Movieblaze

Starring: Tobin Bell, Costas Mandylor, Cary Elwes, Betsy Russell, Sean Patrick Flanery, Gina Holden

Director: Kevin Greutert

Writer(s): Patrick Melton, Marcus Dunstan

Cinematography: Brian Gedge

Original Score: Charlie Clouser

Running Time: 90 mins.

You know the drill by now, “it’s Halloween, it must be Saw” though this is purporting to be “The Final Chapter” which would suggest some sort of conclusion to the ever sprawling story and back-stories that have built up the franchise’s mythology over the last 6 installments. By now much of the goodwill and fondness I (and many others) have for the first rather ingenious film has been wittled away to the point where rather than a stand-alone film or sequel in the true sense each installment has become the byword for a literal cash-in, simply setting up a “game” whereby a group of loosely connected people have to run a literal gauntlet of traps that test their wills and those of others to see who lives or dies, with the obligatory dopey detectives working in the background to discover whats going on and culminating with a final reveal that shows blows apart one of the previous films with a “twist” and a returning character.

In the years least surprising move Saw 3D follows this exact same model, albeit failing to shoe-horn the ubiquitous Jigsaw (Tobin Bell) into proceeding bar two minor flashbacks, don’t let his presence on the poster fool you this is still very much Detective Hoffman’s (Costas Mandylor) game, with most of the plot driven by his personal revenge mission against Jill Tuck, Jigsaw’s widow. Something which leaves the whole game aspect out in the cold, it presents us with the requisite traps in abundance but no semblance of why anyone would go to all this hassle for seemingly insignificant people, led by a supposed Jigsaw survivor in Sean patrick Flannery.

So to the traps, and it is the presence of these over plot or acting that audiences seem to flock to the cinema year on year, thing is they now seem rather old and monotonous along with the rest of the film’s elements. at one stage they were designed to teach the victim a lesson whereas now they are designed purely to shower us with blood and guts in the most laughable way, in that sense it has lost all power to shock or scare (as the first film had the skill to do) meaning all that remains is the reaction of “eww, that’s gross” in the same way you would in a gross-out comedy, surely this is a low-point for a horror film reduced to below-par comedies!

The saving grace is the fact that this does somewhat conclude the series in a satisfying whole, a hard feat considering how trampled the mythology has become in 7 years. To say Dr. Gordon (Cary Elwes) returns is hardly a spoiler, and given his lack of presence throughout you just know he is key to giving us some closure, the brief glimpses at he and Jigsaw  will help you hark back to the original’s ingenuity and may even gain some of that goodwill back though in killing of Jigsaw, in Saw III, which seemed a courageous move at the time hasn’t paid dividends and makes you wonder if he had been kept as the villain throughout there may have at least been a charismatic character amongst all the blood-letting.

While 3D films are ten-a-penny now it is rather important to draw attention to the 3D in Saw 3D given it is the title, the publicity would have you believe we are to be picked up by Jigsaw and strapped into a chair, I can’t say this was ever an expectation of mine (I’m not quite that gullible) but something more immersive than what’s on offer would’ve been nice, as it is we are given blood splatters and chain flying at the screen with the usual credits sequence that utilises the technique more than anything else in the film, in that respect Saw: the Final Chapter would have been a lot more palatable, and appropriate…thankfully!

VERDICT

As a stand-alone film it is simply more (weak) excuses to splatter and dismember countless, faceless victims, except the entertainment value has now all but gone., thankfully in its conclusion of a limping franchise Saw 3D is satisfying for around 15 minutes, …I wouldn’t count out a reboot though!

Starring: Katie Featherston, Micah Sloat, Brian Boland, Sprague Grayden, Molly Ephraim, Tim Clemens

Director: Tod Williams

Writer: Michael R. Perry, Oren Peli

Cinematography: Michael Simmonds

Original Score: N/A

Running Time: 90 mins.

Much like the original Saw film before it (and a great many other horror films) Paranormal Activity burst out of nowhere and went on to surpass The Blair Witch Project as the most profitable film ever, given this as Hollywood’s penchant for draining a horror franchise for all it’s worth Paranormal Activity 2 really is the years biggest no-brainer, especially when the Saw franchise is apparently on its “final chapter” we are in dire need of a new horror franchise to plug that gap (note the sense of sarcasm!). So the question now remains, will Paranormal Activity go the same way as every other horror genre example and suffer the law of diminishing returns, or not?

Not a big surprise this but it certainly doesn’t offer some amazing feat in cinema and prove to linger in that ever elusive group of sequels that better their original, however it is not the severe mis-step and excruciatingly bad watch that The Blair Witch Project 2: Book of Shadows presented us with a year after success akin to Paranormal Activity, though at least that film had the gall to try something a little different (to its cost). Paranormal Activity 2 safely stays in the home-video/lost footage genre relocating us from the first films young couple aesthietic to one where, as horror film lore suggests a sequel should do, introduces a family that features a baby, a teenager and a dog, something of a surprise they didn’t  hold at least one of these elements back for the inevitable three-quel!

The main problem Paranormal Activity 2 has when held against the original is its lack of just that, originality, last year it was a little creepy film that crawled under your skin largely through the air of mystery and surprise around the plot we can all relate to and “that” ending, this time we lose both of those factors and with the suspense and shock lost all we are left with is a film that treads exactly the same territory a little too safely (night 1, pan falls, night 2, door opens and closes, night 3, baby is dragged from cot and dog is riled…so on and so forth). The family are likeable enough but the introduction of “the superstitious mexican nanny” is a cliché too far and attempts at a teen-movie element seem to have slipped in from another even more lacklustre film, on the plus side the couple here are infinitely more likeable than Katie and Micah ever were…

And talk of the devil, Micah and more significantly, Katie, make a return as this is yet another sequel that acts as a prequel which presents us with problem number 2, the same exact problem the Saw franchise has found itself falling further into. For in attempts to slot past events into a story that didn’t exist before it comes off as hackneyed and leaves gaping holes in both films, again like Saw this cheapens rather than enhances the series, and make no mistake the ending suggests there is much more Paranormal Activity to come and find itslef shoehorned into a write it as you go mythology

The one saving grace is the film’s ability to make you jump, there is no doubt that once again we can all relate to the things going bump in the night and it provides the requisite friday night horror you may just be craving just don’t expect to leave the auditorium a nervous wreck or to remember anything about this cheap horror film, in every sense of the word.

VERDICT

Shunting around ike a ghost train, Paranormal Activity 2 is a predictable and largely dull ride with sporadically cheap shocks that won’t stay with you beyond the ride.

Starring: Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, Helen Mirren, John Malkovich, Karl Urban, Mary Louise Parker

Director: Robert Schwentke

Writer(s): Jon Hoeber, Erich Hoeber, Warren Ellis & Cully Hamner (Graphic Novel)

Original Score: Christophe Beck, David Holmes

Cinemtography: Florian Ballhaus

Running Time: 111 mins.

As graphic novel adaptations continue apace it naturally falls upon those that are lesser known to plug the gaps between the Spider, Super, Bat and X-Men, this year has already seen the arrival of Jonah Hex (a mess), The Losers (entertaining but hardly boundary-pushing) and Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (a unique oddity). On top of this the summer has seen all manner of burgeoning action hero troupes filled (largely) of the slightly older man, The Expendables, The A-Team, and the aforementioned Losers which is appropriately a DC adaptation, much like RED which ticks both “graphic novel oddity” and “aging action hero troupe” boxes.

There is little, bar one of two visual flourishes, in the film to suggest its roots as a graphic novel, even the characters are written (on the whole) as slightly more believable as your average comic book hero, and they have glaring weaknesses to boot, Bruce Willis is a retired CIA agent reduced to pining for a call centre operative in Dallas, Morgan Freeman resides in a retirement home and has terminal cancer, while John Malkovich is a paranoid loner living “off the grid” in order to avoid all the satellites he thinks are following his every move, and then there’s top assassin Helen Mirren, bored with her life running a hotel and taking “jobs” on the side. Needless to say this being a film involving the FBI each of these ex-operatives are classified as RED (Retired Extremely Dangerous) and hunted down by Karl Urban’s ruthless rookie agent.

There is little in the above description to suggest anyone watching RED is in for anything other than an action film starring a novelty cast of older generation actors relishing the chance to have fun and walk the nominally predictable steps that the plot provides, and you would be right. Thankfully, very much in a similar vein to the Oceans films, the cast are clearly having fun and it is on the whole contagious, each line is delivered with a knowing wink and seeing the likes of Freeman and Mirren not thesping it up is a joy, with Malkovich given the chance so lacking in Jonah Hex to go crazy and OTT as only Malkovich can, as for Bruce Willis he’s Bruce Willis, the guy can do lighthearted action romps in his sleep. Add to this a game support cast that includes a fun turn by Brian Cox and there is little not to smirk along with, on occasion though the tone is a little askew and the cracks become slightly harder to paper over.

If RED is a film that usually aims hits Oceans 11 knock-about fun it also has a tendency to slip into Oceans 12 territory and flail around like you’re watching a group of old friends getting drunk together, fun or the friends maybe but not so great for you as the observer, losing focus and therefore any sense of empathy or enjoyment you were having in the characters presence, this is something that becomes hard to claw back after the third time it happens especially as these moments become more frequent in the films final third. Jarring as they do against the brutal nature of some of the violence the tone veers wildly leaving you confused, is this now a thriller? Is that meant to be funny/tragic/sad? Clearly Schwentke (director of The Time Travellers Wife) is not capable enough of controlling such a wide array of personas amidst such a clumsy script and it is on this ground that the bul of the film can be won, or in this case, lost.

VERDICT

Sporadic fun provided larfgely by a game cast, sadly that exact same thing becomes the films downfall as RED loses both the focus, plot and in turn its audience!

Starring (the voices of): Hugo Weaving, Ryan Kwanten, Helen Mirren, Abbie Cornish, Geoffrey Rush, Sam Neill

Director: Zack Snyder

Writer(s): John Orloff, Emil Stern,

Cinematography: Grant Freckelton

Original Score: David Hirschfelder,

Running Time: 90 mins.

An animated film about owls from the director of Dawn of the Dead, 300 and Watchmen…stranger things have happened, Mad Max director tackling dancing penguins anyone!?! Oddly, and like that penguin film, Warner Brothers have pulled a coup d’etat with another visually arresting effort adapted from a series of children’s books, this time The Guardians of Ga’Hoole, Lord of the Rings by way of Watership Down with owls is the best way to describe Legend of the Guardians and whatever your opinions on Snyder’s (rather shallow, story-wise at least) output there is no denting his eye for visuals even if he does like slo-mo a little TOO much.

The Legend of the Guardians is your typical coming of age tale, two brothers, one good one eventually seduced by badness, butt heads as the good one gathers a band of owls (and a snake!) to find the legendary Guardians of Ga’Hoole whilst the bad-guys mount a plan to overthrow the owl kingdoms using, inexplicably, metal pulled from owl pellets consisting of mostly dead mice, culminating in an epic battle between the good guys and bad guys to rescue the young owl sister and restore balance to the force…ih  hang on wrong film. As you can probably tell this is a film that pulls the “epic” plot points from many a quest film, no bad thing as many of these inspirations are classics in their own right. Star Wars, Watership Down, Lord of the Rings…each is a classic and is capable of being applied to a new and awe-inspiring world, the world of owls.

It is undoubtedly the visuals that make the film and for all its lack of originality it finds something special in its presentation, even without (or perhaps even more so) 3D this would be a refreshingly real representation of a world full of depth and awe-inspiring epic wonder (arguably as luscious as that of Avatar), of course it helps that the characters are largely all owls and fairly gracious in their movement, flying in particular is a god-send to a director as visually accomplished as Snyder leaving little wonder he has been selected to try and reboot Superman, again! The owls soar through the skies and there is enough to differentiate each flying sequence to stop the rot or boredom setting in, whether it be a typhoon of rain or the use of fire and metal gauntlets in the fight/flight scenes each has its own flavour.

Amidst being swept along by the visuals it is easy to overlook the (rather glaring) flaws, unoriginality and predictability of story are a given but the voice cast also serves to hinder at times, ranging from weak to very good it really is a mixed bag, David Wenham and Geoffrey Rush are the only two who make any kind of impact but sound much like themselves giving their characters little in the way of characterisation, something not helped by the lack of much to differentiate between owls. But it is the lead brothers that are the weakest links, making Soren and Kludd both dull and uninteresting to listen to, but like I will keep reiterating you are likely going to be too engrossed in the visuals too care all that much about the sound coming from the characters beaks!

It is easy to pull a film such as this apart, it reaches for something much more than Despicable Me and aspires to be seen as the animated equivalent of Lord of the Rings, unfortnately there isn’t nearly enough at work to raise it to those standards…or anywhere near where depth is concerned but for pure surface sheen there is something to behold, in fact in that sense it really isn’t very far removed at all from Snyder’s past work.

VERDICT

The Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole is a luscious and beautifully shot film, employing slow-mo to the max, sadly it shares the weaknesses of it’s directors other films, lack of originality in plot and any sense of depth to his characters, that is unlikely to hinder your enjoyment though.

Starring (the voices of): Steve Carrell. Jason Segel, Russell Brand, Julie Andrews, Will Arnett, Kristen Wiig, Jermaine Clement

Director(s): Pierre Coffin, Chris Renaud

Writer(s): Ken Daurio, Sergio Pablos, Cinco Paul

Cinematography: Eric Guillon

Original Score: Heitor Pereira, Pharrell Williams

Running Time: 95 mins.

Having your villain as the lead character is nothing new, not least in the world of CGI animation which sees two such films released within a month of each other, Megamind which is Dreamworks latest toon and sees its lead voiced by Will Ferrell is the second to get a release while Despicable Me is the first out of the gates which also casts a comedy superstar as the lead, this time around Steve Carrell sporting a comedy-value eastern European voice. Which one proves to be the better of the two remains to be seen but Despicable Me takes a good crack at a well-worn story

Carrell is Gru, a bald, pointy-nosed seeking to commit a villainous deed big enough to make his perpetually disappointed mother (Julie Andrews) proud, all of which means a plot to steal the moon is planned hindered by “The Bank of Evils” refusal to lend Gru the money for a rocket and the ever more annoying intervention of a rival super-villain in the form of Segel’s Vector. But in order to get the required shrink-ray Gru must penetrate Vector’s heavily armed fortress with the help of three cute orphan girls, where will it all end? And will it be as predictable as you expect?

As for predictability Despicable Me wears its heart on its sleeve, of course the orphan girl’s will melt Gru’s heart, there would be very little in terms of plot of they didn’t, and while it is tackled in the most hackneyed way possible with a last-minute dash to save them, for extra cliched measure, it isn’t nearly as plodding and painful as many of its peers (Ice Age, the current Alpha and Omega) and gets by on laughs, sadly they are the kind of laughs sitting in the region of titters rather than belly laughs, on the whole at least. It is telling that it is in those scenes that have least to do with the plot that hit the best, the more “random” humour as it were.

The character of Gru is the standout point of the film, a character due a better film to display his “talents” helped greatly by Carrell’s vocal skills and the relationship with hsi mother, some classic put-downs stem from this situation, and the slightly darker hints are so welcome you crave more to raise the calibre of the film, the tone should be more animated Lemony Snicket rather than a slow descent into Mrs. Doubtfire, and not in a good way…

There are glimmers of something straining to reach beyond mediocrity and hit the same comedic heights of last years Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs but when it looks like being that out-there and daring a plot contrivance is on hand to shoot you back down, something which has to be laid at the feet of directors Coffin and Renaud, they are first=time directors but unsurprisingly had a hand in the lacklustre Ice Age trilogy. Despicable Me is not nearly as weak as those films but has the same lack of reach on the whole that leaves you feeling as though the idea of rival super-villains in a wacky world inhabited by a plethora of comedy stars voice-work could be both great and greatly unique, maybe Megamind will be that film…or failing that we will have the inevitable Despicable Him/You/Us/We!

VERDICT

Despicable Me is amusing wnough to be entertaining but sadly that is all, sad because the opportunity for something special was there and largely wasted in favour of soppy cliche.

Starring: Emma Stone, Penn Badgely, Amanda Bynes, Thomas Haden Church, Patricia Clarkson, Cam Gigandet, Stanley Tucci

Director: Will Gluck

Writer: Bert V. Royal

Cinematography: Michael Grady

Original Score: Brad Segal

Running Time: 93 mins.

Taking the same teen-movie root as Clueless and Mean Girls, Easy A is less concerned with cheesey High School romance and more concerned with sassy know-it-all’s who narrate their own story and have bags of attitude to spare whilst surrounding themselves with the quirkiest characters imaginable. Thus your enjoyment of Easy A will very much hinge upon whether or not you can take another such film and can over-look some rather desperate attempts at quirky characters this side of Napoleon Dynamite. Grounding the film though is Emma Stone (of Superbad and Zombieland fame), and truth be told this is very much Stone’s star vehicle displaying the same level of likeability and grounded characterisation found in both her previous turns, it’s little wonder she was picked as the new romantic interest for Peter Parker!

Offering up a character much like that of the pre-crazy days Lindsay Lohan, that is to say one who craves acceptance yet accepts her place in the middle of the school food-chain! We know this because, as is common-place, we are told via Olive’s (Stone) opening salvo as she walks through the school grounds pointing out the jocks, geeks etc etc. In fact this scene oddly mirrors Kick-Ass’ opening except minus the superhero aspirations, not a bad thing but serves to prove that this oh-so-clever high school routine is become a bit tired, especially after this year has already seen too many quirky comedies starring quirky characters finding themselves in quirky situations, that’s far too much quirk for one person to take.

So basically Oliver starts a rumour that she has lost her cherry, so to speak, and basically ends up with a reputation as the school hussy, something further helped/worsened when she agrees to fake an encounter with her gay friend to prove his “straight-ness”, as with all these kind of exploits it does not end well with Olive at first embracing and then hating her new-found status, will she work it all out and get her childhood sweetheart? I think you know the answer to that…

But it is not the predictable elements (which are actually handled very well) but the attempts are something a bit more “out-there” that don’t quite gel on one hand is the slightly hip teacher (Haden Church) who pitches it just right, hitting the cool vibes while keeping it just the right side of appropriate while on the other hand are Patricia Clarkson and Stanley Tucci as Olive’s parents. Both fine actors and both usually reliable to inject something different into a role, sadly on this occasion that “different” part is just way off base, trying to be hip-and-trendy parents and just coming off as plain creepy and unbelievable, all that asides from the total lack of likeness between supposed parents and child in looks or personality.

These kind of mishaps don’t relegate the film to unwatchability but it just means that some scenes feel lost and out of sync with the film as a whole, thankfully Stone is always there to provide a chuckle with her sassy comments and flippant nature, a hero that we can root for is a big plus but hopefully she is an actress that can find something more worthy, and worthwhile, than this kind of deja-vu project.

VERDICT

Easy A is a by the numbers quirky teen-movie, problem is there’s too much quirk making for a confused experience grounded by another solid performance from its star.

Starring: Katherine Heigl, Josh Duhamel, Josh Lucas, Christina Hendricks, Sarah Burns

Director: Greg Berlanti

Writer: Ian Deitchman, Kristin Rusk Robinson

Original Score: Blake Neely

Cinematography: Andrew Dunn

Running Time: 112 mins.

Returning to the same ground she made her name on, baby-based comedies, Katherine Heigl seems to have refound some of what made her charming and watchable in Knocked Up, maybe its just the parental psyche inside but it seems that when it involves a sprog be it hers biologically or adoptively she loses the irritating edge that seems to have been built up over the course of her last few films, weak films at that teaming her with a number of equally smug actors, Ashton Kutcher, Gerard Butler et al. So to see her teamed with Josh Duhamel is refreshing as it provides Duhamel with the kind of exposure he deserves and a personality likeable enough to offset Heigl’s more smug leanings to the point of almost-non-existence.

Though formula wise this is effectively the rom-com by numbers, boy meets girl, boy and girl are mismatched until (low and behold) something brings them together and makes them realise their true feelings. Thankfully plot-wise it stretches beyond the usual rom-com beats, for a start the main narrative catalyst (the death of a couple) is not the usual quirky event which helps in veering us close to something more engaging than a holiday scenario or the arrival of a quirky family member. There is some debate as to how tasteful, let alone realistic, the adoption of a baby by the mismatched best friends is but when it is served up so well who am I to complain, after all a film is designed to entertain is it not…

So while plot is intriguing and sufficiently original in situation the plot inevitably takes over in the final act as “true love” finds precedent over baby-care, thankfully the darkly tinged strain of humour never lets up and bar a few body-fluid based gags they are a little more witty than the baby-poo on the face seen in the trailer, something which is both fitting given the tragedy in the setup and the down-to-earth down that the makers seem to lean towards. Of course all this would stand for very little were your central couple unlikable or lacking in chemistry, something Heigl and Duhamel have no problems in avoiding. The slow build of their relationship is keenly observed so as not to sledgehammer things home (well, not until the end at least), and while Heigl is watchable and able in generating chemistry with Duhamel it is the man himself who wins it for the film.

Since Transformers he certainly looked the part, all lanter-jawed and 6 foot-odd but was given very little to do in the acting department, subsequent roles have offered little more and a role in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen saw him do even less. Then came When In Rome which flopped big style, all of which leaves Life As We Know It for him to make his mark, and he does so with aplomb. He is the man Gerard Butler so badly wanted to be in The Ugly Truth, a real man’s man, one of the lads, but smooth with the ladies, but beyond this is the warmth of character and actual acting talent that marks him out as actually better than the film itself, on this evidence we could well be seeing Hollywood’s next leading man…expect the superhero role sooner rather than later!

VERDICT

Refreshingly down-to-earth in the rom-com department, Life As We Know It, thankfully putting character before irksome lovey-dovey scenes for the most part and proving Josh Duhamel as a great, and hugely like-able, actor.

Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, Justin Timberlake,  Rooney Mara, Joseph Mazzello, Bryan Barter

Director: David Fincher

Writer: Aaron Sorkin, Ben Mezrich (novel)

Cinematography: Jeff Cronenweth

Original Score: Trent Reznor, Atticus Ross

Running Time: 122 mins.

Largely known since its original announcement as “The Facebook Film” The Social Network is not called that for a very good reason, it is as much about Facebook as Fight Club was about fights, in other words if all you take from this cinema experience is the story of Facebook you really are missing the point as with all those dumbasses that watch and cite Fight Club as their favourite film “because of the fights and manliness of it all”, fools that they are! So what is The Social Network about? One critic has elated it as it the “film that defines a decade” which quite frankly pretty much sums the experience up nicely, though to deny the picking apart of what exactly makes it so good and such a defining piece of art is a misgiving in itself.

Much has been made of the team-up of director David Fincher and writer Aaron Sorkin, though in truth it is Sorkin who seems to have found the majority of plaudits, rightly so as his script is a thing of beauty, witty, breathless and kinetic it keeps the film hurtling along at 100mph rarely stopping for breath, or allowing the characters to at least, anyone familiar with The West Wing or the hugely under-rated Charlie Wilson’s War will know what I mean. He can write characters so morally ambiguous and often loathsome and make them into curiosities that we learn to love for their eccentricities, which is precisely why tackling (now) moguls such as Napster founder Sean Parker and Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg is the perfect fit. It is unlikely any other writer could have made these men as interesting to watch and at once so likeable while being effectively villains is the traditional sense of the word.

Of course it helps that the parts have been written for actors that can play the roles to perfection, embodying those characters and making you forget you’re watching people act, in the finest possible way. Thankfully, and rather amazingly, this is an across the board feat, with every person regardless of the size of their part fitting just perfectly, Justin Timberlake is the sleek and shark-like Parker, playing off Zuckerberg’s frailties while Andrew Garfield is effectively the good guy, despairing at the loss of his friend while trying to reclaim what is his, but inevitably it is Jesse Eisenberg who is the standout, his is a name that deserves mention in the same breath as “Oscar Buzz” and there is unlikely going to be a performance to match his this year. Zuckerberg is a nasty piece of work, there is little denying but the machinations for this are those that many an unpopular student will recognise, he simply craves the popularity of those jocks that are the foundation of the clubs and societies.

In this respect he isn’t technically a “bad guy” rather a guy trying to be bad or as a character late in the film puts it “trying to be an asshole”, soemthing which he does with aplomb, in fact to draw on fight club it would be prudent to draw lines between the characters of Parker and Tyler Durden and Zuckerberg and The Narrator, two sides of the same psyche both vying for attention. The similarities to that masterpiece do not end there, depth is something most films strive for yet very few actually achieve, and after the slight and shallow nature of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button Fincher is back on safer ground. Studies of the human condition seem to be the mans forte, especially the darker reccesses of it, and while Zuckerberg, Parker and the Winklevos twins aren’t killers or fascists they are the monsters on the new-age.

Finchers stamp obviously goes beyond the sub-conscious, as ever his visuals are impeccable and though they are not showy, this is a film that has little time for set-pieces, there are standout scenes that are as kinetic as the action that happens via words. A scene set against the backdrop of a nightclub and a boat race that takes place during the Henley Regatta are big, loud, visual beasts searing into your memory as much as the dialogue will. Only time will tell but I would almost certainly put this up there as one of Fincher’s very best, and that is damn high praise indeed!

VERDICT

“The Social Network defines the decade” – Rolling Stone….I can’ t really put it any better than that!

Starring: Rhys Ifans, David Thewlis, Chloe Sevigny, Crispin Glover, Omid Djalili, Jack Huston, Chriatian McKay

Director: Bernard Rose

Writer: Bernard Rose

Cinematography: Bernard Rose

Original Score: Philip Glass

Running Time: 121 mins.

Film based on life-stories are something of a minefield, often coming off as a little trite or failing that a bit too awards friendly, seemingly manufactured to win it’s actor portraying some tortured genius or member of the monarchy in order to nab themselves a golden baldie, it’s refreshing that Mr. Nice, based on the life story of drug smuggler/dealer Howard Marks is not heavy-handed enough to be seen as awards fodder but largely avoids falling into the trap of novelty thanks to Rhys Ifans in the role he was surely born to play, of course it helps that he is a long-time friend of Marks and has obviously had the time to get close to the man and understand what makes him tick rather than just wheeling out an impersonation or caricature!

So while Ifans raises the film’s credentials the rather episodic A to B storyline makes sure we are in entertaining rather than outstanding territory, beginning with Mark’s schooldays and following through to University in Oxford to Ireland and his dealings with the IRA as well as a foray into America, with a side helping of the issue of whether or not he acted in the interest of M16 as an undercover spy. It’s a lot to condense into one film which is why those biopic’s that focus on one strand of a persons life are the best but it is perhaps hard to understand why Mark’s is such an infamous character in the outcome if you cannot see his humble beginnings, so in that sense it is a film faced with a catch 22 situation from the off.

Inevitably some episodes in the man’s life work better in translation to screen than others, for example the decision to have Ifan’s play the schoolboy of the man is just plain odd giving the black and white opening scenes a rather comedic feel, however good an actor Ifans is he can’t pull off playing a 12-year-old! Thankfully things improve, but only after the uninspired and rather old hat trick of having the saturated colour fade into Technicolor when Marks experiences his first “joint”, a visual flourish you could chart from a mile off, and something you’d expect to find on a sunday night in Heartbeat!

Thankfully the change to Technicolor not only signals the apparently eye-opening powers of hashish but the introduction of a great plethora of support characters, the standout is quite clearly David Thewlis as Marks IRA  contact, highly amusing and feeling more like a throwback from the best stoner movie ever, The Big Lebowski, which brings me to the other saving grace of Mr. Nice…the fact that you really need not appreciate hashish or have ever smoke it to “get” the film and indeed the man himself unlike Pineapple Express for example that seems to have been made purely for those “under the influence”.

So while the plot meanders via jaunts to Iraq, America and Europe, it is Ifans that keeps you interested, making Marks seem like the man of the title, there’s very little not to like about the him and with the tone very much set to fun rather than lofty aspirations of critical plaudits is unlikely you will leave the cinema without a smile even if you’re not really any wise as to the mans depth or quite how he got away with his misdemeanours as long as he did.

VERDICT

Mr. Nice is fun yet shallow, rather than deep and meaningful, Ifans is the star here and on this evidence Howard mark’s really was nice…much like this film.

Starring: Paul Walker, Idris Elba, Chris Brown, Hayden Christensen. Michael Ealy, Jay Hernandez, Matt Dillon, Zoe Saldana

Director: John Luessenhop

Writer(s): Peter Allen, Gabriel Casseus, John Luessenhop

Cinematography: Michael Barrett

Original Score: Paul Haslinger

Running Time: 107 Mins.

The best crime drama since The Departed and the best heist movie since Heat, that is what I have witnessed this Autumn, suffice to say that Takers is not that film…with Ben Affleck’s terrific The Town receiving those plaudits from me and a great many others, something which leaves Takers up the creek without a paddle as its credentials are hardly rock solid to begin with. Case in point, it stars Paul Walker, Hayden Christenten and a couple of rappers/wannabe actors (Chris Brown and T.I.) as well as Matt DIllon who’s descent into mediocre fare better suited to DTV (Armoured, Old Dogs and You Me and Dupree) is only solidified here, add to that a fledgling director and one of the most hackneyed premises ever and the signs are hardly encouraging.

Alas this signs are largely correct, forgettable but passable, Takers is everything you would expect, which is pretty much all of the above…in spades! In all fairness though it has no aspirations besides a short sharp burst on entertainment, there is little attempt at depth beyond a sub-plot involving Idris Elba’s character’s sister and even that hasn’t enough time spent on it to become offensive. So what of plot, well there’s this one big heist a gang of bank robbers want to pull off that has been set up by someone who previously took the fall for them, should they trust him or not? Take a guess…I bet you will be right! And hot on their tale is Matt Dillon’s detective and his partner (Hernandez), so into the mix is an attempt at a corruption plot and the weakest attempt at a love story you will likely see all year which displays the biggest waste of the film’s talent in Zoe Saldana!

But a lack of aspiration can sometimes be a saving grace for the film is pacey enough to grip with spontaneity and shockingly Hayden Christenten turns in an enjoyable performance, something complimented by some nice visual flourishes, Luessenhop clearly knows how to shoot an action scene with some flair even if it’s nothing we haven’t seen before. Sadly the positives all too easily get bogged down by the hackneyed scripting and a predictable finale that tries to pack some punch but fails to the point where I am struggling to recall what happened, never a good sign!

The saddest thing to come from the film is the waste of talent that is Idris Elba, while The Losers was enjoyable he really isn’t  stretching the acting chops he so clearly has on the basis of TV series such as Luther, someone please give the guy a part he is worthy of and not the fourth leg in a team based film! Which leads me to the final point, structure, the story was evidently written with the idea that each of the cast would get their moment to shine amongst the team based aesthetic. Neither of these are pulled of successfully, with only Christenten making an impact and next to no chemistry between anyone else, something that is crucial in a film of this nature, even the weakest examples of the genre usually manage a little of that important ingredient.

VERDICT

Takers is the film you would expect, entirely forgettable and with very few redeeming features, so n0t awful then but a bit of a waste of time.