The Counselor


Director: Ridley Scott
Screenplay: Cormac McCarthy
Starring: Michael Fassbender, Javier Bardem, Brad Pitt, Cameron Diaz, Penelope Cruz, Bruno Ganz, Rosie Perez, Toby Kebbell, Ruben Blades, Natalie Dormer, Dean Norris, Edgar Ramirez, Goran Visnjic, Sam Spruell, Richard Cabral, John Leguizamo.

You are at a cross in the road and here you think to choose. But here there is no choosing. There is only accepting. The choosing was done long ago“.

Being a huge fan of Pulitzer-Prize winning novelist Cormac McCarthy, Ridley Scott was originally planning to adapt his controversial 1985 novel “Blood Meridian” before the project eventually fell through. Scott, however, was given another chance when McCarthy wrote his first ever original screenplay in the mould of “The Counselor“. Circling it for a short time, Scott eventually took the reigns and drafted in a star studded cast which led it to be one of the most anticipated movies of 2013. When it finally reached the public-eye, though, it was met with such a vehement backlash that I actually steered clear of it… until now.


Deeply in love with his fiancée Laura (Penelope Cruz), The Counselor (Michael Fassbender) aims to provide a high standard of living for her. To do so, he enters into a one-time deal with dangerous drug dealer Reiner (Javier Bardem), his sociopathic girlfriend Malkina (Cameron Diaz) and middle-man Westray (Brad Pitt). Despite several warnings about the severe consequences of dealing with the Mexican cartel, The Counselor foolishly decides to go ahead anyway.


Inert“, “directionless“, “disjointed“, “misjudged” – these are just a few of the adjectives that I came across when “The Counselor” was released to mass disappointment. As a result, I went into it with very heavy reservations. If truth be told, I was preparing to write a scathing review where I could really pick out the flaws and expose them for all their ludicrousness. Much to my surprise then, that after 20 mins I found myself with nothing to criticise and, if anything, I started to find my feet in this elaborate thriller and found myself enjoying it more and more with every passing minute. It became apparent that this isn’t a film that’s “misjudged“, this is a film that has received a very misjudged marketing campaign. It’s not the fast paced, slick crime thriller that many were expecting but more of a deliberate and philosophical parable about the nature of greed and the rippling effect of immoral decisions.


A lot has been said about McCarthy’s first ever screenplay and his unconventional method. Many have claimed it to be deliberately cryptic and indecipherable. Admittedly, at times, it can be but the real key to understanding the film is breaking through our preconceived ideas of how dialogue should be delivered. The answers are there, they just need that extra concentration and willingness to find them. Some lengthy monologues do keep the audience at a particular arms length and it can be difficult to break through their very dense and metaphoric meanings but I managed to play along and actually found the film to be richly rewarding.


It looks fantastic, with wonderful picturesque locations and even though the characters are lavish and colourful, this is still a very believable and foreboding criminal underworld. Scott shows a confident handling of the material and the acting ensemble all seem fully committed to McCarthy’s abstract and idiosyncratic prose. I didn’t get the impression that they felt strained or unsure of what they were involved in here and that’s primarily what makes the film work. Each of their characters are convincing and they all deliver solid performances.


That being said, this is not a film that will appeal to everyone and it’s entirely understandable why it hasn’t been kindly received. Very little is explained; there’s no backstory or linear conclusion and even Fassbender’s Counselor is never revealed by name. In fact, those that were critical of the underwhelming epilogue of the Coen brothers’ adaptation of McCarthy’s “No Country For Old Men” in 2007 will likely be frustrated with “The Counselor” in it’s entirety. The whole film operates on that suggestive level. It’s a bold and daring move but one that I find respects the audience’s ability to read into events and possibilities.


Having been disappointed in a lot of Ridley’s Scott’s recent films, I was expecting more of the same here. Far from it, though. This is a highly underrated neo-noir that’s one of Scott’s best efforts for some time and McCarthy constructs a transcendent, almost Shakespearean, tragedy. It only leaves me with hope that this won’t be the last time he writes a screenplay – despite it’s much maligned reception.

Mark Walker

Trivia: Natalie Portman was considered for the role of Laura before Penelope Cruz and Angelina Jolie was originally cast as Malkina before dropping out and being replaced by Cameron Diaz.

About these ads

100 Responses to “The Counselor”

  1. Pretty interesting film, I have to agree.

  2. Victor De Leon Says:

    This is one of the very few positive reviews I’ve read lately. Nice job! I am looking forward to this one despite so many people telling me to steer clear of it. I love Ridley anyway and always give his movies a wide berth. I really respect the guy. Thanks!

    • Many will tell you I’m wrong, Vic, but I went into this expecting a complete turkey and came out really respecting it. It certainly won’t appeal to everyone but those that do get it, will find plenty to chew on!

      • Victor De Leon Says:

        Ah cool. I’m pretty sure, especially after your good review, I will find much to like in this movie. Looking forward to it very much, now! :)

      • I hope you like it as much as I did, Vic. Many will warn you against it but keep your mind open for a different experience and you just might find substance here. I certainly did. In recent memory, I’ve not came across a film more harshly criticised as I have this.

  3. Very interesting Mark! I have to admit I haven’t been enthused about this one given its maligned reception but I might give it a shot at some point. I don’t always agree w/ critics so we’ll see how I’d feel about this one. That said, I’m not generally fond of Cameron Diaz and ppl are saying she is the weakest link here.

    • I’d heard so many scathing opinions of this, Ruth, that I honestly expected to follow suit. I can’t say that I did, though. The dialogue is certainly unique and the film’s structure is too but I have to admit that I really went with it. It’s not a film that everyone will “get” or follow easily but I was completely captivated. In my humble opinion, I reckon it’s vastly underrated. I even considered rating it higher but I’ll wait for a second a viewing before it comes to that.

  4. Thank you!! Finally someone else who sees this flick for what it truly is :).

  5. I think you saw my review, but I am definitely of the opposite mind here. I agree if wants to be a contemplative analysis of mistakes, death and life. But I think it fails.

    Glad you found more to like than I did, though.

    • As always I appreciate your opinion, Josh, but I simply can’t see why this has received such a brutal criticism. I don’t think it did fail. I can see it from the point of view of expectations but that’s exactly why I liked it so much. It completely came from a different angle and approach. McCarthey’s prose were intelligently structured and masterfully delivered by all cast members. I found It very much like trying to decipher Shakespeare and his iambic pentameter. It’s takes time to tune your ear, but when you do, it’s has riches beyond most contemporary screenplays! I love it!!

  6. I am SOOOOO glad you liked this one, Mark! I loved this movie, definitely one of my favorites from last year. Great review here, and welcome to the minority! :D

    • Likewise Chris. It’s great to hear you were a fan also. I thought it was fantastic and can only assume that many were not prepared at all for it’s different approach. We seem to be the minority but I’m still glad I’m in it. :)

  7. Cheers to you for finding some positives in this complete mess, Mark. It’s funny. I actually really am on board with the obtuseness of the film. It was very hard to read into, but that’s not to say all movies need to hand everything to the viewer on a silver platter. The part I didn’t much care for was just how unpleasant everyone was. This was no happy movie. And I didn’t think too highly of some of the acting myself, which aided in my growing displeasure of what I was watching. I didn’t bash the film so much for the confusing bits, just moreso that it wasn’t the film I perhaps selfishly wanted it to be? If that makes sense. . .lol

    • Understood Tom. I can definitely see that this wasn’t the film that most wanted it to be but I was actually prepared beforehand, so I think that added to my ability to sit back and take it for what it was. I honestly didn’t find it that confusing and followed the dialogue and story for the majority. I thought it was very well delivered by everyone involved.

  8. Great review, Mark, and glad to see someone besdes Joseph liked this one, haha! I didn’t. Though it was so boring and hated the dialog.

  9. Interesting review my friend. I’ve postponed this film mainly due to the terrible opinions of it. Still I plan on seeing it this week. I actually have liked Scott’s last two films. He’s one of my favorite directors and he was a draw for me. Hopefully I’ll enjoy it on the same level as you.

    • Cheers bro! I really hope you do enjoy it as much as me. If possible, watch the extended cut. That’s the one I watched. I have little knowledge of how it matches up with the theatrical version but all I know is that I managed to really delve into it. Keep your mind open and allow it to take its time and work it’s magic.

  10. Hi Mark, very refreshing to hear someone liked it as much as you. The cast seemed so perfect. I’ve read most all things McCarthy has done and was quite intrigued by this film. Scott is hit or miss with me, but I like to give him the benefit of the doubt. Like you, and others, I had too much trepidation to rush out and see it. Now, I have to reconsider. Thanks, for that! :)

    • Thanks Cindy! I’ve read a couple of McCarthy novels and I really enjoy his writing. Maybe that helped in viewing this but I couldn’t say for sure.
      Like you, I also find Scott hit and miss but even though the majority reckon this is a disastrous miss, I strongly disagree. It’s certainly different but there’s no denying it’s bravery in being so.

  11. I raised my original opinion of this film (based on the initial cut seen in the theater) when I watched it again, in its extended cut on disc. I have to admit its now my favorite feel bad movie of 2013. Four-stars for me, too. Fine write-up, Mark.

    • Great to hear Michael. Thanks! I should have said in my review that this was the extended cut that I also watched. I haven’t seen the theatrical so I can’t compare. What I do know, is that this wasn’t as confusing or disjointed as most people made out. I actually followed it fairly easily and loved every minute of it. I considered rating it higher. :)

  12. Good review Mark. The cast does all that they can with this, and for the most part, the results are better than they should be. However, the script is just way too wordy and unbelievable in the way everyone speaks and acts.

    • Cheers Dan! I thought the cast were great and delivered the dialogue perfectly. It couldn’t have been easy for them, much like Shakespeare can be for some actors. I can see why the prose are unbelievable for some but I actually found it very interesting and original.

  13. jackdeth72 Says:

    Hi, Mark:

    Sounds interesting.

    I enjoy smart, well written “adult” entertainment. Especially when it involves high stakes money, drugs and hopefully, double and triple crosses.

    After enduring Scott’s ‘Domino’. This one looks like the clientele is about two or three levels above the scuzzy, sweaty pond scum Kiera Knightly and Mickey Rourke dealt with in that film.

    Is it just me, or is Javier Bardem going through a lumpy, doughy phase Bencio del Toro went through, post ‘Sin City’ and ‘Traffic’?

    • Hey Jack, always great to see you stop by.

      If you keep your mind open and get a handle on the idiosyncratic style of McCarthy’s prose, then you could be in for a real treat here. It does all depend on that, though. This isn’t your average crime yarn but it’s certainly adult entertainment.
      I wasn’t much of a fan of Domino but I think that was Ridley’s brother Tony who done that and I’ve not been known to be much of a fan of his work anyway (True Romance being an exception). I do have respect for a lot of Ridley’s work, though, despite being disappointed in a few of his recent ventures. He took a lot of flack for this movie but I consider it seriously underrated and misunderstood. Give a go, man. You never know! You might find yourself in the minority like myself and a handful of others.

      • jackdeth72 Says:

        Hi, Mark:


        You’re right, it was Tony Scott who directed ‘Domino’. Mea Culpa.

        I checked out the associated clips from the trailer clip you posted. The more I saw. I more I’m intrigued! Especially Cameron Diaz, her cheetah, outfits and back story.

      • Diaz took a lot of criticism for her performance but I actually quite liked her. Granted, she probably is the weakest of the cast, but she’s by no means bad. Try and watch the extended cut if you can Jack!

  14. Saw this a while ago and I did not like it at all. Had no idea what the hell I was watching. The movie has some interesting moment, but as whole I could not connect with it…at all. Received a review copy this past weekend and actually did not know what to do with it as I didn’t want to bin it, but also wouldn’t want to give it to anyone else. It will probably remain wrapped in a closet.

    • Sorry to hear that Nostra but I do understand. I went into it completely prepared, lowered my expectations and came out praising the film. I should add that this was the extended cut that I watched, though. Who knows if it’s massively different or not but it certainly struck a chord with me. I wouldn’t mind getting this as a review copy… I wish I was offered more of them. It’s only happened to me once and I didn’t take it up.

  15. Great review Mark. This was one of my most anticipated movies of last year, and then I saw the trailer… The reviews started to roll in, life happened and I missed it. Now your review has me thinking I should give this one a chance and get a rental.

    • Thanks Natalie! I gave this film a serve as well for a while. Once I heard that people really despised it, I looked elsewhere for films. Thankfully I returned to it, though. It didn’t work for most people but it did for me.

  16. Great review Mark. I was one of the rare few who liked this when it hit cinemas. It was an honourable mention on my best of 2013 list. I really enjoyed it and loved the really over the top, almost overwritten at times, dialogue.

    I hadn’t really thought of it, but I think you are spot on about the marketing being one of the issues. It really is not the up tempo thriller that people were expecting. I mean that motorcycle beheading that they continuously pushed in the trailers is a great moment. But it is one that is really not at all representative of the film as a whole.

    • Cheers Tim. Great to hear you also appreciated this. I didn’t see the theatrical version, this was the extended cut (apparently 20mins) that I watched. The only thing I know, that’s slightly different is a more violent Unrated version of the Brad Pitt scene at the end. (Don’t want to mention too much incase of spoilers). If you liked it already, though, I’d recommended checking this version out. It’s not the confusing dribble that everyone claimed it to be. I actually found it very intelligent and philosophical.

      • Yeah for sure, I definitely found it philosophical too. Perhaps what we found philosophical others found wanky or indulgent?

        Will keep an eye out for the extended cut. That scene was pretty violent in the theatrical cut as it was. But would be cool to see slightly more of the whole thing.

      • Haha! Yeah, maybe we’re just wanky self-indulgent types? LOL. We’re certainly in the minority anyway but it’s still good to know that there are a handful of us that seemed to get it.

        That scene with Pitt was something else, though, wasn’t it? Masterfully directed by Scott and actually one of the best scenes of the year in my opinion.

      • Absolutely. Really slapped me back in my seat that scene.

      • Me too, man. Gripping stuff!

  17. Very interesting review Mark, especially considering some of the vitriol this got when it came out. I still want to give it a go though, purely for the cast. I hope I find some positives in it too.

    • Cheers Chris! “Vitriol” is the right word for describing how people thought about this one. Frankly, I find it very unfair. Like I said in my review, I reckon it’s the marketing campaign that’s done a disservice to the movie. Ridley Scott himself even described it as an “art-house” film. If you keep that in mind beforehand, you just might go along with it. I hope you do! :)

  18. Nice to read a positive review of this Mark – good stuff and glad you enjoyed it. I haven’t seen it myself which refrains from me saying more, sorry.

    • Well, I’ve been known to go against the grain on occasion, Stu. Probably none more so than this movie. As we always do as amateur reviewers, though, we have to give our honest opinion and mine was very positive on this misunderstood, original gem! Give it a go, man. I’d love to hear your thoughts!

  19. Well, having read the script, seen theatrical cut and director’s cut, because I’m apparently a masochist, I must disagree – there are no answers, no matter how hard you look. I think Cormac is a good novelist…and a horrible screenwriter. The opening alone should have earn this movie dozens of Razzies. The worst part is that with the right use of script this could have been a little better but they actually cut out some of the best scenes.

    • Hey Sati, I expected you make an appearance on this one ;)
      I do remember reading how much you hated this movie. It’s understandable why you would, especially after reading the script and watching both cuts and still not taking anything from it. I have to say, though, it did work for me. I enjoyed the cryptic dialogue and the themes on human nature. I don’t find it hard to follow but it was the extended cut I seen. Had I seen the theatrical cut first, my high rating might not have happened.

  20. A really good review here Mark. Like everyone I read the incredibly negative reception this received but I still wanted to see it. I am Intrigued, it looks like an interesting film, I plan on watching it soon.

    • Cheers Chris! Most of the reviews on this were very negative. That’s what put me off originally. Like yourself, though, I was intrigued and still wanted to see it, to see why it was apparently so bad. I was very surprised when it didn’t turn out to be bad at all. I thought it was great.

  21. Says:

    Nice review. I always find it fascinating how ‘marketing campaigns’ will prejudice peoples expectations, that when they finally see the film, they feel almost betrayed that it was as ‘advertised’. I am a big believer in walking into ANY movie with no expectations. How else can you make your own opinion.

    • Thanks! The marketing certainly made this film out to be something it’s not which I find to be a real shame. It didn’t really have a chance. Like you, I try to go into a film without expectations and normally avoid trailers as well. In this case, I admittedly did have expectations with this but those were for the film to very poor. As it turns out, those expectations worked in my favour.

  22. I was incredibly disappointed when reading all the negative reviews about this on release. A tremendous cast, a great director and an exceptional writer – how could it have gone so wrong? Very glad to hear a positive reaction though, maybe now I’ll actually watch the film (when I eventually get round to) with hope. Great review Mark!


    • Cheers Adam. I was disappointed with the reception this received to. I’m even more disappointed after seeing the film and finding out that most people’s opinions are quite harsh. It worked for me but it’s a shame it didn’t work for others. I would go as far to say, that it’s in Ridley Scott’s top five movies.

  23. Great review Mark and reading it kind of makes me want to revisit the film. However, that moment passed when I remembered how underwhelmed I was during its meandering play. I gave it my all for an hour before it took its toll on me. My favourite author and a director I truly admire just wasn’t enough for me to connect to what I can only call, a cold piece of tripe :(

    • A cold piece of tripe? LOL. Fair enough, Allan. I’m sorry to hear that but I do understand. When I was writing my review, I expected that a lot of people would disagree with me.

      • Haha, Harsh I know, not like me :P Jokes aside, I will revisit the Counselor soon enough and give it another whirl (purely on the strength of your appreciation and analysis). On a similar note, I guess the soft spot you hold for this controversial film is no different to the high regard I hold for ‘Only God Forgives’. The backlash I faced was unhinged to say the least. So yeh, I feel your pain :P

      • Did you receive some backlash for Only God Forgives too. LOL. So did I. I liked that movie. I was one of the few on that occasion that thought the film as misunderstood and I also took some flack for berating Rush. Hated it and very overrated in my humble opinion.

      • Yes I received major backlash for my love of ‘Only God Forgives’, like yourself with the Counselor, I tried to give a unbiased, yet in depth analysis of its themes and symbolism….It didn’t help. People are only gonna connect with what speaks to them and that for me is one of the joys of film. On a side note, I to was neither blown away or remotely enthralled by Rush. I found it a very light weight experience that revved into cutesy melodrama territory far to often.

      • That’s exactly it, man. We all take different things from different films. Admittedly, the first time I seen Only God Forgives, I didn’t fully understand it but on a repeat viewing, I was ready for it. I tend to like films that don’t explain everything, though. That’s why I’m such a big fan of David Lynch and his like.
        (Here’s my review of Only God Forgives if you want a friend on that one ;) )

        As for Rush, I’m so happy to hear that you felt that way too. I actually found it embarrassingly bad at times. Typical from hack Ron Howard.

      • Excellent. I shall head over for a read now. Cheers Mark

  24. Excellent as always Mark. I’ll be honest, I stayed away from this on the back of the largely terrible reviews. Yours is possibly the first positive thing I’ve read about this!

    • Thanks Mark. I stayed away for a while myself but I’m glad I gave it a go. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I can’t guarantee that you will but if your expectations are in check and you’re prepared for a slow burner that does things differently, you just might take something from it.

  25. Wow nice score Mark, great review! I have not seen this and it got extremely negative reviews from everyone so I wasn’t enamoured by it. Maybe if I come across it sometime I will check it out!

    • Thanks Zoe. You should definitely take heed of the negative reviews as it’s not a film for everyone. I’m definitely in the minority here but I do think it’s misunderstood and the expectations people had were always going to go against it.

      • Maybe I look into it, I will take it all into considerations. I am still not entirely sure what it is about or what anyone was expecting… that might count in my favour hahaha.

      • That’s a good thing Zoe. My expectations were for it to really stink but that worked in my favour. ;)

  26. Third Eye Says:

    Thought provoking, intelligent and creatively crafted! Since I hadn’t read any prior reviews about this film, I had no prejudices to overcome. It’s refreshing to see a film that dares too avoid the usual “action-thriller” format, and take those willing to decipher the metaphors on a ride with this very artistic film. Loved it!!

    • I couldn’t have said it any better. It certainly does avoid conventions and for that I was thoroughly impressed. Glad to hear from yet another fan! Thanks for dropping in :)

  27. Brilliantly written review

  28. Interesting review Mark. Pretty much the two things I heard about this movie when it was released was how much of a mess it was and Diaz humping a car. I may check it out after reading your review.

    • Cheers Vinnie. This movie certainly has upset quite a few people. Many claimed it a mess and that Diaz was severely miscast but it’s far more that. Who knows if you’ll like it or not but you should find out. It’s definitely one of those polarising movies.

  29. Nice review Mark! The Counsellor is an interesting film about morality and greed that has a lot of great ideas, but they’re unfortunately all over the place. The script has a lot of great stuff in it, but desperately needed vigorous editing and I think Ridley Scott was lost with where to go with this film. The cast was great, apart from Fassbender who has given his first bad performance.
    I still enjoyed it though!

    • I think it was fantastic, to be honest. It lost its way on occasion but I put that down to me failing to grasp some of the dialogue. Other than that, I thought Scott had a fine handling on the material. I also really liked Fassbender too. That man just do no wrong these days. Thanks man! :)

  30. I just watched the film two days ago, with only a single review and an alright trailer to support me, and although the review wasn’t a glowing one, I went with my gut. I had a strange feeling this would be MY kind of film, and turns out I was digging deep into the deliciously dark; physically gorgeous and surrealist almost, but definitely not skin deep.

    Post the film I’ve only been scourging for people who understood the film completely – only to check if I wasn’t fighting the fight alone – and I bumped into yours, Mark. Great write-up; both descriptive and mysterious when needed; and I definitely agreed with all of it.

    Considering there were quite a handful of people who also understood the nature of the film and the way it flirts with both philosophy and it’s subtextual nature when in connection with human nature and inhumanity, I’m quite happy sanity exists in this world :)

    • Sounds to me as if you’ve managed to look at the film objectively, my man! Outside influences and bad marketing have led this film down a very rocky path. It’s certainly a work that requires some thought and willingness to delve into its unconventional approach but it’s a path worth treading, in my opinion. Glad to hear that you took something from it too. And thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts. Much appreciated! :)

      • I think it all depends on the frame of mind of people watching the movie (leaving those with a high intolerance of philosophy, complexity and subtext in scenes) as well. I guess I was just in the right frame of mind when I watched it. A little voice in my head keeps telling me the extended cut helped.

        Had a discussion with a friend who ended up watching The Counselor at my suggestion, and who loved it too. He told me, “People don’t really have the patience any more, really. Give ‘me blasts and boobs and they’re happy.” And it’s so true. Present sexuality in a viscerally dynamic and push-the-envelope form and you’re basically done for. This is exactly what happened with Diaz and the car and the kind of polarizing response it received. People probably didn’t even realize it wasn’t just requisite of her character, it also needed itself to be bewildering, as Reiner actually even admitted later.

        I can go on and on man. I feel I’m not done talking about it and I probably won’t be for such a long time.


      • I totally agree, man. I was lucky enough to be in the right frame of mind too. It also helped that I expected it to be complete drivel. It was the extended cut I seen also so I don’t really have a comparison to make. Surely it couldn’t have been that much different? From what I heard, it was ‘ ‘THAT’ Brad Pitt scene that was a little more graphic and there was the occasional scene slightly extended. To be honest, I just reckon it was the unconventional approach that put most people off.

      • Definitely the wildly unconventional approach. Plus, I think people probably don’t have the patience to watch two people passionately talking about perfect and imperfect diamonds for around less than 10 minutes!

        Well, I did end up doing some research on the promotion, and I have to concur here; Fox just decided to promote just the opposite of what the movie actually ended up being. This reminds me of this Anton Corbijn movie called The American, which I personally am madly in love with. Right from Clooney’s understated performance to his conversations of self-discovery with Paolo Bonaccelli’s priest, that movie was so badly misunderstood, I was mad with rage. “Such a boring movie,” they said. Sigh. This movie suffered from a similar fate of giving a highly aleatory spin on an oft tried set of events in film.

        And yeah, from what I heard it was the Brad Pitt scene and the prelude to the titles which extends the scene between Fassbender and Cruz, to name a few, which – apparently – were highly diluted to suit the audience. This reminds me, I really need to catch up on the theatrical cut to see why did the people just keep themselves from being involved!

      • I think I’ll probably check out the theatrical cut too, just to see what the hell is going on with people’s judgements here. I’m genuinely surprised by the backlash it took.

        It’s interesting you mention The American. Again, that was a film that didn’t deserve the hatred towards it. I did like it but it’s certainly one I’d have to give another chance.

      • You know what? This has been one of the most satisfying conversations I’ve had on a movie by far. I’ve followed your blog, and I’m definitely going to take a gander at what you’ve got in store.

        This is undoubtedly going to be the movie I’m going to try and gently break down for my next one on YouTube. It needs coverage – and basically I’m obsessed, so that would also amount to some closure, haha!

      • That’s good to hear, man. I’m following your blog too. I look forward to getting into your stuff too. You have a youtube channel also?

      • Yeah I’ve got a Youtube channel: – and well I have a new, works-but-still-constructing blog called where I’ll be shifting all my movie reviews and thoughts! Do check ‘em out if you can! :)

      • Cool, man. I’m following now. Make sure you add a little ‘follow by email’ button aswell, though. I prefer to keep track that way. I’ll swing by your you tube channel too.

      • I’m still learning the ropes of new widgets. Stuff used to be simpler back in the days I had started to use WordPress! Some of it is confusing me a tad much but I think I’ll come around to that real soon!

        And yeah, do check ‘em episodes out! Feedback would definitely be fun because I seem to be a newbie here!

      • No worries, man. We’ve all got to start somewhere. I took me ages to work out widgets. It’s also didn’t help that I do all of my blogging by iPhone. Makes it a little trickier but I eventually worked it all it out.

      • Wow, iPhone eh? Good sire, I now salute your bravery! I can still not really seem to get my hands around WordPress blogging get out over Smartphones! Respect!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,820 other followers

%d bloggers like this: