Nothing But the Truth - A thriller that doesn’t need the ‘thrills’

Most – supposed – ‘thrillers’ tend to rely on high-octane stuff to try and keep their audiences on the edge of their seats.  However, ‘Nothing But the Truth’ tends to shy away from this, choosing instead to just tell quite tense story – without anyone ever really being in much of a tense/life-threatening situation.

It tells the (almost true) story of a journalist (Kate Beckinsale) who ‘outs’ a CIA operative in her newspaper.  Naturally, the government isn’t too happy about this and demands that she reveals her ‘source.’ She refuses and must suffer the consequences, or buckle.

The other thing that’s worth noting is that Kate Beckinsale probably gives her best performance to date.  I’ve seen more than a few scathing comments online about how she ‘can’t act.’ Hopefully, if people watch her in this, they may just choose to reconsider and see her as more than just a vampire-huntess in leather.

Like I say, there’s no real ‘action’ or thrills, i.e. people being stalked through creepy locations.  However, it is pretty tense.  You will care about the characters and what happens to them.  Plus it isn’t a short film.  If you want to watch this, you’ll need nearly two hours of talking/tension to sit through.  But, if you’re in the mood for that, you’ll find yourself rewarded with a rae thriller of the type that Hollywood doesn’t make many of these days.

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

Clockwise - Classic British comedy

Somewhere between the success of 'Fawlty Towers' and 'A Fish Called Wanda,' came 'Clockwise' - a film about a Basil Fawlty-esque headmaster who is obsessed with time-keeping, yet finds himself increasingly late for an important meeting in Norwich.

Seeing as it was released between the two masterpieces, it's fitting that it sits between the two in terms of enjoyment.  It sort of leans in and out of the other two, borrowing a little of each's style, but never quite matching either.  Cleese is now called Brian Stimpson, but is basically Basil doing a slightly different job, so you have him effectively performing as Basil, yet on the big screen.  Plus it's possibly the most bleak of all Cleese's projects.

It's easy to see why 'Clockwise' was never as much of a global hit as the other two. 'Fawlty Towers' delighted in showing up English eccentricity, whereas 'A Fish Called Wanda' was designed to appeal to an Anglo-American audience. 'Clockwise' has a distinctly British feel to it, therefore, only people of a certain age will truly get it (my young daughter watched it and simply said `Why don't they just use their mobile phones?' - ahh, to grow up in the 21st Century!).  I know that saying 'it doesn't take itself seriously' may sound a little obvious when it comes to a comedy.  However, it's definitely not really meant to be taken seriously in terms of realism.  I think its style of humour comes from the 'Carry On...' films' style of comedy, rather than the dark and gritty style of a black comedy like 'A Fish Called Wanda.'

I watched it when I was young and loved it then (but then I was brought up on 'Fawlty Towers!'), so watching it now brings back a healthy dose of nostalgia for me.  I seem to remember that most major criticism came from Cleece simply playing Basil again.  However, seeing as how great Basil was and we only ever got the two series on TV, I was delighted to see this 'faux-Basil' on the big screen.

If you're a fan of 'Fawlty Towers' and possibly the much under-rated 'Fierce Creatures,' then you should definitely give this a go.  You probably won't like it as much as all Cleese's other projects, but it should raise a few chuckles here and there.  Plus watch out for the many 'Fawlty Towers' cameos who are all great, as are all the supporting cast, but this is John Cleece's film through and through.  If you're a fan of him then you should definitely give it a go.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice - Not as bad as you’ve probably heard

Okay, I know I’m a little late to the party here – ‘Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice’ has been out for a while now, so I was well aware of the split opinions when I finally got round to watching this on DVD.  From what I gathered you either thought it was the greatest film ever made or a steaming pile of bat-kryptonite.

I come down somewhere in the middle.  I’m no die-hard comic book fan, so I can’t really tell you how well the main characters are represented, apart from how they compare to their various filmic incarnations.  But I can tell you that, although it’s no classic, it’s probably not as bad as you’ve heard.  But then that’s not to say that it isn’t without faults.

First of all, if you didn’t know, the comic company behind Batman and Superman is DC and they’re playing catch-up to rivals Marvel when it comes to recent big screen outings.  Marvel created a ‘shared universe’ where they made a film about each superhero then combined them for an ‘ensemble’ movie.  Now, DC is jumping on the bandwagon, but is going a little too far too fast.  BVS is packed full of characters and sub-plots, many of which could have been taken out.  It only really had the Man of Steel (aka Superman 1) before it, so it’s trying to get too much information in, compared to Marvel’s slow build up.

Then you have Jessie Eissenberg.  Yes, he plays the main villain ‘Lex Luthor’ (or Luthor’s son to be precise).  However, as many feared, he’s just not up to it.  I like the actor, I just think that he was horribly miscast for this role – and it shows.  You really needed a more threatening (and older!) actor to take on the role.

Then you have the trailer.  If you were looking forward to this film then you probably saw the trailers.  They basically ended up being a condensed version of the two and a half hour film, so you can probably work out everything that’s going to happen.  No surprises here then.

But, despite its faults, I actually enjoyed it.  I was sceptical about Ben Affleck as Batman, but he was actually pretty okay (and that’s high praise for Affleck from me!).  Wonder Woman’s inclusion wasn’t as ‘shoe-horned’ in as I thought it would be and she’ll probably have a reasonably successful stand-alone movie off the back of this.  Plus the fight scene that we were all waiting for was well worth the wait (if cut short for many people’s taste).

Overall, don’t believe either the lovers or the haters.  If you go into this film with your expectations suitably set to something that will pass the time and is actually worth it for seeing – arguably – two of the greatest superheroes ever knocking seven bells out of each other, then you’ll just about get your money’s worth.  Probably one for DVD rather than paying full price in the cinema for. 

I’m well up for the Justice League – expectations set low for that, too.

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

Undead - When aliens meets zombies

Yes, zombie movies have been done to death these days, but back in 2003 you could actually make one that was - almost - original.  Because 'Undead' is hardly a 'straight' horror film, choosing instead to make it more of a horror/comedy.  However, due to choosing these two genres, it does draw a lot of comparisons with the far more well-known 'Shaun of the Dead.' This is kind of unfair, as they are very different from each other and, although 'Shaun' is indeed probably the much better of the two, it doesn't mean that 'Undead' isn't worth a watch if you're into the zombie genre.

Instead of London or America, 'Undead' is set in a small fishing town in Australia which suddenly falls foul of a ghoulish uprising.  However, the unfortunate townsfolk don't just have to watch out for the usual slow-moving 'walkers' shuffling towards them and trying to eat their brains, but also a fleet of flying saucers piloted by those 'X-files-like' grey spacemen with the big heads and skinny bodies.

The characters are all the usual stereotypes you'd expect to find in any horror film (whether the 'comedy' element is added, or not) - you have the strong dependable female, the crazy authority figure, the weasel-like one who's always going to sell his colleagues out just to stay alive.  So, nothin new there and you probably won't remember any of their names by the time the credits roll, but the question you need to know is... is this funny?

And the answer is yes.  It never tries to take itself seriously and spoofs the genre nicely, plus the story adds a few new elements to the tried and tested tale courtesy of the alien menace and there are definitely some plot developments that you won't see coming.

Despite definitely being a comedy, there's actually a decent amount of gore here.  Most of the 'red stuff' comes in the (most welcome!) form of 'practical' effects (the aliens and spaceships are all CGI and they're not that bad considering this film is hardly 'big budget') and the gore is pretty well done, plus many inventive and funny ways of despatching the undead.

Yes, the title is hardly inspiring, but if you like tongue-in-cheek horror films, or 'zom-coms' then you should definitely give this one a try.  Just make sure you get a version with the subtitles enabled as the funniest line is actually written and comes near the end of the movie - don't miss it!

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Hercules - One great big silly, fun cliché

There’s nothing worse than a film that’s completely clichéd in every way.  Or at least I thought so until I watched ‘Hercules.’ It’s absolutely everything you’ve seen a thousand times before, therefore it’s a mystery as to why I enjoyed it as much as I did.

From what I hear it’s hardly based on fact (and when I say ‘fact’ I mean the Greek legend of Zeus and Mount Olympus etc).  Instead, it’s based on a comic book which, in turn, is based on the classic tale of Zeus’ half human-half god son, Hercules, and his adventures.  Seeing as I’ve completely forgotten everything I learned about Ancient Greece at school and I’ve never read the comic books, I can’t comment on how well it ties into whatever source material it’s based on.  However, I can tell you that – if you’re in the right frame of mind – it is quite good fun.

Dwayne ‘The sometimes Rock’ Johnson plays our titular character and he plays him with as much charm as you’d expect from our muscle-bound leading man.  Many have criticised him as an ‘actor,’ but then he doesn’t need to do an awful lot of soul-searching to find inspiration to smash every baddie he encounters in the face.  He does the job.  He’s cool.  He’s likable.  And he wipes the floor with monster he meets.

And Dwayne’s not alone in his quest.  Unusually, we get to see quite a lot of his mates, namely the band of warriors who follows him wherever he goes, generally picking off anyone who’s still alive after Herc has beaten an entire army to a pulp.  Yes, his homies are all walking clichés, but they’re also fun enough to root for and it’s simply nice to see that, despite being ‘part immortal’ on his father’s side, even Herc needs a chum or two to get things done.

Do you really need to know what they do?  There’s a baddie doing bad things.  Herc and co have to stop him.  Don’t bother wasting any more time on plot intricacies than that.

The film runs for an hour and a half and, if I’m honest, it actually feels a bit rushed.  If they’d added an extra 20-30 minutes of character development, they really could have made something quite epic (as opposed to a fun little B-movie).  Perhaps the worst thing about it is the computer-generated effects.  And they’re worse at the beginning.  Seriously, there are some scenes near the start that looked like they were created by a media student for his homework assignment (they do get better.  A bit).

If you want to know what sort of mind frame I was in when I watched this, I’ll tell you.  I was home from work with a cold.  I didn’t feel 100% and was wrapped up under a blanket as I watched Hercules and his posse kicking ass.  I didn’t want a deep and meaningful, heart-wrenching drama or anything I had to think about.  I just wanted a fun little action movie to rest my brain to.  And I got one.  If you find yourself in a similar state, this is the kind of movie that should nurse you back to full health.

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

In Security - Entertaining, but not necessarily funny

‘In Security’ (aka ‘Armed Response’) is about two guys who own a home security firm which is slowly failing.  Therefore, they hit upon the idea of robbing houses in the area in order to boost their business.  It’s a simple enough premise and in works... to some extent.

Okay, so it’s never going to be a classic, but it has its strong points, namely the two main guys play off each other well and are a believable pair of ‘normal’ blokes.  The story is also solid and has a lot of potential and you may be forgiven for thinking that this is going to be a comedy.  It has all the makings of one, but, somewhere along the line, it was like the writers never bothered to include any actual jokes.

I watched the whole film without laughing once.  The first half may raise the odd half-smile, but that’s about as close as you’re going to get to any hilarity (in fact... during the first half there was a bit that actually made me jump – something that doesn’t even happen when I watch horror movies!).  But, like I said, the story rolls along and, despite the lack of humour, it’s still entertaining.

Then, in the second half, things lose all hints of comedy and actually get quite dark (think murder and torture).  We’re introduced to quite a nasty villain, but, if you saw either Ving Rhames or Vinnie Jones’ names in the cast list – don’t go expecting them to burst onto the set and save the day.  Their addition amounts to little more than extended cameos.

By the time I got to the end of the film I’d forgotten that the whole thing was actually told by one of the guys in a bar.  This all seemed a bit pointless by this time as it’s never mentioned during the film’s runtime.  However, I didn’t feel like I’d wasted my time watching the film.  It’s an enjoyable enough little film, just don’t go expecting too many laughs and be prepared for when it goes dark about half way through.

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

Day Of The Dead (2008 Remake) - One of my favourite bad films

Let's get this out the way... `Day of the Dead' (2008) is awful. Pretty much everyone absolutely hates it. I can completely see where they're coming from. If you've heard negative criticism about this film then it's probably justified. However, saying all that... I still enjoy it every time I see it.

The title has been lifted straight from (zombie Godfather) George A Romero's 1985 dark and brooding film of the same name. And, if you've seen the original Day of the Dead and are wondering how this remake relates to it, it can be summed up in one word: names. Many of the characters share the same names in both films.

Perhaps the 2008 film's main fault is that it shares the name of a classic and people therefore attribute words like `remake' and `re-envisioning' to it. Plus Dawn of the Dead was remade in 2004 (and it was actually highly thought of!) and Ving Rhames stars in both, leaving many people to wonder if Day 2008 is a sequel to Dawn 2004 (it isn't).

So... on to the faults. For a start there's the casting. Not only is Ving Rhames' presence confusing, but he's the best actor there and he's completely underutilised. Then you have Mena Suvari as the tough solider in charge. That just doesn't ring true. She neither looks nor acts like she's in the military and is more the `token pretty face.' Many people have pointed out how the film is called DAY of the Dead and most of it takes place at night, plus the survivors don't reach the missile silo (the 1985 version's setting) until the end of the movie. The zombies seem to turn at random whenever the story needs another scare and - most bizarrely - they have the ability to run up walls like giant spiders (but only when they're attacking pointless extra characters - when they're chasing Mena, they kind of forget they can run up walls and just run blindly into her gunfire)

One plus point people seem to agree on is that the zombies' are well made up and look pretty grisly. However, despite all the negatives, I still watch it ever now and again. If you can forgive them for using a classic zombie movie's name and look at this as nothing to do with the original, then you might find enough fun in it to keep you entertained for an hour and twenty minutes. And, if nothing else, you get to see a vegetarian zombie (no, seriously).

6/10 May just keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights