Review: Ted

Star Rating:***

Director: Seth MacFarlane

Cast: Mark Wahlberg, Mila Kunis, Seth MacFarlane, Giovanni Ribisi, Joel McHale, Patrick Warburton, Aedin Mincks

Plot/Overview: A kid, John Bennet (Wahlberg), wishes that his Teddy Bear 'Ted' (MacFarlane) could talk and so it comes to life, which causes a problem later in life when John is all grown-up and living with his girlfriend Lori (Kunis) and a teddy bear that smokes weed.
To be honest, my expectations for this film were low. I have never been into the crude types of movies but this movie totally surprised me! There was of course, the typical plot that focused around the relationship between John, Lori and Ted ... but there was also a subplot that introduced two new characters,  Donny (Ribisi) and his son Robert (Mincks) who are completely obsessed with the famous talking bear, Ted.


What are the good points?
1. The subplot with Donny and Robert really makes the movie that much better. It adds so much more humour and excitement and I am definitely glad they added this in.

2. Mila Kunis. She's not really funny but let's face it, she's hot and the movie wouldn't be the same without her.

What are the bad points?
 1. I didn't actually think the bear was that funny really, considering he was the main character... I just don't think crude humour is funny (Hey, I'm not a prude). Don't get me wrong, there were some funny parts/lines but on the whole... he wasn't that hilarious. Sorry.

2. The fact that I have nothing else to say about this film says it all...

Should you see this movie?
I would say yes. Don't go out of your way to see it.. I mean, it's not crucial or anything, but if you have a free afternoon, fancy a bit of a giggle and an 'alright' movie then go for it. I would say you will probably find this funnier if you are a teen (15+)... just because it's one of those films (I'm looking at you American Pie 4 and onwards)... but also because it does still have a pretty good sub-plot.

Review: The Dark Knight Rises

Star Rating:****

Director: Christopher Nolan

Cast: Christian Bale, Gary Oldman, Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Anne Hathaway, Morgan Freeman, Marion Cotillard, Michael Caine.

Plot/Overview: There's a bad guy called 'Bane' (Tom Hardy), who wear a creepy mask thing over his mouth that's attached to his skin which is kind of gross, and the Batman is needed to defeat him.  A lot of the plot is carried on from the previous film (The Dark Knight) and this film is about Bruce Wayne (Bale) coming to terms with everything that has happened previously and "rising"as the Batman again.


Source: Wikipedia

What are the good points?
1. The acting is incredible. I definitely didn't have any doubts since the cast is pretty good (*cough* Gary Oldman*Cough*) but I was particularly surprised by...


2. ...Anne Hathaway who played Catwoman. I was definitely expecting that character that Hathaway always plays. It always seems me that although her roles vary, there is always something about her characters that is just the same. ANYWAY... She just reinvented herself for this movie or something... and I had always believed that there would never been a good Catwoman, after seeing some terrible portrayals of the character, but I guess she proved me wrong!
She was sexy, mysterious, graceful, and let's not forget, very very cat-like. Well done Ms Hathaway, well done.

3.The plot. I had heard various things about there being a massive plot twist, and there definitely was, and I was definitely surprised. Other people may have seen it coming, but I definitely didn't, which is always nice :).

4. Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

5.The special effects are amazing. It's films like this that really make me see how far technology and improvements in CGI have come.

What are the bad points?
1. OK, don't shoot me, but I really hated the villain. There seems to be a massive Tom Hardy craze at the moment (with people I know, anyway) and I completely agree that he is one of the best actors in the business, right now... I just didn't find the villain AT ALL threatening or scary. Without speaking... the villain, Bane, looks really freaky... but the voice that comes out of him is not at all what I expected. It was almost the voice of a machine-generated sarcastic professor... if that makes any sense at all? It might have fit the bill for others but for me it was distracting and ill-fitting. Weird.

2. Despite the film being called The Dark Knight "Rises"... it seems that Bruce Wayne spent the whole film attempting to "rise" out of a giant well. Again, this is just a preference and all other parts of the plot I LOVED.. but this part of it just didn't sit well with me.

3. For those who don't know, Juno Temple (St Trinian's, Atonement) also makes an appearance as Anne Hathaway's sidekick or something. I'm a fan of Juno Temple but her role in this is basically pointless. I don't even know what happens to her "in the end" and by that I mean from the middle of the film onwards. She has very few lines and her screen time is about 3 minutes in total, probably. I just don't know why they didn't just leave her out of it completely.

4. You have to see 'The Dark Knight' (the previous film) before you see 'The Dark Knight Rises'. This should be pretty obvious and shouldn't really be a "bad point" but as someone who hadn't seen the first movie (don't shout at me!) I was confused about a lot of things. (But I have seen The Dark Knight now so a lot of things have been resolved)

Should you see this movie?
Yes. This movie is for anyone who likes Batman and action movies with a good storyline. There are a few things that bugged me, but in general, this is a good film. Seeing it in the cinema will give you the best experience for this movie.

Review: The Amazing Spider-Man

Star Rating: ****

**SPOILERS (probably)**

Right, I did see this movie a good few weeks ago so sorry the review is really late, but let's leave that now and get right to my oh-so-opinionated review.
I would just like to note, quickly, that I don't know the story/stories of Spider-Man and haven't read any of the comic book stories, so this review is based entirely on the movie(s)... and what I thought of it.

I loved "the other" Spider-Man film (lets call it 'film 1'), you know, the one with Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst, so I definitely went into this movie (we'll call it 'film 2') thinking that I would never be as impressed...

...Okay, so, I was proved wrong. Mostly by the graphics if I'm honest, which definitely supported the "Amazing" part of this movie's title. You really don't realised how much technology and CGI has improved until you see this film, and then going back to watch 'film 1' to compare the two just adds to the "Amazing" of the new film.

Source: Google/Collider.com

In my opinion, Andrew Garfield (the Amazing Spider-Man) wasn't as good as Tobey Maguire. I did think that Tobey (yes, I used his first name) added a lot more of an innocence and a "geeky-ness" to the role, which is what I have always thought the character was. I also preferred the idea in film 1, that Peter Parker doesn't reveal his secret to anyone, not even his love interest.

...And speaking of love interests, we have said goodbye to Mary-Jane (Kirsten Dunst) and said hello to Gwen Stacey (Emma Stone). I kind of like both for different reasons, though I slightly prefer Mary-Jane. I really liked that she was always someone that Peter Parker really liked, and that she really liked Spider-Man, though not knowing he was Peter Parker... (can anyone understand what I just said?). I just liked that Mary-Jane was feisty but at the same time a complete damsel in distress that he could save... and in all honesty I think Gwen was kind of.. boring. She was, I guess, similar to a "Bond girl" in the sense that she was involved in the action, and was quite similar to the "hero" of the story. I would have liked to have seen more vulnerability with Gwen, though I did like that she was a bit of a nerd like Peter Parker.

Right... (sorry, still rambling)... Now we move onto "the kiss". When I think of Spider-Man, I always think about that kiss. You know what I'm talking about, the one that's upside-down, in the rain, and SUPER HOT. In 'film 1' I loved loved LOVED that kiss. It's so iconic and so different.

GUESS WHAT?

'Film 2' didn't even care about that kiss. They just created a new one... where Gwen walks away in a huff or something and he 'zaps' her with his web, which might I add, comes from a machine he created himself that enables him to 'zap' his web (oo-er), which is another thing I really dislike about this movie, though I did hear it's pretty true to the comic books so I can't complain too much.
Anyway, I found this kiss predictable, unexciting and cheesy. I also didn't think there was enough build up to the Gwen and Peter relationship... it didn't.. flow... (I hate using that word).

OKAY so I know that I have complained for quite a bit now.. and you're probably thinking "well aside from the amazing graphics, why did you give this movie a 4 star rating?", well my lovely blog readers... it was basically because overall it was an awesome film.

Rhys Ifans, who is this film's villain Dr. Curt Connors/ the lizard definitely added something extra as he was kind of normal, but then there was also something quite off about him... without being too OTT creepy-villain with a deep, husky, evil voice.

I just thought he was an amazing villain, someone who was obsessed with the idea of genetics and science.. (not unlike film 1 villain the "Green Goblin"/Norman Osborn played by Willem Dafoe who I equally loved).. I also loved that the villain of this movie was essentially something that Peter Parker created... and something he felt he needed to "stop".
I also should note that I liked the idea that in this movie, Peter Parker was not automatically amazing at everything, and even by the end of the movie he was still adjusting to his new "powers" and still learning. Andrew Garfield definitely played the clumsiness very well and I liked that he definitely appeared more of a teenager that in film 1, with the scruffy hair and awkwardness.

I really am just rambling now.... but I'm gonna keep going ;)

We also saw Martin Sheen and Sally Field play the roles of Uncle Ben and Aunt May in this movie. I really liked Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben. He played him as someone who was calm but also quite assertive and parent-like... though this is nothing we haven't seen from Cliff Robertson who played Ben in film 1. Unfortunately I didn't think Sally Field brought anything to the role of Aunt May other than playing a woman and being sad. Rosemary Harris, who played this role in film 1 seemed to bring a calmness and wisdom to the role... as well as a gracefulness and such a motherly kindness. I really wanted to like Sally Field but she just didn't do it for me when I just think there is so much more to Aunt May than what I was shown.

Right so, to conclude... I liked this movie. You should see it, even if it's just for the graphics.

Review: Midnight in Paris

STAR RATING: ***

Probably some **SPOILERS**

I sat down the other night to watch Midnight in Paris, not really knowing what to expect as I had read no reviews or any kind of synopsis that tells you the general storyline of the film. I knew three things:

1. It was starred a few familiar faces, including Owen Wilson and Rachel McAdams.
2. It was set in Paris
3. It was directed by Woody Allen.

Yes, that's all I knew.

The storyline actually focuses on a Hollywood screenwriter known as Gil (Wilson), who seems to be somewhat unfulfilled in his current life and attempting to finish his first novel, whilst vacationing in Paris with his finance Inez (McAdams') and her wealthy parents.
Gil and Inez are clearly not the perfect match for each other, and we do see them in constant disagreement with each other from the moment we see them together. Aside from the fact that Inez clearly doesn't understand Gil's ambition and his unhappiness with his career, the couple also disagree strongly about the fact that Gil desperately wants to move to Paris after they marry, and Inez desperately wants to stay in Malibu. Let's not also forget an extra catalyst added to the couple's relationship problems in the form of Paul (Michael Sheen) - a friend of Inez who appears very cultured and knowledgeable about Paris and it's history.
We get all this information in the first fifteen minutes of the movie, and honestly, at this moment I was thinking that it was very... well.... cliche.

One night on their vacation, after dining with Paul (and another woman who I think is pretty irrelevant), a drunk Gil decides he doesn't want to join them to go dancing afterwards and decides to walk back to their hotel, only to get lost in the back streets of Paris. He sits to rest on some steps when a nearby clock strikes midnight and a 1920's car suddenly appears and the people inside beckon him to join them... and so he does.
Gil then finds that he has travelled back in time to 1920's Paris an time that he dubs as a "golden era". He finds this happens every night at the same place, same time, and along way manages to meet great historical figures and people that he idolises such as Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald (Tom Hiddleston and Alison Pill), Ernest Hemingway (Corey Stoll), who offers to have his novel read by Gertude Stein (Kathy Bates), and Pablo Picasso (Marcial Di Fonzo Bo).
He also meets a woman named Adriana (Marion Cottilard) whom he begins to fall in love with and obviously that causes problems, 'cause.. y'know.. she's from the 1920's and stuff.
Back in present time, Gil also meets antiques dealer Gabrielle (Léa Seydoux) who he has shared interests with and a clear connection...

Back in the 1920's with Adriana, the paid travel back in time together to Paris in 1890, which is the time that Adriana most idolises, and when she decides she that wants to stay, Gil finally realises that whilst it's nice to be nostalgic... it's a much better idea to accept his present time.
That being said... he then goes back to sort stuff out with his bride-to-be...

(I won't say anymore about the plot.. even though I have already told you most of the story.)

If I'm honest, I didn't think Owen Wilson was particularly great... he played the typical character he always plays, which is always the likable character of any story that we all want to see do well... but I think it can sometimes get tiring. The only depth to this character was created by Woody Allen through the writing and directing of this movie, so I must admit that it would have been nice to see Wilson add something a little extra to this character... perhaps a quirky mannerism or habit? since we are talking about a man who is, on paper, so wrapped up in his own little world and frustrated with his current life.

Similarly I was also disappointed with Rachel McAdams, whom I usually absolutely adore! Though I do have a massive girl-crush on her, I have to say I was really disappointed with her character. I'm not entirely sure it was her portrayal of the character that I disliked (though perhaps I am being a little biased), It was more the character that had been created for her. I think this "spoilt-brat-fiancee who doesn't understand or support her husband's dreams and ambitions" has been done so many times before, and I think the story would have worked just as well if she had been the complete opposite. I definitely think that if the story had focused more on Gil and his acceptance of his current life in present time and less on his relationship with Inez and Adriana, then the entire movie would have been improved greatly.

Aside from this, I actually think Woody Allen did an excellent job writing and directing this movie. For a movie that seems to have such a mediocre storyline, I think it actually provoked some complex and abstract ideas such as the concept of time and nostalgia, but without making the story completely incomprehensible or "artsy" (which isn't a word, but seems to describe a category of movies of which I think everyone is familiar with...).

So all in all, I would say... watch this movie if you have a free evening and fancy watching something slightly bizarre. Don't focus too much on the character's, but turn your attention to the "message" or ideas presented by the story.. it might turn out that you actually quite like it...

...and besides, the scenery is gorgeous! So if you're watching it for anything... watch it for the sights!

My Love for Cast Away

***SPOILERS!***

I haven't seen this movie in a long time, so immediately hit the record button when I saw it was going to appear on BBC 1 the other night!
I find it so hard to believe that this movie was slammed by so many critics when I think it is arguably one of the best movies ever made ... probably in the top 500 (which, when you think about how many movies actually exist, is actually a pretty decent place for a movie to be).

For those who don't know the movie (and if you don't then I think you should watch it), it focuses around Chuck Noland (played by Tom Hanks), who is a FedEx executive who finds himself stranded on a Desert Island for four years (ish) after enduring a plane crash.

So basically, it's all about how he copes physically and emotionally with his isolation and new lifestyle (and I might add that the fact he doesn't die in the plane crash isn't a spoiler as it is about his life on the island...).

What I find very interesting about this movie is the fact that Hanks has very little dialogue throughout the movie, despite being the main character... I mean, there is some dialogue.. but not very much, and considering his conversations are mostly with himself and inanimate objects, I think it is fantastic that he somehow manages to keep an audience captivated and almost emotionally attached to Chuck Noland's character.

What I definitely see, (that most critics did not apparently...) is the change in Noland's character throughout his stay on the island. I think most people where looking to see him break down or go insane or whatever they think would usually happen if you found yourself alone on a desert island for four years.. but I really disagree! Here are my reasons:

• Firstly, we don't see every year that he is on the island. For all we know, and I'm assuming it probably happened nearer the beginning of his time there, he could have had so many breakdowns and emotional moments, as well as suicide attempts (which we do actually see that he considers).
• Okay, secondly, Just like every other human/animal/living organism he learns to adapt to his new environment over FOUR YEARS!
• Thirdly, if talking to and becoming emotionally attached to a ball that you have named "Wilson" is not what you would call "going insane" then I don't know what is.

One of my favourite things about this character is also his belief that he will deliver one of the FedEx packages (he leaves one unopened). I think he sees it as some sort of goal, and sees the opening of the package as admitting defeat. I also love that idea of him having a picture of his love interest/girlfriend (Helen Hunt) to look at.. but I don't think they meant to portray this in a cheesy "someday I will be reunited with my love" kind of way, but I think it is a way of keeping the character emotionally connected to the "real world", and to feeling something "real" to prevent him becoming less "human". (Sorry a lot of quotation marks going on today... )

Anyway, in case you haven't already got the picture, I love this movie. I think it is different and interesting and as always, Tom Hanks is brilliant. I definitely think that even if it is not in everyone else's top 500, it can be argued as one of the most underrated films in history...

.. In my opinion anyway ;)

10 Rubbish, Must-See Movies

Not in any particular order, here are 10 movies that, for various reasons, you should watch in your life time, even though, they are "rubbish"  in their own ways. (Though, might I add that you will probably still enjoy some of these though they are technically "bad" movies)

10. She's the Man.
Basically, A girl who wants to play football (or soccer if you prefer) can't because her school cut the girl's team... so she poses as her brother at his new boarding school while he goes to London to work on his music... (he has no idea she has done this).. and then basically it's all about how she wants to play football and then gets to hang around hot guys while pretending to be one.
This film is a typically Amanda Bynes comedy where a lot of stupid things happen and eventually she gets the guy. This shouldn't be a good movie...
But it is... and it is so so so so funny. I have seen this movie too many times, and yet every time I watch it, the jokes are just as hilarious as the previous times. Also, it's worth mentioning that Channing Tatum stars in it and is very hot. Very very hot. It is definitely a movie that will cheer you up and doesn't need much concentration... watch it with friends and a tub of Ben & Jerry's and you're good to go.

9. Carry On Movies
Anyone who knows the Carry On movies knows that they are very silly and immature... and absolutely hilarious.
Full of innuendo's and sleazy men lusting after girls with massive boobs... and full on British comedy.
Each Carry On film is set around a different time or theme (Carry On Henry- Tudor Times, Carry On Cruising - On a boat etc... ) but every single movie has a loose plot line... that usually involves Sid James' laughing... and Kenneth Williams trying to fight off Hattie Jacques.
If you haven't got time to see them all, then the ones i recommend are Carry On Doctor and Carry On Camping.

8.The Blue Lagoon
Starring a young Brooke Shields and some other guy, this film is the cringiest and weirdest movie I have ever seen in my life. Technically, it isn't a good movie really... but it is a must-see! just because it is painfully bad and so so so funny (for the wrong reasons).
It is effectively about a boy and a girl going through puberty on a desert island after they end up there when their boat crashes when they are younger. The whole film they are pretty much naked and just say cringey things.. a lot happens, but at the same time, nothing happens.
Definitely watch it all the way through, but remember... it will be shit all the way through.


7.Bring It On
A film about cheerleaders.
I'm pretty sure there are about 5 of them?
They are all about the same thing. They are completely rubbish and usually about occasionally bitchy girls who like cheerleading, but they are a "feel-good" type of movie and you should probably watch them before you die. The good team nearly always wins their competition.. and if they don't then they learn something valuable about friendship or love along the way. *sigh*




6. Pete's Dragon
A Disney movie about a kid with a dragon that is invisible to everyone else but him. They sing to each other and shit and the dragon is poorly animated (though it is kinda old).. but it's kind of a sweet movie. The kid has a bowel-cut which adds super-cuteness to the whole movie and then there are some weird adults but I'm not really sure how they are related to Pete as I never really paid attention enough when I watched it as a kid. All I do know is that there is a song at the beginning called "I love you too" which the kid and the dragon sing to each other and it will change your life. OK, I joke, the song is awful, but just like the movie, it's so bad it's good.


5. Monty Python
These movies aren't really bad at all, they are COMIC GENIUS!
... but they are very silly and strange with no real "plot" to them..

and they have to go on this list just so I can grab your attention.

If you cant handle too much weirdness then I wouldn't recommend The Meaning of Life.. perhaps start with the Life of Brian, which is incredibly funny and odd. All movies contain mostly the same cast.... Eric Idle, Michael Palin, John Cleese etc...  all are very very funny and very.. errrr... British?
Just watch them - you won't be sorry!



4. Grease 2
This has nothing on the first movie and it is absolutely awful but you have to watch it just because of the cheesy songs and because Michelle Pfeiffer is in it and probably regrets it.. so we can all laugh at her foolish decision ;)
The songs are poor, as is the story-line but I say you should watch it anyway.. because let's face it... we all want to know what happens in this one since in the last one the car randomly decided to fly at the end... anything could be possible for Grease 2, right?
Also, Frenchy is in it again so it just adds more awesome to a really really bad movie.





3. Twilight Films
First I need to say, I have nothing against the people that do like them, but I really HATE these movies (used to love the books when I was like.. 14?).
I blame Stephanie Meyer for part of this hate... but mostly I just have something about the way that Catherine Harwicke directs the first movie - in an incredibly awkward and weird design with a bad and cheesy script. Edward and Bella make me want to be physically sick... nonetheless you should probably see them all since they have become very very famous movies, though in my opinion are completely overrated....
If you can't bear all of them, then you only need to watch one, and if you are going to watch any of them then I suggest the third one as it is the most bearable..

2. Team America
I think this movie was purposely meant to be rubbish in order to be funny, which is why I have put it in this list ... but I actually think it is very clever.. in an odd way.
The whole film is done with puppets, in a Thunderbirds sort of way.... and in short, is about a group of people who are known as 'Team America' who are a kind of 'Super' team without the powers... I guess you could call them "agents" .. anyway, they basically save the world from terrorists and other bad people, but in doing so cause destruction to everything else. They then hire an actor to pose as a terrorist and he joins their team and then a bunch of stuff happens.
The movie is hilarious, but not for everyone... I would definitely say give it a try though! It is a MUST SEE MOVIE.

1. Beastly
This definitely goes in my list of top ten worst films ever... which I should probably make a separate list for...
Anyway, this is a relatively new movie starring Alex Pettyfer and that girl out of High School Musical (which is another movie that should have gone on this list..), Vanessa Hudgens. It's basically about a popular kid who turns ugly and then a nerdy girl from school comes to live with him and then nothing really happens.
This is a must-see movie because it is painfully bad. I mean, really cheesy (and not in the good cheese, guilty-pleasure kind of way...) and really really disjointed, poorly scripted and just laughable. Of all the movies on this list, this is the one that is on here for actually being an actually shit film....
just... awful.
Yeah, so you have to watch it because you wont be able to see how bad it is until you do :)



 ....Aaaaaaand that's it!
I probably have loads more but these are the 10 that I can think of right now :)

Review: Avengers Assemble

Star Rating: *****

That's right, 5 Stars from me!
I LOVED this movie. Everything about it.

The story line was kind of weak... you know, there's a bad guy... all the avengers are gathered together by Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and stop the bad guy called Loki, brother of Thor (played by Tom Hiddleston) who wants to cause destruction etc.

But I don't care about the weak storyline - It did not for a moment stop the movie from being entirely AWESOME!.

Okay so, the avengers include Iron Man/Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), Captain America/Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), The Hulk/Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), Hawkeye/Clint Barton (Jeremy Renner) and Black Widow/Natasha Raminoff (Scarlett Johansson).

This movie is full of action, clever one-liners and amazing graphics... and I definitely recommend it. I have already seen the other movies based around each of the avengers so every character was familiar to me, as well as their 'histories'. I definitely think everyone should watch the other films before seeing this movie.. not because you wont understand it, but because it's almost like seeing all your weird friends with super-abilities together (I know, I know.. very sad).

I definitely loved the use of comedy in the movie, as it wasn't OTT, but just enough to remind us that marvel isn't meant to be dark and all-serious. The script is fantastic, but not easy to follow. I think they definitely added the sci-fi lingo to make the storyline seem more confusing than it was, but even so, I did not care as I was kept entertained all the way through.

Mark Ruffalo filled a pair of extra large boots as the new alter-ego(ish) of THE HULK! and he really did an excellent job, in my ever-so-humble opinion. His voice and manner was just so so calm, which was an absolutely brilliant addition to the whole 'Bruce Banner turns into giant green monster' thing, as it kind of reminded you that they were two almost very different personalities, and that Banner was trying everything in his power not to get angry. LOVED IT!

Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans resumed their roles as Iron Man and Captain America and did a brilliant job, introducing a kind of brotherly relationship - including all the bickering (which was hilarious)... And lets not forget Chris Hemsworth, Jeremy Renner and Scarlett Johansson who starred as Thor, Hawkeye and Black Widow and were also very brilliant and very very hot! (yes - Scarlett Johansson is hot.. even from my point of view!)

Okay, so it's only May and I can already say that this movie will be in my top 10 for this year. It's a definite must-see, especially for any marvel fans out there.. or just any massive nerds like me!
It's fast moving, comedic and extremely enjoyable

I only wish I had seen it in 3D...  ;)

Review: American Reunion

Star Rating: ***

I love the American Pie films, (specifically talking about 1, 2 and the wedding as we can pretty much ignore all of the others...) So I had high expectations for this movie and was completely aware that it was going to be ... well... an American Pie movie..

The fourth movie (and it is the fourth movie, don't argue) sees the 'team' reunite for their high-school reunion, and as per usual nothing goes smoothly.
I don't particularly want to tell you anything else about the story... because I don't want to give away the jokes or big plots, but I will say that if you did like the original movies and characters, then you will probably like this movie too.

If I'm honest, I wasn't disappointed, I laughed a lot and it was really nice seeing the cast back together and where all the characters were in their lives now.
It would be fair to say that we shouldn't expected too much from these movies, essentially they are all about sex, alcohol and embarrassment, but we still love them.

Jim's dad (Eugene Levy) is still probably my favourite character. Always awkward but trying to do good, we see him now a widower and ready to date again.... which leads to a number of funny situations at, you guessed it, Stifler's (Seann William Scott) party.

Of course we see our favourites, Oz (Chris Klein), Michelle (Alyson Hannigan), Heather (Mena Suvari), Vicky (Tara Reid), Finch (Eddie Kaye Thomas), Jim (Jason Biggs) and the one and only Stifler's Mom (Jennifer Coolidge).

To be honest, this movie was nothing new or spectacular, but I think that is what was nice about it - we never like too much change.

Just as much of a cringe and just as funny, this film is great for anyone who already loves these movies and wants to feel nostalgic for the evening. As a movie, it will never be great, but the characters and the bad jokes make up for it all.

Until we blog again,
x

Dealing With People

I have met a lot of people in my life so far.

The majority of them were lovely... perhaps they wound me up a little at points, but that happens with everyone as some point right?
Unfortunately there will always be the other people...
The people you want to scream at but know that nothing good will come of it.
The people that cause your hair to fall out.

First, I just want to say that nobody is perfect, and chances are, you are probably a difficult person to someone else in the world.
I could never assume that I am a person that waltzes through life without pissing anyone off, and I am completely aware that I am very opinionated amoungst many of my other flaws... which probably makes a lot of people dislike me, but unfortunately a lot of people don't think like this...

which brings me to...
Type 1 - The people in denial
I find these people one of the most difficult, because they completely assume that they have no flaws.. or very few atleast... And I don't mean appearance-wise, because obviously most people have something they dislike about themselves, but I mean that they are completely dillisional about what their true flaws actually are.
For instance you may often hear 'I'm too nice' or 'too generous' or 'I let people walk all over me'.
PLEASE.
That's not a flaw and you know it!
When it comes to their actual flaws (perhaps they are bossy or snobbish or just rude), they just cannot see the truth.
I think sometimes we can all be a 'Type 1', - I mean, it's not your fault if you can't see how you are behaving...but it is when this denial becomes constant that you almost want to scream 'YOU'RE A DICK!!!' into their faces :)
The only way I can suggest dealing with these people is to either leave it, and accept they are a twat and wont admit it... or you can sit them down and talk about the issue you have with them (if it is constructive and you think they are likely to change - which they probably wont as they have no flaws, right?)... If it was me then I would just leave it because they probably wont understand what you're on about and tell you that you're being a big bully (see Type 3).

Type 2- The Compulsive Liars
My pet hate. PLEASE JUST TELL THE TRUTH YOU FOOLS.
Not necessarily big lies.. maybe just little fibs? but still fucking annoying.
It can be anything from an exaggeration of their life to 'I swear I didn't take the last biscuit'.
But you know they did ;)
The frustration is that you know they are lying, but you have no way of proving it and you just sit there, listening to their lie and smiling.... saying nothing.
Within the Type 2 categrory is the people I call 'the ones that lie to get out of trouble'. By 'trouble' I do mean little things... like breaking an object, for instance, and then just trying to hide it until someone else breaks it so they can take the blame.. or if like me you live in a shared house and someone uses your washing tablets and when asked about it (just to find out where they have gone) lie about it (quite obviously).!!!!
(Sorry, a bit of personal venting right there.... )
Okay, so the best thing to do with these people is to just ask them for the truth. They will soon learn that telling the truth is easier than stringing along some lies. Either that, or just make a suttle implication that you know the truth about them and let them SUFFFFFFERRR ;)

Type 3- The people who like to victimise themselves
I have no time for these people. Everyone has days where they feel like everyone is ganging up on them, but people who believe they have done nothing wrong in an argument and that they are the innocent ones are just as dilluded as the 'Type 1' people.
There are two sides to every argument and usually both sides are to blame (unless... you know... one cheated with the other ones partner, for instance.. ).
I have no way of dealing with these people... don't try and talk to them about it... you'll probably just be really mean to them or something.

Type 4 - The spoilt brats and high-maintainence princesses
This is usually only for girls... but with an occassional guy here and there.
They value money. They have a boyfriend, probably. Their boyfriend buys them A LOT.
I'm not saying that being bought stuff is a bad thing... but when you being to realise that most of your conversations revolve around money... when you return the £80 bracelet your boyfriend bought you because you think it's ugly... that is when you should know.. YOU'RE FAR TOO SPOILT.
I may fall into Type 1-3 at some point... but I steer clear of Type 4. Always.
Type 4 people often try and make it look like they have no money or are struggling (so may fall into type 3) ... they may say things like 'my family is really struggling with money right now' while you're thinking .. perhaps you could sell one of your 3 houses?...
I don't think these people are particularly bad as they perhaps don't realise they have more money than the people in their company.. but sometimes you just think 'SHUT UP'.

Type 5 - the 'I don't care' People
You know the people.
The ones who just don't care about anything.
They really frustrate me, because I really do care, and I can never see things from their perspective.
What annoys me further is that they probably do care, they just don't want to seem like they do.
But it does make it difficult when people get offended or hurt... or they go out looking like complete dicks and say they don't care when you politely tell them they have a strange hair sticking out the top of their head.
At the end of the day, it's only going to make them look stupid.. and usually they will slyly slip to a mirror to fix their stray hair... but they people that offend others and society with their 'I don't care' attitude (I'm looking at you - rioters!!!) are the pricks we need to look out for.



Okay.... so there are 5 for you to look out for now ;)
Got any other ideas? message me on twitter or write in the comment beeeelow ;)
Love
xoxo

Review: 21 Jump Street

RATING: ***

I have never seen the TV series that this movie was based on, but I vaguely knew the story line...
Directed by Phil Lord and Chris Miller, this movie tells the story of two 'cops' sent undercover to infiltrate a drug ring that is supplying high-school kids with synthetic drugs. Jenko (Channing Tatum) and Schmidt (Jonah Hill) have to relive their high-school experience, but where Jenko used to be the 'popular jock' and Schmidt the 'uncomfortable nerd', the two now find their roles reversed and have to deal with the consequences, as well as completing their mission.

If i'm honest, there is not much more to the storyline... and it is fairly predictable...

Buuuut...as an fan of Jonah Hill's comedy and of Channing Tatum's... well... err... physique.... I really wasn't that disappointed that I went to see this movie.

I definitely think that this is definitely a teenage guy's comedy, but that is not to say that it's not for girls either. A teenage audience can definitely get its kicks from seeing these two actors experience what they experience(ish) almost every day... in a completely unusual and O.T.T. kind of way...

It was an OK movie, with quite a few laughs but very little depth to the story line, and in a sense I think that's all it needs to be.

It is definitely not the best movie I have seen in a while, but definitely not the worst, so go and see this if you're bored on a rainy Sunday afternoon :)

Until we blog again,
x

Review: The Hunger Games (Cast Review)

(please note that anything I say is not giving away crucial parts of the story - though this is more a review for people who have read the books)

Oh my god.

Okay, so as you all know I am in love with this trilogy, so seeing this movie was a big thing for me.

I desperately tried not to build it up too much because I know that I can get easily disappointed, but I really, really wasn't.

I already explained the storyline in my review of the books... so I'm just going to go straight ahead with the movie review, if that's alright? ;)

I just want to first say, the cast is FANTASTIC!

Jennifer Lawrence, for a start, is perfect for this role. I love her because she doesn't overplay it, but somehow gets the right emotions put across in the right places. To me, she just is Katniss. Katniss is (in my opinion) supposed to be strong, but I think in the sense that she wants to show others that she is strong. She is still just a girl, who cares about her family and friends and her district, so the parts where she breaks down (without giving any spoilers) are my favourite, as Lawrence's really brings out Katniss' weaknesses.

Josh Hutcherson is another perfect choice. Peeta, I think, goes into the games with the acceptance that he is going to die (still not giving anything away). It's almost heartbreaking how he feels less important next to Katniss, but Hutcherson's way of showing it really strengthens Peeta's character, as we see how through this acceptance, he really wants to concentrate on saving Katniss - not himself.
Hutcherson's portrayal of Peeta is calm and genuine, which makes him entirely lovable - which is what Peeta is meant to be - as noted by Suzanne Collins (author of The Hunger Games) and character Haymitch who says in both book and film how Peeta is easy to like - and I definitely agree!

Gale, played by Liam Hemsworth, I almost just as I pictured him. Very tall, dark hair and completely attractive. One thing I loved about the film adaptation is the way we were able to see clips of Gale (even if they were very short) whilst the games were going on, as I had always wondered what his reactions would be. Hemsworth is equally as brilliant as his co-stars, though we see very little of him. The scenes he shares with Lawrence -though short- really allow us to see the relationship between Gale and Katniss straight away, and how similar they are in terms of their beliefs, family values and their attitudes towards the Capitol and the Games.

Nearly finished I promise....

The last Character I want to look at (though there are many more I could look at...) is Effie Trinket played by Elizabeth Banks. Effie is one of my favourite characters of the book, just because she is so groomed and particular, and I think she doesn't really know what she believes - just that she needs to do her job, and so she does it. Elizabeth Banks plays Effie to perfection. One thing I did notice straight away was that she has interpreted the Capitol accent. It was very subtle and seemed almost natural, but is so important to the overall character of Effie. Banks also managed to create a whole personna for Effie in the way she carries herself and poises her arms upright in a natural pose. It is definitely the smaller details all added together to create Effie's character and you can see how each has been individually thought out by Banks in the development of this character. She definitely didn't disappoint me.


Okay so, one more thing before I leave you all again...
I just wanted to point out that The Hunger Games is NOT a love story!
I would love to sit here and tell you what it is about, but really I think it is open greatly to interpretation. Perhaps one day I will do blog post on it.... ;)

Until we blog again,
x

Review: The Woman in Black

STAR RATING: *****

OK. I was really scared to see this movie.

Just the day before I had been queueing at the cinema waiting to see a different film, when my cousin came out of one of the screens, completely freaked out and shaking, telling me that the film she had just seen was completely terrifying!

The Woman in Black.

To be honest I was fighting two thoughts in my head. The first said 'it's a 12A... how bad could it be?' and the second voice said 'don't go and see it - it's going to be reaaaaally scary'. I mean, seeing my cousin's reaction wasn't the only time I had been forewarned about this movie - my other peers and official reviews also emphasised that it was probably going to give me nightmares for the next few weeks.

.... buuuuuuttt... I went to see it anyway ;)

I have to be honest, I wasn't scared as I thought I would be. I'm not sure if this was because the hype had geared me up so much that I was expecting the worst and it therefore seemed less scary when it didn't match my expectation, ... or if perhaps I was putting on a brave face whilst surrounded by other cinema-goers.
...But I wouldn't deny that it is very very creepy and very haunting. This movie is exactly the type of example that can be used to show the difference between a horror movie and a ghost story. It is definitely a ghost story, and although this label implies a lack of scariness, this is definitely not the case. I may not have been terrified, but I was definitely cowering into my seat for some parts.. and I did jump... a lot.

The story is based around Arthur Kipps, played by Daniel Radcliffe, who is called to a remote mansion called Eel Marsh House to settle the late-owner's estate. He arrives to the nearby oh-so-creepy village where he intends to stay whilst carrying out his business, only to receive very unwelcoming attitudes from the local residents, with the owners of the inn he is supposed to be staying in telling him they have no spaces, and the local solicitor telling him to leave town on the next train and he is not needed.

Yes, yes, very suspicious! We get the immediate feel of eeriness and a 'hidden secret'.

Spooky stuff.

Anyway so, Kipps ignores them and continues to the house the following day. Almost immediately after he walks through the front door of the old mansion, you begin to sense something is wrong. This feeling is probably encouraged by the haunting music and grey colours that seem to scream GHOST!!!!

After a few jumpy moments... the ones that make you think that something big is going to happen, Kipps begins to experience some ghostly happenings, such as noises and seeing things out of the corner of his eyes Once he even sees the Woman in Black herself, though at this point he knows nothing of her....

and then the story really begins...

... and that is where my general plot-overview ends. I really can't give anything away, you see ;)

To generally review the film, Daniel Radcliffe is absolutely brilliant. I was concerned about how young he is and looks... with Arther Kipps being a father and all, but if you think about it, in this Victorian era it was probably common to be a family man at such a young age, when old age was so uncommon. Nonetheless, his mannerisms really accentuate maturity and the way he acts with his on-screen son really makes you believe he is a father. I really did imagine I would be thinking "oh my god, it's Harry Potter" the whole time... but it didn't actually cross my mind once. To me, he was just Arthur Kipps.
Aside from Radcliffe's outstanding performance (in my opinion), I was so impressed with the general direction (James Watkins) and screenplay (Jane Goldman). The particular scene(s) in which Kipps stays in the house for an entire night, were exceptional. It wasn't until after the movie had finished that someone mentioned to me that, in this section of the film, there was about thirty minutes where there was no dialogue at all. I hadn't even noticed, and I think that really is a good sign, don't you think? To be so caught up in a story... it's what you really want out of a film.

Okay, so I know I keep giving movies good reviews... but I guess I have just seen some good movies lately. The Woman in Black is definitely one of the best films I have seen in a long time. It is a fantastic horror(ish) movie that also holds a great storyline, which I think is so hard to find.

A definite must-see.

Until we blog again,
x

Review: The Vow

STAR RATING: ****

In general, the films I tend to go for are 'the really good ones'. I like a good story line, with strong characters and that special something that makes me leave the cinema thinking 'I definitely just watched a good film'.

I have never been a fan of really, really cheesey films with a predictable storyline, but I do have a few exceptions, and one thing I can't resist is one of those soppy love stories. You know the ones like The Notebook, Dear John and Titanic. Mostly just Nicholas Sparks novels-turned-movies. They don't have a particularly deep plot, and are mostly just boy-meets-girl kind of stories, nothing to serious...

...but perhaps that's why I like them, and probably why I was desperate to see The Vow starring The Notebook's Rachel McAdams, and Dear John's Channing Tatum.

The film is about a married couple, Leo (Tatum) and Paige (McAdams) who are involved in a car accident which results in Paige's memory loss through which she fails to remember the last few years of her life, including the part of her life she shared with her husband.
With his wife not knowing who he is, Leo attempts to reconnect with his wife and make her fall in love with him all over again, at the same time trying to help her remember her life with him.

As far as the storyline goes, I didn't think it was that complex, if anything it was very simple. However, director Michael Sucsy really played on the emotions of the couple and their relationship rather than the cliché 'journey of the couple finally getting back to their old selves and falling in love all over again'.The story definitely played on the idea that one small event, or 'moments of impact' as narrated by Leo, really has the power to change your life completely and unexpectedly.

As much as I was expecting a completely cheesey Rom-Com type movie, and in places it almost reached this point, what I actually got was a movie that was very touching and thought-provoking.
Of course, we were always going to get the oh-so-predictable 'oops-you-walked-in-on-me-naked' type scenes, but I genuinely thought they added a light touch to a movie that is actually, quite depressing.

Channing Tatum, I thought, was fantastic. It wasn't completely different from that character he always seems to play (the tough guy with the cheesey grin and the kind heart), but he somehow managed to put so much more emotion into this role without overplaying it. It must be so difficult to play a guy who's wife has no idea who he is...

Tatum portrays Leo as, not a man suffering from unrequited love, but a man who honestly has no idea what to do with the situation that has been thrown at him. He loves his wife and seems to have such trouble understanding how isn't the same person she was, but also has no idea how to bring her back. You can really see how Leo is trying to stay calm and patient for his wife, but slowly losing hope for her, and it definitely made me feel for him.

Similarly, Rachel McAdams does an amazing job of playing wife Paige. It really can't be easy to play the role of a person whose accident has resulted in such unusual consequences. It would not have been good enough for her to just act like she didn't know her husband and have no connection with him what-so-ever. We have to take into account that, yes she has lost her memory, but she also has this man in her life that tells her that he's her husband and so she must be thinking 'well I must love him if I married him', and I really do think McAdams has taken this into account whilst playing Paige. You can see throughout most of the film that Paige doesn't just look at her husband and think 'who the hell are you?'... instead she sees a man that she is supposed to know and love, but doesn't know how to get that back. She is just as frustrated as Leo and doesn't want to hurt him, and I think that that is what makes her character more relatable in such a rare situation. (I used the word rare since it is noted in the end credits that the movie was based on true events).

OK so, I did go in to the movie expecting something very cheesey, and there was not as much cheesey as i had hoped for, but I wasn't dissatisfied. Without giving anything away, I was extremely please with how to story played out - in a way that i completely didn't expect.

If there a negative I could give this movie it would be that I would have liked a little bit less emphasis on Leo's emotions and a little more on Paige. I guess the story is partly told from Leo's point of view, but I would have like to have seen more of Paige on her own, or even Paige and Leo together, just the tow of them. Perhaps that's the romantic in me talking... who knows.

I wouldn't give this movie five stars, but only because compared to every other movie in the world, it doesn't exceed them all in terms of screenplay or originality, but I will give it four stars because the soppy-romantic in me really enjoyed it and I recommend it to anyone that likes that kind of movie :).


Until we blog again,
x

Review: The Descendants

Star Rating: ****

Directed by Alexander Payne, new movie The Descendants starring George Clooney tells the story of a father, husband and lawyer, Matt King (Clooney), who is forced to deal with the various consequences that arise due to his wife's unfortunate boating accident off Waikiki, where she now lies in hospital in a coma she is not expected to recover from.

From breaking the news to his two daughters, Alexandra (Shaileene Woodley), and Scottie (Amara Miller) to the discovery of his wife's affair before the accident and the search for her lover, this story is about how Matt has to step up to the mark as a family man and reliable father whilst learning to deal with all the emotions that have suddenly crashed into his life.

We learn early on that Matt is Hawaiian Royalty, owning a vast amount of land of which he inherited along with other members of the family in a trust, which they now intend to sell. This is also a common theme of the movie and also plays a large part in Matt's life at this time, as he alone is to make to final decision on who they should sell the area of land to. This is all added pressure onto Matt's life, along with the trouble-making of his two daughters (Scottie's "unusual" homework and bullying her peers, and Alexandra's rebellious teenage behaviour). We get the immediate feel that Matt's life is as complex as it can get, however, we also can tell that Matt is a strong character, and one we are probably going to like.

Clooney completely surprised me in this role. He stepped out of his comfort-zone and into an unlikely role which he plays fantastically. The fact, that he plays the role so low-key, really emphasises how normal this man's life is in terms of tragedy and stress (though we probably do not relate to his financial situation).

Woodley also deserves to be recognised for her outstanding portrayal of Alexandra, who puts her rebellious teenage mannerisms and attitude aside in order to help and support her father (along with her boyfriend Sid played by Nick Krause).

This story sounds simple and uneventful, but in reality it is fantastically portrayed tale of family, loyalty, friendship, trust and most importantly, acceptance. It doesn't need action, a huge twist or a fancy show to hide behind, just its story alone and the amazing actors that make it so touching and believable.

I went into this film expecting something mediocre, and came out feeling that I had definitely seen something that deserves to be recognised.

If I could, I would have told you more about the plot, but really, I just want you to go and see it for yourselves, without me giving away most of the story.

Until we blog again,
x

LOVE

I recently asked two of friends (who both have boyfriends, might I add) how they know they are "in love".

I did give a *CHEESEY QUESTION WARNING!!* beforehand, don't you worry.

But, in general, I was just curious.

I mean, both these girls argue constantly with their boyfriends that they so claim to "love" and I suppose I was just interested in what makes them know they love their boyfriends despite their arguments.

How do you know when you're in love? and how can you differentiate between lust and love?

The first of my friends replied "Well... you just know"

-.-

As  you can tell this was NOT the answer I was looking for...

My second friend said to me "I want to be with him all the time, and when I'm not with him I want to talk to him"

Okay, so this gave me a little bit more of an insight into what i'm looking at, but even so, this isn't to do with how you feel.. is it?

I came to the conclusion that it is indescribable, like my first friend said "you just know"..

But then that lead me to a further question, how do you know you've found 'The One'.

Surely the answer to this is.. you don't... and what does this term even mean?!
People think they have found that one special person nearly every time they begin dating them. At the beginning, everything is seen through rose-tinted glasses and you may as well be running towards each other in slow motion in a meadow.

Okay, some people eventually get married... but then again, some people get divorced. I bet you anything that when that person first started dating their ex-partner that they could have sworn they were "The One".

My first friend also said "you just know when you've found that one person you're going to be with for the rest of your life"... but really?

OF COURSE YOU DON'T

This brings me to my next utterly-miserable point.

LOVE AT FIRST SIGHT IS NOT REAL PEOPLE!!!

We are completely brainwashed my movies and television that encourages us to believe that you can meet eyes with someone and then automatically love them.
I'm not saying that linking eyes with someone isn't possible. It may lead to talking. or a date. maybe eventually marriage.... but the feeling you felt when you first saw that person wasn't love. It was lust.

which is just plain fancying the pants of someone. And if you meet eyes with someone on a night out, they are probably looking for a hook-up.

sorry... :/

If anyone has ever seen the film He's just not that into you, alothough slightly cheesey, it actually provides a perfect insight into dating in general (if you cut out the part at the end where boy gets girl blah blah blah).

I think that is all I have to complain about...

Until we blog again,
x

A Whole New World.

This evening, I sat down with my housemates to watch Disney's Aladdin. This movie was one of many that played a huge part in my childhood. Every girl wanted to be a Disney princess at some point. Seven-year-old me would have given anything to be Cinderella is a pumpkin carriage, or Belle held captive by a mysterious prince-turned-beast.

One thing all of these films had in common was that the girl always got the guy. After all, it would have been pretty boring if after everything, Belle thought to herself 'You know what... I kind of fancy the bad guy after all' or Jasmine thought 'I can't believe Aladdin lied to me. Better find someone with money'. those scenarios would have certainly been entertaining... and probably more realistic... but of course, Disney would have never let us be influenced by something that was not a fairytale ending.

I love Disney movies, but actually.. they give young children a pretty unrealistic image of what to expect in life.

You probably think I'm being over-dramatic (I probably am.. ) but c'mon... In real life you would never be able to automatically tie your hair up with a single ribbon and expect it to stay exactly the way you styled it all day - at least not without three cans of hairspray and a few bobby-pins. And on a more serious note, the majority of us would never be able to be carried away on a white horse into the sunset... or marry a prince (though I hear Harry is still available...).

OK so, I complain a lot... but really I love the majority of Disney movies. Even the unrealistic princess ones! They gave me imagination... and the idea that the majority of animals can talk.
Oh and not forgetting the talking furniture (Thanks Belle...) and of course talking Toys.

OK so now we can move on to that topic. That one film (or three films..) that is loved by children and adults of all ages. Yeah, you said it...


TOY STORY!!!

yes. I love it too.

OK so that is all I have to say :)

Until we blog again,
x

Review: The Hunger Games (Book)

Okay. I don't know about any of you, but one of my favourite things in the world is when I manage to find a book that I practically become addicted to and refuse to put down until I finish it.

For Christmas, one of my presents was 'The Hunger Games' trilogy by Suzanne Collins, and I have to say that these books are what I have been waiting for - and more.  I was completely captivated from start to finish and I will definitely not forget these for a long time.

To give you a general overview (with as few spoilers as possible), 'The Hunger Games' is set in the post-apocalyptic future in the country of Panem separated into 12 districts. As a punishment for a rebellion that occurred many years before the story takes place, each year one male and one female from each district between the ages of 12 and 18 are forced to compete in a nationally televised event called 'The Hunger Games' in which all 24 contestants must fight each other until death, as well as managing to survive and avoid any extra obstacles that the "Gamemakers" might throw at them in a huge arena that has been specially designed. There can only be one winner out of all 24 contestants and this story follows Katniss Everdeen, a girl from district 12 who has to compete in the games for her district.

There are many more things I could tell you about the storyline... but I really want you to read these books for yourself.

I felt completely tense and on the edge of my seat throughout these books and right now, I can't fault them. Collins wrote Katniss Everdeen's character in such a way that I felt for her throughout the whole thing. I almost shouted into the book a number of times because I was getting frustrated, sad, excited or angry about things that were happening, and in my opinion, any book that can make you feel something is a book worth reading.

When I was 13 or 14 I read Twilight (I know, I know what you're thinking). At the time, I was in awe of the books and completely drawn into them. To this date - I don't regret my like for those books because they were part of growing up for me, but little did I realise what a good read was.

The Hunger Games is a good read. buy it. read it. enjoy it.

P.s. sorry for my lack of blogging... I was enjoying Christmas... y'know.

Until we blog again,
x