Thor: The Dark World ☆☆☆☆

Ooooo boy. How to review this one without spoilers eh? I guess it depends if you read these to know if you should go see them, or to see if you agree with my analysis...or if its just me pontificating to myself.

I'll try no spoilers.

****Advice note: stay until the very end of the credits. I did not and I missed out on what was probably a lovely scene****

With this second outing for the standalone Thor films we delve deeper into the history of Asgard and get to know Thor's family a little better. We also get to see Thor and Jane reunited, while the hunt for a dark energy called the Aether brings Dark Elves into Asgard and a lot of death and destruction for both Asgardians and Londoners.

Jane and Darcy have come to the UK at the behest of Eric Selvig who has, well, suffered since having Loki control him and there are some choice scenes and almost constant lack of trousers. Jane has suffered in the two years since Thor had to destroy the Bifrost to save Earth and has all but given up on the science,
choosing instead to wallow. Darcy, still an intern, has gotten herself an intern. Go Darcy.

Thor has spent his time away from Jane saving the Earth against his brother (with the Avengers) and repairing the Nine Realms, establishing peace across the systems while keeping an eye on Jane through Haimdell.

Then the worlds begin to, literally, collide and Jane inadvertently gets herself mixed up with the Aether, this dark energy source, and Thor has to take her to Asgard to keep her safe from the Christopher Eccleston led Dark Elves.

What ensues is a lot of action, some dark and tragic moments, welcome humour and a rather brilliant film.
Director Alan Taylor is said to have panicked about halfway through this film because he was concerned he wasn't getting the tone right for the Marvel Universe, I'm guessing because his background in Game of Thrones (though epic) is dark and twisty without much lightness. In comes Joss Whedon for a few choice rewrites and guidance and voila, what a film we now have.

Taylor does a fantastic job directing this beast. His background in epic television certainly has helped getting the battle scenes and tense mood of the characters, whilst also lending an intimacy to the proceedings much the same way Joss Whedon did with The Avengers. Taylor had to balance two worlds of characters, Earth and Asgard, then cross these over as Thor comes to Earth and Jane goes up-world to a less-than-impressed Odin and a flirtacious and wonderful Loki.

It was like seeing old friends going to see this movie. Jane and Thor back together with their height difference, Darcy being Darcy, Eric being so much more than he was allowed in the first movie. Loki being - well Loki. Hiddleston has a riot for sure.

However what I really loved was getting to see Frigga and Odin more, especially Frigga and her interactions with both Loki and Jane. Rene Russo is a simply gorgeous mother of Thor and adoptive mother of quite possibly a psychopath. Anthony Hopkins got to be an angry King of Asgard, a worried father and loving husband.

Zachary Levi makes a great replacement Fandral. Funnily enough he was supposed to play the character in the first movie but couldn't owing to television commitments (Chuck), and his replacement Josh Dallas had to duck out of the sequel owing to his commitment to Once Upon A Time. Personally I love consistency in films and characters but when the replacement is good enough (see Don Cheadle replacing Terrence Howard in Iron Man) then you can get over it. Zach Levi is fabulous so no complaints from this fan.

Eccleston is a completely dead-eyed, evil Elf with a malevolent nature and the acting chops to be the face of the Enemy.

So for fans of the genre, of Thor and his world this is a fantastic second installment and third outing for the 'god'. It has action, humour, darkness, tragedy and a real human element amoing the magic and space ships. There is also a rather magnificent cameo from one of the Avengers....

It is a definite recommend to see on the Big Screen.

***As for the credits, though not as fabulous as Iron Man Three's, there are two stings (one of which I missed and am now really sad) but the first sting is a clue to the next film in Marvel Phase 2 - Guardians of the Galaxy. So probably good to plan to stay until the screen goes black.***

I Give It A Year ☆☆

Hmmmmm. This one either needed work or to be watched under the influence. Am thinking now that a glass of wine or two would not have gone amiss.

I Give It A Year is a frankly depressing tale of a couple's first year of marriage. They get married after only being together for seven months and, for some, that can be enough for the rest of their lives. Not so much for these two.

The 'happy' couple spend the next nine months in various states of love, unrest and wanting to kill each other for their quirks. She sings the wrong words to every song, he is so laid back he's horizontal most of the time.
They each have potential love interests in the form of Americans, unsure whether this was deliberate or just happened to come out of casting for the roles.

Essentially, they should never have gotten married.

Try as they might the cast, which is full of decent actors and comedic talent, can't save this film.

The leads, Rafe Spall and Rose Byrne, have barely an ounce of chemistry between them. Their would-be-affair-havers-with have even less chemistry. Anna Faris needed to have words with whoever did her hair and make-up on this film as she lost her spark completely. Or perhaps it was the company she had that just sapped it from her. Simon Baker was just embarrassing. There is a scene with doves which, though Byrne is quite funny in her reactions, does nothing for Baker's character or acting.

Actually none of the characters were especially pleasant. I didn't root for anyone, not even Olivia Coleman's frankly bizarre turn as a man-hating marriage counsellor. Stephen Merchant was on top form as a completely embarrassing, cringe-inducing, idiot best friend of Spall. Usually I can cope with him, but I think perhaps there was too much for my taste.

Had the characters been less vile I would have enjoyed it. Undoubtedly I laughed but most of it was accompanied by "what are these people doing?!" Even for a rom-com it was totally implausible, utterly ridiculous and with an ending that just wouldn't happen. Ever.

Try it with a glass of wine, my mother found it funny so we suspect there may have been fermented grape juice involved. However she may simply have enjoyed the film so what I'd say is give it a go. Its not a complete waste of time and may start some interesting conversations about how much we put up with from our partners.

Cosmopolis ☆☆☆☆

After seeing another Cronenberg film only recently – A Dangerous Method – I had my expectations set quite low for this one. I wasn’t blown away by ADM, but Cosmopolis is something else entirely.

This film truly captures Cronenberg’s filmmaking vision. It takes the quiet, characterisation of a single figure and juxtaposes that with shocking violence and graphic sex. Alongside these traits previously seen in A History of Violence, there was also commentary upon the changes to our technology and the arrogance of the super rich.

For this is what the film is about, Robert Pattinson riding around in limosine through New York while his company loses hundreds of millions of dollars and a threat is made against his life. But Pattinson? He just wants his hair cut.

The film is entirely focused on Pattinson, his whims, his desires, the sex he is having, the effect he has on others. It feels very staged and very ‘other’, but not so out of the box you can’t follow. Or at least it didn’t lose me despite how tired I was when I watched it. I’ll admit to almost falling asleep once or twice, but then some extreme violence would occur and I’d be snapped back to being fully engaged.

For an actor looking to shake off the chains of a teen saga Pattinson could not have done better than get this role, as Cronenberg could have gotten no one else to quite pull off the arrogance mixed with this strange aura of innocence. The supporting cast were a mix of sublime and truly odd, with Juliette Binoche and Samantha Morton taking up brief residence in the limo to advise the young billionaire, while Paul Giamatti turns up toward the end as what I can only describe as a true madman.

Personally I feel like I wouldn’t watch this film again, but like a lot of brilliant filmmaking it deserves a high rating. The acting was superb across the board, the idea completely odd, the setting and way it was filmed more art than traditional movie making. But then this isn’t your average Hollywood movie, it’s one that deserves some thought and attention.

I would say if you enjoyed A History of Violence, or even David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive, you should give Cosmopolis a try. Chances are you may find it too much, but then again you may just engage with Pattinson enough to want to know why he is worth filming.

Despicable Me 2 ☆☆☆☆☆

What Universal discovered upon the release of the first Despicable Me was the sheer popularity of the Minion. Much like Dreamworks discovery that the penguins were the most popular part of the Madagascar films, Universal have taken on board the Minion madness and put a LOT more of them into this film.

As you can tell by my star rating it was worth the extra minions.

This film was HILARIOUS. In my humble opinion. I base this on the fact I was wiping away tears at the end and had some difficulty breathing. Also the five stars goes to say I would watch this again tonight if possible.

It follows on from the first film where evil villain extraordinaire Gru adopts three girls as part of his plan to steal the moon. Of course he ends up loving his new role as Father and it ends with him giving up his villainy. In this new film Gru is still the devoted father, making Jams and Jellies with the help of his Minions and Dr Nefario (who is on his hilariously slow motor scooter once more).

Gru is recruited to stop other super villains by the AVL (anti villain league) and paired up with Kristen Wiig voiced Lucy, an enthusiastic and kind hearted agent with whom Gru has a chemistry. Its all very PG though so parents don't worry. They are assigned the task of stopping a villain who is using a monster-serum out of a mall, this involves going undercover as bakery owners and checking out the locals who include a wig shop owner voiced by Keon Jeong (Hangover, Community) and Eduardo the Mexican restauranteur voiced by Benjamin Bratt.

While Gru is undercover, the Minions are slowly being kidnapped in batches and then turned into monsters using the serum, Agnes is pining for a Mother, Margo is falling for an exotic boy (son of Eduardo), and Edith is...well she's Edith but with ninja skills.

I won't profess to say that this is a laugh-a-minute movie, but then to me it wouldn't be a good enough story if it was just joke after joke. Instead it is a clever blend of fart jokes, engaging storyline, movie references, and even some mild peril which made me a bit worried. Not scared, just worried. And yes I'm aware a 26 year old shouldn't feel worried during a U rated movie but I did.

The animation continues to be superb, without it being obvious until the final Minion based credits that it was designed in 3D. Regular readers will know I cannot watch 3D.

The voice talent were excellent, really bringing the characters to life. Agnes as always is such a sweetie you just want to buy her the biggest, fluffiest unicorn possible. Steve Carell and Kristen Wiig are talented comedic and voice people, while Russell Brand's Dr Nefario is by far the greatest thing he has ever done.

But lets face it, its the Minions who absolutely steal this movie. From the start to the finish it is Minion mayhem, with the finale enough to make me cry with laughter. If you have seen the Banana song online it is NOTHING compared to what is in store in this movie.

So, in short, I loved it. The Minions were amazing, especially Kevin, and you won't regret a trip out to the movies to see it. The little ones in the screening I was in had a riot, as did the adults.

Man of Steel ☆☆☆☆

A self-professed Marvel girl I have only really loved one of DC’s outputs of late, which was Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy. This was because it was dark, removed any hint of silly or goofiness, but really explored the depth and breadth of a character and his world. Which is why I wanted to see Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel so badly, firstly Christopher Nolan co-wrote and secondly it looked to be so much more serious and dark.

I am openly admitting that Henry Cavill’s pectorals had a LOT to do with me wanting to see it, but also I adore Amy Adams and wanted to see her take on Lois Lane and think that Michael Shannon is one of the best actors in his generation. Shannon plays Zod, a Kryptonion who is set on creating a new Krypton on Earth by destroying the humans and beginning the Krypton race once more using their artificial baby growing pods. The Empire reviewer was right when she likened those pods to the Matrix, but then I guess both the Matrix and Kryptonions were powers that had lost their, for lack of a better word, ‘humanity’.

What I really enjoyed about this film was that it explained so much about the world of Kal-El: exactly why he was special enough to be sent to Earth, why Zod had this crazy and unrelenting pursuit of the Earth’s destruction, how the ‘Ice Fortress’ came to be and how his father, Jor-El, could communicate with his son despite being dead. I am positive that previous Superman outings have also explained this but I am not well-versed in this area. I simply appreciated the tale being told in a clear way that didn’t feel like a lecture on the lore of Superman and Krypton.

A lot of reviews have commented on the lack of humour in this film and fine, there is no belly laugh moment, no bad guy being swung around like a rag doll by a green giant. But that wasn’t what this film or this story required. I did laugh at some points and not when I wasn’t supposed to – there is some really good dry humour in this movie. I especially enjoyed seeing the man who was never supposed to lose his temper absolutely go nuts when his mother was threatened – it proved so much about Clark Kent and the importance of family.

As for casting, despite being from Jersey (British Isles Jersey not the short term for NJ) they genuinely could not have found better than Henry Cavill. He looked so much like the comic in build, that poor boy must have worked ridiculously hard and eaten hardly anything fun to get to that odd, triangular shape. He is also a pretty good actor and his chemistry with Amy Adams worked well. That is probably not hard on Adams’ part as she frequently admits that she found any excuse to touch his chest.

I am still unsure what I made of Adams’ Lois Lane. Yes she had feisty reporter down to a T but…I don’t know, maybe its the years of seeing her as a brunette that I am still swayed toward that image. Acting wise and chemistry wise, just brilliant. And as this is the only Superman film I would consider buying perhaps her version will become my ultimate Lois.

Russell Crowe’s Jor-El was pretty damn good. He got to be the most action-y I’ve seen for a while, his fights with Zod were really entertaining and quite brutal. I also really liked seeing Krypton and liked its grand setting and clothing. It provided a modern explanation for Superman’s suit, removing the underwear on the outside (which was a reflection of 1950s strong men) and making the whole suit armour with a fancy cape, as was the fashion on Kyrpton.

Laurence Fishburne as Perry White was brilliant because I wasn’t expecting it, plus even more links to the Matrix. I think the casting of Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury has sparked a change in comic to film production, realising that just because at the time the comics were written people of a different colour or culture to Caucasian were not in these pivotal roles does not mean the man or woman on the screen cannot be. Its great that it actually comes down to talent, which I hope will spread like a disease among new comic adaptations.

Fishburne’s casting was just one of the many geeky moments of delight I had watching this film. Fans of Dollhouse would recognise Boyd as General Swanwick, Gaeta from Battlestar Galactica/Dr Hamilton from Smallville gets a small role, and Tahmoh Penikett from both Dollhouse and Battlestar Galactica also appears. I internally squealed lots.

What I have seen amid the moans of the lack of comedy are complaints that the final fight meant the destruction of a lot of Metropolis. Yes, a lot of buildings are destroyed and you do wonder at the actual death toll, but to me it was a visual representation of just how strong these Kryptonions are, to not leave you under any kind of impression that the humans might win in a fight. We are puny, the Kryptonions are gods.

I genuinely enjoyed this movie. Zack Snyder brought his visually arresting style and talent for glorious action while Nolan and the other writers made sure the story was solid and engaging. The special effects were incredible and I seriously urge people to see this on the big screen, its worth it.

Life of Pi ☆☆☆☆½

First thing I have to say is OH how I wish I'd gone to the cinema to see this one.
Second: don't ever watch films that are meant to be this stunning on television that either has no HD or said HD has broken. Like mine. Also you need a TV that won't cut the subtitles out of the screen no matter at which setting you have it. Like mine does.

Despite these set backs owing to poor quality hardware, I loved this film. It was beautiful and majestic and I really really need to see it on a huge HD telly using a blu ray disc.

Based on the prize winning novel by Yann Martel (which, horror of horrors, I have not read), it follows the story of Piscine, a boy who is the sole survivor of a terrible tragedy as the ship taking him and his family to Canada sinks beneath the waves in a terrifying storm.

Pi is left with only his wits and a tiger, Richard Parker, on a boat drifting across the Pacific ocean. Fending for themselves, forming a relationship, encountering such strange and wonderous but equally terrifying sights, serves to make this one of the most extraordinary and visually arresting films in quite some time.

Even on my slightly pants telly I could tell how spectacular the CGI actually was. Poor Suraj Sharma who played Pi was absolutely battered by waves, rocked on the partial boat that was one of the few real pieces of the set, and thrown overboard by the ferocity of the wave machines. You felt you were watching a real shipwreck and seeing real animals panic and attack one another in confined spaces.

This is a heartbreaking film. The animals just mentioned are injured, scared, trapped with Pi and at the end of the day act on instinct. The revelation at the end causes you to really pause and think about the differences between humans and animals, which I have always felt was a superior attitude of humans to believe themselves so much better.

If you have not yet had the chance to see Life of Pi I wholly recommend you do. It is a relatively simple story, two protagonists trapped on a boat having to survive. But it is extraordinary and a delight to watch.

A Dangerous Method ☆☆☆

When I first started watching this film I thought "Yes, this is going to be a four or four and a half star review I get to write, or very least it will be a little more than 'worth the watch'".


It totally had me at the start, but lost me about halfway through. The problem? I'm not entirely sure, its as though the story had so much momentum at the beginning that when it got to the middle it just ran out of steam, floundering a little in the failing relationship of Freud and Jung. It was also edited quite badly (IMHO), as I found it to jump from one thing to the next without much in the way of storytelling.

I know Cronenberg has his own unique style, as all good directors do, but I found this film a little flat compared to the other films of his I have seen.

Perhaps it was due to the fact I know very little about Freud or Jung, apart from their work in psychoanalysis and anything remotely sexual in conversation is often called a Freudian slip. I knew nothing of Sabina Spielrein, the Russian patient of Dr Jung's with whom he has an affair.

The film follows the early years of Jung and Freud's relationship and the impact of Spielrein upon it. It is beautifully acted by all involved, how Keira Knightley wasn't nominated for an Oscar or BAFTA is slightly beyond me because she was incredibly convincing. Michael Fassbender is wonderfully repressed as Jung, his stilted marriage and stiff mentality proved a great dilemma when faced with Spielrein's need for sexual punishment - he couldn't resist. He portrayed Jung as this man who was not unfeeling, but also didn't realise quite how much his wealth affected his relationship with Freud.

Freud was excellently played by Cronenberg's favourite, Viggo Mortensen, whose lack of money compared to Jung was obviously quite a sting for his ego. He was also authoritative but evidently felt hi mini-me was not quite living up to the clone he had hoped for.

This is going to be a terribly short review as there's not much more I can say except: it was all very well acted, the scenery and costumes were gorgeous, it had a great build up but just didn't hold my interest the whole way through.

I'd love to hear from others who have seen it, whether or not they agree or hold an entirely different opinion.

Les Miserables ☆☆☆½

To be totally honest, I wasn't in the best mood to watch this film. I forced myself into watching it because I had a time limit on how long I could keep the disc for, which meant I wasn't really in the mood for either a musical or romantic drama.

For those who don't know this is a dramatic musical set after the French Revolution, where a King is back and the people are just as miserable (geddit?!) as before. It focuses on 'criminal' Jean Valjean who breaks parole and becomes a successful and kindly man after being shown great kindness by a Priest he steals from. He is pursued by policeman Javert, who is determined he should not escape punishment, while he takes care of a young girl whose Mother, Fantine, died after being kicked out of her job in Valjean's factory and was forced to become a prostitute to keep up payments for her daughter.

This is a tale of unjust pursuit, poverty, unrequited love, death, tragedy, and love at first sight. It lives up to its name to say the least!

Now, I have seen the stage show (yes I know, need to change the name of the blog if I'm going to keep talking about the theatre), and that has affected how I have percieved this film because I was constantly making comparisons. No doubt that this is epic and beautifully made, and sometimes the intimacy that you can attain through a film goes beyond that of the theatre, but you do suspend your level of disbelief so much more when watching a stage. You go with the love at first sight story because aww its so sweet and isn't this whole thing quite downtrodden? Whereas sat watching the film I was a bit put off by the trills of Amanda Seyfried and Eddie Redmayne cooing at each other like love struck pigeons...ok that might be mean but I'm a little tired.

What the film absolutely outdoes the stage show on is being able to see clearly the agony on peoples faces, Anne Hathaway's Fantine was simply incredible, and was one of three moments that I welled up (I know right, I normally go to pieces at the slightest hint of tragedy but this time I was being too much of a critic).

Hathaway definitely deserved the supporting actress Oscar, though I think 10% was for having her hair unceremoniously hacked off. She has a lovely singing voice and it was strong enough to carry through her tears and anguish. Am not sure Amanda Seyfried's voice would have been strong enough for such a role, but she was playing the young and sweet Cosette who needed only to be young and sweet for her dear Papa and Marius.

Now, Eddie Redmayne, even though I disliked his lighter lovey-dovey moments with Seyfried, he has a powerful presence when he sings. There is a scene toward the end after one of the many tragedies occurs, and his emotion and strength was astonishing. I am a bit ashamed to admit that my attention wandered sometimes toward Twitter, but then the film would force me into paying attention - especially Redmayne's singing.

AS for Javert and Valjean...I have to say I found both of their voices annoying and pleasant. Hugh Jackman's Valjean was a bit too high for my liking, plus I think I put a lot of expectation on his voice being this magical and beautiful thing. Equally I had such low expectations of Russell Crowe's singing ability that I was pleasantly surprised. I mean it is not your typical voice for musicals, but it wasn't entirely awful.

The voices I had zero issues with include the little boy in the revolutionaries camp, the young Cosette, her awful caretakers played by the marvellous Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen, and the lovely Samantha Barks playing Eponine.

Barks is a professional musical theatre performer, with Eponine her most recent role on stage, so it is unsurprising that she could carry off the emotion and sing at the same time. She was very impressive and I'd like to see her live on stage one day.

We have heard the impressive pipes of Bonham Carter and Baron Cohen previously in Sweeney Todd, and evidently they can do comic like no other actors whilst singing live and leaping all over the place.

Which of course is the truly remarkable thing about this movie, that 90% of the singing is in fact Live. They had earpieces in which piped music, then they sang on top, the same thing several times, wearing out their voices. Its a wonder they got to the big finale with any voice left.

However, impressive as the style in which it was filmed is, Les Mis is a film that only musical lovers should watch, and even then the singing takes its toll. There are maybe five spoken lines in the whole thing, otherwise its all singing. It got to me a little whilst watching it on stage, and it grated even more while watching the film. And I am a HUGE fan of musicals, but maybe its just this is too much because of the story and the style of singing. I think Tim Rice's 'Joseph and his Technicolour Dreamcoat' also involves a lot of singing and hardly any dialogue, but it has a bit more of an up-tempo vibe (despite, you know, the brothers trying to kill Joseph).

I think I need to watch this film again, when I'm really in the mood for a weepy musical, at which time I'll probably wish I'd added another star on to this review. However for now, its very good and worth a watch, but only if you love romance, musicals, and some good old fashioned tragedy.

Star Trek Into Darkness ☆☆☆☆

SPOILERS! Cannot emphasize ENOUGH how many SPOILERS there are gonna be. So read on for my full review of the film, but only if you have seen it. If you have not yet seen it I take no responsibility for your future viewing being ruined if you carry on beyond this point.

So again.

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS!



Ahem.


(image courtesy of Star Trek and Empire Magazine)

Again, like with all future films that are in 3D I stuck to the 2D format, and believe me it doesn't suffer just because you happen to not get pieces of the Enterprise flying at you as it crashes or gets blown to pieces. I would like someone who has seen the 3D version to comment on what the special effects were like for them.

I thought this was a brilliant second outing for the rebooted franchise. That first part in the distant planet which was hugely colourful and diverse really harked back to original Trek, where everything was strange and new. It also reintroduced the characters nicely, with Bones and Kirk running for their lives from the alien race because Kirk screwed up slightly, Spock in the middle of an active volcano preparing for death so another race does not die out, and Uhura, Sulu, Scotty and Chekov all desperately trying to work around them.


The Enterprise being underwater was just fabulous. I smiled so much when I realised that's where they were hiding it, and Scotty's annoyance at the whole thing was really good to hear.

They pretty much nailed the casting in the first movie, though it does still slightly annoy me they couldn't have cast a Scotsman to play Scotty I'm not sure anyone else but Simon Pegg could do it. Plus he does us Scots proud accent wise. The obvious addition to talk about is Mr Cucumber Patch himself, but we'll get to my love of him later. Just wanted to mention that I thought Alice Eve was a great casting choice for this film.


Eve surprised me slightly, I thought she was going to end up being a slightly bad-guy, but then if she was they couldn't have her carry on into the next films (if any more are to be made). She was sassy and bright, ok so I know there have been lots of complaints about the gratuitous underwear scene but hey, it's about Kirk's libido at the end of the day and the fact he cannot stay turned round when a pretty girl is undressing. Plus it isn't as though the girl is naked or she is waltzing around like that for half the movie, it's a few seconds maximum.

Anyway, Eve was great, and though slightly predictable at turning on her own crazed Father, it worked well and the flirtations attempts of Bones and Kirk at her were pretty funny.



The thing about this film is it feels very much like a set-up movie, like a book in the middle of a huge series that has to tie up loose ends (kill off Pike and establish without doubt that Kirk and the crew are going to get to go on their 5 year deep space mission) and create new threads (war with the Klingons) it left me feeling that something bigger is on the horizon compared to this one.


It also was a little too much of a buddy film, but I guess the relationship of Kirk and Spock was fledgling at the end of the first film and needed to be cemented here. When Kirk died I had this odd feeling of really? Are they gonna let him die? Surely not...oh thank god the puffball came back to life so Bones can save him! I have always been quite skeptical of Kirk, though I love Chris Pine and think he plays him wonderfully, but there was always too much of the playboy about him. But here, self-sacrifice, being logical for once - oh gods Mr Pine you kinda killed me when you died.
I felt like it was cheating when Spock contacted, well, Spock to find out more about Khan. Though always happy to see Leonard Nimoy in work I wanted there to be a different way to discover who Khan could really be to Starfleet. But it worked, and seeing as the first film set up this clash of future and past it was good to carry on the theme.

Now Khan, aka John Harrison, aka CucumberPatch, aka Benedict Cumberbatch, was a phenomenal piece of casting. Truly. If anyone can embody anger, emotionless violence, pure hate, and still make you really strangely want to give him a hug and make it all better, then its gotta be Cumberbatch. The scene in the cell when he has his back to Kirk and Spock, telling them about the threat to his people and his anger at being used, I mean god he was scary. Physically shaking with the anger and torment and emotion spilling from his eyes. I imagine in real life I wouldn't want to piss Mr Cumberbatch off, cos he could really bring it.


I loved that in the end Khan was frozen with the rest of his psychotic clan, it means there is a chance of him coming back in the future. Using him as a way of introducing the Klingons was also clever, because your focus was always on Khan but the importance of what he was doing, and the crazy Commander, to the future of the Earth and Star Fleet was not lost on you.


Now, truly, it was a cheesy ending. But it was so needed, just to hear Kirk say:


"Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before."


It is great to get that 'man' replaced with 'one', because that is something Star Trek has often suffered with, being misogynistic in its portrayal of women-folk and not having enough strong women on board ship. Hence the introduction of Alice Eve.

I get my sister's complaint that this wasn't as funny as the first movie, which to be fair it isn't. But also it wanted to be less funny, to make these characters grow up that bit more and cement their relationships. Scotty and Bones are the main funnymen this time round, though Kirk and Spock still get a share of the laughs. Sulu and Chekov come more into their own, and I hope George Takei is proud of how his iconic character is being portrayed.


Personally I really enjoyed this film. The first is my favourite but Khan was a far scarier villain than Nero (sorry Eric). I think in a lot of ways Cumberbatch carried this film, but that may be more because of the importance placed on the character than a reflection on the rest of the cast. Not many films or shows manage to cast perfectly, but Star Trek and JJ Abrams sure set the bar high for themselves and every other sci-fi franchise.

So heres to the next one, may the Klingons prove to be just as scary as Khan and the visuals just as arresting as that first sequence in the pink foliage.

Another theatre review. Maybe I should rename the blog...

Well I did warn you guys a few months ago I would gush about this show. And gush I will. A lot.

Please stop reading now if you require absolutely no spoilers before going to see it, which I HIGHLY recommend doing so before it closes in June.

Now, as with Singin’ In The Rain, I had amazing luck with seats. Due to the unfortunate lack of sales (which, to be honest is because the price of the seats in the Stalls and Royal Circle is extortionate) they closed the Grand Circle (the top of the theatre and the £20-£30 seats, ergo most popular) and so upgraded everyone in the Grand Circle to the Stalls. Freaking amazing seats we got, and for over fifty pounds less per ticket than it should have been.

We did suffer with having a group of obnoxious women in the Stalls who were clearly drinking and had no respect for fellow theatre-goers. If you have paid to see a show, no matter what seat you are in or if you got upgraded, you CANNOT talk through a performance without getting yourself kicked out to a round of applause during the interval.

So HA to those girls, and I hope they never get to see the rest of the show.

Luckily they didn’t ruin the whole show or tarnish my opinion of it. Written by Jennifer Saunders and created by Mamma Mia’s Judy Craymer this was a fantastic blend of Ab-Fab comedy and songs used to great effect.

The story follows Viva, a young girl who lives on a barge with her Mum, and her girl group Eternity who are taking part in talent competition ‘Star Maker’, with the appropriate Simon Cowell/Sharon Osborne/mindless idiot judges. Along the way the band get a mentor, split up, Viva becomes a solo act and falls for a Spaniard.
Pretty standard rom-com fare, but with Spice Girls songs to illustrate each point.

The cast were fantastic. The girls, ‘Eternity’, were played by four newcomers who were all really good. A couple had fantastic voices, a couple were a bit squeaky for my taste, but then again what girl band doesn’t have a mix of tones. They harmonised well so that was the main thing. The main girl, Viva, was great and engaging, especially in the scenes between herself and her Mum.

The Mum, Lauren, and best mate Suzi were amazing and hilarious. Suzi is played by Lucy Montgomery who is a comedian and was in Tittybangbang, voiced Destiny the pigeon in Mongrels, and stars in the Ryvita adverts. Suzi is essentially Patsy from Ab Fab: likes to get drunk, isn’t afraid of being extreme, and is all over the boys. And Montgomery was tear-inducingly funny, especially when she does a Zumba class…honest its worth the money to just see that segment.

What was also worth the money was the use of 2 become 1 in a romantic scene between Lauren and her man-friend. Actually cried with laughter and hurt my eye trying to stop the mascara running.

The young lovers were Viva and her music coordinator Angel (pronounced An-hel, cos he’s Spanish). Angel’s rendition of Viva Forever was beautiful, especially as he played Spanish guitar – who doesn’t love a Spanish guitar? It was really sweet and not sickly at all.

The rest of the cast were fab. We had an Eastender playing Johnny, the Simon Cowell of the judges, with Simone, his rival, played with ferocity and fabulous comic timing. One of the assistants for Star Maker, Minty, stole basically every scene she was in hashtag hilarious girl. If you’ve seen it you’ll get that last bit

The choreography, musical direction and combinations of songs were really very good. There is an amazing dance piece set in Spain which had these giant puppet things and some fantastic Spanish dancing. It leaves me feeling so sad that this show is being cancelled.

The only explanation I can see for this show not getting the bums on seats it deserves is the over-pricing of the tickets. Make the entire theatre £30 a ticket, first come first served for best seats, with maybe the top of the theatre and restricted view half the price. Then so many more Spice Girls fans would make the trip to London. Unfortunately its not a show that will necessarily attract the tourists. Its definitely not for little ones, though I don’t understand why less men are coming to see Viva Forever than would go to Singin’ In The Rain or Mamma Mia.

What I hope is that they take this show on tour. Take the Spice Girls TO the fans, cos lets face it London is a very expensive day out, and often involves a hotel stay to boot if coming from further than 3 hours away.

I’ll just say, in case it doesn’t go on tour and Lucy Montgomery does not return, if you liked the Spice Girls or anything Jennifer Saunders does, GO TO THIS SHOW. Its funny, sweet, sing-along fabulousness with a cracking end that gets everybody on their feet for a final sing and dance together.

Iron Man Three ☆☆☆☆☆

I have been debating with myself all day whether or not to write a totally spoiler free review, one with some spoilers at the end, or one that screams THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS AIN'T IT COOL?!

Ahem.

I have decided on trying spoiler-free, but if it gets too much I’ll add a short note at the end.

Those familiar with the world of Marvel, of Iron Man, Iron Man 2, and Avengers Assemble should, by rights, love this movie as much as my Mother and I did. In fact, to quote Mum, this was “the best one” of all the Iron Man movies.

If you are not familiar with Marvel but are intrigued at the effect it is having on popular culture and the movie industry, I’d say Iron Man is a great starting point. My personal favourite Avenger is Thor but Mum, well she loves Tony Stark.

*my mother is also the coolest human being on the planet, just so you know*

This third instalment of the Iron Man franchise is epic, but like The Avengers doesn’t lose the humanity of the characters. It also gets a new director in the form of Shane Black who brings his talent from Kiss Kiss Bang Bang to incorporate the darkness that Tony is going through with the action scenes that are a prerequisite of a comic book adaptation.

Tony Stark is not coping well after New York, being part of the Avengers and very almost dying to save the World from the aliens. Essentially Stark has PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) and HUGE kudos need to be thrown at both Black and Downey Jr for the serious and shocking ways that his condition is portrayed. On top of this a new villain in the form of 'The Mandarin’ has come from nowhere and is killing people with an unknown power source.

This is all you need to know plot wise because this film is full of twists and turns that I wasn’t expecting, and I sincerely hope no one spoils it for your own viewing and you are as surprised, shocked, devastated and elated as I was.

I’m going to just throw some praise the actors way before the director and the special effects team.
Robert Downey Jr remains one of my favourite people on the planet, he IS Tony Stark. He is arrogant, charming, intelligent, and vulnerable. This is something I have really connected with in Iron Man, that Stark is allowed to be human and show weakness. There are some extraordinary scenes in this film with Downey Jr and a kid where he just loses it, exactly how someone suffering with PTSD can lose themselves to their panic and anxiety. I was just so impressed with Downey Jr’s performance.

Gwyneth Paltrow is amazing as Pepper Potts, and the characterisation of Pepper throughout all four movies has shown her not to be the damsel in distress (actually none of the Marvel universe or DC women are D.I.D), culminating here in Iron Man Three where she gets to show what she is really made of. But then she is still vulnerable, because most importantly she is as human as Tony.

Rebecca Hall and Guy Pearce were fine additions to the film, which is all I can say without ruining the plot. Ben Kingsley was fantastic though, truly he must have had a riot in his role.

The best thing about the casts of these movies, which I think I probably mention every time I review these films, is how seriously they take their roles. You can tell if an actor isn’t quite taking the movie as the best thing they have ever been cast in, and luckily there have been no lazy actors cast yet. Except perhaps the final instalment of Spiderman, no one was taking that film seriously, not even the director.

To the levels of action and special effects. Frigging awesome. Like Avengers Assemble the film has balanced the need for dialogue and serious story with blinding action scenes. I cannot watch 3D movies but I still felt thrilled watching it in 2D. What you have seen in the trailer is nothing compared to what you’ll see on the big screen, its a final battle to be proud of.

Black does a phenomenal job with this film. Seriously, he and Joss Whedon and Christopher Nolan and Bryan Singer need to get together for drinks and just toast to each others’ ability to blend the dark with the light, and balance the complex worlds they have been in charge of.

The inclusion of techniques from Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, the narrative and the move back in time to 1999 to begin the story, are well thought out and played, right up until the snippet at the end of the credits. Oh yeah, there is an extra scene, and I loved it.

I would watch this film again tomorrow, which is why it gets five stars from me.

ParaNorman ☆☆☆☆½

This is the first time in a looooong time that I’ve watched an animation not done by Disney and said ‘that was excellent’. And this was excellent. Truly.

The story follows Norman Babcock, an eleven year old living in a small town in Massachusetts who has an unusual gift. Norman can see and converse with ghosts. His family and the whole town know this, or at least they know that Norman ‘believes’ he can see them. And for this Norman is bullied, ignored, shouted at, and generally mistreated. Its actually very sad and any kid who has ever been bullied will identify with Norman.

However Norman’s ‘gift’ means one important thing – he has a Destiny. This destiny is relayed to him by a crazy old guy called Pendergast who can also see ghosts, so unsurprisingly Norman is reticent to fulfil said destiny which is to go to the grave of a witch who cursed the townsfolk who sent her to her death 300 years ago, and read a book on the anniversary of her death.

But of course things aren’t going to go smoothly for Norman and he and his new friend Neil, his sister, Neil’s brother, and bully Alvin have to battle zombies and crazy and murderous townsfolk before the night is done.

So I’m going to review this with the voice cast going first, the story second, and then the animation to round it off, so here goes with the voice cast.

Genuinely talented bunch of voices in here. You have Kodi Smit-McPhee (Let Me In, The Road) as Norman, whose youthful tones are not lost but serve to really power the animation, his voice really brings Norman to life. Anna Kendrick (Pitch Perfect, Up In The Air) finds her inner cheerleader as Norman’s older sister, fawning over Neil’s older brother, and trying to work out her little brother. The older brother is played by Casey Affleck, which I didn’t pick up at all, probably because I wasn’t expecting a 30 something year old to be voicing a teenage beefcake.

Jeff Garlin who voiced Norman’s father is no stranger to voice work, having been part of Pixar’s Cars and Wall-E, and I love how exasperated he can make his voice sound in such a quiet way. Leslie Mann who is more famous for being in anything her husband makes (she is the wife of Judd Apatow who made Knocked Up etc), was again unrecognisable, but that may have been because I was more fascinated with how the mother was animated than her tone of voice.

Rounding out the cast are the voices of Pendergast (John Goodman), zombie leader (Bernard Hill), Alvin the Bully (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) and finally little Neil who is voiced by a young actor I do not know of called Tucker Albrizzi.

This actually moves me on nicely to reviewing the story, because Neil was definitely my favourite character. He was this chubby kid who is also picked on, but for a plethora of reasons that he outlines to Norman without a trace of anger or resentment, just a calm acceptance of his fate. I just wanted to squeeze his animated chubbiness, especially when he shows up to Norman’s house wearing a hockey mask and is just stood there, like a mini Michael Myers. Which is EXACTLY the creators intention.

This wasn’t an animation that dumbed down any dialogue or lessened the scariness to benefit the smallest people. If I had been seven years old, or even eleven, I would have been terrified. Actually if I had been in a cinema on my own I probably would have been scared, watching something on your laptop in the daylight does take away the atmosphere.

The speech was fabulous, intelligent and funny, whilst also kind of breaking your heart at times. Norman’s facial expressions were beautiful, he does this tiny smile that real people do when they have been complimented but have never let themselves believe anything about them is good.

The animation overall was stunning. I love stop-motion and this really captured the heart and soul of the story and characters. It allowed the animators to create extreme looking persons to reflect their characteristics, or just to put a huge bum on a cheerleader. Visually arresting I guess you could say, especially the final big sequence.

I’ve read reviews that say this is good but not as good as Coraline, but then again these films are exploring two different kinds of dark, but both are scary. The difference is ParaNorman goes for the funny too, and I enjoyed the humour being put out there because its there to stop the kids freaking out. It is childish humour, and you know we all like to see the bully hide behind the kid he’s been picking on sometimes, its poetic justice and quite funny.

Of course the thing to always remember about my reviews is this is just my own humble opinion. Raising expectations never does anyone any good, so don’t take my word that this is funny, scary and beautifully animated, go watch it and decide for yourself.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower ☆☆☆☆½

He wrote the book. He wrote the screenplay. He even directed the movie.

Stephen Chbosky is a talented guy.

First thing I'd like to say about this is that it is extraordinarily hard to review because the author did all the important stuff, he would even have had a say in the casting. So I cannot make comparisons to the book (which of course I reviewed on my other blog) because any differences were totally done to make it translatable to screen which the director handled amazingly...this is gonna be a gushing review.

SO the plot. We focus on Charlie, played by Logan Lerman (Percy Jackson, 3:10 to Yuma), a young man who has had a difficult time in life and is somewhere on the autistic scale. This is reflected in his behaviour and extreme social awkwardness. We meet him on his first day of high school and the film charts his life throughout that first year, where he makes friends and discovers hidden talents, screws things up in spectacular fashion, but then makes his way to recovering what has been lost.

The people in Charlie's life include his mother and father, Dylan McDermott (American Horror Story) and Kate Walsh (Private Practice), whose small amount of screen time was just brilliant. I didn't even recognise Kate Walsh at first.

There is also Candace, Charlie's sister, played by The Vampire Diarie's Nina Dobrev who also impressed me. Mostly I think because I have become incredibly annoyed by TVD and her character, so it was good to see her playing a human in a human world. Her boyfriend, Ponytail Derek, was a lot different to how I had imagined him in the book, mostly because I don't remember the ponytail...however this is Chbosky's show
so it must have been what he intended, so I went with it.

Charlie has an older brother who pops up at Christmas, time restrictions meant leaving out the deeper worries and wishes of Charlie to be in more contact with his big brother, but I was quite touched by their scenes together.

Charlie's first friend, his teacher Mr Anderson, was almost exactly as I imagined him from the book - I just didn't realise I had been imagining Paul Rudd. Its good to see him in a serious role for once, where he gets to play the mentor and person pivotal to Charlie 'participating'.

Now to the people you've seen in all the trailers, Miss Emma Watson as Sam, Ezra Miller (We Need to Talk About Kevin) as Patrick and of course Logan Lerman as Charlie. All three were perfect. Perfect. I know this only my humble opinion but genuinely, the way that Sam was written in this film meant that any expectation I had from the book was broken down and rebuilt in the form of Emma Watson. I'd love it if any North Americans out there could tell me if her accent was really bad, but to me it sounded fine. Akin to Dakota Fanning's British accent I think Watson was doing the generic American twang that to a local would sound a bit odd, but it worked for me.

Ezra Miller was Fab-U-LOUS! His Patrick was just, well read the book you'll understand it was just so very Patrick. And he and Watson worked well together and completely pulled off their step-sibling relationship. There is all sorts of seriousness happening with Patrick, his sexuality, relationships and some violence. And it was all brought to the screen magnificently.

The most important character though is of course Charlie and I'll admit I had reservations when seeing Lerman on the trailer. But, the kid can ACT. He was funny without meaning to be, engaging, heartbreaking, and ultimately utterly believable as Charlie, this kid I fell in love with only a couple of months ago. So if you've seen, say, The Three Musketeers, please don't judge Lerman on that, judge him on this film.

What I was concerned about was that I wouldn't react the same way watching the film as I had whilst reading the book. But I did. I was forcing myself to watch the screen when a truly embarrassing to the core and heartbreaking at the same time moment happened, the same as I had forced myself to read on. I was in pieces in an important 10 minute period toward the end of the film, and I think the amount of tears was equal to those that flooded my kitchen table when reading the same scenes.

If all authors had the talent that Chbosky has, then maybe I wouldn't get so mad at book adaptations. Because how can you argue with something that has clearly had the same level of attention and passion put in to it as the original source? Yes there are some minor changes but these are not deal breakers to the enjoyment of the film.

I hope those who have seen the film are encouraged to go on and read the book, because the story achieves so much more in terms of really getting to know the characters. However because of the superior quality of this film and the depth it manages to reach, I won't be too unhappy if you only spend an hour and a half with this amazing boy and his world.

Now Is Good ☆☆☆½

I think I might be a sucker for a film about a dying girl, these are the ones I’ve wept through prior to this Dakota Fanning movie:

• A Walk to Remember (with Mandy Moore dying)
• Love Story (1970s original weepy)
• Restless (an amazing and original story with Mia Wasikowska)
• My Sister’s Keeper (though not really a love story it ticks most of the boxes)

So with the above list in mind, I’m not going to delve too deeply into the plot, this is the trailer if you’d like to know what the story is about, but really its about Dakota Fanning putting on a British accent and playing a 17 year old who is dying and makes a list of things to do before she dies, but falls for the boy next door in the months leading up to her death.

Along with My Sister’s Keeper, Now Is Good is a film that made me feel faint because of the hospital/brutal reality of the illness. Luckily I was watching NIG at home so could pause to put my head between my knees (genuinely I get quite ill, seeing me give blood is probably hilarious). During MSK I was in the cinema and missed about 4 minutes of the hospital scenes because I felt so awful and had to hide my head somewhere near the floor.

However, aside from feeling poorly, Now is Good made me an emotional wreck. Paddy Considine broke my heart as the Dad, simply called ‘Father’ in the cast list, and just thinking about one particular scene is making my eyes well-up once more. Then again he is a phenomenal actor and now director who is pretty good at tugging on your heart-strings (watch Dead Mans Shoes or Tyrannosaur). But he also could produce some comic relief as the disapproving Dad of the boy next door.

Olivia Williams as Mum was something of a shock, the Mother who couldn’t handle her childs illness and had no idea about hospital appointments, treatments, and avoided as much as she could. She also had extraordinary hair – bottle blonde with some fabulous roots, a clear indication of her frame of mind and where her real worries lie, not with her appearance but with her child.

Onto the dying girl herself, Miss Dakota Fanning as Tessa Scott, the girl who has decided to stop chemotherapy after leukemia returned after a four-year battle. Fanning was demonstrating her ability to do an English accent…and you know it wasn’t terrible. Perhaps a little too posh and clipped sometimes, a lot of ‘yes’ when a more relaxed ‘yeah’ would have been a natural response, but overall if I didn’t know she was from the USA I reckon I could have been convinced. Fanning is a pretty good actress and she dies quite well, I think she must have been channelling her inner Brit to be so deadpan about the whole thing, even her eyes were unforgiving about sentiment.

Jeremy Irvine is the required boy next door, but this one isn’t the jock who needs to be taught a lesson in humanity (A walk to remember) or a strange young man who gate crashes funerals (Restless), Irvine’s Adam has lost his father the year before and has been something of a recluse ever since. Despite the reservations he has he goes for it, cos hey Tessa is a pretty inspirational person. Irvine puts in a much better performance than War Horse…that may be unfair as I have no idea what his War Horse character is supposed to be like but I found him a tad unbearable all the same. So he proved to me he is a decent actor, and he meshed with Dakota quite well.

I really loved Tessa’s little brother, played by Edgar Canham who only has this film to his name. Basically Cal is the kid who makes ‘inappropriate’ comments such as ‘when Tessa is dead can we go on holiday?’ which make Tessa smile because he is the one person who truly accepts what is happening, likely because he doesn’t comprehend the effect it will really have on him and his life.

Kaya Scodelario, of Skins fame, plays the best friend who is helping Tessa tick things off her list, and their friendship was easy and believable.

This is a really good version of the dying girl movie. Restless is my absolute favourite because of the originality of the characters, but this is definitely very good and that comes from a strong cast and an equally strong script and direction. Ol Parker the director and writer keeps a firm hold and does not lose any focus, but also manages to balance the light with the dark very much as he did with The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel.

However if, like me, you are a bit of a weepy person, your tear ducts might get some serious exercise. Like I said above, Paddy Considine broke my heart, I challenge him not to break yours.

Labyrinth

The feeling I am currently experiencing is this awful mix of rage and disappointment - pretty much how I feel whenever I think seriously about politics and the general state of the world.

This feeling is also the reason I will not be reading George R R Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series which has been adapted into HBO's Game of Thrones. Why? Because I don't want to be annoyed at characterisation, messing with plot or subplot, and, especially, the casting of my favourite characters.

Labyrinth has fulfilled on all three points, I am incredibly annoyed. The book isn't even the best novel in the world but the mini-series has messed with fundamental points that gradually build throughout the just over three hours...its irritating is all.

What is also irritating is that I cannot tell you what has been changed without spoiling either the book or the series. But I will do my best to review the adaptation, though it is probably going to assume prior knowledge at some points - but don't despair if you want to read my review of the book please click here.

Labyrinth is an epic tale of love and treachery that spans across eight hundred years, set in both the 13th and 21st centuries. It focuses on the lives of nobility in Carcassonne in 1209 during the Crusade against the Cathars and this historical events influence on the modern period. Most importantly it concerns the quest for the mysterious 'Grail', or everlasting life.

The 21st century aspect to the story focuses on an Englishwoman who has come to Carcassonne in 2012 to recieve an inheritance from an unknown relative. This is all told a LOT better in the book, namely because the TV producers/writers/editors mashed in the inheritance by showing Alice to be forgetful, and also completely changed how two fo the main characters met, Alice and Will, which I thought was quite lovely.

In 1209 we have Alaïs du Mas, the daughter of the advisor to the Viscount of Carcassonne. She is married to Guilhem, a chevalier, and is a generally well loved human being. Except she has a cheating husband, whose chosen beau is her vindictive sister Oriane. Each has a part to play in the quest for the Grail, some in the role of protector while others are seeking to gain everlasting life for their own.

The casting of the 13th century characters was actually okay, I put most of the blame on the poor writing and rushed method that what fell out of their mouths was trite and mundane. I really enjoyed watching Draco Malfoy, sorry Tom Felton, play the good guy as Viscount Trencavel, a man who wants to keep his city fair and free for all inhabitants no matter their religious choices. Katie McGrath just seemed to channel Morgana in her portrayal of Oriane, a scheming and evil woman who will stop at nothing in her quest for the Grail. Lady Sybil, okay Jessica Brown Findlay, was...well her portrayal of Alaïs was pretty similar to Sybil. Strong and family driven, but always so breathy.

Now Emun Elliot, the man I blame for me even reading Labyrinth, was a bit disappointing - but again I blame the writing. As Guilhem he had to be a conflicted bastard who really loves his wife but is weak willed, and he mostly managed it. He has a very pretty face so that saved a lot of his performance.

What I cannot forgive in the historical section of this adaptation is the casting of a 23 year old in the role of an 11 year old....BOYS CHANGE LOTS. I don't know if it was just to save casting a grown up for when Sahje got older, no one seemed to get much older despite the book requiring about a 15 year lapse in time. Matthew Beard is a good actor but he seemed pushed into being a teenager and then a grown man...it really didn't work. I loved little Sahje in the book and was looking forward to seeing a mischevious young actor getting to run around and admire Alaïs.

In 2012 we have Alice Tanner, a woman who has come from England to recieve an inheritance but takes some time out to help her friend at an archaeological dig. What Alice cannot know is her discovery at this dig will trigger the past to come back to life through modern events through a strange cult and the continuing quest for the Grail.

In terms of the 21st century casting...again I can't complain about the acting too bitterly, the problem is mostly with the writing. Alice Tanner is our heroine and Vanessa Kirby does a good job portraying her, not quite what I imagined but also not too annoying. I disliked what the writers did with the character, they made her into this slightly pathetic creature when she really isn't.

John Hurt was good but he lacked the surrounding characters, evidently trimmed from the programme to save on time and money, to bounce off of and be able to slowly reveal his true identity.

Who I loved in the modern time zone was Sebastian Stan....maybe that comes down to me loving him anyway but still, he does the best job out of everyone no matter what his Marvel connections are. He portrays Will, an American who is stuck in this complex world of hidden religion and missing Grails because of his relationship with a slightly psychotic Frenchwoman...don't ask its something I can't explain properly without spoiling everything.

As you may have noticed so far I have a huge dislike of the writing of this show. It was far too syrupy and overly dramatic, I often wanted to slap their faces with fish. I saw an interview with Kate Mosse who said she chose television to adapt it because of seeing Pillars of the Earth, a program that had many episodes and is an equally fat book. And yet Labyrinth got only two...very odd and annoying. I feel strongly that had they had the time (say six hours) they could have improved so much.

I will end this poorly executed review on a positive note however. The method of swapping time lines was incredibly well done. The streams were cleverly combined using landscapes or visions that Alice has, and you never felt jolted from one era to the next. If only the rest of the program had been so well executed I would have been absorbed rather than frustrated for the three and a bit hours I spent watching the damn thing.

Singin' In The Rain: a theatre review!

I'm taking liberties with my blogs today, posting a review in Tumblr of Singin' In The Rain instead of a jazzy picture or gif with OMG I WANT TO SEE THIS AGAIN! And you, my fellow blogspot and Google plus people, and my Wordpress followers, will see a review of a theatre production because I want to gush about the magic of the stage.

Who you can see above is Adam Cooper, tap dancer and ballet star famous for his role as the Swan in Matthew Bourne's revolutionary Swan Lake from the mid-nineties (you can also spot him playing older Billy Elliot in the 2000 film). He was fantastic as Don, the role that I thought no one else but Gene Kelly could schmooze his way through, but boy does Mr Cooper ooze charm and easy grace. I was ready to leap on stage to snog him myself.
What I love about the theatre is that it is innovative and always wanting to make it worth your while to be there, films are often lazy but theatre companies cannot afford to be so because they need bums on seats. So what happens here is IT RAINED ON STAGE. No joke, there was water all over that specially created stage which meant the people in the first few rows of the stalls were in the ‘splash zone’ and you could tell the dancers took some pleasure from kicking the water out.

As well as the amazing set which could hold water, the rest of the props and the set design was brilliant. The Palace Theatre was without a curtain so nothing was hidden from the audience which I particularly love as behind the scenes tasks are often intriguing, plus all the stage hands were dressed in 1920s appropriate garb so it kept the spirit alive even while watching them mop the stage or dismantle lamposts.

What I found quite unusual (or maybe it was because I was closer to the stage than I usually am) was that the Chorus had a lot to do, dipping into speaking parts, taking three or four different roles each, and having to do all the dances. I know this is normal but it was the fact that the Chorus was actually quite small in number - maybe a dozen of them? Regardless I was hugely impressed with them and intensely jealous of their dancing skill.

The main roles of Don, Kathy and Cosmo were all splendid - Don especially. But Jennifer Ellison (from Brookside) as Lina Lamont absolutely stole every scene she's in (she's the one who 'Can't Stand Him!'). It must take so much skill for someone who is six months pregnant and a pretty fantastic singer to sing off-key and in such a high pitched voice.

The whole production was simply fantastic, the costumes, cast, styling...I beamed the whole way through. As I often do when watching the 1952 movie in fact.

So, apologies for the digression from film and TV. It won't happen often as I cannot afford to go to London very often, but be warned, I have tickets for Viva Forever in May so there is gonna be some gushing about the Spice Girls sooner than you'd all like!

The Host ☆☆☆

I was determined not to see this movie if I had to pay for it, so adamant that I firmly believed it would be a few years until I actually watched it. However I have a supremely kind sister who paid for me to go see it, which is why I am able to give my verdict about 3 years earlier than I expected.

And you know what? It wasn't that bad.

Don't get me wrong my expectations were below sea level prior to viewing, with the exception that I hoped Saoirse Ronan would be at least the best thing in it as I happen to believe she is a fine actress (if you've not seen Hanna or Atonement you really must). And Ronan was one of the best things by far.

To catch up those unfamiliar with the story, this is the adaptation of Stephanie Meyers abortive attempt at science fiction. Why so harsh? Because it was a rehash of invasion of the body snatchers with a love triangle and hardly any horror. I am fed up of Love Triangles, and Meyer cannot write science fiction.
You have these parasitic 'souls' who attach themselves to the dominant life form on a planet and seek to co-exist within their bodies and minds. However humans are more resistant and have to be forced out leaving the 'soul' to live in harmony with it's brethren, who have made Earth peaceful, harmonious and a really quite boring planet.

After a few years a new soul called 'Wanderer' arrives and is given the host body of Melanie Stryder, one of the last humans still resisting being taken over. However Melanie resists and instead reveals to Wanderer what their invasion has meant for the humans. Cue a love triangle between Melanie's true love and the guy who loves the alien, some impressive action sequences (very few but still good), and, as is expected from a Meyer movie, a neat happy ending.

If this had only been a film and not a book, I think I might have liked it more. But the stigma of bad writing is such that I cannot forgive the painful cheesy romantic moments because they are the fault of Meyer. There are a few of these, but luckily what out weighs them is the really great relationship formed on screen between Wanderer (or Wanda) and Mel's uncle Jeb played by William Hurt (Incredible Hulk, Into The Wild). Saoirse did the split personality very well and was how I imagined Wanda/Melanie to be. Hurt was easy going and laid back, very easy to watch in fact rather like Charlie in the Twilight movies.

The boys, Jared and Ian, were slightly less comfortable to watch, but I'll put that down to the cheesy moments they were made to be part of. Max Irons (Red Riding Hood) and Jake Abel (Percy Jackson) were pretty good and lived up to my own impression of the territorial boys in love with one of the two personalities in Melanie's body. They were also not hard to look at either.

I thought Diane Kruger did a great job as Seeker, a soul whose skill is in finding people, and her obsession with Melanie was well played out.

The artistry of the film, in the sets, costumes and general look, is also to be praised. The white and silver of the alien invaders contrasted with the earthy colours of the resisting humans, making them seem more enemy-like. The caves where the humans are in hiding were quite stunning and almost exactly as described in the book, these caves were definitely the most fascinating aspect of the original tale.

Overall this is worth a watch, especially if someone else is paying. There are tedious moments that make you want to skip through the scene, but there is also some surprising violence that was much needed and made you wake up a bit.

If what you loved about Twilight was the romance and love triangle issues, you'll definitely love The Host. If like me you have become bitter and critical then I say if you have the opportunity to see this movie take it, if only to see some beautiful caves and Saoirse Ronan showing yet again that she really can act, even when the script sometimes makes you want to gag.

Pitch Perfect ☆☆☆½

I used to be a Glee fan. I will always be a musical theatre fan. And I am a fan of a decent rom com.
Basically give me singing, dancing, and a small amount of romance with a lot of comedy and I'll be a happy bunny no matter how trite the plot. Like I said, I used to be a Glee fan, I can cope with pretty much anything.

Which is why I wanted to give Pitch Perfect a go. That and I really do enjoy Anna Kendrick and Rebel Wilson's acting abilities.

Though I have strong objections to the way her name is spelt, this film concentrates on Beca (Anna Kendrick), a college freshman whose passion involves mixing music NOT singing. She is in college against her will but at the bequest of her Father, who has a condition that she must try and find a club to belong to and 'make memories', then if she really hates it she can move to LA and try to make it in the music business.

Of course this is where the singing and dancing comes in, as the group she finds is the all female A Capella group The Bellas, led by Brittany Snow (Hairspray, Prom Night) as Chloe and Anna Camp (True Blood) as Aubrey.
Aubrey is the real leader who has something to prove after an embarrassing exit in the finals of last years A Capella competition. Chloe is a confident but submissive co-chair who wants Beca in the group after making her perform an audition in the shower...yeah I was a bit disturbed by the casual nature of the intimidation but there was no malice involved so I think it was okay.

The Bellas main rivals are on-campus all-male A Capella group the Treblemakers, who won last years competition and generally out-do the girls because their music choices do not begin and end with eighties female empowerment records. They are led by Bumper, played by Jack Black wannabe Adam DeVine (you might recognise him from the most recent Sim City ads) and joined by Jesse who is played by Skylar Astin, the Dane Cook of this generation. Don't know who Dane Cook is? Thats probably a good thing as it means you haven't been subjected to his 'stand-up' or movies such as Good Luck Chuck. Though Dan In Real Life is worth a watch.

The rivalry is fun, the singing is pretty good and the sing-off between all the groups on campus is a good watch.

Rebel Wilson is without doubt the star of this film as she brings her no-bullshit style of comedy and is obviously ad-libbing wherever she can. The name of her character is 'Fat Amy' and its the best reason for a name ever, 'So that twigs like you can't call me it behind my back'. Genius. She also gets one of my favourite lines of the movie "I'm gonna finish him like a cheesecake!" There is some really great humour in this film.

The romance between Beca and Jesse is cheesy but fine, its not gonna make you vomit for the sacchirine but also its not so dead you wonder why its even there.
Anna Kendrick's performance is great, she pulls off the loner-type well but also has a decent set of pipes on her. I hope she continues to do well, make the right choices in films etc. So far Pitch Perfect has been the furthest away from Up in the Air (for which she was Oscar nommed) but I enjoyed it a lot.

Director Jason Moore has relatively few TV/movie credits but did get Tony nominated for directing Avenue Q, a funny and dark puppet musical, and I felt he handled this movie particularly well. There are moments of real gross-out humour that I could have done without, but then again it is probably meant to appeal to the American Pie lovers rather than the Glee ones anyway.

This film is meant for an older audience than Glee would normally attract, with it being set in college and having talk of sex, and it benefits from this. There are a wide range of characters, from the girl who no one can hear to the boy whose passion involves close up magic, as well as the stock characters of romantic leads, mouthy girl, and uptight drama queen.

It might have helped I was drinking cider (only one pint) through the film so my expectations were that much lower and my inclination to laugh that much higher. I am pretty sure that a sober viewing would still induce the same amount of enjoyment.

So yeah, give Pitch Perfect a go if you enjoy musicals and rom coms, wouldn't recommend it to anyone who loathes Glee though.

Breaking Dawn Part Two ☆☆☆

I am still failing to see why this needed to be in two films.

As with part one I refused to pay good money to travel to and sit in a cinema to watch the final films in this saga. So instead I have waited until renting it on a whim by signing up to Tesco's Blink Box thing (if you put in £1 they give you a fiver, so that's six squid to spend renting movies, basically you can rent one recent one and one from a few years ago). I flat out refuse to pay any money whatsoever to see The Host (Stephanie Meyer's poor excuse for a sci-fi novel) but with Twilight I HAD to get some closure.

Plus there was this thing of people telling me it was really good....uh huh.

It IS worth a watch for those who like Twilight, which is why it gets three stars. I had some positive moments and there is actually some decent acting going on - kudos to the casting director! I AM going to spoil the frick out of this movie though so if you are perhaps waiting for it to come on the TV in order to not pay a penny to see it (apart from the TV subscription and electricity of course) please stop reading now.

Just in case you skim read my reviews...

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

We shall start on a positive note. Lee Pace (aka Garrett, sexy loner vampire) was AMAZING. He, along with Billy Burke who plays Charlie, totally got the character and didn't seem the slightest bit uncomfortable. This has always been the problem with the Twilight movies, no one has ever seemed secure in their role except Charlie, and now Garrett. Oh and Benjamin and Aro too.

Aro is played with a vicariousness only present in a secure actor, who is of course respected Tony Blair impersonator Michael Sheen...OK so that's unfair as he is a very good actor when not being our former PM.
He also gets to kick some butt in this film which I really enjoyed despite it NOT HAPPENING IN THE BOOK.

Now okay so I rag on Meyer for being a terrible writer but seriously, when there is no fight scene in a book and all your going to do is this 'clever twist' which I guessed when people told me 'oh its really clever how they fitted in the fight that we have all seen in the trailers' because seriously, how else was it going to happen except for it being a vision that Alice has seen? you DON'T have to spend the extra money making the fight scene. That is, and I would have been happy with this, unless you are gonna change the ending and have the fight be real and actually introduce some tragedy into the sugary vampire drama.

Do I sound harsher than usual? I think I must be in a bad place or something.

So yes, because I knew they wouldn't possibly change the ending I spent the fight sequence thinking 'this is cool and all, vampire heads being ripped off left right and chelsea, few dead wolves too, but it means nothing really'. Fine, so the vision is the reason Aro doesn't start a battle but honestly, I felt real bad for Marcus.
That vampire wanted to die so bad, you could almost see the (excuse my language here) 'Oh for fucks sake' that was running through his mind as Aro shooed everyone away from starting a fight.

Visually the film was stunning. Fantastic snowy mountains, the grown up vamps looked cool and newcomer Benjamin with his fancy element manipulation was also fun.
However, and this was a gripe from the end of the last movie, when the child is described as being beautiful and with big brown eyes like her Mother's used to be, WHY THE HELL DOES CGI HAVE TO GET INVOLVED?

Seriously? Can someone explain why it was a good decision to manipulate a child's face with special effects? If you want a serious looking child get one that is half asleep, and once Renesmee got to about five kids are pretty good at acting, no need to make her face look a certain way. And it was so badly done, so awful and obvious it just put me off looking at the child when you are meant to be captivated by her.

Just a side note regarding the stupid name of the child, my respect levels for Kristen Stewart's acting abilities went up about a million points as she growled at Taylor Lautner (bless the boy his acting skills will never be as good as his abs) for nick naming her after the Loch Ness Monster.

Actually lets return to the positives once more because as annoying as I find Ms Stewart's acting method she must have let loose in this movie. Perhaps it was the restraint of the characterisation of Bella that made her seem to be the same in every other movie she did, but here she got to be proactive and when she yelled I believed her.

I think Pattinson was just coasting by this point in the films, he knew he could do Edward Cullen easily and just went with it. Can't blame him really, there are amazing gif sets that come up on Tumblr about how no-one was happier than Mr Pattinson for the Twilight nightmare to end. And when he smiles he is pretty so I was happy with his performance.

The rest of the actors were fine, its all a bit over dramatic for my taste anyway. I liked the Denali sisters and the showing off of each others powers. It was a shame they couldn't have scripted it better, there were some awful and painful cheesy lines in there.

But like I said, positives were in there too. Stewart acted. Pace was a fantastic Garrett. Sheen was Sheen. And though I was disappointed all the death and violence didn't actually take place the battle sequence was pretty cool to watch.

Overall the Twilights have been worth the watch. The first was undoubtedly the best because of the mood and tone that Katherine Hardwicke brought to the table. It was also the film where you can tell that everyone cared, no one had been tainted by the overwhelming nature of fandoms or been given nick names yet, no ones love life had been scrutinised constantly by the gossip machines of E! and the magazines, it was a brand new thing - not the vampire love story, but the idea that a teenage audience could connect to it.

I have become more disillusioned over the years and splitting Breaking Dawn into two films was the icing on the cake. Only good literature should be shown such devotion, and unfortunately I cannot bring myself to say that any of the Twilight books are remotely worth recommending based on the skill of the writer.

Somewhere ☆☆☆☆

I am a huge huge fan of Sofia Coppola. Not because I've seen everything she's ever made, I've consciously avoided Marie Antoinette, but because she made Lost in Translation and I think that is perhaps one my most favourite films ever.

Somewhere is very similar to LiT in that it uses long scenes of quiet, minimal dialogue (no wasted words with Copolla), great actors and a pretty fabulous soundtrack.

Stephen Dorff plays an actor, Johnny, who lives in a hotel (but not in a sad way), and generally does what he pleases. He is visited on occasion by his bright and bubbly 11 year old Cleo, played by the lovely Elle Fanning. When she visits it brings him out of his selfish bubble and he notices what she does and takes care of her needs (mostly) above his own. Then during one visit the mother of Cleo calls to say she is 'going away' as is wont to happen in films of father-daughter bonding.

The subsequent journey of the two of them, not getting used to each other because they already had a pretty great relationship, shows Johnny how fantastic his daughter is, and how much he needs her in his life.

It so frigging CUTE. I loved it.

You have to like Lost In Translation to like this movie, I firmly believe that. Anyone who disagrees please do comment me back and say so, but to me they are so similar in style (unsurprising when it comes to writer/directors) that if you disliked the quiet of Johansson and Murray then Dorff and Fanning are not going to win you over either.

Dorff was really very good. I don't know him from anything except the Britney Spears video for Everytime and so I didn't have any expectations piled on him, but he impressed me. He has an easy charm as Johnny but also this wonderful and caring look in his eye as he interacts with Fanning.

Fanning is a sweet actress who hasn't quite gotten the same acting chops as her big sister, but as Cleo she is charming and lovely and you wonder at her ability to be such an adult at only 11. But then kids from broken homes often are.

The two together are brilliant and they light up the screen. Films like this only work if the chemistry is there and it was there in spades, they really could have been father and daughter.

Copolla is a sturdy hand with a film like this, her words are chosen carefully and they are not said with any lack of emotion or believability. She has the corner on the quiet indie film market and I hope there are more Lost in Translations and Somewheres to come our way.

So finally, as I have said before, I loved it. I hope if you haven't tried out a Coppola movie this inspires you to do so, and that you enjoy them and take as much from them as I do.

A Good Day to Die Hard ☆☆☆☆½

Considering all the terrible reviews for this film you may be surprised at my four and a half stars. Why have been so generous? Because it was f-ing AWESOME.

I went in with the lowest expectations but these were blown away. After all, what do I actually want from a Die Hard movie?
Bruce Willis as John McClane: check.
Good special effects: check.
Extravagant and ridiculous car chases or final battle: double check.
Bonus eye candy (as well as Mr Willis): huge fat tick in the form of John McClane Jr, aka Jai Courtney.

The plot was beyond ridiculous, it involved Russia and the Chernobyl disaster, the CIA and the twisted Russian political system. But we don't watch Die Hards for the intricate plots and depth do we? No. We watch them for Bruce Willis to get beaten up beyond belief but still be able to bring down a helicopter in the most ridiculous way. And this time they threw in a kick ass son for Willis to buddy up with.

Jai Courtney is an unknown to me but has been in a series of Spartacus and was in Jack Reacher last year. He has arms I just wanted to curl up and die in. He is also not a bad action hero, certainly in the realm of Bruce Willis who has acting talent along with being able to pull off crackers stunts (I'm not a fan of Arnie or Stallone who really cannot act their way out of a paper bag). They have a great chemistry actually, Willis and Courtney, and the whole father-son bond thing works well for the film. Its similar to Lucy in the previous film where she starts calling him John but by the end she realises what a goddam hero her father is.

Because that is why I go to see a Die Hard film, and why I will definitely go see the sixth instalment, because Bruce Willis is a bona-fide hero. Last time round we saw him jumping around on top of fighter jets - this time he creates the biggest car pile up in Russian cinema history AND brings down a helicopter using a truck. And I LOVED it.

Be prepared to laugh at the ridiculousness, enjoy the stunts, brush off the weakness of the plot, and just set your expectations through the floor because I can guarantee if you enjoy Die Hard movies as much as I do (with the exception of Die Harder - no one likes that one) you'll have a great time watching this movie.

Warm Bodies ☆☆☆☆

As far as book to film adaptations go Warm Bodies is up there with the best. I actually reviewed the book here last year when I first saw the trailer for Warm Bodies, having had no interest in the book previously despite knowing that Simon Pegg was a fan.

The film version has many positives, the zombies, the scenery, the tinting of the colours to be this washed out grey to reflect the militirised state of the humans and the one dimensional lives of the zombies. There are also Boneys who are so far gone into their zombie state that they are walking/running skeletons. Scary things.

So for those who haven't read the book or failed to click on my helpfully supplied link to my review above, this is a love story between a zombie called R and a girl called Julie (getting the Shakespeare reference?) who he rescues from being eaten, handily after eating her boyfriends brains. Their connection sparks a revolution in the zombies and it is up to the pair to change the world, fighting boneys and parents along the way.

There are changes to the story to make the film an easy to watch hour and a half, it is a little sappy to be any longer and the things they cut - a 'marriage' between R and another zombie and their 'children', communication between R and Perry (the boyfriend) through the recently deceased's memories - made the film more workable. They did change the ending which was disappointing as it would have been amazing for John Malkovich to really sink his teeth into the character of General Grigio, Julie's father, and...well I'm not going to spoil the book now am I?

So story wise I approved (mostly) of the changes and it flowed really well. As for the characters, much like the book R is the most captivating of them all and the use of his narrative was excellent, there are moments where I was frustrated by the hand-on-heart great to be alive and American moments and then Nicholas Hoult's zombie voice would cut through the syrup and make you laugh as he struggled to communicate but sounded so happy to get the smallest sentence out.

Hoult (About A Boy, X-Men) really deserves a full star of his own - he is what made the film brilliant to me. In a recent interview with Graham Norton he said that he had this thought that zombies wouldn't blink, and so Jonathan Levine pounced upon the idea and so Hoult did not blink. Not once. Okay maybe he did but it was for good reason. And it was really effective so kudos to you Nick Hoult.
Hoult transformed and became R, confused about himself but unable to express it beyond grunts and shrugging. His relationship with his best friend, played fantastically by Rob Corddry (What Happens in Vegas, Hot Tub Time Machine), is communicated through their eyes mostly, but then through the sentences they manage to cobble together. It was another of the great aspects of the book that translated really well onto screen.

Teresa Palmer (I Am Number Four) lived up to the Julie of the book, a bit flat and annoying, but at least she could handle a weapon so was a bit more kick ass than the Bella Swans of the supernatural world.
John Malkovich should have had so much more to play with than what he had, and he half suited the role because of the changes - had they not changed so much he would have been f-ing awesome.

Levine did a great job as director, having previously been responsible for All The Boys Love Mandy Lane and 50/50 he has shown he can handle horror and romance with equal strength. The plotline was solid, it kept to a story that was easily followed by the viewer and retained the humour from the book. The casting of Hoult was beyond brilliant and only he, in my humble opinion, could convey the struggle of R to the screen with such spirit, you know, for a walking corpse.

SIDENOTE: Forgot to put this in earlier, but the soundtrack is fantastic and those who love vinyl will appreciate its use and the sentiment attached through the film.

Seeking a Friend for the End of the World ☆☆☆☆½

I feel drained. Emotionally drained. Ugh so much feeling in this movie and I so want to spoil the whole thing but I can't, I just can't do that to you guys.

But I think its safe for me to say I went through some emotional turmoil watching this movie, regular readers of this blog (and those who actually know me, same people I'm guessing) should know that I am fairly sensitive to these types of things - I'm the kind of person who tears up at adverts about washing up - so the admittance that I feel drained should have no bearing on how anyone else will feel.

The story is about the apocalypse funnily enough, and a road trip to find lost love. Steve Carell plays Dodge, an insurance broker who is still going to work despite his wife running away upon the announcement that there is definitely only three weeks left until an asteroid hits the Earth, estimated to destroy all life. Keira Knightley is his slightly eccentric neighbour Penny that he has never said more than two words to in three years, until the night she sits on the fire escape in tears outside his window.

They join up to go on a road trip to find Dodge's first love and a way for Penny to get back to England and her family. They meet a variety of characters, get arrested, and find their way to themselves. And that is where I'm leaving it.

Carell and Knightley are magnificent in their respective roles, and the supporting cast flesh out the story nicely.
Writer/director Lorene Scafaria does a better job with this one than indie movie Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist, perhaps because she was directing this time so had more control, or likely that it wasn't Michael Cera in a lead role so didn't annoy me. Carell's Dodge is representative of probably half the world, someone who didn't quite get their life right and don't want to be forced into a new one just because the world is ending.

In fact what I liked about this film was that I can imagine if the world were to end that it would play out like this. People would stick to routine until the point of explosion, when they would riot or else commit suicide. Marriages would become dispensable and drugs entirely acceptable. Oh and children would get drunk - yeah that happens in this film.

This film is sad, dramatic, endearing, violent, and sweet. If you enjoy Carell in dramatic roles (Dan in Real Life, Little Miss Sunshine) and want to see Keira Knightley not in a period drama I think you'll love this film as much as I did.

The Fighter ☆☆☆☆

I'm slowly starting to suspect that David O'Russell may be some sort of genius. I watched Silver Linings Playbook (and gave it a rather good review here) back in November and adored the way he brought the difficult subject material of mental health to the screen in such a way that it is now much easier to talk about it - to identify with different members of the family that were portrayed.

The genius lies in the way he can bring actors out of themselves and truly become the character. He did it with Jennifer Lawrence (who is an astonishing talent anyway) and Bradley Cooper in Silver Linings, and he also achieved another amazing family in 2010's The Fighter.

Now the only reason I have not given this film a full five stars is because the subject matter - boxing - is not entirely my cup of tea so I'm not itching to watch it again. But it is most certainly brilliant.

The Fighter is the true story of boxer 'Irish' Micky Ward and his crack addicted brother, former boxer Dicky Ecklund, and their quest to make Micky a prize fighter.
It is half movie half documentary as it begins with the filming of Dicky and his 'comeback' by HBO - who are actually making a film about crack addiction. It follows the few ups and huge amount of downs faced by the Ward family, their dysfunction, and those who surround them as Micky tries to win fights while his family are at each others throats.

What this film really showcases, as Silver Linings does too, is family dysfunction and the bonds that are held by blood. In The Fighter Micky (played brilliantly by Mark Wahlberg) has to contend with a brother who is nine years older than himself and therefore an obvious childhood hero, but who has fallen so far off the pedestal with his addiction - a pedestal that their mother, Alice, has kept Dicky on.

The two Oscar winning performances in this film are thoroughly deserved - Christian Bale is just extraordinary as Dicky, going from crack addiction, through prison to coming out the other end a better man....? I'm not spoiling it for those who don't know the real story. But seriously his performance alone is worth watching this film for, and there are an abundance of reasons to watch this film.
Melissa Leo, now I had never heard of her until she swore upon receipt of her Oscar for this role, but blimey can she act. She was ABHORRENT as the mother/manager of Micky - you'll know what I mean, all the women in this family are excruciating at times. On the other hand she was a normal proud mother, someone who couldn't quite let go of her role in her boys lives and didn't want to be sidelined.

Amy Adams was nominated but did not win for her role as Micky's girlfriend, one of many catalysts in his life for taking steps to ensure he would be a real boxer and not just someone to be used to move other fighters up the tables. Adams' performance was great but out of her and Leo it was definitely Leo's to lose. Amy Adams always seemed to get the chirpy girl roles, even in the indie movies (Junebug, love that film) but here she is utterly believable as the waitress who wants her boyfriend to succeed even if it means taking a chunk out of one of his sisters.

The rest of the supporting cast are also fantastic, its as though the film really was a documentary of the lives of this huge family and their friends. Everyone in it is worth watching. Which is why I found it sad that Wahlberg didn't get at least a nomination for his performance.

Personally to me Jesse Eisenberg was playing an exaggerated version of himself in The Social Network so why did he get the nod where Wahlberg was snubbed? I don't know, its all personal taste I guess. All I know is that I'm not going to watch The Social Network again but I'll probably watch The Fighter.

At the end of the day, David O'Russell is a genius. He got me to enjoy a film about boxing which has happened only once before with Somebody Up There Likes Me - and that was because I am more than a little in love with the late great Paul Newman. He once more pushed Christian Bale's boundaries with health and fitness, and brought Melissa Leo to the forefront of great movie making.
This was just an utterly brilliant film, I definitely recommend it even if you think boxing is the last thing you want to watch. But this isn't a film about boxing really, it is about family, and David O'Russell has a gift when it comes to family.