Classic Film Review - John Carpenter's 'The Thing'

I wanted to write about this film right from the moment I heard that a ‘prequel’ (I need confirmation if it is actually directly attached to this film or simply an adaptation) was being produced and if I'm honest I was a little horrified. If it is released in this country I shall certainly be watching it, although I hope to be as non-biased as possible. Well, I’ll try not to slate it too much.

Anyhoo, these are the basic details that you need to know if you have not seen ‘The Thing’. John Carpenter thought it would be better to re-adapt the 1951 movie ‘The Thing from Another World’ and I, for one, am very glad he did. I admit that I watched the 1951 movie long after Carpenter’s work, but it is nowhere near as chilling. The monster is for lack of a better description, an alien of Frankenstein’s creature that is twice as slow and has a knack for catching fire easily. With it being made in the 50s as well, you will no doubt be aware of the limited costume designs that were around too. However, there is a similar plot. The film is set in 1982 at a remote Antarctic research station and features a team of 12 researchers. What they’re actually researching I have no idea...ice? The team are visited by what appears to be a crazed couple of Norwegians who are chasing a Siberian Husky over the mountains in their helicopter and rifle. I could talk about how unbelievably crap they are with their rifle, but I’m not going to. If they’d have shot the dog we’d have a very short film and a complaint from PETA or some other animal cruelty organisation. Tragically however, the Norweigan’s meet their maker early, as a dropped hand grenade destroys the helicopter and the pilot. And the gunman? He is shot, by one of the Americans (friendly fire?) as he attempts to casually strolls over to the shoot the dog. The Americans take it upon themselves to look after the dog, and go and visit the Norwegian base, placed several miles away. They find the base, where the remaining Norwegians have committed suicide. I would like to add here, that the 80s were a prime time to design a horrific, frozen corpse. It looks just more convincing than today, where it’s easier to use a Windows package to do the job.

The crew find something else, they find a large hole in the ground near by and also find and empty ice shell in the base. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out whats happened there – and so we’ll move on.  Back at the base, the dog is a little restless and so is put into the kennels with the rest of the Huskies. Bad idea. The dog then changes into a bizarre creature with some canine features, but also some...king crab like legs and tentacles that make me itch each time I picture them. This creature then begins to attack the rest of the dogs, where the gang are alerted of the horror. I’ll put a little space here to give yourself a chance to prepare yourself for the picture, it’s pretty gruesome in a 80s way, so if you don't want to look...then don't. 

(some of these pictures are not loading - annoying)

I love these types of special effects. They have had alot more time and effort put into them, some may think that they look tacky or you can tell that its fake, but to me it just says alot more. There’s something there! There’s no blue screen and the crew aren’t gasping at nothing. They need to bring it back, really they do. After the crew dispose of the beast, they begin to find the real terror. They learn that the alien can imitate anything that it comes into contact with, and that essentially the creature can take over the entire crew within a matter of hours. For me, this is the true horror of the film. Although I love the special effects, I really do think that the best kind of horror you can get is from the horrors that we cope with in our everyday lives; things that we all experience. It’s easy to say that we are positive thinking and optimistic about life, but when it comes down to the nitty-gritty – our paranoia often gets the better of us. This film is steeped in paranoia! From the moment they realise that it could be anyone, the crew and anyone watching the film immediately doubt everything that they have learnt and the true instinct of humanity takes place.  Survival of the fittest with only the one thing that they think they can trust – themselves. 

This affects everyone concerned with the film – more importantly those who watch it. We immediately start to question everyone. Is it the star of the film? Is it the silent fella who no one has really heard or seen do anything yet? Is it the angry, possibly sexually frustrated one? Is it the cool hip one? We don't truly know.  Even when tests have been negative and we assume that we know who is human and who isn’t, we still have that thought in our head. Without spoiling too much, you never stop questioning if the Thing has really been destroyed or if it has won. 

John Carpenter’s ‘The Thing’ is a wonderful horror film. It builds suspense, there is a slight bit of humour within it, with plenty of original twists. The best part about this, as well as the creepy and pure Carpenter-esquecgi and a soundtrack which over embellishes the point that this film is suppose to be scary. The Prequel has got a lot to live up to. That’s all I have to say.

If you haven’t seen it before, please go out and rent/buy it. If you have seen it and agree/disagree then don't be shy and say something.

Thanks

GPK

Very sorry

Right, first of all – Apologies to those who have been waiting a while for one of these reviews. I’ve been working a lot lately and I have not had the time to pour my heart out to you all. So, hopefully over the summer holidays (i’m a teacher for those that don’t know) I shall be presenting a few thoughts of mine to you all about a few films that I have managed to get the chance to see (old film & new). So I would like to start this spring-snooze I have had with an 80s classic.

Neds

Neds - directed by Peter Mullan in 2010

For all those who are not from Scotland and have never seen Chewin' the Fat or Still Game, a Ned is an acronym of a Non-Educated Delinquent. What would they be called in English culture? Maybe....Chavs,Choras, Scallies, Twockers. Whatever you call the type, they’re generally the underclasses who have turned to anti-social behaviour, violent crime and other forms of social deviance. 

Neds is a part-biographical adaptation of the director, Peter Mullan’s, childhood. It stars Conor McCarron as the young boy ‘John McGill’, a boy who has just left primary school as one of its star pupils. John has been protected though out his upbringing by his family as they fear he will grow up to be just like his older brother, Benjamin McGill (who was expelled after he assaulted two teachers.)  John is excited about the prospects of Secondary school and has high ambitions, wanting to go to university and, above all, making his mother and his auntie proud of him. However, from the start of the film we see that John has his work cut out for him as the harsh reality hits him, and us, in the face when he is confronted by a Ned. Literally 3 minutes into the film we hear the soon to be immortal line ‘you’re gonna get your cunt kicked in’ (Kind of ‘raises the bar’, doesn't it?). 

This film could easily be tagged as a ‘coming of age’ film. In fact, it is really.  It shows John in the first year in Secondary school, being placed into the ‘stupid’ group as opposed to the ‘smart’ class that he craved to be in. John gets his wish after the winter holidays and is on his way to the similar glory that he attained whilst at Primary school. He is warned at the end of the year to be careful what he gets up to in the summer holidays by a ‘considerate’ teacher (incidentally, the teachers in this film are the pure cliche type that you would expect in any retrospective British film, however, they are hysterical!). This warning is not taken on however, and John becomes wrapped up in a new lifestyle that he has been avoiding for years. This leads John into a similar tale that has been heard before... Rises to his desired level of social fame, gets carried away, and hurts those around him. Does he get out of this downward spiral? I’ll let you lot come to that conclusion. 

Neds is what we have come to expect from a man such as Peter Mullins’ background. It is another one of the ‘Brit-Grit’ films of the post-new wave era. Mullins tries to tell it like it is, or was, and from that he does a good job. He keeps it as realistic as possible (although this could be argued in some of the later scenes of violence). He does this by using home-grown talent as opposed to actors and keeps the dialect as local as possible (I sometimes struggled with what was being said and I like to think I’m okay with taking in Glaswegian accents). However, there is the unfortunate sense that, this type of film has been done before. It is dramatic and at times it is shocking, you wonder if the situation has changed for the city’s youth, if things are better. You dread to think that there have been children who have witnessed such scenes of graphic violence.  However, there is still a feeling that it has been done before. However, maybe there are ulterior motives? Films of this nature often try to change what is happening or to get across the social dilemmas that people face. Perhaps this film is different, the level of humour within it shows to me that this film is just an example of the ordinary? Not a warning or a statement; simply showing that this is life for some.

If you wish to read more click below. However I do warn you – there are some spoilers so perhaps you should watch the film first.

Feedback

Hello all.

Thank you very much to all those who have given me feedback about what I have written so far. From the sounds of it, I'm doing alright - so I'm going to keep going. However, I thought I would let you know that I will be slightly changing my structure. Instead of a huge mesh of whats good about the film & what happens - I will now start off with a short review of the particular film. In which I will let you know if it's worth a watch or if it's rubbish. After this, I shall then give an in-depth analysis of what I found interesting about the film.  This way, if you want to read more about what I think about the film and if you agree/disagree - you can do.

Thanks very much

GPK

Black Swan Review/Analysis

Hello all,

This is my second review/analysis. For those of you that havent seen the film, a slight warning, I will be writing about instances that occur throughout thefilm so you may therefore only want to read this after you have seen it. If you want my final thought of the film I advise you skim to the last paragraph. However, if you’re not fussed – then neither am I.

Black Swan 2011 directed by Darren Aronofsky.

Having watched two of Aronofsky’s films before (Requiem for a Dream and Pi) I was feeling a ray of optimism that this film would feature some of the techniques that I had previously witnessed. For example, closed in camera angles, flashing lights mixed with bone-wrenchingly harrow music and a story line that adds a new, or forgotten, societal value that may have been perhaps been washed over by the demands of our forever changing cultural importance (I’m not saying other films don’t have this – simply that I like how Aronofsky uses this). After seeing the cast line-up (Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, Vincent Cassel, Winona Ryder and Barbara Hershey) I was thinking more and more that this could be an alluring broth of cinema.

Would you like a flash-in-the-pan synopsis for Black Swan? Here you go - A ballet dancer, Nina (Natalie Portman) wins the lead in "Swan Lake" as she is deemed perfect for the role of the delicate White Swan - Princess Odette. However, she is told to work on her role more of the Black Swan. She slowly loses her mind as she becomes more and more like the Black Swan, resulting in disastrous consequences.

After discussing with a few colleagues it became apparent that there was a divide between some people thinking that this film is worthy of all the credit that it receives and that this film could be another anti-climax. Black Swan is not particularly an original film idea. It is about an artist/athlete who is pressured (by herself and by her peers) to work, some may argue, further than their own capabilities. It is also an adaptation of the play Swan Lake. Here, certain characters play out different roles of the play within the film. Whereas some people would see this as a fresh and original idea. Others see it as merely repeating Swan Lake with a modern twist, I personally believe that this is where the film deserves some kudos. Swan Lake is a very clever but simple story. The play tells the story of a princess turned into a swan by an evil sorcerer's curse. The spell can only be broken if someone falls and expresses their love to the princess (there’s more to this but I could go on forever and I write enough as it is!). However, Ballet has been given a rough ride over the years. It is now seen as pretentious, arty-farty drivel that is island to the rest of society and those with an emotional imbalance can only appreciate it; and so with that people outside of this ‘high-brow’ culture can not see the beauty and horror and love that come with it.  So my argument here is that Aronofsky has been able to transmit to the world, to popular culture, a wonderful tale that does not get enough praise from anyone outside of the social elite.

Aronofsky has directed a true horror here. Not the type that involves a shadowy figure who preys on all who pretty much deserve what they get, but a horror that plays with your mind. He is able to play with your own perceptions of film genre and use this to his advantage; creating characters that you fall for instantly, are able to associate with/relate to, and therefore understand their wants and needs - Creating a true ‘enemy within’.  This is helped out with the acting cast themselves; you are sucked in to Portman’s position. Apart from her physical ability, her character begins so frail and introvert that you can perhaps sympathise with her. You see that she has grown into a woman who is constantly under pressure from her mother, constantly pressurized by the environment that she has grown up in. I wondered to myself, while watching this, can be reflected upon by Portman herself? Growing up in a bitchy, confrontational ‘dog eat dog’ world industry, did she ever feel the desire to break away? Well, this is academic, as she didn’t. Her acting is superb, but not astounding. As Nina, practicing the part of the White Swan, she is comforting and pleasing to watch. But I can’t help but feel that she doesn’t seem natural. It is into her trip into deliririum and schizophrenia that she shows more of an appeal. Her fears become your fears; she is fearful of Lilly’s (Mila Kunis) vanity and sexual prowess. She believes that Lilly is a part of the cutthroat clique that she seems to have avoided all these years.  Through this paranoia however, she transgresses into a main role of the film and the play, the enigmatic, fearless, sexually empowered Black Swan. At the same time, she is no longer a frigid, shy little girl – this is the part where she metamorphoses into a vibrant, passionate woman.  It is here, through Portman’s acting ability and Aronofsky’s shocking film work (in particular, the breaking of Portman’s toenail, her moulded feet and Ryder’s psychotic self-mutilation) you are filled with shock, dread and wonder  - which, therefore, sweeps you into the spell of Black Swan.

I think a sign of a good film is where you want to learn more. This is exactly what I did once I had watched Black Swan. I wanted to see if this was really the life of a Ballerina. Not so much Nina’s life, but is that really what they have to go through? That level of concentration, flexibility, and the sacrifices they have to carry out? For me it shed new light, it isn’t for the articulate, it isn’t for the weak...but for a strong. I know a lot of strong fellas, but can the pirouette like their lives depended on it? I doubt it. Are they able to resist the sweet side of life for their work? No chance. Is all this done for the artistic merits that the ballet can bring to them? Or is it more for adoration, fame and fortune?

There are some interesting points to make in Black Swan. For example, Winona Ryder’s character. I find her role a very enchanting one for a few reasons.  To those who may go to the cinema often, you could argue that Ryder is an actress who is ‘fading’ out of the major Hollywood film industry. Although she is still working in film, she has not really (in my opinion) been in a big film for over 10 years.  For me, Portman and Ryder’s on screen encounters could be related to real life – Portman is the new heroine of the screen, Ryder is the one fading out. I hope I am wrong here, as Ryder is truly brilliant and was perfect for this part. It’s such a small role but such an important one. Ryder’s character, Beth Macintyre, could be seen as though she is within a spell that is outside of the play. She is cursed. You could argue that when Nina takes on the main role, the curse has been moved on to her. This could be represented when Nina takes Beth’s make up. When she is caught up in her own paranoia – she attempts to visit Beth in hospital, but is this a visit? Or is this an opportunity for her to attempt to break the curse? By returning back Beth’s stolen goods. For me, this was Nina’s last chance of finding her original state of normality. Unfortunately, Beth does not allow this.

The film addresses a number of ideas that question reality. Within this, there are at times some scenes where you question is what we are seeing actually happening. Some are more apparent than others, such as the death of Lilly when she plays Nina’s alternate. Nina drags her body to a separate toilet area and then jams the bottom of the door with a towel in order to stop the blood. We later discover that Lilly is alive and well. The scene showing that the encounter was with Nina and her subconscious, her battle with herself to become the Black Swan. There are much earlier points in the film that suggest Nina’s insecurities become visible through her mother’s paintings. Are they really as horrid and as antagonising as we see them? Or are these the visions that Nina sees? Is she really thinking that this is how her mother thinks of her? However, this could be looked into almost anything! Does Nina actually visit Beth at the Hospital? Does she even Stab herself? We are believed to think this is the case, but the spell of Black Swan may have hypnotized us too.

The film is also about the idea of ‘perfection’, and what we are willing to do to find this social fabrication. In Nina’s case, we are led to believe that it is a matter far greater than anything she has encountered before, even her own life. That it unleashes a true self, a new identity. Perfection can enable you to turn to those you love and embrace them, as she does with Vincent Cassel’s character, Thomas.  I believe that Black Swan is a message to us all that we are unable to achieve pure perfection, or something relative to that ideal without a great consequence. That the term is constructed by those higher above us, in this case Thomas, who are able to unjustifyingly determine whether or not someone’s actions are ‘perfect’ (While on the subject of Cassel, his part in the film is good and he delivers it greatly, although I feel that there was something missing from his performance.  He was aggressive, passionate and beastly at times, but he lacked something to make him truly convincing. Maybe I need to watch ‘Guest House Paradiso’ and see if he had what he was looking for then??).

If you haven’t yet seen this film, please do. I am not one for jumping on bandwagon but when it comes to this film there are so many things to get out of it. It’s full of fear, love, hate, sex, passion, disgust, want and is very hypnotic and curious. It’s about a psychological journey, and features the metaphorical and physical representations of transgression. You’ll want to see if Portman’s character is able to succeed on her journey for affection and her quest of finding perfection.  My thoughts are only from a certain perspective and I may have missed some things that others may see, if you think I have or want to add something – feel free. It is truly a wonderful film, and I am sure that we will all be talking about it for months to come. I look forward to it already.

GPK

Classic film review No.1

Hello all.

So this is my first one. I thought I’d start with a ‘Classic’. Why? Why not? I thought I could cause a stir by trying to say this was a classic as I assume (I know I shouldn’t make assumptions) some of you would agree/disagree; and I also thought to myself that as it’s my first stab at this sort of thing, I shouldn’t dive in and claim that I am the new Mark Kermode. So, here you are…

Blue Hawaii starring Elvis Presley – Directed by Norman Taurog in 1961. 

So, How do I start with this? Well, I suppose I should try to inform those who have not yet seen this film what it’s about. It is only fair, after all. However, as this is a review some…fifty years later – it’s fair to say that some thoughts of mine may be a little different than if I watched the movie back then. I’ll be sure to point these pieces out as I go along.

So the film stars everyone’s Rhythm and Blues stealing, sexhip-swinging, ‘Rock and Roller’, Elvis Presley. He plays ‘Chad Gates’ a popular local resident who has recently left the US Army, stationed in Europe. Chad is happy to be back home, he doesn’t have a care in the world it would seem. He has all the things that he left behind – his surfboard that I don’t think he uses to surf in this film, his beach boys (not the band, that’d just be silly) and his lovely girlfriend ‘Maile Duval’ who was played by Joan Blackman. Chad’s mother, Sarah Gates, wants Chad to work in the family business, which astonishingly happens to be the Great Southern Hawaiian Fruit Company…. so come on, what fruit is it? Eh? Eh? Pineapples! Yeah, that’s right. Got it in one. However, Chad doesn’t want such a colossal burden on those well-built shoulders of his. What does Chad want to do for a living? Working as a tour guide at Maile’s agency. Showing board housewives, octogenarians and flirty promiscuous jailbait that pineapples aren’t actually grown on trees…but on the ground. (Incidentally, I thought they grew on trees as well. Boy, was my face red!) This later results in Chad being in a pickle as Maile catches him with four teenage girls in his room…nothing happened, Relax! But Maile got the wrong end of the stick and so leaves him. Chad manages to win Maile back and get his life in to a productive, more approvable manner that pleases his family immensely. You know what I’m going to say here don’t you? Yes, he marries Maile and gets a more secure job…with the Great Southern Hawaiian Fruit Company.

From the opening scene I thought to myself that this film screamed ‘Glamour’ in a shrill Kenneth Williams-esque tone. It begins with Maile racing to the airport in a soft-top convertible, which is stopped  by the local police office for speeding. However, the officer recognises our speeding heroine, has a little chin-wag, doesn’t fine her or give any precaution for the traffic offence and then decides to take a quick half hour off duty in order to escort her to the airport, where she is greeted with a friendly native who offers her complimentary leis and pre-marital advice. At this point we see the arrival of Chad. With Maile’s cautious words of  ‘…he’s been gone for two years, what if he’s changed?’ (There are additional words from her wrinkly leis seller, but who cares what she says??) We see the aeroplane door open and –instantly- a uniformed Chad playing tonsil-hockey with one of the stewardesses. Now, I have a sneaking suspicion (no pun intended) that if any of my friends, or even myself, were to arrive on the scene necking the flight attendant we would probably get a mouthful of abuse, a slap across the face, or maybe even a swift knee connection towards maybe the groinal area. I think if this scenario were to unfold I would, at least, be looking a little worried. Not Chad though, he looks up, spots Maile and casually greets her as though he’d just got back from The Co-operative. What was he thinking? Well it seemed he trapped off with the generic stewardess in order to make Maile jealous. Genius. I’d never have the balls to do that. I’d never for once have thought ‘ooh, you know what? I’m going to have a quick smooch with this lady – That’ll get me in the good books’. Did it work? Well she didn’t get back in the car and drive off. Instead, they both drive off, in which the journey turns to the first musical number, where Chad sings a delightful love song of how he was ALMOST always being true to her. Now, do I advise people to try it today? Probably not. Picture the scene – a loved one has been stationed to a foreign land for two years, this is before Facebook by the way, you’re at home, not knowing if their ok, not knowing if they’re missing you…do they want to hear a song about how when they were away they were almost always true to faithful? Doesn’t require an answer really.

If you were to think of it in one way, you would argue that Chad was an absolute arsehole. He’s back home after two years, doesn’t go to see his family but instead heads off to the beach, gives his girlfriend a swimming costume, that slips off as soon as she goes swimming in it; immediately tells his beach chums of what antics he got up to abroad while she’s frantically searching for her bra (oh by the way, the local corgi finds the bra and ‘returns’ it to the gang, where one of his Chad’s friends thinks the bra is some kind of seaweed. Idiot). He finally decides to go home, after five days, where it comes clear that his parents (or more precisely his mother played by Angela Lansbury, his dad’s quite laid back – gets the idea that youth is cool so people better get use to it) is totally oblivious to his return…not very detective like of her, eh? * To be fair, I quite like Lansbury in this film, she has a bizarre ‘deep south’ American accent, acts overly highbrow and offers her boy who has been gone for two years some pineapple juice when she sees him. Bet he loved that. 

So why else would some have a bit of beef with Chad? Well, his folks set him up a ‘Welcome Home’ party, in which he arrives quite late and is there for literally about 3 minutes…two and a half minutes of that where he’s singing. He also sings an inappropriate love song to his girlfriend’s grandmother (the Elvis favourite ‘Can’t Help Falling In Love’). I wonder what Maile was thinking. He then goes on to flirt with anything with a pulse, regardless of age or sexuality or if his girlfriend is there or not!

However, this isn’t the point of the film, is it? (Besides, I have to defend Chad here. When the very annoying, very young girl comes on to him he firmly informs her ‘I don’t rob cradles’. Good work) He’s not supposed to come home, join his dad’s business and share the same repetitive monotonous anecdotes to his parent’s friends at the party. He’s not supposed to get married because it’s the norm. He’s telling the world as diplomatically as he can ‘Fuck you, I wont do what you tell me!’ years before that funk-rock band did. This film’s rebelling against what is expected of youth at the time. Resisting against the notion of getting a secure career in the agricultural industry as well as acquiring a spouse who appears to be loving and honest at first but then begins to slowly turn in to an ill tempered interfering old fart who hasn’t had a chance to get down ‘n’ dirty in years. It’s out with traditions and in with the hula dance. Urging its viewer to break free of the social restraints and to dance! He defends his clients, a bunch of young teenage girls, from the drunk and sleazy Mr Garvey – which results in a punch up where Chad takes on about four or five men without retaliation. Unfortunately he gets arrested but what does he do? Sings about it. Brilliant. Although he’s socially and culturally bizarre compared to the world today, he does have some qualities that would still be considered honourable. I didn’t see any rohypnol in this film at all. He’s always the gentleman, when stressed he’s still trying to help out those in trouble. He’s even the philosopher. When saving the annoying young blonde lady from drowning he tries to make her see that the world cares for her…it’s just a shame he does this by spanking her. What else is good about Chad? Well…everything! Don’t forget, he’s Elvis after all! And I 1961, Elvis could just about do anything. Examples? Well, in Blue Hawaii he stars as a character that doesn’t want to get married and doesn’t want to work in his dad’s family business. So what does he do? He manages to get a job at his dad’s business and gets married to girlfriend. Like I said, Elvis could do anything. Even pull out a contradiction and get away with it.

There are also a few things I need to mention in this film. If you were to watch it now, you would say that it isn’t very politically correct. For one, the Gates family have a ‘Houseboy’ who…let’s say, may be fitting an old stereotype. He appears to be of either Hawaiian/Asian descent and goes by the name of ‘Ping Pong’ with a very odd Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffany’s type of accent. Don’t let this put you off not seeing it, he’s well looked after and doesn’t seem to be mistreated in any way. Also, Chad tells a little fib when he presents a gift to Maile’s grandmother. He gives her a music box that plays what he says is ‘a European love song’. Now, UB40 have covered ‘Can’t Help Falling In Love’ but it’s not really European. Just thought I’d mention that just in case there was any confusion.

I think it would be criminal not to mention some of the one-liners that Chad comes out with. Some of them are just incredible! For example  “(wolf whistles) They didn’t build teachers like that when I was at school!” he says to his girlfriend immediately after meeting Abigail Prentice, a potential employer. Other one-liners include “I promise to get a little older every day”, ”You wanna know something – on you, wet is my favourite colour”. It’s not even Chad that delivers the goods, when spending a night in the cells an inmate perks up with “You boys sing beautiful, I hope you get life with me!” (Awe, thanks Mr Mugger/Murder/Peado!).

The film’s perfect for it’s audience. A new generation of people who, at the time, had access to disposable income and didn’t know what to do with it. An audience who were able to look up to the silver screen and form a sacred relationship with someone they had previously only heard on vinyl.  So what would they do? Make a great film about showing how people have fun. It’s something that you still kind of see today. There are still stars such as Eminem, Timberlake and Aguilera that have a stab at the odd film every now and then . However, it’s not the same. Maybe it’s a result of today’s technology and our cultural fascination with ‘the celebrity’ but there’s no mystery to today’s new stars. Not as much as there were with Mr Presley. Having said that, I can’t forget to mention that this is, after all, musical! It’s a musical that has given me the desire to find as many Elvis Presley films as possible to watch. Watching these films now gives an odd window of the past. How people would act, how people were expected to behave and how people would get in and out of romantic situations or hostile conditions. There’s a lost sort of charm to it. Although saying that, you can argue that this film is not supposed to be taken seriously. I don’t know about that though…

If you're one of these people that need a conclusion I'll say this - Blue Hawaii is a great film but for the wrong reasons. All hail the King. 

Thank you very much for taking the time to read my thoughts about this film. I remember at the beginning I had hundreds of things to say about it but now I’m not sure if I’ve covered it all or not. If you like what you’ve read let me know and I’ll spew out some more thoughts about some old or new films. Don’t tell me if it’s rubbish though. I like the  little bubble that I live in.

GPK

Hello all...

Just getting things started really. I shall be sharing, with those that are interested, my thoughts about future film releases and also some 'classic' films that have affected me over the years. If you agree, disagree, just like to comment then....super.