How cute are these guys? Cuddly eh? Well no not really, they'd likely claw you to pieces, but that's hardly the point.
The fact is that in a few years the only way you'll see a giant panda is via archive footage online. Why? Because their natural habitat has virtually disappeared and it isn't coming back.
This habitat destruction is of course necessary for the betterment of humanity, who have a seemingly infinite 'right to life' involving boundless expansion of territory and an insatiable demand for resources. Why let a few cuddly bear things get in the way? Or anything else for that matter.
After all, we were created in God's own image and given custody of planet earth, to do with as we see fit. Everything has a right to life as long as it's human.
Selfish? Not at all. It says in this here compendium of ancient manuscripts that we're the important ones. OK we were 'given' a breaktakingly beautiful planet with literally millions of creatures to share it with -- an ideal opportunity to demonstrate humanity's compassion you might think -- but since we obviously have the greatest need, everything else is disposable, including the planet's resources.
Let's cut the crap here -- humanity is merely the dominant animal on this tiny planet -- nothing more than a first rate parasite leeching off it's immediate habitat. Sooner rather than later, fuel, habitable areas and food resources are going to run out -- climate change or no climate change. The result will be a phenomenal, irreversible decimation in human numbers, and the subsequent rise of another scavenger, most likely the rat.
Will the earth stop turning? Will there be some mystical rapture or second coming? Will anything other than the remenants of humanity give a damn?
'There's a ghost in me, wants to say I'm sorry, doesn't mean I'm sorry.'
It says it all yet says nothing. The video bleeds loneliness and isolation -- it features people together yet apart, animals together as collective prey, endless roads and overwhelming beautiful despair.
I do like a good rom-com -- '50 First Dates', 'Clueless', even 'Notting Hill' or 'Love Actually'. But unfortunately this isn't one.
A very slight tale of boy meets girl, boy falls in love with girl, girl marries someone else -- '500 Days of Summer' (the girl's name is Summer geddit?) has been hailed as a left-field box office smash and lauded by critics worldwide. It's 'Rotten Tomatoes' rating is a staggering 87%. I fell asleep. Three times.
Every romantic comedy stands or falls on it's male & female leads being believable and emphathetic. Unfortunately neither worked for me. Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is basically a rather sad whinge-fest whilst Summer (Zooey Deschanel) delivers a detached and unmemorable performance. Their relationship, for what there is of it, basically consists of a few oddball dates and some incredibly tame sex.
Laughs are few and far between and nothing really seems to work. I was left with the impression of the bare bones of a story crying out to be developed. The film also employs an annoying fast forward and rewind technique complete with unneccesary narration, just to pile on the annoyance.
For me though the real disappointment is Zooey Deschanel. Possessed of drop dead gorgeous eyes and a kooky manner of potentially Phoebe Boufet proportions, she should have been adorable. Instead we get a faxed-in personality-free performance leaving us at a loss as to why Tom should have any particular long-term interest at all. And what's with the wardrobe? Awful awful clothes dear.
Tom's two long-suffering friends / work colleagues are subjected to constant whining which they take with good grace instead of telling our hero to either get a life or a blow-up doll. The most sensible character is the little girl (Tom's sister?) who advises him not be such a pussy.
The sole remarkable moment is the explicit use of the f word in a 12A film -- something which would have guaranteed an 18 certificate just a few years ago.
Not great at all and even more disappointing as I'd been looking forward to this.