Andy's Movie Dome

Son Of Rambow (2008)

2008-04-04T10:19:00.000-07:00

Set in the 80s, Son of Rambow, tells the story of Will (Bill Milner) , brought up in a strict religious family, forbidden to watch movies or TV or really get out much. This changes though when he meets Lee Carte (Will Poulter) , rebel of the school will attends. Carter is hoping to film a home made movie to enter into a local compettition, so they team together to make, "Son of Rambow".

Directed by Garth Jennings , who also directed Hitchiker's Guide to The Galaxy back in 2005. It opens with Carter sitting in the cinema watching Rambo, while smoking and taping the film. It gives you an idea of this character straight away. The two lead performances are fantastic full of slight comedic moments that could be missed, such as terms of phrase and also they both bring a great deal of physical comedy to their roles that really adds to the film. Carter's character in some ways is a little cliched, a confident kid, a rebel who is the clown of the class and troubleamker but roles are reversed in family life with specific reference to his relationship with his brother, it's nothing new but the acting performance by Will Poulter is fantastic.

I guess the film this has to be compared to, at least in terms of releases this year is Be Kind Rewind due to the narrative of making a film. It has all the charm of Be Kind Rewind and then some. It's very emotional at times, but not only that it's also Very Very funny. Let alone the filming of "Son of Rambow" but little moments like Carter standing with tomato sauce on his top to represent blood, standing in a field, then turning to a cow and saying "don't get too cocky this'll be on you one day" or something to that effect. One of the elements of the film i was worried about from the trailer was the character of the french kid who comes in an exchange deal with the school, the character's name escapes me now but the actor is Jules Sitruk. However he was one of the funniest in the film, not him as such but him and his Crew. He gathers a following of students at the school and the scenes with them are very funny jumping through hoops for him and anything he wants, just so they could be seen with coolest kid in school was very funny.

This film was leaps and bounds better than the closest british offering this year , St. Trinnians. Buckets more charm, an actual story with likable characters. The scenes where they are making the film are hillarious and well excuted.

It's also a well shot film, with brilliant shots of english country side, great filming locations for their home made movie, some interesting camera tricks (when carter throws the ball at will for instance) Theres a lot going on behind the camera in this film. The part animated sequences (such as Will's dream about the film) are awesome, help show the imagination of this character and further pull you in, a great idea.

All in all, their will be elements of this film you would of seen before, it's a bit Billy Elliot, it's a bit Kes, it's a bity Be Kind Rewind, and it comes together to make a well made charming movie that is an early highlight of 2008.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007)

2008-03-13T08:38:00.000-07:00

Tim Burton is my 2nd favourite director of all time (next to Wes Anderson) but even i was worried when i heard about his new project, and that it was going to be a musical. I knew nothing of Sweeny Todd's narrative or its themes, so to me it could of been anything. It could of been a cheesy musical, but luckilly it was not. It's a violent , epic story that burton was able to sprinkle with his own taste for the strange and unusual.

Sweeny Todd sees burton teaming with Johnny Depp for the 6th time. Depp pulls in a solid performance here, but he's not the only one here. Helena Bonham Carter delivers what i think was the finest performance of the film that added the humour and charm to the film. The interaction between the two was engaging and they worked together very well. Sacha Baron Cohen brings a short but memorable performance tro the film, his shave-off with sweeny is one of the many highlights of this movie. Alan Rickman plays the villian of the film with a quiet menace that is another wellocmed element of sweeny todd.

Now to my biggest fear, the music. I was suprised that i really enjoyed the musical elements of this film, ranging from the sinister / dark songs to the funny and quirky (By the Sea). Tim Burton was able to bring a sense of danger, elements of violence and humour when needed to these songs.

If i was going to point out something i didn't enoy it would be the romantic storyline between the character Anthony and Johanna. There i felt it starting turning into your conventional musical and slushy romantic storylines did not benefit this film at all.

All in all, Sweeny todd is a fantastic piece of work. Tim Burton has managed to create a visually appealing film, strong performances by all involved. Sweeny Todd has made a musical fan outa me ! (as long as they have violence and blood)

Semi-Pro (2008)

2008-03-05T10:39:00.000-08:00

As i mentioned in my Talladega Nights review, Will ferrell has found his style, a arrogant character who was successful but has since lost his fame or skills and has to work his way back up (anchorman, Talladega Nights, Blades of Glory). I love Anchorman, one of my favourites of 2004. Talladega Nights i liked on first watch but lost its appeal on rewatches, then i really really liked Blades of Glory. However i think Will Ferrells style has finally worn off with me.

Watching Semi-Pro, i couldn't help but think that it was a shame that Dewey Cox didn't get more attention. One of the main issues with Semi-pro is that the story isn't solid, its a basic sport/comedy movie storyline, a team working towards one event. It's just slightly dull and formulaic. Usually even if i notice some cliches and basic narrative elements found in Will Ferell movies his comedic style pulls it through and makes it worth wathing, sadly this is too dull and he can't help it and comes off samey.

There were some funny moments but they came in set pieces rather than consistantly funny scenes. I'd rather have a film that has lots of funny jokes, than one or 2 REALLY funny jokes with the rest below par, which is basically what semi-pro is. My favourite scenes in terms of comedy were the puking scene, the gun scene and parts of the bear scene. Solid laughs there for sure. I also liked Woody Harrelson in this film, his character was prettygood and provided the romantic storyline.

All in all, it might be just be the fact that there has been so many of these types of movies (will ferrel basic comedy movies) that it was just unlucky in terms of order. However i'm pretty sure even if it was his first movie, it would seem dull.

Be Kind Rewind (2008)

2008-02-27T10:58:00.000-08:00

Be Kind Rewind follows Mike (Mos Def) who works at a VHS rental store, Be Kind Rewind, for boss Mr. Fletcher (Danny Glover). When Mr. Fletcher Leaves for certain amount of time. Mike's friend Jerry (Jack Black) who was recently in a electronic mishap, has become magnetic enters the store, un-knowingly erasing all the tapes. Now to save the business they set out to re-create movies.

Be Kind Rewind is directed by Michel Gondry, whose former work includes Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind and Science Of Sleep. from other reviews and news One of the main critisms of the film is that the re-makes are the best bits with the rest falling short. Going into this film i hoped that was wrong and i would disagree but i don't. The re-creations are very funny and fun. In fact thats one of the main points, Gondry is known for his visual flare and off-kilt approach. In the re-make scenes thats where this is most evident, and the rest of the film is well...pretty plain. It's formulaic and linear in it's narrative, verging on clichéd. In fact if i hadn't known this was a Gondry film, was shown it then asked who i thought directed it, i would probably never of said Gondry. There were elements of the story i didn't like, the business being attempted to be closed down by TWO seperate groups of people was fairly uneeded. However it was mainly that it was very plain in comparrison to Science of Sleep or Eternal Sunshine.

It's not all bad. As i mentioned the re-makes are brilliant. The props used including a playmat with a cartoon style town on it to represent height and distance was hillarious, a front of a toy truck to represent King Kong's nose, and a green bag for slimer from ghostbusters add some hillarity and charm. Little moments such as cuts in the footage, showing mos def as slimer then cutting to show the same place with no one there then cut again to the next scene, displaying the rough / amature style of there films. Jack Black adds his usual sense of manic comedy. The best in the performances and scenes come in the subtle moments, such as Jack Blacks "For your consideration" cards. Certain scenes such as filming at night and stealing the projection scene are hillarious and add a lot of charm to the film.

There is a plot running through of an old jazz legend who lived in the city. The story seemed pretty pointless and kind of took the film into an overally mushy approach. The ending was pretty cliched in terms of the films tone, but i did enjoy the last moments, it seemed that Gondry was really tributing the power of film (and in many ways silent cinema if you take it from the crowds point of view)

All in all, its not as daring or visually interesting as science of sleep or eternal sunshine. The characters are fairly plain as is the narrative. However the re-makes, chemistry between Mos Def & Jack Black and little mmoents in the acting help this film and make for a charming film. It's pretty average but it's intention is harmless and if you can overlook some stale aspects of the film , its an enjoyable feel good film.

No Country For Old Men (2007)

2008-02-20T12:10:00.000-08:00

-- Possible spoilers towards the end ---

The Coen Brothers' No Country For Old Men adapted from a novel of the same name by Cormac McCarthy Tells the story of Llewelyn Moss. Moss stumbles upon the aftermath of a drug deal gone bad. He takes the money that was left at the scene and becomes the target of a ruthless and relentless killer who wants the money and will kill anyone who gets in his way.

No Country For Old Men is a visually stunning film. The landscape shots that start the film with gripping narration / voiceover from Tommy Lee Jones character, Ed Tom Bell, have to be one of my favourite intros to a film, ever. Beautiful landscape, and brilliant voiceover by Tommy that instantly projects the sense of disbelief and worn down attitude that Ed Tom Bell has towards the world without even being introduced to the character, a truely brilliant intro. This is followed by a scene where we see Moss (Josh Brolin) hunting, and the landscapes are amazing.

Along with visuals this is a movie of scenes and performances. Another movie that comes to mind that relates to performances and scenes is True Romance. True Romance is really a pretty hyberbolic crime movie, a lot of glamour and over the top moments. What True Romance, which i think is a great film, had was great performances and scenes. Be it Christopher Walken and Denis Hopper creating a tense masterpiece in one scene, Gary Oldman doing what may be his best performance as pimp Drexl, or James Gandolfini & patricia arquette having an epic violent brawl, those scenes stuck out and elevated the film. As is the case here, First of mention would be Josh Brolin searching the aftermath of the drug deal. Later a scene in which Anton (Javier Bardem) is offering a gas station clerk a life or death coin toss, with comedic elements thrown in it brilliantly glides the line between intensity and darkly comic humour. The scenes in which anton tracks down Moss in his motel are brilliant and very tense, getting the sense that you just cant out run this guy because he is one step ahead all the time. Tommy Lee Jones is an actor i was never that keen on, i always felt his characters were slightly over the top, but he plays this so subtle, it's a truely brilliant performance. In fact thats an interesting point his character is so well crafted, that even though he is related and involved with the centre story, you really get the idea he has his own war with himself going on, one that may never have stopped, even after the credits, its brilliantly portrayed.

Some elements i wasn't too keen on include Woody Harrelson's character. His performance was fine but i didn't see the point of his character's inclusion in the film. If it had not been such a well known and charasmatic actor perhaps the role would of stuck out less but it just seemed odd. For me it didn't even play as "whose this CHARACTER he's a bit out of place" for me it was like "whats Woody Harrelson doing here?". I also think some more subtle elements may of taken some of the experience away for me, such as a lack of non-diegetic (ie score or music in general) i think subconsciously played on my mind. This is also a movie i plan to see again, because it takes a lot of attention, not one to drift away from, mainly due to only having one core story driving it.

I will talk for a moment or two about the most discussed element of the film, the ending. I don't want to spend too much time on it or dwel. Possible Spoiler ... :

I personally felt that Anton's exit, mixed with the open ended situation concerning the fate of Carla Moss helped the film, it reflected that life goes on. In terms of Bell (Tommy Lee Jones) 's final speech, well just as i said above, it was about life going on. Bell in many ways was the heart of the film, the entire mood of the film was there in that one character, he was out of touch and unhappy with the state of the world, a man high on principles, that is not going to just go away. I thought the abrupt ending was fine and again portrayed that the issues were still there, unresolved, which is true of life.

All in all, No Country for old men is a fantastic film. I had issues with some elements and there was something nagging on my mind in the film (probably the music issue) however this is a film of standout performances, classic scenes and beautiful cinetograhpy, a lesson in film making before your eyes.

Juno (2007)

2008-02-13T12:44:00.000-08:00

Regular and keen readers of this blog will know that i am a big fan of the genre, if it is such a genre, of quirky comedy, and Juno falls into such a genre. Though unlike films by directora such as Wes Anderson, Juno, is more firmly based in a more familiar and real world. It tells the story of 16 year old high school student Juno, who is pregnant. she decides to give the baby up for adoption, it basically follows her journey with the hopeful adopted parents to be, her friendship/relationship with father and fellow high school student Paulie Bleeker and also focuses on her relationship with her dad and step mum.

I would like to first mention, almost as a side note that the film starts with a brilliant animated credit sequence that follows juno on her travels to the local store. A great way to kick of the film and provided for a hip and light starting tone for the film. Where this film succeeds the most is in its heartfelt moments. Some moments in this film are truely touching, and not only that but each subplot seems to have one moment where everything is about the emotions of these characters. Be it Juno's breakdown, Paulie's mis-understanding of the situation and naive approach, the father and step mother connecting with their daughter while remaining supportive and strong. It doesn't stop there, from the hopeful adopting parents, the woman, Venessa, some of the moments where we get the true degree of her need to be a mother again work brilliantly.

Where i feel this film takes some mis steps are within the charatcer of Mark, the husband of venessa. His character is not ready to grow up, still having dreams of playing in bands and being generally, cool. However it's his friendship with Juno where his character weaknesses show. The constant mention of band names and movies, saying stuff like "you haven't lived till you've heard ___" so on and so on. Something that Garden State in 2004 was guilty of. I even heard some tuts from the audience. It felt they were trying to hard to seem cool and cmae of as forced and un-needed. I understand that his character trait was a key to a future narrative point but i can't help but feel the constant name dropping came off as well...lame. I'm not also too sure on the overuse of cool lingo and street / teenage talk. Some of the so called hip short hand way of talking comes of annoying after a while. I just wish it tried less to key into the youth.

All in all when its not trying hard, it works, when it was trying hard, it didn't work and let the flow of the film down. As i mentioned i wasn't as impressed with others on page's performance, i liked her character in her tougher emotional moments but some of the sarky / quick witted stuff i wasn't too keen on. However this film has a heart, and these problems are secondary when to be honest what this film does very well is let the core story, a young girl facing a serious choice guide the film, with strong supporting performances from Jennifer Garner, Michael Cera and very strong performances from J.K. Simmons & Allison Janney grounding the film. Jason Bateman's (Mark's) story lets the side down though

Cloverfield (2008)

2008-02-05T14:18:00.000-08:00

The lights go down and a booming sound hits the cinema, followed by a few more, then the film begins and straight away i was hooked. We pick up the film from the view of retrieved footage, that we assume was picked up by the government / Army with the case titled "Cloverfield" started at an area "once known as Centeral Park" this immediately sets up a sense of dread. Then it's followed by footage of a young couple who have just spent the night together, planning their day and traveling on the train. Then it flips between two characters planning a party. With the date at the bottom of recording changing it set up an idea that these two stories probably inter-connect but it was a brilliant idea to get you thinking. I was like "ok so thats like a month and a bit between the dates" getting the audience thinking, genius move. Setting up the emotional aspect and real human lives established a solid base to actually care about these people. It's funny because obivously i knew a monster had to attack at some point but during the party scenes, the interaction between the characters was so solid and engaging that when the monster did attack, it came as a suprise, i was like "oh yeah the monster". Actually part of me was like "damn i have to get used to a new film now" because i was worried the tone would change in terms of the characters. However it didn't when a character dies they take time to show how to effects the fellow characters. Obiviously they don't spend too much time on it, as it's a action movie with a monster, but it was enough and many other disaster movies wouldn't take anytime for the characters.

The monster itself (not too give anything away) well actually thats a good point. To go off on something else for a second. The viral promotional campaign was the main part of this factor. I don't feel right to mention the details of the monster because the viral promotion was so good that it kept you guessing. Whether it was slight glipses on trailers, posters, internet stuff (including fake myspace accounts for the characters) it was so brilliantly done, i don't want to ruin the suprise for thos who have not seen it. I will say that the action is tense and gripping. There is a moment where the monster strikes at a helicopter, emerging from smoke, it was made me jump and i challenge you not to do the same.

The director Matt Reeves had previously directed The Pallbearer. A quiet, dark romantic comedy. A brilliant film that i loved for many years (it's in my top 10 of all time) , way before Cloverfield was announced. However given the genre of this film, then contrasted with the genre of The Pallbearer, i was a little worried that it might not be carried off due to the staggering difference in tone. Don't be alarmed by that, this is as good as a disaster movie i have ever seen, the best i've seen in fact. He seems to of taken to it like a duck to water.

Before this turns into a lovefest i should point out that although i loved the film as a whole, there was one moment that i really did not like and was made for irritating by the fact it went against everything the rest of the film was about. There is a moment where Hud, the character who has the camera, is approached by the monster in a "he's behind you !" sort of manner. He turns and the charatcer looks up (as does the camera) it sticks on the monster for like 5-7 seconds. My issue comes two fold :

1. The camera angle was too prefect, if you were look at a huge monster you wouldn't be bothered about filming it, you'd look with your eyes

2. By seperating them and making it a face off between him and the creature, what that did was make it obivious these are the main characters, like the monster was like "i could go over there .. or maybe here where the stars are" where the rest of it was it was happening around them, for that moment it was happening TO them, which i have issue with.

All in all, those issues i had with it above, mainly made more prominent because i felt it went agianst what the rest of the movie stood for. However that was a small moment that i had issue with, because the rest of the movie was so brilliantly done. There is so much to like about this movie, but, the key reason for me is that after the film was done. I was silent, the rest of the audience was silent and i felt drained. It made me care, and to top that it was at the same time one hell of an exciting ride. A triumph.

Aliens vs Predator - Requiem (2007)

2008-02-02T10:37:00.000-08:00

It's such a shame to see something you are a fan of butchered and ruined as much as this was. I make no excuses that i love pretty much all the first 4 alien films (yes even Alien Resurrection). I rank Aliens in my top5 of all time, and Predator in my top 30. However the situation in relation to Requiem gets worse, because we have to remember this isn't the first AVP film. The first one was bland, boring and cliched. This film was just out right wrong and horrible.

One of the saving graces of the first AVP in 2004 was that the action was pretty fair, but here, well i'm sure it would be good if we good see the goddamn thing. It's near impossible to tell which of the creatures is throwing the punch at any given time. Dull, dark and murky camera shots provide plenty of fustration for a fan of the alien/predator franchise (independently). Every Cliched music cue, every over the top action sequence its all here.

The crap doesn't stop with the mise-en-scene the general direction, the characters too. Whether it's the stereotypical (if you're in the movie "Grease") teen bully boys are tourment one of our leads with childish fighting and all that. The obiviously only there for male gaze teen female lead, and boy was the male gaze abused in this film. Oh and not too mention the "we're not trying to tap into and con exisiting fans because signourney knows when to quit" Riply-esque character, who falls for Hicks...oh sorry i mean Dallas....

All iin all this film was pretty damn poor in nearly every respect. With negative reviews i tend to keep them short because the film dosen't deserve much attention , even if all bad. On my other site i gave AVP2 a D- , with it being saved from an F because the fact at least it was another chance to see aliens / predator on screen. However this is the ONLY redeeming factor, seeing them on screen...when you can, when they're not just a grey blur of un-needed camera movement.

The Simpsons Movie: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Overlook The Weaknesses

2008-01-13T17:39:00.000-08:00

When reading over my review of Futurama : Bender's Big score, Futurama was not fresh in my mind, The Simpsons was. More to the point how much i wrote about the Simpsons Movie...more to the point, how negativly i wrote about The Simpsons Movie. Now don't get me wrong, in terms of all out laughter, for me, Futurama won. However i can't help but feel i sold The Simpsons Movie short.

So, I gave it a rewatch. Don't look opon this article so much as a review, more of just a rant. A way of lcearing my mind on this film. On the rewatch i found jokes i missed the first time, second, third...yes my 4th viewing of this film. I think part motivation for me watching it so many times is that i'm such a simpsons fanboy , or at least for the old days.

Don't get me wrong though i still think it has MAJOR flaws. Flaws that i think are shared by a lot of die hard fans. In fact, thats one of the main issues. The Simpsons movie wasn't directed at Die Hard fans, it was almost pointed at people that had never seen it before. Evidence of this comes from the commentary on the DVD. They said that during test screenings, they had Milhouse more of a centeral part of the lisa storyline. However audiences didn't know the connection and that he had fancied her all the way through the TV show, so the angle was dropped and colin was made more prominent. I would of been so much happier if slight changes were made, why president schwarzenegger and not president Wolfcastle? As even the newset of simpsons newbies would make the connection between the Wolfcastle character and schwarzenegger. Why Russ Cargill and not Mr Burns? or a story involving Sideshow bob? I've expressed my issues before on the set piece jokes (chores, fishing) so i won't go no and on. Besides i seem to remember saying i felt i'd sold this film short right?

On the rewatch, There was far more i enjoyed about it, i've said what i didn't like so lets list what i did like

* A lot more of the jokes i seemed to enjoy this time ("Black thats the worst colour" "i like en now" "maybe we should kiss"

* Marge / Homer narrative though explored many times before, worked. Marge's video was especially effective.

* Bart's character really worked in the film and the journey he took was quite interesting, and it was good for him to be fairly centeral to the story as when the show first aired, he was the star, untill homer of course took over.

* it looks fantastic and really captured a cinematic sensability and feel.

-----------
MORE TO COME, WORK IN PROGRESS
-------------

Futurama : Bender's Big Score (2007)

2008-01-08T09:40:00.001-08:00

Futurama is an interesting show in that it is different yet samey at the same time. The visuals look slick and colourful, it mixes drama with comedy (you only have to see Jurrassic Bark to see what i mean) however at the same time, it can still fall flat. A fair few of the characters are one dimensional. A few comming in for one liners (zoidberg) or main characters built on chatchphrases (Bender). I still remain that in it's day, at it's best, The Simpsons was the best TV show of all time, animated or other. However The Simpsons qaility has dropped to terrible levels, and i still find it hard to believe that when Simpsons was churning out near-crap, futurama, which was still performing on a more than solid level, was cancelled. When The simpsons movie came out, i must admit it was better than i expected. Some jokes were very funny, however most fell flat and i guess deep down it was more the spectacle of seeing them on the big screen that pushed the movie beyond the praise it deserved. The simpsons movie was made when simpsons was at a low point, Futurama movie was made when it was at a high point, and this movie proved it should of never left our screens.

Where Simpsons was lacking on belly laugh jokes, Futurama : Bender's Big Score did not. It brought joke after joke, many pushing the bounderies ("can i use your pen" "your tail was wagging") and giving it a wellcomed egde. The Narrative is both interesting and well played out, it moves smoothly while still allowing for off-beat comedy moments and direct away from what is a pretty dense and complicated narrative.

When i heard there were songs, i was so worried. However, if you too are worried, don't be. There's only Two and they are both brilliantly excuted and Very funny. Here we get wellcomed returns for characters such as bubblegum tate, barbados Slim and Zap. This film also opened my eyes to what a great character Fry is. I mentioned earlier that i feel Bender can sometimes fall too flat in terms of layers to his character, however Fry is, IMO, one of the richest characters on TV. Here the emotional thread of the film revolves around him, and his character really comes into his own. Through the series there was always that interesting angle that fry was dumb, yet passionate and though maybe not as book smart, had it over his future friends as he knew and missed a lot of the things in 2000. He is dumb but being redeemable by emotion and a sense of relatablitity.

What sold it for me totally was that i never felt Bender's Big score trited too hard. Where the simpsons movie would times take breaks to show one-stand alone- one liner or set piece (chores, lights out at moes ect.) however the jokes in Bender's big score i felt came more naturally and happened and co-existed within the narrative.

All in all, Bender's Big score is fantastic, belly laughs throughout, but more importantly mixed with a real emotional narrative thread. It keeps up where it left off, shame the simpsons did too, ay?

The Number 23 (2007)

2008-01-08T09:11:00.000-08:00

It's funny when a favourite actor stars in a bad film. Sometimes it's an issue of the film being bad and not the actor's performances and in many cases this can lift the film higher than it deserves. Sadly, i can't say that for The Number 23.

The Number 23 is the story of Walter Sparrow who becomes obsessed with a novel that he believes was written about him. As his obsession increases, more and more similarities seem to arise. He becomes obssesed with connections between the number 23 and his life and decends into insanity while at the same time we see it from the view of his alter-ego in the story, "Fingerling".

The idea may seem an interesting one at a glance, hell i'm all up for a good thriller, shame this wasn't. The main reason is that the whole "23" thing was done to death, i mean any little connection to "23" it could make, it made. It went past ridiculous and entered into down right stupidity. Now back to my original point. I'd heard bad things about this movie before seeing it but had high hopes Carrey (one of my all time favourite actors) could help this film, sadly not even he could lift it above average. In fact his performance was an interesting one. He really throw himself into it but at the same time, you get the feeling that the people involved know this is madness and are hoping that it will do well by going in full force.

I did like apsects of the visual (gothic) style. i liked some parts of the film noir style, and the scenes involving fingerling. However, some of the twists taken in this film aren't good and really push the bounderies of believability. For instance, the story itself takes so many turns, from who wrote the book, a story involving a character in jail also mixes in with both the real time and fingerling story, which comes off as over the top and just too many twists. Not to mention a dog that is haunting carrey's character

All in all, i have to credit the enthusiasm of all involved. However enthusiasm could not save a film with a flimbsy story and too many plot twists. In fact the main flaw of this film is it tries to hard. There was a nice visual style there and a good idea, sadly done to death.

Re-casting Batman Villians.....

2008-01-05T17:14:00.000-08:00

Batman forever & batman and Robin are known for some interesting cast choices. Mainly, Arnold for Mr.Freeze, which was totally stupid. So I would like to offer you some of my choices for people who could play batman villians if they were to appear in a Nolan version of Batman...

The Riddler

Michael Emerson

Steve Buscemi

Hayden Christensen

Tobey Maguire

=============================================

=============================================

(though i like the choice for TDK)

Two-Face

Josh Brolin

==========================================
==========================================

Mr Freeze

Patrick Stewart

Samuel L Jackson

Denzel Washington

Javier Bardem

Ben Kingsley

========================
=========================

Tha-tha-tha-thats all folks.

Most anticipated of 2008...

2008-01-05T13:45:00.000-08:00

These are the movies i'm going to try and see.

BOLDED are the ones i'd run over my own cat for, and i like my cat, a lot.

--------------------
Already seen & recommend : The Great Debaters (Review comming soon in main section)
--------------------

Be Kind Rewind
A fan of Jack black, Mos Def , Gondry and ghostbusters! so this cannot fail, it's gonna rule!

Cloverfield
possibly rumoured "lost" connection makes me interested, along with the clever marketing.

The Dark Knight
I don't need to say anything here do i ? movie event of the year, hands down.

The Happening
I never saw "Lady in The Water" and don't plan too, as i've heard it's shit. However i'm a fan of sixth sense, Unbreakable and Village (signs not so much). Plus Zooey Deschanel is in it, so its a given that i'm gonna see it, but i'm in no rush.

Hellboy 2
The first film was a very nice suprise and set the bar high for the sequel, so should be good.

Iron Man
trailers look good, Ironman looks impressive, should be good.

Kung Fu Panda
pretty much just for the cast, film, not so much.

Meet the Spartans
spoof movies can be hit and miss, lets hope it hits.

The Poughkeepsie Tapes
Purely based on story outline on IMDB, could be a good horror / thriller, seems Se7en'ish

Rambo
iI was impressed with his return was Rocky, so no reason this should be poor

Semi-Pro
more of the same from Wil ferrel, but i'm still excited by the film and trailers.

Star Trek
Could suck major balls, lets hope not

21
Seems a bit like Smockin' Aces, probably will see it, again no rush

Wall-E
It's pixar, no other reason needed

----------------

I Am Legend (2007)

2008-01-04T08:11:00.000-08:00

Here's a few things i look forward to within the movie world : The new Tarantino movie, the new Wes Anderson movie, anything with Zooey Deschanel in, THE DARK KNIGHT lol and aonther one of those things is, the new Will Smith movie. I realise he's been in more than his share of stinkers (wild wild west) but he's also been in some good ones (Men In Black, IRobot) and i've heard great things but yet not seen, Ali. So here we have I Am Legend, the story of the last surviving man in the world, after a outbreak of infection that turn humans (and dogs apparently) into zombie/vampire like creatures. Actually the casting of Will Smith is a pretty solid move, as the nature of this movie needs an actor with a lot of charisma that can hold the screen, as for the majority of the time, he's the only actor on it.

I would like to start by saying, as a movie going experience, i enjoyed this film, quite a bit. The defining factor being the following. In an age where shock value (if you can call it that) comes in gruesome and over the top violence (Saw series, Hostel, Wolf Creek ect. ect.) it was a wellcomed change of pace to see a sci-fi horror that used old fashioned delayed shock and "is it around that corner?!" style that is rare these days. In fact the last film i remember using that tatic was "The Others" in 2001. So i think it was a brave choice to shy away from all out violence and use a more psychological fear approach. The moments we are meant to care, be scared or be on the edge of our seat hit perfect (or at least for me) and i was involved in the film a lot more than i thought i would be.

There is also an interesting, yet only breifly covered in some ways arguement for Science Vs Religion in this film. Will Smith's science and a character he meets later, Anna represents religion. Anna has a lot of faith where Will Smith has lost all of his having been in this situation for so long. In the end it appears both come together to solve the issue. It was an interesting concept, that maybe could of been done a little further, but for what it was, was interesting to see play out.

However this film is not without it's short commings. For instance i'll have to agree with the comments on the CGI effects, though not totally. I agree that the CGI was, in terms of looks, was not up to scale with other movies of the genre. They looked more like something you would see in an episode of Buffy The Vampire Slayer and lacked a certain grand scale feel. However, i thought the capture and movement motion was fantastic, and in many ways helped over look a somewhat un-scary zombie/vampire thing. I have issue with some directions taken in the movie and explanation of the title "I Am Legend". Let me guide you to Wikipedia for the original explanation given in the book :

" he reflects on how the new society of the living infected regards him as a monster. Just as vampires were regarded as legendary monsters that preyed on the vulnerable humans in their beds, Neville has become a mythical figure that kills both vampires and the infected living while they are sleeping. He becomes a legend as the vampires once were, hence the title "I Am Legend "

I personally really like that theory but the film sort of ditches that theory. Instead, in this film, Will Smiths character takes certain action that allows a colony of surviving humans to live and rebuild. I feel ditching the original explanation takes away from the film. It does show he has killed many zombies at one point, but not directly pointing out that he is seen as a feared entity in the eyes of the infected. Instead going for, in my eyes, a weaker reasoning for the title.

There are some cheesy moments we have to come to expect ("butterfly") but it isn't played to much, and it has less sentimentality as Will Smith's character is seen to be wore down by the world he lives in and his character is fairly to the point, which is rare also for a big bankable star like Will Smith to play.

All in all, as i say i have some issues with it. However, as a shock film, it works. Will Smith brings the charisma you would expect. The CGI is a bit weak, but i was still able to look past it and enjoy the film. I do wish it was able to stay a little closer to the material. The film was edgier than i thought it would be. I would recommend this to sci-fi fans, it has some issues but Will Smith's charisma and high speed tense cinetography pulls it through.

The Dark Knight Official Trailer : My Thoughts

2007-12-23T13:09:00.001-08:00

With the release of the new trailer for The Dark Knight, my fears have been laid to rest. No other trailer have i been more excited about, shit, no FILM have i been more excited about. So i will attempt now to go through point by point some of my views on the trailer. I will be doing a youtube specific review in the new year. Remember to watch it above to help with the understanding of this "Review" / "thoughts"

POINTS

1. Narration by The Joker. - very good move, an usual choice but i love the way it opens with joker's perspective not batman, very nice movie.

2. The batbike intro - nice, coupled with the images of bruce on his own in his house, then on the rooftop really help quickly establish the idea of Gothem against batman and batman being a loner and not much different from joker.

3. Joker in cell "knives and lint" - Awesome. I like the sense of fear and menace that is built just by this short clip, joker seems very indifferent, just sitting there. The knives and lint line is chilling as is "evening commissionor" with ledger's chilling delivery

4. "Why so Serious!" - Fantastic moment that shows the agression and the darker tone they are taking the joker. Also followed by an awesome moment with him hanging his head out of the car window adding to the insanity and carefree nature of this character. Rocket launcher moment also good and brings the character back to the weedy / fumbling aspects brought up in the cartoons.

5. Bat signal smash - I'm not sure about this storyline, having heard about the fake batmans and possible framing of batman, it seems a little cliched, but i'm willing to wait and see.

6. General action scenes - all the aaction seems to notch stuff

7. Street showdown - the moments of joker and batman in the street "c'mon HIT ME!" reminded me very much of the 1989 burton film with joker and the batwing.
---------------------------

All in all, lets face it the main reason people wanted to see the trailer was for Heath Ledger's version of The Joker, and from my humble opinion, i can't fucking wait.

The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou (2004)

2007-12-23T12:23:00.000-08:00

In many ways this is Wes Anderson's most commercial and mainstream outing. Though still maintaining common themes of his previous films (family, and more to the point the definition of family) With The Life Aquatic what you get is Wes doing, maybe for the first time, an all out comedy.

Yes it stilll has the quirky moments you come to expect but it also has far out whacky "slapstick" moments. Including Bill Murray's steve zissou running into a room of pirates firing a gun, fight scenes, and other aspects that take it away from the more subtle aspect of say Rushmore. That's what i like about Wes Anderson as a director, he is known for his quirky style but he's not afraid to take it to the extreme too. The final job in bottle rocket, the wedding reception in royal tenenbaums and many scenes in life aquatic prove this.

Bill Murray steals the show here and it's a nice change of pace for him. After his more downbeat / subtle performance in the brilliant, Rushmore, he seemed to take roles that suited that style (Lost in Translation , Broken Flowers) but here we see a great mix of the subtle qaulities of Translation and the more out there style seen in ghostbusters or groundhog day. I could pick out so many comedy gems from murray in this film. Jeff Goldblum also pulls in a solid performance here and he and murray bounce comedically of eachother quite well. Owen is as always great and further proves he is at his pure best when working with Wes, no other of his performances come close (see bottle rocket for Owen's shining moment - and first film)

Life Aquatic mixes surreal with ...well not even real.. i guess hyper reality. Everything is slightly off kilter, which adds to the charm. One of the most interesting points of the film is that of the fish. Being a film about an oceanographer, sea life is present. However the marine life is animated using stop motion animation. A form of animation i love, however here, it never quite mixed well. It seemed too odd, the characters themselves were odd enough to sustain the zaney-ness of the film. However it does help to further seperate it from his other work.

Further seperating it is the choice of music. Seu Jorge provides the majority of the music with covers of Bowie songs, with the odd original bowie song thrown in there at key moments. The addition of Seu Jorge, who also played a character, who would sit and play songs, seemed a little odd, and a very commercial move.

All in all, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou is a brave move for Wes Anderson. I remember seeing this in the cinema and comming out having never laughed so much in a cinema, i was a keen Andersonite at that point already. However on 3rd and 4th watches i can see how this film may dissapoint some Wes Anderson fans. It is more mainstream, it is more commercial, but please, look past that. it still holds values from all his films previous, but with a stronger attempt at broad comedy. Bill Murray is fantastic here and steals every scene, What Wes has done here is create something that will appeal to none fans of Wes, and one of Murray's finesy performances.

2007 Movie Releases I'm Still Catching Up With

2007-12-08T10:55:00.000-08:00

Want Too See

(Bold - REALLY REALLY Wanna See.)

Zodiac
Stardust
Shoot Em' Up

Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie Film for Theaters
No Country for Old Men (2008 in UK)
Eastern Promises
Severance
Vacancy
The Lives of Others

30 Days of Night
Dead Silence

Sicko (2007)

2007-12-07T13:34:00.000-08:00

Bowling For Columbine was an amazing piece of work that was engaging, funny, heartwarming, sad and beautifully told. One of the finest Documentary films i have seen. Fahrenheit 9/11 was for sure a step down for Michael Moore. Less engaging, too overally political and overall didn't have the impact of Columbine

With Sicko, Moore is looking into the currupt medical system within the united states. It's an improvement on Fahrenheit but didn't reach the heights of Columbine. From a directing standpoint it's more towards columbine. Because unlike Fahrenheit which seemed just a tool in which moore could express his political views, Sicko uses human stories to make his point, which gives it an extra level of it being a problem that effects people. Some of the stories were truely sad, and they worked in the context of the documentary, becausei felt like throwing stuff at the screen because of the terrible situations the US health system had left these people in. Moore does have a likeability factor, and a certain charisma that shines through on the screen.

However, and it's a pretty big "however", there is one simple, and i mean simple, point where sicko loses a lot of its credit. The moment Moore steps out of the states and tries to make a point about other countries health systems, the weakness and one sided mind of moore is exposed. He goes to the UK, and of course, health care is free here but we still have our issues, issues that Moore seems to have overlooked. Instead he hails all other countries Health systems as heaven and faultless. He also not only dumbs down his general arguement by skipping over facts opting for a faultless utopia of health but his attitude makes him seem really...stupid. He wonders around asking "so how much did that cost?" about 50 times "i was beginning to wonder where the cashier guy was" "This can't be true..[montage of him asking the same question]...maybei should check another country"...Que france....Same stupid questions. It just came off as dumbed down. I totally agree that the currupt way the US works their health is wrong, based on profit and such. He's right to point out these issues, but point out the issues in other health systems, don't pratonise your audience and the people of those countries who (though have free health care) have to deal with plenty of other health issues, its not near perfect.

Even though this was a HUGE gripe for me, and i don't want to set it aside. I can though realise that he does expose some huge flaws in the US system, theres some great footage here too. Including 1950s public service videos, the true life stories are very interesting.

All in all, i can't fault Michael Moore's directorial talent. He's great with setting up the sequences to provide gripping documentary film making. He is also exposing subjects that need to be exposed and there is a huge fault in the US health system. This is deffinatly a step up from Fahrenheit 9/11. However his ability to dumb down his approach, plainly skip over issues in other countries to service his own point takes this film down quite a few pegs for me.

Favuorite Directors

2007-12-06T18:23:00.000-08:00

Tim Burton
Seen: Vincent, Beetle Juice, Batman, Edward Scissorhands, Batman Returns, Ed Wood, Mars Attacks!, Sleepy Hollow, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Corpse Bride
Want too see: Planet of the Apes, Big Fish, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

Wes Anderson
Seen: Bottle Rocket, Rushmore, The Royal Tenenbaums, Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou, Hotel Chevalier, The Darjeeling Limited
Want too see: The Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009) - this is gonna be interesting to say the least

Quentin Tarantino
Seen: Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, Kill Bill, Kill Bill Vol.2, Death Proof
Want too see: Inglorious Bastards (2008)

Martin Scorsese
Seen: Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Casino, Gangs Of New York, The Aviator, The Departed
Want too see: Mean Streets

David Fincher
Seen: Alien 3, Se7en, The Game, Fight Club, Panic Room
Want too see: Zodiac

Farrelly Bros.
Seen: Dumb & Dumber, Kingpin, There's Something About Mary, Me Myself & Irene, Shallow Hal
Want too see Stuck On You, Fever Pitch, Heartbreak Kid

Coen Bros.
Seen: Raising Arizona, Fargo, The Big Lebowski, Ladykillers
Want To See: Blood Simple, Miller's Crossing, Barton Fink, The Man Who Wasn't There, No Country For Old Men

Favourite Actors / Actresses

2007-12-06T18:12:00.000-08:00

Actors

Paul Giamatti
Seen: Sideways, Cinderella Man, Man On The Moon
Want too see: Lady in the Water, The Illusionist, American Splendor.

Jim Carrey
Seen: Truman Show, Ace Ventura 1&2, Dumb Dumber, Cable Guy, Liar Liar, Eternal Sunshine, Man On The Moon, Me Myself & Irene, Fun With Dick & Jane, Bruce Almighty, The Majestic
Want Too See: The Number 23

John Cusack
Seen:Grosse Pointe Blank, Con Air, Being John Malkovich, High Fidelity Identity
Want Too See: The Thin Red Line

Steve Bucemi
Seen Reservoir Dogs, Airheads, Fargo, The Big Lebowski, Con Ai, Ghost World, Monsters Inc.
Want Too See: Trees Lounge

Alec Baldwin
Seen Beetle Juice, The Cooler, The Aviator,Fun with Dick and Jane, Royal Tenenbaums (Narrator), The Departed
Want Too See: The Good Sheperd

James Gandolfini
Seen: True Romance, Get Shorty, The Last Castle, "The Sopranos"
Want Too See The Man Who Wasn't There, The Mexican

Will Smith
Seen "The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air", Made in America, Independence Day, Men in Black 1&2, I Robot, Shark Tale, The Pursuit of Happyness
Want Too See: Ali, I Am Legend

Jack Nicholson
Seen: Easy Rider, Five Easy Pieces, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, The Shining, Batman, Mars Attacks! As Good as It Gets, Anger Management, About Schmidt, The Departed
Want Too See

Steve Zahn
Seen: Reality Bites, You've Got Mail, Chain Of Fools, Saving Silverman, Joy Ride, Riding In Cars With Boys, Shattered Glass
Want Too See : Rescue Dawn

Owen Wilson
Seen Bottle Rocket, The Cable Guy, Shanghai Noon, Meet the Parents, Zoolander, The Royal Tenenbaums, Starsky & Hutch, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, Meet The Fockers, Wedding Crashers, Cars, Night at the Museum, The Darjeeling Limited
Want Too See The Wendell Baker Story,

Jack Black
Seen: The Cable Guy, Mars Attacks!, "Tenacious D" (Tv Show), High Fidelity, Saving Silverman, Shallow Hal, Ice Age, Orange County , The School of Rock , Shark Tale, Envy, Anchorman, King Kong, Tenacious D: Pick Of Destiny.
Want Too See Be Kind, Rewind

Samuel L Jackson
Seen: Pulp Fiction, True Romance, Jurassic Park, One Eight Seven, Jackie Brown, Star Wars: Episode I, Unbreakable, Changing Lanes, Star Wars Episode 2, Star Wars Episode 3, Kill Bill Vol.2, The Incredibles, Snakes On A Plane.
Want Too See: Sydney, The Great White Hype, Trees Lounge, Coach Carter

Zach Braff
Seen: "Scrubs", Garden State
Want Too See: The Last Kiss

Al Pacino
Seen The Panic in Needle Park, The Godfather, The Godfather: Part II, Dog Day Afternoon, Scarface, Carlito's Way, Heat, Donnie Brasco, S1m0ne.
Want Too See: Godfather Part III, Glengarry Glen Ross, Scent of a Woman.

Michael Keaton
Seen: BeetleJuice, Batman, Batman Returns, Jackie Brown, Cars
Want Too See: White Noise

Robert De Niro
Seen: The Godfather: Part II , Taxi Driver, The Deer Hunter, Raging Bull, The Untouchables, Goodfellas, This Boy's Life, Heat, Jackie Brown, Ronin, Analyze This, Meet The Parents, Godsend, Shark Tale, Hide & Seek, Meet The Fockers
Want Too See: Mean Streets, The King of Comedy , Once Upon a Time in America .

Ray Romano
Seen "Everybody Loves Raymond", Eulogy, Ice Age 1&2, Wellcome To Moosport
Want Too See Grilled

Jean Reno
Seen: Nikita ,Subway, Léon, MI, Godzilla, Ronin
Want Too See

Alan Rickman
Seen: Die Hard, Dogma, Galaxy Quest, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Want Too See: Something the Lord Made

Bill Murray
Seen: Caddyshack, Ghost Busters 1&2, Little Shop of Horrors, Scrooged, Groundhog Day, Ed Wood, Kingpin, Rushmore, The Royal Tenenbaums, Lost in Translation, Coffee & Cigarettes, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, Broken Flowers, Darjeeling Limited (Cameo)
Want Too See: Stripes, Tootsie, The Man Who Knew Too Little

Hank Azaria
Seen "The Simpsons", Mystery Men, Eulogy, Appearances in "Friends", Shattered Glass, The Simpsons Movie
Want Too See

Johnny Depp
Seen: A Nightmare on Elm Street, Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, Donnie Brasco, Sleepy Hollow, Blow, Pirates of the Caribbean 1,2 & 3, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Corpse Bride
Want Too See: Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, What's Eating Gilbert Grape

John Candy
Seen Little Shop of Horrors, Spaceballs, Planes, Trains & Automobiles, Uncle Buck, Cool Runnings, Rookie Of The Year, Home Alone
Want Too See Stripes, Splash, JFK, Who's Harry Crumb?

Christopher Walken
Seen Annie Hall, The Deer Hunter, A View to a Kill, Batman Returns, True Romance, Wayne's World 2, Pulp Fiction, Blast from the Past, Antz, Joe Dirt, Catch Me If You Can, Envy, Wedding Crashers, Click
Want Too See King of New York, Romance & Cigarettes

Bruce Willis
Seen: Die Hard, Die Hard 2, Pulp Fiction, Die Hard: With a Vengeance, Twelve Monkeys, The Fifth Element, The Sixth Sense, The Whole Nine Yards, Unbreakable, Hostage, Sin City, Lucky Number Slevin, 16 Blocks, Over the Hedge, Live Free or Die Hard
Want Too See: The Jackal, Mercury Rising, Armageddon

Actresses

Zooey Deschanel
Seen Almost Famous, Big Trouble, Elf, Eulogy, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
Want Too See Live Free or Die

Drew Barrymore
Seen ET, Wayne's World 2, Donnie Darko, Riding in Cars with Boys
Want Too See The Wedding Singer

Natalie Portman
Seen Léon, Heat, Mars Attacks!, Star Wars: Episode 1 2 & 3, Garden State, V for Vendetta, Hotel Chavelia
Want Too See

Winona Ryder
Seen Beetle Juice, Edward Scissorhands, Reality Bites, Alien: Resurrection, Mr. Deeds, S1m0ne Want Too See Girl, Interrupted

Helena Bonham Carter

Instant Memories....Merry Christmas

2007-12-06T18:06:00.001-08:00

Saw Traps Music Video

2007-12-01T13:56:00.001-08:00

I made it, enjoy !

Top 10 Movies of 2007

2007-11-23T13:26:00.000-08:00

I've waited a long time to make this list, and here it is !

TOP 10

1. The Bourne Ultimatum

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GbvNL6s45U - Trailer

2. This Is England
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0jkv2bRFgQ - Trailer

3. Knocked Up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F6YTdGWxLY Trailer

4. The Darjeeling Limited
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO1bYukdvLI - Trailer

5. Grindhouse (Planet Terror / Death Proof)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0AaVUs3-Pw

6. Ratatouille
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYUjNQrokeg&feature=related

7. Superbad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3UFV1in5Qk

8. Hot Fuzz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7J_vYN5ZkY

9. Sunshine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ2-xR54UDU&feature=related

10. Reign Over Me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ3_OZzxCmw

------------------------------------------------------------

Other highlights of the year

Transformers , Kenny, Sicko, Ocean's Thirteen , 28 Weeks Later, The Simpsons Movie, 300, Live Free or Die Hard, Smokin' Aces, Blades Of Glory

Worth A Look

Saw IV, Shooter, Spider-man 3, Ghost Rider.

Meh

Death Sentence, Fantastic Four : Rise of The Silver Surfer.

NO

Run, Fatboy, Run , Hostel Part II, Mr bean's Holiday, The Hills Have Eyes 2

NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Norbit, Epic Movie

The Darjeeling Limited (2007)

2007-11-23T13:06:00.000-08:00

I first discovered Wes Anderson with Royal Tenenbaums which to this day is still my go to favourite movie of all time. I'm a huge fan of his style of film making sometimes pretencious yes, but there is a lot of directorial talent there.

Darjeeling Limited follows the story of 3 brothers who after the death of their father travel around india on "The Darjeeling Limited" train and attempt to go on a spiritual journey to re-connect with eachother.

Darjeeling opens with what is actually one of Wes Anderson's finest moments. We follow Bill Murray who is playing a business man, we see him in a taxi rushing to the train station, the train is leaving and we follow him rushing for it. The camera slows and Adrian Brody also running for the train over takes Murray and reaches the train. It's a great moment, a passing of the tourch if you will from Murray to Brody, as muuray has been a major fixture of Anderson's movies since Rushmore in 1998. There is also a scene where some kids are playing on a raft on a river and it gets swept away. The guys jump in to save them, adrian brody's character is on the raft with the kid swimming to safety when it flips and both end up under the water. This is followed by a muffled dip in the audio (much as you might expect in a war movie) and we see Jason's character running across the bank. A still moment, then Adrian's character emerges from the water with blood down his face and shirt holding the kid. He quickly announces "he's dead,he's already died" This has to be one of Anderson's finest moments, he doesn't give you a second to adjust. The raft is turned over quick, then followed by frantic running and dip of audio, then when adrian emerges he ends any hope straight away. A brave move, but it worked. I may say that if you're going to be picky you could point fault that maybe this characters death is mainly used to service the toher characters story and segway into a flashback. However, the excellent direction that is taken in that scene totally makes up for it.

All performances are top notch. Adrien Brody shines here adapting quickly and perfectly to anderson's somewhat quirky style. Owen Wilson is solid as always, his character here reminded me very much of his role in bottle rocket, which is of course a wellcomed addition. Anjelica Huston another wes Anderson regular is also back and puts in the best performance i have seen from her and spends way too little time on screen. It's a more subtle performance than in her previous collaborations with Anderson, and benefits for it.

Then there's Jason Schwartzman. Before the film played, you are treated to a 15 minute short movie, Hotel Chevalier. A prequel of sorts to Darjeeling featuring Jason's character Jack and his on-off girlfriend played by Natalie Portman. You get back story to Jason's character, and works perfectly with Darjeeling. It's somewhat art house, and fairly risqué too. Jason's character in Hotel/Darjeeling, reminded me of an older version of his character from Rushmore, just bit more successful with the ladies. He still played it with that conflicted mind, and a quiet, almost depressive attitude, much like Max fischer from Rushmore.

The scenery and interia of the train are fantastic with every bit of detail you would expect from Anderson. It used tracking shots from time to time in the train, much like the open interia from life aquatic. All of Anderson's films have ended with a slow motion end sequence leading to the credits, expect this one. Which (though a little disapointed, cus a fanboy like me i was wondering how it was gonna end in slow motion) he did use slow motion much more throughout the film brilliantly

All in all, this is not as funny as Life Aquatic, it may share a little too many conventions with Royal Tenenbaums. However what you have here is a beautiful looking film, with great direction, a top notch cast, great use of music and a poetic quiet mood that carries the film across, allowing for moments of chaos. Thats actually interesting because there are a fair few slap stick comedy moments or caper moments in this film (the snake, mace ect ect). It worked well previously in Life Aquatic and there were moments of it in Tenenbaums and Bottle Rocket. However what we have with darjeeling is a subtle mix of the slapstick comedy of Aquatic mixed with the subtle character driven narrative of Tenenbaums. Wes has done it (yet) again (and twice if you count Hotel Chevalier)

Flightplan (2005)

2007-11-19T03:57:00.000-08:00

If you were to look up "Average" in the dictionary, you may well see a picture of this film. In fact this film is so depressingly average i can barely remember seeing it. I had been wanting to see it since its release in 2005. I liked the trailer and the narrative seemed interesting. However above all it was the cast that interested me. Jodie Foster who i enjoy watching in a majority of her films. Peter Sarsgaard, who had impressed me in "Garden State£ and was compelling in "Shattered Glass". However my like for the cast could not save this film

It's just a bit of a mess. incase you don't know the story is :

*A bereaved woman and her daughter are flying home from Berlin to America. At 30,000 feet the child vanishes and nobody admits she was ever on that plane* {Cheers IMDB!}

The main reason for me this film fails is this statement i found that IMDB used to describe it:

"A claustrophobic, Hitchcockian thriller"

Yeah, for a bit. I will admit, it does work as a hitchcockian thriller for the first 30-50 minutes where its more about her quizing passengers about the location of her daughter. Then we have Peter Sarsgaard who starts off quite scary with a quiet menace. Then he and his flight attendant girlfriend hold up the plane with a bomb and peter has a fight with jodie and the plane blows up. yes Hitchcockian, i remember in Rear window when James Stewart grabs a rocket launcher and blows up the opisite house. Also there was this subplot idea of jodie's character being physcologically unsound and she may of never brought her daughter on the plane, or there was never a daughter. This was a nice enough idea, but once it was discussed once, it became tiresome. There isn't really a sense of danger, its too slow. She runs around for a bit, the passengers get annoyed, Sean bean looks stern , then the plane explodes.

All in all this isn't the worst film ever, its just a mess of a film. It's nothing special, it doesn't try anything new, i got a strong sense i'd seen it before.

Live Free or Die Hard (2007)

2007-11-18T20:19:00.000-08:00

I have a set of movies that i consider my all time favourites. By that, it means this : if i catch it on tv, whether its 1 minute into it or 1 hour into it, i get sucked in and end up staying with it and Die Hard (1988) is at the very top of that list. Proven by the fact i've seen it twice this year already, and watched it 3 times last year. It had everything, in fact, if i could see any movie on the big screen, it would be die hard without having to think twice.

So going into Live free or Die hard (called Die Hard 4.0 over here) i was somewhat nervous. I knew it wasn't going to be on the same level, but i have to say i was pleasntly suprised. It wasn't all that bad, it wasn't all that good either. Let's go through the good stuff shall we....

One aspect of the film i was worried about was the use of comedy and Justin Long's role in the movie. The comedy in the first one was well excuted and came from John Mclane's attitude towards the situation he was in. However i felt with the addition of justin long as a sidekick if you will, the comedy might turn out to be corny. In places it was, but hell, i got a kick out of it. Some of the moments with john trying to figure out recent technology was cool. Justin long's character was actually a great addition to the film and i liked the character more than i expected. On another good point, the cinematography was fantastic, especially during the somewhat over the top action scenes. the whole film managed to keep me on the edge of my seat and was a great movie going experience in that sense, much in the way Bourne Ultimatum was. The final scene was a highlight of the film, the way john get's himself out of the situation was great and really went back to no messing style of the first film.

On the negative side, you can tell that this film is mainly focused on "how big and over the top can we make this scene?" by that i mean here we have john mclane Vs harrier jump jet, John and a Car Vs a helicopter, john sliding down a broken bridge while a plane crashes after him, john ducking to avoid to cars flying towards him. It's certainly far removed from a fist fight that ends with both men tumbling down a flight of stairs. Some aspects of these over the top scenes did make me long for the good ol' days. I felt Maggie Q was great in this film but her character wasn't the best, she played it well. However the character itself was way over the top, reminded me of a computer game character, she survived falling down an elevator shaft in a car, as she was holding onto the car (as it was falling) she was still punching and kicking. She survived a full on hit with the car, it was a little mad. As was that crazy acrobatic guy who was slidding around when john was trying to shoot him, all said to me "hmm am i watching a film or a video game?"

that being said, there is enough here for that to be somewhat forgiven. It may just be me, comming from a...."die hard" die hard fan i can't help but compare it. What i'm tyring to say is this : if i read a positive review (not that this isn't) by someone who had NOT seen the original, i can totally relate to that. As there is a great film here that is above what you see usually these days in action movies, but when compared to die hard, it makes its faults more prominent.

All in all, its one of the better movies of the summer. I have issues with some of the more hyber bolic elements of the film, but i can also see this is an action movie that though not too the same feel as the original, still has a lot to get enjoyment from and is quite a bit better than the majority we see these days.

Norbit (2007)

2007-11-18T20:04:00.000-08:00

It's movies like Norbit that make me jump to the defense of Adam Sandler. Sandler gets a lot of flack for going for the cruder comedies (Little Nicky, Chuck n' larry ect. ect.) however at least he mixes it up with serious roles (Punch Drunk Love, Spanglish, Reign Over Me) whereas Eddie Murhy's skills seem to be "comedy" based only. Actually he did have a serious role in the same year as norbit, oh actually an oscar nominated role in Dreamgirls. Many say that the reason he didn't get this award is because of the piece of crap that was norbit made people think "whoa is that who we nominated!?"

It's been a while since i saw Norbit, and because of that (and the lack of positive stuff to say about it) i'm gonna keep this short. Firstly, fat is not funny. so the film fails straight away there. Then and this really really annoyed me, this film had a catchphrase. I'm sorry but when a comedy movie has to rely on a repeated line, thats terrible. oh and to top that, its a stolen line. Rasputia says (nearly every 10 seconds) "how you doin'" of course made popular by TV Show Friends...so..stealing a line and saying it again and again is funny?? Another thing that still baffles me to this day, why the hell did Thandie Newton agree to do this film??! It's a shame to see some one as great as her wasted on this crap.

As i say, i've got nothing positive to say, offensive stereotypes, Eddie Murphy trying to be funny, stolen catchphrases, its a trainwreck.

Booking My Season Viewing...

2007-11-16T08:58:00.000-08:00

Sorry about the break from reviews lately (planet terror being my last review) i should soon have a review of Beowulf and if i have enough time, American Gangster.

However in the meantime i would like to share something with you. You know when you hear a film critic or someone in the business talk about it being a "summer blockbuster" I've decided to do my season bookings of films i would see during the 4 seasons. Such as you get dramas around janurary time or in september after the summer blockbuster boom. So here is my "dream team" of season releases if you will :

Spring (March, April, May)

1. Sideways (2004)
2. Stand By Me (1985)
3. Forrest Gump (1994)
4. Bottle Rocket (1995)

Summer (June, July, August)

1. South Park : Bigger Longer & Uncut (1999)
2. Austin Powers (1997)
3. Toy Story (1995)
4. Die Hard With A Vengeance (1995)

Autumn (September, October, Nov)

1. Rushmore (1998)
2. Brotherhood (2004)
3. Saw (2004)
4. Almost Famous (2000)

Winter (December, January, and February)

1. The Nightmare Before Christmas (1994)
2. Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind
3. Die Hard (1988)
4. Batman Returns (1992)

so there you have it

Top 5 Saw Traps.....

2007-11-15T14:10:00.000-08:00

This is a list of my personal favourite traps, in terms of the visuals aswell as the general terror. Also taking into account the characters and the impact of the traps in some areas.

1. The Rack (Saw III)

I think for me the main reason this one is horrible to watch is that unlike majority of the others, the victim is in no way in control. For tim (victim of the trap) his fate is totally in Jeff's hands, as his body is slowly torn all sorts of ways. its that lack of control that is truely disturbing about "The Rack"

2. The Needle Pit (Saw II)

I think it's safe to say this is considered by many to be the best and most disturbing Saw trap, its very popular amongst the fans and though i have not placed it at the number one spot, i have no reason to disagreee that it is terrifying. Its a subtle trap in many ways that plays on our subconscious fear of the world around us and infection.

3. Venus Fly Trap ("Head Trap" Saw II)

The opening scene of Saw II and boy did it make an impact. A pretty simple idea, much like a mini iron maiden. However coupled with the key behind the eye, this had me on the edge of my seat.

4. Razorwire Maze (Saw)

[too graphic for a picture!]

A trap that is seen by only for moments, we mainly see the after math. a man is placed in a bundle of bardedwire and told to find a way out. in many ways, with the fact the door closes after a certain time, this kind of breaks jigsaws rules as there was little chance he could survive this.

5. Scalp Trap (Saw IV)

The only entry for Saw IV and for a top 5 thats pretty good. The reason the scalp / hair trap works is that compared to the elaborate set piece traps of Saw III and some of Saw IV, this is actually at its heart a simple yet painful trap, going back ot the days of Saw / Saw II.

============================
============================
============================

honorable mentions

The Hand Trap (Saw II)

Ok this was by far the closest to making it on the list, however one simple fact stops it. She didn't have to it, she had enough time to look at it think "oh shit i ain't gonna survive that
" and walk away, there was no way she was gonna make it throug this one and could of walked away.

Angel trap (Saw III)

WAY to elaborate. It looks scary and as a visual set piece is pretty shocking and effective. people say "why did she just tip the jar of acid" well she was suspended up and if the key had dropped it likely would of landed on the floor and she would of been screwed. good trap but way too big

Death Proof Music Video

2007-11-14T10:11:00.003-08:00

Made it, enjoyed making it, hope you like

28 Days Later Music Video

2007-11-14T10:11:00.001-08:00

I made this quick, don't be harsh!!

Planet Terror (2007)

2007-11-10T09:25:00.000-08:00

"GRINDHOUSE PRESENTS" YES!! YES!! This can actually claim that. Because unlike Death Proof (which i did enjoy quite a bit) Planet Terror actually went all the way with the grindhouse style, not only in terms of the picture qaulity but in terms of the narrative which felt a lot more like a throway grindhouse popcorn flick.

I watched this from an American DVD i borrowed from a friend. Me and my brother sat down to watch this with a few beers and a pizza, i'd say the best way to view this film. Unlike Death Proof, Planet Terror doesn't take itself seriously, its a bit of gruesome fun. Saying that i do feel some moments were a little off, such as one involving a kid. Dr. Dakota Block who has run away from the infected area where the zombie ("Sickos") are and gone to her dads house with her son. She leaves her son in the car and gives him a gun to protect himself from the zombies. while she is away the camera follows her and we hear a gun shot, the kid had shot himself accidently. Though this type of stuff is usually in grindhouse films, it can't help but come off a bit weird and unneeded. Especially as its not really mentioned again. Some of the characters i didn't feel quite worked, such as Dakota Block and Abby (Naveen Andrews "Lost"). However i did enjoy the subplot of Dakota and her cheating on her husband, and the way that was used within the film was interesting.

Quentin Tarantino makes a appearence in a pretty needless scene, but hey. Bruce willis does an almost cameo though quite funny role (that bin laden stuff was classic). Actually the Osama bin laden scene is evidence of the throwaway fun style that planet terror was trying to create, and it did. The music score was also great, and really enagaging i love that main theme. on a personal level there were some aspects i didn't like, just because it reminded me of that 2005 film "slither" which i didn't like , but thats just me :) Rose McGowan was great as Cherry Darling, as was Freddy Rodríguez as Eli Wray.

All in all, its hard to rank this film, as its so much fun, its not the best film in the world by a good few miles, but, hell its very fun and thats all it was meant to be, and for that it was a success. I guess the best way to end this would be as follows :

Planet Terror = A Better "Grindhouse" film
Death Proof = A Better Film

I had fun at both, but i had more fun watching Planet Terror, so go with a few mates, throw logic out the window and enjoy.

Finding Nemo (2003)

2007-11-08T06:03:00.000-08:00

Toy story i think will always remain my favourite Pixar film. With Cars & A Bugs Life (Antz Rules!!) being my least favourite. However due to recently watching Ratatouille i decided to rewatch the Pixar movie i had seen least recently, Finding Nemo.

Still buzzing of the recent Ratatouille, i was excited to rewatch Nemo and i have to say, what a film !

I had almost forgot how good this was. It has for me one of the key selling points of most pixar movies (bugs life & Cars aside) thats a real emotional core. The narrative of Marlin trying to find his son, combined with the script, animation and voice acting really manages to pull you in and believe that these fish are capable of these emotions. Thats what i love when pixar gets it right, it takes a very human emotion and attributes it to an animal, Toy or car (well not so muh car) and makes you care. In many ways actually out of the Pixar creations, this feels most like a classic disney narrative. Where as i felt Cars was very much a Kids movie, i feel Nemo is a family movie. By this i mean there is enough for both kids and adults to get something out of it. Theres some lessons to be learnt about parenthood and growing up, and its these qaulities that harp back to the classic ideologies of old Disney Animations. It starts with the death of what seemingly was going to become a main character, nemo's mother. It's something that anyone can relate to the fear or realisation of losing a parent or someone close to you.

The relationship between Marlin and his son Nemo is fantastic and always feels real. This film also maybe pixar's most consistantly funny, with Dory, the re-formed sharks and sufer dude turtles really adding to the laughs. Albert Brooks provides some of the best voice acting in a pixar movie and you really hear Marlin's worry and fear throughout all of his performance.

The film of course looks brilliant. I saw once on a documentary that they actually had the capabilities to make it look picture perfect, seriously no difference at all to real life and they actually opted for the option of making it slightly brighter and meagical, which i felt was a good choice. Again another factor that goes back to classic disney.

I have to mention my favourite scene , where Marlin is swimming after the boat that took Nemo, and we see him endlessly swimming frantically, with the fear on his face, without any real words, in the animation we know just what is going on, and it is a fantastic bit of work

All in all, Finding Nemo is amazing. Everything about it is epic, you really feel that with this pixar has come full circle. In many ways they have combined everything that makes a disney/pixar film work :

* Animals
* Real emotional narrative
* Human emotions within creatures
* Humans causing trouble for the animals
* consistantly funny
* Visuals

I would also like to mention the ending, which has a very hearfelt feel to it. With Nemo pixar has crafted something that should be remembered as a classic.

Favourite Movie Soundtracks

2007-11-06T12:17:00.000-08:00

In my mind, one of the most important aspects of a movie is its soundtrack and overall use of music. Whether its the openening scene song which sets the tone or a key piece of music during a scene, music can make or break the tone and mood of the film or scene.

So with that being said heres a list of soundtracks i recommend you check out.

Jackie Brown

Key Tracks :

Across 110th Street (Bobby Womack)
Strawberry Letter 23 (The Brothers Johnson)
Who Is He And What Is He to You? (Bill Withers)
Street Life (Randy Crawford)
Didn't I Blow Your Mind This Time (The Delfonics)
Midnight Confessions (The Grass Roots)

----------------------------

Pulp Fiction

Key Tracks :

Miserlou (Dick Dale & His Del-Tones)
Let's Stay Together (Al Green)
Son Of A Preacher Man (Dusty Springfield)
Girl, You'll Be A Woman Soon (Urge Overkill)
Flowers On The Wall (The Statler Brothers)
Since I First Met Y0u (The Robins)
You Never Can Tell (Chuck Berry)

-----------------------------

Dumb & Dumber

Key Tracks:

The Ballad of Peter Pumpkinhead (Crash Test Dummies / Ellen Reid)
New Age Girl (Deadeye Dick)
If You Don't Love Me (Pete Droge)
Crash (The Primitives)
Too Much of a Good Thing (Bret Reilly / Sons)
Insomniac (Echobelly)

------------------------------------

The Royal Tenenbaums

Key Tracks :

These Days (Nico)
Me and Julio Down by the Schoolyard (Paul Simon)
Wigwam (Bob Dylon)
Look At Me (John Lennon)
Police & Thieves (The Clash)
Judy Is A Punk (The Ramones)
Needle In The Hay (Elliot Smith)

-------------------------------

Garden State

Key Tracks :

Blue Eyes (Cary Brothers)
Don't Panic (Coldplay)
Let Go (Frou Frou)
Fair (Remy Zero)
The Only Living Boy In New York (Simon & Garfunkel)
Caring Is Creepy (The Shins)
New Slang (The Shins)
In The Waiting Line (Zero 7)

----------------------------------

Rushmore

Key Tracks :

Here Comes My Baby (Cat Stevens)
The Wind (Cat Stevens)
Ooh La La (Faces)
Oh Yoko! (John Lennon)
Nothin' in the World Can Stop Me Worryin' 'Bout That Girl (The Kinks)
Making Time (The Creation)

-------------------

Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind

Key Tracks :

Mr. Blue Sky (Electric Light Orchestra)
Theme (Jon Brion)
Light & Day (The Polyphonic Spree)
It's the Sun (The Polyphonic Spree)
Wada Na Tod (Lata Mangeshkar)
Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometimes (Beck)
Something (The Willowz)

----------------------------

MORE COMMING SOON

Ratatouille (2007)

2007-11-04T15:08:00.000-08:00

*bows* we're not worthy, we're not worthy! ok, thats done now. Last year's pixar effort, Cars, wasn't my cup of tea. I felt it, though technically fantastic, lacked any emotional level, any level of connection for the audience. I'm not taking my words back either, though given the qaulity of Ratatouille i may have to rewatch Cars incase i missed something!

Before i start the review on Ratatouille i have to mention the short that came on before it, Lifted. That's why Pixar are so good, not only do you get a feature length film, you get a short film to the qaulity of the feature. Lifted is no expection, a funny and fun short film that made me laugh all the way through and set the tone and mood for the enjoyment of the feature brilliantly.

Ratatouille is the story of Remy a young rat living in the french countryside. A wannabe chef, though being a rat, this is a difficult conquest. When he gets seperated from his family, he ends up in paris. Inspired by the ghost of his cooking idea, Gusteau. Remy finds himself at his idol's restaurant. He spots Linguini a young man who is working at the restaurant as a garbage boy. Remy finds himself inside the restaurant, unable to resist using some of the incredients, he adds spices to a soup that linguini had made. The soup turns out to be a success, and linguini who can't cook teams with Remy to cook great food, while trying to keep the rat secret and win the heart of fellow chef Colette.

Like any pixar movie this film is a visual feast. One scene in which Remy is swept up in a drain pipe , then into the sewers is fantastic. The water effects, with the faultless looking water roaring and thrashing against the screen is a delight to watch. Then this is quickly followed by a sequence in which we follow Remy through the air vents and in between the walls of houses in paris. seeing him dodge mouse traps, running frantically, and we see glimpses of people living their lives in the rooms below, is brilliant and a joy to watch. All the food looks good enough to eat, and other aspects such as bottles and glass look flawless too. Theres a scene in which Linguini is asked to get rid of remy, when he is discovered in the kitchen. Linguini takes him to a near by channel that runs through paris. During this scene the visual effects really shine. fog and mist cover the paris sky and with faint gleering lights in the background, this scene above ll in terms of visuals, may be pixar's finest work.

In my cars review i mentioned the character of Mater, who i described as, and i quote :

" the character-less stereotype of dumb side kick in form of Mater"

and in the name of fairness, this is evident here aswell, this time taken by Remy's brother Emile. There is a certain qaulity that will sell toys as he has a lot of the light-cruder jokes (burps and such) though not to the degree of mater, this character annoyed me ever so slightly. Also if we're on the subject of similarities with Cars, we arrive at Remy's dad, Django. Much like Doc Huson in Cars, Django offers advice to the main character, who much like Lightning Mcqueen, declines his advice. However i guess most pixar movies have this convention...wait, so should i take back my comments about cars? No, and why? because Ratatouille has one defining factor that seperates it, Collette.

The love story between Collette and Linguini is great, it feels real and has ups and downs even during its 1hr and a half run time. You really feel for linguini because you can tell he's trying and working hard at his job and really cares for Collette But what made me connect to it more than cars??...They're HUMANS! (nothing against automobile love, go for it!)

All in all, pixar is back on form. a heartfelt film, that along with lots of likeable characters, proves that, they can get back on the horse after a slip up. All hail pixar for they're contributions to not only animation, but film.

AMERICAN GANGSTER- Full Trailer

2007-11-04T06:25:00.001-08:00

Looks amazing

A New Era For Movies & Games

2007-11-02T09:48:00.000-07:00

Hey

I'd like to take this time to mention another blog, "Movie&Game". Run by a friend of mine, Coopey, It's a new blog that will feature movie news, video game news and reviews. I'll hopefully be thorwing my two cents in here and there on the stories. We hope to be both writting on both sites, so you may see stories from me on his site or reviews on here from him to form a great movie blogging experience! Coopey has a great knowledge and view on film, so keep up with his posts!

so please check out:

http://andycool-moviegame.blogspot.com/

Saw IV (2007)

2007-10-26T17:26:00.000-07:00

Saw IV basically apitimises why i don't give grades. Much of my review style is less of me reviewing a movie, more of me ranting and trying to figure out just what i thought about it, a lot of which is discovered there and then during the writing process. Then i look back and hopefully it matches my true thoughts while be entertaining at the same time, shall we go for it? Let's go to work

I've made no attempt in the past to cover up my love for the saw series. Many people disagree but i find the saw franchise one of the most refreshing film series' to come out of the film industry in a long time, horror or otherwise. Saw 1 was a subtle yet daring film that really made you think. Saw 2 was yes, more mainstream, but still had the ability to craft a fantastic horror that kept you guessing. Saw III was possibly far fetched at times, but , was a nice way to finish the series with a great feeling of finality.......oh wait....damn.

So it's not over yet. Part of me is happy, part of me has Nightmare on elm street 300000 running in my mind. Anyway, last year (when i was in my full Saw loving mode) i really wanted to see Saw III at the cinema, but didn't. So Saw IV was my first experience of Saw in the cinema. and i was hyped, was it mis-placed?

yes and no. There is deffinatly a sense that the traps may have gone too far, both in their quantity and lack of qaulity. Lets face it, the majority of Saw fans just wanna see the traps, a sad fact, but hey, it has its..."charm". One of the films highlights was a solid performance from Lyriq Bent, who returned as Rigg, a SWAT team member, once a supporting player, now on centre stage. I felt he carried that responsiblity very welll. The film opens fairly well with an autopsy , but the whole first tape being found thing was a bit over the top. Plus, with the whole tape system you REALLY REALLY REALLY have to suspend your disbelief, which, at parts in this film, takes a LOT of suspending. This factor alone can take away from the films overall effect, and i guess, more than any of the others, this factor was present. For Example it all relies on the person following these instructions, what if he / she would of just got home and thron the tape in the bin!!? well, we wouldn't have much of a film i guess. Some acting was a bit off, but that i guess you have to expect from horrors (but should you have to ?). It at times plays like this - Trap - Trap - Trap - Trap - Tape - Trap - Tape - Trap - Jigsaw doll turns up - Trap ect. ect. However though this plotline can get tiresome, i felt the majority of the victims were interesting enough to warrant there inclusion. Especially one of which, who has a connection to John (Saw / Jigsaw) before he starts on his ways and is the reason he started his "Games" (and is the victim of his first ever "game") Some of the backstory and flashbacks were actually pretty engaging, and helped to tell a lot about John's past life and what makes him do his work.

I also liked the way Rigg was being used, the traps and choices set for Rigg being used as a way to try and teach him john's way of thinking, which i thought was a nice touch. However, its just a new way of coating the same idea but giving it a lsightly new twist i guess. I found the payoff very disapointing, i'll let you make your mind up about that, but given the payoff in the first two (II especially) this fell so short......(WHO WAS THAT GUY!? I DON'T CARE...DAMN) just love in jokes, don't ya?. As for the traps and violence, the traps were ok, very gruesome, and look-away worthy thats for sure. What i didn't like was the way the film finished it gave a sense that this could go on forever, due to the bounderies (or lack of) of the story and narrative formation. A great performance from Tobin Bell as usual and for sure has to go down as one of the best horror villians by now.

All in all, I'd say, i was all in all, impressed. By that i mean it managed to be interesting enough, to keep my interest. However, there are some moments that make it by far the weakest Saw film, the payoff i thought was laughable, over use of same ideas, some of the traps, some of the characters. However, some of the apsects, makes it one of the better saw films. Tobin Bell fantastic, backstory to his character done better than in any of the other movies, character of Rigg and his overall task and choice. As i say this film has split my opinion and i'll wait for the DVD for a rewatch. What i can say though is, its better than i thought it would be, theres enough backstory there to keep it interesting, but at same time, theres enough bad acting, unoriginality and one lame ass payoff to make it a bad viewing experience.....

sorry Thats really the best i can do lol .... (rewatch time!)

Jackie Brown (1997)

2007-10-17T16:28:00.000-07:00

After bursting onto the scene with almost post modern and deffinalty daring, Reservoir dogs, in 1992, Quentin Tarantino established himself as a serious player in modern american cinema. Then 2 years later he released what i consider to still be his best work, Pulp Fiction. Much like dogs, its fragmented timeline, violence, dialogue and direction proved that Dogs wasn't a fluke. It would be Christmas day 1997 when Tarantino would release his next film, Jackie Brown.

Jackie Brown, adapted from novel, Rum Punch by Elmore Leonard, seemed on odd choice for his next project. Tarantino had made a name for himself with his writting and the decision to work on a project written by some one else was a suprise. However, he found a way to balence Elmore's work with his own imput, in what turns out to be one of tarantino's most solid films.

By solid i mean, unlike Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction before it, which could be argued they were more style of substance, Jackie Brown derives its strength from its characters and lets them tell the story. With a great cast top to bottom including Samuel L Jackson, Pam Grier, Robert De Niro, Robert Forster, Michael Keaton and Bridget Fonda. Also more so than his previous films, its the subtleties within the characters that sells them. Whether its Fonda's laid back performance as sufer chick Melanie, or Robert De Niro playing a man who is released from prison, slowly getting used to life outside again. Another stand out performance coems from Michael Keaton, who shines in this. Samuel L Jackson is of course great, in possibly his most evil role. The soundtrack is also a key factor of this movie with blues and soul tracks adding alot of depth to the film.

It's narrative is far more linear than QT other films, telling the story for the most part in order. Some complained about this, and yes i can see where they are comming from, once a director, an autuer one such as Tarantino goes against his usual style, it may come as a shock . However if you are worried about this i ask you to try and ignore that and watch it for the great character study it is.

All in all, this is a fantastic work, though maybe not as daring or loud as his other films, its a subtle, well made movie that is a great lesson in story telling.

Death Proof (2007)

2007-10-13T17:19:00.000-07:00

Any Quentin Tarantino movie sparks my interest. The news that he was working with Robert Rodriguez (From Dusk Till Dawn / Sin City) to create a double feature Grindhouse presentation was great news. Sadly due to under performing in US box office terms, the film was split from 2 movies back to back to two movies released on their own. I was very disappointed i wasn't going to get to see the Grindhouse experience. Slightly let down i still had high hopes for the experience of seeing a QT film in the cinema

Quentin Tarantino's homage to the grindhouse comes in form of Death Proof, and to be honest, its a mixed bag. Their is a sense of originality and style that always comes across in QT's work that cannot be denied and its no different here. Kurt Russell delivers a cool, calm, collected performance as Stunt Man Mike. Played with a slight self awareness of its core material (being a little over the top lets be honest) it adds a extra level to the film. The scene where he picks up his first victim, pam is very creepy and well pulled off. Its scary enough and provides some genuine shocks. This film is basically split into two parts following travels of 2 sets of women and their run-ins with Stunt Man Mike. Personally i found the first half much more compelling. Arlene, Shanna and Julia i felt i was more interested in their characters than the second group. With hints of Arlene's insecurity, Julia false confidence and Shana's fun loving attiude porvided some of the better wirtting in this film in terms of actual character development. Even a small moment in which julia calls pam "a skinny little bitch" even without knowing her as she's sitting at the bar, and arlene obivious jealousy when she sees pam talking to mike, adds a level of character to the film, an almost high school popular girls against the unpopular girl thing going on. The second group, consists of women who work within film (a character plot i found pretty smug) . Character development came here in form of pretty pointless stories told by the group about their past rather than any actual emotional level within them.

The second half however does contain the big car chase set piece, which is as people say, very engaging and thrilling. The cinetography is fantastic and keeps you on the edge of your seat, however i can't help but feel if i cared a bit more about the characters, i'd be a little more near the edge of my seat than i was. The character twist near the end was very well excuted and added greatly to the enjoyment of the overall film. I was suprised how well Quentin Tarantino took to the action / horror genre especially during the chase scenes as they are brilliantly directed.

However in the bounderies of Grindhouse this film can't help but fall short. Having seen Planet Terror recently i can say that this, well, its really a Grindhouse film. Planet terror went balls out (quite literally in parts.) on the grindhouse style. With not only dirt and burn effects but the overall picture looked tired and warn. However Death Proof was WAY too polished and at times felt like he forgot what tthis film was meant to be. it was like "damn i better throw in a slight line in the picture there" because rest of it is crisp clear with even stylistic black and white effects follwed by super bright colour. Bit of a let down when you think of Grindhouse style it was meant to be.

All in All there is a level of qaulity that cannot be denied, Kurt Russell is fantastic, as is the first group of ladies. The chase scenes are as thrilling as it gets and there are moments of shock and engaging characters. However, it does become wordy, it at times descends into a big "in joke". I wish QT had let go a little in terms of his film making and went along with grindhouse a little more (The entire second half is picture perfect..what?! ) . I do recommend, but not as much as i would of hoped. However, the fact that it lets down on the grindhouse style and that i feel QT just ended up making another QT movie, it's still a engaging watch for the most part and up there with the better films of this year

Superbad (2007)

2007-09-21T18:54:00.000-07:00

The film industry is known for "New Waves" the french had it, American cinema had a new wave (highly inspired by the french though) then the UK so on and so on. It appears at the moment we are experiencing a new wave within comedy. This could be best described as a "network" of actors and directors, often friends, who are working, wrtitting and directing together to create a portfolio of work. It's quite clever and sneaky really as its just an easy way to create buzz and get people to see your film. well...take Superbad. Produced by 40 Year Old Virgin director Judd Apatow, and written by 40 year old virgin and Knocked up star Seth Rogan superbad can now be marketed as "a new film from creators of 40 Year old virgin" even though its not directed by him. Much in the way Tarantino was the producer of hostel and suddenly it was "Hostel, From Quentin Tarantino" even though he was merely one of the producers. Anyway this point, though meant in a slightly negative sense becomes pointless when you watch the movie because, sly marketing aside, it does what it says on the tin, and thats be F*cking hillarious.

Having watched 40 Year Old Virgin, Knocked Up & Superbad i can safetly say they are some of the funniest films i have seen in a long while. Though they can be extremely crude (Superbad especially) they have a certain qaulity to them, they almost go back to the golden age of american comedy and deliver something that really challenges and bushes the bounderies. So many comedies of today seem pale, yet these films inject new life into the comedy scene.

Superbad Follows Seth (Jonah Hill), Evan (Michae Cera) & Fogell in their quest to "Get lucky". Along the way, Fogell is seperated from the group is befriended by two cops who he travels with on their duties. That storyline provides for most of the all out jokes, as some of the other plotlines are mixed with more emotional moments (though not that much mind you, not to degree of Knocked up). The cops played by Seth Rogan (Knocked up) and Bill Hader (you, Me & Dupree) are fantastically funny. Some people have complained about the addition of the cops saying they were too over the top in the way they acted. However though i can see where people may view it like that, i felt that manic homour and with the comedic delivery by both involved, for me, it added to the film. It also provided a great hook for the character of Fogell to be discovered further and the interaction between the 3 is hillarious at most part.

One of the biggest faults pointed in the direction of Superbad is its moral issues and its depiction of teenagers and teenage life. Yes this film is crude, very crude. I think there can be something said for a certain amount of negativity within its depiction of women aswell, but (and i may be scrapping the barrel of defense for this issue) but i feel its fairly even. Evan's storyline and his girl , Becca, is not a good representation of young women. She gets drunk alot, is seen as just wanting to have sex, so on and so on, so yes i can agree that is bad. However on the other storyline the roles are reversed where it is the guy (Seth - Jonaah Hill) who is made out to be the idiot. Where the girl he likes, Jules (Emma Stone) doesn't drink, smart and is in control of the situation, where Seth is made to look like the fool. So i feel you have some balence here but i guess that can be compromised a little by the ending (you'll see what i mean)

When i review a film i try to take it for what it is, or if it does what it says on the tin, and superbad is a comedy and all the moral issues aside, for me, it works as a comedy. in fact, not since Knocked up (theres a suprise) have i laughed so much in the cinema. The "Dick Montage" is quite possibly the single funniest thing i have seen and nearly fell out of my seat. Lines such as "if you stratch my back i'll scratch yours" - "well funny thing about my back is its on my penis"...crude yes, but hell whats life without laughter!?

All in all, this team of comedy writers, actors and directors are on a role, with 40 yr old virgin, knocked up and Superbad they are creating hillarious, on the edge, slightly controversial comedy movies that are a cut above what we are used to seeing.

Run, Fatboy, Run (2007)

2007-09-21T14:25:00.000-07:00

When going into this movie a lot of the factors seem to point to a great film. on the acting front you had Simon Pegg, Thandie Newton, Dylan Moran and Hank Azaria, all have shown they can deliver the laughs. Then to top that you had David Schwimmer seating at the directors chair. He and Simon pegg have begun to form a union in film, having previously starred in "Big Nothing" which was a solid dark comedy. So i thought this film couldn't set a step wrong....

Boy, was i wrong. The first point i would like to bring up is that this is not a "Simon Pegg Production" written by American Michael Ian Black, this is not in the same mindset or frame that Simon Pegg / Edgar Wright films are. I knew this was the case before i saw the film but i still expected it to be fairly daring and entertaining, it wasn't. You can clearly tell this is an American story with American / hollywood studio ideologies attached to it. It's brutally predictable and clichéd to the point that you feel you're watching a step by step playbook on how to make a romantic comedy. It at times felt over sentimental and some of the side characters were way to one-dimensional and struggle to get a laugh. It was weird seeing these talented people try to get something funny out of this stale film. It ends how you would expect it to end and has all the narrative hooks you would expect from a film of this type without trying to be different

Right, i guess i better even this out a little. Lets talk good, though i may not talk for that long. It seemed to me that the funniest scenes stuck out. By that i mean, when it was actually trying to be funny and get genuine laughs, it felt it was refreshing from the lovey dovey slush the rest of the film was. The fight between Dennis (Pegg) and Gordon (Moran) was pretty well comedically executed. The several Cameos including David Walliams and Stephen Merchant work well. Though one of the main plus points is the soundtrack. It has a great soundtrack with a mix of current songs (Baby Fratelli - The Fratellis, Monkey Man - Amy Winehouse) or old clasics (Queen Bitch - David Bowie) and add life to a pretty stale comedy.

All in all, I felt this film didn't live up to its director or cast and overall gave in to hollywood conventions and fell short, quite short.

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

2007-08-17T17:09:00.000-07:00

Going into The Bourne Ultimatum i had not seen any of the previous films. However saying that i couldn't help but build up an idea of the films in my mind. The mere mention of Matt Damon can't help but bring visions of wooden acting and mindless action, a stereotype yes. My idea of the Bourne series was "lots of chase scenes"...and yes, there was many chase scenes, but hell, i loved it.

Yes thats right. I was pleasantly suprised. The action was tense and gripping, and Matt Damon pulls in a pretty solid performance. The performances are one of the key factors of this movie, for a genre that is not particually deep in meaning, the acting performances here really add depth and give it a little more weight and credibility. David Strathairn is fantastic as sleasy Noah Vosen, who is on the search for Bourne. Paddy Considine pulls in a great performance also, and it is great to see him getting more big profile work (for another great Paddy Considine performance i also recomend "Dead Man's Shoes").

What really sold it for me was the lack of need to "suspend my disbelief", unlike fellow summer blockbuster Live Free Or Die Hard, Bourne seemed on a whole all in the context of reality and most of the action seemed possible. Matt Damon really captures this character and makes oyu feel for him. This being his highest profile performance since The Departed, he really shines here, as i felt he was out performed by leonardo dicaprio in the departed.

On the negative side, the camera shots during fight scenes are way too jumpy & jerky, not allowing for the fights to shine as much as they should. However though i disagree with choice of shooting methods during these scenes, the fights themselves are very well performed and planned out. I would say there are 2 key action scenes, Bourne guiding Simon (Paddy Considine) through the train station and the chase in madrid, both are engaging and thrilling. They are each quite long scenes and are given time to fully devolpe and are not rushed therefore allowing the suspension to build without rushing it or sacrificing qaulity.

All in all, this is at its heart a cat and mouse movie, but as far as they go, this is brilliant. Engaging action and qaulity performances make for what was for me personally, one of hte most thrilling and gripping cinema going experiences. Seeing it on the big screen may be a big part of its appeal for me i guess, it is one of those films that you have to see on the big screen really. Bourne Ultimatum for me, is as it stands, my second favourite film of 2007, below This Is England.

Hot Fuzz (2007)

2007-08-12T18:12:00.000-07:00

Hot Fuzz had a lot to live up to. With the release of Shaun Of The Dead and their previous work in the TV series "Spaced" Pegg & Frost qucikly established themselves as key players in the british comedy scene. 3 years after Shaun Of The Dead we finally get the second big screen offering from the team in the form of Hot Fuzz. While Shaun Of The Dead parodied Zombie films, Hot fuzz takes a comedic look at, the often OTT Cop movies.

Claiming inspiration from films such as Bad Boys 2, Point break (haha my mate would kill me if i didn't mention that) Straw Dogs and The Wickerman. Thats the first point i would like to make. The varying inspirations really help give it depth. You can really enjoy it on two levels. Not only does it have great action moments (BB2,PB) it also has dept h and a mystery level (The Wickerman).

Pegg is fantastic in the lead role but for me, the show stealer is Timothy Dolton, who is brilliant as sleasy supermarket owner, Simon Skinner. I would also feel shamed not to mention the hillarious performances by Paddy Considine & Rafe Spall as "The Andys".

As many have stated , yes it is 20 mins to long, and could of done with a cut down. There are moments where some of the jokes come off a bit weak ("Yarp Yarp...Narp" or "No..No..Noooooo") . Some have also complained about the cinetograhpy, saying its too loud and distorting, though ican see their point, i personally don't mind as it adds an auteur twist on the direction and gives it its own mark.

All in all, few weak moments and the extra 20 mins aside, this is a hillarious movie, and a must see of 2007.

The Simpsons Movie (2007)

2007-08-12T17:51:00.000-07:00

It's been a 18 year wait for this film. The simpsons quickly established its place in pop culture pretty much from its early days in 1989. Though its style changed often, the first few seasons being more emotional, then moving onto a mix of both, hitting its stride in the 4th season. As many people have stated the recent seasons have gone down in qaulity, by quite a bit. It became more manic, and the episodes became more and more hyberbolic, sadly sacrificing its qaulity.

Personally for me, it had got the point where going into this film, rather than comparing it to recent episodes, i went in with the South Park movie as my example to compare it too. South park movie not only succeeded as a tv-movie transfer, but it still remians one of finest comedy movies of any kind. Maybe it would of been best to go the way South Park did and release The Simpsons movie earlier, but they didn't so, in 2007 here it is and....

Its good. Yes, it is more like an extended *recent* episode, but i couldn't stop the Fanboy in me, being so happy just at seeing simpsons on the big screen. The addition of the pig worked and provided for some of the funniest moments. There were also some moments that strectched the PG rating, some worked, some didn't. A moment where homer gives the rioting crowd the finger is hillarious. Then of course the "Bart's willy" joke, that works in theory of how they set the joke up. having something cover it up untill the end , so in terms of set up and irony it works, but the decision to include it, can't help up come off as ood. However a scene in which homer is considering whether he should kiss the pig is very funny.

On negative side, the story of homer / marge fallout has been done many times before, the end scene, though well animated, is bit OTT. However on flipside, there are enough funny moments to make up for it , and spider-pig is genius.

All in all, this is a solid movie. Not as good as south park movie, not in the area of classic simpsons, but a fun movie that has enough for both adults and kids, a worthy attempt at a simpsons movie, given the recent episodes.

Cars (2006)

2007-07-24T07:51:00.000-07:00

Pixar hit the scene with the fantastic Toy story that still holds up to recent CGI movies. Toy story looked great (and still does) but why toy story was successful is simple : it's a great film. Animation aside, the narrative, the lines, the characters all make for a top film. Thats what Pixar does so well, they start with the story and the animation is secondary. After churning out more great films (Monsters Inc, TS2, Incredibles) in 2006 pixar released Cars, another classic....right? has to be doesn't it?...No.

First off, the animation is FANTASTIC, and the film looks bright and appealing. However looks aren't everything. You have the usual "toy seller" character of Lightning McQueen , the character-less stereotype of dumb side kick in form of Mater and the love interest Sally Carrera . A moral message is tacked on in form of "big business = death of small towns" which really does seem tacked. It is used only to achieve narrative resolution for main character Lightning McQueen ("bring him down to earth")

However my main issue is what is lacking rather than what is there. Thats the human element. I found it hard to buy into cars living in their own world, and taking away the humans took away chance for interesting scenes (airport scene TS2, Nemo in dentist office) of humans getting in the way of the car's lives. Also the lack of human made it feel more of a kids movie. I wanted nothing more than at the end for the camera to pan out to reveal a kid playing with a toy car set, but didn't happen.

All in all, it may be the best looking Pixar movie, its the loudest and the races were well animated and high energy. However lack of humans and tacked on moral narrative lets it down.

(i will say though i am looking forward to Ratatouille, roll on october)

I'll be back Very soon !!!

2007-07-24T07:48:00.000-07:00

hey i'll be writting more reviews soon, as i'm seeing two big movies this week

for the return reviews expect ....

The Simpsons Movie
Transformers
Hot Fuzz
Ocean's 11
Ocean's 12
Ocean's 13
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Live Free or Die Hard
The Host

The Prestige (2006)

2007-06-16T18:36:00.000-07:00

The Prestige tells the story of two rival magicians who are caught in a battle of One-upmanship and both become obsessed with discovering the secrets of the other's magic tricks.

The Prestige may be the strongest work from an already established director. Christopher Nolan with the prestige has taken a subject, maybe not obviously cinematic and turned it into a accomplished, slick film. While watching The Prestige i felt this sense of an "epic movie" (not to be confused with the crap comedy of this year) it had a certain style and way of story telling that felt different, in that it made you think and guess, which not many films bother to do anymore.

The performances are fantastic, Hugh Jackman i feel was a highlight, in the sense that i had only seen him as Wolverine before, so having this character with such depth, i was suprised how well he pulled it off. Bale also was great, especially begining to shine towards the end of the film when his character encounters issues and conflicts within his personal life. Michael Caine and Scarlett Johansson put in great supporting roles that give the film some extra depth.

One of my favourite aspects about the film was how it built tension, and the character study. How a lot of the tension was out of the complete greed of the two main characters. it's hard to explain without giving aspects away, but some of the way the tricks are acheived involve some very sinister methords. Such as use of doubles and their fate, is a very wellcomed "subplot" and adds to the tension of the film.

Some aspects of a sub story in which Hugh character meets a legendary magican called Tesla (played by David Bowie) seem a bit far fetched, but still interesting.

All in all, i will have to say it's quite hard to review this film , as it has a lot of twists and turns, so i have to be careful in what i say. However the final pay off is worth it, its fantastically done. Though even without the final pay off, it's a solid film. I really enjoyed the levels of issues going on (murder, adultery, Greed). That's what i loved, it was a great character study more than anything, these were both well studied, flawed characters that held my attention all way through. With only certain aspects of the Tesla subplot putting me off (was it going into sci fi??), overall this is a fantastic watch. It kept me on edge of my seat, guessing and suprised by the ending, it was an involving movie experience. One of the best of 2006, which was already a damn strong year.

The Science Of Sleep (2006)

2007-06-12T12:38:00.000-07:00

Science of sleep is a film by Michel Gondry, director of Eternal Sunshine of the spotless mind. Science of sleep follows the story of Stéphane Miroux who lands a job at a calender making firm. In doing so he moves into a near by apartment building. Here he meets Stéphanie, who he falls for. However Stéphane lives on a thin line between dreams and reality and what we get is a love story with a trippy twist.

I think enough has been said about the genius of Eternal sunshine that you only have to mention the name to those who have seen it and fond memories return. So as you can guess i went into this film with huge expectations, and it did not in any way... disappoint.

The first thing that really struck me was how funny it was. More so than eternal sunshine. This film has moments of laugh out loud humour. One example is a scene in which Stéphane is trying to retrieve a letter he sent through Stephanie's door with a coat hanger and we later see it from her view. also look out for Stephane's womanising boss Guy who provides a lot of the laughs. That's what i like about characters, they are very rich, almost cartoonish in their stlye and actions that it only adds a depth to the story and helps blur the line and show the strange reality of which Stephane exists in.

That leads me onto the dream scenes. Oh my god, i wish i had seen this at the cinema if only to watch these brilliant animations play out on the big screen. The dream scenes could vary. whether it was small detail like tap water turning into blue and white tissue paper, or on a larger scale such as a whole town in stop motion animation made out of carboard. The animation was a joyful mix of The Clangers, Beatles Yellow submarine and an L. S. Lowry painting. I have decided to include (at very bottom of the review) a clip and trailer to display what i mean by the animation and show how great it is.

It also displays very well the natural problems that arise in forming a relationship and aspects of Staphane's insecurities are well played out in the film. A lot of the funny moments come out of that and the very real interactions between the two. Such as Stephane's nervs causing him to say crude things in relation to Stephanie. Charlotte Gainsbourg who plays Stephanie puts in a brilliant performance here as does Gael García Bernal & Alain Chabat.

All in all, Science of sleep is every bit as endeering and brilliant as Eternal sunshine. Laugh out loud funny, mixed with the tragedies of love and beautiful imagination and animation that goes above and beyond anything in Eternal sunshine. See it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P0jQHUSWgM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GjjYHVj-mw

Mission: Impossible III (2006)

2007-06-08T18:27:00.000-07:00

I wasn't in the mind to dismiss this film straight away, but given the bad reputation that both the film series and Tom Cruise has, it would be fair to go in with low expectations. I tried not too, trust me. It starts very well gripping you with a interrogation / torture scene of tom cruise (what a start!). With the added depth of character given by the fact we have the main character unable ot help the woman, Julia, that he loves, i thought "ok, this is good." then that bit stops.

ah. Now we cut to a cheesy party scene where Tom is walking around, smiling, laghing and making us wonder why he makes all that damn money. Of course this scene is used to lay the ground work to why he loves Julia, but if it would of meant avoiding this scene, i really didn't need to know why he cared for her.

The action scenes were ok, but we'd seen it all before. A scene in which we have a helicopter shooting at cruise on a bridge, is a little far fetched, but hey, quite fun. Though especially during the first action scene in the warehouse i found the cinetography disorientating. Quick cuts mixed with fast beating soundtrack make for an overall confusing experience. My fave action based scene though is when Cruise is Interrogating Owen Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and to make him talk he lowers him through a open loadinng dock part of a plane, in mid air, that was impresive. oh wait did i mention Philip Seymour Hoffman?? well...

He steals the film, but thats no real suprise is it? his performance gives the film an undeserved sense of credibility. Too be honest he really does push this from a below average action film to something worth a look. Though Laurence fishburne and Billy Crudup also push their game up to full pulling in fine performances. I also enjoyed some of the darker tones, such as the brain implanted bomb, i thought was quite dark in that it is done when the character is drugged and it's something you can't get away from. Reminded me of the explosive collars in Battle Royale. If it could of skipped some of the more cheesy or generic moments of an action flick and kept a darker tone, i would of been more happy.

All in all a promising start turns into your average action flick with moments of hope brought in from time to time from supporting players and Philip Seymour Hoffman is no1 reason to watch this film, so i make that about 3 reasons, oh well, its a hollywood blockbuster right?

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)

2007-05-26T08:42:00.000-07:00

Johnny Depp was already a pretty successful actor before the release of the first pirates film in 2003. However it was Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) that really launched depp in the mainstream and into the conscious of movie goers on a larger framework. I was first introduced to him through his collaborations with director Tim burton. In many ways actually Depp has always been a cult movie star choosing roles that go against the mainstream , Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, What's Eating Gilbert Grape & Sleepy hollow for example. so that's why it always comes a bit of suprise to think he's part of a franchise that is now in it's third movie.

The film opens with a pretty gripping (and suprisngly detailed for 12A) hanging scene (yes that's right), Family entertainment written all over it :) personally though i can see issues parents would have about it, i wellcomed that darker tone of the film and intro and felt it gave the film a little extra weight and credibility. Though it does seem more and more out of place as the movie goes a long as its not mentioned or a key part of the story, apart from it allows one line to make sense later. actually thats not the only dark scene, there are many moments including gun shots, toe snapping and nasy knife deaths that really do push the 12A to it's limit.

So yes darker tone worked, but maybe not the younger kids. Though it's strange because at the same time as being the darkest pirates movie, it was also probably the most funny, and whacky one. With high voiced pirate kings, monkeys, multiple jacks and rock crabs, adding to this fact. It is 2hrs and 50 mins so yes, it does feel at times as it drags, there's no avoiding that. i'm not evening saying it in a overly negative sense, but when you have to sit for 2hrs 50 mins, its going to drag. The action scenes are great, tension is very good too. The first big scene where Elizabeth Swann & Barbossa meet with Captain Sao Feng. With acting of Yun-Fat Chow stealing the scene it makesfor what is a pretty gripping moment in the film.

On negative side, Character of Jack Sparrow, though good, i didn't find as good as he has been. I felt a lot of his appeal had faded. He had almost become a cartoon version of Jack Sparrow. Though what i did like was the way the film panned out. It's 30+ mins before Jack even appears on screen, i have to praise them for this. For a series basically built on Jack sparrow & Depps performance it takes a lot of faith in the narrative to hold him off for 30+ mins, and was a refreshing suprise. Also, like with the other pirates there are a lot of scenes of pirates explaining things that would seem stupid in any other context and theres A LOT of plot to explain and get through. Which doesn't add to the pace of the 2 hr 50 mins. Bloom & Knightley story is ok and done better than in the other films. In fact Bloom's character gets his best showing in this film and gives his character more depth, even if his acting lacks a whole lot of it.

All in All, my fave pirates next to Curse of Black Pearl. Darker, yet at times funnier than the previous films. it's no huge leap from the others, but its enough to give it a slight edge. Great action scenes, and even though narrative is slow, its still very watchable. In a scene where their ship falls down a huge waterfall and the screen is emersed in water, made me think "wow theres not many movies where you have a visual sight like this". I think for all the negative press it gets, it has made a very unusual and select genre successful again, and every film shows quite a bit of imagination. See this film, expect to yawn somewhere in the middle, but expect to be gripped later with great action scenes and visions of imagination and, well, fun.

Spider-man 3 (2007)

2007-05-12T10:35:00.000-07:00

It's been a week and a day since i saw spider-man 3. The main reasons i waited untill i wrote this reivew are 2 fold.

1. I wasn't sure what to say

2. I wanted to gage the opinons of others and see how it did

I'm glad i did. The internet site IMDB is basically your one stop shop for all movies. They do a feature called "top 250" and it is a list of 250 "best" films, in terms of votes by users of the site. It's pretty loose and nearly anything can make it into the list and any big opening film usually makes it into top50 for at least a month or two. So imagine my shock when one of biggest hyped movies of the year, Spider-man 3, did NOT make it into this list. Not only that but currently holds a pretty low score of 6.8/10. Not taking into account, it's part of a major franchise and a summer blockbuster, i am so suprised that it did not feature. So the feedback must of been pretty bad to keep it from a list that any old movie can get into

and the feeback was bleak. Ok so here's my input. First off, i don't think it is as bad as people say it is. For instance, really apart from some storyplots its not far removed from Spider-man 1 or 2 so how come they are good but this isn't? Acting was fine for a comic book movie (or summer blockbuster for that matter). Plus did you see those special effects?? i mean the "birth" of Sandman, when he emerges and takes his first few steps only to crumble is one of most engaging things i have ever watched on the screen. If that is why this movie took so long to come out, to get the special effects done just for that shot, its worth every extra waited week. Sandman is in fact the best thing about this movie. That is not to say it doesn't have other highlights, it does. One of those is the comedy. Now i do NOT mean the "evil" "cocky" "EMO" peter scene, at all. what i am reffering to is a scene where peter meets MJ in a restaurant to ask her to marry him. He trusts the ring in the hands of the Maître d’ and the moments that follow are very funny. Also the character J. Jonah Jameson is also funny, and funnier than his two other performances. Venom is great once you see him but this brings me onto my first negative point....

You wait over half the movie (maybe more) to see full pure evil form of Venom and he keeps ripping his Venom "mask" (lack of better word) to reveal Eddie Brock (actor Topher Grace) 's face. Which seemed very harsh to an audience who i'm sure just wanted to see Venom. Majority of the harry stuff including a convenient placement of a butler who happens to explain to harry death of his father :) The MJ / Harry stuff also seems out of place and well, boring. the movie is also way too long.

Also theres one scene in which during his "evil" (aka EMO) stage peter strikes MJ to the floor. Now i'm sorry but if you are going to do that, shouldn't it at least be mentioned again in the film?? it isn't. She just seems to forget it.

There are issues, but it also features brilliant fight scenes, good comedy, interesting villians (Sandman mostly.). Maybe not quite spider-man 2, it is for sure too long but given amount of charatcer i guess this time was needed. I think people to some extent are just crapping on it because it has soe issues, but hell, it was fun right? had explosive fights? had a good villian and one great one? so i'm not complaining.

all in all, narrative overload is a problem, time is a problem, but action and the sandman more thna make up for it. see it, and enjoy it!

This Is England (2007)

2007-05-09T19:49:00.000-07:00

This is a film from british director Shane Meadows. It tells story of a young boy, Shaun, in the early 80s who gets caught up in a violent and racist gang known as "skinheads". They take him under their wing and not konwing better, he goes along with it. Slowly he gets exposed to deep racial prejudice and horrible violence this group is emersed in.

This is a difficult film to watch. The character of shaun is set up as innocent and going through some hard times in his family life having jus lost his dad. So to see him swept up in a world so far away from his personality adds to the dramatic effect and general effect of the film. In terms of acting, there is not one bad word i can say, all are fantastic. Though the subject matter is very serious Shane meadows mainly through Shaun finds in certain way to find humour which makes for a break from what is a very serious and uncompromising film.

Apart from some odd subplots , mainly Shaun's friendship/relationship with punk girl Smelly , though odd, it does kind of work and does provide for some of the lighter moments. especially a scene of kissing in a shed and when she turns up at his house and waits for him with his mum ("it kind of ryhms..it does though right??")

In all in all it is brilliantly directed, and handled overall well given the subject. I will warn you it is a tough watch, especially the scene where the main leader of the group finally snaps and performs a disgusting and violent attack. This is one of few times i have felt geniunely uneasy while watching a film.

this is a strong film with strong cast and direction. In my opinon, a strong contender for best movie of 2007, even this early on.

Shattered Glass (2003)

2007-05-06T08:22:00.000-07:00

Shatered Glass tells the true story of journalist Stephen Glass who wrote for "The New Republic" magaizne. That is untill it was revealed that half of his stories were complete fabrications. It follows his eventual downfall.

Released in 2003, i've been wanting to see this for ages. The main attraction was that of the actors involved, mainly Peter Sarsgaard, Hank Azaria & Steve Zahn. all of which were brilliant, but a suprise came in Hayden "Darth Vader" Christensen. I was expecting much at all from him, but hell, he steps up the game and is on top form. Playing this shy, desperate journalist who seems out of his depth. The way he played it slowly with at times minor mannerisms becomming more overwhelmed and in over his head with his lies was very interesting to watch unfold. It's hard to actually beleive that he thought he'd ever get away with the extent of the lies he was telling. Another and possibly finest achievement of Shattered Glass is related to character of Chuck Lane (Peter Sarsgaard). The movie starts of portraying him as a jerk, without any real evidence, just through the reactions of other cast towwards his character. Chuck takes over as head editor from Hank azarias character. However by mid way your view has been seamlessly changed to feeling nothing but sorry for Chuck and what he has to put up with in terms of his new job and Stephen Glass.

On negative side it may feel like it drags, as the subject matter is not all that interesting, people at a magazine headquarters. However please do not let that put you off, it is very interesting and the almost thriller style it is done is fantastic. The feeling of unease you get when Glass begins to get more and more diluted by his lies and the situation, the more involving the film is. In terms of cinetograhpy and presentation, it does at times feel like a TV movie but the performances and narrative justify it's place on the big screen.

All in all, this is less a story about some guy at a magazine more of a great charatcer study, not only for glass but Chuck too. See it.

Inside Man (2006)

2007-05-06T07:43:00.001-07:00

Inside man is by Director Spike Lee, who is usually known for making politically charged movies, this is for sure his most mainstream and commercially accessible film to date. Boasting an impress cast Denzel Washington, Clive Owen, Jodie Foster, Willem Defoe, Chiwetel Ejiofor & Christopher Plummer. It Starts with this character, Dalton Russel (Clive Owen) explaining this perfect bank robbery, he is about to take into action. Detective Keith Frazier (Denzel) is put on the case and what unfolds is many twists and turns as they try to out smart eachother.First off, all performances are excellent. Jodie foster, who plays a sort of CIA agent who is protecting the concerns of bank owner Arthur Case, who has few secrets about that bank and its contents. Clive Owen plays the smart, cool and collected bank robber very well. Much like the character if Hans in Die hard. i loved the idea of using painter outfits and having the hostages where same as the robbers to allow for swaps and changes, which keeps mystery of really who did it undercover. Denzel is also great and is becomming action movie icon. Chiwetel Ejiofor who is brilliant in anything he's in again is great here as Denzels right hand man. My few issues i have with film are : Willem Defoe has so much charisma that in such small part in this film, he seems out of place. The soundtrack (apart from the intro song) is little off too. Scenes of just denzel walking calmly not really much of important scene, are set to fast paced loud tracks that seem out of place. This seems a little too much for the scenes and takes away from what is cut above most action movies, and kind of dumbs it downThat being said, its a tense, interesting movie that fans of action movies and smart movies alike will enjoy. It's no die hard, but its pretty damn good.

Bottle Rocket (1996)

2007-05-06T07:27:00.000-07:00

Wes Anderson's first feature film bottle rocket is also the screen debut of Owen & Luke Wilson. Co-written by owen wilson with Anderson it focuses on 3 aimless young men who attempt to take a life of crime with no apperent reason rather than to make their lives more interesting.

First off, i love this film. It wasn't the first Anderson film i saw, that was The Royal Tenenbaums, but in many ways, it could be my favourite. Ok this changes a lot, but Bottle Rocket has a certain "care free" feel to it , heartfelt and fun. Not as quirky as some of his later films, in many ways, this may be his most mainstream. More accessible fan his follow up movie, Rushmore, it just generally feels lighter than his other works and benefits for it. It also has a (IMO) career performances by both Wilson brothers. Whether it's Owen's portrayal of ever aspiring and hopeful Dignan or Luke's subtle performance as Anthony. Because it was co-written by Owen , that really transfers on screen in his performance, for a debut one, its top notch. You really get feel he has lived with this character.

The romantic subplot of Anthony & hotel cleaner, Inez, is well done and at times pretty hearfelt. It gives the film a solid narrative thread in which to explore the characters further and provides a little deeper context to what was untill then a pretty narrative-less film. Though it sometimes gives into mainstream narrative conventions, especially in the romantic story, you still get the quirky style you came to expect.

Martin Scorsese in a magazine interview stated Bottle Rocket to be in his top 10 of the 90s and in relation to Anderson called him "the next Scorsese". so how can you argue with such praise?? well i'm not going to, seriously, i have no issues with this film, its no.2 in my fave 90s movies . it's quirky, funny, hearfelt, brilliantly shot, as fantastic performances, see it.

Sunshine (2007)

2007-05-06T07:26:00.000-07:00

From the director of Trainspotting & 28 Days later comes this tale of 8 astronauts who are sent to re-ignite the dying sun 50 years into the future. While on this mission they get a distress call from the previous ship that failed the mission and has not been heard from for 7yrs. They decide to answer the call and in doing so create many problems for themselves.

You can tell Boyle is calling on sci-fi classics such as Alien & 2001 with this film. Though maybe not as subtle as those films, Sunshine still manages to keep the tension. In fact some of best tention in sunshine comes from the characters interaction with eachother as times slowly become more desperate. A scene in which they realise their oxygen level is running low and they have to decide who to sacrifice to save the rest of the team (and the world) is very well done and tense moment. The film is visually stunning to watch. Not only through the theme and subject matter can you tell they borrowed from alien & 2001 but in sets too. Ranging from the dull corridors of alien or the clean white clinical style rooms of 2001.

Though i do have some issues with it. There is a subplot of the captain of the old ship, who has since been burned beyond recognition. He became addicted to the observation deck in which you can view the sun at full heat. Anyway it goes into almost freddy krueger nightmare on elm street film where he is chasing crew around the ship. Though it does create some good moments, it also comes off as un-needed and over the top. The film also feels at times a little repetative its like "oh man glad we survived that..but we've got another problem" and this theory is repeated throughout. Oh and on a trivial note, why even have an observation deck where it allows you to view sun at full power?? surely thats not safe idea, bad ship design i say!

all in all, even with the above being said, this become very minor points with what is a thrilling, great looking, well acted, tense sci-fi film with wellcomed throwbacks. Very much recommended.

The Weather Man (2005)

2007-05-06T07:24:00.000-07:00

Being fan of quirky films, when first heard of this back in 2005 i really wanted to see it and finally in 2007 i got chance too, and well....meh.

Tells story of Weather man David Spritz (Nicolas Cage) who has split from his wife who now lives with their two children. He also has a dying father (Michael Caine) and is hated by the public because of his well paid easy job.

Ok well it sure is quirky and well directed. The general mise-en-scene and all that is fine, what i didn't like was the tone and message it was bringing across. Nicolas Cage is pretty dull in terms of line delivery and persona at the best of times. However having him play a character always down on himself, always complaining and when take into account its played by major movie star who i'm sure has little to complain about, this eventually begins to annoy. In the end i just didn't really care what happened to his character. Though it's not all bad, the story with his wife and scenes between them are funny, a scene where we hear his thoughts is also good, and the respective stories in relation to his kids are also well done. Michael Caine also pulls in a very good performance, and a pretty good american accent.

On another bad note though, i feel at times it gets too bogged down with symbolism and because of this sometimes comes off a bit like "We're so clever."
All in all, it does have redeeming qaulties. The family stuff is very funny and well played out. at its core its a heartfelt movie about family but you have to sit through Cage feeling sorry for himself with no real narrative resolution. It's almost as if they said "we're making a quirky movie, heres a check list of things to include" and this ticks every box and comes off as at times as pretentious. Though i'm a fan of Wes Anderson movies, which also get accused of being pretentious, so maybe Weather man deserves a rewatch lol

Blades Of Glory (2007)

2007-05-06T07:22:00.000-07:00

Blades of Glory is the story of two rival Olympic ice skaters who are stripped of their gold medals after an on ice brawl and both banned from men's single competition permanently. However they find a loophole in the system that will allow them to compete as doubles, making first ever all male figure skating team.

Being a huge Will Ferrell fan i was looking forward to this, the previews were good, and it was on my top to see list for 2007. Though between this i had seen School for Scoundrels , which was okay but overall falls short. Not even a minor role by Sarah silverman (who i do like) was enough to help the movie. So after seeing this film , which also starred blades of glory star Jon Heder, i was growing ever worried about Blades of Glory. After seeing the film, i asked myself...why the hell was i worred!?

Honestly, i can't remember last time i laughed so much. I've made comments in the past about ferrell and fact he does the same type of movie. Guy at top of profession ends up at bottom of it and has to work way back up, and yes, its the same again. However Ferrell is so good at doing that arrogant, stupid guy thing that his repetition of roles is totally forgivable. Also, though i did enjoy Talladega Nights, i found some issues with it and is probably my least fave ferrell movie (but still very good) here he is back on more achorman territory in terms of character mannerisms. Jon Heder also does his dorky guy , slightly effeminate character , which though not as engaging as Ferrell is still a wellcomed contrast.

What i think confirmed for me it was a success was fact i could pick up to 8 scenes that were (for me anyway) laugh out loud and i want to revisit. Some include Ferrel's character making drunk phone calls to heder's character after a fall out including him drunkedly singing Aerosmith's "Don't wanna miss a thing" down the phone. A scene where Ferrell turns up drunk at his new job as a kids ice show performer (ok its not all ferrell drunk) oh the chase scene and the head falling scene.

All in all, Blades of glory is well worth a watch for any Ferrell fan. Sure its full of cliches and narrative conventions of this genre but hell, with the performances, takes it a cut above the rest. IMO better than Taladega Nights, as good as Anchorman. In fact i'm not fully focused on this review as i'm too busy laughing at the scenes as i remember them!

From Dusk Till Dawn (1996)

2007-05-06T07:21:00.000-07:00

From Dusk Till Dawn was written by Quentin Tarantino with Robert Rodriguez at the director's chair. It tells story of Two criminals and the hostages they take finding refuge in an area and later a building full of vampires, thats right, vampires

Tarantino is a self confessed film buff and his references can be seen throughout his films. whether is the tribute to "Bande à part " with Travolta & Uma's dance in pulp fiction or the yellow jump suit in Kill Bill designed from one wore by bruce lee., he makes it clear he is borrowing from other films. With Dusk Till Dawn what we get is a tribute to the almost B-movie style of movies that were popularised in 1950s. The b movie saw a style that was full of generic conventions, popular with teens because of it's special effects and easy to understand narrative plot. They were quick, cheap escapism in it's finest form.

From Dusk till dawn takes while to buy into , you have to expect this is no epic, its fun experience thats not trying to be anything else. The acting is so so throughout but its somehow okgiven the context of the film. Clooney actually works quite well in the role and tarantino does a pretty good job in his acting role. There's still the sharp witted dialogue you expect from a tarantino film, especially in the road trip to the vampire town or anything before the vampires. It does play a little to much like "good crime movie, interesting...whoa! vampires!??" it comes as a shock, but , given the intent it doesn't take too much away from the previous stuff.

All in all, I enjoyed watching it. it had tarantino's trademark all over it. It has it flaws (acting, some of the plot) but in its defense, it was based on b-movies and grindhouse style films, and thats what they were like, so it could come down to context rather than anything esle. See it, it's a fun movie that cult movie fans will enjoy

La Haine (1995)

2007-05-06T07:20:00.000-07:00

I'll have to take down my top films of the 90s as i forgot to add this masterpiece. Having had to study it for film studies in relation to world cinema , i got hands on a copy and watched it again. i have since seen it 3 times and i have yet to be bored by it.

It's set in a struggling estate in the slums of france and we follow the story of said, Vinz & Hubert. Being under heavy control by the local police , many rebelious memebers of the community often riot. After one riot, a friend of Said, Abdel is hospitalised due to an attack by a police officer. After finding a gun, vinz vows to kill a cop if abdel dies, as an act of revenge.

One of my favourite aspects of this film is how we are not forced a main character. Vinz is probably commercially pushed as our protagonist but within the narrative there could be many arguments for each. The story begins and ends on said opening and closing his eyes, do we see it from his view? Hurbet narrates and is the moral conscience of the film, so is he our main man? either way, each character is so rich and deep in diffeent emotional levels it doesn't matter, they are all appealing.

The use of black and white gives it a more raw and real feel and adds to the feeling of pending chaos. Along with the clock titles and soundtrack. Actuality footage of Riots and reports add to this effect. What we also see here is something very interesting, that is a mix of cultures. At its heart its a very french film, but you can see a blending of cultures especially in a scene where N.W.A's "Fuck the police" is mixed with a high cultured french tune, as this song beems out to the estate. Other aspects include american film culture, such as references to Taxi Driver & Raging Bull. It also challenges expectations you may have of a french movie by being a very gritty film, compared to the cafe dwelling, cigar smoking french films we come to expect.

All in all, please see this film if what you want is a well excuted character study, great presentation and well... a damn good film. One of best of world cinema, and one of films of the 90s

High Fidelity (2000)

2007-05-06T07:16:00.000-07:00

High Fidelity ticks so many boxes for me, all factors that if said to me i'm like "wheres the movie being shown, i need to see it!?" Some of which include : John Cusack (who i maintain is in my top5 actors list), Jack Black, relationship comedy, about music, told through narration or in a quirky fashion, told through (at times) a timeline, a could go on and on. Based on a novel by Nick Hornby, it tells story of Rob, who owns a music/record store and is compiling (among many other lists) a top5 breakups list, which includes the one he is currently part of, we follow his progress.

I want to start off with jack black, many have said it and i'm not one to argue, though i'm a huge Cusack fan, i have to give this one to jack black, he truely steals the show in his role. Not seen often, but when he is, he scene steals with the best of them, monday morning tape scene being one of funniest scenes i have seen. John Cusack does (very well) his self pitying act as many films has seen him do. Cusack is in many ways reminiscent of Woody Allen in his hay day. Especially when Cusack talks to the camera, breaking the 4th wall, enaging the audience. Much the style made popular by Allen in films such as Annie Hall. Though mostly subtle, certain scenes do break into all out comedy ("fight with Ian 'Ray' ).

An interesting issue also comes in case of director Stephen Frears. He has the ability to make films of totally oppisite genres and make them truely beleiveable. Whether it's "The Grifters" a crime/drama, The Queen a bio film, Dirty Pretty Things a thriller or a subtle comedy in case of this film, each genre is totally emersed in its subject. Which is tough to pull off for a director who decides to make many different types, rather than sticking to one and becomming a safe almost auteur as some choose to do.

What we have here with high fidelity is a great study of relationships, their effect on us and our character, how it can effect our later lives.

All in all, i have no real complaints. so how do i finish? well in the theme of the movie and our protagonist, i can olny think of one way..right?

Top 5 reasons to watch High Fidelity

1. Jack Black
2. John Cusack
3. Frears
4. The Soundtrack
5. Cus i said so.

Little Miss Sunshine (2006)

2007-05-06T07:15:00.000-07:00

The word of mouth movie of 2006. It seemed everyone who saw it fell in love with it. They'd say "have you seen it yet??" "you need to see this film i saw last night" and such to that affect. So after hearing so much praise for it, i decided, "hell, now i need to see it".

It follows the story of Olive who is shortlisted for Little Miss Sunshine beauty contest. At first it appears her family can't take her because of the money it would cost to make a trip to where the place is being held. oh and the family, well heres a set of characters. There's Olive's dad Richard, who is a motivational speaker. His wife Sheryl, and her brother who was commited to hospital after trying to take his own life, Frank. The reason is later revealed that he was a teacher who fell in love with a male student who later broke it off with him and he couldn't take it. Olive's brother Dwayne who takes a vow of silence untill he gets his pilot licence and then thers drug adicted grampa. the family decided to travel to the place in a now trademark of the movie, yellow VW bus.

First off i have to praise Steve Carel as Frank, wow. he plays this conflicted, confused character to perfection. The character point of his sexuality was never over played and played with a harsh realism. It makes it almost impossible to think that he was once brick the weather guy in anchorman, this performance is utterly convincing and heartfelt. Along with Carell my second fave performance was from Paul Dano as Dwayne. Though a majority of the film he plays silent, the moment he brakes this silence (for a reason i won't reveal because best if you go in fresh) is IMO the finest scene in the movie and i was hooked to the screen, brilliantly done. Also seeing the different dynamics play play out on screen is great, watching different hybolic characters act a scene together is great.

On negative side, it does take some strange twists. one scene (and you'll notice it straight away) it takes this unneeded and out of place turn into a broad almost slapstick comedy. It works in context of family sticking together, but suddenly feels like a caper/ slapstick which is huge contrast to the previously subtle comedy. Another issue that other people have brought up that it kind of goes easy on the subject matter. though it touches on the issue it never goes any deeper and kind of scares off. The subject is that of media influence and the importance of todays society has put on appearance and looks. It sort of deals with it but in the end bows out to what is a rather tame finish.

all in all, a heartfelt film, that though great, maybe isn't quite what people say it is. it takes a turn for worse with one or two scenes, but little miss sunshine makes for a damn good watch and one of better movies of 2006.

Fargo (1996)

2007-05-06T07:13:00.000-07:00

In my opinon the Coen brothers are one of the most talented and underrated people working in film today. All you have to do is look at their work and realise how much talent they have. They are able to switch between comedy (Raising Arizona / Big Lebowski) to crime dramas (The Man Who Wasn't There). Fargo, released in 1996 is closer to some of their earlier work, such as Blood Simple. A more violent work, almost horror film was the first by coen bros and fargo seems like they are revisiting that area

Fargo tells story of Jerry Lundegaard , is experiencing fiancial trouble and in a panic comes up with an unusual plan to hire someone capture his wife and demand money of his wife's wealthy father. He hires Carl Showalter (Steve Buscemi) & Gaear Grimsrud (Peter Stormare). Along with this we also follow the character of Marge Gunderson (Frances McDormand), a cheif who is assigned to the case.

it's an unusual story tackled in a quirky manner and takes quite alot to stick with. However, what coen bro movies are so good at doing is mixing genres. So in fargo you have a crime / drama / thriller / comedy all in one. Many non comedy movies that attempt comedy moments, the comedy usually falls short, cringe worthy and out of place. With fargo it never does, i think its mainly done by the charisma and effort but in by the actors. Steve Buscemi is fantastic as is peter stormare. William H macy does his quiet normal guy thing put in weird situations pretty well, but he always seems to play same type of charatcers. The story of Marge Gunderson's character provides a much needed counter story to the main story. her character is more down to earth and provides a real balence to the more hyberbolic aspects to the film. A lot of the more subtle comedy comes from her character, and the role is brilliantly acted.

Fargo is a film full of rich characters, an interesting and engaging story. One other issue i want to bring up is the tone of fargo. It uses very strong genre conventions. It has an almost film noir feel, guy captures someone, hired hitmen, a cheif on his case all conventions much to feel of a traditional film you would expect to see in 1940s. However, it doesn't match entirely. The characters aren't clear black and white, good and bad. It dosen't use any proppian narratives. We are meant to dislike the bad guys, but in this case they are funny and audience engaging. William H macy's character, the main character, is a confused charatcer and is not easy to read. all of this being said, Fargo is a 90s classic, though not my fave Coen bros movie (big lebowski being my fave) this is still a great film that i fully recommend.

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005)

2007-05-06T07:11:00.000-07:00

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy started life as a radio comedy sketch in 1978 on BBC radio 4. Then transformed into series of 5 books spanning 1979-1992. A TV series in 1981. My first intro was through the tv series which i loved. So many years of have passed and fans have built up visions in their minds and in 2005 a feature film is made.

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy stars Martin Freeman in lead role of Arthur Dent, from The office fame. American rapper Mos Def takes role of Ford Prefect and Zooey Deschanel of Trillian. All performances are fantastic, especially Sam Rockwell as Zaphod Beeblebrox. Zooey deschanel (who i love seeing in anything) is again great, Mos Def also does great job. So should be great right? meh.

Well, i was entertained but it was missing alot. Theres so much more, or just better stuff they could of featured. However my main issue is not with what they did or didn't put in, its a narrative issue. The relationship narrative of Dent & Trillian was added in as a hook for marketing and gives film something solid to base itself on. Thats where it fails for me. It loses it's charm. The appealing factor of Hitchhiker's Guide was it was all something about nothing. It was quirky, random and you didn't know what you were going to see or read next. So having it tied down with a (well acted) but poorly placed love story, just takes away some of the original intent of the story. It turns that story into an almost hugh grant'ish sloppy brit rom com, which goes against everything hikers was all about. Such as in one scene after Dent puts fish in his ear, in the book it leads to a convosation about existance of god and makes light of the issue, which is not in the film, shame in my eyes.

I could of done with more of the book narration, which from personal stand point was my fave part of the book & tv series. Again this was lost for narrative safety. Visually the film looks bright, bold and appealing, all costumes look great and keep in mood of the series by not resorting to CGI. What this movie did do well (while sacrificing artist orginial intent) was appeal to a new audience. It made a film where you didn't really have to have had read the book or seen tv show, it brought it back into public consciousness and for that it was a success.

All in all, its a fun film, i laughed, i had a good time. Just don't go in expecting alot of originality of the source material, expect a hollywoodized version with good performances and a nice (safe) attempt at a classic of modern pop culture

Glastonbury (2006)

2007-05-06T07:10:00.000-07:00

Glastonbury is a documentary film released in 2006 about , you guessed it, Glastonbury music festival. It was directed by Julien Temple who is also responsible for directing other music films and dvds (such as music videos for Blur). I was expecting alot from this, being fan of many different styles of music and many of which featured on this doc. however i would rank this film under Disappointing. The main reason is, it didn't tell you much. One main purposes of a documentary is to inform and at same time entertain, this struggles to do both. What it does do well is capture the feeling of the times and vibes connecting with gigs such as Glastonbury or Reading, with use of archive clips. I did learn that the earlier glastonburys looked insane with hippie types stripping and dancing, setting things on fire and chanting, much like a cult lol. So it did well in showing great footage, but well, thats about all it had to its name. It starts off tracking home made videos of a group of people who attended a recent glastonbury and i thought "oh this is cool, from eyes of fans , real and gonna be interesting see how they got on". However that soon stops. They pull out all this clips and they go on for ages. Like you can be watching an archive clip of people dancing for like 5 mins at a time (and they use it alot) with no narration or interviews. The few interviews it did have were quite funny and interesting (such as a few from owner of the land) but there just wasn't enough. It showed near whole songs by bands. It actually felt vety much like watching it on TV, you wait ages to watch the song you want, then something else comes on.

It's mainly that i didn't learn much i didn't already know, it was alot about the old glastonbury's not much about new ones or anything leading up to them. As i say it catches the vibe well but just doesn't work well as a documentary.

300 (2007)

2007-05-06T07:08:00.000-07:00

Greek epics have never really appealed to me. They always remind me of those types of movies that would be on TV in background on a dull sunday afternoon. Having never seen gladiator, Troy or Kingdom of Heaven, i am working on a sort of stereotype i had in my mind going in. Though i am a fan of battle movies and huge fight scenes, because of the massive sets and depth of detail, but i just hadn't seen enough of the genre. However, having seen the trailer for 300, i was attracted to it due to the more sci-fi element (mutants) with almost lord of the rings feel. So, the marketing worked on Me.

300 is the story of warriors, The Spartan, against an army of well over 100,000 members of persian army. Our almost proppian hero in this case is King Leonidas, who fights for sparton army. We see him as a child being trainned and follow him to adulthood where he has since has a wife and son who is trainning now. Leonidas declares war on parsians, mainly due to pride, and goes back on the ruling council and acting government at the time in doing so.

directed by Zack Snyder and based on a graphic novel by Frank Miller who is also the brains behind Sin city. Which brings me to my first point, The visuals. Sin city was praised for staying loyal to the style of the original novel and having looked at some screens in research, 300 also keeps to the style. The gold tones, bold reds and dramatic light effects all feature. I think it is important to stay loyal if your making a comic book movie and not to sell out to industry pressure , to comprimise the artists original vision, just dumb it down and make more money.

One first things that struck me was the narration which at first i wasn't keen on, but it eventually won me over. It seemed at times it was merely the voice of captions in the comic or just narrating actions. "the sparton raised his sheild" it almost had a feel of a book being read to you, which takes time to get used to, but i feel in end it gave the film some extra edge. The violence is interesting in this movie. it's not realistic, it's more a hyberbolic violence (for exanple : Kill Bill) than maybe you'd find in a war movie. However, looking at the screens from novels its just following the violence depicted in it. The fights were gripping, and really well excuted, though it was done in stages, it was like, fight, rest, fight.. so on. i guess this is realistic as you wouldn't go in spears blazin' but at times made it drag a little. Acting was slightly on dodgy side, but pretty good. some cheesy moments (the apple? the head flying? the guy falling and camera follwing him?) but these were still entertaining. Another point i liked were the level of interesting characters, the god of persian army, the mutant warriors, all very iconic looking. This other character i wished they had used more was this fat mutant guy with a skin blade arm thing, was was ace.

Overall, escapism, alot of style, great battle scenes, drags a little and bit cheesy at times, but i really enjoyed it and it was one of those "wow that was cool" type action/epic movie. I recommend you see it if you liked lord of the rings too.

Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby (2006)

2007-05-06T07:07:00.000-07:00

Will Ferrel like many comedians has found his groove. picked something, a style or persona he's good at and started churning out money making summer hits. More power to him. Carrey did it in the 90s, Sandler has them too. It's a basic format, reminds me of that south park episode where cartman pretneds to be a robot thinking of new adam sandler movies "adam sandler, meets this girl, but shes a tree" "adam sandler is a rich guy who learns lesson of life". Much to this theory i've heard to sell it too distributers Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby was pitched as "will ferrel is a NASCAR driver" and they got the deal on that alone. As i say, if they can do it, fair enough. Will ferrel's movies have a running theme too, he is usually a dumb guy at top of his chosen field who has a sudden decline and is bettered (Anchorman , Talladega Nights).

So with that said the narrative of Talladega Nights, is that Will ferrel is Ricky bobby, successful NASCAR driver who is top of his game :). With his best friend and driving partner Cal Naughton, Jr. (played by John C. Reilly) rule the NASCAR world. That is untill French Formula One driver Jean Girard (Sacha Baron Cohen) hits the scene. Having also dominated his field, he enters world of NASCAR in hope Ricky bobby will beat him, so he can prove himself. In meantime, during the fall of ricky his best friend Cal Naughton, Jr. stars affair with ricky bobby's wife and ricky is kicked out of his home. and takes his two sons with him to move in with his mum.

i've seen Ricky Bobby 3 times, once in cinema and twice on DVD. having been huge fan of Anchorman, i had high expectations with this film. i'm happy to say, i really like it. Sport comedy movies are hard to buy into unless you like that sport. Though some can really hit the mark (Happy gilmore, Kingpin and Nacho Libre..yes wrestling is kinda a sport!). A trademark of these movies is the final scenes are of the final contest of this sport being played out. These are very hard to make funny as you have to balence the sport and comedy, enough to get point across (kingpin / Libre did it brilliantly). Talladega Nights also does it, especially the very end result.

Personally some of funniest scenes to me were : the knife scene, the highlander rant, all of Sacha Baron Cohen's scenes, the cugar stuff and Ricky bobby's dad. On negative points, the shake and bake joke gets bit annoying and in general Ferrell's dumb guy thing is little tired after a while, especially when they could have fallen back on Cohen or Reilly. Also, looking at trailers for his new one, Blades of Glory (which i do wanna see) you really get the idea from his character that it might aswell be Ron Burgundy or Ricky, but hell , i still wanna see the movie, so his style is working. oh i do recommend you see his short but movie stealing role in wedding crashers though, which is most different out and out comedy role ive seen him do (excluding elf) The drama aspect of this film with the dad narrative is pretty well excuted and is pretty good on its own right (Gary Cole "office space" is ricky's dad and is brilliant)

All in all i laughed quite a bit, not up to many repeat viewings, no anchorman, but Sacha Baron Cohen is fantastic, Ferrel is funny doing what he does best and its a very fun, acessible movie. gather up some friends and watch it, you'll have a laugh.

Saw II (2005)

2007-05-06T07:04:00.000-07:00

(---SPOILER---- though there are few spoilers, it is hard to explain some points without mentioning spoilers from first film, so read with caution)

Which is better Saw or Saw 2, its a damn close race.

The first film, Saw, was a movie that drew me in, i was hooked and at the end i was on edge of my seat, an effect that very few movies have had. Saw was a fairly low budget, semi art house film that used implied violence rather than all out violence and grim scenes (bar the razorwire scene, which was pretty tough going).

Saw 2 follows the story of John (aka Jigsaw) a cancer patient who captures victims and puts them in situations which they have to over come or they will die, in attempt to make them value their life. An interesting narrative within Saw 2, is that Jigsaw is caught by a SWAT team and detective Eric Matthews. Matthews had previously been called out by jigsaw with a message left on on of his traps. When they find jigsaw he tell Matthews that he has something that might interest him. He guides him to a set of monitors that reveal he's trapped a group of people in a room, with deadly gas being aired into the room. If he doesn't follow his rules, they will die in 3hrs, one of those people, is Eric Matthew's son, Daniel.

What's interesting about this narrative is that it takes a very mainstream approach. a group of people in a situation having to work together, is very much a blockbuster teen-horror movie narrative. This is huge departure from original saw, and it does feel, sometimes like they sold out. Not only in the teen-horror mainstream narrative, but also with the traps. The traps were actually a very small part of Saw, only about 4 traps were featured, Saw 2 jumps up the traps count. It does feel like they called a meeting and said "nobody cared about the subtle parts of film and want traps, make more traps, make more money." However, it isn't just traps, just alot more. In a way you can very easily seperate the film into two parts. The main trap of people in house is your money making hook, but the scenes with jigsaw and matthews are more of a throw back to original. IMO the best bits of the films come from those scenes, tense cat and mouse between the two, sharp script and brilliant intensity, in those scenes, makes the movie. Grizzly out right violence is plentyful (though not quite much as Saw III) and has more narrative importance than Saw III. With references to original saw , horror movie influences ("Last house on the left") it adds depth to what could be a pop corn sequel.

In fact, though more mainstream, the scenes with jigsaw and matthews are so rich in intensity and top notch cinetography, pulls this into a cut above the rest. My favourite of Saw movies often swiches between 1 & 2. Acting apart from Tobin bell (jigsaw) & Donnie Wahlberg (Matthews) is bit shakey but they were people stuck in a room with little effort to explain deeper character attributes, so they did pretty well. The editing and cinetography is top notch and not much of a difference from Saw. Just more of fast edits and music video style cuts. All in all, not as subtle as Saw, but as sequels go, i really really liked it. High intensity, hooks you in just as much as first one..the ending, well its awesome and just as good as Saw. I very much recommend this, but see Saw 1 first.

Pan's Labyrinth (2006)

2007-05-06T07:02:00.000-07:00

With Guillermo del Toro's Pan's Labyrinth, it's a situation of alot of hype, but does it live up to it? well, it sure as hell does. It tells the story of this young girl, Ofelia, who travels with her pregnant mother to live with her stepfather, a ruthless captain of a spanish army. Ofelia reads alot of fantasy books and has a big imagination, just before leaving with her mother she spots a dragon fly type creature she beleives to be a fairy. This dragon fly creature follows her is indeed a fairy, who leads her to an old fawn in the center of the labyrinth. She is told that she's a princess, but to prove herself must undertake several tasks for these fairytale creatures. However, in meantime the captain is undertaking a violent war and has little remorse for Ofelia's mother or Ofelia herself. His only concern is that ofelia's mother is pregnant with his child, who he beleives is a boy, and that boy must be born, even, due to complications, if it risks the mother's life.

Recently i've been studying "shock cinema" in film studies class, and how they use different elements to shock you. In case of Labyrinth, the shock comes in form of violence. The way it was promoted and marketed would have you beleive this was a fairly harmless fairytale story with wonderful creatures and stunning visual effects. It has those, but this is set to a very hostile story of power, greed, violence and war. This is backbone of the movie and i beleive is prime reason Ofelia is in this fantasy world, to escape harsh reality of the actions taking place around her. The visuals and creatures in the movie are all a joy to watch, a scene in which a creat (pictured at start of review) is chasing ofelia is very stunning. With the disembodied parts, detachable eyes he places in his palms, he has to adjust while chasing her. mise-en-scene used and the non diegtic music adds to the tention. With many references to story much like this such as "Alice in Wonderland" & "Wizard of Oz" you can see relation between ofelia and those respective characters.

Some have said the Captain character was over the top. Which he is, but i liked that. his hyperbolic almost cartoonish villainy, adds to fairytale aspect of the iflm, he is much like a villian you would read about in a short story or comic book. Keep in mind, this is in no means a kids movie, though the fantasy elements, tihs is a vivid violent look at war, birth, greed and struggle laced with a running fantasy story.

The final scenes will grip you, as will majority of the film. The cinetography is well placed and hooks you in. Music is fantastic and adds to the scenes.

Final point i want to make is about the director Guillermo del Toro. being born in Mexico, this is film set in his native country and is subtitled. However what really interests me is he is able to make this art house films such as Pan's (and his earlier work) yet he also transfers into the blockbuster market, being director of comic book movie, Hellboy. So he is able to be a big commercial draw and make smaller films such as pan's.

I cannot stress enough how great this movie is, best of 2006. See this film, even if your not usually keen on world cinema, this is movie about love, family, imagination, greed and war, all things that will transfer, any language.

Ghost Rider (2007)

2007-05-06T07:00:00.000-07:00

Another film based on a lesser known marvel comic series. It tells the story of Johnny Blaze (the name alone lets you know the feel of this film) a stunt motorcyclist who sold his soul to the devil as a young man to save his father's life. As a result he is now the devils main guy, who he can call opon at anytime to do his bidding. As a subplot the devil's son (oh yes you read right) is causing all types of trouble which allows for the action scenes. oh and Johnny Blaze meets up with his old girlfriend from his younger days. Oh did i mention his head goes on fire at night and rides around on a bike?..well he does.

first off , the film is pretty bad but, kind of in a good way. it's a perfect example of high concept where narrative and deeper contextual meaning is thrown away for a hot chick and explosions.some of the lines are laughable, the acting is pretty plain, though cage is usually pretty subtle and down beat. It guided you along when you didn't need it, i mean it isn't memento, we get the story, we don't need a shadow of the devil to appear when lightening struck, just so we know who he is, we got it. However as stupid as that was, it did make me laugh. At the end of the day we have to remember it is based on a comic book and it's only working with the content its based on and comic books tend to have hyberbolic characters in crazy situations. The special effects are pretty ace, first time Cage's head is engulfed in fire to reveal the skull (in cartoony manner, not as graphic as it sounds lol) is quite impressive. The bike chases look cool, the bike itself looks cool. The story is pretty simple and doesn't try to be anything else, its kind of story you might see in episode of buffy vampire slayer.

The love story subplot, really isn't that bad. in a way, it is the audiences point of view. in certain scenes, one in which cage tries to explain his situation to Eva Mendes, who plays roxanne, with words used you get the idea the film makers are saying "we know this is pretty silly premise, but stick with us".

in terms of narrative its not great, and is a throwaway popcorn film but, i have to admit, i did enjoy myself. The story , lines and general tone of the movie had a good feel to it. It wasn't trying to be anything it wasn't, it got few good laughs, it had pretty good action scenes and visual effects. It's no spider-man 2, It's no batman begins, but for pure fun, not goo for technical stand points, but a good popcorn flick.

see it if you love comic book movies, don't see it if you love good movies but see it if you want to have a fun, escapism movie going experience

Reservoir Dogs (1992)

2007-05-06T06:59:00.000-07:00

Being first film from quentin tarantino he attempts to make a low budget film that will shock and grip you. From it's exciting beginning to tense, explosive end, Reservoir Dogs lets you know "its here and here to stay" and it does. After finishing it stays with you, whether you remember the lines, the cinetography, the acting or the music, theres so much to love about it. However Reservoir Dogs nearly never got into production. Harvey Keitel who also starred in the movie was so impressed by the script that he put up the funding to get it secure and into the works.

Incase you don't know Reservoir dogs is story of 6 guys all teaming up for a bank robbery. all using aliases to protect their real identity. However it all goes wrong and one of guys Mr. Orange gets shot, by cops. The speed in which the cops arrive lead the guys to suspect they have a rat in their group, so rest of film is a sort of "who dunnit" to discover who the rat is.

One of key thing about reservoir dogs is it can be easily seperated into key scenes that are all fantastic and better than most scenes in other films. The ear scene of course being the one most people reference, it is indeed tense and violent. Other outstanding scenes include Mr orange's sniffer dog/drugs story, final showdown, closing scene, Mr White / Mr Pink confrontation and many more. Acting is fantastic throughout, Tim Roth as Mr Orange was a standout given the layered character he had to portray. That's another aspect that sets film film apart from others and into the classic status, in most films you get one maybe two characters that people remember and become cult icons, here, you have pick of like 6. All characters from this film are so well thought out and delivered. From nervous Mr pink to calm and cool mr blonde, we have charatcers that have gone down in film history. A brutal film that cleverly unfolds with every inovative shot, and of course the now heavily used fragmented timeline. Have to remember that was cutting edge at the time seen as fresh and new, now most people demand money back if you don't see the end first :) of course i exaggerate but it did set a standard, which is highly replicated.

All in all i don't think i really have a bad word to say, i probably do if i think hard enough but looking back at all great stuff, seems little petty to mention those now. so if you haven't seen reservoir dogs, do, its directed brilliantly, acting is top notch, mise-en-scene and fantastic soundtrack (diagetic and non)...but above all...its cool.

Coffee and Cigarettes (2003)

2007-05-06T06:58:00.000-07:00

As soon as i heard about this film, i really wanted too see it. I was (and still am) fan of quirky dramas / dark comedies (Royal Tenenbaums, Pallbearer, Eulogy) so i was looking forward to this film. to be honest, and i knew the premise before hand, people sitting around talking rubbish, it was bit boring. I thought i'd like that style, but as i say, just found it boring. IMO the best skit was Steve Coogan & Alfred Molina's "Cousins?" where they debate that they might be related and we see aduring fans come and meet molina while not knowing who coogan was and he attempts to name drop to get some attention. In a way, its the most mainstream segment, so what does that say about me?? Another reason i wanted to see this was bill murray, who is pretty much brilliant in anything. Though may be bias, his skit with rappers RZA & Genius was second best skit. An example of the bordem was a segment Renée which was a scene where tihs woman just sits there and drinks coffee, thats it. i'm all for arty stuff, but c'mon? Though when it was funny it was very funny, Bill murray, Molina, Coogan, iggy pop too and some of white stripes stuff was good, but i expected more.

overall i was mostly just disappointed by it, maybe deserves a rewatch.

Casino Royale (2006)

2007-05-06T06:56:00.000-07:00

I hadn't seen the last few bonds, goldeneye being most recent i had seen all way through, which by the way i really like. This is the story of bond before / just as he gets his 007 rank, a prequel of sorts. it also features the beginings (in pretty lighthearted way) of some of bond tademarks we know (origin of the Aston Martin, Shaken not stired ect.) I'd like to get one issue out the way, which is just me, probably didn't bother ANYONE else. However if its meant to be start of bond, then shouldn't it be set ages ago and the mention of 9/11 and all cool technology be gone. :) i know they were just taking poetic license, to make a exciting film and it would of been insane to make it makes sense timeline wise, but it does make me laugh. Then again in that case my theory is all to pot anyway due to never aging bond and always looking shockingly different :):)

i guess first i should state my point on the whole Daniel Craig as bond deal. I thought he did great job, aspect he brought was a more ruthless street wise bond and that was an interesting take on the character. The romance story here is pretty damn good, it reveals reasons behind Bonds attitudes towards his relationships, and give the character more depth than other bond girl storylines have before. really Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) as she is seen as strong, makes bond re-evaluate his life and such , of course theres the proppian narrative in play at times as her as "Damsel in distress" but the relationship vibe seems stronger in this one to other films.

The action sequences are good, somestimes OTT, but guess expect that. I think it tried to focuse less on the gadgets, which in this "all style no substance" world we live in, was good to see. Not saying there were no gadgets, there were, but don't expect invisable cars speeding across ice. Though this all style can be seen in the action sequences, though in its defense, action s cenes are trademark of bond, so can't really complain. the final one in the old building was pretty ace, but the crane one was, fun, but bit crazy. We do see a bond in conflict here, which is a refreshing dipiction. It does drag a little in middle, and some action sequences i can't remeber why it was there (plane one??) but overall soild, fun, and best since goldeneye, even though i haven't seen between them, i've heard they are really bad, so i can assume :)

Spider-man 2 (2004)

2007-05-06T06:55:00.000-07:00

For me my guidlines that i use to rank any superhero movie are Tim Burton's Batman & Batman Returns, always has been and probably stay like that for a while. Having seen them as a kid, i may be bias as they hold memories but hey, they're my favourites. I didn't really know much about spider-man before seeing the first movie back in 2002, but i liked it. however Spider-man 2 improves on Spider-man in nearly every aspect. Some of ideas are the same, the bad guy is someone peter parker looks up to in both films, untill they have something happen to them and turn evil, but hey, what comic book doesn't do that? Peter parker is pretty conflicted in this but from i've seen its x10 in spider-man 3. Personally what makes this film work is that looking at it, its easy to assume its just another comic book movie, but no, its not. it manages to balance the action and emotional aspects brilliantly. You have Alfred Molina, a stage actor of theatre and every experienced playing role of Doc Oc. Personally i think he's the ground of the film, he ties it together, it gives it that extra level of professionalism that makes it a cut above the average comic book flick. The action scenes (train and bank heist especially) are thrilling and really cool to watch unfold.

The love story of peter & Mary Jane is given alot of screen time which i think helped the film, cus it gave it depth, and thats what this film had over spider-man 1. it was about peter, not spider-man.

In all, one of highlights of 2004, up there with best comic book films and well...roll on Spider-man 3.

Smokin' Aces (2006)

2007-05-06T06:54:00.002-07:00

Story of a Vegas magician, Buddy 'Aces' Israel, who befriends the mob, is the target of several hitmen and woman, after he ratted out the mob to the cops. The mob have hired some of the most ruthless hitmen. Georgia Sykes (Alicia Keys) , Jack Dupree (Affleck) and among others a "Mad Max" style of german warriors, Tremmor Brothers. Buddy is coked up and laying low at top level of high class Vegas hotel, and its just matter of which killer gets there first. At same time the cops, headed by Ray Liotta & Ryan Reynolds, try to find him first to save him so he can continue to give the police info.This is pure pop corn action movie fun, a slightly clever ending that doesn't really make to much of a deal, but its pretty good. sure it maybe a example of death of narrative cinema, but hell, i liked it. Jeremy Piven gives a fantastic performance and is really the highlght of the movie. The different level of hitmen is interesting, best being Alicia Keys, Tremmor bros and this guy who steals faces of people to sneak behind detection (yes you read right). As i said its fun, throwaway stuff. a good way of doing it is, it's better than Guy Richie's Revolver and just as good as Lucky Number Slevin. It's a action movie for the "Fast & Furious" generation of movie goers, but its better than the usual. I Recommend it, Jeremy Piven steals the film but don't expect to be challenged, expect to enjoy it.

Brotherhood (2004)

2007-05-06T06:54:00.001-07:00

This heart breaking story of two brothers forced to fight in Korean war is one of most moving pieces of film i have ever experienced. We start of in 1950 Korea we see two normal young adults, brothers, living their day to day life. Jin-Tae who works hard to earn money for his family and brother, Jin-Seok. War is announced and Seok accidentally signs up for the army and Jin- Tae joins to help his younger brother, earn medals to send him home.However Jin-Tae becomes slowly poisoned by war. He gets taste for it and becomes reckless and risks lives of himself and his team mates, Jin-Seok included.The war scenes are brutal and breath taking. However, above all, this is a story of family, friendship and love, and how war can comprimise this. Brotherhood is my Fave war movie and possibly IMO, one of most affective dramas. I'm not ashamed to say my eyes welled up slightly on final scene. I cannot stress how amazing tihs movie is. From its excellent cinetography to the fantastic acting, i cannot recommend it enough. It is VERY brutal and not for weak at heart, however, for a great story of family, violence and heat break, see it. It's Awesome.

The Departed (2006)

2007-05-06T06:53:00.001-07:00

I've always had an on off relationship with Martin Scorsese Movies. I didn't care for Taxi Driver or Raging Bull (which i will explain in later reviews). However i loved Goodfellas & Casino, and really liked The Aviator. Scorsese here makes possibly his most commercial film yet. Film going action fan teenagers will love it, and "get it" more than maybe his other films, as this is quite accessbile. A remake of a fantastic Asian film, Infernal Affairs, it tells story of Two men from opposite sides of the law are undercover within the State Police and the Irish mafia. Mob boss Frank Costello, played brilliantly by Jack Nicholson, has sent one of his men, Colin Sullivan (Matt Damon) into the state police is a rat. Unkown to him (for time being) state police have also done same sending Billy Costigan (Leonardo DiCaprio), a hard working cop, into his gang to bring back info to the police.As i'd already seen the original and loved it, and knowing remakes can suck, AND that i had a luke warm appreciation of Scorsese movies, i was worried to say the least. Thankfully i thought it was great. Sure its mainstream, but it is gripping. it moves at a fast yet not too fast pace that kept me interested. Dicaprio gives IMO his best performance so far, Damon also, though not to level of Dicaprio does fantastic. Nicholson of course steals the show, but when doesn't he? Look out for great roles by Ray Winstone and Mark Wahlberg. Another element i enjoyed was the soundtrack, the title intro motage set to Dropkick Murphys' "Shipping To Boston" was very effective. Without giving anything away, many have found the ending to be over the top and there only for shock value. I'd like to say that i thought the ending was fine. It's just like original really, with few added moments, but i enjoyed the ending and have no issues with it.In all, My fave Scorsese movie next to goodfellas and Casino. Scene stealing performance by Nicholson and great action through out. See it !

Casino (1995)

2007-05-06T06:51:00.000-07:00

It's 1995 and Martin Scorsese releases Casino. Having already a string of movies many consider to be among best ever made, Casino had alot to live up too. Goodfellas in 1990 was his nearest success (however he did release Cape Feare in 91) and Goodfellas to this day remains his highest rated film on IMDB (not that thats much to go by). Teaming again and so far, for final time, Robert De Niro, Casino is story of Sam 'Ace' Rothstein who is mainly a small time crook trying to conquer Vegas. However he has baggage, his old friend Nicky Santoro played by Joe Pesci. Soon Nicky causes trouble with his methords of dealing with people who get out of line and is banned from all casinos in vegas and this affects Sam's reputation. Sam in meantime falls for a hustler, Ginger. Ginger however is still in love with her fomer boyfriend and pimp Lester Diamond. So Sam has to deal with all this well at same time trying to stay on good side of vegas' elite.

This is as you'd expect a pretty brutal film. a couple of torture scenes involving those who won bit too much for casinos liking, as they are very old school way of working. It's a fantastic film, long but never feels too long. The "friendship" between Nicky and Sam is played out so well, included a great scene where he meets him in the deserts of vegas to basically say "shape up or leave" cus he was ruining him at the time. Sharon stone who plays Ginger is great, however that story does get repetative. She's always leaving then comming back and he just accepts it, several times. However thats only point i can think that i didn't like. Some say "its just goodfellas, in vegas." sure, it probably is, but, if it ain't broke why fix it ? It does have narration like goodfellas aswell but i found this narration to be better. its more lighthearted, especially at the beginning. Actually for first 15 mins is basically 90% narration, it slowly gets less and less, but you don't notice it.

its a great film, maybe not quite goodfellas, but not far off.

Alien 3 (1993)

2007-05-06T06:50:00.000-07:00

Underrated, best way to start this. After the classics Alien & Aliens, this had alot to live up too and despite a few falls, i like it. It picks up the story and the ship that Ripley (Weaver) Hicks, Android Bishop and Newt had used to escape from in Aliens has crashed. We find out in (a brilliant) opening sequence that their sleeping pods had been broken into by a face hugger Alien. We later find out that in crash landing all but ripley had been killed and Android Bishop was desroyed. Also Ripley had been impregnated by the face hugger alien and was now carrying an alien egg in her. They crash land on this Prison unit planet and Ripley is forced to stay there due to lack of other options. A dog, used by people of this prison planet to help search out ripleys destroyed ship, is unluckily enough to to be victim of the alien and the alien is transformed into a alien on four legs, unlike to legged in first two filmsFirst off i loved the idea of alien on 4 legs and ripley having an alien in her, all approached brilliantly. it's also worth mentioning the Director was david Fincher who would later go on to make classics like Fight Club & Se7en. Though prison idea works, i liked the ideas i've heard were nearly chosen before film was made. one of them had it being set in a religious community in a huge wooden floating sphere in space. I thought this was interesting as the Alien could of been shown as comming of the devil in eyes of the monks on this wooden planet and would of brought up many interesting dimetions. However, the inmates in the prison do have a monk like out look and feel to them, so i guess they kept the idea, kind of.may not be best of series, but it looks great, it's kind of slow and some of the dialog isn't great, but it has got atmosphere. It's tense when it wants to be and direction is great. Given the little time Fincher had to make this, he did great job. Not the best, but it had hell of alot to lvie up too.

The Deer Hunter (1978)

2007-05-06T06:48:00.000-07:00

My second fave War movie just behind korean movie "Brotherhood". Deer hunter presents a steller cast De Niro, Walken & Streep. Michael, Nick, and Steven are three buddies from the steel mill town of Clairton, Penn.They are like schoolmates, hanging out in a local bar and enjoying weekends of deer-hunting. Michael and Nick are also both in love with Linda, who seems to juggle both of the men. It displays the harsh reality of war both from point of battle field, but it is more a study of how it effects friendships and families. At just over 3hours long it first hour and half takes place before they even get to war. it documents their everyday lives, working, hanging out and a 45 min scene of one of their weddings. fully painting a picture of their friendship before tearing it apart with brutal scenes of war. This film found its place in film history for the "russian roulette" scenes, which are very hard to watch. they are indeed tragic, tense scenes as you'd expect and amazingly planned out. This film is truely a classic, see it, but be warned, its exremely raw and real dipiction of war. Also probably my fave performance by de niro (yes raging bull / Taxi driver included) and Walken steals the show. a harrowing film, tense, all of this added to by setting up a normal life narrative, tearing it apart by violence.

See it, it's Classic, amazing.