FILM: Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (6/10)

Why did I watch it?
I saw Guy Ritchie's first take on the Sherlock Holmes story in 2009 at the cinema. It was a pretty fun outing for Robert Downey Jr. so I decided to give the follow-up a go, albeit at home this time around.

What's it all about?
Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law reprise their roles as Holmes and Watson respectively, with Guy Ritchie once more in the directors chair. This time around, new writers Kieran and Michele Mulroney plump for a story pitting Holmes against his traditional nemesis, Professor Moriarty. Having moved out of Baker Street to get married, Watson is pulled back into Holmes' investigation by Moriarty, who targets Holmes' sidekick and his wife as revenge for Holmes' attention. The investigation into Moriarty's warmongering schemes sees Holmes' travel across Europe to Paris, Germany and finally to the famous Reichenbach waterfall in Switzerland. 

Should you watch it?
Game of Shadows is certainly not going to uproot any trees but as with its predecessor it's a entertaining action film that audiences can enjoy with minimal effort. As with the original, the film makes a mockery of Holmes' traditional sleuthing and is nothing more than a buddy movie complete with Victorian fisticuffs with the Sherlock Holmes badge on. At least the writers paid some homage to the story by featuring Professor Moriarty and the infamous waterfall scene even if Moriarty's warmongering plot is 

Downey quips his way through the film (is his Holmes character an ancestor of his Iron Man!?) while Jared Harris (Mad Men's Lane Pryce) provides Holmes with an intellectual foe as clever as himself as Moriarty.

The film suffers from being unevenly paced, at times the action and script, especially considering Downey's sharp delivery, are overly frantic. The film's action pieces are heavy with slow motion effects and while this works in places, it felt overused by the film's end.

FILM: The Avengers (8/10)

Why did I watch it?

I watched all the character origin films in anticipation for this film. I missed out when it was on at the cinema so it was must once it came out on DVD.

What's it all about?

Thor's evil brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) returns to Earth via energy from the Tesseract and having struck a deal with an extraterrestrial army, he wreaks havoc intending to open a portal allowing the Chitauri army to follow him to Earth. S.H.I.E.L.D. director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) initiates the recruitment of Iron Man, Captain America and Bruce Banner to help fight Loki, while Thor arrives to stop his brother. 
 
Should you watch it?
My main concern with The Avengers was, in encompassing all of the members, the film would be spread too thinly between the characters, resulting in a watered down attempt to integrate characters and personalities, a little like the X-men films. Thankfully this is not the case, although it's interesting that co-writer Zak Penn was involved in two of the X-men group films. Penn and Joss Whedon find enough screen-time for all the Avengers and by introducing them gradually through the film's opening third, sufficient emphasis is placed on each character. Similarly, I was disappointed when I discovered that the film's antagonist would be Loki, as I was not overly impressed with him in Thor. Again though, due to Hiddlestone's improved performance this time around and with Whedon's direction, I felt Loki was a much more interesting villain and one more fitting of the collective's film.

The team dynamic of between the superheroes is what really makes the film, alongside the blockbuster action sequences. Thor and Hulk clash, Captain America and Tony Stark routinely throw barbs at each other while Stark shows a surprisingly sincere side when offering support to Bruce Banner. Mark Ruffalo plays Banner with a sense of fear and regret of his destructive, uncontrollable power and I found him to be the most interesting character of the team. There's a slightly contrived back-story thrown in to give Hawkeye and Black Widow something of interest but its the funny moments between Stark and co. that gives the film its spark. Samuel. L. Jackson's brings his usual 'don't mess with me' cool factor and his larger role also benefits the movie. Being critical, I'm not sure the plot gave enough explanation as to why Banner returned to fight alongside the others after showing nothing but resistance to let 'the other guy' appear, or how he was able to control Hulk more effectively in contrast with the film's earlier events.

The so called Battle of New York finale is a really exciting well-directed battle, especially when you consider it's similarities to the frantic city battles Michael Bay treated us to in his Transformer films.

A genuine action blockbuster fit for it's cast. 

FILM: Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol (8/10)

Why did I watch it?

From the days when I used to watch the re-runs of the original TV series, I've always been a fan of the Mission Impossible franchise. Also, word spread about the Burj Khalifa scene in Ghost Protocol and having been up to the top of the Burj last year I was definitely interested.

What's it all about?

Following the death of their own agent, the IMF is implicated in an attack on the Kremlin and the US president implements 'ghost protocol' procedure disavowing the entire IMF. With no support, Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) leads his team to recover Russian nuclear launch codes and launching device from the Kremlin's true attacker, a rogue Russian nuclear strategist with visions of nuclear war.

Should you watch it?
Ghost Protocol is probably the strongest entry in the Mission Impossible series so far. It's a fast paced, strong plot loaded with exciting action set pieces, none more so than the Burj Khalifa stunts, which look fantastic. With clever gadgets, missions, disguises and Hunt working as part of a true IMF team, Ghost Protocol stays true to the Mission Impossible mantra. Speaking of the IMF team, Paula Patton, Jeremy Renner and Simon Pegg add to the film's dynamics as well as most of the film's humourous moments. 

Make no mistake though, Ghost Protocol is Tom Cruise's film. When Ethan Hunt is on form, and is he in Ghost Protocol, Cruise probably doesn't play a better character these days. He seems to thrive on the stunts he performs himself and the film is better for it. The film isn't without its flaws however, I didn't feel that anywhere near enough emphasis was placed on Michael Nyqvist's villain. In fact, I could barely remember him the following day! Also, for the fact that the film is based on a protocol that supposedly renders the team with no support or back-up, it didn't really seem to have any impact at all on the mission. I can't remember it really being mentioned later on.


All things considered though, Ghost Protocol is a really enjoyable action film with some fantastic action sequences.

FILM: Friends With Benefits (7/10)

Why did I watch it? 

Mila Kunis. It looked like a reasonable rom-com with more untraditional leanings. Mila Kunis in pants.

What's it all about?

Dylan (Justin Timberlake) moves to New York after being head-hunted by Jamie (Mila Kunis). The pair become friends and having both had relationship problems in the past decide they can become 'friends with benefits' in order to satisfy their needs without affecting their friendship.

Should you watch it?
Having read the plot outline above, it will probably be pretty obvious to all how the story ends and unsurprisingly Friends With Benefits stays true to expectations. That said, what happens prior is largely enjoyable thanks to a strong script, energetic performances from the leads and fantastic chemistry between Timberlake and Kunis. Woody Harrelson turns up as a gay sports editor to some amusement. I did get a little frustrated at how flippant and cocky the pair are in assuming that their friendship will be unaffected, especially when as a viewer you know what's around the corner, perhaps that's the whole rub of the film though I guess.

The writers try unashamedly hard to pitch their characters as the coolest inner city hipsters, Jamie from N.Y. and Dylan from L.A, listening to Semisonic, with flash mob contacts and friends with street artists. As the pair make fun of romantic film stereotypes, the writers just about avoid falling into the traps they mock.

FILM: Ted (6/10)

Why did I watch it?

I'm not a regular watcher of Seth Macfarlane's Family Guy but I've enjoyed the episodes I've seen over the years. Ted seemed to be getting promising reviews and the trailer looked pretty funny.

What's it all about?
As a child, John Bennett (Mark Wahlberg) wishes he could be best friends with his teddy bear for ever. His wish comes true and his bear comes to life. Fast forward to his mid-thirties and John is still inseparable from Ted much to the chagrin of his girlfriend Mila Kunis. While still a teddy bear, Ted has grown up into a rude, beer drinking, pot smoking bad influence on John's life.

Should you watch it?
I was quite disappointed with Ted to be truthful. I actually found that Ted became slightly annoying as the movie went on, which is a pretty major problem. The script is packed with Family Guy style lines for Ted, but I found them to be very hit and miss, even more so once Ted began to grate on me.  

That's not to say that Ted doesn't have some very funny moments and nice touches. For instance, it begins with nods to magical Christmas films as Patrick Stewart narrates John's Christmas wish as the camera pans over the neighbourhood at night to witness a shooting star. I also liked the way that Macfarlane made the magic of Ted visible to all and that Ted had become an overnight celebrity before his novelty and popularity wore off. It's a refreshing but necessary take on the traditional children's magic tale.


Overall, it's a shame I didn't enjoy the film more as Mark Wahlberg plays the role of the lazy, childish grown-up well and also shows a good handle for the comedy aspect. 

Top 10 Anticipated Films of 2013

Disappointingly I only watched about a dozen 2012 film releases so I decided against writing a '2012 top ten list' (incidentally Moonrise Kingdom would have topped my list). Instead I've decided to look forwards not backwards and as I try to be more active in seeing new releases I've listed the top ten films I'm looking forward to seeing in 2013. Enjoy. 

Honourable mentions:
Flight (Feb 1st), Cloud Atlas (Feb 22nd UK), Iron Man 3 (May 3rd), Pacific Rim (July 12), 300: Rise of an Empire (Aug 2nd) and Sin City: A Dame to Kill for (Oct 4th). 

10. The Wolverine (July 25th)
Written in part by Christopher McQuarrie (Usual Suspects, MI: Ghost Protocol) and directed by James Mangold (3:10 to Yuma), the sequel to X-Men Origins: Wolverine will be set in Japan and from the scarce plot details it sounds very martial arts/samurai themed which sounds pretty cool. 

9. Only God Forgives (May)

This film has only just arrived on my radar when reading some other 'Most Anticipated' lists. It makes it onto the list purely based on the fact that it reunites Drive director/actor team Nicolas Winding Refn and Ryan Gosling. Based in Bangkok , it's described as a crime thriller.

8. Man of Steel (June 14th)

With Zack Snyder (300, Watchmen) on director duties, Henry Cavill as Superman, Michael Shannon (Boardwalk Empire's Agent van Alden) as the villain and Dark Knight trilogy writer David S. Goyer onboard this reboot should be better than the 2006 Superman Returns.

7. Oblivion (April 12th)

I came across this in the February issue of Empire. After enjoying MI: Ghost Protocol Tom Cruise is back in my good books and also starring Olga Kurylenko and Morgan Freeman, Oblivion's apocalyptic sci-fi plot sounds a little Fifth Element, Blade Runner and Wall-E rolled into one and has got my attention.

6. Oz: The Great and Powerful (March 8th)

Sam Raimi (Spiderman trilogy) directs what looks like a really interesting origin story to the Wizard of Oz tale and if the trailer is anything to go by the film looks pretty stunning. James Franco leads a good cast including Mila Kunis as the Wicked Witch of the West.

5. The Place Beyond the Pines (April 12th)

I recently saw the trailer for The Place Beyond the Pines starring Ryan Gosling, Bradley Cooper, Rose Byrne and Eva Mendes. It looks like a gritty crime thriller similar to those of Ben Affleck (Gone Baby Gone, The Town) where new fathers Gosling and Cooper go head to head to provide for and protect their children.

4. Star Trek Into Darkness (May 17th)
I enjoyed J.J.Abrams' 2009 reboot of the Star Trek franchise and the full cast returns this time around with what sounds like a stronger antagonist in former Starfleet Commander John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch).

3. Gangster Squad (Jan 11th)

LA-noir cool meets The Untouchables with a great cast as Josh Brolin, Ryan Gosling, Nick Nolte, Robert Patrick and Giovanni Ribisi to name a few, go up against Sean Penn as a menacing Micky Cohen. Not long to wait for this one. 

2. Elysium (Aug 9th)
I for one am really intrigued to see how director Neill Blomkamp's follows on from District 9 with another sci-fi film, this time with a massive budget. Sharlto Copley (Wikus from District 9) works with Blomkamp again supporting Matt Damon and Jodie Foster in 2159 where the human population is split between a luxurious space station and ruined Earth.

1. World War Z (June 21st)

I loved Max Brooks' book and this film has been on my radar ever since. I'm really curious to see how the book is adapted for the big screen. I've seen it listed as 'unfilmable' alongside Life of Pi and Cloud Atlas. Hopefully the script issues have been sorted out for the better. The recent trailer had some fantastic zombie scenes so here's hoping the film lives up to my expectations.

FILM: The Sitter (5/10)

Why did I watch it?

Good question. I remember this being released and with Jonah Hill as the lead I was hoping for something along the lines of Superbad. 

What's it all about?
Jonah Hill plays Noah Griffin, a geeky, overweight, suspended college student who tries to combine the baby-sitting of three troublesome children with an attempt to impress a girl by picking up some cocaine for her. What could possibly go wrong?

Should you watch it?
In one word, no. It has to be said that The Sitter is not without it's funny moments. I'm sure that plenty of people laughed along in places. Any film in which Hill is on camera for it's entirety is bound to have some decent gags. It's just that for the most part the 'jokes' are either pretty lame or unoriginal. Think True Romance for the old 'fighting over a bag of coke until it tears open all over the face of a car's occupant' scene. I get that the children are supposed to be annoying for the sake of laughs, but they are really annoying in a particularly unfunny sense. Jonah Hill does his best to lead the film while things fall down around him but it's too much for his broad shoulders to cope with and the film lurches through some awkward scenes in which Hill provides sincere fatherly advice to the children to it's finish inside of 80 minutes.
  

FILM: Life of Pi (9/10)

Why did I watch it?

Having read the book (Yann Martel's Life of Pi) over the summer in anticipation of the film's release, this was one film I was desperate to see on the big screen.

What's it all about?

Life of Pi tells the story of Pi (Suraj Sharma), an enthusiastic Indian boy with more than a passing interest in religion, he finds solace in the individual facets of Hinduism, Christianity and Islam, whose father owns a zoo in Pondicherry. Tragedy strikes when the family emigrate to Canada with their animals as the ship sinks and Pi finds himself the sole survivor on-board a lifeboat, with Richard Parker, the zoo's Bengal tiger, for company.
  

Should you watch it?
Academy Award winner Ang Lee's Life of Pi is a stunningly beautiful film. Supposedly an 'unfilmable' novel, Yann Martel's book gives Lee ample opportunity for great visual imagery, an opportunity Lee and cinematographer Claudio Miranda grab with both hands. Whether its shots of Pi's boat floating adrift on a sunrise-reflecting ocean, of an island inhabited by a thousands of meerkats or of close-ups of the tiger, the visuals are unrivalled.


Lee dedicates enough time either side of Pi's incredible journey, with an adult Pi narrating his story to a writer (Rafe Spall), to give meaning to Pi's emotional ordeal. Although perhaps because of the nature of live action, in particular with facial expressions of the actors, some of the ending's ambiguity may have been lost in translation to the big screen.

Newcomer Suraj Sharma gives a fantastic performance as Pi, playing the role against a fully CGI tiger in what must have been a difficult filming environment. The other true star of the film is Richard Parker the tiger, the special effects for which really are outstanding.

In not staying true to the book, I was slightly disappointed that the writers felt the need to give Pi a love interest at the film's start, I don't feel that this added anything to Pi's character or to the story once the family set sail. Did the writers not want anyone to think he was gay or something?! Anyway, I also felt that Pi's gradual blindness from dehydration which for me was one of the most harrowing parts of the novel, could have been featured to add some more despair to Pi's journey, not that it needs more! However, my grumbles about how the film relates to the book count for little.

I had incredibly high expectations for this film after reading the book and seeing the trailers and thankfully Lee's adaptation lived up to those. Life of Pi is a beautiful film of a boy's unbelievable journey and how he finds a home for it among his eclectic religious beliefs.

Bring on the Oscar nominations.