More Movie Madness!

Great news everybody!




Lesbian Vampire Killers looks better than Zombie Strippers and well, pretty much any cheap B-grade schlock horror film combined.

Going in to this film, you'll know exactly what to expect. Zombies. Lesbians. Killers. Just like when you went to watch Snakes on a Plane you knew what was going to happen (unless you thought it was going to be an adult film). And I think we need more movies like this.

And I'm not saying that just because I'm a guy who likes lesbians, vampires, or killers.

A Rocky Ride

Movie: RockNRolla

Director: Guy Ritchie

Starring: Gerard Butler, Toby Kebbel, Thandie Newton

Rating: 7/10

Guy Ritchie has directed great films like Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. But he has also directed some rubbish features (Swept Away springs instantly to mind), and so when I went to see his newest film, RockNRolla, you can understand my trepidation.

Of course, the benefit of this is that Ritchie is back in his well-worn-London-gangster-film-slippers, which promises at least a halfway decent film. And it was. Halfway decent.

By which I mean the film didn’t really pick up until just after the halfway mark. For the first part of the film, the ridiculously complicated plot lines and the relevant characters are established. During this phase the directing and the story feels lacklustre as it meandered on its journey towards the dramatic conclusion. That isn’t to say it wasn’t well-acted, because it was. Thandie Newton as the sexy dangerous accountant is, well, sexy; Gerard Butler’s criminal One Two is endearing and amusing; Toby Kebbel playing the dead drugged up rock star Johnny Quid to perfection, and the rest of the cast is equally great.

The storyline is convoluted and unnecessary in the beginning, with clunky silences and awkward direction, but then Ritchie comes into his own towards the end with his trademark cuts and quick progression and it feels more assured, more grown up. And it works better for it.

The dialogue is also more grown up, but that’s not to say there aren’t the typical Ritchie flourishes and one-liners, but it feels more responsible and it helps to keep the slow story flowing at the beginning.

By the end of the film you’ll want to see more, and Ritchie is going to give you that opportunity with another two films with the same characters. So as the end credits say, “The Wild Bunch will return in the Real RockNRolla”.

Here’s hoping Ritchie's recently returned skills stick around for the next one.

Movies that will make you cry like a big girl

I don't cry in movies. Hell, I rarely cry at all. But there are always some scenes or movies that get to me. And I figure that if they can to someone as hard and as masculine as me, then it must leave all you other wimps bawling in the dirt, wailing at the unfairness of it all.

So in no particular order I give you some of the saddest scenes in history. And if none of these affect you, you have no soul and we should go have a beer.

Also, there are probably spoilers in here somewhere.

The Lion King
How can this not upset everyone?



Bambi
I've never seen this film, but I've seen clips. And this is pretty sad. But imagine how well the hunter is gonna eat tonight!



Homeward Bound
Shadow is stuck in the mud and he's injured and we don't know if he'll be okay! Oh no!



American History X
One of the best endings ever.



My Girl
This is what you get for messing with bees. If Thomas J. had been more of a man, this never would've happened.



Armageddon
I was gonna put the fat guy being hit by a meteor at the start of the film in, but this one will have to do.



The Land Before Time
In true classic cartoon style, a mother dies leaving her baby to find their own way...



Mystic River
Sean Penn may be crazy, but damn he's a great actor.



Love Story
A romance story that is more wishy-washy than The Notebook, and all the better for it!



Meet Joe Black
And if this scene doesn't get you crying, I don't know what will!

Quarantine this film...

Movie: Quarantine
Director: John Erick Dowdle
Starring: Jennifer Carpenter, Columbus Short, Marin Hinkle
Rating: 4/10

Rookie reporter Angela Vidal (Jennifer Carpenter) and her cameraman Scott (Steve Harris) work for a reality TV show about people that work whilst the rest of the world is asleep. As a result they are assigned to cover the night shift at an LA fire station. Nothing happens for most of the night apart from flirting and establishing the characters of Vidal and her cameraman, as well as the two firemen they’ve been assigned to (ten bucks says you can guess who dies first).

Then suddenly they get a call in the middle of the night and rush to a small apartment block where they meet up with two cops. Once inside, they find a woman covered in blood and breathing heavily. She then attacks them... with her teeth. As the cast try to get help for the injured policeman, they realise that the building is sealed and they have no way of escaping.

If the premise sounds familiar, it is because “Quarantine” is a remake of a Spanish film that was released just last year, but they're zombies in Spain and not infected with some weird mutation of rabies.

The entire film is shot with the one camera to give it a more realistic feeling (much like The Blair Witch Project and Cloverfield). Like the two previous films, the camera work is shaky and, as the horror mounts, finds it harder to focus. This is a technique that does work; though if you have a squeamish disposition or get motion sickness and have an aversion to gore, don’t see the film.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what the ending will be, and as such the character development is perfunctory at best. We know Vidal and her plucky cameraman will survive to the very end, and as the rest of the cast is dispatched we find them alone but for one of the firemen, Jake (Jay Hernandez), as they try to make it out alive.

Needless to say they fail.

Which is what you could say about the film. It is supposed to be a horror film, and although there are tense moments, there was nothing more substantial to it. The cast is as solid as a horror movie can be (all Carpenter needed to do was look pretty, look flirty, look scared, scream, look pretty, look scared and so on), but otherwise it falls into the category of ‘been there, done that’.

Movies of the (upcoming) Month

For a change I'm going to make judgements about films purely on rumours and my own personal prejudices. Which obviously means I'll be correct in every single one of my comments, and if by chance I am wrong then I reserve the right to change my mind.
Because I'm a girl.

We start December with some crackers. We have Four Christmases with Reese Witherspoon and Vince Vaughn, and we all know what that means right? It's gonna be crap. Joining that wonderful yule time shit fest will be yet another crap film, High School Musical 3: Senior Year. Now excuse me if I don't get all excited like a pre-pubescent boy who has just seen a glimpse of boobs for the very first time and needs to change his pants, but come on! One was enough to scar the world completely thank you very much.

Then we have teen vampire flick Twilight to whet our whistles, and to be honest I couldn't care less about it. It's gonna be the same old teenage moody angst but this time, shock horror, it will be with VAMPIRES! OMFG! Vampires? Seriously? And the acting looks shite as well.

I think I've noticed a trend, because we also have Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa coming out as well. And for all intents and purposes I can pretty much guarantee it will be exactly the same as the first one, just on mainland Africa. Though at least the penguins will be back - they were the best bit of the last one.

On Boxing Day we have the big releases - the ones that should make you sit back and take notice because, dammit, these are gonna be awesome films. Well, they should be at any rate.

But to be honest, out of a list of like 8 movies, only 4 look actually tempting. We have Frost/Nixon which is based on a play based on an interview between disgraced former US President Nixon and young whippersnapper of a journalist from England, Frost. It looks to be a great film, especially if you know about the interviews that the film is based on.

Then we have French drama I've Loved You So Long with Kristin Scott Thomas. This had rave reviews in the UK and France and she is generally a very strong actress. Expect tears in this film though. Lots and lots of tears.

Another film that looks to be a tear-jerker (as well as somewhat disturbing) is the next Brad Pitt film, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. About a man who ages backwards, you just know that there is gonna be a lot of tragedy and heartache, but also some heart-warming moments too. Though nothing can beat Brad's death in Meet Joe Black.

And lastly there is the sex-addled film Vicky Cristina Barcelona. This is supposed to be Woody Allen at his depraved best. Also, it features girl on girl action, and that's always something I can get behind!

Madonna Protect Me

Madonna is awesome.

And by awesome I mean crazy.

And by crazy I mean insane.

And by insane I mean completely f**king-nuts.

Seriously.

She's insane.

I have no idea how the superb Guy Ritchie put up with her for so long. I recently stumbled across a list of "rules" (read "dictatorial demands") she made Guy adhere to whilst their children visited him in London.

If that isn't a whole serving of crazy, I don't know what is. If I were Guy I would totally smackthat woman around. And you know what? I'm fairly sure the judge (because let's face it, Madge would take you to court. She's petty like that) would side with Guy after hearing half the crap he has to put up with.

Oh yeah, that list of "rules" was apparently sent by her PA (as stated in the article). Way to take an interest in your kids' lives Madonna.

Thanks to The Daily Mail for the picture.

Quantum of Solace? More like Quantum-of-I-want-to-be-Jason-Bourne-ace.

Movie: Quantum of Solace
Director: Marc Forster
Starring: Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Olga Kurylenko
Rating: 5.5/10

“The name’s Bond. James Bond.”

It’s a line eponymous with the suave and debonair Englishman who has a license to kill. In fact, it would feel like something was missing from a Bond film if that line and the actions associated with the man aren’t in it.

And that is exactly what happened with the newest in the franchise, Quantum of Solace.

Bond films have traditionally been a flight of fantasy. The title character was a cool, calm, killer (lady and bad guys alike) with an easy charm and a dry wit. He felt at home amongst the upper class, staying in extravagant hotels, and had the taste and grooming to match.

But now the series is being re-born (or should that be re-Bourne?), making Bond grittier, tougher, more emotional. And it just doesn’t feel right.

Casino Royale had everything necessary for a rejuvenation of the franchise. But its sequel (and Bond films should never have a sequel) felt like it didn’t know where it was going. It was a mix of drama and action, but the editing was hit-and-miss with an obvious lack of tension and suspense.

There were the briefest of glimpses of the Bond that we all know and love – the glib one-liners, the womanizing charm – but they were too few and far between. It does give hope for any future Bond film though, and that helped save this one from crashing and burning.

The performances were uniformly excellent, with Craig playing the craggy Bond to perfection. His co-stars were equally great, but good acting doesn’t make up for more direction and an even worst storyline.

As a standalone action film, it had the goods necessary to rival the Bourne series – quick cut shots (although Forster does have a penchant for cutting between action and a seemingly irrelevant sequence happening at the same time) and amazing hand-to-hand combat – but as a Bond film it was trying too hard to be something it’s not, and it just didn’t work.

Here’s hoping Bond, James Bond is back for the next one.

GHWT FTW

Whoever said Guitar Hero was for nerds and wannabes?

Mad 28 Days Escape from Braveheart

If you've ever thought to yourself that there should be a movie that combines the best elements of awesome flicks such as 28 Days Later, Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome, with a little bit of Braveheart thrown in and inspired by flicks like Escape From New York, then you should watch Doomsday.

Not because it's necessarily a good film, but because it fits the aforementioned criteria.

Set in England in 2035, Scotland has been quarantined from the rest of the country due to the 'reaper' virus - a virus that emerged in 2008 and decimated pretty much the entire population. So what does England do? Build a bloody big wall to keep the dying and infected Scots out of their country.

Now it has somehow made it's way to London and so a team of specialists are sent into Scotland to retrieve a cure from survivors.

I never said the premise wasn't weak, nor did I say that it was a particularly good film. But goddamn! This film is full of gratuitous violence: blood spurting, limbs hacked off, bodies exploding, breasts being bared (not really violent per se, but I had to throw them in somewhere)... the whole nine yards.

Leading the charge is super-hot and super-dangerous Major Eden Sinclair played by Rhona Mitra.

As the film progresses we find there are essentially two tribes of survivors - the crazy Mad Max-ian ones that eat human flesh chargrilled to perfection over a massive barbecue pit, and who have taken their styling tips from the punk scene.



(For the observant ones: yes that is gaff tape around the girl's neck, and no it isn't just a fashion statement. In fact, she needs it to keep her head on because, well... you know)



Then there is the other tribe of crazies that live in a massive castle. They've also decked themselves out in full medieval garb just to fit in; horses, armour, crossbows, swords. The whole shebang. These are the ones channeling Braveheart.



Needless to say, trouble ensues and boy it sure is fun to watch. With Mitra muttering one-liners James Bond would be proud of, the action (and the blood-pumping gore) just keeps on coming. And to top it all off, it ends with an epic car chase through the Scottish countryside...



Yep. You can't get much better than a sexy goddamn Bentley Continental GT Speed crashing through a bus AND SURVIVING WITH BARELY A SCRATCH! As an aside, Bentley don't go for the entire product placement thing so the producers actually went out and bought three of those sexy beasts to play with.

This film has taken a cleaver to some awesome films and muddled them up into a mish-mash of cliches filled with blood, gore, and horrible acting. Which means if you're looking for a film that will stretch your mind and infuse your heart with a healthy glow... I'd look elsewhere. But if you want a film chockablock full of... nothing in particular other than body parts galore... then this is the one for you.

Double or Nothing

Double the Fist is back for a second season on the ABC. Why am I bringing this to your attention? Because I can.

Below is a trailer for the upcoming season.



I reviewed the first episode and I found it... different.

Back for a second season is Steve Foxx and he is pissed. The end of last season (four years ago) saw him being jettisoned into space to save the world…

Two armoured knights from a medieval re-enactor society watch on as a flaming meteor crash lands in the desert. Out of the steaming wreckage walks Foxx.

Double the Fist is a show for the boys. It is full of testosterone, anger, vampires, and mullets; the perfect show to watch whilst smashing down cans of VB, eating a bag full of raw snags, and beating your significant other.

Or is it?

Weakness is what is destroying the world (or so Steve says) and it is his self-proclaimed job to get rid of this weakness and make us all strong again. With the help of his mullet-wearing brother Rod, idiot Womp, odd-job man Mephisto, and a panda, this opening episode sees Foxx setting his sights on stealing 1 million dollars from a Pokie Tournament. Now this entire scheme is an homage to that wonderful crime caper Ocean’s Eleven and the aim? to buy a parcel of land where he can set up his headquarters for Fist glory of course.

It is an odd show (which is putting it lightly) with over-the-top special effects (that don’t look too crash hot), and sub-standard acting.

But that’s what they wanted. So they’ve succeeded in their goal of making a cheap and nasty show that’s politically incorrect and sure to raise the ire of several viewers.

Would it be recommended? Probably not, but that panda is hot.


Funnily enough, part of that review was edited out by my sub when I submitted it for a website I write reviews for and I just don't know why. Do you?

Splendid

After a wicked weekend away in Byron Bay for work (I was reviewing Splendour in the Grass which I will publish soon I'm sure) I came across this amazing band called Band of Horses.

They're an American indie rock band and they have such an amazing and dreamy quality to so many of their songs. Below is their song No One's Gonne Love You which really deserves more appreciation.

More songs from them to come.

Repo(ssess) My Heart!

I have found what has to be one of the greatest movies of all time to be released this year. No, I don't mean The Dark Knight, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull nor do I mean Zombie Strippers (which to be fair does look like it'll be a barrel of laughs and has porn star Jenna Jameson and horror maestro Robert Englund in it). A brief summary can be found in this wonderful trailer.




How does that movie not sound appealing? And what's more, how can there be a movie better than that? Well my friends, the answer is here.

Repo! The Genetic Opera.



With stars such as Alexa Vega, Paris Hilton, Sarah Brightman, Anthony Head, and many more actors of awesomeness, it is billed as a cross between Blade Runner, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, and Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.

Eagle eyed readers may have spotted Paris 'the root of all that is bad in the world' Hilton, but stay with me here. It is a schmaltzy rock opera with hideously amazing costumes and what sounds like a pretty freaking rocking soundtrack. Even she can't go wrong there right? And if she does, we can just hope she meets the same fate she did in House of Wax.



If you still think that Repo! The Genetic Opera looks bad, check out this clip.



There is hope for mankind yet!

I (Don't) Want to Believe

For all you X-Files fans out there, I sure hope you haven't seen the new movie.

Let's forget for a moment that it seems to have no real relation to the original TV show; or the fact that it seems like the producers/creator just wanted to create a cash cow that appealed to the massive fan base of an awesome and amazing series from the 90s; or even that the paranormal (which as we all know was the basis of the show) is somewhat sidelined in this recent outing.

Let's forget all of that because a bigger travesty has occurred.

You know part of the appeal for the original show was the 'will they won't they?' aspect of Mulder and Scully's relationship. Well now we know for sure. In the last X-Files movie (which was also the first) the relationship was always hinted at. There is even baby William to consider in this little cat and mouse game that was played at by Mulder and Scully - where did he come from? Was Mulder really the father? These were questions raised in the TV show and I think it was an effective plot device - it made us, the viewer, interested and it got us thinking and claiming our own theories. It was after all a show designed for the paranoid and the crazy.

But now all those questions seem to be answered.

In the latest movie, it appears that Mulder and Scully are shacked up and are in fact an item.

WHY?!

This takes away any sort of respect or interest in that particular aspect of the story. It appears that once again the bastardisation (or Hollywooding) of movies is alive and well and has ruined what could have been a halfway decent movie. We don't need things to be overtly emphasised or explained - we're not completely stupid. In fact, to hell with the internet and all that making the kids of today stupider than those of last generation. It's the goddamn movies that come out of Hollywood that explain everything to you in the most obvious terms possible. I'm surprised they haven't started releasing films that have a running commentary about what is happening. Imagine that?

BEN: I am going to pick up this pen and write down a note for my partner to get when she returns home. It is important to know because it will be the last note I ever leave her. I am leaving now.

JUDY (upon returning home): Oh look at this handily placed note on the table that makes it very obvious. I wonder who it could be from. I am going to read this note aloud now.

JUDY Reads: Dear Judy. I have just gone to the shops now because we needed some milk to feed the cats we have. I will be home later. If I am not, then you must assume the worst and think that I have been kidnapped or something equally horrible.

Subtitles down the bottom of the screen (assuming that people can still read):

BEN has just written a note to his partner saying that he will be going out to pick up some milk so that they can feed their cats. In the note, it also mentions that if he does not return then she must assume the worst. BEN places the note on the table in a very obvious place.
JUDY returns home and sees a note placed obviously on the table. She wonders who it could be from. She picks it up and reads it aloud.
SUBTITLES OF THE NOTE DISPLAYED ON SCREEN.

See. How freaking horrible would that be? And that is what has happened to the new X-Files movie. It is like being hit in the face with a goddamn brick whilst being told that you're being hit in the face by a goddamn brick.

Or at least, that's what I imagine it to be like.

I haven't actually seen the movie yet.

Tcard Me Home

The Tcard has been a public debacle for ages, and I just don't get it. If London managed to introduce the Oyster card why can't we? It's all a load of political crap that has stopped it being developed. And maybe the complete incompetency of the company that was supposed to help bring it about.

What really needed to happen was for the people in charge of NSWs public transport systems to come into a room with the premier and the developers and be told to streamline the existing fare structures and then have examples of how to do it.

By all means keep the concession/student/adult ticket prices, but actually divide cities into major zones. Zone 1 for Sydney CBD with a 3 or 5km radius, then Zone 2 from there and so on and so forth. That's what London did and people complain because it costs 4 pound to go from one station to the next in Zone 1 if you buy a ticket. What they don't tell you is that if you get an Oyster card (which you can pretty much buy anywhere) the price goes down to about 1 pound. Bargain! And you don't even have to live there to buy one! I suppose it also helps that the Underground is an effective and (reasonably) efficient public transport system. Especially considering that Sydney is severely lacking in that respect (but that's another rant).
Sure, once you hit the ocean in the east the zones run out which could be an unfair disadvantage compared to those living in the western suburbs but so what? If it makes ticketing and fares easier to understand then it's worth it.

So what is so hard about that? Stop trying to please everyone involved because that doesn't benefit the people who will actually be using the system. Pull your thumbs out and actually go and get this sorted. It's not that hard - swallow your whatever and do it. Hell, I'd even allow them to use my idea and see where that gets them.

Though knowing this country, it'll be another 10 years before it's put into effect.
By which stage even Ethiopia will probably have a better public transport fare system than here.

Australia: Land of the Free, Home of the Brave

We all know that America is the land of the crazies and the yobbos, not to mention the fatties and the uneducated.

Well, at least we thought we knew that. But with the recent revival of "me-tooism" it appears that Australia wants to take those crowns from the good old US of A and own them for itself. I keep finding evidence that we, the laconic people of the land Down Under, are fast becoming some of the stupidest people in the world. And the most awesome.

A case in point would be this article in the online Herald that caught my attention. For those that can't be bothered checking it out, it pretty much says that some guy from Newcastle (of course. You wouldn't see a Sydneysider being so uncouth) getting on his horse and riding around the streets of his neighbourhood.
Sure, that doesn't sound too bad does it.
But no, he was also swigging from a bottle of bourbon. Now that is awesome.
Of course, if this was America he would have been waving some lasso around and shooting off his little pistols whilst yelling "Yee-ha" and "darn-tootin" a lot (not to mention the flannel shirt, the cowboy boots, and the 40 gallon hat).
Seriously awesome!

Of course, in my mind I prefer to imagine it to be something similar to this amazing scene from the Governator's movie True Lies. If you don't know what I'm talking about, don't just watch that scene - go out and rent the freaking movie!!
It is one of the greatest movies of all time.
If you're into crap dialogue, unbelievable action sequences, and a plot so full of holes it looks like swiss cheese.
But it is still awesome and anyone that dares question me on that point will be summarily stoned.

So what does this have to do with Australia wanting to become fatter, stupider, crazier, and more yob-ish than America?

Probably none. I just wanted to say it.

The Demise of Civlisation as we know it?

This is in relation to a newspaper article that appeared in an American newspaper a few days ago. I found it whilst trawling one of my regular haunts, the photography forum DPReview.

The link to the article is http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_8893673 but the basis of the article is thus: a photographer was asked to take photos of a same-sex commitment ceremony in New Mexico, America. As a Christian, she refused due to religious objections about same-sex couples – it’s against the Bible and all that jazz. The couple then took this photographer to court and the State’s human rights commission instructed the photographer to pay US$6637 for her decision to refuse to do the job as it violated New Mexico’s discrimination law.
Now over on this website people started getting a little bit heated. What started off as a discussion about the so-called stifling of rights in America, it descended into what could only be described as ‘gay-bashing’ by a few members. I’ll get to that later, but first, the rights issue.
I am by no means an expert on American law. In fact, I don’t know the second thing about it. I do know, though, that they have discrimination laws which are supposed to keep people and businesses treated on an equal footing. I am also fairly sure that the laws are different in every State. Based on this particular news article though, it appears that it is a straightforward case about discrimination based on sexual orientation which as stated in the article directly contravenes N.M.’s discrimination law.
Unfortunately, there is not much more information to be had from this article. It tells us that the photographer refused based on her religious beliefs, but it doesn’t tell us how she refused. Did she simply say, “I’m sorry, I can’t photograph your commitment ceremony.” That is short, simple, to the point. It doesn’t give any reasons and to be fair, she is not required to. If she had said that, then the couple in question would have no excuse to file a complaint against her.
However, because a complaint was filed against her, I wonder if she said something a little bit more controversial. Something along the lines of, “I’m sorry. I refuse to photograph your commitment ceremony. I simply can’t do it. You see, you two are gay. Lesbians. A same-sex couple. I’m a Christian. I believe in God and I follow the Bible. And guess what? The Bible is against gays. It’s true. In fact, you should read it; it may help you change back to being normal again. Seriously. What it really comes down to though is that I just won’t take photos of you and your ‘partner’ because, a) I don’t want to end up in Hell which is where I’m sure I’ll end up for dancing with devils such as yourself, and b) You are sub-human, abnormal freaks, and I don’t want to get infected with your disease.”
Of course, the photographer could have just said, “I’m sorry, but I can’t accept this job as I don’t think I would be able to do my best professional work when I disagree with the situation.” If she had said that, then it could have swung either way – you know what Americans are like; always spoiling for a fight or failing that, someone to take to court. Yes, I know it is a gross overgeneralisation, but you have to admit that there has been an increase of cases where people just want to try grab some easy money. But that is for another time and another discussion.
Now we get on to the issue of the rights, something that Americans hold so dear to their hearts.
The First Amendment, according to the Supreme Court, says that the government may not compel people to express views that they don’t endorse. You could then make the argument that being paid to photograph a same-sex ceremony – something that you are morally opposed to – would be endorsing it to some degree. Therefore, refusing to take photos of the ceremony based on religious/personal views because you don’t want to be seen as ‘endorsing’ it is legal.
However, and this is where things get murky, as a business operating in the United States, the photographer can not refuse service to someone over something that they are not able to control such as race, handicaps, sexuality, and the like. In fact, the Federal Civil Rights Act states, “…full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.” Some states have a Civil Rights Act that provides broader protection than the Federal one, and so include sexual discrimination.
Where does that leave us then? Do we choose to honour the First Amendment or do we suck it up and take photos of the event because it is discriminatory to refuse to? In this particular instance it appears that the photographer chose the first option (no pun intended).
Of course, what makes this case all the more unbelievable is that although New Mexico ruled in favour of the same-sex couple, the state itself chucked out a proposal to allow for domestic partnerships after critics said that it would be akin to recognising gay marriage. Where’s the discrimination there I wonder? How can a state have an anti-discrimination law – and force people to follow it – when they don’t follow it themselves? Sure, they allow ‘commitment ceremonies’, but that is still a backwards way of looking at the issue. Reading through that thread I found that there are still so many people that discriminate against gays because of their sexuality. The following is taken directly from one of the posts:

Gays and their supporters are way out of control, and are doing their best to shove their abnormal behavior onto everyone else…
Many homosexuals, and a lot of others, live their lives with a chip on their shoulder and are just spoiling for a fight. They wave their freak flag high, as though that's going to make their abnormality normal. It won't.
If homosexuals want to be homosexuals, I don't care, as long as they don't try to force it on me or convince me that it's normal. The same goes for religious wackos. Leave me out of it and we'll get along fine. I don't try to force anything on anyone else and I don't expect anyone to live the way I do.

This is by far one of the most disgusting of the posts there, but someone else posted a comment about gays now having the rights to adopt children. He goes on to say that giving them that right is a bad thing and says gays are selfish for wanting that right. What the hell? Is he honestly saying that gays make worst parents than ‘traditional’ parents?
It is just scary to me that people out there still have such strong views about gays, and it’s not all related to their religious beliefs. Some people genuinely believe that homosexuals are ‘abnormal’ and ‘freaks’.
I honestly hope that this particular viewpoint is on the way out, but I’m afraid that it will never go away. It’s these same intolerant people that label Islam a threat to civilisation as everyone who follows that religion is hell bent on destroying their precious little world.
It could be that they just aren’t educated (and let’s face it, the American education system isn’t all that crash hot), but what can we do about it? I’m afraid of what the answer to that question is.