Going up in the world!

I wrote a letter into the games magazine, Gamesmaster and it's just popped up on their sister site, CVG! 

Take a look and tell me what you think!

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/383544/features/isnt-the-wii-u-pro-controller-a-cop-out-for-developers/

Is Social Media in Football A Bad Thing?

No longer does the average Premier League fan, or football supporter in general turn up to a match at three o’clock on a Saturday afternoon to watch their beloved side win, lose or draw and then forget about it until the following Saturday. Fans want to be kept in touch with what is happening with their club constantly, all day, and every day. It is simply part of the constitution of modern day football. Sky Sports have really been the catalysts in fuelling this culture now apparent in football, exemplified most greatly by Sky Sports News, which runs by the tag line ’24 hours a day, 7 days a week’.

The most recent exponent of this culture is Twitter. The main function of Twitter is that it is a medium in which the players can interact with their fans in a relatively safe environment. The problem is that it has become out of control. Very rarely does a day go by without hearing a negative Twitter news story and Twitter guidelines with the FA Code of Conduct highlights their concerns over it.

The problem with Twitter is that ultimately, it inhibits too many flaws. The first of these flaws is that it is too easy to Tweet. In the space of thirty seconds and four clicks on my phone, I can post a tweet. And this is dangerous when human emotion is involved. When ‘tweeting’, humans cannot be emotional. Ashley Cole found this to his detriment when he blasted the FA following their reasons for suspending John Terry. He later said he regretted his tweet which was sent in the heat of the moment.

The second problem with Twitter is that fans, and players, are too irresponsible with it. The reality is that unfortunately most tweets are negative rather than positive. If fans mention a player in their tweet, it is more often than not to criticise rather than praise their performance. For example, in this summer's Euro 2012 when England crashed out on penalties to Italy those 'idiots' were straight on Twitter racially abusing the players that missed – Ashley Cole and Ashley Young. Which really is disgusting behaviour. What makes them think that is okay behaviour? Would they do that if they saw them on the street? Of course not, but they see Twitter as a wall to hide behind. Another example would be what happened to Kyle Walker earlier this week. He revealed he had closed his Twitter account following the abuse he received from fans criticising his mistake which led to Chelsea’s fourth goal in their win on Saturday. The biggest problem with it is that there is a small minority of 'idiots' on Twitter who think because they're allowed to tweet people, they can tweet what they like.

I would be interested to see the amount of praise he has received for his previous impressive performances in comparison to the abuse he has received in the last 3 days. I would cynically suggest he hasn’t been praised all that much. Players too, are culprits of irresponsible tweeting. I think that sometimes they forget what their main purpose for Twitter should be. In their role as professional footballers, they should communicate with fans in a positive way.

Too often players live up to their stereotype of being thugs and idiots when they interact with fans who are clearly just mindless idiots. Arsenal’s Emmanuel Frimpong was guilty of this in July when he called a fan a term which is derogatory towards race and ethnic origin. Too often players use Twitter as a forum to criticise authority bodies or fellow professional footballers which they must know will land them in hot water. Rio Ferdinand was a culprit of this when he labelled Ashley Cole a “choc-ice” following the trial involving John Terry and Anton Ferdinand. Both players were fined by the FA for their comments, and to this extent there is an argument to suggest that Twitter is just a way of getting footballers into trouble.

The point about freedom of expression is an interesting one. This is because footballers believe that they should be entitled to it. And in many ways they should. The problem is that there is a great contradiction when considering freedom of expression. The contradiction lies between being able to express an opinion, and being responsible and accountable to your actions as a role model or a celebrity. Many footballers have millions of followers on Twitter and should know what they're saying will be seen by millions and should realise what they're saying it wrong.

This being said, crucially there is no way of eradicating Twitter. However, is there no way of harnessing the damage that Twitter appears to cause? Are there any solutions? Well perhaps. I believe that players and clubs should utilise their websites more. If players want to post an opinion, then why not post it through the club website? If it too controversial, then chief editors of the website can advise them against posting it. Clubs already have their own pages on Twitter. So again, an alternative suggestion is to start ‘trending’ and ‘mentioning’ their clubs more often on their tweets. I personally think Twitter should be banned by their managers because it only seems to get teams and the players into trouble.

Of course, there are exceptions to this and it is only the bad things that are seen in the press. In fact, the vast majority do use it how it's meant to be used - which is a way of interacting with their fans on their day to day involvements with their club. In my opinion, Manchester City’s Sergio Aguero is an example of how a top footballer should use Twitter. He picks up an injury at the start of the season, updates his followers weekly on his progress and thanks them for their support. It’s quite simple. In doing this, he effectively turns a negative news story into a positive one. Another example of when many footballers have used Twitter for good was the Fabrice Muamba situation. When Fabrice Muamba suffered his Cardiac Arrest against Spurs in the FA Cup last season.'Pray for Muamba' was constantly being tweeted from footballers and fans on Twitter and that must have gone someway in giving Fabrice the confidence to come back from such a tragic state of affairs.

The final thing to add is that more than likely, Twitter will not always be around. Technology, and especially social media, is an ever changing phenomenon. It will surely only be a matter of time until the next craze comes along and blows Twitter out of the water. 

How I think Arsenal will do this season

It's funny isn't it? The 0-0 draw against Stoke and everyone was saying that Arsenal were in real trouble. Now that they've beaten Liverpool, they're still unbeaten and haven't conceded a goal.

So, how do I think Arsenal with get on this season. Well, a lot better than most people. They have added to their squad terrifically with the signings of Podolski, Giroud and Cazorla. and their defence is looking incredibly strong, compared to recent Arsenal teams.

I think Cazorla is one of the best players to put on an Arsenal shirt in recent years. As soon as he's on the ball you know he's going to make something happen. He looks like a real replacement and a much better player than Nasri - which they didn't have last season.

If they can keep Diaby fit, they have a real player on their hands. He's strong, he's quick and he's good on the ball. He looks like a mixture between Patrick Vieira and Yaya Toure and is a player that Arsenal have really needed in their midfield for a long time. But like I say, keeping him fit is key and that is a lot easier said than done.

Steve Bould as new assistant manager is arguably the best thing to happen to Arsenal this season. It looks like he's really sorted out Arsenal's defence and they're working as a unit and are finally looking strong from set pieces. I think the clean sheets speak for them self.

Finally, I think the appointment of Thomas Vermaelen will really be the making of him. He leads the line well and leads by example.

So, what do I think is going to happen to Arsenal this season? 3rd and the FA Cup or Capital One Cup.

The Bourne Legacy Review

A Bourne film without Matt Damon is like a Man United side not being managed by Alex Ferguson or Queen without Freddie Mercury. Less successful. And that is the perfect phrase to describe The Bourne Legacy. Of course, Queen with Paul Rodgers weren't bad and neither is this installment into the Bourne franchise, but it's certainly the worst film of the lot.

It's main criticism is it's story, or lack of for that matter. Now I know that the original trilogies stories were not it's strong point, in fact all three of them were very similar films, but they all had key characters, at least adding to the story a bit. This film doesn't have that. As good as the characters are portrayed they are very minimal and weak. As the story progresses you keep saying to yourself, "Okay, what's going to happen next?" throughtout the whole film until you hit an abrubt wall that is the ending. By the ending you realise how pointless the film really is. The ending was an odd sensation because no questions were answered, yet you didn't really have any questions after. My ultimate criticism is that this film didn't really have to happen. It didn't add anything to the universe.

Apart from that massive issue though, it is typical Bourne throughout. Good chase scenes, a good leading man and good action. It ticks all the right boxes of a Bourne film and a summer blockbuster. There's a good chemistry between the two leads just like the Damon trilogy. Jeremy Renner plays a good character. He looks the part and plays the part really well. Obviously it's difficult to reach the heights that Damon found, but he gave it a good go and is a very strong point for the film.

So yeah, like I said, not a needed film at all. But it's certainly not a bad film. It's easily the worst Bourne film of the lot, but I'd definitely check out a likely sequel to this, because it could very well go somewhere.

6/10         

The Dark Knight Rises Review

The Dark Knight was always a film that was going to be hard to match let alone top. Going into the cinema I would've been happy that it even matched up to the first in the series, Batman Begins. Forget all that though, my expectations were blown away. The casting was brilliant, with the newbies, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Anne Hathaway and Marion Cotillard all putting in tremendous performances, as well as the usuals providing stellar performances with an extra mention for Michael Caine, who I thought put in an absolutely marvelous performance as Alfred. Anne Hathaway was a real surprise to me though. All I've ever seen from her is dull rom-coms, but she brought an exciting, funny and sexy edge to Catwoman, which was way better than Michelle Pfeiffer's in Batman Returns. The fact that she was true to the comics was brilliant. She looked amazing (You know, in a non-pervy way).

I had my doubts about how good Bane would be as a lead villain. I wasn't sure that it would match up to the magnificent Joker of the previous film, but I was very wrong. Nolan's interpretation of Bane was brilliant. Of course, nothing like the comics, but who cares when he fits so well into this story? Tom Hardy looked and played the part. I had issues with his voice at first, but you got used to it as the film progressed.

The story was, once again, a brilliant one. It had twists and turn the whole way throughout, carried along by the once again amazing protagonist and antagonist. The ending was beautifully crafted and answered everything you needed. I walked out of that cinema past content. Infact I wouldn't have changed a single thing.

Another mention has to go for the music, wonderfully crafted by Han Zimmer. Honestly I think they would've been half the films, without his unbelievable work. He adds something to every scene whether it be tension, frenetic pace or pure shiver down your spine moments.

So that's that. A fantastic ending. Is it my favourite trilogy of all time? Yes probably. I can't think of another trilogy which has been this consistent through all three of the films.

Thank you Christopher Nolan for your fantastic work on these films and for also ruining any other Batman film that WB inevitably push out of productions. Now I hope to see you direct Bond 24, or anything for that matter. Can you make a bad film? I think not.  

5 Reasons why the Spiderman trilogy sucked

1) Tobey Maguire
He just wasn't a very good Peter Parker or Spiderman. He just seemed to be whiny and annoying. And god, that 'emo' phase from Spiderman 3. He just didn't play the part well at all.


2) The costume designs were pretty bad
This is mainly for the first one. I didn't like the Spiderman costume. I don't know why, I can't quite put my finger on it. Something just bugged me about it. As for the green goblin, that one is fucking awful. He looks like a villain from a really bad saturday morning cartoon. The green goblin is supposed to be terrifyingly scary and he just wasn't. The venom costume is just plain lazy. They've just turned the already bad spiderman costume black. Very lame.

3) Badly done villains
Like I said about the green goblin. It just isn't scary enough. He doesn't carry some of the most iconic weapons and gadgets from the comics. Dr. Octopus was probably the best, but still he wasn't russian. Hence taking out the whole of his backstory completely. Then the atrocious villains from Spiderman 3. None of theme were developed enough. Sandman was boring and badly acted. James Franco just wasn't right for the hob/new goblin and Venom didn't have enough time and sucked. I wasn't even sure that that was possible.

4) No Webshooters
This one really pissed me off. Raimi basically dismissed the fact that Peter was a genius and a science wiz. It just doesn't make sense why he would choose to do that. For me, he's taking a lot of character out of Peter Parker just by choosing to do that.

5) It's not funny enough 
The best thing about Spiderman for me it's the humour of Spiderman compared to the nerdyness of Peter Parker. The trilogy didn't have that. Tobey Maguire played the same part for both of them, which shouldn't have happened. The whole point is that Peter Parker feels comfort in the suit and becomes confident, hence taunting the villains. This didn't happen, which was disappointing.

Rezzed - Day Two

I got there on the Saturday morning before it opened so I could really have time to go on everything. As soon as it opened I went to play Krater. I was actually quite surprised at how much I enjoyed it. It's like a cross between Torchlight and Borderlands. It plays just like Torchlight, a point and click, top down RPG, but with the style of Borderlands. The 20 minute demo I played was really interesting. I won't buy it now, but if it was ever on sale I would definitely go for it. 

I then played some indie games on show. One of them was Drunken Robot Pornography (yes I know). It played quite well. You had a jet pack and massive robots kept appearing and you had to take them out and you would get points. Not the deepest or most enticing game I've played, but for what it was, I enjoyed it. Another indie game I played was Guacamelee. A 2D sidescroller, where you play as a luchador on a quest through dual worlds to save El Presidente's daughter. I was pretty impressed with it actually. It plays like Shank, but with less edge. The puzzles are quite cool and the characters are funny. I also played Gateways. Okay, this is a 2D platformer kind of like Terraria, but instead of copying Minecraft, it's copied Portal. It doesn't play badly really and the puzzles are quite challenging. 

At the end of the day, I finally got my hands on Aliens: Colonial Marines. It was set up, so the Gearbox guys were playing as the Aliens and we were the marines. We got absolutely owned. They were too good. We had no chance. It's very good though and I was quite surprised at how it managed to keep the suspense and tension in the multiplayer. It certainly shows good signs for the single player when it's released. 

Okay, so now onto the conferences. I didn't go to all of them on day two because I wanted to play more games and the lineup wasn't great. 

First of all, it was Rock, Paper, Shotgun's Indie Panel. Basically, it was their take on doing a panel show, which was actually quite funny. Questions like 'what game was that quote from?' and 'Can you make a new game character out of chewed hubba bubba?' helped make it a very enjoyable hour.

It was then time for the developers of the upcoming Prison Architect, showing the rise and fall of Subversion and showing more of Prison Architect. The stuff on Subversion was really cool, they were telling us how they had built all the very cool tech, but how it actually sucked as a game and they didn't want to release shit. So kudos to them for that. Then onto Prison Architect which looks very impressive. The premise is that you have to make a prison that will cater for the inmates. Simple really, but just like the Sims it looks like it'll come with it's difficulties. A day one buy for me really after the showing. I think it looks brilliant. 

Up next was Dean Hall talking about DayZ. He told us a bit about the game and then for the most part, it was a Q&A which really helped enlighten me about the game. I'm not really feeling it at the moment. I don't really dig the premise. I can feel myself getting bored just fending off zombies, with no real objective. 

The last conference I went to was Rock, Paper, Shotgun's Gamejam. It turned out to be really cool. It was all the developers from all the conferences who were told to develop a game in an hour with the theme of resurrection with disastrous, but hilarious outcomes. We had scientists vs jesus, a board game that came to nothing, a game that couldn't be played at all and various amounts of technical difficulties. 

So that was my weekend with Rezzed. It was brilliant, totally worth the money. I really hope they do it next year, I'll definitely be go if that is the case! 

Got any questions? Comment below or email me at mcmillen.starsky52@googlemail.com

Rezzed - Day One

My day started with a bit of Serious Sam 3 survival mode which was quite enjoyable if difficult, just like every Serious Sam game. I also played some Borderlands 2, which was fantastic. Definitely my favourite game at the show. I really can't wait for it!

The first conference was from Indiestone, the developers of Project Zomboid. They came to speak about the do's and don'ts of making video games. It turned about to be very entertaining and funny as well as being factual. They spoke about the problems they had developing the game including bomb scares (I know), budget limits and lack of time. They also spoke about the benefits of being an indie developer, including getting to craft the game all on your own, whereas at bigger studios you barely make an impact. It was a very cool conference and a great start to the show!

Next up, The Creative Assembly to talk about 25 years in the business and Total War: Rome 2. During the show, we got to see a before alpha trailer of Total War: Rome 2 which looked very impressive, especially due to the fact it needed a lot of work. They spoke about their console team's new game, well just about. They said it was going to be using the Alien IP and that's about it. Still, ALIENS!!

Now it was time for possibly the coolest guy to ever grace gaming. Yes, it's the guy who brought Duke back from the grave, Randy Pitchford. We got to see a playthrough of Borderlands 2, which as you know, I think looks unbelievable. During the demo, Claptrap was on form. Very funny and just like the original, the comic relief. Some of the new skills look cool and intuitive. Also, Randy announced that there would be splitscreen co-op and online co-op at the same time, which I thought Borderlands really needed.

Peter Molyneux was next. I was bracing myself for all of the promises he was about to give me. However, he was actually very cool. He spoke more about his new studio, 22 Cans and his new curiousity game. This looks really cool. Basically, you have a cube of 6 million little squares. Everyone hacks away at it to get to the middle, where there is a special 'something' that he was hush about. I think it looks good, apart from the fact that it could be over in seconds and that would be it. I look forward to downloading it though, you never know, it could be me!

The last conference of the show was from the guys behind Natural Selection 2. Now I hadn't really seen much of this before today and wasn't sure what to expect, but they gave a really solid show which enticed me from the start (probably due to him being Australian).

So that was my time at day one of Rezzed. Did any of you go? Comment below or email me at Mcmillen.starsky52@googlemail.com

My thoughts on Star Wars: The Phantom Menace

So I thought I'd watch all the Star Wars' again, because I recently got them for my birthday. I thought I would start with the bad ones, because otherwise I would have no inspiration to watch the bad ones after I had already watched the good ones. So tonight I watched The Phantom Menace. Yes the one everyone hates. Now the thing is, I hadn't seen it in a while, so I couldn't really remembered why I disliked it so much. This is why...

George Lucas has done a James Cameron and thought that special effects would be able to let him get away with having such an awful story, but this just didn't work. It only worked for Cameron because he had an above average story, albeit cliched and stolen from countless other books/films, but it was okay. The Phantom Menace story is so weak. From the start you feel like you've missed something, which is pretty awful due to this being a prequel that is there to give you information on what has happened. The story is very stop/start, also. It starts off fairly strongly, then has a massive dip, when Jar Jar Binks comes in (I'll come on to that), then it starts to get fairly interesting when you meet Anakin (which should have happened far earlier may I add), even though it is terribly childish and very PG. It then has another major dip with all the political nonsense the film is based around. Then it picks up to the fairly decent ending showdown.

The characters are another big flaw in the film. Think of all the memorable characters from the original trilogy. In this, the only interesting characters are Obi-Wan and Anakin, and that's only because we already know them from the other films. The others are all very dull or extremely annoying! Which brings me on to my next point... What was Lucas thinking bringing in Jar Jar Binks?! Everything about him makes me want to scream, and watching it again, he really has no role in the film. If you take him out, everything would still make sense and would probably lift the film up a bit to be honest.

Another annoying aspect to the film is that it is, undoubtedly, trying to find another audience. The film is incredibly childish at times, which just turns out to be very annoying. They also make cheap jokes, mainly through Binks, which don't work and just end up breaking the flow of the film. Star Wars is supposed to be such an epic, you can't have an epic if you make it PG. It's such a kick in the teeth to fans of the original story! 

The film is only of any worth due to the nostalgic trip it gives you. Some of the references and the characters you see are pretty much worth watching the film alone, but that's not the point. George Lucas should have taken a lot more care with this film. He had made such a brilliant original trilogy, but that gives him no right to cash in on a bad film.

Snowglo: The Review Community

What is Snowglo? 

I have recently become part of the promo-team for an up and coming company called Snowglo. This is a new exciting website where you can earn money by writing reputable reviews. When you sign up to Snowglo you will be given your own profile page. One you have done this, you can write reviews on practically everything, this is taken from Amazon. All of your reviews will begin to appear on your profile page. Once you start writing your reviews, you will start making Snowglo friends, like you do on Facebook. Snowglo is all about sharing opinions and finding friends that share your opinions! Once you have made new friends on the site, you will begin to see all their friends new reviews on the review feed. You then have the ability to make money from your reviews on the sight and work your way up the snowglo ranking system to make more money!

The website will bring people's opinions together, and people will only be heard but also rewarded for their views. Snowglo is going to grow into a fantastic and safe community of people who are not only making profits, but having fun while whilst doing it.

Find out more: 

Like what you've heard?
Check the website: http://www.snowglo.com/
Follow them on Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/TheSnowglo
And like them on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/Snowglo

My thoughts on VGHS: Episode 1!

I've been watching Freddie Wong video's from practically the beginning and have been a fan for ages. So when I heard about the production of VGHS I was pretty excited. I mean Freddie Wong, Brandon and a bunch of other cool guys making a series all about video games? Count me in!

So I recently just watched the first episode, without really knowing much about what it was about, and first things first, this has Freddie Wong written all over it. It's practically a montage of his video's put together. You have the war games, the classic jokes, the awkward kids and the cringey-ness that everyone knows and loves about Freddie Wong.

I really enjoyed the first episode. It's basically a feature length Freddie Wong video and what's not to enjoy about that?

I will definitely watch the next episode, to see where this leads.

Varndean School's football team leaving assembly video

Take a look at this video. Me and the rest of our school football team made this video for our year 11 leavers assembly.

Take a look and if you find it funny, share it!

Awake Season 1, Episode 2

Another episode of the promising show has me worried that it may have slipped in with all the other generic crime dramas. This time they're investigating a murder of a homeless guy, while using both of the two worlds he lives in. The worrying part though is that, already, it is beginning to become a bit stale. 

The promising side to the show though is you find out more about is family which I hope will be a bigger part in the series to break up the flow a bit. 

Still a show that I'm going to continue to watch, but I'm not as exciting as I was when I watched the first episode. 

What makes a good horror film?

Horror films,you either love them or you hate them, but what makes a good horror film? Is it just for the scares  or is deeper than that? Here's what I think makes a good horror film;

An imaginative story, you can tell exactly whats going to happen in any horror movie, I also think a twist helps a great deal. They just need to start surprising their audience.

Most horror films lack a genuinely scary villain or anti-hero, most are just boringly stereotypical villain. I think we need new monsters, people are getting bored of vampires,mummy's,zombies and ghosts. Why can't writers think of new monsters ? Just something original to shock the audience.

Suspense is often a key factor in horror films, something to keep the audience on the edge of their seats, that goes hand to hand with jumpy moments, if done correctly.

If you look at some of the great horror films you will see that they need a fear inducing and well filmed setting. It could be anything from a tower block (Candyman) ,a wide open area (Hills Have Eyes) or even just the sea (Jaws) as long as it is well filmed it's fine.

Actors are obviously the key to any film but what I think horror films need especially is a likable main character, if you don't like the character you're not going to care if he dies are you? Good acting is obviously a necessity as well, that’s what I think horror films lack, good acting.

Horror films needs something to engross the audience, some intensity would be good because when I see a horror film it doesn't feel like I’m “in the film” the story line is just too impossible to be real.

They need more angles than just the classic horror film angles, try to mix it up without making it too cheesy and photogenic and so it can't distract from the horror.

A story that you don't know the ending to is key. Take Scream, if you took the plot twist out of the equation, it would be an average film. The story also need to be easy to follow, but interesting.

Also, most horror movies think they can just slap on blood and guts to make a horror movie. This is not the case. Horror movies, although they don't look like it, are smarter than that (well, most of them).

In short, a horror movie needs to be; unexpected, original, tense, have brilliant acting, and involve your worst nightmare.

My thoughts on England's Euro 2012 squad

Goalkeepers: Joe Hart, Robert Green, John Ruddy 

Defenders: Glen Johnson, Phil Jones, John Terry, Joleon Lescott, Gary Cahill, Ashley Cole, Leighton Baines

Midfielders: Theo Walcott, Stewart Downing, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Steven Gerrard, Gareth Barry, Frank Lampard, Scott Parker, Ashley Young, James Milner 

Strikers: Wayne Rooney, Danny Welbeck, Andy Carroll, Jermain Defoe 

So, let's start with the goalkeepers. Obviously Joe Hart was a must. He's clearly the best English keeper and arguably the best keeper in the world at the moment. Paul Ruddy has been brilliant this season and fully deserves his place, but Robert Green...really? He's been playing in the championship this season and not even for the championship winning side. If you're going to go the championship route would you not pick Kelvin Davis? He's been unbelievable this season. In my opinion though, where's Ben Foster? He was excellent this season and has played at the top level. 

Now onto defenders. Fairly decent list. Obviously Cole is a must. He's fantastic and the best left back in the world, in my opinion. Terry is a leader and there have been good glimpses of him and Cahill having a fantastic partnership. For me though, the weak links are clearly Baines and Jones. Jones is so overrated. He's a fairly good center back, but put him in defensive midfield or right back and he's useless. He's an awful passer of the ball. Also, where the hell is Micah Richards? He's been brilliant this season. He's big and strong and can defend, unlike Glen Johnson.

The midfielders is very strong. Everyone there deserves to be there for different reasons, apart from Downing. Let's be honest, he's done absolutely nothing all season. Let's like on the bright side though, Gerrard and Lampard are fantastic leaders on the pitch. Walcott and Oxlade-Chamberlain will be great impact players to bring on. Barry is a very good player. Good passer of the ball and good at breaking up play. Ashley Young and Milner are will be good but I would've preferred to have seen Adam Johnson instead of Milner, as I feel as the better winger. 

Strikers is fairly simple. Rooney was obviously a dead certain. Jermain Defoe is a great goalscorer and Andy Carroll could be a good player to bring on if we need goals. I would have liked to have seen Crouch in the squad though. He's consistent, you know what you're going to get with him and he can score goals. 

All in all though, very good team and I'm really looking forward to the Euro's! 

Awake Season 1, Episode 1 Summary

It's not usual that you'll find a crime drama that is particularly unique anymore, due to how many there have been. Awake, however, is very different from the rest. Jason Isaacs (who is very good in it and manages to pull of a very believable American accent) stars as Detective Britten, who has just been in a car crash with his wife and his son. However, during this, his life is somehow split into two realities. One where his wife survived and one where his son survived. All the while, he is going to a shrink in both realities, that are both telling him that that world is real. The very interesting part though, is the fact that both of these realities help him to solve crimes and even stopping them from happening.
Yes I know, it all sounds very confusing, but it's actually portrayed in a very simple way. This is due to a couple of reasons. For one, he has a different partner and shrink in each reality. So, all in all,  it was a very promising pilot and I hope it keeps it up the whole series!

What did you think? Tell me in the comments below!

My 'The Amazing Spider-Man' thoughts

I've been a Spider-Man fan since I was a kid and was watching the cartoon on Fox Kids (anyone remember that?) and have loved him ever since. Now I know there has been a trilogy of films before, but other than the first one I didn't really enjoy them for a couple of reasons. One being that he didn't have fucking web shooters, which just goes against the whole idea of Peter Parker being a genius, but that's another story. When 'The Amazing Spider-Man' was announced I was willing to give it another chance, mainly because I long for a good Spidey film, but also because I loved (500) Days of Summer and wanted to see what Marc Webb could do with the webhead. Now I knew it could always could go either way, but I always thought in the back of my mind it would be good. My faith has just slightly been reassured with the new trailer. This is mainly due to seeing The Lizard/Curt Connors. From the trailer, it's looking like he has the exact personality of Curt Connors/The Lizard from the comics and Rhys Ifans has great potential to pull of the the mad scientist. The other key point from the trailer that really brought my attention was seeing the little knife quip that he made. This was genuinely funny and exactly like he should be, unlike Raimi's films.

Yes, I know this is all hope, but I truly have faith in this film and hope my faith it repayed. What do you guys think? Feedback would be appreciated!

Just a little update...

Woah! Look at that! I haven't posted since 18th August last year. I'm currently very busy with my exams but will start religiously posting on here after that. I'm currently working on a Football Manager 2012 mega post, so look forward to that!