FILM: Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps (6/10)

Why did I watch it?
It's not so long ago that I watched the original Wall Street for the first time so it made sense to see how Oliver Stone took the story of Gordon Gecko forward.

What's it all about?
Gordon Gecko (Michael Douglas) is released from prison and attempts to make amends with his estranged daughter Winnie (Carey Mulligan). Winnie is dating young Wall Street trader Jacob Moore (Shia LaBeouf), whose company loses it's value resulting in the suicide of his mentor. Moore seeks out Gecko to uncover the source of the toxic debt rumour that sunk his company in trade for acting as go between for Gecko and Winnie.







The Good:

• I thought Douglas and LaBeouf were solid. Douglas brought his Gecko skulduggery and LaBeouf his typical energy. Carey Mulligan was a bit disappointing after some of the film's I've seen her in of late.
• Frank Langella as Moore's mentor Louis Zabel

The Bad:

• The soundtrack is truly bizarre
• Oliver Stone's visual gimmicks, slow motion, split screens, editing styles
• The script is written with such accuracy it will bamboozle most viewers, myself included, with it's heavy city jargon. J.C. Chandor's Margin Call did a much better job.
• Clichéd motorbike race where Moore and Bretton James try to out-macho each other 

Favourite line:

'Stop telling lies about me and I'll stop telling the truth about you' - Gordon Gecko

Stand-out moment:

When the penny drops for Winnie and Moore....

Like the film? Watch: Wall Street, Margin Call

What my wife would say: Watched it, 'Good but not as good as the original'.

What the world thinks:

Rotten Tomatoes - 55%

Metacritic - 59/100

LAMB Score - 2.81

Twitter -

Sorry sir but we simply cannot accept you to Harvard Business School if you can't relate the basic plot of Wall Street 2: Money Never Sleeps
— PartyRockAnthem (@PartyRockAnthe1) February 23, 2012

FILM: Blue Valentine (7/10)

Why did I watch it?

Blue Valentine has been on my radar for a while after seeing lots of positive reviews for the film. I enjoyed the style of director Derek Cianfrance's next effort The Place Beyond the Pines and as luck would have it Blue Valentine appeared on TV shortly afterwards.

What's it all about?

Blue Valentine tells the story of Dean (Ryan Gosling) and Cindy (Michelle Williams) and is told across two spells in their relationship, the initial courtship with the pair full of passion for each other and the present day several years later as their marriage finally falls apart.

Should you watch it?

I watched this a long time ago so I'm going to keep this review short and sharp. 

Not a film for Valentine's Day

There's no denying that watching Blue Valentine, a film that tells the story of the complete breakdown of a couple's marriage is not an easy watch (especially for someone just married!) and is certainly an intense, claustrophobic experience, as the audience never really gets a break from the two characters but honestly I was slightly disappointed that the film didn't turn out to be quite the emotional heart-breaker I was expecting. Perhaps in anticipation I had turned my heart to it's complete stone setting. That's not to take anything away from the film's leads who gave brilliantly sincere and convincing performances as the troubled couple. Special comment for the 'Future Room' which with it's tacky futuristic decor and lighting must have been director Derek Cianfrance's ideal shooting location!

FILM: Robin Hood (7/10)

Why did I watch it?
The Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe combo has served up some more than decent films over the years and I was definitely interested in seeing Scott's take on a British legend.

What's it all about?
Russell Crowe stars as Robin Longstride, an archer in King Richard I's army returning across France from the Holy Lands. Longstride interrupts a French plot to assassinate the King, who unbeknown to the French has already been killed. Impersonating Sir Robin Loxley, who was killed in the failed ambush, Robin escort the King's crown back to England with his closest soldiers and Robin continues to Nottingham fulfil a promise to the dying Loxley.
 
Should you watch it?
If the plot described above sounds nothing like any Robin Hood film or TV show you have seen before you would be right. This is Ridley Scott's story behind the legend. It's certainly a fresh take on the well known character and I think Scott should be applauded for not repeating the same story of Robin Hood and his band of merry men running amok in Sherwood forest. The true story of Robin Hood is shrouded in doubt and conflicting myths but I think that Brian Helgeland's (L.A. Confidential) screenplay probably stretches historical accuracy to the maximum you may expect of an American-produced film of a British myth.

That leads me onto my next point, the cast. Casting Russell Crowe as Robin, hmmm. Crowe brings a fairly stoic grittiness to the role but I can't help but feel that there were better options. The fact that Crowe is one of the films producers suggests his role as Robin was paid for. As angry as this may make Crowe, there is no denying that his accent in the film was plain off and seems to cover almost all UK regions at some point in time. With the exception of Mark Strong and Mark Addy, the cast is largely American and I found that frustrating as there are scores of British actors that could have played the likes of Little John, Will Scarlett and King Richard I at least as well as Danny Huston. Shows like Game of Thrones have shown that a largely British cast can deliver the goods. Cate Blanchett can be excused as I thought she was excellent as Lady Marian.

Towards the film's end I thought that the film began to morph into Kingdom of Heaven as Robin lead the British defence en masse against the French invasion force on the beaches of the South Coast. At this stage the story seemed to have veered too far away from the Robin Hood we know and love. 

An alternative take on the much told story of one of Britain's favourite characters and one that is worth a watch even if the gritty nature of Robin and his story take away some of the fun and adventure that always been associated with the character. 

FILM: Piranha 3D (7/10)

Why did I watch it?
Because sometimes you just need some low brow, tongue-in-cheek horror to brighten up your day.

What's it all about?
It's spring break at Lake Victoria and the small town has been invaded by the stereotypical masses of drunken frat-boys and bikini-clad college girls. Unfortunately for them, their lakeside debauchery coincides with the release of thousands of super aggressive prehistoric piranhas into the water from an underground lake, opened up after millions of years by an earthquake. Elisabeth Shue stars as the local sheriff and Jerry O'Connell plays a pornographer out filming on the lake, both caught up in the horror.  

Should you watch it?
As long as you can handle the deliberately gratuitous gore, boobs, more gore and more boobs (the things I go through for the purposes of a review!),  Piranha 3D is a hilarious and enjoyable B-movie horror. It is probably the goriest film I have ever seen, but whereas the likes of Hostel cross in to  'gorno' territory, director Alexandra Aja provides horror and violence of the comedy kind.

Aja sacrifices a few lone lake inhabitants over the first half of the action and moving underwater shots suggest that no-one is safe. However, once Sheriff Forrester (Shue) discovers the truth behind the random attacks, Aja releases the army of piranhas on the partying spring break masses in a ten minute scene that can only be described as total carnage, with a body count that makes Rambo look like Disney. Some of the deaths are so hilarious, they must be seen to be believed.

Elisabeth Shue is the film's hero, Ving Rhames barely appears and Christopher Lloyd adds to the general craziness with his small part, but it's O'Connell's crazed, coked up adult film director who is most memorable.

The piranha: eats bikini-clad spring breakers  

Although it owes a lot to Jaws and the original parody Piranha, Aja ensures that Piranha 3D is it's own beast (at one point the music does sound similar to John Williams' theme though!). 

FILM: The Expendables (5/10)

Why did I watch it?

Borrowed the DVD from my brother. Seemed like a good idea at the time.

What's it all about?

Sylvester Stallone leads a team of mercenaries including Jason Statham, Jet Li, Terry Crews, Dolph Lundgren and Randy Couture up against rogue CIA operative Eric Roberts who is using the national army to enforce a brutal dictatorship on a South American island. 

Should you watch it?

Yes, it probably is the 'most awesome action cast ever assembled' but unsurprisingly it's far from the most awesome action film. Many years have past since some of these guys were at their peak and they certainly haven't spent that time in acting classes. Dolph Lundgren wins my vote for the worst performance, just don't tell him I said that.

I haven't seen all that many 80's action films that The Expendables may be a throwback tribute to so perhaps I'm not amongst the audience likely to enjoy this film. A large part of the film is shot in the dark, and it does makes it a little difficult to work out which beefcake action star is talking trash or more likely shooting at an other. The plot is simple, no problems with that. Statham's girlfriend issue brings no value to the film or character and is a see-through attempt to add some 'character development' somewhere, anywhere. When Jean Claude van Damme turns down a role citing lack of substance to a character you know you are in trouble.

"One, two, three.....give me your tough faces"

There are some nice touches in the film, the short scene with Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Willis being worth watching the film for. Schwarzenegger commenting that Stallone 'loves playing around in the jungle' certainly made me chuckle. Also, wrestling stars Stone Cold and Randy Couture going head to head at the end was a treat for sports fans.

The Expendables is what it is, an over the top action film, definitely nothing more and probably even a little less.

TV: Borgen (S1) (7/10)

Following on from the successful Forbrydelsen (adapted as The Killing in the US), Danish TV produced another well-received (2012 BAFTA for Best International Series) series in the form of Borgen. Set in the home of the Danish government, the ten parter follows new Prime Minister Birgitte Nyborg through her first year in office from election to the opening of parliament.

The series follow three main characters, Prime Minister Nyborg, her spin doctor Kasper Juul and his ex-girlfriend and political news anchor Katrine Fonsmark. The writing is sincere and each episode covers a crisis of some sorts for Nyborg's infant government be it CIA landings on Danish territory, morally complicated extraditions or ministerial scandals. The political drama takes place alongside the drama of each character's home life, in particular Nyborgs. This helps to ground all the characters and is equally as enjoyable as the politics.

I haven't seen The West Wing so I can't compare the two but good acting and strong writing make this series a success and I am sceptical at the news that a US adaptation may be in the works. I'm not sure that the story is transferable to a two-party system but we'll see. I look forward to watching the next series.

FILM: Iron Man 2 (6/10)

Robert Downey's Iron Man returns after his first film outing two years previous, with director Jon Favreau again at the helm. As with Iron Man, Favreau delivers another fun ride and allows Downey to steal the show as Tony Stark.

Downey's egotist, smarmy and arrogant but ultimately likeable Tony Stark is the film. Other characters are purely used for Downey to show off in front of, flirt with or talk over. In honesty, this becomes a little frustrating by the end of the film but it doesn't become a terminal problem because of the hidden weakness and humility Stark shows on occasions. Also, it makes a change for a superhero to be so public with his identity and arrogance.

Facing pressure from the US government on one side and the film's nemesis Whiplash on the other, Stark also struggles to cope with the ill effects of his power source and becomes isolated and irresponsible with his powers. The main antagonist is Whiplash, the son of a Russian inventor formerly employed by Stark Industries, who out of spite for the Stark family develops his own power source to rival Iron Man. The Russian factor brings about inevitably thin Cold War references but it is the idea that the US government sees Iron Man ans his technology as their property and does not wish to be dependent on Stark's alliance for protection that is the strongest plot string.

When given scenes without Downey present, the supporting characters are a mixed bunch. The introduction of Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow to the Marvel Universe is flat and the same can be said for Gywneth Paltrow, who is talked over by Downey for all of her lines. Don Cheadle plays Iron Man's sidekick James Rhodes (aka War Machine) complete with some Robin-esque cheesy lines ("Get a roof"). The positives come in the form of Mickey Rourke as Whiplash and Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer. Rockwell injects some brilliant humour to proceedings for when you've had your fill of Downey.

The action is evenly paced, although the action sequences towards the end of the film are a little robotic, literally, as Iron Man and War Machine take on Whiplash (in a similar suit) and his army of Iron Man suited drones.

Overall, perhaps not as fresh as the original but still a better than average entry to the Marvel catalogue.

FILM: Senna (9/10)

Brilliant 2010 documentary film following the racing career of three-time F1 World Champion Aryton Senna.


Compiled from hours of footage of racing, family videos, interviews with the Brazilian with interviews from peers played over the top, Senna is a documentary featuring no narration or retrospective interviews and plays out more like a written film than documentary.


The film tells the story of Senna's arrival in F1, his instant success on the road to his titles, his rivalry with Alain Prost and clashes with the FIA, culminating with the fateful San Marino GP in 1994.


The film is perhaps unbalanced when it deals with the Prost Senna relationship and I share Prost's opinion that it doesn't explain how their relationship thawed before Senna's death. The fact that Prost was a pallbearer at Senna's funeral speaks volumes of this. That said, the real 'bad guy' of the story is then FISA president Jean-Marie Balestre.


Senna comes across as highly spiritual, patriotic, committed and I'm sure racing fans of the Senna era enjoying seeing and listening to some interviews with the man just as much as the racing footage. 


A moving masterpiece in documentary making that will appeal to all.

FILM: True Grit (9/10)

After their 2007 No Country for Old Men, the Coen brothers try their hand at a true western with True Grit, an adaptation of the novel of the same name which John Wayne won his only Oscar for the 1969 version.


Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) is a headstrong 14 year old girl out to avenge her father's murder. Knowing her limitations she recruits the most unscrupulous U.S. Marshal she can find, Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges). They set off into Indian territory to hunt down her father's killer (Josh Brolin) occasionally accompanied by Texas Ranger Matt Damon, who is after the outlaw for a previous offence.


Helped by the Coen's excellent script, Steinfeld, Damon and Bridges in particular deliver excellent performances. Mattie is the moral compass of the uncomfortable trio as they proceed on their road trip and amusingly keeps her elder companions in line throughout for her own gain. 


The film also benefits from superb cinematography, including some memorable shots when Rooster and Mattie cross the horizon at sunset.


True Grit operates at its own pace towards it's finale and although few may consider it uneventful or boring it is a great story of unflinching retribution and justice.

FILM: 13 Assassins (8/10)

Set in shogun-era Japan, 13 Assassins tells the story of an elite group of samurai selected to rid the land of the shogun's evil brother who uses his power to rape and kill at will.


I was expecting fight sequences similar to Chinese produced successes like Crouching Tiger or House of Flying Daggers, with elaborate camera effects and stylish choreography. However, director Takashi Miike serves up a totally different kind of action. The fight scenes are much more substance than style and are considerably more gritty and realistic.

At just over two hours long, 13 Assassins can easily be broken into three chapters. Initially the film is slow to start as the story is told and characters are introduced, although Miike sensibly introduces the assassins in groups, and provides more focus on a few rather than diluting the characters too greatly. The middle of the film deals with the assassins travel to their chosen ambush point as the shogun's brother and samurai approach. Following a few minor fights in the first two-thirds of the film, the ambush and subsequent fight fills the remaining 45 minutes without much pause and can only be described as epic.


After the initial upper hand is lost, the 13 men fight against a seemingly never ending army of guards and samurai knowing they are fighting towards their inevitable deaths. Having killed tens or hundreds of the enemy each, the realism of the film is underlined by the fatigue shown by the assassins as they are ultimately swamped holding off the enemy forces.

A largely enjoyable samurai film worth watching if not only for the epic fight between good and evil.

FILM: Predators (5/10)

Based on a draft screenplay penned by producer Robert Rodriguez in the mid-nineties, the Predator (without Alien) franchise was given an update with this 2010 reboot/sequel directed by Nimrod Antal.


Set on an anonymous planet serving as a game reserve, Adrien Brody (yes, Adrien Brody) leads a group of humans shipped to the planet for the purposes of being hunted by several Predators. The humans are selected from various global military organisations and have to overcome their initial confusion and distrust of each other as they are stalked by their foes.


I remember seeing the trailer for this film and being amazed that Brody had bulked up to play an action hero role. He actually plays the morally detached and cold Royce reasonably well and attempts his own version of the patented Christian Bale Batman voice. While I think about the trailer, the coolest scene where tens of red Predator scopes appear all over the cast never actually occurs in the film!


The story starts well as the mix of characters knit and begin to piece together why they have been brought to the planet. It is an interesting take on the Predator series, however Antal doesn't manage to sustain the interest once the first Predator kill occurs. From this point on the film becomes a pretty average and predictable killing spree similar to Predator itself only without the originality and B-movie feel. Only the brief cameo from Laurence Fishburne as a crazed survivor provides some change in direction.


As a standalone film, Predators is an average action film although better than the recent AVP series. As a new entry to the Predator story, it fails to live up the original, either that or perhaps I just remember the Arnie version for being better than it actually was.

FILM: Devil (7/10)

Economical horror with a promising premise which delivers in part. A familiar almost Agatha Christie who-dun-it story is given a modern day setting with spiritual undertones.

The claustrophobic setting, sound effects and sharp editing create a succession of low-budget scares, although the turn of events become slightly repetitive each time the lights go out. The use of elevator CCTV footage provides some variety to the action and builds suspense as the audience are made to feel equally as helpless as the rescuers as they see the action play out in front of them. 

A potential step back towards form for producer M. Night Shyamalan.

FILM: Little Fockers - (5/10)

Tired and tedious third installment of the series. With no fresh ideas, the writers rely on the jokes that made the first film amusing and the second slightly less so, mainly cute children saying inappropriate things and the word 'Focker'. The plot is on a whole similar to the previous films albeit set with Greg and Pam now parents themselves and Ben Stiller still floundering around trying in vain to appease Robert De Niro. I would be lying if I said that the film does not contain any laughs, mainly from De Niro and Hoffman. The writers clearly find Owen Wilson's character more humourous than I do, by the end I felt he had been flogged to death twice over for laughs . All in all, worth viewing at some point for a few laughs but no more than that. After reading comments from De Niro after it's release there is unlikely to be another.