blacklist-1 Reviews

Adventures in Babysitting (1987)

An absolute gem of an 80s movie that is really funny and terrifically written!

[9/10 · 27 March 2021]

My friend recommended this to me as I really needed a fun and light movie to watch and Adventures in Babysitting certainly delivered! Plus the fact that Elizabeth Shue was the main lead was a big plus for me (as those reading they may know she played Ali in the first Karate Kids film a few year prior to this movie).

I wasn't sure what to expect when it started but from the first moment when Chris Parker appears on the scene dancing with some of the great 80s music of the era, I was sucked in. The acting across the entire cast was really good including having some pleasantly familiar well known actor faces also turning up. Chris going to babysit the Andersons kids for the evening, I thought what could go wrong? It all starts when she is forced to bring them along in her mother's car to the city to pick up her friend Brenda who has become stranded at the bus station.

But it's not quite as simple as that as the characters get into mishap after accidental mishap and things gets worse for them as the night goes on until they end up getting pursued by the mafia! The film is terrifically written with lots of hilarious moments and so cleverly structured, when just when you think things can't any worse and even seeming harmless actions like picking up a playboy magazine can have huge consequences. The pacing is perfect throughout and never lets up to the end, with you coming to care about the characters. Elizabeth Shue shines in this film throughout, especially in one of my fav moments when they have to sing the babysitting blues. She actually has a pretty good voice!

This brings me on to the other biggest plus of the movie, which is the terrific music. All the songs chosen fit perfectly and there wasn't a moment when my foot wasn't tapping along to it. Watching this made me laugh and smile a lot and a lot is packed in to it's 100 minutes run time. The fact it achieves this with such great pacing and doesn't feel rushed or dragged is an amazing achievement! Babysitting has never seemed so dangerous! I loved every minute of viewing this slightly underrated gem!

Blank Check (1994)

One of my fav childhood films, that is still a guilty pleasure all these years later!

[6/10 · 27 March 2021]

Oh man! I loved watching Blank Check as a kid! The amount of times I viewed this in my childhood I've lost count. The story of Preston Waters (Brian Bonsall) getting a blank check from a guy in a car who totally ruins his bike, and cashes it in for one million dollars brings back a lot of nostalgic memories of viewing. He gets filthy rich and goes on a spending spree, but soon gets into more trouble than he bargained for when the money he stole comes back to haunt him in more ways than one.

I had forgot all about this movie until recently when I saw a cheap DVD copy and decided to purchase it. Even after 27 years re-watching this after so long still brought a smile to my face. Yes the plot makes absolutely no sense whatsover and has the typical cliche message that family and love should be valued over money and that it can't buy happiness. But you know it doesn't bother me. This is not a film that should be taken seriously. I still found it quite entertaining, with the acting across the cast being decent. I smiled all the way through and laughed sometimes at the silliness of it all. This film for me has become a guilty pleasure and as other reviewers as reiterated is fun for the whole family. It's an hour and a half of fun enjoyment and you could certainly spend your time watching a lot worse movies!

The Other Guys (2010)

A brilliant start, substituted for an average middle and terrible end.

[5/10 · 10 May 2017]

For the first thirty minutes The Other Guys promises to be one of the best comedies of the year and a rating of a nine or ten. With witty dialogue, extremely funny jokes and great acting from Will Farrell, Mark Wahlberg, Samuel L Jackson and Dwayne Johnson, (the Rock). Farrell is at his funniest at first as a mild-mannered "forensic accountant" with no ambition to get out from behind his desk. He got into policing because he liked all the paperwork. Wahlberg is just as amusing as his reluctant partner, a frustrated man of action with anger management issues, especially when it comes to his partner. Trigger management is another problem. He's been confined to desk duties ever since he accidentally shot a famous baseball-player for trespassing in his own stadium.

Several funny sequences early on are funny with the dialogue witty. One in particular is a classical exchange of conversation between Farrell and Wahlberg about which would win in a fight between lions and a tuna. There's a clever moment when they experience just how loud one of those explosions is when you're close to it – not at all like it is in the movies. Also Johnson and Jackson appearing twice in a small cameo get some great jokes, with how they are allowed to get away with millions of dollars in collateral damage in order to make a minor drugs bust. Also the part when they jump off a twenty storey building to go after some criminals who raided a jewelry store, where they say they will land in the "bush," but splatter themselves to death on the pavement is a classic. I also enjoyed the absurdity of the fight between cops at a funeral, with all of them whispering insults as they roll around on the floor, so as not to be disrespectful of the dead. The first half hour is directed with skill by Adam McKay as the laughs keep constantly coming keeping me highly entertained.

So why do I give this only a five star out of a ten? That's because after thirty minutes have past. The film becomes desperately dull as Jackson and Johnson disappear with a lot of the fun. A plot of white coaler crime involving a dodgy financier Steve Coogan is boring and uninvolving with Coogan being deeply unfunny. The jokes with respect to the script become repetitive like when Walhberg kept saying how hot Farrel's wife is played by Eva Mendes at least five times, dreary catchphrases and some disgusting jokes about homeless people having orgies in a car and jokes about urination and penises put me right off. It's as though the scriptwriters have been replaced by someone who hasn't got a clue how to write one. The second half hour isn't too bad as I did chuckle a few times but the last forty five minutes is at it's worst with me only laughing twice as the comedy all but disappeared.

Another problem for me after thirty minutes was that Farrell and Walhberg started to get on my nerves, particularly Walhberg who kept shouting all the time. It was hard to award this in the end as it started off as a nine or a ten and then dwindled down to a one, so I compromised with a five star. I'm glad I saw the first half hour, but in the end I was extremely disappointed as in terms of wasted comic potential it's the most disappointing picture of the year.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)

An intelligent and entertaining sci-fi that has heart.

[8/10 · 22 July 2014]

After the success of the rebooted Rise of the Planet of the Apes back in 2011, a sequel was inevitable. I very much enjoyed the first one as director Rupert Wyatt reinvigorated the franchise refreshingly, which was needed after the 2001 disastrous debacle. My final words of my review of Rise was "I'm really looking forward to seeing the continuation of the story and seeing how this promising new franchise will continue to develop." I'm pleased to say Dawn of the Planet of the Apes continues this in good stead in the very capable hands of director Matt Reeves (who has already signed up for the third film). Dawn picks up ten years after Rise where we find the Simian virus has virtually wiped out most of humanity except for a few who are living in the ruins of San Francisco. First though the film directs us smartly to the Apes where we see leader Casear (another excellent performance by Andy Serkis) and his family (wife and two sons) along with other Apes like Koba (Toby Kebbel), Blue Eyes, the son of Casear (Nick Thurston) and Maurice (Karin Konoval) living peacefully in the woods hunting deer and interacting through sign language for years without seeing a human until one day they come across a group in the woods led by Malcolm (Jason Clarke) with his wife Ellie (Keri Russell) and son Aex (Kodi Smit-McPhee). Tension is immediate between the human and Apes, which becomes more complicated as the humans need access to a dam to restore power to their base, where the Apes live.

Whilst Malcolm and Casear though initially sceptical about one another want peaceful co-existence between the two parties, it's further complicated by human leader Dreyfus (Gary Oldman) who hates Apes as well as Koba who dislikes humans as they treated him badly by keeping him captivity and experimenting on him. Throughout there is a delicate uneasy balance between the two parties until an all out war is the only outcome. The differences between the humans and Apes in how they feel (Malcolm and Casear want peace) and (Dreyfus and Koba want war) is nicely mirrored, but this isn't a simple case of good versus evil as soon Malcolm and Casear find common ground through there interactions with each other of love and family. But Koba increasingly angry at the humans and his distrust leads him to turning against his own kind in hurting Casear (as at first Blue Eyes agrees with Koba) and punishing any Ape that sympathises with the humans as he goes out and leads an attack against them.

Of course the CGI effects are just amazing as the first one as the motion capture performances are terrific. Again through the facial expressions and words Serkis and Kebell are the two most impressive stars in the film as we feel for both of them, the peace yet scepticism of humans Casear has as well as his love for them (shown in one beautiful scene where Casear watches a video of Will from the first film bonding with him) and the burning hatred Koba feels for them. The human actors gave decent performances too, but the Apes were the real stars of the movie. Over 15,000 people helped make this film and it shows with the incredible amount of effort you can see was put into it. Mesmirising music is provided by Michael Giachinno, the action sequences are terrifically done and very entertaining to watch and there are some truly touching moments in the film between the Apes and humans (mainly Malcolm and Casear) but also between the Apes when Casear watches over his family and Blue Eyes when he apologises to his father for letting him down. This gives the film heart and some substance.

The themes of peace, war, nature and family are touched upon, but without any real exploration (though family is to an extent), which is why this stops short of being a brilliant film and a rating of no higher than an 8. I'm not sure what else they could have done to explore these themes, but I just felt the movie was missing that little something extra. The biggest weakness though regrettably like the first movie is the human characters who are not all that memorable. Malcolm makes the most impact, whilst Dreyfus is a wasted opportunity (played well by Gary Oldman) but his screen time is limited. We know his hates Apes, but his motivations are not really explained, though in one scene he cries when looking at photo of his lost family who presumably were killed by the virus, which hints at something, it doesn't come across particularly well (Does he blame the Apes for killing his family?) Malcolm is serviced by a wife (who is a doctor and saves Casear) and a son who are there to maybe humanise his character. But like the Vet Caroline in the first one, they are completely expendable and really didn't need to be in the film at all.

However though Dawn didn't blow me away, this was as good as Rise and I thoroughly enjoyed it from start to finish. It's rare to find sci-fi's that have intelligence as well as heart, but this one has it in abundance. I look forward in great anticipation to the third film.

Battleship (2012)

Battleship manages the incredible feat of you just wanting to play the game, such as how this movie consists of nothing but complete boredom and virtually zero talent.

[1/10 · 17 August 2013]

Battleship or as one reviewer favourably calls it Battles**t, is a typical American patriotism film, which I don't normally mind. I also delight from time to time in mindless fun cliché action movies. Check out my reviews on previous films like The Losers, The A-Team and Olympus Has Fallen and you'll see my point.

The plot of this abominable disaster consists of aliens coming to Earth for reasons unknown and a fleet of Amercian ships trying to stop them. Among them is disgraced Lt Alex Hooper (Taylor Kitsch), the other members of the cast consists of Rhianna and Liam Neeson.

Unfortunately Battleship manages to drag "mindless action genre" to such low new depths, that you would never see the bottom of it to reclassify itself of just "mind-numbingly boring."

First off the film drips so much in American Patriotism that you feel nauseated. One example is when Hooper who miraculously manages to regain his rank at the end so quickly employs a bunch of old navy guys on an old navy ship to help out, which is done in such a cliché and shoddy way, it makes you want to shoot yourself. The problem with such a long movie is there is even more dialogue/acting scenes than ever in most action films, but it's written so poorly and acted so badly it gives you a headache. Cliché after cliché presents itself so much that it resembles a built tower in a game of Jenga. Even the action itself is nothing special, which has been done with more skill and thought in other action films. There are claims that Battleship is unique in that it tells the story from both the humans and aliens point of view. I must have missed something, because I only got one side of the story.

Rhianna and Kitsch are the worst offenders with their "acting." It doesn't help the fact that they pander so rigidly to stereotypical characters like Kitsch as Cooper who is the "redeemer" and becomes the hero by the end of the film. At a certain point I might have cared, but when it came round to him changing I just didn't. I would have preferred his brother Commander Stone Hooper (Alexander Skarsgård) to be the forefront of the piece as Skarsgard has some acting ability (but unfortunately he is killed early on.) Neeson is the only other to pull in a decent performance, but as he's in it for only the equivalent of about 10 minutes of screen time in an 131 minute movie, there's little he can do to save it (despite the best efforts to market the film tailored towards Neeson being a main character in it as he's such a big Hollywood star, particularly being bankable as the new middle-age action hero in films such as Taken and Unknown recently. If anything when they did this and I saw this thinking Neeson was a main character and finding his screen time was so limited, it annoyed me even more and smacks of how desperate they were to make the film succeed. It makes you feel as though they knew it was going to be a flop).

If you want to see a good example of a sci-fi action movie done well, watch Independence day or even Battle: Los Angeles, which was done with more skill and talent than this pile of drivel.

Put simply in the end Battleship left me very bored and frustrated with clunky dialogue, too many cliché's to count, poor acting and over-coated too much with American Patriotism, which wasn't even inspiring. As a result it's just 131 minutes of complete crap with little skill, talent or thought involved.

Iron Man Three (2013)

Iron Man 3 manages to drag the franchise out of the mud after it's inferior predecessor and revitalises it to be the best one yet.

[9/10 · 4 May 2013]

After the watchable enough, but disappointing Iron Man sequel, this third one in the franchise had a lot to live up and to revert my opinion on the franchise, which had hit a rough patch. My expectations were exceedingly low, even with the good reviews.

However in a way that worked massively to the film's advantage and after 130 minutes I came out convinced that I had just seen one of the best third films of any franchise (whatever the genre, I shudder at the number 3 sometimes with movies like Rush Hour 3, Spiderman 3 and Shrek The Third) and the greatest Iron Man up to date.

One asset of the franchise, which has never failed in all three movies is it's most bankable star Robert Downey Jr (who is just a fantastic actor in any film) who always plays the part with a smarmy, sarcastic twinkle in his eyes with the undercurrent notion of a man burdened by so much, which is certainly the case in the third film.

Set after The Avengers Assemble movie (nicely referenced throughout the movie) Stark is struggling with day to day life, staying up for days at a time, (by throwing himself into his work) and struggling to sleep and having nightmares of what Loki did. We also see him suffer anxiety attacks. He is also pushing away his girlfriend Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow - who gets a meatier role in this and more to do instead of being the typical damsel in distress). But a threat to America from the fearsome adversary The Mandarin (Ben Kinglsey) aided by Killian (Guy Pearce) forces Stark to pick himself up and protect the people and everyone he loves. Throughout he is supported by his friend Rhodes (Don Cheadle) and when Iron Man crashes in the snow aided by a kid Harley Keener (TY Simpkins - there's always a kid isn't there!?)

The cast give wonderful performances, with Downey Jr obviously being the best one with his flippant attitude and witty wisecracks (thanks to a well observed script by Shane Black whose credits include Lethal Weapon). Paltrow gives her best performance yet and humanises the whole film with her worry for Stark and her best moment comes at the end where she becomes all bad-ass and then comes up with the best one liner after the carnage she causes (I won't tell you, you'll have to see if for yourself). Kingsley and Pearce gives terrific performances as the bad guys, with a nice, unexpected twist with The Mandarin, though some other reviewers say they feel cheated and it brunts the impact felt of The Mandarin being a fearsome adversary for Iron Man (which is fair enough as everyone has their own interpretations). I have to disagree and if anything for me it elevated his mystique. Downey Jr works wonderfully with Cheadle and the kid Simpkins as they have great buddy chemistry as those two gives solid performances.

Though Iron Man 3 may start off a bit slow and not have as much action as it's predecessor, on balance I prefer as it builds up the story and the character development (of Stark), which is rare in a third movie. It takes the time to not just wow us with the great special effects and exciting action sequences (the best being the last sequence at the docks), but also get to know and care about the new characters and the old ones too. The music was also great and the cameo right at the end of the credits by a certain actor (no not Robert Downey Jr) from The Avengers movie was brilliant.

The only criticism I have for Iron Man 3 is the 3D, which was awful. Very little of it is in 3D and was just a wasted gimmick that was not necessary for an already great film. Overall Iron Man 3 for me elevates the franchise to a whole new level and becomes the best of the lot. Not everyone will agree, but see it for yourself and make up your own mind.

Olympus Has Fallen (2013)

An entertaining popcorn action movie.

[7/10 · 30 April 2013]

Olympus Has Fallen is no different to any other "America being the heroes" films. The plot isn't particularly realistic. You have to suspend your disbelief a bit. (Like Kang entering the third code of that programme for nukes that the president holds, they can only get it from him by force as they did the other two characters who held it, yet they just enter the third code!?). But putting that aside I for one thoroughly enjoyed it from start to finish.

The synopsis consists of disgraced (he failed to rescue the First Lady in a car accident) ex secret service agent Mike Banning (Gerard Butler) coming to the aid of the president (Aaron Eckhart) and his son Conner (Finley Jacobesen) after the White House is taken over by terrorist Kang (Rick Yune). Meanwhile Mike is in contact with Speaker Trumbull who is the Acting President during the crisis (Morgan Freeman)

As I said the plot isn't particularly realistic, but it establishes the characters and the motives, the good guys and the bad. And the plot flows nicely from the action to the story, which is refreshing as a lot of action films struggle to do that. The script isn't great unfortunately with blatant attempts at the sort of Die Hard wisecracks Bruce Willis had (which were actually funny, in this it's just embarrassing), but the actors play their parts well. The only disappointment was Rick Yune, he never really convinced me as being a fearsome adversary (unlike he did in Die Another Day as Zao). But Eckhart makes a capable enough president, but Butler is even better as a one man action hero who you root for all the way. However unsurprisingly the actor who steals the show is Morgan Freeman as the Acting President who lends gravitas and dignity to his scenes.

I enjoyed the music throughout and it is crisply edited. The biggest asset throughout was the CGI, which was great and the action, that was terrifically choreographed. The best sequence being when the terrorists take over the White House. Olympus Has Fallen is an overall entertaining popcorn action movie for it's two hour length that I really enjoyed.

Oz the Great and Powerful (2013)

An overall fun and magical ride into the world of Oz, but it does unfortunately stumble as he shows he really isn't that great.

[8/10 · 12 April 2013]

Oz the Great and Powerful is superbly directed by Sam Raimi adding another overall great film to his fairly successful movie directing career. He gave me two hours of pure entertainment that never felt dragged out or overstretched. It starts out in Kansas 1905, in black and white (a wonderful homage to the 1939 classic with Judy Garland) with Oz (James Franco) a failing small time Magician who ends up in the colourful world of Oz. Mistaken for the actual wizard in a foretold prophecy of being the saviour that would rid the world of the Wicked Witch, he has to use his bag of "tricks" to convince the inhabitants he is who he says he is and rid the world of the Wicked Witch. Along the way he encounters characters such as Theodora (Mila Kunis), Evanora (Rachel Weisz), Anna/Glinda (Michelle Williams) and has two faithful sidekicks Finley, a monkey voiced by Zach Braff and China Girl (Zoey King)

Where the film really takes off is when Oz lands in the enchanted world and the film changes to colour. Raimi and the production team pull out all the stops in making this world come to life with a feast for the eyes with the superb CGI. The production values are top notch, some of the best effects I've seen, with really great 3D throughout too. While the film has lots of style, it also has funny moments within the script particularly with the monkey Finley. I just wish there had been some with Oz.

The fundamental failing of this film, which others have rightfully pointed out is the leading performance by James Franco. I don't mean to be harsh as he is a great actor and has pulled off some terrific performances in other roles. But Oz is one of his worst. He tries too hard to act throughout to be funny and lacks any charm or grace, which this role required. It was quite frankly embarrassing to watch particularly in moments when he smiles, which is meant to be charming, but no offence came across as forced and creepy. Even my father who is easier to impress than me didn't like Franco's performance. Ironically Franco wasn't the first given choice with this role with both Robert Downey Jr and Johnny Depp being offered the parts, which they turned down. They would have been far better as Oz. Not to mention it doesn't work in his favour when the script has his character treating the women around him badly and he gets away with it, without any redemption or anything. Boys will be boys I suppose, but not really a message that should be sent out to kids. I didn't hate Oz's character, but I didn't like him either.

Thankfully the rest of the cast, the three female leads and Oz's two sidekicks deliver excellent performances, which covers up Franco's awful one. Williams and in particular Kunis and Weisz revel in their roles and it's fun trying to work out which one of them is the Wicked Witch. Zach Braff does a wonderful voice-over job as Finley and makes the character enjoyable and entertaining to watch (he gets the best comedy moments) and the young actress Zoey King delivers an endearing voice-over performance as China Girl perfectly capturing the character's warmth and vulnerability.

With a more capable leading actor Oz the Great and Powerful could have been really Great, but the four female performances and Braff's acting along with the terrific CGI and 3D makes this an overall magical and fun ride for the whole family. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Final Destination 5 (2011)

A Somewhat Return to Form for the FD Franchise. Entertaining Enough.

[5/10 · 5 November 2012]

Initially after hearing of an FD 5 hitting the big screen, I put off seeing it after the last one, which churned out the worst of the series. To me having a fifth movie seem to taking it too far and really solidifying that expression milking the cow for all it's worth. But I am happy to report after deciding to sit down one evening with my friend who rented it from blockbuster that this was actually a decent addition to the franchise and is worth watching at least once. I would rate it as the third best in the franchise certainly surpassing the last two, which is nice. The problem with the last one was it just wasn't scary (but that was the same with two and three anyway). The main issue was that the deaths were pathetic. They were far too predictable and had lost their edge and just become tiresomely repetitive, which is what made the franchise fun (and with the first movie scary to begin with)

This fifth addition sees brand new people finding themselves facing the force of Death. As a bunch of corporate firm colleagues with friends and loved ones are going on a retreat. On the way as the bus travels over a suspension bridge, Sam Lawton (Nicholas D'Agosto) has a premonition of the collapsing of the bridge. Obviously some of his friends and colleagues get off with him and are put on Death's list where they are killed one by one in the order they are meant to if they had died in the premonition. What sadly this film lacks is anything resembling a decent script, which is truly dreadful with characters you don't come to care about and actors who cannot act to save their lives. One disappointment is Emma Bell who plays Molly (Sam's girlfriend). She gave a great performance in the chilling horror Frozen, but she was next to hopeless in this. However I'm pleased to see the return of Tony Todd as Bludworth who was sadly absent in the last movie, but returns to give the best performance in the film with a creepy demeanour as he makes the most of his limited screen time.

Anyway even though most of the acting is abysmal I'm pleased to report that the death scenes are terrifically choreographed once again, something that had been lacking since FD3. Director Steve Quale teases the audience wonderfully with how the characters will die with planting red herrings in the build up to the death, which replenishes that suspense and tension with how the death scene is built up, which was apparent in the first three films. Two of the deaths I'm referring to in particular is the gymnast one and the one at the massage parlour. The CGI as well adds to the dramatic effect as it is still impressively implemented.

The story itself has had a couple of tweaks, where instead of intervening to save the person for Death to skip them. Those on the list have to wrestle with the inner turmoil of killing someone else for Death to leave them alone. This presents some conflict with some of the characters pitting them also up against each other, but unfortunately it isn't acted well. However the ending itself was a big surprise, which I didn't see coming, which I enjoyed, even if how it was implemented looked a bit choppy.

It's true FD5 has it's flaws, but Steve Quale really does try and offer us something new and tries to capture the freshness of the first two movies, which is done somewhat successfully and I commend him and the other production staff for that. I'm glad I saw it as it was enjoyable enough to watch. By far not the best of the franchise, but it could have been a lot worse. A decent effort.

Skyfall (2012)

The Best Bond Movie Ever?

[10/10 · 2 November 2012]

Usually my review titles refer to how I feel about the movie. With the case of a Bond movie I would normally use phrases such as "Bond is Back!" or "The Best Bond Movie in Years!" etc. However this time I have decided against it and chosen to indulge in a perspective of a highly debatable nature. Is, on the 50th anniversary of James Bond, Skyfall the best Bond movie ever conceived? A lot of fans of 007 would say yes, that it far surpasses all the previous ones including the true classics, Goldfinger being one example, whilst others would surmise it is one of the best. Me personally I would argue the former for several reasons. For a start the plot is refreshingly different from all the others, which would normally consist of some plot for world domination, but this time it is much more personal with revenge against MI6, more specifically M, with instead of Bond pursuing the villain, it's the other way round. Taking the foundation of the Bond formula for a narrative and twisting it on its head offers the audience the notion that the Bond franchise can still deliver surprises and make the process feel refreshed and offers a whole new consistent level of interesting. The last two Bond movies with Daniel Craig Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace tried that, but on the individualistic level of the core of Bond's character by making him more humanistic and vulnerable, with more prone to serious injury both physically (when he is poisoned by Le Chiffre) and mentally when he loses Vesper who he was in love with. They also moved away from Bond's reliance on gadgets as well. The whole new spin on the tone of the franchise with Bond's quippy one liners and glitzy gadgets was both a triumph and failure. But Skyfall successfully blends the two beautifully with the return of Q and Moneypenny (played by new actors of course) and a certain old car.

Secondly Skyfall manages to skilfully combine the old suaveness, British patriotism that drives Bond to do his duty with his quippy one liners, whilst maintaining his more humanistic characteristics as we learn more than any other Bond movie combined about his childhood. This makes his character more compelling and attractive than ever with the Bond mystique about his world irresistible to immerse oneself in. In particular the relationship he has with M is keenly felt in this film as though she is the mother Bond never had. This is elevated by the brilliant performances Dame Judi Dench and Daniel Craig deliver with an assemblage of a top-supporting cast that turn in all exquisitely proportioned performances no matter their length of screen time. Craig's acting as Bond in Skyfall solidifies him as the potential to be one of the best Bonds in the 50 years franchise, whilst Dench delivers what can only be described as another first class performance in her prosperous acting career. Both do not deserve to be overlooked come this Oscar season. Javier Bardem as villain Silva is sensational as he is funny, weird and horrific all at the same time. Though his screen time is limited, every nuance, word and sentence carried weight and he shows himself to be a true adversary worthy for Bond. There are also great supporting performances from Ralph Fiennes, Albert Finney, Ben Winshaw (terrific as the new Q) and Naomie Harris as Eve.

What also helps with the excellent performances is the exquisitely written screenplay by Purvis, Wade and London, which is high on topicality (cyber-terrorism, which gives Bond a much needed update), wit and intelligence. This includes some great character development for Bond and a couple of ingenious twists, which I didn't see coming. Cinematographer Roger Deakins does a wonderful job with capturing the feel with the locations of London, Shanghai and Scotland. Credit must also go to music composer Thomas Newman who's score throughout is perfectly atmospheric as he cleverly plays on the old Bond music themes, whilst adding some nice new ones of his own. Director Sam Mendes directs with an ease and confidence as though he has done an action movie before (he hasn't, but he should after this and direct the next Bond movie!). He gives us some heart-stopping stunts and brilliantly staged action sequences that are some of the very best I've seen in any action movie. There are far more acting scenes than usual in a Bond movie, but it doesn't makes the two hour, twenty minute run time seem dragged out. If anything it makes other action adventures feel amateurish by comparison.

In the end Mendes and cast and crew have collated together to bring us the best Bond movie since it's inception 50 years ago. Obviously not everyone will think this. By all means do go and see it and make up your own mind. But mostly every Bond/action fan will enjoy something from this movie. There is no doubt in my mind this should receive Oscars. It would be criminal if it didn't. And thanks to a marvellous undertaking by everyone involved in this film, the Bond franchise is assured to continue for years to come. The best Bond and one of the best action adventures I've ever seen. I loved every minute of it. Happy 50th anniversary Bond!

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

The Dark Knight Rises above and beyond to Perfection. A Monumentally Epic End to Nolan's Trilogy.

[10/10 · 24 July 2012]

Nolan's reboot of the Batman franchise has finally come to an end in this trilogy consisting of Batman Begins, The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises. I loved Batman Begins with it's perfect balance of blending Batman's origins with the action. It was the first Batman movie, where for me, Batman was as interesting and engaging to watch as his adversary. When it came to The Dark Knight as those who read my review on that, which I will revise shortly, I wasn't that keen on it unlike the majority. I can understand why people loved it. That's fair enough. For me though were some large flaws to it and even though I enjoyed it, it didn't rise up to the first one's accomplishments. Then The Dark Knight Rises came along and blew away any misconceptions I had of Nolan completing this trilogy. Hands down as most audience reviewers have reiterated, this is definitely the best movie of the year so far and far surpasses The Dark Knight and even Batman Begins to be the best of this trilogy. As the saying goes, they save the best until last.

Even though this was two and a three quarter hours, the time flew by and I loved every minute of it. Picking up from The Dark Knight, this third film is set eight years later where both Bruce Wayne and Batman have all but disappeared from the world as Batman has been outlawed by the police and the people of Gotham because they believed he killed Harvey Dent. Meanwhile Wayne Enterprises is starting to fall and he gives board member Miranda (Marion Cotillard) responsibility of leading the organisation. Eventually Bruce (Christian Bale) decides he wants some fresh air and goes out where he is still tormented by memories of losing Rachel Dawes and the death of Harvey Dent. Whilst Bruce suffers and Alfred tries to help him (Sir Michael Caine), Selina/Catwoman (Anne Hathaway) comes into Wayne's life by posing as a maid to steal his mother's pearls and eventually teams up with Batman against Batman's new adversary Bane (Tom Hardy) who comes to Gotham with the plan to destroy it by carrying out Ras Al Ghal's legacy. Eventually Batman returns and with the aid of Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) Officer Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), Fox (Morgan Freeman) and Catwoman, they form a plan to stop Bane from destroying Gotham.

Nolan brings together the story threads from the first two Batman movies and ties them beautifully into the conclusion. He is skilfully adept at conveying the loneliness and rage that Bruce feels in isolation away from the people of Gotham. As he struggles to deal with the demons of his past to rise up again and reclaim a normal life as Alfred wants him to, he dons the cape one last time. Bale gives his most best performance to date as either Bruce and the caped crusader. Through his movement and facial expressions you can see the pain in his eyes and beyond into his soul with a man scarred with a painful past. Thankfully when Bale transforms into Batman, the annoying growl of a voice he had in The Dark Knight is blessedly diminished. Tom Hardy as Bane is Batman's most fearsome adversary to date with him having the build and acting to pull off a brilliant performance. Bane turns Gotham into absolute chaos (like the Joker) but in a more daring and convincing way. Hardy's voice behind his mask is cold and calculating, which sent shivers up my spine. There have been complaints by film critics that Bane's dialogue behind the mask is inaudible a lot of the time. Maybe they need to get their ears checked because I heard every word he said. Each word and nuance carried weight and he owned the role. Hathaway as well has received a fair amount of criticism as Catwoman, but she carries the role with great sophistication and it is definitely one of her best performances. Gordon-Levitt, Freeman, Caine and Oldman all transcend in their roles. Also special mention must go to Marion Cotillard as Miranda who though her screen time is limited makes the most of her scenes.

The story is terrifically orchestrated, with a great twist that I didn't see coming. Though I know it's from the original comics, I haven't read them so it was new to me. The special effects were amazing and I loved The Bat as well. The actions sequences were excellently choreographed and superbly tense and entertaining to watch. Nolan wonderfully intermixes all these characters that we care about and the film never loses site of itself as the action and story is balanced perfectly together. And at the end of the movie I was jumping for joy for a staggering achievement that Nolan has achieved for this trilogy, particularly this last one. There's no harm in betting that this will win plenty of Oscars and it is well deserved. Every aspect of The Dark Knight Rises is impeccably placed. Batman really does rise on this occasion and sends the trilogy out with a bang. This is well worth seeing, even if you didn't think much of the second like me, the hype this time is well justified. I loved every minute of it.

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

A Great Spiderman, But Not Amazing.

[7/10 · 9 July 2012]

The Amazing Spiderman is certainly a diverse superhero movie, in the sense of how diverse the public opinion is, with those that love it and those who can't stand it. Me myself when I first saw the trailer, I was unimpressed and thought that rebooting the franchise after only five years after Sam Raimi's Spiderman 3 was a mistake of colossal proportions as it was just too soon. Then when Columbia Pictures advertised the next couple of trailers, I became more excited as there was more in it and I was quite looking forward to the movie, with myself becoming more open minded.

In the end I quite enjoyed The Amazing Spiderman for what it was. I can from my perspective see both sides of how this film has been seen, in why people like it, whilst others despise it. The decision to concentrate on Peter's parents origins was an interesting angle to take I think, and though it is not fully resolved along with Peter wanting to catch the thief who killed Uncle Ben, it will most likely come up in the sequel, so I will not see that as a negative aspect of the film.

Initially it took a while for me to get into the movie as though I knew they were aiming for a more serious and dark tone for the reboot than Sam Raimi's version, it took a while to adjust. Things I did like from the reboot apart from the refreshing angle of Peter's origins was the superb CGI of the Lizard and Spidey Suit. The 3D when it was properly implemented was impressive and the action sequences was terrifically choreographed.

The acting was also up to a good standard. It took me some time to get used to Andrew Garfield as Spiderman, but in the end he acted well and carried the part with enough charisma. Despite that though he just paled in comparison to Toby Maguire, who captured the dopey, awkward teenager who took risks so much better. But that is just my personal opinion. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacey was excellent in her scenes (though I felt she was underwritten) as she was adorable and charming. I also liked the fact the writers neatly avoided the stereotypical damsel in distress routine, which became irritatingly prominent with Mary Jane in Raimi's Spiderman. Stacey showed intelligence and seemed like a much more realistic character as a result. Martin Sheen and Sally Field as Uncle Ben and Aunt May carried their scenes with great aplomb as well. Unfortunately Rhys Ifans as the Dr Curt Conners/Lizard fared less well, with though a decent enough performance, was terribly written. The Lizard as a villain wasn't convincing enough for me as a true adversary to Spiderman as he was also underwritten like most of the cast.

This is one of my main problems of The Amazing Spiderman as the film just felt so rushed even though it was longer than Raimi's Spiderman. There is substance throughout the entire movie, but it only scratches the surface with underwritten roles for these characters like Stacey, Aunt May and the Lizard who don't get to flex out their characters enough. In terms of the story itself, like the Lizard's motivation and Peter's parents past and the death of Uncle Ben just felt too quick and patchy. This is not due to the fact you don't find out more about Peter's father or that the thief who murdered Uncle Ben is not apprehended. It's down to that these moments of the film felt so rushed with though there is some emotion, the impact of these events on the characters is not prolonged enough. I felt as though the film was trying to bring style too much to the forefront and not enough substance, which was lacking.

Part of this reason for substance lacking is the main reason why this movie does not stand up to the Raimi's first two Spiderman movies. It lacks an emotional punch, heart and humour (though there is some in TAS, I loved the scene when Spiderman apprehends the car thief) there just wasn't enough and as a result I didn't feel an infinity with these characters or really come to care about them unlike in Raimi's, which gave it more depth in story and character development. I admire director Marc Webb's idea of the reboot and he really does try, but in the end though I love the style of the film and appreciated it's attempt at interesting story arcs and character development, it lacked that real emotional punch and comedy factor, which would have made it even more fun and a superhero people could connect with. Don't get me wrong it was fun, with some also great acting and action, but it wasn't enough for me as it was easily forgettable. By all means do go and see this as it does have some merit and I thoroughly enjoyed all it's 136 minutes. I would go and see the sequel as this film showed great potential, which I hope will be further developed in the sequel. It was a great effort on the whole. But for me this Spiderman didn't quite live up to his title. He was great yes, but just not amazing.

Johnny English Reborn (2011)

More great fun with our favourite bungling spy! Johnny English is back and just as great as ever!

[8/10 · 25 December 2011]

Finally after a much long await of eight years, the nations favourite hopeless spy Johnny English gets his much deserved sequel, though not quite as excellent as the first this sequel is still very enjoyable. Johnny English Reborn is set five years after his adventure in the first. Hiding out shamelessly in a cave in Tibet Johnny is called back into service by Her Majesty once again to foil international assassins in their plot to terminate the Chinese premier.

Rowan Atkinson proves once again why he is one our best comedy actors. He plays English down to a T and if one ever had any doubts if he would be able to step back into the role after eight years, seeing this should wipe those doubts out of your mind. He gives a hilarious performance all the way through aided by sketches of slapstick though predictable are wondrous in their genius of timing. They are so well timed just like in the first film, it makes it all the more hilarious thanks to a sharp and witty script.

There are numerous funny sequences throughout,(which had me chuckling and shouting with laughter) with too many to pick from. But my favourites would have to be when English mistakens his bosses mother as a Korean assassin and undoubtedly the best one, which had me crying with laughter and has already been identified with other audience reviewers on here is the scene where English is in a briefing sitting on a chair, which he tries to adjust, breaks and ends up the chair rising up and down.

Great performances are also supplied by Rosamund Pike as a psychologist, Daniel Kaluuya as Agent Tucker who though good isn't in the same league as Bough (Ben Miller) and Dominic West as Ambrose. Johnny English Reborn is a hilarious spectacle from start to finish, that those who liked the first film or who are a fan of Rowan Atkinson should see. The nations favourite bungling spy is back!

In Time (2011)

A great concept, which potential was wasted as my time was in watching this.

[3/10 · 25 December 2011]

In Time directed by Andrew Niccol has a marvellous premise. The idea is that in a future society time is actually currency where the whole economy, in terms of work and day to day living is based on paying a time allocation each individual has (that is somehow etched in/onto their skin) which is normally 25 years. However if someone has the means of wealth they can extend their life indefinitely and live for centuries. There is a class divide whereas the working class would only typically live to twenty five years. Somehow time can be exchanged between people as well. Eventually when your time is up, you are terminated.

The concept is original and interesting. As the film started I was asking all these questions, like why is the age you can only normally live to 25? Why and how was this society created? Is it based on time due to overpopulation? There are timekeepers throughout the film that manage and control time to keep the system working, but if people are allowed to exchange time, how is it policed? And how did this society based on a time society end up in a class divide? And why do those who live past twenty five not age?

I was looking forward to the film exploring this idea in depth, in what I thought would be a intelligent and thought-provoking movie. Instead Niccol stupidly decides to skim over these important questions as though it is background noise and is obsessed with bringing to the forefront two main characters Will Salas (Justin Timberlake) who when his mum dies (Olivia Wilde) ends up gaining centuries of time given to him by a suicidal stranger. Mistakenly identified as murdering the man timekeeper Raymond (Cillian Murphy) goes after him. Will kidnaps a rich daughter of a man Slyvia (Amanda Seyfried) where they go on the run to try and bring down the capitalist system. The problem is these two characters are boring and are not worth the screen time to pay for watching. We don't come to care about these characters or root for them in anyway. Both Timberlake and Seyfried give awful performances, which is a pity from her as she has given some good ones in Mamma Mia, Chloe, Jennifer's Body and Letters to Juliet. Timberlake though is even worse, particularly in the pathetic scene, which he horrifically overacts when his mum dies. Niccol is intent on making us agonise over watching the "romance" develop between him and Seyfried, which has no chemistry whatsoever. Even the action sequences, which is very little of is surprisingly boring and nothing we haven't seen before.

I will admit it is stylish looking with some great special effects and cinematography. I did particularly like one scene where Will and Slyvia are in a room and arm wrestle with a guy for time, which was cleverly written and skillfully executed (that is the only scene by the way) and Cillian Murphy gives a good performance as does Olivia Wilde in her cameo role, but they cannot do much with a flat and poorly structured script. In the end we are left with a film that looks like it will deliver the goods in first class except it doesn't arrive at all. This film might look cool at first glance and looks like it will have a lot to say, but underneath it is just a hollow empty shell, which is more concerned with showing off babes and guns (I wouldn't have minded had the concept been explored). This film shamefully manipulates it's audience into wasting their time viewing this rubbish. I did mildly enjoy a few parts as it does have a few saving graces. By far it isn't the worst film I have seen this year. I would certainly grant it that reprieve. However it is the most disappointing, with a great concept that had potential ending up criminally wasted.

Immortals (2011)

Entertaining enough, but instantly forgettable.

[6/10 · 25 December 2011]

From the producers of 300, which wasn't a bad film comes Immortals, another fest of loads of CGI effects and violent and bloody head decapitation is depicted. Of course it has all the ingredients of an average popcorn blockbuster that entertains and that's it. Anyone with a fascination with Greek Mythology (which isn't really me) should give this a miss as it has lots of flaws and is completely inaccurate. Lack of anything resembling much of a story, which basically consists of Theseus (Henry Cavill), a mortal man chosen by Zeus to lead the fight against the ruthless King Hyperion, who is on a rampage across Greece to gain a weapon that can destroy humanity. This lack of a story or no characterisation of depth with the characters is thrown out of the window. The dialogue is pathetically bad with a terrible script. This is obviously a style over substance film. Visually it is a treat. The CGI is superb, much in debt to 300 (I didn't see it in 3D as it was added I heard post-production, which would have made it terrible), the scenery is stunning and the costumes are exquisite.

The action sequences are also a big asset that made the film enjoyable to watch with some well choreographed scenes that were greatly shot and edited. One surprise is that some of the acting wasn't bad. The lead actor Henry Cavill gives a decent performance, it isn't great but better than Sam Worthington in Clash of the Titans. John Hurt gives a great performance as the old man and Mickey Rourke as the villain King Hyperion was surprisingly good after disastrous performances of recent in Iron Man 2 and The Expendables. His gravelly voice gave him a quiet intensity and his presence on the screen collated together to make him a formidable adversary. The rest of the cast though Luke Evans as Zeus, Frieda Pinto as Phaedra and Stephen Dorff as Stavros gave awful performances.

Though Immortals has lots of flaws, it is still enjoyable enough to watch, though it is instantly forgettable as it isn't in the same league as the Prince of Persia film last year. It is certainly more entertaining than Clash of the Titans.

Hugo (2011)

An interesting and occasionally wonderful film from Scorsese, but it isn't for kids.

[8/10 · 25 December 2011]

Scorsese's attempts at making his first "kids" movie is an admirable one. But the problem is the target demographics for Hugo has been misplaced. Very few young children under the age of ten are likely to enjoy this (though I'm sure there will be a few) because they maybe won't understand the story or wonder what is so interesting about the history of cinema. It just will not appeal to many. At first it does seem to be heading in a magical and mystical direction with the two kids Hugo (Asa Butterfield) and Isabelle (Chloe Moretz) who in the 1930s in Paris are trying to unlock the mystery of an automaton man who has a key shaped hole in his back. It does take a bit of time to build up to that moment and when it did I thought some sort of magical and fantasy world would open up, but it didn't. Not that I'm saying it wasn't interesting it certainly was; as in my first year at university I studied about the origins of cinema and I found the narrative fascinating in Hugo. To be fair there are certain elements of comedy and effects that may attract kids, but it won't be enough I think to keep their attention diverted for over two hours.

Anyway on the whole for me the story was interesting and unfolded well, though I will be honest there were points at the beginning before the mystery of the automaton man was solved where I was getting bored as it did begin a bit too slowly. There were also other points in the structure of the narrative that tended to get bogged down in sub-plots, which though weren't boring, was not necessary for the film. Like the station inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen) lusting after the flower women Lisette (Emily Mortimer). At the risk of sounding so negative though there was plenty about the film that I really enjoyed. Apart from the great story, the acting was excellent across the whole terrific choice of cast. Newcomer Asa Butterfield gives a wonderful performance as Hugo capturing the essence of his character, an orphan who loved his father and has a joy in building and running the clocks in the station. This gives his character some depth as well. The scenes in particular played between him and his father (Jude Law who gives a great cameo) are quite heartwarming. Chloe Moretz again delivers an excellent performance, building on from her already promising acting career from films like Kick-Ass and Let Me In proving once again she is one of the best up and coming child actresses in Hollywood.

Other members of the cast are equally mesmerising, Ben Kingsley as Georges Méliès probably gives the top performance of the movie as an old man working at a toy store in the station who feels haunted and sad after the end of his glorious film director career, but is transformed back to those days as Hugo and Isabelle solve the mystery. Cohen as the station inspector is surprisingly funny (given I'm not a fan of his more extreme comedy) and shows a vulnerable side with his leg injury from world war 1, which he overcomes with courage. Terrific cameos are also provided by Emily Mortimer, Christopher Lee and Richard Griffiths. With such great acting you do come to care about these characters as well and wish them all the best.

The 3D is also truly spectacular and is used to magnificent effect particularly when it snows in the film, you actually feel like it's snowing in the cinema! It is the best 3D I have seen since the third Transformers movie. The cinematography and scenery are gorgeous visuals with some stunning views and the musical scores throughout are pitch perfect.

In the end though Hugo does have it's flaws and I think the target demographics are slightly misleading. Everyone from teenage years and upwards should find something to enjoy, particularly film enthusiasts who are intrigued by the history of film. Hugo for me wasn't really magical, but it was interesting, touching and an occasionally wonderful spectacle. Scorsese deserves high merit for trying something out of his normal comfort zone and I commend him for that.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011)

The second outing with Holmes and Watson is just as fun and action packed as it's predecessor. Terrific entertainment!

[9/10 · 23 December 2011]

Guy Richie's modern take on Sherlock Holmes for me has been interesting and refreshingly different. The first film I wasn't sure what to expect but it bought out a terrific comedy duo between Holmes (Robert Downey Junior) and Watson (Jude Law)thanks to a witty script, excellent acting and exciting action.

Their second promises more of the same and delivers. Coming up against Holmes ultimate Nemesis Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris). They suspect him of dozens of killings across Europe in a plot to start a world war as he is into arms manufacturing. They are joined by Madam Simza Heron (Noomi Rapace) from the Swedish version of the excellent Millienium Trilogy films and come into contact with Holmes brother Mycroft (Stephen Fry). The story is quite predictable as we know who the villain is from the outset unlike the first one, which did have more of a mystery. The women of course like the first outing are criminally underused, though Noomi Rapace gives a great performance and makes the most impact of the limited female characters on screen. Another criticism is even though Jared Harris gives a good performance as Moriarty, he just wasn't as menacing or have as a sly demeanour as Mark Strong who played Lord Blackwell.

However I loved everything else though the film did start off a bit slow, once it got going it was at it's best. Robert Downey Junior and Jude Law give excellent performances once again, which are just so much fun to watch, particularly Downey Junior who just makes the role of Holmes seem so effortless to carry out, it's almost bewildering in it's simplicity of his portrayal. Of course what makes this comedy duo so fantastic is that script, which is just as wise-cracking and witty as the first one and though some of the comedy is quite silly, it is meant to be in a funny and goofy way as this whole movie just has the air of not taking itself seriously, which made it a real delight to watch. Special mention must also go to Stephen Fry as Mycroft though in a cameo appearance he makes the most of in a hilarious and cracking performance.

Guy Richie's directing is equally exquisite with wonderful scenery and editing of slow-motion during the action sequences, which were choreographed to the highest quality, with plenty of excitement attached. The musical score is also wonderful. Though I did have a few gripes with the film (not every movie is perfect, even the ten of out ten movies). I loved this from start to finish. This is one movie and franchise that knows how to have a heck of a fun time and lets it audience experience the same feeling. Let's have a third one please!

Tower Heist (2011)

This "action-comedy" has pretty much none of either. A boring and over-long piece of cinema trash.

[2/10 · 25 November 2011]

Well I had my seat in the cinema. All I would have needed was my pillow and quilt cover and I could have had a nice nap for an hour and three quarters. Such as was how unbearably boring and awful this movie was I wish I had bought them with me. Tower Heist is one of those "all the best bits are in the trailer" films, which is what propelled me and my father to go and see it.

One other attraction with Tower Heist is it's confluence of top stars such as Eddie Murphy, Ben Stiller, Casey Affleck and Tea Leoni. But a star studded A-list cast doesn't necessarily mean a fantastic film as I found out to my disappointment. This film tries to be like Ocean's Eleven (as others have already reiterated). Funny, clever and slick. Tower Heist falls desperately short on all these fronts. It's not funny (where's the comedy!?) dumb and boring. There's nothing wrong with the story. Rich millionaire embezzles his employees money that they invested in him for their pension, so they decide to get their own back by stealing the money he owes them. The thing is it just isn't involving or fun in any shape or form. Stiller at least gives a decent enough performance along with Affleck and Leoni, but with such a poorly convoluted script that is thinner than the edge of a piece of paper, there's little they can do. The film starts off far too slow in getting to the core of the story (which at this point I was prepared to ignore because I thought it was a build up to an entertaining and clever heist), but instead found myself just constantly looking at my watch. The narrative was straightforward, predictable and plodding. Nothing remarkable happens during the heist, though I did admire how they got the gold bullion car out of the hotel (even though it is impossible, you couldn't do that in real life). I did also chuckle at a few moments I will admit, hence my two star rating, not one. But I was unamused for the most part.

One of the other biggest grievances I had for this is putting Eddie Murphy in this film, who still plays the same boring, repetitive, loud mouth role he has for the last twenty years. The last thing I found him funny in was Nutty Professor 2: The Klumps, which was about ten years ago. Since then and in Tower Heist, he is not funny and is loud, but just annoying and tries desperately too hard and has the propensity to horrifically over-act. It's about time he retired from acting I think. Realising when I read the name Brett Ratner as director who also did X Men: The Last Stand (which was awful) I shouldn't be surprised this was rubbish. Trust me Ocean's Eleven this film isn't. I wouldn't even class this as an "action-comedy" as it had little of either. A wasted opportunity that was bungled due to a predictable and unimaginative narrative and poor script that lacked anything resembling a laugh. This is one caper film whose characters I didn't find funny or care about. Skip this and just re-watch Ocean's Eleven instead, it's ten times better.

Colombiana (2011)

This popcorn movie entertains for the most part. but it does have flaws.

[7/10 · 26 September 2011]

Colombiana is bought to us by Luc Besson, the director who bought us such assassin movies as Leon, Nikita and The Transporter franchise. In his latest movie Zoe Salanda an actress who impressed me both visually in terms of her physique and her acting ability in previous action films like The Losers and James Cameron's critically acclaimed film in terms of visual effects and 3D Avatar. She does the same thing here and though she is considered to be in that role of a bad-ass chick as she plays it here in Colombiana. But like her two other films for me she has a certain presence on screen that marks her out as more than just an action actress whose just good at stunts etc. There are certain scenes within Columbiana that separate her character and our perspective of her as being an actress who can deviate from this narrow role and carry off more serious parts. She has a bright future ahead of her and I hope that any roles she gets in future will be a film of a different type than action as she has that potential to broaden herself out.

The basic plot of the movie starts out as Cataleya as a young girl who parents are murdered in cold-blood. She escapes from the assassins and goes to one of her father friends who takes her in. She then grows up to become a stone-cold assassin herself to avenge her parents death. The plot of course is nothing new as it's been done so often before. But there were other problems with it. For a start the Colombians speaking in English was ridiculously bad in such a way it was funny. It would have been better if they had just spoken their native language and had subtitles for those parts. I wouldn't have minded.

The film didn't start well either. The first twenty five minutes was just plain awful, with a few plot holes that are so glaringly obvious, you would have to be blind not to see them. I wouldn't have minded these plot holes had the film in this segment been entertaining. First of all the father of the family who is killed doesn't even warn his own guards outside his house that his "friend" is sending men to kill him. Then miraculously Cataleya as a ten year old girl manages to jump out of a window onto her fathers car, which is easily a few hundred feet drop without injuring herself. Even being healthy for her age and having plenty of exercise she would have injured herself in some fashion as a child's bones at that age aren't fully developed. We're also meant to swallow the notion that she can travel from Colombia to Chicago in America without being picked up by the authorities.

It's only when Zoe Salanda comes onto the screen as Cataleya as an adult when the film really improves. The first scene when she comes into the police station masquerading as a prostitute is one of the scenes where Salanda steps out of the role as action chick and shows more acting ability. It is a great little scene which is humorous. In fact she is so convincing (as it is a deception) I really thought she was a prostitute. From the scene in the police station Salanda gives a great performance (with an impressive physique, she once again impresses as being an action chick). But there were a few other scenes two with her boyfriend Danny (Michael Vartan) they were surprisingly tender, particularly the second one. In these scenes and a couple of others Salanda through the projection of her dialogue and facial expressions managed to evoke an emotional response from me. I felt some sympathy for her character of what she had gone through. This is why I think she has more potential as an actress instead of just an action chick.

Good performances also come from Vartan and Lennie James as Ross (an FBI agent). Other good things about Columbiana is the stunts and action sequences were well done (those in the segment of the last eighty minutes of the movie). I particularly admired in a goofy sort of way when Catalaya uses toothbrushes as a fighting weapon. Of course the script and dialogue is bad but that is easily forgivable. I did detest the first twenty five minutes but it did get better and I thoroughly enjoyed the rest of the film. This is worth seeing for most of the action and stunts and an understated performance from Salanda who is more than just eye candy in this. If you can get pass the plot implausibilities and awful script and dialogue and a cliché story, you may enjoy this for the other positives I mentioned. But that is not guaranteed as others will have differing opinions from me. I though did enjoy it for the most part. It fulfils it's primary function to entertain and you can't ask much more from a popcorn trashy movie.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

These Apes are well worth rising to go and see on the big screen.

[8/10 · 16 September 2011]

After the initial success of the original Planet of the Apes back in 1968 with Charlton Heston (which I saw only a couple of years ago and thoroughly enjoyed) they did three sequels preceding it which weren't bad through into the early 70s. Then in 2001 tragically Tim Burton tried a remake/reboot with Mark Walghberg at the helm. For me as it was seen generally by the public it was absolutely awful. Finally after another decade director Rupert Wyatt has made a second attempt at a reboot/remake and I am pleased to say he has carried it off with great aplomb.

This version first sees good-intentioned scientist Will Rodman (James Franco) doing experiments on genetically enhanced Apes to try and find a cure for Alzheimer's which his father Charles (John Lithgow) has. He ends up taking home a baby ape that he calls Caeser (Andy Serkis) when it's mother dies after being killed by security guards who thought she was going on the rampage while really she was protecting Caeser. Whilst taking care of Caeser Will discovers a drug within the Apes that will help cure his father as he also teaches Caeser how to socialise. He also develops intelligence (a side effect of the drug). Meanwhile Will ends up dating vet Caroline (Frieda Pinto) who loves Apes as much as Will.

As years go by Will's father starts to deteriorate again as the drug begins to wear off and an incident with Caeser defending Charles against an abusive next door neighbour gets the Ape catered off to a sanctuary with other Apes where Caeser is bullied by two guards, one being Dodge Landon (Tom Felton who played Malfoy in the Harry Potter franchise).

Due to the cruel treatment Caeser receives at the hands of these humans and feeling neglected by Will he establishes himself as the alpha-male and plans a daring and well co-ordinated escape for freedom with the other Apes to rule over the humans (what will eventually be the case in the sequel). First off the CGI of the Apes themselves is absolutely jaw-dropping. Forget men in monkey suits in the original and the sequels that proceeded. These apes look - are actual apes, you wouldn't think that they are just special effects. It's a testament to giving this film realism as they move like real apes. The second biggest strength is the central performance by Andy Serkis as Casear, it also reflects the many strengths of silent movie making as Casear stays virtually wordless. Serkis gives a sensational central performance that deserves at least an Oscar nomination. Through Caesar's movements and facial expressions and when he finally speaks we feel everything he feels tenderness and love at Will looking after him and pain and rage when being mistreated by humans. It is bravo piece of acting and the audience feels for Casear's plight the whole way.

It's unfortunate that the humans fair less well mostly. The only ones who really make any impact is Tom Felton as the nasty guard who makes the most of his menace in a cracking performance and Lithgow as Charles who gives an accurate and sensitive portrayal of one suffering from Alzheimer's. Even then they have little character development.

Unfortunately James Franco and Frieda Pinto are nothing more than cardboard cut outs as they have severely unwritten roles (though they give decent performances). Franco though has more to do for the first hour as the screenplay sets him up well but loses interest in him in the last hour where he does nothing except fall for the expendable vet who could have been cut from the film altogether as she was very forgettable as a character and run hopelessly after Casear. Also some of the plot is a little too sloppy with a few glaring plot holes. How come Will's neighbours delay complaining to the authorities about the chimp until it is fully grown, when it has behaved scarily for years? How come Will waits so long before telling his boss about the miraculous properties of his drug? Did they somehow slip his mind? And why does Will's boss – a poorly written corporate type profit obsessed - change abruptly from ultra-cautious about animal testing to ridiculously reckless?

However putting those faults aside there are other positives going for this film apart from Serkis's performance and the CGI. The action sequences namely the climax is well worth waiting for, which takes place on the Golden Gate Bridge is excellently choreographed and exciting to watch with beautiful cinematography from Andrew Lesnie who previous work included Lord of the Rings.

There are faults with Rise of the Planet of the Apes but not enough to stop me enjoying it all the way through. This is a worthy addition to the other versions and a terrific first film for a reboot that is certainly worthy of a sequel. These Apes are well worth seeing on the big screen. I'm really looking forward to seeing the continuation of the story and seeing how this promising new franchise will continue to develop.

Cowboys & Aliens (2011)

A sci-fi western with great potential, which was never fulfilled and that took itself far too seriously.

[5/10 · 28 August 2011]

With a title like Cowboys and Aliens, mixing the genre of sci-fi and western (obviously done before with Will Smith in Wild, Wild West and I'm sure other films too) and with a star studded cast of Harrison Ford, Daniel Craig and Olivia Wilde, it promises the idea of a wacky and wild fun ride with the air of a good old fashioned adventure with great action and funny comedy. Unfortunately the end result though not a complete disaster is a rather bland and incomplete affair with too many problems with it to ignore.

Obviously there are those that have said that a film with the title Cowboys and Aliens shouldn't be taken seriously and that it's just harmless entertainment and it shouldn't be nitpicked. However the tone of this film, which compliments Jon Favreau's intentions is to be serious and for us to approach it in the same manner, which is just ludicrous for a B-Movie such as this. So if we are going to take it seriously as Favreau wants us to then it has to be critiqued, both positive and negative aspects.

What adds to this seriousness is the element of mystery that Favreau presents particularly surrounding the character of Jake Lonergan (Daniel Craig) like who is he? What happened to him? And what is that metal bracelet on his arm? There are also more questions as well that fit together like a puzzle as reviewer Terry Roehrig II rightly points out and again when all revealed it's very simplistic, which is a bit of let down as it just has that air of mysteriousness, which makes you feel as though when all is revealed it will be something exciting, but no.

The film seriously needed to have more of a sense of humour, though there a few chuckling moments I did enjoy and Daniel Craig gives a great performance, it needed an actor with a sharper and wittier sense of humour. It has already been suggested Robert Downey Jr would have been perfect for this role who would have injected some much needed life into this soulless film. Of course an actor can only do so much with an awful script which felt poorly written and lazy. It was truly dreadful, particularly when it came to the schmaltz moments of Jake having memories of his wife and him and Ella (Wilde) sharing an intimate moment or two (They lacked any romantic chemistry) or various members of the clan trying to bond when they go off in search of the aliens that took their loved ones etc. I wouldn't have minded these moments but it was just boring and uninvolving and we don't come to care about any of these characters or what happens to them, though it tries to be touching. All I wanted was for it to get to the next action sequence.

There are also large plot holes in this movie, which others have already pointed out and it just becomes too long. The last forty minutes in particular being the worst and when the film hit the eighty five-ninety minute mark I just wanted the film to end instead I had to put up with another tedious twenty five minutes. Faverau had this problem before of an overlong film (Iron Man 2) trying to go for character development and substance in which he just fails. The thing is there is a wasted opportunity for this as Woodrow (Harrison Ford) and Jake have a disliking to each other. Their relationship is never explored, though their in the same film together for most of it, they spend it apart with little interaction and dialogue. This makes it seem as Terry Roehrig II again rightly says it's as though Ford and Craig are starring in two different films at the same time. It instead ends up with Jake mainly interacting with Wilde's character Ella and Woodrow with some native Indian chief of a tribe. If Speilburg executive producer of this film had been in the driving seat, this would have turned out differently.

However where Faverau cannot be faulted is the action sequences (though the last one was overlong), they were choreographed superbly with plenty of suspense and tension. These were the moments I most enjoyed. The special effects too were impressive with good leading performances from the three main stars, particularly Ford being a villain for once. The scenery itself was lovely to look at and there was some great soundtrack music. I did actually really enjoy the first seventy minutes being a few minutes here and there that were boring. I was at a point where I was thinking of giving the film a seven out of ten but by the end I was sorely tempted to whittle it to four, but I thought that would be unfair as it does have some saving graces, but really it's too rusty around the edge with a slow pace. With a better suited leading actor for the role (no offense to Craig), Speilburg being at the helm and the tone taking itself less seriously this film could have really been something of the highest entertainment. But it falls well short and the finishing product is a film that is messy and largely bland. The stars Craig, Ford and Wilde deserved better material than this and so did the audience. It's just a pity that the potential the film had was never reached or realised by those making it.

Super 8 (2011)

A super film all round.

[9/10 · 15 August 2011]

Spielburg and Abrams pay tribute by combining elements from other Spielburgian movies such as Jurassic Park, ET, War of the Worlds, Poltergeist and The Goonies amongst others to create Super 8. Revolving around a bunch of teenagers, 12 year old Joe Lamb (Joel Courtney) who loves to make old movies and is doing one for a competition (he is the make up/special effects guy). His love of model-making brings him into conflict with his father who is the sheriff of the town Jackson (Kyle Chandler) who wants him to play baseball. Their relationship is already fractured due to the death of Joe's mother in an industrial accident who he was close to. The other two kids who are Joe's friends Charles who is the director (Riley Griffiths) and Cary (Ryan Lee). Charles invites young girl Alice (Elle Fanning) to act as a role in the film. Whilst filming a train crashes near them that was no accident as they find their science teacher in the crash who gives them a warning.

Soon the military turn up and try to keep everything hush hush as the town's dogs and household appliances like microwaves start to go missing. Joel and his friends are caught up in what's going on. Meanwhile a lovely sub-plot develops of a budding romance between Joe and Alice.

The plot itself is nothing new but the combined elements of Spielburg's other movies creates something fascinating and new (though I know not everyone would agree), the special effects of the alien when you see it is truly spectacular and terrifying in a way. Abrams teasingly keeps the alien hidden until right near the very end keeping you uneasy and in suspense. But what makes this film such a winner in my eyes is the fact that these characters are ones you come to care about and the acting is really great. They all in particular Elle Fanning (who acts tremendously in one scene with a performance in a performance blew me away) give performances of commendable charm. The screenplay is very smart in this respect as the friendship between the kids and Joe and his dad and Alice and her's feels very real and give the character's some depth (Alice's dad blames himself for Joe's mum's death as on the day of the accident she covered for his shift in work). It also lend the film some heart, particular in one touching scene where Joe is playing an old video in his room of the times he had with his mum and Alice feels sad as she blames herself in a way for her death. There is also plenty of suspense and tension throughout the film and some great action sequences that are terrifically choreographed.

This is just a super film all round in the end, that though it does contain some plot holes, it didn't detract from entertaining and thrilling me from start to finish. One for the whole family to enjoy and a film I will be adding to my DVD collection in future. I really love this movie.

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

Entertaining superhero movie but it never reached it's full potential, with a few major flaws.

[6/10 · 27 July 2011]

Captain America: The First Avenger is a superhero movie I was quite looking forward to. But in the end I came out quite disappointed with a movie though entertaining is completely forgettable and didn't reach the real potential it could have with a few major flaws.

First though a brief synopsis with the character Steve Rogers/Captain America (Chris Evans) being deemed unfit for military service, Steve volunteers for a top secret research project that turns him into Captain America, a superhero dedicated to defending America's ideals during WWII. He is aided in stopping a Nazi villain Johann Schmidt/Red Skull (Hugo Weaving) who wants to destroy the world. America is helped in stopping Schmidt by Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell),James Buchanan 'Bucky' Barne (Sebastian Stan) Colonel Chester Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) and Howard Stark (yes father of Tony Stark from Iron Man).

The first hour of the film was the best and most enjoyable with the main characters set up nicely as it was quite interesting. The script though basic did have flashes of wit with some cheesy, but fun comedy. But after an hour and at least eighty minutes into the film just ran out of steam (as another reviewer on here has rightly put it) and I just wanted the film to end. At almost two hours, it was too long. The CGI was impressive, some of the acting was great, mainly Hugo Weaving as Red Scar and I enjoyed Tommy Lee Jones's performance as Colonel Phillips, but I found Hayley Atwell's acting to be mediocre, which is a shame as she showed a bit of spunk in one scene at the start where she punched a male solider in the face for trying to hit on her. Her character just petered out I guess. Chris Evans made a capable enough lead and he had a certain charisma on screen at certain points, which made him watchable. But he was really just boring (though not unlikeable) and quite bland like a lot of the film. He had no spark in him as though he only put in a half-hearted effort.

But it wasn't entirely his fault. His character has little character development. Yes we know he wants to do his duty to his country and that is very admirable and be a solider. But an important question which could have been explored and one of the film's major flaws is why? What motivates him to become a solider and ultimately Captain America? This is where the film pales in the shade next to brilliant superhero movies like Batman Begins and Spiderman 1 and 2, where the audience understands why Peter Parker becomes Spiderman and Bruce Wayne becomes Batman, which gives the character more substance, makes them interesting and you can relate to them in some way making you care about them. Captain America dosen't do that. The action as well though enjoyable to an extent had nothing special with it like any great stunts etc. There also wasn't enough of it and felt incredibly rushed as though it just wanted to get to the next scene past the action to the talking. It felt very condensed.

In the end though I think this was much better than Thor, Captain America has been overrated. And if they do another standalone sequel of this and when it comes to The Avengers joining of all the marvel comic book superheroes in 2012. They should get a different actor for the part of America as Chris Evans couldn't pull it off. This film entertained me, but it just wasn't enough and didn't do anything for me overall.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)

Magnificent and a monumental epic end to this much love franchise of books and films that has been a part of millions of people lives for the last fourteen years.

[10/10 · 16 July 2011]

When the first Harry Potter book came out the 30th June 1997, no one not even JK Rowling herself could have predicted the storm that would follow as millions of people of all ages from the young to the elderly fell in love with the fictional character of Harry Potter along with Ron, Hermione and all the other characters throughout the seven book series. Told in books, played through computer games and now turned into movies with websites, forums and fan clubs based on "the boy who lived," Harry Potter has become an iconic symbol of British/world culture with the values of trust, honesty, friendship, love and courage lots of human beings show everyday. The character has been and will continue to enrich all our lives for pure enjoyment for generations to come as well as being a terrific role model for younger kids.

Part I of the Deathly Hallows was brilliant at conveying the burden and isolation Harry, Ron and Hermione felt. Part II promises heart stopping action on an epic scale and it delivers. We see the trio try and find and destroy the remainder of Voldemort's Horcruxes as they break into Gringotts and Hogwarts where battle takes place with student/teachers against Voldemort's army of Death Eaters, Trolls and Spiders. The acting is brilliant all round as everyone gets their moment to shine like Maggie Smith as McGonagall, Gary Lewis as Neville Longbottom and Julie Walters as Molly Weasley. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson pull off their best performances since the beginning of the franchise. But it's Radcliffe who I think steals the film with his most believable performance yet. All three deserve to go on to more things with their acting career as they truly deserve it from learning to adapt and grow from film to film with their acting. However the other stars cannot be ignored with Ralph Fiennes being truly menacing as Voldemort who gets more screen time, Alan Rickman as Snape, Helen Boham Carter as Bellatrix, Micheal Gambon as Dumbledore and Gary Oldman as Sirius amongst other actors all get their moments to shine.

The special effects are better than ever with a truly realistic dragon at Gringotts and the design set pieces of Diagon Alley, Gringotts and Hogwarts. It was also quite good in 3D, which was very well implemented. The script as well had it's sharp moments producing some comic bits when Herminone tries to act like Bellatrix at Gringotts and some heartfelt moments when Fred and Lupin and Tonks die. This brings me on to the action, which truly is spectacular and choreographed superbly on a massive scale. The best bits of the fight and most exciting though being when Harry and Voldemort face each other after the forest and when Ron, Hermione and Neville conspire together to kill Nagini.

The narrative as well by Steve Knowles is held together quite well as the important story strands are tied beautifully into the conclusion. Of course it still is a bit patchy from previous films and the editing is a bit choppy like Molly Weasley amongst other characters suddenly appear out of Hogwarts from nowhere and some of the last battle sequence for a small part it is a bit hard to make out what is happening on the screen. But this is only a small gripe compared to it's overall achievement as I liked the part of Snape's memories, which was well done and the last sequence of nineteen years later when Harry, Ron, Hermione and Ginny have grown up with their children bought a tear to my eye as it is really quite beautifully done.

This film is the best of the lot and truly does justice to the books and ends a much loved and will be missed franchise that has entranced millions. Thank you JK Rowling and all the actors and directors of all the film particularly David Yates for the last three films (and superbly directed this last part) for giving us many wonderful years of enjoyment and entertainment. Harry Potter is a legacy that will be passed on through telling of the stories and watching the films as generations to come will immerse themselves in the world of Harry and Hogwarts. To that I say farewell to Harry and all. These characters will all be greatly missed by lots of people including me.

Trust (I) (2010)

A brilliant topical drama that is handled sensitively and tackled intelligently.

[10/10 · 16 July 2011]

Trust is a drama I have wanted to see for some time. I was shocked when I saw it wasn't being shown at any of the odeon cinemas. So instead I went to the nearest cinema complex that was showing it and came out convinced I had just seen one of the most intelligent and interesting films this past year.

Trust directed by David Schwimmer (yes Ross Geller from Friends) really struck a chord with me as I am sure it did with the few who have reviewed this and the over three thousand who have rated this who were able to relate to this in some way. I know because what happened in Trust almost happened to one of my friend's young sisters. She was fifteen and when she went to meet the guy who she thought was the same age, he was forty. Luckily her parents were there with her to quell their fears, which were justified. They called the police and managed to arrest and convict him. Trust chillingly reminded me of what could have happened to my friend's sister if her parents hadn't gone with her. The consequences to her, the family and my friend would have been unimaginable and could have unfolded just like in the film.

Trust tells the story of fourteen year old Annie (Liana Liberato) who is constantly on her phone and an internet chatroom talking to "sixteen" year old Charlie. We see their online relationship unravel through coloured speech that pops up on the screen. Her nice liberal parents Will (Clive Owen) and Lynn (Catherine Keener) have no idea about Charlie's true identity. As the drama progresses Charlie confesses to Annie that he isn't sixteen but twenty. But she is feels so close to him as she tells him no one understands me the way you do she accepts it. But then he tells her he is twenty five and then when she goes to meet him for real at the mall (as her parents take her brother to college and she tells her Aunt who is looking after her that she is going out with a friend), he is in fact thirty five. Despite this she goes to dinner with him as he manipulates her and acts charming and makes her feel good about herself and says all the right things, where he takes her to a motel and they have sex.

Then things get worse for Annie as everyone at school is talking about her and she feels estranged from her parents particularly her father. The ramifications for them as well is that Annie defends Charlie and insists he loves her even when she finds out he's had other girls her age. Will ends up torn between guilt at not being there for Annie when she is raped as he believes he could have prevented it and rage at Charlie the paedophile as he tries to obsessively track him down. As he becomes so consumed with rage his marriage also starts to become strained.

Trust could have become easily sleazy and exploitative, but David Schwimmer tells the story from Annie and her parents point of view and tackles this sensitive subject intelligently (with a terrific script) and with sympathy and total plausibility with how the family suffer. David Schwimmer himself confessed on here in an interview that children that had been sexually abused affected him deeply as for the last fifteen years he has participated in charity work for the rape foundation trust and actually sits as a member on it's board. He wanted to make a film for parents with teenage girls who use the internet or anyone else who can relate to this issue to help them understand better.

This is a brilliant topical drama that bought out all the emotions Schwimmer wanted his audience to feel, shock and horror and enormous sympathy of what the family go through. I had tears in my eyes myself as it was so powerfully moving. The acting also helps in this respect showing Schwimmer is excellent with actors as they turn in some of the most truthful and believable performances I have ever seen. Both Catherine Keener and Clive Owen (one of my favourite actors) are on top form with possible best career performances, which should have been Oscar nominated. You really feel the depth of their character's pain. But the revelation is young actress Liana Liberato who I saw in an episode of CSI Miami and House. She was good in them but she is incredible in this with a performance of extraordinary power and depth. She is someone else who I think has been overlooked. It's criminal Trust wasn't at least nominated for any Oscars as it deserved it. One reason it didn't and was undervalued by so many critics is because Schwimmer wisely restrains himself from falling victim to the Hollywood cliché ending of the whole family dealing with the issue and living happily ever. Because if he had done it would have ruined the movie for me making it seem false.

I always like Schwimmer for his acting in Friends and a couple of romantic comedies he directed including Run Fatboy Run but I didn't think he could pull off as something mature and thought provoking as this but I was wrong and as a director he should become much more recognised after this. I have a new respect for him. All parents with teenage girls should see this film as it is a timely film particularly in the digital media age we are now in of communicating with each other. It is a very important film to see and should have received much more attention than it did. Saying that this is an outstanding drama which was made and acted superbly. Well done to all involved for making this film.