Reviews

The Guest is a movie destined to perform beyond it's relatively meagre budget and release. Word of mouth and positive reviews, particularly among 18-30's (me essentially) will ensure a strong cult following for years to come. Quite right too, as The Guest provides tremendous entertainment throughout, combining superb deadpan humour with high intensity action sequences. Like the excellent British comedy Dead Man's Shoes, the film gradually ramps up both the carnage and the moral ambiguity of the lead character until the audience may be conflicted as to who is the villain and who is the hero. Admitedly the plot is a little light and the film tails off a little towards the end, but it matters little. The 90 minutes fly by and in the end you'll be more than pleased with your discovery of this gem.

Nobody ever saw a 'Dirty Harry' movie for its plot or the quality of the acting. It's all about watching the coolest anti-hero in Hollywood dispense a succession of no-good punks with his 44 magnum, and of course deliver his trademark glares and quips. 'Sudden Impact' has plenty of action, plenty of thousand yard stares from the great man, and of course gives us some suitably bad-ass quotes which have entered popular culture.

That's the long and short of it. If you like Eastwood and lots of shootouts, then you'll enjoy it. If not, then you shouldn't watch it, but you probably knew that already. 'Sudden Impact' is exactly what all films of its niche should be. Unpretentious, and aimed squarely at its fans, who want to see Clint put those punks in their place.

Of the four TNG films this is probably closest to capturing the spirit of the series itself and ironically its probably the poorest of all four said films. The plot attempts to tackle a series of serious ethical and moral challenges that made TNG, in my opinion, the finest example of scfi drama, and of course with Patrick Stewart on board you known the acting is going to be first class. Unfortunately all this is usurped by two fundamental flaws; the script and the action elements.

In terms of the script, its fair to say that the writers definitely had a serious off-day. Trek comedy has always been fairly hit and miss, but whoever thought Data asking Worf 'if his boobs were firming up' or that Picard and Worf distracting Data during a mid-air dogfight with Gilbert and Sullivan was comedy gold was clearing smoking something good. There are just so, so many cringeworthy lines in this film, mostly revolving around Data and so many attempts at a cheap laugh. Quite why the writers felt they needed to spice up a story involving forced relocation, genetic manipulation and insubordination with gags such as Worf getting acne and Data inflating into a buoyancy aid is beyond me.

If that were all, then the positives of Insurrection, such as the aforementioned engaging plot and strong acting from Stewart would still come to the fore. But sadly its not.The action elements in this film are sadly as lamentable as its script. Again, it's not as if Trek in general is renowned for its action, especially TNG, undoubtedly the most cerebral and least 'old west in space' of the franchise. If you are going to make a film appealing to the philosophical strenghs of TNG then why do you need so many weak phaser fights and running around? Added to that there's a ludicrous ship-to-ship duel in which Riker pilots the Enterprise with....a joystick.

Obviously I recognise there needs to be an element of action if the title of the film is 'Insurrection', but surely it could have been done better than this? The sight of a portly Brent Spiner diving around should have stayed on the cutting room floor. Compared with the fight scenes in 'First Contact', well there is no comparison.

This review is ultimately very negative, which is a shame because there are some very touching and brilliantly done moments which temporarily make you forget you're watching a bad film, Geordi watching the sunset without his visor or bionic eyes for instance. But surely enough some five minutes later there's another 'Lock and Load' quality line which makes you despair again. And thats a real pity.

My mate described this film as 'Longer and worse' than the first Transformers movie. And that's about right. The first film succeeded perhaps because someone reminded Michael Bay you needed the occasional break from screeching tyres, explosions, thumping music and shouting in order to keep it watchable. Here someone must have forgotten to give him the message. This movie is a relentless white noise that goes on about an hour too long.

The really troubling thing about Transformers 2 compared with Transformers is that everything that was either criticised or ridiculed in the first movie is expanded upon massively in the sequel, while the positives are pushed quietly aside. Didn't like the annoying parents much? They have thirty minutes more screen time. Offended by the black stereotype robot? There are two of them now. Found the fawning to the US military irritating? Well guess what, now Uncle Sam's finest even has jurisdiction over Shanghai.

When you factor in the substantial drop in the quality of the comedy, which has come down from silly but clever radio gags level to the imply stupid 'Look that robot has balls' level, and the fact that Optimus Prime appears to have had a personality transplant, going from a conscientious and a pacifistic leader into a violence loving bad ass it all becomes too much. I haven't even mentioned the plot. Of course its rubbish, you expect it to be rubbish and it doesn't really matter too much, but when everything else is rubbish as well it becomes a real issue.

All in all, its just not very good.

As a huge wrestling fan you only have to look at the acclaim given to 'The Wrestler' by not only the wrestlers themselves (such as Ric Flair and Bret Hart) but also many, many wrestling fans, to know that this is a wonderful and heartfelt tribute to the world of pro-wrestling, particularly those that work their backsides off on the indy scene. Mickey Rourke delivers a fine performance, both in and out of the ring, and carries the film on his shoulders, much as Sly Stallone does in the original 'Rocky'. The wrestling itself is excellently done, and the supporting cast all play their roles well.

If the acting and the in-ring action is superb, its a shame that the rest of the movie doesn't quite live up to that standard. The plot meanders along following 'The Ram's' retirement, and Randy's attempts to reconcile with his daughter and woo his stripper heartache feel a little contrived and forced. The finish, whilst undeniably glorious, is a touch hokey, which is a shame as the film carries itself with an unflinching honesty and seriousness up to this point.

That doesn't take away from the fact that this is a very good film, and a very good performance by Rourke. I think perhaps the superlatives lavished on 'The Wrestler' are slightly over-the-top, but its undisputably a fine film.

OK i'll get this out of the way early on. This isn't a great piece of cinema, it's not a particularly good story, the characters aren't great and the acting is mediocre to poor. Generally that would mean disaster but fortunately it doesn't really matter.

Transformers works despite these flaws because it is an unashamedly populist action/adventure movie aimed almost exclusively at 15-30 year olds who want to be entertained without having to think. It serves up a constant menu of explosions, car chases and fight scenes, supplemented by hot cars, girls and some good jokes. This adds up to a movie that's very easy and enjoyable to watch. The effects on said explosions/fight scenes are superb, and the Transformers themselves are fantastically animated.

What really stands out in this movie though is the comedy. It's surprising that a movie that appears to take itself very seriously, and has a plot line featuring the potential end of the world, would be filled with so many gags. It's a smart move by Director Michael Bay, who has clearly followed 'The Pirates of the Caribbean' recipe in creating an action movie that is semi-serious and therefore doesn't disappear up it's own backside. The comedy is pretty good throughout, and doesn't descend into Jackass/American Pie territory, which is a relief. The biggest compliment I can pay is that I saw 'The Simpsons Movie' and Transformers in consecutive days, and Transformers got far more laughs.

There are, of course, problems within this high-action teen based formula. We could have certainly done without the cheap black stereotyping in the Jazz character, and Optimus Prime's rather cheesy speeches seem to be fawning to be the comic book crowd a little too much. In addition there is too much schmaltz, particularly at the end, but then Spielberg did produce.

But ultimately Transformers prevails because it sets out to entertain and thrill it's target audience. Had Bay and co set out to produce a completely straight-laced realistic movie like the Dark Knight it would have been complete rubbish. This may be the most stupid movie ever, but it's also great fun to watch.

Okay i'm not a big fan of Japanese horror, although i have seen the original version of The Ring and thought it was OK, but this really is a bad movie on all levels.

First, the characterisation is awful. We learn nothing about each character except a very brief overview before they get killed off. As a way of creating pathos for the victims it's not ideal.

Second, it's very annoying. None of the characters put up a fight when they get killed, either cowering in fear or standing stock still as their doom very slowly approaches in the form of s small child or woman screaming at them.

Third, it's not very scary. There's the standard 'OMG, it's right behind her' and the mirror reflection shot, but other than that it relies upon the aforementioned sinister child and woman to chill our spines. Whilst their stilted movements might be kinda creepy on the first few occasions, by the time half a dozen hapless individuals have met their demise in this manner, it's become very dull indeed.

Fourth, it makes the error of adding that mind-numbingly stupid end sequence in which the villain of the piece appears unscathed at the end of the piece, ready to strike the heroine down, thus rendering the entire last twenty minutes, and indeed the film utterly pointless. This is a modern film-making trend in the horror/thriller genre, and it should not be encourage Worst of all though is the fatalism of it all. So everyone who enters the house dies and there's nothing that can be done to stop it. Why would we want to watch a film like that? One after one characters are killed of for no other reason than that they once entered a house, and there's nothing that can save them. Talk about depressing.

As such this renders 'The Grudge' completely unwatchable. Not even the divine Sarah Michelle Gellar can make it anymore enjoyable, truly terrible. Avoid, Avoid, Avoid or read a book instead.

Anyone remember that line? It's from the great man himself, Homer J. Simpson, perhaps the greatest TV character ever, and that quote sums up the Simpsons Movie.

Quite frankly, compared to what it was in the 90s, it's complete rubbish. The best jokes are the ones you've already seen in the trailers. There's one great line from Ralph, and a couple of decent 'Homer gets hurt' gags but thats it. The jokes are all stupid, slapstick comedy designed for people who find somewhere injuring themselves over and over again hilarious. It's almost as if it is 'Jackass', but in cartoon form. Gone are the brilliant observations, the masterful one-liners, the superb songs, and yes, the occasional superb physical comedy gag( Homer falling down Gorge is my favourite) I know it's asking a lot for it to be as fresh and witty as it was but come on! How can 'Spider-pig, spider pig' compare to 'No-one who speaks German can be an evil man'

As for the story, it's an episode stretched too far with a schmaltzy finish and few guest stars thrown in. In short everything the Simpsons has been circa 2002. I mean Marge and Homer splitting up? That was old back in 1998! Entertaining and much loved characters such as Krusty, Chief Wiggum, Burns, Smithers and Apu have about 20 lines between them, replaced by Green Day and Tom Hanks. The focus is entirely on the Simpsons, which is a shame because they themselves have become painfully one-dimensional. Compare the Homer seen here to Homer in 1992 and you'll see what I mean. The Simpsons no longer have any depth. Homer is stupid and selfish. Marge is kind-hearted and nags a lot. Bart is stupid and rebellious and Lisa is always on her soapbox. As Lisa said a long time ago 'You don't want to be a one-dimensional character with a silly catchphrase'. Sadly you have become one.

Rocky IV seems like the kinda film a group of producers and writers knocked up during a coffee break.

'Say Bob, that Stallone, he's pretty popular huh? People pay to see him in movies'

'Sure Bill, and those Rocky films are surefire winners' 'I know, lets do a Rocky sequel, and lets have some Russians in it, after all old man Reagan's stirring up the cold war again' 'Good idea Bill, and these Russians should kill one of Rocky's closest friends' 'Sure thing Bob, and how about Rocky going to Moscow to kick the Reds A** in revenge?' 'Sounds good to me Bill, and don't forget the cute kid bit in the middles' 'Can't leave that out Bob. Carole-Ann, get me Sly Stallone on the phone'

That pretty much sums up Rocky IV, it's basically Rocky III draped in patriotism and injected with stereotypical evil Soviets. Apollo Creed gets killed after his 'I love America' bit and Rocky jets off to Russia to kick steroid enhanced Soviet butt. The music is dreadful 80's cheese( with the exception of James Brown) and the training sequence is more homerotic than ever. The fight is by-the-numbers too, with Rocky getting beaten to an inch of his life before the thrilling last round comeback.

If it was any other character i'd hate this film for it's laziness, terrible soundtrack and embarrassing 'stars and stripes' patriotism. But I love Rocky, so I won't savage it completely. Only see if you are a Rocky fan, and one who can suspend a lot of disbelief.

In musical terms T-3 would be the 'difficult' third album, the one that perhaps didn't need to made, or was over-produced and over-hyped. Think 'Be Here Now' by British band Oasis, following in the footsteps of two hugely critically and commercially successful albums.

The first two films in this franchise really set the bar high, the first a low budget cult classic, and the second an overblown but ultimately superb blockbuster action movie. But T-3 is a flawed project. First and foremost there was no James Cameron, meaning Mostow got the job instead. Coming from U-571, in which history is changed so that the Americans found the enigma machine instead. Not a good omen. With Cameron's films there is a focus and seriousness that is hugely appealing. 'The Terminator' is completely straight-edged and 'T-2' for all the one liners is serious when it needs to be. I don't get that with this film. From the moment the TX's chest expands it feels silly, at times a little gratuitous. What I liked about the original and it's sequel was how cold and efficient the Terminators were when it came to the killing. In 'T-3' the deaths are over the top and pointlessly visceral. Why would the TX choose to saw a victim to death rather than just shoot or stab them? Surely that would save valuable time and attract less attention? For me the TX is a real shame in this picture. A female Terminator could have chilling, more terrifying than Arnie or Robert Patrick. But for some reason it just doesn't work, she's just not cunning, or relentless enough. The T-1000 remains far more intimidating in my book. My other concern is with John Connor. Okay so Ed Furlong was a little annoying in 'T-2' but at least he had had some heart, a spark and an initiative. I could perceive him as a leader because he had some BALLS. Nick Stahl just doesn't have that. John Connor is too pathetic, too resigned to things to be the hero he'll turn into. I understand maybe Mostow felt he needed to explore Connor a little, but it doesn't work.

It's not all bad though, in fact far from it. 'T-3' has much to commend it. As you'd expect the special effects are good, and the action is fast paced and good to watch. The chase scenes are not as good as in 'T-2' but hey, it's hard to climb Everest twice. In particular Claire Danes is great as Caroline Brewster. Her resourcefulness and spirit despite not having a clue what's going on are hugely refreshing when placed next Nick Stahl's Connor. And of course who can forget Arnie? The big man delivers enough solid display as a character it's hard not to like. Arnie also delivers maybe the best line in the series so far 'what I what is irrelevant, I am a machine!' which I think is a fantastic line.

My favourite part of the movie though, is the end. No i'm not being sarcastic. The ending scene at Crystal Peak is inspired, a wonderful ending to the film. Wheras 'The Terminator' and 'T-2' needed happyish endings, 'T-3' needed the opposite. The notion that John Connor and Caroline Brewster were only meant to survive, not change the course of history is a far better concept than having them stop Skynet again. Obviously it's leading into a sequel, and it's a fine way to do it. The ending to me is the only time the whole film really captures the spirit of the original, in which survival was everything.

'T-3' is a good film, but it's not a great film and as such will always suffer unfavourable comparisons. Viewed objectively at times it's very good, but it doesn't do the serious stuff as well as 'The Terminator' or the action as well as 'T-2'. As a film it's quite good, but as a sequel it ultimately doesn't stack up.

The greatest compliment I could give this film is that I have viewed it twice, as an 11 year in the cinema, and as an 18 year old at home, and enjoyed and loved it on both occasions. It's been said already, but this film really does combine the best of both worlds. It's silly and slapstick enough to make the kids laugh, and has enough subtle and sophisticated humour for the adults too. In fact, the comedy is what makes this film so special. The jokes are consistently excellent, and it's highly unlikely that anyone can keep a straight face throughout. It's funnier than the Disney/Pixar efforts, save Toy Story, and in fact it's better than most comedies you'll see.

The characters are great too. Hogarth Hughes ( Eli Mariental) is actually not that annoying for a Hollywood kid. His double-act with the Giant (Vin Diesel) is entertaining and endearing. Halfway through, Beatnik Dean McCoppin (Harry Connick Jnr) is added to the mix, and together it's a highly amusing triumvirate. However, the show, and the best lines, are stolen by FBI agent Ken Mansley (Christopher McDonald). Mansley is the ideal kid's movie villain, just bumbling and stupid enough to be humorous, but with enough menace to get by. His interrogation of Hogarth itself is chilling, as is his hate of the giant, demonstrated during the finale. The other character of note is Hogarth's mum, Annie (Jennifer Aniston). She isn't a prominent part of the story, which is strange given that Aniston is the biggest name in the cast list. But thankfully, she doesn't wreck the film either.

The film is at it's weakest when it's trying to be profound, and there are certainly a few cheesy lines as a result. However the film carries a decent anti-war message, as well as preaching acceptance to those who are different, which is to be applauded in a kid's film. In particular, the Giant's initial refusal to allow himself to become the weapon he was designed to be is well done. Even better is his subsequent rage and rampage at Hogarth's apparent death at the hands of the army, which shows us we can all go off the deep end sometimes. That's pretty deep for a U-rated picture.

Other things to note are the animation, which is excellent, different from the Pixar style, but impressive nonetheless. The 50's soundtrack is great too, adding authenticity.

In conclusion this is a film that really punches above it's weight, providing great comedy and a decent message that anyone of any age can enjoy. It's said often, but this really is a film that the whole family CAN enjoy. Highly recommended.

Do you have to be a Star Trek fan to enjoy this? No, but it certainly helps. The humour of Galaxy Quest pokes affectionate fun at us Trekkie's and the subject matter, whilst at the same time paying tribute to the world of cosmic sci-fi.

What really makes Galaxy Quest work is the chemistry between the actors. Tim Allen is on good form and as always Alan Rickman is superb. They are backed up nicely by Tony Shalhoub, Daryl Mitchell and Sam Rockwell, who all have their fair share of good lines. However the real shock is Weaver. Known for playing the hard-as-nails Ripley in the Alien films, her character is almost the anti-Ripley, being a blonde bimbo with a push up bra who complains about her role on the show. In many respects, her character is the funniest, and has most of the best lines. A good amount of the comedy is Trek-based, such as Guy's fear of being 'the expendable' character or the self-destruct button stopping at one. But it's also got plenty of laughs for the non-trek fan, and it's doubtful you'll keep a straight face for too long.

Ultimately this film is enjoyable and provides a good laugh. The story bounces along at a good pace and it's serious when it needs to be. This film isn't a masterpiece, but it is an entertaining and enjoyable one.

Right this might seem a little left field but bear with me. If you have read Harry Potter Order of the Phoenix and seen the movie then see what you think of this.

First of all:

Luke Skywalker= Harry Potter Han Solo= Sirius Black Darth Vader = Lord Voldemort Yoda and Obi Wan Kenobi= Combination of Snape and Dumbledore. A bit tenuous I know but hear me out.

Right. 1) Luke Skywalker and Harry are both believed by the good forces in both cases to be the one with the power to destroy the evil, in their respective cases Vader and Voldemort

2) In Ep 5 Luke is close to Han Solo, a sort of elder brother who looks out for him. underlined when Han rescues Luke on Hoth. In the same way Sirius Black is harry's guardian, with a close link with harry and someone who is always looking out for him. Both Han and Sirius have rough edges to them compared to harry and Luke.

3) Both Voldemort and Vader know that Harry and Luke care deeply for Sirius and Han so they devise plans to trap harry and Luke by using the bait of Sirius and Han. Harry begins to dream about the department of mysteries where he will eventually see Sirius tortured by Voldemort. Luke begins to visualise Han in danger. Both Vader and Voldemort use their physic skills to project vision's to Luke and harry as to draw them into the trap.

4) The forces of good, being Obi wan Kenobi and Dumbledore both realise the threat and ask trusted friends, Yoda and Snape to teach Luke and harry to repel these visions being sent by the evil forces. Luke begins Jedi training under Yoda who attempts to convince him that confronting Vader before his is ready would be foolish, and that he could TURN TO THE DARK SIDE!!!!! Snape begins teaching occlumency to harry to enable him to prevent Voldemort's incursions into his dreams

5) Both Luke and Harry become frustrated with the teaching and in one way or another it ends. I know this is tenuous because Snape ended harry's lessons whereas Yoda wanted Luke to continue but it still just about sticks together. Luke receives more visions of Han in danger and leaves Dagobah to confront against the dire warnings of Kenobi and Yoda. Harry sees Sirius being tortured by Voldemort in the department of mysteries and rushes off to save him despite Hermione's's protests.

6) Although Han is actually at the planet whereas Sirius arrives after harry, both are peripheral to Vader and voldemort who only care about deposing of Luke and harry. Vader tries to persuade Luke to join him but probably would have killed him if he hadn't jumped off the platform. Voldemort wants the prophecy but tries to kill harry as well. In Han's case he is put in mortal danger through the carbon freezing process, whereas Sirius is killed. The intervention of allies saves Luke and harry from certain death and both escape, albeit at a great cost, Luke his arm and harry his guardian.

There you have it. I hope this has made you see the film and book in new light and that I convinced you. If you think it was a load of rubbish, then thanks for reading anyway.

Being a fan of the Next Generation rather than the original series i have always favoured the TNG movies. And to be honest, although even this is not as good as numbers Two, Four and Six, it's far better than One and Five, and a match for number Three.

Unfortunately the Next Generation crew all suffer from the same problem as their OS predecessors, namely age. Paunches are in evidence here and a few tired faces as well. There are some bad moments, cheap driving and shooting on some badly filtered patch of desert, B4,the Troi rape scene and Rikers worst fight ever let the side down somewhat.

But with TNG you get class and good acting. Stewart is always immense and there's no change here. The scenes with him and Hardy are excellent, eloquent and enjoyable. Okay so it's not 'phasers on stun', but TNG has always been better when they talk rather than shoot. I love the scene with Picard and Shinzon at the Romulan Senate, it's a touching scenes, and acted beautifully. The fight scene between the Enterprize and the Reman ship is one the better ship-to-ship battles in Trek movies, certainly superior to the ones in Search for Spock and Final Frontier.

There's enough good on show to make this a good film, but the weaknesses of TNG are exposed, There's too much shooting, pointless action sequences and pyrotechnics. The strengths of TNG are pushed outside in favour of 'movie moments' which undermine the whole theme of the Next Generation philosophy. It's too much like cowboys in space. Picard doesn't take stupid risks, he and his crew find another way, which has not really been reflected in any of the films than other First Contact. I do like Nemesis, but I can see why it's criticised. It's not a great send off, but certainly not a bad one either.

Air force one is by no means the best written, the best acted or most original film I have ever seen. At times it's corny to the point of embarrassment, and it's soaked in the type of stars and stripes patriotism us Brits love to hate.

But despite these flaws, this is one of my favourite films. Why, because it's so exciting, it doesn't require a Harvard diploma to enjoy and it's the classic 'good vs evil' that we all enjoy. Gary Oldmans terrorist ticks all the cliché boxes, and yet manages to be one of the most effective bad guys ever. He's such an evil character, and the series of brutal, cold-blooded executions means that every time I watch the film I really, really hate this guy, and when he gets his inevitable comeuppance, it's a great moment. There have been many brilliant pieces of dialogue in cinematic history, but few can make 'Get off my plane' for 'back of the net' elation. Of course it's cheesy, but that's the fun of it. The story bounces along at a good pace, with plenty of action and tense moments to keep the audience interested. The storyline is basic but functional, the struggle between the President and the Terrorists on board linked with Radek's release gives a really dramatic climax to the film.

This film is not perfect, but it's an uncomplicated and exciting picture which asks nothing of it's audience. Just sit back and the nonsense wash over you and enjoy this film for what it is, a great story with a fantastic 'feel good factor' at the finale. Call me a Phillistine, but that's entertainment.

Coming after a truly revolutionary film, this can only be classed as a letdown. The opening 45 minutes are truly sleep-inducing, and the fight scenes go on far too long and are generally pointless. The set piece on the freeway adds some much needed impetus but all is lost with the stupidly confusing and pretentious scene with the architect.

Agent Smith is played excellently by Hugo weaving, with real menace and style, but loses valuable credibility when Neo fights off hundreds of Smith's in an impressive, but ultimately tedious sequence. Keanu Reeves gives a masterclass in wooden acting which comes as a shame as I thought he was impressive in the original. Upon closer inspection of reloaded, I don't think his facial expressions change once.

the biggest problem with reloaded is the real anti-climax of it all, not only within the film, but the film itself. I was really looking forward to this film in 2003, but it disappointed me then as it does now. Throughout the film you wait for something to happen, and when it does it is not only underwhelming but you know what happens already due to Neo's dreams. Unfortunately this film sets the tone for Revolutions, a slight improvement, but the damage to the potentially awesome trilogy has already been inflicted by Reloaded.