16: THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL

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

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

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

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

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

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

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