Reviews

Where to start, OK when I first heard the rumours that Ridley Scott was going back to the Alien franchise I was so excited I could nearly explode. The potential of one of the greatest film directors re-visiting a genre defining film but with the advantages of 30 years of experience and modern techniques and equipment could be one of the greatest films ever.

So to say the least my expectations where high.

The trailers and speculation online and in print had whetted my appetite and the marketing machine in full swing had built my desire for this film to be good like few films before.

I found myself reflecting during the screening on what made Alien such a good film, and also films like Aliens and Jaws. Directors I think work best when they have real restrictions in place with budgets and the equipment and technologies available to them. When you have to build tension through style and cinematography, when it's more about what you don't see than it is about what you can show the REAL directors step up to the plate and can deliver stories of real impact.

This like so many other films lacks originality, spends far too much time celebrating how good CGI can be and doesn't bother to imbue its villain with any kind of personality or character.

The basic plot is covered in the trailers, discovered all over Earth across multiple sites and throughout all history there is a common recurring theme of a star map, a location, an invitation?? So of they go, a rag tag group of scientist and industrialists with one Android looking after them in hyper sleep. From there you already know the story because it is exactly what you think it will be, only unlike the original Alien there is no tension and little conflict, no horror, no suspense and nothing original. It would be hard to invent a film language like he did in the original, but here he has followed the conventions of sci-fi like a paint by numbers film, lazy story telling but beautifully put together.

The premise of the film is simple, what if by taking a magic pill you could increase your brains ability to the extent that you become a genius at whatever you put your mind too?

This has been explored in a lot of movies in various different ways and follows the simple German folklore tale of Faust a man who makes a deal with Mephistopheles (the Devil) to gain access to the divine knowledge, once the pact is made his soul is damned for eternity.

That is where this film falls down, although the set up is good and the characters and acting interesting it doesn't really explore anything with any real depth. The moral ambiguities of this gift or the repercussions of using it for either personal gain or to the benefit of mankind are never really thought of or considered. They appear as passing thoughts with no reflection or comment.

You do get to see different types of people take the drug to explore how different people would use it, but this opportunity is lost really as the contrasts are broadly drawn and quickly stepped over.

The central character seems to be rather one dimensional even with his gift and strands to the narrative are simply left open or unresolved.

Having said all that, if you shut down your active mind and just look at the beautiful people and don't go looking to deep into the story what passes is a couple of hours of good fun, with some neat camera techniques, amazing visuals and an interesting premise that will get you thinking, if not really exploring the potential of the source material to the full itself.

Sadly the team behind the trailer have created an immense sense of false expectation for a documentary that had real potential.

The premise is simple, a photographer (Yaniv) from New York starts a friendship online with a young girl from small town America who has created some paintings from the photographs he has had published.

He begins to correspond with her extended family first her mother, then an older sister. As these relationships develop the stories they tell begin to unravel leaving a lot of unanswered questions, moving inevitably to Yaniv travelling to visit and find out exactly what is going on.

If you set your expectations at zero, better still (too late now if you are reading this, but if you are going to watch with a friend give them this advice) read nothing about this in advance and don't expect much.

Avatar is an average film with average acting and predictable story lines. (In fact the film is almost the same as Dune and several other sci-fi staples) The special effects are amazing! The graphics beautiful and the 3D stunning, but in the greater scheme of things this has not re-invented cinema, much like Titanic before it, it is an event picture to see, it has pushed the boundaries of cinema technology forward whilst not daring to challenge conventional story or plot development. But it has certainly raised the bar in the wow factor in films.

Films like this tend to be super ceded by other technological marvels in a matter of years and then are almost forgotten about with only a few films (those with the story behind them) truly lasting the test of time. Avatar will always have its dedicated fan base but I feel this will wane over time as people see through the graphics to the rather shallow core.

Avatar will remain in the consciousness for some time but I don;t think it will ever hold the affection of films such as Star Wars or the first two Terminator films, which whilst they also pushed the boundaries of film technology and story telling they also had a heart to their story making that made them stand out from the rest.

I can applaud the effort here, it really wants to say something, I'm just not certain that the director had the balls or the producer the guts to give it both barrels! Which I suppose is ironic given the subject matter! (Though I don't think intentional) Robert De Nero plays an ailing producer on the decline in the business, he has two ex wives and stress from egotistical stars and their demands, whether it be high maintenance directors or attention seeking actors.

The core of the problem I have with the film is that the main character is completely unsympathetic.

You'll hate him, he's shallow, selfish, egotistical and devoid of any passion. Whilst this may be the point of the character, and I think it is, it doesn't make for a good film! I went away from the film thinking that they were trying to tell me that Hollywood is full of artists, but that the system breaks them down into nothing more that monkeys who turn out dross films that appeal to the mass market because focus groups tell them too.

Well if the artists are going to produce films like this then maybe there should be some editorial control, away from the hands of the artists because this missed, in my opinion, on just about every level.

The film that this will be compared to most is The Player by Robert Altman, a much better film and I highly recommend, the main difference between these two films however is in The Player everyone is in on the joke, Altman never speaks down to the audience and has fun with the story.

Tim Robbins (in The Player) is just as much of a shallow and hollow character and you'll dislike him as much as De Nero in this but because you are included in the joke, because you can see how distanced from reality he has become, by being a part of the Hollywood system, you can feel sorry for him.

Sadly for De Nero in this I couldn't.

I can't recommend this title to anyone but the dedicated film fan who will see a lot of the in jokes about Hollywood, everyone else should give it a miss.

In the simplest possible terms this film is awful.

I have never before witnessed a more contrived and unbelievable 2 hours of nonsense in my whole life.

I can't really complain about any of the acting as everyone involved gives a good account of himself or herself.

However I directly hold the writer and the director responsible for wasting 2 hours of my life.

The plot is ridiculous, the story is nonsense, and the paranoia and action have no basis in reality and plays on the worst kinds of media hype and mainstream American ideals.

I can't really say anything positive about this film and strongly suggested that you give it a miss.

But I have to say the reason I went to see the film was because of a brilliant trailer, so at least one person associated with the film did a good job, the editor of the trailer. I just wish he hadn't, then I would have been spared the entrance fee and 2 hours of my life!

What scared me most about this film occurred to me after the opening 20 seconds.

Somewhere on this planet there is somebody who not only thinks this is funny, but that it needs to been to be shown to anybody else.

Also that there are people to fund the movie, and an audience that like it.

Thankly it seems that the only thing I have said that isn't true is the last bit, the audience hated it.

If I could score this film negative I would, avoid like a mad and rabid chipmunk!

From the beginning you are shown a character (Clooney) who although a lawyer from a prominent Law firm is anything but within the Law.

Interrupted at a late night illegal card game, he visits a recent hit and run driver, advising him on what actions to take, before the police are even investigating. Then after a brief drive to clear his head his car explodes! 4 Days earlier.....

This film is the story of the 4 days in the life of a 'fixer' from a law firm, dealing with a failed partnership in a bar with his drug addicted brother, raising the funds to pay off a loan shark, whilst at the same time dealing with a major client whose illegal dumping of chemicals has led to a potential liability of 3 billion dollars.

The case has been dragging on for some 9 years and the lead council for the defence, a manic depressive, has gone off his medication and had a breakdown during a deposition. Worse than that he has apparently had a crisis of conscience and has assembled the evidence to prove the case for the plaintiff.

So, is it any good? Well yes and no! The film is really split in two, the private and public life of Michael Clayton. The failed business of the bar, the breakdown of his family relationships along with an increasing sense of isolation at work all make for a compelling story that doesn't quite deliver on its emotional potential.

The understated performance of Clooney (Devoid of his usual smirk) distances you from the main character, who quite simply could never be a sympathetic hero anyway. His business is and has been for a long time correcting and sorting out the mistakes of others. And as a defence attorney we all know what a bastard he must have been, totally unredeemable.

Whilst at the same time Tilda Swinton (woefully underused by Hollywood) presents a baffling performance of a rabbit trapped in the head lights. Where was the sharp, ambitious devious, vicious bitch that this character should have been. Instead we see a woman wrecked with self doubt and an unhealthy looking sweating problem.

This should have been a great film, the premise was good, the actors were fine, the script didn't quite hold up and the direction wasn't sharp enough, but its still worth a watch.

Everyone who I have shown this film reacts differently to it, which is the only thing you can say for certain about this film.

Everyone will get something different from it because it is all about personal interpretation. The film itself is a series of images filmed all over the world set to the music of Phillip Glass.

Personally, I've found that on repeated viewings as I get older my opinions about the sequences have changed, because the film doesn't set out any particular agenda and the viewer is left to make up their own mind you tend to bring your own baggage to the film, and it is this that makes up the narrative as you watch.

I find it an awe inspiring experience and thoroughly recommend it to anyone, with the simple caveat that you go in with an open mind and try to think about what it means to you as you watch. I know this is hard for some people who aren't used to thinking for themselves but that is what makes it such a great experience.

'Cherps' or the black Alfie as it should have been titled.

It's a harmless enough film which really does little to really explore any of the conditions of the characters or society which it inhabits. There are some good sequences and the main performance is solid enough with the affable charm and direct to camera narration allowing for the thoughts and motivations to be conveyed.

The film really struggles on the back of its message though, because it has so little to say, it glorifies a lifestyle it ends up damning. Yet fails to explore the history that has led to the ineffectual lifestyle that the main character lives.

Oh and the central character reminds me of my friend Lennox Leach! If you met him you'd understand.