The Incredible Burt Wonderstone - Good, light-hearted fun

Basically, this movie - about two warring magicians - got a lot of flack at the box office and was almost branded `a flop.' Yes, it's no masterpiece. It's not even a comedy masterpiece. Perhaps people expected more because of the talent on display. They may have a point - the film does have a stellar cast and maybe it should have been better, or funnier than it actually is. However, just because it's no classic, doesn't mean that it's not worth watching.

Steve Carell plays the titular (if laughably named) 'Burt Wonderstone' - a magician who got into magic to avoid getting bullied at school and is now living the high-life at a top-notch Las Vegas hotel, playing out to sell-out crowds.  However, his fall from grace comes in the form of (newcomer to the 'magic scene') Jim Carrey, playing a (kind of David Blane rip-off) Steve Gray.  The public - and also the hotel's manager (a rather underused James Gandolfini) - start developing a taste for Carrey's form of 'street magic' (largely involving self-mutilation, as opposed to Wonderstone's more 'traditional' entertainment involving pulling rabbits out of hats etc), putting Wonderstone on the back foot and desperately playing 'catch-up.'

It's light-hearted and easy-going. The gags - while occasionally predictable - are still amusing. You may not have many `belly laughs' but, if you're in the mood for something that isn't very serious and quite frothy, the film should maintain a little smile on your face all the way through.  It's a tale of 'fall and rise' for Wonderstone.  He starts off self-centred and completely shallow, but thanks to his impending fall from grace means he can learn and grow.  Olivia Wilde is in there as the obligatory 'love interest' for Carell, but - like Gandolfini - is kind of underused.  In fact, despite her best efforts, her character could probably have been written out of the story all together and it wouldn't make that much difference.

You may get a little more out of it if you're a fan of any or all of the actors. Steve Carell and Jim Carrey are top-billed and for a reason - they play their (kind of stupid) parts very well.  Steve Buscemi is also along for the ride and yet seems never to get any of the best lines in favour of Carell.

My only gripe is that it ran for about ten minutes too long in my opinion. It probably could have been trimmed somewhere in the middle to make it just that little bit tighter. Still fun though.  And don't go expecting a film like that other - much more famous - film about two warring magicians, 'The Prestige' - it's nothing like that!

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

Date Night - You could do worse than have a date with Tina and Steve

Date Night tells the story of a married couple (Steve Carell and Tina Fey) who are stuck in a bit of a rut and whose lives revolve around their kids and work (just like so many of us). However, the similarities end when they get mistaken for criminals during their weekly `date night' and are ruthlessly hunted down across New York by the mob.

I feel after that brief plot summary I should write `...with hilarious consequences.' However, that would not be accurate. Date Night is not a `laugh a minute' film. I actually think it's better than that. It goes to great lengths to portray a `normal' married couple who, although are happy together, there's still that little something - call it a spark? - that's gone out. It's a funny film, but mixed with decent observations and character development that lifts it emotionally from the likes of American Pie and The Hangover.

It's funny and entertaining and, although not that original in its storyline, the chemistry between Carell and Fey is undeniable. I think that most couples married for a long time will easily understand the situation of Phil and Claire.

A great date movie.

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

Jackass 3D (2010) - What are you expecting?

I find it hard to imaging that there are many people who stumble across a film called 'Jackass 3D,' not knowing what 'Jackass' is all about.  Then they put the film on, watch it to the end and thus hate every moment of it and are disgusted by what they just watched.

However, in case you're thinking that 'Jackass' is merely a mildly offensive term for someone who is a 'little bit silly,' then you really need to swat up on your pop culture.  I believe it started out on a cable channel as one of those ridiculously over-the-top late night shows that gains a cult following for all the wrong reasons.  Basically, the premise is a bunch of men hurt each other.  No, this is not 'scripted' in the traditional sense.  It's literally a bunch of guys coming up with weird and imaginative ways to hurt and humiliate each other (and sometimes unsuspecting members of the public or their family).

If you're therefore thinking of something vaguely clever or surreal (ala 'Triggerhappy TV') then you're wildly off course.  There is nothing clever about 'Jackass' and there never will be.  It's pure 'shock TV' and, if that's your thing, then you'll have a blast with this film.

Naturally, there's no story.  It's just one wacky clip after the next of guys doing painful and disgusting 'stunts' (or 'pranks,' depending on who you ask).  Again, if you like that sort of thing then you'll enjoy the film.

If you're in two minds about whether to watch this (or any of the 'Jackass' films or TV) then I'm sure you can find many a clip on the internet.  Watch it then decide if it's for you.  Trust me... it'll save you an hour and a half of watching grown men pull each other's teeth out with sports cars and sitting in a port-a-loo (full of human 'you-know-what') and then getting jettisoned high into the air, making the *ahem* 'brown stuff' go all over the man entombed within.  Yes, that actually happens.

This sequel in the 'Jackass' franchise is 3D.  I didn't watch it in the cinema using glasses, only at home on the telly, so I can't really tell how much the 3D adds to the effect.  Either way, it's pretty disgusting.  But, at the end of the day, I'm almost ashamed to admit that I enjoyed this film (and the previous two).  No, I don't watch them often, but, if I'm in the mood for something so low brow that I can almost feel the IQ points diminishing as the runtime progresses, then this is it.

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

Hatchet - A good chuckle, but make sure you're in the mood for it

I'm writing this review after a second viewing of Hatchet. I do love a good/daft horror/slasher movie and this one was billed as being right up there with the best of them, plus even a homage to the classics of the seventies and eighties.

In short, I didn't like it at first. However, after a couple of years I decided to watch it again and see if I missed anything.

Even now, I probably wouldn't say it's an absolute classic, but it is a decent enough little yarn (with plenty of blood).

Did I say `plenty' of blood? I meant TONNES. In fact, the producers obviously know they're going a bit over the top and must have had great fun throwing bucketloads of the red stuff at trees after every kill takes place.

It's quite a short film (it doesn't really need to be any longer) and, after the thumping Marilyn Manson opening song, we meet about a group of people who go on a boat ride into the swamps of America and end up on the wrong end of a maniac's hatchet. The kills are very violent and, if you're looking for gore, you'll find it here. The best part of the film is the characters. Whether they're horrible or nice, they're entertaining. There's plenty of amusing banter between them to keep us amused (special mention to the two *ahem* `actresses' who continually bicker with each other all the way through).

These good characters go some way to make up for the film's major flaw: they don't kill the killer. This slasher film possibly has the most opportunities to either kill, or severely subdue the nutter with the hatchet, yet they choose to run off every time and leave him to `get better' and resume coming after them. This is the most annoying part of the film and, if it wasn't for the snappy, tongue-in-cheek dialogue, I would have found myself getting increasingly annoyed with the whole package.

All in all, this film is far from perfect, but, if you lower your expectations enough and put your brain on hold, you should enjoy the daftness and gore (like I say, it's not on for long!).

Also, kudos to the film-makers for getting Robert Englund, Kane Hodder and Tony Todd on the same cast list.

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

Joe - Just your ‘average Joe’ of a movie

Nicholas Cage.  Once a bankable star, has found himself falling on the wrong side of some filmic choices of late.  Or, to put it another way, he’s made some right turkeys recently.  However, I’m pleased to say that ‘Joe’ isn’t one of them.  Okay, it’s not great, but it’s better than most of his stuff.

Unsurprisingly, Cage plays the titular ‘Joe’ – the leader of a lumbering crew in America.  He’s doing his best to make an honest buck, but things don’t always go his way.  There are plenty of people who seem to want to either bust his skull in over debts, or just shoot him dead.  And, if that wasn’t enough to be getting on with, he hires a young lad with an alcoholic father – two people who complicate his life yet further.

I guess the first thing you need to know if you’re contemplating watching Joe is that it is a drama.  A straight drama through and through.  There’s no action, adventure or even light comic relief.  It’s a pretty bleak affair.  You’ll need to be in the mood for something very ‘character-driven’ to appreciate this.  But Cage holds it together and we see shades of the reason he was so bankable once upon a time.  It’s his baby, but credit has to go to the young lad who plays his new crewmember.

It’s a long film, clocking in at nearly two hours, so you really need to be in the mood for something this ‘no thrills.’ I would say it was ‘fun,’ only it wasn’t.  But then it’s not supposed to be.  It’s supposed to be a dark and depressing drama.  And for that it succeeds.  You just need to make sure you’re in the mood for something like this. ‘The Rock’ it is not.

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

Wanted (2008) - One of those movies that is very underrated

Maybe ‘Wanted’ wasn’t as successful as – I thought – it should be when it was released back in 2008 because these sorts of (semi) superhero movies were only just coming into fashion?  Maybe it’s because it was based on a comic book that wasn’t that well-known and the film’s producers annoyed the die-hard fan by changing various elements?  Or maybe it’s because it’s got a pretty ‘uninspired’ title which doesn’t really tell you what the film is about?  It could just be someone posting something on Craig’s List!  Either way... I loved it then and I’m pleased to say that it stands up to this day.

It’s about a young man Wesley (James McAvoy, before he really hit the big time in Hollywood) playing a young man who doesn’t know his place in life.  He medicates himself daily while working in a dead end job (don’t we all?) and is routinely victimised by his boss while his girlfriend is having an affair with his best mate.  However, his life takes a slightly more wild turn when a femme fatale known as Fox (Angelia Jolie) inducts him into a super secret society of assassins known as ‘The Fraternity’ led by Sloan (Morgan Freeman) and together they’ll... well, you’ll have to see, but there’s naturally various bad guys to kill and noble causes to fight.

I suppose the plot isn’t that radical to attract much attention, however, it has all the look and feel of a good comic book you could ever want.  Now, I call that a plus, whereas I think a lot of people saw it as a drawback.  Largely, because these assassins are pretty damn amazing – their main ‘special ability’ being the knack of ‘bending bullets’ so they can bend the missiles around corners.  Yes, it’s a little far-fetched, but this is a comic book movie and if you can get over this then I think you’ll have a really good time.

If you’re expecting something uber serious and gritty then look away now.  There are more than a few times where the film does things simply for laughs and to not just bend bullets, but also the movie’s reality.  It never really takes itself that seriously and so is a lot more fun and popcorn-worthy than some type of ‘darker’ modern action movie like Daniel Craig’s ‘Bond’ franchise or the ‘Bourne’ movies

Yes, there’s nothing that new here, but the fact that it’s a great action movie with A-list stars and set pieces that make the most of the unique ‘fighting premise’ that exists in this movie world should be enough to give it at least a ‘cult following’ and stop it fading into complete obscurity.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

The Orphanage - Creepy little ghost story

In ghost story terms, there’s nothing particularly new about ‘The Orphanage’ – it follows the modern ghost story formula pretty well, i.e. family moves into new location, strange things happen, no one believes them, contact expert to clarify supernatural element and then climax.  The Orphanage ticks all those boxes and in that order.  However, just because its story isn’t that original, doesn’t mean it’s bad.

It’s Spanish, for a start.  I don’t know why I always give foreign films more leeway when it comes to acting terms.  Maybe it’s the subtitles that mean I can’t really tell a ‘good’ foreign actor from a ‘bad’ one.  But, the acting certainly seems well up there to me.  It’s about a couple who have adopted a young boy and move back into an old orphanage to refurbish it and open it up for taking on new children.  However, things go more than a little wrong when their son starts developing ‘imaginary’ friends and then vanishes completely during the opening event and, no, they don’t find that he’s been taken into the TV, ala, Poltergeist.

See?  Nothing particularly new there, but it’s the film’s overall tone, direction and acting which elevates it about the – literally – thousands of similar clones which infest DVD bargain buckets at your local petrol station.  The setting is great and I’ve already mentioned the acting.  But it’s simply the foreboding feel of dream and despair that keeps you watching. 

Basically, if you like your ghost stories slow-burning and creepy (and don’t mind subtitles) then give this one a go.  It moves slowly to a sensible ending and doesn’t have any hordes of CGI monsters or major action sequences, so don’t be expecting a horror marathon of epic proportions.  Just expect something subtle and dark.

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