Welcome home, James Bond...

Skyfall is currently breaking UK Box Office records left, right and centre, and after watching the latest release commemorating 50 years of Bond (starting with Dr. No in 1962), I think it's easy to see why.

Shortly after watching the film, I went around asking people, "Which James Bond did you grow up with?".  I was shocked at the realisation that I now found myself in an older generation who answered Roger Moore, or even Sean Connery.  The majority now answer Pierce Brosnan, some will noe even answer Daniel Craig.  I believe your answer to this question will have an effect on how you view and appreciate the film, unless you are a big Bond fan who has gone back to watch all the previous films.

Pierce Brosnan's Bond had the charm, the swagger, and the gadgets.  Everything from laser watches, to exploding pens.  The one thing he lacked was any sense of peril.  No matter what the situation, Pierce Brosnan's Bond never had us concerned, just impatient to get to the bit where he mounted his escape and stuff started to explode.  This was the end of a progression that saw Bond use his quick wit and whatever was to hand less (a strand of hair across a door in Dr. No), and flashy gadgets that seemed tailor made for a situation that he seemingly accidentally found himself in, more (think laser watch escape from train in GoldenEye).

Then in steps Daniel Craig as Bond in Casino Royale, and the cycle is broken.  Bond is the more physical and violent character that we read about in the books, complete with brutal fight scenes and, the then in vogue, free running.  But more importantly Craig's Bond is only human, we see him fall in love and have his heart broken, as well as tortured and hospitalised.  An on screen process that makes you feel that you're there for the creation of the ice cool veneer that is synonymous with James Bond.  The only element that was missing from Casino Royale was the bad guy.  Mads Mikkelsen plays an excellent part, but he isn't the classic Bond villain.  There's a bigger shadowy element moving behind the scenes, a corporation of evil that runs through both Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.  A great idea given the economic and political landscape of the times, but not very Bond.

That brings us to Skyfall (and some SPOILERS).  Here we have a classic return of the Bond villain in Javier Bardem's Silva.  He gives a stand out performance, with a character who is camp but dangerous, tongue in cheek but can still be taken seriously.  Most importantly, he has the smarts to stand toe to toe with the good guys (and they don't give a white cat to cradle in his arms during his opening monologue).

The most important, and for me, best aspect of Skyfall is the breaking and rebuilding of Bond throughout the course of the film.  Those responsible for Die Another Day, watch carefully, and take note.  If Casino Royale exposed Bond's underbelly, Skyfall creates a genuine doubt as to whether Bond can recover fully.  This is helped throughout by references to Bond being an old school player in a new age where technology trumps fieldcraft.  Whether it's the direct question posed by Mallory, or the scene between Q and Bond in the gallery.  The rebuilding is successful however, due to Bond's successful capture of the more tech savvy Silva using nothing but a radio, and the later set piece in Skyfall house.  Here we see Bond fend of Silva and his goons using low tech booby traps using whatever is at hand.  Giving us a new take on the light bulb that you're unlikely to see on 60 Minute Makeover any time soon.

Whilst the ending sees the passing of Judi Dench's M, the credits roll with a new M in the shape of Mallory, the return of Q and Miss Moneypenny, and everything set for Bond to return in a completely new adventure (no sign of a Quantum of Solace-esque follow on.... phew).  It's only when the credits roll, however, that I understood the majesty of what had been achieved by Skyfall.  A 50 year old character, played by 8 different actors, has been successfully relaunched into a new age, with a band new generation as it's audience.

Bring on number 24....

5 Live Octoberfest

Last week, between the 11th and 13th October, BBC Radio 5 Live put on a number of live shows in Sheffield.  Until a week before, I knew nothing about it, when a friend from work announced he had a spare ticket and would I like to go.  The ticket in question was for Kermode and Mayo's Film Review show, it was like Christmas had come early.

The event took place at the Crucible Theatre, of which I had only seen during televised footage of the snooker.  It was a simple set up, and whilst I don't know what I expected to happen, it quickly became apparent that they were doing their usual radio spot live in front of us.  Part of that included the Top 10 Review, so to make use of the live audience they asked for volunteers to provide their thoughts on any of the Top 10 they had seen.  Some did their contribution as part of a pair, and I felt very sorry for the gentleman who followed the first lady to speak reviewing Looper.  It was a fantastic one line review, that I personally wouldn't have tried to follow.

I was really taken aback by the relaxed approach to the whole event.  I never imagined live radio broadcasting to be the most stressful of activities, but Kermode and Mayo were amiable and talkative between segments, with Kermode even taking the time to sign autographs and pose for photographs.

The best part of the event had to be the interview with Mark Herbert of Warp Films.  Ever since watching Dead Man's Shoes, I have been a fan of Paddy Considine and Shane Meadows.  Only later to find that Warp Films played a huge part in a great many projects involving the two.  For those unfamiliar with the work of any of the above, check out:

www.warpfilms10.com

It gives a great overview of what these guys have achieved and created, as well as details of Warp Films 10th anniversary celebratory event.  They are screening Dead Man's Shoes at the Magna Centre in Rotherham, with those involved in the original score, and guests, re-imagining the soundtrack live whilst the screening takes place.  Along with a host of other screenings and music events, £20 is a steal.  It's an early bird price, and with the event taking place on November 17th they probably won't be around much longer.

Check out the podcast of Kermode and Mayo's live event here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/kermode

Looper packs a punch...

Heading in to see Looper, I had made an effort to not look further than the theatrical trailers for information about what was in store for me.  Undoubtedly there was not much more to find out at that point, but I had a good feeling about Looper being something special, so I didn't want to take any chances.

One thing I was aware of, was the talk surrounding Joseph Gordon Levitt's prosthetics and attempt to mimic Bruce Willis.  The talk seemed to turn to ridicule in some instances.  I fully believe it enhances JGL's performance, and really adds that 'younger Bruce Willis' element.  JGL does a great job of his expressions and speech patterns as well.

Whilst they have great material to go on with the story, Bruce, JGL, and Emily play brilliant parts (Emily's character Sara has a fabulously dirty mouth).  But the performance that had me on the edge of my seat was that of Pierce Gagnon, the child playing Cid, Son of Emily's character Sara.  He has great comedy timing, is freakishly natural in front of the camera, and really nails some emotionally charged scenes.

The film starts, sets the scene, introducing the Loopers in a near future world, who act on behalf of those in a future 30 years further on.  There are some great touches to this not so distant future, solar powered cars (where cars are used and battered with solar panels crudely attached to them), and over crowding from increased population to name a few.  But the best thing it does here is not dwell on, or over think, time travel.  You know the bare minimum, even during dialogue between the 2 Joes (JGL and Bruce), this way it doesn't become a thread to pick at, distracting you from the main story.  It's illegal, and used only by criminals for the purposes of getting rid of people, this is then where the Loopers come in.

Then, once the stage is set, and the film gets in to it's rhythm, I thought for a brief moment that it was going to end by the numbers and predictable.  All this Twitter hype for the few days previous would have been just that...hype.

Then something quite remarkable happened, and it was like being punched in the face by the fist of awesomeness.

To start with, I thought the film had come to a rather abrupt and premature end.  Then, I realised that I'd been hit with the twist.  But even after that, after the credits, walking out of the cinema, and even on the drive home, the sheer brilliance of what I'd just seen was still sinking in.  So many different aspects of the relationships between people are examined during the course of the film, not least between the different incarnations of Joe, and it's only with the final twist that it all gets brought together.

A great tonic to the fast paced, explosion fest, blockbusters of the summer, Looper is a film that I will enjoy watching the second time just as much as I did the first.

It's Judgement time!...

On July 21st 1995, a dark shadow was cast across the world, a vile taint in the form of Judge Dredd starring Sylvester Stallone.  Many people have spent many an hour lamenting the many failings of this film, for me it saw the ruination of a comic book legend.

The removal of Dredd's helmet has to be by far the biggest error in the film.  The reasoning that they wanted to humanise the character is laughable.  Dredd is the law, unyielding, unsympathetic, hard.  He doesn't do sentiment or romance.
Rob Schneider creates 'the sidekick'.  A character we will have to endure forever more.  For those who haven't seen it, think Shia LaBeouf in I, Robot or Constantine.  Thanks Rob....thanks a lot.

17 years, 1 month and 17 days later.....

(that's a long time by the way)

Dredd is back on our screens, under the guise of Karl Urban.  Needless to say I was very excited about this, and whilst for previous big releases (Avengers Assemble for example) I have been nervous about how good a job will have been done, this time I was not.  Nothing could be worse than the Dredd of 1995, and the wait was finally over to have something to replace it.

The film is spectacular.  Action packed, dark, gruesome, unapologetically brutal, and fun throughout.  When leaving the cinema my first thought was how well it worked as a complete and self contained film.  Whilst Alex Garland (screen writer) has gone on record saying that they have worked on, and would like to do multiple films, nothing was left in reserve.  No 'you're going to have to wait until next time' bits.  That is the stand out point of this film that makes it not just good, but great.

***Here come the SPOILERS***

They do this with the angle of it just being another day in Mega City One.  Just a day on patrol for the Judges.  It just so happens on this day they run in to Ma Ma Madrigal and a Mega Block full of drug crazed cronies.  The main elements are introduced, The Cursed Earth, Mega City One, The Hall of Justice, Dredd, Anderson, and then their day unfolds.  There is no drawn out attempt to give needless back story to try and score points with the fans, they just get down to business.

Then they walk away.  Maybe for another day, maybe not.  I hope they do, but that's because I'm a huge fan.  But not because I need a sequel to explain some part of the film, or fill in any blanks.

Then there's Dredd the character.  First of all, bravo Karl Urban.  The man is a hero and a legend.  Through his portrayal of Dredd, we get one of the best realisations of a comic book that has ever been released.  The biggest compliment that I could pay to Karl is that he does such a good job, it could be anyone under that helmet.  You get 100% Dredd.  No bullshit, no softening of the edges, no sentiment, and definitely no romance.  Karl Urban's Dredd kicks ass, dispenses justice, and delivers great one liners.  All with the signature grimace.

Even walking out of Peach Trees at the end of the film, ragged, shot and bloody, all Dredd has to say about the experience is "the perps were uncooperative".

Bad....ass.....

Dredd was always going to get a small fanfare in the UK cinemas.  When I went to see it on opening weekend it was only on one of the cinema's smaller screens.  Unfortunately, it has had an equally poor reception in the US.  Having only has a modest $50 Million budget, it has only grossed $10 Million (ish) worldwide at the cinema so far.  I sincerely hope that things pick up, and it also has a surge once it gets it's DVD/BluRay release.  We need more films like this.

Whether you have seen Dredd yet or not.  Spread the word.  This is a great film, a type of which you very rarely see at the cinema anymore.  Great, solid, action packed and fun throughout, and aimed unapologetically at adults.  We need to get behind it.

WATCH IT....THEN TELL EVERYONE YOU KNOW ABOUT IT!

The curse of 2 step verification...

Like millions of others last weekend, I was like a kid at Christmas with my new iPhone.  Due to my complete lack of patience, I started a new number, abandoning my previous number of several years.  I'd only just stopped getting phone calls for someone named Pete!  From what I could gather from my many conversations he was an electrician who worked in and around the South Yorkshire area.

So I get my new phone up and running, and I start using my email app to find I'm prompted for my email password to my Gmail account.  I enter it.  Nothing.  I go online and try to log in from the website, and I'm informed that a verification code has been text to my old number.

Oh yeah, I set up 2 step verification.....bugger.

Not a problem, I'll just put my old sim into my new phone, and....ah....nano sim, not micro sim.

Still no problem, 6 years in the mobile industry, sim cards are easy to change.  Go into the shop, buy a sim, and I'm told all it takes is a phone call to connect it.  That seems reasonable, no sense in the advisor wasting their time when I can make the phone call myself.  15 minutes on hold, give them all my details, and....we can't change your sim like that.  We have to send you a sim in the post, ok, I'll roll with it.  Get them sim in the post, now it's time to rock and roll.  Nope, I have to activate online....then wait up to 48 hours.

2 step verification....removed.

I wouldn't mind so much, but during this time, I've seen Dredd and by god do I want to blog about it!

So now I'm back in the land of the technological living, I think it goes without saying that my next post will be about Dredd.

What's next after Dredd?

Judgement is coming....(again)

It's no secret that I'm not a fan of Stallone's outing as Dredd in '95.  So for me, there is a real possibility of a great, new beginning for this amazing character on the big screen.
A number of plot details are available, still a month away from it's theatrical release, and much has been made of it's unrelenting, brutal visual styling.  All that remains is how it's received by audiences.

Alex Garland, writer and producer of Dredd, has already said there's more to come.  If Dredd takes enough at the box office, what might we have to look forward to?

Judge Death:


Undoubtedly the most anticipated character from the 200AD universe, Judge Death is a character who originated from the alternate universe 'Deadworld' which he himself created.  Son of a psychopathic dentist, he began killing at a young age, starting with 3 school bullies.  He became a Judge so he was able to kill people legally.  His enthusiasm for which earning him the nickname of Judge Death.  His psychosis lead him to believe that as all crime was committed by the living, life itself was a crime.  Spawning his vision of 'total justice' (the extermination of all life), and catchphrase "The crime is life, the sentence death!".
Once finished extinguishing all life in his world, Judge Death made crossed over to Mega City One and made several attempts to do the same there.  There is even crossover with Gotham City.

There are so many great stories and characters surrounding Judge Death, that it almost seems impossible that a studio would not want to go there.

Necropolis:

Having been saved from Ma-Ma in Dredd, could this be the next peril to befall Mega City One?  The Necropolis story arc sees Mega City One captured by Judge Death and his fellow Dark Judges.  It also sees Dredd fall from grace, making for a perfect third act triumphant return that equates to box office gold.  If you want a great introduction to Dredd and 2000AD, check this story out (progs 674-699).

The Dark Judges:

Judge Death is just one of four Dark Judges, all of who are seriously bad ass (the others being Judge Mortis, Judge Fear, and Judge Fire).  Themselves Judges from an alternate universe, the other Dark Judges are all devoted to Death's ideals and cause.  Whilst Death makes the dimensional jump to Mega City One first, his subsequent defeat means the others shortly follow.  A formidable adversary of Dredd and all life in Mega City One, there's also ample opportunity for a Dark Judges origins story.

Cynics might call it money making tactics, I call it exciting times ahead.  Who knows, Dredd's popularity could see The Dark Knight and Dredd join forces to save Gotham? (see Judgement on Gotham)

Come on Karl, Alex and crew, do Dredd proud!

Maybe I need to see TDKR again?...

There will be spoilers...

Filling cinema seats by the thousand up and down the UK, The Dark Knight Rises opened on Friday.  After lots of scheduling clashes, and rearranging, I managed to be one of the faithful who went along on the opening day.

My wife and I had watched Batman Begins a few nights before, during which she made a great point.  It's the first time we see on screen what goes into making Batman so kick ass.  I get that's the point of an 'origins' film, but in all the other films Bruce Wayne just puts on a Bat Suit and takes on a slightly super human quality.  In Batman Begins, we see what goes into it, and it makes it more believable once the suit goes on.

Then we were treated to The Dark Knight.  I will very shortly be watching it again, as it sits waiting in my iTunes library.  As action films go, it's a corker, and Heath Ledger's performance has ensured The Dark Knight's place as a timeless classic.  The kind of film that I will sit down and watch 20 years from now and enjoy just as much (a great example of this I watched just last night in Aliens).

So then we have TDKR:

What a mouth watering prospect.  Bane, Batman and closure.  3 things that were, in my opinion, heavily touted by all involved.  That rare thing, a compelling and well told story, allowed to run it's course and then end.  All things pointed to modern day greatness in the making.

I left the film on Friday, and for a good hour I felt frustrated and disappointed.  My wife and I spoke at length about the ending, which she loved, and I tried to reconcile my differences with it.  I will undoubtedly see the film again at the cinema, in a final attempt.  I didn't know quite what to expect from the ending, but whatever it was, I didn't get it.

You know how for some films, when they release the DVD or Blu-Ray, they include alternate endings?  Well I think in a bid to save everyone's time from having to watch several different endings to TDKR, they just cut them all together.  First Batman/Bruce Wayne dies, then he doesn't.  Then Gotham is saved, but wait, let's hand over the mantle of protector to someone else just in case (which in itself ruins the whole closure aspect).  Then you have the scene in the café...

Whilst TDKR is a great film, it's not the triumphant sign off I was hoping for.

Marvel unveils upcoming line up....

Now that Comic Con has now finished, and I'm able to pull myself away from my Twitter feed for longer than 30 minutes, it's time to see what SDCC has served up for us.

All of my attention was, without doubt, focused on what Marvel brought to the table.  To be expected, Robert Downey Jr. made waves during the Iron Man 3 panel.  From what I have read and seen, there was a beautifully orchestrated piece of theatre.  With Downey Jr. making a typically Stark-esque entrance, before making the introduction to the show reel.  Complete with Iron Man hand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra_jGGe9BHg

So as well as looking forward to the show reel footage making it's way into the public domain over the coming months, Marvel has unveiled a power house line up for the next 2 years.  With some titles we knew about, and some rumoured titles being confirmed:

Captain America, Iron Man, and Thor we knew were on the way, with shooting having started on the later 2 already.  Whilst Ant Man has very much been unveiled, with Edgar Wright showing his test reel, Marvel studios have only said it will happen, rather than when.  Guardians of the Galaxy is the much rumoured title that has been confirmed and given a release date.  Whilst Marvel is no stranger to the more mystical side of it's comic book universe on the big screen with the outing of Thor (I also can't wait to see how they tackle The Mandarin), I think The Guardians of the Galaxy presents an altogether different challenge.  I don't think the subject matter will lend itself to the more classical feel of Branagh's Thor.  So far, no details about who is involved have surfaced.  I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

I remain most excited about Iron Man 3, and only hope that they go all out with the Extremis story arc.  Although I'm not ready to see the back of Downey Jr. and Tony Stark, so let's hope they don't leave it too long before announcing a sequel to Avengers Assemble.

Red Lights not lighting the way...

Red Lights, a film that I found at least enjoyable, even though it never quite decided what it wanted to be.

**Spoilers Ahead**

To begin with you are introduced to Sigourney Weaver's 'Dr. Matheson', and Cillian Murphy's 'Dr. Buckley' (add in Robert De Niro, and Ashley Olsen, and you have a good enough reason to give this film the time of day).  The two are scientists investigating and debunking apparent paranormal occurrences.  At the point where we are told about the concept of 'Red Lights' by Dr. Matheson, I'm enjoying the film.  Red Lights are the tell tale signs that the paranormal is in fact normal, and we're just having the wool pulled over our eyes.  In the context of the film, the characters are sat outside a clairvoyant event looking for the people planted in the crowd, gathering information that can be used to convince them later that the person in front of them is able to read minds and talk to the dead.

At this stage De Niro's character is introduced, Simon Silver is a man who has lost his sight, but gained psychic powers.  And as both Sigourney's and Cillian's characters have history when it comes to being upset by people claiming to have some sort of psychic powers, they both undoubtedly want to see Silver exposed for the fraud he is (Matheson's history involves a son who is on a life support machine that she refuses to turn off as she doesn't believe in an afterlife.  Remember this for later, it's important).  Matheson is reluctant as she knows the dangers of going up against Silver, Buckley disregards this and just goes in all guns blazing....so far, still enjoying the film.

Matheson then dies, and as Buckley's attempts to uncover Silver as a fraud get more desperate, all kinds of weird goings on occur.  I'm suspending my skepticism as the sudden increase in 'unexplained goings on' is inline with Buckley's deteriorating mental state.

Then in an attempt to pull a Sixth Sense style cat out of the bag, the wheels fall off.  Whilst Sliver is exposed as a fraud (owing to the fact he can see), it turns our Buckley is the one with powers.  He being the cause of all the weirdness.  He knew this all along.  That for me is the nail in the coffin.  Knowing the situation with Matheson and her son, yet still keeping his mouth shut about the actual existence of some kind of paranormal just didn't sit well with me. 

In my opinion, Matheson should have also slipped into a coma, and the end scene of Buckley turning off the son's life support should have included Matheson as well.

The film started with great potential, but lost it's way with the ending.  Great performances from those involved make it worth the watch none the less.

Can Spiderman change my mind about reboots?

First things first.  Garfield is a great Peter Parker.  His cool edge gives him a more modern, up to date, geek factor.  The scene where Peter stands up to Flash is particularly important when it comes to highlighting this new side of Peter Parker.  Although the dynamic between the students is altogether different, as a later scene with Flash underlines shortly after the death of Uncle Ben.  Also Garfield embodies the wittier side of Peter that Maguire never really brought to the screen, the scene with the car thief the most notable example.  One thing that Garfield was behind the curve on was the 'Hero's Struggle'.  The inner turmoil was ever present throughout the first Spiderman films.  And even though you get a healthy slice of 'with great power comes great responsibility' from Martin Sheen's Uncle Ben, you don't really connect with Peter's turmoil through Garfield until the end scenes with Gwen after Peter has made his promise to her father.

There is an undeniable chemistry between Stone and Garfield.  Whilst they leave it open for the addition of MJ in future films (although that would make a mess of the Spiderman timeline, though we'll ignore that for now), I'm at this point more interested in seeing Gwen and Peter reunited.

I found it a bit too much towards the end of the film, the injection of patriotism when the workers align the cranes for Spiderman.  The camera pans over the worker's shoulder and the shot settles on the image of an American Flag against the side of a building.  The sentimentality of the scene was almost too much to bear.  The father of a boy saved earlier, just happening to be a crane operator who can repay Spiderman's kind act in his hour of need.  On it's own, I could have dealt with it, with the forced inclusion of the flag shot, too much.

Overall Spiderman was a thoroughly enjoyable film.  What started as cynicism, gradually gave way to mild excitement as the film got closer to release.  Now having watched the film, I eagerly await to see where this franchise will go.

Let the rumours about Spiderman's next adversary begin...

The return of The Law

Thursday saw the release of the first full length trailer of the upcoming reboot of Judge Dredd, titled 'Dredd'.  If you haven't watched it yet, catch it below:

http://youtu.be/PifvRiHVSCY?hd=1

Firstly, and most importantly, there's no sign of Dredd removing his helmet.  Beyond that, I think that this is looking impressive, and has the chance of being a surprise hit this year.  Gone is the cheesy, vibrance, and neon of the '95 version.  Replaced by a gritty, near future realism.
The uniform/body armour looks functional, having taken it's toned down cues from what was achieved in Captain America.  With regards to the helmet, and the thinking that it is too big, I think it looks fine and the outfit overall is just right.

Lena Headey is looking particularly bad ass, and complete with facial scars as Ma-Ma.  Striking just the right balance of sex appeal and villainy.

It also appears as though the 'Lawgiver', complete with user selectable ammunition remains in some form.  We see bullets for the most part, but a rather spectacular shot of what looks like some kind of cluster missile which I'm sure will result in the demise of a great many bad guys.

The story won't set the world on fire, the plot is going to be pretty straight forward.  Trapped in a city block, 2 Judges against a multitude of bad guys, fight their way to freedom/victory.  Similar to the recent The Raid.  You could argue that it leaves little in the way of twists, but for me I just want it to be a strong first outing, and a set up for more Dredd films to come.

And would it be complete without the muttering of those immortal words...

'I am The Law'  (check it out @ 2:01)

The Man of Steel returns...

We're drawing ever closer to the return of The Man of Steel to return to our screens.  In the aptly named 'Man of Steel', being brought to us by Zack Snyder a year from now in June 2013.

Zack has been responsible for 300 and Sucker Punch, both of which have their own unique visual styling.  It remains to be seen how much this influences the stylings of The Man of Steel, but I for one think it will only be a good thing when breathing new life back into the Superman franchise.  We've already seen what may be considered a modern day re-imagining of Superman, thanks to Bryan Singer's Superman Returns in 2006.  So Zack will definitely need to bring something new to the table with his Man of Steel.  One sure fire way of doing this will be through his casting, which so far looks to be spot on for a more edgy and less clean cut vision of The Man of Steel.

For starters you have Henry Cavill as The Man of Steel himself:

For those not familiar with Henry, he has been most recently (and most notably in my opinion) on our screens as Theseus in Immortals.  If you haven't seen Immortals, I would recommend it.  I can understand how Cavill would have gotten onto Snyder's radar as a result.  Heavily inspired by 300, Immortals is visually more vibrant but with less teeth, and much less shouting.  In short, it's everything that Wrath of the Titans wishes it could have been, and in it Henry Cavill does a great job of being a humble chap who doesn't want any trouble with a dash of ultimate bad ass thrown in.  With the added bonus being that he can actually act!

Then we have Amy Adams (brilliant in The Fighter) as love interest and leading lady, Lois Lane.  A stella parentage in the form of Kevin Costner and Diane Lane, as John and Martha Kent.  Then to add some the rough and ready edge you have Russell Crowe weighing in as Jor-el Father of The Man of Steel himself.

To add to this, we have General Zod making a return as the villain.  An excellent character first portrayed by Terrence Stamp.  I hope in the Man of Steel he remains as pompous and arrogant under the guise of Michael Shannon.  Even better if he is still flanked by Non, although I have seen no mention of him as yet in any cast list.  And whilst this would be a welcome stroll down memory lane, modern day audiences don't seem to take to well to that type of monosyllabic, dim witted character type anymore.

Needless to say, the combination of Zack Snyder's unique visual style, and a quality cast list.  I'm really looking forward to seeing the results come June 2013.

The saviour of DC?

As we draw closer to the release of The Dark Knight Rises, speculation increases as to where Christopher Nolan will go after this.

There has been lots to say that whilst he will not be at the helm of any further Batman films, he will help produce future Batman reboots.  The current trend for reboots is something that I'm finding myself increasingly at odds with.  Take the recent 'reboot' of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.  

I'm a big fan of the 2011 film, the book, and of David Fincher.  The problem being it's critical reception due to it's proximity to the original, had a damaging effect on it's box office performance.  This in turn has put a dampener on the subsequent sequels, in particular the turning off of Fincher.  Who has pretty much categorically ruled out a return to the chair for the remainder of the films.  The current news being that both sequels are due to be filmed back to back (starting in the autumn), for release in 2013.  I'm not holding my breath.

Back to Nolan.

I'm reading lots about plans for Nolan to be the saviour of the remainder of DC Comics character stable.  Most notably with a reboot of The Green Lantern (hence my earlier comment about reboots).  I'm not hugely opposed to a Green Lantern reboot, as the Ryan Reynolds outing was particularly awful, and as a character The Green Lantern deserves better.

What concerns me more is the possibility of Nolan getting caught in a black hole of comic book adaptations (which wouldn't be the end of the world, as I love comic book movies), ultimately detracting from other projects.  Nolan has the midas touch, and I love the variety and quality of his films.

One door that this does potentially open though, and one that is currently a hot topic out there, is the Justice League being brought to the big screen.

This I would love to see...

I am the LAW!

The reboot of Judge Dredd is not far away now.  A great character that I am looking forward to seeing (I won't say again, but we'll come to that in a moment), especially as Karl Urban is stepping into the lead role.  I'm confident he will make a great job of giving Judge Dredd the big screen outing he deserves.

As you may, or may not, know, Dredd had a previous outing courtesy of Sylvester Stallone.

Before we go any further, let's not forget that Dredd originally came to us via the Great British comic anthology 2000 AD.  He's a law enforcement officer in a violent city who has the power to take on the role of judge, jury and executioner.  Dealing out a lethal brand of justice as he sees fit.  For someone who has no super powers, this guys is the ultimate bad ass!  This guy has even taken on Aliens, yes the very same acid for blood ones we know and love from the famous film franchise.

Imagine my horror when watching the 1995 outing.  The bloody things a show tune or two away from being a sodding musical!  Don't even get me started on the Angel Gang, Mean Machine Angel...well, it's just not right I tell you.

Luckily by the end of the year, things will be set right.  Judge Dredd will be The Law once more.

Prometheus vs. Alien

One of my 'ones to watch' for 2012, I really got hyped about Prometheus on the run up to it's release.  I've now seen the film, and spent the last few days reading what everyone else has to say about it.

If you haven't seen it yet...you might not want to read on.  There will be spoilers.

One of my favourite reviews so far has come from @infamouskidd's article on Aintitcool.com, here's the link if you want to check it out:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/56298

Some reviews have been quite scathing, soap boxes have been dusted off and claws sharpened.  Others go too far the other way, rose tinted glasses and blinkers must have been handed out on the way into the cinema.

The reason I like Billy's is because it's, in my opinion, remaining objective on what appears to be turning into a bit of a marmite topic.

On a side note, this is clearly the most hilarious review of Prometheus ever:

http://badassdigest.com/2012/06/08/sam-strange-remembers-prometheus/

Whilst Ridley Scott had to reference the links to the Alien story pre release, for contextual reasons as well as to heighten anticipation, it's the constant connections and comparisons I was trying to make that took away from the overall film.  The most important thing for me with relation to the Alien films were that I found out about 'the spaceship' and 'the guy in the chair'.  Beyond that, Prometheus has to be viewed as a film of it's own.

I found the film to be visually stunning.  Also creative and ambitious in it's story telling.  I could have ambled along towards the ending that we were all expecting.  Instead it aimed for some real flourishes, which in my opinion it pulled off.  The idea of our creation by a race who then go to great lengths to destroy us is very thought provoking.  Also the 'black ooze' which manifests itself in various different ways throughout the film I found very interesting.  Whilst it's been heavily criticised, the fact is that the Aliens from the franchise we know and love are birthed from the ooze, and you could argue that the acidic xenomorphs are the stuff of nightmares, so I find this variable manifestation quite poetic.

I also particularly like Fassbender's David.  I genuinely felt that sense of being morally unburdened, his curiosity is childlike and untethered by thoughts of consequences and ramifications.

The one thing that lets the film down for me is the character development, or lack of.  Again a feature of many people's criticisms, though one I believe to be justified.  The two best characters are Meredith Vickers and David.  Charlize Theron manages to execute Meredith's slide from cool and in control, to out of control and panicked perfectly.  Whereas early in the film, we feel sorry for David when he is mocked for trying to mimic his human counterparts.  Before a great scene at the end with Noomi Rapace, where David claims to feel fear and I adopted the same mocking nature that earlier had made me feel sorry for him.  The biggest disappointment in terms of character development is Idris Elba's Captain Janek.  I'm a great fan of Idris (for anyone who isn't familiar with his work, go and watch Luther), so I was very excited to see him included in the cast line up.  He has some great moments, and a very heroic sign off, 'HANDS UP!'.  The only problem is that he has the kind of insight that someone only gets from experience or a bloody past, but we never even get a whiff of what those experiences may have been.

Overall Prometheus is a hugely enjoyable film that I will be watching again.  The best thing about it, everyone will come away with something different.  I could sit and pick over elements of the film and the story for hours, but you just have to see it for yourself.  I just wish I could go back in time to advise myself to forget about the Aliens franchise before going to see it the first time, and to just sit back and enjoy the ride.

Do I jump on the bandwagon?...

I want to start by making a confession.  I'm a fan of the Twilight franchise, and by this point I have yet to read any of the books.  My only experience is the films.  This is the complete opposite to the norm for me.  I went to great lengths to make sure I'd read the Harry Potter books before I saw the corresponding films  The books always have more to offer in my opinion.  Everyone can take away something unique for themselves.  Their imagination makes it that way.

So the question is, do I want to go down the same road with The Hunger Games?

Until the release of the film, I knew nothing about the series.  The same can be said until I recently went to see the first instalment of the franchise.  Since then I've done a little homework into the series of books behind the film(s).  Suzanne Collins has achieved great success in tapping into the lucrative market of adolescent/late teen/young adults, with excesses of time and money.  You have all the big hitting themes in there, poverty, famine, social uprising, politics, even love found and love lost.  Although I've reached that age where I see all of these things happening outside my door, in the world.  I suppose I need to read the books themselves to really pass judgement, but what's making me wonder if I have time to devote to them, is the film.  Here's why...

We start with the main premise of the film, The Hunger Games themselves. Boys and girls aged between 12 and 18 fighting to the death.  Immediately you start to draw comparisons with Battle Royale (itself a film adapted from a novel, involving children fighting each other to the death).  Although it was less restricted by it's target audience (Battle Royale was certificated 18, and banned for a long period of time following it's release), with Battle Royale you felt the stark terror and sheer confusion of the children's situation.  This was a bunch of school children that had been taken against there will and forced to fight to the death!  The Hunger Games, well that whole concept just felt soft around the edges.  The one time you felt the terror, panic, and hopelessness of Katniss' situation was when she entered the tube just before the start of the games.  This was helped in part by the great sound editing, making you feel as though you were in there with her as the doors slid shut and all exterior sounds we muted out.  Beyond that, I just wasn't made to feel the injustice of the situation they were faced with.

This same numbness was, to me, present throughout the other elements of the film too.  Don't get me wrong, I got the themes that the film is trying to broach.  The poverty of the districts in comparison to the money and advances of the Capitol.  The 'big brother' government.  Even the love story thrown in for good measure.  If we take the love story element in direct comparison with the other great teen franchise, Twilight, there you have the edgy backdrop of vampires and werewolves.  Great catalysts for romance, lust and love.  And whilst The Hunger Games comes at it from the 'we need to ham it up for the sake of our survival, but am I really falling in love with you?' angle, again, I'm just not feeling it.  It's all thinking and reasoning.  I'm not feeling it.  As it is with the other themes mentioned above.

Part of the problem for me, is my final gripe, the incoherent back story to flesh the whole thing out.  Now I must admit that as a sci-fi fan, a loose back story is something that I should be accustomed to.  In a lot of cases I let a great wealth of things slide in this department.  Sometimes though, it just niggles me.  Gets under my skin, and I have to start picking at the holes.  This was one of those such occasions.

What happened during the uprising?  Did the districts exist before this point, or were they created afterwards?  What circumstances lead to people living in the Capitol, or is it purely a birthright?  The lack of answers to these questions, for me, meant that all the other ideas and concepts struggled to gain traction.

That brings me back to my original question.  Do I go down the same road with The Hunger Games as I have with Twilight.  Continuing to watch the films without reading the books?  Or would reading the books make me more forgiving of my perceive shortcomings within the films?

Make time for Cabin in the Woods...

It's been a while since I went to see Cabin in the Woods, so it's about time I share my thoughts on it with you.

I mentioned in an earlier post that my first experience of Cabin in the Woods was during an article on BBC's website.  The article spoke about too much information being given about the plot of a film during it's trailers.  Here's a link to the article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16972394

In the article it makes reference to viewers witnessing a force field barrier.  A bird flies into it, apparently giving away vital plot details.  I will agree only that it gives away the fact that a force field barrier features during the film.

The films opens with a sequence during which 2 men are walking through some kind of complex having a conversation about an upcoming project they're about to start work on.  It's very reminiscent of 80's america, workmen with their lunch boxes, the only thing that's missing are the hard hats.  What this sequence does is throw the cat among the pigeons from the word go.  You immediately know that something isn't right.

From there it continues along more familiar, formulaic lines.  To the point where after about 20 minutes I was sitting in fear that I was about to witness another teen slasher horror.  Then I realise that something very special is happening.  The witty Whedon dialogue, the familiar faces (for Whedon fans you'll notice faces from Doll House, Buffy and Angel), and the sublimely layered and drip fed storyline.  All of a sudden I'm in nerd/scifi/film lovers heaven.

The story is expertly brought together as well as being amazingly imaginative.  I know I've previously made reference to the gut-stabbing unicorn, but to go from innocent midterm holiday in the woods, to devil worshipping, human sacrificing, multi national corporation is something to behold.  With some sexy wolf kissing thrown in for good measure (it's just not right I tell you!)

Put in it's simplest terms.  Cabin in the Woods is a brilliant film for the casual viewer, and a tour de force for lovers of the genre.

Joss puts it very well in his own words during an interview with Total Film:

"On another level it's a serious critique of what we love and what we don't about horror movies. I love being scared. I love that mixture of thrill, of horror, that objectification/identification thing of wanting definitely for the people to be alright but at the same time hoping they’ll go somewhere dark and face something awful. The things that I don't like are kids acting like idiots, the devolution of the horror movie into torture porn and into a long series of sadistic comeuppances. Drew and I both felt that the pendulum had swung a little too far in that direction"

I loved the spectacle of The Avengers, and as a huge Marvel fan, this is by default my top film of 2012 (this is my Oscar winner).  Cabin in the Woods, this takes my Palme d'Or.

Pre Spoiler Alert!!

It has been brought to my attention that in my last post I didn't give any warning before talking about a plot detail from Super 8.  Granted it was a minor plot detail, and one that is glaringly obvious and in no way a twist.  Yet still, a plot detail none the less...without warning.

So I would like to take this opportunity to provide a pre spoiler alert.

Especially if you are a close friend of mine.  One who has an exceptionally good DVD collection that is completely without filler (seriously, not one in the whole lot that I wouldn't gladly watch).  Who also seems to take on average 5 months to see a film once it has been released, almost 12 in the case of Super 8.  It was released in August 2011 for crying out loud!

Yes Matt, this is for you.

My next blog post will go into detail about Cabin in the Woods.  I've held off for as long as possible, but it's just too good a film to not talk about.

Go and watch it now.

Just for the record (and to avoid any notion of exaggeration), it has been 291 days since the release of Super 8 on August 5th 2011.  It has then been 39 days since the release of Cabin in the Woods on 13th April 2012.  When citing Matt's tendency to procrastinate in seeing films, I used these as the examples which gave me the average of 165 days, or 5.42 months.  I rounded it down to 5.  Although in fairness I then hammed it up by saying it was almost 12 months since Super 8's release.

The youngsters steal the show...

With it's current run on Sky Movies Premier, I watched Super 8 again the other evening.

I remember leaving the cinema when I saw it first time round, with the feeling of disappointment at what I considered to be a sickly and overly sentimental ending.  I specifically remember sitting on the edge of my seat, saying "please don't let go of the locket" repeatedly.  Needless to say, Joe let go, and I was reminded that one of the producers was the same man who brought us E.T and *batteries not included, and I did indeed have my heart warmed.

Watching Super 8 again achieved 2 things:

- Dispelled the feeling of disappointment I felt following my first viewing.

- Reminded me that the child acting in Super 8 is some of the finest I have ever seen.

The last time I remember seeing children carry a story so well on the big screen was Stand By Me, and for me that film has to much of a special place in my heart to ever be bettered.  And whilst Steven Spielberg wasn't involved in Stand By Me, he has been responsible for bringing some fantastic child acting performances to our cinema screens:
- E.T
- The Goonies
- Empire of the Sun (featuring a very young Christian Bale)
- A.I Artificial Intelligence (with one Haley Joel Osment)
It's quite clear that among many of his talents, Spielberg has an eye for picking out a great child actor.

If you have yet to see Super 8, get on it.  The same can be said for any of the other films I have mentioned above.  If you haven't seen Stand By Me, every moment you spend from now not watching it, is time wasted.  Thinking about it, it's time I watched it again myself.

Sometimes you just feel like a bit of a snack...

We all like a snack every now and then.  I particularly like an onion bhaji.  My local Indian takeaway, Everest Tandoori, do a lovely onion bhaji (among other things) that is roughly the size of an average burger patty.

Retuning home from work a few evenings ago, I was excited to see what treat my lovely wife had in store for me.  All day she had been sending me messages, saying she had bought me the greatest gift.  It went without saying that the gift was a food item (the way to this man's heart, is indeed through his stomach), and when I arrived home she opened the oven and the familiar aroma of onion bhaji came wafting out to greet me.

As my wife pulled the oven tray out though, I could see that this was no ordinary bhaji.  It was a monster!  Larger than my fist:

To try and put it into context a little better, I also took a photo of the bhaji next to a tin of baked beans:

Now I'm not a huge frequenter of curry houses, I like Indian food, but the majority of that I eat is takeaway.  But this is the biggest onion bhaji I have seen (in the flesh so to speak).  And larger than an apple, it was almost a meal in itself.  Definitely something to brush your teeth after eating though!

I'm a fan of larger than average foodstuffs, and I'm an even bigger fan of people who make things as large as humanly possible.  So needless to say, I've had a rummage round the internet to find the World's biggest onion bhaji.

The current record is held here in the UK, by a team who created their behemoth at Bradford College's International Food Academy (IFA).  Their gigantic creation weighed in at 95kg, and measured almost a metre around the middle.  Even the engineering department had to get in on the action, to help design bespoke cooking equipment!

Please aspiring record breaker out there, attempt to go one bigger.  And let me come and help eating it!!

Old fashioned values...

I often enjoy revisiting the good old action films of the 80s and 90s.  The wise cracking good guy, the (usually English) bad guy, with pet/sidekick/shady boss person at the other end of a video link in tow.  The good guy always wins, gets the girl, then the credits roll.

Why do I enjoy the trip down cinematic memory lane?  Because it's good fun.  Simple.  Mindless.

I'm not always in the mood for a Requiem for a Dream, The Piano, or Momento style trip to the outer reaches of my psyche.  Sometimes after a hard day at work, I want to relax, crack open a beer, but most importantly, not have to think to hard.

With the above in mind, Lockout is a return to good old fashioned 'action film making' values.

Elevated from B movie status, in my opinion, with the inclusion of Guy Pearce, it offers, thrills, spills, wise cracks, and is strictly uncomplicated.  Add to that, a seemingly genuine chemistry shared by Guy Pearce and Maggie Grace, especially in the closing scenes (see my post 'High School Drama Productions' http://brightsidegerman.blogspot.com/2012/04/high-school-drama-productions.html for why this scores points with me) and you have good value for money from your trip to the cinema.

The only fly in the ointment is a decidedly dodgy motorbike chase at the beginning.  With it's heavy use of CGI and wild camera work, it feels like an amusement ride at Universal Studios.  It could quite easily have been left out, at no detriment to the film.

Parallels to Snake Plissken, and John Carpenter's Escape from New York and L.A films have been drawn in a great many reviews.  It's understandable why.  Guy Pearce's wrongly accused and disgraced CIA agent Snow is forced into a seemingly suicidal rescue attempt of the President's daughter (sounds familiar).  Only this time it's in space, and instead of the deadly threat of Plutoxin 7 as an incentive to play ball, Snow has a space station cum prison facility full of psychotic, escaped convicts for motivation.

The antagonists come in the form of brothers Alex and Hydell.  The latter played by Joseph Gilgun, who is a particular favourite of mine from shows such as This Is England, and Misfits.  Apart from a hideously out of place scottish accent from Gilgun, his character has menace still without taking himself too seriously.  The main of the two brothers, Alex, then ends up seeming a damp squib by comparison.

It's not a hot tip for the Oscars, and it won't be breaking any records at the box office.  But long live films like Lockout.  Making regular trips to the cinema enjoyable since 1983.

In a world gone PC mad...

Unite, the union for truck drivers, fighting for the right's of drivers throughout the UK, may have missed a trick.  Whilst causing havoc over the Easter period, locked in negotiations to secure better conditions, pay and working hours for it's members, they've missed a grievous wrong being exacted on truck drivers, even as you read this.  Call me liberal, but I don't think I can live in a world where this kind of blatant prejudice is allowed:

I remember my parents, battling against a tyrannical system that wouldn't accept the use of their left hand dominantly over the right.  Hands were tied behind backs, knuckles were rapped with rulers, many naturally left handed people were lost.  They were dark times.  And it seems whilst we have taken huge steps forward in becoming a more tolerant and accepting society, we may have taken one big step backwards.

I've seen many left hand drivers, and they drive just as well as right hand drivers.  So to be labelled in this way is outrageous.

Truck drivers, unite!  Take action against this wrong! Viva la left hand resistance!