From Oedipus to Samuel L. Jackson's Wallet

"I think we oughta leave now." "Yeah, that's probably a good idea."

2012-01-29T23:29:00.001Z

This will be the last new entry on this blog from me, and, unless any of the other contributors decide to write a final entry, most likely the last entry of all. After 684 posts, four-and-a-half years, seven sporadic contributors, countless links, opinions, reviews and displays of geekery, the decision has been made to finally call it a day here.

There are several reasons behind this decision. Firstly, I am currently the only active contributor, and have been for at least a year. The other contributors' input has dwindled for various reasons - concentrating on other individual blogs, waning interest in blogging, or simply lack of the time they used to have to contribute - and their names now stand more as a recognition of their past work than an expectation of them to start writing here again.

Secondly, this blog was set up as a place where the contributors would write about anything. Of course, with the same contributors, similar topics and themes occurred more and more as the post count grew. But as the contributions became less frequent, the topics narrowed. Essentially, this blog now serves as a film review site (my recent attempt to widen my focus having been largely unsuccessful), which isn't what it was created to be.

The final reason is almost the flipside to the second reason. My interest in blogging is now almost entirely focused on film. Whilst I've managed to become more regular once again in my blog activity over the past few months, I've held back on trying out a few different types of post I'd like to attempt because I've carried on writing here.

Essentially, whilst I've loved contributing to this place for the past four-and-a-half years, writing here now comes with a fair amount of "baggage", for want of a better phrase. My blogging interests have changed, and this blog no longer fits those interests closely enough.

It also feels like the right time to close up shop here as this blog will never again see the amount of activity it once had. Gone are the glory days of the early years - this blog has gone from tallying almost an entry per day on average in 2008 to barely one or two entries per month in 2010, and whilst things have picked up in the past year, the collective feeling is one of wanting to preserve what once was rather than attempting in vain to get it back.

So, this is pretty much it for From Oedipus To Samuel L. Jackson's Wallet. It's been a great four-and-a-half years, and the most successful blog I've been involved in. The blog will remain here to be browsed should anyone wish. I know I will be revisiting entries fairly regularly, as I have done the whole time I've been writing here.

So, what's next? Well, TheTelf and I are in the process of getting a new, film-centric blog started up, hilariously titled:

Some Like It Hot Fuzz

Most of my reviews from the past year have been imported there to provide some material to get things going. All my new reviews will feature there, as well as some of those other film-related post ideas I mentioned before once things are up and running. I know there are several people who visit here fairly regularly and read my reviews at the moment, so please follow me and TheTelf to our new blog home and keep reading, I really appreciate just knowing people are reading what I've written.

In closing, I would like to offer my personal thanks and appreciation to everyone who has contributed here, no matter how big or small a capacity that has been in. Thanks too to everyone who has read what has been written here, as it makes blogging feel that much more worthwhile. I've loved every moment of being part of this blog, and will look back fondly at the entries that have been written here.

From Oedipus To Samuel L. Jackson's Wallet

pulpfact.blogspot.com

20th July, 2007 - 29th January, 2012

Film Review | Another Year (2010)

2012-01-27T00:10:00.001Z

My experience of Mike Leigh prior to Another Year is decidedly (and, perhaps, shamefully) scarce - I've seen Abigail's Party, albeit about ten years ago, and that's about it. Leigh is, seemingly in equal measure, considered a pillar of British cinema and a heinous purveyor of anti-feminist trash depending on who you're speaking to. Either way, he has established himself as a immovable fixture of modern film-making.

Leigh's latest follows Tom Hepple (Jim Broadbent) and his wife Gerri (Ruth Sheen) throughout a year of their life, and their encounters with various friends and family members, most prominently Mary (Lesley Manville) who works with Gerri, as well as their son Joe (Oliver Maltman).

To relate the plot of Another Year is a tricky task, because in many ways nothing unusual really happens. Tom and Gerri's lives are pretty ordinary - he a geologist, she a counsellor, both nearing retirement - and the things that happen to them are just as ordinary. But it's the people who surround them and move in and out of their lives that makes Another Year such compelling viewing. Leigh's handling of what in the hands of many could seem positively humdrum is so skilled and authentic that you can't help but get drawn into the Hepples' world.

Thanks in no small part to Broadbent and Sheen's sublime performances opposite each other, by the end of the film Tom and Gerri feel like old friends. The couple are happy, as in genuinely happy. They love and trust each other, they support each other, and they can communicate to each other with a glance or a word (more than once Gerri reins in Tom's slightly more outspoken side with a carefully intoned utterance of his first name). Together, Broadbent and Sheen create one of the most authentic married couples seen on screen in recent memory.

Tom and Gerri are in many ways the calm eye of a constantly simmering storm around them, as the friends and family orbiting the couple generate much of the drama seen throughout the film. Many of the characters are seen for only one segment of the whole film, such as Tom's old university friend Ken (Peter Wight), a pitiable man refusing to retire and seemingly eating and drinking himself to death, and Ronnie, Tom's brother, played by David Bradley in a understated turn a world away from his role as Filch in the Harry Potter films. In fact, it is often the characters who are only seen briefly who create the greatest impact; Imelda Staunton as a patient of Gerri in the opening scenes encapsulates many of the film's recurring themes - growing old, loneliness and the concept of happiness - in a startlingly blunt performance. Martin Savage, too, as Ronnie's wayward son Carl, immediately generates tenseness, unease and even threat, telling a story that began years before the timeframe of the film in only a handful of scenes.

It is Manville, as the alternately pathetic and sympathetic Mary, whose performance is likely to stick in your mind long after the gentle acoustic guitar music plays over the film's closing credits. Beginning the film as almost a caricature of middle-aged spinsterhood - drinking too much and retelling the same tired jokes her friends obligingly smile through - Mary becomes Tom and Gerri's most constant opposite. As her actions become increasingly ill-advised and symptomatic of somebody not wholly in balance, Manville's performance firmly steers Mary away from what many may have seen as a one-dimensional misogynistic diatribe of a character from Leigh, creating a complex and human creature both seriously flawed and impossible to hate.

In fact, this may be Leigh's greatest achievement in Another Year. Tom and Gerri at the centre may be the only stable characters here; but despite this, Leigh allows us to like everyone we meet throughout. Nobody is inherently bad, just suffering from a lack of happiness in some way (even Carl, whose actions are almost entirely reprehensible, comes across as troubled rather than evil). Whilst we might not agree with everything the characters do, they are always relatable and, Leigh suggests, both capable and worthy of redemption.

There are occasions when Another Year slows down a little too much for its own good, and there are segments which possibly go on a little longer than they should. But the film is largely a great success for Leigh and his immensely strong cast. The imbibing of wine is a common activity throughout the film, and it may be that Another Year is a film that, like a fine wine, will get even better with age. Or maybe it is I, a mere twentysomething, that needs to continue aging before all aspects of the film truly hit home to me. Either way, Leigh has created a compelling character-driven drama of both quality and heart.

8/10

Film Review | Attack The Block (2011)

2012-01-21T19:11:00.003Z

The comparisons between director Joe Cornish's Attack The Block and Wright and Pegg's modern classic Shaun Of The Dead are possibly an overly simplistic way of evaluating the more recent film. Both are the major feature directorial debut of a name primarily made in TV comedy, both blend action, sci fi, horror and comedy genres, and both transport these genres to unlikely locations from domestic Britain. Edgar Wright (SOTD co-writer and director) serves as executive producer of ATB. Oh, and both have Nick Frost in them. But, despite the two fims' similarities, it's not fair to simply rate Cornish's film on the "Shaun-ometer".

Attack The Block follows the exploits of a gang of teenagers living in a run-down council estate in London. After mugging nurse Sam (Jodie Whittaker), the group encounter an alien entity which gang leader Moses (John Boyega) quickly decides to kill after it wounds his face. However, life on the estate quickly becomes more and more dangerous as larger and fiercer aliens soon arrive.

In many ways, Cornish doesn't make life easy for himself in making ATB a success. Within the first five minutes of the film, the group that we follow are set up as violent criminals; they rob a young woman at knifepoint, and their first instinct upon discovering what they quickly realise is an alien lifeform is to kill it, seemingly to teach it a lesson and just because it will entertain them for a while. The gang also associate with local drug dealer Ron (Frost) and his gangster boss Hi-Hatz (Jumayn Hunter). This does make the group difficult to root for once under siege from the alien threat, but also provides intrigue as to how, if at all, the gang members can redeem themselves before the credits roll.

It's to Cornish's credit that most (but not all) of the gang do manage that redemption. He shows us snapshots of their everyday lives - single parent families, living with grandparents, brief shouted conversations between rooms - as well as doing his utmost to make them more than just mindless hoodies hanging around on street corners. One of the most poignant moments of the script is delivered by Moses in a moment of respite against the alien threat, where he considers whether the government is sending in "monsters" to kill them. "We ain't killing each other fast enough" he ponders, "so they decided to speed up the process".

As the film progresses, it becomes clearer and clearer that Cornish is just as concerned with tackling why life on "the block" is the way it is as he is with extra-terrestrial action. That's not to say that the action takes second place to the social commentary. Cornish proves himself to be a dab hand at creating both fast paced fight sequences and tense set pieces that provide genuine scares. The alien creatures too, whilst clearly in part a product of a relatively small budget, provide ample threat and mystery throughout.

Moses slowly but surely takes his place as the film's primary protagonist, with Boyega's performance proving the most satisfying of the whole film. Having made Moses such an unlikable character at the start of the film, it is to his credit that Boyega bestows the role with depth and authenticity, so that when the story truly calls for it, we are fully behind him. Moses' home life is also one of the most hard-hitting, reminding us just why some teenagers fall into lives of delinquency. By the halfway point, Boyega owns each scene he's in, making his turn one to remember - his is a name that deserves to stick around for a good while in British cinema.

Whittaker's turn as recently qualified nurse Sam is also commendable, although the way her relationship with the gang who attacked her at the start of the night unfolds sometimes feels a bit too unlikely. I was also impressed with Hunter, who brought genuine menace and arrogance to local gangster Hi-Hatz.

Unfortunately (perhaps inevitably) not all the characters come off so well. Nick Frost as Ron the drug dealer and his upper-middle-class-trying-desperately-to-fit-in-with-gang-culture client Brewis (Luke Treadaway) provide some laughs, but never become more than one-dimensional caricatures. Within the teenage gang itself, not all members become sympathetic enough; Pest (Alex Esmail), for example, never shows much regret for his criminal indiscretions or understanding for his victims' feelings, essentially coming across as selfish and making it very hard to feel any connection to him at any point.

Attack The Block is ultimately a successful and enjoyable film that should please fans of horror and sci-fi, as well as anyone looking for decent homegrown British cinema. It's not without its faults, and doesn't succeed in everything it attempts, but Cornish's ambition and genuine talent as a writer and director deserves high praise - it's easy to forget when watching that this is his feature debut. Is it the next Shaun Of The Dead? No. But it doesn't need to be, nor does it try to be. What it definitely is, however, is a very promising start for a host of fresh British cinematic talent.

7/10

Film Review | Man On Wire (2008)

2012-01-16T19:14:00.001Z

Without wishing to oversimplify the documentary genre, a good documentary essentially needs two things to make it a success: an intriguing subject, and flair of execution. If one of these two is severely lacking, then the film falters. American: The Bill Hicks Story is a recent example of a documentary that had the potential to be excellent but wasn't because one element of the two didn't cut it - Hicks and his career are potentially fascinating, but the way the documentary was put together felt awkward and inaccessible. American is also a prime example that succeeding in one of these two factors cannot make up for lacking in the other. The vast majority of viewers would surely agree that Man On Wire has one of these aspects in the bag before you've even begun to watch. The question therefore that must be answered during the film's ninety minutes is this: does director James Marsh have the flair to bring into being a potentially truly brilliant documentary?

In case you're not aware, Man On Wire has what must be one of the most intriguing subjects of any documentary, that being high-wire artist Philippe Petit's tightrope walk between the North and South towers of the World Trade Center on 7th August 1974. The film chronicles the walk itself and the complex methods utilised by Petit and his team to set up the walk, as well as Petit's life and career from the moment he first conceived the idea of walking between the Twin Towers in 1968, before construction of the towers had even been completed.

The film's subject matter, and the man at the centre of it all, Petit, do not disappoint. Petit's life is undoubtedly captivating and extraordinary, and the feats he achieves both at the Twin Towers and on other daredevil tightrope walks leading up to the WTC walk are wondrous to behold. Petit too is a filmmaker's dream - a vibrant and eccentric personality, likable, mischievous yet a little bit scary, almost like an imp en Français. He commands the camera and yet feels incredibly natural; the Petit we see never feels like an act, making his feats all the more magical and the man genuinely enigmatic.

Marsh's style is on the whole successful, but never matches its subject matter in terms of charm. He opts for a mix of stock footage taken at the time of the events themselves, talking heads of Petit and those involved in his stunts, and reenactments of events with actors playing the parts of Petit and his collaborators. Marsh attempts to present the whole film like a heist movie, which works at some points and feels forced (even a little amateurish, especially during the reenacted scenes) at others. Marsh also has the problem of his other contributors not being nearly as captivating as Petit himself. It occasionally feels as though the film becomes oversaturated with speakers to the point where I started forgetting exactly what role each of them played in the events.

Marsh chooses to focus entirely on the events of Petit's life from 1968 to 1974, and whilst this means we learn a great deal about this genuinely amazing period, it also means that the subjects of the film are never fleshed out fully. We learn next to nothing about Petit's childhood or life leading up to his decision to walk between the Twin Towers. Nor do we find out much at all about the direction Petit's life leads following the stunt. Any reference to the eventual fate of the Twin Towers on 11th September 2001 is also entirely absent, as is any reference to the WTC's lack of popularity as a landmark before Petit's stunt, and the increase in this following it. Marsh's decision to focus entirely on Petit and his crew's lives during this strict six year window ultimately becomes a double-edged sword - we are spoilt by the amount of detail devoted to Marsh's chosen time period, but ultimately left hungry for a little more breadth.

When taking into account all aspects of Man On Wire, the film can be considered far more hit than miss, but definitely not a film without fault. Marsh's choice of the Twin Towers stunt and Petit as his focus reaps huge rewards - the event and the man are genuinely captivating. It is Marsh's execution that holds the film's flaws. These are not glaring, unforgivable errors, but feel more like Marsh has relied a little too heavily on his subject matter to make the film a success. This works to a point; but it also means that, every so often, you wish that the documentary chronicling such astounding events was slightly more astounding in its execution.

7/10

Film Review | The Beaver (2011)

2012-01-08T15:33:00.000Z

Every now and again a film comes along that grabs my attention as soon as I first hear about it, to the point where I know I simply have to see it no matter what opinions might be levelled at it. The Beaver is one of those films. The film's highest of high concepts is a serious gamble on the part of director (and supporting actress) Jodie Foster, and casting Mel Gibson in the starring role hardly makes the film's success any more of a safe bet following his relatively recent fall from grace in the public eye.

Gibson plays Walter Black, the CEO of a formerly successful toy company who is suffering from serious depression. Following a failed suicide attempt after his wife (Foster) kicks him out, Walter develops an alternate personality which manifests itself through a beaver hand puppet. Despite seeming to many to be a sign that he has finally tipped over the edge into insanity, initially the beaver (as it is simply known) helps Walter to fix many of the fractured areas of his life, including his relationship with his wife and younger son Henry (Riley Thomas Stewart), although not his older son Porter (Anton Yelchin) who is exhibiting some troubling behaviour of his own. As the beaver takes more and more control over Walter, however, it becomes apparent that his influence over Walter's life is not as positive as it first appears.

The Beaver is undoubtedly one of those films that will divide opinion, and whether you enjoy it or not depends a great deal on whether you buy into its premise. The way I see it, if you assume that The Beaver takes place entirely in the real world that you and I inhabit, you almost certainly won't be able to get a lot out of it. Walter's character arc at the very least must be seen as almost entirely allegorical, and to view it any differently is almost obstinate on the part of the audience. The puppet on Walter's hand is a lot more than a quirky device through which to demonstrate his mental instability - it represents Walter's suppression of one part of his personality and allowance of another to take control, and the ramifications, both reparative ad destructive, of doing so. Once you accept this, The Beaver comes across as one of the most intelligent films of last year.

Gibson's performance as Walter Black is, in short, excellent. His fall into depression is entirely believable whilst being neither melodramatic nor ridiculous, with a subtlety a million miles from the in-your-face instability of Martin Riggs in Lethal Weapon. From the moment Walter allows the beaver to take over, Gibson sells it brilliantly to the audience, playing things entirely straight and almost taking on two separate parts, endowing the puppet with a hybrid cockney-Australian accent which is questioned by other characters but (pleasingly) is never explained.

Yes, there are a few laughs to be had - let's face it, Gibson with a manky rodent on the end of his arm was always going to be at least a little funny, and a sex scene between Gibson, Foster and the beaver is awkwardly hilarious and sold perfectly by both actors. But this is a dramatic story and Gibson's excellent turn makes sure we know this all the way through. A scene in which Walter and his wife go for an anniversary meal, with Walter back in control for the first time since the beaver entered his life, ends awkwardly and is one of the most emotionally raw scenes in the entire film.

Yelchin too shows himself again to be a talent worth keeping an eye on after proving his action chops in Star Trek and Terminator: Salvation. His performance here is strong and sells effectively the subplot of Porter's initially unlikely relationship with fellow high school student Norah (Jennifer Lawrence), as well as his intense desire to be as removed from his father as possible.

The Beaver's key fault comes from its relatively contracted running time of just under ninety minutes. Foster's direction feels controlled and assured, but certain aspects of the story occasionally come across as a bit hurried or underdeveloped. Walter's life prior to the film is narrated within the first few minutes of the film as a montage, leading us almost immediately to his being under the beaver's control. This makes it initially a little tricky to connect with Walter as a character, as the audience has had very little time to get to know him prior to this key event in his life. Porter and Norah's relationship also feels lacking in depth at times, suggesting it may have benefited from further screen time to add a little more authenticity.

As I said, if you buy into the premise of The Beaver, there's an awful lot of good to get out of it. If you can't accept the concept behind the story then it's unlikely you'll be able to appreciate many of its impressive attributes. Don't expect a lighthearted look at depression and mental instability either - a wacky, wisecracking sidekick this beaver certainly is not. But allow the film the chance to take you through its allegorical tale and what you'll find is a highly original, well made and poignant piece of cinema.

8/10

Film Review | Moon (2009)

2012-01-08T11:07:00.000Z

Having seen Duncan Jones' second feature, Source Code, at the cinema last year (of which you can read my opinion right here), and having heard great things about his debut feature Moon, I have been eager to experience it for quite some time. Like several aspects of Source Code, Moon places itself on the dark side (excuse the pun) of science fiction with a strong psychological thread running throughout. It also wears its "old school" sci-fi influences firmly on its sleeve (Alien and 2001: A Space Odyssey come to mind immediately, but there are a host of others), which just created even more reasons for me to want to see it, and make it even more shameful that it's taken me this long to get round to it.

The story takes place on the eponymous natural satellite, which is being harvested by Lunar Industries for helium-3 to be used as fuel back on Earth. Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell) is the sole crew member of the Sarang moon base nearing the end of a three-year contract, with only the base's computer GERTY (voiced by Kevin Spacey) and occasional recorded messages from his wife (Dominique McElligott) for company. As his mind begins to play tricks on him, Sam becomes more and more eager to reach the end of his contract and return to Earth. However, an accident out on the moon's surface sets in motion a series of events which change Sam's entire perspective of his time there.

As debut features go, Moon is pretty darn successful in a great many ways. Jones' direction is confident and produces a satisfyingly palpable setting for Sam's experiences. Many of the choices Jones makes regarding the film's production were undoubtedly governed by the film's relatively small budget, but the majority of them serve to help pleasingly create the film's idiosyncratic retro-yet-futuristic feel. Finer details are well considered in terms of their overall effect on the feel of the film - Sam's alarm clock which plays Chesney Hawkes to wake him up, GERTY's "emotions" displayed through emoticons on a video screen, and the video-communication device that's far more brick than iPad, all feed into the authenticity of Jones' lunar bunker.

Whilst Jones without question deserves a great deal of credit, the part that Rockwell plays in the film's success simply cannot be underestimated. Apart from Spacey's GERTY (undoubtedly taking influence from 2001's HAL in his delivery) Rockwell is pretty much on his own throughout. It's hard to describe his performance without giving away some major plot points, but Rockwell boldly demonstrates a huge range and throughout the film commands every scene brilliantly. Rockwell makes Sam's isolation, and the effects of it upon both his mental and physical state, incredibly believable. Whilst I felt in one or two scenes that his performance required a little more raw emotion, it's hard to imagine many actors being able to take on the role and make it quite so credible, which Rockwell does with great skill.

However, there is a noticeable enervation during the middle of the story. I stand by Rockwell's performance as being impressive throughout; it is Jones' focus upon where things are actually going that becomes somewhat fuzzy. In fact, it's not until the final moments of the whole film that Jones makes the focus of the story completely clear. Again, it's difficult to explain without giving away some huge spoilers, but Sam's motivation in his actions was never made quite clear enough to give me a genuine reason to get behind them (other than the fact I like the character) until the very last frame, by which point it felt a little late. Once they had been made more obvious I was able to look back on everything I'd just watched with a clearer view, but it did feel as though, if Jones had structured things slightly differently, I might have viewed the film's finale from an altered, slightly more satisfying angle.

Ultimately, however, Moon is a great success. Rockwell's fantastic performance coupled with Jones' strong direction and creation of setting make the film one of the strongest and most human in the sci-fi genre I can recall from the last few years. There is a great deal of originality and imagination within Jones' film, which is laced with an obvious passion for the genre's heritage forming a satisfying, enjoyable and well made end product, and one that leaves me keeping a close and positive eye on Jones' future work.

8/10

Film Review | Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale (2010)

2012-01-02T14:34:00.001Z

Based upon two short films which garnered a huge amount of interest and critical praise on YouTube (and rightly so - they're very much worth watching and can be seen here and here), Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale essentially attempts to take the style of the shorts more than the premise and create a feature length story from it. Successful transition from short film to feature can be tricky, but with source material as original and well made as the two shorts, director Jalmari Helander had already done a great deal right before he even started.

The feature film focuses on a small Finnish community around Christmas time. A science team has been despatched to excavate a particular area in the local mountains, believed to be a huge burial mound. Meanwhile, Pietari (Onni Tommila) has become more and more fascinated with ancient myths surrounding the origins of Santa Claus, in which the figure is more concerned with punishing the naughty children than rewarding the nice. As the excavation progresses, strange occurrences begin to happen in the community with increasing frequency, arousing Pietari's suspicions as to who or what is buried beneath the mountains.

Helander's film deserves a huge amount of praise for its originality and execution. The story, whilst feeling a little uneven in places, is captivating throughout. The twists placed upon traditional Santa Claus iconography are inspired, putting a fresh and alternative perspective on Christmas traditions. Helander's direction fits the horror style of the story well, showing his appreciation for the genre, its conventions and legacy. The fact that the actors play everything entirely straight also helps to sell the sometimes ludicrous concepts presented in the film as authentic threats - the characters show genuine fear and uncertainty throughout, making the horror seem that much more real. The use of the bleak yet picturesque scenery of Finland as well is not just an interesting backdrop to the story, but provides a constant reminder of the unsettling spin placed upon the well-known childhood fable.

The film's main failings come from its running time, as at just under an hour and a quarter some of the character development feels rushed or unfinished. Pietari's relationship with his father Rauno (Jorma Tommila) is shown to be strained after the loss of Pietari's mother, and what we are shown of Pietari and Rauno's relationship is engaging and shows genuine talent on the part of both actors (the fact that Jorma and Onni Tommila are also father and son in real life no doubt helped with this). But the relationship is ultimately left underdeveloped, affecting the impact of how this relationship changes during the film's final act. A slightly longer running time to accommodate a few more scenes dedicated to Pietari and Rauno's strained emotional connection would have improved the film overall.

The film's climax is pleasing, although some of the shifts in character (Pietari's in particular) feel a little unlikely. The epilogue also feels somewhat disconnected with what has come before - it almost feels as though Helander wanted to finish with a strong connection to his original short films even if he had to crowbar it in slightly. In the end, however, Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale's successes outweigh its failures. Crammed with imagination and originality, it's a film likely to please both horror fans and those looking for an alternative to the festive schmaltz usually reserved for Christmas movies.

7/10

Film Review | TRON: Legacy (2010)

2012-01-01T19:02:00.000Z

Direct sequels created a significant amount of time after the original film's release are always a tricky beast to handle, and generally garner a wide range of critical response - John McClane and Indiana Jones' respective jaunts into the 21st Century are proof enough of that. Creating a sequel for a film with such strong cult appeal as 1982's TRON just adds to the challenge of the task. In creating TRON: Legacy, Disney not only took on the job of at least matching the technical prowess and improving on the oft-criticised plot of the original film, but also of pleasing firm fans of the original whilst making the world of TRON appeal more to a mainstream audience.

The film picks up soon after where the events of the first film finished. Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges) has disappeared. Despite being the largest shareholder in Kevin's computer company ENCOM, his son Sam (Garrett Hedlund) has no interest in controlling the company whilst harbouring clear abandonment issues towards his father. However, when Kevin's friend and business partner Alan (Bruce Boxleitner) tells Sam he's received a mysterious message from Kevin's old office, Sam's subsequent investigation leads him into The Grid - the virtual reality world Kevin entered decades previously - and on a journey of investigation into what happened to his father.

In many ways, TRON: Legacy exhibits many of the same strengths and weaknesses as the original film. The technological wizardry is clearly apparent from the moment Sam steps into The Grid, and gets more and more impressive as the film progresses. The world introduced in 1982 has been appropriately "upgraded". The updated version of the iconic light cycle battle is particularly breathtaking, as is the fast-paced fighter jet chase towards the film's climax. The Grid as a universe is captivating in itself even when things slow down, providing beautiful scenery within which the story can unfold.

Bridges is reliably solid returning to the role of Kevin Flynn and bringing an intriguing mix of spirituality and world-weariness (or should that be "Grid-weariness"?) to the aged version of the character. Impressive too is Bridges' performance as CLU, the corrupt program created by the senior Flynn who acts as the film's antagonist. CLU appears as the younger version of Kevin Flynn, achieved through motion capture and computer animation, and it is to Bridges' credit that his performance comes through the technology and post-production so strongly.

Hedlund's performance as Sam Flynn is good, believable as Kevin's son, although his supposed animosity towards his father never truly comes through. The rest of the cast are fine but never much more.

The film's weaknesses come through pacing and plot, as the story occasionally becomes a little overly complex, tying itself into knots that it can't quite straighten out. Some scenes also become a little slow and self-indulgent from time to time. The End Of Line Club sequence, for example, feels almost entirely unnecessary - although it does provide a key opportunity to showcase Daft Punk's magnificent score for the film - and the plot elements involving Michael Sheen's character could easily have been eliminated to help reduce the film's slightly flabby two hour running time. Sheen's over-the-top performance feels somewhat at odds with the rest of the film too.

Despite its faults however, TRON: Legacy is much more success than failure. You can't help but be entertained and impressed by the action sequences and use of CGI throughout, and the main story of a son's quest to find his father and ultimately take control of his destiny is compelling and well told. Whilst things do slow down a bit too much between the action, the film never gets boring, and the universe created is a thing of wonder from start to finish. In the end, TRON: Legacy successfully establishes itself as a worthwhile and enjoyable continuation of an intelligent and imaginative action sci-fi franchise created almost three decades ago.

7/10

Film Review | Megamind (2010)

2011-12-30T17:44:00.002Z

Megamind is one of those films that makes writing reviews a chore, in that there isn't really a great deal to say about it. It's not an awful film by any stretch of the imagination, but there also isn't that much that is genuinely good there either.

The film tells the story of Megamind (voiced by Will Ferrell), an alien supervillain whose various attempts to defeat his nemesis, superhero Metro Man (voiced by Brad Pitt), and take over Metro City have so far always failed. However, when Megamind finally succeeds in killing Metro Man, he suddenly finds his life to have no purpose and begins questioning the nature of being a villain at all.

Essentially, Megamind attempts to both parody and pay homage to superhero movies in the same way that previous Dreamworks offering Monsters Vs. Aliens did with B-movie disaster flicks. The problem is, no part of Megamind feels as though it has any authentic heart or spark of originality behind it. Ferrell is fine as the eponymous alien but never more than that, and regularly his performance sounds merely like a cross between previous Ferrell characters Ron Burgundy from Anchorman and Mugatu from Zoolander. Brad Pitt's efforts as Metro Man are alarmingly more disappointing, making the character nothing more than a flat and uninteresting superhero stereotype. Tina Fey as TV reporter and generic love interest Roxanne Ritchie is again satisfactory but nothing more, and Jonah Hill as her assistant just serves to prove he's just as irritating even when you can't see him.

The lacklustre feel filters through the film's execution, with many parts feeling predictable and the plot losing steam long before the final act. Elements clearly included to appeal to the older generation, such as modelling Megamind's sense of showmanship after bands such as Kiss and Alice Cooper, just don't fit comfortably with any other part of the film and essentially come across as a little desperate to gain parental approval on the part of the writers.

Ultimately, Megamind is not a bad film. But it is an average film in pretty much every way, which is key to its failure. With the computer-animated film market more and more saturated, and rival studio Pixar leading the way in producing ever more impressive films in terms of technical skill and cinematic excellence, there are simply too many films that it's worth seeing before Megamind.

5/10

Film Review | Black Swan (2010)

2011-11-20T14:31:00.002Z

Black Swan achieves a rare feat in cinema, in that by the film's climax I was genuinely unsure as to how much of what I was watching was real and how much was in the head of a character. By the time the credits rolled director Darren Aronofsky and Natalie Portman in the lead role had led me so expertly to this point, exactly where they wanted me to be, that I could do nothing but allow the emotional, psychological, beautifully dramatic spectacle I had just witnessed to continue washing over me.

The film tells the story of Nina (Portman), a professional ballerina who lands her first lead role in her company's latest production, Swan Lake. As Nina struggles to meet the demands of her dual character as both the Swan Queen and the Black Swan, her relationship with her mother (Barbara Hershey), her director (Vincent Cassel) and fellow dancer Lily (Mila Kunis) all become increasingly complex whilst her mental state becomes less and less stable.

Whilst praise has already been heaped upon Portman and Aronofsky, it's important not to overlook the importance of the supporting cast in making the film the success that it is. Cassel brings both intensity and intrigue to his role; Hershey too is strong as the strict yet devoted mother to Nina, and deserves high praise in particular for her scenes with Portman when Nina falls further into mental instability. The character of Lily is potentially the most demanding after Nina herself, but Kunis handles the role incredibly well, striking a balance between the different elements to her character, at times cerebral, at others much more physical.

The triumph here, however, must be a shared achievement of Portman and Aronofsky. Portman's performance is blissfully enigmatic, allowing the audience to develop an uneasy relationship of sympathy and distance with Nina in a very short space of time which lasts until the very last shot. It's a turn more than worthy of her Best Actress Oscar.

Portman's performance fits seamlessly with Aronofsky's direction, a heady fusion of extreme realism and the disturbingly surreal blurring the lines between the real world and Nina's warped perspective. This intentional ambiguity creates superb psychological melodrama with occasional hints of horror, and makes Black Swan Aronofsky's most finely crafted film to date. In fact, if there is one criticism of the film it's that it is at a few points almost too uncomfortable to watch. Black Swan, fundamentally, is a film I find it very difficult to fault. Whilst it may at times be a difficult viewing experience, this is undoubtedly an incredible piece of cinema.

9/10

TV Review | Life's Too Short (Series 1, Episodes 1 and 2)

2011-11-19T01:11:00.002Z

Life's Too Short is the latest television comedy offering from contemporary giants of the genre, Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant. Described by Gervais as the third in their TV sitcom trilogy (The Office and Extras being the first and second parts respectively), Life's Too Short shows promise in the first two episodes, but there is also the feeling that maybe we've seen this all before.

The series is a mockumentary following dwarf actor Warwick Davis (probably best known most recently for playing Professor Flitwick in the Harry Potter films) as he goes about his "showbiz" life as a dwarf actor as well as running his own dwarf talent agency. Davis plays a twisted version of himself, coming across as arrogant and deluded as to how famous and successful he is. The style of comedy is typical Gervais and Merchant, playing up the uncomfortable scenarios to the point where you can barely continue watching. Davis is clearly up for pretty much anything, with highlights of the first two episodes including an excruciating failed interview with a local news anchor who at one point gets Davis to stand on a chair to emphasise his dwarfism, and Davis donning something truly humiliating (I won't say what to avoid spoilers) as a makeshift Ewok costume when attending a Star Wars themed wedding. Davis' likability and talent as an actor will no doubt be key to the series' inevitable success.

Much like he did in Extras, Gervais also uses his Hollywood connections to bring in some serious star power, which essentially provide the best scenes of each of the first two episodes. Liam Neeson cameos in the first episode to great effect, approaching Gervais and Merchant (playing themselves) about a change of direction in his career; it is Johnny Depp's performance in episode 2 that is currently the one to beat, initially meeting with Davis to gain advice on how to play a leprechaun, which ends up in a confrontation with Gervais over his comments at the Golden Globes.

However, Life's Too Short, whilst undoubtedly funny, is almost unashamedly unoriginal. Davis' lines could often be lifted directly from David Brent ten years ago, and even his delivery sometimes feels as though he's basically doing an impersonation of Gervais. And whilst the celebrity cameos so far have worked, you can't help but feel the idea has been almost directly lifted from Extras. The format is essentially a cross between The Office, Extras and Curb Your Enthusiasm (a show of which Gervais is openly a huge fan) and also borrows quite heavily from I'm Alan Partridge. Whilst it's true that Gervais and Merchant obviously know what they're doing with this style, it's also a shame that Life's Too Short doesn't yet feel like its own entity, more the bastard lovechild of several successful previous sitcoms.

The hardest part to swallow so far, however, is Gervais and Merchant's portrayal of themselves. Whilst we've seen both play warped versions of themselves previously, here it almost feels like they're no longer acting. The duo sit in a large and finely decorated office adorned with memorabilia from both their successes together and Gervais' solo efforts. I genuinely found some of the scenes involving Gervais and Merchant quite cringeworthy in an unpleasant way - it feels as though the two of them (Gervais in particular) have gone too far up one particular part of their anatomy. Five years ago it was amusing; now it just feels genuinely narcissistic.

I'll continue to watch Life's Too Short, as despite its shortcomings (no pun intended) it undoubtedly has promise as the first two episodes had several genuinely funny moments. At the moment I can't see it being as revered as Gervais and Merchant's first two comedy series, but that's not to say it isn't a worthwhile watch. In fact, creating a series that is merely very good rather than universally acclaimed might just be what's needed to knock the writers back down to earth, or at least a little closer to it.

Film Review | Surrogates (2009)

2011-11-19T00:26:00.000Z

Surrogates is clearly influenced in its style by a great many other sci-fi films, from big names such as The Matrix and the Terminator franchise to cult titles such as Gattaca. The problem is, it's never quite as good as any of the films it has been inspired by.

Set in a near future where the world's population lives through hi-tech robotic counterparts - the 'surrogates' of the title, and as they are referred to throughout the film - we follow the story of FBI Agent Tom Greer (Bruce Willis) who, with his partner Agent Peters (Radha Mitchell), investigates a series of unprecedented murders committed through destroying a person's surrogate. Willis is reliably watchable, but never feels as though he is stretching himself too far from either his troubled loner or irrational action-man archetypal fallback roles. Other than Ving Rhames as The Prophet, the shadowy leader of a resistance movement against the surrogates, and James Cromwell as the inventor of 'surrogacy' (both of whom receive far too little screen time), the cast is largely pedestrian and forgettable.

The story is entertaining enough, providing enough satisfying sci-fi quirks and action sequences to keep things interesting. Things get a little muddled towards the end, and the final act doesn't provide the satisfying payoff that you would hope for. A subplot involving the death of Greer's son and the effect of this on his relationship with his wife (Rosamund Pike) never really manages to go anywhere meaningful. However, the film's swift running time of under ninety minutes does mean it never has the chance to become tedious.

Ultimately, Surrogates feels like a wasted opportunity. There's a huge amount that could have been explored in terms of human morality (there doesn't seem to be any repercussions for destroying a surrogate, despite more than one indication that they aren't exactly cheap pieces of kit), and the current popularity of online chat and smartphones could have been very easily commented upon, but instead is only slightly hinted at. Like I said before, Surrogates draws on a great many entries into the sci-fi canon but unfortunately this usually only serves to remind you of how many better films there are of a similar style that you could be watching. It is enjoyable and worth a look, but in many ways had the potential to be so much more than it is.

6/10

A Statement Of Intent

2011-11-14T20:41:00.000Z

So, as you may have picked up on, activity here over the past couple of months has been somewhat scarce (let's face it, there's been more activity in a nun's knickers) and for this I apologise. To be honest, I'm not even sure who visits this blog any more in terms of reading what's written here, so I might be apologising to myself and nobody else, but hopefully there's a few more people than that.

I'm not going to start reeling off reasons why things have become quieter - I know what they are, and they aren't really anything special, other than having a couple of busy months where all the little jobs and bigger jobs and everything in between has had to come first to the point where writing here just hasn't happened.

My main intention is to try (again) to get into a more regular posting pattern here, potentially going for more succinct entries to try and increase the amount that are written. That's not to say there won't be longer entries here still, but as time to write entries is one of the contributing factors to this blog becoming somewhat neglected, shorter entries seems a logical step forward.

My secondary intention is to attempt to broaden the focus of this blog once again so that it doesn't concentrate solely on films and film reviews. Whilst film is an important interest, hobby and passion of mine, concentrating almost entirely on films has revealed itself as a double edged sword: it has allowed me to focus both the blog and my own writing on something I truly care about rather, but it has also meant that when I don't have as much time as I'd like to sit down and watch a film properly the blog suffers the consequences - not watching films regularly means writing entries even less regularly.

My aim for the blog over the next few weeks and months is therefore to increase activity by writing snappy entries on a range of subjects - "like the good old days", to use a clichéd but apt phrase. I can't speak for the other contributors to this blog, but I will also say that I hope my renewed intention here might help to inspire them into a similar blogging renaissance.

My intention is genuine, and I will do all that I can to make it into a reality. And if nothing else, this entry has broken my two month silence here, which is a simple but significant step towards reinvigorating this blog.

Review Round-Up | August 2011

2011-09-14T23:29:00.001+01:00

Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes (2011)

A highly crafted summer blockbuster with enough brain and enough heart to push it from being a very good film to a great one. The narrative is compelling, successfully combining the pacy style of an action film and the epic feel of a story laced with gravitas. One or two elements feel somewhat lacking in development, such as the relationship between Franco and Pinto's characters, but these are easily to forgive as minor issues in a largely enjoyable and skilfully related story. The computer-generated effects are incredibly impressive, seamlessly interwoven with the live action elements to the point where I regularly forgot where the CGI elements ended and the "real" features began. Franco continues to impress as a likable and talented leading man, and the supporting cast also do well. It is Serkis, however, who deserves by far the highest praise for creating in Caesar the ape a believable and authentic animal performance as well as a strong protagonist with depth and sympathy.

8/10

Toys (1992)

Too long, as the plot is stretched out to fit the running time of a minute over two hours; there are several moments in the film which feel like filler, and occasionally the film strays over to the undesirable side of self-indulgence. The narrative also becomes patchy and confused at times. The film's moral message (to put it crudely: fun is good, war is bad) feels laid on at times and things get somewhat schmaltzy at several points. That said, there are great performances from all involved, and the vast majority of the jokes and comedy set pieces throughout are successful and clever without feeling self-aggrandising. The film is a visual treat as well, with scene after scene providing an imaginative treat for the eyes. Ultimately, Toys is flawed but enjoyable.

6/10

Face/Off (1997)

An incredible action film packed with stylish, adrenaline-fuelled fight sequences and set pieces throughout. Woo uses many of the hallmarks seen in his previous action movies, but makes them seem fresher and more electric than ever. The main contrivance of face-swapping is a risky plot device, but in the skilled hands of Woo it comes off brilliantly. The greatest credit, however, must go to Cage and Travolta for two outstanding performances throughout the film. The way in which both men inhabit both characters that they play is superb and a delight to watch. Both men manage to mimic each other's tics and traits whilst keeping the film firmly away from farce and parody. The skill of the two leads raises this from being a great film to an outstanding one. One of the defining, must-see action films of the 1990s.

9/10

Leaving Las Vegas (1997)

Strong performances from both Cage and Shue, and the genuine chemistry between them, provide the backbone for the film's success. Cage in particular balances extroversion and high emotion well, bringing to his character a pleasing balance of humour and sadness. The narrative is simple, and becomes somewhat hazy in the second half, which results in the film feeling unfocused at times. The film's slow pace throughout is also a double-edged sword: whilst it allows for the central relationship between Cage and Shue's characters to properly develop, it also made the film drag occasionally. Figgis' cinematography presents a paradoxically gritty yet artificial Las Vegas, giving the film's setting an unnervingly unpredictable quality rarely achieved in cinema. Ultimately a very good film, although be prepared for some emotionally punishing and unashamedly graphic scenes throughout.

7/10

The King's Speech (2010)

A highly polished film that exudes quality in every way. Hooper's direction and use of cinematography is refined with welcome splashes of originality, and the script is tight and charming. The film has a wonderful sense of authenticity, recreating the period in which it is set with panache, whilst at the same time delivering a sharp and fresh contemporary cinematic experience. At the core of the film are some outstanding performances from both Firth and Rush, bringing to life the relationship between the two men with authenticity, emotion and genuine humour. The supporting cast are also incredibly strong; Bonham Carter especially deserves high praise for a charming and heartfelt performance. A truly excellent piece of cinema that deserves the high accolades it has received.

9/10

Night Of The Living Dead (1968)

Like all the zombie movies it has spawned in the four decades since its release, the film is at its best when dealing not with the dead brought back to life, but with the very human stories that are created through those who are living through the horrific situation. The actions and reactions of the band of survivors thrown together through circumstance are compelling viewing and a masterful comment on human behaviour. Romero's direction is fantastic, with cinematography clearly inspired by Welles and Hitchcock and even matching their standard when at its very best. The film suffers from a middle act slower and less focused than its opening and closing sections, almost as if Romero felt the need to pad things out a little, and as such the television report sequences become a little tedious. The final act, however, gives the film a harrowing, punch-packing finale. Ultimately, an entertaining and effective horror film which has stood, and no doubt will continue to stand, the test of time incredibly well.
8/10

The Addams Family (1991)

Not only a film that brings back great memories of childhood enjoyment, but also one that, two decades on, has stood the test of time incredibly well. The script and style of the film timelessly and effortlessly parodies gothic horror as well as lampooning society and culture without locking the film into an early '90s time capsule. The main cast are incredibly strong and never miss a beat, with Anjelica Huston and the late Raul Julia deserving particular mention for a pair of flawless performances. The plot is somewhat simplistic and the narrative a little thin here and there, but this is pettifogging as what the film does right vastly outweighs anything it gets wrong. Clever, entertaining and very very funny.
8/10

Addams Family Values (1993)

Considered by many to be superior to the first film, for me when Values is at its best it outshines its predecessor, but it also manages to miss a few more beats than the original film. Its strengths are similar strengths to the first film - Julia and Huston are again perfect as Morticia and Gomez; Lloyd is given more time to truly shine as Fester than in the previous outing; Ricci as Wednesday is superb; and Cusack is a welcome addition bringing her reliable wackiness to the antagonist role. The script at its sharpest is even better than the first, but there are elements which begin to tire - whilst the summer camp subplot begins ingeniously it eventually becomes a little tedious, and the segment where baby Pubert (best baby name in film history?) suddenly becomes cute always feels somewhat tacked on with no real purpose other than to unnecessarily pad things out. That said, just like in the first film, there is a huge amount more here to like than dislike. Overall, this sits well with the original to form a pair of excellent comedies.
8/10

Westworld (1973)

Sluggish pacing and decidedly unimpressive direction from Crichton hamper the telling of what is a genuinely excellent story. The first hour gets gradually more tedious as no character receives enough development, and whilst Benjamin and Brolin's performances are fine, they never make either of their characters sufficiently memorable. It is Brynner who shines here with a chilling performance throughout that, upon expansion during the film's second half, elevates the final act far above what has preceded it. It is clear to see that Westworld is an important entry into the action sci-fi canon, with obvious influence on future films including Terminator and Jurassic Park; as a film in its own right, whilst this is undoubtedly enjoyable it is also unforgivably flawed.
6/10

The Super Mario Bros. (1993)

For a video game fan, there is fun to be had in spotting the homages to the original video games; it is pitiful, however, that you can count them on one hand. Simply put, the film is dull and unimaginative, wasting one opportunity after another. Hoskins and Hopper phone in their performances, clearly under no illusions that what they are creating is worthwhile, and it's a wonder that Leguizamo managed to forge a respectable career after debuting in this turkey. The film presents a mix of action and fantasy which never sit comfortably together throughout. The film has retained a modicum of kitsch and cult value which save it from being entirely unwatchable, but with far better options in the video game adaption and action fantasy camps, there's very little point in doing so.
3/10

The Bourne Identity (2002)

Successfully gels the action, mystery and thriller genres with style and seamless excellence. Damon brings the right balance of gritty authenticity and action-hero audicity, making Bourne a believable yet fittingly enigmatic protagonist. The story is solid, and the action set pieces are consistently adrenaline-charged and entertaining with some fresh ideas presented throughout. The supporting cast are solid, with particularly strong performances from Cooper and Potente, as well as Stiles, Owen and Cox bringing pleasing quality to relatively minor roles and adding strength to the film as a whole. Overall, this is a thoroughly enjoyable and well made action movie that rightfully left its mark on the action and spy genres giving a somewhat stale subcategory within film a welcome reboot.

8/10

Charlotte's Web (2006)

Eleven years after Babe, the premise of a live-action pig and other animals talking with human voices is decidedly unspectacular. The voice cast is impressive on paper, and it's fun to spot who each animal is voiced for about ten minutes after the animals start talking, but it's clear that those involved are here for the pay packet and not to bring the characters to life. The film does not do justice to the children's novel from which it is adapted, losing it's charm and feeling decidedly sanitised. Fanning as the young farmer's daughter is fine, but the rest of the cast are forgettable. Ultimately a distinctly middle-of-the-road children's film.

4/10

Scream 2 (1997)

Slightly better than the original, with the returning characters benefiting from the depth already established in the first film, and the cast as a whole giving a stronger performance. The self-referential postmodern style is crafted even better than in the first film, with the discussion of the nature of film sequels being a particular highlight. Whilst the film famously suffered from internet script leaks resulting in last-minute rewrites, the moments of tension and fear are just as finely crafted as in the original, and the story has enough surprises and twists to keep you on your toes and guessing right until the end. Overall very enjoyable and well made.

7/10

Unbreakable (2000)

Forever destined to be compared to The Sixth Sense, overall this is not as good as Shyamalan's breakout masterpiece but is still an excellent piece of cinema. The story is compelling, if a little slow at points, and the performances from Willis and Jackson are fantastic throughout. Shyamalan demonstrates sharp direction with clever use of and reference to comic book style and mythology. Whilst the ending is perhaps somewhat anticlimactic, it also grounds the film - and the audience - into the leaden reality crafted by the director throughout the majority of the film. Ultimately compelling and well made.

8/10

Scream 3 (2000)

A considerable step down from the first two films in pretty much every way. The franchise now feels tired, with the scares pedestrian and the action at times cartoonish. The story, whilst keeping you guessing, is ho-hum overall. The postmodern film references are at times still clever, but just as often feel laid on too thick and very contrived with characters and situations seemingly dropped in and out of the film without any thought or build-up. Ultimately, whilst this remains in the same tradition as the first films, it never hits the relative highs previously seen in the franchise and at times even becomes somewhat clichéd - a cardinal sin for a series with its tongue supposedly firmly in its cheek.

5/10

The Bourne Supremacy (2004)

Greengrass is the perfect choice to continue the Bourne franchise, picking up the baton from Liman and taking the story further and darker with a satisfyingly more complex feel. Damon fits back into the character of Bourne with ease, taking the character to new heights stretching both his human and fantastical sides pleasingly. The action becomes even more impressive; Greengrass' incredibly authentic feel brings an energy to the set pieces, and the ideas for the action sequences are ever more impressive as the narrative fizzes along. Whilst his camerawork is at times bewildering in its speed, barely keeping up with what's going on at times, this only serves to enhance the way in which the story is related. Essentially, this film takes everything that was great about The Bourne Identity and does it just as well or, in several cases, even better.

8/10

The Queen (2006)

The performances from the cast as a whole are the key to a large part of the film's success. Mirren as Elizabeth II creates a multi-dimensional and sympathetic character, exuding both the grandeur of a reigning monarch and the genuine humanity of a family matriarch in a time of sadness and crisis. Sheen also deserves praise for a balanced and compelling portrayal of Tony Blair that rarely forces you into viewing him in one narrow light. Cromwell also deserves high praise for his role as Prince Philip, again bringing humanity to his portrayal of an often lampooned and caricatured figure. The film at times lacks flair, and is often cinematographically unspectacular. The use throughout of genuine news footage woven into the dramatised narrative works well, however. Ultimately an enjoyable and worthwhile film.

7/10

Monsters (2010)

A solid, well made and engaging film that is all the more impressive when the relatively tiny budget and professional cast of only two actors is taken into account. The effects are original and the tension and scares throughout are palpable and skilfully crafted. McNairy's Andrew comes across as a genuinely unlikely hero, and it is impressive that, for a character who at times is clearly not a particularly nice person, he gives a sympathetic and compelling portrayal throughout the film. Able also does well as Samantha, pleasingly adding layers to her character as the film. The narrative offers both a compelling science-fiction story and a pleasingly subtle comment upon contemporary social and political issues. Whilst the film slows down a little too much at the very end, overall this presents a modern, clever and restrained take on the extra-terrestrial invasion story which kept me hooked from start to finish.

8/10

Reviews | Catfish (2010); Exit Through The Gift Shop (2010); I'm Still Here (2010)

2011-08-27T15:21:00.003+01:00

Catfish, Exit Through The Gift Shop and I'm Still Here all have quite a lot in common. Not only are they documentary films, but they are also all documentaries that have had similar criticisms levelled at them at various points through their creation and release. The criticism focuses upon whether or not each film was genuine in what it purported to document. Whilst each hasproponents for both sides of the argument, two conclusions that seem to be arrived at by critics fairly regularly are:

i) that a documentary film not being "true" links in some way to the quality and aesthetic worth of what has been made;

ii) that the makers of a documentary not being entirely transparent about the levels of factual and fictional content in their film again impact on its quality and aesthetic worth.

Looking first at Catfish, reviewing the film's content is tricky as a fair amount of the impact that the film will have on its audience rests on finding things out as the film progresses. The film focuses on photographer Yaniv "Nev" Schulman who strikes up a friendship on Facebook with a young girl called Abby after she sends him paintings of some of his photographs. This online friendship soon spreads to Abby's extended family, including her mother Angela and her half-sister Megan, and the film continues documenting the unexpected directions these relationships take.

Since its release, the truth behind the events of the film has been questioned from a number of directions, including opinions from others in the film industry ranging from the relevant (Morgan Spurlock, most famous for making Super Size Me) to the not-so-relevant (Zach Galifianakis, most famous for playing an idiot in The Hangover). Some seem merely unable to believe that the events of the film could be anything other than fictional; others have analysed the way in which the film's events are related and the timescale over which they are purported to have happened, and concluded that the film can't be relating real life events. Nev and the makers of the film, his brother Ariel and their friend Henry Joost, have continually insisted that the film's story is completely true, although they have admitted to recreating a handful of elements after the event for the benefit of the film's narrative. For many, this is enough to call shenanigans on the whole film.

However, opinion on whether the film's events are "real" often takes over the entire view of the film. From armchair critics to professional journalists, the focus regularly returns to how truthful the filmmakers are being about how much (if any) of their film is fiction. This is undoubtedly a great shame, as Catfish has a huge amount going for it in terms of style and craftsmanship. The way in which modern technology is seamlessly integrated into the way the story is told is fantastic; using Google Earth to illustrate long distance travel and Google Streetview to produce establishing shots, for example, are simple yet inspired touches. The style of cinematography is matched perfectly to the tonal shift of the film as it progresses, beginning with a personal handheld style, moving to a more sinister quasi-horror style as events take a more unsettling tone, and then a cleaner, relatively more polished feel for the film's closing act. Schulman and Joost know their stuff when it comes to documentary style, that much is certain. The narrative is engaging and kept me hooked until the very end. Nev is presented as such an amiable character that you feel an immediate attachment to him and his life. And none of this hangs on whether or not what we are watching is true. Moreover, does it actually matter when the film is as enjoyable and masterful as it is?

I'm Still Here is, in almost every way, the counterpoint to all the things that make Catfish a great documentary. The film chronicles a year in the life of Joaquin Phoenix as he unceremoniously retires from acting in order to pursue a career as a rapper. And that's pretty much it. Phoenix's reasons for leaving acting are never entirely clear, other than boredom on the actor's part, with him essentially coming across as a conceited Hollywood brat. His rapping is awful, although his intention to become a serious rapper seems entirely genuine most of the time. Phoenix's meetings with P Diddy to get advice and try to jumpstart his new career move provide some of the film's most compelling scenes. The uncomfortable edge they have is comparable to that seen in Larry David's Curb Your Enthusiasm or Ricky Gervais' Extras, although never to such an entertaining degree.

Other than that, the film is filled with Phoenix and his entourage ordering hookers, getting drunk, taking copious amounts of drugs and generally behaving appallingly towards each other. Many of these scenes quickly become tedious and regularly unpleasantly uncomfortable. Phoenix himself comes across as highly unlikable and obnoxious to be around for most of the film. The way he treats those around him is abhorrent. By the end of the film, not only is it hard to care about Phoenix's struggle to break into the music business, but also that he left a promising career in film to do so. I just wanted him to go away.

Having insisted all along that Phoenix's tumultuous attempt at a career change was entirely genuine, soon after the film's release (and in what many have seen as an attempt to boost unimpressive box office returns after mixed reviews) director Casey Affleck admitted that everything seen in the film is entirely set up. Phoenix was playing a fictional version of himself the whole time, remaining "in character" during public and promotional appearances whilst the film was being made. Phoenix and Affleck have explained their desire to comment on people's willingness to believe everything they see as true when it is labelled as "reality". But this desire never comes across through the film, nor does coming clean about the manufactured nature of the film's events make it any more obvious. There is never a clear message behind the film, despite bookending the events seen with references to Phoenix's childhood and relationship with his father (also set up: the home video footage is fabricated and the man seen in the film is actually Affleck's father, not Phoenix's) possibly to imply Phoenix straying from his roots. This lack of clarity is not due to subtlety, but simply poor filmmaking.

Whilst there are moments that are made slightly more impressive by knowing they were set up (the scenes with P Diddy, for example, and an uncomfortable altercation between Phoenix and Ben Stiller), for the most part the revelation just serves to make Phoenix come across as even more self-indulgent. He has moved from a self-important actor failing to make it as a musician, to a self-important actor who apparently thinks watching him fail to make it as a musician will be entertaining for others. A film of this type needs to be shot through with either genuine humour or satire, and it is sorely devoid of both. Affleck too does not come off well. The revelation of the documentary's fictitious nature doesn't matter; either way, his directorial style throughout the film is uninspired, lacking in panache or storytelling know-how. Compared to the effortlessly stylish Catfish, in terms of craft this is pedestrian at best, downright amateurish at its worst. Affleck may be a highly promising acting talent, but based upon I'm Not There, I'm not looking forward to his next outing as a director.

Banksy's Exit Through The Gift Shop treads the ground somewhere between Catfish and I'm Still Here. The film begins by introducing Thierry Guetta, the man behind the camera and an obsessive camcorder user who stumbles into the world of street art almost entirely by accident, becoming the unofficial biographer of the underground movement. Guetta becomes obsessed with tracking down Banksy, apparently considered the most elusive of all street artists, and eventually their paths cross. However, events take a twist for the bizarre once Banksy sees Guetta's documentary and decides to take control of the film himself.

The main problem with ETTGS is that, very simply, a lot of what it shows you isn't actually that interesting to watch. After Guetta himself is introduced, a lot of the first act of the film is comprised of footage of street artists doing their thing. It's just that, whilst street art as a cultural phenomenon is interesting, watching people creating the street art just isn't as compelling as looking at the finished product. For around ten minutes or so, I found myself genuinely interested in watching Guetta's footage of the intricate painting and stencil work that goes into creating street art; but there are only so many times you can see shady figures spraying walls or putting up giant images of André The Giant or being questioned by the police before it all begins to merge together.

Things perk up a bit once Guetta has teamed up with Banksy. The sequence chronicling Banksy leaving a "murdered" red telephone box on the streets of central London is a particular highlight, as is footage of Banksy's infamous Disneyland Guantanamo Bay prisoner stunt, which becomes as tense as a scene in any thriller worth its salt. There is quite a bit of street art creation footage in between these however, which still failed to truly ignite my interest in the film. In many ways the film's running time of under ninety minutes is a blessing: had it been much longer, the less enthralling segments may have ended up as my lasting impression of the film.

Thankfully, the film's final third vastly improves upon what has preceded it, with the camera turned on cameraman (and by far the most fascinating personality on show here) Thierry Guetta and his own attempt to break into the street art scene. The result is a truly excruciating finale - a car crash of epic proportions waiting to happen that you can't bear to watch but at the same time can't possibly look away from, with a conclusion truly unforgettable.

It is largely the film's final act which drew skepticism from many, which is essentially the same criticism that Catfish received. Many refused to believe that the events of the film could be anything but fictitious, the greatest elaborate prank from the street artist who is almost as famous for his elaborate pranks as he is for his pop-culture-bending stencils. The makers of the film - or at least those involved who are happy to reveal their identities - have always stated that the story the film tells, and all the people depicted, are genuine. Out of all three films here, ETTGS probably has the most evidence outside the film to prove that at the very least a significant portion of the film's events actually happened. At the same time, however, it probably has the biggest reason for people to be wary of its claimed credentials. After all, you can't ignore that above the title on the film's poster appears the phrase "A Banksy film".

Essentially, these three documentaries together show that it doesn't really matter how candid the makers of the film are about the truth (or lack thereof) in the film when it comes to the quality of the film as a whole. I'm Still Here is the only film discussed here where those involved have unequivocally stated that the film's content is staged, and it is by far the poorest of the three. In fact, these three films are more revealing about the people passing judgement on them. Catfish and Exit Through The Gift Shop in many ways prove the well-known adage that "truth is stranger than fiction", but also that many people today would rather dismiss something remarkable as fabricated than stretch their belief to accept an unlikely truth.

Whilst I'm not saying that everything should be accepted at face value, there's being inquisitive and then there's trying to reveal the man behind the curtain for no reason other than spite. When I'm Not There was first revealed as a "mockumentary" rather than a depiction of real life, there were even those who poured scorn upon that admission, seeing it as an attempt by Casey Affleck to save face for Joaquin Phoenix. Essentially, the skepticism was reversed: critics claimed that Phoenix's actions were all completely real, and the claim of it all being a set-up was the hoax. To be that cynical must make life a constant struggle against disappointment. In the end, it is of course an entirely subjective decision as to how much of what you see in these films you actually believe. Just make sure this decision has no bearing on your aesthetic enjoyment of the film.

* * * * *

Catfish

8/10

I'm Still Here

4/10

Exit Through The Gift Shop

7/10

Review | Super 8 (2011)

2011-08-24T01:17:00.004+01:00

Super 8 is resplendent in its Spielberg credentials. Honestly, why shouldn't it be? When you've got one of the most successful men in the film industry executive producing your film, you'd be a fool not to make the most of it. Except Super 8 doesn't just make the most of it, instead going beyond paying homage to Spielberg's earlier work (think pre-Schindler's List and you're about there) to jam-packing the film so full of stylistic and thematic references to other films that writer and director J.J. Abrams too often seems to forget to put in any of his own film.

The story is straightforward enough. A group of school friends growing up in small-town USA in 1979 set about making their own movie. Sneaking out to film at a ramshackle train platform one night, the group witness a catastrophic train derailment bizarrely involving one of their schoolteachers driving onto the tracks. It soon becomes apparent that that's not the only unusual thing about the crash as the U.S. Air Force soon make their presence felt as well, as strange occurrences become more and more frequent in the town.

The film does have a lot going for it, not least the performances of the young actors. Child actors can often make or break a film for me, either proving such a fresh and pleasing talent that they alone become reason enough to see it, or grating so badly they detract from the film's overall success. Thankfully the group of young'uns heading up Super 8 firmly avoid falling into the latter bracket. In fact, their collective performance is what makes the first half of the film so enjoyable. Standing out slightly more than any others are Joel Courtney and Elle Fanning (younger sister of Dakota) who play Joe Lamb and Alice Dainard respectively. The companionship that grows between these two throughout the film is wonderful to watch, and whilst Courtney's portrayal of a pre-teen boy who has recently lost his mother is at times a little too understated to feel genuine, the chemistry between him and Fanning in bringing Joe and Alice's relationship to life is palpable and impressive in such young performers. Fanning throughout shows immense potential to become a future star.

Despite his intent to make a film paying tribute to Spielberg, it is often when Abrams is being most true to his own style that the film shines. The derailment of the train and subsequent crash sequence is spectacular, done without the grandiose nature of Emmerich or the mindless busy mess of which Michael Bay can't get enough. Abrams makes it authentic yet fantastical and always captivating, reminiscent of the brilliant plane crash scenes seen in another of his creations - the television series Lost. His handling too of the scenes in which the extra-terrestrial attacks is also very tight, providing genuine jumps; Abrams expertly controls the precise moments at which the alien lets rip, as well as how much of the attack we actually see.

Super 8 is also beset with flaws, however. After crafting a heartfelt opening act and, for the most part, a well-crafted sci-fi mystery with touches of horror for the second, the film unfortunately wanders into less inspired territory for its final act. Things seem to shift almost entirely from inhabiting an ordinary world where extraordinary things are happening to a highly cinematic world of sudden character shifts and drop-of-a-hat action sequences. Perhaps Abrams was hoping to kick things up another gear or two for a stunning climax, but it just makes the final thirty minutes or so of the film sit uncomfortably at odds with what's come before it, denying the audience the type of payoff they were undoubtedly hoping for.

As stated previously, however, the greatest problem with Super 8 is also the element that at times provides some of its greatest strengths, namely its referential nature to not only Spielberg's work and style, but also other movies outside his canon of work. You will notch up nods to The Goonies, E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, as well as Stand By Me, Alien and even Cloverfield, a film to which Abrams himself is linked through production duties. Whilst Abrams at times invokes these spirits of the past with panache, giving his film an air of quality and heritage, more often they return to haunt his picture highlighting just how it often has very little of its own to say. The alien presence is a prime example. Those who've seen Cloverfield may find themselves experiencing more than a little déjà vu, to the point of anticlimax. Abrams also invites us to empathise with the creature in the way Spielberg did nearly thirty years ago with E.T., but this is easier to do before actually meeting Super 8's extra-terrestrial. Somehow I just didn't feel too inclined to emotionally attach myself with an alien after seeing it feed on human beings, apparently without discretion.

Ultimately, Super 8 does a lot of things right, but these in the end are regularly competing with errors too large to ignore. Whilst there is a great rite of passage story for at least one of the young protagonists in there, it becomes clouded by an unnecessary shift to a clichéd action style and Abrams obsession with alluding to other cinematic works. Ironically, if he hadn't tried so hard to emulate his executive producer, Abrams may have got closer to what Spielberg at his best does to perfection: great storytelling his own way, where the action is never placed above the heart within the story.

6/10

Review | Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

2011-08-20T01:03:00.000+01:00

Your enjoyment of Captain America: The First Avenger will most likely depend on what you are expecting before you go in and how you view it as both an individual film and part of the creation of a larger Marvel Comics universe. Because whilst CA:TFA is clearly cast firmly from the superhero movie mould in terms of it's foundations, in spirit it doesn't quite follow the patterns you'd expect. Unfortunate considering I'd sold seeing the film to my fiancée with a sentence something along the lines of "you enjoyed Iron Man, so you're bound to enjoy this", only for her to claim ownership of the next viewing choice at the cinema in recompense for her lack of enjoyment as we walked out of the screen.

In many ways we have your standard superhero origins story: frustrated by his continual rejections from the U.S. Army due to medical health problems and general scrawny stature, Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is selected for a top secret "super soldier" programme due to his personality and willingness to fight. After undergoing the experimental procedure, Rogers is transformed into a "perfect" man, with abilities at the peak of human potential, and of course transformed from his puny frame into a towering musclebound adonis.

The development of Rogers' character in the opening act of the film is pleasing and handled well; it reminded me of the way in which Peter Parker is introduced in the first Spider-Man film. Whilst it means that the start of the film doesn't move particularly quickly, I was happy to accept it as a necessary element of the origins tale. However, it's in the film's second act where things begin to stray from what you might have prepared yourself for. Where Peter Parker began climbing walls and swinging through New York City, and where Tony Stark began honing his metallic suit and breaking the sound barrier, Rogers does very little in the way of superheroic activity. We get one action sequence following Rogers' transformation, and then that's it for a while. And whilst this turn of events is explained within the film's plot, it does take some of the momentum away from the film before things have even properly got started.

When the action does finally get going, again it's not quite what many will undoubtedly expect from a superhero film. The action is much more closely related to CA:TFA's war film roots than its comic book roots. The film is less a superhero film set during World War II, more a World War II film that happens to focus on a superhero. It actually feels quite different to most superhero films of recent years, and whilst this is not necessarily a bad thing, it does leave the film at times feeling a little awkwardly placed between two genres that don't often marry.

For all its "not quites", CA:TFA nevertheless has an awful lot going for it. Evans is great as the hero, giving a performance that fits with both who the character is and the time period in which the film takes place. The supporting cast are also consistently solid: Tommy Lee Jones is reliably excellent in his role as Colonel Phillips, required to run the gamut of feelings towards Rogers and his eventual alter-ego; Hugo Weaving somehow manages to toe the line between authentic and comic book maniacal villain with a strong performance; and Dominic Cooper impressed me as Howard Stark, bringing both arrogance and likability to the character. Only Hayley Atwell provides something of a weak link: whilst her performance is fine in many parts, I never found there to be nearly enough chemistry between her and Evans to make their romantic relationship anything more than hinted towards.

Ultimately, Captain America: The First Avenger works as both a standalone film and as a quasi-prequel to The Avengers film which is set to arrive next year (without giving too much away, the closing scene here could almost be the opening to that very film). It's a film that is likely to split opinion, as what some may see as bold, if not entirely successful, attempts to do something fresh and different with the superhero and war genres, others may see as unnecessary meddling to a tried, tested and desired formula. Taking a step back from (over) analysing the film, this is essentially a summer blockbuster made to entertain. And whilst it certainly could have entertained me more, it managed to do so sufficiently far more often than not.

7/10

Review | Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)

2011-08-13T18:14:00.004+01:00

The Potter film franchise is one that has divided many throughout it's decade-long tenure as one of the most successful film franchises in the history of popular cinema. Those who have wanted faithful interpretations of the books have essentially never had this, with characters and subplots deemed non-essential to the overarching story of Harry versus Voldemort unceremoniously chopped as if they had never existed. My own feelings towards the series have fluctuated throughout, with my main gripe being those films within the franchise that fundamentally become incoherent having had so much excised from the original source material. Alfonso Cuarón's Prizoner Of Azkaban, for example, has so much left out that some parts that are included are simply left hanging as nonsensical half-finished strands.

This was therefore my main concern heading into the final Potter film: would David Yates mangle things by leaving important parts of the final book out? His previous track record made me somewhat optimistic: Order Of The Phoenix, whilst having some elements removed, managed to tell the story of the fifth book faithfully by and large; Half-Blood Prince was less successful in this regard, however, and left me feeling unsatisfied; Deathly Hallows Part 1 posed a new problem - whilst splitting the final novel in two meant that much less is skimmed over or chopped, the film very much felt like half a story, again leaving an unsatisfying feeling. Deathly Hallows Part 2 therefore had a lot to prove - as a continuation and conclusion of the Potter franchise, as an adaptation of the final novel continuing from where Part 1 left off, and as a worthwhile film in its own right.

Thankfully, the film is much more success than failure. Yates wastes no time in getting straight back into the story - there's no preamble, no recap of the events of Part 1, and no information dump of exposition (something which I had prepared myself for, and was glad not to have to endure). This is a relatively bold move, considering the notoriously gentle and comedic openings of many of the previous films. But it works a treat, and we are soon back into what the Potter films generally do best: fantasy action sequences. Within the first half an hour we've had magical larceny, wand-based battles and a dragon. It's almost as if Yates is making up for the sluggish pace and decidedly unspectacular feel of Part 1. But it works, and gives the film a welcome adrenaline-charged start.

The battle sequences in particular are a strength of the film all the way to the end. The scenes are lucid and, for the most part, have a genuine sense of menace to them. One-on-one tests of wandsmanship are at times given short shrift (no doubt many fans will be left wishing Mrs. Weasley's showdown with Bellatrix Lestrange had been given slightly more screen time), but seeing as these are snapshots from within a greater, more epic war, Yates on the whole makes the right decisions.

The whole film, in fact, has a pleasingly epic feel to it that Yates has never managed to nail in his previous efforts. Images such as the Hogwarts Quidditch pitch razed to the ground, along with a stylish touch of a damaged goal hoop later being used as a giant's weapon, and Professor McGonagall summoning the statues that adorn the castle to protect the school will no doubt endure in the minds of the audience long after the credits have rolled.

The script is pretty standard Potter film stuff: key quotes and passages from Rowling's text make it through, but there's nothing too impressive with things regularly becoming fairly functional. It is the performances of the cast as a whole that equates to a large part of the film's success. Daniel Radcliffe as the eponymous boy wizard again failed to truly impress me - there's nothing particularly wrong with his performance here, but then there's nothing particularly right about it either. The main thing Radcliffe has going for him at this stage is that there's nobody else who could possibly play Harry Potter for the millions who have spent a decade growing up with his performances.

Rupert Grint and Emma Watson provide no further surprises; the former puts in the strongest performance of the three indicating the most post-Potter promise, whilst the latter's is charming but patchy, although stronger than she has been in previous films in the franchise. In fact, when surveying the performances of the young stars in this film, it is two others who genuinely catch the eye as talents of the future - namely, Matthew Lewis and Tom Felton, who play Neville Longbottom and Draco Malfoy respectively. Both young men put in strong, mature performances of emotion and depth. Felton has been a dark horse of the series for several films, but Lewis truly raises his game for this final film making Neville an authentic and sympathetic character.

It is the supporting cast who really make the difference, as the talent and star power on offer is simply overwhelming providing a "who's who" of the previous seven films. Big names such as Jim Broadbent and Robbie Coltrane give it their all in roles that have literally minutes of screen time, and it is the willingness of these former key players in the franchise to lend their weight to the film that really gives Yates' film a credence and sense of high quality. Ralph Fiennes' turn as big baddie Voldemort feels as though he has been holding back since his first turn in the role four films previous, and has now let loose in a genuinely maniacal, menacing and downright creepy performance. Praise must also be given to Alan Rickman as Snape, one of the most reliable talents throughout the whole film series, who gives this pivotal and complex character the swansong he deserves with one of the strongest and most moving performances seen in any of the films.

Essentially, In Part 2, Yates finally strikes the right balance of action, drama, emotion, menace and humour on his fourth and final opportunity, creating the strongest of all the Potter films at precisely the right time. The film is a great improvement on the sluggish and unsatisfying Part 1, feeling like its own entity rather than just the second half of a story. In my opinion it shouldn't go down as a truly great film, just a very good one, as the film is by no means perfect. But the spectacular battles and action sequences coupled with the brilliant star power on show makes this a thoroughly enjoyable and satisfying conclusion to a film franchise that has gripped popular cinema for a decade.

7/10

Review Round-Up | June & July 2011

2011-08-01T18:29:00.002+01:00

Firstly, apologies for June and July not having their own entries - no specific excuse other than life being very hectic over the last couple of months. However, seeing as the next month or so should allow me more time to write here, I'll make up for my neglect with a few individual reviews in the near future. Anyway, to get things back up to date, here's June and July's reviews.

* * * * *

A Few Good Men (1992)

In a film overflowing with brilliant performances, it might seem unfair to single out any individual, but Cruise gives one of the most impressive performances of his career here. It is Nicholson who steals the movie in every scene he is in however, proving yet again what an enigmatic and powerful actor he is. The story and script from Sorkin are both intelligent and compelling, and the direction from Reiner is tight and polished. The penultimate act may miss a minor beat in not getting to the film's climax quickly enough, but ultimately this is a film I find it very difficult to fault.

9/10

Wild At Heart (1990)

A film that demands your attention from the opening scene and leaves you gripped until the credits rolls. A brilliant mix of mystery, comedy, action and crime tied together as a wonderfully surreal road movie. Lynch's inimitable style is present throughout with some fantastically dark and mindbending scenes, masterful cinematography and captivating dialogue. The narrative structure is not as bewildering as in some of Lynch's other works, which affords you more opportunity to appreciate the top-notch acting and direction on show here. The cast as a whole is excellent throughout. Things slow down noticeably during the second hour as compared to the first, but the story remains compelling and Lynch remains entirely in control. Bold, enthralling and thoroughly entertaining cinema.

9/10

The Other Guys (2010)

Distinctly average, with a plot that neither excites nor interests. The jokes miss at least as often as they hit, and Ferrell and Wahlberg never produce the chemistry needed to keep this properly afloat. Samuel L. Jackson and Dwayne Johnson's cameos are the highlight of the film, and are also over far too quickly. Keaton is amusing as the police captain, but again is underutilised. Ultimately, whilst raising some laughs as it trundles along, this is nowhere near as successful as McKay and Ferrell's previous work together and overall fails to impress throughout.

5/10

Scream (1996)

Lauded as the saviour of horror/slasher films on its release, Craven's Scream has aged much better than many other films of the '90s but certainly isn't timeless. Campbell does well in the lead, and the supporting cast range from satisfactory to strong. The mix of horror, black comedy, postmodernism and genre satire is overall an entertaining success.

7/10

The Day The Earth Stood Still (2008)

Entertaining sci-fi/disaster romp. Reeves is fine in the lead (due in part to the fact that he needs to come across as mechanical and emotionless) and the supporting cast are fair aside from the constant irritation from Jaden Smith. The disaster set pieces are fairly impressive and enjoyable, and there are enough questions left unanswered to keep things intriguing with a sinister edge. If you're looking for a groundbreaking reinvention of either genre, look elsewhere; for an enjoyable Hollywood popcorn movie, you could do much worse than this.

7/10

She's The Man (2006)

Corny teen Shakesploitation that's so bad it's good. Awful on so many levels, but never takes itself seriously for a second. Cheesy enough that you can't help but enjoy it, with enough clever Shakespeare nods throughout to keep even the most ardent Bard fan grinning. Casting Vinnie Jones as a football coach who deplores violence on the pitch is a knowingly satirical touch too. It's no 10 Things I Hate About You, but it's certainly good fun.

5/10

EdTV (1999)

Often retreads very similar ground to that covered so well in The Truman Show, but with much less to say. The narrative is a little uneven; after a somewhat rushed opening, the first half maintains a good momentum, but is followed by a second hour that feels too long and unfocused, and in which characters are introduced or forgotten with little to no explanation. The cast is fairly solid, and this is one of McConaughy's better performances. Ultimately, the film doesn't take the opportunity to say nearly as much as it could have, but as lighthearted entertainment this is a success.

6/10

Gnomeo & Juliet (2011)

Enormous fun from start to finish. The animation is charming, whilst never of Pixar standard (but who except Pixar is?). The voice cast works well throughout, although there are probably too many characters as some do feel a little underdeveloped. That said, this is a knowing comic tribute to one of Shakespeare's best loved plays, with plenty of pleasing Bard references scattered throughout. Funny, well-paced and never given the chance to drag - as lighthearted animated comedy goes, this is quite simply great.

8/10

How To Train Your Dragon (2010)

Everything in this film smacks of being above average, with a few glimmers of excellence, but there is nothing - from the voice cast to the animation to the pverall concept - that stood out as particularly noteworthy to me. Compared to Dreamworks previous efforts this felt good but uninspired, and at no point comes anywhere close to the brilliance of which rival studio Pixar is capable. Undoubtedly entertaining and well made, but nowhere near a classic.

6/10

Pretty Woman (1990)

Gere is fine, as is Roberts who only occasionally grates, but this stays safe and predictable despite its potentially interesting subject matter. A film that ultimately has very little to say.

5/10

Due Date (2010)

Doesn't bring much to the table in terms of originality, and the gags don't come as thick and fast as they should for this type of movie; that said, this is still enjoyable, mainly due to Downey Jr. and Galifianakis' performances. Obvious comparisons to Trains, Planes & Automobiles don't really help either, seeing as no part of the film ever comes close to the comic brilliance of the older movie. Worth watching, but all involved have done films far better than this.

6/10

Review Round-Up | May 2011: Haiku Special Edition

2011-06-12T14:55:00.004+01:00

Simply because none of last month's films neither require nor deserve more than fourteen syllables to be reviewed. Next month: sonnets.*

Godzilla (1998)

Mutant iguana

foiled by Leon and Bueller.

Mindless disaster.

4/10

Head Of State (2003)

Rock's one-note satire:

One joke told ad nauseum.

Last nail? Obama.

3/10

The Pacifier (2005)

Vapid Disney dross.

Diesel's Schwarzenegger-style

half-arsed comedy.

3/10

How To Lose Friends & Alienate People (2008)

Neither good nor bad:

considering the talent,

this should have been great.

5/10

Big Momma's House (2000)

Neither brain nor heart

are found in this "comedy";

Watching's just a drag.

2/10

*I reserve the right not to write next month's reviews in sonnet form.

Review Round-Up | April 2011

2011-05-15T14:39:00.000+01:00

Wanted (2008)

A film that puts style firmly over substance all the way through. Bekmambetov's envisioning style of action that worked so brilliantly in both Night Watch and Day Watch again works well here, although at times it feels as though he's been pushed to emulate the style of others (particularly the Wachowskis) rather than truly put his own stamp upon this. That said, the style is more or less all there is to enjoy here. McAvoy fails to cut it as either whining office worker or superhuman assassin with a patchy performance throughout; Jolie is on action autopilot; and Freeman is clearly fully aware that the script he's spouting is lifeless drivel with a phoned in and forgettable turn. A couple of action disaster sequences of which Roland Emmerich would be proud are somewhat impressive, but the plot and concept riddled with inconsistencies coupled with a flat script leave this as a wholly unsatisfying film.

4/10

The Elephant Man (1980)

In this, his second feature film, Lynch as director again brings his unique cinematic style seen in Eraserhead to this film, and with much more success. The director's invasive use of sound is captivating, and the urban gothic version of Victorian London he creates is the perfect setting for the story Lynch is telling. Hurt gives an unforgettable performance as John Merrick, bringing both class and sensitivity to his portrayal of the infamous disfigured man. Taking into consideration how little of Hurt's actual face is available to him throughout the film under the heavy make up and prosthetics, the range and emotion that he is able to put across is quite astounding. The technical side of transforming Hurt into Merrick is also captivatingly real, leaving it no surprise that the film led to the creation and inaugural presentation of the Oscar for best Hopkins opposite him is just as superb as Frederick Treves, giving an understated and quietly emotional turn; the scenes between Merrick and Treves are touching and genuine, whilst at the same time managing to stay away from becoming overly sentimental. Occasionally a little slow, but overall an excellent piece of cinema.

8/10

U.S. Marshals (1997)

Inferior to its precursor The Fugitive, but still enjoyable nonetheless. Jones never misses a beat, stepping back into the character of Marshal Sam Gerard as easily as you would a comfortable pair of shoes, playing him superbly with the same cocky gruffness as in the first film. Snipes, however, never comes close to Harrison Ford's wrongly accused runaway; he struggles with scenes in which his character has to show any emotion other than anger, although he comes across a lot better during the film's action sequences. Downey Jr. does well playing against Jones, and provides enough ambiguity in his allegiances to keep his character interesting; he does lose some momentum in the final act however. The story has several ideas rehashed from the first film, but there's enough new material here to make it a worthwhile exercise. That said, the film is about twenty minutes too long, with some sections dragging and an ending that feels somewhat rushed. Overall, a fairly decent actioner which gains an extra half star because Tommy Lee Jones is in it.

7/10

American: The Bill Hicks Story (2011)

Hicks is one of the finest comedy minds of all time. As a performer he was never anything less than consummate, and this is clear through the presentation of the recordings of his stand up throughout. Unfortunately, the film as a documentary is much less successful than its subject. The photographic animation used for the vast majority of the film is effective in places, but becomes pedestrian, repetitive and even somewhat patronising in parts (do we really need to see a photo-animated Hicks sitting in the back of a black cab to illustrate him travelling to London?). The film moves very quickly between speakers over the animation without showing the speakers' faces or a caption introducing them, and this becomes increasingly confusing especially as many of the people Hicks grew up with all have a very similar Houston accent. Whilst I am a huge fan of Hicks, I found the film to be too biased towards worshipping the man rather than taking a critical eye at certain points (Hicks' alcoholism is given a balanced view, but his drug-taking seems almost entirely to be presented as a positive thing). Ultimately, Harlock as director never makes his aim clear, his film coming across as technically pedestrian and unremarkable. Hicks' performances deserve top marks; Harlock's documentary as a film deserves less than half, so things ultimately even out somewhere in the middle. Ultimately, American is worth watching as an introduction to Hicks' work and to see footage of his performances from the very start of his career to the very end, but if it's Hicks as a comedian you're after, you'd be better off buying a full recording of one of his live shows.

6/10

Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World (2010)

One of the most stylish and finely crafted films of recent years. The plot is incredibly simple, which works perfectly as the film moves from one beautifully extravagant fight sequence to the next, but can make things seem to lack focus during the more story-driven sections of the film. Wright's direction is some of the most confident I can remember seeing, bringing many of his brilliant touches seen in Shaun Of The Dead and Hot Fuzz to this film. He grabs hold of the fantasy video game style with both hands and commits to it fully, which leads to an incredibly pleasing feel to the film overall as well as some gloriously detailed touches that hit their mark every time. The performances from all involved are very strong, with several of the evil exes in particular feeling satisfyingly fleshed out after only a short amount of screen time. Ultimately a very enjoyable and well made film that will almost certainly only get better with age.

8/10

Brassed Off (1996)

A modern classic of British cinema, this is packed with strong performances from all involved - Pete Postlethwaite is predictably flawless, Stephen Tompkinson gives the performance of his career, and Ewan McGregor shows how much substance he could bring to roles before transferring to Hollywood. The script is charming and tight, giving the film a gritty yet comfortable authenticity throughout. The story is poignant, compelling and funny in the right measure. And whether you're a fan of brass bands or not, the way in which the music is showcased throughout the film is fantastic. Ultimately a thoroughly enjoyable and well-made piece of cinema.

8/10

The Game (1997)

A moody thriller which at times becomes pleasingly dark. Douglas does well in the lead role, and the supporting cast is generally strong. Fincher's direction is tight with a polished and atmospheric feel throughout. The story is ambitious, and at times is pleasingly cerebral; Fincher clearly enjoys leading the audience down one path, only to then reveal things to be in a differently place altogether. Ultimately, however, the film strains under its own complexities, and occasionally feels sluggish in its execution; the opening act particularly feels unfortunately clunky at times. This is undoubtedly an enjoyable film overall with some pleasingly tense scenes throughout but, when all is said and done, this never shows Fincher at his best.

7/10

Dawn Of The Dead (2004)

Simply put, this is enjoyable zombie fare all the way through. The performances are as good as they need to be, and the simplistic plot, whilst feeling somewhat thin in several places, allows for a satisfying amount of horror scenes. The action gets going pretty much straight away, showing an understanding of what the audience want and getting straight to it. Scenes dotted here and there have tongue pleasingly at least partway in cheek, ensuring the film doesn't merely stay on the same well-worn note. If you're looking for innovative cinema that challenges both its audience and the boundaries of its genre, look elsewhere; if you want a pleasing and entertaining addition to the zombie genre, this is for you.

7/10

Mary Poppins (1964)

A true family classic that has aged very well. Julie Andrews is superb as the eponymous magical nanny, and Dick Van Dyke is endlessly enjoyable even with his infamous questionable cockney accent. However, it is David Tomlinson, often overlooked, who provides the perfect counterbalance to Andrews; he never misses a beat as the self-important George Banks, providing a wonderful blend of caricature and authenticity to create a character of both simplicity and depth. The music throughout is superb, with many tunes and lyrics that have since embedded themselves in Western social consciousness. The film itself showcases a huge variety of cinematography from glorious multicoloured scenes mixing live action and top notch Disney animation, to darker, more menacing scenes of early 20th Century London. It could be argued that the film is a little too long, but engross yourself in the wonderful world created and it's unlikely you'll even notice the time passing. A cinematic triumph, and a film that will no doubt remain a cinematic treasure for decades to come.

9/10

Mulholland Drive (2001)

This is one of the trickiest reviews I've ever had to write: how do you rate a film that, whilst watching, you enjoyed in part but in all honesty had difficulty understanding large portions of? A film which you then did some post-viewing research on, understood a lot more (but certainly not entirely), and retrospectively enjoyed it more as a result? Well, I'm going to try. Lynch's cinematography is as top notch as ever, with his trademark uncomfortable and dreamlike quality present throughout, although here I felt it was more subtle and refined than in his earlier work to the film's benefit. The whole cast are solid, with Naomi Watts in particular giving a fantastic performance ranging from darkly comic to devastatingly emotional. Lynch's unconventional narrative structure, surrealist outlook and refusal to hold the audience's hand through the story at any point is undoubtedly brave, bold and striking film-making. It does however lead to several points within the film where I had almost entirely no idea what I was watching or how it related to the story, so much so that I became frustrated with the film at two or three points throughout. As stated previously, after reading around the film after I had watched it, I have a clearer idea of how many previously confusing elements fit into the film's overall story and themes, and I'm fairly certain I will appreciate the film as a whole much more on a second viewing. I have a strong feeling that when I watch Mulholland Drive for a second time I will want to review it again giving it a higher score. For now, I feel that the score I have awarded it reflects my view of the film after seeing it just once.

7/10

Review | Source Code (2011)

2011-04-14T13:37:00.001+01:00

Watching Source Code is a bit like tucking into a juicy sirloin steak with a tough, fibrous line of fat running through it. There's a lot to like there, with a great many mouthfuls to enjoy without issue. But there's also niggling in the back of your mind that unappetising gristly bit that you try as hard as you can to avoid, even ignore. You have one spoiled bite. Then another. You try and eat round it. But when the meal's over, despite all those unsullied morsels you enjoyed throughout, you keep coming back to that unfortunate thread of adipose material that left you feeling not entirely satisfied with what had the potential to be a really great dish.

Let us first, then, look at the meat. Source Code's story, and the concept behind it, is generally pretty good. Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) awakens on a train unaware of how he got there sitting opposite a woman who knows him as Sean Fentress. Colter soon discovers that his reflection is that of someone else, but before he is able to find out anything further, the train explodes. Colter then wakes up strapped into a dark capsule, where he discovers from Captain Colleen Goodwin (Vera Farmiga) that the crash he just experienced happened earlier that day, and that he is part of an experimental military operation known as "Source Code". Colter's consciousness was transported into that of a passenger's - Sean's - for the final eight minutes of his life, with the aim of Colter discovering who is responsible for blowing up the train in order to avert further attacks in the future.

So far, so complex. But Duncan Jones' direction from the outset keeps things moving at a pleasing and steady pace whilst at the same time making the whole thing believable. You feel that Jones really hits his stride when depicting Colter's experiences outside of his transportation to the same eight minutes on the train. The design and nature of the bleak capsule Colter inhabits, with its harsh structural features and intrusive video and computer screens, has strong echoes of Gilliam's post-apocalyptic world Bruce Willis experiences in 1995's Twelve Monkeys. In fact, Jones' influence from a wide range of science fiction and beyond - from Inception to Groundhog Day - is apparent throughout Source Code, and the film is all the stronger for it. The director takes inspiration from respected sources, whilst at the same time crafting a fantastical concept that is original and fresh. Jones' first feature, the highly acclaimed Moon, is one that has so far (shamefully) passed me by, but on the strength of his handling of many elements on show here I feel all the more compelled to seek it out sooner rather than later.

Gyllenhaal too must not be undersold. His performance as the former army helicopter pilot thrown into a disorienting and perplexing scenario of which he has no recollection of choosing to be a part, shows diversity that perhaps has only been hinted at before. His previous roles, from romantic drama in Brokeback Mountain to action hero in Prince Of Persia, come together in his portrayal of Colter to provide a satisfying and genuine mix of humour, tension and pugnacity.

The supporting cast also do well, with both Farmiga as Captain Goodwin and Jeffrey Wright as Dr. Rutledge, the creator of the Source Code program, giving strong and memorable turns. Farmiga and Wright are key to the success of the darker and more mysterious aspects of the film; Wright's continuous use of a single crutch providing a unnerving quirk to his character. It is Goodwin's appearances on Colter's video screens that provide some of the film's most enduring sequences, however; the extreme close ups on Farmiga's face make her presence intrusive on both Colter and the audience, and the methods she uses to help bring the disoriented soldier back from his trips to the exploding train - asking him to recall series of cards from a story, playing bird calls into his capsule - have an unsettlingly sinister psychological edge to them.

Unfortunately, whilst there's a lot to like about Source Code, this is largely where the good stuff comes to an end. Michelle Monaghan is fine enough, if somewhat forgettable, in her role as Christina, Colter's perpetual travelling partner on the train. But the fact that her character, other than sharing some wonderfully shot slow-mo explosion scenes with Gyllenhaal, never feels anything much more than peripheral in the film as a whole means that the romantic thread between Christina and Colter largely falls flat.

The biggest failing, however, is the film's handling of the human side of its story. Whilst it's hard to address this without giving away large chunks of the story it's fair to say that, whilst Gyllenhaal makes his character sympathetic, many of the more emotional elements of his story regularly slip too far into melodrama and become swamped in pathos. As more and more about Colter's circumstances in reality (as opposed to on the train) is revealed, this becomes more and more of a problem. The second half of the film also has an ill-fitting anti-war undertone with more than a hint of schmaltzy Americana, which simply feels stale and tacked onto the science-fiction premise at the core of the film.

Ultimately, as stated previously, there really is a lot to enjoy within Source Code. Its sci-fi credentials are solid, and whilst it never reaches the heights of Nolan's Inception, it sits pleasingly a few steps below in the ranks of the cerebral blockbuster. In the end, however, Source Code leaves you feeling as though it never quite fully realises the potential that its concept holds. A little less preoccupation with pushing a message onto the audience, and a little more focus on both the darker mystery-thriller aspects that work so well throughout the film and the ingenious science-fiction concept at its nucleus, and this could have been an excellent film. As it is, the flaws are there, and noticeable enough to make it just very good.

7/10

Review Round-Up | March 2011

2011-04-04T22:12:00.004+01:00

Amadeus (1984)

F. Murray Abraham is never less than excellent in his performance as (prior to this film) all-but-forgotten composer Antonio Salieri, consumed by a paradoxical cocktail of hatred and guilt over his role in the tragic fate of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. His aging Salieri bookends the film with panache, whilst his performance as the composer in his prime is a compelling and enigmatic tapestry woven simultaneously of idolatry and envy, awe and hate. Tom Hulce as Mozart begins the film as an unsavoury caricature, gaining layer upon layer as the film progresses as Hulce constructs a sympathetic and enthralling presentation of the tragic genius. Mozart's music is wonderfully showcased throughout, especially his operas, with fantastic staging and highly polished performance at every opportunity. The Director's Cut version of the film, to me, felt somewhat slow during the middle acts, with little driving the story forwards here and there; this is a minor niggle in what is a captivating, entertaining and very well made piece of cinema from start to finish.

8/10

Eraserhead (1977)

Often described as a nightmare on film, or the ultimate manifestation of male paranoia, Eraserhead is far from a comfortable watch. This in itself is not necessarily a bad thing, as director David Lynch clearly never intended to make an easy film to sit and relax to. That said, I at times found parts of the film had been made weird simply for weirdness' sake, rather than to enhance either the telling of the story or the quality of the film. The pacing of the film is perpetually slow, which allows Lynch's brooding imagery and style to fully hit home only slightly more often than it makes the film drag. Ultimately a film that I definitely appreciated more than I enjoyed, being as it is a unique and fascinating piece of art within the historical context of cinema. As my first experience of Lynch as a director, however, this was in hindsight almost certainly throwing myself in at the deep end; I would very much like to revisit this film once I've experienced more of his work.

6/10

Seven (1995)

The film which allowed director David Fincher to spread his wings, take off and begin to soar after having them cruelly clipped during his tenure at the helm of the famously problematic Alien 3. Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman are both superb - over fifteen years later and both men's performances are regularly cited as amongst the best of their career. The detective pairing created by Pitt and Morgan - the former as pigheaded Mills, the latter as stoic Somerset - is a relationship that is unwaveringly compelling and believable. Solid support comes from Gwyneth Paltrow and R. Lee Ermey, and whilst Kevin Spacey's final act turn as John Doe takes nothing away from the film, I don't think I'll ever become a fan of his. It is the film's final act that somewhat lets things down all round, relatively speaking, as its more conventional feel doesn't match up to the moody, grimy, noir-esque cinema preceding it that Fincher allows us to gorge upon. Overall, however, this is finely crafted and thoroughly enjoyable.

8/10

Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time (2010)

If it's a standard action adventure blockbuster you're after, it really doesn't get much more standard than this. All involved have fun with the sword-and-sorcery style swashbuckler, and the story, whilst tangling itself in a couple of knots here and there, isn't totally mindless and firmly takes a backseat to the action and set pieces. Jake Gyllenhaal earns his action chops with a generally satisfying performance as hero Dastan. Gemma Arterton is satisfactory in support as damsel-in-distress-cum-strong-and-independent-female Tamina, and Ben Kingsley is enjoyable hamming it up immensely as Nizam. Ultimately this never excels, but never really does anything wrong either, from the enjoyable yet somewhat reserved action and fight sequences to Alfred Molina's amusing yet largely forgettable ostrich race organiser (yes, really). This feels like a live action version of Disney's Aladdin on several occasions (which, again, is not necessarily a bad thing) and if you enter into the spirit of it wanting unchallenging and enjoyable 12A-certificate action that's light on depth then you'll most probably enjoy this.

6/10

Review Round-Up | February 2011

2011-03-06T23:26:00.000Z

Hard Candy (2006)

A simple story told chillingly and stylishly through two great performances. Patrick Wilson is excellent throughout; it is a pre-Juno Ellen Page who steals the film with a calculated, mature and genuinely frightening performance that sends shivers down your spine. The direction from David Slade is high quality throughout, bringing a claustrophobic edge to the film which intensifies both the horror and psychological thriller elements. The film's refusal to paint the characters and events it shows you as definitely good or bad but frequently an uneasy mixture somewhere in the middle is key to its success, drawing you into a violent, extreme and uncompromising world. Brave and powerful cinema.

8/10

Brokeback Mountain (2005)

The performances from Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger are outstanding throughout, with Gyllenhaal's raw emotion providing many of the film's most powerful scenes. The understated turn by Ledger, smouldering with intensity and suppressed passion, is the film's highlight and now tragically an indicator of a brilliant acting career cut short before it could truly take off. Support from Anne Hathaway and Michelle Williams is solid, although the film is at its best when Gyllenhaal and Ledger share the screen. At times the story feels a little too slow and loses momentum, and parts which don't focus on the relationship between Ledger and Gyllenhaal's characters feel a little underdeveloped at times. Ultimately a powerful film which, without agenda or prejudice tells, a fascinating story of two ordinary people.

7/10

The Prestige (2006)

Christopher Nolan's unmistakeable moody, unsettling and highly polished feel gives the film a luscious authenticity whilst at the same time remaining undeniably modern. Christian Bale puts in a strong and convincing performance throughout; it is Hugh Jackman however who makes the part of Robert Angiers his own, delivering a magnificent mix of obsession, passion and showmanship to make the magician a truly engrossing character. Michael Caine is reliably excellent in support, counterbalancing the increasingly extravagant and emotionally charged of Bale and, in particular, Jackman with a grounded and humble turn. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for Scarlett Johannson who appears out of her depth in a role that never really comes into its own. The story is regularly and pleasingly dark told through a grippingly mysterious plot which unfolds with energy, never losing momentum and keeping you guessing right until the final moments.

8/10

Intolerable Cruelty (2003)

An underrated Coen Brothers gem. Whilst this might not be the brothers' best, their unique take on the romantic comedy that also pays tribute to the screwball comedies of Hollywood's Golden Age is finely crafted and immensely enjoyable. Clooney never misses a beat as Miles Massey, and whilst I usually find Zeta-Jones decidedly average, here her performance is a great counterbalance to Clooney. The supporting cast are also top notch, with Adelstein as a perfect comic foil to Clooney and Thornton giving a wonderfully caricatured performance as oil tycoon Howard D. Doyle. Whilst the Coens' unmistakable style is not quite as apparent as in previous films, it is most certainly present throughout the film with some gloriously dark moments (a magazine called "Living Without Intestines" has to be one of the brothers' finest creations). The film also presents some wonderfully intelligent cinematography with an ingenious choice of colour used throughout. Often too easily dismissed as the Coens' "sell-out" or "mainstream" picture, upon closer inspection this is a comic masterpiece that stands proudly next to the brothers' other work.

9/10

Bubba Ho-Tep (2002)

Surely one of the quirkiest and most ludicrous ideas for a film ever conceived. A B-movie-style delight full of charm and held together by a unforgettable performance from Bruce Campbell as Elvis Presley. Ossie Davis also does well in support. The first half is slow, albeit entertaining, but this is remedied nicely with a final act that pulls out all the stops. The script is strong with some pleasingly philosophical sections that never feel out of place, as well as some fantastic comic lines scattered generously throughout. Go into this with the right frame of mind and expectations and you can't help but have fun and enjoy it.

7/10

The Fountain (2006)

Jackman shows depth and diversity in a challenging and demanding role - his excellent turn in three separate yet intertwined roles is a key part to what makes the film great. Beautiful cinematography and effects bring to life the three stories (although some are closer to motifs or visual concepts than definite narratives) with artistry and lustre; Aronofsky's deliberate ambiguity as to how, if at all, the three are connected adds to the enigma making the film constantly captivating. This is brave film making which demands your attention to grasp its themes, ideas and structure. An excellent piece of cinema provided you are prepared to give it the commitment necessary.

8/10

Memento (2000)

Now over a decade old, Nolan's first big budget outing is still striking and bold, delivering stylish and intelligent cinema that never dips in quality. Pearce is strong throughout, bringing an authentic yet outlandish quality to Leonard, and making the anterograde amnesia from which he suffers both believable and not gimmicky. Pearce is supported ably by Moss and Pantoliano who ably ensure you are kept guessing about their characters roles and motivations in Leonard's story until the end. Occasionally the film gets too wound up in its own premise, although Nolan makes sure things never become self-indulgent; this is a minor niggle in what is a brilliantly original and constantly gripping film that may still be Nolan's best execution of a non-linear narrative structure.

The Fugitive (1993)

The first hour outshines the second, where the pace slows a little too much, but this is a gripping thriller from start to finish with a handful of great action spots scattered throughout for good measure. It is Jones and Ford who elevate this from very good to excellent however, with fantastic performances from two Hollywood stalwarts both arguably at the top of their game. Ford's emotional and adrenaline-fuelled turn is complemented perfectly by Jones' US marshal entirely lacking in sympathy and hell bent on recapturing his man. Thoroughly enjoyable if somewhat imbalanced.

8/10

Following (1998)

Genuinely intriguing not just as a film, but as an early document of Nolan as a writer and filmmaker. It is clear from start to finish that this was made on a minuscule budget with an unavoidable "film student" feel throughout. Whilst in itself not a bad thing, this does however hand the film some shortcomings. The acting from the non-professional cast, whilst never terrible, often comes across as flat and amateurish, which in turn affects the flow and clarity of the film at times. However, Nolan's skills as a storyteller are as apparent here as in his later work, and whilst his skills in direction and cinematography are limited financially and by the cast at his disposal, this is still a stylish and very intelligent film which concisely tells a fascinating story.

7/10

Review | True Grit (2011)

2011-02-22T14:22:00.001Z

The news that the Coen brothers were remaking True Grit, the film that won John Wayne his one and only Oscar, received a lukewarm reception from many moviegoers most of whom are probably a bit older than myself. Why remake a classic that features one of the most revered performances of a Hollywood legend like Wayne? Undoubtedly still resonating for some fans of the brothers' work is their decidedly hit-and-miss 2004 remake of The Ladykillers, to date both their their worst film and only other remake. Still, the Coens' resoundingly successful venture into the Western genre with 2007's No Country For Old Men gave more than a glimmer of hope. This coupled with the fact that they would again be teaming up with Jeff Bridges twelve years after his now iconic performance as The Dude in The Big Lebowski, one of their most beloved films, made calling the success or failure of True Grit a tricky task indeed.

The film tells the story of fourteen-year-old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) who sets out to capture criminal Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin) who murdered her father and has since taken in with a band of outlaws led by "Lucky" Ned Pepper (Barry Pepper). She hires the services of US Marshal Reuben "Rooster" Cogburn (Bridges), who has encountered Pepper before, in order to do this. Also on Chaney's trail is LaBoeuf (Matt Damon), a Texas Ranger after the bounty on Chaney's head for the murder of a senator. LaBoeuf teams up with Cogburn, and despite both men's protestations, Mattie insists on joining them on the hunt as they head into the Colorado wilderness.

Any fears of the film being either an unnecessary or unsatisfactory remake are soon quashed. I almost put the word "luckily" at the start of the previous sentence, which would have been untrue - luck has nothing to do with it. This is purely great filmmaking from every angle. To call this a reboot is also untrue, as the Coens have apparently gone back to the original novel by Charles Portis in telling the story. Having never seen the 1969 version I can't draw comparison between that version and this; nor have I read the novel upon which both films are based, so faithfulness to the source material is also not something I can analyse. But the film should be judged on its own merits, and to do that is to find a genuinely excellent film.

The film doesn't contain a bad performance; a wealth of fantastic turns are on offer here. From her first moment on screen, Steinfeld has a presence, maturity and gravity that makes it quite mindboggling that this is her first big screen outing. She makes the character of Mattie her own immediately, providing a unique yet believable balance between the innocence and youth of her fourteen years and the quick wit and indomitable spirit of an adolescent who has already experienced the harshness that the world can present.

Damon, too, continues to show why he is one of the most reliably talented actors of today, bringing a stripped down authenticity to LaBoeuf that it's hard to imagine many other actors of Damon's generation being capable of. LaBoeuf's arrogance and enigma make him simultaneously repellant and intriguing and Damon's performance expertly provides the balance between these two facets of the character. Damon clearly relishes the classic Western heritage his character is swathed in, whilst never falling into parody or cliché. It's also worth noting that Damon handles to perfection the change that occurs in the way Laboeuf speaks midway through the film. It would be easy to turn the character into a mockery of his established self, but Damon incorporates this change seamlessly into what he's already created without missing a beat.

Deserving of mention too are Brolin as Tom Chaney and Pepper as Lucky Ned. Whilst both characters receive relatively small amounts of screen time, what they do with the scenes they have adds to the all-round excellence of the film. The calculated control of Lucky Ned contrasts wonderfully with the recalcitrance of Chaney.

However, it is undoubtedly Bridges as Rooster Cogburn who provides the film's most memorable character. The veteran actor never misses a beat, taking the character of Cogburn away from the one-dimensional grizzled lawman and imbuing him with a complex and enigmatic blend of mystery and candour. We get the impression that Cogburn is a man who has seen and done a great deal throughout his life, and what we see is just a snapshot of an immense character. It is the fantastic performance of Bridges that puts across a character of such enormity, whilst at the same time keeping him firmly rooted as an ordinary man. Cogburn is by turns intimidating, admirable, pathetic and amusing - it's therefore no surprise that elements of Bridges' previous Coen incarnation as Jeffrey "The Dude" Lebowski welcomely seep through here and there. It's hard to keep a grin from your face as you watch Cogburn barely stay in the saddle as he rides through the Colorado woodland drunk and not to let yourself see The Dude, just stranded in a different century.

True Grit doesn't simply get by on the performances of its cast, however. The story is genuinely gripping and, after a slow burning first act to establish Mattie and Cogburn, the tense and gritty scenes just keep coming until the inevitable showdown that both stays in keeping with the film's authentic approach and doesn't disappoint. This is also arguably the Coens most beautiful film with marvelous cinematography taking advantage of the landscape the story is set against and camerawork wonderfully reminiscent of the Western genre heritage. The quirky Coens-style moments are not as prevalent as in most of their previous films, but that's not to say it's not there. Early scenes between Mattie and a horse trader are vintage Coens; another where Cogburn and Mattie encounter a man wearing an entire bear skin (complete with head) will surely raise a smile for its sheer absurdity.

True Grit is one of those films that is simply a joy to experience. There is no part of it that is not of very high quality; nothing lets it down. The story may burn ever so slightly too slowly at the start, but this is soon forgiven for its deep, rich characters portrayed with universal excellence and the masterful control and artistry of the sibling directors at its helm.

9/10

Review | Love And Other Drugs (2010)

2011-02-10T21:09:00.006Z

Love them or hate them, one thing that is certainly true of romantic comedies is that you know exactly where you are with them in terms of characterisation and plot development. Of all the contemporary popular film genres, the rom-com is the most reliably safe. Directors and actors remain firmly on the rails to produce middle-of-the-road cinema that they know has a definite audience who paid to see a film that will offer unchallenging viewing and nothing coming out of left field. True, straying from this tried and tested formula can sometimes produce surprisingly pleasing results - just watch (500) Days Of Summer - but it can also hatch cinematic turkeys that can't even provide the vanilla comedy of their unreservedly formulaic cousins. And whilst Love And Other Drugs isn't a complete and utter disaster, it ultimately veers firmly into the latter scenario.

Set in the mid '90s, the film tells the story of Jamie Randall (Jake Gyllenhaal), a salesman for drugs company Pfizer whose success comes from being one of the first people to sell viagra to medical practitioners. After talking his way into shadowing an influential doctor (Hank Azaria) Jamie meets Maggie Murdock (Anne Hathaway), a patient suffering from early onset Parkinson's. The two quickly form an almost entirely physical relationship, but this soon begins to develop into something more complex.

Technically, I suppose, Love And Other Drugs is a romantic comedy-drama (or "dramedy" for those whose time is too precious to say two words where one can be portmanteaued into existence) as it is clear some sections are there to make you laugh, and others are definitely not. One of the key problems in the film is that of balance; when providing comedy the scenes are simply not funny enough, or awkardly juxtaposed with pathos that makes you unsure of whether you should be laughing or not. Equally, when tackling more serious scenes, the emotion can seem limp - and at times almost completely absent - and the film quickly becomes tedious.

The reason behind this imbalance is that neither Gyllenhaal nor Hathaway's characters are very nice people, which makes it hard to care much about the things that happen to them. Soon after we are first introduced to Gyllenhaal's Jamie he is promptly fired from his job in a top-of-the-range electrical shop for unashamedly shagging his boss's girfriend in the stockroom. Receiving a punch in the face for his troubles, Jamie promptly reminds his irate former employer that he's owed a significant amount in commission and runs out of the store, flirting with a female customer all the while. Jamie comes across as shallow and arrogant from the start, which makes it very hard to care about - or indeed believe in - his emotional journey with Maggie later on. Gyllenhaal has proven in the past that he can deliver when it comes to challenging roles, but here his performance simply doesn't provide the emotional depth or connection with the audience needed to make his character either credible or appealing.

Anne Hathaway too struggles to lift Maggie off the screen, leaving her a collection of rom-com and tearjerker clichés that largely come across as irritating. The fact that Maggie is suffering from a disease rarely associated with the younger generation would seem a fairly easy way of generating sympathy for her; instead, Maggie comes across for most of the film as something of a self-obsessed bitch. Granted, suffering from Parkinson's at such a young age can't be easy, but there are so few moments in the film where Maggie shows even a modicum of care for anyone other than herself that it's hard not to consciously detach yourself from the character entirely. As a result of this, the handful of scenes where Hathaway does begin to bring some depth to her character's condition are rendered entirely useless.

With the two main characters so undesirable, it's not difficult to see why the story becomes tedious fairly quickly. After initially seeming like an extended fling, Jamie and Maggie's relationship soon moves into more involved territory (after much preening and self-obsession from both characters), but this shift is both hard to believe and hard to care about. By the film's halfway point I'd lost virtually all interest in their relationship: when Maggie begins to self-destruct, struggling to cope with the hopelessness of her incurable condition, I genuinely wasn't bothered whether Hathaway and Gyllenhaal's characters stayed together or broke off their relationship. The incredibly clichéd rom-com climax to the film, which seems somewhat out of place following the relatively less conventional format of that which has preceded it, might have felt a bit more disappointing had my attention still been held at that point. As it is, I wasn't all that surprised - it just felt like the filmmakers had given up hope on the film a bit later than I had.

Supporting characters are either achingly out of place (Josh Gad as Jamie's brother Josh feels like he's wandered out of a Judd Apatow film) or painfully underutilised - Jamie's sales partner Bruce (Oliver Platt) appears to be a character with a story potentially much more interesting and affecting than that of Jamie and Maggie, but sadly is relegated to the position of underdeveloped side character.

Considering Love And Other Drugs is based upon a non-fiction book, it's a shame that so many elements in the film are lacking in either dimension or authenticity. Love And Other Drugs has all the ingredients to potentially make it a refreshing and original take on the rom-com genre. But with misfire after misfire in terms of plot and script coupled with lacklustre performances by the leads, this doesn't even have the quick and easy bubblegum cinema charm of safer offerings in the genre. If there was a cinematic equivalent of viagra, Love And Other Drugs would require a lengthy prescription, delivering as it does a consistently disappointing performance.

3/10

Review Round-Up | January 2011

2011-02-02T20:38:00.000Z

Caddyshack (1980)

A film that left me feeling decidedly nonplussed at various points throughout. Chevy Chase puts in the most successful and funny performance as the privileged and unsettlingly wacky Ty Webb. Bill Murray is also funny as the dimwitted Carl Spackler, although this is far from Murray's best work. Rodney Dangerfield's nouveau-riche Al Czervik is amusing, although over thirty years on both the character and Dangerfield's performance come across as decidedly dated. The film generally suffers from a lack of direction, with the story seemingly dropped without warning and then picked up again all the way through, allowing for some amusing stand-alone sequences but also some more tedious sections. Entertaining, and worth seeing to get some of those Simpsons and Family Guy references you've never quite recognised, but ultimately less than the sum of its parts.

6/10

Uncle Buck (1989)

A John Candy vehicle plain and simple, but undoubtedly a highly successful one. The plot's nothing to write home about - family crisis forces parents Bob and Cindy Russell (Garrett M. Brown and Elaine Bromka) to call Bob's brash brother Buck (Candy) to take care of their three children whilst they're away - and in the hands of anyone but Candy and director John Hughes this would be a very ignorable film. Candy entirely inhabits Buck, creating one of his most memorable characters, and owns every scene he's in, which adds up to the vast majority of the film. A pre-Home Alone Macauley Culkin shows why he became such a huge child star in the early '90s, giving a charming, cute and genuinely funny performance as Buck's nephew Miles. Jean Louisa Kelly as older sibling Tia also provides a pleasingly acerbic turn in an entertaining battle of the wills with her uncle. This is Candy's show though, and he truly delivers with a genuinely very funny performance punctuated with a handful of well-handled more emotional scenes. This might not be the most lauded of Hughes' films, but his innate ability to understand and bring out pure entertainment from everyday people makes this film a great pleasure.

8/10

Hot Shots! (1991)

Hot Shots! very much wants to join the heights of success and popularity that both Airplane! and The Naked Gun films enjoyed, and at times the humour comes close to the sharpness of those films. Charlie Sheen as Topper Harley plays things pleasingly deadpan, recalling (although never coming close to the heights of) Leslie Nielsen as Frank Drebin, and giving the film a sound foundation on which to build its ridiculousness. Lloyd Bridges as Admiral Tug Benson is also a surreal delight throughout. But although the jokes largely hit their mark, too often it feels as though you're waiting for the next laugh to come, and the story and performances are ultimately nowhere near strong enough to prop things up when the humour is absent. That said, Hot Shots! is enjoyable and entertaining with enough examples of sharply observed comedy to make it worthwhile viewing.

6/10

Hot Shots! Part Deux (1993)

Pretty similar in many ways to Hot Shots! with the main focus of parody moved from Top Gun to the Rambo franchise. All the things the first film did right are done right here too, and thankfully several of the problems seen previously have been remedied. There are fewer gaps between laughs, and the gaps that are there are shorter and more bearable. The humour is better crafted with well-placed parodies and references that draw from a pleasingly broad range of films - look out for nods to everything from Terminator 2 to Lady And The Tramp - and the vast majority of these are successful. There are also a handful of great moments where the film touches on postmodernist humour. A conversation between Topper (Charlie Sheen) and his love interest Romada (Valeria Golino) on the nature of film sequels is particularly well done, and followed quickly by a brilliant reference to another Sheen movie. Not a quite classic, but consistently enjoyable and very funny.

7/10

Dumb & Dumber (1994)

The film that, for better or worse, spawned a thousand "gross-out" imitators and successors. Few have reached the idiotic heights of Harry (Jeff Daniels) and Lloyd (Jim Carrey) however. Daniels and Carrey have genuine chemistry and give it their moronic all throughout, both as a duo and individually. Daniels takes to the role brilliantly, and Carrey gives arguably his best "rubberface" performance. The Farrelly Brothers get the comedy spot on, with gag after gag hitting the mark. Seventeen years on and this is still a complete hoot from start to finish.

8/10

Click (2006)

Incredibly patchy and seemingly unsure of what type of film it wants to be. Sandler swings wildly in the message of using his "universal" remote control, from crude humour (pausing his life to fart into his boss's face or kick a love rival in the crotch) to much more sinister, heartless reasons (skipping having to "endure" spending an evening with his aging parents). The sudden switches between these two extremes is sometimes so sudden as to be uncomfortable. The key problem I had with Click is the same problem I've had I've had with other Sandler films, in that I found it very difficult to either like or care about Sandler's character. The ending also comes across as lazy, clichéd and ultimately unsatisfying. David Hasselhoff as Sandler's boss is somewhat amusing, but becomes a bit tiresome before thankfully bowing out around halfway through. Christopher Walken's kooky performance as Morty (essentially Walken parodying himself) is Click's main saving grace, along with a James Earl Jones cameo in the film's most inspired moment. Not funny enough to be a comedy, not enough substance to be a drama, and ultimately far too preachy for its own good.

4/10

Twelve Monkeys (1995)

Fantastic performances from Willis and Pitt give the film the substance and depth needed to carry off the phantasmagorical story and cinematography. Gilliam's direction suits the themes and plot, and whilst the film occasionally becomes too entangled in its own concept, it never seriously takes away from the film's success. Both Gilliam's stylised presentation of the future and the present marry together well with a satisfying grittiness and authenticity that again helps to ground some of the film's more far-flung elements. Intelligent and bold film-making place Twelve Monkeys amongst the finest sci-fi films of the 1990s.

8/10

To Wong Foo, Thanks For Everything! Julie Newmar (1995)

"It's like living in a Tex Avery cartoon" Vida (Patrick Swayze) comments to Noxeema (Wesley Snipes) at one point during the film, and this is exactly the way in which To Wong Foo... should be viewed - an over-exaggerated camp-fest that should be enjoyed way before anything else. And viewed this way the film is a great success. The trio of Swayze, Snipes and John Leguizamo make the film incredibly fun and all three give very impressive performances. The film's more serious elements, such as a spousal abuse subplot involving Arliss Howard and a predictably excellent Stockard Channing, are generally handled satisfactorily, but thankfully take a backseat to the humour. The cartoonish elements of the film are its biggest successes however - Snipes' Noxeema teaching the local men to treat women with respect in a very painful manner is a highlight. Almost certainly not a film for everyone, but if you can enter into the spirit of To Wong Foo... with an open mind and a light heart, there's a great deal here to enjoy and appreciate.

7/10

Did You Hear About The Morgans? (2009)

Sarah Jessica Parker struggles to make her character light enough, and Hugh Grant's befuddled Englishman in America comes across as noticeably tired. Together they aren't any better with a severe lack of chemistry throughout. It feels as though director Marc Lawrence has gone for a style harking back to the classic romantic caper films of yesteryear, but this for the most part backfires as the feel of both the film's plot and execution is cheap and clunky. Sam Elliot and Mary Steenburgen provide a welcome remedy to Parker and Grant, although they can only do so much with the lacklustre material they are given. The film's presentation of rural America is occasionally amusing, but much more often comes across as clichéd stereotype. A mediocre rom-com which aims low and achieves lower.

4/10

2011 Oscar predictions

2011-01-31T21:36:00.001Z

The nominations for the 2011 Academy Awards were announced last week, bringing few surprises for many it would seem. The nominees in most categories seem to have followed what many predicted, and the general consensus appears to be that those who are nominated deserve to be there. With twelve nominations, The King's Speech is the front runner, with the Coens' True Grit pleasingly receiving ten, followed by Inception and The Social Network with eight each. Whether this will be an Oscar year of forgone conclusions or big surprises remains to be seen, but I thought I'd join the foray of predictions with my thoughts on how things might go in the main categories. You can find out all the nominees on the official Oscar website.

Of the ten nominees for Best Picture, I've only managed to see Inception, The Social Network and Toy Story 3 and I'm pleased that they've all been nominated. There's been a great deal of praise for all the nominees over the past year, but The King's Speech seems to be the film on everyone's lips. Black Swan might get a look in, and I'd be happy to see the Coen Brothers get another best picture win after No Country For Old Men in 2007. But with all the accolades it's already received, I'm going to go with the general consensus and predict The King's Speech will be victorious here.

Best Director is a tricky one to predict, as I've only seen The Social Network. But where is Nolan for Inception? Not to take anything away from the nominees, but it's a great shame to see him missed off. I'm guessing looking at the directors nominated that Inception was too much of a summer blockbuster to get a nod. Anyway, all the directors have been lauded for their work on the films here, so I'm going to plump for Fincher winning here because I've seen the film and the direction was ace.

I've not seen any of the Best Actress films (whoops), but I'm expecting Natalie Portman to claim it. As for Best Actor, again I've only seen The Social Network, but the buzz around Firth's performance in The King's Speech has been impossible to miss. I'm glad to see Jesse Eisenberg and James Franco in here, as both are great young talents who deserve to go far, but again I'm going to go with the consensus and predict Firth as the winner as it would seem foolish not to.

As I haven't seen any of the films for either Best Supporting Actress or Best Supporting Actor, I'm not going to give any predictions for them.

Great to see Mike Leigh nominated for Best Original Screenplay for Another Year (a film I very much want to see). Another category where I've only seen one of the films - Inception this time - and as Nolan seems to have been largely overlooked in other categories, I'm going to go with him winning this one.

Best Adapted Screenplay is a tricky one to call. I've seen two of the five nominated (The Social Network and Toy Story 3), and whilst it would be great to see the Coens win this with True Grit, I'm going to go with The Social Network to win this one as it's script was razor sharp.

From the rest of the categories:

Best Animated Film has to be Toy Story 3.
A shame to see Daft Punk's score for Tron: Legacy miss out on a nomination. I'd love Reznor and Ross' score for The Social Network to win this one.
Inception for Best Cinematography, please.
Good to see Banksy's Exit Through The Gift Shop nominated for Best Documentary Feature.

If I manage to see any more of the nominees between now and 27th February I'll be sure to update my predictions.

Review | Leap Year (2010)

2011-01-31T21:32:00.000Z

Since her break-out performance in 2007's Enchanted, Amy Adams' career has been both varied and increasingly impressive. She brings a comprehensive authenticity to roles, from a feisty and energetic Amelia Earheart in Night At The Museum 2 to the understated and discomfortingly innocent Sister James in Doubt, in which Adams held her own supporting cinematic heavyweights Philip Seymour Hoffman and Meryl Streep. Adams has proven herself as a talent to watch, which makes it all the more disappointing to see her talents completely wasted in forgettable dross such as Leap Year.

Adams plays Anna Brady, a successful career woman who mistakenly believes her boyfriend of four years Jeremy (Adam Scott) is going to propose to her. When she realises her mistake, she follows the advice of her father (John Lithgow, sadly only in a cameo) to follow Jeremy to Dublin, Ireland when he travels there on business to propose on 29th February as, according to Irish tradition, a woman is allowed to propose to a man only on this day. After her flight is diverted from Ireland to Wales, she finally makes it to the small Irish town of Dingle where she manages to convince innkeeper and taxi driver (yes, really) Declan O'Callaghan (Matthew Goode) to accept the fare of transporting her across the country to Dublin. Their relationship begins at odds with each other, but naturally things change along the way.

Essentially, Leap Year follows the premise of countless other romantic comedies before it. Anna and Declan start off as polar opposites - her a preened and fastidious city girl, him a good old Irish country boy - but over the course of the film they grow much closer. Not that I wish to spoil the film, but if you've ever seen a rom-com you can work this one out for yourself. In terms of genre conventions the film plays things absolutely safe and down the line. This doesn't necessarily make Leap Year awful from the get go, but it does set things off on a decidedly average mark.

Things soon go downhill however. Leap Year contains some incredibly "Hollywood" geography, as Anna lands at Cardiff airport when her flight to Dublin is diverted due to stormy weather. Welsh ferries also out of action because of the storm, she then proceeds to sail from Cardiff to Ireland. In a tiny fishing boat. Manned by one fisherman. Through a raging storm. Yes, really. To cap it all, Dingle - where Anna ends up - is on the far side of Ireland to Wales. Whilst I appreciate the film is supposed to be lighthearted entertainment, with an opening act as ludicrous as Leap Year's it's hard not to become cynical.

The "Hollywood" geography is soon joined by painful Irish stereotypes, as pretty much everyone Anna meets in Ireland apart from Goode's character appears to be a grizzled old bumpkin who spouts superstitious nonsense. Research into Ireland done for the film appears to have consisted of little more than sitting in an Irish theme pub.

Unfortunately it's not just the minor characters who lack depth. Both Anna and Declan have hurried backstories tacked onto them at separate points to explain why they are the way they are (Anna obsessed with keeping to plans, Declan just a bit of an arse) as if the makers of the film suddenly realised their main characters were a bit flimsy and decided on the quickest and laziest way to remedy this. Suffice to say, it doesn't work. It also doesn't help that Adams and Goode have almost no chemistry whatsoever on screen. It's never believable that the two truly hate each other, even less so that they could suddenly fall head over heels in love.

There are worse films in the rom-com genre than Leap Year, but there are also plenty that are much more enjoyable. Adams does the best she can with the trite and predictable script, but she has proven herself to be much better than this and hopefully will steer clear of this kind of tosh in the future. Adams' performance and the views of the beautiful Irish countryside jointly earn Leap Year an extra mark, but this is ultimately a film with ridiculous plot points, cultural ignorance and nothing new to say. If it's lighthearted entertainment you want, watch Enchanted again instead.

4/10

Review | The Aristocrats (2005)

2011-01-31T21:27:00.002Z

Making a documentary film about one of the filthiest jokes ever told might seem to many to be inviting controversy for controversy's sake. Upon its release, The Aristocrats did stir things up a little with one chain of cinemas in the US refusing to screen it. But the style and delivery of the film quickly demonstrate that the intention of filmmakers Penn Jillette and Paul Provenza here is not to directly shock or cause offence (although many watching The Aristocrats will no doubt be shocked or offended) but to look into the nature of comedy, of joke-telling and of the people who make their living in those fields.

The premise of the film is simple: to explore the origins and enduring appeal behind a joke known as "The Aristocrats" which has existed for decades since the vaudeville era. The structure of the joke, as explained within the first ten minutes of the film, is simple: there is little variation in the opening of the joke or the punchline, whereas the middle part of the joke is the exact opposite; it is the chance for the teller of the joke to make it his or her own through ad libbed and improvised description. And here's where the shock and offence come in: the intention of the teller is to make the middle section as boundary-crossing, taboo-breaking and downright filthy as they can.

Essentially, if you don't have a sense of humour, a strong stomach and are easily offended then it's likely that you'll get very little out of The Aristocrats. Jillette and Provenza's documentary consists almost entirely of interview footage of comedians, performers and members of the entertainment industry either talking about the joke or giving their own rendition of it. There are plenty of big names here (Robin Williams, Whoopi Goldberg and Chris Rock to name just three) but also many who aren't so well known, especially as all but a few of the comedians featured are American. The three Brits who feature are Eddie Izzard, Billy Connolly and Eric Idle (all of whom, incidentally, have very successfully broken the US market).

With around one hundred people interviewed throughout the film, and with humour being such a subjective and personal thing, there's bound to be a handful who don't quite hit the mark - Drew Carey comes across as smug and grating, and a ventriloquist act credited as "Otto & George" is neither funny nor successful at ventriloquism. But there's also going to be plenty of contributors who you will enjoy. With such a large amount of speakers in the film, in lesser hands the film could have become incredibly unfocused, but Jillette and Provenza keep things vibrant whilst at the same time drawing from the rich array of comedic talent and experience they have at their disposal.

That said, there are points when it's hard to judge what the purpose behind the film is. The opening ten minutes or so feel a little like a false start as we go straight in to the middle of George Carlin (undoubtedly one of the most captivating minds on comedy in the entire film) speaking about the origins of the joke without any form of introduction from the makers of the film. There are also sections throughout the documentary where people are talking about aspects of the joke or the ways it can be told where it is unclear why they are saying what they are saying at that particular point in the film. These sections make the film feel unfocused at times, and occasionally left me waiting for the film to find itself again and continue on a more meaningful track.

However, the good in The Aristocrats far outweighs the bad. The line between a comedy film and a documentary is expertly toed. The film never becomes dull, with many laugh-out-loud moments including regular fantastic renditions of the joke itself - Sarah Silverman's unique and unsettling version immediately springs to mind as a particular highlight. Jillette and Provenza never forget that they are documenters either, resisting the urge to turn the film into a lightweight series of sketches or clips from comedy shows. The film also succeeds in deconstructing what makes the joke successful as well as how each comedian's slant on the joke reflects their personality and brand of humour. Close analysis of comedy in this way can often destroy the entertainment within it, but once again the craftsmanship within the film makes sure this is never the case.

In The Aristocrats, Jillette and Provenza have produced both an entertaining and insightful look into the world of comedy, as well as a keen observation on the nature of comedy itself. Whilst it's not always completely clear what direction the film is going in, the ride is always thoroughly enjoyable. And although this is clearly a documentary about comedy, rather than a comedy film per sé, you'll find the laughs are consistent and the presentation pleasingly high in quality. Probably file this one in the "films not to watch with your mum" pile, though.

8/10

Hathaway, Hardy announced as Catwoman, Bane in "The Dark Knight Rises"

2011-01-31T21:22:00.001Z

So the announcement arrived the other week that the villains in the third and final installment of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy The Dark Knight Rises will be Catwoman and Bane, played by Anne Hathaway and Tom Hardy respectively. The reaction so far across the internet and elsewhere has been mixed, mainly towards Catwoman and Hathaway playing her. Many seem disappointed that Nolan has chosen to go with a well-known nemesis of Batman who has been portrayed more than once on screen already.

My initial reaction is one of positivity, and is in fact similar to when I first found out Heath Ledger would be playing The Joker in The Dark Knight. The choice of The Joker was criticised before that film was released with many questioning how Jack Nicholson's portrayal in the 1989 Burton film could be bettered. Then the casting of Ledger was equally scrutinised as doubts were cast on his ability to do the character justice. And then The Dark Knight was released and, at the risk of sounding cliché, the rest is history. Essentially, I trusted Nolan then and I trust him even more now.

Whilst Hathaway is more known for "lighter" roles in films such as Bride Wars and The Princess Diaries, she has also ventured into more challenging and quirky roles (her turn as The White Queen in Burton's Alice In Wonderland springs to mind in relation to those two adjectives in particular). Whilst she may still be proving herself to me and others, I believe Hathaway has the presence of screen and the versatility for the role. And not to hammer home the point too firmly, but similar things were said of Ledger when he was first announced as Nolan's Joker. Ledger was still proving himself; his most well-known performances prior to The Dark Knight, in films such as Brokeback Mountain and A Knight's Tale, hardly point towards his cerebral and dark turn.

In terms of Nolan's choice of villain being too mainstream, obvious or overdone, simply look at the critical acclaim that was heaped upon Nolan and Ledger for their reconstruction of Batman's most infamous foe following The Dark Knight's release and any fears should be quelled.

Anyway, I'm more excited about the other side of this story which currently seems to be being overshadowed by Hathaway's casting. I haven't seen Bronson, the film which gained Hardy notoriety, but he impressed me greatly in Inception and he must have caught the director's eye for Nolan to cast him in two films in succession. The only other actor who currently holds that honour is Batman himself, Christian Bale, in The Prestige and Batman Begins. The character of Bane also sounds like a fascinating choice allowing Nolan a great deal of scope and interpretation within his version of Gotham, as well as bringing some juicy potential character arcs for both himself and Batman to the closing installment. One thing I think can be seen as a certainty is that Nolan's Bane will be an innumerable amount of times more palatable than Joel Schumacher's abomination in 1997's Batman & Robin.

If the last two Batman films have shown us anything, it's that the Dark Knight and the world he inhabits are in some of the most capable hands in cinema in Nolan. He has my confidence in his decisions and will find me eagerly awaiting the next tidbits of information on The Dark Knight Rises whenever they should appear.

Review | Kick-Ass

2011-01-31T21:16:00.000Z

Kick-Ass is undoubtedly one of the films that caught, and held, my attention the most in 2010. And not just mine, being as it was decried as much as it was lauded at the time of its release. Mainly by those who write for, or those who read, The Daily Mail. But if experience has taught us anything, it's that if something ires a Daily Mail writer/reader, it probably dares to stray significantly from the middle of the road and is worth checking out. Both of these things are true of Kick-Ass.

"How come nobody's ever tried to be a superhero?" is the question posed by Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson) at the start of Kick-Ass, establishing from the get-go the high concept behind the film. So begins Dave's journey from being a high school nobody (and not even a particularly notable nobody at that) to becoming Kick-Ass, the first real superhero. Or so he thinks. Dave soon discovers through donning the mask and tight-fitting costume of a comic book crusader that, in actual fact, there are superheroes already out there, namely Damon Macready (Nicolas Cage) and his daughter Mindy (Chloe Grace Moretz), a.k.a. Big Daddy and Hit-Girl. And, of course, with superheroes must come the villains in the shape of mob boss Frank D'Amico (Mark Strong) and his associates. As Kick-Ass gains notoriety and popularity, Dave finds out more about those who he is fighting both with and against, and quickly realises that he may be in way over his head.

Matthew Vaughn, a director never defined by genre - his first two directorial efforts being Layer Cake and Stardust, films poles apart from both each other and Kick-Ass in both genre and tone - demonstrates his innate ability to strike the tone of the film quickly and accurately. The opening scene of Kick-Ass shows us a young man in a superhero costume diving off a skyscraper in expectation of flight, only to crumple violently onto a parked taxi below as onlookers gawp. A voiceover from Dave assures us that this isn't him, transforming the scene into something of a prologue to the story the remainder of the film will present, and establishing the key premise of Kick-Ass - it is most definitely a comic book film, but one that refuses to sugarcoat what it might actually mean to become a costumed vigilante by keeping one foot somewhat firmly in reality. Think Bruce Wayne in Batman Begins but without all the privileges of having ridiculously advanced technology at your disposal and, y'know, being a billionaire, and you're some of the way there.

This dedication to placing the superheroes of the film into a more realistic world is followed through for the most part successfully and skilfully. During Dave's first act of heroism as Kick-Ass, he holds his own for the first ten seconds or so before being promptly stabbed in the stomach and then stumbling into the path of a speeding car, earning him a lengthy stretch in hospital. Similarly, Big Daddy and Hit-Girl go against the usual superhero credo of "no guns", the walls of their home being lined with all manner of firearms to use during their crimefighting exploits. Nonetheless, our heroes still most definitely feel like heroes, as opposed to just some people who've put on outlandish costumes. We believe in Big Daddy, Hit-Girl and, eventually, Kick-Ass as credible superheroes. Vaughn's balancing of these two competing elements is tight and well-judged for the majority of the film, presenting a fresh take on a genre that has needed and received more rebooting than most in recent years. Kick-Ass is its own reboot and it knows it.

Whilst the film's tone and presentation are largely a success, that's not to say there aren't flaws. Vaughn, along with co-scriptwriter Jane Goldman, do stumble into some pitfalls of the action genre. Some of the supporting characters feel too one-dimensional, especially on a second viewing. Dave's friends Todd and Marty (Evan Peters and Clark Duke) become increasingly stereotypical "comic book nerds" as the film progresses despite admirable performances from both actors. A far worse offender is Marcus (Omari Hardwick), a former colleague of Damon who is given so little depth it is difficult to buy into the key role we discover he played earlier in the lives of Damon and Mindy. The subplot of Dave becoming friends with his high school crush Katie Deauxma (Lyndsey Fonseca) by allowing her to think he's gay also feels somewhat thin, and the conclusion of that particular story within the film severely lacks credibility, even by comic book standards. Putting a little more into these characters and plots to make them more than just cookie-cutter elements already seen in countless other films would have helped to seal some of the cracks that can be seen occasionally in Kick-Ass.

That said, you have to look pretty closely to see the imperfections. Kick-Ass succeeds far more than it fails, and considering how high Vaughn continually raises the bar, this is a considerable achievement. The action sequences are some of the most vibrant and well-executed I have seen in an action film in recent years, with the film's climax providing scenes that will leave you in awe of Vaughn as director and the cast delivering them. After an unsure opening chapter which feels unsure of its purpose, the film gains momentum as it progresses. It becomes bolder and more confident in its endeavour as well as allowing itself to become increasingly and pleasingly ludicrous, and succeeding on both counts. Case in point: Kick-Ass' magnificently over-the-top entry into the final foray will either make you say "Really? That?!" or "Best. Entrance. Ever." - most likely a mixture of the two - but you'll soon be rubbing your hands with glee either way. It's very difficult to deny how consistently entertaining Kick-Ass is.

A key component to the film's success is undoubtedly the cast. Johnson as Dave Lizewski barely puts a foot wrong, making both Lizewski and his eponymous superhero alter ego credible and genuinely likeable. Strong too is also satisfying as Frank D'Amico, bringing little that is new to the mob boss role but certainly making D'Amico his own. Christopher Mintz-Plasse as D'amico's son Chris, later becoming superhero Red Mist, continues to successfully shed the curse of "McLovin" that he began to throw off in Role Models and proves himself to be a talent worth watching.

The film, however, is undeniably stolen by Moretz and Cage both individually and as a duo. Moretz's performance is astoundingly mature whilst bringing enough childlike qualities to the character of Mindy/Hit-Girl to make the performance authentic, heartfelt and highly original. Hit-Girl receives some of the finest lines in the whole film, and Moretz's delivery of these with precisely the right amount of tongue in her cheek makes the character vibrant, cool and unforgettable. Equally Cage - who despite being one of my favourite actors has undeniably produced some fairly ropey performances in his career - is on absolute top form here. Damon/Big Daddy is arguably the character we see develop the most throughout the film, and Cage's performance underpins this superbly. Cage presents all the elements of Big Daddy - a devoted father, an honest man wronged, an unhinged vengeance machine, an Adam West fan (you'll see) - in an expert balance that only an actor of the calibre of Cage at his best could manage so perfectly. And it is when he and Moretz share the screen together that Kick-Ass is at its very best. The chemistry between the two is a delight, and whilst presenting surely one of the most unconventional father-daughter relationships ever seen on film, the bond between Big Daddy and Hit-Girl is also one of the most honestly believable I can recall seeing for some time.

Kick-Ass is not successful in everything it attempts. However, its successes far outweigh its shortcomings, and many of the criticisms of the film must be rooted around for to be found. Vaughn has shown that he is not afraid to set himself challenging goals in his films and that he is more than capable of reaching them. Kick-Ass successfully both parodies and pays tribute to the comic book film, but at the same time creates something of much more depth and ambition. I would go as far as to say that this is a film of such quality that it now sits at the right hand of Nolan's Dark Knight in becoming what all future comic book adaptations will be measured against.

9/10

So Long 2010

2011-01-20T23:12:00.001Z

Best film I saw at the cinema in 2010:

Kick-Ass
(honorable mentions: Toy Story 3, Up In The Air)

For one reason or another, I've watched films on DVD a lot more than going to the cinema this past year. Partly due to there being a smaller selection of films I've really wanted to experience at the cinema this year; partly due to time constraints, in that it's a lot quicker and simpler to put a disc in a DVD player than it is to head to the cinema; but also, partly for no reason in particular - the reasons I've just given are certainly with the benefit of hindsight, but neither was particularly prominent throughout the last twelve months. My selection was naturally narrowed therefore, but the films that I considered are in no way inferior to those of previous years. Toy Story 3 was very close to claiming the honour, as it's another Pixar masterpiece, rounding off the Toy Story trilogy faithfully to the characters and universe of the franchise that also proves that "threequels" and beyond can be fantastic pieces of cinema in their own right. Kick-Ass pipped it to the honour, being as it is a film of equally high calibre (but clearly very different genre and intention). Its triumph comes from its relatively minuscule budget and the perseverance of those who made it to make it a success. It's also not a sequel, whereas TS3 has the previous two films to help in its success. Kick-Ass is also one of the boldest and most uncompromising pieces of cinema of the whole year, or indeed any year. Up In The Air also deserved consideration for the great performances, polished direction and the uncanny balance of reality and hyperreality created within it.

Best film I saw (for the first time) on DVD in 2010:
Exam
(honorable mentions: Shutter Island, Inception, Blazing Saddles, A Serious Man, Synecdoche, New York )

All of these films stayed with me as something special, as films that chose to do things individually, setting challenging goals and reaching them sublimely. Shutter Island is another Scorsese-DiCaprio masterpiece with a unnerving Hitchcockian feel and superb craftsmanship throughout. Inception is one of the most original and ambitious films I can remember ever seeing, and solidifies Nolan as a truly special director. It took me far too long to see Blazing Saddles, but it's a genuinely innovative, unreserved and unequivocally hilarious comedy that will stay with me for the rest of my life. A Serious Man took my breath away with the Coens' masterful ability to build character and fly in the face of cinematic convention. And Synecdoche, New York is almost indescribable, but incredibly beautiful filmmaking from Kaufman, a perfect performance from Seymour Hoffman and is almost certainly the most cerebrally challenging film I've seen all year (yes, even more so than Inception).

So how did Exam manage to beat all these? Simply put, Exam excels in every single challenge it sets itself. It contains some of the finest storytelling I have ever seen in cinema. It shows that great cinema can rely almost solely on the writing, direction and acting and be a comprehensive success. And it inhabited my brain way after the credits had rolled. I was left exploring the world of Exam in my brain for a long, long time. A world which in many ways was only hinted at. Of all the many exquisite films I saw in 2010, Exam blew me away even more than the rest.

Best TV show that I saw for the first time in 2010:
Life After People

I didn't watch a great deal of new TV this year. I picked up Life After People cheap on DVD after being intrigued by the idea. And it's a very entertaining watch. It mixes the ludicrous with the highly technical in a way that's never really appealed to me before. It's almost certainly a guilty pleasure, but sometimes that's exactly what you need. If you've never seen/heard of Life After People I urge you to give it a go. If nothing else, you'll have a laugh - whether at its entertainment factor or at its expense.

Best TV show that I continued to watch in 2010:

Lost
(honorable mention: Doctor Who)

Doctor Who went from strength to strength with a fantastic send-off for Tenth Doctor Tennant at New Year followed by a series of equal if not greater success introducing the team of Stephen Moffat taking over as executive producer and new Doctor Matt Smith. The series felt rejuvenated after a quiet year in 2009, with Smith making The Doctor entirely his own whilst at the same time bringing just as much warmth and vibrance to the role as was recognisable in Tennant's incarnation, and Moffat introducing a slightly darker tone to the series overall, countering the slightly overindulgent and flabby feel that previous executive producer Russell T. Davies had delivered towards the end of his tenure.

But I just cannot ignore Lost's final season. Not as successful overall as Season 5 (especially on a repeated viewing), but keeping things fresh and innovative with the "flash-sideways" timeline whilst at the same time providing enough answers (with "enough" being the pivotal word) to bring the series to a satisfying and fitting conclusion. Many were unhappy, but when a series generates as much intricate mythology and fan theorising it's an inevitability. Personally I loved it. Lost is the best series from the first decade of the 21st Century, and the best bar one (The West Wing, if you're interested) that I've ever seen.

Best singles of 2010:
DJ Fresh - Gold Dust

Cee-Lo Green - Fuck You

Magnetic Man - I Need Air

Duck Sauce - Barbra Streisand

Best albums of 2010:

Sadly, I don't have even one best album of 2010. The new albums from The Chemical Brothers, Scissor Sisters, Fatboy Slim & David Byrne, Daft Punk and Royksopp may have been candidates if I had got round to getting hold of them. Equally, I've briefly enjoyed new albums from Magnetic Man, Richard Cheese, Gorillaz and Goldfrapp this year, but don't feel I've listened to them enough to warrant judging any of them as best albums. In the past, none of these albums would have slipped through my fingers, all receiving at least a few listens each. Unfortunately it seems to have been my enthusiasm for music that has fallen by the wayside this year due to increasing demand of my time for other unavoidable commitments, and it's something that even as I type leaves me feeling quite disappointed in myself. All I can do is endeavour to significantly improve upon this in 2011.

A thin year in some ways (I haven't been to see any live shows for a good couple of years now), and I hope that 2011 is a year where I can pick up some interests that have dropped off slightly in recent times. Whether that is actually achievable remains to be seen, but the intention has now at least been stated and here's hoping it will be fulfilled, at least in part.

Telf's (embarassingly meagre) Filmography 2010

2011-01-09T22:33:00.001Z

Toy Story 3
Keeps up quality of previous offerings. Well told story that will appeal to all and impeccable presentation. Funny and moving at times, and never dull.
9/10

Inception
Brilliantly original and uncompromising.
10/10

Shrek Forever After
Lacking in ideas. Very few entertaining moments - hanging off its previous incarnations like an old sitcom.
3/10

Despicable Me
Funnier and cuter than Shrek, but really very kid-oriented.
5/10

The Other Guys
Occasional moments that work, but mostly just feels like everyone involved is just treading water.
5/10

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
Pushes so deep into the culture that it is trying to reference that it sometimes loses its grip on the plot. Mostly very entertaining, though.
9/10

Films I would like to have seen:
Genuinely too many to mention...

BamBi's Filmography 2010

2011-01-01T21:40:00.007Z

Simple really. Every film released in 2010 that I've seen, reviewed in no more than twenty five words. See 2009's, 2008's and 2007's editions for reference.

Released in 2010:

Up In The Air

Very difficult to fault. Clooney, Farmiga and Kendrick collectively barely put a foot wrong. A sharply written and directed film of very high quality.

9/10

Percy Jackson & The Lightning Thief

Too slow, with flat characters and decidedly average execution. Feels like it's being forced into filling the Potter-shaped hole on the cinematic horizon.

5/10

Alice In Wonderland

Burton and Carroll should have been the perfect combination. Instead we get a "lite" version of both and a storyline reject from Narnia.

6/10

Valentine's Day

Think Love, Actually set in America on February 14th and you're pretty much there. Cardboard cut-outs tumble through the paper-thin story. Yawn.

3/10

Kick-Ass

A tour de force of action and superhero cinema. Original, highly polished, pleasingly gritty yet authentically comic book in style. The cast are collectively superb.

9/10

Whip It

Page impresses again, counterpointed superbly by Harden, Wiig and Lewis. Indie style direction from Barrymore gives this a satisfyingly rough finish. Well made, very enjoyable.

7/10

Iron Man 2

Downey Jr. shines again, Cheadle, Rourke and Rockwell are welcome additions. A simple yet effective story allows the characters and action to successfully drive this.

8/10

Sex And The City 2

Self-indulgent, too long and barely a storyline in sight. A generous helping of cultural ignorance makes sure this one goes down painfully and uncomfortably.

3/10

Toy Story 3

Pixar at their charming, beautiful best. Masterful, with genuine humour and emotion in perfect balance. The ideal swan song for a loved and respected franchise.

9/10

Precious: Based On The Novel Push By Sapphire

One part emotionally uplifting to three parts punishing. Mo'Nique stands out from a wealth of strong performances. Powerful and well-crafted. Steel yourself before watching.

8/10

I Love You Philip Morris

Carrey is strong in the lead, and McGregor provides solid, understated support. Unfocused and meandering at times, but ultimately funny, entertaining and well made.

7/10

Exam

Outstanding human drama that is cerebral, tense and enthralling. Sets the bar high and exceeds it continuously. Virtually flawless. My film of the year.

10/10

Shutter Island

Tense, psychological and engrossing. Scorsese and DiCaprio make a perfect pairing once again. Classically Hitchcockian with a charmingly modern finish. High quality cinema.

9/10

The Social Network

Sorkin's tight, sharp writing marries brilliantly with Fincher's raw, moody direction. Eisenberg steals every scene; Garfield and Timberlake are winningly strong in support.

8/10

Four Lions

A disconcerting, albeit satisfying, mix of realism and farce. Despite somewhat lacking focus, Morris' searing humour and pitch-perfect satire are as sharp as ever.

8/10

Hot Tub Time Machine

A simplistically ludicrous plot allows plenty of genuine humour. Cusack is a strong and agreeable lead. Knows what it wants to be, and succeeds.

8/10

Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part 1

Better and darker than recent Potter outings, but still pedestrian from Yates and most of the cast. Half a film, so ultimately imbalanced and unsatisfying.

6/10

The Lookout

Great heist film that presents familiar genre elements well yet adds enough originality to the mix to elevate it further. Gordon-Levitt is superb.

8/10

The Tourist

Depp and Jolie do well, but this is plodding with an ending that renders the story ludicrous. Especially disappointing considering this could have been excellent.

5/10

Inception

Brave cinema, captivating from start to finish. Pleasingly gritty, breathtakingly fantastical cinematography. A wealth of outstanding performances from the year's strongest cast. Difficult to fault.

9/10

And those from 2010 I missed...

A Prophet

A Town Called Panic

Bitch Slap

Buried

Catfish

Creation

Daybreakers

Death At A Funeral

Dinner For Schmucks

The Disappearance Of Alice Creed
Exit Through The Gift Shop
The Expendables

Green Zone

The Human Centipede (First Sequence)

The Killer Inside Me

Lebanon

Machete

Megamind

Predators

Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time

Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale

Red

Rosencrantz And Guildenstern Are Undead

Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World

The Town

Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives

Valhalla Rising

The Wolfman

Youth In Revolt

And to finish, my top five films first watched (but not released) in 2010

A Serious Man

Adventureland

Blazing Saddles

The King Of Kong: A Fistful Of Quarters

Synecdoche, New York

Not the most film-packed year compared to previous lists, but I've managed to see quite a few films from previous years on DVD or online this year - I saw nine of the twenty one films I listed as ones I missed at the end of my 2009 list - so overall I'm satisfied. 2011 looks to be an interesting year in terms of cinema - lots of franchises continuing or finishing (Transformers 3, Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, HP7 Part 2) so I'm hoping there'll be plenty of quality to fill in the gaps between the box office pleasers.

Top 8 Rubbish Christmas Songs

2010-12-23T12:13:00.002Z

8. Basshunter - Jingle Bells

Obviously I have nothing against Jingle Bells. I do have something against it being turned into yet another piece of chart trance shit. This doesn't even have a hint of tongue in cheek about it.

7. Ronan Keating & Moya Brennan - Fairytale Of New York

When the original is so good, why would you bother to remake this Christmas song? Especially in such a bland, sanitised way. It's always going to be compared to the original, and when this actually makes the song sound like nothing special that's never going to be a good thing. Awful, but more importantly, totally pointless. This is what The Pogues episode of Glee would sound like.

6. Cliff Richard - Millennium Prayer

Cheap and nasty Y2K cash-in from Cliff Richard. He didn't write the music (it's "traditional", so Cliff didn't even have to pay to use it) or the words (those would be God's, and I'm sure he didn't ask for any royalties either). Fair enough it was for charity, but that doesn't stop it being pants. Still rears its ugly head around Christmas time every so often. Would be higher if it had more exposure today.

5. John & Yoko And The Plastic Ono Band With The Harlem Community Choir - Happy Xmas (War Is Over)

A controversial choice I suppose, but I always skip this when it crops up on my Christmas compilations. I have my reasons. For one, it's just really dreary. Slow, almost dirge-like in places. Second, it's pretty depressing. I'm sorry, but I don't want to think about war at Christmas. I can think about how terrible war is and what I can do to help the rest of the year, but I don't want two hippies preaching at me through a Christmas song about it. Band Aid did it the right way in the '80s, but Lennon misses the mark here. Thirdly, Yoko Ono "sings" on it, and any Christmas song warbling all over it can just bugger off as far as I'm concerned.

4. Robson & Jerome - I Believe (Click here)

Awful, just awful. The only reason this isn't higher is that it seems to have sunk without a trace in recent years (along with R&J's music careers), but it's still cropped up on a few Crimbo compilations in its time. The only claim this can have to being a Christmas song is having a bloke dressed as Father Christmas in the video and Robson and/or Jerome stating the fact that it's meant to be Christmas. It wasn't even Christmas number 1.

3. Frankie Goes To Hollywood - The Power Of Love

Nothing to do with Christmas, apart from the tenuous link that Christmas is a time for love. I'm pretty sure this one only crops up on Christmas compilations because of the music video, which is Christmassy, although apparently only because the song was released near the festive season. Also, it's dreary and just boring, and that's not what I look for in my Christmas songs.

2. East 17 - Stay Another Day

Crappy boy band ballad sung by four blokes who clearly had a hand in the creation of chav culture. No part of the song has anything to do with Christmas in any way. The only thing that links the song to Christmas is that it happened to be 1994's Christmas number 1. And no, putting on parkas, shoving some snow over the top of your music video and some tubular bells at the end of your record doesn't change that. I really really wanted to put this as my top pick, but I just couldn't put the atrocity that's there anywhere else...

1. The Wombles with Roy Wood - I Wish It Could Be A Wombling Merry Christmas Every Day

A "mash up" which essentially destroys two 1970s Christmas songs at the same time: one that's pretty forgettable (A Wombling Merry Christmas by, well, The Wombles surprisingly); and, much more distressingly, one that's undoubtedly a modern Christmas standard - Wizzard's I Wish It Could Be Christmas Every Day. Have a listen if you've never heard it before. Starts harmlessly, if pointlessly, enough. Roy Wood sounds like someone doing a bad karaoke version of his own song, which is pretty pathetic. But then we get to the chorus. Oh dear lord, the chorus! THE CHORUS!! How did anyone hear that travesty of bodged lyrics and crowbarred extra notes that simply don't fit, and think this was worthy of releasing? It's just dire. It makes my skin crawl. This one has so much wrong with it that it beat East 17 to the top of my list - that's how much I hate this one.

Christmas Movie Haiku

2010-12-23T11:00:00.001Z

Home Alone

Culkin foils the thieves;

But the true miracle is

Pesci doesn't swear.

Jingle All The Way

Festive comedy:

Arnold Schwarzenegger stars...

Festive comedy?

Love, Actually

Christmas equals love

As long as you're white and straight.

Merry Middle Class!

***

The Holiday

Transatlantic love

Standard sappy rom-com fare...

What the fuck - Jack Black?!

****

Elf

Ferrell's tall and thinks

He's an elf but he isn't.

That's the only joke.

*****

The Muppet Christmas Carol

Caine sings with puppets?

A blue furry Charles Dickens?

Sharp retelling? Yes!

******

'00 Ten Part Four: "This Is England" (2007)

2010-12-19T12:55:00.003Z

It's through sheer chance that, since rewatching This Is England for this entry into my list, I've also watched the TV drama serial-cum-sequel This Is England '86. Although I don't want to take up a great deal of space reviewing the series rather than the film, it does give a useful launch pad for the reasons why I've included This Is England in my ten.

Whilst one of the most emotionally pummelling and, at times, truly gruelling TV series I have ever watched, This Is England '86 is also one of the most rewarding, enjoyable and well crafted pieces of television I have seen for some time. Its overwhelming success was only possible from the outset, however, due to the original film from which it came. Whilst my admiration of TIE was already secured before I watched the TV sequel, watching the series served to highlight even further all the things that really are special about the original film.

Essentially, the series would not have worked if the film which it follows wasn't so brilliant. That's not to take anything away from the series, and also makes it seem as though it's simply a cash-in by TIE writer and director Shane Meadows, which it isn't. Meadows himself said that he wanted to make '86 because of the wealth of opportunities and untold stories that the film left behind. Again, that's not a criticism of the film, being as it is a tight and masterfully crafted piece with a definite beginning, middle and end. The two complement each other beautifully, but the fact remains that '86 could not exist in the way it does without TIE.

Meadows is a master of characterisation, as demonstrated throughout his canon of films. But nowhere is this skill more finely demonstrated than in This Is England. Shaun, the main character, is portrayed superbly by Thomas Turgoose (incidentally, another reason why TIE is deserving of its place here is that it's the only film I've seen since 1999's The Sixth Sense where the main character is played by a child, and yet not only was I not irritated by them once, but I didn't even consider the fact that they were a child, seeing them simply as an actor so strong and mature was their performance). Turgoose's performance is by turns humorous and sympathetic, but always incredibly genuine. From the moment you first see Shaun, you can relate to him. He's clearly an ordinary boy from an ordinary upbringing. And yet the things he experiences, both preceding period the film covers and during the story we see, are never short of extraordinary. The relationship Shaun still has with his late father, both vicariously through his mother and through the raw emotions he harbours inside him about his death in the Falklands war, is incredibly touching. But it is the keen juxtaposition of the tenderness of Shaun's feelings towards his father, and the extreme consequences of the decisions he makes based upon these feelings throughout the story, that provide the emotional driving force which runs through Meadows' film.

Opposite Turgoose is Stephen Graham as Combo. In Combo, Meadows and Graham have jointly created one of the most fascinatingly compelling characters in cinema. Combo shares traits with Hitchcock's Norman Bates and Coppola's Michael Corleone. From the first moment you see Combo on screen, his every scene is loaded with such energy and power through the performance of Graham and the writing of Meadows. His scenes are simultaneously captivating and excruciating to watch. The mastery behind the character is the sense we get that what we see is only a very small part of who Combo is; underneath there is a great deal more going on.

Outwardly, Combo is a racist bully, a powder keg that can - and frequently does - explode without prior warning. He is manipulative and power hungry. But it's the subtle touches, the short scenes that could so easily be overlooked in the overall story of the film, that make Combo such a brilliant creation. Way below the hardened and volatile exterior, Combo is also an emotional and proud creature. The scene which he shares with Lol (within the perfectly chosen claustrophobic confines of a car) during which we learn a little more about the two characters' previous relationship, exposes a depth to Combo which takes us aback when compared with what we've seen before. By the end of the film, the character's name takes on a deeper meaning: he truly is a complex combination of a great many elements, meaning that by the end of the film it isn't as easy as we would like it to be to straightforwardly condemn him, despite the atrocities he has clearly committed.

In Shaun and Combo, we undoubtedly find two masterful creations from Meadows. But it is in the supporting characters where Meadows skill genuinely shines. Several other characters feel multi-dimensional and authentic despite the fact that they are largely absent from the majority of the film. Woody is a key example here. Joe Gilgun creates such a likeable character in Woody, and one of the easiest characters to relate to in the entire film, to the point where it's easy to forget that Woody barely features in the second half of the film. Woody provides an important counterbalance to Combo in the film and it is significant that he is largely sidelined once Combo is introduced to the story; it is also a credit to both Gilgun and Meadows that Woody is such an integral part of the film to the point that it is almost difficult to believe that he isn't there right to the very end.

Woody's key role in This Is England '86 also demonstrates how well-crafted he is. In fact, if it wasn't for the fact that so many of the more minor characters in This Is England are so masterfully created, the sequel series simply would not have worked as brilliantly well as it did. And through no other character is this demonstrated as well as through Lol. Lol is one of the least prominent characters in the original film. Largely removed from the main story, she receives only one major scene (the one shared with Combo mentioned previously). But it is through the expert craftsmanship of Meadows coupled with a brilliant performance from Vicky McClure that Lol feels real: a peripheral character in Shaun's story, but a key player in other stories not yet told. And Meadows proves this through '86, shifting the focus off Shaun and telling Lol's own story. '86 would not be able to be the powerful, high quality drama series it is if not for the groundwork provided by the original film.

Through This Is England, Shane Meadows demonstrates his incomparable way of creating characters who are as real as they come in cinema. Meadows creates very authentic, very ordinary but very memorable people who have very extraordinary stories to tell. This is a common trend through the entirety of Meadows' cinematic canon, but nowhere is it more apparent and more masterfully demonstrated than through This Is England.

'00 Ten Part Three: "Primer" (2004)

2010-09-01T23:40:00.007+01:00

Not so long ago, I watched Charlie Kaufman's most recent film, Synecdoche, New York - a fantastic film, both beautiful and intelligent, and one that narrowly missed making its way onto this list. When it came to describing the mental journey that film took me on, I opted to call it "the most cerebrally challenging film I've seen since 2004's Primer". However, after making this comparison, a small niggling feeling stayed with me that it had been a good couple of years since I last watched Primer, therefore making the comparison a little unfair on both films. Therefore, having just rewatched Primer I can now confirm that the statement I made in reference to Synecdoche, New York is indeed accurate. I can also supplement it with an additional statement: Primer is, to date, the most cerebrally challenging film I've ever seen.

So mindbending are the concept, plot and narrative of Primer that every time I watch it, I go through a similar mental process. Before watching, I remind myself of the general idea of time travel behind the story and the principles that are established within the universe of the film, and convince myself that I will have a slightly better understanding of the story as a whole than I did last time. I begin watching, with certain scenes and elements of the film ringing bells in my head, allowing me to begin the process of piecing together the elaborate jigsaw that director Shane Carruth is laying out in front of me. And then, as the film reaches its climax, I realise that my understanding of the story isn't any better than it was last time (in fact, the second time I watched it, I actually understood the story much less than I did the first time), and I ultimately come to the conclusion that no matter how many times I watch Primer, I'll never fully get my head around it.

So, why has a film that in many ways I don't understand made it into my ten defining films of the decade? Well, there's quite a lot of reasons actually. Firstly, it's the fact that the film doesn't really care whether you fully understand every single thing it shows you or not. Carruth as writer and director refuses to dumb down his story or the way he tells it, and by doing so keeps both his own integrity and that of the film incredibly high. Throughout Primer, Carruth provides the absolute minimum of exposition, with what little that is there being present simply because it's part of the story and not to hold the viewer's hand at any point. He describes the main characters at the start of the film as "clever" but not geniuses, and masterfully keeps the characters' language and attitudes to that level - to have them begin explaining all the science and technology used in the film would simply mean they wouldn't ring true to who they are meant to be.

By the same token, Carruth makes sure there's plenty in the film that the characters are experiencing that they themselves don't fully (or, in a handful of cases, at all) understand, lending the characters depth and genuineness, which in turn makes the whole situation presented by the film feel all the more authentic and real. Carruth also shows bravery and confidence through his filmmaking by leaving certain elements pretty much completely unexplained, instead only referring to them and leaving the audience (and the characters) to make of them what they will. The effect that time travel has on the handwriting of Aaron and Abe, the two main characters, is a prime example of this. The fact that Carruth simply chooses not to explain why the two men can't write in more than a scrawl after time travelling several times renders that particular facet both intriguing and chilling. The inclusion of touches such as this again adds further dimension to the story and concept Primer presents to the audience, and proves that each thread of a film does not necessarily need to be tied up neatly or explained away before the credits roll to make for a satisfying experience. If anything, it left me pondering the film for much longer after I'd finished watching than if everything had been nicely wrapped up.

The second reason Primer deserves its place on this list is that it is a masterclass in low budget filmmaking. When I first watched the film, I knew it wasn't a multi-million dollar Hollywood blockbuster, but when I found out that the entire film had been made on a budget of approximately US $7,000 (on a rough calculation, using 2004 exchange rates, no more than £4,000) I was completely dumbfounded. If anything, I would encourage people to see Primer for this reason more than any other, as even if you don't understand one single thing that's happening in the film, it's impossible not to be impressed with the film Carruth has created on such an extremely small budget. In comparison, the budget of Transformers, one of the biggest sci-fi films of the last decade, was approximately 21,429 larger than that of Primer. And there's no doubt in my mind which is the superior film (hint: Transformers won't be making an appearance in my list of ten).

Maybe a comparison with such a huge CGI-heavy blockbuster is too vast a cinematic gulf to traverse, but the numbers alone are enough to show how minuscule was the amount of money with which Carruth completed his film. The amount becomes slightly more understandable when you find out the fact that the vast majority of people involved in the film were Carruth's friends and family, from the catering staff right the way up to the actors - another fact that astounded me considering the consistent high quality performances throughout the film. There aren't any powerhouse Oscar-worthy turns, but equally there are no performances that stand out as weak or amateur or that let the film down. But perhaps most astounding of all is the list of roles Carruth himself fulfils throughout the film. IMDB lists Carruth as writer, director, actor (he plays main character Aaron), producer, soundtrack composer, editor, casting director, production designer and sound designer. A mind-boggling list, made even more impressive by the fact that Carruth's background is not in filmmaking, but in maths and engineering. Essentially, Carruth took on everything he could in making Primer, and the result shows what can be accomplished with what in filmmaking terms is the bare essentials.

My final reason for including Primer in my list is simply the way it so perfectly holds a mirror up to the 21st Century everyman. The way in which Abe and Aaron deal with their time travel discovery and what it enables them to do as the film progresses twists and evolves until the very last scene. When they first realise what they've stumbled upon and how important it is, they decide to keep it entirely to themselves, even bluntly cutting out the two friends from work with whom they have been working. The first thing we see them use time travel for is to make money on the stock market. The two men are selfish and without morals, and we as the audience condemn them for it. But it's hard to imagine a couple of ordinary office workers doing anything else. If we'd seen them do anything other than entirely protect their own interests and use their discovery for their own gain then Primer's authenticity would have no doubt suffered severely.

The more entangled the two men become within the intricate time web of their own creation, the more we see them run the gamut of emotion and morality, stretching to the limits their friendship, their health and their humanity. And we continue to struggle with how to react to their actions, but at the same time see within them more of the society in which we live. We find some of the things the men do questionable, others deplorable, but if we saw them do anything else they would neither be as authentic as characters, nor would they so sublimely reflect the zeitgeist of the period in which the film is set and was made. Abe and Aaron aren't bad men, they're just men. In his creation of Primer, one of the most original films made, not only in the last decade but also in any decade, Shane Carruth has both created a truly fantastical scenario and a breathtakingly authentic portrayal of the society of the time.

Smells Like Meme Spirit

2010-07-11T20:35:00.001+01:00

Okay, so this entry has at least one foot in the "cheap and easy entry" category, but seeing as my more legitimate posting seems to have fallen behind somewhat over recent weeks this seems like a good entry to put together to get myself back into a blog writing mindset.

With two of my more eclectic musical interests being mash ups and cover versions, it's hard not to notice which musicians and songs occur again and again in both of these fields. For example, in the world of mash ups, the acapella version of Eminem's Without Me has been used so much that it's now become almost unusable (the fact that it seems to fit over almost any other song has also put off those who wish to produce something that will be seen as skilled and credible). Without Me is an extreme example; there are other songs and artists that crop up again and again in both cover versions and mash ups that always sound fresh and original, or at least demonstrate the craft that went into the original version. And the song that comes to my mind as a prime example of this before any other is Nirvana's Smells Like Teen Spirit.

Smells Like Teen Spirit is a song that is ingrained into the zeitgeist of the mid-1990s. Whether you love the song, loathe it, or couldn't be more indifferent, it's hard not to see it as part of the soundtrack of (at the very least Western) culture and society of the time when it was released. And it endures, and has endured, through its Louie Louie inspired guitar riff, Kurt Cobain's indecipherable lyrics and the general aura that it seems to ignite around it. Even the music video has become a cultural reference point. Smells Like Teen Spirit has become a musical meme.

So, here's some of my favourite versions of the song, both mash ups and covers. Neither definitive nor exhaustive, and almost certainly incomplete, as I doubt very much that SLTS is likely to go away any time soon.

1. Dsico That No-Talent Hack's cover version

2. DJ Lobsterdust - NirGaga (mashed with Pokerface by Lady Gaga)

3. 2 Many DJ's - Smells Like Booty (mashed with Bootylicious by Destiny's Child)

Click, hear

4. The Ukulele Orchestra Of Great Britain's cover version

5. The Moog Cookbook's cover version

6. Paul Anka's cover version

7. Weird Al Yankovic - Smells Like Nirvana

see el eye see kay

8. Patti Smith's cover version

9. The Flying Pickets' cover version

10. And finally, more for comedy value than musical excellence, this is teh fuhnehz

So yeah, enjoy. And if anyone knows any other decent versions/mashes of SLTS, let me know.

Over the line.

2010-06-28T22:17:00.004+01:00

I've enjoyed the world cup so far - there've been some upsets, some good goals, and, of course, a good dollop of controversy too, not least on Sunday, as England and Mexico exited the competition. Both teams were the victims of mistakes which use of technology might have prevented, and in both cases, the mistakes did not matter (at least mathematically, if not temporally) to the final result. One thing that has really irked me, though, is the way that the media (specifically BBC and ITV in their live coverage and analysis) have addressed the issue of technology.

Both broadcasters have pushed the line that they cannot understand why video technology is not being used; indeed Mark Lawrenson makes this point so often and with such ferocity that it would almost be unsurprising to find a monthly cheque from the producers of Hawkeye landing on his doormat. Both broadcasters made it a major thread of their post-match discussions, but while opinion was somewhat divided amongst the pundits, there was never a strong argument made against its introduction. Those with reservations, such as FIFA, were cast in the role of Luddites, and equally mocked for their lack of foresight and demonised for the effect it had on the English team's defeat.

I find it annoying that rather than taking the opportunity to discuss the benefits and drawbacks of technology in the game, this complex issue was presented by both broadcasters as an obvious solution being held back by pencil pushing "suits". This characterisation is misleading at best and tabloid at worst, and such a visceral reaction will not have been at all persuasive to those whose votes are counted on the matter.

Also, sorry it's been so long since I posted - it's very clear now that life is getting in the way pretty much permanently. I make no promises on the timing of my next effort, but hopefully it'll be easier now that I've broken my silence.

Comedy Playlist

2010-06-14T22:30:00.007+01:00

Browsing around the BBC's comedy website, I stumbled across what I think is a fairly novel concept: the comedy playlist. It pretty much does what it says on the tin - a selection of comedy sketches and clips chosen by one person. The only one I've watched so far is Stephen Merchant's (although at the present time there only seems to be his and Johnny Vegas' playlists on the site) which contained some absolute gems - I particularly recommend Adam Buxton's Nutty Room, the Big Train sketch and No More Women (a game I'm planning to play with whosoever is willing to try it with me).

So, naturally, I decided to have a go at my own comedy playlist. Below is a collection of ten clips, mainly resourced from YouTube, from comedy shows that I've enjoyed over the years. It's not my definitive top ten; more accurately it's a collection of ten clips from some of my favourites series that first came to mind, that I found just as funny on a fresh viewing and, just as important, I could find online. I may have a go at more than one of these, maybe around specific themes or something, if this one proves successful.

Merchant includes a very brief description/introduction to each of his clips, but I'll just let mine speak for themselves.

It'd be good to see anyone else's playlist if they fancy giving it a go...

1. Big Train - Cakes

2. Monkey Dust - Clive Pringle: 24

3. Henry 8.0 - Pope And Glory

4. Harry Enfield - Women: Know Your Limits

5. Jam - Casual Parents

6. The Fast Show - Posh Cockneys Up North

7. Man Stroke Woman - Minstrel

(I could only find this one attached to a second sketch, which is also funny, but my chosen sketch finishes at 2:09)

8. Fonejacker - HMV

9. The Office - The Brentmeister General

10. The League Of Gentlemen - Jedd Hunter's Commercial

'00 Ten Part Two: "Shaun Of The Dead" (2004)

2010-06-08T23:46:00.005+01:00

Shaun Of The Dead holds a peculiar honour, in that it is possibly the film that speaks to me the most over any other in terms of a realistic representation of the culture and society in which I live and have grown up. Peculiar indeed, considering the large amount of reanimated corpses present. But, unsurprisingly, it's not the zombies that make SOTD a film to which I can really relate, but the misfits, misanthropes and moaners who find themselves caught in the film's situation and the way in which they react to it. And it is in this respect that SOTD succeeds so comprehensively.

Let us consider the landscape of British cinema into which Shaun Of The Dead dared to tread. Big British films released around the same time as SOTD essentially fall into two distinct categories. Films in the first bracket present life in Britain, and in general, as a cross between an episode of Teletubbies and a Waitrose advert - all bright and fuzzy and colourful with absolutely no offensive content or sharp corners, and at the same time exceedingly prim, proper and upper-middle class in an oh-so-charmingly awkward yet frightfully optimistic kind of way, where the most taxing problem is who gets the last slice of Taste The Difference summer fruits torte. Love, Actually and Wimbledon are two prime candidates for this category that emerged around the same time as my chosen film. Essentially the cinematic equivalent of an overly-sugary marshmallow, with characters as one-dimensional and bastardly as they come, I pretty much despise every film that falls into category one.

Films in the second category have never been summed up better than by The Fast Show. So instead of trying to trump it, I'll just show you instead:

"Pukka", I hear you whimper. Think Snatch, think Layer Cake, and you're very much in the right area. Whilst I do find some of these films enjoyable on their own merits, the characters within them are anything but a relatable portrayal of the British people amongst whom I grew up.

So then, in 2004, came Shaun Of The Dead - so much more than just a comedy film, or even the "rom-com-zom" (romantic comedy with zombies) that its marketing purports it to be. Strip away the plague of shuffling, flesh-hungry cadavers swarming the country and Shaun Of The Dead presents to its audience the finest portrayal of - and most heartfelt tribute to - 21st Century suburban Britain.

Before we look at why this is the case, let us first cover all the other ways in which Shaun Of The Dead is cinematic perfection as well. Firstly, it's incredibly original. Looking at the film as a parody of the horror genre, it spoofs the situations and settings of horror movies, particularly zombie movies, not only incredibly accurately but also respectfully. Scriptwriters Edgar Wright (who also directs) and Simon Pegg (who plays the eponymous Shaun) lampoon the genre through clever subversion of conventions and cinematography, but also show what huge fans they are of zombie flicks through the cavalcade of references and tributes that charge at you throughout the film. Not being much of a zombie film buff myself, I picked up only a smattering of these, but a quick google reveals just how many nods there are to characters, actors, dialogue and a huge amount more from not only a great many zombie movies, but also a wide variety of other films and TV shows.

Second of all, Shaun Of The Dead is very, very funny. The basic premise of the film takes one of the most fundamental rules of successful comedy - either place extraordinary people in an ordinary setting, or ordinary people in an extraordinary setting (in SOTD's case obviously the latter) - and runs with it superbly. The humour in SOTD regularly comes organically from the inspired concept of normal people trying to deal with a zombie epidemic interrupting their day-to-day existence. To come up with an idea so simple yet so ingenious is a sublime feat in itself.

However, it's also in the finer detail that Shaun Of The Dead's comedy brilliance comes to light. The writing is incredibly sharp, with even seemingly the simplest of sequences being formulated to perfection. The opening scene is a prime example of the razor-sharp wit present throughout. We enter the film on a profile shot of a vacant Shaun sitting alone in the pub, eyes glazed and pint in hand. We quickly realise, however, that Shaun is actually in the middle of a fairly serious conversation with his girlfriend Liz (played by the fantastic Kate Ashfield). Then, as more and more of the gaps in the conversation are filled for us, it soon becomes apparent that what we perceived to surely be a private conversation between Shaun and Liz about spending time together away from their friends is actually taking place in full view and earshot of both Shaun's flatmate Ed (Nick Frost) and Liz's mates David and Diane (Dylan Moran and Lucy Davis). The opening reaches its peak when Shaun softly explains to Liz that Ed is a bit of a loner, indicating one of the reasons he likes to spend time with Ed is that he feels sorry for him. Ed then comprehensively obliterates this argument, and any sympathy Shaun may have conjured for him, with the unforgettable interjection: "Can I get... any of you cunts... a drink?". Not only has Wright created a brilliantly authentic suburban London pub setting within the first few minutes of the film, but he's also set the bar for the comedy within the film incredibly high - a bar which is maintained throughout.

However, raising Shaun Of The Dead from being just a very successful comedy to one of my top ten picks of the last decade is, as I said before, its affectionate and uncanny representation of suburban England. The characters are multi-layered and authentic, but also undeniably and authentically British. Shaun as the main character provides ample proof of this throughout the film. After a night on the booze, waking to a Britain overrun with the living dead, the hung over Shaun autopilots to the newsagent oblivious to the destruction around him. Once he and Ed realise what's happening, Shaun's first choice of action is to "have a sit down". Their plan for survival involves picking up Shaun's mum (Penelope Wilton) and now ex-girlfriend Liz, then settling down with a cup of tea and waiting for "all this to blow over". Their plan only changes in beverage choice, from a cuppa to a nice cold pint, when their eventual choice for a stronghold is local pub The Winchester Tavern (as it's safe, familiar, and somewhere Ed can smoke).

Essentially, Shaun, in both his attitude towards and strategy for survival of the zombie plague, is relentlessly optimistic with a tendency to consciously downplay the severity of what's happening, and ultimately a little bit crap. In short, very British. He's a hero, but not a particularly good one. Any time he tries to be even a little bit cool he immediately falls on his face - quite literally at one point when attempting to leapfrog a garden fence as a shortcut to the Winchester. But it's not just Shaun who exemplifies Britishness in Shaun Of The Dead. Nick Frost's Ed is essentially a mischievous boy caught in a slobbish twenty-something man's body. Lucy Davis brilliantly creates Diane as a dippy optimist repressing her frustration with her boyfriend David, an irritating know-it-all almost entirely driven by ferocious jealousy of Shaun and played superbly by Dylan Moran (a wild departure from his most famous role as alcoholic misanthrope Bernard Black in Black Books, which allows Moran to really demonstrate his skill as an actor). Wilton as Barbara, Shaun's mum, and Bill Nighy as dry stepfather Philip, bring in yet another facet of Britishness - a hybrid of "stiff upper lip" and "ignore it and it'll go away" mentalities, with Philip not wanting to make a fuss over his zombie bite as he's "run it under a cold tap", and Barbara combating the zombie threat by closing the curtains.

All very British indeed. But Shaun Of The Dead is always highly authentic, never hackneyed nor offensive, in its portrayal of the British social psyche. This is down to a combination of Pegg and Wright's superb writing, Wright's direction, and the collective cast's exceptional performances. I relate to each and every character in the film not only because of the depth of writing and quality of acting, but because I recognise pretty much each one from some part of my life, from main character Shaun's underachiever and Ed's idiotic rogue, right down to those on the periphery, such as Peter Serafinowicz's belligerent killjoy Pete. But as well as recognising them, even though some characters are more obviously likeable than others, none are clear-cut as "good guys" and "bad guys". Each character is flawed, and whilst you might hate some of them for the majority of the film, you can almost always relate to their point of view.

In a perverse fashion, it is the element of Shaun Of The Dead that is most removed from the real world that demonstrates how truly special it is in reflecting the reality of British people, and humanity in general. Through each of the characters' reactions to the dead walking the earth, we see one aspect of what makes up who the British people are - illuminated in a surreal, masterful and incredibly genuine way.

'00 Ten Part One: "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" (2000)

2010-05-01T17:37:00.005+01:00

(Okay, so it's been quite a while since I stated my intention to run down my ten films of the last ten years, and my plan to make a prompt start clearly hasn't quite come into fruition, mainly because I simply hadn't had the opportunity to rewatch any of my selections in order to write about each film with it fresh in my mind. I can only apologise and shake my head at my own epic failure.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to reiterate that the films are presented here in no particular order. This isn't a countdown towards my number 1 film, nor is it a chronological list. I'm simply writing about these films in the order that I rewatch them in order to write about them here. O Brother, Where Art Thou? just happens to be first to be written about because, out of all my choices, I fancied watching it first.)

So, my inaugural entry to my ten is 2000's O Brother, Where Art Thou? from the cinematic canon of Ethan and Joel Coen. In some ways O Brother... may seem a strange, even perverse, choice: it isn't my favourite Coen Brothers film of the decade - that honour would most probably go to The Man Who Wasn't There - but as I said before, this list isn't simply going to be my favourite ten films of the '00s. It's also probably not the first, or even second, Coen film from this decade that would come to the mind of many. No Country For Old Men is probably their most notorious and highly lauded, and others such as Burn After Reading and Intolerable Cruelty are usually mentioned in the same first breath, with O Brother, Where Art Thou? relegated to the second and brought up after a little more brain-racking. But I have good reasons for placing O Brother... into my list above other Coen offerings, as well as all the other films made during the 2000s.

O Brother, Where Art Thou? is, when all is said and done, one of the most finely crafted films the Coens have ever created. The story is simple: in Depression-era America, three men break off a chain gang in order to track down a hidden treasure. It would be so easy to finish off that synopsis with the oh-so-clichéd phrase "with hilarious consequences" - applied to every half-baked, hackneyed and unfunny comedy since the dawn of time. But it in this case it would be absolutely, one hundred percent true.

O Brother... is unashamedly Coen in feel and execution. Chronologically, the film was never going to have it easy, directly following the Coens' flawless character comedy and topper of many a film fan's list of all-time favourite movies, 1998's The Big Lebowski. Regarded by many as the brothers' finest film, and with both mainstream praise and a huge cult following that thrives and grows to this day, whatever film the Coens made next was going to be held up against the might of The Big Lebowski and picked apart relentlessly. So, did the brothers opt to try and outdo themselves and out-Lebowski The Big Lebowski itself? Or did they decide to head in a totally new direction with the arguably wise decision that a film of Lebowski's popularity and critical acclaim should not try to be replicated? Well, in O Brother, Where Art Thou? they kind of tried both.

The film has definite comparisons to The Big Lebowski - three guys on a quest without much of a point, where the humour comes from the situations they find themselves in and the interactions between them - ultimately, the characters are much more important than the story. So far, so Lebowski. But, at the same time, O Brother... is nothing like its predecessor, largely due to the different threads running through it that give it a decidedly less sprawling feel than that of The Big Lebowski. Homer's Odyssey ties together the events occurring and the journey that the men take. Some of the references to the Greek epic are clear (the seductive sirens on the rocks, John Goodman's larger-than-life cycloptic Big Dan Teague), others more subtle (the character of Pete, for example, can often be seen to represent the more mutinous and rebellious faction of Odysseus' men, and his "transformation" in the middle of the journey also has echoes of the temporary metamorphosis of the soldiers into pigs in Homer's epic poem). Attempting such a "loose" recreation of one of the most highly regarded and influential pieces of classical literature is arguably setting yourself up for a fall in many ways, but the Coens don't just manage it - they succeed in every way.

There is also the historical and cultural setting which forms a thematic link throughout the film. Placing their odyssey in the middle of America's Great Depression of the 1930s allows the Coens to present us with some bleak yet beautiful landscapes; the washed-out, almost sepia look of the film is exquisite throughout, with the tones and hues of each shot expertly chosen and crafted. The way the Coens play with light and shadow is also a joy to behold. The scenes in which the characters sit around a campfire produce some of the most photographically wondrous scenes I've seen on screen. We also see throughout the film the ways in which people from all walks of life cope with the hard times they are experiencing. The travelling trio experience everything from a religious congregation atoned of their sins by a priest in a river, to a gathering of a very different kind - a hooded Klan meeting complete with burning cross and prearranged lynching. We see an isolated farmer in a field of corn bewildered by electoral candidate Homer Stokes pledging to "stand up for the little man", complete with a midget companion to hammer home his point. And at one point Pete's cousin Wash tells the men that he's afraid the meat they're currently enjoying is "starting to turn" as he slaughtered the horse it came from several days previously. From start to finish, the troubles of the Depression are relayed in both serious and comedic fashion, but always with expert skill.

Music is also used constantly throughout the film to hold together the proceedings. Music is seen to give hope, such as through the extreme popularity the men garner (albeit entirely unknown to them) as The Soggy Bottom Boys, a collective moniker they adopt when recording a song simply to earn a little money to feed themselves. When they are finally revealed (entirely accidentally) as the band, the excitement and joy in the audience demonstrates how powerful music can be in bringing positivity into the seemingly most hopeless of circumstances. Music is also used to punctuate some of the more dramatic moments in the film, such as when a trio of aging black gravediggers, upon finishing their work, sing the three fugitives to their planned execution with contrabass acapella gospel. The Coens' use music perfectly throughout for both setting the historical scene and the atmosphere, as well as an important device in telling their story.

The characters created in O Brother... are some of the Coens' most wonderful creations of all of their films. John Turturro follows up his sublime supporting role as Jesus Quintana from The Big Lebowski superbly in a more central and entirely different role as the ever-cantankerous and oppositional Pete. Tim Blake Nelson is brilliant as the simple and good-hearted Delmar, who gets some of the most comically perfect lines of the whole film (in deciding who is the leader of the group, Pete claims "I'm voting for yours truly", to which George Clooney's Everett replies "Well I'm voting for yours truly too; after a glance at each of the other two men, Delmar earnestly tries to resolve the situation: "Well, I'm with you fellas".)

But it is George Clooney who provides one of the most memorable Coen characters of their entire canon as the main protagonist. Ulysses Everett McGill is unforgettable for perhaps two main reasons. Firstly, his undeniable "gift of the gab", which Clooney makes his own from the first word he utters on screen. Everett's constant yet eloquent chatter gets the men into trouble as much as it rescues them from it. It also shows Everett up for what he really is: an intelligent man in the company of two knuckleheads such as Pete and Delmar, but not nearly as clever as he likes to think. This helps to raise him above the cartoonish or allegorical feel of some of the characters in the film, giving him dimension that is both likeable and pitiable. The second readon is Everett's obsession with his hair. Waking several times through the film with a semi-conscious utterance of panic about his follicular appearance, obsessing over his beloved Dapper Dan pomade throughout their journey, and even going as far as to enquire whether cousin Wash has any spare hairnets that he can use whilst they stay with him, this facet of the character is simple yet inspired comedy that the Coen Brothers do better than anyone else, and have possibly not nailed quite so perfectly before or since as they do in Everett

O Brother, Where Art Thou? is therefore an important film to the decade in many ways. It showed the Coen Brothers had the ability to follow up huge success with an original and authentic film that stands in its own right. Its grounding in literature, history and culture show that it is a film of substance, and yet it is still a film that can be watched and enjoyed as a light-hearted farce and finely crafted character comedy. And it helped form a turning point in George Clooney's career, which had in the years before featured more typically Hollywood roles in rom-coms, action thrillers and (yikes) Batman & Robin. The only less mainstream role Clooney had taken before O Brother... was 1996's Robert Rodriguez-directed and Quentin Tarantino-penned From Dusk Till Dawn; many Coen aficionados originally scoffed at the idea of Clooney in the starring role of the Coen's first film of the 21st Century, preferring that the part be filled by a Coen regular, or at least an actor used to roles such as that of Everett. But Clooney silenced them all. Ten years on, Clooney has collaborated with the Coens twice more very successfully in 2003's Intolerable Cruelty and Burn After Reading in 2008, and has cemented himself as an actor of great skill, credibility and diversity. After 2001's Ocean's Eleven, the deal was sealed on Clooney, but O Brother, Where Art Thou? undoubtedly played a key part in the journey to where George Clooney is now in his acting career.

(So yeah, I'll try to make sure Part 2 of this list doesn't take quite so long to materialise here, but for now I hope you enjoyed this opening entry into my ten. I'd love to read any comments anyone might have on this, whether they are in agreement or to tell me I'm talking utter piffle.)