Forward Motion: February 2007

Wednesday 28 February 2007

Casino Royale

‘James Bond will return’, the mantra slapped across the end credits of every James Bond film has, in recent years become more a note of warning than a cause for celebration. I have never been the biggest fan of the series; the old films can be fun and range from the good to the awful. I did however really enjoy Pierce Brosnan’s first outing as 007 Goldeneye and whilst his other films have been entertaining the quality has steadily fallen up to the less-said-about-the-best Die Another Day. So when Brosnan left and the series was put on hiatus I wasn’t too fussed, equally I was optimistic about the planned reboot of the series with a remake of Ian Fleming’s first Bond novel Casino Royale helmed by Goldeneye director Martin Campbell and with Daniel Craig as 007, a bold choice that outraged fans. Well now I think it’s safe to say that the risk has paid off, finally we have a new Bond film to be proud of and that should re-launch and re-energise the flagging series for years to come. Updating the book to the modern day (and screwing with all sense of continuity in the process) the film deals with Bond’s inauguration as a 00 Agent neatly opening with his required two kills. Fast forward and we see Bond on his first mission, a breathless and brilliant elongated set piece that sets the tone for the film, harsh, unforgiving and relentlessly enjoyable it hammers home the point in no uncertain terms, this is Bond as you haven’t seen him before, bleeding, tireless and determined. Craig is a revelation as Bond, he brings a wonderful confidence and machismo to the role yet has a vulnerable side – and it is his most un-Bond like trait that the film explores and in doing so shows you a side of Bond we have never seen, and explains why he is the way he is in the process. Bond has never really had an origin story before and it is fascinating to see his history laid out here, to see the man he will be moulded through these events and it sets future films in the series up perfectly. The film itself has an unusual structure, the main plot ends about half way through in a sequence that could well have been the finale of any other blockbuster and it is in a high-stakes poker game that the focus on the film rests upon. Here Bond is chosen to play against Le Chiffre, a banker to terrorists the world over, in order to deprive him of winning the money he needs to pay off his debtors. The Poker scenes are wonderfully done and focus on the people as much as the cards building the tension expertly and never outstaying their welcome. It is the card game and the resulting events that the film is really about though and with a heartbreaking and emotional finish in Venice it twists yet again in a different direction. The action all round is great, the actors reign in their performances giving the still rather ridiculous plot credibility. Eva Green radiates chemistry with Craig and Mikkelson plays Le Chiffre as a human being, not a typical Bond bad guy, with as much to lose as Bond himself. If you are at all a fan of James Bond you should applaud this film, there will be sticklers who miss Q and the gadgets and awful puns, but when you look beyond all that you will realise that this in fact is James Bond as he was written, arrogant, brilliant, ruthless and flawed, and the series is all the better for it. Bond reborn and re-energised this is a fantasic film that rarely stops for breath whilst invigorating the series that has felt so weak lately. More please, and soon!

The Holiday

A Christmas romantic comedy. If those words are enough to put you off this film then stop reading and move along now. This is a carefully and deliberately constructed and unrealistic feel good, light-hearted film from Nancy Myers, the woman behind As Good as it Gets and What Women Want. Then again that’s not to say it’s without its charm and at the end of the day I enjoyed it but then again I’m a sucker for these kinds of films. Kate Winslet and Cameron Diaz play women who, for different reasons, want to leave their lives behind over the Christmas period and who find each other on a house-swapping website (cue some rather pointless web-chat conversations) and end up in each others homes. Winslet, a journalist loves her new Beverly Hills mansion and Diaz (a film trailer editor, no really) likes the peace a quiet of the British countryside. Needless to say that despite the fact the women went away to swear off men, they soon find local interests, with Diaz it’s Winslet’s brother Jude Law and for Winslet it’s Jack Black in an overly restrained role as a film composer. From here on it it’s pretty obvious sailing, but like I said Myers is good at constructing the films people respond to and there is a good nature to this film that makes it likeable, rather than some marketing gimmick stretched out to feature length. The film also has plenty of entertaining moments that make its overly long runtime pass quickly. It could be so easy to be cynical and turn on this film for many reasons, but to be honest I liked it. I think that whatever the cynics say there is a place in cinema for such sugar-sweet films. Serious dramas have their place as do political commentaries, but at a time like Christmas this is the movie equivalent of snuggling up on the sofa with a hut mug of cocoa and who can argue with that? Predictable to the end and trite this still manages to entertain thanks to a good hearted nature and some energetic performances. Hardly original but does what it does well.

Stranger than Fiction

As you may have gathered during the course of many of my reviews there is one aspect of Hollywood that I bang on and on about – originality. While this may seem like a tired message it is true that it is becoming harder and harder to see original work on screen either through lack of public interest or the studios being unwilling to finance such ventures. Well with Stranger than Fiction we have the emergence of an original voice and a highly original take on the typical romantic comedy. Written by first time scribe Zach Helm the film play like Charlie Kaufman in love, or at least stripped of his usual biting cynicism, but bases itself on a premise the king of crazy himself would be proud of. Harold Crick is an IRS agent, and playing to the stereotype he is rather dull. Basing his life around mathematics and routine Harold overthinks his existence, stopping himself from experiencing anything new and exciting. Until one day he meets a woman, Maggie Gyllenhaal, a baker who refuses to pay a portion of her taxes and who slowly starts to change Harold’s ways. So far so romantic comedy, but the twist in the tale is that Harold is actually the main character in Kay Eiffel’s (Emma Thompson in brilliant mental breakdown mode) new book. Confused? Well as Harold goes about his business he starts to hear Eiffel’s voice narrating his life from the novel which is weird enough, but when the voice implies he is destined to die Harold suddenly finds himself in a race against time to find out exactly what is going on and whether or not he can stop it from happening. To say any more would be to ruin what is one of the smartest and most intriguing films of recent times. Will Ferrell plays the main character brilliantly, and in an inspired and brave move he abandons all his usual mannerisms and humour. The character of Harold Crick is so far removed from his usual crazy performances, but works due to Ferrell’s innate humanism and sadness. He manages to make Harold realistic, but not dull and his chemistry with Gyllenhaal (who also impresses) is believable and sweet. In fact the performances all round are great, except maybe for queen Latifah who is stuck in a role that is never developed enough and so feels rather useless, and the chain of events always intriguing and clever. In fact much credit must also go to director Marc Forster who continues to impress after directing Monsters Ball and Finding Neverland, his visual flair highlights the story perfectly but subtly and he avoids being heavy handed with the emotional aspects of the story. However the film is not perfect and towards the end there are some choices and reactions that don’t sit so well with me. I also feel that the relationship between the author and Harold could have been explored more; delving into the influence she has over his life, or even looking back and seeing if a similar occurrence happened with her previous novels. Of course there is also the impossible nature of the premise, something you either have to accept and get past because there is no explanation as such within the film, though I, for one, am thankful for this and feel the film works better as a fable, a phenomenon rather than a logical, understandable event. So for the most part the film walks the tightrope of lightness vs. philosophical debate well and if you embrace it for what it is, a concept movie taken to its extreme limits, you will find yourself with an underrated gem that you can’t help falling for. A unique and ambitious film with great performances and a fantastic premise that it can't quite live up to, but still makes a refreshing and enjoyable change from the normal cinema fare.

Borat

I am a convert. I have never been a fan of Borat before now, I found Ali G amusing but Borat never appealed to me, however I was willing to give the film a chance, based on all the positive reviews I have read and have to admit, they have a point. Depending on your taste you will probably love or hate this film that at least has to be admired for its bravery, guts and sheer lack of political correctness. Now many people have moralised over the meaning of the film and the way it uses the character of Borat to uncover people’s hidden prejudices, but I think any deep analysis of the film is missing the point. This is purely comedy for the most part, if it has a point along the way then that’s great but with the inclusion of sections of the film that obviously contain actors alongside hidden came footage of people not in on the joke it becomes a tricky film to work out any truth from. In fact the knowledge you have about the style of Borat’s interviews can take away from the film because it leaves you questioning his methods and wondering if something is genuine or not, rather than focusing on the story. Yes the film has a story, and in fact does a good job of turning Borat’s small 5 minute sketches into a feature length film by having him and his rather useless producer scour America firstly to make a documentary, and secondly to try and lead Borat to Pamela Anderson, the woman he believes is destined to be his future wife. The character of Borat is wonderfully played by Cohen, he is just the right side of caricature to make him believable and comes out with the most offensive and funniest things, parts of the film do make you cringe, but under all Borat’s bigotry and misguided judgements there is a person there and there is a deft subtle quality to some of the scenes that make you care for Borat more than you might think. Basically the film is very very funny, it is also completely outrageous, featuring one particular wrestling match that I would be very happy never to witness again, though its sheer nerve did make me laugh. There isn’t much more to say about the film really, chances are you already know if you will like the film and this kind of humour appeals to you. Unlike many comedies Borat manages to sustain the jokes, be they from his situations or his wonderfully inaccurate voiceovers, throughout the running time. The film is not quite as big and clever as it may want to be seen but it is funny if you like this kind of thing and Cohen’s risqué style of humour is definitely unlike anything you will have seen before. Dangerous and hilarious Borat works surprisingly well as a feature film and goes places few would dare follow. Not for the feint hearted, but if this is your thing you could well laugh yourself silly.

Saw III

I have mentioned before my fondness for the Saw series, and was pleasantly surprised by Saw II when it was released last year. Well here we are, 12 months on and another sequel has emerged more blood-soaked than the other two put together, but lacking in ideas and hopefully the last of these films in their current format. Taking place directly after the events of Saw II this iteration on the series sees Jigsaw, bedridden and dying kidnap, with help from his assistant Amanda, a doctor to help keep him alive long enough to see another of his victims complete his final game. As a set up it works quite well, seeing Jigsaw in this state though, while interesting, robs him of a lot of his malice and while he is still a great character, his mightier-than-thou attitude and justification for his challenges grow ever more repugnant. His claims of setting people free from their lives do not ring true and as a lot of the focus of the film turns to Amanda leaving these areas unexplored. Now Amanda is one of the main problems I had with the film, I’m not sure exactly what it is but she is not a very interesting character to me and the actress who plays her obviously feels the need to go borderline psychotic in every scene making her appear unhinged, but lacking the depth of her mentor. But in the same way it is a brave decision to show the master-apprentice relationship in this way crumbling and full of miscommunication with Amanda failing to grasp her tutor’s lofty ideals. The rest of the film is solid however, the performances are generally better than before and the puzzles certainly more gruesome and twisted. I don’t consider myself squeamish but there are several sections of the film that had me cringing and the set design and look of the film is as dingy and industrial as ever suiting the mood. The film is still a cut above your average horror fare with a tight storyline, though the way the two separate plots come together is somehow less satisfying than in the other films, like the filmmakers felt the need to better themselves each time rather than expanding the ideas. Saw III will satisfy those who enjoyed the first two films but the hyper-kinetic editing wears thin this time round and it feels as if elements of character and plot are lost amid the gore. The Saw style of horror films has been much copied and maybe that’s why elements of the film feel old fashioned now, let’s hope that if the series is to continue that the makers find some new and different ways of playing their sick and twisted games. A gruesome and tightly wound thriller that strays rather to closely to formula and, whilst it has some good ideas, remains less intriguing and more ambivilous than the other films sticking rather too closely to formula.

Gaming

Here you can find all my posts related to gaming, be they articles, reviews or impressions or just news or clips, enjoy! 2008 Mass Defect 2007 Reviews, scores and sequels - far from perfect? Get corrupted Where Nintendo is going wrong Five is the Magic Number A casual problem My Games #1: Super Mario 64 A console retrospective E3 2007 Round Up Sailing the Blue Ocean Manhunt 2 and Pleasant Surprises This is Living

Faith

Here you can find an archive of all my posts relating to the topics of faith, religeon, christianity and other such topics - no don't go just yet, there could be some good stuff here.... 2007 Re-Post: Oh no the R Word 40 Days and 40 Nights

Tuesday 27 February 2007

Pan's Labyrinth

Despite being a huge film lover, I have to admit it has only been in the past couple of years that I have gained an interest in foreign films, be they Japanese, French or in the case of the current crop of directors to reach the international stage, Mexican. Along with Alfonso Cuaron who release his stunning Children of Men earlier this year, and who produced this film, Guillermo del Toro represents this group, he has had some mainstream success before with Blade 2 and Hellboy, both films I enjoyed but didn’t love, but who really comes into his own as both writer and director with Pan’s Labyrinth. A dark fairytale unlike anything you have ever seen Pan’s Labyrinth masterfully mixes gritty realism with gothic fantasy to unusual and haunting effect. Going into the film I was unsure of what to expect but was anticipating a much larger fantasy element. As it is the film is just as, if not more, concerned with the human element of the story, leaving the fantasy to one side for much of the running time. The film is set in Spain in the year 1944 and concerns itself with Ofelia, a little girl who has come wither her pregnant mother to stay with her stepfather at a military outpost where the Spanish army hunts down the remaining rebels who have hidden inside the mountain. It is within this cruel and dark environment, her stepfather is a brutal and viscous character and her mother is sick, that Ofelia discovers a mysterious labyrinth hidden in the grounds of the base. Soon afterwards Ofelia is approached by a creature she calls a fairy who leads her to the Faun Pan who informs her she is, in fact, the missing princess of the underworld and that return to her true family she must complete three tasks. What del Toro, very cleverly, does in the story is never explicitly condemn, nor confirm the existence of this other world to anyone but Ofelia. In this way the film can be interpreted many ways and it helps it blend in to the harsh and violent war story that is going on in the background. One thing to get straight is that this is a fairytale in the traditional sense. It is dark and disturbing and del Toro fills the film with realistic violence and enough stomach churning moments and flourishes to really make you fear for these characters. People die in the film and good may not always win. This adds a fantastic layer of tension and danger to the proceedings as we feel for Ofelia and the situation she is put it. The special effects are wonderful, kept to the background for the most part they serve the story perfectly and the fantastical creatures and scenarios del Toro thinks up are masterfully executed. One character in particular, the thin man is amazingly creepy and unlike anything you would have seen before and it is this juxtaposition with the serious drama that makes the film so unique and captivating. While the film is dark, it also has moments of light and a really beautiful score than sticks with you long after the end credits. I would recommend this film to those seeking an alternative and daring film that is challenging to watch but rewarding. The film isn’t perfect, personally I would have liked more of the fantasy element explained and focused on, but this is a fantastic film on all levels and fully establishes del Toro as one of the most exciting and visually creative directors working today. Dark, brutal and imaginative this is Del Toro's finest film so far and a wonderful modern fairytale masterfully contrasting the harshness of war with the wonder and imagination of childhood.

The Prestige

Christopher Nolan is fast becoming one of my favourite directors, after hitting the mainstream with Memento he has gone on to make varied but thematically similar films since with Insomnia, Batman Begins and now The Prestige which is the film most reminiscent of Memento and sees the director return to the world of mysteries and puzzles, all deftly crafted with a magicians eye for detail. Adapted from Christopher Priest’s novel of the same name The Prestige concerns itself with two turn of the century magicians played by Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale, each equally impressive in their respective roles. Initially partners a tragedy pulls them apart and the film charts their attempts to compete to become the greatest magician of the time, specifically over one trick, the disappearing man. Bale plays Alfred Borden a naturally gifted magician who struggles with the presentation of his act. Jackman’s Robert Angier is the opposite, a consummate showman he has to employ Michael Caine’s Cutter to design his tricks and enable him to stay one step ahead of his rival. I will say no more of the story as the best way to enjoy this film is going in knowing as little as possible; half the fun comes from the twists and turns in the story and piecing together exactly what it is you are being shown. Nolan is a master when it comes to structuring a mystery and this is evident throughout The Prestige. He manages to keep you intrigued and puzzled, but never tricked or cheated. The answers are all presented to you and if you can spot what is going on is makes the unfolding all the more rewarding. This is not a ‘twist’ film in the traditional sense, the film does not revolve around the mystery, there is a lot more going on. Themes of duality and sacrifice run throughout the often dark tale, and the sense of dread and atmosphere created is marvellous and subtle, the fact that this is a period film is hardly realised, Nolan sucks you into the world and simply presents it to you. The cast are uniformly great; Caine is still producing wonderful performances at this stage in his career, with this and Children of Men showing different sides to his character this year alone. Scarlett Johansson manages a surprisingly decent British accent but her character is the thinnest of the bunch and not developed as much as the others. Overall this is a great film, it is wonderfully and confidently constructed by a director at the top of his game. The film does rely on a certain amount of suspension of disbelief and a central theme you have to embrace to fully appreciate, but overall for a cinema trip that is challenging and rewarding and that makes you think, you’d be hard pressed to find a better film around than this. A wonderfully constructed and executed mystery, this is a conveluted and original tale with fantastic performances and a kick in the tale that will send you spinning. Highly recommended.

Marie Antoinette

Like many people Sophia Coppola was brought to my attention through the wonderful Lost in Translation in 2004. When it was announced that her next film would look at Marie Antoinette, I was intrigued but not convinced. Add to this the bizarre trailer and you get a film I was unsure about. I needn’t have worried, while not a classic on par with Translation there is no doubt that Marie Antoinette is a success, a breath of fresh air to the historical genre and a very unusual film. Bringing her atmospheric and lingering style to the world of 18th century France, Coppola manages to imbue these historical figures with real humanity and, despite the use of 80s pop tunes, helps us relate to Marie, an Austrian sent to an arranged marriage in France and locked away at Versailles, growing and coping with the life thrust upon her. Coppola seems to understand isolation well and again it is through her careful use of laying scenes and placement of shots that she emphasizes Marie’s feelings. The opening of the film is stark and silent, hardly a word is spoken and it is masterfully put together. Now it has to be noted that, like Translation, this is a slow film. Not much happens and many audiences may find themselves loosing patience. Unlike most films this is about mood and repression, Marie in unable to show how she really feels, to express herself and so Coppola keeps her at a distance. The film is gorgeous to look at and the attention to detail is fantastic. The excessive nature of the royal existence is shown in detail, from luxurious parties to cakes and feasts and servants aplenty. But she also shows Marie as a girl who likes fun, she laughs and plays with her friends and revels in the lifestyle. Unlike so many films that treat the past as something that has already happened, there is a sense of modernity to this film. The modern songs help and it does a great job of making the film immediate, for these characters it is the present and it’s a refreshing attitude to history. Of course the film is not trying to be a documentary and the famous beheading is absent from the film, understandable so. The film is not about that, it’s not even really about 18th century France. It is a look at the human conditions of sacrifice, lifestyle and choice. However I do feel that the sense of disconnectedness hampers the film. We never delve deeper into Marie’s character, or that of those around her. We see glimpses and hints, and Dunst has never been better playing Marie perfectly with the right amount of charm and youthful exuberance, but we are never let behind her exterior, as she views her subjects from afar we do the same with her. Overall this is a great film, rich in atmosphere and those musical interludes Coppola is so great at. It is more a film to soak up and relax into, than one to study and analyse and an enjoyably shallow but unique cinema experience. Sophia Coppola impresses again with this dreamy and haunting look at the life and times of Marie Antoinette. Dunst has never been more radient and the film's use of modern songs and aimless excess blend wonderfully to provide a unique experience.

The Guardian

Ashton Kutcher, best known for playing Kelso on That 70’s Show and for his MTV prank show Punk’d has recently been trying a bit of a Jim Carrey, that is a comedy actor trying to play more straight up dramatic roles (see also Jack Black in King Kong or Zach Braff in The Last Kiss). In the Guardian he plays an ambitious recruit for the Rescue swimmers, the elite search and rescue team employed around America ’s coast to save those involved in boating or other sea-related accidents. The film follows his relationship with the head coach Frank Farmer played by Kevin Costner, in typical hero / mentor with issues style. Renowned as the most decorated swimmer in recent history Farmer suffers an accident and is put in charge of the years new trainees. Enter many training montages, bonding moments and arguments with the existing staff over his unusual teaching style – for example helping the recruits learn about pneumonia by having them huddle in an ice bath. For what the film does it does it pretty well. The characters are reasonable interesting and the film is enjoyable, in so much as I found it interesting to find out about the life of the rescue swimmers, group I didn’t even know existed, and who will no doubt will benefit from the publicity gained from this film. However the main flaws lie in the fact that the story has been told so many times, and the characters seem so familiar that it is rarely surprising. It is comfortable, in the same way so many romantic comedies are because you know where it is going and it doesn’t challenge you along the way. There are some pretty decent special effects during the rescue scenes, though they are not always totally convincing and generally the acting is good, Costner still has plenty of charisma and plays the hard man with a heart so well you forgive the clichés that follow his character. Kutcher doesn’t fare as well, he embodies the youthfully cockiness well enough, but it is too easy to see his comedy side come through, though he manages the dramatics with more skill that you may think. He is certainly no embarrassment and is a likeable enough lead character. The other recruits however are fairly forgettable and where the film really falters is that the ending does not serve what has come before. We see few actual heroic rescues, and to have a conclusion where the rescue swimmers end up having to save each other after disregarding their training feels anti-climatic and disappointing. The film often feels like it is building to a big, dramatic finale that never appears; something that is a lot harder to forgive than the familiar story and thin characterizations. Formulaic and predictable but solidly made and acted with enough winning performances to keep you engaged throughout. The letdown ending leaves a sour taste in the mouth however.

X-Men 3: The Last Stand

So another summer comes and with it another slew of comic-book adventures. This, the third and supposedly final, chapter in the X-Men series come in almost direct competition with the original two film’s director Bryan Singer’s Superman Returns, and much has been made of his absence from this production and the hiring of Brett Ratner. After seeing the film though I have to say that, mainly, it turned out pretty well and those that feared the quality would drop with this entry should feel relieved. Whilst it’s not as good as maybe it could have been with a bit more time, this is still a worthy entry into the series and continues the story, so well set up in the first two films, successfully. The plot this time revolves around a ‘mutant cure’ that has been developed in the world. Naturally this provokes some angry responses from Magneto and his band of followers who fear that the drug will be forced against them. Meanwhile Jean Grey returns to the X-Men after her exploits at the end of the second film, different and dangerous. Now one of the main things sequels should do is up the ante from previous films, and it’s here that X-Men 3 works best. The stakes are considerably higher this time round and the seriousness and impart of the conflict takes its toll on the X-Men. The film is quite uncompromising and many will be shocked to see how some established characters are treated. Whilst this adds tension and darkness to the tone of the film it also feels, at times, like a bit of a waste. Originally I’m sure there was a much longer plan for this franchise with so many mutants to deal with and so many possible storylines to plunder. However it seems with this film that the makers have decided to finish the series is style and while it is exciting and spectacular to watch it also suffers from feeling like too much is lost. By the end of the film about 7 or 8 main characters from the first two films are changed and/or gone leaving the series in tatters if it was ever to continue. It’s probably worth mentioning that the film deviates heavily from the original comic books as well, something that has upset many fans who had seen many potential stories gradually set up in the first two films only to be bulldozed over with the third. Whilst the plot is intriguing, many of the new characters that are introduced are not given enough time to be fully realised. Kelsey Grammer does well as Beast but we see precious little of him in action. Speaking of action though, this is where the film excels. There are a few great action scenes, especially towards the end that really draw you in with some wonderful special effects. More than the other films there is a sense of an epic battle going on and it helps the film stand apart from its predecessors. In other areas however Bryan Singers touch is sorely missed. Brett Ratner is a fine director and the film looks good visually, but some of the heart and emotion of the story has been lost in the telling and many of the aforementioned losses are not as expertly handled and therefore affecting as they could have been. Equally the film, if anything, is a touch short. The film is just over 1 hour 40 and another 15 minutes could easily have been added to flesh out some more of the new characters and add some more character development to the established folks. Storm takes a more central role this time often leaving Hugh Jackman’s excellent Wolverine in the shadows, he is more sedate in this film ‘tamed’ even and it’s a shame there’s not more of his dark side. But taken as a whole the film is a success, the stakes are raised, the look and feel of the other films is retained and the story moves along well and leads to a satisfying climax. Considering what some fans had been anticipating this could have been a disaster, luckily what ended up on the screen was far from it. An exciting and worthy installment to the X-men series that suffers slightly from the change in director and rapid overkill of plotlines but emerges as entertaining and enjoyable as a summer blockbuster should be.

World Trade Centre

It may have been five years since 9/11 but the issue still sits at the forefront of our modern society, the ripples caused by the events of that day still echo out over the world at large. So does that mean that a Hollywood blockbuster based on the events is acceptable? Well ultimately that is up to us all individually to decide, but when one is as safely made as this one that manages to tell an heroic story whilst honouring those affected by that day it is hard to see many people having serious objections. That's not to say the film is amazing, it isn't and there are dangers of glossing over that day with the sheen of a big budget blockbuster but thanks to Oliver Stones steady hand at the controls World Trade Centre managed to edge the borderline between United 93 style realism and those hallmark style made for TV specials. In fact for a film called World Trade Centre there isn't actually much focus on the towers and reaction to the events from around the world, more time is spent in the rubble following two brave Port Authority Officers who find themselves trapped when the towers collapse. The opening of the film is striking in its simplicity, morning life in New York like any other day and yet totally different. Somehow Stone manages to convey a wistful sense of nostalgia for a time just 5 years shy of now. However seeing the actual event recreated, as well as peoples reactions is an odd thing, everyone remembers where they were that day and to see it, and yet know it is a film is a slightly off putting thing at first. However once the officers are trapped - a sequence that suitable captures the absolute terror and sheer force the collapse would have caused - the film improves with a tight claustrophobic atmosphere that immediately puts you in the place of those men. As the time goes on we follow the two officer's families as they wait for news from the site, as well as a former army sergeant stroke pastor who volunteers himself to search the rubble. Following these stories is a questionable decision though as it offers us the viewers a beak from the rubble, therefore disrupting the mood created. It would have been a much braver and more effective move to stay with these trapped men for the entire time and truly get into their position. Maria Bello and Maggie Gyllenhall do decent enough jobs as the spouses of the trapped men but it is these sections of the film that seem to head towards the aforementioned Hallmark made-for-TV style and won't be as palatable for non-American audiences and the rather corny dialogue and flashback sequences doesn't help the situation. But once again when the story comes back to the trapped men it captures your attention and both actors rise to the occasion with great emotion with the limited space, light and movement they have. Their plight is realised superbly and so when the rescue comes it is a massive relief, a ray of light in the darkness and a wonderful outlet for the despair that starts to creep into the proceedings. I have to admit that bits of the film really go to me, but in an obvious way. United 93 hits you with its cold factual views of the day, World Trade Centre feels more like it is manoeuvring you into certain feelings and so it works as a cathartic tool but also feels slightly manipulative. Basically Oliver Stone has constructed the kind of film you would expect to see about 9/11, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The film looks at the positives of the day and points towards the common good we share as people and on a day so full of the worst humans are capable of it can be nice to be reminded of that. After watching the film it made me want to call my family and tell them I loved them, hug my wife and pray that no-one I know ever has to go through such an event, and that if nothing else captures the feeling of September 11th perfectly. Heartfelt and reverent this is a typical Hollywood representation of the events of 9/11 but done with a style and grace that does justice to those involved and honours the good that was found amongst the tragedy.

The Departed

Martin Scorsese has been absent from the crime genre he so pioneered back in the 1970s, recently spreading his wings with Gangs of New York and The Aviator and still failing to capture that elusive Oscar. So it is nice to see him re-invigorated and focused simply on telling a good story without one eye on the awards, the irony being that this is probably a better film for it. A remake, or re-imagining, of the classic Hong Kong film Internal Affairs, the Departed focuses on Matt Damon and Leonardo DiCaprio two young cops, one (Damon) on the payroll of local mob boss Costello infiltrating the police, the other (DiCaprio) a cop disgraced in order to gain access to Costello's gang. It is from this set up that we are launched headlong into the film, the pounding of the Dropkick Murphy's in the soundtrack and a sense of exhilaration and anticipation. Now I won't detail any of the films many twists and turns but what you end up with is an uncompromising, violent, over the top testosterone fuelled police drama anchored by fantastic performances all round. Set in Boston with the backdrop of Irish immigration all the stars excel, rising to the occasion with flair, Jack Nicholson is as unhinged as ever, Matt Damon wonderfully self-assured and slimy as the ruthless Sullivan but it is DiCaprio who impresses the most playing what could have been a one-dimensional character with great empathy. He has quietly become an impressive leading man and as the film progresses you can see the burden of his assignment literally weighing down on his shoulders, blurring his ideas of who he is and what is right and wrong. The script is smart, vulgar and entertaining and Dominic Monaghan managers to give everyone a chance to shine, creating an entertaining and tension filled film that still manages to look at the deeper issues of identity and deception. In fact the film runs at 2 1/2 hours but doesn't feel it. The story is constantly intriguing, and while the violence is harsh it fits the world that these characters live in, a kind of exaggerated fantasy grounded by the reality of these characters. However the film does drag a little at the end, leaving you unsure as to where it is heading, and personally, I was disappointed by some events near the end of the film. It does work and fit the story, it is just not where I would have liked to see it go, but this is partly due to the bond you feel with these characters as the movie progresses. But aside from this and a few plot points that niggle once you start to think about them afterwards, there is not much to complain at here. The Departed is a masterfully crafted piece of filmmaking. Neither overly flashy nor violent just for the sake of it, it is a timely reminder of Scorsese's ability and is a blast to watch. Not for the feint of heart but if hard boiled action with some of Hollywood’s greatest actors commanding the screen is your thing, you won’t find many films better than this. A return to blistering form from one of America's finest directors, macho, tough, violent and very enjoyable this is a tour-de-force of acting from some of Hollywood's brightest stars, young and old.

The Last Kiss

I have been a fanm of Zach Braff since I first saw Scrubs and enjoyed his debut film as writer/director Garden State when it was released last year. In The Last Kiss he proves again what a versatile actor he can be and has chosen a smart film to further his transfer from sitcom star to Hollywood actor. Here he plays Michael, a typical guy settled in a relationship with a child on way who starts to panic when he looks at his future and sees no surprises. Enter The O.C's Rachel Bilson as the teenage temptress Kim, who Michael meets at a wedding and continues to see, unsure exactly of what he is doing or why. As well as this central story the film follows three of Michael's close friends all dealing with different aspects of being in their late 20s and coping with maturity and adulthood. This film is a smart and refreshing look at relationships, the characters are often unsympathetic and realistic and are each responsible for the problems they find themselves in. Unlike many similar films these are flawed people, something that is unusual but the film always stops them completely crossing the line, keeping them likeable and the audience interested. the acting all-round is good with Braff impressing in a more dramatic role than usual. There are still hgints of his Scrubs personna but he makes Michael's life-crisis believeable, and brings real weight to the dramatic scenes when needed. The film does get pretty serious as well and those expecting a frothy Hollywood romance will be suprised, but like I said it makes a refreshing change. The film was written by Paul Haggis, of Crash fame and unlike that film this just about dodges an overdramatic tone and ends on a perfect note of hope amongst pain. So if you are on the look out for a more realistic and grounded film about adulthood and having to grow up this could be the film for you, just don't go in expecting any happily ever afters. A refreshingly open and honest romantic comedy with more focus on drama and the realities of relationships than comic mishaps. Great performances ground it, but the slightly cynical edge may make it hard to enjoy and sympathise with the characters.

The Da Vinci Code

There’s not much I can say about this film that hasn’t been covered in hundreds of magazines, websites and newspapers over the past few weeks and months. In fact I’ve been so sick of all the talk that it’s hard to write this knowing that in a small way I’m adding to those very articles. Basically I read the book, quite liked it but don’t see the big fuss. It’s quite obviously a load of rubbish in terms of having an actual real conspiracy to it, but it has struck a chord with society as a whole and so when the film was announced there was no surprise. What I was surprised by was that even with a great cast and director the film is so limited by its source material. In adapting such a popular book the makers have slavishly stuck to the story everybody has already read, and unfortunately for them the book isn’t strong enough for such an adaptation. The characters are weak and underdeveloped as the book is plot driven, once you’ve found out the secrets there’s no desire to re-read it (or there wasn’t from me) and watching this film felt like re-reading the book. There is very little new here and when you know where the story is heading it become a bit of a chore to sit through. This fact indicates the difference between other adaptation such as the Harry Potter films where even though I know them really well I can’t wait to see it up on the big screen, because we care about these characters, we want to see them grow and experience these things again, in the DaVinci code there is none of that. I think the telling fact is simply that if the book wasn’t so popular, this would have never been made into a film. Anyway enough of all that moaning; how is the film? Well like I said it’s a bit dull, but generally fine. It looks great, has great actors, moves at a reasonably brisk pace (at least for the first half), in other words it’s a perfect straight adaptation of a book that needed changing. Tom Hanks sleepwalks through the film, Audrey Tatou does her best and Paul Bettany and (as always) Ian McKellen really shine but ultimately I found it hard to care. There is nothing beyond the intrigue of the set-up and the payoff at the end is disappointing too. What annoyed me as well was a speech Tom Hanks is given at the end that has obviously been placed in the film to try and calm those who may be offended by the ideas of the film, but that makes no sense. It’s like proving something is true, then telling everybody all that matters is what you believe! It’s a load of rubbish and the fact that the film can’t seem to stick to its supposed message speaks volumes about how commercial a venture the whole thing has been. I think what really hampers the film is that it takes everything so deadly seriously. The book moves at a fast pace, like a film. It has crazy stunts, puzzles, car chases – like a modern Indiana Jones and yet the film feels very laboured and slow. If they had embraced the trashy nature of the book and pushed the film to the edges a bit with more humour and excitement rather than something that feels more akin to a two hour history lesson with McKellen and Hanks stopping every few minutes to explain something else to the clueless Tatou, it could have been a great adventure film. As is is though it is lacking that sense of urgency and danger, and whilst it may make interesting reading to hear about all this history, up on screen it’s harder to take in and happens far too often. But like I said the film isn’t terrible, it’s passable. It does a fine job of representing the source material, and I guess for the three people out there who haven’t read the book they might find it interesting, but for those who have read the book it feels like a complete re-tread of a tale that didn’t need re-telling, or at least not in this way. A surprisingly lethargic and wordy affair this takes too few risks with the source material and wastes the talent involved. In film the weaknesses of the book are exaggerated and by the end the film peters out with a whimper rather than a bang. A shame.

Superman Returns

When Bryan Singer jumped ship from the X-Men franchise to make Superman Returns there was a mixed response. Few people had doubt his Superman film would be great, but it was the fate of the X-Men franchise that people were concerned about. Well in a strangely ironic turn of events neither expectation was properly fulfilled, X-Men 3 turned out to be pretty good, and unfortunately Superman, while really good, falls short of the greatness many had hoped for. Picking up 5 years after Superman II (this has been widely reported as the ‘true’ Superman 3) the story sees Superman (and Clark) return to a changed world. Lois has become a mother and is engaged, the rest of the world seems to be coping without having Superman around. As he starts to get back to his old life Clark finds it hard adjusting and add into this mix Lex Luther, released from prison and bent on revenge and you have a classic Superman set up. And for the most part it works great. The universe Singer and co. have created here feels like a natural progression from the original films and the film makes constant reference to those films honouring them and yet changing the rules and adapting the characters. A film like this lives or dies on the shoulders of its leading man and thankfully Branden Routh steps up to the plate big time here. As a newcomer he displays amazing confidence and charisma as both Clark and Superman making a clear distinction between the two and, though he has few lines, he manages to imbue Superman with a very real humanity, a man conflicted by emotion and struggling to fit back into the world. Superman is the archetypal outsider and the emotional investment you gain with the characters is well woven and developed. Unfortunately though the actual plot of the film has had less attention. Whilst spectacular at times is feels rather generic and ludicrous and while Spacey’s Lex Luthor is a definite improvement on Hackman’s 1970s version he has no clear motivation and it’s a shame Superman does not have a classic villain to contend with here. That said the special effects are generally excellent and Singer creates some truly beautiful shots. The most work seems to have gone into those of Superman flying and they are truly spectacular at times fully engaging you in the moment with John Ottomans reverent and clever use of John William’s original score furthering the nostalgic but contemporary feel of the film. Overall I think the problems the film suffers from are pacing issues, it is quite long and can drag especially at the end, but also the fact that it is re-launching a series yet acting like a true sequel to the originals. It seems stuck in the past, yet modern and it’s an unusual mix. Add to this some plot holes and inconsistencies and the pure fact that Superman is pretty much invulnerable makes the tension hard to create. We don’t ever really feel like he is in danger, in some ways he is the least human of the Superheroes and with seemingly no limit to his powers it makes it hard to feel like he can lose. But despite these flaws this is a great film, it is entertaining, funny and genuine with great performances and real heart, something X-Men 3 was lacking. So why the same score? Purely because I feel what it makes up in characters, it loses in plot and excitement. I hope though that a sequel gets made because now that a new Superman film has finally been released, hopefully Singer and co will be freer to move on and create something that we truly, have never seen before. Lovingly made and beautifully crafted, this is an emotional and reverant film with some great acting and FX let down by a lackluster plot and fixation on the past.

Snakes on a Plane

Snakes on a Plane is a strange film. One built around a fevered internet fan base and pretty much a title alone. A film that has been hyped beyond all recognition months before its release and encumbered with a title that will go down in history regardless of the content of the film. In fact it will probably come as a surprise to many people that the film isn’t so bad it’s good, in fact it’s a pretty decent over the top horror / action / monster movie with enough excitement humour and Samuel L Jackson to keep most cinema audiences entertained. This is the movie equivalent of Ronseal – it does exactly what it says on the tin, and on the tin it says Snakes on a Plane! Samuel L Jackson is cool, there’s no two ways about it. Without him the film just wouldn’t work and I can think of no other actor today that a) people would want to see battling hundreds of poisonous snakes at 35,000 feet or that b) would want to actually star in said film. All credit to Jackson who has been behind the project from the start, he knows exactly what kind of film this is and his committed performance and love for the fans make this film a blast, it’s ridiculous and even admits as much, but he somehow grounds the film and stops it achieving a campy level of humour that would not have worked. As it is we get a surprisingly decent bunch of, rather stereotypical but interesting, side characters, some really intense sequences and some nasty snake attacks. The film does not shy away from the violence, which of course makes it all the more involving and over the top. It is not perfect, in fact bits of the film are down right absurd and there are elements that could have been expanded upon and some of the acting is slightly questionable, but on the whole, the film delivers what it has set out to do and remains inventive enough to ever stop from being boring. It wastes no time getting going, keeps you entertained and delivers tonnes of snake fuelled action. If you like crazy monster movies with a twist and Samuel L Jackson doing his ‘cool as’ shtick then you’ll enjoy Snakes on a Plane. Oh and in case you were wondering ‘the line’ is awesome! Great popcorn cinema! Ridiculous, crazy and packed with screams and laughs this is a schlock horror film that delivers on its promise of entertainment and Sam Jackson kicking some serious snake behind!

Pirates of the Carribean: Dead Mans Chest

The first Pirates of the Caribbean was a surprise hit, and a film that managed to do the impossible by making pirate film cool again. Thanks to its ingenious casting of Johnny Depp and almost impossibly entertaining nature the film won people over everywhere, so inevitably here we, a few years later with the first of two sequels. Thankfully though this film more than stands next to the original and dares to take the series to some pretty extreme and unexpected places whilst retaining the swashbuckling fun of the original. Make no mistakes Cap’n Jack Sparrow is back, and it was worth the wait! Picking up soon after the events of the first film Dead Mans Chest sees Jack being pursued by the enigmatic Davy Jones, brilliantly played by Bill Nighy behind a digital mask. Completely lifelike and real Davy Jones is a testament to CGI and a marvel to behold. Naturally it isn’t long before Will and Elizabeth get caught up in the action, but the plot is to convoluted to bother detailing here. Suffice to say the group end up searching for the titular Dead Mans Chest as the only way of stopping Davy Jones and his crew of the damned. Now the general rule of sequels is to top the original and DMC does that in nearly every department. Aside from the rather disconnected opening 10 minutes or so this is a wonderfully entertaining and enjoyable film. The sets and stunts are bigger, more characters introduced and plotlines stretched and reversed. The films does a good job of adapting the characters and furthering them, so much so that by the end nobody is in the same place they were at the start. It is a brave move to change the established relationships but one that pays off and leaves you wanting more. In fact one of the few criticisms of the film is that it feels like half of a bigger story. Don’t get me wrong, the ending is a great cliff-hanger but it (quite rightly) leaves you unsatisfied and with many threads left unresolved. Personally I enjoyed this film more than the original, Johnny Depp is fantastic as always and the humour in the film is great and fits alongside the darker moments, of which there are quite a few especially towards the end. Sure there are unnecessary bits in the film and it is very overindulgent and overlong but it’s such good swashbuckling cinema that it’s hard to fault it for that. My only other criticism is that Elizabeth and Will are not the most interesting of characters, they have no real edge or agenda and whilst the events of the film do add more depth to them often in their scenes you find yourself missing Jack or Davy Jones who really light up the screen whenever they are involved. The special effects are superb throughout as is Gore Verbinski’s subtle but excellent direction. It’s not easy to tell a complex story such as this so well and he manages it effortlessly. So if you feel like escaping life for a couple of hours down at the local cinema look no further than Dead Mans Chest, it offers more entertainment per buck that most blockbusters of the past few years and sets up the final film (to be released next year) perfectly. Bigger, dafter and more overblown than the original, this is a blockbusting extravaganza sure to satisfy all fans of the original and sets up next summer's finale perfectly.

Mission Impossible 3

J.J. Abrams was seen as a risky choice to take over the reigns of the Mission Impossible series. A first time film director with TV experience he doesn't seem the right man to get the series back on track after the disappointing and overblown MI2. But when you consider the shows he has been involved in include Alias and Lost, it becomes less surprising that has exceeded all expectations with this film. Going back to the roots of the original television series and further away from the flashy gunplay of the second this film this is a masterful action film that rarely pauses for breath, or makes a wrong step. I was blown away by the film from the start and would definitely class it as one of the best all out action films of the past few years. There is a certain realism to the proceedings, the characters feel more real, the action more intense that seperate this from the majority of the so-so action fare that has been released recently. The pot concerns Ethan Hunt being brought back into the fray at IMF when a sadistic arms dealer, played to perfection by Phillip Seymour Hoffman, kidnaps his girlfriend and charges Ethan and his team with recovering a deadly weapon for him. The plot twists and turns, as any good Mission Impossible one should, and draws you in from the start. More than any of the other films in the series this tries to identify Ethan as a more rounded character whose attempts to leave his life at IMF behind and start again come undone at the seams. It is a bit strange to see Tom Cruise acting again given all his recent antics and the film is a timely reminder of his abilities. Whatever you think of the man he brings a renewed intensity and desperation to Ethan this time round, for the first time he has a weakness and seems vunerable - he has something to lose. The filmmakers play on this expertly cranking up the tension bit by bit as the film progresses following each action sequence with another even more entertaining. The film is quite brutal and harsh but also very clever and Ethan's team of agents is utilised here better than in any of the other two films. The film isn't perfect and the main story peters out towards the end as the focus turns to the personal conflicts involved, but aside from this and some rather cliched twists in the tail the film is a resounding success. With great performances, some amazingly integrated effects and a first time director clearly in his element this is one of the most exciting and entertaining blockbusters to be in cinemas in a while. So if you evern remotely liked the first two you'll have a blast with MI3. Highly recommended. Amazing stunts, a franetic pace and some great performances make this the best Mission Impossible yet. With eat set piece outdoing the last and some real emotion tossed into the action this leads where other action films should follow.

March of the Penguins

March of the penguins is a difficult film to review, in so much as it isn't really a film. This award winning documentary gathered over $60 million last year at the US box office and knocked War of the Worlds off of the number 1 spot. Not bad for what is essentially a wildlife documentary by an unknown french filmmaker. Taking place over the span of a year in the life of the emperor penguins at the South Pole, the film details the amazing journeys the creatures make in order to breed. Walking nearly 70 miles they must endure months of freezing winter, starvation and predators all for the suvival of one precious chick. The film is narrated by Morgan Freeman, who is a perfect choice. He has a wonderful voice for narration and embeds the film with realy heart and interest. Personally I would have liked more scientificn or informative narration than simply descriptive, and you do get the feeling sometimes that the film is aimed at younger children. Visually the film is a treat. The cinematography is stunning, from the gorgeous landscapes and wide shots to the close intimate shots of the penguins themselves. They are beautoful creatures that are unique and fascinating the watch. The film does a good job of moving the action along nicely and spending just enough time at each stage of the process. Each section is handled differently so it doesn't get too repetitive or outstay it's welcome. The film works for what it is, a short interesting and visually arresting documentary about some amazing creatures. Somehow seeing theit struggles, ups and downs reflects back on us as humans and citizens of the same planet and resonates inside. Nature is a miraculous creation that is endlessly fascinating to me and this documentary offers a small glimpse of the wonders of this planet, and for that it should be commended. Stunning cinematography and a fascinating story of survival in the harshest conditions on Earth make this a short and unusual, but worthwhile documentary. Could have done with more depth though.

King Kong (2005)

Peter Jackson’s love for the original King Kong has been well documented recently, and this has been one of my most anticipated films of the year. I must admit to not having seen the original, recently I have been wanting to but have deliberately waited to see this remake first. I am glad I did as I can more accurately assess it on its own merits, rather than just in relation to the original. King Kong really is an epic film. Huge in size and scale, and fully justifying its mammoth budget this is impressive filmmaking on all levels, from the amazing cinematography and incredible special effects, to the little moments and wonderfully acted and realised characters. I loved this film, it is probably too long, and too indulgent, but is so well constructed and caringly made you can’t help but be drawn in to the wonderful world Peter Jackson has created. The film starts in New York circa 1933 and does a wonderful job of setting the scene and providing an accurate picture of the world at that time. The opening hour is relatively slow, building characters and setting up the middle third of the film on Skull Island , but it really well done and intriguing. There is a lot of time spent aboard the ship on the way, all of it visually impressive but also it is very good at slowly building the apprehension of what is to come. A lot of time is spent with some of the crew here, which is good, but seeing as they are dropped later on in the film some of it seems a bit redundant. Skull island comes just at the right time, and as soon as Kong appears the film lets loose. Flexing his action muscles as impressively as any other working director in Hollywood Jackson lets rip with a myriad of fantastically executed and constructed action sequences. It is all very exciting, very over the top and amazing to look at. These do sometimes come off as a bit excessive, and suspending your disbelief from the relatively realistic opening, to the fantastical nature of the island can be a bit tough, but this is such powerful stuff that you soon forget about realism. Now it is here that the genius of the film truly emerges. In a word it is Kong. I have heard it said that he is the single most effective special effect in film history, and would have to agree. The film hinges on him being completely realistic and having a real relationship with Ann. Within minutes of his arrival all fears are put to one side as you see this marvellous creature come to life. Whatever people say, for me Kong is real. He exists - in his sad eyes is a lonely soul. He is completely real; Andy Serkis (the man behind Gollum) breathes life again into CGI pixels. He is a wonder to behold and the already great film is elevated beyond reproach when Kong is on screen. Not all the characters are so compelling, but thankfully once Skull Island ends the film focuses rightly on Kong and Ann. They build a tender relationship in a few short scenes, and James Newton Howard’s wonderful score helps ground it in real emotion. The ending is perfectly executed and achingly sad as the theatre of human folly is exposed. Kong is a tragic hero, and a heroic character and makes this film without a doubt. The film is not perfect, Jackson maybe went too far in some places, and the story could have been more tightly focused, but overall this is one of the most powerful, visually stunning and enjoyable cinematic experiences I’ve had all year. Bits of it are perfect; the rest is just really great. Whatever your preconceptions I urge you to check this film out, and let yourself be transported to another time and place, but one of the view truly visionary directors working today. These kind of films are the reason I want to make films and I for one am glad Peter Jackson has finally gotten the chance to make the film he’s always wanted to, maybe one day I will too. Kong is a true revelation in this fantastical, epic and overblown cinematic offering. Brilliant performances ground it in emotion and Jackson once again provides a reason to go to the cinema this Christmas. Go and be transported.

Monday 26 February 2007

Just Friends

A big factor in whether or not you like this film rests on your feelings towards it's star Ryan Reynolds. I've always liked him, from the otherwise rather poor Van Wilder to the disappointing Blade 3 he has always stood out above the material he's presented with. Here he stars again in a romantic comedy squarely aimed at the teenage market, but that manages to rise above it and provide a decent time at the cinema and plenty of laughs. Reynolds plays Chris Brander, a record producer, who returns home to the girl he liked in school. The catch being that back in school he was slightly overweight, and we purely seen by her as a 'friend'. A lot of people can identify with this position, especially in relation to girls they like and this immediately gains you some familar ground with the characters. The film is a light entertaining affair with some good perfromances. As well as Reynolds Anna Faris is a hoot as the crazy pop star he is forced to bring with him, and Chris Marquette is good also as Reynold's annoying younger brother. This relationship in the film rang very true for me, with both characters annoying each other and constantly fighting, but ultimately caring for each other in a realistic way. If you can get past the obvious plot and contrived set pieces (an ice hockey match with some aggressive kids for example) as well as the 'love-rival' character (played very well by Chris Klein) ripped from about every other romantic comedy, there is a lot to like here. The film is genuinely funny, the script smart and fast paced and the characters better realised than a lot of similar films. Amy Smart is appealing as the shared love interest and with a nice Christmas atmopshere this is a breezy and amusing film that will only appeal to a certain crowd, but does it well enough to leave you with a smile on your face. A smart and funny romantic comedy with good performances and a good Christmas atmosphere and plenty of laughs, let down by the fact that it brings nothing new to the table and doesn't stand out from the already crowded genre.

The Hills Have Eyes (2006)

As you may have gathered from this site horror films are a guilty pleasure to me. A friend recently queried my response to horror films as a Christian, something that got me thinking, and to be hoinest I'm still not sure how I feel. To me certain horror films are enjoyable for the way they can engage you and provide a tense and exciting experience. Those films that seek to glorify violence or encourage it do not achieve this, the best horror films feature ordinary people surviving extraordinary situations. It is right in this category that The Hills Have Eyes falls, a remake of Wes Craven's low budget 1970s original the story concerns itself with the misfortunes of a family, who, whist travelling through the desert break down, only to find they aren't alone. Alexandre Aja first came to peoples attention with the brutal and decent (the ending aside) film High Tension (or Swichblade Romance as it was titled over here). Here he steps up a gear and once again proves that he has something that separates him from the generic horror pack at the moment. This is a tough and uncompromising film that benefits from his unflinching direction and steady hand. I haven't seen the original, so without comment to that I have to say that this is one of the more impressive horror outings I've seen in a while. What separates this film from the other more psychological horror films of late (the Gruge etc.) and similar slash flicks (the recent remake of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre aside) is the careful build up and well detailed characters. Too often in horror films the characters are ignored in favour of gore and suspense, but the most effecive way of drawing an audience into what's happening on screen in to have them care. The family in the film are far from the usual cardboard cutouts, they seem real. The arguments, the way they relate to each and chat. These characters are people, and as such it makes the film more engrossing and horrific when things kick off. I won't spoil much but the film is not afraid to push the boundaries, but in a tasteful way always focusing on story and characters. The tension is build effectively and builds to a wonderful, unrelenting climax. Unfortunately this happens with about 1/3 of the film to go. This is my main complaint with the film, that it reaches this wonderfully intense point, and then lets it go off the boil by skipping ahead to the following morning. By giving the audience this time to breath and recover it never quite manages to recover the same momentum and does leave some of the ending of the film dragging slightly. This and some horror cliches aside this is a very impressive film that looks stunning throughout thanks to the gorgeous Texas scenery and with unusually great performances from all the cast. If you're a horror fan than I would reccomend this film, if not and you feel you can handle it then this is a great ride and one that like the best horror films leaves you breathless and sticks with you long afterwards. A lean mean and brutal horror film that after a slow start goes straight for the jugular. With decent characters and an unflinching eye this stands out from the horror crowd, if you can stomach it.

Final Destination 3

I am a big fan of the original Final Destination film, and liked its sequel, which took a more tongue in cheek attitude towards the whole setup. The idea of death stalking those who have foiled its plans is a great one and one that is once again assumed in this second sequel. Rather than a plane crash or highway pile up, the accident in question this time involves a rollercoaster and is an well conceived sequence that is bound to put people off fairground rides for a while. However the scene is somewhat less impressive than those in the other films and no time is taken afterwards for the people who escaped to fully realise the situation. Its almost as if the film is in such a hurry to get to the deaths and the meat of the action that setting up the horror of the incident or the impact it has on the survivors is forgotten. Afterwards the films follows a fairly straighforward pattern following the main two characters as they track down the people that survived before they get killed off one by one. Strangely there is little connection to any of the first two films here aside from some internet research and so those following the mythology of the series will be annoyed at the lack of any tenuous connection or continuity. This is entertainment pure and simple and as such succeeds. The deaths are generally more elaborate and gory this time around, similarly the characters are barely developed outside of the main two which means you don't especially care who lives or dies. This is far from a cheap cash in sequel and has a lot to reccomend, however it also fails to bring anything new to the franchise. There is no new twist, nothing different hapens than the first two films and the ending is pretty disappointing in my view. This is a film made for a purpose and an audience. It delivers gory deaths, some decent action and cardboard characters. It's not bad by any means and I enjoyed it, but it's almost a shame to see what started as a more serious and intriguing horror film descend to the equivilent level of a slasher film. Innovative deaths and some great set pieces save the rather muddles rest of the film. Never straying from overly familiar ground this is a decent enough sequel but does nothing to advance the franchise or build on the past installments.