Nature’s edible yellow boomerang fruit: REVIEWED

Bananas, like marmite, mushrooms and the second series of The Wire, are highly divisive creatures, capable of causing rifts between the firmest of friends. Banana-wise human beings tend to fall into three camps: the people who hate them unconditionally (my mum), the people who only like them if they’re on the verge of decomposition (my brother) and the sensible people who prefer them just ripened, with a slight hint of greenness at either end (me).

That makes reviewing the banana a tricky task – do I review the spotty banana, or the straight-from-the tree banana? What about that foul creation, the dehydrated banana? Does that get a look-in? It seems the only safe option is to review all these forms of banana simultaneously. The just-ripe banana gets a 10, obviously. The spotty banana gets a 6, the almost-gone-off banana a 4, the dried banana a 2 and the delicious pureed banana that you always used to get given as a baby another 10. That gives a total score of 32/50, or to round it down to our preferred ratings system:

6.4/10.

GM

Going meta: REVIEWED

First of all let’s get the terminology straight. According to the most reliable online lexicological resource, Urban Dictionary, “meta” means: “A term, especially in art, used to characterise something that is characteristically self-referential.”

So, essentially, that means all online content. And especially Comment is Free.

[So far this review is typically MacInnes - high on cheap jokes, low on factual content. And the level of research, well let’s just say it’s perfunctory]

It’s also the case however that “meta” has come to mean something grander, describing the process by which an artist creates a work that turns out to be within a work that, in turn, is within a work. The man most devoted to this practice is surely the film-maker Charlie Kaufman and his grandest statement, Synecdoche, New York, where even the title is a sort of metatextual pun and the entire film is devoted to confusing the viewer as to precisely which box the characters are stuck in.

[It’s clear he’s confusing himself here. I pity how the reader must feel]

In summary, meta is either a cheap self-involved ploy or a complex one. I give it:

3/10.

[2/10.]

PM

That Review Anything review of going meta: REVIEWED

Not the most meticulous review of meta here – there wasn’t even a mention of David Lynch. I’d also quibble with the Comment is Free point. Comment is Free is not always self-referential. Often it isn’t even at all referential – it is just made up.

A crude but simple means of describing meta: when something talks about itself in the third person. Paul does this a lot, so he should have a better grasp on the subject. However, he is very senior to me, and his review contained a couple of moments where my top lip curled upwards at the corners, if almost imperceptibly. Good, but could be better meta.

4/10.

HJP

Guardian canteen muffins: REVIEWED

It was Thursday afternoon, 4pm, when the cravings started kicking in again. It’s a familiar feeling: the desire to gorge on a muffiny mountain of sponge and take delight at a “surprise” filling. I have these pangs every day, regular as clockwork. It has started to alarm colleagues, who wave bags of tangerines at me like you would a bone at a thick spaniel, but nothing can come between me and my muffiny mounds of moreishness.

Except this muffin was different. Its burnt exterior was crustier than a week-old hiker’s sock. And what of those piddly moles scattered on top? They were not delicious chocolate chips but sad little dried cranberries, littered with no particular thought or care. It got worse: I peeled back the crisp brown paper to find a cloying, vanillery cake that clogged up my throat and made me sound like Phil Mitchell after a brutal night on the Sovereigns. There was no surprise filling beyond the unwelcome surprise of that starch-white sponge; just dairy and carbohydrate baked into a ball of disappointment. FFS. This is the kind of muffin that makes tangerines look appealing. A muffin that makes you want fruit? Just no.

2/10.

KH

Boob-haired vampiricism: REVIEWED

Francis Ford Coppola’s adaptation of Bram Stoker’s goth manual landed with a critical squelch when released back in the Olden Years Days of 1992. Most blame Keanu Reeves, whose performance as British gentleman Jonathan Harker was like watching a pony trying to do an impression of a Timberland boot. “Human male” was and remains an insurmountable task for Reeves, bless him. But what of Gary Oldman as Dracula? How was his performance? Appreciating that I’m definitely not going to re-watch the entire film like some kind of total chump, the only way to judge Gary fairly and empirically is with some context-free screengrabs. So let’s begin:

Grinny Oldman

He looks properly chuffed here, does Dracula. Looks well happy. I’m totally convinced. “You’re really funny in this film, Keanu Reeves,” his jowls seem to say. “I like you, Keanu Reeves. You make me do this smile.” You’d never know he was probably wishing to all the gods in the universe that Keanu Reeves was dead. 9/10.

4th Bee Gee Oldman

Radiating disco sex. Porn ’tache. Soft, flowing locks. And what’s that he’s looking at? It must be something really interesting, like a sand sculpture, or a polecat. But it’s actually nothing! It’s acting! Some of the best “looking” acting I’ve ever seen, in fact. Superb. 10/10.

Perturbed by darkness Oldman

I haven’t seen the film in years but if memory serves Dracula is cack-scared of the dark. That’s sort of the whole point of the film or something. And I’m properly buying that here. Poor Drac. He looks terrified. Never heard of Gary Oldman being scared of the dark, which means this is all acting. What a guy. 7/10.

Gary Lampman

You’d never know that the lamp he’s holding is 100% CGI would you? That’s because, when it comes to Lamp Acting, Gary Oldman is basically the Marlon Brando of hypothetical light sources. He studied under Stanislampski. And that’s the worst joke in the history of Review Anything. Sorry. 9/10.

In summary

Gary Oldman in Dracula: 9/10.

Standard “sharing screentime with Keanu Reeves” performance handicap: -1000.

Total: -991/10.

LH