Author: Ben Browne

It’s right there. The first thing on the damn poster is “From the director of The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum” and a whopping great photo of Matt Damon. It’s very hard not to draw comparisons with a certain forgetful ass-whuppin’ machine. It’s a shame, really as Green Zone should be judged on its own merits as it certainly believes it has something to say for itself.

“I came to find weapons and save lives and I didn’t find shit. I want to know why.”

Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller (Matt Damon) is posted to Iraq to justify the US invasion by finding weapons of mass destruction. With his search proving fruitless, he starts asking tricky questions, and soon even his own side are out to kill him. The story itself was alright, if a little predictable. Damon is fine as Miller, but the role doesn’t exactly require him to stretch himself that much. At times, I felt Miller was a bit too “all-American” though, appearing to naturally choose the most patriotic thing he could at a moment’s notice. Brendan Gleeson was great, proving that I will pretty much enjoy him in every film he appears in thanks to In Bruges. Jason Isaacs too, was quite the bad-ass. As someone who is used to Isaacs in his Lucius Malfoy guise, it was refreshing to see a different, less catty side of him (face it, Lucius Malfoy is a vicious bastard, but he’s a bit girly. I mean, look at his hair…) Greg Kinnear was good too, although he didn’t exactly have to play much further outside his normal “pompous dick” comfort zone.

I kept getting the feeling that Green Zone‘s message is slightly dated now. Other reviews have argued that the message is more relevant than ever, but I’m not so sure. Anyone with a brain in their head will have questioned the motives and possible shady dealings involved in the Iraq invasion, so why do I suspect that the film believes it is truly enlightening its audience with a never-before-considered notion?

A spiritual successor to Bourne, this ain’t. Green Zone is probably best likened to The Hurt Locker and Blood Diamond in terms of general feel. I’m going to be purposefully ambiguous here so you can’t argue with the preceding statement. The main purpose of it is to convey an idea, but there are moments of action that could justify a place in the action/adventure section of your local rental place. The action is, unsurprisingly, brilliant. Greengrass knows how to get the best out of a sequence and does so whilst making it look easy. The sequence in which Miller’s team take a house full of “terrorists”, is really well done.

My main problem with Green Zone is the way it handles the message it is so eager to ram down our throats. The message is a bit too simplistic to be a real revelation, for one. For two, well, Green Zone spends the last hour asking all these questions and then everything’s wrapped up in a neat little parcel at the end. Seriously, no questions are left unanswered by the time the credits roll. Whilst I would normally expect a film to wrap up things convincingly, Green Zone seemed like the sort of film that would want to leave its audience asking questions on the way home. Also, in some parts I did find myself rather bored by the overly dramatic dialogue scenes.

“I’m saying there is a disconnect between what’s in these packets and what we are seeing on the ground. There is a problem with the intelligence, sir.”

So, Green Zone. It’s a decent film with a lot to like about it. I just wish I didn’t get the feeling that the film had delusions of grandeur whilst I watched it. Catch it if you can.

Superhero films instantly grab my attention, even if I haven’t heard of the titular superhero. Kick-Ass belongs in the “never heard of it” category. I was sort of anticipating it, but when I heard it was from the imagination of Mark Millar, scribe of the Wanted comics/film and co-written by Jane Goldman, co-writer on the surprisingly good Stardust, I was completely sold.

The plot is basically that of Spider-Man with a few twists. Nerdy teen Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson) notices that people simply don’t help each other and takes it upon himself to dress up in a costume and re-invents himself as the superhero Kick-Ass. After defending a stranger from a brutal beating, Kick-Ass is filmed, put on the ‘Net and becomes a YouTube sensation. Little does Dave know that there are “proper” superheroes out there- Big Daddy (Nic Cage) and his fouled-mouthed daughter Hit-Girl (Chloe Moretz) watching his even move. The plot is great. As I said, it is pretty much a carbon copy of the first Spidey film, but it comes into its own later on. The film is part parody, part normal film and for the most part it works well. I thought all the leads were great, but the persistant scene-stealer is Chloe Moretz’s Hit-Girl who effortlessly draws your attention with her ultra-violent ways and her knowledge of four letter words. That’s not to downplay Nic Cage’s turn as Big Daddy who speaks in a dead-on (not to mention fucking funny) Adam West type voice. Special mention to Christopher Mintz-Plasse for his Red Mist portrayal. The guy’s hilarious.

One of the many things I liked about Kick-Ass was the fact that all the costumed crusaders are presented in a different way to the normal “eat justice and shit honour” bullshit that we are normally lumbered with. They are all varying forms of insane, especially the team of Big Daddy and Hit-Girl who are unbelievably likeable, but undeniably deserve to be carted off to Arkham Asylum or some similar institution. Funny thing is, the sanest character is probably big baddie Frank D’Amico (Mark Strong) which is a nice reversal from the norm.

There are some fantastic scenes too. In fact, many of the scenes in Kick-Ass are fantastic ones. It seems like a disservice to mention the select few. Having said that, I can’t write a review without mentioning one of my favourite bits- the origin of Big Daddy and Hit-Girl, which takes us into a 3D comic book style scene which impressed the living hell out of me.

However, I do feel there are some problems with it. Firstly, I felt that the film was trying way too hard to appeal to da yout’. For example, in one of the establishing scenes, Dave is on his MACBOOK, speaking to a friend on SKYPE. His friend asked if he’s seen the latest FAMILY GUY. Later on Kick-Ass has a MYSPACE page and is a huge hit on YOUTUBE. I have a horrible feeling that all the capitalised words were blank spaces in the script until a tea boy told them what was popular these days. (Also, you can replace the above capitalised words for rude ones like “arse”, for a fun game to play when you’ve lost the will to live.) My second problem is a small one, really. Many of the more graphically violent action scenes have some upbeat track playing over the top. A particular gripe was when Hit-Girl was kicking ass and taking legs to the strains of “Bad Reputation”. I realise that this is meant to make the violence less shocking, but c’mon- that feckin’ song was used in Shrek! It really took me out of the moment.

As you’ve probably guessed, I loved Kick-Ass. It’s a fun mix of insanity, ultra-violence and daft bastards in costumes. Go and see it as fast as your legs can carry you.

I’ve been looking forward to Shutter Island ever since I saw the trailer. Thing is, thanks to its delayed release from the end of last year to now, I forgot all about it until very recently. I mean, the elements for a decent cinema experience are all there. We have DiCaprio, who is fast becoming one of my favourite actors, and Martin Scorsese at the helm. At the very least I expected a solid film. However, I was both surprised and pleased at what it turned out to be.

Based on the hugely successful novel of the same name, the film follows two U.S. Marshalls, Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his new partner Chuck (Mark Ruffalo) travel to the downright creepy place of Shutter Island- home of an asylum for the criminally insane- overseen by Dr. John Cawley (Sir Ben Kingsley), to investigate the seemingly impossible escape of an patient. However, when rumours of sinister experiments start circulating, the two Marshalls get more embroiled in the dark goings-on. I haven’t read the book, but if the film is anything to judge it by, it’s well worth the read. The story is gripping from the off and continues to be until the end with very few lulls inbetween. The leads are all great too, with Lord Sir Duke Benjamin Kingsley Esquire, putting in an especially memorable performance.

In terms of tone, Shutter Island is a B movie writ large. The film plays out as a cross between a Hitchcockian thriller and Scorsese’s own remake of Cape Fear. Whilst I have no problem with B movie referencing, I do have a problem with some of the elements of it. For instance, the first time we see the eponymous island, there is a ridiculous portentous track playing that may as well have been Scorsese flashing up on screen and saying “Look, just fear this fucking island, okay? Bad shit is about to go down.” before cutting back to DiCaprio’s annoyingly good-looking face. Yes, ridiculously over-the-top themes are hallmark for B movies (remember Bernard Herrmann’s Cape Fear theme? That will be forever burned into my brain…) but these days I actually find it a bit embarrassing. Especially as these films are not B movies, considering they were made for considerably more than pocket change.

Visually, the film is feckin’ stunning with some fantastic camera work to gape at. Daniels’ dream sequences are especially amazing and genuinely something to behold, rather than to just passively watch. It’s clear that Scorsese is relishing having more creative freedom than his usual output allows. Some of the angles are also very Hitchcockian. The one real problem I had with Shutter Island was that things were resolved a bit too neatly for my liking. Throughout the film, we as the audience, are perpetually having the rug pulled out from under us. However, most of the pressing questions are neatly answered in the last half hour, leaving very little to the imagination. To Scorsese’s credit, the film does recover some of its mystique later on, but I wanted to be completely foxed, rather than merely baffled.

Shutter Island is a truly great film. It’s tense mind-fuckery at its very best. Go. See. Now.

When I was a kid, I watched a lot of shit on T.V. Most of the cartoons I watched were basically 20 minute adverts for overpriced toys. From what I gather (thankfully the G.I. Joe phenomenon bypassed the U.K.) G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero was an ’80s cartoon based on a toyline about an elite force of solidiers who all had codenames like “Blowtorch”, “Ace” and “Rimjob”. 30 years later, we now have feature-length adverts for plastic toss. It’s nice to know society has moved so far in two decades (!) So, if you’re still with me, this film is the movie adaptation of the cartoon which was based on the comic which drew inspiration from the toyline. Sounds like an Oscar winning formula to me!

In the not-too-distant future, U.S. Army grunts Duke (Channing Tatum) and Ripcord (Marlon Wayans) are tasked with couriering “nanomite”-filled warheads, when they’re ambushed by mysterious baddies armed with supercool hi-tech weaponry — one of them Duke’s ex, Ana (Sienna Miller) — and saved by mysterious goodies with more supercool hi-tech weaponry. Turns out these goodies are G.I. Joe- an elite super-badass team who are each sold seperately. The plot is absolutely farcical. It’s unbelievably stupid and nothing long-suffering audiences haven’t seen a hojillion times before. If I think about it any more, my brain genuinely starts to hurt. The ridiculous thing is, despite the offensively simple plot, director Stephen Sommers manages to over-complicate things with needless flashbacks, resulting in a turgid mess of a film. To be fair to the actors, no one person sticks out as bad. Everyone manages to play their hackneyed roles straight-faced, churning out the godawful script with professionalism.

As I’ve said time and time again, I really don’t mind brainless boomfests. Fellow Hasbro stablemate Transformers wasn’t ever going to win any awards for acting or its script, but at least it was fun. G.I. Joe isn’t fun. I kept expecting it to become fun, but the action sequences left me cold. Part of the reason for this was that they are heavily reliant on CGI. There is no weight to anything. The visual effects are genuinely impressive, but the overall impression it leaves is a cutscene in a shit video game.

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra doesn’t just embrace cliché, it makes sweet, sweet love to it and asks it to go steady. Every single supposed twist is signposted so clearly early on, I could have stopped watching 20 minutes in and been able to accurately predict what was going to happen. The inevitable counter-argument to this is the ol’ “kids’ movie” point. Yes, it is for kids, but there are much better films out there that are this kind of thing but better- the aforementioned Transformers for one. All this film wants to do is sell toys. That is it. It doesn’t entertain, it just peddles its horrible wares. Whilst watching the film, I was painfully aware that every vehicle and every character dicking about on screen had an action figure counterpart. At least television adverts are fairly short and less depressing. Avoid.

I must admit, like most misanthropes, I do find the idea of a zombie apocalypse appealing. I’m not sure how I’d do if faced with hordes of creatures who want to bite my face off, but fuck it, I’ve survived numerous trips to Merthyr Tydfil, so I reckon I could survive anywhere.

The Fourth Kind begins with Milla Jovovich walking towards the screen, and lecturing the audience that the story is ‘based on real events’, and gives the choice whether the audience wants to believe or not, saying that the film contains distressing scenes. All this adds is a sense of mild confusion. The film is set in the remote Alaskan town of Nome, and follows a psychologist as she deals with patients who suffer from similar sleep disorders. All the patients wake up at the specific time of 3:33am. The reason for waking is, and it is difficult to write this, seeing a white owl looking at them through their window. A white owl. Staring. The owl is an important character, and we never find out who plays it, although it may have been Hedwig, or a muppet.

In order to understand why they wake up at this point, the psychologist puts them under hypnosis and tries to delve into their subconscious and understand what is really waking them up. In scenes like this, the screen splits and shows the “archive footage”, featuring the ‘real people’ alongside the same event, allegedly recreated for film. The film then follows the psychologists’ attempts to convince a sceptical local authority, and her own family and colleagues, that the sleeping disorders are linked to alien activity. It is intercut with ‘later’ interviews, again featuring the ‘real’ psychologist.

The Fourth Kind attempts to cash in on The Blair Witch Project by claiming that it is based on real events. However, the ‘event’ in this instance is so farfetched, and doesn’t have the subtlety of Blair Witch, so it doesn’t work as well. Whilst watching this film, a large quantity of rhubarb and custard sweets were consumed, and to be honest, they were far more interesting and were able to hold my attention. It may have helped if the film was not purporting to be a true story, because by stating it at the beginning, the end, and the ‘real footage’, it immediately evokes scepticism, which detracts from the shoddy plot.

By far the best shot of the film was a 360 degree panning shot around the owl, who follows the camera by turning his head. Neither of us were sure if this was intending to be as hilarious as it turned out. Aside from that, there are some nice aerial shots of snowy mountains, but when this is the best thing you can say about a film, then you can kind of predict what the rating is going to be…

KD & RB

I lie, you lie, he/she/it lies. There are always going to be exceptions to the rule, but in general terms, everybody lies. Being unable to lie is a concept that has been explored before, most memorably in Liar Liar, but the central idea seemed sound enough to warrant a viewing.

The premise is simple. We are shown a world where people can’t lie. As a result, there is no fiction or art and any films that are released are turgid documentaries. We follow Mark Bellison (Ricky Gervais) who, inexplicably finds that he has the ability to lie. Unused to the notion of something being not true, everyone blindly believes anything he says. As I said, the concept has been done before, but the one question I kept asking throughout was why people would blurt out their innermost secrets. Being unable to lie is one thing, but keeping your mouth shut is quite another. Yes, this is a nitpick, but when you have a high concept like this, it’s normally the little questions that need to be addressed. Gervais was Gervais- which is fine by me, but if you’re not a fan, I’d steer clear- you’re just going to find the same things you don’t like here. Although he did show more of his dramatic side in this, which proves that he can actually act and hopefully will silence some of his critics. Jennifer Garner managed to be likeable in a really flat role, which is an achievement.

There are some really great ideas present here. I loved the fact that due to Bellison’s truth-twisting ways, the concept of religion is born. The scene where Bellison’s mother is dying and is terrified, so he makes up the concept of an afterlife to comfort her is genuinely moving and made me well up- a very rare thing indeed (i.e. crying at films, not crying in general. I’m not the Terminator…)

Thing is, I didn’t find The Invention of Lying that funny. It had its moments (The bus ad that says “Pepsi: For when they don’t have Coke” springs to mind) , but they were pretty tame. The endless parade of cameos started to really annoy me after a while. Even the scene with the brilliant pairing of Stephen Merchant and “Barry off Eastenders” (Shaun Williamson) was ruined by Merchant wearing a fez, smoking a pipe and mugging in a completely over-the-top fashion.

As I said, there really are some great ideas here, but they just don’t gel as well as they should. Most of the “comedy” on display here boils down to simplistic insults, most of them directed at Gervais’ character, but it’s all playground stuff to please the ‘tards. When it came down to it, The Invention of Lying just wasn’t that much fun to watch. Honestly.

I’m sure I wasn’t the only one thinking that James Cameron had gone a bit crazy with his work on Avatar. After all, when a respected director like Cameron works on a project for 14 years and then the first images released of said project depict some weird Smurf/feline hybrid, it’s perfectly natural to assume that maybe not all of his dogs are barking. Regardless, I decided to check it out in super-dynamic, wallet-raping 3D no less.

When his twin brother is killed, disabled ex-Marine Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) is recruited to aid a mining expedition on the distant jungle moon of Pandora as only his DNA will bond with the alien hybrid body, known as an Avatar, that allows humans to breathe the toxic air. However, Jake falls in love with one of the native aliens Na’vi hunter Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) and things start to go awry. The plot itself is nothing new- it’s pretty much Pocahontas meets Fern Gully. Whilst that description is scarily close to my own personal vision of Hell, it’s passable. Sam Worthington is much better here than in Terminator: Fermentation and Zoe Saldana is brilliant as Neytiri. It was great to see Sigourney Weaver back in the limelight too. Story-wise, Avatar is as average as you can get. Supposed plot twists are signposted so clearly earlier in the film that there is no element of surprise whatsoever when they do finally roll around. The dialogue is a bit of a problem too, with some exchanges so clunky and awkward it caused me to flashback to Attack of the Clones like a scarred Vietnam War vet.

However, Avatar‘s charm does not lie in story. Cameron has created a fantastic world in the form of the lush vistas of Pandora. Floating mountains, breathtakingly beautiful flora and fauna and some of the most imaginative creatures you’ll ever see all inhabit this stunning landscape. I genuinely had my mouth agape in parts of the film, a very rare occurrence for me. The Na’vi are brilliantly done too, with a language and customs all of their own. It’s very difficult to not get swept up in it all. The 3D is pretty impressive too, although I think that 3D is a silly gimmick, I’ve never seen a more justified reason for the technology. It would take someone far more cynical than I to not be impressed by the opening scenes of the film, let alone the first moments we get to see Pandora.

I’m extremely conflicted about what to give Avatar. It’s technically astounding, but the script is too damn average to back up the amazing visuals. It reminded me of something like Captain EO or Honey, I Shrunk The Audience! at DisneyWorld. Much like them, Avatar is a tremendously fun experience but not really a great film. You’ll leave the cinema buzzing, but unlike something like District 9 (Best film of 2009 at the Benjys™) I can’t really see it having much life beyond the cinema or holding up to repeat viewings on DVD. So, I’ve decided to hedge my bets. I figure that if the film is a five star experience, but a three star story then it would make sense to give it four, with some free advice thrown in- go and see it at the cinema, it just won’t be as good at home.