I am Superman, no I'm Superman, no I'm Superman.

Superman is without a doubt my faviourte superhero, so for this review take everything with a pinch of salt. I own the comics, the films and possibly to many clothes with the "S" proudly emblazoned from underwear to outerwear. It took a huge amount of strength during the entire film not to jump up and loudly announce that the man on the screen was a fraud and that I was the real Superman (yes my complex runs that deep!). As of late the comic book film has seen a revival with The Avengers Assemble, Thor, Captain America and The Dark Knight. But after a lackluster Superman Returns it seems that the last son of Krypton was doomed to be the forgotten superhero of earth. And let's all be honest the man in the cape with his pants over his suit is the best of them all.

In Zack Snyder's Man of Steel 'Supe' is re-imagined as a drifter without a place in the modern world bouncing around from job to job trying to find out where he came from but obviously destined for great things. All the usual suspects are involved; the Pulitzer prize winning Lois Lane (Brilliantly played by Amy Adams though criminally underused), General Zod (played with menace and malice, despite the black leotard, by Micheal Shannon) and newspaper owner Perry White (brought to life by Morpheus himself Lawrence Fishburne). However, the supporting cast are dwarfed by The Man of Steel himself Henry Cavill who is every bit Superman. It's rumored that Stan Lee said of Robert Downey Jr that when he thought of Iron Man he imagined a man just like the actor one day inside the suit, and for Shuster and Siegel I can imagine it would be a very similar experience if they could have seen Cavill flying through the air donning the cape of their own pulp fiction hero. No-one can ever hope to be Christopher Reeve sailing majestically against a green screen on a gymnasts horse, it was only after he hung up his leotard that the world truly understood why it was that he was and forever will be Superman because of what he accomplished, but Cavill is a close second.

Henry Cavill - possibly the best looking man on the silver screen right now!

It's the same story as it's always been so I won't tell it again in its entirety, but once again the son of Jor-El is sent to Earth just as Krypton begins meeting its sticky end and will obviously later be the one to save us all. However, the material is as relevant as it was when it was written; Russell Crowe's Jor-El warns the elders of Krypton that their abuse of their home planet will cause its destruction just as General Zod leads a failed coup against the hierarchical structure on the planet in the hope of reshuffling the deck. If you need the real world implications pointed out for you again turn on the news and wait ten minutes one or both will arrive pretty quickly!

I could go on and on about the film for days both the good and bad points. Good: Snyder has recovered from the terrible Sucker Punch in style, visuals at times are simply stunning and some shots look as if they should be in European art cinema rather than a blockbuster film, the scenes between Clarke and his dad hit home particularly hard. Bad: It's a little long at times and the final fight sequence drags on, Superman "purists" will dislike the moral ambiguity of this particular incarnation of their hero, the end feels a little shoehorned in and the science behind it ropy and best. Ultimately though I want you to experience the film for yourself in all its glory and enjoy it for what it is, another stab at re-imagining the greatest superhero of our time for a modern audience. What I really want to look at is what this incarnation of the man in tights is saying about our world today. 

Amy Adams as one of the only female characters in the whole film - Lois Lane

Superman for me is the greatest inspiration for young and old alike and whatever the medium I am reading/watching/wearing the "S" symbol is a marker for hope and freedom (The film goes to great lengths to make the viewer aware that in its literal translation that's what it means on Krypton). Unlike the Stars and Stripes that as of late has been tainted with Americas recent history, the flag of the "S" can be worn around the world as a marker for those who believe in the greater good. When Clarke finds his fortress of solitude in the arctic Jor-El explains the history behind the emblem and conveys the pride and responsibility that his son should feel when wearing that suit. At times it feels though as if he is not actually addressing the man in-front of him but rather us in the audience. Is it that Snyder is trying to instill in the fan boys and girls watching that they too should feel these things when donning their own Superman apparel? Transforming us all into better people through the philosophy of the man himself asking us to stand to account as individuals for what is right, each as our own 'Superman' (it brought back memories of Spartacus as each slave stood as an individual to face their fate together rather than let the man that had come to embody their ideals die alone); or is it another cheap trick to get us to buy more merchandise? I hope that it's the former.

That was the last time that Zod would have a curry before fighting Superman

However, the thing that most interested me was how the film captured the current climate surrounding the debate of surveillance and individual freedom. As Zod's craft circled Earth able to tap into any electronic device on the planet to project his warning to the world you cannot help but think of the recent NSA and GCHQ scandals where it was finally revealed to the world that our governments now more than ever are easily able to find out a little to much about us with the click of a button. Never fear though as it seems that Superman is on our side bringing down a surveillance drone that is looking for him in the closing minutes protecting both his privacy and seemingly willing to defend ours. No longer it seems that the Man of Steel is simply a pawn for American idealism but is rather his own man with his own destiny that he and he alone wishes to fulfill. Is it that the new 'Supe' might actually be a Libertarian at heart? It certainly seems that way. (Or at least I'm claiming him as one of our own!)

With a sequel already on the way get to see Man of Steel now so that you won't be the only one in the cinema that is wondering what on earth is going on! The only change that I'd have them make for the next one is to give some of the female characters something else to do other than stand around and look pretty waiting for the guys to start doing something.

Updates - 'The Light', 'Source Material', chasing 'Chasing Chuck' and others...

Long time no blog - after getting into a good rhythm of churning out something each day I find that I've fallen by the wayside recently but after a successful shoot on The Light I'm now back in the game and ready to tell all you happy people out there a little about what I've been doing for the last week!

So I've just finished my time on the set of The Light directed by the winner of this years 'Enter The Pitch' competition Simon Cookson. It was a great experience and presented me an opportunity to see another perspective on making short films and learn a lot during the four days that I was on set. The piece looks amazing and I can't wait for the opportunity to see the finished product in January 2014 at the premier at Pinewood studios. Have a gander at some of the behind the scenes stuff from the shoot on the 'Enter The Pitch' website:

http://www.enterthepitch.com/the-pitch/

Other than that I've been keeping myself busy with all the other projects that I've got floating in the air at the moment. The rough cut of Source Material is now finished ready for some colour grading and hopefully an original musical score that will really turn what I think is a great short film into an amazing one!

We're still chasing Chasing Chuck - tomorrow I have a meeting with Dusthouse in London to get some advice and mentoring that will hopefully help shape the project and am happy to announce that we have the wonderful and talented Dave Chawner on board now as the man hard (crazy) enough to fight Mr Norris. Dave is a stand up comedian who is rapidly making an impression on the stand-up circuit who is perfect for the part and is even currently working on a show that focuses on masculinity in the modern world that is perfect for the documentary! Check him out here:

 www.davechawner.co.uk.

Also, Dark Matter is looking increasingly exciting with the producer sending me over some incredible production packages that he's put together that have really cemented the idea of the piece on my mind. I just can't wait to get cracking on it.

The only, slightly, bad news for the day is that we're now looking elsewhere with Aftercare - the first avenue that we approached the series with has been half shut so we are looking for ways around it to see if others in the BEEB might be interested in taking it on board. Everyone in the camp is still very hopeful that it's going to go well and someone will take an interest in it so we're still plugging away and just waiting for that magic yes!

A review of 'The Hangover III' - One too many hangovers

Having a hangover is no fun at all. I’m guessing that they are responsible for at least 60% of all the misery being caused throughout the lands on a Saturday morning. However, it appears that the Wolf Pack are able to do the impossible when most of us would be unable to lift our heads off the pillow through fear of being overwhelmed by the movement of the earth beneath our feet.

There seems to be a rule in Hollywood that there can either be one film or there has to be three and as every fan will tell you; the first one is always better. The Hangover was the break out success of the ultimate whatever happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, a buddy comedy caper that was silly, surreal and at times hilariously funny. The second installment was a little samey but was at least watchable with the likable cast returning for a similar caper on the other side of the world, but with the stakes very much raised with the Bangkok the boys found themselves in feeling far more threatening than the previous adventures in Caesars palace.

However, the third film feels devoid of all the charm of the previous two. The cast feel as if they are phoning this one in, especially Bradley Cooper who at time you believe doesn't particularly want to be there and is under some hideous contractual obligation that he overlooked. At one point Alan (Zack Galifianakis) asks Phil (Bradley Cooper) “Are you coming Phil?” almost as if the cast themselves can’t believe that they've managed to rope him into this when he really should be winning Oscars or attempting to sweep Jenifer Lawrence off her feet rather than performing in what is a mediocre comedy at best.

Now don’t get me wrong there are some moments that raised a chuckle. Ken Jeong is able to make a laugh at basically anything and I could watch Galifianakis just being and I would be entertained but this particular hangover fails to deliver the belly laughs of the first two. It may be that in the third and final film from Todd Phillips there isn’t even a hangover until after the credits, the single funniest bit in the whole feature.

So dropping the alcohol induced amnesia the group must now trying to convince man child Allan that he needs to go to rehab following the death of his father. However, things begin to go awry when gangster Marshall (John Goodman) appears wanting to find super villain Chow (Ken Jeong) as he’s stolen a shipment of gold bars from him. When the group profess ignorance he takes Doug (Justin Bartha) and gives the gang a timeline to bring him back unless Doug might once again meet a sticky end.

It’s all stuff that you've seen before, and it should be funny, really funny it’s just it’s not. Everyone on the screen seems to be sick of the joke and the trouble that the wolf pack find themselves in no longer feels like an organic development of the plot rather a desperate attempt to continue the narrative. It may be that it appears so forced as the dilemmas that appeared before the group in the previous two films were far-fetched yet at the same time entirely believable. We've all awoken in a morning barely able to see wondering what on earth happened last night only to retrace our steps to find that it was a night of mystery and adventure that may have involved complete strangers, copious amounts of alcohol and on particularly strange nights anything from traffic cones to livestock. However, very few of us have ever been tasked with tracking down an international criminal and seemingly the jokes don’t quite transfer between the two situations.

In the end it had to be made because Hollywood demanded it and it was going to make everyone involved a heap of money. All I ask now is that the wolf pack give up drinking so that there might not be a chance that they ever have to do this again. 

IdeasTap Austerity poem

So IdeasTap - possibly one of the greatest arts resources on the internet at the moment offering young artisits across all forms of media. Fancying myself as a bit of a poet I entered this one with a little ditty about Austerity - all feedback is welcome and why not have a stab at it yourself if you think that you might have something in verse that would be up to it?!

http://www.ideastap.com/Opportunities/Brief/80137951-2216-41ff-a304-a1cd00f201e4#Overview

Possibly a little socialist for my tastes though you do find out a lot about yourself delving into the creative mind!

Austerity

By

Ted Wilkes

What if for a day

there is this place

where the rich are expected to pay their way

and not draped in opulence and disgrace?

                “A fair share for all” is the rally cry

                And then I awake without a dry eye.

What would the world be if we all paid our tax?

We’d only have other problems to solve.

It wouldn’t be the Bullingdon club who scratched each other’s backs

there’d simply be another corrupt power to dissolve.

They promise us this, they promise us that

in the end what else should we expect

besides another career politician in a different hat

with yet more principals, now in power, they reject.

Let’s look at what we have on offer

to run this island and abuse our coffer.

The Tory Toffs, the party of mam and dad.

The economy may have been in the loo

when you started and I’ll agree that’s certainly bad

but fix it now! It’s what you’re in power to do.

And then there’s the alternative with Ed minus a brother he stabbed so hard

with two wars to their name on the countries American express

who can’t be trusted with more than a Tesco club card

and now they simply expect us to do more with less?

Then there’s the liberals, the less said the better

savaged between the two like a dirty yellow bird

strutting around pretending to matter

as if anyone would care even if they could be heard.

“Oh isn’t it dreadful this Austerity thing.”

Goes up the chant

“If only it was that I was able to sing.”

Then I could be famous with no need to rant

and have all those things I deserve. Like that bling.

People; this all may be the Government’s fault

but there’s only one way that we can fix this mess.

“It’s those bankers who’s the problem.” I hear you exault

well let’s do something about it I would finally stress;

                We should band together and be united as one

                And change the world to better than what’s going on.

Here’s an idea; watching “live” TV at home is now the largest social experience that we ever take part in.

If you think of the biggest crowd that you’ve ever been in most of you will probably think back to either watching a football match at a stadium or being at a large club or shopping centre but now thanks to social media sitting a home on your sofa watching a show such as Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead or even Britain’s Got Talent with your smart phone in hand or laptop in front of you now puts you in the largest gathering of like-minded people you’ll ever be in.

We might need a bigger sofa

Social media has created a phenomenon I like to think of as the metaphorical long sofa – although you may think that watching TV is quite an insular activity with at most three or four people sitting in relative silence glued to a flickering screen you can now share your living room with upwards of one million people with a simple hashtag or “@” symbol that you are able to search out the show that you are watching and find those who are watching it “alongside” you.

As people now watch the box they are constantly sharing and updating their reactions to the narrative before them, either good or bad critiques, dismay at a characters decision or even simply a reaction on the screen. Viewers can now build up a community around a show with people from all around the country from one event that they are having the same experience as. They are able to chat, agree, disagree, debate or even troll one another just as if they were sitting alongside them in the room, so long as their responses are less than 140 characters.

Tweeting pictures of your bare feet is one way to get a "certain" type of follower.

Although you could say that it is similar behaviour as fans of box sets that tweet along as you watch that you can find later there is an immediacy to the conversations that you have with people when watching a “live” event as you are experiencing these things alongside them. In that sense I would still argue that the box set is still a lonesome viewing experience as it’s a little like you’re watching them with your pretend friends rather than a community. Social media reaction to a marathon of Mad Men or 24 might have allowed the viewer a large amount of time to think about that jibe or witty retort making it lose the immediacy of a reaction that would be from someone off the long sofa.

Engagement with Twitter and Facebook is actively encouraged by broadcasters as it is obviously great free publicity. One of the greatest examples of this I have seen is Comedy Central’s Workaholic’s where after a particularly bad pun or clanger of a joke there was a hastag that popped up in the bottom right corner encouraging fans to tweet about that exact instance, it allowed for immediate reaction from viewers who could then be sought out and interacted with. A particularly witty Tweep might add further to the joke or a thoughtful one speculate on the underlying meaning behind it adding to the richness of the viewing experience.

Workaholics!

Now there are even theories as to how many “social media talking points” there should be in a show in order for it to be considered a success. Senior VP of Viacom International Media networks Phillip Bourchier O’Ferrall believes that there should be between 10 and 15 of these points during a show to ensure that they are considered a rich social TV experience as reported in The Drum (http://www.thedrum.com/news/2013/04/25/tv-show-should-feature-15-social-media-talking-points-says-viacom-senior-vp)  He says that shows can now be judged on how they: “…create social media conversations.” rather than solely on traditional ratings measurements. Could it be soon that ideas of three act structures in film or 5 acts in TV will be replaced by moments woven into the narrative that will be considered Tweetable?

But what is that makes us want, nay need, to interact with others when we’re watching the TV? Psychologists talk about the term Intersubjectivity which basically means that we are social beings and to combat the terrifying philosophical idea of Solipsism (we are entirely unsure that any knowledge we hold outside our own head is actually real) we seek reinforcement of experiences by trying to deduce if others have held them to. So the outcry on social networks over the previous episode of Game of Thrones is in some way a cry for help that it wasn’t just me that thought: #OMG did that just happen on @GOT #HolyCow! Intersubjectivity emphasizes that shared cognition and consensus is essential in the shaping of our ideas and relations, basically without socializing in some way we’d all be in trouble and when you have access to the world’s largest network of people right at your fingertips you can alter you viewing experience into an experience that (without sounding too much like a multitasking The Sims player) can fulfil both your entertainment and social needs. The further beauty of it though is that no-one needs especially to interact directly with you, you are included in the conversation and that seems often to be enough to feel as one with the community.

Though it might actually even run deeper than that. Most of us on social networking sites share something of an ideal of ourselves we de-tag unflattering pictures and usually only update with information that we wish to be associated with or that will portray us in a certain way that we would like to be associated with. Interacting, on whatever level, with a TV show that we are interested in becomes an extension of our character on the social network and allows us to express ourselves to an audience of people who we will most likely want to associate with as they like similar things to us. In a sense we are “peacocking” hoping that our wit or assertions might win us followers or “friends” who we might be able to interact with further.

Anyhow, this is just me possibly over analysing what probably is just the simple act of watching TV and typing away but if anyone wants they’re welcome on my metaphorical long sofa.

'Waking Sleeping Beauty' a review

If you didn't know Disney are those guys who produce all the films from your childhood that you still know the words too. In Waking Sleeping Beauty Don Hahn (Disney producer nominated for an Oscar for Beauty and the Beast) takes us behind the scenes of what it was like to work in the animation department in the House of Mouse during the Renaissance period of Disney before every second film was about talking snow dogs that you secretly hope are now being fed large chunks of meat with suspicious pills in. What could have been a nice insight into the egos, conflicts and etchings of the artists behind the pictures that would interest those from animation aficionados to slow-Joe-in-the-back-row ends up being one and a half hours of  Don hammering home the point that Hollywood execs don't understand anything about making movies and charging around from event to event in his home movies pointing at stuff just to make sure that we understand that it's bloody brilliant working for Mickey!  

I'm a bit of an animation buff if I'm honest, I love the stuff, the magic of pencil on paper projected at the screen at 30 frames per second in vivid colour with talking animals and rousing musical numbers is my idea of a great time. In the beginning I was determined to like Waking Sleeping Beauty, I wanted to see the faces behind the magic; those that had poured their heart and soul into every frame that would fly past the screen in less than a second; the tortured loners, the eccentrics, the one's that saw beauty in every blade of grass but what I got was a rather lengthily documentary about how three old guys (Jeffrey Katzenberg, Michael Eisner and Roy Disney) pretended to like each other and made some films in the background at the start because they thought: "That's what Walt would have wanted." and then because it made them a boat load of money. For a movie that is supposed to be about making movies the main theme seems to be that of corporate backstabbing and office politics rather than the geniuses that actually created the films from idea to implementation. What is worse is that we never even really see any actual backstabbing, the real story comes only from what we can infer with Hahn unwilling or unable to show us the real showdowns between the three and we are left to deduce where most of the conflict comes from from sideways glances and everyone insisting that they wouldn't be invited round each others houses for Christmas.

Katzenberg constantly set up for a fall - and a mauling.

Hahn sets it up from the off that you should hate Katzenberg lining him up as a ruthless self promoter and ignorant to the artistic process of making a film only seeing the audience as walking dollar signs ("Did you know that he wanted to cut 'Part of that world' from the Little Mermaid? Only the most important song in the whole film!" Or "He flew us all to London for a meeting to tell us that we had no more money for the film, just to fly us back?" Squawk several interviewees during the documentary.) When the documentary shows a real life lion attempting to maul Katzenberg on stage during the promotion of The Lion King the camera lingers a little too long on the incident as if Hahn behind it was willing the beast on, just even to take a little chunk out. In the end though I realized that I had enough bile to be thrown at all three men and was happy enough to dislike them all equally. They were the only one's that I could see that were stopping me from seeing more of Belle, Ariel and Simba - when they shut up and went away I'd be able to see more of what Disney did best, the only problem is that they never did.

Frequent insights into the animator's minds are brilliant - and a little scary!

Spliced around the home movie footage there are interviews with various people either to camera or on the phone. The problem is that often the floating voices are speaking while their counter-part on the screen is moving their mouth making it uncertain who is speaking to the point where I was certain that the sound had to be broken on the rented disk that this was playing off. It was off-putting enough that I missed the emotional climax of the documentary with the death of Howard Ashman (Composer on The Little Mermaid) before he had ever seen the finished cut of the film he was working on at the time (Beauty and the Beast). After a quick rewind and a re-watch there were tears in my eyes as colleagues recount Ashman's battle with AIDS and how he passed away on a hospital trolley still wearing his purple Beauty and the Beast pull over. The only time that I was truly lost in the narrative and captivated by the human drama of the piece.

The film provides a solid overview of this period of Disney history but if you are already familiar with the events (and I suspect that this will be the case with virtually everyone thinking of seeing this), it doesn’t really have much to offer aside from some fascinating glimpses of the likes of John Lasseter and Tim Burton toiling away in anonymity before they got their big breaks. There's also some great artwork from the artists working on various projects lampooning their bosses or recording events in the office as little comic strips. 

For the most part it feels like a tabloid article that hash enough superficial gossip to keep audiences interested but lacks any real bite. Animation buffs are likely to find it fascinating, at least when it deals with the nuts-and-bolts of the filmmaking process, but for everyone else, Waking Sleeping Beauty is essentially a lengthy DVD extra that Disney is charging people to see.

The Spec Script - Waiting on Warner Bros.

So these last few weeks have been a little hectic and more importantly quite devoid of any new ideas being worked on as of late (a few have been generated but nothing actually written on Courier New on a blank piece of paper! However, what I have been doing is writing a spec script for the Warner Brother's Writers' Workshop over in the US of A (http://writersworkshop.warnerbros.com/) it's a programme that the studio runs to try and bring in new writers to compete for a position on the staff of one of their shows. Graduates from the programme include: Terrance Winter (Boardwalk Empire), Marc Cherry (Desperate Housewives), Greg Garcia (My Name Is Earl) and Felicia Henderson (Soul Food). As you can imagine competition is tough with out of nearly 2000 submissions they only select the top 10, though they're better odds that winning the lottery!

In order to be considered you have to write a spec script of a show of your choice - after my rant the other day about Community losing its way as of late it would be rude really if I didn't give the opening episode to season 4 a crack - so that's just what I did. I took one of my ideas - The Inception spoof and decided that I'd run with that one.

Working on the screenplay I was constantly out of my comfort zone - I hadn't created these characters - I could never know them as well as the people who had first penned them but it was important that I tried to get their voices right else the show wouldn't ring true. It was the first tip that I'd give to anyone writing a spec script - you have to be a fan, and not just any fan, a super fan. You have to be able to take the characters you're writing about and bring them into your world. I thought what would Abed think about gay marriage, how would Troy react to there being no service on his phone, what would Annie do if the group split up - and there I had my story.

Watching back a few episodes to freshen my memory about some of the idiosyncrasies of the characters I realized that Jeff is really the main character of the show even though it has become more of an ensemble piece as of late,  and with him graduating at the end of series 3 it left the group at a crisis point that they probably wouldn't realize until it was too late. I thought that Abed being unable to cope with Jeff's absence would again try another of his and Troy's high-jinks to solve the problem and convince Jeff to return to Greendale by going into a dream within a dream within a nightmare.

However, with the group parted the boys had to try and bring them all back together before they could even attempt to break into Jeff's mind. I had a little fun trying to reunite everyone before they finally all met back up at the study room to begin their adventure.

Once they got into Jeff's dream the big twist was that he wanted to come back to Greendale anyway as he missed the group and was really dissatisfied with his return to being a lawyer. I played a little with the ending too bringing the spinning top motif from the ending of the actual film - giving it a little wobble - hopefully everyone will know what that means and won't spoil the ending of Inception to much for anyone who hasn't seen it!

From writing the spec script I thought that I'd try and impart a little wisdom from my own experience to help out anyone who is thinking about writing one for next year's programme or even for a bit of a giggle:

- Know the characters that you're writing about - as I said before be a superfan - get the characters out of the world that you've previously seen them in and see if they still live in your head as they do in the series - that's when you know that you can tackle a spec script.

- Tweet/Facebook/Email/Stalk the writers of the series - never before in the history of the world can you easily access the people who actually write the show for a living from the comfort of your own home. I sent out a couple of tweets to the guys who write the show and got a response from Chris McKenna! *girly squeal!*

- Take risks with the series - don't go crazy and flip the world on its head but do something out of the ordinary - creativity will excite the reader and make them aware that you're a writer who will come up with something completely different in the writers room (if you ever got there) a good trait to have.

- Do the obvious - if you've got this far with the blog you're probably a writer and know how to write a good script - carry those rules into writing a spec script; make it about the human condition, write from the heart, proofread the darn thing once you've written it!

Anyhow what I really wanted to do was to see if anyone fancied giving the script a once over to see what they thought - fan or not of the show - it's linked from dropbox here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/1rz8szazgofblu5/Community%20S4E1%20It%27s%20a%20dream%20within%20a%20dream%20within%20a%20nightmare.pdf

A 'State of Decay'

I'm not ashamed to admit it I've thought about "the plan" after the moment of infection if the world were to come to an end in a plague of the walking dead. It's not all that complex I decided that I don't really have the street smarts to make it in a world where the deck has been reshuffled so have decided of a mixture of laying and praying and going down swinging. Recently there have been various titles that allow the hardcore zombie hunter to play out their end of days fantasies from Resident Evil to Dead Island but as of yet we've never seen an actual sandbox survival 'em up zombie apocalypse.

Enter State of Decay on the Xbox arcade that delivers just that a huge open world where as a survivor you have to just basically survive: gathering stuff from houses, basing "z's" brains in and negotiating with other groups for resources and assistance. On paper it looks like the closest thing to impending doom that you can get while having the sticks in your hands.

Everything about State of Decay should mean that it's a title that I can't put down but for some reason I feel cheated. It's delivering everything that it promised it would: the gathering, the bashing, the negotiating and the surviving but it just feels like there's something missing amongst the hordes of shuffling dead.

State Of Decay starts off a few weeks after the initial outbreak and joins our heros up out of the way of it all in a campsite in the hills. There's no time for flashy cut scenes or even adequate tutorials as you're thrown head first into the action bashing and collecting from  the off. The combat is a nice mixture between stealthy and hack and slash with players able to chose if they want to go all gun-ho and risk attracting a horde or throw a bunch of fire-crackers and sneak on past. Whereas the collecting, an integral part of the later game in order to help the group survive, at the start is interesting trying to make as little noise as possible while rummaging through sock draws trying to find a semi-automatic machine gun (It's where I keep mine!) but soon feels repetitive with nearly every building looking similar. 

After everything goes tits up on the campsite and you've acquired another survivor on route you're off into the big bad world to just survive. I'm sure that there is an inbuilt story, it's starting to build, there's good guys and bad guys knocking around, a tyrannical judge who has anointed herself in charge of the situation and a military who are trying to keep order at the end of the world that started off more interested in evicting squatters and taking my guns but are now warming to me after a few favours. It's not a bad stab at an end of the world narrative, with so many others out there it does feel fresher than if they had started us off in a prison and we had to fight off the "Governor" however, I was just getting myself more and more frustrated with the NPC's, it seems that in the world of State Of Decay no-one appears to have ever seen a zombie film and are quite happy to repeat all the mistakes of 28 Days Later, Dawn of the Dead, Land of the Dead etc... 

There's also a stab at some kind of emotional arc for your own "home" having to council other survivors if they are scared or angry by heading out into the wilderness with them to have a bit of fun with a cricket bat. At one point you even having to put one or two of them down after they become infected. However, what would be a harrowing job in real life never really feels all that bad as you have never had any time to actually bond with other survivors as you're constantly out on the road trying to complete missions and gather tins of beans.

All of this aside State Of Decay would still be an amazing game even with all these faults. However, it stretches further than some ropey dialogue and repetitive gameplay. There are constant glitches in the gameplay, often zombies get stuck in the floor or walls while coming to get you and simply charge around like a toddler on Novocain. Frequently a mission will require you to clear an area of zombies where what it means is kill the zombies that started in the area; often after five minutes of hacking and slashing one of them has wandered off bored that he isn't getting some brain bashing attention and is now hiding well away from the area and you have to spend ages trying to find him.

Also, the missions in State Of Decay appear on the map as quickly as they disappear. With so much going on at once it's hard to keep up with things that you need to do and what is going to disappear first and thus needs immediate attention. Often something that you're about to attend to (a supply run) is wiped off the map as it's too late for the materials when you've spent the last ten minutes trying to save another survivor - in my mind a much more important task. However, over the airwaves you're still scolded for your negligence and lose some group moral. It doesn't matter that you've managed to save the only doctor everyone really needed that supply of wooden boards that apparently have an expiration date of ten minutes time.

I'm thinking that my main grievance with State of Decay is that I was expecting The Walking Dead and got something along the lines of GTA or Mercenaries. I wanted a complex look at societal breakdown and human relationships when the end was coming, whereas what I got was an excuse to enjoy a bit of hack and slash with some RPG elements thrown in (I can imagine that the latter is both cheaper and easier to programme). It isn't that State Of Decay is a bad game it's just that I had bigger expectations going into it that I should have for something that costs 1600 MSP (£15). For what it is it fills the market and is actually quite an enjoyable little romp that I'm sure will keep me entertained for a few months of dipping in and out before I finally snap and start taking a shotgun to anything that looks like it might break.

Ultimately State Of Decay is a huge expansive world which has great depth and a massive amount of options and paths for the player to take and is the best take on the end of days sandbox survival 'em up that we've ever seen. It's just that I want more and with the obvious success that the game is going to be expect big things in the future with expansion packs and the obvious co-op mode that will follow! That's when the real fun can begin and we really will find out whose "plan" is the best.