RoboCop  (2014)    70/100

Rating :   70/100                                                                     117 Min        12A

This is actually better than the 1987 original, although it is not without its problems, chief among them massive overuse of shaky cam in some of the action sequences. The story is similar but not identical – here America and her giant corporations seem to be steamrollering the whole world (or Iran at any rate) due in no small measure to their manufacture and deployment of robotic military equipment, but the home market has remained a no-go for the technology due to public concerns over its safety, much to the chagrin of Raymond Sellars (Michael Keaton), CEO of OmniCorp the cybernetics juggernaut responsible for the mass production of robots and the prompting of the moral homeland debate (this is set slightly in the future, in case that wasn’t obvious).

The logical solution to this pesky setback is to plonk a man inside a robot who has a moral conscience, only the same conscience is a little too slow at deciding when to pull the trigger and when not to, so a little amount of cerebral ‘tinkering’ goes on behind closed doors with their first unwitting participant in the scheme (he gets blown to bits by the bad guys, fortunately one of the intact bits is his head) Alex Murphy (Joel Kinnaman). This tinkering and the core concept itself forms the central discussion of the film, in between RoboCop annihilating the criminals in his home town of Detroit, and it’s handled at a reasonable pace with solid performances and slick special effects, and although there are a few problems with some of the action, and it’s not especially noteworthy, it does hold its own for the most part.

Support work from Gary Oldman as ‘tinkering’ scientist Dr Dennett Norton (inspired by Norton anti-virus?), Abbie Cornish as Mrs Murphy and Samuel L. Jackson is good, and the film successfully makes the OmniCorp board seem more like morally questionable people rather than the cardboard bad guys that so often frequented eighties action movies, RoboCop amongst them. In a scene where oodles of data and perp profiles are downloaded into Murphy’s noggin so he can immediately identify people wanted for arrest, I couldn’t help but think – don’t we already have the technology to do this? There are plenty of programmes that can identify faces, just pair it with a database and strap it to an officer’s squad car/ass kicking visor and bob’s your uncle, you could even apply it to a network of surveillance cameras and call it ‘The RoboCop Protocol’ …

The Lego Movie  (2014)    70/100

Rating :   70/100                                                                     100 Min        U

Lego, one of the most enduring and popular toys of the last century (the name comes from the Danish ‘leg godt’ meaning ‘play well’) took a surprisingly long time to bring itself onto the big-screen given the success of the Transformers franchise and the completely unmerited monetary haul of the G.I. Joe films. Here everything, not surprisingly, is made from Lego and all digitally mastered together into a traditional tale of the underdog, Emmet Brickowski (Chris Pratt) – an unexceptional everyday Lego worker with no friends to speak of but who never has a bad word to say about anybody, who must realise his own potential and learn how to help others do the same (with the help of the Master Builders, who can creatively construct things from Lego without using a rulebook, don’t you know) all to undermine the dastardly plans of PRESIDENT BUSINESS (Will Ferrell) who can’t stand all those pesky Master Builders ruining his otherwise regimented and ordered Lego universe. But does Emmet have what it takes?

Initially the story and comedy value are a little flat, and a little predictable, and songs like ‘Everything is Awesome’ (the only song in this incidentally, it’s not a musical) are a little grating, but then … it becomes catchy! And the bland component parts eventually become endearing, partly due to an array of likeable characters, such as Batman (Will Arnett), Bad Cop/Good Cop (Liam Neeson) and Unikitty (Alison Brie), the leader of Cloud Cuckoo Land, domain of rainbows and puppies, who variously becomes Biznesskitty and Iwillripyourfuckingfaceoffifyoudothatagainkitty. Along with everything, she too, is awesome. Overall, it’s a fun trip guaranteed to spike sales of Lego and with a good message at it’s heart of creative self expression and the importance of appreciating this as a universal concept.

Lone Survivor  (2013)    30/100

Rating :   30/100                                                                     121 Min        15

A huge opportunity missed here as what could have been a tight, thrilling and quite moving war piece based on a true incident taking place in Afghanistan in 2005, descends into complete farce and jingoism with the main American soldiers each being shot about five hundred times, exclaiming ‘damn it’ with each hit as if they’d merely been stung by some nettles as blood spurts everywhere all leading up to dramatic Boromir style death scenes in slow motion with the sun setting on the picturesque landscape surrounding them. The title itself completely blows much of the story as for anyone who wasn’t aware of the details (the vast majority of viewers one imagines) we know only one of the four man team survives, and the very beginning compacts this gross error by showing it is very clearly going to be Mark Wahlberg’s character Marcus Luttrell, and indeed the film is based on Luttrell’s novel recounting events as they happened on the ground (reputedly his original report put enemy troop numbers at circa 20 -30, then in his book they became more like 200, whilst an alternative novel published about the operation puts them at more like 9 or 10).

The other three combatants are played by Emile Hirsch, Taylor Kitsch and Ben Foster, and, frankly, if I died fighting for my country I’d be pretty pissed off with some of these casting choices, and the film opens, after some decent real army footage, with what seems to be some sort of homosexual soft porno with the focus on the bodies of the men instead of the camaraderie or characters. Without knowing the exact details of the events that actually occurred, their assignment according to the film was to covertly approach an Afghan village and take out a Taliban leader, or ‘the bad guys’ as they put it, thought to be there, but it many ways it seems doomed from the beginning. They quickly find the mountains are making radio communication impossible – how is it they didn’t factor that in? It surely cannot have come as a surprise. Then they encounter their first major obstacle and make a complete dog’s breakfast of it, before failing to properly conceal themselves in what seems pretty good terrain to disappear in, especially if there are only four of you. Not only this, but instead of both hiding themselves and also preparing cover where they would have the advantage, they elect to run at the superior numbers taking very little precaution with cover (but when you can take multiple bullets without even noticing I guess that’s not so much of an issue), and then, when they should once again be trying to disappear, they loudly call out to each other creating a very, very easy duck hunt for the people trying to kill them.

It ends with what is actually a very moving tribute to the real men that lost their lives there, but this is cheating – an emotional punch at the end that people are naturally going to feel and empathise with and yet it cannot make up for the majority of the film being terrible. I say the majority – the last quarter of the story has more of a heart to it, which took me by surprise, and some of the scenes at least successfully begin to set up tension, with at least one of them slightly uncomfortable viewing, as was intended by the clever way it was shot. However, when you are watching the main characters effectively play Cowboys and Indians and pretending to be riddled with lead and hit every bone of their bodies off rocks, still calmly delivering cheesy lines to one another, then the thing is sunk without any real hope of redemption. This is entirely the fault of director Peter Berg as he not only helmed the project but also wrote the screenplay, in fact, and I may be misremembering this, but I think he tells us he is the director twice during the opening credits. His last film was ‘Battleship’ (12) and this is in the same league as that, notwithstanding the real world relevance.

I, Frankenstein  (2014)    67/100

Rating :   67/100                                                                       92 Min        12A

This is a pretty awesome, bad film. Given the concept is that Frankenstein’s monster has not only robbed his creator of his name, but has also managed to survive until the present day and get himself involved in an eternal battle between demons and gargoyles (yes, that’s right, gargoyles – but ones that can transform into attractive humans and which serve the powers of good) that, naturally, humans are blissfully unaware of, the discovery that this is a bit rough around the edges with bad dialogue and a fair amount of ropey acting, isn’t really an astonishing surprise.

In the beginning we see Mr F dealing with a few family issues, and his voiceover comes to us ‘I though it was the end ..(long pause).. But ..(long pause).. It was just the beginning’ and we very quickly assume this is going to be a nightmare to sit through. Responsible for the somewhat lacking screenplay is Stuart Beattie, but credit where credit’s due – in his dual role as the director he has also created some pretty cool action sequences and somehow gelled everything into a very flawed, and yet very likeable film. Aaron Eckhart can take a lot of credit for anchoring the piece as Frankenstein, getting the tone spot on in what can’t have been an easy role to play, and Yvonne Strahovski as the hot blonde scientist in tight jeans adds the right touch of schlock sex appeal and the two of them, as well as the rest of the cast (Miranda Otto, Jai Courtney and Bill Nighy are in support – with the latter of those gleefully delivering his cheesy lines), with the direction, weave the right threads of ridiculousness and entertainment unashamedly together.

Not sure if this would work as well on the small screen, but I went into this in a foul and vituperative state of mind, and I left in a good mood. I’d recommend it if you’re feeling the same way.

Jack Ryan : Shadow Recruit  (2014)    73/100

Rating :   73/100                                                                     105 Min        12A

Finally – a new Keira Knightley film woohoo! No doubt everyone was as distraught as I was when last year didn’t feature miss Knightley in any film on general release, but here she is back on fine form as Cathy, the wife of the late Tom Clancy’s long running fictional character Jack Ryan, with Chris Pine filling in his shoes – he has been previously played by Alec Baldwin (‘The Hunt for Red October’ 90), Harrison Ford (‘Patriot Games’ 92, ‘Clear and Present Danger’ 94) and Ben Affleck (‘The Sum of All Fears’ 02). The role of his wife was a fairly small one in the previous films, and screenwriters Adam Cozad and David Koepp have done a good job of writing her a larger part whilst managing the difficult task of avoiding it becoming too cheesy or predictable, although despite the end of the cold war, the Russians are still the bad guys.

Clancy passed away last October (the film is dedicated to him), and this is the first movie to feature his characters but to not be based on one of his novels, and one does wonder what he would make of it. It’s a series reboot, with Ryan initially an economics student in London who becomes galvanised to join the Marines after the 9/11 attacks on New York. He receives a crippling back injury and is close to despair when he is recruited as an analyst for the CIA but also meets Cathy as the undergrad doctor who promises to go to dinner with him if he dedicates himself to his physical recovery. If only Keira had won the role of Catwoman in ‘The Dark Knight Rises’, poor old Bruce Wayne wouldn’t have had to get punched in the back and thrown down into a grotty hole to recover from his spinal fracture. Indeed, pretty sure if she went around the NHS wards and made similar propositions we might see a remarkable recovery rate in patients ….

“Keira Knightley says she’ll go on a date with you if you get better.”
“…what?”
“Yeah, she said she wanted to give sick people something to live for.”
“Are you fucking shitting me?! Quick, cancel all my visits – give me that fucking water {stands} I’m better! {vomits} Get off me! I’ll be fine!”

The film has almost certainly been inspired by the reboot to the Bond franchise, and there are possibly a few nods in its direction, with an inaugural fight in a toilet and a few camera shots of glass elevators similar to the ones in both ‘Casino Royale’ (06) and ‘Skyfall’ (12) as well as a set up not too dissimilar to the one in Skyfall’s Shanghai skyscraper scene, not to mention putting the character name in the title of course. Kenneth Branagh directs and stars as the Russian bad guy, with the trailer making his accent sound a little ropey (the trailer and marketing for the film was not great in general) but its actually pretty good, and Keira sports a new American one (she has several – she is very talented), the two of them, Pine, and Kevin Costner as Ryan’s CIA contact all sell the film well with their combined talents and, together with tight direction, it all comes together nicely as a good, fun, spy thriller. It amply supplies the base for a new franchise and although it’s not quite in the same league as ‘Casino Royale’, there are plenty of good things to build on for the next one …

47 Ronin  (2013)    66/100

Rating :   66/100                                                                     118 Min        12A

Based on Japan’s epic legend and visually very nice, but at the same time somehow completely flat throughout. The true story this is based on is a fascinating tale of honour, feudal Japan, and the way of the samurai, or Bushido, as the forty seven warriors are forced to become ronin (the Japanese term for a samurai without master) when their lord is ordered to end his life, and they spend the next couple of years planning a reckoning. Here, however, the filmmakers have opted to mix the story in with fantasy elements from mythology, which may have worked but there’s no real skill in the delivery, no real scope or tension to bait the audience with.

Keanu Reeves is the token famous western actor to sell the film with and who had his part deliberately augmented with that in mind, although he is actually pretty good in it – the rest of the cast is comprised of well know actors in Japan, but with that in mind it would have been a much better idea to film the dialogue in Japanese and then subtitle it as their delivery of the English lines leaves a lot to be desired and arrives, at times, painfully slowly. Where the film is successful, is in painting a wonderfully rich image of eighteenth century Japan with fairly grandiose sets and the costume department in particular outdoing themselves (although they too have not always pinioned themselves with historical accuracy). The fighting though, is nowhere near as good as in the likes of ‘13 Assassins’ (10) and there is a very average feel to what had the potential to be very spectacular indeed. It may still satisfy though, if you just happen to be in the mood for a bit of light fantasy action.

Outlander  (2008)    59/100

Rating :   59/100                                                                     115 Min        15

Sci-fi that sees Jim Caviezel’s soldier from another humanoid race (who seem to be exactly the same as us, something never touched on – nor is their relationship with Earth explained) crash land in Norway in the year 709 AD, releasing his deadly cargo onto the harsh and beautiful Norwegian landscape (although it was mostly filmed in Canada). Encountering a local tribe led by John Hurt, he must help the natives defend themselves against the extra terrestrial beastie he has forced upon them, and will inadvertently garner the lusty attentions of the king’s daughter, played by Sophia Myles (who is essentially recreating her character from ‘Tristan + Isolde’ 06), but how will the local churls react to potentially losing one of the two attractive women we see in the village? Well, they are about to get eaten anyway, markedly improving our hero’s chances.

A reasonably interesting story with convincing sets and average-decent swordplay, but one that is sadly let down by having an all too traditional resolution and increasingly improbable action sequences.

Homefront  (2013)    67/100

Rating :   67/100                                                                     100 Min        15

What is by and large a really good film unfortunately dwindles into all too familiar territory come the end, but nevertheless it remains on the whole worthwhile. It’s the latest action number from Jason Statham and features James Franco, Kate Bosworth and Winona Ryder as the supporting bad guys trying to trade off his life and that of his little girl to an incarcerated drug baron, who was of course put behind bars by Statham during his days as an undercover DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) officer. Trying to lay low and just look after his family now, things are set in motion after his young girl, whom he has taught how to defend herself, bedecks a local bully, and his hick junkie mother (played wonderfully by Bosworth) sets out for vengeance. Definitely worth a look for Statham fans.

Oldboy  (2013)    55/100

Rating :   55/100                                                                     104 Min        18

This is director Spike Lee’s remake of Park Chan-Wook’s South Korean film ‘Old Boy’. Given the original only came out in 2003, and if you are into film then you have almost certainly heard of it and probably at least thought about trying to watch it at some point, the question has to be asked, why remake it now? Especially since it’s a mystery, one who’s story has not been changed very much here, so if you know the outcome there is precious little reason to watch this version, and given that it’s a pretty flimsy attempt at a remake there is then no reason whatsoever to do so. So it seems this was either made for people who don’t like to watch films with subtitles, or was simply the inflection of Lee’s own ego – although to be fair, reportedly the producers did somewhat take the project away from Lee when it came to the final cut, much to the chagrin of director and leading man Josh Brolin alike.

The story revolves around Joe Doucett (Brolin) who is, for reasons unknown, locked up in a room for twenty years and then one random day released, and is then left to find out what on Earth happened to him and why. One of the first problems is that Joe does not look a day older when this two decade period elapses – initially we are shown his overweight gut and then a montage of him working out whilst interred, suggesting a level of commitment from Brolin, but still hardly accounting for the physical changes twenty years would bring. The all important story elements around the time of his release are simply delivered in a very weak way – in fact, judging by the random fight he gets into with some jocks immediately upon release, for no real reason, and his ability to contort their limbs at will, it seems twenty years of constant body building is enough to also grant one super powers to boot.

Elizabeth Olson turns up in what for her is not the first bad and unnecessary remake she’s appeared in (see 2011’s ‘Silent House’), Samuel L. Jackson has a brief role, and Sharlto Copley has another good turn after his memorable performance in ‘Elysium’. One of the biggest set pieces and most iconic scenes from the original is recreated – and from the point of view of the crew it’s a difficult scene all filmed in one continuous shot over multiple levels of the same building. Unfortunately, it looks completely ridiculous with stunt men throwing themselves all over the place willy-nilly, looking more like the WWE Royal Rumble on a bad year than a well rehearsed big budget action scene. That kind of sums up the whole thing – I did begin to get into the story again toward the final third, but overall it just feels like an ill conceived attempt to steal someone else’s thunder – the production team should really have just orchestrated the wider rerelease of the original if they were so taken with it. DEFINITELY watch the South Korean version, not this.

The Hunger Games : Catching Fire  (2013)    71/100

Rating :   71/100                                                                     146 Min        12A

The sequel to last year’s first instalment in The Hunger Games trilogy (well, they are stretching the original three novels by Suzanne Collins into four films) sees the return of new best actress Oscar winner Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson as Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark respectively, ready to face the repercussions and responsibilities expected of them by the domineering force of The Capitol after successfully surviving the annual Hunger Games in the last film – a brutal last man standing, kill or be killed contest designed to both entertain and control the partially enslaved populace in this dystopian vision of the world’s future.

Those consequences are predictable enough – indeed the very names of the novels and films are kind of spoilers in their own right. Not that there is much in the way of originality in this teen fantasy series – the Japanese film ‘Battle Royale’ (2000) which predates all of the novels is one of many examples telling essentially the same story. However, the production value here is enormous, with a great spectrum of committed creative talent behind it. All of which ensures that the films are visually engrossing and perfect just to escape from reality for a few hours with.

Aside from an underwhelmingly abrupt ending, this is just as fun as the first one, compellingly acted and with a number of nice flourishes – like Cinna’s (Lenny Kravitz) indulgence with Katniss’s dresses …