9
(30.01.13) - In a post apocalyptic world, where machines have warred with and almost decimated the humans, a group of 9 hand stitched dolls come to life, one of whom has the key to the survival of humanity. Embarking on an adventure to recover a small item with significant power, the dolls band together to fight the machines and discover the purpose of their existence and the secret that they hold. This animated film was an absolute delight. The animation was stunning and the whole thing was beautiful to look at, the characters were well designed and the style of the piece was excellent. The characterisation of the dolls was great, garnering genuine emotions and attachments to the characters in the viewer, and the whole thing was very enjoyable. You can't ignore the Terminator overtones of the piece, nor the almost Nazi-like feel of the enemy, but overall, this was a very surprising film, far surpassing my expectations and turning out to be an excellent little film.
The Losers
(28.01.13) - A band of soldiers on a mission are presumed dead when a rogue CIA agent orders the destruction of the helicopter that they were meant to be on, but instead had packed with children that they had rescued from a drug lord's home. Vowing revenge and desperately trying to get back to their lives in the USA, the group are given a chance, when the only other person that they can find who believes them that there is a corrupt agent in the CIA makes them an offer - kill the CIA agent and regain entry to the USA. But the agent is hell bent on acquiring a new weapon and selling it to the highest bidder and a terrorist organisation who will actually use it. This film based on a comic book was just fantastic. I had no real knowledge of it and therefore no expectations, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. The plot is as clichéd as they come, and certainly is nothing unusual or original, but the film is fast paced, has some excellent action sequences, and is done with it's tongue firmly planted in it's cheek. It's characters were the usual wisecracking band of friends, each with their own specialities, but there was something genuine about the chemistry between them (probably due to the fact that the actors looked as though they were all thoroughly enjoying themselves and the banter on screen was reflective of the banter off camera). This camaraderie is what sets the film apart from the usual run of the mill action films of this ilk. This film has no more of a plot that an episode of The A Team and doesn't pretend to be anything other than what it is, but I personally found it an excellent little movie, which was much better than I could have anticipated.
Ted
(26.01.13) - A young boy, John, makes a magical wish that his teddy bear can talk, and overnight, his bear comes to life. They become the best of friends and grow up together, but as they hit their 30's, John is forced to choose between his girlfriend and his pot smoking, juvenile teddy bear. But with a "collector" trying to acquire Ted for his strange son and a kidnap plot afoot, will Ted and John remain friends? I reviewed this film last year (on the 2012 film page) and thoroughly enjoyed it. Watching it again, it still had it's moments, but did not seem as funny as when I first saw it. It had some laugh out loud moments still, and I maintain that it strikes a chord with my sense of humour, but it lost something on a repeat viewing. I did question in my previous review about whether it would stand up to repeated viewings, but I am not sure it would. That said, it was still a good film which brought a smile to my face and is worth a watch if you have not see it.
The Black Cauldron
(21.01.13) - A young boy sets out on a quest to defeat the evil Horned King in this Disney fantasy. Teaming up with a band of friends he meets along the way, the young boy must find and destroy The Black Cauldron, an artefact that contains a great evil power. The Horned King wants to use the power to raise an invincible army of the dead. But can our hero and his band of friends put a stop to his evil plan? In many ways, this film was perhaps the darkest of Disney films. It is genuinely bleak and a world away from the usual Disney animations that we are used to. It's dark visuals, brooding and scary imagry, themes of resurection of the dead and the booming vocal performances from John Hurt (as the Horned King) make this a very menacing film indeed - a Disney film with no songs, a rousing orchestral score and where even the hero's bleed and shed blood. The whole proceedings are lightened by two "comedy sidekick" characters, one each on the side of good and evil, but even this, and a lighter middle section cannot take away from the shadows that overcast the two sections which bookend the more usual Disney style in the middle. The imagery itself - skeletons, dungeons, baron landscapes and so on is very menacing and bleak and the main villain is perhaps the scariest Disney villain there has been. In terms of animation, it is typical of the 1980's style of Disney with the characters and the way in which they are drawn quite familiar. The special effects start to come into their own and look impressive at times (very early CGI(?)) but overall, the hand drawn look and feel of the film has something vaguely comforting about it. When watching it, I could not help but think that it was the Disney version of Lord of the Rings, which was animated in the late 1970's, and there are clear parallels between the two - a young hero thrust into a journey, a mystical object containing all the evil in the world, parallels of Gandalf, Gollum and other such characters and many more. It also has more than a hint of "Dragons Lair" about it - an animated laserdisc based arcade game which was released two years earlier in 1983 and, incidentally, made by one of Disney's rival producers of animated movies, Don Bluth. It is easy to see why this film was not as successful as other Disney films and it perhaps was too dark for it's target audience. Despite efforts to lighten the mood, you cannot detract from what this is which is a Lord of the Rings style fantasy. It was slightly confused, as it is almost as though they stuck in the middle section thinking "this film is too dark overall" and tried to lift the film back into the Disney realms, but it just jolts uneasily against what is actually a very good, if slightly adult, animation.
Ong Bak
(20.01.13) - A young man is trained by the elders in his village in the ancient martial arts, but gives a promise not to use his skills. When a religious artefact, the head of a statue of Buddha, is stolen from the village which impacts on the villager’s festival and their wealth, prosperity and good fortune, he is sent to infiltrate the seedy underbelly of the Bangkok criminal underworld. The head has been stolen by a crime boss who also specialises in underground boxing with high stakes. Teaming up with a couple of small time hustlers, he sets out to retrieve the statue and restore balance to hi village. This was nothing more than your typical martial arts film – whereby pretty much every cliché was put in there – from the reluctance to fight, to the scene of them training, wrapping their arms in rope in readiness for the fight and so on. But if you ignore all that, where this film comes into its own is the spectacular stunt and fight sequences, which seem to alternate between barroom brawls and high speed chases on foot, by tuk-tuk and by motorbike. The stunts are amazing and reminiscent of the old Jackie Chan movies, with fast paced fights and parkour style chases. Cliché characters and average performances are aplenty, and the translation of the subtitles are a little off and perhaps not wholly accurate or coherent at times, but that kind of added to the charm. The whole thing is over the top, but the fast and furious action moves this film along at a cracking pace. In terms of story – you have seen it all before, but in terms of stunts and fight scenes, it is a cut above your average kung fu flick.
John Carter
(19.01.13) - John Carter is transported from the 1890's Virginia to Mars, where there is a battle raging between two clans. The only way to seemingly reach a truce is for the princess to marry the aggressor. Initially found by a tribe of dessert living nomads, John sets out to find his way home, with the help of a talisman which he believes got him there. But on the way he becomes embroiled in the war. I went into this film with a totally open mind. It was panned by the critics and was a huge box office flop (one of the biggest of all time) so I went into it with low expectations and really did want to give the film a chance and to enjoy it. However, the film was just plain terrible. There a positive in so far as the visuals were stunning and it was beautiful to look at. However, that is about as far as I can go. The acting was wooden at best, but even that could not detract from the non descript story and other flaws in the film. The first problem was the story, which quite frankly was virtually non existent in terms of major plot, but had a number of side plots which were confusing and never clearly explained. The second issue was the lack of any set pieces. There were one of two pockets of minor action, at which point you thought that it was about to kick off, but in reality, they lasted sixty seconds and then the story fell back to it's tediousness. The third thing was the fact that virtually nothing happened and it was boring as watching a pan of broccoli boiling. It got to over half way through the film (a good hour into it) and the story had made minimal progression and still hadn't grabbed my attention, despite me willing it to get going. Fourthly, the script was terrible, or at least what I could hear of it was terrible. The indecipherable mumblings of the actors were generally drowned out by the over-loud background music making it impossible to hear what they were saying half of the time. Also, the "accents" of the aliens sounded like someone trying to talk whilst coughing with a mouth full of soggy bread, which made most of what they said indecipherable as well. Fifthly, there was very little action. The whole story was plodding along with very few (tiny) action set pieces to break up the monotony. it really didn't go anywhere, and the actual plot could perhaps have fitted into an hour long film. Finally, the lacklustre direction felt as though the director was as bored as I was. It is not often that I actually give thought to turning off a film, but I was tempted, especially in the second hour, on a number of occasions. The problem is, by that stage, it was such an overblown, tedious, up it's own backside mess, I had no empathy or relationship with any of the characters at all and quite frankly couldn't care less if they lived, died, got married or were transported back to Earth. I didn't think that by the third week in January, I would have found such a strong contender for worst film of the year. In summary an overblown, confusing, pretentious mess of a film amounting to two hours of tediousness.
Unstoppable
(18.01.13) - Two train drivers, one has 28 years of service under his belt, the other is a newbie fresh out of training, head out on a routine days work. But in another train yard, a train carrying a toxic and highly explosive cargo sets off on a full steam ahead collision course when it's driver leaves the cab to switch some points, but fails to get back on the train. The driverless train pelts down the track, and various attempts to bring it to a halt fail. The two drivers use their engine to chase the train and stop it before it de-rails itself in a highly populated area. This thriller was based on a true story and one where you knew exactly how it was going to end. But as can often be the case in films, it is not always where the story takes you but the journey you go on (knowing that the crew made it safely back home did not ruin Apollo 13). This was a high octane thriller which was expertly directed by the late Tony Scott. The camera work is dizzying and as relentless as the train itself and had a feeling of an 80's thriller about it. Switching between the runaway train, the cab of the engine in pursuit and the control room, the film has a sense of urgency about it and was hugely enjoyable. The plot was shallow (stop the train), the characters were likeable, but never really developed and the whole thing was exactly as you would expect, but there was something really engaging about it. I was glued to the screen when I first saw it, and I could not believe who quickly the running time flew by. Good performances were put in by Chris Pine and Denzel Washington and given it was his final film, it was a fitting swan song for Scott.
Dog Pound
(18.01.13) - Three young offenders enter into the brutal world of the youth justice system in Canada. Their crimes range from drug dealing to car jacking to assaulting a correctional facility officer. They are all immediately challenged by the top dog, beaten and bullied to establish the hierarchy within the prison. But the unprovoked attacks get more and more brutal until the three of them band together to fight back. But an eye for an eye leads to more horrific consequences and revenge escalates out of control. This prison drama had each one of the clichés you would expect... the top dog, the cruel warden, the tough youths, the obligatory strip search, the beating in the bathroom and the inevitable sexual assault - making it a prison film by numbers. It may as well have been termed as a remake of Scum, simply because it was just an update with more street talk than you can shake a riot baton at, plenty of hand slapping and enough swearing to make a sailor blush. Whilst a lot of the violence in this film is graphic, the overall impact of the film (in terms of a brutal prison drama) has been diluted over the years. That said, there were some good performances from the cast, the direction had it's moments and overall I enjoyed it. But it was nothing new or original, and in all reality, was just a decent, albeit it standard, prison drama.
Seconds Apart
(16.01.13) - Twins with powers of mind control and telekinesis toy with their peers at school whilst undertaking their secret "project", namely honing their skills on unwilling subjects. They force four jocks to engage in a deadly game of Russian roulette and gain the interest of the investigating officer. But when one of them meets a girl and his interest in the project dwindles and his desire for more independence grows, his brother is not happy. This was nothing more than a mediocre thriller. Released on the After Dark label, it had the look and feel of a straight to DVD film or a made for TV movie. It had an interesting premise and was watchable enough, but it had few scares, minimal gore and a slightly off the wall denouement. It was more psychological than all out horror, but ultimately was an average but ultimately forgettable film.
Sherlock - Series 2
(13.01.13 to 15.01.13) - Following on from the first series, Sherlock and John investigate "A Scandal In Belgravia", where a high class call girl has information capable of causing a huge embarrassment to the royal family and place national security at risk. But the girl is not all she seems, and anyone who can win the heart of Sherlock has more to them than meets the eye. Heading to Devon, they investigative "The Hound of Baskerville", whereby a young man is terrorised by a giant hound on the moors. But is it his mental health or is the beast as a result of the Baskerville Government Research Facility. Finally,in "The Reichenbach Fall", Holmes faces Moriarty in the ultimate game of cat and mouse with the highest of stakes. This series was excellent. The leads were outstanding as usual, the direction excellent and the writing, script and stories were spot on. It felt more like a cinema release than a BBC drama. The weakest of the three in my view was the first one, but despite me terming it as this, it was still very enjoyable. Baskerville was perhaps my favourite this time around. I simply loved this show and would recommend it without hesitation.
Sherlock - Series 1
(12.01.13) - Holmes and Watson are drawn into trying to resolve seemingly unrelated crimes in the third and final episode of series one. Receiving phone calls from people who have bombs strapped to them, Holmes is given a set number of hours to solve each challenge. But his investigations push Watson into the firing line and Holmes comes face to face with his nemesis, Moriarty. I re-watched the last episode of series 1 as it ended on a cliffhanger and I wanted to refresh my memory prior to commencing series two. There is review on the Film 2012 section of this site, but suffice to say, I loved this series and found it fresh, imaginative and incredibly well written,. acted and produced. This is perhaps BBC drama at it's best and has made me want to re-watch episodes 1 and 2 again. Outstanding entertainment and well worth watching.
Livid
(11.01.13) - A young woman is employed as a nurse who visits the infirm in their home. She attends the large mansion of an old dance teacher who is in a coma and requires mechanically assisted breathing. The nurse learns that the old woman has a treasure hidden in the house, so along with her reckless lover and his brother, they break into the house that night to locate the treasure to enable them to start new lives. But once in the house, things are not what they seem and someone, or something, is stalking them in the darkness. This was a film of two halves - the first half nicely built up the characters and cranked up the tension. The latter half transformed from a haunted house story to a vampire story and moved away from the tension and psychological horror to the more gore filled horror I would have expected. The film had a real adult fairy tale / dreamlike quality to it, which was quite unsettling at times and did build and build like a nightmare. That said, it did never quite hit the heights of the directors other film, "Inside", which is one of my favourites, perhaps because Inside was so grounded in reality and this was firmly planted in the realm of fantasy. It had it's moments, the ending was slightly messy and muddled, but overall, it was good. It was not quite what I expected, but I think I would do well to watch it again in the right frame of mind and with the expectations of a psychological horror as opposed to the usual gore filled French New Wave Horror I am used to.
Les Miserables
(08.01.13) - The epic musical comes to the big screen. A criminal, Jean Valjean, breaks his parole, and spends the next 19 years running away from Javier, the policeman intent on bringing him to justice. Valjean reinvents himself as a mayor of a small town and assists a young woman called Fantine, who finds herself in utter despair He promises her that he will care for her young daughter and so becomes a father to Cosette. As a young woman, Cosette falls in love with Marius but their relationship is overshadowed by the revolution which is brewing. This film was quite simply outstanding. I do love the stage show, and didn't have very high expectations for the film, especially with some of the cast members, but I have to say that my fears were (mostly) unfounded. Starting with the overall look of the film, the direction is functional, but nothing special. It is competently handled, but nothing that particularly jumps out at you. The look of the film and the epic scale of it all is as you would expect - the whole production is bold and spectacular, the costumes are beautifully put together and the look and feel of the film is luxurious, with it's multitude of extras and lavish sets. The performances were almost universally excellent. Starting with the leads, Hugh Jackman does a better job than expected, but at least he has the stage background behind him. His acting has never been better, and his vocal performance was better than expected. That said, it depends on what you are used to - if you are more familiar with people like Alfie Boe performing the songs, then he does not compare, but as a standalone performer, he does a great job. He got better as the film progressed, which may have been a sign of me getting used to him in the role. Russell Crowe was perhaps the weakest link. He can sing to an extent, but in my view has a clearly limited range. When singing within his comfort zone, he is very good, but there are certain points in songs where he is struggling and it shows, especially when the rest of the cast do such a good job. Another weak link is Sacha Baron Cohn, as the innkeeper, who is just not quite right for the part - Matt Lucas did a much better job in the 25th Anniversary concert. Finally, Eddie Redmayne, as Marius, was excellent, and perhaps one of the best male cast members. Turning to the female leads, Amanda Seyfried is adequate in her role as the adult Cosette, but nothing particularly special. Helena Bonhem Carter is excellent in her role as Madame Thenardier. Eponine, played by Samantha Barks was brilliant, putting such passion in to her songs, especially in one heartbreaking scene in the rain. But the real revalation here was Anne Hathaway, who quite frankly was just outstanding. Her vocal performance is flawless, the raw emotion she portrays on screen is incredibly powerful and her performance is just brilliant. If she doesn't win the Oscar for best supporting actress, I will be amazed, as quite frankly, it is not just the best performance in the film, but one of the best performances I have ever seen in any film. Her rendition of I Dreamed A Dream will be a reference point in her career for many years to come. As for the rest of the cast, all of the supporting and secondary characters were all excellent too - there was not really a bad performance, vocally and acting wise, from any of them - a shame then, that two of the "star turns", Crowe and Baron Cohn, were the weakest out of the entire cast. I can't help but think that they would have been better casting some of the the incredibly talented West End performers we have. The film had a real feeling of the stage show about it, nowhere more obvious that the "Lovely Ladies" section. There were some incredible set pieces and the music and the songs were spectacular. The source material is so good, it stands up so well on the big screen. The whole film was filled with emotion, made even more noticeable by the fact that there was a constant steam of people in the audience wiping tears away at some point or another. You do have to wonder whether, with such a strong story and such excellent source material, whether they could really have made a mess of this film adaptation, but I have to say that it comes across incredibly well. Simply put, as a fan of musicals generally, this is sumptuous entertainment at it's peak and was wonderful, emotional and powerful. I thoroughly enjoyed the film and literally cannot wait to see it again. It was outstanding.
Kill Keith
(07.01.12) - A runner on a morning TV programme is madly in love with Dawn, the beautiful female presenter, but every time he makes a move, he manages to make a complete fool of himself. He is berated by the "up himself" male presenter of the show, who is leaving and there are a few celeb replacements lined up, including Keith Chegwin and Russell Grant. But the potential replacements are all being stalked by an unknown psycho who is intent on kidnapping them and killing them. Can the lovelorn studio assistant save the day and win the girl? This British film was entertaining enough. It was never going to win any Oscars, but was actually quite funny in places and made me laugh out loud. It is very childish humour (the name of the TV show is "Get Up At The Crack Of Dawn" which may suggest the tone and level of humour), but hit the right notes as I was in one of those daft moods when I watched it. It's ninety minutes running time meant that the gag never really wears thin, and it has some nice self mocking (but never insulting) appearances from a number of British (cheesy) celebs themselves The whole thing was shallow nonsense but was good fun and a nice piece of easy watching. It is one of those films where you will either get the joke, or think this it is just plain terrible.
Wreck It Ralph
(06.01.13) - Wreck It Ralph is the bad guy from a video game in an arcade which is celebrating it's 30th anniversary. He is shunned by the other characters at the end of the day when the arcade is shut, and so sets out into the other games in the arcade to win himself a hero's medal. Finding himself in a modern futuristic first person shooter, he shoots bugs and wins a medal, but an accident propels him into a game called Sugar Rush, A racing game set in a candy filled world, where he partners up with a young girl to enter into the race and win back his beloved medal. But the Candy King has other plans and is determined to stop them from entering the race.... and he has his own reasons for doing so. This Disney film was beautifully produced with stunning animation and excellent 3D effects. It was amazing to look at and the characters and scenes were beautifully done . The voice acting was great, especially Jane Lynch, best known for her role in Glee. For someone like me, who had a wasted youth spending far too much time playing computer games, it was excellent fun spotting the various game characters in the background (Dig Dug, Space Invaders etc) and some more prominent in the story (Qbert and his cohorts, Pac Man Ghost (Clyde) and Bowser) and even sounds (the "alert" from Metal Gear Solid). I have to confess to being absolutely enthralled for the first 20 minutes, with it's in jokes, retro 8 Bit style graphics/animation and thrilling set piece when in the futuristic bug shooting game, but unfortunately (for me at least) it did sag a little in the middle. However, the ending picked it up and it redeemed itself. That said, there was enough to keep the children amused (my 5 year old nephew enjoyed it) and plenty of laugh out loud moments for me (mainly as a result of the nods to the 8 Bit generation. At 1 hour 40 mins, it was a little over long which perhaps is why it felt padded in the middle. Overall, not as good as Tangled, but great fun nonetheless. The secret of it for the adults though is to spend more time watching what is happening in the background - that is where the subtle jokes are.
Les Yeux Sans Visage
(05.01.13) - A plastic surgeon fakes the death of his daughter after she is horrifically disfigured in a car crash which he caused and, along with assistance from his housekeeper, abducts young girls and subjects them to his experimental operations to try to transplant their face onto his daughter who is hidden away from the world. But his daughter is fed up with wearing her mask and hiding away and her hope of a normal life is fading fast. This is one of the "original" French New Wave horror films - made in 1964, this film was a pioneer in many ways. The most noticeable is it's use of quite shocking images. The viewer constantly waits for the camera to pan away from what is about to be seen, or to cut away, as per the horror films at the time. But it never does, leaving the viewer, for the first time, to view what they only imagined before. This lack of cut away's is one of the main features of this film, nowhere so obvious as to the operation scene. Secondly, the performance of the daughter by actress (Edith Scob) is outstanding, the way she manages to portray such emotion using only her eyes (the rest of her face being obscured by a Michael Mysers-esq emotionless, blank, white mask). Not as shocking to watch in light of the state of horror films today (reflected by it's 15 rating), but an interesting piece of cinematic history and, despite being slow moving, a good little film.
Urban Explorers
(04.01.13) - Four young adventurers on holiday in Berlin head underground with a guide to explore the tunnels and bunkers which run under the city. But following an accident which incapacitates their guide, they split up, two to stay and look after him, two to go for help. But in the darkness and shadows of the tunnel, a man lives in the abandoned bunkers who offers them help. But he has plans other than helping them and following their torture, the race is on to escape both him and the darkness. This was a film which I thought would go one of two ways - either be really good or be a bog standard horror by numbers. What it turned out to be was a surprisingly enjoyable, nasty little shocker. Unexpectedly gory, lots of twists and the fact that the story did not develop how I expected it to - in terms of who the film focuses on, characters which I thought would reappear or play a part in the story and just in terms of the tenseness of the film overall. A hybrid of "The Descent", "Hostel" and "Creep", this was a very pleasant surprise.
Unknown
(01.01.13) A doctor on his way to a conference in Berlin finds himself in a car accident as he races back to the airport to collect his briefcase which he left there. Upon awakening from a coma 4 days later, he approaches his wife who denies that she knows him and he finds a strange man has taken his identity and stands by his wife's side. With no help, support or any means of proving his identity, he finds himself relentlessly pursued by an assassin who is trying to silence him. But his amnesia prevents him from knowing why he is being chased or what secrets he may hold. This nice little film was your above average Hollywood thriller. Liam Neeson gives get another decent performance (although you can tell that he is not really putting everything into it - especially when you compare it to the performance he gave in The Grey)/ The rest of the supporting cast adequately fill their roles. The action scenes are very good, come thick and fast and the story moves along at a cracking pace. There are a number of very good twists and turns in the plot, which if you thought about it hard enough, you would probably guess, but if, like me, you simply sit, watch it, enjoy it for what it is and let it wash over you, you would not necessarily get. The film was clearly made off the back of Taken, but swaps violence for story, which is not necessarily a bad thing. It is reminiscent of "The Fugitive" and those old 80's Steven Segal films (Out for Justice, Nico etcetera) and I have to say I enjoyed it a lot. In summary, a good (albeit by numbers) thriller, which was an enthralling action packed movie and positive start to the the new (film) year.