A Life Less Ordinary - Not an ordinary rom-com

A Life Less Ordinary was the next film in the highly-bankable combination of (director) Danny Boyle and (actor) Ewan McGregor. After the success of Shallow Grave and Trainspotting, it was thought that they could do no wrong. Sadly, A Life Less Ordinary was not half so well received.

Critics accused it of simply missing the point and lacking direction. And, yes, I can see their point. However, that's not to say that it's all bad. It's about two angels, charged with the task of getting the most unlikely couple (spoilt rich girl Cameron Diaz and penniless writer and toilet cleaner, Ewan McGregor) to fall in love. What follows is a road movie involving kidnapping, quirky angels and robbery.

Perhaps the problem is that it was marketed as a romantic comedy. Yes, it has both elements (mainly romance), but not much comedy. What replaces the traditional laughs is more a surreal atmosphere more akin to a Monty Python film in places.

Personally, I liked it. Or rather most of it. There's not many people who seems to like all of it. I will admit that there were certain sub-plots that could have been left out.

It's not that funny, but its uniqueness does give it some kudos. Plus Diaz and McGregor make a cute couple, so, if you're a fan of either of them, this should tick enough boxes for you.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Clay Pigeons – I still don’t know what this is

I’ve now seen ‘Clay Pigeons’ three times and yet I’m still not totally sure how best to describe it, or know what exactly I’ve even watched!  However, at least I must like it... whatever it is.

It’s a story which doesn’t really fit easily into any particular genre.  It’s not really thrilling enough to be a thriller.  It doesn’t have any element of a ‘who-dun-it’ as every death is pretty much self explanatory and there’s certainly no action in it.  Perhaps the best category – if this IS even a category – is ‘serial killer’ film... as there are plenty of bodies piling up here and there.

It’s about a man – Clay, played by Joaquin Phoenix – who just seems to attract death and destruction all around him.  He can’t seem to go a day in his small American town without someone he knows getting killed – normally horribly.  And this trend is set to get worse when he meets Lester, played by (a slim) Vince Vaughn, who also seems to just want to kill pretty much everyone in his way.  

What follows isn’t your average story.  There are no ‘damsels in distress’ who conveniently need to be rescued in the final act.  And, talking of final acts, there isn’t the traditional stand-off between hero and villain in some dramatic place, like the top of a high-rise building.  Perhaps that’s why the film has such an odd feel to it.  It doesn’t really conform to any sort of blueprint.  You just follow the lives of these – murderous – characters and see where it takes you.  

If you like the sound of that, you should get something out of this film.  It has the feel of a film-maker’s early work where he’s still allowed enough freedom not to conform to every Hollywood convention.  However, a word of caution, if you’re looking for ‘relatable’ characters then you probably won’t find any here.  All of them, even Clay, are hardly the sort of people you’d want to hang around with.  But then that’s why you probably won’t mind seeing them bumped off one by one.

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

Return of the Living Dead 3 - Good little zombie flick (rotten sequel)

If you’re looking for an excellent, fun little zombie film, filled with laughs, gore and general gross-outs... then watch ‘Return of the Living Dead.’ That’s ‘Part I’ that is. ‘Part II’ was basically ‘zombies for kids’ (even if it did try to follow on directly from the original and keep the humour/gore style intact.  However, ‘Part III’ doesn’t really feel like part of the saga at all.  Yes, it continues to chart what happens to barrels of the chemical ‘245 Trioxin’ (the stuff that creates zombies, if you’re interested!), but, apart from that, it’s a whole new film.

You can understand those who enjoyed the first one (and the second didn’t have too many fans to begin with) being disappointed with the third entry.  It’s really a sequel in name only.  But, believe it or not, not a bad film.

Yes, it doesn’t have a budget and no, it doesn’t really have any actors who are that famous, but it did have an original little concept (for its time).  Back in 1993 the idea of zombies having an ‘inner conscious’ was actually something new.  Since zombies came back into fashion, we’ve had all sorts of takes on that idea, but in the early nineties, when a girl dies before her time in a (easily prevented!) motorcycle accident, then her boyfriend uses his dad’s access to the military base and its stores of Trioxin to bring her back.  Naturally, things don’t go to plan.  Yes, his beloved Julie returns to him, but also with a desire to eat anyone not going out with her.

Don’t expect a masterpiece.  It’s one of those films that, if you like the genre and can find it for free (it must be on Netflix or the like by now!), then you’ll probably enjoy it.  The two primary characters are likable (if a little stupid at times) for you to care enough about and there’s some decent (non CGI) gore to keep the ‘claret-lovers’ happy.

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

Kill For Me - A slow-burning, yet very enjoyable thriller

In `Kill For Me' there isn't anything too new, that hasn't been seen before. Yet, it's presented well enough and done just right for that not to matter.

Talking about the film would be giving too much away about the plot. It basically revolves around two women with - very - troubling men in their lives. Take a guess as to how they decide to deal with them?

One of the film's strengths is its length - it's quite short. That isn't a negative, it actually helps - everything is neatly tied up leaving no loose ends within the film and therefore hopefully not letting the audience feel cheated. All the characters are believable and acted well in their respective roles - the men are suitably horrible and the women... well, you'll just have to see what they're like!

If you like a good murder story with plenty of fiendish plotting, give this one a go - it probably won't be remembered as a classic in twenty years time, but fans of the genre should enjoy it anyway.

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

Below - Surprisingly enjoyable B-movie romp 

The crew of an American World War II submarine, pick up three survivors of a sunken British navel vessel. As soon as they do, strange - and by `strange' I mean ghostly - things start to happen.

With a plot like that `Below' could well simply fall into that seemingly bottomless abyss of horror films that are pretty forgettable - it has no major stars in it and would probably never get a mainstream release in the cinema. However, the fact that the submarine looks extremely authentic and the external shots of the vessel at sea are also very realistic, means that the film makes itself look more like a straight war film with a decent budget.

The cast all do a good job with the script and the claustrophobic setting of the submarine adds to the tension. Soon, things become pretty tense as the crew's bodies start to pile up.

If you like horror/ghost stories, this one is a slight cut above the masses of others on DVD.

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

All Good Things - Dark and disturbing, but excellent performances nonetheless

All Good Things is a film that's `based on a true story.' However, I've lost count of the amount of times I've seen those words, only to find that the movie was so loosely based on reality that it might as well have been Star Wars. Yet, with All Good Things, it really is based on a real murder/missing persons case in America from the eighties.

We see Ryan Gosling and Kristen Dunst meeting and falling in love. Everything seems idyllic until Gosling starts acting more and more strangely. Then his erratic behaviour starts to get physical and even violent. The strength of the movie as a story lies in its focus on a web of characters and their relationships to one another, rather than on the crimes themselves. We never see the actual violence, but only its effects on characters, and their subsequent efforts to conceal the truth, to escape from their situation, or to satisfy some personal need.

We're given plenty of visual ammunition with which to base our own conclusions on who may or may not be guilty of which crimes, mainly through alluding to deviant mental conditions or sexual preferences. None of these offer any real evidence, only circumstantial. However, despite leaving the viewer in the role of judge as to whether Gosling's character is guilty or innocent, the film is worth watching for the two leads' performances. They do well to get into some very difficult characters and the film is definitely worth a look.

So, not a great movie, but an engrossing entertainment if you are in the mood for a dark story that leaves you wondering how closely real events in fact matched up to this clever reconstruction.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Team America: World Police - You don't have to love South Park to like this (but it helps)

`Team America: World Police' comes from the creators of the (somewhat irreverent) TV show South Park. Therefore, if you don't know, expect strong language, adult humour and plenty of poking fun at celebrities. Just like South Park, Team America can easily be dismissed as silly, vulgar and pandering to the lowest common denominator. However, just like South Park, nothing can be further from the truth.

South Park's genius is that it sees the adult world through the eyes of innocent children. Team America uses - pretty obvious - puppets to show us the dilemmas faced with international terrorism. It's interesting to note that those with `far right' political leanings claim that the film is too `liberal and left wing.' However, those with left-wing leanings claim that it's too right wing. The answer is that it's both. It doesn't really promote one side over the other. It deliberately shows how both arguments are right and they're both also wrong.

Team America is about just that - a (not particularly secret) branch of the American military who save the world from those who want to bomb us helpless innocent civilian. However, by repeatedly saving the day, they also annoy everyone by blowing up everywhere they go while they kill the bad guys. Here we have the dilemma: should the ends justify the means?

To find out, you really have to watch it and make your own mind up. Yes, it is vulgar, stupid and crude, but it's also funny, intelligent and thought-provoking. It is a rare breed, juggling everything from vomit-jokes to political satire. But, seeing as it came from those who do that sort of thing every week with South Park, you would expect nothing less.

You do need a decent sense of humour to watch this. It's not one for the easily offended. Or Matt Damon.

10/10 The Monty Python Knights of Camelot are currently looking for this