Reviews

This new breed of video nasty keeps luring me back in- usually with uninspiring results but much in the manner I'd go back to the Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday 13th sequels here I am watching Captivity. Of course any film starring Elisha Cuthbert is going to have some degree of appeal, Captivity, though, doesn't go much further.

It's relatively slick yet it lacks finesse. Scenes are chopped up into what are essentially segments-affecting the flow. The pace is consistent which makes these little torture 'bites' more bearable. For long periods the motive is held back and frankly when the 'killers' identity is revealed one would be forgiven for wishing he had stayed in the shadows.

Ultimately Captivity is as interesting as most of these torture horror films and while it isn't awful there is certainly room for improvement.

More of the same. It's interesting that I keep coming back to these films, it's morbid curiosity really.

Basically, this is the point of the saga where we find out about the 'killer'- to unravel the enigma. Of course the exploration into Jigsaw's mind is rather superficial although it does - just about outdo- the humanisation of Freddy Kreuger in Freddy's Dead.

Of course there's still plenty of time for the sickness. And although the traps continue to be relatively innovative the whole thing is growing slightly tiresome.

Essentially this is the same film, again. Only this time it is amped up even more than it's predecessors. The action moves thick and fast, each early scene melded together by a kind of overly stylistic editing which is almost as disorientating as the more blood curdling moments.

As with each of the Saw sequels it has its moments but it's just a bit overly familiar now and with Saw 5 on it's way this franchise shows no sign of slowing down. No doubt my curiosity will bring me back to the saga one more time at least.

The build up to this suggested a some potential, however this film is merely average which is a disappointment when all's said and done.

The main problems being the dodgy CGI (I thought Hollywood blockbusters were past this but apparently not) of the seekers. Some horrible dialogue at times 'I was saving that bacon'!!!. There are jumpy moments and I'm sure i left my seat a couple of times but 'boo' doesn't quite cut it these days. Aside from the scene searching for the dog the slow paced approach is wasted by ridiculous passages discussing the music of Bob Marley (there are better examples that struck me at the time but I forget now). Rather than explore the cause or delve deeper into Robert Neville's psyche. There's no real atmosphere of eerie tension which should be built up instead time is wasted in a relatively short film. Having said that the deserted New York looks impressive.

Another money spinner from Hollywood's 'lack of imagination' department. The marketing technique was undeniably astute. However the film itself never quite sheds the impression that the whole project was nothing more than a marketing project. A strange sense of deja vu shrouds every gory set piece, each nearly identical to the original. Albeit each one is executed in slick fashion but somehow that isn't enough.

Liev Schreiber is no Gregory Peck and here we lose the heart of the film. Schreiber seems half cut as he often does and lacks any charisma as a leading man.

Perhaps remakes should be seen as an opportunity to reinterpret the original story not merely rehash time and time again The Omen does attempt this to an extent however it constantly returns to the 'iconic' moments of the original making its efforts seems all the more half arsed. Ultimately, for the viewer, it doesn't stand out as a worthwhile exercise.

"We accept the reality of the world with which we are presented." A film adequately summed up in one quote. It's an allegory on the influence of the media. How films and TV shows and adverts are packaged and manipulated by those who are in a position to do so. The message is strengthened here by Carrey's performance (at a time when he was not known for 'dramatic' roles) and the character of Truman himself who gives the film it's emotional weight. We want to see Truman escape this world that he has been essentially trapped inside, as do the audience of the show as we see them in the film. However they also want their show to continue. For them Truman's life is not reality but catharsis- ring any bells Big Brother, Survivor and the numerous other 'reality' shows of the past ten years? The Truman Show is one of the best films of it's time.

Whether it is or not, this seems like a cheap cash-in (no Wright and Frost here by the way). in order to capitalise on the success of the excellent Hot Fuzz and thus solidify the box office value of Simon Pegg. Unfortunetely Run Fatboy Run is a lazy comedy with none of the quirky pastiche evident in Pegg's prior work. The story is plain, as is the humour which propels it. In fact the void left by snappy rhetoric and knowledgeable parody is filled by gross-out; namely penis jokes and that blister (etc)! Run fatboy run is painfully run of the mill and the ending may as well be a stock Hollywood ending (aside from the 'Forrest Gump' run). It's a shame but it seems no one is perfect. Let's hope Pegg's next outing is a more memorable one.

I am rather indifferent to musicals, I need to enjoy the music of a film which is filled with music, to enjoy the film. Make sense? I recall Sweeney Todd from my childhood. The grisly concept is one which has stuck in my mind throughout the years and if there was a team that could deliver an adaptation of a musical then surely it would be Burton and Depp.

There's no denying the wonderful settings, in fact everything that could be categorised 'mise en scene' is exemplary. It is a visual feast. However, and call me narrow minded, but the music just irritates me and I've been unable to get past that. 2 bars into each song I found it impossible not to sigh at mediocrity of each number. What can I say? It's not for me. (Would have been 1 star but I've given an extra 1 for those wonderful sets).

All set for the new century Baz Luhrmann updated one of the best loved stories of all time. Unfortunately it didn?t work. There is an uncomfortable clash between the modern setting and the original Shakespearean dialogue. The dialogue is delivered as though it were written by a contemporary writer-as is the point. However as a result the tone of the actors is wrong- for much of the film the cast sound as though they are about to break into laughter. 1990's teenagers reading 15th century literature in this tone simply doesn't work. It is in this that the adaptation loses its power, by diminishing the power of the original story Luhrmann's film has nothing but lots of fancy, overly stylised camera work?oh and Leo, which speaks volumes for the success of the film. Aimed at the teenage (female) audience much of it?s success was surely down to the young heart-throb?s presence.

I realise I've gone on about the dialogue quite a bit but considering this is an adaptation of a play i think it is fair criticism.

Jim Carrey's 'straight-faced' mode, in a thriller that is dynamic enough to hold viewer interest, however its all a bit, well, silly. This number 23 is never really explained as anything other than a curse, and why exactly is it a curse? Well simply because thats how our protagonist decides to view it. One might argue that this is a tale of paranoia, thus that is ample explanation. Its all just a little hollow. The performances are good without being spectacular, enough to do justice to the characters portrayed. It flows along well enough, however amidst various plot twists it all just seems to fall in to place a bit to easily. Overall its a muddled film, where it actually could have been quite compelling.

There really is too much to say about this. I'll fit in what I can. Okay, lets go back 1 year. Superman Returns and Brian Singer lovingly recreates the spirit of the first two films in nearly every way possible. The result is a wonderful film that does more than pay homage to Richard Donner's originals.

Now in 2007 and Michael Bay has basically defecated on Tranformers legacy with this 're-interpretation'. Aside from an nice opening scene, the film is almost bereft of Autobots or Decepticons for the first 45 minutes. Instead we get some some teen-angst bullshit that we've already seen too many times before in countless teen rom-coms, there's no place for it here. There's no theme tune - you know the one! Instead we get some run-of-the-mill alt-rock from Linkin Park. I could go on, but wont.

On the upside there is some good action and when we aren't being subjected to the silly teen-comedy i.e. when the Transformers are actually part of the plot, it is an enjoyable film. Unfortunately its all a case of too little too late.

Well it was inevitable wasn't it? The Simpsons hasn't been relevant, sharp or consistently funny for several years now. It was perhaps a false dawn but the return of the 'old' writing team promised a upturn in form. A homecoming of sorts to relive the glory days of one of the modern comic greats.

Only the truth is that despite its 'promise' The Simpsons Movie falls short on a number of counts. The major point being laughs. There just aren't enough of them. Also there isn't that element of surprise anymore and it seems as though the writing team knows this. They have used up all their jokes and rehashed and then repeated throughout the 17 some odd years of The Simpsons. Rather than catch us off guard with the razor sharp wit that is sorely lacking we get shock humour that is best left to South Park and Family Guy- Bart's penis anyone? I recall letting out two solid laughs (man being crushed by dome-Ralph Wiggum's 'i like men now'). The only time I was caught off guard being the appearance of Bart's todger. The rest of the duration I managed to titter intermittently and sterile gags which we've heard before (Chief Wiggum nearly blowing his head off with his gun for whatever elementary reason-doughnuts).

'Minor' characters, Mr Burns, Sideshow Bob, Frink, Comic Book Guy etc etc weren't always integral to plots but they made the show buzz, gave it a freshness. The film centre's too much on the family and result is a drab story which goes no particular place quickly (Alaska okay, I'm talking figuratively here). How many times have the Simpson family become disillusioned with each other only to realise just how much they mean to each other? Please. The global warming slant is a feeble attempt to be relevant which falls flat.

It's a sad case, ultimately. I'd like to think that Groening and friends might put The Simpsons out of their misery but there's clearly been no narrative closure so we can expect more. Just one thought. If I'd been watching this 'movie' on TV,I would have switched channels.

A precursor to Halloween. I only mention that because the comparisons are rife and have been since I first read of the two.

The similarities are undeniable (Carpenter used Black Christmas as a model essentially) but Black Christmas is able to stand on it's own. The acting is actually slightly better on the whole than most slasher films (note a young Margot Kidder and John Saxon is a fine b-movie actor). With a dark sense of humour and a creepy unnerving atmosphere (good use of the POV shot)and a relatively good murder-mystery plot, Bob Clarke's original vision for Black Christmas is one of the best films of it sub-genre.

Martin Rosen's second animated film is a powerful piece, which is based on Richard Adams novel of the same name. The Plague Dogs is a very rare example of a film in the animation genre which strives for realism in the grittiest of senses. As far away from fluffy Disney films as one could imagine, this is a disturbing account of the hardships of two dogs who escape from an animal testing lab. The perceived haven of the real world soon turns out to be anything like Rowf and Snitter had hoped. However the friendship that is built through out the film between the two dogs and a rogue fox whom they meet, is touching and at times heartbreaking. To delve much further into the story would be to spoil certain aspects of the film, so that shall be left down to the viewer to discover.

Suffice to say, the main strength of Plague Dogs is paradoxically the reason the film has found itself in obscurity. To this date the original, 'uncut', version has not been released on any small screen formats (not to my knowledge at least). This strength is the bravery with which Rosen tackles the story. Resulting from this is a down beat film that isn't suitable for, nor is it likely to interest most, children. This is more than likely the reason it never found the success of Rosen's previous feature, Watership Down.

In short, this film deserves to be released in its full splendor and embraced by a whole new generation of film lovers. Anyone with a heart that isn't made of stone will get the appeal of this wonderful film.