Author: Ben Browne

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

Decided to interrupt my seemingly endless film review catch-up to review the brand new X-Men prequel. Er…that’s it… Blah blah blah. End communication.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)

 

It’s been a while since the last X-Men film. I’ve always thought that out of the Marvel superheroes, the X-Men suited film best (yes, even over my beloved Spider-Man), so I’m always going to be first in line for any X-Men related goodness. After the hugely disappointing “…Last Stand” in 2006, it looked like the franchise was done for. After much Ratner strangulation, Fox heard the word “prequel” and decided to kick a Wolvie film into production. However, without the back-up of a memorable team including classic characters such as Weatherella, Beam Eyes and Baldy Crippleface, would the clawed one be able to carry a film by himself?

“Well, well, well. Look what the cat dragged in…”

Beastly badass Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) is a member of elite military mutant squadron Team X, led by William Stryker (Danny Huston), before he became all Brian Cox-ish. But when he tries to leave violence behind to become a family man, he finds his past catching up with him in brutal fashion — not least his carnage-loving half-brother Sabretooth (Liev Schreiber). We’re not really presented with anything new here, but I can forgive this because it adheres to the various Wolverine origin stories quite religiously in places. Hugh Jackman was as good as ever as Wolverine, but I really liked Liev Schreiber’s Sabretooth, giving us a huge change from Tyler Mane’s snarling brick shithouse in the original “X-Men”. However, the Sabretooth character was a bit too much like “Heroes” baddie Sylar for my liking. Still, an improvement. Will.I.Am’s inclusion was as needless as it was baffling. I liked Dominic Monaghan’s Bolt though, but again he was largely ignored.

I liked the intro too, with the film whipping through pretty much every American war ever with a frenetic speed. Although it was a bit Dr.Manhattan, it was good to see Wolverine and Sabretooth show Spielberg how he should have done the Omaha Beach landings- with superpowers! I liked Team X too, it was such a damn shame we didn’t get to see more of Ryan Reynolds’ Wade Wilson/Deadpool though as he was by far the most interesting character. One of my main problems with “…Wolverine” was the fact that we don’t see much of Wilson for the first act, he’s completely omitted from the second and he turns up in the third fully transformed into Deadpool. If you’re going to include a fan-favourite character, at least show him some respect. It’s like the whole Venom situation in “Spider-Man 3”.

The action sequences were very impressive, with a lot of money clearly being spent on huge explosions. The stand-outs for me were the war montage, the Wolverine vs helicopter bit and the Three Mile Island showdown. The only part that was disappointing in terms of action was the Las Vegas alley scrap between Wolverine, Sabretooth and Gambit (Taylor Kitsch) who was, like Deadpool and Bolt, criminally underused. Unfortunately, the film has plot holes you could pilot the X-Jet through. For example, Stryker states that after the operation, the only way to kill Wolverine was with Adamantium bullets, but later changes his mind and says they’ll only wipe his memory. Huh? I realise they had to wipe Logan’s memory at the end, but couldn’t they have come up with something better than that? Having said that, I liked the classic shot of Wolverine carrying Kayla (Lynn Collins) into the sunset, only for Stryker’s gun to emerge and shoot him in the back of the head.

“Logan isn’t the only piece of this puzzle.”

Overall, you could do much, much worse than going to see “X-Men Origins: Wolverine”. It’s fun, entertaining and has some really decent action. Here’s hoping the success of this film persuades them to finally start work on the long- awaited Magneto origin story.

Crank 2: High Voltage

Predictably, it’s time for my thoughts on the sequel to “Crank”, “Crank 2: High Voltage”. Let’s get one with the reviewing before I start singing that fucking Electric Six song…

Crank 2: High Voltage (2009)

It’s safe to say that I was a latecomer to the “Crank” party. I only saw it a few months ago and I went into it with the knowledge that there was going to be a sequel. I watched it, loved it and after enthusiastically badgering my long-suffering friends into viewing it, was all set for “Crank 2: High Voltage’. However, maybe if I’d seen it years ago when it originally came out I may have had time to consider whether a sequel was a good idea or not.

(To Johnny Vang) “Did I just drop some change or did I hear a Chink?”

“Crank 2” starts exactly where “Crank” left off. Hitman Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) is scraped off the road with a snow shovel and bundled into a van. He then has his heart replaced with an electric model and now he wants his original ‘strawberry tart’ back. Cue much Stath-induced mayhem and racial slurs. In terms of plot, it’s fucking insane and completely nonsensical, however I wouldn’t have it any other way. Statham is still Statham and I was glad to see Amy Smart given the chance to do something different with her character, giving her a much harder edge and making her actually interesting. Didn’t think much of the main villain, Johnny Vang (Art Hsu) but at least he had a few interesting quirks (the cooler revelation is actually a bit genius and almost definitely referencing “Pulp Fiction”). In fact, everyone was good except the hooker character, Ria (Bai Ling) who acts like a skinny, scantily-clad Chinese Jar Jar Binks with nothing but racist dialogue (she actually says she’ll do something “long time”) and a generally annoying presence. Whilst she is funny for the first few minutes when coupled with the gruff Chelios, her appeal rapidly wears off and we are left with one of the most annoying characters in recent memory since that franchise ruining, floppy-eared fuck. Bonus points for a “No…it can’t be!” David Carradine cameo too.

It’s clear that “Crank 2” wants to outdo the first film in every way possible, however some of these things work and some definitely do not. I love the fact that the film is trying to be as offensive as it can with its choice of scenes, dialogue, situations and general demeanor. For example, in the space of about 10 mins we go from a shoot-out in a strip club to a huge scrap with police officers to a pornstar protest rally with placards displaying phrases like “No Cash, No Gash”. It’s brilliantly demented, displaying a great knowledge of what will really get Daily Mail readers spitting out their Earl Grey and immediately tapping out an indignant e-mail to said “newspaper”. You’ve got to admire “Crank 2” for that at least.

There are some great scenes too. One of my favourites is a little meta-moment where Chelios nonchalantly whistles along to the non-diegetic soundtrack. I feckin’ love stuff like that and it brought a huge grin to my face. Another grin-worthy moment is the utterly surreal “Godzilla” style fight between the papier-mâché headed Chelios and Vang. However, one of the most surreal moments (and in this film that’s really saying something) is a bit of a misstep. We flashback to a young Chev on a chat-show accompanied by his mother (Geri Halliwell, in an inexplicable cameo). The idea is great, even citing video games as the cause of Chelios’ violent behaviour, but the execution is terrible. The accents on display here are truly awful. Both Ginger Nut and young Chelios are bad enough to be drop-outs from the Dick Van Dyke school of “Cock-er-ney” accents. It seems like such a silly mistake to make too, but oh well.

“What language is that? Cuntonese?”

The video game similarities are definitely upped in this film. It’s obvious that it wants to be treated as such and that’s fine. However, much like many video game sequels, certain technicalities are improved, many hallmarks of the original repeated but it ultimately disappoints. When it comes down to it, “Crank 2” just isn’t as fun as its predecessor. I wasn’t a big fan of the ending either, with things becoming a little too silly (which again is saying a lot in this film). With the hinted-at “Crank 3” on the horizon, I just hope they inject some good ol’ fashioned fun back into the franchise.

Crank

Right, it’s time to go from a film which wasn’t really what its title boldly claimed, to a film which definitely is fast and furious. It’s “Crank”, one of the craziest films you’ll see- until you see the sequel, that is.

Crank (2006)


Action films have it tough these days. It’s got to be hard coming up with something that the audience hasn’t seen before. Take “Fast & Furious” for example, apart from the opening sequence, the rest of the action sequences were pretty well-trodden, with nothing jumping out at me as fresh or new. Plus, it took too damn long to get there, with every character spouting line upon line of shitty, hackneyed dialogue. Well, luckily for me, there are films like “Crank”, which takes all those boring plot development bits, punts them out of a window and calls them a certain naughty c-word.

“Listen, I’ve been fatally poisoned, there’s probably a psychopath heading over there to torture and kill you as we speak, but don’t bother getting out of bed, I’ll be there in a flash… Maybe you could fry me up a waffle or something, ‘kay?”

Hitman Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) wakes up in his apartment to the knowledge that he’s been poisoned with a toxin known as the Beijing Cocktail which will kill him within the hour unless he keeps his heart pumping fast enough to slow it down. So Chev sets off on an adrenaline-fuelled rampage across L.A. to track down the people responsible. The plot is as brilliant as it is barmy. Imagine the film “Speed”, replace the bus with Jason Statham and you’ll have an idea of what this film is about. Talking of the Stath, I’m continually impressed by the fearless way he throws himself into his roles. He seems to love playing Chelios and does so with infectious enthusiasm. Amy Smart is good too, adding some laughs and making an impression as what is basically the thankless role of Chelios’ blonde bimbo girlfriend.

From the opening credits, “Crank” aligns itself with video games which is a smart move. The film plays out like one of the early “Grand Theft Auto” games, except with more Stath. It’s a fantastic example of meta-movie making, a club in which films like “Shoot ‘Em Up” also belong. It’s very, very aware of what its doing and doesn’t give a shit, which brings a big smile to my face. I love the overall look of “Crank”. It’s an assault on the senses from the very start and pulls out some seriously off-the-wall shots (Google Earth?!) to help it tell its demented story. My favourite has got to be the numerous crash-zooms onto the Stath’s heart, letting us know that the action is going to be kicked up a notch or twelve.

There are some brilliant scenes too. My favourite has got to be the scene where Chev is running around a hospital like a madman in a loose-fitting, arse-showing hospital gown and holding up a crash trolley for some synthethic adrenaline. It’s so utterly nuts and funny that it will stick in my head for a long time to come. In fact, I don’t think there was any scene that didn’t entertain me in some way. Seriously, “Crank” is almost entertainment in weaponised form. I don’t think it’s possible to be bored whilst watching Mr. Chelios doing something outrageous to keep his ol’ strawberry tart pumping.

“You haven’t been tight since your brother fucked you in third grade.”

I could go into more detail, but I get the feeling it would spoil the fun of “Crank”- the whole point being that it does something unexpected and usually funny and painful in equal measures. It’s your standard uber-violent action film boiled down, mixed with a refreshingly dark sense of humour. Word of warning- it won’t be to everyone’s taste (definitely not a film you should show your grandmother) but if you manage to stay the full 90 or so minutes, you’ll end up with a mile-wide grin on your face. See it.

Fast & Furious

Something very strange happened to me over the Easter holiday. There I was, minding my own business, when suddenly I started to feel light-headed. I distinctly remember staggering around before giving up and crashing to the ground. When I awoke I was in a screening of “Fast & Furious” with a large Coke in my hands. I tried to run, but was held down by a mysterious force. I swear to God, I’m telling the truth. What I’m saying is be careful out there, people. It could happen to you…

Fast & Furious (2009)


The “Fast and the Furious” series and I have had a checkered past. We’ve mostly stayed out of the other one’s way. I remember watching the first one and rather enjoying it- it was definitely something I hadn’t seen before and the car stunts were really good. However, when I watched “2 Fast 2 Furious” I found it to be 2 shit 4 words. I therefore gave the only tangentally related “…Tokyo Drift” a miss, because I had better things to do with my time than see another installment of “Vroom Vroom, Crash Crash LOL!!1”

“A real driver knows what’s exactly in his car.”

When a mutual friend is suddenly murdered by a Los Angeles drug cartel, FBI agent Brian O’Conner (Paul Walker) and outlaw boy racer Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel) separately infiltrate the shady organisation in search of revenge, justice and screeching handbrake turns. The plot is crappy, but so it should be in order to not get in the way of the braless women and shiny cars. This really is movie making for those who struggle to read the back of cereal packets. However, I wasn’t really expecting much. In terms of actors, Vin Diesel is well, Vin Diesel- but that’s fine. He plays Vin Diesel well so why change things? At least he better than Paul “No Charisma” Walker. Seriously, he is so bland it made me a bit angry. I wanted to reach into the screen and choke him for having no presence at all.

The opening sequence is undeniably impressive as our ‘lovable’ gang of scallywags try to jack an oil tanker using fast, shiny cars and Vin Diesel’s bald, shiny head. It works well as an attention-grabbing opener, but then cacks its underpants with an overuse of CGI, therefore taking any danger out of the situation. Come on “F&F”, it’s 2009. Overuse of CGI is so early 2000s. Films have evolved since then, why haven’t you? Oh yes, because your target audience are fucking morons who need to see a shiny car or big titted woman every 5 minutes lest they get bored and read a book. There’s a race midway through the film where all the cars are taking orders from a Sat-Nav, giving us full-screen visualisations of the proposed route and looking like a cheap version of “Tron”, if that’s even possible. Yes, it’s that stupid. To paraphrase the brilliant Morbo from “Futurama”: “Sat-Nav does not work that way! Goodnight!”

When the racers go to a club, the film reminded me of everything I hate about it. Vin Diesel sits down and orders a Corona™ brand beer before we see Paul Walker blandly come in and pass several groups of women kissing each other, wearing the material equivalent of a small T-shirt between them. I should go on record and say I have no problem with women kissing other women, it’s just when it is done this childishly and is such an obvious ploy to get moron eyeball focus up another 15%, it depresses me. Maybe I’m just getting old, but the scene where Vin Diesel is talking to some slag in the basement of the party, I just wanted the poor girl to put on a bra. Everything was so visible she may as well have been topless. Again, don’t have anything against topless women (in fact, I encourage it) but the whole scene was tacky rather than sexy.

“…Just like old times”

“Fast & Furious” is just what you expect it to be if your brain is at least half functioning. It’s a dumb film packed with loud noises and shiny things. The action sequences are good, but it’s hardly worth recommending it for them alone. If you want to have the full “F&F” experience at home, just read “Max Power” magazine whilst masturbating, flicking your eyes between the fake-titted bimbos and shiny, shiny bonnets. Once you’re done, pull up your trousers and give yourself a long, hard look in the mirror before crying yourself to sleep.

Monsters vs Aliens

Summer blockbuster season is nearly upon us and this is the time when studios wheel out their biggest releases to make oodles of lovely cash. So we have Dreamworks’ “Monsters vs Aliens”, which has been number one in every country with cinemas and people.

Monsters vs Aliens (2009)


As you should know by now, I’m a big fan of childrens’ films. I’ve often tried to work out why this is. Maybe it’s because they’re bright and colourful. Maybe it’s because they remind me of a more innocent time, or maybe it’s because I’m an idiot. In any case, how could I resist a computer animated film called “Monsters vs Aliens”? In 3D no less? I couldn’t.

“Once again, a UFO has landed in America, the only country UFOs ever seem to land in.”


Irradiated by a meteorite on her wedding day, Susan Murphy (Reese Witherspoon) suddenly grows to be 50ft. tall (well, 49 ft. 11″…) is called on to join four monstrous freaks of nature and science in defending Earth from evil alien overlord Gallaxhar (Rainn Wilson). The plot is pretty good, if a little uninspired. The film has to be commended for actually creating empathy for Witherspoon’s character, no easy task as the source material for her is the utterly ridiculous, not to mention crap “Attack of the 50 Foot Woman”. All the voice acting is top-notch, but that’s to be expected these days. Bonus points for having Stephen Colbert playing the President and Kiefer Sutherland playing General W.R. Monger too.

Remember “Van Helsing”? God, what a piece of shit. Do you also remember “The League of Extraordinary Gentleman”? Again, utter shite. Let me allay your fears. “Monsters vs Aliens” is nowhere near that bad. However, it does share something in common with the aforementioned abominations, but unlike them- it succeeds. What “Monsters vs Aliens” does quite brilliantly is bring ’50s B-movie icons together and actually create something interesting. We have Hugh Laurie’s Dr. Cockroach as a nod to “The Fly”, Seth Rogen’s B.O.B. as a reference to “The Blob”, Will Arnett’s Missing Link as a parody of “The Creature from the Black Lagoon” and the fanatastic Insectosaurus as Godzilla cohort “Mothra”. It’s really quite clever what Dreamworks has done with the assortment of crazy characters at their disposal. Unfortunately, the character that didn’t work for me was the main villain, Gallaxhar. He just wasn’t very funny and wasn’t giving enough decent lines or development to be a match to the brilliant monster team.

Much like “Bolt”, “Monsters vs Aliens” benefits from the 3D presentation. I’m still impressed by the way studios are using the technology as less of a gimmick and more as an actual experience. When it comes down to it, 3D is fun. I defy anyone to put on those silly glasses and not crack a smile. It adds a little jolt of fun and novelty to proceedings which can only be a good thing.

“Commander, do something violent!”


“Monsters vs Aliens” is good fun, if a little underwhelming. I can’t help but feel if the successful gag rate was higher it could have rivalled studio king “Shrek”. However, for me a lot of the jokes fell flat. On a personal note, I am getting fucking sick of Seth Rogen’s laugh. I really have nothing against the guy, but his chuckle makes an appearance in every single film the guy’s in. It’s like the new Wilhelm Scream or something. Anyway, there are some decent laughs and a brilliant 3D presentation which is undeniably impressive. Hooray for monsters!

The Boat That Rocked

As I have loads and loads of reviews to catch up on, I thought I’d focus on Richard Curtis’ latest as it’s fresh in my mind. Rock on!

The Boat That Rocked (2009)

I like Richard Curtis. I think his witty writing typifies what I think of when I think of British comedy. After all, he helped to give us the brilliant “Blackadder”. However, his latest stuff has been a bit hit-and-miss. I mean, “Love Actually” was alright, but hardly groundbreaking.

“Welcome to the boat of love”

As the ‘60s get into their musical stride, the stuffy old BBC are only playing 45 minutes of pop and rock every day. However, pirate radio stations in the North Sea, like Radio Caroline Rock, have taken it upon themselves to flood the airwaves with rock and naughty banter 24 hours a day. The plot is pretty decent. The very notion of pirate radio sums up the rebellious feeling of the time. It’s basically the Sixties on a boat. In terms of actors, nobody can be accused of turning in a duff performance, which is a feat in itself considering the size of the main cast. I thought Philip Seymour Hoffman was brilliant as The Count, adding a real sense of fun and later, emotional depth to the film. However, the stand-out performance for me was Chris O’Dowd’s Simon who is easily the most likable of the motley crew of DJs. He gets some choice lines and moments that garner genuine sympathy. The scene where he is dumped by his wife (for a mere 17 hours) is a masterclass in what I call “funny pain”- a time when you feel empathy towards a character, but are still laughing your head off. Hats off to Mr. O’Dowd- he puts in a really impressive performance. I didn’t warm to Rhys Ifans’ character much as I get the feeling he wasn’t as rounded as the other characters. Whilst characters like The Count, Carl and especially Simon are constructed carefully, Ifans’ Gavin is an unfunny, one-dimensional cartoon character.

Actually, talking of one-dimensonal- Kenneth Branagh’s character of Dormandy was really boring. Just because he’s the bad guy trying to shut down pirate radio, it doesn’t mean you have to make him the most clichéd, stuffed shirt type character ever. Nearly every scene with him and his deputy (I’ll talk about him in a minute) is tired and predictable. So much so, that you believe that they couldn’t possibly go for the lame joke you imagine they’re going for and then they do anyway. It’s like setting a scene with a man walking down a corridor with a banana peel at the end. You believe that something unexpected will happen before he reaches the peel, therefore subverting the general expectation, but it doesn’t. The man slips and you’re just left in a stunned silence before punching the person next to you out of sheer annoyance.

Right, the deputy- played by the great Jack Davenport. Before I tell you the running gag, cast your mind back to “Blackadder”. Remember the brilliant running gag about Darling’s surname, making every order Melchett gave seem more like a doting husband sweet-talking his wife? Yeah. Well, we have the same gag here except the character’s name is (sigh) “Twatt”. Curtis seems like he’s doing a pale imitation of himself and it’s frustrating to see.

“We have their testicles in our hands, Twatt, and it feels good.”

“The Boat That Rocked” is a very entertaining film if a little overlong. It’s got some decent characters, funny lines and a nice sense of fun threaded through it all. However, I can’t help but get the feeling that the otherwise brilliant closing 30 mins were tainted slightly by the preachy message in text at the end. I just sat there thinking “Really? Is that the point you’ve been trying to make?” when I should have been wiping the tears of laughter from my eyes. Still, it’s decent enough and the soundtrack kicks arse.

Twilight

Sorry for the past three reviewless weeks, I went home to Abergavenny and it appears one of the local Pterodactyls pecked the town’s only dial-up cable. Anyway, I have a lot of films to catch up on and all the time in the World to do it. Hooray!

Twilight (2008)

I finally caved in and sat down to watch one of the most talked about films of last year. From what I can gather, this film is now the “Citizen Kane” of the 11 to 16 year old girl demographic. Does it stand up to this jaded 22 year old male’s view? Let’s find out…

“Death is peaceful, easy. Life is harder.”

“Twilight” is based on the first book in the popular series of books of the same name and follows troubled teenager Bella Swan (Kristin Stewart) when she moves from Arizona to the small, hick-ass town of Forks in Washington, to stay with her dad. On the first day in her new school, she meets pale-skinned pretty boy Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson). After Edward gets over intially being repulsed by her, the pair start sharing long, lustful stares and some strange things happen. Bella hits the internet hard and figures out what every sane viewer on the planet figured out from the first minute- dude’s a vampire. Overall, the plot plays out like a fat, Goth girl’s fantasy. Smart, sassy and most importantly misunderstood girl is persued by a good looking, unattainable boy who only has eyes for her. I imagine the first draft of the book being kept in a coffin-shaped box stashed underneath a bed, the pages stained with candlewax and tears. To be fair, all the fantasy romance wasn’t as nearly as vomit-inducing as I thought it would be. The leads were OK, but a bit wooden for my liking. Hopefully this’ll improve as the sequels are filmed.

The annoying thing about “Twilight” is that it’s pretty much critic-proof. It is what it is. It’s not trying to please everyone, which is actually quite admirable. Whilst watching it I was very aware that due to my age and gender I wasn’t really welcome at the “Twilight” party. Which is fine, didn’t want to hang out with white-skinned, fat girls who smell like the floor of a third-rate kebab house anyway…

If you look past all the Gothette pandering and ’80s special effects, there’s a fairly decent film underneath it all, even if it doesn’t go anywhere. Whilst I didn’t buy the Bella/Edward romance, I liked the relationship between Bella and her parents. It’s nice to see a parent/child relationship presented in a more realistic light for a change. In terms of specifics, I actually enjoyed the vampire baseball scene (set to Muse’s “Supermassive Black Hole”) and the fight scene between Edward and the supposedly sadistic vampire, James. Whilst this may seem like a typical male meathead groping at sports and violence related straws, these scenes are the only ones that do something different, giving us a break from washed-out fleshtones, longing gazes and softly spoken dialogue.

“Bella Swan: Are you going to tell me how you stopped the van? Edward Cullen: Yeah. Um… I had an adrenaline rush. It’s very common. You can Google it.”

All in all, “Twilight” was OK. The main romance didn’t convince me and the main villain is introduced way too late into proceedings to make any real difference, but nevertheless it kept me occupied for 90 minutes or so. It’ll be interesting to see if the sequel “New Moon” will do anything interesting with the clunkily alluded to vampires vs. werewolves gimmick mentioned near the end of the film.

Bolt

Well, shit-nearly forgot about this film after I kept pushing it back for certain films starring a blue glowy superhero guy with his celestial bits out and a drunkard down-and-out superhero. So now for something completely different- a film about a dog with superpowers. Yes.

Bolt (2008)

What is it about Pixar? They can take a big, manly man like me and over the course of a surprisingly good and magical film change him into a horrible, girly wreck who uses words like “cute” to describe the film with no hint of irony. Well, unfortunately Pixar had very little to do with this film- although head honcho John Lasseter was drafted in for a few pointers.

“You’re beyond awesome! You’re… be-awesome!”

A girl named Penny (Miley Cyrus) and her dog Bolt (John Travolta) star on a hit television series called appropriately enough,”Bolt” in which the titular character has various superpowers and must constantly thwart the evil plans of the nefarious Doctor Calico (Malcolm McDowell). Due to a crazy producer, Bolt has lived his entire life on a soundstage and believes he really is his fictional counterpart and possesses superpowers. After filming completes for one episode, Bolt escapes from his on-set trailer mistakenly believing Penny has been kidnapped by the television villain. The story is pretty good. It’s the standard “believe in yourself” malarkey, but as it’s Disney, it’s forgivable. After all, if the Mouse House can’t pump cheesy morals and ideals into impressionable children, who can? It plays out like a kid-friendly version of “The Truman Show”, which is by no means a bad thing. As with most animated films these days, the voice acting is top-notch too.

Truth be told, I enjoyed “Bolt”, but I kept getting the feeling that with a little Pixar magic it could have been truly great. There are some great ideas here, such as the delusional Bolt believing that his powers aren’t working due to Styrofoam peanuts in a Superman/Kryptonite type way. However, the best part of “Bolt” is the superfan hamster Rhino (Mark Walton) who is a clear frontrunner for my “Talking Animated Rodent of the Year” award. I felt that Mittens (Susie Essman) was a bit underused and her story of human neglect was just a rehash of Jessie’s tale of woe in “Toy Story 2” Still, it’s not as if Disney can be accused of repetition and recycling is it?

“How do you say “No way I’m doing this” in crazy?”

I was lucky enough to see “Bolt” in 3D and I suggest you do too. The days of the ridiculous red and blue lens glasses are gone and a new era of black-tinted ridiculous glasses has begun! What i liked about the 3D presentation of “Bolt” was the fact that it wasn’t all “things poking out of the screen at you” and added some genuine (well, as genuine as an optical illusion can be) depth to the film, in both senses of the word. So, last words. Go and see “Bolt”. It’s not the best animated flick ever, but it’s damn enjoyable nonetheless. Be aware though, you will have to sit through the awful “Cars” short “Tokyo Mater” beforehand though- that’s 10 minutes of my life I won’t get back…

Watchmen

All the whores and politicians will look up and shout “Review Watchmen!”… and I’ll look down and whisper “No.”
…
…
…

Oh, alright then.

Watchmen (2009)

You’ve got to hand it to director Zack Snyder. Dude got some balls. Both in a testicular sense and the fact that he decided to take on a supposedly “unfilmable” comic held in ridiculously high regard and make a big Hollywood production out of it. Whether this was a good idea or not is up for debate.

“Rorschach’s Journal: October 12th 1985. Tonight, a comedian died in New York.”

Set in an alternate 1985, a retired superhero called The Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) is thrown out of a high-rise apartment window to his death. Fearing some kind of secret plot to bump off other costumed heroes, a vigilante known as Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley) starts to investigate. Okay, the plot summary sounds about as hackneyed as you can get, but that’s my fault rather than the film’s. The plot is multi-threaded and dense, just like the comic. Honestly, the plot is amazing. I liked the casting choices too, so no disappointments on that front.

The film sticks amazingly close to the comic. Nearly every single panel is recreated and every line of dialogue is present here. It’s very clear that Snyder loves the source material, which is admirable. However, I think he gets a little too overexcited at prospect of directing something which means so much to him. “Watchmen” has always been a reflection of popular culture and the film is no different. However, where the comic was subtle, the film is smack-in-the-face obvious- which is a shame. Snyder’s use of music too, irked me a little. Most of the songs seem very out of place due to the fact that they’re so recognisable. I understand that Snyder wants to give us an aural sense of popular culture too, but he could have been less heavy-handed with the whole thing, without seemingly crowbarring them into the start of nearly every scene.

The slow-motion thing annoyed me too. It is a stylish tool when used sparingly, but Snyder uses it all the damn time. It like when you’re playing “Mortal Kombat”,”Street Fighter” and the like with your mate and he keeps using the same fucking move that wipes you out over and over again. At first, you’re slightly taken aback and almost congratulatory, but by the fifth time you want to reach across and punch him in his stupid face. Whilst I’m not threatening physical violence against Mr. Snyder, I do wish that he could have kept his finger off the slo-mo button for a least a while. In terms of specifics, the Rorschach apartment scene was odd. Mainly because it’s pretty much a carbon copy of Marv’s apartment escape scene in “Sin City”. Fan favourite character gets framed for murder, keeps cops at bay with bad-assery and eventually jumps out of a window. I swear even some of the shots are the same. I’m not sure whether “Sin City” was referencing the “Watchmen” graphic novel with Marv’s scene or what, but the similarities are pretty clear.

However, all the above are minor niggles when compared to the following point. I don’t think “Watchmen” works as a film. As a comic book, it acts as part parody, part political story filled with layers upon layers of meaning and satire. However, as a film, the very act of not reading it takes you away from the way it’s meant to be experienced. It’s like if a parody film like “Airplane!” or “The Naked Gun” were faithfully turned into graphic novels with every frame and every line of dialogue present. They’d still be funny, but you’re missing an important part of the parody itself. In simple terms, for a parody comic to fully work as a parody, you need to be able to turn the pages and read it as one. When translated to film, this is obviously lost.

“You people don’t understand. I’m not locked in here with you, you’re locked in here with ME!”

I’ve been really indecisive over what to give “Watchmen”. I enjoyed it but I get the feeling I would have been lost if I hadn’t read the comic first. My advice is to read the brilliant source material before going to see the film. At least that way the film acts as a companion piece to the comic, rather than the other way round. I’m going to give it four stars, but definitely knock off a star or two if you haven’t read the comic.

Reign of Fire

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the magic you feel in the air is completely intentional. Things are different. This is because I am going to embark on my first (and thus far only) requested review. So, let’s go down, down, down into “Reign of Fire”. (I know it’s “Ring of Fire” you pedants…)

Reign of Fire (2002)

As I was handed this film with an assurance that it was “the worst film (they’ve) ever seen” I had an image in my mind. I imagined that I was Rocky Balboa (not the first time I’ve imagined that) and this film was that piece of meat in the freezer:

Artist’s impression


However, this was not to be the case. Don’t get me wrong- it’s bad. But it’s so damn bad it’s hard to get worked up about it. It’s like if your toilet clogs up and sewage water goes everywhere. You don’t really get angry, you just get depressed and call a plumber.

“Only one thing worse than a dragon… Americans.”

In the mystical, futuristic year of 2008 (!), a huge, hibernating dragon is found during London Underground construction. Dragon gets understandably pissed off and the only survivor is a young boy called Quinn, who loses his mother in the tragedy. Flash forward years later and we catch up with a ripped, bearded Quinn (Christian Bale) who is in charge of one of the only surviving human colonies left, due to the fact that most of the human race have been wiped out by the dragons. As the plot progresses we are introduced to bald, bearded Denton Van Zan (Matthew McConaughey) and non bald, non bearded helicopter pilot Alex (Izabella Scorupco). I like some the ideas on display here, but they’re so badly done someone needs to be smacked upside the head with the shovel of good filmmaking. Christian Bale is pretty bland through most of the film, believing that a raspy voice and glottal stops can suffice in place of actual acting. Izabella Scorupco seems lost throughout, however when you cast a Polish/Swedish actress in an shitty American film set in Britain, it’s inevitable. Matthew McConaughey seems to be the only one having some fun, riding tanks with the gun phallically between his legs and so on. However, this slight injection of life is soon quashed when Van Zan decides to get all moral on us.

Before I go on any further, tear your eyes away from my poorly Photoshopped Stallone impersonation and look at the poster. Done? Good. None of that happens in the film. There is no torching of Big Ben, no all-out war between Apache helicopters and a metric fuckton of dragons, no nothing. All of that interesting stuff is skipped over in the credits, with newspaper articles and photographs showing the carnage. Why the fuck is this film not about the destruction of London and other famous cities? Surely that would have made a more interesting film? I understand that budgetry concerns could have been an issue, but if that’s the case, why bother making the film at all? I don’t want a film about some dumb future where everyone is dirty and can’t act. I want what is promised on the poster!

Right, so since this is a film about dragons, the dragons must be able to stand up on their own and be a tangible threat, right? Well, yes and no. The dragon designs are really good, with some clear thought going in to creating the fire-breathing beasts. The CGI is surprisingly good too, still holding up seven years later. Trouble is, the film can’t wait to show you them, with a mere 10 minutes going by before you see one. Listen film, I want to be teased. I want to be desperate to see the creatures before you grant me my wish. “Jurassic Park” is a masterclass in this. It’s got to be a good 40 minutes or so before you see a fully fledged dinosaur and the film is all the better for it. To put it bluntly (not to mention vulgarly), the film blows its load way too soon.

“Look out that window, Eden isn’t burning- it’s burnt.”

“Reign of Fire” is simply a bad film, or just a bad, simple film depending on your viewpoint. I’m not opposed to brainless carnagefests, but when they’re this poorly acted and written, they’re not worth my time.

P.S. Thanks to Lily for the request.