Pulp Fiction review

Jules: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee. 

Director: Quentin Tarantino
(1994)

There's something very special about Quentin Tarantino films, something that’s difficult to pinpoint. It’s not the quality of the cinematography, the flashes of hard violence or the intriguing narrative. No, I think my love for his films comes out of the fact he has characters sit somewhere and talk about shit for an entire film and still manages to craft some of the most brilliant, perversely funny films I've ever seen. There’s little doubt in anyone’s mind, Pulp Fiction is a fast talking, pop culture phenomenon.

Opening with a couple chatting about robbing liquor stores and restaurants, Pulp fiction grabs your attention from the get go. The dialogue is a standout; these characters remain seated for almost the entire scene, our interest held by the enthralling conversation. These 2 characters (Tim Roth and Amanda Plummer) are almost discarded as we jump cut to a pair of hitmen, Vincent (John Travolta) and Jules (Samuel L. Jackson) as they do dirty work for their boss, Marcellus Wallace (Ving Rhames). Tarantino isn’t content with just following this duo, and we witness more jump cuts involving prize-fighter Butch (Bruce Willis), Marcellus’ wife Mia (Uma Thurman) and the mysterious cleaner, the Wolf (Harvey Kietel). It’s presented in a non linear fashion, the story consists of various plot arcs that don’t instantly mesh, but become entrancing in the way they fall perfectly into place.

Tarantino shows us that he is one of the finest writers of his generation. There is nary an exchange that isn’t brimming with style or class, every word spoken is thoughtfully chosen. Homage’s are lathered on thick, his previous occupation as a video store clerk being used to full affect. Pulp may last 2 and a half hours, but sublime dialogue makes the time fly. The best scenes are those with Jackson and Travolta. The dialogue here is insane, ranging from the weird (comparing foot rubs to oral sex) to the hilarious (you wanna know what they call a quarter pounder with cheese in Europe? Royale with cheese.) The middle of the film becomes severely bogged down by Bruce Willis’ character Butch. It starts splendidly, with an excellent Christopher Walken starring flashback, but becomes tiresome. The following cab ride with a driver obsessed with death (Angela Jones) was good, but too much time is spent on Butch’s girlfriend Fabienne (Maria de Medeiros) talking about pot bellies and blueberry pancakes. This arc does finish excellently though, violence and death preventing this sizable chunk of film from becoming a total loss.

Complimenting the phenomenal dialogue is the superb work of Cinematographer Andrzej Sekula. His incredibly gorgeous cinematography goes beyond excessively flashing framing in order to augment the narrative. One scene that always stick in my mind is when Butch realises his precious pocket watch is missing. Things begin with a long shot framing both him and girlfriend Fabienne, as he roots through his suitcase to find it. As he searches, the camera slowing zooms in to focus on him, Fabienne out of shot but still talking. Pulp Fiction is full of shots as meaningful as this; both Tarantino and Sekula have successfully added a further layer to the way the story is told.

Once the credits role and all the pieces of the puzzle fall into place, Pulp Fiction can very much be considered and influential, genre defining classic. Rammed with iconic, memorable scenes and backed by a scintillating script and a perfect use of music, we have the defining film of the 90’s. The middle is dragged down and Tarantino pushes the boundaries of self cameo a little too far, but Pulp Fiction is and always will be a classic.

The walking dead Season 3 mid season finale Episode 8: Made to Suffer

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Warning, season 3 spoilers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click the link to reveal review.

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel review

 Evelyn:  Initially you're overwhelmed. But gradually you realize it's like a wave. Resist, and you'll be knocked over. Dive into it, and you'll swim out the other side. 

Director: John Madden
(2012)

If, like me, your below the age of 20, chances are haven't seen The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel. A film aimed very much at the over 60’s crowd, it’s been a box office success proving the over 60’s crowd shouldn’t be ignored. After watching it on Blu Ray, I was surprised at how poignant and diversely appealing the film was, making one of the best comedies so far this year.

TBEMH follows a group of British pensioners who decide that retiring abroad in India is how they wish to spend their remaining days. By using a smartly cut opening 15 minutes, director John Madden effectively establishes the characters, as well as their motives. Evelyn (Judi Dench) leaves England in an attempt to move on after the death of her husband, Muriel (Maggie Smith) moves to get her hip replaced quicker, fearing her time on this earth is short despite her racist tendencies (“I can’t wait that long, I don’t even buy green bananas!”). Others such as Douglas (Bill Nighy) and Jean (Penelope Wilton) leave because they have no choice, while Madge and Norman (Celia Imrie and Roland Pickup) make the trip for a sense of adventure. The most interesting character is Tom Wilkinson’s Graham, who’s choice to return to India is initially a mystery, and the films revelation of his motives is both powerful and memorable, quite easily the highlight of the film.

The state of the hotel itself is like many things in life, considerably different from the pictures. It has its charms, but manager Sonny (Dev Patel) lacks the needed funds required to renovate. One of the many joys of TBEMH is seeing how these various characters deal when outside their comfort zones. While Douglas wanders the city exploring, Jean and Muriel scarcely leave the hotel, their distaste of Indian culture being the primary cause. The plot is purely character driven which does wonders at pacing the film proficiently. The large cast means we get constant progression throughout the film; a joyous feat that keeps TBEMH from sliding in banality.

While the sheer variety of the different story arcs enjoyable, it’s almost a waste of talent that some of the characters are severely underutilised. For all his talent, Bill Nighy has only a handful of scenes, a poor decision considering his importance to Dench’s story (inarguably the ‘main’ character).  Norman makes for some excellent comedic moments, but is used far too sparingly. The same applies to Madge, her cougar like attitude produces chuckles, but she is condemned to the role of comic relief at such an early stage of the film.

The biggest shortcoming that TBEMH suffers from is its ending. Events are a little rushed and would have benefitted tremendously from having more time to unfold. This neuters the ending somewhat, what could have been a climax boiling with emotion is merely warm instead. Penelope Wilton's Jean is the closest the film gets to an antagonist, but is too shallow to resemble anything other than a caricature; despite her solid performance. While it targets a mature crowd, The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel is a wonderful blend of happiness, despair and adventure that can be enjoyed by anyone regardless of their age.

Short Review: The Snowman and the Snowdog

Director: Hilary Audus
(2012)

After the beautiful wordless short hit that was short The Snowman in 1982, we have a sequel on the 30^th anniversary of such a beloved classic. Following the young child from the original as he moves house and suffers the loss of his dog, we’re once again drawn into the magical world of the snowman on the eve of Christmas. Much like its predecessor, no characters speak; TSATS is a silent short, the only words are lyrics from the song that erupts during the film’s most impressive scene. The flickering art style and gorgeous animation has been retained that adds to the magical splendour excellently. The story is light, the plot nearly identical to The Snowman and the Snowdog’s character almost superfluous, but TSATS is a worthy sequel, complete with one of the most graceful flying scenes you’re likely to ever witness.

Silver Linings Playbook review

Pat: You have poor social skills. You have a problem. 
Tiffany: I have a problem? You say more inappropriate things than appropriate things. 

Director: David O.Russell
(2012)

Mental conditions are a very difficult, and often serious subject to commit to film. When making a film that deals with such illnesses, it’s undoubtedly going to be a challenge for any director. Play things too dark and the audience may feel stifled and melancholic. Conversely playing events solely for laughs will cause viewers to scratch their heads or even be offended. Much like last years The Descendants, Silver Linings Playbook is a jarring mix of comedy and drama. The only difference is Director David O. Russell has the deftness of a sledgehammer.

The film opens with Pat (Bradley Cooper) in a mental institution. His mother (Jacki Weaver) intends to bring him home after 8 months of his spell, his incarceration caused by a nervous breakdown after his wife cheated on him. This, coupled with his Bi Polar has caused him to realise he needs to reinvent himself in order to have any chance of being with the woman that he loves, despite the  restraining order she has on him. Upon returning home, Pat meets Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence), a desperate, depressed widow who forms a bond with the eccentric Pat as the 2 of them help each other solve their problems. If first impressions were any indication of a films overall quality, SLP has a very unconvincing start. Characters are poorly developed, the plot is stop and start and the story is introduced simply isn’t satisfying. The first 20 minutes are a total grind, and things don’t seem to be getting any better until Lawrence’s Tiffany appears, finally events shift into a higher gear.

The performances are easily the best thing about Silver Linings Playbook. Bradley Cooper, Hollywood’s leading funny man is redefined here in a more serious, dramatic role. It’s a vast departure from the half baked lounging that he did in the Hangover films, and he does have some scenes where he shows he can, ya'know, act. His performances won’t be removing your socks ala Joaquin Phoenix in The Master, but it’s a solid, if inconsistent turn. 2012’s new girl Jennifer Lawrence on the other hand, is easily the star, giving the finest performance in the film, an academy Award contender and rightfully so. Since her tremendous work in The Hunger Games earlier this year she has proved her consistency, once again taking her characters nuances and troubles, displaying them with dramatic authenticity. It’s one of those performances where she embodies the character completely.

So while these young actors shine brightly, the more experienced ones suffer at the hands of minute screen time and a poor script. Robert De Niro plays Pats violent OCD suffering father who, like the entire family, possesses an almost unhealthy obsession with the Philadelphia Eagles. The choice to play his OCD almost solely for laughs is a bad one that's not improved by another one of De Niro’s half arsed attempts at acting. I struggle to look at this man and remember that he once gave the world Travis Bickle; his fall from brilliance has indeed been a great one. Still, at least the script asks something of him, a colossal contrast to Jacki Weaver’s character. Weaver is a great actress relegated to a worrisome mother figure that possesses all the backbone of a jellyfish.

Russell’s slack script tarnishes other aspects of the film too. His characters unhealthy obsession with the Philadelphia Eagles is. Using characters mental disorders to generate laughs is certainly questionable, but the laughs it produces are out of guilt, not the witty script. After the 4^th time Pat remarks about Tiffany’s dead husband, we kind of get the point. This repetitious nature stretches to the character obsession with their local team too, the Philadelphia Eagles. It’s a quirk at first, but soon becomes a rather irksome aspect of the film. What's more bewildering is the part they play in the plot. De Niro’s character insists on betting his life savings  in a parlay the depends on both the Eagles winning and Pat and Tiffany achieving a 5 out of 10 in a dance contest the pair have been practicing for. It’s utterly absurd, the shit that any sane writer would steer clear of due to its pure ridiculousness. I understand that Russell adapted from a book, but why he didn’t refine this terrible aspect of the plot is beyond me.

So after some good scenes between Pat and Tiffany, the friendship they forge through dancing, we arrive at a finale that pulls the whole film into cliché. Will there ever be a film where a man and woman can be just friends? Considering how SLP does well at distinguishing itself from other RomComs, Russell totally bottles it. Coupled with a terrible plot full of convenience, contrivance and plain bad writing, Silver Linings Playbook falls back on its strong performances and guilty humour for all of its 2 hour runtime.

Short review: Cube

Director: Vincenzo Natali
(1997)

Despite hating Vincenzo Natali’s Splice (2009), I was oddly drawn to his 1997 cult hit, Cube. It puts 6 random strangers into a maze of cubes; each of these strangers possesses a skill that is integral to aiding the groups escape. The characters themselves are almost caricatures, complete with little chemistry and poor performances from the entire cast. Yet this doesn’t detract from the film or the intrigue of the cube itself, its odd machinations and Kafkaesque mystery being one of the finest aspects of the film. The plot unfolds rapidly; each new room offers a new challenge that breaks the group’s conceptions of the maze, causing them to rethink how they will escape. Despite the limited environment (we never leave the cube throughout the 90 minute runtime), Cube constantly thrills; a monumental achievement considering it relies on its audience to gather their own conclusions

The Hunger Games review

Katniss Everdeen: May the odds be ever in your favor. 

Director: Gary Ross
(2012)

Films that are adapted from popular novels always face certain challenges when they hit cinema screens. Fans must be catered to, there's nothing worse than the target audience of said adaptation feeling screwed over. Conversely, appeal to general moviegoers is essential in order to be a big enough box office success to warrant a sequel. For the most part, The Hunger Games has the necessary elements to both camps, and is an involving, entertaining picture for the masses.

Set in a dystopian future of Panem, a broken America that has survived the ravages of war after an uprising against the tyrannical Capitol has failed. In order to intimidate the 12 districts that remain in Panem, the Capitol hosts an event called ‘The Hunger Games’. This yearly event takes 1 boy and 1 girl from each district and forces them to fight to the death until only one remains. After her sister gets selected for the games, our heroine Katniss Everdeen volunteers herself to be entered in order to save her younger sibling.

Right off the bat its clear that director Gary Ross is happy to show us the broken squalor that Katniss has to suffer in her impoverished home in district 12. People live in huts and shacks, scavenge food and wash in tubs. When Katniss sneaks out of bounds to hunt for food the electric fence that barricades her in is without power, yet another sign that they struggle to survive each day. It’s strong stuff, and once we’re whisked off to the Capitol at the end of the opening 3^rd, the juxtaposition is a vast one. The emerald greens and thick browns are contrasted with clean whites and pastel shades that resonate from the quirky clothing of the Capitols residents. In terms of crafting a believable and interesting world, Ross is wholly successful.

While the concept of last-man-standing-deathmatch-with-kids isn’t the freshest idea in the world, The Hunger Games succeeds where others fail for a multitude of reasons. Firstly, we have some strong build-up before the games actually start; allowing Katniss to the get the character development required to be a likeable and fully fleshed out character. We also meet the other tributes and get some backstory on them, adding some small meaning to events that unfold in the arena. This can be accredited to both the strong script from Ross, Suzanne Collins (also the author of the novel) and Billy as well as Jennifer Lawrence’s excellent performance. Every emotion is cast on her face; every action feels grounded and real. She’s the driving force for a good portion of the film, due to her isolation inside the arena. It’s undeniable that with a lesser talent as the lead, The Hunger Games would simply be a weaker film.

After an interesting build up involving mentor Haymitch (Woody Harrelson) Presenter Caesar Flickerman (Stanley Tucci) and Gameswoman Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks), Katniss, fellow district 12 competitor Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) and the remaining children are thrown into the arena in a breathless sequence of violence and death. At least, that what I think happens, as Ross’ choice to violently jerk the camera around is crude and often incomprehensible. It’s an understandable decision (to keep the certificate at a fan friendly 12A) yet is ruins action scenes almost outright. What's worse is this erratic cinematography is used constantly in order to give a sense of first person perspective for the audience. When the camera is restless in filming 2 people conversing at a table, it’s clear that the execution of this style was horrendous. The total lack of technical proficiency doesn’t end there, and the editing is also unnecessarily choppy, with shots that don’t mesh together with any impression of cohesion.  ILM’s CGI work is also slack, with muddy textures and animals that merrily skip through the uncanny valley. Considering the 78 million dollar budget, The Hunger Games has a rough and sloppy feel to it.

The Games themselves make up the latter half of the film and are made all the more interesting thanks to the great work that adds weight to the demise of many of the characters. While half of the 24 tributes lack dialogue, the others get some semblance of development, and this causes the vicious murders to have a far greater impact. Some tributes form temporary alliances, teaming up to prey on the weak. Others work alone, staying alive thanks to honed survival skills or just pure luck. The potential monotony of the forest environment is alleviated by cuts to the control room, where the arena is modified to make the Games more exciting, and to Tucci’s commentator, used to inform the audience of events that are mysteries even to Katniss. Both break the films 1^st person perspective, but don’t feel tacked on and add to the overall desperation of Katniss’ situation.

Yet despite said imperfections, The Hunger games is something that is still quite rare in today’s age of cinema; a film aimed at young adults that doesn’t pander solely to its audience. The result is an enjoyable, entertaining feature that is accessible to a wide variety of audiences. It will also do wonders for Lawrence; undoubtedly one of the stars of tomorrow.

The Blair Witch Project review

Heather Donahue: How's east? 

Michael Williams: East? 
Heather Donahue: Yeah, we've been going south all this time. How's east? 
Michael Williams: Wicked Witch of the West, Wicked Witch of the East. Which one was bad? 
Heather Donahue: Wicked Witch of the West was the bad one. 
Michael Williams: Then we should go east. 

Director: Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sánchez
(1999)

No one in their right mind would state than 1999 wasn’t a stupendous year for movies. From American Beauty to Fight Club, audiences of a variety of tastes were certainly well catered for. Out of these great films though, only 2 changed the landscape of cinema, and both shook their respective genres to their core. The Matrix reinvented Sci-Fi with its perfect blend of cyberpunk, martial arts and philosophy, inspiring directors for years to come. The other, often forgotten game changer was The Blair Witch Project, the film that can be accredited with sparking off the craze for the ‘found footage’ genre that makes up the majority of today’s horror offerings.

The plot here is a simplistic, if functional one. A group of 3 young adults wish to make a documentary about the legend of the Blair Witch, a paranormal entity that caused the deaths of many children in the 1940’s. The film takes place in Burkittsville Maryland as the three filmmakers Heather (Heather Donahue) Josh (Joshua Leonard) and Mike (Michael Williams) head off into the woods to gain footage for their project. And it’s not long before events take a turn for the worst and the trio become lost in the woods.

What freaked audiences out most when the film released was simply down to the opening title card. It stated that the events we see is from recovered footage from 1994, and everything is indeed real. While eagled eyed viewers will spot a few anachronisms to discredit this, for the most part, Directors Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sánchez does a fine job of making a realistic, involving film. This feels mainly due to working without a script, and instead leaving the cast rough notes at the various campsites that the actors travelled to. This isolation from cast and crew was a bold choice, yet it works wonderfully. The performances feel absolutely authentic, from the delivery of the ad libbed dialogue to the way each characters personalities conflict with each other.

The film is entirely shot via handheld cameras, and not once do we see any footage that isn’t from a first person perspective. Josh handles the black and white 16mm camera, while heather documents their trip on colour video. This design choice puts us right in the thick of the woods with the characters and the results are great. We as an audience never gets to leave the uncomfortable atmosphere of the group and this leaves us drained and fatigued; like a fourth member of the group. The film constantly ratchets up the tension in every passing shot, tempers rise as things start to go bump in the night. The first night it sounds like an owl and the crunching of a few twigs, but becomes far more malevolent as the nights pass. As heather sticks her camera out the tent to try and sight the cause of the disturbance, the image is pitch black and all we can make out is the sounds of something in the distance. It’s in these heart in the mouth moments that The Blair Witch Project truly shines. Myrick and Sánchez quite literally show us nothing, never resorting to cheap jumps or screaming monsters. The tension builds and builds and then, nothing. It’s undoubtedly an uncomfortable experience that the many imitators simply fail to top.

While lasting a slight hour and 20 minutes, TBWP does have some considerable problems that cause monotony, partly due to the unfulfilling script. The group becomes lost and then proceed to walk for days, complete with bickering and squabbles. Heather is an infuriating, self centred bitch, Mike whines continually, leaving Josh as the only member of the groups who even comes close to be likeable.   The camera is jerked around too much as well, many scenes succumbing to the limitations of such a style. It’s best to avoid this film completely if you suffer from motion sickness as a tripod is almost unheard of. By far the biggest negative that can be levelled at TBWP is that its most innovative aspect, being a ‘true’ story, has been rendered defunct by the ravages of time. 13 years ago people thought this footage was real; nowadays this is an easy charade to see through, resulting in a film that doesn’t retain that sharp edge that made it renowned.  While these faults are somewhat severe this is still a film worth watching, if only to witness a film the redefined a genre.

Short review: Killer Joe

Director: WIlliam Friedkin
(2012)

From The Exorcist director William Friedkin comes Killer Joe, a dark yet comical thriller about murder and deception. When Chris (Emile Hirsch) comes up with a plan to kill his mother for her insurance payout, he hires Killer Joe (Matthew McConaughey) to do the deed. Without the blood money upfront, sister Dottie (Juno Temple) is offered as a retainer. Naturally, things go pear shaped, and conflicts amongst the family arise. Based on a play of the same name, the best scenes are those that feature multiple characters sitting in one location conversing. The dialogue is sharp, managing to be simultaneously witty and gruesomely dark. McConaughey is good as the unhinged Joe, the highlight of a remarkably solid cast. The ending serves up a massive anticlimax however; the careful build up destroyed in a hail of disappointment. Regardless, it’ll put you off KFC for life.

Short review: Stake Land

Director: Jim Mickle
(2010)

Beginning with a moody monologue, Jim Mickle’s Stake Land is an ultra serious apocalyptic film, set in a vampire infested America. Martin (Connor Paolo) and his mentor Mister (Nick Damici) are travelling to the fabled New Eden to escape the horrors of the world. Throughout its 98 minutes, Stakeland is content to tick all the generic boxes of its genre, rarely surprising its audience. Hordes of foes? Check. Cheap jump scares? Check. Religious lunatics? Check. A car breaking down at the worst possible time? Oh yes. This rudimentary execution seeps into every pore of the production, from the uninspired acting to the functional fight scenes. Only 2 set pieces- a tracking shot portraying Christians attacking a camp by throwing vamps out of a helicopter and being stalked by an intelligent bloodsucker- offer any modicum of thrills. And even then these are over before they've begun.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo review

Henrik Vanger: You will be investigating thieves, misers, bullies. The most detestable collection of people that you will ever meet - my family. 

Director: David Fincher
(2011)

When it comes to remakes, sequels and reboots, I'm almost always in the group that strongly opposes the decision to make such a film, even more so when it’s a Hollywood remake of a foreign masterpiece. While I sure as hell won’t be watching Spike Lee’s Oldboy remake, I did decide to watch David Fincher’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo instead of the original. Why? Because it’s directed by David Fincher.

While this decision may seem silly and slightly absurd, Fincher’s track record has so far been fantastic and out of the many I've seen they’ve all been likeable, riveting pieces of cinema. So while the original Swedish trilogy is definitely something I intend to watch, I'm more than happy to wait for the ‘American’ versions instead. Although this wait might be easier said than done, as The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is a fantastic thriller that keeps you guessing thanks to its twisting plot and engaging characters.

It’s obvious from the opening scene that you’re watching a Fincher film. It has Jeff Cronenweth’s stunning cinematography, Trent Reznor’s understated yet effective score and a muted colour scheme that plunges Stockholm into a dreary yet provocative haze. Our protagonist Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) has just lost a court case for libel, and now possesses a depleted bank account and a reputation in tatters. Things begin to turn around when industrialist Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer) offers him a murder mystery case that has gone unsolved for 40 years, concerning his niece, Harriet. Henrik is convinced the killer is a member of his family, all of whom live on the same island that possesses only one bridge to the mainland. Juxtaposing Mikael’s journey is that of Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara) a mentally damaged woman who is an exceedingly talented hacker with a bizarre dress sense.

What's so fantastic about these 2 characters is how Fincher and his award winning editors Angus Wall and Kirk Baxter perfectly pace these plot arcs in the first half of the film. We spend the exact amount of time with Mikael and his initial clue mongering before getting an insight into Lisbeth’s life, in which she suffers the abuses of her new social worker and an attempted mugging on a subway. This allows for a breathless pace, allowing for intricate yet never overly complicated plot to become totally engrossing. The second half of the film also receives such superb treatment and the 2 and a half hour running time simply flies by; a colossal achievement for a film of such length and intricacy.

The complex plot is thanks to Steven Zallian’s stellar script, a solid adaptation from the book of Stieg Larsson. By drip feeding the audience clues in amongst plenty on exposition, Zallian gives the viewer enough information to keep up with the plot, but never allows for them to become overly knowledgeable about which direction events will travel in next. The dialogue doesn’t feature the quirks or snappy pacing that was so prominent in The Social Network, but this is a different breed of film, one that's cold and mysterious as opposed to being overtly smart and nerdy. The script falters towards the end, where the climax of the book is relegated to mildly gripping epilogue. The reveal itself is somewhat lacking also, but this can be chalked up to the build-up being so finely crafted; the payoff simply couldn’t live up to tactful work from both director and writer.

One thing is for sure, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is a dark, unsettling film. Violence and murder are brutal, but almost pale when compared to the early rape scene. It’s hard to stomach, but Fincher knows its importance to character development, so the full force of such an evil act is shown. Such a scene would be pointless if the protagonists weren’t engaging, but thankfully Craig, Mara and Plumber all do more than enough to show the depth and nuances of their characters. The payoff might not be mind blowing, but The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is a smart, riveting thriller guided with Fincher’s talent and precision. Easily one of the best remakes ever, as well as the best thriller of 2011.

Short review: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs

Directors: Phil Lord and Chris Miller
(2009)

Coming from Sony animation, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs is a solid if relatively unspectacular film that is as silly as it is fun. Flint Lockwood (Bill Hader) is an inventor down on his luck until he accidently makes food rain from the sky. While this phenomenon boosts his town’s economy, things spiral out of control when the giant food begins to wreck havoc. He aims to stop the surreal events by teaming up with weather girl Sam (Anna Faris) and his monkey Steve (Neil Patrick Harris). Featuring some vivid if simplistic animation, Cloudy is a visual treat, with its highlight being escaping from a tornado made of spaghetti. However, the supporting characters are annoying and the climax suffers from shoehorning in an underdeveloped antagonist to act as conflict and payoff for our characters journey

Marble Hornets: Prologue to episode 11 review

Based on the fearsome and immensely popular Slenderman meme, Marble Hornets is a collection of episodic content that can be found on Youtube. The backstory behind the series is relatively simple, film student Alex gives up his raw footage of his project to J before its completed, citing ‘unworkable conditions’ on the set, despite being in within close proximity to his home. J uploads this footage to Youtube, and we’re thrown into a thoroughly unnerving series concerning an entity known only as ‘The Operator’.

The prologue starts innocuously enough, featuring footage from a car journey interspersed with text from J, explaining the story about how he came into possession of the tapes, as well as Alex leaving school. It sets the tone perfectly, and the episodes are paced sufficiently in order to keep interest. What's great is that some episodes are out of chronological order, and its satisfying to see events unfold from a different perspective.

While E1 gives us a fleeting glimpse of the mysterious tall man, the next few uploads show Alex behaving strangely, as well as eerie visual and audio distortions. While these initially seem like imperfections from filming, they have sinister light shone on them around E5. E6 and E7 feature more sightings although the latter gives the audience a bit too much of a good look at our strange stalker.

The remaining episodes continue to show Alex’s erratic and aggressive behaviour that culminates with a restrained yet horrifying payoff in E11. Aside from some unexpected intentional audio distortion, Marble Hornets doesn’t resort to cheap scare tactics; but would much rather subject its audience to a slow burning build-up. This tension does get a chilling payoff every few episodes, but in a way that possesses a great deal of control. Marble Hornets doesn’t want to startle you with cheap, jumpy scares. Instead, it would much rather get under your skin and play on your mind, and it succeeds for the most part. If these 12 episodes are any indication, fans of true fear are in for a treat.

Twilight review

Isabella Swan: Will you tell me the truth? 
Edward Cullen: No, probably not. 
Edward Cullen: I'd rather hear your theories. 
Isabella Swan: I have considered radioactive spiders and kryptonite. 
Edward Cullen: All superhero stuff right? But what if I'm not the hero? What if I am the bad guy? 

Director: Catherine Hardwicke
(2008)

It’s hard to go into a popular and commercially successful film with an open mind. After legions of teenage girls call it the ‘best movie evar’ and consider it the second coming of Jesus, its difficult to take said film seriously. With my best efforts, I completed my first viewing of Twilight, a film shamelessly engineered to hoover up money from its easily manipulated target audience.

The story is a simple and relatable one, a major reason why twilight is the success that it is today, a multibillion dollar franchise. Our protagonist, Bella (Kristen Stewart showing all one of her facial expressions) is an average girl, burdened with the hardship of moving schools from Arizona to Washington to live with her father. Soon she falls for Edward Cullen, a mysterious and impossibly attractive student who, as it turns out, is a vampire. Bella and Edward begin a relationship that not only endangers her, but also both their families.

As a romance, Twilight sucks. The pairing of Bella and Edward possesses no chemistry, a fatal flaw that can be attributed to both the terrible script and the dire acting. Edward is a poorly written character, hormonal to the point of having mood swings that effortlessly shatter any character development. Pattison has a degree of talent lurking under this shoddy character, but director Catherine Hardwicke completely fails to coax it out. The first half of the film involves Edward being nice to Bella, followed by being a total dick to her in the next shot. A prime example of the abysmal chemistry between the pair is when they get put together in biology. There’s no tension, romance or even awkwardness, just bad acting and writing.

Kristen Stewart is indescribably bad in the lead role, almost effortlessly ruining every scene she’s in. It may be a shock to her, but perpetually pouting, face devoid of emotion and mouth slightly parted doesn’t constitute as acting. Especially when it was her attempt at showing happiness. She was passable in Adventureland (2009, just a year later) but here she is abhorrent. The rest of the cast don’t fare much better, from her friendship group of stereotypes, her almost equally expressionless father (Billy Burke) to Jacob (Taylor Lautner), another teen idol with little in the way of actual talent. In all honesty the best character is the Washington countryside itself, a stunning collection of emerald greens and muted browns that still portrays emotion better than the entire cast.

This insipid storyline drags on for far longer than it should, until Bella’s scent is caught by the more malicious Vampires in the region, and must flee with the rest of the Cullen family to safety. The barely cooked romance is temporarily disposed of in favour of an interesting escape; the family splits into groups in an attempt to lure these antagonists away from Edward's new love. This burst of adrenaline is the undoubted highlight of the film, although this is still ruined by a final fight that has some hideous special effects. These hideous visuals match the quality of the rest of the film; cheesy and unimaginative.

With so little in the way of redeeming qualities, it’s truly perplexing as to why it’s garnered so much success. Any teenager who wants to watch good fantasy films needs to look no further than Harry Potter, and the yearly release of trashy RomComs still offer more emotion and heart than this insipid mess. If terrible acting and laughable writing is your thing, Twilight may well be the film for you.

Project X review

Costa: Tonights about the girls we never had a shot at. Tonight's about changing the game. 

Director: Nima Nourizadeh
(2012)

The premise behind Project X is simple, 3 friends aim to throw the party of a lifetime. The idea behind said party starts with humble beginnings. As his parents go away for the weekend, Thomas and his 2 buds, Costa and JB plan a gathering to mark his birthday. Scared no one will turn up; he enlists Costa to invite people on his behalf. Mass marketing and the use of craigslist later, the cap of 50 people Thomas set is smashed considerably. From here on, project X is equivalent to a Ferrari speeding flat-out down a motorway for an hour.

In the place of story, project X director Nima Nourizadeh gives us wonderful stunts. Skateboarding off of roofs, hanging from chandeliers and jumping through windows, it’s all here in full force. These events spiral out of control towards the films climax and become lacking in plausibility and logic. Thankfully the scale of the party increases, with Nourizadeh conveying a frenetic, feel good spirit through almost a dozen montages. The content of these is as you can expect, drugs, alcohol, and horny teenage boys scoring with horny teenage girls, all put to a club and hip hop soundtrack. The downtime between these montages mostly consists of Thomas worrying about his house, as well as a few outside threats to the party itself. Its disappointing that all this is fluff, filler just to pad out the running time already short running time. But the disappointment of the dramatic element becomes irrelevant as the film charges head first into another sense assaulting montage. It’s like sugar; it gives a great buzz but offers no long lasting sustenance.

While project X is riddled with flaws, some are bigger culprits than others. Things get a little too silly in the final act, and while I enjoyed seeing a crazy party, when events become life threatening, the film loses its fun. The romance plot arc was useless and tacked on in a poor attempt to give a story less film closure. When making something as experimental and freeform as project x, closure is about as useful as non alcoholic beverages. As much as teenage boys love it, the camera lingers on the body of women a little too much here. We get it, the party is full of attractive girls, but here it very much becomes a form of exploitation. The chance to include any form of weaving tracking shot through the party is an opportunity missed however; screaming volumes about the quality and ambition of the film.

If you’re a teenager, Project X is the stuff dreams are made of. An endless party with no rules or constraints, infinite alcohol, no law, consequence or regret, just sheer drunken euphoria is etched into every frame. Project X is not a good film, nor is it clever or responsible. It exploits its target audience to the maximum possible degree; hell the swimming pool in Thomas’ backyard has more depth. But it captures the free spirit of youth just as well as anything else out there, and for that, and only that, it is to be recommended.

Short review: The Nightmare Before Christmas

Director: Henry Selick
(1993)

While directed by Henry Selick, Tim Burton is often seen as the driving force behind this quirky stop motion animation from Disney. Following Jack Skellington, King of Halloween town as becomes bored of celebrating his spooky holiday and instead decides to celebrate Christmas instead. Cue a good willed takeover from ‘Sandy Claws’ as Jack gets the residents of Halloween town to make toys for children, which turn out horrific due to their scary nature. The film is stuffed with songs, used to add exposition to events without the need for excessive dialogue. The tunes are solid, but some tarnish the experience somewhat by dragging the pacing to a near standstill. This charming tale is amplified by some stunning animation and set design giving the entire production a dark charm that's almost unrepeatable. It lacks substance, but remains fun nonetheless.

Home Alone review

Marv: Kids are scared of the dark. 
Harry: You're afraid of the dark, too, Marv. 

Director: Christopher Columbus
(1990)

Each year around Christmastime, I always try to catch as many films centred on the festive period as possible. And every year, it’s become almost tradition in my household to watch the 1990 family favourite, Home Alone.

This light-hearted film focuses on Kevin (Macaulay Culkin at the peak of his fame), an annoying know it all child who’s family accidently leaves him at home over the holidays as they fly to France on vacation. Mid flight his mother Kate (Catherine O’Hara) realises they've forgotten him and embarks on a quest to get home. Initially Kevin is beguiled by the disappearance of his entire family from the house, naively believing that his wish for them to disappear had come true. Regardless, he is enamoured with this newfound freedom that is so seldom to an 8 year old child with multiple siblings.

This lack of restrictions is an immense weight lifted off Kevin, and considering we’ve all been children once, we can relate to his happiness and relief of nagging parents and peers. The second third of the film does a solid job of emphasising this, and Kevin indulges in the finer aspects of childhood. No bedtimes? Check. Marshmallows and chocolate sauce for a meal? Check. The ability to pick the TV channel that he wants to watch? Check, check, check. All while Kevin wallows in his euphoric paradise, we learn of The Wet Bandits Harry and Marv (Joe Pesci and Daniel Stern respectively), 2 idiotic thieves who plan to hit Kevin’s Neighbourhood which is empty due to the residents leaving to see their families.

The final third of Home Alone is when events hit their zenith, and we’re given some absurd and often funny scenes. Knowing that the thieves are about to strike, Kevin sets up traps all around his house in anticipation for their arrival. Writer/Director Chris Columbus shows his talent at producing quirky and inventive comedy. From putting nails on the steps in the basement to setting tripwires attached to blowtorches, Columbus’ scenarios are full of ingenuity and generate laughter almost with ease.

Despite being tonally fluffy, Home alone has some issues that simply can’t be ignored. While Columbus’ script does exceedingly well at avoiding the use of contrived plot devices, it occasionally falls into such a frustrating pitfall. When Kevin’s mother calls the Chicago police from France to ask them to send an officer around to check on Kevin, the officer haphazardly knocks on the door, before turning away 5 seconds later and declaring that no one is home. While events such as this cause mild frustration, nothing compares to the annoyance of Culkin's performance.  He’s a bigmouthed precocious brat who spends the 2 thirds of the film whining and screaming when applying aftershave. His character becomes somewhat tolerable by the films conclusion, but still manages to be absolutely infuriating for the bigger part of the film.

Regardless of Culkin’s infuriating performance or some bad writing, Columbus has done a good job of delivering a solid Christmas film that has appeal to the whole family. While it pales in the shadow of something like it’s a Wonderful Life, Home Alone shouldn’t be overlooked when it comes to choosing the next festive film   

Close Encounters of the Third Kind review

Roy Neary: I know this sounds crazy, but ever since yesterday on the road, I've been seeing this shape. Shaving cream, pillows... Dammit! I know this. I know what this is! This means something. This is important. 

Director: Steven Spielberg
(1977)

When watching a Steven Spielberg film, there are certain expectations, no matter how open minded a viewer you are. He's made many great films in his time, and I was sure that Close Encounters was going to be another addition to his good list. While Close Encounters is a decent film, it doesn’t live up to the standard of this great director’s work, both before and after its 1977 release.

The film follows Roy Neary, a cable worker, husband and father of 3. After witnessing flying spaceships in the night sky, he begins his search to understand what he witnessed, at the neglect of his job and loved ones. Richard Dreyfuss is astonishing as Roy, a likable man, seemingly discontent with his drab suburban lifestyle. Soon after his first extra terrestrial experience, he becomes obsessed with a mountain, trying to understand what it symbolises. He isn’t alone with these experiences, we see Jillian Guiler (Melinda Dillon) drawing the mountain in her artwork; she also shared this bizarre experience with Roy and wants to find answers.

One thing that is a mainstay in Spielberg's films is his frequently excellent cinematography. He really frames his scenes fantastically, and it makes for some interesting visual storytelling. This is seamlessly coupled with some stunning visual effects from the brilliance that is Douglas Trumbull. The first view we get of the alien crafts is a sight to behold, and even in today’s world of CGI, this scene holds up remarkably well. But its nothing compared to what's in store for the climax. The reveal of the mothership is an incredible sight. Its typical Spielberg, every frame drips with magic and wonder, the very same he would apply to E.T just 5 years later.

Roy is a very irresponsible man, though giving him such a title might be pushing it. He’s a big kid at heart and his love for model trains and the film Pinocchio cement this representation. He has a compulsion to figure out the significance of the mountain and his drive to understand the seemingly impossible is certainly interesting, but to neglect his family and job lessens how much we can care about his struggle. What's worse is that his kids are annoying loudmouthed brats and his wife is a total bitch, a poor attempt at making us empathise with him. 

The film is at its best when we witness aspects of suburban life behaving in a strange manner. Record players and TV’s switch on randomly, battery powered torches stop and start erratically and toy cars spin into life. This anonymity gives the first half of Close Encounters a mysterious, almost unsettling vibe, and it’s absolutely engrossing. Events remain sufficiently interesting right up until the final 30 minutes, where we the story is concluded in a fractured and unsatisfying manner. While I admire ambiguity in films, Close Encounters offers plenty of questions, but we get far too little in terms of payoff by the time the credits roll around. For a director so inclined to beat his audience over the head with blatant symbolism and obvious meaning, Close Encounters is happy enough to be frustratingly vague.

By the end, close encounters of the third kind gave me a deflated feeling. It was a fantastic combination of intrigue, thrill and wonder. The answerless ending dulls the entire experience, and the whole experience begins to feel hollow as we stop caring for our protagonist. A film such as this shouldn’t spell everything out to its audience, but a few answers would have gone a long way.