Reviews

Those who have read the book would certainly agree that My Sister's Keeper is a poor adaptation of a truly superb novel. The novel's main plot is Anna's trial against her parents for emancipation for the rights to her own body. However, the film seemed to concentrate solely on the cancer stricken Kate and her suffering rather than the pain and anguish felt throughout the rest of the family members. I watched the film right off the back of finishing the book, and of course with the words still itched in my brain, the film just felt so wrong. I'll list a few below:

-Campbell Alexander has been completely miscast with Alec Baldwin taking up the role. Campbell was by no means a commercially successful lawyer. In the book, he is a more low profile character, but nevertheless a prolific lawyer. I also pictured him as a younger early 30's lawyer, and more up and coming rather than established.

• A dog is a dog, but I did not imagine the dog looking like that at all. I expected it to look dopier, darker.

• The court scenes seems so irrelevant, whereas in the book, it is the most emotionally charged part, and if it has been on film the way I pictured it, it would probably be edge of the seat stuff. Showing clips on Campbell wagging fingers and stomping around just took so much away from the courtroom drama.

• Anna's alias was well cast, but she was not made to be as intelligent as she was in the book. She was very weak here too. Her motive for filing this lawsuit in the film was because Kate told her to. That's just stupid. Why didn't Kate just tell her parents and say she doesn't want to suffer anymore. Also, why didn't Kate help fund the case then instead of Anna selling her priceless locket bought by her dad? The book makes it more of Anna's decision as she didn't want to see Kate suffer the way she was, although Kate did draw some hints.

-Jesse was a totally different character and uninteresting in the movie. Jesse's parts in the book were fun, rebellious which masked his true suffering for Kate. In the film, he was just there, looking rather dumb and he was the one who turned the case in court? Hang on, he was the one besides his sister's bed whilst the court case was going on.

-Of course, the ending was completely shallow, no substance or twist to it at all. Just see her suffer, and in the end she dies. That was a huge mistake whereas the book's ending was so effective.

• These flashbacks were badly put together. Some could have been replaced with others. There's just not enough emphasis on the other characters as there should be.

• The continuous montage of the photo album used up valuable time to show more than it should have.

• Julia's character was not major in the book, but she was needed nevertheless. I've never really heard of an ad litem before, but after reading, it is to my understanding that this person's role is to know as much about the people involved in the case as possible and then help with the jury's final verdict. When Baldwin's Campbell told Sara he was Anna's ad litem, it felt rushed and random, and throughout the rest of the film, they were rarely together and saw no intellectual conversations to convince Campbell to be more understanding of the case he had taken on. Julia also gives something extra for Campbell's character and makes the viewer sympathise with his illness more

-'You've been served' – What the hell? How cheesy is that?! That was terrible, no more to say.

De Salvo – a woman. Nothing against it, but why change? Because the case is about two girls so a woman can give a fairer verdict? Come on! None of that bullcrap! She didn't look like a judge, act like a judge – bad casting again. And the way she said she wanted to see Kate first before she gave a verdict was also very random, although it did happen in the book. Maybe it was because she was expressionless. A tear would've added an effect.

A long moaning review here but just do yourself a favour and read the book. You will be much more informed about how good the film really should've been.

After one of the most interesting TV series of season one, Heroes has quickly become almost unbearable to watch. 'Save the cheerleader, save the world' was a great tagline. Then next (I'm making it up), 'save the bottled formula, save the world'; then season 3 - 'rip up the formula into a thousand pieces, save the world', season 4 – 'save everyone, save the world'. And now season 5 looks like 'kill the president, save the world'. But we all know the main plot. Heroes is very similar to Harry Potter – every book/season is 'Kill Voldermort, Save the world' – see the resemblance?

The load of unanswered plots, the pointless characters, and the recycling of superpowers and subplots just makes any season other than the first all the more pathetic. The latest season is the worst of all. There were so many fillers it was almost like watching a pointless episode of a Japanese anime. One of the main subplots was finding Angela Petrelli's sister, and this just fell flat on its face. Really, it didn't give us anything to care about. Martha lost control after being locked up in the concentration camp, and then what? They used this to show why what Nathan was doing was wrong. And after a battle against the storm and against each other, they just ended up in a skanky café watching a small TV with Sylar taking up presidency. It's so random. The finale made very little sense, or should that be common sense. Nathan is dead – sorry for the blunt spoiler there. But no worries, Sylar has been knocked out cold and has the ability to shape shift. Therefore, Sylar's body and mind can be manipulated, so he bubble pops into Nathan by who? Matt Parkman. How in the world does Matt Parkman know so much about Nathan to be able to completely transfer his memories into Sylar? In the whole three seasons, they hardly ever interact! The most amusing thing about heroes is the only character anyone cares about…is Sylar. The psychopath, serial killer, tormentor, and we want him to survive and win against the good guys. I wonder if that's what Tim Kring was hoping?

There are just too many plot holes in Heroes. And I and I'm sure many viewers could go character by character, plot by plot, scene by scene picking out all the nonsense Heroes has on offer. Season 5 is on its way, and please, treat the audience with some respect, coz not all of us are stupid. But no matter how much I moan about it, I am still curious to see the next events. What a disaster so far. If they don't improve, then send Heroes to bed, or even, make a spin off – Sylar, The Sympathetic Mass Murderer. Or something among those lines.

I would imagine Jet Li being envious of Jackie Chan after he proclaimed Fearless would be his last Martial Arts adventure to concentrate on more dramatic acting. But it is Jackie Chan who has come out with a movie that Jet Li would have wanted a part of.

Overall, The Shinjuku Incident is a decent movie with strong acting, gore and violence, and also has a simple yet powerful story. Jackie Chan does a good job as Steelhead, leading a group of Chinese immigrants in dominating areas of Japan occupied by the Japanese Yakuza. Steelhead meets an entourage of immigrants, who are reliant on fraudulent activities to survive in this anti-Chinese society. Their little scams in order to gain a living lead them towards head-on clashes and come into direct conflict with the Yakuza with catastrophic consequences.

Daniel Wu plays a gentle and cowardice guy who is always at the wrong place at the wrong time. His misfortune finally bring him to meltdown after he is brutally beaten upon on a couple of occasions. From a gentle loving guy, these violent acts against him proves to be a life changing experience, turning him into a rebellious, punky drug addict whom seeks trouble and fear wherever he goes.

After these events, Steelhead vows to play a much bigger game and seek true power within the society of the Japanese Yakuza. They are eventually given territory within the Shinjuku district and the power crazy gang soon turns real ugly, and the gang end up turning against each other, in particular against Steelhead. The Chinese gang end up bringing chaos to the streets of Shinjuku, leading to the Japanese and Taiwanese working together to oust them out in the most brutal and tragic way possible.

The acting I felt were all rather solid. Even the veteran TVB actor who played the Taiwanese gang leader in the bar was superb as always. I didn't know his Mandarin was so good - better than Jackie's anyway. Jackie's Mandarin of course is fluent, but the accent - even though I am not a Chinese native - is quite awful to listen to. Jackie's first non martial art role was well done, but he is the same as any of his other films. We've seen his sentimental acting before in just about the end of all of his movies. So it was all as I expected, except his Mandarin accent let him down. Jet Li I believe would have done a more solid job, but we will not know, unfortunately.

The supporting cast members are also well played, in particular Daniel Wu who plays practically 4 different roles. First the nice caring guy, then the tragic and badly beaten, the coming to terms with his loss, and finally the crazed, power mad drug addict. He plays a major role in the developments of the gang, spurring Steelhead on to the power they achieved.

Shinjuku Incident was a good film, but I felt some discomfort afterwards. It gave me a real eerie feeling, and if a film manages to do so, then the film has done a good job in getting to the audience. It seems the morale of the story is either, if you seek power through fraud, you will not succeed, or being Hong Kongnese myself, I have a stronger feeling that the message is, the Chinese have no place in Japanese society. I found it really sad that the Chinese are depicted in this way, and of course unsurprised this will or has not got a showing in Chinese cinemas.

A good film that is worth viewing, especially to see the direction Jackie Chan is going with his movies. Mr Li, take note!

Monsters and Aliens was a poor clichéd animated outing from Dreamworks. I found some of the pop culture and repetition in an attempt to get cheap laughs were embarrassingly bad. In particular the part where the President tries to make peace with the alien invaders by playing the Beverley Hills Cop theme on an electric piano made me cringe. Another scene where the general was showing images of the monsters to the cabinet with the secretary hysterically screaming on a number of occasions, leading to the president screaming also left me cold.

The characters were charming, yet I did not feel that the bond between the female lead and the alien characters were all that strong for her to want to stay as the heroine Ginormica - and yes, what an original nickname, eh? Whilst Pixar and Disney are still coming out with great original flicks such as Wall-E and Bolt, Dreamworks are really hitting a downer with unoriginal narratives, and they need to find a new formula to get their franchise going again. Shrek 3 was also unimpressive. Maybe they should get out of their monsters theme and find some new kind of characters to play on.

I've just gone through my second viewing of this film, and the time flew just as quickly as it did the first time I watched it.

Ip Man is a fantastic film, with a generous mixture of action, comedy, sentiment, great acting and a simple but gripping story. In a book I read a few years ago, Donnie Yen was quoted to be not as famous as the likes of Jet Li and Jackie Chan because of his look. But, judging by this film, he has a good and posture on screen much domineering than the both of them. Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of Jet and Jackie, but Ip Man has set him on the way, and I hope it brings him bigger success.

The fighting scenes in Ip Man is brutal, fast, very fluid, and actually beautiful to watch. They are also very realistic, in particular the battle against the 10 Japanese guys and the boss. The acting from all cast were also very strong. I in particular enjoyed watching Ka Tum Lam. You could really feel his pain at watching his comrades getting killed by the Japanese, and his suffering whilst getting beaten upon like a dog, you just really wanted him to escape. I was quite surprised that he was a survivor all the way until the end.

I think this film would do wonders worldwide, but it doesn't look like it is getting out of Asia, and that's a great disappointment, not just for HK film and Donnie Yen, but also for the Western audience, particularly when films - especially the action genre - these past years have been poor.

Donnie Yen is getting some healthy exposure, and he still looks very young for his age. Let's just hope he gets some better recognition, and we could have another martial arts legend (he already is in Asia) the world over! You'd be a fool to miss Ip Man... Especially if you have seen all four legendary Bruce Lee films.

Hot Fuzz was simply a lot of fun. Simon Pegg's follow-up to Shaun of the Dead (not a sequel) delivers once again with its very blunt, rapid humour. The film direction and editing was sublime - extremely fast paced yet so easy to follow. The storyline itself is quite similar in ways of Shaun of the Dead, using the same actors playing similar roles, except, Pegg's character isn't as much of a loser as that in Shaun of the Dead. Nick Frost is also in the same role, playing the sidekick to Pegg, a loser with no friends and very dimwitted and lovable at the same time.

Hot Fuzz is essentially a spoof on the police drama genre, but it isn't so obviously a rip-off. It has a proper storyline which, even as a comedy, keeps you thinking till the end. The film's take on modern society and the role reversal of the old community and chavs is quite hilarious and clever. In the beginning, Pegg's character ignores the idling hoodies with a snuff, just as people would prefer to do in real life, then later shows that in fact they are the saviour of Sandford whilst the oldies are there to brainwash it.

This is a must see film that will bring out all kinds of emotions from you. Never has a film mixed comedy, action, suspense, horror, gore, drama and detective/film noir in such an effective way.

Firstly, user Adlion 94, very well said! Your comments on young kids masturbating being more of a taboo subject than young kids shooting at police and random buses is rather...inspiring to say the least. I don't know why it is the comment on the front page though.

Anyways, Babel is a film that is very much Crash - esquire(the site doesn't let me type e.s.q.u.e.) A non-linear narrative with different sub plots, broken down, spread around all over the place and then finally submerged together to become a film about the lives of different people from all over the world who are in some ways connected to a life-changing event. Babel is, as these films usually are, nicely filmed, exquisitely edited, and well acted. But the connections of these stories are some what weaker than that in Crash, and as soon as you are introduced to the characters, you already know exactly their significance in the story. Let me just give an easier word to what I'm trying to say - its predictable. There you go, why didn't I just say that in the first place? The stories of each character, I feel, are too centralised on them rather than their connections to the main plot. The Japanese guy giving his voluntary tour guide the rifle - which makes up his connection with the shooting - is quite a poor way of showing why he is involved. Of all the plots, I do feel that the Japanese one could become an interesting film in itself.

Over all, Babel is a decent movie. But it doesn't have you engaged in it as Crash or even 21 Grams. Some of the scenes sometimes drag on too much. It's been a bad year for films in 2006. But of Babel and Departed, there's no doubt the better film lost - Departed was terrible. But I suppose Babel just isn't a good enough film to dominate the Oscars

A lot of the people who say this is a great and amazing movie, are, like myself, most likely those who are very loyal to the greatness of the Mr Bean TV episodes and the work of the genius that is Rowan Atkinson. And those who canned this movie are probably big-wits who are just looking for pieces of art (or people who voted for the Departed as best film) - maybe they will give props to the "nothing nothing" film within the movie. I think its alright. Nothing to rave about, and nothing to hate on.

But, to be honest, there are some recycled gags. There's scene where he eats raw food and chucks it in a lady's bag to hide the evidence. This is used in one of his episodes, as is the scene where he gets stuck in the hut, is a recycled part of an episode when he gets stuck in a post box. The camera: He gets someone to take photos for him with his camera, and it in some ways teases at it getting stolen before his eyes just as in the episode when someone runs off with his camera and the park and Mr Bean traps the thief in a waste bin and pokes him with a pen. And in some episodes, he has run ins with kids and he tries to please them - such as the baby in the fun fair, or the kid who gets travel sick on the plane. And does anyone have the feeling that this film is also a little like the the Brazilian film Central Station?

But it doesn't matter about the recycled stuff. They bring back memories of those classic episodes that, those who have watched them over many times during the re runs every Christmas, have never forgotten. It's almost like Mr Bean's holiday is playing homage to the old Mr Bean, which is a compliment to itself in both respects. There really is no reason to hate it, so watching with an open mind and not expecting American Pie style Hollywood toilet humour, then you would no doubt feel fine about it.