Change Your Image
Red_Flag
Faverite Films
-The Godfather
-The Shawshank Redemption
-The Devils Backbone
-Pans Labyinth
-United 93
-Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon
-No Country for Old Men
-Oldboy
-Ran
-The Lord of the Rings
Reviews
Robin Hood (2010)
...until lambs become lions.
Director: Ridley Scott Starring: Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchett, Mark Strong Running Time: 140 minutes Genre: Action | Adventure.
I know what you're thinking! A sense of Déjà Vu has just come upon you right? I mean how many times must we hear the same story told countless time...to be perfectly honest, for Ridley Scott I'll be happy to hear it one more time. I'm not going to make it a secret that Scott is, for all extensive purposes, my favourite director. So much so that kingdom of Heaven (a film unfairly critically panned) stands as one of my favourite films of all time! His retelling of Robin Hood is a joy to watch striking a perfect balance between humour and tragedy. Though Scott's master stroke is in the films scope, the sheer beauty and authenticity make for what is most certainly the best version of Robin Hood to date.
Director Ridley Scott and actor Russell Crowe reunite for their fifth big-screen outing, a retelling of the Robin Hood legend featuring the Gladiator star in the titular role. A bowman in the army of Richard Coeur de Lion, virtuous rogue Robin Hood rises from an unlikely background to become a hero to the impoverished people of Nottingham and lover to the beautiful Lady Marion (Cate Blanchett). Cyrus Voris, Ethan Reiff, and Brian Helgeland collaborate on the screenplay for a costume adventure produced by Brian Grazer (Frost/Nixon, American Gangster).
Refreshingly, this Hood ends where most of the tales begin acting as a prelude to the story we've come to love. It works tremendously and silences the only gripe I had before seeing the movie. We asked "does the world really need to see this story again?" and Ridley Scott gave his answer in the form of a new tales that's both epic and emotionally resonating. Die hard's will scoff but I won't hesitate to say that the story being told here is better than the one told in previous iterations. One sub-plot overstays its welcome and at times the film's tone can turn from dark to downright silly but the genius lies in the pacing! Throughout the entire film, not once did I find myself distracted, even for a second. This is a perfect balance of action and story that never lets up until the final curtain falls.
Ridley Scott is an astounding director; he doesn't need to prove that to anybody! So it's wonderful to see just how much effort he has added to the mix here. From stunning scenery to startling landscape, it's hard not to gaze slack jawed at just how phenomenal everything looks. The action sequences are filmed to perfection just as they should and everything falls into place beautifully! I love spending 2 hours immersed in Scott's world almost to the point where I don't enjoy leaving, this master director remains the greatest director working today and if for nothing else I urge you to see this film for the direction.
The acting is also astonishing in its breath and acts as the films shining point. Standout roles form veterans Russell Crowe and Cate Blanchett are to be expected but it's when actors surprise you with their portrayal of historic characters that talent emerges. This man Oscar Isaac who is relatively new to the scene pulls out a tremendous performance as Prince John. There's little to say that's wrong with the acting, I can bet my bottom dollar that this will be up for some awards come Oscar time.
The attention to detail is extraordinary, from the dialogue and the storyline to the myriad elements in production design, as the filmmakers create a convincing, raw, unjust and dangerous world - England as it might have been almost 1,000 years ago. Its staggering to watch these setting in action, its breathtaking. Scott's authenticity is what makes it so stunning to behold, to the point where I'd be surprised if they hadn't invented a time machine to capture such wonderful moments on film.
Verdict: Scott's version of the classic Robin Hood tale is a joy to watch, from the staggering authenticity to just how entertaining the prelude to the well known story can be. He has created, as far as I'm concerned, the greatest adaptation of the tale to date. Scale, spectacle and heart make Ridley Scott's Robin Hood a heart-pumping and wonderful tale. I cannot stress enough the sheer amount of entertainment I get from Scott's world. Destined to takes its place besides Ridley Scott's other classic as one of his best films date.
The Lovely Bones (2009)
A lovely little misstep!
Peter Jackson is an enormous talent, be it art-house (Heavenly Creatures) or splatter house (The Frighteners) his position as one of the most ingenious artists of our time is set in stone thanks to a little film called Lord of the Rings. The Lovely Bones is a compilation of his previous work, the subtly of Heavenly Creatures combined with the scope of his more epic creations. Is the final product a lovely little masterpiece or is a lovely little misstep?
Lifted, almost directly, from the classic Alice Sebold novel The Lovely Bones which deals with the kidnapping, rape and eventual murder of a 14 year old girl played by the ever wonderful Saoirse Ronan. Based on the critically acclaimed best-selling novel by Alice Sebold, and directed by Oscar winner Peter Jackson from a screenplay by Jackson & Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens, The Lovely Bones centres on a young girl who has been murdered and watches over her family – and her killer – from heaven. She must weigh her desire for vengeance against her desire for her family to heal. Oscar nominee Mark Wahlberg and Oscar winners Rachel Weisz and Susan Sarandon star along with Stanley Tucci, Michael Imperioli and Oscar nominee Saoirse Ronan
Great effort has gone into adapting Sebold's story to the big screen and it plays out wonderfully. The story is emotional, tense and for the most part extremely beautiful; all of which is squandered by the incredibly off-putting comic relief that was mostly absent from the novel. It's incredibly inappropriate and off-putting and has no place in a film so brutal. Susan Sarandon is the main offender playing the bumbling alcoholic grandmother. Her role as a whole seems redundant other than to deliver an inappropriate one liner! For the majority of the film her character will have you rolling your eyes, gritting your teeth and pulling you hair out...sit down grandma you're not funny!
Jacksons direction is formulaic, but always competent. Painted by numbers seems the appropriate term to use in this case. One moment its brooding, tense and compelling but on several very noticeable occasions Jacksons slips up producing something that can only be described as painfully armature. No matter how confident you get as a director montages in place of organic flow is never acceptable and at several pivotal moments the film slips up big times. Not to say everything is bad as far as the direction goes - Jackson does a astounding job at building up tension within the first twenty minutes almost to the point where it's hard to watch, granted all this tension is deflated with the final, tepid scene of the movie but stokes of geniuses often shine through a otherwise plain canvas.
The acting is very hit and miss, as I talked about before Susan Sarandon is the standout disappointment of the whole picture and as talented as she is her presence is detested throughout the entire thing. Other noticeable downfalls come in the form of Mark Wahlberg who, is very talented, but seems to sleepwalk through this entire film - his character is very two dimensional and for me blame is to be shared with both him and the writing of his character. Standout performances include Rachel Weisz who is inexplicably missing in action throughout most of the film but they give her a lot of depth for what little screen time she has. The true masterful performance; and one of the few redeeming qualities of the film is this young girl Saoirse Ronan who is just as incredible here as she was in the 2007 adaptation of "Atonement". She brings believability and grace to what has turned out to be an extremely ugly film to sit through.
The imagery kills the fear. In a film which is essentially about a child serial killer, the constant blossoming of visual possibility leaves the reality of what happened to Susie both hidden and cold. As far as the presentation goes the film is a mess; strange that such an ugly film should come from a visual master like Jackson but calling the visuals in this films abysmal is a gross understatement. When our main character Susie is in limbo she sees what she perceives as a perfect world...we, the audience, see a crude child watercolour or a desktop screensaver. It shouldn't be as imposing as it is, for a film that needs to rely on its subtly to work these grand opuses of colour and grandeur are totally out of place and unattractive . We've seen the afterlife treated much better using practical effects so to have it done here entirely visually feels heartless and cold. No bones about it, Jackson looks like he's spent so long in front of a computer he's forgotten how to tell a story.
On the plus side the films soundtrack is magnificent scoring high on both emotional resonance and striking fear. Well known orchestral and world tracks like "This Mortal Coil - Song To The Siren" and "Cocteau Twins- Alice" punctuate the distracting visuals and provide moments of real beauty, it's a shame the overall visual package couldn't have lived up to that of the soundtrack.
Verdict: It's unfortunate that a film this close to Jacksons heart should come out so muddled and chaotic. It reeks of an unfinished product with sloppy B grade visuals alongside Jacksons often amateurish direction. Moments of beauty often punctuate the clutter thanks to standout performances by Saoirse Ronan and a soundtrack that is a treat for the ears; but when a director this competent gives us a product this undercooked its hard not to scoff. You can't help but asked "what happened?" a story this promising, a director this talented...clearly something is rotten in Denmark. The lovely bones can be precious at times but for better or for worse this is one murder mystery that belongs in the ground.
Avatar (2009)
It's out of this world!
James Cameron's sci-fi epic finally arrives having gestated in the filmmakers mind for longer than a decade. Is his vision of the future just as fresh in 2009 or is should this avatar be terminated? There's one thing you have to give Cameron, he is like the postman...he delivers; granted sometimes he may be a little late but if there 's one filmmaker you can always rely on its Cameron. I haven't disliked a Cameron movie to date, in fact I've loved, almost, everything he's done; with the exception of course being Piranha II but let's not get into that. Avatar is a razor-sharp reminder of how epic film-making is done. Not since Return of The King has epic been done on a scale this big.
A paraplegic ex-marine finds a new life on the distant planet of Pandora, only to find himself battling humankind alongside the planet's indigenous Na'vi race in this ambitious digital 3-D sci-fi epic from Academy Award-winning Titanic director James Cameron.
The story ticks all the right boxes, at least for a Cameron film. It's got good guys with guns, bad guys with even bigger guns and appalling guys with even bigger guns. It's far from original and won't come up at this week's book club. This said it's very engaging and the people, and aliens, involved are interesting. The film goes to great length in order to develop its characters so we feel the hardship and pain when they fall in battle. The film does an excellent job of keeping a good pace. Its near impossible to get bored whilst watching the film and this may have been the quietest i have ever seen an audience. It's an engaging trek through uncharted lands that, while feeling very familiar, is a brand new assault on the senses.
James Cameron has spent a long time in incubation, flitting around on submarines, but if "Avatar is a reminder of anything it's a reminder that he's the best the industries got. His harsh, no-nonsense approach to film-making has landed him with one of the most polished pieces of art of the century and for that I take my hat off to you. This may be the most polished movie of the decade, sweeping, epic and ... dare I say flawless? Not quite. As far as the direction goes however, it's close enough and ranks, for me, as Cameron's second best film to date, behind "Aliens". IN the hands of any other director this could have gone terribly wrong; anybody other than Cameron may have played it safe delivering a spectacle, but an underwhelming one. Cameron pushes so many boundaries with one single film that it's hard not to stand up and cheer once the final credits roll. This film has pushed the limitation of the cinema medium and emerged as one of the finest film of the decade. And dare I say a classic? The acting is exceptional. Nothing warms my heart more than seeing Weaver and Cameron united for the first time since she stood toe to toe with the alien queen. She is astounding and gives an electrifying performance as Dr. Grace Augustine a woman split between two worlds. What's funny is the fact that she is not the strongest actor in the film. If anybody deserves a standing ovation is has to be Zoe Saldana who completely transforms into this other worldly thing. If you had gone into the movie not knowing that that was her you would never had guessed she was even human. She is unrecognisable and exhilarating as Neytiri who is, without a doubt, the standout role of the film. Other congratulations must be given to Sam Worthington who shows us that Terminator Salvation was not just beginners luck. Michelle Rodriguez gives a stellar turn as Trudy Chacon and ends up the way Rodriguez usually ends up. That however would be too much information.
Now for the pièce de résistance the reason you've already booked your ticket, the reason you're so sceptical, the reason the hype for this film is so large. The presentation. To call it out of this world would be an understatement. It's stunning. Sun all those pre conceived judgement and see for yourself. The sheer scope of the film is impeccable. This film will have you clambering through the jungle on horseback, soaring on the back of a banshee and just when you've taken in the sights and sounds Pandora has to offer you've bee blinded be the beautiful destruction on the final act. Any filmmaker that can make such destruction rather beautiful is a mastermind in my opinion.
Verdict: Avatar is far more than a movie, it's a cinematic experience. This is a visually assault on the senses and something that is destined to change cinema forever. It's utterly gorgeous; all backed up with scene stealing acting, fantastic direction and, wait for it, the mother of all battle scenes. Believe the hype; Cameron has delivered one of the best films of the decade and something that will undoubtedly stand the test of time. I'll be waiting in anticipation for the sequel; just don't be too long will you?
The Fourth Kind (2009)
An experience, out of this world
Stop, before you make a joke about Steven Spielberg's "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" let me make it clear that these films have nothing in common. Instead of Spielberg's focus on making contact with visitors from another word, "The Fourth Kind" focuses on the abduction challenging us with the idea of reality Vs. fictional. What's makes the experience worthwhile however is the fact that this film comes with a disclaimer. Warning the following is based on true events. I know what you're thinking; in fact I know your already thinking about skipping this one. Honestly? You shouldn't, because unlike other films based on "true" event, this film challenges the reality behind it. The film tackles the issue of whether we should always believe what were told. It's this reason that makes "The Fourth Kind" a contact you won't want to miss.
In 1972, a scale of measurement was established for alien encounters. When a UFO is sighted, it is called an encounter of the first kind. When evidence is collected, it is known as an encounter of the second kind. When contact is made with extraterrestrials, it is the third kind. The next level, abduction, is the fourth kind. This encounter has been the most difficult to document...until now.
The story is typical sci-fi fare; a small suburban town is host to abductions, suicides and a hell of a lot of eerie owls. The story can get abit trite at times playing out like a straight to DVD horror flick but it's in the delivery where "The Fourth Kind" really shines. The story is laid out with fake re-enactment footage mirroring what were leads to believe is archive footage of the real events occurring. This makes some of the more intense scenes in the movie utterly petrifying. One moment especially near the centre of the film had me cowering behind my coat; this can be occasionally powerful stuff. Its these ingenious initiatives that makes "The Fourth Kind's" story stand out, its not going to win any awards for originality but boy it does know how to spin a good yarn that will keep your engaged throughout the majority of the film with passable dialogue and well developed characters.
Photobucket The film is directed with flair and originally showing a keen eye for the inventive. The story may be familiar ground but the director has made some conscious choices in order to make the experience feel fresh and exciting. If you're worried that this is merely going to replicated the shaky cam style of films like "The Blair Witch Project" fear not. The film is primarily focuses on the main story only diving into archive footage for the very eerie occasions. The direction is confident along with some staggering cinematography and in all a staggering amount of effort and though seems to have gone into the making of this film. What works to the films advantage is the directors decision to focus it on the facts and leaving the speculation up to you, it never force feeds you opinions and only ever strays off into the unbelievable for a mere moment of seconds. I'm not sure whether or not I'm watching a true story but if I'm being honest; he had me convinced.
The acting is the one category where "The Fourth Kind" really shows some lag. Jovovich does a fine job showing conviction and respect for her character and deserves some recognition for a sometimes staggering portrayal of a troubled women. She is let down however by her incompetent supporting cast comprised of Elias Koteas, Will Patton and Hakeem Kae-Kazim. Will Patton especially shows a real lack of enthusiasm and is more wooden than a fleet of ships. His performance is almost laughable and at points dragged to movie down into levels of tedium. His role is brief thankfully and there is very little to complain about outside of this.
The movie certainly looks a treat. The low production values of the archive footage are intensely creepy and really add to the terror omitted by the film, everything else looks well polished and, well, darn right pretty. The landscape is a sight to behold the camera angles are intelligently placed and it all adds up to one amazing looking flick. The film also has technical muscle sporting off some neat visual tricks and a foreboding soundtrack that strikes up at just the right moments. All of this plus the balance of archive footage makes "The Fourth Kind" something that should be seem to be believed.
Verdict: Despite its lack of originality and weak supporting cast, "The Forth Kind" offers an experience that is truly out of this world. One you get past the recycled material you'll be treated to a movie that's high on creativity and will barrage you with some of the most astounding frights of the year. You don't have to believe in far-fetched tales of mysterious beams of light and alien abductions to get caught up in The Fourth Kind. This is the same kind of put-on as the low-budget phenomenon Paranormal Activity. Except it's far more effective.
(500) Days of Summer (2009)
500 Days isn't enough
(500) Days of Summer is a simple story of boy meets girl. The boy Tom Hanson (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) believed his whole life that he wouldn't be happy until he found the one. The girl Summer Finn (Zooey Deschanel) did not share this believe. Were told right off the bat that this is not a love story. Its is however intensely personal, for anybody who has ever experienced unrequited love, which is likely to be a large proportion of the people who were sitting in the cinema. Its a romantic comedy for all extensive purposes, but unlike you've ever seen before. (500) Days of Summer reverses the roles usually associated with character tropes and places Tom as its starry eyed dreamer who believes that true love is just around the corner. Summer, played the dude in this situation. She is just out to have fun and as a consequence they both end up in a destructive relationship.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel star in director Mark Weber's wry, non-linear romantic comedy about a man who falls head over heels for a woman who doesn't believe in love. Mark (Gordon Levitt) is an aspiring architect who currently earns his living as a greeting card writer. Upon encountering his boss' beautiful new secretary Summer (Deschanel), Mark discovers that the pair have plenty in common despite the fact that she's seemingly out of his league; for starters, they both love The Smiths, and they're both fans of surrealist artist Magritte. Before long Mark is smitten. All he can think about is Summer. Mark believes deeply in the concept of soul mates, and he's finally found his. Unfortunately for Mark, Summer sees true love as the stuff of fairy tales, and isn't looking for romance. Undaunted and undeterred by his breezy lover's casual stance on relationships, Mark summons all of his might and courage to pursue Summer and convince her that their love is real.
The film does an excellent job of creating its own sense of style. Before every outing we would see the day we going to. Their break up occurs withing the hundreds and therefore every time it passes that mark were prepared for tears and tantrums. Marc Webb (director) has made an outstanding movie, one that will make my top ten list by the end of the year, mainly due the the raw reality of it. You see a argument occur and its so realistic it almost becomes uncomfortable. Fortunatly the films wins you back round with its quirky sense of humor which had me in sticks constantly. The film seems to have a lot going for it, a great sense of realism, hilarious moments and some impeccable direction and characterization. Its a stunner on many levels none more so than the acting. Both Deschanel and Levitt do an outstanding job at being the fun likable characters the are at the start of the time line and then there almost seamless descent into struggling human beings. They bring life what could have been lifeless characters.
Webb's direction is an absolute joy throughout, presenting the story in a series of inventive and original scenes that will stay with you long after you leave the cinema. Highlights include: a split-screen sequence that puts the reality of a party up against Tom's expectations; a French art-house film parody; and a simple but breathtakingly brilliant sequence where Webb uses the same four snapshot clips of Summer to illustrate both things Tom loves about her and later, things he hates about her. The tag line for the film sums it up perfectly: "Boy meets Girl. Boy falls in love. Girl doesn't." In addition, the narration insists early on that this is not a typical romcom; instead it's a beautifully written, modern day reworking of Annie Hall that will strike a chord with anyone who's ever had their heart broken. Needless to say, it also has a terrific soundtrack.
Verdict: 500 days inst long enough. The warm friendly glow of this romantic comedy mixed with the harsh reality of life makes for something we haven't seen in a very long time. A charming, funny and wonderfully inventive romcom that's easily one of the best films of the year. It is so absolutely adorable that, as the ending credits were rolling, I had the overwhelming urge to wrap my arms around the movie and never let it go. 5/5.
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (2009)
It brightened up my day.
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs is a vague title. So much so that its almost off-putting. My first though after seeing the trailer was that this film is strictly for the youngsters; something you might leave them at while the parents go see something considerably more adult. Truthfully, this couldn't be any further from the truth. Cloudy with a chance of Meatballs is no only one of the most entertaining animated movies thus far but it's one of the best movies I've seen all year. Now i know what you're thinking. This guy has lost all credibility, there's no way this could be on par with Pixar's outing. You know what; if I were you I wouldn't believe me either. Honestly though. The film has masterfully written material and production values to die for. Each scene is crafted with care and a keen eye for the obscure.
Inspired by Ron and Judi Barrett's beloved children's book of the same name, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs follows inventor Flint Lockwood (voice of Bill Hader) and a brainy weathergirl Sam Sparks (voice of Anna Faris) as they attempt to discover why the rain in their small town has stopped, and food is falling in its place. Meanwhile, lifelong bully Brent (voice of Adam Samberg) relishes in tormenting Flint like he did when they were kids, and Mayor Shelbourne (voice of Bruce Campbell) schemes to use Flint's latest invention -- a device designed to improve everyone's lives -- for his own personal gain. Mr. T. voices by-the-books cop Earl Devereaux, and James Caan voices Flint's technophobe father Tim.
Cloudy managed to get its fundamentals out of the way rather quickly. While most animated features these day will rely on the cliché, Cloudy braches out in to the vague and at times downright obscure. Don't get me wrong there is a lot for children to enjoy here. The artistry is astounding and the sight gags are constantly amusing but the real hilarity comes from the jokes aimed at adults. Its perplexing but magnificent when 9/10 of every joke told hits dead on. This is an outright guarantee, you'll be laughing throughout 50% of the film. The other 50% you'll be spent in outright awe of the visuals which are unmatched by today's standards. Much like the graphic kids books its based off "Cloudy" certainly has its own art style, whether or not you like it is all down to taste.
"Cloudy" looks phenomenal. Every inch of the film is innovative, and jaw dropping. Though not for everybody. The animation style is extremely over the top and eccentric. If your sensitive to flashing colour, or you though "Speed Racer" was an ugly film your likely to have a similar problem here. No matter your taster there no denying the outright beauty of the final act which sees several unbelievable set pieces made cleverly out of food. It's this innovation that makes me so positive towards this, one of the best films of the year.
Verdict: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs is one of the funniest films of the year - a hugely enjoyable, superbly written and brilliantly animated comedy that'll send you out of the cinema grinning from ear to ear. Unmissable entertainment. Modestly, Meatballs opens with the dedication: "A film by . . . a lot of people." Well done, a lot of people. You've made a lot of other people very happy. And hungry. 5/5.
Inglourious Basterds (2009)
The ultimate cinema basted is back but is it cinema bliss or a total miss?
It's been a long time coming, sure some might argue that Kill Bill isn't a total mess, but for a lot of people Quentin Tarentino hasn't made a good film since Jackie Brown. Does Inglourious Basterds mark his triumphant return as king or does it just dig his grave deeper? The story takes place in Nazi occupied France and a young Jewish refugee Shosanna Dreyfus witnesses the slaughter of her family by Colonel Hans Landa. Narrowly escaping with her life, she plots her revenge several years later when German war hero Fredrick Zoller quickly takes an interest in her and arranges an illustrious movie premiere at the theatre she now runs. With the promise of every major Nazi officer in attendance, the event catches the attention of the "Basterds", a group of Jewish-American guerrilla soldiers led by the ruthless Lt. Aldo Raine. As the relentless executioners advance and the conspiring young girl's plans are set in motion, their paths will cross for a fateful evening that will shake the very annals of history.
Let's face it, the first trailer for this was terrible. It looked and sounded like kill Bill the World War II version, and true to formula it is. Oddly enough however that works to the films advantage rather than as a handicap. In Kill Bill the endless homage and references were almost unbearable. Any fan of The Shaw Brothers or Lady Snowblood could see from the second that film started who and what he was ripping off, which wouldn't have been a problem if it had been done well. reservoir Dogs, fantastic movie, total rip off of the movie "City on Fire". Why is it so highly touted as one of the best movies of all time? It's because Tarentino knew how to improve on the formula. With Kill Bill he did nothing but homage. Granted Inglorious Basterds isn't a fantastic movie, it's enjoyable, funny and wonderfully acted but in ten years time nobody will be referring to it as a classic. It has a lot going for it, the story is always engaging and takes several highly amusing twists that you don't see coming.
So why doesn't it entirely work? For many of the same reasons Kill Bill didn't work. Tarentino is really smart about knowing what just the right about of good is. He never overdoes it and when it's good it's fantastic. That said the film features some scenes of just monotony, mostly when Eli Roth rears his head but in a movie this well polished the moments of low grade stuff sticks out a mile. Pitt is passable as Lt. Aldo Raine but it's his co star Christoph Waltz WHO BRINGS THE GOOD. He is smart, edgy and most important absolutely hysterical. What it lacks is the texture of felt life; to put it another way, you don't believe a word of it. To fans of "pure" cinema this might not matter, because the film creates a world unto itself; it is about technique and spatial understanding, not realism. (The same defence used to be deployed by fans of Brian De Palma). But lacking that human dimension, the QT effect will always come up short. He's a great film encyclopaedist, which is somewhat different from a great film-maker.
QT's bullet-speed banter is back (although without the modern pop references, obviously), firing out a hail of comedy moments, with rat-a-tat regularity. The opening act feels like a spaghetti western, as we're introduced to the film's star man, Nazi officer and ace 'Jew hunter' Landa (Christoph Waltz's scene-stealing moments are brimming with malice and ominous humour), before picking up pace as a war flick with the unleashing of the Basterds, a brutal Dirty Dozen who carve swastikas onto the faces of their foes. The director's signature flourishes – close-ups of female feet, biting barroom banter and the Mexican stand-off – all get a fresh and funny update. The soundtrack's decent, too.
Verdict: Tarentino's back but not quite on top form. This is undoubtedly the best film he has made this decade but something feels out of place whether it be the underuse of the bastards or the stilted first act this is no Pulp Fiction. It is, however, a good film full of, as I like to put it "F*ck Yeahs". it will have you hooting and hollering until the final credits roll. The picture contains all the things his fans like about Tarantino -- the wit, the audacity but at the very same time it leaves in everything we don't favour him for. Hopefully next time he can iron out the wrinkles. 3/5.
Moon (2009)
My favorite film of the year.
Anybody that knows me knows that I'm a sucker for a Sci-Fi story. Just two years ago I was bowled over by Danny Boyle's shimmering spectacle "Sunshine" which provided human drama And Made for one intense thrill ride. Two years one and Duncan Jones releases "Moon" a low budget, human drama that just happens to be set out in space starring Sam Rockwell, who happens to be one of my favourite actors working today. All of these ingredients should mix perfectly to create a film that's highly emotive, beautifully acted and a sight to behold but is this moon landing a giant leap, or just a small step.
An astronaut miner extracting the precious moon gas that promises to reverse the Earth's energy crisis nears the end of his three-year contract, and makes an ominous discovery in this psychological sci-fi film starring Sam Rockwell and Kevin Spacey. For three long years, Sam Bell has dutifully harvested Helium 3 for Lunar, a company that claims it holds the key to solving humankind's energy crisis. As Sam's contract comes to an end, the lonely astronaut looks forward to returning to his wife and daughter down on Earth, where he will retire early and attempt to make up for lost time. His work on the Selene moon base has been enlightening -- the solitude helping him to reflect on the past and overcome some serious anger issues -- but the isolation is starting to make Sam uneasy. With only two weeks to go before he begins his journey back to Earth, Sam starts feeling strange: he's having inexplicable visions, and hearing impossible sounds. I could go into more depth about the plot of this film but, honestly the less about this film you know the better.
Photobucket Firstly the film looks sublime. Much like Danny Boyles "Sunshine" this low budget spectacle uses effects to enhance the story rather than distract from it. Mix that with some harrowing shots of the environment and you've got a film that both looks fantastic and, thanks to Clint Mansell's superb score, sounds great too. Sam Rockwell is a versatile actor, his range is absolutely phenomenal. One moment he is relaxed and friendly the next he's ready to slit your eye open with a pocket knife...but let's not spoilt that for you. Simply put. This is a Oscar calibre performance My only major grip with the film was with Kevin Spacey as GERTY who, does a good job, but often distracts you from the realism that the film strides for. All of these elements work just great, mixing together to display some fantastic presentation. It's the story and the direction that leads me to believe that this is the greatest film of 2009.
The story is told at a steady pace. The film never ruses and the pacing feel organic, but its this slow pacing that made me feel distinctly uncomfortable while watching this film. The filmmakers never shy away from showing you a deserted hallway (cribbing heavily from "Alien)and calling it disturbing is a severer understatement. So much so that once the film decided to give us answers you're so involved that seem personal to you. The film never shies away from pulling on your heartstrings either; a phone call to earth makes for one of the most emotional moments of the year. You might not think that "Moon" is the greatest film of the year, the things I've described may not appeal to you. However, don't dismay this film. Even if it doesn't sound like it for you please go see it. If just to make your opinion on it.
Verdict: Moon is a stunner on many levels. The direction is methodical and precise mixed seamlessly with the tour de force performance from Sam Rockwell. An eerie, disturbing and moving film, but not without occasional bursts of humour, Moon is a refreshing antidote to the dumb action-orientated futuristic fodder has dominated cinemas in recent years. For these reasons alone "Moon" takes it's place as one of my favourite films of all time and my favourite film of 2009. 5/5
The Proposal (2009)
The Proposal
OK so, the rule is as followed. As a dude I'm entitled to enjoy one romantic comedy a year, any more than that and I may as well have grown a vagina. The trailer for "Bride Wars" made me distinctively uncomfortable. I couldn't make it through the first 30 minutes of "Confessions of a shopaholic" so it comes as no surprise that this proposal didn't interest me. Why did I go? To state a few reasons, its starring Ryan Reynolds, aka the greatest guy that ever lived. He was the one spot of blue in the big sea of red that was "Wolverine" and his presence alone made me excited to see the proposal. The verdict? This is one of the better romantic comedies you'll be likely to see this year, granted its made especially for women, this won't send men into a nauseating coma but It may just make that special someone go week at the knees. If the movie doesn't do it, Reynolds is sure to.
Sandra Bullock stars in the romantic comedy The Proposal, as a Canadian immigrant who creates a demanding and difficult work environment for her subordinates at the office. When the news arrives that she's about to be deported to the Great White North, she rushes into a marriage of convenience with her young assistant (played by Ryan Reynolds) to prevent such a catastrophe from occurring. 27 Dresses' Anne Fletcher directs from a script by Peter Chiarelli for Touchstone Pictures. The story isn't anything groundbreaking. To put it simply its tediously formulaic and, as is the trend for romantic comedies, "The Proposal" doesn't aim for new heights. Instead of going for gold it plays it safe making for a satisfying if unoriginal coupling. The story hits every point you expect, it has the rise, the fall, the rise then once again, the fall and, not to ruin the ending but typically our heroes rise once more. It's been here seen that all before material but it does a decent job of getting from point A to point B.
What works for the film particularly well is casting director Amanda Mackey Johnson knew what she was doing. The film is wonderfully cast with each actor giving it everything they could. We've come to expect exceptional performances from screen veterans like Reynolds, Bullock and Steenburgen but the real pleasure comes from Golden Girl Betty White was makes for a hysterical treat as she goes from the bizarre to the downright dangerous. Bullock is better here than she's been in some time. That's not to say she is going to be nominated for any awards but she gets the job done with grace and dexterity, and for a woman of her age to have the guts to do a nude scene, you have got to give her props. What's odd is my distain for this director (Anne Fletcher) previous two movies. Step Up and 27 Dresses were two films I couldn't get through, possibly because I'm the wrong crowd but here she brings her A game and directors each moment with grace and a certain style that I haven't seen in a Romantic comedy in quite some time.
Whoever decided to cast Sandra and Ryan in this together is a genius. Their chemistry is so natural and they look so good together that it is one of the main reasons that this film works. You won't laugh out loud too often. And in fact some of the scenes are plain embarrassing (especially those involving Oscar Nunez's waiter/exotic dancer/minister character) but it is all rather engaging fun. Plus there is a very funny nude scene that Bullock and Reynolds have to share that goes to show that both are in good nick physically (remember she has 12 years on her younger co-star)and are game for a laugh.
Verdict: The Proposal is not a marriage made in heaven by any means, but the eventual charm of the leads and a gag-packed second half manage to salvage the movie from inauspicious beginnings. Ultimately, there is something refreshing about The Proposal's undemanding humour and unabashed feel-good factor. A pedigree cast, fun premise and punchy dialogue make Bullock's return to romantic comedy look a great catch, and Reynolds is sharper than a diamond solitaire. For my overall rating I give the proposal 3/5.
Public Enemies (2009)
Manns back...
Michael Mann is a guy I've looked up to for some time now. He is indisputably one of the greatest film makers of our time and has provided the world with some ground breaking films. Let's forget 2006's hiccup that was the Miami Vice movie and feast upon his latest offering, Public Enemies. But is Mann turning up the heat, or is it collateral damage.
Based on author Bryan Burrough's ambitious tome Public Enemies: America's Greatest Crime Wave and the Birth of the FBI, 1933-43, director Michael Mann's sprawling historical crime drama follows the efforts of top FBI agent Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale ) in capturing notorious bank robber John Dillinger. A folk hero to the American public thanks to his penchant for robbing the banks that many people believed responsible for the Great Depression, charming bandit Dillinger (Johnny Depp) was virtually unstoppable at the height of his criminal career; no jail could hold him, and his exploits endeared him to the common people while making headlines across the country. J. Edgar Hoover's (Billy Crudup) FBI was just coming into formation, and what better way for the ambitious lawman to transform his fledgling Bureau of Investigation into a national police force than to capture the gang that always gets away? It was the movies that killed John Dillinger -- Gangster No. 1 until he was gunned down outside a Chicago theatre after taking in the pictures one hot night in 1934 -- and it was the movies that brought him back to life. More than once. But this time it's different. This time Michael Mann is in charge. This is undoubtedly a Michael Mann film. From the intense close ups to the thrilling soundtrack its clear who's running the show. And boy if he doesn't do it near perfectly. This is masterful direction on his part; each scene is pitch perfect and balanced to the point that there isn't a speck of dirt on camera, in this aspect Public Enemies soars. Unfortunately the film does have some technical issues, none of which are large enough to take you out of the movie, but at times the audio editing is, jumpy to say the least. One minute we have guns blazing defining anybody sitting in the aisle seats, other times speech is misheard as the characters speak lines so softly it's easy to misinterpretation.
As far as the look of the film, it's absolutely phenomenal. Shot entirely on digital, which seems to be Mann's new forte, the picture looks crisp, clear and utterly classy. Sporting some unparalleled cinematography that encapsulate 1930's Chicago, there no denying that Public Enemies is the best looking film of 2009. The acting is nothing below extraordinary with favourite Johnny Depp and Christian Bale recovering from the rough patch they been through recently. This is them back on form and better than ever. Oscar Winner Marion Cotillard delivers a solid is underused performance.
Verdict: Public Enemies shows Michael Mann's steady recovery from 2006's Miami Vice, there are a couple of casual bugs, the sound can be dreadful at time but for the most part Public Enemies shines as one of 2009s brightest gems and could be up for some serious awards come Oscar time. The running time may scare some and with it being a Michael Mann film it's definitely not for everybody but for thoses who appreciate his style of movie making, this is all for you. A stunning, sumptuous sensation that acts as one of my favourite films of 2009.
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs (2009)
Sever meltdown
To be perfectly honest, I wasn't a big fan of the first two Ice Age movies. The first one has a couple of solid jokes back-up with uninspired storytelling and cheap CGI. The seconds fixed any complaints I had with the animation but once again the laughs were futile and ineffective. Here we have Ice Age 3: Dawn of the Dinosaurs and with the prospect of 3-D to tantalise our taste buds it's hard not to get excited. But is this fossil becoming extinct? After the events of "Ice Age: The Meltdown", life begins to change for Manny and his friends: Scrat is still on the hunt to hold onto his beloved acorn, while finding a possible romance in a female sabre-toothed squirrel named Scratte. Manny and Ellie, having since become an item, are expecting a baby, which leaves Manny anxious to ensure that everything is perfect for when his baby arrives. Diego is fed up with being treated like a house-cat and ponders the notion that he is becoming too laid-back. Sid begins to wish for a family of his own, and so steals some dinosaur eggs which leads to Sid ending up in a strange underground world where his herd must rescue him, while dodging dinosaurs and facing danger left and right, and meeting up with a one-eyed weasel known as Buck who hunts dinosaurs intently.
Dawn of the Dinosaurs sports some great visuals, sweeping landscapes and phenomenal character design. Everything looks and sounds just as it should. The film spots some fantastic voice acting most prominently from Simon Pegg as Buck, what's trips them up is the lazy dialogue, as much as the trailer tried to deviate away from it, Buck is the focal point of the movie, he's in 80% of it and does a great job in every scene he is in. It's just a shame that by doing this they pushed the rest of the cast forcibly into the background. Dennis Leary who plays Diego has a prominently smaller role than in the previous film and acts as nothing more than a springboard for other characters. Here in lies the problem. The creators on Ice Age 3 have done a great job at capturing the look and feel of the era but have skipped over some serious character arch's, they resolve the main characters efforts but the supporting cast is criminally underused.
The wrighting, unfortunately, is no sharper than that of the first two films. Which is to say it's rather blunt? Characters peak in monotonous one liners, there are fart gags left right and centre and while the audience who feel in love with this series back in 2002 have grown up, the series is still playing catch up. It's a futuristic looking film that feels like it was written way back in 2002. It feels uncomfortably convoluted at times with each character having their own primary motives and suffers from what a lot of threequel suffer from. T.M.S.G.O. Which stands for too much sh*t going on. It's confusing especially for younger audience members. The most disappointing aspect is the 3-D which at times is utterly phenomenal, but there such a rare occasion that if it weren't for the glasses perched on your face you would forget you were watching a 3-D film.
Verdict: Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs looks years ahead of its time, it sports great visuals and an impressive vocal cast. The wrighting on the other hand are such in the Jurassic Era with a script stolen from"Animation for Dummies" it's a admirable attempt, but a one that feels older than the fossils it encompasses. Compared to animation giant "Monsters Vs. Aliens" the 3-D is admirable but far from jaw-dropping. 2/5.
Terminator Salvation (2009)
Hasta La Vista Baby
He promised he'd be back, and four movies on the Terminator franchise is starting to look rusty. Will it be worth going back for another look into the future, or is it hasta la vista baby for this series? From what we saw in the trailer it's clear that this isn't your average Terminator movies. While the first three were primarily chase movies in which our protagonists were forced to escape and oncoming Terminator. Here it's a full frontal battle movie, everything you remember from the opening sequence of the original movies with the grown John Conner, that is this movie. With one major difference. The originals gave us a sense of envy, Conner was a person given little screen time, very screen time we longed for. Here were given it and I almost feel selfish in saying, we really didn't need this. Bale is the main problem, as much as I love Batman, I feel erroneous to even be saying this but, Christian Bale is atrocious in this movie. It's almost as if it's Bale playing Batman playing John Conner, his excessive tone that makes the movie hard to take serious, even for a Terminator film.
Call me jaded but the reason the first films work so wells is because of their pacing, they create a sense of pathos to begin with only to release hell upon our protagonists, and here the pace is near gone. Playing like your average video game rip off its nothing more than one looming set piece to the other. Don't get me wrong the film looks incredible and McG creates a formidable vision of the future with survival the main priority. Unfortunately any sense of trepidation is tarnished by dreadful one lines that feel out of place in the grand scheme of things, the supporting cast do an admirable job of keeping the foundations of the film upright, Sam Worthington giving and impressive attempt and managing to resonate where other do not, if I didn't know any better I would have had him take Bales place as Conner, but that's just me.Though competent in its B-movie way, Terminator Salvation lacks the humour, heart-tugging moments and visual pleasure that made the first two movies of the series modern pop masterpieces.
Set in post-apocalyptic 2018, John Connor is the man fated to lead the human resistance against Skynet and its army of Terminators. But the future Connor was raised to believe in is altered in part by the appearance of Marcus Wright, a stranger whose last memory is of being on death row. Connor must decide whether Marcus has been sent from the future, or rescued from the past. As Skynet prepares its final onslaught, Connor and Marcus both embark on an odyssey that takes them into the heart of Skynet's operations, where they uncover the terrible secret behind the possible annihilation of mankind. The story is typical fare, including several Terminator time-loops that give the film purpose but no real goal. With no antagonist to fear the film feels pointless, and with a protagonist that you're unable to relate to it acts emotionless. Untimely leading to an unbalanced film. Granted this is a film director by McG, (Charlie's Angels) and for a McG film you get everything you're expected to, the battle scenes are exciting and stimulating while the final 20 minutes a untouchable run that acts as the films strongest point. None of which really matter when taken into context. Sure we get to see everything we came there to see but It all happens in the last 20 minutes and trust me it's a long excruciating wait tarnished with disastrous plot holes, some of the worst dialogue of the summer and character that are so underdeveloped that it would shame that of "Wolverine" Change was inevitable—the established Terminator formula has been squeezed dry in FOX's prime-time The Sarah Conner Chronicles. But among the many things junked in McG's chop-shop is the notion of pleasure: The director describes cutting that "gratuitous moment of a girl taking her top off in an action picture" (God forbid) to get a franchise-first PG-13. He does, however, begin his film with the hook of Worthington clammily kissing a vampire-complexioned, bald-pated Helena Bonham Carter. Bale, doing the "Grrr" voice, is a lesson in how clenched effort does not equal effect. What's remarkable about his leaked freakout—mostly embarrassing in revealing a director who can't Alpha up on his set—is that it's over a performance in McG's "Terminator Salvation." Did the dude sweat this much over Reign of Fire? Verdict: Stylish but shallow, action-packed but without ever being exciting, Terminator Salvation is a movie that looked amazing as a trailer, but doesn't stand up as a 115 minute film. Bales performance is one note and shockingly dismal and it's obvious that this Terminator is showing some rust. The movie suffers from an inevitable tedium, which can best be summarized as: bang-bang-bang; pow, pow; fireball, fireball; ka-boom! It neither adds to nor subtracts from the mythology. And with Judgment Day upon us, there's no more tension, nothing compelling left to explore. By the time Arnie shows up your mind is already made up. For my overall review I give Terminator Salvation 2/5.
Drag Me to Hell (2009)
Drag Me To Hell
So many questions, so little time. I'm just going to come out and say it not only will this review be one of the longest I've written but folks I'm not holding back, this may include one or two spoilers. The movie I'm talking about, of course, is Sam Raimi's "Drag Me To Hell" which in theory is Sam Raimi's first horror films since The Evil Dead III: Army of Darkness. The main question, im sure, is does this director still have what it takes? Will he have me rolling in my seat nostalgic and immersed in the world he created with "The Evil Dead" or like some naysayers have been stipulating, has he been in Hollywood so long that he won't have the chops for this. I think its safe to say at this point that he still has it, in fact it's so apparent that I felt inclined to stand up at the end of the movie and shout "yes!". Fortunately I was in a theatre with several other Sam Raimi fans and I wasn't the only one. In that the rue brilliance of this movie emerges, if you go see this by yourself, you'll have a great time, it will be a fun, forgettable romp. See it with friends, at night, in a crowded cinema and you'll be on the floor, "please stop it your killing me" laughing.
For anybody that doesn't know, and the trailer can be deceiving, this is essentially a comedy. Granted there are several sense where the film ups the ante and you are genially terrified (for example towards the end of the movie there is a séance sequence that drove me insane, pulling my hair out) but for the most part this is a comedy, and boy if it doesn't work, almost perfectly, there are sequences that are do ultra violent and over the top that you'll be begging for an intermission just to change your pants. The movie is cast phenomenally, the supporting cast plays in well, and don't play dumb when it comes to the point where they know this isn't their movie. There no denying that the film belongs solely to Alison Lohman who is such a juxtaposition when in context. Being the young, pretty pixie of a girl it's devilishly cruel what Raimi puts her through but, god damn it it's just so much fun to watch from beginning to end. In that we get this films true motivation. It's a playground for Sam Raimi, whatever you may think of the movie one thing is absolutely undeniable, Sam Raimi had a blast making this movie twirling his Dick Dastardly moustache saying "what horrible stuff can I do to this girl next" If there's anything I can say that's bad about the movie and I almost don't want to after falling this deeply in love with it. (Spoiler Ahead) Raimi trys to pull a twist ending resulting in the immediate realisation of the audience, it almost plays as a merit if only because it will have you screaming in agony at the screen telling her, "don't you even dare go in there" As much as I may think the twist ending is a stooper, all is made up when the films takes you beyond the level you expected to...welcome to hell. Scant of plot and barren of subtext, the film is single-mindedly devoted to pushing the audience's buttons, and my god if my buttons weren't pushed. Only one other movie this year had me feeling like I was pumped full of adrenaline and that was, funnily enough, Crank 2. This is that kind of insane, over the top, exploitative fun that I enjoy so very much.
The 99-minute, eye-popping, bowel-twingeing, possessed-talking-goat extravaganza that follows must be one of the scariest things I've ever seen in the cinema. How bad? Well, I screamed out loud in genuine, save-me-now-Jesus terror for the first time since Evil Dead II. And I laughed through the fear much more often. Don't let the movies 15 rating deceive you, there may not be a whole load of blood on show (despite a horrific nose bleed sequence) but trust me you'll be throwing up your breakfast at the endless amounts of puss and slime and close up shots that may linger for days on end. You're unlikely to find a better night out this year and there not way this isn't going to make my "best of" list.
Verdict: It's a visceral assault on the senses and will have you gasping for breath as the laughs and scares mount. Raimi directs with the confidence and flair of a genre master. No Raimi fan would miss the opportunity at seeing the master filmmaker back at the helm of a movie that suits him so comfortably, this insane thrill ride grabs the audience full throttle and refuses to let go throwing blood, puss and slime in your face topping it off with a punch to the gut that is the nerve shredding ending. This is diabolically entertaining, ferociously funny and mind numbingly intense, go see it with friends, go see it at midnight. You have my guarantee you'll come back a new person, for better or worse. Muhahahaha!
Star Trek (2009)
Boldly going where no other Trek film has gone before
Boldly going where no other Star Trek movie has gone before. Upon coming out of the new J.J. Abrahams I felt both joyful and saddened. Joyful because this is, very easily, the best thing I've seen this year and saddened because it may have just replaced Wrath of Kahn as my favourite Star Trek movie of all time. Seriously folks it's just that good. For anybody who doesn't know the general outline this new Trek movie works both in and out of the continuity of the original series. Mission: Impossible III director and Alias creator J.J. Abrams resurrects the classic science fiction franchise created by Gene Roddenberry with this feature film that embraces the rich history of the influential television and film series while also exploring some uncharted territory. Heroes star Zachary Quinto assumes the role of the Federation Starfleet lieutenant and Vulcan made famous in the original series by Leonard Nimoy (who also appears in an older incarnation of his original role), Spock, with Anton Yelchin stepping into the role of USS Enterprise navigator Pavel Chekov, Zoe Saldana assuming the role of communications officer Uhura, Simon Pegg keeping the ship in top shape as chief engineer Montgomery Scott (aka "Scotty"), and Eric Bana tormenting the benevolent space explorers as the villainous Nero. Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle co-star John Cho also boards the Enterprise as Hikaru Sulu, with Chris Pine and Karl Urban assuming the legendary roles of Captain Kirk and Leonard "Bones" McCoy, respectively.
The summer officially stars here; forget what happened last week, as far as I'm concerned last week's "bad star" could have very easily been erased from my memory after watching this. This is everything and more that a Trek fans could have asked for flawless in its execution of its characters, battles and dialogue. Granted if you've never seen an episode of Star Trek in your life (god help you) and you feels repulsed by the very thought of sitting down and watching this movie, don't be. This works equally as well for newcomers as it does for fans flitting in between of spectacular set piece to yet another spectacular set piece the true heart and nature of the film becomes present, the love between Uhura and Spock becomes tender and the as the troubled friendship between Spock and Kirk becomes more prominent even those who fail to see the emotional drive in the series will undoubtedly notice it hear. The main feat that this movie accomplishes, and a one that I doubted it for, is its casting. I mean Karl Urban as Bones, you've gotta be kidding me? Holy crap Karl Urban is Bones. It's that astonishment that left me with shivers as every actor nails each of their performance with grace and passion, even if they didn't look like their TV show counterparts they embody what it means to be that character.
"Live long, and Prosper." Calling the special effects groundbreaking is a huge understatement; the visuals are exciting, refreshing and filled with such flair you would get from a less competent director. They blend seamlessly within their environments (unlike Wolverine) adding a sense of atmosphere rather than to simply look pretty, this is how you use special effects to tell a story. And what a story it is. If there were ever a series that were devoted to certain the best story possible it would most certainly be the Star Trek series. The plot is crafted with grace and complexity throwing plot twists at us left right and centre and not to mention what could possibly be the greatest cameo of all time by none other than Spock himself. All of which works a charm up against a beautifully orchestrated score that echoes with the same majesty that the film carries. Bringing together what could very easily be the greatest movie this summer.
Those who will nod knowingly (or shiver with excitement) at the appearance of Captain Pike or the reference to dilitheum crystals and those who remember that Sulu can fence will be reassured that any anomalies or inconsistencies with canon are cleverly explained away and by the appearance of one key member of the original cast. Those who are new to the franchise will be reassured that the story is self-contained. They may wonder why people applaud and laugh at a few in-jokes or the inevitable origins moments of first encounters between characters whose future interactions and relationships are as well known as their own (possibly better), but there is so much happening on screen they will not have time to wonder what they are missing. Indeed, there is so much that I have seen it twice already and look forward to seeing it again. I loved it so much I wanted to Vulcan mind meld with it.
Verdict: The best movie of the year? Most likely! The best movie of the summer? Undoubtedly! Star Trek is safe with its properties yet extraordinarily entertaining. Director J.J. Abrams hits it straight out into hyper space. Anyone left reeling after years of not having a Trek film to drool over, your wait is finally over. An epic adventure that deftly captures the spirit of the original series, while succeeding utterly in charting a new course. For my overall rating I give Star Trek an outstanding 5/5.
X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)
Talk about a Shaggy Dog story...
Sharp claws, cheep cigars, cheesy one liners? Have I seen this movie before? Thought so! Its round four for the X-Men and with the mutant franchise over it's about time we check the personal files on our protagonists with "X-Men Origins" This origin story tells the tale of Wolverine, the most prominent of the X-Men, and also the one that headlines all three of the previous film. Which brings up the films biggest flaw. Relevance. The problem is that Wolverine is a character that, in layman's terms had been done to death. A fourth film in which he headlines is abnoxsiouse, repetitive and insanely dull. The only pleasure fans will get is from the vast array of new characters most interesting of which is the criminally underused Dead pool (Ryan Reynolds). Is it an awful movie? Not really. The phrase below par seems adequate here. Its feels rushed, undercooked yet overblown at the same time. The action scenes are admirable at best blending real backgrounds with some of the ugliest CGI I've ever laid my eves upo¬n. The gruff, steel-clawed Marvel superhero Wolverine strikes out on his own in this X-Men spin-off starring series regular Hugh Jackman. The film is set up as an origin tale for the character, and will find him sharing the screen with Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds), Gambit (Taylor Kitsch), John Wraith (will.i.am), Victor Creed/Sabretooth (Liev Schreiber), and Col. William Stryker (Danny Huston). Academy Award-winning director Gavin Hood (Tsotsi) films a screenplay penned by Troy scribe David Benioff. Daniel Henney and Lost's Dominic Monaghan round out the supporting cast.
What works for the movie are twofold, it's simple structure is fool proof. There isn't a second where you'll get lost and it acts as an idiots guide to the series, obviously causing a problem for readers of the X-men comics. It's insanely undemanding leaving skipping key events and undermining characters that should play a pivotal role. None of which is going to matter to the passing movie goer. The acting is a step up for the series with bright spark Danny Huston taking over from Brian Cox as William Stryker. Liev Schreiber, a personal favourite of mine, plays Sabretooth with a veracious and cold nature and is only ever stumbles when he is stricken with poor dialogue. Here is where the film falls flat on its face, granted the series is well known for its campy dialogue - (anyone remember the Juggernaut) - here the dialogue is so underwritten and textbook that its almost uncomfortable to watch each character stagger over every line they deliver.
It's a shame really, if anyone remembers director Gavin Hood's previous work (Rendition, Tsotsi) then you'll know he is capable of great things. With this it doesn't show. His direction is lost in a haze of special effects and poorly choreographed fight sequences. Never before have I wanted Bryan Singer to get behind the wheel. The film runs at approximately 107 minutes, which is at best 20 minutes too long. Granted this movie is aimed more at the younger children than it is at me. Maybe I'm just too old for this, but if old man Logan were watching this I'm pretty sure he'd have a thing or two to say. Which brings up the concluding point, this is a film designed to repel fans boys. It placates to those in the need for a mindless actioner without any complex narrative, if you've never picked up a comic in your life, by all means go have fun. The rest of us will have to wait until next time to get the origin story we deserve.
Verdict: At best Wolverine is undemanding, placating to an audience too young to appreciate the comics it's based upon. The older audiences will only turn their nose at the poor fight choreography, drastically drab visuals and a story so effortless it for shames that of its video game counterpart. This clunky prequel doesn't even make an effort to maintain a semblance of balance between story and spectacle, characters and special effects. For my overall rating I give X-Men Origins: Wolverine an unenthusiastic 2/5.
Låt den rätte komma in (2008)
Let the Right One In
Anyone wishing for more of a bite out of the 2008 blockbuster Twighlight might want to sink their teeth into Let the Right one In. a thoughtful and provocative movie that tells the story of unrequited love in its most innocent of forms. At its best "Let the Right One In" is hauntingly chilling and motivating creating a romance so pure and innocent that it juxtaposes the bleak environment its set it. Granted, it feels very similar to Twighlight, though to be fair the book that this movie was based on - also called let the right one in - was published a year before Twighlight. Anybody ready to condemn this as a mere rip off with be forced to eat their own words as the unadulterated relationship between our protagonists (Oskar and Eli) unfolded smoothly while if you were to rent Twighlight (out on DVD) you would find a clunky, forced and artificial relationship, if you were to ask me which of the two I would spend your money on, Let the Right One In ticks every box.
While lacking a couple of years and experience, Kåre Hedebrant and Lina Leandersson, play their characters with strength and determination, its clear on both parts that effort went in to both of them as you watch in awe these screen virgins tackle their very first project with ease and grace, especially Leandersson who on several occasions sent chills down my spine as a twelve year old girl who must feed on human blood to survive. Despite its heart being in the right place, this warm, sweet tale of young love quickly turns into something completely different. A 12-year-old boy befriends a mysterious young girl whose appearance in town suspiciously coincides with a horrifying series of murders in director Tomas Alfredson's adaptation of the book by author John Ajvide Lindqvist, who also wrote the screenplay. Oskar is a young boy who can't seem to shake off the local bullies, but all of that begins to change when a new neighbour moves in next door. After striking up an innocent friendship with his eccentric next-door neighbour, Oskar realizes that she is the vampire responsible for the recent rash of deaths around town. Despite the danger, however, Oskar's friendship with the girl ultimately takes precedence over his fear of her.
With the pace at a steady, down tempo speed it's a wonderful opportunity for the audience to take in their surrounding beautifully filmed by the movies cinematography. He/She displays wonderfully the contrast between beauty and austerity as we see blood splatter hauntingly align upon the snow. Beautifully crafted and expertly acted, Let the Right One In eschews the easy options of excessive gore and cheap laughs to create a haunting, emotionally involving journey into the macabre. It can only become a classic of the genre. You're unlikely to find a more affectionate, loving yet equally frightening movie this year. As it stands Let the Right One In is the best movie of 2009 bar none. Just wait until the nerve shredding ending that had my heart in my mouth for the entire 10 minutes.
Verdict: Right One is a marvel: an ingenious genre film that manages to terrify and endear in the same instant, deftly erecting one of the most persuasive, haunting film experiences of the year. Where Twighlight failed Let the Right One In soars with impressive cinematography, beautiful acting and an ending that will have your heart racing while at the same time allowing you to shed a tear. Be that a tear of happiness or sorrow I will not tell you, I might just have to let you find out for yourself. You would be a fool not to let this movie in. For my overall rating I give Let the Right One Inan outstanding 5/5
Dragonball Evolution (2009)
make sure to order the nachos cause there's plenty of cheese.
Who said little green men don't exist? According to James Wong they do and, according to James Wong, they make excellent baddies. He couldn't be more wrong, as our antagonist "lord Piccolo" makes his way onto the screen, without a flowing introduction, several sly laughs Eco around the cinema as I hear from one corner "Do I have to sit through 90 minutes of this". Fortunately, with the movie opening nationwide tomorrow you still have hope of saving yourself, Lord Piccolo is the very least of this movies problems I assure you. I've heard from fans of the series, a series which i don't watch, that the movies follows the story reasonably closely. Now it's clear why I didn't watch the series. The plot is paper thin a mere excuse for an onslaught of cheesy on liners and attempts at wetting our appetite for the painfully obvious twist that's clear a mile off. You'd think that the director of ridiculous but tense thriller "Final Destination" would be able to conjure up the same tongue in cheek playfulness with this. And yet any sense of self ridicule is miles away, it feels almost as if Wong thinks he is making a good movie. So for a good hour and a half we are subject to colors thrown at our face, some of the worst direlogue I've ever had to sit thorough and acting that would shame Keanu Reeves.
James Wong adapts the rich mythos of the Dragonball series that grew from a manga into various popular animated series with this 20th Century Fox production starring Justin Chatwin. The plot revolves around Goku (Chatwin), Earth's greatest champion, who must defend the planet against an invading race of alien warriors hell-bent on dominating the universe. Wong directs from his own script, with Kung Fu Hustle's Stephen Chow producing. Buffy the Vampire Slayer's James Marsters co-stars as the film's villain, Piccolo, with Jamie Chung playing Chi Chi and Emmy Rossum portraying Bulma. Hong Kong legend Chow Yun-Fat rounds out the cast as Master Roshi, Goku's mentor in the film. The story develops at a breakneck pace, granted there is little story to develop, while its good to know the movie is so short, the less of it you have to endure.
Think back to this time last year, a certain manga adaptation was released under the name "Speed Racer" this hard, cold, emotionless shell of a movie sported the same recycled material that Dragonball Evolution does. It's nothing but cutsie visual jokes mixed up with some of the worst dialogue in film history. Our protagonist delivers this line with a stale drone "I am Goku. I am Oozaru. In order to defeat you, I must be one with myself" and it's only downhill from there. The acting is all over the place ranging from the over eccentric Master Roshi played by Chow Yun-Fat (who really needs to fire his agent) to the mellow underused Chi Chi (Jamie Chung) who is by far the best actor present. Though I'm not sure whether or not to blame these actors of to blame James Wong for the way he directed them. I've seen each and every person here gives great performances in different movies and it is possible for them to deliver dialogue without sounding like a reject from Street Fighter.
Verdict: Tearing through its mystical, who-gives-a-toss storyline like a drunk bat bouncing off cave walls, Dragonball's cocktail of cheap effects, eye-rolling clichés and dismal direlogue will have fans of the series condemning it as a beyond-lame failure. Dragonball: Evolution is so lazy and cheap in every aspect of its execution that the end result is almost unwatchable. It's clear no effort has gone into yet another Fox production - The Day the Earth Stood Still anyone? - why anyone would pay to this is beyond me, if your forced however, make sure to order the nachos cause there's plenty of cheese. For my overall rating I give Dragonball Evolution 1/5.
Monsters vs Aliens (2009)
See it in 3D!
Ifhere's one thing that's undeniable when it comes to DreamWorks Animation it's that its increasing in quality with every movie it makes, sure last month's Madagascar 2 wasn't quite up to snuff, but compare it to the original it may as well be Shakespeare. Kung Fu Panda couldn't hold a candle to last year's Wall-e but if you remember that this is the same studio that gave up Sharks Tale, the Panda doesn't look too shabby. So by making a film that riffs of everything I every loved about the 50's surely Monsters Vs Aliens should top them all, not quite. There are two ways to see monsters Vs Aliens, in 2D and in 3D. Which are so crucial they may as well be night and day. See it in 2D and it's a fun, forgettable animated movie that, while head and shoulders above Sharks Tale or Shrek the Third, its far from Pixar perfect. If you're lucky enough to see it in 3D, it might be one of the most entertaining experiences you'll have in the cinema all year. Calling the 3D visuals astounding is a huge understatement. Last month's Bolt looks petty in comparison, its stunning to watch and you'll get your money's worth even if it means paying full price and a little extra for the glasses.
I'm afraid I might have to eat my worlds from an earlier post I did, while commenting on the new "Up" trailer. I might have mentioned my lack of enthusiasm for DreamWorks latest offering. Calling the trailer for it, dull uninteresting and unfunny. Two of which I'll be happy to retract. It certainly isn't dull. There isn't a second during the movie I slouched over in my seat. Your entertained 100% of the time, what doesn't quite work is the jokes. The movie feels split between two major audiences. There were jokes referencing moments from movies that kids below the age of 15 are likely not to have seen (Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Mothra) with this looming to movie feels like its geared towards the audiences of film lovers who still revel in the wonders of 50's B-movies, however only seconds later were forced to sit through childish bodily functioned joke followed by a innocent giggle coming from the front row. In this sense then it pleases both audiences and deludes them at the same time, adults wont appreciate the childish fart jokes while the 50's references will escapee minors.
When California girl Susan Murphy is unwittingly clobbered by a meteor full of outer space gunk on her wedding day, she mysteriously grows to 49-feet-11-inches tall. The military jumps into action and Susan is captured and secreted away to a covert government compound. There, she is renamed Ginormica and placed in confinement with a ragtag group of Monsters: the brilliant but insect-headed Dr. Cockroach, Ph.D.; the macho half-ape, half-fish The Missing Link; the gelatinous and indestructible B.O.B.; and the 350-foot grub called Insectosaurus. Their confinement is cut short, however, when a mysterious alien robot lands on Earth and begins storming the country. In a moment of desperation, the President is persuaded to enlist the motley crew of Monsters to combat the Alien Robot and save the world from imminent destruction.
What's amiss is cleaver development, the films moves so fast and where rarely allowed to catch our breath to such an extent that some of the characters feel left out and excluded from what's going on. It's reassuring however that DreamWorks have made a film that both appeals to the avid movie lover in me as well as the young child. It works to an enormous extent and is a rarity that I can recommend both you and your child to go see this. You'll probably take your kids to see Monsters vs. Aliens, but you might have more fun seeing the movie without them.
Verdict: Its rare i ever come across a split verdict for a movie, I'm usually set on how I feel. With this I was debating it and debating it and could come to only one conclusion.With a witty script and a collection of adorable characters, Monsters doesn't have a lot of emotional depth, but it's a well-designed crowd-pleaser. You can't go wrong if you're willing to fork out an extra couple of pounds for the 3D experience. For my overall rating I give Monsters Vs. Aliens 3D 4/5 while the 2D experience gets an enthusiastic 3/5.
Blade Runner (1982)
My favorite movie of all time
Blade Runner posed question most of us were afraid to answer. The most predominant of which was what will become of us if we allow the media to control us. The film represents 21st century life as a dystopian wasteland controlled by the censor, were our lives are pre-determined and were we can't turn a street corner without being confronted with a garish advertisement, none of which was a real problem back in 1982 when the movie was released. Which is why today's audiences have managed to connect so wonderfully with this movie. The neo-noir classic has a visual flair unmatched by any other film, not only in it genre, but quite possibly of all time. These days, it's almost impossible to find a gritty science fiction motion picture that doesn't owe at least a small debt to Blade Runner's visual style. And yet this manages effortlessly to balance both its substance and its style perfectly. Each character is fleshed out perfectly, each giving depth and insight to the grand scheme of it all.
A blend of science fiction and noir detective fiction, Blade Runner (1982) was a box office and critical bust upon its initial exhibition, but its unique postmodern production design became hugely influential within the sci-fi genre, and the film gained a significant cult following that increased its stature. Harrison Ford stars as Rick Deckard, a retired cop in Los Angeles circa 2019. L.A. has become a pan-cultural dystopia of corporate advertising, pollution and flying automobiles, as well as replicants, human-like androids with short life spans built by the Tyrell Corporation for use in dangerous off-world colonization. Deckard's former job in the police department was as a talented blade runner, a euphemism for detectives that hunt down and assassinate rogue replicants. Called before his one-time superior (M. Emmett Walsh), Deckard is forced back into active duty.
A quartet of replicants led by Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer) has escaped and headed to Earth, killing several humans in the process. After meeting with the eccentric Eldon Tyrell (Joe Turkel), creator of the replicants, Deckard finds and eliminates Zhora (Joanna Cassidy), one of his targets. Attacked by another replicant, Leon (Brion James), Deckard is about to be killed when he's saved by Rachael (Sean Young), Tyrell's assistant and a replicant who's unaware of her true nature. In the meantime, Batty and his replicant pleasure model lover, Pris (Darryl Hannah) use a dying inventor, J.F. Sebastian (William Sanderson) to get close to Tyrell and murder him. Deckard tracks the pair to Sebastian's, where a bloody and violent final confrontation between Deckard and Batty takes place on a skyscraper rooftop high above the city. In 1992, Ridley Scott released a popular director's cut that removed Deckard's narration, added a dream sequence, and excised a happy ending imposed by the results of test screenings; these legendary behind-the-scenes battles were chronicled in a 1996 tome, Future Noir: The Making of Blade Runner by Paul M. Sammon.
Verdict: Blade Runner remains a dark masterpiece exploringandroid slavery and the decay of the human condition. Its visceral imagery of afuturistic and dystopian Los Angeles sticks with you for life. This raw, gorgeous,poetic masterpiece is one of the few films on my list that will have youreimagining the way you live your life. As time goes by, it's increasinglyapparent just how high this film towers.
Frost/Nixon (2008)
Its the Rocky of political dramas
If anyone were to do justice to a role that deserves justice done to it its Frank Langella as Richard Nixon. There isn't a second in the gorgeously crafted film that he loses focus and while he doesn't look like the man himself to a degree he certainly embodies the character, as does the supporting cast. Michael Sheen flawless and the self obsessed talk show host attempting to exonerate Nixon. The real triumph however comes in the form of the direction. Ron Howard has undoubtedly brought his a game to this. There isn't a moment of boredom simply because of the fact that its films as such a quick pace it feels impossible to reach that level of boredom.
The reason this film works so effortlessly as it does is due to the fact that, unlike many other historical dramas, it doesn't feel like a history lesson. Anyone with a pet peeve for this sort of historical account will still find enjoyment in Frost/Nixon because it's just so goddamn entertaining, with a pacing to rival any Rocky movie.
The director Ron Howard shoots his movie with such an energy and such resemblance to, as I said before, a boxing match that it's no wonder this is one of the front runners at this years Oscars. It may climax like a Rocky film, but doesn't end like one. There are more words to be said, and you're glad for every one.
Hollywood heavyweight Ron Howard adapts playwright Peter Morgan's West End hit for the silver screen with this feature focusing on the 1977 television interviews between journalist David Frost (Michael Sheen) and former president Richard Nixon (Frank Langella). At the time Nixon sat down with Frost to discuss the sordid details that ultimately derailed his presidency, it had been three years since the former commander in chief had been forced out of office. The Watergate scandal was still fresh in everyone's minds, and Nixon had remained notoriously tight-lipped until he agreed to sit down with Frost. Nixon was certain that he could hold his own opposite the up-and-coming British broadcaster, and even Frost's own people weren't quite sure their boss was ready for such a high-profile interview.
When the interview ultimately got under way and each man eschewed the typical posturing in favor of the simple truth, fans and critics on both sides were stunned by what they witnessed. Instead of Nixon stonewalling the interviewer as expected, or Frost lobbing softballs as the truth-seekers feared, what emerged was an unguardedly honest exchange between a man who had lost everything and another with everything to gain. In this film, viewers are treated to not only a recreation of that landmark interview, but a behind-the-scenes look at the power struggles that led up to it as well. Tim Bevan, Eric Fellner, and Brian Grazer team to produce a film adapted for the screen by original play author Morgan (The Queen and The Last King of Scotland).
It sounds like an awful night out in the cinema. But you will be amazed. In Frost/Nixon Ron Howard turns this duel between Michael Sheen's glossy playboy and Frank Langella's shifty ex-President into a gripping tango of egos. The two-hour plus running time zooms by as the so-called "thinking man's Rocky" plays like an intellectual boxing match with Nixon effortlessly dodging Frost's hesitant jabs and the young challenger looking like he won't last the distance.
Verdict: Thought Ron Howard was going to stuff it up? Think again - Frost/Nixon's a great advert for stage-to-screen adaptations. And if you'd forgotten the power of the close-up, prepare to be dazzled by dapper Dave and Tricky Dick. For my overall rating I give "Frost/Nixon" 4/5.
Vicky Cristina Barcelona (2008)
Welcome back Woody, weve missed you.
If I were to tell you that Woody Allen, director of the exceptional Annie Hall, were back on top form you would most likely not believe me. Understandable of course considering he hasn't made a good movie for several years, funnily enough the truth is that he is indeed back on sparkling form with "Vicky Christina Barcelona" his attempt at a romantic comedy showing off a beautifully ensemble cast including Javier Bardem, Scarlet Johansen and Penelope Cruz and while the premise may feels worn out and ultimately dull there this unusual chemistry between the three just mentioned that works as a huge advantage in favour of this movie. Even at the dullest point the movie remains a charm if simply for its colourful characterisation.
One thing that stands out like a sore thumb is how wonderful Penelope Cruz is. Ultimately she's a brutally tormented characters unable to deal with her own ghosts and looks nothing but unstable for 90% of the movie. Honestly said, it's an Oscar calibre performance hitting all the right notes allowing her audience to see the pain she's experiencing.Woody Allen's romantic drama Vicky Cristina Barcelona stars Rebecca Hall and Scarlett Johansson as best friends Vicky and Cristina. As the movie opens, the pair of twentysomethings travel to Barcelona so that Vicky can work on her post-graduate degree. The two meet the charming artist Juan Antonio (Javier Bardem), who offers to take them on a vacation and make love to them. Vicky, being a happily engaged young woman, refuses, but Cristina is eager for this life experience. A love triangle begins to coalesce, and things grow more complicated when Juan Antonio's passionate, unstable ex, Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz), arrives to stay after a suicide attempt.
Ultimately, in exploring this distended romantic triangle, Allen never comes down on the side of either the dull stability of marriage or the unpredictability of the boho threesome, but his position remains clear. Vicky Cristina Barcelona is another in his persuasive arguments that love, for all the complexities and pain it throws up, is still worth chasing. And along with art, perhaps the only thing worth chasing. The performances of Bardem, Cruz, Johansson and Hall are delightfully inventive, with Cruz in particular relishing the tempestuous nature of Maria Elena and her tantrums.
Vicky Christina may not be much in the long run but as it stand its a fun enjoyable fell-good romance movie with spectacular cinematography, sumptuous acting and a director that, for now, remains a one to watch. Allen has crafted a wry and thoughtful film about the peculiar stirrings of the heart, which is certainly his most accomplished piece of work since Match Point, and his funniest in the eight years since Small Time Crooks.
Verdict: Believe the hype, Woody's back and better than ever with Vicky Christina Barcelona. While the territory is familiar, the terrain is new: Allen shoots his title city with an eye for its art and architecture and while undoubtedly forgettable, you'll have a blast watching it. Vicky Cristina Barcelona is so engaging so much of the time that it feels like a modest rejuvenation: evidence that a summer in Spain can do wonders for a writer-director who may not have outlived his prime. For my overall rating i give Vicky Christina Barcelona 4/5.
Friday the 13th (2009)
Friday the 13th...a day that never ends!
At this point, number 12 in this ever disappointing franchise, it's unlikely I'll find anyone willing to give Jason another shot at reinventing himself in this. It's unfortunate then that this entry fails to do any justice to the original movies in this overblown franchise. Right off the bat were plunged into a unfortunate situation among some of the most unlikable characters known to man. The original protagonists fails to be any more relatable, understandable or hell even likable than Jason himself. Its sick, but at times I felt relief when these characters met their demise if only because being in their company is irritating to say the least. The fact that the director expects us to sympathise with them is outrageous and its near impossible to feel any emotions toward any of them.
This, however, remains the least of my worries. I never expected this to be a good movie. the trailer looks decent at best but nothing really stood out, in saying this I didn't walk in wanting to hate the movie. Anyone who knows me will know that Friday The 13th is one of my favourite horror movies of all time so to see this done well would have been a dream come true for me. The problem arises when I come to realise that none of the so called "scares" that are been thrown in our faces are in any way, shape or form scary. There mediocre at best and if you're not going to be a well made slasher flick at least have the will power to scare me.
The original handful of Friday films had a certain low-rent elegance about them, and this slickly done, dimly lighted, whiplash-edited update loses that too. The story has been pulled from its shallow grave, but not at all reinvigorated. Rather, it's been dusted off and repackaged for the sole purpose of raking in millions from foolish audiences.
A man in search of his missing sister stumbles across a deadly secret in the woods surrounding Crystal Lake as Texas Chainsaw Massacre redux duo Michael Bay and Marcus Nispel resurrect one of the silver screen's most feared slashers -- machete-wielding, hockey mask-wearing madman Jason Voorhees. The last time Clay heard from his sister, she was headed toward Crystal Lake. There, amidst the creaky old cabins and moss-coated trees, an unstoppable force of evil lies quietly dormant, patiently waiting for the perfect moment to strike. Though the police and locals all warn Clay to stay as far away from Crystal Lake as possible, it's the only lead he has, and he isn't willing to give up until he finds his sister. Clay isn't the only one inhabiting these woods either, because a group of thrill-seeking college students have just arrived at Crystal Lake hoping for a wild weekend of fun in the sun. Later, as Clay and one of the recently arrived revelers search for clues, the infamous Jason Voorhees emerges to show them just why the locals have avoided these woods for years. Could it be that Clay's sister has already met a grim demise at the end of Jason's razor-sharp machete, or is she still out there somewhere in the woods, waiting for her brother to come to her rescue? Freddy vs. Jason scribes Damian Shannon and Mark Swift pen the screenplay for a remake executive produced by Sean S. Cunningham (producer/director of the original Friday the 13th).
Verdict: Everything feels textbook, novice and amateurish when it comes down to it, you predict every death, you feel no sympathy for any of these characters and while the blood may be admirable and the opening sequence (a homage to the original) may be pretty intense this boils down to nothing more that sheer boredom. everything in post production seems so rushed and straight to DVD you wonder why they even bothered. If nothing else, just scare me. This, however, failed to even do that. For my overall rating I give Friday the 13th 1/5.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)
Its a curiouse thing...
As far as directors go, David Fincher ranks among thoses I idolise. His gentle interplay with dark and light, fun and sorrow and most importantly the real and the surreal. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button isn't his greatest movie, his most lavish movie, but not his greatest. What's striking is the way Finchers worst still manages to be better than most director's best attempts. Despite some negative criticisms, Benjamin Button is a beautiful movie, both tender and tremendous. If not overly emotional. It manages to sustain both style and substance where something like "Australia" dropped the ball. Finchers movie is well worth the wait and a certainty at this year's Oscars.
One thing that resonates wonderfully is the chemistry between Brad Pitt and Kate Blanchett, reunited after starring together in the 2007 movie "Babel", there characters show development and while there not all going in the same direction you can feel them growing, learning with age, or youth in this case. It takes a world-class storyteller and a great yarn to rivet your attention for nearly three hours. This very classy, old-school movie -- employing cutting-edge technology that will make your eyes pop -- did it for me.
David Fincher's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, an adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald's story, re-teams the director with Brad Pitt, who takes on the title role. What makes Button such a curious case is that when he is born in New Orleans just after World War I, he is already in his eighties, and proceeds to live his life aging in reverse. Brad Pitt gives a bravura, Oscar-caliber turn in Fincher's modernist epic yet lyrical tale, which bears resemblance in structure and magical realism to Forrest Gump (both penned by Eric Roth), but without that film's simplistic morality and sentimentality This sweeping film follows the character's unusual life into the 21st century as he experiences joy and sadness, loves lost and found, and the meaning of timelessness. Cate Blanchett co-stars along with Tilda Swinton, Elias Koteas, and Julia Ormond. If there's one thing this films is going to be remembered by its the beautifully subtle yet equally frightening make up effect sued on both Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett. The creators blended both visual effect with make-up effect to create some of the most awe inspiring visual effect to dat. You believe in these characters because the actors playing them are shown at every stage of their life. Aptly for a film so concerned with time, Button is 13 minutes shy of three hours and just flies by. If this is Fincher selling out, can he sell out more often please? An epic, melancholic romance that employs a multi-generational cast and groundbreaking visual effects. It's a testament to Fincher's skill as a storyteller that the film actually works, albeit sporadically. There may not be the normal, anticipated dosage of sentiment to latch onto in this film, but in exchange for patience and a little faith, Button presents the exquisite weight of the human experience in a manner the screen rarely witnesses.
Verdict: Touching yet never tedious, sensitive yet never overly sentimental. Button balances all of its elements perfectly and while the running time may scare some, the movie flew by in manner of seconds merely due to the charm and charisma of its leads. Tantalizing, touching and timeless - an epic fable revolving around mortality. For my overall rating I give The Curious Case of Benjamin Button 4/5.
Australia (2008)
Trouble down under...
If there was one convention of a movie that people might call a certainty its how it's structured. We expect the standard opening, we enjoy a good middle, and we demand a exciting pay-off. Baz Luhrmann however has decided to ignore these conventions completely. Australia is a mess of flawed ambition, a beautiful mess what with some unmatched cinematography, but a mess none the less. While any other film would be separated into three acts as mentioned above Australia plays like three separate movies each taking an hour, each failing to do justice to their surroundings. What's a shame is two of these acts are downright awful. Not since "The English Patient" have I seen a movie so pretentious that it can't even settle on what genre it wants to fall into. For an hour were subject to a convoluted drama that manages to incorporate some extremely uncomfortable elements of comedy that stick out like a sore thumb. For all its flaws the orchestral score is magnificent, it captures the emotion unlike any other element the movie has to offer. Your preconceptions of what a Baz Luhrmann's movie is will be challenged once more. None of the characterisation present in "Moulin Rouge" is present here. Each character is played to such blatant stereotypes that it borderlines on offensive.
Set against the scenic backdrop of pre-World War II Australia, Baz Luhrmann's romantic period adventure stars Nicole Kidman as an English aristocrat who inherits a sprawling ranch, and Hugh Jackman as the rough-and-tumble cattle driver who helps protect her property from greedy English cattle barons. As the pair attempt to herd 2,000 head of cattle hundreds of miles across the treacherous Australian outback, they are stunned to bear witness to the bombing of Darwin by Japanese forces -- who just a few months prior launched a devastating attack on Pearl Harbour.What Baz Luhrmann fails to comprehend is that to create a film that grips its audience and delivers what we expect, it need to be fleshed out better. Despite the movie being three hours long we never get insight into the psychosis of these characters, each and every one of them remain disposable, forgettable and if I'm being perfectly honest rather comical. None of which is helped by any of the actors who a doing nothing more than going through the motions. Australia's flaws mainly originate from its inability to sustain a consistent story. Many might argue that a story of this calibre can barley manages an hour and a half let alone the three hours Luhrmann set it to. Its in this unfortunate method that "Australia" really stumbles. Baz Luhrmann's ambition has left the story bloated, overstretched and nothing more than a gorgeous mess.
Australia fails to be anything more than an endurance test of good intentions and tangled ideas, exploited facts and fuzzy fictions, where the performances, like the plot, are slapped onto the beautiful backgrounds with the broadest - and clumsiest - of strokes. Built on lavish vistas and impeccable production, Australia is unfortunately burdened with thinly drawn characters and a lack of originality.
Verdict: As beautiful as it may be, Baz Luhrmann's ambition got the better of him. Instead of focusing on the development of his character he opted for style over substance and made a film that, while a treat for the eyes, flails to evoke emotion even from the most sensitive viewer. For my overall rating I give Australia a 2/5.
Revolutionary Road (2008)
Revolutionary Road: It's a one way street
Stop, before you even attempt to read this review I must warn you. If you are currently engaged, if you are in a happy relationship and especially if your newlyweds, stop reading now. This movie is designed to repel you. This may just be the most depressing movie of 2009. An anti-marriage campaign if I ever saw one. What sets it apart from other movie with the same attitude (The Heart of Me) is that its flawlessly done. Sam Mendes movie looks and sounds gorgeous and not once does it put a foot out of line. What Revolutionary road fails to do however is maker you like it. Its wonderfully made sure, but the subject material is so banal its almost impossible to sit through.
With "American Beauty", Sam Mendes's previous film, we were given at the very least a glimmer of hope. The theory behind that movie was that even in the last year of your life you can live a lifetime over. Here, none of these characters are given a glimmer of hope; in the end it all feels worthless.
It's a movie for a specific audience, an audience I thought I catered to, with this movie however I even had to think twice about staying. It's not that it's a bad movie however, as I said it's wonderfully made. Look as hard as you want your won't find a flaw, its simply a case of the execution overruling the premise, a rare feat but true in this case. Its seems that from the get go this story fails to do justice to the elements Sam Mendes incorporates into it.
These elements, done so flawlessly, include two riveting performances from Kate Winslet and Leonard DiCaprio both playing tortured middle class people living in 1950's America. Titanic shipmates Kathy Bates, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Kate Winslet step onboard for director Sam Mendes' tale of suburban malaise in 1950s-era Connecticut. Adapted from the classic 1961 novel by author Richard Yates, Revolutionary Road tells the tale of a young Connecticut couple whose once-idealistic relationship steadily deteriorates into a ceaseless cycle of petty jealousy and bickering as they strive to retain their independence in the conformity-obsessed world of picket fences and perfectly manicured lawns. Ever since they first met, Frank (DiCaprio) and April (Winslet) saw themselves as special and different.
They strive to form their relationship around higher ideals, though upon moving into their new home on Revolutionary Road, the defiant couple pledges never to be confined by the social conventions of the era. As time passes, however, Frank and April gradually become the very thing that they both feared most -- a typical suburban family complete with abandoned dreams and faded hopes. Frank loses his nerve after taking a comfortable job with a reliable salary, and April morphs into an unsatisfied homemaker desperate for passion and excitement. But April's independent spirit hasn't been suffocated just yet, and when she hatches a plan to head for Paris, her need to escape at all costs stands in direct contrast to Frank's desire to hold on to what they already have.
The score is executed with the same pin price precisions of that used in American Beauty, it feels as if somebody has spent a great deal of time on it. As does this film itself, Sam Mendes may have been so busy with the elements of his movie he may not have realised that the premise he was making his movie on felt a little lifeless. For better use of the word, a downer. Revolutionary Road is beautifully made, but it won't make your day.
Verdict: A film crafter so beautifully it would be a shame to pass it up now. Sam Mendes directional style shine through the dim premise and while it's unlikely to leave any audience member happy, simply due to its depressing nature, it may just enlighten some. You come out knowing you have seen some great performances, brilliant direction and beautiful cinematography, but it is just not a film you love. For my overall rating I give Revolutionary Road 3/5.