Italy Part 2: Orvieto to Florence

We continue on our Italian journey, hubby and I.

Days 5: 1 January 2013 - Orvieto

We parted ways with our travel companions on the Roman leg and hired a car for our drive into Umbria and Tuscany. What I thought was going to be an idyllic little road trip turned into an anxiety filled nightmare, thanks to these little babies:

This sign denotes a limited traffic zone. Every time a tourist crosses one of these it results in a fine of at least 100 Euros. They were everywhere! It didn’t help that there are numerous variations of these signs. Some with time restrictions, some with weight restrictions, some with pictures of bicycles/motorcycles/cars/vans/taxis/trucks, some with additional warnings in Italian, so each time we saw one of these we had a mini coronary and had to look at the sign carefully to try and decipher exactly what it meant, which was sometimes impossible when trying to navigate at the same time.

Despite these hateful little signs, we eventually got to our hotel in Orvieto (we drove past one of these signs on the way to the hotel, but luckily the hotel can sign you off as “offloading luggage” to escape a fine). To get to the town you have to drive up quite a steep hill, and it seemed to be surrounded by a walled extension of the cliff face. It is quite a drive up, and the low clouds and mist added to the sombre feel of the city’s approach.

We arrived late in the afternoon and it was very cold and misty. The hotel was… meh. You could tell it was nice in its heyday, but it was in desperate need of an update.

Once checked in we took a quick walk around town (it’s tiny so it really was quick), past the Orvieto Duomo (which was closed) to what felt like the end of the town, with this not unpleasant view.

We took a few snaps of the Duomo as well:

From the outside, this was by far the most striking cathedral I’d seen thus far, mostly because of the black and white stripes all the way down the sides of the building (La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona still takes the prize for the most beautiful and unusual interior though). The frontage is also impressive – beautifully decorated archways alongside carved reliefs of Biblical depictions. The gables feature additional illustrations, inlaid in gold.

One thing I noticed from walking around the streets of Orvieto was the abundance of boar heads in store windows. Another curiosity was the presence of Pinocchio on a bench outside one of the shops, dressed as Santa. I’m still not sure why. Perhaps Gepetto was born in Orvieto or something.

As night fell and our tummies rumbled, we went in search of somewhere to go for dinner. Our expectations weren’t high given the size of the town and the fact that it was New Year’s Day. We consulted our guide book and discovered that there was a restaurant in this tiny little town with a Michelin star! Even so, we were not very hopeful that it would be open, or that it would have space for us without a booking. We wandered down to the restaurant anyway and were pleasantly surprised – not only did we get in, it was practically empty! The food was amazing, and the service was great. The best food we had in Italy! The name of the restaurant? 

I Sette Consoli. http://www.isetteconsoli.it/en/

Day 6: 2 January 2013 – Orvieto to Siena

Originally I had planned to go to Assisi from Orvieto, but the stress of driving (and the inconvenience of waking up early) meant that this plan was axed quite early into our road trip, making our next stop Siena.

Siena is a quaint little city, with effigies of the she-wolf nursing Romulus and Remus popping up all over the place. (Legend has it that the sons of Remus founded the city when they fled from Rome, carrying the statue of said wolf.)

A visit to the Piazza del Campo is a must, as is a climb up the Torre del Mangia, where you can get a good view of the fan-shaped plaza below.

The Palazzo Pubblico at Piazza del Campo

View of the Piazza from the Torre del Mangia

Siena Cathedral is the other must-see. A striking vision in black and white stripes, both inside and out. The front façade is ornately decorated, as are the marble floors inside the cathedral, where once again the wolf of Siena features. Along with the art inlaid into the floors, there are also paintings and sculptures dotted around this cathedral, giving it an ostentatious look and feel.

Siena Cathedral

One of the best discoveries in Siena, though, was vending machine salami!

Day 7: 3 January 2013 – Siena to Florence

A beautiful day greeted us as we started our journey to Florence.

View from our hotel room in Siena

We arrived in Florence around lunch time and took a stroll around the city. It’s not hard to find the highlights and we immediately came upon Florence Cathedral, or the Duomo di Firenze. It is another distinctive building, this time in white, pink and green with a large dome and campanile and is still one of the largest churches in Italy.

Florence Cathedral with façade made of coloured marble.

Inside the dome

We then took a wander around the Piazza della Signoria, with several statues dotted around the square, one of which is a copy of the David statue, the original being housed not too far away in the Galleria Dell’Accademia.

A horse and buggy in the piazza

The reproduction of Michelangelo’s David, outside the Palazzo Vecchio

A little way from the piazza, the river Arno runs through the city, where the famous Ponte Vecchio connects one embankment to the other.

The river Arno

Ponte Santa Trinita bridge, which neighbours Ponte Vecchio

Day 8: 4 January 2013 – A day trip to Pisa

The drive to Pisa was a little less traumatic than some other were. Probably because we managed to stay out of town centres for the most part. It was a chilly day, but the sun was out, so it was nice if you managed to stay out of the shade.

Like the Colosseum, I felt in awe seeing such an iconic landmark. These are things that you learn about in school: for those of us who were government schooled in an African country, it seemed almost inconceivable that one day we would be able to see these things in person what we only saw in text books as children. It is wonderfully well kept, with the marble structure pristine and white, and, well, it’s just…pretty. We did do the climb up the tower, but it is a bit expensive for what it’s worth and involves queueing up for quite a while, so if I were to do it again I would rather save my money and have a picnic on the grounds instead.

The Leaning Tower from the ground

The steps up to the top. Notice how each step has been worn away in the centre from centuries of use.

Look at that lean!

Day 9: 5 January 2013 – A museum day in Florence

Despite all the information I read about long queues at the Galleria dell’ Accademia, I managed to slip right on in easily at around 10am on a Saturday. Now, I’m no early bird, but even to me, 10am is not that much of an early start to the day. The star of the show here was obviously Michelangelo’s David. He is jealously guarded by a number of museum workers whose job it is to shout “No pictures!” every time they see a phone or camera being pointed at him. (Don’t worry, you can take a photo of the copy at the Piazza della Signora without anyone shouting at you.) Aside from David there are plenty of other sculptures to look at and there is also a small section on musical history (or rather antique musical instruments), but once you’ve seen Dave, there’s little else that matches his beauty.

Yeah, that’s Dave down the hall.

There is just so much wrong with this picture I don’t know where to begin.

 At this point my husband decided that he was already bored of museums and decides to go back to the hotel to chill. Brilliant. I spend the next three hours wandering around the Uffizi Gallery absolutely mesmerised. The audio guide takes you through the development of art from the 1300’s right through to the 19^th century and this gallery houses several recognisable works from Renaissance greats like da Vinci and Michelangelo. Unfortunately there is also a no photo policy here, hence no photos of the Uffizi.

Having been rejoined by my husband, we took another walk along the Arno and get in another photo of the river, this time capturing the Ponte Vecchio.

Finally a good(ish) photo of Ponte Vecchio

Day 10: 6 January 2013 – The last day

We had a kind of strange last day in Florence. Our plan was to walk up to Piazzale Michelangelo, which offers a panoramic view of Florence. On our way there, there seemed to be an abundance of penned farm animals that were not there the day before.

Florentine donkey and companion cow

Omg the cutest little horses!

 There also seemed to be a little street parade of various peoples carrying various flags of nations around the world. We decided to ignore this for the most part and continue with our plan. The view from Piazzale Michelangelo is indeed worth the hike uphill, with the landmarks of Florence clearly visible from the viewpoint.

View from Piazzale Michelangelo, with the Ponte Vecchio, Palazzo Vecchio and the Cathedral clearly visible.

On our way down we happen upon a little Japanese garden, the Rose Garden. It was pretty and quiet and a nice place to sit down, relax and take in the views of the city. It was nice to have a little peace and quiet because as we got back down into the city, the parade was happening in full force!

People dressed in medieval attire, some as soldiers, some as farmers wheeling around produce (and chickens), drummers, persons of religion, camels (CAMELS!!!) joined the earlier parade we saw. I’m still not sure what this was for, but it was quite an unforgettable experience.

Some of the participants

She looks excited to take part…

Whaaaat??

To this day, Florence remains one of my favourite European cities. The Renaissance movement started here. It is the birthplace of modern civilisation and is full of history, art and beauty. Viva Firenze! <3

Nocturnal Animals

I had been looking forward to this movie, as I have been a fan of Jake Gyllenhaal ever since his turn as a creepy journo in Nightcrawler. Plus it looked so slick and stylish and promised to be a dark, powerful revenge story.

Slick and stylish it was – Tom Ford was able to translate his fashion sense to the big screen well, but as much as it was beautiful to behold, it lacked substance. Beautiful, but hollow. Draw as many conclusions as you like from that, considering the industry in which he made his name.

Quick synopsis: Susan, a posh art gallery owner, gets sent a manuscript from her ex-husband, Edward (who is less posh and wealthy) – it’s a book that he has written and it’s just about as dark as anything that he has ever done. Susan reads the book. That’s basically it.

The film cuts in and out between current reality, past reality and the happenings of the novel that Edward has written. The contrast between these three timelines is superbly set out: Susan’s presumably unhappy life in the now is represented by cold, stark, minimalist, modern architecture and décor, punctuated by fake yes people she has around her, who are essentially caricatures of wannabe snooty art types. Her past, in which she gets together with Edward, features softer lines and is warmer. The novel’s middle of nowhere desert setting is harsh and barren and somewhat reminiscent of a moody Western. Points for style, though I must point out that the opening sequence, while tres artsy in the modern sense, was incredibly cringey, particularly if you have an aversion to naked fleshy persons.

Ford also makes a lot of use of symmetry – in the characters themselves as well as visually, in the transitions from one timeline to another. It’s obvious that the people in Edward’s book are “mirror images”, if you will, of Edward, Susan and her daughter. (Jake Gyllenhaal plays both Edward and Tony, who is the main character in the novel, and Isla Fisher (playing Tony’s wife) has a passing resemblance to Amy Adams.) There is also an underlying theme of male “weakness” or perceived weakness, which manifests in different ways in Edward and Tony. Hell, there’s so much symbolism and symmetry in this movie that it’s worthy of an entire school literature paper on it.

While Adams and Gyllenhaal are decent in their roles (though Adams doesn’t have to do much except look sad/thoughtful at various times), I thought Michael Shannon, as the policeman/sheriff’s deputy or whatever lawman he was supposed to be, was the star of this one. Gruff, but sympathetic, and flawed like any human, law enforcement or otherwise, he brought real character to Bobby Andes. Aaron Taylor-Johnson also does an accomplished, but unexpected and totally unrecognisable turn as bad guy Ray Marcus – polar opposite of his slightly nerdy Kick-Ass role.

So, if everything is so good, what’s so bad about it? I can’t quite put my finger on it. Perhaps it’s the fact that, aside from the story played out in Edward’s novel, nothing actually happens in “reality”. Perhaps it’s because Susan’s reality seems so fake. But probably the biggest reason is because of the ending. It is a let down of note. I was expecting something massively cruel to happen, or some clever twist, a sting in the tail to teach Susan a painful lesson. The novel’s ending was good. The film’s ending? Insipid and disappointing.

7/10 - 9/10 for style, 5/10 for story

Chappie

What can I say about this mish mash…?

After the earlier success of District 9, a documentary style take on aliens landing in Johannesburg, Neil Blomkamp once again enlists the help of Sharlto Copley for this story about a robot who gains consciousness, once again set in the South African city of gold.

In a country where criminals have run rampant, police robots have been deployed to bring things under control, and they have worked spectacularly well. The designer of these robots eventually succeeds in developing AI consciousness which he uploads (against company instructions) into a robot that was destined to be destroyed. The robot, named Chappie, ends up in the hands of a band of criminals (played by South African rap band, Die Antwoord) who use him to carry out various illegal acts. When a jealous fellow developer sabotages the police robots and tries to destroy Chappie, he shows his mettle and tries to save those that he loves.

This is such a strange movie. I can’t help thinking it was merely a vehicle for Die Antwoord to showcase their acting skills, which actually aren’t too bad. (I still can’t believe how big they are in America, being something of a parody – I cannot stand their music, and I use that term very loosely.) Considering they pretty much play their roles of Ninja and Yo-Landi Vi$$er every time they are in public, I guess they are used to these characters and playing your alter ego is a lot easier than playing something completely different. Still, they did a pretty good job of it, playing the doting “Mommy” and no good “Daddy” to robot child Chappie.

Chappie (Sharlto Copley) initially reminded me of a scared puppy dog when he first gains consciousness, but evolves into a child-like entity, and it is this innocence and naivety that makes his mistreatment at the hands of various characters seem so dastardly. Chappie soon learns about human nature and it really is a sad commentary on the human race.

The big names in this movie, to me, are entirely wasted, perhaps with the exception of Dev Patel, playing the robot designer, Deon Wilson. Sigourney Weaver, as the company CEO doesn’t get too much screen time and her character is completely one dimensional. Hugh Jackman plays villain number 1, the designer of the Moose robot, whose machine gets rejected by the police force as being overkill. Although he gets a lot more screen time than Sigourney, I feel that his character, too, is flat and cartoon villain-y with no redeeming aspects to his character. This, too is where some of the plot is a bit silly – Jackman is jealous that his robots are not suitable for police work, but it is obvious that its strengths would suit the defence force, and actually I spotted a SANDF (South African National Defence Force) sticker/stamp on it, so surely that should be his target market??

Villain number 2 is even more outlandish and cartoony than Hugh Jackman’s character. Hippo is the gangster to whom Ninja owes money. Brandon Auret’s physique is impressively intimidating even if not fitness model standard, but Hippo reminded me a bit of the Tasmanian Devil – a bit unhinged with a speech pattern that leaves a lot to be desired. I mean, what even was that accent he put on?? Ugh.

I think this was a movie that could really have been great, but has somehow turned into a big mess. There were some subtle comedy moments - I especially liked the bit where a pitch was being made to police officials who seemed more interested in polishing off the free biscuits than in what was being said – and Die Antwoord were surprisingly good, but numerous plot holes, crazy ass single dimensional villains and in my opinion, Chappie not being able to meaningfully connect with the audience let this film down. 6/10

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

This is the first offering in the Harry Potter universe that does not feature said wizard boy, but it definitely feels Potteresque.

We are introduced to Newt Scamander, played convincingly by Eddie Redmayne, who arrives in New York with a suitcase full of strange creatures. A mix up occurs, creatures escape and inevitably chaos ensues. Cue a Potter world version of Pokemon (gotta catch ‘em all) with a side of magical murders and mistreated orphaned kids a la Annie, only creepier and with no music. Oh, and the establishment trying to arrest/kill our main character and his merry band of sidekicks.

This movie is good fun if you don’t think too hard about things (like why Newt had to travel by ship and go through customs if he can just teleport himself around by wizardry). The animals are great, fantastical, in fact, and I can’t imagine how much fun the cast must have had throwing themselves around in front of a green screen. Some of the beasts even have personalities of their own and are characters in their own right.

The friendship that develops between Newt and Jacob Kowalski, a muggle (or no-maj) who just happens to be caught up in all the madness, is rather cute, and so is the romance between Kowalski and Queenie, a rather fetching mind-reading witch, who reminds me a bit of Marilyn Monroe. (The rotund Kowalski definitely punches above his weight and it’s cute because this would never happen in real life…)

Eddie Redmayne's Newt appears a bit nervous and shy, not terribly social and seems to get along with his fantastic beasts a lot better than he does with humans, magical or not. Totally understandable, because all animals are amazing and people, in general, suck. I'm so with Newt.

Anyway, a solid 8/10 for this one. Loved the characters and the CGI beasts and Redmayne seems perfectly cast as the perhaps slightly autistic Newt.

Arrival of Kubo and the Two Strings in La La Land

A few weeks ago, I managed to see a flurry of movies in one weekend and was able to make a more or less sensible title for my review out of the titles of said movies. Go me!

Arrival

I wasn’t sure I wanted to watch this one. I had heard it being described as “boring” because there isn’t really any action in it, and there is a lot of talking. Well, kind of, yes. There are almost no action sequences to speak of, but the director does know how to build tension and suspense. The moody grey skies, the claustrophobic tunnel within the space ship, the heavy breathing in the space suits and the misty glass partition obscuring the aliens from view (other than their outlines which reminded me of Squidward from SpongeBob SquarePants, and some gross looking tentacle ends pressed up against the glass) – these all contributed to a feeling of impending doom and menace. What did they want? Why were they here? Are they going to kill us? Where was SpongeBob? Did they stick Patrick Starfish on the ends of their tentacles?

Anyway, Amy Adams pretty much does everything in this film. Not sure why they bothered having other people in it at all. She does a great job as Louise Banks, who is brought in as a linguistics expert by the military after alien ships show up at a dozen spots around the planet. Her job is to try and communicate with the ones at the local Montana branch, and she eventually does this, but she also spends a lot of the time daydreaming. Those scenes did tend to annoy me after a while, but they are actually important to the storyline, and although not a lot “happens” in the movie, there is a great plot twist where everything comes together very cleverly, which I like. A lot. So the slower scenes are forgiven.

So while I’d imagine a lot of people will dismiss this as slow moving or boring, and yes, I’ll admit there were certain points when I thought that the movie had stalled, but I was adequately entertained and I really wanted them to hurry up and get to the answer of whether Squidward 1 and 2 were friendly or not and what were they doing here.

In summary, good things: Amy Adams, plot twist, cinematography, bad things: ok so it is a bit slow at times. Overall, 7/10.

La La Land

It was between this and Lego Batman. I think I actually wanted to see Lego Batman more, but due to a circumstance of timing we ended up seeing La La Land.

At the time of viewing, it had won itself seven Golden Globe awards, including best comedy/musical, best actress for Emma Stone and best actor for Ryan Gosling. (And since I saw this, we all know what happened at the Oscars!) So is it worth all its hype?

Well, after the opening number I was heartened that this was going to be an absolutely amazing film. I loved the song, the dancing, the unusual setting (LA traffic jam) and I especially loved the vibrant colours. I felt the urge to clap after that first song, so much did it remind me of musical theatre, and I was not alone – the old ducks who couldn’t shut up during the pre-movie trailers clapped heartily.

Unfortunately, the film does not live up to its early promise. It’s good, but it’s not amazing. Why? Well let’s take a look.

I’m sure we all know what the story is about by now. Struggling actress meets struggling musician, they fall in love, whereupon success hits and of course, it tears them apart, because success = bad. Awesome. Hardly an original premise, but I guess that’s difficult to come by these days.

Mia is likeable enough and Emma Stone does a great job playing the hapless wannabe, but I was missing the usual Stone wit, sarcasm and feistiness that does not shine through in this character enough for me. She does show a vulnerability, though, which is perfect for the part, but is a quality that does not resonate with me, and actually it annoys the crap out of me. Sebastian – well, he is a bit of a dick. He is a jazz purist (read snob) and immensely rude and surly. I’m not sure Ryan Gosling had a lot to work with, but having seen him do chat shows and interviews I’m not sure this character is too far off his natural state. But he is pretty. So we forgive him.

This being billed as a musical, I can’t not comment on the singing and dancing. The songs themselves are great and Emma Stone does pretty well, though given that she was in the Chicago stage musical I was expecting a bit more. I don’t think she was given the chance to show off her range, though, and apart from the audition song (The Fools who Dream) I felt that she was always singing in the same sweet, saccharine style.  Gosling, though, seemed to struggle at the lower registers and I presume that is why his numbers are quite limited in the movie. Gosh, sometimes it felt like he struggled to stay in tune at all. Overall I felt the vocal performances were weaker than they should have been, which is a great pity, because the songs really do deserve better treatment, and actually, the instrumental bits on the songs are fantastic.

As for the dancing, apart from the opening number, I felt what little dance sequences that survived the final cut were a bit too tame and “safe” – absolutely nothing either of the leads did wowed me, but perhaps I am expecting too much. Fred Astaire was primarily a dancer who could act, while I suspect Stone and Gosling are rather actors who kind of can dance.

So yes, it’s good - Emma Stone’s acting chops, the beautiful cinematography and the score make it so, but I can’t help thinking that a different male lead (one who can actually sing and maybe dance) would have made it so much better. That, coupled with a fairly pedestrian story line, gets this homage to Hollywood and its ups and downs a 7/10.

Kubo and the Two Strings

For as much as La La Land lacked in story, Kubo possesses it in abundance.

This is classical storytelling wrapped up in stop motion animation with just enough creepiness to put the scare into young children.

It didn’t surprise me that the makers of this movie are the same ones behind the uber creepy Coraline, she with the buttons for eyes. This one is slightly less disturbing though, and is all about magic and fantastic tales and a little boy named Kubo, who is kind of a refugee. He is saved by his mother as a baby and during their escape they are washed up ashore somewhere, where they have been in hiding from the Moon King, who tried to take his eyes (again with the eyes!). Eventually, something bad happens and Kubo must go on a quest to find three magical items.

This is a children’s story, but I totally loved it. The characters are beautifully crafted and lovable, from the protective but grumpy Monkey to the villagers who are essentially secondary actors, but oh so endearing. I was absolutely charmed by Kubo and his friends. Kubo’s own tale is tragic, yet heartwarming and, like real life, even though the outcome is not what you really wanted in the beginning, it will all be ok somehow.

Kubo gets 9/10 for its beautiful storytelling and characters, and its immense heart.

Squad Finds Suicide Dory

I can’t remember when last I did two movies at the cinema in one weekend, and the contrast between the two could not have been greater. One was full of sociopathic criminals and the other was full of friendly characters helping a fish find her parents.

Let’s do the easy one first.

Finding Dory

Let’s face it, it was always going to be hard to live up to the original Finding Nemo. It introduced us to lovable characters, had loads of heart and gave us lots of laughs, many of them due to Dory being Dory. Dory was ever the optimist, steadfastly determined and had a never say die attitude that I envy, despite her inability to remember anything (is this early onset dementia??). And she was damn funny. All this endeared her to me as I’m sure it did to many Nemo fans out there, so when Finding Dory came out I was very keen to see it.

Unfortunately, I think Finding Nemo outdoes this film on all fronts. It’s cute, but not as cute. It’s an adventure, but not as wild. And Dory is… not as Dory. She still suffers her disability, but now that she remembers she had a family that she wants to find she is not as effervescent, her kookiness doesn’t surface as much and she has some real self doubt. Now obviously she can’t be the happy, optimistic fishy she was when she is desperately trying to find her parents, but I missed the old Dory. To me, she lost a bit of her Dory-ness, which was a touch disappointing.

On the plus side, there are some great new characters – Hank the septopus, Becky the (slightly disturbing) dishevelled looking bird, and the limey sea lions were my favourite. There were the scenes that make you go “awwwwww” (especially the one near the end with the shell – just so touching!) plus little Dory is really cute. Cuter than little Nemo.

A cutesy 7/10 for Finding Dory.

Suicide Squad

Another movie I was really looking forward to. Because Jared Leto.  

I’ve heard critics have slated this movie, though some have had praise for the acting of Margot Robbie (Harley Quinn), Will Smith (Deadshot) and Jared Leto (the Joker). I have my own thoughts on this.

The movie itself was enjoyable, harmless fun. Standard popcorn fare for which you didn’t really need to do too much thinking (actually best not to do any analysing at all), and to a large degree quite formulaic. But let’s break it down.

Margot Robbie is the best thing about this movie - when she is Harley. In the flashbacks as Dr Quinzel she is inexplicably (and annoyingly) entranced by the Joker, despite being a professional criminal psychologist working in an asylum. I also found the dialogue between these two especially cringey, with her Freudian slips eye rollingly so in one of the earlier scenes. She doesn’t seem to do much in these scenes either, except stare starry-eyed and open-mouthed at Jared Leto’s Joker - something that Kristen Stewart could have done, as she proved throughout the entire Twilight saga. As Harley, however, Robbie totally owns the part, showcasing Harley’s deranged girliness, giggling at inappropriate times, gleefully smashing people (or ex-people) to death with her strangely durable baseball bat and being a total ditz at times. It’s almost as if she was born to be Harley.

Will Smith is another solid performer. He combines doting father with hardened criminal with as much ease as he is able to throw in the occasional comic one liner in this film. His character is one of the more well rounded in this movie, which does help.

I’m not sure I saw enough of the Joker to give a truly informed view, but I will say that I prefer Heath Ledger’s version. This new Joker is a bit too slick and polished, a bit too pimp, a bit too bling. I much preferred the grittier, messier Heath Ledger Joker. I’m not sure I like his slow “heh-heh-heh” laugh either. I’m actually not even sure what the point was of having the Joker in the movie at all. He disappears for large parts of the movie and most of the scenes he does appear in are in flashback sequences. He really did not make any impact at all on the storyline. I get that this is an introduction to the Joker for subsequent movies, but I’m not sure it started out that way. One of the trailers was just full of Joker scenes and I’ve heard that a lot of Jared Leto’s scenes were cut from the final version. The fact that they had to do reshoots also fuels the theory that the story was taken in a different direction than originally intended. This may also account for the weird flow (or not flow) of the movie too. It just felt a bit messy.

The problem was that it was trying to do too much at once. A lot of characters were introduced in this movie in advance of others to come. Enough of a back story for each of them was required to explain their motivations in this movie. The movie itself had to have its own plot, and links were established to other characters within the DC universe that already had their own movies. That is a lot to achieve with the number of people in this squad and the result wasn’t great. It just didn’t have the flow it should’ve had.

The film also seems to borrow somewhat from others – Boomerang’s fetish for pink unicorns? Deadpool anyone?? I was also expecting Zuul to appear from underneath the swirling pile of rubbish, or for the Ghostbusters to show up and suck Cara Delevingne into the ghost traps. Not to mention Harley Quinn being stuck in a Sia music video during her incarceration.

One more gripe about June Moone and Rick Flagg. Why was she even with this guy?! He made her turn into the enchantress when clearly it distressed her, turning her into a simpering, mewling wreck, and yet she didn’t leave him?! (Ok maybe she couldn’t because of Boss Amanda, but really. The Enchantress was clearly incredibly powerful and would have dealt fine with whatever came for her “host”. Girl needs to grow a pair and is obviously far better off as Enchantress.) Aside from the fact that he was basically forcing his (and the government’s) will on poor June, Rick Flagg was the most boring character in the whole movie. A one dimensional character with no personality.

And another thing. If you were going to put together an elite squad to take down the world’s biggest threats you’d totally include a bank robber without any super powers, right? Right? An unhinged girl, also with no super powers, armed with a baseball bat is arguably not much better though….

I was going to give this a 7/10, but the more I think about it, the further the scoring slides. 6.5 at best.

Inamo Soho

Rating: 3/10

So what makes this place unique is that you are meant to be able to order everything (including the bill) electronically from a user interface built into the table. "Great!" I think, because I have been in so many restaurants where you basically have to do a whole song and dance routine to get the waiter's attention, especially when you are in a hurry to get the bill, pay and get the hell out!

I had high hopes of an efficient ordering and bill delivery mechanism, and of delicious Asian food (probably my favourite food), but my hopes were systematically dashed.

My husband and I had the prepaid pre-theatre meal (soup, small plate and large plate for £13.99 booked through a third party). We were told that they would bring out our dishes when ready, not unlike Wagamama, I suppose, and if the food had come out within Wagamama time frames I would not have been too upset.

But lets go back a step or two.

Having being seated (this venue was a little small, so the tables were quite close together), the hostess explained to us how to order, etc. This was fine, and we managed the system easily, finding it quite intuitive, however I think the touch pad could have been more responsive as it did feel a bit clunky.

After ordering I noticed a bit of spilled soy sauce on the table that had not been cleaned up properly after the last patrons had left and called for service using their electronic interface. Our drinks arrived, but there was no move to clean up the mess. Obviously nobody had noticed that there was a service call needing attention on our table. The waiter who brought our drinks left again and I was curious to see how long it would take for someone to attend to our service call. Too long, as we got tired of waiting and "manually" flagged the waiter down to clean up the spill. (In all fairness it was probably less than 10 minutes before he noticed the service call and returned to ask if we needed something, after he had already cleaned it up, but it really seems that the service call button is redundant.)

Cue food. My food. Only. All three of my courses arrived before any one of my husband's did. He watched me eat for half an hour before his first course was served, and his soup arrived last. Overall I found the food ok. The soup and sushi were good, but it is hard to get miso soup wrong, and as long as the ingredients are fresh, the same goes for a simple cucumber and salmon hosomaki. My vegetable noodles were a bit bland though, and I had to throw in my leftover soy sauce to give it a bit more flavour. Added to that, the lime that was served on top of my noodles (presumably to squeeze over the noodles) seemed to have been sitting around for a while, evidenced by the dried, browning rim around the cut edge of the skin. But I shouldn't complain, because at least I had food. Poor hubby was still waiting for his as I was finishing off my noodles. We had to ask (manually) two people where his food was before it finally arrived. Unfortunately his chicken and sweetcorn soup was not as good as my homemade one (true story) and his Korean BBQ chicken was average at best. Totally underwhelmed by this place.

At least getting the bill was quick, but suffice to say that I was not impressed by this restaurant at all and will not be returning.

P.S. At least the disappointment of this restaurant was counteracted somewhat by a huge piece of red velvet cake at the Hummingbird bakery, which has never disappointed me, and a cracking time at the Apollo Theatre watching Nell Gwynn, starring Gemma Arterton. Only a pity that we caught the last night of the run, as I would have recommended it to be seen. Maybe it will make a comeback some time.