Interstellar

Directed by:

Christopher Nolan

Starring:

Matthew McConaughey

Anne Hathaway

Michael Caine

Jessica Chastain

Christopher Nolan, Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Michael Caine, a huge budget and worldwide fanfare. It's safe to say that you know what to expect when you go to see Interstellar. A very long movie, an epic of biblical proportions, heightened drama, more tension than in the chest of an asthmatic old lady carrying heavy shopping and fantastic story telling. You will not be disappointed.

Interstellar is a slow-burner but it has to be, Man Of Steel showed us what happens when the movie is THAT long and tears off the line - we remember the general gist of what happened but I'll be damned if I remember much of the plot or the millions of secondary characters for that matter! Here though, Nolan reverts to the formula that served him so well in the Dark Knight franchise. We are allowed to learn to love and to hate the characters before they are thrust into exciting incidents.

Matthew McConaughey stars as Cooper, a genius-turned-farmer, in a world set somewhere in the not-too-distant future where the need for farmers and for produce far outweighs the need for engineers and scientists. That the world we are seeing is a very real probability lends credibility to Interstellar. There are no fancy contraptions, take note Back To The Future II (where are the floating cars and inside-out jeans and self-drying jackets?) This world, on the brink of dystopia, reminds us that brain power and cunning and all of our books and education count for nothing if we don't have a world to live in and a family to leave behind.

Cooper is recruited by the extravagant and exciting Professor Brand (Michael Caine) with his daughter who is annoyingly just known as Brand (Anne Hathaway) in order to find alternative life in the universe and thus save the future of mankind. What is it with the insistence of Hollywood to make us know poeple by their surnames? Mulder & Scully, Mr White, Mr Anderson, Underwood, etc etc etc. 

Once you can get your head around the ridiculous science, the movie sucks you in like a black hole (snigger). While it does stick to conventional scientific theory, the idea of black holes is one that, even as a Sci Fi fan, I find it hard to hang my hat on. Then again, there are people who base an entire career around the THEORY of the big bang. Imagine their disappointment when that one is disproved. 

Allow yourself to fully leave your disbelief at the door and you will love Interstellar. Don't be a skeptic and all will be well.

McConaughey is fantastic as the brash and quick-witted Cooper. There are genuine moments of Rusty Cole from True Detective here as he struggles to make sense of the world he lives in and risks his life to save. Although it was a bit weird to not see him sucking on endless cancer sticks throughout the movie for once! There was a moment in recent times when McConaughey was nothing more than a chick flick actor. He was typecast as the boring and dreadful love interest of his co-star and therefore every lady that watched them. However, just two major roles later and he has transcended into the world of the serious actor, portraying complex characters with a deeper-lying agenda and endless thought behind those mysterious eyes. All that is left for McConaughey to do is to play the action hero and then perhaps the genius yet twisted villain. Have they cast for the next James Bond movie yet?

Anne Hathaway is great as the secondary character here but her famous talents are wasted in this role. She has limited dialogue and we are expected to believe that there is a bond between her and other humans when her few lines and body language suggest that she is a cold and limited human being of little or no humility. But what actor in their right mind would have turned down this role?!

Overall the movie leaves you pondering the wonderful and has a definite air of the magnificence about it. There are constant questions being asked and more importantly, being answered. The special effects are - ahem - out of this world and the narrative, once it has dragged you in, becomes your life for the next 169 minutes. This is not one of those movies that you will spend looking at your phone. 

Are there any flaws in the movie? Well of course. It is a little bit dragging towards the final act and the simultaneous telling of a story at different times gets a little bit messy. Then there is the ending. Make the movie three minutes shorter and we have possibly the theultrareview's greatest ever movie!

This is the movie of the year and one of the best I have ever seen. If you have the chance to see Interstellar, do it. Please do it. You will not regret it and don't wait for it to come out on DVD or Bluray - I don't care how good your set up is, it will not do Interstellar justice - trust me!

I was reluctant to review the movie for fear of not doing it justice, that's how good it is. This is what happens when one of the greatest directors of our age, a massive budget and one of the world's most accomplished actors get together on a project. Sometimes everything clicks.

The overall theme is one of leaving your comfort zone and pushing yourself to find out who and what you can truly become, only to realise that there will always be that little bit of you wishing you were back in your bedroom at the age of eight, playing with your toys and without a care in the world. The best quote from the movie is a poem by Dylan Thomas called Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night. These words sum up Interstellar and it really hits home how rare movies as important and emotive as this really are.

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Rating: ★★★★★

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSWdZVtXT7E

Fury

Directed by:

David Ayer

Starring:

Brad Pitt

Shia LaBeouf

Logan Lerman

Michael Pena

Jon Bernthal

It was pure coincidence that I heard a radio interview with Fury director David Ayer literally moments before I went into the cinema to watch his latest movie. His words inspired me and my fears about the movie were allayed. He spoke of wanting to make a war movie that focused less on the overall theme of good vs evil; the just and worthy, god-fearing Americans verses the evil, antiquated and ill-advised Krauts. He lied. Though there were moments of greatness and simplicity in Fury, they were all performed to the backdrop of the great and noble cause that pushed them forward. There were many moments in the film where all that was missing from the scene was a star-spangled banner flying in the background, with that song playing while American bald eagles flew overhead. The surfing scene from Apocalypse Now springs to mind, not because of its ridiculousness, that scene is so powerful because it is a parody of itself and of the entire Vietnam War and the American way. A bit of that self-deprecation would have been appreciated here.

In the same interview, he spoke of wanting to focus on the deeds of the many and the relationships they harvested; brothers fighting for each other and not for any perceived greater good. He said that he wanted to movie to not be just another Spielberg war fantasy. Again, he lied. Ironically, the greatest parts of this movie have much in common with Saving Private Ryan. What makes Fury so watchable is its portrayal of the men as men. We are reminded constantly that, although brainwashed by propaganda and bullshit rhetoric, the men are ordinary folk. They are scared, they cry, they miss their wives, they miss their kids, they miss baseball and ice cream. We learn about who these guys are and that they are so much more than the numbers that they are likely to become.

We begin to love and hate characters as much as the sides we choose, even if we don't want to. We experience every bullet and we feel every lump of mud that they crawl through. We feel as though we have been in their vaunted tank - the death machine and life saver for our crew of unlikely heroes.  

What Fury achieved above all else and what makes this movie different to all other war movies is its temporary refusal to eulogise about war. Fury is a powerful movie in the awkward silences between the men who are effectively strangers. When the bombs have dropped and our heroes have somehow managed to survive the German onslaught, there are cheers of joy, yee-haws and vehement expletives. But what happens when they stop? Once the dust has settled and the camaraderie has stopped, all these men want to do is kiss the ground they are walking on for another day and thank their deity that they are still alive, they want to cry and hug each other...but they cannot. They must remain broad-shouldered, square-jawed and with a stiff upper lip. Much like the cinematic masterpiece that is Drive, the most powerful words in this movie are the ones that are left unsaid. We have to read the moment, the body language and put ourselves into the situation to know what those men are thinking. It is then that you realise that the movie has got you. You are emotionally involved. Of course, this soon gives way to the old "the Germans all deserve to die" nonsense but for a while at least, we are walking a path not walked in a long, long time.

Herein lies the problem. Ayer said none of this in his radio interview. The movie's biggest achievement went unadvertised on the night of its launch. This leads me to believe that the movie's biggest success was down to the cast and their chemistry and given the cast - I would not be surprised. Brad Pitt is fantastic as "Wardaddy" in a roll that he plays with more intensity than anything since Twelve Monkeys (this is not World War Z - the Z is for flop). Shia LaBeouf is brilliant as the emotional, religious and fittingly-named "Bible", Michael Pena is great as the token Latino "Gordo", Jon Bernthal of The Walking Dead is solid as the token hick idiot "Coon Ass" and Logan Lerman is very, very good as the pathetic, deer-caught-in-the-headlights kid "Norman". It speaks volumes about the actors that they spent so much time in the tank leading up to the shooting of the movie to get used to the small spaces and each others' habits, personalities and smells.

Fury was designed to be a war movie with a difference. It was but not as much as it should have been. While it was great to see the dark side of war tackled for the first time in a long time, there was still far too much of the very thing Ayer claims he tried to avoid - the glorification of the allied cause. Therefore the movie has to be put down as a missed opportunity and a failure to do something that hasn't been done before. 

This movie isn't as intelligent as it thinks it is.

Rating: ★★★½

Trailer:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OGvZoIrXpg

Gone Girl

Directed by:

David Fincher

Starring:

 Ben Affleck

Rosamund Pike

Tyler Perry

Neil Patrick Harris

Carrie Coon

When you sit down to a movie starring Ben Affleck and with the word "girl" in the title, it is safe to say that you should not expect too much from the experience. You would be forgiven if you expected to sit through almost two hours of Affleck smouldering with that big square jaw and those bigger, squarer shoulders and generally being all handsome and wonderful. You would also be forgiven for making the assumption that you had just wasted almost €20 on tickets and extortionately priced cardboard imitation food - and that's assuming you go Dutch. You would be forgiven but you would also be very wrong.

Sure, the price is still high, the food is disgusting and the jaw is still ridiculously square but this is a different Affleck flick. This is definitely more The Town than Gigli and more Argo than Jersey Girl. Remember, this is the Affleck that is trying to win the hearts and minds of Batman fans. It is no coincidence that he has starred in darker roles as of late and will continue to until he stars as The Dark Knight.

Here, he plays Nick Dunne, a husband who comes home from work to find his wife Amy, played by Rosamund Pike, is missing and their house in a state of disarray. A marriage that outwardly appeared to be as close to perfect as one could idealistically suggest suddenly appears to be creakier than Betty White's hip.

Then unfolds a topsy-turvy whodunnit which transforms into a breath-taking and utterly captivating wasanythingevendone. Not since the early days of Homeland have we questioned whether or not the main star was a good guy or a bad guy in such detail. For every reason to like him there is an equal reason to doubt him.

Then there is the ultimate twist of all - is Affleck even the star? Amy is present throughout by means of flashbacks to her narrated journal writing, bringing a verisimilitude to the part that Nick himself must play; we are allowed to hear the innermost thoughts of Amy set to the backdrop of Nick needing to appear remorseful and sad at his doting wife's tragic disappearance. In fact, so good is Pike in her role that I felt compelled to glance through Jack Reacher, just to judge her eyes in a new light which stayed with me so long after seeing Gone Girl. I will never look at her the same again!

Make no assumptions with this movie, except the assumption that this movie is worth your time and spondulas. This film never lets you rest on your laurels because just when you think you have anyone or anything figured out, you are thrown yet another curve-ball. Christopher Nolan take note; you don't need three or so hours for a movie to perfectly depict drama.

At one point, Nick is in a police station in a poignant moment and you are left to wonder what the message is in the movie - how did two young affable, loving people get to this point in their lives? It is then that your eyes are drawn to the notice board in the station. Amidst the ocean grey walls and military grey features is a poster that boldly states "God Bless America". This is the point of the movie. These two people and their relationship have become perverted products of a bastardised society. Gone Girl is a searing indictment of modern America and the morals and standards it sets its citizens. It is a message that is very well said.

Gone Girl brings into question our very ideas of love, happiness, marriage and the inter-dependency of the traditional monogamous relationship. A slow-burner to start with, each twist is like a gear change and with each one, the movie accelerates at a rate that keeps you moving forward but in a very smooth manner.

For this movie, leaving the story exactly where they did is as fascinating as every intricate twist and it will be commendable to leave the story as it is. Slight curiosity aside, you won't know what happens next and you won't want to know!

Neil Patrick Harris was a welcome secondary character in the movie, playing the part of the creepy ex-boyfriend Desi Collings to a tee, a role far-removed form his goofy shenanigans in How I Met Your Mother. Unlike Topher Grace playing the bad guy in the awful Spiderman 3, Harris' change of persona is very welcome and proves that he should have a decent career on the big screen away from that piffling teen drama.

For Pike, this should prove to be a major turning point in her career - she is almost TOO good as Amy.

For Affleck, the future is dark and very, very bright.

Rating: ★★★★

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esGn-xKFZdU

Lucy

Directed by:

Luc Besson

Starring:

Scarlett Johansson

Morgan Freeman

Min Sik-Choi

Amr Waked

Lucy is a movie of two halves. Starring Scarlett Johansson as Lucy, it is a thrill ride for the first 50 to 60 minutes, after which it completely deteriorates. Let's start at the beginning...

Lucy is an unwilling runner for her scumbag boyfriend in Korea. Quiet, gentle and on a bit of an adventure, she somehow ends up with a new synthetic super-drug running through her veins. The drug opens up her mind to more of its potential, far above the 10% it is estimated that humans currently use, at which point she develops talents that are, for want of a better phrase, really cool! The point is that Lucy is super-human. Her abilities are fantastic and she copes splendidly with the knowledge, strength and responsibility she is given. Not only is she super-human, one of her unique abilities is that she knows just how powerful she is. Hark back to superhero movies, remember Superman struggling to understand what he could actually do here on earth, the hilarious moments when he picks up the car for the first time, not knowing whether or not he could actually do it? Remember the start of The Flash, when he runs to catch a bus and accidentally arrives miles down the road, seemingly completely unaware of his speed? This is where Lucy is different. Her power is her mind and while she has unbelievable physical abilities that belie her timid and frail appearance, she is fully aware of everything she can do. 

The first half of the movie is entertaining. Lucy out-muscles her aggressors and she effectively saves her friend's life by diagnosing her with a hug. Yes that seems silly but if you can believe that Scarlett Johansson can make her hair change colour and length at will, you will believe anything! It is around the halfway point, however, that you begin to ask questions? Why is she so mature? Increased capacity doesn't guarantee increased maturity. This is the timid little lady who couldn't speak to a hotel receptionist less than an hour ago and now here she is, stiff as a board, cool, calm and collected, facing down the barrel of a gun.

Another point on maturity - why is she completely void of bravado? In that pub conversation that is frequently had, intoxicated men often venture through the mental exercise of what they would do if they could become invisible. Often the answers range from "rob a bank" to "perv in the girls' locker room" - both equally childish yes but both very human and honest. Lucy knows what she can do - why isn't she doing anything fun?! What made Bruce Almighty so much fun was that he had god's powers for a week and went around the place having fun, fixing things in his own life just generally doing things that every person watching the film would love to do. Not Lucy - Lucy is transformed into this non-human entity, oblivious to everything she was, her hopes and fantasies seemingly non-existent. Another question - why does she shoot everyone? She has got the power to take bullets out of guns with her mind and to control other humans at will yet she resorts to shooting people...this made little sense.

There is one more pertinent question about the movie. Why did they cast Morgan Freeman as the scientist type guy, Professor Norman? He is completely wasted in the white coat. He's not even the B character in the film. He isn't allowed the screen time nor the lines to put his stamp on the part. They could have put anyone in that role and it would have made no difference. This isn't a knock on Freeman, this is a knock on the writers - if you're paying for Morgan Freeman, USE HIM! Have you never heard the man's voice? He could have used his gravely tones to bring down the heart-rate of the movie, before hitting us with more unlikely magic. Every valley accentuates every peak.

The relationship between Norman and Lucy could have developed over the course of the movie but that, like every other relationship in Lucy and every single character, remains as it was at the beginning. They could have been made closer; Lucy could have confided in him that she's afraid of what she has become and he could have become a father figure to her. She could even have turned on the professor after he criticised her murderous ways and abused her abilities, if they needed a twist. Alas - it wasn't to be. This is a movie for the type of audience that enjoy The Expendables franchise.

There is also a bad guy but he is so inconsequential that I have completely forgotten his name.

The first half of the movie played like the fantastic Hanna on LSD mixed with elements of Limitless, for obvious reasons. The second half was so unwatchable that you could have fast-forwarded to the ending and missed nothing in between. The ending itself is such a cop out that you'll appreciate the credits, just to terminate the experience, so you can move on and do something else with your evening. 

As an experiment, the idea is fun but in practice, it is poorly executed. Two fine actors, a great idea and fabulous special effects fail to save this movie from the WOMO file - Watch Once and Move On.

Rating: ★★★

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVt32qoyhi0



Remember, if you want anything reviewed from the past or if there's a film coming out and you want to know if it's worth the coin, email or comment below :-)

The Maze Runner

Directed by:

Wes Ball

Starring:

Dylan O'Brien

Will Poulter

Aml Ameen 

Ki Hong Lee 

Thomas Brodie-Sangster 

Kaya Scodelario
 

Directed by Wes Ball and starring Dylan O'Brien as the reluctant but very obvious saviour of the masses, The Maze Runner is one of those movies that you can just tell was a fantastic novel but the transfer to the big screen did not do it justice on such a small budget. First off, we need to establish that this is a movie for teenage boys, a more dynamic and interesting response to the one-dimensional Divergent. However, the step up from that chick-flick isn't all that great. Thomas arrives in this seemingly dystopian world in an elevator. He steps from the elevator, highly confused by his surroundings, immediately running away from the teenage boys around him who seem to revel in his confusion - all of the boys have no memory of who they were before arriving here. His running is halted when he realises that the world in which he has been thrust into is confined behind four high walls from which there is no escape - unless you tackle the maze - the only possible escape from their perpetual enclosure. 

The boys live their lives in relative comfort; it never rains, they all sleep outdoors, there is no disease and they eat what they grow. But it is here that the story becomes so obviously one-dimensional, leaving you with many questions about the boys and their lives. Why are there no bullies? In fact, safe for a few seconds towards the end, nobody portrays villainous traits whatsoever. Though this is a prison for boys, it's obviously a teenage version of Oz The Series? Obviously the extreme homo-eroticism of that show cannot be portrayed here but why go to the other extreme? The obvious long-term effects of captivity are not dealt with here at all. Why is everybody so nice? If this is a metaphor for an all-boys school, where are the bullies? Where is the guy that pushes you around just because he can? Where is the guy that waits until you have a plate of food prepared then shoves that to the floor? We are expected to believe that every boy that comes up that elevator is a charming boy with the social graces of a man 20 years his elder.

Perhaps the major flaw in this movie is the lack of vulnerability these boys show. Emotions in a teenage boy are at the fore - always! Yet there are effectively no fights between the lads and aside from one side character in a very short clip, none of these lads cry out for their parents. Some of them have been there over three years and not once in the movie were the absent members of their families wept over. I get that the boys are being made out to be mature beyond their years but at 30 years of age, I still miss my parents. If I missed my parents at 17 I would at least talk about it. The human side of the boys is lost in the obsession to focus on the maze itself. Every day, the "runners" go into the maze to try and find a way out before the doors close at night. They return with plans drawn in their heads of the pathways, they are the cartographers of the dystopian age.

For a time The Maze Runner came across as The Matrix meets The Goonies. We have the futuristic vibe, the chosen one and the questioning of reality, not to mention the gates being the blue pill. Then we have the teenage adventure, the gadgets, the search for treasure and there is even a small, jolly, fat kid called Chuck - that's waaay too close to Chunk for that to be a coincidence. However, it is only when the first girl comes up through the elevator that the theme becomes obvious. This movie is a metaphor for turning 18, of how afraid you are of escaping the walls of childhood, where your life has comfort, meaning and strata and yet you are so excited and curious to escape into the maze of adulthood, where you have only yourself to rely on, away from the annoying teenage girls that created divisions amongst the boys and into the unknown. It is then that this movie begins to shine. 

The hero slowly begins to take his place at the top of the food chain and it is then that we see the true emotions of the boys. Parents are mentioned, fears are divulged, tears are shed and there are even villainous deeds and death. In a rare cinematic occurrence, the movie grows with the boys. This is definitely a slow-burner but give it time and you will be rewarded with a fantastic ending and an open door for what promises to be an intriguing sequel.

Most of the actors in the movie are British which is not to detract from the talent. On the contrary, it is a compliment to how accomplished young British actors and the British film industry is in general. While Dylan O'Brien played the part of the handsome, reluctant hero very well, it is Will Poulter who was the star. This chap has a fine career ahead of him has a villain. His brow alone should see him trying to slay James Bond sometime down the line. 

The music of the movie is generic and though special effects are unnecessary in the majority of the film, slicker CGI would have been appreciated. There are plenty of terrible movie adaptations of novels out there but author James Dashner's is better than that. There are still perhaps too many questions, the biggest of all being left unanswered at the end. I shan't divulge what that is here for fear of spoiling the movie. (SPOILER ALERT!!) Let's just say this is more The Island than Oliver Twist. Still, look forward to the sequel, if only to quell your curiosity. Not a great movie but not a waste of time either. You get the feeling the book, read as a teenage boy, would be much better.

Rating - ✮✮✮½

Trailer -  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64-iSYVmMVY

A Walk Among The Tombstones

Directed by 

Scott Frank

Starring 

Liam Neeson

Dan Stevens

David Harbour

Let’s stretch poetic licence as far as we can here and rename A Walk Among The Tombstones. Let’s give it a more appropriate title. Let’s give it something that really gets to the heart of the movie. Taken – Light. There, that was easy! And therein lays the problem. Much like the affliction that will haunt Aaron Paul throughout his career, if you give Liam Neeson a gun and a phone, you are automatically watching Taken. Since the massive success of Taken, Neeson has starred in The Grey, Taken 2, The Dark Knight Rises, Battleship and Wrath Of The Titans. It’s almost as if Schindler’s List never happened. 

The reason I refer to the movie as Taken - Light is because that’s what it is. Imagine Taken if you subtracted the majority of the budget, nobody travelled to Europe and if our hero “hunted down” what were, ultimately, cheaper, tackier bad guys. The movie even tries to replicate the epic phone conversation from Taken which we all know by now. It fails. Miserably. The lines are feeble and the movie lacks the suspense necessary to make this flick anything other than a poor substitute for the real thing. No, non-alcoholic beer is not just as nice and no, Diet Coke is not as satisfying. 

As an exercise in fairness, let’s examine the movie as if Taken never happened. Neeson plays the part of Matt Scudder, an ex-cop turned off-the-books private detective who has the skills to make life difficult for yada yada yada. The main story revolves around the kidnapping of drug dealers’ wives. Yes, you read that correctly. We are expected to feel pity for drug dealers – the bane of modern society. Are we to just pretend that these people don’t have horrible day jobs that prey off the weak and the vulnerable?

“Oh I am sorry Mr Hitler, I will try to get your wife back in your loving arms as soon as possible.” Something about that picture doesn’t quite command my empathy.

The action is substandard for what is an action movie and perhaps most alarmingly, there are no chase scenes in a movie that cries out for one. In fact, the story is so undeserving of your empathy that you are left to look for something that warrants your affection.

This brings me the best thing about AWATT; the relationship between Neeson and his homeless young protégé, played by Brian Bradley. The bond between the odd couple of crime detection draws you in, makes you laugh and really care about the two of them by the end. This is the movie’s greatest achievement. One thing the makers of the movie did right was to utilise Neeson’s great talent as an actor. They effectively try to build the movie around the relationships between him and his co-stars. The only problem is, the story was pathetic for the most part. Even by the end of the movie, other than Neeson and his little buddy, I did not care a jot about any of the other players in the movie. The bad guys were more slapstick than intimidating and I feel as though I actually know less about Neeson’s character than I did when the movie began. Sure, there’s the odd life-changing, epiphanous flashback straight from an 80's B movie but it presents you with more questions than answers. Namely, why did Neeson ever shave off that goatee? Spartans faces are in right now and for most they are disgraceful but on Neeson, he looks like a proud, carnivorous beast, straight from the planes of the Serengeti – magnificent!

Movies don’t have to be made on huge budgets but if you don’t have the budget, you need a fine cast and a riveting story to make a good movie. Neeson fails to save this movie from becoming the parody of an action movie that it is.

The ending - if you can call it that - while final, leaves a sour taste in the mouth. The t's are crossed and the lower case j's are dotted…but is that it? Is that all we get? The movie builds up to a huge climax but for some reason we’re not allowed to see it. Did they run out of money to shoot the most important part of the film? Perhaps this is a kick in the face to the punters, just like the end of The Sopranos. One would hope not - that show gave us years of riveting televisual orgasms to qualify that anomaly.

I should probably try and say nice things about the movie now. Well, there are two. Sometimes the movie is so dark and unerring that it echoes some of the taboo subjects from the thrilling Prisoners, starring Hugh Jackman. The movie pushes boundaries and moral buttons, even if only for a short time. However, the biggest positive of the movie is the fact that Neeson doesn’t have a horrible ex-wife named after laundry detergent and a spoiled-rotten daughter ruining his existence as he tries to save the day. That’s one thing that this movie has over Taken…and that is about it!

The movie’s tagline is also the film’s most stirring line – “people are afraid of all the wrong things”. This alludes to a darkness could have opened a door to a whole new movie and could have separated the film from everything Taken about the movie. Sadly, they didn’t have the bravery or testicular fortitude to follow through. Very disappointing - much like the movie itself.

As for Neeson; it says it all when there is a Taken 3 in the works and a cinematic masterpiece like Schindler’s List will never happen again. Money talks and the people want dross!

Rating - UUU

Trailer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6Ttj9tXzCA

Need For Speed

 Directed by:

Scott Waugh

Starring:

Aaron Paul

Imogen Poots

Dominic Cooper

Ramón Rodríguez

Kid Cudi

There were two major roadblocks as I sat down to suspend my disbelief for this movie. And I mean major. 

Roadblock number one - Breaking Bad. You have to understand that Aaron Paul would never have gotten this gig without the success of possibly the greatest TV series of all time (and that includes the future). There was a qualified fear that I would not see Toby Marshall, that I wouldn't even see Aaron Paul but that I would see Jessie Pinkman. Being typecast is a horrible thing for an actor, up there with writer's block for an author and a zit on a model. Was Ben Affleck ever going to be taken seriously after all the drivel we were forced to watch with his Mills & Boon levels of charm and massive chin starring in it? No way José. To Paul's credit, I was taken by surprise. Five minutes into the movie, I had forgotten that Breaking Bad had ever happened. This is most definitely not Jesse Pinkman. While Marshall and Pinkman are both in touch with their emotions, Pinkman spent the entirety of Breaking Bad teetering on the edge, struggling with life and the decisions he made along the way. Guilt, regret and anger consume him throughout the award-winning show. Marshall is a much better put together man. He is strong and quiet; reserved almost. But when the situation calls for emotion, he sells better than a cockney on a market stall trying to shift dodgy knickers. Pinkma... Paul is the star of the show and he relies on his acting to show us who he is.

Then there was roadblock number two - Need For Speed - the game. Need For Speed has been a stable game of every platform going back to the year 1994. It has sold millions of copies for it's super-fast and RIDICULOUSLY easy gameplay and has, evidently, become a franchise, with 23 releases to date. The problem is that, as a racing game, it is shallow. A to b racing, being chased by the cops, yawn. In 20 years of production, I only enjoyed one version of the game and I was 18, unemployed and sexually frustrated when that happened. You could have given me a giant hamster wheel and I would have been entertained. Then comes the fact that this is a movie-adaption of a game. This never works. Resident Evil, the original and NONE of the others, is about as close as this formula has come to being successful and that's if you ignore the second half of the movie.

I had also feared that the movie would be picking up the creative crumbs from the Fast And The Furious franchise that has exploded again. Is it 17 movies they have done now? Yes Dwayne, we get it; you have a big neck. And while there are parallels between the movies - the hero works in a garage, he just happens to be a kick ass driver, his has a thing with his buddy's sister, he has blonde hair, there is division, loss and racing aplenty - this is a very different movie. They used no CGI, the driving is slick and realistic, they use no CGI, the action is gritty, they use no CGI, the acting and dialogue easily suspend your disbelief, they use no CGI and even though I played the games, I was left guessing up until the very end. Sure, there is a small bit of cheese but it is not too far fetched and merely knocks on the fourth wall as opposed to breaking it down. Even the obligatory love story isn't cringing. Oh and did I mention that they used no CGI? How did that happen? This movie is filled with action, car crashes and moments were you stop and rewind and still cannot get your head around it. No CGI!!

The movie opens with one of the greatest chase scenes/races in movie history (not an exaggeration) and that is just a taste of what is to come. The soundtrack to the movie is one of the best things about the two-hour experience; there practically is none. The background music is understated, allowing you to sit back and enjoy the soundtrack that comes from an unadulterated V8 engine. That sound is like the purr from the stomach of a famished Lion - natural, deep and somehow soothing and violent at the same time.

There are unwritten rules when it comes to movies. Sequels are never better than the original. Heroes do not make good bad guys. Game to movie adaptations suck. Then Godfather 2 happened. Terminator happened. Need For Speed happened. This is a watershed moment in cinema.

Carroll Shelby would be proud.

Rating: UUUUu

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e73J71RZRn8

Zero Theorem

Directed by:

Terry Gilliam

Starring:

Christophe Waltz

Melanie Thierry

David Thewlis

Lucas Hedges

Matt Damon

Starring the epic Christophe Waltz and the deliciously elegant Melanie Thierry and just a splash of MATT DAMON, Zero Theorem is exactly what you expect from a movie with a title like that; nerdy, melancholic and a little bit leftfield.

That Zero Theorem was directed by the man behind the mid 90s classic, mind-bending paradox Twelve Monkeys, will come as no surprise. We are taken to the most colourful outer reaches of our imaginations of the future, where our hopes and fears collide. Mix this with modern special effects and a liberal budget and we are presented with a dystopian world where everything is for sale and advertising is king. If that sounds like the world we live in now then get to a cinema near you now because this movie is just for you!

Simply put, the theme is mid-life crisis. Sure, this has been done a million times before but when mixed with the underlying themes of the inevitability of the end, the mortality of man and above all; sanity in an insane world. You are left to question; how is sanity measured, who has the right to measure it and is it indeed all relative?

All of this is represented in the most beautifully-designed sets since Tron Legacy gave us optical orgasms a plenty!

Of course, the film was able to learn from the hilarious mistakes of other futuristic movies; Back To The Future 2 claimed that cars would be flying by the year 2015! That’s next year. Although being the fun fest that Back To The Future was, it must be assumed that their predictions were uber tongue-in-cheek. Zero Theorem had the foresight to present us with a prospective world where everyone and their cat has an ipad, everyone drinks and everyone smokes…well…sort of...

There are no grand advances in technology for the human race which is perhaps the biggest victory of all for this movie. In this world, we are not more advanced, mere evolved and not necessarily in the right direction.

There is so much in this movie that you cannot understand, so many props that make no sense and by the time you have pestered your fellow cinema-goer for an explanation the movie has moved on to the next scene and you are presented with another plethora of visual confusion. But, instead of being annoyed and perplexed, this merely serves to increase your already elevated intrigue as you find solace and meaning in the characters. Perfect.

Usually in fabulous costumes, see Django Unchained or Inglorious Basterds, Waltz hits our screen completely hairless and not for the last time in this movie, completely naked too. Although as we discover, this nakedness is merely a vessel, designed to tell us that Waltz maintains a fresh-faced naivety throughout, a physical manifestation of the sense that he is not of this time nor longed for this world.

We are allowed to read every facial expression of Waltz as he shows us how ill-at-ease he is with the world around him. In fact, his surroundings are as alien to him as they are to us!

His thick German accent that he never seems to lose is played up to in movies, here it is another tool, portraying to us how different and odd he is in this world. Looking odd in a world like this, where every street and mundane task appears to border on perfect chaos, is what makes Waltz such a phenomenal actor. Yes, I said phenomenal!! Anyone who can play the evil Jew Hunter so well and then command so much sympathy in this movie demands respect and awards a plenty!

 

Leaving the movie, you are left to ponder the after taste. Over-thinking the most negative of inevitabilities can destroy you, unless you learn to block out, to accept human companionship and grow as a constructive member of society, things that all pragmatists and uber skeptics must face in their lives.

Rating: UUUUu

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rae7_O_6EtU

Transcendence

Directed by:

Wally Pfister

Starring:

Johnny Depp

Rebecca Hall

Cillian Murphy

Morgan Freeman

From the start we are told that this is a movie of thought, where philosophy replaces action, not that that's a bad thing but it sets the tone of little drama from the outset. This means that when the drama comes it’s authentic, surprising and its effect is magnified by the suspense.

The cusp and meat of this film occur in your own imagination. Your mind is encouraged to wander, to wonder and to second guess and you will be wrong, mark my words. The suspense we spoke of only serves to fuel the fires of curiosity

Never mind that the characters routinely test on animals or that they themselves play god, crossing all kind of moral boundaries you genuinely care about them, all of them, well most of them, but I shan’t spoil it!

This movie is one part AI, one part Twelve Monkeys, one part the more thought provoking moments of Terminator 2: Judgment Day and is topped off with a generous dollop of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Rebecca Hall, of The Town fame and love interest here, just has too many teeth in her head, trust me - it's true, it's damn true!

Morgan Freeman plays his usual character, ie: Morgan Freeman. By the way, he's really tall, like 6ft 2in. When did that happen?

Johnny Depp's character is admirable and he plays the part quite well which is worrying. He is far too Hugh Grant and not enough Edward Scissorhands in this role. But he remains the awkward quirky Brit for only a short time, eventually we get the brooding intelligent confident charismatic man those looks and talents should dictate. Eventually he transcends (get it?) into a shell of a man, somewhere between Jeff Goldbloom's Fly and Christian Bale's Dark Knight. High praise indeed...then again that’s hardly surprising given that Christopher Nolan produced!

This is a rare serious role from the modern Depp and one that sees him return to the dark mysterious roles that fit his personality and more specifically; don't call upon him to pretend he's a drunk pirate with a lot of eyeliner, for some reason. What's Eating Gilbert Grape? and Benny & Joon leap to mind throughout.

This movie is brave and breaks boundaries that high profile movies usually avoid. It questions the stages of grief that it is accepted that we shall experience or may be unfortunate to have gone through already. It also asks the most difficult of questions to face, when does one let go?

For that and posting the genre-old question of the moral implications of artificial intelligence, I commend Transcendence.

Rating: UUU

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCTen3-B8GU