Reviews

I'm reviewing this from the perspective of my 3 year old daughter who loves Bianca and can watch a few episodes of Wishenpoof without pause. From a socio-educational viewpoint I also think its very good. The storyline are meaningful for a child and themes like friendship, kindness, trying your best are dealt with in an enjoyable way.

I particularly like how they handled getting angry when Bianca and her friends came up with strategies to get by. It must have worked because my daughter was singing along!

And ultimately that's the real test for a show like this: characters that little ones can identify with, storyline that makes sense and good singalong moments.

Olivia Colman and Jessie Buckley are both brilliant as older and younger versions of the protagonist Leda. The film gives a documentary like observational study of how the younger version's life choices left her with bouts of anxiety and bouts of sadness that are wonderfully realised by Colman. But the film meanders along and it feels like a long tease to get to anything approaching real drama. And the eventual resolution seems to run contrary to everything in the preceding near two hours. The performers deserved better.

When I heard Michael Haneke was re-making Funny Games in America I wondered why: what purpose could it possibly serve? The set-up to both versions is simple in that a bourgeois family is subjected to a torturous ordeal by a couple of ever so polite psychopaths. Moreover, like the original the re-make is a cruel exercise in exposing our fascination with the violence depicted in the media - the "our" specifically meaning the middle classes, comfortable in our existences and oblivious to the horrors of the world.

However, Haneke is on record as saying that he always considered Funny Games to be an "American story", as he regarded the use of violence as a form of entertainment to be a specifically American phenomenon. No matter that this is a bit of a flawed viewpoint: having the aggressors seem straight out of the O.C. gives the impact of their sadistic actions an even more discomfiting air. Michael Pitt (charismatic and barbarous) and Brady Corbett (seemingly dopey but utterly vicious) are both excellent, but their performances leave one feeling a bit um "seen it all before".

Which takes me back to my first thought: what is the point? Cosmetics aside this is exactly the same film, right down to the assumption that the well to do like to listen to classical music and that the audience may be unsettled by playing them some thrash metal. Haneke even has Pitt address the camera and manipulate the film, so re-using the trick about playing with reality and focusing the viewer on what actually counts as real. It is just that this playing around does not carry the impact it did 10 years ago.

In fact, due to the unconventional nature of the film and the vast disparity it offers with reality it's hard to care much at all. Yes what happens is horrible, but it does not feel at all real. I'm waiting for someone to point out that, that is Haneke's point, but frankly, I don't care. No amount of intellectualising can make this watchable.

You would think Haneke would know better too. His most recent film Hidden took a genre film and flipped it about to deliver one of the most surprising and intellectually challenging thrillers of the decade. By stringing the audience along and offering some sense of catharsis and understanding of character motivation he offered a way in. Funny Games U.S. offers no such intrigue or tension and is ultimately a big step backward. He may see it as an American story, but it worked better as a small Austrian film, set in anywheres-ville Europe.

Fernando Meirelles's follow up to City of God is proof that that powerhouse chronicle of life in the favelas was no one of. Shot with an extravagant eye for detail and scented with a noble poignancy, The Constant Gardener (based on John Le Carre's acclaimed novel) follows Terry George's Hotel Rwanda as the next important document of the troubles and tragedies of Africa.

Following the discovery of the body of his wife Tessa (Rachel Weisz) by the idyllic surroundings of northern Kenya's Lake Turkana, Justin Quayle (Ralph Fiennes) sets out on a quest to understand the side of Tessa he never knew. As a British diplomat, his marriage to her modern day "revolutionary", seems at first glance a strange one, but the story elaborates on their relationship, shown through a series of flashbacks as Justin remembers the tender moments they shared and the great joy they obviously brought each other.

The memories however, are underscored by unease as her humanitarian activities, in association with Hubert Kounde's Belgian doctor, create tension within the diplomatic service ranks. There is a suggestion that the two may have been engaged in an affair (Tessa's murder is even initially assumed to have been a crime of passion).

As Justin digs further his own life is put in danger, as he realises his wife was trying to fight for a just cause. We learn that there is a sinister side to the British (Western) presence in Kenya and their relationship with giant multinational drug corporations who exploit poor Africans desperate for treatment. When I think about recent scandals involving large pharmaceutical companies and their reluctance to manufacture cheap retrovirals to supply third world countries, such a scenario seems frighteningly realistic. The film brings home the horrible reality of such dubious dealings as demonstrated by the appalling treatment of a sick young mother.

Meirelles shoots this with a vibrancy and life that those familiar with City of God will be au fait with. The Kenyan slum is evinced as a place of sparkling colour (scenes in Kibera Africa's largest shantytown are full of bright oranges and reds sets against dark red earth and endless corrugated iron). The photography also encompasses staggering images of flocks of flamingos, bright blue lakes and flowing savannah as we leave the city.

This is in stark contrast to the dark grey backdrop to the European locations. London seems very drab and rigid by comparison. There is perhaps an artistic point to this, as a growing darkness becomes more apparent in the story during the section where Justin travels back to London and on into Germany.

Fiennes exudes graciousness and stoicism throughout, as he bravely tries to piece together the events. He manages to also convey Justin's gradual release of emotion, culminating in a heartbreaking moment of recollection of happier times (Meirelles cutting from a broken Justin to an image his beaming wife).

His performance is strongly backed up by Weisz's contrasting turn. She vivacious and radical while he toes the line. However, the further Justin heads on his pursuit (always realistic and never taken over by any overblown heroics), the more impassioned Fiennes's performance. An important scene has him angrily questioning a South African doctor (Pete Postethwaite in a small but influential effort) all the while maintaining a dignified air, as chaos descends around them.

The story welds together romance and intrigue in a potent formula. It contains the ingredients for an epic tale like the English Patient, but is concentrated more towards the machinations and movement of a fast paced thriller like the Bourne Identity. Each minute builds the sense of conniving on a grand scale and the plot is complex, but never impossible to fathom. Furthermore, a level of social conscience underscores it together with an understanding for the problems of Africa Bob Geldof could never hope to impart with his superficial ranting. The Constant Gardener is a triumph on every level.

With The Incredibles Pixar have made a big departure from their standard story lines of cute critters on a voyage of discovery. With its opening pastiche of 40s comic book serials through to the Bondian stylings of the set and the super heroics of the finale, for me it was clearly aimed as being an action-adventure for the family, more Indiana Jones than Woody and Buzz. As such I think it succeeds wonderfully.

The opening sets the tone with a night in the life of Mr Incredible, as he foils bad guy after bad guy and even saves an elderly woman's cat! It manages to throw in a bit of satirical humour too, as Mr Incredible saves a man attempting suicide, he is thanked with a lawsuit, leading to a surge of lawsuits against crusaders, in a clever dig at "compensation culture".

15 years on we find ourselves in the suburban lives of the Parr's, headed by Mr Incredible himself Bob Parr and his wife Helen, formerly Elastigirl, as they pretend to be "normal". Seeing Parr at work as a pathetic insurance clerk grounds the movie with a glimpse into the mundane reality of his new life, as he tries (and fails) to forget the glories of his past. There is a Nietzchean undertone to this passage of the story, with a hint of Professor Charles Xavier's school for gifted children and the hounding of masked vigilantes from Watchmen. Why be normal when you can be special, why be a desk clerk when you possess superhuman abilities. The unfairness of having to hide what you really are, whilst being hounded from town to town to hide one's anonymity. He can't even get angry for fear of giving himself away by revealing his super strength. In a philosophical moment, his son Dash, banned from using his super speed, bemoans the fact that if everyone is special then no-one is.

The plot switches up a gear as a mysterious benefactor requests Mr Incredible's help, to subdue a giant robot running amok on his desert island. The classic Bondian set design of genius Ken Adam is strongly evoked by this setting. Mission accomplished Parr soon finds events taking a dangerous turn.

The movie does drag a touch during this section, before the family Incredible team up for the non-stop finale. However we do get the hilarious costume designer Edna Mode to give our ribs a tickle, in a treat of a scene, as she demonstrates the dangers of wearing a cape for superheros. It's actually pretty dark humour, as a succession of heroes are seen in flashback meeting untimely deaths due to their flowing apparel.

In fact there are plenty of laughs to be had throughout, if not of the belly ripping variety, they help keep the mood light. I particularly enjoyed Sam Jackson's Frozone, reminiscing as to how his life was saved by a "monloguing" villain. Anyway I feel it's become a trend for movies to have a few set piece moments, either comedic or action packed, to help carry them, something the more evenly enjoyable Incredibles does not do.

Overall I'd probably agree it does not quite enter the class of the Toy Story movies. There perhaps is a certain amount of charm lacking, but that's not to say the characters are dull, far from it. The genial and likable humanity of the Parr's makes that so. It establishes strong central character's by showing them going about there everyday lives and as far as superhero, action-adventure movies go it's all the better for it. Movies like this do or die on whether you care for the characters, and this set are strong enough to sustain the necessary hold on the audience, young and old. It's one the most enjoyable movies I've seen this year, I'd say up there with the web slinger. Overall 8 out of 10.

Going into Spider-man 2 I was somewhat dubious about the hype surrounding it. I was a tad unimpressed by the first film, it never surpassed X-Men IMO, at times it felt a bit artificial and the time elapsing device seemed to miss out a lot of key events and just assumed we'd guess what happened since they left college. The action was pretty special at points, but somewhat marred by the CGI, which I was never convinced by.

Spidey Mk 2, welds the story far more convincingly together, managing to deal with all the various plot strands, character development and adding some very humorous moments (I'm still guffawing at the lift scene, the busker was a most amusing bit of in jokery, and Bruce Campbell would get an Oscar if there was one for hilarious cameos), all the whilst delivering awesome action. The attack on the bank and the train sequence are big screen action to the max. I was literally gasping at points there. Best of all is probably the operating theatre, as Doc Ock's tentacles kick in to life, with devastating effect.Sam Raimi's roving camera adds to the experience, the camera zooming in to detail the key action.

There are some smartly directed little moments to, like Peter running across the rooftops trying to recover his powers (a wonderful flipside to his "discovery" in the first film) which are filmed with real pizazz. There were a few other moments where the camera pans round in such a way as to be in itself exciting. Kudos to Bill Pope for helping bring the cinematography to such an exciting level. I'll need to see it again just to remember all my favourite bits.

I guess the sheer scale and scope of the movie will diminish on the small screen. What makes both movies so great is the way you are sucked into this take on New York, the world of Spidey. Something all great movies do and it's best represented on a mega mutha of a screen.

This is one of the best blockbusters in recent years, up there with Mr Jackson's masterpiece. It delivers everything a film should laughs, emotion and excitement, a genuine hero. There are some thought provoking messages too, the idea that in everyone there's a hero, it's inspirational stuff. I think people will still be warming to Spider-Man 2 for years to come. Nine out of ten.

I, Robot comes across as a movie that very much fits the idea of three separate acts. Act one establishes the situation, act two is a conventional whodunit with act three an all action climax. The first two thirds of the movie actually throw up some interesting ideas, the concept that artificial intelligence can evolve to become more human, and tries to fathom what it means to be a robot or indeed to be human. Pretty deep ideas for a summer blockbuster, and perhaps that in the end, is too much for it. It's a nice try all the same and allows for some entertaining set pieces.

Alex Proyas manages to keep his eye on both the excitement and thought side of things, introducing us to the world through the eye's of Will Smith's Del Spooner. He very much helps ground the film, a sci-fi cop that was born outside of a time that would've suited him, i.e. the present. As he is told by one character, "The kind of guy that would've stopped the internet to keep people going to library's" (or words to that effect). Smith is a likable presence, and though some may not have warmed to his portrayal, I thought it helped keep the film "human", without his easygoing charm it could have been too detached to be likable. However I would certainly say that his back story felt very much "been there seen it", surely there could've been a better explanation for why he didn't like robots. I did also feel some of the support characters seemed superfluous (what's with the kid?).

The conspiracy underpinning the plot is involving enough, and kept me hooked till the conclusion. Why would a giant robot producing corporation allow have conspired in the murder of their greatest inventor? Or was it suicide? And who's trying to "accidentally" kill Spooner and to cover what?

While figuring this out we are treated to the sight of Smith escaping from gigantic demolition robots, robots leaping out of trucks in a high speed car chase and finally scores of the blighter's storming the robotics lab. The CGI is very good, perhaps some of the best I've seen and Proyas directs the action with some zip, without over editing.

The script probably aspires to more than what it eventually delivers, but as far as blockbuster cinema goes this is a superior effort. Overall for the cool vfx, enjoyable action set pieces, the engaging Big Willie performance and the engrossing murder mystery suspense plot with a dash of philosophical robotics theorizing, I'd give it eight out of ten.

21 Grams is a hard film to like. The first half hour or so is inaccessible and at points the editing leaves one bewildered. You don't get a chance to know or engage with the characters because you are buffeted between stories at an incredibly fast pace. I'm just about to learn about Jack Jordan's faith then I'm suddenly thrown into Paul Rivers's marital strife. At times this works well, like the cut from Jordan giving his son a slap, into Cristina Peck's kitchen where she is baking a cake with her kids. There is a certain fluidity to it that makes sense, aside from the fact that those events are actually taking place in the same time frame.

Ah the time frames. As I said at times the cutting between them is quite bewildering, but then I stopped to think what the movie would be like without them, as in the editing cleverly disguises what it really is. Yes it could have been a feature length episode of British hospital drama Casualty, with superior acting. Seriously, we've got the family of to meet mummy, the guy who's just been sacked and the guy who needs a heart transplant, what catastrophe will it take to get them all in the ER room? And that in my mind is where it all falls down, this is just a bit of melodrama, that is technically brilliant, contains powerful performances, but is at best a very dull story.

That's not to say I disliked it. The pay off at the end is very good, and seems to provide a philosophical twist to events, and gives Rivers a noble slant to his character's arc. Sean Penn IMO gives the stand out performance, measured, calm, at times enigmatic and never showy. He makes Rivers feel genuine. I believe in him when he 'stalks' the wife of his heart donor. Del Toro's Jordan is very good, he conveys the genuine anguish of his character, as he falls from the born again Christian he has fought to become. Watts as Cristina I felt was the weak link. There are moments where she gets angry, that I felt were incredibly contrived. For example when Paul first hits her with his revelation, her explosion felt stagey. I've seen angry, I've been angry, and know what it should be like. Melissa Leo as Jordan's wife is very good in the scenes she gets, but again it's a character conveying anguish. There's a lot of that in this film.

The director says it's a hopeful film, and I'd agree to an extent. The ending offers some hope for the characters, as they resume their lives. I don't think life is as simple as that though, they've seen and lived some pretty bad sh*t and I imagine they'd be scarred no matter how they approach the future.

I did like some of the symbolism Inarittu finds with some of the cuts. For instance there's a shot of Jordan leaving his truck, and as the camera lingers it captures in the frame a number of religious symbols in his car. Then when Cristina leaves her kids' room after she gets the call, the camera focuses on a mobile hanging. In each case it lingers for a second or so, giving one the chance for some reflective thought.

Overall it's an interesting film, it will make you think, but whether it will really engage your emotions I don't know. Certainly didn't engage mine and left me pretty cold. It's hard to find specific things to criticise it on, I suppose if I was struggling to say why I liked something I'd say it was the 'je n'ai ce quoi' so this is reverse 'je n'ai ce quoi' if you like. That and the fact that it's a glorified version of a bit of British kitchen sink drama!

It's big, it's dumb, it's cheesy as hell, but I found it to be enormous fun. This was made to be a roller-coaster ride and by that token it should be judged.

Actually after the opening pastiche of the Boris Karloff Frankenstein movie, I thought this had the potential to be a 5 star movie. It was very atmospheric and had me hooked. However the film never really captures any sense of magic from there onwards.

The main body of the movie does go on a bit, and it could have done with some attempt to create engaging characters. Plot and story are not always necessary for fun movies, but you do need characters with a level of interest to capture the mind, otherwise you tend to find yourself not giving a s**t. I felt Van Helsing did verge into this territory, but for the most part it's so fast paced this doesn't matter so much. The points where it does try to introduce plot are the moments where it really does fail. In fact there is too much going on that is never really explained, and I think it would've been better not to have bothered at all, than use the nonsense Sommers resorts too. For example the attempts at backstory to Van Helsing. Better to have one of those interlude chatty scenes you have in the Indy films, where it establishes he's a dude, rather than the poor attempts at angst and pathos. Really bad was the moment he gets upset over Frankie's Monster. What the hell was that all about?

Hmm maybe I took that a bit seriously, but the movie knows what it is, why try be something else. I also thought that that masked ball sequence was a natural conclusion, the eventual finale at the castle felt like an add on, which lacked any real punch.

Far better was Van's introduction to Transylvania, with the benefit of some neat angles and panning shots, the crossbow battle with the brides was cool. The coach chase was exciting without being exhilarating, but kept the flow going, so it's a shame some more bad plot gets thrown in, especially when it was involving the underwritten Velkan. That's the film's main problem - overkill of characters, with little space given to any of them to evolve.

Finally a word on the CGI. I thought it was very good, especially the morphs that were used. The very first moment Drac starts to turn made me jump a touch, and when the vampires turns into their fanged, contorted state it looked pretty scary to me. The wolfman transformation, with the ripping flesh looked genuinely painful. At this point I was thinking the CGI was genuinely stunning. I'd have preferred the finale if it had just been Van vs Drac though, having CGI characters fight felt uninvolving, and Drac in snarly state was far better than the beast he turns into.

This is a movie to genuinely switch of the brain and enjoy. At times there's too much going on and perhaps a bit too much swinging about for my liking, but it's an adrenaline filled ride. I'd probably give it 7 out of 10.

Zhang Yimou set a new benchmark for martial arts movies with Hero. Visually both inventive and dazzling, whilst having a strong thematic thread, it still managed to kick ass, with energetic fight sequences. He continues in the same vein with House of Flying Daggers, with love and romance replacing Hero's chivalry and honour. It is at times as blisteringly exciting and exquisite to view, but there are a few problems.

Set in a similar time to Hero, the plot revolves around the mysterious House of Flying Daggers, a group of assassins leading a rebellion of sorts, against the rulers of their land. News has reached the local military captain Leo (Andy Lau) that the leader of the House can be found plying their trade in the local brothel. Sensing that this could be the key to ending their resistance he sends one of his men, Jin (Takeshi Kaneshiro), to infiltrate the establishment posing as a customer. This soon leads him to the beautiful blind dancer Mei (Zhang Ziyi), who may just be the daughter of the assassinated former leader of the House. What follows is his journey with edit her, through forests and meadows, as he vies to gain her trust, all the while intent on leading the army to their destination in an attempt to discover the leader of the House.

The plot is actually far more complicated than my short synopsis could come close to. We are treated to a twisty turny adventure, punctuated with set pieces of (excuse the tired terminology) balletic grace. Yimou sets a number of scenes within symmetrically perfect backgrounds, the picture set up like a work of art. We find ourselves in a dance hall encircled with drums, where the camera moves with a sense of fluidity, as though part of the dance, as we see Mei play a game of "echoes" with the Captain. Each time he hits a drum with a flicked nut, she follows, striking it with her flowing robes. The scene has a steady tempo, finally hitting a crescendo as the whole bowl is flung, nuts flying everywhere like missiles striking every drum. The sound of each strike reverberates like thunder.

For me the other set pieces never quite match the "echo" dance for majesty, rhythm or look. We get to see numerous showdowns between, with Mei and Jin taking on the soldiers that chase them, all the while with Jin trying to maintain his cover. The fights very much feel like a dance, and are filled with POV shots of arrows, sharpened bits of wood and of course flying daggers. I thought this camera trick felt overused, it looks good, but eventually started to feel tired as yet another dagger is seen boomeranging into action.

As events reach a climax, the plot gets pretty messy, as revelation after revelation is thrown about. In contrast to Hero's coda, where the action became about what's doing right for the good of the whole country, House of Flying Daggers has one of a more personal nature. It never quite rings true, there just isn't the emotion on display for this to work. The final act is somewhat botched, with a "it's over, no it isn't" feel to it, which caused a few "no ways" to be uttered in my vicinity. It is yet another gloriously shot scene, but we'd already seen some extraordinary moments. I felt it seemed to be reaching a more natural conclusion, and with a bit of editing a tighter last half hour would've made this a classic.

As it stands House of Flying Daggers is a fine movie, never quite as good as Hero, and probably behind Crouching Tiger too, and maybe it goes on a bit too long, but it's far superior to most of the formulaic actioners Hollywood produces. Out of ten, I'd give it an eight.

I really enjoyed Troy for the most part, but it's severely lacking in places and there are big problems caused by some of the changes to Homer's text.

Actionwise it's spectacular. Wolfgang Petersen's direction is perfunctory at best (imagine what a visionary like Peter Jackson or an action expert like Ridley Scott could've done with the material). The scale of it all is so great though, that such a problem doesn't impact too greatly on the entertainment value. There are literally thousands of warriors on screen slugging it out, and because so many real people have been used, there's no way of saying who are real extras and where the vfx begins. The fights aren't as dynamic as Gladiator's (the first of many times where I feel the need to compare the two) but there's plenty of punch and scale to it all. It's at it's best during the one on one moments, especially the Achilles vs Hector duel. There's an almost balletic quality to the way it has been choreographed, it's certainly not shot to look like your average bit of gladiatorial violence.

In between action sequences the characters and plotting are diverting enough. Peter O'Toole especially gives proceedings a genuine gravitas as Trojan King Priam. Eric Bana does a very good job as Hector, he's got a good screen presence about him and there were moments where I felt genuinely moved by his performance, in his defense of Paris, his final night with his wife as he holds his baby son and his final march down to face his doom. As some have mentioned Orlando Bloom is very much his standard self, but it seems right for the role he is playing, Paris is after all a legendary ladies man. I never particularly got the feeling he was in love with Helen, but there scenes together did enough to suggest it to me. Diane Kruger's Helen is similar to be honest, nothing stand out, but it's functional enough to move the plot along.

And what of the much talked about Brad Pitt. For me his portrayal of Achilles is at times hopeless. He's fine at the physical stuff and during the stroppy Achilles phase he does well, but the moment the role calls for any amount of emotion it goes to pieces. His reaction to the death of Patroclus his cousin felt like a whiny kid who'd just had his new toy taken away. And here's where the Gladiator comparison really does Troy no favours at all. You compare Pitt's feeble attempt at emotion to Russell Crowe's powerhouse display as Maximus. You want a broken man driven to revenge, take a look a Crowe, we've got rage, sadness, tears, the man even gives us snot. The scene where he collapses to his knees upon finding his family murdered says it all. OK maybe it's a bit harsh to compare a guy reacting to his cousin's death to a man who's just lost his wife and kid, and the diversion from Homer here doesn't help much either, seeing as Patroclus was Achilles's 'dear' friend, but come on he's practically untroubled by it all. Seeing as Petersen has set out to make a Gladiatoresque film, rather than giving us Homer's rich mythology, such a scene is vital and I thought it failed. Any scene from there onwards Pitt struggles, as he also does in showing passion for his lover Breiseis. That's a love that feels superficial, he might as well have won her in the lottery.

Anyway I could go on about Pitt's performance all day, suffice to say he may as well have been in a coffee shop with Jennifer Aniston, which is probably my main problem with his casting. He felt to contemporary, not 'dirty' enough to play such a role, nor hard enough.

Mention must be made of the music. James Horner is quite frankly a hack of a composer, something I've thought since Titanic, which was pretty much his score to Braveheart with a few extra bits. This is heavily pilfered from Gladiator, so we get the chanting melodies for sad scenes and the big chords for the battles. The difference being that Hans Zimmer has talent and produced something that felt fresh. The lyrical beauty of Lisa Gerrard's vocals is hoplelessly ripped off, especially as they were often used to score the more abstract moments of Gladiator, while Troy is very much a by the numbers movie.

Anyway for a film I'd still rate seven out of ten, I've been heavily critical of it. It is entertaining, which for cinema is very important to me. This was supposed to be a contender for film of the year though, an Oscar hopeful, and it doesn't live up to that. Even if it hadn't been hyped so heavily, it would still be a waste of a great piece of Greek mythology. Troy has very little to do with the Illiad at all, except for containing the same characters. Stripped of the sense of adventure and the fantastical aspects this is a generic sword and sandals picture. People who haven't read any Greek lit, try for a moment and imagine the Lord of the Rings movies being based entirely around Helm's Deep and Pellenor Fields and you have some idea of how Troy has been adapted. I just feel they may as well have written an original script if this is what they planned to do. As a sword and sandals picture it pales next to Gladiator, as well as the older precedents Spartacus and Ben Hur. As an adaptation of The Illiad it's greatest crime is that we will never now see it as it should've been, on screen. Oh well it diverted my attention for 2 1/2 hours at least.

I went into DAT (The Day After Tomorrow) under the impression it was some sort of unholy combination, Twister meets Armageddon if you will. Those are two of the worst event movies I have seen. Twister because it is boringly repetetive with no arc to proceedings, it just goes nowhere. Armageddon, which forgetting it's hubristic jingoistic approach and callous disregard for life (the easy destruction of Shanghai and Paris really soured it for me) is poorly edited to the point it makes no sense. DAT has the crazy weather and destruction on a global scale, but it's infinitely better than either of those two films, because it is far more involving, with the disaster movie approach adopted it allows for a proper story arc. Furthermore it avoids the heavy handed approach adopted by Armageddon. Areas of the world suffer greatly, but it isn't just glossed over when the heroes save the day, rather there is an undercurrent of melancholic regret punctuating the movie, well represented in the scene where we say goodbye to Ian Holm's professor and his team.

In fact it is to Emmerich's credit that he has managed to fill the movie with good character actors, who genuinely give the film a sense of humanity. Ok so some of it is a bit on the cheesy side, but the thought is a good one. These are real people being put through appalling stuff, so it's important that we have some sympathy for them. Dennis Quaid in particular brings a solid presence to the film. There is an honourable stoicism to his Dr Jack Hall. I felt genuinely moved by the scene where he decides to go to retrieve his son. Jake Gylenhaal as son Sam plays along well, he's more than capable of making this stuff believable.

I did like the scenes in the British weather outpost. Ian Holm, Adrian Lester and the other guy (sorry perhaps someone can put me right here) felt more than just "weather fodder", they played it low key, and kinda helped sum up the human cost. There's a serious point being made here, and whether the science involved errs closer to fiction or not, it does make you think. By ignoring the scientists and continuing to harm the planet we could end up causing a catastrophe, maybe not on this scale, but many lives would be lost.

All of which makes it sound like a depressing two hours, which it most certainly isn't. There's a guilty pleasure to be had in seeing how Emmerich wrecks the place. Twisters rip through the Hollywood sign and tidal waves submerge the Statue of Liberty. I don't know whether Emmerich meant anything by this, but to me this a symbolic of the humbling of the Western World. Underscored by the irony of having Americans pouring in to Mexico as refugees and having the American Vice President announce that we are now dependent on the Third World.

The first builds up with ominous events alerting us to the dangers to come. We see snow in New Delhi and hailstones in Tokyo. The LA storm for me was the highpoint though, it demands to be seen on a big screen. There's so much detail to it. The flooding of New York is superbly orchestrated too, with the masterstroke for me being the sight of the ship floating up to the library.

The look of the film is pretty dark. Refreshing in fact to see a film that isn't reliant on the warm colours. The cinematography and editing are bang on with the action all shot in a steady style, with wide angles capturing the full scope of the mayhem, with chaos occurring all over the screen. The sound is good too, with storm fx coming from all sides of the auditorium, you genuinely feel part of the experience at points.

After my misgivings going into DAT, I have to admit this is a very good film. It does drag a touch in the final half hour, but it's hit you with so much by then, and your so involved in the protagonists fight for survival, that it takes you all the way. It does go through a number of disaster movie cliches (the people who go don't listen to the hero and go off anyway, the heroic friend who buys it), but the characters feel genuine and the scale of events and spectacle generated is awesome. If I'm marking, it's Eight out of Ten for me

Kevin Costner has got a lot of stick over the years, wrongly as far as I'm concerned, both as an actor. a director and quite often personal abuse. He's a much underrated performer, purely because he has chosen not to be flashy or in your face, but he's a master of the understated, knowing his limitations and often giving very good, heartfelt performances. His role in Open Range, as freegrazer cattlehand Charlie Waite is no different, and it is all the better for it. In fact it's a very good performance, easygoing and tough, bringing a very real hint of danger to the party.

The movie itself is laidback, Costner as director likes to develop characters and let them live. So we have his character Waite, Boss Spearman (Robert Duval) the worn down man in charge, Button (Diego Luna) the happy go lucky kid and Mose (Abraham Benrubi) the big guy with a good heart, living their lives in the beautiful green praeries of the west. We pick up with them retrieving some cattle who have lost their way during a storm, and are treated to some fabulous cinematography, bringing the scene wonderfully to life.

This picture of life is rudely broken by trouble from the town in the form of Michael Gambon's landowner, who don't like guys passing through his land, nor their cows eating his grass. After an incident with his men, Waite and Spearman are thrown into confrontation with him, and it's their destiny to do what a man's gotta do, and sort him out.

This is situation brought vividly to life by the fine performances. Duvall probably just shades it, his Spearman is a good man, and he imbues him with true feeling. You know he'd die for Charlie or any of his team. He also gets to deliver one powerhouse speech, which pretty much made me stand up and cheer, because it was delivered in quite an understated way, yet packed a punch, inspiring the townsfolk to action. Costner gets to attempt a romance with Annette Bening's doctor's assistant and sister, which doesn't entirely work, but his character's awkwardness with the situation is well described.

The film builds to the climatic gun fight, which is punctuated with some ear shattering gunshots, the sound effects boys have given this a real go. It's tensely fought, and all the better because of the pacing, as in knowing the characters as you now do, you care whether they make it or not. There are spurts of minor violence, which whilst not graphic, are strong enough to emphasise what killing is about.

And before I finish it's worth saying Michael Kamen has written a fine score for this movie, which is a great credit to his fine legacy as a film music composer.

In all this is a strong package, maybe a bit too slow for those more used to the bombastic MTV style of most recent action pictures, but all the better for those who like a solid film, with well drawn characters and actions that count. Nine out of ten.

The film starts in a standard Cruiser style, with Tom doing Tom and pretending to be drunk and acting a bit mad, but his performance improves all the way through, following the arc of his character as he becomes a changed honourable man. He is also helped by some cleverly done flashbacks, showing the war crimes his character Captain Nathan Algren has committed. This makes the pain he is feeling far more believable than his attempts at drunken rambling. Once in Japan he really catches fire as he starts to immerse himself in Japanese culture.

It is at this point though that we meet the real star of the film, Ken Watanabe playing Samurai chief Katsumoto. He is the heart and soul of the movie, and it is an immensely powerful turn. I can't recall seeing Cruise take a back seat for so much of a film before, but he is put in the shade here. Watanabe is able to use simple facial expressions to take control of scenes and his dialogue is powerfully delivered. When the action comes he is more than up to the task, slashing at ninjas (in perhaps the movies best sequence) as they raid the samurai village and charging lines of rifle wielding troops. He fully conveys the values and coda of the samurai, and it is a performance worthy of awards recognition.

The film itself moves from harsh battle scenes to gentle moments as characters are developed and friendships forged. The growing mutual admiration between Algren and the samurai is well portrayed. Edward Zwick's direction is at times cheesy, but for the most part it is powerful and gets a strong message across, something along the lines of preserving ancient cultures against the tide of growing consumerism, which is certainly relevant in today's climate.

There is one piece of direction I particularly like, when Algren has defeated four opponents, Zwick cuts to Algren replaying it in his mind, shown from a new angle. This finishes with an enemy shown to be still standing as Algren finally finishes him.

There is also some wonderful cinematography of the landscapes and of the epic final battle sequences, as 500 samurai take on the American guns and mortar rounds of the newly formed Japanese army. I thought these were incredibly moving moments, interspersed with some fairly brutal combat. It actually reminded me a bit of the Last of the Mohicans, but raised to another level.

With strong supporting players, there's a decent turn from Timothy Spall as a British expert on Japanese culture as well as numerous Japanese actors filling out the samurai group, The Last Samurai is a very strong package, at times viscerally brutal and honourably emotional. Nine out of Ten!

Magnificent. This is one word and it does the film the justice it deserves. It's a triumph on so many fronts, technical and creative or both at the same time. Great story, innovative and clever direction, super editing, high quality acting, stirring soundtrack composition, nigh on flawless special effects, well drilled stunt performers, wonderfully 'authentic' prop design. Hell I could go on all day, there are so many elements here that are excellent I find it hard to spot and point out the flaws. Maybe as well the fact that the film has left me speechless on three occasions.

Fundamentally though one could strip away the fantasy elements, the huge battles and dazzling effects, and you'd still be left with a fine film. Why? Well because the themes it deals with are so affecting and beautifully written and acted that there would still be a gripping humane drama to play out. The corrupting lure of power against the strength of friendship. As the ring takes hold of Frodo he could be lost to the evil that has taken the pitiable Smeagol, but through courage and willpower from both himself and Sam, his character triumphs. It is to the credit of Elijah Wood and Sean Astin that they convey this spirit so well on screen.

It is also to the credit of Andy Serkis and the nice chaps at Weta digital that Smeagol/Gollum is so compelling. He must be one of the most complexly deceptive characters to have ever been written about. Sweet and innocent, but brutally cold and calculating. A true enigma of a person. This could've gone wrong, but we are at once disgusted and pitying of Gollum, frightened by his treachery, but understanding of Frodo's continued trust in him. He is the dark heart of the film.

The other cast members also do fine job, bringing the heart and emotion of Tolkien's text to the screen. There is tragedy and heroism in equal measure through to the film's lump in throat climax.

When you have these elements welded to some of the most stirring and powerful battle sequences put to celluloid, picture thousands of horse riding warriors riding to battle tens of thousands of orcs and assorted monsters, then you have a genuine classic. I can safely say this film will be loved for years to come and will sit well next to the likes of Casablanca.

Ten out of Ten. I would give it more if that were possible!

There is a line in Master and Commander, uttered by Russell Crowe's Captain "Lucky" Jack Aubrey, to his friend and Ship's doctor Stephen Maturin (Paul Bettany) who is setting off an an expedition of the Galapagos Islands (the movie's one sojourn on land), where he asks for a plant to be named after himself, "one that is prickly and difficult to eradicate". It's a nice exchange between the two men, and seems apt, in that it sums up Aubrey . This is a ship's captain after all who has taken his men on a voyage across to the far side of the world, chasing what seems to be his own Moby Dick, a French frigate the Acheron, which he has been assigned to stop from taking the war across the world. The film opens with Aubrey's ship HMS Surprise taking a pummelling from the French, but having managed to evade this attack he sets of in pursuit for the rest of the film.

This is absolutely cracking stuff. The aforementioned opening salvo is so realistic I thought I was there, each cannon blast ear shatteringly authentic. Proceedings settle down thereafter, with time given for characters to come to life. As well as Aubrey and Maturin, there is the second in command Tom Pullings and the midshipmen Callamy, Hollum and the excellent Max Pirkis as Blakeney, as well as numerous sea dogs (including Hobbit Billy Boyd as the coxswain), too numerous though I'm afraid for me to remember them all.

We are treated to a feel of what life on board must've been like, with all concerned interacting wonderfully with each other. Aubrey is always in command though, and Crowe portrays him as strong and at times authoritarian, a man who doesn't lie down and say no. His relationship with Maturin is crucial, and Bettany provides a perfect foil. A smart man of science, who is our view into this hard world. The first scene of the two of them playing their violin and cello together, is almost ironic. One of the movie's best scenes has the two of them discussing whether or not they should be continuing the chase, and it's well played by both men.

This is genuinely classy stuff. It's inevitable that comparisons will be made to the other sea-faring movie of the year, Pirates of the Caribbean, but it's not vaguely in the same class, and face it, if the pirates had been up against Aubrey he'd have sunk them in the first five minutes of the movie. I don't like to compare when they are so different though, but if it's authenticity you seek, and the feel of what it was like to be in the British Navy circa 1805, Master and Commander is the film for you.

Hmmm, lemme see, I'd give it 9/10.

The wait is finally over, the answers are in and the line is drawn, the big question being, was it worth the wait? The simple answer is that I'm not sure yet. I think I need to see the movie again to be fair, but for me, whilst I enjoyed the 128 minutes of movie and end credits even (well sitting and chatting with my mates while the the Gothicesque piece of music played), I just felt it was somewhat lacking.

The story begins exactly where we left it in Reloaded. Our heroes are aboard the Hammer one of only two human ships left after the failed defence against the sentinels. Neo lies unconcious in the medical unit along with Bane, the character copied over by Agent Smith within the matrix. The first 10 - 20 minutes then sets out to establish what devilry has befallen Neo and how he can be saved.

We end up in a S&M club where everyone is dressed in rubber and which is run by the French information trafficker the Merovingian. In order to save Neo, Morpheus and Trinity have gone there with Seraph the Oracle's guard on her advice. Without giving very much away they are able to save Neo, having first dealt with some of the Merovingian's men and survived a fairly amusing stand off.

I won't give any more of the plot away, suffice to say the heroes split up with Morpheus and the remaining crew of the Hammer, having meeting Niobe and her ship the Logos, heading back to Zion in the Hammer. Meanwhile Neo and Trinity take control of the Logos to help Neo fulfill his destiny. Where we end up is with an epic battle of Zion involving thousands of sentinels and many armoured mechanical walkers, as used by the defenders of Zion. While Neo engages in the mother of all fights with Agent Smith, as many of you may have gathered from the trailer there are a fair few of him, though the fight takes place with just the one.

Is all this enough then? Well I'd say no. The battle of Zion is incredible to watch and Neo/Smith round 3 is sometimes brutal and beautifully photographed. Unfortunately the philosophy of the previous films is more or less dispensed with in favour of a number of blockbuster cliches. We get the plucky kid who wants to do his bit, the heroic captain who 'will give em hell', and a bald headed heroine (don't actually remember what she was called) who turns up in the heat of the battle to...well that would be spoiling, but lets just say you can see it coming. Some of the dialogue could have come straight out of an 80s blockbuster, which considering the high brow appeal of the previous films is unfortunate at the least. I missed the talk and philosophy and felt many questions raised in Reloaded were just ignored.

The action isn't quite on a par with Reloaded's burly brawl, chateau fight and freeway chase, but stands above most blockbusters at any rate. Those scenes gave me an adrenaline rush that I never really felt here and just seemed so different.

Aside from those negative points though, what we have is an incredible looking film, that manages to satifactorily resolve the saga. The finale is epic, and the brothers use of extensive storyboarding is apparent throughout. Added to which Hugo Weaving's performance as Smith again dominates, setting some sort of new standard for bad guy cool. the movie ends in a surprisingly ambiguous manner, which I felt was appropriate and in line with Neo's closing speech to The Matrix. There are also some pleasingly symbolic moments.

Revolutions is a worthy conclusion to the Matrix trilogy, but not quite what I was hoping for. I'd say anyone who liked the other two will like it. Those who disliked Reloaded because of the philosophy may be swayed by the more direct approach. This is mainly one for the fans though, and many of us there are!

Well I've generally slammed the Matrix on these forums, but I'd admit I did enjoy Reloaded. I think it appealed to me as both a martial arts fan and someone who's done some programming. I would agree with the fact that it is nowhere near as great as some are making it out to be.

This is mainly due to the poncey dialogue. At times it is incomprehensible. I have seen many complex films before that I have both understood and enjoyed, but this film takes the piss. So many questions are answered with questions, and it just seems overly pretentious. 'You didn't come here to make a choice you already made that choice, you're here to understand why you made it.' Eh. Talk about answering questions with a riddle. Which is my problem with the dialogue in general. Movie dialogue should add the plot, but should not be the whole plot. Many films can explain things with an image, something I thought worked well in X-Men. You see a shot of Wolverine healing, you've learnt what his powers can do, you don't need 10 lines of dialogue to tell you that. Or in LOTR the shots of the one ring and the pwer it has over everyone, you don't need much more explantion to establish how evil it is. The endless musings on choice become tiresome after the tenth time.

The supposed gravitas the lines are delivered with grates too. No sense or attempt is made to be ironic. The same points are just repeatedly rammed home. Are we free to choose, etc. But these are nothing compared to the near insane ramblings about the programming of the matrix. Jees are we all assumed to have an interest in these techy ramblings. I knew trouble was in store when the Oracle started rambling about programs running all over the place and the system assinilating programs. For the love of God. I have a degree in electronic engineering but this talk of anomalies nearly caused my head to explode. Again this is something handled better in the X-men films, especially through Wolverine's eyes as he jokes about the others names. It had a vein of humour to it which is completely lacking in Reloaded. The best blockbusters never take themselves too seriously, just see the likes of Raiders of the Lost Ark, Back to the Future or Ghostbusters for examples.

Then there is the relationship between Neo and Trinity, which doesn't exactly sparkle, but I guess they may well be living in a computer game so it's probably hard to get real human emotion from their relationship. And the sex scene was completely unerotic. Are they in love or is he just paying for it, couldn't really tell. Which s why when Persephone asked eo to kiss her like Trinity I couldn't take i hat seriouly. He was hardly that passionate about Trinity in the first place.

As for Neo fighting I never seriously thought he'd lose a fight, he's just got far too hard. And if it's all a computer game where's the fun in that. Wolverine can take serious damage, but he does it on Earth under real physics and he's got a human heart with real emotions. Neo is just so unphased by everything, so unemotional, he doesn't seem at all frightened. Yeah he got cut in a fight but he came back at them even stronger. Once he got the sai no-one really layed a finger on him. And the flying did look a bit pants.

For a film supposed to be compassionate little thought is given for all the destruction going on, the fact so many people seem to get killed, like during the car chase agents destroy a number of civilian cars. Because it looks good? Doesn't Trinity care that people they are trying to save are getting killed as a result of this.

And the finale was very jumbled. What was going on with the two other important missions? Niobe seemed peripheral yet played a significant part taking down the power station. How then? Well you'd have to (like me) play the Enter the Matrix game to learn. That to me is a shameful cash in, where the filmmakers are saying you want the full story then, you'll have to finish the game and watch the animatrix. That's not good cinema as far as I'm concerned. That's cynical marketting.

However while the film isn't as smart as it thinks it is it did make me think all the same. Few films do that. And I did think the martial arts choreography was superb, especailly the Agenet Smith fight. I got a genuine adrenaline rush from that. I loved the expression on their faces as Neo flew off, especially the one just left of the centre. The car chase is high quality action cinema, and the sheer intensity of it was different to anything I have seen before. The fight Neo engages in with Merovingian's goons beforehand was superbly done too. The movements were wonderfully fluid and were realistic yet fantastical.

It's genrally an entertaining film, certainly if it was judged purely as an action film it's a superior beast, with at least 3 excellent set piece moments. I'd give it six out of ten.

Finally I've seen it. And now I want to see it again. I wouldn't judge it against past efforts just yet, but, and only time will tell properly, this is probably the best comic book adaptation to date.

Bryan Singer has done a fantastic job, giving the characters space to feel but also remembers to let them kick some ass, and what a way to kick off proceedings with Nightcrawler bamfing through the Whitehouse. What makes that scene so fine isn't just the action packed thrill of it. Well that helps but the scene is also integral to the plot, making it more than just eye candy. It's a great way to introduce a new character, and means that when we find out about his tragic past, our attention has already been won.

The rest of the film runs in a similar vein, building upon what we already know and adding to the characters personas. Inevitably with such a large cast some don't come of as well, mainly Storm and Cyclops. This is a minor gripe though as the characterisation elsewhere is spot on.

Iceman and Rogue's almost tragic relationship, with Iceman unable to kiss her is well played by both Shawn Ashmore and Anna Paquin. Iceman's coming out to his parents demonstrates more ability on Ashmore's part and he seems to be a young actor with some emotional range. The exchange with his mother where he is asked 'Have you ever tried not being a mutant' captured the adolscent-esque awkwardness of his situation.

Aaron Stanford conveys the burgeoning hatred of humans, that his Jon Allerdyce/Pyro feels. The glee with which he attacks police officers sent to arrest the mutants is well played. As the viewer we know there is something distinctly dark about this boy. His exchange with Magneto where he is asked 'what's your real name?' by the magnetic master is the moment he knows being human is no longer an issue.

Then of course there is Hugh Jackman's Wolverine. Jackman has real presence, and dominates whenever he's on screen even when faced with the similarly adamantium pumped Yuriko Oyama, or trading words with Brian Cox's sinister Stryker. He certainly had the acting chops to carry the first film and is excellent whenever given the opportunity here. His improvised answer of 'Art' when asked what subject he teaches brought a cackle and his ability to deliver such one liners is often in evidence. He can do the emotional stuff too though, with scenes involving him chasing after the unattainable love and looking almost apologetic after he dispatches Oyama after their climactic fight. That actually made the fight better for me, as after all the hype it never quite had the required impact on me, but Jackman's understanding of Wolverine's reaction to killing one like himself shows.

Both Ian Mckellen and Patrick Stewart as the mutant elders give solid performances. Famke Janssen is good value as Jean Grey and Rebecca Romjin Stamos cuts loose a number of times as Mystique, ironically turning up as 'herself' to entrap a prison guard in a bar.

Overall I really did like the movie. It develops well, splitting the characters and re-uniting them in a steady flow for the finale. The plot resonates with the zeitgeist of the world with parallels being drawn to many recent events. Ignoring these it's still a kick ass bit of entertainment, so if you want to be bothered with the themes of acceptance and hatred of those that are different or just want to see an F-16 get knocked out by a tornado there is something there for all.

Mutation has allowed X2 to leap to the top of the pile of this year's blockbusters and allowed it to plant a very firm foot there. It'll take some shifting.

8 Mile can be viewed two ways, a semi-autobiographical tale about Eminem, that seeks to make him more sympathetic, or as a general tale about growing in a rough neighbourhood and aspiring to be someone. The truth is it probably lies in the middle.

The film has a great opening with Eminem's, Jimmy Smith Jr or Rabbit to his friends, psyching himself up to contest in the ultimate challenge for an aspiring MC, a rap battle. Curtis Hanson directs this scene in a way which picks up on the emotions running through Rabbit, as he chokes at his big moment. The close ups of his face show his fear. Hanson is an actors director, something he'd shown to masterly levels in LA Confidential, and something he displays here with all actors given a chance to display their potential. He also deserves credit for making Eminem, ditch the Shady look, and the ego, and become the average looking nobody type.

The supporting cast do a great job, with Mekhi Phifer believable as Rabbit's best buddy Future and cool enough to pass as the MC who hosts the slams. Kim Basinger is suitably trashy as his trailer dwelling mother, who is sleeping with one of his former school comtemporaries. She creates enough pathos with her situation to have sympathy with her. Brittany Murphy generates enough sex appeal as Alex who seduces Rabbit, but is never dispisable despite the fact she appears to be sleeping her way to the top.

Special mention to, for Rabbit's one white pal, Cheddar Bob (Evan Jones). He is involved in one moment that demonstrates that this group are just street punks, and not gangstas, when he injures himself with his Mom's gun.

As for Eminem, he demonstrates that he has screen presence, always the focus even when he isn't doing anything. If we take the view that he's playing himself he does it well, but the fact is he seems to understand that you don't have to jump up and down screaming to give a good performance. Less is often more, and the shots of him in contemplation, as he travels to work on the bus are as good as his verbal assaults. Not that the final rap battles aren't extremely entertaining and exciting. Having seen so much CGI and explosions over the last year, it's nice to know as much adrenaline can be pumped with a bit of verbal. His final acappela assault, literally leaves his opponent speechless.

The ending also works out well, as Hanson doesn't allow Rabbit to suddenly become a star, but keeps him grounded in reality, by sending him back to work his factory job. The film's about aspiring to be somebody, but wanting to do it your way, on your own terms.

Is it Eminem the actor on screen or is it just Slim Shady. I don't think I know, but it's enthralling whatever.

This must be one of the most dull Schwarzenegger vehicles ever. The opening is truly bizarre, I mean what sort of gym was that? Quite why Arnie needed to go there isn't entirely clear, but hey that's the sort of information you do not need in an Arnie film. It's pointless stuff to set up him going on the rampage. At least it is in Commando, The Running Man and Raw Deal. Unfortunately Red Heat contains none of their insane mayhem. What it contains is scenes of plot exposition through dull dialogue no-one understands, to lead up to a completely uninspired conclusion, which is a rip off of Walter Hill's own earlier and far superior 48 Hours. The kiss off moment is so sudden I can barely remember it now. Arnie's performance is memorable for him trying to pronounce the name "Viktor" in a Russian accent. I'm not sure why he bothered. Sadly the film is also memorable for Belushi's poor acting. His character is obnoxious throughout and he lacks any charm whatsoever. There's a moment where he puts a gun to a bad guy with the words "Freeze motherf*****", with no threat at all. Just think of Sam Jackson saying that to emphasize how poor Belushi is. In fact all his lines end with some sort of phrase and they are never funny. It makes me laugh to think of a script doctor going through adding the one liners and actually thinking someone may find them funny. Do I have a good word to say about Red Heat? No.

The first time I saw this film was as a terrestrial tv premier, one Christmas holiday. Now not having seen it before, I found this edited for tv version hilarious. A few years later, I finally had my chance to watch it in all its profanity strewn glory. The moment where Foley's (Murphy) boss first walks into the the locker room, and launches into a tirade of F words, is just incredibly funny, especially if like me you believe that a proper comedy should contain swearing. As far as the story stands, Murphy is Axel Foley, the motormouthed detective with attitude. When an old friend of his is killed, he goes in search of the perpetrators. The case leads him to Beverly Hills, where he eventually teams up with two local cops (John Ashton playing grumpy and Judge Reinhold his younger, more easily influenced partner), and we move from great scene to great scene (a banana in the tail pipe, and a strip bar to name two). Murphy is electric in the role that made him the biggest star of the period, his street talk is funny and very profane. Ashton and Reinhold give able support, as the often bickering detective duo, and Steven Berkoff is suitably menacing as the villain. There is also a stomach achingly funny cameo from Bronson Pinchot as a camp art gallery employee, and his scene with Murphy lives long in the memory. In fact, many of the best comic moments are the sort you suddenly think of on the bus/train, and cause you to laugh out loud in public. To this day it stands as the highest grossing R rated film in America, and it lasted 13 weeks at the number 1 spot, a record recently broken by Titanic.

A British spy ship has sunk in the Mediterranean sea, and it just happens to be carrying a tracking system, which if in the hands of the Russians, can be used to to create all sorts of havoc with the Royal Navy. Only one man can save the day... Sounds like an exciting premise doesn't it. Unfortunately even though it was directed by the excellent John Glen, there is too much wrong here for him to save. It goes bad right from the opening of Bond in the eye. Roger Moore appears in flares, to the twangy overtures of Bill Conti's extremely bad score. Unfortunately he decided to re-mix the classic Bond theme in the style of 1970s disco music. Perhaps a good idea at the time, but having just heard David Arnold's, terrific score to Tomorrow Never Dies, this is really hard on the ears. In fact every single potentially suspenseful action sequence is ruined by the incongruous sounds of the instruments used. At points it seems, he just chose to hit the piano and hope. It shows, especially when the best sequence of the film, Bond scaling a sheer cliff face, is played out in silence. The music aside, there is the unnecessary return of Blofeld, at the start, who has the worst concocted plan ever in a Bond film, to kill 007, and a closing comic scene featuring bad impersonators of Maggie and Dennis Thatcher, which made me curl my toes over 360 degrees. Let's also not forget the fact that the main villain is quite unmemorable, and the fact that Moore could never beat the life out of a fly.

Timothy Dalton's second outing as Bond sees him seeking revenge on an evil drug lord, Franz Sanchez (Robert Davi), for permanently disabling his old ally Felix, and killing his wife. Here Dalton has grown well into the Bond character, and plays him as a gritty determined killer, much as he was in the Fleming novels. There are some well worked stunts, notably an armoured truck falling into the sea, and the villains subsequent escape, but none of them are ever as over the top, or unrealistic as those seen in the Roger Moore films. Also seen are some excellent gadgets, much missed in the later Moore films. While the formula has been updated for the modern world, and Bond is returned to his macho self in the Sean Connery style. It is a shame Dalton didn't do more Bonds as he certainly had the character to a T.

Donald Bellisario the man who created Battlestar Galactica and Magnum PI, and later Quantum Leap, thought of this great action TV movie, which spawned a mega-hit show. The story runs that Dr. Moffet (David Hemmings) has created a super helicopter which with the help of thrusters can fly faster than a jet fighter, is equipped with twin machine guns, multiple rocket launchers, and Sunbursts to evade heat seeking missiles. Unfortunately he is a bit evil, and defects to the Libyans, taking his creation with him. Michael 'Archangel' Briggs (Alex Cord) the chief of a highly secretive organisation, the Firm, needs someone to go into Libya and bring back Airwolf. He turns To Stringfellow Hawke (Jan-Michael Vincent in the role which made him tv's highest paid actor), a former Vietnam pilot, who agrees after much negotiating. A top piece of TV entertainment, and the preface to one of the most successful shows of the 1980s.