Ghost Machine: A much debated Brit Flick …

Hmmm …

You know, there’s times when movie night can’t half generate a lot of …

Well …

I was going to say hot air.

But to be fair to myself, Movie Night Adrian, and Kevin, all at my place, tonight, to catch a film … ?

Let’s call it discussion, shall we … ?

And slightly odd text messaging. The three of us happened to briefly discuss Hannibal Rising, at the end of tonight’s movie: only for Kevin D to text me, once he’d got home, to tell me that the film version was on.

Mild piece of synchronicity, I think …

««~»»

At any rate, I’ve got to admit, the three of us had quite a bit of nattering over what to watch, tonight.

But eventually settled for a little something that Adrian had managed to extract from Brentwood Library.

The 2009, Chris Hartwill directed, Sven Hughes/Malachi Smyth written, Ghost Machine.

Which is where things get debatable.

Possibly.

Can I offer you an observation, there … ?

Something I’ve noticed is that a good film generally gets the three of us agreeing that it’s a good film: even if we’s found different things enjoyable about it.

We’re generally the same with a bad film: indeed, the half time natter will be about anything but the film of the evening.

Where it get’s debatable … ?

Is where we can’t agree if a film is good or bad, and if, so, why it’s good or bad.

Or even what makes for a valid comparison.

I’m thinking that’s what we’ve got with Ghost Machine …

Oh, boy, did we EVER!

Ghost Machine sees Sean Faris, Luke Ford, Jonathon Harden and Sam Corry as a group of friends who also work as technicians on a complex computer virtuality system used a a military training system: and friends, as friends with a shared interest in computer gaming, can’t resist … ahh … ‘borrowing’ some of the kit, and taking it to an abandoned prison to … try out … !

Ahem … !

You can tell it’s going to go pear-shaped, can’t you … ?

»»»~«««

Now, can I make a confession, here … ?

I know Ghost Machine has had quite a few iffy — if not downright bad — reviews.

And certainly, it saw Adrian, Kevin and I discussing exactly what made for logical and illogical plot points!º

Personally, though … ?

I know it’s one I found entertaining, if not stunning.

Granted, the characters could have been a touch more memorable — or better drawn — and certainly the blurb on the back of the box could have been a touch more accurate — I’m wondering if the blurb writer had actually watched the film — but there were one of two points of interested.

I think we all agreed that the effects were nicely done.

And the basic concept — a dead terrorist, haunting the prison she’d been killed in, and hacking into a computer system from beyond the grave to extract revenge* — was fairly sound.

Personally … ?

I’m thinning this is watchable.

So long as you don’t expect too much.

★★☆☆

«««~»»»

* Certainly the idea of the minds and personalities of the dead occupying some sort of computer system has been around for a long time: I know it’s a central point in 1970s-era Dr Who, where the Time Lord’s Matrix system is used to store the personalities of dead Time Lords. And William Gibson’s Mona Lisa Overdrive has the main villain — Lady 3Jane Tessier-Ashpool — trying out something similar.

º Bog standard Gamer behaviour, immunity to virtuality, and whether those helmet’s should or shouldn’t have throat-mikes. All fun stuff to mention. And how to politely, throw popcornª at the screen.

ª Or Dairy Co-op toffees and peanut M&Ms, in our case^ …

^ Oh, so you know … ? This is a pointless footnote. You can tell it’s late, can’t you … … ?