How To Lose Friends and Alienate People review

How To Lose Friends And Alienate People based upon the memoir of Toby Young, it tells the story of Sidney Young (Simon Pegg), a failing editor of his own film magazine who attempts to break into celebrity parties to score interviews with celebrities, this leads to a well written and charming conversation between Sidney and Thandie Newton. After a stint at a celebrity party Sidney is offered a job at a New York magazine company working for Clayton Harding (Jeff Bridges) whilst there he meets Alison Olsen (Kirsten Dunst) and tries to make a name for himself and impress his boss unfortunately every time he tries it just ends up with him going back to square one and embarassing himself.
There are many similar comedies to How To Lose Friends and Alienate People which would employ very similar jokes, but what it is that makes this film different is that it establishes a firm foundation on which to make these jokes. This foundation is consisted of a good amount of character development and by having a character who has a calm sense of the world but finds himself in very tense situations which leads me to see why Simon Pegg was hired for the role of Sidney. Though Sidney is a jerk in a lot of respects it is Simon Pegg which encompasses the vision that Sidney is a nice man trapped in a jerks body who you unconditionally love despite his faults.
By having a clear and organised foundation and a good amount of relevant, funny jokes the only way this film can go is up, and it does by continuing the same style but progressing through the story at a very comfortable level, making this a film that you could sit down and watch and not have to think about a thing just know that it's there to make you laugh and i can assure you it will (unless you're a humourless limpet).
All together everything that this film gives allows it to be very charming and slightly inspiring which makes this a very realistic love story which is what it needs to be seeing as it is set around real life.

I was particularly suprised by Kirsten Dunst, though her performance wasn't anything worthy of an award it did prove to me that she in fact isn't a bad actress overall, i don't think much other people (except Rachel Weisz) could portray that nice a bitch without seeming repulsively annoying or uncannily sarcastic.
But Jeff Bridges for me was where most of this films acting talent was. Jeff Bridges seems to have a voice that is both incredibly clear but also intriguing and slightly forceful and this helps a lot in portraying a boss who is a fun, good man but ultimately has a company to run and has to be harsh when he needs to be. Jeff Bridges also showed that he can be incredibly serious and it is this sort of seriousness that paves the way for joke after joke from Simon Pegg which is the main reason that the scenes between Sidney and Clayton were my favourite.

How To Lose Friends and Alienate People is a consistently funny but moreso charming film that will keep people easily entertained and give people the great feeling of knowing that they're at least going to get 1 good laugh out of it and gives an accurate and extremely interesting look at media in New York.

Rating: ****
share on: facebook

The Breakfast Club Review

Well i feel like doing some reviewing so i'm gonna do 3 short reviews, a DVD review, a review of a film thats currently on in the cinema and whatever other film i pick. Firstly i think i'll pick The Breakfast Club


Last night i decided i really had nothing to do so i watched 3 films in a row until 3am, one being The Breakfast Club which i was extremely happy to find for £3 in Cambridge.

The Breakfast Club (Directed by John Hughes) is the simple story of five teenagers who have to spend their Saturday morning and afternoon in detention. The film starts extremely simply but effectively by showing all the teenagers arriving at school, most of which are driven there by their parents, this opening scene instantly illustrates who the characters are. As the day continues it becomes more evident what high school stereotype each of the teenagers are (The Athlete, The Princess, The Brain, The Criminal and The Basket Case) but the story evolves into showing how all of them become friends in the space of this one day and understand though they are different they have lots of similarities and they also find out for themselves who they really are. This is the main aspect of the film and John Hughes shows extremely accurately he knows a lot about the teenage mind and is one of a very short list of film makers who can actually understand it and it's because of this that he is able to make what are considered the best 80's teen movies ever and Breakfast Club excells above all of them for the reasons that it's an accurate representation of the teenage mind, very funny, and by using the fact that John Hughes can unleash the full potential of a simple plot.
The Breakfast Club has some very good casting choices particularly Judd Nelson as John Bender who portrays the best use of rebelious sarcasm that i have ever seen in any movie.

The Breakfast Club is considered as the definitive 80's teen movie and it is very easy to see why thanks to a brilliantly written script, superb cast and soundtrack and above all exceptional representation of teenage life.

Review: *****/*****
share on: facebook

Short DVD Reviews

Short DVD Reviews

(For me these are essentially just short reviews with a tiny bit about the special features but i've been watching a lot of films on DVD recently and felt i needed to do some)

Children Of Men


Children Of Men is a film which poses the question 'what if every person on the planet became infertile?'. Starring Clive Owen as the films protagonist, Theo, a man who simply lives among all the threats and worry of the country since everyone became infertile. It shows his journey with Kee (Claire-Hope Ashitey) who is the last pregnant woman on the planet, he must to deliver he to a ship in which the problem of the worlds infertility is being investigated.

Children Of Men is a very graphic and realistic vision of the world in a time of trouble and conflict this is exceptionally shown through the camera work in many scenes and the fact that this film will add anything into the background that they feel needs to be in there eg. extra's.
The film almost comes to an end with a very long though thrilling scene of Theo running through a battlefield protecting himself so he can reach Kee, this is extraordinary that a scene such as this could incorportate so many things to make it as realistic as possible from building explosions to tanks appearing and people being shot all whilst Theo runs through this orgy of risky destruction. This scene is the pinacle of the entire film because it perfectly signifies peoples reaction to fear and what it's like to be stuck in between a country and government gone mad.

Clive Owen's performance isn't very memorable, neither are many performances in this film seeing as Michael Caine plays a lesser character it's hard to base the films acting expertise fully around him, though he does a good performance. Though Clive Owen portrays quite accurately the feelings of a man in his situation and seems very realistic he can come across as slightly wooden luckily this does not alter the feel of the film much and it is still a highly thrilling film.

The DVD extra's are okay, nothing to complain about, they're what you'd expect from a DVD, there are a few deleted scenes which wouldn't add anything at all to the overall film and some documentary's on making the film which are fairly interesting seeing as it seemed a very laborous and precise film to shoot.


Children Of Men draws it's strengths from being extraordinarily realistic and being extremely accurate at posing a 'What If' question and explaining it without going into any levels of ridicule. It will excite, interest and shoot nerves high.

Rating: ****

Extra's: ***
share on: facebook

Tropic Thuder review

Thats right i promised you guys this, you extreme 4 or so readers that we have (god bless ya)
Here is my review of Tropic Thunder (to be honest a film i've been wanting to review for a while but i thought i'd wait a while until i was in the perfect mind frame to review it because i want this one to be good+ i did forget sometimes)


The idea behind Tropic Thunder is that there are a group of actors filming a war film that goes badly and then they are put into a real war situation to make everything more believable and have to save themselves from Korean drug farmers at the same time.

Tropic Thunder showcases some laugh out loud moments and is all together enjoyable but holds on to a story that seems to be nothing more than the idea that is presented to the audience in the trailer or at the start of the movie, the problem with this is that the movie doesn't seem like it's going anywhere. Luckily Tropic Thunder isn't a poor excuse for a plot that has awful jokes bursting out from every unwanted crevice, but if it wasn't for this films general idea being quite inventive yet simple and the few laugh out loud moments it would create a tedium of just Ben Stiller trying to be funny (which i'm sure a lot of people might accept he really can't do as well anymore).
A lot of the reason that this film can be considered memorable is for the fake trailers played just before the movie (used for the actors played by actual actors in the film) especially because one of which features a superb cameo from Tobey Maguire, it is because of these trailers that there is an averagely significant glimmer of hope that Ben Stiller can still spawn some originality and turn it into something.

Robert Downey's Jr. in a way represents the whole of the movie extremely well, in the way that his character is an excellent idea and concept but lacks the hilarity to fully bring out that concept but is funny enough to make the idea a proposition of an amusingly easy film to sit and watch.

As with most Ben Stiller films the film seems to take a strange direction away from what the idea of the film seems to be and leads to something that is out of place and could perhaps work well as a sketch but because of a lack of relevance loses out on perhaps the true humour of it, in Tropic Thunder this happens quite frequently with idea's such as Jack Blacks character being a drug addict and Ben Stiller's characters previous film about a retarded farm hand 'Simple Jack' which quite frankly takes a lot of the focus of this being a war comedy (though these minimally link in with the plot the jokes don't).

I cannot say i'm dissapointed with Tropic Thunder because it does entertain but more just upset that such a good idea was not saved until a better script came along (though Ben Stiller had the idea for this film for half his life).

In short Tropic Thunder has a very worthy plot but the script lack of jokes and often lack of relevance help to steer this film away from being something brilliant, but nevertheless the material offered still entertains.

Rating: ***
share on: facebook

The Cider House Rules Review

And as a special in honour of Toms mums reviews i shall be reviewing his mum next week, but for the moment here are 2 reviews of The Cider House Rules and Tropic Thunder


The Cider House Rules

The Cider House Rules tells the story of orphan boy Homer Wells (Tobey Maguire) who is raised by Dr. Wilbur Larch (Michael Caine) amongst lots of nurses, this orphanage also happens to be a place wherein women can get abortions. Homer Wells is trained to be a Doctor by Dr. Larch and though he knows everything that can be taught to him he doesn't consider himself to be an actual Doctor.
Homer longs to see the world, which is partly why he doesn't accept himself as a doctor, because this would mean he'd have a feeling of being bound to the orphanage all his life.
Enter Candy Kendell (Charlize Theron) who is taken to the orphanage by her boyfriend Wally Worthington (Paul Rudd). After the abortion Homer "hitches a ride" with Candy and Wally to a Cider House where Homer decides to work picking apples so he can experience the world.
Meanwhile Wally goes off to war, forcing Candy to feel extremely lonely and begin an affair with Homer.


The Cider House Rules starts off exceptionally and i would be perfectly comfortable to say that it's one of the best starts to a film i've seen since Pulp Fiction, it sets the scene of the orphanage perfectly and features some of Michael Caines best work as an actor which allows for a deliciously heartwarming first 10 minutes which perfectly illustrates the relationship between Dr. Larch and Homer perfectly.
Unfortunately this changes as soon as Homer leaves for The Cider House, it loses it's warm feeling and takes a lot of point out of the opening scenes at the orphanage, by showing that this film isn't going to be an uplifting film about an orphanage, and this is my main problem with the movie because afterwards the film doesn't seem to be able to stick to a lot of it's main themes and lingers on a lot of them. A theme that is particularly lingered upon is the affair between Homer and Candy especially seeing as this seems to be one of the main elements of the film.
Before long the story changes and offloads a moral situation upon the audience which destroys all views that this film might be in fact just trying to show that it's about how one man develops throughout his life and because the other key elements of the film are present it takes a lot of emphasis off of them and never draws out what could be an exceptional story and constantly makes the audience think they're waiting for something which of course does happen but with an unfortunate and exceptionally too short climax.

I was dissapointed by Tobey Maguire's performance, partly because i was very impressed by his performance in Pleasantville, but The Cider House Rules shows that Tobey Maguire could be an actor that would become very easily typecast. He doesn't embrace the seriousness that his character needs nor the charm that he could portray quite easily from playing an Orphan. Though Tobey Maguire doesn't show seriousness as well as he should and in places is quite wooden he does keep one of the key parts of Homer Wells's character which is that he is very curious but in a respectable manor, this is something he does very well but at the expense of the other characteristics it overall isn't a very memorable performance.

Michael Caine on the other hand fully embraces the warmth, seriousness and often sadness of his character and is the perfect vision of his character and is a lot of the reason that though i did not enjoy this film as much as i would of hoped i still was able to keep a warm smile throughout thanks to the pleasantness of his character.

The Cider House Rules shows a very realistic and sometimes upsetting but overall heartwarmingly charming vision of orphan life and a slightly notable vision of how Homer Wells's curiosity evolves with age but lacks the seriousness to make a lot of it's main issues seem worthwhile. I am dissapointed with this film, as i think the audience will be because it starts off amazingly and has the ability to be a classic and gets there which a lot of films struggle to do but instantly throws it away to make it a slightly above average mismatch of morals.


Rating: ***


Coming soon......... My Tropic Thunder review and maybe a review of Being John Malkovich (though it will literally be the hardest film to review out of every film i have ever seen)
share on: facebook

Pineapple Express Review

Last week i ended up going to the cinema a lot and subsequently i am probably going to be writing a lot of reviews because of it and here is my first of that week (though it wasn't the first film i saw that week it is the one i am most eager to review).



Pineapple Express starts telling the story of Dale Denton (Seth Rogen) and what his day-to-day life is like, which introduces the character of Saul Silver (James Franco) who is Dale's drug dealer and friend. Saul supplies Dale with a new form of weed described as "the dopest dope", this form of weed is Pineapple Express. Later whilst Dale is doing his job as a process server he witnesses a murder, the murderers unfortunately see him and he leaves the remenants of his joint at the scene pinpointing him to Saul.
The film from herein onwards turns into an on the run film which builds the friendship of Dale and Saul.

Pineapple Express has a well meaning and effective plot in the way that it does show a compassionate charm of having two drug fuelled stoners becoming friends because of a threat on their lives and though this is one of the elements of the film that is pulled off effectively it never seems to create any sort of climax to the friendship, though it tries it doesn't work and just becomes part of the plot instead of being a heartfelt piece of cinema that ties into the plot. Luckily the moments wherein their friendship is building is warmingly funny.

Pineapple Express lacks in the way that it seems too much like it's a film which just describes it's plot to a piece of script that just tries to flow along but fails because of it's lack of jokes that could easily be fitted in to a plot which should have loads of potential for making a laugh out loud movie.
The times at which Pineapple Express does present it's audience with humour it seems to be that it is in no context with the overall script and therefore lacks a lot of amusement about the jokes and dampens the fact that the overall plot idea might just be because it is deemed cool instead of actually being Seth Rogen's idea of a plot bursting with opportunity for comedic excellence.

James Franco does help save the movie from seeming like a dull illustration with a wonderful performance that captures the elements of what the movie should be about and luckily he helps it to allow to hang on to those elements that do make it interesting. One particularly noticeable thing about James Franco's performance is that as opposed to Seth Rogen he can pull off the part of a drug addict successfully in the ways that it's believeable which allows it to be funny and it encompasses those visuals of a drug dealer having a comic aspect to him that actually makes it funny. The problem with Seth Rogen's performance as a drug addict (which he seems to have in all his films) are that he sees them as being funny on script and that if he supplies the audience with a character who just obsesses about how much he loves weed then it will be funny without thinking at all about whether his portrayal is realistic.

Rogen does however pull out of the bag one of the funniest and best chase scenes i have ever seen and it is a shame that the rest of the movie doesn't offer more scenes like this because it perfectly shows how it is possible to bridge that gap between comedy and action and still do something original.

Pineapple Express does portray some enjoyable action scenes and it is in these that the best humour comes and luckily it doesn't go over the top with comedic fights, which could potentially ruin a lot of the movie if they were exasberated so easily. Unfortunately there are a lot of throaway scenes that seem to be centered around just the humour of the movie.

In short Pineapple Express is an enjoyable, slightly heartfelt romp that delivers but nowhere near enough as a movie with this much potential should.


Rating: ***
Best bit: The Chase Scene
Sequel?: No
share on: facebook

The Shawshank Redemption review

Hey, this will currently be a very short review because i'm in registration and quite bored. (i will probably add more to this when i get home or perhaps in one of my frees)


The Shawshank Redemption tells the story of Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins) who has been charged with the murder of his wife and the man she was having an affair with. Andy is sent to Shawshank prison where he meets Red (Morgan Freeman), a man who has spent 20 years inside Shawshank, who is also able to get people things from the world outside the prison. Life inside the prison for Andy is atrocious, he has to face frequent attacks from other members of the prison, deal with the harsh ways of the captain of the guard and live in fear.

Though The Shawshank Redemption tells a depressing story it is altogether extremely uplifting and heartfelt, the relationship that grows between Andy and Red is beautiful and extremely well written, all of which includes narration from Morgan Freeman who undeniably has the most warm and loving voice in film. There is a great deal of sympathy felt for all the characters in this film and it will completely throw a lot of peoples opinions of people in jail turning a despised hatred into a sort of sorrow.

Both Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman deliver exceptional performances and emphasise their roles and portray them better than perfectly, so much that they push them beyond limits of anyones normal acting career allowing anyone to say the words 'if these performances aren't oscar worthy i sure as hell don't know what is'. An excellent choice in casting i must say, Morgan Freeman is the ideal man to portray a worn old man who still clings to hope and Tim Robbins is ideal for a suspicious but friendly and righteous man who relies on planning and a good will.

The Shawshank Redemption is packed with loads of unforgettable lines and scenes that it isn't hard to say why this film is considered one of the all time greats. As a film it really reaches it's limit and tries to break that limit without seeming ridiculous or off the point.

Rating: *****


share on: facebook

The Brave Little Toaster

All toasters toast.............utter crap (and bowser)

Okay, this is partly because i don't have time to do my Little Miss Sunshine review right now but also because it just made me think ".....what,why,ahhh!!?!". (But i will tomorrow-hopefully)

Earlier today i got bored so i decided to watch about 3 minutes worth of The Brave Little Toaster (i don't own it, i watched it on youtube) and it's extraordinarily messed up, it's about a toaster who is on some crappy adventure, probably to return to his master (a four year old boy who really seems to get some strange sort of a kick out of over-using household appliances (i blame the parents)). The toaster is accompanied by a lamp, a hoover, a radio and a electronic heat blanket thing which the toaster seems to fall in love with in this short scene i watched.
What made the whole thing extraordinarily weird for me, was a) how the toaster and the lamp described love. The toaster described it as "like seeing a new loaf of bread" and "that warm toasty feeling inside" whereas the lamp described love by the so called pleasure he gets out of a four year old boy changing his bulb.
b) this is what mainly freaked me out, and it's the fact the toaster has a nightmare and in this nightmare a clown dressed as a fireman petrifies the toaster by saying the word "run" which causes me to completely re-think my life whilst watching a toaster attempt the well known skill of running.

Eventually the toaster is attacked by a Tsunami of forks and falls from a great height into a bath tub, oh and to make it even more scary.......THE TOASTER BURNT THE TOAST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! shock horror!!!! not only is this every toasters nightmare it's also every film critics. Yet i do find some pleasure for hating a film about a living toaster, and even more for it's sequel (the brave little toaster goes to mars, which i haven't seen, but to be honest i don't think i need to).
share on: facebook

Review: Imaginary Heroes

Okay i've got about 1 day until i leave for Reading festival and i thought i should leave a review on here, and this is for a film that i've been meaning to review ever since i saw it and it's a review of a film that was reccomended to me (and i always love to review those ones the most) so here we go:

Oh, firstly, i'm crap with punctuation, but i'm working on it.


Imaginary Heroes begins to tell the tale of a suburban family who's lives have gone to the worst after the suicide of one of the sons in the family, everyone in the family blames it on themselves and they get up to many ill deeds afterwards in order to attempt to keep some sort of sense of order in their family and support their sadness.

Imaginary Heroes starts off well, it has an interesting idea and that something like a suicide would happen in a normal suburban town is quite major and heavy to take on but neverthless it's interesting to see how everything is going to go, that is until it starts to unveil a lot more to the audience and more problems between the family seem to erupt and it's because of this that there is never enough focus on one issue to make it interesting.

With a mass of ethical issues shown in this film it's hard to simply ask any ethical question at all that could bring up any reason for the audience to be stunned or at least think about what the films message is. The main problem is this film appears to have no single idea, it's extremely hard to work out whether it's a chance for every single ethical issue to be shoved into one to try and make an 'Ethic Movie' or whether it's a chance to see some amazing acting by challenging the problems that could happen in life.
Maybe this film should stick to asking the question of 'How is it that a family falls completely apart?' and for some very short moments in the film it does do that, but it is hardly consistent and justs adds another issue which will not be brought out and explained properly to make this a good film.

I found watching this film was like watching 'Imaginary News' wherein it broadcasts it's problems to the world and goes on telling people about them but never explains them and says because lots of bad things are happening you should be stunned, without knowing why, well if you're going to make a film which puts this much issues on it's plate you're going to need a lot of Why!

Though the reasons for everything in the film are because of the sons suicide it never stops to say "this happened because of the sons suicide" it just assumes the audience will be able to take a massive leap and somehow work a tangled link between two completely different ethical problems, this could be a good thing, but they've completely forgotten that the audience like to be told why, it adds a layer of interest to a film.

There is never a moment of just plain grief in this film, for some reason grief has to be shown by drugs and lying instead of sadness and crying, and it's because of this that it makes this film extremely unconvincing.


I was impressed by Jeff Daniels performance in this film, and it is the lack of his character that allows him to impress the audience on a higher level than everyone else in the film, he is portrayed as being a guilt carrying father who eventually must do all he can to keep his family together, he portrays what are some of the best scenes in this film and make them near enjoyable because of his acting, but it is nowhere near enough to keep this film together.

I honestly think i would of enjoyed Imaginary Heroes if it was a film that questioned peoples beliefs on suicide and peoples reactions to it but only one scene does this, though it's an okay scene it doesn't support the film enough to give it enough of a foundation to support the heavyness of it's multiple ethical questions and the whole films comes towering down and creates a mess of ethical issues thrown around.

Imaginary Heroes is like going to a drug dealer with no money, you'll get to have a look at the good stuff but never get even close to touching upon it or experiencing it in full.

Rating: ***/*****
What it needs: to stick with one idea and work upon it
share on: facebook

Review: Pans Labyrinth

Pans Labyrinth tells the story of Ofelia, growing up after the Spanish Civil war. Ofelia and her pregnant mother go and stay with Captain Vidal at his mountain post where he and his soldiers are fighting the rebels. Captain Vidal is Ofelia's step father and the father of Ofelia's mother's soon to arrive baby. Ofelia finds a scapegoat from the horrors of the real world like her mother being very ill because of her pregnancy, her step father being horrid and her father having died when she was very young, the scapegoat she finds is in her fairytales and it is because of these her imagination conjurs up a world in which she must complete three tasks set by a mysterious faun and fairies appear in the form of winged stick insects.
Whilst Ofelia's imagination takes her far on completing her three tasks there is a war going on and Captain Vidal is shown to be a maniacal and very powerful killjoy, Ofelia's mother's condition worsens, the Captain's Mistress Mercedes develops a relationship with Ofelia and helps out the rebels with the help of the Doctor.

Pans Labyrinth is a visual wonder which primarily deals with fear shown with a fantasy element, and it goes deep into the subject of Ofelia's fear of her current condition and displaying this with the fantasy element creates a very touching story which will excite, intrique, thrill and electrify (not literally of course).

There is nothing about Pans Labyrinth that would stop it becoming epic, it sets itself a high limit and doesn't waste time or deviate to get to that limit of greatness and it gets there, by not wasting any time with making scenes that have no meaning or do not help to develop the characters. Pans Labyrinth is like a film that has been rushed because it features all the necessary stuff but a film that has been rushed by Adonises of film.

Pans Labyrinth displays how deep the fantasy genre can be and it does this perfectly with an extremely fitting location and brilliant portrayal of how dark and frightening the imagination of Ofelia is when brought up around such terrifying circumstances.

Beneath an exceptionally well written script and visual brilliance this film displays phenomenal performances from it's cast especially from Sergi López i Ayats who played Captain Vidal, he gives a raw and chilling and most of all ultimately believeable portrayal of his character that would convince any audience that this man is pure evil.....in a box!
Maribel Verdú also pulls off an Oscar worthy performance as Mercedes who creates a brilliant contrast to Captain Vidal and acts as a hope button for Ofelia, her performance captures beautifully the sadness experienced and her hope longing personality in a way that makes her character strangely loveable as the beacon of hope throughout the film.

Pans Labyrinth would be an immense film even if it was just an hour and a half of reading the script, but either way every other single part of the film, from it's acting, direction and visualization turn it into a ridiculously brilliant epic!


Rating: *****/*****
Why see it? Because there is nothing wrong with it, it is perfect!

Sequel?: the idea of a sequel for this film is extremely frightening and I'd be dissapointed by a sequel even if the sequel was amazing, plus there is no possible way for there to be a sequel.

Best bit: I love it all, but i'll probably say Mercedes with her kitchen knife about three quarters of the way into the film
share on: facebook

Review: Hancock

Hancock begins by telling the story of John Hancock (Will Smith), a superhero whose deeds to society are not appreciated because of the destruction he causes in order to do the right thing and how he becomes accepted by the public with the help of Ray (Jason Bateman), but half way through the film changes it's plot and becomes a lot more complicated and unnecessary.

Hancock starts out as a very good film, and the first half of the plot is a good idea with lots of potential, unfortunately this potential is not unleashed and makes the film seem to cry out for acceptance of being a landmark film (much like the character of Hancock who also secretly cries out for acceptance). But in no way is this a landmark film, it's enjoyable to say the most but because of a massive change in the plot and because the film combines a lot of genre's it never really knows where it's going, only where it started.
Watching this film it seems more of just a good idea that the audience should like because it combines a lot of popular modern culture, everyone loves Will Smith and superhero films are big at the moment, surely combined they should do excellently.........Unfortunately not, maybe if Hancock stuck with being an idea of a superhero who is hated and just made a consistent story to go with that people would love it for it's idea, but to see a good idea be spoilt by a mix of comedy,action,romance, thriller and fantasy does not work.

The second half of Hancock decides that the film has to go somewhere, and it does go somewhere it just trails off in many different direction to try and reach the ultimate goal of Epic but gets completely lost on it's search for it.

One thing i did enjoy about Hancock is that Jason Bateman put on a good performance and was by far the best actor in the movie, i could never call Jason Bateman's performance monumental in any way at all, but this is partly because the character he played was very average with no room to show off a monumental performance but enough room to show off that Jason Bateman can indeed act. Will Smith on the other hand pulled off a dismal performance, and there were not much points that i believed that Hancock was an alcoholic bum with superpowers, which may sound like a hard part to play but in truth is exceedingly easy. Will Smiths acting did help to turn what could of been a great idea into a misled flop.

With a lack of Jason Batemans character Ray, and Will Smiths poor performance the second half of the film appears dull, and seeing as the film has already completed what it's initial plot was it's very easy to lose interest and feel like you're sitting through an hours worth of deleted scenes.

Hancock tries so hard not to be an utterly terrible film that it takes no risks and winds up being dull and average and if you're going to watch Hancock, make sure you enjoy the first half because the rest of it loses it's humour and ruins what was a good idea and turns it into a lost script which puts too much on it's plate but doesn't even attempt to deliver that plate!



Rating: ***/*****
Reason to watch it: So that you can turn it off half way through
What it needs: Consistency, to take it's initial idea and keep it going without losing audience interest
Sequel: Never, why grind an idea with lots of potential down even more so that it loses all hope of being any good
share on: facebook

Review: Wall-E

Well here is my take on the film Wall-E

Wall-E tells the story of a robot on earth whose sole job is to clear up earths rubbish, unfortunately he is the last thing on earth because all the humans left because earth became unliveable after a huge increase in fumes and rubbish, Wall-E has been stuck on earth for around 700 years and eventually becomes curious and lonely being the only robot left on earth with everything at his desposal, he then meets the robot EVE who comes to earth in search of plants as a probe droid, he falls in love with her almost instantly and tries to win her heart on an intergalactic mission which entails in humanity's return to earth.

Wall-E starts with a fantastic scene featuring Wall-E cleaning up the earth and searching through the rubbish for any remenant of earth that he takes a shine to, this scene is both visually stunning and very humorous and it is impossible to not at all feel compassion for this lonesome robot. When EVE arrives the mood changes slightly but it still runs along very well by building Wall-E's character and then showing how this films plot will esculate into an intergalactic romp of romance and comedy. Scenes with EVE on earth are both funny and especially heart wrenching when we see Wall-E trying to win the heart of this flying iPod with lasers!

What really makes this film is how well the two main characters are portrayed and how much compassion is felt for them, especially Wall-E, the build up that is given to Wall-E winning the heart of EVE is fantastic and raises lots of points about love that other films have failed in doing so. This film is very wise in waiting quite a long time until EVE ends up falling in love with Wall-E, but it shows the hardships of it as Wall-E appears to annoy EVE accidentally on multiple occassions by faults which are not his own. Combining a perfectly written love story with one of the cutest characters of all time makes a perfect blend of compassion for this Sardine can on tire tracks.

Wall-E's main strength is that it is undeniably loveable as a film, but it has some certain weaknesses for instance the start of the film is the only part of the film that fully embraces the humour of the entire film, and to have this lack of consistency does weaken the flow of the film.
Once aboard the Axiom (the ship in which the rest of humanity are living) there is a lot less interraction between Wall-E and EVE and perhaps too much focus is on the captain of the ship, and it seems like the films is trying too hard to be a space age film aswell as a love story because of this, this is a foolish mistake to make for a film that has shown that has prooven to be deeply emotional and loving, the more space age stuff feels a bit like filler so that the glorious end scene can be built up even more, though it does seem like filler it is still good filler and does keep some consistent humour.
The film does ask the question half way through "what are Pixar trying to do here?" seeing as the audience feel that they are in for a beautiful love story....in Space! but changing that makes the film seem a tad like 2 films merged into one, which is why the second half probably loses audiences attention compared to the first half, but not enough to stop the audiences compassion for our lovesick sardine can.
Though the second half of the film does help to show that Wall-E and EVE are possibly the most human things on board the ship, and that in a world that there is no love 2 very unlikely characters can experience it, which adds a brilliant touch of beauty to an already extremely beautiful plot.

Luckily Pixar did not go down the road of thinking that a film which is visually amazing will automatically do well and they have created an excellent plot and used it's visual excellence to really bring that alive.

My view of Wall-E as i left was it is the greatest portrayal of love in a film ever but the problem is it needs something more than that if it attempts to be something more, which as a Pixar film it is doomed to have to be funny, and it is, just not enough.


Rating: ****/*****
Reasons to watch it: Greatest representation of love in a film, ever, Wall-E is undeniably cute.
Best Bit: When Wall-E shows EVE his various sacred pieces of rubbish in his quaint home
What it needs: More humour
share on: facebook

Emperors New Groove

I know this probably isn't a review that you'd be expecting to see on here but i watched this film last week because of my sudden, strange want to see Disney films that i hadn't before, and i felt i had to review it after seeing it.

The Emperors New Groove is the story of the Emperor Kuzco who plans to build a summer home on top of a hill which unfortunately is the home of peasant Pacha, who lives and simple and busy life but still stands by a set of morals despite having to live a peasant life. The plot is changed when the evil adviser to Kuzco decides to plot against him and turns him into a llama with the help of her minion Kronk. From this point onwards the plot escalates into a tale of morals and comparison between it's two main characters.

As much as i enjoyed The Emperors New Groove, which i did, i felt it was a film you can watch without too much ease and enjoy either way, i did feel that it did not meet the mark that most Disney films seem to. Though the film set out to be a comedy with morals it failed by it's own definition slightly with a lack of humour, most of the humour coming from the character Kronk but still making it infrequent and a very simple story about morals which was not expanded on much at all, basically saying that no matter how different you are you can always be friends, this was shown but not to an extent that it shaped the film, what this film really needed was a montage like so much over Disney films of the relationship between Kuzco and Pacha, but seeing as this film lacked music that was nowhere to be seen.

With a lack of music, romance, and with infrequent humour the plot cannot go anywhere except make a few good jokes along the way, and unfortunately because of the lack of romance, music etc. it unravelled the plot to be simple and just look like a journey back to a palace (which is what most of the plot is) whereas something like Shrek has a very simple plot but the audience never find it to be simple or tedious because of it's frequent humour, romance, music and much more.

Another problem i found with this film was they based a film mainly around the Emperor Kuzco but the character himself was never given any of the decent jokes and there is so much spent showing the audience that he is an annoying, spoilt emperor that it is slightly unclear of a change in him as a person, thus weakening the point of basing this plot around morals and by taking away the romance etc. it's really weakening Disney's shield of this being a success as a film.

The film did end up seeming like it was just a massive chance for the character of Kronk to make some good jokes and i couldn't help but think that it was just a test film for Disney so they could work out how to make better films by making one average one, neverthless i did enjoy the character of Kronk to a very large extent, unlike Kuzco he was well written and was given a lot of jokes, and because of this it is in Kronk that most of the attention is given and it ends up that Kronk is the character that keeps fighting so that Disney has some very thin shield helping them defend from the inevitable word 'flop'.

I would respect Disney more if this was just a test film wherein they would ideaolise the character of Kronk and work out how well a Disney film can do without it's main genre's but unfortunately that is very unlikely and it does just seem like a disregard to their usual standards of Disney classic.

The main problem with this film is that it doesn't provide enough to the audience, it will keep audiences amused but never wanting more after the film has finished except of the character Kronk.


Rating: ***/*****
Why watch it: Kronk, and if you need a film which you don't need to pay much attention to
What does it need: A Montage!!!!!!
share on: facebook

Review: Iron Man

I start writing this post by rocking out to the song Iron Man by Black Sabbath, and i assure you though that was very fun it will not change my opinion of the film (sorry Robert Downey Jr.)

When i heard about Iron Man being the best superhero film since classics such as Spiderman 2 and Superman from other reviews i must say i was very hyped, seeing as i am a massive fan of the superhero film genre, unfortunately i find myself disagreeing with these reviews.
Iron Man is a superhero action packed film which also raises ideas about how peace can be achieved. The way in which Iron Man raises this idea of peace helps to stop this film from becoming another superhero film let down which sets itself on having vast CGI involved action scenes and like Spiderman 2 did it helps to appeal to a larger audience (like Spiderman 2 did with Peter Parkers love for Mary Jane) unfortunately this side to the film is never properly expressed in any major way but acts as a barrier for audiences enjoyment behind the action.
Luckily the action scenes of this film were very impressive and did not rely heavily on special effects and is consistent throughout the film but does not boggle the audience or at worst cram them with too many action scenes.
There is a problem that i did find with the action scenes towards the end, which is that the villain is not too appealing, this is partly because of the unoriginal idea of the villain (just a massive version of Iron Man) and also there is a lack of character development so classic characteristics of a villain are never shown which make this character very unimpressive and leave the audience to mainly concentrate on Iron Man.
Robert Downey Jr. gives a superb performance as Tony Stark/Iron Man and brings a light charm to the film which appeals well to the mass audience who look for more than just a superhero film, Robert Downey Jr. is part of the reason this film is saved from being a throw away superhero movie, and it's just as well because there isn't much of the film which does not feature him, so the audience find themselves drawn to this one character to save them, and because he is able to be funny and serious as an actor means that this film is a success.

Tony Starks assistant, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) adds a very light edge of romance to the film but draws some of the attention away from Tony Stark but because of the fact she does not heavily appear in this film it allows the film to keep to it's main aim of being a superhero film and not a boring love spun tale with an exceeded amount of shoddy action scenes.

Iron Man is a film that can be easily enjoyed by almost anyone and does absolutely nothing wrong but unfortunately doesn't do everything right, but neverthless it features amazing action scenes and keeps audience attention.

Rating ***+/*****
share on: facebook

Review: Horton Hears a Who!

Well this is my first post and therefore first contribution to the blog, and i thought i would start it nicely by writing a review of Horton Hears a Who!, so here we go, i hope you enjoy.

Horton Hears a Who!
Rating: ****/*****

At first, when arriving to the cinema to go and see Horton Hears a Who! i was expecting an amusing film that would impress me but would be something i could perhaps forget with a couple of amusingly childish moments from Horton (voiced by Jim Carrey),and animation that bordered on the line of being visually stunning but faced towards the visual dullness of such films as The Reef.
I can and will say that my premonition of this film was wrong, and i was wrong to make this premise.
Horton Hears a Who! is centered around an elephant called Horton who resides in a jungle, and one day hears voices on a tiny spec and goes about protecting the spec from the other jungle inhabitants who disagree with Horton. This mix of a plot that borders being Philosophical combined with the whimsical enjoyment that children can appreciate from this film make it a perfect family film.
Though Horton Hears a Who! is a film that does not have many characters centered around it's plot it uses the lesser characters so that this adaptation of a Dr. Seuss book does not seem like the film is centered around a Philosophical plot, for instance the blue mouse Morton (voiced by Seth Rogen) brings a sarcastic charm to the film, whereas the character Katie adds a touch of childishly loveable humour.

Horton hears a Who! offers a delightful adventure full of laughs, but some of which do not appear to be in line with the story and make the film slightly lacking and as though it seems the film is trying to be stretched out as much as possible, neverthless it strives to keep it's plot as interesting as possible and luckily succeeds in making an amusing family film that can mainly be aimed at children, but still allow an older generation to be entertained.
share on: facebook