Film Review: NINJA ASSASSIN (2009)

Director: James McTeigue
Running time: 99 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 18

Genre: Action/Adventure/Martial Arts
UK release date 22nd January 2010

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 31st January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I do like a good martial arts film; I remember the Bruce Lee classics with great affection. Of the more recent crop, I’m not sure I like any of them, but I live in hope, and so I came to Ninja Assassin. It’s certainly not in the class of the Bruce Lee films and there is far too much CGI gore for my liking, but I’ll tell you more of my thoughts later. Here’s a brief summary first (summary haters please conceal yourselves in the shadows while I write the next paragraph).

We are told the story of Raizo, who, from a young boy, was brought up to be a Ninja. In his youth he formed a friendship that could not last and, thanks to his Ninja clan it ended tragically. Having grown into a lethal assassin, Raizo escapes the clan but they are always just one step behind him. Meanwhile, researcher, Mika Coretti is working on a series of mysterious deaths that she puts down to the work of a Ninja clan. Her boss, Ryan Maslow is sceptical but allows her to continue. As she digs deeper her life becomes threatened and a member of the clan is sent to kill her. Saved by Raizo, who has been watching her, the pair is now on the run… I won’t say any more as I don’t want to give too much away.

The plot, on the face of it, isn’t too bad; unfortunately the way it has been filmed has made it all a bit on the bloodbath side of gory. Gratuitous use of CGI has taken so much of the skill of the artists and stunt guys that it all looks a bit too fake for my liking. Performance wise; Rain as Raizo, Naomie Harris as Mika Coretti and Ben Miles as Ryan Maslow are all adequate without being stretched.

I guess if you like a lot of violence and blood and don’t mind that it’s mostly achieved by the use of CGI then this is the film for you. For me, because the plot does hold a little water and, bloodbath scenes excluded, it did have a little entertainment value, I’ll let it squeak over the 5/10 barrier. Over all, not recommended unless you’re into extreme violence and lots and lots of blood.

My score: 5.6/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1186367/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1198524-ninja_assassin/
Official Site: http://ninja-assassin-movie.warnerbros.com/dvd/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi2358117401/

Film Review: WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE (2009)

Director: Spike Jonze
Running time: 101 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): PG

Genre: Drama/Book Adaptation
UK release date 11th December 2009

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 30th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

First of all, I had better say for the record that I have never read Maurice Sendak’s much loved book of the same title published in 1963. It’s just one of those that never crossed my path. The film, well, it didn’t really strike a chord with me (which I’ll probably get a lot of stick for) but hey, you can’t like everything. But more of that later, here’s a very brief summary first (summary haters please have a snowball fight while I write the next paragraph).

Max in a high spirited lad with a very active imagination who has a habit of throwing a tantrum when things don’t go his way. After an argument with his mother, Connie, he storms out of the house and runs away. The thing is, he also runs away in his head to a place across an ocean (yes, you guessed it) to Where the Wild Things Are. They take the form of giant furry monsters, for want of a better description, and Max befriends them. One of them, Carol, is just like Max, strong willed and prone to the odd tantrum or two. Max persuades them to let him be their king, but he soon finds that being a king is a bit harder than he first thought.

Now, technically I can’t fault this film, it’s beautifully shot with some excellent special effects used for the ’Wild Things’. My problem begins and ends with the character of Max, if you can’t identify with Max then the rest of it just falls apart I’m afraid. Don’t get me wrong, I thought it was a fine performance from Max Records as Max; it’s just that the character didn’t resonate with me.

It’s a shame because I was really looking forward to watching this and I feel a bit let down by it. I grew up in the countryside, climbed trees, grazed my knees and did all the fun things children do, but at the end of the day I was always happy to go home. I guess that’s where I differ from Max; I never had a need for somewhere to escape to. But I digress; I cannot say if it is a good representation of the book, I’m sure there are others out there who can answer that. For me, a bit of a disappointment and so not recommended.

My score: 5.4/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0386117/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/where_the_wild_things_are/
Official Site: http://wherethewildthingsare.warnerbros.com/dvd/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi3225158169/

Film Review: PROOF (2005)

Director: John Madden
Running time: 100 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

Genre: Drama
UK release date 24th February 2006

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 30th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

This is one of those films that I’ve seen before and remember the beginning, but can never remember the ending. Maybe it’s because I never got to the end before, but this time I did. This appealed to me because I studied mathematics (amongst other things) at university and thought it might strike a chord. It did, but not in the way I was expecting… But more of that later, here’s a brief summary before I give you my thoughts (summary haters please solve a couple of differential equations while I write the next paragraph).

Catherine’s father, Robert, has recently died, he was a great mathematician in his day but insanity had plagued his latter years. She had looked after him for the last five years of his life at their home in Chicago and is now coming to terms with his loss. A former student of his, Harold Dobbs (Hal), is looking through his notebooks hoping to find something of note. As the funeral approaches, Catherine’s sister, Claire, arrives from New York. She is a successful businesswoman and takes her slightly mentally unstable sister in hand. After the funeral a wake is held back at the house and Catherine gets together with Hal. The following day she gives him the key to her father’s desk where he finds just what he’s been looking for, a brilliant mathematical proof. The trouble is, Catherine claims she wrote it… there is a lot of doubt though. Has Catherine inherited her father’s genius, amongst other things, or did he write it in one of his more lucid periods? Well I guess I’d be giving too much away if I told you here.

First off, really great performances from both Gwyneth Paltrow as Catherine and Hope Davis as Claire. Jake Gyllenhaal was adequate as Hal and Anthony Hopkins was as good as ever in the flashbacks of Robert. Now, to the film, it is based on a play by David Auburn, who also co-wrote the screenplay, and I find films based on plays sometimes suffer; they can become a little claustrophobic. This, unfortunately is a case in point. Although an effort is made to broaden the scope of the story by taking parts of it outside, it’s still very much a character driven piece which I’m afraid I found a little dry.

The plot I found a little weak, it all boiled down to a small thing that could so easily have been resolved (I’m sorry I don’t want to say what it is… spoilers). I feel that too much time was taken to set up the characters and the back story and this didn’t quite work on film. So, over all, some great performances in what is essentially a play transferred to the big screen. Although the plot is weak in places and it is pretty slow, I still recommend it (just).

My score: 6.7/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0377107/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/proof/
Trailer (not great quality I’m afraid): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsgyghe-6O8&feature=player_detailpage

Film Review: GREEN ZONE (2010)

Director: Paul Greengrass
Running time: 115 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

Genre: Thriller/Action/Adventure/War
UK release date 12th March 2010

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 29th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

This film has had a bit of a slating by certain critics and I know it didn’t go down too well with many in the USA. Given all this controversy I decided it might be worth a viewing and I can see how it might get certain sections of society a bit riled up. What I saw was an entertaining film, a work of fiction based on recent events in Iraq. But more of what I think later, here’s a brief summary first (summary haters please search that building for WMDs while I write the next paragraph).

Roy Miller is a soldier tasked with investigating sites identified as holding Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) soon after the invasion of Iraq. After coming up empty each time he begins to question the validity of sources used to obtain this information. The top brass aren’t interested and just fob him off but a CIA operative, Martin Brown, is sympathetic to his dilemma. Whilst investigating a site (& coming up empty yet again) an Iraqi civilian approaches Miller’s unit and tells him that he has seen some ex-republican guard commanders meeting at a house nearby. This civilian ‘Freddy’ is brought along as an interpreter and they set off to intercept the meeting. Capturing one of the insurgents, they find out that a General Al Rawi was attending. Miller takes a notebook from the prisoner before a Special Forces unit, lead by Briggs, intercepts and takes the prisoner away. The notebook Miller has taken has the key to finding the General and others, with much darker, political, agenda’s would like to get hold of him for their own means. I’ll leave it there as I don’t want to give the whole plot away.

There have been several films made on the subject of this conflict, but this one stands out as one that questions the reasons for the war in the first place. The US government are portrayed as very uncaring and only out to cover up anything that might make them look bad in the eyes of the world. Yes, it’s all very political! Decent performances all round; Matt Damon did a decent job as Miller and Brendan Gleeson was pretty good as Martin Brown. Honourable mentions also go to; Greg Kinnear as Clark Poundstone, “Hello” to Jason Isaacs, with a tremendous moustache, as Briggs and Amy Ryan as journalist Lawrie Dayne. I also thought that Khalid Abdalla was excellent at the Iraqi civilian, Freddy.

Now, as I’ve already said this film is very political, but it is also a very good thriller with a lot of action thrown in for good measure. As a piece of entertainment I found it very adequate although I could see the plot being a bit over-complicated for some. At the end of the day I thought it was an entertaining thriller set against the aftermath of the Iraq war that asks some tough questions of those that brought the war about in the first place. Recommended.

My score: 7.1/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0947810/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1202804-green_zone/
Official Site: http://www.greenzonemovie.com/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi447415577/

Film Review: IRON MAIDEN: FLIGHT 666 (2009)

Directors: Sam Dunn & Scot McFadyen
Running time: 112 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

USA release date 21st April 2009

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 29th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I was checking out what was on TV the other night and found this tucked away after midnight. As a bit of a fan of Iron Maiden, (I’ve seen them a couple of times over the years) I thought I’d give it a go. What I found really surprised me, a very professional bunch of guys that happen to play some great heavy metal music (IMO). But more of my thoughts later, here’s a very brief summary first (summary haters please load the plane while I write the next paragraph).

Iron Maiden hardly ever get their records played on mainstream radio and are seldom featured on mainstream Music TV. And yet their albums always sell well and they have a massive fan base all over the world. As part of their 2008 Somewhere Back in Time tour they provided their own transport in order to reach some of these fans in far-flung parts of the world. The transport took the form on a 757 jet, modified to accommodate the entire crew, the band and all of their equipment. Of course the plane was piloted (amongst others) by their lead singer and qualified pilot, Bruce Dickinson. We see the logistics of moving such a huge operation through India, Australia, Japan, Los Angeles, Mexico, Central and South America, before ending in Canada. Interviews with the band, the crew and many of the fans intersperse live performances of many of their classic songs. It gives a real insight into the lives of the band members and just what life is like on the road these days for this group of musicians who, let’s face it, aren’t too young any more. But that’s enough summary, here’s what I think of it.

As a fan of Iron Maiden, of course I like this documentary. As a fan of film, I think it’s very well edited and gives a coherent chronological account of the international leg of the tour. The balance between the live performances and the interviews and the narration is just about right for me. It may be a little long for those that aren’t fans of the band, but I guess if you’re not a fan then you wouldn’t choose to watch it. So, over all, a definite recommendation for fans of Iron Maiden, but maybe give it a miss if you’re not.

For those that are fans, what follows is a list of live tracks included in the film:

“Aces High”, “Transylvania”, “Wrathchild”, “Moonchild”, “2 Minutes to Midnight”, “Revelations”, “The Trooper”, “For the Greater Good of God”, “Number of the Beast", “Wasted Years”, “Can I Play with Madness”, “Powerslave”, “Run to the Hills”, “Heaven Can Wait”, “Fear of the Dark”, “Iron Maiden”, “Rime of the Ancient Mariener”, “Hallowed Be Thy Name”

My score: 8.3/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1361558/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/iron-maiden-flight-666/

Film Review: BLACK SWAN (2010)

Director: Darren Aronofsky
Running time: 108 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK Release date: 21st January 2011

Watched at the cinema Friday 28th November 2010.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

Having heard many good things about this film I thought it was about time I checked it out. At first I wasn’t too sure, but as the drama unfolded, I really got into the story and found myself transfixed by the end. But more of my thoughts later, here’s a brief summary first (summary haters please wait in the wings while I write the next paragraph).

Young ballerina Nina Sayers has been chosen to play the lead in Swan Lake. The production’s director, Thomas Leroy, has chosen her because she can play the white Swan perfectly, but he wants her to show more passion when she dances the part of the Black Swan. As she strives to achieve this level of performance we witness quite a dramatic change in her that totally alters her personality. She also has to contend with a rival dancer, Lily, who Thomas has put as her alternate (I guess the equivalent of an understudy in a play). Add to this the decline of Beth Macintyre, an experienced dancer that Nina admired and the attentions of her overbearing mother, Erica, and you can see she has a lot to contend with. Not wishing to give too much away, I’ll leave my brief summary there.

There is much to admire in this film, Darren Aronofsky certainly knows how to get a performance out of his cast. He also knows how to tell a story, I couldn’t fault the filmmaking; it’s great to look at, all topped off with a great performance from Natalie Portman as Nina Sayers. Also worthy of note are; Mila Kunis as Lily, Vincent Cassel as Thomas Leroy, Barbara Hershey as Erica Sayers and Winona Ryder as Beth Macintyre.

I very much like the use of music through this film; the themes from Swan Lake are throughout and only add to the enjoyment of the piece. I love the way the line is blurred between reality and the dark place Nina is trying to find inside herself. All this is brilliantly done, but I have just one problem, I find it very hard to find any likable characters in this film. Although I found myself rooting for Nina at the end, I never really found her character particularly likable. Having said that, it’s still a brilliant film with some great performances and one I highly recommend.

My score: 8.3/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0947798/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/black_swan_2010/
Official Site: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/blackswan/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi3985807385/

Film Review: SOLOMON KANE (2010)

Director: Michael J. Bassett
Running time: 100 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date 19th February 2010

Watched on Sky+ Monday 24th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I saw this film last year at the cinema and quite enjoyed it. It has now made it to TV and I thought it was worth a second viewing… Here’s what I thought second time around. ‘Solomon Kane’ is based on a character created by Robert E. Howard, the writer who also created the, ‘Conan the Barbarian’ in the 1930’s. So as you can guess, I was quite keen to see what the filmmakers have done with him. It is the 1600’s, and Solomon Kane, who left his home at a young age having argued with his father and having thrown his brother from a cliff, is the captain of as ship in North Africa seeking treasure. What he finds is not what he bargained for; he finds the devil’s reaper who tells him that because of his evil ways, his soul was forfeit. Not wanting to go to hell, Kane denounces violence and vows never to kill again before escaping. That’s the set-up and here’s a brief summary before I give you my thoughts (summary haters please pray for redemption while I write the next paragraph).

Back in England, Solomon is staying at a monastery when Father Michael asks him to leave. He has had a vision and it’s time for Solomon to move on. With great reluctance Solomon leaves and heads west, towards his home. He is attacked on the road but is rescued by William Crowthorn and his family, wife Katherine, oldest son, Edward, younger son, Samuel and daughter, Meredith. They travel on together and Solomon begins to form a bond with them, particularly with Meredith and the young Samuel. Meanwhile, a band of warriors lead by a mysterious masked man is stalking the land, taking everyone they see as slaves or turning them, by evil magic, into soldiers. The family come across a place where some people had tried to burn a witch; everyone was dead with their eyes burnt out. They find a girl, the only survivor. Taking her with them, they continue on their journey, not realising that she is, in fact, the witch. Solomon discovers the deceit but the witch escapes, but not before marking Meredith. The family are then caught by the band of warriors and Meredith kidnapped. Enraged, Solomon now breaks his vow and kills as many of them as he can. Fatally wounded, William tells Solomon that he can redeem himself if he saves Meredith. This is now Solomon’s mission, but does he have the strength of will to carry it out? That’s enough summary for now.

Although quite slowly paced, I found this film very entertaining, the action sequences were very well done, the dialogue well paced and the special effects were excellent. I thought the mix of action and fantasy was very well judged, the balance was about right for me. Very good performances from James Purefoy as Solomon Kane, the late Pete Postlethwaite as William Crowthorn, Rachel Hurd-Wood as Meredith Crowthorn, Patrick Hurd-Wood as Samuel Crowthorn, Jason Flemyng as Malachi and Max von Sydow as Josiah Kane.

I suppose you can’t help but compare this film with the Conan the Barbarian films. I found it stood up well, set in a time that people can relate to and with much more dialogue, it’s very different, but I can see in the hand of Robert E. Howard there. Over all, it’s a very well made, even paced film with some very good performances, some great fight scenes and a great hero. I really enjoyed it… Recommended.

My score: 7.2/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0970452/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/solomon_kane/
Official Site: http://www.solomonkane.com/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi3791717401/

Film Review: CLEANER (2007)

Director: Renny Harlin
Running time: 88 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

USA release date: 27th May 2008 (DVD Premiere)

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 23rd January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I watched this on the recommendation of a friend and, to be honest, he owes me 88 minutes of my life back. It’s a crime drama set against the backdrop of the world of forensic clean-up. The guys that clean up what’s left after the body has been removed. I’ll give you my thoughts after this brief summary (summary haters please stay behind the tape while I clean up the next paragraph).

Tom Cutler is a retired cop who is now making a career out of cleaning up crime scenes. His wife was killed some years ago and he lives with his teenage daughter, Rose. He turns up to the scene of a murder to find nobody at home but a key has been left for him. Having completed the job he returns home only to find he still has the key. Going back the next day he’s surprised to find the wife, Ann Norcut, at home holding a children’s birthday party. He asks if he can speak to her husband, but she says he is out. At this point he tries to cover his tracks, realising that it might be a set-up. He hides the evidence he collected but things are about to turn bad for the former cop. His ex-partner, Eddie Lorenzo, gets in touch and Tom takes the opportunity to ask him about the case. He denies all knowledge, but the investigating officer, another former colleague, Jim Vargas, is slightly more forthcoming. The press have, by now, got hold of the story that Ann Norcut’s husband is missing and Tom is between a rock and a hard place. Not everyone is telling the truth and this can only mean trouble.

A very complicated plot does not help this film. It strikes me the filmmakers are trying a little too hard to be clever and failing to hit the mark. The performances were OK, but nothing to write home about; Samuel L. Jackson wasn’t really stretched as Tom Cutler, Ed Harris had a stroll in the park as Eddie Lorenzo and Eva Mendes was nothing particularly special as Ann Norcut. Honourable mentions should go to Luis Guzmán as Det. Jim Vargas, Keke Palmer who I thought was actually pretty good as Rose Cutler and it was also nice to see Robert Forster as Arlo Grange.

It was almost like watching one of those old Philip Marlowe movies where Marlowe was a crime scene clean-up guy instead of a Private Eye. It certainly has that feel, but with nothing like the style it needed to carry it off. Over all I found this one pretty disappointing and I can see why it went straight to DVD… NOT recommended.

My score: 5.2/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0896798/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cleaner/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/screenplay/vi3049128217/

Film Review: THE KING’S SPEECH (2010)

Director: Tom Hooper
Running time: 118 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK Release date: 7th January 2011

Watched at the cinema Saturday 22nd November 2010.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I always like a film based on true events, it seems that real life has just as many amazing stories as pure fiction. This is a case in point. A man who stammers has to rise above his affliction, with the help and support of those around him, to speak for a nation. It’s quite a remarkable film. Here’s a short summary first before I give you my thoughts (summary haters please wait outside while I get through the next speech… sorry, paragraph).

King George VI, known as Bertie to his friends and family, was not born to be king. That honour went to his older brother David, or King Edward VIII, after their father George V passed away. Unfortunately, David finds he cannot carry out his duties due to events in his private life (quite a scandal actually) and so Bertie has to step in. A long time before this he had started seeing an unorthodox speech therapist named Lionel Logue. He had always stammered and found it particularly hard to speak in public. With the help and support of Logue, his wife, Elizabeth and his daughters another Elizabeth (later to become Queen Elizabeth II) and Margaret; this film depicts how he overcame his problems to give a very important speech live on the radio to the entire British Empire (as it was then) just after the outbreak of World War II. It also gives an insight into the reasons for Edward’s abdication and the effect it has on the nation. But I think that’s enough summary for now.

I found this a totally engaging film from start to finish. As a Brit, I was taught about the abdication of Edward VII in school, but I never knew about George VI’s stammer or the work of Lionel Logue. Of course, the film is most noted for the performance of Colin Firth as King George VI (Bertie to his friends), which is totally justified, he is outstanding! Also worthy of note are both Geoffrey Rush as Lionel Logue and Helena Bonham Carter as Queen Elizabeth. Honourable mentions go to Derek Jacobi as Archbishop Cosmo Lang, Michael Gambon as King George V, Guy Pearce as King Edward VIII, Claire Bloom as Queen Mary and Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill.

Apart from the performances, I thought it was an excellent screenplay by David Seidler. Nicely directed by Tom Hooper, it depicts the period perfectly. This is a film with many laughs, more than a lot of modern ‘comedies’, IMO, which serve to lift the mood of what is, after all, rather serious events in world history. Over all, brilliant performances, a great story and a few laughs along the way… who could ask for more? Very highly recommended.

My score: 9.3/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1504320/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_kings_speech/
Official Site: http://www.kingsspeech.com/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi806197529/

Film Review: EVERYBODY’S FINE (2009)

Co-Writer/Director: Kirk Jones
Running time: 96 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 12A

USA release date: 4th July 2009

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 22nd January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

This is based on the 1990 Giuseppe Tornatore film “Stanno Tutti Bene” which I’ll admit I haven’t seen. It’s has a gentle pace that slowly unfolds the story of a man trying to make a connection with his children after his wife has sadly died. Here’s a very brief summary before I tell you my thoughts (summary haters please look after the garden while I’m away writing the next paragraph – thank you).

Frank Goode is waiting for his children to come and visit. It is the first time the family has all been together since his wife passed away eight months ago. Giving one excuse or another, the children all cancel, but Frank is determined to see them. He doesn’t like flying, and has a lung condition that prevents it anyhow, and so he gets on a train and a bus and goes to see all four of them. They are all in different parts of the United States and so it is quite a trip for a man of his age. The four children are; David, an artist in New York, Amy, an advertising executive, Robert, a musician on tour with an orchestra and Rosie, an actress in Las Vegas. I won’t go into details here, but none of them are telling Frank the entire truth and he soon realises that it’s going to be tougher than he thought to connect with them all.

Although it has quite a slow pace, I don’t mind because it gives the viewer a chance to become invested in the characters, particularly Frank. I love the way that he always sees them as little children rather than the grown-ups that are before him. Great performances all round, particularly from Robert De Niro as Frank; he reminded me what a fine actor he really is. Drew Barrymore did a fine job as Rosie, as did Kate Beckinsale as Amy and Sam Rockwell as Robert. You may think I’ve forgotten the other son, David, well, that’s a mystery I’ll leave for you.

The gentle pace may not be for everyone, I think you have to be in the mood to watch this one, but if you are, it’s worth it. There is a really good pay-off at the end which I found both satisfying and heart-warming. I like the cinematography and it has a very appropriate soundtrack, including a song by Paul McCartney that I haven’t heard before. It’s not perfect and it won’t be to everyone’s taste, but I quite enjoyed it… Recommended.

My score: 7.1/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0780511/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1211197-everybodys_fine/
Official Site: http://www.everybodysfinemovie.com/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi2944533529/

Film Review: MY COUSIN VINNY (1992)

Director: Jonathan Lynn
Running time: 115 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date: 17th July 1992

Watched on Sky+ Monday 17th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

There are very few comedies I find funny, if you read enough of my reviews you’ll eventually find out which ones I like. This is very much one of them! For me is has everything, great acting, an excellent script and, most importantly, it’s funny. But more of my thoughts later, here’s a brief summary first (summary haters please consider yourselves in contempt while I write the next paragraph).

Two college students, Bill Gambini and Stan Rothenstein, from Brooklyn are on their way to LA via the South when they stop off in a small town in Alabama. They are mistakenly identified as the murderers of a clerk in a small store they had visited. Unable to afford a lawyer, they turn to Bill’s cousin, Vinny Gambini, who has only been practicing law for six weeks. Vinny has brought his fiancée, Mona Lisa Vito, with him but he is determined to win the case on his own. Judge Chamberlain Haller is suspicious of Vinny’s credentials but allows him to defend the two boys. Vinny immediately falls fowl of the accepted procedure in court and finds himself in contempt (more than once). The prosecution seem to have a strong case but Vinny is determined to find as many holes in it as he can. Will Vinny prove the boys innocence? Will the judge discover he is only a novice? Will Vinny ever get a decent night's sleep? All these questions and many more will be answered… but not here.

First of all, hats off to Jonathan Lynn, I love the way he just lets the story unfold and the way he allows the characters to develop. Yes, there are one or two clunky bits, but for the most part I also very much liked the dialogue. Finally, great casting, I couldn’t imagine anyone else apart from Joe Pesci playing the part of Vinny. Also, I thought Marisa Tomei was excellent as Mona Lisa Vito, a role for which she won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar, and it was great to see Fred Gwynne (yes Herman Munster) as Judge Chamberlain Haller. Honourable mentions should also go to; Ralph Macchio as Bill, Mitchell Whitfield as Stan and Lane Smith as Jim Trotter III, the prosecutor.

I may be biased, but I saw this film many years ago and fell in love with it then. It’s one of those I always get great pleasure from watching. If anything, it is a little long, but I can forgive that, I think when you’re invested in the story the time factor becomes less important. Over all, a very well scripted film with some really great comic performances and one which I highly recommend.

My score: 8.2/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0104952/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/screenplay/vi2744844569/

Film Review: SEX & DRUGS & ROCK & ROLL (2010)

Directors: Mat Whitecross
Running time: 101 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date: 8th January 2010

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 16th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

Back in 1977 while punk was just getting going, a band called Ian Dury and the Blockheads released an album called ‘New Boots and Panties’. A few years later, feeling a bit nostalgic, I bought said album really cheap. I still have it today; in fact I’m listening to it as I type this review. Now, onto the film, it’s a biopic all about Ian Dury, his fight against disability and his rise to fame. Here’s a brief summary before I tell you my thoughts (summary haters please mingle with the audience while I write the next paragraph).

Ian Dury was an entertainer, or that’s what he always said he was interviewed. He had been struck down with polio when he was young and this left him withered down his left side. When we first see him, he is with another band who are rehearsing downstairs while his wife, Betty, gives birth upstairs. Later, after their last gig, he meets Denise Roudette, with whom he has an affair. They move in together and a while later, his son, Baxter, comes to stay with them. As Ian puts a new band together, including musician and songwriter Chaz Jankel, Baxter struggles to come to terms with the chaotic lifestyle he has been thrown into. The film plots his rise to fame and the effect it has on Ian and those around him. It also tells of his early life in flashback, his relationship with his father, Bill, and his unhappy childhood in an institution. I won’t say any more as I don’t want to give too much away.

Made in a very theatrical style, this film cuts from live action to animation, to live musical performances and back again. It all sounds a bit chaotic, but, for me at least, it works. At the centre is a really great performance from Andy Serkis as Ian Dury, although he doesn’t particularly look like him, he has all his mannerisms down to a tee. I also thought Bill Milner played the part of Baxter Dury very well, it can’t have been an easy part for a young actor and I thought he coped with it pretty well. Similarly, Wesley Nelson played the part of Young Ian Dury very well. I should also give honourable mentions to Olivia Williams as Ian’s wife, Naomie Harris as Denise Roudette, Tom Hughes as Chaz Jankel, and nice cameos from both Ray Winstone as Bill Dury (Ian’s dad) and Noel Clarke as Desmond.

Although Ian Dury wasn’t the easiest person to get along with (for those that don't know, he passed away in 2000) and consequently not the nicest man in the world, I found this quite an enjoyable film to watch. I can’t say I’m a huge fan of Ian Dury and the Blockheads, but I do recognise that Ian was a very talented chap and I always respected him as an artiste. Later in his career he appeared in quite a few films, not a bad actor. Over all, it’s quite an interesting film, very touching at times but also quite bold in its approach. I know it won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, but still… recommended.

My score: 7.1/10

LINKS:
IMDb Site: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1393020/
Official Site: http://www.sex-drugs-rock-roll-thefilm.com/news/16/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi1506083865/

Film Review: THE BOOK OF ELI (2010)

Directors: Albert Hughes & Allen Hughes
Running time: 107 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date: 15th January 2010

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 15th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I saw this when it came out in the cinema and quite liked it. Now it has come round on TV I thought it might be worth a second viewing. This film is about the quest of one man to get a book to the place it’s supposed to be, to use his words. Now, I’m not a religious man but I can see the value this book might have in a world torn apart by war. It is a post-apocalyptic world, thirty years after it was destroyed. Those that were not killed scratch a living out of what’s left, and many have turned to cannibalism. Many were blinded by the flashes in the sky but survived. As stated in the film, after the war people destroyed the bible blaming it for what happened, but Eli has the last remaining copy. Now you know the set-up, here’s a brief summary before I give you my thoughts (summary haters please don’t touch Eli… not if you want to keep your hands that is… and wait here while I write the next paragraph).

Always moving west, Eli is a loner on the road. Like everyone out there he knows it’s a very dangerous place. He kills animals for food and gets clean water where he can. When set upon by hijackers but Eli is a ferocious fighter and thus far has come out on top. One day he wanders into a small town run by Carnegie, a determined man who has been sending out men in search of a particular book, the very one Eli has in his possession. Carnegie has a mother and daughter, Claudia and Solara in his entourage, Claudia was blind from birth, but Solara is sighted. In trying to persuade Eli to stay, as he can see the value of a man who can fight like him, he sends Solara to his room and she discovers the book. Carnegie finds out about the book and sends his henchman, Redridge to get it but Eli has already gone. Eli starts heading west again only to find Solara following him. Redridge wants Solara and makes a deal with Carnegie to get the book in exchange for her. And now the chase is on, will Eli and Solara escape or will they be caught? I think that’s enough for now.

This film was shot in a similar way to 300 (2006) with a kind of washed out comic book feel to it and, for me, it looked a bit too artificial in places. A lot of the landscapes were CGI which didn’t come over too well on TV. Great performances from all of the leading cast, Denzel Washington as Eli, Gary Oldman as Carnegie, Mila Kunis as Solara, Ray Stevenson as Redridge and Jennifer Beals as Claudia. Honourable mentions also go to Frances de la Tour and Michael Gambon as Martha and George, a mad old couple who Eli and Solara find on their travels.

Although it’s a fairly straightforward story I found it a very entertaining and compelling film to watch, the 107 minutes went by pretty quickly, which is always a good sign. It did get a bit bogged down in the middle, but redeemed itself with a totally unexpected twist at the end. Don’t worry; I’m not going give that away here. Also a haunting soundtrack backs up the visuals to great effect. Over all, although it’s not been well received everywhere and although not perfect, it’s a good effort… Recommended.

My score: 7.3/10

LINKS:
IMDb Site: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1037705/
Official Site: http://www.sonypictures.net/movies/bookofeli/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi862650905/

Film Review: CRAZY HEART (2009)

Director: Scott Cooper
Running time: 107 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date: 5th March 2010

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 15th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I wasn’t too sure about this one at first. I’m not a great fan of country music for a start, but I do know a good tune when I hear one and those guys at the Academy can’t always be wrong, so I thought I’d give it a shot. I’m really glad I did! It’s a really great film with some cracking songs and some truly great performances. But more of my praise later, here’s a very brief summary first (summary haters please help unload the gear while I write the next paragraph - thanks).

Bad Blake is a country singer whose best days are behind him. He plays small bars, bowling alleys; anywhere he can get a gig really. Like many on hard times he has turned to alcohol to ease the pain, but it is clearly doing him no good. While playing in Santa Fe he meets journalist, Jean Craddock, who he begins a relationship with. She has a young son, Buddy, who takes to Bad and it seems things a looking up for the Country star. His agent calls him and tells him he has a gig in Phoenix, opening for his former protégé, and a very successful star, Tommy Sweet. At first he’s hesitant, but finally agrees to do the show. He talks to Tommy and Tommy offers to help him out by paying for any new songs Bad has written. The trouble is Bad hasn’t written any new material in quite a long time. On his way back to see Jean, Bad has an accident and is laid up for several weeks. During this time he begins to write again, but his alcoholism is about to rear its ugly head. Is Jean his salvation? Well, I guess that would be giving the game away, so I won’t tell you here.

First of all the music, as I said at the beginning, I’m not a fan of Country music, but I do know a good tune when I hear one, and there are several on show here. The original songs by both Stephen Bruton and T-Bone Burnett are spot on. So good in fact that I bought the soundtrack album. One thing I did note was that there is no incidental music which I found made the film a little sparse. Lots of dialogue can get a bit tedious without anything to break it up. Having said that, I guess it makes the viewer appreciate the performances of the actors more.

I am not surprised that Jeff Bridges won the Oscar for Best Actor for his part as Bad Blake; he is truly excellent in this. I must also give praise to Maggie Gyllenhaal as Jean Craddock; I thought she was really good as well. I will also give honourable mentions to; Colin Farrell as Tommy Sweet and Robert Duvall as Bad’s friend Wayne (he was also one of the Producers by the way). Both Jeff Bridges and Colin Farrell performed the songs themselves which, I think was, first of all, brave, and secondly, excellently done! Both could have a second career some day.

Over all, a really well made film with some great cinematography, the use of the landscape of New Mexico really stood out. Of course, the performances all round were excellent and only added to my enjoyment. It did fall a little flat in the third quarter where the story concentrates on the relationship between Bad and Jean, but I guess that’s because there are no songs in that part. Having said that, this is still a film I would still recommend to anyone! If you haven’t seen it, please do, it’s well worth a look.

My score: 8.4/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1263670/
Official Site: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/crazyheart/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi1217594393/

Film Review: THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS (2009)

Director: Grant Heslov
Running time: 94 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date: 6th November 2009

Watched on Sky+ Monday 10th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

Having heard the journalist, Jon Ronson, who wrote the book on which this film is based interviewed a couple of times I was intrigued to see this one. Unfortunately, these interviews were all broadcast around the time of the cinema release and I never got the opportunity to see it. Fortunately, it arrived on the BBC just over a year later and so my curiosity was finally satisfied. My thoughts later, but here’s a short summary first (summary haters please stare at those goats over there while I write the next paragraph… sorry, I couldn’t resist that one).

When journalist, Bob Wilton, is separated from his wife in 2002, he decides to go to Iraq to prove himself to her. Here he meets Lyn Skip Cassady, an ex-member of the U.S. Army’s New Earth Army. What’s that I hear you say, well, it’s a special unit set up in the 1980’s to look into using psychic powers as a means of winning a war. The unit was headed by Bill Django who had spent many years studying the ways of the more free-spirited Americans. As Bob and Lyn travel through Iraq Bob learns more about the work of the unit and how he may be involved in the secret mission Lyn is currently on. In flashback we learn that Lyn had a nemesis back at the unit, Larry Hooper, who was to turn up again before the end of the mission.

Although I did find a lot of the humour in this one quite funny, I did find the story a little weak. It’s a pretty well made film with some good performances but I felt a little let down by the plot, particularly the end. Performance wise, George Clooney never missed a beat as Lyn Skip Cassady, Ewan McGregor was ok as Bob Wilton, but he wasn’t really stretched, Jeff Bridges did a great impression of ‘The Dude’ as Bill Django and Kevin Spacey again wasn’t at all stretched as Larry Hooper.

I found it funny that a film starring Ewan McGregor featured an Army unit that called itself ‘The Jedi’. And there are plenty of other little jokes like this throughout the film. If it wasn’t for George Clooney and Jeff Bridges I guess I would have given a lower score, but they just about pushed it to a 6.5 for me. So, over all, if slightly unsatisfying, it’s still worth seeing for Messer’s Clooney and Bridges alone… Recommended (just).

My score: 6.5/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1234548/
Official Site: http://www.themenwhostareatgoatsmovie.com/#home
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi309003545/

Film Review: TRAINSPOTTING (1996)

Director: Danny Boyle
Running time: 94 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 18

UK release date: 23rd February 1996

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 9th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

This is Danny Boyle’s second feature film and I must admit that by the time I’d seen this one I was convinced he was Scottish. Fortunately I know better now. This one’s all about drug addiction and the consequences of it. Sounds a drag, but believe me, it’s one of the most entertaining films you’ll ever see! But more on my thoughts later, here’s a very brief summary first (summary haters please go cold turkey in the back room while I write the next paragraph).

Set, for the main part, in Scotland, this film tells the story of Renton and his friends, Spud, Sick Boy, Tommy and Begbie. It tells of their flirtations with heroin and all that brings. How they rip each other off, ruin each other’s relationships, get high, get low, get sick, get off the drug, get back on it again… it’s all here. Eventually Renton decides to get off it entirely and moves to London, but that is far from the end of it. I’m going to leave it deliberately brief and vague because this is a dish best served without too much prior knowledge my friend.

First of all, it’s a great script by John Hodge based on the novel by Irvine Welsh; add to that the directorial skill of Danny Boyle and you have a bit of a masterpiece on your hands. There are times where things do get a bit surreal, but I think it all adds to the brilliant execution of this tale. Really great performances all round, particularly from; Ewan McGregor as Renton, Ewen Bremner as Spud, Jonny Lee Miller as Sick Boy, Kevin McKidd as Tommy and Robert Carlyle as the psycho, Begbie.

There are scenes in this film that are quite hard to watch but I believe it is all included to show just how real the effects of drug addiction are. There is also a lot of humour in this film which, kind of, plays against the grain in a couple of places, but it didn’t detract from my enjoyment too much. Over all, with an iconic soundtrack, some great performances, a tremendous script and some brilliant filmmaking, this one is very, very highly recommended.

My score: 9.2/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0117951/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/screenplay/vi596088857/

Film Review: SHERLOCK HOLMES (2009)

Director: Guy Ritchie
Running time: 123 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 12A

UK Release Date: 26th December 2009

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 9th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I originally saw this one at the cinema in early 2010; it was a small room, packed out and not much of an enjoyable viewing experience. It has now made it to the small screen and I am able to watch it in comfort… so much better! Now, I don’t know if it was the better viewing conditions, or the fact I have a better sound system than my local cinema, but I enjoyed this one a tad more second time around. But more of my thoughts later, here’s a brief summary first (summary haters please walk Gladstone, the dog, while I write the next paragraph).

Holmes and Watson occupy rooms at 221b Baker Street, however, their idyll is soon to be disturbed because Watson has got engaged and plans to move out to be with his new bride. It’s Victorian London and they currently have more pressing matters, the game’s afoot! We begin with Holmes and Watson closing in on Lord Blackwood, who is in the throws of performing a satanic ritual in the catacombs below London. They successfully apprehend him and he is arrested by Inspector Lestrade. Sentenced to death, Lord Blackwood calls for Holmes and warns him that there will be four more murders. Having been hanged and pronounced dead, by Watson, his body is interred. The following day his tomb has been opened from the inside and he has been seen wandering about the graveyard. It seems Holmes and Watson have another mystery to solve. At this point, Irene Adler, a former adversary of Holmes appears on the scene and commissions him to find a man involved in the Blackwood case. This will lead them to a conspiracy that threatens the bedrock of British society. She is in the employ of a very mysterious stranger, a professor of some kind. I think that’s enough to whet you appetite… I don’t want to give the game away.

A very well made film with plenty of action and some really great comedic moments. I loved the interplay between Holmes and Watson; they were almost like an old married couple at times, which was really amusing. Great performances from all of the leading cast, Robert Downey Jr. as Sherlock Holmes, Jude Law as Dr. John Watson, Rachel McAdams as Irene Adler, Mark Strong as Lord Blackwood, Eddie Marsan as Inspector Lastrade and Robert Maillet as Derdger, Holmes’s fighting nemesis.

I found this a most enjoyable film to watch second time around. The score, by Hans Zimmer was spot on and fitted the action on screen perfectly. Although the dialogue does get a little bogged down at times, there was still plenty to keep the viewer’s attention. The fight scenes, and one scene in particular featuring an explosion in slow motion were all excellent… hats off to the stunt and technical guys for those! Over all, very entertaining and well worth a viewing!... Recommended.

My score: 7.8/10

LINKS:
IMDb Site: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0988045/
Official Site: http://sherlock-holmes-movie.warnerbros.com/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi781780249/

Film Review: SHALLOW GRAVE (1994)

Director: Danny Boyle
Running time: 92 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 18

UK release date: 6th January 1995

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 8th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

This is the first feature film directed by Danny Boyle and I have seen it a few times now. I find it funny that when an artist becomes famous, people always look back at their early work, as if looking for the beginnings of that spark of genius. Me, well I just enjoy a well made film with some good performances and a decent plot. But more about my thoughts later, here’s a brief summary first (summary haters please hide in the attic and guard the cash).

Three young flatmates, Juliet Miller, a doctor, David Stephens, an accountant and Alex Law, a journalist, have a spare room and are looking for a new tenant. Having interviewed, and callously rejected, several applicants they finally settle on Hugo, a writer. He moves in and locks his door and that’s that last the trio see of him… alive that is. After a couple of days they break into his room to find him lying dead on his bed. Searching the room, Alex comes across a suitcase stuffed full of cash. After much debate it is decided to keep the cash and dispose of the body. At this point I’ll have to stop or I will give too much away, but needless to say, things don’t go exactly to plan.

Unfortunately this film was made in the nineties and the three main characters personify everything I hated about that era. They are greedy, arrogant and just about the most loathsome trio I would wish to meet. However, the story that’s played out on the screen is pretty good, so I stuck with it. Great performances all round, particularly from Christopher Eccleston who is brilliant as David, Ewan McGregor is particularly lithesome as Alex and Kerry Fox put in a good effort as Juliet.

As we’ve come to expect from Danny Boyle, this is a very well made film with great attention to detail. The star performance for me came from Christopher Eccleston; he gave us the full range of emotions here which made him stand out. If the three main characters weren’t quite so loathsome then maybe I would have given a higher score, but it’s definitely worth watching nonetheless… Recommended.

My score: 7.4/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0111149/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/screenplay/vi1328349977/

Film Review: FORBIDDEN PLANET (1956)

Director: Fred M. Wilcox
Running time: 98 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): PG

USA release date: 15th March 1956

Watched on DVD Wednesday 5th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

Having been laid up with flu for a few days I have been unable to watch any films. I had bought the 50th Anniversary Special Edition DVD as a gift to myself for Christmas. Having started watching it yesterday, it was clear I wasn’t going to be able to concentrate on it. This afternoon I felt slightly better and so decided to watch the rest. This old classic didn’t disappoint, I have seen it many times before and it’s always a pleasure to watch. But more of my thoughts later, here’s a brief summary first (summary haters please help those guys out and shoot at that monster thing attacking the spacecraft).

Late in the 22nd Century United Planet cruiser C57D is a year out from Earth base on the way to Altair for a special mission. They are to look for survivors from the Bellerophon expedition 20 years earlier. As they approach they are warned by Dr. Morbius, the last surviving member of the Bellerophon, to turn back. Of course they land and are met by Robbie the Robot, who takes Commander J. J. Adams, Lt. ‘Doc’ Ostrow M.D. and Lt. Jerry Farman to the residence. Here they meet Dr. Morbius and his daughter, the innocent ‘Alta’. Morbius explains that the crew of the Bellerophon had all met with a gruesome end and he and his daughter seemed immune to whatever it was that killed them. They later find out that an ancient civilisation, the Krell, had once inhabited the planet. They had left vast machines buried deep underground that Morbius was trying to unravel the secrets of. But there’s one vital bit of information, related to the Krell, Morbius is unaware of… I won’t say any more, don’t want to give too much away.

Although dated by today’s standards, I love the special effects in this film. It’s clear that a lot of time and thought went into them and it shows on the screen. I also love that big clunky robot, Robbie, an iconic figure from the era (which is before my time, by the way). Great performances all round; Walter Pidgeon is melodramatic as ever as Dr. Edward Morbius, Anne Francis as the naive Altaira ‘Alta’ Morbius, Leslie Nielsen reminded me of what a very good actor he was back then as Commander J. J. Adams, Warren Stevens as Lt. ‘Doc’ Ostrow M.D., Jack Kelly as Lt. Jerry Farman and not forgetting Robby the Robot as himself.

One problem with Science Fiction is that you always have to explain the advances in technology, society, science…etc before you can begin to tell the story. This film is no exception, a great deal of time is taken to explain how mankind has advanced and the things Morbius had discovered about the Krell, but I don’t mind all that. At the end of the day the purpose is to entertain and I think they struck just about the right balance here. The comic relief is provided by a little sub-plot involving the cook, who likes the odd Bourbon, and Robbie the Robot. Over all, it’s quite an intellectual film but one that is also very entertaining. Yes, the music is all futuristic and weird, but I’m sure you can forgive that… Highly recommended.

My score: 8.8/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0049223/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/screenplay/vi463995161/