Latest Vampire For New Moon

So with production of the vampire equal well underway in Vancouver, teens all over the world have been begging for news as to who will be playing the characters from their beloved book series. With casting for the wolf pack truly out in the open, attention has now been turned to the baddies. In New Moon the featured baddies are The Volturi, an ancient group of vampires that live in Italy and protect the secret nature of vampires all over the world. They are led by Marcus, Cauis and Aro.

And now I present to you.........................

Cauis

Jamie Campbell Bower is a 20 year old English actor who can be seen in Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of a bad film and RocknRolla. Questions have been raised on iMDb forums saying he's too young, any thoughts ?

The Week in Film by Robert Mann - Week Starting 27/3/09

Knowing ***

Nicolas Cage is one of those actors who always seems to be in films yet, despite the apparent popularity and success that allow him to keep doing major movies, very few people seem to actually like him, with his acting constantly being criticised and his hair style often getting more attention than his acting ability. Personally, while I rarely find Cage to be that convincing an actor, I constantly find him to be a very entertaining screen presence who is consistently watchable, if never memorable. His recent track record has been very hit and miss (when anyone does as many films as him this is inevitable), with him having appeared in some absolutely abysmal films but also some extremely entertaining ones. His latest movie Knowing looks to be in the latter category with an intriguing concept and Alex Proyas (I, Robot) as director making this one of Cage’s more promising films of late.

In 1959, the students of an elementary school in Massachusetts bury a time capsule that is meant to be unearthed in 2009. When it is unearthed and opened, its contents consist of images drawn by the children of what they thought the future would be like. One of the things contained in the capsule is a sequence of numbers and student Caleb Koestler (Chandler Canterbury) takes it home with him, believing that the numbers hold some meaning. His father John (Nicolas Cage) is an astrophysics professor and he realises that there is some meaning to the numbers, and a very chilling one it is. Realizing that the numbers relate to every major global disaster in the last 50 years, detailing dates, locations and number of people killed, he comes to the conclusion that the numbers are intended as a warning. The remaining numbers in the sequence warn of a number of impending disasters and John sets about trying to stop them, with the reluctant help of Diana Wayland (Rose Byrne), the daughter of the girl who wrote the numbers, but soon he learns that the final disaster may threaten all of mankind and may be unstoppable. Also, a mysterious unknown force seems to be following him and his family around and its intentions are unclear.

Knowing is very much a hit and miss affair, falling directly between the two camps of Nicolas Cage movie, being neither abysmal nor truly engaging. This is through no fault of director Alex Proyas though. Proyas, who has proven himself to be a very capable director in the past, handles the film very well, delivering a reasonably entertaining disaster thriller that features a number of very well executed disaster sequences. On occasion, his use of shaky camera technique is a bit annoying but this isn’t too big a problem. He also manages to create a sense of unease throughout the film, which aided by a decent musical score, creates a tense atmosphere. The tension is well handled with the film actually being quite scary in places, aided by suggestions that all is not going to end well. In the visual effects department, we are given effects that aren’t particularly spectacular but they do get the job done, being decent but unmemorable. Where the film goes wrong is in the storyline. The basic concept for the story is a very good one but the way it is handled in the film is very poor, with the writer’s incorporation of certain paranormal elements - I won’t give it away here but it’s not too hard to figure out - detracting from the effectiveness of the overall scenario. These elements verge on cliché and not very well done cliché at that, and lead to a climax that is unsatisfying, and that doesn’t really make sense or fit in with the tone of the film as whole. You may not see it coming but this isn’t because it is cleverly executed, just that it seems completely out of place. This is even more the case with the tacked on closing sequence which only seems to be present to ensure that the film doesn’t end on a downbeat note, and this is a very downbeat movie. Alex Proyas does his best despite such shortcomings and just about manages to overcome some of the setbacks but a potentially great film is ruined by weak, predictable and poorly written plot devices. On the acting front, Nicolas Cage doesn’t especially convince as a professor type character nor is he incredibly entertaining here but he delivers a competent performance that does the job, if not with any sense of flair. A more capable actor could have brought some real depth to the role. The other actors are also competent but none of them are really required to do that much. Essentially, the performers suffice but no one excels. All in all, Knowing is a watchable but forgettable piece of cinema that you may enjoy but you won’t leave the cinema knowing anything that you didn’t already.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Haunting In Connecticut *½

The words ‘Based on a true story’ have been used many times in relation to horror movies. Usually though this is little more than a marketing gimmick to entice gullible moviegoers to see the film based on the pretence that it finds its inspirations in real life, with the truth that serves as inspiration for the film usually so mundane and unincidental as to render the meaning of the words completely inert. It appears that this is very much the case with The Haunting In Connecticut, the latest horror film to carry the words, and considering the numerous criticisms of the real life story it could even be said that it is more ‘loosely inspired by a fictional story’.

Matt Campbell (Kyle Gallner) is a teenager who is suffering from cancer and his mother Sara (Virginia Madsen) is determined to help him through no matter what it takes. Forced to relocate so that they can be closer to where Matt is receiving his treatment, Sara and her family move into a house in upstate Connecticut. At first everything seems to be perfectly fine, but soon Matt begins seeing horrific things in the house. Initially, this is put down to a side effect of his medication, but soon it becomes clear that something far more sinister is at work. Apparently, the house has a very dark history and violent, supernatural events begin to occur, with not only Matt but the whole family experiencing them. Their only help comes from Reverend Popescu (Elias Koteas), a fellow cancer sufferer who believes that Matt’s closeness to death allows him to see over to the other side. With the events getting more and more severe, along with Matt’s condition, the family attempt to overcome the horrific events going on around them and also come to terms with the transformations that Matt is undergoing.

The marketing for The Haunting In Connecticut made it look like countless other horror movies that you have probably seen, yet, considering the generally sorry state of the horror genre as of late, it actually seemed like one of the more promising horror films in some time. The film does deliver on this promise in that it is one of the better fright flicks seen in a while but this says far more about the quality of recent horror movies than it does about the quality of this film. One of the key areas in which this film is set apart from other genre entries is in the acting which is of a much higher standard than has been lately, even though it still isn’t much to speak of. The film also delivers some genuinely scary scenes with a few decent jumps, a reasonably effective sense of unease and some slightly (implied) gruesome sequences. The séance sequences are particularly well executed, managing to pretty creepy. Sadly, however, such moments are too few and far between and most of the scares are tired, predictable and not very scary at all. In fact, it you have seen any of the countless other haunted house movies you will know exactly what to expect from this film’s pitiful attempts at scaring its audience. With very little that is fresh to offer the film falls back on numerous overused horror plot devices which now just seem dull and boring, and this isn’t helped by the fact that they aren’t pulled off with any kind of flair or panache. This is really what lets the film down. A lot could have been done with regard to the hallucinations of Matt, with the audience being asked to question whether what is happening is real or in his head but any chance of this is destroyed by the revelation that everything really is happening. What could have been an interesting psychological piece is instead just yet another mediocre and forgettable fright film. The storyline is just typical horror, completely wasting a potentially thought provoking premise. It has reached a point now where films such as this have so little value that it is a wonder that they ever get made at all, and The Haunting In Connecticut does absolutely nothing to change any of this, with the only people likely to get any real appreciation out of it being those who have never seen any horror movies before whatsoever.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reviews by Robert Mann BA (Hons)

Russell Crowe And His Merry Men ?

It's true. Set to start filming next month in the U.K., Russell Crowe will take on the role of Robin Hood in Universal's still untitled drama about the tights-wearing hero to the poor. What makes this a promising film about a story we've seen many times before ? They are going to focus on retelling the story and the origins of its key characters with Ridley Scott taking the reins.
Although we have yet to learn who will make up his band of merry men, the beauty portraying Robin Hood's leading lady is none other than the fabulous Cate Blanchett !

Keep your eyes peeled, and hopefully more updates to come soon !

Traitor

Writer/Director : Jeffrey Nachmanoff

Starring : Don Cheadle, Guy Pearce, Said Taghmaoui, Neil McDonough, Alyy Khan and Jeff Daniels.

Legendary comedic actor Steve Martin goes against type cast by writing the story (he also has an executive producer credit) for what is certainly fashionable at the moment – films surrounding the subject of terrorism. The Kingdom (2007), Rendition (2007) and Shoot On Sight (2008) are just a few of the recent movies that portray the same global issue.

The screenplay is written by the director Jeffrey Nachmanoff – who seems to make a film every 7 or 8 years, with the highlights here being the solid performances by the cast and the striking cinematography by J. Michael Muro.

Samir Horn (Cheadle) is an American citizen and devout Muslim who is an expert at manufacturing bombs and explosives due to being a former highly trained officer of Special Operations in the United States. He uses his talents by selling these weapons of destruction to Jihadi radicals. One of these meetings is raided by the FBI and Samir finds himself in a Yemen jail locked up with a myriad of terrorists.

Omar (Taghmaoui) comes to the aid of Samir whilst in prison and the two men begin a friendship which leads to an escape for both of them. They relocate in France and Samir is introduced to an elite terrorist group who plan to execute an astronomical attack on the United States by bombing 50 buses simultaneously – one in each state... while trying to avoid the attention of persistent FBI agents Roy Clayton (Pearce) and Max Archer (McDonough) who are hot in pursuit.

This film is a mixture of action, drama and spy thriller. Although this sounds exciting on paper the transfer onto celluloid is good but nothing more. It often suffers in the dialogue department with Nachmanoff not writing the conversation with anything new – we have heard the words all too often. However Steve Martin in his story is definitely displaying a strong message in this film – there are Muslims who believe Al-Qaeda and their subsidiaries use them for their faith.

The main reason where the film fails to deliver though is the audience having to believe that Don Cheadle is a terrorist. If we can clearly see he is not a sadistic and intentional mass murderer of innocent people, we are continually asking the same question – why do the Islamic extremists not see this ??

SUPERIOR SCENE : The first meeting between Samir and the Jihads, see him trying to sell them six crates of semtex with custom built detonators. Well shot, edited perfectly and tense... then interrupted with action – a full scale raid by the FBI. Very competent film making.

QUALITY QUOTE : “If a man hasn’t discovered something that he will die for, he isn’t fit to live.” Samir Horn (Don Cheadle) quotes Dr Martin Luther King, Jr.

RATING : 3 / 5 stars.

Can You Dig It!!??

In 1979 Margaret Thatcher became the UKs first female prime minister, Michael Jackson began his solo venture into music and Walter Hill got his hands on an awesome novel. From this piece of brutal literature, Hill crafted a work of unprecedented genius good enough to stand alongside its literary counterpart and not behind it; this film was of course The Warriors. A film that doesn't care it's a bit camp, doesn't feel any embarrassment from its often Stilton like dialogue nor does it apologise for its frequent lessons in bad acting but despite all it's glaring flaws it has a timeless charm. Thirty years later, it still stands up as a superlative piece of entertainment. Caaaaaan yoooooo dig iiiirrrrrrt???!!!

Cyrus, leader of the Gramercy Riffs

Loosely based on the tale Anabasis by the Greek soldier Xenophon, The Warriors pits a collective of Coney Island gang members against hordes of New York boppers as they try to navigate through the streets of the city and return to their home turf. It's a simple premise, a premise probably written on the back of a napkin but everything just fits. Comic in its narrative and characterisation, there are too many elements of Hill's landmark effort that simply stick in the mind relenting to let go. Memorable is probably the best word to describe The Warriors, and what says more about the effect of a film than the pure feeling of nostalgia? Right from the off we are submerged into a world of gangs caked in darkness; the intro is arguably the finest intro to any film setting the scene perfectly for the prologue. We are introduced to many gangs, all of many persuasions, all with very questionable evening wear. There are clowns, skaters, a baseball team and bunch of grease monkeys to name but a few. Then we have The Warriors, all kitted out in their gorgeous custom made leather waist coats (presumably crafted by their mothers) led by Cleon, the war chief of the crew and an all round nice guy. All heading to Van Cortlandt Park, each gang is represented by nine to a summit by Cyrus, the leader of the hardest of gangs; the Gramercy Riffs. After a rather rousing speech plotting a unity of all the gangs to overthrow the police, Cyrus takes a bullet in the gut from the Luther, leader of a rival gang; The Rogues. As one would expect, chaos ensues and Luther blames it on The Warriors the little bastard. During the riot, Cleon is brutally, yet somewhat amusingly, beaten to death by the Gramercy Riffs and their armour plated elbows. After escaping, The Warriors find themselves on the other side of town, a man down and fearing for their lives. Thus begins the journey for this eclectic 8 piece and their new war chief; Swan. The Warriors throws us straight in at the deep end and all the better for it. It doesn't ever try to be over complicated, nor does it attack us with thought provoking insight or a deep political message. As soon as we hear "Nowhere To Run" play over a montage of what lies in wait for the group, we know we're ready for fights, chases and whatever lies in-between. What you see is what you get, and pretty much all we see is awesomeness defined. Walter Hill's brief surely said "Entertainment is key, no BS baggage", a brief he stuck to throughout. Sure you can see the entire crew sitting on the road when the Turnbull ACs chase Swan and co down the street, sure you can hear Walter shout "Action" at the start of Luther's now iconic bottle clinking scene, sure you can see cameramen and lighting equipment in the park, sure there are continuity errors all the way through the film but its technical prowess is not what makes this film so good. Despite all its shortcomings, and yes there are a few, there's a distinct charm a lot of movies tend to be void of these days. For one, some of Hill's shot selection is frankly superb countering any technical hitches we frequently see. Often the lighting exquisitely compliments Hill's set ups, supporting the notion of fear within the group and their attempt to return to safety, i.e. the daylight. We are consistently treated to visually brilliant shots, all of which encapsulate the gritty reality of the grimy side of 70s New York perfectly. For some reason, despite its undoubted campness caused by costumes, it feels real.

Hill's shot selection is frequently superb

Supporting such shots of visual panache is the near faultless soundtrack. Barry de Vorzon completes the experience attacking us with retro seventies synth and echoes of John Carpenter. And although scarce, songs from Arnold McCuller, Kenny Vallance and Joe Walsh are perfection when laid over such epic montage moments and satisfying denouements. Each character is individual, not just The Warriors, every gang and its members are unique from aesthetic looks to the way they carry themselves, and considering the sheer number of groups in the film this is an incredible achievement.

Despite being camp, the gangs were all brilliantly varied.

While its faults are there to see, there's no questioning what Hill does well, he does with a brilliant consistency. He manages his cast well, and despite falling into an occasional realm of cheese, they all complete the experience. From Michael Beck as Swan, who leads the group with a cool head and a hope of redemption to James Remar as Ajax, the fist toting horndog, they all bring uniqueness with differing qualities to compliment their equally likable personas. It's a shame no one seemed to forge a career after The Warriors. James Remar did play a lightning God and get to bone Kim Cattrall but it's hardly spellbinding. Some of the cast careers seemed to fall by the wayside into a world of made for TV movies and serial dramas, some chose to embrace other career paths and unfortunately for Marcelino Sanchez (Rembrandt) a premature passing, he died of cancer in 1986. Other minor characters went on to semi success but The Warriors is surely the high point on their respective resumes.

The films narrative essentially sees the posse running from one area to the next, each time stumbling upon rival gangs or the police all vying for their capture. Each scene is broken up by radio broadcasts commentating on their progression home by the sultry spoken Lynne Thigpen. It plays out like a video game, and there was no surprise when in 2005 the developing giant Rockstar added a videogame adaptation to their already impressive roster. Being one of the more successful film to game recreations, its gaming counterpart is a prequel to the films events and contains most of the original cast in events leading up to the film. It's a stellar effort from Rockstar, and impressed the fans as much as the general gaming public.

The Warriors game was well received,
getting a very respectible average of 84 (metacritic.com)

The film was never going to win awards, but in terms of cult status it has achieved the highest of accolades. Creating inspiration for fancy dress parties and churning out some of the most memorable lines ever committed to film, The Warriors is easily one of my personal favourites. It doesn't make me think, nor does it force a message down my throat but what makes The Warriors so memorable, what makes it so good, is its timeless charm. No film gives me the same satisfaction as watching Walter Hill's fine expression of Greek mythology. Granted I laugh at its shortcomings, but what film is perfect? I'd rather be entertained for 90 minutes cheering at the fight with the Punks, shouting out quotes from Cyrus and chuckling when Ajax offers to insert a bat into a dude's rear orifice, I'd rather do all this than be bored senseless for 3 hours watching a movie cited as excellent for being a relevant commentary to social issues. Movies are about escapism, and who better to escape with than Swan and his merry band of leather clad men.

Warriors come out to playyyy-eee-yayyy!!!

Knowing

I've sat in films and found myself giggling at seriousness in the face of stupidity before (Anti-Trust), I've sat dumbstruck by a film's awfulness incapable of even laughing at it (The Happening) and I've loved films for being awful (Bride oOf The Monster); but there are times when I don't know why I'm at odds with what I feel is the general consensus. Behind me in the screening I saw of Knowing, the new film from the director of The Crow, Dark City and I,Robot, was a man who had a laugh that sounded like someone who wants people to know he's laughing at something, and as I stood to leave the cinema once the credits rolled he said to his friend 'I didn't know we'd come to see a comedy!' Upon hearing this I was a tad confused because the film I'd just watched was actually, surprisingly entertaining.

Perhaps it's the problem of casting Nicolas Cage in a film after a run of just-plain-awful or unintentionally-funny misfires like Next, Ghost Rider and The Wicker Man remake; now people expect him to be making bad choices, acting terribly and sporting dodgy hair-pieces. Admittedly Cage does fudge a few emotional moments here, but generally this is the best Nicolas Cage film in a very long time. This is also the best Alex Proyas film since Dark City. This is also one of the best original sci-fi movies to come along in a while, and, boy, is this sci-fi. This is sci-fi as in pure, 1950's Twilight Zone/The Outer Limits big-idea sci-fi and it even gets quite pulpy in its execution and these are the reasons why I feel some audience members may find themselves unsure of how to take the film and may end up laughing.

The trailers have sold Knowing as a very straight numbers = disasters thriller in a similar vein to a lot of the big twist movies that occured as a result of Shyamalan, and yes, on one hand, it is that movie to begin with; however Proyas very quickly, and carefully, starts layering in a multitude of elements that play out over the film to help it become something quite different. To say much more would be detrimental to the film, but I must argue that it's a shame that people can applaud the generally lazy, unimaginative writing that goes into general Hollywood popcorn fare and then deride a film-maker trying to tackle something experimental yet still entertaining. Proyas does an excellent job of cranking up the impending dread and delivers some bravura disaster sequences, hampered a little by the so-so CGI; but this is a film that was made on $50,000,000 - a quarter of most tent-pole releases. What this film retains though that the larger budget movies lack is a vision, a voice and I am quite shocked that I already feel prepared to turn around to the gigglers and vociferously defend a Nicolas Cage movie!

4/5

Truly Wonderful Trailer For Where The Wild Things Are

Needs no introduction....

Redgrave Takes On Robin Hood

I've been informed that the Vanessa Redgrave is throwing herself into work so soon after the loss of her daughter Natasha Richardson. She's signed up to be involved in Ridley Scott's Robin Hood project, Nottingham and is set to play Queen Eleanor of Aquitaine, mother of the folklore hero's nemesis King John, played by Oscar Isaacs.

Redgrave will join Russell Crowe as Robin Hood and Cate Blanchett, who was drafted as Maid Marion after Sienna Miller dropped out.

The Week in Film by Robert Mann - Week Starting 20/3/09

Duplicity ****½

Coming just three weeks after action thriller The International, Duplicity once again sees Clive Owen on the cinema screen. This time, however, he takes second billing to Julia Roberts in their first on screen pairing since appearing together in 2005’s Closer. This film also showcases Roberts’ first out and out leading role in five years. With such a terrific duo of actors in the leading roles and the presence of writer/director Tony Gilroy, the man behind 2007’s critically acclaimed award winning Michael Clayton and writer of all three Bourne movies, at the helm this film certainly has the credentials that promise something quite special, and this is exactly what the film delivers.

Ray Koval (Clive Owen) is a former MI6 agent and Claire Stenwick (Julia Roberts) is a former CIA agent. Now they both work privately in the world of corporate espionage, finding themselves in a war between two corporate giants headed by bitter rivals Howard Tully (Tom Wilkinson) and Richard Garsik (Paul Giamatti). Both are working for Garsik but Claire is working as mole on the inside of Tully’s organisation. Tully has just announced a new miracle product that will complete revolutionise his company, and Garsik is determined to get his hands on it at any cost. However, he didn’t count on a past romantic history between Ray and Claire and the fact that they are planning to pull a con of their own. However, in the world of corporate espionage nothing is ever as it seems so what is really going on and who can really be trusted?

One part corporate espionage thriller, one part romance, Duplicity is a film that effectively and slickly combines the two genres to produce something that really stands out from the crowd, with virtually everything about it being pitch perfect. Tony Gilroy’s work on the film is excellent in all aspects, with his script providing a plot that is constantly clever, interesting and engaging, and extremely sharp dialogue that the film’s actors deliver with great aplomb. The dialogue is a particular strong point, with Gilroy using it in such a way as to give the film make the film seem sexy without us ever seeing anything and without the film losing any of its class. Here, mere words count for far more than anything more explicit ever would. Gilroy has also created one of the very few films that actually has genuinely surprising and cleverly executed plot twists that really do come as a shock when they are finally revealed. The presentation of the film works particularly well in this regard, with the flashback sequences being used very effectively as part of the main plot to show not only the back-story of the two main characters but also illustrate all the intricacies of what is going on. This is essential considering how complex the storyline is, and while some may have a degree of difficulty following it all, observant viewers will find it perfectly compelling. Gilroy’s direction is also excellent with everything from cinematography to editing being of a high standard. Particularly of note is his use of split screen (which can be a very poor technique if not used properly) is both stylish and effective and really works in every instance. Gilroy also gets excellent performances from his entire cast. Clive Owen is perfectly suave and sophisticated while Julia Roberts is spot on class, and the two share a sizzling on-screen chemistry that is both convincing and thoroughly entertaining. There are also great performances from the always excellent Paul Giamatti and Tom Wilkinson as the two rival corporate bosses, although sadly they don’t get much screen time together, except for the well executed opening credits sequence involving a showdown between them. Overall, Duplicity is a slickly made film that works on virtually every level, working well as an engaging thriller and also being extremely enjoyable as a piece of entertainment. It is also one of the most ingenious films seen in a long while and makes for a must see piece of cinema.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paul Blart: Mall Cop ***

A huge surprise box office smash success in the states, Paul Blart: Mall Cop is a film that has repeatedly defied expectations since its release there, with the Kevin James vehicle becoming one of the most successful comedies in quite a while, actually outperforming the recent efforts of such Hollywood comedy royalty as Adam Sandler (whose production company Happy Madison produced this film), Jim Carrey, Seth Rogen and Will Ferrell, not to mention countless others. So, why has this film been so successful? After all, it is hardly one of the most original or distinctive comedies to be put onto celluloid. This question has a very simple answer. The film is fun. This is pretty much all there is to it. In a time when many people are in serious need of some cheering up, cheer is something that this film has in spades.

Paul Blart (Kevin James) is a mild-mannered security guard working at a mall who takes his job very seriously and for years has been attempting to become a cop. However, every time he applies he fails the physical exam. He is also very lonely with his wife having walked out on him and the only two people in his life being his mother (Shirley Knight) and his daughter Maya (Raini Rodriguez). However, he is developing a bond with Amy (Jayma Mays), a girl who works at the mall. When the mall is overrun by an organized group of criminals, Paul finds himself being the only person who can stop them and rescue the hostages they have taken, Amy being one of them. With an overwhelming sense of duty and a desire to save Amy, he steps up to the challenge and unleashes the hero within, utilizing all his knowledge of the mall, taking on the criminals one by one. With the police outside powerless Paul is on his own and he gets the opportunity to show what he is really capable of and to win the girl.

The main reason that Paul Blart: Mall Cop works is in the casting of its lead role. Kevin James (who also co-wrote and produced the film) is excellent as Paul Blart, finally moving up from supporting roles in films like Hitch and I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry to leading man. His portrayal of the character makes for a performance that is not only extremely amusing and very likable but also very sympathetic, making it easy for us to empathise with his situation. James has a genuine talent for comedy and he alone makes this film worth seeing. He is also ably backed up by a strong supporting cast with Jayma Mays standing out with a sweet and charming performance as the romantic interest of the piece. There is a lot to enjoy in the film’s humour with some of the potential scenarios of a mall setting being exploited to great comic effect, but unfortunately the film is a bit too lacking in really big laugh out loud moments. As it is the film is extremely enjoyable but with some more belly laughs it could also have been quite memorable too. The storyline is very predictable also and there is not much to speak of in terms of the dialogue, but these are not really much of a problem, given that this film is only really intended to be a fun piece of popcorn entertainment and nothing more substantial. Ultimately, if you are looking for the next great Hollywood comedy, this will not be for you. The film fails to excel in any area but accomplishes what it sets out to do effectively, thus if you are looking for a fun way to spend an hour and a half and forget about your troubles, Paul Blart: Mall Cop is one film that you will love.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lesbian Vampire Killers NO STARS

Following the success of their award winning (to the bemusement of this critic) TV series Gavin and Stacey new comedy actors on the block James Corden and Mathew Horne have gone from being relatively unknown television stars to being comic superstars. Now, like Simon Pegg and Nick Frost before them, they have broken out into the medium of cinema, with their horror comedy Lesbian Vampire Killers. A sort of spoof of cheesy 70s horror flicks (something that the marketing has played on heavily), Corden and Horne are clearly hoping for a success to rival that of Pegg and Frost’s Shaun Of The Dead. However, the result couldn’t be much further away from that comedy classic.

When Jimmy (Mathew Horne) is dumped by his girlfriend and his best mate Fletch (James Corden) loses his job, they decide that the best way to forget about their troubles is to go away on holiday. However, both are skint, so their only option is to go hiking. Heading to an extremely remote and isolated village they get more than they bargained for when they come across a group of young European students who are there on a field trip. That’s not all, though, as they soon discover the village is under a curse that was placed long ago by vampire queen Camilla that turns all its girls into lesbian vampires when they turn 18, and it just happens that Jimmy may be the only one who can bring an end to the curse. Thus, with assistance from the village Vicar (Paul McGann) and one of the students named Lotte (MyAnna Buring), Jimmy and Fletch finds themselves forced to become reluctant heroes and save the world from the threat of the lesbian vampires.

I never thought I would see the day when I would deride a major film enough to give it no stars whatsoever, but that day has come with the release of Lesbian Vampire Killers. Quite why James Corden and Mathew Horne are so popular is beyond me, as there is nothing in this film that suggests that either has any discernible talent as actors or comedians. The only thing bigger than James Corden’s lack of talent is his ego which seems to make him believe that he is actually funny when there is absolutely nothing remotely funny about anything he says or does. He is just irritating, something which he should not be applauded for. Mathew Horne is slightly less so but this merely means that he isn’t as brash or as crude, not that he is any better and actor or any funnier a comedian. The rest of the cast don’t fare much better with even Paul McGann unable to salvage this travesty of a movie. Whoever actually thought that this film was a good idea - Corden and Horne apparently - is someone who has no concept what good comedy is, with the film failing to be even remotely funny or even scary come to think of it, a major problem for a horror comedy. The concept would barely have made for a decent sketch and there is certainly no justification in it being made as a full length movie, and even with the short running time the film is a drag to sit through. A disaster of a script doesn’t help matters, delivering a weak storyline and lousy dialogue and failing to produce a single decent comic scenario, and the film fails in pretty every other area too, including effects, which are just cheap looking, editing and cinematography. To put it simply this is a film with absolutely nothing to recommend it, the kind of which hardly ever gets made. And absolutely abysmal film, Lesbian Vampire Killers is a lock for the worst film of 2009 and ranks quite highly in this critic’s worst films of all time. The only thing that is funny about it is how unfunny it is and the only thing shocking is that it ever got made. Don’t’ waste your time on this. Instead just re-watch Shaun Of The Dead, a film that shows how a British horror comedy should be done.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reviews by Robert Mann BA (Hons)

A Look Back To The Future

My media studies teachers told me that once I started studying and analyzing film I wouldn't be able to sit back and enjoy them. Fortunately I generally seem to be able to juggle my analytical and my 'brain-off-popcorn-in' sides of my gray matter, allowing to both enjoy a film or look at it from a different view. Unfortunately sometimes I'll sit down to watch a film thinking the Casual Captain is in charge only to find out that Admiral Analysis is at the helm.

This happened most noticeably when I got comfy to have a nice nostalgic afternoon with 80's classic and generally acknowledged feel-good, intelligent, comedy masterpiece Back To The Future. I figured I'd be lounging about smiling at the oh-so-familiar scrapes that denim-clad Marty McFly gets himself into as he inadvertently almost erases himself from existence. Instead I wound up getting angrier and angrier with the film as I grew more aware of its sickening 1980's MTV generation material sensibilities and by the film's surface-value close I was not bathed in a warm glow of re-established status quo but rather I wallowed in puddle of murky values and questionable responsibilities.

Marty McFly is the most abhorrent product of the 1980s, a skateboarding slacker who grumbles about his own 'failures' whilst skiving his education due to his abuse and destruction of a mentally unstable old man's property all for the purpose of 'rocking out', and then zipping into school to the sounds of Huey Lewis and the News in order to play some pop-rock with his band The Pinheads; who sound remarkably like Huey Lewis and the News. His eye, as his attractive girlfriend Jennifer tries to console and comfort him, is drawn to the behind of another lady passing by and then a great big truck with flames on the side, like totally awesome.

McFly's home life is shot in turgid browns that heighten the pathetic existence eeked out by his NHS glasses and braces wearing nerd-father George and alcoholic, jowly mother Lorraine. His brother wears a terrible visor and his sister stuffs food into her face. Meanwhile former school bully turned car dealer Biff continues to tease, ridicule and intimidate George.

As we all know Marty ends up traveling back in time to the 50s, almost ruining his parents' relationship and negating his birth, but instead he manages to effect the character of his father, ultimately leading to him punching Biff in the chops and winning Lorraine's heart rather than her pity. Once Marty travels back these actions have had a repercussion on McFly's existence that extends beyond a better of understanding of the love bond between his folks. In fact, it never seems that Marty really cares for his parents beyond the concept of keeping himself in existence; which to some extent is entirely understandable, but outside of the fears of incest and eradication Marty doesn't re-evaluate his parent's need to be together. This is because that Lorraine, like her son, is something of a shallow and material person.

Marty's rewards for recoupling his mother and father are a complete overhaul of the decor in his home to success-indicating pastels, a change of attire and posture for both father and mother (including contacts for Dad, glasses are a sign of weakness after all), a business suit and better job for his brother and the latter for his sister and the change of career into science fiction romance that seems to have funded this paint-job and tennis-playing alternate-lifestyle. Not only that but that one right hook from George has crumpled Biff into a sniveling, track-suit sporting toady with bad hair, now reduced to polishing George's car rather than spilling beer over it as he writes it off.


But the ultimate example of Marty's material belief system is safely locked up in the garage, the sunlight shines in on that big black truck with the flames down the side and Marty's life is complete. All the character's goals have been summarised in the ownership of a gas guzzling behemoth, in which he can drive off with his girlfriend to make-out point. Of course, Marty is a high school student, and it's quite a relief that he doesn't go all My Super Sweet 16 on his family and start bawling that the flames are the wrong colour. At this point his equally-denim clad girlfriend Jennifer shows up, but to further cement Marty's desire for the material she is roundly replaced by the far more aesthetically appealing Elisabeth Shue for the sequel.

Sharks Have Issues Too...

Green Lantern Update And Other Bits

It has been reported from some apparently legitimate sources that the new Captain James T. Kirk is the favourite to take the role of Hal Jordan.

Chris Pine seems to have a good presence about him in the Star Trek trailers and would probably make a good Green Lantern. I'm still hoping that Nathan Fillion, Serenity's Captain Malcolm Reynolds, will still get the role.

All casting aside Martin Campbell, it seems, is going start shooting in September in Australia.

POSTERS: Awesome new Terminator Salvation poster has cropped up on IGN. Looks like Marcus who is holding the head, but to be honest anything with an endoskeleton gets the adrenaline rushing with this movie. Fingers crossed it will be ace!

Whilst thinking of Terminator Salvation, Sam Worthington's other film Avatar, directed by James Cameron, is reported by Time Magazine to be the most expensive film ever with costs in excess of $300 million. Even though few people have seen footage, Spielberg predicts it will be the biggest 3D live action film ever. Sounds good, 3D cinema could become much more mainstream after this.

The Celluloid President

This has been on my mind for a while now and it all started when I was watching Air Force One on TV a few years ago. I was marvelling at the heroics of Harrison Ford as American President James Marshall as he stays on board the hijacked titular transport to save his staff from the evil Gary Oldman, when a thought struck me. Could this film be made now? Of course, at the time of this puzzler, the incumbent president was George W. Bush and the notion of a motion picture being released that depicted the U.S. president as a heroic man of action seemed doubly ludicrous. With Air Force One being released right in the middle of Bill Clinton's time in office I at least felt that the notion was somewhat plausible, Clinton was a president who did reckless things but ended his term with the highest approval rating of any President since the end of World War II.

In George W's term time we've seen a number of celluloid presidents come and go; there's been Dennis Quaid as a thinly-veiled Bush-a-like in American Dreamz, which pitched the president as a simian idiot manipulated by his Chief of Staff (Willem Dafoe). Elsewhere Billy Bob Thornton portrayed a somewhat untrustworthy President in Richard Curtis' Love Actually, who seemed designed to further make us cheer on Hugh Grant's hallway dancing Tony Blair clone. Of course things culminated at the end of last year, and at the end of Bush's run, with Oliver Stone's surprisingly even-handed (and thusly under-performing) portrayl of the man himself in W (dub-ya).

With Barack Obama now taking over I can't help but wonder what movie presidents will be like? Naturally South Park has already jumped in and shown Obama to be not-unlike George Clooney in Ocean's 11, again though, entirely plausible, charming, smart and not unattractive! Of course Obama was not the first black president, there's been Morgan Freeman in Deep Impact, Terry Crews in Idiocracy and Danny Glover in 2012.

Also with Watchmen and Frost/Nixon there's been an on-screen resurgence of Tricky Dick, who has also found fame again with his return to Presidency in Futurama (Billy West's Richard M. is my personal favourite). Theodore Roosevelet as well has found himself back thanks to Robin Williams in Night At the Museum (and its upcoming sequel), undoubtedly the kids of America shall remember him more fondly for doing battle with tiny Romans than negotiating peace in the Russo-Japanese War. Finally Spielberg's long cherished Abraham Lincoln project should see a big name actor taking on an Oscar-baiting role, though whether he'll be any match for Robert V. Barron's portrayl from Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure is another question ("PARTY ON, DUDES!")



Meanwhile on these shores Michael Sheen seems to have copyrighted playing Tony Blair (or any other real-life Englishman), whilst other foreign dignitaries are usually reserved for lampooning in spoofs such as The Naked Gun with its brilliant opening ambush or Team America: World Police.

Personally I'd like to see some sort of 'Movie Presidency' being organised, akin to Marvel's contracting of Samuel L. Jackson to play Nick Fury across all its output leading up to The Avengers. What would happen is a number of actors are nominated and audience's vote for who should play the President in all contemporary set movies over the next few years, thusly the President in Transformers would be the same as the President in G.I. Joe, and his run would continue until 2013 when he'd either be re-elected or replaced. Personally, my vote goes to Jeff Bridges.

Who Watches The Audience ?

I went to see Watchmen on opening night, fresh from re-reading the comic and was predictably displeased with what I saw. I thought it missed the point of the comic, was almost pornographic with its 300-style slow motion kung-fu action and certainly with its insistence on granting Dr Manhattan’s pendulous appendage more arresting screentime than most of it’s female leads. It came across as pompous, self-important and most distressingly, rather dull.

This fact I’m sure of because not only was my girlfriend fidget-arsing around throughout, but people in the audience were audibly voicing their dissent. I assumed that the late opening night screening would be full of similar geeky fanboys, but quite the opposite was true. People were fairly quiet for the first few minutes but then the noise level started to grow. Half-hearted shhhhhh’s were flung but to no avail; the audience was revolting. Yes, in both ways. People were having audible conversations about totally irrelevant shit and calling out after lines like we were in some kind of Rocky Horror show. Some fellow kept on wolf whistling when Little Manhattan popped up and people were just laughing throughout. It was just ridiculous and undoubtedly tainted mine and other non-ignorant audience members enjoyment of the slow motion fest.

The question is what can one do to negate such a situation. The whole cinema was against me on this occasion so I kept my mouth shut and waved an imaginary fist at the culprits. An individual anarchist is a far different proposition- often one of them granny shhh’s is usually sufficient, but who does those anyway? I always hope someone else does so I don’t have to step outside my grumpy little bubble and deal with some bandit who may decide to respond to my scolding with a bop on the nose. It’s when it turns personal that you really have to take action. Say, for example, some bozo is kicking the back of your chair during the film, what then? You could turn round and give them a damn good glaring, but sitting in front makes you extremely vulnerable to popcorn attack, gum in the hair or possibly even a boot to the head. If you go tittle tattle to a cinema-attendant I bet most of them wouldn’t give a shit, either. So you either put up with it and fidget a bit to communicate your annoyance, move (if possible) or leave. Which is no fun at all.

To me, cinemas are hallowed ground that suffer from a medieval lawlessness. It’s every man for himself, baby. Choice of venue is paramount to a satisfying experience, obviously, as is seating choice. I tend to position myself around old folk as they seem to enjoy films in quiet appreciation or silent bemusement. Couples are a good shout mostly, unless they look a bit frisky. Which may or may not be detrimental to the show, depending on how perverted you are. People sitting on their own are perfect to sit near, though I did have one weird experience when a guy shifted up next to me and started chatting idly during the film. I could have sworn he had his hand down his trousers as well. I didn’t know what to do so went as if to go to the loo and stealthily pounced on another seat. I didn’t hang around for the end credits that time.

Of course, being part of an audience is part of the whole experience and I wouldn’t want to individualize the whole process. I must have annoyed people myself on reflection, having released an involuntarily loud guffaw with a chum during Trinity’s death scene in Matrix Revolutions. Probably throughout the whole thing, if I’m being honest-talk about believing your own hype. Maybe I’ll have to “man-up” or wait in view for some kind of entrance examination to weed out those rotten troublemakers. Some films are made for reactions and that’s just dandy, but for those other films you really do have to rely on human decency. There’s no easy solution for a rogue goon in the audience I’m afraid and it’s not wise to pick a fight in the arena; in doing so you spoil your own enjoyment as well as making it worse for everyone around you. ‘Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster’, or so the quote goes. Quite.

What's In The Box ?

www.whatsinthebox.nl

EDIT - Found these bits to connect to the film.

Mystery of Mysteries
Every medium, as its ancestors
Every pro, has his anti's, now you think about that

EDIT - And now this from an anonymous commenter -

follow whatsinthebox live! because this is NOT a game
http://bliin.com/trip/3163

Quite Beautiful Where The Things Are Poster

I bought the Maurice Sendak book a while to relive my childhood memories. It wasn't as good as I remembered, aside from the unique character designs. I am really looking forward to this Spike Jonze adapt.

Above is the first poster, sent to BRWC by Kate. The poster looks simple and eloquent and I love the framing of the monster. Wonder why we don't see it's face ? And is Max screaming with fear or having fun...?

Time will tell. Thank you Kate.

EDIT - Here's a test clip. You may have seen it already, but I thought I'll stick it up here as it looks stunning, even for a test.

Gaspar Noe To Release Enter The Void In 2009

"Movies are really a kind of dream-state, or like taking dope." ~ Martin Scorsese

Who here knows about French-Argentinian director Gaspar Noe ? He already has two features to his credit, Seul Contre Tous (known in English as I Stand Alone (1998)) and the highly controversial Irréversible (2002) as well as other shorts, music videos and commercials to his credit.

It has just been announced that his third film, Enter The Void will be released this August, at least in his native France. An eight minute promo reel was recently screened at the Berlin Film Festival to good reviews, but whether Noe's film will be shown in Cannes is still uncertain. The special effects, which have taken several years to complete, are what may tip the scales.

The plot is as follows, according to the film's press kit:

Oscar, (20), and his sister Linda (18), are recent arrivals in Tokyo. Oscar sells drugs for a living, and Linda works as a nightclub stripper. One night, Oscar goes to a bar to make a deal. But the cops are waiting, and in the panic that ensues he is accidentally shot.

As Oscar lies dying, his perception grows distorted. Swept along a limitless tunnel of memories, he witnesses again the death of his parents in a car crash when he was five years old, and the promise he made to his little sister – that he would never abandon her. A dazzling light tears him from these memories but Oscar cannot abandon the world of the living. Like a disembodied spirit, his vision flies through the city and around those close to him. But despite all his efforts, he cannot communicate with them. Not even with Linda. Magnificent coloured lights appear again, and try to pull him away from the world, but he rejects them, true to his promise and a prisoner to his desires and his fears. Oscar’s perceptions grow evermore distorted, his visions evermore chaotic and nightmarish. Past, present and future merge in a hallucinatory maelstrom.

Shot from start to finish from the subjective point of view or mental perspective of its leading character, ENTER THE VOID is a hallucinatory film, a melodrama of altered states of consciousness.

Personally I am looking forward to this film. I am sure the visuals are going to be mindbending and as whole it will be a hallucinatory experience. As more information and visuals are being released it's apparent that Noe won't let us down.

Special thanks to Le Temps Detruit Tout, Noe's unofficial fansite. For more information I would recommend you make a visit there.

Snake Goes Multi-Media

Having retired in a blaze of glory from his last outing for the Playstation 3 in Hideo Kojima's epic Metal Gear Solid 4, Solid Snake is branching out. Well not Snake himself, but the man who is as much a hero from voicing Snake over the many years he has been at the forefront of gaming.

David Hayter has turned his attentions from voicing the aging espionage soldier to form his own production company with Doomsday and London producer, Benedict Carver. Dark Hero studios will be a film, TV, internet and videogame company that fill focus primarily on action, sci-fi and horror. The first project to be made under the Dark Hero name will be Demonology, a pet project of Hayter's which he will write and direct.

This guy is a cult hero and all round nice guy

Not being a stranger to the world of movies, Hayter co-wrote the screenplay for Watchmen and Bryan Singer's two (and frankly awesome) X Men movies. (He also penned The Scorpion King, but we'll forgive him for that). His directorial debut Slaughter's Road is set to start shooting in the summer, which he also wrote and with Carver on producer duties.

Here's hoping Hayter will use the Dark Hero name to make a kick-ass Metal Gear Solid film.

Curse Of The Mummy

Classic Scene : In The Name Of The Father (1993)

Irish born acclaimed film maker Jim Sheridan in his third movie, delivers two of the most dramatic court room scene's ever to be witnessed on celluloid - this is one of them. The story of innocent people wrongly imprisoned for the heinous crime of bombing a packed Guildford pub (which incidently is my home town) in 1974 - that was actually committed by the terrorist group, the I.R.A.

SETTING THE SCENE : It is the verdict after the trial. The judge played by Aidan Grennell speaks his harsh words with power and intensity set to eerie and recurrent background music by Trevor Jones... together with the mannerisms and frightened looks from Daniel Day Lewis, this scene will guarantee to chill you to the bone with every repeated viewing...

INT. COURT ROOM. DAY

Judge : Have you reached a verdict ?

Jury foreman : Yes, we have, my lord.

Judge : How do you find the defendants ?

Jury Foreman : Guilty as charged.

Cheering and clapping from crowd..

Man from the crowd : Hang the Irie bastards !

Judge : Order ! Silence !

Man from the crowd : String em up !

Cheering continues..

Judge : (Leaning forward) Gerard Patrick Conlon.

Court Usher : (signalling to Gerry) Stand up.

Gerry shocked and terrified stands up slowly...

Judge : I feel it is my duty to wonder aloud, why you were not charged with treason to the crown - a charge that carries a penalty of death by hanging - a sentence i would of had no difficulty in passing in this case.. I sentence you to life imprisonment and i instruct that you shall serve a minimum of 30 years.

Haunting music with drum beat begins...

Judge : Take him down.

Gerry like a frightened boy is moved out of the court. On his way he turns to his Father Giuseppe Conlon..

Gerry Conlon : (with intensity) Help me.

Judge : Paul Michael Hill.

Haunting music continues...

Judge : In my view, your crime is such that life will mean life.

Carole Richardson bursts into tears...

Judge : Annie Maguire, i recommend you serve 14 years !

Annie Maguire : (sobbing and shouting) What have i done for Christ's sake ?

Judge : Take her down ! ...Giuseppe Conlon, 12 years.

Mrs Conlon : (stands up shouting) No, my husband's innocent !

Giuseppe Conlon : Lord have mercy on you !

Judge : Patrick Joseph Armstrong, 30 years.

Gerry is forced down to the holding cells...

Judge : Carole Richardson, 30 years.

The eerie music gets slightly louder with a drum beat you will never forget..

Carole is taken down to the cell next to Gerry howling and screaming, as nurses follow her. Gerry sits down with his head in his hands in utter disbelief...then he puts his hands over his mouth as he obviously feels sick in the stomach.

New Moon Set Pics

To all you Twilight fans, our friends over at SpoilerTV have posted over 100 images from the Vancouver set of the highly anticipated sequel to Twilight, New Moon. They seem to be a cast full of smokers and are smokin' up a storm. Wonder if they realize that they're not vampires in real life and that they are not immune to the effects of smoking. Anywho...enjoy!

Who Watches The Watchmen...Early Signs Show Everyone Does

Not being the first to admit I've never actually read the much adored graphic novel from Alan Moore, I feel I have to read it to decide whether this was actually a worthy adaptation or whether it falls in the category of "good effort, massive letdown". Seen as my knowledge of the source material is somewhat limited, my thoughts on this film are purely based on its film incarnation and not a comparative commentary on it's translation from page to screen.

For a start, I am a huge fan of Zack Snyder. His Dawn Of The Dead remake was, in my opinion, far superior to the original in terms of horror, action and pretty much everything else. The celebrity sniper scene was brilliant, the montage to a Richard Cheese lounge version of "Down With The Sickness" equally so. In his remake, Snyder managed to forget about the political and social connotations of Romero's original and transformed zombies from the lumbering and retarded to the pacy and hershy stain inducing. 1-0 to Snyder. 300 was an adrenaline fuelled blood bath of superlative entertainment with more half naked men than the WWE. Style may have taken precedent over substance but what's not to like about Spartans kicking/stabbing/bludgeoning ten shades out of a Persian army. Racist? Hell no. Awesome? Hell yeh! Snyder scores a 2nd. And what about his 3rd? Is it 3 and 3 for Snyder or does Watchmen have too big a story or come with far too much baggage for an MTV generation director to handle, let alone carry?

Following the story of a collective of retired superheroes, Watchmen is set in an alternate 1985 where America have won in Vietnam and Nixon is still the most powerful man in a world on the brink of nuclear war. The merry band of misfits are formed of 6; The Comedian, who incidentally is spectacularly murdered in the opening of the film thus being the main catalyst for the narrative. Rorschach, the trench coat wearing sociopath out to find the person responsible for the death of his fallen comrade. Night Owl II, a man very much in the Batman/Bruce Wayne mould struggling with erectile dysfunction. Silk Spectre II, a strong, independent everywoman forced to operate in the shadow of her mother (the previous Silk Spectre). Ozymandias, a recognised genius with an equally inflated celebrity personality and Doctor Manhattan, the only one of the group with any superhero ability; a God like deity with incredible power and a sombre outlook on life and mankind.

Right from the outset, we are treated to the unique visual brilliance now a staple of Mr Snyder. A superb credit sequence giving a brief lesson in superhero history accompanied to perfection by Sir Bob Dylan is undoubted brilliance. Unfortunately for Snyder, his opening gambit is the most impressive piece of the entire film. Now I'm not suggesting the film falls off into obscurity after the intro, it doesn't. It's just that when an intro is so good, it's hard to maintain a similar level of creative excellence throughout. Snyder does give it a bloody good go mind you. For a film clocking in at over 2 and a half hours, it doesn't ever feel laborious. The pacing is top notch helped along with incredible set pieces, seamless flashbacks and such a consistent high standard of acting more suited to a Shakespearean stage play than a comic book popcorn action-movie. I loved everyone in this movie but the standout performances come from Patrick Wilson (Nite Owl II) and Jackie Earle Harley (Rorschach). Bringing a humility to the film, an everyman quality we should all relate to, Patrick Wilson is simply brilliant as the only sane character seemingly without fault. As the complete opposite, Jackie Earle Harley is simply frightening as the psychopathic Rorschach leaving the current fans outcry for Harley to be the new mangled face of Freddy Krueger completely justifiable. There's no disputing that such brilliant turns from pretty much everyone in the film is great testament to Snyder's ability to pull the strings but there just seems to be something missing with each of the character's inner emotions, feelings and basic motives for being heroes. Apart from Rorschach, no one is really explained with great depth. There are a lot of questions to be asked about each of the Watchmen, and not too many get answered. This is where I feel the idea to have made this iconic tome into a high concept serial rather than feature might've been a more successful medium. For me, this didn't take anything away from the overall viewing experience as I still felt satisfied with such a solid narrative but I can understand why fans of the novel, who are educated in the characters on screen, may feel a little short changed.

Visually, it's superb. From start to finish it looks gorgeous. And I expect no less from a guy who made me want to watch a bunch of half naked men wrestle in ancient Greece. The use of slow motion to capture the stills from the novel work as good as they did in 300. I was constantly in awe of what I saw before my eyes, and as I have already mentioned, this contributed to the long looking running time feel like minutes. If I had one outstanding criticism however, it would be the soundtrack. Apart from the aforementioned Bob Dylan accompaniment, the rest of the soundtrack feels like a student film maker trying to show off his taste in music. And like in student films, it almost always doesn't work. It's such a shame that this is the major falling point of what is essentially a hugely entertaining piece of work. A working soundtrack should only amplify a films good looks, not hinder them with an oft feeling of awkwardness and unbalance.

I would like to reiterate, I have never read the graphic novel. I don't know what was missing, I don't know what has changed etc etc but it is fairly obvious to see that like Dawn Of The Dead, Snyder has chosen to leave social and political commentary on the back burner. The fact is, it's not 1986, and it's clear the film version of Watchmen is no where near as politically relevant as the novel was. Of course echoes of world war still ring true in today's society but that's a given, when has war not been on the agenda? But it just seems like the reason I enjoyed the story and was thoroughly entertained throughout is purely for visceral reasons, not for the multi-layered politics and complex characterisation, two of the main reasons why so many people loved the novel. Watchmen has been out around a week and it's had film goers divided. Fans of the novel seem disappointed, Moore's impeccable story fleshed out for the screen with all its underlying connotations of superhero mythology aligned with political activism discarded for action set pieces and visceral flair. Not being aware of the original, I have to admit I was entertained by a film maker who looks like he was trying to appease both fans and newcomers to Alan Moore's 1985. It certainly is no Dark Knight. I went to the cinema 3 times to watch Nolan's masterpiece but despite enjoying Snyder's latest effort, I can wait until it's blu-ray release to watch again. Like The Dark Knight, it brings the often candy coated world of the comic book firmly into adulthood. It is a film I feel both fans and newcomers should enjoy. If you like Snyder's previous work, it's a given you will like this. If you liked the novel, then hopefully Snyder's effort will not be spat upon with distain as it is a really good movie which ticks most of the boxes.

...plus Snyder maintains his habit of homo-erotic nuances courtesy of an ever present glowing blue penis.

**** Stars

Wildcats Everywhere, Wave Your Hands Up In The Air

Now, we all know it's not cool to admit you like High School Musical or even to admit you have seen all 3 and own them on DVD, but I am the sort of person who is open to new things and I openly admit I love these films. Singing, dancing, and the small hint of a love story. OK so it may be Disney and marketed for 8 year olds but what the hell. I’m 22 years old and I like High School Musical, now I feel so much better. I can feel you all groaning, going "it's not a proper film, it's not Oscar nominated", yes I know,I know. It is in fact Grease for the kids of today. And there’s nothing wrong with a bit of Disney cheese is there ?

The HSM trilogy is directed and choreographed by Kenny Ortega who has previously choreographed the cult classic Dirty Dancing (1987). He is also set to direct the remake of Footloose staring HSM star Zac Efron due for release in 2010.

HSM is set in East High School home to the Wildcats, the film opens with two lead characters Troy (Zac Efron) and Gabriella Montez (Vanessa Hudgens) meeting at a New Years Eve party, they duet at Karaoke. Cue musical number one “Start Of Something New”. Midnight approaches and they nearly kiss they swap phone/cell numbers, Troy returns home and to school where is the star basketball player and jock of the school. He enters his tutor group/home room to find Gabriella just so happens to be the new girl in school; this is where we meet the other central characters Sharpay Evans (Ashley Tisdale), Lucas Grabeel (Ryan Evans), Corbin Bleu (Chad Danforth), Monique Coleman (Taylor McKessie) and Olesya Rulin (Kelsi Nielsen). Gabriella persuades Troy to audition for the “Winter Musical” but everyone in East High knows Sharpay and Ryan always get the part don’t they ?

Troy and Gabriella ultimately upset the status quo of the school by breaking away from their labels. Cue catchy number “Status Quo”. This musical number is brilliantly choreographed and shows the kids of East High saying "Well if Troy can do it so can I". Sharpay on the other hand is furious someone is fighting for her role in the musical and ultimately sabotages Troy and Gabriella’s chances by making the basketball game and the scholastic decathlon the same time as auditions. It is clear they are worlds apart, the class geek and the jock simply can’t find the time to star in a musical can they? This is a Disney film so yes of course they can helped by fellow jock Chad and geek Taylor and other fellow classmates they come up with a system to do both the basketball game and make it to auditions. They blow the audience away with “Breaking Free” and its soon clear who the real stars are. In true Disney fashion a big old sing song at the end with “Were all in this together” This is a pivotal song in HSM as the film is essentially about finding yourself, fitting in and realising your dreams in a cheesy Disney bubble gum kind of way.

HSM is one of those rare movies that will make you laugh at its absurdity smile at its cheesiness but at the same time love everything about it. The plot isn't exactly complex but the dance routines and musical numbers are catchy and well thought out it also has a moral just remember, “We're all in this together once we know that we are we’re all stars and we see that were all in this together and it shows when we stand hand in hand make our dreams come true”.

HSM 2 is set in the summer as school kicks out for summer holidays/vacation the musical number “What time Is it” plays out with the cast participating in a brilliantly choreographed roller coaster style wave in the school corridor. This year the Wildcats need jobs, Sharpay comes up with a plan to get Troy to herself all summer by getting him a job at her country club Lava Springs, she tells her people to get him here by any means she did not anticipate the any means to be all of the Wildcats including Troy’s girlfriend Gabriella. Troy and his Wildcat friends work in the kitchen while Gabriella works as a lifeguard, Sharpay is furious Gabriella is once again ruining her plans. Lava Springs holds a talent contest every summer which as usual Sharpay and Ryan win every year. Kelsie has written a “Breaking Free” style song “You are the music in me” for Troy and Gabriella to perform but Sharpay is having none of it she takes the song and makes it much more up-tempo she also plots to take Troy away from Gabriella and sing with her, she offers him a better job than the other Wildcats. Troy starts to like his job and what can be offered to him a basketball scholarship and a future but isn’t he forgetting the Wildcats and Gabriella?

Troy loses his friends and acts like a jerk, he finds out Sharpay has stopped his friends from performing in the talent show and realises he has let down his friends, cue musical number “Bet on it” and Zac Efron running/dancing around a golf course. He asks for his old job back and leaves Sharpay without a partner for “You are the music in me” She crawls back to brother Ryan to ask for help he simply states “You've always wanted the spotlight. Now you've got it”. The Wild Cats sing in the talent show with Troy reconciling with Gabriella and singing “ Everyday”. Although this film isn’t as good as HSM it still has a moral message of respect, respecting who you are and those around you Troy learnt the value of love and friendship. The catchy dance routines and musical numbers are back this time with a beautiful backdrop of glorious sunshine.

HSM 3 is entitled Senior Year and was released in the cinema and you bet I went to see it, a cinema screen’s worth of Zac Efron who could turn that down. The only downside of seeing it in the cinema was me and my two uni friends were the only people in the cinema without children. The experience of seeing it in the cinema was pretty amazing and in my mind it is on a par with the first film. The third instalment of the HSM trilogy centres on the Wildcats as they prepare for graduation and college its time for big decisions Gabriella has been accepted to Stanford and Troy has to choose between basketball, singing and Gabriella. The other Wildcats are facing their own tough decisions, Sharpay as usual wants the limelight to herself and when the drama club announces a spring musical Gabriella persuades her fellow Wildcats to participate.

The musical will reflect their hopes and fears of the future and will be something they can do together before they graduate. Gabriella suggests they hold the perfect prom. The film deals with issues all kids will have to deal with at some point in their lives, a split amongst established friends or loved ones, it is a film about closing a chapter in your life and looking forward to the future. This is a Disney film so don’t expect it to be deep, its fun and a refreshing take on the musical genre. The film has a more romantic tone throughout with musical number “Right here, right now” Troy and Gabriella sing “Right here, right now I’m looking at you at my heart loves the view cause you mean everything” this song reflects how torn Troy is between his future and a future without Gabriella. “Can I have this dance” is a dance routine/song set on the roof of the school where Gabriella is teaching Troy to dance for the prom, the scene is well choreographed and well danced by the pair and they burst into spontaneous song singing “Its like catching lightning the chances of finding someone like you, Its one in a million the chances of feeling the way we do….let it rain let it pour, what we have is worth fighting for. You know I believe we were meant to be”.

In this film the characters have really grown up and the songs reflect how they are feeling. Gabriella has to go to Stanford meaning she will miss the musical, she starts to feel she shouldn't come back as it will be to hard to say goodbye again, Troy senses something is wrong and travels to Stanford telling Gabriella she should come back she finally agrees and the pair head back to East High where the musical’s already in full swing will they still make it for their performance? Well this is a kid’s film so of course the pair steal the show, at the end of the performance the Wildcats are asked about their future what colleges will they attend. When Troy is asked he states, “I’ve chosen basketball, but I’ve also chosen theatre. The University of California in Berkeley offers me both. And that’s where I’ll be going next fall. Most of all, I choose the person who inspires my heart, which is why I picked a school that’s exactly 32.7 miles from……you. Gabriella Montez. Stanford University School of Law”. Cheesy yes, romantic, yes and a very Disney ending. The film ends with a song entitled “High School Musical” and the Wildcats graduate and leave East High with new dreams and aspirations but most importantly with each other.

So yes these film may not be everyone’s cup of tea but if you have kids, like musicals, dance films, or simply just want to check out Zac Efron looking a bit fit then I would recommend you watch these films. What’s the worst that could happen you could find out that you secretly like them?

Eastwood's Swansong: Gran Torino

So here we are...50 plus years in the industry, and another cinema legend is bowing out, in his final screen appearance. Clint Eastwood, in the 1990s, made another swansong from the genre that made his name - Unforgiven was an instant classic...a lament for a lost vision of America...yet one that wasn't pretty or sentimental. Unforgiven was as hard and callous as any of Leone's or Siegel's films set in the prairies and deserts. Unforgiven was an old school western given a realistic, albeit, revisionist angle.

If Eastwood consigned one genre to the past (the genre that made him a superstar), he however plodded on with other films for another eighteen or so years...it's been a mixed bag, however, the films he has directed in the past five or six years have seen a stunning return to form: Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby, Flags Of Our Fathers and Letters From Iow Jima.

Now, in what Eastwood acknowledges as his final screen appearance, he lays to rest another of his cinematic icons...Dirty Harry. Gran Torino is not another episode in the life of the San Francisco maverick-cop-with-a-hand-cannon, Harry Callaghan...yet Eastwood's latest film is certainly in the spirit of those films.

Gran Torino, unlike the Dirty Harry films, has a heart and complex thematic pre-occupations to deal with. In the film, Eastwood plays a Korean war vet named Walt Kowalski, who is bereft of his way of life (a factory worker for Ford) and his recently departed wife. Unlike Dirty Harry, Walt hides his pain in comic indifference to the world around him...yet this man is hiding the pain of lonliness and what he sees as modern culture's lack of respect for well...anything.

In a Michigan, working class neighbourhood, Kowalski sees himself besieged by ethnic minorities, and his All-American ideals shot to hell. He is a character who longs for company yet retains the stereotype of a grumpy old man. When some Hmong exiles move into the house next door, the old man's humanity slowly breaks out...however, Kowalski's humanity is deeply troubled and conflicted due to his past as a soldier. When one character asks him what it was like to kill a man, Walt replies, with anguish burning in his eyes (Eastwood is outstanding in this film) - 'you don't wanna know'.

Gran Torino, for all it's amusing and deliberately racist comments, is a film all about the good and bad elements in all cultures. To accept the politically correct version of life, according to Eastwood's film is doing more harm than good. Whilst some may argue about its simplistic moralising and stance...Gran Torino is actually a fairly subtle and beautifully played drama.

Sure, the audience will laugh guiltily every time Walt calls his neighbours 'dinks', 'zipperheads' and whatnot...but it will also see that the joke is on Walt and those that think like him. Ultimately, these 'dinks' give Eastwood's character a beautiful friendship, once his guard and prejudices are caught off guard...the Hmong family next door to Walt end up the best family he ever had.

The story of Gran Torino could have come from any silly racist comedy...the type prevalent in 1970s England where a minority group moves next door to a white person...yet that is exactly the point of the whole film. It might all be amazing for those embracing multi-culturalism from a distance...but what if, like most white working class communities over the years, multi-culturalism wasn't some 'exotic' option...because the ethnic minorities don't pitch up in the middle class suburbs...they are thrown in with the others and that is exactly what Gran Torino is about.

Whilst the overly-melodramatic ending is satisfying...it does leave open many questions. As Eastwood's last film, it implies that Dirty Harry finally finds his humanity amongst all the scum. Gran Torino is also a beautifully played comedy at times...a comedy of errors. Special mention must also go to the actress, Ahney Her as Sue, Walt's conduit to the Hmong world and his guide.

Gran Torino is a most fitting swan song for one of cinema's greatest icons. It's a sad day indeed. Oh, and stay for the ending credits...the audience is treated to the dulcet tones of Mr. Eastwood crooning the film's closing song...sounding like Tom Waits' grandfather eating gravel...Eastwood hasn't sung on film since Paint Your Wagon in the 1960s.