Jingle All the Way – C’mon, there’s worse out there

Arnold Schwarzenegger made the comedy movie ‘Twins.’ Everybody loved it.  The he made ‘Kindergarten Cop.’ Everyone loved that, too.  Then he made the comedies ‘Junior’ and ‘Jingle All the Way.’ I guess the joke must have worn a bit thin as both were labelled as some of the worst films ever made.  Now, I watched ‘Junior’ when it was released and admittedly the reviews were correct when they said it was a ‘one-joke’ movie.  And, possibly because of this, I never got round to watching ‘Jingle All the Way’ until I found it on an online streaming service nearly twenty years after it had been released.  And, as it was Christmas and I’d already watched ‘National Lampoon’s Xmas Vacation’ I thought I’d give it a go.  I guess because I’d heard so much negativity surrounding it I feared the worst, therefore I was actually pleasantly surprised.

Now, don’t get me wrong, ‘Jingle All the Way’ is no classic.  If you’re a fan of ‘Predator’ and ‘Terminator’ then you need to know that this isn’t the ‘action’ Arnie on display here.  This is definitely the ‘comedy Arnie’ who is doing his best to make fun of himself and the various clichés that have sprung up around his batch of movies and action films in general.  He plays a harassed father of Darth Vader (well, that kid who played Anakin in the Star Wars prequels) who’s always putting work over family.  However, on Christmas Eve, he vows to get his son the one ‘hot toy’ of the year – a ‘Turbo Man’ action figure.  And, as we parents who are annually forced to purchase that one mythical item for our children, we know you should never leave it till only a few hours before the big day to buy one.

What follows is possibly every parent’s (Christmas-related) nightmare where Arnie is driving round New York, visiting one toy shop after the next, desperate not to be shown up in his son’s eyes by coming back empty-handed.  I’d love to say that it’s as funny as ‘Twins’ or ‘Kindergarten Cop,’ but it’s not.  However, that doesn’t make it the worst film ever.  The humour is pretty low brow and slapstick, but, if you’re in the mood for something very silly (and it probably helps that you’re a fan of Arnie) then this should keep you entertained over the festive period.  Not all the jokes land and it’s a bit corny in places and there are some gags that definitely feel dated, however that’s due to bombs in New York not being a particularly funny subject of comedy in this ‘Post 9/11 era,’ but it does take a satirical swipe on consumerism and the shameless ‘supply and demand’ toy manufacturers employ when it comes to mass merchandising their products.

It's also great to see James Bellushi reuniting with Schwarzenegger for an appearance as a ‘bad’ Santa.  Ultimately, ‘Jingle All the Way’ was probably never worth paying full price for in the cinemas, so I can imagine audiences feeling short-changed with what they got.  However, it’s much more at home as being a film that’s included in an online streaming service that you can put on in the background/  It’s probably a film that children would enjoy more, due to the ‘obvious’ slapstick humour.  Kids probably won’t get the consumerism references, but at least adult will be able to get something out of it, too.  It’s probably worth saying that – as a fan of Arnie – the best I can say about this is that it’s ‘okay if you’re in the mood.

6/10 Should probably keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights

Back to the Future – As good as it ever was

There are some films that are just timeless and everyone should watch (especially in today’s climate of remakes, reboots and reimaginings).  Basically, see it before it gets horribly remade with overblown computer effects and wafer-thin characters that you simply just don’t care about.  By now, you can probably already tell that I love this film and I’m effectively going to ‘gush’ about it, so if you just want to accept now that it’s a definite 10/10 you might as well stop reading now.  However, if you’re vaguely interested as to why I think it’s so – technically – perfect, then feel free to read on.

In case you’re one of the few people that have been living in 1955 all your life and have only just arrived in our year courtesy of a time machine, you may need to know that ‘Back to the Future’ is about time travelling.  Marty McFly, played by the ever youthful Michael J Fox, gets caught up in eccentric inventor, Doc Brown’s, latest scheme to build a time machine out of a DeLorean car.  Naturally, things don’t go smoothly as he inadvertently ends up in 1955 and accidentally interferes with the very moment his parents got together, therefore possibly preventing him from every being conceived.  If this wasn’t bad enough, he’s only got a one-shot chance at returning to his own time thanks to a lightning bolt due to power his time machine for the return trip.

I think what makes this film stand the tests of time is the fact that it is a true ‘family’ film.  Whereas most films which can be watched by children are largely aimed ONLY at them and force the adults to sit through it until it’s over, I can’t imagine anyone – male/female, young/old – not actually finding enjoyment out of this adventure.  It’s funny without ever being childish or vulgar, exciting without ever being over the top or unrealistic (if you’re willing to suspend your disbelief enough to believe that time travel is actually possible) and, of course, it contains some of the most memorable characters ever committed to film.  Naturally, our dashing young hero, Marty, is very easy to root for, however it’s his cranky old sidekick ‘Doc’, played perfectly by Christopher Lloyd who steals every scene and is the true joy to watch all the way through.  It’s also worth mentioning that Marty’s on-screen family also can hold their own, played different versions of themselves throughout the time periods, but special mention should go a character who should – by rights – be little more than a stereotypical bully, yet ‘Biff’ somehow becomes the clichéd bully that all other on-screen thugs aspire to be ever after.

If this film has a downside – and I’m only mentioning this because I can see that some people may have a problem with it these days (I didn’t and still don’t!) it’s that there are a few topics of humour that some people may find a little ‘edgy’ in today’s PC culture.  For some reason I get the feeling that today any ‘family’ movie may shy away from a mother inadvertently falling in love with her son, but it was the eighties and things were different then!

There aren’t many movies that still can bring a family together around the TV in the living room on Christmas Day, but this is still one of them.  If you haven’t already brought the entire trilogy on DVD, then watch it now and show your children.  It deserves to entertain future generations.  Yes, the following two ‘Back to the Future’ movies weren’t quite so well-received by the critics, but I think they’re great, too. 

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

Bright – An idea better than the film

Sometimes a film comes along with a premise that sounds so good that you couldn’t see failing.  However, when it comes to being executed on screen, it doesn’t live up to what it could have been. ‘Bright’ has been getting a lot of hate from the critics, some even calling it ‘the worst film of 2017.’ Personally, I didn’t think it was that bad – just could have been better.

Apparently, in ‘Bright’s’ world, elves, orcs, fairies and other supernatural beings have existed alongside us humans throughout the ages.  Now, we’re in modern day L.A. and we see the results.  Now, off the bat, if these types of creatures had lived among us all through our history, our cities would be radically different.  They’re not.  It’s basically L.A. with a few different races roaming around and occasionally have their own ‘districts.’ And that’s an example of how a film like this probably should have been done differently.  You had an interesting idea and wasted it.

But, like I say, it’s not as bad as some are making it out to be.  It’s effectively a ‘buddy cop’ film where Will Smith (human) is paired with the first ever orc cop (Joel Edgerton).  So, we have our typical ‘mismatched cop’ duo who bicker constantly all the way through it.  Soon they come across an elven maiden with a wand which the bad elves are also after.

So, again what could have been a vaguely interesting set-up turns into a series of action set-pieces where one group of bad guys attacks our trio after the next until the obvious end battle.  First the humans attack.  Then the orcs.  Then the elves.  Then it’s over.  Again, nothing wrong with that, it’s just with an idea like this it should have been able to have been stretched into more original territory.

However, it has Will Smith at the helm and, just because he’s on Netflix, don’t think he’s any the less charming.  He holds it together and the action is fast-paced and fun.  There’s quite a lot of swearing, so it’s not a family movie, but, if you’re looking for something action-packed (only!) to watch, stick this on your ‘watch list’ and, as long as you’re not expecting too much, it’ll keep you entertained for a couple of hours.  Oh, yes, it’s a couple of hours long.  It probably could have been an hour and a half and been all the better for it.

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

The Chumscrubber – Almost unique

I don’t know why I originally chose to sit down and watch ‘The Chumscrubber.’ Maybe it was the name, or maybe it was the impressive cast list?  Or maybe I was just bored.  Whatever the reason, it left a profound impact on me.  I watched it.  Loved it.  And then forgot about it completely until the next time.  Then I repeated that – again and again.  I’ve seen it at least three times now and every time I love it and, for whatever reason, have real trouble recalling what it was about until I find myself watching it again a few years later.

I guess it could be described as a really ‘unique’ type of film, or at least it would be if it wasn’t for the fact that it feels very similar to the legendary ‘Donnie Darko.’ In today’s world of ‘shared cinematic universes’ I reckon there’s a reality out there somewhere where the two of these films co-exist.  Both are about a young, troubled boy whose world is turned upside down in an insular community of modern suburban America.

Whereas ‘Donnie Darko’ was definitely science fiction, I’m tempted to say that ‘The Chumscrubber’ is also – at least part – sci-fi.  However, on my latest re-watch I’d say whatever ‘supernatural’ elements are here, they are so minor they’re barely worth talking about.  Jamie Bell plays Dean, whose drug-dealing best friend kills himself, leaving the local thugs out of pocket when it comes to their stash.  Therefore, the town’s clichéd school bullies kidnap another boy and try to blackmail Dean into retrieving the ‘merchandise.’

Seeing as I’m refusing to acknowledge ‘The Chumscrubber’ as science fiction, I’m going to call it a ‘satire.’ In other words... it’s not quite funny enough to be a comedy, but there’s enough in it to make you smile to stop it from being an out and out drama.  Its message is how parents are too wrapped up in their own – legally medicated – worlds to notice what’s happening to their own children.

I can see a lot of people finding this film ‘too weird’ to be enjoyable, but, put simply, if you’re a fan of ‘Donnie Darko’ type movies, you should like what’s happening here, too.  It’s clever, dramatic, funny, different, has a message about our modern way of life and did I mention practically every cast member is a recognisable face in his or her own right?

9/10 almost as perfect as The Godfather

Bringing Out the Dead – Stylish, but lacking a certain something

Sometimes you can watch a film and see that all the pieces are there and yet there’s still something not quite right about it. ‘Bringing Out the Dead’ stars Nicholas Cage (while he was still highly-bankable at the Box Office) as a New York ambulance driver who’s on the brink of burning out completely.  He’s seemingly lost the ability to sleep (properly) and turned to various substances to get himself through his – increasingly dangerous – nightshifts.

Now, back in 1999 when this film was released, Cage was pretty much at the top of his game and you could guarantee that he’d put in a good performance, especially under an equally great director.  Here we have none other than Martin Scorsese at the helm who is more than capable at keeping hold of Cage’s reigns and making sure he doesn’t do that ‘over the topness’ he sometimes slips into.  The premise is great and there’s plenty of scope for the story and characters to evolve.  The films sports an equally impressive supporting cast including Patricia Arquette, Ving Rhames and John Goodman.  So, baring all that in mind, it’s hard to see that anything could go wrong with it.

I certainly don’t hate ‘Bringing Out the Dead.’ I just feel that with that much talent at its disposal it should be a lot better than it is.  The actors and direction are amazing, but where it falls down is a general lack of focus as to where the story is going and what genre the film wants to be.  It flips from everything from romantic comedy to gritty drama almost every other scene and even flirts with the possibility of a supernatural element (loosely).  There’s not an awful lot of motivation for the supporting cast and they just seem to do things to provide Cage with something bad/dramatic to react to.  The films plays out like a string of sketches/mini episodes that are loosely strung together by the flimsy of narratives.

If you’re a fan of Cage and/or Scorsese, this is a ‘must watch.’ However, some may get a little tired with waiting for something to happen.

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

Pleasantville – More films should be like this

There are some films which seem to come and go and no one ever really seems to notice.  With all the big-budget movies out there which are predicable, laden with annoying CGI effects and follow a formula where you know exactly what will happen at all times, ‘Pleasantville’ is a real breath of fresh air.  Yet, for some reason, no one really talks about it even though it’s held in high regard seemingly with everyone who’s seen it.

It’s rare that a film’s tagline sums it up so well, but you may see on any marketing ‘The Truman Show meets Back to the Future.’ And it’s hard to put it any better (although I saw a hint of ‘The Last Action Hero’ in the plot, but it’s barely noticeable!).  Two of today’s American teens are – for reasons you’ll soon find out – ‘beamed’ into an old black and white TV show from yesteryear.  It’s safe to say that things worked differently in the days before cell phones and Instagram.  Back then firemen constantly rescued stranded cats from trees, teens holding hands was still a taboo and the most exciting thing the youth of the time could do was hand out the local milkshake bar.  Therefore, our two young protagonists (played by Tobey Maguire and Reece Witherspoon) find it a challenge to blend in with the locals.

However, things really start to go wrong when their influence – literally – bring new life to the fictional telly town.  Their modern influence slowly starts seeping into the people and environment and the black and white world they’ve found themselves in starts to become colour.  Now, that wouldn’t be so bad, but the locals start engaging in – what they consider – to be ‘immoral’ behaviour (which you’d probably find on kids’ TV in today’s times).  What follows is a tale about whether our two teens can actually escape their TV-prison and, what will happen to the residents they leave behind.

It’s truly one of the most clever – vaguely mainstream – films to come out of Hollywood in recent times and, if you’re in the mood for something that doesn’t involve superheroes flying around a destroyed U.S. city, then you should definitely watch this one.

9/10 almost as perfect as The Godfather

Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi – I don’t see why it’s (quite!) so divisive

In 2015 we – us ‘Star Wars’ fanboys – finally got treated to more ‘proper’ Star Wars (and by ‘proper’ I mean with characters we actually cared about in a story set after the events of ‘Return of the Jedi’ rather than prequels or spin-offs). ‘The Force Awakens’ opened to almost completely positive reviews, most completely overlooking the fact that it was a thinly-disguised reboot of ‘A New Hope.’ Yes, I too enjoyed it, but never really went as far as to claim it was as good as many were making it out to be.

Now, ‘The Last Jedi’ opened to mega-praise by the critics, describing it was either ‘The best Star Wars film ever,’ or (at worst) ‘The best Star Wars film since The Empire Strikes Back.’ Then the audience reviews started rolling in and it seems they weren’t so impressed.  Personally, I enjoyed the film for the most part.  I certainly wouldn’t say it’s perfect, but what film is these days?
First of all the (new) cast, as they had more to prove that the returning Luke and Leia.  Daisy Ridley seemed more comfortable as ‘Rey’ this time, however she did struggle with some of the more ‘dramatic’ moments, but she did play of the ‘battle-worn’ Luke well.  Oscar Isaac was awesome as Poe and was almost like having a new (younger) Han Solo back again.  Adam Driver was much more in sync with being the villainous Kylo Ren and clearly enjoying his beefed-up role.  However, like I say, it’s far from perfect and for every Isaac and Driver there were new faces who just didn’t work.  Almost all the extras (who had lines) in both the First Order fleet and the Resistance appeared to almost be reading their lines off prompt cards and, despite new face ‘Rose Tico’ getting high praise, I found her annoying and pointless.

At least we had Luke and Leia to fall back on.  The two ‘old faces’ (no offence Mark and Carrie!) are seasoned pros of the genre and it was a joy to watch them back in the roles that made them famous.  For me, Luke was the perfect evolution of the character (I understand that statement may be shot down from many!).  Leia too is awesome, however the storyline itself does seem to be troubled by Carrie Fisher’s unfortunate death, leaving many (including me this time) to wonder what’s going to become of this highly-prominent story arc.

The film looked brilliant and was a joy to watch – visually.  I felt the majority of the (large) cast worked well and played off each other, plus there seems to be a view held that there’s ‘too much humour’ in the film and it’s ‘typically Disney’ and ‘almost like an ‘Avengers’ movie.’ Yes, there were a few humorous moments, but I didn’t think they detracted from the overall story or feel.  However, the films was way too long and this leads me to the point which does seem to unite most viewers – that the Rose/Finn sub-plot was not just annoying, pointless and too CGIed, but simply padded out the film to levels which made many of us check our watches when it was revealed that the film was going on (and then on).

That was my major gripe about the film, i.e. too long thanks to wasting Finn on a pointless mission.  When this film comes out on DVD I will buy it, but just skip these scenes forever after.  I understand that most people who hated the film were hung up on decisions made by established characters and I can sort of see where they’re coming from.  However, for me there were more minor grips such as how certain (interesting) characters are underused, various plot points from The Force Awakens aren’t answered and, if I’m really nit-picking, The Force itself just seems to add new powers whenever it wants, making us wonder why Jedi/Sith didn’t use all this a long time ago (in a galaxy far, far away!).

Overall, I did enjoy this film, despite its flaws (biggest of which I will personally rectify courtesy of the ‘Chapter Skip’ button on my DVD remote.  However, no matter how bad you’ve heard it is, it’s NOT going to be ‘removed from Star Wars cannon’ like that pointless petition seems to want it to be.  For me, it was a decent enough addition to the Star Wars universe and I’m looking forward to seeing where they take the final part of the (new) trilogy in a couple of years time.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation – Still as much fun

I remember renting ‘National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation’ from a video store back in the late eighties and again in the early nineties (until I figured it was simply more convenient and cost effective to buy a VHS copy and watch it whenever I want).  I was young at the time and clearly loved its slightly dumb, cheesy humour (plus I was a fan of the two previous ‘Vacation’ films, but you don’t actually have to have watched either of those to watch this one – you’ll just not be one of us who get confused at the repeated new casting of the kids, Audrey and Rusty).  However, for some reason, the film didn’t survive my eventual binning of my tapes and buying everything again on DVD.  Therefore, I was delighted when a popular online streaming service put it on their schedule in time for the festive season.

It was only now did I realise how much I must have watched it back when I was young, as I knew the script practically word for word.  So, in short, I still loved it and was in nostalgia heaven.  And I could almost leave the review there if it wasn’t for the fact that I was watching it now with my girlfriend who had never seen it before in her life.  She hated it.

Therefore, I was sort of forced to re-evaluate it and, although I maintain my love for it, try to see what some people may find wrong with it.  Yes, the jokes are dumb.  It’s sort of like the ‘American Pie’ of its generation.  It’s definitely not high-brown entertainment and you have to accept that you’re going to be watching a buffoon at work when it comes to the central character, played by Chevy Chase, Clark Griswold.  I guess it could be said that some people may simply find him too annoying and stupid to root for.

I suppose a few of the gags do fall a little flat and just as many are predictable, but then by now most adults will have seen so many comedy films by now that they can see ‘old humour’ coming a mile off.  There was actually more profanity in this than I remember, including one ‘F-bomb’ which does mean that the film may be more unsuitable for ‘all’ the family than I remember.

I suppose it’s quite tame and, because of its age, has a feeling of being done before.  However, I still maintain that, overall, it’s stood the test of time reasonably well and should still pick up a few new fans here and there (especially in terms of good/funny Christmas movies).  You’ll definitely get more out of it if, like me, you have nostalgia on your side, but even my girlfriend had to admit that Randy Quaid was a joy to watch.  Although, she still maintained that the (seldom-used) neighbours got all of the best gags!

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Ghostbusters II – Don’t believe the hate

I think it’s fair to say that the original ‘Ghostbusters’ is a classic.  Very few people will disagree with that.  Therefore, due to its success, a sequel was inevitable.  I remember watching ‘Ghostbusters II’ at twelve years old back in 1989 and absolutely loving it!  As did every other one of my friends.  It was only as I grew up (and possibly coupled with the rise of the internet) did I realise how – apparently – hated it was.

Since that revelation, I’ve watched it a few times and, every time, tried to see its flaws.  And, even after repeated viewings through older, more cynical eyes, I still love it!  It has all the original actors from the first film and they play off each other perfectly.  The story has literally moved on and the characters have grown as a result.  The special effects still look better than many that are overly-CGIed nowadays and best of all, it’s funny.

If I was really trying to be critical I could mention that it does seem a bit odd that, by all accounts, the city of New York has completely forgotten about how the Ghostbusters saved the world (and, sometimes, it’s even debateable whether the populous even BELIEVES in ghosts!).  Plus it is a bit of a re-tread of the first movie’s plot, beat for beat (but no one seemed to mind that much when ‘Star Wars: The Force Awakens’ did that many years later!).

I’d never say it’s better than the original.  That kind of praised is reversed for the ‘filmic elite’ and rarely happens at the best of times.  However, just because it’s not as good doesn’t make it a bad film.  It’s a perfect compendium piece to the original and, if you accept that, you should have fun with it.  Now, if you REALLY want a bad and extremely pointless film, then check out the Ghostbusters remake (actually, don’t – stick with either of the originals, the eighties cartoon series or even the game on the PS3 when it comes to your fix of ghostbusting!).

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Dog Day Afternoon - Certainly not a ‘dog’s dinner’

Perhaps if you sat down to watch ‘Dog Day Afternoon’ you may come away claiming that it’s totally unbelievable to be a good film.  I might have done if it weren’t for the fact that I was alerted to it being based on a true story by someone else.  It’s about a bank robbery in the seventies that was carried out in broad daylight.  It’s safe to say that it would be a pretty bland film if everything went according to plan.  However, in this case, nothing went according to plan and it was a total mess from beginning to end.  That’s what makes it such a damn good film (well, that and Al Pacino).

Pacino plays the lead robber (well, out of the two of them) who managed to bungle his way through raiding a bank and taking hostages at the same time.  Of course his ineptitude means that the police have plenty of time to show up and Pacino is forced to hold out in the bank with little idea of how to escape a secure building surrounded by marksmen.  The film clearly rests on his shoulders and, as the majority of his performances show, he can more than handle the responsibility (which is probably more than can be said for his character!).  He clearly enjoyed himself on set and much of the dialogue ended up being improvised as he almost becomes institutionalised over the period of a matter of hours, before almost succumbing to the brief stint as ‘minor celebrity’ that his dodgy deed affords him. There are a few twists and turns which I won’t go into for fear of giving plot points away, although I will say that it’s an interesting commentary on the issues of the time and would be equally interesting if something like this happened today – I’m guessing plenty of #bankheists would be posted from bemused onlookers. 

If you’re in any way a fan of bank robbery/heist movies, or just a fan of Al Pacino then you really have to watch this.  It is a little long and may have benefitted from a harsher editor here and there, but apart from that, it stands the test of time.
8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Scott Pilgrim vs. The World - Looks great on Edgar Wright’s CV

The interestingly-titled ‘Scott Pilgrim vs the World’ is based on a comic book about a young man who has to fight his new girlfriend’s seven evil ex boyfriends.  No, seriously.  And, if the first question you’re asking is “Why?” then you’re probably like me.  First of all this is a movie (probably!) more for teenagers and youngsters (not bitter and cynical forty-somethings such as myself), therefore I’m guessing that most people will just go with it, rather than questioning every single plot point like I found myself doing.

I did enjoy the film – sort of.  Once you allow yourself to get past just how ludicrous the plot is, you’ll find that it is in fact quite funny.  The titular Scott Pllgrim, played by the totally typecast Michael Cera, falls in love with a new girl in his town, only to discover that, in order to win her heart, he has to beat and pummel all her ‘evil’ exes one after another.  And it’s quite fun to watch, possibly because it knows how daft it is and therefore plays on it, deciding to shoot the film almost like a computer game from yesteryear.  Expect ‘life gauges’ to appear on screen every time Scott picks a fight with someone new.  Plus plenty of visual comic-like clues as to the fact that it wants you to know that it’s based on a comic book, such as written text on the screen to emphasise sounds and feelings.

I’d probably forget the film quite quickly if it wasn’t for the fact that it’s co-written and directed by Edgar Wright, best known for working with Simon Pegg on various film collaborations. I think it’s fair to say that Wright has a visual style that really works with this type of film.  Every scene he emphasises silly little things in order to draw your attention to little details that most films overlook.  I found myself enjoying how the film looked even more than the actual film itself.  Sorry for the generalisation, but I do think that younger cinema audiences will enjoy the story aspect, however it was funny enough to keep me entertained and had a visual flair that is often missing from mainstream Hollywood.  Just a pity Edgar Wright never got to do his vision of Marvel’s ‘Antman!’

If nothing else, it’s worth watching Captain ‘Chris Evans’ America take the beating that even Iron Man himself couldn’t manage!

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

Terminator: Salvation - Could have been so good

Ever since Kyle Reece explained to Sarah Connor what the future would look like when the machines ruled the Earth, Terminator fans have been desperate to see more of those dark, gritty, laser-filled scenes that James Cameron dropped into the first two movies.  Now, we finally get to see a whole movie showing us what the future world would look like.  And it basically looks about as much as James Cameron’s original vision as Christian Bale looks like Edward Furlong, not bothering to retain either the look or feel of what has gone before.

‘Terminator: Salvation’ is the film that fans asked for, but didn’t ask for the way they got it.  While it was made, the Terminator himself was busy running the state of California, so couldn’t really reprise his role (and don’t get me started on any CGI work used to correct this – it really isn’t up to the ‘Rogue One’ standards we’re now used to).  However, that’s not so bad, as the story isn’t just about the indestructible machine of metal, but also the Connor family, so most people were relieved that a decent actor like Christian Bale was going to be playing John Connor.  Unfortunately, the film takes the weird route not to follow him, instead choosing to be mainly about Sam Worthington’s character – a death-row inmate who somehow wakes up in the future and also helps trash a cyborg or two.  I won’t spoil too much of Worthington’s character, especially as the trailer basically did that for me.  However, I will say that this film would have been a damn sight better if it simply omitted his character completely.  I’m not having a go at the actor.  He did all he could with what he was given.  It’s just people weren’t going to watch this film based on ANY new character – they wanted to see more of the old ones (even if they had been recast!).

I could pick out various personal annoyances that I had with this film – the helicopter pilot who wears sunglasses at night, the silent child who’s used as a plot device to show how caring our central characters are, or the fact that the end battle completely rips off T2 beat for beat.  All of these I could have overlooked if it wasn’t for the fact that ‘Salvation’ completely ignores various plot points that have been clearly stated in previous films.  Maybe those not so ‘up# on Terminator lore won’t notice, but for me I found myself asking too many questions as to why things were happening this way.  I know you could say that timelines got changed here and there so things are now different in the future, but, in my opinion, that’s just lazy writing and a cop out.

There were at least a couple of stand-outs, namely Ashton Yelchen’s excellent take on how Michael Biehn portrayed Reece, Skynet City looking pretty cool and the nod to T” by playing Guns and Roses again.  However, this film was almost damned before it was released as much of the publicity surrounding it was directed at Christian Bale’s bizarre outburst on set at a fellow crew member.

I guess that ‘Terminator: Salvation’ isn’t as bad as I’m making out.  It’s an okay sci-fi/action film.  However, because it has the Terminator name attached we – the fans – are just hoping for more than we got.  And, if you’re interested, you may want to Google it’s alternate ending, as it is much darker and interesting than what we got.

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

The Cave - In the shadow of ‘The Decent’

There’s plenty of instances where two films come out practically at the same time and have exactly the same premises, i.e. Volcano vs Dante’s Peak, Armageddon vs Deep Impact, Shark’s Tale vs Finding Nemo and so on.  Here, a film about a not-so-lucky band of caving explorers who found themselves trapped underground at the mercy of a pack of slobbering monsters really resonated with horror audiences.  And this film was called ‘The Decent.’ Therefore, when the (slightly less imaginatively-titled) ‘The Cave’ was released at roughly the same time and also able to be summed up in a similar statement, no one really noticed.

And that’s a shame, but ‘The Cave’ isn’t that bad.  Okay, so that’s hardly high praise, but we are talking about films in terms of horror movies here, so I’m sure its core audience is hardly expecting deep and meaningful character development or overarching story arcs.  What most horror fans are looking for is a few nice kills, the odd gruesome monster and characters you sort of what to root for over whatever is trying to murder them.  And, based on that appraisal of the horror audience’s collective desires, I think ‘The Cave’ ticks all boxes.

As I previously mentioned a group of caving explorers are trapped in a subterranean nightmare when a pack of beasties start having them for lunch.  What follows is your generic monster movie where they’re offed one by one, but each character is just about well-rounded enough for you to noticed when they’re being devoured and you’ll probably have fun trying to work out who’s going to live and who’s going to die first (hint: the film does its best not to succumb to the obvious when it comes to character deaths!).  I’m guessing a fair part of the movie was filmed in a studio set to save on actors really going underground, so I’m assuming the caves were fake, but they looked pretty reasonable and the film’s budget must have gone some way on the sets.  Unfortunately, that means that the monsters are a little under-developed and you only catch glimpses of them here and there for the most part.

Fans of ‘Game of Thrones’ may enjoy seeing one of Lena Headley’s less-known early performances and – for me, anyway – is about the only recognisable face among the cast.

There’s nothing new here and, yes, The Decent probably does everything on offer here better.  However, if – like me – you’re a fan of the monster-munching genre then there should be enough here to keep you entertained for an hour and a half.

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

The Babysitter (2017) - Cinema is dying

Don’t let the kind of bland name, i.e. ‘The Babysitter’’ fool you into thinking this film isn’t anything special.  Yes, it’s a ‘Netflix original’ and don’t let that fool you into thinking that it’s just there to make up the quota of ‘in-house content’ on the web’s streaming service.  In the UK Netflix costs less than a tenner a month to watch a variety of film and TV and, before you think I’m being sponsored by Netflix, I’m merely pointing out that if you can get original films like ‘The Babysitter’ for that price, what’s the point in going to the cinema that often?

Anyway, onto the film.  If you check out the blurb of the film you’ll see that it’s a horror movie, but I won’t go into too much detail as I don’t want to give anything away that you might not have guessed.  It’s about a twelve-year-old boy who, much to his disgust, still has to have a babysitter whenever his parents go away.  However, despite his initial humiliation, it’s not so bad, as he’s head over heels in love with his sitter.  She’s a good looking young girl who is literally his ‘fantasy’ woman, as she indulges in everything he’s into (well, all apart from the obvious thing he’s interested in, but that’s left up to his teenage imagination).  In fact, she seems too good to be true and, whenever that happens, you know something is going to go wrong.  And it does.  And, in horror terms, something ‘wrong’ normally involves vast amounts of blood and guts. ‘The Babysitter’ happily provides such gore.

‘Meta’ is the word I’d use to describe the film.  Don’t expect to be scared, more amused.  The script is light-hearted and self-knowing, even when bodies are being diced it never takes itself seriously – and it’s all the better for it.  It’s your basic ‘horror-comedy’ (or should that be ‘black comedy?’) with the emphasis on the humour.  Of course the jokes are only really as good as the actors delivering them and I’m pleased to say that a film who stars a twelve-year-old as the lead could be a risk.  Luckily, he never comes across as brattish or annoying (like so many child actors do!) and he’s quite a believable and relatable hero to root for.  Then you have the babysitter herself.  She too is a joy to watch as she comes across as cool, caring and friendly, meaning the two leads can play off each other well.

If you’re into horror-comedies that are simple enjoyable (adult!) romps then you definitely have to watch this one – especially as you probably won’t be able to get it on DVD or see it in the cinema!  It’s definitely worth adding to your ‘watchlist!’

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Independence Day - It is what it is

I watched ‘Independence Day’ back in 1995 during the ‘height’ of the X-files-induced ‘alien fever’ that was so prominent in popular culture that even the President of America at the time had to address the world and point out that the Government wasn’t really stashing away bodies of little grey men.  Therefore me, like many, were absolutely blown away when marketing material showed a giant alien spaceship hovering over the White House and promptly blowing it to pieces.  That one iconic image sold the film alone.  However, I distinctly remember the sense of disappointment I felt upon leaving the cinema.  I’d seen the (fleeting!) clips of aerial dogfights between fighter jets and UFOs and expected them to make up more of the film.  However, what I got was effectively a two and a half hour story about one stupid decision after the next.

Despite being one of the most profitable movies of all time, it hardly won any prizes for logical storytelling.  If you search Google for articles about the film’s numerous plot holes and daft developments (Apple laptop being the highpoint!) you’ll see what I mean.  I didn’t hate the film at the time.  I appreciated the amazing special effects (for the day) and a great deal of work had gone into showing the carnage caused by an alien attack of populated areas.  No faults there.

So, if the effects were really the only stand-out aspects of the film, why did I end up buying the film and still watch it to this day?  Well, I guess I appreciate it for what it is.  It’s the very definition of loud, dumb and stupid.  It’s a ‘popcorn’ movie, designed to entertain and keep your mind vaguely occupied while you check Instagram on your phone.  Granted today’s generations will probably not appreciate the effects, based on the numerous superhero movies where entire cities get reduced to ruins over a period of a half hour battle sequence, but what still holds up is the general sense of eagerness.  This is arguably the film that launched Will Smith’s career and you just can’t help but warm to him.  Yes, no matter how dumb and unlikely every situation he’s placed in is, he’s still brilliant to watch and, along with Jeff Goldblum (who’s basically playing Jeff Goldblum – again), the pair of them make the movie still relevant to this day.

So, if you want to enjoy ‘Independence Day’ you’ll definitely have to put your brain on hold and know that you’re getting what became the template for disaster movies (certainly nineties ones anyway, but then ‘San Andreas’ was pretty much the same story).  You’ll also have to be okay with healthy doses of ‘pro-America’ scripting.  If you’ve watched (the brilliant) ‘Team America: World Police’ you’ll probably be singing along that song of theirs ‘America… *£$% yeah!’ all the way through, as it really is applicable.  And then, when you’re done enjoying the stupidity, treat yourself to a YouTube video on how these are the dumbest aliens ever to invade our planet (with the possible exception of that lot from ‘Signs’).

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

Happiness - The clue isn’t in the title

I’ve always enjoyed ‘Happiness,’ despite asking myself WHY I ever bothered to watch it after every single viewing.  Yes, the title is deliberately ironic as there is barely a trace of anything vaguely happy in the entire mover, but then it knows that.  It’s safe to say that ‘Happiness’ is definitely not a ‘feel-good’ film and you really do need to know what you’re in for before you sit down to invest over two hours with this manic depressive beast of a movie.

I suppose you could call it an ‘ensemble’ piece as there are numerous characters all woven together around the three central characters who are sisters all at various stages of adulthood and doing their best to either live with what’s become their lot in life, or desperately try to change it.  It’s basically a family drama, but with a few – very – dark helpings of black humour.  However, the overriding thing to say about ‘Happiness’ is that it deals with the worst themes you can probably think of and presents them in a way that forces you to think about those who it’s easy to despise without a second thought.  Therefore, you don’t just have to be in the mood for something depressing, but also something that really goes into areas of human nature that you would probably not like to dwell on, most notably child abuse.

‘Happiness’ is a film that will certainly leave an impact on you, even if it’s just you swearing you will never watch something like that again.  However, for all the darkness and realism it presents, I have watched it about three times and I think it’s a worthy film.  The performances are all excellent.  You’d be hard put to it to find a weak link among the cast.  Phillip Seymour Hoffman is naturally excellent, but perhaps the hardest role falls to Dylan Baker who plays possibly one of the most (bizarrely!) relatable child molesters you’ve ever met.  It must have been a horrible role for him and he plays it to perfection.

Like I say, don’t expect feel-good and get ready for a rough ride.  But, if you’re in the mood for something as deep as this it will certainly make you wonder who’s sitting opposite you and what goes on behind the façade of family-friendly life.

9/10 almost as perfect as The Godfather

Thor: Ragnarok - There is no justice in the film industry

As little as ten years ago, if you were to ask the average film-goer which film they would think would be better out of the third instalment of a lesser known Marvel comic book star, aka Thor, or the first outing for DC’s ‘Justice League’ featuring some of the biggest comic book names in superheroes ever created, ala Batman and Superman.  I’m guessing most wouldn’t ever have heard of a Norse god when compared to Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent.  However, in late 2017 ‘Thor (part 3): Ragnarok’ was released a few weeks before ‘Justice League’ and completely sunk all hope for Batman and co at setting the Box Office alight in terms of superhero-related movies.

I know there’s quite a heated debate between the Marvel and DC community, but I like to think of myself as one of the ‘neutrals.’ Batman is probably my favourite superhero, so I was hoping beyond hope that Justice League would live up to its potential.  I even saw it before Thor: Ragnarok and thought it was pretty good.  However, when I then went and watched Thor, I kind of realised why Justice League was flagging.

I can think of a handful of ‘elite; sequels that surpass the original, but they’re the minority (Aliens, T2, Empire Strikes Back and so on), but I can’t quite recall any third instalments that blow both predecessors completely out of the water.  In short… Thor: Ragnarok is epic.  It feels like it’s been given a much bigger budget and the freedom to really have some fun with the characters.  I think it’s the general consensus that it’s the ‘funniest’ of all the Marvel cinematic universe films to date.  It never really takes itself too seriously and is all the better for it.  You really get the feeling that the cast were generally having a laugh while they were doing this.

All the old faces you’d expect from the previous Thor outings return, i.e. Anthony Hopkins, Thor’s mates (all of which names escape me right now!) and, most importantly, Tom Hiddleston as Loki.  It’s kind of a thing that Marvel doesn’t really know how to do its villains too well and most people feel that Loki has been the one and only highlight of the enemies the Avengers have had to face.  Therefore, Ragnarok plays on this perfectly and beefs up his screen time even more than ever.  That’s not to say that Cate Blanchett isn’t good too as ‘Hela.’ In fact, she actually has some decent lines and we may be witnessing the film with both the best and second best villains in at the same time!

However, no matter how good the supporting case is, the film is called ‘Thor’ after all and it wouldn’t be anything without Chris Hemsworth’s (disgustingly perfect) shoulders to rest on.  He has really settled into the character and his interaction bounces off characters new and old alike.  There’s only a small amount of new faces added to the film, but they feel like they’ve been there all along.  And, without getting back into the Thor versus Justice League debate again, the fact that these new characters seem so easy to relate to compared to JL’s characters who feel like they’ve been crowbarred in just to add to the ‘hero-weight’ – just shows how well-written Thor is.

As much as I wanted to enjoy Justice League more, I just couldn’t.  Thor was simply too much fun, much more action-packed, wonderfully light-hearted and literally a more colourful film to watch.  If I had to pick a fault I’d say that the CGI still looked a little fake in all of the newly-built worlds, but the fun you can have with this mammoth of a popcorn movie more than made up for that.

I’m not saying that I haven’t enjoyed Marvel’s previous output, but I really hope they make more like this.  Oh, and did I mention the electro music is awesome as well?

9/10 almost as perfect as The Godfather

Justice League - The Simpsons did it

Right now, the long awaited ‘Justice League’ is taking a bit of a hammering at the Box Office.  People are already claiming that it signals the (premature) end to comic giant DC’s ‘shared universe’ (which, in case you’re not up on the cut-throat world of comics and their filmic interpretations) was Warner Bros’ answer to the seemingly unstoppable juggernaut that is Disney’s ‘Marvel cinematic shared universe.’ And, they may be right, but sadly for possibly the wrong reasons.

The tragedy is that DC has – arguably – the most famous and beloved superheroes in its arsenal, i.e. Batman and Superman (whereas Marvel was forced to rely on (due to licensing issues) a rag-tag band of its lesser-known stars such as Iron Man and Thor).  Twenty years ago if you had told the cinema-going public that they were about to witness Bruce versus Clark slug it out on the big screen it would probably have been seen as the cinematic event of all time.  However, ‘Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice’ kind of whimpered its way through the public’s consciousness, leaving no one that excited (and die-hard DC fans more worried) about the film that was supposed to bring all their most beloved heroes together for their first major outing.

Critics have already slammed ‘Justice League’ for being a ‘directorial mess,’ citing a change of directors for the post-production phase and general studio interference.  Now, I’m not saying they don’t have a point.  Original director Zack Snyder wanted a film that was closer to three hours, yet the studio wanted as many showings per day as possible, therefore made the cinematic cut just under two hours.  So the finished product does feel decidedly unfinished.

Also, a few weeks before ‘Justice League’ came out, ‘Thor: Ragnarok’ sneaked out in cinemas.  And, despite it being about one of my afore-mentioned ‘lesser’ heroes and it was the third instalment in Thor’s personal film career, it was amazing.  It performed better than even Disney had hoped and forced ‘Justice League’ onto the back foot in the public’s and critics’ eyes alike.  There are plenty of other minor gripes like the 'forced' humour that secondary director Joss Whedon seemed to feel the need to add, JK Simmons being very underused as Commissioner Gordon, continuity issues, things that aren’t properly explained due to the harsh cutting to save runtime, the – slightly cheesy – CGI, especially in the film’s villain himself, Steppenwolf and that one terrible line poor Jeremy Irons is forced to utter during the final battle.  However, I felt the real problem lay in the fact that ‘Justice League’ was released too early.  Superman was only given one solo film, before sharing the stage with Batman (for a new caped crusader’s first outing after Christian Bale refused to reprise the role and link Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy into this new shared universe).  Aquaman was decent enough, but he would have benefitted from having his own stand-alone film shown BEFORE he was put into JL.  The Flash makes his first film appearance, despite DC giving him his own (highly-prised) TV show and then choosing to create a new version for the big screen.  And, as for Cyborg, personally I liked him, but no one besides die-hard fans of the kids’ cartoon ‘Teen Titans’ will know who he was.  Wonder Woman was about the film’s only real character people felt they connected with due to her having a hit film (or should I say the ONLY hit film) prior to this get together.  Therefore, whereas much of the audience this film was meant for has already seen this kind of ‘superhero shared universe’ played out by Marvel characters.  All of which had their own solo films to build up their characters and bring a sense of grandeur to the point in time when they finally come together as one unit.  Here, it just felt rushed for the sake of ‘playing catch-up.’

If you’re wondering what my ‘Simpsons-related’ title refers to, it’s about a little-known episode of ‘South Park’ which made fun of itself and ‘The Simpsons’ where the jokes come from the fact that the Simpsons has been on TV for so many years that they’ve done everything and there’s nothing that ‘South Park’ can do that feels original.  This was how I felt watching ‘Justice League.’ Every time something happened a little voice in my head said ‘Marvel did it, Marvel did it, Marvel did it’ and that was kind of disappointing.  Whether it was watching Aquaman fly and fight like Thor or the team chasing Infinity stone-like cubes to stop them  falling into Thanos’ hands (sorry, Steppenwolf), everything felt like I’d already seen it before – and, sadly, better.

I didn’t hate ‘Justice League,’ in fact I found it an okay movie and definitely not as bad as many of the online community is making out.  However, it is definitely a missed opportunity and could have been so much better if handled with just a little more care and forethought.

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

Scouts Guide To The Zombie Apocalypse - If you’ve seen one ‘zom-com’…

Once upon a time a zombie film was a rarity after the millennium.  Now it seems that the genre has been done to death and distorted and blended with every other genre in an attempt at keeping it fresh.  Here, in ‘Scouts’ Guide to a Zombie Apocalypse’ we have a comedy/horror (or ‘zomcom’ as I’m informed they’re referred to as).  However, a gory undead outing with laughs is nothing new – and it hasn’t been since about 2004’s ‘Shaun of the Dead.’ And, in short, it doesn’t even come close to ‘Shaun of the Dead.’

This isn’t a bad film.  It just offers absolutely nothing new.  If you’re a fan of zombie films then you’ve seen better.  If you’re a fan of zombie-comedy films then you’ve seen better.  If you just like gore there’s about as much gore in the average episode of ‘The Walking Dead’ as you have here.

It’s about a group of geeky scouts who get caught up in an undead uprising.  Pretty soon you have all the tropes you’d come to expect with the genre, i.e. boarding up windows, headshots, have-sex-and-die moments and characters turning into zombies after being bitten.  There’s the obligatory hot girl and geek will they/won’t they subplot and the only really memorable actor (David Kochner) is woefully underused.  This film kind of reminds me of both ’Dance of the Dead’ and ‘Deadheads’ in tone and feel, only they’re both better!

There’s about one really funny (if a little gross!) moment involving what someone is forced to hang on to when about to fall out of windows and the zombie animals made me smile, but that’s about it really.  The ending tries to be exciting, but – guess what – I’ve seen people using hedge trimmers to slice up zombies with before (Peter Jackson’s ‘Braindead’) and I just got annoyed when no one noticed a zombie attack on a crowded dance floor (surely someone would have filmed and uploaded it to Instagram?!).

I can only recommend this if you really love zombie/comedy films and you’ve never seen one before.  Otherwise, just put your DVD of ‘Shaun of the Dead’ in – I know you’ve got a copy somewhere!

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

The Night Before - Where are the jokes?

I’ll start by saying that I’ve been a long time fan of Seth Rogan, even through some of his (supposed) ‘misfires’ such as ‘The Green Hornet,’ therefore I was quite surprised that ‘The Night Before’ sneaked by my consciousness and popped up to view on an online streaming services.  I read the blurb about three old friends going out just before Christmas for one last big party before they all have to carry on with their adult lives and figured it would be worth an hour and a half of my time.  It wasn’t.

Since watching it I’ve read a number of reviews, many bashing it for its ‘glamourising drugs,’ one viewer going as far as to say that ‘the drugs were almost like a character in themselves.’ However, that didn’t bother me so much as the fact that I just didn’t laugh.  Most comedies fail to make you split your sides with laughter, but you should at least get a few chuckles and wry smiles out of a known comic actor’s offering.  I just didn’t.  There were simply no jokes.  There was a lot of shouting and a few gross scenes, plus a fair amount of swearing (again, swearing bothers me about as much as dtrug-use, but it needs to be incorporated into the jokes, rather than just to fit as many four-letter words in as possible).  There are undertones of likening the story to a modern retelling of ‘A Christmas Carol,’ therefore expect the odd (borderline) supernatural experience to be thrown in there.  I don’t know whether it was supposed to be really supernatural, or just brought on by the drugs, but it wasn’t necessary to what little plot there was and it certainly wasn’t as clever as it was supposed to be.

I wouldn’t even call the humour ‘crude,’ simply because there wasn’t any humour on display.  The three central characters just bumble from one drunken/drug-induced (supposedly comedic) set-piece to the next as they go around town.  If they were likeable you may actually care about their lives and the problems they’re (sort of) trying to escape from (namely growing up), but you don’t.  They come across as the sort of ‘bros’ you don’t wanna know.

I still like Seth Rogan and will look on this as the first of his ‘misfires’ that actually misfired with me.

3/10 Jabba the Hutt wipes himself down with this film

Beetlejuice - Needs more Keaton

You’re probably already aware that ‘Beetlejuice’ is considered a ‘classic’ when it comes to modern cinema and I don’t really disagree.  However, upon re-watching the eighties horror/comedy today I still level the same criticism – not enough of the titular character, aka Michael Keaton.

The story follows a young couple who find themselves dead after an unfortunate road accident.  Now they’re forced to spend the afterlife haunting their own dream home, now infested with the (annoying) living.  And, in an effort to drive out these fleshy interlopers, they enlist the help of one particularly unhinged fellow spirit, known as Beetlejuice.

It was directed by Tim Burton as (arguably) the height of his career.  It’s wonderfully gothic with all his best trademarks all over the place (not counting the lack of Johnny Depp).  The only aspect of the film that rivals Keaton’s performance are the (completely non-CGI) special effects which add to the atmosphere perfectly.

Maybe today the film is looking a little dated, but it’s one that you have to suspend your disbelief and enjoy it for what it was at the time, rather than compared to today’s filmic offerings.  I wait for the (depressing) day when I hear it’s going to be remade with all CGI environments.  That will probably happen, but no matter how much computer trickery they employ, they’ll never be able to CGI another performance as good as Keaton’s.  And that’s why the original will always stand out (and not just as an excuse to laugh at how unbelievably young Alec Baldwin looked back then!).

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Mindhorn - A nice little chuckle

‘Mindhorn’ is one of those films that just do the job if you’re looking for something simple which will amuse for an hour and a half.  There aren’t that many ‘laugh out loud’ moments, but, if you’re into this kind of humour, then you should have a smile on your face for most of its runtime.
Julian Barratt (most famous from TV’s ‘The Mighty Boosh,’ but did better in the much maligned ‘Nathan Barley’ in my opinion!) is always good value for money and this is his first outing as a ‘lead.’ He plays the titular ‘Mindhorn’ – a TV detective from the eighties whose career has lasted about as long past 1989 as you might expect for someone from that era.  He spends his time making embarrassing TV commercials and being bitter about how his fame has descended into this.  However, when a real life police case on the Isle of Man needs his ‘expert’ attention, he thinks this may prove to be a way of getting back into the public’s awareness.

I guess what you need to know before you watch this is what sort of comedy this is, as the style will totally dictate whether you like the film or not.  Like I’ve already hinted at, it’s hardly a ‘laugh out loud’ affair.  Its humour derives more from unsubtly poking fun at the very niche genre of ‘80s detective TV shows.’ It has plenty of references and throw-backs to the genre and the laughs come more from watching an incapable, slightly self-obsessed, character succeed despite his own failings.
Julian Barratt is the star and he carries the film.  His character could have been too unlikeable to root for, but he plays it tragic enough (ala Boosh/Barley) for you to feel sorry for him at the same time as probably not wanting to hang out with this guy in real life.

If you get your laughs from subtly smiling at cringe-worthy humour like ‘The Office’ and ‘Peep Show’ then this should entertain you, plus Barrett’s fans will have been waiting a long time for him to shine on his own as a leading man – and he does it well here.  Probably more a 6 out of 10, but I’m feeling generous.

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

Deja Vu - Thinking Man's sci-fi

‘Deja Vu’ is definitely a film that you haven’t felt like you’ve seen before *boom boom* - it’s actually as ‘original’ as any modern Hollywood film is going to be.  And by that I mean it’s probably quite similar to a few others, but presented differently enough to make it worth a watch.  And, if that’s not enough of a recommendation, it has Denzel Washington in it.  What more could you want?

The ever excellent Denzel plays a cop who has to investigate a domestic terrorism incident where someone blows up a boat full of naval servicemen and their families as it draws into port in New Orleans.  However, instead of taking witness statements and making public appeals, he chooses to team up with a shadowy government agency who have invented a machine that can ‘look into the past.’ However, just because they can peek into the past, doesn’t mean they can easily identify the killer.  Unfortunately, the machine can only look into the past exactly four and a half days ago – and time is constantly moving forward.  Even in the past.  Confused?  Don’t worry.  Denzel will explain it better than I can.

Although, it is one of those films where you do have to pay attention.  It’s not one where you can check your Instagram account and wander off for a cup of tea.  I’m not going to go into how the plot unfolds, as there’s more to it than I’ve mentioned.  If you’re slightly put off by the sci-fi element, don’t be.  It works on many levels.  Obviously, there’s a strong sci-fi feel to it, but nothing too over-the-top and the machine has a ‘real’ look to it, like it could really exist in our world.  However, it’s primarily a cop movie where the good guy has to track down the bad guy.  So, hopefully it should appeal to more than just fans of the sci-fi genre.  And, obviously, you have Denzel.  He’ll probably never win any Oscars for his performance here, but it is definitely enough to lift the film to even higher heights.

Don’t expect wall-to-wall action.  This is definitely not a ‘Transformers’ movie.  And it’s all the better for it.  Get ready to follow closely and see what the future holds for the war on terror.  Or should that be the past?

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Kingsman: The Golden Circle – Moore ‘Bond’ than Craig!

The words ‘pleasantly surprised’ always came to mind when I watched ‘Kingsman: The Secret Service.’ I was always more taken with the slightly cheeky Roger Moore era of the Bond franchise, before it all turned uber-serious courtesy of Daniel Craig.  Therefore, I was delighted to see great stunts, ridiculous gardens and over-the-top villains hiding in hollowed-out volcanos (or the like).  Now, I’m even more delighted to say that the sequel is actually pretty good, too.  Yes, you can always argue that the sequel will never topple the original (Empire Strikes Back, Godfather II, Aliens and T2 excluded), but, as far as sequels go, this one stays pretty much true to the spirit of the first and is definitely worth a watch if you like spy movies in general, or – like me – are stuck in the past in the Connery/Moore Bond era.

In case you’re not up on the first movie, you don’t really have to be as this one stands alone quite nicely as well.  It’s about a super secret English spy agency that masquerades as a tailor’s in the middle of London.  However, one sunny day someone goes and drops bombs on all but one of the Kingsmen agents, leaving the last man standing to flee across the pond and join his counterparts in America, aka The Statesmen (and find out who was behind it all, obviously).  It’s good to see all of the cast have returned for this one (even ones you may not think should be in there, but that goes into ‘spoiler’ territory) which is always nice to see.  And it’s equally nice to see that the film isn’t afraid to kill off characters who you may not expect to see go out in the way that they do.  Not only do the Kingsmen and Statesmen have to find out who blitzed the London agents, but also stop Julianne Moore from distributing drugs that will poison the world while they’re at it.  Now, despite my overall praise and enjoyment of the film, I felt that Julianne Moore was possibly the weakest element.  Not because she was an especially bad villain – she’s a great actress and did everything she could to appear as menacing to the world’s population as possible, but she had one hell of a tough act to follow – Mr Samuel L Jackson.  He was so crazy (and brilliant!) in the original that anyone was going to struggle when following in his footsteps.

However, that’s just a minor gripe.  You could say that if you’ve seen one spy movie then you’ve seen them all – i.e. a super villain wants to do X and the hero must stop him, then insert a few high-octane car chases and fist fights along the way.  Well, ‘Kingsman: The Golden Circle’ doesn’t offer anything particularly new by going against that formula.  It’s simply the way it’s done that sets it apart from the rest.  It’s silly, light-hearted fun, but at the same time is able to dip effortlessly into the action genre and also provide some genuine heart-felt moments.  I hope we definitely at least get a trilogy out of this franchise.  Dark, gritty Bond is okay if you’re in the mood to be mega serious, but for those of us who still like our spy thrillers a little more light-hearted, then Kingsman is definitely the way forward.

About the only major thing that jarred with me was some really noticeable CGI backdrops, but the action scenes were so well-shot that these more than made up for the Glastonbury festival that was blatantly created on a PC.

9/10 almost as perfect as The Godfather

Bladerunner 2049 – Good, but could do with a trim

Despite my love of epic sci-fi, Ridley Scott, Harrison Ford and general futuristic shenanigans, I am possible the one geek out there who never really ‘got’ ‘Bladerunner.  I’ve watched it numerous times over the years, every time hoping I’d see it for the ‘masterpiece’ that everyone else seems to.  The weird thing about my interaction with Bladerunner is that as soon as the credits roll, I forget everything I’ve seen.  About the only two things I can remember are something about a man questioning a robot about a turtle and Rutger Hauer snapping fingers towards the end of the movie.  Therefore, when I sat down for the (long awaited) sequel ‘Bladerunner 2049’ my hopes were hardly high.  It’s now nearly a day since I’ve watched it and, although I wouldn’t call it the greatest film I’ve ever seen, at least I can pretty much recall everything the average cinema goer does about a film they’ve just watched – so at least that’s an improvement on the original (from my point of view!).

The first film is set in the future where human-shaped robots (known as ‘replicants’) live among the human population.  Harrison Ford was the cop in charge of bringing in any replicants who go AWOL.  This time round in 2049 we have a similar set-up, this time with Ryan Gosling taking over the role of the cop chasing down rogue replicants.  Now, he’s a good choice for the serious tone of the lead.  Just because the original was filmed in the eighties where action movies were a little more over the top and tongue in cheek, doesn’t mean either ‘Bladerunner’ film is anything other than completely serious.  And, I should say now that neither should really be considered an ‘action’ movie.  If you’re looking for wall-to-wall shoot outs and car chases, you won’t find them in ‘Bladerunner world.’

I suppose as much as I enjoyed Gosling’s performance in the lead, I was (and am) always a Harrison Ford fan.  Now, he came back in a big role in ‘Star Wars: The Force Awakens’ and I keep hearing rumours of a fifth ‘Indiana Jones’ movie.  So, I hope I’m not spoiling this film for anyone when I say that, despite Ford being featured heavily in the marketing, the overall film is kind of ‘Ford-lite.’ This is Gosling’s film and, to be fair, he does it well.  But, I’m being a bit negative.  The film was actually pretty good – it’s strength lying in its atmosphere.  You really do get a feel of what the world is like here.  The long (reasonably non CGI!) establishing shots, combined with the haunting musical score bring a sense of gravitas to the film that few others have.  I can see this becoming a bit of a cult masterpiece of the future, simply by how it looks and in relation to its score alone.

However, as atmospheric is as this film is and, despite that being a bonus, it’s also the film’s undoing.  The film stands at quite a lengthy two hours, forty-three minutes and much of that is spent watching long, lingering establishing shots of various desolate landscapes.  Basically, I’d probably end up editing about ten seconds out of every scene and bring down the overall running time by about twenty minutes (it would help – my opinion!).  Yet, as much as the slow pacing of some of the scenes did drag for me, ultimately the film didn’t seem the full run time (probably felt more like around the two hour mark).  So, I guess that means that I actually enjoyed this one more than the first (rare for a sequel, I know).  Due to its length I probably wouldn’t watch ‘2049’ again for a while, but I definitely think I’d watch it again as it’s left more of an impression on my than its predecessor.  Yes, I’d have liked more Ford (and possibly more Jared Leto, too – also underused!), but you can’t have it all.  In a world of sub-standard sequels it does seem that this one was actually worth the wait.

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

Gremloids (a.k.a. 'Hyperspace) - Possibly the worst film ever made (and I LOVE it!)

 So, I’ve already mentioned that this is possibly the greatest film ever made, so I really ought to do my best to justify exactly why I think a low budget ‘Star Wars’ parody is so good.  Even though I know deep down that it’s terrible.

First of all, I was seven when this film came out only a year after George Lucas had released Return of the Jedi.  Therefore me (and every other boy of the eighties) was heavily into our ‘holiest of trilogies.’ And, I believe this was before ‘Spaceballs’ came out, so ‘Gremloids’ (or ‘Hyperspace’ if you’re not from the UK) was just about the first time I’d ever seen Star Wars sent up (in anything other than brief TV sketches). 

It’s about a Darth Vader wannabe ‘Lord Buckethead’ (who you’ll have to see to understand exactly why that name is so fitting!) who is in pursuit of the leader of the rebels (who just so happens to be a beautiful space princess) because she’s gone and nicked a bunch of top secret plans from him.  Now, I’m sure you’ll probably agree that this all sounds very familiar.  However, from then on it does veer off from what you might expect a Star Wars parody to be like.  For a start, our evil villain is not exactly hot on her trail.  Instead, he’s ended up on Earth in some small American town.  Therefore, the rest of the film is a case of mistaken (planetary) identity with Bucketbrains chasing around a hapless receptionist, rent-a-kill guy and their vacuum cleaner (Bucketbonse thinks the Hoover is a ‘droid!’).

Now, the best thing about ‘Gremloids’ is that it’s bad.  No, make that EXTREMELY bad.  The special effects are so bad that they’re actually referenced as such more than once during the movie.  Then there’s the acting.  I don’t think they hired any professional actors for the lead roles (I think I saw one guy in ‘Groundhog Day’ but that was about it!).  In fact, I think most student film-makers could make a more believable alien invasion movie than this.  And yet I still say it’s brilliant.  There’s just something weirdly amazing about the whole thing.  I almost can’t place why it’s so great.  I guess it’s because the film-makers knew that they weren’t exactly making a ‘real’ sci-fi epic, such as the source material that it’s based on and just played to the film’s strength, which is a script that is truly funny and a situation that is so daft it just works.

There are times when you see a film with great actors, a massive budget, a well-known writer and director behind the scenes... and the film turns out to be rubbish.  Everything SHOULD work and yet it doesn’t.  Here nothing should work and yet it does.  I would even go as far as to say that the speederbike... sorry SHOPPING TROLLEY chase could well be the worst special effects ever committed to film... and yet I still laugh every time I see it.  I’ve watched this movie so many times now I practically know the script off by heart.  I’d like nothing more than to recommend it, yet I know deep down that it has a very ‘limited’ appeal.  If, like me, you enjoy ‘so-bad-they’re-good’ films, plus love ‘Star Wars’ and cheesy eighties B-movies, then you may just get something out of this.  Otherwise, I can see many people watching the first ten minutes and claiming that this is the ‘worst film ever made’ (and I can see where they’re coming from in a strange sort of way!).

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Red - Die Hard with a walking stick

I don’t know why I feel so ‘dirty’ watching ‘Red.’ Deep down I know it’s hardly Shakespeare and I should never rate it more than a 2/5.  However, there’s something oddly satisfying from watching a load of old actors go crazy with guns and take out wave after wave of trained henchmen like they were immortal. ‘Red’ is effectively an action-thriller, with a healthy dose of ‘Bourne-like’ spy-movie thrown in there.  Bruce Willis plays a retired John McClane (not really, but he might as well – effectively a retired CIA killer) who, something, something, something, ends up on the run with a woman he’s been flirting with over the phone.  Naturally, there’s hired government killers on his trail at every turn and he must fight for survival every step of the way while he desperately tries to prove his innocence.  Think that plot synopsis sounds familiar?  Well, it does.  It’s basically the same as every other recent (Bourne clone) spy movie made in the last few years.  It’s nothing new, but it is fun.

I guess you could say that it’s a bit of a gimmick having the lead being an ‘elderly’ balding (sorry Bruce!) hero, as opposed to a young man with a nice tan and full head of hair on the run.  In fact… it is the ‘age factor’ that is this film’s only real selling point.  Bruce doesn’t go it alone, he’s helped out by an aging John Malkovich, an aging Morgan Freeman and an aging Helen Mirran – all of which are quite capable to murdering any young, highly-trained upstart who gets in their way.  And, yes, it is fun to see them in action.  

Despite the serious subject matter of death at every turn, the film never even attempts to take itself seriously.  It knows it’s daft and over the top and that’s its main saving grace.  If it tried to make us think that a bunch of senior citizens could really do all this then it would be ridiculous.  However, throughout all the car chases and shootouts it almost parodies itself.

If you like your action movies fun (like pre Daniel Craig Bond) then you should appreciate this, plus if you’re a fan of Bruce Willis doing what he does best, or just want to see Helen Mirren wield a sniper’s rifle, then you should definitely enjoy this.  The plot is simple, Karl Urban is kind of wasted as the film’s primary antagonist, hell bent on Willis’ capture/death, but he’s a nice addition anyway.  Just don’t think too deeply about why an older man still has to have a considerably younger love interest at his side!
7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that