The Pros and Cons of slipping up

So I was trucking along very well with 18 days of no playing the machines.

While on holidays I slipped up, I have to admit deliberately, and spent time playing them. On the plus side, I won quite a bit.

On the minus side, today I did it again and lost quite a bit.

I am we'll and truly in front for the weekend but today's events have proven to me that I must return to banning myself from the machines.

It makes sense. I was going great for the almost three weeks and that proves to me that I can do it. I'm best to stick to the races when it comes to gambling.

I learnt a lesson that could have been a lot more costly.

Seventeen and counting

I'm almost up to three weeks now on the Challenge and all is going well.
I find it amazing and awesome that something as simple as a little 'challenge' has been enough to get me out of the habit that had been troubling me.
I don't pretend I have won the battle yet but after 17 days I'd have to say I'm getting on top.
I've been away a bit and am going away again shortly but after that I should get a bit more consistent with posting and resume the movie reviews.

One week down

So it has been seven days since I undertook the challenge to go 100 days without playing the machines.

So far so good.

It hasn't been easy but it also hasn't been super hard. Occasionally I'll consider it then i'll correct myself and think about better ways to use my money.

The 100 Day Challenge

It's time to get serious and beat this troubling habit I've developed when it comes to the poker machines.
How and why it started doesn't matter, it was pretty innocuous, but what does matter is that is has reached a stage where it could be a big problem if I continue down the path I seem to be headed.
So I came across the 100 Day Challenge - a goal to set and commit to not gambling on the machines for 100 days.
By then the habit should be broken and while I don't pretend it will be easy it's great to have a goal to work towards.
100 days is a long time and it isn't a long time - if you know what I mean.
It's important to me to be able to win the mental battle here because there are bigger battles up ahead.
Yes, I have a problem. This is the first step on the way to beating it.
Wish me luck.

Easier said than done

It seems that instigating change isn't so easy.
I failed badly at trying to curb the gambling issue that I was having and it cost me a bit more than I'd like to admit publicly. But, if there is a positive, it has forced me into a retreat and I've stopped all forms of gambling for the time being.
That should right that ship.
Other areas are now at the forefront, most alarmingly my battle with health related anxiety.
Even though I thought I'd learned how to deal with things it seems that I haven't. If anything I've reacted worse to some issues than ever before and it is a real concern.
There are other activities that I'm not sure are doing me any good, long term, either but I reckon they are replacements for 'real life' things that either I'm not ready for or am too scared to have a shot at.
Is that what it all comes down to - fear?

Oz The Great and Powerful

I'm not a fan of unnecessary sequels, so imagine how I feel about unnecessary prequels! Well, Oz The Great and Powerful is definitely an unnecessary predecessor to a timeless classic, The Wizard Of Oz.
Before I discuss the film, it's worth thinking about the merits of it first.
Consider this, Oz and all its characters exist only in the imagination of Dorothy Gale thanks to being knocked out during a tornado. Only then was she transported to this wonderful, colourful land.
So then, how can we have a prequel to a dream when Oz is only a figment of Dorothy's imagination. What they are asking you to do is buy that the Wizard was transported to Oz well before Dorothy was born by a similar tornado journey. Please.
That aside, we have Oscar Diggs (James Franco) who is a small time Kansas magician and con man. He's sent to Oz in a balloon trying to escape from carnival people who have caught up on his dallying with women.
When he arrives he is met by Theodora (Mila Kunis), a witch whose motives are unclear but who falls for the man she proclaims the wizard who was prophesied to arrive and save Oz.
Along the way to the Emerald City, Oz comes across Finley (Zach Braff) a monkey (who looks a lot more like the winged monkeys in the Wiazard of Oz than the actual bad monkeys in this one) who pledges himself to a life of servitude for being saved.
On arrival at the city we meet Evanora (Rachel Weisz), Theodora's sister, who quickly shows her evil side in sending Oz to kill the 'wicked witch' after promising all the riches of Oz to him when he takes the throne as Wizard.
This wicked witch is Glinda (Michelle Williams) who we all know to be the good witch of the north.
Anyway, there's also a china doll character that comes along for the ride in one of a few tie ins between Kansas and Oz similar to what you see in the original.
The first thing you notice about Oz is that its been given an overdose of CGI. It just looks far too over the top. Also, we don't see any ruby slippers (apparently due to a copyright issue) that the wicked witch of the east possess.
There's pretty much just one song and Oz cuts the munchkins off half way through, the makers obviously weren't looking for a musical, and as much as I like him James Franco might have been miscast.
The witches are excellent, Finley is great comic relief at times but overall it has all the hallmarks of an unnecessary prequel, particularly since it is not allowed to be linked to the original.
Probably because The Wizard Of Oz is such a great film it's hard to get into this overproduced, overly long and virtually soulless movie. Ironically, it's saved by the witches and that's largely why I went 6 out of 10.
Maybe they should have done a movie version of Wicked instead, I didn't need to know how an imaginary wizard, who couldn't have been in Oz in a world without Dorothy, made it to an imaginary land.
But maybe I overthought it...

Psychobabble

It's been a while since I last posted anything but that's largely from a desire to take a break and decide whether I want to keep doing this.
I've decided that I do.
In the past couple of months I've given a lot of thought to where I'm heading in life.
I know it's a big question to ask yourself, I don't know how many people consciously do it though I suspect many do.
Aside from the larger topics of work, happiness or contentment, relationships I've decided that I must place a larger emphasis on health, specifically, exercise and fitness.
I don't think I'm ever going to reach the stage where I'm considered 'buff, athletic or even toned' but so long as I feel comfortable (as opposed to uncomfortable at the moment) with my physical appearance then I'll be happy.
In many ways I am more comfortable with myself than I have ever been but what has crept up on me, and I have alluded to it now and then, is the fact that a bit of weight has crept on and I have reached a stage where it is noticeable and uncomfortable. (You know, your clothes don't fit quite as well etc).
For other health reasons, I have always feared losing weight. As silly as that may sound it is completely true.
I've paid little attention to the fact that I've put on weight in the past 12 months or so because it has never worried me, whereas losing it has.
(If you really want to know why feel free to ask but trust me it's a legitimate, if not completely logical, fear).
Now I must push past the psychobabble and actually drop some weight. And that, if you've ever had weight issues, is something that is not as easy as it sounds, despite the prevalence of weight loss shows and fad diets these days.
I should know, I've done it once before and it is as simple as this - move more, eat less.
While the philosophy is simple, the practice isn't because it involves changing habits that you have slipped into. It means making sure you go for a decent walk every day and being more conscious about the amounts of food you eat as well as what you eat.
I can't just go running to the gym because whenever I go there I tend to wind up injuring myself of overdoing it. So the plan at the moment is to make the lighter exercise a habit, a consistent part of life, again and start to feel the difference. Then I'll know it is time to start going to the gym again to build on it.
For my height, a weight of around 90-95kg would be considered pretty well in the healthy range. It will take a while to reach that I think - while I won't divulge my current weight here I'll say that I certainly don't need to lose 20kg to make that mark.
I actually must stay off the scales for a little while, and you shouldn't weigh yourself every day anyway.
I have made a start. I had a good walk on Saturday and Tuesday and today (Wednesday). I was out out of town on Sunday and Monday but I spent a good portion of that on my feet (though did attend a dinner and lunch so that probably cancels itself out).
Hopefully within a couple of months I'll start to see a difference. A few weeks would be a good encouragement but it is something that takes time. Wish me luck!

The Impossible

Based on the story of one family's battle to survive following the devastating Boxing Day tsunami of 2004, The Impossible is not an easy watch but definitely a worthwhile one.
Naomi Watts and Ewen McGregor are English couple Maria and Henry Bennett who head to Thailand for their Christmas holiday with their three sons Lucas (Tom Hollan), Simon and Thomas.
It all seems like a normal fun holiday until that fateful morning when the ocean swallowed up the resort and most of the inland area for miles and miles.
Maria and Lucas emerge from the wave and eventually manage to find each other and make it to safer ground. Maria suffers a badly cut leg in the process. They rescue a young boy, Daniel, and are saved by a group of locals who take them to the nearest hospital, believing the rest of the family had died.
I don't really need to go into the finer points of the story, they unfold in time.
I know Naomi Watts is nominated for an Oscar for her role and she is very good but it surprises me that Tom Holland, who plays young Lucas, didn't get some recognition. He's stunning and really is the heart of the story. The lessons he learns from the ordeal are so poignant and the main lesson is something we should all pay more attention to. I'll let you figure that one out for yourself but is should stand out.
It really is amazing how detailed the re-enactment of the tsunami is. I know technology continues to forge ahead but it almost looks like they really staged one.
As I have said, this isn't an easy film to watch. It is heartbreaking at times, shocking to watch given we know it really happened just over eight years ago, though you will find it strangely uplifting in hindsight.
Definitely a well made, well told film with a delicate topic given its reality.
An 8 out of 10.

Jack Reacher

Being a massive fan of the books I was always going to be very critical of the Jack Reacher movie.
The ninth book in the series, One Shot, is the book that has been adapted and while it may seem strange to start at book nine it's one of the books that always seemed like it would make a good film.
And it does.
First to the casting of Tom Cruise. I was against him as Reacher and I still am. I would have thought someone like Adam Baldwin would have made an ideal Reacher but we're stuck with Cruise.
To give him some credit, Cruise plays Reacher very well but he just simply isn't Reacher. He's not imposing enough and he doesn't have the presence that Reacher commands.
One Shot, or Jack Reacher as the movie is called, opens with five people being randomly slain by a sniper.
Very quickly James Barr (Joseph Sikora) is arrested in a seemingly open and shut case. Except that he won't admit to the crime and has one simple request - 'get Jack Reacher'.
As it happens, Reacher sees his arrest on television and sets straight off to find him. When he arrives, much to the relief of Barr's lawyer, he says he's not there to save him he's there to bury him.
If you've read One Shot you'll know they have left out two major characters from the movie and at least one of them, Rosemary Barr, I think was necessary to have in the film. She's the one that appeals to Helen Rodin (Rosamund Pike) to take on her brother's case when nobody else will and she is also crucial to uncovering the link between her brother and other major characters in the movie.
Without her it seems all a bit too disjointed as far as narrative goes.
I know movies and books are different and while Lee Child, who has a cameo in the movie, has said he writes the books and others can write the movies I think he should have insisted on Rosemary's inclusion.Having said all of this I do think this is an excellent adaptation of the book, it unfolded as I imagined when I was reading it and while the ending is a fair bit different it still didn't leave me unsatisfied.
Australian actor Jai Courtney is pretty good in his role as Charlie, the right hand man as it were to The Zec (Werner Herzog), the book/film's villain who is poorly explained in the movie.
If you're a fan of the Jack Reacher book series then you've probably already seen the movie and have an opinion on Tom Cruise - probably similar to mine. If you haven't read them, I'd recommend the books as they are easy reads and are never dull. Start with Killing Floor, the first book.
A comment on something I read in a newspaper review regarding the timing of the release of this film not long after the school shooting in America. Shame on the reviewer for connecting the tragic events there with the release of Jack Reacher.
As for the film, an 8 out of 10, and I hope they do more but Cruise will NEVER be Reacher.

Mariah Carey concert

It's been a long wait, almost 15 years, but Mariah Carey finally performed shows in Australia this week and I was fortunate enough to get in early to get a ticket.
I was never going to miss the opportunity to see my favourite singer in concert again.
I can't fault the performance, she absolutely nailed every one of the songs in the show, but it has to be said that a lot has changed in 15 years.
It seems that the shows are more about her than about those who paid to see her. There's a fair bit of fussing and vanity going on on-stage - there was quite a long segment with her meeting a six year old girl called Mariah plus three dress changes and an embarrassing bit where she was going to eat Vegemite on stage as well - and all that vanity certainly wasn't apparent last time she played in Australia.
I don't care what her demands or requirements are backstage, but when she's on the stage it's all about the people who have shelled out (and tickets weren't cheap) to see her and, if I wasn't such a huge fan, I'd almost say it wasn't value for money.
Having said that her performance of Hero was absolutely stunning and almost worth the price for that alone. (I'm aware of the contradiction there by the way).
When I went to the Roxette show last year they played for two solid hours with one small break before the encore where they belted out another three or four songs.
Mariah's show went for about 90 minutes and she would have been off stage for at least 15 of those, her encore consisted of one song. (In 1998 her encore was three songs).
The set list, from memory, went something like this - Can't Take That Away, Touch My Body, Shake It Off, My All, Emotions, Always Be My Baby, Can't Let Go/Love Takes Time (medley), I'll Be There, Obsessed, Don't Forget About Us, It's Like That, Close My Eyes, Hero, We Belong Together.
I would have thought she could have included songs like Anytime You Need A Friend, Vision Of Love, Through The Rain and even her version of I Want To Know What Love Is. But that's me being picky.
So what I'd say to Mariah Carey would be - have a little more humility.
Other than that, it was great to see her live again. There are few around with a voice like hers (she even hit the high notes in Emotions) and she should use it more instead of wasting time judging singers whose careers, if they have any, will peter out after a year when they aren't flavour of the month any more.

The 2012 Raymo Awards

It's that time again when we look back at the films of the previous year and 2012 was an interesting one with highlights scattered throughout the year.
All up I saw 40 movies at the cinema, on par with 2011, although only 11 managed a score of 8/10 or more but a total of 23 scored 7/10 or above. So it's been a reasonably good quality year.

Here's the top 5:

1. The Perks Of Being A Wallflower (10/10).
Setting a new standard is my first ever 10 and as it was pointed out to me 'if you can't fault it you have to give it a 10'. Charlie is a 'wallflower', a quiet, unassuming and somewhat closed off teen who begins freshman year in high school having recovered from the suicide of his best friend. He eventually strikes up a friendship with Patrick and Sam, two seniors who open Charlie's eyes to the world. It doesn't sound a 10 on the surface but it's a much deeper story than that, delicately told and is led by a stunning performance from Logan Lerman as Charlie. Couldn't fault it one bit and is easily the movie of the year.
2. The Iron Lady (9/10)
While overall not the most accessible movie given the flashback method, it is the absolute performance of the year by Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher that not only saves the film but makes it memorable. You have to pinch yourself at times to remember that it is actually Streep in the title role, she's that good. The movie tells the story of the rise of Thatcher in a male dominated political world and while it could have done a better job of making it engaging it was still outstanding and a worthy runner-up.
3. The Avengers (9/10)
Say what you like about Batman but Joss Whedon set a new standard for superhero movies when he, finally, joined Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, the Hulk, Hawkeye and Black Widow to form The Avengers. Proving a superhero movie can have action and intelligence, this was a great ride giving each character a significant role and not pushing one into the background. We knew Joss Whedon would do a great job - you just have to look at Buffy - and all I can say is bring on the sequel.
4. Shame (8.5/10)
Being about addiction, this is far from everyone's cup of tea but it is definitely a highlight from 2012. Brandon is a successful New York businessman whose life outside of work is dedicated to servicing his addiction for sex. He goes to great lengths, even shutting out his family, to satisfy himself. His world is turned upside down when his sister arrives unannounced (though we do hear her call him a number of times, he ignores it). Michael Fassbender is amazing in his role and while it is disturbing, with a shattering end scene, Shame is in many ways an important film.
5. The Hunger Games (8.5/10)
Somewhat of a surprise inclusion in the top five, the first of the trilogy by Suzanne Collins was thoroughly enjoyable and had me eager to read the books (sadly the second one isn't so great but let's hope the movie is better). Katniss and Peter are chosen to represent District 12 in the annual Hunger Games, a fight to the death of 24 teens with only one winner staged by the Capital as a way of keeping the peace following the downfall of America. Not knowing much about it helped, I guess, but it is a very well put together action, of sorts, film and certainly a better introduction to its series than Twilight was.

Honourable mentions: Argo (outstanding), Looper (intelligent sci-fi), The Intouchables, The Dark Knight Rises (good series finish, bad villain choice), Margin Call, Arbitrage and Ted.
Surprise of the year: Pitch Perfect. Wow, who would have thought a Glee-like musical could have been so much fun and so well written and performed. One of the more fun experiences at the movies in years. Runner-up Rock Of Ages - ditto.
Flop of the year: Killing Them Sotfly. Overhyped, disjointed, somewhat dull.

Other thoughts: James Bond is going downhill with Skyfall definitely not up to scratch and unnecessary remakes/adaptations were far too common (Spiderman, Total Recall and Snow White).

The Perks of Being A Wallflower

This is one of those films where, if you haven't read the book, it's probably best not to know too much. I'd seen the trailer a couple of times and though it looked interesting and, boy, was I in for something unexpected.
Without going overboard, without a doubt The Perks of Being A Wallflower is the movie of the year.
The basic plot sees a very reserved Charlie (Logan Lerman) about start freshman year of high school. He's been through a lot, most notably the death of his favourite aunt when he was younger and the suicide of his best friend.
He's determined to make friends this year but gets off to a slow start when he tells his Literature teacher (Paul Rudd) that if ''my English teacher is the only friend I make today it will be a truly depressing day'' (words to that effect, anyway).
He soon strikes up a friendship with Patrick (Ezra Miller) and Sam (Emma Watson), two seniors who quickly embrace the shy Charlie and introduce him to their world.
I won't go any further that that. It might sound plain but it there is certainly a lot more to the story than the early synopsis.
Firstly, the performance of Lerman has the 'wallflower' Charlie is almost Oscar nomination worthy I think. I hadn't heard of him before but he has to carry the movie and he does it with ease and charm. You can't help but love Charlie, he's sincere and unassuming (certainly to start), but you also have to be aware that with what he's been through comes quite a bit of baggage and watching him deal with it is both heartbreaking and uplifting.
Emma Watson, best known as Hermione from the Harry Potter films, surprised me a little. For an actress who will always be known for the HP films she's taken a bit of a risk with playing Sam and she's outstanding as well.
The third of the trio is Patrick, an openly gay teen who really takes Charlie under his wing after they meet while watching a football game. Patrick enthusiastically supports the football for reasons which become apparent a bit later on.
Why is Perks a great film?
I was absolutely entranced. I couldn't look away from the film, it may have been a little slow in parts but I didn't notice with Charlie's narration and the revealing of what he's been, and is going, through. It's funny, moving, a little sad, shocking and uplifting and I'll admit to welling up a little at the end.
As I thought about it afterwards I couldn't fault it. It held me for the entire 100 minutes or so and I went along for the ride wholeheartedly.
Definitely the best movie of 2012 for me and I gave it an unprecedented 10/10. Others may disagree but it's brilliant and I'd encourage you to see it for yourself - but I advise to watch the trailer, and if you think it might be for you then go for it. Now, I want to read the book!

Braces

I'm finally doing it. Some six or so years after first investigating it, and there were pretty decent circumstances as to why I didn't pursue it then, I'll be getting braces in a bit over a week.
It is necessary as well as desirable.
My teeth are something that I've never been happy with and I didn't have any trouble making the decision to go ahead when my dentist recommended I look into it again.
While I don't expect to come out of it with movie star perfect teeth the end result will be a big improvement on what I have currently.
It's not cheap but fortunately you don't have to pay it all upfront so that makes it much more affordable.
And while it isn't cheap it is definitely worth it. It's going to be interesting having them on and dealing with food and things, might feel like a teenager for a while!

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2

So it has finally come to an end - I'm going to assume if you're reading this you are somewhat interested in Twilight and have seen the movies or read the books.
In order to cash in on the fact there are only four books, Breaking Dawn was split in two - a la Harry Potter - and we have Breaking Dawn Part 2 .
The big flaw in the second half is the start....it's almost as though they filmed the whole thing at once then split it in two. There is very little joining of the two films, even a 'previously' bit might have helped.
We pick up the story as Bella (Kristen Stewart) wakes as a newborn vampire much to Edward's (Robert Pattinson) delight.
They have a daughter (I always hated Renesmee as a name) who Jacob (Taylor Lautner) has imprinted upon and is therefore obsessed with, somewhat creepily.
The first 20 minutes or so is spent with Bella revelling in her newfound strength, agility and poise and we watch her child grow quickly into a 10-ish year-old probably.
It is then that Irina (Maggie Grace) sees her and wrongly believes she is an immortal child and reports this to the Volturi who set out to destroy it, setting up a confrontation with the Cullens.
After you get through the slow patch at the start, which could have been helped so much by developing Bella's newborn character - she was very well restrained when you consider how newborns have been described through the series, there are some pretty funny and well done scenes, though nothing will top the baseball scene in the first movie.
When Jacob decides to show Charlie (Billy Burke) that he is a werewolf it's hilarious, and also the obligatory scene where he gets his shirt off.
The 'friends' of the Cullens that assemble to witness to the Volturi are very well imagined from what they were described as in the book.
There's a 'twist' that is talked about that deviates from the book but I'm not sure that it is such a big twist, more an extrapolation of what might have happened had it been written about in the book...you'll know when you see it/if you have seen it.
Overall I've enjoyed the Twilight series.
It's not high art or intellectual fiction but it is enjoyable, if a little on the soppy side.
I still don't think the casting was right in places (particularly Edward) but that's just my opinion. There is a nice touch at the end of Breaking Dawn Part 2 where they go through the entire cast from the five films, as well as use the book as way of ending the story.
Considering they did it fairly rushed when Twilight became a hit I think the series was well done - it is just a shame it had to be rushed because there are things in all five movies that could have been done so much better.
As far as this film goes, a 7.5 out of 10, and that'd be about true for the series as a whole.

Vices

We've all got them, those things that we know aren't good for us but we just can't help but fall under their spell.
At the moment I'm trying to offload one of my vices while at the same time trying to not let one I'm particularly enjoying be more than a little fun.
The vice I'm looking to lose is a bit of an unhelpful gambling habit that occasionally gets out of control. It's the type of gambling that you know you're not supposed to win at but for some reason it seems to be appealing.
I think you know the type I'm referring to.
Sometimes I wonder what part of the brain is overriding the common sense part that tells you that even if you do happen to have a win in the big picture you will lose.
I'd like to think I can overcome that. The feeling you get when you've lost is not pleasant, you feel like chasing the loss and you end up losing a lot more than you can, or should, afford. It's a different experience with the horses. There is less element of chance involved and I'd like to think my knowledge is better than the average person's.
So I am making an effort to overcome this vice.
The other one is at times a lot of fun and at other times I'm disappointed in myself. At the moment though I think the fun outweighs the disappointment so I'm happy to play a bit while it is fun.

Arbitrage

It's refreshing to see a character and story driven film for a change.
While not quite up to the excellent Margin Call from earlier in the year, Arbitrage is a very well put together drama vehicle for Richard Gere.
He plays Robert Miller, a financial whiz whose company is secretly losing value as it is crippled by debt and bad investment.
But that's underneath his perfect family man exterior.
When we meet Miller he's arriving late to his own birthday dinner at which he proclaims how wonderful his family is and how important they are.
Of course he rushes off to meet up with his mistress Julie (Laetitia Casta), a struggling French artist, and plans to run away with her.
Miller's seemingly perfect life begins to unravel when a tragic incident threatens to expose his secret life.
Gere is the centre of this film and he carries the responsibility like the seasoned pro he is. His character is not unlike the businessman we met in Pretty Woman all those years ago, though Miller is a lot more deceitful.
In an attempt to avoid being exposed Miller steps over anyone and everyone he purports to care about - his wife Ellen (Susan Sarandon), daughter and business associate Brooke (Brit Marling), Julie of course and a young man,  Jimmy (Nate Parker), who helps him out of respect for his father's association with Miller.
Then there is the NY policeman (Tim Roth) who thinks he can bring the rich high flyer down.
I could go deeper into the plot but that would spoil it, it's better not knowing what is coming. That said, there aren't any major twists.
As mentioned, it's great to watch something that doesn't rely on CGI, or vulgar humour, or comic book popularity and see a real story for a change.
Quite often the best movies are the ones that aren't hyped and that rely on the cast and the script to deliver the goods to the audience.
Arbitrage is one film that does deliver. I enjoyed it as well as being a little disturbed by the outcome. A 7.5 out of 10.

The Watch

The Watch is a great example of how previews can mislead you. I expected to be in for a rollicking good time but actually was given some laughs and the feeling that I had been cheated.
Just because you throw together a bunch of old action stars and come up with a hilarious send up of their genre (Expendables) doesn't mean you can put a few funny people in the same film and make it work.
Evan (Ben Stiller) runs the local Costco, the running club, the Spanish table and a host of other community events but when a beloved employee is murdered he decides to take it upon himself to find the killer and sets up Neighbourhood Watch as the police are rather insipid.
An eclectic group of interested parties turn up to the first meeting - Bob (Vince Vaughn) is a man's man looking for a bunch of guys to hang out with, Franklin (Jonah Hill) is a rather manic wannabe cop who likes the idea of a vigilante group and Jamarcus (Richard Ayoade) who is a British recent arrival in town who seeks illicit encounters with local Asian women.
It soon becomes apparent that the murder was done by an alien and we're thrown into another alien invasion plotline.
Some of it works but most of it doesn't. Stiller is Stiller, control freak not unlike his Meet The Parents character; Vaughn is his usual chatty, over the top self, Hill isn't bad and seems to enjoy playing a loose cannon. I was most disappointed by Ayoade, who I love in the IT Crowd. I just couldn't buy 'Moss' saying a lot of the things he said in this film and his comic timing went criminally unused.
I don't really need to go any further.
If you must see this then lower your expectations, it does have some pretty good moments but overall it really shouldn't be classed as a comedy because it's not really that funny. A 5 out of 10.

A is for....

Let me give you a bit of free advice.
If you're ever diagnosed with anxiety take it very seriously and learn how to manage it.
The past few days have been hellish, I've felt anxiety physically and it's not pleasant to deal with. It has a habit of creating a vicious circle which is tougher to get out of than you think.
I have a fair idea of what has been contributing to the bouts of anxiety and hopefully it can settle down. At the same time I need to manage it better as I thought, I guess, it wasn't an issue any more because I hadn't really felt it for quite some time.
Funny thing, I was watching a show on TV the other day and it had quite a prophetic line in it and one that we should all keep in mind, regardless of whether anxiety is an issue for you.
''If you're going through hell....keep going''.

Stagnation

Something really needs to change.
I've probably said this a number of times of late but never have I felt it so strongly.
I took a small step today by starting my gym program, and I definitely underestimated how hard it would be. Sure, I didn't think it would be easy - and anything that brings about physical change isn't going to be - but it still took me by surprise. Have to say it was very good, though.
I felt similarly to the time I went to a pilates class with a friend and pretty much thought I was going to die for about 15 minutes. It probably wasn't quite that bad - I didn't feel physically sick but I did know I had had a workout.
The plan is to go back on Thursday as other commitments will prevent me from going again tomorrow (and given how the body feels it is probably a good thing that I have a few days rest).
If I can lose between 3 and 5kg by the start of summer it will be a good achievement. And it will give me confidence that I'm doing things right outside the gym as well.
So that's a great step forward, albeit a relatively small one.
But still I feel that some areas of life need to be different. Part of it is in attitude, outlook and purpose.
I don't really know what I want, long term.
Hopefully I can begin to address this problem in the next few weeks, I'm in the process of doing some organisation in that area.
I do know that standing still is no way to move forward.
In some ways I probably don't have the guts to make the change that needs to be made. Certainly not yet, though it has been on my mind for quite some time.
I guess I hoped it would happen naturally. Alas, it hasn't.
That will be reassessed in the near future, it has to be, because I suspect that it is the area that is causing this stagnation.

Hope Springs

Let's face it, it's hard not to like anything that the wonderful Meryl Streep does these days.
In yet another example of how the trailer doesn't do the movie justice, Hope Springs sees Streep team up with Tommy Lee Jones for a drama about a couple whose marriage is dying. The trailer will have you believe it is a whimsical comedy (does have some funny moments, though).
Streep is Kay, a housewife stuck in Groundhog Day-style life with her husband Arnold (Jones) and she isn't happy. They hardly speak, the sleep in different rooms and they haven't been intimate for years.
She decides to try an intensive couples therapy, dragging a resisting Arnold to Hope Springs to meet with Dr Feld (Steve Carrell) in an effort to save their marriage.
Arnold thinks there's nothing to save, he doesn't see any problems and is rather grumpy and dismissive of the process. This is much to Kay's disappointment.
As Feld digs deeper into their relationship, or lack thereof lately, we find out what attracted them to each other when they were younger and how their marriage just started to fade at a time when it was supposed to be at its most fun.
I must admit there are some uncomfortable scenes here, but that depends on how you feel about people in their 60s attempting to have sex and performing acts of foreplay.
It's done fairly tastefully though, and quite tongue in cheek mostly.
Naturally, this is another vehicle for Streep. It's directed by David Frankel (The Devil Wears Prada) and Streep is engaging and touching as a woman desperate to restore the love and passion to her marriage. Tommy Lee Jones is his usual gruff self but you can also see through Arnold's eyes here - and there's a great metaphor about a client of his who he's had the same conversation with for 17 years. When you see it you'll know why it's poignant.
Hope Springs is a little misleading in a way, you think you're in for something fairly light-hearted - and there are funny moments - but it's actually quite sad and stark in the way it depicts a marriage that is dying. Does it get saved? Well, you'll have to see to find out.
Not exactly what I was expecting but Meryl is fantastic, Steve Carrell isn't bad either as the therapist for that matter. A 7 out of 10.