When I first came across this film I thought to myself ‘What in the name of God is this?’, I almost turned it off, but it was amusing in an ironic sort of way so I hesitated awhile. Good job I did as, of course, it was meant to be ironic, and what unfolds quickly becomes a very, very well put together and fascinating documentary about the use of performance enhancing drugs in the world of sports in America, particularly in the field of weight lifting, but also athletics and baseball. The film is fast paced, fitting in a ton of information – every bit of which is relevant, advances our grasp of the subject, and also manages to deepen the interest level, as the interviews progress from members of the filmmaker’s family, to members of congress and top level athletes like Ben Johnson and Carl Lewis.
It is the fruit of many hours work, and the brainchild of Chris Bell – and for an inexperienced feature filmmaker it’s a sterling production. The footage and interviews with his family over a period of what seems to be a couple of years add a very human relevance and emotional connection to the film, as we see the wide reaching implications of the story unfold. The scope continues to widen as it fits in the big business world of sports supplements, the tales of poster boy stars like Stallone and Schwarzenegger, and it even manages to sneak in an interview with Stan Lee, of Marvel Comics fame, to talk about the popular appeal of the idea of superhuman strength. The asterisk in the title refers to the ones used to mar an athletes record if they are found to be using anything illegal. Sadly, one of the brothers in the film, Mike, died shortly after the film was completed (click here for the details).
A must see movie for anyone who likes well researched, balanced and eye opening documentaries.
The most striking aspect of this animation is its austere use of black and white contrasts, which initially made it a little painful to watch (lights had to be turned off as a necessity) but come the end I was thoroughly enjoying its unique style. If you were to imagine a beautifully inked noir graphic novel suddenly come to life as a series of moving pictures before you, this is exactly what you would see. The title refers to the literal meaning of the French word, rebirth, and the story takes place in Paris in the year 2054, where we see a young woman being kidnapped and a hard boiled cop enjoined to track her down.
Daniel Craig voices the lead, and as always with animation there is the inherent distraction of time spent thinking ‘I know that voice! Who is it, hmm…’ and the satisfaction of finally getting there (or the irritation of not), to help everyone along, there is a connection linking the hero to the villain, and again from the villain to the guy in the middle. The plot revolves around the disappearance of the girl and the cosmetics company she works for, unfolding in very traditional film noir style. Enter the role of the disappeared’s sister, and the worst elements of the film are revealed, as suddenly both the dialogue and its delivery, along with the concepts, nose dive into a corny and ill developed pastiche of the genre.
It’s not gripping, but it does have a lot of credible artistry to it. Fans of different styles of animation (a combination of motion capture and 3D computer graphics were used here) will probably get more out of it than followers of film noir will, but it’s probably still worth a look in for both.
The sequel to ‘Kick-Ass’, one of the most popular films of 2010, sees a return of the cast, but not director Matthew Vaughn, who instead personally selected the relatively inexperienced Jeff Wadlow to step behind the cameras and also write the screenplay. Oddly, the change in director isn’t particularly noticeable, a testimony to Wadlow and his adherence to both the previous film and the comic book source material, from Scottish writer Mark Miller.
For the series Miller has openly stated that the story is autobiographical, primarily in that when he was young, he and his pals decided to actually train to become superheroes. Eventually, reality kicked in and they changed their minds, but when writing the comics his desire to play with this concept together with his founding love of the genre produced a curious, violent, blend – central character ‘Kick-Ass’ with no powers whatsoever, trying to fight crime and often being brutalised in the process, and other characters like ‘Hit-Girl’, a schoolgirl with deadly fighting skills and an unparalleled eloquence for one-liners, who is for all intents and purposes a real superhero. Therein lies the founding problem with the series on the big screen – it’s a fun blend, but one constantly compromised by the need to get the balance spot on, an all but impossible task that sucks the heart out of the story, leaving the supporting characters, like Hit-Girl, a lot more interesting than the fraudulently motivated central one.
‘Kick-Ass 2’ sees a raft of people don capes and spandex and take to the streets to fight crime, all after being inspired by the exploits in the first movie, and Kick-Ass finds himself in a sort of very low-key Avengers style gang. Here, the aforementioned balance is constantly rattled around, with severe and dire consequences applied via a layer of gloss. A scene involving the killing of a dog was removed from the film, as was a rape scene – although the footage left in the film suggests the only reason the rape doesn’t happen is because the villain can’t get it up at the time. It’s all a little too much – sensible deletions for the sake of trying to focus on a fun, comedy comic book film, and yet it leaves the feeling of something sinister that isn’t quite being given the serious treatment it needs.
Jim Carrey has a fantastic cameo (much like he did in ‘The Incredible Burt Wonderstone’) as Colonel Stars and Stripes, but has since distanced himself from the film in the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings. This is the statement he released;
“I did Kick-Ass a month before Sandy Hook and now in all good conscience I cannot support that level of violence. My apologies to others involved with the film. I am not ashamed of it but recent events have caused a change in my heart.”
And the response from Chloë Grace Moretz (who plays Hit-Girl);
“It’s a movie. If you are going to believe and be affected by an action film, you shouldn’t go to see ‘Pocahontas’ because you are going to think you are a Disney princess. If you are that easily swayed, you might see ‘The Silence of the Lambs’ and think you are a serial killer. It’s a movie and it’s fake, and I’ve known that since I was a kid… I don’t want to run around trying to kill people and cuss. If anything, these movies teach you what not to do. Each to their own. I respect [Carrey’s] decision.” Source : Huffington Post
Interestingly, the penciller for the comics, John Romita Jr, has talked about the violence he has to depict, saying he morally never thought he would be drawing the stuff, but he frankly loves the characters and the fact that it has become a movie – it’s now a guilty pleasure for him. That sort of encapsulates the difficult duality of the thing. Personally I love Hit-Girl arriving and dicing the bad guys (this film is just as gory as the first one) but there’s a definite conceit, an uneasiness to everything. Kick-Ass decides to go back to crime fighting simply because he’s bored, for example, which is a little too convenient after the events of the first film, and here the police seem a little too relaxed about allowing several teams of costumed vigilantes roam the streets – not to mention the fact real superheroes regardless of their costume would make every effort not to be noticed by the public, not withstanding the likes of Iron Man.
Aaron Taylor-Johnson returns as the titular hero, with Christopher Mintz-Plasse, as was hinted at the end of part one, becoming the bad guy – ‘The Motherfucker’. There’s a host of other bad guys who aren’t given enough screen time and barely get one line each, and indeed the climax is nowhere near as good as in its predescessor. Ultimately, it’s wayward but enjoyable, and it still left me in the mood to watch Batman again, which is no bad thing. Part three is being written as the finale. I suspect there will not be much of a happy ending.
DO NOT GO AND SEE THIS FILM. Not unless, that is, you are aware of what it actually is. Disney have rather cynically released this knowing that people will assume it is another release from Disney Pixar, and whilst it is a spin off from their ‘Cars’ (06) film line, it is actually a creation of DisneyToon Studios, a wing of the Disney machine that normally produces straight to DVD releases. The only reason this has a theatrical release is the money they intend to make from the little trick they’re playing on the public.
The story is about as basic and rudimental as it can be – Dusty Crophopper is a crop duster who dreams of competing with the fastest planes around in a global competitive speed race, but will he overcome his own limitations and the laughter of his peers to realise his ambition? Will he indeed. For older audiences there is absolutely nothing here of any interest value. The animation is slick, and for the people it was made for, young kids, it may well be completely fine – in fact it may make a welcome change to see a Disney film aimed especially for them on the big screen. For everyone else, best give it a wide berth.
Mark Wahlberg teams up again with his Icelandic ‘Contraband’ (10) director Baltasar Kormákur, starring opposite Denzel Washington in a film adaptation of Steven Grant’s comic book series, that also hails back to Hollywood’s perhaps excessive history of crime/cop ‘buddy’ films. Here, Wahlberg’s Stig is the undercover Naval intelligence officer foil to Washington’s Bobby, an undercover DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) agent, and only after they rob a bank together at the beginning does each begin to realise who the other really is, but by this point one particularly interested and rather pissed off bank customer (Bill Paxton) would really like his money back.
Some of the editing is a little ropey, and likewise some of the action explodes perfunctorily, but it is reasonably good fun, largely thanks to the charisma of the two leading men and their obvious ease with, and enjoyment of, each others company. James Marsden, Edward James Olmos and Paula Patton (‘Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol’ 2011) appear in support, and the whole is a decent if perhaps unmemorable addition to the back catalogue of like examples, except for one scene that stands out featuring a bunch of Mexicans shooting at some chickens they’ve buried in the sand so that only their heads are sticking up. Stig’s dialogue briefly becomes the voice of the audience in outrage, and it’s not especially pleasant to watch. Poor things. Not sure if psychologically damaged chickens would, ahem, fall foul of the standard “No Animals Were Harmed” in the making of this motion picture, a phrase that American films using animals have run at the end of the credits (courtesy of American Humane Association legislation).
The team (producers Disney and Jerry Bruckheimer, director Gore Verbinksi, and lead actor Johhny Depp) that brought ‘The Pirates of the Caribbean’ to astounding commercial success, reunite for the first big screen outing in a generation of one of televisions most loved and iconic characters, but this time around they are without the charms of Keira Knightley. The result? A disaster, portended to cost producers Disney a monetary cascade of millions. Well, I think we can safely say where the real talent lay on Pirates ….
It’s an odd undertaking to say the least. I’ve never seen a single episode of ‘The Lone Ranger’, nor am I even familiar with basic character motivations, other than the eponymous central character being the masked vigilante of the western genre (it is perhaps the continuing rise of the superhero film that originally inspired interest in this endeavour) and his accompaniment by his equally renowned Indian sidekick Tonto. In fact, I’m probably more familiar with The Milky Bar kid, who was doubtless based on him, so I had no real preconceptions going in, and yet it is abundantly clear where they got this one wrong.
In the first instance the filmmakers have made the cardinal sin of forgetting who their target audience were – in this case families, whilst trying to appeal to a much wider adult audience at the same time, much like Pirates did. But young children should absolutely not be taken to see this film. The first two thirds are a fairly gritty, dark western, with especially brutal murder and executions and the central characters visiting a brothel à la the continuation of adult themes (they do not themselves partake, at least). A family friendly western like ‘Maverick’ (94), also a TV adaptation, is a good example of how to get the balance right, but that is not to say this part of the film is bad, far from it, there are a lot of nice touches – especially with regards to the cinematography and the atmosphere (it was shot on location in New Mexico, Utah and Colorado, although I suspect a grainy colour scheme may have been applied to a lot of it in post production, which, if accurate, was entirely unnecessary).
Additionally, Johnny Depp as Tonto is fantastic – going into the screening my biggest concerns were about his portrayal, as it looked in the trailers just like the basic replication of the previous formula and his Jack Sparrow character, but I was impressed throughout by the originality he brought to Tonto, whilst still remaining the playful Depp we are familiar with. Then, however, the final third of the film is delivered as what we expected the whole thing to be, farcical and light hearted, over the top action sequences and Disney gooeyness whilst the William Tell overture plays, which ironically completely destroys the decent western that had been built up so far. Deepening the film’s woes, they annihilate the characters at the same time – up until this point The Lone Ranger has steadfastly refused to kill anyone, instead demanding on principal that he will bring them to justice. In the final third he pretty much gives up on that idea by trying to shoot someone, but he can’t as he is out of ammo, and the silly chase sequences continue. What on Earth? Your central character either stands for something, or he doesn’t, you can’t just casually throw away the core concept of his very being, but at the same time fudge it so he doesn’t actually kill anybody. It’s outrageously pathetic (see the {very well researched, if I do say so myself} Tintin review for more very similar casual character destruction).
Armie Hammer plays the ranger himself, and he is ok in the role, but is a far cry from being inspiring, and it is very clear that Tonto is the more central character, was it the same in the series? I very much doubt it. Indeed, Tonto is billed first in the credits, though he does appear onscreen first too as the film opens with the Indian as an old man, looking like a sun wizened version of Alice Cooper, approached by a young child who will get his life story in exchange for some peanuts – and why in the name of heaven is the blooming child crunching away at the peanuts?! It’s incredibly annoying! Bad enough with every second row featuring some fat bastard with half a truck full of popcorn, grrrrrr!
The camaraderie between ranger and Indian works to some degree, and the supporting acting is fine from the likes of Ruth Wilson, Helena Bonham Carter, Tom Wilkinson, William Fichtner and Barry Pepper. If you stay through the end credits, they last a really long time and whilst they are playing we can see in the background Tonto as an old man again, walking torturously slowly, and yet as fast as he’s able, into the western landscape. It’s incredibly sad, and unlike anything you’re likely to have seen before. It sums up the entire film, a legitimate artistic touch, and yet one completely wrong for this film (the whole movie is also bloody long for families to sit through).
I couldn’t resist this – ‘Hi Ho Silver’ from Scottish singer/songwriter Jim Diamond and written in memory of his father (also used as the theme tune for ‘Boon’)
The sequel to 2010’s ‘Percy Jackson & The lightning Thief’ sees most of the cast return for the next adventure, although Anthony Head has replaced Pierce Brosnan as Chiron the centaur. It’s based on the novel by Rick Riordan, part of a five book series focusing on main character Percy Jackson, the half human son of Poseidon, and his adventures with best buds Grover, a satyr, and Annabeth, the half human daughter of Athena (each played by Logan Lerman, Brandon T. Jackson and Alexandra Daddario {Texas Chainsaw 3D} respectively). This time around, the intrepid trio must make their way to ‘The Sea of Monsters’, which in human terms is just the Bermuda Triangle, to find the Golden Fleece of myth, apparently significantly relocated since Jason quested for it in the Black Sea millennia ago, as only the Fleece’s regenerative powers can save the tree that protects Camp Half-Blood from the poison it is infected with. But the dastardly devil who infected said tree (just like in the Harry Potter series, it is in fact the same bad guy from the previous instalment) also intends on using the Fleece – to ‘revive’ Kronos, father of the gods and ruler of all before his children usurped and murdered him.
Yes, the story really is that shit. Not only that, but reviving Kronos was also the central plot for 2012’s ‘Wrath of the Titans’. Indeed, the villain here had only to not poison the protective tree, and thus not also send the heroes off after the Fleece, to be able to track down the object of his desire in a pleasant and unhurried manner. However, the story could be forgiven its various sillinesses, were it not for most of the rest of the film misfiring too. Percy has hero doubts/daddy issues as Poseidon won’t talk to him (perhaps so they wouldn’t have to pay an actor to play him again) and realises he has a brother, courtesy of the god of the oceans having his way with a nymph (if it’s anything like the real Greek myths, this means he raped her), the result of which, bizarrely, is a half human, half cyclops called Tyson, that everyone picks on. For families and youngsters the adventure and very crude and obvious character development is probably fine, and may indeed even prove suitably entertaining, but for anyone older this is not going to hold their attention for very long.
The special effects are also a let down in several key areas, perhaps nowhere more so than in the animation of Tyson’s solitary eye, which at no point really looks convincing. The concept of Greek mythology in a modern day setting isn’t really so bad, but it’s just delivered in a sort of lame ‘Scooby Doo’ manner, and much like the other modern day bastardisations of one of the most fundamental literary resources of western civilisation (of which, 2011’s ‘Immortals’ is by far and away the worst example) it scrambles to fit in all of the most extreme characters from the source material. It’s crazy, and completely unnecessary – the myths have so much scope within them that you would never in a million years run out of stories to tell and epic films to create. Much better to focus on the small scale, build some characters up and then throw them into historical context, modern day or ancient, combined with one or two detailed elements from mythology. Indeed, here, for the son of Poseidon, Jackson certainly forgets to use his powers an awful lot, not to mention his staring into space digesting the scene while he really should be, Olympus forbid, doing something heroic.
A couple of nice touches exist – Nathan Fillion appears as Hermes and bemoans the death of an unfairly cancelled TV show (he was the captain, Mal, of the ship Serenity on Joss Whedon’s cancelled masterpiece ‘Firefly’ of course) and when they end up on an abandoned but still operating fairground ride, two of them start humming ‘It’s a small world’, which is the song that plays incessantly on the rides of the same name at Disneyland (The Red Dragon was once on the Paris version of this when it broke down, but THE SINGING CONTINUED. For quite some time. I suspect foul play by sick minded teen operators). This is an adaptation of the second book in the series, so the assumption has to be they were hoping to milk the franchise and get all five of them out there, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they decided to curtail it at three, and just mash the best bits of the final three books together.
Steve Coogan’s most iconic comedy persona gets his first big screen outing, twenty two years and multiple TV/radio shows after he was first aired to British audiences in 1991, with BBC Radio 4’s parody show ‘On The Hour’. After the heyday of his graduation from radio to television, Alan’s life has returned to a more leisurely pace working once more for the local radio station in Norwich. The peace is about to be ruined, however, when corporate downsizers arrive and it looks like either Alan, or his closest friend at the station Pat (at least, in the eyes of Pat he is his closest friend), are the two most likely candidates for the chop. Chaotic skullduggery ensues, resulting in a hostage situation at North Norfolk Digital, and a chance for Alan Partridge to once again appear in front of the cameras …
The Red Dragon has never been a big fan of the main character, in fact I’ve often wondered if he wouldn’t operate much better as a supporting one with the right surrounding enterprise, much like earlier in his career, and it’s a style of comedy that I find a little drab, a little obvious, and a little flat. That said, I would definitely call this is a solid adaptation of the TV series, but, despite laughing a few times, the thought of someone sitting me down to watch ‘Knowing me, knowing you … with Alan Partridge’ still makes me want to gag. One lady in the audience was practically wetting herself with laughter on more than one occasion (though she may have been laughing at the simple fact she was laughing) so this is most probably worth seeing if you are a fan of Coogan and his alter ego, but at the same time I think it’s unlikely to galvanise many people into new followers.
Adam Sandler’s sequel to his commercially successful 2010 film ‘Grown Ups’ sees the return of the entire cast, not to make their audience laugh, unless their audience is comprised entirely of emotionally underdeveloped twelve year old boys, but to make a lot of money whilst expending no creative effort, nor indeed any effort of any kind whatsoever. I can’t remember a single thing about the original, that’s how good it was, unfortunately I wish I could say the same for this cringe worthy attempt at comedy which has genuine moments of ‘this was actually allowed to be made and deemed suitable for human consumption?’. Sandler’s own production company, Happy Madison Productions, (which has long since been blind to the quality of the products it ships out), being the film’s driving force, answers this question.
There are a few reasonably amusing gags, but they are steamrollered by the abundance of flatulence driven garbage that assaults the audience throughout, as if they couldn’t be bothered actually writing a real script but instead turned up onset and decided to begin throwing themselves into objects, farting at the same time. Hilarious. Between these high brow entertainments feature a Stifler pleasing amount of well endowed women showing off their assets, as if Sandler is determined to not only appeal to the lowest common denominator, but also wishes to mount a one man crusade against feminism at the same time.
The returning roster of shame includes Sandler, Kevin James, Chris Rock, David Spade, Salma Hayek, Maria Bello and Maya Rudolph as the principal cast, with a few familiar faces in support, including Taylor Lautner, which, you may be surprised to learn, does not improve matters.
Is The Conjuring scary? Hmm so-so. Is it any good? Ultimately, yes. You can tell by the picture above, and the look on Vera Farmiga’s face, that it features some very traditional scares, in this case a creepy little music box that probably has an equally creepy little clown inside, just waiting to pop out and enter your nightmares whilst a determinedly repetitive melody plays (it is in the affirmative for all of the above things, but you can see ghosts in its mirror as well ooooo). The problem with the first half of the movie is that it relies far too much on these very predictable tricks of the trade, wood will creak, doors will slam, matches will mysteriously blow out and then reveal something on the third striking etc. etc. It falls a little below humdrum, as we get to know the Perron family who are moving into their new home, which stands alone far away from civilisation and has a weird boarded up cellar. Obviously, they are not familiar with horror movies.
What makes this a little more interesting than your standard horror flick is that it’s loosely based on a true story, and we eventually get properly introduced to Ed and Lorraine Warren (Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga respectively), paranormal investigators for whom the Perron case was to be one of their most famous. Interestingly, several previous films have been based on the investigations of the infamous academics (one can’t help but wonder if they influenced the creation of Scully and Mulder for ‘The X-Files’, although neither of the Warrens were sceptics) including ‘The Haunting in Connecticut’ (09) and ‘The Amityville Horror’ (79 & 05), and here, when they finally enter the family’s home, it is the look on Lorraine’s face telling us she’s seen something that she doesn’t want to admit to the family, that starts to draw the audience in.
Both principal leads have previous experience in the genre, and both in fantastic showcases of it – ‘Orphan’ (09) for Farmiga, and ‘Insidious’ (10) (which was genuinely quite scary) for Wilson, indeed The Conjuring’s director, James Wan, helmed ‘Insidious’ as well as the original ‘Saw’ (04). Lili Taylor, who plays the mother of the family, is also arguably best known for her role in ‘The Haunting’ in 1999. All this experience and a reasonable story combine for, not an amazing horror film, but certainly a pretty decent one.
105 Min 
