I, Brucie

Some actors can choose 'em. Some can't. Tom Cruise, Michael Douglas, Jodie Foster, George Clooney. They have a tendancy to pick quality projects pretty much consistantly. Then there's A-listers like Bruce Willis that not only does studio and indie movies, but only picks a quality project every now and again. For every Die Hard, Pulp Fiction and Sin City, there's a handful of others that are lackluster, simply adequete or under-whelming. Yeah, you know...Bandits, Hart's War, Perfect Stranger, The Story Of Us, Mercury Rising...you understand?

Jonathan Mostow's Surrogates is, unfortunately one of those 'others', although it is at the top end of that group. It's a solid, unspectacular studio science fiction thriller that does exactly what it says on the tin. It blends sci-fi concepts you'll recognise from Logan's Run, The Matrix as well as I Robot (james Cromwell effectively playing the same role in Surrogates too)....and it does it well. There's nothing really to complain about...it has action, suspense and Mostow hasn't skimped on action or effects. The script, while short at 88 minutes, is well structured, if a little familiar. ....but there's little in Surrogates to get excited* about either.

Still, Bruce delivers an agreeable and emotionally subdued performance and the cast, including Ving Rhames, Radha Mitchell and Jack Noseworthy add class.

* Rosamund (Die Another Day) Pike must get special mention as Brucies wife. If a Pikey surrogate goes on sale in my lifetime...that honey is mine. Hear me now.

The Running Gamer

Gamer is, in essence, Schwarznegger's The Running Man, except the hero Gerard Butler is a human avatar for a mind controlling internet game & he has a wife and kid that he still give a monkeys about.

As you'd expect from the directors of the Crank movies, it's spectacularly inventive. It's occasionaly surreal (Michael C Hall's dance number)and batshit crazy (the Simms inspired "Society" intro) but not to the point where it's at odds with itself.
The action is often quickly cut but never to point where it makes things not understandable (yes, 10 months later and I'm still on Quantum of Solace's case). Taylor and Nevildine have a complex sci-fi concept to introduce...what the Slayers online game is, how it works and how it affects the world and our characters...which could easily get confusing in the midst of intensely lunatic set-pieces. However the story concept is communicated clearly with the social commentary you'd expect from this kind of high concept science fiction all present and correct. It comments on how we're all all wired into net, tv, etc and how our morality has changed as a result (a great example is the News hosts who now casually smoke and swear as a matter of course). Of couse, if you've seen Untraceable, Gladiator or The Condemned recently, the same themes are explored.

There's also a cool soundtrack which features Marilyn Manson's cover of Sweet Dreams and The Bloodhoundgang's The Bad Touch. The great cast includes Kyra Sedgewick, Ludacris , Milo Ventimigila (it takes a brave man to act that crazy on film), cute Allison Lohman and a sexy Amber Valletta and an 'on form' Michal C Hall.

It occured to me that Nevildine and Taylor show the same sort of invention, at this early stage of their career, as Sam Raimi and Peter Jackson did in theirs. Perhaps one day, I thought, we may see these guys producing Oscar baiting stuff...or a multi-billion superhero franchise...maybe 20 years down the road. Once they've got their batshit ideas off their chest. Then again they might just be the next Russell Mulcahy..whose Highlander showed great promise, and who ended up helming Scorpion King and Resident Evil sequels. Mmmmm.

Dreamwork's Monsters Vs Pixar's Aliens

You can tell from Monsters Vs Aliens, the latest Dreamworks CG animation, that every effort has been made to counter the box office profitability of Disney's Pixar movies. The focus has been on big star names, high concept stories, pop culture gags, action packed storylines and sequels for every movie that makes a profit. It's a hit machine.

Unfortunately the inner working of that machine are too obvious and Dreamworks movies never attain the raw human quality in their characters and stories their Pixar rivals achieve. Dreamworks flicks are too light. Too fluffy. Fun, sure, but lacking the emotional depth and lightness of touch to pull of a genuine classic.
And Monsters Vs Aliens is much the same.

It's cool, well designed, funny, exciting, action packed and does exactly what animation should do; tell stories that are better done non-live action. A solid, three out of five star movie, that will keep adults and kids entertained (unlike the coma inducing animation from Fox, Sony & Co).
While is still much better than their early CG efforts like Antz and Sharks Tale it still doesn't rise above the rest of the Dreamworks pack to claim the prize of 'animated classic'. With sequels to Madagascar, Shrek and Kung-Fu Panda on the immediate horizon, that title still seems a long way off.

FAQ About How To Pick Up Anna Faris

Frequently Asked Questions About Time Travel, a low budget British science fiction comedy, reminds me of the recent Fanboys movie. It's a well intentioned, high concept comedy that isn't all that funny.

FAQ is certainly well cast with Chris O'Dowd (from The IT Crowd) and Dean Lennox Kelly (Being Human)and a third, less talented bloke, as friends who find a time portal in the bog of their local pub. The alway watchable Anna Faris has a quiet (for her) cameo as a future person sent to help the hapless heroes. Hilarity ensues. Not.

You can tell the performers are trying, the story is clever (in a way that only time travel stories are) and the limited budget is stretched without looking cheap (great SFX). But the humour doesn't reall work...both from a lacking in the script and direction department.

However, like Fanboys, it does have the major plus of having maximum respect for the science fiction genre. There's tons of movie references, it name drops the masters (Bradbury) and it playfully reveals the turmoil of living as a geek in a modern world. Now that really IS a good reason to make a movie.

Carry On Don't Lose Your Head

After the dire averageness that was Christopher Smith's debut horror movie Creep, my expectations were pretty low for his follow up Severance. Fortunately, with an inspired (mostly) British cast, a witty script and (rarely) a measured balance of humour and horror, Severance is a triumph.

A group of office workers go to 'somewhere in eastern Europe' for a team building weekend. After finding their lodge is a s~~thole, the masked nutters turn up and it's fight for their lives. Pretty generic stuff. Fortunately the group are well wriiten and brought to life by a sparky Laura Harris, superior Toby Stephens, struggling Tim McInnerny and brown-noser David Gilliam. The legend that is Danny Dyer gets to be the most fun as the horny, foul mouthed, drug taking Steve.

Along with Dog Soldiers, The Descent, Shaun Of The Dead and 28 Days Later..Severance isproof that the Brits can deliver a powerful brand of horror that can rival what the Japanese, Koreans and French are doing these days. With added humour, of course(The decapitated head gag and wild bear gag get me every time.)

Oceans Eleven, Ensemble Heaven

Without a doubt, the Ocean's Eleven remake is one of THE great movies of the decade. It takes a tired genre, still loaded with potential, shakes it up, and deals out something fresh.

The ensemble are poetry in motion...all memorable individual thieves, criminals and con-men interacting engrossingly as a team. Plus it has a plot that has everything; an intricate, mission impossible style caper, mis-trust in the group, a love story (who will she choose!?!), A-list stars and a cold ruthless villain. It keeps the belly laughs flowing consistantly and presents a heist that you can't quite work out how Danny and the boys will pull off.

Director Steven Soderbergh gives mainstream cinema a shot in the arm of sophistication with this movie. Everything from the sleek set design, glossy, rich photography, artsy european editing and David Holme's jazzy, chillout dance score giving this a classy edge.

The best thing about it isn't the most obvious, but it bleeds into every aspect of the story; that which is left unsaid. Lots of the humour is built on this concept whether it's the one way banter between Clooney and Pitt (Brad doesn't need to say a word yet George, or even Topher Grace, know what he's thinking) or the chinese mutterings of Yen, which in true Chewbacca style, the rest of the crew understand perfectly without ever translating for the audience. Clooney doesn't need to answer the question of what his post-prison plans are (we're here to see a heist movie...we can read his mind) and we never get to find out what Pitt was telling Damon to "never, ever forget..." The whole emotional core of the movie is built on what Ocean left unsaid to his wife during their marraige while the entertainment value of the heist is improved by leaving unsaid how 'exactly' it will be achieved.

The script is tighter than a gap in Seth Rogan's schedule and classier than Charlize Theron's under-garments. Like Back to the Future, the sequels are great fun too, but never managed to recreate the perfection displayed here. Magnifique!

Prawn Rock-Tale

I wonder if the Hollywood studio system gets introspective when it sees something like Neil Blompkamp's District 9, a modestly budgeted science fiction extravaganza made outside the studio system. Produced by Peter Jackson, it's an amalgamation of familiar science fiction concepts fused into a top class display of imagination.

So we get the huge alien flying saucer hovering above a major city (Independence Day/V). The aliens (nicknamed Prawns) live on earth and interact uneasily with the native human population (Alien Nation). A down to earth guy comes into contact with new technology and undergoes an undesirable transformation (The Fly/Robocop). Finally, having learned a few home truths, the hero puts selfish desires aside and fights for freedom (Han Solo/Avatar).

But this combination of story elements has never been told with this much gritty realism. The Johannesburg setting provides a different setting for a mainstream action movie while the hand held camera style leaves you with a vividly realistic sense of time and place. The documentary framework which starts off the movie and frequently reappears throughout allows the audience to become familiar with the unusual environment, situation, characters and relationships in a way that's informative, and easy to digest.

For something that deals with a subject as heavy as the forced mass-relocation of a race, the film is loaded with sharp humour, which isn't dulled by a child-frindly rating (the first translated Prawn dialogue is "F~~k Off!"). Add to that the balls out action of RoboCop (the great exo-skeleton shoot-em up), the gross-out body horror of a Cronenberg movie (exploding bodies) and the sharp topical alagory that marks the best science fiction work.

Newcomer Sharlto Copley make a spectacular enterance to the world of acting as Wikus, the blindly oppressive, out-of-his-depth, career focused, bureaucrat who does good. The alien prawns also put in good performances courtesy of Weta Digital; they're the best non-verbal animation outside of Phil Tippett's effects house, with each prawn having a distinct personality.

Like all good movie-blends, it's not the ingrediants but HOW the movie mixes them. The action, humour, horror and thriller aspects are finely balanced. It has a break-neck pace, slimey villains and even a touching love story thrown into the mix. Most importantly, it never loses focus on the importance of character despite the intense events depicted. It's tense too as you're never sure how things will pan out for Wikus, and his Prawn sidekick Christopher Johnson. This is low-budget, non-studio sci-fi so a happy ending isn't necesarely guarenteed.

I wonder if Hollywood is ready to fund Blompkamp's Halo adaptation now. Then again, showing what excellence can be achieved without them, will he really want to anymore?

Year One, Belly Laughs Zero

Year One, directed by Harold Ramis, is a pleasingly pleasent comedy. Nothing here is butt clenchingly hilarious or shouts of originality. What it does have is Jack Black and Michael Cera doing their usual thing (Black over-ambitious, enthusiastic under-achiever & Cera smart, socially awkward, do-gooder). It also displays a nice line in adult humour (when movies are all PG-13 these days, it's nice to get some tits and nob gags) that's missing from other broad summer comedies like Land of the Lost.

It's well produced and shot...Ramis knows how to shoot comic dialogue and how to time a gag. Olivia Wilde and Juno Temple up the cute factor considerably while Hank Azaria, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Vinnie Jones and a great David Cross (as Able's brother Cain) have fun in supporting roles. It's not bad in the slightest, it's just not great. Perhaps that's just modern comedy writing for you as it's scripted by some of the guys behind the US version of The Office. But in a broad, big scale comedy such as this, perhaps the under-stated approach isn't the most appropriate.

102 Minutes That Made Me *#$% My Pants

It's strange. I'm always drawn to the bigger picture. When I first heard about the 9/11 attacks, my very first thoughts were of the worldwide consequences; the wars that might follow and the way our lives, our politics and our beliefs would change afterwards. For the most part, in the years that have followed those fateful events, my concerns have been on a larger scale; illegal invasions, widescale abuse of civil liberties, right wing, mainstream media propaganda etc.

Of course, on getting home from work in 2001 and seeing the live footage my thoughts immediately turned to those individuals involved. The residents, families and workers of New York City, especially those of the emergency service crews tackling the disaster head-on.

102 Minutes That Changed America is a documentary made up of footage shot by first hand witnesses of the events in New York that day. While the footage isn't always as spectacular as some recorded by the TV networks, it does have the bonus of having the original sound of those civilians recording it; specifically their confused, scared, angry and horrified reactions.

It's powerful stuff. It's not the most informative or the most definitive visual record of 9/11. BUT, it does convey better than any documentary so far about what it was like in a major metropolitan city on the day of a catastrophic terrorist attack. 8 years later and brown cords are still required when viewing this footage.

The Third Ice Age - Dead By Dawn

I hate Ice Age: Dawn Of The Dinosaurs, the third in Fox's CG animated franchise. I hate that the characters I grew to like in the first film, are reduced to bland losers. I hate that stand out character, Scrat, has not one entire sequence to shine. I hate that all attempts to include something for an adult audience has been removed to allow the braindead zombies of middle America to not feel like they're 'not getting it'. Mostly I hate that I was bored by the uninspired predictability of it all.

On the plus side I was disappointed that Ice Age newcomer Simon Pegg was unable to lift the enjoyment level of the movie significantly, although at least he's trying. And the Scrat sequences at least have a wacky surreal quality...even if they're no longer funny.

The staggering worldwide success of this installment means an inevitable sequel. I just hope it's a silent solo Scrat movie or the cinema suicide rate might just escalate!

Tiny Miracles In A Titanic Movie

There's a million things I could write about the brilliance of James Cameron's Titanic. There's the usual stuff about Cameron's perfectly structured script. Or his beautifully uncluttered direction and his mastery of editing suspensful action. There's the memorable score or the grandly staged production where no expense has been spared. Or the fresh performances of Winslet, DeCaprio & Co, bringing their rounded charcters to life vividly.

But at the end of the day there's two reasons why Titanic is so good and why it went on to become the biggest money earner in film history.

First, it's based upon the most famous modern historic tragedy of the twentieth century. People, including me, are interested in what really went on that tragic night; what caused the disaster and what it would have been like for the 2200 souls on that voyage. With the aid of staggeringly accurate research applied to the script and design of the film, we can get a feel for it. State of the art FX allow audiences to see the sinking in the most realistic way possible. And very likable, regognisable and relatable performances from the two leads allow us to experience the disaster through their eyes. It's this historic aspect which got audiences into the theatres in 1997 in the first place.

What got them coming back for multiple showings, created massive positive word-of-mouth, and spawned an unstoppable global box-office behemoth was one tiny, tiny moment in the film. It takes 2 and a half hours to build up to it, lasts not-even 10 seconds, and is perfectly complimented by the remainder of the film.

Rose lets go of Jack's hand.

The entire script is designed around this one moment. Everything about the thematic content, the character arcs, even the tragedy of the Titanic herself culminates in that moment. It was obvious that this scene is profoundly affecting from the mass-audience crying I witnessed (more than once), when seeing it originally in cinemas in '97.

There's two reason why people are moved by this. Firstly, audiences are so invested in Jack (DiCaprio) & Rose (Winslet) at this point, that it's devastating that Jack has not survived and that his, and Rose's, "perfect" romance is not to be. After all the film has been strengthening the romance throughout and it's then taken away from audiences, perhaps who are expecting wedding bells at the end.

But the beauty of this film is it isn't just about death (despite 1500 passengers going to their doom. It's really about life. It's set up early in the movie when Leo saves Kate from falling; there's a close-up of their hands gripping tight. Later, Leo makes Kate promise to "Never let go". And of course in that very moment, their hands part. When their hands clasp at the beginning of the movie, Kate is literally clinging onto to life. The hand parting at the end signal she's letting go of death, and 'not letting go of life', so shell survive. Winslett makes a simple choice communicated with a single gesture.

That's something in narratives I'm drawn to; people making life changing choices at precise moments. It might be Luke deciding to turn off his targeting computer in Star Wars, Red deciding to break his parole and get on that bus in Shawshank or Haley Joel Osmant finally deciding to tell his mum about his secret, by point out that accident up ahead. But with Titanic the impact is even more profound as it's intertwined with the historic tragedy as well as being placed at the moment when the characters are at their lowest ebb. It's the same as when Marty McFly's gonna fade from existance in Back to the Future. It's at that emotional low that George decides to kiss Lorraine and you get the emotional highpoint of the movie.

It's much like Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan in that respect, as it shows from a mostly historic viewpoint the power of death as a reminder to embrace life, and it demonstrates this with a contemporay voiceover. Star Trek: Generations has the save lofty themes too, if I recall. But it's Titanic's commitment to this one moment that gives audiences such an extremely powerful reaction.

There's also the controversy over the meaning of the film's ending; does old Rose die in her bed or is she simply dreaming? You can read it either way...Either Rose's life has come full circle, she passes away quietly and goes to 'heaven', represented by the presitine luxury of Titanic, where her friends and loved ones await. Or, as I'd prefer to think, she falls asleep and interacts with Jack and co, as they exist "only in our memories". I prefer the latter interpretation but it's spiritual stuff, either way.

Then there's those that resist watching the film at all, either because of the film's overwhelming popularity or because it's perceived as a girly love story. I sort of get the resistance to a movie ingrained in the culture (I've never seen Grease or The Sound of Music...but I will do, one day!). But this is a James Cameron movie...he of perfect action direction, compelling storytelling and cutting edge VFX. The love story is secondary in the story too. It's more about a bloke trying to save another person from a joyless, suicidal life.

So c'mon...there's no excuse! Watch this movie. If you don't like it, then you can always turn it off. But I know you won't...