or Men Who Hate Women) is a fantastic adaptation of the first book of the best-selling “Millennium Trilogy” by late Swedish author Stieg Larsson (see my book review here).

The film has a classic mystery suspense thriller plot.  It tells the story of a wealthy industrialist, Henrik Vanger, who is convinced that someone in his dysfunctional family killed his beloved niece more than 40 years ago.  In a final effort to solve the mystery, he hires Mikael Blomkvist, a recently disgraced journalist facing prison time for libel.  Running parallel to this storyline is the tale of the dangerous and vulnerable security specialist Lisbeth Salander, the titular character.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is the type of film that will make you like the book more.  When I read the book, I wondered how the heck they would be able to fit the extremely long and complex novel into a single film.  But somehow, the screenplay by Nikolaj Arcel and Rasmus Heisterberg managed to take the best of the book and squeeze it into the 152-minute running time.  All of the essential elements are there, including the key characters, almost all of the investigative events, and the majority of the subplots.  A few relationships and subplots may have missed the cut, but I think making things a little simpler actually helps the film.

One of my primary complaints with the novel was the amount of exposition — there were so many biographies and backstories that I felt it sagged the plot and the pace.  But the film version got around most of these problems without compromising the intelligent and complex storyline.  Sometimes a short scene or conversation, or even just a look, replaced pages and pages of exposition from the book.  A fantastic adaptation.

What really sets The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo apart from your average thriller is the main characters.  Of course, everyone talks about Salander, one of the most intriguing characters to be portrayed on screen in recent years, played perfectly by Noomi Rapace.  But I also think Blomkvist, played by veteran actor Michael Nyqvist, is a highly interesting character.  All the minor characters are well cast and well played too.  A high quality production whichever way I look at it.

A great start to the Millennium Trilogy.  I can’t wait to see the next two films.

4.5 stars out of 5

Is it worth paying extra for 3D?

April 5, 2010 in Movie Reviews, Technology

One thing that’s really been annoying me lately is the extra price movie-goers have to pay to enjoy a film in 3D.  Where I’m from, there’s the “normal” price of the ticket, and on top of that there is the arbitrary price for the 3D, and then there’s the additional cost of the 3D glasses.  Some theatres allow 3D glasses to be reused, but others require you to purchase a new pair each time.  When you add it all up, the movies are getting ridiculously expensive these days.

Now if it is a genuine 3D film, like say Avatar (or even The Final Destination), where the experience is truly enhanced because of the 3D effects, I don’t have a huge problem with that.  You pay for it with extra cash and discomfort from wearing the glasses for the entire duration of the film, but it’s ultimately worth the trouble.

But the last two “3D” films I watched, Alice in Wonderland and Clash of the Titans, both felt like they were riding the 3D tidal wave for a bit of extra box office income.  I was appalled by how little the so-called 3D effects added to the films.  Arguably, I would have enjoyed them more had I watched in ordinary 2D, without the irritating glasses frames, the darker tint of the lenses, and me taking taking them off constantly wondering whether I had accidentally walked into the 2D version.

So from now on, I’m going to be a 3D sceptic.  No more watching films in 3D if those effects have been added in post-production in order to ride the 3D bandwagon — unless, of course, someone tells me I’d be missing out on something amazing.

Movie Review: Clash of the Titans (3D) (2010)

April 4, 2010 in Movie Reviews

Big action blockbuster and Greek mythology — two of my favourite things.  Put them together, throw in a bit of 3D, and you get Clash of the Titans, the new remake of the 1981 classic.

The story is very loosely based on the Greek myth of Perseus, played by Sam Worthington (Avatar), and has numerous and significant differences from the original film.

There’s not much point in giving away the plot, other than to say that the film takes place in a world where humans have full knowledge of the Gods’ existence, and that bizarre creatures and mythical monsters live among them.  And in this world, Perseus, a demigod (ie half-man, half-god), is fated to go up against the Gods and save humanity.

If that sounds silly and cliched, that’s because it is.  Directed by Louis Leterrier (Transporter 2, The Incredible Hulk), there is no serious attempt to make Clash of the Titans even a remotely believable film.  It feels like the makers decided that this was an impossible task, and instead went down the full-blown, technology-driven action route.

The result is a pretty exciting experience, albeit one you cannot really feel fully engaged in because of the campness, the laughable dialogue, and the lack of character development.  To be fair, they did try to inject a bit more like into the central characters, but the effect was so poor that it became humorous, and only wasted valuable time that could have been spent on more action.  Speaking of action, I would have liked to have seen less quick cuts and more wide shots, but for the most part it passed the grade.

The special effects were great, but not exceptional by today’s high standards, and the 3D added a little extra, but to be honest not a whole lot more.  I don’t think I would have regretted it had I watched it in plain old 2D.

Sam Worthington, Hollywood’s next big thing, seemed like he had plenty of fun.  There are no pretensions in his performance because he knows it’s all about the action.  He still lacks the “superstar aura” that Russell Crowe has, but maybe he’ll get there some day.  It was great to see Liam Neeson playing Zeus, and especially Lord Voldemort himself, Ralph Fiennes, playing the King of the Underworld, Hades.  Both inject star power without diverting attention away from the rest of the cast.  They even got Pete Postlethwaite to play Spyros, Perseus’ adopted father!  My only complaint was probably Gemma Aterton’s Io, who was just plain weird.

So Clash of the Titans is unlikely to be remembered as a classic.  There are plenty of things wrong with it.  It’s silly and cheesy and lacks heart.  But for those who like Greek mythology, monsters, sword-wielding action, and don’t need things to be taken too seriously, Clash of the Titans is a fun, exciting popcorn movie for the majority of its 118-minute running time.

3.5 stars out of 5!

[PS: watching Clash of the Titans gave me a new appreciation for films like The Lord of the Rings, films that actually have heart and make you believe in their world while not compromising the thrilling action.]

Hopkins gets revenge against Jones Jr in stinker

April 4, 2010 in Boxing

Today I went to the same public venue where I watched Manny Pacquiao take on Joshua Clottey last month to see Roy Jones Jr take on Bernard Hopkins in their long-awaited, 17-years-in-the-making rematch.  While the place was packed beyond belief last time, I was stunned to find that this time it was virtually empty.  No one there could care less about a fight that would have been huge 10 years ago, but couldn’t even muster a live crowd of 7,000 now.  Even Danny Green (the man who knocked out Jones in one round last year), who sat behind right behind me, had a stern ”that should have been me” angry look plastered across his face the entire time.

Hopkins (45) smashed Jones (41) in a clear unanimous decision, 117-110 (twice) and 118-109, in a foul-filled, boring stinker where both fighters didn’t have much to give.  Especially Jones, who had to resort to multiple foul tactics (hitting behind the head and low blows) just to keep things interesting.  Hopkins actually collapsed in his dressing room from the back-of-the-head blows.  Both men had to be taken to hospital for tests afterwards.

In the lead-up to the fight, many people warned me that it would be an absolute crapfest, but a part of me still wanted to see two old legends settle a score that should have been settled years ago.  Well, I shouldn’t have wasted my time.  It was sad to see what had become of them.

While we all knew that Jones was way past his best, but people were still saying that Hopkins could fight.  Against Jones, he could, but to be honest he wasn’t much better.  I know Hopkins doesn’t fight pretty, but this was ugly.  If Hopkins goes up to Heavyweight to challenge David Haye like he says he would, then good luck to him.  He could get seriously hurt (just like if Haye challenged the Klitschko brothers).

Let’s hope both men retire and not further tarnish their glorious careers.

Bad Behavior has blocked 641 access attempts in the last 7 days.