GRIMLY FIENDISH

:lol: :lol: Couldn't have put it better myself.....

Yeah, it was good stuff, but they just seemed to "forget" about the family... Now, I guess some would argue that it was so we could "join the dots" ourselves, but the danger is something like that can be so easily mis-interpreted as sloppy writing or editing.... The best scene in the film for me has to be the brilliant one-shot fight scene in the underground station with Eric Bana taking on multiple foes, a bit reminiscent of "Oldboy" too... That scene is just a work of art...

Coalishun maybe trying to get back at Wales for effectively rubbishing their HE plans.... ? The Labour-led Welsh Assembly haven't exactly been too happy with the fees rise.....

The Arthur in Merlin is young and fairly inexperienced too, he's not even the King yet, but the actor playing him is just so much better than JCB, age-wise there's only maybe about 5 years difference between JCB and Bradley James..... Another problem JCB has is his physical presence, there's no real defined muscle tone or any signs that the actor even did any combat training for the role... The actor who plays Arthur's brother, I can see as fighter and a warrior, but JCB, just doesn't come across as a warrior at all... During the sex scenes with Arthur and Guinevere, I frankly found it a bit difficult to tell who was who..... :lol: :lol: I wont deny he's a good looking lad, and I can see why the ladies and the gay audience would like him, but you need a bit more than looks for a role like Arthur, IMO... I liked this show however for all that, but still think that John Boorman's "Excalibur" is the daddy when it comes to Arthurian adaptations....

You and James P are actually both right in a way... Was just reading in Private Eye about this yesterday.. Budgetary constraints are problem, definitely (there were serious problems in getting the Neil Gaiman episode into production for example because of costs...), but there have also been schedule over-runs, and you have to say that THOSE are likely the fault of the production team, including Moffat.... I've argued this in the past, but I'll argue it again, it money is an issue, I think it's about time the producers of Dr Who swallowed a bit of pride and approached a cable company like HBO or AMC to do a co-production, they have the money and would do a good job given the fact that both networks consistently produce excellent quality and ground-breaking shows which are syndicated world-wide and have won multiple critics and viewers awards... As a fan, I want Dr Who to be the best it can possibly be, and frankly as a fan, I'm not happy with the way things appear to be heading with season splits and possibly not even having a full season in 2012....

Not understanding all the Jamie Campbell Bower Love at all... He was by far the show's weakest link, and, yes, I've seen the whole series so I can actually comment on this with some authority... His portrayal of Arthur was frankly pretty awful, I was far more impressed by the young lad who plays Arthur in "Merlin" tbh... You can actually buy him as Arthur, I was never convinced by JCB for a minute... Serious miscasting, either of the actors who played Gawain or Leontes would've been far better in the role... Surely it cant have been the intentions of the show's creators to have people rooting more for Morgan than for Arthur, but that's pretty much what I and a lot of reviewers on IMDb seem to have been doing.. Eva Green was fantastic and by far the show's biggest asset, an absolutely blinding portrayal of Morgan, Joseph Fiennes was excellent, Claire Forlani was also very good as Queen Igraine... JCB?? A boy pretending to play a man.... He would be okay in some girly teen drama or something like "Vampire Diaries", but the lead character in a full-blooded fantasy epic..?? Naaaahhh.... Just think of Edard Stark in Game of Thrones being played by, say, Robert Pattinson instead of Sean Bean, and you'll get an idea of just how wrong this bit of casting is...... I honestly dunno how a show can get it so right in terms of production, design, writing, direction and most of the other casting, but gets it so wrong when casting the lead character.... Mind you, it's still a far better attempt at re-telling the King Arthur legend than "Merlin" is....

Just finished watching this show the other day. Really surprised that AMC isn't doing a second series tbh, I thought it would be picked up because AMC seemed to me to be a network that focuses on delivering quality rather than worrying about actual ratings all that much... Mad Men, The Killing, Walking Dead, Rubicon are all incredibly high-quality shows... It was a damn good series, admittedly, it took time to get going and you had to be patient, but when things started coming together and a head of steam built up, it was almost like an unstoppable juggernaut... If it is indeed going to end, at least we can take a certain amount of pleasure in the incredibly ambiguous way the season ended.... "You Can Never Win", seems an even more poignant title to that final episode now.... -_-

So, basically you're just going by things you've read about the film rather than having actually seen it yourself....? Sorry, but I dont think really anyone can make a judgement call like that unless they've got a first-hand knowledge of the film... It's easy for the tabloids to exaggerate.. For example, if I had believed everything I read about Driller Killer, I would've expected to see a gory, ultra-violent horror film with a nasty killing every minute, instead of the dull, tedious, boring piece of crap I actually finally did see... Taking the first Human Centipede as a barometer here, it is an absolute snorefest tbh, and has more than the faint whiff of the absolutely ludicrous about it, with some seriously dodgy ham-fisted over-acting... Human Centipede 1 was released on DVD only in this country as far as I know, and quickly became forgotten about... Hyping the sequel up into something it's more than likely not is just going to lead to what is likely basically just a bad film (and I'm going by my knowledge of the first film here and admittedly making an assumption, but I reckon given the fact that it's the same writer/director doing it, it's a fairly safe assumption...) will give it a cult status it likely doesn't deserve... A lot of the 80s "Video Nasties" have cult status purely by virtue of the fact that they got banned, but a good 90-odd% of them are just utterly laughable and are really not good films at all, even by 70s and 80s standards... Banning films is a ridiculous and reductive thing to do IMO, especially in the internet age.... The whole "video nasties" scaremongering never really stopped anyone who wanted to obtain an illegal copy of these films, but now there's no need to even go scouring car-boot sales for second-gen copies or taking a trip to Amsterdam to pick up what you want......

Well, I dont get how anyone could find this trite, CGI-laden rubbish to be "glorious".. So, I guess that makes us even... :lol: Seriously, Jark, Watch Heavenly Creatures, watch this again, and then tell me that Lovely Bones comes even close to matching the quality of HC....

Precisely....

Yeah, I have to say, I dont like this tactic of "minimum turnout", it's totally bogus... If you were to apply a minimum turnout of 50% across the board, then very few elections would show valid results... I think a better idea would be to make voting in elections or referendums compulsory rather than do something like this...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jun/07...om-six-spoilers Human Centipede 2 has become the latest victim of the British Board of Film Classification. Basically, they've banned it.... But, my question is, what's the point...? We live in a digital age where we can download any film we like.. We also have literally millions of Internet markets out there - Amazon, Play.com, Ebay, etc, etc, etc, where you can buy just about anything you want legally... The BBFC may have had a purpose in the 1980s, when they pretty much had, and exercised, the power to ban and to cut just about anything they liked. But, then came the Internet, and lo and behold, the stuff that I wanted to see, but had been banned or in a form that was so mangled and cut-up that it wasn't really worth seeing, suddenly became available to me... In all it's wide-screen, 5.1 surround sound/DTS, uncut GLORY... Zombie Flesh Eaters, Cannibal Holocaust, The Beyond, Tenebre, The New York Ripper, Cannibal Ferox, Suspiria, and literally LOADS more.... And there wasn't a bloody thing the BBFC could realistically do about it... So, by all means BBFC, ban Human Centipede 2, all you'll really guarantee is people who would normally not really bother about a film like this, will actually likely have their interests piqued by your self-righteous, pointless moralising...... The BBFC's job should be to classify and to give guidance, but to restrict in this global internet market, is ultimately pointless, in my opinion.... At best, all that will be denied the director Tom Six is a cinema release, he wont be denied ANY future DVD revenue whatsoever, and the publicity he'll get from having a film of his banned, wont exactly hurt the "Bad Boy of Horror" image he is trying to cultivate......

A male version of Nikita...? Discuss....

This turned out to be a surprise tbh.... I ended up quite liking it. Glad they didn't kill off Percy though, that would just be wrong... The big question is will Alex become Alexandra....?

I really like it. Bloody good, complex, dark and moody stuff... I like the way it shifts focus from one character to another, so you kind of see where the "shadowline" of the title actually stretches.... It's all beginning to make sense, but I think I'm going to need to watch this one again on DVD from beginning to end all in one sitting (just make sure I have a free day to myself.... :lol: ) for it to really sink in...

Wouldn't call it a favourite show, but I thought the concept was a good one and really liked the way they ended the first series.. With this and Flashforward from the previous year, I seriously wonder about American audiences.. Seems to me all they want is endless CSI or Law and Order spin-offs or crappy "reality" shows.... I seem to remember that quite a lot of shows in the past didnt start out with particularly great ratings (eg Star Trek TNG and Babylon 5), but networks stuck by them and the fan-worship gathered momentum slowly at first, but then it went supernova later on...

I see Nothing But Cancellations has ditched The Event.... Tossers.... Not impressed with NBC at all... I honestly dont know why I bother watching new sci-fi/drama shows because it's obvious that I've got very little chance of seeing them carried to full term.....

Seven episodes into this, and have to say it's absolutely brilliant... Acting, writing, directing, action, all top-notch. And, unlike Camelot, it doesn't rely just on the ability of one exceptionally good actor or actress to carry the whole thing (jeez, that Eva Green sure must be stronger than she looks.... :lol:) because all the actors get an equal chance to shine.. Sean Bean and Peter Dinklage only get honourable mentions purely because they both continue to surprise me... Bean in particular, whom I've never really been a fan of, is really nailing his part...

Saw that big reveal coming a mile off tbh.... As soon as you saw the name "Melody Pond" it was like, AWWW, COME ON..... :lol: :lol: Not impressed in the slightest with splitting up the season, really lame of them, IMO, they've never felt the need to do that before.... By the time three months is up and we've had Torchwood, I reckon most of us will have forgotten about half the events in the first seven episodes....

Student numbers could be cut to cover spiralling cost of loans Ministers underestimated how many universities would charge £9,000 fees – and now face huge bill to fund student loans Source - The Guardian Tough quotas on student numbers may have to be introduced to avoid the creation of a spending black hole under plans to raise tuition fees at English universities to a maximum of £9,000, a powerful committee of MPs has warned. Ministers underestimated how many universities would charge the maximum fee and now face an annual bill to fund the interest-free student loans that is "several hundred million pounds" higher than anticipated, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) reports. The current balance of outstanding loans – £24bn – is expected to rise to £70bn by 2015-16, the report says. Margaret Hodge, the chair of the committee, said: "At present, more universities intend to charge higher fees than the department had expected. If the universities' plans to widen participation are approved by the Office for Fair Access, this will leave a substantial funding gap which will either require further cuts in higher education or further resources from the Treasury." Whitehall sources told the Guardian they would not know the true cost of the policy until students had turned up at freshers' week in 2012. Reducing student numbers below the current cap would prove deeply unpopular after several years of increasing demand and an annual row over the competition for university places. While some students will forgo loans and universities will subsidise some of the fees with bursaries, ministers will still have to consider other options "which might range from finding more money through to reducing places available", the PAC report says. Figures compiled by the Guardian reveal that as of Monday, 105 universities had declared the fee they will charge, with an average of £8,765. The government modelled its plans on an average fee of £7,500. The Office for Fair Access is vetting universities' fee plans. They will announce on 11 July which have been agreed. A Whitehall source said uncertainty over the costs was inevitable given the number of variables but insisted that they were confident that the figures they had used were the best projection. Whitehall sources indicated on Monday that students at the New College of the Humanities – a new private university being set up by high-profile academics including AC Grayling – would not be entitled to government-backed student loans because its £18,000-a-year fees break the £9,000 cap. The university's backers have said they expected students to be eligible for loans of up to £6,000 from next year in line with other private universities. They are also seeking commercial loans. The forthcoming white paper on higher education is expected to set boundaries of a "level playing field" between traditional institutions and new private providers. Only students at universities charging under the £9,000 cap are expected to be eligible for state-backed finance. Ministers are expected to pave the way for students educated privately to borrow up to £9,000. However, private universities charging fees above £6,000 are also expected to become subject to government requirements on widening access to students from poorer backgrounds. A growing number of universities are warning of uncertainty over the policy. Nicola Dandridge, chief executive of umbrella group for higher education, Universities UK, said: "While it is quite clear that changes are ahead, there is still a great deal of uncertainty as to the level of student demand and for which courses, and the extent to which students will take out student loans. The final cost of the new funding system to the government is therefore far from clear." But the uncertainty is compounded by predictions that applications could collapse when students are faced with higher fees, putting some less popular institutions in financial jeopardy. The PAC calls for clarification about what the government will do when universities are in danger. Meanwhile Oxford University is poised to take an unprecedented vote of no confidence in the higher education minister, David Willetts, on Tuesday in the most aggressive act of the university against a government since its dons vetoed an honorary degree for Margaret Thatcher. Oxford dons will vote on a resolution that says: "Congregation instructs council to communicate to government that the University of Oxford has no confidence in the policies of the minister for higher education." Cambridge, Goldsmiths and Warwick are to embark on similar exercises. There is fury in parts of the academic community about the hikes in fees – but also about funding cuts, particularly to the arts. Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union, called on every university to hold a vote of no confidence claiming that the plans were in "disarray". • This article was amended on 7th June 2011. It originally stated that the Oxford vote of no confidence in David Willetts was on Monday. It is in fact scheduled to take place on Tuesday. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seriously, is David Willetts just a complete plank...? He talks about having "two brains"... Really...? Frankly, I think that's a typo, because I'd be frankly surprised if he had two brain-CELLS firing at the same time.... What the hell did they think was going to happen once they slashed state funding to universities and then told them they could raise fees to £9k..? "oh, but it was only supposed to be a select few universities that would charge the top rate"..... Honestly, this is what these f**king morons actually thought, maybe not word for word, but this was the assumption that Clegg, Hughes, Willetts, Cameron, et al were working on, and, well, that turned out to be a right load of pony... Then Clegg has the brass nerve to criticise Universities for basically charging what he and his cronies actually said they could charge... You honestly couldn't make this up... Okay, maybe certain unis have a bit of brass nerve charging 8-9k, but that's neither here nor there, the door was opened by this government for them to do so, so it's a bit rich for them to then turn around and slag them off for doing exactly what was in the provisions of the bill that was passed in December... So now, we're in a right blooming pickle aren't we...? The outstanding cost of loans is set to almost triple in the next few years... So, what the hell has actually been gained from this exercise? Was slashing uni funding going to reduce the deficit..? Err, well, certainly not now if this deal with the outstanding loans is the case, the money to cover this has to come from somewhere... So, well done Cameron and Clegg, the bloody Laurel and Hardy of politics, another fine mess you've gotten us into.... Dicks....

Well, I mean, if the EU keeps on bullying and beating them over the head, then it'll just create a siege mentality and they wont deal with it... Difference between WW2 and the Balkans is, that WW2 was a very clear-cut, pretty unambiguous straight up war between good and evil... The Balkans is NOTHING of the sort like that... There's no black and white with The Balkans, only shades of grey, and I'm not even all that convinced one side was any "worse" than the other... With Nazi Germany/Italy/Japan vs Britain/USA/France/Russia/Poland, etc, it's obvious and clear-cut, and it was a war between nations, not a war between "tribes" (for want of a better phrase) as The Balkans was.... Tribal war doesn't tend to be all that clear-cut.. Northern Ireland is another example of this, where the lines are very blurry....

The question is though, does football really want or need such an elitist and corrupt organisation like FIFA to administer it..? I think FIFA needs to be, at the very least, seriously reformed, but preferably it should be completely dismantled and something better and more accountable replacing it.. FIFA needs to learn from the reforms the IOC made to its procedures, IMO....

To be fair, that wasn't Florida, that was the Republicans in Florida.... :lol:

Naaah, no one ever got into "moral panic" mode over what Waterman did, Frankie Goes To Hollywood on the other hand..... Absolute sh"t-storm, and they had three of the biggest selling singles of the 80s.... "Relax" and "Two Tribes" in particular sold by the tankerload... PWL never even came close to those levels of sales that Frankie's first three singles got....

Well, the Croatians are Catholics too, and they were hardly blameless either.. The only reason Tudjman escaped indictment for war-crimes was because of the fact that he died in 1999 a "free man", so he escaped justice, as have many other Croatian criminals apparently. Milosevic wasn't quite so fortunate to die in office, and died in prison during his trial instead...... Sorry, but I dont buy this "blame the Serbs more than anyone else" stuff... It's the same propaganda crap that the West and the EU have been peddling for years and have been using it as a stick to continually beat Serbia with, while letting the other guilty parties pretty much get away with it. The younger generation are now, quite justifiably, becoming sick of it all. They had nothing to do with it, and yet they're still expected to put up with the situation. It's wrong, simple as... We wouldn't expect younger generations of Germans to feel misplaced guilt for the Nazis, so why should young Serbs, who either weren't born or were too young to know what was going on, feel any guilt over Milosevic, they didn't vote for the b'astard.... There's also a lot to be suspicious of in the way that the ICTY has conducted their affairs, IMO... It seems to me that they're furthering the agenda of the US and UK rather than actually trying to get to the full truth....