Wes Craven Did Take My Soul

Like fellow horror film maker John Carpenter, Wes Craven is now in his fifth decade of making movies. And while both of them prove to be capable storytellers when it comes to directing a slick Hollywood thriller, Craven has now evolved into a screen writer of shockingly poor ability.

His latest supernatural horror, My Soul To Take, is utter shit. There's no getting round the fact this is one of the worst scripts I've seen in recent years...and you're talking to someone who's seen a million cheap exploitation films in his years AND has a high resistance to liking naff entertainment. But My Soul To Take is way too much to take. If there's one thing I cannot abide in a movie it's boredom. It's THE worst thing any piece of art can be. And thanks to Craven's script this is the one horror film this year that'll make you want to slash your wrists while watching ab acre of paint dry, while cutting your jacobs off with a rusty blade. It's that dull.

The movie is 30 minutes too long, the serial killer is rubbish (in both visual design and concept), the cast are average but unremarkable, and the story slow and confusing. The main concept about a small town killer's soul being reborn in seven new born children, on the day he died, is extremely convoluted resulting in the audience have absolutely no idea who or what is happening through the bulk of the film (and this is from a person who gets Inception). There are endless scenes of brain numbing dialogue along with long, drawn out scenes of characters engaged in teen banter (that's supposed to come across as witty in a Kevin Smith / Tarantino kind of way, but isn't). Many many time my internal monologue yelled at the screen for the stupid people to stop their jaws from flapping and prayed (I'm not even religious) for the cast to get brutally butchered.

In the end you get a film that's a cross between Craven's biggest hit A Nightmare On Elm Street and Scream...and ends up being a timid shadow of both. As bad as John Carpenter movies got on occasion, they were never this bad. A career low for Wes.

January Pick N Mix

Above: If Disney made Jurassic Park...
Below: Mel Gibson has a new agent...



Here's a collection of movie spit takes...



An instructional video foe dealing with Zombies at Christmas...



Here's an Alternative Star Wars Christmas Special...



And an alternative ending to Tron...



Finally, if you've seen Mr Plinkett's review of Revenge Of The Sith, here's a link to his website RAPE THE FALCON!

Another Bughunt

James Cameron's Aliens, the 1986 sequel to Ridley Scott's classic Alien, is very special to me as it was my first 18 certificate film I saw in a movie theatre. I was only 15 year old at the time an terrified I'd get caught by the box office clerk or one of the eagle eyed usher, but I was desperate to see it. I'd seen the original on VHS which I'd taped from late night network television and being a hardcore science fiction fan and lover of all things outer space, I'd lapped up every minute. Then when I'd heard of a sequel, which just also happened to have dozens of the unstoppable xenomorphs and a bunch of military dudes with guns aplenty, I just had to risk sneaking in to see it. Sitting three rows from the front so the landmark experience could fill my entire vision, Aliens was the first movie to make me shit my pants in a cinema. Well nearly. When the encased facehugger smashed against the inside of the jar, myself (and my fellow audience members, jumped 10 feet out of our chairs. It was also the first cinema experience where a normally reserved British audience shook off their inhibitions to whoop and cheer as heroine Ripley demanded, "Stay away from her you bitch!" This truly is what cinema was invented for.

After that I got my confidence together and started seeing many more 18 certificate films, encouraging my friends to come along too, which included Cronenbergs The Fly, Lethal Weapon, RoboCop and Predator. While all of these films were classics and amongst the greatest films I'd ever seen, I was always disappointed that few of them gave me the same rush of adrenaline and exhilaration that Aliens gave me (only Die Hard managed that exceptional feat.)

Watching it again, and after several years as well, is like watching it anew and with a fresh perspective. But Aliens still affects me the same way. It's still James Cameron's best film, and that's saying something for a man with two Terminator movies, Titanic, Avatar, True Lies and The Abyss under his belt. All the character's are identifiable and three dimensional with Bill Paxton's Private Hudson being one of the single greatest screen characters ever committed to celluloid, with some of the best dialogue ever too, "Stop your grinning and drop your linen!" The designs and locations are welcome echoes of Scott's classic, but wonderfully re sculpted to adapt to Cameron's distinctive vision. Like the original, the visual universe of Aliens is a balance of the awe inspiring and the gritty and realistic.

Storywise, I used to prefer the original theatrical cut of Aliens, feeling the Hadley's Hope sequences diluted Ripley's story. But I soon realised this is little Newt's story too, and the story of the two women coming together to vanquish their fears and form a new family unit (along with the cool Michael Biehn's Corporal Hicks) was the emotional core of the plot. The longer version reinforces this.
And let's not forget Cameron's handling of action sequences of which I still think this is his strongest work. The initial combat sequence where the troops are ambushed and subsequently rescued by Ripley, is one of the most exciting sequences ever filmed. By itself that would be impressive enough, but the movie is packed with such action, from the facehugger sequence to the massive scale face off as Ripley escapes with Newt from the Queen Alien's lair. By the end you're left breathless and left wanting more...which Cameron duly delivers with the stunning Power Loader vs Queen Alien fight. At this point it's clear that Aliens isn't meant to terrify as Alien did, but to pummel your brain cells in oblivion with turbo charged action and character fireworks. He succeeds.

Still a classic that's just as effective now as it was 25 years ago, Aliens can proudly stay in my top ten films of all time.

The Resurrection Of J.C....The Carpenter

There's two ways to review The Ward. The first is as a horror movie. The second way is as a John Carpenter movie. Set in an American 1966 mental ward, Kristine, played commandingly by Amber Heard, is committed after burning down a farmhouse and losing her memory. And as a film in it's own right The Ward is an effective, well told yarn with several good jump-scares. If there's anything that lets the whole enterprise down it's that the story is built on a twist, that although a fantastic idea, is completely unoriginal, especially if you've seen this and this.

But since this is Carpenter's first movie in 10 years (he has done a couple of solid Master Of Horror TV episodes a few years ago) it's more interesting to see whether he's regained any of the class from his early years (70's & 80's) or remained in mundane hell (90's & 2000's). The result, I'm happy to say, is mostly positive.
The Ward is cinematic, being very effective at telling it's story visually rather than bombarding it's audience with rambling dialogue. Now that cinematographer Gary Kibbe, a regular Carpenter collaborator since 1987, has been given the push it's great to see his replacement has deliver the best looking Carpenter movie in 20 years, being classy, slick and professional looking wirg great depth and subtle colouring. There's a classic Carpenter female lead in the shape of the lovely Amber Heard, following in the footsteps of Jamie Lee Curtis, Karen Allen and Laurie Zimmer, playing a no nonsense anti-authoritarian character fighting the system (another JC trademark).

It's not all perfect. Carpenter has a tendency to edit his movie faster than his pre-nineties films, robbing The Ward partly of his distinctive visual signature. That distinct style is also lacking in the score, provided by Mark Kilian, which is less primal and minimalistic than one would hope for. And Carpenter's picked up a few bad habits over the last 15 years, such as cheesy screen fades between scenes, which seem distracting and amateurish.

While not in the same league as his early classics, this is at least better than In The Mouth Of Madness, Memoirs Of An Invisible Man and Village Of The Damned....and that's to be celebrated. Carpenter working below form is still more enjoyable than many modern horror directors on form, so this is a major victory for horror fans. Let's just hope he decides to direct a few more before he retires for good.

The Forty Five Quid Zombie Movie

Yep, you read that headline right. Colin was filmed in the UK for £45. And to give it it's dues, it's a lot better than movies that cost a lot, lot more (Dinocroc, I'm talking about you!) For a film with such small resources there are inevitable technical issues such as poor sound, unsophisticated natural lighting and a group of inexperienced extras (probably a load of mates called in for a big favor), but Colin rises above them. There's an experimental tone to the editing, there's great use of music and the bleached out photography lends to the apocalyptic nature of a zombie outbreak.

It's basically a zombie's eye view of a disintegrating Britain as the dead raising plague takes hold of an urban city. As zombie Colin roams the streets he intersects various stories of people trying to survive, along with his sister who refuses to destroy her flesh eating bother. It can be quite touching at times, there's a streak of black humour and a general competency that raises this above the level of a cheap, knockoff student home movie. It's not all perfects as the story is just as meandering as our hapless hero and sometimes the editor needs a firm kick to move the audience on from a particular shot or scene (it can drag on sometimes).

But based on the talents of director Marc price and his forty five quid investment, he should be getting paid on his next flick.

Poltergoost 3 - The Other Side Of The Mirror

The first Poltergeist is a work of genius because, despite what it says on the credits, it's pretty much directed by Steven Spielberg. For the 1986 sequel the Spielberg connection has gone and replaced by a daft Native American myth for the continued haunting of little Carol Ann Freeling, but it at least was well made and kept the continuity in terms of cast, composer and the warming Spielbergian glow.

By 1988's Poltergeist III, the only constant remaining was poor Heather O'Rourke reprising her role as the tormented pre-teen. And for the most part it's a sorry affair. Replacing Carol Ann's parents are Tom Skerritt and Nancy Allen as her aunt and uncle...both strong actors, to be sure, but the pathetic script id too much for them to combat. The diminutive Zelda Rubinstein makes an unsubtle return but she's quickly sacrificed in noble Obi Wan fashion. The setting makes for a pleasant change, a modern skyscraper, all gleaming glass, concrete and florescent lighting, but it comes off as cold and distancing rather than the homely qualities of the last two movies.

The film feel like a disaster movie...a haunted version of Towering Inferno. We're introduced to a whole bunch of disposable characters, including a group of annoying teens (including the very cute Lara Flynn Boyle), who get to be terrorised in the final hour. There's the impossibly dumb psychologist who believes the ghosts are all a hypnotic suggestion, the shoddy animatronic, smoke and lighting effects which look cheap (as the director wanted all the effects done 'in-camera') and a story that hardly gels as it's main character, in this case Nancy Allen's Aunt Pat, is completely ignored until the final five minutes!

The only thing that works is the conceit with the mirrors; the ghosts in the spirit world exist only in the reflections. Similar to the Kiefer Sutherland 2008 movie Mirrors, the reflection that should not exist are downright creepy, and it's made all the more effective knowing it was all achieved without the use of visual or digital effects. Very clever indeed (unlike the rest of the film).

Far more watchable than I'd remembered it, Poltergeist III is still the runt of the franchise. I said runt.

Lost For Words For The Kings Speech

On the day I write this review, The King's Speech has received 14 BAFTA award nominations including best film. It's up against some stiff competition including Inception, 127 Hours and True Grit but the true story of King George VI is worthy of the prestigious company. It's the little known tale of Prince Albert who suffered from a debilitating stutter, not only affecting his official duties but his personal interactions too (keeping his children's bedtime stories necessarily short). As Albert, who later succeeds his brother to be King of Britain and the Empire, struggles with a solution for his woes, he meet Lionel Logue, an unorthodox Australian Speech therapist.

It's a wonderfully absorbing film that works on several levels. It's a coming of age tale as Albert, or Bertie as his close family call him, not only learns to live with his disability, but to embrace the responsibilities of a King. It's also a 'bromance'...a story of friendship between two men from different classes, upbringing and countries who gradually become equals as the film progresses and it's a fascinating document of history from an unusual perspective. Both the scandal of Edward and Mrs Simpson, plus the rise of Hitler and the start of World War II form the framework for the narrative, with everything culminating in the King's speech of the title where Bertie must address the Nation ,via radio, regarding the declaration of War.

Colin Firth is suburb as the beleaguered Prince/King and is worthy of all the accolades currently coming his way. However, good as he is the role is utter Oscar-bait being about a person dealing with a disability (see Daniel Day Lewis in My Left Foot, Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man or Tom Hanks as Forrest Gump). Still it's an emotionally complex role which is handled superbly by Firth. However I think more should be made of the excellent contribution of Geoffery Rush as Logue, a man that is as common as you or I, yet has to make the King do ridiculous things in order to manage his condition and convince him to treat him as an equal...all done with charm, humour, dignity and a quiet, understated assertiveness. Oh, and Helena Bonham Carter is great too as The Queen Mother...in her youth, obviously.

Technically the film is flawless. The photography is surprisingly beautiful, the production design rich and textured and Tom Hooper is a very fine director. He's great at framing shots to communicate the standing of the two men, both in the eyes of society and each other. Hooper often places the characters on opposite sides of the screen to show Bertie and Logue's differing opinions and the placing of objects in the composition, like the radio microphone for example (which takes on an antagonists status) is placed to the fore of the frame.

A great story that deftly balances the larger world narrative of Kings and War with the smaller story about friendship. Jolly good, wot wot!

Is It A Bird? A Plane? Nope, A Fat Comedian!

The Green Hornet, a remake of the 60's TV show, could have been adapted in a multitude of tones and styles. For example the Starsky & Hutch reboot went for a broad comedic tone, Tim Burton's Batman reboot went dark and fantastical while Charlies Angels turned into a glorified, feature length pop video. In the end, indie director Michael Gondry was the perfect choice to helm to reimagining of the franchise as he's essentially updated it with the bland of adventure and silliness intact.

The original, starring Van Williams and Bruce lee as masked crime fighting duo Green Hornet and Kato, was made in 1966 and lasted just one season. It shares a similar style to the Batman TV series made the same year along with the dramatic voice over, animated title sequence, stylised acting and exuberant theme tune. But despite these wacky comic book flourishes, Hornet took itself much more seriously than Batman, making it a crime thriller first, with humour taking a backseat.

The remake works because Gondry, along with writer and star Seth Rogan, keep the characters and the plot grounded. The comedy is often broad and absurd, the comic book elements all present and correct (along with the over-dramatic batman-esque music and animated end credits) but the characters seem real and believable. The big reinvention in the remake is the relationship between millionaire newspaper owner Britt Reid (Seth Rogan) and his assistant Kato (Jay Chou) in that the dynamic is now much like Hon Kong Phooey and Spot The Cat; Kato is the real hero and Britt Reid is the sidekick (although Reid would see it the opposite way around). It's this relationship which is the foundation of the movie, not only as a story through-line
but also the emotional and humour core of the film.

Seth Rogan plays Reid as a spoilt, arrogant, self obsessed overgrown kid, staying just the right side of likable even when he's being a complete twat. Jay Chou is a great find as Kato. While his command of English might be limited, he more than makes up for it in his use of martial arts and a genuine star charisma. Rogan and Chou's scenes together are the film's best. Cameron Diaz has more of a cameo role, but she's at leat very important to the dynamic of the crime fighting team. Inglourious Basterds Christoph Waltz raises many a laugh as a villain under going a midlife crisis and there's a brilliant James Franco cameo which opens the movie.

Director Michael Gondry's trademark style has been dramatically toned down from his previous work, but what remains is enough quirkiness to make Hornet funny and distinctive. There's plenmty of invention including a Benny Hill style snogfest around Reid's garage, Pink Panther style combat around the mantion house and some ultra-cool slow motion photography to illustrate 'Kato-vision'! It's a fun ride and it's really refreshing to watch a superhero/vigilante movie that isn't as intense and brooding as the likes of Batman. Of course I love Batman, but it's feels good to see an action comedy that actually works (sorry Cop Out).

The Amazing 2012 Movie Preview !!!

Even before the year has begun I'm in a position where I can predict what films will end up on my top 10 list for the year's end. I'm primarily drawn to quality studio blockbuster films that are shot anywhere from 1 to 3 years ahead of their release date, so I'm able to see at an early stage what's been filmed, by whom, and what it's all about. The first thing I look for is the director; if a great director stays true to form then chances are it will rank highly in that year. Secondly it's the story or the premise that holds the appeal; if a movie has a killer concept, done well, then it's got a good chance of impressing me. If you've got a great concept delivered by a first class director...and both are as good as they can be...then the movie is likely to blow my mind. For example, I could tell in January 2010 that Inception had the potential to be amazing from the presence of Christopher Nolan and the high concept plot.

So as I look forward into 2011 I once again anticipate the blockbusters that have the potential to impress me. And unfortunately, there isn't a great deal to truly look forward to. Only Zack Snyder's March release Suckerpunch, with it's mindbending 'Alice In Wonderland with machine guns' concept, has me excited and geeking out with anticipation. But little else. A new Harry Potter, a new Pirates of the Caribbean, a new Twilight and a new Transformers; these are not things I expect to be any more than solid summer entertainment. Of course there's Green Lantern, Thor and Captain America this summer, but their directors rarely produce exceptional work, so there's little reason they'll start doing so now. Perhaps Matthew Vaughn's X-Men: First Class has a shot if interfering studio Fox keeps it's grubby paws out of things...but that's asking a lot. So come 31st December 2011 it'll be smaller, less prominent movies that will be claiming the quality top spots for the year.

2012 though appears to be a different matter altogether.

Instead of the 1.5 movies I'm jazzed to see this year, 2012 has at least 10 big budget studio extravaganzas that I can't wait to see and a ton more that hold more potential than the remainder of this year combined. Years like this come along perhaps once a decade. 1989 was one where a new Indy, Star Trek, Batman, Ghostbusters, Lethal Weapon, James Bond and Back To The Future all hit along with new films from Ridley Scott and James Cameron (although most of them turned out to be disappointments). A better example is 2005 where movies from Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, Tim Burton, Peter Jackson, Christopher Nolan, Robert Rodriguez and Joss Whedon all hit home runs with classics.

So, to share my excitement, I'd thought I'd share these films with you.

1/ The Dark Knight Rises. I didn't think Christopher Nolan could top Batman Begins...but he did in 2008 with the intelligent, absorbing The Dark Knight. Even without Heath Ledger's presence as The Joker, the third and final part of Nolan's trilogy has the greatest potential to be number one of 2012. Out 20th July 2012.

2/ The Hobbit - Part 1. Peter Jackson returning to Middle Earth...what could be better than that? Although this story doesn't pack the weight of The Lord Of The Rings, I trust Jackson will have me wrapped around his little finger with this prequel tale of Hobbits, Dwarfs and Dragons. Out 14th December 2012.

3/ Superman - Man Of Steel. Take one script by superhero king David Goyer, produced by genius Christopher Nolan and directed by Watchmen/300 helmer Zack Snyder. There is no bad here. Out Christmas 2012.

4/ Star Trek 2 - If this sequel to the stunning 2008 reboot matches the quality and entertainment levels of the original, this will be right up there. Hopefully original director JJ Abrams will announce he's on board in the next couple of months for a return voyage. Out 29th June 2012.

5/ Prometheus. Ridley Scott returns to science fiction after 30 years with a film that has it's roots as an Alien prequel. There's the Fox interference factor to consider along with the fact that the last time Scott had a cool movie concept in development, he himself blanded it down into the tepid Robin Hood. But if Scott's doing space stuff again, he'll get me in a movie theatre, no problem. Out 9th March 2012.

6/ Bond 23. Daniel Craig is an exceptional James Bond. It's a shame that Quantum Of Solace was spoiled by a first time action director who misjudged the editing of the set pieces. The new Bond has Road To Perdition's Sam Mendes in charge...perhaps the classiest director given the reign of this franchise...EVER! Out November 2012.

7/ The Wolverine. I didn't think I'd get remotely excited about a sequel to 2008 uber-shitfest X-Men Origins: Wolverine, but the creative team of writer Christopher McQuarrie (The Usual Suspects) and director Darron Aronofsky (Black Swan) has huge potential to subvert the superhero genre. Hopefully Fox will keep their noses out. Out June 2012.

8/ Jack The Giant Killer. The concept isn't that enticing but this big budget fantasy from Warner Bros is directed from X-Men / Superman Returns legend Bryan Singer. When it comes to storytelling, the man's a master. Out 1st March 2012.

9/ The Avengers. Joss Whedon being back in the movie writer/directors chair for the first time since 2005's Serenity is reason alone to put this on a 'most anticipated' list. But this being Marvel Studio's mega-gamble superhero team up, it has a concept never before attempted in movies. Out 4th May 2012.

10/ John Carter Of Mars. Wall-E's Andrew Stanton might be an untried talent on a live action film but he sure knows how to tell a story visually. This Edgar Burroughs adaptation has the full weight of Pixar's creative team behind it, which has to be one of the surest bets in Hollywood ever. Out 8th June 2012.

The next bunch of movies are a slightly riskier proposition, but still hold a huge deal of must-see potential:-

11/ Spider-man. Although Sam Raimi is no longer involved, this reboot of the Spidey franchise has Marc Webb as director, who did a fantastic job with 500 Days Of Summer. With a cast that includes talent like Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Martin Sheen, Sally Field and Dennis Learey, this should be a winner. Out 4th July 2012.

12/ Battleship. The downside of this is that it's derived from the board game of the same name. Everything else looks rosie such as director Peter (The Kingdom) Berg's involvement, a huge scale alien invasion plot and a massive $200 million budget. Out 18th May 2012.

13/ Dredd. I thought Hollywood wouldn't dare adapt my favorite comic hero into a movie again after Stallone 1995 frack-up Judge Dredd, but here we are with a grittier, more faithful attempt with the brilliant Karl Urban as the chisel jawed lawman. Director Pete Travis is solid so anticipation for this is riding mainly on concept. Out Spring 2012.

14/ Gravity. Take an acclaimed director in Alfonso Curon, add a tense plot about a space station heading towards disaster, and mega movie stars with real acting ability like Sandra Bullock and George Clooney and you've got an intriguing high concept, science fiction thriller. Out Fall 2012.

15/ Dark Shadows. Yet another teaming of Johnny Depp and Tim Burton, this is a reinterpretation of the vampire centric 1970's soap opera. Although Alice In Wonderland misfired, you'd be mad to write off Burton & Depp after so many hits. Out Summer 2012.

16/ Total Recall. A remake of the classic 1990 Paul Verhoevan action classic, this version stars Colin Farrell and is directed by Underworld's Len Wiseman. Rumours are it's closer to the Philip K Dick novel and a little more Earthbound than it's Schwarznegger starring predecessor. Out Summer 2012.

17/ Abraham Lincoln - Vampire Hunter. Director Timur Bekmambetov's first English language feature since 2008 hit Wanted, this will hopefully be as crazy and inventive as the title sounds and as the Nightwatch director's talent promises. Out 22nd June 2012.

On top of these you've got a bunch of potential must-see blockbusters, if the creative teams can ready them in time for 2012 and if their studios will greenlight them in time.

18/ At The Mountains Of Madness. The upside of Guilermo Del Toro leaving the Hobbit is that he should get to direct his dream project, an adaptation of Lovecraft's classic. With a huge budget and James Cameron producing, this should be exceptional.

29/ The Man From Uncle. Yet another reteaming of Steven Soderburgh and George Clooney this would be a remake of the classic 60's spy series. If it has a fraction of the wit and style of the Ocean's series then it will be great.

20/ Moscow. With Star Trek and Unstoppable, Chris Pine has proven himself a strong leading man. With Moscow he's taking over the CIA analyst role of Jack Ryan from Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford and Ben Affleck.

21/ Ghostbusters III. Even though the first sequel was a shoddy, unimaginative affair it's still pretty enjoyable. Probably THE most anticipated sequel at the moment, it's all dependant on Bill Murray giving the script a thumbs up. It would see the old crew passing the baton over to a new team, thus setting up a new franchise.

22/ XXX 3 - The Return Of Xander Cage. Vin Diesel and director Rob Cohen return to the franchise that tried to give the world a more streetwise super spy. Both previous movies are far from perfect but they're solid action fare.

23/ One Thousand A.E. This one features rising megastar Jaden Smith in a science fiction epic from M Night Shyamalan. A few years ago that would be reason to get excited, but after the abysmal The Happening and the imperfect Airbender, who knows what this'll turn out like.

24/ World War Z. Monsters Ball and Quantum Of Solace's Marc Forster is behind this adaptation of the epic zombie tale told from different personal accounts, including Mr Brad Pitt.

25/ Die Hard 5. Bruce Willis says it's going to happen and there's a script doing the rounds called Die Hard 24/7, but whether this installment reaches cinemas by 2012, if at all, is any ones guess.

26/ Expendables 2. The sequel to last years action hit is racing forward apace with Statham confirming the desire for a 2012 release. Bruce Willis will most likely be the villain, Van Damme is on board for the sequel and there's a rumour Arnie may turn up for more action now he's out of political office.

As if that wasn't enough, here are a load of movies that WILL reach the screens in 2012 but will likely be relegated to second tier status in the quality stakes, although many are likely to go on to make tons of cash.

27/ Men In Black III. Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith return 10 years after the weak sequel to the 1997 sci-fi, comedy classic. Director Barry Sonnenfeld is returning too but he's not done anything of note since the 90's. Keep your fingers crossed kids. Out 25th May 2012.

28/ The Bourne Legacy. Director Tony Gilroy has a strong pedigree having written the last couple of Bourne movies and directed awards nominated flicks like Duplicity and Michael Clayton. But this sequel is a HUGE gamble as it doesn't feature Matt Damon as Bourne. Hmmmm. Out 3rd August 2012.

29/ GI Joe 2. The first movie should have been a glorious turd, but it turned out to be a big, colourful bundle of dumb fun. The sequel should out in summer 2012, this time without original director Stephen Sommers at the helm. Yey? Out Summer 2012.

30/ Ghost Rider 2 - Spirit Of Vengeance. Under normal circumstances I wouldn't be interested in a sequel to Nicholas Cage's original superhero clustercuss. But this is being directed by Crank's Nevildine and Taylor, a perfect fit for the wacky flaming-skull biker concept. Out 17th February 2012.

31/ Yellow Submarine. Yet another mocap movie from former genius Robert Zemekis. This remake will be jammed to the rafters with groovy Beatles tunes and employing less realistic characters than the creepy dead eyed CGI zombies seen in Beowulf and Polar Express should make this a step back in the right direction for the Back To The Future director. Out Fall 2012.

On top of that we've got sequels Wrath Of The Titans, Ice Age 4, Monsters Inc 2, Madagascar 3, Twilight 4: Breaking Dawn Part 1 and the return of Kate Beckinsale in Underworld 4. If you're partial to a bit of Buz Lurhman, then you've got his adaptation of The Great Gatsby starring Leonardo Di Caprio and Carey Mulligan to look forward to, plus a feature length version of Tim Burton's Frankenweenie, McG's big budget fantasy adventure Ouija, Keanu Reeves period actioner 47 Ronin, Disney's animated Native American epic Brave, TV remake 21 Jump Street with Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill, Chuck Russell's Arabian Knights with Anthony Hopkins, Luc Besson's orbital prison thriller Lockout with Guy Pearce, Unversal's animated Dr Seuss movie The Loraxand Ang Li's unfilmable film fantasy Life Of Pi.

When you start adding in the lower budget films like indie productions, potential Oscar winning dramas, small comedies and niche entertainment, the potential for 2012 is off the scale. Of course, just like 1989 Hollywood may just mess the whole thing up and deliver a bunch of half arse crap. But the chances are 2012 is gonna rock!

Discover Your Quantum Of Solace

The 22nd James Bond extravaganza, Quantum Of Solace, was a film that left me split down the middle. On the positive side it has a wonderful European thriller vibe courtesy of director Marc Forster who gives it a gritty, edgy look, some brilliant unconventional editing techniques and a refined, minimalist approach to the visual storytelling. On the other hand, the action is truly abominable. OK, not so much the action itself, but the way in which it's edited is so fast that it's impossible to understand what the hell's going on without multiple viewings or the help of a pause button. If there's one thing I want to enjoy in a Bond movie it's the massive stunts done with real cars, planes, bikes and boats. In Quantum's case I know there's something going on but I have absolutely no idea what it is.

It's so frustrating that every time I build up the enthusiasm to watch it again, I'm put off by the atrocious chase sequences that Quantum is front loaded with. Every time I try, I get 15 minutes in and inevitably get pissed off by the epilepsy inducing set-pieces.

Not always being such a smart chap, my friend and fellow blogger Count Geekula provided me with the answer. It was so obvious that I had to slap myself, Geekula was right. The only way to watch Quantum is to skip the action, to fast forward past the unwatchable Italian car chase, the roof top fights, the incomprehensible aerial dogfight and the disasterous finale....and just watch the dialogue stuff and the drama. Genius!

It works so much better at an hour and fifteen minutes! One can appreciate the lovely girlies (Olga Kurylenko and Gemma Arterton), the character development of Bond from the vengeance minded lover of Casino Royale to the dutiful, cold blooded killer that we all know and love and the experimental film making techniques that director Forster uses to flavor this adventure. The Opera sequence is stunning in its own right showing Bond infiltrate and escape the villains lair with an abstract flair that's almost extinct in studio blockbusters. Of course the central plot is extremely weak (stealing water in Bolivia , eh?) and Mathieu Amalric is perhaps the weakest Bond Villain in existence, but it gets by on Daniel Craig's sheer screen presence and dry, abrasive wit.

With Road To Perdition's Sam Mendes on board to direct the next installment I feel positive that the mistakes of Quantum won't be replicated. But it's still unfortunate that the only way to watch a Bond movie is with the help of a remote control device.

F Gets Marked An 'F' Grade

The film makers had ambitions for F, a low budget British horror film set in a modern comprehensive school. They wanted it to have the menace of a John Carpenter film and they wanted their antagonists, a group of faceless 'hoodies', to have the eerie, unstoppable supernatural quality of Michael Myers. But in most areas of script and execution , F fails miserably.

On the positive side the film looks suitably moody, the hoodies move through the school in a suitably unnerving way, has a great, high concept, siege drama premise and is cast well with David Schofield, Emma Cleasby and Juliet Aubery (with Roxanne McKee on hand as eye candy knife fodder). But the script is under-written (Schofield's teacher is central to the plot and often seems like a bystander in his own movie), very poorly paced (it's 75 minutes feels like 3 hours) and the set pieces are often unimaginative, especially if you've seen plenty of stalk and slash thrillers. The ending too is unsatisfactory, while clearly showing Schofield's commitment to his daughter (whom he mentally and physically abused at the film's beginning), it shows some ambiguity as to his state of mind towards his ex-wife.

overall a fail. Could do better.

Megamind Made By A Minimind

When Jeffery Katzenberg founded Dreamworks Animation he was keen to give the studio's films an identity separate from that of rival animation studios Disney and Pixar. Well, over the last decade he's certainly done that...except that identity is predictably one of shallow emotions, chocked full of contemporary pop/rock tunes, crap pop culture jokes, needless A-list celebrity voice-overs and a manic eagerness to please which can lead to overkill. With the exception of 2004's Shark Tale (which is unwatchable crap) most of Dreamworks output has been passable, unremarkable, disposable nonsense where kids can be dazzled by the bright colours and the adults won't be too uncomfortable over a 90 minute running time. Only Over The Hedge and 2010's stunning How To Train Your Dragon have raised the bar from the studio.

Sadly, Megamind is back to the run of the mill; it's fine, being funny (you certainly get your moneys worth with Will Ferrell), fast paced, visually stunning and fun. But, as expected it's engaging but not deep (as Pixar movies are), has an interesting superhero plot (but it's too convoluted to work well) and is jumping up and down, waving it's arms in the air so wildly it rarely calms down enough to make us care about the characters. Considering Dreamworks are planning even more sequels to their dispensable hits (Madagascar 3, Kung Fu Panda 2, Puss In Boots) I just hope they try a little harder next time.

I Used To Be A Wolfen But I'm All Right Nooooooooooow...

Based on the book by Whitley Strieber, 1981's Wolfen has a hotdog New York detective, the mumbling Albert Finney, investigate a series of vicious murders which appear to be animal attacks. Then he starts drawing parallels to ancient Native American Indian wolf legends. Prior to seeing this recently, all I knew about Wolfen was the poster....and I thought it was a cheap werewolf movie. Not so, as it's a big budget, stylish crime thriller with supernatural overtones.

While it's a classy piece of film-making (photography, score, locations and cast are all very impressive) what lets Wolfen down is it's ponderous pace and limp characters. The mystery of the killer animal's origin is weak and the characters bland, leaving you with an impressive shell but nothing substantial to enjoy underneath the surface. On a side note, it's interesting to hear composer James Horner's score for the first time. Horner, a musician who tended to rip off his own themes, here introduces music cues that he'll go on to re-use time and time again in Star Trek III, Aliens and Cocoon. The twat.

Jeffery Combs Goes Crazy Ape Bonkers With His Resonator And Sex

Stuart Gordon was one of the big name genre directors that was able to land a job on the recent anthology series Master Of Horror, although judging by his 1986 film From Beyond, I'm not sure the description 'master' is deserved. Scientist Jeffery Combs (on brilliant barking form) and his madder colleague Dr Pretorius (Ted Sorel) create a device called the resonator so they can peak into dimensions of reality beyond our own. Things get out of hand causing Pretorius to disappear and Combs to go loopier than usual. The lovely Barabara Crampton, playing a psychologist with cutting edge views, is called in to investigate. Then it gets weird.

I'll give Gordon something; no one makes movies like he does. Gory and grotesque, silly and campy, sexy and provocative, intelligent and thought provoking...From Beyond is all these. I'm not sure whether all these separate elements gel into a 'good' movie...but the performers are spirited and the story never, ever dull. And how come I was never away of Barbara Crampton until now?!? I feel like I have a gap in my teen years now...

Twisted Firestarter

Having never seen 1984's Firestarter until now, I always kind of assumed it would be a cheap, independently produced exploitation horror film. But as I started watching I realised this is a glossy, big budget studio adaptation of a Stephen King novel.
And, as such, I was pleasantly surprised at what I found.

It being a King story means it's a rambling story with an ensemble cast where the supernatural elements don't get exploited until the final reel. It's talky but never boring, more a thriller than a horror, and a generally solid story that would have been told more effectively in 45 minutes of an X-Files episode (and probably was come to think of it).

The casting is fantastic from cute ikle Drew Barrymore as the moppet that can start blazes with her mind, Martin Sheen as the shady government dude that wants to discover her secrets and the enigmatic George C Scott as a mysterious assassin for hire. Scott's character is the most intriguing aspect of the film as he seems to be a complex combination of conflicting morality. He's a quietly composed professional killer who completes his tasks with a ruthless efficiency and a cool emotional detachment. On the other hand he's a creepy old guy obsessed with the tiny Drew Barrymore and wanting to spend all his time with her and demanding she be handed over to him on the completion of the Government's experiments on her. Maybe he's a Catholic Priest but it's never referred to. Still, it makes interesting viewing.

More thriller than fear, Firestarter is a worthwhile supernatural thriller with the emphasis on the thriller aspect. Solid.

Mouth Agape At The Robot Rape

Yet another infamous science fiction / horror film I've not seen until now is 1977's Demon Seed. I say infamous as it's the one where Julie Christie gets raped by a robot. How lovely. But at least it's got a bit of brains and style behind it which stops it from being dragged down to pure sexploitation levels of depravity. Computer Boffin Fritz Weaver invents the worlds first super intelligent Artificial Intelligence, which in true to form fashion, gets thoughts of its own and decides to trap Weaver's ex-wife, the classy Ms Christie, in her own computer run homestead.

So far so good. The plot's set up economically, the production a high quality affair and there's lots of subtext set up about the differences between psychologically flawed people and super-rational computers. Then it all stars going a bit crazy. Slowly at first, as the A.I., Proteus IV, voiced by a menacing Robert Vaughn (surely they could have programmed something a little more cheery)restricts Christies movements and outlines it's cunning plan; to have a baby with her. Even by today's standards of nanobots and genetic science it's a bonkers concept, and the naive 70's setting makes the idea even more extreme.

Christie's motivations don't always seem logical (although, to be fair, she has been a little brainwashed), Proteus' physical forms are ill designed...either a wacky, animated tetrahedron-robot thing...or a wheelchair with a roving metal arm attached; either too advanced or too primitive to do the task at hand.

But it's an interesting story with strong ideas... What is it to be a living thing? Is it wrong for Proteus to want to procreate as all living things do, or survive in some part through it's offspring? There's also an intriguing religious undercurrent as Christie is immaculately impregnated by a superior being, and she'll spawn a child that will dominate society...Proteus being an almost sci-fi anti-Christ. Disappointingly it ends abruptly just as it's getting interesting (just as the similarly themed Colossus: The Forbin Project does). If ever a Dean R Koontz story needed a follow up it's this one. Just less robo-rape please.

RoboPlop Number Twos

First some context. Paul Verhoevan's 1987 RoboCop is a classic. Not only is it a great action film, a brilliant cop thriller about corporate and political mis-deads but it's also a darkly funny science fiction satire in the way that the Judge Dredd movie SHOULD have been. In other words, 'close to perfection'.

RoboCop 2 on the other hand is a hastily produced sequel that, while entertaining, is riddled with problems. Chief of these is the massively over the top, silly script from Dark Knight Returns legend Frank Miller which gives us a pantomime Major, a pre-teen psychopath drugdealer, violent robot slapstick and a tone that's definitely more 'comic book'. It's also wildly inconsistent in tone ranging from broadly comical set pieces to ultra-violent gunfights to tender drama. Character-wise, RoboCop's story arc is dispensed with in the first 20 minutes and from then on we just get daft stuff being chucked at us for another hour and a half.

Irvin (The Empire Strikes Back) Kershner's direction is solid but unremarkable, Peter Weller is great (given the thankless material he's got to work with), Dan O'Herlihy gets to chew the scenery and Tom Noonan gets to play a less creepy version of the nutter he played in Last Action Hero. It's nice to see the film look glossier than it's predecessor but that comes at a price with it's bright, day-glow, non-threatening sheen.

The uneven nature of RoboCop 2 is at the very heart of it's troubles. On one side you have the amazing sop motion effects of Phil Tippett, seen mostly during the large scale finale. At the other end of the spectrum you have Leonard Rosenman's abysmally mis-judged score with it's 1940's orchestrations and choral section chanting 'RoboCop!' With more thought put into the scripting, and more time for Irvin Kershner to bring the elements tonally together (he replaced original director Tim Hunter just before shooting began) then the Robo sequel might have worked in a manner akin to Lethal Weapon 2. Alas, what you get instead is a hodgepodge of the good, the bad and the outright ugly.

127 Hours Of Suspense (In 1 Hour, 27 Minutes Of Joy)

Even though British auteur director Danny Boyle goes from drama to drama, you always know you're going to get a hell of a lot more for your money than just that. Take his Oscar winning Slumdog Millionaire. What would have been a straightforward tale of a young man winning Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, we got a rollercoaster of plots, characters, imagery, along with every dramatic variation under the sun. It was so good, and since Boyle had taken 12 years to direct another solid gold nugget, I really didn't think his follow up 127 Hours would be anywhere near as good.

Thankfully Boyle's on a roll because 127 Hours is phenomenal. It's a very simple tale, based on a true story, of a lone hiker/climber, Aaron Ralston, who got his arm trapped underneath a boulder while climbing in a Utah desert canyon. What makes this survival tale so important is that Ralston had to hack off his own arm in order to escape to civilization. Nice. The genius of Danny Boyle is that he's able to take what is virtually a one man drama (Kate Mara and Amber Tamblyn keep Ralson company for 10 minutes at the movies beginning before buggering off) and a depressing subject matter and bring it to life with boundless imagination and vibrant energy.

There's never a dull moment. Rather than simply document Ralson's predicament, Boyle seeks to get inside his mind. That frees the director to explore more arty, more abstract forms of storytelling from split-screen, documentary-style camera POVs, surreal dream sequences, flashbacks and every other film technique he can think of. As with Slumdog it's exhilarating as you never quite know what's coming next, whether it's being funny, post-modern, silly, moving, haunting, rock and roll, inspirational or harrowing. Most surprisingly of all it's uplifting and powerful in it's simplicity. It's a film that celebrates life and people and dreams and courage, and that's a hell of an intoxicating shot in the arm.

James Franco is strong in the lead role, carrying most of the movie himself (although unlike the recent Buried he gets to interact in dreams and flashbacks). The eclectic soundtrack does a lot of work in driving the story's emotional momentum; as expected with Boyle movies each track perfectly slots into exceptionally edited sequences heightening Ralson's perception of his situation, both good and bad.

But this is Boyles movie through and through. Like other auteur directors this year (Nolan, The Coens, Aronofsky, etc) no one on the planet makes films like Mr Boyle, and his level of consistency holds it shouldn't be too long before we get yet another masterpiece from him.

It Turns Out The Coens Do Have True Grit

I wish I could say it was different, but I've rarely 'got' the films of The Coen Brothers...at least what I've seen of their body of work so far. Only three stand out for me; the wacky, off-beat Raising Arizona, the darkly humorous Fargo and their 2007 contemporary western No Country For Old Men, being their best films so far. But established classics like The Big Lebowski and O Brother Where Art Thou?...forget it. What was all the fuss about? That's not to say I've written those movies off... Not at all, as I intend to revisit them...but at the moment, they didn't connect with my sensibilities.

That cannot be said of their adaptation of True Grit, reportedly skewing closer to Charles Portis' novel than the famous 1969 John Wayne movie of the same name. By far the most engrossing Coen Brother movie I've seen yet, stuffed with brilliant performances.
Stepping into the role which won John Wayne his only Oscar is Jeff Bridges who redefines the term 'grizzly'. Drunk, unkept, cynical and unsocial, his Rooster Cogburn is a larger than life character who eats up the screen whenever he's around...but never falls into caricature territory. Matt Damon and Josh Brolin are equally memorable; as Texas Ranger LeBoeuf, Damon channels an unearned arrogance into his buffoon of a lawman while Brolin plays down his macho side as the killer Cogburn is tracking, making murderer Tom Chaney dim-witted but mean.

Despite the talent, the movie belongs to newcomer Hailee Steinfeld as 14 year old Mattie Ross. Her older-than-her-years, grieving teenager is the glue that holds the story together and her confidence and maturity, combined with an inevitable naivety, is what makes this such a great tale. This is the western myth from a woman's perspective, as experienced by a child and recalled by a woman. It shows the journey of a girl into womanhood, and the consequences of pursuing her vengeful quest to its inevitable conclusion.

Apart from the female perspective, it's the tone The Coen's give the film that makes it unique. It has an almost poetic, lyrical quality that is partly due to the period authentic dialogue the characters wittily banter with and the haunting score derived from the traditional hymn 'Leaning On The Everlasting Arms'. It's also quite funny... the Coen's clearly enthused by the snarky exchanges of wit that are allegedly present in Portis' book.

I've not seen the John Wayne version in 30 years or more and can barely remember a thing about it, but if you haven't discovered this story yet, I'd recommend this new interpretation as a great place to start. If it's got me loving the Coen brothers work and excited about seeing Westerns again, so it's got to be pretty good.

The Go Go Boys & The Lost City Of Bordom

It's an increasingly common practice these days for an ultra-successful movie franchise like The Matrix or Pirates of the Caribbean to shoot their sequels back-to-back as a cost saving exercise. That way you get to keep your valued cast and crew for two features and you only have to pay them one salary! But back in 1985 it wasn't the done thing. So we have the Go Go Boys (er, that's Cannon Films' Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus) to thank for the two Indiana Jones exploitation movies based on H. Rider Haggard's classic literary character Allan Quartermain. The first, King Solomon's Mines, is my favorite guilty pleasure movie. Despite it being tacky, childish and devoid of subtlety...it's also funny, swashbuckling and packed to the max with ludicrous invention.

The sequel, Allan Quatermain and the Lost City Of Gold, shot the same year with returning stars Richard Chamberlain and a young Sharon Stone, is nowhere in the same ball park as it's predecessor. The glorious Zimbabwe locations make a welcome return, as does the stunning Jerry Goldsmith score (heavily chopped and remixed by replacement composer Michael Linn), but it's not enough to save a movie with lead in it's veins. Gary (The Back Hole) Nelson's direction is flat and static, the screenplay punchy in places... but generally lacking much spark...and the budget severely restricted (even though there's some impressive large scale sets on show).

Henry (Kane) Silva looks twatish in poodle metal perm, as does poor Cassandra (Elvira) Peterson, both as the baddies of the plot. At least James Earl Jones puts in some effort...the poor guy... but it's all too slow and pondering. The fun has gone. When there should be a fight or a chase or an escape, all we get are shots of our heroes endlessly canoeing downstream, and that's not the rip-off adventure flick I signed up for.

Never Too Old To Have Your Body Snatched

It's weird why some important or major movies have passed me by. I've still yet to see Grease or The Sound Of Music, but I intend to check them out when I can muster the enthusiasm. Far more surprising is why I've left it until now to see the 1978 remake of Invasion Of The Body Snatchers. I'm not sure why but I'm very glad to have discovered it now.

The remake is directed with an experimental art-house vibe by Philip Kaufman who enriches the story of the classic 1956 original (love original stars Kevin McCarthy cameo). The suspense in this version isn't from whether there are aliens or not (that's answered in the opening frames) but from how fast our heroes will wise up to the fact they're being replaced by extra-terrestrials in their sleep, before trying to stop it, or escape from it. There's a great slow build to the film which gives the audience hope that the threat will be quashed quickly... but that gradually gives way to the snowball effect of the replaced population becoming the dominant intelligent species in San Fransisco.

The Commie threat of the original is subverted into a commentary about the brainwashing effects of our own capitalist society, whether that's from consumerism (as referenced by Leonard Nimoy's book sales) to mistrust of government itself (the alien seed pods are distributed from The Department Of Health). Although it came several years before John Carpenter's classic The Thing, this almost feels like a logical sequel to that film (aliens duplicating people to take over the Earth).

Great effects, excellent cast, a disturbing tone and a fantastic, dystopian ending, this is one film I regret not having seen earlier.

Shatner At 37,000 Feet

I had very vague memories of watching evening television as a small child and seeing a William Shatner movie which was set on a commercial airliner in which ooze secreted from the fuselage. It was such a vague memory that I thought I'd dreamed it up. But come the advent of internet search databases, I found the title of the mystery film; the produced for TV "The Horror At 37,000 Feet". An architect (Roy Thinnes) and his wife are transporting an ancient alterstone from England to the USA via a barely booked passenger jet. On route, all sorts of weird supernatural happenings confuse the passengers and crew, holding the plane in midair and resists all attempts by the airplane to break free or land.

First the bad news. TV in 1973 wasn't that subtle; it's what the word corny was invented for. So we have pilot Chuck Connors as the man charged with getting his troubled 747 back on the ground, hysterical Buddy Ebson as a riled up passenger and one William Shatner on classic form as a drunk ex-priest. There's lots of bad dialogue, awkward 70's camera moves and a static and theatrical direction that betrays when the film was made.

However, it's still got a great concept that's really compelling. It's essentially a haunted house ghost story set on a plane. The trick the film still manages to pull of is to put you in the middle of the action. What's going on? What would you do to get out of it? And by keeping the menace largely unseen it adds a thick layer of tension over events that snakes on the plane couldn't muster by themselves.

It can't be that forgettable as it's clearly the inspiration for many of the gags in Airplane! The young girl traveling alone, the female passenger with a guitar, and the pompous doctor are all present and correct. And wasn't Chuck Connors the aircraft captain in Airplane II?

Martians Stole Tobe Hooper's Brain!!!

After the massive success of Poltergeist, and the continued infamy of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, director Tobe Hooper was able to secure work directing big budget fantasy fare. There was a 'but'. Hooper was quite clearly not the creative voice on Poltergeist...Steven Spielberg was. And while Hooper might have secured work on big summer blockbusters, the company hiring him was Cannon Films, the place in the 80's where big bucks, over ambition and lack of talent collided.

After the unintentionally hilarious, science-fiction/horror flick Lifeforce (a film so bad I used to pronounce it the worst film ever, until Uwe Boll came along), Hooper reteam with Cannon films and Alien writer Dan O'Bannon for a remake of 19653's Invaders From Mars. Like Invaders Of The Body snatchers, the original fed off of the Commie paranoia that was rampant at the time, substituting Martians for Ruskies.

As usual with Cannon and Hooper movies it's wildly inconsistent. The tone shifts from serious horror, to action adventure to OTT silly and back again throughout its running time. The production shifts from impressive effects (by Oscar winners Stan Winston and John Dysktra) to cheap 70's sets of blinking flashing lights in tack wood-replica offices. The score shifts from Christopher Young's classical heights to David Storr's monotone electronic drone. It's both a glossy summer blockbuster AND a shoddy, ill-judged exploitation film rolled into one confusing whole.

The cast are a mixed bunch too. Child star Hunter Carson looks like he was the prototype for Danny Madigan in Last Action Hero, all enthusiastic and irritating, Bud Cort is chopping on the scenery as an Army General while the wonderful Louise Fletcher provides a delicious baddy as an evil possessed school teacher. Louise Black gets the female lead, paired with Carson's school kid....these days there would have to be two kids, like in the Witch Mountain remake, to allow for a little romance. If there's anything to admire about the whole thing it's how it exploits a child's growing mistrust of authority (school and parents) as they mature and begin to strike their own path.

An interesting attempt at riding on the wave of fantasy based family movies in the wake of Lucas and Spielberg in the late 80's. Alas no one here knew what the hell they were doing.

Gate Hate

The great thing about the beginning of the year is I have no compulsion to try and catch up with a load of recently released movies with the intention of including them on my 'best of the year list'. That leaves me free to catch up with some long-time classics, guilty pleasure treats or recommended movies that I've been dubious about watching for one reason or another. However, in this case I'd thought I'd catch up on a bucket load of exploitation films that I've either not seen for decades or have never seen in my life, despite their infamous reputations.

With a remake due later in 2011, I'd thought I'd revisit The Gate. The results?:-
1/ I barely recognised star Stephen Dorff, here a 14 year old boy playing much younger. Considering he grew up to be the bad ass villain of Blade, he's a bit wooden here.

2/ It's small scale (confined to the modern detached estate house), cheap (badly lit with a crappy synth score) and slower than a deceased tri-athlete (bugger all happens for 40 minutes).

3/ The tone is all over the shop. Since the movie's set up concentrates on the antics of two bored children and a fairly responsible 15 year old girl, the assumption is you're watching a kids movie. Later we get heavy gore and zombies wothy of a adult nasty. Unlike this years The Hole, with is essentially a vastly superior remake to this clustercuss, it can't decide a consistent tone to pitch at it's audience.

4/ When the gate, a dirty great mud hole at the bottom of the garden, decides to open it livens up sporadically. The effects are surprisingly good being a mixture of unrestrained gore and ingenious animatronic/stop motion animation demons. If The Gate has a silver lining, it's right here.

The First Great Train Connery

There's a lot of great stuff going on in The First Great Train Robbery. First off, it's a caper movie, along the lines of Ocean's Eleven, with the unual twist of it being set in 1855 England. It's the brain-child of writer/director Michael Crichton, the man behind Jurassic Park, Westworld, Twister and E.R. who, as with all of his novels and movies, is preoccupied with the issues that technological progress has on humanity, whether it's cloning, robotics, time travel, nanites or Victorian railway security.

You've got a playful Sean Connery, a silly Donald Sutherland and a ultra-sexy Leslie Anne-Down as the con men attempting the impossible 'job' with British luvies Michael Elphick and Wayne Sleep giving them a hand. Oh, and another vintage Jerry Goldsmith score from one of the best years of his career (Star Trek and Alien were composed in 1979 as well).

This is huge, huge fun and the period setting allows you to admire the craft of 'grand theft' in an era before electronic safe-cracking became the norm. Just a word of warning however; If you feel the need to watch this on the Universal Channel (the one that shows NCIS, Monk and Psych)...then don't. Chances are they won't transmit the climactic robbery itself, making Universal the biggest thieves of your time that you'll encounter all year.

Bale KO's The Wahlberg

If ever there was a movie pitch aimed at making me not see a movie it was this, 'True life boxing drama starring Mark Wahlberg'. I've seen all the Rocky movies (and Raging Bull) and it's pretty much established that Wahlberg is useless unless he's part of an ensemble. Then it was announced that the film, imaginatively titled The Fighter, would be directed by David O. Russell and co-star Christian Bale, both deeply committed, firebrand talents that could surely lift the generic material to at least 'watchable' standards.

And so they did. The drama isn't so much focused on Wahlberg's boxer Mickey, who dream at a shot at the world welterweight title, but on the personal conflict he was born into in his Boston suburban hometown. On one side is his older, half-brother Dickie (Bale), a former high-achieving boxer who threw his talent away on drugs, his mother Alice and the 'gang' of five sisters that protect the family interests. At the beginning of the movie it's under Dickie and Alice's wing we find Mickey. On the other side we have Mickey's father, the local cop who runs the gym Mickey O'Keefe (playing himself in this true story!) and Amy Adam's barmaid Charlene who starts dating The Wahlberg.

Directed with the same raw style and quirky editing that Russell brought to Three Kings, the film follows Mickey as he learns to stand up and communicate his wants and needs to those in his life. Wahlberg is Wahlberg and is in no danger in receiving any acting recognition (although, to be fair, his is the most introverted character in the whole film). Bale impresses as Dickie, making his cocky drug addict likable enough for us to sympathise with. Melissa Leo completely transforms herself in an Oscar baiting performance as Alice. It's her character that's the greatest source of antagonism in the story and she raises to the challenge of etching a fully rounded character. It's also good to see Amy Adams try something outside of her comfort zone (no Disney princesses or uptight Nuns here).

A strong, well acted and directed movie, but not a great one, that will hopefully see at least one acting win come Oscar night. But it's not a revelatory drama or ground-breaking reinterpretation of the sports genre either.

Watching The Inferno (With Shit Tinted Specs)

There used to be one thing that came to mind after watching Irwin Allen's production of The Towering Inferno, which was "Goddamn! Isn't that the best disaster movie ever!?!" Which, at the time, it was. It plays the disaster movie playbook step by step setting up the victims (er, characters), locations, geography and root cause in the first 45 minutes. Then all hell breaks loose, slowly at first giving the audience hope that the hero can stop it in it's tracks before it gets out of hand. But despite our desire to see the good guys win, we secretly want everything to go to shit. Tension. Spectacle and big name stars plummeting to their death. Mint.

What also works to Towering Inferno's advantage is the fact that it's protagonists are proactive, not just reactive. Megastars Paul Newman and Steve McQueen (you see modern Hollywood, THAT's what you call star power) are constantly trying to out-think and out-maneuver the expanding fireball. That gives you hope which creates tension.

These days there's another thing that comes immediately to mind while watching Towering Inferno and it's the reason the film hasn't been aired on prime time in a decade. 9/11. There's no doubt when Steve McQueen's fire chief arrives and grumbles that it's impossible to effectively fight a fire over 7 stories high, you swell up with admiration for firemen the world over. And that's when you make the connection to those men that actually had to climb dozens of floors to fight a real, impossible blaze. When Susan Flannery takes a dive out of her office window to avoid the fire that's when your memory flashes to news report images of business men plummeting over 100 floors.

There's no doubt it's a brilliant, brilliant thriller with Oscar winning effects and a John Williams score that still holds up well today, but it's not the guilt free entertainment ride it once was.