Machete

Right, speaking of ridiculous.... If you are the kinda guy who looks at a film and says "that car chase would never happen because the power to weight ration of the escaping car is blah blah blah blah blah..." and "he would never survive the crash because his head has the same density as a watermelon and blah blah blah.." then you are better off going back to your lab, because this film is simply ridiculous.

No joke, it's sort of Once Upon a Time in Mexico meet Shoot 'Em Up, plus added ridiculousness.

Sadly the opening fight is the best in the film in my opinion and there is a greater chance in every member of the film crew being hit by meteorites while they are equally distributed across the earth than the final battle going down as it did. However, combine Jessica Alba, Lindsey Lohan and Michelle Rodriguez in the same film and we, my friends have got a movie on our hands!

No, seriously, go and see this, its freakin' amazing! Totally absurd and brilliant at the same time. (just make sure you have a few beers before and have plenty of snacks and you're sorted!)

Clash of the Titans

What I don't understand is why we have to make stupid. Yeah, its all about crakens or however you spell that, and medusa etc. but even taken that into consideration, I felt it was stupid. Secondly, I didn't get the feeling like it was a quest. Maybe I have been spoiled by LOTR and Star Wars and other endless trilogies, quadrologies, gadzilliologies, but there was no sense of occasion. When when the main guy was on the pegasus to the final fight, I thought to myself - "Already? All you did is have two fights before and slapped some witches' eye around."

Only thing I liked about this film was the lead. I really like Sam Worthington now. Alas, there wasn't much else in there. Even the battles made ma wanna go make tea instead.

So what you can really do is give this one a miss and watch 300 or Troy again instead... they are far far better.

Brothers

So it's dark. It's twisted. It's simple. It's edgy. It's brilliant.

Story of a brother that deploys to Afghanistan, is supposed dead but makes an unlikely comeback to find his place in the family replaced by his brother. Mentally, it's kind of like Jarhead and The Messenger combined, but with a twist. Sounds good right? Well it is.

Besides, if you, for some unimaginable reason like me, enjoy Jake Gyllenhaal, then you are all sorted and there really is no reason for you not to go see this film.

The Other Guys

I will now capture the essence of this film in three sentences. Have you ever seen Anchorman? If yes, then you might get a laugh or two out of this one. If no, then watch this, you will love it and once you are done, watch Anchorman because you will laugh your sides off.

That was two sentences. Well, you know what they say, sixty per cent of the time it works every time. Honestly, Will Ferrell is extremely funny, but I don't think it came out as much in this. On the other hand, Mark Wahlberg really stole the show here. If you have been reading my reviews, you will remember that monsieur Wahlberg can only play one character. Well this was perfect for him because normally when he plays the backstreet tough guy with nothing-to-lose attitude, he just looks silly and as credible as a koala pretending to be a grizzly bear. But let him play the same role in a film where this anger is supposed to look over the top and ridiculous and you have a combination worth gold.

It is a definite must-see film that will leave you rolling on the floor. Just try not to choke on your popcorn.

Toy Story 3

I guess there really isn't much to say about this one. The people who are into Toy Story will see it and the people who aren't won't. It's just that kind of a film.

Which makes it even more surprising, that having not seen 1 or 2, I, who I'm not really bothered about such films saw it. Bits were funny and, having been explained the whole plot malarky, I kind of understood what made it tick. People who you could tell were proper into it were in tears by the end. I, however, was not. It just isn't my type of film, so thus there wasnt much cinematographic value in it for me. Which, looking back, didn't stop me one bit from having fun, so you might as well give it a go.

But like I said in the beginning - if you're into it, you will enjoy it, you you aren't, you probably won't.

The Ghost Writer

I'm really undecided on this one. The plot was clever, I guess but it felt so dragged on that I lost interest in it and started looking for other things to keep me entertained. The scenery sparks to mind as, after all, films are a visual art. Sadly, the setting of the film was about as interesting as watching an 80-year old man's hair grow. Yes, its creepy and nothing will ever happen, just like the film.

At the same time, there were twists and turns in the story line, Ewan McGregor could have been worse, Brosnan couldn't, and the ending was a bit of a loose end. So it sounds pretty decent, no?

Oh I can't make up my mind, just go, watch it and then let me know what you thought.

The Daybreakers

Has anyone ever seen a worse film? No, I'm serious. Actually, wait, I take that back now that I've remembered some people decided to make High School Musical 1,2 and even 3, which are also known as the worst films in the history. I'd rather go have a wall of death with a pack of rhinos than watch those 3. But in all seriousness, The Daybreakers is just an awful, awful film.

There was only one thing I mildly enjoyed throughout the hour and a half of utter disgust - the concept of blood running out. Basics of supply and demand were covered, except if human blood was exchanged like a commodity as food, the whole market would have collapsed ages before they came to the situation when people realise there isn't any left. Just like what's gonna happen to us when we stop finding new places to drill oil from.

So here's an honest suggestion - why don't you go and watch a documentary about drilling oil rather than waste time on this crap?

From Paris with Love

It's kind of like Training Day crossbred with Mr. & Mrs. Smith. So it sounds pretty good, right? Wrong. I really enjoyed the first half and when it got to the second half it was just a complete anticlimax.

The first half was witty, exciting and the fight scenes were bloody. So all was well. And then we got to the second half which reminded me a bit of old Steven Seagal or Jean Claude van Damme films - crap. It was as if the director realised he had run out of time and made a bit of an etch-a-sketch ending for the film. As an insult to injury, the final scene was little short of cinematic abortion. This is 2010, last lines like that belong in the early 90s.

Two things did make me happy though. Firstly, I am not sure whether it is the extrapolation of John Travolta's midlife crisis into his acting career or if he has really into the baddie role now, but He was awesome in this as he was in the Taking of Peltham 123.

Secontly, one of Travolta's lines was "royale with cheese," which made me laugh.

I wouldn't recommend it, but I can't blame you if you wanna watch it.

Up In The Air

Luckily, I saw this film on a long bus journey when I was hung over. This covers all the basis as I was in a similar situation to the characters and due to my intoxicated condition, looked much like George Clooney.

It is the sort of film that isn't bad enough to be a time waster, i.e. the kind you watch for the cheap thrills from oversized explosions or slapstick humor. Surprisingly, it wasn't good enough either to be an actual work of art. So what are we actually left with here? Well, quite frankly not much apart from a 50-year old bloke who hates people, thinks he finds his match and true love, only to get smacked in the face in the most ironic of ways. And that is fine, because he treats us.

No wonder he got nominated for an oscar, because he is one hell of an actor, but it's the movie that let him down and robbed him a small yellow dude on a platform. And since I've already ruined the twist in the plot there is no reason why you should see it. So instead, go and run in the fields or something, walk your dog or play chess.

Inception

Right, so basically, imagine a ball of string. Pretty simple right? Now picture a ball of string with gadzillion ends sticking out rather than one. That's what you get with Inception.

The best bit was, however that as you go through the story, all these little ends of string find matches and tie to them to make a big, fat piece of rope that will soon, thanks to the twisted writing skill of Christopher Nolan, explode, be involved in a car chase, be shot at, punched and thrown off a bridge.

The story in a nutshell is about invading people's dreams to steal thoughts. Easy, right. But not when Leo DiCaprio is around... should have seen that one coming. Now naturally, you must go into someone's brain to put an idea in there, but obviously that is completely impossible...

...unless you have Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page and Handsome Bob on your side, obviously. Combine this and you have all that it takes to make a good movie - think of it as an IKEA equivalent of a blockbuster.

Luckily though, the whole thing is so well done that not once did I get the feeling I had no clue what was going on, which leaves you without a single reason not to see this film.

Shutter Island

Basically, this is a right mindf*ck of a film. There is no other way to describe it.

I expected it to be one of those supernatural, creepy-lady-with-a-rotting-tongue type films, but I was wrong and I'm glad I was because what it was, was so much better. I am not a fan of scary films as time and again their point seems to evade me completely. Shutter Island surprised me with its wittiness, execution and the lengths to which the plot was thought through to.

However, it was not human testing or mental illnesses that got me thinking, not even Leo's wavy locks managed it this time. How far would we go to believe a beautiful lie over an ugly truth? Being the sort of person that likes his truths served like sushi minus the soy sauce, I struggle with the idea of a life mislead. Ideals can be noble and glorious in their essence, onto which layers of lies are laid, but can we really place a lie at the center of our lives? Yet I find it difficult to blame Teddy Daniels for following his lies through to salvation.

P.S. Make sure you watch it.

The Green Zone

So this is what? The story that is supposed to wash the iraqi blood off the American footsoldier's hands? I'm not into politics and fully understand that soldiers go to war for leaders and die for ideas stupider than a chair, but my problem with the film is that I genuinely don't see a point in it.

It was alright for passing time, which, I essentially was doing watching it. And the chase sequences and power relationships kept me interested, but so would a washing machine. Honestly, I would be as happy watching a red sock and a pair of blue undies battle it out in the dryer as watching this. Its the sort of corrupt cop drama that you have seen a thousand times before, except the cops are soldiers, and the baddies are government officials rather than dirty cops.

So have we really been force-fed this pumpkin and jello mash just that some halfwit somewhere would understand it was a rubbish administration rather than a nation that caused a pointless war? I'm sorry, but if you need this film to figure that out, maybe you would be better off growing turnips and referring to a lightbulb as witch-craft.

At least Matt Damon now has some money to buy a fake beard for and maybe get a different haircut to make him look a bit more rugged and less of a 19-year old shop assistant.

Crazy Heart

I can see why people appreciate this film so much. I, however, do not.

Don't get me wrong, it's a good film, the acting's brilliant and the soundtrack too, provided you are the kind of person that has a sofa on you r front law, do not know what soap is, don't consider vegetables a meal and look at your fit cousin and think: "I'll have a bit of that." But I just can't see myself wanting to see it again. And when it comes to films, that is something I look for. I want to have a need for more.

Right, so without spoiling much, its about Bad Blake, don't know who he is, google it, I'm not an encyclopedia. His struggles, successes and vomcanoes. As you do, if you have an alcohol addiction. Jeff Bridges, as we all know, got an Oscar for the lead and I can now see why, he really did do a good job, but nonetheless, I remain unmoved.

I'd say - see for yourself, maybe you'll love it. I didn't.

The Bounty Hunter

I wouldn't waste my time on this again. It wasn't exactly bad, but it was far from good, so I think I'm right to say that it was horrific.

As a result of a combination of films and by comparison with other slightly quirky-yet-so-girl-from-next-door-looking actresses I now hate Jennifer Aniston. This film has a lot to do with it. It set it in stone for me. Gerald Butler was bearable on account of Gamer, Law Abiding Citizen and The Ugly Truth. If it had not been for these films before this, I would have hated him too, but for now, I will exercise my right to remain silent. Everybody gets away with one.

The plot was... well there was no plot. It was more like the drunken ramblings of a meerkat with tourette's. Basically, don't watch this, you will only encourage the people making this crap.

Dear John

There's no point. Don't bother.

It has some life truths in it, but you will learn them anyway and will be saving yourself a lot of time.

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

Those of you who know me know that I have an obsession with penguins. You also know that I am extremely picky with fantasy films. This one was a bittersweet viewing for me.

I was annoyed throughout the film. My ear was itchy, the caravan-thingy they lived in was stupid, Johnny Depp was rubbish (I know, who would have guessed I'd ever be saying that) the mirror looked as good as Bigbird's impression of Julia Roberts and the graphics were childish enough not to be enjoyed by anyone looking for a serious experience and the children... Well there weren't any there and tell you the truth, I wouldn't take my kids to this either.

I would, however, take my kids to watch Brokeback Mountain. Not because I have an overwhelming need to make my kids gay, heavens no, and don't read into this because I'm not looking forward to explaining why I'm not PC. Just be quiet, will you! The reason I would take my kids to watch that film is because I want them to appreciate good acting. One of the reasons for me watching this misguided effort of a film in the first place was that Heath Ledger happens to be one of my favorite actors. How can you not like someone who apparently improvised half the comedic dialogue in this film? He made this film, without him, this would be as much to watch on the big screen as tomato soup boiling. And I don't know about you but I dislike tomato soup.

When Depp played his Tony, I was rather frustrated. The charismatic swagger of Heath had been replaced with the awkward yet warm slyness of Jack Sparrow. I won't say anything about Jude Law or Monsieur Farrell, mainly because I felt them to be trivial to the film. Kind of them to take part and extremely kind of them to give their paychecks to Matilda Ledger, but apart from the somewhat awkward fit of Farrell's badboy look for Tony's fate, I found little to be joyous for.

By the way, Lily Cole is a babe. That is all.

Now I wonder whether it would be the same film if Ledger would have finished the film. I guess it wouldn't. But it would be better. I suppose he just went to prove again that the brightest of us burn out the quickest. Heath Ledger - what a man... and what an actor.

The Hurt Locker

You know one of these films that you watch and feel nothing and would carry on feeling nothing for a few hours? Well it is definitely one of them.

There was sort of nothing good about the film, there was nothing that hasn't been done before, whether you take Jarhead or Full Metal Jacket. It's all about the camaraderie and the trust and dependence the soldiers share trusting their lives in the hands of their mates.

There seems to be nothing happening in the film. There is just some sand, and boots and a shell and a guy with explosives locked to his chest begging for help. And then there is dust, a football, more dust some wind and then a sniper taking your head off.

I didn't understand how it won more Oscars than Avatar... and I still don't. But it is just SO good. Why don't you do yourself a favor and go see it? If you don't, you will be angry at you and you won't like him when he is angry.

New York I Love You

The weirdest film I have seen in a long time. It was kind of like the show "The Hills" in terms of meaningless fragments of the plot and the rest filled with scenes from the city.

Maybe I'm being harsh here, because I've never been to NY, I don't know, I'm not a doctor. But I know that the so-called plot in the film reminded me more of scribbling on a napkin than script. I bet the guy who wrote this, realised he had a deadline for this, but then took the down payment he received for the script, went and bought a large quantity of weed and disappeared off the face of the earth for about a month. Once reality came calling, he just decided to chuck in random bits and fill the rest in with piano music and shots of buildings.

And another thing. Fair deuce you want to make a film where people's lives cross randomly, but if you stuff your film with conversations developing on the corner of the street it will feel very fake. Because people just aren't like that in real life. I was thinking to myself several times during the film "In real life, at this moment the person would just tell you to f*ck off!" And the truth is that they would, call me a cynic, but they would.

What I did like about this film though was the old couple. "Lift your feet" "I am lifting my feet" "No, you are shuffling" - Brilliant.

Oh, and don't watch this film.

The Messenger

It has been a long time since I saw a film the I enjoyed as much. And I'm not being too kind here, because I expected it to be good. Oscar nomination for Woody Harrelson and a solid plot - you would expect good things to happen.

But here's the twist. I didn't think it was that good. For starters, Woody Harrelson was good, I won't go against the academy on this one, but I didn't think he was that good. I thought Ben Foster was better. Everything else seemed good as well - the directing, screenplay, writing (once again, won't go against the academy.) But that doesn't mean it was anything special. So why did I enjoy this so much?

The reason was that for the first time for a very long time I felt the people were really acting the emotions of the characters. And I liked that. Every now and again a film like this comes along and we instantly credit the plot or the writing. I guess for me, it was the combination of acting with the theme that created this sense of enjoyability. It just felt good to watch. I felt the actors weren't simply depicting the actions of the characters, they weren't puppets to movement. They were real, they were playing feelings.

Having never been to war and being very unlikely ever to have, I cannot judge whether the feelings conveyed were accurate or not, maybe someone else may see the film as slightly fake but I enjoyed it. I really did.

The Good, The Bad & The Ugly

Surprisingly enough, I had never seen this film until last night. To make up for this horrible mistake, a friend and I got the extended version and settled down for night of relaxation, empty deserts and a theme tune more catchy than Francisco Cervelli.

I will tell you now that I thought the film was utterly brilliant in every way possible so I wouldn't waste your time with animal related metaphors discussing the butchness of Clint Eastwood or how absurd the camera angle in the first scene was.

What I liked most about this film though, was the extended version bit. Now, I haven't seen the normal version, but I can't see what bits of the plot could be taken out and still tell the same story. Which brings me to the conclusion that to extend the playtime they decided to add random scenes of the desert and the band playing while Tuco took a beating. As absurd as this may be, the slow pace made the film for me. There was a sense of irrelevancy. As if the characters just happened to be there, without any purpose, just minding their own business.

And I like this. I like old films because they are not stupid in their insistence upon being epic. The final battle between the hero and anti hero in Dirty Harry consisted of a single punch in the face. What is wrong with that? Do you really have to go all Jean Claude Van Damme on my rear end and get shot, electrocuted, stabbed and strangled to make a good action film?

However, The Good, The Bad & The Ugly was epic in every way regardless of its subtleness and I'm going to regret going back into the world of cramming life-changing events into 120 minutes of screen time. I liked the old days - life was slow, people were random and there was a great abundance of horses.

44 Inch Chest

Long story short, it's a story of a wife who cheats on her husband. But then, as you do, the husband decides to kidnap the lover.

At first, I was quite annoyed to see the whole time warp thing again. If you have read any of my previous reviews, you would understand why this is. But then it got worse. I happened to watch The Departed again on the same day and as we all know, that film doesn't really shine with a simple plot. Its even more complicated than quantum-physics and nobody knows how that works. However, as complicated as the story line in The Departed may be, the one in 44 Inch Chest was even more so and even just plain weird. I was confused from the get-go.

It reminded me of an "arty film" with long, slow shots and scenes or composition planned more carefully than Lady GaGa's hair. Perfect example - the opening scene, which, by the way was gorgeous. If there is anything to take from the film, it is the dialogue. Yes, you can argue it's the only thing one possibly can take from a film where the action is situated in one room and one room only, but regardless, it was witty. Casual and witty indeed.

Apart from that, let's move on to something more interesting... like another film perhaps.

Invictus

I was really rather surprised when the film ended. The name in the credits after "directed by" left me asking myself whether something has happened to the man who can make such cinematic brilliance.

The film was good, but the thing is that it will never in a million years be as good as the real story, so it is sort of like comparing the aviation capabilities of a rocket and a rhino... on a loo. This is not meant in any way to take anything away from the film, because I enjoyed every minute of it and even now have an urge to go see it again.

Something I was dreading looking forward to seeing it was Matt Damon. Not because I have a particular dislike to his acting skills or that I find his appearance somewhat of a buzzkill. It's just that ever since Blood Diamond I am terrified of having hollywood what-nots having to play someone with a particular accent. What is wrong with having a South African play a South African? Why do we need to bring in a bloke who is of english, finnish, swedish and scottish decent, born in Massachusetts, to play a South African? It was better then Leo, but still sounded half russian,half umpaloompan from time to time.

Bearing that in mind, I thought Morgan Freeman didn't struggle with this, surprisingly. Then again, Mandela's speech is extremely... well... particular, so maybe it was easier for him. Then again, he did do a brilliant job and watching the Oscars the other night, I felt sorry for him sitting there, earning no hardware and not having to deliver a speech about all the people he wishes to thank. Although, I totally understand why he left with nothing and will thus not start one of my usual rants about everything that is wrong with the world.

Another thing I thoroughly enjoyed was the music. Especially in the final game in the stadium, it filled my heart with simple joy and made think about all the things that the western world misses out on. I know we boast 5 cars, 20,973,463 tvs and gadzillion internets per household, but do we know the joy of life?

One way or another, I am genuinely happy I saw this and like I said, I might just have to go see it again.

Valentine's Day

I finally found time to write the review to the film I had been waiting for with great expectations. Luckily for me and all those who are fed up with my complaining, they were met by what can perhaps be best described as a crossbreed between Love Actually and Love Happens. I will explain the reasons for that later.

I was extremely ill-equipped for watching this film having seen the trailer and expecting a straightforward rom-com. Furthermore, I happened to read a review by Mick LaSalle for the San Francisco Chronicle where he makes the case for casting many A-listers as an intrusion of the film's "illusion of reality". Monsieur LaSalle, I thoroughly enjoyed your review, but that paragraph was a complete load of bull. They are actors and actresses, it's their job to remove themselves from the equation and become somebody else.

Speaking of which, looking at the acting through this prism, Jennifer Gardner redeemed herself in my eyes. Those of you who are acquainted with my history with the actress realize what a compliment this is. She escaped the role of the quirky type that suits her so well to deliver a part that was both heartwarming and serious.

I will try to refrain myself from focusing on the cast for too long since there were such good actors/actresses and funny roles, but I will mention two. Firstly, I believe I speak for the whole population of the world capable of appreciating beauty if I say there was a distinct lack of Jessica Alba in terms of screentime. Secondly, and take this with a pinch of salt because I do love the man, I thought Ashton Kutcher has really come to himself with the last films I have seen him in. I don't think Reed achieved the level of deliverance as Nikki in Spread, which - truth be told - wasn't really a film as much as a showcase of the actor's abilities. However, Kutcher's character was, to me, the embodiment of the essence of the film. (and it was cool to see him in the same piece with Topher Grace again)

The essence of the film is where the comparison with Love Happens comes into play. Love Happens was a film that had as much to do with love as a pelican has with an igloo. I thus suggest removing all of the film's claims for the name and add it as a subheading to Valentine's Day because that was what this film is about. It goes to show that you cannot plan love or relationships. You may find the most amazing person but it will not work out and you will be left heartbroken. But all of a sudden, when you least expect it, when you least try... love happens. You realize that the person you are truly comfortable to spend your life with is right there, standing next to you without you ever realizing.

At this point I remember something else Mr. LaSalle said. He claimed the film to be too fake, the people in it too nice and how this would jeopardize the reality of what you see. I agree that the conversations were too nice and it is difficult to find pleasant people like that in the real world. But this niceness is only a few words away from us. All we need to do to make it a reality is open our mouths an be kind to someone.

So when I think of the film as a whole I can't stop thinking about the actual day. Just like the film, the valentine's day is a bit fake, people try too hard, try to force things. Which makes it a bit unnatural. So would I say it is a rubbish film? No, because just like valentine's day, if you get the timing right, the mood right and have someone special to enjoy the occasion with, you will have a really good time.

Amelia

Right, so before any of you say anything, no, it's not Amélie and its not by the French.

Amelia is the story of Amelia Earhart, one of the most influential female pilots ever to walk the surface of our beloved earth. She was the first woman to fly across the Atlantic and the first woman to fly across the Atlantic solo.

I had trouble placing this film in my mind, which was torn when I was watching it. There was something about it that just made me want to leave, yet there was a lot to keep my eyes glued to the screen. It was one of those bittersweet moments in life where you are not entirely sure how or what to feel.

Looking at the cast on paper, I am surprised to realise in hindsight that I was bored for most of the film. Hilary Swank accompanied by Richard Gere and Ewan McGregor, who often seems to creep up in the films I see recently, should be more than enough to make my seat have hands all of a sudden. Hands that pin me down and slap me around every time I seem to lose focus. Yet this was not the case. Swank played a solid role. In fact, many times during Amelia, I was thinking to myself how good she was. I have seen her in Million Dollar Baby and P.S. I Love You, but somehow, as good as Million Dollar Baby was, I was more impressed with here in this.

At this point I can't stop pondering about what the sweet part in the bittersweet was. Why do I still struggle putting the film behind me and stop thinking about it. Normally, when I see a good role in a mediocre (read: rubbish) film, I think to myself: "what a waste of talent, C'mon son!!! get your crap together" and go back to feeding Mars bars to pelicans. This time, I cant.

The film talks about a soul that wishes to roam free. Take the silver bird and fly it into the sunset for as long as it will carry her. With everything else out of her mind but her destination. It is a swansong to the roaming hearts that feel imprisonment where there is comfort, struggle where there is safety. The trouble with these hearts often is though, that they forget where their home is. I live by "home is where the heart is" so I guess for Miss Earhart, home was in the cockpit of the silver bird. And who am I to judge such a heart? My question though, is what happens when you lose sight of your home... and your destination?

The Boys Are Back

What happens when with a blink of an eye everything in your life changes? When the woman you love is like water slipping through your fingers and there is nothing you can do about it? When you have to explain to your little son why mummy is dying? When you don't know how to comfort him because you have never been around?

When this happens to Joe Warr (Clive Owen), his whole life changes along with every relationship he has with his close ones. How do you solve problems in a child's head when understanding anything going on in there is like explaining the physics behind an airplane to a geko? Joe adopts a simple rule: "Just say yes."

This is a heartwarming story of fathers and sons and the unity that forms when life decides to challenge us. It reinforces my view of of whatever works (no quote to Woody Allen's last film intended) because often there is no right or wrong in life. It's just... whatever works. When your kid needs to turn your house into a pool, not that I am saying this is good parenting, let him.

Major kudos to Scott Hicks, who to me, as unprofessional as my view may be, is completely unknown. He managed to direct this to a standard that shuts me up and that really is good, because I have verbal diarrhea which will now be aimed at the cast, the poor things. I appreciated Clive Owen with the understanding that most of his role involved saying nothing and looking as miserable as a basset-hound witnessing his food being stolen. Having said that, often it is what is left unsaid that tells a million words and being quiet the real difficulty. I feel the story made the acting, which is never too much to an actor's credit. However, the best actor, much like the best design, is invisible. Pick your route to go down, one way or the other the lead was solid and he deserves credit.

The film was well paced to preserve the underlying taste of sadness and the personal tragedy of those involved while depicting them dealing with their sorrow. It also makes me think of the roles we play in life and in other peoples' lives. How prepared are we to adapt a new role, but more importantly, how willing are we to let the role change us? Owen's character said that saying yes is more difficult than saying no and that because saying yes means we need to change something in ourselves. We need to make an effort.

I definitely recommend this, time and money well spent.

More Than A Game

When I am about to watch a film, I am normally well aware of what I am about to watch. And so I thought this time. I couldn't be further from the truth. Again. Luckily, what I saw was better than what I expected.

I was expecting the story of a bunch of angry kids from a tough neighborhood, playing ball, being rubbish, getting amazing at it, getting cocky, being slapped around by the coach and then missing a last second shot to go down in history, leaving the viewer heartbroken for these boys. So yes, I was expecting to see Coach Carter again.

But this is not a story about basketball, it's a story about people. About relationships and friendship. I was expecting LeBron James to do all the talking and could not have been happier when I found the story being revealed from the perspective of the coach, Dru Joyce II. I was charmed by the line at the end as well, downplaying the role of the superstar in the film. Quote: "Lebron found seasonal work in Cleveland". Understatement of the year.

Another aspect of this film, that I found intriguing and somewhat unlike your typical sports-cinderella story was the humbleness of these people. Call me on this one if you think I am wrong, and I am ignoring the whole Hummer business at this point, but listening to them talk about a life that most of us would see as utopian in a bad way, and still making it sound as the most natural thing in life is what stuns me. I think this is where the balance in the world lies, because some of the players in the NBA get paid sums we would not be able to comprehend. So should a person who has not seen what it is like to own nothing in life be in that position... I would imagine them being the most unpleasant person in the world.

Now, then. Back to the Humvee incident. For a 17-year old "boy" (a word only used because of the relative value of the number, as mentally and physically, the 17-year-old LeBron was more of a man than most 30 year olds) to be on the cover of the SI and still be a part of a team? Unbelievable? I think so. All the attention he got while he was still at school and remained focused on his team and friends. Wow, that is all I can say - wow. I read an article on his pregame routine the other day and I find it interesting that every gameday, he still listens to the song the listened to together as the fab-five and his best friend from the group gets a handshake before any of his teammates once the names have been called out in the arena.

This goes to show that it truly is a film about relationships and things that are more than a game of basketball. However, if this world sports superstar is not someone you take interest in, there is no point in you watching the film. If the opposite is the case, you would be stupid not to.

Trainspotting

So I finally took the time to watch this and to my viewing pleasure, I wasn't disappointed.

Right from the title sequence you get the feeling you aren't in for an easy one and the message will be hit home hard. Brutally, without any need for illustration, but with the full filth that the message carries. It's a story of heroin and the life it induces.

My friend suggested this to me to change my perception of Ewan McGregor that is so far highly influenced by his role in Moulin Rouge. And to his credit, I must say my perception has been changed despite the difficulty of removing the image of the actor singing and dancing away almost maniacally in more than bizarre scenes. Then again, I guess it is difficult to remove such things from your brain, much like any other traumatizing event.

However, in my opinion, it was the dialogue between his narrating and acting which made the role so enjoyable to watch. Words describing the horrors of the mind whilst the actor delivers the cool, almost unconscious state of the addict who is close to losing all contact with the real world. Other names worth mentioning from the cast include Robert Carlyle, who, in comparison with his later roles in the 51st State and The Full Monty has clearly delivered best in Trainspotting.

What really impressed me throughout the film was the certain blurry reality of an addiction-led life, which was conveyed ever so well through screenplay, narration and camerawork. Unconventional and sometimes even obscure camera angles introduced the viewer to the twisted perspective of the characters' lives. The toilet sequence and a few other scenes were a perfect example of the brilliant way the film depicted the transfer of the individual from one state of mind to another. This reminded me of The Science of Sleep where the main character was fluctuating between being awake and being asleep, here Renton was moving from sober to high to sober to high. Well, you get the picture.

I think this film is a perfect depiction of how different the lives and values of addicts are to non-addicts and it digs deep to illustrate the point graphically. This morning I saw a case on the Jeremy Kyle Show where a 40 year old mother bought and smoked heroin with her 14 year old daughter. At which point Ewan's voice keeps saying "choose life" in my head and I keep thinking about what goes on in a person's head who would do such a thing. Is there anything in her head at all? Is she capable of thought?

I'm glad I saw this film and would recommend it if anyone asked me, but if you are going to watch it, make sure you have the right mindset first, because you will be in for a heavy, but enjoyable night.

The Lovely Bones

I saw this a few days ago and being bedridden, I now have the time to write the review. Also, I think this is the kind of film you need to think about before saying anything.

I know there is quite a lot of hype around this film and having read a review or two before seeing it I was somewhat unsure what to expect. The trouble was that I was expecting a serious and deep film, but what I got was more cartoony and "trippy" than I would ever have expected.

Those of you, who have read the book ignore this, but those who have the reading ability of a shortsighted walrus, like myself, the film is about a teenaged girl in the 70s who is raped and killed. Nothing new here, huh. However, the story takes an interesting twist as the story is told from her perspective as she watches over her parents trying to find the killer. When I was told this, I was expecting something along the lines of Taken, an amazing film by the way. Yet, The Lovely Bones adopts a completely new approach, which is a mixture of the feelings of Susie, the victim, and those of her parents. It is a story of how a little girl overcomes personal trauma and the feelings of detest towards her killer/rapist and how a family fights the turmoil of losing a sister, a daughter.

The acting leaves something to be wished for, my opinion on this being mainly influenced by Mark Wahlberg having the same ability to act different characters as a dead donkey. Not to be harsh towards the man, but I can't really say he is versatile and watching him in The Lovely Bones was like watching Max Payne all over again. There is something about these roles that suits him so well, but looking at the bigger picture, I sadly can't appreciate him as an A-list actor.

I also failed to appreciate the CG scenes of Susie in the in-betweeny bit, leaving earth but not reaching heaven yet. I think the concept of telling the story from the victim's perspective is an interesting touch, but the surreal scenes quickly lost their appeal and became more of a distraction and left me craving a more realistic film.

Unconventionally, the killer's identity is revealed as the crime is committed and the viewer has the difficult task of not shouting out how much they hate him and how creepy he looks - all to the credit of Stanley Tucci who definitely was the bright spot of the cast.

At the end of the day - would I recommend it? Yes, I would. But I find it difficult to pin down the reason for this. It isn't a brilliant film, the acting isn't particularly good and it doesn't really deliver much cinematic value. Then again, I'm wrong here and it does have value, but not to the potential the plot offers and thus, not even having read the book, but having discussed this with people who have, I can tell the film is a bit of a failure. And the book remains superior to the film, long live the written word.

Love Happens

So there I was with a few hours to kill and Love Happens in front of me. As you would imagine, I was set to watch a film about two people whose lives collide, there is some sort of difficulty, they "play the game" for a while, cock up and through admitting their love for one another, end up together. Well you are wrong. And so was I.

The only thing Love Happens and the film described above have in common is the shop scene that this film shares with Notting Hill. The only difference between the two being one ending with a painting and the other with a kiss. Everything else is the same, the unexpected entrance, the speech, the quirky shop assistant, the whole concept of a shop for that matter... I'm sure in some countries in the world people get tortured extensively for this kind of a thing.

Acting - let's not go there. Jennifer Aniston played her typical role which to me is as interesting as jam. Quite frankly, I'd prefer jam. I would also take jam over Aaron Eckhart. But that is rather irrelevant. A bit like the acting in this.

I was positively surprised, though, because like I said, I was expecting a wholly different type of film. And if I had any say in the directing, I would have ended it with him dropping the note and leaving. (sorry to be a plot pooper in case anyone decides to watch this film. I hope such a decision isn't based on this review though, because I would not want any of you making the mistake I made and wasting a good two hours of your life) At the end of the day, though, I do not have a say in this and looking at the film the way it was actually made, despite being positively surprised, I would say it's still only a strong 2 out of 5.

My Sister's Keeper

Wow. I think that is an appropriate place to start from. Story of a girl who was conceived so she could donate whatever needed for her sister with leukemia and the chaos within the family caused by her decision not to help her sister and pursue medical emancipation. As you can tell, not the lightest of films so don't expect me to be blasé about it.

First things first though, I absolutely hated Cameron Diaz in this. I hated her with a passion and more often than not, when you hate an actor's/actress' character with a passion it just shows that they have played a good part. And it also happened to be the case here, regardless of my understatement of the year because she truly was brilliant. The rest of the cast did well which is sort of the same as telling a fish it can swim - irrelevant waste of breath. I am, however, excited for Abigail Breslin and am sure to see her career spur off with something perhaps a bit more sophisticated than her latest Zombieland. Even though she fulfilled her role well in that too.

What really pisses me off, though, is the whole time warp scenario. I know I have been over this, but why do directors see the need of doing this? I hope they do realize that it is completely within the realm of possibility to make a brilliant film which has a straightforward timeline. Having said that, I wasn't annoyed by it whilst watching the film. In contrast to the last movie I saw, The Road, I actually felt every "flashback" contributed to the storytelling in a natural way, even though some viewers may find it difficult to follow from time to time. It was not done to the level of ingenuity as in 500 Days of Summer, but it was good.

Lastly, as with such deep films it seems to be the case, it made me think of life. It made me think of the things we cherish in life and what we fight for. Things we are afraid of and what drive us forward. But most of all I thought about death and how wrong most people seem to be about it. Not that I know much about such matters considering my short, 21-year inhabitation of this planet. But what I have learned is that the opposite of death is not life as most people tend to think. It is not life and death, it's birth and death. Those are the opposites and between them is a wonderful thing called life. It doesn't matter how we were born, or how we died, it is how we lived that remains in the hearts of our loved-ones. Long after we are gone.

The Road

Having been bombarded with somewhat rubbish films recently, I am really happy I watched this. It is a heartbreaking story about a journey of survival. Viggo Mortensen plays a father that has to look after his son once momma nature has given up on us and herself. At this point I wonder whether our actions now will result in a similar road unfolding before us one day.

I was impressed with both of the leads, Mortensen had the tall order of depicting emotions of a man who has pretty much everything taken from him, the only reason not to blow his brains into the wasteland being Kodi Smit-McPhee's character. I am undecided which of the two did a better job as Kodi had to play a boy who has no concept of the world as we know it, being raised in hell and yet being the embodiment of whatever was left of humanity and good will. Having said that, the father was the one that witnessed both the worlds and realizing all the things missing from the dilapidated, treacherous surroundings full of cannibals and... well not much else. It is as if the film is a dialogue of two brilliant acts. And I really mean brilliant.

It's dark and gory from time to time so if you are not afraid of nightmares and ready for cinematic brilliance, go take a walk on the road.

Couples Retreat

There is not much to say about the film. It was bad. The sort of bad that makes you want to waste half of your life on building a time machine so you could go back in time and persuade yourself not to watch it. But somehow I feel I have wasted this 2h I spent watching it completely if I say nothing here.

So here it is: relationships are quite frankly the worst thing there is. It is as if at one point two seemingly intelligent people decide to force a badger through their ear and let it eat whatever is left of their common sense. Once we are in a relationship we start to think it is important to name things, label emotions and take things seriously. After that you forget why you wanted to be around the person in the first place and ten minutes after that you will find yourself in a motel next to either a Bianca or a Pablo trying to find your doctor's number on your phone so you could enquire about the downsides of syphilis. We've all been there.

Rarely do we realise that making 10% effort every now and again can solve 90% of our problems. No, I haven't been to one of those "yes, you can do it, believe in yourself, carpe diem" talks that inspire people to sell more and buy less or vice a versa depending on what sort of a shape a bloke in japan discovered at the bottom of his coffee cup. The key is that the 10% effort needs to be focused on ourselves. Saying that I am being a selfish donkey and I will now make a conscious effort to focus on making someone else happy. Then we will beat the leprechaun to the pot of gold.

Alternatively, doing simple things that are as unfamiliar to your daily routine as penguins are to polar bears will also remind you why you got in a relationship in the first place. And then you can just enjoy the company of that person and share wonderful things with them.

So the main thing to take away from this film is that I wish I was Vince Vaughn. He is funny and I like him. The film wasn't funny though. I did not laugh once. Full stop.

The Invention Of Lying

Before I saw this film, my friend told me it was rubbish, not funny and ridiculous. I have now realised I shouldn't listen to my friends because they don't have a clue what they are saying, even when they are absolutely right.

The film is funny, but not in the conventional way, nor thanks to the plot, which is as absurd as trying to eat your own head. Which, by the way can be achieved upon great practice. I am sure the people who wrote it must have been either extremely bored or extremely intoxicated. Either way, it's awful. The funniest bits were random comments that people made throughout the film that just made you chuckle.

Sadly, I can't say the acting was any better than the plot. Not to take anything away from Ricky Gervais, but even I could play the role of someone taking constant abuse and keeping a straight face through it. It's not rocket-science you know.

Having never been to fond of Jennifer Garner, I must say there was little acting to keep me at the film. It's just her suitability for the quirky-type characters that makes me lose all interest. I'd even be more stimulated by her playing an ass-kicking heroine in some bound-to-fail-attempt-of-a-film like Elektra or the series Alias. The horrors of TV.

Throughout the film I thought about how much we lie every day. At which point, luckily, my companion for the film was kind enough to point out that people can simply withdraw themselves and not say anything at all. That wouldn't be lying. How right she is. I guess I was even more upset at the fact that truth sometimes just isn't romantic at all. Which truly upsets me because I love the truth and prefer it served like a nice salad - cold.

Although the film did turn out to be utter rubbish, I can't help but realise that I had fun watching it and should I find it on TV, I wouldn't mind seeing it again as terrifying as that thought may be.

An Education

Having just done my exams and looking forward to another semester in uni, this film makes me wonder about the education we receive in life. Is it right for us to be carried on hands from cradle to grave or should we be thrown in at the deep end? One way or another, we have a lot to learn.

We can start by learning from the people who made this film about how to make a film with a plot worth millions as boring as watching two bisons taking a poop. Although nobody would like to learn how to do that. I felt bored and even though presented an award-winning (11 wins & 39 nominations) plot I found it difficult to stay intrigued for long.

The acting was good, which naturally means that there was nothing special and nothing was visibly horrendous so I could take yet another poor actor to the slaughterhouse. I was impressed with Carey Mulligan and expect to see her in something again soon. I wish she did a role of someone dominant and fierce. I think it would be challenging for her and treat for all of us on the other side of the screen. Until that she will always be a girl in a film about a girl and a man, which at the same time is brilliant and nothing special.

However, I do feel anyone with a spare 90 minutes should definitely consider this coming of age story.

The Damned United

An intriguing depiction of Brian Clough (Michael Sheen) and his job as manager of Leeds United FC. As well as the road leading to the job for the man was depicted, I was slightly annoyed by the time "warp". It was also done in 500 Days of Summer, Definitely,Maybe and The Other Man, so by now has lost its "wow" effect on me. Which should not take any credit away from the film, but leaves a bitter taste my mouth.

The cast was fairly unknown for me as Colm Meaney's (Law Abiding Citizen, Law & Order) was the only face I recognized. Yet this played in the film's advantage, portraying unknown managers coaching unknown players that went on to make history. Which is where the rub is. The true story will always be bigger, more emotional, better and more relevant than this film, which will fail to exceed mediocrity.

For me, the only bright spots in the film were added clips of actual footage from news reports on this affair (much like photos at the end of The Blind Side) and the personality of Brian Clough. Men like him are so ambitious that nothing will take them down. But the crucial part is that they have to act towards themselves with the same ruthless and somewhat vulgar attitude they face to world with. Alas, they will always start their own downfall.

The Men Who Stare At Goats

Quite possibly the most random film I have ever seen.

Even after a hard session of concentration and a taking a while to think things through after seeing it, I still failed to understand the message of the film. From time to time the plot simply made no sense and I had trouble following it. However, this didn't stop me enjoying it one bit. The film is full of witty humor and the occasional cheap laugh. George Clooney was impressive as always and in hindsight I must say that it was his acting that made the film for me.

Ewan McGregor failed to impress me, but then again, this may highly be up to my narrow-mindedness, which only allows me to see him through his role in Moulin Rouge. I was constantly waiting for him to break out in song and dance.

All in all, the film disappointed me, but then again my hopes were incredibly high and thus failure was imminent. Do not get me wrong, however, this film is still great great entertainment.

The Other Man

It's a very heavy film with a dark plot and an ingenious twist.

I would not say it is a particularly good film, apart from the twist, which I do not want to spoil for you and thus will not elaborate on. I have grown fond of Liam Neeson's acting lately and in my eyes, he delivers once again. Antonio Banderas puts in a decent effort and I can imagine the role of a slick dreamer who wives cheat on their husbands on was interesting to play for him.

The bottom line, however, is this - it drags a lot and builds up to the twist after which there is an anticlimax and everybody is richer for the experience. You need to be in a very specific mood to watch this, otherwise it will be nothing more than average.

Whip it

Whip it is a film that I have trouble placing in a category. And I am not talking about genres here, because there is no problem there - this is clearly a perfect example of the notorious vomit genre. The sort of film that is a result of two men in their middle thirties, a whole lot of alcohol and a schmoke or two.

I do not want to be harsh towards the actors and actresses involved because all of us need to eat, right! I am, however, slightly disappointed in Ellen Page, I LOVED her in Juno and do think she can be a brilliant actress, dare I say she already isn't. But I do fail to see the reasoning behind this part selection. Honey, I am sure there are far better films out there that bring out what you are really made of.

I am under no illusion that this film was directed at and by someone still learning to walk. However, with Drew Barrymore finding her feet as a director I ponder whether there are such things as "a born actress" or "a born director." There should be because sometimes, people should simply stay either in front or behind the camera and not wander around somewhere they do not belong.

Turning back to what category I would put this film in and the winner is.... awful.

The Blind Side

Firstly, very similar the the last film I saw, Adam. As in, its not particularly good, but the story is breathtaking. Well, not so much as for Adam as for this. A truly remarkable story of Michael Oher, a big boy with a bigger heart who carries everything he has in life - a spare shirt - in a plastic bag wherever he goes. Taken in by a wealthy white family, he needs to figure out the new life he is given - admission to a predominantly white private school based on his believed excellence in sport.

Secondly, the person who did the casting should be shot. That for two main reasons. a) he/she is brilliant in selecting people who so well match the real people seen in the photographs in the credits. b) for selecting Kathy Bates as miss Sue. She is perfect for the role, but I just can't stand the actress! I am sorry and am sure she is a lovely person in real life, but can't stand her on screen.

As for the rest of the cast - how is Sandra Bullock still getting roles? Who can I write to about this? I'm sure there are others out there who would quite happily have seen Megan Fox play Leigh Anna Tuohy.

The story is amazing and I would encourage all to see it. It tells me once again that the true stars in our civilization are those men and women that nobody knows about. The regular everyday normal guy and gal that have a heart as big as an elephant.

A truly inspirational "based on a true story" film, in fact, the best I have seen. That argument not being based on the films side of things, but the story side of things. That's my opinion and I am sticking with it.

Adam

Before I start writing this I have to come clean. My friends... I love chick-flicks. Big time. But not the kind that makes the girls in my house whine about how they all "want a boyfriend" (now they only do it because they know it irritates me, but whatever). I like chick-flicks with a twist. Here's a few examples to know what I'm talking about: Spread, The Ugly Truth, 500 Days of Summer.

Anyhow, this film intrigued me. Boy meets girl. Boy falls for girl. Girl falls for boy. Boy has Asperger's. Sorry? Yeah, wake up call miss "I want a boyfriend"! Life isn't all roses and butterflies. People see things in a whole different way and that is why Hugh Dancy's acting impressed me - he was able to convey that in a way that was clear enough to get the message across but subtle enough not to ruin it. Many of the things his character said and did made me think about our lives and how much of it is lies. Are we really becoming so superficial that amongst all the politeness our real message is lost? Are we unable to tell the people around us what we are thinking because we are too worried about what they might think of us?

Which brings me to my next point. When we say so many polite things, we run out of ways to express sincere emotion, sincere affection when we most wish to express it. On this blog, I have been saying that a lot of films are good just because they have left me with no negatives to point out. So now, when I actually saw a film that was not amazing, that was not bound to go down in film history, that was not superb, but was extremely heart-warming and a lovely watch... I simply... Do not know how to say it. Because there are these other films in the way.

This really is a good (I know, I'm sorry) film and I encourage you to watch it, unless you are the type that needs exploding cars and an average of 5 stabbing and 89 deaths per film in order for it to be "good". In which case you know nothing of cinema and should not watch anything at all... better still - don't even leave your house and chuck your TV out the window. Do that and I promise that I will be more objective with the next reviews I post.

Law Abiding Citizen

Before you start reading this, I ask that you try to take everything I say with a pinch of salt because I got a lot of love for Gerald Butler. But often as it is, we choose to ride those we love the hardest, so they achieve their full potential. Kind of the case here. Watching it I wondered why monsieur Butler chooses roles of broken men with a bit of roughness to them, someone who has lost someone close. We saw this in P.S. I Love You (loved that film by the way) and also in the Gamer. As he has that look about him which makes such roles suit him so perfectly, I can't help but wish that he did something completely different. Something to really challenge his ability as an actor. For the love of God, it's not like he would ruin his career, should he fail. Not with the kind of looks he's flashing around. Take The Ugly Truth for example... there are always that kind of films as a back-up.

Jamie Foxx? Well, let me tell you that not having seen too much of his stuff, I would have to say he did well. Nothing about his acting that left me with a bitter taste, nothing about it leaving me rallying the troops to go riot an Oscar for him. Not that it would be the kind of caliber film, that would bring home the golden men. Don't get me wrong, I do think it is a good film.

And the thing that really makes it good is the plot. Kurt Wimmer (writer) is undoubtedly bang on and F. Gary Gray (I know, awesome name, right) has done a good job directing. I love comparing the incomparable, so here it is: whilst for Avatar, the plot can be suggested to be the weakest feature - slightly lacking in creativity and choosing raw muscle over wit in trying to hammer home the message - this is completely the opposite. I love a thought provoking film and this definitely is a true-blooded member of that tribe.

However, the plot on its own can't make a film or break it, nor can any other aspect. Similarly, just the ability to put the ball in the basket doesn't make one a good basketball player. There are other aspects of the game that make you a true player, like Brandon Roy or King James. You have to be a solid all-rounder and that is what I think this film is. It is a good solid act, with some stronger aspects and some weaker ones, but just like the fore mentioned players, it will make you remember itself.