Reviews

As someone whom has never read the graphic novel, I read a few of the reviews here and was afraid that I might find the plot incomprehensible. I am glad to say that I understood pretty much everything, and it was good.

Just like '300' and 'Sin City' the visual imagery in Watchmen is outstanding, with many scenes of breathtaking beauty, however unlike the aforementioned, Watchmen also makes excellent use of symbolism and repartition which enhance the impact of a storyline already laden with some deep examination of a range of human values. In places this is very subtle, and may be missed by those whom are used to a pure action fest, no more so than the impact and amazing irony present within the finale. In many ways Watchmen is like an art-house movie with a Hollywood budget... amazing.

That is not to say all is good. Whilst Jackie Earle Haley as the moral-psychopath Rorschach gives a performance that will surely yield an academy nomination, and Jeffrey Dean Morgan gives us a likewise consummate Comedian, the other characters are found lacking to a greater of lesser degree.

In addition, the film is nearly three bottom-aching hours long, which would be fine if there was no-nonsense. But with many extended ultra-slow gore shots and an unnecessarily long sex scene or three I think at least 15 minutes could have been chopped off without any loss, and they might have got a lower rating.

Some people moan about the soundtrack, but I thought it was used to a decent effect, and provided some (intentional) gallows humor in a film that is otherwise of an extremely dark tone.

All in all, a good film that could have been great if only for better casting and a shorter cut.

The chase scenes were interesting, the dialog was snappy and as always with Tarantino the cinematography and soundtrack was excellent. The trashy 80s movie touches like the somewhat cheesy acting, unexpected cuts and random bad production added to the fun.

Kurt Russell as 'Stuntman Mike' was the show stealer, but all the women accounted for themselves pretty well also.

But, perhaps because I watched the stand alone version rather than the grind-house double-bill Death Proof seemed to drag a little. Ultimately it felt about 30-45 minutes too long.

Overall a 6/10, but probably a whole lot better as it was originally intended.

Better than Lord of the Rings? Yup. Whilst the former had awesome special effects, great acting and a fun plot it was mainly action-centric, with other elements taking a seat on the back burner.

Stardust is much more of a mix. Romance, Knowing Humor, Action and plot, there really is something here for everyone. And the result is a film that although plainly fantasy, ends up feeling really human. There are only a couple of other films that I have felt this way about being Big Fish and the Shawshank Redemption.

As such, and despite the occasionally wonky special effects, and horrible Gervais 'cameo' any film that manages to draw me in to such an extent gets a 10.

When I first heard of Sunshine, I was cautiously optimistic. The good reviews both here and from the press further raised my hopes of a return to intelligent science fiction from the (sometimes fun but formulaic) action films masquerading as science fiction.

Unfortunately, it was not.

The science was poor, the characters were largely unemphatic and the blurry distortion scenes towards the end were laughably bad. You could think of it as a mix of Space 2001 with Event horizon, but taking the worst properties of each. The over gratuitous and long winded cinematic shots of 2001 and the boring characterization and the sci-fi cum horror of Event horizon.

It is a pity, because the first ten minutes look hopeful, and the acting and effects are good. However, at the end of the day the science, plot and character psychology are not really explored at more than a superficial level. The movie doesn't have anything else to fill up this gaping void.

Maybe there is an editors cut out there that adds 30 minutes of footage to make this a decent movie, but as it stands 5/10.

I read that the Chinese version is different, with more plot explanation and less nationalistic tendencies. What I review here is what I have seen (US version).

As the 'Last ever' Jet Li film I was hoping for something in the ilk of Crouching Tiger or perhaps Hero. While the wired fight scenes were decent, they were mostly without context and thus lacked any impact. Additionally none of the fight scenes were very imaginative; it was very much a case of seen it before.

Generally the plot of Chinese films comes across as rather obscure and this seems to be the same here. From what I could read into it the film was about the end of the 'old ways' and bringing together China to stop the corrupt and evil capitalists from taking over (especially Japan). The characterisation of these villains is paper thin though, lasting perhaps 3 minutes in the entire film.

In the middle of the film we see some attempt at building an emotional bridge with the viewer as the main character overcomes his own problems and reforms himself. This is never followed up properly though.

The sets, costumes and imagery are very well done and the acting is not bad (although its hard to tell with subtitles). I believe this was meant to be based on the truth of a great man, but like many 'true' stories it lacks punch.

Overall the film comes out as blatant state propaganda with decent fight scenes. 5/10

What do you get if you take a computer science student and a art house student and throw money at them ? Very probably something like Ultraviolet.

With seemingly random elements from pulp fiction mixed together, this could have turned out to be a fun romp like the matrix,. Unfortunately the special effects and fight scenes were well below par (most look like shots taken from a 3 year old video game). Also, there is a peculiar method of direction which stinks of 'art for arts sake', like a fresh media student. For example, at one point the camera zooms into violet's ear and emerges from a gun barrel. Laughable.

The plot and acting are no better.

On the plus side I did like the *ideas* of nano tech, dimensional portals and anti gravity, even if the implementation was poor. Also Violet looks quite nice in her skimpy costumes.

Overall this film is a real pity, because they must have spent a lot on the effects. If they had instead limited them and had a better plot/acting we might have had a decent film. As it is this is a waste of space. 3/10

Good fun The story of the Hogfather revolves around a fictional world named 'Discworld' and a group of beings trying to stop Hogswatch (the Discworld equivalent of Christmas). Opposing them are a bumbling group of wizards, a babysitter who is more than she appears, and the personification of death itself.

The story leads itself in a fantastical ride with something for both adults and children (although there is some violence in parts, so maybe not suitable for the very young or fragile).

Don't be fooled into thinking this is another Harry Potter clone though. This film (and the book) is far deeper. At its core, it raises questions about the nature of belief and the human condition itself (All in a fun way though).

As a fan of Pratchett's books, when I noticed the UK subscriber channel 'Sky One' had commissioned this live action mini-drama, I was both hopeful and fearful. Hopeful that Pratchett's unique meld of fantasy and parody would come across well, but fearful that the medium change or the 'suits' would rob all of it's worth.

Thankfully, the end result came a lot closer to my hopes than my fears.

One of my major fears was that the whole humor would be changed from the subtleness within the books to a crude slapstick. I am pleased to announce that although some slapstick has been added (on the part of the wizards) the subtle jokes and references are still there. As for the story; I felt it came across well, although there were a few moments where people who have not read the book may be left struggling.

The sets, effects and costumes are all of a decent quality considering it was 'made for TV'. The notable exception is the costume of Death and the other non-humans. Unfortunately, these were obviously not budgeted enough and appeared inanimate and 'plasticy'.

The cast did a decent job, as you would expect from this group of veteran TV actors. Above the rest, a special mention should be given to Marc Warren for his truly creepy representation of Teatime.

Overall, there is something here for everyone here. Whether Child or Adult, Fan or Neophyte there is fun to be had.

Lets hope they make some more.

The first rule about Revolver is, don't talk about Revolver.

Wait wrong film.

I hired this film on DVD expecting another lock-stock, but it ended up being a decent but flawed blend of snatch with fight club. As expected from this crew, the acting and technical areas were good but not amazing. Where films like this live or die is on the storyline and its twists/resolution.

These I would summarize as the film equivalent of a trip to a modern art gallery. Ie. some interesting pieces, but a lot of self indulgent pretentious tosh with no point but to convey a simple concept in an over complex and ultimately unsatisfying way.

If you generally 'get' complex plots then it's worth a watch, but don't expect a masterpiece.

7/10