SAW 3D (2010)

Horror Movies and 3D have a long and varied history, going back to the third instalment of the Friday the 13th franchise, and more recently 2008's "My Bloody Valentine 3D". Being all about atmosphere and scares, does this overused tool have a place in this genre? let's take a look and see with SAW VI director Kevin Greutert's final instalment in the most successful horror franchise of all time.

The story begins by recapping the events of the film just previous, telling us the fate of Jigsaw's Apprentice, and revealing that he survived the predicament he was left in at the end of VI. The secondary plot-line running throughout the film is the current player, supposed Jigsaw trap "Survivor" Bobby Dagen (Sean Patrick Flanery) who has released a self help book about his escape, providing inspiration to the masses. The film slowly works it's way through a weak "Cat & Mouse" chase of Jigsaw's apprentice and Internal affairs officer Matt GIbson (Chad Donella) and the Self help author learning his lesson about lies, deceit and how the people around you, knowing you're doing wrong, and yet do nothing are just as much to blame. The film wraps up in the most APT ending to the SAW franchise, a total mind-fuck with an extremely familiar face making an EPIC return to the franchise (if not a little on the chubby side, but then again, look who's talking).

Conclusion: First thing's first, this film SO did not need to be in 3D, although having cost $17 million to make, (the most expensive film in the franchise, but still not a scratch on most of the Hollywood blockbusters this year) I can see why Lionsgate made that move. I resented paying extra for the ticket, as the film felt a tad showy for my liking, also there were some TERRIBLE performances, overacting and hammy delivery a-plenty (though Linkin Park frontman Chester Bennington does a very respectible, though short, job of it), also toward the end someone winds up in a trap I truly doubt deserved to be there. The films plot and connections to previous film's were to be commended though, with a truly "big finish" for the franchise I've followed for the past 7 years. this one actually managed to make me CRINGE with it's traps (fish hook... you'll know when you see it) something the previous instalments had rare success with, the whole thing was just a lot of fun to watch, when taken with a big pinch of salt. 7/10

To end my Saw-a-thon, It took a long time to get here, while V and VI felt the most contrived, the series was by no means BAD, while they could (and probably SHOULD) have stopped the series earlier, it has been this generations shining star in the genre, Michael Myers, Leatherface, Freddy Krueger and Jason all tried to resurface, but their time was done, and the 2000's belonged to Jigsaw. Epic finale to a franchise that's amazing to watch this time of year, it made us think, made us Cringe, and opened up a new door for low budget ULTRA shock/gore films (A-la Hostel and The Collector). So, in the words of Jigsaw all the way back from SAW (2004) "You are still alive. Most people are so ungrateful to be alive. But not you. Not anymore. " GAME OVER.

SAW VI (2009)

After V, I, like most was left disheartened with the franchise, the twist wasn't very good and it asked so many more questions, so there was a lot riding on this sixth instalment, did IV & V writers Melton and Dunstan deliver? we shall see.

"SAW the sixth" starts a little differently, for the first time in the franchise, SAW DOES CURRENT AFFAIRS! that's right! in the opening "trap" we have two bankers (who irresponsibly gave loans to those who could never pay them back), have to quite literally give their "pound of flesh" in order to survive, I'm sure I wasn't the only one to get a kick out of that, the winner however doesn't seem fully "appreciative" of the life they got away with. the bulk of the film however, continues the escapades of SAW's partner in crime (again, I don't want to ruin it so I won't say who it is) and how they are dealing with increasing suspicion, also we inter-cut to a health insurance broker who has denied hundreds claims to health insurance (one of them being Jigsaw) and is seemingly out of touch with the value of human life, again a hot topic at the time of release (fall 2009). the film winds and winds, and manages, with it's finale, to encompass scenes way back when from III, and brings the current situation into light with a satisfying (though not brilliant) pay-off.

In the scheme of thing's. I would consider myself a fan of Kevin Greutert's first film in the franchise, it's two major flaws are that
1) I'm not convinced a thriller/horror franchise, 6 films in, is the best way to make a topical statement about the government and economics (though there was plenty of satisfaction to be had watching someone who preyed on the financially fragile having to hack off their own belly fat).
and 2) It had to clean up after V, that film was sort of a watery set up for this one, which it should never be, the first four did a good job of encompassing the previous instalments while being self contained (though it would help to see what came before).

Conclusion: VI, more so than the rest of the series has to be seen in context of the franchise, but a HUGE improvement on it's direct predecessor 6/10

SAW V (2008)

You know the Dealio here, t'was another Halloween (my Birthday actually) and another outing for Liongate's longest running franchise. With the fourth instalment ending like it did, things had to get much more complicated in order to continue (as our main Villain died 2 films ago).

We start off by seeing a man strapped to a table with a giant bladed pendulum swinging above him, unlike most SAW traps before it though, after crushing his hands (as per Billy the puppet's instructions) he is not released from his restraints, and goes on to be cut into 2. Cut to Agent Straum EXACTLY where we left him in IV, as he winds up in a trap himself shortly after (if my review sounds rushed, it's only because I'm describing literally how the movie played out) we then get to see more flashbacks inter-cut with the current players, 5 seemingly unconnected people being told to work together to overcome their predicament. Instead of focusing on Jigsaw's motivation this time around (as that was well covered last time) we're shown the journey his assistant took to get to this point, (don't worry, this isn't a SPOILER blog). These three premise's inter-wind and culminate at the very end (with the signature twist franchise fans have come to expect)

Now...ABOUT that twist. I remember the tag line in the Trailers at the time being "you won't believe how it ends" so i was expecting my reaction to be "HOLY MUNCHKIN MIDGET FUCK! where has my brain gone?" but instead it was more akin to "oh.. I get it". There was a lot of set up in this film for an extremely weak pay off, also with an ever increasing budget per film (and the franchises third director David Hackl) it's much more clean feel is drastically changing the aesthetic of the original premise (dark, dirty and deadly) and what the FUCK is it with the CG blood? how much do blood squibs possibly cost?

Conclusion:IV writers Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan definitely deliver us the series' weak point, some of the traps were kind of cool but the 5 people in the main game are utterly one dimensional and only communicate when the audience needs to be told something, also, too many jumps between past and present gets annoying AND confusing. the film doesn't succeed as a SAW film or a Horror/Thriller, purely as gore. 3/10

SAW IV (2007)

Or as i like to call it, "SAW III, part II" as III and IV are, more so than the others, absolutely integral to each-other, along with mandatory gruesome traps and sharp music scoring, we're treated to the a truly "holy shit..i don't even?" ending.

The player this time around is SWAT team leader Rigg (Lyriq Bent of SAW II and III alumni), we see him put his commitment as a police officer to the test and the scope of the SAW-verse expanded, between Rigg and the now dead Jigsaw (Bell once again, who shows up as a chillingly still corpse in the gut wrenching opening scene) we're given the motivations behind Jigsaw's quest to help people help themselves through flashbacks. The plot weaves in and out between the events surrounding the current "Game" and police Lieutenant Mark Hoffman (Costas Mandylor) and FBI agents Straum and Perez (Scott Patterson & Athena Karkanis respectively) hunting down Jigsaw and chasing after Rigg. It ends, as ever with a twist ending, this one however SO integral to the events of III they could be 2 parts of the same movie.

An interesting observation is that this entry became the first in the franchise not to have original Creators Leigh Whanell and James Wan involved with the writing (but instead sat back as Executive producers, as they have for II and III), Director/Co-writer Darren Lynn Bousman instead teams up with new-comers Patrick Melton, Marcus Dunstan and Thomas Fenton.

Conclusion: While the now lavish set-pieces look great, the films are starting to get a bigger budget, which for me takes away some of the charm of the previous instalments, this one (and the 2 that follow) really have a shiny new "Hollywood" feel to them, and starts to lack as much subtance as before. That said, aside from some OTT and possibly pointless traps (yet another person is subjected to two tests) and CGI blood (?) the movie continues what was set up in 3 nicely, they really are 2 sides of the coin, though, best seen back to back. 7/10.

SAW III (2006)

Third time's a charm? we'll see about that.
Another October brought us yet another SAW film, this film was released with a guaranteed fourth, which left some of the suspension a bit moot, however the actual story is probably as creative as the first.

Jigsaw (reprised by Tobin Bell) is sick, and so he must apprehend Doctor Lynn (Bahar Soomekh) A woman who is seemingly unappreciative of her husband and family, but as ever, there's more reason to her being here. While Jigsaw is being treated by the good doctor, we're flung between the current "player" Jeff (Angus Macfadyen), who is unable to move on from his son's death, causing him to pay no attention to his wife and daughter, Jigsaw pit's him against various people involved in and around his son's tragic "hit and run" passing. the film concludes with a bigger twist than II, but not a scratch on the original, again giving us the dilema of choice, with the moral being "Let go".

Series creators (and executive producers) James Wan and Leigh Whannell return to co-write with Director Darren Lynn Bousman. Creative and devilishly clever in places, there are some people in these traps featured in III that have little to no control over their fate, something that seems to go against the point of Jigsaw's motivation, the film in the end becomes partly a tale of loss and the breakdown of a family unit, hitting some emotional highs while bringing it all together in the final act.

Conclusion: The clever plot is brought down only by some of the shaky performances and seemingly unmotivated actions of some of the characters, it does it's job, and ties into it's successor beautifully. 7/10

SAW II (2005)

So begins the slew of sequels, following hot on the heals of the first, SAW II was released just a year later, in many ways it was the original SAW film in the sense that it set the template for the rest, and features the traps and "players" in equal measure as Jigsaw and his accolades.

Instead of a measly 2 guys, directer/co-writer Darren Lynn Bousman teams up with original screenwriter Leigh Wannell to bring us a roster of 7 people, each seemingly with a dark past, once the game begins the heat is on to find a cure to the nerve gas being pumped into them through the ventilation system, while outside the house we finally see Jigsaw being "caught", but is that all it seems?
we see Jigsaw<(Tobin Bell) having a back and fourth with Cop Eric Mathews (Donnie Wahlberg, brother of Mark) and discover that Mathews' son is one of our house-mates. connections between the group start to become apparent, but it is not until the end we find out how important Eric was to the rest of the group.

While lacking the first's claustrophobic nausea, the second one does spread it's wings a little, the victims had a chance to explore their surroundings, and a sort of anti-group dynamic was allowed to form, no time for love interests or comradery, these people seem to be more interested in saving themselves. that said, given the bigger scope of the film it brought with it the negatives that would plague the remaining sequels, the more technical something is the more variables there are, and a lot of what the group do or decide appears to be way too circumstantial.

Conclusion: though in contention for the best of the sequels, it can't match up to the first for depth, emotion of confinement, but we still see basic and believable traps at work (for example the pit of syringes.... *shudders*), whereas in later films everything starts looking like over-mechanical uber-traps are the only devices to hand. 6/10.

SAW (2004)

It's Halloween again, and with this time of the year comes another saw film,
this year brings us SAW 3D, which will (hopefully) be the last in the 7 film franchise, but where did it all begin? what kind of movie spawns 6 sequals and goes on to be one of the highest grossing Horror Franchises of all time? let's find out today with SAW.

The 2004 and horror/thriller movie is brought to us by Director James Wan and writer/star Leigh Whannell,based on a short film they made in 2003 (of the same name). Photographer Adam (Whannell) and Surgeon Lawrence Gordon (Cary Elwes) wake up to find themselves chained to pipes in a dirty, windowless and quiet shower room with a body between them and tapes revealing they have only a limited amount of time to escape, or not only does Dr Gordon die, but his wife and daughter too. so it becomes a race against the clock to find out why they are there, and how they will escape.

In the wrong hands the film could have become very formulaic and mundane and wouldn't have had the lasting power it has today, but the passion and vision from creators Wan and Whanell give us the kind of horror movie never seen before. a smart one. The plot spans out beyond the confines of the enclosed shower room long enough to fill you in on what's going on on the outside as well as in the past (as flashbacks) but doesn't leave it too long before dragging you back again, leading to possibly one of the greatest endings of the 2000's.

Conclusion: Superb performances from all involved (excluding Danny Glover) made this low budget gore/thriller all the more chilling and convincing, while tight Writing, Directing and Editing made it also a beauty to behold (with a badass soundtrack and scoring to boot) 8/10

Edge (2010)

The BFI festival is running from the 13th until the 28th of October, and this gave me the chance to broaden my horizons and check out some Independant film yumminess, the first being "My Joy" and the second being Edge, written and directed by Carol Morley, and starring Maxine Peak, Marjorie Yates (both of Shameless fame) Joseph Dempsie and Nichola Burley.

The story revolves around 6 strangers staying at a little hotel in a non-descript area of the British coast, where each the guests seem to be in some way broken inside, the six main guests pair up into 3 groups which give us our 3 main stories (loosely flowing in and out of one another) as well as the Receptionist and Waitress phasing in and out as comic relief. the film cuts between each of the pairs, where usually one of the 2 has an issue the other is trying to help them overcome, while revealing their own flaws in the process, slowly working through each of their problems until the finale, which envelopes all three tales and culminates them into one ending.

Having attended the BFI film festival showing, the film was followed by a Q&A, in which Writer/Director Morely explained how delicate a balance it was between the humour and the dark source material, and that it was something she wanted to convey as all those darker moments in her life were usually surrounded by humour too. This, I feel, was something she didn't fully pull off in the execution, while stunning to look at, as long takes and the beautiful landscapes give you plenty to ogle, this Indie Drama feels a little watery at points, without giving too much away a lot of what happens, the climax feels a bit forced, something more likely to come out of a soap opera episode climax. But it was striking a balance between morbidity and laughter that something never quite clicked, while the humour DID work it just as if it were placed at the wrong time on some occasions.

Overall, great to see low budget Brit Indies being made at such a high calibre, the whole cast manage to convince us of their inner turmoil and angst, if only the story hadn't felt so much like a "made for TV deal" 6/10.

My Joy (2010)

Film titles often make promises, "There Will BE Blood" or "Disaster Movie" both delivered, (one contained blood and the other was a disaster) Director Sergei Loznitsa deceives us with My Joy, with almost anything but what could be considered "joyful".

This dark, dark tome comes to us from Russia (though filmed in Ukraine and financed by Germans) followed a period of time in the life of a Russian truck driver meeting various different people along the way, some merely offering a story (taking us into historic flashbacks) or in one case, paid sex. It unravels (very slowly) to show us a man having his spirit, hope and possibly even life destroyed by his countries rotten folk, the scum and corrupt picking apart his soul.

It's a technical feat in the sense that there are MANY long takes in this film, Director Loznitsa stated that there are only 140 in the entire 127 minute running time, while these long takes (of which I am a huge fan) are well done and work only toward emerging you into the films world even further, the confusing plot and extremely slow pace begin to grate on you after a while, though films made for us by our European brethren are usually more artistic and expressionist, this whole feature is emotionally sucking and slow, elements that could be good in some films, but this one, for all it's pretty imagery started to feel like a chore toward the end.

Great style, solid performances, but maybe something one has to see through the eyes of a Russian to understand it's many complexities, 7/10.

Leon

Leon is a very famous, very well thought of, very influential film. But is it, in fact, any good?

Yes, mostly. Occasionally amazing, thanks to two fantastic lead performances. The dynamic between the quiet hit man Leon and the twelve year old Mathilda is multilayered and complex. It takes your assumptions of what the dynamic should be and throws them away, giving you something fresh yet familiar, loveable yet occasionally nauseating. I won't go in to too much detail, but having watched the aptly named 'Long Version', you'll be shown a picture of a relationship that will split opinions. I personally did not have any problems with the subject matter, however run time was an issue, something I feel a little guilty for having a go considering the afore mentioned version. Regardless, I think the film sags in the middle. The relationship, while interesting, arcs quickly and once the meat of the story is over, we're left trudging through familiar ground. In other places, the story is quite by the numbers, a tale of revenge. Gary Oldman is fantastic as the psychotic antagonist, with a lovely identity twist early on. It was the kind of performance that really leaves an impression.

The action sequences are great, the pay off is rewarding, and there is a lot to like, but as I have all ready said, the subject matter and occasionally overtly surreal moments may be a little of a turn off. Stylish, emotional, but an acquired taste.

7/10

Romero's 'Dead' Series - Part 1 (1968-1985)

One of my favourite directors. One my favourite series of films. I'm biased. While zombie films divide the movie going public, I'm here to stick up for them and give the unbeliever a glimpse of why they really should be on board.

Night of the Living Dead (1968) is often considered one of the original horror films, and certainly the scariest of the entire series. Any reviewer can talk about its cultural significance, the censoring, the legacy and interpretations, but lets not get too carried away. The film, or the most part, is solid, well written and tight. Direction is controlled and simple, with good use of light and dark to really get the most of the grim surroundings, making the house and fields area even more daunting and eerie. Characterisation is an obvious strength, each sympathetic in their own way. The ending is fantastic, and while the pace sags in places, the pay off is well worth the wait. On the whole, the film is a humourless, horrid spectacle that intrigues as much as it entertains, but bears very little resemblance to Romero's later work, of which I am more of a fan. The wit and fun of the sequels is strangely absent. While a solid classic, for me it's not something that can be re-watched and enjoyed more than a few times. 7/10

Dawn of the Dead (1978) is possibly one of the greatest horror films ever made. In fact, I would consider it to be one of the greatest films ever made, period. Social commentary and consumerism satire aside, it's tremendous fun. Sure, the direction is occasionally a little shaky. Okay, the dialogue is mostly ridiculous and borderline insane. It's one of those rare films that will provoke completely different responses from people. Some would see it as a horror, some as a comedy. I like to enjoy both perspectives when watching. Some of the sequences and exchanges between characters are undeniably funny, but there's always this heavy weight bearing down on the film, you can really feel the impending doom, the inevitability of the fact that even though they're living in luxury and the zombie's can barely put one foot in front of the other, they will eventually all die a horrible, theatre paint red death. Amazing fun, great effects, superb tone, a true original. 10/10

Day of the Dead (1985) was a true sequel to Dawn in style and substance. Perhaps even more bleak and dark than Dawn, the underground military base, home to grisly experiments and borderline psychotic soldiers makes for some riveting viewing. The balance of power between the parties involved is perhaps even more scary than the gore, as for the first time we are given a true antagonist in Captain Rhodes, who is delightfully unhinged, a victim of his environment and responsibility. Then add to the mix a lot of surreal dark humour, an Irishman with a catch phrase, caravans, 'a mouthful of Greek salad', a typically zany score, guts (lots of), an awesome opening scene and a better closing half an hour of zombie nonsense. It may not have the wide reaching themes of Dawn, but it's just as much fun. 9/10

Coming soon, Part 2 and the not so amazing 21st century Romero films...

RED (Retired, Extremely Dangerous)

What's that I hear you cry? The Loser's, The Expendables and The A-Team weren't enough to satisfy your ensemble cast actioner cravings? well fear no more as Robert Schwentke brings you his DC comic adaptation starring what could be called a "Dream Cast" consisting of Bruce WIllis, Helen Mirren, Morgan Freeman, Brian Cox, John Malkovich and Karl Urban.

The film primarily follows retired black ops agent Frank Moses (Willis) and how he slowly unravels the who what and where about the people trying to kill him, along the way picking up fellow retiriees also targeted, leading to an ok but not too original conclusion. I'd go into more detail but, that's kind of it in a nutshell, love interest and occupational gag's are thrown in as if manditory, think Bourne Supremacy meets Mr. and Mr. Smith.

So, is this "little late for the summer" blockbuster flick fit to take on the big boys? well to be honest Sly Stallone stole the thunder this year as the stupidly overhyped (but generally ok) movie The Expendables already tackled the ultra bad-ass "but getting on a bit" super agents taking down a corrupt power, the main difference i can see is that this one tries a bit harder to make you laugh, the problem with THAT is, it's left mainly to Mr Malkovich who, though doing a good job, ultimately isnt enough to land a belly laugh.

So the film gets caught somewhere between action/comedy and conspiracy "clear my name" blah blah blah, Mirren and Cox both enchant and engage while the rest just seemingly running the motions, not to mention the criminal underuse of Morgan Freeman (a man so awesome, only God could play him in a movie) overall it'll tide you over and give you a chuckle, but very soon forgotten. 6/10

Rear Window (1954)

Pick up any random issue of Empire or Total Film and you will see the word(s) "...even Hitchcock would be proud" or "Hitchcockian" 5 or 6 times between the covers, this is because Hitch is one of, if not THE single most influencial director of all time, not merely because of a string of financial hits, but becaue his pioneering techniques have become the Hollywood norm, everything from his use of score and framing of scenes, to including strong female leads (something Hollywood could improve on) and caring about performance and visuals in equal measures.

The feature is about James Stewarts' wheelchair bound photographer (due to a broken leg sustained on an assignment) with little to do other than watch out his titular rear window while doting girlfriend (the effortlesly graceful Grace Kelly) and physiotherapist pop by from time to time.
while looking out he observes the lives of the people living around him, everything froma balerina dancing around half dressed to the newly-wed couple living in the building once over, it is while he indulges his voyeurism that he see's something suspect, which snowballs into the plot's main driving force.

So, while not his most well known piece, (that honour perhaps goes to Psycho, or possibly The Birds) Rear Window perhaps is his most brilliant, the version I watched was the DVD which used a remastered print of the film, a risky move for most old movies, as they say the Devil is in the Detail, and sometimes the magic from older films is lost when you can see everything, but everything from this 56 year old masterpiece held up beautifully. For the perspective of him looking out from his apartment to the building opposite and the courtyard in-between, an entire set was built, which allowed the camera to flow naturally and for every inch of the screen to be heavily detailed further enhancing our suspension of disbelief, a technical and thematic masterpiece from arguably the most talented director to have ever worked in La LA land, (who of course, was British)

DEFINITELY one to check out if not for the cleverly laid out story, then the beautiful Kelly as she steals the show with her rich, yet unspoilt, beautiful yet not superficial strong female lead. 9/10.

Ricky Gervais - Keeping the Faith

Ricky Gervais is one of the most successful and talented British comedians the country has ever produced. He has won tens of awards for acting, directing and writing the genre defining worldwide phenomenon The Office and the brilliant Extras. For me personally, he's a hero of mine. He's the hero. He's the man that made me pick up a finger and type and try and make people laugh, perhaps had more impact on my life and world view than anyone else. He has his critics, but these are the facts. However, he has yet to truly broaden his talents in to filmmaking. While his films have by no means been ill received, or financial flops, he has yet to reach his full potential and produce that comedy masterpiece on film that will truly define him.

His first lead role came in David Koepp's Ghost Town (2008). Gervais said at the time that it was the best script he had been offered, and presumably he had been offered a considerable amount since his break through Golden Globe win in 2003. Despite being a very 'golden age Hollywood' comedy, directed and produced with a whimsical, light hearted tone to suit the subject matter, it was a suitable vehicle for Gervais's first lead. While the story was somewhat pedestrian, Gervais was able to demonstrate his trademark social realism and work with a great cast. He was the star, and without his performance the film could have been unwatchable under a lesser lead. Enjoyable and charming, the film was well received and gave Gervais the start he deserved. 7/10

Many believed the best was yet to come. The Invention of Lying (2009) was Gervais's first co-written and directed film, and many believed this would show the cynical, biting Gervais at his best, working on his own terms, ready to take on the world with a venomous piece of social satire. But something strange happened - A miss fire. The film was not the piece of genius fans like me had hoped for. In many ways, the film was remarkably similar to Ghost Town - a light hearted, fantastical yet contemporary Hollywood comedy. It was all too nice. The score bounced. Jennifer Garner smiled. There was no cutting edge and no real bite, despite a heap of controversy around the fundamentally atheist concept. Even as a religious satire, the film showed little risk. Perhaps a more important and disheartening problem was the fact the film wasn't actually very funny. Polished, quite enjoyable, but not very funny. Gervais had not yet translated his genius to the big screen. 5/10

Another year, another stab. I had high hopes for Cemetery Junction (2010), Ricky's first collaborative effort with long time partner Steve Merchant. It was a love letter to 70s England, it was a coming of age story about the young being young. The execution was great, both the direction and the performances were stylish, but perhaps a little too stylish, and too cool to really be funny. I would have preferred a much grittier take, finding a bit more edge between the mundane and the 70s hip. The funnies are not the film's focus - It's all about the coming of age tale. Though told flawlessly here, its been told flawlessly hundreds of times before because, let's face it, there's nothing to it. 'Cemetery Junction' was a rom-com by the numbers. It didn't give Gervais and Merchant enough space or leeway to really nail the gags or the emotional substance they are capable of. Too nice, too safe, too ordinary, and frankly too generic, and I hope it was just something they needed to get out of their system. 6/10

If his big screen career to date tells me anything, it's that next time he needs to go back to his roots, get nasty and have a go at society again. The genius IS there, just need that one great original idea to really show it off. The obvious comparison would be with Simon Pegg & Edgar Wright, who have translated their craft to the big screen with breathtaking results, for me surpassing their television accomplishments (though I'm sure there are many die hard Spaced fans who might say otherwise). I have faith that Ricky Gervais will do the same. One day he will get it right, and come up with his Spinal Tap. He's never let me down before.

Heat

Most sane film goers are fans of Di Niro and Pacino. Their collective body of work boasts some of the best films ever made. It's little wonder then why there was so much hype around the film that finally brought the two actors back together under the direction of Michael Mann. Heat is a gritty, three hour, cops and robbers, cat and mouse epic. Pacino is the cop. Di Niro is the man he's chasing. Game on!

The film's obvious perks are the two leads. Di Niro and Pacino carry the film almost entirely with their flawed but ultimately endearing characters that share similar problems (they're jobs are taking over their lives, their love lives are falling apart) with one major difference. While Pacino has a kind of symbiotic relationship with the job that defines him, Di Niro is looking to walk away from the criminal life. It's this difference from which all the drama really stems. Despite the two actors sharing very little screen time, the scenes that feature them both are gripping, especially the finale.

Unfortunately, the film suffers in places. It's very stuck in the nineties, with an intrusive 'COP DRAMA' score that never lets up. If two people are talking in a bar, you can bet there's some twat playing a blues guitar solo in the background. The direction is hit and miss. While the action shines, the slower moments suffer from too many needless close ups and tracking shots. Less would have been more. The plot is fine, but even with the film's mammoth run time, it couldn't quite get to grips with the vast amount of peripheral characters that Mann is desperate for us to become attached to. As a result, everything that involves something other than the two leads leaves you feeling a little underwhelmed.

Faults aside, A good COP DRAMA, if you have three hours to kill.

7/10

Bond - The Timothy Dalton Years (1987-1989)

After the series was left stale by the end of Moore's tenure as the British icon, it would take a strong lead and taking some risks to get the series back on track. Despite only starring in two films, Timothy Dalton brought a more mature, realistic and often darker Bond to the table for the better.

While The Living Daylights (1987) has a few Moore's traits left over, it's a worthy stab at something a little different. We still have the odd innuendo, but nothing as ludicrous as what has come before, except maybe a ski chase scene involving a cello case. The plot is at times a little overcomplicated, but at it's best it's a strong, character driven world cruiser with an enjoyable turn from Joroen Krabbe as the central antagonist. Strangely, we see Bond blatantly lie and take complete advantage of a helpless female simply for the mission, something never really done before in the series. That in itself shows a shift in the tone, however small at this stage.

It was in License to Kill (1989) that Dalton and the character really came in to its own. The story is not simply a man on the job, but a quest for revenge. Despite a typically Bond-esque pre-credits opening, the film quickly darkens, hitting Bond with some pretty severe personal blows. It had been since pre-Moore era we had seen Bond humanised and effected by a plot in such a way we were given a real reason to root for him. The film plays out efficiently, the action is slick and Dalton shines in what was probably the best Bond in over a decade. It's only a shame we weren't given a third Dalton film in order to see how the character may have progressed. I believe the best was yet to come.

6/10 a piece.

The 3D Revolution

Hello again film fans, I thought I'd just ramble out my musings on the current phenomenon sweeping out screens (whether we like it or not).
I'm ofcourse talking about 3D, the ability to "enhance" your viewing pleasure by having the objects on screen like like they're FLYING RIGHT AT YOU! (best to avoid any Jack Black feature then)
So why has it taken over so quickly you might ask? and if you do... really? you're asking that while reading a blog? that's just weird.

MONEY... nothing more and nothing less, while AVATAR was the biggest breakthrough hit to cultivate the new technology, (love it or hate it) Mr Cameron did try to focus on story as much as he did visuals, the film was beautiful to look at because it was from the ground up designed to be a 3D viewing experience, it was no mere afterthought, every single angle was mapped out and thoroughly thought through, that said the money it raised at domestic box office alone ($749,766,139) wet the appetites of pretty much everyone in Hollywood, the 40% extra you can tab on to the ticket price had producers, directors and distributors seeing dollar signs.

And so over the past 12 months we've had a slew of forced 3D perspective releases (the worst of which being Clash Of The Titans) as well as many coming out that just didn't NEED to be in 3D (SAW 3D, Gullivers Travels), the problem with pissing and moaning about 3D however, is that the studio's are right... even though it's unnecessary people ARE going to see these movies, and pleasing the masses allows the studios to put more money back into creating the films you love.

So knowing that the 3D trend is predominantly active so the companies can make as much mula as humanly possibly, should we instantly disregard any 3D title as bandwagoning and lacking substance? fuck no, while Avatar was the only one purpose built for the format, it doesn't mean being in 3D makes the movie BAD, it just means the people at the helm of the movie often focus in on the wrong thing.

As long as the creative team put story first, then 3D can be a valuable ally, and with great directors like Christopher Nolan and Jason Reitman staying the hell away from it, passionate film making and great cinema is far from dead, film-makers only need be weary when they're putting style before substance
*cough* George Lucas *cough*

What are YOUR thoughts on the inevitable 3D takeover? please leave your feedback below.

(pic found here http://www.3dglassesonline.com/how-do-3d-glasses-work/)

The Other Guys

This year I endured both "Dinner for Schmucks" and "Cop Out" both being comedy buddy movies that just didn't appeal, the former just not being as funny as it could have been and the latter being an absolute shit storm that I can't wait to be buried and forgotten in the depths of time.

The Other Guys uses tried and tested "odd couple" formula and makes it.... funny? yes, I think that would be the word, while not over satirising the movie industry (though it has it's pokes here and there for the best example see the explosion scene) it manages to create an enjoyable atmosphere where you go from laugh to laugh, the comedy doesn't rest solely on the shoulders of "someone please find me funny?" man Will Farrell, as Mark Wahlburg holds up his end of the giggles with surprising ease.

All in all, is it the best cop/comedy you'll ever see? maybe not (there aren't LOADS out there, only Beverly Hills Cop and Police Academy stand out) but will it keep you laughing for 90 minutes? it certainly will.

Watch with friends as i did, and i think you'll enjoy it, and it's enduring and heartfelt message "I hope you like jail food, and penis" (6/10)

The Social Network

Have you ever wondered how Facebook, the thing you visit every day of your life, came in to being? Do you have an interest in intellectual copyright? Well, has director David Fincher got a treat for you! The Social Network is the story of how it all came in to being, and the proceeding court battles. What fun.

The film's strengths lie with some tight, fast paced direction. The pace never slackens, which makes trudging through the programming and legal talk a lot more bearable than it should be. The dialogue too is quite neat, and the characterisation, performances and the drama around the court case is reasonably engaging. If this had been a film about anything else, it might have been a triumph.

Unfortunately, does anyone really care about this stuff? Despite the film making plusses, following the dense story is dizzying and pretty exhausting. I'm surprised that audiences are connecting with this enough for it to top the box office in the US. While the journey is not always chore, I'm not sure if it's worthwhile. Also, there's something kind of pretentious about all these genius making billions of dollars and sleeping with super models only to winge and moan about it. Just buy a country, you'll feel better.

6/10

Frankenstein (1931)

Universal horror movies have become a recent passion of mine, Wolf Man, Dracula, The Mummy, The Creature From The Black Lagoon, Phantom of the opera etc are all greats in their own way (and possible candidates for future reviews) but James Whale's nightmarish 1931 feature is what we're talking about today.

The movie (as if you don't already know) is about the "Mad Scientist" who creates a monster using pieces of various dead bodies sewn together, and re-animates the being using the power of thunder.

While that summation would make you hesitant to see any movie with a serious frame of mind, it's deceptively brilliant, while Boris Karloff's "creature" does kill, he never does so knowingly or with joy, the role is played with such grace and subtlety you feel yourself wanting to protect him. Karloff (who has indian ancestry) said he used influences such as being singled out at school for being darker than everyone else as a drive for the character, what it feels like to be different and mis-understood, and it really shows.

While the film approaches it's 80th anniversary, and has many technical issues with reguards to sound and lighting, given the time it was made (the pioneering 1930's) it is truly a storytelling achievement, Director James Whale lands a hell of an emotional punch along with the scares and overall nightmarish tale, one to check out if you REMOTELY refer to yourself as a film fan. (8/10)

Fawlty Towers

Ahhhh yes, we now enter Sitcom territory, i know this is predominantly a film review blog, and on Steve's instruction this shall be removed, but having made my way through the two legendary series for what seems like the millionth time in my life, I cannot get over how well written and performed these episodes were, the "less is more" approach taken by writers Cleese and Booth just works.

Finishing on a mere two seasons, through fear of the formula going stale and the quality declining, they left us with only twelve eposodes, each of them GOLD, each of the twelve focus on escalation, one man's own neurosis/jealousy/pride eventually getting the better of him until the (usually hilarious) climax.

I believe if Cleese had taken a mere writing position it wouldn't have been what it was, the physicality he brought to the role made Basil Fawlty more than a character, he became someone came to love (but would hate in real life) while hating almost every guest that darken his doorstep he continues to run his hotel, with usually hilarious consequences.

A sitcom that stands the test of time, and allows Cleese to say "Python was no fluke" something everyone should watch at some point in their life. A proud 9 out of 10!

Devil

Devil, the M. Night Shyamalan produced thriller set around five strangers in an elevator, and a curious cop with a dark past, is at best a great B-list movie. It was cheap. It's haunting and gets the scares, it is at worst a series of jump scares, but I believe it leans more toward the former. Though some would debate over the originality of the plot, it's something that stood out to me. We were left inside the elevator long enough to start feeling claustrophobic, but then we would come out to find out more about the people inside the elevator... the pacing was well thought out and it definitely had a few "WHAT THE FUCK" moments, something best seen at the cinema, or rented on a dark night with friends, but by no means a light watch. Expect scares and twists a plenty, as it keeps you guessing until the end, and even then surprises you while taunting your closed minded expectations.

Not brilliant, but not far off. If only they'd kept the story a little more grounded and less supernatural. Best line "he's just religious, don't listen to him"

7/10

Dumbo

Through what could possibly be pure nostalgia, I cannot find anything wrong with this film.

I've watched since I was a very young child and I love everything about it. His relationship with his mother parallels my own, the various colourful and supportive characters he comes across show tolerance even to people who are different. For example, while initially finding the elephant in a tree funny, the crows later support Dumbo in helping him reach his potential. It also has the main character getting a little drunk (in a relatively harmless way that actually helps the story move along), showing a certain fearlessness in its storytelling that you simply do not see in kids movies these days, even from Disney themselves.

Its short running time means that watching it is never a chore, great voices, great story, and generally a feel good film.

10/10

Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World

I'm a huge Edgar Wright fan, I suppose. I think Spaced is great. I believe Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz to be two of the best comedy films ever made. I would say that qualifies me. Based on a graphic novels of the same name, Scott Pilgrim is an geek-fest tale of a hero's journey to love. And he has to beat up some people along the way. Cue pretty colours and break neck action!

Going in to the film, I had my doubts. The dizzying ad campaign here in the UK had more or less put me off it, but it didn't take long for Wright's charismatic, quick cut direction to work its charm on me. He is well known for his often blatant references of cult films, and this time its computer games. From Mario to Street Fighter, there are plenty to keep you interested and laughing as you recognise music and catchphrases. Any film in which a character plays the bass line from Final Fantasy 2 gets my thumbs up. The direction is so fun and the sense of humour is so loveable (despite Michael Cera's one trick pony acting), it will more than likely entertain. Though it was difficult for me to look past the direction, the script is tight and well written. The ensemble cast members work well and never intrude or outstay their welcome, and though the soppy love story would usually be a turn off, there's enough good to divert your attention from it. 

There's no denying this film has a niche. It's you're not looking for a fairytale geek-fest for geeks to geek-out to, then it will probably be a big turn off. If you're not in the loop, then it will leave you behind. However, I can say that being one of the target audience, this has to be one of the most entertaining films of the year, and a misunderstood commercial failure. 

8/10

Frost/Nixon

Nominated for five academy awards in 2009 and starring one of my favourite actors in Charlie Sheen, I had a good few reasons to go in to viewing this with a certain optimism. The film re-tells the play of the same name, which in turn tells the story of how David Frost (Sheen) came to interview Richard Nixon (Frank Lengella) after the Watergate scandal. To be perfectly honest, I had no idea what the Watergate scandal was, let alone the its historical significance. I am now enlightened.

The films strengths come from characterisation and performances of the two leads. Despite an inform Sheen giving a charismatic, heartfelt performance, Langella steals the show with a strong, accurate portrayal of the former president. The way the two trade punches, so to speak, in the closing stages are a joy. Strangely the film holds a lot of parallels with Rocky, with lots of emphasis in the dialogue about 'the fight' and battle between the two's verbal jousting, making the final show down a great pay off.

Despite the film being slow burning, it never really sags. Sam Rockwell & Oliver Platt are good additions to the background, giving the piece a bit more weight. Rebecca Hall is amicable but never really shines. The only reason I there were times I felt a little bored was because I'm not a huge politics fan, nor am I American, so the subject matter didn't connect with me in a way it may have for someone like Sam Rockwell's character.

Still, a very assured, classy film that does well to entertain considering the rather dry subject matter.

7/10

Buried

Buried, the 2010 character study/thriller film stars Rom Com regular Ryan Reynolds, taking a bold step out of comic relief (see Blade: Trinity, and X-men Origins: Wolverine) and into the sole onscreen character of a private company truck driver stationed in Iraq, who wakes up 6 feet under, in a sealed coffin with nothing more than a hip flask, an extremely well filled Zippo and a Blackberry smartphone.

Reynolds shines as the desperate "average joe" in a beyond average situation, while trying to figure out why he's here and ultimately, if he'll ever get out, he runs the gambit of human emotion and while not leaving the confined space, takes us a journey we can only hope we never have to take.

While the social and political commentary (Iraqi attitude to everything American, not just the soldiers and how expendable a company could see its employees) it isnt rammed down your throat leaving it the only thing you walk away thinking about, toward the end i found it hard to breath, needing to get out just as much as he did, truly immersive and technically impressive (yes it CAN be achieved without 3D!) this film will leave you gasping for air and praying for the poor bastard.

Moving, claustrophobic, and well done in most aspects, 9/10

The Town

Stifled, dreary, cliche - these are just some of the words I would use to sum up Ben Affleck's latest critical and commercial success. Affleck plays a man who robs banks. When a job goes awry, his cohorts take a female hostage (Rebecca Hall) to secure their safety, and release her soon after. Paranoid that the hostage may rat them out to the FBI, Affleck's dangerous running buddy (Jeremy Renner) decides she needs to be kept tabs on, and Affleck takes the job. He falls in love with her. And there is the twist!

Poor old Ben Affleck's acting has always been subject to a hefty amount of scorn. Unfortunately, he does himself no favours here. Often sounding like a punch drunk stroke victim, Affleck's performance is so wooden, slow and plain you will drift off half way through. Poor old Ben, the same can be said of his direction too...

The film is littered with basic, fundamental film making flaws. The pacing is tired and stale, drifting from one awkward conversation to another. At no point was I convinced Hall's character would EVER be interested in Affleck's slow talking, world weary criminal, but then we aren't really told a great deal about her. Rebecca Hall struggles to make a role devoid of any character come to life. However, Jeremy Renner's character is intimidating and well played (if ultimately under-utilised) and the actual hiest scenes are enjoyable. I can't think of much else positive to say.

Despite the film's generally warm critical reception, I cannot understand why anyone but uber lovers of the genre would be interested in this cliched, badly scripted, boring 'COP DRAMA' that views like it was made for television.

3/10