Translate

Thursday 31 May 2012

Review of Plot Device (Short Film)

'Plot Device' is a 2011 short film by Seth Worley. The films is only just over nine minutes long and is about a young filmmaker who obtains a mysterious device that unleashes the full force of cinema on his front lawn. The whole idea for this film is brilliant, the mysterious device takes him to a different plot line each time he presses the big button on it, and each one looks different, e.g. one is black and white, another is made to look like a flashback ect. The plot lines vary from action drama, to romance, and even science fiction.

It's a really great, original piece of work and I would really recommend giving it a watch. It doesn't take up much of your time, but it's a great example of the type of high quality end product you can come up with.
 The film was actually a promo for Magic Bullet Suit 11, so if there are any young filmmakers in the audience, they know where they can get all the effects Worley used.

The link to this film is below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFdKi33DHls

I'm going to give 'Plot Device' an 8/10, for creativity and originality.


Review of Snow White and the Huntsman

'Snow White and the Huntsman' is a 2012 British/American action, fantasy film based on the fairy tale 'Snow White' by the Brothers Grimm. The film is directed by British director Rupert Sanders and written by Evan Daugherty. The films stars Kristen Stewart, Charlize Theron, Chris Hemsworth and Sam Chaflin. This is another one of those film that I was really excited for when I saw the trailer, the idea of a live-action Snow White movie had so much potential! It's a shame they didn't make it everything it could be. It's still really good though. Warning, this review contains mild spoilers. This film is a prime example of why you should bring kids younger than 12 to a 12A, all they do is ask questions and complain about being scared. It was really annoying.


I'll start off with the positives. The world that they've created for this film has a very 'Alice in Wonderland' feel about it (which is good), and everything looks great, the CGI is spotless. One thing I really liked as well is how everyone in the film (except from the Queen) is grubby, the whole film is dark and filthy, so it works well when we don't see all the characters walking around like they've just had a bath like in most movies. The action is also really really good, it's like a cross between 'Lord of the Rings' and 'The Chronicles of Narnia', in fact there's one seen, where Snow White, the Huntsman, the Prince and the Dwarves are travelling over a mountain and it literally looks like they've taken a scene from the trailer for 'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey'. With it being a 12A, obviously there isn't a lot of blood, and no gore, but the action is still fast paced and there's lots of swords being swung and arrows being shot, so you can't complain. 


Another thing that is good (for the most part) is the casting and acting, I'm not a fan of Kristen Stewart, but she's quite good in this, she portrays the character well (there are some parts when you just think 'meh'). Chaplin is also really good as the Prince, although he doesn't get as much screen time as he should have. Hemsworth is as brilliant as he always, he manages to pull off a very good Irish accent, and we see him as an action hero without superpowers for once. He successfully pulls off the complicated character. The Dwarves are a collection of great actors like Ian McShane, Brian Gleeson, Ray Winstone and Nick Frost, who all pull off their characters well. A smart movie by the writers was not to use the Dwarves original names (Sleepy, Grumpy, ect) and are given names like Duir, Coll and Gus, makes it a much more mature movie. I think the only poor casting choice was Charlize Theron as the Queen, she's a good actress, but she just doesn't pull off the character for me, many will probably disagree with me but that's just my opinion.


Moving onto the parts of this film that aren't so good, like I mention before, the casting of the Queen, the other parts that in my opinion, aren't very good, are very petty things. Like how at the beginning there is a massive gap of about ten years or so (give or take about two years either side) where nothing seems to happen, when the story continues after the prologue there's loads of talk about resistance to the Queens rule, but they haven't done anything for years, and the Queen hasn't attempted to crush them, she conquered a Kingdom in a day but wasted years not foiling a rebellion? Seem stupid to me. Also I know it's based on a fairy tale, but some of the actually fairy tale related scenes, are a bit silly, and boring (the scenes with the fairies and all that sort of stuff). I know it was necessary, but I didn't like it. One last minor complaint, and that's that the war for the entire Kingdom is settled in one battled, and the Queen doesn't put up much of a fight, it seems lazy. 


I've complained a bit about this film, but overall it is really good, the action keeps the audience entertained. Hemsworth and Stewart are great on screen together, the effects are great, the music is amazing in parts, no matter how much I've complained about it, I still enjoyed it, and I think they did a really good job turning a fairy tale into an action film. It makes me more excited for 'Jack The Giant Killer', I think we'll be seeing more serious adaptations of fairy tales int he future. There's already talks about a sequel, revolving more around the Huntsman character, which I like because he is such an interesting character.


I'm going to give 'Snow White and the Huntsman' a 7.5/10.

Wednesday 30 May 2012

1000 Views!

I'd like to thank everyone who visits my blog, I do put a lot of effort into it and I'm so happy that I've finally made it past 1000 views. I must admit that it has taken me a lot longer than I wanted to reach this point, considering I started this blog back in February, but in all fairness it has only just recently started to properly pick up views.

Thanks again everybody for visiting my blog, as long as I have an audience, I will keep posting.

Feel free to contact me and let me know how I can improve my blog, what type of things you would like to see from it in the future and if anyone ever wants it, I will do special movie review request on demand. What I really want is more comments on both the blog and Facebook, I want to hear your opinions!

Lets try and reach 2000 views faster than it took us to reach 1000 lol.

(Yes, I just used lol in a blog post, that is slightly shameful of me)

A Look At Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy

With the release of Mark Webb's 'The Amazing Spider-Man' arriving on the 3rd  July, let me take you on a short journey through it's main competition. Sam Raimi did an amazing job with spider-man, the first movie in my opinion is still one of the best super hero movies ever made. Sadly they do get worse as they go along. The big question is can Mark Webb so better? The bar has been set pretty high, he's got a lot of fans to win over this this remake. By the way, this post will contain spoilers.

Our journey begins back in 2002 with 'Spider-Man', we all know the story of Peter Parker, a teenage school boy who is at the bottom of the food chain at high school, he lives with his aunt and uncle because his parents died when he was young. On a school trip to the genetics division of Oscorp Peter is bitten by a radioactive spider, which alters his DNA, turning him into something more than human. He initially uses his powers in order to make money to by a car, but his rash decisions lead to the death of his uncle and his decision to become the amazing Spider-Man to fight crime and prevent anyone from going through the pain he has endured. Basically this film was (and still is) great, Tobey Maguire was perfectly cast as Peter Parker, likewise with Willem Dafoe as the Green Goblin. Raimi made a risky decision by scrapping the hand made web shooters that Parker used in the comics and went for a biological approach, which many have claimed to be a really smart decision because it makes the story easier to tell, and it puts his mark on the films, making them his own. One of the decision which wasn't so well received (but which me and many others do still approve of) was the decision to give the Green Goblin a more realistic costume in order to make him look less gimmicky (which was actually Dafoe's idea), I think it was the beginning of more realistic superhero movies, a trend which very popular with filmmakers today.

With the success of 'Spider-Man' a sequel was inevitable, so in 2004 we were presented with 'Spider-Man 2', the story revolves around Peter struggling to balance his life as Spider-Man and as Peter Parker, and is forced to make some difficult decisions regarding his future. In the mean time Alfred Molina stars as Doctor Otto Octavius/ Doc Ock,a science who's experiments with four mechanical arms with artificial intelligence goes wrong, with deadly consequences. I quite liked this movie, in my opinion it wasn't as good as the first one, but it still kept a lot its charm. I think it would have been better if there was more action involved, because Doc Ock doesn't seem to be in it very much, it's mostly just scenes of him building his machines, but the two big fight scenes between him and Spider-Man are really good (especially the one on the train).

Concluding Raimi's 'Spider-Man' Trilogy is 2007s 'Spider-Man 3' which continues the story of Peter Parker, now that hes balanced his life as Spider-Man and Peter Parker, he now has to balance his life between Spider-Man and Mary Jane. A ghost from the past comes back to haunt him, and a strange alien substance arrives on Earth and attaches itself to Parker, gifting him new strengths, and brings out his inner evil. 'Spider-Man 3' had a lot that was right with it, but even more that was wrong with it. One of these things that were right was the casting of Thomas Haden Church as Flint Marko/The Sandman, I think he pulled the character off really well, it's a shame that although the film is only a few years old, the effects haven't beaten the test of time, and now the transformation of Flint into The Sandman, looks awful. Also I think the alien costume scenes were done really well, successfully showing the substance enhancing Peters characteristics, especially his anger. I quite liked James Franco's Harry Obsborn taking on his fathers role of the goblin, now named the 'New Goblin', his new tech and vendetta against Peter (now that he knows Parker is Spider-Man)I like Topher Grace as an actor, I thought it was great in 'Predators', but he was a poor choice for Eddie Brock/Venom. Anyone who has ever read the comics or watched the animated series knows what Eddie Brock is supposed to be like.He's not big enough or angry enough to play Brock. I didn't think the effects on venom looked that bad, it was an interesting take on him, but you didn't see enough of Venom as a whole, half the time we see Venom with Brock's face. Now we come to the biggest mistake of this movie, they killed off Venom in less than twenty minutes (give or take, I'm sure on the exact time amount)! He is the most important villain in the franchise and they discarded with no hope of return! How stupid! Without Venom, we can't have Carnage, and Carnage is awesome.

So there we have it, you now know my views on Sam Raimi's 'Spider-Man' Trilogy, interestingly, even though 'Spider-Man 3' wasn't as well received as the other two movies, Sony still wanted a sequel, there was a lot of talk that Maquire had agreed to return as Spider-Man and that there would either be a fourth and fifth movie shot back to back, or a fourth on its own, then a fifth and sixth shot back to back. There was also rumours that the villains in these films were going to be The Vulture (apparently John Malkovich had been in talks with Sony) and The Lizard. Also Anne Hathaway had been considered to play Felicia Hardy. However, she would not transform into The Black Cat like in the comics, but a whole new superhero with a new set of superpowers, called The Vulturess. Apparently Sony and Raimi had many disagreements between 2007 and 2009 over sequels, and in 2010 Sony announced that 'Spider-Man 4' had been cancelled.

THIS NEXT PARAGRAPH IS ALL MY IDEAS AND OPINIONS REGARDING THE STORY OF THE NEW MOVIE AND FUTURE RELEASES BASED ON WHAT INFORMATION HAS ALREADY BEEN RELEASED. IF I'M RIGHT THEN IT MAY CONTAIN SERIOUS SPOILERS (ONLY IF I'M RIGHT).

So what can we expect from Mark Webb's 'The Amazing Spider-Man'? So far we have seen that there is a new Spider-Man (whose humour seems more relevant to the comics), a new costume, we now have web shooters (a good merchandising move) and a new villain. Well there's two new villains, we've seen plenty of The Lizard (whose design seems to date back to some of the very first Spider-Man comics), but we've not been shown anything of The Proto-Goblin (not even some concept art), so when we see him on screen (most likely at the end), it'll be a first for everyone. We also know that The Lizard (played by Rhys Ifans) launches a biological attack on the city, which I think will be the biogenic decombinator, when he attempts to make everyone in the city like him. If I've got that right, then it opens so many doors for stories in later movies, like Morbius and the Man-Spider. But what of The Proto-Goblin? My guesses are that they're going to use him as a replacement of The Green Goblin, and follow the story line where the Goblin kills Gwen Stacy, which in turn, bring together Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson. As far as Spider-Man himself is concerned, his current origins in the new movie is different to that of Raimi's 'Spider-Man', in that Peter has always had something inside of him that makes him special, and that the spider bite just brings out that something and merges the spider DNA with it, turning into Spider-Man.

I am really excited for 'The Amazing Spider-Man', I can;t wait to see what direction Webb takes the franchise in. The fact that they've already announced the release date for 'The Amazing Spider-Man 2' in 2014 shows that Sony must really have faith in this movie. I hope it's everything I want it to be, I suppose we'll all have to wait and fine out June 29th.

Tuesday 29 May 2012

Review of War of the Dead

'War of the Dead' is a 2011 action horror film written and directed by Finnish directed Marko Mailaakso and starring Andrew Ternan, Mikko Leppilampi, Jouko, Samuli Vauramo, Andreas Wilson, Mark Wingett and Antii Reini. The world premiere of the zombie war movie took place at the Toronto After Dark Film Festival on  the 22nd October 2011 and was released by Momentum Pictures on the 28th May 2012 on DVD. Since the release if this film was so limited in this country (I couldn't find a single cinema that played it) and many wouldn't have heard of it until the DVD release, I have decided to treat it as if it were a direct to DVD film and give it a full film review.


The story revolves around Captain Martin Stone (Ternan) as he leads a finely-trained, elite platoon of American and Finnish soldiers as they attack an enemy bunker. Underestimating their enemy's strength, they are quickly beaten back into the forest. As they try to regroup, they are suddenly attacked by some soldiers they had just killed a few minutes earlier. Forced to flee deeper into Russian territory, they discover one of war's most terrifying secrets and realise they have woken up a far deadlier enemy. The movies not bad, I'll give it that much, with a budget of only 1.3 million euros it was never going to be a blockbuster hit. It starts off with bad acting, bad one liners and a very rushed prologue. As the film goes on though, the story begins to pick up, along with the action, and the acting. By the end of it you are indulged in the story and characters. It kind of feels like a cross between a live-action Call of Duty: World At War Zombie movie and 2008s 'Outpost'. Films with zombies in them are always fun to watch, they're even better when the zombies can movie fast, jump and fight. Also it's a zombie movie with Russian and Nazi zombies, what a great combination!


It's like a mix of loads of movies, near the beginning, in the house, it;s like the first level of Nazi Zombies in Call of Duty: World At War, then later a bit like 'Dog Soldiers', then once they reach the bunker, it's nearly exactly like 'Outpost'. So it's by no means an original films, but it's definitely worth watching because we get a good combination of fire-fights, hand to hand combat, explosions and a handful of men fighting off hordes of enemies (with decent dramatic music in the background to make the situation feel even more helpless). It's a typical zombie film, and that's what makes it enjoyable. It's a shame that the movie didn't start off as well as it ended, I was tempted to turn it off at the beginning, and some of the special effects weren't too pleasing on the eye. I'd still recommend giving it a chance, if you're a fan of Call of Duty and zombies, then it's nearly the perfect film for you. I'm going to give 'War of the Dead' a 6.5/10.


I know it seems low even though I've said a lot of good about it, but I'm judging the movie as a whole. 




Review of Iron Sky

'Iron Sky' is a 2012 Finnish-German-Australian science-fiction film directed by Timo Vuorensola and written by Johanna Sinisalo and Micahel Kalesniko. It tells the story of Nazi Germans who, after being defeated in 1945, fled to the Moon where they build a space fleet to return in 2018 and conquer Earth. The reason why I'm giving this film a late review is because since its release was so limited in the cinema, DVD and Blu Ray for many was the first time they'd seen or heard of it.


When I first saw the trailer for 'Iron Sky', I was extremely excited for it, it looked like something that we see for too rarely, an original movie. So many films are remakes, sequels and different versions of things we've seen a million times. So when we see a script that's original, about Nazis on the moon, and a comedy, what's not to be excited about? I can confirm that the movie is great, the stories alright, the acting's decent, everything looks great, the humor's amusing. It all adds up to make a good film. What's really funny about it is the fact that even though the Nazi have managed to set up a base on the Moon, they're still using technology from the 1940's, and still share the same beliefs, so when they capture a Black astronaut at the beginning of the movie, their reaction is priceless. There's a lot of different kinds of comedy in there, they poke fun at both the Nazis themselves and Western society as a whole. The scenes with the United Nations are quite funny, especially the way they refer to each person as the country they represent, as if they are a singularity. They clearly define societies attitudes towards countries like Korea and India. 


I wasn't expecting much on the visual side of things because the film isn't mainstream, I know that the producers battled for years to get more money to make the project work, I think work began on this movie all the way back in 2006, eventually ending up with something like a 7 million euro budget. To my utter surprise, everything looks quite good, actually, it looks really good. With science fiction, it is really easily for companies to splash out on visual effects, with the end result still looking awful, but this film has pulled it off. Another note on the way the film looks, I have to give credit to whoever designed the Nazi space vehicles and space suits, because they've managed to successfully create a look at this suited for both the 1940s and now (well, or 2018).


Obviously there are a fare amount of moments where you just think "this is so cheesey", a lot of what you see fundamentally would not work, the physics of it all isn't right, but as the film goes on, you forgive it, because it's a film about Nazis in space, most people are going to enjoy it just because of that. I was actually really surprised to see that the Germans were involved in making this movie, because they are a proud people and obviously this is based on a dark era from their past. It's good to make fun of certain aspects of the past, but it has to be done in a way that isn't offensive to people who have emotional attachments to that era. It's a bit like 'Dead Snow', it makes fun of the Nazis, but in a way that doesn't offend people. This film successfully manages to avoid talking about the past as much as much as possible to avoid that fear of offending people.


So overall, it's cheesey, it's funny, it looks good, the music, story, acting are all good, but most importantly, it's original, and it's about Nazis on the Moon, it's a winner in my book! 9/10.

Monday 28 May 2012

Review of Men in Black 3

'Men in Black 3' is a 2012 American 3D science fiction comedy film starring Will Smith, Tommy Lee Jones and Josh Brolin. The film is the third installment of the 'Men In Black' series based on the Malibu Comics series called 'The Men in Black' by Lowell Cunningham. Barry Sonnenfeld returned as director and Steven Spielberg returned as executive producer. The film basis around an old enemy of Agent K's (Tommy Lee Jones), called Boris the Animal (Jermaine Clement) going back in time to kill Agent K to prevent him from shooting off his arm and arresting him. THIS REVIEW CONTAINS MILD SPOILERS!


I will always stand by the my own opinion that the first film of the series is the best, but I was surprised at how much I enjoyed the third installment. It's not as good as the first one but it is definitely better than the second film. I'm going to begin with the story, all together it isn't that great, very few time travel stories are great because a lot of the time they are fundamentally flawed. This one is no different, because there are some blatantly obvious flaws as soon as the time travel aspect begins, I'm not going to go into anymore detail because it may ruin the story for you. With the film being mostly set in 1969 it provides a great opportunity for a change of pace and scenery to suit the decade and make the film stand out next to its predecessors. It's interesting to see what MIB technology was like back in late 60s compared to what it is like in the films set in the current day (the film is set before humanity had even made it onto the moon!).What is good about it though, is that the story is set out and told in a simple enough way so that all audiences can keep up and understand what is going on. Another surprise was that the 3D aspect of this film wasn't bad, like most 3D films out these days the 3D parts aren't that obvious in places but there are some great 3D moments in this movie. One especially good moment is near the beginning when Agent J walks into the hardware store, the owner has lasers on and in 3D it looks fantastic! Also that isn't the only coming out of the screen 3D moment in the film, which is nice to see for a change. More 3D films which revert back to old 3D when it was just about things flying out of the screen at you, it makes you experience much better! 


The real savior for this film however is the cast, Will Smith is brilliant as always, he is the reason the 'Men in Black' movies are loved, and that's because he is naturally funny. The film would be boring without him. Tommy Lee Jones, although he only gets a small amount of screen time, is a fundamental necessity to the film and story, and in his short amount of time, Jones establishes himself as the hard faced, stern talking father figure that Agent J longs to connect to. Jermaine Clement turned out to be a really good villain, he portrayed Boris the Animal really well, he was both funny and dangerous. Michael Stuhlbarg plays Griffin, an alien with precognitive powers, at first I thought I wasn't going to like this character because he seemed quite annoying, but as the film goes on I really started to like him. He has the ability to see many different futures that might or might not happen, which although many would see as a gift, he sees as a burden which he hates to carry, this becomes as the film progresses and we see a deep emotional character that can't bare to see the more darker versions of the future come to light. The real star of the film however, is Josh Brolin as the young Agent K. He portrays Agent K perfectly, in both the way he speaks, and his mannerisms. You'd almost think the voice was being dubbed by Tommy Lee Jones. He doesn't just mimic Jones' character, he also adds his own twist to it, showing that he hasn't always been the same person, that he was young once too. The audience gets to see what we love of Agent K, but also a new side to him which keeps the character fresh. Honestly Brolin is brilliant.


I also really liked the ending to this movie, we get a nice bit of action and something that pulls at our heartstrings, bringing the whole story round to a full circle. Brings it all to a close as this was intended to be the last film. Although Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones have been approached and have shown interest in a fourth installment. Which I wouldn't want them to do because it would ruin how this film ends, but I'd probably still go and see it because I love the franchise.


Here's a top tip for you, constantly be on the look out when you're watching this film, there are loads of links to previous characters from the other films and whenever they're in the MIB headquarters, look at the screens that monitor alien activity on earth, you can spot a few well known celebrities, including Lady Gaga, Tim Burton and I think Justin Bieber and David Beckham (I'm not positive on those last two).


All in all, it's a really good film, definitely worth seeing. it has flaws, but it has strong elements of what makes the series so enjoyable in the first place. I'd give 'Men in Black 3' an 8/10.





Sunday 27 May 2012

Weekly Blu Ray Review: Back To The Future, Die Another Day, Jurassic Park, Alien vs. Predator and Alien vs. Predator: Requiem

This is a new weekly post I'm beginning, basically at the end of every week I will be doing a quick review of all the blu rays I have watched that week (both new releases and older ones). The numerical rating will be rating the quality of the bu ray, not the film itself.

Back To The Future (1985)
A timeless classic, I sore this one in the cinema remastered last year for the 25th Anniversary, and I have to admit that I thought the work they'd done to it then was amazing, it looked as if it could have been made today. Well with the blu ray release they have managed to make it look even better, it is easily one of the best looking blu rays I own. Everything is sharp (especially the detail on the characters faces) and bright an the sound quality is good. The only complaint I really have with it is the same problem you always get with blu rays of older films, and that is that since everything looks so good, so real, you can easily tell what props are real and which aren't, and it magnifies a couple of bad visual effects. Apart from that, it looks great, no blu ray collection is complete without this film, it never gets old! 9/10.

Die Another Day (2002)
The last installment of Pierce Brosnan's James Bond in the series. I love Bond films on blu ray for one particular reason, and that is the opening sequence; since they are so over the top visually anyway, in blu ray, everyone looks so surreal, it's a great way to pull you into the film. Overall the film looks and sounds really good, however, there are occasions when the blu ray magnifies the awfulness of some of the special effects. That's always obvious with blu rays, the quality of the visuals is magnified, good becomes great, poor becomes, obviously poor. Apart from that, a very good blu ray for the collection. 7/10.

Jurassic Park (1993)
I sore this in the cinema last year for the re-release, it's one of those films I'd always wanted to see in the cinema, so I jumped at the opportunity. It wasn't remastered or anything, just as it was back in 1993. This is obviously part of the Ultimate Jurassic Park collection, and overall it looks good, there are parts that don't look so good, like in some scenes the backgrounds are sometimes a bit fuzzy, it's the same with some of the characters faces, nothing major, but still noticeable. Also things like bushes and leafs on trees sometimes blur together, it doesn't look good. The effects used on the dinosaurs are a bit outdated now, they still look great today (the mixture between stop-motion and CGI), just a little bit more noticeable. When I sore it in the cinema I noticed some flaws in the effects, but in it's defense, these effects were groundbreaking 19 years ago. With the blu ray release, somehow the bad side of the effects haven't been magnified as much as you'd expect, it's still noticeable, but a lot of the dinosaurs were incredibly detailed models so it enhances that detail making it look superb! So it's a mixture of good and bad, but still a necessity for your collection. I will probably be seeing the 3D re-release for the 20 year anniversary next year because I'm a sucker for 3D re-releases. 7/10.

Alien Vs. Predator (2004)
I was pleasantly surprised at how good this film looked, it's a shame the film itself isn't that great, but I'm not here to talk about that, I've already complained enough about this film on a previous blog post. There are a few great moments where thing looks great (i.e. the chestburster scene) and a few that don't look so great (e.i. the first fight between the Xenomorph and the Predator), but I think that's the fault of the film makers and not the blu ray quality, but like I've said with every film so far, the bad effects are magnified. 7.5/10.

Alien Vs. Predator: Requiem (2007)
Sadly this one does not look nearly as good as its predecessor, it's a better film altogether, but the blu ray release wasn't so good. This is because the film is very dark all the way through, even in the cinema it was difficult to see certain details, and it's the same with the blu rays. They had the perfect chance to enhance the right parts and make it easier on the eye, but they wasted the opportunity. The Xenomorph's and the Predator's look great, the blu ray really brings out the details in them (when you can see them, you have to walk into a lit up area first). So it's a good watch, but not worth the blu ray, the DVD looks just as good. 5/10.

That's it for this week, next week I shall definitely be reviewing 'Chronicle' and 'Iron Sky', plus whatever else I decide to watch during the week. Since 'Iron Sky' had such a limited release, I will be giving it a full movie review as well. If there's any film you want me to watch and review, just tweet me @DarthSpock.

Thursday 24 May 2012

Review of Ghost Recon Alpha (Short Film)

'Ghost Recon Alpha' is a 2012 short film that acts as a prequel to Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Future SoldierTM game being released at the end of the month. The movie invites you into the future of war with the US Armed Force's point of spear. Inserted deep behind enemy lines, the Ghosts must strike swiftly to eliminate one of the world's most feared war criminals, and vanish as they came.

This is the second short film I've watched and review tonight, each one is completely different from the other, and I have to say that this is a really good piece of work, it's almost as if they've taken a scene right out of a feature film, it looks that good! You can pick at the special effects a little bit, but it doesn't really matter, you can forgive it because of how good everything going on around it is. It gives you, the audience, a great sense of realism switching from a third person perspective to a first person (from the point of view of the drones). It makes you believe that this is the type of warfare we will be facing in the future, because nothing in it is too outlandish.

It's easily the best promotional video I've seen for a game, a lot of time and effort has gone into this, the best before this was for Halo ODST a few years back when they got Peter Jackson to film a live action sequence. I also noticed that it gives special thanks to the one and only Ridley Scott, looks like he has been busy this year. The film ends where I expect the game will take off, and I can already see that the public wants more of this.

Give it a watch!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-wAzlqzXH0

It isn't just good as a promotional film, it's good as a film full stop! A solid 9/10.




Review of TELL (Short Film)

'TELL' is a 2012 short- horror/drama film by Ryan Connolly. This is the first short movie I've reviewed on this blog and I was really impressed by the quality of it, so I will probably be doing more in the future. I have been a fan of Ryan Connolly for many months now, he is the creator and host of the podcasts FilmRiot and FilmState, on FilmRiot he basically goes through everything you need to make a great movie, and this was the first serious piece of work from him that I've watched. I'd heard great things about it so I went into it with a positive mind.

Connolly wrote, directed, shot and edited the film and I have to say he has done an amazing job with it! The acting is good, the lighting, script, story, music and effects were all really good. The pacing is kept at a slow steady pace and that coincides with the music really well to create a very tense atmosphere. I wasn't expecting it to be as creepy/scary as it was, I think it gave me more shivers than most mainstream horrors, because it's not just jump/shock scares, the way the scene has been set out, and how it looks on screen, just looks, creepy. The only thing that I think let it down was near the end with the policewoman, I don't know whether it was bad acting on that actresses' behalf, or if it's just the slightly cliche scene that we've all seen a million times before, but it just didn't work for me.

All in all it is a really good piece of film work, it's gritty, and it's good filming down to the bone. I'd definitely recommend giving it a watch. I've posted the link below.

http://doyoufeelguilty.com/

I'm going to give 'TELL' an 8/10. Good job Mr Connolly!

Wednesday 23 May 2012

What's Your Top Five Bonds and Bond Movies?

A friend of mine told me he wanted me to do another poll. He didn't know what he wanted it to be about so with the recent 'Skyfall' teaser trailer being released, and it getting positive reaction, I've decided to do a poll about Bond films. The fact that I was watching 'Die Another Day' today has nothing to do with this decision...

Since there have been so many Bond movies, and so many Bonds, I've narrowed it down to my favourite five, that should get people thinking. It may be the case that your favourite Bond might not necessarily be in your favourite Bond movie. 

So here's my Top Five Bond Movies. 

5. Goldfinger (1965) Sean Connery
4. Live and Let Die (1973) Roger Moore
3. The Man With The Golden Gun (1974) Roger Moore
2. Tomorrow Never Dies (1997) Pierce Brosnan
1. GoldenEye (1995) Pierce Brosnan
 
And here's my Top Five James Bond's.

5. George Lazenby
4. Daniel Craig
3. Sean Connery
2. Roger Moore
1. Pierce Brosnan

I picked Pierce Brosnan because it was his Bond films that I watched when I was younger, he was my first Bond. The first Bond film I saw was 'Die Another Day' and that got me hooked. Only after that film did I proceed to watch the classics, so Brosnan's films will always be special to me, plus 'GoldenEye' in my opinion is the best Bond film (so far). 





Review of The Dictator

'The Dictator' is a 2012 comedy film co-written by and starring Sacha Baron Cohen and directed by Larry Charles. Baron Cohan stars as Admiral General Aladeen, a dictator from the fictional North African country of the Republic of Wadiya. He stars alongside Ben Kingsley and Anna Faris. Unlike Baron Cohen's previous films of this type ('Borat' and 'Bruno') this one was completely scripted.


The film isn't bad, it's definitely much better than 'Borat' (I haven't seen 'Bruno'). The performances in this movie are alright, with the exception of Sacha Baron Cohen, the whole casts performs at an average level, I think this may be a result of the script, because for example, Ben Kingley, is an amazing actor and we've seen it before when amazing actors don't get the screen time they deserve. Even Anna Faris is a good actress, and although she has a good amount of screen time, she even given a decent amount of material that really shows her skill as an actress. The story is nothing special, but with this type of film it never is. It is definitely more funny if you have a knowledge of the current political situation, I'm not saying if you don't then you shouldn't go see it, because there is still plenty of laughs to be had. 


The comedy is consistent throughout, you're never left for longer than a minute without something to laugh at. To be quite honest, there are very few laughs that are absolutely hilarious, that keep you laughing for ages afterwords (by a few, I mean that there are some really funny moments that shock the audience). The way it works in this film is that when it counts, it's really funny, there's lots of parts you can giggle at, but there are some scenes that catch you off guard and you find yourself laughing out loud in the cinema. One of the great things about this movie is that it pushes the boundaries of comedy, by this I mean that the whole concept of a comedy about a dictator and terrorism is very risky with the sort of political climate we have today. They even make jokes about Kim Jong-il and Osama Bin Laden, which is funny because they're names that are still fresh in our minds, but it's risky because there are a lot of people that would consider this material inappropriate or offensive. Sacha Baron Cohen has always been one to push the boundaries of his films, all the films he makes of this style, offend somebody, somewhere, and that's what people like about them, they know that if they go see his films, they're going to see some comedic material that others would consider too risky to joke about. 


That's all I want to say about this film, because I don't want to spoil it, I'd highly recommend going to see it, it may not be strong on the story side of things, but it's funny, it's really funny. It should do well this year because apart from '21 Jump Street', it doesn't have that much competition, especially with 'American Reunion' being a disappointment to most. I'm going to give 'The Dictator' a 7.5/10.


So go see it! You'll laugh!



Tuesday 22 May 2012

An Overlook of the world Prometheus Is Entering

'Prometheus' is one the most anticipated films of 2012, with thousands of fans awaiting Ridley Scott's return to the world of science fiction, with the film that for months he claimed was not an 'Alien' prequel, but we all knew it was, and then he confirmed that indeed, it was. The trailers just scream 'Alien', and it has been a long time since the final 'Alien' movie (not including the AVP franchise), what can we expect from this movie? Whatever happens inevitably leads to the events in 'Alien' in someway or another. Will we find out more about that mysterious crashed alien ship? Will we find out where the Xenomorphs come from? Will we see any Xenomorphs? These are all questions that 'Alien' fans will have in mind before seeing 'Prometheus' next month. This blog entry is all about the films set after the upcoming 'Prometheus', and the world that this movie in now entering. Warning, this entry contains spoilers from across the whole franchise, so you have been warned, but in all honesty, you should have seen all these by now.

What happens in 'Prometheus' directly leads to the events in Ridley Scott's 1979 'Alien'. 'Alien' is about a commercial towing spaceship called the Nostromo, which at the time is on a return trip from Thedus to Earth, hauling a refinery and twenty million tons of mineral ore, and carrying seven crew members in stasis. The crews stasis is disrupted by an emergency transmission of unknown origins from a nearby planetoid. Upon investigation the crew discovers a derelict alien spaceship. The same spaceship we see in the 'Prometheus' trailer. The films revolves around the main protagonist Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver), the film was a huge financial and critical success. Ridley Scott managed to reinvent the whole world of science fiction with this movie. There are particular aspects of the film that instantly make it recognizable to the masses, these being the egg and facehuggers (the eight legged, tailed parasite that attaches itself to the victims face and lays an embryo in their throat) and the chestburster which grows up to become the alien/Xenomorph. The scene where the chestburster forces itself through Kane's (John Hurt) chest is one of the most iconic scene in sci fi. At the time it was terrifying, along with the end resulting alien itself. It was such a brutal entry into the world for the creature that it left audiences stunned. The Xenomorph itself is iconic for its mouth within a mouth and its acid for blood, it's almost as if everything about this creature can kill you. It was just so strange to comprehend a creature with concentrated acid for blood, nothing like it had been seen before. The marketing line "In space, no one can hear you scream" describes the exact tone of the movie, because the crew are completely alone, trapped in the middle of space with no chance of a rescue, fighting against a creature they know nothing about (which is more than capable of killing every one of them).

'Alien' instantly threw Sigourney Weaver into Hollywood fame, making her a household name, it also opened the doors for a whole new world of science fiction, along with its own mass media franchise, stretching from numerous movie sequels, to toys, games and books. Although Ridley Scott did not return to do the sequel, they managed to find someone more than capable of handling the task.

In 1986 James Cameron (Avatar and Titanic) took the helm and brought us 'Aliens', which is personally, my favourite film of the franchise. The films continues the story of Ellen Ripley, who at the beginning of the film, has been in stasis for 50 years. She awakens to find her world completely changed, and that colonists have been placed on LV-426 (the name now given to the planetoid). She faces many problems from the start, including having to deal with the aftermath of destroying the Nostromo in order to destroy the Xenomorph. When the company loses contact with LV-426, Ripley along with a squad of colonial marines are sent in to investigate what has happened. Upon arrival they discover that the colonists must have encountered the alien spaceship that Ripley had warned them about. Following the success of 'The Terminator' in 1984, which brought Cameron into the line light as an action director, 'Aliens' was given the green light, along with a $18 million budget. Cameron brings a different tone to the franchise, instead of Ridley Scott's horror motif, Cameron gives in a sense of action and adventure. Basically he takes the first movie, throws in a hundred more Xenomorphs, and marines with big rifles, what more could we ask for? The story is good, the acting is good, the effects are great! The Xenomorphs were created by using a mixture of costumes, puppets and miniatures. A lot of work went into making them as realistic as possible; changes had to be made in order to make the alien more durable, they believed if they kept the exact same design as in the first movie, then the head piece would split through too much movement. The scenes involving the Alien Queen were the most difficult to film (according to the staff). This is because a life-sized mock-up was created by Stan Winston's company in the United States to see how it would operate. Once the testing was complete, the crew working on the queen flew to England and began work creating the final version, which stood fourteen feet tall! It was operated using a mixture of puppeteers, control rods, hydraulics, cables and a crane above to support it. Two puppeteers were inside the suit operating its arms, and sixteen were required to move it. All sequences involving the queen were filmed in-camera with no post-production manipulation, which is truly a marvelous achievement. Even today the queen still stands up against many CGI monsters made for movies, this proves that there is still a place for real, hand made props in the world of film. The fact that the whole thing was hand operated without the help of post-production editing to make it look good, is just brilliant!

With 'Aliens' being so different to its predecessor, it was well received by critics (many believing it to be better) and it was also a financial hit, with a total box office of $131 million. Even today it is classed as one of the greatest sci fi movies ever made, and possibly the biggest achievement for this movie is the fact that it managed to surpass 'Alien' which was already a classic and had left really big boots for Cameron to fill on this job.

Then it begins to go downhill a bit, in 1992 with 'Alien 3', it was the debut of director David Fincher, who instantly had a huge challenge ahead of film, following great directors like Scott and Cameron. I do actually like this movie, but it's a massive step down from 'Aliens'. The story begins with an ejected pod from the Colonial Marine spaceship Sulaco from 'Aliens' crash-landing on a refinery/prison planet, killing everyone aboard with the exception of Lieutenant Ellen Ripley. Unknown to Ripley, an Alien egg was aboard the ship. It is born in the prison and begins a killing spree. The prison has about 20 inmates, each one either a murderer or a rapist, and each has taken on religion and an oath of celibacy (so Ripley's presence there disturbs the peace among the inmates). It tries to go back to the horror theme from 'Alien', but throughout the movie there are moment where you just feel bored, waiting for something to happen. The effects on the new Alien, the 'runner', do not stand up well today, especially next to the previous two films. Stan Winston, responsible for the creature effects in 'Aliens', was approached but was not available. Winston instead recommended Tom Woddruff, Jr and Alec Gulls, two former workers of his studio who had just started their own company, Amalgamated Dynamics. So they're to blame for the awful effects.

I did like the idea behind a different Alien, a look at what would happen if a facehugger attached itself to something other than a human, so it kind of takes the story in a new direction, providing Ripley with a new challenge. Evidently the franchise was supposed to end with 'Alien 3' because Ripley dies at the end of the movie, but in the words of James Cameron "Death is never certain in science fiction". Ironically, he said that about Sigourney Weaver's character in 'Avatar 2'.

The film had a very difficult production, with multiple screenwriters constantly getting involved and dropping out. Fincher was attached to the project very late on and he had very little time to prepare. The studio made the process agonizing for him, constantly getting involved and changing things without his consent. It received mixed reviews and was not very successful at the box office.

Apparently there had been other plans for 'Alien 3', and from the sounds of it, if they'd gone ahead and made that movie instead, then 'Alien 3 and 4' would have been so much better! Originally Brandywine Productions was approached by 20th Century Fox to create two more sequels. After going through several ideas, David Giler and Walter Hill, thr film series producers, "settles upon a complex two-part story that offered the underhanded Weyland-Yutani Corporation facing off with a militarily aggressive culture of humans whose rigid socialist ideology has caused them to separate from Earth's society" Sounds interesing doesn't it? Sigourney Weaver (Ripley) would only make a cameo appearance in the third film, with the lead going to Michael Biehn's Corporal Hick's from 'Aliens'. 'Aliens 4' would see the return of Ripley "in an epic battle with Alien warriors mass produced by the expatriated Earthlings". Weaver in particular liked the Col War metaphor and agreed to the smaller role feeling that her character would become "a burden to the story".

Weaver also agreed on being removed because she disagreed with the studio changes to 'Aliens', which removed scenes of Ripley's backstory that she considered crucial. 20th Century Fox didn't like the idea, but they agreed to finance the story, but asked if Hill and Giler could get Ridley Scott to direct. They also asked that the two films be shot back to back to lessen the production costs, However this proved to be difficult as Scott, though interested, was busy working on three films at the same time. William Gibson agreed to write the script. However, when a final screenplay (by David Twohy) was delivered to Fix president Joe Roth, he did not like the idea of Ripley being removed, declaring that "Sigourney Weaver is the centerpiece of the series" and Ripley was "really the only female warrior we have in our movie mythology". Weaver was then called, with a reported 45 million salary, plus a share of the box office receipts.

So we blame Joe Roth for scrapping what could have been two amazing movies, following the style of 'Aliens', instead we got a disappointing third movie (both for us and him I imagine) and an alright fourth movie, which brings us to the fourth installment.

In 1997 French filmmaker Jean-Pierre Jeunet gave us 'Alien Resurrection', from the outset it is better than 'Alien 3'. The film is set 200 years after 'Alien 3'. Ripley is cloned and an Alien queen is surgically removed from her body. The United Systems Military hopes to breed Aliens to study and research on the spaceship USM Auriga, using human hosts kidnapped and delivered to them by a group of mercenaries. The Aliens escape their enclosures, while Ripley and the mercenaries attempt to escape and destroy the Auriga before it reaches its destination, Earth. The story is very far fetched, but it's science fiction, anything can happen. There lot's of rewrites of the script, trying to work out how they could bring Ripley back from the dead, because the studio still wanted her as the protagonist. Originally the film was going to revolve around a clone of the character Newt from 'Aliens'. Joss Whedon (The Avengers Assemble) was brought in to write the film's script. He composed a thirty-page treatment surrounding this idea before being informed that the studio, though impressed with his script, now intended to base the story around Ripley. He had to rewrite the script in a way that would bring back the Ripley character, a task he found difficult. Whedon's initial screenplay had a third act on Earth, with a final battle for Earth itself. He wrote five versions of the final act, none of which ended up in the film. The whole idea of space mercenaries that Whedon used for this film is similar to that which turned into his short-lived series 'Firefly'.

Just like with the previous films, we are introduced to a new breed of Alien, this one is much stranger than all the rest. Apparently something happens in the cloning process that effects both Ripley and the Alien queen, resulting in the eventual birth of the Alien/Human Hybrid. The aim was to make it appear more human than Alien, and they achieve this in the face. I won't go into too much detail, you'll just have to watch it and make your own opinion. It;s an average movie, but it's definitely an improvement from 'Alien 3', but also it's no where as good as 'Alien' and 'Aliens'.

That's us done with the Alien Collection, I'm now going to talk about the extended universe of Alien, the crossover with the Predator franchise.Firstly we have 'Alien vs. Predator' in 2004, which shows an new idea of the Xenomorph's role in the universe, as hunt for the Predators. The film indicates that the Predators brought them to Earth in order to hunt them, and they used humans as hosts to breed them. The film itself isn't bad, the Aliens and the Predators are a perfect match for each other, however it's one of those movies where you leave thinking it could have been so much better. The main advantage of this film is the ending, which sets up for a chance of redemption in the franchise. In 2007, we were presented with 'Alien vs. Predator: Requiem', which follows the story from the end of the last movie. We are introduced to a new breed of Alien, the Pred-Alien, or the Abomination (it's obvious where that came from). Straight away there's a major gap in the story, and that is that at the end of the first movie, the Predators leave on a massive ship, with dozens of other Predators, and the chestburster then appears, but at the beginning of this movie, they're on a much much smaller ship, with only three Predators. Yet again it isn't a great movie, it doesn't quite work because it was supposed to be set in space sometime in the future, but the studio decided they wanted to conclude the story on Earth. Someone made a big mistake with these two film, they could have been really good, they're enjoyable, there's no doubt about that, but it's a wasted opportunity.

So 'Prometheus is entering a large franchise with some very good films to compete with, it does however have the advantage that it's main competition in the franchise was made in the 80s, because all the films made in the 90s and 20s, didn't quite live up the standard left for them. If 'Prometheus is as good as we're all hoping it will be (which I think it will be), it could revive the franchise, there has been talks for years about doing a fifth 'Alien' film. Before 20th Century Fox gave 'Alien vs. Predator' the greenlight, James Cameron had been working on a script for a fifth installment, with Ridley Scott to direct. It is believed that this became 'Prometheus' but there is also more talk that Sigourney Weaver has shown interest in returning for another film, continuing on from 'Alien Resurrection'. Apparently James Cameron actually liked 'Alien vs. Predator, rating it third out of the five 'Alien' movies out at the time, whereas Ridley Scott thought it killed the validity of the franchise.

So what does the future hold? The possibility of a fifth 'Alien' film, but also there has been talks of an 'Alien vs. Predator 3', which would follow the original plan of the second movie and be set in space in the future, possibly giving us more of a look at the Predators home planet, but we only get teased with in 'Alien vs. Predator: Requiem'. At the moment it seems unlikely that it will actually go ahead, but there is more activity going on on the other side of the water. Ever since 'Predators' came out in 2012, there has been talks of a sequel. The first movie was actually toned down in order to made a sequel possible. There's more news! With Arnold Schwarzenegger's return to acting, along with 'Terminator 5', he was apparently asked to star in 'Predator 3', which would be amazing! So if 'Prometheus' does as well as we expect it to, it may set the ball rolling on the rest of these sequels, which could potentially be really good for the world of sci fi.

So there we have it, a brief look at the world that 'Prometheus' is entering. Ridley Scott reinvented sci fi and cinema with 'Alien', can he bring back that same magic touch with this prequel? Let's hope so! As you can probably tell, I am extremely excited for this movie (hence why I spent ages writing this post), and it has all the right ingredients to make it one of the best films this year. It has some tough competition this year, with 'The Avengers Assemble' now the fourth highest grossing film of all time, and with the release of 'The Amazing Spider-man' and 'The Dark Knight Rises' very close on the horizon, we'll just have to wait and see how well it holds up.


Tuesday 15 May 2012

Review of Dark Shadows

Dark Shadows is a 2012 American horror comedy film based on the 1966-1971 Gothic horror soap opera of the same name. The film is directed by Tim Burton and stars Johnny Depp as Barnabas Collins, a 200-year-old vampire, Eva Green as Angelique  Bouchard a vengeful witch who plots a vendetta against Barnabas and his family, and Michelle Pfeiffer as his cousin Elizabeth Collins Stoddard. When I first heard about this film, and that Tim Burton was directing it, I had a great feeling that finally the reputation of the vampire on the big screen had the chance to redeem itself (the Twilight films have more than sufficiently destroyed that).


I've never seen the TV series, so I went into the cinema with an open mind, and I can clearly conclude that Tim Burton has done a good job with this, it carries everything that makes Tim Burton films appealing. The film is by no means perfect, there's a lot that could have been done better. I'm going to start with the cast, as with everything Depp does, he was great as Barnabas Collins, you can tell that he studied the like of Christopher Lee in order to create his incarnation of the vampire. Which is obviously a good thing because that means he was mimicking the golden age of the vampire, back when they were played by some of the greatest actors of the time. Depp combines  his formula for comedy with the charming yet ferociousness nature of the vampire. When you also add in the fact that his character is from the 1700s, his mannerisms appear out of place in the 1970s, it is the perfect setting for a comedy, but it is important not to allow that to distract from the fact that a vampire is a deadly creature, that needs to feed, needs to kill. As for the rest of the cast, Eva Green is brilliant as the witch, she's sinister, sexy and cunning. Her and Depp would a good on screen pair. Helena Bonham Cater has a smaller role than she normally does in Burton's films, but she still makes herself known. Apart from Chloe Grace Moretz and Bella Heathcote, the rest of the cast is extremely average. Alice Cooper has a cool cameo in the film, it's quite funny how he looks exactly the same today as he did in the 70s (the guy has always looked old!). 


The film itself is good, flows pretty well (my only complaint is that it seems to rush through the prologue) and the music resembles that of 'Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street' (minus the musical film aspect of it), which works well in this. On the comedy side of things, it's funny, but it's not nearly as funny as it could be, and the laughs aren't long lasting. You find yourself laughing at Depp's character more than anything. The whole film as that particular look and feel that all Burton films have, and I strongly believe that this is one of his better pieces of work. The film is consistent throughout, everything about it is decent up until the end, where things start to become a bit ridiculous and border line stupid.


So overall, it's a good film, definitely worth seeing if you are a Tim Burton and Johnny Depp fan, but it's one of those ones that could have been done better. It isn't a big return to glory for vampires that i wanted, but it is definitely a good start; it's like the first step in a long journey to making vampires cool again. I'd give this film 7/10.



Thursday 10 May 2012

What's Your Favorite American Pie Movie?

Just a quick post before I head off and get my hair destroyed by the barber college (why I decided to be a model for them is beyond me), I'm interested to see which out of all the 'American Pie' movies (including the direct to DVD ones) are your favorite. I'm not too fussed if you want to include 'American Reunion', I will be.

Here's my list of my favorite 'American Pie' films, ranking from 8 down to 1 (8 being the worst and 1 being the best).

8.American Pie Presents:The Naked Mile
7.American Pie Presents: Beta House
6.American Pie Presents: The Book Of Love
5.American Wedding
4.American Reunion
3.American Pie Presents: Band Camp
2.American Pie
1. American Pie 2

I'd love to see your opinions, comment on here, or on Facebook, even on Twitter if you so wish!

Wednesday 9 May 2012

Review of American Reunion

American Reunion is a 2012 comedy film, written and directed by Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg. It is the eighth installment of the American Pie film series overall, and the fourth theatrical release. The film includes all the cast members from the original three movies, just from knowing that I was very optimistic about it, knowing that it would be better than any of the direct to DVD releases. It is set thirteen years after the events of 'American Pie'. Warning, this review contains mild spoilers.

This was probably one of the most difficult films I've reviewed so far, because there's much I have to hold back so that I don't ruin the movie, but it's also difficult to get my views out without doing that. You'll understand what I mean if you go and see it.

I'm going to start by saying that it's brilliant to see the original cast back together. I thought they were going to miss out a few of the minor characters, but nope, they're all there. I was disappointed that not all the cast members got a lot of screen time, but when you put the whole thing in perspective, it's the same situation they had with 'American Wedding' in the fact that it would be difficult to write a story big enough and interesting enough to give so many cast members their own decently sized part.

It's a funny film, the laughs are consistent throughout, but the main problem I had with this film, is that the only thing that makes it feel like a true American Pie film, is the cast. By that I mean that this film may be funny, but there's no outrages scenes that would instantly come to mind if this film was brought up in conversation. With the first film we have the scene when Jim strips and in the second one when he glues his hand to his penis. These types of scenes are what made the franchise famous in the first place, it was crude, pushing boundaries of what was allowed to be shown on screen, even the direct to DVD releases had scenes like these ones, like in 'American Pie Presents: Band Camp when Matt Stifler gets an oboe stuck on his penis.The trademarks of the franchise are the outrages scenes that we all remember, and will probably never forget. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed this movie, but one of the most memorable scenes in my opinion, is in the trailer. There's very little that differentiates it from other comedies out there, apart from, like I said before, the cast. Other parts of the film is similar to its predecessors,  in the fact that the gang always manage to take a simple situation, and make it ridiculously complicated, with everything going wrong at every turning, and that's what I love about all the American Pie movies. They're so ridiculous, but it's always in a way that it makes you think "this could actually happen" kind of way, because a lot of the stuff that happens is just exaggerated versions of events that could happen to anyone.  

The story itself is actually quite good, it's not all about the reunion, the impending reunion merely brings all the cast members back home to East Great Falls and back together and it centralizes on how much there lives have changed since High School, and how some of them are having trouble adjusting to that life and how the relationships between the characters has changed now that they're older.  The reunion itself, acts almost in the same way prom did in the first film, it also acts as the point where they tie off loose ends from the story and they bring in all the characters that they haven't managed to fit in before that point in the film.

All in all the film is one massive blast from the past, if you aren't a fan of the movies, then there's a lot you won't understand about this one, because there are many references back to the first one especially, but if you are a fan, then there's a chance you'll love it. Like I said before, the main problem I have with it is that it doesn't feel like the old American Pies, and the jokes aren't really that fresh, but I would still recommend going to see it, because it's still a good film, it's really funny, and you'll fall in love with the earlier films again. It's definitely a film for you to see with your friends and enjoy yourself. It was a good way to go full circle with the cast and bring it all to an end, but I think it's time the story does end. Yes, they do leave it open for more sequels, but I think it's time they put it to bed, they were pushing it with making this one anyway. I'd give 'American Reunion' a 6.5/10.


Monday 7 May 2012

What Is Your Top 10 Childhood Disney Movies?

At the request of a friend I have decided to do a second poll. This time about Disney films. Before I got started I realised that as you get closer to the current day, Disney films start appearing less and less like the Disney films I grew up with. For example, I love the Avengers, but I don't see it as a Disney film (Disney owns Marvel Studios). So I decided that we should all have a look back at what made our childhoods special, what characters have stayed with you over the years, and which ones you still watch on the TV every time they're on.

So here's my Top 10 Disney movies from my childhood...

10. Mary Poppins (1964)
9. The Santa Clause (1994
8. Treasure Planet (2002)
7. George of the Jungle (1997
6. Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey (1993)
5. Monsters, Inc (2001)
4. The Jungle Book (1967)
3. Aladdin (1992)
2. Flubber (1997)
1. Toy Story (1995)

So there we have it, obviously there are so many others that I could include, it took me a while to narrow it down.I'm quite surprised that I didn't put Toy Story 2 in there to be honest, I may regret that later.

As usual comment either on the blog or on Facebook (you could even get in contact with me on Twitter!). I look forward to reading your Top 10.

Sunday 6 May 2012

Review of Silent House


Silent House is a 2011 (released in the UK in 2012) independent horror film, directed by Chris Kentis and Laura Lau. The plot focuses on a young woman named Sarah (Elizabeth Olsen), who is terrorized in her family vacation home whilst she is there cleaning the place up with her father and uncle. The film is a remake of the 2012 Uruguayan film 'La casa muda' (The Silent House), which was allegedly based on an actual incident that occurred in a village in Uruguay in the 1940s. The films marketing was aimed at the fact that it was filmed in real time, and was edited so as to appear as a single continuous shot (similar to Alfred Hitchcock's 'Rope' in 1948).

Before I jump straight into this I am going to say that I am rubbish when it comes to watching horror flicks in the cinema, I'm fine when they're on the TV, but honestly, in the cinema I am a complete coward (has to be admitted). Obviously the best thing about this movie is that it was filmed to give the impression of real time, so as much of it as possible was filmed in one shot, which would be very difficult to do, not just in the case of filming, but it would be really tough of the actors, especially the lead role, in this case Olsen, because in any other movie, you'd do maybe a dozen or more takes, and they'd pick the best one, whereas in a scenario like this, nearly the whole film is one take, that's a lot of pressure and I think Olsen pulled it off fantastically. If she did slip up at any point she pulled it back and really sold it for me, she was excellent. Now back to the method of filming; I think the method of creating a sense of rel time worked really well, at first it looked a bit iffy because it looked very shaky as it followed Olsen around (it just looked like bad camera work), but as the film progresses you realise that it blends in with how the story is being told, and even something as simple as a shaky camera creates a sense of realism. Also the beauty of doing one continuous shot is that in order to preserve the realism, special effects are kept to a minimum (maybe even none at all), no CGI, just the right noises made at the right time. The whole thing is gritty, it's like all the modern computer work has been stripped back and has left nothing but a pure product of good acting and filming. It almost gives off the feeling of a found-footage movie, without the need for a running commentary to explain everything that is happening. So a wise choice by the directors on that one. It definitely creates a sense of realism which is difficult to create in a horror flick.

I've already mentioned how the acting is top notch, but that doesn't make a brilliant movie, in my opinion, it is the story that lets it down. It begins the way many horror films do, i.e. really slow, nothing much happening, and then slowly building up to something big. The problem is with this one, is that it just keeps building and building, an building, you keep anticipating a jump which doesn't happen! You'll get one decent jump scare (that's another thing, the atmosphere may build up a good scary vibe in the cinema, but the scares are all jump scares), and then you're left waiting for what feels like ages (which is surprising because it's quite a short film). Admittedly the story does pick up a bit near the end, it even takes a turn in a strange and slightly disturbing direction (honestly ' The Cabin In The Woods' didn't have a twist as good as this). By the end you don't quite know how to react to what you've just seen, you find yourself replaying the whole movie in your head trying to piece things together.

That's basically all I can say on this film without giving too much away. It was never going to a hugely successful film. It's good, in the sense that it looks good, and the acting's good, but the story does let it down, because even though it picks up near the end, there's a good chance it'll have lost some of its audiences interest by then. Basically if you're a film fan, and are interested in how films are made, then go check this one out, because the whole real time and one continuous shot method works well and it is a really interesting way to do it. It's the type of method that would only work with a horror. Like most independent movies, it wouldn't have had a huge budget, so this method of filming is a suitable substitute to pricey visual effects. It has a nice, gritty feel to it that can only be appreciated in the cinema. I'd give this film a 6.5/10.

I know that's a low rating, but like I said, if you're interesting in seeing different ways of filming and presenting a story on screen, then go check this film out. It's definitely worth your time.

Thursday 3 May 2012

The Build Up to American Reunion

For years the original American Pie series has had a special place in my heart, because even though they weren't well received by critics, they have still managed to secure themselves in modern pop culture (for example, what teenager today doesn't know what the word 'milf' means?). I find the films extremely entertaining and I still laugh every time I watch them. So here's a quick overview of where it all started (I'm mostly going to talk about the original three movies, the ones that were released in the cinema). I am not going to go into depth about film (i.e. cast and story) because it would take forever for me to do that with all seven films. This post does contain very mild spoilers.

Our Journey begins 13 years ago...

American Pie (1999)
This is where it all started, written by Adam Hertz and was a directorial debut for brothers Paul and Chris Weitz. The film followers a group of students in their final year of high school, on a mission to get themselves laid  before they leave. The goal of getting laid at prom being the main goal. Like I said, I'm not going to go in depth with the story, but the film goes on with each of the characters trying their best to achieve their goal whilst inevitably encountering awkward and embarrassing situations. With memorable characters and scenes that are now embedded into the minds of thousands of teenagers, 'American Pie may not have been a critical success, but it was most certainly a box office success. The film took in a gross worldwide revenue pf $235,483,004, $132,922,000 of which was from international tickets. The success of this movie spawned two immediate sequels over the next few years and a series of direct to video releases.

American Pie 2 (2001)
The sequel to the loved 'American Pie' continues the story of the same four friends as they now adjust to life at college, believing that their luck will change now that they are older and more mature. As their summer break comes up they decide to rent a beach house and have a party. Throughout the movie they encounter more hilarious situations, most of which top those of the first movie. For example, the scene when Jim's masturbating and he uses glue instead of lube, is possibly the best scene across the whole franchise! The film got mixed reviews, this time because it lacked the originality of the first movie, which is to be expected with it being a sequel, but it is still the best received film of the series.

American Wedding (2003)
This sequel was the final of the series to make it to the big screen for what would turn out to be 9 years! It ties up the story of Jim and Michelle, going from meeting in the first movie, to dating at the end of the second movie, to finally getting married in this installment. Story wise, this varied the most from the theme of the original movie. The story itself doesn't revolve around the main characters obsessing with getting themselves laid, but they obsess with helping Jim give Michelle the wedding she wants. Their journey takes them from dance offs in a gay bar, to strippers dressed as french maids and police women duck taping someone to a chair. Naturally the gang faces many challenges on the way to organising the perfect wedding, some more ridiculous than others, and for once we even see a little bit of characters development (many will disagree, but I don't think characters development has been strong in any character apart from Jim). One main notable point about this film is the absence of particular characters from the previous two movies, most the absence of   'Oz' who had to be written out due to scheduling conflicts. The other characters were written out because the writers didn't believe that they couldn't make an interesting  enough story that could include such a large cast of characters including the new editions.

Now we make to the stuff that didn't make it to the big screen...

American Pie Presents: Band Camp (2005)
This first installment of a new series of American Pie movies follows the characters of Matt Stifler, the younger brother of Steve Stfler from the original series. The story follwers the younger Stifler as he gets himself into trouble and is made to attend band camp, where he plans to reveal all the dark naughty secrets of the campers, but in the process discovers more about himself and becomes more attached to his fellow campers. This is my personal favourite from the spin off series. I don't even know why, I guess it's just because it sticks in my head the most due to a number of memorable scenes (i.e. the scene with the oboe).

American Pie Presents: The Naked Mile (2006) 
This is the second installment of the spin off series and it includes a new cast, including a new Stifler (two new Stiflers), and follows the story of the younger Stifler being given free pass by his girlfriend to go out and explore his sexual needs. Him and his friends journey to visit possibly my favourite Stifer from the spin off, Dwight Stifler, played by Steve Talley. The films is filled with raunchy drinking parties, and the famous naked mile run which the film is named after. It's a funny enough film, not the strongest of the series, but it has some laughs, and each of the main characters goes away with his own awkward sexual encounter, one of which is exceptionally hilarious.

A horrible point to mention is that back in 2007, a 22 year old man called David Reid, from Manchester died when copying the binge drinking game called "last man standing" depicted in the movie.

American Pie Presents: Beta House (2007)
This installment follows the story of the young Eric Stfler, now going to college to join his older cousin Dwight, and it follows him and his new friends campaigning to complete a set amount of tasks in order to become 'betas'. Inevitably the house has a rival house called the 'geek' house and the two come to blows at the end in the famous (banned) 'Greek Olympiad'. It is funny, but ridiculous at the same time. I'm really not a fan of this one, it kind of feels like a low point because it just doesn't feel like 'American Pie', they could easily have made it its own film, but instead they slapped a Stifler on it, and released it as part of a well-liked franchise.

American Pie Presents: The Book Of Love (2009)
To date this is the final installment of the American Pie spin off series. With a completely new cast, the film was set 11 years after the events of 'American Pie', the whole film ties in a lot of aspects of the previous films, and in my opinion, is an improvement on its predecessor. It is still not a fantastic film, but it brings back some of those magical elements of the original films and takes it in a new direction. The end of the movie suggests that it was the kick start the series again. So far their is no word on whether or not this series will be continued.

One thing all of the movies have in common, is the appearance of Eugene Levy, better known as Jim's dad Noah Levenstein. He is the main factor that binds all of the movies and has acted as a mentor and councilor to the main characters all the way through.It becomes clear as the movies go on that he isn't the sexually naive father figure that we are introduced to int he first movie back in 1999. 

And finally we are here, the end product of many years anticipation...

American Reunion (2012)
Also known as 'American Pie 4' and 'American Pie: The Reunion', obviously I cannot review the film yet because I won't be seeing it until early next week. So what can we expect? Well we expect some of the former glory of the original movies with the return of the original cast, now much older, but none the wiser. If the films good enough, it may act as a revival of the series, giving the writers a chance to explore new areas involving troubles in the adult life. It could also revive the spin off series, since the final installment leaves it open to many possible story lines.

I really hope 'American Reunion' does justice to the franchise, it is the first of the series to make it to the big screen since 2003. Theoretically it should do really well, because not only will fans of the original films want to go and see it, but it will attract attention from the new generation of teenagers who maybe aren't as attuned to the series as the rest of us.

Well I hope you enjoyed this quick catch up on the 'American Pie' series, it's hard to believe that a film, named after a song released that summer, went on to become something to large and culturally accepted (and on that note, the soundtrack to these movies across the board is amazing! There is even a cameo from Blink 182 in the first movie!). Thank you American Pie, we love you.

Look forward to my next to 'build up' installments where I explore the original 'Spiderman' trilogy and the history of the 'Batman' franchise in preparation for 'The Amazing Spiderman' and 'The Dark Knight Rises'.