TV: Blue Bloods (S2) (5/10)

I want to like Blue Bloods, I really do, it has a decent cast, led by Donnie Wahlberg and Tom Selleck but the writing really lets the show down.


Firstly, the writing for the children on the show is complete drivel. Thanks to the writers, Blue Bloods's children may well be the most annoying children in the history of moving picture. I cannot accept that any 10 or 13 year old, no matter how well they have been raised, or even if they are a Reagan, would ever come out with such sickly sweet and pretentious lines, delivered in the majority by Erin's daughter. What world have these writers been living in? The following are two of my vomit-inducing favourites, Nicki saying "I do know what it means, I buried my Uncle when I was 13" and Danny's son (about 10 or 11) on the family business, "I think you have two lives, one you are born into and one you choose". I rest my case.


Moving on. The family is so self-righteous and respectable it is tedious. I have lost count on how many times I have been told what it means to "be a Reagan" or why anyone one else would do this or that but not Selleck's brood because they are Reagan's. This saintly and holier than thou attitude is served up by Selleck for family dinner each week and gives me indigestion. It is in stark contrast to Danny, apparently the only detective in New York it would seem, running around slapping 10 bells out of any criminal he can get his hands on.


Thirdly, the family dinner. The writers use the weekly family dinner as an opportunity to discuss the moral implications of the episodes cases. Given Erin's role as Assistant District Attorney, like Law and Order, the show is able to argue cases from both sides of the arrest with Erin arguing for the law, right or wrong, and Danny arguing for justice at whatever cost with Tom Selleck acting as judge from the head of the table. If it wasn't for the  way the writers get the children involved in the discussions, or use the unflinching Reagan moral compass as a way of discussing the cases, these discussions could really deliver a decent view of the episodes cases. As it is though, the family dinner is usually a cringing low point of each episode. 


All the above spoils what is actually an average show. The idea of a police version of the Corleones, with Selleck as the Godfather and all his offspring in the family business of delivering justice in one way or another is a unique one. The episode plots are pretty simple but it can be enjoyable watching Danny, Jackie and Erin work their cases episode to episode. The writers clearly made the decision to build in a longer length story arc each season, Jimmy and the Blue Templars or Jimmy and the Mob in the case of season two, but they just don't dedicate enough time to develop this arc week to week for it pay off at the end of the season with any satisfaction.


I think Blue Bloods is probably the first show to give an insight into the mixed political/police role of a police commissioner. While Selleck's role was interesting in the first season, the writers seems to be fast running out of story lines for Frank Reagan this time around. The episode featuring the Catholic Church visiting him to get his opinion over a sainthood for his conflicted childhood priest was the worst by far.



The terrorist threat and missing child cold case season finale felt like we were covering old ground from the first season and apart from Frank resignation dilemma was a disappointment.


The show has been renewed for a third season so they are obviously doing something right, either that or maybe the network boss is a Reagan.

TV: John Adams (8/10)

Having an interest in most things historical, I looked forward to the HBO produced mini-series chronicling the life of American Founding Father John Adams.


History does not appear to have been as kind to the reputation and legacy of John Adams when compared to the likes of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin and as such I was curious to discover more of Adams's role in the American Revolution.

It soon becomes apparent that Adams is a feisty, strong willed and self-adored character of the revolution. At first uncertain of using his legal skills to defend Massachusett's interests amongst the thirteen colonies in their dispute against the British crown, Adams grows into his role as statesman and becomes instrumental in campaigning for and assisting in the development of the Declaration of Independence. More due to his vanity and stubborn nature than any particular political beliefs, Adams seems to be largely unpopular amongst his peers. 

The show provides an unromanticised insight into the hard work and personal sacrifices given not by the soldiers of the war but by the new statesmen of the American independence. Following on from independence, the political machinations of the early US government are seen through Adams's eyes as he serves first as vice-president and then as the 2nd President. Adams and Jefferson's friendship breaks down, leading to some greatly dignified but passionate disputes between the two as the ideals of the revolution diverge into Federalist and Republicans party beliefs. In a similar manner to its subject, the series may be slightly overblown at eight hours in length. The middle section in which Adams travels throughout Europe certainly did not need to last for two or three episodes. Although this does serve the purpose of making the time Adams was apart from his family seem extended and more credible bearing in mind his family's remonstrations. That said I certainly would not wish to see any of the brilliant and emotionally intense last episode cut. The series can be subtly humorous in places, notably in Europe where Adams struggles to communicate with the French nobility and deal with their gratuitious pomp and excess and later in London when taught the required etiquette of an ambassador in King George's presence. 

The scope of the mini-series is impressive and as is the norm for an HBO production the visuals and attentions to detail are great.


Now here is the kicker, Paul Giamatti is not a favourite actor of mine. I find him quite limited and find him too abrasive and shouty for my liking. I tried to look past this when watching him on screen and in fairness he does play the part quite well and is capable of portraying some of Adams's character flaws but I just feel strongly that the main part could have been much better cast. Thankfully, Giamatti is supported by a terrific cast. Laura Linney, in particular, is fantastic as Adams's wife Abigail and Washington, Jefferson and Franklin are superbly played with real thought by David Morse, Stephen Dillane and Tom Wilkinson respectively. 
All in all a strong series well worth watching for anyone with a degree of interest in the subject matter. Even non-Giamatti fans! 

FILM: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (5/10)

Bloated and excessive sequel from Michael Bay, with a 'more is more' approach seemingly applied in producing the second Transformers film.


Revenge of the Fallen's plot will appeal to both sci-fi fans and fans of the franchise, however Bay overshadows the story by packing the film full of exhaustingly repetitive action sequences to the point of saturation. The characters and plot appear to just be something to fill the time with in between rounds of the contest.
For the first two thirds of the film, the human characters are largely sacrificed for the breakneck speed at which the plot hurtles along towards the next robot royal rumble.


As goofy and frantic as before, Shia LaBeouf is responsible for most good things in the film. On the other hand, the writers really failed with the addition of the annoying Leo (Ramon Rodriguez) and the two wise-cracking and Autobot twins, complete with racial slurs.


Applying a bigger is better philosophy, the cast of Transformers seems to have multiplied ten fold from the first film. The new Transformers are never properly introduced, and the vast number makes it difficult to identify the main characters amongst all the flying metal and exploding scenery.


At this point it should be mentioned that the CGI is impressive and the Transformer battle scenes are visually top notch. This usually counts for something in a film which relies on effects so heavily but the novelty of seeing cars and planes transform into robots was worn out in the original and so counts for less second time around. In all honesty I think Bay could have halved the budget and re-used the Transformer battle footage from the original given how unmemorable the battle scenes are in Revenge of the Fallen. 


Not likely to attract new fans to the Transformers series and worthwhile only for die hard fans.

TV: Ringer (S1) (6/10)

I'll hold my hands up, this show is something of a guilty pleasure of mine, which may have something to do with my old teenage liking for Sarah Michelle Gellar.


Set in upper class New York, Ringer's story revolves around two identical twins both played by Gellar. On the run to avoid being killed, Bridget takes her sister Siobhan's place in wealthy New York in order to stay alive when she believes Siobhan has killed herself. However, as it pretty quickly turns out, by doing this she unwittingly inserts herself into her sister's devilish schemes.


The story is dizzying with twists and turns and it can be slightly convoluted with the same actress playing two roles on top of flashbacks of each role. It can take time at the beginning of a scene to work out which character is being portrayed by Gellar. Helped at first with Siobhan hiding out in Paris, this challenge only increases when she moves back to New York.

Weighing in at a ridiculous 22 episodes, Ringer is definitely several episodes too long yet as the story lines finally begin to be wrapped up towards the end of the season, there are some strong episodes and twists aplenty as the scheming and backstabbing takes its toll on several characters. Serving as executive producer, Gellar managed to recruit a strong supporting cast including Ioan Gruffudd and Nestor Carbonell (Richard from Lost). Ringer features a very contemporary soundtrack which fits well with its glamorous New York suburbanite settings.

There were times I doubted how much scope remained in the story for any future seasons but with the final revelations the writers set the scene for a second season of sibling squabbles. However, the future of this show remains in doubts as a second season is yet to be confirmed.

TV: Homeland (S1) (8/10)

The debut season of Homeland is an enjoyable and suspenseful ride through the modern post 9/11 world of American domestic espionage.
It stars Claire Danes as the paranoid spy doing just that on newly-returned war hero Damien Lewis, in an above average 'is he or isn't he" thriller.


The introduction to Brody, for the first few episodes, is largely provided through footage from illegally installed surveillance cameras planted in his house by Carrie (Danes), this provides an interesting viewpoint which serves to heighten the suspicion on his strange behaviour in settling back into his much-changed family life.


As the action progresses, Carrie, not without her own personal struggles, finds it difficult to foster support for her theories within the CIA and risks everything by going it alone to investigate Brody up close and personal. Having kept the lead characters apart for the first half of the series, with Carrie always watching from afar, I was unsure about how the show would develop once the two grew close but I was not to be concerned as their relationship falls apart once Brody learns of Carrie's suspicions.


The show deals with some uncomfortable themes that are unlikely to go down well with too many loyal Americans, namely that the US is largely responsible for the terrorist threat it faces on its own soil, and I strongly doubt that many American viewers will be too sympathetic to Brody's cause, be it as it is based on Islamic ideals. The writers try to Americanise Brody's adopted ideals by having him use an American civil war last stand at Gettysburg to explain to his children that you should always fight for what you believe in.


The action is tense in places and strong performances are delivered by Danes, Lewis and Mandy Patinkin as Carrie's supervisor and mentor Saul. Once Brody's intentions are finally apparent, the final episode makes for tense viewing and features some superb acting from both Lewis and Morgan Saylor (Brody's daughter) at the moment of truth.


A second series is confirmed and the events of the final episode suggest that the action will switch from that of violent retribution to silent political influence, however with Carrie still on the trail.

BOOK: 127 Hours, Between a Rock and a Hard Place, Aron Ralston (7/10)

The inspiring story from which Danny Boyle produced the Oscar nominated film 127 Hours is a fantastic read and having seen the film, provides Aron Ralston to narrate the sequence of events from his own perspective.


Ralston tells his story in a methodical, clear and intelligent manner in many ways similar to the way in which he approached his horrific situation.


For the majority of the book Ralston alternates the chapters between the infamous accident and stories from his earlier climbing experiences. While these older anecdotes provide an insight into Ralston's experiences, and allow him to explain how his adventurous life took him to that canyon on that fateful day, the detail into which he provides, specific dates, locations and names, does become slightly monotonous. Midway through the book, these chapters became nothing more than a distraction from the main event and I found myself longing for the next update from the canyon and the grisly details of the accident. 


Several chapters are also dedicated to the actions of Ralston's parents, friends and rescuers and how, in parallel to Ralston's entrapment, come to realise that something is amiss when he fails to return and begin to raise the alarm. The book converges this side story with that of Ralston's own perspective when he frees himself and finds help. Being deliberately excluded from the film, I enjoyed discovering the actions of the other parties involved. 


The final chapters of the book, describing the amputation and escape were an excellent, inspiring read and more than made up for any previously mentioned flaws. 

FILM: Sucker Punch (3/10)

Graphic novel style action film based on an original screenplay from director Zack Snyder. Babydoll (played by Emily Browning) is sent to a mental institution for teenage girls and visages her escape from her captors through a series of fantastical quests. Although clearly inspired by Kill Bill, Inception and a host of modern day video games, credit has to be given to Snyder for the film's creative context but unfortunately that's about all it can be given for.


The fantasy within a fantasy concept does allow Snyder license to create some stunning looking fantasy backdrops and action sequences ranging from fighting giant samurai in feudal Japan to mechanical Nazi soldiers in a WWII bunker. The action sequences are visually stunning as you would expect from the director that delivered 300 and Watchmen and renowned for his graphic novel and video game style imagery. Although why a teenage girl would choose to invent such fantasy situations to serve as replications of the quests undertaken, except for the obvious reason of serving up gun-totting chick action for the likely audience, is unclear.


The all-action girl heroes attempt to complete a series of simplistic quests, dubbed 'the plan' and actually just involving obtaining several objects, to escape from their prison. Perhaps Snyder felt that the fantasy within a fantasy premise was as much as his target audience could handle, especially with all the teenage girls running around, and dumbed down 'the plan' to the point of having Babydoll write it down as a reference for the audience to understand the progress achieved. The quests are completed and ticked off, for the audiences benefit, with tedious repetition.


Snyder breaks the stereotype of the female role in action films and it is refreshing to see a team of girls manning machine guns, flying helicopters and fighting dragons, however the film is conflicted in its attempts to portray a spirit of female empowerment, which is relevant, when the female characters breaking out from their male oppressors are a group of nubile teenage girls scantily clad in school uniforms.


The fantasy within a fantasy premise and impressive visuals are not enough to cover the hollow and humourless characters and abysmal script. The rush of deaths in the film's final act feel too contrived as if Snyder realised with 10 minutes to go that some quick emotion was required in order to set up an attempt at a profound ending. The narrated dialogue over the final scenes is hard to appreciate after the previous ninety minutes which really did nothing more than serve up the literal definition of a teenage nerds wet dream. 
Imagine if MTV remade Inception crossed with Kill Bill for the video game generation and avoid.

FILM: Memento (9/10)

Challengingly complex thriller from Christopher Nolan about a man with short-term memory loss out to avenge the murder of his wife. With two converging sequences of events being played out in parallel, Memento both demands and warrants careful attention throughout as the audience must hunt for clues in every scene to help piece together the puzzle. Watching one half of the story unfold backwards is demanding but genuinely rewarding as earlier events in the film are explained retrospectively.
The film owes a great debt to the clever story telling technique employed by Nolan, as without this the story would actually be far less dramatic.
Guy Pearce is superb as the aggrieved husband and plays his character with a subtly sly sense of humour considering the events unfolding.

FILM: Up (8/10)

Disney-Pixar have almost consistently produced films to a superb standard in recent years and Up does not just meet this standard but raise it further. As with its predecessors, the animation is great and the story is amusing and rich in sentiment but what makes Up stand out above the rest is the combination of unusual characters, odd story and superb Oscar winning score. 


With the exception of The Incredibles, Pixar have traditionally stayed away from humans as central characters. However, in Up the main characters are Mr. Fredricksen, a lonely, grumpy old man and Russell, a plump young explorer scout. An unlikely pair who are unintentionally thrown together as Mr. Fredricksen transports his house to South America using helium filled balloons to escape moving from his home. There they meet a group of talking dogs, an endangered bird and Mr. Fredricksen's childhood hero as the adventure and fun continues.


As plots go it is one of the most bizarre yet from Pixar but it's a fun journey and the writers actually cover the pretty serious themes of ageing and missed opportunities, loneliness and friendship along the way. The montage at the beginning of the film displaying the life Mr. Fredricksen shared with his wife, from their childhood to her death, is beautifully made and, supported by the superb score, is an incredibly emotive piece of film making.


If you are looking for an enjoyable, funny film for the family then you can not do much better than Up.

TV: Spartacus: Vengeance (8/10)

Following on from the first series and subsequent prequel, Spartacus has developed something of cult following and true second season of the most explicit show on TV returns with Spartacus raising an army of familiar faces to take on the might of the Roman empire. The writers manage to find a way to reunite all the favourites from both previous seasons. Spartacus is played by Liam McIntye in Vengeance following Andy Whitfield's sad death and McIntyre fills the role with similar gusto to Whitfield albeit with a slight Christian Bale voice impersonation.


Third time around its dawned on me how seriously the show takes itself. There are very few light hearted moments and I lost count of the number of grand speeches and intense stares Spartacus and Praetor Glaber give throughout the series. The seriousness of the show is in stark contrast with the attitude of Spartacus' audience, most of whom I believe watch just for fun and with tongue firmly in cheek, adding to the shows cult appeal.


The combination of extreme gore, though impressive, and explicit sex is not quite as novel this time around but the backstabbing, bed-hopping and blood-spilling plot is still strong enough to enjoy. The finale is gripping as the action switches between Spartacus and Glaber and the scheming pair of Lucretia and Illythia.

BOOK: A Game of Thrones, George R.R. Martin - (8/10)

I'll hold my hands up, I read this book, as plenty of others have, on the back of enjoying the first season of the HBO adaptation. What really strikes you about the story is the stunning level of detail that Martin has built into the fantasy kingdom of Westeros. Combining old-fashioned kings and swordplay with dragons and mysterious evil, similarities with the Lord of the Rings series may appear obvious but at no time during the book did I ever find myself finding anything that made me think of Mordor, Aragon or hobbits. Told through the eyes of six characters, the story is engrossing and for those not familiar with the TV series will provide enough shock and intrigue aplenty. The way Martin kills off seemingly major characters suggests the story has plenty more unfolding to do in the next few books.

TV: The Walking Dead (S2) (8/10)

The critically acclaimed Walking Dead returns with a second season amid high expectations following on from a great first season which benefited from being only six episodes long and contained some zombie scenes that delivered unbelievable suspense.


Unfortunately the second season only hits these highs on a few occasions, most notably at the beginning and during the second half. The decision to extend the season to thirteen episodes did not help the writers, who struggled to really fill the additional time with any meaningful story lines. Most viewers watch TWD for zombie action, and while I understand it takes periods of calm to build suspense and surprise in between the zombie action, these periods lasted too long this time around.


After a great first episode with an impressive zombie herd scene, the first half of the season is dominated by the missing Sophia and the search to find her. This storyline dragged on for several weeks too long, especially bearing in mind that we were barely introduced to her in the first season. In order to continue the search the group settles at an occupied farm nearby. The group remain here until the final episode and this gives the action a different feel from the first season. Settling down and not moving on through zombie infested roads and towns allows the writers to develop some of the characters, in some instances using the relationships with the farm occupants. It is at this point that the season starts to slow down and becomes too much of a soap opera. Trips away from the farm occasionally come across the odd zombie but the threat seems largely relegated in place of group tensions, cat fights and a love story. The merging of the survivors with the farm occupants leads to a clash of mentalities, those with first hand experience of the current world and those keeping faith in the chance of a cure. This provides the writers the opportunity to inject a spiritual point of view to proceedings that is ultimately disproved. Also, the terror of zombies that the group originally had seems to become less as the season progresses until almost all group members appear to become skilled and too confident in zombie killing. This only serves to lessen the suspense when we are treated to occasional zombie moments.


The season begins to improve dramatically when Shane, gradually spiralling out of control throughout the season, opens Hershel's barn and the Sophia story line is put to bed in brutal fashion. From this point on the action predominantly revolves around Shane and Rick, and the growing tension between them. Shane is the stand-out character of the cast, and driven by his belief that Rick is weak, ruthlessly strives to protect Lori and Carl. Starting by killing Otis, and next opening the barn, he butts heads with Rick throughout the season and the tension reaches boiling point when he decides to kill the prisoner Randall, leading to a fist fight surrounded by zombies that almost costs both men their lives. In the end it is Lori who unwittingly sets in motion a series of events that occupy the last two episodes by revealing to him that he may well be the father of her baby. The events to come are hinted at when Rick comments that Randall (loose in the woods having been freed) is not the only threat out there and they should look out for each other. Referring to the potential zombies, Rick may also have been aware of what was to come.


The barn burns in the backdrop of an impressively choreographed last stand in the season finale, signifying the end of their time at the farm as the group flee to pastures unknown. A third season is confirmed and it looks as though the social dynamics of the group may be shifting. Following on from his actions, Rick's position is in question, even with Lori and Carl and he lays the law down as dictator. The finale certainly posed questions to be answered by season three, what are the implications of being infected, who is the mystery gentleman that saved Andrea and where will the group head now. And will Merle ever catch up with them!

FILM: The Incredible Hulk (6/10)

Following on from the 2003 film Hulk, Marvel decided the best course of action prior to the Avengers film was to reboot the series with a new director and cast, resulting in this 2008 update starring Edward Norton in the title role. Hulk is a different type of superhero to most of the traditional good-looking all-American heroes such as Spiderman or Iron Man. Although tamed by Betty Ross, the Hulk is not capable of relating to humans and therefore the audience and I feel this has always made it difficult for storytellers and directors to produce engaging films with this character. 


On the occasions that the Hulk appears during the first half of the film, in a repetitive series of chase and escape scenes, he destroys almost everything in his path without remorse as Banner is unable to control his rage. At the end of the film, Banner intentionally turns into the Hulk in order to fight the Abomination, leading the audience to believe that the Hulk is now a fully fledged crime fighting superhero. This transformation between out of control animal and useful superhero may be the films idea of character development but apart from reuniting with Betty, no other significant events occur that explain this. Norton and Liv Tyler play their characters well and William Hurt is impressive as General Ross, despite the occasionally cheesy lines he is fed. Tim Roth gives an intense performance as Blonsky prior to his transformation into the Abomination. Ultimately though, despite being visually impressive, the final battle is between two CGI monsters and I found the film did not do enough to make me engage with Hulk. This is in part to do with the Hulk being unable to portray any real human emotion, this having to be shown through Betty at his side. Worth watching if you are a superhero film fan or as a warm-up for the Avengers.

FILM: True Romance (8/10)

No excuses for having never seen this film until now! Released all the way back in 1993 with a Quentin Tarantino script, True Romance is an energetic, fast-paced, road movie starring Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette as Tarantino's Bonnie and Clyde on the run from the mob.


The film bears all the hallmarks of Tarantino films of this era, it oozes his trademark combination of glamourous violence and cool characters and in many aspects is the trial run for Pulp Fiction and Natural Born Killers. While this may not have been the case back in 1993, looking back the film features an ensemble cast of supporting actors including Gary Oldman, Dennis Hopper, Samuel L Jackson, James Gandolfini and Christopher Walken, each of which Tarantino gives an interesting character with at least one scene to stand-out and make their own. Of particular mention is the famous 'Sicilian' scene between Walken and Hopper.


A must see film for any Tarantino fan.

FILM: 21 Jump Street (8/10)

First things first, this may be hard to believe but Channing Tatum is actually genuinely good in this film. He shows an adeptness for comedy that many would not expect. Perhaps his performance is in part due to his role, as the dumb jock of the pair, being naturally made for him. On the flip side, Jonah Hill plays the intelligent nerd of the pair, again a natural persona, and also delivers a strong script consistently packed with gags. Although the film treads the familiar path of 80's buddy movies with a plot reminiscent of Bad Boys, it does so with a strong sense of self-parody mixed in to the hilarious gross-out humour. At no point is this clearer than when the police chief revives the defunct undercover programme and comments that nobody has any original ideas anymore so all that is left to do is lazily repeat previous work, a fun poke at the films 80's TV series origin of the same name and similar plot. The films final third drags on slightly, with a few drawn out action sequences displacing the fun for marginally too long but all things considered 21 Jump Street is a good value laugh out loud comedy. In one line, Superbad meets Bad Boys.

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: Drive - (9/10)

I had high hopes for Ryan Gosling's performance on the basis of a possible (yet not forthcoming) Oscar nod and it did not disappoint. The powerfully understated performance as the loner who finds happiness with the family next door is fantastically delivered. A man who seems to consider the necessity of each and every word he speaks, the scenes where Gosling and Carey Mulligans relationship develops through the briefest of exchanges and longest of stares are particularly mesmerising with director Nicholas Refn stretching the scenes of the silence to the absolute limit before with the viewer feeling awkward. Refn manages illustrate the intimacy between the characters without the need for a lazy gratuitous sex scene, a scene which would have been considered mandatory in other films.
The driver (Gosling) begins to come out of his shell as the film progresses and initially hints at his violent capabilities when provoked by a former criminal associate with a loud mouth. This character becomes more prevalent as he strives to protect Irene from danger brought on through his own actions of goodwill. 



The film is stylish and has a retro feel to it, assisted by the excellent soundtrack of synth-heavy electro-pop. 
Yes, the actual car action pieces are few and far between, but in the end the driving only serves as the backdrop to the central story of the film. The film is builds up suspense in places, and maintains this through the finals scenes to the ending. Excellent. 

FILM: Clash of the Titans - (6/10)

Standard fare epic fantasy historical action film in the vein of 300. Louis Leterrier, of Transporter fame, leads Sam Worthington as Perseus into combat against the gods of Olympus. Worthington fits the bill as the all-Greek action hero but has little to work with in the script department, often finding it cliched and riddled with cheesy one-liners. The cast includes some big names, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes and Danny Huston but these characters are given little screen time in comparison with Worthington, with the exception of Fiennes, notable for his terrible portrayal of Hades complete with Voldemort voice. Worth mentioning that the visuals and special effects are excellent as one would expect with a film that relies upon them so heavily. 

FILM: Carnage - (8/10)

Quirky French play transferred to the big screen by Roman Polanksi and starring a strong cast of Jodie Foster, Kate Winslet, John C. Reilly and Christopher Waltz. Two sets of parents meet up to discuss the recent behaviour of their children with amicable intentions. The meeting quickly descends into a humourous farce as the four bicker and offend each other. All four characters take up allegiance with each other character at some point to verbally spar with the alternative pair. The script is witty and clever and all four actors give strong performances. Christoph Waltz's rude ignorant businessman father is the stand-out of the four, routinely answering his work phone in front of the couples until Foster reaches breaking point. All in all, an amusing and clever film showing that with the right material four actors and one set can be used to great effect.

FILM: Righteous Kill - (4/10)

Spoiler alert - pairing De Niro and Pacino together does not result in a great film alone. Given the chance to star alongside each other for what, on this outcome, may well be the final time, De Niro and Pacino play a pair of veteran detectives struggling to keep up with a serial killer on the loose. Thinking back I struggle to recall either of their characters actually doing any police work in the slightest, this falls to Donnie Wahlberg and John Leguizamo. Both actors play their characters as nonchalant, wise-cracking smart asses. This is a natural character for Pacino but why both need to appear so is unnecessary and just adds to the feeling that their hearts were not in this fully. That said, the story plods along until the dreadful twist at the end that left me more confused initially than anything else until I recognised how the writer had got away with it. A cheap trick, not in league with the writers previous work (Inside Man), that leaves the viewer feeling disappointed with the previous hour and half serving no purpose but lead up to this charade. Ardent Pacino and De Niro fans may be interested but otherwise steer clear.

FILM: Safe House - (7/10)

Set in Cape Town, Denzel Washington and Ryan Reynolds are the two CIA operatives, past and present playing cat and mouse with each other in Daniel Espinosa's first major US film. The film was shot in location in Cape Town, and this was obviously something that Espinosa felt keen to impress on the viewer, who is reminded this perhaps once too often with stunning shots of the area. It almost felt like the location was selected for this purpose first and the plot made to fit second. Equally strong performances from both Washington and Reynolds keep the viewer engrossed throughout the film in between the hit and miss action sequences until the slightly formulaic ending. Overall a fairly routine spy thriller that ticks all the boxes without setting the world alight.

FILM: Battle: Los Angeles (7/10)

Set in present day Los Angeles, Battle: Los Angeles follows a platoon of marines playing their part in defending the city against a large scale alien invasion. Granted, not for everyone's taste. Imagine Black Hawk Down meets Independence Day with all the usual war movie cliches thrown in and then some for good measure. Credit should be given to the screenplay for not giving in to the usual expletive filled rants so typical of marine films. This allowed the film to be rated 12 and I'm sure was appreciated by younger cinema-goers. The almost-documentary style filming of the aliens arrival and initial platoon movements work and the film is capable of developing a pretty reasonable level of suspense as the platoon encounter the first aliens. The special effects are fantastic and result in several visually intense action sequences. Bryan Tyler should also be praised for producing a big epic score that fits well with the scale of the invasion and the task faced by the characters. Ultimately though, the cliches win the day and the film pays for not providing any real human aspect for the viewers to relate to, with the exception of Eckhart. Saving Private Ryan remains the outstanding reference for how war movies can engage the viewer through character emotion. Sadly this is lacking in Battle, but the film will definitely appeal to sci-fi and action fans without a doubt.

FILM: In Time - (7/10)

Enjoyable thriller from the writer of The Truman Show, Andrew Niccol. Set in an age when time is the global currency and all humans are given only one year to live from their 25th birthday with additional time having to be earned or collected. This inevitably results in an imbalance between the time-rich and the time-poor who cling to every second they earn. Justin Timbalake is likeable as the lead character and strikes a good chemistry with Amanda Seyfried, who plays the Bonnie to his Clyde. Ultimately, the film falls short of delivering a truly great experience that the intriguing concept could warrant but is definitely worth a look.

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.