Clever looks like he is hovering!
All posts by Govvy
Spanish Government employs 1-10th of the law on a Picasso!
In a follow up to my previous post about the Picasso family taking back by force some of Picasso’s paintings. It seems to me that Spanish government is now following a similar pattern.
First I like to say, if you own a painting you should be able to display it where ever you like. Just as long as you give it the right respect.
But if you have been keeping an eye on the news this happened.
From BBC News: Picasso ‘national treasure’ seized by French customs
So 9-10ths of the law of ownership. And a powerful Spanish family fall fowl to the French and Spanish governments requesting a painting worth £17m (€25m).
Well is saves the nation of Spain millions to aquire the painting but how about those legal bills? That could in the end run up to a few million.
I also wonder if they even asked Jamie Botin the owner If he could loan it to the nation. Or maybe they had and he rejected!! Which might explain a few things, nevertheless in my view this is art theft at the heighest level.
Gatekeeper Butterfly
Holly Blue Butterfly
Did the Picasso family steal the paintings back?
So you’re given a gift of some painting 40 years ago which are now worth a fortune. Then you decide it’s time to sell them, but wait a minute what happened here?
BBC News: Picasso electrician must return piecess to artist’s family
It seems to me that the Picasso family can afford the better lawyers and take back with force and no consiquence, effectively stealing from this poor couple.
Pinterest are you stealing peoples property and violating copyright law?
I would just like to browse, but I can’t for every time I visit Pinterest this happens.
I don’t want to signup, I don’t want to login with facebook. The other reason why I refuse to signup to pinterest is simply the first part of their ToS.
Assault on Wall Street, why did I watch this?
Currently on Netflix is another Uwe Boll film Assault on Wall Street. I didn’t realise it was a Uwe Boll film when I started watching it, as I generally stay away from his films as they are generally very poor and the guy is not a very good director. I understand why he makes films, because he is making money, a million here, a million there. Not the huge amounts like Hollywood, but he obviously gets by and makes more than enough to support his habit of producing these bad movies.
The film starts off in a sombre way as the main characters wife who works on Wall Street is not very well, the acting is not half bad, however she looks very well on the outside you would also think if she had a brain tumour, it would actually appear on the charts instead of what appears to be a very healthy scan! Then 15 minutes into the film the black guy tells his joke where you clearly see the burger complete on the left side of the plate, then when the camera returns in the same breath the burger is suddenly no longer looking like a burger but a clean cut sandwich on the right side of the plate.

Filmed in 2013, But set under the Bush Government which sets the film between 2001 to 2009 I kept wondering if the tech is right for the era. I couldn’t see any other faults with the film in tech terms, but I didn’t look hard enough. As it goes I thought this was one of Boll’s better films. Surprisingly the overture music was a nice accompaniment, however there is too much filler, lots of cut-scenes of New York, too much play on thinking.
Dominic Purcell who plays the main character Jim Baxford seems lost and doesn’t do anything until the last 20 minutes of the movie. You seem him go insane after his wife commits suicide, loosing all hope and then deciding to investigate the people who lost his money in his investments. I realised I failed to mention that a guy who is struggling to get by has investments on Wall Street.


When I thought we were going to get serious, he begins to do target practice, then he coldly murders a few people leading upto.

So he goes insane on Wall Street, wanting to take out the bad guys? But who are they, in fact he is mostly killing innocent people, making him the bad guy in the end. I really didn’t see any point about this film. I felt like I wasted my time watching it! And I leave you with one thought.

DareDevil Netflix review
DareDevil on Netflix
The first two episodes I watched when DareDevil was first released didn’t seem to suck me in so well, so I left it alone until this weekend where I have just watched the rest of season one, which was only 13 episodes. Still that’s a lot of TV for me this weekend!
It wasn’t till after episode five when I was really sucked in by the characters, the Devil himself was portrayed by Charlie Cox who I felt was an excellent choice. His dark, grimey, slightly sick look played well into the character and he built the role up for a final showdown which wasn’t that offensive.
Offensive in a way in which Marvel’s Agents of Shield went all soppy, (you only need to ask me why I say that). But that show has gone down hill in my opinion.
However with DareDevil the show stayed on par to a high tempo and excellent character plots. The best being the bad guy, and generally the bad guy does do the best acting. Vincent D’Onofrio was perfect for Wilson Fisk (aka Kingpin), his big frame, on screen presence and some exceptional acting should surely earn him an award. It’s not often you feel for someone who is mentally ill in a disturbing way, but in understanding how Fisk came to be, was in essence the core for the whole of season one.
There are similarities with other shows such as DC’s Arrow. “This city is sick and needs saving!” to a very dark Gotham feel, where the city is drained of all hope. A dark ally, a fight scene, a chase, a save. There is a, been there, done that approach to DareDevil although it does hold it’s own. It’s just a feeling of copying what works. And it does work.
The approach and story throughout is gripping, so I shouldn’t say much more and spoil it for others. But I recommend the show for others.
Two Peacock butterflies.
Mark Hamill in Flash “I am your father”




