“Rise of the Guardians” (ROTG) | Film Review

Plot/Synopsis
Ever wondered what the Boogeyman really looked like? What accent the Easter bunny has? How sandman’s powers worked? This film reveals all of the childhood wonders you had of these mythical creatures that parents told you about at night, and more. The Boogeyman has come back to seek havoc, scare the children and make them not believe that their precious guardians: Santa, the Tooth fairy, Sandman, Easter bunny and now the new edition of Jack Frost has joined but Jack doesn’t think he’s all “hard work and deadlines”, he’s more of “snowballs and fun times”. Now he has to save the children from Pitch’s nightmares. How will Jack find out why he’s suited to become a guardian when he doesn’t even know of his past? Will the guardians be ready to fight Pitch (the Boogeyman). Watch the film or find out in this review.

Director: Peter Ramsey
Art Department (27 credits)| Actor (4)| Assistant Director (2)
But he’s most known for his storyboards on: ‘Penguins of Madagascar’ (2014); ‘Shark Tale’ (2004); ‘Panic Room’ (2002); ‘How the Grinch stole Christmas’ (2000); ‘Fight Club’ (1999); ‘Godzilla’ (1998); ‘Men in Black (1997); ‘Independence Day’ (1996); ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child’ (1989). He’s only been assistant director twice which doesn’t make him very experienced but I still think he done an awesome job of ROTG.

The Pleasure of Viewing a Film
It’s pleasing to see a wonderful film, it can have quotes/characters that inspire you, like when you see how invisible Jack Frost is to the children but no matter what he still tries to be seen and in the end, he’s seen. I love the scene when Jack is finally seen by “the last light”, it never fails to make me smile when he realises Jamie can actually see him and then he jumps around the room like a child. There’s better visuals, clearer picture, better sound in the cinemas (they have all the equipment needed, they even go to turning the lights off so you can feel a part of the film and maybe even feel chills when it gets to the snowy scenes).

Word Of Mouth – Pre and Post-viewing experiences
Cinema experience: I went with my mum to go see this film, I know, pretty childish but it still felt weird to go alone, especially considering she would be dropping me off there in the first place, so why not?  Anyway, watching this film in the cinema for the first time was almost like a dream, except when I got to the middle of the film and parents with their too-easily-bored children started walking out. I wanted to scream “YOU’RE MISSING OUT” at them. I stayed quiet but I still gave them the evil death glare, which probably looked a little something like

this. I only had a little clue of what I was going to see from this film but I was definitely speechless when it started, close to questioning why it was written off as just a child’s film when a fifteen-year-old me loved it all the same. I hid my tears when the first sad scene came to screen, amazed that they were allowed to kill off a secondary character so easily. I had just witnessed one of the myths I was told as a child die before my very own eyes. I just couldn’t believe it, then I cried again as well as giving the film a standing ovation at the end. This only gave mum more reason to believe I was mad.

Home experience
The disapproval Santa and Bunny give in to Jack in this picture, it’s like Santa and Bunny are on the side of watching it in the cinema whilst Jack is like “see ya guys, I’m waiting for the DVD to watch in MY OWN HOME.” Of course I still smile at scenes watching it at home but I still haven’t cried again since the first time. At home, there was no one to walk out during the film, just me, myself and I who even had the chance to pause the film when needed so I could go grab more snacks.  I’m still able to relate and love the characters as dearly as I did when watching it in the cinema. At home, it’s a lot harder to get even near as immersed as you did at the cinema.

Genre – Animation, Adventure, Family
Now with animation, it is usually assumed to be for children but this film was trying to appeal to the parents too: that would be taking their children to go see the film so they wouldn’t just be sitting there, bored. Adventure usually comes along with animation as a duo to make the film exciting, possibly add why the magic was being used and where they would need a hero (Jack Frost) to save the day. Family sets the boundaries of how the film plays out and how the script is written. There can’t be any swearing, nudity, or just anything that wouldn’t be child-friendly and this film has definitely stuck to that.

Mise en scene
Lighting: bright lighting as a sign of hope, there’s still hope left in the world. Except when it goes to the scenes with Pitch, it gets darker like hope is lost.

Performance: (mentioned later on in celebrity profiles).

Setting: present, this helped to make it more believable as well as relatable for 2012’s generation.

Dialogue: you can tell that they’ve added the comedic aspect to this film to make the children laugh, even when Pitch is on screen and the guardians just don’t seem to have it cut out for them, there would be jokes to stop them being scared. The dialogue can appeal to both the children and parents but the main reason is for humour.

Props: weapons, Jack has a staff, Santa has these swords, Bunny has a boomerang, Sandman uses his own powers and none of these except the swords are menacing, something children would be afraid of. Santa has toys and Bunny has Easter eggs, for their own holidays.

Costumes: clothing that would suit the mythical creature. For example, the Easter bunny has no clothes, because he’s a bunny and it’s never been told where the Easter bunny was wearing clothes.

– Non-linear: for the moment Jack has a flashback of his past, the baby teeth that are collected hold the dearest memories of childhood that Jack had forgotten, so when baby tooth showed him these memories, a flashback occurred which made him realise why Manny (Man in the Moon) made him a guardian.
– Restricted narrative: it stays to Jack’s point of view and we follow his journey of becoming a guardian whilst also keeping the children believing.

– Open narrative: it’s still all about Jack and the adventures he’s faced with, sometimes he messes up like when he was distracted by Pitch’s diversion to follow the voice of his sister, whilst the nightmares destroyed all the Easter eggs with no time to make more for Easter the next day.

Target Audience
Family, children and their parents – this film appeals to the audience by it being child-friendly. It does make you question why it was just aimed at children: on bits where Jack is dealing with disbelief, being ignored by everyone which children can slightly relate to with school but earlier on, unless their parents are always busy, they don’t have a chance of understanding. With parents, the older audience there are jokes that only they would get, and when Jack has the identity crisis then finds himself from the memories of his past, only the older audience would understand this fully.

Fandom:
Soon after the film was released, many fanfictions of Jack and Tooth were made since they came so close to kissing in the film, and there was even fanfictions made on Jack and Bunny out of the rivalry they had where it would go from worst enemies to lovers. When the DVDs came out in 2013, over 3.2 million were sold worldwide which proved it to being “the highest box office to DVD conversion ratio among major releases” (Seeking Alpha). In 2014 when ‘Frozen’ came out, the fandom started comparing the animation graphics of Jack’s ice powers to Elsa’s and hate the fact that ‘Frozen’ did SO MUCH better than ROTG. I’ve read the whole rant with GIFs included that showed the differences in ice magic animation, they’ve compared it to say that ‘Frozen’ just looks like it was made in paint compared to the amazing ice graphics in ROTG.

How the film did:Budget: £99,294,550
Opening weekend: £16,279,831(USA)
Profit lost (Budget – Opening Weekend): £83,041,719
All media sales: £210,216,525
Opening weekend didn’t do so well, it didn’t earn near as much as they paid for the budget. The only way I found out about this film coming out was from seeing the one or two trailers on YouTube. As mentioned with the Social Media, they could’ve done much more. It’s just disappointing to see how much money was put into this film, and only after the DVDs came out did they get more than double the amount back. Hence why so many of the fans were glum to hear that there’s almost no chance for a sequel; even when they need to carry on the stories that this film was based from.

Preferred Readings
DreamWorks Animation love to do these, I’ve always noticed that they love making sure each character has something to do when in shot, try spotting it out the next time you see characters in the background of a DreamWorks film.

– Sandy (Sandman) – the producers have said that Sandy never speaks throughout the whole film, due to an old belief that if he talked, he could wake up a child so they made sure to keep Sandman to only using body expression and hand signals, never saying a word.

– There’s this theory that Jamie isn’t the last believer of the guardians, like he’s told to be at the end. There’s still his little sister, Sophie. It’s said that the lights on the globe actually represent a house that still contains believer(s) of the guardians. This is all due to the scene where you can see Jack carrying Sophie to bed, he wouldn’t be able to carry her if Sophie didn’t believe in him. He would be invisible. It could’ve also been because she was asleep (and the dreaming counted as believing for a moment), or the animators just wanting this cute scene but it’s a cool thought for the audience to notice these little fragments.

– Except from the Guardians and Pitch, none of the adults’ faces are clearly seen. Perhaps to emphasise that they need children to believe in the guardians, they need to save the children from Pitch and his nightmares, the children help out the guardians, so you can see it’s based around the children. Considering, adults are much harder to convince that children’s beliefs are real.

– This is Jack Frost’s sister, (the obvious observation since Jack says “I have a sister” when remembering her but you start to see more when you watch the film more times). Mary Overland Frost that was used to portray William Joyce’s daughter, Mary Katherine Joyce, just before the film starts, it is dedicated in her memory, she died from a brain tumour. It is said that Jack and Mary’s relationship is used to correspond the relationship to William’s children. Jack’s full name is Jackson Overland Frost whereas William’s son is named Jackson Edward Joyce.

Social Media
This is where DreamWorks failed in advertising this film, you can’t even tell that the one on Twitter is the real one. Facebook was easy to find, but what doesn’t have a Facebook page? They just used DreamWorks’ normal YouTube for trailers when they could’ve made its own channel with bonus like behind-the-scenes; interviews; TV spots and film reels.

Representation
The film was originally based from the children’s book series, ‘The Guardians of the Children’, written and illustrated by William Joyce. His other works include ‘George Shrinks’ (remade to a Canadian TV show by PBS); ‘Santa Calls’; ‘A Day With Wilbur Robinson’ (remade into a film, ‘Meet the Robinsons’ by Disney). Joyce has even helped to make films like ‘Toy Story’ and ‘Robots’. The film only follows Jack’s experience to becoming a guardian, a restricted narrative.

When you first see pictures of Jack Frost, you may assume that he is a strong, strangely good-looking (even though it’s animation) character, but when watching the film we see his bad side, how he struggled when Pitch made the children stop believing in the guardians which made them fade away as the beliefs decreased. Part of the agreement with becoming a guardian was that “if enough kids stop believing, everything your friends protect – wonder, hopes and dreams, it all goes away. And, little by little, so do they.” This was just one of the things that scared Jack into believing he wasn’t cut out to become a guardian. There’s always the argument that the books are always better, I agree since you can imagine everything and your mind is unlimited to the imagination, a book gives you the colours and instructions but you hold the paintbrush to imagine how the story’s told in your own mind. Whereas with films, it’s all there on a screen for you, for the lazy dreamers. With films, you can see how the director purposely asked the writer of the book how they wanted it all to look, for the readers to see if what they had in mind from reading the books would be any similar to what played on the screen. Would it be portrayed the exact same or would they have to miss out bits of the story to have a shorter viewing time for those who got bored easily?

Celebrity Profiles, all-star film – (which just makes it even more surprising how it didn’t do so greatly in Box Offices).

Chris Pine as Jack Frost
6 wins & 16 nominations.
Actor (42 credits)| Soundtrack (2)| Writer (1) | Producer (1)
Known for: ‘Star Trek’, ROTG even refers back to Pine’s past with ‘Star Trek’ on Baldwin’s (Santa’s) line “walk with me” You may also recognise his face from ‘Princess Diaries 2: Royal Engagement’. I found rumours that Leonardo DiCaprio was originally called out for this role but pulled out during preproduction, personally I prefer Pine’s performance of Jack, I love DiCaprio’s works but the character just felt more suited to Pine’s voice, he brought the animation to life. Sure DiCaprio would’ve brought a bigger audience and I probably would’ve loved the film anyway, but it just wouldn’t have the same feelings that Pine brought along. Animators have stated that Jack was 18 in the film, yet Chris was 32 at the time but I think he nailed the voice of just-gone-through-puberty.

Hugh Jackman as Bunny
Born in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia (his Australian accent is referred to in the film when Jack calls Bunny a Kangaroo “it’s the accent, isn’t it?”).
20 wins & 71 nominations.
Actor (53)| Soundtrack (16)| Producer (9)
Known for: ‘X-Men’; ‘Real Steel’; ‘Les Misérables’; ‘Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb’; ‘Pan’; ‘Prisoners’ and ‘Broadway 4D’. I love Jackman’s performance of Bunny, especially when the producers let him use his own Australian accent and then mention it in the script. I still find myself laughing at all his jokes when re-watching the film, you just never would’ve thought that no one could’ve played a better Easter kangaroo than Jackman.

Isla Fisher as Tooth
Actress (43)| Producer (no credits available) | Soundtrack (1).
4 wins & 10 nominations.
Known for: ‘Home and Away’(TV series, 1988); ‘Now You See Me’ (2013); ‘Rango’ (2011); ‘Wedding Crashes’ (2005); ‘The Great Gatsby’ (2013); ‘Horton Hears a Who’ (2008); ‘Scooby-Doo’ (2002); Oliver Twist (TV series, 1999). I knew Fisher from ‘Rango’ and I’ll admit at first when watching ROTG, I wasn’t so sure but that was mainly because she was making moves on Jack (the dreamy-but-he’s-animated guy). After I grew to terms with that, I grew to love her voice and see how well it suited the character of a tooth fairy, I may be repeating myself with how well the celebrity suited their character but it does seem that’s how well DreamWorks went to cast these celebrities.

Alec Baldwin as Santa/North
Actor (115)| Producer (15)| Soundtrack (4) and one Director Credit.
41 wins & 87 nominations.
Known for: ‘The Departed’ (2006); ‘Beetle Juice’ (1988); ’30 Rock’ (2006); ‘The Hunt for Red October’ (1990); ‘Mission Impossible – Rogue Nation’ (2015); ‘Madagascar 2, Escape to Africa’ (2008); ‘SpongeBob SquarePants movie (2004); Cats & Dogs (2001) Baldwin definitely succeeded with finally giving a voice to one of the well-known children’s tales, I always had this feeling when watching other Santas that you could hear the voice was put on, like they were only doing it to keep the brats happy although with Baldwin, you could actually hear the resemblance to him and the character of North (Santa).

Jude Law as Pitch
Actor (60), Soundtrack (4), Producer (2) and once a Director. 
16 Wins & 50 nominations. 
Known for: ‘Sherlock Holmes’ (2009); ‘Spy’ (2015); ‘Enemy at the Gates’ (2001); ‘Hugo’ (2011). Earlier, I found this article that claimed Pitch was the best villain DreamWorks had ever made, Law definitely brought chills to playing as Pitch. He may’ve even scared some of the children in the cinema. He was no Voldemort but he was definitely a thing of nightmares.

“Scott Pilgrim VS. The World” 2010 | Film Review

Known as one of the best comic adaptations to boys worldwide. An adaptation of the graphic comics that Bryan Lee O’Malley has written six volumes on, all put into one film which seems like a video game. Where the main character (Scott) collects coins, levels up whilst defeating bad guys, to impress the damsel. It’s the typical storyline where the guy goes after the girl; but there is a/are bad guy(s) who stop him from going after her. There is constantly someone or something that stops Scott (the good guy going after the girl) from being with Ramona (a modern damsel that’s trying to get away from her exes) which reminds me of the first few Super Mario video games (where Mario had to save Princess Peach from Bowser, multiple times). Although this time, the hero isn’t wearing a plumber’s uniform, and the girl he’s saving, isn’t a princess, but this isn’t the only difference to the typical storyline…

Target audience
Stereotypically, this film would be most suited for white, 13-16 years old teenage boys who love to read comic books and play video games on a daily basis; so they would’ve read/heard about Scott Pilgrim. The kind of people who go to events like comic-con, they would need the money to get tickets to these events, as well as money to buy merchandise for their favourite comical merchandise; which would class them in classes D-E. I don’t find this the best target audience, because the audience would be expected to have at least heard of the story before, but it’s impossible for everyone to have read those six volumes. However, this film does incorporate what they need from those books, and doesn’t confuse the viewers by going too fast pace, or leaving out details that helped the books make sense; of the world they were creating. It stops us from having to say “I haven’t read any of Bryan O’Malley’s work and I’ll need to read his comics on Scott Pilgrim to make sense of this bloody film.”

Mise-en-scene
There is a modern-day surroundings used which makes us believe that it’s just a normal film, but then they use traits of video games (“Mortal Kombat” being a main aspect) to step away from our normal world, the last thing we need is another “big brother”; where they try to make us appreciate that we don’t have cameras watching our every move. Instead, this is one of those films where we wish our world could be like that, without taking note of the fact that most of us wouldn’t be able to survive in those situations. Don’t we just love these kind of films? There’s a love sword which Scott gains by confessing his love, and there’s also a sword of self-respect when he claims to fight for himself. The sword of self-respect turns out to be more powerful which teaches us that self-respect comes before love, like the old saying “love yourself before another”, how cliché. I like that they’ve shown Scott breaking away from being the hero who only cares about his love, instead we get to see him be who he is; and that the world isn’t collapsing, just because his girl was stolen. Unlike the usual video games, they don’t wear a superhero costume; they wear normal, casual (t-shirt and jeans) clothes, it signifies that they are from this time period, modern day, and it’s not a film where they fail miserably at showing that the film is set in the past, because of a clothing item being out of place. Casual clothing is used to empathise that Scott isn’t a superhero, he is just like us, as well as the rest of the characters. We are no different to them. The film goes to show that a normal guy can save a girl, as well as having self-respect. I thought all the actors done a good job, even though Scott’s mumbling was annoying, there was still a reason behind why he mumbled so often in the film, which I suppose made it a little less annoying. This being any normal reason why we would mumble (low confidence and self-esteem). As Michael Cera plays Scott, I thought he done a good job as being a normal guy; but happen to have a life similar to the video games we play at home. As the film progresses, we see Scott getting closer and closer to the girl, whilst she starts to break away from ‘the pushing people away’ phase; this is how the film shows its romantic side, by focusing on them, and showing how their relationship grows. Sorry boys and girls, but this is going to be another film where there’s a perfect relationship and they both love each other to pieces. There’s this cool scene where a guy known as ‘the talent’ talks over the music, where we can still hear the music but we can also hear him talking, which is hard to do with rock music. You’ll have to see the film to see how they do this, but it’s used to represent how good the band is, and that they’re scared they won’t be able to beat them.



Technical CodesThankfully, this isn’t another “Transformers 3” where the film is too fast, with too many explosions and it makes no sense, whatsoever. In the love side of this film, it sets a mood of the day being fast paced whilst the nights are slow, because he can’t stop dreaming about the girl. When the camera follows Scott’s life (tracking shot), and it’s in a normal pace, it gives a sense of realism, as well with what the characters wear (casual style). Framing is used the way it should be, but also the way it’s expected to be used; the screen frames on the character that’s about to attack another character. Camera angles are used in the typical way where a low angle makes the character look powerful and a high angle is used for the opposite of this. Continuity editing is used, I mean don’t you just hate it when fights are dragged on for an entire episode, or there are just fights, one after another shown, you’ll be glad to know that this film doesn’t do that. The film succeeded to present the idea that Bryan O’Malley first had when he wrote Scott Pilgrim. The film has a way of contradicting itself (juxtaposition) by making a normal person fight bad guys. When Scott collects coins; there is a “ding” noise (like you would normally hear in video games) and this is how the film uses non-diegetic sound. The soundtrack (which features a cover of the Rolling Stones’ hit song, “Under my Thumb”) is mostly used for diegetic sound; when we can see the bands playing. The lighting is natural which helps to add a sense of realism to the film, instead of one of those shows where they brighten the shots to make the stars look glamorous, it looks normal, and we’re able to see if they have any small beauty spots. The damsel changes her hair colour as Scott starts to learn more about her personality.

Pink can symbolise physical weakness; which means that she felt weak about letting guys into her life and being hurt, over and over again. This can suggest to the audience that she’s just like any one of us; she hides her feelings and pushes people away without letting them know her true feelings. Blue can show trustworthy, alive, balance and faith. Which means she was starting to gain trust for Scott, she feels safe with him, and she’s starting to feel confident that this relationship won’t end badly… She has faith that Scott will defeat them. Green shows envy, jealousy and evil. This can symbolise that this is the moment where one of the evil guys started to mind-wash her. He felt jealous of her relationship with Scott and he wanted to separate them so he could have her for himself. Or she could be just one of those girls who loves to dye their hair all the time, and doesn’t do it for a certain reason, but just for a change.

Narrative

Just before a battle is about to begin, the shot frames on the bad guy, and then Scott; this is also used in video games. Using a linear narrative so it doesn’t give the audience a headache by going back and forth, and in case we get bored of the main character, the film uses multi-strand narrative. Just to annoy us, I’m afraid to say that this film has an open and closed ending in different perspectives. There could be a sequel to this film; as they use a “continue” countdown at the top of the screen. However, there is also the happy couple walking to a distant door which could be happy-ever-after. This film has a creative way of going back to the comics that helped this film become what it is, in the way it uses flashbacks; there are comic drawings of what happened used, whilst a girl explains what she remembers from her point of view. Leaving us to wonder whether Scott will be able to defeat them or if she’ll ever get away from them. Focusing on love by showing the relationship between Scott and his girl, and how it develops, how soppy. Don’t worry, this isn’t all that the film focuses on, it also focuses on revenge; Scott gets revenge on the bad guys by defeating them for taking his girl away from him. This suggests that the film’s genres are romance, comedy and action. These are the same genres that the comic books of Scott Pilgrim contain, which may make the audience want to read the comic books.

Genre
Action, Comedy and Romance. Action would make us assume that there has to be (a) good guy(s) and bad guys that go to battle with one another, so that they would be able to gain what was taken; in this case, it would be Scott gaining his girl back. In romance, we would expect to see A LOT of kissing but thankfully, the film doesn’t involve a lot of this. Otherwise the film rating (12A) would be higher. We would expect to see all sorts of jokes used within comedy; so that they’re able to make anyone with a funny bone laugh, this film doesn’t go by this stereotype, and instead it uses immature humour; to appeal to their main target audience (13-16 years old boys). I find it selfish of them to only aim towards the target audience, but it is hard to make a film that everyone will love.

Production values/stars
The budget for this film was $60,000,000. This tells us that it was done very professionally, it will mostly be shown in the United States and Canada because that’s where it was filmed. It will appeal to families with 12 or older sons/daughters. The soundtrack was written by: Nigel Godwich and produced by: Edgar Wright, Marc Platt and Nigel Godrich. Nigel is known for being a producer of “Radiohead”, whilst Edgar is known for “Shaun of the Dead” (2004), “Hot Fuzz” (2007), and more. Marc Platt is known for “Legally Blonde” (2001), “Wanted” (2008) and many more. The main character is Scott Pilgrim, who is played by Michael Cera who has also been in films, such as: “Juno” (2007), “Superbad” (2007), and more. I haven’t seen Michael in any previous films which makes it hard to make an assumption on him as an actor, but with his performance in this movie, I can assume that he’s not that different to Scott; underneath a famous actor, he is just like us, and hopefully he isn’t stuck up.

Representation
Scott is known as a guy who can be immature, and he mumbles around people he’s not confident about; people who make him feel like he’s out of their league and he shouldn’t even be talking to them, the tone of his voice on the first moments he spent around her is when this was shown, he talked quietly and mumbled. This is how most people would act when they try to talk to someone that’s out of their league, which makes it relatable. When I first saw pictures for this film, I assumed that it must include a geek (Scott), and when I saw pictures of Roxy (one of the bad guys) I knew that this film must have been created for men’s entertainment, or by men. After I saw the film, I found out that Scott isn’t a geek, and the film isn’t just what men would like to watch, but there’s much more to the plot. When Scott has his girl taken away from him, we are positioned to feel sorry for the poor guy. Overall, this film isn’t one of my favourites, but it was worth a watch to see why boys were so interested in this film. It’s not one of those films with un-deserved hype.

PewDiePie: Legend of the Brofist 2015 | Video game Review

(IF YOU HAVE NOT PLAYED THE WHOLE GAME THERE MAY BE SPOILERS YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!)

The most subscribed YouTube gamer has made a new app, PewDiePie: Legend of the Brofist; he has teamed up with Outerminds to create this game where you can play as Felix of course; Marzia; or play as one of his amazing friends who all have their own little companions who help out when they need an extra life. The aim of the game is to defeat barrels and then progress to defeat Barrel King.

Target audience

Mostly young, (7 years and older), basically anyone who would know about PewDiePie and have an phone which can access an app store with the game. Social classes C1-E. Self actualization on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. No specific gender or race.

Issues raised with the audience can include the pricing of the app (£3.99), where many complained that it should be free but with the amount of work and own money that went into produce this game they need to get something back out of it. There’s also the never-ending argument of “oh look at how much they earn just by uploading videos of themselves online” – this is a very problematic title they earn for being different and not having “normal jobs” like the rest of us. Their earnings are based from who watches an advert (which is only harder when quite a few of us would have ad blockers) to view their content as well as clicking on the advert, it also varies with the new system of YouTube Red, it’s not as easy as they make it sound.

Mise-en-scene & Technical codes
Throughout the game there was constantly the gaming music in the background being played, I liked this feature a lot it was like the sense of you never left the game. I also liked that each character had their own little friends to follow them through the levels and take a bullet (barrel/any other villain it may be) for them. One thing I did notice was when you start a level and you choose the difficulty it goes from easy then straight to hard and REAL HARD then possibly duck mode and pug mode-I still need to find a tutorial of how to get those modes without me trying every button or somehow winning a bro level for nothing. Anyway, everything was done up to high standard, Outerminds have really outdone themselves with making this game. Even though it’s particularly over the time this game came out I still find myself going back to it trying to complete levels on bro mode. No one can tell me it’s no longer Halloween, I’m keeping them in Halloween costumes until the end of time- or if it somehow turns into flappy bird and the creator deletes the game- which is very unlikely but who knows? I can only hope there are extra parts for Christmas being added too.

If you try and do levels more than once you always notice something you didn’t see the last, you can really tell Outerminds worked hard on this game for bros to enjoy Felix (or his friends) in a new platform, out of YouTube, on your phone. There are many, and I mean MANY ducks whether obvious or hidden on this game to mix with Felix’s YouTube identity of a duck posing as a human. (Only bros would understand this reference).

Narrative
The voices were really great quality almost as if, if you closed your eyes you could imagine the characters in your room, you could hear them clearly and there was even the second option of subtitles. You follow Felix’s story of defeating the barrels whether that’s playing as the star himself or his friends, following them on this journey where it builds up to bosses and then there’s the ultra boss to finish with. The flow of the storyline really works; you get so hooked on the story that if there were energy you needed for each level you would buy the heck (pardon my language) outta that just to find out what happens next. What friend will you find next? How more unlikely is going to get that I won’t complete a level on Bro mode?

Overall opinion, I really love the concept of the game, I love that you don’t HAVE to play as the duck- I mean Felix for every level or certain ones and the choice really is up to you, whether to play all all as easy mode or harder, what path to choose, to save up coins or to spend them all straight away, this list is endless but I will summarise this with: is this game worth price? I would say (drum roll) yes, I mean we are already able to watch almost (not including YouTube Red) all of Felix’ (and others) content FOR FREE on YouTube which they use all their own time to film, edit and upload for us. Trust me it’s not as easy as it sounds, especially when it’s daily, yes that means a video or two or more are uploaded on THE SAME DAY. There are some which even upload up to ten a day so these people really do work hard for what little praise and money in return they actually receive back. Felix is asking for £4 on this one app which could honestly be more with what it provides but to me, this is cheap for what the game offers. I mean instead of wasting that fiver on a magazine you probably will only read once why not spend it on a game you’ll spend the rest of your life trying to complete in all modes of each level.

These people have been making content FOR US to keep US entertained, happy, smiling and laughing, they succeed in all this and the one moment Felix asks for £4 FOR EXTRA WORK HE HAS DONE FOR US, he received people questioning why isn’t it free? This, my friends, is why it wasn’t free. It was extra work alongside what he and many others already do with their content. They didn’t even have to do in the first place and he could’ve easily stuck to YouTube but he made the effort to go out of his way to make this game for us, for me he has succeeded. I can’t force you to buy the game but do take into consideration that this was something Felix and Outerminds went out of their ways to create.

Stars of this game, the first have to be the makers otherwise there wouldn’t be a game, or there would be a crap one without them, all characters playing as themselves (almost longest title in existence)
Outermind – http://www.outerminds.com/
Felix (duck- Pewdiepie) – https://www.youtube.com/user/PewDiePie 
Marzia (Cutiepiemarzia) –https://www.youtube.com/user/CutiePieMarziaMark (Markiplier) – https://www.youtube.com/user/markiplierGAME
Ken (Cinnamontoastken) – www.youtube.com/user/CinnamonToastKen
Jack (Sean / Jacksepticeye) – https://www.youtube.com/user/jacksepticeye
Cry (Cryaotic) – https://www.youtube.com/user/ChaoticMonki
There are many more which are featured in the credits of this game which would be a VERY LONG list but if you scream at me to add them here I will.

Download the game for £3.99
on itunes: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/pewdiepie-legend-brofist/id1028623510?mt=8
Google play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.outerminds.pewdiepie&hl=en_GB
Have fun playing!

"Louise Live" {03/09/16} Review [some spoilers!]

So this won't be organised if that's what you were hoping for, soz {sorry}. The trains just weren't great on the day I went so I was late by like 15 mins because of part closures. Great timing.

Was it worth the money?
Of course I'm going to say yes but I still wish there was more to it with merchandise wise {it was just a poster and a tote bag, where were the books?} and that we didn't have to queue just to say hi. I just remember seeing clips of the last Louise Live where it was all done as a group and yes don't get me wrong it's nice for everyone to have their own time to say their things but then they go straight to the show after they're done, even though it was in a bar. It just seems like a bit of a missed opportunity to talk with us all and just hang out but I guess that is pretty difficult when quite a few people in one room.

Would you go again?
Hell yeah, I asked if she had caught up with OUAT {Once Upon A Time} and she said she hadn't but in the next show she'll call me out then for it, but idk {I don't know} when that is since it was the last show, for now I'm guessing. But even then there will be a few shows before mine comes up again so good luck in memory department when so many others.

Was it funny?
Yes, it was hilarious, I found myself genuinely laughing quite a few times throughout it, I loved the moments where you could tell she was paraphrasing so it wasn't just script-work. There was even this bit where the lights and a disco ball went off when she was in the middle of talking about bins and she acknowledged it with "UH, can we go back to the normal lights please? I was trying to tell a story," someone even shouted that they were being blinded by the disco-ball, I was too.

Anything you think could be improved with the show?
Maybe one thing extra actually, it was like you could tell the chairs were just pulled out the back. Which I've been to the place before and seen it without chairs so I know they probably were but they were just placed so close together, it was an obstacle course if you wanted to get out during intermission. I could feel mine moving by itself, like it just wasn't steady. Alongside the little merchandise and not what I expected the VIP room to be like when it was literally held in the bar area.

What would you rate the show?
9.8/10 {the .2 left being the two things that could've been better}. Ok I'll change it to 10 on Darcy's behalf, she's just so adorable, I wanted to squish her, I didn't. But I know now I'll be that grandmother who squeezes their grandchildren's' cheeks.

I think I've basically summed it all up so all in all, it was a lovely show. I think I even cry laughed a bit in the intermission, or my hay-fever was acting up again.
- Video version of this.

Halsey - BADLANDS | Concert Review, photographed by Rajalaxmi Watkinson

We (myself and Rajalaxmi Watkinson) started off the day by checking we had the right directions written down on our phones, all the right trains to get on and a vague idea of what way to go when we got there, thankfully Rajalaxmi remembered the way from the last time we went there and all the memories started flooding back from the last time we went to O2 Brixton Academy.

Once we got to the arena, after praising that Rajalaxmi had remembered the way; we had to go to the back of one of the longest queues we had ever seen, it just never ended, it went round and round, and around the building and then to other buildings. Giving us the heads up that the show is “SOLD OUT”, even though we already walked past that sign. We finally made it to the end, where we would wait until it was time for doors to open, and if the line already wasn’t long enough; people started queuing up behind us, reminding us just how big the arena is. Rachael got the tickets out of her bag for us to keep hold of, ready to be scanned when we did eventually get to the doors, there was still plenty of time for selfies to take for ‘Snapchat’ to send around.

Skipping to the moment the queue actually started moving, we got past the side of the building which had gates to only show the other side of the queue, still yet to go in themselves. There were these big posters of her on the walls with the labels “SOLD OUT”, there was always that feeling of relief, remembering we have our tickets already in our pockets. I almost forgot all about them having to check our bags, which meant I was a bit disorganised, trying to open up my bag as soon as I could, assuring the security guards that we just had big cases for our professional cameras. This was where I said my goodbyes to my water-bottle, and a guard made the comment “don’t take her sandwiches, that’s just cruel.”… and leaving me to dehydrate isn’t cruel? Overjoyed and excited for the night to begin, we had a quick look at the merch stand, then remembered how poor we are and decided we could easily find something on eBay later on, we ran to our seats on the higher balcony, and then the radio started playing; where we only recognised one song which happened to be by ‘twenty øne piløts’ which we sang and danced along to, still awaiting the concert to begin. 

We won’t mention names of the special guests, considering they-well.-to put it blunt, they were awful. The base was fine, but we couldn’t hear a word of any of the songs, there were these bright, blinding lights. The two bands played about six songs each, which we just about survived through, with little help from Rachael’s earplugs (playing ‘Panic! At the Disco’ and ‘Bethan Leadley’ / MusicalBethan on YouTube). We had that small moment of thinking Halsey was next, considering the whole arena had blacked out, which usually means the next act is up but it was just the second band. Soon enough, after making sure not too much time had passed, it was definitely running later than what it had said on the ticket; this time, we knew Halsey was next. Well, thanks to the small hint when the people checking the instruments and lighting had shown the logos of the two bands that had just been up and then Halsey’s on the screen. We waited a little more, and then we recognised the start of her music being played.

Trying to contain all our excitement, there she was, on stage; taking our breath away. We just couldn’t believe that the girl we had been listening to non-stop was in the same room as us and performing those songs we love, live. Witnessing another beauty to add to our list of god(esses) that make us question our sexualities. I just loved how she didn’t sing those songs the exact same way as on her album, otherwise what would be the point? She sang some notes higher and with just more emotion, it just had more atmosphere to remembering that this was happening live, and we were there to witness. It was like she was really bringing herself to the stage.
We did find ourselves wishing she had an intro sort of trailer to welcome us into the Badlands, or at least use the trailer for the album here but to ease the audience into it (not that they needed it) and give a better sign that she was up next, something we could scream in excitement at. But the space being played on the screens behind her when she was bringing herself to the stage was just so aesthetic. I mean look at it. Space is beautiful and we were just so glad it wasn't some pixelated low quality kind.

I love how she was just so genuine, she called us her friends that were too cool for her, if we knew her in real life. She was so comfortable with us, she even took her bra off at the start of ‘Castle’; hiding it up by twerking. I really couldn’t believe it, that there was this point where in-between the song break, she told us that she was taking off her bra. “I bet you all didn't notice I was taking my bra off at the start of the song”.

There were times she couldn’t keep herself away from the crowd, she would go back and forth to stand on the bars and she would reach out to some of us who were reaching back to her. There was even hand movements she was getting us to do with the song that looked silly but she still got us to move our hands up and down to the beat; like we were all dancing as good friends. As well as dancing, she pointed the microphone towards the crowd when she noticed us singing the words back in sync. Almost like karaoke where we would sing the chorus back to her. 

When it came to the break or sometimes in the middle of song, she would stop it all, just to say how much she appreciates us all, give a round of applause for the special acts beforehand and her band helping her out or try to get as close to the crowd as she could. She swore in almost every sentence when she wasn’t singing (including her song, ‘Strange Love’), yet it didn’t sound like she was actually swearing, more like talking to us as good friends and she didn’t mean for the swearing to be harmful, to not be taken seriously. “I love all your f**king faces”. Before we knew it, it came to the last song ‘Colors’ and there was confetti everywhere, she sang songs from her old EP “Room 93″ and every song from her album, “Badlands” except for ‘I walk the line’. Throughout all the songs, the crowd was just so enthusiastic to be singing every word with her, dancing along. We just didn’t want the night to end. Sadly, it had to, otherwise we would miss our train back, and the college days after that.
Now came the time to endure that after-concert-depression, until Friday (26th February), where another concert will add on to all the emotions Halsey left us with.

Written by Rachael Cook, photographed by Rajalaxmi Watkinson.You can find more photography of this concert here.

Are internet friends better than irl {in real life} friends? | Waffle/Rant

A better version of this blogpost in video form.

So many of us will know of the term "internet friends" either quite well to the point where you have many of your own that you have no idea how you got, or some would wish they had friends like that. Without trying to shove it in anyone's faces I can honestly say I do have great friends that happened to start out online. To the parents who still think everyone online is a paedophile, nahhhh just friends you haven't had the chance to meet just yet. Now for those of you who find yourself wishing to still find those friends, many of them will already be around your online persona, you both just need to be fair on the time you talk one-on-one and the friendships can take off. Or sometimes fall, some just weren't meant to be.

I'm not exactly the pinnacle {is that even the right spelling for it? idk [I don't know] I only just passed my English Language exam, cut me some slack} to be giving advice here. I was lucky enough to have internet from a young age but even then mum would still restrict me from certain websites like Twitter. Other social medias and elsewhere were completely fine but a big N O to Twitter. Bear in mind I had no idea about Tumblr back then, ah that probably would've been blocked too though. So I wasn't actually able to start with Twitter till March 2011, I was about 14 and I think I was only able to because I was on it when mum wasn't around but before then I guess I did have some {like 5, none I talk to now} on Facebook/YouTube where I made random friends to get the free gifts for games.

Anyway, to get to the actual point of this blogpost; it's to say that it's quite rare to have friends or anyone that you talk to day in, day out. There are people I still consider friends and we haven't talked for a week or longer but in a way we're still connected, neither of us have deleted the other on Facebook just yet, so we must want to stay in contact or we're just not really bothered on it. Either way, we can still be in each others lives and say "hello" randomly then catch-up. There have been people that followed, said hi and unfollowed then went the next, so if the person hasn't done that yet you're a shoe in.

Thing is though, even online where you have your own build to hide behind and not everyone will know you irl so you're free to be whoever and whatever, it can still take courage to start your own conversations with random people; whether this is in groupchats {gcs}or one-on-one. Honestly I find each as hard as each other, with gcs you have to talk to a number of people at the same time and be equal, you have to be as open as you are with some people in that gc to all the people in that gc, it's just a lot of work. Then there's talking one-on-one where it should be easier with just the two of you but really at first, we, are all strangers. Those good friends, you started out as strangers. Even with our own family members, yes we're related but that doesn't always mean we're close, we could still be strangers; like those old ancestors that say they remember you as a baby but you don't remember them, because who remembers things as a baby? So you see what I mean, even the bestest of friends start out as complete strangers and it can take a while or milliseconds to get to know each other; depending on how fast your personalities click together.

To find those kind of people faster, you have to either join gcs or search for your likes {within fandoms}, find people who like the same singer/band/youtuber/artist of any kind and go from there; find out what else you have in common. Most will like that person for the same reasons so you can bond easily then but each of you have to keep the conversations going, that's where it gets difficult to keep internet friends.

There's a literal distance that internet friends have that irl friends easily don't. Irl friends can easily go to each others houses, hug, have sleepovers, watch their favourite digital things with one screen, pat each other on the back when needed, no walls to travel, and even possibly see the side that isn't always seen online. Whereas for internet friends, they have to do all this with the barriers of actual distance, timezones, their own lives and just even their own irl friends. That is a hell of a lot of work to keep up, and it's no wonder there are those that break when it all becomes too much. There are even ones that would still make you feel like: "they're ignoring me, aren't they? They haven't replied in seconds like they always do so they must be ignoring me." Uh actually they have a life of their own, it could be many things. I guess even irl friends still have this too though, and it can still be same with jealousy; where a friend treats another friend better than you, or they're closer or just whatever.

Some people would go as far to say there is no such thing as internet friends and they can't be compared to irl friends, but really, the difference is: internet friends don't have to be there in person with them ALL the time, they've literally started out online so it can stay online. Irl, there HAS to be the get togethers sooner or later, according to them: "it's just not possible to catch-up through texts."
Sure,, don't mind us internet friends connecting in the way we just always have through messages. 

So you see why internet friends hug SO MUCH when they meet irl, compared to actual friends irl who see each other everyday; internet friends won't always have that lucky opportunity, so those ones that use it to their advantage in hugs are the ones worth keeping around. They shouldn't really be valued differently because either kind can help out when needed most, some just have it easier than others. Either can bounce back to say hi randomly. What really matters, are the people are there for you and you're there for them, you CAN get to know each other through messages. Hello, this is 2016 where videochat has been a thing for a while now. It's not impossible. Some will rank internet friends higher when they find them easier to interact with than people irl because they're just not near as social irl. It's just easy to judge the sort of person who ranks internet friends to irl friends on which they choose as best. Neither are best, one can be just more convenient than the other at times. So to sum up on this waffle, I love internet friends and irl friends, both have been there in times of need and both have their differences. If someone wants to have a day where they just praise internet friends then leave them be and vice versa. Neither have a pedestal but there are kinds of people that find one easier to be themselves with than the other at times, you just have to let them know it's alright and in time, it will be same.

Ah, this is a mess, I just wanted to an update blogpost with some links that match here, oh well.
The time I filmed visiting two internet friends:
Gays in Vienna