100 Free Movies In TWO Years

End Credits

2010-07-04T07:29:00.001-07:00

Unfortunately, I have struggled to keep up to date with not only my blog posts on this site, but with reaching the big 100!!

I still have another Cineworld Unlimited Card to activate this year, so plenty of movies to watch, for free!! If I feel moved to write a review, they will appear here - http://heavydnilbett.blogspot.com/

Thanks for watching!!

D

51: WHITEOUT

2009-10-03T07:15:00.000-07:00

Problems on the Bakerloo line meant that I missed the movie I was planning to watch (see number 52) and was therefore subject to leftovers. Always a risky situation. Whiteout is based on a comic book that I always wanted to read, thus guiding me to my second choice.

Damn you, Bakerloo line. But I suppose it was my own fault. Sometimes you've got know when to turn away. Sure, my attempts at salvaging the night weren't entirely foolhardy, but maybe I would have been better served going for a drink in a bar somewhere, or playing pool with friends, or jumping in front of a bus.

It could've been because I missed the first couple of minutes, but this movie had zero impact on me. It elicited no emotion. It was as if I'd sat in a cinema for 90 minutes watching a blank white screen - no, that's not true - a blank white screen would've been impressive in its audacity.

Avoid this one - unless you want a spare 90 minutes to think about something else.

3 out of 10

50: DISTRICT 9

2009-10-01T05:12:00.000-07:00

Part two of my Staples Corner night out (crazy times), and the official halfway mark!!

Entertaining, original, funny - District 9 has it all. Set in Johannesburg, South Africa, and shot in documentary style, it's a refreshing new addition to the science fiction genre. Peter Jackson produces this 'independent' movie and you can see why - it's hilarious (the main character, Wikus van der Merwe, is introduced as a bit of a deskbound nerd, but, when under pressure out in the field, comes out with some great one liners and uses the word 'fuck', with his Afrikaans accent, with great humour), it's gory (blood flies about in copious amounts and bodies explode regularly), it's touching (sort of), and its topical (examples of the way the 'prawns' are treated can be found in the real world, and being set in South Africa only emphasises this point).

A very entertaining 2 hours from a talented director, who hopefully doesn't go on to sell his soul to the remake / sequel producing machine that is Hollywood.

8.5 out of 10

Paying For It - Number 4 (The Thing)

2009-09-16T05:13:00.000-07:00

As part of Cineworld's Universal re-release series, I went with five others to watch the brilliant sci-fi/horror classic John Carpenter's The Thing, starring Kurt Russell.

I've seen the movie a number of times but never on the big screen, and Cineworld West India Quay was the perfect place to do just that. Universal had touched up the quality a bit, leaving the quality of picture immaculate, especially with the white snow covered landscape of the Antarctic (or British Columbia in reality).

Only slightly dated, the movie is still a brilliant horror film with impressive Rob Bottin effects and a tangible sense of claustrophobia and paranoia. The only negative comment about the experience was the significant lip sync issues, due to either the re-mastered print or the fault of the cinema.

The Thing: a repeat viewing worth the admission price.

I'll finish off with my favourite line from the movie:

"I know you gentlemen have been through a lot . . . but when you find the time . . . I'd rather not spend the rest of this winter TIED TO THIS FUCKING COUCH!"

49: INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS

2009-09-09T05:28:00.000-07:00

Although slightly disappointed with Death Proof, it didn't take me a second to say 'yes' to Tarantino's latest. Part one of a two movie night at Staples Corner - party animal!

Fitting somewhere between Jackie Brown and Kill Bill No. 1, this is Tarantino back on form. Long drawn out scenes, great dialogue, and excessive violence - it's all here and in pure QT style. Constant references to Nazi killing don't always sit well, but if you didn't catch the tongue in cheek tone of the film in the second act, you will in the final one. Not a masterpiece, but very entertaining.

8 out of 10

48: MESRINE: KILLER INSTINCT

2009-09-06T05:30:00.000-07:00

Part one of the two part biopic of French gangster Jacques Mesrine. French production, Vincent Cassel and good early buzz. No signs of Che-itis with the two movie split.

Entertaining swashbuckling type tale of a hard French criminal who is attractive in his endeavours (e.g. attempting to bust out criminals from a prison that subsequently is closed down over its questionable practices) and brutal when cornered (e.g. against a couple of park rangers). Raw, French and engaging stuff. Good turns by Cassel and Depardieu. More than just a prelude to Mesrine Part Deux.

7 out of 10

47: MOON

2009-09-02T05:24:00.000-07:00

The previews suggested an atmospheric, claustrophobic, old fashioned science fiction movie in the style of 2001 and Alien. Something we've all been waiting for.

Three things made this movie an amazing experience - Duncan Jones skilfully subtle direction, Sam Rockwell's stellar 'one-man band' performance, and the moody music of Clint Mansell lurking in the background. Moon is a throwback to the smart sci fi movies of the 70s and one that is entirely welcome.

Side note: The soundtrack is so good, I bought it the next day.

Second side note: Adrian McKinty compares Moon to another sci fi classic here.

8 out of 10

46: PUBLIC ENEMIES

2009-08-18T05:55:00.000-07:00

The long awaited next Michael Mann movie - love his stuff and with Depp and Bale starring, it can't go wrong.

The inevitable comparisons to Heat can be made (and there are a few similarities) but Mann's latest is an entertaining and beautifully shot movie in its own right. As is Mann's style, he takes his time, scenes playing out at their own pace; the movie simmers. This is a movie that entertains the brain cells and will hold up to repeat viewings - a beautifully constructed and captivating telling of John Dillinger's life as Public Enemy No. 1. To appreciate not only Depp, Bale, et al and Mann's subtle direction, but also the crystal clear digital photography - go see it on the big screen, if it isn't too late. The worst thing is: having to wait for Mann's next one!!

8.5 out of 10

45: THE PRIVATE LIVES OF PIPPA LEE

2009-08-17T05:26:00.000-07:00

Again Haymarket gets a look in - it's one of the Cineworld cinemas that seem to show movies on limited release (and these are the movies that I find most enjoyable). This particular movie was outside my usual viewing remit, but it was deemed worth a go.

Another dose of memorable performances in a similar vein to Fireflies. Most notable: Alan Arkin, Winona Ryder and Maria Bello. Entertaining story. I came to conclusion that even though Kenau Reeves's character is the self confessed asshole, Arkin's Herb Lee is the true baddie of the piece: manipulative, selfish and cruel. Up to you to see it and agree/disagree.

7 out of 10

44: STATE OF PLAY

2009-08-13T05:01:00.000-07:00

Three more movies (excluding this one) and I will be up to date. Saw this a while back at Haymarket - the cinema with the pillar in line of sight of the screen.

This movie had potential to be a thought provoking political thriller but turned out to be a by-the-numbers "so what" type of movie with a flimsy ending. Russell Crowe is always good but the rest, excluding Jason Bateman, are mediocre. Even the ever reliable Helen Mirren doesn't rate - forced to utter cockney rhyming slang and other wince inducing lines to remind the audience she's English. TV series is supposed to be better, so I'd stick with that.

5 out of 10

43: AUSTRALIA

2009-08-12T05:04:00.000-07:00

Another retro post - this one at Wandsworth around the start of the year. Expecting big things - Jackman, Kidman, Australia and Baz.

It looks beautiful and it's fun spotting the Aussie actors, like Bryan Brown and Jack Thompson, but ultimately, Baz's Aussie movie behemoth disappoints. Nicole is not very good at all, the magnificent Aussie sunsets are "green screened" and there are too many endings (a la Lord of the Rings). The movie fails to reach the epic proportions it strives for.

6 out of 10

42: FIREFLIES IN THE GARDEN

2009-08-11T05:09:00.000-07:00

Risked going to Haymarket Cineworld, probably their worst cinema - strange shaped rooms, uncomfortable seats - but this time around, I ended up in the main room for the first time (usually used for theatre) and it was much better.

A character driven, thought provoking drama with plenty of tension. The cast is brilliant - Ryan Reynolds showing off his 'serious' acting skills; Emily Watson, Julia Roberts and Carrie Ann Moss playing strong female roles; and the always scary Willem Dafoe perfecting the potrayal of an evil human being. Great drama without the theatrics.

7 out of 10

41: QUANTUM OF SOLACE

2009-08-10T10:14:00.000-07:00

Another retrospective entry; one day I'll catch up with my blog posts, you just watch me.

Not as good as Casino Royale and comments about lack of substance have some merit - it is action packed from the start, moving ever so swiftly, so much so that plot and characters tend to trail behind. But they are there, and have enough presence to make this a worthwhile entry in the reign of Daniel Craig. Wets the appetite for the next one.

6 out of 10

40: TRANSFORMERS: RISE OF THE FALLEN

2009-07-09T05:14:00.000-07:00

Early Saturday morning at the movies seems to be the way forward - hardly anyone goes! Or maybe it's because no one goes to the Cineworld in Staples Corner. Why put a cinema in the middle of a business park? Weird. Take note Cineworld: there's a perfectly empty Bingo Hall on Kilburn High Road waiting to rise up again as a new cinema!

This is such a confusing movie - the plot is incomprehensible and the action scenes are impossible to follow. Round of applause if you can follow who's who where and when in this movie. The effects are good but the Transformers themselves are overly detailed and complex to the point I couldn't see where their heads were half the time. Lines are corny, acting wooden and the writers have a frustrating habit of changing the rules in order to move the plot forward. I mean, when did Transformers start disguising themselves as people a la Terminator? Disappointing.

3 out of 10

39: YEAR ONE

2009-07-05T10:00:00.000-07:00

A switch to comedy at the Trocadero in the last weekend of June; always a risky move. Comedy, that is; not the Trocadero.

Should be called "Laugh One". Up to you to spot where the laugh comes from. Actually, don't bother.

1 out of 10

38: LET THE RIGHT ONE IN

2009-06-17T07:37:00.000-07:00

The second of a double bill at Cineworld Chelsea, seen in a large auditorium like cinema with a steep incline and grandstand type seats, sparsely attended by about ten people.

A slow paced, creepy study of the relationship between boy and pale faced, bloodsucking vampire-girl with an underlying theme of friendship and (very young) love. The final scene in the school's swimming pool expresses these themes in a most powerful way. A unique experience.

7.5 OUT OF 10

37: FIFTY DEAD MEN WALKING

2009-06-16T05:15:00.000-07:00

It was time to check out Cineworld Chelsea, one of the London venues I hadn't visited yet. I went for a double bill, making up Numbers 37 and 38 of the 100 Free Movies In TWO Years list!

A harrowing tale of an informer working against the IRA during The Troubles; brutal, intense and Ben Kingsley has a funny accent. The real life informer, Martin McGartland, distanced himself from the movie, but, if not authentic, this movie certainly does pack a punch.

6.5 out of 10

36: THE DAMNED UNITED

2009-06-15T05:28:00.000-07:00

I had just finished reading the brilliant book by David Peace when this one came out, so I decided to give it a shot.

One in the back of the net in my opinion: Michael Sheen is captivating to watch portraying Brian Clough as a funny, yet troubled man. Fast paced and entertaining, but, and I'm sorry to fall into cliche here, it isn't as good as the book. That said, given that the book was considered unfilmable, it's a pretty good effort.

7 out of 10

35: TERMINATOR: SALVATION

2009-06-14T06:57:00.000-07:00

Time to leave movies seen in the distant past behind for a moment, travel into the future to arrive at the present - Saturday morning to be precise. Confused? Also, first movie at Staples Corner, in the bowels of a retail park.

Bale broods, Worthington simmers and the Terminators kick ass. Entertaining, cool action sequences and a well realised Terminated future. Better than Term 3 if not the others. McG steps up a notch as a director. A point taken off for the totally frustrating plot point reveal in the trailers - ruined half the movie. May reinstate point if second viewing deems more satisfying.

7 out of 10

34: LAKEVIEW TERRACE

2009-06-12T05:28:00.000-07:00

Still catching up; this one seen in Feb, I think - I do remember there not being much else on at the time.

Reasonably interesting outing with good performances by all; Samuel L doing "angry" like only he knows how. Not satisfying enough for my liking though.

6 out of 10

33: THE BAADER-MEINHOF COMPLEX

2009-06-11T04:54:00.000-07:00

Jumping around a bit here; I think I saw this one in November or December of last year.

Intense, violent, Komplex. Multi-layered action and a deep character study: a film about the infamous West German terrorist group that is entertaining, shocking and morally ambiguous.

8 out of 10

32: TWILIGHT

2009-06-10T04:48:00.000-07:00

Despite being released on my birthday, I let this one slide a bit, knowing full well it was based on a bestselling book, popular with teenage girls - not exactly an audience type that I share my taste in movies with.

Actually, not too bad, although it was slightly hampered by its target audience - I mean, surely a vampire flick has to have more sex in it, or at least inferred sex. Five months later, I can't remember if they'd even kissed. Actually, five months later and I can't remember much of it at all. That said, if I'd be a sixteen year old girl, I'd be screaming my tits off with delirium, I'm sure.

5.5 out of 10

31: THE SPIRIT

2009-06-08T05:35:00.001-07:00

Thus begins a series of "catch ups". I'm about seven movies behind at the moment, so I need to step up a gear. I saw this one at the turn of the new year.

Visually quite impressive and some nice bods to boot, but this Frank Miller solo directorial debut lacks substance and Samuel Jackson is just waaaay too over the top.

4 out of 10

Change In Format

2009-06-08T05:27:00.000-07:00

Here I am again, debating about whether to continue this blog or not. And here I am again, redefining the content in an attempt to keep it going. All I really want to do is to keep track of my quest to see 100 movies in two years (yes, two years now, not one) and to be able to look back and reflect on what movies I managed to see, whether they were brilliantly constructed epics, entertaining blockbusters, disappointments and let downs . . . or The Happening.

So, I shall continue with a bare bones account of my quest to see 100 MOVIES IN TWO YEARS, FOR FREE!!

P.S. Please feel free to post comments as I will be more than happy to weigh in with a more detailed opinion.

Movies I'm Excited About - # 2

2009-05-12T13:19:00.000-07:00

I'm always dead keen on seeing the next Michael Mann movie and this one looks like it won't disappoint.

Depp, Bale and what looks like a 1930s version of Heat.

Sign me up!

30: STAR TREK

2009-05-11T05:10:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

Good reviews and a promising trailer suggested that this re-envisioning by J. J. Abrams would be entertaining. Also, a hangover ruled out anything too taxing on the noggin.

Where?

The old faithful, Wandsworth, 640pm.

Comments?

I've never been a Trekkie; I'm more of a Star Wars fan. I've tried to watch some of the movies and a couple of the TV episodes but I could never get into the whole Star Trek thing. The later series, Next Generation, etc, did nothing to generate interest either. Nah, definitely Star Wars for me, through and through.

That said, there's a chink in my anti-Star Trek armour after last night. I enjoyed this new version of Star Trek, using the original (and best) characters, made with flair and skill by director J. J. Abrams of Lost and MI:3 fame. In fact, I loved it. Excellent fast moving storyline (not the "by the numbers" plot my hangover was hoping for), likeable characters and amazing special effects. Not being a Trekkie, I can't say for certain whether this movie was faithful to the original but I got the impression that it was. The cheers and the clapping as the credits rolled seemed genuine and were a good sign of approval.

The humour in the movie surprised me and it's entertaining humour, especially in the scenes with Kirk (Chris Pine), Spock (Zachary Quinto) and, of course, Scotty (Simon Pegg). There are plenty of nods to the old series too, including a cameo that does not come off as a hastily inserted publicity stunt at all; in fact, it fits into the storyline superbly, the first appearance of the character giving me one of my laugh out loud moments.

But this is not all laughs and nostalgia - the action and tension is ramped up with brilliant space battle scenes and entertaining hand to hand combats. And Bana is brilliant as the Romulan baddie - like Chopper Reed, but with ears.

The movie's best moments, in my opinion, are when Spock is on the screen. Quinto does an amazing job at nailing this role and bringing a darker side to the much loved character - an absolute joy to watch. Let's hope they keep him on.

I won't say I've been converted to the Trek side of science fiction, but if Abrams continues to champion this new vision, I'm definitely on board for future instalments.

Would I pay to see it?

Definitely - a must see on the big screen.

Rating?

8 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Brilliant! Even with a hangover. Live long and prosper."

29: DUPLICITY

2009-03-30T05:53:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

To tell you the truth, I travelled all the way to Hammersmith hoping that it was showing The Damned United. Alas, it wasn't. Therefore, I was left with four movies to choose from. Duplicity was picked because I like Clive Owen and I enjoyed Michael Clayton, which was written by the director.

Where?

Hammersmith, 830pm.

Comments?

Duplicity tries hard to bring together a complex plot of mystery and intrigue and almost pulls it off. The final twist in the tale is both clever and predictable and the film is a little clunky in bringing it all together. There's not the same feeling of complete satisfaction when the plot knots are unpicked; not like, say, Ocean's Eleven, which is as good a comparison as any.

The on screen chemistry between Julia Roberts (who, in my opinion, walks funny) and Clive Owen (always good) is not too bad. The banter between the two is enjoyable but is not as "cool" or smooth flowing as others (e.g. Out of Sight). The flashbacks to how their relationship develops is slightly annoying but is reasonably well handled. The one thing I couldn't get a grip on was how this relationship would work or last, given that they don't trust each other one iota. Must be the sex.

Would I pay to see it?

Probably not. It's an enjoyable romp that can be experienced on your TV at home and not necessary for a big screen experience.

Rating?

6 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Not bad for a second choice. Must review cinema times in the future."

28: WATCHMEN

2009-03-15T13:16:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

This was one of the comic books that I'd always heard about but had never read. It was the only graphic novel included in a recent listing of post 1930s 100 novels to read. It was a comic that changed the shape of superheroes. The trailer looked awesome. I didn't need too much more convincing.

Where?

Wandsworth, 630pm.

Comments?

In two words: awesome and complex. This is multilayered story telling at its best. Will have to watch it again to catch all the script's intricacies. It is an amazing movie to watch, visually out there with a narrative that jumps in and out, back and forth but still works. The alternative style and storyline will turn a few away, as will the long running time, and some diehard Watchmen fans might be a little peeved about glossed over details, but I enjoyed this immensely - a no holds barred anti-superhero roller coaster ride with violence, language, sex and the most interesting madman since The Joker! I'm talking about Rorschach!

Would I pay to see it?

Hell yes! Especially as some of the plot points passed over me. Not sure I'm too keen to see Dr Manhattan's blue penis again though.

Rating?

9 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"I'll be ticking off another of the 100 novels to read before you croak very damn soon."

Changes

2009-03-05T05:07:00.000-08:00

The many demands of life have forced a change to the 100 Free Movie Blog. For some time, I have been contemplating closing it down and moving on. The reason for this was that it was taking some time to maintain, my blog entries falling well behind the number of movies I've watched (I think I am about eight behind at the moment). The Oscar series was a hard slog, that was for sure, and keeping the blog relatively up to date was taking time away from other things, including the novel that I am feverishly working on.

I recently read that blogging, Facebooking, Twittering and all that is all well and good but if it's taking away time from actually doing some novel writing, it should be canned. So that was what I had planned to do.

The thing is, I've loved cataloguing the movies I've watched this year, using my free movie voucher from Cineworld. I loved seeing the finished blogs with the eye catching posters. I loved watching the list on the right hand side (slowly) grow, loved perusing back through the movies I have seen.

During this aforementioned perusal, I happened across the first two movies I saw with my voucher, The Orphanage and [REC]. I noticed that the reviews were quick and to the point. Compare them to The Dark Knight and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and you can see the difference, how my reviews have grown in size. I had loads to say about those latter movies, but did I have that much more to say then compared to The Orphanage? Maybe a little more, but not five paragraphs more.

So in order to keep the blog alive, I am going to revert back to how I began - short, sharp reviews with lovely large movie posters. That way, I'll be able to keep the blog going without my other writing suffering.

Moving on from that decision, the blog will include two different posts over the next month: a combination of "Catch Up" movies seen long before the Oscars started but not yet included in the 100, and newer releases, of which two I will be seeing this weekend if I meet my writing goals.

So I'm hear to stay, albeit in reduced form, so your comments would be appreciated to beef up the blog. I've also got some news that I have been holding back since late December; news that will no doubt be the death of me.

Keep watching for more soon!

And The Oscar Goes To . . .

2009-02-22T23:25:00.000-08:00

I've just spent the last thirty minutes watching the acceptance speeches for this year's Oscars on it's official website. By all accounts, it looks like it was a grand night with its fair share of embarrassing speeches, co-ordinated close ups and poignant moments. In particular, the announcement of Heath Ledger as Best Actor brought genuine tears to the house.

How did I fare? Not too bad, but I missed out on the big prize, Best Movie and Director. Slumdog Millionaire was an obvious favourite and picked up many awards; congrats goes out to Danny Boyle and his crew for their wonderfully colourful movie.

Four for four in the actor categories, so I am happy with that. Kate Winslet would have been a close call with Angelina Jolie but it was a much deserved win. Heath Ledger was an absolute shoe in if there ever was one and Penelope Cruz was a favourite and her acceptance speech enjoyable to watch. Sean Penn's win would have split a few opinions, other people thinking that Brad Pitt or Mickey Rourke should have taken the Oscar, but my opinion remains that his performance in Milk was the best of a very good bunch.

Special mention goes out to Wall E for Best Animated Feature; I can picture the little guy adding the gold statue to his collection of odds and sods.

As for the Oscar poll, the group did well with six for six - well done to those of you who got them all.

Well that's it! An enjoyable, at times draining, three weeks of Oscar movie watching and reviewing. I hear the music starting up so I best be on my way.

Congratulations to all!!

MY OSCAR TIPS

2009-02-22T11:57:00.000-08:00

Tonight the winners will be announced and the Oscars handed out. I've spent the last two weeks or so watching all the nominations in the top six categories, determined to view the entire field in order to make an informed decision as to what and who I believe should win. Barring one movie, Frozen River, I have managed to cover all nominations.

The reasons for my nominations are evident in my blog posts, in the movie reviews, so I will not repeat them here, unless I have something more to say.

So without further preamble, here are my Oscar tips:

Performance by an actor in a leading role

SEAN PENN in MILK

Performance by an actor in a supporting role

HEATH LEDGER in THE DARK KNIGHT

Performance by an actress in a leading role

KATE WINSLET in THE READER

(This was by far the toughest choice - honorable mention to Angelina Jolie)

Performance by an actress in a supporting role

PENELOPE CRUZ in VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA

Achievement in directing

DAVID FINCHER for THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON

Best motion picture of the year

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON

So there they are and I will know by the morning how close I got. Of course, conflicting with the Academy's ultimate choices is not such a bad thing, but I know that these were the performances that impressed me the most over the past month and I wish them good luck. Good luck also to Wall E, which deserves every award it is nominated for.

Originally, I was going to "watch" the Oscars on the web, however, it starts at 1 a.m. and finishes at 5 a.m.; I'm not that dedicated.

Look out for a recap of the winners first thing tomorrow morning and keep voting on the right hand side.

I'd like to thank so many people . . .

27: VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-22T10:19:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actress in a supporting role - Penélope Cruz

Where?

Wandsworth, 620pm (hmmm, what can I have to eat? Oh sod it, Nandos it is!)

Comments?

So we come to the end, the final nomination out of the six main categories. It's a little bit sad but also a relief as well. I've managed to watch all nominations except one before the Oscar winners are announced, starting in just under six hours time - a bit of an effort if I do say so myself.

What a nice, breezy, humorous movie to end the Oscar marathon with. Vicky Cristina Barcelona is a very enjoyable romp about relationships, both long lasting and fleeting, and the need to live life to its fullest, a consistent theme amongst many of the nominated movies. This one does it best though, with Woody Allen's dry humour, great performances from the four leads - Javier Bardem, Scarlett Johansson, Rebecca Hall and Penélope Cruz - and the beautiful summer images of Barcelona.

The four main characters, Vicky, Cristina, Juan, and Maria Elena, get caught up in a tangled web of love, sex, longing, romance, passion and artistry. The movie is funny in a light hearted way, with Vicky (Rebecca Hall) assuming the Woody Allen type character, a newly engaged neurotic who is reluctant to throw caution to the wind and do anything spontaneous. Cristina (Johansson), her friend, is the complete opposite, always wanting to try different things, always looking for something; she doesn't know what she wants but she knows what she doesn't want, which doesn't really help her. They end up spending a weekend with Juan (Bardem), a Casanova type Spanish painter who seduces both women, an expression of his desire to grasp the moment. Things are going quite well, albeit in a complicated fashion, when Juan's ex wife (Cruz) returns to Barcelona after a cry for help via an attempt to kill herself. She once stabbed Juan with a knife in the heat of an argument, is obviously completely round the bed and she is none too pleased with the current romantic arrangements. Comedy ensues.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona is a very enjoyable movie with tasteful sexual encounters, intricate relationship threads and a funny script by Mr Allen. His he back to his best? Hard to tell, but taken in isolation, this movie is great fun and should be re-released in the summer, just to set the mood.

Oscar Glory?

Penélope Cruz plays the psychotic ex-wife, Maria Elena, a woman who is very passionate in everything she does, whether it's painting, arguing, lovemaking or stabbing her ex-husband. Cruz is excellent, very entertaining, and she gives the movie a bit of extra sexy Spanish spark. The arguments between her and Juan, both in Spanish and English, are hilarious.

I actually like her for the Oscar, ahead of Amy Adams, mainly because Cruz takes the role and makes it her own, without having to rely on the drama of the situation to dictate it. And she is a joy to watch. After Revolutionary Road, this movie was a god send, a feel good movie. Sure, it's light and breezy and can be forgotten soon after, but it's enjoyable while you watch it and Cruz is a big part of that.

Rating?

7.5 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"That's me done."

Paying For It - Number 3 (Oscar Edition)

2009-02-22T07:43:00.000-08:00

When the nominations for this year's Academy Awards were announced, Changeling, a Clint Eastwood movie set in the 1930s about a mother who loses her child and is used by the Los Angeles Police Department to further their own crusade to resurrect a flailing public image, was on its last legs at the box office. After a few more sessions here and there followed by a final screening on a Sunday at Cineworld Trocadero, it disappeared from the screens.

At this point in time, I had resigned myself to the fact that I had missed it, just one of two instances in my attempt to see all nominated movies for Oscars 2009. The other was The River, which I don't think has ever been screened in the UK.

To my delight, the National Film Theatre decided to present a short run of Changeling in their Studio cinema, a five row, 35 seat cube set in the theatre's foyer. I managed to acquire the final seat for last Friday's session and, although I was pretty close to the screen, I enjoyed the film immensely.

It's a harrowing tale and a frustrating one. To think that, in the 1930s, a stricken mother, searching for a lost son, can be subject to ridicule, slander and incarceration by the very police she hopes will find her son is heartbreaking. Angelina Jolie is amazing as Christine Collins, the distraught mother who finds her son missing when she comes back late from work one day. What happens over the next five years is almost unbelievable if it wasn't true.

In a nutshell, the LAPD forces Collins to accept that the boy that they find 5 months after her son's disappearance is her son, even though the boy is 3 inches shorter and is circumcised. It is definitely not her son, but the more she protests, the more frustrated the authorities get, eventually throwing her into a psychiatric ward for women. Christine Collins has a saviour though, in the guise of Reverend Gustav Briegleb (John Malkovich) whose determination and support brings hope.

Jolie puts in a fine performance and currently, with the movie still fresh in my mind, I am unsure as to whether she will win the Oscar for Best Actress over Kate Winslet or not. This will be a decision made at the final hour.

The other actors, Malkovich, Jefferey Jones (as Juvenile Department captain), Michael Kelly (as the detective who discovers horror at a farm in Southern California) and Jason Butler Harner all put in fine performances and Eastwood's direction is as good as ever.

A fine film and one that I am glad to have seen before the Oscar ceremony begins.

26: REVOLUTIONARY ROAD (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-22T02:32:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actor in a supporting role - Michael Shannon

Where?

Wandsworth, 6pm (no time for Nandos this time, straight from work and into the cinema).

Comments?

Revolutionary Road is about a quite depressing little topic - the claustrophobic confines of a set life, whether it be the day to day repetition of a dead end job that does not excite or a marriage that is going through the motions, suppressing any urge to break free and live a fulfilling life.

Frank and April Wheeler were once a happy couple, full of promise and vigour, enchanting each other with free flowing minds and ideas of travel and wonder. Something changed over the course of their marriage: they had kids; Frank settled down in his now deceased father's job in marketing, hating the tedious working life; April is shackled to her home, cleaning and looking after the kids, totally devoid of inspiration, regularly sensing the lost magic and potential her marriage once had. The tension brought about the Wheeler's situation is tangible and many arguments occur. Infidelity seems to be the only way for them to feel anything. One day, April proposes that they do what they always wanted to do, go to Paris, allowing Frank to find out what he really wants to do with his life. For a brief moment, one that you wish would last, they set in motion plans to uproot their family and go for it, enjoying a sense of freedom that they had long thought impossible. Inevitably, things take a turn for the worse.

Although Revolutionary Road is set in 1950s America, it can easily be transferable to the current day and any location. Many people are in a similar situation to the Wheelers, but whether you are or not, the movie brings about feelings of the inadequacies of one's life to the surface. It's not an entertaining movie to say the least. Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio are both outstanding but that is the problem: they are too convincing and the arguments and choices they have to make hits close to the bone. I left the movie a little depressed, although there was an overwhelming urge to do more with my life.

Definitely not a date movie. And definitely not one to take your spouse to. If you want to express the point of this movie to someone you love, i.e. you can't allow life to remain stagnant, do it over a bottle of wine in the park and do it positively.

Oscar worthy?

Here's another very small supporting role up for an Oscar. Michael Shannon appears in three scenes in this movie, maybe totalling fifteen minutes at a stretch. That said, you do wish for more. His portrayal of a slightly crazed mathematician brought to visit the Wheelers by his elderly parents is engrossing. His frank comments hit home for Frank and April, both positively when they are glowing from their announcement to move to Paris and negatively when things go a little tits up. Very well handled indeed.

Will he snare the Oscar ahead of Heath Ledger? No. However, if his role had more screen time, it might have been a close call.

(I've mentioned this before, but it seems the Academy has been scraping the bottom of the barrel for nominations in some respects (and this isn't directed at Shannon's role at all). I checked last year's nominations for Supporting actors and actresses and all of them have meaty roles and plenty of screen time - think Ben Affleck in Jesse James, Jaiver Bardem in No Country for Old Men and Amy Ryan in Gone Baby Gone. This year, we've got at least three nominations for bit parts. Surely, Oscar, with a little bit more digging, there were better supporting roles out there? Or was it a case of production companies being a bit lazy in putting forward roles for consideration? Food for thought. Apologies to Shannon for hijacking his moment.)

Rating?

6 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"I'm depressed."

25: SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-21T15:02:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Achievement in directing - Danny Boyle

Best motion picture of the year

Where?

Haymarket, 6pm (probably the worst cinema I've been to out of the Cineworld chain; the screen wasn't centered, there was a huge wide gap in the seating so that you couldn't sit anywhere near the middle, and there was a slope in the floor and seats, which after two hours, gave me a numb ass).

Comments?

Slumdog Millionaire is quite a clever movie; it's also funny, moving and charming. It is also the hot tip for Best Movie, the "slumdog" of the nominated movies beating all odds to win the major prize, not unlike the movie's main character, Jamal Malik, who gets to within one question of the million pounds (20 million rupees). However, it is doubtful that Danny Boyle's movie will be pulled at the last minute for cheating, as what happens in Slumdog Millionaire.

The structure of the film, on the face of it, is quite ingenious. Jamal is sitting in the hot seat on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, the Indian version. Across from him is the host Prem Kumar (brilliantly played by Anil Kapoor), who encourages Jamal and digs at him throughout. Why wouldn't he? Jamal is a slumdog, part of the lower class and his only achievement thus far, monetary wise, is to secure a job as an assistant at a telephone call centre.

Despite all this, he answers the penultimate question correctly and his hauled straight to jail on charges of fraud and cheating before even getting the chance at the big prize. What follows is a question by question account of how Jamal knows the answers, based on his experiences in the slum (luckily the answers-slumdog life links are in chronological order). Within the flashbacks of his life, we discover that he fell in love with a childhood sweetheart and that, before coming on the show, he had lost her forever.

It's a good movie, no doubt about it. Danny Boyle's direction is very good, as always, and he brings all the feel good elements together nicely, with added authenticity by using Indian actors and locations.

Whether or not the numb ass or the stupid idiots in the audience who insisted on talking throughout (obviously at a high pitch tone so that no one else seemed to notice, if their willingness to suffer silently was any indication), but I couldn't really connect with this movie. Sure, it was funny, and the scenery and images are wonderful, but I found myself not really caring whether Jamal got the girl or the millions. When things turn tragic and there is a race against time at the end, I found myself not feeling much at all.

The Millionaire quiz show scenes are a double edged sword: they are probably the most entertaining to watch, but end up bisecting the movie, almost as a distraction to the Slumdog's tale. To me, the movie became focused on "what happened in his life that allowed him to answer the next question" and this little trick became a bit tiring for me.

If I was able to buy into it a bit more, felt closer to the characters, then these little annoyances would have passed me by. A lot of other people loved the movie and it's bound to win the Oscar, so I guess I just have to blame my disinterest on the numb bum and the chatterbox in the audience.

Oscar worthy?

I suppose I've said my piece about the movie already. It will probably win the Oscar, but for me, it wasn't engaging enough and I felt more of an emotional tie to the likes of Milk, The Reader and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

Danny Boyle's directing is always good though. He always does something different and is quite an artistic filmmaker. But I can't base my Oscar choice on his previous films and I still think Fincher did a better job this time around.

Rating?

7 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Not much to say really but tut tut, sigh loudly, scoff and hope the person sitting next to me gets the thinly veiled point and stops talking throughout the movie. God forbid I'd politely ask them to shut up. Hmmm, guess what my pet hate is?"

24: THE WRESTLER (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-21T14:19:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actor in a leading role - Mickey Rourke

Performance by an actress in a supporting role - Marisa Tomei

Where?

Wandsworth, 8.15pm (Nandos again).
Comments?

The Wrestler suffers from too much hype. My expectations of this movie were pretty high, especially in regard to Mickey Rourke and Marisa Tomei's "comeback" roles. Not to say that the movie isn't any good or that their acting performances aren't top notch; they just don't live up to the hype.

Director Darren Aronofsky follows Randy "The Ram" Robinson (Mickey Rourke), usually from behind, as the once top billed wrestler (his hey day was 20 years ago) continues a fading career at smaller just-above-amateur contests where he is still respected. These early scenes are good for giving the audience a little bit of insight into what happens backstage, bringing humour to the fact that the whole show is staged and highlighting the importance of the wrestler's performance to the sport's success.

The Ram takes every chance he can get and he moves to bigger wrestling exhibitions that use broken bottles, chairs and a staple gun to bring in the crowds. He hasn't exactly stooped to an all time low, but he is not exactly living the high life. He has an estranged daughter, he has no partner, he has been evicted from his caravan, and he puts his body through the wringer in these sickening contests.

After one too many staple gun punches to the head, a health scare puts Randy on a course to put his life back on track. He finds a real job, he discovers love with an ageing stripper (Marisa Tomei) and he attempts reconciliation with his daughter. Ultimately, he steps back into the ring, a place where he knows he is something, he is someone, he is The Ram.

It's a sad tale that is often used in sporting movies. The body gives out, too many knocks to the head takes its toll and, in some instances, the sporting heroes are left with nothing, not even their dignity. The Wrestler takes this often used premise and gives it a different slant through an engaging film that just misses out on meeting expectations.

Oscar worthy?

Both Mickey Rourke and Marisa Tomei are very good in The Wrestler. Rourke, in particular, puts his heart and soul into his character and it is no doubt his best acting role. The sadness and inevitability of his demise, especially in the climatic final scene, is expressed with skill in The Ram's eyes. You can not help but feel sympathy and pity for the ageing wrestler, testimony to Rourke. Tomei is good too, putting on a brave performance as Pam, Randy's love interest, personifying the life that could've been.

As with the film itself, their performances are great and skillfully delivered, but my high expectations of their comeback roles raised the bar, putting it just out of reach of Oscar glory. That said, Rourke does deserve all his other awards; I just think that there is another out there who will take the golden boy home.

Rating?

7.5 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Maybe it will win an Oscar; The Boss has written a song for it!"

23: RACHEL GETTING MARRIED (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-21T02:46:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actress in a leading role - Anne Hathaway

Where?

Chelsea, 8.40pm (second in a double bill).

Comments?

On first glance, Rachel Getting Married looks like a non taxing rom-com that would not be to my liking at all. Anne Hathaway is the lead actress; there's the word "married" in the title. I was not hoping for much, hoping for something that I would at least be able to sit through.

Digging a little deeper, I saw that the movie was directed by Jonathan Demme, the man who gave the cinematic world The Silence of the Lambs. Okay, this made me feel a little better. Sure, it still looks like a marriage rom-com but maybe there's something a little darker underneath. I was right.

Rachel Getting Married is an intense, fly on the wall study of a dysfunctional family attempting to come together for a momentous occasion, but instead bringing all festering anxieties and arguments to the surface. It is a captivating account of how far families can be torn apart and how they can, if not in totality, be brought back together.

Kym returns home from rehab for her sister's wedding. Rachel is marrying a musician and is deeply in love. Kym's arrival is not exactly welcomed by Rachel, a little too late in an attempt at reconciliation, but their father, overbearing and protective of Kym, does everything he can to keep the wedding on track. Sounds like something Steve Martin and Martin Short might be involved in, but rest assured, this is as far from The Wedding Planner as anything could be. Nothing is held back or sweetened; this is raw, visceral stuff.

Deep down below the surface, Kym is fighting her family, who, whether spoken or not, hold her accountable for a tragic accident that occurred when she was sixteen years old. The horrible incident in the past permeates the movie from beginning to end, just as it would do so for the family members for the rest of their lives, and it is depicted in many poignant scenes. One such scene involves a dishwasher stacking contest in the kitchen which comes to an abrupt end by the appearance of a solitary plate, accidentally retrieved from the cupboard at the height of the contest. Memories come flooding in, filling the silence.

Rachel Getting Married drains the emotions from each end of the spectrum, sadness and regret, to joy and love, but you will leave the cinema feeling fuller in spirit. An important movie, deftly handled and superbly acted, this may not be a rom-com or a date movie, but it is an experience that touches the heart and soul, a "marriage" movie that has to work hard for happiness.

Oscar worthy?

I can be comfortable in saying that Rachel Getting Married should have been up for more Oscars. If The Academy turned their eye to more independent, challenging pieces, Rachel would maybe up there for Best Movie, but definitely for Best Director. It doesn't even get a nod for Best Screenplay, which was written by Sydney Lumet's daughter, Jenny, and is both raw and warm in its delivery. Lines like "he lives in our hearts and pays a little rent everyday" and "I wish that you both will live to 100 years old and that I will live to one day less, so I will always know that people like you never die" may sound corny in this context, but upon hearing them on screen, they felt like the most original lines I've heard in some time.

Although Rachel Gets Married is not an Oscar film, I believe it is better off for it. A small indie type film and release guarantees it remains at a size befitting the story and production.

As for Anne Hathaway, she is excellent as Kym, the family's embarrassment who, no matter how hard she tries to deny it, wants acceptance. However, the actress is not alone. Rosemarie DeWitt as Rachel, Bill Irwin as the father, Debra Winger as the estranged mother, and everybody else in the cast down to the wedding singers (which of there are plenty) are brilliant and, this is a complement to the cast as a whole, they are so well rounded and natural in their performance that they don't even appear to be acting. There should definitely have been a few Best Supporting nominations thrown into the mix here, especially for DeWitt (who, after seeing this movie, I've added to my Celebrity Sex-e-Que © list) and Irwin; both fine performances. As for Hathaway, I think she is great in this movie, but her co-actors are just as good, thus diluting her chances, in my eyes, for the Oscar.

Rating?

8.5 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"I didn't expect to gain anything from this movie, but I'm pleasantly surprised. I didn't expect to lose anything either, but where's my bloody umbrella!"

OSCAR POLL

2009-02-19T06:51:00.000-08:00

Running along the right hand side of this blog are a series of polls - one for each of the main six categories for this Sunday's Oscars.

Please feel free to vote on each of the categories - once in each of the categories - before 10pm this Sunday. We will then see how close we are to the winners.

I will submit my vote close to 10pm, not too soon after posting my own selections for the Academy Awards.

Good luck to everyone!

A Quick Word On Best Supporting Actor

2009-02-19T04:52:00.000-08:00

When the nominations for this year's Oscars were announced, there were two movies in the major categories that I had already seen: The Dark Knight and Tropic Thunder.

The Dark Knight formed part of my Cineworld challenge and is reviewed here. I praised Heath Ledger in that review and I will praise him again here. His performance as The Joker is memorable for all the right reasons - a brilliantly concocted and delivered version of Batman's old nemesis. Heath's tragic death occurred just before the film's release. It didn't hurt the movie's sales, but it wasn't his death that had people coming back for repeat viewings or had critics and the public alike praising Chris Nolan's magnificent film. Amongst other things, it was Heath Ledger, at his acting best, delivering an amazing achievement in acting history. Oscar assured.

Robert Downey Jnr's nomination came as a complete surprise. The movie, Tropic Thunder, which I saw twice in Dubrovnik for less than a quid each time, is a complete pisstake of war movies, hardly a film that would cross the desk of those in The Academy as a consideration for an award. That said, Downey Jnr is the best thing about the movie and his turn as an Australian method actor who goes to great lengths to play an African American soldier is hilarious and absolutely brilliant. A performance that can be watched over and over again. If it wasn't for Heath Ledger, I would have loved to have seen Downey Jnr win.

Both these nominations indicate that the Academy are opening up to left of field ideas when it comes to nominations and awards, as opposed to sticking to the mainstream line. However, for every Downey Jnr nomination, there is a Best Picture snub, and this time it was for The Dark Knight. How that didn't make it to the final five, I have no idea. Anyway, that's a gripe for another post.

22: DOUBT (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-18T13:00:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actor in a supporting role - Philip Seymour Hoffman

Performance by an actress in a leading role - Meryl Streep

Performance by an actress in a supporting role - Amy Adams

Performance by an actress in a supporting role - Viola Davis

Where?

Chelsea, 6.30pm (a pain in the ass to get to, so a double bill was required to justify the trek).

Comments?

As can be seen by the Oscar nominations, this is a movie for the actors. Despite a tremendous effort by the director, John Patrick Shanley, who also wrote the screenplay based on his own stage play, the ensemble cast carry this movie beyond that of just a good dramatic film.

Doubt held my attention throughout. It is a harrowing tale about the suspicions of the Principal of a Catholic Church in the Bronx; suspicions of the Father of the Church and how he may have strayed from the flock, taking particular small boys with him.

The paedophile priest, unfortunately, has become a bit of a cliche in movies and real life, but it pays to remember when watching this movie that it is set in the sixties. The Principal, Sister Aloysius, played by Meryl Streep, has grave concerns about the Father's conduct and for her to make any accusations at all is a major step outside the boundaries of what is considered acceptable. But, nevertheless, she takes those steps and puts Father Flynn's reputation at risk.

Are the accusations unfounded? Shanley skillfully ensures that nothing is clear cut and that the audience remains in the same boat as the main characters, never really sure what is happening behind closed doors. Some of the characters have no doubt, they have their certainty that they are right; some seem certain but then their minds are changed, they become confused, they choose what is less hideous to comprehend, they want "simplicity back". Others make decisions that seem unfathomable in the face of the obvious repercussions.

The movie builds up along the thoughts and feelings of these characters, driven forward by the actions of those who think they are right, and ultimately searches for a satisfying resolution. A final emotional statement ensures that this can not be so, a revelation that, on the face of it, shatters everything that has gone before, but upon reflection, in my opinion, refers to something less obvious, and reflects a greater fear, a greater sense of self doubt, one that is not so easy to cast out.

Oscar worthy?

What a cast! Streep! Hoffman! Adams! It's a stellar line up of consummate professionals and they deliver in spades. The skill that these actors show is amazing; their performances breathtaking without dominating any one particular scene. They form part of the bigger story, each of them bringing a captivating performance to the screen.

I read somewhere that there was an award (not in the Oscars) for best ensemble cast and that the Doubt team were nominated. They should win that, for sure. A confrontation scene mid-way through the film, with the three actors above involved, is something truly mesmerising to experience; you can not help but enjoy watching them in full flow, acting their socks off, but avoiding taking it too far. Professionals, every one of them.

In my opinion, though, no one will win an Oscar. Not because of their performances, but because of who they are up against. Streep is amazing and, as expected, at her best, bringing the very strict and stubborn Sister Aloysius to life; Hoffman as Father Flynn, as he so perfectly does, tip toes along a line of creepiness, staying on the right side so as to keep the doubt brewing. That said: Streep will lose out to Winslet; Hoffman to Ledger. It's a shame but it doesn't take anything away from their performances.

Best Supporting Actress could be a different kettle of fish. Amy Adams is very good but she is slightly overshadowed by the two headline acts above; but that works, as she plays Sister James, young, naive and totally overwhelmed by the head Sister and Father Flynn. Another great performance.

Viola Davis is good too, as the mother of the only African American boy in the Church. Her son attracts the care and attention of Father Flynn and his well being becomes of great concern to Sister Aloysius. The mother makes a decision that shocks and Davis plays it quite well, but her screen time is minimal, fifteen minutes tops, not enough in my opinion to make a good enough impression.

So, the jury is still out on Best Supporting Actress. I haven't seen the other nominations yet, so I won't make a call. I will say, on their performances alone, the Oscar probably isn't here either. The team at Doubt need a new category in the Oscars - Best Ensemble.

Rating?

8 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Either I've discovered something quite profound in the movie's last words or my mind is not completely with it because I haven't eaten enough food. More popcorn for the next one please."

21: THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-18T05:11:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actor in a leading role - Brad Pitt

Performance by an actress in a supporting role - Taraji P. Henson

Achievement in directing - David Fincher

Best motion picture of the year

Where?

Wandsworth, 8.15pm (after half a chicken with medium Peri Peri sauce).

Comments?

What a magical film this is! A magical film indeed. An astounding film with a unique premise and a warm message to convey. Fine performances, brilliant directing, a perfect script. Oscar whitewash? We'll come to that later.

The movie begins with the birth of a baby boy, born with the facial features and health of an eighty year old man. "He looks just like my ex-husband," says one of the residents of a New Orleans retirement home. The little baby was abandoned there by its father out of pure disgust for what he believes is a monstrous deformity of a child. The comment by the elderly resident is an example of the many warm comedic moments throughout the film.

The concept of the movie: as the boy grows older, his body grows younger. At five years old, he looks like an ageing midget (a cute one at that), in his early twenties, he takes on the appearance of a elderly gentleman with white hair and liver spots (but unmistakeably a bit of a ladies man underneath). And so on.

The premise is captivating and creates many interesting and humorous moments, all delivered with the utmost skill by the director, David Fincher. I did find myself wondering where it would end, how Benjamin Button would appear when he reached old age. Although the result, in my opinion, conflicted with the "rules" of Button's reverse ageing process, it was still touching. Just like the rest of the movie.

Those actors not nominated for Oscars turn in amazing performances, from the ever reliable Cate Blanchett as Button's everlasting love, Jared Harris as Captain Mike, a raucous character whose tattoos tell a sad story, Tilda Swinton as a upper class British woman whom Button falls for while staying in Russia and Jason Flemyng as Button's guilt ridden father. These characters, and many more, leave the movie as quickly as they arrive (only to reappear later), short term appearances with long lasting impact, each character personifying the movie's beautiful message.

Under the brilliant makeup (and it is brilliant, Cate Blanchett's appearance as a young twenty year old was amazing and moved me in more ways than I care to mention) and the perfect performances of the skilled actors, there is a simple story and a simple message, one that still resonates deeply. I won't mention what it is, as that would be spoiling your discovery of it. Needless to say, the movie made me think about my own life long after the credits had finished rolling.

Oscar worthy?

Oscar whitewash? Oscar clean sweep? Is The Curious Case of Benjamin Button that movie that heads off home after the ceremony with a big bag of golden statues over its shoulder, leaving everyone else to lick its wounds?

It's very very possible. However, it won't be a clean sweep, as it does not appear in every category - not in Best Actress or Best Supporting Actor. That small point aside, it could well pick up the rest.

Brad Pitt puts in a solid performance, understated in parts, amazing in others. His range is stretched here in a subtle way and he steps up to the plate, conveying a warm hearted man with the name of Benjamin Button. And the ladies love him. Is his performance better than Sean Penn? I'm borderline on this. Maybe Mickey Rourke will top them both.

Taraji P. Henson has been nominated for Best Supporting Actress as the African American woman who "adopts" the baby Button at the retirement home. She has presence and savvy on screen, a joy to watch, but I don't think she will take the Oscar. I thought that maybe even Tilda Swinton was better, but that's just my opinion.

As for Best Director and Best Movie, yes, I think Benjamin Button will win. It is such a beautifully shot, well constructed, warm hearted movie that it deserves recognition as a work of art. I took this movie with me out of the theatre and it still stays with me, a sign of something special. Out of what I have seen thus far, I would say that David Fincher and the production team will receive the Oscars. But Slumdog Millionaire may have something to say about that.

Oh yeah, was the movie too long as some have suggested? I didn't even notice.

Rating?

9 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Nothing could be more entertaining or joyful than watching the young Benjamin Button in his old guise discovering life."

Paying For It - Number 2 (Oscar Edition)

2009-02-17T05:24:00.000-08:00

Running through the list of nominations in the six main categories for this year's Oscars, I noted that there were a couple of movies that I wouldn't be able to see. They were a little obscure and quite possibly wouldn't make it to mainstream release in the UK.

One of those was Frozen River with Melissa Leo, nominated for Best Actress In A Leading Role. The movie is about a border crossing between New York State and Quebec and looks quite special. Unfortunately, I will not be able to see this movie before the Oscars. I know Melissa Leo's work from Homicide Life on the Street, so I am very happy for her to be nominated.

The other movie that looked destined to be unwatched before the Oscars was The Visitor. Thankfully, I was able to snare a screening of The Visitor at Riverside Studios in Hammersmith, as part of a double Hiam Abbass bill.

The lead actor, Richard Jenkins, is up for Best Actor and he is very good in his role as a teacher, Prof. Walter Vale, dejected with his life, after losing his wife. He returns to his apartment in New York to attend an economics seminar and finds a couple dossing there, a Syrian musician, Tarek (Haaz Sleiman) and his Senegalese girlfriend Zainab (Danai Gurira), both who are in the country illegally. He develops a friendship with them and is pulled into their struggle to remain in America, to be able to fulfil their dreams. Tarek's mother, Mouna (played by the charming Hiam Abbass), arrives in New York to find her son and a relationship develops between her and Walter, one that is innocent and heartwarming. Walter finds a cause and a love, both of which are fleeting, both of which impact him deeply.

Richard Jenkins will not win an Oscar for his role; he is definitely worthy, but the star quality power of Sean Penn, Brad Pitt and Mickey Rourke will be too much for him. A fine performance nonetheless.

The movie itself is wonderfully touching and hats go off to its writer and director, Thomas McCarthy, last seen playing a dodgy reporter in season 5 of The Wire.

Outside of the Oscar race but still noteworthy was the second movie in the double bill at Riverside Studios, The Lemon Tree. It is a touching story surrounding a lady (Hiam Abbass again) who defends her lemon tree plantation from destruction by her neighbour. A simple story in theory, but the fence line between neighbours is the border between Israel and Palestine and her neighbour is the Israeli Defense Minister. A touching movie and once again, Haim Abbass is wonderful.

20: MILK (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-11T23:49:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actor in a leading role - Sean Penn

Performance by an actor in a supporting role - Josh Brolin

Achievement in directing - Gus Van Sant

Best motion picture of the year

Where?

West India Quay, 5.30pm (first time at this cinema, very nice and modern, tiered seating, big screens, big sound, on the DLR).

Comments?

Milk is a tender, faithful and ultimately heartbreaking true story about Harvey Milk, an American politician and gay rights activist who was the first openly gay man to be elected into politics as a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. It was a major win for the gay movement and many celebrated the nomination in the Castro District of San Francisco, where Milk established his base.

Milk's life as we join it in the movie, is unfulfilled and dissatisfying, a dead end job and a suppressed personal life. He begins a relationship with Scott Smith and together they head for San Francisco for a better, more open life. They witness oppression and bigotry towards homosexuals, forming the catalyst for Milk's move into politics. His mandate: equal rights for gays. He is unsuccessful during two campaigns, but with Smith and a team of dedicated workers who believe in his cause, he achieves his historical election to the Board of Supervisors.

The movie is upheld by the spirit of Harvey Milk, a heart-warming man who stood up for what he and many others believed in. He became an icon for the gay movement, a spokesperson, and unfortunately, a target. However, his ultimate downfall is not brought on solely by homophobic sources, but from a disturbed fellow Supervisor, Dan White, who lets the pressure of the situation and his own confused state lead him to an unspeakable act.

The acting performances are amazing in this movie, with Sean Penn leading the charge as Harvey Milk. Other notable turns are from James Franco as Scott Smith, Josh Brolin as Dan White and Emile Hirsch as Cleve Jones. Deigo Luna contributes a fine supporting role as Jack Lira, a lost soul who falls for the charismatic Milk but struggles to share him with the man's political passion.

Milk is an entertaining movie that will pull at the heart strings. It depicts an important episode in the gay movement with honesty and heart, a true reflection of the man, Harvey Milk.

Oscar worthy?

Milk has four nominations in the major categories of this year's Oscars, with no other film faring better. It definitely deserves the nominations, an excellent, moving film with fine performances.

Josh Brolin's portrayal of Supervisor Dan White is expertly done. However, he has reasonably little screen time for a supporting role. What he does with it is tremendously good and he is a fine actor, but he is up against Heath Ledger and the two performances are miles apart.

As for the Directing and Best Movie nominations, I'd say it is right up there with the other four in each category. A thoroughly entertaining movie depicting an important movement in political history. Gus Van Sant's direction is flawless, an exceptional effort indeed. It's hard to tell thus far who will win, who is a dark horse and who will miss out on the golden statue in these categories. We may see a split in the categories, where normally, Best Directing follows Best Movie. If I had to make a call, I would say Milk stands a better chance in Best Movie.

As for Sean Penn, his performance mesmerised me; it was outstanding. The character is so believable, it actually feels like you are watching the man's life unfold before you. Big smiles, subtle campness and fine acting add to the transformation. But it is more than just a transformation, it is an expression of Milk's tenacity and big heart, his ruthlessness and caring persona, a statement of what it meant to be gay in San Francisco in the seventies. I haven't seen The Wrestler yet, but my hot tip is that Sean Penn will win the Oscar.

Rating?

8.5 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

It's bloody cold," in reference to standing outside waiting for the DLR to arrive.

19: FROST / NIXON (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-02T07:01:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actor in a leading role - Frank Langella

Achievement in directing - Ron Howard

Best motion picture of the year

Where?

Shaftesbury Avenue, 845pm (straight after The Reader, although I did pause, not wanting to dissipate the thoughts and feelings generated from watching that movie. A hunger for popcorn, missed due to a late arrival time at The Reader, made the decision for me).

Comments?

Frost/Nixon is about the disintegration of power and the decline of a political figure. It is also about show business and what makes good show business, what makes or breaks a career in entertainment and what the masses enjoy the most during prime time. It's about the numbers and it's about the lies.

Richard Nixon and Watergate. David Frost and a career on the brink. History brought them together in a head to head battle recorded on tape and shown to a worldwide audience. And to the winner goes the spoils.

Nothing excites me more than to watch a moment in history play out- it sends shivers up your spine and you know as you witness it that this moment is another chapter in world history. The next best thing to being there is to experience a dramatic representation of the event, to live it as it was lived, to understand what it felt like to be in the crowd in Dallas when the shots rang out, to feel the pressure of the last moments during the Cuban Missile Crisis, to wonder what the hell Harold Holt was doing jumping into the sea (okay, maybe not). It excites you, it scares you and it makes you wonder about the "what ifs". JFK, Thirteen Days, United 93, Saving Private Ryan, even a movie like Zodiac - all these depictions of real events are amazing to watch and interesting to debate.

Oliver Stone did it best in JFK. Sure the details were questionable, but there was such a sense of being there in that movie, of reliving the events of the assassination as if it was happening for the first time - and you are there, watching it happen. It drew me in for three hours and hasn't left me since.
This was what I was hoping for in Frost / Nixon. Unfortunately, it failed me. Don't get me wrong, it is a very good movie and the performances of Frank Langella and Michael Sheen are flawless. I just think Ron Howard let the side down and could taken more risks with his direction, brought the audience, made the movie more visceral and less intellectual.

There is a moment in the movie when the camera focuses on Frost (Sheen) asking a probing question directly into the camera. The image whirs across, the camera swivelling around to face Nixon (Langella) to receive his reply, right up close, face to face. At that moment, however brief it was, I felt drawn in as if on a roller coaster ride - I got excited. The camera whirred again, but not back to Frost but to the team waiting in the Green Room, egging him on. I visibly sunk into my seat, disappointed. This great use of the camera never reappeared and for the remainder of the movie I may as well have been watching the original interview. Albeit it trivial and minor, that camera pan was a glimpse at what might have been.

Frost / Nixon is a good movie, no doubt about that, and hats go off to the lead actors, who perfected their roles, giving us a sense of pity and sorrow for Nixon and a feeling of buoyancy for Frost. It just ain't no JFK.

Oscar worthy?

There is no doubting that Frank Langella's performance as Richard Nixon is a masterful one and very entertaining to watch but I don't think it deserves Oscar glory. During the movie, it felt like you were just watching someone act like Nixon as opposed to watching Nixon himself, a weakness inherent in the role and one that doesn't take anything away from Langella's acting ability. It is a shame that Michael Sheen wasn't nominated for Best Supporting Actor but that race has already been won too in my opinion. As for the movie itself, it shouldn't poll well for directing or best picture, although it may do well in Best Screenplay (Adapted).

Rating?

7 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Must jump on to You Tube to see the real thing."

18: THE READER (OSCAR SERIES)

2009-02-01T02:14:00.000-08:00

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actress in a leading role - Kate Winslet

Achievement in directing - Stephen Daldry

Best motion picture of the year

Where?

Shaftesbury Avenue, 6pm (one of two planned movies for the night).

Comments?

I was readying myself for an uncomfortable movie experience when I settled into my Cineworld seat at Shaftesbury Avenue cinema. I had seen the previews of The Reader and knew this was a movie touching on the annihilation of Jews during World War II. But that was not the half of it.

The Reader is a love story. It is still an uncomfortable viewing, but for a different reason - this is a story of first feelings: love, loss and betrayal. One can relate to the primal feelings expressed by the main characters, if not the context. What makes this movie stand out from your everyday love story is not this context, but the decisions made by the characters, each and every one in defiance of the formula. But each decision rings true, as frustrating as it is to watch.

Decisions have to be made by the audience too - a decision of sympathy and sadness for lost possibilities versus condemnation of an atrocious crime driven by nothing more than a sense of duty. It's a tough one, but the romantic in me fell for the former.

Kate Winslet is amazing as Hannah Schmitz, the object of passion for a seventeen year old Michael Berg (played with perfect innocence by David Kross) who happens across her one day when he falls sick on a tram in his home city of Berlin. All the actors, including Ralph Fiennes, are perfect, but it is Winslet's performance that resonates and rings true, that captivates and elicits conflicting feelings. Right from the start, her mannerisms, characteristics and facial expressions betray a troubled spirit, a woman dealing with her own personal shame, a shame that is misplaced when viewed objectively in the context of her other actions, and ultimately leads to her downfall. Kate Winslet's professionalism means that her performance complements the movie, without upstaging it.

The Reader is a movie that will cling to you long after it finishes, leaving you with mixed emotions and a sense of loss, but one thing is for sure, this is another great performance by a true talent.

Oscar worthy?

Not until I sat down to write this post did I realise that The Reader is up for both Best Director and Best Movie. In fact, after watching the movie, not knowing any different, I thought that it should be. This early on, it's hard to say whether it will fare well in those categories, but without evidence to the contrary, Kate Winslet will win Best Actress - her performance is pitch perfect, subtle where it has to be and just amazing to watch. The Streepster might pip her at the post, but Kate deserves it based on this performance.

Rating?

8.5 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"The Oscar Series has begun and Kate looks the goods."

Oscar Nominations 2009

2009-01-25T04:48:00.000-08:00

It's that time again and whatever you have to say about the Oscars, it's always exciting to see who has been nominated and to debate over who might win.

I'll be using my trusty Cineworld voucher to see all nominations in the six main categories and make my predictions before the Oscars take place in February.

Firstly, here are the nominations in those six categories and my initial comments:

Performance by an actor in a leading role
• Richard Jenkins in “The Visitor” (Overture Films)
• Frank Langella in “Frost/Nixon” (Universal)
• Sean Penn in “Milk” (Focus Features)
• Brad Pitt in “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” (Paramount and Warner Bros.)
• Mickey Rourke in “The Wrestler” (Fox Searchlight)

I haven't seen any of these movies but can say straight off the bat, based on predictions and rumours buzzing around, this looks like a close call. Couldn't pick it at this early stage, although a lot of people have been talking about Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler.

Performance by an actor in a supporting role
Josh Brolin in “Milk” (Focus Features)
Robert Downey Jr. in “Tropic Thunder” (DreamWorks, Distributed by DreamWorks/Paramount)
Philip Seymour Hoffman in “Doubt” (Miramax)
Heath Ledger in “The Dark Knight” (Warner Bros.)
Michael Shannon in “Revolutionary Road” (DreamWorks, Distributed by Paramount Vantage)

The obvious noteworthy nomination is for Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight and I think he will win it, solely based on his performance, but the real surprise here is the inclusion of Robert Downey Jr in Tropic Thunder, the only other movie I have seen out of this lot. Tropic Thunder was a piss take movie with Ben Stiller, but its great to see pure comedy roles getting a mention, because Robert Downey Jnr's depiction of a method actor going to extreme measures to play the role of an African American soldier was an amazing performance. Robert Downey Jnr is a fine actor, as was Heath Ledger.

Performance by an actress in a leading role
Anne Hathaway in “Rachel Getting Married” (Sony Pictures Classics)
Angelina Jolie in “Changeling” (Universal)
Melissa Leo in “Frozen River” (Sony Pictures Classics)
Meryl Streep in “Doubt” (Miramax)
Kate Winslet in “The Reader” (The Weinstein Company)

Haven't see any of these so it's hard to pick at this stage. Might have to pay to see Changeling as it is no longer screening at Cineworld. Kate Winslet got a Golden Globe for her performance in The Reader and Meryl Streep's movie, Doubt, looks the goods.

Performance by an actress in a supporting role
Amy Adams in “Doubt” (Miramax)
Penélope Cruz in “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” (The Weinstein Company)
Viola Davis in “Doubt” (Miramax)
Taraji P. Henson in “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” (Paramount and Warner Bros.)
Marisa Tomei in “The Wrestler” (Fox Searchlight)

Again, I haven't seen any of these performances and haven't got much to comment on except the inclusion of Marisa Tomei, who has come out of nowhere to pick up an Oscar nom.

Achievement in directing
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” (Paramount and Warner Bros.), David Fincher
“Frost/Nixon” (Universal), Ron Howard
“Milk” (Focus Features), Gus Van Sant
“The Reader” (The Weinstein Company), Stephen Daldry
“Slumdog Millionaire” (Fox Searchlight), Danny Boyle

Ooh another tough one and another five I haven't seen. Word has it Slumdog Millionaire is the favourite, but I love David Fincher's work and would be very happy if he picked it up for his most intriguing movie yet.

Best motion picture of the year
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” (Paramount and Warner Bros.), A Kennedy/Marshall Production, Kathleen Kennedy, Frank Marshall and Ceán Chaffin, Producers
“Frost/Nixon” (Universal), A Universal Pictures, Imagine Entertainment and Working Title Production, Brian Grazer, Ron Howard and Eric Fellner, Producers
“Milk” (Focus Features), A Groundswell and Jinks/Cohen Company Production, Dan Jinks and Bruce Cohen, Producers
“The Reader” (The Weinstein Company), A Mirage Enterprises and Neunte Babelsberg Film GmbH Production, Nominees to be determined
“Slumdog Millionaire” (Fox Searchlight), A Celador Films Production, Christian Colson, Producer

Same five as directing, and same comments.

Other nominations of note: Wall E should be a shoe in for Best Animated Picture and could take the Best Original Screenplay too, The Baader Meinhof Complex (review still pending) for Best Foreign Language Film and only Milk was dropped from the big five movies for Best Adapted Screenplay, replaced by Doubt. Also, there is a very notable absence in the form of Che - haven't seen the movie but good things have been spoken about Benico Del Toro's performance and it's stunning to see that the isn't listed in any category.

So, not long to go, Oscars are on February 22, so I better get cracking. Excited about seeing most of those nominations above.

For a full list of the nominations, go here.

17: STAR WARS: THE CLONE WARS

2009-01-20T10:19:00.000-08:00

Why I chose it?

You're either Star Trek or you're Star Wars. I've always been Star Wars and I couldn't pass up an opportunity to see another entry into the legend on the big screen. Almost missed out too - last session at Cineworld!

Where?

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away. I'm that far behind in my posts.

Comments?

It was the last ever session at Cineworld for the first computer animated movie entry into the Lucas legend that is Star Wars. It was out in the cinemas for a long time but I hadn't got around to seeing it. The last ever session, screening at 11am on a Sunday morning in Wandsworth - I was expecting a vacant cinema. In fact, I was the only adult there; the only adult without a kid. Yes, it was me, 100 parents and 150 kids. Mayhem.

That said, this movie was perfect for them - amazing graphics, albeit bordering on too cartoony, and loads of action. And Yoda. The little tackers lapped it up - reminded me of the first time I saw a Star Wars movie many dual moons ago.

For me the movie was entertaining, although it almost didn't feel like a Star Wars movie. I hadn't seen the TV series so hadn't been warmed up to the new visuals and the notable absence of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare did throw me a bit. But the story is pure Star Wars and the action never lets up. I'll concede the storyline was a little weak (Jabba The Hutt's son is kidnapped?? Sounds like a plot better suited to the "Droids" cartoon) but it was good enough to keep me interested.

All the familiar characters are here too - Obi Wan, Anakin, Yoda - and a few new faces too, but most of the voices are different, except for Samuel L Jackson (who must be a true fan), Anthony Daniels and Christopher Lee. The old characters stay true to their live action counterparts and the new bods fit well into the Star Wars universe.

Overall, an entertaining Sunday morning spent with a bunch of kids experiencing a new Star Wars movie - brought back the memories! And I must say, it did fuel my excitement for the new cartoon series.

Would I pay to see it?

It's Star Wars: unless the words "Ewok Adventure" are included in the title, I'd pay to see it without question.

Rating?

7 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"May The Force Be With You" to every parent with a screaming child.

16: THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL

2008-12-16T04:57:00.000-08:00

Why I chose it?

I had just finished some Christmas shopping and was at a loose end, thinking it was too early for Sunday dinner. I was keen to watch a movie but The Baader Meinhof Complex and Changeling were on at inconvenient times. So I was left with The Day The Earth Stood Still.

Where?

Shaftesbury Avenue, 6.30pm.

Comments?

I have never seen the original 1950s science fiction movie The Day The Earth Stood Still, but I had heard about it and the character, Klaatu and the image of the giant being with the laser beam eyes were instantly recognisable. The storyline wasn't, so I went into this remake without much of an idea about its plot.

The movie is quite entertaining, good special effects and an interesting premise about aliens landing on Earth to teach us humans a few lessons. It's a spin on the usual "aliens taking over the planet" and the annihilation of humans is kept to a minimum; at least initially. The appearance and purpose of the aliens' visit is revealed very early on, leaving the tension for the question of whether they can be stopped or not.

The problem with this movie, for me, is that it tries to avoid coming over all preachy and issuey but fails miserably; it could easily be categorised as another in a long line of movies whose underlying theme or moral revolves around the environment and how humans are destroying the planet. This is an important issue but the message is starting to dilute.

If it is delivered subtlety, (like in Wall∙E), it works; if it is delivered by an alien who admonishes the human race for raping the planet and orders complete destruction of all evidence of human occupation as punishment, we are in danger of treating the audience as a bunch of school kids who need a good telling off. When people laugh at dialogue meant to be thought provoking, you know the message isn't getting through. And you can't blame the audience for getting a little sick about being reminded about our impending doom if we don't stop using plastic bags or wasting water. The message is important, but it should not be delivered in this way.

And Will Smith's son is annoying.

Would I pay to see it?

No.

Rating?

5 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Can we please lay off the remakes for a while? It's starting to look like there are no more original ideas left out there."

Movies I'm Excited About - #1

2008-12-13T02:51:00.000-08:00

Bale as John Connor; set in the future; nuff said. Check out the kick ass trailer here.

And I absolutely love this poster!

15: BODY OF LIES

2008-11-29T09:56:00.000-08:00

Why I chose it?

Despite the two big names in the lead, it was Sir Ridley Scott as director that pulled me towards this one. I've always been a big fan, love his style and American Gangster was up there as my favourite movie of 2007.

Where?

Shaftesbury Avenue, 8.45pm. (There's not enough angle on the seating, so I got a crick in the neck after watching this 2hr plus movie).

Comments?

Body Of Lies is based on a novel by David Ignatius and follows the crusade of a CIA operative on the trail of a terrorist who has recently taken credit for bombings in Continental Europe and whose secret safehouse is believed to be in Jordon. Ferris (DiCaprio) is assisted by CIA Boss Hoffman (Crowe) in tracking down the terrorist leader and bringing him to justice, but has motives, information and plans of his own which he keeps to himself, thus putting Ferris and others in danger.

I found this movie very intriguing and, as I have said, I am a big fan of Scott's direction (except when he creates an effect on screen where the images blur and jump, which he did once in this movie and too many times in Hannibal). The tension is tangible throughout, not just in the action scenes, but in the dialogue, most notably between Ferris and Hani Salaam, head of the Jordanian General Intelligence Department (superbly played by Mark Strong).

There are issues raised here about government policy, the threat of terrorism and the tragedy of war. Scenes of bombings in public places (Manchester, Amsterdam, Turkey) resonate, especially since recent events overseas. However, it is the underlying theme of secrets withheld and lies told that creates the greatest tension and which result in the direst of consequences.

There is an element of realism here that had an impact on the layman (me) and the drama unfolding on the screen is captivating. There is globetrotting around some of the most dangerous parts of the world, including Iraq, and I found much interest in some of the aerial shots of these locations. Scenes of torture and violence are graphic and realistic, not for shock value, but to add to the tension; still, most are very hard to watch.

DiCaprio and Crowe (who added plenty of weight to "fill" the role of the CIA boss) are engaging to watch, DiCaprio going from strength to strength since Blood Diamond. As I mentioned above, Mark Strong is superb as the Jordanian intelligence boss, who toes the line of righteousness with methods that are questionable but effective. Just don't lie to him. And there was a pleasant surprise to see a well-liked Australian actor amongst it all (see below).

This is an explosive movie, and not just in the pyrotechnics, and it is one of the better movies to address the war on the ground in the Middle East and the fight, as ill directed as one may think, against terrorists. It also has a much better thematic approach than last year's The Kingdom. Some critics point out that the long running time desensitises the film's impact, but I, for one, can say that my interest was held throughout.

Another worthy effort by Sir Ridley Scott.

Would I pay to see it?

Yes.

Rating?

8 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"I knew that was Vince Colosimo!" said with visions of buying the Underbelly TV series next year.

14: WALL∙E

2008-11-26T04:52:00.000-08:00

Why I chose it?

You can't go past a Pixar movie, from Toy Story to Ratatouille, they produce some of the most magical stories with unbelievable images and memorable characters - brings out the kid in me!

Where?

Wandsworth, just after Batman - yes, I am that far behind in my posts.

Comments?

This movie is a delight to watch, quite touching, quite humourous and the visuals are amazing. As with all Pixar movies, it is just as entertaining for the adults as it is for the kids. In fact, the heartfelt story of this little robot who falls in love, pulls on the heartstrings and touches the emotions in a way that is beyond the comprehension of a child. The kids will love the antics of little Wall∙E and his offsider and the magic of space will enthrall them, but it is the story that will resonate with the adults.

As appears to be the norm lately, there is a statement about environmental concerns and the impact on our way of life if we don't do something about addressing sustainability, but it is handled very well, bringing in an element of humour without softening the message. Ultimately, however, this is a love story and even though we are talking about robots here, you will not be untouched by Wall∙E's feelings of loneliness, infatuation, heartache and happiness.

And he's such a cute little fella too.

Would I pay to see it?

Yes, highly entertaining stuff.

Rating?

9 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Waalllllleeeeee. Eeeevaaaah," repeated ad nauseum.

13: THE DARK KNIGHT

2008-09-09T05:25:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

This Batman movie has looked impressive ever since the first brief images of Heath Ledger as The Joker appeared on the internet. As more and more images and trailers appeared, more and more fans salivated and wrung their hands, waiting for the release date. This was one of those movies that would never be overhyped. How could I not watch it?

Where?

Cinema 2, Wandsworth, 6.30pm.

Comments?

The Dark Knight is superb. It’s one of those movies that come along all too infrequently – picture perfect. It’s dark, emotive, powerful, frenetic and the action never lets up – this is a superhero movie for those who hate superhero movies. And for those who LOVE superhero movies.

The plot is complex: gang bosses and deals with the devil; a brave politician who toes the line within a corrupt world but is a hero in his own right, without the fancy gear and gadgets; a business tycoon battling between his duty to a city and his love for a woman; and a crazed man in a dark suit, hanging out the window of a stolen police car, cackling at his own deviousness, improving the standard of the Gotham City criminal with a smile.

I already want to see this film again.

It was Rupert Wyatt, first time director of The Escapist, who said in an interview in Empire magazine that he admired Christopher Nolan’s ability to take on a big blockbuster movie and still convey his own personal style, or something like that. He was definitely referring to The Dark Knight – it is more subtle than Memento or The Prestige in its cinematic wizardry but the tricks of the trade that Nolan continually invents are all there – complex story structure, fast paced, quick cuts, sleight of hand – it helps that he wrote the script as well with his brother – a brilliant script at that. Some say the movie is too long – sure it’s long but given that I didn’t ever want it to finish means it wasn’t long enough.

The acting is excellant too. Heath Ledger is amazing in this movie. Almost thankfully, he is unrecognisable under all that makeup, but his acting ability still shines through – he licks his lips constantly; rolls his wrist, flicking his knife open; tells each victim a different origin story more gruesome than the last; and delivers a masterpiece performance of a complete maniac called The Joker. Sure he had big shoes to fill, but he solved that problem by bringing his own.

And now we come . . . to The Batman. There’s something very dark about Christian Bale, even as Batman he scares the shit out of me. There’s always a hit of violence in his eyes, that he’s about to do something bad. Batman in The Dark Knight is just as disturbing as Bale’s other performances in American Psycho, The Machinist and Harsh Times – because this time he is the good guy! And he is perfect as The Caped Crusader.

The supporting actors are all very solid too - Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine as Alfred and a standout performance by Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent – adding to this amazing superhero movie that is a two hour character study of despair, insanity and loss – and damn, isn’t it a cracking good movie!

Would I pay to see it?

Without a doubt - hopefully before it leaves our screens.

Rating?

10 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"It's not often I'd say this, but I'd go see that again. " The Jingo (guest quoter).

12: KUNG FU PANDA

2008-08-13T23:42:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

After the depressing Wanted, I was looking for a bit of a pick me up and Jack Black seemed to be the man to supply it.

Where?

Cinema 5, Shaftesbury Avenue, 9pm.

Comments?

Kung Fu Panda is a lot of fun and a lot of it is down to Jack Black and Dustin Hoffman, offering up different styles of comedy in the guise of Po (the Panda) and Master Shifu (the smaller red panda). There are many humourous moments, a couple of laugh out loud funnies and the animation is top notch, making this an entertaining ninety minutes to sit through.

The plot is quite standard fare but that's all it needs to be: no need for complexity in a story about a clumsy Panda dreaming of fighting alongside the Furious Five (made up of the voices of Angelina Jolie and Jackie Chan to name two of the five). Plot intricacies aside, Kung Fu Panda's strong points include attention to detail. I can't say I know much about Chinese custom or history, but the movie convinced me that the producers did, and that gave the movie some of its originality in the crowded computer animated movie stakes.

The fight scenes are also impressive, easy to follow with expressive moves and complex duels, including those that involve Po. The scene where Po takes on Master Shifu in a duel over a bowl of dumplings using chopsticks is highly engaging and entertaining.

Kung Fu Panda is a colourful, comical romp predominantly due to Jack Black, who is in top form. The kids will love it and the adults will find it good throwaway fun.

Would I pay to see it?

Tough question with this one. It isn't as impressive as Toy Story was or Wall-E is billed to be, but it's still great fun. Not necessarily one to see at the movies; more a DVD rental or Sky movie option for me.

Rating?

6 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Jolie wasn't half as sexy in this one." Daryl Nilbett

11: WANTED

2008-08-04T04:37:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

The trailer for Wanted looked pretty hot, in more ways than one, and I like James McEvoy's work. Guns, explosions and oh yeah, Angelina Jolie.

Where?

Cinema 5, Shaftesbury Avenue, 6.40pm (the only Cineworld close by that was showing it!)

Comments?

I am like any hot-blooded male - I like action flicks, I like carnage and I like a bit of cinematic violence. But Wanted left me with a sour taste in my mouth. Sure, there was violence and most of it was shot, pardon the pun, in a very unique way, making it quite visually pleasing (and much more so when Jolie hit the screen) and some would say it was entertaining. I wouldn't.

This movie lacked a moral grounding. People are killed left, right and centre and not one of their deaths, including any main characters you may have grown attached to, have any meaning. Even the deaths of the targets of this "fraternity of assassins" are without purpose. The assassins don't know why they are being killed; we don't know why they are being killed - they just are, in the most flamboyant ways imaginable.

When one of the main characters works out a unique way of shooting a target through the sun roof of a car, he grins and fires away and the audience is expected to grin with him, laugh even, marvel at how clever he is. Sure, if this target was the main villain of the piece who has alluded death many times before, it would be a good set piece and we would be cheering. But we don't even know what this guy has done to warrant death in the first place!

Another fatal flaw of Wanted is that it starts off quite brilliantly, approaching the subject matter very tongue in cheek. No hoper (McAvoy) is being pursued by a gun man for no reason that he can discern but is protected by a sexy gun-toting assassin (Jolie) who believes he is the next big thing in the assassin world. There are some ludicrous car chase moves which are gleefully enjoyable and there is a classic scene involving a computer keyboard and the face of a "best friend" who has been cheating on McAvoy's girlfriend. All very funny stuff.

Then the movie starts to take itself seriously, the laughs dry up, the dark humour dissipates and people start dying for no apparent reason. The assassins are taking orders from a loom in a textile mill through a binary code hidden in weaving errors of the cotton fabric - it's called (cough, ahem) The Loom of Fate. In the first twenty minutes, this scenario may have brought a few laughs; at the point in the movie when everything is taken seriously, all it got was a few groans.

Maybe I'm getting old, but this shoot 'em up had less morals than last year's Shoot 'Em Up, and left me lambasting the movie like an old man waving his wooden cane and telling youngsters to turn that music down!

If it wasn't for Angelina . . .

Would I pay to see it?

No.

Rating?

3.5 out of 10 (an extra 1/2 point for Jolie's presence - jeez, I'm shallow!)

Post Movie Quote:

"Wham, Bang, no thank you ma'am." Daryl Nilbett

Best Free Movie Of The Year - Nomination - Month #3

2008-07-31T09:15:00.001-07:00

Oh dear.

Month 3 (June 21 - July 20) was a light one, wasn't it? During the 30 odd days since Gone Baby Gone was announced as Best Free Movie Of The Year - Nomination #2, I managed to see, wait for it, wait for it - one movie.

One. One solitary movie in a month. What in god's name was I doing that whole month? Getting a life, some might say - but in terms of reaching the goal quite clearly displayed at the top of the page, it was a pitiful display. I need to pull my finger out.

But I bet the guys at Cipher Films and Limelight would be pointing out the silver lining. Their independent film based in London and starring relative unknowns has made the BFMOTY nominations, by default. As Homer Simpson would say: "Default! The two sweetest words in the English language."

That's a bit harsh though - there is a reasonable chance that I would've picked this movie anyway, especially if I had been subjected to too many mediocre blockbusters in a row during the month. One or two mediocre blockbusters is okay, but a whole string of them leaves you feeling a little dead inside.

So without further ado and dropping the need for a build up of tension, the third nomination for Best Free Movie Of The Year is:

ADULTHOOD

Well done guys.

So the average amount of movies per month for me to see in order to reach the big 100has jumped to 10! I really do need to pull my finger out, even more so given that as I post this entry, I am already 11 days into Month 4 and haven't been to the flicks yet!

Dang this hot, summery weather!

10: ADULTHOOD

2008-07-28T04:52:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

Plain and simple, I wanted to watch something from the independent stable. Too many blockbusters in a row has deadened the impact, especially when one of those blockbusters was The Happening. Time to see something raw and without the over the top special effects.

Where?

Cinema 4, Wandsworth Southside Shopping Centre, 7.10pm (experienced first hand bus rage on the way to the cinemas with a 12 year old who insisted on playing music on her mobile at the highest volume; thought I'd risk getting knifed just to get me into the mood).

Comments?

This was exactly what I was after - a movie that is raw, visceral and without any visible boom mikes.

Adulthood is a sequel, set six years after the movie Kidulthood, which was also written by director Noel Clarke. It is quite an eye-opening look at life in West London for these young adults with violence, drugs and really bad language the order of the day. I haven't seen Kidulthood but I suspect it is more of the same, but with the added impact of the main characters at a younger age.

Not seeing Kidulthood doesn't detract from enjoying this sequel, even though the events do have a major impact on the set up of Adulthood. In short, Sam Peel has just come out of the slammer after doing something really bad at the end of Kidulthood and there are a number of people out for revenge. He has a few allies along the way but they are just as flawed and messed up as he is and they cause him more grief than good.

Adulthood is pretty full on and the skill of the actors involved creates an increased level of realism. It's the perfect independent film to foil big-blockbusters-itis and has the added fun of spotting London landmarks ("Look, there's Hammersmith tube station!"). The Mexican standoff ending is a bit lame, especially after the action that precedes it but that is a minor grumble.

Adulthood is not as good as similar urban gang movies such as Bullet Boy, Tsotsi and the brilliant City of God, but it does have an impact on the viewer. I will definitely be thinking twice before joining in on road, restaurant, bus or any other type of rage on the London streets.

Would I pay to see it?

Innit.

Rating?

6.5 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Don't look at anyone. Keep staring ahead. Let that guy play his music on the bus. Don't worry about the girl next to you smoking. Just keep calm." Daryl Nilbett

Best Free Movie Of The Year - Nomination - Month #2

2008-06-26T12:41:00.000-07:00

Month two (May 21 - June 20) delivered a round of big blockbusters including the long awaited Indiana Jones movie, destined to be in the running for the Best Free Movie Of The Year.

I increased the monthly average of movies watched in May/June but not by much, and I am still languishing behind the 8-9 movies per month I need to see to hit the big 100. Two movies a week is much harder than it sounds, especially given the great sunny weather that London has been having lately. I've even had a few guilt trips while sitting in the cinema with the sun shining outside - guilt trips, but no regrets (how about The Happening, I hear you ask? Sure, I regretted seeing that movie, but luckily, it was miserable outside that day, so no double whammy).

So, what movie knocked my socks off this month? Was there a better movie than what Indy had to offer? Or was there a sleeper hit ready to knock the fedora wearing archaeologist off his perch?

Before I announce the nomination this month, I must clarify that The Incredible Hulk falls into this month's considerations. Although the post was made after the 20th of June, I did see it before that date. I was just being slack.

Anyway, without further ado, the second nomination for The Best Free Movie Of The Year is:

GONE BABY GONE

I still think about this movie almost a month after seeing it and I will be taking Kathy to see it on Monday. An outstanding directorial debut by Ben Affleck, brilliant acting by his brother Casey and the rest of the cast, and a powerful movie full of suspense and emotion. The front runner (after two months) for the big award.

Sorry Indy.

9: THE INCREDIBLE HULK

2008-06-25T05:49:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

Seeking out another blockbuster after the disappointment of The Happening, The Incredible Hulk looked entertaining and visually impressive. Having not seen the first Ang Lee movie which received a critically and commercially luke warm response, I had no expectations of a return to form for the big green monster. I hoped that this would increase my enjoyment.

Where?

Cinema 2, Wandsworth Southside Shopping Centre, 7.10pm (I now have this uncanny knack of getting there by bus with moments to spare.)

Comments?

Firstly, I was surprised it wasn’t an origin movie. My perception going in was that this movie was to wipe the slate clean of the first one, starting from scratch. Except for a recap of sorts over the opening credits, this second instalment of The Incredible Hulk is a continuation and begins with Bruce Banner hiding out from the American military, trying to find a cure for his furious temper that, if unchecked, gives way to a bad case of CGI-tis.

After the initial scene setting, the movie just passed me by. Not necessarily a case of “so what” but as events unraveled on the screen, action sequences and character scenes alike, they had little impact. It was also hard to sympathise with the title character. The Incredible Hulk was masterly presented in computer generated beauty, but this made it difficult for me when I was searching for the tormented human Bruce Banner within, even when his eyes went all gooey at the sight of Liv Tyler. At least with Lou Ferrigno (who has a short cameo here), he kinda looked human.

The movie isn’t as bad as all that. It stacks up pretty well against Iron Man, another recent superhero movie, and has a better battle finale, but Ed Norton is no Robert Downey Jnr when it comes to portraying intriguing alter egos. The Incredible Hulk does have some positives: it has some good action sequences and doesn’t fall into superhero clichés (except for the aforementioned final fight).

My assessment of this movie may have been dragged down by the fact that I have become tired of multi-million dollar blockbusters after the long spate of them since [REC]. The Incredible Hulk is a reasonable superhero outing, but compared to Iron Man, which it has more in common with than first thought, it can not be said to be memorable.

Would I pay to see it?

It's borderline but I would say yes.

Rating?

5.5 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Time for some independent movies; I’m all blockbusted out." Daryl Nilbett

8: THE HAPPENING

2008-06-18T05:22:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

M. Night Shyamalan's form of late has been mysteriously mediocre since Signs (and even that was borderline disappointing) but the excellent Sixth Sense still gives the movie goer some hope that one day M. Night's great storytelling abilities will return to form. Previews of The Happening suggest that the day may have arrived.

Where?

Cinema 2, Hammersmith, 6.30pm (Got there a little late and missed The X-Files preview!)

Comments?

What has gone wrong with M. Night Shyamalan? He used to be such an adept screenwriter and a director of atmospheric, tense and intriguing tales. Unique and entertaining. Now his movies have the quality of direct-to-video rubbish (and without any sex or dodgy gross out scenes to keep us amused).

His form has dropped off considerably and it's hard to reconcile The Sixth Sense to his latest outing. It's like watching your favourite AFL footy team go from a winning streak at the start of the season to getting walloped by 100 points by Round 11 (or in soccer parlance: 6 nil by mid-December) with exactly the same team on the field. It's very hard to understand why the quality has dropped. Complacency perhaps? Lack of pressure? Surely M. Night can no longer live off the cred he received after his brilliant debut, but that said, that was the main reason why I went to see The Happening in the first place.

Why is it so bad? Poor acting (Walhberg looks out of place, Zooey Deschanel is horrid), dialogue as corny and unrealistic as anything George Lucas has conjured up, and a story that lacks direction, tension and a satisfying ending. I won't go into it too much here so as not to give away the plot (a policy on this blog), but let it be said that surely M. Night could've come up with a more thoughtful and clever way of making a political statement (if that's what he's trying to do here - not entirely sure).

This would have been an average Twilight Zone episode on a good day.

And can I just add: I can't believe how sloppy a director can be to allow a shot to make it through to the final cut where the boom mike makes an appearance. M. Night committed this cardinal sin (in my book, anyway) four times. Count them - FOUR times. And we're not just talking about "blink-and-you-miss-it" type appearances - one of the mikes, with a nice bright red casing, hovers around the actors for at least two minutes! At one stage, I thought these errors were intentional and that M.Night's customary twist in the tale ending would reveal a Truman Show style caper. Unfortunately, I wasn't that fortunate.

Would I pay to see it?

A resounding no.

Rating?

2 out of 10 (a point lost for the cameo boom mike (who was on the screen so much, it should've got an acting credit))

Post Movie Quote:

"That's the first time I've tut-tuted at the end of a movie. Good night M. Night." Daryl Nilbett

7: INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL

2008-06-10T04:41:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

If this was my first time seeing Indy 4, I would've ignored this question - it's Indy, of course I'm going to see it!

Why see it again? I wanted to enjoy it all over again but I also wanted to see if the mixed feelings I had about the ending could be rectified with an expectation free repeat viewing.

Where?

Cinema 13, Wandsworth Southside Shopping Centre, 7.15pm (Wandsworth again? I hear you say. Well, it's got the most screens and the popcorn is rocking and I quite enjoy the bus ride.)

Comments?

This is definitely an Indy movie - wise cracks, close calls, car chases, nasty villains, the fedora - it's all here and a whole lot of fun it is too. Indy is back!

Harrison Ford, albeit 20 years older since the last instalment, still pulls it off as the archaeologist adventurer out to discover all the wonders of the world and keep them out of the hands of those nasty Nazis (or in this case, Russians).

It's very entertaining and you can tell the whole production gang enjoyed themselves too. The addition of Shia LaBeouf is great, a James Dean type who takes a fair share of the action, leaving the much older Jonesy to stunts that are more considerate of his age. However, that said, Harrison Ford doesn't shy away from the action, performing the majority of his own stunts with impressive strength and agility. If the light is right and you can't see the silver hair, he doesn't look a day older than The Last Crusade.

As mentioned above, I've already seen this movie and had mixed feelings about the plot device and the ending. We had The Ark of the Covenant, the Sankara stone and the Holy Grail - all plot devices with religious and spiritual connotations. Kingdom of The Crystal Skull offers up something a little bit left of field and maybe a little too far out there to fit into the mold of the Indy movies we love so dearly. Sure, the plot is relevant to the period in question and should resonate with modern audiences, but something about it doesn't click and unfortunately, I'm still on the fence about it after a second viewing. In fact, I hasten to say that I enjoyed it a little less the second time around.

That said, what the movie does do is bring back the memories of the Indy franchise, back when my dad took me to see my first movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and how it scared the crap out of me. Great memories, rekindled by a movie that stays true to the originals but is brave enough to try something different, even if that decision's success is still not decided in my mind.

Still great fun!

Would I pay to see it?

Already did.

Rating?

7.5 out of 10 (an extra half point for nostalgic reasons)

Post Movie Quote:

"Can't wait to watch the old ones again!" Daryl Nilbett, with a crack of his whip.

6: GONE BABY GONE

2008-06-09T04:56:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

This movie was delayed for nine months in the UK to respect the feelings of the parents and those close to Madeleine McCann. However, the film's parallels to that tragic real life abduction case was not why I wanted to see it - I actually saw a poster for Gone Baby Gone in Chicago last September and it looked good. I had just seen Casey Affleck in the Jesse James movie and was liking his work. It is also Ben Affleck's directorial debut, which makes for interesting viewing, and by all reports, he has received the thumbs up. To top it off, it's based on a book by Dennis Lehane, an author I have not read but I have heard a lot about - in particular for his work on The Wire and for another one of his books, Mystic River, which has also been adapted, with Oscar winning results.

Where?

Cinema 12, Wandsworth Southside Shopping Centre, 6.10pm (I know, I know, I should've been outside in the sun.)

Comments?

This is a must see - a very moving, emotional and gripping movie, perfectly handled by Ben Affleck for his first go at directing.

I must admit, the first few scenes had me thinking about Madeleine McCann, but soon after, it was the story of the little girl Amanda and the private investigator asked to find her that had me engrossed.

Casey Affleck is excellent as Patrick Kenzie, his subtle expressions and quiet voice perfect for the role as the honest, street wise P.I. who attempts to find the missing four year old girl. Other standouts in the cast include Ed Harris, Michelle Monaghan and in particular, Amy Ryan as the mother whose sordid life attracts blame for the disappearance of her only child.

The questions faced by the principal characters are not clear cut, making each decision all the more gut wrenching and impacting.

Parents watching this movie will find it hard to keep their emotions under control; everyone else will be both distressed and moved by this story of a little lost girl.

Would I pay to see it?

Yes.

Rating?

9 out of 10 (even though it is a completely different genre and they have the same rating, I would put this above The Orphanage and [REC]).

Post Movie Quote:

"Gone Baby Gone is an important film delivered with honesty and ability by everyone involved, especially the Affleck brothers. Inspiring to me not just as a film buff, but also as a writer." Daryl Nilbett, pensive.

5: IN BRUGES

2008-05-28T04:54:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

I'm always up for crime movies with a bit of dark comedy, and based on the previews, this seemed to fit into that category quite well. I also saw an interview with the director (who has a background in theatre) and it sounded interesting.

Where?

Cinema 12, Wandsworth Southside Shopping Centre, 8.25pm (took the 28 bus from Paddington

Comments?

I really enjoyed this one. Colin Farrell, Brendan Gleeson and Ralph Fiennes were superb, delivering a witty and entertaining script perfectly.

There's dark humour for sure, and more than its fair share of violence, but there are underlying mature themes that are delivered with subtlety and skill. One particular scene had me close to tears, not of laughter, but sadness - an event that drives one of the characters to great despair.

But there's comedy to be had here too. There are laugh out loud classic lines even if the jokes are non PC and there are enough C bombs to warrant the 18 rating. On the face of it, these elements interlaced with drawn out Bruges snapshots and a simple melodic soundtrack don't seem to gel, but take my word for it, it all fits perfectly.

Slow at times, cliche ridden at others, but entertaining and thought provoking.

Dark with a heart.

Would I pay to see it?

For sure - this movie has more substance than anything Guy Ritchie has produced and it has better laughs.

Rating?

7 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Very good - really enjoyed it. Now how the f$*k do I get home from here?!" Daryl Nilbett, while searching for the nearest bus stop.

Paying For It - Number 1

2008-05-28T04:40:00.000-07:00

Sometimes, you just have to pay for it.

Although I have an unlimited Cineworld card that allows me free movies for a year, there are moments, sometimes within in my control, sometimes out of my control, where I will have to fork over the £10 plus to catch the latest flick.

As I have a target of reaching 100 free movies in one year (and because I love getting things for free), I won't be handing over my hard earned cash that often. But sometimes a movie warrants a big event type screening at an eff off sized theatre complex with 1/2 mile screens and a defeaning sound system - i.e. IMAX cinemas - or it justifies paying a little over the odds to enjoy a comfortable screening in a cinema where hardly any punter turns up - i.e. Apollo cinema.

And of course, sometimes, I just can't get to a Cineworld cinema. But that is rare, as they are all over the place.

Last weekend, Kathy and I were in Edinburgh for the marathon (well done, Kath on the PB!). Post marathon relaxation (yes, I was exhausted from all the supporting and cheering) included a flick at the local Vue cinema. There is a Cineworld in Edinburgh but it is in Haymarket and is a little out of the way if you are staying in Leith - so, I pulled out the wallet and paid over the cash.

But, I didn't mind - because I went to see (with big booming voice):

INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL

Let's just say it was money well spent. I will save my review for when I watch it again (for free) but I can safely say that it was a very entertaining movie with Indy back and at his best, despite the ludicrous ending.

I'm giving it a few weeks before watching it again, but watch out for it in the 100 sooner rather than later.

Best Free Movie Of The Year - Nomination - Month #1

2008-05-28T01:01:00.000-07:00

In the fourth week of April 2009, I will be picking my favourite movie from the 100 seen during my year of free cinema. I expect that there will be numerous contenders for the crown, so in order to make it easier on myself (and make up the numbers re: blog entries), I will select the best movie I've seen each month and thus nominating them for the coveted award of BEST FREE MOVIE OF THE YEAR.

During Month 1 (constituting April 21 to May 20), I saw four movies, well below the average of 8 1/3 movies a month required to hit the big 100. A slow month for sure, but there wasn't a dud amongst them - quality, not quantity, is what I'm talking about.

All four movies had me leaving the cinema thinking - they made an impression. Some more than others and all in their own special way.

However, without further ado, I announce the first nomination for Best Free Movie Of The Year:

THE ORPHANAGE

This was the first movie I saw with my Cineworld free movie card, so it has some nostalgic significance, but it is also the pick of the bunch - a frightening but ultimately moving horror story delivered perfectly and with heart - a true contender for the BFMOTY.

On to Month 2!

4 : SPEED RACER

2008-05-12T01:07:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

The Wachowski brothers - those dudes who came up with The Matrix Trilogy - said to have pushed the boundaries on visual effects once again!

Where?

Cinema 2, Hammersmith, 8.20pm (right after Iron Man with only enough time for a 6" Sub)

Comments?

All I can say is WOW. Yeah, it's pretty much a kid's flick, a little cheesy and some of the race scenes are confusing, but with the AMAZING CGI effects and a great cast, this is definitely a must see. It's bold in its visuals, writing and direction and its nothing like anything you've ever seen before.

You'll either hate it or love it but you will definitely be impressed by it! Take the kids if you've got 'em!

Would I pay to see it?

My word yes, this movie stayed with me a long time afterwards (and not just because of the catchy theme song). If I get a chance, I'll be doing a repeat viewing. Might even go and see it at IMAX in 3D.

Rating?

8 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Go Speed Racer, Go Speed Racer, Go Speed Racer, GO!!" Repeating over and over in Daryl Nilbett's head.

3 : IRON MAN

2008-05-12T00:50:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

Robert Downey Jnr really. Yes, I was pretty keen to see a good superhero movie and the trailer looked exciting, but it was Mr Downey Jnr's turn as Tony Stark which drew me in - it was supposed to be quite a unique character as superhero's ulter egos go.

Where?

Cinema 4, Hammersmith, 5.30pm (had to run to make it!)

Comments?

The effects were very good and the build up to how Stark becomes Iron Man was interesting, but it was Robert Downey Jnr who made this movie watchable - very entertaining. As for the plot, the backstory dominated the movie leaving little room for any big time battles except for the finale, which was okay at today's superhero movie standards. Jeff Bridges was excellent as Obadiah Stane - a far cry from The Dude but entertaining nonetheless.

Would I pay to see it?

I think I would: it was enjoyable and Downey Jnr was quite funny.

Rating?

6.5 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Very entertaining, but what's next? Ah, yes - Speed Racer!" Daryl Nilbett.

2 : [REC]

2008-04-24T01:00:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

Comparisons to Blair Witch - which would normally flag it up as a piece of shite - but this isn't an American film, it's Spanish, so I braced for something different, and based on the other Spanish movie I saw, something downright scary.

Where?

Cinema 6, Trocadero, 9.15pm

Comments?

Reading subtitles while the camera moves and shakes is a challenge but the subject matter and intensity on the screen makes you forget all about it. I think I jumped out of my seat about five times. This is one scary follando film (pardon my Spanish).

Would I pay to see it?

Yes I would and I would fork out some money for brown underpants next time too.

Rating?

9 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Gee, the Spanish know how to scare the shit out of you! "Daryl Nilbett (to anyone who would listen).

1 : EL ORFANATO (THE ORPHANAGE)

2008-04-21T12:47:00.000-07:00

Why I chose it?

Involvement of Guillermo Del Toro (Pan's Labyrinth, Hellboy); a bit of a buzz surrounding it from critics and viewers alike (which isn't always a good thing).

Where?

Cinema 2, Haymarket

Comments?

Quite an enthralling psychological thriller with superbly handled supernatural elements; great use of sound; plenty of "edge of your seat, hold your breath" sequences.

Would I pay to see it?

Yes! Full price!!

Rating?

9 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Scary and frightening, but ultimately, heartbreaking. A great start to the 100!!" Daryl Nilbett (to no one in particular).

Lights! Camera! Action!

2008-04-21T12:38:00.000-07:00

And so it begins.

One hundred movies in a year. Roughly two a week. All starting from yesterday, 20 April 2008.

And it's all free.

How is that? I hear you ask. Well, The Jingo bought me a Cineworld Unlimited movie pass for one whole year for my birthday last year. Great pressie; great chick.

Free movies at any of the Cineworld theatres - Trocadero, Haymarket, Chelsea, Fulham Road, even Dublin - for one whole year!

I activated the card yesterday at Haymarket cinema with giddy glee. They took a photo of me for identification purposes and based on the photo, I will need to be shitfaced on beer and raspberry snaps for me to pass inspection. No, I wasn't drunk yesterday; it's just a rotten picture.

I activated the card, bought some popcorn and soft drink and headed into Cinema 2, where I saw Movie Number One, which was anything but rotten.

Roll it!