Beyond Skyline - Too far 'beyond' for my liking

I remember watching the original 'Skyline' movie some time after its release.  It was fair to say that the 'new take' on an alien invasion movie had had its fair share of negative reviews, but I quite enjoyed it.  It had more than a few nice touches and scenes which were memorable and I've watched it a few times since when I'm in the mood for something to relax my brain to.  In the first one, many objected to the last few scenes at the end, not to mention how the characters survive a nuclear bomb being detonated right on top of their heads and still survive without the use of a fridge to hide in.  But, despite these flaws, I thought I'd give the sequel a go.  Now, after watching it, I have to say that I could probably have done without bothering. 

It starts out okay enough - a cast of pretty much unknown actors are underground in the Los Angeles subway system when a giant alien spaceship arrives overhead and sucks up the population with a mesmerising bright light, ready to use our juicy human brains as batteries to drive their army of drone-soldiers.  Therefore, our plucky band of stereotypes don't end up getting their vital organs removed along with the rest of us.  Until the do.  Without wanting to spoil the film too much, it's a bit all over the place in terms of settings and pacing.  As I say, we start in a stricken LA, then we have the space ship, then - bizarrely - end up in the jungles of somewhere that looks like that set from the end of the original 'Mortal Kombat' film.

And, throughout these wide and varied locations, the film really does struggle with what it wants to say.  The aliens were near impossible to kill in the first film (even going as far as to 'reform' when smashed apart).  Now they can be killed with knifes - which is a far cry from a species that is basically immune to nukes (and they even get badly injured when hit over the head with a wooden, breakable crate - in a scene which reminds me of that old 'Simpsons' episode where Moe the bartender thwarts an alien invasion using a plank of wood with a nail in it).

It's also pretty long - certainly longer than most B-movies and it feels like they were just either trying to cram in as much as they could, or just didn't know which bit worked best, so they went for it all.  During this time you see glimpses of other sc-fi tropes like 'Pacific Rim' and the 'starchild' from the original 'V' TV series.

Basically, if - like me - you did actually enjoy the original, then the sequel doesn't really feel like it expands the first, choosing to re-write all the 'rules' that were established first time round.  Yes, the special effects were actually quite good in a blatant B-movie (not including the guy in the alien suit who looked every bit like a man in a reasonably-priced Halloween costume).  Whereas the original was pretty bleak, you get a lot more of a feeling that the humans could win at any time.  Believe it or not, I'm all for that - if the humans win that means there won't be a THIRD in the 'Skyline' series.  At least there was quite a humorous 'outtakes' section during the credits - possibly one of the main highlights!

5/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back

Limitless – Fun little sci-fi romp

‘Limitless’ isn’t what I’d describe as an ‘amazing film.’ And yet for it lacks in originality and anything majorly stand-out, it makes up for in being just simply very watchable.  And I guess that’s down to its leading made – the ever highly-watchable – Bradley Cooper.  Once again, he plays a man who’s just slightly better looking than the average guy and yet you still find him relatable and can see his traits in your own mates.

Here, instead of voicing a manic space-racoon or losing his memory in Vegas, he’s an out-of-luck writer who can’t even write as much as I already have in this review.  Then, one day his luck changes when he bumps into an old acquaintance who offers him a pill.  Perhaps most of us would decline, but Bradley’s so low that he’ll take anything to potentially perk himself up.  He was probably expecting – at best – a while trip and a night of infinite energy dancing away at a local nightclub.  What he got was an activation of areas of his brain that humans haven’t even touched on consciously operating yet.

Therefore, he writes his novel in hours, makes a killing predicting the stock markets, seduces a couple of women who hate him and generally exploit this new ability for all it’s worth (wouldn’t we all?).  Sadly for Bradley, there are people who don’t appreciate this ‘new man’ and want to either stop him, ruin him, steal his stash of pills, or plain old murder him and leave him in a ditch.  Luckily for him, he is probably now the smartest guy alive – a trait that will come in handy when juggling so many balls at once.

Like I say, it’s nothing special, but it is fun.  The premise is definitely science fiction, but you don’t need to be a fan of the genre to enjoy this, as I think it has broader appeal.  Of course the film doesn’t get hurt by also having – acting legend – Robert DeNiro on the cast list, playing a shady Senator who also takes an interest in this young author’s sudden rise to greatness.

‘Limitless’ has been around a while now and you’ll probably come across it on one online streaming platform sooner or later.  If you do, I recommend you give it a go as it’s certainly an enjoyable ride.  One slight criticism of mine was the ending.  It’s okay, but I felt that the build up deserved something better (or at least a little less sudden).  Still worth a watch though.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

The Fly - Once Upon a time... remakes worked

Nowadays you can’t throw a half-brick into the air without hitting some old film (and when I say ‘old’ I mean basically ‘made before 2005’ these days!) that’s been remade for a modern audience.  Then we’re treated to a sad retelling of a familiar story with a few updated special effects and the addition to an iphone for every character.  However, back in the eighties, when ‘old’ films back then were made in the fifties and sixties, certain areas of special effects and story-telling had improved enough to justify making it again.  1986’s ‘The Fly’ is one such example of this.

It was originally a horror movie made in 1958, telling the now infamous tale of an eccentric scientist who created a machine to teleport people, only for his experiment to fall foul when an average house fly gets into the device at the same time as a human, thus merging the two life-forms together.  It was pretty creepy at the time, but by the eighties, ‘monster make-up’ and effects had reached a point where the ‘merged’ creature could really be done well and with gross consequences.

‘The Fly’ became one of those rare films which went on to become more famous (and well-received) than the original.  Not only does it stand up today and still get lumped in with some of the greatest horror films of all time, but few people even know it’s actually a remake.  It’s an example of a time where everything just came together perfectly and probably couldn’t be recreated even if they tried (and they did a few years later with ‘The Fly II’ which, although perfectly watchable, is usually forgotten alongside the 1958 version).

The cast is small, but perfect.  It’s basically only two people (maybe three if you count John Getz’s character ‘Stathis Borans’).  Jeff Goldblum plays the scientist (Seth Brundle) and (his then wife at the time) Geena Davis plays the journalist who investigates his brilliant new mode of transport, Veronica Quaife.  Naturally, the two form more than a professional working relationship and, as the experiment progresses, things start to go a little off-track (with delightfully hideous consequences!).

Secondly, it’s directed by horror mastermind, David Cronenberg.  Around the eighties he really was at the top of his game and gets the perfect performances out of his cast and then mixes it with a slow built-up of dread which finally reaches ‘boiling point’ during the final conclusion.

If you like horror, you will definitely like this.  It’s not an action-packed ‘slasher’ of a film.  You know where it’s going from pretty much the start, but it’s the inevitability of the journey and the knowing of what’s going to come and how it’s almost impossible to prevent that provides the real horror of it all.  I also briefly mentioned John Getz.  His character is worth mentioning as, for a supporting actor, he’s actually quite memorable (despite playing a particularly slimy kind of guy, he also goes on a bit of a journey as a character).
9/10 almost as perfect as The Godfather

Nightbreed - There's a good film in there (somewhere)

Have you ever watched a film that you love… and yet, deep down, you know that it's very flawed?  Well, that sums up 'Nightbreed' for me.  I found out about it after playing the computer game tie-in on the Amiga and fell in love with its concept straight away.  A troubled young (Aaron Boone) man is seeing a psychiatrist because he's haunted by visions of a strange place filled with monsters and he feels he belongs there.  However, before he can finish his treatment, he's framed for murder.  What he doesn't know is that the man treating him has other motivations than a mere 'doctor/patient' relationship - he's played by none other than David Cronenberg and he's the killer responsible for the grisly murders and he's going to set Boone up for his crimes.

So, rather than spend the rest of his life in prison, Boone goes on the run and finds himself in the place of his dreams - Midian.  This is where the monsters who have rejected the 'naturals' life and live underground beneath a deserted cemetery.  But, despite Midian being a refuge for monsters, Boone doesn't live happily ever after there as not only his girlfriend track him down, but also his insane doctor.

What I loved about 'Nightbreed' was this story - the way the monsters aren't actually the bad guys (despite they're pretty hideous make-up!).  They're just minding their own business, happy to not be part of the human 'natural' race.  Then along comes Boone who brings with him a while heap of trouble.  David Cronenberg is definitely the bad guy and is so creepy as the masked killer that I'm surprised that he's not done that much acting since.  As I already mentioned, the make-up and Midian's sets are fantastic.  The monsters are really some of the most creatively designed ever - special nod to 'Pelequin' who is by far the most memorable character.

So, it is definitely a visual treat to watch.  But that doesn't mean I'd recommend it to everyone.  Despite how much I enjoy it, I can see others not doing so, for it has many faults.  First of all is the lead actor.  Sorry to say that he's just not that charismatic.  The true stars are the monsters and David Cronenberg.  Plus the story is a bit all over the place.  It speeds up and slows down seemingly at random and has long periods of what might be described as 'filler.' It doesn't really know what it wants to be, or at least say.  It's definitely a horror, but never quite feels like it can commit to the genre.  Plus, as much as I like Clive Barker's writing ('Nightbreed' was based on his novel 'Cabal') I have to say that a lot of these problems seem to be down to his directing (perhaps he should have let David Cronenberg direct as well as star?).

I showed 'Nigfhtbreed' to someone recently and they loved it.  Or rather they loved the first half, then they started tuning out when the story kind of lost its way.  But, like I say, I loved it for its sheer concept rather than finished product.  There are various 'director's cuts' of the movie.  Some work better than others.  The longest really doing its best to flesh out the characters.  I hear it's in the pipeline to be remade for TV.  I have to say this is one remake I'm actually looking forward to, as the source material is definitely there for something special to be made out of it.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Office Space - The office worker's bible

As I type this, I'm actually sitting in an office being paid to… well, NOT write film reviews (clue: my job involves spreadsheets - yawn).  In fact, I've spent much of my adult life sitting in offices looking at spreadsheets while getting paid a bit, but actually trying to make my stay in my swivel chair a little more enjoyable than it actually is.  In short... I can totally identify with the characters in the low budget adult comedy 'Office Space.'

It predates Ricky Gervais' 'The Office' (or Steve Carrell's slightly later US version) and, although both TV shows expands on what it's like to sit in the same chair at the same boxed-in desk for most of your waking hours, 'Office Space' did it first.  And it also did it in a more 'succinct' kind of manner.  It didn't have multiple series to flesh out its characters, so, although we may get a few more stereotypes here, doesn't mean they're any the less able to be identified with.

It's about… you guessed it - an office worker - just an ordinary guy at an ordinary desk in an ordinary workplace (that could have been filmed around my very person right now).  The difference is, that, after years of towing the line and doing what he's told - no matter how unfair - he decides he's had enough.  And, by doing so, becomes the hero of everyone in a similar position (i.e. me).  He does what so many of us only dream of doing - he rebels and tells his bosses to… I'll let you use your imagination.

'Office Space' is great.  It's a comedy for adults which plays on many of their very existences.  I haven't watched it for a while, but now I have I'm pleased to say that it holds us as well today as it ever did.  As long as there are middle management bosses who get their employees to do more work for the same money this film will always be relevant.  And, from the twenty or so years I've been sitting here doing just that, I can't see this film EVER not being an accurate portrayal of modern life.

Oh, and if you need any additional motivation to watch this - it also has Jennifer Anniston as an equally put-upon waitress, who shows that you don't have to sit behind a desk to be exploited and degraded.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have 'TPS reports' to get on with.

9/10 almost as perfect as The Godfather

Day of the Dead: Bloodline (2018) - Seriously?

I was into zombie movies BEFORE zombie movies became cool again (some time in the early 2000s I believe when 'Resident Evil' appeared on the big screen.  Therefore George Romero's 1985 film 'Day of the Dead' (or rather sequel to two classics - 'Night of the Living Dead' and 'Dawn of the Dead') was a real favourite of mine.

In fact (and don't hate me for this!) even though 'Day' wasn't quite as well-received as its two predecessors, I actually liked it the most.  I loved its darkness, sheer terrifying claustrophobic nature, cast, gore - in fact, everything about it.  Now, skip forward a couple of decades where I'm allowed to browse the internet and I find out that - for some reason - the actual TITLE of the film, i.e. 'Day of the Dead' was never copyrighted (or something).  This meant that, if I so wished, could make my own version of the film (maybe with some sort of addition-tagline just to cover myself) and not get sued.  This went some way to explain 2005's 'Day of the Dead: Contagium' (don't watch it - trust me!).  And possible 2008's remake of 'Day of the Dead' which confused many into thinking it was a sequel to the (quite excellent) 2005 remake of 'Dawn of the Dead.'

I don't know why I watched 'Bloodline.' Maybe it's because 'The Walking Dead' is currently between seasons, or because 'Bloodlines' is on Netflix.  Either way… I wish I hadn't.  Although, like any good car crash, I couldn't turn it off. 

'Day of the Dead: Bloodlines' has some of the worst acting I've ever seen.  It also has some of the most obvious sets I've ever seen.  The gore is okay, but too over-the-top for a film that's not supposed to be a 'comedy-horror' and the characters are more one-dimensional than your average daytime soap opera.  So why did I continue to watch it?  Possibly because I couldn't believe that someone was not just content with ripping off the 'Day of the Dead' title, but they've basically remade the original film... only much worse.

Most of the original characters have been 'updated' (any by 'updated' I mean turned completely one-dimensional by second-rate actors), although a few names have been changed and/or applied to different characters.  They've taken the setting, the characters, recreated the location (albeit badly in a set, rather than a real underground missile silo) and palmed it off as some sort of update.  And - surprise, surprise - it doesn't work.  They've even turned 'Bub' (aka the slightly more intelligent zombie from the 1985 version) into a slimy stalker, although, in the actor's defence, he's probably the best actor in this remake.

If you like zombie movies - great.  Just watch a different one, as you're bound to have a few in your collection.  Just because this is 'free' on Netflix, doesn't mean you should waste your time on it.  It really is that bad. 'The Walking Dead' will be back soon enough.  Even if you think the TV show is getting stale, it's still head and shoulders over this garbage.

2/10 Scuzzier than the leftover goo from a Queen alien's egg sack

Submarine - Better the first time around

Being so far away from my school years that I remember Betamax video players and a world without Instagram, I'm not that into teen love stories, but I was more than happy to give 'Submarine' a try, based on the fact that it was directed by the (awesome!) Richard Ayoade (best known for the 'IT Crowd').  And I really enjoyed it.  In fact, I bought the DVD, but have only just got round to watching it a second time again.  Oddly enough... I wondered what I saw in it the first time round.

It's set in the eighties (some may call this a 'period piece' but it basically sums up the world my childhood was set in) where a teenage boy struggles with growing up.  Or rather he struggles with his own inner demons surrounding what plagues many boys of that age... girls.  He's fallen in love with a girl in his school and he basically has to come to a way of winning her over, while dealing with his parents possibly having marital difficulties.

So the plot is hardly original and, don't get me wrong… it's not bad.  The direction is very good - I believe the term is 'meta' where the characters sometimes talk directly to the camera in scenes where the protagonist theorises on what may or may not be happening.  And, although there are plenty of good lines here and there which will make you smile.  Plus, if you're like me (i.e. of a certain age) you will enjoy seeing the world before smartphones.  However, what didn't seem to gel with me this time was the two leads.

I found them both a bit unlikeable.  They seemed so wrapped up in themselves that I found I didn't really care whether they got together and lived happily ever after or not.  Maybe I've just got even older and I'm finding even less in common with the younger generation (even if the younger generation in question are the ones I grew up with!).  Overall, I - sort of - enjoyed it the second time around.  Like I say, it's very well directed and Richard Ayoade definitely has a future ahead of him if he ever tired of fixing computers, plus I did laugh here and there, but I probably won't watch it a third time.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Push - Ahead of its time?

These days you can't throw a half-brick in the air without it landing on someone who can fly, or was bitten by a radioactive spider (and that's assuming that the 'half-brick' in question doesn't GIVE the person it lands on the power to fly or climb walls!).  However, back in 2009, superhero movies (or those generally showing young, good-looking people with superpowers) weren't quite always guaranteed to make as much money as today's average Marvel Cinematic Universe film.  Therefore, 'Push' sort of flew below radar at the time.  I'd like to say that it's achieved a 'cult following' over time and it's a bit more of a 'sleeper hit,' however, it seems to have been completely forgotten.  And, in my opinion, that's a shame - I really enjoyed it!

I guess to sum it up simply, it's a bit like the 'X-men.' There may not be a 'recognised' team of superheroes dedicated to saving the world here, but you do have a sub-group of human who are 'cursed' with special powers and so destined to either be hunted by shady Government agents before being studied in Top Secret laboratories , or simply working for the afore-mentioned shady Government agencies.

Chris Evans is one such 'person of power' - yes, THE Chris Evans who glossed over the 'Fantastic Four' to become one of the headliners of the Marvel universe, Captain America.  However, rather than wielding a red, white and blue shield (or being able to burst into flames at will!) here he's a 'mover.' This is one of the many types of 'ability' these 'special' people exhibit and, in his case, basically means someone with telekinetic powers.  He's currently on the run from the authorities in Hong Kong, but his life of hiding comes to a premature end when a young 'watcher' (someone who can see the future and played by Dakota Fanning) tracks him down in order to help her rescue more of their kind.

What follows is effectively a 'chase movie' where the 'gifted' youngsters are pursued by their evil equivalents.  And, like I say, if you like superhero-type movies, it's all good sci-fi fun.  The characters are likeable enough and there's good chemistry between the leads.  Plus there's plenty of action and a few fight-scenes using special powers which are quite inventive and do stick in your mind once the credits have rolled.

If I had to mention a negative side (besides the kind of uninspiring title!) I'd say that the world which we find ourselves watching does need a lot of explaining so that you know all the rules of how it all works.  Nowadays, we know what to expect in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but, back then, there was quite a lot of 'exposition' supplied in lengthy voice-overs of segments of dialogue.  I'm not sure whether 'Push' was based on a comic, or book, but it felt like you'd certainly pick it up quicker if you'd read a great deal of backstory surrounding what's going on.  And, it's because of this lack of knowledge as to what powers people possess, that our heroes seem to bounce from one scene after the next meeting a new person with the exact superpower required to either get them out of their current predicament, or move the story along.

However, I can forgive that and simply enjoy it for what it is - a harmless piece of superhero fun.  Even if it never got the recognition that I felt it at least deserved, it's still fun.  And, if you can find it on any of the popular modern streaming services, I'd recommend you watch it - even if it's just to see what Chris Evans did before life in the MCU. 

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Tropic Thunder - Keep calm, it's a satire

'Tropic Thunder' is a 'star-studded' comedy which worked as much as it didn't.  It seemed to split the audience down the middle, dividing those who found it funny with those who found it offensive.  We have the - highly-bankable - trio of Ben Stiller, Robert Downey Jr and Jack Black, playing a group of overly-paid actors who are in the process of filming a Vietnam war movie deep in the jungle.  It's a weird kind of action-comedy hybrid which doesn't just poke fun at a few Hollywood conventions, but actually tries to tackle some deeper Hollywood issues at the same time.  Personally, I found it a great film, but it was those 'deeper' issues of race and mental health that seemed to rub a few people up the wrong way.

Before I get on to that part of the film, I will say that the cast is great.  They all basically play exaggerated versions of themselves (or at least stereotypical A-list Hollywood actors) and seem happy to be the butt of many jokes aimed at them/the industry.  They all seem to be having fun and play off each other really well.  There are plenty of other stars who pop up - such as (a slightly underused) Steve Coogan and a (totally unrecognisable) Tom Cruise.

The movie of the movie is already undergoing production problems when their director tries to mix things up a bit by shooting the film 'gorilla-style' and drops the principal cast off in the middle of a jungle in order to get the shots.  A noble idea, but one which ends up falling short when the actors end up being stalked by real enemy soldiers.  This kind of set-up means that, for a comedy, there's actually a fair amount of action scenes (well, it is a war movie after all!).  In fact, some of the action is action better than what you might see in a typical action-orientated film these days (i.e. a lot of real stunts rather than overused CGI - although there is a bit of CGI thrown in here as well).

You'll probably get more out of the comedy portion of this film if you're well into 'Hollywood industry culture' and can see what they're trying to say about it all.  I know that much of the controversy surrounding this film comes from Robert Downey Jr 'blacking up' in order to play a solder of African descent, but I really believe that this was done in order to show (as another African-American character even says in the film) that this shows how even when there is a part in a movie that would suit a black man, it still goes to a white man!  Then there's the issues with 'mental health.' Ben Stiller's character apparently played another character in a previous film within this film with learning difficulties.  I suppose this aspect is slightly harder to defend and I can see how some people may have taken offense.  However, hopefully this won't detract from the film's overall message about how shallow and pretentious Hollywood is.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Gremlins - Still hard to beat

There have been many 'monster movies' made, but few can still seem to top 1984's 'Gremlins' in terms of… well, everything.  If it wasn't for the fact that there's no such thing as a 'perfect' movie, I would be tempted to describe it so.  I know it's never going to be remembered as a deep and meaningful literary great, but, for a monster movie, you really can't ask for much more.

Perhaps the mistake that many monster movies make is using the first half of the film to create a human cast of between 5-10, simply to use them as 'monster-fodder' for the second act where the beasties need to prove how terrible they are by slaughtering all those you - sort of - got to know previously. 'Gremlins' doesn't have - that - many main cast members, just our protagonist, Billy, and sometimes his immediate family and friends.  If there is a 'supporting' cast member, it's the cute lovable (and totally anamatronic!) 'Mogwai' known as 'Gizmo' (that's what gremlins are before they become horrid, green and vicious - in case you didn't know!).

It's a nice, simply story - a father buys an unusual pet (Mogwai) for his son while travelling to the Far East.  However, what he doesn't know is that this pet comes with more rules than just putting newspaper down in the dirt box at night.  If you expose them to bright light - they die.  If you get them wet - they multiple.  And, most importantly, if you feed them after midnight, you'll find you're dealing with a plague of tiny monsters (don't question how the whole 'time thing' works when spread over International Time Zones - that's generally over-thinking things!).  Anyway, guess what happens to Billy's new pet?

The real stars are - of course - the gremlins (and Gizmo, obviously).  Despite all of them being blatant puppets, they're still somehow very believable as characters.  You'll love the cute and cuddly Gizmo and generally feel that the gremlins are a real nasty bunch who take delight in causing havoc and even death.  A special mention should go to whoever made the puppets and did the special effects in general.

I remember when 'Gremlins' first came out (in the UK) - there was a controversy because it was rated 'PG,' meaning kids could go unaccompanied to watch it.  Apparently, the film was deemed 'too scary' for children and the rating was swiftly upped to a '15.' Although I never had any nightmares involving having water poured over me and then splitting off into a team of evil dopplegangers, I can see that the film is a bit 'dark' in places and probably not suitable for (all!) children.  Perhaps that's where 'Gremlins' fault lies - that it's too dark for kids in general, but also probably a little too light-hearted to be taken seriously as a straight horror by adults.

Either way, I think it's an awesome 'horror-comedy' film.  So, if you're into dark humour with horrible little critters who you really don't want as pets, you really should check this out (if you already haven't!).  It was the film that stated a whole wave of copycat films involving little, nasty puppet monsters throughout the eighties.

9/10 almost as perfect as The Godfather

Hard Target - Possible the 'slowest' film ever made (sort of)

I didn’t notice this back in the nineties, but Jean Claude Van Damme’s action B-movie ‘Hard Target’ is possibly the ‘slowest’ film ever made.  It’s an action epic, filled with kicking, punching, gunplay and motorcycle chases.  So… how can it possible be ‘slow?’ Actually, it’s not – it’s pretty fast-moving.  However, everything from ‘pertinent punches’ to Mr JCVD flicking his awesome mullet haircut back over his shoulder is filmed in slow motion, for added… emphasis, I guess.  It’s directed by (veteran action director) John Woo who can turn out excellent high-octane movies time after time.  It’s just he must have been going through his ‘slow-mo’ period here, as, even by his standards, there is a lot on display – seriously, once you look for it you’ll never see anything else!

Anyway, my minor sneery gripe aside, ‘Hard Target’ is actually pretty good fun – if you’re in the mood for a film like this.  The ‘Muscles from Brussels’ plays a drifter in one of America’s southern states who inadvertently gets caught up in a plot where rich businessmen pay Lance Henriksen to hunt and kill such people (who don’t have enough family to be missed by anyone).  Talking of Mr Henriksen, he’s actually quite fun to watch as the evil baddie here.  Sure, he overacts here and there, but he does make a loud, entertaining opposite to Jean Claude’s calm, sombre hero.  Plus, if you like your action ‘R-rated’ then there’s probably more gore and violence than you’d get in one of today’s action offerings and the motorbike chase I already mentioned is very enjoyable on a ‘carnage level.’

There’s not an awful lot more to say about this film – it’s a simple premise which doesn’t take much explaining and, if you’re in the mood for something where you can simply put your brain on hold and enjoy mindless, over-the-top action, then this will certainly entertain you for an hour and a half.  Sure, it’s got plenty of negative points if you’re looking to be really picky.  Ignoring the overused slow motion, there’s also a totally generic love interest for JCVD, no real character development and the typical waves of generic henchmen who are easily despatched by out hero, but, if you like your action B-movies, do you really care?

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that